Verbatim report of proceedings of 22 April 2024
Date: 2024-04-22
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Parliament, parliamentary debate








C_202502131EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series














10.4.2025







            22 April 2024
            VERBATIM REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF 22 APRIL 2024
            
         
(C/2025/2131)

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
4










5.

Composition of Parliament
4










6.

Announcement by the President
4










7.

Composition of political groups
5










8.

Negotiations ahead of Parliament's first reading (Rule 71) (action taken)
5










9.

Delegated acts (Rule 111(6)) (action taken)
5










10.

Delegated acts (Rule 111(6))
5










11.

Corrigenda (Rule 241)
5










12.

Explanations of vote of the last sitting
6










13.

Signing of acts adopted in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure (Rule 79)
6










14.

Approval of the minutes of forthcoming sittings
6










15.

Order of business
7










16.

Resumption of the sitting
12










17.

Preventing plastic pellet losses to reduce microplastic pollution (debate)
12










18.

Common rules promoting the repair of goods (debate)
22










19.

Prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market (debate)
33










20.

Amending Directive 2011/36/EU on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims (debate)
44










21.

One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
55










22.

Agenda of the next sitting
62










23.

Approval of the minutes of the sitting
62










24.

Closure of the sitting
62




Verbatim report of proceedings of 22 April 2024
                  


PRESIDENZA: ROBERTA METSOLA


President

1.   Resumption of the session

President. – I declare resumed the session of the European Parliament adjourned on Thursday, 11 April 2024.
2.   Opening of the sitting

(The sitting opened at 17.02)

3.   Statements by the President

President. – Dear colleagues, can I ask you to take your seats and then we can start this last plenary before the elections.
My first announcement is about Swedish nationals in Iran. Last week, we marked two years since Swedish national and EU official Johan Floderus was illegally detained in Iran. This week Professor Ahmadreza Djalali, also a Swedish national, will have been jailed for eight years – making him the EU national held longest in Iran.
On these sad anniversaries, the European Parliament once again condemns their arrest by the Iranian regime, in the strongest possible terms. Last week, I joined Commissioner Johansson at a vigil we held with Johan Floderus' loved ones, as I reiterated this Parliament's support. We will continue to work tirelessly to secure the release of our friends Johan, Ahmadreza and all others held on trumped-up charges.
Also, dear colleagues, as this is the last plenary session before the European Parliament elections in June, I would like to take this opportunity to thank you all for your tireless work over the past five years. It has been challenging, but this Parliament has delivered.
Over the last years, we have navigated our way out of COVID restrictions. We have led the European debate that has made people's lives a little bit easier, a little bit safer and little bit more secure. We have passed ground-breaking legislation on artificial intelligence, on migration, on asylum, on climate, on creating jobs and safeguarding European industry and agriculture, on new tech, and on digital services and digital markets. We have passed huge files on equality – there are still some left this week – and reinforced the social pillar. We have doubled down on making this Union a superpower of rights everywhere.
We have faced the invasion of Ukraine, de-coupled from Russia and created new energy and health priorities. We have stood up for humanity in the Middle East and around the world. We have given new life into our mandate to promote parliamentary diplomacy and freedom.
We have listened, we have learned, and we have burst through the Brussels and Strasbourg bubbles to engage with, and reach out to, people across Member States. We have worked hard to ensure that this House is more efficient, more effective and fit for purpose. We have made it more open and more independent. We have negotiated and balanced budgets. We have ensured that this is a place of work that people feel proud of and feel safe at.
We have done all of this together. We have debated, we have acted and we have delivered for people. And for that I want to thank all of you, all your staff and all of Parliament's services. I am so proud to be here, I am so proud of the work we have done, and I hope you feel I have repaid your trust and faith in me.
I also want to pay tribute to the legacy of my predecessor, David Sassoli. He gave so much for this Parliament and for Europe, and I hope he would be proud of us, too.

(Applause)

Now, colleagues, our work does not end here. In just over six weeks' time, EU citizens in all Member States will be called upon to elect the 720 Members of the European Parliament that will make up the 10th legislative term.
Now is the moment to speak up for Europe: to call upon people – especially young people – to vote, to invite them to shape the future they want to see. Because every voice, every vote, every choice matters.
Dear colleagues, together I am confident we can do just that.

(Applause)

4.   Approval of the minutes of the previous sittings

President. – The minutes and the texts adopted of the sittings of 10 and 11 April are available. Are there any comments? No? Therefore, the minutes are approved.
5.   Composition of Parliament

President. – Following the appointment of Petri Sarvamaa as a member of the European Court of Auditors, the competent authorities of Finland have communicated to me the end of his mandate with effect from 1 June 2024. He will be replaced by Eija-Riitta Korhola as of the same date.
6.   Announcement by the President

President. – Pursuant to Rules 10 and 176 of the Rules of Procedure, and after taking into account the observations of the Member concerned, there will be two penalties imposed on Angelo Ciocca.
First, for having disrupted the sitting of 27 February 2024 by behaving improperly during the debate with the President of the European Central Bank. That penalty consists of a reprimand.
Second, for having disrupted the sitting of 12 March 2024 with conduct that led to the discontinuation of the voting session. This penalty will consist of the forfeiture of his entitlement to the daily subsistence allowance for a period of three days, as well as a temporary suspension from participation in plenary activities of Parliament for a period of six days on which Parliament meets, starting on 10 April 2024, without prejudice to his right to vote in plenary, and subject to strict compliance with the Members' standards of conduct.
The Member concerned has been notified of these decisions and no internal appeal with the Bureau under Rule 177 has been lodged. Therefore, they are final.
7.   Composition of political groups

President. – Theodoros Zagorakis is a member of the S&D Group as of 18 April 2024.
8.   Negotiations ahead of Parliament's first reading (Rule 71) (action taken)

President. – In relation to the decisions by the committees to enter into interinstitutional negotiations, pursuant to Rule 71(1), announced on Wednesday, 10 April, I have received a request for a vote in Parliament by the S&D Group on the decision of the ECON Committee to enter into negotiations on the following file: ‘Union retail investor protection rules’. The vote will be held tomorrow.
Concerning the other decisions by the ECON and the LIBE and FEMM committees to enter into negotiations, I received no request for a vote in Parliament by Members or a political group or groups reaching at least the medium threshold. Therefore, the committees can start the negotiations.
9.   Delegated acts (Rule 111(6)) (action taken)

President. – In relation to the recommendations for decisions tabled by the AGRI Committee to raise no objections to two delegated acts, which were announced on Wednesday, 10 April, objections to the recommendation on the rules on the ratio for the good agricultural and environmental condition standard 1 have been raised by the Greens and The Left groups, and some individual members.
Pursuant to Rule 111(6) of the Rules of Procedure, this recommendation will therefore be added to tomorrow's voting session.
As regards the recommendation on some provisions following the EU-New Zealand free trade agreement and the deletion of obsolete provisions as regards the export tariff quota for milk powder, no objections were raised within the 24-hour deadline. Pursuant to Rule 111(6), this recommendation was therefore deemed approved. It is published with the adopted texts.
10.   Delegated acts (Rule 111(6))

President. – I was informed that no objections have been raised within the Conference of Committee Chairs to the recommendation by the LIBE Committee not to oppose a delegated act pursuant to Rule 111(6) of the Rules of Procedure. The recommendation is available on the Plenary webpage.
If no objections are raised by a political group or Members reaching at least the low threshold within 24 hours, the recommendation shall be deemed to have been approved. Otherwise, it will be put to the vote.
11.   Corrigenda (Rule 241)

President. – The IMCO and LIBE committees, in joint committee procedure, and the ECON Committee, have transmitted one corrigendum each to texts adopted by Parliament. Pursuant to Rule 241(4), these corrigenda will be deemed approved unless, no later than 24 hours after their announcement, a request is made by a political group or Members reaching at least the low threshold that they be put to the vote.
The corrigenda are available on the Plenary webpage. Their titles will be published in the minutes of this sitting.
12.   Explanations of vote of the last sitting

President. – I would like to inform the House that no oral explanations of vote will be taken at the end of the sitting on Thursday. Any explanations of vote on items put to the vote on Thursday may be tabled in writing, in accordance with Rule 194.
13.   Signing of acts adopted in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure (Rule 79)

President. – I would like to inform you that, together with the President of the Council, on Wednesday I shall sign 11 acts adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure in accordance with Rule 79. The titles of the acts will be published in the minutes of this sitting.
14.   Approval of the minutes of forthcoming sittings

President. – As this is the last sitting of the current parliamentary term, I propose that the provisions of Rule 202 be waived, and that the minutes of Wednesday's and Thursday's sittings be approved on Thursday at the end of the voting session.
I would also like to inform the House that I have received multiple requests for points of order, so we start with Assita Kanko.

Assita Kanko (ECR). – Madam President, dear colleagues, I would like to wish a happy Passover to all Jews in Europe and around the world. The story of Passover and of its redemption and liberation is especially relevant today, as we cannot forget the hostages still held by Hamas and others. Passover also carries a message of hope and of time spent together as a family. Therefore, once again, a happy and peaceful Passover to all Jews and to everyone who keeps human faith in their heart.

Terry Reintke (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, colleagues, you have probably heard it in the news. We are quite concerned about reports coming from Italy on interference with press freedom. We have seen it in Hungary; we have seen it in other European countries, that very often when there is an authoritarian backlash, journalists are the first targets.
So let me be clear. We will stay vigilant and defend journalistic freedom in Europe. And because it cannot be said enough: anti-fascism must not be censored. Anti-fascism is the basis of our democracies, and the brave fight against fascism is the reason why this project of European Union exists today. So I say it proudly:

                  ‘Siamo tutti antifascisti’.

Hannes Heide (S&D). – Madam President, colleagues, 30 years ago in Rwanda, a genocide was taking place. Within 100 days, starting in April 1994, more than 800 000 Rwandans, members of the Tutsi minority, as well as others who tried to oppose it, were systematically murdered. In total, more than 1 million people lost their lives.
Thirty years later, we in the European Parliament do not forget these victims and wish to express our solidarity with their families and friends who still mourn the loss, as well as with the survivors, and to Rwandan society at large. In commemorating this terrible event, we also wish to reiterate our unwavering commitment to the prevention of genocide and any crime against humanity across the world.
To ensure full accountability, we must continue to ensure that the drivers of genocide such as xenophobia, discrimination and hate speech targeting national, ethnic, racial or religious groups are condemned and fought against. The international community must remain united in this goal. In Rwanda, people commemorate these events under the name Kwibuka, which means ‘to remember’. We do the same today. We remember: never again. We may never forget.

Abir Al-Sahlani (Renew). – Madam President, thank you. Allow me to give a big thank you to this House and to you personally on behalf of the Swedish people for always standing up for the hostages from Sweden, taken illegally by the Islamic Republic of Iran. And we have now taken also an initiative and I would like to kindly ask you to participate in signing a request and a demand to the Islamic Republic of Iran to immediately release both Johan Floderus but also all EU citizens who are held illegally and arbitrarily in Iran at the moment, and to demand from Iran to stop its hostage diplomacy. The letter will be outside the plenary room here, and I really kindly ask you to take just a few minutes of your time and sign your name. Side by side, together, we stand for our European citizens, no matter where they are, if they are in the hands of a terrorist regime.

Tineke Strik (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, tomorrow we vote on the visa exemption for holders of Serbian passports issued by the Serbian Coordination Directorate in Kosovo. It's presented as a technical proposal by the Commission, but Serbia proved last week that the opposite is true. Vučić prevented hundreds of Kosovars from entering the EU at the Serbia–Croatian borders as an act of retaliation for the country's Council of Europe membership. It proves again that Serbia does not intend to advance relations with Kosovo, nor does it care about international law. Our votes will be seen and sold as a win by Vučić. So, dear colleagues, let it not become the legacy of this legislator to appease a Kremlin-flirting regime. Let us reject the proposal tomorrow and support the integrity and European integration of Kosovo.

Matjaž Nemec (S&D). – Madam President, I'm the rapporteur of this dossier. I would like just to suggest not to postpone, because in the future, there will be no new elements to do so. We are talking about 80 000 people who were discriminated since the beginning of this year. We are talking about the Serbs from Kosovo and the decision – it's fully technical; it's not political. If we're going to postpone this decision, we are creating a political issue.

Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, this day four years ago my mother died. I think every day in sadness of the mothers and children of Gaza. Mothers without children. Children without mothers.
President, I want to reiterate my request for a minute of silence for the Palestinians and international victims killed by Israel in the Gaza Strip. It's the only case which we don't have any minutes of silence.
It's time, President and Members of the Chamber, to stand against the genocide in Gaza and stand up for a permanent ceasefire.

President. – Thank you very much. All orders can come through the groups, all requests, and we can proceed with them directly.
15.   Order of business

President. – We come to the order of business. The final draft agenda as adopted by the Conference of Presidents on 17 April pursuant to Rule 157 has been distributed.
I would like to inform you that I have received one request for urgent procedure from the ENVI Committee, pursuant to Rule 163, on ‘the gradual roll-out of Eudamed, information obligation in case of interruption of supply and the transitional provisions for certain in vitro diagnostic medical devices’. The vote on this request will be taken tomorrow. If adopted, the vote will be held on Thursday.
With the agreement of the political groups, I wish to put to the House the following proposals for changes to the final draft agenda:
The following objections are added to Wednesday's first voting session: ‘Objection pursuant to Rule 112(2) and (3): Calculation, verification and reporting of data on recycled plastic content in single-use plastic beverage bottles’ and ‘Objection pursuant to Rule 111(3): Novel foods – the definition of “engineered nanomaterials”
                  ’ .
Deadlines are as follows: amendments – tomorrow at noon; splits and separates – tomorrow at 19.00.
If there are no objections, these changes are approved.
We now move to requests for changes by political groups. For today, the ECR Group has requested that Council and Commission statements on ‘Recent attempts to ban political meetings – the importance of safeguarding the freedom of speech and peaceful assembly in Europe’ be added as the fourth item, before the report by Ms Björk and Ms Rodríguez Palop. As a consequence, the sitting would be extended to 23.00.
I give the floor to Nicola Procaccini to move the request on behalf of the ECR Group.

Nicola Procaccini,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, I am one of the MEPs invited to attend the National Conservatism Conference last week in Brussels. Along with me and my colleagues were heads of governments, ministers, journalists, Christian and Jewish religious representatives. As you may know, three mayors of the municipalities of Brussels had decided a few days before to ban its holding because of the risk of violence by the extreme left and because they said they didn't share the opinions we would express that day. One of these mayors even sent the police to suppress the conference by force.
Thanks to the intervention of Prime Minister De Croo and other European premiers, NatCon was able to go on, but I believe that what happened in Brussels should be discussed in this plenary. Therefore, the ECR request you add a debate on recent attempts to ban political meetings, the importance of safeguarding the freedom of speech and peaceful assembly in Europe.

President. – Does anybody wish to speak against? That does not seem to be the case. Therefore, I will put the request to a vote by roll call.

(Parliament rejected the request)

We move to Tuesday. The Left Group has requested that the title of the HR/VP statement on ‘The EU's response to the repeated killing of humanitarian aid workers, journalists and civilians by the Israel Defence Forces in the Gaza Strip’ be changed to ‘The EU's response to the ICJ provisional measures, the UN Security Council Resolution 2728 calling for a ceasefire, and the repeated killing of humanitarian aid workers, journalists and civilians by the Israel Defence Forces in the Gaza Strip’.
The Left and S&D groups have also requested that the debate be wound up with a resolution. So we will first talk about the title and then the request for a resolution.
To talk about the title, I give the floor to Mr Wallace, on behalf of The Left Group.

Mick Wallace,
on behalf of The Left Group. – Madam President, it's soul destroying that this House still hasn't wanted a resolution on Gaza on the ICJ ruling. Whatever happened to our respect for international law? We've had six months of Israeli genocide in Gaza, over six months, and we are still to condemn it. We want the resolution added to the Gaza debate, and that we also include reference to the International Court of Justice order and the UN Security Council resolution, which Israel is flouting. We are allowing international law to be shredded to bits. The international legal system is at stake. The Palestinians are being murdered in their tens of thousands. Silence is a choice, and it's not a good one.
Our proposed title is EU's response to the ICJ provisional measures, the UN Security Council Resolution 2728 calling for a ceasefire and the repeated killing of humanitarian aid workers, journalists and civilians by the Israeli Defence Forces in the Gaza Strip.

President. – I see that Ms Incir wants the floor, but do you want to speak against? OK, if you don't want to speak against, first we will need to vote on the request to change the title.
So we put the request to change the title, as proposed by Mr Wallace, to a vote by roll call.

(Parliament rejected the request)

Therefore, the title remains the same.
Now, Ms Incir, you wanted the floor. Go ahead.

Evin Incir,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, over 30 000 people have been killed in Gaza due to the bombs that are raining down on the people in Gaza. Over 70% of them are women and children – totally innocent.
It is unacceptable, this current situation, and we need to act. More than that, we need to start ensuring that we demand a stop to this ongoing violence that is taking place right now. So due to this, we from the S&D Group would actually want to add a resolution to the debate, but with the current title. So we don't want to change the title, but we want to add a resolution.

President. – So now we put the request for a resolution to a vote by roll call.

(Parliament rejected the request)

For tomorrow, the Greens/EFA Group has requested that a debate on ‘The simplification of certain CAP rules’, currently scheduled for vote only on Thursday, be added as the fifth item in the afternoon, after the statement on ‘The situation in Haiti’. As a consequence, the sitting would be extended to 23.00.
I give the floor to Mr Eickhout to move the request on behalf of the Greens/EFA Group.

Bas Eickhout,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, this proposal was, of course, being published on a late Friday by the Commission as a simplification of the CAP proposal.
This is being brought by some of you as one of the big ways of alleviating pressure on our farmers. We more see it as, on a last minute, even with some legal unclarity and legal questions by the Legal Service on an urgent procedure to really simplify a CAP procedure, which is, in its core, downgrading the Green Deal. That deserves a public debate and a Plenary debate.
So, quite astonished that that was not carried in the Conference of Presidents. But we can fix this as Plenary, and even those who are happy with the proposal, then I still think they would like to talk about it and to declare why they are happy, and then we can declare our dissatisfaction. Therefore we would like to have a Plenary debate tomorrow, and we would like to ask it with a roll-call vote.

President. – We put the request to a vote by roll call.

(Parliament rejected the request)

For Tuesday, The Left Group has requested that a HR/VP statement on ‘Diplomatic tensions between Ecuador and Mexico’ be added in the afternoon, after the HR/VP statement on ‘The situation in Haiti’. As a consequence, the sitting would be extended to 23.00.
I give the floor to Mr Scholz to move the request on behalf of The Left.

Helmut Scholz,
on behalf of the The Left Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, you all know that on 6 April, Mexico's diplomatic mission in Ecuador has been raided by police forces violating international law. This violation of international law has been firmly condemned by the United Nations Secretary-General, and has led to a crisis in the bilateral relationship between the two countries. Furthermore, it aggravates dramatically the situation already very aggravated in the region.
We believe that this House should not remain silent as the Vienna Convention is under attack, and encourage our partners to maintain relations based on international law. I therefore ask you to support our request for debate to be added on this week's agenda, and to extend the session on Tuesday to 23:00.

President. – So unless anybody wants to speak against, I will put your request to a vote by roll call.

(Parliament rejected the request)

For Tuesday, the Greens/EFA Group has requested that a Commission statement on ‘The responsibilities of fossil fuel companies in the cost of living crisis’ be added as the last item in the evening. Therefore, the sitting would be extended to 23.00. The debate would be wound up with a resolution.
I give the floor to Alviina Alametsä to move the request on behalf of the Greens/EFA Group.

Alviina Alametsä,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President and colleagues, in 2022, nearly 10% of our citizens lived in energy poverty, unable to properly warm their houses. At the same time, the biggest fossil fuel companies in Europe made great, extraordinary profits for themselves and were also lobbying and using considerable resources to lobby in favour of favourable policies to them, against climate, nature and the public interest.
This is why it is very important that we discuss this topic, and the Committee on Petitions tried to form a resolution but failed in that. I think the citizens deserve for us to have a genuine discussion to prevent energy poverty in the future. This is why I wish to add a Commission statement ‘The responsibilities of fossil fuel companies in the cost of living crisis’ with resolution on Tuesday evening, and this request should be taken by roll-call vote.

President. – I give the floor to any colleague who would like to speak against. Yes, please.

Christine Anderson (ID). – Frau Präsidentin! Das ist wirklich hochinteressant. Da beschweren sich nun also die Grünen, dass es Menschen gibt, die in Energiearmut leben. Ich will Ihnen mal was sagen: In Deutschland leben auch sehr viele Menschen und können beispielsweise ihre Stromrechnung nicht mehr bezahlen. Die wissen auch nicht, wie sie ihre Häuser wärmen sollen. Und wissen Sie, an wem das liegt? An Ihrer grünen Politik! Daran liegt es! Aber jetzt wieder die fossil-fuel companies dafür verantwortlich zu machen, das ist genau das, was ihr Grünen könnt: immer nur mit dem Finger auf andere zeigen. Ändern Sie endlich Ihre verdammte Green-Deal-Politik, verdammt noch mal!
               

President. – We put the request to a vote by roll call.

(Parliament rejected the request)

We move to Wednesday. The Left Group has requested that the title of the HR/VP statement on ‘Iran's unprecedented attack against Israel, the need for de-escalation and an EU response’ be changed to ‘Israel's attack on Iran's diplomatic premises, Iran's unprecedented retaliation against Israel, and the need for de-escalation and an EU response’.
I give the floor to Mr Wallace to move the request on behalf of The Left Group.

Mick Wallace,
on behalf of The Left Group. – Madam President, on 1 April, Israel made an unprovoked attack against the Iranian diplomatic premises in Damascus, violating the sovereignty of two countries, as well as violating the UN Charter and the Vienna Conventions. It killed 16 people, including civilians. Where was the condemnation from von der Leyen? Iran retaliates, claiming self-defence. The logic Ursula von der Leyen vehemently supported on 7 October and Iran are met with strong condemnation from the EU. The hypocrisy is shocking. Why are you turning a blind eye to the actions of Israel? Are you trying to provide cover for them? Let's not make total fools of ourselves. Our proposal to modify the debate is as follows: Israel's attack on Iran's diplomatic premises; Iran's unprecedented retaliation against Israel; and the need for de-escalation and an EU response – to be taken by roll-call vote.

President. – Does anybody want to speak against? No? So we put the request to change the title to a vote by roll call.

(Parliament rejected the request)

For Wednesday, The Left Group has requested that Council and Commission statements on ‘Lawfare and criminalisation of opponents and activists in support of Palestine, including recent bans of political meetings, the importance of safeguarding the freedom of speech and peaceful assembly in Europe’ be added in the evening, before the reports under Rule 144. As a consequence, the sitting would be extended to 23.00.
I give the floor to Ms Chaibi to move the request on behalf of The Left Group.

Leila Chaibi,
au nom du groupe The Left. – Madame la Présidente, le gouvernement israélien massacre les Gazaouis en toute impunité et c'est la critique de ce même gouvernement israélien qui est criminalisée. Ce rétrécissement de l'espace démocratique en Europe est très dangereux. Dénoncer les agissements de Tsahal ou alerter sur le risque de génocide fait l'objet d'une véritable censure.
               

                  En France, cela peut même conduire à une convocation au commissariat pour apologie du terrorisme. Il y a quelques jours, une conférence de Jean-Luc Mélenchon et de la juriste franco-palestinienne Rima Hassan a été interdite. Des rassemblements de soutien au peuple palestinien ont également été interdits. Nous devons défendre de toutes nos forces la démocratie, qui est aujourd'hui mise en danger par ces atteintes à la liberté d'expression.
               

                  C'est pourquoi j'aimerais faire une proposition d'ajout à l'ordre du jour pour mercredi.
               

President. – Does anybody want to speak against this proposal? I don't see that to be the case so we put the request to a vote by roll call.

(Parliament rejected the request)

For Wednesday, the S&D Group has requested that Council and Commission statements on ‘Recent attempts to deny dictatorships and the risk of Europe returning to totalitarianism’ be added in the evening, after the Council and Commission statements on ‘Forging a sustainable future together’. As a consequence, the sitting would be extended to 23.00.
I give the floor to Mr Luena to move the request on behalf of the S&D Group.

César Luena,
en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, les voy a leer un pasaje de un libro de Timothy Garton Ash: Europa. Una historia personal. Dice: ‘la práctica del olvido deliberado había sido la norma en Europa durante siglos. […] Pues bien, en los años sesenta y setenta se estableció una norma nueva: ¡no olvidar jamás! Había que documentar y analizar el pasado problemático, abordarlo desde un punto de vista psicológico, moral y político en un proceso de reconocimiento público y privado.’.
               

                  ¿Por qué traemos los socialdemócratas aquí este debate? Porque tenemos que defender el motor del recuerdo frente al abismo del olvido, que es adonde nos llevan las derechas.
               

                  Ejemplos: una concentración fascista en Italia. ¿Qué dijo la señora Meloni? Niente [nada]. Y, en España, los neofranquista de VOX y la derecha del Partido Popular —que siempre es muy tímida cuando se trata de condenar el franquismo— están eliminando las leyes de memoria democrática en las comunidades autónomas. Y eso es una vergüenza.
               

                  Por eso, en este Parlamento tenemos que tener este debate para defender el recuerdo como un motor verdadero de construcción europea. Nunca, jamás, el olvido.
               

President. – Does anybody want to speak against? No? Therefore, we put the request to a vote by roll call.

(Parliament approved the request)

Therefore, the agenda is changed accordingly.
The Renew Group has requested that Council and Commission statements on ‘The anti-LGBTIQ bill passed by the Ghanaian Parliament, with implications for human rights, freedom of expression and democratic principles’ be added in the evening, after the Rule 144 reports.
I give the floor to Mr Kauch to move the request on behalf of the Renew Group.

Michael Kauch,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the Ghanaian Parliament has passed a law which is really draconian not only on homosexual behaviour, but also about freedom of speech, about political debates on LGBT rights. All this faces up to ten years of imprisonment. It still requires the signature of the Ghanaian President, so there's still hope that it is not finally passing.
It is not only a question of LGBT rights: it is a matter of Ghanaian democracy; it is a matter of freedom of speech and human rights in the world. The Member States are still very quiet, so we would like to hear from the Commission and from the Council about their response to this Ghanaian law, so we ask you for your support for a debate.

President. – I give the floor to anyone who wants to speak against. That does not seem to be the case so the request is put to a vote by roll call.

(Parliament approved the request)

Now for Thursday, the EPP Group has requested that the vote on ‘The simplification of certain CAP rules’, currently scheduled for Thursday, be moved to Wednesday, to the second voting session.
I give the floor to Mr Lins to move this request.

Norbert Lins,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, last plenary session, Parliament endorsed an urgent procedure to be applied for the simplification of certain CAP rules. The vote is for now scheduled on Thursday this week and Parliament waits for the EEC to adopt its opinion on Wednesday. Following the consultation of the EEC agenda, it should be easily feasible that Parliament receives the EEC opinion on the simplification of certain CAP rules in time before the second voting slot on Wednesday afternoon. For this reason, the EPP Group would like to advance the vote from Thursday to Wednesday afternoon, second voting slot.

President. – Yes, we are informed that, in fact, the opinion should be received on time. So let's put the request for a change of title to a vote by roll call.

(Parliament approved the request)

Therefore, the agenda is adopted and the order of business is thus established.
Have a good last plenary week, everyone.

(The sitting was suspended for a few moments)


Puhetta johti HEIDI HAUTALA


varapuhemies

16.   Resumption of the sitting

(The sitting resumed at 17.44)

17.   Preventing plastic pellet losses to reduce microplastic pollution (debate)

Puhemies. – Esityslistalla on seuraavana João Albuquerquen ympäristön, kansanterveyden ja elintarvikkeiden turvallisuuden valiokunnan puolesta laatima mietintö ehdotuksesta Euroopan parlamentin ja neuvoston asetukseksi muovipellettihävikin estämisestä mikromuovisaasteen vähentämiseksi (COM(2023)0645 – C9-0378/2023 – 2023/0373(COD)) (A9-0148/2024)
               

João Albuquerque,
relator. – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, no final do ano passado, em plena época natalícia, as notícias que nos chegavam da Galiza fizeram muitos de nós recordar a tragédia do petroleiro Prestige. Infelizmente, este desastre ambiental, em que 26 toneladas de péletes de plástico invadiram as belíssimas praias do norte de Espanha, está muito longe de ser um fenómeno isolado.
               

                  Os péletes são a terceira principal causa de poluição não intencional por microplásticos. E sabemos hoje que os microplásticos já entraram na nossa cadeia alimentar e, por essa via, estão já hoje presentes nos nossos próprios organismos.
               

                  Anualmente, são produzidos 57 milhões de toneladas de péletes de plástico apenas na União Europeia e as estimativas apontam – atentem bem –, para o equivalente a 7 300 camiões cheios de péletes a serem perdidos todos os anos apenas no nosso espaço europeu.
               

                  Para nos ajudar a perceber a importância deste regulamento, peço-vos que se recordem do esforço hercúleo de centenas de voluntários a tentarem limpar a areia das suas praias e que tenham em conta, também, uma informação que me marcou profundamente.
               

                  Em conversa com uma das presidentes de câmara da Galiza, dizia-me ela que, para conseguirmos limpar cerca de 25 kg de péletes, é necessária a remoção de uma tonelada de areia. E isto é o que se consegue remover. Fica a faltar tudo o resto que se perde no mar, ou que é consumido pelos animais e que tem efeitos devastadores nos ecossistemas.
               

                  Por tudo isto, por todas estas razões, é mais do que evidente que, após uma perda não intencional destes péletes, a sua remoção do ambiente é um processo não só inglório e custoso, mas também demorado e altamente disruptivo. Foi por isso que recebemos com entusiasmo a proposta da Comissão Europeia de elaborar um regulamento que enfrente este problema ambiental e de saúde pública.
               

                  O que podemos, então, fazer? Para nós, a resposta foi clara: só através de medidas fortemente focadas na prevenção é possível reduzir estas perdas para o meio ambiente de forma bastante considerável e reduzir o impacto negativo no ambiente, na saúde humana e também na economia.
               

                  Relativamente à proposta da Comissão Europeia, saudamos a escolha da base e do instrumento legal, a sua visão de integrar toda a cadeia de abastecimento na regulamentação e as tentativas de reforçar a aplicação das medidas previstas neste regulamento. Mas a urgência e a importância desta legislação obrigavam-nos a sermos um pouco mais ambiciosos. E foi este, também, o sinal que recebi de vários Estados-Membros.
               

                  Neste sentido, enquanto relator do Parlamento Europeu, procurei fortalecer a proposta que nos chegou da Comissão e torná-la num regulamento exequível e implementável, em vez de apenas numa série de recomendações.
               

                  A proposta final que votaremos amanhã contou com um amplo apoio da Comissão do Ambiente e eu gostaria de destacar os principais pontos que procurámos introduzir no texto legislativo: introduzir a obrigação de rotular os recipientes em contentores de armazenamento e transporte que contenham péletes de plástico; expandir a aplicação do regulamento a todos os meios de transporte, incluindo o marítimo; incluir medidas adicionais, aplicáveis ao transporte marítimo, para garantir maior segurança dos contentores e evitar a sua perda acidental; introduzir uma certificação única para pequenas empresas que manuseiem mais de 1 000 toneladas de péletes de plástico por ano; reduzir o período de autodeclaração de conformidade, para médias e grandes empresas, de cinco para três anos; tornar obrigatório o anexo I, que cobre as medidas de avaliação interna, permitindo, no entanto, flexibilidade às empresas na sua implementação, de acordo com as especificidades das suas instalações; introduzir a possibilidade de os Estados-Membros utilizarem as receitas geradas pelas sanções para apoiar projetos destinados a limpar zonas poluídas por plásticos e a evitar a poluição por péletes de plástico; exortar a Comissão Europeia a monitorizar os desenvolvimentos no âmbito da Organização Marítima Internacional; instar a Comissão a avaliar a possibilidade de introduzir a rastreabilidade química das péletes de plástico e, por fim, ter em atenção as especificidades de micro e pequenas empresas, com a introdução de regimes especiais de acordo com a quantidade de péletes que manuseiam.
               

                  Em suma, e como tentei demonstrar, esta é uma proposta consistente, que equilibra o fortalecimento das medidas de fácil implementação e baixo custo na área da prevenção, ao mesmo tempo que procura não sobrecarregar as empresas da indústria europeia de péletes.
               

                  Mais importante do que tudo, é que este regulamento aposta fortemente nas únicas três formas eficazes de combater a perda de péletes de plástico: prevenção, prevenção e prevenção. Estou certo de que amanhã contarei com todos vós para votarmos favoravelmente esta proposta e definirmos a posição ambiciosa do Parlamento.
               

Maria Spyraki,
rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy. – Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, when it comes to microplastic leakage, prevention is the only solution. Tackling the unintentional release of plastic pellets addresses a serious problem, not only for our environment, but also for our health. This proposal for a regulation aims to ensure that all operators handling pellets in the EU take the necessary precautionary measures.
As the rapporteur on behalf of the ITRE Committee, it is important to highlight that we agree on, first, the non-binding recommendation adopted by the parties to the Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic, which will be taken into account. Second, the period of six months after entering into force to develop awareness-raising and training on the implementation of the regulation. It is also important to highlight that funds will be available to develop training material. Assistance for SMEs (small and medium enterprises) could take the form of specialised management and staff training, organisational and technical assistance. This provision can also be in the form of financial support and access to finance, including the acquisition of equipment required to achieve compliance.
Tomorrow we will vote in favour of a key step towards our commitment to reduce microplastics pollution by 30 % by 2030. It is important to have consistency in our policies. As we examined in the single-use plastic case, we need to reduce the lack of alternatives and performance, as well as the low awareness of our citizens, in order to bring sufficient and highly functional alternatives.

Ylva Johansson,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, thank you for scheduling the Parliament's first reading on this important proposal, which is a crucial element of EU action against microplastic pollution. Pellet losses are the third largest source of unintentional microplastic releases. This proposal will help us reduce them and achieve the 30% reduction target we set for microplastics in the Zero Pollution Action Plan.
Microplastic pollution caused by pellets is a significant problem. In 2019, between 52 000 and 184 000 tonnes of pellets were lost to the environment in the European Union. Plastic pellet losses at all stages of the supply chain cause negative impacts on the environment and, potentially, on human health. They are a persistent source of pollution of our rivers, seas and the ocean. Once in the environment, plastic pellets are difficult and costly to clean up. Accidental losses, like those off the coast of Spain and Portugal earlier this year, are occasional, but can create sudden and significant negative impacts on affected communities, livelihoods and ecosystems.
Reducing microplastic pollution directly benefits the fishing and aquaculture sectors, as well as other sectors, like tourism. It is an excellent example where protecting the environment goes hand in hand with supporting local economic activities. Therefore, with our proposal, we aim to prevent and reduce pellet losses by up to 74%. This will take us closer to our ‘Zero Pollution’ ambition, with a minimal burden on SMEs.
The Commission welcomes warmly the support of the European Parliament for the proposal and many of the proposed improvements of its core elements. These improvements concern in particular the definitions, the key handling requirements for all actors and stages of the pellet supply chain, and the compliance check system. They also concern the annual 1 000 tonne threshold for third-party certification, and the lighter requirements for microenterprises, as well as the assistance to stakeholders to comply with the requirements and the standardised methodology to estimate pellet losses.
However, the text being discussed today also contains a number of changes on which the Commission needs, at this stage, to reserve its position. These include new obligations for economic operators such as labelling all storage and transport containers, shorter deadlines for notifying renewals of risk assessment plans and self-declarations, and making all the measures listed in Annex I mandatory.
We are concerned about the new obligations for small enterprises, notably about mandating third-party certification, annual internal assessment and awareness and training programme, and also about new obligations for non-EU carriers. We need to look carefully at the new obligations for the competent national authorities and for the Commission.
Overall, our priority is to strike the right balance between ambition and feasibility. For that, we must continue to aim for a simple and coherent framework for the responsible handling of pellets. We need, for sure, a radical change, away from the laxness of the current approach and the poor handling at all stages. At the same time, we should avoid an excessive burden on our economic operators.
Regarding the broadening of the regulation's scope to include maritime transports of pellets, as maritime transport is international in nature. The Commission is determined to continue to work on global rules in the International Maritime Organisation to ensure harmonisation of international, national and regional rules. In particular, it is important that mandatory rules are agreed on three aspects: transport information, quality packaging and safe storage.
At the same time, the Commission is open to consider inclusion of maritime transport of pellets in the regulation, provided that coherence with the developments at the International Maritime Organisation is ensured, and that the competitiveness of the European industry is not jeopardised. I look forward to listening to your views and your suggestions.

Deirdre Clune,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President and Commissioner, tomorrow, this Parliament will vote on the world's first ever piece of legislation aiming to prevent spillages of plastic pellets at all stages along the supply chain.
Losses of these plastic pellets, which are the base material for manufacturing plastic products, are the third largest source of unintentional microplastic releases in the EU. According to the European Chemicals Agency, almost 180 000 metric tons of plastic pellets are accidentally or unintentionally released into the environment each year. Microplastic pollution is not only a serious problem for the environment, but also for public health. Once microplastics enter our environment, it is almost impossible to get rid of them.
That's why I'm supporting this measure – and I'd urge that we all would tomorrow – because it will prevent microplastic spillages in road, rail and maritime transport. It is a practical, realistic proposal that will work, and the new law is particularly timely given the millions of plastic pellets that were washed up on the coast of Spain and Portugal, the north-western Galicia region, in January of this year. The incident has caused major disruption, threatening to endanger wildlife and posing a serious risk to the livelihoods of fishery communities and tourism communities in that area.
So the proposal, which will address the release of plastic pellets into our environment, will apply to European and non-European operators. It will set requirements for best handling practices. Mandatory certification and self-declaration will be measures which will be put in place. Importantly, however, lighter requirements will apply to micro and small operators.
This regulation is expected, as it is been said, to reduce the release by up to 74% of microplastics. It would result in healthier ecosystems, contributing to plastic-free rivers and oceans and, of course, reducing risks to human health. I am a strong believer that prevention is the best solution, and here we have a very practical proposal, and I want to thank the rapporteur and the other shadows for all the work that he did and that we did on this file.

Mohammed Chahim,
namens de S&D-Fractie. – Voorzitter, ik zie, ik zie wat jij niet ziet. En het zijn … microplastics. Onzichtbaar, maar ze zitten in je dagcrème, in ons water en ons eten. Hoe kleiner het deeltje, hoe groter het risico.
               

                  Nu praten we over microplastics, maar we kunnen het net zo goed hebben over pfas of pesticiden. Een giftige cocktail van chemicaliën die op allerlei manieren op ons bord en in de natuur terechtkomen. Afzonderlijk vormen zij al een gevaar, maar ook het stapeleffect is zeer zorgwekkend. Helaas wegen voor sommige partijen in dit Parlement de economische belangen zwaarder dan gezondheidsrisico's. De lobby van de chemische industrie is in tegenstelling tot die van microplastics wel zichtbaar. Daar heb je geen vergrootglas voor nodig.
               

                  Voor mij is het glashelder: belangen van de markt mogen nooit boven mens en milieu komen te staan. Met dit voorstel van mijn collega Albuquerque denk ik dat we in de goede richting gaan om zo min mogelijk microplastics en plastic pellets in de natuur te laten terechtkomen.
               

Catherine Chabaud,
au nom du groupe Renew. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, mes chers collègues, je me félicite que l'on puisse clôturer la première lecture du Parlement avant la fin du mandat et que ce dossier essentiel ait résisté aux vents contraires anti-Pacte vert qui soufflent depuis quelques mois sur notre maison. Merci au rapporteur et aux rapporteurs fictifs pour leur bonne collaboration.
               

                  Il faut bien comprendre une chose: les industriels eux-mêmes tentent depuis des décennies de mettre en place de bonnes pratiques face aux pollutions liées aux pertes de granulés plastiques qu'ils ont eux-mêmes constatées. Toutefois, leurs efforts ne suffisent pas et c'est là que l'on comprend la nécessité de mettre en place des normes – que bon nombre contestent aujourd'hui – et de le faire a minima à l'échelon européen, en espérant, comme je le promeus, qu'un cadre réglementaire voie le jour à l'échelle internationale, soit via le traité contre la pollution plastique, soit via les recommandations de l'Organisation maritime internationale. Je me félicite aussi de l'introduction du transport maritime dans ce texte et de la possibilité pour les États membres d'utiliser les pénalités envisagées pour soutenir des projets de dépollution là où c'est encore possible.
               

                  Enfin, si vous me le permettez, Madame la Présidente, je profite de cette dernière intervention au Parlement européen pour lancer un appel afin que la prochaine mandature mette en œuvre un véritable pacte bleu, un pacte européen pour l'océan, qui reflète la dimension maritime de l'Union européenne et que nous travaillions à régénérer l'océan, notre bien commun.
               

Ska Keller,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, plastic particles have been found in the Antarctic. They have been found in the deep sea. They are harming flora and fauna, they are harming humans. And those particles, they come from tyres, from panes, from landscape fabric, from textiles, etc. from many other things. And they come from plastic pellets, flakes and powders that are supposed to be the base material for all things plastic but end up in the environment because of careless handling or because of accidents. Last December, on the coast of Galicia – an example which has been mentioned by many colleagues – more than 1 billion plastic particles were lost into the sea, but even that huge amount is not even 1 % of the yearly losses of plastic pellets.
So urgent action is needed. What we are setting out to do with this legislation is exactly that urgent action. For preventing pallet losses, we don't need some new invention, we don't need some crazy new technologies. We need better handling. We need better measures for transport, precautionary measures, a cleaning system in place. And we also need to know who's responsible for when things go wrong and what they have to do then, because it's not about harassing small enterprises, it's about making sure that some people who are making profit with the product are not harming the environment that we all depend on.
This legislation is certainly not the end game in a battle against plastic pollution. But it's a good start and one start that we have managed to improve also in the committee. I would like to thank the commission for the proposal and also the rapporteur and our shadow rapporteur. Next it's up for the Council to be ambitious, and I hope that ministers will bring back some resolve from Canada, where they are currently discussing global plastic pollution. And if you want to lead in the world, we should start at home.

Aurélia Beigneux,
au nom du groupe ID. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, pour cette ultime séance plénière, vous avez enfin décidé d'aborder la pollution par les microplastiques, une question cruciale qui affecte notre environnement, notre santé et notre avenir. Cette menace invisible représente un défi auquel nous devons faire face pour nos générations, mais surtout pour les générations futures, dont nos enfants, qui en seront les premières victimes.
               

                  Mais quand je regarde en arrière, qu'a fait cette Commission durant ce mandat pour réduire son impact? Rien, absolument rien. Qu'a-t-elle fait pour remettre en cause sa politique ultralibérale? Rien, absolument rien. Cette politique, votre politique, a déversé dans nos océans des millions de tonnes de microplastiques. Ces déchets sont le résultat final d'une volonté de toujours plus de surconsommation, toujours plus d'importations inutiles, toujours plus de traités de libre-échange dévastateurs.
               

                  Il est temps de mettre fin à cette approche totalement irresponsable et de placer la protection de notre environnement au cœur de nos priorités. Depuis des années, mon parti en France, le Rassemblement National, défend une politique plus ancrée dans l'environnement. Cette approche, c'est le localisme. Cette vision de l'écologie du réel manque cruellement à cette Commission. Elle refuse ces tonnes de marchandises produites à l'autre bout du monde par des enfants souvent réduits en esclavage. Du bon sens, mais que les technocrates ici présents n'arrivent pas à admettre.
               

                  Le choix est donc clair: allons-nous continuer sur la voie du libéralisme aveugle, ou allons-nous enfin embrasser une approche localiste, responsable, et qui met l'accent sur la préservation de notre planète? Ce choix, nous l'aurons tous le 9 juin prochain en choisissant la seule liste qui se préoccupe réellement de l'écologie enracinée et qui dira stop à la folie de Bruxelles et à ses traités de libre-échange.
               

Marina Mesure,
au nom du groupe The Left. – Madame la Présidente, le combat du siècle a commencé. La lutte contre la pollution plastique est probablement l'une des plus importantes de notre époque. Alors que les déchets plastiques prolifèrent dans le monde sous différentes formes, visibles ou invisibles, nous commençons seulement à réaliser leur dangerosité sur l'environnement et notre santé. Le plastique se fragmente continuellement et les particules deviennent si fines qu'elles sont transportées dans l'air, dans l'eau et dans le sol. Ces microplastiques nous entourent, s'imposent à nous et sont devenus une véritable bombe à retardement pour notre santé et notre écosystème, en contaminant les habitats terrestres et aquatiques.
               

                  Dans ce contexte, l'Union européenne a une responsabilité historique: celle de porter une législation ambitieuse permettant de limiter drastiquement la prolifération des déchets plastiques, de contrôler les pertes de granulés plastiques dans la chaîne d'approvisionnement – ce qui représente 23 milliards de petites billes plastiques qui finissent chaque jour dans l'environnement de l'Union européenne – et de sanctionner évidemment fermement les entreprises qui contreviennent à ces règles.
               

                  Je salue cette législation, mais il faudra aller beaucoup plus loin, en transformant durablement nos modes de production et de consommation, afin d'éliminer le plus possible le plastique de notre quotidien. Il s'agit là d'un enjeu vital pour toutes et tous.
               

Maria Angela Danzì (NI). – Signora Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, dobbiamo impedire la dispersione della plastica. Le microplastiche si disperdono ovunque: nell'aria, nell'acqua, nel suolo, nei terreni agricoli e noi le ingeriamo mangiando gli alimenti contaminati.
               

                  Occuparsi di questo problema significa occuparsi della salute nel suo complesso. Un recente studio italiano dimostra che molte malattie, come il rischio di ictus e infarto, sono causate dalle microplastiche. Dobbiamo agire alla fonte e lo stiamo facendo. Più prevenzione significa meno malati, significa meno pressione sui nostri sistemi sanitari devastati. Ogni misura come questa contribuisce all'abbattimento, come vi contribuiva anche il provvedimento sugli imballaggi e il riuso.
               

                  Oggi si celebra la Giornata mondiale della Terra. Il tema dell'edizione è proprio questo. In 190 paesi del mondo i cittadini sono in strada proprio per dare questo grido disperato. Diamo loro la parola. Questo è un buon provvedimento.
               

Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). – Señora presidenta, en primer lugar me gustaría dar las gracias al ponente por su informe. Celebro que por primera vez vaya a haber una regulación específica sobre la prevención de las pérdidas de granza de plástico de pélets en la Unión Europea.
               

                  El reciente vertido de pélets del Toconao en aguas del Atlántico puso de relieve la conveniencia de que el transporte marítimo de los pélets sea incluido en el ámbito de aplicación de este Reglamento. Yo mismo presenté enmiendas en este sentido hace unos meses junto con mi compañera de delegación Dolors Montserrat.
               

                  Celebro que la posición del Parlamento vaya en esta dirección. La propuesta original de la Comisión Europea era demasiado limitada —como es bien sabido— en esta materia de transporte marítimo. Por supuesto —nos lo recordaba la comisaria— es necesario que la Unión Europea y los Estados miembros sigan abordando este importante asunto también en el marco de la Organización Marítima Internacional (OMI), donde parece que se están dando pasos en la buena dirección, pero todavía insuficientes.
               

                  En este sentido, celebro que el pasado mes de marzo el Comité de Protección del Medio Marino de la OMI aprobara las recomendaciones para el transporte marítimo de pélets de plástico en contenedores. Entiendo que estas recomendaciones no tienen todavía carácter vinculante. Y, señora comisaria, me gustaría que nos informara sobre los pasos que se van a dar en el marco de la propia OMI para que estas recomendaciones pronto puedan convertirse en derecho vinculante.
               

                  Volviendo al ámbito de la Unión Europea, espero que el Consejo adopte también una posición ambiciosa en lo que se refiere al transporte marítimo. Confío en que de esta forma los diálogos tripartitos sean fructíferos y podamos conseguir avances para prevenir la contaminación por microplásticos en el transporte marítimo.
               

                  Una última consideración: quería subrayar el esfuerzo que tuvo que hacer el Gobierno de la Junta de Galicia en la gestión del vertido de pélets del Toconao, que implementó un gran despliegue de medidas —además en mar y aire— más allá de sus competencias. Lamento el uso electoralista que hacen algunos del accidente sucedido en aguas del Atlántico, sin importarle los perjuicios que podía causar al sector pesquero, tan importante en mi tierra.
               

                  Espero que ahora el Gobierno de España se ponga en marcha y ejerza sus competencias, en particular procediendo a reclamar al armador del buque la correspondiente responsabilidad por los daños producidos y los gastos en que se incurrió.
               

Tiemo Wölken (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist ein echt gutes Zeichen, dass wir als Europäisches Parlament den Vorschlag der Europäischen Kommission zur Vermeidung von Mikroplastik in der Umwelt noch einmal verschärfen konnten. Ich möchte insbesondere unserem Berichterstatter João für die harte Arbeit an diesem Bericht danken.
               

                  Ich glaube, es ist sehr deutlich geworden, dass wir im Europäischen Parlament uns wirklich darum sorgen, dass Mikroplastik in der Umwelt nichts verloren hat, denn Mikroplastik ist tatsächlich nicht nur für die Umwelt, sondern auch für uns Menschen schädlich.
               

                  Deswegen ist es richtig, dass wir heute, am Tag der Erde, hier über dieses wichtige Vorhaben gemeinsam diskutieren und darüber abstimmen werden und dass wir hier im Europäischen Parlament jetzt ein klares Zeichen setzen, dass wir wollen, dass es, wenn mit Mikroplastik umgegangen wird, verbindliche Regeln für diejenigen gibt, die diesen Stoff transportieren – und das haben wir mit diesem Vorschlag sehr deutlich gemacht. Und es wird vor allen Dingen auch klar, dass wir wollen, dass Verantwortung dafür übernommen wird, wenn dieser Stoff transportiert wird.
               

                  Insofern hoffe ich, dass wir morgen mit der Abstimmung sehr deutlich machen, dass wir eine klare Mehrheit für diesen so wichtigen Bericht haben werden. Vielen Dank, João, für die harte Arbeit daran.
               

Nils Torvalds (Renew). – Fru talman! Fru kommissionär! Vi har under årens lopp fattat ett antal beslut kring plast. Det började kanske på ett lite politiskt sätt med förslaget om engångsplast, där det kanske handlade mer om att samla poäng än om att lösa problem.
               

                  Av den orsaken hälsar vi med stor tacksamhet kommissionens förslag välkommen. Men vi vet att vi har större utmaningar i framtiden. Vi vet att plastpellets för med sig inte bara mikroplast utan också nanoplast. Och får vi inte ordning på det här kommer vi snart att ha – inte bara i kommissionens hjärna utan också i parlamentarikernas hjärna – mer nanoplast än vad som är hälsosamt för beslut och hälsa.
               

                  Jag vill också använda det här tillfället, eftersom det är mitt sista tal efter tolv år i Europaparlamentet, att tacka mina kollegor – främst mina kollegor som är samordnare i miljöutskottet – för ett gott samarbete, där vi har fått göra en hel del arbete för att få kommissionens förslag på något sätt i hamn. Det är ett arbete som kommer att fortsätta också efter det att jag lämnar över ansvaret åt andra.
               

Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE). – Senhora Presidente, como eurodeputada galega, este debate é importantíssimo para o meu país, a Galiza. O desastre ambiental da perda dos péletes de plástico na costa da Galiza foi uma evidência da falta de resposta do governo galego. Senhor Millán Mon, foi uma autêntica irresponsabilidade do governo do Partido Popular.
               

                  Saúdo as palavras do relator. Sempre presente e sempre a ajudar para que não se repitam estes desastres, com prevenção, com armazenamento seguro. Muito obrigada!
               

                  Queremos evitar que se repitam eventos como o acidente do navio porta-contentores. Falei recentemente com a presidente da câmara de Muros. E ouça o Senhor, ouça o Partido Popular, ela diz que continuam a chegar os péletes, que continua a chegar a maré branca, e que estão com muitas dificuldades.
               

                  Assim, não venham aqui mentir, porque este é, sem dúvida, Senhora Comissária, um problema europeu e, por isso, queremos que se inclua o transporte marítimo, que se inclua o transporte obrigatório e a responsabilidade, para que povos como o meu, na Galiza, não continuem a ser os que recebem marés de petróleo e marés de microplásticos.
               

Anja Haga (PPE). – Voorzitter, kunststofpellets, ook wel nurdles genoemd, zijn plastic korreltjes die gebruikt worden als basis voor plastic producten. Het probleem van dit product is dat het door containerschepen wordt vervoerd, er gaat een container overboord en je raadt al wat er met die korrels gebeurt: die belanden op de stranden. Vijf jaar geleden gebeurde dat bij mij in de buurt, in Noord-Friesland, op de Waddeneilanden. Ze waren bezaaid met al die plastic korrels. Verschrikkelijk, want die kan je niet meer opruimen. Ze blijven in het milieu liggen en ze vergaan tot microplastics. Daarom ben ik heel erg blij dat er nu een voorstel klaarligt om dit aan te pakken.
               

                  Persoonlijk vind ik het voorstel niet ver genoeg gaan. We zouden gewoon helemaal af moeten van wegwerpplastic en waar we dan toch nog plastic producten nodig hebben, moeten ze gemaakt worden van biogebaseerde materialen. Ook die pellets moeten dus gemaakt worden van biogebaseerde materialen. Als die in het milieu terechtkomen, vergaan ze en zo voorkomen we dat er microplastics ontstaan, dat dieren ze opeten en erin stikken of verhongeren omdat hun maag vol zit met die korreltjes.
               

                  Kortom, we moeten af van alle goedkope wegwerpplastics. Het verbod op pellets is een goed begin, maar ze worden nu alleen maar in grote hoeveelheden verboden. Dat is een mooie start, maar niet voldoende. Wat mij betreft, komt er een totaalverbod op wegwerpplastics en op kunststofpellets.
               

Marek Paweł Balt (S&D). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Obecnie mamy poważny problem dla naszego ekosystemu, dla zdrowia ludzkiego i gospodarki, ponieważ w oceanach i morzach znajdują się ponad dwa miliony ton drobin mikroplastiku. Przy jednoczesnej rocznej produkcji ponad 430 milionów ton tworzyw sztucznych, z których dwie trzecie stanowią produkty szybko wyrzucane, tych zanieczyszczeń będzie przybywać. Mikroplastik trafia do oceanu, a potem do naszej żywności poprzez nieodpowiednie obchodzenie się z granulatem i jego transportem.
               

                  Dzięki naszemu rozporządzeniu chcemy zmniejszyć straty granulatu o trzy czwarte. Wymagamy od wykonawców i przewoźników, aby zapobiegali wyciekom granulatu, zabezpieczali rozsypany granulat oraz sprzątali po rozsypaniu lub stracie granulatu. Te i inne szczegółowe wymogi będą wymagane od przewoźników unijnych oraz od przewoźników spoza Unii Europejskiej.
               

                  Redukując uwalnianie granulatu z tworzyw sztucznych do środowiska, to rozporządzenie doprowadzi do stworzenia czystych i zdrowszych ekosystemów, co jest kluczowe dla dobrobytu obywateli i zachowania naszej planety dla przyszłych pokoleń.
               

Caroline Roose (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, saviez-vous qu'à une heure du Parlement européen à Bruxelles, un drame environnemental est en cours? Dans la petite ville d'Écaussinnes, en Belgique, un complexe pétrochimique appartenant à TotalEnergies produit 1,2 million de tonnes de granulés de plastique par an. Une partie de ces granulés se perdent. Ils finissent dans les sols, les cours d'eau, les rivières, puis les océans, tuant oiseaux marins et poissons à petit feu. Total et ses amis de la pétrochimie refusent d'assumer leurs responsabilités et se renvoient la balle. Écaussines, malheureusement, n'est pas un cas isolé. Le problème se pose partout dans le monde, comme on l'a vu sur les plages en Galice, et cause une pollution gigantesque.
               

                  Cette semaine, le Parlement européen va voter un règlement pour enfin s'attaquer à ce problème. C'est une vraie avancée et nous voterons en faveur de ce texte, qui renforce la proposition de la Commission. Seuls les eurodéputés d'extrême droite, dont ceux du Rassemblement national, s'y opposent. Comme d'habitude, ils préfèrent favoriser les lobbies de la pétrochimie plutôt que l'avenir de nos océans, de nos rivières et de notre santé.
               

Sara Cerdas (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, Colegas, a invenção do plástico revolucionou as nossas vidas, mas também trouxe consigo uma maldição ambiental e uma ameaça à saúde humana.
               

                  Os microplásticos estão hoje presentes em todos os ecossistemas. Estão no mar, estão no ar, estão nos animais, estão nos vegetais. Encontramo-los em todas as etapas da cadeia alimentar e provocam consequências hormonais, imunológicas ou mesmo oncológicas, apenas para enumerar algumas.
               

                  A proposta da Comissão é um passo na direção certa, mas é tardia e faltava-lhe a ambição para a verdadeira resolução deste problema. E, aqui, saúdo as alterações propostas pelo meu colega, João Albuquerque, em nome deste Parlamento, que vão mais além. O desafio foi grande, mas conseguiram.
               

                  Com este relatório vamos mais longe na prevenção e mitigação dos riscos dos microplásticos para a saúde humana, para a saúde ambiental, para a saúde animal. A história julgará o que fizemos ou que deixámos de fazer para proteger o nosso planeta. Vamos garantir que a resposta ao desafio seja feita com determinação, com coragem e com compromisso para um futuro sustentável.
               

Πέτρος Κόκκαλης (Verts/ALE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, με την Πράσινη Συμφωνία έχουμε δεσμευτεί στην πορεία για έναν κόσμο με μηδενική ρύπανση, έναν κόσμο λιγότερο τοξικό και επικίνδυνο για τον άνθρωπο. Μιλάμε σήμερα λοιπόν για τα μέτρα μείωσης της πλαστικής ρύπανσης σε έναν κόσμο γεμάτο από πλαστικά, μικροπλαστικά και νανοπλαστικά που πλέον βρίσκονται παντού: στη θάλασσα, στην τροφική αλυσίδα και στα σώματά μας, αφού ο καθένας και η καθεμία από εμάς τρώει περίπου 5 γραμμάρια πλαστικό την εβδομάδα. Μια τράπουλα τον χρόνο. Η τελική, λοιπόν, αυτή συμφωνία βελτίωσε την πρόταση της Επιτροπής, θεσπίζοντας υποχρεωτικά μέτρα για όλους τους μεταφορείς, αυστηρότερες κυρώσεις για τους μεγάλους μεταφορείς, συμπερίληψη όλων των θαλασσίων μεταφορών και προσθήκη όλων των προπλαστικών μορφών στο πεδίο εφαρμογής.
               

                  Είναι πολύ σημαντικό ότι τα πρόστιμα για τη μη συμμόρφωση θα κατευθύνονται σε έργα που αποσκοπούν στον καθαρισμό των περιοχών που πλήττονται από απώλειες πέλλετ. Με την υιοθέτηση λοιπόν μιας ολοκληρωμένης προσέγγισης που συνδυάζει τεχνολογικές, κανονιστικές, εκπαιδευτικές και συνεργατικές προσπάθειες, είναι δυνατόν να ελαχιστοποιηθούν οι απώλειες πλαστικών πέλλετ, και να μειωθεί ο αντίκτυπος της ρύπανσης από πλαστικά στο περιβάλλον, στη θάλασσα και στον ανθρώπινο οργανισμό.
               

Grace O'Sullivan (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, an estimated 230 000 tonnes of plastic pellets are spilled into our oceans every year. These tiny, durable objects can end up anywhere and are increasingly found in every marine habitat. This is devastating to vulnerable ecosystems, but also to human health. As these beads make their way up the food chain to us. So we must do more to protect our marine environment and prevent this toxic pollution entering our waterways and our oceans.
On this note, I welcome today the announcement by my Irish Green colleague and Government Minister, Malcolm Noonan, of the establishment of Ireland's first marine National Park, incorporating seas off Dingle Peninsula in County Kerry. So across Europe, we must take decisive action to tackle the scourge of plastic pellets, safeguard our marine ecosystems and preserve the health of our oceans for now and for future generations.

Pyynnöstä myönnettävät puheenvuorot


Nicolás González Casares (S&D). – Señora presidenta, en mi tierra, en Galicia, sufrimos hace unos meses un vertido dañino de pélets. La gente tuvo que recogerlo mientras el Gobierno regional la abandonaba ante esta contaminación, que luego supimos que no solo era dañina para los ecosistemas, sino que podía serlo también para la salud humana.
               

                  Por lo tanto, nos congratulamos de esta nueva regulación ambiciosa que constituye el compromiso de que quien contamina paga. Porque salía muy barato contaminar con estos pélets.
               

                  Le doy la enhorabuena a mi compañero João Alburquerque por el informe sobre esta propuesta de Reglamento. Esperemos que los diálogos tripartitos sean tan ambiciosos desde el Consejo, pues a los grandes contaminantes de pélets —los grandes navíos, los grandes transportadores— no les debe salir barata esta contaminación. Deben pagar por el daño en las costas, pero —sobre todo— deben prevenir. Por lo tanto, bienvenido sea este Reglamento, y que no se vuelvan a ocasionar estos daños.
               

                  Recordemos que a veces usamos los plásticos y microplásticos cinco minutos, pero pueden durar quinientos años. En este Día Internacional de la Madre Tierra creo que es preciso recordarlo.
               

Jordi Solé (Verts/ALE). – Señora presidenta, es una muy buena noticia que estemos avanzando hacia una legislación europea para luchar contra la contaminación provocada por los pélets de plástico.
               

                  En febrero de 2021 pude comprobar sobre el terreno las consecuencias de este tipo de vertidos, producidos de manera repetida y a gran escala. Visité la playa de la Pineda, en Tarragona, cerca del polígono petroquímico más grande del sur de Europa, en Cataluña, y aquel día la playa no parecía una playa de arena. Parecía una playa de plástico, con miles de pequeños granos de plástico. Y aquello no era puntual, no era solo aquel día, sino que ocurría muy a menudo.
               

                  Y, aunque las entidades ambientalistas, las autoridades de la zona y el Gobierno de Cataluña han trabajado para poner fin a esta contaminación —a menudo con la implicación de los actores de toda la cadena de valor—, todo el mundo sabe que, sin una legislación que establezca obligaciones y responsabilidades claras, es muy difícil prevenir estas pérdidas y esta contaminación. Por eso hay que dar la bienvenida a este Reglamento.
               

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, there's much that's welcome in this regulation to tackle pollution from plastic pellet losses, but in truth, we could be doing more. The regulation should include all pre-production plastic powder forms, powders, dust and flakes. It should also apply to all operators. Article 1 exempts operators handling quantities lower than five tonnes per year, and creates reduced requirements for operators handling quantities under 1000 tonnes per year. But all operators, no matter what quantity they are handling, can contribute chronic losses to the environment.
Implementation of the regulations should be accelerated in terms of certification and verification. 184 000 tonnes of pellets enter the environment each year, and we shouldn't have a four-year lead in that period either. That would also give us a realistic chance of meeting the Zero Pollution Action Plan target of a 30 % microplastic-release reduction by 2030.

Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, there's no doubt about it: plastic pollution is a total scourge, and this legislation does certainly go in the right direction regarding tackling it. We're only really beginning to learn about the toxic impacts of microplastics on the environment and, critically, on human health.
But I think there's a slight irony that we're discussing it at the moment, on the eve of the elections in the context of Ireland, because in the next month we're going to see 600 000 plastic posters going up the length and breadth of the country for the European and local elections. None of these are going to be made of recycled plastic. Even worse, they're going to be exposed to the elements, these eyesores leaking millions of microplastic particles directly into the environment, the big parties with large numbers, with every candidate on every lamppost.
So while the people of Ireland have constantly rejected and argued for this nonsense to be scrapped, it still goes on. I, for one, won't be participating in it and I really think this issue must be tackled.

(Pyynnöstä myönnettävät puheenvuorot päättyvät)


Ylva Johansson,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, I really appreciate this debate and your strong commitment to address this very critical problem and make a real difference. Thank you.
Let me also briefly reply to the issue raised by Mr Millán Mon and Ms Miranda. Maritime transport of pellets is international in nature, and would be best addressed by rules adopted globally, because the impact of such rules would be best in terms of environmental protection. This said, the recent work within the International Maritime Organization could only lead to the adoption of recommendations, which is not sufficient. As for binding measures to be adopted there, it will take several years. The Commission could therefore show openness to consider inclusion in this regulation, provided coherence with the developments of the International Maritime Organization is ensured, and the competitiveness of European industry is not jeopardised.
The adoption of Parliament's first reading is a key step that I hope will pave the way to an agreement on this important file by the end of this year. The Commission looks forward to the Council's general approach, before the end of this semester, to start negotiations to ensure our common goal to reduce pellet losses by up to 74 %, to move closer together to zero-pollution ambition, also by adding other main sources of unintentional microplastic pollution.

João Albuquerque,
rapporteur. – Madam President, Commissioner Sinkevičius, please accept my sincere appreciation for your words today. Also to Commissioner Sinkevičius, my apologies for not being able to delay this debate of today, but unfortunately, on Thursday we have a very important day in our democracy, which is the 25 April, the reason for which I will not be able to be here.
I want to thank all the comments and all the remarks that were made. I think that we have struck the right balance in our reports, and I hope that in the next mandate, whoever takes the flag and continues this work is able to reach a good compromise with the Council in order to make sure that all the efforts we have made regarding prevention are kept in our in our agreement.
We are sensible and sensitive to the arguments of the Commission regarding international maritime transportation, but we also hope that this issue, which is one of the main sources of unintentional pollution from pellets, is also tackled in the best way possible.
I want to thank all the work from the rapporteurs and all the good cooperation that we have had. I also thank the Commission, as this is my final intervention regarding this matter also in this plenary, and it was a huge privilege and a huge honour to be here and to serve the European population, especially the Portuguese.

Puhemies. – Keskustelu on päättynyt.
               

                  Äänestys toimitetaan huomenna, tiistaina 23.4.2024.
               


Kirjalliset lausumat (171 artikla)



Miapetra Kumpula-Natri (S&D),
in writing. – Dear friends and colleagues, we need regulation to tackle the increasing challenge of microplastics. They are not only harmful to the environment, but also enter into the human body. One of the biggest unintended sources of microplastics is plastic pellets used in the plastics industry. Most losses of plastic pellets ending up into the environment happen as a result of incorrect handling, for example during transport or production. That's why it is crucial that we complete the regulation aimed at preventing pellet losses to reduce microplastic pollution as quickly as possible. In the winter of 2024, an accident in Spanish and Portuguese waters caused millions of plastic pellets to fall from a cargo ship into the sea, causing serious environmental damage. The incident shows that we need the new regulations, also covering maritime transportation. Once the pellets end up in nature, it is almost impossible to clean them. Plastic pellets are part of a wider challenge of plastic entering into nature. We need to continue to work to protect our unique and precious environment and seas.
18.   Common rules promoting the repair of goods (debate)

Puhemies. – Esityslistalla on seuraavana René Repasin sisämarkkina- ja kuluttajansuojavaliokunnan puolesta laatima mietintö ehdotuksesta Euroopan parlamentin ja neuvoston direktiiviksi tavaroiden korjaamista edistävistä yhteisistä säännöistä sekä asetuksen (EU) 2017/2394 ja direktiivien (EU) 2019/771 ja (EU) 2020/1828 muuttamisesta (COM(2023)0155 – C9-0117/2023 – 2023/0083(COD)) (A9-0316/2023).
               

René Repasi,
Berichterstatter. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Dieses Mandat, das diese Woche zu Ende geht, stand unter dem Eindruck, dass unsere Generation hier die größte Herausforderung meistern muss, nämlich den menschengemachten Klimawandel zu stoppen. Eine Herausforderung, die nicht am 9. Juni endet. Unsere Wirtschaft muss sich dieser Herausforderung genauso stellen. Nicht immer aber scheint der Markt imstande zu sein, Produkte hervorzubringen, die diese Herausforderung auch annehmen und sich ihr stellen. Ein Phänomen, das in diese Kategorie fällt, sind Produkte, die immer kurzlebiger werden und in kürzester Zeit auf dem Elektroschrottplatz landen. Wir belasten damit die Umwelt, und wir verschwenden wichtige und kritische Rohstoffe.
               

                  Das hat Gründe. Unser Wirtschaftsmodell baut auf schnellem Konsum auf. Wir haben unsere Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher in den letzten Jahrzehnten dazu erzogen, ihre kaputten Geräte zu ihrem Verkäufer zu bringen, der viel kann, aber in den meisten Fällen nicht reparieren. Dafür jedoch ein volles Warenhaus mit vielen neuen Geräten, die uns einreden, dass jede neue Generation eines bestimmten Smartphones die disruptive Innovation der letzten Jahrzehnte ist.
               

                  Wenn wir hieran etwas verändern wollen, bedarf es konkreter Rechte für Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher. Konkret: Wenn Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher ihre Produkte reparieren, anstatt ein neues zu kaufen, dann ändern wir die Grundlage für die geschilderte Fehlentwicklung. Mit dem Recht auf Reparatur, das wir diese Woche in die Endabstimmung bringen, schaffen wir das. Wir machen Reparatur während der gesetzlichen Gewährleistungsfrist attraktiver. Indem wir die gesetzliche Gewährleistungsfrist pauschal um ein Jahr verlängern, entscheidet sich der Verbraucher oder die Verbraucherinnen dann für die Reparatur.
               

                  Wir schaffen obendrauf einen Anspruch gegenüber den Herstellern, dass sie ein Produkt auch nach Ablauf der Gewährleistungsfrist zu reparieren haben. Und wir schaffen eine Pflicht für alle Mitgliedstaaten, Reparatur in ihren Hoheitsgebieten zu fördern. Damit das allerdings in der Praxis auch tatsächlich funktioniert, bedarf es vor allen Dingen der Stärkung eines Akteurs, nämlich unabhängiger Reparaturbetriebe, die die Waren zu Hause um die Ecke reparieren können, und zwar zu bezahlbaren Preisen. Preistreiber Nummer eins für die Reparatur durch Unabhängige, das sind die Ersatzteilpreise. Deswegen schaffen wir in unserem Recht auf Reparatur einen Anspruch auf marktgerechte Ersatzteilpreise, sodass Mondscheinpreise, in denen etwa ein Spiegel in einem Auto 900 Euro kostet, der Vergangenheit angehören. Vor allen Dingen verbieten wir Reparaturhindernisse aus Hardware-, Software- oder vertraglichen Gründen, wie den berühmten Wegfall der vertraglichen Garantie, wenn man Nichthersteller-Ersatzteile verwendet.
               

                  Allerdings sind all diese wichtigen Elemente beschränkt auf bestimmte Produktkategorien, nämlich solche, für die das EU-Recht Reparaturanforderungen selbst vorsieht. Das ist verständlich, um der Voraussicht von Herstellern irgendwie zu entsprechen. Überzeugend ist es aber leider nicht. Es ist ein echtes Recht auf Reparatur, wenn wir es auch auf jede Produktkategorie anwenden können, so wie wir es bei unseren ganz normalen Widerrufsrechten auch tun, und vor allen Dingen dann, wenn es um die Reparaturhindernisse geht. Aber ich nehme die Kommission, vor allen Dingen Herrn Kommissar Reynders hier beim Wort aus dem Trilog, dass die Kommission so schnell wie möglich die Liste der anwendbaren Produktkategorien ausweiten wird.
               

                  Was uns noch bevorsteht, ist eine Diskussion um die Rolle des geistigen Eigentums, das noch häufig angesprochen wird, um Reparaturhindernisse aufzustellen. Da muss in der Zukunft noch etwas getan werden. Jetzt nehmen wir allerdings mit dem Recht auf Reparatur den entscheidenden Schritt, um unseren Binnenmarkt in einen echten Markt umzuwandeln, der die Nachhaltigkeit zum zentralen Ziel hinstellt und seinen Anteil zur Bekämpfung des Klimawandels leistet.
               

Mercedes Bresso,
relatrice per parere della commissione per l'ambiente, la sanità pubblica e la sicurezza alimentare. – Signora Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, vorrei innanzitutto ringraziare tutti i colleghi che hanno lavorato su questa importante direttiva che, allineata al Green Deal europeo, sarà fondamentale per raggiungere gli obiettivi di consumo sostenibile e di neutralità climatica.
               

                  Come è già stato ricordato, la direttiva sulla riparazione dei beni avrà importanti ripercussioni positive in molti ambiti. Sappiamo che, secondo una ricerca dell'Eurobarometro, il 77 % dei consumatori europei preferirebbe riparare i propri prodotti piuttosto che acquistarne di nuovi e che ogni anno la sostituzione prematura di beni comporta di fatto una perdita di 12 miliardi di euro e un'enorme produzione di rifiuti.
               

                  Il Parlamento ha lavorato molto per far sì che questa direttiva renda la riparazione più accessibile, meno costosa, economicamente vantaggiosa anche per i riparatori, permettendo così di poter scegliere più facilmente la riparazione invece della sostituzione.
               

                  Tutte queste misure, che riguardano anche la creazione di un mercato aperto, misure pubbliche e incentivi finanziati per promuoverla, avranno oltre che un impatto su tutti i consumatori europei, un effetto positivo anche sull'ambiente, grazie ai risparmi sulle emissioni di gas serra, sulle risorse e la minore produzione di rifiuti. Ci avvicineranno quindi sempre di più all'obiettivo della neutralità climatica.
               

                  Come il collega, anche questo è probabilmente il mio ultimo intervento in quest'Aula e sono molto lieta che sia una norma così importante per l'ambiente.
               

VORSITZ: EVELYN REGNER


Vizepräsidentin


Ylva Johansson,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, I'm pleased to be with you today for this debate concerning the Directive promoting repair of goods – The Right to Repair Directive as we have come to know it. The directive is a key step towards offering consumers more sustainable choices, to continue enjoying their the products they have purchased. According to estimates, it will help consumers to save more than EUR 175 billion over the next 15 years, as it will be easier and more affordable to repair goods instead of buying new ones.
To begin with, I would like to thank the rapporteur, René Repasi, and all the shadow rapporteurs and their teams for your hard work on this file. We have achieved an agreement within a very short period of time, thanks to the efficient work of everyone involved. The political agreement on the proposal is overall balanced. It preserves the objectives as well as the overall architecture of the original Commission proposal, namely encouraging consumers to repair products instead of replacing them. It sets out a number of measures that will promote repair for consumers and encourage the development of a repair business ecosystem.
The new directive will introduce a new right for consumers to claim the repair of certain products beyond the legal guarantee. This new obligation to repair will apply to products that are subject to repairability requirements in EU law, such as eco-design requirements. Manufacturers will have to repair those products upon the consumer's request, within a reasonable time and for a reasonable price. They will also need to give access to spare parts at reasonable prices, and will be prohibited to use contractual hardware or software-related barriers to repair, such as impeding the use of second-hand compatible and 3D printed spare parts by independent repairers, in line with applicable laws.
If consumers want to repair products that are still covered by the legal guarantee, they will get an extra year of legal guarantee if they choose to repair the product instead of replacing it. Then, a new online European repair platform will be launched to help consumers to find repairs and give more visibility to repairers who are mostly SMEs. Finally, Member States will be obliged to take financial or non-financial measures to promote repair locally.
In conclusion, the agreement is a win-win-win welcome outcome for consumers, businesses and the environment. The final agreed text encourages consumers to repair, provides clear obligations for businesses and measures to boost the development of a repair market. It is also important that the new obligations are consistent with the current and future product specific requirements, in particular those in the framework of eco design for sustainable products.
So once again, I would like to thank you, Rapporteur René Repasi and your team for having worked closely with the Commission and successfully concluded the negotiations in an efficient manner and in a short time. Congratulations and thank you.

Deirdre Clune,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, the right to repair – rather than the alternative to throw away or to replace something – that is going to be absolutely welcomed by consumers, not just because of a cost-saving measure, but also, importantly, because of the positive impact on our environment.
It is estimated that EU consumers lose up to EUR 12 billion each year by opting to buy new goods instead of repairing, and the option to repair is not always available. This legislation will remove those obstacles by ensuring that products can be repaired within the legal guarantee, that consumers have easier and cheaper options to repair goods when the guarantee is expired, that strong provisions will be in place to ensure independent repairers can easily repair products without restrictions by the manufacturers.
This will be supported by provisions to ensure affordable spare parts that are there available, that manufacturers must disclose repair details and offer spare parts and tools at fair prices. Consumer awareness is to be facilitated through a new European online repair system, allowing them to locate repair facilities in their own State.
And, of course, another major benefit of this legislation must be the impact on our environment: less waste, less use of limited natural resources. The Commission figures tell us that 261 million tonnes of CO2-equivalent emissions are generated each year by the loss of electronic waste, resulting in 35 million tonnes of waste in the EU every year. So this proposal will address those challenges, be a major contributor to our sustainability, to our circular economy, and ensure the consumers have more money in their pockets.

Christel Schaldemose,
for S&D-Gruppen. – Fru formand! Jeg tror, vi kender det alle sammen det her med, at vaskemaskinen står af på det værst tænkelige tidspunkt. Garantien er lige udløbet. Og hvad gør du så? Ja, det er altid bøvlet at få repareret sit produkt og samtidig med, så ved man ikke, hvad konsekvensen er, og det er i det hele taget ret så irriterende. Hvert år bruger borgerne i Europa 12 milliarder euro på at udskifte de produkter, der rent faktisk kunne have været repareret. Og hvert år så ender mere end 35 millioner tons affald på Europas lossepladser på grund af det her, og derfor er vi så i gang med at forbedre det her i Europa.
                  

                     Nu bliver det heldigvis nemmere for europæiske forbrugere at reparere i stedet for at købe nyt. Det er godt for din pengepung, og det er godt for vores klode. Fordi vi forbrugere, vi vil nemlig gerne tage et bæredygtigt valg og reparere vores defekte produkter, men det skal bare være nemmere, og det bliver det nu. Og derfor vil jeg gerne starte med at sige stor tak til vores ordfører på sagen, René Repasi, som har gjort et kæmpestort stykke arbejde for at sikre, at vi har fået denne nye lov.
                  

                     Jeg vil gerne fremhæve særligt tre ting, som jeg synes er godt. For det første sikrer vi, at reservedele bliver nemmere tilgængelige, og prisen skal være rimelig. Priser og tilgængelighed skal nemlig ikke stå i vejen for at kunne reparere. For det andet, så sikrer vi, at reparation bliver det, man tager i udgangspunktet. Hvis et produkt er gået i stykker, så skal reparation helst være den første vej. Altså at udskifte produktet skal i virkeligheden være den sidste udvej. Og for det tredje, så indfører vi, hvad jeg tror er ret afgørende, nemlig en forlænget garanti på 12 måneder på produkter, der bliver repareret igen. Det vil give en øget sikkerhed for forbrugerne.
                  

                     Så næste gang vaskemaskinen står af på det værst tænkelige tidspunkt, så har du altså en bedre mulighed for at få den repareret. Det er godt for os forbrugere, og det er i særdeleshed godt for vores klode. Kæmpestor tak for den lovgivning, vi får nu.
                  

Catharina Rinzema,
namens de Renew-Fractie. – Voorzitter, wat doen wij in Europa? Plannen steunen die Europa veiliger, vrijer en welvarender maken. Die het leven gemakkelijker kunnen maken. Zoals deze richtlijn, het recht op reparatie. Producten kunnen hierdoor goedkoper en gemakkelijker gerepareerd worden. En als het goed is, wordt het daarmee ook beter voor onze aarde en de wereld om ons heen.
                  

                     Het is vooral belangrijk dat mensen in Nederland en Europa erop mogen vertrouwen dat wij hun leven makkelijker en veiliger maken en dat we goede wetten maken. Deze richtlijn is daar een voorbeeld van.
                  

                     Het is vooral belangrijk dat we altijd oog hebben voor de mensen, die willen dat ze op ons kunnen vertrouwen en dat we stappen zetten. Ik heb me daar de afgelopen tijd voor ingezet. Altijd met oog voor het leven van jou. En daarom, omdat dit mijn laatste speech is, wil ik iedereen bedanken. Mijn man, mijn familie, mijn team, mijn collega's en de mensen om me heen.
                  

                     Ik weet dat we in een moeilijke tijd leven die donker en verwarrend lijkt. Ik wil na dit mandaat daarom op zoek gaan naar lichtpunten om die lichtpunten voor jullie te bundelen en me in te zetten voor een veiliger en vrijer Europa.
                  

Anna Cavazzini,
im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Nirgendwo kommt die EU so konkret bei den Menschen an wie beim Verbraucherschutz. Wir verbessern das Leben von fast 450 Millionen Menschen: Wir bekämpfen Greenwashing und Elektroschrott, wir haben die Roaminggebühren abgeschafft und das einheitliche Ladekabel eingeführt. Und alle profitieren davon.
                  

                     Jetzt bringen wir endlich das Recht auf Reparatur an den Start, und damit ist Schluss mit unnötigem Ressourcenverbrauch: Unsere Handys, Laptops und Waschmaschinen können wir in Zukunft einfacher, schneller und kostengünstiger reparieren. Wir haben der Kreislaufwirtschaft den Teppich ausgerollt. Wir verändern, wie wir wirtschaften. Wir machen Nachhaltigkeit zum lohnenden Geschäftsmodell. Hiervon profitieren am meisten die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher.
                  

                     Damit zeigt sich erneut: Der europäische Grüne Deal ist eine Erfolgsgeschichte – für einen besseren Alltag der Menschen, für den Planeten, für die Planbarkeit von Unternehmen. Deswegen dürfen wir ihn nicht aushöhlen und nicht stoppen. Nein, wir müssen den Grünen Deal entschlossen weiterführen. Das wollen nicht zuletzt auch die europäischen Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher.
                  

Beata Mazurek,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Chciałabym podziękować sprawozdawcy Panu René Repasi za wspólną pracę, którą wykonaliśmy w Parlamencie, za skuteczne negocjacje podczas rozmów trójstronnych. Efektem tej współpracy jest tekst, który zapewnia optymalne korzyści dla konsumentów i minimalne obciążenia dla przedsiębiorców. Nowe przepisy oznaczają łatwiejsze i bardziej dostępne naprawy dla wszystkich konsumentów, co z kolei przyczyni się do przedłużenia żywotności produktów takich jak pralki, zmywarki, lodówki, odkurzacze czy wyświetlacze elektroniczne. Obecnie, gdy nasze sprzęty domowe ulegają usterce, często są po prostu wyrzucane, bo części są drogie albo ich w ogóle nie ma.
                  

                     Ta dyrektywa to także duża szansa dla niezależnych serwisów naprawy, dzięki zapewnieniu szerokiego dostępu do części zamiennych oraz ułatwieniu świadczenia tych usług transgranicznie. Zyska na tym nasza gospodarka. Szczególnie widzę w tym miejscu nowe możliwości dla polskich przedsiębiorców, gdyż od dawna istnieje u nas kultura naprawiania urządzeń. Czas wykorzystać nasze mocne strony i wyzwolić ten potencjał.
                  

                     Chciałabym także podkreślić swoje zadowolenie z faktu, że w ostatecznym kształcie dyrektywa będzie rzeczywiście prawem do naprawy, a nie przymusem, gdyż pierwotna propozycja Komisji odbierała wolność wyboru konsumentom pomiędzy naprawą towaru a jego wymianą. Możemy stosować różne zachęty, ale wybór musi pozostać po stronie konsumenta. Taką zachętą będzie rozwiązanie zapewniające konsumentowi decydującemu się na naprawę w okresie gwarancji otrzymanie dodatkowej 12 miesięcznej ochrony prawnej na swój naprawiony produkt. To bardzo dobre rozwiązanie.
                  

Virginie Joron,
au nom du groupe ID. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, chers rapporteurs, chers collègues, en tant que députée française du Rassemblement national, je soutiens évidemment cette proposition visant à promouvoir la réparation des biens. Oui, l'ère du ‘tout jetable’ et de l'obsolescence programmée ne nous a mené nulle part. Ce n'est pas notre projet de civilisation et ce n'est pas notre modèle.
                  

                     Le recyclage et la réparation, ce sont aussi des emplois locaux, ici en France, ici en Europe. Je sais que c'est un gros mot inconvenant pour certains macronistes, mais ceux qui payent notre salaire, ce ne sont pas vos amis lointains, ce sont les travailleurs européens. Ce sont eux que nous devons servir. Et nous l'avons fait par voie d'amendement, mais malheureusement, pour des raisons politiciennes, vous les ignorez. ‘Bruxelles ne sait pas servir, mais Bruxelles peut nuire,’ comme disait Molière.
                  

                     Alors aujourd'hui, à Bruxelles ou à Berlin, vous réalisez bien tard que vous avez détruit des pans entiers de l'industrie européenne. Nous ne supportons plus ces leçons fréquentes et ces douceurs feintes de la majorité Macron/von der Leyen, tous ces prédicateurs assaisonneurs de vertu. Le droit à la réparation doit trouver un juste équilibre entre le pouvoir d'achat des consommateurs et un coût acceptable pour les industries. Or, cette Commission de Bruxelles a cassé notre industrie avec des décisions absurdes qui ont fait exploser les prix du gaz et de l'électricité, et font fuir nos emplois.
                  

                     Est-ce que nos voitures diesel sont réparables ou jetables? Est-ce que la centrale de Fessenheim est réparable ou jetable? Est-ce que Nord Stream est réparable ou jetable? Vous avez cassé notre industrie automobile, vous avez brisé notre élan nucléaire et fermé la centrale de Fessenheim, alors qu'elle fonctionnait. L'Allemagne démonte ses éoliennes qui ne marchent pas pour reprendre le charbon. Vous gaspillez l'énergie des Européens et faites fuir nos entreprises. Quels services avez-vous rendu à l'Europe et à la France? Nous sommes toujours à la traîne. La France est désormais descendue au niveau de la Grèce en termes de part de l'industrie dans le PIB. Si nous réparons les trains en Bulgarie, qui réparera la SNCF? Où est le décollage du numérique français, sinon européen? Après des décennies de destruction industrielle, il est aussi temps, oui, de réparer l'Europe. Rendez-vous le 10 juin.
                  

João Pimenta Lopes,
em nome do Grupo The Left. – Senhora Presidente, os elementos abordados sobre o direito à reparação de equipamentos e eventual responsabilização dos fabricantes nesse processo são importantes do ponto de vista da defesa dos direitos do consumidor.
                  

                     Porém, a questão essencial que fica por abordar, em nome, quem sabe, do sacrossanto mercado, é o da durabilidade dos equipamentos. Antes de chegar ao momento em que seja necessária a reparação, deveriam ser tomadas medidas – que, de resto, poderiam ter sido vertidas neste regulamento e não foram –, que dessem efetivo combate à obsolescência programada, essa determinada pelos fabricantes, que compromete as próprias condições de reparabilidade e longevidade dos bens adquiridos.
                  

                     Importaria, ainda, que se incidisse sobre os períodos de garantia, alargando-os, bem como sobre o estabelecimento de normas de produção e montagem que garantam a possibilidade de desmontagem e substituição de componentes, inclusive pelo utilizador, quando aplicável, a par da proibição de linhas de código introduzidas na programação de qualquer aplicação que visem diminuir o tempo de vida útil ou a eficácia de um dispositivo.
                  

Edina Tóth (NI). – Elnök Asszony! Európai parlamenti képviselőként igyekeztem mindig a fogyasztók érdekeiért kiállni, és e ciklusban sokat dolgoztam azon, hogy az Európai Unió olyan jogszabályokat fogadjon el, amely a fenntarthatósági szempontokat szem előtt tartva közvetlenül segíti az állampolgárokat. A javításról szóló javaslat pont egy ilyen kezdeményezés.
                  

                     Már nem tartható fenn az a modell, amely alapján a fogyasztók egy terméket megvásárolnak, majd rövid használat után kidobják. Üdvözlöm, hogy a javaslat lehetőséget biztosít az elromlott termékek javításához, legyen szó akár mosógépről vagy kerékpárról. Úgy gondolom, hogy az új jogszabály nemcsak állampolgáraink pénztárcáját kíméli majd meg, hanem csökkenti a használati cikkek által generált hulladék mennyiségét, amely fontos lépés egy környezettudatos Európa irányába.
                  

                     A jövőre nézve pedig csak azt tudom javasolni, hogy Brüsszel az európai fogyasztók mindennapi életét könnyebbé tévő, célravezető javaslatokkal foglalkozzon áljogállamisági eljárások helyett.
                  

Martine Kemp (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Es ist eklatant, wie sehr sich unsere Konsumgewohnheiten in den letzten Jahren verändert haben. Immer öfters wird das Wegwerfen und Ersetzen von beschädigten oder alten Gegenständen zur Norm, anstatt sie zu reparieren. Diese Wegwerfkultur kostet uns Verbraucher, wie bereits von Kollegen gesagt, jedes Jahr rund 12 Milliarden Euro und verursacht enorme Umweltschäden.
                  

                     Hier denke ich zurück an meinen Opa, der abends versucht hat, kaputte Gegenstände zu reparieren oder sie für einen anderen Zweck wiederzuverwenden, anstatt sie einfach wegzuwerfen. Dies war nicht nur aus ökonomischer Sicht sinnvoll, sondern auch eine bewusstere Art des Lebens. Heute jedoch verlieren Verbraucher, die sich für Reparatur anstelle von Ersatz entscheiden, beträchtliche Geldsummen, oder es ist ihnen vom Hersteller sogar unmöglich gemacht worden. Wir dürfen allerdings nicht zulassen, dass die sofortige Entsorgung von Waren zur Regel wird, besonders wenn sie, technisch gesehen, noch reparierbar sind.
                  

                     Reparieren soll einfach und erschwinglich sein. Was mich positiv stimmt, ist ein zunehmender Mentalitätswandel und der wachsende Wille, Gegenstände zu reparieren. Verbraucher werden zunehmend sparsamer und umweltbewusster. Sie erkennen die Bedeutung ihres Handelns für die Umwelt – sei es z. B. in Bezug auf Luft- und Wasserverschmutzung oder den Ressourcenverbrauch.
                  

                     Nun liegt es an uns, den Verbrauchern die Möglichkeit zu geben, ihre Produkte zu reparieren und die Kontrolle über ihren Besitz zurückzugewinnen. Dafür brauchen wir einen klaren rechtlichen Rahmen, der Reparaturen erleichtert und sie zu angemessenen Preisen ermöglicht. Unabhängige Werkstätten spielen dabei eine entscheidende Rolle und müssen gestärkt werden, um fair mit den Herstellern konkurrieren zu können. Zudem können Reparaturanreize technologische Innovationen fördern, da sie uns auf neue Ideen und Wege bringen, wie wir unsere Produkte besser und länger nutzen können.
                  

                     Daher begrüße ich das Ergebnis dieser Verhandlungen über das Recht auf Reparatur, insbesondere die Ausweitung der gesetzlichen Garantie für bestimmte Waren sowie die Bestimmungen, die sicherstellen, dass unabhängige Reparaturwerkstätten Produkte problemlos und ohne Einschränkungen durch die Hersteller reparieren können. Diese Praxis ist nicht nur eine umweltfreundliche Praxis, sondern bringt auch wirtschaftliche, soziale und technologische Vorteile mit sich. Das sind wichtige Schritte in die richtige Richtung, zu einer nachhaltigeren und gerechteren Gesellschaft.
                  

Brando Benifei (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, attualmente si perdono molti miliardi di euro l'anno nell'acquisto di nuovi beni per sostituirne di rotti, quando sarebbe possibile ripararli, senza contare i 35 milioni di tonnellate di rifiuti generati, perché è più semplice gettare via il telefono o il computer rotto e comprarne uno nuovo invece che ripararlo.
                  

                     Spesso l'Europa appare distante dai cittadini, ma il diritto alla riparazione che il nostro gruppo politico chiede da anni – ci siamo battuti molto, qui c'è chi se n'è occupato più di tutti, René Repasi, che ringrazio per aver portato avanti questa battaglia per tutti noi – rappresenta una vera svolta per i consumatori, oltre che per il pianeta.
                  

                     Finalmente i produttori dovranno rendere possibile accedere ai pezzi di ricambio e alla possibilità di riparare i prodotti a prezzi ragionevoli e con un'estensione della garanzia. Con queste nuove misure la riparazione verrà incentivata negli Stati membri e permetterà ai consumatori di risparmiare molto, liberando risorse preziose in questi tempi difficili e salvaguardando anche l'ambiente da nuovi rifiuti e dalla sovrapproduzione di beni.
                  

                     È una svolta davvero concreta nelle vite di tutti noi e penso che l'Europa vada avanti anche con questi piccoli passi che cambiano pezzo a pezzo la vita delle persone.
                  

Vlad-Marius Botoș (Renew). – Doamnă Președintă, produse durabile nu sunt doar acelea care nu poluează, ci și produsele pe care le putem repara pentru a le putea folosi cât mai multă vreme.
                  

                     Acesta este modul tradițional, normal de a utiliza lucrurile. Consumatorii trebuie să aibă dreptul și posibilitatea de a-și repara produsele fără a pierde garanția.
                  

                     Nu demult, noi, cetățenii europeni, puteam să ne schimbăm singuri bateria la telefoane sau ecranul la o adică, iar bunicii noștri și părinții noștri puteau să își repare radioul sau televizorul și chiar puteau să facă mici reparații la automobile.
                  

                     Nu era o problemă majoră să găsim nici piese de schimb și nici ateliere de reparații, iar reparația era o opțiune pe care o alegea multă lume. Și da, repararea produselor trebuie să fie o opțiune viabilă, iar consumatorii trebuie să-și cumpere produse noi pentru că au nevoie de acestea sau și le doresc, nu pentru că nu au altă opțiune.
                  

Sara Matthieu (Verts/ALE). – Voorzitter, beste collega's, morgen boekt de consument een ongelooflijke overwinning, want eindelijk voeren wij het recht op reparatie in.
                  

                     Dat is een doorbraak, want daarmee wordt het herstel van onze smartphones, onze wasmachines, betaalbaar voor iedereen. En daarmee maken we ook een einde aan het monopolie van de grote multinationals als Samsung, als iPhone. Want zij dwingen ons nu om steeds nieuwe toestellen te gaan kopen als de oude stuk gaan. En dat is compleet absurd, want het jaagt de mensen nodeloos op kosten en dat is natuurlijk ook een ramp voor onze afvalberg.
                  

                     Maar nu keren we die perverse logica om. We verplichten de producenten om die reparaties aan te bieden binnen een redelijke termijn en aan een redelijke prijs. En je krijgt ook nog een extra jaar garantie als je je toestel laat repareren.
                  

                     Kortom, we gaan bakken geld besparen, we verminderen onze afvalberg, we verminderen onze klimaatuitstoot. Dus ik zeg: leve het recht op reparatie.
                  

Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR). – Voorzitter, altijd maar het nieuwste van het nieuwste willen hebben, dat is toch eigenlijk wel een heel naar trekje van onze wegwerpmaatschappij.
                  

                     Natuurlijk, soms zijn nieuwe spullen gewoon nodig, maar vaak ook helemaal niet. Ik rij zelf bijvoorbeeld op een fiets van dertig jaar oud en dat gaat nog gewoon prima. Ligt hier niet een belangrijke sleutel in het voorkomen van enorme afvalbergen? Namelijk: stoppen met alles zomaar weggooien en tevreden zijn met wat je hebt.
                  

                     Zo leven kan, maar dan moet je wel de mogelijkheid hebben om spullen die stuk gaan betaalbaar en eenvoudig te kunnen laten repareren. De deal over recht op reparatie bij elektronische producten juich ik daarom van harte toe. Hij kan enorm helpen om het laten repareren van onze telefoons, strijkijzers en ga zo maar door ook na de garantieperiode weer normaal te laten worden.
                  

                     Hier gaan gezond verstand en zorg voor het milieu hand in hand.
                  

Emmanuel Maurel (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, le capitalisme d'aujourd'hui, celui de l'hyperconsommation, c'est une immense accumulation de marchandises qui engendre des quantités phénoménales de déchets. Ce gaspillage, cela a été dit, n'est ni soutenable ni tolérable, aussi bien d'un point de vue écologique que d'un point de vue – j'oserai le mot – moral. À l'échelle continentale et planétaire, les chiffres sont vertigineux. Ce sont des milliards de téléphones portables, de lave-linge, de lave-vaisselle, de réfrigérateurs et d'aspirateurs qui pourrissent dans des décharges à ciel ouvert, que nous envoyons généralement aux pays les plus pauvres.
                  

                     Il faut donc favoriser la réparation des biens d'équipement, en luttant contre l'obsolescence programmée, en étendant les durées de garantie, en mettant à disposition des pièces de rechange et en renforçant les réseaux d'entreprises de réparation. C'est très important de restaurer le lien humain entre le consommateur et le producteur.
                  

                     Je ne dis pas qu'il faut produire moins en Europe. Au contraire, je pense qu'il faut revenir sur les délocalisations et donc continuer à produire plus en Europe; mais produire, cela ne veut pas dire jeter: le recyclage et la réparation doivent faire partie intégrante du processus de production. C'est ce que nous demandent les consommateurs et c'est ce que nous demandent nos enfants. Alors, ce texte est bienvenu et je suis sûr que nous allons vers un modèle plus vertueux.
                  

Katarína Roth Neveďalová (NI). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, chcela by som poblahoželať pánovi Répasovi k skvelej správe a možno vám trošku povedať o tom, čo mám na sebe. Táto sukňa od mojej sestry, ale táto časť je súčasť kroja z dediny Čeľadice pri Nitre na Slovensku, ktorú nosili aj moji starí rodičia aj ľudia pred nimi, a presne to boli tie generácie, ktoré si vážili svoje zdroje a to všetko, čo mali, a snažili sa všetky veci, ktoré nosili opravovať.
                  

                     A dnes sa opäť vraciame k tomu zdravému rozumu, ktorý tu fungoval, a naozaj sa snažíme vrátiť naspäť to, čo by malo byť. Ak si niekto niečo kúpi, mal by mať právo si to dať niekde opraviť. Toto vytvorí ďalšie pracovné miesta nielen na európskom trhu, ale vytvorí to ďalšie miesta aj vo fabrikách, ktoré vyrábajú rôzne náhradné diely. A myslím si, že to je správnym krokom aj k udržaniu nielen zdrojov, ktoré sú na našej planéte veľmi obmedzené, ale aj k takému zdravému rozumu, ku ktorému sa opäť musíme vrátiť.
                  

                     Sú ľudia, ktorí hovoria, že keď budeme mať takéto právo na opravu, tak tým vlastne znemožníme nejaký ďalší pokrok, alebo že budú musieť nejaké tieto diely niekde skladovať. Ale viete, keď bola diskusia aj tu o tom, že chceme napríklad udržiť, udržať záruku na 2 roky pre výrobky, ktoré si ľudia kúpia, tiež rozprávali niektorí, že preto niektoré firmy skrachujú, a v podstate sa nič nestalo. Čiže si myslím, že to je veľmi dobrý návrh dávať spotrebiteľom oveľa viac slobody, a to, čo si kupujeme my, by sme mali mať právo udržiavať si čo najdlhšie.
                  

Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, já todos passámos pela maçada de ter um eletrodoméstico que deixa de funcionar, um telemóvel partido, um rádio que deixa de sintonizar. O que fazemos, então? Deitamos fora? Queremos uma solução rápida e eficiente para restabelecer o funcionamento dos nossos equipamentos, evitando o desperdício e os custos adicionais da sua substituição. Evitando responder à pergunta, deitamos fora, compramos um novo.
                  

                     Temos agora um novo conjunto de instrumentos destinados a tornar a reparação possível, mas que é também atraente para os consumidores. Por exemplo, a possibilidade de os consumidores exigirem aos fabricantes a reparação dos produtos, quando isso é tecnicamente possível, mesmo já fora da garantia, ou uma plataforma europeia em linha dedicada à reparação, com vista a facilitar o estabelecimento de contactos entre consumidores e oficinas de reparação para saber onde reparar.
                  

                     Ao escolhermos a reparação, em vez da substituição, estamos não apenas a dar uma nova vida aos nossos produtos, mas também a criar empregos, a reduzir os resíduos, a limitar a nossa dependência de matérias-primas importadas, a impulsionar a economia circular e, mais importante, a proteger o ambiente. Obrigada ao relator René Repasi e a todos os colegas envolvidos e às suas equipas pelo excelente trabalho feito.
                  

Sandro Gozi (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, enfin, une vraie liberté de choix; enfin, le droit à la réparation, qui est un pilier de notre stratégie du marché unique durable, car il est impossible de réaliser une vraie économie circulaire sans reconnaître le droit de réparer.
                  

                     Nous avons déjà avancé sur l'obsolescence programmée, mais nous faisons un autre pas en avant sur notre liberté à nous tous, car nous sommes tous des consommateurs et nous savons tous que nous sommes obligés de jeter et de racheter des produits qui pourraient être réparés, qu'il s'agisse d'une machine à laver ou d'un téléphone portable.
                  

                     Choisir la réparation signifie aussi être mieux informé, bénéficier de meilleures garanties, réduire les déchets et encourager une production durable. Cela signifie également créer des marchés locaux de pièces détachées plus compétitifs et revitalisés – je dirais surtout des marchés européens. Une fois de plus, nous l'avions dit et nous l'avons fait. Nous agissons et nous allons continuer d'agir pour une Europe des solutions concrètes et écologiques.
                  

Kim Van Sparrentak (Verts/ALE). – Voorzitter, moet je je telefoon rond de lunch alweer opladen? Zit er een barst in je scherm of kun je geen apps meer downloaden omdat je toestel na een aantal jaar geen updates meer toestaat? Ja, laten we dan gewoon maar weer eens een nieuwe telefoon kopen. Dat is zo ongeveer de enige optie die Apple of Samsung je nu geven.
                  

                     Telefoons en andere producten worden zo gemaakt dat ze moeilijk te herstellen zijn en als het al kan, is een nieuw toestel kopen vaak zelfs goedkoper dan het te laten repareren. Dat is natuurlijk te bizar voor woorden.
                  

                     Daarom hebben we als groenen het voortouw genomen om het recht op reparatie eindelijk in de wetgeving te krijgen. En met deze richtlijn zetten we een belangrijke stap om onze wegwerpsamenleving te repareren.
                  

                     Met deze richtlijn wordt reparatie de standaard. Multinationals zoals Apple bepalen niet langer de levensduur van onze producten, reserveonderdelen moeten makkelijk verkrijgbaar en betaalbaar zijn en ook klussers en onafhankelijke reparateurs moeten reparaties kunnen doen. Zo besparen we grondstoffen, zorgen we voor werkgelegenheid en wordt geld bespaard.
                  

                     De Green Deal kan zeker een win-winsituatie zijn.
                  

Catch-the-eye procedure


Ljudmila Novak (PPE). – Gospa predsednica. Spoštovana gospa komisarka. Kolegice in kolegi. Seveda podpiram krožno gospodarstvo. Zavedam se, da preveč malih in večjih aparatov zavržemo in s tem povečujemo količine odpadkov.
                  

                     Kljub našim pozitivnim načrtom in velikim ciljem, ki jih imamo s tem predlogom, pa sem precej skeptična.
                  

                     Na trgu je veliko število različnih aparatov, različnih tipov in različnih znamk. Resda tehnologije napredujejo, kljub temu pa se sprašujem, ali res lahko zagotovimo rezervne dele za vse te stroje, modele in tipe.
                  

                     Drugo vprašanje pa je, ali bomo imeli dovolj usposobljenih delavcev za takšna popravila.
                  

                     Čas bo pokazal, ali so naši cilji uresničljivi ali so le pobožne želje. Ozaveščanje je dobrodošlo. Poznam ljudi, ki sami fizično popravljajo veliko stvari, žal pa so vse bolj redki.
                  

Barry Andrews (Renew). – Madam President, the new law on the right to repair will put money back into consumers' pockets. It will bring new life to broken appliances and make sure that we move away from a disposable economy to a circular economy. The throwaway culture has come to an end. Your smartphones, your airfryer, your bicycles can be repaired even after the expiration of a warranty or a guarantee. Saving 4 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions is the equivalent of taking 2 million cars off the road. European consumers lose almost EUR 12 billion a year in buying replacements for goods that could have been repaired.
This directive shows how the Green Deal can work for consumers, and for those of us who have consistently voted in favour of Green Deal measures throughout this mandate, it is crucial that we use these positive measures to show members of the public that laws that protect the environment are a win-win for people and for planet.

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, if we were to truly make repair available to everyone, it needs to be affordable, accessible and mainstream and protected from monopoly practices. The text of the provisional agreement goes a long way to addressing this concern.
Manufacturers will be obliged to provide information on spare parts on their websites, and to make those spare parts available to all parties in the repair sector at a reasonable price. They will be prohibited from using contractual hardware or software barriers to repair, which is good news. However, we can still do much more to tackle consumption.
Back in 2021, Parliament's report on the circular economy action plan called on the Commission to propose targets to significantly reduce the EU's material and consumption footprint by 2030 and bring them within planetary boundaries by 2050. Binding targets of this sort would make an enormous difference, but sadly, the Commission refuses act. Why?

Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, I too, of course, am a firm believer in the repair economy, and of course, in that sense support the legislation, which will give people more consumer rights and will assist in preventing the needless disposal of products that are repairable.
But at the same time, we have to recognise that our current consumption model is a huge part of the problem. With planned obsolescence and continuous growth, it is loaded against the idea of repair. And this will continue unless we address that and other serious issues, such as costs, accessibility, and other barriers, like insurance. In Ireland, for example, a recent survey showed that only 11 % of people are aware of our national repair directory, repairmystuff.ie.
So, we need a concerted boost, which could be a game changer for this sustainable, hidden part of the national economy. It would be supporting vocational training and small businesses. We need this legislation and directive implemented. It can certainly help.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


Ylva Johansson,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, allow me again to thank you all for this debate and for the great efforts that the Parliament invested in this proposal to reach this agreement.
It's a major step in promoting sustainable consumption in the European Union and I'm confident that, together with the other relevant Commission initiatives promoting sustainable consumption, such as the Eco-design for Sustainable Products Regulation and the directive empowering consumers in the green transition, this proposal will make the right to repair a reality in the European Union.
The Commission stands ready to deploy all efforts, working closely with the Member States to facilitate the transposition of the new directive and to ensure that it can be implemented quickly and properly by all stakeholders.

René Repasi,
Berichterstatter. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In der Tat, das war schon eine besondere Plenardebatte, da ich ein Wort der Kritik gehört habe, aber ansonsten parteiübergreifend im gesamten Hause breite Unterstützung. Wenn man so etwas hört, dann muss man sagen:Entweder haben wir alles falsch gemacht, oder wir haben alles richtig gemacht. Ich denke natürlich, dass Ersteres der Fall ist. Dass das möglich war, hat viele Gründe, die zu verstehen uns auch zeigt, wie wir im künftigen Mandat gute Politik für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger machen können.
                  

                     Damit will ich meinen Dank verbinden. Zunächst einmal einen Dank an Herrn Kommissar Reynders, der sich über unbekannte Widerstände des Regulatory Scrutiny Boards hinweggesetzt hat und den Vorschlag trotzdem brachte. An die Schattenberichterstatterinnen und -berichterstatter, die die Arbeit unterstützt haben, die die Ambition unterstützt haben und dabei mitgemacht haben, ein hohes Ergebnis zu finden, statt dass wir uns nur auf den kleinsten gemeinsamen Nenner einigen können. Wir haben eine Ratspräsidentschaft, die sich im richtigen Moment des Trilogs traute, einen weiteren Schritt zu gehen, damit wir ein echtes Recht auf Reparatur bekommen, und sowohl über das Ratsmandat als auch über den Kommissionsvorschlag hinausgegangen ist, sowie Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter auf allen Ebenen, die unter einem heftigen Zeitplan hart daran gearbeitet haben, dass wir dieses Ergebnis hinbekommen haben. Diese Kombination zeigt, wie wir auch im nächsten Mandat zu guten Ergebnissen kommen können.
                  

                     Wir haben jetzt für den anstehenden Wahlkampf eine schnelle und einfache Antwort auf die Frage, die wir immer kriegen: Was bringt mir Europa? Die Antwort lautet: Ein Recht auf Reparatur. Aber damit ist die Geschichte noch nicht zu Ende erzählt. Die Geschichte einer Produktentwicklung zeigt: Es darf sich kein Rost ansetzen. Deswegen lassen Sie uns nicht vergessen, dass es auch in diesem Recht auf Reparatur noch Bremsen gibt, die wir lösen müssen. Wir müssen die Produktkategorien ausweiten, und da setze ich auf die Kommission, dass sie hier ambitioniert und schnell vorgehen wird. Und wir müssen uns das geistige Eigentum vornehmen, um die letzten Bremsen für ein echtes Recht auf Reparatur herauszunehmen.
                  

President. – The debate is closed. The vote will be held tomorrow.


Written statements (Rule 171)



Eugen Jurzyca (ECR),
písomne. – Po novom bude ľahšie využitie neoriginálnych dielov pri opravách, to môže zákazníkom pomôcť. Naopak, nesúhlasím s návrhom zriadiť štátny web na vyhľadávanie opravárov. Každý si predsa vie ‘vygoogliť’ opravára vo svojom okolí. Predpokladám, že to dopadne ako slovenský ‘štátny Waze’. Peniaze sa minuli, nikto ho nepoužíval, tak web vypli. Nesúhlasím ani so zásahmi regulátorov do cenotvorby. O nekalých praktikách by mali rozhodovať buď protimonopolný úrad, alebo súdy, nie detailná regulácia. Pozor aj na to, či riešime reálny problém – či množstvo odpadu nevyplýva z toho, že ľudia nakupujú nové veci nie kvôli tomu, že sa im staré pokazili, ale preto, že už nie sú v móde. Ako je to napríklad pri textile.
                  

Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE),
kirjallinen. – Toivotan direktiivin tavaroiden korjaamista edistävistä yhteisistä säännöistä tervetulleeksi, sillä direktiivillä tartutaan ilmastonmuutoksen ja biodiversiteettikadon juurisyyhyn eli materiaalien ylikulutukseen.
                  

                     EU:n ylikulutuspäivä on tänä vuonna jo 3. toukokuuta, jolloin olemme laskennallisesti kuluttaneet tämän vuoden kestävästi käytettävissä olevat luonnonvarat. Direktiivi yhdessä ekosuunnitteludirektiivin kanssa on tärkeä osa kestävien tuotteiden lainsäädäntökehystä, jolla voimme suunnitella jätteen pois sekä edistää kestävää tuotesuunnittelua ja kiertotaloutta Euroopan unionin sisämarkkinoilla. Maksimoimalla tuotteidemme elinkaaren ja käyttöiän vähennämme materiaalien valmistukseen kuluvien raaka-aineiden määrää. Korjaaminen on ollut kuluttajille lähtökohtaisesti vaikeaa takuun ulkopuolella ja varaosien hankalan saatavuuden vuoksi. Kuluttajien on monesti myös vaivalloista ja hankalaa löytää sopivia korjaus- ja entisöintipalveluita, minkä vuoksi uuden ostaminen koetaan vaivattomammaksi vaihtoehdoksi. Lisäksi korjaaminen on monesti myös kalliimpaa kuin uuden ostaminen.
                  

                     Uusilla sovituilla säännöillä varmistamme kiertotalousekosysteemiin oleellisesti kuuluvien korjauspalvelujen toimivuuden, asetamme korjaamisvelvoitteita valmistajille ja kannustamme kuluttajia valitsemaan korjauspalvelun uuden ostamisen sijasta.
                  

Tom Vandenkendelaere (PPE), schriftelijk. – Deze richtlijn is een cruciale stap naar een circulaire maatschappij, waarin repareren de norm wordt. De richtlijn komt niet alleen op tijd, ze is ook nodig. De slinger van onze wegwerpmaatschappij is wat doorgeslagen. Wij vinden het meer en meer evident om goederen gewoon te vervangen, in plaats van voor herstelling te kiezen. Wanneer een smartphone of wasmachine kapotgaat of defect is, is vaak de gemakkelijkste of goedkoopste optie om een nieuw product te kopen, eerder dan het te laten repareren, zeker wanneer de wettelijke garantie is verstreken. Deze richtlijn zal daar verandering in brengen door de toegang tot reparatiediensten eenvoudiger en aantrekkelijker te maken en het zo voor consumenten gemakkelijker maken om goederen te laten repareren dan om ze te laten vervangen.
                  
19.   Prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market (debate)

President. – The next item is the debate on the report by Samira Rafaela and Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques, on behalf of the Committee on International Trade and the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market (COM(2022)0453 – C9-0307/2022 – 2022/0269(COD)) (A9-0306/2023).

Samira Rafaela,
rapporteur. – Madam President, the forced labour ban regulation resembles a grand marathon with many challenges along the way that made the journey both demanding and fulfilling. This regulation will be groundbreaking and unique. It is broad, inclusive and tackles many issues. The forced labour ban will put a halt to the entry of products and services produced under dire, inhumane and undignified circumstances.
For too long, we have accepted products and services that are cheap, at the expense of societal consequences on the people involved in the production or supply chains. Almost 30 million people are working in inhumane conditions and slaved, sometimes for life, to produce goods and services exported around the world, notably to our markets. And 13 million victims are women and girls. Forced labour touches the very essence of gender inequality. We see women and girls placed in environments that set them back significantly in life, time and again. We see women and children imposed upon with reality that is ugly and unjust. Several companies earn altogether around USD 236 billion thanks to these practices over the back of the people. And I'm happy that many of you stood firm with us when we negotiated and demanded a comprehensive definition of remediation in the regulation. Even though some parties were immovable until the very end.
I firmly believe and am convinced that mainstreaming, remediation and regulation will lead to transitional justice for victims. We have worked for decades in sweatshops, factories and other dire and dark circumstances to support unethical supply chains. The faces, names and stories shall be and must be recognised. The regulation will also ensure that we address not only forced labour, but also state imposed forced labour through a risk-based approach. This approach will enable European national authorities, along with the European Commission, to lead investigations into suspected cases of forced labour.
The regulation will further enhance inter-European cooperation. Member States and their respective customs authorities will work together in the Union network with unified and facilitated access to comprehensive information on risk areas, products and gender aggregated data through the database and this will ease the work of authorities tasked with preventing products from entering the European market.
This regulation is also a significant opportunity for our companies and SMEs. Together with the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, companies will be prepared to address the significant issues ahead of us, making them more resilient, competitive and real drivers of change. And the regulation will also democratise the way we trade with our partners, while placing human rights and responsible business conduct at the forefront. People, consumers and other organisations will now also be able to take initiative when they realise that products do not comply with the newly set norms and together with the authorities, they will help us tackle the serious issue of forced labour.
It has been a true pleasure, a great honour and a privilege to serve in this House, and this sprint marks the end of my marathon. So I thank you very much for the cooperation and specifically towards my dear co-rapporteur Maria-Manuel Marquez. I am proud of what we do together in the EU and for each other, for intersectional policies and justice and for the people outside, around the world. And my final ask would be to vote in favour of this regulation tomorrow, and to the countries and partners watching, this is your moment to ratify ILO Protocol 29 to the Forced Labour Convention.

Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques,
relatora. – Senhora Presidente, atualmente, em todo o mundo, 28 milhões de pessoas estão presas nas mãos de traficantes de seres humanos ou, por vezes, de Estados que as forçam a trabalhar por pouco ou nenhum salário. 12 % delas são crianças. Este negócio da miséria humana está a prosperar, apesar dos esforços internacionais para acabar com ele. Quase 100 anos após a adoção da histórica Convenção sobre o Trabalho Forçado, de 1930, a Organização Internacional do Trabalho estima que o trabalho forçado origine 217 mil milhões de euros por ano de lucros ilegais, um aumento dramático de 37 % desde 2014. É comparável a uma economia como a de Portugal.
               

                  É muito provável que a t-shirt que hoje vestimos seja feita com algodão contaminado por violação dos direitos humanos, sem que saibamos disso. Se não foi colhido no Turquemenistão, pode ter sido na região de Sinquião, na China, onde se estima que mais de 2 milhões de pessoas, principalmente uigures, estejam em risco de trabalho forçado. São forçados a trabalhar em setores de mão de obra intensiva, onde colhem algodão ou tomate, montam brinquedos, mobiliário e eletrónica, costuram vestuário ou processam polisilício.
               

                  Temos agora uma oportunidade histórica para combater esta forma de escravatura moderna, tanto na União Europeia, como no resto do mundo. Após anos de mobilização cívica e batalhas políticas, após meses de negociações muito difíceis – obrigada, Samira, pela tua cooperação –, a União Europeia aprovou a primeira lei europeia que proíbe a venda de produtos fabricados com o trabalho forçado no seu mercado. Os Estados Unidos e o Canadá já possuem os seus instrumentos jurídicos equivalentes.
               

                  Para nós, socialistas, este é seguramente um motivo de orgulho. Tínhamos pedido esta lei como grupo político e a seguir trabalhámos duramente na sua discussão no Parlamento Europeu. Conseguimos um acordo muito alargado, como convém, quando sabemos que este é apenas o primeiro passo de um caminho longo e difícil para eliminar o trabalho forçado.
               

                  O texto final que vamos votar amanhã não é assim tão ambicioso como gostaríamos, mas pode fazer a diferença para as vítimas em todo o mundo. A nosso pedido, a Comissão criará uma base de dados com uma lista de setores económicos e áreas geográficas específicas, onde ocorre trabalho forçado imposto pelo Estado, informação essa que será utilizada para avaliar a necessidade de abertura de uma investigação.
               

                  A Comissão Europeia será responsável pela investigação de casos suspeitos de trabalho forçado fora da União, enquanto as autoridades nacionais competentes dos 27 Estados-Membros tratarão de casos dentro da União. No final da investigação, se ficar provado que houve trabalho forçado na cadeia de produção, o produto final terá de ser retirado do mercado interno, podendo ser reciclado ou doado.
               

                  A Europa não pode exportar valores e importar produtos feitos com trabalho forçado. O facto de a União Europeia ter finalmente uma lei para proibir estes produtos no mercado interno é uma das maiores conquistas deste mandato e uma vitória para todos os que defendem os direitos humanos. Muito obrigada a todos os que me ajudaram e à Samira, bem como às nossas equipas nesta negociação.
               

Salima Yenbou,
Rap avis AFET. – Madame la Présidente, 28 millions de personnes dans le monde sont victimes du travail forcé. Cette réalité choquante doit tous nous alerter. Dans ce contexte, ce règlement crucial et historique présente des points forts, en traquant et en bannissant enfin, dans les chaînes d'approvisionnement des entreprises, les produits issus du travail forcé ou liés à des systèmes étatiques. Nous demandons la mise en place d'une base de données pour faciliter l'identification du travail forcé par zone ou entreprise à risque. Nous exigeons aussi des entreprises une réparation pour les victimes. Nous apportons un soutien supplémentaire aux PME. Nous demandons la destruction des produits issus du travail forcé.
               

                  Ces avancées ayant été obtenues, en tant que rapporteure en droits humains, je demande à la Commission d'appliquer ce règlement de manière urgente. Ensemble, nous devons œuvrer à un véritable instrument de changement, qui garantit des conditions dignes et humaines à chacun. Nous le devons aux Ouïgours, malheureux symboles du travail forcé, et nous le devons à toutes les victimes, sur tous les continents.
               

Mounir Satouri,
rapporteur pour avis de la commission de l'emploi et des affaires sociales. – Madame la Présidente, le travail forcé n'est pas un crime du passé. Des régimes dictatoriaux y ont recours tous les jours et trouvent le moyen ainsi de rentabiliser les violations des droits humains. Des entreprises vont jusqu'à construire tout leur modèle d'entreprise sur l'exploitation de la misère. Cela fait 28 millions de victimes dans le monde et des millions de produits qui inondent nos marchés. Une ONG a d'ailleurs démontré que depuis 2017, 600 millions de tonnes de poisson issu du travail forcé se sont retrouvées dans nos assiettes, ici même au Parlement européen. C'est totalement inacceptable.
               

                  Avec cette législation, nous n'avons plus besoin de nous soucier d'où viennent les produits que nous consommons. Désormais, l'Europe s'en charge; l'Europe nous protège. Le marché européen sera donc protégé de cette concurrence déloyale. Les États répressifs qui pratiquent le travail forcé verront leurs bénéfices baisser.
               

                  Malheureusement, nous sommes passés à côté de l'exigence d'indemniser les victimes. Les Verts ne les abandonneront pas. C'est un combat que nous nous engageons à poursuivre jusqu'au bout, parce qu'il en va de notre honneur.
               

Valdis Dombrovskis,
Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, first of all, I would like to thank the Parliament for organising this debate and for this opportunity to speak on this important legislative initiative: a proposal for a regulation to prohibit products made with forced labour on the Union market.
The fight against forced labour is a political priority for this Commission. As forced labour continues to exist, and even grow, the European Union needs an effective tool to avoid that products made with forced labour are placed on the EU market. For example, the latest ILO report issued last month estimates the total illegal annual profits for forced labour at USD 236 billion. This is USD 64 billion more as compared to the previous estimate from a decade ago.
Therefore, this measure is urgently needed to provide strong incentives for companies and governments to ensure respect for human rights and better labour protection, in line with international commitments taken by a large majority of countries, as well as to make sure that the economic operators produce products without using forced labour. We cannot allow companies to profit from forced labour by selling their products in the single market.
The Commission welcomes the trial agreement, reached in early March by the European Parliament and the Council on the draft regulation, so I'd like to congratulate Parliament and especially the co-rapporteurs, Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques and Samira Rafaela, for their remarkable work on this file.
We expect that the agreed text will lead to a balanced and effective instrument based on elements included in a provisional agreement, such as close cooperation between Member States and the Commission, as well as implementation of a risk-based approach and the approach of state-imposed forced labour.
The main change brought to the agreed text, compared with the initial Commission proposal, concerns the governance mechanism, which will result in the Commission taking a large majority of cases. This instrument will be only as strong and effective as the team implementing it so, going forward, we count on Parliament and the Council to assure that the Commission will have enough resources to be able to deliver for the Union and meet the objective of helping to eradicate forced labour and ban products made with forced labour from the Union market.
The Commission has prepared a formal statement on financing of resources for the implementation of the regulation. The statement was sent to Parliament's services for inclusion in the verbatim record of this debate. So let me thank Parliament again for your hard work throughout the negotiations on this file, and encourage you to endorse this instrument as provisionally agreed with the Council.

Commission statement (in writing)

‘The European Commission notes that the final agreement reached by the co-legislators on the Regulation on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market has evolved significantly in terms of the staff and resources required for its implementation by the Commission, compared to the legislative financial statement which accompanied the original proposal (COM(2022) 453 final of 14.09.2022), which was based on a decentralised model of implementation combined with support for implementation at EU level.
The Commission recalls that, for the current MFF, the Commission is operating under the principle of stable staffing imposed by the budgetary authority, and – given the wide array of additional tasks that have been conferred upon the Union since the beginning of the MFF – it is already under severe constraints, making it difficult to cover even the existing tasks' needs. There is no margin to finance additional officials or external staff. Therefore, any additional tasks conferred by the co-legislators upon the Commission shall be accompanied by corresponding resource reinforcements ensuring their effective implementation.
In light of the above, the additional Commission human resources required by the final agreement endorsed by the co-legislators will not allow the Commission to respect the principle of stable staffing.
This will require additional establishment plan posts and corresponding appropriations, to be authorised by the European Parliament and the Council during the annual budget procedure along with the related budgetary appropriations.
Furthermore, the Commission will also propose, in the framework of the annual budgetary procedure, the creation of additional budget lines under the Single Market Programme, the Customs Programme or both, financed from the Programme's available appropriations, in so far as allowed under the respective legal bases, as identified in the updated Legislative Financial Statement provided by the Commission, which will also be used to finance the Commission's implementation of the Regulation beyond the limit of the principle of stable staffing. These new budget lines will cover the cost of contractual agents and other administrative expenditures of the Commission in implementing the Regulation, to be authorised by the European Parliament and the Council during the annual budget procedure.’

Ilan De Basso,
föredragande av yttrande från utskottet för utveckling. – Fru talman! Det är över 150 år sedan som den transatlantiska slavhandeln avskaffades och 12 miljoner människor frigjordes. Trots det så förekommer det än i dag. Internationella arbetsorganisationens uppskattning är att nästan 30 miljoner människor i dag är offer för tvångsarbete globalt. Det här är helt oacceptabelt.
               

                  Människor utnyttjas, och många av de här företagen vill bara tälja guld på arbetstagarnas bekostnad. Det här kommer vi aldrig att acceptera.
               

                  Tvångsarbete är inte bara ett horribelt brott mot mänskliga rättigheter. Det snedvrider konkurrensen, missgynnar de företag som tar sitt ansvar för schysta villkor i leveranskedjan. Trots den svenska högerregeringens senfärdighet under sin tid som ordförandeland kan vi äntligen driva igenom en lag som tar itu med tvångsarbete och osund konkurrens, därför att mänskliga rättigheter måste vara en prioritet för oss.
               

                  Socialdemokraternas budskap är därför tydligt: Företagen ska ta sitt ansvar, respektera mänskliga rättigheter, och vi ska sätta stopp för modernt slaveri och tvångsarbete.
               

Grace O'Sullivan,
Rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Fisheries. – Madam President, when we think of forced labour and slavery, we might naturally think that these awful practices are long gone, unacceptable relics of the past with no place in the modern world. Unfortunately, we know this is not the case.
It is estimated that around 50 million people around the world are living in modern slavery at any given time, and of these, over 27 million are trapped in forced labour. We may also think that these practices occur far away from us in Europe and have nothing to do with us. Unfortunately, this also isn't the case.
This forced labour often occurs in the value chains of international businesses operating in the EU. We must take strong action to put an end to these medieval practices. Those responsible must be punished and the European economy must be cleansed of goods built on misery and servitude of others. It is high time we act.

Martine Kemp,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, for too long we have been turning a blind eye to the suffering of countless individuals who are forced to toil in deplorable conditions, often for little to no pay. The bitter reality is that, by allowing products produced through forced labour available in or exported from the European Union, we are being complicit in this injustice.
By undermining the efforts of ethical businesses that strive to uphold labour standards and human rights, we are sending the message that exploitation and abuse are acceptable as long as they lead to cheap goods. I believe none of us present in this Chamber agrees with this. What we agree on, though, is that the European Union leads by example, always standing up for the values that we hold dear: freedom, dignity and justice for all.
To this effect, with this regulation we are clearly stating that products made with forced labour will not be tolerated in any form, and that those who engage in it will face consequences. In this regard, I personally celebrate the balanced, solid and fair agreement reached:
Balanced, because it is developed on a risk-based approach, focusing our efforts on the most severe cases.
Solid, as it does not only maintain the possibility for the Commission to carry out field inspections even in and outside of Europe, but includes a stronger and more explicit non-cooperation clause as well.
Fair, since it ensures a level playing field for our SMEs that shape the very basis of our economy and who are so often overburdened by new regulations.
For all these reasons, with this agreement we are sending a strong signal of solid commitment to the principles and values that characterise and differentiate us in the international sphere, while ensuring our strategic autonomy by strengthening the competitiveness of our SMEs.
Human rights are non-negotiable, and we will not fail on our commitment to justice and fairness.

Bernd Lange,
im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Exekutiv-Vizepräsident der Kommission, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir kennen alle diese blauen Einmalhandschuhe: Die haben wir alle während der Corona-Pandemie angehabt. Die kommen zu 70 % aus Malaysia, und drei Firmen nutzen zur Herstellung dieser Einmalhandschuhe nachweislich Zwangsarbeit.
               

                  Ich glaube, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, in einer Zeit, in der wir leben, wo wir seit 1930 das Verbot der Zwangsarbeit durch die ILO haben, 1957 noch einmal in der ILO-Konvention 105 ergänzt, kann es nicht sein, dass Unternehmen aufgrund der Zwangsarbeit von Menschen zusätzliche Gewinne einfahren. Valdis Dombrovskis war auf einer Konferenz, die ich mit der ILO zusammen organisiert habe, um zu präsentieren, wie viel. Und es sind 236 Milliarden zusätzliche Gewinne, die auf dieser Erde durch Zwangsarbeit erzielt werden – nebenbei nicht nur in Asien, sondern auch in Europa. Das muss man sich immer auch vergegenwärtigen.
               

                  Und deswegen ist es richtig, dass wir in unserer Gesetzgebung nicht differenzieren – die Bösen draußen und die Guten drinnen –, sondern es ist horizontal, auch für die Europäische Union. Import, Vermarktung und Export gehören auf den Müllhaufen der Geschichte.
               

                  Wir brauchen wirklich Ressourcen: Wir brauchen die Datenbank, und wir brauchen auch Menschen in der Kommission, die das umsetzen können und die Untersuchungen durchführen können. Dafür werden wir auch streiten. Das darf kein Papiertiger sein, das muss ein vernünftiges Gesetz sein, das den Menschen in Europa und darüber hinaus hilft.
               

Svenja Hahn,
im Namen der Renew-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Der EU-Binnenmarkt darf kein Absatzmarkt mehr für Produkte aus Zwangsarbeit sein. Das neue Gesetz muss einen Beitrag leisten, um moderne Sklaverei zu bekämpfen. Das ist sowohl eine Frage von Menschenrechten als auch eine Frage von fairem Wettbewerb, denn Ausbeutung darf kein Geschäftsmodell sein.
               

                  Wir dürfen dabei nicht vergessen, dass der Schutz von Menschenrechten zuvorderst staatliche Aufgabe ist. Deswegen ist es so wichtig, dass in Zukunft die Kommission Verantwortung übernehmen wird und zusammen mit den Mitgliedstaaten die Beweisführung für Zwangsarbeit in den Lieferketten durchführen soll. Denn leider muss man sagen: Die EU-Kommission unter von der Leyen hat es – wie viel zu oft – vergessen, zu diesem Gesetz auch eine Folgenabschätzung vorzulegen. Das heißt, wir wissen nicht, ob dieses Gesetz praxistauglich ist. Deswegen ist es so wichtig, dass wir Liberale durchgesetzt haben, dass das Gesetz bereits zwei Jahre nach Inkrafttreten daraufhin überprüft wird, ob es zielgenau greift. Denn unser weltweiter Einsatz für Menschenrechte braucht eine EU, die auch funktioniert.
               

Anna Cavazzini,
im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! 28 Millionen Arbeiterinnen und Arbeiter in Zwangsarbeit, und es werden immer mehr. 28 Millionen, das ist nicht irgendeine Zahl, das sind Menschen. Menschen wie Tara, die in Indien Tag und Nacht und auch noch, als sie schwer erkrankt, in einer Ziegelfabrik arbeiten muss. Oder Menschen wie Henry, der nach Mauritius kam und dort als billige Arbeitskraft ausgenutzt wird, Textilien für den europäischen Markt näht – ohne jemals die Fabrik zu verlassen, ohne Lohn zu bekommen. 28 Millionen Menschen, viele von ihnen Kinder, Migrantinnen und Migranten – Menschen, die wenig Macht haben und deswegen von skrupellosen Unternehmen ausgenutzt werden.
               

                  Für diese Menschen, für Tara und Henry, haben wir dieses Gesetz auf den Weg gebracht: das Verbot von Produkten aus Zwangsarbeit. Für all die vielen Unternehmen, die redlich sind, die korrekt wirtschaften, haben wir dieses Gesetz vorangebracht, denn Zwangsarbeit ist schließlich eine der krassesten Formen von Dumping und Wettbewerbsverzerrung. Und nicht zuletzt für die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher stimmen wir für das Verbot von Produkten aus Zwangsarbeit. Endlich können sie sicher sein, dass ihre Lieblingsjeans oder ihr Handy nicht unter Zwang hergestellt worden sind.
               

Kosma Złotowski,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Wyścig o obniżanie kosztów w gospodarce światowej prowadzi do sytuacji, w których przedsiębiorstwa, chcąc generować większy zysk, korzystają z pracy przymusowej na różnych etapach produkcji. Konsumenci w Unii Europejskiej często nie mają pojęcia o tych praktykach i, kupując produkt, sugerują się głównie ceną.
               

                  To uderza przede wszystkim w uczciwe firmy i ich pozycję rynkową. Musimy szukać sposobów, jak skutecznie wykrywać przypadki wykorzystywania pracy dzieci czy form współczesnego niewolnictwa, którego ofiarą bardzo często padają kobiety.
               

                  W najbliższym sąsiedztwie Unii Europejskiej są państwa, takie jak Białoruś czy Rosja, które czerpią korzyści gospodarcze z systemu kolonii karnych i pracy więźniów politycznych. W procesie pozyskiwania metali ziem rzadkich, które są niezbędne do produkcji elektroniki czy baterii do pojazdów elektrycznych, dzieci są często wykorzystywane do najcięższej pracy. To dodatkowy społeczny koszt polityki klimatycznej Unii Europejskiej, o którym musimy również pamiętać.
               

                  Nieuczciwe firmy, którym udowodniono świadome korzystanie z pracy przymusowej, powinny być stanowczo karane i eliminowane z unijnego rynku, a informacje na ten temat powinny być publiczne i dostępne dla konsumentów.
               

Alessandra Basso,
a nome del gruppo ID. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, ogni tanto l'Europa non emana solo quelle che tante volte ho definito ‘eurofollie’, ma adotta anche provvedimenti sensati come questo, che vieta i prodotti ottenuti con il lavoro forzato nel mercato dell'Unione.
               

                  Il lavoro forzato è una grave piaga della società che colpisce una parte importante della popolazione mondiale. Secondo l'Organizzazione Internazionale del Lavoro, nel mondo ci sono milioni di persone, tra i quali milioni di minorenni, costrette al lavoro forzato, e i profitti derivanti da questo sfruttamento ammontano a quasi 220 miliardi di euro ogni anno e questi profitti sono aumentati del 37 % in un decennio.
               

                  La schiavitù è diffusa in tutto il mondo, in Africa e nella zona asiatica del Pacifico, negli Stati arabi, dove il totale delle persone schiavizzate rispetto al totale della popolazione si impenna drasticamente.
               

                  Particolare attenzione per via dei milioni di prodotti che ogni anno entrano nel mercato europeo merita la Cina e alcune sue regioni, dove minoranze di fede musulmana sono da anni vittime di gravi violazioni dei diritti umani. Oltre 1 milione di persone sono detenute e costrette al lavoro forzato. Il loro lavoro forzato contribuisce alla produzione di numerosi beni per diverse multinazionali, beni venduti soprattutto nei mercati europei occidentali, quindi a casa nostra.
               

                  E se queste situazioni mettono i brividi, c'è di peggio: lo sfruttamento dei bambini. Milioni di bambini sfruttati. Milioni, mentre i nostri figli e nipoti vanno a scuola a fare sport o a divertirsi. Per fortuna è un fenomeno che si sta tentando di arginare, ma in alcuni paesi certi numeri gridano vendetta. In Thailandia il 32 % dell'intera forza lavoro è costituito da minori. In India ci sono quasi 60 milioni di bambini lavoratori. In Nepal il 60 % dei bambini svolge lavori che impediscono il loro sviluppo. In Brasile lavorano 7 milioni di bambini.
               

                  Per questo motivo ho accolto con fiducia questo provvedimento, che prevede anche orientamenti destinati agli operatori economici e alle autorità per aiutare a porre fine alla schiavitù dei tempi moderni.
               

Helmut Scholz,
im Namen der The Left-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Vizepräsident, werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es wurde schon hervorgehoben, wie viel Gutes dieses Gesetz bringen kann. Ich schließe mich da gerne prinzipiell an. Die Abstimmung morgen ist wirklich eine historische für Menschenrechte und verknüpft – ähnlich der Lieferkettengesetzgebung – politische und wirtschaftliche Verantwortung. Wir wollen keine Produkte auf dem Binnenmarkt, die aus Zwangsarbeit produziert werden, weder in der EU noch in Drittländern. Das senden wir als ein starkes Signal an unsere Bürgerinnen und Bürger, gehen aber zugleich auch auf der internationalen Bühne mit positivem Beispiel voran.
               

                  Wir sollten allerdings ehrlich sein: Der jetzt vorliegende Kompromiss enthebt uns nicht der Pflicht, ein Wirtschaftssystem grundsätzlich zu hinterfragen, das für sein Wachstum Kinder und Zwangsarbeit billigend in Kauf nimmt. Für die 28 Millionen Betroffenen weltweit ist der nächste positive Quartalsbericht wahrscheinlich ein schwacher Trost. Denn es ist uns nicht gelungen, eine Entschädigung der Opfer von Zwangsarbeit im Gesetzestext verpflichtend zu verankern. Es ist nicht haltbar, dass Betroffene von Zwangsarbeit keine Wiedergutmachung erhalten.
               

                  Sorgen wir dafür, dass Unternehmen oder auch staatliche Akteure hier die entsprechende gesetzliche und direkte finanzielle Verantwortung übernehmen! Ich sehe dieses Gesetz deshalb nicht als End- sondern als Ausgangspunkt, soziale Marktwirtschaft in Einklang mit Menschenrechten und Nachhaltigkeit zu bringen.
               

                  Vielleicht noch zum Abschluss eines: Wir haben vieles auf den Weg gebracht, um den 17 Nachhaltigkeitszielen der UNO näher zu kommen. Unsere heutige Gesetzgebung betrifft unmittelbar die Ziele 8, 10, 12 und 1. Bleiben wir dran! Das nächste Parlament muss unsere Bemühungen fortsetzen.
               

Katarína Roth Neveďalová (NI). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, práca má byť dobrovoľná, pracovné podmienky zodpovedajúce a mala by prísť, samozrejme, aj zaslúžená odmena pre týchto ľudí.
               

                  Nútená práca nemá miesto v 21. storočí a už vidíme, že aj chronickí porušovači týchto pravidiel postupne pristupujú k pravidlám Medzinárodnej organizácie práce. Ak je štandardom a zakazujú takúto prácu. Neexistuje dôvod, prečo by sme my ako Európska únia mali tolerovať alebo mali prestať vlastne riešiť túto situáciu, a mali sme umožňovať možnosť, aby mohli vlastne stále niektorí ľudia a niektoré firmy využívať nútenú prácu. Neexistuje vôbec ani pre nás tolerancia, aby firmy mohli hovoriť o tom, že nevedia skontrolovať vo svojom reťazci výroby, či bola nejaká nútená práca, ktorá sa mohla stať počas tejto výroby.
               

                  Je podľa mňa veľmi dobrým riešením aj to, že Európska komisia bude vyšetrovať takéto porušenia. Ak nejaká firma poruší túto možnosť a nebude vedieť zdokladovať, či tam bola nejaká nútená práca, pretože, samozrejme, vždy príde najskôr nejaká, nejaký podnet, ktorý bude mať určite nejaké odôvodnenie. Nemyslím si, že to bude spôsob, ako budeme takéto firmy zneužívať.
               

                  Určite, ak nebudeme používať takéto výrobky, tak je to náš konkrétny spôsob, ako môžeme proti nútenej práci sami bojovať. A myslím si, že je dobré, keď ju zakážeme dovážať do Európskej únie, ak takéto niečo bolo vyrobené. Nemôžeme si dovoliť kupovať lacné veci, pretože boli ľudia pri ich výrobe zneužívaní. Sme v 21. storočí.
               

Miriam Lexmann (PPE). – Madam President, according to the ILO, on any given day in 2021, there were 27.6 million people used as forced labour. In the Chinese province of Xinjiang, around 1.5 million people have been sent to concentration camps. Millions believed to be used as forced labour in making different products that end up on our markets, from cotton to solar panels. For too long, we ignore these facts, thus becoming morally complicit in these crimes. This is why I welcome both the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive and the ban on products made with forced labour.
I particularly welcome the risk-based approach so that our efforts can focus particularly on high-risk sectors and geographical areas, especially those like Xinjiang or Tibet, where State-imposed forced labour takes place. This way, we can also strike a balance between targeting the perpetrators and ensuring that our companies are not burdened by excessive administration. It is crucial that the ban hits those responsible for perpetrating and profiteering from abuses, rather than our small businesses.
The new legislation is not perfect, especially after countless negotiations and compromises. It is, however, an important first step in ensuring that we stop profiteering from the suffering of others. Human dignity is and must always be our number one priority.

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar, stimați colegi, cred că încheiem acest mandat cu rapoarte extrem de importante: combaterea muncii forțate.
               

                  Deși avem o convenție din 1930, trebuie să spunem că nu a scăzut munca forțată. Numai în cinci ani, din 2016 până în 2021, a mai crescut cu aproape 3 milioane de persoane care suferă de fapt la această muncă forțată. De ce ? Cine sunt cei mai năpăstuiți ? Cei săraci, copiii, femeile.
               

                  Și da, s-a mai spus aici: nu trebuie să spunem că numai în țările terțe se întâmplă acest lucru, se întâmplă și în Uniunea Europeană și este foarte bine că astăzi dezbatem și sper să votăm acest regulament care să elimine munca forțată.
               

                  Este oribil să știi că sunt puși oameni să muncească și să nu fie plătiți, să nu poată să-și întrețină familia sau propria viață din banii pe care îi câștigă. Și cred că este bine să avem sancțiuni uniforme în toate statele membre și să eliminăm munca forțată. De foarte multe ori ne bucurăm la produse ieftine, dar trebuie să ne gândim că acele produse ieftine sunt realizate cu muncă forțată. De aceea, cred că este foarte bine că încheiem acest mandat cu un regulament care protejează oamenii.
               

Pierre Karleskind (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, il y a quelques mois, nous avons adopté un rapport sur les pêches chinoises et leur influence sur les pêches illégales. Depuis, de nouvelles preuves de travail forcé à bord de ces navires, notamment dans la zone sud-ouest de l'océan Indien – ce sont les bateaux qui pêchent le thon – ont été apportées. On parle là de chantage, de brimades, d'agressions, d'agressions sexuelles, de retenues de salaires, de mois passés à bord d'embarcations chinoises, loin des familles, loin de tout. Vous pensez bien qu'au milieu des océans, il peut se passer n'importe quoi.
               

                  C'est ce que l'enquête de la Fondation pour la justice environnementale, publiée la semaine dernière, a révélé. Dans la chaîne de valeur de la production des produits de la mer, qui arrivent dans les assiettes des Européens, nous retrouvons aussi en Chine des traces de l'esclavage d'ouvriers nord-coréens. C'est ce qui a été révélé par l'Outlaw Ocean Project.
               

                  Cette semaine, nous allons avoir un vote historique – même deux avec le devoir de vigilance des entreprises. Alors, Monsieur le Vice-Président, faisons en sorte que, notamment avec le règlement luttant contre la pêche illégale, nous puissions combattre ce fléau moderne qui se trouve encore au milieu de nos océans et qui est une honte pour l'humanité.
               

Michiel Hoogeveen (ECR). – Madam President, I would like to congratulate both rapporteurs on the work done and the results obtained. We support and share the commitment to combat forced labour. On these forced-labour ban rules, however, we have a few of our concerns.
First, the absence of an impact assessment remains a crucial point. Despite good intentions, it is essential to assess whether its costs are justified and reasonable. The partial report delivered in a few years does not suffice.
Second, we have doubts on the impact on our small and medium-sized businesses. Although guidelines will be provided, the lack of a centralised national contact point may leave entrepreneurs uncertain about how to implement this regulation.
Our third concern is the fact that the door for remediation remains open. While the reasons are understandable, we doubt its feasibility. Which brings me to my overall concern, and again, we believe this is sensible legislation, but our overall concern, dear Commissioner, is that we, as the European Union, are overregulating. The European Union faces grave competition. So we also need to start focusing on a competitive business climate. We hear promises from the Commission about a ‘one in, one out’ principle, better regulation, adequate impact assessments. But the reality simply does not match up. Again, while this legislation is sensible, we also ask the Commission to practise what it preaches. So we also need to start focusing on deregulation.

Anabela Rodrigues (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, em 24 de abril de 2024 celebra-se 11 anos do colapso do Rana Plaza. Matou pelo menos 1 132 trabalhadores no Bangladexe. Aí, produziam-se as mesmas roupas que vestem milhões de pessoas na Europa e em todo o mundo. Este desastre provou que o mercado desregulado, com condições de trabalho forçado e infraestruturas inseguras, se pode converter num assassino em massa.
               

                  Já ouvimos aqui que, de acordo com a Organização Internacional do Trabalho, cerca de 27,6 milhões de pessoas têm sido vítimas de trabalho forçado em todo o mundo. Esta situação afeta desproporcionalmente pessoas pobres e racializadas no Sul Global.
               

                  Esta semana são votadas duas legislações importantes que ajudarão a travar a ganância desmedida e que constituem um avanço nos direitos humanos: a diretiva da devida diligência e sustentabilidade cooperativa e a proibição de produtos feitos com trabalho forçado. Cabe a este Parlamento lutar pela sua devida implementação, incluindo uma política ambiciosa de reparações a quem sobrevive a este flagelo, e devolver alguma justiça para evitar a continuidade da exploração dos mais fragilizados.
               

René Repasi (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrter Herr Vizepräsident der Kommission, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Diese Woche ist eine wichtige: Mit der Abstimmung über das Verbot von Produkten aus Zwangsarbeit und dem EU-Lieferkettengesetz schaffen wir nicht weniger als eine Neuprogrammierung unseres Binnenmarktes. Wir setzen endlich unsere globale Wirtschaftsmacht ein, nicht nur um Produktstandards weltweit zu setzen, sondern Produktionsstandards.
               

                  Wir sagen jetzt: Wer Gewinne mit den hart verdienten Euros unserer europäischen Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher machen will, der muss sich für den Schutz von Menschenrechten und der Umwelt einsetzen. Wir sagen: Niemand darf einen Wettbewerbsvorteil haben, weil Menschenrechte missachtet werden und der Planet geschändet wird. Die schlimmste Verletzung dabei ist die Zwangsarbeit. Dank an Samira Rafaela und Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques für ihre Arbeit an dieser Verordnung.
               

                  Mit dem EU-Lieferkettengesetz verlangen wir von Unternehmen, dass sie ihre private Macht für den Schutz von Menschenrechten einsetzen. Mit dem Verbot von Produkten aus Zwangsarbeit nimmt zudem der Staat seine Verantwortung wahr und verhindert den Marktzugang der schlimmsten Menschenrechtsschändungen.
               

                  Endlich, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, endlich wagen wir es, unser ganzes ökonomisches Gewicht in die Waagschale zu werfen, um aus dieser Welt einen besseren Ort zu machen. Lassen wir es nicht zu, dass das in dem Getöse über den Bürokratieabbau untergeht!
               

Jordi Cañas (Renew). – Señora presidenta, la Unión Europea va a prohibir los productos realizados con trabajo forzoso. Este es uno de los titulares que deberían señalar esta legislatura: conseguir que la decencia se incorpore en los principios y que los principios se incorporen en las obligaciones.
               

                  La Unión Europea no puede ni debe permitir que productos realizados con el sufrimiento de las personas —de mujeres, de niños, de personas privadas de libertad, de esclavos— puedan venderse con normalidad en nuestro mercado. Y eso explica por qué la Unión Europea es importante.
               

                  Cuando algunos la cuestionan, cuando ponen en duda para qué sirve la Unión Europea, podríamos decir algunas cosas como esta: porque la decencia importa, porque los derechos importan, porque los principios importan y porque para ser una Unión grande y fuerte tiene que ser justa. Justa con nosotros y justa con los demás. No podemos permitir que nadie se enriquezca utilizando el trabajo de los más desvalidos, de los más desfavorecidos. Eso hace grande a esta Unión y eso hace grande a este Parlamento.
               

Inma Rodríguez-Piñero (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, Europa no puede exportar valores e importar productos hechos con trabajo forzado. Tenemos que acabar con la esclavitud moderna.
               

                  Se ha dicho varias veces, y no debemos dejar de repetirlo, que en el mundo hay 28 millones de personas explotadas, sometidas a la esclavitud, y el 12 % de ellas son niñas y niños. También en la Unión Europea 1,3 millones de personas sufren el trabajo forzado. Y todas nos están esperando.
               

                  La Organización Internacional del Trabajo estima que el trabajo forzoso genera al año 217 000 millones EUR de ganancias ilícitas. Un negocio repugnante que sigue creciendo.
               

                  Seamos un referente mundial mañana. Votemos masivamente a favor del nuevo Reglamento que prohíbe la venta en la Unión de productos hechos con trabajo forzado.
               

                  Gracias a nuestra coponente Maria-Manuel Leitão, a nuestro ponente alternativo —que hoy no puede estar con nosotros— Bernd Lange, y a todos los grupos mayoritarios por su excelente trabajo y su colaboración. Y, por supuesto, a nuestra coponente Samira Rafaela.
               

                  Hemos conseguido un buen acuerdo que obligará a todas las empresas que utilizan trabajo forzado en algún eslabón de su cadena de suministro a que sus productos fabricados sean retirados del mercado de la Unión y confiscados. La cooperación internacional y disponer de recursos suficientes será fundamental para una aplicación eficaz de la ley.
               

                  Este será mi último pleno como eurodiputada y me voy orgullosa de haber contribuido activamente, junto con mi grupo socialista y de demócratas, a tener una ley que prohíba la venta de estos productos en la Unión Europea. Las personas deben ser siempre lo primero y no debemos permitir nunca más la esclavitud.
               

Barry Andrews (Renew). – Madam President, Commissioner and colleagues, it is a great pleasure to speak on a new European law aimed at safeguarding the human rights of some of the most vulnerable people in the world.
When I visit schools around Dublin, where I come from, and I tell students that their mobile phones, their food and especially their clothes could be tainted by the mark of forced labour and modern slavery, they are astonished, ashamed and they demand action.
So this is also about putting power in the hands of consumers and giving them the comfort to know that they are not passively contributing to human rights abuses across the world.
I would like to commend the French Government's recent decision to implement an environmental levy on hyper-fast fashion products, particularly targeting items from Chinese brands like Shein and Temu, as well as banning the advertising of such products.
I call on the Irish Government to consider our own national legislation to address the impact of fast fashion and to put an end to the scourge of forced labour and modern slavery. I'd like to congratulate the Outlaw Ocean Project for their excellent investigative journalism in this field, and particularly thank the two rapporteurs, and, if I may say, my friend and colleague Samira Rafaela especially, for their excellent work on this file.

Vlad-Marius Botoș (Renew). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisară, stimați colegi, drepturile omului sunt printre cele mai importante valori ale noastre, ale Uniunii Europene, iar acestea trebuie să se aplice tuturor. Fiecare cetățean trebuie să fie răsplătit pentru munca pe care o depune, pentru anii de pregătire, pentru experiența pe care a acumulat-o. Aceste reguli trebuie aplicate tuturor produselor, fie că sunt produse în Uniunea Europeană, fie că sunt produse în țări terțe.
               

                  Nu este vorba aici doar de importurile clasice, prin intermediul companiilor tradiționale, ci și de toate produsele care sunt cumpărate pe platformele online. Impunerea acestei condiții, interzicerea produselor realizate prin intermediul muncii silnice este o modalitate de a impune un standard minim al drepturilor omului tuturor partenerilor noștri, dar și o modalitate de a crea concurență echitabilă pentru producătorii europeni.
               

                  Drepturile omului trebuie apărate prin toate mijloacele de care Uniunea Europeană dispune. Felicitări, Samira! Felicitări tuturor colegilor care ați lucrat la acest raport. Este un mare, mare pas al nostru, al Uniunii Europene, înainte.
               

Catch-the-eye procedure


Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, the EU pretends to care about forced labour, but methinks the EU would implode if it had to stop exploiting, immiserating and shortening lives in the Global South.
The record of Western capitalism is one of genocide, colonialism and exploitation. We crushed the new democracies that came out of the post-war decolonisation period. We assassinated democratically elected leaders who spoke of independence, of breaking free of the system of exploitation that was established under the European colonialism. We use powerful lending institutions, like the World Bank and the IMF, to impose debt traps on former colonies, to keep them from developing. We force structural reforms on countries who defaulted on these impossible debt arrangements, ensuring that Western capital maintains the ability to exploit Global South resources. We have systematically de-developed former colonies in order to make lives cheap, workforces and resources cheaper and to maintain profits for Western capital at all costs.
Anyone who steps out of line, who challenges the system of Western-dominated global capitalism gets sanctions, regime change and war.

Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, today, it's estimated that at least 27 million people worldwide are captured in the horror of forced labour. Of course, the regulation before us aims to prevent the sale or export of products using forced labour within the EU market, which is obviously very good. Unlike the Due Diligence Directive, for example, this regulation is supposed to deal with all products and all companies regardless of their size, which again is good.
Unfortunately, once again, the Council has watered down the possibility of what we could do here because under certain circumstances, products manufactured using forced labour but likely to lead to the disruption of a supply chain of strategic or critical importance to the Union will be allowed to circulate, which, as far as I'm concerned, is an absolute joke, because what we're seeing is the quest for critical raw materials means ditching moral concerns in relation to the matter. The text is important, but I fear that, like many other measures, it won't be applied consistently and strictly, but rather used to pursue geopolitical objectives against our so-called enemies while ignoring the crimes of our so-called friends.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


Ylva Johansson,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, I would like to thank you all for your interventions. I believe this reflects the importance of this issue.
I would like to emphasise the importance of this regulation and its adoption. The determined fight we are undertaking against forced labour demonstrates to our citizens and to the world that our pursuit of prosperity cannot be achieved without upholding our values and internationally agreed human rights.
This regulation sets a new standard for the fight against forced labour and, together with our like-minded partners, through cooperation and exchanges of information on forced-labour risk, we will continue fighting effectively against this horrible human rights violation.
The Commission is ready to prepare the effective and efficient implementation of the instrument, with the lowest administrative burden for companies, and in close cooperation with the Member States' competent authorities. Allow me to thank you once again for your support of this legislative initiative.

Samira Rafaela,
rapporteur. – Madam President, I think it became very clear from this debate that we all share that we need to stand for human rights and that we need to protect human lives here, because this is really what the Forced Labour Ban Regulation is about. It's about protecting human rights, but it's also about promoting our own values and standards.
And this cannot be only empty talks. So yes, this is an instrument with teeth. We need to make sure that we follow up when it comes to the human rights that we sell in the world, and we are following several examples now in the world as being the EU. There are several other likeminded partners that have comparable legislation in place. Also to protect our multilateral system, and given the geopolitical situation in the world, it is very important that we harmonise as much as possible, that we try to do the same as much as possible as being likeminded partners. Because if we leverage that power, if we leverage these resources, if we leverage that knowledge, then we can be truly effective, from a multilateral perspective, when it comes to fighting for human rights and when it comes to protecting human rights.
And I am very proud to hear that we will probably count tomorrow on a big majority for this Forced Labour Ban Regulation, because that is, I believe, the only message we can send also in light of the elections. This is the message that we need to centre our citizens, that this is the Parliament that we have been fighting for – a Parliament that stands for the human rights and that protects human lives. And if we want to explain to our citizens why they should keep voting for the European elections, why the European Parliament delivers for citizens, then this is one of the very good examples, how we are preventing people in the world to become a victim of forced labour.

Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques,
rapporteur. – Madam President, I want to thank very much all colleagues for their intervention. The fight against forced labour must unite all of us in this Parliament. The European Union will finally have an instrument to address this practice, an instrument that is good for the victims, but also for the responsible European companies that protect their workers and suffer from unfair competition and dumping.
However, our work does not end here. For this regulation to be effective, it must be properly implemented. We must ensure that competent authorities, including the European Commission, have sufficient resources to carry out their new tasks, including inspection in third countries. I hope the Commission feels proud of this new competence. Cooperation with our international partners, particularly the US and Canada, will also be essential to prevent companies blocked by one country from selling their forced labour products elsewhere.
To finish, I want to dictate all my work in this file to the 28 million victims of this form of modern slavery. I am proud of the work of this Parliament.

President. – The debate is closed. Thanks very much to the rapporteurs and to everybody who contributed in this debate. The vote will be held tomorrow.


Written statements (Rule 171)



Ádám Kósa (NI),
írásban. – A kényszermunka alkalmazása sajnos az egész világon elterjedt. A becslések szerint mintegy 27,6 millió ember végzett kényszermunkát 2021-ben. A társadalom kiszolgáltatott helyzetben lévő és marginalizálódott csoportjai, a nők, a gyermekek, az etnikai kisebbségek, a fogyatékossággal élő személyek, az alacsonyabb kasztba tartozók, az őslakos és törzsi népek, különösen gyakran kényszerülnek ilyen munkára. A kényszermunkával előállított termékek és szolgáltatások behozatalát meg kell tiltani, hogy gátat szabjunk az emberek kizsákmányolásának. Nem csukhatjuk be a szemünket, nem hivatkozhatunk arra, hogy nem ismerjük egy termék eredetét. Még ha nehéz is utánajárni annak, hogy alkalmaztak-e kényszermunkát egy termék készítésekor, ki kell használnunk minden eszközt, hogy jó lelkiismerettel mondhassuk el: nem vagyunk részesei kiszolgáltatott emberek, gyermekek és fogyatékossággal élők kizsákmányolásáért. Mindannyiuknak jár a tisztességes foglalkoztatás és a munkajog kínálta védelem! Mert ha jogszerű, tisztességes munka van, akkor minden van!
               
20.   Amending Directive 2011/36/EU on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims (debate)

President. – The next item is the debate on the report by Malin Björk and Eugenia Rodríguez Palop, on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality, on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2011/36/EU on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims (COM(2022)0732 – C9-0431/2022 – 2022/0426(COD)) (A9-0285/2023).

Malin Björk,
föredragande. – Fru talman! Kommissionär! Människohandel. Alla säger att de vill bekämpa det, men det är ganska få som faktiskt gör någonting. Därför skulle jag vilja börja med att tacka min medföredragande, María Eugenia Rodríguez Palop. Jag vill tacka kommissionären som la fram det här lagförslaget. Tack Ylva! Jag vill tacka mina skuggföredragande, de som har kämpat och slitit hårt under flera månader under väldigt intensiva förhandlingar.
               

                  Vi sa inte bara att vi ville göra någonting, vi gjorde det också. Vi i parlamentet, vi hade velat gå längre än det lagförslag vi fick, och vi antog en position som var kraftfullare. Det är det som det här parlamentet gör, i alla fall när arbetet leds av två feminister, som är Eugenia och jag själv. Men i förhandlingar får man inte allt, utan man måste också ge med sig. Men det finns vissa väldigt bra saker som det här reviderade människohandelsdirektivet kommer att innefatta. Det kommer att förbättra medlemsstaternas praktiska arbete med att förhindra människohandel och stärka offers rättigheter.
               

                  Vi får en rad nya traffickingbrott; illegal adoption, trafficking för surrogat och trafficking för tvångsäktenskap. Men en av de mest centrala delarna är det förebyggande arbetet; utbildning för personer som kommer i kontakt med offer, en helt ny artikel fick vi med just kring utbildning. Det blir en bättre organisering av arbetet med nationell samordnare, nationell handlingsplan och ett bättre arbete mellan medlemsländerna.
               

                  Och efter påtryckningar från oss i parlamentet har också rättigheterna för dem som faller offer ökat. Vi har till exempel sett till att migranter som utsätts för människohandel inte ska tvingas välja mellan asylprocessen och att få status som människohandelsoffer. Det som är bäst, det som ger bäst trygghet och utfall för ett offer, det är det som ska gälla.
               

                  Vi hade velat se starkare skrivningar från det här huset vad gäller kompensation till offer. Vi kom en bit på vägen, inte ända fram. Men framför allt kom vi en bit på vägen vad gäller att bekämpa efterfrågan. Vi från parlamentet hade velat kriminalisera allt utnyttjande, allt köp av tjänster från traffickingoffer, i sexhandel och överallt. Inte bara de som utnyttjar med vetskapen om att de utnyttjar.
               

                  Det är nämligen så att i de länder där man har lagstiftning redan i dag, där det är kriminellt att utnyttja ett människohandelsoffer med vetskapen, där blir det nästan inga fällande domar. Parlamentet hade velat gå längre. Nu har vi i alla fall en stark skrivning om att kriminalisering av till exempel sexköp, om du vet att det är traffickingoffer, det ska gälla i varje medlemsland.
               

                  Nu vill vi också se att medlemsländerna gör allt för att få fällande domar. Det är faktiskt inte okej, det är inte okej att utnyttja kvinnor och flickor i prostitution. Det är inte okej att köpa, det är inte okej att köpa sex. Det är inte okej att utnyttja, att vara hallick och att bedriva hallickverksamhet med traffickingoffer eller med några andra kvinnor och flickor i Europa i dag.
               

                  Efterfrågan, det vill säga att bekämpa dem som köper och utnyttjar och säljer kvinnor och flickor, det är fortfarande centralt i arbetet, och där kan medlemsländerna gå mycket, mycket längre än vad det här direktivet säger. Vi har bara kommit en bit på vägen.
               

                  Återigen, som avslutning, vill jag säga att det här huset är oftast kraftfullare. Ibland brukar jag säga att vi feminister som verkar här inne – det är kanske inte alla 705, det vet vi allihop – men när vi bestämmer oss för att göra någonting, då förflyttar vi berg och vi vill förflytta de bergen i riktning mot en värld och ett Europa där man inte köper och säljer kvinnor och flickor och prostitution. Man köper och säljer inte människor och utnyttjar dem i trafficking.
               

                  Vi har kommit en bit på vägen. Vi vet att vi måste lämna över stafettpinnen nu. Medlemsländerna – mycket ligger på era axlar. Ni måste göra det allra bästa av det här direktivet. Återigen, jag tackar alla feminister, kommissionen och mina skuggor och naturligtvis María Eugenia för allt det arbete vi har gjort tillsammans. Det här en bit på vägen.
               

Eugenia Rodríguez Palop,
ponente. – Señora presidenta, han pasado doce años desde que se aprobó la Directiva relativa a la prevención y lucha contra la trata de seres humanos, y había que reformarla porque la trata se hacía cada vez más sofisticada y nuestros medios para combatirla eran cada vez más rudimentarios, ineficaces para detectar y perseguir la barbarie, identificar a las víctimas, protegerlas, apoyarlas y repararlas. Ni siquiera hemos logrado disminuir la demanda.
               

                  Así que la Comisión decidió hacernos una propuesta que nosotras —creo— hemos mejorado con audacia y ambición. Logramos el apoyo de una amplia mayoría de las dos comisiones implicadas y nos hemos guiado por este fuerte mandato. La muestra es que el texto que vamos a votar en este Pleno lleva su sello y su rúbrica.
               

                  Al matrimonio forzado y la adopción ilegal que la Comisión incorporaba como formas de trata, nosotras hemos conseguido sumar la gestación subrogada cuando se cumplen los requisitos del tipo penal de la trata. No vamos a negar que eso exigió un esfuerzo de pedagogía, pero esta forma de explotación reproductiva se va a perseguir en Europa.
               

                  En España, una pareja violó a una migrante extremadamente vulnerable para que se quedara embarazada a cambio de 20 000 EUR porque la inseminación artificial era más cara. La Fiscalía entendía que era un caso de trata, pero tenía dificultades para encajar la conducta en la gestación subrogada. Se pagaba por violar y robar un bebé.
               

                  La trata es tortura y la tortura no es solo patrimonio de los Estados. El Parlamento ha incorporado también la dimensión en línea: ofertas engañosas, ignorancia, coacción, necesidades económicas, etc., que ahora se convierten en un negocio digital que hay que erradicar. Y la difusión no consentida de imágenes, vídeos o material similar de naturaleza sexual agravará las penas.
               

                  El Consejo se opuso a las sanciones obligatorias para las personas jurídicas que se benefician de la trata, pero gracias al trabajo de este Parlamento se fortaleció su exclusión de los procedimientos de licitación, subvenciones, concesiones y licencias. Y se acabaron los permisos y las autorizaciones.
               

                  Que tomen nota los clubs de alterne, los prostíbulos en los que no se cumple con la legalidad. Los hay por doquier, y buena parte de ellos son agujeros negros en los que no se distinguen unos servicios sexuales de otros, ni quién los presta, ni en qué condiciones. Sabemos que hay personas que no están allí porque quieren. Y no olviden que —según esta Directiva— si se solicitan los servicios sexuales de esas personas sabiendo que son víctimas de trata, se está cometiendo un delito. Es algo que hay que tener presente, por ejemplo, si se está frente a una niña.
               

                  El Parlamento amplió también el principio de no enjuiciamiento ni imposición de penas a las víctimas por su participación en actividades criminales incorporando otras actividades ilícitas. Si te pagan 4 000 EUR por transportar droga, eres víctima de trata, pero si te obligan a prostituirte en la calle, también lo eres. No puedes sufrir una sanción de 30 000 EUR que, además, incremente la deuda que tienes con tu proxeneta, como sucede en España con la ley mordaza.
               

                  Si hay algo grave en Derecho sancionatorio es confundir víctimas y victimarios, perder de vista que el victimario es el que debe pagar por lo que hace y la víctima la que debe ser compensada por lo que sufre.
               

                  Esta Directiva plantea que la asistencia y el apoyo a las víctimas sean siempre especializados y se ofrezcan con un enfoque de género, infancia, discapacidad y centrados en quien lo necesita. Y, si hay discriminación interseccional, exige redoblar los esfuerzos. Pero está claro que no vamos sobrados de capacitación y sensibilidad.
               

                  La impunidad de la que gozan los proxenetas y los tratantes tiene que ver también con el modo en que los hemos normalizado, por ignorancia o mala fe, y con la xenofobia y el racismo. Por eso había que cambiar el trato que se le ha venido dando a quienes necesitan protección internacional. Las fronteras son un limbo si hablamos de derechos humanos, un nicho para cazar a personas mercancía y un auténtico negocio de la muerte.
               

                  Poco se puede hacer contra la trata si no se respeta el derecho de asilo y refugio. Las instituciones han estado demasiado ausentes por demasiado tiempo. Por eso, hemos creado la figura del coordinador nacional contra la trata y podrán establecerse organismos independientes que monitoreen la implementación y el impacto de esta Directiva.
               

                  Los planes nacionales serán obligatorios, y se acabó aquello de no saber nada. Habrá estadísticas para evaluar si la lucha contra la trata está funcionando o no. Así que creo, querida Malin, que hemos hecho un buen trabajo del que podemos estar orgullosas. Y a nuestras queridas ponentes alternativas, muchísimas gracias.
               

Ylva Johansson,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, three years ago, I spoke in this plenary about trafficking in human beings, and I spoke to you then about Susan. Susan is from Nigeria. She was tricked into coming to Europe, forced into prostitution. She escaped and testified against her traffickers. Three years ago here in the plenary, I said Susan's story was a story of exploitation. A story of courage. But not a story of justice. Because the men who used Susan's body faced no consequences for their actions. But now women like Susan can have justice – and that's thanks to you, thanks to all of us.
It will soon be a crime in the whole European Union to knowingly use the services of trafficked victims, not only victims of sexual exploitation, but also other forms of trafficking like labour exploitation. Previously, this was only criminalised in some Member States and now we are ending this patchwork of practices. We are making it a crime in all Member States. And this, to me, personally, was a very important goal when I put forward a proposal to update the Anti-Trafficking Directive.
Trafficking is a heinous crime. Traffickers can sell drugs only once, sell weapons only once, but they can sell a woman's body again and again and again and again. The message is now clear to anyone thinking of buying sex from a trafficked woman: there will be consequences – there will be prison.
So you can be proud. You can be proud also that we will be protecting more people by clearly forbidding new forms of trafficking, zero tolerance for forced marriage, zero tolerance for illegal adoption and, at the initiative of the European Parliament, zero tolerance for trafficking for surrogate mothers. I propose the law and you improve the law.
Trafficking is not only a terrible crime, it is also a European crime, a crime committed in the European Union by EU citizens against EU citizens – not only, but also – and thanks to you, we will now have a more European and more effective approach to fight this crime.
When I started nearly five years ago, I was not sure we would achieve this, but thanks to your strong commitment, zero votes against in the joint LIBE-FEMM committee and unanimous agreement by the Member States, it is an amazing achievement. So I would like to thank specially the rapporteurs, Malin Björk and María Eugenia Rodríguez Palop, and of course all the shadows and their teams. And I would like also to thank the Swedish, Spanish and Belgian Presidencies for this achievement.
Thank you for getting the job done so quickly and so thoroughly. Our most powerful tool against trafficking is legislation and you are the legislators. Thanks to you, we will be able to better prevent trafficking, protect victims, and prosecute perpetrators.
The updated Anti-Trafficking Directive will help to identify victims earlier, assisting them in helping to bring them home with referral mechanisms in all Member States. Better coordinate our work against trafficking with mandatory national anti-trafficking coordinators in all Member States. The new directive will put the fight against trafficking on the top of the agenda. All Member States will now draft national action plans with concrete measures against traffickers and to protect victims. And we made online sexual exploitation an aggravating circumstance, which can mean higher penalties for perpetrators, because the internet is now used to commit all forms of trafficking – and also to provide statistics on this threat, to know how we could fight the enemy.
Soon you will vote on the new Anti-Trafficking Directive. And when you vote, I ask you to think about Susan. I call on you to vote ‘yes’ with the same overwhelming convictions as you did in the committees, to show the crime of trafficking of human beings will not stand in Europe, and to show women like Susan: they can count on us.

Lena Düpont,
im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin, werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, liebe Berichterstatterin! Mehr als die Hälfte der Opfer von Menschenhandel in der EU sind EU-Bürger – Opfer im eigenen Land. Gleichzeitig hat die Zahl der Nicht-EU-Bürger in den letzten Jahren zugenommen. Sie übersteigt mancherorts bereits die Zahlen der inländischen oder innereuropäischen Opfer. Die Mehrheit der Opfer sind Frauen und Mädchen, das Ziel: sexuelle Ausbeutung. Der Anteil der männlichen Opfer, hauptsächlich zum Zwecke der Arbeitsausbeutung, nimmt ebenfalls zu. Etwa jedes vierte Opfer ist ein Kind. Die meisten Menschenhändler in der EU sind EU-Bürger. Nahezu drei Viertel der Täter sind Männer. Der letzte Europol-Bericht zu den gefährlichsten kriminellen Netzwerken in der EU listet alleine 55 dieser Netzwerke, deren Hauptaktivität der Menschenhandel ist. Die Grenzen zwischen legalen Unternehmensstrukturen als Tarnung und illegaler Geschäftstätigkeit verschwimmen zusehends.
               

                  Menschenhandel ist und bleibt leider weiterhin eines der stabilsten und lukrativsten Kriminalitätsphänomene in der EU. Daran hat leider auch die bisherige Richtlinie zum Kampf gegen Menschenhandel aus dem Jahr 2001 nichts geändert. Warum? Aus zwei einfachen, aber umso frustrierenderen Gründen: Erstens: Sie ist bisher von der überwiegenden Anzahl der Mitgliedstaaten nicht oder nur unzureichend umgesetzt worden. Zweitens: Der Kriminalitätsbereich hat sich, nicht zuletzt durch das Internet, entscheidend weiterentwickelt. Die Neufassung konzentriert sich daher genau darauf, Strafermittlungs- und Strafverfolgungsbehörden stärkere Instrumente an die Hand zu geben, um alte und neue Formen wie Zwangsheirat und illegale Adoption in den Blick zu nehmen, Ermittlungs- und Sanktionierungsinstrumente gegen Personen, die Menschenhandel betreiben oder die die Dienste von Opfern wissentlich in Anspruch nehmen, zu verbessern, den zynischen Möglichkeiten der Online-Dimension konsequenter entgegenzutreten und die Verfahren zur frühzeitigen Identifizierung und Unterstützung der Opfer zu verbessern.
               

                  Der fast wichtigste Punkt – finde ich – die Zusammenarbeit zwischen allen europäischen Stellen, wie den Anti-Trafficking-Koordinatoren, Europol, Frontex, einerseits und den nationalen Koordinierungs-, Ermittlungs- und Strafverfolgungsbehörden andererseits zu stärken. Dafür gebührt den Kollegen, den gesamten Teams, die daran gearbeitet haben, der herzliche Dank.
               

                  Aber, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, das kann nur dann zum Erfolg führen, wenn die Mitgliedstaaten die Instrumente auch umsetzen und anwenden. Das gilt für die vorliegende Richtlinie, das gilt für den verbesserten polizeilichen Informationsaustausch, für den gestärkten Kampf gegen Geldwäsche oder den Einsatz von KI. Wir werden gegen dieses menschenverachtende Geschäft nur ankommen, wenn unsere Strafverfolgungs- und Ermittlungsbehörden alle Instrumente an der Hand haben, die sie zur Erfüllung ihrer Aufgabe brauchen.
               

Juan Fernando López Aguilar,
en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, comisaria Johansson, en 2011 tuve el honor —junto con una coponente de la Comisión de Derechos de la Mujer, Soraya Rodríguez— de ser el ponente de Comisión de Libertades Civiles, Justicia y Asuntos de Interior del informe de evaluación sobre los diez años de vigencia de la actual legislación europea contra la trata. Y ahora tengo el honor de ser, efectivamente, ponente alternativo en esta legislación europea actualizada que responde a un mandato claro de este Parlamento Europeo.
               

                  Miles de personas caen cada año víctimas de la explotación de personas y de los tráficos ilícitos. El 70 % son mujeres. Y el 70 % —fíjense qué casualidad— son víctimas de explotación sexual; el otro 20 %, laboral. Del 70 % que son víctimas de explotación sexual, el 20 % son menores. Por tanto, estamos ante un paisaje brutal que tenemos que acometer.
               

                  El informe sobre la implementación pone de manifiesto defectos en la protección de las víctimas, defectos en la coordinación de las autoridades nacionales, escasez de demandas, escasez de denuncias y, por tanto, la necesidad de acometer la demanda de servicios laborales y sexuales. Ese es el punto esencial de esta legislación: invitar a los Estados miembros a tipificar penalmente el uso de servicios laborales o sexuales de las víctimas de trata, además de tipificar penalmente el matrimonio forzado, la adopción ilegal, la extracción de órganos y, por supuesto, la explotación de la gestación subrogada.
               

                  Se trata de un avance de la legislación europea, una Directiva penal contra los tráficos ilícitos que da un mandato claro de compromiso del legislador europeo contra esta insoportable forma de explotación de personas como son los tráficos ilícitos y la trata de seres humanos.
               

Jana Toom,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, in January, when we were already heavily negotiating on the directive, an article was published in the local Brussels newspaper. It was the story of Ernestine, an undocumented migrant who left her home country to flee from domestic violence. Ernestine was offered a place to stay in exchange for childcare without any proper pay. In fact, her so-called employer started demanding that Ernestine contribute to bills and rent. When she reached out to help, she was recruited to work at a vegetable shop for EUR 2 per hour. Her employer would demand rent money from her because he let her sleep in the corner of the shop, that way he kept her indebted. This is not far away from home, this is in Brussels.
Ernestine and many vulnerable persons are being recruited in order to be exploited and tricked into cheap labour. The update of this directive takes more measures to protect victims by introducing early detection and specialised assistance. It also provides for more opportunities to persecute perpetrators by introducing measures for legal persons, aggravating circumstances and punishment for those who knowingly use services from trafficked persons. Trafficking is not only the crime, it is a blatant violation of human rights.

Alice Kuhnke,
för Verts/ALE-gruppen. – Fru talman! Jag är så tacksam för alla de kvinnor, de överlevare, som under arbetets gång med den här lagstiftningen har delat med sig av sina fruktansvärda upplevelser och erfarenheter. Ni har upprepat att ni gör det för att rädda andra – rädda dem som fortfarande är kvar i det helvete som ni har lyckats ta er ifrån.
               

                  Det är tack vare ert och andras mod, styrka och solidaritet som vi nu får en tuffare lagstiftning på plats i hela EU. Den kommer att göra det svårare för dem som vill köpa andra människors slavarbete, och det kommer att göra det lättare för offren att få hjälp.
               

                  Och till dig som göder efterfrågan på traffickingoffer när du köper sex, varje gång du köper sex: Du är en skam för mänskligheten.
               

Margarita de la Pisa Carrión,
en nombre del Grupo ECR. – Señora presidente, señora comisaria, señorías, gracias a las ponentes por hacer coincidir tantas visiones.
               

                  El tráfico de personas es esencialmente una perversión del valor de la vida y, por tanto, de la dignidad de la persona. Nadie merece ser tratado como un objeto ni, mucho menos, como objeto de transacción. Todos somos un fin en sí mismos, y no mercancías ni útiles para que los otros deshonren nuestra identidad.
               

                  De una cultura que denigra el valor de la vida humana, podemos esperar que proliferen prácticas que atentan de forma inmoral y criminal contra las personas, tratas de mujeres y niños que deben ser investigadas y perseguidas. La gestación subrogada es también un modo de explotación, donde unos se lucran de la desesperación de otros con propuestas que manipulan la voluntad de las partes implicadas, a las que se tienta con salidas que —lejos de liberarlas— las encadena en grandes dilemas y deseos siempre insatisfechos.
               

                  No puede ser de otra manera. Se oferta al bebé como un objeto de diseño, susceptible incluso de ser rechazado. Se atrapa a la mujer con contratos perversos que ignoran su libertad y su salud y promueven la aceptación del desgarro traumático que supone la separación de una madre de su hijo.
               

                  Esperemos que este cambio en la Directiva relativa a la prevención y lucha contra la trata de seres humanos prevenga de estas prácticas que nos dañan en lo más profundo del corazón humano.
               

Anabela Rodrigues,
em nome do Grupo The Left. – Senhora Presidente, em 2024, o tráfico de seres humanos continua a afetar milhares de pessoas em todo o mundo. Só em 2021, a União Europeia registou mais de 7 000 vítimas.
               

                  Entre 2008 e 2022, Portugal registou um aumento de 107 % neste tipo de crime. Infelizmente, no Alentejo, quem trabalha a terra são, na maior parte das vezes, cidadãos migrantes de países como o Nepal, Bangladexe, Bulgária, Roménia, Moldávia, Ucrânia, Índia, Senegal, Paquistão, Timor-Leste – e podia dizer outros–, atraídos para a Europa sob promessas falsas de redes de criminosas. À chegada, em vez de trabalho digno, são manipulados por empregadores que lhes apreendem os passaportes, os mantêm em locais remotos, com condições insalubres e com mais dívida do que salário.
               

                  Dos 24,9 milhões de pessoas, de que a OIT fala, que estão presos em trabalho forçado, 16 milhões são explorados no setor privado, como o do trabalho doméstico, como o a construção ou da agricultura. Há uma responsabilidade política da UE contra o tráfico, por uma melhor solidariedade, investimento na capacidade para acolher e integrar vias seguras para imigrantes e refugiados, ao invés de insistir em medidas securitárias que os deixam sempre nas mãos desta gente sem escrúpulos e sem um trabalho digno.
               

Frances Fitzgerald (PPE). – Madam President, Commissioner, Berlin, Amsterdam, Paris, Madrid, Dublin: every EU city, town and village houses a victim of human trafficking.
We may not know it or just may not want to notice it, but it is clear from the figures that victims of trafficking are everywhere in our Union.
I would say denial is everywhere: trafficking takes place not just in the murky underworld, but before our very eyes: 37 % of victims of trafficking in the EU are EU citizens, 15 % are children. In 2022 alone, 10 093 victims of trafficking were registered in the EU. This was a staggering 41 % increase on the previous year – of course the real number is likely to be far higher – and 63 % of those trafficked are women and girls and 60 % of those who are trafficked are trafficked for the purposes of sexual exploitation.
Colleagues, we cannot talk about trafficking if we do not speak about prostitution: they are inextricably linked with violent criminal gangs profiteering from the exploitation of women. Let's be clear: as the Sunday Times writer Hadley Freeman said this week, ‘let's stop pretending that paying for sex is anything but abuse’. It is not liberating, it is not the next stage of feminism, it is abuse to exploit women for their bodies. Since when did we say that it is okay to exploit someone if they are getting paid? Never.
Colleagues, it is frightening to think that young boys and girls are being trafficked across our Union. It is time to do more for the innocent children of Europe who are having their childhoods taken away. We have to tackle the criminal gangs involved in prostitution.

Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, na Europa há pessoas traficadas para casamentos forçados, para adoção ilegal, para prostituição, para atividades criminosas, para serem forçadas a trabalhar – ainda hoje, aqui, há pouco discutimos o trabalho forçado – e até para serem barrigas de aluguer. São mais de 7 000 vítimas de tráfico na União Europeia todos os anos, na sua maioria mulheres e crianças, lamentavelmente.
               

                  É para acabar com esta comercialização de pessoas que lutámos arduamente para fazer a diferença com a revisão da Diretiva antitráfico de seres humanos. Muito obrigada à Malin e à María Eugenia e a todos os outros envolvidos neste trabalho.
               

                  Não obtivemos o acordo final tão ambicioso quanto os socialistas gostariam, mas ainda assim imprimimos novas regras europeias, não apenas para prevenir, investigar e combater o tráfico de maneira mais eficaz, mas também para oferecer melhor proteção às vítimas e aos sobreviventes deste crime hediondo. Os resultados da sua aplicação pelas autoridades dos Estados-Membros mostrarão se valeu a pena. Eu quero acreditar que sim.
               

Abir Al-Sahlani (Renew). – Fru talman! Kommissionär, kollegor! Om du åker 20 minuter från det här huset kan du köpa en kvinnas kropp – fritt fram för dig att våldta utan några konsekvenser. Vi är alltså 20 minuter från misär där kvinnor, flickor och pojkar utnyttjas, brukas och används som en slit-och-släng-vara i en butik.
               

                  Jag hoppas att ni blir obekväma av den här tanken, för det är den känslan som vi ska bära med oss. För nu har vi chansen att skicka en signal till hela EU om att sexköp aldrig är acceptabelt. Jag hoppas att ni kollegor tar på er det ansvaret att stå på varenda kvinnas, flickas och pojkes sida som är och har varit offer för människohandel och prostitution.
               

                  Det finns inga ord för att beskriva hur viktigt det är att EU tar sitt ansvar och förbjuder sexköp och förstör denna affärsmodell som bygger på bordellherrarnas preferenser. Och till er män som köper sex: Era dagar som utnyttjare av kvinnors kroppar är räknade, ni som genom er ekonomiska makt tror att det är okej att våldta en kvinnas kropp – för ingen kropp ska vara till salu. Ingen ska behöva gå igenom den psykiska och fysiska terror som era bordeller och trafficking innebär.
               

Beata Kempa (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Potrzebujemy bardzo konkretnych, bardzo celowych, ale przede wszystkim natychmiastowych działań. Potrzebujemy zdecydowanie większej aktywności państw członkowskich w zwalczaniu przemytu i handlu ludźmi. Potrzebujemy przede wszystkim wyższych kar za ten proceder i przede wszystkim surowszego traktowania winnych.
               

                  Kobiety i dzieci to dwie grupy szczególnie narażone. Dane są przerażające. Co roku około 300 tysięcy dzieci staje się ofiarami handlarzy. Unia Europejska chce zrobić więcej. To dobrze. To bardzo dobrze. Tylko np. dlaczego wciąż akceptujemy surogację dzieci. Surogację, która się wiąże z opłatą za to zjawisko? Dosyć przymykania oczu na ten haniebny proceder, który jest niczym innym jak handlem ludźmi.
               

                  Ale dlaczego również wciąż akceptujemy przemytnicze łódki krążące po Morzu Śródziemnym i Atlantyku i dostarczające ludzi na nasz kontynent? Bardzo często jest tak, że ludzie tymi łódkami nie dopływają, że giną na morzu. Usprawiedliwiamy często organizacje pozarządowe, które niestety – w jakiejś części, bo nie wszystkie oczywiście – za to odpowiadają.
               

                  Najprostsze sposoby okazują się najskuteczniejsze. Wszyscy wiemy, co trzeba zrobić. Trzeba przede wszystkim zdecydowanie w tej sprawie i skutecznie działać.
               

Cyrus Engerer (S&D). – Madam President, as a Parliament, we are strongly united to fight human trafficking and the organised criminal networks that prey on the most vulnerable people across the globe.
I believe that all human trafficking should be condemned. Anyone who is forced to do anything against their own will should be considered as a victim and needs our protection in the European Union. I do agree that anyone using the services of people who have been human-trafficked should also face criminal proceedings, and that is why I agree with this very strong statement and with this very strong directive in this Parliament being discussed right now.
However, if I could constructively criticise the text, I would say that we should not have listed the different reasons why people are exploited, why people are trafficked. I say this because all of it is wrong, all of it is criminal, and we can run the risk of leaving some situations out.
At the same time, we have unfortunately listed all of surrogacy in general terms as something which is totally wrong – and I agree, if this is forced, it is unacceptable. But then there are some circumstances where we have altruistic surrogacy, and we need to make sure that we do not put this in a negative light.
Let's be strong. Let's combat human trafficking in all our force, ensuring justice for all victims and holding criminal networks accountable.

Dorien Rookmaker (ECR). – Voorzitter, dank u wel, meneer Engerer, want uw punt is precies het punt dat ik wilde maken. Mensensmokkel is mensensmokkel en het maakt niet uit waarom je het doet, het is booming business en het is crimineel.
               

                  Of het nu gaat over smokkelen van vluchtelingen, over smokkel voor adoptie of prostitutie of gedwongen huwelijken, criminelen verdienen er miljoenen aan en dat is verkeerd. Een oversteek van de Middellandse Zee kost gemiddeld 10 000 euro en op een bootje zitten gemiddeld 500 mensen. Tel uit je winst: 5 miljoen omzet per bootje. Daar kun je niet zomaar wat aan doen. Maar we moeten er iets aan doen.
               

                  En wat gebeurt er nu? Eigenlijk niks. We maken het smokkelaars nog makkelijker om de dans te ontspringen, dat wel. Het aanvragen van een verblijfsstatus, dat zou voor iedereen buiten de grenzen van de EU moeten plaatsvinden. Op ambassades, zo dicht mogelijk bij de plaats van vertrek. Pas als de procedure met succes is doorlopen, mag men veilig afreizen. Zo tackel je de businesscase van mensensmokkelaars en daar moet je de aanpak op richten. Zolang we de oversteek van de EU-grens zonder geldige papieren blijven toestaan, gaat dit feest door.
               

Maria Noichl (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Wenn es um die Prävention beim Menschenhandel geht, ist es wichtig, ganz genau zu benennen: Was ist der Zweck des Menschenhandels? Denn nur, wenn ich den Zweck wirklich im Blick habe, kann ich präventiv tätig sein. Und ich möchte da meinem Vorredner explizit widersprechen: Es ist richtig und gut, und ich möchte Danke sagen, dass klar benannt ist, was der Zweck der Ausbeutung ist, nämlich Menschenhandel zum Zwecke der sexuellen Ausbeutung, offline oder online, Menschenhandel zum Zwecke der Leihmutterschaft, Menschenhandel zum Zwecke von Organhandel.
               

                  Genau der Zweck gibt uns die Richtung an, wie wir die Prävention starten können. Es ist doch klar: Wenn der Zweck die sexuelle Ausbeutung ist, sei es in der Prostitution oder in der Pornografie, dann müssen wir dort ansetzen, wenn wir Menschenhandel stoppen wollen. Genau in der Pornografie und in der Prostitution – dort muss klar sein: Hier ist der Ansatzpunkt. Beim Zweck der Leihmutterschaft müssen wir genau dort ansetzen und ebenso beim Organhandel.
               

                  Wichtig ist zu wissen, dass legale Strukturen – gäbe es legale Strukturen, und es gibt legale Strukturen, z. B. in der Prostitution – diese legalen Strukturen ausgenutzt werden, um die illegalen Strukturen aufzubauen. Das bedeutet: Die illegale Prostitution findet mehr oder weniger im Schatten der angeblich legalen statt. Deswegen: Der Zweck gibt uns den klaren Ansatz, wo die Prävention starten kann.
               

Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR). – Voorzitter, beste collega's, mensenhandel is een veelkoppig monster waar we maar geen grip op krijgen. Wat daarbij zeker niet helpt, is dat veel landen prostitutie als een normaal beroep zijn gaan beschouwen, terwijl juist daar heel veel mensenhandel is.
               

                  Dat we nu de richtlijn inzake de bestrijding van mensenhandel actualiseren, is een goede zaak. Maar er is meer nodig, met name bij de lidstaten: meer mensen en middelen voor opsporing en handhaving, betere informatie-uitwisseling tussen nationale instanties, maar ook meer uitstapprogramma's voor prostituees en het aanpakken van prostitutiebezoekers en exploitanten.
               

                  Uitbuiting van draagmoeders zal nu ook onder de richtlijn vallen en dat is zeer terecht. Ik blijf echter van mening dat draagmoederschap in zijn geheel verboden zou moeten worden. En dat niet alleen vanwege de uitbuiting, maar ook omdat het ethisch gezien zeer discutabel is een kind na de geboorte bij de moeder weg te halen.
               

Catch-the-eye procedure


Έλενα Κουντουρά (The Left). –Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριοι συνάδελφοι, κάθε χρόνο περισσότερα από 7 000 άτομα πέφτουν θύματα εγκληματικών δικτύων εμπορίας ανθρώπων στην Ευρώπη και η πλειοψηφία των θυμάτων είναι γυναίκες και κορίτσια που διακινούνται για σεξουαλική εκμετάλλευση. Ένα στα τέσσερα καταγεγραμμένα θύματα είναι πολίτες της ίδιας χώρας. Το έγκλημα αυτό αναπτύσσεται όλο και περισσότερο στο διαδίκτυο, και η νέα οδηγία για την καταπολέμηση της εμπορίας ανθρώπων ενισχύει τα δικαιώματα των θυμάτων, ενισχύει τα μέτρα πρόληψης και εξοπλίζει τα κράτη μέλη με το απαραίτητο πλαίσιο για να αντιμετωπίσουν τα εγκληματικά δίκτυα εμπορίας, και να στηρίξουν τα θύματα. Προβλέπει αυστηρότερες ποινές στα ζητήματα του καταναγκαστικού γάμου, παρένθετης κύησης και παράνομης υιοθεσίας.
               

                  Για πρώτη φορά, έχουμε μέτρα προστασίας για τα παιδιά που βρίσκονται σε ιδρύματα και τους ανθρώπους με αναπηρίες. Υποχρεώνει τις χώρες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης να επιβάλλουν κυρώσεις στα άτομα που εν γνώσει τους χρησιμοποιούν υπηρεσίες παρεχόμενες από θύματα εμπορίας ανθρώπων. Τώρα είναι η ευθύνη των κρατών της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης να την εφαρμόσουν άμεσα.
               

Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, I think that human trafficking is, of course, a grotesque crime, and I think we all share a commitment to fighting it. But like everything else though, that apparent commitment can be abused. And we have seen that in prosecutions of migrants and NGOs for human trafficking, when actually what they've been doing is saving lives.
And we have seen it time and again being used to browbeat people into supporting policies that harm sex workers' rights, for example. Now, thankfully, the more extreme elements of Parliament's position on this directive are now gone, but the push for the Nordic model is still there however watered down. This model has been criticised by everyone, from the UN to the ILO to Amnesty International and, more importantly, by sex workers themselves. Criminalisation doesn't reduce demand, but it does succeed in harming women.
Ireland introduced this model seven years ago. It was supposed to be reviewed in 2020. Four years on, that hasn't happened because if they did, it would be exposed for the failure that it is. So can we just deal with the crime of trafficking as it is and stop using it as a Trojan horse for other questions?

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, unfortunately, the EU's continued complicity has rendered the aims of this directive meaningless. Time and time again, the EU has fed the poverty, conflict and unemployment, which the EU itself names as the root causes of trafficking.
Within just four months in 2022, the EU countries reported over 80 suspected trafficking cases of Ukrainian refugees. Two years later, Parliament is still refusing calls for an initiative to secure a ceasefire. We cannot continue cheerleading conflicts worldwide, imposing famine conditions on millions of Palestinians and supporting sanctions that increase unemployment while claiming to protect victims of trafficking. And all the warmongering being engaged in by the EU only makes things worse.
The recent migration pact has destroyed individual right to asylum. Because of the policies we implement, children at our borders will be greeted with fingerprinting and increased detention. Yet this directive promises victims a straightforward, child-centred approach to international protection. God help us.

VORSITZ: RAINER WIELAND


Vizepräsident


Sandra Pereira (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, a diretiva que aqui discutimos avança no sentido do combate ao tráfico de seres humanos. Além da exploração sexual, inclui outras situações como a gestão da substituição, o casamento forçado ou a adoção ilegal, cujas práticas engrossam o número de vítimas de tráfico. Valorizamos igualmente a abordagem sobre a situação específica das crianças, bem como das pessoas com deficiência.
                  

                     Salientamos que é fundamental que os Estados-Membros tenham os recursos adequados, humanos, técnicos e logísticos para que o combate seja efetivo e as vítimas sejam protegidas. Esta proposta contrasta com o recentemente aprovado Pacote de Migração e Asilo que, com a militarização e externalização de fronteiras, pode ter impactos no aumento da imigração clandestina e, logo, no aumento do tráfico de seres humanos.
                  

                     Urge combater as causas do tráfico de seres humanos, o desemprego, a marginalização e a pobreza e dar prioridade ao reforço dos direitos sociais e laborais, ao emprego com direitos, a serviços públicos de qualidade e ao progresso económico e social.
                  

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)


Ylva Johansson,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, dear honourable Members of this Parliament, thank you for this debate. I thank you for your commitment to fighting trafficking in human beings. As I said at the beginning, trafficking is a European crime. Many perpetrators are from the European Union, as are many victims. Over 70 % of trafficked children are from the European Union. They are trafficked and exploited inside EU borders, and 25 % are trafficked in their own Member State.
Now we will have a better, more effective European approach. What we have done is raise the bar. But a Member State can put in place stricter rules or higher standards. It is important to say that the list of forms of exploitation in this directive is non-exhaustive. We made sure that Member States are criminalising at least these forms, but they can also have stricter rules.
And this much-needed update of our anti-trafficking rules comes at the right time. The latest statistics show the number of detected victims is increasing. The share of labour exploitation is growing. Forced begging and forced criminality is on the rise in relative terms. But in absolute terms, so is the number of victims of sexual exploitation. What doesn't change? Most victims are women and girls. And they are mainly trafficked for sexual exploitation. But the number of successful prosecutions is decreasing.
With your vote, we will bring better protection of victims and better prosecution of perpetrators. I would like to thank you for a job well done.

Malin Björk,
rapporteur. – Mr President, it has been said by several colleagues here that the majority of victims are women and girls trafficked for sexual exploitation. So, of course, that's a big theme and a big topic if we want to be serious about combating trafficking. But I have tried to make the point also that we have to differentiate between different forms of trafficking. If we were going to be successful in the prevention as well as in the prosecution and protection part. So this is also one of the key messages. As legislators, we have tried to do that.
Moreover, one of the main things is that when we try to prevent we have to address demand reduction. And we can do, you know, as much info and awareness raising towards potential victims as we want. But why should those who abuse and use and those who traffic, why should they go without having the main responsibility? That's where the responsibility belongs. So that's why it is so important to say no to those who exploit and those who abuse.
When it comes to labour exploitation, we have to work with, of course, to detect, with trade unions, with people working, you know, going in and seeing in these places, where is the abuse going on? Where can we detect victims and provide rights when it comes to trafficking for sexual exploitation? So who should we address? Of course we should say no to pimps. What kind of Europe is that, where we legalise brothels? And when we say it's okay to buy and sell women and girls and boys and men, it's not! And it's also then goes for those who actually use the buyers, it's not so difficult. You know, we can be very liberal and Sweden is a very liberal country when it comes to sex. Whoever, whenever, what you want, but don't pay. That is abuse. It's harmful and it's abuse and it feeds trafficking. So just be, you know, as other MEPs have said here, let's be honest about that, that some people are still backwards, some people are still backwards. They think that that, you know, like that. That's a normal thing. It's not a normal thing. It's the most conservative, Victorian thing that you should sell. And by women and girls, I just don't adhere to that.
Finally, I will just say what this directive is: it gives rights, rights and rights to victims. And that is the main thing because access to justice, housing and protection, that is what we have achieved.

Eugenia Rodríguez Palop,
ponente. – Señor presidente, ya se ha dicho aquí: cuando hablamos de trata, la mayoría de la gente suele pensar en víctimas de explotación sexual porque son la mayoría. Buena parte de ellas son mujeres y niñas. También se piensa en aquellas a las que se obliga a cometer actos delictivos o de mendicidad porque son más visibles.
                  

                     Pero no olvidemos que esta Directiva persigue también la explotación laboral, que se practica a veces en los mismísimos salones de las casas o en los negocios propios. Hay internas esclavizadas que han sido literalmente secuestradas, encerradas sin documentación y sin cobrar salario alguno con la idea de que bastaba darles cama y comida como si fueran mascotas. Hablamos también de temporeras que han sufrido trabajos forzosos en el campo y que, en muchos casos, han sido objeto —además— de violencia sexual. Se trata de gente de cuya situación irregular se saca provecho económico y con la que se mercadea como si fuera un despojo.
                  

                     Hay miles de personas sometidas a un permanente círculo de violencia sexual o laboral, deshumanizadas y cosificadas, convertidas en una mercancía segura y perdurable.
                  

                     En fin, está claro que el egoísmo y la codicia alimentan la crueldad, la cultura predatoria y esclavista. Y eso no se frena solo con una ley, por más integral que sea. Hay que dotarse de una sólida arquitectura legislativa. Por eso es tan importante que esta Directiva se contemple en conexión con la Directiva sobre la lucha contra la violencia, con el Convenio de Estambul o con el Convenio 190 de la OIT —por ejemplo—, en los que también hemos trabajado en estos años.
                  

                     Aunque a veces es difícil, hay que seguir creyendo en la humanidad para salvarla. Y yo confío en que mañana daremos un paso en la dirección correcta. No habría mejor broche para poner fin a esta legislatura.
                  

                     El mundo podría ser un poco mejor a partir de mañana. Gracias otra vez, señora comisaria. Gracias, Malin. Gracias a todas las ponentes alternativas. Espero de verdad que mañana todo empiece de nuevo.
                  

Der Präsident. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.
                  

                     Die Abstimmung findet am Dienstag, 23. April 2024, statt.
                  
21.   One-minute speeches on matters of political importance

Der Präsident. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgen die Ausführungen von einer Minute (Artikel 172 GO).
               

                  Ich möchte Sie darauf hinweisen, dass Sie für die Ausführungen von einer Minute von Ihrem Platz aus das Wort ergreifen können.
               

Milan Zver (PPE). – Gospod predsednik. Nikoli si nisem predstavljal, da bi ob koncu mandata – mojega že tretjega – moral pokritizirati delovanje evropskih institucij. Izraziti zaskrbljenost za to, da se na primer Evropska komisija pretirano vmešava v delovanje, v politiko držav članic.
               

                  Kot primer naj navedem gospo Vero Jourovo, ki je intervenirala v slovenski zakonodajni proces v času sprejemanja novele zakona o nacionalni televiziji in na ta način povzročila kar velike spremembe, tako vsebinske kot tudi kadrovske, na nacionalni televiziji.
               

                  Ta problem očitno ne bomo mogli rešiti na ravni politike, ker se izteka tudi mandat. Bom pa zato primoran iskati resnico in pravico tudi na evropskem sodišču. Upam, da v naslednjem mandatu ne bo prihajalo do podobnih stvari, kjer bi državam članicam kratile pravico do suverenosti.
               

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente, comisaria Johansson, la semana pasada se reunieron en Canarias los ministros del Interior de los cinco países que integran el denominado grupo Mediterráneo (Med5) —Italia, España, Malta, Chipre y Grecia—, con la intención de coordinar respuestas frente al hecho migratorio que tanto afecta a las islas Canarias.
               

                  Hay un balance de muertes que hace de Canarias la ruta más peligrosa, más mortífera —más insufriblemente mortífera— de inmigración irregular hacia la Unión Europea, que afecta particularmente a personas vulnerables y a menores, cuyo reparto solidario se está discutiendo también a nivel ministerial en España.
               

                  Pero el mensaje que quiero lanzar es precisamente el de la necesidad de que se ponga fin a esa mortandad en la ruta canaria hacia a la Unión Europea con un mecanismo europeo de salvamento y rescate.
               

                  Hace tan solo unos días se descubrió en Brasil un cayuco repleto de cadáveres. Las personas que viajaban a bordo no habían muerto de forma natural, sino que murieron uno a uno de forma agónica, después de haber lanzado al mar a todos aquellos que pudieron hasta que les faltaron las fuerzas para todo.
               

                  Tiene que ponerse fin a esa tragedia con un mecanismo europeo de salvamento y rescate.
               

Grace O'Sullivan (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, colleagues, the Green Deal is under attack and we must defend it. The draft EU strategic agenda has completely dropped environmental protection and climate action from Europe's plans for the next five years. The European Green Deal is gone – nowhere to be found in the draft plans. So right at the moment when we need more ambition on climate action and environmental protection, we are getting less.
To turn away from climate action and environmental protection would be a historic mistake and undermine the future safety and security of every citizen in Europe, and around the world. So I urge every Member and every Group in this Parliament to fight to keep the Green Deal alive and on the agenda.

Dorien Rookmaker (ECR). – Voorzitter, ik wil het vanavond graag hebben over de RRF. Het is een zak met geld op zoek naar een bestemming – 750 miljard. Direct bij de start van het herstel- en veerkrachtplan heb ik gewaarschuwd dat dit weleens helemaal fout kon gaan. En ik was niet de enige. Ook de Rekenkamer waarschuwde.
               

                  Nu al is er een fraudezaak van 600 miljoen aan het licht gekomen. Dat is sneller dan ik zelfs had verwacht. En de Rekenkamer stelt dat er nog veel meer fraude aan zit te komen. Dat is onverteerbaar voor mensen die hard werken en belasting afdragen.
               

                  Het gebrek aan transparantie en verantwoording en, uiteraard, zulke fraudezaken ondermijnen onze samenleving en het vertrouwen in de EU. De Commissie, maar ook het Parlement en de Raad faciliteren diefstal. Dit had nooit mogen gebeuren en het mag ook niet nog een keer gebeuren. De schade is groot. Hoe gaan we dit herstellen? Ik weet het eerlijk gezegd niet.
               

Philippe Olivier (ID). – Monsieur le Président, après l'interdiction de la vente des voitures thermiques en 2035, on découvre au fil des jours l'amateurisme qui vous a conduit au ‘tout électrique’: l'absence de production électrique suffisante, l'insuffisance d'autonomie non résolue des véhicules, le problème de recyclage des batteries et la dépendance à la Chine. Des associations nous alertent maintenant sur l'obsolescence programmée des véhicules électriques: des logiciels de plus en plus complexes dans des voitures électriques, des composants électroniques dont certains sont difficiles à trouver, et des pièces qui ne sont pas en production continue.
               

                  Il est plus qu'urgent de garantir la durabilité des pièces des voitures électriques et de rendre réparables les éléments qui les composent, notamment les batteries souvent indémontables. Derrière tout cela, c'est l'impossibilité pour un propriétaire de revendre son véhicule électrique et surtout l'idée, paradoxale pour votre projet prétendument écologique, d'une voiture jetable.
               

                  Vous devez intervenir sur cette question de l'obsolescence. À moins que le choix de tourner le dos à la voiture thermique ne fût en réalité que la décision d'en finir purement et simplement avec la civilisation automobile.
               

Martin Sonneborn (NI). – Herr Präsident! Im Juni wird eine EU-Wahl veranstaltet, obwohl ihr Ergebnis längst feststeht. Denn die Leitlinien der Politik für die nächste Legislatur wurden bereits beschlossen. Sie erhalten ein rattenscharfes Selbstmordprogramm, das uns durch Handelsblockaden den Zugang zu erschwinglichen Rohstoffen und Produkten verwehrt, während es zeitgleich auf Aufrüstung, Verschuldung und Austerität setzt.
               

                  Das Ergebnis kann nur die weitere Zertrümmerung der Wirtschaft und der Reste des Sozialstaats sein. Das ist präsidenzlos. Den Europäern stehen die schlimmsten fünf Jahre ihres Lebens bevor, und das auch noch mit Frau von der Leyen an der Spitze – würg –, die trotz laufender Ermittlungen gegen sie einfach weitermachen wird.
               

                  Wer diesen Irrsinn mit seiner Stimme zu legitimieren gedenkt, der hat die Kontrolle über sein demokratisches Leben verloren. Lasse sich niemand einreden, diese Wahl wäre zu wichtig, um kleine Parteien zu wählen. Sie ist zu wichtig, um die großen Parteien so weitermachen zu lassen wie bisher. Europa nicht den Laien überlassen!
               

Peter Pollák (PPE). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, Európska komisia zaslala Slovenskej vláde list, v ktorom vyjadruje obavy z legislatívnych zmien, ktoré oslabujú právny štát na Slovensku.
               

                  Kvôli tejto legislatíve nám môže Komisia pozastaviť miliardy eur z plánu obnovy. Po tomto liste rozpútal premiér Fico na opozíciu hon. Nazval nás vlastizradcami. Fico, Pellegrini a Danko po volebnej výhre zabudli na voličov. Zabudli, že sľúbili ľuďom lacnejšie potraviny, lacnejšiu elektrinu či lacnejší benzín. Je pol roka po voľbách. Ani na jeden z týchto sľubov si nikto z tejto trojice už ani nespomenul. Od volieb robia všetko preto, aby tí, čo rozkrádajú na Slovensku miliardy, boli beztrestní, prípadne dostali za svoje spáchané zlodejiny minimálne tresty.
               

                  Vážení Fico, Pellegrini, Danko, hovorte si, čo chcete, nadávajte nám do vlastizradcov, my však nebudeme ticho a už vôbec nečakajte, že vám za tieto vaše zlodejiny, za tieto spáchané – teda naozaj – prúsery budeme tlieskať. A ak prídeme o eurofondy, tak bude to len kvôli tomu, lebo ste obetovali záujmy Slovenska nad záujmy vašich ľudí, ktorých chcete chrániť pred spravodlivým trestom.
               

Цветелина Пенкова (S&D). – Г-н Председател, г-жо Комисар, скъпи колеги, за да имаме силна и обединена Европа, трябва да покажем на нашите граждани, че решенията, които предлагаме, са реални. Трябва да има приемственост, за да можем да реализираме дългосрочните политики на Съюза. През следващия мандат са нужни 7 конкретни стъпки, с които да защитаваме интересите на европейските граждани индустрия, енергетика.
               

                  Длъжни сме да гарантираме сигурността на енергийните доставки и предвидими цени. Трябва да развиваме ядрената енергетика, за да имаме чисти базови мощности. Наложително е да добиваме и преработваме повече критични суровини тук в ЕС, защото все още има залежи. Само така можем да запазим конкурентоспособността на европейската икономика и да гарантираме висококачествени работни места. Трябва да подобрим свързаността на енергийните мрежи и трябва да инвестираме в научно-развойна дейност и да развиваме кадровия си потенциал. Това трябва да са приоритетите на следващата Европейска комисия и на този Парламент.
               

                  Горда съм, че България може да изиграе ключова и решаваща роля в реализирането на всеки един от тези 7 приоритета заради експертния ни капацитет, опит в енергетиката, налични критични суровини и индустриален потенциал.
               

Barry Andrews (Renew). – Mr President, Commissioner and colleagues, it was my honour to launch Housing Europe's election manifesto in Brussels in January. For the last two years, I have been exploring ways in which the EU can directly and indirectly support Ireland's housing policy options, because the reality is that many people struggle to see what the EU can do to help them with the essentials of life, the cost of living, with healthcare and, for young Dubliners at least, access to housing.
And I get it. In Ireland, despite record investment, the housing crisis remains acute, and, far from helping, some EU laws are actually stopping progress. For example, strict EU debt rules forced the government to choose between fiscal prudence and investment in public housing. That is why we need a comprehensive housing strategy for Europe to massively ramp up funding. That's why we need a special committee on housing to work on this day in and day out. Taking real action on housing is our best defence against Euroscepticism.

Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE). – Senhor Presidente, como eurodeputada galega do BNG, defendo o pacifismo e o antimilitarismo. Defendemos a paz, a política como diálogo, a diplomacia como uma ponte, negociar os conflitos em vez de os aumentar com o envio de mais armas que prolongam guerras e genocídio. Não em nosso nome.
               

                  A guerra defendem-na todos aqueles que se dispõem a enviar mais armas e a prolongar os conflitos, esses mesmos que estão dispostos a tudo. E quero voltar a pedir, neste derradeiro plenário, que se ponha fim à guerra. É preciso pôr fim ao massacre e ao genocídio do povo palestiniano, reconhecer o Estado de Palestina e pôr fim aos crimes que Israel comete.
               

                  A hipocrisia e o cinismo que há na Europa em relação às guerras evidenciam quem verdadeiramente está por trás, os que vendem as armas. Por isso, sempre pela paz, não às guerras. Não em nosso nome.
               

Cristian Terheș (ECR). – Domnule președinte, dragi colegi, sub cinci ani de mandat ai Ursulei von der Leyen, Uniunea Europeană a devenit dintr-un spațiu al libertății, unul al tiraniei, dintr-un spațiu al prosperității, unul al sărăciei.
               

                  În acest plen, Ursula von der Leyen a spus în 2019 că proiectul european este fondat pe filozofia greacă și dreptul roman, evitând să menționeze și valorile iudeo-creștine. Au fost valorile iudeo-creștine bazate pe Biblie și pe tradiția Bisericii de mii de ani, cele care au creat baza pentru recunoașterea drepturilor fundamentale ale omului, deoarece toți oamenii, indiferent că sunt bărbați sau femei, au fost creați de Dumnezeu egali și răscumpărați cu preț de sânge prin jertfa lui Isus pe cruce.
               

                  A fost învățătura biblică a reconcilierii cea care i-a condus pe francezul Schuman, germanul Adenauer și alții să se adune la aceeași masă după al doilea război mondial, să se roage, să se ierte și să se reconcilieze și să pună astfel bazele acestui proiect, pentru a aduce pace prin prosperitate.
               

                  În acești cinci ani, sub Ursula von der Leyen, UE, mai ales în perioada pandemiei, și-a abandonat, ignorat, sfidat și încălcat toate principiile fondatoare. Interesele materiale ale firmelor producătoare de pretinse vaccinuri anti-COVID au fost mai importante decât drepturile europenilor la informare și a decide liber și corect informat dacă să se injecteze cu acestea ori nu. Soluția ca UE să aibă viitorul… ( Președintele a întrerupt vorbitorul)


Thierry Mariani (ID). – Monsieur le Président, après le devoir de vigilance pour les entreprises européennes, le Parlement européen discutera cette semaine d'un texte pour lutter contre le travail forcé. Dans le même temps, en Afrique, beaucoup accusent l'Union européenne d'hypocrisie.
               

                  Ainsi, la signature d'un accord avec le Rwanda pour un partenariat sur les métaux rares soulève les pires inquiétudes. Le 22 février dernier, l'annonce de cet accord a provoqué la réaction du président de la République démocratique du Congo, Félix Tshisekedi, qui a déclaré, je le cite: ‘C'est comme si l'Union européenne nous faisait la guerre par procuration.’ Il ajoutait d'ailleurs: ‘Quand vous achetez un produit chez un receleur, vous êtes vous-même coupable du vol.’ Aucun observateur international sérieux n'explique le soutien du Rwanda aux milices qui ravagent l'est du Congo autrement que par son appétit pour les ressources minières de cette région.
               

                  Il convient donc que ce Parlement interpelle au plus vite la Commission européenne, pour qu'elle s'engage enfin à ne pas alimenter l'un des pires conflits au monde en soutenant le régime de Kigali qui viole et pille le Congo en toute impunité.
               

Younous Omarjee (The Left). – Monsieur le Président, préférer la vie à la mort, promouvoir la paix, défendre la justice et le droit international, être toujours du côté des opprimés, des colonisés et des damnés de la terre, se refuser enfin à voir sombrer sa propre humanité et sa propre dignité, en dénonçant les crimes commis aujourd'hui sur la terre de Palestine, sauf à s'en rendre complice par son silence. Voilà ce qui fait de vous aujourd'hui en France, non pas un juste, mais un montré du doigt, susceptible d'être convoqué devant la justice, y compris pour les oppositions politiques et les candidats aux élections européennes.
               

                  Le renversement des valeurs est total. Il dit le climat de terreur intellectuelle et politique pour museler les voix de solidarité aux Palestiniens et empêcher toute critique du gouvernement extrémiste de Netanyahou. Aujourd'hui, en France, le risque est pris, quoi qu'il en coûte pour la démocratie, de porter atteinte à la liberté d'expression.
               

Henk Jan Ormel (PPE). – Voorzitter, mevrouw de commissaris, hoogpathogene vogelgriep is vastgesteld bij runderen in de Verenigde Staten. Het is zorgelijk dat het virus zich nu ook bij runderen en zelfs van koe naar koe lijkt te verspreiden. Steeds meer zoogdiersoorten raken besmet. Ook de mens is uiteindelijk een zoogdier. De WHO waarschuwt dan ook dat deze pandemie bij dieren ook op mensen kan overslaan.
               

                  Ik roep de Commissie en de lidstaten op tot meer en spoedig onderzoek vanuit een ‘één gezondheid’-perspectief: komt het virus bijvoorbeeld al onder Europese koeien, geiten en varkens voor? Hoe verspreidt het zich?
               

                  Ik vraag om meer aandacht voor vaccinontwikkeling voor mens en dier en er moeten zoveel als mogelijk onnodige belemmeringen weggenomen worden om tot vaccineren over te kunnen gaan. Het is nu dat we een volgende pandemie kunnen voorkomen.
               

João Albuquerque (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, o futuro da Europa não parece muito luminoso. Tal como há 100 anos, à nossa volta proliferam guerras fratricidas. As desigualdades não param de aumentar e 95 milhões de europeus vivem em pobreza ou em risco de exclusão social. E tal como há 100 anos, os populismos proliferam, alimentando-se do medo e da falta de segurança no futuro.
               

                  Mas há tempo para inverter este rumo. Há tempo, porque há esperança. Este não é o tempo para baixar os braços. Não é hora da política dos interesses, nem dos interesses na política. É tempo de lutar, de lutar por um sistema económico mais justo e que combata as desigualdades, de lutar pela sustentabilidade e pelo futuro das gerações vindouras, de lutar por uma democracia que garanta e respeite os nossos direitos fundamentais, permitindo que cada um possa encontrar o espaço para concretizar os seus sonhos, de lutar por um sonho de comunidade em que cuidamos dos outros e em que cada um de nós é livre para ser o que é, porque só somos verdadeiramente livres quando todos formos livres.
               

                  Na minha última intervenção neste plenário, quero citar José Mário Branco: ‘Abril é um lindo sonho para viver quando toda a gente assim quiser’. E nós temos de querer. 25 de Abril sempre!
               

Jana Toom (Renew). – Mr President, dear colleagues, I would like to draw your attention to the situation concerning the Estonian congregation of the Russian Orthodox Church. This is the largest religious congregation in Estonia, comprising more than 100 000 believers.
We all know that the Head of the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate supported Russia's war against Ukraine and called it the ‘Holy War’, which is absolutely disgusting and condemnable. And this is exactly what the Estonian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate did: it officially condemned this idea of holy war. But unfortunately, this is not enough for the Estonian authorities. They continue to insist that the words of the Moscow Patriarchate cast a shadow of terrorism on the Estonian Orthodox believers, and seem to want to legally dissolve the Estonian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate.
The EU is based on the principle of protection of freedom of religion and belief, and we should not interfere in religious and ecumenical matters. I hope that it will not eventually be done in Estonia, and that is the reason I do bring this extremely sensitive issue to your attention. This is kind of an early warning, and I want to hope an unnecessary one, but we'll see tomorrow.

Michiel Hoogeveen (ECR). – Voorzitter, dit is het: onze laatste plenaire vergadering in Straatsburg. De Europese verkiezingen komen eraan. Op 6 juni gaan we naar de stembus en verandering hangt in de lucht.
               

                  Onze ouders en grootouders tekenden ooit voor een gemeenschappelijke markt, maar kregen sluipenderwijs een overheersende politieke Unie met vlaggen, volksliederen, gemeenschappelijke schulden en nu zelfs richting een eigen leger, terwijl de kiezer daar nooit om heeft gevraagd of voor heeft gestemd. Het is dan ook niet verwonderlijk dat de Europese verkiezingen in Nederland traditioneel de laagste opkomst kennen.
               

                  Men vraagt zich ondertussen af: wat voor zin heeft het eigenlijk? Maar de geschiedenis leert ons één ding: politieke samenwerkingen zoals de Europese Unie overleven niet als ze star in een en dezelfde richting blijven bewegen. Ze moeten veranderen, zich aanpassen of ze sterven uit.
               

                  In Europa is nu de tijd gekomen. De stroom van macht van de lidstaten naar Brussel moet worden omgekeerd. We moeten macht en middelen terug laten stromen. Terug van Brussel naar de lidstaten en – nog belangrijker – terug naar de Nederlanders.
               

Silvia Sardone (ID). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, diverse volte in questo mandato abbiamo discusso degli attacchi delle forze dell'ordine, ma nel senso di quelle che la polizia fa nei confronti delle persone, mai quello che gli uomini e le donne in divisa si trovano a dover subire ogni giorno mentre prestano servizio per garantire la sicurezza di tutti.
               

                  Solo in Italia ogni anno contiamo 2 000 agenti feriti per mano di clandestini, antagonisti e balordi di strada; cinque al giorno, nell'indifferenza della sinistra che vorrebbe addirittura disarmare i poliziotti e guarda le divise con fastidio. Negli ultimi mesi è montato un odio antipolizia vergognoso e pericoloso, perché legittima scontri di piazza da parte dei centri sociali.
               

                  All'Università Sapienza di Roma, la settimana scorsa ci sono stati scontri con la polizia, è stato persino assaltato un commissariato. La sinistra ha preferito difendere i violenti aggrappandosi al diritto di manifestare.
               

                  Io sono e sarò sempre dalla parte di chi ogni giorno indossa una divisa per garantire ordine pubblico e sicurezza, mai dalla parte dei delinquenti che con qualsiasi scusa e copertura politica si sentono legittimati ad aggredire le forze dell'ordine. Chi attacca la polizia attacca lo Stato.
               

Sandra Pereira (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, comemoramos os 50 anos da Revolução de Abril em Portugal. A ditadura fascista foi repressão, prisões, tortura e assassinatos. Foi atraso económico e social, analfabetismo e obscurantismo, miséria, desigualdade, injustiça, emigração. Foi negação de direitos, dos trabalhadores, das mulheres, dos jovens. Foi colonialismo e guerra colonial com o apoio da NATO. Foi corrupção e concentração da riqueza num punhado de monopólios.
               

                  A Revolução de Abril, a realização dos capitães progressistas e do povo português, foi soberania nacional, liberdade, paz, democracia. Foram direitos no trabalho, saúde, educação, segurança social, habitação, cultura. Foi nacionalização dos setores estratégicos da economia. Foi reforma agrária na zona do latifúndio, foi amizade e cooperação com todos os povos do mundo.
               

                  50 anos volvidos, muitas das conquistas foram destruídas e amputadas por décadas de política de direita. Outras persistem, fruto da luta dos trabalhadores e do povo, mostrando que o futuro de Portugal está nos valores que Abril realizou. Por isso, na semana passada trouxemos um cheirinho da festa que foi Abril ao Parlamento Europeu. Há 50 anos o povo português ordenou e fez-se Abril. 25 de Abril sempre… (O Presidente retira a palavra à oradora)


Stanislav Polčák (PPE). – Pane předsedající, naše Unie dokázala za posledních sedm dekád více než jakákoli jiná mezinárodní organizace. Unie trvá na mírovém soužití mezi svými členskými státy a také tohoto cíle skutečně dosáhla. Unie zásadně zvýšila kvalitu života svých občanů, pomáhá při katastrofách, pomáhá urovnávat konflikty, podporuje vědu, inovace, mladé lidi jako žádná jiná mezinárodní organizace na světě, snižuje rozdíly mezi regiony a podporuje dobré projekty obcí, malých a středních podniků.
               

                  Je nepochybně co zlepšovat a také co na naši Unii změnit. Unie čelí ohromujícím geopolitickým výzvám. Ochrana přírody nám mizí doslova pod rukama. Musíme snižovat byrokracii a rozlišovat mezi podstatným a nepodstatným. V následujících evropských volbách jde skutečně o hodně.
               

                  Dovolte mi vyznat se z obdivu k zakladatelům Unie a také ke státníkům a naším předchůdcům, kteří dosáhli stavu, v jakém Unie dneska je. Myslím si, že máme být na co hrdí. A já se vyznávám z obdivu k Evropské unii.
               

Sara Cerdas (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, este mandato do Parlamento Europeu, que agora chega ao fim, ficou marcado por múltiplas crises, sendo a maior delas a pandemia de COVID-19, que acabou mudando as nossas vidas para sempre.
               

                  A União Europeia respondeu a desafios e também respondeu aos europeus que pediam mais ação na Europa, na Saúde. E assim nasceu a União Europeia para a Saúde. Um sonho, um projeto, uma realidade ainda em construção. E o Espaço Europeu de Dados de Saúde será um novo e revolucionário pilar fundamental desta construção.
               

                  Este regulamento permitirá a um madeirense que viaje até ao continente ou até mesmo a outro país da União Europeia e que precise de recorrer a serviços de saúde uma maior acessibilidade aos cuidados de saúde. Os médicos terão o seu registo de saúde na hora, sem atrasos, sem ter de pedir exames repetidos na sua própria língua. Estima-se com isso uma poupança de cerca de 20 % dos gastos em saúde.
               

                  Trabalhámos, aqui, para que nenhum europeu, vivendo na Madeira, no continente ou em qualquer outro Estado-Membro, fique para trás e, por parte do Parlamento, digo com orgulho: missão cumprida.
               

Vlad-Marius Botoș (Renew). – Domnule președinte, timp de cinci ani, am spus în fiecare dezbatere în acest plen, în fiecare sesiune plenară de la Strasbourg, că locul României este în spațiul Schengen. Și vă mulțumesc, doamnă comisar Ylva Johansson, că sunteți prezentă în această seară aici și la această dezbatere, și vă mulțumesc pentru lupta dumneavoastră și pentru efortul dumneavoastră de a susține această cauză a României, de a fi parte și cu spațiul terestru în zona Schengen.
               

                  Dragi colegi, ‘nu lăsăm pe nimeni în urmă’ este principiul care stă la baza acestei construcții politice și economice deosebite, pe care noi toți o reprezentăm: Uniunea Europeană. Tocmai de aceea, România în Schengen trebuie să fie unul dintre obiectivele noastre, ale tuturor, ale celor care reprezentăm Uniunea Europeană. Și de aceea îmi doresc ca și dumneavoastră să susțineți și după 9 iunie acest deziderat de țară pe care România mai trebuie să-l îndeplinească: România în Schengen și cu spațiul terestru.
               

Clare Daly (The Left). – Mr President, as the present mandate draws to an end, we leave this continent poorer than it was five years ago, with record inequality, a worsening housing and cost-of-living crisis. A Europe taking a sledgehammer to solemn and necessary climate promises. A Europe which has lost the ear of a changing world. A Europe stealing from every single pocket to barrel down the road of ever-increasing war and militarisation. A Europe setting fire to international law so that you can support Israeli genocide.
My God, how did we get to this point and where will we be if we have another five years of it? Well, I'll tell you something: the people of Europe can't afford to find that out. The parties of business as usual have lost their mandate. Change must come. In June, in every country, people have an opportunity to vote for peace and a socially just Europe. It's more important than ever that they take it.

Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Pane předsedající, dámy a pánové, svůj poslední one minute speech v tomto mandátu nemohu věnovat nikomu jinému než těžce zkoušené Ukrajině.
               

                  Tento týden jsme dostali konečně dobrou zprávu z amerického Kongresu, který rozhodl o podpoře Ukrajiny ve výši 61 miliard dolarů. To je jasný signál celému světu, ale také nám, Evropské unii, protože právě nás Ukrajina v posledních týdnech naléhavě prosí, abychom poslali na Ukrajinu systémy protivzdušné obrany. Také proto jsme vyzvali Evropskou radu, aby tak neprodleně učinila, a dokud členské státy nepošlou Ukrajině tuto pomoc, tak Evropský parlament nedá souhlas s účetní uzávěrkou. Bohužel v minulém týdnu Evropská rada zatím nerozhodla a stejně tak dnes ministři zahraničních věcí.
               

                  Oceňuji, že Německo se k této iniciativě přihlásilo. Ale jsou jiné evropské země, které tyto systémy mají, a nikdo nerozumí, proč ještě čekají, na co čekají. Potřebujeme odpověď těm, kteří posílají své syny na frontu, kteří umírají i za nás… (předsedající řečnici odebral slovo)


Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Domnule președinte, accesul la apă de calitate este un drept recunoscut la nivel european. Din păcate, apa a devenit un lux pentru locuitorii județului Alba.
               

                  Prin prisma costurilor supraevaluate ale materialelor de construcție folosite, a salariilor imense ale conducerii companiei județene de apă și a politizării managementului, s-a ajuns ca în frumosul județul Alba, cu multe resurse de apă, prețurile pentru populație să fie mai mari decât în orașele mari, unde veniturile sunt mult mai mari.
               

                  Am decis să vorbesc despre aceste lucruri în plenul Parlamentului European, pentru că politicienii locali dau vina în mod eronat pe Uniunea Europeană, deși am prezentat soluții concrete la toate aceste probleme, de la digitalizarea companiei până la crearea unui fond de solidaritate facilitat de legislația Uniunii Europene.
               

                  Aceste lucruri se întâmplă în contextul în care lucrările realizate sunt de proastă calitate, apa conține impurități care o fac imposibil de băut, iar râurile din județ sunt victimele poluatorilor protejați de mafia locală. Am adresat în acest sens Comisiei Europene solicitarea de a verifica aceste aspecte și a reda oamenilor din Alba dreptul la apă de calitate.
               

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Mr President, last October, Commission President von der Leyen told us Israel has a right to self-defence in line with international law. That's not true. Occupying powers have no right to attack those who resist occupation. Also, fiction is the notion that von der Leyen, the EU or the US give a damn about international law. Israel bombed an embassy in a third country, and the Brits and the US and France, they blocked condemnation of this crime at the UN Security Council. Von der Leyen gave the diplomatic cover for Israel's genocide in Gaza, while the US, Britain, Germany and France provide the arms, logistics and support for the crime of crimes. European powers are still perpetrating genocide in the 21st century.
The mask is gone. All the propaganda about civilisation, international law and EU values, it's all been exposed. The EU has now to decide, is there going to be accountability for those who have facilitated genocide? Or will the EU be seen as a defender of the law of the jungle?

João Pimenta Lopes (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, neste mandato que agora termina, é incontornável denunciar a insistência em reforçar a imposição de condicionalismos orçamentais, incidindo agora para lá do défice e da dívida sobre a despesa pública, acentuando, por essa via, uma maior pressão sobre o investimento nos serviços públicos para mais contenção salarial, mais retrocessos nos direitos laborais e sociais, mais privatizações.
               

                  São reforçados instrumentos de pressão, chantagem e sanção que atentam contra o direito de Estados, como Portugal, a determinar soberanamente e livre de constrangimentos o seu caminho de desenvolvimento, limitando, por esta via, a necessária resposta aos problemas com que se confrontam.
               

                  Não basta rejeitar a reforma do Pacto de Estabilidade, a que me refiro. É preciso revogá-lo, como propusemos, apresentando a alternativa que urge um pacto pelo progresso social e pelo emprego que consagre a promoção do pleno emprego, o reforço do trabalho com direitos, o reforço dos serviços públicos e das funções sociais do Estado, o respeito pela soberania de cada país, a concretização dos princípios de coesão económica, social e territorial e da sustentabilidade ambiental.
               

Der Präsident. – Damit ist dieser Tagesordnungspunkt geschlossen.
               
22.   Agenda of the next sitting

Der Präsident. – Die nächste Sitzung findet morgen, Dienstag, den 23. April 2024, um 9.00 Uhr statt.
               

                  Die Tagesordnung wurde veröffentlicht und ist auf der Website des Europäischen Parlaments verfügbar.
               
23.   Approval of the minutes of the sitting

Der Präsident. – Das Protokoll dieser Sitzung wird dem Parlament morgen zu Beginn der Nachmittagssitzung zur Genehmigung vorgelegt.
               
24.   Closure of the sitting

(Die Sitzung wird um 21.51 Uhr geschlossen.)



ELI: 
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)