Verbatim report of proceedings of 4 July 2022
Date: 2022-07-04
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Parliament, parliamentary debate








C_202406035EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series














11.10.2024







            4 July 2022
            VERBATIM REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF 4 JULY 2022
            
         
(C/2024/6035)

Contents







1.

Resumption of the session
3










2.

Opening of the sitting
3










3.

Statements by the President
3










4.

Approval of the minutes of the previous sittings
3










5.

Negotiations ahead of Parliament's first reading (Rule 71)
4










6.

Negotiations ahead of Parliament's first reading (Rule 71) (action taken)
4










7.

Signing of acts adopted in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure (Rule 79)
4










8.

Questions for oral answer (submission): see Minutes
4










9.

Action taken on Parliament's resolutions: see Minutes
4










10.

Documents received: see Minutes
4










11.

Order of business
4










12.

US Supreme Court decision to overturn abortion rights in the United States and the need to safeguard abortion rights and Women's health in the EU (debate)
8










13.

Composition of committees and delegations
18










14.

Loss of life, violence and inhumane treatment against people seeking international protection at the Spanish-Moroccan border (debate)
18










15.

Digital Services Act – Digital Markets Act (debate)
28










16.

Adoption by Croatia of the euro on 1 January 2023 (debate)
45










17.

Women's poverty in Europe (debate)
51










18.

Composition of committees and delegations
60










19.

Negotiations for a cooperation agreement between the EU and Interpol (short presentation)
60










20.

Indo-Pacific strategy in the area of trade and investment (short presentation)
62










21.

EU-India future trade and investment cooperation (short presentation)
65










22.

One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
68










23.

Approval of the minutes of the current sitting
75










24.

Agenda of the next sitting
75










25.

Closure of the sitting
75




Verbatim report of proceedings of 4 July 2022
                  


PRESIDENZA: ROBERTA METSOLA


President

1.   Resumption of the session

President. – I declare resumed the session of the European Parliament adjourned on Thursday 23 June 2022.
2.   Opening of the sitting

(The sitting opened at 17.01)

3.   Statements by the President

President. – So, dear colleagues, we are here today, a day after a horrific shooting in Copenhagen where three people were murdered in a shopping mall after being shot by an armed assailant. I think I speak for everyone here when I say our thoughts are with all the victims, their families and everyone in Copenhagen. Denmark, we are with you.
Yesterday, we also saw the terrible news emerge of a mountain glacier collapsing in the Alps in Italy, leaving at least six persons dead, eight injured and twenty missing. Experts have told us that the warming temperature means that the entire glacier is under threat. The horrible tragedy in the Dolomites between the northern Italian regions of Trentino and Veneto has shocked all of us. And I wanted to use this opportunity to offer our deepest condolences and those of the European Parliament to those affected.
I would like to ask you, dear colleagues, to join us in having a minute of silence.

(The House rose and observed a minute's silence)

4.   Approval of the minutes of the previous sittings

President. – The minutes and the texts adopted of the sittings of 22 and 23 June are available. Are there any comments?
That does not seem to be the case, and therefore the minutes have been approved.
5.   Negotiations ahead of Parliament's first reading (Rule 71)

President. – The IMCO and ECON committees have decided to enter into interinstitutional negotiations pursuant to Rule 71(1) of the Rules of Procedure.
The reports which constitute the mandates for the negotiations are available on the plenary webpage, and their titles will be published in the minutes of the sitting.
Pursuant to Rule 71(2) Members or political groups reaching at least the medium threshold may request in writing by tomorrow, Tuesday 5 July at midnight, that the decisions to enter into negotiations be put to the vote. If no request for a vote in Parliament on the decisions to enter into negotiations is made within the aforementioned deadline, the committees may start the negotiations.
6.   Negotiations ahead of Parliament's first reading (Rule 71) (action taken)

President. – In relation to the decision by the PECH Committee to enter into interinstitutional negotiations pursuant to Rule 71(1) – announced on Wednesday 22 June — I have received no requests for a vote in Parliament, and the committee may therefore start its negotiations.
7.   Signing of acts adopted in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure (Rule 79)

President. – I would also like to inform you that since the adjournment of Parliament's session on 23 June, I have signed, together with the President of the Council, four acts adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure, in accordance with Rule 79 of Parliament's Rules of Procedure.
I would like also to inform you that on Wednesday I shall sign together with the President of the Council, one act adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure. The titles of the acts will be published in the minutes of the sitting.
8.   Questions for oral answer (submission): see Minutes
9.   Action taken on Parliament's resolutions: see Minutes
10.   Documents received: see Minutes
11.   Order of business

President. – We now come to the order of business. The final draft agenda, as adopted by the Conference of Presidents on 30 June pursuant to Rule 157, has been distributed. I will just inform you that I have received three requests for urgent procedure, respectively, from the TRAN Committee, the Council and the Commission, pursuant to Rule 163 on the following legislative files:
First, Russia's invasion of Ukraine, temporary measures concerning drivers' documents issued by Ukraine.
Second, identification of the violation of Union restrictive measures as crimes under Article 83(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
And third, exceptional macro-financial assistance to Ukraine.
The vote on these requests will be taken tomorrow.
We now move to changes requested by political groups, but I see that there is a point of order with Mr Gusmão.

José Gusmão (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, a minha intervenção tem a ver com o artigo 39.o do Regimento e com a greve dos intérpretes, cujas reivindicações extraordinariamente razoáveis foram distribuídas a todos os deputados e deputadas à entrada da sala.
               

                  Essas reivindicações têm como objetivo fazer face à degradação das condições de trabalho, que está a ter consequências cada vez mais graves e cada vez mais generalizadas na saúde destes trabalhadores do Parlamento, e fazer face também à situação gravíssima de haver já duas comissões, a AGRI e, espantosamente, a AFCO, que decidiram contratar serviços externos para furar esta greve dos intérpretes.
               

                  Por isso, eu queria requerer à Presidente do Parlamento Europeu que, em primeiro lugar, interrompa de forma imediata o recurso a empresas externas para substituir os intérpretes do Parlamento Europeu, e, em segundo lugar, que encete todos os esforços necessários para resolver estes problemas de condições de trabalho, para que possamos todos trabalhar nas melhores condições possíveis, sem consequências para a saúde dos nossos trabalhadores.
               

                  Eu sublinho que o Parlamento Europeu deve dar os melhores exemplos nesta matéria e não copiar as piores práticas dos piores empregadores.
               

President. – Thank you very much Mr Gusmão. Thanks for the information, and of course we are doing everything we can. And I am also involved in making sure that there is a quick resolution to the ongoing discussions, and I am personally committed to that, I can assure you.
We come to the requests by the political groups. For Tuesday, the ID Group has asked that Council and Commission statements on ‘Judicial cooperation in Europe in the light of the French court decision blocking extradition of Italian terrorists’ be added as the third item in the afternoon. As a consequence, the sitting would be extended until 23.00.
I give the floor to Anna Bonfrisco to move this request.

Anna Bonfrisco,
a nome del gruppo ID. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la mancata estradizione da parte della Francia all'Italia di dieci brigatisti rossi per atti di terrorismo commessi durante gli anni di piombo è una pagina controversa della storia europea.
               

                  Quei dieci terroristi sono cittadini europei che hanno usato la violenza per uccidere vite innocenti e servitori dello Stato, hanno messo in pericolo la democrazia e lo Stato di diritto, hanno rinnegato il pluralismo, la tolleranza, la giustizia, la solidarietà e la dignità umana. Quei dieci terroristi europei sono antieuropei alla radice e minano quell'amicizia che unisce l'Italia e la Francia.
               

                  La Francia dovrebbe mettere la parola fine a questa triste vicenda di frizione con l'Italia, caratterizzata dal sapore amaro dell'ingiustizia e dell'impunità. Gli italiani hanno tutti apprezzato le parole di rispetto pronunciate dal Presidente Macron, pertanto chiedo il sostegno dei colleghi alla nostra proposta di aggiungere domani il dibattito sulla cooperazione giudiziaria in Europa, alla luce della sentenza del tribunale francese di negare l'estradizione dei terroristi italiani condannati.
               

(Parliament rejected the request)


President. – Also for Tuesday, the ID Group has asked that a Commission statement on ‘The recent unrest in Uzbekistan’ be added as the last item in the afternoon. As a consequence, the sitting would be extended until 23.00.
I give the floor to Bernhard Zimniok to move the request on behalf of the ID Group.

Bernhard Zimniok,
im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, werte Kollegen! Aufgrund der besorgniserregenden Entwicklungen in Usbekistan mit mindestens 18 Toten und Hunderten Verletzten beantrage ich, dass das Parlament morgen Abend eine Aussprache zu diesem Thema auf die Tagesordnung setzt.
               

                  Ich fordere die EU-Kommission und meine Kollegen dazu auf, dass wir die Verhandlungen zwischen den Beteiligten unterstützen, um den Frieden in Usbekistan zu sichern. Ich würde mir wünschen, dass die EU-Kommission die Mitgliedstaaten und andere Akteure bei der Vermittlung unterstützt, um eine friedliche und rasche Beilegung der Feindseligkeiten in Usbekistan zu erreichen.
               

(Parliament rejected the request)


President. – For Wednesday, the ID Group has asked that the Council and Commission statements on ‘The UK Government's unilateral introduction of the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill and respect for international law’ – which is scheduled as the first item in the afternoon – be postponed to a later part-session and be replaced by Council and Commission statements on ‘Overcoming current structural deficiencies in the passenger aviation sector’.
I give the floor to Annalisa Tardino to move the request on behalf of the ID Group.

Annalisa Tardino,
a nome del gruppo ID. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, proponiamo di aggiungere all'ordine del giorno una dichiarazione della Commissione con dibattito sul tema dei disservizi nel settore aereo che stanno colpendo i cittadini europei.
               

                  Si tratta di una situazione urgente che sta diventando veramente insostenibile e sta colpendo milioni di viaggiatori nel continente, impattando sulla nostra economia, soprattutto nel settore turistico.
               

                  Chiediamo quindi, di conseguenza, di spostare il dibattito sulle misure Brexit in considerazione della maggiore urgenza che riguarda il settore aereo. Mi auguro che i colleghi degli altri gruppi possano sostenere questa nostra proposta.
               

President. – Thank you, Ms Tardino. I give the floor to Clare Daly, who has asked to speak on this point.

Clare Daly,
on behalf of The Left Group. – Madam President, I'd like to thank colleagues for the suggestion. There's no doubt about it: the crisis in aviation is having devastating consequences on citizens and workers alike, and it is something that can't wait until September. But equally, the UK's unilateral introduction of the Northern Ireland Protocol and the implications for international law cannot wait either. So we would have a counter-proposal that we would maintain the discussion on the Northern Ireland Protocol, but add a debate on the aviation situation for Thursday morning with a round of Group speakers and that the session would therefore start at 8.30, and we would therefore hope that everybody could live with that counter-proposal.

President. – Thank you, Ms Daly. Can I ask Ms Tardino whether she's in favour of this counter-proposal?

Annalisa Tardino,
a nome del gruppo ID. – Sì, Presidente, grazie, siamo a favore.
               

(Parliament rejected the request)


President. – Since the request has been rejected, the agenda remains unchanged.
Also on Wednesday the ID Group has asked that the debate on the Council and Commission statements on ‘The relations of the Russian Government and diplomatic network with parties of extremist, populist, anti-European and certain other European political parties in the context of the war’, scheduled as the third item in the evening, be replaced by a debate on Council and Commission statements on ‘The Commission's use of external consultants’.
I give the floor to Jean-Paul Garraud to move the request.

Jean-Paul Garraud,
au nom du groupe ID. – Madame la Présidente, la Cour des comptes européenne a publié, jeudi dernier, un rapport révélant que la Commission européenne a recours à des cabinets de conseil. Après le scandale McKinsey en France, la Commission aurait donc dépensé près d'un milliard d'euros par an en consultants externes entre 2017 et 2020.
               

                  Le recours massif à ces cabinets privés est éminemment condamnable, alors que la Commission dispose de 33 000 fonctionnaires. Cela pose aussi question en matière d'ingérence, de souveraineté et de collusion.
               

                  Nous devons avoir un débat sur ce sujet hautement sensible. Notre Parlement ne doit pas, bien sûr, se transformer en chambre d'enregistrement de propositions chèrement payées par le contribuable auprès de cabinets privés parfois extraeuropéens et ne payant aucun impôt en France.
               

(Parliament rejected the request)


President. – The ECR Group has asked that a Commission statement on ‘The political sentencing to 10 years of Jeanine Áñez, former President of Bolivia’, with one round of political group speakers, be added as the second item in the morning, after the Commission statement on ‘Recent heatwaves and drought in the EU’. As a consequence, the sitting would start at 8.30. The debate would be wound up with a resolution, also to be voted on Thursday.
I give the floor to Hermann Tertsch to move the request.

Hermann Tertsch,
en nombre del Grupo ECR. – Señora presidenta, sí, creemos que es extremadamente urgente que hablemos del brutal maltrato e injusticia que sufre una mujer por cumplir con su deber y con la ley: Jeanine Áñez, ex presidenta interina de Bolivia, ha sido condenada a diez años de prisión en un juicio que el propio Evo Morales, ex presidente, ha reconocido amañado previamente. El régimen boliviano prepara otros juicios farsa para muchos opositores.
               

                  Aunque dejemos la Resolución para septiembre, es un imperativo moral alzar ahora la voz por Áñez y otros injustamente perseguidos. Áñez asumió la presidencia interina con el aval, muchos lo olvidan, de la Organización de Estados Americanos y de la Unión Europea, en plena crisis, tras huir Morales al descubrirse su fraude electoral. Áñez asumió la presidencia tras la transición, organizó unas elecciones, esas elecciones se celebraron, ganó el partido de Morales con su candidato Arce a la cabeza y se hizo una transición impecable del poder. Ahora está en la cárcel con una condena de diez años, por un juicio farsa.
               

                  Tenemos que alzar la voz por esta mujer que lucha por las libertades en Iberoamérica frente al narcocomunismo del Foro de São Paulo, encabezado por ese Evo Morales que tenemos ahí, por Maduro y por tantos otros.
               

President. – Thank you, Mr Tertsch. Just to clarify, do you want just the debate this week, or also the resolution?

Hermann Tertsch,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, we would like to have the resolution in September.

President. – OK, so the debate this week and the resolution in September.

(Parliament rejected the request)

The agenda therefore remains unchanged.
The agenda is adopted and the order of business is thus established.

VORSITZ: KATARINA BARLEY


Vizepräsidentin

12.   US Supreme Court decision to overturn abortion rights in the United States and the need to safeguard abortion rights and Women's health in the EU (debate)

                  DE
               

Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärung der Kommission ‘Die Entscheidung des Obersten Gerichtshofs der USA, das Recht auf Abtreibung in den Vereinigten Staaten zu kippen, und die Notwendigkeit, das Recht auf Abtreibung zu bewahren und die Gesundheit der Frauen in der EU zu schützen’ (2022/2742(RSP)).
               

                  Ich erinnere Sie daran, dass mit Ausnahme der ersten beiden Reihen, die für die Fraktionsvorsitzenden vorgesehen sind, freie Sitzplatzwahl besteht.
               

                  Nachdem Sie Ihre Abstimmungskarte in das Abstimmungsgerät eingeschoben haben, können Sie über Ihr Abstimmungsgerät spontane Wortmeldungen und blaue Karten beantragen. Bitte führen Sie daher Ihre Abstimmungskarte stets mit sich. Entsprechende Anleitungen sind im Plenarsaal verfügbar.
               

                  Wenn Sie sich für eine spontane Wortmeldung melden möchten, ersuche ich Sie, dies ab jetzt zu tun und nicht bis zum Ende der Aussprache zu warten. Außerdem möchte ich Sie darauf hinweisen, dass blaue Karten auch für eine kurze Wortmeldung hochgehalten werden können und dass danach eine Anschlussfrage zulässig ist.
               

                  Ich weise Sie auch darauf hin, dass Wortmeldungen im Plenarsaal weiterhin vom zentralen Redepult aus erfolgen, außer spontane Wortmeldungen, blaue Karten und Bemerkungen zur Anwendung der Geschäftsordnung.
               

                  Ich ersuche Sie daher, die Redeliste im Blick zu behalten und sich kurz vor Beginn Ihrer Redezeit zum Redepult zu begeben.
               

                  Jetzt habe ich hoffentlich lange genug gesprochen, damit sich alle, die sich nicht beteiligen wollen, aus dem Saal entfernen können.
               

                  Es ist ja auch klar, dass das jetzt eine emotionale Debatte ist. Deswegen möchte ich auch noch einmal daran erinnern, dass das hier ein Parlament ist. ‘Parlament’ kommt von ‘parlare’, ‘sprechen’. Wir möchten uns also hier in Worten austauschen und nicht mit irgendwelchen Zeichen, Bannern, T-Shirts oder Ähnlichem – das nur schon mal vorneweg.
               

                  Und wenn sich jetzt die Atmosphäre beruhigt hat, dann darf ich Frau Kommissarin Dalli für die Kommission das Wort erteilen und sie herzlich hier begrüßen.
               

Helena Dalli,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, my colleague Executive Vice-President Dombrovskis addressed this Chamber on behalf of High Representative / Vice-President Borrell on this issue on 6 June. Since then, on 24 June, the US Supreme Court overruled the right to abortion established in the Roe v. Wade decision of 1973. The June decision returns the right to regulate abortion completely to the state level. Thirteen states have enacted trigger laws that have already or will soon limit or ban completely access to abortion. So it is estimated that all together, 20 states may enact total bans or severe gestational limits on abortion.
President Biden has condemned the ruling. He has indicated a preference for Congress to codify federal privacy and abortion rights. His administration, including the Departments of State and Defense, are also exploring ways to ensure access to sexual and reproductive healthcare for service members, their families and their civilian workforce, as permitted by federal law. The ruling constitutes a rollback of a longstanding legal standard in the US concerning reproductive rights, impacting the lives of many women and in particular, those in the most vulnerable situations. It is a reminder that hard-won rights cannot be taken as a given anywhere.
The EU is committed to the implementation of its obligations in relation to the human rights of girls and women arising from key frameworks, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the Beijing Platform for Action, the Cairo Declaration on Population and Development and their respective outcome reviews. UN treaty body jurisprudence has indicated that denying women access to abortion can amount to violations of the rights to healthcare, privacy, and in certain cases, the right to be free from cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment.
The UN Human Rights Committee has confirmed that although state parties may adopt measures designed to regulate voluntary terminations of pregnancy, such measures must not result in violation of the right to life of a pregnant woman or girl or her other rights under the Covenant. Through cooperation actions, dialogue and other initiatives the EU supports the full enjoyment of sexual and reproductive health and rights in countries across the globe. This means enabling women and girls to ensure bodily autonomy, free choice over their bodies, free from discrimination, coercion and violence, and to lead healthy lives.
In the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy and the EU Gender Action Plan III the EU has committed to scaling up action to achieve gender equality, to protect and promote the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights by all women and girls and their socioeconomic empowerment free from all forms of discrimination, while applying a gender responsive approach.
In the European Union sexual and reproductive healthcare is a Member State responsibility. While the Commission fully recognises every person's fundamental right of equal access to high-quality health care, all women across the EU should have adequate access to good-quality healthcare and treatment. Sexual and reproductive health is part of it.
One of the objectives of the EU4Health programme is to improve and foster health in the Union to reduce the burden of communicable and non-communicable diseases, amongst others, by promoting access to healthcare. This includes access to sexual and reproductive healthcare.
So the programme may support Member States' actions to promote access to sexual and reproductive healthcare and to support integrated and intersectional approaches to prevention, diagnosis, treatment and care where such actions are included in the annual work programme of the EU4Health programme. We also support regular exchanges between Member States and stakeholders on gender equality topics, such as gender equality and health, under the mutual learning programme in gender equality.
We continue to fund civil society organisations working on gender equality, including on sexual and reproductive health and rights. And we provide full support to Member States' efforts in implementing the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals relevant to women's health: universal access to sexual and reproductive care, family planning and education.
Women living in the EU must be equal and free in all aspects of their lives to choose the life they want in order to live, thrive and participate in all aspects of society. Strong women's rights are an asset and a key feature of democracies. It is an achievement we must be proud of and nurture, as it can be easily lost.

Ελισσάβετ Βόζεμπεργκ-Βρυωνίδη,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας PPE. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η απόφαση του Ανωτάτου Δικαστηρίου των Ηνωμένων Πολιτειών της Αμερικής που καταργεί το δικαίωμα γυναικών σε άμβλωση υπό προϋποθέσεις, μετά από 50 χρόνια, είναι τεράστιο πλήγμα στην προστασία των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων σε παγκόσμια κλίμακα, διότι το δικαίωμα αυτό μαζί με την αντισύλληψη (1965) και την αποποινικοποίηση σχέσεων προσώπων ιδίου φύλου (2003) έχουν κατοχυρωθεί στο ίδιο άρθρο του Συντάγματος των Ηνωμένων Πολιτειών της Αμερικής. Επιπρόσθετα, η δικαστική πλειοψηφία που κατέληξε στην αναχρονιστική ρύθμιση έρχεται σε πλήρη αντίθεση με την αμερικανική κοινωνία που τίθεται υπέρ του δικαιώματος με ποσοστό 60%.
               

                  Πέραν, όμως, του οπισθοδρομικού χαρακτήρα της, η απόφαση του Ανωτάτου Δικαστηρίου είναι εμφανώς επικίνδυνη, διότι δεν εκτίμησε σωστά όσα συμβαίνουν παγκοσμίως σήμερα, μεταξύ των οποίων ότι, λόγου χάριν, το 60% από 121 εκατομμύρια εγκυμοσύνες —ακούσιες— καταλήγουν σε άμβλωση· ότι η αποποινικοποίηση των αμβλώσεων δεν λειτουργεί αποτρεπτικά, αλλά αντιθέτως οδηγεί σε μη ασφαλείς για τη ζωή των εγκύων ιατρικές υπηρεσίες· ότι οι απαγορεύσεις και οι περιορισμοί εισάγουν ανισότητες μεταξύ οικονομικά ασθενών γυναικών που αδυνατούν να μεταβούν σε γειτονικές χώρες προς επίλυση του προβλήματος τους· ότι οι επιπλοκές κατά την εγκυμοσύνη ή τον τοκετό ευθύνονται για τον θάνατο εφήβων 15 έως 19 ετών.
               

                  Συνάδελφοι, τα κορυφαία κοινωνικά θέματα που μας προβληματίζουν δεν αντιμετωπίζονται με απαγορεύσεις. Στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση έχουμε υποχρέωση να προβαίνουμε σε αποφάσεις που ενώνουν και δεν διχάζουν. Τα κράτη μέλη θα όφειλαν, οργανωμένα και με σεβασμό πάντοτε προς την επικουρικότητα, να προβούν σε αποποινικοποίηση της άμβλωσης, να καταπολεμούν αποτελεσματικά τη σεξουαλική βία, να διαπαιδαγωγούν τους εφήβους για τη σεξουαλικότητα, την αντισύλληψη, την εγκυμοσύνη, τις ιατρικές υπηρεσίες και τη μεταγεννητική φροντίδα.
               

                  Ο κόσμος αλλάζει, συνάδελφοι, και εμείς στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση των δημοκρατικών αξιών στεκόμαστε με το βλέμμα στις επόμενες γενεές, σοβαρά και υπεύθυνα. Θεμελιώδη ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα που κατοχυρώθηκαν με αγώνες πολλών ετών απαιτούν την αδιάλειπτη προστασία μας —και θα την έχουν.
               

Iratxe García Pérez,
en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, cuando en 1985 Margaret Atwood escribió El cuento de la criada, todos pensábamos que era ciencia ficción. Hablaba del futuro, de un futuro país donde existía una prohibición total del aborto, porque la única función de las mujeres era la de tener hijos. Y la propia autora, hace unos días, se lamentaba de que el Tribunal Supremo de los Estados Unidos había hecho realidad su novela.
               

                  En el país más poderoso del mundo, las mujeres no tienen ningún poder sobre sus propios cuerpos. Un tribunal, formado mayoritariamente por hombres mayores, de género masculino, retrógrados, anclados en el pasado, ha decidido sobre las mujeres jóvenes del siglo XXI.
               

                  Una mujer, una niña que se queda embarazada fruto de una violación o de una relación infructuosa no consentida, la vida de una madre que corre peligro o un feto que no tiene posibilidades de salir adelante: todo eso no importa. Lo único que importa es que el hijo nazca, aun sin tener en cuenta que pueda ser un niño sin madre o que pueda ser un niño en una familia sin recursos, con grandes necesidades.
               

                  Obligan a las mujeres a tener hijos no deseados, pero no las ayudan a nada más. En los Estados Unidos el derecho a llevar armas es indiscutible, el derecho de una mujer a decidir sobre su propio cuerpo no existe.
               

                  El aborto no desaparece al prohibirlo, solo desaparecen las condiciones de seguridad del aborto, que pasa a ser clandestino, en condiciones peligrosas muchas veces para la vida de las mujeres. Las mujeres que tengan recursos se irán a otros países y las que no, tendrán que poner en peligro sus vidas.
               

                  El derecho al aborto es un derecho humano inalienable. El Grupo Socialista ha pedido en reiteradas ocasiones la inclusión de los derechos sexuales y reproductivos, que comprenden el derecho al aborto seguro y legal, en la Carta de los Derechos Fundamentales de la Unión.
               

                  Mujeres de los Estados Unidos, mujeres del mundo, no estáis solas. Seguiremos luchando juntas, porque hay muchas mujeres que somos conscientes de lo importante que es luchar por nuestros derechos, para que nuestras hijas no puedan tener menos derechos que nuestras madres.
               

Stéphane Séjourné,
au nom du groupe Renew. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, le choc de la décision de la Cour suprême des États-Unis nous rappelle que rien n'est acquis. Ce Parlement, dont la première présidente fut Simone Veil, a le devoir d'afficher sans ambiguïté sa solidarité avec les Américains. En un jour, des millions de femmes ont perdu le droit à disposer de leur corps. Dans notre Union aussi, des millions de Polonaises ont perdu la possibilité d'avorter, car des juges inféodés au pouvoir l'avaient décidé.
               

                  D'ailleurs, sur ce sujet, l'extrême droite et la droite ultraconservatrice ne sont jamais transparentes dans leurs programmes politiques. En Europe, ces partis sont plus que jamais discrets pour ne pas nous effrayer lors des campagnes électorales. Ils avancent masqués, mais ils espèrent bien arriver à leurs fins, en utilisant notamment les voies dérivées de la justice. Et c'est d'ailleurs là que l'état de droit, le droit à l'avortement et le droit des femmes se rejoignent dans le combat politique. C'est en ce sens que je vous propose et que nous vous proposons, avec Renew Europe, une demande de clarification et de modification de la Charte européenne des droits fondamentaux. Nous reprenons ainsi la proposition du président de la République française et nous nous inspirons des initiatives française, belge et suédoise qui demandent la constitutionnalisation de l'IVG dans leur pays.
               

                  Le vote de jeudi sur la proposition est un test pour nos groupes politiques. Qui sera véritablement sincère? Qui va défendre le droit des femmes? Qui assumera politiquement de remettre en cause le droit à l'avortement? Qui votera pour, qui votera contre? Les groupes politiques sont face à leurs responsabilités.
               

                  Chers collègues, les Européens doivent savoir que, quels que soient les alternances politiques et les partis au pouvoir, les droits des femmes seront respectés. Les Européennes méritent la même protection que les journaux, les syndicats, les demandeurs d'asile, les propriétaires, les églises. Tous ont des garanties dans la Charte des droits fondamentaux. Tous ont leurs droits respectés dans cette Charte. Donnons donc aux femmes en Europe la garantie qu'aucun juge ne pourra détricoter ces droits et rappelons aux réactionnaires ce qu'ils sont vraiment: un reliquat du passé qui n'a aucun avenir dans l'Union européenne.
               

Terry Reintke,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, colleagues, in the state of Ohio, a 10-year-old girl has just been denied an abortion. Yes, you heard me right: a 10-year-old girl. The child-abuse doctor who was taking care of her had to arrange a referral to Indiana, a state where soon abortion could also be criminalised.
Denying abortion care to a 10-year-old victim of rape is not a policy based on another person's political opinion. It is a form of state-supported, gender-based violence. Forcing a 10-year-old victim of rape to go through with a pregnancy is simply brutal. But cases like this will be the outcome if we do not stand up to the aggressive authoritarian backlash that we are facing right now.
We cannot simply wait and see. We have to act, and we have to act now to stabilise and strengthen our fundamental rights to bodily autonomy, to protect us, to protect our children and future generations before it is too late.

Margarita de la Pisa Carrión,
en nombre del Grupo ECR. – Señora presidenta, el fin de ‘Roe contra Wade’ en los Estados Unidos supone una vuelta a la cordura, después de cincuenta años de confusión y desamparo por una mala interpretación del concepto libertad. La defensa de la vida ha tenido un lugar principal en la cultura e historia de su nación. No existe, por lo tanto, un reconocimiento constitucional del derecho al aborto. Esta sentencia invita a una reflexión, a mirar cara a cara a la realidad del aborto, sin palabras bonitas que nublan conciencias o premisas ideológicas que desnaturalizan a la mujer y nos empujan a despreciar el amor y la vida.
               

                  Durante el embarazo existe una realidad diminuta: evidente. Es ilógico pensar que, si se desea, es un bebé, y si no, pues se desecha, como si fuera un objeto.
               

                  Ábranse a un modo nuevo de entender la vida. No tengan miedo. Si falta la dimensión espiritual y trascendente, si solo valoramos la dimensión material, se instrumentaliza la existencia humana y se mercantilizan las relaciones. La protección de la vida no puede cuestionarse, no depende de circunstancias. No hacerlo nos desprotege a todos, especialmente a los más frágiles. La garantía de la seguridad de los derechos humanos radica en afirmar la vida.
               

Sandra Pereira,
em nome do Grupo The Left. – Senhora Presidente, os retrocessos e os progressos na forma como as sociedades têm olhado para a prática do aborto estão indissociavelmente ligados aos retrocessos e aos progressos da condição feminina.
               

                  O aborto tem de ser encarado como um problema de saúde pública e como uma questão interligada com os direitos fundamentais da mulher. A luta das mulheres pelo acesso a direitos sexuais e reprodutivos e ao domínio da sua sexualidade é uma luta secular que tem passado por perseguições que se prolongam, infelizmente, até aos dias de hoje.
               

                  Os efeitos danosos e as consequências nefastas que esta decisão terá na dignidade humana e na saúde reprodutiva das mulheres norte-americanas deveriam indignar-nos a todas e a todos, mulheres e homens, para quem a exigência da participação e a tomada de posição é um ato de cidadania consciente na defesa dos direitos das mulheres.
               

                  A igualdade tem de ser plena, concreta, e não há igualdade sem direitos. Daqui expressamos a nossa solidariedade para com as mulheres que sentem na pele estes retrocessos inaceitáveis, na certeza de que nenhum direito se perde para sempre.
               

Laura Ferrara (NI). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, è recente la notizia stampa di una bambina di dieci anni incinta perché vittima di stupro, a cui la legge nega l'aborto in Ohio, e per eseguirlo è stata chiesta assistenza medica nel vicino Stato dell'Indiana.
               

                  Questo dramma descrive i primi, devastanti effetti della retrograda decisione della Corte suprema statunitense, che cancella la protezione garantita a livello federale del diritto all'aborto.
               

                  Negli Stati Uniti e in alcuni stati membri dell'Unione europea è in atto un preoccupante regresso nel campo della tutela della salute e dei diritti sessuali e riproduttivi delle donne.
               

                  È solo ipocrisia pensare di impedire gli aborti criminalizzandoli, rendendoli inaccessibili, non legali e insicuri; quando ciò avviene aumenta infatti il ricorso a interruzioni di gravidanza clandestine, si mettono in pericolo vite, si creano discriminazioni tra chi può permettersi i servizi sanitari in un differente Stato e chi non può.
               

                  Diventare madre dovrebbe essere ovunque una scelta fondata su diritti universalmente riconosciuti e non il risultato di un'imposizione o, peggio ancora, di una violenza.
               

Nathalie Colin-Oesterlé (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, il y a une semaine, la Cour suprême américaine a mis fin à la jurisprudence quasi cinquantenaire qui consacrait le droit à l'avortement des femmes américaines. Cet arrêt ne rend pas automatiquement l'avortement illégal: il permet aux États de le considérer comme tel. Et vous l'avez rappelé, quatorze États ont ainsi déjà pénalisé l'avortement ou sont en passe de le faire.
               

                  C'est évidemment une grave régression pour les droits des femmes, et cela ne concerne pas que les États-Unis. Nous le savons: sur notre propre continent européen, les droits des femmes sont aussi menacés. Si l'avortement relève de la compétence de chaque État membre, le Parlement européen peut se prononcer. Il doit même le faire lorsque cela devient un enjeu de santé publique. Dans le monde, une femme meurt toutes les neuf minutes d'un avortement clandestin. Alors que nous construisons ici l'Europe de la santé, dans ce Parlement dont Simone Veil a été la présidente, et alors que nous légiférons pour permettre à tous les citoyens européens un accès égal aux soins, pouvons-nous continuer à accepter que des femmes mettent ainsi leur vie en danger?
               

                  Nous le savons: le fait de limiter l'accès à l'avortement n'en réduit pas le nombre. Nous devons donc rester extrêmement vigilants afin que la santé publique l'emporte sur toute autre considération.
               

Evelyn Regner (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Frau Kommissarin! Abtreibungen kann man nicht verhindern. Punkt. Man kann nur sichere und legale Abtreibungen verbieten und damit das Leben von Frauen aufs Spiel setzen. Roe vs. Wade hat Auswirkungen auf uns! 2021 haben erzkonservative Anti-Choice-Gruppen aus den USA Millionen US-Dollar nach Europa gepumpt, um hier unsere Rechte zu beschränken. Die österreichische Branche allein hat neuneinhalb Millionen US-Dollar erhalten. Das ist gesteuerte Einflussnahme auf unser demokratisches System.
               

                  Wir müssen deshalb unsere Werte verteidigen. Das ist das Recht auf Selbstbestimmung über den eigenen Körper, das Recht auf medizinische Grundversorgung sowie der Zugang zu sicheren legalen Schwangerschaftsabbrüchen. Unsere Großmütter, unsere Mütter haben sich lautstark für das Recht auf Abtreibung eingesetzt und dafür gekämpft. Das müssen wir verteidigen – wir, das sind Frauen, das sind Männer, Jung und Alt. Wir müssen dafür sorgen, dass sich die Gesellschaft weiterentwickelt. Und deshalb: Pro-choice for every woman, also in Europe.
               

María Soraya Rodríguez Ramos (Renew). – Señora presidenta, hace un mes estábamos aquí hablando de una filtración de una sentencia. Se ha cumplido la peor expectativa, lo peor que esperábamos de ello. Y es que las peores expectativas se están cerniendo sobre el derecho fundamental al aborto. No solo en los Estados Unidos, también aquí, en Europa, en todas las partes del mundo. Por eso hoy es el momento de dejar atrás las condenas y de dar pasos activos.
               

                  ¿Qué es lo que representa esta Resolución? Un paso hacia adelante. Cuando el aborto deja de ser un derecho constitucional en los Estados Unidos, tenemos que hacer que sea un derecho fundamental en la Unión Europea. Por eso, la propuesta es muy clara: modifiquemos la Carta, introduzcamos en el título 2 un artículo 7 bis nuevo: en la Unión Europea todos tienen derecho a un aborto legal y seguro.
               

                  Las mujeres en Hungría, las mujeres en Polonia, las mujeres en Malta son todas mujeres europeas, libres, iguales, con los mismos derechos fundamentales, igual que los hombres. No hay en el siglo XXI una carta de derechos fundamentales que excluya a la mitad de la población.
               

Alice Kuhnke (Verts/ALE). – Fru talman! Vi lever i en verklighet där många kvinnor inte själva bestämmer om de vill ha sex eller inte och därför inte själva kan bestämma om de vill bli gravida. Därutöver finns det mängder av anledningar till att man vill avbryta en graviditet. Oavsett vilka skäl som ligger bakom viljan att göra abort, är det ofta ett svårt beslut – ibland det svåraste beslutet i en kvinnas liv.
               

                  Samtidigt pågår det en strid om huruvida det är individen som ska bestämma eller om det är staten som ska bestämma att du ska vara gravid, oavsett vad du själv vill.
               

                  Vi som är beredda att försvara våra friheter måste sätta stopp för den värdekonservativa utvecklingen. Ett konkret första steg att göra det är att se till att aborträtten blir en del av EU:s grundläggande rättigheter.
               

Έλενα Κουντουρά (The Left). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριοι συνάδελφοι, η απόφαση του Ανωτάτου Δικαστηρίου των Ηνωμένων Πολιτειών που απαγορεύει το δικαίωμα στην άμβλωση σηματοδοτεί ένα επικίνδυνο πλήγμα του ακραίου συντηρητισμού στα θεμελιώδη δικαιώματα των γυναικών και ανατρέπει κατακτήσεις που κατοχυρώθηκαν στις σύγχρονες κοινωνίες μέσα από πολύχρονους αγώνες. Η απόφαση αυτή το μόνο που θα καταφέρει είναι να τερματίσει τις ασφαλείς αμβλώσεις. Οι γυναίκες θα στρέφονται πλέον σε επικίνδυνες πρακτικές και σε παράνομες κλινικές. Και αυτό θα έχει ανθρώπινο κόστος.
               

                  Στηρίζουμε με όλες μας τις δυνάμεις τον αγώνα που κάνουν οι προοδευτικοί πολίτες των Ηνωμένων Πολιτειών, ώστε να εμποδίσουν αυτήν την απαγόρευση.
               

                  Το δικαίωμα των γυναικών στην άμβλωση δεν είναι προς διαπραγμάτευση. Η κατοχύρωση βασικών ελευθεριών των γυναικών, όπως αυτή της αυτοδιάθεσης του σώματός τους, δεν ακυρώνεται από δικαστικές αποφάσεις. Η πρόσβαση σε ασφαλή, νόμιμη και αποτελεσματική άμβλωση είναι βαθιά ριζωμένη στο διεθνές δίκαιο ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων και έχουμε χρέος να την υπερασπιστούμε με κάθε τρόπο, τόσο στις ΗΠΑ όσο και στην Ευρώπη.
               

Miroslav Radačovský (NI). – Vo výzve Komisie adresovanej Spojeným štátom americkým z dôvodu, že nechcú dodržiavať základné ľudské práva, právo žien na aborciu, mi chýba jedna podstatná vec. Pokiaľ Spojené štáty americké nebudú rešpektovať náš názor a názor civilizovaného sveta, aké sankcie voči nim uplatníme? Buď zastavíme, alebo obmedzíme dodávky zbraní do Európy, alebo zmrazíme majetok sudcom Najvyššieho súdu, neviem, pretože nemôžeme rozdiel robiť medzi Poľskom, Maďarskom a Spojenými štátmi americkými. A pokiaľ sa týka práva žien na aborciu, ja si nemyslím, že to je nejaké právo. Je to otázka svedomia, charakteru ženy. Je to otázka, ako sa rozhodne. Záhradník, ktorý je vlastníkom záhrady, môže zašliapnuť semeno, z ktorého vyrastie krásny kvet. Môže to urobiť, veď je to jeho záhrada. Je to jeho právo, ale v skutočnosti je to barbarstvo, čiže ja k tomu len toľko.
               

                  A ešte by som sa chcel zaoberať listom alebo výzvou niektorých poslancov z Renew, niektorí z poslancov z Renew, pokiaľ sa týka, že z Parlamentu by mali byť vyhodení všetci tí, ktorí majú iný názor na otázku života, na otázku teda aborcie, na ktorú ak sa už k tejto výzve radí (predsedajúca prerušila rečníka) vyjadriť, čo to je, to je totálny bullshit alebo ja neviem, ako to povedať. To je všetko.
               

(Rečník súhlasil, že bude reagovať na vystúpenie po zdvihnutí modrej karty)


Karen Melchior (Renew),
blue-card speech. – I was a little bit surprised when I was listening to you speak and comparing women as human beings to gardens and gardeners. My body is what propels me into the world and what is the basis of my actions into the world, and it is crucial that we as human people are able to decide over our own lives and our own bodies. And I would like to hear you explain how you can compare women's bodies and their possibility to decide over their own lives to a gardener and a garden and a seed in the ground.

Miroslav Radačovský (NI),
reakcia na vystúpenie po zdvihnutí modrej karty. – môžem vám to vysvetliť. Pokiaľ v tele ženy alebo kohokoľvek bujnie život alebo naopak, pokiaľ v tele ženy bujnie niečo zlé, rakovinový nádor, prípadne sepsa, je potrebné ju z tela odstrániť. Ja ako človek, ja sa nezaoberám ľudsky, ako človek, ako otec rodiny a dedo, neviem pochopiť, ako človek, a neberiem nikomu názor, ako niekto môže odstraňovať z tela, keď tam bujnie život ? Ja nehovorím, či je to právo. Pred chvíľou som povedal, je to právo ženy. Ja to jednoducho vnútorne neviem pochopiť. Preto som to prirovnal k záhradníkovi, je tam semeno, klíči život. Je to jeho právo. Je právo ženy to urobiť. Ja ako človek to pochopiť neviem, to je všetko.
               

Tonino Picula (S&D). – Hvala, gospođo predsjedavajuća, odluka Vrhovnog suda SAD-a o poništavanju prava na pobačaj opasan je presedan i dokaz ‘trumpizam’, nažalost, nije nestao s njegovim mandatom. Upravo zbog toga moramo učiniti sve da spriječimo slične inicijative u našim društvima koje se nadahnjuju ovom ponižavajućom odlukom.
               

                  U tim traumatičnim i nikad jednostavnim situacijama, žene moraju imati mogućnost samostalno odlučivati o vlastitom tijelu i reproduktivnom zdravlju, bez pritisaka i uvjetovanja, te dobiti odgovarajuću skrb u svom gradu i svojoj zemlji.
               

                  Nažalost, zdravstveni je sustav i u Hrvatskoj premrežen najkonzervativnijim utjecajem pa tako u javnom zdravstvenom sustavu imamo cijele bolnice u kojima liječnici odbijaju pravo na pristup pobačaju.
               

                  Vrijeme je da u cijeloj Europskoj uniji, pa tako i Hrvatskoj, pravo na pobačaj dodatno zakonski osiguramo uključivanjem u nacionalne ustave i Povelju Europske unije o temeljnim pravima.
               

                  Pravo žene na izbor ne smije biti opozivo. Naša obveza je da to pravo i osiguramo i branimo!
               

Samira Rafaela (Renew). – Voorzitter, hoe vaak heb ik hier gestaan en gesignaleerd dat het recht op veilige en legale abortus een fundamenteel recht is en dat dit een noodzakelijke voorwaarde is voor de zelfbeschikking, het recht op gezondheid en de lichamelijke integriteit van vrouwen? Als je het mij vraagt: veel te vaak.
               

                  Keer op keer hebben we te maken met extremisten die de ongezonde behoefte hebben zich te bemoeien met het lichaam van vrouwen, die terug willen in de tijd, die willen dat vrouwen teruggaan naar die kleerhanger. De extremisten in Europa hebben zichzelf verzameld in de zogenaamde ‘Agenda Europe’, waar ze hun destructieve plannen uiteenzetten en nu al uitvoeren. Ook hier. Denk aan het de facto verbod op abortus in Polen. Denk aan de anti-lhbti-wetgeving in Hongarije. Dat zijn plannen tegen vrouwen, tegen de lhbti+-gemeenschap en tegen mensenrechten.
               

                  Dat is onacceptabel. Dat moeten we onmogelijk maken en daarom gaan we het recht op abortus moeten verankeren in het Handvest van de grondrechten van de Europese Unie. Want dit zijn extremisten, van de VS tot in het Europees Parlement, en die hebben hier niks te zoeken, niks te vinden van onze fundamentele rechten.
               

Gwendoline Delbos-Corfield (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, l'avortement est une question éminemment politique, témoin et instrument d'un choix de société, et cela à travers l'histoire des femmes.
               

                  Ce n'est pas seulement un sujet d'ordre privé et une problématique majeure de santé publique. C'est encore moins un problème moral. Quand un gouvernement met ou remet en place des lois de restriction ou d'interdiction de l'avortement, ce n'est jamais par hasard. C'est parce qu'une trajectoire autoritaire, l'influence dangereuse d'une religion ou une idéologie réactionnaire exigent le contrôle du corps des femmes pour mieux contrôler la population de cet État. Il s'agit de renvoyer les femmes au foyer pour mieux soumettre la société; du premier signe d'une répression plus globale des libertés et des droits dans un pays; d'un raisonnement démographique raciste pour assurer la suprématie d'un peuple autochtone; ou même du besoin de créer une masse de travailleurs pour la production industrielle. Cela fut le cas au XIXe siècle. Depuis toujours, contrôler la sexualité des femmes et leur capacité de reproduction est un enjeu politique organisé au service des pires désirs de coercition du pouvoir.
               

Spontane Wortmeldungen


Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria de Igualdad, hoy es 4 de julio. Hoy hace 246 años de la Declaración de Independencia de los Estados Unidos y por eso es su fiesta nacional. Es el acta mítica fundacional de una democracia que hoy se manifiesta herida, fracturada y expuesta a graves retrocesos.
               

                  Y sí, es triste que esos retrocesos vengan impuestos por un Tribunal Supremo de composición arcaica, escorado como nunca a la derecha ultraconservadora, como consecuencia de los nombramientos impuestos por el presidente Bush. Y nada puede hacer este Parlamento Europeo con respecto al daño que esto causa a los Estados Unidos. Pero sí puede, y debe, este Parlamento Europeo recalcar que la libre igualdad, el libre desarrollo de la personalidad, los derechos sexuales y reproductivos y, por tanto, el derecho a la interrupción voluntaria del embarazo, son derechos fundamentales en la Unión Europea, que deben observar la Unión Europea y todos sus Estados miembros. Y, en este campo, no podemos dar un solo paso atrás.
               

                  Por tanto, el Parlamento Europeo tiene que centrarse en reclamar que aquellos Estados que todavía no reconocen la interrupción voluntaria del embarazo lo hagan, porque es una dimanación de un derecho fundamental protegido por la Carta de los Derechos Fundamentales de la Unión Europea.
               

Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR). – Voorzitter, de schrapping van het landelijke recht op abortus in de Verenigde Staten heeft ook in Europa veel in beweging gebracht. Prolifeorganisaties mogen op toenemende belangstelling rekenen. Jongeren blijken aanmerkelijk kritischer te zijn over abortus dan hun ouders. Ik vind dat allemaal hoopgevend.
               

                  De kunst is nu om het noodzakelijke debat ook hier in Europa op een waardige wijze met elkaar te voeren. Dat doen we niet door organisaties uit het Parlement te weren, zoals sommigen hier bepleiten. Dat zijn tactieken die ze in dictaturen als China en Noord-Korea toepassen. Daar moeten we ons verre van houden. Laten we ons concentreren op het bieden van de noodzakelijke hulp. Hulp voor moeder en kind. Want abortus is geen oplossing en zeker geen mensenrecht.
               

                  Wat zou het mooi zijn als we over tien jaar zouden kunnen zeggen: de uitspraak van het Hooggerechtshof heeft een keerpunt gebracht in het denken in Europa over abortus. We zijn weer in gaan zien dat ieder leven beschermwaardig is, ook het ongeboren leven.
               

Irène Tolleret (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, non, la lutte pour le droit à l'avortement n'est pas dépassée, n'en déplaise à ceux qui, dans notre hémicycle, s'obstinent à dire le contraire. La décision de la Cour suprême des États-Unis nous rappelle tragiquement que le droit à l'avortement n'est jamais vraiment acquis. Nous devons absolument retenir les leçons de cette situation dramatique et agir rapidement.
               

                  Je suis désolée de devoir reprendre le combat de nos grands-mères; car cette décision est le fruit de l'entrisme des mouvements religieux ultraconservateurs dans les lieux de pouvoir aux États-Unis, ces mêmes mouvements qui sont présents dans notre enceinte. C'est pour cela que c'est très bien que nous ne les laissions plus entrer et que nous luttions complètement contre la présence sur le sol européen de ces mouvements, qui sont parfois financés par des sources étrangères et qui, insidieusement, gagnent en puissance dans l'Union européenne.
               

                  Il y a urgence, urgence à lutter contre les mouvements rétrogrades, urgence surtout à protéger le droit à l'avortement de leurs attaques; car à la fin, celles qui trinquent, ce sont les femmes, en particulier les plus fragiles. Alors faisons un pas de plus vers une Europe protectrice de nos valeurs en inscrivant le droit à l'avortement dans la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l'Union européenne. Faisons ce choix aujourd'hui, car demain il sera peut-être trop tard.
               

Patryk Jaki (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Otóż chciałem przypomnieć, że dopiero potępiliście Polskę za rozwiązania w sądownictwie, które nota bene sami stosujecie, ale twierdziliście, że robicie to dlatego, bo bronicie prawa sędziów do niezawisłości. A teraz co robicie? Chcecie potępić sędziów Stanów Zjednoczonych za to, że skorzystali ze swojej niezawisłości. To jest ten prawdziwy trójpodział władzy według Was: sędziowie mogą sądzić tylko tak, jak Wy chcecie. Pogratulować!
               

                  Ponadto chcecie uczyć moralności Amerykę, której tak bardzo nienawidzicie. Ale tak naprawdę co zrobiliście, żeby bronić życia dzieci na Ukrainie? A przecież przypomnę, że Ukraina to jest granica Unii, a nie Stanów Zjednoczonych. I tak się jakoś dziwnie składa, że Stany Zjednoczone potrafią tam wysłać broń. A Wy co? Przypomnijmy: Niemcy. Co obiecaliście? 30 dział Gepard. Do dziś ich nie ma, bo – cytuję – okazało się, że nie ma amunicji. Wyrzutnie Mars. Jednak ich nie ma, bo mówicie, że są problemy z oprogramowaniem. Systemy IRIS-T – brak, bo komplet okazał się niegotowy.
               

                  Swoją bezczynnością wspieracie śmierć niewinnych dzieci. I wcale się nie dziwię, Szanowni Państwo, że chcecie potępić dziś Stany Zjednoczone za to, że chcą bronić życia. Godna pożałowania konsekwencja.
               

                  Wiem, że jestem tutaj w mniejszości, zdecydowanej mniejszości, ale nawet gdybym był tutaj sam, to ktoś musi bronić życia. Ktoś musi bronić życia tych najsłabszych. I będziemy to robić do końca, bo my jesteśmy za cywilizacją życia, a nie za cywilizacją śmierci.
               

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, the US Supreme Court has dealt a devastating blow to abortion rights. It's a dark development and could have been prevented. In 2008, when Obama was canvassing for election he promised that: ‘the first thing I'll do’, he said, ‘as President, is sign the freedom of choice act’. Yet, just a year later, he said, ‘the freedom of choice act is not my highest legislative priority.’ The hypocrisy was scary.
Now we have a Supreme Court that the far-right has packed with Christian fanatics, and still the Democrats have made no real effort to protect abortion rights. It makes clear what we've known for a long time: it doesn't really matter which corporate-owned party is in power in America – be it Republican or Democrat – human rights are now being dismantled and the Democrats have refused to call the Republicans to heel. They're too busy waging war themselves and prosecuting journalists for exposing war crimes. This is a human right. How can we listen to the Americans talk about anyone else's treatment of human rights?

Ladislav Ilčić (ECR). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, dame i gospodo, Idi Amin, diktator iz Ugande, jednom je rekao: ‘Garantiram slobodu govora, ali ne garantiram slobodu nakon govora’. Drugim riječima, taj diktator je poručio svojim građanima da mogu reći što misle, ali da, ako se to njemu neće dopasti, onda će ih on strpati u zatvor.
               

                  Tako i neki naši kolege koji se nazivaju liberalima i načelno se zalažu za slobodu govora, danas dok su činjenice, znanstvene činjenice jasne, dok se zna da život, da srce djeteta počne kucati u dvadesetom danu trudnoće, da se ne radi o ženinom tijelu, nego o jednom drugom organizmu s drugom genetskom strukturom, da pravo na pobačaj nije temeljno ljudsko pravo, nigdje nije zapisano, danas, dok se sve to zna, onda bi naši kolege nama svima oduzeli slobodu govora, slobodu da kažemo što mislimo.
               

                  Da, riječ je o emotivnoj odluci. Čim se radi o nezaštićenom djetetu, čim se radi o ženi, trudnoj ženi koja ima ekonomske probleme i kojoj možemo pomoći, naravno da se radi o emocijama. Ali, radi se ipak o razumnoj odluci koju u slobodi možemo i moramo svi zajedno donijeti.
               

Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, vicious divisions in US society have again been exposed in the aftermath of the decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and the devastating impact on access to safe abortion. Because we know, of course, that outlawing abortion does not lead to a reduction in abortion, but only to a reduction in safe abortion, endangering women's lives in the process. And as somebody coming from Ireland, where we only in recent years got rid of our ban, we know that women pay with their lives.
And we have to revisit this constant mantra that the US are our like-minded partners. Really? Is it like-minded of EU values that we would like-mind ourselves with a society where women are condemned as second-class citizens, denied the right to bodily integrity by a politically appointed judiciary. And it's all very well President Biden saying he'd like to codify the legislation. Well, why didn't the Democrats do it when they had the chance? It's their failure. It's another political failure. Collective action and solidarity by ordinary people is the only way to deliver on this and in that, they have our full support.

Assita Kanko (ECR). – Madam President, I would like to say, frankly speaking, on the day when men will be able to give birth, on the day when men will be able to be pregnant and become mothers, then, on that day only, will they have the right to tell me what to do with my body. They will have the right on that day to tell my daughter what to do with her body. But today that is not the case. So please live with that. Women have the right to decide for themselves. Women are sovereign over their own body, within the boundaries of the law.
So I stand behind abortion rights. Women must decide by themselves if they want to be mothers or not. But what I regret is that in this Parliament, we forget to defend the rights of Muslim women. Women from my background who mostly cannot even choose if and when they want to have sex or if and when they even want to be married and with whom. Or if they want to divorce, they cannot because they are kept in marital captivity.
So please let us stand up for all women. Let us stand up every day for all women. Because The Handmaid's Tale we have been speaking about is not playing only far away in the US where Roe v. Wade is overruled, but also here in homes near our own, because we do not have the courage to defend the rights of Muslim women.

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)


Helena Dalli,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, thank you for this debate. That a raped and pregnant 10-year-old girl is told to consider her situation an opportunity is, of course, inhumane and unacceptable. Women's and girls' rights are at risk, endangering the achievements fought for, which are at the very core of EU values.
The aim to achieve full gender equality, the full and equal enjoyment of all rights for all women and girls in all their diversity should guide our actions. We need to continue to push forward on women's rights. Strong women's rights are an asset and an achievement the whole of Europe should be proud of. We should push forward.
The EU will continue to engage with partners across the globe to advance the full enjoyment of the human rights of women. We need to stand with all women in all their diversity. Limiting rights would only create greater injustice and inequalities.

Die Präsidentin. – Entschließungsanträge zum Abschluss dieser Aussprache können bis morgen, 5. Juli, 12.00 Uhr, eingereicht werden.
               

                  Die Aussprache ist damit geschlossen.
               

                  Die Abstimmung findet am Donnerstag statt.
               

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 171 GO)


Romana Jerković (S&D),
napisan. – Moć se nikada ne daje, moć se uvijek uzima. Svjedočimo stalnim nasrtajima na prava žena, posebice pravo na izbor. I ne, to se ne događa samo u SAD-u, već i u Europskoj uniji u kojoj već godinama jačaju toksične inicijative kao što je Agenda Europe.
               

                  Imamo li adekvatan odgovor? Bojim se da ne. Uljuljkani u liberalno samozadovoljstvo zaboravljamo da borba za jednakopravnost nikada ne završava te da se i danas moramo boriti za naša prava, pomicati granice, a ne živjeti u iluziji da je moć za koju su se žene krvavo borile naše stečeno pravo.
               

Matjaž Nemec (S&D),
pisno. – Kako je mogoče, da so v ‘modernih demokracijah’, kjer naj bi bile spoštovane pravice vseh in vsakogar, kratene temeljne pravice več kot polovici prebivalstva?
               

                  Dejstvo, da je Vrhovno sodišče v ZDA razveljavilo ustavno zaščito do pravice do splava, je šokantno in škodljivo za ženske. V več državah je v veljavo vstopila zakonodaja, ki pravico do splava zelo omejuje ali pa jo prepoveduje. Predvsem pa poglablja družbene in ekonomske razlike, saj bo neenakomerno prizadela zlasti manj premožne ter socialno ogrožene, ki so po večinoma temnopolti in pripadniki manjšin.
               

                  Zato še toliko bolj pozdravljam resolucijo EP, v kateri države članice EU poziva, naj v Listino o temeljnih pravicah vključijo pravico do zakonitega in varnega splava.
               

                  Evropa ne sme nikoli postati Amerika! Boj za enakopravnost žensk po svetu je terjal že premnogo energije, poguma in tudi žrtev. Žalosti me, da smo po toliko letih znova prisiljeni braniti in se boriti za pravice, ki so že bile enkrat izborjene. Socialisti in demokrati smo na strani žensk in deklic in ne bomo dopustili, da bi se ta nevarni trend desničarskih konservativnih sil nadaljeval. Vsaka ženska v Evropi mora imeti pravico odločati o svojem telesu. Spolno in reproduktivno zdravje žensk je temeljna človekova pravica in pika!
               

Sylwia Spurek (Verts/ALE),
na piśmie. – Czy wiecie, że w wielu państwach świata aborcja jest jedynym świadczeniem zdrowotnym, które ma swoje szczególne regulacje prawne? Dla żadnego innego zabiegu, usługi czy interwencji medycznej nie przyjmuje się specjalnych przepisów, tylko właśnie dla zabiegu przerwania ciąży. Dlaczego? Bo chodzi o kontrolę kobiet, o ograniczenie ich praw. Podobnie jest z orzecznictwem. I orzeczenie Sądu Najwyższego Stanów Zjednoczonych dobitnie to pokazuje.
               

                  Aborcja jest prawem człowieka kobiet. Ograniczanie dostępu do aborcji to naruszenie prawa do godności, bezpieczeństwa, zdrowia i życia. Co istotne, najbardziej na ograniczeniu dostępu do aborcji ucierpią kobiety mniej zamożne, z niepełnosprawnościami, bezrobotne, z mniejszości, migrantki. Ograniczanie dostępu do przerwania ciąży dotknie najbardziej te kobiety, które mają gorzej, a te lepiej sytuowane, wykształcone, zamożne jakoś sobie poradzą.
               

                  I muszą to wiedzieć ci, którzy tworzą regulacje określające ograniczenia i zakazy. I to oni będą odpowiedzialni za wszelkie konsekwencje tych ograniczeń i zakazów.
               

Monika Vana (Verts/ALE),
schriftlich. – Auch, wenn es erfreuliche Nachrichten zu dem Thema aus Deutschland gibt – dort wurde erst kürzlich das Werbeverbot für Schwangerschaftsabbrüche aufgehoben, was einen wichtigen Schritt in der Aufklärung und Informationsmöglichkeit zu dem Thema darstellt – müssen wir auch in der Europäischen Union sehr wachsam sein. Wir müssen für die Unantastbarkeit der Rechte von Frauen und LGBTIQ*-Personen in allen EU-Mitgliedsstaaten kämpfen, an jedem einzelnen Tag.
               

                  In den vergangenen Monaten hat sich das Europaparlament mehrmals zu Entscheidungsfreiheit und Zugang zu Sexuellen und Reproduktiven Rechten geäußert und deutliche Resolutionen verabschiedet. Eine große Mehrheit des Europaparlaments spricht sich klar gegen jegliche Art von Verboten und Restriktionen von Schwangerschaftsabbrüchen aus. Aus Anlass der jüngsten skandalösen Aufhebung des Grundsatzurteils in den USA aus den 70er Jahren zum Zugang zur Abtreibung durch den US Supreme Court fordern wir den Europäischen Rat auf, die Charta der Grundrechte der Europäischen Union zu ergänzen und das Recht auf sichere und rechtlich zulässige Schwangerschaftsabbrüche hinzuzufügen. Verbote führen nicht dazu, dass es Schwangerschaftsabbrüche nicht mehr gibt, sondern dass sie unter gefährlichen Umständen durchgeführt werden. Es ist wichtig, sexuelle Gewalt entschieden zu bekämpfen, eine umfassende, altersgerechte Sexualerziehung für alle anzubieten, sowie sichere und bezahlbare Verhütungsmittel zur Verfügung zu stellen!
               
13.   Composition of committees and delegations

Die Präsidentin. – Damit komme ich zu einer Mitteilung:
               

                  Die ID-Fraktion hat der Präsidentin einen Beschluss über die Änderung von Ernennungen in einer Delegation übermittelt. Dieser Beschluss wird im Protokoll der heutigen Sitzung veröffentlicht und tritt am Tage dieser Ankündigung in Kraft.
               
14.   Loss of life, violence and inhumane treatment against people seeking international protection at the Spanish-Moroccan border (debate)

Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärung der Kommission zum Thema ‘Todesfälle, Gewalt und unmenschliche Behandlung von Menschen, die an der spanisch-marokkanischen Grenze um internationalen Schutz ersuchen’ (2022/2748(RSP)).
               

Ylva Johansson,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, my thanks go to Parliament for organising this important debate. My thoughts today are with the people who died in Melilla, with those who were injured and with their families. I never forget the images of the dead and living.
Loss of life at the European border is unacceptable. Violence at our EU border is unacceptable. The facts, as we know today are that on Friday, 24 June, up to 2 500 people tried to force their way into Spain. Twenty-three migrants confirmed dead, but I am afraid there might be even more casualties, a lot more injured. Not only migrants, also a high number of law enforcement officers, who were put under great pressure.
We also know 134 people arrived in the Melilla migration centre in Spain, mostly from Sudan. Many of them are young, possibly minors. Most have stated their intention to apply for asylum. It's very difficult to know exactly what happened on that Black Friday.
But what we know for now is that the migrants tried to cross at a border crossing in Nador reserved for local residents. This crossing has four narrow corridors. A large crowd entered at once, causing a stampede, crushing many of these young men and boys to death. Others fell to their deaths from a six metre high wall.
It's unacceptable that people try to force themselves across the EU border using violent means, and it's unacceptable that people die in this way at our EU border. The priority is now to provide medical care and fully establish the facts.
I strongly support calls by the United Nations and the African Union for investigations into this tragic loss of life. I welcome that in the meantime the Spanish public prosecutor is carrying out an investigation. And in Morocco, the National Human Rights Commission has launched an information mission.
What we can say in general is that 99% of irregular migrants use smugglers. Most migrants in Morocco have been smuggled. It seems those involved in the incident were smuggled mainly from Sudan through Libya and Algeria, through a desert that can be every bit as deadly as the Mediterranean or Atlantic, a desert where smugglers leave people to die.
This is what I learned directly from people when I visited Agadez in Niger. Smugglers take people's money and dump them along the route and leave them to their fate, leaving them in a hopeless situation, where they might commit such desperate acts.
The only way to manage migration to Europe is to engage with partners outside Europe along the routes. Since the start of my mandate, I have been building and working on strong migration partnership with partner countries, countries of origin and transit and destination. In Africa I have visited Egypt, Ethiopia, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, Tunisia, Morocco to build partnerships addressing the root causes of migration, so people don't feel the need to risk their lives on dangerous journeys, and to improve possibilities for legal migration, and to fight the smugglers, raising awareness about the dangers and boosting law enforcement cooperation, and supporting partners in border management.
Upholding fundamental rights is key to all of these partnerships. Morocco is a key strategic partner of the European Union to manage migration and to fight smuggling. In this year alone, Morocco prevented 26 000 irregular departures, one tenth of them saved at sea.
We have a very good cooperation with Spain and I am in close contact with the Spanish Government. I intend to engage with Morocco further to discuss the tragic events in Melilla and to further strengthen our comprehensive partnership on migration.
In closing, let me say that, first, Melilla showed once again that Europe needs the pact on migration and asylum. We are making good progress. Let's get it adopted in full. Second, in all situations, people must be treated with dignity and respect for fundamental rights.
Finally, Melilla is an alarm call. More people will put their fate in the hands of smugglers and embark on desperate, dangerous journeys. We must do everything in our power to save lives in partnership with countries of origin and transit, and treat people with respect and according to their rights.

Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez,
en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señora presidenta, lo sucedido en la frontera marroquí el pasado día 24, como usted ha descrito, señora comisaria, es una tragedia sin paliativos. La muerte de decenas de personas no puede calificarse en ningún caso de asunto bien resuelto, como hizo Pedro Sánchez, el presidente del Gobierno de España.
               

                  Lejos de estar bien resuelta, la gestión de la compleja situación de la frontera sur por parte de su Gobierno es un cúmulo de desaciertos. No está bien resuelta la política migratoria errática y de bandazos, que ha pasado del efecto llamada del Aquarius y la retirada de las concertinas a la actual complacencia ante el desastre humanitario. No está bien resuelta la política de interior que deja desprotegida la dotación de fuerzas y cuerpos de seguridad española en frontera, sin los adecuados medios técnicos, material disuasorio ni medidas antiintrusión. Y no está bien resuelta tampoco la política internacional que ha alterado el delicado equilibrio del Magreb y ha logrado enemistar al mismo tiempo a España con dos de sus grandes socios estratégicos, como son Marruecos y Argelia.
               

                  Todo está bien resuelto en el mundo paralelo de la propaganda de Sánchez, pero prácticamente nada en el mundo real. Por eso, necesitamos un cambio. Necesitamos un Gobierno que recupere la credibilidad de España y de Europa en el norte de África, y necesitamos un Gobierno transparente y fiable que retome los lazos de colaboración y que responda de manera efectiva a la presión migratoria para evitar que se repitan tragedias similares.
               

Birgit Sippel,
im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Der tragische Verlust von Menschenleben vor Melilla an der marokkanisch-spanischen Grenze zeigt, wie dringend wir eine solidarische Migrationspolitik brauchen.
               

                  Die EU ist eine Werteunion. Tatsächlich? Was ich sehe, ist: Es mangelt derzeit an Solidarität mit Mitgliedstaaten an der Außengrenze, an Solidarität mit Bürgerinnen und Kommunen, die sich für Geflüchtete einsetzen. Es mangelt an Solidarität mit schutzsuchenden Menschen, die sich auf ein Grundrecht der EU berufen. Und jenseits reiner Grenzkontrollen brauchen wir endlich echte partnerschaftliche Kooperationen mit Drittstaaten.
               

                  Doch anstatt unsere Werte durch konkretes Handeln zu verteidigen, gibt es Schuldzuweisungen – jeder gegen jeden. Und dabei sind wir alle gemeinsam verantwortlich. Unsere Verträge fordern eine Politik im Geiste von Solidarität und geteilter Verantwortung. Und die Missachtung der Verträge macht kriminelle Banden zu Profiteuren dieses Versagens und gleichzeitig Geflüchtete und unsere Werte zu ihren Opfern.
               

                  Doch der Umgang mit Geflüchteten aus der Ukraine zeigt: Noch können wir das Steuer herumreißen. Noch können wir schutzsuchende Menschen schnell und menschenwürdig bei uns aufnehmen, unterbringen und dann auch integrieren. Es bräuchte nur den politischen Willen von Mitgliedstaaten und Kommission.
               

Jordi Cañas,
en nombre del Grupo Renew. – Señora presidenta, lo sucedido el pasado 24 de junio en la frontera entre Marruecos y la Unión Europea es una auténtica tragedia, una tragedia que este Parlamento condena. Pero lo sucedido es el trágico corolario de la gestión de las fronteras que hace Marruecos, una gestión que es una mezcla de negligencia e incapacidad, unida a una indecente utilización política del drama migratorio como mecanismo para presionar a España y al conjunto de la Unión Europea.
               

                  Este Parlamento debe exigir a Marruecos el cumplimiento escrupuloso de los derechos humanos de los inmigrantes y la lucha contra la inmigración irregular y el tráfico de inmigrantes. Pero también tiene que hacerle respetar los compromisos que ha adquirido con la Unión Europea, por los cuales recibe y ha recibido más de 346 millones de euros. Sin embargo, el incremento de las entradas por vía terrestre en Ceuta y Melilla en el primer trimestre de 2022 ha sido de un 239 %.
               

                  La gestión de las fronteras que hace Marruecos es un auténtico desastre, un desastre que sufren los inmigrantes y los ciudadanos de Melilla. Porque hay que recordarle a Marruecos que debe cumplir con los derechos humanos, pero también la Unión Europea debe garantizar la seguridad de los ciudadanos de Ceuta y Melilla porque, como decía la Comisión, Ceuta y Melilla son frontera de la Unión Europea. No solo son frontera de España, son una frontera de la Unión Europea, y sus ciudadanos se merecen el respeto y la seguridad que merece cualquier otro ciudadano de la Unión.
               

Tineke Strik,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, the death and injury of migrants at the borders of Melilla doesn't need easy rhetoric, but honest self-reflection. Access to an asylum procedure is the core of the Refugee Convention. And this is at stake at the fences at the Spanish enclaves, where most migrants from sub-Sahara cannot approach the border-crossing points to ask for asylum. Spain begs Morocco to keep them away, not caring if they are beaten up or dumped in the desert. And the EU strongly supports this practice, without any guarantee that migrants are being protected.
The Commissioner puts the blame on the smugglers, but sealing off the borders, not offering legal pathways, makes refugees dependent on smugglers. So who should we blame here? We must put EU values at the centre of border policies and migration deals, enforce access to asylum, condition funding to human rights compliance inside and outside the EU, monitor the human rights situation, and of course start offering legal pathways to refugees.

Annalisa Tardino,
a nome del gruppo ID. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, questo di oggi è l'ennesimo dibattito su morti e violenze ai confini dell'Europa, oggi con riferimento ai fatti di Melilla e alla violenta e minacciosa calca che ha tentato non di entrare, Commissaria, ma di sfondare il confine tra Marocco e Spagna.
               

                  Pedro Sánchez, Primo ministro socialista spagnolo, ha definito la tragedia ‘un attacco all'integrità territoriale del nostro paese’, un ‘assalto violento e organizzato da parte delle mafie dedite alla tratta di esseri umani’, ma lui, esponente dello stesso partito che in quest'Aula da anni nega l'esistenza del traffico di esseri umani e di ONG complici nel Mediterraneo boicottando soluzioni efficaci, può dirlo, se lo diciamo noi siamo sovranisti, persino cattivi e razzisti e, come Matteo Salvini, andiamo a processo solo per aver difeso i nostri confini.
               

                  Vedete, non possiamo parlare di violenza e morti senza guardare alle vere responsabilità: quelle della politica di Bruxelles, di chi fa credere a queste persone che saranno accolte, integrate, e che da noi, anziché la crisi, troveranno prosperità e lavoro. La responsabilità non è, come volete far credere, di quegli Stati come il Marocco che, con grande difficoltà, cercano di sostenere e arginare un fenomeno epocale senza una reale e concreta cooperazione, ma è vostra e della vostra ipocrisia.
               

                  Solo difendendo i confini possiamo tentare di scrivere la parola ‘fine’ su un business criminale che genera milioni di euro sulla pelle di gente disperata, dando l'occasione a terroristi e criminali di infiltrarsi nei nostri territori. L'Europa non può accogliere tutta l'Africa e gli africani hanno il diritto di vivere civilmente nei loro paesi.
               

Hermann Tertsch,
en nombre del Grupo ECR. – Señora presidente, con respecto a los muertos en la frontera de España con Marruecos, no busquen responsables entre policías españoles ni, por supuesto, entre los españoles con sentido común que sufren en sus barrios la consecuencia de la inmigración ilegal y descontrolada.
               

                  Se recordaba aquí que Sánchez ha calificado como una agresión a nuestras fronteras este asalto. Lo ha sido. Por fin una verdad del presidente del Gobierno español, tan infrecuentes esas verdades. Pero eso lo lleva diciendo Vox desde hace mucho tiempo y se le tacha de racista y de xenófobo por ello. Esos son los hechos. Los hechos son que los responsables de que esté pasando esto están dentro de Europa, están en el Gobierno de España, por ejemplo, y están también aquí. Responsables son todos aquellos que prometen, con el dinero de otros, un paraíso en Europa que no existe; responsables son los que piden que vengan cincuenta millones de inmigrantes para desbordar las listas y destrozar los salarios; responsables son los que subvencionan esos buques de falsas ONG que son traficantes; responsables son los que quieren aquí a muchos, muchos inmigrantes para intercambiar dentro de su terreno de juego. Culpables son las mafias también.
               

                  Muchos vamos a insistir en los errores, pero va a haber dentro de veinte años 2 500 millones de africanos. No podemos con todos.
               

Sira Rego,
en nombre del Grupo The Left. – Señora presidenta, digámoslo con claridad: las instituciones europeas son racistas. Las políticas migratorias de la UE son racistas. El control de fronteras se hace con un sesgo racista.
               

                  Solo así se entiende que, frente al mismo fenómeno, se actúe de manera distinta. Si hemos sido capaces de proteger a varios millones de refugiadas ucranianas que huían del horror, nada, absolutamente nada, justifica que no hagamos exactamente lo mismo con quienes vienen huyendo de otras guerras y otros horrores.
               

                  Pero no es eso lo que hemos visto en la valla de Melilla. Hemos visto cuerpos hacinados y golpeados, hemos visto a la guardia marroquí invadiendo el territorio comunitario para ejecutar devoluciones en caliente y al menos a 37 personas muertas y casi un centenar de heridos.
               

                  Y es que hay que recordar que no existe ni un solo lugar físico para pedir asilo en toda la frontera sur. ¿Y saben por qué? Porque la política de asilo de la UE está condicionada por el color de piel.
               

                  Por eso, les pediría a quienes ‘lamentan’ las muertes, mientras financian a los ejecutores, menos cinismo y que inicien también una investigación para depurar las responsabilidades de esta masacre.
               

Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó (NI). – Madam President, Commissioner, the EU's border with Morocco has been the scene of serious human rights violations for many years, not just now. But what we just saw 10 days ago is hard to forget and should be harder to justify. Sadly, the death of human beings has left the European Union indifferent.
The Spanish state justified and thanked the intervention of the Moroccan police, and the European Commission continues to show – despite the Commissioner's words today – an eloquent disregard. Why does the death of these human beings go so unnoticed? Can anyone explain why there are de facto first- and second-class human beings? There are no excuses that can justify this crime.
But I also see no interest in finding solutions. It seems that if wars, droughts, famines and epidemics are in Africa, their effects are smaller and more bearable for Europeans. What a grave mistake.

Ελισσάβετ Βόζεμπεργκ-Βρυωνίδη (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, είκοσι τρεις ακόμη συνάνθρωποί μας πρόσφατα έχασαν τη ζωή τους υπό τραγικές συνθήκες, γεγονός που μας καλεί να αρθούμε στο ύψος των περιστάσεων. Το μεταναστευτικό δεν προσφέρεται για πολιτική εκμετάλλευση ούτε για ποσοτικοποίηση του ανθρωπισμού —η ανθρώπινη ζωή είναι για όλους υπέρτατη αξία— ούτε προσφέρεται για διαχωρισμό των χωρών της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης βάσει γεωγραφικής θέσης. Κυρίως, δεν πρέπει να επιτρέψουμε εργαλειοποίηση απελπισμένων ανθρώπων χάριν σκοπιμοτήτων. Οφείλουμε να δείξουμε στην πράξη μηδενική ανοχή στο άθλιο έργο των διακινητών και όσων τους στηρίζουν.
               

                  Συνάδελφοι, η απάντηση στο πρόβλημα πηγάζει από το διεθνές δίκαιο και τις ευρωπαϊκές αξίες: είναι η κοινή ευρωπαϊκή πολιτική ασύλου· είναι η δίκαιη ανάληψη ευθυνών με ειλικρινή αλληλεγγύη και είναι η σοβαρή αποτελεσματική φύλαξη των εξωτερικών συνόρων —αναφαίρετο δικαίωμα κάθε κράτους μέλους.
               

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria Johansson, un suceso en la frontera exterior de la Unión Europea que se salda con un balance de muertes todavía por determinar y abrumador es lamentable e inaceptable. Pero no ha pasado en Melilla, ha pasado al otro lado de la frontera entre España y Marruecos, es decir, de la frontera entre la entera Unión Europea y el entero continente africano. Y este Parlamento Europeo en su resolución, sin duda, tiene que exigir una investigación independiente, exhaustiva, que esclarezca lo que ha sucedido, que determine las responsabilidades y que adopte las medidas necesarias para que esto no vuelva a pasar.
               

                  Pero del mismo modo en que no basta con expresar dolor y consternación, tampoco basta con centrar o detener la vista en Marruecos, que soporta una importante presión migratoria de personas procedentes del África subsahariana. La mayoría de los miles que estuvieron involucrados en ese suceso en la frontera exterior eran sudaneses y chadianos, también víctimas ellos de los tráficos ilícitos y de las mafias que explotan a los seres humanos en su desesperación, y también ellos sometidos, por tanto, a ese esclavismo inhumano que es el que explica la situación en la que nos encontramos.
               

                  Por tanto, es imprescindible que este Parlamento Europeo exija responsabilidad compartida, además de solidaridad, tal y como ordena el Derecho europeo del conjunto de la Unión Europea y no solo de los Estados que tienen frontera con el continente africano o ante el Mediterráneo. Que exija también que se desactive el modelo de negocio de las mafias que trafican con seres humanos y que exija finalmente vías legales y seguras a todas esas personas que, en su desesperación, de otro modo, arriesgarán la vida en el intento o la perderán. Como ha sido, lamentablemente, el caso.
               

Sophia in 't Veld (Renew). – Madam President, Madam Commissioner, I note that, as usual, the Council is absent, apparently it doesn't care.
Twenty-three people dead or 37 people dead, we don't know, but, as so often before, we are all horrified. And then I ask myself, how many more times are we going to have this debate? Because we've had it many times before, and then we say the policy is failing and oh, it's people smugglers. No, colleagues. This is the policy, because the Member State governments want deterrents. They think that this is going to scare people away. So let's go back in time a little bit.
Little Alan Kurdi, do you remember him ? The little two-year-old boy washed up on the shores of Turkey. Do you remember the people who died in the freezing forests on the border of Poland and Belarus not so long ago? Do you remember the thousands, if not tens of thousands of people who are at the bottom of a mass grave in the Mediterranean? Do we remember the people who died when they were pushed back from Greece to Turkey? Do we remember the slave markets in Libya? Do we remember the people who have died in the desert? That, colleagues, is the policy. It's not a failure of the policy, it is the policy. Yes, Madam President, I'm coming to my conclusion.
I would just like to say one thing to the absent Council. I think it's a scandal that they are not here because they are actually the biggest obstacle to finding a solution to this situation, to finding a coherent asylum and migration policy. And I can tell you that, for me, screening, Eurodac and building walls is not a policy.

Diana Riba i Giner (Verts/ALE). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, la extrema derecha gana cuando incluso aquellos que se denominan progresistas verbalizan su mismo discurso, porque es entonces cuando se consigue imponer su agenda, su lenguaje y sus marcos mentales.
               

                  Un ejemplo de ello son las bochornosas palabras del presidente español Pedro Sánchez para definir lo ocurrido en Melilla en una acción policial en la que se asesinó a 37 migrantes: habló de operación ‘bien resuelta’ y de ‘asalto organizado y violento’, criminalizando así a personas que huyen de la miseria y de terribles conflictos bélicos como el de Sudán.
               

                  Exigimos que se investiguen los hechos y que se rindan cuentas. Queremos saber cuál es el pacto con Marruecos y a qué precio se están defendiendo estos crímenes. ¿Con qué cara puede Europa atreverse a hablar de derechos humanos si los pisotea con asesinatos a sangre fría en las mismas puertas?
               

                  Lo demostramos con Ucrania: si queremos, podemos. Derribemos esta Europa fortaleza creando vías legales y seguras para aquellos que huyen del horror, indistintamente del color de su piel.
               

Bernhard Zimniok (ID). – Frau Präsidentin! Da stürmen 2000 illegale und zum Großteil schwer bewaffnete Immigranten mit – ich zitiere die FAZ – ‘großer Brutalität die Grenze’, und hier wird ernsthaft behauptet, sie hätten internationalen Schutz gesucht. Das ist ein Schlag ins Gesicht für die zahlreichen verletzten Grenzschützer, die sich in ihrem Leben bedroht sahen und nicht nur Spanien, sondern uns alle hier verteidigt haben. Haben einige von ihnen überreagiert? Vielleicht. Aber wir sollten alle bedenken, dass es für die Grenzschützer um Leben und Tod ging.
               

                  Die Grenzen für illegale und gewalttätige Migranten zu öffnen, ist keine Lösung, sondern führt zum Untergang unserer Nation und unserer Kultur. Das große Problem ist und bleibt die massive Überbevölkerung Afrikas, die zuerst zu diesem immer größeren Migrationsdruck führt. Afrika muss dieses Problem also endlich in den Griff bekommen.
               

                  Wir hingegen müssen uns nicht vorrangig um die Dinge in Afrika kümmern, sondern unsere Bevölkerung davor schützen, überrannt zu werden. Nur so können wir das Überleben unserer Nation und unserer Kultur sichern. Denken Sie auch mal an diese Aspekte.
               

Miguel Urbán Crespo (The Left). – Señora presidenta, las muertes en la frontera de Melilla no son una tragedia, son una masacre, son asesinatos provocados por la Europa fortaleza. Estos crímenes tienen culpables: el Gobierno y la policía marroquí. Pero también responsables, y hay que hablar de ellos: primero, el Gobierno español, que calificó de manera vergonzante la situación como bien resuelta; segundo, la criminal política migratoria europea de externalización de fronteras que subcontrata a dictaduras como la marroquí para que hagan de matones de fronteras.
               

                  Es fundamental impulsar una investigación internacional e independiente que depure las responsabilidades penales y políticas de esta matanza. El ministro del Interior español, Grande-Marlaska, no puede seguir ni un día más en su puesto. Más de cuarenta muertes bien merecen una dimisión fulminante. Y eso es lo que pedimos también desde aquí, desde esta Cámara. Europa debe acabar con sus políticas migratorias, racistas e hipócritas. No hay refugiados de primera y de segunda según su procedencia o el color de su piel. Eso es racismo. Derechos para todas. Ningún ser humano es ilegal. Derrumbemos la Europa fortaleza.
               

Κώστας Παπαδάκης (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η πρόσφατη μαζική σφαγή ξεριζωμένων ανθρώπων στη Μελίγια, αλλά και οι σε καθημερινή βάση αγριότητες είναι αποτέλεσμα της σύμπραξης των δυνάμεων καταστολής του Μαρόκο, της Ισπανίας και της πολιτικής καταστολής της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης με χωροφύλακα τον Frontex —συνέχεια των πολύνεκρων ναυαγίων, των επαναπροωθήσεων στο Αιγαίο και στη Μεσόγειο, των υπερδομών-φυλακών σε χώρες όπως η Ελλάδα.
               

                  Τα συγχαρητήρια του σοσιαλδημοκράτη Sánchez στις δυνάμεις καταστολής, μιλώντας προκλητικά για εισβολείς, αποκαλύπτουν τη δήθεν αλληλεγγύη της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, την τάχα προοδευτικότητα των λεγόμενων αριστερών κυβερνήσεων. Αυτό που προβάλλει με καμάρι η ευρωομάδα της λεγόμενης Αριστεράς, όπως η ισπανική κυβέρνηση, ο οικοδεσπότης των υπολοίπων μακελάρηδων του ΝΑΤΟ, που στη σύνοδό τους σχεδίασαν νέα κλιμάκωση των ιμπεριαλιστικών σχεδιασμών τους που οδηγεί σε νέα κύματα προσφυγιάς.
               

                  Η οργή και η απέχθεια των λαών σε αυτά τα εγκλήματα να γίνει οργανωμένη δράση ενάντια στο σύστημα της εκμετάλλευσης και των πολέμων, διεκδικώντας οι πρόσφυγες να πάνε στις χώρες προορισμού τους με σύγχρονα δικαιώματα σε άσυλο, υγεία, παιδεία και εργασία με δικαιώματα.
               

Janina Ochojska (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Wydarzenia na granicy hiszpańsko–marokańskiej są kolejnym świadectwem tego, co dzieje się na zewnętrznych granicach Unii. Budowane są mury i łamane są prawa człowieka. W każdym dokumencie Unii dotyczącym migracji jest mowa o poszanowaniu praw podstawowych. Jednak wielokrotnie na granicach zewnętrznych Unii dochodzi do przemocy i wielu innych naruszeń praw.
               

                  Unia na ochronę przed migrantami wydaje co najmniej 10 mld euro rocznie. Budowa murów i ochrona granic nie doprowadzą do zniknięcia migracji. Przeciwnie, zmuszają ich do szukania innych, bardziej niebezpiecznych szlaków i pchają w objęcia przemytników. Unia tak naprawdę tworzy rynek dla przemytników, z którymi, jak twierdzi, chce walczyć. Europejskie przedsiębiorstwa zbrojeniowe eksportujące broń do krajów na całym świecie, w tym do krajów w stanie wojny, z represjami i łamaniem praw człowieka, równocześnie dostarczają całą technologię związaną z uzbrojeniem murów i ogrodzeń, a także ochronę, nadzór czy patrole. To biznes graniczny, na którym korzystają politycy. Czy chcemy budować twierdzę Europa, mówiąc, że migranci to zagrożenie bezpieczeństwa dla Europy? Czy Europę zbudowaną na wartościach solidarności i niezbywalnych prawach każdego człowieka ?
               

Sylvie Guillaume (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, la protection des frontières extérieures de l'Union européenne n'est pas en cause dans notre débat aujourd'hui. Mais encore faudrait-il, d'une part, assurer cette protection avec discernement, en respectant les droits humains, et d'autre part, en respectant le droit à demander une protection internationale. Les événements terribles survenus à Melilla, le 24 juin dernier, nous obligent à nous interroger sur les modalités à mettre en œuvre pour conjuguer ces deux impératifs.
               

                  Bien sûr, il n'y a pas de recette miracle, mais il est certain que le recours à la violence, tel que ce fut le cas à la frontière dans l'enclave de Melilla, est inadmissible. Tout ceci fait tristement écho aux événements qui ont eu lieu à la frontière entre la Biélorussie et la Pologne en 2021.
               

                  Pour y répondre, la Commission a proposé un règlement sur l'instrumentalisation des migrants, qui pourrait être utilisé dans un cas comme celui de la frontière hispano-marocaine. Premier problème: la définition de ce qui constitue l'instrumentalisation des migrants se trouve dans la révision du code frontières Schengen – ce qui n'a pas grand-chose à voir avec le sujet. Mais surtout, ce règlement se trompe de cible: l'instrumentalisation vise principalement les victimes de ce chantage inhumain, à savoir les migrants eux-mêmes, et non pas les auteurs du crime, certains dirigeants politiques ou même des passeurs sans scrupules. Il est donc temps de revoir sérieusement notre politique aux frontières, de respecter nos engagements internationaux et de permettre une enquête indépendante afin de dégager les responsabilités concernant le drame de Melilla.
               

Fabienne Keller (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, chère Ylva Johansson, les crises migratoires ont trop souvent des conséquences humaines dévastatrices. Les événements récents dans l'enclave de Melilla sonnent comme un bis repetita, une répétition à l'infini, à chaque fois inacceptable. Prenons collectivement la mesure des réalités migratoires, plutôt que d'ériger des barrières toujours plus hautes. Avec la guerre en Ukraine et la hausse du prix des matières premières agricoles, les déplacements de population vont s'intensifier.
               

                  Je plaide, Madame la Commissaire, pour une poursuite du travail engagé notamment par la présidence française de l'Union européenne, en bâtissant une relation et des partenariats forts entre l'Union et les pays tiers dans notre voisinage.
               

                  Il s'agit de travailler au développement économique de ces régions, d'où partent et transitent ces flux migratoires, et aussi de faire la guerre aux réseaux criminels et aux mafieux qui exploitent les rêves ou la détresse des migrants.
               

                  Il s'agit aussi, chers collègues, d'aboutir enfin sur la réforme de la politique européenne d'asile. Nous en connaissons les difficultés, mais les circonstances nous obligent, chers collègues, pour une politique humaine et responsable. Avec mon groupe Renew, nous appelons aussi à la présidence tchèque à prendre un engagement fort à cette fin.
               

Jean-Lin Lacapelle (ID). – Madame la Présidente, ‘un jour, des millions d'hommes quitteront les parties déshéritées de la planète pour gagner les terres riches de l'hémisphère Nord. Et cette invasion ne sera ni fraternelle ni même pacifique’. Ainsi, chers collègues, s'exprimait en 1974 le président algérien Houari Boumédiène.
               

                  Cette phrase prophétique et glaçante trouve son illustration dans les assauts sauvages des frontières espagnoles à Ceuta et à Melilla, par des hordes de milliers de clandestins qui escaladent les grilles et forcent l'entrée de notre continent. C'est la même intention hostile lorsque l'Algérie envoie des bateaux chargés de centaines de clandestins vers l'Espagne pour faire pression sur elle.
               

                  Ces migrants, sur lesquels les politiciens européens versent parfois des larmes de crocodile, sont ouvertement considérés comme nuisibles par l'Algérie comme par la Turquie, et leur présence affaiblit l'Europe. Parmi eux, combien de futurs égorgeurs islamistes, de violeurs de masse comme à Cologne ou de délinquants rendant nos villes invivables et pourrissant la vie de nos compatriotes? Ils bénéficient tous de l'encouragement et de l'aide complice des ONG immigrationnistes, de l'extrême gauche, mais aussi des lobbies infiltrés au sein de l'Union européenne. La prophétie de Boumédiène prend désormais forme sous nos yeux: quand allez-vous enfin en prendre conscience?
               

Pernando Barrena Arza (The Left). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, existe un gran paralelismo entre la traición de Suecia y Finlandia con los kurdos para contentar a Turquía y la enésima puñalada de España al Sáhara Occidental. En el caso saharaui, va evidenciándose que España ha cambiado de posición histórica en favor del ocupante marroquí a cambio de externalizar la frontera sur de la Unión Europea en Melilla, con el resultado trágico de las 37 muertes que conocimos hace dos semanas.
               

                  Se trata de una pésima gestión del Gobierno español que también implica a la Unión Europea, porque España ha subcontratado el control de la entrada sur de la Unión Europea a un país cuyo respeto por los derechos humanos brilla por su ausencia. Esto pone en entredicho los valores fundamentales de la propia Unión.
               

                  Pero esto no es solo responsabilidad de España. La Unión Europea también es responsable de estas atrocidades cuando recurre las sentencias del Tribunal de Justicia, que no reconocen otra soberanía que la saharaui sobre el Sáhara Occidental. Señora comisaria, es hora ya de terminar con esta vulneración interminable de derechos, porque las vidas de los africanos también importan. Dejen de jugar con los derechos del pueblo saharaui y acaten de una vez por todas las resoluciones de los tribunales europeos.
               

Balázs Hidvéghi (NI). – Madam President, Commissioner Johansson, dear colleagues, what happened in Melilla last weekend is a real tragedy that evokes the sympathy of us all. Those lives should not have been lost. Border guards, however, cannot be blamed for protecting borders against illegal entries. Blaming those who are only doing their job is the wrong approach. Instead, we have to name those who bear the real political responsibility for such tragedies.
Let me make this very clear: the political responsibility lies with pro-migration politicians, pro-migration NGOs and other advocates of an open society who have been encouraging illegal migration towards Europe for many years. Those forces constantly attack the legitimate border-protection efforts of Member States and create the false impression that people can illegally come to Europe and then just stay. The only result of their fanatical actions is that lives are constantly put at risk in the Mediterranean, in the Balkans and elsewhere. If we want to avoid similar tragedies, pro-migration political actions must come to an end.

Domènec Ruiz Devesa (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, gracias por su presencia. En primer lugar, solamente quisiera recordar, dentro del respeto al Reglamento, que en este debate habría querido participar mi compañero Javier Moreno, pero que, por un problema de transporte aéreo, no ha sido posible. Además, quisiera sumarme a las condolencias y la solidaridad expresadas por esta Cámara a las familias de todas las víctimas.
               

                  Señorías, esta tragedia no es la primera y, desgraciadamente, me temo que tampoco será la última, aunque debiera serlo. Si no cambiamos nuestra política, volverá a ocurrir, y no solo en la frontera más meridional de la Unión. La pandemia frenó temporalmente los flujos migratorios, pero ahora los cambios seculares, el calentamiento global y la guerra de Putin los están acelerando, y también las hambrunas, que están provocando esta situación insostenible.
               

                  Obviamente, confiamos en las investigaciones emprendidas por las fiscalías española y marroquí, y por el Defensor del Pueblo español, para saber lo que ha ocurrido exactamente. La pérdida de vidas humanas no tiene ni color ni religión. Los inmigrantes siempre deben ser tratados con dignidad. Pero algunas fuerzas políticas de derechas, especialmente las de mi país, tratan de sacar rédito de esta tragedia ante un reto cada día más acuciante en el que todos deberíamos estar unidos para llevar a cabo una política europea de inmigración holística, ordenada y eficaz.
               

Spontane Wortmeldungen


Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (Renew). – Señora presidenta, una expresiva muestra de la gravedad de lo ocurrido el 25 de junio en la frontera hispano marroquí es que hoy, nueve días después, no puedo homenajear aquí a esas personas pronunciando su nombre. Tampoco sé cuántas son las que murieron allí. Se estrellaron con una actuación policial, a ambos lados de la frontera, que exige una investigación inmediata e independiente. Es urgente identificar a las víctimas —seres humanos como nosotros—, repatriar sus cuerpos, esclarecer los hechos, depurar responsabilidades, establecer medidas de reparación y evitar la impunidad y la repetición de hechos similares.
               

                  Pero este incidente nos recuerda además dos cosas: hay que profundizar en la cooperación a medio y largo plazo, la Visión Común 2030 surgida de la última cumbre África-Unión Europea es un buen punto de partida que hay que completar corrigiendo con unas relaciones comerciales más justas el resultado económico y social de nuestro pasado colonial. Mientras, hace falta ayuda humanitaria y prevención para que no se reproduzcan estas masacres. Y más trabajo compartido.
               

                  Los reproches entre quienes sabemos que la solución no son las vallas solo benefician a los ultraderechistas que las señalan como única estrategia.
               

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, the EU spends billions paying lawless militias and third countries to intercept, sometimes kill, arrest and detain migrants and refugees indefinitely in inhumane conditions. This is to ensure that they cannot reach the EU, where they can avail of international law rights due to them.
EU countries were among the most brutal when it came to genocidal colonialism in the past. Today we maintain a system of capitalist exploitation, theft and crushing debt arrangements that inhibit the ability of many former colonies to provide basic public services for their own people. And if people try to leave this cage that we have made for them and come to the land that survives on their stolen futures, they face the most extreme hurdles imaginable.
The deaths at Melilla were border killings: Fortress Europe has been causing death at our borders for a long time. What has happened to our humanity?

Pierrette Herzberger-Fofana (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, la semaine dernière, plus de 2 000 migrants ont tenté de traverser la frontière à l'enclave de Melilla. Ils ont été accueillis par des bombes lacrymogènes et des coups de bâton. L'ONU dénonce l'usage disproportionné de la force des deux côtés de la frontière, et l'Union africaine exige une enquête, déclarations auxquelles nous nous associons. Rien ne justifie une telle violence aux frontières extérieures de l'Europe, violence qui a provoqué le décès de plus de 23 personnes, enterrées en catimini. C'est un acte odieux, inhumain et aussi, il faut le dire, un acte raciste.
               

                  En érigeant des barrières, nous montrons que la coopération entre les États et la communauté internationale a échoué sur certains points. En effet, on érige des barrières et des murs pour se protéger des personnes en quête d'une vie digne. Est-ce compatible avec nos valeurs? Le droit d'asile est pourtant un droit inaliénable.
               

                  En outre, la formule ‘lutter contre les causes de l'exode’ ne doit pas rester un slogan publicitaire, mais doit se traduire en actes, par une politique climatique équitable et une politique commerciale. Nous devons entamer un dialogue avec nos partenaires en Afrique et trouver des solutions idoines afin que les droits humains des migrants soient respectés. Le massacre de Melilla devrait nous faire réfléchir à la manière de rendre ces barrières obsolètes et prendre en considération le pacte migratoire afin d'éviter que de telles tragédies se renouvellent.
               

Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, Moroccan border forces are funded directly by the EU. When they carry out a massacre of 37 people on the EU's borders, the EU bears responsibility, and we have a responsibility to call it out, because it's not an accident: it's a consequence of the EU's reliance on third countries to prevent people from arriving in the EU, exercising their right under international law to seek asylum, in many instances fleeing from wars and unequal trade caused by Europe in the first place.
So now we have Spain hiding behind Morocco, as Greece blames Turkey. But the truth is, it's EU Member States that are responsible for murder and the violation of human rights. Did the people in Melilla injure themselves? Where is the condemnation of the police? Where is the call for the investigations into the burials to avoid scrutiny? Is it any wonder that Lithuania has now come out and said it's going to ignore the ECJ in these matters when the Commission has stood by and done nothing except encourage rampant lawlessness and racism on our borders? It simply isn't good enough.

Jordi Solé (Verts/ALE). – Señora presidenta, la tragedia a las puertas de Melilla no merece una felicitación a la actuación policial, ni que se eche toda la culpa a las mafias. No merece que se levanten vallas más altas, ni que se adopten los discursos y las prácticas incendiarias de la extrema derecha. Merece que nos despertemos de una vez, que reaccionemos, que practiquemos un poco de humanidad. Mientras la gente en los países del sur, particularmente los jóvenes, no tengan unas condiciones de vida mínimamente dignas, muchos de ellos estarán dispuestos a perder lo poco que les queda para aspirar a una vida mejor entre nosotros. Y esta es una decisión tremenda, pero legítima.
               

                  Necesitamos que el Consejo desbloquee el Pacto sobre Migración y Asilo, pero también necesitamos un auténtico plan para África, para contribuir de manera genuina al desarrollo de los países africanos. Esto es más urgente aún en un contexto de hambruna y de inestabilidad. Si no priorizamos un plan europeo para África, lamentaremos más tragedias a las puertas de la Unión, que son ya las puertas de la vergüenza.
               

João Pimenta Lopes (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, as imagens de Melilha são para lá de trágicas, são absolutamente inaceitáveis.
               

                  As instituições da União Europeia, tão lestas noutras situações, tardam em ouvir-se.
               

                  E porquê? Porque o massacre que ali tomou lugar é indissociável das políticas da União Europeia, que insistem numa visão desumana, seletiva, xenófoba, exploradora e criminalizadora dos migrantes. É indissociável da UE-fortaleza e dos acordos que celebra com países terceiros, como Marrocos, para retenção, repulsão e expulsão de migrantes e refugiados, violando direitos humanos, desrespeitando o direito internacional. É indissociável da militarização das políticas de migrações.
               

                  Importa salientar que a estas trágicas dezenas de mortos se somam mais de 800 mortes no Mediterrâneo, só este ano.
               

                  Exige-se uma resposta rápida e solidária aos milhares de seres humanos que arriscam tudo pelo direito a uma vida digna e em paz, mas, para além disso, exige-se combater as causas nas quais a União Europeia tem responsabilidades, abandonar as políticas de desestabilização e agressão, no respeito pela soberania e independência dos Estados, dos princípios da Carta das Nações Unidas e do Direito internacional.
               

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)


Ylva Johansson,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, thank you very much for this debate on this tragic and complex event. We can never accept people dying at our EU borders. But we can also never accept that people use violence to force themselves into the European Union.
The UNHCR, the IOM and African Union have called for investigations. So have you in this debate tonight. I fully support these calls. The priority now is to help the wounded and establish the facts.
Smugglers are responsible for trafficking many people to the borders in the first place and then leaving them to their fates so they see no other way out. As many of you here also have stressed in this debate, we must to continue to work with our African partners, countries of origin, countries of transit, countries of destination, and with Morocco in particular, against smugglers to address root causes, reduce irregular migration and improve regular migration – legal migration. The EU needs migration, but we need it in an orderly way.
But can I also raise and argue against some things that have also been said in the debate that I do not agree with?
First, I think everybody should be a bit cautious using the word ‘instrumentalisation’. In the proposal that the Commission has put on the table, that is now being put to the co-legislators to decide upon, the Commission defines instrumentalisation as a situation where a third country instigates irregular migration flows into the Union by actively facilitating the movement of third-country nationals to the external borders onto or from within its territory, with the intention of destabilising the Union or a Member State. I do not really see that this is the case in this tragic event.
May I also raise or argue that the EU migration policy is of course not racist. This is totally wrong. But the immigration policy is incomplete. We are lacking a comprehensive and European policy on migration and asylum. And that's why it's urgent to adopt the full pact on migration and asylum.
Many of you have also tonight called for a sustainable and effective asylum and migration policy based on solidarity and shared responsibility. You have also asked and called for legal pathways, and I agree, as I already said.
We have our proposals for a Union resettlement framework. Let's adopt it together with the other files of the pact. Thank you for the debate.

Die Präsidentin. – Die Aussprache ist damit geschlossen.
               

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 171 GO)


Bettina Vollath (S&D),
schriftlich. – Die tragischen Ereignisse vom 24. Juni, als rund 2.000 Menschen versuchten, den Grenzzaun zwischen Marokko und der spanischen Enklave Melilla zu überqueren und dabei 37 Menschen ums Leben kamen, sind ein weiterer Weckruf und zeigen einmal mehr, wie notwendig eine solidarische europäische Migrationspolitik ausgerichtet an Menschenrechten ist. Die tödliche Gewalt von Sicherheitskräften an den EU-Außengrenzen muss endlich aufhören.
               

                  Es gibt Augenzeugenberichte, wonach marokkanische Beamte Flüchtende, die bereits auf spanischem Boden gelangt waren, zurück nach Marokko gezwungen haben. Diese Flüchtenden, viele minderjährig, haben ein Recht darauf Asyl zu beantragen, doch dieses Recht wird ihnen durch 6 Meter hohe Mauern verwehrt – von diesen sind viele in den Tod gestürzt. Unsere Gedanken sind bei den Opfern der Gewalt und ihren Familien.
               

                  Diese unmenschlichen Behandlungen der Migrant*innen und die Haftung der Verantwortlichen müssen schnellstens aufgeklärt werden. Es ist nachvollziehbar, dass die Kooperation mit Partnerländern eine wesentliche Rolle in Europas Asyl- und Migrationspolitik spielen muss. Doch diese Kooperation darf nicht der Aussetzung von Menschenrechtsverletzungen dienen. Sie muss ganz im Gegenteil effektiv Menschenhandel bekämpfen und Möglichkeiten zur legalen Immigration bieten. Europa ist eine Werteunion, wir dürfen Mitgliedsstaaten an den Außengrenzen nicht im Stich lassen. Wir brauchen eine solidarische Migrationspolitik genauso wie Solidarität mit schutzsuchenden Menschen.
               
15.   Digital Services Act – Digital Markets Act (debate)

Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die gemeinsame Aussprache über den Digitalen Binnenmarkt, und zwar über
               






—



                        den Bericht von Christel Schaldemose im Namen des Ausschusses für Binnenmarkt und Verbraucherschutz über das Gesetz über digitale Dienste (COM 2020/0825 — C9-0418/2020 – 2020/0361(COD)) – (A9-0356/2021) und
                     










—



                        den Bericht von Andreas Schwab im Namen des Ausschusses für Binnenmarkt und Verbraucherschutz über das Gesetz über digitale Märkte (COM 2020/0842 — C9-0419/2020 – 2020/0374(COD)) – (A9-0332/2021).
                     





                  Ich darf sehr herzlich die Kommissare Vestager und Breton begrüßen.
               

Christel Schaldemose,
Rapporteur. – Fru. Formand! Ny teknologi har altid ændret verden. Det har skabt fantastiske fordele og masser af muligheder, men med nye muligheder, så kommer også nye udfordringer. Det gælder også for vores formidlingstjenester. Det digitale har på én og samme gang gjort afstanden mellem os kortere, men også gravet grøfterne dybere. Du kan skrive til mennesker fra hele verden, men at dømme efter debatten på de sociale medier, er det alt for nemt at glemme, at det er mennesker, du skriver med. Algoritmerne på de sociale medier fremmer alt for ofte had og splittelse frem for håb og sammenhold, og desinformation spreder sig som en steppebrand og forstærker ekkokamre, der mindsker dialog og forståelse og udfordrer vores demokrati og vores samfundsmodel. Og farlige og ulovlige produkter finder alt for let vej til de europæiske forbrugere via online markedspladser, der udnytter hullerne i vores lovgivning.
               

                  Alt for længe har der været alt for få regler i vores onlineverden. Det digitale har udviklet sig lidt til et vildt vesten, hvor de største spillere bestemmer spillereglerne. Men med DSA'en er der en ny sherif i byen. Nu tæmmer vi techgiganterne, giver brugerne bedre rettigheder og passer på vores demokrati. Vi åbner algoritmernes sorte boks, så vi kan kigge ind i motoren på platformenes pengemaskine. Fremover bliver det et krav, at de største platforme skal risikovurdere deres algoritmer. Spreder algoritmen ulovligt indhold? Fremmer den spiseforstyrrelser og selvskade? Promoverer den desinformation og konspirationsteorier? Hvis der er risiko for, at det her påvirker os negativt, så skal platformene rette op på problemet, ligesom de skal give adgang til deres algoritmer til myndigheder, til EU-Kommissionen samt til forskere og NGO'er, så de kan være med til at kigge techgiganterne over skulderen.
               

                  Vi kræver, at platformene tager ansvar for deres algoritmer. Algoritmer og ikke bare neutrale matematiske formler. De er designet til at holde os engageret på platformen så lang tid som muligt. Det er en central del af platformens pengemodel. Jo længere vi er online, jo mere data indsamler platformene om os, og jo flere penge kan de tjene på at målrette reklamer til os. Nu tager vi et opgør med platformens forretningsmodel. De må godt tjene penge, men ikke på bekostning af vores sundhed eller vores samfundsmodel. Først og fremmest forbyder vi målrettede reklamer til børn og mindreårige baseret på deres personlige data. Platformene skal ikke have et økonomisk incitament til at indsamle massive mængder af data om vores børn og unge og potentielt sælge dem videre. Og ved at lave det her forbud, så gør vi det faktisk tryggere at være barn og ung på nettet, og det giver også mere ro i maven til os forældre.
               

                  Dernæst så forbyder vi, at platformene bruger følsomme oplysninger om brugerne uanset alder til at målrette til reklamer. Og vi forbyder Dark patterns, der manipulerer os til at træffe bestemte valg i diverse dialogbokse. Og nu får platformenes pengemaskine vigepligt for demokratiet. Demokratiet skal sætte rammerne for techgiganterne, ikke omvendt. Det gælder også vores onlinemarkedspladser. I dag er det alt for nemt at klikke ulovlige og farlige produkter ned i den virtuelle indkøbskurv. Det undergraver forbrugerbeskyttelsen og produktsikkerheden og derfor er glad for, at vi er kommet tættere på at ligestille onlinehandel med offlinehandel. Fremover skal onlinemarkedspladserne blandt andet kende deres sælgere, og de skal lave stikprøvekontrol af de varer, der bliver tilbudt på platformen, hvor varerne skal holdes op imod eksisterende databaser og ulovlige produkter. Det er ikke nogen hemmelighed, at jeg gerne ville have gået længere selv, men jeg synes, vi tager et godt første skridt her.
               

                  Og nu vil jeg så skifte til engelsk.
               

                  I would like to thank all the colleagues who made this new legislation possible. Thanks to all my shadow rapporteurs and all the associated committees for the cooperation, and a big thanks to the EU Commission and also to the French Presidency for a fruitful and constructive negotiation. It was not always easy, but I do believe that we can all be proud of the outcome.
               

                  And finally, I would also like to thank our very hard-working and dedicated staff, and especially Mathias, Alexandra and Atanaska for their hard work. They've been working night and day to help us make this legislation possible.
               

                  With the DSA, we will create a safer, a fairer and a more transparent online environment. We take back control from the tech giants and we establish a level playing field for businesses. I think that we can all be very proud of the agreement, and I do hope that a big majority here tomorrow will vote in favour of the DSA. With that, we have made history and we will make the online world much more safe.
               

Andreas Schwab,
Berichterstatter. – Frau Präsidentin, meine Damen und Herren von der Kommission, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Morgen stimmen wir über das Gesetz über digitale Märkte und über das Gesetz über digitale Dienste gemeinsam ab. Und damit – Frau Kollegin Schaldemose hat es schon erwähnt – liegt ein großes Stück Arbeit hinter uns. Europa läutet damit eine neue Ära der Tech-Regulierung ein, in der wir sicherstellen, dass künftig der Grundsatz gilt: Was offline nicht erlaubt war, ist auch online verboten.
               

                  Wir übernehmen damit als Europäische Union auch im internationalen Maßstab eine führende Rolle, weil es eine solche Kombination aus horizontaler Regulierung von Märkten und Diensten bisher nicht gibt. Die Europäische Union geht damit als wichtigster Gesetz- und Regelungsgeber voran mit dem Ziel, Märkte offenzuhalten und Transparenz über die Wirkungsweise von Algorithmen herzustellen.
               

                  Plattformen werden damit erstmals Verantwortung übernehmen müssen für die Rechtmäßigkeit der dort eingestellten Inhalte. Quasimonopolistische Unternehmen werden entlang der Grundsätze der sozialen Marktwirtschaft zum Respekt des Wettbewerbs gezwungen. Nicht mehr die Europäische Kommission, sondern die Unternehmen selbst müssen künftig nachweisen, dass sie freien Wettbewerb auf ihren Plattformen zulassen, und zwar einheitlich in der gesamten Europäischen Union.
               

                  Mit der Konzentration aufs Wesentliche haben wir unnötige Bürokratie vermieden und die Einheitlichkeit des europäischen Rechts gestärkt. Gleichzeitig wird die Durchsetzung, vor allem im Wiederholungsfalle, durch einen verschärften Strafrahmen erleichtert. Mit der Umkehr der Beweislast schaffen wir vor allem auch bei der Offenlegung von Interessenkonflikten und einem möglichen Verbot von marktgefährdenden Übernahmen einen Paradigmenwechsel, der aus der Erfahrung der vielen Wettbewerbsverfahren entstanden ist.
               

                  Damit hat auch das Europäische Parlament einen wichtigen Erfolg erzielt, weil wir in diesem Hause schon 2014 die Kommission zum Einschreiten aufgefordert hatten. Und darum ist es umso wichtiger, dass wir als Parlament heute abliefern, was wir vor acht Jahren angestoßen haben.
               

                  Aber – das gilt auch für die Kommission – wir liefern nicht nur, wir haben die Gesetze in vielen Punkten auch erheblich verbessert. Vor allem haben wir die beiden Gesetze zukunftsfest für zukünftige Entwicklungen gemacht. Nutzer werden künftig ausdrücklich vor die Wahl gestellt werden, welchen Dienst sie nutzen wollen. User können künftig ausdrücklich der diensteübergreifenden Nutzung ihrer Daten widersprechen. Und in den Online-Werbemärkten wird künftig wieder Transparenz verlangt – getreu dem Maßstab: Vertrauen ist gut, Kontrolle ist besser. Weiter soll eine Reihe von Geräten künftig interoperabel werden, und auch bei Messenger-Diensten kann dies zu einer erheblichen Vereinfachung führen.
               

                  Und schließlich: Durch die Anwendung der Regeln werden künftig in Appstores, Suchmaschinen und Social Media wieder Bedingungen geschaffen, die auf Fairness zwischen den Beteiligten setzen und nicht auf das Recht des Stärkeren. Deswegen gilt ganz allgemein, dass die von Geschäftsinteressen geleitete Selbstbevorzugung künftig unter Wettbewerbsgesichtspunkten bewertet wird und nicht mehr von den Finanzinvestoren. Denn unser gemeinsames Ziel ist es, dass sich in den digitalen Märkten in Europa wieder die besten Unternehmen durchsetzen und nicht mehr nur die größten.
               

                  Dazu müssen wir uns nun auf die Umsetzung der Gesetze konzentrieren, und deswegen schlagen wir im diesjährigen Haushalt vor, insgesamt 150 Stellen als Mitarbeiter genau für diese Aufgabe einzustellen. Dabei geht es nicht um eine allgemeine Überwachung der Wirtschaft, sondern ausschließlich um eine zielgenaue Kontrolle der Zusagen der Gatekeeper im Rahmen des regulatorischen Dialogs. Nur wenn wir auf Augenhöhe im Dialog stehen, können wir sicher sein, dass die europäische Gesetzgebung den Respekt bekommt, den sie verdient. Das sind wir den Bürgern und unseren Unternehmen schuldig.
               

PREDSEDÁ: MICHAL ŠIMEČKA


podpredseda


Stéphanie Yon-Courtin,
rapporteure pour avis de la commission des affaires économiques et monétaires. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Vice-présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, un an après la présentation de l'acte sur les marchés numériques, nous votions dans ce même hémicycle, en décembre 2021, la position du Parlement européen. Six mois plus tard, sous la présidence française de l'Union européenne, je me réjouis que nous ayons trouvé cet accord de trilogue. C'est doublement historique.
                  

                     D'abord, parce que nous fixons pour la première fois des règles dans l'espace en ligne. Cette régulation économique des géants du numérique leur imposera une liste claire d'interdictions et d'obligations avant même toute infraction, sous peine de lourdes sanctions. Les modèles économiques vont devoir changer, les comportements aussi.
                  

                     Ensuite, parce que nous l'avons fait en à peine 18 mois. C'est une preuve de l'urgence de nous doter de ce nouvel arsenal législatif. Cette urgence nous oblige à avoir les moyens nécessaires pour appliquer ces nouvelles règles et à délivrer les effets promis à nos entreprises et à nos citoyens.
                  

                     L'Europe fixe un modèle ambitieux, qui sera suivi par les autres juridictions internationales. À l'heure de l'internet sans frontières, la régulation sera mondiale ou ne sera pas. L'Europe a pris la mesure du besoin d'assurer une juste concurrence en ligne sur le plan international. Il faut désormais s'en donner les moyens concrets, et au plus vite.
                  

Henna Virkkunen,
rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy. – Mr President, dear colleagues, Commissioners, as the ITRE rapporteur, I would like to thank all the colleagues for their excellent cooperation on this DSA. The DSA sets landmark standards for a safer and more transparent digital space for users, and also a level playing field for businesses. We can also say that it puts Europe to the forefront in regulating the online world.
As ITRE rapporteur, my focus has been especially on the ICT industry innovations and small and micro-enterprises. It is important for European businesses, especially for our SMEs, that we ensure that they have now a level playing field and fair competition. And we have to make sure that European values and rules are also respected in the online world. At the same time, we should encourage companies to scale up, innovate and invest in Europe.
Our SMEs and start-ups play a crucial role in creating Europe's digital competitiveness and growth. Regulating the digital market should not set obstacles for growth. So that's why we must ensure that the smallest enterprises are not faced with too heavy an administrative burden. Necessary flexibility and legal certainty is needed for SMEs to operate and grow.
So I think we have now a very balanced outcome of two regulations here, DSA and DMA. On behalf of the ITRE Committee I would like to thank all the colleagues and rapporteurs and shadows and all the institutions for this work.

Carlos Zorrinho,
relator de parecer da Comissão da Indústria, do Comércio Externo, da Investigação e da Energia. – Senhor Presidente, Senhores Comissários, o acordo, a aprovação e a entrada em vigor dos Regulamentos dos Mercados e dos Serviços Digitais é um passo histórico na criação de um mercado único digital, inspirado pelos princípios e pelos valores da União Europeia.
                  

                     No atual contexto geopolítico, esse passo é ainda mais importante, refletindo os valores partilhados que incorporam a nossa identidade digital e que estão focados na defesa dos direitos fundamentais e nos fortes compromissos éticos e garantias legais que protegem os nossos cidadãos e as nossas sociedades democráticas.
                  

                     Como relator do Regulamento dos Mercados Digitais na Comissão ITRE, dei, com o apoio de meus correlatores e de uma expressiva maioria dos membros, pleno uso à aplicação da Regra 56 Plus, no exercício das nossas competências transversais e setoriais.
                  

                     Realço o trabalho conjunto feito com a Comissão IMCO e, em particular, com o seu relator, que permitiu que as soluções aprovadas na Comissão ITRE, em áreas tão estruturantes como a interoperabilidade, o acesso dos utilizadores às plataformas, a publicidade, tivessem sido refletidas no relatório final do Parlamento e acabassem por ser determinantes para o Acordo Interinstitucional.
                  

                     Reforçámos as garantias dos consumidores e dos utilizadores e criámos melhores condições para a inovação e para o acesso ao mercado, em particular, das PME e das startups. Agora é tempo de agir!
                  

Patrick Breyer,
rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. – Mr President, on behalf of my Civil Liberties Committee, let me be honest to our citizens: we tried to make the DSA a game-changer and overcome the surveillance capitalist business model of pervasive tracking online. But we failed. We failed to provide you with alternatives to toxic platform algorithms that will push the most controversial and extreme content to the very top of your timelines. And we failed to protect legal content, including media content, from being over-blocked by error-prone upload filters or arbitrarily set platform rules.
But just before industry and governments – who have reliably been supported by the Commission – celebrate too quickly, don't forget that there is more legislation coming up, such as on political advertising, such as on e-privacy, and here we'll fight all the harder against surveillance advertising. We will fight for a do-not-track option on every device, for a right to encryption, and we'll fight against indiscriminate data retention.
Defending fundamental rights in the digital age is a marathon, not a sprint. You'll see.

Margrethe Vestager,
Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, it is a truly historic debate we have today, on the digital services act, on the digital markets act. And those who follow this debate, seeing such a number of dedicated committees, I think that shows what we're doing here.
It's not just one committee, it's not just a corner of the Internet. This is a new rulebook that has been enabled, and for that, I am truly thankful. Because it's urgent. Our aims, they seem simple: to make digital markets safe, to make them fair, to make them more competitive; for people to be online as if they were offline in dealing with other people, respecting what the legislator has decided as to what is illegal and what is indeed legal.
So I wish to thank the lead rapporteurs Christel Schaldemose, Andreas Schwab, as well as the other rapporteurs, shadow rapporteurs and all the many Members of this House who invested themselves in making this happen.
And I want to join Christel Schaldemose in thanking the technical teams here in the European Parliament, in the Council, in the Commission, who have worked to make this vision a real thing. I'm looking very much forward to the debate today because I think it will give more and more nuance as to what we have ahead of us, which is the next chapter, which is the enforcement, which is where business models, they will have to change, because we live in a democracy and the co-legislators are changing the laws of the Internet. Thank you very much, and looking forward to the debate.

Thierry Breton,
membre de la Commission. – Monsieur le Président, Mesdames et Messieurs, chers amis, tout d'abord, je voudrais partager avec vous tous la satisfaction et la fierté qui sont les miennes aujourd'hui d'être avec vous en ce jour particulier. C'est un jour historique qui va couronner près de deux ans de travail avec le Parlement, avec le Conseil, avec la Commission.
                  

                     Je crois pouvoir dire que le Parlement européen a été absolument exemplaire tout au long de cette démarche. Et d'abord, je voudrais remercier, évidemment, toutes celles et tous ceux qui ont joué un rôle absolument essentiel. Tout d'abord, la rapporteure Christel Schaldemose. Merci, Christel, pour ces immenses efforts couronnés de succès. Le rapporteur aussi, Andreas Schwab. Merci aussi, Andreas, pour le travail sans relâche qui nous permet d'être là aujourd'hui et d'affronter de façon confiante le vote qui va suivre. Et merci aussi à tous les rapporteurs fictifs qui ont joué un rôle absolument essentiel. On vient de les entendre.
                  

                     Avec ces deux textes, nous avons enfin – on peut le dire – unifié notre marché numérique. Je suis commissaire au marché intérieur. On n'avait pas encore, il faut bien le dire, de marché intérieur numérique. Et aujourd'hui, c'est vraiment ce dont il s'agit. Nous venons enfin, avec le DSA, avec le DMA, de permettre à nos 450 millions de concitoyens d'évoluer de façon identique dans notre espace numérique européen. Et dans ce marché intérieur, qui s'appuie aussi sur l'une des plus grandes démocraties au monde – si ce n'est la première –, notre démocratie, le DSA et le DMA vont renforcer l'état de droit et assurer une meilleure protection de nos concitoyens dans notre espace informationnel, dans notre espace numérique. L'Union européenne devient ainsi – cela a été dit – la première juridiction au monde à établir un véritable standard pour réguler l'espace numérique selon nos règles démocratiques. On l'a souvent dit, le DSA et le DMA constituent les deux faces d'une même pièce pour établir un nouveau cadre de responsabilité pour les plateformes avec, évidemment, tout ce qui a été indiqué: les obligations contre les contenus illicites, les produits contrefaits ou dangereux, les incitations à la violence et les discours haineux. C'est désormais fini de dire ‘ce n'est pas de ma faute, je ne suis qu'un intermédiaire’. C'est fini.
                  

                     C'est aussi un cadre innovant pour la protection des droits fondamentaux, et notamment la lutte contre les contenus préjudiciables, mais aussi, évidemment, la désinformation. Il offre davantage de confiance dans la protection des consommateurs sur les places de marché. Plus de protection aussi pour les utilisateurs des réseaux sociaux et en particulier – nous y avons passé tellement de temps – pour protéger les enfants. Et puis plus d'opportunités pour les entreprises innovantes qui vont trouver, encore une fois, un accès à ce vaste marché selon des règles simples, strictes et qui vont s'appliquer à tous. Un nouvel encadrement pour la publicité en ligne pour limiter l'utilisation de données et protéger les utilisateurs les plus vulnérables. Et enfin, un point qui, pour moi, est essentiel: l'ouverture de ces fameuses boîtes noires que sont les algorithmes derrière lesquels, bien trop souvent et trop longtemps, les plateformes se sont abritées pour masquer ce qu'elles faisaient – trop souvent, là encore, au détriment de l'intérêt de nos concitoyens.
                  

                     Ces deux instruments de marché intérieur créent une réglementation prudentielle, en particulier pour les plateformes systémiques. Il y a dix ans, une page se tournait, celle des banques que l'on appelait ‘too big to fail’. Désormais, une page se tourne pour les grandes plateformes, que l'on qualifiait de ‘too big to care’.
                  

                     La désinformation russe, la révélation sur l'attaque du Capitole, le harcèlement en ligne et les contenus haineux démontrent l'urgence du DSA. C'est aussi l'une des raisons pour lesquelles le Parlement a travaillé avec autant d'efficacité pour nous permettre d'être là aujourd'hui et de participer à ce vote.
                  

                     Il est essentiel, évidemment, de mettre en œuvre ces textes le plus rapidement possible afin de protéger nos droits fondamentaux, qui sont attaqués tous les jours sur les plateformes, de mettre en place une concurrence saine, équitable et loyale entre les entreprises, et de défendre nos valeurs démocratiques dans notre espace numérique.
                  

                     Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, inutile de vous dire que vous pouvez compter sur nous, sur moi, sur mon engagement, sur notre énergie dans la phase de mise en œuvre, qui va s'ouvrir au lendemain du vote de votre assemblée sur ces deux textes. Oui, je crois qu'on peut le dire, il y aura dans notre histoire, et certainement dans notre histoire informationnelle, un ‘avant’ et un ‘après’ le DSA et le DMA. Beaucoup pensaient que réguler serait impossible, trop compliqué, trop ambitieux, trop soumis aux lobbies, dont on a pu mesurer l'habileté et que l'on connaît bien. Mais le vote d'aujourd'hui nous démontre que, lorsque nous joignons nos efforts, beaucoup peut être fait, y compris ce qui semblait insurmontable, avec comme seule boussole l'intérêt général européen.
                  

Mikuláš Peksa,
rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. – Mr President, dear colleagues, as a Pirate I can only describe the Digital Services Act as a missed opportunity which fails to protect our fundamental rights online. Our privacy won't be protected by the right for anonymity or encryption. Data retention, browser tracking and surveillance advertising will unfortunately remain the norm. Freedom of expression online won't be ensured, as platforms will still be able to use arbitrary censorship tools, and politically influenced courts will still be able to take down legal content.
However, I will vote in favour of this regulation today because, for the first time ever, big-tech platforms will have to report back to a common European public authority. They will have to put in place an effective redress mechanism and conduct regular risk assessments and independent audits. We also managed to impose strong transparency obligations and the possibility for users to choose non-profiling-based options.
Many opportunities were missed. The worst problems have been avoided. I am very grateful to all my colleagues who worked together with me in the ECON Committee. However, the fight for digital civil rights continues.

Roman Haider,
Verfasser der Stellungnahme des mitberatenden Ausschusses für Verkehr und Tourismus. – Herr Präsident! Der Digital Services Act ist ein sehr gutes Beispiel für die zunehmende Einschränkung der Meinungs- und Pressefreiheit in der EU. Kritische Meinungen werden als Hassrede oder als Falschinformation gebrandmarkt, und unter diesem Vorwand wird jetzt ein Relikt aus vergangenen Zeiten wiederbelebt – die Zensur.
                  

                     Gerade dort, wo der Widerstand gegen die bürgerfeindliche Politik der EU immer mehr zunimmt, möchte diese EU jetzt genau diese unliebsamen Meinungen zensieren und auch unterdrücken. Das gilt für Kritik an der ungebremsten Massenimmigration, an der zunehmenden Zentralisierung oder auch an der Klimapolitik. Und um es klar und deutlich zu sagen: Die Grenze der Meinungsfreiheit bildet allein das Strafrecht. Wir brauchen keine zusätzliche EU-Zensur.
                  

                     Die vielen richtigen und wichtigen Ansätze dieses Digital Services Act werden durch diesen Versuch, Zensur durch die Hintertür einzuführen, leider entwertet. Die EU braucht daher gar nicht mit erhobenem Zeigefinger gegen Osten zu deuten. Es gibt genug Dreck vor der eigenen Haustür zu kehren, und die zunehmende Einschränkung der Meinungsfreiheit gehört unzweifelhaft dazu.
                  

Markus Ferber,
Verfasser der Stellungnahme des mitberatenden Ausschusses für Verkehr und Tourismus. – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die erzielte Einigung zum Gesetz über digitale Märkte setzt neue Standards, wie unsere Digitalwirtschaft der Zukunft funktionieren soll. Es geht um klare Spielregeln, um Rechtssicherheit und Fairness.
                  

                     Es kann nicht sein, dass eine Handvoll Unternehmen bestimmt, was angeboten wird, zu welchem Preis und wer Zugang zu diesen Plattformen hat. Das diskriminiert nicht nur viele Marktteilnehmer, das entmündigt auch den Verbraucher. Das geht zulasten von Preisen, Auswahl und Innovationen. Damit ist nun Schluss! Mit der Einschränkung der Marktdominanz von Internetriesen wie Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon und Co. wird deren Monopolstellung deutlich limitiert.
                  

                     Ein Blick auf den Online-Buchungsmarkt im Tourismus zeigt, dass es auch in dieser Branche massive Probleme gibt. Für uns im Ausschuss für Verkehr und Tourismus war es deswegen von ganz besonderem Interesse, Marktverzerrungen durch Plattformbetreiber zulasten der vielen kleinen Anbieter auch wieder zurückzuführen und abzuschaffen. Mit der erzielten Einigung wird der Ausbeutung zulasten kleinerer und mittlerer Anbieter nun eindeutig der Riegel vorgeschoben.
                  

                     Kurzum: Der digitale Marktplatz der Zukunft wird fairer für Betreiber, den Mittelstand und für die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher.
                  

Sabine Verheyen,
Verfasserin der Stellungnahme des mitberatenden Ausschusses für Kultur und Bildung. – Herr Präsident! Der DMA und der DSA sind die richtigen Schritte zur richtigen Zeit, da die Onlinewelt und große Plattformen zunehmend eine entscheidende Rolle in unserem Leben und in unserer Wirtschaft spielen.
                  

                     Wir haben hier sicher einen Meilenstein in der Regulierung von Onlineinhalten auf Unionsebene gesetzt, aber aus Sicht des Kulturausschusses muss ich neben all dem Lob zur Verabschiedung des DSA auf einige verpasste Gelegenheiten hinweisen. Zum einen wurde der Grundsatz ‘Know your Business Customer’ leider nicht auf alle Onlinevermittler ausgeweitet. Zum anderen ist nicht sichergestellt, dass illegale Angebote von Live- und zeitsensiblen Inhalten sofort entfernt werden, und hier muss die Europäische Kommission schnell den nächsten Schritt zum Schutz europäischer Inhalte machen, der sich mit dem Problem der Piraterie gerade auch von Live-Inhalten befasst.
                  

                     Nur ein Gesetzesvorschlag, der diesem Problem wirklich auch gerecht wird und Lösungsansätze bringt, gewährleistet, dass man wirklich auch in diesem Sektor für die Liveübertragungen sagen kann, was offline illegal ist, sollte auch online illegal sein. Des Weiteren ist die Verpflichtung für Vermittler, die Freiheit und den Pluralismus der Medien in ihren Nutzungsbedingungen zu respektieren, ein Kernanliegen und muss durchgesetzt werden. Die Grenzen der Medienfreiheit werden durch Gesetze und nicht durch die Nutzungsbedingungen privater Unternehmen festgelegt.
                  

Petra Kammerevert,
Verfasserin der Stellungnahme des mitberatenden Ausschusses für Kultur und Bildung. – Herr Präsident! In beiden Verordnungen war es aus Sicht des Ausschusses für Kultur und Bildung notwendig, professionellen Journalismus zu stärken und die Verbreitung redaktionell verantworteter Inhalte zu schützen. Dies ist uns im DMA zum großen Teil gut geglückt. Mit seiner Hilfe können wir zukünftig verhindern, dass große Plattformen durch ihre jeweiligen Vertragsbestimmungen ihre marktbeherrschende Position ausnutzen – das dient unmittelbar dem Schutz der Presse- und Medienvielfalt.
                  

                     Allerdings ist es uns im Digital Services Act nicht gelungen, von professionellen Journalisten erstellte, redaktionell verantwortete Medieninhalte, die bereits einer lückenlosen medienrechtlichen Kontrolle unterliegen, vollständig vor einem Zugriffs- und Kontrollrecht durch Plattformen zu schützen. Auch gehen aus meiner Sicht die Rechte, die der Kommission im Bereich der Inhaltekontrolle zugebilligt werden, unter dem Gesichtspunkt der Staatsferne entschieden zu weit.
                  

                     Beides ist aus medienpolitischer Sicht, wie ich finde, eine mittelschwere Katastrophe. Medienfreiheit droht so ausgehöhlt zu werden. Wir dürfen durch EU-Recht den Wert des professionellen, vielfältigen Journalismus in der Presse, im Rundfunk sowie online nicht relativieren oder gar ignorieren.
                  

                     Das Gegenteil von ‘gut’ ist ‘gut gemeint’. Das sollte sich die Kommission bei ihren Vorschlägen zum Media Freedom Act zu Herzen nehmen.
                  

Tiemo Wölken,
Verfasser der Stellungnahme des mitberatenden Rechtsausschusses. – Herr Präsident, liebe Kommissare, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Als ich meinen DSA-Initiativbericht geschrieben habe, war es mir sehr wichtig, darauf hinzuwirken, dass es in der Europäischen Union keine personalisierte Werbung auf Internetplattformen mehr gibt. Eine große Mehrheit hier im Haus ist diesem Ansinnen gefolgt und hat die Kommission aufgefordert, Schluss zu machen mit ausspionierender Werbung.
                  

                     Dazu ist es leider nicht gekommen. Es wird weiter möglich sein, dass Plattformen Daten sammeln und diese Daten benutzen. Wohin das führt, sehen wir gerade in den USA, wo Frauen, die vielleicht eine Abtreibung vornehmen wollen, ihre Daten löschen müssen, um nicht strafrechtlich verfolgt zu werden. Das ist ein Skandal, und an dieser Stelle, muss ich sagen, sind wir nicht weit genug gegangen.
                  

                     Wir haben aber auch an vielen Stellen gute Pflöcke eingeschlagen – ich bin ja der Verfasser der Stellungnahme für den DMA –, sehr, sehr gut, dass wir endlich bei der Interoperabilität in die richtige Richtung gehen!
                  

                     Haben wir mit diesem Gesetz ein neues digitales Grundgesetz für die Europäische Union geschaffen? Ich glaube, ja. Ist dieses Grundgesetz schon perfekt? Ich glaube, nein. Werden wir dabei stehenbleiben? Nein! Es ist unsere Aufgabe, die Europäische Union zur digitalen Grundrechtefestung für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger zu machen, und das werden wir weiterhin machen.
                  

Ondřej Kovařík,
rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. – Mr President, I welcome the outcome of the negotiations on this digital package. The concentration of market power by one or a handful of companies is never a positive thing for competition. The Digital Markets Act brings solutions to this problem. It will provide a clear and more predictable framework for the market, but also for enforcement authorities. It will prevent big platforms – the gatekeepers – from abusing the power and enable their competitors to innovate and grow.
This is particularly good news for European SMEs. It is about a level playing field. Until now, many SMEs have suffered from uneven terms imposed by the dominant companies. Thanks to the Digital Markets Act, small businesses should have more opportunities and better access to the digital market. Digitalisation is way forward, but it is also essential that both European and non-European digital services providers comply with all applicable EU law online and offline. The DMA is a good step forward to ensure that this is the reality and not just a theory.

Jadwiga Wiśniewska,
autorka projektu opinii Komisji Praw Kobiet i Równouprawnienia. – Panie Przewodniczący! Państwo Komisarze! Nowa ustawa o usługach cyfrowych stanowi nowe standardy, nowe ramy przeciwdziałania rozprzestrzenianiu się nielegalnych treści w internecie oraz daje indywidualnym użytkownikom możliwość zakwestionowania arbitralnych decyzji platform.
                  

                     Jest nadzieja na to, że będziemy mieli lepszą kontrolę nad wykorzystaniem naszych danych przez platformy internetowe i duże firmy technologiczne, bo te mają duży wpływ na użytkowników oraz szereg możliwości reagowania. Dlatego uważam, że możemy od nich wymagać zdecydowanie więcej.
                  

                     Z perspektywy komisji FEMM, w której jestem autorem opinii, szczególną uwagę poświęciliśmy sytuacji dzieci, które w środowisku internetowym bardzo często padają ofiarami nadużyć, jak również poprawie sytuacji kobiet poprzez zobowiązania dla dostawców usług internetowych do przeciwdziałania dyskryminacji, zwalczania przemocy i reagowania na sygnały użytkowników.
                  

                     W internecie najważniejszy jest użytkownik i ochrona jego praw, dlatego musimy dążyć do wzmocnienia jego pozycji.
                  

Arba Kokalari,
för PPE-gruppen. – Herr talman ! Olaga hot. Hemsidor som säljer farliga leksaker och droger. Sociala mediekonton som kapas och stängs ner utan förklaring. Ryska desinformationsattacker. Ja, så ser vardagen ut på nätet i dag. Det är dags att få ett stopp på den digitala vilda västern.
                  

                     Internet har revolutionerat världen och förändrat våra liv med helt nya möjligheter, men lagarna har inte riktigt hängt med. I dag handlar de allra flesta online på mobilen och använder sociala medier, men färre använder cd-skivor eller faxmaskiner. Nu uppdaterar vi äntligen EU:s gamla digitallagar – efter 20 år. I förhandlingarna har jag varit en stark röst för yttrandefrihet, tydliga spelregler för företagen, trygghet för konsumenter och att det som är olagligt offline också måste vara olagligt online. Ska vi ta vara på den digitala omställningen så behövs det ordning och reda. Jag vill nämligen se ett tryggt och fritt internet både i dag och i framtiden.
                  

René Repasi,
im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, werte Kommissare, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die digitalen Märkte sind gestört. Wir haben hier Unternehmen, die die Regeln der Märkte, die sie dominieren, deren Zugang sie kontrollieren, selber schreiben. Ihre Dienstleistungen sind inzwischen so wichtig für die Menschen geworden, dass sie ihre sprichwörtliche Seele dafür verkaufen, um diese Netze, diese Dienste nutzen zu dürfen.
                  

                     Die Seele in digitalen Märkten sind unsere Daten. Daten zu sammeln, zu ordnen und hieraus präzise Profile von uns, den Nutzern; zu machen, ist die Quelle für die omnipotente Stellung dieser Unternehmen. Unsere bisherigen Schwerter, das Wettbewerbsrecht und das Datenschutzrecht, haben sich als stumpf erwiesen. In den Niederlanden etwa bezahlt Apple lieber regelmäßig Geldstrafen, als sein Geschäftsmodell zu ändern. Deshalb war es notwendig und richtig, uns mit dem DMA endlich Instrumente zu geben, mit denen wir Datenkraken und ungebändigte Big-Tech-Unternehmen kontrollieren können.
                  

                     Zwei Errungenschaften des DMA will ich hervorheben. Erstens müssen Messenger-Dienste sich öffnen und den Nachrichtenaustausch mit Kundinnen anderer Messenger-Dienste zulassen. Dadurch können Endnutzerinnen endlich tatsächlich Gebrauch von ihrem Wahlrecht machen und den Dienst auswählen, der ihre Rechte am besten schützt, ohne faktisch dazu gezwungen zu sein, nur den Dienst wählen zu können, bei dem alle anderen sind. Eltern müssen ihre Seele nicht mehr verkaufen, wenn sie in der Eltern-App der Grundschule dabei sein wollen.
                  

                     Zweitens bekommt die Kommission das Recht, sogenannte strukturelle Maßnahmen zu erlassen, wenn sich Unternehmen wiederholt nicht an unsere Regeln halten. Sie kann ihnen verbieten, Konkurrenten aufzukaufen und – im schlimmsten Fall – die Zerschlagung eines Unternehmens anordnen. Das sind Strafen, die wehtun und damit das Verhalten der Big-Tech-Unternehmen verändern werden.
                  

                     Diese Innovationen sollten die Kommission im Übrigen auch dazu inspirieren, das Wettbewerbsrecht und die Fusionskontrolle zu überarbeiten. Damit schafft der DMA das Fundament dafür, digitale Märkte wieder genesen zu lassen und zu einem echten Gamechanger zu werden. Für meine Fraktion möchte ich diesen Erfolg meiner Vorgängerin Evelyne Gebhardt widmen, die heute bei uns oben auf der Besuchertribüne sitzt und die für uns den DMA während des parlamentarischen Verfahrens verbesserte.
                  

Dita Charanzová,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, this is a big step, a huge change, and a huge chance to make the digital world better. Instead of piecemeal solutions, these two laws create one system for the whole European single market and with time perhaps the wider global Internet.
I hope today we start a new era for the Internet, that we start the hard work of making the Internet safer and better for our citizens and especially our children. An Internet that keeps the best of us – free speech, innovation, and universal knowledge – while limiting the worst.
References to the Wild West, gold standards and what is illegal offline is illegal online have come to the point of being Internet memes and different games, especially among the tech journalists. But the key point here is that our citizens should know that their lives will get better thanks to this vote.

Alexandra Geese,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, the digital services act (DSA) is a landmark legislation with the potential to become a global standard. While it is not perfect, it is still revolutionary. Why is that so?
First of all, it breaks with the paradigm of inevitability, and it puts democracy over private, monopolistic interests, because until now there was a feeling that big tech was too powerful to regulate, and now we make it clear that democracies set the rules.
Secondly, it makes the Internet a better place without interfering with freedom of expression. The DSA holds platforms accountable for what they do and not for what their users think or write in their posts.
And finally, it tackles the information asymmetry. Today, platforms know everything about us because they collect our data. But the little we know, we learned from whistle-blowers, like Frances Haugen. And this is why the risk assessment and the access to the data of the platforms for independent researchers, also from civil society organisations, is so important because they will provide us with the evidence we need to regulate well. And they will be able to tell the stories about how social networks influence our public opinion, our politics, or the health of our children.
Europe and the world deserve a free Internet where democracy counts more than private profits. The DSA is a first, but giant, step in that direction.

Virginie Joron,
au nom du groupe ID. – Monsieur le Président, Madame, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, des décennies de laxisme ont fait de l'Europe une colonie numérique des Big Techs américaines, les GAFAM. La législation sur les marchés numériques, le DMA, est donc une tentative de renverser la situation.
                  

                     Le président Macron s'autocongratule sur cette législation. Cependant, c'est en dépit de la position de la présidence française, et non grâce à elle, que le DMA contient encore des dispositions utiles. En raison de la pression exercée par la présidence française du Conseil, l'amende maximale pour une infraction a été réduite de moitié. De même, le démantèlement des GAFAM qui enfreignent les règles a été rendu plus difficile. Étonnamment, le Conseil n'a pas vu beaucoup de valeur dans l'interopérabilité des services de messagerie. L'ouverture de WhatsApp à des services alternatifs profiterait à des millions de citoyens. Pourtant, elle n'a été acceptée qu'à contrecœur.
                  

                     Je félicite donc le rapporteur Andreas Schwab pour avoir réussi à limiter les dégâts. Je suis heureuse que la proposition de mon groupe visant à protéger les lanceurs d'alerte fasse partie du DMA. Je tiens à remercier le rapporteur, mes collègues et le personnel concerné pour cet énorme travail.
                  

                     Le DMA est nécessaire mais pas suffisant. C'est un début mais pas une fin. Cette mesure législative ne créera pas en soi des emplois numériques en Europe et ne créera pas de champions numériques non plus, ni de souveraineté numérique de l'Europe. Nous devrions soutenir massivement les entreprises numériques européennes et investir dans les emplois numériques en Europe, comme par le passé, avec les initiatives de coopération et les investissements européens tels qu'Airbus. Après des décennies de laxisme, nous avons devant nous une dernière chance de reprendre l'initiative. Notre groupe soutiendra ce rapport.
                  

Adam Bielan,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, today, we are discussing two flagship legislations of this mandate. The digital services act and the digital markets act are needed as rapidly evolving digital technologies transformed EU citizens' and companies' use of Internet, and required updated rights and obligations for all digital actors, from markets and service providers to users and customers.
The digital markets act is a step forward, promoting greater competition and fairness online in markets dominated by big platforms. I believe it will lead to improvements for all businesses across Europe and will open new opportunities for small businesses, including access to data. And, under the digital services act, we have reached our purpose – the online environment is now set to become much more transparent and safer for users.
In my capacity as shadow rapporteur for both legislations, I would also like to thank the rapporteurs, Ms Schaldemose and Mr Schwab, for their work, engagement in defending the European Parliament's position and excellent cooperation.
I believe all of these achievements not only defend fundamental rights online for Europeans, but also put us on the right track to set the global benchmark for regulating online platforms in the future, including cloud services and search engines, so that freedom of expression is always guaranteed.

Edina Tóth (NI). – Tisztelt Elnök úr! Az óriásplatformok társadalmi hatása mindannyiunk számára érzékelhető, hiszen napi szinten befolyásolják szokásainkat és döntéseinket is. A digitális szolgáltatásokat és piacokat szabályozó javaslat ezért kulcsfontosságú, mivel célja egy átlátható, biztonságos online tér megteremtése. Fontos, hogy a technológiai vállalatok többé nem határozhatják meg önkényesen a játékszabályokat, és polgáraink nem lesznek teljesen kiszolgáltatva nekik. Mivel a közösségi média fokozott veszélyforrás a kiskorúakra nézve, gyermekeink könnyebben válhatnak a zaklatás, az erőszak vagy a megfélemlítés áldozataivá a digitális térben. Ezért üdvözlöm, hogy a javaslat kiáll a kiskorúak védelméért, hiszen a technológiai óriásplatformok többé nem tehetnek közzé személyre szabott hirdetéseket gyermekeink számára.
                  

                     Bízom benne, hogy a jövőben hatékonyan fog érvényesülni az az elv, hogy ami illegális offline, az illegális online is.
                  

Salvatore De Meo (PPE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, permettetemi innanzitutto di ringraziare i due relatori di questi due atti legislativi importanti, che rappresentano un punto di svolta cruciale della disciplina di un mercato, quello digitale, dove sempre più cittadini e imprese, è stato detto, si incontrano e, nel corso degli anni, molti sono i rischi aumentati per gli utenti e tante le forme di concorrenza sleale.
                  

                     Per molti anni i colossi digitali hanno controllato il mercato, facendo valere il loro potere economico e dando vita a un vero e proprio monopolio, nel quale le piccole imprese non sempre hanno avuto un ruolo adeguato e non sempre i consumatori utenti sono stati considerati.
                  

                     Credo che l'Unione europea abbia finalmente deciso di dotarsi di regole per garantire una concorrenza leale, l'innovazione e la tutela dei consumatori. Ci saranno delle sanzioni, perché evidentemente la legge sui mercati digitali rappresenta una colonna portante, ma è importante monitorare la sua attuazione perché il mercato digitale, così come si è evoluto in questi anni, continuerà a reagire a questa legislazione ed è importante saperla adeguare per evitare che, fatta la legge, si trovi, ovviamente, un raggiro, e in questo saremo attenti esecutori di una legge importante per questa Unione europea.
                  

Biljana Borzan (S&D). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, želim čestitati izvjestiteljima, prije svega Christel i Reneu, na izvanrednom poslu koji su napravili. Ovo su uistinu zakoni koji će promijeniti internet kakav znamo i uspostaviti standard za zaštitu građana na svjetskoj razini.
                  

                     Internet je kroz godine postao divlji zapad. Svi se tamo mogu lažno predstavljati, svatko svakoga može pratiti, uzimati mu podatke, prevariti, novčano oštetiti, svatko o svakome može nešto loše i lažno reći i napisati bez ikakvih posljedica. Predugo su naši građani bili prepušteni samovolji Googlea i Facebooka koji su debelo profitirali na našim podacima, čak i na onim najosjetljivijim.
                  

                     Ovaj zakon stavlja odgovornost na internetske divove da provjeravaju sadržaj koji nude, da ne manipuliraju korisnicima niti koriste njihove podatke bez njihovog znanja. Uspostavlja se interoperabilnost usluga za slanje poruka te zabrana praćenja u cilju oglašavanja za maloljetnike.
                  

                     Tko kod nas hoće poslovati, mora poštivati naša pravila. Danas smo pokazali kako u Europskoj uniji nema nedodirljivih!
                  

Valérie Hayer (Renew). – Monsieur le Président, Madame, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, nous l'avons fait. En moins d'un an, nous avons réussi à négocier les textes les plus ambitieux au monde pour réguler les géants du numérique. Face à l'hégémonie des entreprises chinoises et américaines, face au modèle muselé par un État autoritaire ou de capitalisme de surveillance, nous bâtissons un internet plus juste, plus transparent, plus protecteur des Européens. ‘De grands discours’, diront certains. Eh bien non. Non, Amazon ne pourra plus permettre à des produits de contrefaçon d'inonder nos marchés. Non, Facebook ne pourra plus impunément, par ses algorithmes, contribuer à promouvoir des appels à la violence et à la radicalisation.
                  

                     Les géants du numérique pèsent sur le fonctionnement de nos démocraties, ils doivent donc en porter la juste responsabilité: c'est cela, protéger les Européens. Chers collègues, l'Europe avance. Nous devons maintenant garantir les moyens suffisants à nos institutions pour faire appliquer ces nouvelles réglementations, sans quoi nous aurions failli.
                  

Marcel Kolaja (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, the big tech created a strongly centralised digital environment because they want to exercise full control over our digital lives. But my political group has always been fighting to give power back to people over the technology they use. This means challenging the centralised digital ecosystem. This means ensuring that messaging services can interoperate, so that people are able to move to privacy-friendly alternatives, to switch between applications, to refuse intrusive surveillance advertising. Because our fundamental rights can prevail over the commercial interests of the big tech as long as the digital ecosystem relies on covert tracking of individuals or when legal content is removed by error from filters. While we have a lot to do in order to protect fundamental rights online, the Digital Markets Act will now challenge the big tech's power over our digital rights. And with that, Europe is making a great step forward to better protect people.

Alessandra Basso (ID). – Signor Presidente, signori Commissari, onorevoli colleghi, siamo arrivati all'epilogo di un lavoro complicato sul DSA, per noi è stata un'occasione mancata per contribuire alla sicurezza online e alla protezione dei diritti fondamentali.
                  

                     Rilevo con dispiacere due aspetti: uno, la presenza dei trusted flagger, i segnalatori di professione, le cui segnalazioni avranno la priorità sulle segnalazioni di un cittadino qualunque; due, l'introduzione, quasi sul filo di lana da parte della Commissione, del meccanismo di risposta alle crisi, proposta introdotta senza un vero processo democratico, considerato che, già nel 2020, eravamo in piena crisi Covid.
                  

                     La Commissione avrebbe voluto un potere quasi illimitato nel dichiarare lo stato di emergenza e nel richiedere alle piattaforme di adottare misure di mitigazione per controllare la libertà di espressione. Abbiamo appena tolto le mascherine e la Commissione voleva metterci un nuovo bagaglio, questa volta alle nostre idee. Nonostante il poco tempo, siamo riusciti ad arginare questo potere.
                  

Beata Mazurek (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowni Państwo! Chcemy jednolitego rynku cyfrowego, który ma mniej barier handlowych między państwami członkowskimi, który służy budowaniu dobrobytu gospodarczego. Wszyscy znamy wymierne korzyści płynące z rozwoju jednolitego rynku cyfrowego. Konsumenci mają dostęp do szybko rozwijających się nowych produktów, niższych cen, szerszego wyboru i lepszej jakości towarów. Jednolity rynek cyfrowy to także rozwój nowoczesnych modeli biznesowych i administracyjnych.
                  

                     Nasza praca nad dwoma aktami legislacyjnymi przełoży się bezpośrednio na regulacje działalności platform internetowych, z których korzysta dzisiaj prawie każdy mieszkaniec Unii Europejskiej. Zadbaliśmy o więcej pewności dla osób kupujących towary online oraz ochronę wolności słowa na dużych portalach społecznościowych. Kompromis wypracowany w ramach rozmów trójstronnych uznaję za krok naprzód. Niemniej jednak, zgodnie z naszymi postulatami i mając na uwadze dobro konsumentów korzystających z gospodarki cyfrowej, uważam, że należy wzmocnić dialog regulacyjny, wzmocnić krajowe organy ochrony konsumentów i konkurencji, i upewnić się, że Komisja Europejska jako nadrzędna instytucja dbająca o właściwe przestrzeganie uchwalonego prawa, będzie je egzekwować skutecznie we wszystkich krajach członkowskich.
                  

Pablo Arias Echeverría (PPE). – Señor presidente, señora vicepresidenta, señor comisario, conocemos los beneficios de la revolución digital, pero también sus riesgos: estafas y productos peligrosos, amenazas a la integridad física y psicológica de los menores, difusiones ilegales de contenidos protegidos por la propiedad intelectual, dependencia de las pymes de los gigantes de internet o injerencias en procesos electorales de terceros países, por solo mencionar algunos. Lo que hemos denominado el Wild West digital es consecuencia de la, hasta hoy, falta de una regulación clara, que nos ha posicionado a la cola de la revolución de la carrera digital.
                  

                     La Ley de Servicios Digitales y la Ley de Mercados Digitales tienen un potencial suficiente para empezar a solucionar los problemas que han generado los gigantes de internet en nuestro mercado interior. Creamos una constitución digital para proteger y mejorar la accesibilidad de los ciudadanos en el entorno online y sentamos las bases para que nuestras empresas, sobre todo nuestras pymes, puedan crecer y competir en un entorno propicio. Esto es solo el principio para posicionar a la Unión Europea en la carrera digital global. Hay que seguir trabajando para complementar esta legislación y abordar retos concretos. Todos cabemos en el mercado único digital, siempre que se cumplan nuestras reglas y sin que nadie nos imponga nada desde fuera, sobre la base de lo que hemos denominado el European Way.
                  

Alex Agius Saliba (S&D). – Mr President, both the DSA and the DMA are the first of its kind – unique instruments to regulate big tech companies. The new rules will force the tech giants to play fair and end their abuse of power and ability to game the digital economy for their dividends while creating harm for our societies, for our citizens.
                  

                     We will finally move away from a purely advertisement-centric and surveillance-based model to rules focusing on people's interests in accessing and sharing high quality content, high quality information. More than ever, in the wake of the fighting of propaganda and also the disinformation war, we will need the democratic tools to regulate user safety, to protect our consumers, to fight targeted advertisement, to end the surveillance of users, and to safeguard transparency and accountability.
                  

                     At the beginning of the mandate, we have put the framework to ensure that what is illegal offline should also be illegal online. I must say that the new rules have fully fulfilled our expectations to empower people and to take back control of the Internet. Once again, Europe has been the champion and shaper of a better global digital world.
                  

Moritz Körner (Renew). – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrte Kommissare, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der DSA setzt klare Regeln für die Onlinewelt. Und diese schnelle Einigung über dieses Digitalpaket zeigt: Europa kann handeln. Europa kann tatsächlich schnell vorangehen und auch Regeln in dieser Welt setzen. Das ist ein gutes Zeichen.
                  

                     Als Verhandlungsführer der Liberalen im Innenausschuss lagen mir aber vor allem die digitalen Bürgerrechte am Herzen. Da haben wir nicht alles erreicht, was wir uns gewünscht haben. Aber wir haben doch sichergestellt, dass es keine generelle Überwachungspflicht gibt, dass dadurch nicht in Zukunft Uploadfilter durch Haftungspflichten eingeführt werden. Das ist an der Stelle ein Sieg für digitale Bürgerrechte, und ich glaube, für viele junge Menschen, die dagegen vor ein paar Jahren demonstriert haben, auch ein ganz wichtiges Zeichen.
                  

                     Aber der nächste Angriff auf digitale Bürgerrechte wird schon vorbereitet. Die Chatkontrolle wäre eine generelle Überwachung aller unserer Chats. Es wäre eine Privatisierung der Strafverfolgung. Das sollten wir nicht machen. Gerade die Werte, die wir mit dem DSA beschreiben, würden wir damit brechen. Diesen Weg sollten wir nicht gehen.
                  

Kim Van Sparrentak (Verts/ALE). – Voorzitter, twintig jaar lang hebben we grote techbedrijven vrijwel onbeperkt laten groeien onder het mom van innovatie. Nu zijn deze bedrijven zo machtig dat ze een bedreiging vormen voor onze maatschappij en onze democratie. De algoritmen van googles en facebooks laten ons zien wat hun aandeelhouders het meeste winst oplevert. Ze weten alles over ons en hebben ontdekt dat ons gepersonaliseerde haat en desinformatie voorschotelen, de meeste advertentie-inkomsten oplevert, omdat we langer op het platform blijven, met een verdeelde maatschappij tot gevolg.
                  

                     Niet alleen op het internet, maar ook in de gezondheidszorg en het onderwijs krijgen deze techbedrijven dankzij hun geld en datamacht steeds meer invloed. Je komt er bijna niet onderuit om WhatsApp te gebruiken of om je kind naar een googleschool te sturen. En ook de data van je Fitbit gaan direct naar Google. Dit moet stoppen.
                  

                     Met de wet inzake digitale diensten en de wet inzake digitale markten zetten we grote stappen richting een wereld die niet in handen is van big tech, maar in de handen van burgers. We krijgen eindelijk meer grip op wat er online gebeurt en zetten stappen om de megalomane uitbreiding van techbedrijven af te remmen. Wat mij betreft is dit pas het begin.
                  

Markus Buchheit (ID). – Herr Präsident! Meine Damen und Herren, ich kann diese positive Kritik kaum nachvollziehen. Wenn ich mir den Gesetzestext anschaue, dann sehe ich häufig den feuchten Traum, den wahr gewordenen feuchten Traum so manchen Fetischisten des Obrigkeitsstaates.
                  

                     Uns mag die Digitalisierung der öffentlichen Verwaltung nicht gelungen sein. Die Digitalisierung des Blockwartwesens in Form des 
                           ‘trusted Flaggers’
                         allerdings, die scheint uns vorliegend zu gelingen.
                  

                     Sie wollen in Krisenzeiten den öffentlichen Diskurs einschränken, demokratische Rechte einschränken. Ich frage Sie, was sind denn diese Krisenzeiten? War eine solche Krise die Flüchtlingskrise 2015? War eine solche Krise die berechtigte Kritik von Abertausenden von Menschen an zu früh auf den Markt geworfenen Impfstoffen?
                  

                     Meine Damen und Herren, der vorliegende Entwurf ist in weiten Teilen mündiger Bürger unwürdig. Man mag sogar so weit gehen: Das ist die späte Rache Mielkes an der westlichen Meinungsfreiheit. Meine Damen und Herren, wer ein wahrer Demokrat ist, der stimmt diesem Text in dieser Form so nicht zu.
                  

Geert Bourgeois (ECR). – Voorzitter, collega's, commissarissen, de wet inzake digitale markten is zonder meer een goede zaak. De wet creëert de broodnodige, eerlijke concurrentie en biedt ook groeikansen voor onze jonge bedrijven. Ook de wet inzake digitale diensten is een grote stap voorwaarts. De wet zorgt ervoor dat er uniforme regels zijn op de interne markt en biedt een veel betere bescherming voor de gebruikers van de digitale platforms.
                  

                     Toch maak ik mij grote zorgen over de vrije meningsuiting, ondanks enkele belangrijke aanpassingen. Ik ben bang dat belangrijke private spelers de vrije meningsuiting aan banden zullen leggen. Humor, satire, parodie, kritische stemmen, legitieme politieke meningen zullen niet door de algoritmemolen geraken. Algoritmen die geen enkele nuance kennen.
                  

                     Ik ben blij uit een land te komen waar de grondwet censuur verbiedt. Offline en online. Dit had ook het uitgangspunt moeten zijn voor de EU, met uitzondering van enkele limitatief opgesomde grote misdrijven. De EU die er prat op gaat de rechten en vrijheden te beschermen.
                  

Tom Vandenkendelaere (PPE). – Voorzitter, commissarissen, collega's, we mogen het historische belang van de wet inzake digitale diensten en de wet inzake digitale markten niet onderschatten. Dit is in de hele wereld het eerste jumbopakket aan wetgeving dat landt om big tech te reguleren. Onze onlinewereld krijgt zo een stevig fundament in de 21e eeuw om deze voortaan eerlijker en transparanter te maken.
                  

                     We mogen trots zijn als Parlement, want wij hebben de achterpoortjes gedicht. Wij hebben gezorgd voor meer bescherming van minderjarigen. We zien de laatste weken al positieve signalen van de platforms die aan de slag gaan met deze nieuwe regelgeving.
                  

                     Maar de implementatie en de handhaving worden echt cruciaal. Zoals altijd zit the proof of the pudding in the eating. Het Parlement zal er nauw op toezien dat de Commissie en de lidstaten hun verplichtingen nakomen, zodat de wet inzake digitale markten en de wet inzake digitale diensten echt een mentaliteitswijziging teweegbrengen op het terrein.
                  

Karen Melchior (Renew). – Hr. Formand! Og tak til kommissærerne for at være her i dag. Det her er kulminationen på tre års arbejde og 15 års erfaringer med en stadigt stigende digital centralisering. Og hvad har det vist os? Det har vist os, at tillid er godt, men åbenhed er bedre, og frivillighed hos virksomhederne er godt, men lovgivning er bedre. Det som bringer mig stor glæde ved lovforslaget, som vi skal stemme om i morgen, det er at se, at vi har fået implementeret ansvarlighed gennem design, hvor platformene skal have åbenhed og rapportering til en europæisk myndighed frem for upload-filtre og mørklagte beslutninger.
                  

                     Vi har mulighed for at appellere de beslutninger, som de træffer, og der er et forbud mod digitalt bondefangeri, de såkaldte ‘dark patterns’. Vi har nu en base for at sikre vores demokrati, vores virksomheder og vores rettigheder. Men det, der er essentielt, det kommer til at være håndhævelsen, og der er GDPR nok et skræmmebillede, hvor vi har brug for, at vi får det bragt op på et europæisk niveau og får et europæisk agentur eller en europæisk myndighed til at sikre, at den lovgivning, som vi forhåbentlig vedtager i morgen, rent faktisk også bliver til virkelighed gennem klarhed og håndhævelse.
                  

Krzysztof Hetman (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowni Państwo Komisarze! Przyznaję, że przemawiam dzisiaj z wyjątkowym poczuciem prawdziwego, historycznego wydarzenia. Oto bowiem wraz z przyjęciem obu aktów o rynkach cyfrowych, jak i o usługach cyfrowych, Unia Europejska jako pierwsza na świecie kończy z ‘Dzikim Zachodem’ gigantów internetowych i wkracza na szlak precyzyjnych i przejrzystych ram regulacyjnych, gdzie chronione są prawa użytkowników internetu, respektowane potrzeby przedsiębiorstw, ułatwiony wzrost gospodarczy i konkurencyjność na rynku jednolitym. A równocześnie Big Tech ponosi odpowiedzialność za swoje działania.
                  

                     Z mojego punktu widzenia za szczególnie istotne uważam kwestie związane z walką z dezinformacją, która jest we współczesnym świecie niezwykle potężną bronią. Liczę na to, że mechanizm reagowania na sytuacje kryzysowe pozwoli nam lepiej stawiać opór fake news i manipulacjom. Oba te akty to również, między innymi, bezpieczniejsze zakupy online dzięki lepszej identyfikacji sprzedających czy też kontroli sprzedawanych produktów.
                  

Vystúpenia podľa postupu prihlásenia o slovo zdvihnutím ruky


Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, Senhores Comissários, como legisladores, é bom saber que conseguimos decidir depressa quando para isso nos empenhamos. Depois de duas décadas de quase não regulação chegámos a uma nova fase da vida das plataformas online e dos mercados digitais, com uma regulação que protege os interesses dos utilizadores, que podem escolher o seu serviço de mensagens, o das pequenas empresas, que têm sofrido com a concorrência desleal das próprias plataformas onde vendem os seus produtos, e o da sociedade em geral, que sofre os efeitos sistémicos negativos do excessivo poder das grandes plataformas.
                  

                     Para já, contudo, estes diplomas não passam de tigres de papel. Para serem algo mais do que isso e fazerem a diferença precisamos de um nível adequado de recursos para as autoridades nacionais e para a Comissão Europeia, responsáveis pela sua aplicação.
                  

                     Hoje damos um passo, mas só quando atingirmos os resultados que nos levaram a aprovar estes diplomas poderemos dizer que a nossa missão, conjunta, foi cumprida.
                  

Sandro Gozi (Renew). – Monsieur le Président, avec ce paquet numérique, nous avons réalisé l'impossible. Je veux donc remercier Margrethe Vestager, Thierry Breton, tous les collègues et la présidence française du Conseil.
                  

                     Un marché plus ouvert et compétitif, plus de protection pour nos citoyens, plus d'instruments contre l'illégalité et la désinformation, plus de transparence des algorithmes: c'est formidable. Face à la transition numérique, nous assumons toute notre responsabilité en tant qu'Union. Nous agissons en tant qu'initiateurs de normes au plan mondial et nous renforçons notre souveraineté numérique et notre état de droit.
                  

                     Maintenant, deux grandes priorités: assurer la mise en œuvre complète et efficace de toutes les nouvelles règles le plus rapidement possible et mettre notre modèle au centre de nos relations avec tous nos partenaires mondiaux – à commencer par les États-Unis d'Amérique –, l'expliquer et le promouvoir. C'est là tout le sens de notre engagement et nous serons, j'en suis sûr, encore une fois au rendez-vous.
                  

Clare Daly (The Left). – Mr President, I think the DSA really was a chance for the EU to regulate the hyper-centralised digital sphere and to crack down on the harmful business model of big tech that so much feeds off the exploitation of the billions of users' personal data.
But we have to be honest about it. The attempt to create a digital constitution and to protect our online fundamental rights has largely failed. It really has. We've only chipped away at the immense power of online monopolies. We don't have the right to opt out of targeted surveillance advertising. We don't have the right not to use digital services anonymously. And there's no alternative to the toxic content algorithms that shape our online world and information and cause so much damage to people's mental health.
So democratising the digital sphere is going to take collective action. We've got to hold the tech giants to account – their wielding of addictive, obsessive platforms, it's just not good enough. It's motivated by profit and not people's interests.

Paul Tang (S&D). – Mr President, the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act will rewrite the rules of the internet. I would like to thank our dear colleagues Andreas Schwab and Christel Schaldemose for taking on the job of finding the compromises, and its compromises are a giant leap forward.
But no thanks to the shadow lobbying of the big tech. Some of you may have read last week a piece in The Guardian. It explains that in response to your initiative of the Tracking-Free Ads Coalition, Brussels saw a surge of small and medium-sized enterprises taking up the job of lobbying. However, they pretended to represent small and medium business enterprises, but they were, in effect, representing big tech. They were funded by big tech, representing the interests of big tech companies. Now, it is clearly a shame that democratically chosen representatives in the European Parliament are being manipulated in covert ways and with dirty tricks.
Dear colleagues, organisations that are not listed in the EU Transparency Register or that are not honest about their members and their funding should not be allowed to lobby the European Parliament. I call on the colleagues to ban big tech shadow lobbying and, of course, last but not least, vote for the DSA and the DMA.

(Koniec vystúpení podľa postupu prihlásenia o slovo zdvihnutím ruky)


Thierry Breton,
membre de la Commission. – Monsieur le Président, au cours des derniers mois, il nous est arrivé de comparer le processus législatif à un marathon. En fait, je pense qu'il eût été préférable de le comparer à un véritable sprint parce que la vitesse d'adoption, qui a été saluée par tous, est d'autant plus flagrante lorsque l'on voit les difficultés auxquelles sont confrontés par ailleurs – Sandro Gozi y a fait implicitement référence tout à l'heure – nos partenaires non européens. Et il est vrai qu'ils essaient depuis un certain temps de faire ce que nous avons fait – vous avez raison – avec l'adoption de ces textes: nous donnons le cap et nous serons prêts à aider ceux qui voudront s'inspirer, s'ils le souhaitent, de ce que nous avons fait pour nos 445 millions de concitoyens.
                  

                     Comme je l'ai indiqué, comme beaucoup d'entre vous l'ont rappelé, la priorité désormais, c'est évidemment la mise en œuvre du DSA et du DMA. Et pour ce qui est de ces nouvelles responsabilités, la Commission – je tiens à vous le dire – se prépare très activement à être opérationnelle, et ce dès le premier jour, afin que les entreprises puissent commencer à être contrôlées comme il se doit. Ces grandes plateformes vont donc devoir s'adapter à nos règles, et non l'inverse.
                  

                     Nos équipes sont en train d'être renforcées, comme vous l'avez à juste titre demandé. Je dirais même que, pour beaucoup d'entre elles, elles sont désormais déjà au travail. Elles sont en interaction avec la plupart des grandes plateformes concernées, pour leur expliquer ce qui est dans le texte et pour les aider à se préparer à leurs nouvelles obligations. Et je tenais à vous dire que, dans ce contexte, nous saurons évidemment nous montrer à la hauteur de votre confiance. Nos services vont appliquer ces règlements avec la plus grande fermeté et le plus grand sérieux sur l'entièreté du marché unique. Et il sera également capital de collaborer – vous le savez, c'est aussi l'esprit du texte – avec les États membres ainsi qu'avec les diverses parties prenantes.
                  

                     En parallèle, nous allons poursuivre notre travail de réorganisation de l'espace informationnel afin, là encore, de continuer à renforcer la position de nos concitoyens. Or, on le sait, certaines grandes plateformes vont continuer à vouloir exploiter les données personnelles des citoyens européens en échange de services en apparence gratuits, notamment ceux liés à l'identité. C'est pourquoi nous devons avancer très rapidement vers l'adoption du nouveau règlement sur le portefeuille électronique européen, proposition qui est déjà à l'étude du Parlement européen et des États membres. Notre objectif, encore une fois, est de mettre l'individu au centre de son propre espace numérique et de son propre espace informationnel, et surtout de lui donner les clés pour qu'il puisse en reprendre le contrôle.
                  

                     Je tiens encore une fois à remercier le Parlement pour ce travail constant et je vous le redis: nous sommes désormais au travail pour mettre en œuvre cette réglemention dès que celle-ci sera adoptée – je l'espère demain – par le Parlement.
                  

Margrethe Vestager,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, this has been a real debate. It has been obvious for everyone listening that not everyone was happy. Some wanted more. Some wanted less. And yet there is a strong coalition in this Parliament to change the rules of the digital world. This is not the end. This is not perfect. But it's good and it's strong and it's ambitious, as a new beginning for a democracy that sets the rules of our digital world.
This is what is needed, and the timing is absolutely perfect because now everything digitalises. Had democracy not reinstated itself in our digital world, it may have been too late, because what we can do now is to enable a fair, open digital market, safe products and respect for our democracy and what feeds it.
We have discussed, I have learned a lot in these years when we have done this, and we have solved problems – a number of them. We have got more platform services covered. We have started interoperability. We protect minors. I think the proposals that you will vote on are better than the ones the Commission tabled because we have learnt together, and I want to thank you for this. It's in the realisation of this that real change begins.
As was just said, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. The proof of the law is in its enforcement, and in making these laws in real life, in the enforcement, well then big tech business models will change. And then new business opportunities will open for all the SMEs of this world – with their own data, with their own access, with their own ideas.
Because making the most of technology is making it serve: serve us as humans, serve small businesses, serve those who protect and develop our democracy. In doing that, we create trust in technology. I think that is what you are reaching to achieve.

Christel Schaldemose,
rapporteur. – Mr President, thank you, colleagues, for a very good debate today and to you, Margrethe. I was going to say the same as you just said here – finally, we are at the end of the beginning, because tomorrow we vote and then we have the legislation in place. And then the hard work will begin. And I count on you, Mr Breton and Ms Vestager, I count on you – you need to do a very good job. It will be tough to implement and it will be even tougher to enforce it. But we need it because otherwise we will not get the tech industry under democratic control.
And I will follow it, together with the Parliament; we will make sure that you will be pushed and we will look over our shoulders and follow your work, because this is very important.
But I have to say that I am extremely proud that we together have made history and we together have made landmark legislations that will impact the whole digital world and a lot of citizens will really feel the difference. So we need to be proud. I am proud. Thank you very much for the cooperation.

Andreas Schwab,
rapporteur. – Mr President, colleagues, Commissioners, I would like also wholeheartedly to thank you for the trust that you have given to me when we were dealing with the law, with the draft law, and when there were compromises to be made. This has been a difficult situation for those who felt not to be the leading part of it, but you have made a big step for this law to be, in the end, a success for all of us. This has only been possible because you have made a step in favour of democratic compromises, which are the strengths of this House. I would like to thank you for that.
Secondly, I think it has been a very strong cooperation also beyond committees, and therefore all those that have contributed in different committees have made their impact on the laws that even at the end might not always be seen as clearly as it was in the process. Also this has been of utmost importance.
Certainly I am very grateful that the Commission has committed itself today to a very strong pathway to implementation. You know that we have been writing to the French Presidency, arguing that if we are stronger together, then it means that if we are now putting common tasks at European level in enforcing the DMA and the DSA, that also the manpower has to be shifted from Member States to the European level, at least in relation to these laws. And you know that we haven't got from the Council side very emotional answers.
Therefore, we would like to see more than just promises, we would like to see at least 150 staffers in the two relevant areas, to make sure that the Digital Markets Act and the Digital Services Act get a reality, because it is true that nice laws may read well, but the end is that they be really strongly enforced – and for that we count on you.
As I have been discussing last week with an ambassador of a very important democracy who said the European Union is the strongest regulator in the world. With that law that we did we lead the path, but we have now to make proof of modesty and smart application, and for that I wish the Commission all the best.

Predsedajúci. – Rozprava sa skončila.
                  

                     Hlasovanie sa uskutoční v stredu [06. 07. 2022].
                  


Písomné vyhlásenia (článok 171)



Eva Maydell (PPE),
in writing. – The DMA is about the digital transformation being fair. It's not about punishing the big guy. It's about allowing the little guy to compete and broadening consumers choice. Enforcement by the European Commission will be key. Dialogue and coordination mechanisms between public authorities and private stakeholders will determine whether this law is a success. The DMA covers a fast-moving sector. That is why the European Commission will need to have permanent expertise to monitor trends and respond quickly. There may be clear dos and don'ts listed in the DMA, but the constant emergence of new technologies and business models will inevitably lead to new questions regarding interpretation. Thus we have future-proofed the regulation to account for still inexistent digital technologies and markets.
16.   Adoption by Croatia of the euro on 1 January 2023 (debate)

Predsedajúci. – Ďalším bodom programu je rozprava o správe, ktorú predkladá Siegfried Mureșan v mene Výboru pre hospodárske a menové veci, o návrhu rozhodnutia Rady o prijatí eura Chorvátskom 1. januára 2023 (COM(2022)0282 - - 2022/0179(NLE) (A9-0187/2022).
               

                  Ako prvý v nej vystúpi spravodajca pán Siegfried Mureșan.
               

Siegfried Mureșan,
rapporteur. – Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues. On 1 January 2023, Croatia will become the 20th member of the euro area. This is good news for the people of Croatia. It is good news for the Croatian economy and for Croatian businesses. It is good news for the European Union as a whole. This is why here from the European Parliament, we need to congratulate the people of Croatia and the Croatian authorities for all the achievements of recent years and for fulfilling all the criteria required for joining the euro area.
On 1 June, the European Central Bank and the European Commission both concluded that Croatia fulfils all legally-required conditions to join the euro area. Its debt complies with the requirements, its interest rate, its exchange rate, its inflation, and Croatian legislation is in line with the Treaty, including with the statute of the European Central Bank.
This is why we, as the European Parliament, say very clearly that once a country fulfils all legal requirements, it should be accepted to join without any further delay. This is why I have put forward, during the month of June, the draft report here to the ECON Committee in Parliament in which I propose that we give a green light to Croatia joining the euro area on 1 January 2023.
I would like to thank my shadow rapporteurs and I would like to thank our colleagues from the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs for voting with an overwhelming majority – 43 votes in favour, just one vote against, and two abstentions – and giving a green light on the side of Parliament for this important achievement. This shows that de facto there is no opposition here in the European Parliament towards Croatia joining the euro area.
During my visit to Croatia, I could see on the ground that Croatia fulfils the conditions in a very sustainable manner. Throughout the crisis, throughout the economic and social crisis generated by the Coronavirus that debt, the interest rate, inflation – all the economic indicators – respected the rules. I could also see that the politicians in that country, the main political parties, are supporting this. I could also see the popular support in the country in view of Croatia finally using the euro as their currency.
This means that the people of Croatia can easier travel to other countries of the euro area. It will be easier for investments from other countries of the euro area to invest in Croatia, to help develop the Croatian economy to generate jobs. It will be easier to trade. It will be easier for European tourists to go and enjoy the beautiful landscapes in Croatia. I am also of the strong belief that Croatian authorities know that 1 January will be the beginning, not the end, of the further economic development of Croatia.
Reforms need to continue. The economy needs to become even stronger and more competitive and, of course, the EU funds from the traditional budget of the European Union and from the Recovery and Resilience Facility can play an important role. During my discussions with Croatian Government representatives, the National Bank and colleagues in Parliament, I had the feeling that the authorities are aware of the importance that the EU funds grant, that they are committed to further managing people's money and the budget with care, to further strengthening and reforming the economy.
This is why, to conclude, once again thank you very much to you, to our co-rapporteurs. A big word of congratulations to the people of Croatia. We are looking forward to welcoming Croatia as new member of the euro area. We are of the strong belief that this will be good not only for Croatia but for the European Union as a whole. It shows the trust that exists in our common currency.

Paolo Gentiloni,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I am very pleased to be here to discuss the adoption prospects for Croatia. This is an historical step for this country – a country that 30 years ago was at war. And I think we see the progress that was made with the EU candidates who are entering the EU and now the prospects of joining the euro. The Parliament is playing its full part in the enlargement procedure. And I want to thank all of you and the rapporteur, the honourable Mr Mureșan.
On 1 June, as you remembered, the Commission concluded its convergence report that Croatia has achieved the high degree of sustainable economic convergence with the euro area economy and is ready to adopt the euro on 1 January next year.
The ECB report was fully aligned with ours. Croatia has fulfilled the four economic convergence criteria, and its national legislation on monetary affairs is also in line with the Treaty. The Commission has therefore made the legal proposal, required by the Treaty, for the introduction of the single currency. We have examined Croatia thoroughly and fairly in full respect of the principle of equal treatment. The conditions for Croatia to thrive in the euro area are clearly in place.
Following our proposal, euro area member countries in the Council adopted the recommendation supporting Croatia's adoption of the euro. The European Council agreed that Croatia fulfils the convergence criteria of the Treaty and is ready to adopt the single currency.
Now I invite the European Parliament to signal its political support for the euro adoption by Croatia on 1 January 2023. Following the vote of the European Parliament, the Council will be able to adopt the final legislative proposal on 12 July. And this would give sufficient time for Croatia to prepare for the 1 January changeover.
Above all, this would be a message of trust and determination – the strong signal that European monetary integration is a successful project. It will be a reminder that sustained policy efforts generate concrete results.
Joining the euro area will contribute to increase Croatia's potential growth and to strengthen the adjustment capacity of its economy. To this end, the effective implementation of Croatia's recovery and resilience plan will be key. As you know, based on the fulfilment of first milestones and targets, the Commission made a first payment of EUR 700 million to Croatia last week and we look forward to more reforms and investment.
So, as the honourable Mr Mureșan said, it is a starting point, but a starting point of historical importance for Croatia.

Markus Ferber,
im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Für einen Beitritt in der Eurozone legen wir aus guten Gründen hohe Maßstäbe an, denn wir haben in der Vergangenheit leider gesehen, in welche Schwierigkeiten die Eurozone kommen kann, wenn ein Mitgliedstaat in wirtschaftliche Schwierigkeiten gerät.
               

                  Kroatien hat diese hohe Hürde mit Bravour genommen. Die Regierung von Andrej Plenković hat in einem ganz schwierigen Umfeld in den vergangenen Jahren beachtliche Fortschritte auf dem Weg in die Eurozone gemacht.
               

                  Wenn wir auf die einschlägigen wirtschaftlichen Kennziffern schauen, zeigt sich, dass Kroatien in vielen Bereichen besser dasteht als so manches etablierte Mitglied der Eurozone. Das sollte uns doch zu denken geben, denn das gemeinschaftliche Ziel, nämlich die Stabilität der gemeinsamen Währung zu bewahren, sollte uns miteinander verbinden. Es gilt ja, dass jedes Mitglied der Eurozone eine Mitverantwortung für die Gemeinschaft als Ganzes hat. Daraus leitet sich auch eine Verantwortung für eine verantwortungsvolle Haushaltspolitik ab.
               

                  Ich freue mich und darf für die EVP sagen, dass wir unterstützen, dass Kroatien das 20. Mitglied der Eurozone wird, und hoffe, dass sich andere Mitgliedstaaten ein Beispiel an der kroatischen Wirtschafts- und Haushaltspolitik nehmen.
               

Margarida Marques,
em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, a adesão da Croácia ao euro é um sinal de unidade e de uma crescente integração na União Europeia, de um novo alargamento da união monetária e do reforço do euro como moeda global.
               

                  A moeda única continua a ser vista como um projeto sólido, de futuro e o garante de maior segurança e estabilidade aos Estados-Membros.
               

                  A Croácia cumpriu todos os critérios de adesão. A entrada para o grupo dos países com o nível mais elevado de integração europeia é um passo histórico para o país. Cabe agora aos cidadãos e às instituições croatas retirarem plenamente todas as vantagens de estar numa união monetária robusta para tornar a economia e a sociedade mais resilientes, sólidas, competitivas e ainda mais europeias.
               

                  A adesão da Croácia à moeda única em 2023 é o primeiro processo de integração europeu desde o Brexit. Finalmente, como presidente do grupo de trabalho dos países candidatos ao euro da Comissão dos Assuntos Económicos e Monetários, queria congratular-me com este percurso que fez a Croácia, esperando que outros se lhe juntem.
               

Georgios Kyrtsos,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, today is a good day for Europe because we are sending positive political messages. Croatia sends the message that it was able to move from war and destruction to European development within a few decades. A very good example – a perfect example – for all of the countries that aspire to join the European Union. The eurozone sends the message that it was able to deal, to cope with the European economic crisis and that it even found a way to strengthen and continuously expand itself.
Together, we sent the message that the European Union, despite difficulties and lost opportunities and lost time, always finds the way to progress and strengthen itself. The last message is of particular importance, in my view, since we face new major challenges.

France Jamet,
au nom du groupe ID. – Monsieur le Président, mes chers collègues, l'euro va mal. Sa baisse violente depuis le mois de février démontre sa fragilité. Notre économie va mal. Pour Mme Christine Lagarde, présidente de la BCE, l'inflation inquiétante qui s'installe sera durable et excessivement élevée.
               

                  Pourquoi donc l'Union européenne, au fait de la difficulté de nos États au lendemain de la COVID-19 et en pleine crise ukrainienne, décide-t-elle aujourd'hui d'autoriser la Croatie à adopter la monnaie unique, alors même que ce pays n'a appliqué aucune des 17 recommandations du groupe d'États contre la corruption du Conseil de l'Europe? Alors même que cela va renforcer les divergences économiques au sein de la zone euro, qui se creusent chaque jour un peu plus? Les premières victimes seront les plus modestes: nos petites entreprises, nos épargnants, que vous allez déclasser sans la moindre hésitation.
               

                  Alors moi, je vous le dis: il faut en finir avec cette Europe qui se fait envers et contre tout, et surtout contre les peuples. D'ailleurs, à propos de peuples, je serais bien curieuse de savoir si le peuple croate a été consulté sur ce sujet.
               

Eugen Jurzyca,
za skupinu ECR. – Vážený pán predsedajúci, Chorvátsko vstupuje do Eurozóny vo veľmi vypätých časoch rekordnej inflácie a veľkej neistoty. Čosi podobné zažil aj Slovensko, odkiaľ som, ktoré zaviedlo spoločnú menu v roku 2009 počas finančnej krízy. Zo skúseností vieme, že samotné zavedenie eura v zásade nespôsobuje zdražovanie a pre malú krajinu môže byť v ťažkých časoch výhodnejšie z dôvodu väčšej menovej stability. Nezabudnime však, že garantom stability jednotnej meny nie je počet členov, ale jej fiškálne pravidlá. Vstup do eurozóny preto nesmie byť koncom, ale začiatkom cesty k rozpočtovej zodpovednosti. Nech je mementom pre nás 19 členov eurozóny, že fiškálna konsolidácia a reformy, ktoré očakávame od Chorvátska, sú nevyhnutnosťou aj pre nás samotných. Len fiškálna zodpovednosť zaručí, že euro bude prínosom pre všetkých a nie príťažou pre zodpovedných.
               

Sunčana Glavak (PPE). – Hvala lijepa predsjedavajući i poštovani kolega Mureșan, čestitam na izvješću. Poštovani povjereniče, hvala i vama što ste podsjetili na težak put Hrvatske koja je imala rat na svojim prostorima i agresiju na svoju zemlju.
               

                  Kolegice i kolege, danas je dobar dan za Hrvatsku, danas je dobar dan za moju zemlju. Ponosna sam što mogu danas u ovom Parlamentu reći, kako se navodi u izvješću, podržava se uvođenje eura u Hrvatskoj od 1. siječnja 2023. godine; konstatira se da Hrvatska ispunjava sve kriterije za uvođenje eura kao rezultat ambicioznih, odlučnih, vjerodostojnih i održivih napora hrvatske vlade i hrvatskoga naroda. Hvala vam na tome.
               

                  Primili smo i prijedlog Vijeća da se granične kontrole ukinu s početkom sljedeće godine. Ovo su iznimna postignuća u vremenima gospodarske i sigurnosne krize, ali i priznanje koje će obilježiti deset godina hrvatskog članstva u Europskoj uniji.
               

                  Uz najavljeno pristupanje Schengenu, ulazak u eurozonu kao njezina 20. članica dodatna je potvrda naših sposobnosti, ambicija i predanosti integracijskim procesima Europske unije. Pozivam vas da bezrezervno podržite hrvatski ulazak u eurozonu!
               

Biljana Borzan (S&D). – Zahvaljujem poštovani predsjedavajući, kolegice i kolege, poštovani povjereniče, želim prvo čestitati izvjestiteljima, osobito mojoj kolegici Margaridi na ovom pozitivnom izvješću.
               

                  Nebrojeno puta se pokazalo kako u vremenima krize poput ove snaga je u zajedništvu i integraciji. Upravo zato je daljnja integracija Hrvatske u Europsku uniju pozitivna za obje strane. Vjerujem da će ulazak Hrvatske u eurozonu ojačati kako hrvatsko tako i europsko gospodarstvo.
               

                  Ali ne smijemo zaboraviti kako euro nije cilj, već sredstvo za bolji život naših građana. Kvalitetna kontrola procesa prelaska u euro je ključna kako bi se građane spasilo od dodatnih poskupljenja.
               

                  Svi skupa moramo raditi kako bismo osigurali da se ova pozitivna vijest prelije na svakodnevnicu naših ljudi.
               

Ladislav Ilčić (ECR). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, dame i gospodo, očito je da će Hrvatska uvesti euro. Uvođenje eura ipak nije baš puno dobra donijelo Portugalu, Grčkoj ili Italiji. Mi smo u Hrvatskoj to uvođenje mogli odgoditi kao što su to učinile Poljska, Švedska ili Mađarska, zemlje koje se sa svojim valutama jako dobro razvijaju.
               

                  Dakle, pametne zemlje surađuju s drugim europskim zemljama, ali i same određuju kada i koliko tijesno će se integrirati. Nažalost, vladajući u Hrvatskoj nikad nisu željeli ni raspravljati o tome, niti smo ikada koristili prednost imanja vlastite valute jer je za federaliste svih boja jedini politički cilj što veća integracija Hrvatske u neku europsku super-državu, bez obzira koji dio te integracije je za nas stvarno dobar.
               

                  Vladajući u Hrvatskoj nisu željeli provesti referendum o tome kada treba uvesti euro, no nadam se da ćemo se izboriti za to da ubuduće gospodarski interesi hrvatskog naroda budu prvi i glavni kriterij svih gospodarskih odluka.
               

Andreas Schwab (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist ein schöner Moment, dass Kroatien in diesem Jahr das 20. Land der Eurozone werden soll, und unsere Kollegen haben bereits darauf hingewiesen: Kroatien hat sich diesen Weg hart erarbeitet. Denn die Währungsunion – Herr Kommissar, Sie legen immer Wert darauf –, ist regelbasiert, und deswegen ist, wer wie Kroatien die Regeln respektiert, darum bereit für den Euro.
               

                  Das ist außerordentlich positiv, und deswegen sollten wir den Kurs der dortigen Regierung entsprechend unterstützen und sicherstellen, dass die gemeinsame Geldpolitik der Eurozone auch in Zukunft den Konvergenzkriterien folgt, denn ohne fiskalische Disziplin ist eine Währungsunion nicht funktionsfähig. Deswegen hat Kroatien sich nach hartem Anstrengen am Ende für diesen Beitritt bewährt.
               

                  Es ist schon darauf hingewiesen worden, dass nicht überall in der Europäischen Union derartige finanzielle Voraussetzungen bestehen. Deswegen wird es darum gehen, in den kommenden Monaten nicht nur Kroatien in die Eurozone zu führen, sondern auch sicherzustellen, dass wir die Inflation in der Eurozone insgesamt und die Haushaltspolitik der Mitgliedstaaten auf einen soliden Weg führen.
               

Tomislav Sokol (PPE). – Poštovani povjereniče, poštovani izvjestitelju, kolegice i kolege, nakon devet godina članstva u Europskoj uniji Hrvatska je nadomak ostvarenja još jednog strateškog cilja.
               

                  Ulaskom u eurozonu uklonit će se transakcijski troškovi i valutni rizik, od čega će najviše profitirati hrvatski izvoznici i turizam. Sama najava uvođenja eura već je dovela do rasta nacionalnog kreditnog rejtinga, što omogućava niže kamatne stope za poduzeća i građane. Također, ovim korakom, kao i ulaskom u Schengen, Hrvatska je pokazala volju za još čvršćim integriranjem u europsku zajednicu naroda i država. Općenito možemo reći da ulazak u eurozonu predstavlja veliku korist za hrvatsko gospodarstvo i društvo u cjelini.
               

                  Ispunjavanje uvjeta za uvođenje eura, posebno onih vezanih uz javni dug i deficit, nije bilo lako. Vlada HDZ-a uspjela je racionalnom i uravnoteženom fiskalnom politikom smanjiti javni dug naslijeđen od prethodne socijalističke vlade s 83,3 % na razinu 81,1 % na kraju 2019. Time smo pokazali da se ekonomska politika može voditi na način koji potiče gospodarski rast, ali bez prekomjerne i neodržive proračunske potrošnje.
               

                  Uvođenje eura predstavlja veliko postignuće za Republiku Hrvatsku te je stoga zadovoljstvo podržati ovo izvješće i iskreno zahvaliti izvjestitelju na njegovom radu.
               

Vystúpenia podľa postupu prihlásenia o slovo zdvihnutím ruky


Franc Bogovič (PPE). – Gospod predsednik! Dovolite, da takoj na začetku čestitam prebivalkam in prebivalcem sosednje Hrvaške, njeni vladi za uspešno izpeljavo vseh reform, ki so pripeljale do tega, da Hrvaška izpolnjuje vse pogoje za vstop v euroobmočje, in na drugi strani, da so tudi ljudje izrazili pripravljenost za vstop v okvir euroobmočja.
               

                  Prihajam iz Slovenije, kjer smo se po tem, ko smo leta 2004 vstopili v Evropsko unijo, leta 2007 odločili za vstop v euroobmočje. In če danes vprašate gospodarstvenike, pa tudi prebivalce, kaj je tisto, kar največ šteje od vstopa v Evropsko unijo, je sprejem eura ena izmed največjih vrednot, ki nas danes povezuje in nam daje tudi konkurenčno območje za naše delo.
               

                  Prepričan sem, da bo Hrvaška kot turistična država zelo izkoristila ta vstop v euroobmočje, po drugi strani pa bomo tudi turisti, ki prihajamo na Hrvaško, bili malce manj slabe volje, ko bomo izgubljali denar pri valutnih menjavah, tako da čestitke Hrvaški in veliko uspehov na zahtevni poti, ki vas še tudi čaka v prihodnosti.
               

Karlo Ressler (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, hvala puno kolegama na podršci, ali i na prepoznavanju ogromnog napretka, ogromnih napora hrvatske vlade u tome da ispunimo sve zahtjevne kriterije za uvođenje eura.
               

                  Moram odgovoriti, također, kolegi Ilčiću jer je očito da neki danas, nažalost, zaboravljaju da niti kuna nikada nije bila svrha sama po sebi, nego oruđe za veću kvalitetu života hrvatskih obitelji. Ako to danas možemo bolje, snažnije osigurati s eurom, a oko toga nema nikakve dileme, ne vidim nikakvog razloga da ne.
               

                  Valuta je uvijek oruđe jednog gospodarstva, a nikada ne može biti samo njegov ukras. Hrvati i danas uglavnom štede u eurima, poduzeća koja izvoze i koja uvoze posluju u eurima, a zbog uvođenja eura već danas uživamo rekordni kreditni rejting.
               

                  Uz euro, ali i uz rekordna europska sredstva koja imamo na raspolaganju i koja potiču poduzetnost i inovacije, digitalizaciju imamo stvarno prvoklasnu generacijsku priliku koju moramo iskoristiti snažno, ambiciozno, atraktivno i otvoreno. Zato što to možemo i zato što to hrvatski građani zaslužuju!
               

(Koniec vystúpení podľa postupu prihlásenia o slovo zdvihnutím ruky)


Paolo Gentiloni,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I think that this debate is confirming that we are discussing an historical step for Croatia. I repeat that the convergence criteria were positively assessed by the Commission and the ECB. Now we will have, after your decision and the Council decision, a common commitment on the changeover, which will be very important, especially in this environment of high inflation, and then Croatia will continue on its path of reforms and investment, also supported by Next Generation EU.
So there is a very good perspective for this country, but also progress for us, for the Union. We have now almost 350 million European citizens sharing the same currency – 20 Member States. So I think that with your support, with your decision, the European project will be stronger.

Siegfried Mureșan,
rapporteur. – Mr President, dear colleagues, thank you very much for this debate and for the overwhelming support in view of Croatia joining the euro area on 1 January 2023. Croatia will be stronger as a member of the euro area and the European Union will also be stronger by having Croatia as a member of the euro area.
The people of Croatia have shown their determination during the last years in strengthening their economy, in keeping Croatia on course for further integration with the European Union. Now it is our duty to show our commitment to Croatia and to vote by a large majority tomorrow in favour of accepting Croatia into the euro area on 1 January.
I am confident, following the interventions of the Commission and of colleagues of various political groups, that Croatia enjoys large support here in the European Parliament, which it deserves.
The Government of Croatia, under the leadership of Prime Minister Plenković, the Minister of Finance, the authorities, the National Bank especially, have prepared everything for the introduction of the euro area.
We are confident that following the quick decision of the Parliament tomorrow and the confirmation by the Council on 12 July, the final technical preparations and the information of the population will take place, because the people of Croatia deserve to know about the benefits of the introduction of the euro area. It will be easier for the people of Croatia to travel to euro area countries. It will be easier for Croatian businesses to export and it will be easier for companies from the euro area to invest into Croatia.
Taking into account the fact that the people of Croatia already have savings in Europe, taking into account the fact that the major investment countries into Croatia are euro area countries, we believe that Croatia joining the euro area will lead to more benefits. We have seen, throughout the crisis, Croatia meeting all of the criteria, and now Croatia still is one of the countries of the European Union with the lowest rate of inflation.
This is why, once again, colleagues, thank you very much. Congratulations to the people of Croatia and we are looking forward to giving our positive vote tomorrow here in the European Parliament.

Predsedajúci. – Rozprava sa skončila.
               

                  Hlasovanie sa uskutoční v stredu [06. 07. 2022].
               
17.   Women's poverty in Europe (debate)

Predsedajúci. – Ďalším bodom programu je rozprava o správe, ktorú predkladá Lina Gálvez Muñoz v mene Výboru pre práva žien a rodovú rovnosť, o chudobe žien v Európe (2021/2170INI) (A9-0194/2022).
               

                  Ako prvá vystúpi práve spravodajkyňa pani Lina Gálvez Muñoz.
               

Lina Gálvez Muñoz,
ponente. – Señor presidente, señora comisaria, ante todo, quisiera agradecer a los ponentes alternativos, a los equipos y a los grupos políticos su trabajo y su compromiso con un problema, el de la pobreza, que afecta a toda Europa y preocupa cada vez más a la ciudadanía europea, como pone de manifiesto el último Eurobarómetro.
               

                  Y es que la pobreza es inmoral y, en un territorio rico como es Europa, es sencillamente incomprensible. Limita los derechos efectivos de ciudadanía que deben cimentar el proyecto europeo y atenta directamente contra los valores fundamentales de la Carta Europea.
               

                  La pobreza se ha disparado en Europa con el alza de los precios de la energía y con un aumento medio de la inflación del 10 %. Y les pongo de ejemplo mi tierra, Andalucía, donde los últimos datos nos dicen que más del 38 % de la población está en riesgo de pobreza y exclusión social. Esto es sencillamente una vergüenza que nos urge a actuar con valentía y con convicción.
               

                  En el contexto actual, con la invasión de Rusia a Ucrania, estamos viviendo una incertidumbre extrema y también una realidad muy dura. Los precios de los alimentos básicos, de los combustibles y de la energía suben sin parar, y los salarios no lo hacen al mismo ritmo. Una pobreza creciente que afecta especialmente a las personas más pobres entre las pobres, que son las mujeres. Según los últimos datos de Eurostat, hay 64,6 millones de mujeres, frente a 57,6 millones de hombres, en situación de pobreza en Europa, y, en los últimos años, la brecha de género de la pobreza ya había aumentado en 21 de los 27 Estados miembros. No tenemos excusa.
               

                  Por eso, este informe intenta desplegar una serie de propuestas que hay que poner en marcha de manera urgente. En primer lugar, debemos poner en marcha una estrategia antipobreza para 2030 que sea ambiciosa, incluyendo el despliegue de rentas mínimas en todos los Estados miembros; un pacto de rentas, apostando por un nuevo contrato social que este sí sea feminista, con empleos y trabajos decentes. Debemos atajar todas las brechas de género existentes: en el empleo, del 11 %; en el salario por hora, del 13%; en las pensiones, del 29 %; o en los ingresos, del 36 %. También la brecha en el acceso a todo tipo de recursos y servicios que, en definitiva, conducen al riesgo de exclusión social y a la pobreza.
               

                  En segundo lugar, debemos combatir de forma decidida la pobreza energética, ya sea en invierno o en verano, en especial en este contexto de emergencia climática, que afecta especialmente a las mujeres mayores solas y a las familias monoparentales. De la misma forma, hay que combatir la crisis de la vivienda, porque toda vida digna comienza por tener un techo.
               

                  En tercer lugar, debemos incorporar la perspectiva de género a la transición digital, incluso creando un fondo específico que incremente la participación de las mujeres en la economía digital, que es esencial para la inclusión.
               

                  En cuarto lugar, necesitamos crear una estrategia europea de cuidados, un auténtico pacto europeo de cuidados, porque el trabajo de cuidados no debe recaer de manera gratuita, no reconocida, no remunerada o naturalizada, en las mujeres. Necesitamos medidas que garanticen la corresponsabilidad de todas las personas en los cuidados, especialmente en el seno de sociedades que envejecen, y la dignidad para quien recibe cuidados y para quien cuida.
               

                  En quinto lugar, debemos revisar nuestras políticas económicas, nuestra gobernanza económica y nuestra fiscalidad, para garantizar el acceso en igualdad a servicios públicos básicos, una financiación adecuada, una fiscalidad justa y progresiva, y unas políticas económicas que no sean generadoras de desigualdades, sino todo lo contrario: un auténtico pacto de renta.
               

                  Y, en sexto y último lugar, debemos incorporar la transversalidad de género en todo el ciclo de políticas públicas dentro de la Unión Europea y los Estados miembros. La pobreza de las mujeres tiene causas estructurales que debemos combatir si queremos una Europa digna y con futuro. Espero contar con su apoyo.
               

Dragoș Pîslaru,
rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs. – Mr President, dear Commissioner Dalli, dear colleagues, the crisis emerging from the COVID-19 pandemic and the repercussions of the war in Ukraine have disproportionately affected women. And yes, it is true, women suffered more. And I wish more colleagues would be here to join us for this important debate.
It is dangerously jeopardising the progress made in the past few decades on reducing poverty and gender inequalities. To reverse this trend of the last couple of years, we must address the multidimensional root causes of women's poverty and help their empowerment against pay inequality, discrimination, segregation, unpaid care, domestic labour and economic dependence.
It is crucial to ensure that access to education, to training, to digital skills programmes and to create opportunities for the labour market, entrepreneurship and high career prospects. Combining their participation with accessible and quality childcare support and essential pay transparency will help strengthen the principle of equal pay.
We remain a long way from ending women's poverty in Europe, but we must continue our efforts to move closer to the goal. This report and the policies currently being discussed in parallel are a step in the direction and I am looking forward to the cooperation with the European Commission for this particular cause.

PRZEWODNICTWO: EWA KOPACZ


Wiceprzewodnicząca


Helena Dalli,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, the statistics speak for themselves. Women's lower earnings and under-representation in the labour market translate into a higher risk of poverty. While female employment currently stands at 66.2%, the employment gap between women and men is still 11 percentage points. The gender pay gap is 13% and the pension gap is 27%.
Care responsibilities keep some 7.7 million women out of the labour market, compared with just 450 000 men. Other important drivers of gender inequalities include the over-representation of women in low-paid sectors, segregation related to the choice of education and career paths, and the under-representation of women in management and decision-making positions.
Certain women are more at risk of poverty and social exclusion than others. This is the case, for instance, of women living alone, migrant women, elderly women and women with disabilities. Several initiatives in the Gender Equality Strategy and Action Plan of the European pillar of social rights can be game-changers for women's economic empowerment and can help tackle the structural issues that cause, exacerbate or perpetuate women's poverty.
The Action Plan sets a target for an employment rate of 78% by 2030, complemented by an ambition to reduce by at least 50% the gender employment gap. The employment target will also contribute to achieving the poverty headline target under the Action Plan, which aims to reduce the number of people at risk of poverty by at least 15 million by 2030.
The proposal for a Directive on Adequate Minimum Wages aims to reduce wage inequality and poverty for all of the most vulnerable workers, many of whom are women. And I welcome that on 7 June, the European Parliament and the Council reached an agreement on this initiative. The Commission will adopt later this year a proposal for a Council Recommendation on Minimum Income to support Member States in ensuring that those lacking sufficient resources receive an adequate minimum income benefit for a life in dignity.
In March 2021 the Commission put forward a proposal for binding pay transparency rules. Negotiations between the co-legislators kicked off on 30 June and will hopefully lead to a swift adoption. Ensuring the right to equal pay between women and men as enshrined in the Treaties will contribute towards closing the gender pay gap and strengthen women's economic empowerment.
Women's economic empowerment, professional choices and meaningful participation in the labour market depend on available, affordable and good quality care structures. This year the Commission will come forward with a new European Care Strategy. It will be accompanied by a proposal to revise the Barcelona targets on early childhood education and care. It will build upon the European Child Guarantee, which aims to support vulnerable children.
Concerning long term care, the strategy will set a framework for policy reform to ensure better and more affordable access to quality services for all. The Care Strategy will also address carers. Care work is often undervalued and the time has come for us to start caring about care. Many care workers, more than 80% of them in the EU are women, and a number of them are of migrant backgrounds, face difficult working conditions and have limited career prospects.
It is crucial to ensure that in the post-pandemic recovery we recognise and value women's immense and sometimes invisible contribution to our economy and societies. Improving working conditions in the sector requires stronger social dialogue, adequate pay, and upskilling and reskilling opportunities. Informal care should be a choice rather than a necessity, driven by lack of quality and affordable services. Support measures should be in place for informal carers.
The unprecedented EU funds available and already in use will support this endeavour. I'm thinking here particularly of NextGeneration EU as well as the cohesion policy funds, notably the European Social Fund+, our main instrument for investing in people, and the European Regional Development Fund.
The Commission stands ready to support Member States in undertaking relevant reforms, particularly to integrate care through the technical support instrument. Each of these instruments and initiatives contributes to the empowerment of women and gives them the tools to help them to thrive. Better sharing of care between parents is a key factor to ensure that most women and men can participate equally and in a meaningful way in the labour market.
The Work-Life Balance Directive will make it easier for both women and men to combine work with care responsibilities. The aim is to encourage both women and men to equally share care responsibilities. The Commission will closely follow the transposition of the directive, set for August 2022.
So thank you for putting the debate on combating women's poverty high on the agenda. We need a gender-transformative approach to ensure that all women and girls are equally included, recognised and valued for their contribution in society. It is a long road to gender equality and we will need to continue paving it. We count on your support to continue mainstreaming gender equality into legislation, policies, programmes and actions.

Christine Schneider,
im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Vizepräsidentin, Frau Kommissarin! Fast jede vierte Frau in der Europäischen Union ist von Armut betroffen. Armut bedeutet mehr als nur materielle Entbehrung. Armut bedeutet auch gesellschaftlichen Ausschluss und soziale Isolation.
                  

                     Wir müssen die tief verwurzelten Ursachen von Armut und sozialer Ausgrenzung effizient bekämpfen. Wir müssen die strukturelle Kluft zwischen Männern und Frauen in der Wirtschaft, beim geschlechtsspezifischen Lohn- und Rentengefälle endlich überwinden. Und wir müssen in den Mitgliedstaaten Synergien zwischen politischen Maßnahmen in der Sozialpolitik zur Förderung der Gleichstellung der Geschlechter, der Beschäftigung und der Bildung schaffen.
                  

                     Es gibt leider keine Lösung nach dem Motto One size fits all. Dazu ist das Problem viel zu vielschichtig. Die Tätigkeit von Frauen muss be- und entlohnt werden, auch wenn sie nicht in einem klassischen Arbeitsverhältnis oder in der informellen Wirtschaft erfolgt.
                  

                     Wir müssen Frauen bestärken, Familienleben und ihre Karriere in Einklang zu bringen. Die meisten Hochschulabsolventinnen in der EU sind Frauen, auf dem Arbeitsmarkt sind sie jedoch unterrepräsentiert. Und trotz ihrer höheren Qualifikation arbeiten Frauen häufiger in Teilzeit – das gilt insbesondere für Frauen mit Kindern.
                  

                     Wir müssen die Chancen der Bildung und Weiterbildung, einschließlich der digitalen Revolution und der Förderung von MINT-Berufen bei Mädchen und Frauen, fördern. Dazu gehört auch das weibliche Unternehmertum.
                  

                     Abschließend möchte ich mich bei der Berichterstatterin für ihre Arbeit und für den wirklich fairen und konstruktiven Austausch bedanken.
                  

Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques,
em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, um dia, na campanha eleitoral para o Parlamento Europeu de 2019, conheci a Margarida numa estação de Lisboa. Era cabo-verdiana e tinha emigrado para Portugal porque o pai dos seus filhos desapareceu sem dar notícias. Deixou as crianças com a avó, numa ilha de Santiago, e veio à procura de recursos, fazendo limpezas à hora em casas da cidade e arredores. Quando a encontrei eram sete da manhã, mas para ela o dia tinha começado duas horas antes, num bairro muito pobre da margem sul do Tejo, onde vivia, e ainda lhe faltava uma hora de transportes para chegar ao primeiro emprego. O dia dela terminaria muito tarde, com mais duas horas de regresso.
                  

                     Falamos muitas vezes, em jargão técnico, do conceito sociológico de interseccionalidade. Para quem não sabe o que isso significa, é isto mesmo que vos acabo de descrever: ser mulher e, ao mesmo tempo, mãe solteira, imigrante de África, sem estudos, precária e pobre. Sem sindicato para defender os seus direitos, sem vida para ter amigos solidários, quase invisível.
                  

                     É por este caso e muitos outros que hoje estamos aqui a discutir a pobreza feminina e a maneira de a reduzir. Pela minha parte, quando votar a favor deste relatório, sinto que cumprirei pelo menos uma parte da promessa que fiz à Margarida, nesse dia de maio de 2019.
                  

Sylvie Brunet,
au nom du groupe Renew. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, il est révoltant, oui, révoltant qu'en 2022, il y ait encore des millions de femmes, d'hommes, d'enfants dans l'Union européenne dans une situation de grande pauvreté.
                  

                     Les femmes pauvres font face à des problématiques spécifiques qui doivent être traitées comme telles. Je voudrais saluer le travail accompli sur ce rapport, qui présente des pistes concrètes et pertinentes pour lutter contre la pauvreté des femmes et y remédier: favoriser leur indépendance, leur autonomie économique, revaloriser les métiers à dominance féminine, partager les tâches ménagères et lutter contre le harcèlement au travail qui peut précariser les femmes.
                  

                     Enfin – vous l'avez dit, Madame la Commissaire –, je voudrais souligner que tous les travaux que nous menons en ce moment, en commission de l'emploi et en commission des droits des femmes, doivent nous permettre de lutter contre la pauvreté des femmes. Que ce soit la transparence des salaires ou même l'économie sociale et solidaire, tous les sujets que nous traitons doivent au fond nous permettre d'arriver à des actions concrètes pour lutter contre la pauvreté des femmes.
                  

Pierrette Herzberger-Fofana,
au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Madame la Présidente, la féminisation de la pauvreté en Europe a pris des proportions inquiétantes, notamment en raison de la pandémie.
                  

                     Depuis le milieu des années 1970 déjà, la recherche sur les femmes s'appuie sur la thèse selon laquelle la pauvreté est féminine. Plus de la moitié des mères célibataires et des femmes élevant seules leurs enfants vivent sous le seuil de pauvreté et travaillent dans des conditions précaires.
                  

                     Nous devons donc tout faire pour éliminer les inégalités structurelles dans la rémunération des emplois principalement occupés par les femmes, et mettre à contribution notre système de protection sociale pour y parvenir afin qu'elles puissent arriver à l'autonomisation. La revalorisation est le mot clé. L'écart salarial entre les sexes doit être remplacé par l'équivalence ou, dans un premier temps, par une revalorisation significative du travail des femmes.
                  

                     Les femmes seules ou âgées, ainsi que les mères célibataires et les personnes qui s'occupent de leurs ascendants naturels, doivent être considérées comme une boussole sociale pour la solidarité et l'esprit communautaire. En Europe, les femmes d'origine non européenne, en particulier les femmes roms et les femmes d'origine africaine ou arabe, sont doublement défavorisées. Dans bien des cas, elles occupent des emplois précaires et mal rémunérés, travaillent à mi-temps malgré leurs qualifications.
                  

                     Dans le contexte de l'égalité des sexes, notre rapport doit viser à faire revaloriser ce type d'emplois avec des mesures de soutien qui puissent permettre l'épanouissement des femmes.
                  

Christine Anderson,
im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! In diesem schicken Elfenbeinturm hat zwar kaum jemand Ahnung von Armut, aber sei's drum. Armut gehört bekämpft, und die EU weiß auch, wie. Den Bürgern schreiben wir jetzt also vor, wie sie ihre höchstpersönliche Lebensführung innerhalb der eigenen vier Wände zu gestalten haben. Persönliche Berufs- oder Karriereplanung wird – ganz so, wie sich das in der schönen neuen Welt gehört – am Reißtisch der EU entworfen.
                  

                     Welche Lehrinhalte zu einer guten Bildung führen, entscheidet die EU, und renitenten Mitgliedstaaten, die stur darauf beharren, dass Bildung in ihre Regelungskompetenz fällt, wird bei fortgesetzter Widerspenstigkeit der Geldhahn zugedreht. Ein weiterer Bericht, der den Mitgliedstaaten ideologischen Schwachsinn oktroyiert. Weil aber Bekämpfung von Armut darübersteht, wird eine große Mehrheit der Abgeordneten, von denen bei diesem wichtigen Thema im Übrigen gerade mal neun anwesend sind, ihm wieder begeistert zustimmen.
                  

                     Dieser Bericht bekämpft nicht Armut, er bekämpft Freiheit, Demokratie und Rechtsstaatlichkeit – so wie alles, was aus diesem Hause kommt.
                  

Jadwiga Wiśniewska,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Szanowni Państwo! Bieda w Unii Europejskiej ma twarz kobiety. Kobiecy wymiar biedy wynika z wielu czynników. To nie tylko niższe zarobki i emerytury, dyskryminacja ze względu na wiek, zatrudnienie w nisko płatnych branżach i niepewnych warunkach, ale także przemoc ekonomiczna, bezpłatna praca w domu i samotne macierzyństwo. Aż 85% samotnych rodziców to kobiety. A co czwarte dziecko w Europie jest zagrożone ubóstwem. O kobietach mówi się, że są menedżerkami ubóstwa, zarządzają domowym budżetem, szukają okazji, dodatkowych form zatrudnienia, tną wydatki.
                  

                     Dlatego działania na rzecz kobiet i inwestowanie w nie to inwestycja w ich rodziny, a w szczególności dzieci. To kobiety są przyszłością Europy. To od nich – to od nas – zależy jej rozwój demograficzny. Ale w kontekście starzenia się europejskich społeczeństw, warto także pamiętać, że odgrywają kluczową rolę i dominują ilościowo w sektorach zdrowia i usług opiekuńczych. Dziękuję Pani Sprawozdawczyni za konstruktywną, dobrą pracę.
                  

Sandra Pereira,
em nome do Grupo The Left. – Senhora Presidente, a luta contra a pobreza e a exclusão social é inseparável da erradicação das discriminações específicas que atingem, maioritariamente, mulheres e crianças. Nesse sentido, são necessárias medidas sociais específicas no que diz respeito ao acesso à habitação, aos transportes, à justiça e à energia a preços acessíveis.
                  

                     Consideramos que o direito ao trabalho é condição essencial à independência económica, à realização profissional das mulheres e à efetivação da igualdade de direitos. Para tal, é preciso pôr fim a esse flagelo que é a precariedade e que ataca as trabalhadoras mais jovens e as menos jovens. É preciso valorizar profissões, salários, carreiras e, claro, as pensões. Defendemos, ainda, o reforço dos serviços públicos, com uma aposta clara num serviço nacional de saúde público, universal e gratuito, numa escola pública e democrática que garanta a igualdade de direitos e de oportunidades para todos e num sistema público de segurança social mais forte. Medidas que não se encaixam nas políticas neoliberais da União Europeia, mas que para nós são o caminho do combate à pobreza e da garantia de um melhor futuro para as mulheres de hoje e de amanhã.
                  

Frances Fitzgerald (PPE). – President, Commissioner, colleagues, we cannot build a true union of equality if half of our population – women – are disproportionately at risk of poverty. It is unsustainable and unacceptable. Take, for example, single parents: 85% of single parents in the EU are women and an astounding 42% of single parent families are at risk of poverty. And the risk of poverty is only growing for women.
I want to highlight the situation of older women. The gender pay gap in Europe is currently 39%. That means, on average, women have 39% less than men in their pensions. We cannot have a situation where women are living in poverty as they retire and grow older. We have to do more, as has been said in the report, to close the gender pay gap, including recognising and acknowledging blocks of time that women spend caring for relatives and children.
Of course, access to employment remains a key issue in the new industries, particularly in AI and technology. We have to ensure that young women take up those STEM subjects. It's so important. This is one of the ways we will deal with this phenomenon of women in poverty.
There is no reason for anyone in Europe to be living in poverty in the 21st century. We must stamp out this 19th century phenomenon.

Nathalie Colin-Oesterlé (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, les statistiques le montrent: l'inégalité salariale au sein de l'Union européenne est en moyenne de 13 %, et la pauvreté touche davantage les femmes que les hommes. Elle a même augmenté ces dernières années.
                  

                     Si les violences à l'égard des femmes, notamment conjugales, existent dans tous les milieux, les femmes qui disposent de peu de ressources et qui dépendent économiquement de leur conjoint ont encore davantage de difficultés à s'en sortir; car si elles quittent leur domicile avec peu ou pas de ressources, comment peuvent-elles se loger ou se nourrir?
                  

                     La peur de sombrer dans la pauvreté et d'être exclues socialement ne doit pas – ne doit plus – être un frein. Pour aider ces femmes victimes de violences, nous devons profiter de la prochaine législation européenne pour créer un réseau de guichets uniques d'assistance. Il existe, en effet, de grandes disparités d'un État membre à l'autre en ce qui concerne les services fournis aux victimes. Or, nous devons assurer à ces femmes victimes une prise en charge globale, de la mise à l'abri au soutien économique, judiciaire, social et médical. Nous devons également créer une nouvelle infraction et définir un cadre commun afin de faire des violences fondées sur le genre un nouveau domaine de criminalité.
                  

Zgłoszenia z sali


Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, I think the simple truth is that the neoliberal policies advocated by the European Union cannot provide a sustainable solution to women's poverty in our economy. We see widespread, atypical and precarious working conditions, with the dismantling of social security systems being a huge contributing factor to the problems. And the only solution to eradicating women's poverty is to strengthen collective representation, effective collective agreements, minimum wages and the right to a decent job with pay and conditions.
Our priority, in that sense, should be to restrict the circumstances in which precarious contracts can be used, not to encourage them. And yet here we are meeting when our interpreters, a majority of whom are women, have had to take action to defend their working conditions. They are being forced to use equipment which doesn't meet the necessary standards to protect their health; 100 out of 250 of them have health problems; and when they serve strike notice the Parliament moves to bring in strike-breakers and outsource labour. If we want to protect dignity in working women's rights, let's protect our own workers first.

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, I welcome aspects of the report in addressing poverty gaps in Europe. Yet, I fear it's not enough for the most economically marginalised groups in our societies across Europe: migrants.
The treatment of migrants in Europe is a humanitarian crisis, there's no question about it. Non-EU migrants, and in particular migrant women, experience significant limitations in access to the labour market, shocking levels of homelessness and impoverished living conditions in refugee camps. Women refugees in Europe face double discrimination.
Things are not much better in Ireland, where we have rightly welcomed Ukrainian refugees and treat them well. Migrants and refugees of a different colour and religion have been herded into areas called Direct Provision Centres, which are essentially a form of state-sanctioned poverty.
When we talk of women's poverty in Europe, spare a thought for the women in Ireland's Direct Provision Centres.

Billy Kelleher (Renew). – Madam President, I welcome the broad thrust of the report, but there's no doubt we have a long way to go in terms of working conditions and gender pay equality. At the outset, a lot of our legislation is weak in these particular areas to defend and vindicate the rights of women, but equally in terms of access to education, access to credit, access to housing, access to health and reproductive rights. These are all issues that are contingent on Member States either giving or not giving, and they should be mandatory obligations at this stage in terms of certain guarantees and fundamental rights.
So when we talk about education, young women with a number of children are unable to access further education, in many cases. They are unable to access proper housing provision. They are unable to access the workplace simply because their conditions are not protected in legislation. So when we talk about equality, when we talk about the gender pay gap, we do have obligations in this House; but, equally, Member States – where the competency still lies in many areas around legislation on employment – have a lot to do and we should hold them accountable equally across the European Union.

Juozas Olekas (S&D). – Man, kaip vyrui, yra gėda, kad mes XXI amžiuje turime svarstyti čia, Europos širdyje, tokį klausimą kaip moterų skurdas. Bet, manau, iš kitos pusės yra garbė, kad mes galime imtis tokio klausimo ir išspręsti tą problemą. Iš tikrųjų matome, kaip Europos Sąjungoje, skirtingose valstybėse skirtingai moterims apmokama už tą patį darbą. Kaip gydytojas galiu pasakyti, kad moterys susiduria su daugiau problemų gaunant medicininę pagalbą įvairiose valstybėse. Todėl manau, kad reikia labai atsižvelgti į Europos piliečių siūlymus, kad mes prisiimtumėme daugiau atsakomybės ir, kaip sakoma pranešime, rekomenduotume išlyginti tuos skirtumus visose valstybėse narėse, kad mes galėtume didžiuotis, kad Europos Sąjungoje už tą patį darbą moterims ir vyrams mokamas toks pat atlygis, kad skurdo požiūriu tarp lyčių nėra skirtumų. Ačiū už pranešimą.
                  

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)


Helena Dalli,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, we all agree in this House that women's poverty does not have a place in Europe – nor in the world, I would say. This is why the Commission is strongly committed to reducing inequalities and eradicating poverty and the particular impact on women it can have.
From today's debate, it is clear that the ultimate solution cannot be found in a single instrument. Instead, many policies need to contribute to tackle women's increased risk of poverty and ensure an equal economic empowerment of women and men. The fight against women's poverty is a joint responsibility. I would like to thank the European Parliament for being a steady ally in our efforts to ensure a Europe of equality.

Lina Gálvez Muñoz,
ponente. – Señora presidenta, como han dicho la comisaria y los diputados que me han precedido, la discriminación de género y la pobreza de las mujeres hablan por sí solas, los datos hablan por sí solos. Pero es que, además, en esos datos la pobreza real de las mujeres está estadísticamente infravalorada, ya que se mide la pobreza a través de la unidad familiar, sin tener en cuenta las desigualdades intrafamiliares de género. Esto infravalora los datos de pobreza real de las mujeres y maquilla las desigualdades estructurales que sufren las mujeres, su menor acceso a todo tipo de recursos, su mayor dificultad para escapar de situaciones de violencia machista o el hecho de verse abocadas a la prostitución o a ser víctimas de explotación sexual, especialmente las mujeres sexualizadas o inmigrantes con mayores dificultades para acceder al empleo o a los servicios sociales.
                  

                     Y es que las estadísticas no recogen bien el carácter multidimensional de la pobreza o no miden la pobreza de tiempo, que ancla a las mujeres en esa situación de pobreza, sobre todo en los hogares monoparentales, ya que las mujeres representan el 85 % de los hogares monoparentales, constituyendo estos el 42 % de los hogares que están en riesgo de pobreza y exclusión social. Esa pobreza de tiempo deja apenas sin herramientas a esas mujeres para poder revertir su situación, como también la de sus hijos e hijas.
                  

                     Tenemos que saber que uno de cada cuatro niños y niñas dentro de la Unión está en riesgo de pobreza o exclusión social. No podemos permitirlo. Por eso necesitamos mejores estadísticas, mejores leyes, mejores políticas, sobre todo económicas, para combatir la desigualdad, la pobreza y también la desigualdad de género. Y, sobre todo, necesitamos un compromiso político firme de la Unión Europea y de los Estados miembros. Estamos aquí para actuar, para cambiar todo lo necesario, para que las personas, también las mujeres, puedan vivir con dignidad y ejercer plenamente sus derechos de ciudadanía. Así construiremos un proyecto europeo de futuro, una prioridad para las y los socialistas que creemos en una Europa feminista y con justicia social. Trabajaremos por más Europa y por menos pobreza.
                  

Przewodnicząca. – Zamykam debatę.
                  

                     Głosowanie odbędzie się we wtorek 5 lipca 2022 r.
                  


Oświadczenia pisemne (art. 171)



Caterina Chinnici (S&D),
per iscritto. – Sono ben 64,6 milioni le donne e 57,6 milioni gli uominin che vivono oggi in condizioni di povertà negli Stati membri. Cifre, queste di Eurostat, assolutamente insostenibili, dietro alle quali vi sono donne, ma anche bambini, poiché sappiamo che la povertà femminile colpisce in modo particolare le famiglie monoparentali, composte da madri sole con figli piccoli. E tale piaga, già tristemente presente nell'Unione, nel 2020 a causa della pandemia di COVID-19, e da ultimo, con l'aumento dei prezzi dell'energia a seguito della guerra in Ucraina, si è ulteriormente aggravata. È bene ricordare tuttavia, che la povertà femminile ha carattere multidimensionale e spesso rappresenta il risultato di discriminazioni causate da stereotipi culturali difficili da scardinare, che si traducono sovente, non solo in una privazione materiale, ma anche nella mancanza di accesso a risorse e servizi diversi che limitano di fatto la capacità delle donne, di godere pienamente dei loro diritti di cittadinanza. Necessarie, pertanto, misure più incisive sia livello nazionale che dell'Unione: l'annunciata Strategia europea di lotta alla povertà per il 2030, dovrà dotarsi di obiettivi concreti e ambiziosi, per porre fine alla povertà femminile e spezzare, una volta per tutte, il ciclo intergenerazionale del rischio di povertà.
                  

Λευτέρης Χριστοφόρου (PPE),
γραπτώς. – Όπως δείχνουν τα στατιστικά, το χάσμα μεταξύ των φύλων σχετικά με τα επίπεδα φτώχειας έχει διευρυνθεί σε 21 κράτη μέλη από το 2017, και το 2020 ο κίνδυνος φτώχειας ή κοινωνικού αποκλεισμού στην ΕΕ ήταν υψηλότερος για τις γυναίκες από ό,τι για τους άνδρες. Λαμβάνοντας υπόψη το χάσμα μεταξύ των φύλων σε ήδη πολλούς άλλους τομείς, μου είναι αδανόητο πώς υπάρχει χάσμα και ανισότητα μεταξύ των φύλων και στα επίπεδα φτώχειας. Είναι απαίτηση μας να γίνουν ειδικές δημόσιες πολιτικές για την αντιμετώπιση των διαρθρωτικών ανισοτήτων μεταξύ των φύλων, οι οποίες προκαλούν ή/και επιδεινώνουν τη φτώχεια στις γυναίκες. Οι συνέπειες της φτώχειας στις γυναίκες είναι μεγάλες. Για παράδειγμα, η φτώχεια των γυναικών έχει άμεσο αντίκτυπο σε αυτούς, των οποίων οι ζωές αντιμετωπίζουν τους πιο σκληρούς περιορισμούς λόγω της φτώχειας και πιο συγκεκριμένα στα παιδιά. Κρίνω σημαντική την ενσωμάτωση της διάστασης των φύλων σε όλα τα επίπεδα της διαδικασίας του προϋπολογισμού της ΕΕ, έτσι ώστε τα έσοδα και οι δαπάνες να μετατραπούν σε κοινωνικές επενδύσεις, για την επίτευξη των στόχων της ισότητας των φύλων, όπως την καταπολέμηση της γυναικείας φτώχειας.
                  

Λουκάς Φουρλάς (PPE),
γραπτώς. – Παρότι η αρχή της ισότητας είναι κατοχυρωμένη από τις Συνθήκες, η φυλετική ανισότητα, αντί να μειώνεται, διευρύνεται ακόμα και σήμερα. Ο κίνδυνος της φτώχειας και του κοινωνικού αποκλεισμού είναι πολύ μεγαλύτερος για τις γυναίκες και είναι αλληλένδετος και με την παιδική φτώχεια. Το μισθολογικό χάσμα μεταξύ των φύλων στην Ευρώπη δεν έχει βελτιωθεί ιδιαίτερα. Δεν εφαρμόζεται και δεν επιβάλλεται πλήρως πουθενά. Οι εργοδότες έχουν τεράστια ευθύνη για την ισότιμη μισθοδοσία. Ζητούμε από την Επιτροπή και τα κράτη μέλη να δημιουργήσουν προγράμματα για μεγαλύτερη συμπερίληψη των γυναικών στην αγορά εργασίας. Πρέπει να διασφαλιστεί καλύτερη ισορροπία μεταξύ επαγγελματικής και προσωπικής ζωής. Θα πρέπει επίσης να ενθαρρύνονται οι γυναίκες ώστε να συμμετέχουν περισσότερο στην εκπαίδευση και ειδικά στην εκπαίδευση STEM, όπου το χάσμα σήμερα είναι μεγάλο. Μεγάλη επίσης προσοχή θα πρέπει να δοθεί στις γυναίκες που ανήκουν σε ομάδες υψηλού κινδύνου φτώχειας και ακραίας φτώχειας, όπως οι μητέρες που μεγαλώνουν μόνες τους τα παιδιά τους, οι ηλικιωμένες, οι αγρότισσες και οι γυναίκες με αναπηρία. Τα δικαιώματα των γυναικών είναι κατοχυρωμένα. Έχουμε υποχρέωση να τα διασφαλίσουμε.
                  

Andżelika Anna Możdżanowska (ECR),
na piśmie. – Pod koniec XVIII wieku kobiety odważyły się walczyć w obronie swoich praw i o równouprawnienie. Mamy XXI wiek, rozwiniętą gospodarczo i intelektualnie wspólnotę UE, a jednak znaczącym problemem w skali europejskiej jest ubóstwo kobiet.
                  

                     Według Eurostatu 22,9% kobiet w UE w 2020 r. było zagrożonych biedą. Kobiety są pierwszymi ofiarami polityki oszczędności i kryzysu gospodarczego. Stereotypy, różnice w wynagrodzeniach (od 5% o 20% w całej UE), emeryturach, a także brak wysokiej jakości usług publicznych, to jedne z głębokich korzeni i głównych przyczyn popadania kobiet w ubóstwo i wykluczenie społeczne. Kobiety pracują w sfeminizowanych nisko płatnych branżach, jak np. sektor opieki, w którym zatrudnionych jest blisko 70% kobiet.
                  

                     Równość płci na rynku pracy i godzenie życia zawodowego z rodzinnym jest ważnym instrumentem eliminowania ubóstwa kobiet, który przynosi korzyści całej gospodarce i ma pozytywny wpływ na PKB, poziom zatrudnienia i wydajność. Poprawa równości płci doprowadziłaby do wzrostu PKB na mieszkańca UE o 6,1-9,6% oraz dodatkowych 10,5 mln miejsc pracy.
                  

                     Kobiety są przyszłością Europy, więc niezbędne jest promowanie zmian strukturalnych w dziedzinie sprawowania rządów, gdyż obserwujemy niedostateczną reprezentację kobiet w rządach i parlamentach. Problem ‘szklanego sufitu’ w świecie biznesu nadal jest częstym zjawiskiem. Nadszedł czas, aby ubóstwo nie miało już nigdy więcej twarzy kobiety!
                  

Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE),
kirjallinen. – Naisten köyhyys on Euroopassa iso tasa-arvo-ongelma, joka on ratkaistava. Köyhyydessä elävien naisten osuus Euroopassa on korkeampi kuin miesten. Lista syistä on surullisen pitkä: sukupuolten väliset palkka- ja eläke-erot, sukupuolten erilaiset hoivavastuut, naisvaltaisten alojen, esimerkiksi hoiva-alan, alipalkkaus tai yksinhuoltajuusvastuun keskittyminen naisille. Kaikki nämä ovat rakenteellisia ongelmia, jotka yhä sinnikkäästi vaikuttavat yhteiskunnissamme. Koronaviruspandemia ainoastaan pahensi tilannetta, kun naisvaltaisilla aloilla menetettiin paljon työpaikkoja ja naisvaltaisella hoiva-alalla työolosuhteet vaikeutuivat huomattavasti. Naisia on usein suhteettoman paljon ja vastoin tahtoaan epävarmoissa työsuhteissa. Naisten keskuudessa myös osa-aikaisten, matalapalkkaisten ja määräaikaisten työsopimusten ja nollatyösopimusten osuus on suuri.
                  

                     Köyhyys on jokaiselle ihmiselle, kärsivätpä siitä sitten naiset, miehet tai muut, kärsimystä ja väärin. Kenenkään ei pitäisi joutua elämään köyhyydessä. Kuitenkin myös köyhyys, kuten muutkin yhteiskunnalliset ilmiöt, altistavat erityisesti naiset erityisen vaikeille ja vaarallisille tilanteille. Köyhyydessä elävät naiset ovat esimerkiksi alttiimpia hyväksikäytölle tai ihmiskaupalle ja muuhun naisiin kohdistuvalle väkivallalle. Tätä vahvistaa esimerkiksi se, jos köyhyydestä seuraa asunnottomuutta. Parlamentin mietintö aiheesta esittää hyviä ratkaisuja, kuten intersektionaalista lähestymistapaa työmarkkinoihin, datakeräystä, palkkatasa-arvon edistämistä ja naisten rohkaisemista STEM-aloille. Palkkatasa-arvon edistäminen on yksi tärkeimmistä välineistä, minkä vuoksi meidän on trilogineuvotteluissa saatava aikaan palkka-avoimuusdirektiivi mahdollisimman pian. Tarpeellisena yksityiskohtana mietintö myös kehottaa jäsenvaltioita poistamaan naisten hygieniatuotteiden eli kuukautissuojien verotuksen. Kuukautisköyhyys on vakava ongelma monen naisen elämässä.
                  
18.   Composition of committees and delegations

Przewodnicząca. – Grupa ID powiadomiła Przewodniczącą o decyzji w sprawie zmiany powołania do składu komisji parlamentarnej. Decyzja ta zostanie zamieszczona w protokole z dzisiejszego posiedzenia i stanie się skuteczna z dniem niniejszego ogłoszenia.
               
19.   Negotiations for a cooperation agreement between the EU and Interpol (short presentation)

Przewodnicząca. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego jest krótka prezentacja sprawozdania sporządzonego przez Jadwigę Wiśniewską w imieniu Komisji Wolności Obywatelskich, Sprawiedliwości i Spraw Wewnętrznych w sprawie negocjacji w sprawie umowy o współpracy między UE a Interpolem (A9-0200/2022) (2022/2025(INI).
               

Jadwiga Wiśniewska,
sprawozdawczyni. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Szanowni Państwo! Na wstępie chciałabym bardzo podziękować za współpracę koleżankom i kolegom kontrsprawozdawcom. Pracowaliśmy naprawdę intensywnie, by stworzyć kompleksowe stanowisko Parlamentu Europejskiego, które zostanie uwzględnione w negocjowanym przez Komisję Europejską porozumieniu Unia Europejska–Interpol. Dziękuję również za wsparcie doradcom, sekretariatowi LIBE oraz asystentom. Owocem naszej dobrej współpracy jest sprawozdanie z własnej inicjatywy, które zostało przyjęte niemal jednogłośnie podczas zeszłotygodniowego spotkania komisji LIBE.
               

                  Obecnie terroryzm i przestępczość zorganizowana pozostają jednymi z najważniejszych i jednocześnie najpoważniejszych wyzwań w zakresie bezpieczeństwa. To zjawiska ponadnarodowe, globalne, charakteryzujące się niezwykle niebezpieczną dynamiką i wykorzystujące najnowocześniejsze osiągnięcia technologii i cyfryzacji. Dlatego potrzeba bezkompromisowej reakcji i skuteczniejszej, skoordynowanej współpracy Unii Europejskiej z międzynarodowymi organami ścigania, takimi jak Międzynarodowa Organizacja Policji Kryminalnej – INTERPOL. Taka współpraca ma zapewnić bezpieczeństwo i stworzyć niezbędne ramy do walki z przestępczością międzynarodową.
               

                  Unia Europejska współpracuje już z Interpolem. Istnieją jednak obszary, w których współpraca ta może zostać zacieśniona, a przede wszystkim sformalizowana, ponieważ Interpol nie podpisał jeszcze takiej umowy o współpracy z Unią. Sprawozdanie z własnej inicjatywy to lista rekomendacji do negocjacji umowy o współpracy z Interpolem. Do kluczowych należą: przyznanie agencjom unijnym dostępu do baz danych Interpolu, gwarancje przestrzegania europejskich przepisów o ochronie danych podczas przesyłania danych między Unią a Interpolem, wezwanie do reformy procedury czerwonych not. Ponieważ przetwarzanie czerwonych not nie jest wystarczająco przejrzyste, istnieje wiele dowodów wskazujących na nadużywanie i wykorzystywanie tej procedury przez kraje, które chcą prześladować, uciszać i represjonować swoich przeciwników poza granicami kraju.
               

                  I ostatni punkt, ale nie najmniej ważny, to wykluczenie Rosji z Interpolu i wyłączenie jej dostępu do baz danych. Rosyjska agresja, nieuprawniona napaść na Ukrainę, gdzie Rosja dopuszcza się zbrodni ludobójstwa, jest wystarczającym powodem do tego, by wykluczyć Rosję z Interpolu. Poza tym to Rosja należy do głównych emitentów politycznie umotywowanych czerwonych not. Współpraca organów ścigania musi opierać się na zaufaniu i musi zostać utrzymana. Dlatego Interpol powinien podjąć natychmiastowe i zdecydowane środki w celu wykluczenia Federacji Rosyjskiej. Liczę, że w jutrzejszym głosowaniu zechcą Państwo poprzeć sprawozdanie.
               

Zgłoszenia z sali


Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisar, felicit raportoarea. Cred că este un document extrem de important, pentru că vizează o cooperare de care Uniunea Europeană are nevoie, la fel cum și Interpol, în condițiile în care avem nevoie de instrumente tot mai eficiente pentru a combate traficul de ființe umane, pentru a combate traficul de droguri și, evident, pentru a-i arăta Rusiei unde-i este locul, în condițiile în care Rusia vrea să utilizeze în continuare acest instrument extrem de eficient și important pentru a se răfui cu oponenții politici. Și cred că Rusia reprezintă o amenințare destul de reală pentru activitatea Interpol și din acest punct de vedere, cred că este mai mult decât binevenită această recomandare de a-i limita Rusiei activitatea în cadrul Interpol.
               

                  De asemenea, cred că este foarte important să aibă acces agențiile europene la baza de date a Interpol. Felicitări din nou raportoarei!
               

Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, I have to say I think there are a lot of good provisions in this agreement, but it is debased by the insertion of geopolitical interests, which have no part in neutral international cooperation agreements. Now, Interpol has a huge responsibility to ensure proper verification of information, judicial redress and compliance with fundamental data rights. It should be organised on a rules-based cooperation to protect citizens, but it's well known that governments in many parts of the world are abusing its systems to pursue their critics, whether they be asylum seekers, journalists or political opponents. But Interpol is supposed to be above all that. It's supposed to share information in compliance with the founding principles of neutrality and to protect human rights in tackling international crime.
And to that end, the report's call to suspend Russia and Belarus from Interpol membership actually disturbs Interpol's concept of political neutrality. The speaker made the point that on the basis of war crimes, Russia should be excluded. Well, so should Ukraine, so should the US. That's not a way forward. We shouldn't be instrumentalising every discussion.

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, people are saying that we shouldn't allow Russia to use Interpol to fight political opponents. But I mean if you ban Russia from the Interpol system, what are you doing? Is it not the same thing?
Listen, I condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine as well. I think it's terrible the things that are happening. Russia is behaving like an imperialist power, doing what it likes in Ukraine.
But come on, are these the only ones you are going to throw stones at? Why weren't the Americans thrown out of Interpol when they killed a million citizens in Iraq? A million innocent civilians! Why weren't they thrown out of Interpol? Why aren't Saudi Arabia and the UAE and the Americans and the French and the UK, for supporting the genocide in Yemen today? Are you going to throw them out of Interpol?
You're making a joke of Interpol if you're going to use it as a political football yourselves. That doesn't make any sense!

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)


Helena Dalli,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, dear rapporteur Wiśniewska, the Commission welcomes and shares the views of the European Parliament that terrorism and serious and organised crime require a robust response. And we need a more effective and coordinated EU cooperation with international law enforcement authorities and bodies such as Interpol.
We reflected on the important role of Interpol in police cooperation and information exchange and the EU security union strategy and the EU counter-terrorism agenda. We need a cooperation agreement with Interpol because Interpol is very important for the EU Member States. It provides the default channel to exchange law enforcement information with third countries. This information is crucial for the internal security of the Member States and the EU as a whole. Interpol provides information on third-country criminals or EU criminals fleeing to third countries.
Despite existing cooperation with Interpol, there are areas where cooperation could and should be stepped-up or even set up new areas – the aim being to better support Member States in preventing and combating terrorism and organised crime. These operational needs, notably as regards cooperation between Interpol and our relevant agencies and bodies: Europol, Frontex, Eurojust and the EPPO, requires concluding a cooperation agreement with Interpol.
Interpol will also be an indispensable partner in achieving high standards, especially when it comes to data processing and data protection. In fact, data protection is at the core of the agreement. The agreement will have to comply fully with the relevant provisions on data protection stemming from EU law and fully respect fundamental rights and principles.
Concerning the abuse of Interpol's systems for political purposes, the Commission considers that supporting and reinforcing the mechanism established at Interpol – such as, for instance, its independent Commission for the Control of Files, or its dedicated task force to screen every red notice or diffusion before publication, would guarantee that Interpol's systems would be used only to achieve its aim, which is to support and facilitate international law enforcement cooperation.
During its negotiations with Interpol, the Commission will explore ways to incorporate the recommendations of the European Parliament and will endeavour to meet Parliament's expectations and address its concerns as regards the need to enhance the safeguards and transparency of Interpol, while, of course, following the negotiation mandate given by the Council and finding solutions that will work for both parties to the agreement.
Please be assured that the Commission is committed to keep the Parliament fully informed on the upcoming negotiations.

Przewodnicząca. – Zamykam dyskusję nad tym punktem porządku dziennego.
               

                  Głosowanie odbędzie się we wtorek 5 lipca 2022 r.
               
20.   Indo-Pacific strategy in the area of trade and investment (short presentation)

Przewodnicząca. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego jest krótka prezentacja sprawozdania sporządzonego przez Jana Zahradila w imieniu Komisji Handlu Międzynarodowego w sprawie strategii dla Indo-Pacyfiku w dziedzinie handlu i inwestycji (A9-0170/2022) (2021/2200(INI)).
               

Jan Zahradil,
rapporteur. – Madam President, Commissioner, it's my great pleasure indeed to introduce this report to the Czech MEP only few days after the Czech Republic took over the Presidency in the EU Council and also as a Vice-Chairman of the International Trade Committee, only a few days after you successfully concluded trade negotiations with New Zealand, and indeed we have had a number of national strategies vis-à-vis Indo-Pacific, also communications from European institutions.
We already have recognised that the Indo-Pacific region has become a geopolitical and geo-economic reality, and together Europe and the Indo-Pacific represent over 70% of global trade in goods and services and over 60% of foreign direct investments. We have four bilateral trade agreements in place. We have five strategic partnerships and two connectivity partnerships. We have also several countries in the Indo-Pacific with tariff preferences under the GSP and GSP+ schemes.
We have also witnessed a growing geopolitical competition between US-China, changing a geopolitical shift and global order. And we have also seen new legal frameworks in the region like comprehensive and progressive agreement for trans-Pacific partnership (CPTPP) while by the way, US withdrew while China, Taiwan and the UK formally submitted a request to accede and also regional comprehensive economic partnership (RCEP) which entered into force in January 2022 and created the world's largest trading bloc.
So the time is up to define and summarise our relations to that region, particularly in the situation where geopolitical reality has dramatically changed since Russia's invasion of Ukraine. We are therefore calling on the Commission to strengthen partnership with all relevant actors in the Indo-Pacific, taking into consideration subregional dynamics and specificities. We should use better and more strategically our economic leverage while respecting the political and economic specificities of our partners and their interests.
We also coordinate our Indo-Pacific strategy with recently adopted EU global gateway strategy, and we should better use already existing treaties like that one between EU and South Korea, Singapore, Japan and Vietnam. And we also should raise awareness among businesses, stakeholders, civil society, social partners and citizens of these existing FTAs in the region and the opportunities they provide.
We are calling for substantive progress in negotiations on the EU-Australia after New Zealand has been already concluded. India, I will leave to my dear colleague Mr Bourgeois. And when it comes to China, we know that China is a cooperation partner, but also a competitor and also a systemic rival, and it's necessary to continue engaging with China to promote solutions to common challenges.
When it comes to Taiwan, we should cooperate in green technology and digital economy while respecting One China policy. We are on a good track with Indonesia, not on a very good track with the Philippines, Malaysia and Thailand and almost everything is frozen with Myanmar and Cambodia. So we have to continue and to make some progress.
And last but not least, we also further engage with ASEAN. We should use the momentum of the planned EU-ASEAN Summit in 2022, and we also should have a new strategic approach towards CPTPP and also thoroughly monitor the direct economic effects of the RCEP. I very much believe that this report will set a positive and encouraging atmosphere for the Commission, for the Council and for strategy of individual Member States.

Zgłoszenia z sali


Margarida Marques (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, Senhor Relator, a relação entre a UE e o Indo-Pacífico, geoestratégica ou comercial, tornou-se ainda mais importante. Relação que deve ser baseada nos valores universais, no respeito da democracia, direitos humanos, Estado de direito. Com base na ordem internacional multilateral, baseada em regras como reciprocidade e benefício mútuo, com uma Organização Mundial do Comércio modernizada.
               

                  Esta parceria passa por todos os atores relevantes no Indo-Pacífico, com dinâmicas e especificidades sub-regionais, parcerias para os desafios comuns globais, como o combate às alterações climáticas, a preservação da biodiversidade, a transição digital para estados, cidadãos e empresas.
               

                  Finalmente, exige-se que mobilizemos todas as ferramentas para promovermos uma ordem global mais social, inclusiva, coerente e baseada nas regras.
               

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, I welcome the report as well, and it was glad to hear the rapporteur bring a bit of common sense to the equation and also respect the One China policy.
It's a bit of a contrast to what we had to listen to at the Madrid summit, where NATO listed China as one of its strategic priorities for the first time, saying ‘Beijing's ambitions and its coercive policies challenged the Western bloc's interests, security and values’. And its Secretary-General, Jens Stoltenberg, went on to say China is ‘substantially building up its military forces, including nuclear weapons, bullying its neighbours and threatening Taiwan’.
My God, I mean, these are our biggest trading partner and we want to fight with the Chinese. What's in it for us? The Chinese haven't dropped the bomb on anyone in 40 years. The Americans still spend three times more than they do on military hardware.
What's wrong with us? Are they in the ocean of America? I don't think so.

Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, I too would welcome the balance introduced in the report by the rapporteur. I think it was very welcome because all too often now the warmongers in NATO would appear to have captured the EU, and as somebody from a neutral country I find that quite offensive: NATO has come to view China as a security threat, describing its policies as a challenge to the alliance's interests, accusing the Chinese Government of seeking to make friends, whether through economic support or alliance building, in order to undermine what has been the Western alliance in the Indo-Pacific.
Now, what absolute cheek: countries in this region should be sovereign to make decisions about who to trade with. This is China's front yard and they're entitled to develop cordial relations with their neighbours, and I'm glad they're doing it with trade rather than with guns. And of course, that's not good enough for NATO. They want to invite the Asia-Pacific Four into the NATO summit, stoking up division as they did in Ukraine. I hope this time round we will resist.

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)


Helena Dalli,
Member of the Commission. – Thank you Madam President, we welcome the draft report on the Indo-Pacific strategy in the area of trade and investment. And I thank the rapporteur, Mr Zahradil, and all shadow rapporteurs who have contributed. As underlined in your report, the Indo-Pacific region is of strategic importance for the EU. This is accentuated with the adoption of the EU's Indo-Pacific strategy last year, which highlights the strategic relevance of the Indo-Pacific for Europe. The region's growing economic, demographic and political weight makes it an important partner for the EU and a geopolitically significant player in addressing global challenges.
The EU's strategic engagement in the Indo-Pacific is designed to promote respect for international law and access to open markets. This will entail a further deepening and diversification of our trade and investment ties and collaboration to help accelerate the green and digital transitions and spur innovation and connectivity.
In today's challenging, competitive and often turbulent geopolitical environment, it is essential that we strengthen trade and political links with the region. This has become even more relevant in view of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Therefore, it is vital to work closely with the region to reinforce and diversify value and supply chains, especially with a focus on technologies and raw materials, and to finalise ongoing trade negotiations.
In this context, our general approach is the following: the EU so far has concluded ambitious and comprehensive trade agreements with Japan, the Republic of Korea, Singapore and Vietnam. Their implementation is making a clear difference, and they have led to a noticeable increase in bilateral trade flows. Negotiations for similarly ambitious agreements with other countries in the region are progressing. We notably sealed an agreement with New Zealand just last week, while negotiations with Australia are picking up pace. Talks with Indonesia may be concluded subsequently.
With India, we resumed negotiations in June. The EU's objective is to negotiate an ambitious and comprehensive trade agreement modelled on the most recent EU trade deals. This would notably include market access for goods, services and government procurement, digital trade, intellectual property rights, as well as ambitious provisions on trade and sustainable development. In parallel, negotiations would also aim at concluding separate agreements on investment protection and geographical indications.
Turning to South-East Asia, we remain very committed to engaging with ASEAN, and we are moving forward with individual FTAs as building blocks for a future wider region-to-region engagement. We remain very interested in the possible resumption of trade negotiations with Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand, once the conditions are right and with the eventual negotiation of a region-to-region trade agreement as a longer-term objective.
In addition, I would like to highlight that our trade policy strategy also proposes alternatives to traditional trade agreements. The aim is, for instance, to prevent and diminish market access barriers by fostering more regulatory alignment through regulatory cooperation. In that context, and as your draft report rightly insists, we want to create a network of digital partnerships. A digital partnership with Japan was launched in May, and the partnerships with Korea and Singapore are planned to follow later this year. The economic and geopolitical importance of sustainable connectivity and the digital economy is one of the priorities defined in the Indo-Pacific strategy, and the EU is now actively committed to translating it into concrete action.
In the area of connectivity, the EU will aim to promote all dimensions of connectivity with Indo-Pacific partners in a strategic manner, building on the global gateway strategy. Furthermore, with the new connectivity strategy launched on the 1 December 2021, the EU is stepping up its offer to help partners around the world meet their needs in increasing investment in both hard and soft infrastructure and beyond, thereby promoting democratic values, human rights and high standards such as good governance and transparency.
On Taiwan, I would like to highlight that we have worked with our Taiwanese counterparts to modernise EU-Taiwan trade and investment engagement and expand our discussions to strategic topics linked to trade and security. The resulting EU-Taiwan Trade and Investment Dialogue took place for the first time on the 2 June, co-chaired by the Director-General of DG Trade and the Taiwanese Minister of Economic Affairs. At the dialogue, the EU and Taiwan agreed to work together on the monitoring of supply chains for semiconductors, and we agreed to deepen cooperation on export controls, FDI screening, while working towards solutions to market access concerns.
The Commission welcomes this report and we believe that EU involvement in the Indo-Pacific region has become more relevant than ever, not only to advance our interests, but also to promote the rules-based international order and promote global standards on sustainable development. The Commission looks forward to working together with the European Parliament on this very important agenda.

Przewodnicząca. – Zamykam dyskusję nad tym punktem porządku dziennego.
               

                  Głosowanie odbędzie się we wtorek 5 lipca 2022 r.
               
21.   EU-India future trade and investment cooperation (short presentation)

Przewodnicząca. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego jest krótka prezentacja sprawozdania sporządzonego przez Geerta Bourgeoisa w imieniu Komisji Handlu Międzynarodowego w sprawie przyszłej współpracy handlowo-inwestycyjnej między UE a Indiami (A9-0193/2022) (2021/2177(INI)).
               

Geert Bourgeois,
rapporteur. – Madam President, colleagues, Commissioner, if the EU wants to play its role as a global actor, it has to promote rules-based trade and show by example that trade agreements deliver, bring peoples together and raise the standards worldwide on safety of labour, sustainable development goals and human rights. In these geopolitically unstable times, more than ever we have the duty to diversify our supply chains and open up new markets.
Colleagues, nine years after negotiations were suspended, the political leaders of both the EU and India agreed last year in May to resume negotiations for a balanced, ambitious, comprehensive and mutually-beneficial trade agreement, a separate negotiation on a standalone investment protection agreement and another agreement on geographical indications. This report confirms this approach.
An agreement with India will be favourable for economic reasons as the untapped potential is huge. With its 1.3 billion inhabitants, India is the largest democracy in the world and a solid alternative for an EU that wants to diversify its supply chains. Although in recent years the EU has become India's leading trade partner, figures show that the potential in economic cooperation with India remains mainly untapped. India is one out of the EU's four strategic partners within the European-Indo-Pacific strategy. Therefore, the agreement is also of geopolitical importance.
Dear colleagues, in this own-initiative report, the European Parliament gives its full support to the negotiations, based on the current mandate. MEPs also firmly welcome the establishment of a Trade and Technology Council with India that should be launched by the end of this year under the Czech Presidency. We have listed the following positive priorities: a comprehensive free trade agreement with a dedicated chapter on SMEs on digital trade and raw materials, and an ambitious and enforceable TSD chapter aligned with the Paris Agreement. We encourage the negotiators to touch upon the longstanding market access irritants both across governance levels and sectors, with the comprehensive elimination of tariffs and quotas on a reciprocal basis, while paying attention to sensitive products and ensuring that reductions will not be compensated by an increase in domestic taxes and levies; a standalone investment protection agreement with a dedicated EU-India Investment Court system, with a view to the founding of the Multilateral Investment Court; a robust chapter on public procurement applicable at all levels of governance and a prohibition of certain discriminatory bi-national practices; an agreement on the establishment of a bilateral ex-ante and ex-post consultation platform between the EU and India, designed to facilitate discussions or consultations in advance of any new measure that could negatively affect trade or investment; and, finally, we propose – following the good experience we have had in the FTA with Vietnam – the establishment of a parliamentary joint committee to allow parliamentary oversight.
Colleagues, I conclude that, without any doubt, challenging negotiations await. However, not only the EU but also India and the world have changed. In all contacts with our Indian partners we have clearly understood the political will to succeed. I hope that negotiations can succeed and that this parliament will be able to give its consent in the current mandate. We therefore need to grab this opportunity to strengthen EU-India ties with both hands.
Finally, I would like to thank my entire colleagues for the good cooperation, and I hope for the approval of my report with a broad majority tomorrow.

Zgłoszenia z sali


Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, I thank the rapporteur. India is going to be a massive player. It will probably have the biggest population in the world pretty soon; I think it'll outpace China for population. It's a developing economy and I think the EU could develop a very good, healthy relationship with India.
There's obviously things that we need to keep in mind, and too often when we have done trade deals and arrangements with countries a lot poorer than ourselves, very often the people lose out. I suppose I am referring in particular to many of the African cases, where very often we still behave like colonialists. I think we need to treat the Indians in a fair manner. I think you mentioned human rights as well, I think it's very important that we make sure that human rights standards are maintained at all stages.
But you also mentioned the geopolitical nature of it: I think India is going to do a business with everybody, whether it's the Russians, the Chinese, the Americans or the Europeans. We should be independent of all that and do our own business in a good way.

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)


Helena Dalli,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, this report on EU-India Future Trade and Investment Cooperation comes at a pivotal moment in EU-India relations.
EU-India trade negotiations were formally relaunched in Brussels on 17 June by EU Executive Vice-President Dombrovskis and Indian Commerce Minister Goyal. They also launched separate negotiations on an investment agreement, and another on geographical indications. A first round of negotiations covering all three tracks already took place in New Delhi last week, with two additional rounds to be held before the end of the year. Furthermore, during her visit to India in April, Commission President von der Leyen agreed with Prime Minister Modi to establish an EU-India Trade and Technology Council.
These separate yet complementary developments point at the intensification and deepening of the strategic partnership between the EU and India. In this context, the Commission welcomes the solid and comprehensive report prepared by Parliament. The Commission is also grateful for the report's support to its approach to EU-India trade and investment relations, particularly regarding the three strands of negotiations. The aim of the bilateral negotiations is to maximise the considerable trade and investment potential between the EU and India, which remains largely untapped. Liberalising trade and investment will generate opportunities for growth and job creation, including in areas going beyond trade in goods, notably services, digital trade, intellectual property and public procurement.
We also aim to contribute to securing our supply chains, promoting our values, protecting the climate, and to promote high environmental and labour standards.
To this end, the Commission seeks to negotiate ambitious and comprehensive agreements. The first round of talks took place on the basis of an EU negotiation text for 18 FTA chapters, as well as texts for investment protection and geographical indications. All our state of the art, the trade texts, which will shortly be made public, cover the broad scope of issues sought by Parliament.
The Commission also aims to negotiate ambitious and legally binding disciplines on trade and sustainable development. However, we have not yet shared a proposal for trade and sustainable development as we were waiting for the outcome of the Trade and Sustainable Development Review. We would expect a trade and sustainable development text to be discussed at the next round.
On top of this, the Investment Protection Agreement should significantly increase investor confidence on both sides. We are confident that this will lead to increases in foreign direct investment in both directions.
The EU and India also share a similar approach when it comes to protecting geographical indications. Once concluded, the Geographical Indications Agreement will support rural communities and help preserve the cultural and culinary heritage of both sides.
Our recent contacts with India at all levels point at a more positive Indian attitude towards trade liberalisation than in the past. This is confirmed by the recent conclusion by India of trade agreements with Australia and the United Arab Emirates. This is also confirmed by India's willingness to engage on long-standing market access issues in parallel with the trade negotiations, with the aim of solving some of them. Therefore, conditions for a successful outcome are more favourable than in 2013, when we had to suspend the negotiations due to a gap of ambition between the two sides.
Nonetheless, we must be both constructive and realistic. These negotiations are a challenging endeavour which will require strong political leadership on both sides. Yet we need to seize the moment. There is increased convergence and joint interest between the EU and India at the economic, strategic and geopolitical levels, and both sides have a clear interest in deepening their strategic partnership.
So, in line with the European Parliament's report, the Commission will work towards concluding trade, investment protection and geographical indication agreements that are ambitious and comprehensive. So your report will be a point of reference for the Commission in its efforts. I thank you again for your support.

Przewodnicząca. – Zamykam dyskusję nad tym punktem porządku dziennego.
               

                  Głosowanie odbędzie się we wtorek 5 lipca 2022 r.
               

Oświadczenia pisemne (art. 171)


Karol Karski (ECR),
na piśmie. – Negocjacje w sprawie przyszłej współpracy handlowo-inwestycyjnej rozpoczęły się, a Unia wciąż boryka się z problemami związanymi z dostępem do rynku indyjskiego w wielu sektorach. Sektor samochodowy czy sektor wyrobów medycznych są wciąż obciążone ograniczeniami importowymi.
               

                  Mój kraj, Polska, jest znaczącym producentem i eksporterem opon w UE, w tym opon do autobusów, samochodów ciężarowych i dostawczych, które sprzedawane są do Indii. Niestety konieczność uzyskania licencji na tamtym rynku, poświadczającej jakość i zgodność z normami bezpieczeństwa, spowodowała zmniejszenie eksportu tego produktu aż o 50%. Tylko niewielka grupa firm otrzymała takie licencje, niestety żadna z Polski. Były to głównie firmy eksportujące gotowe produkty motoryzacyjne, takie jak pojazdy, a nie same opony. System nie jest przejrzysty, wytyczne do uzyskania licencji są wciąż niedostępne. Bariery te powodują nieuzasadnione blokowanie (od czerwca 2020 r.) eksportu opon produkowanych w Polsce na rynek indyjski.
               

                  Mój kraj jest również zaniepokojony niejasnymi regulacjami prawnymi na rynku wyrobów medycznych, a także zakazem importu odnowionych wyrobów medycznych. Tu również napotykamy trudności, np. w uzyskaniu licencji, w prowadzeniu badań klinicznych. Kraje unijne są w tej kwestii bardzo dyskryminowane. By utrzymać dynamikę konieczną do kontynuacji rozmów negocjacyjnych, potrzebne są natychmiastowe rozwiązania, nie przedkładajmy szybkiego zawarcia umowy nad jej treść.
               

Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D),
schriftelijk. – India is een belangrijke strategische partner van de Europese Unie. Niet enkel op politiek en economisch vlak, maar ook op vlak van handel is een goede relatie met India cruciaal om onze aanvoerketens te diversifiëren en onze strategische autonomie te vergroten. Door de sterke positie van China in de regio en de oorlog in Oekraïne wordt het uitbouwen van sterke handelsrelaties enkel belangrijker. Daarom steunt het Europees Parlement, met een verslag dat vandaag door de plenaire vergadering werd goedgekeurd, de heropening van de onderhandelingen over een vrijhandelsakkoord met India.
               

                  Maar die toekomstige handelsrelatie moet ook op een duurzame en rechtvaardige manier worden vormgegeven. Net zoals het geval was bij het vrijhandelsakkoord met Nieuw-Zeeland, dat vorige week door de Europese Commissie werd afgeklopt, verwachten we dat er met India sterke, bindende en afdwingbare afspraken rond klimaat, duurzaamheid en mensenrechten en rechten van arbeiders worden gemaakt. Ook het uitroeien van kinderarbeid is daarbij voor ons een prioriteit. Met de Green Deal en de klimaatwet is de Europese Unie een nieuwe weg ingeslagen. Die nieuwe weg moet ook vertaald worden in de manier waarop we in de 21e eeuw handel drijven met de rest van de wereld.
               
22.   One-minute speeches on matters of political importance

Przewodnicząca. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego są jednominutowe wystąpienia w ważnych kwestiach politycznych (art. 172 Regulaminu).
               

Anna-Michelle Asimakopoulou (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κυρίες και κύριοι συνάδελφοι,
               

                  οι νέες καταστροφές στον ναό της Αγίας Σοφίας στην Κωνσταντινούπολη είναι μία ακόμη απόδειξη της απόλυτης έλλειψης σεβασμού που δείχνουν οι τουρκικές αρχές σε ένα μνημείο παγκόσμιας πολιτιστικής κληρονομιάς της UNESCO και ένα από τα μεγαλύτερα σύμβολα του χριστιανισμού.
               

                  Δυστυχώς, όμως, δεν είναι μόνο η καταστροφή του μαρμάρινου δαπέδου, των τοίχων ή της ιστορικής αυτοκρατορικής πύλης του ναού, και όλα αυτά μετά την επίσημη μετατροπή της σε τζαμί· είναι επίσης και η βεβήλωση της Παναγίας Σουμελά, του ιερού προσκυνήματος των Ελλήνων του Πόντου, με disco party και γυρίσματα χολιγουντιανής ταινίας. Είναι και η μετατροπή της Μονής της Χώρας, ενός εμβληματικού βυζαντινού μνημείου, με μακρά ιστορία, σε ισλαμικό τέμενος.
               

                  Πρόκειται για μια πάγια τακτική της Τουρκίας που στρέφεται έναντι ορθόδοξων ιερών προσκυνημάτων, που προσβάλλει τον πολισμό μας, σπιλώνει και αλλοιώνει τις αρχές και αξίες της χριστιανοσύνης και της ορθοδοξίας και υπονομεύει την ευρωπαϊκή μας ταυτότητα.
               

                  Κυρίες και κύριοι συνάδελφοι, σήμερα, απέναντι σε αυτές τις προκλητικές ενέργειες, ζητώ από αυτό το βήμα τη στήριξή σας για να προστατεύσουμε την πολιτιστική μας κληρονομιά, όχι μόνο ως Ευρωπαίοι, αλλά και ως χριστιανοί.
               

Isabel Santos (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, no próximo dia 10 de julho será votada no Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas a renovação do corredor de ajuda humanitária de Bab al-Hawa, única via para que o apoio das organizações internacionais chegue à população síria depois de a Rússia, em 2020, ter bloqueado os outros três corredores. Por ali passam, mensalmente, centenas de camiões com bens indispensáveis à sobrevivência das populações da região de Idlib. Em maio, esta fronteira foi cruzada por mais de 1 000 camiões.
               

                  Existe o fundado temor de que, devido à situação geopolítica atual, esta autorização seja posta em causa pela Rússia, em retaliação contra as sanções impostas devido à invasão da Ucrânia.
               

                  Apelamos a que a União Europeia condene a priori e contrarie energicamente qualquer tentativa de politizar a ajuda humanitária ao povo sírio. Está em risco a sobrevivência de 4 milhões de pessoas. Não podemos fechar os olhos a esta tragédia. O povo sírio não pode ser abandonado.
               

Barry Andrews (Renew). – Madam President, I want to address the human rights situation in Zimbabwe. According to Johns Hopkins University, inflation in Zimbabwe is over 400% – the highest in the world – and 63% of the population live below the poverty line. Unfortunately, President Emmerson Mnangagwa is indistinguishable from his predecessor, President Mugabe. Added to economic mismanagement are his now endless assaults on civil society.
The proposed Public Voluntary Organisation (PVO) Amendment Bill is currently before the Zimbabwe Parliament and would criminalise NGOs, designating them as high-risk or vulnerable to terrorist abuse. The UN Human Rights Council last week completed its voluntary periodic review, and Zimbabwe has rejected criticisms of the PVO Amendment Bill by Ireland and others. It has also not implemented any of the EU election observer mission recommendations. Opposition leaders hope for a peaceful, inclusive and modern Zimbabwe. The EU must send a clear message in opposition to this highly regressive legislation.

Gerolf Annemans (ID). – Voorzitter, we weten allemaal dat de Islamitische Republiek Iran een veilige haven is voor terroristen. Het Iraanse regime gebruikt zijn ambassades en internationale terreurgroepen om onze veiligheid in het Westen te ondermijnen. Dat zagen we bijvoorbeeld bij de geplande aanslag op politieke tegenstanders in de buurt van Parijs, georganiseerd door de Iraanse diplomaat Assadollah Assadi.
               

                  Op dit moment wordt hij vastgehouden door België, maar de Belgische regering staat nu als eerste westerse staat op het punt een ruil tussen deze veroordeelde terrorist en de onschuldige Iraans-Zweedse professor Djalali te organiseren via een wet en een bilateraal verdrag.
               

                  Dat is precies de strategie van Iran. Ze gijzelen onderdanen met een dubbele nationaliteit, zoals de professor, om de terugkeer van terroristen naar Iran te bewerkstelligen. In de Verenigde Staten werd daarop reeds terecht kritiek geuit. De EU blijft echter vooralsnog stil over deze Belgische beslissing, die een precedent is voor de EU. Voor ons is dit totaal onaanvaardbaar.
               

Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR). – Voorzitter, de manier waarop de Hoge Vertegenwoordiger spreekt over Israëls nederzettingen is onjuist en onzorgvuldig. Hij heeft het voortdurend over illegale bezettingsactiviteiten. Internationaal rechterlijk bezien is daarvan echter alleen sprake als het bezette gebied toebehoort aan een andere erkende staat. Bij de Krim is dat duidelijk: dat is van Oekraïne. Maar aan welk land behoorde de Westelijke Jordaanoever vóór 1967? Niet aan Jordanië, niet aan het Ottomaanse Rijk en ook niet aan het Britse imperium. Zolang er geen oplossing is voor het Israëlisch-Palestijnse conflict, is er ook geen sprake van een erkende Palestijnse staat die bezet zou zijn. Het merkwaardige is dat zelfs voor situaties waar de juridische status glashelder is, zoals Noord-Cyprus, de Hoge Vertegenwoordiger de term ‘illegale bezettingsactiviteiten’ niet in de mond neemt. Mijn oproep is: doe dat dan zeker niet in het geval van de nederzettingen, waar zo'n typering volgens het internationale recht helemaal niet voor mag worden gebruikt. Daar is niemand mee geholpen.
               

Chris MacManus (The Left). – A Uachtaráin, I mí an Mheithimh vótáil Feisirí ar son rún ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa maidir le todhchaí oileáin na hEorpa.
               

                  Moladh amháin a bhí sa tuairisc seo ná go mbeadh 2024 mar Bhliain na nOileán san Aontas Eorpach. Creidim go láidir sa togra seo agus tá mé den tuairim go dtabharfaidh sé deis dúinn plé ceart a bheith againn ar thodhchaí ár bpobal cósta agus oileáin. Scríobh mé chuig an gCoimisiún ó shin chun cinntiú go ndéantar staidéar ceart ar an togra seo.
               

                  A chairde, ba chóir d'institiúidí AE oibriú lenár bpobail oileáin ar fud na hEorpa chun plé cuimsitheach a bheith againn faoin todhchaí, agus mar Fheisirí, ba chóir dúinn brú a chur orthu chun é seo a chinntiú.
               

Tatjana Ždanoka (NI). – Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, political prosecutions in the Baltic States are going on. Six years for investigative journalism – this was the verdict of the Lithuanian Appeal Court against Algirdas Paleckis at the beginning of May.
In my country, Latvia, a number of politically motivated arrests of political activists and even people being far from politics, took place during the last two months. Recently, Vladimir Linderman, a well-known journalist and politician, was arrested in Riga. The effects of degrading attitudes against him are known – a 60-year-old man with a number of chronic diseases who was not allowed to use life-saving medicines, which needed to be taken constantly.
More than 40 criminal cases were initiated on the basis of a recently added section of the criminal law: ‘assistance to a foreign state in action directed against the Republic of Latvia’. This phenomenon cannot be called an obsession on the search for enemies of the state or spies. This, on the contrary, is an artificial labelling of people as Kremlin agents in order to intimidate the entire Russian-speaking part of the population.

Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisar, recent, după anunțul Consiliului European privind obținerea de statut de țară candidată la Uniunea Europeană pentru Republica Moldova, Parlamentul României și Parlamentul Republicii Moldova au organizat o ședință comună a celor două legislative.
               

                  Am participat la acest eveniment, invitat din partea Parlamentului European. Ce m-a uimit însă este reacția fostului președinte al Federației Ruse, Medvedev, această figurină a lui Putin, care a criticat în termeni foarte duri o apropiere firească între România și Republica Moldova în contextul integrării europene a acestui stat.
               

                  Amenințarea venită de la Moscova nu ne sperie, pentru că obiectivul nostru este ca Republica Moldova să se integreze în Uniunea Europeană, iar aici, în familia europeană, națiunea română să se reîntregească, așa cum este firesc, nu așa cum își dorește Moscova.
               

Carmen Avram (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisar, propunerea Comisiei privind utilizarea sustenabilă a produselor de protecție a plantelor nu doar că nu se bazează pe un studiu de impact, dar pune la zid fermierii din România și din alte state care deja utilizează produse chimice mult sub media europeană.
               

                  Țara mea, de exemplu, ar trebui să reducă cu 35% cantitatea de pesticide, adică ar rămâne cu de 4 ori mai puțină substanță decât e necesar pentru un randament mediu la hectar. După aceeași propunere însă, alte state vor folosi mult mai mult pesticid decât România.
               

                  Propunerea Comisiei e nerealistă. Producția sustenabilă ar putea rămâne un vis, hrana, o marfă de lux, iar mii de fermieri riscă să falimenteze.
               

                  O propunere realistă ar trebui să plece de la premisa simplă să nu ne autodistrugem și de la o întrebare: chiar vrem să suplimentăm golurile lăsate de fermierii noștri cu importuri la standarde îndoielnice și cu impact mai mare asupra mediului?
               

                  Îi cer deci Comisiei Europene să repare această nedreptate, să vină cu o propunere echilibrată și să dea sectoarelor agricole din diferitele state membre șanse egale pe piață.
               

Yana Toom (Renew). – Madam President, I will continue the line of Tatjana Ždanoka.

                  ‘Collateral damage’ – I've heard this expression pretty often after the beginning of the Russian aggression against Ukraine.

                  ‘Collateral damage’ was said about Russian human rights defenders, who now have huge difficulties with visas, with status, with payments, as they are somehow ‘suspicious’.

                  ‘Collateral damage’ to Russian students who are not allowed any more to enter into the universities of my home country, Estonia. Probably this is our way of promoting European values!

                  ‘Collateral damage’ to teachers in the remaining Russian schools of Estonia and Latvia. We went so far that in the heat of the discussion about the closure of Russian education, the biggest Estonian newspaper called them a ‘purulent tumour’. And guess what – nothing happened!
The aggression against Ukraine kind of legitimises aggression against Russian-speaking Europeans. But colleagues, language is just language. It is a set of cases and morphemes, grammatical structure, a means of communication. I would like to urge the Commission not to turn a blind eye to the increasing discrimination against Russian speakers in Europe. This blindness will cost us a lot.

Gunnar Beck (ID). – Frau Präsidentin! Die EZB erwartet 6,8 % Inflation dieses Jahr, 3,5 % nächstes Jahr und 2 % 2024. Das sind 12,8 % über drei Jahre oder 4,3 % pro Jahr im Schnitt – weit über dem Zwei-Prozent-Ziel der EZB und satte 4,3 % über dem EU-Vertrags-Preisstabilitätsgebot. Die EZB entwertet so Erspartes um gut 4 % pro Jahr und Nettoeinkommen um rund 3 %. Gleichzeitig steigen die Immobilienpreise im Euroraum um 10 %. Die Zinsen erhöht die EZB indes kaum.
               

                  Fazit: Die EZB hat uns in die Stagflation geführt, einfache Bürger enteignet und Großvermögen zweistellige Zuwachsraten gewährt. Nennen wir die Dinge doch mal beim Namen: Die EZB hat geldpolitisch versagt. Sie ist – zur Abwechslung mal mit Marx gesprochen – nichts als der Handlanger der Plutokratie.
               

Cristian Terheș (ECR). – Madam President, ‘corruption is power without accountability’, said an anti-corruption expert from Slovenia. The attitude of the European Commission led by Ursula von der Leyen, clearly fits the description of corruption. Billions of doses of vaccines were bought by Ursula von der Leyen's Commission based on contracts that were not fully disclosed, even to Members of the European Parliament, who should check on how she is spending people's money.
These doses must have cost tens of billions of euros, but we don't know for sure because the contracts are not published. If this is not corruption, then what is? Ursula von der Leyen is there, is lecturing the EU Member States on rule of law, but it is her, the first one who is not transparent with her activities, nor with how she's spending people's money.
I demand, therefore, that if Ursula von der Leyen clearly believes in transparency to fully publish the contracts she has signed with the vaccine companies, so we will know all how much all these vaccines have cost.

Έλενα Κουντουρά (The Left). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, έχω την υποχρέωση να ενημερώσω το Σώμα του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου για ακόμα μία ανησυχητική εξέλιξη που αφορά στην τουρκική προκλητικότητα απέναντι στην Ελλάδα, με επίκεντρο το Αιγαίο.
               

                  Η Τουρκία κατοχύρωσε τον όρο Turkaegean ως ευρωπαϊκό εμπορικό σήμα και τον χρησιμοποιεί εκτενώς σε μια πανευρωπαϊκή εμπορική καμπάνια προώθησης του τουριστικού της προϊόντος, δημιουργώντας σύγχυση στο ταξιδιωτικό κοινό.
               

                  Πρέπει να καταστεί σαφές ότι ο όρος Τurkaegean δεν είναι αθώος. Αντανακλά την κλιμακούμενη τουρκική επιθετικότητα και εντάσσεται στο ίδιο πλαίσιο πολιτικής με τις προκλητικές δηλώσεις και επανειλημμένες απειλές Τούρκων αξιωματούχων απέναντι στην Ελλάδα.
               

                  Πρέπει να σηκώσουμε ένα ευρωπαϊκό τείχος αλληλεγγύης απέναντι στις τουρκικές προκλήσεις και να στείλουμε το μήνυμα προς πάσα κατεύθυνση ότι η αμφισβήτηση της διεθνούς νομιμότητας και των ελληνικών συμφερόντων που βασίζονται σε αυτή, σε όλους τους τομείς —τον εμπορικό, ενεργειακό και διπλωματικό— δεν θα γίνει ανεκτή.
               

Dino Giarrusso (NI). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la Presidente von der Leyen ha elogiato con forza il Superbonus 110, una misura italiana definita dall'Europa rivoluzionaria, transizione ecologica che crea sviluppo e lavoro tutelando l'ambiente.
               

                  Purtroppo, dal novembre 2021 questa misura subisce un attacco frontale dal governo Draghi. Cambiando le regole in corsa, si è bloccata la circolazione dei crediti, penalizzando le aziende e privandole della liquidità per lavorare. Si rischia una catastrofe economica e sociale senza precedenti.
               

                  Intesa Sanpaolo denuncia 16 miliardi di crediti impegnati e quattro erogati. I crediti bloccati ammonterebbero a decine di miliardi, cioè decine di migliaia di aziende distrutte, centinaia di migliaia di posti di lavoro spazzati via.
               

                  Chiedo all'Europa di utilizzare ogni mezzo di dissuasione consentito dai trattati verso il governo italiano, al cui senso di responsabilità mi appello: riattivate subito i canali di aziende partecipate dallo Stato, Poste italiane e Cassa Depositi e Prestiti, rispettate il patto con le imprese, che stanno dando una spinta al PIL senza precedenti.
               

                  L'Italia ha sottoscritto al G20 del dicembre 2020 accordi sulla transizione ecologica e questa misura va in quella direzione. Abbiamo avuto i primi suicidi di imprenditori distrutti da queste scelte scellerate. Prima che si suicidi l'Italia intera, sbloccate la circolazione dei crediti, evitando così la rovina per centinaia di migliaia di italiani.
               

Tomislav Sokol (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, hvala lijepa. U sklopu Strategije ‘od polja do stola’, Europska komisija najavila je da će ove godine predstaviti nova pravila o označavanju hrane na prednjoj strani proizvoda.
               

                  Nedvojbeno je da će se time potrošačima omogućiti da na jasan i pravedan način dobiju najvažnije informacije o hranidbenoj vrijednosti proizvoda. Sada su te informacije malim slovima navedene na poleđini pakiranja, zbog čega mi se često potrošači žale da imaju poteškoća s njihovim pronalaženjem.
               

                  Međutim, s ovog mjesta želim upozoriti Komisiju da se oznakama hrane može lako manipulirati. Primjerice, korištenjem oznake Nutri-score gazirano piće s umjetnim sladilom, kao što je coca-cola, rangira se kao poželjnije u pogledu prehrambene vrijednosti od djevičanskog maslinovog ulja, što je krajnje nedopustivo.
               

                  Zato još jednom pozivam Komisiju da pri izradi prijedloga o označavanju proizvoda uvaži specifičnosti maslinovog ulja i spriječi manipulaciju potrošača. Zajedno moramo čuvati mediteransku prehranu čiji je neizostavan sastojak upravo maslinovo ulje.
               

Цветелина Пенкова (S&D). – Г-жо Председател, г-жо Комисар, несигурната ситуация, в която се намираме след започването на войната в Украйна, изисква от нас да мислим за енергийната си сигурност. Трябва да развиваме свои технологии и да произвеждаме нужната ни енергия в рамките на Европейския съюз.
               

                  Европейският ядрен сектор е един от най-иновативните в света. Трябва да запазим позициите си и висококачествените работни места на Европейския съюз в този стратегически сектор. Целите за постигане на безвъглеродна икономика са ясни, но имаме нужда от базови мощности, които да гарантират стабилността на енергийната система в Европа. Все още не разполагаме с достатъчно технологичен капацитет, за да разчитаме единствено и само на възобновяеми източници на енергия, и това е ясно с повторното отваряне на въглищните централи в Германия и Австрия. Чрез ядрената енергия ще се гарантират достъпни цени на тока и достатъчно електричество за европейските граждани и индустрията.
               

                  Прагматичните политики трябва да са водещи. Европейските граждани очакват от нас решения. Трябва да гласуваме против предложеното отхвърляне на делегирания акт в таксономията.
               

Charlie Weimers (ECR). – Fru talman! Skogen omnämns inte i fördragen. Sverige har aldrig gett makten över skogspolitiken till EU. Trots detta vill kommissionen omvandla vår skog – vår nationalskatt – till en kolbildningsreserv. De bygger sitt förslag på fördragens skrivningar om att utnyttja naturresurserna varsamt och rationellt samt ett utslag i EU-domstolen från 1999, där man uttalat att kommissionen kan reglera miljöåtgärder i skog. Det må vara legalt, men inte legitimt. Vi har aldrig på demokratisk väg givit ifrån oss makten över skogen.
               

                  Sverige är världens näst största exportör av industriprodukter från skogen. Skogsnäringen ger hundratusentals arbetsplatser. Förslagen att Sverige ska tvingas återskapa minst 2,5 miljoner hektar naturskog kommer att kosta 350 miljarder kronor. I stället för skogsbruk läggs en död hand över stora skogsarealer. Hur många som blir av med jobbet är det ingen som vet. Var så säker, många svenskar kommer att känna ‘hit, men inte längre’. Kommissionen sågar av den gren de själva sitter på.
               

Billy Kelleher (Renew). – A Uachtaráin, Den chéad uair riamh, de bharr COVID, táimid ábalta na buntáistí a bhaineann le comhar maidir le cúram sláinte san Aontas a fheiceáil. Leis an gcur chuige aontaithe seo, chun COVID a chomhrac, tá feabhas mór curtha ar an éifeachtúlacht agus ar an bpaireacht i measc ár saoránach. Le hAontas Sláinte Eorpach, beimid ábalta freagairt le chéile do ghéarchéimeanna sláinte atá ag teacht chun cinn, soláthar leighis a áirithiú, agus galair a chosc agus a chóireáil.
               

                  Sílim gur cheart go mbeadh ailíniú seirbhísí diagnóiseacha mar bhunchloch lárnach don straitéis seo. Mar shampla, tá beartais dhifriúla ag tíortha Eorpacha faoi láthair maidir le diagnóisic nuabheirthe. Úsáidtear ‘an tsáthástáil sála’ in Éirinn. Mar sin féin, cé go dtástálann dochtúirí in Éirinn do naoi dtinneas a d'fhéadfadh a bheith ann, tá éagsúlacht i measc tíortha eile: tástálann an Fhrainc do shé (6) cinn, ach tástálann an Spáinn do cheithre cinn is fiche (24).
               

                  Le treoirlínte coiteanna maidir le diagnóisic, bheimis in ann acmhainní a roinnt chun trealamh agus saineolas a sholáthar, agus chomh maith leis sin, chinnteofaí comhionannas i measc ár saoránach. Ní mór na gnéithe bunúsacha agus ríthábhachtacha seo a bheith lárnach in Aontas Sláinte Eorpach.
               

Sandra Pereira (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, no seguimento da decisão do tribunal de extradição para os Estados Unidos da América e do posterior assentimento da Secretária Pretty Patel, na passada sexta-feira, Julian Assange apresentou recurso junto do Supremo Tribunal contra a sua ordem de extradição.
               

                  Ontem, no dia em que completou 51 anos, os dez últimos em cativeiro, houve expressões de solidariedade um pouco por todo o mundo, incluindo em Lisboa, onde estivemos, apelando, uma vez mais, à libertação de Assange, denunciando e rejeitando uma decisão que visa impor uma inaceitável pressão para condicionar a divulgação de informação de interesse público.
               

                  Não podemos deixar de notar o silêncio das instituições da União Europeia, por contraste com outras situações sobre este caso e da revelação de informações, entre outras, sobre a guerra no Iraque e no Afeganistão, expondo violações do direito internacional, entre as quais crimes de guerra.
               

                  Expressando solidariedade com Julian Assange, continuaremos a exigir a recusa da sua extradição e a anulação das acusações contra Assange e a sua imediata libertação.
               

Fulvio Martusciello (PPE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, nel tardo mese di agosto ci sarà l'incontro tra il Presidente Macron e il Presidente dello Zimbabwe, a dimostrazione di un ritorno alla normalità nei rapporti fra l'Unione europea e questo paese, che è culminato nell'eliminazione di alcune sanzioni nei confronti di alcuni soggetti.
               

                  D'altronde, che lo Zimbabwe vada verso una valutazione positiva lo dimostra anche lo svolgimento delle elezioni suppletive, che ha visto vincere l'opposizione con tanti seggi, a dimostrazione che il paese va verso una democratizzazione nuova, non ci sono stati né scontri né accuse di brogli.
               

                  È allora giunto il momento, da parte dell'Unione europea, anche alla luce dell'incontro che ci sarà a fine agosto con Macron, di eliminare le ultime sanzioni che ci sono nei confronti di questo paese, che può diventare davvero una frontiera forte nei confronti dell'avanzata del terrorismo, del jihadismo – ricordiamo quello che è accaduto a Mogadiscio – e bisogna mettere lo Zimbabwe in condizione di far fronte all'avanzata jihadista nella regione.
               

Vlad-Marius Botoș (Renew). – Doamnă vicepreședintă, doamnă comisar, în acest mandat am avut multe provocări, iar Uniunea Europeană a trebuit să regândească un mod de acțiune pentru a face față încercărilor, de la pactul ecologic european la Brexit, la pandemia COVID-19, războiul din Ucraina și criza energetică sau cea a creșterilor de prețuri.
               

                  Sigur, că pentru a contracara efectele negative, pentru a soluționa o parte din probleme, Uniunea Europeană a gândit soluții de moment și soluții de durată.
               

                  Am alocat fonduri speciale și am flexibilizat fondurile existente pentru ca autoritățile din statele membre să poată face investițiile cele mai potrivite, ținând cont de situația din teren.
               

                  Dar ca aceste fonduri să aibă totuși rezultatele pe care trebuie să le simtă cetățenii noștri, este nevoie să facem mai mult decât să alocăm doar bani. Este nevoie să transferăm cunoștințele de adaptare a strategiilor de dezvoltare regională și locală.
               

                  Oamenii nu au nevoie doar de fonduri. Ei trebuie să știe atât care sunt previziunile pentru perioada următoare, cât și soluțiile tehnice care pot fi aplicate în funcție de specificul regiunilor noastre.
               

Michiel Hoogeveen (ECR). – Madam President, we've become accustomed to the EU's regular condemnation of the State of Israel for allowing Jews to reside in the West Bank. The European Commission claims that this is based on international law. If that is so, why hasn't the EU ever called any other people's residential activities in occupied territories an international crime?
We are aware that there are many territories that the EU deems ‘occupied’ around the world, even in Europe. Yet people move in and out of these territories all the time. However, the EU only talks about illegal settlers in relation to Israeli Jews. The truth is that the EU chooses to focus on one conflict over the other. It condemns certain actions of one particular state and turns a blind eye to other examples.
We call on the Commission to either use international law consistently or refrain from using legal language entirely.

João Pimenta Lopes (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, um pouco por toda a União Europeia assiste-se ao caos nos aeroportos sem termo à vista: centenas de voos atrasados ou cancelados, falta de pessoal operacional de terra, no controlo aéreo, nas tripulações. Eis o resultado dos milhares de despedimentos durante a pandemia, dos processos de reestruturação impostos pela Comissão Europeia, do caminho de privatização e liberalização do setor da aviação, arrastando atrás de si a precariedade, a perda de direitos, os baixos salários.
               

                  Em Portugal, as consequências deste processo de liberalização, imposto por sucessivos governos, salta à vista: concessão dos aeroportos nacionais à multinacional Vinci, subordinando as necessidades operacionais às comerciais, obstaculizando a construção do novo aeroporto de Lisboa em Alcochete, em prejuízo do interesse nacional; falta de pessoal operacional e nos serviços públicos e forças de segurança; submissão às imposições da UE com um plano de reestruturação ruinoso para a TAP.
               

                  Este não é o caminho.
               

                  É preciso recuperar o controlo público deste setor, colocando as suas infraestruturas e a TAP ao serviço do país.
               

Peter Pollák (PPE). – Priatelia, v tomto parlamente som už niekoľkokrát hovoril
               

                  Napriek tomu, že máme politickú vôľu, ako aj stratégie integrácie Rómov na európskej či národnej úrovni, napriek tomu, že máme aj peniaze, je obrovské množstvo detí bez vzdelania. Ich rodičia sú bez práce. Mnohí Rómovia žijú v podmienkach, ktoré sa podobajú Africkému kontinentu.
               

                  V čase, keď európske obce a mestá stavajú za eurofondy cyklotrasy, kupujú autobusy, obnovujú námestia, rómske deti v tých istých lokalitách pijú vodu z potoka.
               

                  V mnohých obciach a mestách vidíme, ako dokážu úspešne čerpať európske peniaze, no keď príde na projekty pre Rómov, tam sa to zastaví.
               

                  Vážení priatelia, my to však nemôžeme nechať len tak. Nemôžeme akceptovať to, ako sa obciam a mestám do rómskych projektov nechce ísť.
               

                  Som rád, že na budúci týždeň spolu s kolegami z Výboru REGI navštívime Slovensko, kde budeme hľadať riešenia, aby konečne peniaze a stratégie ponúkané Európskou komisiou prijali starostovia za svoju prioritu.
               

                  Aby v 21. storočí, vo vyspelej Európe žili aj Rómovia dôstojne ako ľudia.
               

                  .
               

Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, we hear a lot in here about the battle between democracy and authoritarianism. To defend democracy and get Finland and Sweden into NATO we're prepared to do a filthy deal with Turkey, selling out the Kurds to a country known for persecuting them.
To protect EU values, get oil and guns, we're prepared to snuggle up to Saudi Arabia, known to dismember journalists, execute 81 people on the one day, not to mind murdering 400 000 in Yemen and starving 2.3 million children. And to defeat Russian authoritarianism, we're prepared to sanction Russia hurting ourselves, arm Ukraine, helping to kill them in the process.
And when the people of Europe call out this lunacy and as in Italy demand peace and a cessation of sending arms to the conflict, instead of listening to them as a democracy would do, Italian state TV and four private channels are investigated for spreading Russian disinformation.
You couldn't make it up. Orbán's doublespeak is alive and well. We have a ministry of truth, and your democracy is looking a hell of a lot like authoritarianism.

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, the NATO summit in Madrid was a big love-in for the supporters of the military-industrial complex. NATO is not a defence alliance, it's a war machine. Ask the people of Afghanistan, Iraq or Libya. NATO's real goal is the defence of a waning US hegemony and a unipolar world system. That's what NATO exists for. Any discussion of that is silenced, chilled in this land of free speech. The war in Ukraine: NATO's loving it.
Like the US, the Russian economy is dominated by monopoly capital. Both countries are run by oligarchs. Now we have a US-NATO proxy war against Russia and Ukraine, two factions of capitalist imperialism waging war against each other with millions of workers caught in between. A survey by the European Council on Foreign Relations showed that a vast majority of European citizens want peace rather than promoting a war that punishes Russia. But NATO never wants peace.
What I want to know is, what does the EU really want?

Przewodnicząca. – Zamykam debatę w tym punkcie porządku dziennego.
               
23.   Approval of the minutes of the current sitting
24.   Agenda of the next sitting

Przewodnicząca. – Zamykam posiedzenie. Posiedzenie zostanie wznowione we wtorek 5 lipca 2022 r. o godz. 9.00. Rozpocznie się od debaty na temat sprawozdania sporządzonego przez Milana Brgleza w imieniu Komisji Zatrudnienia i Spraw Socjalnych oraz Sirpę Pietikäinen w imieniu Komisji Praw Kobiet i Równouprawnienia w sprawie wspólnych europejskich działań w dziedzinie opieki (A9-0189/2022) (2021/2253(INI)).
               

                  Porządek obrad został opublikowany i jest dostępny na stronie Parlamentu Europejskiego.
               
25.   Closure of the sitting

(Posiedzenie zostało zamknięte o godz. 23.04)



ELI: 
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)