Verbatim report of proceedings of 22 October 2024
Date: 2024-10-22
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Parliament, parliamentary debate








C_202504707EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series














28.8.2025







            22 October 2024
            VERBATIM REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF 22 OCTOBER 2024
            
         
(C/2025/4707)

Contents







1.

Opening of the sitting
4










2.

Establishing the Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism and providing exceptional macro-financial assistance to Ukraine (debate)
4










3.

Urgent need for a ceasefire in Lebanon and for safeguarding the UNIFIL mission in light of the recent attacks (debate)
24










4.

Resumption of the sitting
40










5.

Welcome
40










6.

Request for waiver of immunity
40










7.

Request for an urgent decision (Rule 170)
40










8.

Negotiations ahead of Council's first reading (Rule 73)
40










9.

Voting time
41










9.1.

Establishing the Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism and providing exceptional macro-financial assistance to Ukraine (A10-0006/2024 - Karin Karlsbro) (vote)
41










9.2.

Implementation of the Single European Sky (recast) (A10-0010/2024 - Jens Gieseke, Johan Danielsson) (vote)
41










9.3.

Draft amending budget No 2/2024: entering the surplus of the financial year 2023 (A10-0005/2024 - Siegfried Mureșan) (vote)
41










9.4.

Draft amending budget No 4/2024: update of revenue (own resources) and adjustments to some decentralised agencies (A10-0007/2024 - Siegfried Mureșan) (vote)
41










9.5.

Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: application EGF/2024/001 BE/Match-Smatch (A10-0009/2024 - Michalis Hadjipantela) (vote)
41










9.6.

Discharge 2022: EU general budget – European Council and Council (A10-0003/2024 - Jonas Sjöstedt) (vote)
41










10.

Resumption of the sitting
42










11.

General budget of the European Union for the financial year 2025 – all sections (debate)
42










12.

Protection of European journalists reporting on Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine (debate)
67










13.

Resumption of the sitting
71










14.

Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting
72










15.

Question Time with Commissioners – Situation of animal health in Europe: how to prevent and prepare for future sanitary crises in agriculture
72










16.

Resumption of the sitting
85










17.

Question Time with Commissioners – Situation of animal health in Europe: how to prevent and prepare for future sanitary crises in agriculture (continuation)
86










18.

Guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (debate)
87










19.

Corrigenda (Rule 251) (action taken)
101










20.

Situation in Azerbaijan, violation of human rights and international law and relations with Armenia (debate)
101










21.

People's Republic of China's misinterpretation of the UN resolution 2758 and its continuous military provocations around Taiwan (debate)
113










22.

State sponsored terrorism by the Islamic Republic of Iran in light of the recent attacks in Europe (debate)
121










23.

Situation in Tunisia (debate)
132










24.

Explanations of vote
137










24.1.

Establishing the Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism and providing exceptional macro-financial assistance to Ukraine (A10-0006/2024 - Karin Karlsbro)
137










25.

Agenda of the next sitting
138










26.

Approval of the minutes of the sitting
138










27.

Closure of the sitting
138




Verbatim report of proceedings of 22 October 2024
                  


SĒDI VADA: ROBERTS ZĪLE


Priekšsēdētāja vietnieks

1.   Opening of the sitting

(Sēde tika atklāta plkst. 9:00.)

2.   Establishing the Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism and providing exceptional macro-financial assistance to Ukraine (debate)

Priekšsēdētājs. – Pirmais darba kārtības punkts ir debates par Karin Karlsbro ziņojumu Starptautiskās tirdzniecības komitejas vārdā par priekšlikumu Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes regulai, ar ko izveido Ukrainas aizdevumu sadarbības mehānismu un sniedz ārkārtas makrofinansiālu palīdzību Ukrainai (COM(2024)0426 – C10-0106/2024 – 2024/0234(COD)) (A10-0006/2024).
               

Karin Karlsbro,
rapporteur. – Mr President, Commission, colleagues, since the first day of Putin's war, it has been clear: one day Russia must pay for the destruction of Ukrainian society and the rebuilding of future Ukraine. But already today, the European Parliament can make it happen – by using the windfall profits from frozen Russian assets, we can send EUR 45 billion to Ukraine and let Russia pay.
The brave Ukrainian people are not only defending their country and territory; what we see is an existential defence of values – for freedom, democracy and for Europe.
The price the Ukrainian people pay for this war cannot be measured in euros or in dollars. Nevertheless, we cannot escape the financial dimension of this war. Ukraine's economy is under huge pressure, and after years of Russian attacks on infrastructure, power plants, cities and villages, schools and hospitals, on houses and homes, we need financial support. The need for financial support is urgent. Our assistance is a question of moral duty and responsibility.
Today's decision here in the European Parliament marks a historic moment. It takes place at a decisive moment for Europe, for Ukraine and for the free world. The EU and the G7 countries, including the US, are now moving forward together with a completely new model of support for Ukraine. This means borrowing funds to a value of EUR 45 billion, in which the EU undertakes to cover up to EUR 35 billion. The repayment of the loan will be financed by the returns from frozen Russian assets in Europe.
This is the first time this strategy is being applied in a structured manner and on such a large scale by lenders across the EU and G7. Not long ago, some said it wouldn't be possible, but today we will show they were wrong. We want to – and we will – make Russia pay and hold them accountable for their aggression and horrendous crimes.
Despite the rapid time frame, we have done our democratic duty in Parliament to scrutinise and vote on this proposal. I want now to take the opportunity to thank my colleagues in the Committee on International Trade, the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Foreign Affairs for their excellent cooperation in this simplified procedure, in this very urgent situation.
What is happening in Ukraine right now, while we are sitting here, will soon be our common European history. Today, we, the European Parliament, will make Russia pay.

Janusz Lewandowski,
sprawozdawca komisji opiniodawczej – komisji BUDG. – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie komisarzu! Dziś zdajemy kolejny egzamin z europejskiej jedności i solidarności w obliczu agresji wobec Ukrainy. To nie pierwszy i nie ostatni sprawdzian, trudny sprawdzian, bo to jest wyścig z czasem. Amerykański udziałowiec programu miał kłopoty z naszym sześciomiesięcznym cyklem odnawiania sankcji wobec Rosji. Kaskadowa konstrukcja oparta jest na wykorzystaniu odsetek od zamrożonych aktywów rosyjskich.
               

                  W mojej ocenie budżetowej, która jest załącznikiem do sprawozdania, zwróciłem uwagę na pewne ryzyka eksploatowania naszego budżetowego headroom przez zobowiązania, których nie przewidziano w ramach finansowych w 2021–2027. Potrzebna była dobra wola wszystkich stron, okazano ją ze strony pani sprawozdawczyni Karin Karlsbro, prezydencji węgierskiej, Komisji, sekretariatu budżetowego. Dlatego zmierzamy do szczęśliwego finału.
               

Didier Reynders,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, I would like to express the Commission's gratitude to the European Parliament for its swift work. In June 2024, leaders committed, together with G7 partners, to provide USD 50 billion or equivalent, EUR 45 billion, all the necessary support by the end of the year to meet Ukraine's military, budget and reconstruction needs. After consultations with G7 partners, the Commission's proposal was submitted one month ago. This file has been taken forward in record speed and I commend you for it. It was very important to go very fast, and thank you for the different efforts that you made to to be sure it was possible to reach the goal today.
The European Union came first with the proposal and with the biggest amount, as Ukraine is a candidate country and belongs to the European Union. We are now at the last stage to get your approval, which will allow for the operationalisation of the proposal by the end of this year, thereby enabling the European Union to proceed with the set-up of the Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism and the disbursement of the macro-financial assistance loan to Ukraine.
First of all, let me recall that the European Union and its Member States have been providing strong financing support to Ukraine since the onset of Russia's war of aggression. Our support has reached over EUR 120 billion, including over EUR 25 billion from all previous macro-financial assistance operations. Our support has been a lifeline for Ukraine in order to bolster economic, social, financial and military resilience to withstand Russia's war.
However, additional and urgent financial support is critical for Ukraine. Russia's intensified war on Ukraine and its attacks against Ukrainian energy infrastructure are having a significant impact on Ukraine's economic and public finances. The International Monetary Fund estimates that the financing gap could reach USD 41.5 billion in 2025, meaning USD 15.6 billion higher than previously anticipated. In light of these challenges, G7 leaders committed in Apulia in June 2024 to provide, as said, a total of approximately USD 50 billion of the so-called extraordinary revenue acceleration loans to Ukraine. These loans will be repaid by future flows of extraordinary profits stemming from immobilised Russian sovereign assets, known as windfall profits.
I would like to recall that this commitment was followed by the European Council conclusions from 27 June, which invited the Commission, the High Representative and the Council to take this work forward. Following this, the Commission has adopted a regulation to establish the Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism and to provide a macro-financial assistance loan to Ukraine. Allow me to briefly summarise the content of this regulation.
First, the Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism is an instrument aimed at collecting the windfall profits stemming from the Russian immobilised assets and make them available to Ukraine for the repayments of the loans of the EU and G7 partners, and potentially other countries wishing to join the extraordinary revenue acceleration loans initiative. This means Russia will pay for the damage of the war in Ukraine. And you know that we had two main goals: the fight against impunity on one side, but also the certainty that Russia will pay for the damage caused by the aggression against Ukraine.
Second, the EU's contribution to the G7 agreed ERA initiative will come through an exceptional macro-financial assistance loan of up to EUR 35 billion. Similarly to our previous operations, this MFA loan will be linked to the fulfilment of political preconditions and specific policy conditions to be established under a memorandum of understanding with Ukraine.
At the same time, this MFA loan introduces some innovative features. Let me mention, in particular, the following ones. First, Russia is made accountable for its actions. The loan is not expected to aid on the one who was attacked, but it is paid back by the aggressor. Second, the Commission's proposal provides an authorisation to lend up to EUR 35 billion, with an automatic correction mechanism, should G7 lenders come in with amounts that would take the total exposure over the agreed cap. Later this week, on 25 October, in Washington, G7 partners will announce their contributions. We continue our close engagement with our partners to ensure their contributions for the ERA loan mechanism.
Recognising the novel nature of the proposal, the Commission will provide a statement confirming the need for both a high degree of transparency towards the European Parliament, as well as the disclosure of documentation that will be provided as we proceed with the implementation. This statement will be included in the verbatim record of this debate.
Let me conclude by expressing thanks to both the chair and the rapporteur for the Committee on International Trade, Mr Bernde Lang and Ms Karin Karlsbro. Their efforts over the past months have ensured a swift and efficient process, bringing this proposal to the point where you can now vote on its timely operationalisation. So when we have an urgency, it's possible to react very fast with the European institutions. Thank you very much for that.

Commission statement (in writing)

The European Commission acknowledges the importance of the Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism in the Union's support to Ukraine and the exceptional nature of the macro-financial assistance loan, confirming the need for a high degree of transparency towards the European Parliament and the Council. The European Commission confirms that any decisions or assessments undertaken by the Commission on the basis of Article 5(3), Article 6(4), Article 6(8), Article 7(1), Article 8(3), Article 8(5), Article 11(2), Article 11(5), Article 13(2) and Article 15(1), and any developments concerning the implementation of Article 10(1), will be treated as ‘developments regarding the implementation of this regulation’ as referred to in Article 17(1) and the corresponding documents will be provided by the European Commission to the European Parliament and the Council without undue delay.
In particular, the European Commission will immediately inform the European Parliament and the Council upon receipt of any information that impacts the amount of the macro-financial assistance. When providing the decisions regarding disbursements of the non-repayable support, the Commission will also inform the European Parliament and the Council of the remaining amount due under the macro-financial assistance loan and how any excess amount for the macro-financial assistance loan as referred to in Article 8(4) has been utilised. The information will be provided on the basis of the most recent available data.

Sandra Kalniete,
PPE grupas vārdā. – Priekšsēdētāja kungs! Komisāra kungs! Godātie kolēģi! Krievija turpina brutālo agresijas karu pret Ukrainu, ar raķetēm un bezpilota lidaparātiem ik dienas graujot valsts enerģijas infrastruktūru un atņemot dzīvību nevainīgiem cilvēkiem. Ukrainai ir vajadzīgs mūsu nelokāmais atbalsts, jo ukraiņu tautai stāv priekšā kara trešā ziema – līdz šim visgrūtākā – jo Krievija ir izpostījusi vairāk nekā pusi valsts enerģijas resursu.
               

                  Tāpēc es aicinu visus deputātus balsot par Eiropas Komisijas sagatavoto 35 miljardu eiro lielo makrofinansiālās palīdzības paketi. Šis finansiālais atbalsts ir ļoti svarīgs, lai apmierinātu Ukrainas steidzamās budžeta vajadzības. Eiropas Komisijas priekšlikums paredz izmantot ievērojamo peļņu no iesaldētajiem Krievijas aktīviem, kā arī no dalībvalstu un trešo valstu iemaksām. Šis mehānisms piedāvā Ukrainai finansiālu atbalstu, ko tā var izmantot, lai atmaksātu Eiropas Savienības ārkārtas mikrofinansiālo aizdevumu, kā arī G7 valstu divpusējos aizdevumus.
               

                  Balsojot par šo Eiropas Komisijas priekšlikumu, mēs būtiski atbalstīsim Ukrainas atveseļošanos un izpostītās infrastruktūras atjaunošanu. Krievijas iesaldēto aktīvu izmantošana Ukrainas aizdevumu sadarbības mehānismam ir pareizais signāls Putinam. Krievija ir jāsauc pie atbildības un jāpanāk, lai tā tieši maksātu par savu agresiju un noziegumiem pret Ukrainu. Šodienas balsojums par Ukrainas aizdevumu ir izšķirīgi svarīgs, taču Eiropai ir jādara vēl vairāk. Dalībvalstu līderiem ir jākonfiscē Krievijas iesaldētie aktīvi un tie jāizmanto Ukrainas apbruņošanai un atjaunošanai. Putinam ir jārēķinās ar savas rīcības sekām.
               

Brando Benifei,
a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il Parlamento europeo è chiamato a rinnovare concretamente la solidarietà all'Ucraina con il nuovo meccanismo di cooperazione per i prestiti, a cui sono orgoglioso di aver lavorato per conto del mio gruppo politico.
               

                  Uno strumento urgente e necessario per sostenere un Paese europeo che si trova sotto l'attacco brutale e ingiustificato della Russia di Putin, che sta intensificando il suo sforzo bellico proprio per distruggere infrastrutture strategiche ed energetiche dell'Ucraina, proprio adesso che l'inverno si avvicina per provocare ulteriore sofferenza a un popolo che lotta per la sua libertà.
               

                  Uno strumento giusto, perché i 45 miliardi di aiuti che arriveranno a Kiev saranno finanziati dai profitti derivanti dagli asset sovrani russi congelati, perché il costo del sostegno all'Ucraina deve essere pagato da chi è responsabile per tale devastazione, non dai cittadini europei.
               

                  Credo che l'Unione debba tenere quindi aperte tutte le opzioni per garantire il sostegno fattivo alla stabilità finanziaria e alla ricostruzione dell'Ucraina, perché il futuro dell'Europa passa da qui.
               

Thierry Mariani,
au nom du groupe PfE. – Monsieur le Président, de la visite du président Zelensky à Bruxelles et de son plan pour la victoire il ne restera pas grand chose. Ou plutôt si: 35 milliards d'euros. Oui, 35 milliards d'euros que la Commission veut nous imposer comme un remède miracle pour maintenir en vie un État déjà gangrené, bien avant la guerre, par la corruption et incapable de subvenir aux besoins élémentaires de ses concitoyens.
               

                  Retraites, salaires des fonctionnaires, hôpitaux: tout vacille en Ukraine. Et ce n'est pas la première fois, car ces 35 milliards viennent s'ajouter à une montagne de dettes contractées auprès de l'Union européenne: 18 milliards en 2022, 33 milliards en 2023. Évidemment, chacun sait que rien ne sera jamais remboursé. D'autant que cette gabegie financière ressemble de plus en plus pour l'Europe à une aventure en solitaire, puisque Washington n'est plus vraiment certain de vouloir contribuer à cet effort financier massif. Et chacun sait que, si les États-Unis se retirent, c'est que la dette n'est plus soutenable. D'ailleurs, la Cour des comptes européenne ne dit pas autre chose dans son dernier rapport sur l'exercice budgétaire 2023, en qualifiant ces prêts successifs de ‘risques non négligeables’ pour les futurs budgets européens.
               

                  Mais vous voulez connaître l'étape suivante? Ces prêts reposent en grande partie sur le gel des actifs russes. Lesquels, si une paix est négociée et que les sanctions sont levées, ne pourront plus servir de garantie. Alors, la bombe à retardement budgétaire sera prête à exploser. Soyez lucides: cet endettement sans garantie ni vision à long terme met en péril l'avenir économique de l'Europe.
               

                  Pour Shakespeare, ‘la mort est une dette que chacun ne peut payer qu'une fois’. C'est exactement ce que vivent les Ukrainiens. Il est temps que cette guerre s'arrête.
               

Rihards Kols,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, dear colleagues, this is a crucial step. Yes, EUR 35 billion to help stabilise a war-torn economy is no small feat. But the goal of this mechanism is not in the plan itself; it is in the implementation.
The aggressor must not only lose, but also pay. Using immobilised Russian assets as collateral is a bold statement – one that Russia should pay attention to. And now, with this mechanism in place, we must create a framework for seizing frozen Russian assets and impose sanctions – not every 6 months, but until Russia withdraws from Ukraine entirely and pays reparations.
We must not only provide financial help, but also confront the international dynamics that threaten Ukraine's sovereignty. At this time, Ukraine faces two nuclear powers as the warring parties on its soil. Reagan warned us that freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We must safeguard Ukraine's freedom today, or we shall spend our lives recounting stories about what it was like when the nations were free.

Marie-Pierre Vedrenne,
au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, aujourd'hui nous devons réaffirmer notre engagement envers l'Ukraine, une nation qui lutte pour sa souveraineté et pour les valeurs démocratiques qui nous unissent. La guerre injuste menée par Moscou menace plus que la paix: elle menace la stabilité en Europe et remet en question l'ordre international.
               

                  L'aide macrofinancière que nous proposons ne se limite pas à n'être qu'une assistance économique. Elle constitue une réponse résolue à l'agression russe, un signal clair de notre volonté de soutenir l'Ukraine. Financer cette aide avec les avoirs russes gelés constitue une démarche juste, permettant d'utiliser les ressources de ceux, agresseurs, qui ont provoqué ce conflit pour en atténuer les conséquences.
               

                  En soutenant cette mesure, nous investissons pour l'avenir de l'Ukraine, une Ukraine libre et prospère, tout en renforçant notre propre sécurité européenne. Ne laissons pas la fatigue de la guerre éroder notre détermination. Le peuple ukrainien compte sur nous, et nous devons être à la hauteur de son courage et de sa détermination.
               

Markéta Gregorová,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, honourable Members, we stand here today not just to discuss a financial transaction, but to reaffirm our unwavering commitment to the people of Ukraine.
This is not a traditional MFA package; it is an extraordinary initiative. It is not just an act of solidarity; it is an urgent necessity. Without this assistance, Ukraine's fiscal stability – and therefore its ability to resist Russia's aggression – will be gravely jeopardised. This funding will help Ukraine balance its fiscal sheets, ensuring the country remains functional in the face of war.
Let me remind you that this MFA, like all others, comes with the usual preconditions: respect for democratic institutions, the rule of law and human rights. However, we recognise that Ukraine is in an extraordinary situation. We do not seek to impose further sectoral conditionalities. Instead, we must acknowledge their ongoing adherence to the IMF programme and the conditionalities of previous MFAs.
I especially appreciate the new mechanism that has been developed to support the repayment of the Ukrainian debt. Extraordinary profits from frozen Russian assets, totalling around EUR 210 billion in the EU, are generating yearly returns of up to EUR 3 billion. This revenue, which is neither sovereign nor belongs to the Central Bank of Russia, can help ensure Ukraine's repayment obligations and that they are manageable.
Our support for Ukraine is not just about financial assistance. It is about standing by a nation fighting for its very existence. By voting in favour of this MFA, we send a clear message: Europe will not allow Ukraine to fall, and we will continue to support their fight for democracy and sovereignty.

Manon Aubry,
au nom du groupe The Left. – Monsieur le Président, lorsque des frontières sont violées, lorsque le droit international est bafoué, il n'y a pas à hésiter. Il faut se tenir du côté de l'agressé et défendre le retour à la paix. C'est le sens de cette aide accordée à l'Ukraine, financée par des avoirs russes gelés, que nous soutenons.
               

                  Mais permettez-moi, chers collègues, de faire trois remarques. Tout d'abord, je note que notre volonté commune de venir en aide aux peuples bombardés vaut pour les Ukrainiens, mais pas pour les Gazaouis. Comment expliquez-vous que vous puissiez débloquer des milliards pour l'Ukraine, mais pas pour Gaza? Le droit international ne saurait souffrir cet insupportable ‘deux poids, deux mesures’, et tous les crimes de guerre doivent être condamnés, que le criminel s'appelle Vladimir Poutine ou Benyamin Netanyahou.
               

                  Deuxièmement: oui, il est utile d'utiliser les intérêts des avoirs russes et de faire payer les belligérants pour aider l'Ukraine, mais pourquoi imposer à l'Ukraine des contreparties économiques? On ne peut pas demander aux Ukrainiens d'appliquer des réformes austéritaires libérales alors que le pays est brutalisé par la guerre. Cela n'a aucun sens, et c'est d'autant plus hypocrite que vous continuez à subventionner en parallèle les oligarques russes et Poutine en continuant d'acheter leur gaz. À quoi sert alors de prendre d'une main ce que l'on donne de l'autre?
               

                  Enfin, il faut aussi mettre sur la table le sujet de la dette ukrainienne. Elle doit être restructurée et partiellement annulée pour permettre au pays de remonter la pente. Pourquoi, alors, le refusez-vous systématiquement à chaque fois que nous le proposons? C'est la priorité aujourd'hui: desserrer l'étau pour permettre ensuite au peuple ukrainien de se reconstruire une fois la paix revenue. Une méthode que nous ferions bien d'appliquer à tous les théâtres de guerre de par le monde.
               

Milan Uhrík,
za skupinu ESN. – Vážený pán predsedajúci, máme tu zase ďalších 35 miliárd pre Ukrajinu. Zase Európania: plaťte, plaťte a zase plaťte. Pán komisár, hovoríte, že Európska únia podporuje len projekty, ktoré spĺňajú európske demokratické hodnoty. Povedzte mi, prosím Vás, aké hodnoty spĺňa tá súčasná ukrajinská vláda? Veď to je opak demokracie. Najskorumpovanejší režim v Európe – je to tak -, ktorý zrušil voľby, zrušil opozíciu, zakázal nezávislé médiá a práva menšín, a napriek tomu sa tam neustále posielajú ďalšie a ďalšie peniaze. Slovenská vláda, slovenský premiér nedávno oznámil, že Slovensko pripravuje balík finančnej pomoci pre Ukrajinu. Presne v čase, kedy vláda oznámila najväčšie zdražovanie pre Slovákov. A presne v čase, kedy ukrajinský premiér v ten istý deň povedal Slovákom, že od nového roka zastavujú pre Slovensko dodávky ruského plynu. Akože čo je toto? Čo toto má znamenať? A nikto nič. Všetci si tu sedíme a všetci sa tvárime, že všetko je v poriadku, a donekonečna sa tam len posielajú peniaze, ktoré nikto nekontroluje. Toto už skutočne, kolegovia, musí prestať a tá vojna už musí skončiť.
               

Jörgen Warborn (PPE). – Herr talman! Jag tror att vi alla kan vara överens om att Rysslands oprovocerade och omotiverade aggression mot Ukraina inte på något sätt avtar, och att en bitter vinter väntar för Ukrainas medborgare.
               

                  Samtidigt som levnadsförhållandena inte förväntas bli bättre ökar landets finansieringsgap till över 40 miljarder dollar år 2025. Då måste vi i EU använda alla tänkbara sätt för att stödja Ukraina. Det här föreslagna makroekonomiska stödet kommer att lindra de ekonomiska påfrestningarna och stärka den finansiella stabilitet som landet så väl behöver. Det är en viktig samarbetsinsats med de övriga G7-länderna.
               

                  Tiden är av yttersta vikt här. EU måste visa ledarskap och anta det här förslaget omgående, så att en smidig utbetalning av de här lånen kan ske före årets slut. De oroväckande attackerna och det mänskliga lidandet kommer inte att upphöra. Vi måste agera nu. Ukraina kan räkna med Moderaterna och EPP:s orubbliga stöd.
               

Bernd Lange (S&D). – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar! Erst einmal, Herr Kommissar, herzlichen Dank für die freundlichen Worte, dass wir schnell gehandelt haben im Handelsausschuss und im Parlament insgesamt.
               

                  Ich glaube, das zeigt auch noch einmal sehr deutlich, dass wir in der Lage sind, ohne auf Artikel 122 oder auf Dringlichkeitsverfahren zurückzugreifen, schnell und klar zu handeln, wenn es notwendig ist. Und in diesem Fall ist es wirklich notwendig, dass wir den Haushalt der Ukraine stabilisieren, damit die wirtschaftlichen Tätigkeiten und die Verteidigungsmöglichkeiten gesichert bleiben. Wir haben versprochen, insgesamt 45 Milliarden Euro auf den Tisch zu legen. Gerade hat Großbritannien noch einmal erklärt, sie werden mit 2,2 Milliarden dabei sein. Ich hoffe auch, dass die Vereinigten Staaten bei ihren Verpflichtungen bleiben.
               

                  Wir brauchen die Unterstützung, weil es nicht sein kann, dass ein souveräner Staat in der Europäischen Union durch eine Aggression Russlands unter Druck kommt und leiden muss. Wir sind hier solidarisch.
               

Tomasz Buczek (NI). – Szanowni Państwo! Polska uczyniła już wiele dla Ukrainy. Po wybuchu wojny przyjęliśmy do naszych domów prawdziwych uchodźców wojennych. Daliśmy im takie same świadczenia socjalne, jakie otrzymywali nasi rodacy. Dostali dostęp do polskiej opieki medycznej na takich samych prawach jak obywatele Unii Europejskiej. Z zasobów naszej armii przekazaliśmy między innymi czołgi i samoloty bojowe warte miliardy euro. Nie oczekiwaliśmy w zamian nic prócz zwykłej uczciwości wobec prawdy historycznej. Nie dostaliśmy nawet tego.
               

                  Na skutek błędnej polityki Unii Europejskiej otrzymaliśmy w zamian destabilizację polskiego rynku rolnego, nieuczciwą konkurencję wobec polskich transportowców i – to, co najbardziej boli – dalszą blokadę ekshumacji i godnego pochówku dla moich rodaków zamordowanych przez ukraińskich szowinistów na Wołyniu.
               

                  Ukraina traktowana jest dzisiaj przez Unię Europejską na równi z państwami członkowskimi zawsze wtedy, gdy chodzi o udzielenie jej pomocy. Natomiast normy i wymogi dotyczące produkcji rolnej czy ratowania klimatu Ukrainy już nie obowiązują. Chętniej byśmy pomagali Ukrainie i byłoby nam łatwiej to czynić, gdyby nasze rolnictwo i nasz przemysł miały takie same warunki funkcjonowania jak firmy i gospodarstwa rolne na Ukrainie, które nie muszą ponosić kosztów chorej polityki klimatycznej Unii Europejskiej. Oczekujemy takich samych zasad dla Polski, jakie posiadają na rynku unijnym…
               

(Przewodniczący odebrał mówcy głos)


Michał Dworczyk (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowni państwo! Od 2014 roku, czyli od zajęcia przez Rosję Krymu i części Donbasu, Ukraina mierzy się z rosyjską agresją. Przez większość tego okresu państwa zachodnie – przede wszystkim Niemcy, ale nie tylko – ponad głową Ukrainy i państw regionu prowadziły lukratywne interesy z Rosją, zasilając miliardami euro rosyjski budżet. Niedługo minie tysiąc dni od pełnoskalowej agresji. Co prawda gaz Gazociągiem Północnym już nie płynie, ale kolejne sankcje są nakładane na Federację Rosyjską. Ale wciąż mamy do czynienia z grą pozorów. Jesteśmy zbyt mało zdecydowani i to nie pozwala Ukrainie wygrać.
               

                  Oczywiście popieram mechanizm pożyczkowy z zamrożonych rosyjskich aktywów, natomiast budzi sprzeciw propozycja udzielenia przez Unię Europejską Ukrainie pożyczki z regresem. Uważam także, iż stabilność mechanizmowi zapewniłoby automatyczne przedłużenie sankcji, dopóki Rosja nie zaprzestanie łamania prawa międzynarodowego.
               

                  Ukraina potrzebuje naszego wsparcia bardziej niż kiedykolwiek. Nowe formaty normandzkie, gdzie przy stole nie ma miejsca dla przedstawicieli regionu, o którego przyszłość toczy się ta gra, z pewnością nie są krokiem we właściwym kierunku.
               

Lucia Yar (Renew). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, to, čo Putin Ukrajincom zničil, máme teraz možnosť obnoviť z ruských peňazí a tak je to správne. Kremeľ už takmer 1000 dní bombarduje ukrajinských civilistov, nemocnice a školy. Je načase, aby za to zaplatil, a to doslova – prostredníctvom výnosov zo zmrazených ruských aktív. Hoci my v Európskej únii Ukrajine pomáhame, stále nie sme dôslední. Ruským oligarchom sme dovolili užívať si jachty, dali sme im diplomy z elitných škôl, predávali im luxusné nehnuteľnosti, kabelky, ale čo je horšie, prižmurujeme oči, keď európske firmy obchádzajú sankcie alebo keď nakupujú plyn z tretích krajín, ktoré ho majú za lacný peniaz z Kremľa. A aj preto vojna na Ukrajine pokračuje ďalej. My ani zďaleka nemáme právo byť z vojny na Ukrajine unavení. Pozrite sa na Ukrajincov. Oni vedú spravodlivý boj a bojujú aj za nás. Naša zásadovosť im pomôže vyhrať.
               

Damian Boeselager (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, I am very happy and proud we are now approving the EUR 35 billion for Ukraine via the Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism. Russia needs to pay. Russia needs to pay for the reconstruction. Russia needs to pay for bombing children and hospitals and electricity plants. And I'm happy we're making the invader pay because – although it's still hard for some to understand – Russia is the invader.
But colleagues, it's also part of the truth that Orbán is again stopping a more long-term solution within the Ukraine Facility that we just approved a couple of months ago, and that he's stopping EUR 10 billion from the US, by not allowing the extension of the freezing of Russian assets. So for all those from the far left and the far right who were clapping here two weeks ago for Orbán, who was sitting here, we have to be aware that you're on the side of North Korea now that is trying to help Russia invade. You're on the side of Putin. You're on the side of the guy who is using Russian interests within the European Council. And we need to wake up. We need to make Russia pay and Ukraine win.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question)


András László (PfE),
blue-card question. – Why are you saying all these lies? Why are you pretending that a country of 10 million is somehow blocking or making a major difference in this issue? The situation is: European countries, including Hungary, gave what they could to Ukraine at the beginning of the war. Afterwards, the EU gave money to Ukraine. Then it was joint debt. Now it's joint debt based on Russian assets.
Do you think, really, a country of 10 million will be blocking or determining the fate of Ukraine? That's ludicrous. And what do you think about your Chancellor – you're in government in Germany in coalition – who's also saying that you should be talking with Putin and discussing peace negotiations? Why don't you comment on that?

Damian Boeselager (Verts/ALE),
blue-card answer. – Thanks a lot for asking, because I was here and I negotiated the Ukraine Facility and the EUR 50 billion we had there, and I did see Orbán trying to block that and only being bought by EUR 10 billion that we had to unblock here in the European Union. That was already blackmail, and he has been doing this a long time. Now again, yes, he is blocking. You can ask him. He's currently blocking the extension of the freezing of Russian assets, which makes it impossible for the US Senate, or at least the President, to unlock 10 billion. So I'm not making this up; this is not lies. You have a problem with Orbán in Hungary and we need to solve it. I think we need to take the veto away.

President. – Thank you very much, colleagues, we can have different views, and let's keep this democratic principle in this House, as long as it's not breaking the rules.

Hans Neuhoff (ESN). – Herr Präsident, Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der Ukrainekrieg ist weithin unverstanden, auch und gerade in diesem Haus. Der große US-Stratege polnischer Herkunft, Zbigniew Brzeziński, hat in seinem 1997 erschienenen Meisterwerk ‘The Grand Chessboard’ das verkümmerte geopolitische Bewusstsein der Europäer mit gnadenloser Schärfe beschrieben: Tributpflichtige Vasallen, so Brzeziński, übernehmen sie willfährig das Denken ihres Herrn. Und so wollten die Europäer nicht begreifen, dass der Ukrainekrieg hätte verhindert werden können, wenn sie, die Europäer, von Anfang an klargestellt hätten, dass eine Aufnahme der Ukraine in die NATO für sie nicht infrage kommt.
               

                  Wir treffen eine falsche Entscheidung nach der anderen, zum Schaden aller, die den eurasischen Kontinent bewohnen. Wenn das Parlament heute die Einrichtung des Kooperationsmechanismus bei Ukraine-Darlehen beschließt, dann treibt es nicht nur die Ukraine noch tiefer in einen Konflikt hinein, den diese nur verlieren kann. Wir schaden uns vielmehr auch selbst, indem wir gegen den römischen Rechtsgrundsatz des usus fructus verstoßen und als einziger großer Wirtschaftsraum der Welt verkünden, dass die Früchte aus Einlagen ohne Zustimmung des Eigentümers einer anderweitigen Verwendung zugeführt werden können. Wenn man ausländische Investoren, namentlich auch aus den BRICS+-Staaten, abschrecken will, in der EU ihr Geld anzulegen, dann tut man es genau so.
               

                  Ja, der Ukraine muss geholfen werden. Was die Ukraine braucht, ist ein Waffenstillstand als Grundlage von Friedensverhandlungen. Was Europa braucht, ist eine gesamteuropäische neue Friedensordnung. Was Europa braucht, ist ein neuer …
               

(Der Präsident entzieht dem Redner das Wort.)


Fabio De Masi (NI). – Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, ich fasse die bisherige Debatte zusammen. Erstens: Kredite für den Schuldendienst der Ukraine bei den G7-Staaten und die Fortsetzung eines endlosen Krieges und somit die Zerstörung der Infrastruktur sind gut. Zweitens: Kredite für zivile Investitionen und den Aufbau der Infrastruktur in Europa sind schlecht. Diese Verrücktheit wird Europa wirtschaftlich weiter abhängen.
               

                  Während die EU Kredite für den endlosen Stellvertreterkrieg aufnehmen will, soll Frankreich etwa seinen Haushalt um 110 Milliarden Euro kürzen. Mario Draghi empfahl jedoch, die Investitionen in der EU um 800 Milliarden Euro zu erhöhen. Währenddessen ist die Ukraine von Korruption zerfressen. Es wird darauf bestanden, dass sie weitere staatliche Betriebe privatisiert und langfristig zu einer wirtschaftlichen Kolonie wird.
               

                  Die EU hat keine Strategie, um den völkerrechtswidrigen Krieg in der Ukraine zu beenden. Das Parlament fordert weitreichende Waffen – gegen die Linie des US-Präsidenten und des deutschen Bundeskanzlers. Radikale Phrasen über einen vollständigen Sieg über die Atommacht Russland sind weltfremd. Die EU spielt bei der brasilianisch-chinesischen Friedensinitiative, die von der Schweiz unterstützt wird, keine Rolle. Den Preis zahlen die Ukrainer: Das Land ist zerstört, über eine Million Menschen sind tot, zurück bleiben Alte und Verletzte.
               

                  Die Ukraine muss aufgebaut werden, aber dafür braucht es eine realistische Strategie mit Sicherheitsgarantien und einer neutralen Ukraine. Wenn Donald Trump die US-Wahlen gewinnt, wird er uns ein kaputtes Land vor die Füße kehren.
               

Siegfried Mureșan (PPE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, we need to say the truth. There is only one responsible for the suffering, for the damage caused to Ukraine and to the people of Ukraine, and that is the aggressor, that is the Russian Federation, and the job of the European Parliament is to be united against this.
Today we have the opportunity to prove our commitment to the people of Ukraine. Establishing this loan cooperation mechanism is a win for Ukraine, and it is also a win for Europe. It means that we put to good use Russia's frozen assets. They have to contribute to the reconstruction of Ukraine. The aggressor needs to pay for the damage that he has created.
We, the European Union, have proven that we are a strong supporter of Ukraine. We stand firm financially, militarily, because we understand that helping Ukraine is the right thing to do, but it also means that we are helping and contributing to the security of the European Union.
My call to you today is: let's make sure that Ukraine has all it needs to defend itself and to win this war. I am not afraid of Putin losing this war; I'm more afraid of Putin eventually winning this war.
By supporting Ukraine, we are investing in our own security. What Russia is doing today in Ukraine is an attack upon the whole free world. We cannot let Russia win. We must continue supporting Ukraine and defending our democracy.

Christel Schaldemose (S&D). – Hr. formand! I snart tre år har ukrainerne kæmpet for deres land og for deres frihed. Men de har også kæmpet for europæiske værdier, for vores fred og vores frihed. Ukraine udgør lige nu et fysisk bolværk imod Putins aggression. Det mindste, vi kan gøre, det er da at støtte og styrke ukrainernes kamp, militært, civilt, økonomisk. Derfor er det en vigtig beslutning, vi skal stemme om i morgen. Det er dyrt at føre krig. Nu giver vi i fællesskab Ukraine en ekstra økonomisk håndsrækning, den er vigtigt. Denne lånemekanisme kan hjælpe dem til at føre krigen videre. Den er så vigtig. Og finansieringen, den kommer af renteindtægterne fra indefrosne russiske midler. På den måde er russerne selv med til at finansiere Ukraines krigsøkonomi. Det, synes jeg, er ret smart. Jeg håber, I vil støtte lånet i morgen, når vi skal stemme om det. Det er utrolig vigtigt for Ukraine. Det er utroligt vigtigt også for vores frihed. Og så er det utrolig solidarisk.
               

Petra Steger (PfE). – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Ich sage es klar und deutlich: Es muss endlich Schluss sein! Mit diesem Satz spreche ich nicht nur für die europäischen Bürger, sondern auch für die zigtausenden Ukrainer, die seit Beginn dieses abscheulichen Krieges ihr Leben verloren haben.
               

                  Es muss endlich Schluss sein mit dieser Eskalationsstrategie, mit immer mehr Waffen, Sanktionen und Milliardenzahlungen. Wenn Sie so weitermachen, steuern Sie Europa geradeaus in den Krieg. Ich frage mich ja immer: Was ist aus dem angeblichen Friedensprojekt der Europäischen Union geworden? Was ist mit den Interessen der europäischen Bürger? Was ist mit der Solidarität gegenüber der eigenen Bevölkerung?
               

                  Bei uns fehlt es mittlerweile an allen Ecken und Enden. Mehr als zwei Jahre unterstützen Sie jetzt schon bedingungslos die Ukraine. Keine einzige Friedensinitiative! Die Friedensaktivisten von gestern sind die Kriegsaktivisten von heute geworden. Dieses 35-Milliarden-Paket ist der nächste Schritt eines sich ständig steigernden Eskalationsprozesses. Ich frage Sie: Wohin soll das noch führen?
               

                  Zu glauben, dass ein Krieg rasch zu Ende geht, wenn man immer mehr Waffen produziert und Geld liefert, ist hanebüchen und verantwortungslos. Wenn die EU ihre Strategie nicht endlich ändert, wird es nur Verlierer geben. Es wird keine Lösung auf dem Schlachtfeld geben. Das, was es jetzt braucht, ist Mut. Mut für Diplomatie, Mut für Gespräche und Mut für Frieden anstatt immer weitere Milliardenpakete.
               

Johan Van Overtveldt (ECR). – Voorzitter, commissaris, collega's, de Russische invasie bedreigt niet alleen de soevereiniteit van Oekraïne, maar ook de fundamenten van onze Europese waarden. Laten we er geen doekjes om winden: denk aan de recente onthullingen over de samenwerking tussen Rusland en Noord-Korea. Noord-Koreaanse troepen zouden de facto de intrede van China in dit conflict betekenen.
               

                  Onze voortdurende steun is absoluut noodzakelijk. We moeten Oekraïne niet alleen voorzien van humanitaire en financiële hulp, maar ook de Oekraïense defensie-industrie ondersteunen, zoals Denemarken recentelijk actief deed. Door deze sector te versterken, kunnen we Oekraïne helpen zichzelf te verdedigen en onze gezamenlijke veiligheid te waarborgen.
               

                  Investeren in de Oekraïense defensie-industrie zou meer betekenen dan alleen maar wapens en materieel. Het zou uiteraard de economie stimuleren, de tewerkstelling bevorderen en ook aanleiding geven tot innovaties die ook voor de Europese markt interessant zouden zijn. Bovendien vermindert het de afhankelijkheid van externe leveranciers. Door Oekraïne te ondersteunen, verdedigen we niet alleen hun vrijheid, maar ook de onze.
               

Dan Barna (Renew). – Domnule președinte, mecanismul de împrumut pentru Ucraina, pe care îl vom vota în această plenară este un pas extrem de important pe care Europa îl face atât în susținerea Kievului, dar și în procesul de a trage la răspundere un regim dictatorial.
               

                  De la începutul invaziei ilegale a lui Vladimir Putin în Ucraina, am auzit des vorbele: ‘Rusia trebuie să plătească!’ Acest mecanism este cu adevărat o notă de plată dată Kremlinului. Am auzit vocile extremei drepte în acest parlament, spunând despre reconstrucția Ucrainei, dar nu spun cine a distrus Ucraina, cine este responsabil de distrugerea acestei Ucraine.
               

                  Vladimir Putin a utilizat profiturile generate de activele rusești imobilizate pentru a susține financiar Ucraina. Este un gest de responsabilitate și moralitate atât din partea Europei, cât și din partea comunității G7. Vreau să spun însă ferm că acesta trebuie să fie doar un prim pas. Uniunea Europeană contribuie acum cu 35 de miliarde de euro prin acest mecanism, dar valoarea totală a activelor rusești imobilizate în Europa este de peste 210 miliarde. Dintre acestea, 190 de miliarde sunt imobilizate doar în Belgia. Cer răspicat Comisiei Europene și Consiliului European să formuleze și să aprobe instrumente legale pentru ca toate aceste fonduri să fie folosite la reconstrucția Ucrainei. Când un barbar ne atacă cu ghioaga, nu ne putem apăra cu uneltele unui stomatolog. Rusia trebuie să plătească (…)
               

(Președintele a retras cuvântul vorbitorului)


Рада Лайкова (ESN). – Уважаеми граждани на Европейския съюз, през цялата година Европейският съюз се опитваше отчаяно да използва замразените руски средства или техните лихви, за да създаде някакъв вид фонд за Украйна. Това обаче постоянно се проваляше, тъй като схемите изглеждаха крайно съмнителни и дори наподобяваха кражба на руски средства.
               

                  Сега Европейският съюз иска да вземе заем, а откраднатите лихви да се използват за погасяване на заеми в бъдеще. Но първо, тези средства никога няма да помогнат на украинските граждани. Те служат само за покриване на дупки в украинския бюджет като кредитна карта, използвана за погасяване на други кредитни карти.
               

                  Второ, тази кражба на руски средства може да доведе до ответни действия от страна на Русия, като например конфискация на активи на европейски компании в Русия. И трето, може би най-лошото, това изпраща ужасяващ сигнал. За първи път Европейският съюз не само присвоява средства на свои граждани, но и чужди средства. Правно това е изключително рисковано и ще отблъсне чуждестранни инвестиции в Европейския съюз, защото вие бихте ли инвестирали при един крадец?
               

(Ораторът приема да отговори на няколко въпроса ‘синя карта’)


Davor Ivo Stier (PPE),
blue-card question. – The Council of Europe and the Parliamentary Assembly have established that these are legitimate countermeasures because the Russian Federation has breached international law. Something similar has been done in the case of Kuwait; also, it has been a breach of international law. So what was the problem to respect the international law? I think that is the key question. Why is it so difficult also to respect the will of the Ukrainian people? You say you are sovereigntist. So why not respect the will of the Ukrainian people to be part of the West?

Рада Лайкова (ESN),
отговор на въпрос, зададен чрез вдигане на синя карта. – Както вече казах, тези руски средства изключително трудно могат да бъдат оправдани по един правен начин и Европейският съюз цяла година се опитваше да намери механизъм, чрез който да оправдае това присвояване на чужди средства. Също така е важно да си припомним докладите и доклада на Драги, който говори за рязко намаляване на чуждестранни инвестиции. И следващият път, когато прочетете за едно такова рязко намаляване, си спомнете дали някой би инвестирал в Съюз, който се държи като крадец.
               

Rihards Kols (ECR),
blue-card question. – Just a very simple question. So you said that the budget financing is something that is governments' and not people's. How is your country when your government approves the budget? Is the budget that you see only for governments and not for the citizens? Or did I get it wrong, what you said about Ukraine – that the money's not going to the Ukrainian citizens?

Рада Лайкова (ESN),
отговор на въпрос, зададен чрез вдигане на синя карта. – Това, което казах по отношение на ползата за украинските граждани е изключително просто. Всички знаем, че тези средства на първо време ще отидат за погасяване на кредити по други кредити, след това ще отидат за запълване на дупки в украинския бюджет. Всички знаем, че в този проект Украйна в момента отчаяно трябва да се инвестират европейски средства, защото други държави като САЩ вече не желаят да инвестират там. Тези средства ще отидат не за украинските граждани, а за погасяване на дупки в бюджета.
               

Ľuboš Blaha (NI). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, zmrazenie ruského majetku je krádež, doslova lúpež. Môžete si tu hľadať tisíce výhovoriek, ale ak niekomu ukradnete majetok, a vy ste Rusom ukradli ich majetok, tak to robíte to, čo robia zlodeji. A ja to absolútne odmietam. Navyše, pýtam sa, či ste mali potrebu kradnúť cudzie majetky, keď Spojené štáty americké viedli nevyprovokovanú agresívnu vojnu proti Iraku? Kradli ste majetky Američanov, keď NATO bombardovalo Belehrad a keď protiprávne odtrhlo Kosovo od Srbska? A pýtam sa, aj dnes budete kradnúť majetky Izraelčanov za to, že páchajú genocídu na palestínskom národe? Prosím, spamätajte sa a prestaňte liať miliardy a zbrane do Ukrajiny. Miliardy potrebujú chudobní Európania, tak prestaňte dookola riešiť len Ukrajincov. Je to nefér voči našim vlastným občanom. Tie vaše sankcie proti Rusku nefungujú. Bol som pred pár dňami v Moskve a videl som na vlastné oči, ako Rusko prekvitá. Jediné, čo môže priniesť mier, je dialóg s Ruskom. Nie krádeže, nie zbrane, nie ďalší mŕtvi Ukrajinci, ale dialóg a rešpekt. A ja budem do Ruska chodiť aj naďalej, lebo na rozdiel od vás neverím vo vojnu, ale verím rovnako ako Slováci v mier.
               

(Rečník súhlasil, že odpovie na viaceré otázky položené zdvihnutím modrej karty)


Maria Grapini (S&D),
întrebare adresată conform procedurii ‘cartonașului albastru’
                     . – Domnule, ați spus că confiscarea activelor Rusiei este un furt. Dacă casa dumneavoastră ar fi dărâmată de un oarecare, ați vrea să vă recuperați activul? Ați vrea să fie blocate veniturile celui care v-a … (Președintele a întrerupt vorbitoarea) Ați spus că activele Rusiei au fost furate de Uniunea Europeană. Vă întreb, dacă casa dumneavoastră ar fi dărâmată de un oarecare, așa, peste noapte, ați dori să vă recuperați casa? Ați dori să fie blocate veniturile individului sau, mă rog, celui care v-a dărâmat casa?
               

Ľuboš Blaha (NI),
odpoveď na otázku položenú zdvihnutím modrej karty. – Vážený pán predsedajúci, ďakujem pekne za otázku, ale nepočul som preklad presne, ale trvám na tom, že áno, ide o krádež, pokiaľ kradneme ruské majetky, a som presvedčený, že jediný spôsob, ako zabezpečiť, aby Ukrajinci neumierali, je prestať s expanziou NATO prestať s rusofóbiou, prestať s nenávisťou proti ruskému národu. A presne toto chceme my, Slováci, dialóg s ruskou stranou, a áno, k tomu patrí aj vďaka za to, že nás oslobodili od fašizmu v druhej svetovej vojne, a patrí k tomu, áno, aj ospravedlnenie za to, že tu prijímame rasistické, militaristické a nenávistné deklarácie.
               

Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis (S&D),
pakėlus mėlynąją kortelę pateiktas klausimas. – Gerbiamas Pirmininke, aš paklausiu Jūsų lietuviškai. Jūs sakėte, kad buvote Maskvoje ir matėte žydinčią Rusiją. Tai klausimas, ar buvote Putino viloje ir ten matėte tą žydinčią Rusiją? Ar iš tiesų Jūs suvokiate, kur Jūs buvote?
               

Ľuboš Blaha (NI),
odpoveď na otázku položenú zdvihnutím modrej karty. – Vážený pán predsedajúci, vážený pán poslanec, bol som na 80. výročí Univerzity MGIMO, svetoslávnej diplomatickej škole, a prednášal som veľmi múdrym a šikovným ruským, slovenským a ďalším študentom z celého sveta. Chodil som po Moskve, bol som dokonca v obchodoch a neuveríte, majú tam práčky. Tvrdili tu západní propagandisti, vraj ich kradnú na ukrajinskom fronte. Nie, oni tam majú aj práčky, aj chladničky, aj autá. Majú tam všetko. Troj a pol percentný rast očakáva ruská strana. Tento rok nemecká ekonomika klesne o 0,2 percenta. Tak sa pýtam, v koho záujme sú tieto sankcie – v záujme Ruska alebo v záujme Európy? Pán kolega, ste veľmi, ale veľmi pomýlený.
               

Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez (PPE). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, desde la invasión de Putin, Ucrania ha perdido el 30 % del PIB. El coste de la reconstrucción del país se aproxima ya a los 500 000 millones de dólares, una cifra que, lamentablemente, aumenta cada día.
               

                  Para hacer frente al drama humanitario y evitar el colapso de Ucrania, mañana votaremos un paquete de asistencia financiera a Kiev de hasta 35 000 millones de euros: una factura de miles de millones de euros con cargo no a los ciudadanos europeos, sino a Vladimir Putin, al responsable de la invasión y de la devastación de Ucrania.
               

                  Y es que hemos logrado canalizar, en favor de Ucrania, los activos rusos congelados, valorados en más de 200 000 millones de euros. Y así lo hemos acordado con los Estados Unidos y el resto de socios del G7.
               

                  El camino hacia la victoria de Ucrania y su reconstrucción requerirán de un esfuerzo titánico por parte de todos; también por nuestra parte, la de los europeos. Pero, no lo olvidemos, el principal financiador de la reconstrucción debe seguir siendo Vladimir Putin: el responsable.
               

Heléne Fritzon (S&D). – Herr talman! Kriget i Ukraina pågår här och nu. När vi möts här i dag faller bomber och raketer över oskyldiga – över kvinnor och barn i deras egna hem. Det ukrainska folket lider men kämpar för sin frihet och vi, vi måste fortsätta göra allt för att öka stödet till Ukraina: ekonomiskt, militärt och humanitärt.
               

                  Vi måste också få stopp på den ryska gasen. Den är fossil, och den göder Putins krigskassa. Jag vill också att vi använder de frysta ryska tillgångarna till mer hjälp åt Ukraina, och jag hoppas innerligt att vi står eniga i vårt stöd här i morgon.
               

                  Det ukrainska folkets kamp är också en kamp för vår fred och frihet. Vi ska stå i solidaritet med det ukrainska folket. Slava Ukraini.
               

(Talaren godtog en fråga (‘blått kort’).)


Dick Erixon (ECR),
fråga (‘blått kort’). – Jag välkomnar socialdemokratins stöd till att skicka vapen till Ukraina. Men det är oroande att er samarbetspartner Miljöpartiet nu, enligt Sveriges Radio, kritiserar Polen när det stoppar Rysslands hybridkrigföring med migranter över gränsen från Belarus. Är det inte allvarligt att Miljöpartiet springer Putins ärenden?
               

Heléne Fritzon (S&D),
svar (‘blått kort’). – Herr talman! Mitt svar till Dick Erixon, som representerar Sverigedemokraterna från Sverige och de högerextrema partigrupperingarna här i parlamentet, är att jag är mer orolig för era partiers kontakter med Ryssland och närhet till Putin, och jag vill noga följa upp att vi står eniga i morgon kring ett fortsatt stöd till Ukraina, både ekonomiskt, militärt och humanitärt.
               

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Mr Parliament, Rule 178, paragraphs one and three, sentence two, states that you may only speak when given speaking time. And also, when you are at your place in this debate here today, which is a troublesome debate. And I also feel that some things that are being said here are despicable. We have Members screaming stuff from their seats into the plenary multiple times. So I request that we stop this, because this is not the way that we should debate here. We should be civilised. We should listen to each other. Of course, we can applaud and we can boo, because this is what people do. But if we don't have speaking time, we should keep ours mouth shut.

President. – Thank you very much. I am trying to keep Parliament's Hemicycle in order. As I see it, there could be some emotions, but so far, in my opinion, it's okay. But I fully take your point into account, and if colleagues would follow your suggestions, I would appreciate it.

Angéline Furet (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, l'Union européenne et ses États membres ont apporté ensemble une assistance civile et militaire à l'Ukraine qui se porte à 118 milliards d'euros depuis le début de la guerre et à 43 milliards rien que pour cette année.
               

                  Toutefois, les besoins de financement de l'Ukraine dépassent les projections du Fonds monétaire international, qui prévoyait une fin de conflit pour 2024. L'Union européenne propose donc, pour la fin de 2024, une nouvelle aide financière sous forme de prêt, d'un montant de 35 milliards d'euros, et à laquelle il faudra ajouter à nouveau environ 40 milliards d'euros en 2025: un véritable tonneau des Danaïdes, des prêts que nous savons difficilement remboursables – si tant est qu'ils le soient.
               

                  Si, sur le principe, nous sommes favorables à une aide civile à l'Ukraine, les différents textes et communications de l'Union européenne n'abordent jamais la fin du conflit ou l'avènement d'une solution diplomatique. Comment se fait-il que des pourparlers de paix ne soient pas une condition de cette aide financière? Le soutien à la paix et non à la guerre ne serait-il pas la solution la plus économique et la plus humaine?
               

                  De plus, à l'heure où la France a été mise en procédure pour déficit excessif par l'Union européenne, où l'inflation touche les peuples européens et où l'Union européenne se demande comment boucler le prochain budget, charité bien ordonnée ne commence-t-elle pas par soi-même?
               

Alberico Gambino (ECR). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, la proposta di un meccanismo di cooperazione per il prestito all'Ucraina e l'assistenza macrofinanziaria eccezionale di 35 miliardi di euro non è solo una questione economica ma un atto di responsabilità verso la stabilità dell'Europa.
               

                  L'aggressione russa ha devastato l'Ucraina con impatti diretti sull'economia e sulle infrastrutture del Paese. Senza un intervento deciso, le conseguenze si rifletteranno su tutta l'Europa, minacciando la nostra sicurezza collettiva.
               

                  Il prestito è strutturato con condizioni ovviamente vantaggiose e finanziato anche attraverso gli asset congelati alla Banca centrale russa, un messaggio, questo, chiaro e forte per chi viola appunto il diritto internazionale: dovrà pagare a proprie spese la ricostruzione. Inoltre, il pacchetto complessivo di 50 miliardi di euro fino al 2027 include sovvenzioni che garantiscono servizi essenziali per l'Ucraina stessa.
               

                  Non è carità questa ma è un investimento nella sicurezza europea, è una dichiarazione di sostegno a valori di libertà e democrazia. Ora più che mai dobbiamo agire con determinazione.
               

Ivars Ijabs (Renew). – Dārgais priekšsēdētāja kungs! Dārgais Reindersa kungs! Es vispirms gribētu pateikt paldies mūsu ziņotājai Karīnai par to, ka mēs beidzot to esam izdarījuši, proti, pieņēmuši šo makrofinansiālo palīdzību Ukrainai, izmantojot Krievijas iesaldētos aktīvus kā garantiju. Šis ir ne tikai finansiāli ļoti racionāls projekts, bet arī morāli, protams, nepieciešams. Krievijai jau šodien ir jāmaksā par Ukrainai nodarīto postu tāpēc, ka mums ir jāpalīdz tai stiprināt savu ekonomisko dzīvotspēju un jāpalīdz tai arī militāri aizsargāt sevi.
               

                  Bet tie 35 miljardi – šī summa, protams, ir liela, bet nav īsti samērojama ar Ukrainas šībrīža vajadzībām. Tieši tāpēc es pievērsīšu jūsu uzmanību, ka Kremlim pietuvinātajiem oligarhiem, kuri ir profitējuši un joprojām profitē no šī noziedzīgā režīma, joprojām pieder ļoti lieli līdzekļi, daudz lielāki aktīvi Eiropā. Komisijai šeit vajadzētu mudināt dalībvalstis izturēties pret to ļoti, ļoti nopietni un domāt, ko darīt ar šiem aktīviem, arī tad, ja dalībvalstis reizēm ir pievērušas acis uz šādu te aktīvu klātbūtni.
               

Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Ukraina potrzebuje zainteresowania, zrozumienia i wsparcia, i to w takiej kolejności. Nie będzie, krótko mówiąc, zrozumienia bez zainteresowania i nie będzie wsparcia bez zainteresowania i zrozumienia.
               

                  Kolejny element, który jest niezbędny, to pewna stabilność pomocy. Nie powinniśmy się kierować w tej materii wyłącznie emocjami, ale powinniśmy także zwracać uwagę na to, jaka jest prawdziwa sytuacja w Ukrainie, jaki przebieg ma ta wojna. Dopiero wówczas możemy pochylać się nad określonymi formami pomocy. One mogą być różne.
               

                  Tym razem mamy inicjatywę państw G7, aby skorzystać z zamrożonych środków rosyjskich, aby wesprzeć Ukrainę. Tę pomoc nazywa się pożyczką, ale generalnie rzecz biorąc będzie ona rodzajem bezzwrotnego wsparcia. Bardzo istotne jest, aby udzielanie tego wsparcia przebiegało we właściwym czasie, we właściwym tempie, bo wtedy będziemy efektywni, będziemy prawdziwi, będziemy autentyczni i będziemy po prostu skuteczni. I tego życzę, krótko mówiąc, Ukrainie i Ukraińcom.
               

Raphaël Glucksmann (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, enfin! Enfin ce mécanisme commence à faire payer l'agresseur. Mais, disons-le, c'est, comme d'habitude, trop peu et très tard.
               

                  Depuis deux ans, nous faisons tout dans l'Union européenne pour maintenir l'Ukraine à flot. Mais nous ne faisons pas assez pour lui permettre de gagner la guerre. Alors la question est simple: quand allons-nous enfin saisir les 200 milliards d'avoirs publics russes gelés dans nos banques? Quand allons-nous donner à l'Ukraine les moyens financiers et militaires de gagner cette guerre, qui définit l'avenir de l'Europe?
               

                  Chers collègues, dans quinze jours, Donald Trump peut redevenir président des États-Unis, et l'Union européenne peut se retrouver seule, seule face à cette guerre, seule face à Poutine, seul soutien véritable de la résistance ukrainienne. Est-ce que nous sommes prêts à cela? Avons-nous réellement compris les enjeux?
               

                  Alors que la France rabote son aide militaire, que nos pays continuent à imposer des restrictions absurdes à l'utilisation des armes européennes par la résistance ukrainienne, et que l'on entend partout monter le chant de la capitulation – comme à l'extrême droite de cet hémicycle –, permettez-nous d'en douter. Il est temps de se réveiller.
               

Aurelijus Veryga (ECR). – Gerbiamas Pirmininke, kolegos. 2022-aisiais metais Rusija pradėjo plataus masto karą prieš Ukrainą, tikėdamasi greitos pergalės. Tačiau Ukraina ir jos žmonės įrodė savo valią kovoti už savo valstybės laisvę, suverenitetą bei europietišką ateitį. Nesugebėjusi užkariauti Ukrainos, Rusija labai sistemingai siekė palaužti ją kitais būdais: atakuodama ligonines, mokyklas, strategiškai ir gyvybiškai svarbius energetinius objektus, keldama grėsmę atominės energetikos objektams. Už šios žalos atstatymą turi sumokėti pats agresorius. Rusija turi sumokėti už tai, ką ji padarė Ukrainoje. Ukraina negali veikti įprastai ir pati pasirūpinti reikiamomis pajamomis iš savo ekonomikos, nes ji turi skirti pakankamus išteklius gynybai nuo agresoriaus bei Rusijos nuolat griaunamos infrastruktūros atstatymui. Todėl finansinė parama su užpuoliku kovojančiai Ukrainai yra būtina, norint užtikrinti esmines valstybės funkcijas, makroekonominį stabilumą ir priartinti Ukrainą prie pergalės prieš Rusiją.
               

Eugen Tomac (Renew). – Domnule președinte, Ucraina nu este ocupată astăzi, așa cum și-a propus Putin să o ocupe în câteva săptămâni, pentru că noi, Uniunea Europeană și Statele Unite, i-am spus ‘stop’ lui Putin și am stat alături de Ucraina. Bătălia pentru Ucraina nu este doar pentru acest stat, ci este pentru viitorul Europei și este esențial să rămânem alături de această țară. Este esențial să înțelegem că Putin nu atacă doar cu rachete, atacă cu multă propagandă, cu multă dezinformare, pe care am auzit-o inclusiv astăzi, aici, în acest plen.
               

                  De aceea este esențial să susținem Ucraina și Republica Moldova, care a făcut față unei provocări fără precedent. În urmă cu două zile a avut loc un referendum prin care cetățenii Republicii Moldova, în majoritate, au spus ‘da’ pentru integrarea europeană, deși Rusia a încercat să corupă sute de mii de cetățeni cu carduri bancare emise în Federația Rusă pentru a-i corupe. Trebuie să acordăm asistență financiară pentru a rezista în fața acestui război.
               

Pekka Toveri (PPE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, Russia is attacking not only the Ukrainian defence forces, it is also attacking the whole Ukrainian civil society, killing elderly women and children daily, not vice versa. And if the civil society crashes, the soldiers at the front won't fight too long either. And that's the fact.
This loan helps to keep Ukraine and civil society and civil administration working, and helps also Ukraine to fight for its freedom and also for the democracy and freedom for all of Europe. This is a good start, but not enough. We need to be ready to do more.
It is also appropriate that this is a loan, because a loan safeguards that the money paid will be used wisely and effectively. It's also appropriate that we use Russian frozen assets to support Ukraine against the Russian criminalities. Criminals are responsible for the damage they have caused in all of EU countries' legislations, so why would it be any different when we talk about Russia's criminal activities?

Javier Moreno Sánchez (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, la semana pasada el Consejo Europeo reiteró el apoyo incondicional de la Unión Europea a Ucrania. Lo ha hecho con toda solemnidad, amplitud y contundencia. Pocas veces la Unión ha dedicado tanto esfuerzo a una causa, cueste lo que cueste, durante el tiempo que haga falta: ahora, en el esfuerzo de la guerra, y después, cuando la paz regrese, para la reconstrucción del país.
               

                  Ahora nos toca a nosotros debatir y votar la ayuda macrofinanciera. Este instrumento es, sobre todo, un compromiso político histórico para que Ucrania pueda disfrutar plenamente de su soberanía, recuperar su integridad territorial y vivir en paz y libertad: está en juego la democracia en Ucrania, pero también en toda Europa. Por eso, pido a todos los grupos que votemos a favor. A la ultraderecha, que se ha opuesto en el voto en comisión, le pido que diga claramente si está con Putin o con Ucrania. Señorías de la ultraderecha, están ustedes a tiempo de rectificar. Por la paz, por Ucrania y por Europa.
               

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Mr President, German Chancellor Scholz's pursuit-of-peace policy, and Hungary's blocking of different forms of support, are dangerous for Europe.
This now-discussed new cooperation mechanism is a highly crucial piece of support for Ukraine in its fight against totalitarianism.
I specifically want to address my colleagues on the Left who weren't on board with the effort to support Ukraine in September. Nobody sings the songs of peace when someone breaks into your home or home country. Nobody wants this war to continue. Everybody wants a long-lasting peace. But we also want Ukraine to restore the integrity of its sovereign territory.
The best way to ensure peace is to ensure that Ukraine has the proper means to fight off the aggressor. Once Putin realises the hopelessness of his effort, he will cease. But he only speaks in the language of force. Let's give Ukraine another victory tool, not the thoughts and prayers of a fool.

Paulius Saudargas (PPE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, we are talking about money here. I have a few questions for you. How much does a life cost? How much does one Ukrainian cost? Mother, father, daughter, son, sister, brother. Hundreds of thousands lost their lives in Ukraine. No billions can bring them back.
Second question: why does the war last so long? Because we have been debating for too long; about tanks and F-16s, about support and sanctions. We are too slow.
Third question: why do the sanctions fail to break the aggressor? Not only the third countries are to blame, but ourselves, because there are traitors and cheaters among us.
And the question of today: can we use Russian frozen assets to pay the needs of Ukraine? We have to do it. We owe it to Ukrainians. We are in big debt because it is not our sons and daughters dying out there, dying for us. This is the least we can do to make Russia pay. Slava Ukraini!

Francisco Assis (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, Caras e Caros Colegas, quero começar por saudar esta decisão, que vai no bom sentido: a atribuição de apoio à Ucrânia por via de um empréstimo que tem como garantia os fundos imobilizados russos. O agressor tem de assumir todas as suas responsabilidades pelos danos causados ao povo ucraniano.
               

                  Ouvindo este debate, fica muito claro. Aqueles que aqui estão ao lado de Putin não estão apenas ao lado da Rússia, estão contra os valores fundadores da União Europeia, porque, verdadeiramente, o que os aproxima de Putin é a rejeição do nosso modelo de sociedade e do nosso modelo de organização de um Estado de direito. O que rejeitam é uma sociedade livre. O que rejeitam é um Estado de direito democrático. O que rejeitam é uma sociedade que valoriza a cidadania individual e que valoriza uma cidadania democrática que está assente no princípio da igualdade.
               

                  E é por isso que há aqui uma divisão muito clara. Aqueles que vêm aqui falar em nome de Putin também estão a atacar claramente os princípios fundadores da Europa. E este debate é um debate que estabelece uma divisão muito clara nesta casa: entre aqueles que lutam e pugnam pela democracia e aqueles que verdadeiramente estão contra ela.
               

Michał Szczerba (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Wysoka Izbo! Od 970 dni Ukraina walczy nie tylko o własną wolność, o własną suwerenność, o integralność terytorialną, ale również o nasze bezpieczeństwo – bezpieczeństwo 27 krajów członkowskich. Dzisiaj Parlament Europejski decyduje o tym, czy przyjąć propozycję liderów G7. Absolutnie tak. Potrzeba wykorzystania tej makrofinansowej pomocy. Potrzeba również tego, żeby Ukraina mogła korzystać z tych środków, które zostały zamrożone.
               

                  Ale pojawia się następujące pytanie: czy jest to wystarczające? Według mnie nie tylko należy zamrozić, nie tylko przejąć, ale po prostu przekazać Ukrainie. Te środki muszą pracować. Nie jutro, nie pojutrze, ale dziś, po to, żeby Ukraina mogła zwyciężyć i wygrać tę wojnę.
               

                  Zbliża się zima, która będzie dla Ukrainy bardzo niebezpiecznym okresem ze względu na ataki na infrastrukturę krytyczną, energetyczną – Ukraina może zostać pozbawiona prądu. Ta pomoc jest potrzebna, jest czasowa. Dajmy zielone światło, ale pracujmy na bardziej odważnych decyzjach w przyszłości.
               

Evin Incir (S&D). – Mr President, colleagues, in September I had the privilege of visiting Ukraine. There we witnessed the unwavering resolve and commitment of the Ukrainian people to defend their freedom, dignity and sovereignty. Their struggle is not only a national Ukrainian cause, it is our shared European cause. It is a cause of international law.
In discussions with Ukrainian officials, we talked about their urgent needs and the further direct support they need to win the war against Putin. That is why the Ukrainian facility is important, and not least – as my colleague Raphaël Glucksmann said – to make the aggressor pay.
Furthermore, it is crucial that the support also addresses the need of vulnerable groups in Ukrainian society. While Putin's dark forces unleash war and destruction, we must continue to stand firm for prosperity, democracy and victory of Ukraine.
And it is also sad to see over and over again that the far-right side of this Parliament manages to constantly stand on the wrong side of history over and over again.

Inese Vaidere (PPE). – Priekšsēdētāj! Godātie kolēģi! Krievija ik dienas Ukrainā slepkavo, slepkavo arī sievietes, bērnus, iznīcina infrastruktūru. Kopš kara sākuma infrastruktūra iznīcināta 150 miljardu eiro vērtībā. Šis solis – solis, lai krievi maksātu par to, ko viņi ir izdarījuši, ir pareizs solis. Tam nav alternatīvas. Arī tam nav alternatīvas, ka mums visiem ir jāpalīdz un ka visām mūsu valstīm – demokrātiskajām valstīm – ir jābūt vienotām.
               

                  Mums ir jāiet arī tālāk. Krievijas iesaldētie aktīvi Rietumu bankās ir 210 miljardi. Tur klāt nāk arī vēl tomēr oligarhu iesaldētie līdzekļi, jahtas, nekustamie īpašumi, finanšu līdzekļi – tie ir nekavējoties jākonfiscē un jāizlieto Ukrainas atbalstam, kam ir vajadzīgi 400 miljardi eiro. Mēs nedrīkstam vilcināties. Ir jāatļauj Ukrainai uzbrukt militārajiem objektiem Krievijas teritorijā. Ir jāatrod līdzekļi, lai šis karš beigtos pēc iespējas ātrāk, lai karš beigtos ar Ukrainas uzvaru.
               

Riho Terras (PPE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, Russia has waged this full-scale war against Ukraine for almost 1 000 days by now. Ukraine people are making sacrifices far bigger than we can imagine every day. It is in our hands to help Ukraine win this war. They need our military aid, as well as financial support, to reconstruct the infrastructure and keep the economy going, despite the ongoing war.
Using windfall profits from Russian assets to repay the loans is legitimate and just. Russia is the sole culprit and must be held accountable for these crimes. It is in the hands of this House to make sure that Ukraine gets the funds they need, and they get them fast. It is in our hands to make Putin's Russia pay for their crimes. Thank you very much. Slava Ukraini!


Wouter Beke (PPE). – Voorzitter, commissaris, hoge vertegenwoordiger, collega's, vorige week stond in de media dat de steun van Europa aan Oekraïne een kwestie is van veel woorden maar weinig daden. Veel blablabla, maar weinig boemboem. Vandaag bewijzen wij het tegendeel en dat is broodnodig.
               

                  Vorige week was de Oekraïense minister van Defensie op bezoek in dit Europees Parlement en hij sprak van te weinig leveringen van wapens, munitie en ook F16's. Vandaag zetten we wél een belangrijke stap in de steun aan Oekraïne. Met de lening van 35 miljard nemen we het voortouw in onze gezamenlijke steun van de G7. België speelt een belangrijke rol, want het grootste deel van de Russische goederen zijn bevroren bij ons.
               

                  De Europese Unie trekt aan de kar en dat is logisch, maar ook noodzakelijk. Op die manier moeten we druk zetten op de hele G7. De levering van Noord-Koreaanse troepen aan Rusland toont aan dat dit niet alleen een regionaal conflict is, niet alleen een zaak is van Europa, maar van de hele wereld en ook van de hele wereldvrede. Daarom is deze steun zo noodzakelijk.
               

Željana Zovko (PPE). – Mr President, Russia's aggression and war against Ukraine not only altered the geopolitical landscape, but also compelled us to act swiftly and decisively to support our brave Ukrainian partners. Two and a half years later, the European Union continues to show solidarity and strength against those who seek to undermine our democracies. The Ukrainian people are not only defending their own country, their dear friends; they are defending Europe.
Russia has invested 1 billion in propaganda and we can hear it here, all around where the elections were happening. They are investing money in propaganda and this money cannot be invested so much to extinguish the truth. The truth shall set you all free. Democracy cannot be killed. The Ukrainian people are fighting for us. We have to fight until the end to help them.
Many years ago, Croatia was fighting like this and we had propaganda against us, trying to stop us from telling the truth. Now we are here, we are standing here. We will stand until the end to help Ukrainians to fight for freedom.

President. – Now we have the catch-the-eye procedure. I have 11 requests. We do not have time for everybody. That's why we use criteria. I will not give the floor here to those who were speaking either on the speakers' list or on a blue card. I apologise, but we have to take care about the time.

Brīvais mikrofons


Hélder Sousa Silva (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, Caros Colegas, o paradigma tem mesmo de mudar. Temos de ser claros que vamos apoiar a Ucrânia com o tempo e com os meios que forem necessários para que a Ucrânia ganhe mesmo esta guerra. Mas as palavras não param, claramente, os rockets russos que caem diariamente sobre a Ucrânia, nem reconstroem hospitais, nem escolas e muito menos as casas destruídas pelos mísseis de Putin.
               

                  Os ucranianos podem contar, através deste mecanismo, com o financiamento concreto de 35 mil milhões de EUR para a recuperação e reconstrução do seu país. Algumas forças deste Parlamento tentam minar o debate, como vimos. Mas, Caros Colegas, não nos deixemos enganar. O que estas forças anti-Europa nunca mencionam é o tremendo impacto negativo que a vitória russa provocaria na nossa União. Quem se sentiria seguro com as tropas russas em Levive? Eu não. Para terminar, direi que a autonomia e independência estratégica da nossa União está dependente da vitória ucraniana e por isso…
               

(o Presidente retira a palavra ao orador)


Jean-Marc Germain (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, aujourd'hui, avec nos frères ukrainiens, l'Europe montre ce qu'elle a de meilleur. Elle est au rendez-vous. Elle est au rendez-vous depuis le début pour défendre le droit le plus essentiel: le droit des peuples à choisir leur destin. Et son destin, l'Ukraine l'a choisi: c'est l'Europe. Et l'Europe a dit oui en ouvrant sans délai la perspective d'adhésion.
               

                  L'Europe est au rendez-vous encore avec cette nouvelle facilité pour l'Ukraine de 35 milliards d'euros, financée par les revenus des avoirs russes gelés. La Russie devra payer les dommages de la guerre dont elle est responsable, et cela commence dès aujourd'hui avec cette aide macrofinancière, à laquelle je suis fier d'avoir contribué en tant que rapporteur fictif S&D de la commission des budgets.
               

                  L'Europe devra aussi être au rendez-vous pour que cette guerre prenne fin. Arrêter la guerre, c'est montrer à Poutine qu'il ne la gagnera jamais. C'est l'intensification des sanctions, c'est la levée des restrictions sur les frappes préventives, c'est une perspective d'adhésion à l'OTAN, c'est la convocation d'une conférence de prêt, c'est le plan de paix proposé par Volodymyr Zelensky, que je propose de soutenir.
               

Dainius Žalimas (Renew). – Mr President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, Russia's criminal aggression against Ukraine is the grossest possible breach of international law. Such an extraordinary situation undoubtedly requires extraordinary measures and solutions. Therefore, I welcome and support today's Commission proposal to employ the profits from immobilised Russian assets.
However, in my opinion, this is not yet the most comprehensive and the most effective solution to the problem. In my opinion, the Commission should also initiate, without undue delay, more courageous decisions on the secure confiscation of frozen assets of Russia, as well as very effective use in strengthening Ukraine's defence and ensuring Ukraine's post-war reconstruction.
I am convinced that under international law, this can be done at the expense of Russian reparations. By the way, the Commission's proposed regulation clearly states that Russian state funds must remain frozen until Russia ends its aggressive war and compensates Ukraine …

(The President cut off the speaker)


Siegbert Frank Droese (ESN). – Herr Präsident! Wenn man hier einigen Rednern zuhört, frage ich mich, ehrlich gesagt: Was wird denn auf Ihre Konten vom ukrainischen Regime überwiesen? Das ist grauenhaft, da kriege ich Ohrenschmerzen davon.
               

                  Wer hören will und sehen will, der konnte vor Jahren schon sehen, dass die Kommission zur Ukraine Papiere verfasste, wo die Ukraine als korruptes Land, als das korrupteste Land in Europa dargestellt wurde. Es hat sich eigentlich in der Frage nicht viel geändert, außer dass heute noch die Ukraine der Bandera-Ideologie huldigt.
               

                  Der Westen hat die Ukraine in diesen Krieg getrieben, den kann sie nicht gewinnen. Die Ukraine ist ein Fass ohne Boden in finanzieller Hinsicht. Wir könnten eigentlich vorne mit dem ganzen Geld einen großen Haufen machen und den anzünden. Dann könnten wir wenigstens uns noch an dem Feuer wärmen, aber das Geld bekämen nicht die korrupten ukrainischen Oligarchen, die letzten Endes das faschistische Regime der Ukraine stützen.
               

                  Keinen Pfennig Steuergeld für diesen Staat der Ukraine, solange in Deutschland die Brücken zusammenfallen, Schulen in unmöglichem Zustand sind, die Rentner Flaschen sammeln gehen!
               

(Der Präsident entzieht dem Redner das Wort.)


Grzegorz Braun (NI). – Mr President, what is this? A bank robbery? I don't want to take part in such activities. You're discussing here the money that is simply not yours. And it's wrong! It's deeply wrong, for many reasons.
One reason was just mentioned by the honourable colleague. The Kyiv regime is probably one of the most corrupt and deadly to its own people of the regimes in the history of Europe.
The other reason is when you open this door, this gate, and you let yourself indulge yourself – taking somebody else's money in this particular moment – then what happens next? I don't want to take part in organised crime.

Matej Tonin (PPE). – Gospod predsednik! Zmaga Ukrajine se mi zdi ključna zaradi sporočilnosti, da meja v Evropi v enaindvajsetem stoletju ni mogoče spreminjati na nasilen način. Seveda pa se bo ta vojna enkrat končala in ko se bo končala, nas bo čakalo dolgo in dolgotrajno delo pri obnovi Ukrajine. In na tej točki se mi zdi seveda pomembno in smiselno, da agresor plača za svoja dejanja.
               

                  Zato podpiram vse mehanizme, ki uporabljajo dobičke milijard agresorja zato, da pomagamo Ukrajino obnoviti in jo ponovno postaviti na njene noge. Za uspešen prihodnji razvoj Ukrajine pa se mi zdi ključno, da jo vključimo v Evropsko unijo in ji omogočimo dostop do vseh finančnih sredstev, ki jih Evropska unija podpira zato, da bo Evropa celostna in Ukrajina del Evropske unije.
               

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Herr Präsident, liebe Mitmenschen! In dieser Debatte über die finanzielle Unterstützung der Ukraine unter Verwendung eingefrorener russischer Vermögenswerte sprechen viele Abgeordnete über Frieden. Frieden, während Putins Regime Schulen, Krankenhäuser und zivile Infrastruktur gnadenlos bombardiert. Frieden, während die russische Armee mehr und mehr ukrainische Soldaten, die kapitulieren, auf der Stelle exekutiert. Frieden, während das ukrainische Volk ungebrochen in seinem Willen zur Verteidigung seines vollständigen Heimatlandes ist. Frieden, während unsere Bevölkerung mehrheitlich – und das wird manchen nicht gefallen zu hören –, aber mehrheitlich eine Unterstützung der Ukraine bis zum Sieg wünscht.
               

                  Kennen Sie, werte Abgeordnete, eigentlich Putins Bedingungen für die Aufnahme von Friedensverhandlungen? Die hat er erst vor kurzem in einer Pressekonferenz offiziell verkündet: die vollständige Kapitulation des ukrainischen Militärs. Sie können sich vorstellen, wie diese Friedensverhandlungen aussehen würden. Slawa Ukrajini!
               

(Brīvā mikrofona uzstāšanos beigas.)


Didier Reynders,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I just want to say that it's important to thank you so much for reiterating your firm and unequivocal support for Ukraine, and for confirming it through this legislative initiative, adopted in a short period of time, as a number of Members of the European Parliament mentioned.
I'm impressed by the large support for this proposal, but the lack of unanimity proved the importance of fighting for values in the European Union too, and of fighting for democracy, the rule of law and human rights. Because that is what we are doing here, with such a proposal, in Ukraine: defending our values, defending democracy, the rule of law and human rights. And I'm sure that there's a lot of things to do in different parts of Europe on the same level.
Last week, President Zelenskyy's request for further support this winter was warmly welcomed by European leaders and taken up in the Council conclusions that there is no time to lose. The coming months will be decisive. Your approval of the proposals is essential to honour the commitments of the EU and its Member States. With the Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism, we not only reaffirm our unwavering support for Ukraine for as long as it takes, but we also take an important step towards ensuring accountability (including financial accountability) for vicious aggression. It's very important that Russia itself pays for the aggression and the damage caused by the aggression. And this will continue to be done in close cooperation and coordination with all G7 and other international partners.
So thank you again for your very fast reaction to such a proposal and the way we will continue to support Ukraine in the coming months and maybe years.

IN THE CHAIR: CHRISTEL SCHALDEMOSE


Vice-President


Karin Karlsbro,
rapporteur. – Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, thank you for this important debate. Listening to you and my colleagues in this Chamber, I am proud that the support for Ukraine remains so strong also after the European elections.
I want the vote later today to be the first of many votes we take in this mandate to support Ukraine, because our support will remain firm until Ukraine's victory, until the last Russian soldiers have left Ukrainian territory.
But I hear dangerous arguments from the extreme right willing to surrender to our enemy in the name of peace. But let me be clear. There will be no peace in Europe as long as Putin attacks Ukraine, as long as Putin occupies Ukraine, as long as Putin still tries to steal a country and steal its future. There will be no peace in such a situation. Instead of being worried about the legal base of this proposal, you should save your worries for Putin's next step.
Since the first day of Putin's war, it has been clear one day Russia will have to pay. One day Russia must pay for its destruction of the Ukrainian society and the rebuilding of a future Ukraine, a Ukraine in the European family. Already today, we, the European Parliament, can make this happen. We can make Russia pay.

President. – The debate is closed.
The vote will take place today.


Written Statements (Rule 178)



Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D),
raštu. – Netrukus bus treji metai, kai Rusija užpuolė Ukrainą su vieninteliu tikslu – atimti Ukrainos žmonių laisvę, jų šalį bei teisę nuspręsti savo šalies ateitį. Nuo pat pirmos invazijos dienos Europos Sąjunga išlaikė solidarumo testą teikdama karinę, finansinę ir humanitarinę paramą Ukrainai ir jos žmonėms. Matome, kad agresorius trauktis neketina, todėl mūsų parama Ukrainai ne tik privalo išlikti, bet privalo būti padidinta, kad Ukraina galėtų ir toliau apsiginti. Pagrindinis mūsų visų rūpestis privalo būti Ukrainos pergalė bei visokeriopa parama jai pasiekti, nes pralaimėjimo atveju viską praras ne tik Ukraina – praras visa Europa ir įžengsime į didelės grėsmės zoną. Labai sveikinu ES lyderystę telkiant paramą Ukrainai globaliu mastu ir įtikinant tarptautinius partnerius dėl būtinybės skubiai rasti finansavimo būdus ir padidinti paramą Ukrainai. Rusija privalo sumokėti už šio karo pasekmes, todėl labai džiaugiuosi ES ryžtu panaudoti iš įšaldyto Rusijos turto gautas pajamas ir jas skirti neatidėliotiniems Ukrainos finansiniams poreikiams. Už sunaikintą šalį, už prarastus gyvenimus turi mokėti ne Ukrainos žmonės ir ne ES piliečiai – tai privalo padaryti Rusija, ir šį kartą mes ją praversime tai padaryti.
                  

Maria Grapini (S&D),
în scris. – Pacea este importantă nu pentru că nu ar trebui să cheltuim bani pentru reconstrucție, ci pentru că trebuie să nu mai moară oameni. Mecanismul de cooperare cu Ucraina pentru împrumut prevede lucruri clare care trebuie respectate de Ucraina și verificate de către Comisia Europeană. Fondurile împrumutate trebuie folosite eficace. Se prevede corect rambursarea anticipată atunci când se constată fraude și acte de corupție în Ucraina. Banii împrumutați sunt pentru cetățenii ucraineni, pentru a le ușura viața, nu pentru oligarhi.
                  

                     Apoi, Comisia Europeană trebuie să verifice să nu se suprapună finanțări complementare. Domnule comisar, ar trebui, până când se va reuși pacea, pentru care trebuie să se folosească toate instituțiile mondiale, diplomatice, să instituiți un mecanism de verificare pentru ca fondurile să fie folosite pentru scopul social și economic.
                  

Ľubica Karvašová (Renew),
in writing. – When Russia destroys Ukraine, it has to pay for the destruction. This new financial instrument says that loud and clear. The EUR 35 billion loan to support Ukraine is a lifeline for a nation devastated by Russia's brutal war. This loan will provide urgent relief, directly addressing the country's most pressing needs.
In an unprecedented approach, the loan draws from profits on frozen Russian assets – a mechanism that enforces the principle of accountability, ensuring that those who inflicted the devastation contribute to rebuilding what they destroyed. With the backing and active contribution of the G7 partners, this instrument not only supports Ukraine's immediate resilience but also strengthens its pathway toward sustainable, long-term recovery and the construction of a more robust economy.
For the European Union, this initiative reaffirms its commitment to Ukraine's journey toward stability, democracy, and a stable place within the EU family. Ukraine will rise stronger, and those who sought to destroy it will pay the price.

Bogdan Rzońca (ECR),
na piśmie. – Zgodnie z zobowiązaniami podjętymi podczas szczytu G7 i na posiedzeniu Rady Europejskiej uważam, że utworzenie Mechanizmu współpracy pożyczkowej dla Ukrainy jest istotnym krokiem, by zapewnić dodatkowe wsparcie finansowe Ukrainie w obliczu skutków rosyjskiej agresji. Mechanizm ten zakłada udzielenie Ukrainie pożyczek o wartości do 45 miliardów euro, w tym nadzwyczajnej pomocy makrofinansowej w kwocie do 35 miliardów euro. Kluczowym elementem tego rozwiązania jest finansowanie spłaty pożyczek z przyszłych dochodów pochodzących z zamrożonych rosyjskich aktywów. Dzięki temu środki te będą trafiać bezpośrednio do pożyczkodawców, co zapewni stabilny i przewidywalny przepływ finansowy na ich spłatę, jednocześnie ograniczając obciążenia dla Ukrainy. Postrzegam ten mechanizm jako przykład efektywnej współpracy międzynarodowej, szczególnie że wysokość unijnej pomocy zależy od wkładu finansowego innych członków G7.
                  

                     Rada już zaakceptowała tę propozycję. Jeśli Parlament również ją przyjmie bez zmian, przepisy szybko wejdą w życie, umożliwiając przekazanie pierwszej transzy wsparcia. Uważam, że warto poprzeć mechanizm, który jest wyrazem naszej odpowiedzialności wobec Ukrainy i dowodem na siłę europejskiej solidarności.
                  
3.   Urgent need for a ceasefire in Lebanon and for safeguarding the UNIFIL mission in light of the recent attacks (debate)

President. – The next item is the debate on the Commission statement on the urgent need for a ceasefire in Lebanon and for safeguarding the UNIFIL mission in light of the recent attacks (2024/2889(RSP)).

Janez Lenarčič,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, I would like to thank the European Parliament, also on behalf of High Representative Borrell, for convening this session.
Lebanon is a fragile country, gravely weakened by multiple crises and at risk of being further destabilised by Israeli operations, which would also have wider repercussions on the region and beyond. The civilian population of Lebanon is paying the highest price. The country is facing the most devastating conflict in a generation, with almost 2 500 people dead, one in five Lebanese displaced, and with 43 % of the displaced being children.
The lack of space in shelters disrupted education. Numerous attacks on healthcare facilities, increasing number of deaths among health and other relief workers, and the high risk of disease outbreak are only some of the elements underlining the need for an immediate de-escalation of this conflict and the ceasefire.
UNIFIL's stabilisation role is essential for Lebanon and for Israel, and this role will become even more critical in the perspective of a ceasefire. It is the responsibility of the UN Security Council to define the mandate of UNIFIL. And, according to UN Security Council Resolution 1701, UNIFIL is supposed to be the only armed force, together with the Lebanese armed forces, to be deployed in the south of Lebanon.
The cooperation between UNIFIL and the Lebanese armed forces has been remarkable so far. The EU is committed to further empowering the Lebanese armed forces and to facilitating their cooperation with UNIFIL. To this aim, the Council of the EU has recently approved a new assistance measure for the Lebanese armed forces, worth EUR 15 million under the European Peace Facility. The Lebanese armed forces play a key role in guaranteeing Lebanon's national security, stability and sovereignty, and this is also in the interest of Israel's security.
The EU is equally committed to scaling up our humanitarian engagement in Lebanon. Humanitarian needs in Lebanon are huge and increasing by day. There is an imminent need for more humanitarian funding. For this reason, the EU allocated an extra EUR 10 million to Lebanon to address the most pressing needs of the conflict affected populations, both injured and displaced. This includes the provision of health and shelter services. Additional EUR 13 million for Lebanon are in the pipeline. This comes on top of the EUR 64 million already allocated earlier this year.
We have also activated the EU Civil Protection Mechanism to support the Lebanese health sector. A number of Member States have already offered medicine and medical equipment. In addition, to support the most vulnerable and displaced population in Lebanon, the Commission has launched the European Humanitarian Air Bridge. So far, three flights delivered a total of 105 tonnes of the EU humanitarian stocks. More flights with life-saving assistance are being scheduled.
Mobilisation of the humanitarian aid and support to the Lebanese armed forces and UNIFIL will be among the key objectives of the international conference on Lebanon that will be held in Paris this Thursday. The EU welcomes this conference, where both High Representative Borrell and I will actively participate.
The EU and its Member States have always supported UNIFIL and will continue to do so. The fact that 16 EU Member States contribute troops to UNIFIL speaks for itself. High Representative Borrell visited the UNIFIL headquarters next to the southern border during his last visit to Lebanon to emphasise this EU support. UNIFIL's brave decision to remain in the field in the face of threats against it deserves our political support, recognition and respect from all of us. This is crucial for the credibility and the security of multilateral peacekeeping operations, but also for the morale of our troops in the field so that they know that they have our full backing.
This point was made very strongly during the European Council last week, and it is clearly reflected in its conclusions. The European Council condemned the attacks by the Israeli Defence Forces against UNIFIL, which constitute a grave violation of international law and must stop immediately. The European Council also recalled that all actors have an obligation to take necessary measures to ensure the safety and security of UN personnel and property and to respect the inviolability of UN premises at all times.
The European Council also recalled the need to ensure that civilians are protected at all times, that civilian infrastructure is not targeted and that international law is respected. The recent incidents affecting the civilian population and UNIFIL only make ceasefire even more urgent. We hear the many voices and declarations within Lebanon now calling for an immediate ceasefire and the deployment of the Lebanese armed forces along the Blue Line.
The European Union supports these voices and is ready to continue playing its part. To ensure that ceasefire is credible and efficient, a strong implementing and monitoring mechanism will be needed. As EU, we are confident that UNIFIL can play this important role.

Nicolás Pascual de la Parte,
en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señora presidenta, de nuevo estamos ante una crisis en el Líbano, una crisis humanitaria sin precedentes: mucho sufrimiento humano, miles de desplazados y un país en total crisis.
               

                  Esto nos obliga, en la Unión Europea, a redoblar nuestros esfuerzos diplomáticos, nuestros esfuerzos políticos, para tratar de encontrar una solución pacífica al conflicto y, sobre todo, para exigir un alto el fuego: un alto el fuego inmediato para que callen las armas. Y, después, tenemos ya que empezar a ver cómo podemos diseñar una estrategia a medio plazo para la normalización política del Líbano, que es un país rehén de una organización terrorista como Hezbolá.
               

                  Hezbolá es una organización terrorista y como tal hay que tratarla: no hay que negociar con ella, hay que exigir su desarme y su disolución. Y no hay que distinguir entre brazo armado y brazo político: todos ellos son terroristas porque apoyan el terror y, por tanto, como tal la hemos de tratar.
               

                  Por otro lado, me hago eco del llamamiento a que cesen los ataques contra la misión de la FPNUL desplegada por las Naciones Unidas en el sur del Líbano para garantizar la vida y la integridad física de los soldados desplegados en la zona con el contingente militar, que está demostrando una profesionalidad y un valor humano increíbles.
               

                  Tiempo habrá en el futuro de ver cuál debe ser el mandato de una nueva misión en la zona, si es preciso, pero de momento han de callar las armas, han de cesar los ataques contra la misión de la FPNUL y nosotros, los europeos, tenemos que redoblar nuestros esfuerzos negociadores y de entrega de asistencia humanitaria al Líbano.
               

Γιάννης Μανιάτης,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας S&D. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, στη Γάζα πάνω από 42 000 άνθρωποι, κυρίως γυναίκες και παιδιά, έχουν χάσει τη ζωή τους. Στον Λίβανο 2 500 άνθρωποι έχουν σκοτωθεί, 1,2 εκατομμύρια έχουν αναγκαστεί να εγκαταλείψουν τις εστίες τους, ζητώντας καταφύγιο ακόμα και στη Συρία. Είναι τόσο μεγάλα τα προβλήματα που η κυβέρνηση του Λιβάνου ζήτησε τη βοήθεια του μηχανισμού πολιτικής προστασίας της ΕΕ για να αντιμετωπίσει τις αυξημένες ιατρικές ανάγκες λόγω του πολέμου. Από την αρχή αναγνωρίσαμε το δικαίωμα του Ισραήλ στην άμυνα και στο να προστατεύει τους πολίτες του. Όμως, αυτό δεν του επιτρέπει να παραβιάζει διαρκώς το διεθνές δίκαιο, βομβαρδίζοντας αδιακρίτως, εκτοπίζοντας εκατομμύρια πολίτες, αποκλείοντας κάθε ανθρωπιστική βοήθεια προς τη Γάζα. Δεν είναι αποδεκτοί στόχοι οι κυανόκρανοι του ΟΗΕ ούτε είναι αποδεκτές οι επιθέσεις προς τον Γενικό Γραμματέα των Ηνωμένων Εθνών. Πρέπει να σπάσουμε αυτό τον φαύλο κύκλο. Ζητούμε άμεση εκεχειρία στον Λίβανο και τη Γάζα και την επιστροφή όλων των ομήρων στις οικογένειές τους.
               

Jordan Bardella,
au nom du groupe PfE. – Madame la Présidente, mes chers collègues, le 10 octobre 2024, le contingent des Casques bleus des Nations unies au Liban a été la cible de tirs volontaires de la part de l'armée israélienne. Je veux dire ici qu'aucun pays, aucune démocratie ne peut tolérer ce type d'agression délibérée.
               

                  Depuis près de un an, dans le seul but d'assurer sa survie, Israël s'est lancé dans un combat légitime visant à neutraliser le totalitarisme islamiste au Proche-Orient. Une lutte nécessaire, qui doit se faire dans le respect du droit de la guerre et des conventions internationales. L'offensive israélienne récente a conduit à la neutralisation des terroristes du Hezbollah, à la solde de l'Iran, qui, depuis quarante ans, sèment la terreur et la pauvreté au sein du peuple libanais.
               

                  Parce que l'histoire nous lie, aucun Français, aucune Française ne peut rester indifférent à la situation préoccupante du Liban, à ses souffrances, à ses défis économiques, financiers, démocratiques et civilisationnels. L'histoire du Liban est le réceptacle de celle du Proche-Orient. Chaque crise, chaque conflit se répercute sur sa terre, dans ses frontières et dans sa chair.
               

                  La France en a payé un lourd tribut il y a tout juste quarante et un ans, le 23 octobre 1983, lorsque 58 soldats français avaient été lâchement assassinés par les islamistes du Hezbollah lors de la guerre civile. Je veux ici leur rendre hommage. Amie du Liban, protectrice des chrétiens d'Orient depuis saint Louis, la France doit tout mettre en œuvre pour que l'offensive militaire en cours épargne les civils et les infrastructures essentielles. ‘Vers l'Orient compliqué, je volais avec des idées simples’, confiait le général de Gaulle.
               

                  La France a un rôle et une tradition historiques. Puissance d'équilibre, elle peut compter sur sa diplomatie comme rempart ultime face à la guerre généralisée au Proche-Orient et au Moyen-Orient, une guerre dont l'onde de choc serait ressentie jusqu'ici, en Europe, et qui provoquerait par la même occasion de nouvelles vagues migratoires sans précédent.
               

                  À l'heure où le conflit généralisé menace, il nous incombe de faire advenir ce qui paraît aujourd'hui impensable: la paix, la paix et la paix. Celle-là ne pourra se faire que lorsque le Liban aura recouvré la pleine souveraineté sur son territoire et qu'il sera débarrassé de la mainmise islamiste, du désordre intérieur et des désolations de la guerre.
               

Carlo Fidanza,
a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, Giorgia Meloni è stata il primo leader europeo a recarsi in Libano in questi giorni.
               

                  Lo ha fatto dopo gli inaccettabili attacchi israeliani ai nostri militari, per ribadire con forza che pretendiamo da tutti il rispetto delle truppe UNIFIL, della loro incolumità e sicurezza e del mandato della risoluzione 1701 delle Nazioni Unite. Se necessario, siamo pronti a rafforzare UNIFIL e a ragionare su nuove regole di ingaggio per contribuire a disarmare Hezbollah in quella striscia di terra.
               

                  Sul piano politico, a maggior ragione dopo la morte del ‘macellaio’ Sinwar, è tempo di un cessate il fuoco – sia a Gaza che in Libano – e del contestuale rilascio degli ostaggi israeliani ancora nelle mani di Hamas.
               

                  Infine, l'Unione europea deve farsi carico della situazione drammatica non soltanto degli sfollati interni al Libano, ma anche dei rifugiati siriani, ai quali dobbiamo assicurare un pronto e sicuro ritorno in Siria per scongiurare una nuova ondata di immigrazione che non saremmo in grado, con le regole attuali, di gestire.
               

Christophe Grudler,
au nom du groupe Renew. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, j'ai une impression de déjà-vu aujourd'hui, à quelques détails près, et toujours aucune déclaration du Parlement européen sur la situation au Liban, sur les attaques contre les Casques bleus ou contre les civils libanais.
               

                  Les besoins humanitaires sont énormes: 6 hôpitaux sur 8 sont fermés au Sud Liban, des cas de gale et de choléra surviennent parmi les 800 000 déplacés. Quel manque d'humanité nous contraint, nous Européens, à ne pas réagir officiellement par la voix de ce Parlement? Ce sont maintenant les Casques bleus qui sont pris pour cibles par des bombardements israéliens, d'abord timides, puis délibérés. C'est une violation du droit international, et tout le monde le sait. Vous, nous et l'ensemble de nos collègues ici présents. Qu'attendons-nous?
               

                  Nous avons besoin d'une prise de position a minima, d'une déclaration du Parlement européen d'envoyer de l'aide et des médecins au Liban, d'aider l'ONU à accomplir sa mission, de protéger l'aéroport de Beyrouth afin qu'il reste un terrain neutre et accessible, et enfin – et surtout – il faut un cessez-le-feu immédiat.
               

Leoluca Orlando,
a nome del gruppo Verts/ALE. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, è del tutto inaccettabile l'aggressione militare di Israele contro postazioni e soldati delle Nazioni Unite impegnati con l'operazione UNIFIL di peace keeping.
               

                  Non si è trattato di un errore durante una operazione di guerra ma della deliberata violazione della risoluzione 1701, che impone condizioni di rispetto da parte dei contendenti. È evidente che tale condizione debba essere rispettata anche dalle milizie di Hezbollah.
               

                  Tale violazione da parte dell'esercito israeliano fa seguito alla gravissima affermazione del presidente Netanyahu, che ha definito ‘persona non gradita’ il segretario delle Nazioni Unite, António Guterres. È inaccettabile il disprezzo e l'aggressione verbale e militare nei riguardi delle Nazioni Unite, il cui ruolo è fondamentale per costruire condizioni di pace, sviluppo e convivenza nel mondo.
               

                  Israele ha il diritto di difendersi ma entro i limiti della legalità internazionale, che configura crimini di guerra e condanna ogni forma di apartheid e genocidio. Israele e tutti gli altri contendenti devono cessare il fuoco e riconoscere, non mortificare, bensì promuovere il ruolo fondamentale delle Nazioni Unite, unica organizzazione internazionale al di sopra di contrasti tra Stati e alleanze geopolitiche.
               

                  Il Parlamento chiede alla Commissione, con riferimento specifico all'aggressione militare contro UNIFIL, di censurare le violazioni della legalità internazionale da parte del governo israeliano e di adoperarsi per rafforzare la presenza delle Nazioni Unite in Libano, così come in tutto il Medio Oriente, per garantire aiuti umanitari, cessate il fuoco ed evitare e prevenire un'irresponsabile escalation che aggiunga, alla tragedia di Gaza, la tragedia umanitaria del Libano.
               

Lynn Boylan,
on behalf of The Left Group. – A Uachtaráin, we meet yet again to discuss Israel's escalating assault on Lebanon and the ongoing genocide in Gaza. The EU must now reckon with its own ethical and moral failures, because it has been 'business as usual' with the Israeli Government as they have engaged in the most egregious breaches of international law.
And yes, last week, the European Council condemned the attack on UNIFIL. But the question is: who attacked UNIFIL? It was the IDF who attacked them, and it was deliberate. As an Irish MEP, I want to express concern for the 379 Irish soldiers in UNIFIL and commend them for their bravery.
The EU remains the largest trading partner of a country that violates human rights on a daily basis, that deliberately targets UN personnel, that wages an escalating campaign of brutality in north Gaza. How have we reached a point where burning patients alive in their hospital beds is not a red line for the EU? Where is the EU's moral compass?
This week, we will see shameful attacks in this House; attempts to attack and undermine UNRWA – the last lifeline for the Palestinian people. UNRWA provides essential services, including education, health care and support, for 5.9 million refugees.
And I can tell you now, the public are on the right side of history. They have taken to the streets to demand sanctions, to demand the application of international law and for a permanent ceasefire. So now, no more double standards, no more impunity and no more hypocrisy from European leaders.

Tomasz Froelich,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Der Angriff der Hamas auf Israel ist zu verurteilen, und natürlich hat Israel auch das Recht auf Selbstverteidigung. Aber Israel hat nicht das Recht, den Nahen Osten in Schutt und Asche zu legen. Die Frage ist: Wann hört Verteidigung auf, und wann fangen Verbrechen an? Im Libanon verbrennen Patienten bei lebendigem Leibe. Es sterben Zivilisten, Frauen, Kinder. Ganze Dörfer werden ausradiert. Friedenstruppen der UN werden angegriffen.
               

                  Nein, werte Kollegen, das ist keine Selbstverteidigung mehr, das sind Kriegsverbrechen. Das ist die Hölle auf Erden, und mir blutet das Herz, wenn ich so etwas sehe. Es braucht jetzt endlich einen Waffenstillstand. Deshalb auch Schluss mit Waffenlieferungen nach Israel, denn wer Waffenstillstand fordert, aber Waffen liefert, der ist ein Heuchler. Mehr Waffen bedeuten mehr Terror, mehr Flucht, mehr Krieg; darunter leiden alle, auch wir.
               

                  Italien hat es begriffen, Frankreich auch, Deutschland nicht. Wir liefern weiter Waffen, obwohl 70 % der Deutschen dagegen sind. Hören Sie doch endlich mal aufs eigene Volk! Es braucht jetzt Diplomatie statt Eskalation, und das Ziel muss sein eine Zweistaatenlösung und Frieden im Nahen Osten.
               

Laurent Castillo (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, mes chers collègues, en attaquant Israël le 8 octobre 2023, le Hezbollah s'est rendu coupable d'une guerre qui plonge le peuple libanais dans la tourmente. La sécurité d'Israël n'est pas négociable, celle du Liban non plus.
               

                  En tant que président de la délégation pour les relations avec les pays du Machrek, je tiens à exprimer ma profonde inquiétude. Les attaques récentes contre la Force intérimaire des Nations unies au Liban – la FINUL –, qui ont blessé plusieurs Casques bleus, constituent des violations inacceptables du droit international. Ces actions doivent cesser. Elles sont inacceptables.
               

                  J'appelle à un cessez-le-feu immédiat au Liban et à une reprise du dialogue fondé sur la mise en œuvre complète de la résolution 1701 du Conseil de sécurité des Nations unies. La paix passera par le désarmement du Hezbollah.
               

                  Aux morts s'ajoute le déplacement de plus de 1 million de Libanais, entraînant des conséquences humanitaires terribles. Notre soutien financier, matériel et humain, déjà renforcé, doit continuer, tout comme nous devons continuer à aider le Liban à retrouver une stabilité politique et économique.
               

Nicola Zingaretti (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, in Libano l'Europa c'è: quello che manca è la coerenza e l'unità dei governi. Eppure ciò che abbiamo fatto di buono nella nostra storia lo abbiamo fatto quando abbiamo superato gli egoismi nazionali per guardare più lontano.
               

                  Stiamo cercando di farlo per la guerra di Putin all'Ucraina ma non, purtroppo, di fronte alle guerre del Levante, in particolare a Gaza e in Libano, dove è in atto invece un'escalation che minaccia le stesse fondamenta – anche giuridiche – dell'attuale sistema internazionale.
               

                  L'attacco alla missione UNIFIL in Libano, voluto dal governo Netanyahu per ridefinire in maniera unilaterale il volto del Medio Oriente, contiene questo rischio e anche per questo va condannato. I governi europei devono cambiare passo, mettere da parte i nazionalismi e cercare tutti il rafforzamento della politica estera comune per esistere e incidere.
               

                  È ora di avviare un'iniziativa europea per la pace con un impegno diretto e di altissimo livello: rilascio immediato degli ostaggi israeliani, cessate il fuoco a Gaza e in Libano a tutela delle popolazioni, per aprire un processo diplomatico e costruire una soluzione politica, unica garanzia per una pace duratura.
               

Sebastiaan Stöteler (PfE). – Voorzitter, sinds Resolutie 1701 van 2006 was het de bedoeling dat de blauwhelmen van Unifil de grensstreek van Libanon en Israël zouden monitoren, de zogeheten blauwe zone. Unifil had erop toe moeten zien dat daar geen militaire activiteiten werden ontplooid. Niet door Israël, niet door Hezbollah of welke andere club dan ook.
               

                  Maar wat gebeurde er? We zagen recente beelden van raketlanceringen door Hezbollah in de richting van Israël, onder de neus van Unifil-basissen. We zagen beelden van Hezbollah-tunnels en wapenopslagplaatsen in de zogeheten blauwe zone, de zone waar Unifil had moeten controleren, de zone waar Unifil de baas had moeten zijn.
               

                  In werkelijkheid was niet Unifil de baas, maar Hezbollah. Unifil heeft vreselijk gefaald en nu staat heel Libanon letterlijk en figuurlijk in brand. Het is vreselijk, maar Israël moet orde op zaken kunnen stellen. Unifil zou zich terug moeten trekken, want anders worden de blauwhelmen ‘blauwschilden’ voor Hezbollah.
               

Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR). – Voorzitter, commissaris, collega's, de VN heeft gefaald in Libanon. Volgens VN-resolutie 1701 moest Zuid-Libanon vrij blijven van Hezbollah-strijders. Hezbollah trok zich daar echter niets van aan en legerde er een enorme troepenmacht. Unifil stond erbij, keek ernaar en deed niets.
               

                  Israël moest daarom wel militair ingrijpen, zeker gelet op de dagelijkse beschietingen sinds 7 oktober. Nu dit de realiteit is, moeten conflicten met Unifil uiteraard worden vermeden. Maar Unifil moet zich ook één ding heel goed realiseren: de burgerbevolking verdient bescherming, Hezbollah niet. Op het moment dat Unifil in de weg gaat lopen in de strijd tegen Hezbollah gaat er dus fundamenteel iets fout.
               

                  Unifil zou – in lijn met Resolutie 1701 – eigenlijk moeten helpen Hezbollah uit het gebied te krijgen. Bijvoorbeeld door erop toe te zien dat de wapenleveranties vanuit Iran stoppen. De VN zou zowel de Libanese als de Israëlische bevolking daar een geweldige dienst mee bewijzen.
               

Hilde Vautmans (Renew). – Voorzitter, collega's, Europa heeft deze maand 30 miljoen euro aan noodhulp aan Libanon gegeven. Sinds 2011 hebben we in totaal bijna 1 miljard euro gespendeerd. Maar structureel verandert er niets. Het land is enkel nog verder afgegleden.
               

                  Zolang Europa zich beperkt tot het geven van geld en wij ons niet verder politiek engageren, zal er ook niets veranderen. Sorry als ik mij wat cru uitdruk: een zak geld geven kan iedereen, maar waar is onze strategie om Libanon weer op de rails te krijgen? Waar is onze steun in het gevecht tegen corruptie? Tegen de Iraanse invloed? Waar zijn onze inspanningen om het land te stabiliseren?
               

                  Laten we er nu in de eerste plaats voor zorgen dat de Unifil-missie versterkt wordt. Zeker niet Unifil terugtrekken en zeker niet de blauwhelmen verzwakken. Zijn jullie het drama in Rwanda vergeten? Tien Belgische blauwhelmen gedood! Unamir dat zich terugtrok en een hele genocide die zich voltrok. Laten we er nu alles aan doen om de blauwhelmen te versterken en te beschermen. Dat is nodig om vrede daar te krijgen en ook hier bij ons.
               

Hannah Neumann (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, we are safe and free from repression here, and this is a privilege. I said this last session and I might have to say it again next session: we all have a choice to make about how we use this privilege. Will we continue to play into the hands of terrorists and warmongers, accusing each other of anti-Semitism or double standards, using symbols and rhetoric merely to provoke, echoing the deep divisions and escalation in the Middle East? Or will we rise above it? Will we try to understand, to use the different perspectives we have inherited, the deep ties we have with one side or the others as a shared resource to build the bridges so desperately needed?
Dear colleagues, beyond the zero-sum game of brutality and retaliation, there are so many people in Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, Iran desperately yearning for peace. But if we, secure in this Chamber, can't even bridge our divides, how do we expect them to do so?

Danilo Della Valle (The Left). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ancora una volta la maggioranza di questo Parlamento decide di mostrare al mondo la sua ipocrisia e i suoi doppi standard: oggi ci impedite di poter votare una risoluzione che dica anche una sola parola contro il governo Netanyahu.
               

                  Prendendo di mira le basi UNIFIL, Israele prende di mira dunque l'ONU, il diritto internazionale, i soldati italiani ed europei impegnati in questa missione di pace. L'obiettivo di Israele è chiaro: vuole carta bianca in Medio Oriente, vuole eliminare ogni possibile testimone dei suoi crimini di guerra.
               

                  La scorsa settimana l'UE ha espresso le sue preoccupazioni per queste azioni e Israele, di tutta risposta, ha abbattuto una torre di osservazione UNIFIL. Insomma, se ne fregano delle nostre richieste. Ai 40.000 morti di Gaza, di cui qui potete leggere alcuni nomi, centinaia in Libano e migliaia di sfollati, oggi si aggiunge anche la pressione sul contingente UNIFIL e i suoi 1200 soldati italiani.
               

                  Cosa deve accadere ancora prima che l'Unione europea decida chiaramente di smettere il velo dell'ipocrisia e dei doppi standard e si ponga dalla parte dell'ONU, delle popolazioni libanese e palestinese che soffrono in questa guerra e della Corte internazionale di giustizia? L'UE deve approvare l'embargo di armi a Israele e deve sostenere la Corte di giustizia internazionale nel proprio corso.
               

Salvatore De Meo (PPE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, lo scenario di guerra che si sta delineando in Libano è profondamente preoccupante e minaccia di estendersi ulteriormente nella regione.
               

                  Certamente la strage di Hamas del 7 ottobre ha reso inevitabile per Israele difendersi. Ma anche il diritto di difesa deve avvenire nel pieno rispetto del diritto internazionale umanitario. Per questo motivo gli attacchi contro la base UNIFIL in Libano vanno fermamente condannati, perché mettono a rischio non solo il nostro personale delle Nazioni Unite ma anche la fragile stabilità della regione.
               

                  La scomparsa del capo di Hamas rappresenta un'opportunità per spingere verso un cessate il fuoco: ma è necessario lavorare con determinazione per una de-escalation immediata utilizzando ogni canale diplomatico.
               

                  Per questo motivo, nella giornata di ieri, il ministro degli Esteri italiano, Antonio Tajani, si è recato in Israele e Palestina: per costruire un dialogo che miri alla cessazione immediata delle ostilità ma anche a una soluzione a lungo termine, ossia ‘due popoli, due Stati’, dove israeliani e palestinesi possano convivere in sicurezza e prosperità.
               

                  Questa è l'unica via per garantire una pace giusta e duratura.
               

Evin Incir (S&D). – Mr President, colleagues, this show in here unfolds a tragic scene. The name Gaza is being systematically erased from titles of the debate by the right wing and the far-right factions in here.
Meanwhile, horrors erupt in front of our eyes; children of Gaza in anguish. Their cries fill the air and they are burned alive. This is a nightmare created by humans that history really will tell about. No refuge remains – not even the hospitals. Even there, the world watched them burned alive. Sha'ban al-Dalou was one of their names.
How many must suffer? How many must die? Palestinian souls, Lebanese in need, humanitarians driving, journalists, bold UN peacekeepers, and many stories are yet untold.
I turn to the EPP, ECR, Patriots and ESN. Tell me: how many must be killed before you let go of the hands of Netanyahu, and your empathy rises for the Palestinians and Lebanese also? How many must die before you can say 'ceasefire now' for the people of Israel, Lebanon and Gaza, too? The greater the number, the less is your humanity.

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Arvoisa puhemies, haluaisin, että kiinnittäisitte huomiota herraan, joka istuu paikalla 457, eli vasemmistolainen meppi, joka kävi täällä puhumassa pöntössä äsken. Hänellä on päällä paita, jossa on QR-koodi, ja kun häntä kuvataan, niin QR-koodin kautta paljastuu sivusto, joka on poliittinen palestiinalaissivusto.
               

                  Haluaisin kysyä teiltä arvoisa puhemies, että onko tässä salissa sallittua käyttää tällaisia poliittisia paitoja, poliittisia ilmaisuja, koska ajattelisin niin, että pelisääntöjen pitäisi olla samat kaikille?
               

President. – Thank you very much. We will take note of that. And it's true that it's not allowed to expose political messages on your clothes. So please respect that, colleagues.

Hermann Tertsch (PfE). – Señora presidente, tras un año de guerra provocada por Hamás, Hizbulá y el régimen criminal de Irán, tras inmensas tragedias agravadas porque el terrorista siempre se escuda tras la población civil, con los principales jefes de la matanza del 7 de octubre ya muertos y las organizaciones Hamás y Hizbulá diezmadas, hay una gran oportunidad para una paz estable en el Líbano y en la región.
               

                  Para ello, hay que acabar con el secuestro del Líbano por Hizbulá y eso está siendo impedido en este momento porque tenemos unas fuerzas de la FPNUL que fueron llevadas allí para que no estuviera Hizbulá y hoy en día sirven de parapeto a Hizbulá en una guerra abierta. La FPNUL se desplegó para mantener la paz: esa paz no existe, luego debe irse de inmediato. Algunos parecen querer impedirlo para que quizá haya accidentes y víctimas de la FPNUL y poder agitar aún más la animadversión contra Israel. La FPNUL no ha cumplido su cometido contra Hizbulá; ahora, de hecho, protege, sin quererlo, a Hizbulá de las tropas israelíes. Los cascos azules, muchos de ellos españoles, han de ser retirados de inmediato: en la zona de guerra no pintan nada, que se vayan ya.
               

Giovanni Crosetto (ECR). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, si è appena concluso un importante G7 sulla difesa, nel quale è emersa una forte richiesta di supporto alla missione UNIFIL in Libano, missione che ovviamente noi condividiamo, in quanto la presenza di UNIFIL rappresenta l'unico vero impegno concreto per implementare la risoluzione 1701.
               

                  È altresì emersa una forte condanna degli attacchi dell'Iran sul suolo israeliano e, congiuntamente, la richiesta di interrompere dall'Iran il supporto alle organizzazioni terroristiche come Hamas, Hezbollah e gli Huthi.
               

                  Noi dobbiamo qui difendere il diritto di Israele di esistere e di difendersi da ogni attacco, ribadendo che il problema non è Israele ma il fondamentalismo e il terrorismo islamico. E al contempo dobbiamo riconoscere che, però, gli attacchi alle basi ONU preconfigurano violazioni del diritto internazionale, diritto al quale ovviamente chiediamo a Israele – come a ognuno degli attori coinvolti – di attenersi.
               

                  Nonostante le difficoltà e i fallimenti, abbandonare UNIFIL adesso è impensabile. UNIFIL deve riuscire a esercitare deterrenza e andare via minerebbe la credibilità dell'ONU. Accettare la guerra come unico modo di risolvere le controversie equivarrebbe a negare il diritto delle organizzazioni sovranazionali multilaterali di esistere e questo non ce lo possiamo permettere.
               

Billy Kelleher (Renew). – Madam President, at this very moment, Israeli Defense Forces personnel are actively putting the lives of UNIFIL peacekeepers at risk in south Lebanon with their deliberate actions. Soldiers from 16 EU Member States form part of UNIFIL, with my own country contributing just under 400 troops at present.
Members of Óglaigh na hÉireann have served continuously since 1978 in UNIFIL and, sadly, 48 of our soldiers have lost their lives while wearing the UN blue beret in Lebanon.
It's a sad situation, colleagues, where munitions sold by EU Member States to Israel are now being fired at the very own soldiers working under UNIFIL in the blue beret. What's worse, the vast majority of Member States are silent on Israel's actions in south Lebanon, and indeed in Gaza.
The EU talks a lot about the rule of law. Yet one country, Israel, gets a free pass for its actions, despite them being contrary to international law, cited by the International Court of Justice, breaching UN resolutions and the UN Charter, Article 2 of the EU-Israel trade association agreement, and, crucially, basic human decency.
The EU must once again become an honest broker in the Middle East peace process. We need to promote the two-state solution, and we need a ceasefire in Gaza, the return of the hostages and an immediate ceasefire as well in south Lebanon to ensure there is no more risk to UNIFIL troops.

Mounir Satouri (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, la violation du territoire libanais par Israël est inadmissible. Il y a urgence à retrouver la voie du droit international et à condamner les crimes de guerre par voie judiciaire et non militaire. Il y a urgence à rappeler l'essentiel: personne n'a le droit de se faire justice soi-même.
               

                  Les attaques israéliennes répétées accablent toute la population libanaise. Elles détruisent chaque jour un peu plus un pays qui était déjà à genoux. Nous, Européens, ne pouvons regarder cela les bras croisés. Face à cet embrasement régional, la FINUL, organe censé maintenir la paix à la frontière, est ciblée. Nos soldats sont en danger. Il est temps de rétablir le droit international et de défendre les Nations unies. Que ce soit la FINUL ou l'UNRWA, l'ONU n'est là que dans un seul but: le respect du droit des populations à vivre dans la paix et la dignité.
               

                  Il est encore temps de ne pas laisser le gouvernement israélien, de ne pas laisser Netanyahou piétiner tout ce que la communauté internationale a construit au fil des ans pour faire la paix.
               

President. – Thank you very much. The next speaker is Ms Montero. But before I give you the floor, you have to take off your scarf, please. Thank you.

Irene Montero (The Left). – Señora presidenta, las normas internacionales también impiden los genocidios y aquí está Europa apoyando uno. Esa norma no la cumplen.
               

                  Señor comisario, ¿por qué siguen dando apoyo a los genocidas? Esto no es una crisis humanitaria, es una invasión y es un genocidio. Y si Europa dejara de comprar y de vender armas a los genocidas y de permitir el tránsito de armas, si se rompiesen las relaciones comerciales y el Acuerdo de Asociación, Israel no podría acumular más de 43 000 personas asesinadas en Gaza y más de 1 000 en el Líbano.
               

                  El ataque a la misión de paz de las Naciones Unidas es un acto de guerra de Israel contra países europeos ante el que tampoco han hecho nada. Si ustedes llaman genocidio al genocidio, si dejan de participar de la propaganda sionista diciendo que Israel tiene derecho a defenderse, entonces el Estado terrorista de Israel tendrá que dejar de arrasar escuelas, hospitales, campos de refugiados, tendrá que dejar de bombardear el Líbano con fósforo blanco y de quemar vivas a personas en hospitales, bajo telas.
               

                  Señor comisario, esta es la barbarie retransmitida en directo y ninguno de ustedes podrá decir que no lo sabía. ¿Para qué sirve Europa si dejan que se imponga el más fuerte pisoteando la dignidad de la humanidad y también la legalidad internacional? Ustedes pueden practicar un embargo total de armas y romper relaciones con Israel. Y si no lo hacen, son cómplices.
               

Malika Sorel (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, le monde est aujourd'hui en ébullition, la guerre sévit. Cela doit nous inciter à beaucoup de modestie et de sagesse. Je vous demande, Madame la Présidente, de faire respecter le règlement. Nous n'avons pas le droit, en tant que député au Parlement européen, d'arborer des signes politiques. Le keffieh palestinien jette de l'huile sur le feu, nous empêche de réfléchir. Le retirer ne suffit pas, il doit être banni de cet hémicycle. Je vous en prie, Madame la Présidente, plus de symbole politique!
               

                  Nous devons, en tant que parlementaires, donner l'exemple et réfléchir de manière calme. Il s'agit de la vie et de la mort de citoyens partout dans le monde. Donc, respectons ce qui nous est demandé. Le keffieh palestinien n'a pas sa place dans l'hémicycle.
               

President. – Thank you very much for that. I agree that if you're here and at the speaker's place, then you're not allowed to expose political messages. That's the way I try to rule the debate.

Željana Zovko (PPE). – Madam President, firstly, I would like to say I sympathise with the victims or injured of the attack on the UNIFIL mission. But above all, we have to understand, finally, that securing Lebanon and especially southern border can be only assured if Hezbollah withdraws its forces from the area and in accordance with UN Resolution 1701. The Lebanese have to take responsibilities. They have to elect their president, that is being hijacked by Hezbollah again, the political wing, and we have to support them in order to make their army able to guarantee the security of the borders as it was.
Resolution 1701 was never respected. It's dead. It's the end. And I welcome the decision not to renew the mandate of Croatian soldiers that were there, to pull them back, the UN Security Council has to reconsider who is defending and who is observing these borders and this resolution. We have to discuss this issue and not to lose our time here spreading political messages.

Leire Pajín (S&D). – Señora presidenta, quiero interpelar hoy aquí no a nuestros valores e ideas, ni siquiera a los valores constituyentes de la Unión Europea que deberían regir siempre y parecen no hacerlo en situaciones como la de Gaza: quiero apelar hoy aquí al más mínimo sentimiento de humanidad y desde ahí quiero pedirles que condenemos, de una vez por todas, la violación del Derecho internacional humanitario porque, señorías, no, las órdenes de evacuación por parte de Israel no son conforme al Derecho humanitario internacional, no. Los ataques deliberados a trabajadores humanitarios, a cascos azules, son violaciones del Derecho humanitario internacional. Lo que está ocurriendo hoy en el Líbano debe ser denunciado y debemos pararlo: más de dos mil trescientas personas muertas, más de un millón de personas desplazadas, han vuelto el hambre y el cólera al Líbano… Necesitamos ayuda humanitaria y garantías de acceso, necesitamos corredores humanitarios, necesitamos parar esta barbarie y necesitamos estar a la altura. Por eso, exigimos hoy a la Comisión que lo esté, para que podamos mirar a los ojos de nuestros hijos en el futuro.
               

Ondřej Knotek (PfE). – Madam President, we shall not mix cause and consequence, and in this debate you are focusing too much on the consequence. So let's be honest: one of the root causes is simply that UNIFIL failed to help to protect the people of Lebanon from Hezbollah. UNIFIL even failed to protect our closest neighbourhood from the presence of those terrorists, which is what we are debating today. And also, to be honest, Hezbollah is supported by Iran and represents a threat not only to the people of Lebanon, but also to Israel. So Israel, just like Ukraine, which we debated in the previous item, is only doing what is necessary: they are protecting themselves.
So, ladies and gentlemen, it would be an application of double standards, if you ask now Israel for a ceasefire. If we are not doing it for Ukraine, don't do it for Israel.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question)


Evin Incir (S&D),
blue-card question. – Madam President, I'm a bit shocked at what was just said. Am I understanding it correct that the colleague from the far-right bench of this Parliament is saying that it is okay for Israel to attack the UN Blue Helmets, to attack UNIFIL? Is that correct?

Ondřej Knotek (PfE),
blue-card answer. – Madam colleague, you should be careful when people are talking, or go back to school, because I didn't say anything like that at all. Israel protected Israel. It's UNIFIL's problem that they were not careful, because close to their stations and positions, there were terrorists, so maybe they have not been doing the correct work. That's it. Please do not say things that I have not mentioned.

Jaak Madison (ECR). – Madam President, dear colleagues, first of all, about the facts: the fact is that from Lebanese territory, Hezbollah has been attacking Israel since October last year. That is the fact. They have been supporting Hamas. Hamas has been supported by the very many Palestinians and probably also by the many very left-wing colleagues here. So they are destroying the ideology that we need to destroy Israel.
What is the fact? UN peacekeepers, they were warned that they are sitting next to the bases of Hezbollah. They were sitting next to it. They were warned. And now the General-Secretary of the UN is visiting Russia to meet with Vladimir Putin at the BRICs summit. That's fine for you, of course.
So the problem now is there is a lot of hypocrisy. Left-wing radicals are, of course, providing support with the EU funds that have been deported to Hamas in Palestine. This money has been used to support the Islamic terrorists, to kill Jews and to destroy peace there. We know the facts that Hamas is working together with Hezbollah in Lebanon, with Russia, with Iran and North Korea. That is the side of evil. But we are standing on the good side to destroy the terrorists and to finally fight for peace.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question)


Barry Andrews (Renew),
blue-card question. – Is the speaker aware of the widespread reports that for many years the Israeli Government supported Hamas and facilitated financial support to Hamas through third-party countries in order to undermine the Palestinian Authority? How does he reconcile that fact with the statements he's just made to the Hemicycle?

Jaak Madison (ECR),
blue-card answer. – Actually, you say big sentences like they have been supporting in history, when sometimes, we know just now the facts. Recently, in the last years, the EU taxpayers' money has been used by Hamas to force the terrorists against Israel. That's the fact in the last recent years. We know who are the good side and who are the bad side. If we don't look at the facts about who is actually working together, you are also supporting terrorists. And that's the problem. You are also supporting the Russian terrorism against Ukraine. You are supporting North Korea, because they are all working together there. And that's why I really don't believe that there will be peace without destroying the terrorists. And that Israel has to win with the good side.

Irena Joveva (Renew). – Madam President, the escalation of conflict in the Middle East is horrifying, but who is really to blame?
Every day, another attack. Every day, tens of civilians dead, another hospital bombed. Displaced people seeking refuge still become targets in bombed and burnt shelters. Population of Palestine, Gaza, population of Lebanon – even UNIFIL peacekeepers – have nowhere to hide from bombs, destruction, mayhem. People are being burned to death, blown to pieces and shot every day in this war. For more than a year, we have been watching the breakdown of humanity, sending Israel weapons and supporting them with our trade deals. Meanwhile, much like a wildfire, the war has been spreading throughout the region.
For far too long, we have tolerated Israeli actions which only encouraged more brutality. Of course Netanyahu is to blame, but so are we or you. We need to cease support for Israel, cease weapons supply and cease our trade deals, and only then we will have a ceasefire.

Jaume Asens Llodrà (Verts/ALE). – Señora presidenta, tenía una intervención preparada, pero voy a decir otra cosa.
               

                  Señor comisario, llevo toda la mañana escuchando los argumentos por los cuales hay que apoyar a Ucrania, a su población, y estamos de acuerdo. Pero he pensado: ‘Hay que decir la verdad’. Y la verdad es que es una hipocresía apoyar a Ucrania y no hacerlo con el Líbano o con Palestina.
               

                  Las fronteras de Ucrania valen tanto como las del Líbano o las de Palestina que estableció la ONU. Es una hipocresía sancionar duramente a Putin y no hacerlo con Netanyahu: lo que vale para Ucrania también tiene que valer para el Líbano, para Palestina. Es una hipocresía el doble rasero internacional.
               

                  Y decidimos aceptar las resoluciones de la ONU, de la Corte Penal Internacional, del Tribunal de La Haya en relación con Ucrania, en relación con Rusia y, en cambio, no hacerlo con Palestina, con Israel. ¿Hasta cuándo seguiremos siendo cómplices? Hasta ahora tenemos las manos manchadas de sangre.
               

Luke Ming Flanagan (The Left). – Madam President, looking at the title of the debate, I'm wondering is there a limitation to the amount of text that you can put on the screen. It says 'Urgent need for a ceasefire in Lebanon and for safeguarding the UNIFIL mission in the light of the recent attacks'. I'll finish it off you: 'by Israel, using weapons provided by Germany and the United States of America'.
There will be no ceasefire so long as Israel has an endless supply of weapons. At this stage, I don't expect any better from the United States of America. In fact, I hear their Secretary of State Blinken is going there today to try and breathe new life into the possibility of a ceasefire. Those words make me sick because they're not serious.
But Germany, the country that keeps saying they will never forget the genocide during the Second World War, I do expect better from ye. But still, you're supplying them with 30 % of their weapons. You've got to stop this, because the reality is you seem to have forgotten, but the rest of the world hasn't forgotten. And we won't forget this either. Stop it now. Stop providing the instruments of death.

Alice Teodorescu Måwe (PPE). – Fru talman! Jag undrar hur det kommer sig att Hizbollah har kunnat attackera Israel under det senaste året – flyglarmen har ljudit över hela Israel denna morgon – samtidigt som Unifil under 18 år inte fullgjort sitt uppdrag i enlighet med resolution 1701, av vilken följer krav på nedrustning och upplösning av Hizbollah.
               

                  Hur har Hizbollah, trots förbud att operera vid gränsen där Unifil befinner sig, kunnat upprätta tunnlar, bunkrar och vapendepåer, liksom att återkommande beskjuta Israel?
               

                  Varför stannar ens Unifil kvar och låter sig utnyttjas som civila sköldar när de misslyckats med sitt fredsbevarande uppdrag och uppmanats att lämna. Israel gör nu det FN inte förmått göra, vilket belyser den impotens som FN karaktäriseras av. EU behöver skyndsamt terrorklassa hela Hizbollah och rikta blickarna mot Iran som destabiliserar hela regionen.
               

                  Om morgondagen inte ska påminna om gårdagen, så måste den terror som israeler, palestinier, libaneser och andra folk tvingas leva med en gång för alla elimineras. Därför behöver vi stå bakom Israel, som står framför oss, i kampen mot terroristerna. Bara så kan det bli fred.
               

Matjaž Nemec (S&D). – Madam President, dear colleagues, what is happening in Lebanon and in Gaza must shock us. With impunity, Israel is daily committing war crimes. While rejecting peace, Netanyahu got what he wanted: a regional war and destabilised neighbours. He turned the region into his playground.
In the strongest terms, I condemn Israel's attack on the UN peacekeeping mission and civilian infrastructure.
So, dear colleagues, I ask you: when did we accept that it is okay to bomb a school just because a shooter is hiding inside?
So I have this message for a certain EU minister. A civilian can never be – and I stress – is never a legitimate target.
People in Lebanon are desperate. They urgently need our help. We must immediately open a humanitarian bridge. The country is on the verge of collapsing.
I join calls for the implementation of the UN Resolution 1701. We need an immediate ceasefire. We need peace now!

György Hölvényi (PfE). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! A 2022-es libanoni választási megfigyelő misszió vezetőjeként azt kell mondanom, hogy Libanon teljesen reménytelen helyzetben van. Izrael és a Hezbollah közötti konfliktus kirobbanása évek óta várható volt, de ezt a veszélyt sem a nemzetközi közösség, sem pedig a libanoni politikai élet nem kezelte.
               

                  A bejrúti parlamentben pontosan behatárolható politikai erőt, patthelyzetet idéztek elő, így az ország már két éve elnök nélkül sodródik, kiszolgáltatva a Hezbollah által gerjesztett konfliktusnak. A keresztény, szunnita és síita felekezetek közötti egyensúly maga jelenti Libanont. E nélkül – értsük meg – nincs Libanon.
               

                  Meggyőződésem, az Európai Uniónak és a tagállamaiknak nagy befolyással rendelkeznek Libanonban, és itt szóba jött többször Franciaország, sokkal többet kell tenniük a helyzet rendezése érdekében. Mindenekelőtt gátat kell vetni a humanitárius krízis további terjedésének.
               

                  Hadd emeljem ki, hogy Libanon déli részén szolgálatot teljesítő ENSZ békefenntartók munkája szükséges, a biztonságot szavatolni kell, összhangban az ENSZ Biztonsági Tanácsának megfelelő határozatával.
               

                  Libanon kizárólag nemzetközi segítséggel képes talpon maradni, önmagában erre az ország nem képes többet.
               

Barry Andrews (Renew). – Madam President, Commissioner and colleagues, Israel's Ambassador to the UN last week said, and I quote, 'Hezbollah is using UNIFIL outposts as hiding places'. This is patently false. The truth is that the IDF has continuously and flagrantly violated international law, drawing condemnation from the US, from the UK, France, Germany and Italy, in a rare show of moral enlightenment.
Yesterday, an Israeli bulldozer deliberately demolished an observation tower at a UN position. Last week, two Israeli tanks destroyed the main gate of another UN position. Many UN peacekeepers have been injured. So let me take this opportunity to commend the bravery and integrity of UN peacekeepers drawn from 16 Member States. Under intense pressure, they have held the line, carried out route clearances and managed to resupply vulnerable positions, which really underlines how difficult humanitarian access is in the rest of the region.
I am struck by the near unanimity in this House, for once, condemning the actions of the IDF. And I hope this message is heard clearly by the IDF, and especially by those UNIFIL troops, to help them to endure the hardships brought about by the current conflict.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question)


Luke Ming Flanagan (The Left),
blue-card question. – MEP Andrews, you talk a good talk in here, and what you said earlier was very good and very interesting. But I find it hard to square that with the fact that you are part of a government in Ireland that facilitates US war planes landing at Shannon, facilitates weapons being transported through our airspace.
And while that continues, do you not think you are a hypocrite coming in here, saying you're defending the people in the Middle East, when your government is actually facilitating them being shot in the head?

Barry Andrews (Renew),
blue-card answer. – Well, I don't have time to go through your own voting record on human rights issues, but let me restate that the Irish Government was one of the first to recognise the State of Palestine, has continuously insisted on the support of UNWRA, has demanded that there be a review of the EU-Israel trade agreement, and has been four-square standing behind the people of Palestine against Israeli aggression.
And this is recognised not only by UNWRA, but by the people of Palestine. And they have very much acknowledged and recognised the commitment of the Irish Government in this very, very difficult time.

Estrella Galán (The Left). – Señora presidenta, el Líbano ha sido siempre un país de acogida, yo misma lo he podido comprobar trabajando en sus campos de refugiados y en sus asentamientos en la propia capital. Con una población de más de seis millones, acoge a casi dos millones de personas refugiadas de una forma solidaria, personas refugiadas que se vuelven a ver obligadas a huir, ahora acompañadas del resto de la población civil. Israel sigue actuando impunemente contra todos y contra todo, también contra nosotros. Primero exigió la retirada de las fuerzas de la ONU y, cuando esta rechazó sus chantajes, no dudó en atacar sus bases y, por tanto, atacó el Derecho internacional. Lo que hace ahora en el Líbano es lo mismo que hace con el UNRWA: Netanyahu quiere evitar cualquier testigo internacional de su política genocida.
               

                  Señor comisario, ¿hasta cuándo la Comisión va a permitir esta masacre? Los llamamientos al alto el fuego son ya papel mojado y no evitan ni las muertes ni los crímenes de guerra: detengan ya la compraventa de armas, suspendan inmediatamente el Acuerdo de Asociación con Israel, dejemos las excusas a un lado y sancionemos a Israel, porque, si Israel se llamase Rusia, esto habría sido otra cosa.
               

Davor Ivo Stier (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, uoči međunarodne konferencije u Parizu mi moramo ovdje još jednom naglasiti važnost i potrebu pune implementacije rezolucije Vijeća sigurnosti 1701, jer to je ključ ne samo za prekid vatre nego i za održiv mir.
               

                  Ako želimo to, onda moramo podržati implementaciju te rezolucije za izgradnju političkih institucija u Libanonu, za teritorijalnu cjelovitost Libanona, ali i za razoružanje Hezbollaha, koji je teroristička organizacija i kao takvu je moramo tretirati.
               

                  Ako želimo doista zaštititi civile, ako želimo zaštititi civile i u Izraelu, i u Libanonu, i muslimane, i kršćanske maronite, nemojmo njih zaboraviti, onda moramo doista tražiti potporu UNIFIL-u, ali i potporu koja će biti isto tako onda u punoj implementaciji rezolucije 1701, a to traži razoružanje Hezbollaha, jer je on prijetnja i Izraelu i unutarnjoj stabilnosti Libanona.
               

Marta Temido (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário, a guerra no Médio Oriente agrava-se todos os dias, atingindo agora também o Líbano, onde os bombardeamentos de Israel forçaram 1,2 milhões de pessoas a abandonar as suas casas. E, na semana passada, assistimos a um ataque do exército israelita à UNIFIL, que segue um padrão de desrespeito já usado em relação à UNRWA.
               

                  Esta é mais uma prova de que o que está em causa no Médio Oriente é, para além de uma guerra trágica, um ataque deliberado à ordem internacional, à ONU e agora às suas forças de manutenção da paz.
               

                  E é por isso que não desistimos de continuar a reclamar um cessar-fogo imediato em Gaza, na Cisjordânia e no Líbano, a entrega dos reféns israelitas, alvos do ataque terrorista de 7 de outubro, o respeito pelas regras do direito internacional humanitário e o reconhecimento do Estado da Palestina como condição para a negociação da paz para a região e do desmantelamento dos grupos terroristas.
               

                  E é por isso que insistimos em que utilizemos a alavanca da suspensão do acordo de associação entre a União Europeia e Israel e o embargo comercial a todos os colonatos ilegais.
               

Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, since Israel's invasion of Lebanon, not only has more devastation been brought in the world, but also another offensive against the rules-based order, which the United Nations has worked to protect since the Second World War. UNIFIL are not in southern Lebanon to attack anyone. They are a force mandated by the UN to keep the peace. Yet, as we have seen, 'peaceful' or 'UN' do not necessarily qualify as exemptions to Israel's reconnaissance, by far.
There are 380 Irish peacekeepers on the front line in south Lebanon with this mission, and over the last 46 years, over 30 000 Irish peacekeepers have been stationed there, engaging in humanitarian activities. Their impact is such that the people speak English in an Irish accent as strong as mine. We must commend to the highest possible degree the peacekeepers for their commitment to their mission in ever-challenging circumstances, and for their bravery against the IDF, who have threatened them and injured their colleagues.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (S&D). – Madam President, what more will it take for the EU to sanction Israel? Israel has turned Gaza into a sea of rubble. It is engaging in the indiscriminate bombing of Lebanon. Now it has threatened the UNIFIL mandate in Lebanon and even attacked UN troops and property.
Of course, this disregard for the mandate of the UN by the Israeli Government is nothing new. For years, Israel has sought to undermine the Agency for Palestinian Refugees, UNRWA.
UNRWA is the last lifeline for Palestinians in Gaza. For many, they are the only source of food, shelter and access to healthcare. UNRWA is the only hope we have to start education for over 650 000 children in Gaza – the children that Israel has not gotten around to murder yet. Without UNRWA, an entire generation will be lost to this conflict.
I want to say to those on the right of this House who want to do Netanyahu's dirty work by defunding UNRWA: it is shameful what you are doing. History will surely curse you.
Ireland stands with Palestine and Ireland stands with UNRWA.

Lukas Mandl (PPE). – Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, time and again, for more than a year already, in each plenary week of the European Parliament, we have to focus on the Middle East, and that's a tragedy, but it's also necessary that we keep attention up for the ongoing attacks, terrorism, war.
And suffering are in the first place citizens, in the case we are discussing today, citizens of Lebanon. Lebanon is not attacking anybody. Lebanon is a battlefield. Lebanon is a battlefield misused by the Iranian mullah regime, just as the Iranian mullah regime misuses its own population for their negative and destructive harmful purposes. And the Iranian mullah regime is not only using Lebanon as a battlefield, but also Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation, as well as Hamas as a terrorist organisation, not only against our ally Israel, but against all of us.
So let's keep things to be in order and let's seek for peace.

Nacho Sánchez Amor (S&D). – Señora presidenta, los dobles estándares son el cáncer de la política exterior de la Unión Europea y las metástasis se multiplican por el mundo de modo que nuestro discurso de los valores solo provoca sonrisas de incredulidad.
               

                  Estamos actuando como el peor Kissinger: promoviendo y defendiendo violaciones de la soberanía y de los derechos humanos, porque las hacen —para algunos— ‘los nuestros’. Sí, Netanyahu es un conspicuo violador del Derecho internacional, pero para algunos es ‘nuestro’ violador del Derecho internacional.
               

                  ¿Son las fronteras internacionales inviolables? Pues depende de qué ejército lo haga: si lo hace Turquía en Siria, gran escándalo; si lo hace Rusia en Ucrania, resoluciones y sanciones; pero, si es Israel, se acude al 7 de octubre y a Hamás y se justifica cualquier cosa: los más viles asesinatos de población civil indefensa con la excusa de los escudos humanos, los más enloquecidos ataques verbales y militares a las Naciones Unidas.
               

                  Las violaciones son tan flagrantes y repetidas que la cuestión de repensar toda nuestra relación con Israel no va solo de justicia y valores, va también de nuestra credibilidad en el mundo.
               

Catch-the-eye procedure


Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar, stimați colegi, cred că cel mai important lucru pe care l-am auzit astăzi în hemiciclu este să ajungem să punem în aplicare Rezoluția 1701 a ONU, să pledăm pentru pace, să nu ne poziționăm, subiectiv, poate, de o parte și de alta. Mesajul nostru trebuie să fie foarte clar: pace, să înceteze războiul. Da, trebuie să vedem cum au ajuns Hamas și Hezbollah să nu poată să fie dezarmate. Avem misiune ONU. De ce de atâția ani nu reușim să punem capăt acestor teroriști?
               

                  În plus, cred că foarte bine s-a spus aici – trebuie văzut ce facem cu Iranul, pentru că Libanul a fost atacat de fapt de Iran. Pacea trebuie să fie pentru noi, să ne unească aici, dar să reușim ca Înaltul Reprezentant să-și pună pe agendă acum, primul lucru, discuția cu ONU și punerea în aplicare a Rezoluției 1701. Avem două focare de război și pentru ambele trebuie să luptăm, fără dublă măsură, pentru pace și în Ucraina, pentru pace și în Orientul Mijlociu.
               

Γεάδης Γεάδη (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, όλοι λέμε για σεβασμό του Οργανισμού Ηνωμένων Εθνών και καταδικάζουμε οποιεσδήποτε επιθέσεις κατά του προσωπικού. Να θυμίσω την επίθεση του τουρκικού κατοχικού στρατού στην Κύπρο μαζί με άλλους Τουρκοκυπρίους, πρόσφατα, το 2023. Χτυπούσαν μέλη των ειρηνευτικών δυνάμεων, απειλούσαν να τους πατήσουν με φορτηγά και αυτοκίνητα, έσπρωχναν με μπουλντόζες τα αυτοκίνητα του Οργανισμού Ηνωμένων Εθνών, προκαλώντας ζημιές. Ενέργειες, δηλαδή, που είναι απαράδεκτες και συνιστούν σοβαρό έγκλημα σύμφωνα με το διεθνές δίκαιο. Η αιτία; Ήθελαν να φτιάξουν δρόμο σε περιοχή που δεν τους ανήκει, δηλαδή να επεκτείνουν τα κατεχόμενα εδάφη με πρόσχημα δήθεν ανθρωπιστικούς λόγους· ανθρωπιστικούς λόγους, όμως, για τους οποίους οι ίδιοι είναι υπαίτιοι με την παράνομη κατοχή της Κύπρου.
               

                  Τελικά, όλοι έκλεισαν το στόμα τους, τα Ηνωμένα Έθνη υποχώρησαν και η παρανομία υλοποιήθηκε χωρίς καμία αντίδραση ή κύρωση. Οι Τούρκοι έκαναν το δικό τους και όλοι ‘σφυρίζουν αδιάφορα’ για την Κύπρο. Αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, ο σεβασμός των μελών ειρηνευτικών δυνάμεων είναι …
               

(Η Πρόεδρος αφαιρεί τον λόγο από τον ομιλητή)


Ciaran Mullooly (Renew). – Madam President, the horror of the violent onslaught on Gaza is a live TV news event as we speak. Cameras are showing the bombings every hour and over 40 000 people have already died there. Israel has the right to defend itself, but this is outrageous. It must also respect international law. And in years to come, I wonder what the historians will say about what we did in this House, or what we did not do, perhaps more to the point.
And in the middle of it all are 370 Irish soldiers in the 124th Infantry Battalion supporting the UNIFIL forces there. Young men and women from the Custume Barracks in Athlone, from the Curragh and County Donegal, who have been attacked day after day. The peacekeepers! I spoke to the father of one of these just 20 minutes ago. His son has now been in a bunker for more than 40 hours. A peacekeeper under attack. What a disgrace! At the end of the day, what are we going to do about the situation? The father asks us, why is Israel trying to kill his son, a peacekeeper?
Ladies and gentlemen, the time for action is long gone. A violation of international law must be punished.

Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE). – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, Europa tiene que reclamar el alto el fuego en Gaza y en el sur del Líbano. Señor comisario, Europa tiene que reclamar corredores humanitarios. Señor comisario, Europa tiene que reclamar que se cumpla el Derecho internacional humanitario. Y, por último, señor comisario, hagan por luchar por la paz, luchen contra este genocidio.
               

                  La situación en el sur del Líbano y en Gaza es catastrófica. Tenemos peticiones, en estos momentos, de personal médico que nos está diciendo que hay una verdadera catástrofe. Se atacan ciudades, pueblos, hospitales, escuelas… Y, ¿saben?, hay que ir a la geopolítica y saber que la cuestión de las invasiones del Líbano, desde la de 1978, la de 1982, la de 2006 y ahora la invasión, se debe a la causa palestina, y ahora mucho más, porque, si hubiese un alto el fuego en Gaza y el cese de la ocupación, seguramente esta invasión no se produciría. Y hay un culpable, señor comisario: es Israel.
               

João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, as conclusões do Conselho Europeu e o título deste debate espelham a dualidade de critérios da União Europeia e a sua cumplicidade com Israel. Sim, o ataque às forças das Nações Unidas deve ser condenado. Sim, esse ataque constitui uma grave violação do direito internacional. E sim, ele foi feito por Israel.
               

                  O facto de não se referir o agressor é revelador da cumplicidade da União Europeia com Israel e com a escalada de guerra que leva a cabo com os ataques ao Líbano e a agressão ao seu povo, arrastando a região para um conflito com desenvolvimentos imprevisíveis.
               

                  Cumplicidade com Israel, que há décadas faz tábua rasa do direito internacional, que leva a cabo um genocídio em Gaza, pondo em risco a vida de quase 2 milhões de palestinianos – situação sobre a qual a maioria dos grupos políticos e a presidente deste Parlamento recusaram debater nesta sessão.
               

                  Sim, é preciso um cessar-fogo no Líbano e na Palestina. De que lado está a União Europeia, à espera de condenar Israel e tomar outras medidas, incluindo a suspensão do acordo de associação?
               

Ondřej Dostál (NI). – Madam President, the UNIFIL mission in Lebanon is present pursuant to a resolution of the Security Council, and under the UN Charter, everybody has a duty to carry out the decisions of the Security Council.
But two weeks ago, Annalena Baerbock, the German Foreign Minister – and a Green – suggested it is now Germany's position that Israeli attacks on civilian centres are acceptable, as a matter of 'self-defence', to achieve the goal of 'destroying' terrorists. The position of Czech Government, mostly related to PPE, is similarly shameful.
Ladies and gentlemen, nothing in war is black and white. But few things in international law are easier, clearer, than the distinction between combatants and non-combatants.
Attacking the UN peacekeepers is an abomination, which was in past perpetrated by terrorists, but never by state actors and members of the United Nations.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is why I and eight other Members have submitted a motion calling on Israel to desist from these attacks and to fulfil its obligations under international law. Thanks for everybody in the room supporting this position.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


Janez Lenarčič,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, an allegation was made that EU funds – EU taxpayers' money – went to Hamas. This is a very crude allegation without any proof and I want to categorically reject it here. The sources of funding for Hamas are very well known and they are not in the EU.
Second, calls were addressed to the Commission to stop arms exports to Israel. I wish to clarify that military cooperation between EU Member States and third countries, including Israel, fall completely outside the EU competence and the Commission has zero competence in this matter. This issue would have to be reviewed at the national level.
With these two clarifications, let me try to summarise, on the basis of the discussion that we held, a few key orientations for the way forward and possibly, just possibly, a way out of the crisis in Lebanon.
First, attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure must stop immediately. Second, the Israeli Defence Forces attacks against UNIFIL must also stop immediately. Third, the EU remains strongly committed to supporting UNIFIL. Its role will become even more important in the perspective of a ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel. And fourth and last, the EU reiterates once again its call for an immediate ceasefire. It actively supports international mediation efforts in this direction and is ready to bring its own contribution to make it possible at the earliest.

President. – The debate is closed.


Written Statements (Rule 178)



Idoia Mendia (S&D),
por escrito. – Los ataques aéreos israelíes en Líbano se han cobrado más de 2 300 vidas y han desplazado a 1,2 millones de personas, lo que representa una quinta parte de la población libanesa. Durante la ejecución de la estrategia, se han atacado de forma deliberada las inmediaciones de la Fuerza Provisional de las Naciones Unidas para el Líbano (FPNUL), que opera desde 1978, a la vez que Israel ha indicado que deben retirarse los cascos azules. Todo ello, mientras Israel sigue su ofensiva letal en el norte de Gaza. La situación humanitaria es crítica.
               

                  Nuestra postura se enmarca en torno al respeto del Derecho internacional y al cumplimiento de la resolución 1701 del Consejo de Seguridad. España es uno de los diez mayores participantes en la misión de la FPNUL y estamos en contra de cualquier retirada de la misma. Del mismo modo, defendemos el cese del envío de armas y de la revisión del Acuerdo de Asociación de la UE e Israel a raíz de la estrategia de Israel contra el Líbano, Gaza y su ocupación de nuevos territorios. Por último, abogamos por una mayor ayuda humanitaria en el marco de la UE al igual que ha constatado el Gobierno de España.
               

(The sitting was briefly suspended)


IN THE CHAIR: ROBERTA METSOLA


President

4.   Resumption of the sitting

(The sitting resumed at 12:04)

5.   Welcome

President. – Before we start the votes, I would like to welcome some guests in the gallery. We have a delegation of mayors from across Europe, participating in the European Mayors Summit taking place here these days in Strasbourg. Welcome to the European Parliament.
6.   Request for waiver of immunity

President. – I have received a request from the competent authorities in Hungary for the parliamentary immunity of Ilaria Salis to be waived. This request is referred to the Committee on Legal Affairs.
7.   Request for an urgent decision (Rule 170)

President. – I would like to inform you that I have received a request for urgent procedure from the ENVI Committee, pursuant to Rule 170(6), on the Deforestation Regulation: provisions relating to the date of application.
The vote on this request will be taken tomorrow. If adopted, the vote will be added to the draft agenda of the November I part-session.
8.   Negotiations ahead of Council's first reading (Rule 73)

President. – The ENVI Committee has decided to enter into interinstitutional negotiations ahead of Council's first reading on two files, pursuant to Rule 73.
The positions adopted by Parliament at first reading, which constitute the mandates for those negotiations, are available on the plenary webpage, and their titles will be published in the minutes of the sitting.
9.   Voting time

President. – The next item is the vote.
9.1.   Establishing the Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism and providing exceptional macro-financial assistance to Ukraine (A10-0006/2024 - Karin Karlsbro) (vote)

President. – The first vote is on the report by Karin Karlsbro on establishing the Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism and providing exceptional macro-financial assistance to Ukraine (See minutes, item 9.1).

PRÉSIDENCE: YOUNOUS OMARJEE


Vice-Président

9.2.   Implementation of the Single European Sky (recast) (A10-0010/2024 - Jens Gieseke, Johan Danielsson) (vote)

Le Président. – Le vote suivant porte sur la refonte de la mise en œuvre du ciel unique européen (voir point 9.2 du procès-verbal).
                  
9.3.   Draft amending budget No 2/2024: entering the surplus of the financial year 2023 (A10-0005/2024 - Siegfried Mureșan) (vote)

Le Président. – Le vote suivant porte sur le projet de budget rectificatif numéro 2 au budget général 2024: budgétisation de l'excédent de l'exercice 2023 (voir point 9.3 du procès-verbal).
                  
9.4.   Draft amending budget No 4/2024: update of revenue (own resources) and adjustments to some decentralised agencies (A10-0007/2024 - Siegfried Mureșan) (vote)

Le Président. – Le vote suivant porte sur le projet de budget rectificatif numéro 4 au budget général 2024: mise à jour des recettes (ressources propres) et ajustements pour certaines agences décentralisées (voir point 9.4 du procès-verbal).
                  
9.5.   Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: application EGF/2024/001 BE/Match-Smatch (A10-0009/2024 - Michalis Hadjipantela) (vote)

Le Président. – Le vote suivant porte sur la mobilisation du Fonds européen d'ajustement à la mondialisation: demande EGF/2024/001 BE/Match-Smatch (voir point 9.5 du procès-verbal).
                  
9.6.   Discharge 2022: EU general budget – European Council and Council (A10-0003/2024 - Jonas Sjöstedt) (vote)

Le Président. – Le vote suivant porte sur deuxième rapport concernant la décharge sur l'exécution du budget général de l'Union européenne pour l'exercice 2022, section II: Conseil européen et Conseil (voir point 9.6 du procès-verbal).
                  

(Ceci clôt l'Heure des votes)


(La séance est suspendue quelques instants)

10.   Resumption of the sitting

(La séance est reprise à 12h15)

11.   General budget of the European Union for the financial year 2025 – all sections (debate)

Le Président. – L'ordre du jour appelle le débat sur le rapport de Victor Negrescu et de Niclas Herbst, au nom de la commission des budgets, sur le budget général de l'Union européenne pour l'exercice 2025 – toutes sections [12084/2024 — C10-0099/2024 — 2024/0176(BUD)] (A10-0008/2024).
               

Victor Negrescu,
rapporteur. – Mr President, dear Commissioner, I also expected the ministers to be here, dear colleagues, when preparing the speech for today's plenary, I felt trapped in a maze that seems to repeat every year. This is the annual EU budgetary procedure. We know there is a way out – a better solution for the European Union to continue to have a positive impact in the lives of the people we represent – but we always make things more complicated than they are.
The EU budget is an investment budget designed to provide financial resources in the areas that require common action. And today, based on EU polls, citizens expect us to finance the programmes and actions that increase their living standards and protect their prosperity and quality of life. This is what the European Parliament is proposing in its resolution, adopted by a large majority in the Committee on Budgets. I take the opportunity to thank all the political groups involved, and our staff, for a wonderful work and for this result that corresponds, in my opinion, as general rapporteur, to what needs to be done to match citizens' expectations.
Our proposal is prudent yet ambitious. We seek to allocate adequate resources for the key flagship programmes, while at the same time maintaining financial availabilities for unforeseen events and for the payments needed for the Recovery and Resilience Facility. In this regard, in our resolution, we call upon the European Commission to assess what we call 'errors', to conduct better forecasts when it comes to financing the full implementation of the recovery plans, and to ensure the predictability we need for the EU budget.
The European Parliament's position is clear: the EU budget cannot be a prisoner of the interest rates by reducing our programmes beyond the agreement we reached during the revision of the multiannual financial framework. The European Parliament will defend its role as budgetary authority and will continue to protect a budget that is fit for the current challenges.
Coming back to the maze. The position of the Council – Hello, Minister. Thank you for coming – is based on false assumptions that go against what we believe to be the economic theories at work. In a challenging economic environment, we need to invest and increase Europe's impact at global level. The Draghi and Letta report highlight the importance of increasing investments in order to maintain the competitiveness of the European Union.
Let us call it what it is: what the Council is proposing is austerity. Reducing our investment capacity at the European Union level will make us vulnerable on the world stage, will diminish our capacity to help Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova and the frontline countries affected by the illegal war launched by the Russian Federation, would reduce our instruments to innovate and build a competitive economy, will leave our borders unprotected, and would ignore our farmers and young people calling for help that year.
I will switch to Romanian.
De aceea, Parlamentul European dorește ca bugetul nostru anual de circa 200 de miliarde EUR să cuprindă următoarele priorități:






 


o creștere cu 110 milioane pentru programele din domeniul sănătății. Pandemia de COVID-19 s-a încheiat, dar nu putem ignora lecțiile învățate. Putem face mai mult și mai bine împreună în domeniul sănătății. Planul de combatere a cancerului, precum și prevenția bolilor cardiovasculare, îmbunătățirea sănătății mintale sau ajutorarea pacienților care suferă de boli rare și a copiilor care au nevoie de îngrijire medicală sunt doar câteva dintre lucrurile pentru care putem face mai mult împreună;










 


pe lângă respingerea tăierilor propuse de Consiliu, solicităm suplimentarea cu 70 de milioane EUR a programelor noastre de tineret și educație. Erasmus a devenit un program care este accesat mai ales de elite, deoarece a devenit imposibil pentru studenții și profesioniștii noștri să aibă acces la mobilități odată cu creșterea costurilor de trai;










 


42 de milioane EUR în plus pentru a ne proteja cetățenii împotriva efectelor dezastrelor naturale, inclusiv ale inundațiilor recente care au afectat Europa Centrală și de Est. Președinta von der Leyen a promis 10 miliarde EUR și a organizat o conferință frumoasă, dar avem nevoie de surse de finanțare noi. Parlamentul European are o abordare practică și identifică sume suplimentare din fondurile disponibile;










 


96 de milioane EUR suplimentare pentru fermieri și agricultură. Trebuie să ne asigurăm că cetățenii noștri au acces la alimente de calitate, în timp ce fermierii noștri sunt plătiți corect pentru munca lor. Zonele rurale, izolate și montane au nevoie de o atenție deosebită din partea Uniunii Europene. De exemplu, în frumosul meu județ Alba din România, chiar în Munții Apuseni, oamenii încă se așteaptă ca Europa să facă mai multe pentru ei;










 


35 de milioane EUR pentru protecția frontierelor și sprijin pentru solicitanții de azil, inclusiv pentru a finaliza integrarea deplină în spațiul Schengen a României și Bulgariei;










 


acordarea de sprijin pentru infrastructura de transport și energie prin creșterea fondurilor pentru Mecanismul pentru Interconectarea Europei sau suplimentarea fondurilor pentru a proteja natura și biodiversitatea și a sprijini lupta împotriva schimbărilor climatice;










 


creșterea capacității noastre de a acționa la nivel global prin majorarea fondurilor în acest sens, fie că vorbim de ajutor umanitar sau fondurile pentru vecinătatea de est și cea sudică, în special pentru Republica Moldova, care acum, după recentul referendum, are nevoie de mai mult sprijin.




De asemenea, este clar că Europa poate acționa. De aceea, doresc să subliniez mesajul nostru puternic atunci când vine vorba de o acțiune mai eficientă și mai puternică a Uniunii Europene în confruntarea cu cartelurile de droguri, în asigurarea sănătății mintale sau în dezvoltarea capacității noastre militare și de apărare. Voi sublinia de asemenea în final necesitatea de a facilita mobilitatea în UE. Acesta este motivul pentru care Parlamentul European solicită îmbunătățirea coordonării securității sociale, care va permite diasporei europene să-și transfere mai rapid beneficiile sociale și pensiile dintr-o țară în alta.

Niclas Herbst,
Berichterstatter. – Herr Präsident, Herr Staatsminister, Herr Kommissar, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Der mehrjährige Finanzrahmen ist ein sehr enges Korsett – ein zu enges Korsett. Das macht uns bei den jährlichen Haushaltsplanungen immer wieder Probleme. Obwohl der mehrjährige Finanzrahmen ein so enges Korsett ist, schaffen wir es nicht, wirklich vorausschauend zu handeln.
               

                  Ich nehme mal das Beispiel der Revision des mehrjährigen Finanzrahmens. Es ist uns nicht gelungen, die Probleme in Rubrik 7, die wir kannten, wirklich anzugehen; stattdessen haben wir sie wieder mal aufs nächste Jahr verschoben. Wir stehen jetzt davor, wohl wissend, dass wir hätten handeln müssen und dass wir im nächsten Jahr vor genau den gleichen Problemen stehen werden und dass wir wieder spezielle Instrumente nutzen müssen. Rubrik 7 ist im Haushalt nicht ausreichend repräsentiert.
               

                  Das Gleiche, ebenfalls nicht vorausschauend, beim Thema Cybersicherheit: Seit Jahren reden wir darüber, über neue Posten, über mehr Zusammenarbeit, und stellen jetzt fest, dass wir in allen Institutionen handlungsfähig sein müssen – mit den Problemen, die es auch für die Postengestaltung mit sich bringt. Positiv anzumerken: Die Zusammenarbeit wird gestärkt. Auch im Berichtigungsschreiben schaffen wir es, die EU zu stärken, neue Posten zu schaffen und auch Mittel zusammenzufassen. Gleichwohl sehen wir bei den Verhandlungen über Posten für Cybersicherheit, dass es auch hier wieder Probleme gibt. Das ist nicht vorausschauend.
               

                  Stabile Personalpolitik: Ich kann es aus der Sicht des Rates gut verstehen, dass hier von Jahr zu Jahr ein klares Signal bei der Personalpolitik gefordert wird; gleichwohl ist es nur die eine Seite der Medaille. Wenn wir es nicht schaffen, durch Aufgabenkritik wirklich auch Personal an der einen Stelle abzuschaffen oder umzuschichten, dann sind wir natürlich an anderen Stellen, wo wir mehr Personal brauchen, sehr eng gebunden. Das sehen wir nicht nur beim Thema Cybersicherheit. Ich nehme mal das Beispiel EDSB beim Thema Datenschutz. Wir wissen, dass wir in den nächsten Jahren sehr stark auf KI-gestützte Systeme und -Anwendungen setzen müssen, zum Beispiel bei der Risikobewertung, wenn es um das Thema Betrug und Korruption geht. Auch in anderen Bereichen werden wir darauf setzen müssen. Gleichzeitig streiten wir uns um sechs, sieben oder acht Stimmen beim Datenschutzbeauftragten, wohl wissend, dass die Implementierung und die Zulassung solcher Systeme dann Probleme bereiten wird. Das ist nicht vorausschauend.
               

                  Ebenso beim Thema Eurojust, beim Thema Europol und beim Thema Frontex. Über all die Jahre haben wir uns hier gestritten, und jetzt merken wir, dass der Außengrenzenschutz extrem wichtig ist. Wir haben dort nicht vorausschauend gehandelt.
               

                  Wenn es um vorausschauendes Handeln geht, möchte ich ein weiteres Thema nennen: den EAD. Wir wollen in der ganzen Welt diplomatisch präsent sein, haben es aber versäumt, Sicherheitsmaßnahmen in den über 50 Delegationen vernünftig umzusetzen. Wir haben jetzt Probleme – wohl wissend, dass Terroranschläge und auch Angriffe anderer Art immer wahrscheinlicher werden. Das war leider nicht vorausschauend gehandelt. Wenn wir jetzt hier nicht die notwendigen Mittel bereitstellen, dann handeln wir schon wieder nicht vorausschauend, und wir werden am Ende weltweit Delegationen streichen müssen.
               

                  Ein weiteres Beispiel, wenn ich nochmal das Wort vorausschauend benutzen darf: Mietzulage in Luxemburg. Auch hier haben wir jahrelang zugeschaut, haben gewartet, bis die Schere immer weiter auseinandergeht, und stellen heute fest, dass es erhebliche Probleme bereitet, Personal zu rekrutieren. Wir sind auf der anderen Seite auch nicht bereit, Standorte infrage zu stellen. Das ist nicht vorausschauend, und wenn wir in diesem Jahr nicht handeln, dann wird das Problem im nächsten Jahr noch größer.
               

                  Ich weiß, dass es natürlich auch für eine Präsidentschaft extrem schwierig ist, in der kurzen Phase, in der man den Ratsvorsitz innehat, wirklich zu handeln. Ich hoffe aber, dass die ungarische Ratspräsidentschaft mit uns vorausschauend verhandelt. Ja, auch wir als Parlament müssen da unsere Hausaufgaben machen und haben auch in der Vergangenheit oftmals vielleicht nicht vorausschauend genug gehandelt und auf der eigenen Seite auch keine harten Einschnitte befürwortet.
               

                  Ich hoffe, dass wir von den institutionellen Kämpfen wegkommen, die immer so zwischen den Institutionen geführt werden, denn auch das ist nicht vorausschauend, aber genau das ist unsere Aufgabe. Ich freue mich auf konstruktive Verhandlungen.
               

Péter Benő Banai,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, honourable Members, Commissioner Hahn, ladies and gentlemen, I am honoured to attend today the European Parliament's debate on the draft budget of the Union for 2025. We already had the opportunity to exchange views on this important topic in September when I presented to you the Council's position. Meanwhile, the Commission has presented an amending letter to the draft budget, which will have an impact on both of our institutions.
I will start by stating that the Parliament and the Council share many of the key priorities for the entire MFF period and for the next year as well. But we live in difficult times. As I outlined at the September plenary session, we must have the courage to make clear choices, so that the available financial resources in 2025 allows the Union to act effectively without increasing the pressure on national budgets and taxpayers indeed. The current economic and budgetary situation calls for a prudent approach. This is why the Council supports the backloading of some priorities to reinforce others, as well as the creation of margins and flexibility in the budget to ensure a rapid response to address new challenges. This is the key principle of our approach.
Unfortunately, the differences between our respective positions at this stage remain relatively high, near EUR 2.8 billion in commitments and EUR 1.8 billion in payments. It seems to us that the Parliament increases several budget lines, requests an almost full use of the tiny remaining margins, and imposes a substantial use of special instruments to cover expenditure that is not unforeseeable, such as the financing cost of the European Union recovery instrument and the administrative costs. The Council finds this unjustified and in contradiction with our approach, which is based on budgetary prudence and financial discipline. Therefore, the Council would not be able to approve all the Parliament's amendments to its position should you vote them through tomorrow.
Please, honourable Members, Commissioner, allow me to make some preliminary remarks on some amendments. As regards Heading 1, it's important to support the digital green transition, which contributes to the union's economic recovery. However, we cannot accept those additional increases linked to Horizon which stem from the commitments made under the Financial Regulation. This is in contradiction with what was agreed for the whole MFF period, to which the Parliament gave its context as well.
As regards Heading 2a, Heading 3, we have not big differences. I hope that we can reach an agreement on on these headings.
On Heading 2b, let me reiterate, the Council fully acknowledges the importance of programmes such as Erasmus+ or EU4Health, and emphasises the programmes appropriations are already aligned with their financial programming. Therefore, the increases proposed by the Parliament are, in our opinion, not justified.
As regards the interest cost, we still believe that our reading of the use of the cascade mechanism is appropriate to limit the use of special instruments and to ease the situation in the future years, when the financing will become more difficult.
As regards Heading 7, which was mentioned by Mr Herbst, let me mention the Luxembourg housing allowance, which we think is premature. We think it's not the right time now to have this new initiative. Of course, we are ready to come back to this issue in a later year.
To sum up, the Council and Parliament share many priorities, but we need to work together to achieve a well balanced budget for 2025 that avoids unnecessary expenditure and foresees sufficient flexibility to face unpredictable challenges. To that end, I think we have some work to do in the coming weeks. I can reaffirm the Council's willingness to reach a balanced agreement on the budget for 2025 as soon as possible.

Johannes Hahn,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, Minister Banai, honourable Members, we are indeed one week away from the start of the consultation on the draft budget for next year. I would like to thank the European Parliament, especially the Committee on Budgets and all specialised committees, for the intensive work on the Commission's proposal for and the Council reading of the draft budget 2025. Of course, I welcome that there could be found a compromise, not by all the political groups but by the majority of political groups and committees representing a united Parliament's position on this subject.
Both Parliament and the Council have now set the framework for their respective negotiation mandates. As usual at this point, the positions of Parliament and the Council diverge substantially, but as already said here in September, I regret the Council cuts and I don't find the justifications really convincing, in particular where they contradict the Council's own priorities and decisions.
Looking at Parliament's position, I welcome that the amendments proposed by Parliament reinstate the expenditure at the level proposed by the Commission in the draft budget. However, may I say, like always, the Parliament proposes reinforcements of a broad number of programmes, also for 2025. This includes research and innovation, including the use of Article 53 of the Financial Regulation, digital climate action, agriculture, competitiveness and employment opportunities, crisis response, health, EU values actions related to asylum and migration, humanitarian aid and neighbourhood.
I must stress that substantial increases would require extensive mobilisation of special instruments, and we need to treat the remaining availabilities carefully, something we state regularly in the different discussions and settings.
Clear prioritisation of tabled amendments, as well as concessions on both sides, will be necessary, and discussions should focus on those programmes where meaningful adjustments can happen. This is even more important this year when we implement the EURI cascade for the first time. This cascade foresees that part of the cost overrun, a benchmark of 50 %, should be financed from existing availabilities.
I presented the Commission's amending letter during our budgetary trilogue last Thursday. It addresses some elements included both in the Council position and in Parliament's amendments, in particular with regard to the updated needs for payment appropriations, agriculture, the EURI line and administrative expenditures.
I would like to ask Parliament and the Council to consider this amending letter as a starting point for a negotiating process. I am confident that the negotiations will continue in the positive spirit we had until now, and that Parliament and the Council will manage to reconcile their positions in due time. Of course, my team and I spare no effort to support your work throughout the conciliation period to reach a good agreement, a good compromise, and we remain as honest brokers.

Hilde Vautmans,
rapporteur voor advies van de commissie AFET. – Voorzitter, collega's, vanuit de Commissie buitenlandse zaken hebben we deze begroting bijgestuurd, want we zien allemaal dat de wereld in enkele jaren tijd een stuk vijandiger is geworden. Ons nabuurschap staat letterlijk en figuurlijk in brand. Met deze begroting wordt dan voor mij ook een eerste voorzichtige poging gedaan om tegemoet te komen aan die uitdagingen.
               

                  Extra inspanning in humanitaire hulp, een verdubbeling van de begroting voor vredesopbouw en – heel belangrijk – extra middelen voor defensie en in het bijzonder voor de militaire mobiliteit tussen de lidstaten.
               

                  Ik steun die verhogingen volmondig, zolang we maar beseffen dat we niet meer doen dan wat tijd kopen. Want als morgen Trump opnieuw verkozen wordt, zal blijken dat dit allemaal zwaar onvoldoende is. We moeten beseffen dat met Joe Biden de laatste Amerikaanse president vertrekt die Europa in zijn DNA heeft. In het post-Bidentijdperk zullen we veel meer moeten doen dan wat begrotingsverhoginkjes links en rechts. We gaan antwoorden moeten vinden op de volgende vragen: hoe integreren we onze nationale legers? Hoe zorgen we ervoor dat we niet alleen Amerikaanse wapens kopen, maar ook zorg dragen voor onze eigen Europese defensie-industrie? In afwachting van meer en beter steun ik de voorliggende begrotingsverhogingen.
               

Charles Goerens,
rapporteur pour avis de la commission DEVE. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, de nouvelles crises humanitaires viennent s'ajouter à celles déjà existantes, en l'occurrence aux conflits ouverts, oubliés ou gelés.
               

                  Soucieuse de répondre à des besoins humanitaires croissants, la commission du développement a proposé pour 2025 120 millions d'euros supplémentaires pour l'aide humanitaire. Elle a également proposé de maintenir les ressources nécessaires au financement des droits de l'homme, à l'action de la société civile et à la réalisation des objectifs de développement durable, et ce, au moins, à leur niveau initialement prévu.
               

                  Aussi sommes-nous d'avis que les États membres doivent agir de concert avec l'Union européenne, eux qui disposent de quatre fois plus de moyens budgétaires que l'Union européenne elle-même. Le traité de Lisbonne, d'ailleurs, fait de la complémentarité des 27 États membres et de la cohérence dans leur action une exigence.
               

                  Soyons donc conscients du message que nous envoyons à nos partenaires du Sud, dont bon nombre sont en train de nous tourner le dos. Il serait contre-productif, en effet, de baisser la garde dès lors que nous sommes, de loin, le principal acteur mondial en matière de coopération au développement et d'action humanitaire.
               

José Cepeda,
ponente de opinión de la Comisión CONT. – Señor presidente, señor comisario, gracias por estar aquí presente y, sobre todo, gracias también a los ponentes, a los señores Negrescu y Herbst, que han hecho un magnífico trabajo para precisamente trasladar la opinión del Parlamento a este proyecto de presupuesto.
               

                  Desde la Comisión CONT queremos, desde luego, poner en valor la importancia de buscar que los sobrecostes, por ejemplo en los programas de Next Generation EU, no impliquen recortes a nuestras políticas públicas. La Unión Europea, desde luego, necesita tener recursos propios y, en ese sentido, tenemos que trabajar de una forma muy importante para garantizar el Pacto Verde, el Pacto Digital, e intentar desarrollar un nuevo marco en un modelo de mercado donde el conocimiento posiblemente se vaya a imponer a los sistemas monetarios. Y, en ese sentido, y pensando en las futuras generaciones, desde luego queremos también mencionar la importancia de la ciberseguridad: tenemos que proteger nuestras políticas digitales al menos con un 10 % de inversión en cada desarrollo de ciberseguridad que se implemente.
               

Antonio Decaro,
relatore per parere della commissione ENVI. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il parere annuale sul bilancio è un momento fondamentale per il Parlamento, perché attraverso le scelte che faremo oggi diremo ai nostri concittadini quale Europa vogliamo.
               

                  In qualità di presidente della commissione ENVI, non posso sottrarmi dal ricordare gli impegni che abbiamo preso con le prossime generazioni sulle azioni per il clima, ma anche con i nostri concittadini, con le imprese e con i lavoratori.
               

                  Il nostro pianeta ci chiede scelte coraggiose adesso. Quelle date scritte sui documenti ufficiali si devono tradurre in risorse per accompagnare il percorso verso quella data. Il nostro obiettivo è portare a termine una transizione ambientale giusta, che non lasci indietro nessuno.
               

                  Aggiungo che non è pensabile tagliare i fondi per il meccanismo unionale della protezione civile, visti gli eventi climatici che si abbattono sempre più feroci sui nostri territori. E non è possibile tagliare i fondi sulla salute: vuol dire che non abbiamo imparato nessuna lezione dalla pandemia.
               

                  Un'Europa che non investe nella prevenzione e nella salute dei suoi cittadini – tutti – non è l'Europa che vogliamo.
               

Anna Cavazzini,
rapporteur for the opinion of the IMCO Committee. – Mr President, dear colleagues, dear Commissioner, let me highlight the priorities of the IMCO Committee. First, our customs and market surveillance need sufficient resources to implement consumer protection, for example in e-commerce, and to ensure compliance with EU law by all companies to create a level playing field in the single market.
Second, our milestone legislation like the Digital Services Act, the Digital Markets Act, the AI Act, but also the product ban on forced labour, needs to be implemented and enforced effectively and robustly. The digital single market has to benefit citizens and companies alike. We cannot tolerate human rights dumping on our market and, to enforce all of that, we need adequate resources in the Commission.
And third, with the reform of public procurement coming up, we want to remind you that the single market programme is also aiming at supporting actions for strategic public procurement, and this can continue paving the way for the reform.

Daniel Buda,
raportor pentru aviz al Comisiei AGRI. – Domnule președinte, stimați colegi, bugetul pe anul 2025 trebuie să reflecte nevoile unor realități pe care astăzi nu le putem contesta. Avem un sector agricol slăbit, urmare a unor provocări majore generate de secetă, inundații, inflație sau războiul din Ucraina, iar bugetarea adecvată este o necesitate.
               

                  Le mulțumesc raportorilor pentru că o bună parte a opiniei comisiei de agricultură se regăsește în documentul final. Programele de promovare sau banii suplimentari alocați pentru tinerii fermieri reprezintă un pas înainte către consolidarea sectorului agricol european. Sumele dedicate programului de fructe și legume în școli contribuie atât la setarea unor obiceiuri alimentare sănătoase, cât și la combaterea abandonului școlar.
               

                  În același timp, solicit o rezervă agricolă a politicii agricole comune mai consistentă în bugetele anilor viitori, pentru a sprijini mai bine fermierii în fața crizelor neprevăzute, așa cum de altfel cred, domnule comisar, că este nevoie de o creștere a bugetului alocat pentru agricultură. Convergența externă în ceea ce privește plățile directe sau egalizarea subvențiilor trebuie să fie un obiectiv clar al noii Comisii Europene, în condițiile în care fermierii sunt actori pe aceeași piață unică și au aceleași costuri de producție.
               

Carmen Crespo Díaz,
ponente de opinión de la Comisión PECH. – Señor presidente, muchas gracias, señor comisario, y también a los ponentes. Yo creo que el presupuesto apuesta por los sectores productivos —como nosotros queríamos especialmente y como quería la presidenta Von der Leyen en el diálogo estratégico—, pero, en realidad, aunque los 96 millones de euros para la PAC y los jóvenes son muy importantes, hemos perdido una oportunidad para luchar contra el cambio climático con los sectores productivos.
               

                  En este caso, la reserva de crisis no se toca para aumentarla, con respecto a la sequía no hay una perspectiva hídrica para los fondos Next Generation EU y, por supuesto, esto no apuntala la soberanía alimentaria, especialmente también en relación con el FEMPA, que baja un 11,6 %, pese a que se trata de un sector muy vulnerable, pero que es fundamental para el desarrollo de las zonas costeras y también para tener una proteína saludable para alimentar a todos los europeos.
               

                  Creo que hemos perdido una oportunidad también aquí con respecto al Pacto Rural europeo: especialmente hay una incidencia de ese Pacto, por parte de las regiones, por lo que respecta a la utilización del dinero de forma integral, pero, además, saliendo fuera del presupuesto de la PAC.
               

                  Es decir, tenemos muchos aspectos que trabajar. Nos congratulamos de trabajar en esa apuesta por la PAC con la subida, pero necesitamos en este momento que haya otros aspectos —especialmente para la lucha contra el cambio climático— que, con los sectores, se puedan añadir a ese trabajo dotándolos de recursos económicos. Y, por supuesto, la bajada del presupuesto del FEMPA no es nada halagüeña para la soberanía alimentaria de la Unión.
               

Nela Riehl,
rapporteur for the opinion of the CULT Committee. – Mr President, dear colleagues, some ask 'what does the EU offer me personally?' Here is one of the EU's most successful offers: Erasmus. Erasmus is the European success story of public outreach, but also of dismantling borders and drawing Europe closer together.
National Erasmus agencies were telling me just last week the programme is already now underfunded. Every euro that is cut now results directly into student mobility that we cannot support. Last year, Erasmus mobility requests of EUR 833 million in Germany alone, with a budget of EUR 418 million. That is almost twice as much as we could provide.
There is a huge deficit in our Erasmus budget already and the Council tries to cut here. I am happy to see that Mr Negrescu receives a mandate to ask for funding increase of EUR 70 million to this extremely popular programme. This must be the EP's priority.

Sven Simon,
Verfasser der Stellungnahme des AFCO-Ausschusses. – Herr Präsident, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Diese Debatte ist ein guter Anlass, um grundsätzlich über die Zukunft der europäischen Haushaltspolitik zu sprechen. Es sind Reformpläne für den mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen durchgesickert, die eine stärkere Dezentralisierung und mehr Flexibilität der Mittel vorsehen – diese Absicht begrüße ich sehr. 500 Strukturfonds mit aufwendigen Verwaltungsapparaten können keine Antwort auf die struktur- und wirtschaftspolitischen Herausforderungen der Gegenwart sein. Deshalb sind Anpassungen ohne Zweifel notwendig.
               

                  Ziel muss eine gezieltere und effektivere Haushaltspolitik sein. Was wir in keinem Fall zulassen werden, ist eine geringere parlamentarische Kontrolle. Europäische Mittel dürfen nicht dazu dienen, nationale Haushaltslöcher zu stopfen. Jeglicher Zweckentfremdung müssen wir den Kampf ansagen. Europäische Mittel müssen einen echten europäischen Mehrwert haben.
               

                  Und sollte die Kommission mit einem Vorschlag kommen – von dem wir heute noch nicht wissen –, der es vorsieht, das Parlament weniger zu beteiligen, werden wir dem heftig widersprechen und dies selbstverständlich nicht zulassen.
               

Lina Gálvez,
rapporteur for the opinion of the FEMM Committee. – Mr President, Commissioner, gender equality is a principle enshrined in the European Union Treaties. And in order to advance on aid and gender equality, we need to develop a gender equality law policy, but also to bring equality to all policies. And the best way to do it is through budgeting and promoting indicators to truly measure the gender transformative impact of our policies and spending programmes.
For the FEMM Committee, the key topic to include is the promotion of gender equality in employment, education and training, with a specific emphasis on addressing the gender pay gap. Of course, we call for increased funding for recent legal advances such as the directive on equality bodies, pay transparency, women on boards, and especially the gender-based violence directive, as well as to reinforce the EU4Health programme to include comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services with access to legal abortion, gender-specific health research and cross-border health services.
We must live up to our ideals and fully support this gender equality strategy, especially in this gender backlash moment.

Gheorghe Falcă,
raportor pentru aviz al Comisiei TRAN. – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, dragi colegi, în primul rând vreau să spun că am colaborat foarte bine cu raportorii. Avem o gândire comună în Parlamentul European și mă bucur că din partea Comisiei pentru transport putem spune că ne-am atins obiectivele. Am fost interesați ca în ultima parte să discutăm foarte mult de mobilitate, atât ceea ce înseamnă mobilitatea urbană, cât și ceea ce înseamnă conectivitatea infrastructurii de transport, cea rutieră și cea pe calea ferată.
               

                  Un punct important a fost analiza mobilității militare și trebuie să facem o strategie, pe lângă ceea ce înseamnă infrastructura TEN-T, pentru a ne atinge acest obiectiv de siguranță europeană. Apoi, conectarea regiunilor periferice a fost un punct care va menține de aici încolo mulți ani de zile efortul financiar pe care Parlamentul și Consiliul trebuie să-l realizeze. Un punct, din nou, care este arzător, este faptul că la nivel european două țări nu sunt astăzi în Schengen și crește poluarea din zona respectivă. De aceea am atins și acest punct în programul meu. Eu vă mulțumesc și sper că atingem obiectivele Uniunii Europene.
               

Andrzej Halicki,
w imieniu grupy PPE. – Szanowni Państwo! Budżet na rok 2025 będzie pierwszym budżetem po wyborach do Parlamentu Europejskiego nowej kadencji, a także pierwszym budżetem realizowanym przez nową Komisję Europejską. To bardzo ważne, bo w ten sposób jakie priorytety pokażemy naszym obywatelom, tak będziemy oceniani. A te priorytety są bardzo jasne. Nie możemy – i myślę, że Rada skłoni się do naszej oceny sytuacji – ograniczać flagowych projektów, które znają obywatele, takich chociażby jak Erasmus, edukacyjnych, innowacyjnych projektów, które służą poszerzeniu wiedzy i daniu szerokich możliwości. Musimy wspierać rolnictwo, rybołówstwo, bo to ważne zadanie w budowaniu bezpieczeństwa żywnościowego, lecz także bezpieczeństwo zdrowotne. To nowe zadanie, które również jest wpisane w ramy naszej aktywności.
               

                  Nie ma ważniejszego tematu niż bezpieczeństwo fizyczne. Dlatego dodatkowe środki na takie agencje jak Europol, jak Prokuratura Europejska, a przede wszystkim Frontex, są niezbędne. Chciałem też przypomnieć, że 1 stycznia stery przejmie polska prezydencja. Problem skutecznej walki z migracją i skutecznej ochrony granic jest naszym wspólnym zadaniem. Cieszę się, że po raz pierwszy mamy możliwość wsparcia ochrony granic zewnętrznych z budżetu, czyli to, co nie udało się w zeszłym roku czy dwa lata temu. Cieszę się, bo nasi obywatele będą się mogli czuć bezpieczniej, widząc, że to także nasze wspólne zadanie. Z tego miejsca chciałem podziękować za szerokie zrozumienie, a jako negocjator ze strony Europejskiej Partii Ludowej sprawozdawcom – za współpracę.
               

Jean-Marc Germain,
au nom du groupe S&D. – Monsieur le Président, mes chers collègues, ce budget est le premier de la nouvelle législature. Il se devait ainsi de refléter les engagements que nous avons pris auprès des électeurs et de nos concitoyens.
               

                  Mon groupe, le groupe S&D, dont j'ai l'honneur d'être le coordinateur au sein de la commission des budgets, est d'avis que le présent budget va dans le bon sens. Il va dans le bon sens lorsqu'il préserve le Fonds de cohésion ou lorsqu'il propose d'accroître les financements de nos programmes phares, tels qu'Erasmus+ pour l'éducation, qu'Horizon Europe pour la recherche ou que le Mécanisme européen de protection civile pour faire face aux désastres naturels.
               

                  Il va aussi dans le bon sens lorsqu'il utilise nos possibilités financières en faveur de ceux de nos concitoyens qui en ont le plus besoin, lorsqu'il répond à leurs priorités quotidiennes – le logement, l'emploi et l'industrie européenne – et lorsqu'il continue à soutenir la transition.
               

                  Ce projet, c'est aussi le premier dont nous discutons depuis la réforme du cadre financier pluriannuel, qui fixe de nouvelles règles. Ces règles nous imposent tout simplement d'utiliser les marges de manœuvre financières lorsqu'elles existent avant de les réduire, et elles doivent être respectées.
               

                  Ce budget, dont je viens de parler, ce n'est pas celui de la Commission, ce n'est pas celui du Conseil, c'est celui patiemment élaboré par notre rapporteur Victor Negrescu. Je veux le féliciter pour le travail accompli et pour ce premier succès, puisqu'il a été adopté dans notre commission des budgets.
               

                  Le message que nous devons envoyer au Conseil est clair: le premier budget de la nouvelle législature ne sera pas un budget de régression. Le premier budget de la législature n'a pas vocation à faire rembourser les dettes de la COVID-19 par les plus défavorisés de nos concitoyens.
               

                  Chers collègues, nous devons rester unis jusqu'au bout. Les discussions autour de la résolution budgétaire ne portent pas sur nos positions sur l'UNWRA ou sur la politique d'asile et d'immigration. Ne nous trompons pas. L'enjeu est de voter un budget de progrès social, écologique et économique.
               

Tamás Deutsch,
a PfE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! A Patrióták frakciójának határozott álláspontja szerint az Európai Unió 2025. évi költségvetésének a békét, az illegális migráció megállítását, az európai emberek, családok és nemzetek érdekét, valamint a szuverenitást kell szolgálnia.
               

                  Az elmúlt öt évben az Európai Bizottság kudarcot vallott az Uniót sújtó kihívások kezelésében, nem segítette az európai embereket ezekben a nehéz időkben. Az európai polgárok az idei európai parlamenti választásokon ezért egyértelmű üzenetet fogalmaztak meg: változásra van szükség. Azt látjuk azonban, hogy ez a változásra irányuló igény sem az uniós intézmények vezetőinek cselekedeteiben, sem pedig a 2025-ös uniós költségvetés tervezetében nem jelenik meg.
               

                  A Patrióták frakciójának képviselői szerint gyökeres változásra van szükség a Bizottság teljesen elhibázott költségvetési javaslatához képest. Az illegális migráció további ösztönzése helyett a határvédelmet támogató, Európát és az európaiakat megvédő költségvetésre van szükség.
               

                  A Patrióták frakciójának képviselői ezért javasolják az Unió határvédelmi kiadásainak növelését és azt is, hogy az Unió költségvetése támogassa a tagállamokat a külső határok védelmében, határkerítések létesítésében, fenntartásában.
               

                  A Patrióták frakciója javasolja a nemzeti szuverenitást támadó uniós propaganda, illetve az intézményes politikai zsarolás, a jogállamisági dzsihád, a genderideológiai valamint a woke őrület uniós forrásokból való támogatásának megszüntetését.
               

                  Végül, de nem utolsósorban a Patrióták frakciója elvárja az új Európai Bizottságtól, hogy vizsgálja felül a jogállamisági feltételrendszer politikai célokat szolgáló alkalmazását, és állítsa le a tagállamok politikai és ideológiai zsarolását.
               

Bogdan Rzońca,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie komisarzu! Parlament osiągnął dobry kompromis budżetowy – taki, jaki jest on możliwy. W tym kompromisie zadbaliśmy wszyscy o bezpieczeństwo, bo mowa była już o tym bezpieczeństwie na granicach, o wsparciu dla Fronteksu. Ja też podkreślę, że bardzo istotne jest to bezpieczeństwo w wymiarze popierania bezpieczeństwa żywnościowego, więc jest wsparcie dla rolników, w tym dla młodych rolników (przeznaczyliśmy 40 milionów euro więcej). Także zwiększyliśmy o 56 milionów euro Fundusz Gwarancji Rolnej, dzięki czemu będzie możliwe wdrażanie dobrych praktyk cyfrowych i środowiskowych.
               

                  Oczywiście cieszymy się z tego, że w budżecie są środki na bezpieczeństwo dotyczące Ukrainy i Bałkanów Zachodnich. To nie podlega u nas dyskusji. Natomiast także i fakt, że po raz pierwszy prawdopodobnie uda się finansować bezpieczeństwo na granicach poprzez wsparcie właśnie dla tej fizycznej infrastruktury ochrony granic Unii Europejskiej, to jest moim zdaniem taki symbol czasów i uważam, że jeśli tu dojdzie do kompromisu, to będzie to jednoznacznie pozytywnie ocenione przez mieszkańców Unii Europejskiej.
               

                  Konkludując, jesteśmy za takim budżetem, dzięki któremu Unia będzie bezpieczna, w którym będzie przewidziana współpraca między państwami, będzie poparcie dla małych, średnich i mikro-przedsiębiorstw. No i oczywiście czekamy na rozwój infrastruktury drogowej, kolejowej. To wszystko jest w budżecie. Zatem czekamy na zbliżenie stanowisk instytucji unijnych: Rady, Komisji. Mam nadzieję, że te poprawki, które ECR zgłosił, także będą dobrze przyjęte, bo one po prostu przeszły.
               

Fabienne Keller,
au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, j'aimerais vous parler aujourd'hui du budget européen pour l'exercice 2025, qui s'inscrit dans la révision du cadre financier pluriannuel, que nous avions adoptée en février de cette année.
               

                  Les négociations sur ce budget ont apporté peu de changements. Hormis quelques augmentations dans certains domaines précis, les marges sont toujours restreintes, les lignes sous-financées, les instruments d'urgence presque instantanément épuisés.
               

                  Au cours de la dernière législature, l'Union européenne avait été sur le devant de la scène: crise de la COVID-19, emprunt commun, vaccins, guerre en Ukraine, autonomie stratégique: une vraie défense européenne! Que de bonds en avant! Le rôle et les compétences de l'Union européenne sont toujours plus importants, et pourtant nous ne sommes toujours pas en mesure de financer les programmes et les politiques de l'Union à la hauteur de leurs besoins.
               

                  J'appelle donc la Commission et les États membres à investir pour l'Europe, à nous donner de vrais moyens et à faire preuve de plus de souplesse pour le prochain cadre financier pluriannuel. Les citoyens attendent une Europe forte, et ils la méritent.
               

Rasmus Andresen,
im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Stellen Sie sich vor, wir wachen in zwei Wochen auf und Donald Trump ist wieder US-Präsident. Wer von uns glaubt ernsthaft, dass die Europäische Union auf so ein Szenario vorbereitet ist? Und als Haushaltspolitiker kann ich sagen: Haushaltspolitisch sind wir es auf jeden Fall nicht. Denn anstatt mehr zu investieren, was wir dringend müssten, haben uns die Staats- und Regierungschefs in der Vergangenheit sogar Kürzungen eingebrockt – Kürzungen bei Forschung, Kürzungen bei Gesundheit, Kürzungen bei Zukunftsthemen. Gerade von den Staats- und Regierungschefs wie Olaf Scholz oder Emmanuel Macron müssen wir hier deutlich mehr erwarten.
               

                  Denn wir brauchen einen Haushalt, der so aufgestellt ist, dass wir außenpolitisch souverän und wirtschaftlich wettbewerbsfähig werden. Und wir brauchen einen Haushalt, der allen Menschen in der Europäischen Union eine Zukunftsperspektive gibt, inklusive sozialer Absicherung. Stattdessen lassen wir unsere Infrastruktur verrotten, und wir sorgen dafür, dass immer mehr Menschen in der Europäischen Union in Armut abrutschen – das ist nicht zukunftsgerecht.
               

                  Und nein, wir können hier als Parlament mit dem Haushalt 2025 nicht jedes Problem lösen, aber als Parlament formulieren wir kleine Schritte in die richtige Richtung, und jetzt kommt es darauf an, dafür zu kämpfen – beispielsweise unsere Infrastruktur zu verbessern, indem wir die Fazilität ‘Connecting Europe’ stärken, indem wir mehr in Erasmus investieren und dafür sorgen, dass mehr junge Menschen an Erasmus teilnehmen können, oder auch, indem wir mehr in Gesundheit, vor allem mentale Gesundheit, investieren.
               

                  Es wird in den nächsten Wochen darauf ankommen, auch bei diesem Haushalt, darauf zu achten, dass wir in die richtige Richtung gehen. Und ich fordere den Rat auf, nicht das zu machen, was Sie immer machen – immer nur Kürzungen vorschlagen. Diskutieren Sie mit uns über zukunftsfähige Haushaltspolitik und seien Sie bereit, auch dafür die richtigen Konsequenzen zu ziehen!
               

João Oliveira,
em nome do Grupo The Left. – Senhor Presidente, o Parlamento Europeu pretende reverter os cortes feitos pelo Conselho Europeu no Orçamento da União Europeia, mas não reverte as opções erradas que estão na base deste orçamento. Este orçamento reflete opções militaristas e armamentistas e vai ao encontro dos interesses dos grupos económicos e dos desejos do complexo industrial militar, mas ignora os problemas dos trabalhadores e dos povos.
               

                  Esses problemas podem ter ainda alguma consideração a partir das propostas que apresentámos. Propomos que as verbas associadas às opções militaristas e armamentistas sejam canalizadas para os fundos destinados a dar resposta a problemas sociais. Para que os direitos sociais dos povos sejam garantidos, em vez de serem transformados em negócios, propomos que o orçamento da UE dê apoio aos Estados-Membros que decidam reverter os processos de privatização de empresas em setores sociais e estratégicos.
               

                  Propomos a criação de financiamento adicional e específico da União Europeia que os Estados-Membros possam mobilizar para a expansão e requalificação dos parques habitacionais públicos e a defesa do direito à habitação digna e a preços acessíveis. Propomos que os fundos europeus estejam condicionados à proteção do emprego, ao respeito pelos direitos dos trabalhadores e ao contributo para o desenvolvimento local e regional. Propomos o reforço de verbas do Fundo Social Europeu+, uma dotação específica para a Garantia para a Infância e o apoio a redes públicas de cuidados a crianças, idosos e pessoas com deficiência.
               

                  Propomos o aumento de verbas para as fileiras produtivas, nomeadamente nas pescas, no vinho, no azeite ou na apicultura. Propomos ainda a criação de um programa POSEI Transportes que dê resposta às necessidades específicas das populações das regiões ultraperiféricas, como os Açores e a Madeira.
               

                  Na votação destas propostas, haverá ainda uma oportunidade para colocar os direitos e interesses dos povos como prioridade.
               

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea (PPE). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, señor ministro, afrontar un presupuesto es una grandísima responsabilidad porque tenemos que decidir a qué gastos y a qué inversiones vamos a destinar el dinero proveniente de los impuestos de los ciudadanos.
               

                  Por lo tanto, hay que hacer tres cosas cuando afrontamos un nuevo presupuesto. En primer lugar, evaluar los programas que sí funcionan, aquellos que están teniendo el impacto deseado, que están generando las oportunidades que queremos para los europeos y que, además, están cubriendo esas necesidades básicas que queremos cubrir desde la Unión Europea. También tenemos que determinar esas necesidades a las que hay que destinar más recursos porque se ha dado esa situación, como puede ser, en este caso en el presupuesto, el caso de Frontex. Y en último lugar hay que determinar nuevas demandas, como puede ser —y es importante hablar de ello— el pago de los intereses de la deuda de los Next Generation EU.
               

                  Esto es lo que hace este presupuesto. Por un lado, mantiene y refuerza lo que funciona: Erasmus+, la política agrícola común, la política de cohesión, las inversiones en innovación. Y lo mantiene porque funciona. Por otro lado, refuerza algo que estamos demandando, que es reforzar nuestras fronteras, a saber, Frontex. Y, por otro lado, da una solución, que no es la ideal, sobre cómo hacer frente a los intereses que tenemos que pagar de la deuda de los fondos Next Generation EU. Y digo que no es ideal porque nos tiene que hacer reflexionar de cara a nuevos debates que está habiendo sobre crear nuevos fondos también con cargo a la deuda.
               

Nils Ušakovs (S&D). – Mr President, dear colleagues, I will use this opportunity to talk about European administration. The recent incident at Strasbourg train station after the last plenary – which left thousands of employees stranded – has once again highlighted the inefficiency and, at the same time, the financial burden of the so-called 'travelling circus' that the European institutions endure every month. The annual cost is EUR 180 million, and it really raises questions about the cost-effectiveness of this event.
We also have a historical practice of maintaining multiple European institutions in different Member States, such as, for example, Luxembourg – probably the most beautiful, yet also the most expensive Member State, especially with respect to housing. We pay salaries that 90 % of Latvians wouldn't even dream of owning and, at the same time, for certain employees the salaries are lower than the Luxembourg minimum wage. As a result, the European institutions struggle to hire the talent they need to fulfil their primary functions.
Every year, the demands on the European institutions grow as we assign new responsibilities. Yet the financial resources provided do not match these increasing demands. For example, the European Union External Action Service, which operates globally, is forced to maintain offices in substandard, unsecure conditions, sometimes having to rent additional premises in order to provide and to prevent the risk of ceilings collapsing on the heads of staff.
Other institutions have to request budget transfers as early as the summer, because the initial allocations are insufficient to cover basic operational costs, such as heating or electricity bills. I am talking right now not about the budget alone, but also about the new MMF, because we are spending hundreds of millions of euros in administration and, at the same time, we face the situation we just discussed with the External Action Service.
We are discussing the usage of special instruments, such as the single market instrument to finance the needs of the administration. We are discussing the probability of taking funds from essential European programmes. That means that the European Parliament and the Council have to take the challenge and to start collaborating in order to provide a new MMF that will be dealing with hundreds of millions of taxpayers' money in the most cost-effective way.

Julien Sanchez (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, mes chers collègues, en tant que nouveau membre de cette assemblée, je suis d'abord frappé de découvrir, à chaque rapport de la Cour européenne des comptes, la mauvaise gestion des fonds de l'Union européenne, avec des taux d'erreur indécents régulièrement constatés dans presque toutes les rubriques budgétaires et des défaillances persistantes dans les systèmes de gestion et de contrôle, ce qui constitue un signal d'alarme quant à l'efficacité des dépenses européennes.
               

                  J'ai été maire dix ans, et avant d'être élu ici je pensais que ces institutions, malgré leur fonctionnement dogmatique et sectaire, étaient au moins des institutions sérieuses. Je constate qu'il n'en est rien et que le budget de l'Union européenne est beaucoup plus mal géré que le budget d'une collectivité locale en France.
               

                  Nous sommes ici face à un budget de 191 milliards d'euros, qui dissimule un double déficit réel. D'une part, il y a un déficit par débudgétisation. En effet, les articles 6, 7 et 8 du règlement financier de l'Union exigent que des milliards de crédits de diverses masses financières, aujourd'hui classés sous les termes d'instruments, mécanismes ou facilités, soient réintégrés dans les lignes budgétaires. Or ces fonds sont soustraits de tout contrôle démocratique depuis des années. Ce budget est donc insincère.
               

                  D'autre part, il y a un déficit par dissimulation, notamment pour compenser la hausse des taux d'intérêt du programme NextGenerationEU, passés de moins de 1 % à plus de 3 %. Plutôt que d'affronter cette réalité, la Commission et le Conseil jouent sur les marges budgétaires et sur l'instrument de flexibilité, créant ainsi un artifice comptable peu durable.
               

                  La raison de ce chaos budgétaire? Une ambition politique démesurée d'une part et une vision idéologique étroite d'autre part. D'un côté, nous voyons une Commission européenne assoiffée d'élargissement à l'Est, dont les pays ne seraient, en plus, pas des contributeurs nets au budget de l'Union européenne, et d'interventions coûteuses, particulièrement en Ukraine, où la paix n'est plus un objectif de l'Union européenne, qui ne parle que de verser de l'argent encore et toujours, mais sans évoquer un quelconque objectif d'une issue diplomatique. De l'autre, une idéologie malthusienne qui a entravé les investissements essentiels dans nos infrastructures de santé et notre industrie.
               

                  Quand un budget est mal géré, il y a deux solutions: stop ou encore. Vous ne voulez pas tailler dans les mauvaises dépenses, car cela vous obligerait à retrousser les manches. Vous voulez toujours plus de recettes, vous imaginez même de nouvelles taxes, mais les dispositifs imaginés, au-delà d'être complexes et inefficaces, sont dérisoires, illusoires ou à tout le moins provisoires.
               

                  Nous nous y opposons fermement et refuserons tout impôt européen qui viendrait alourdir encore la charge fiscale des citoyens. Il est absurde de vouloir compter sur ces mécanismes pour financer l'avenir de l'Union. Nous avons déposé de nombreux amendements et nous espérons qu'il se trouvera une majorité de gens courageux et sérieux pour les voter, sans quoi nous voterons bien sûr contre ce budget.
               

Ruggero Razza (ECR). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Ministro, signor Commissario, ho sentito alcuni toni un po' entusiasti nel descrivere sia la proposta proveniente dalla Commissione sia il compromesso raggiunto nel lavoro di commissione.
               

                  E io non voglio pensare, secondo la retorica ascoltata, che questo sia il primo bilancio della nuova legislatura, perché una legislatura che si è aperta con una richiesta di maggiore competitività e di investimenti in Europa non li trova nel suo primo bilancio. Una legislatura che si è aperta con una grande attesa da parte dei cittadini su alcuni temi essenziali – penso a quello della sanità – non lo trova nel bilancio.
               

                  Certo, si partiva da un taglio di miliardo di euro sul quadro pluriennale e si arriva comunque a un taglio della sanità, che fa il contraltare ad un ulteriore taglio, che è quello della capacità del nostro sistema di far crescere l'economia.
               

                  E allora io voglio pensare, signor Ministro, che si potranno raggiungere i giusti compromessi ma voglio soprattutto pensare che questo non sia il primo bilancio della nuova legislatura, ma che sia l'ultimo della vecchia.
               

Lucia Yar (Renew). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, kolegovia, kolegyne, európsky rozpočet sa po pandémii a vojne na Ukrajine musí vysporiadať s neočakávanými výdavkami. No naozaj chceme šetriť práve na úkor vzdelávania, inovácií a budúcnosti mladých ľudí? Vidím, že ich tu dnes veľa sedí, vitajte, ale mínus 300 miliónov eur pre Erasmus v budúcom roku je naozaj škandál. Sama som jeho absolventkou, tak ako milióny ďalších, a podobne, ako kedysi ja, mnohí mladí by si štúdium v Európe nevedeli bez štipendia dovoliť. A členské štáty chcú obmedzovať práve tých, ktorí majú potenciál rásť? Z nás absolventov sa aj vďaka tomuto programu stali skutoční Európania a Európanky. Takto sa buduje spoločná Európska únia, takto sa spoznávame, takto sa vzdelávame a takto domov prinášame naozajstné skúsenosti. Nedovoľme, aby pre našu slabú kreativitu vo financovaní dôležitých oblastí v Európskej únii akokoľvek trpeli mladí ľudia. Práve investícia do nich je investíciou do našej budúcnosti.
               

Kai Tegethoff (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, I'm glad there is a compromise. And we support this compromise. Nevertheless, I am disappointed in this House's unwillingness to take the steps that are really needed to tackle the climate crisis. For example, the political groups could not even agree on adequate funding for the European Railway Agency.
As Enrico Letta pointed out in his report, there is a growing risk that the 2030 targets for rail infrastructure will not be met. The modal shift to rail is our joint declared goal, and we are supposed to spend 30 % of the EU budget on climate-related actions, but this is not being reflected in the budget that we are talking about today.
As the European Parliament, we should take a clear stand on this. We should fund the European Railway Agency in a way that reflects the critical need to make modal shift a reality and to improve rail safety. We should demand the Member States start acting and start investing in climate-friendly transport infrastructure and have the core part of the European railway network ready by 2030.
We have tabled two further amendments to improve these factors, at least in the surroundings of the European Parliament. Since we can't stop this insane practice of travelling almost 500 km for every plenary session, we want to make it at least a little bit more sustainable and increase Parliament's charter train capacity.
And second, we should not only install solar panels on the roofs of our parliamentary buildings, but also clearly commit to phasing out fossil fuel heating and cooling systems. I really hope for your support. Let's lead by example.

Pasquale Tridico (The Left). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Torino, Melfi, Termoli, Pomigliano, ma anche Bruxelles, Zwickau: le fabbriche di auto chiuse o in crisi sono dappertutto in Europa.
               

                  Solo in Italia sono 100.000 i posti di lavoro a rischio nel settore dell'automotive e l'indotto fatto da piccole e medie imprese è il più penalizzato. Se non vogliamo far sparire questa industria europea, dobbiamo intervenire subito, come durante il COVID, durante il quale grazie al programma SURE solo in Italia abbiamo salvato quasi 500.000 posti di lavoro.
               

                  La crisi dell'auto è europea: serve dunque una risposta europea. Abbiamo presentato un emendamento al bilancio dell'Unione del 2025, in cui proponiamo l'istituzione di un nuovo fondo SURE valido per due anni per l'automotive per 100 miliardi di euro.
               

                  In passato abbiamo distribuito soldi a pioggia e i grandi manager dell'auto hanno continuato a distribuire dividendi mentre i lavoratori erano in cassa integrazione. Con questo nuovo SURE voltiamo pagina: salviamo i posti di lavoro, aiutiamo l'industria ma obblighiamo le case automobilistiche a fare maggiori investimenti per la transizione verso l'elettrico, per la formazione e per non licenziare lavoratori.
               

                  Il bilancio europeo all'1,1% è troppo piccolo: non ha nessuna ambizione e rispetto alle sfide globali continua ad avere una dimensione insignificante. Adesso abbiamo una grande occasione: una causa comune in Europa sulla quale investire per dare maggiore rilevanza all'Unione. SURE per l'automotive è l'occasione.
               

                  Mi appello dunque a tutti gli europarlamentari: salviamo l'industria europea dell'auto, salviamo centinaia di posti di lavoro, sostenete l'istituzione di un nuovo SURE per l'automotive.
               

Marcin Sypniewski (ESN). – Panie Przewodniczący! Ten projekt budżetu to jest finansowa porażka Unii Europejskiej. Podam trzy przykłady. Po pierwsze, pomimo tworzenia nowych instrumentów, liczonych poza budżetem, tegoroczna propozycja przekracza już 200 mld euro rocznie. Te coroczne podwyżki powinny być wreszcie zatrzymane. Należy zacząć ograniczać wydatki, w szczególności w takich kwestiach jak szkodliwy Zielony Ład, wspieranie całego wachlarza państw spoza Unii, rozszerzanie kompetencji unijnych, bizantyńska administracja i niepotrzebne instytucje. Proszę państwa, Unia naprawdę nie potrzebuje trzech siedzib i ponad 140 przedstawicielstw dyplomatycznych! To jest naprawdę niepotrzebne.
               

                  Po drugie, program Next Generation EU, czyli olbrzymia pożyczka na 800 miliardów, którą planujemy spłacać przez 30 lat. Nikt nie wie dokładnie, ile trzeba będzie spłacić, wszyscy wiedzą, że to będą astronomiczne kwoty. Przypomnijmy, że jeszcze nie zaczęliśmy nic spłacać, a już mówimy o brakach pieniędzy na te zobowiązania i to liczonych w dziesiątkach miliardów euro. Tutaj najlepszym pomysłem na ten problem jest liczenie odsetek od długu poza oficjalnym budżetem oraz wprowadzanie nowych unijnych podatków, które w konsekwencji zapłacą przede wszystkim zwykli obywatele. Ja nie chcę żadnych unijnych podatków. Nie chcę też żadnych długów do spłacenia przez nasze dzieci i wnuki. Kogo my napadliśmy, żeby takie kontrybucje płacić przez lata?
               

                  I wreszcie po trzecie, naszym priorytetem powinno być bezpieczeństwo Europejczyków. Dotychczas w tej Izbie nic w tej sprawie nie zrobiono i na to powinniśmy wydawać pieniądze, a nie na te wszystkie niezbędne sprawy.
               

Thomas Geisel (NI). – Herr Präsident, Herr Minister, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich bin ja noch nicht lange in diesem Parlament, aber ich habe den Eindruck, beim Haushalt gilt eigentlich immer dasselbe Verfahren: Die Kommission legt einen Haushaltsentwurf vor, der Rat streicht ihn anschließend etwas zusammen, und dann kommt das Parlament, stellt den Entwurf der Kommission wieder her und legt hier und da noch eine Schippe drauf. Ich bin nicht sicher, ob wir mit diesem Ritual unserer Verantwortung und unserer Aufgabe als Parlamentarier wirklich gerecht werden.
               

                  Es ist bedauerlich genug, dass dieses Parlament nicht das Recht hat, selbst Gesetzesinitiativen einzubringen, und eigentlich nur darüber entscheiden kann, was ihm von der Kommission vorgelegt wird. Umso wichtiger ist es, dass das Parlament seine Aufgabe wahrnimmt, die Kommission zu beaufsichtigen und zu kontrollieren. Und dabei kann es nicht darum gehen, der Kommission immer neue Kompetenzen zu geben und immer weitere Mittel zur Verfügung zu stellen. Es gilt vielmehr das Subsidiaritätsprinzip: Die Kommission sollte nur die Aufgaben übernehmen, mit denen die Mitgliedstaaten überfordert sind, Aufgaben, die eben nicht bürgernäher, transparenter und effizienter von den Mitgliedstaaten, vielleicht auch ihren Provinzen und ihren Kommunen übernommen werden könnten. Und wir sollten sorgsam darauf achten, dass mit dem Steuergeld der Europäer sorgsam und sparsam umgegangen wird.
               

                  Ich habe nicht den Eindruck, dass diese Gesichtspunkte hinreichend berücksichtigt wurden bei diesem Haushalt.
               

Danuše Nerudová (PPE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, President von der Leyen stood here in this house of democracy and declared that this mandate should focus on the largest investment in our competitiveness ever.
Instead, we are witnessing short-sighted cuts in strategic budget lines from the Member States. A cut in Horizon Europe, our flagship programme from innovation and research: experts are telling us we should double its funding, yet we are slashing it. This isn't a subsidy or expense. It's an investment to our future. A cut in Erasmus, the most successful policy the EU has ever implemented. How do we expect to boost mobility and skills-sharing across our continent if we reduce its funding? A cut in our health programmes at a time when the US spends USD 46 billion annually on health research. We invest only a quarter of that.
Dear colleagues, some states want to keep building our economy on subsidies instead of boosting investments with real European value. Fortunately, we in Parliament have the responsibility and power to push back on these propositions. I am confident that together we can succeed in protecting these crucial policies for the future of the Union.

Giuseppe Lupo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Commissione, condivido la posizione espressa dal nostro relatore, l'onorevole Negrescu, e non condivido per niente la posizione del Consiglio di disconoscere gli accordi sul pagamento degli interessi del Next Generation EU e di tagliare i programmi Orizzonte, Erasmus e altri per circa un miliardo e mezzo di euro dal bilancio 2025, indebolendo così l'economia e la competitività dell'Unione europea e degli Stati membri.
               

                  Sono d'accordo, quindi, con la posizione della commissione per i bilanci di respingere i tagli e di rafforzare gli stanziamenti per la ricerca, la salute, per Erasmus, per l'agricoltura, per l'ambiente, per gli aiuti umanitari, per la Procura europea.
               

                  Presidente, Commissione, colleghi, la crescita e la competitività dell'Unione europea e degli Stati membri si rilanciano rafforzando gli investimenti e respingendo i tagli.
               

Tomasz Buczek (NI). – Panie Przewodniczący! Budżet Unii Europejskiej jest instrumentem realizacji unijnych polityk, jest instrumentem wykorzystującym dorobek milionów Europejczyków do realizacji antyeuropejskiego w swojej istocie programu. Jest to program zerwania z europejskim dziedzictwem kulturowym, program deindustrializacji gospodarek krajów słabiej rozwiniętych i depopulacji rdzennych mieszkańców Europy. Europejczycy stali się zakładnikami Komisji Europejskiej i jej ideologicznych fanaberii, za które wszyscy drogo płacimy.
               

                  Chciałbym widzieć budżet, który zamiast niszczyć konkurencyjność naszej gospodarki w imię utopijnej walki z globalnymi zmianami klimatu, wspiera rodzimych przedsiębiorców, producentów i rolników. Chciałbym widzieć budżet, który na pierwszym miejscu stawia walkę z kryzysem demograficznym, walkę z inwazją obcych nam kulturowo migrantów, walkę o bezpieczeństwo naszych miast.
               

                  Tymczasem przyszłoroczny budżet jest budżetem kontynuacji, budżetem świadczącym o kompletnym braku zrozumienia dla nastrojów społecznych i sytuacji, w jakiej znajdują się gospodarki krajów członkowskich. To nie budżet wymaga zmiany. Zmiany wymaga cała skorumpowana i wzajemnie się korumpująca, trwająca w samozadowoleniu europejska klasa polityczna. Wolne narody Europy w końcu dokonają rewolucji na unijnej scenie politycznej, rewolucji, która przywróci Europie jej dawną godność i konkurencyjność na globalnym rynku.
               

Dick Erixon (ECR). – Herr talman! Parlamentets diskussion om EU:s årsbudget för 2025 är fokuserad på en enda sak: mer pengar till Bryssel. Medlemsstaterna visar större mått av ekonomiskt ansvarstagande och skär ner de föreslagna utgifterna med en miljard euro.
               

                  Parlamentet måste nyktra till. Pengar växer inte på träd. EU behöver fokusera på effektiva lösningar, på konkurrenskraft. Trots att felnivåerna är rekordhöga – upp till 150 miljarder försvann ur förra årets budget – vill ni i denna kammare fortsätta ösa ut miljarderna.
               

                  Har ni ingen förståelse för att den redan överdimensionerade budgeten göder korruption, ineffektivitet och slöseri? Mindre pengar betyder mindre slöseri och svinn. Det ger även EU en möjlighet att prioritera det som verkligen är viktigt: trygghet, säkerhet och välfärd.
               

Olivier Chastel (Renew). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, un budget, c'est évidemment davantage que des colonnes de chiffres. C'est la traduction de nos priorités politiques. Et nos priorités politiques pour l'exercice 2025, tout comme pour le prochain cadre financier pluriannuel d'ailleurs, doivent être orientées vers les investissements destinés à développer notre autonomie stratégique. Une autonomie stratégique qui commence par la réindustrialisation de notre continent, le retour de la compétitivité, l'innovation, la défense européenne et le maintien de notre autonomie alimentaire.
               

                  Cette feuille de route a été balisée par plusieurs rapports, comme les rapports Draghi et Letta. Nous savons ce que nous avons à faire: diminuer la charge administrative, achever concrètement le marché unique, finaliser l'union des marchés de capitaux pour attirer davantage les investissements en Europe, notamment pour développer les technologies du futur.
               

                  Le Parlement a également pris un positionnement clair sur la mise en place de nouvelles ressources propres, dont nous avons grand besoin pour rembourser le plan de relance NextGenerationEU – des ressources dont nous aurons aussi besoin pour maintenir la capacité de l'Union à financer ses priorités et ses politiques.
               

Rasmus Nordqvist (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, dear Commissioners, dear Council, any budget discussion is actually a discussion about whether we are trying to adjust reality to the budget in front of us, or should we try and adjust the budget to this reality we are facing?
I have an example. For as long as I've been following EU budget negotiations – first in the national parliament and now here in the European Parliament – it's a clear case when it comes to humanitarian aid: we are looking at an attempt to actually adjust the reality to the budget. In the short time I've been here, we already amended the budgets for 2024 numerous times, adding more money to the field.
We have several armed conflicts in the world. We see climate crises attacking the poorest people in the world, and still we don't see a humanitarian budget actually answering these questions. So my recommendation for the future is clear: we must be better at adjusting the budget to the reality, and not the other way around.

Rudi Kennes (The Left). – Voorzitter, collega's, de werknemers in Europa krijgen hun facturen niet meer betaald. Maar hier worden gewoon lonen uitbetaald tot veertienduizend euro. De voorzitter en haar Europese Commissie ontvangen zelfs salarissen tussen de twintig- à dertigduizend euro per maand. Als het kassaticket van de supermarkt ontploft en energie- of brandstofprijzen de hoogte inschieten, is dat voor de gewone mens een nachtmerrie. Hier daarentegen voelt men daar weinig of niks van en daarom wordt er ook niets aan gedaan.
               

                  Erger nog, vanuit de ivoren Commissietoren komt men ons vandaag vertellen dat we allemaal onze broekriem een beetje moeten aantrekken. Dat er geen geld meer is voor pensioenen, scholen, onderwijs, ziekenhuizen of ander sociaal beleid.
               

                  Daarom is en blijft ons jaarlijks voorstel van de PVDA even klaar als duidelijk. Doe iets aan die privileges en verlaag deze duizelingwekkende salarissen. Zo krijgt men hier tenminste een idee van de impact van de beslissingen die hier genomen worden. We hebben nieuwe normen en waarden nodig voor onze politieke leiders in Europa. Wij zijn hier allemaal om het volk te dienen, niet onszelf.
               

Monika Hohlmeier (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, liebe Ratspräsidentschaft, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der europäische Haushalt ist so vielfältig und facettenreich wie kaum ein anderer Haushalt. Im kommenden Jahr 2025 gibt es so viele dringende Themen, dass wir uns kaum um alle kümmern können. Aber ich möchte vor allem drei Bereiche angehen.
               

                  Erstens: Horizon Europe, wie vorhin schon von der Kollegin erwähnt. Ich möchte es nicht nur von der Seite der Kürzung her angehen – und dass der Rat da immer noch mehr kürzen möchte, ist eher peinlich, weil nämlich die unglaubliche Anzahl von 70 % der qualitativ hochwertigen Vorschläge nicht finanziert werden können. Und da reden wir dann gleichzeitig von Wettbewerbsfähigkeit!
               

                  Zweitens: das Thema Grenzschutz. Der Rat redet viel vom Außengrenzschutz, aber wir müssen ihn endlich vollständig realisieren, und wir müssen den Mitgliedstaaten, die besonders unter Druck stehen, bei Infrastrukturmaßnahmen wie auch bei sonstigen Maßnahmen und auch personell helfen, damit sie die Aufgaben lösen können, die im Migrationspakt auch vom Rat mit beschlossen worden sind.
               

                  Und drittens: Häufig wird behauptet, dass UNRWA direkt, sozusagen die Europäische Union finanziert Terrorismus. Nein, wir finanzieren keinen Terrorismus, aber es werden Gelder entwendet, und es werden Gelder der UN missbraucht. Und wir müssen auch dagegen vorgehen, dass es Länder gibt, die Terrorismus direkt finanzieren, und das bedeutet in der Konsequenz: Unsere Hilfe muss der Zivilbevölkerung gelten, und das in vielfältiger Form, und deshalb sollten wir die Diskussion nicht auf UNRWA konzentrieren, sondern wir sollten schauen, dass wir jede Form der Hilfe für die Zivilbevölkerung und vor allem für Kinder, Frauen, Alte und Kranke realisieren können.
               

PRESIDENZA: ANTONELLA SBERNA


Vicepresidente


Carla Tavares (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Caros Colegas, a resolução que hoje discutimos em plenário representa o esforço dos relatores para alcançar um sólido pacote de compromissos para o orçamento de 2025. É a resolução que melhor serve os cidadãos, a sociedade europeia, as empresas, os jovens. Reforça os programas de apoio às pessoas no terreno e nas zonas remotas, bem como os programas de apoio ao diálogo social, que permitem uma maior coordenação dos sistemas de segurança social dos Estados-Membros – áreas de vital importância para uma Europa mais coesa e competitiva.
                  

                     Comissário, apesar do acordo alcançado na revisão intercalar do QFP sobre a cobertura dos custos de derrapagem dos juros do NextGenerationEU, esta não é uma solução que possa subsistir para além deste QFP. Precisamos de uma outra solução a partir de 2028. Claramente, o Conselho não se mostra inclinado a cumprir seja o acordado nesta sede, seja o acordado em matéria de recursos próprios cruciais para, a partir de 2028, reembolsarmos a dívida.
                  

                     A negociação do próximo QFP será ainda um maior desafio para todos, se não estabelecermos um entendimento prévio sobre os custos da derrapagem dos juros do NextGenerationEU. Este Parlamento só pode encontrar os equilíbrios necessários e empenhar-se para que os custos e o reembolso da dívida não se façam a custo das próximas gerações.
                  

António Tânger Corrêa (PfE). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário, Caros Colegas, o orçamento da União Europeia para 2025 deve dar prioridade aos nossos cidadãos na eficiência, na segurança e na proteção dos nossos valores, cortar gastos desnecessários e simplificar processos administrativos, em vez de financiar uma máquina burocrática, pesada, inflexível e distante dos cidadãos; nomeadamente, o caso da Suíça, a ação externa da União Europeia.
                  

                     O fracasso das políticas da União Europeia em relação à imigração ilegal e ao tráfico de seres humanos precisa de ser revisto de uma forma decisiva, porque a segurança e a estabilidade da Europa estão, com estas políticas erradas, em risco. Preocupante também é o financiamento contínuo de agendas culturais woke que enfraquecem os valores europeus, a família e os países. Também é imperativo que se cesse qualquer apoio financeiro a grupos culturais ligados a movimentos terroristas. Um forte apoio financeiro ao setor primário, para a segurança alimentar, para a sobrevivência das zonas rurais e marítimas, é fundamental.
                  

                     Portanto, em 2025 deve ser reduzida a burocracia, combatida a imigração ilegal, devem rejeitar-se agendas culturais prejudiciais e deve apoiar-se o setor primário com total responsabilidade.
                  

Beata Szydło (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! W Unii Europejskiej popełniono bardzo wiele błędów, które doprowadziły do tego, że sytuacja gospodarki europejskiej jest coraz gorsza. Gospodarka europejska jest coraz mniej konkurencyjna, sytuacja gospodarstw domowych jest coraz trudniejsza, ludzie tracą pracę, mają problemy finansowe. I to się nie wzięło z niczego, tylko z tych decyzji, które były podejmowane właśnie w Komisji Europejskiej, w Parlamencie Europejskim.
                  

                     Żeby przygotować dobry budżet, który będzie wspierał gospodarkę europejską, który będzie służył Europejczykom, trzeba przede wszystkim skorygować błędy i podjąć refleksję nad tym, co doprowadziło do takiej sytuacji. Można by sformułować jedno określenie obrazujące i nazywające tę sytuację: to jest Zielony Ład – szeroko pojęta polityka, która doprowadziła do tej zapaści gospodarczej. Dzisiaj najważniejsze jest bezpieczeństwo Europy i Europejczyków. To bezpieczeństwo w pojęciu tradycyjnym, ale też bezpieczeństwo gospodarcze i ekonomiczne.
                  

Joachim Streit (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin, wertes Präsidium, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der jüngste Bericht des Europäischen Rechnungshofes zeigt klar: Der EU-Haushalt muss effizienter gestaltet werden. Die Fehlerquote bei den Ausgaben liegt bei 5,6 %, und in den kritischen Ausgabenbereichen erreichen wir sogar 8 % Fehlerquote. Diese alarmierenden Zahlen haben wir seit der Finanzkrise nicht mehr gesehen. Die Komplexität und Überschneidung vieler Programme führen zu Fehlern und unnötiger Verschwendung. Das zeigt uns: Mehr Geld ist nicht die Lösung.
                  

                     Der EU-Haushalt muss sich daher wieder auf die Kernthemen konzentrieren, die den Menschen Sorgen bereiten: Investitionen in eine starke Wirtschaft, eine geregelte Migrationspolitik, Sicherheit und bezahlbare Energie. Statt nach neuen Einnahmequellen zu suchen, sollten wir bestehende Programme verbessern, Bürokratie abbauen. So erreichen wir unsere politischen Ziele und sichern die finanzielle Stabilität der EU, ohne die Bürger zusätzlich zu belasten.
                  

Maria Ohisalo (Verts/ALE). – Arvoisa puhemies, hyvät kollegat ja komissaari, elämme mittaushistorian lämpimimpiä vuosia. Ilmastonmuutos ja luontokato etenevät nopeammin kuin koskaan aikaisemmin ihmiskunnan historiassa. Tämä kaikki korostaa kiireellisiä ja jatkuvia toimia luontokadon ja ilmastonmuutoksen torjumiseksi, minkä tulee näkyä myös EU:n yleisessä budjetissa. Lisäykset EU:n ympäristö- ja ilmastotoimien LIFE-ohjelmaan ovat ensisijaisen tärkeitä yhä enemmän tulevina vuosina, kun luonnon ennallistamisasetus pannaan täytäntöön.
                  

                     Luonnonkatastrofien lisääntynyt riski edellyttää koordinoitua toimintaa ja varautumista unionin pelastuspalvelumekanismin avulla. Luonnon monimuotoisuus voidaan turvata vain sektorit ylittävällä työllä. Esimerkiksi EU:n yhteinen maatalouspolitiikka on merkittävä budjettierä EU:n biodiversiteettitavoitteiden saavuttamisen kannalta ja nyt tämä linkki valitettavasti puuttuu. Kunmingin-Montrealin sopimus globaalin luontokodon pysäyttämiseksi sitoo EU:ta. Luontokodon torjuminen vaatii sitoutumista ja riittävien taloudellisten resurssien turvaamista.
                  

Estrella Galán (The Left). – Señora presidenta, cada día, trece personas pierden la vida en el mar intentando llegar a Europa para poner su vida a salvo; entretanto, este Parlamento quiere aprobar mil millones de euros para Frontex, una agencia que cada año multiplica su presupuesto más y más, mientras ha sido cuestionada tanto por la violación de derechos humanos como por la gestión de sus fondos: mil millones de euros destinados a más tragedia, a más dolor y a más muerte. ¿Cuándo se va a priorizar salvar la vida de las personas frente al blindaje de las fronteras?
                  

                     Señorías, estamos a tiempo: hoy traigo aquí una enmienda en nombre de la sociedad civil, proponiendo que, de esa enorme partida para blindar Europa, para blindar fronteras, 120 millones de euros sean destinados a poner en marcha un servicio de rescate y salvamento para que los Estados miembros puedan cumplir con sus obligaciones de Derecho internacional.
                  

                     Es necesario un cambio de rumbo humanizando las políticas migratorias europeas, priorizando la vida de las personas y la protección de la gente: nuestro modelo es el que defienden las organizaciones comprometidas con los derechos humanos, como Open Arms, o la eurodiputada Carola Rackete, la capitana valiente, nuestra compañera, que puso a salvo a cientos de personas en busca de un puerto seguro.
                  

Hélder Sousa Silva (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, Caros Colegas, no momento desafiante em que vivemos de transformação global, o Orçamento da União permanece um instrumento fundamental para dar resposta às necessidades e também às aspirações dos nossos concidadãos. A proposta de orçamento que iremos votar apresenta uma aposta clara numa Europa mais forte, numa Europa mais competitiva e também numa Europa mais segura. Neste sentido, foram várias as prioridades que foram reforçadas e que são fundamentais para uma Europa que não deixa ninguém, nem nenhuma vila, nem nenhuma cidade, nem nenhuma região para trás.
                  

                     Saliento a aposta na inovação e na educação, com o reforço de programas como o Horizonte Europa, o programa Erasmus+ e o programa Europa Digital. Saliento também os aumentos nos apoios para os jovens agricultores e para a promoção e consumo de produtos agrícolas produzidos no espaço da União. Nas importantes áreas da segurança, saliento os reforços previstos para o Mecanismo Europeu de Proteção Civil e para a Frontex, bem como os aumentos de verbas – eu direi imprescindíveis – para a área da defesa. Por último, dado que não concebemos a Europa desligada do resto do mundo, destaco o reforço de verbas para a cooperação com África e com o Mediterrâneo.
                  

                     Em suma, acredito firmemente que esta proposta de orçamento para 2025 é uma proposta capaz de tornar uma Europa mais forte, capaz de agir e de defender os seus e os nossos interesses e valores democráticos.
                  

Matjaž Nemec (S&D). – Gospa predsednica! Spoštovani visoki zbor, geopolitični izzivi, konflikti, podnebne spremembe, naravne katastrofe od Unije zahtevajo robusten evropski proračun.
                  

                     Ta mora nujno imeti okrepljeno socialno dimenzijo, zato v prvi vrsti pozdravljam zahteve Parlamenta po povečanju sredstev za mehanizem Unije za civilno zaščito. Ta najbrž ne bo zadostovala za vse potrebe, a predstavlja dobršno podporo državam. To smo lahko okusili tudi v moji domači Sloveniji.
                  

                     Proračun je usmerjen tudi v podporo zelenega prehoda ter h kohezijski politiki, ki ne sme biti zgolj orodje za odzivanje na krize, ampak sredstvo za spodbujanje evropskega gospodarstva in kakovosti življenja Evropejk in Evropejcev.
                  

                     Spoštovani, posebej bi rad izpostavil našo moralno dolžnost zavzemanju za mir, vedno in povsod, ter obrambi mednarodnega prava. Ta mora biti jasno izražena tudi v prihodnjem proračunu.
                  

                     Zato je ključno okrepljeno financiranje Unije za pomoč za preživetje palestinskega naroda. Hvala lepa in srečno Evropska unija.
                  

Angéline Furet (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, le budget de l'Union européenne pose de graves problèmes. Il est exorbitant, peu efficace, complexe, peu transparent et peu propice à l'examen par nos concitoyens. Je me dois de rappeler qu'il fonctionne presque intégralement grâce aux impôts des Européens.
                  

                     J'insiste sur la nécessité et l'urgence qu'il y a à réformer le budget de l'Union. Mais j'insiste aussi sur l'importance de le réduire d'au moins 30 %, de rendre tous les fonds comptables et de les soumettre à une procédure de décharge complète – y compris les fonds qui se trouvent en dehors du cadre financier pluriannuel –, de soumettre la Banque européenne d'investissement à l'audit de la Cour des comptes européenne, de supprimer progressivement tous les financements ayant des objectifs intangibles – et par conséquent irréalisables ou presque –, de fixer le montant et les enveloppes des projets de budget rectificatif en cours d'exercice budgétaire, d'interdire la révision à mi-parcours de l'enveloppe du cadre financier pluriannuel, de supprimer progressivement les nouvelles ressources propres de l'Union, de fixer le plafond maximum des fonds empruntés par l'Union dans le cadre de chaque cadre financier pluriannuel, de mettre fin à l'Union des transferts et d'agir par le biais de pôles de coopération régionaux.
                  

Gheorghe Piperea (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, Consiliul rămâne angajat în sprijinirea poporului ucrainean, însă alocă bani din bugetul pentru 2025 pentru continuarea războiului din Ucraina. Nu pentru pace, ci pentru defensivă. Nu există nicio garanție că acest mecanism poate fi funcțional și că datoriile Ucrainei vor fi plătite din banii confiscați Rusiei. Într-o perspectivă pe termen lung, în care războiul va lua sfârșit, iar relațiile dintre Bruxelles și Moscova se vor armoniza, Federația Rusă va putea cere despăgubiri pentru toate activele confiscate în prezent.
                  

                     Economia statelor membre va avea de suferit, iar nota de plată va afecta cu precădere statele mici. Economiile nu vor putea fi capabile să absoarbă un astfel de recul. Consiliul inversează cotele de prelevare din fondurile rezultate din confiscarea activelor rusești. Nu vor mai fi 90 % pentru facilitatea de pace și 10 % pentru Ucraina, ci invers. Cum se sistematizează aceste două obiective total contradictorii, incompatibile cu misiunea Uniunii Europene? Este aceasta o bugetare prudentă?
                  

Stine Bosse (Renew). – Fru. formand! Det europæiske budget skal indeholde mange vigtige dagsordener i vores tid. Men er det nu også klogt at spare på sundhed? Nej, for der er nemlig rigtig meget, vi kan gøre sammen, og på mange områder ting vi kan gøre sammen og slet ikke kan gøre alene, land for land. Det gælder resistens over for antibiotika – en slumrende pandemi, der koster 35 000 menneskeliv hvert år her i Europa. Det gælder folk med sjældne diagnoser – det er 36 millioner europæere. Vi kan, og vi skal, gøre mere sammen uden at flytte ansvar. For færre penge kan vi faktisk skabe bedre løsninger. Derfor skal vi investere i sundhed, ikke spare. Det betaler sig at bruge vores fællesskab netop dér, hvor ingen kan alene.
                  

Janusz Lewandowski (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! To ostatni budżet komisarza Hahna. Chciałem mu podziękować osobiście, ale już go nie ma na tej sali. Pewnie się jeszcze pojawi, bo jest stałym gościem w Parlamencie Europejskim.
                  

                     W budżecie na rok 2025 zwraca uwagę sprawa całkowicie drugorzędna finansowo, ale już w budżecie na ten rok zyskała pierwszorzędną rangę polityczną – to jest kwestia finansowania przez budżet europejski murów i innych blokad na granicach zewnętrznych Unii Europejskiej. W ubiegłym roku większość parlamentarna była temu przeciwna, a ja, wiedząc, że Warszawa ma inne zdanie z uwagi na szczególną sytuację na naszej granicy z Białorusią, gdzie mamy do czynienia z państwowym szmuglem ludzi, zrezygnowałem z funkcji sprawozdawcy do spraw tego budżetu, którą skutecznie przejął Siegfried Mureșan.
                  

                     Teraz mamy szeroki konsensus co do zaangażowania budżetu europejskiego w ochronę granic Schengen. To jest znak czasów. Świadomość zagrożeń płynących z nielegalnej imigracji rośnie. Coraz ważniejsze staje się bezpieczeństwo jako najbardziej upragniony dar, jaki politycy mogą ofiarować swoim obywatelom. Mam nadzieję na płynną koncyliację, bo ludzie nie czekają na niezrozumiałe dla nich spory instytucjonalne, lecz na efekty naszej pracy.
                  

Elio Di Rupo (S&D). – Signora Presidente, les rapports Letta et Draghi sont sans appel. L'Union européenne doit fondamentalement changer de stratégie industrielle, que ce soit pour la défense, la décarbonation, l'énergie ou l'électronique. L'investissement privé ne suffira pas à rattraper le retard que nous accusons sur le reste du monde.
                  

                     Il faudra, selon certaines sources, 800 milliards d'euros par an. Mais l'Europe a décidé l'austérité. De nombreux États membres devront faire des restrictions financières considérables. Quatorze membres ont en effet un endettement supérieur à 60 % de leur PIB, six d'entre eux ayant même un endettement supérieur à 90 %.
                  

                     Dès lors, sans le soutien financier massif de l'ensemble de l'Union européenne, l'Europe va plonger dans une récession gravissime. Pour éviter cela, notre Parlement, celui de tous les Européens, Parlement uni, doit réclamer des ressources financières propres considérables.
                  

Nicolas Bay (ECR). – Monsieur le Président, comme chaque année, le Parlement demande plus d'argent pour le budget de l'Union européenne. C'est l'argent des contribuables, et notamment des contribuables français. Seuls neuf pays sont contributeurs nets au budget de l'Union européenne. La France a ainsi versé plus de 27 milliards d'euros en 2023 pour n'en récupérer que la moitié à peine.
                  

                     Quelques lignes budgétaires sont évidemment les bienvenues: pour la protection de nos frontières ou le soutien à notre industrie. Mais l'argent pour les financer doit être pris sur les autres programmes, avec la réduction drastique des dépenses pour des centaines, des milliers d'organismes et de programmes et autres machins à la fois inutiles et souvent même nuisibles, et toujours coûteux.
                  

                     Tout ce qui finance l'islamisme et la submersion migratoire, le wokisme, l'activisme LGBT ou encore les instruments de voisinage pour aider la Terre entière doit être supprimé, et l'argent doit être rendu aux États. Alors que nos finances nationales sont exsangues, ravagées par sept ans de macronisme, alors que le gouvernement demande des efforts supplémentaires aux Français, déjà écrasés de taxes et d'impôts, ce qui étouffe notre compétitivité et nous appauvrit collectivement, nous voterons contre ces augmentations du budget.
                  

                     Vous demandez toujours plus pour dépenser n'importe comment. Ce n'est pas de l'argent magique, c'est l'argent de ceux qui travaillent et que vous spoliez. Laissez donc les poches des Français et les finances des pays contributeurs enfin tranquilles.
                  

Moritz Körner (Renew). – Madam President, dear colleagues, Palestinian schoolbooks teach hate. In science and math books, terrorists are praised. A female terrorist who killed several Jews is cited as an example for female empowerment. Most maps replace Israel with Palestine. Despite our financial support, these books haven't changed for years. But whenever we propose withholding funds until anti-Semitic pages are removed, the Budget Committee rejects our amendment. Please tell me, how can a parliament that always claims to defend fundamental values suddenly oppose removing anti-Semitic content from a schoolbook? What motivates this double standard? The hateful pages could be ripped out within hours and the funds could be released immediately.
Colleagues, this is not about being pro-Israel or being pro-Palestinian. This is about breaking the cycle of hate and ending the teaching of hate. And since we are all paying for it, we can make it happen. The final vote is tomorrow. So let's make this happen.

Γεώργιος Αυτιάς (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κυρίες και κύριοι συνάδελφοι, κύριε Επίτροπε, κύριε υπουργέ, αυτός ο προϋπολογισμός του 2025 εστιάζει στη βελτίωση της ζωής των πολιτών, την ανταγωνιστικότητα, αλλά και τις σημερινές προκλήσεις στην οικονομία. Πέραν των άλλων, αντιμετωπίζει το τεράστιο πρόβλημα της αποτελεσματικής φύλαξης των ελληνικών συνόρων, δηλαδή των νησιών του Αιγαίου και του Έβρου, που είναι και σύνορα της Ευρώπης. Είναι ιδιαίτερα σημαντικό για την Ελλάδα το θέμα αυτό. Αναφέρει ότι στηρίζει υλικές υποδομές, εξοπλισμούς και συστήματα ασφάλειας καθώς και υπηρεσίες παρακολούθησης, θέματα που επανειλημμένα έχει θέσει και ο Έλληνας πρωθυπουργός.
                  

                     Το ζητούμενο πολλών χωρών σήμερα είναι να υπάρξει ελάφρυνση στις οικονομίες με ανετότερη και καλύτερη διαχείριση των διαρκώς αυξημένων αναγκών για αμυντικές δαπάνες, δηλαδή να μην υπολογίζονται οι αμυντικές δαπάνες στο έλλειμμα των χωρών. Αυτό είναι πάρα πολύ σημαντικό και μάλιστα ο υπουργός Άμυνας της Ελλάδος, ο κύριος Δένδιας, στις 31 Αυγούστου του 2024, δήλωσε στην Πράγα ότι πρέπει να υπάρξουν αλλαγές, να αλλάξουν οι δημοσιονομικοί κανόνες όσον αφορά την άμυνα. Αυτό θα ήταν το κυριότερο που θα πρέπει να κάνει η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση. Κλείνοντας, η κίνηση αυτή, κατά τους ειδικούς, κύριε Επίτροπε, και σημειώστε το αυτό, θα αποτελέσει διαρκή οικονομική ασπίδα στις οικονομίες και θα λειτουργήσει προς όφελος των κρατών για κοινωνικές ελαφρύνσεις.
                  

Evin Incir (S&D). – Madam President, colleagues, the EU annual budget plays a vital role in upholding our commitment to global humanitarian efforts. One crucial partner in this is UNWRA, the backbone of the humanitarian response in Gaza. We must continue supporting it, especially as Israel continues its military attack against civilians, health and humanitarian staff, journalists and hospitals.
Unfortunately, there are sustained disinformation campaigns and blunt lies against UNWRA, even here in our Parliament. The extreme right, but also, unfortunately, some liberals – I'm referring to the previous colleague from Renew – have taken a one-sided view of the conflict, ignoring war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. We cannot allow such extremist actors to shape our policies.
I therefore urge all colleagues here today to vote against Amendments 1, 36 and 69, which are attempts at undermining UNWRA and the Palestinian Authority. I urge all colleagues to stand on the right side of history, by saving lives and not being complicit in the current ongoing horror.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question)


Moritz Körner (Renew),
blue-card question. – Colleague, thank you for accepting my blue card. Because you referred directly to me, I want to ask where in my speech I talked about the conflict between Israel and Palestine. I didn't talk about UNWRA. I also didn't talk about the Palestinian Authority. I just talked about antisemitic schoolbooks.
And I want to ask you: who would be against removing antisemitic content from school books, other than an anti-Semite?

Evin Incir (S&D),
blue-card answer. – Colleagues, everybody knows that when referring to the textbooks, the person who is doing that is trying to undermine the work of UNWRA. This is co-related in the discussion, and it's been done year after year.
When it comes to the textbooks, we have had the Georg Eckert Institute report, done by the EU, which has said that the Palestinian textbooks adhere to UNESCO standards, but that there are still some problems within them. Of course, those problems need to be addressed. I totally agree with you. Hatred doesn't have a place in any textbook. But it doesn't do it in the Israeli textbooks either, because in Israeli textbooks, Palestine does not exist.
So I agree with you, but I would say that we should demand the same from the Palestinians and the Israelis.

Patryk Jaki (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Kiedy Polska wchodziła do Unii Europejskiej wzrost gospodarczy Unii był podobny do Stanów Zjednoczonych. Potem wprowadziliście ETS. Od tego czasu dochód rozporządzalny na jedną osobę w Stanach Zjednoczonych wzrósł dwukrotnie w stosunku do Unii Europejskiej. I od tego czasu przegrywamy we wszystkim, co ma znaczenie – w przemyśle, technologiach kosmicznych, sztucznej inteligencji, startupach, demografii, innowacjach. Dlaczego się tak dzieje? Samo wasze sprawozdanie, sprawozdanie Draghiego wskazuje na dwa główne powody.
                  

                     Po pierwsze: przeregulowanie. Ta hiperinflacja prawa powoduje, że odnaleźć się w niej potrafią tylko giganci i odbywa się to kosztem konkurencyjności małych i średnich firm. I po drugie: ceny energii obłożone absurdalnymi, ideologicznymi podatkami, przez które europejskie firmy przestały się liczyć.
                  

                     No i wreszcie ideologia, gdzie śmierć w postaci aborcji czy eutanazji jest bardziej pożądana niż życie, a dzieci są źle postrzegane, bo rzekomo produkują za dużo dwutlenku węgla. I przez to musicie sięgać po migracje i ściągać coraz więcej ludzi do Unii Europejskiej, którzy generują tylko koszty i problemy. Więc ten budżet jest tym, co spowodowało, że każdego roku Europa jest coraz słabsza. I albo to się zmieni, albo spowoduje to gigantyczną katastrofę.
                  

Anouk Van Brug (Renew). – Voorzitter, het is tijd om onze ogen te openen voor de harde realiteit. Onze veiligheid staat onder druk en economische voorspoed is niet meer vanzelfsprekend.
                  

                     Dit vraagt om een begroting die klaar is voor de toekomst. We kunnen niet langer tweederde van onze begroting uitgeven aan landbouw en cohesie. We moeten stevig investeren in defensie, grip krijgen op migratie en innovatie stimuleren. Dit zijn de echte uitdagingen van vandaag.
                  

                     Laten we samen een begroting maken die niet alleen ons continent veilig houdt, maar ook zorgt voor groene groei en een sterke positie in de wereld. Samen kunnen we bouwen aan een betere toekomst.
                  

Kinga Kollár (PPE). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! 1 milliárd euró. 118 kórház felújításának költsége. Ennyit bukik el minden magyar az uniós forrásokból, most már szinte biztosan 2024 végén, amiért a magyar kormány nem hajlandó bezárni a korrupciós kiskapukat.
                  

                     Ennek mindannyian károsultjai vagyunk. A vidéken élők, akik a kohéziós források nélkül, romló körülmények között kénytelenek élni. Kórházaik bezárnak, vasútvonalaink nem működnek, az oktatás elsorvad. A kis- és középvállalkozások, amelyek hátrányba kerülnek a környező országokbeli versenytársaikhoz képest. A diákok, akik nem tudnak részt venni külföldi csereprogramokon. A kutatóink, akik milliárdos tételben buknak kutatás-fejlesztési forrásokat.
                  

                     Sorolhatnám még, akik napról napra hátrányba kerülnek, de akkor itt ülnénk estig. Miért van ez? Miért blokkolja az Unió a magyaroknak járó forrásokat? Mert a magyar ügyészség jelenlegi formájában nem képes a korrupció ellen hatékonyan fellépni. Nincs is átfogó korrupcióellenes stratégiája az országnak. Rendszerszintű hiánytalanságok, szabálytalanságok vannak a közbeszerzések terén. Az egyetemi alapítványokon keresztül átláthatatlanul tud elfolyni az állami vagyon és az uniós támogatás.
                  

                     Tudnám tovább sorolni a hibákat és hiányosságokat is, amiket a magyar kormánynak orvosolnia kellene, de addig is azt javasolom, hogy erősítsük meg az Unió bűnüldöző és csalás elleni szerveit. Emeljük meg az Európai Csalás Elleni Hivatal, az Europol, valamint az Európai Ügyészség költségvetését. Már csak azért is érdemes ezeknek a szerveknek a munkájába fektetni, mert valójában pénzt hoznak az Uniónak és a tagországoknak. Minél többet költ az Unió ezekre a csalásellenes szervekre, annál jobban járnak az európai adófizetők is.
                  

Marcos Ros Sempere (S&D). – Señora presidenta, la Unión Europea es una gran maquinaria y para avanzar necesita energía. El presupuesto que hoy debatimos es fundamental: ¿hacia dónde queremos avanzar?, ¿en qué medidas invertimos más esfuerzo para lograr nuestros objetivos? Y ese es el debate. Hay quienes hablan solo de gasto, pero solo quieren manchar de negatividad el enorme trabajo de la Unión Europea, un trabajo de gran valor, por ejemplo, en diversidad de ámbitos, como puede ser nuestros entornos urbanos.
                  

                     La Nueva Bauhaus Europea sigue creciendo en todos los países, y me siento muy orgulloso de que el proyecto piloto que la impulsa siga considerado en este presupuesto porque necesitamos hacer esfuerzo presupuestario en todos los ámbitos de la vivienda y el urbanismo y en los energéticamente sostenibles: el camino de la Nueva Bauhaus Europea. El debate sobre los presupuestos determina hacia dónde queremos que avance la maquinaria, por eso me preocupa el largo plazo, no solo el presupuesto de 2025, propuestas que llegan y que abogan por que la Unión Europea se salga de su camino: permanezcamos unidos en la diversidad apostando por un presupuesto europeo más fuerte.
                  

Μιχάλης Χατζηπαντέλα (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριε Επίτροπε, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, ο προϋπολογισμός της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης για το 2025 αποτελεί έκφραση αλληλεγγύης προς τους πολίτες μας και επένδυση στο μέλλον μας. Χαίρομαι που, ως Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο, ζητούμε αύξηση κατά 70 εκατομμύρια ευρώ για το πρόγραμμα Erasmus+, το οποίο προσφέρει στους νέους μας νέες προοπτικές και ευκαιρίες που ενισχύουν τις δεξιότητές τους και τους εφοδιάζουν για το μέλλον. Επιπρόσθετα, ζητούμε αύξηση 42 εκατομμυρίων στη χρηματοδότηση του μηχανισμού πολιτικής προστασίας, ζωτικής σημασίας για την αντιμετώπιση ακραίων καιρικών φαινομένων και φυσικών καταστροφών στην Ευρώπη. Ιδιαίτερα σημαντική είναι και η περαιτέρω στήριξη των αγροτών μας με επιπλέον 40 εκατομμύρια ευρώ για την ενίσχυση των νέων γεωργών και 25 εκατομμύρια ευρώ για την προώθηση των γεωργικών προϊόντων. Πιστεύουμε σε μια ισχυρή Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση· και μια Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση είναι ισχυρή όταν στέκεται δίπλα στους ανθρώπους της.
                  

Nicola Zingaretti (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, se esistesse un tribunale dei diritti dei giovani, condannerebbe i tagli al bilancio europeo.
                  

                     In questo luogo, il Parlamento, abbiamo il dovere di portare i nostri valori, le nostre idee, anche di difendere gli interessi della nostra gente, che coincidono con un'Europa più forte e più umana. Perché le persone hanno paura, chiedono sicurezza, speranza e – da solo – nessun Paese europeo ce la farà mai a garantirle, perché non resisterebbe alla violenza della competizione globale.
                  

                     Per questo i tagli previsti da governi, in gran parte di destra, sono sbagliati e sono tagli alla speranza. È sbagliato tagliare sulla ricerca, sulla sanità o su Erasmus, come invece è stato proposto. Non sono risparmi: sono rinunce che colpiranno in modo particolare le ragazze e i ragazzi.
                  

                     Lo denunciamo oggi e continueremo a farlo ogni volta che sarà necessario.
                  

Jüri Ratas (PPE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, recently the need to improve Europe's competitiveness has been a central topic. Even Draghi's report has highlighted the urgent need for Europe to strengthen its position in the global economy. If we are serious about this goal, we must prioritise investment in research, innovation and technological development. The EU budget for 2025 must reflect this commitment. Our ability to keep pace with global leaders like the United States and China depends on it.
The counterproposal to reduce research funding by EUR 450 million is not sustainable. It threatens our innovative capacity and also weakens our competitiveness. By investing in science, we can provide our industries the opportunity to take the lead in high-value sectors and create new jobs. I believe we should support the increase in research and development funding to 3 % of GDP.

Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis (S&D). – Gerbiama posėdžio pirmininke, gerbiamas Komisare, gerbiamas Ministre, Europos Tarybos pateiktas projektas, deja, neatitinka prioritetų ir tie sumažinimai sveikatos apsaugai, ‘Horizon’ programai, ‘Youth4Health’ programai yra neatitinkantys iš esmės investicinės politikos, nes tai yra investicinės politikos dalis, ir dėl to dėkoju Victorui Negrescu ir Europos Parlamento visiems dirbusiems, kurie pasiūlė projektą kompromisinį ir pasiūlė padidinimus būtent. Gerai, kad biudžetas nėra regresinis ir dėl to mes labai džiaugiamės (pirmininkė nutraukė ir paprašė pradėti iš naujo). Ir aš norėčiau pasidžiaugti Victoro Negrescu sėkme ir taip pat noriu pasakyti, kad Europos Komisija teisingai sako, kad ji palaikys Europos Parlamento siūlymą padidinti išlaidas, padidinti investicijas į tai, kas yra pasiūlyta. Suprantama, tai yra kompromisinis projektas ir mes turime kuo skubiau jį patvirtinti, bet, kolegos, didžiausia problema aplamai lieka, kad Europos Taryba iki šiol nėra patvirtinusi pastovių nuosavųjų išteklių. Be pastovių nuosavųjų išteklių judėti toliau ateityje negalime. Europos Sąjungos biudžetas aplamai yra per mažas. Jeigu lyginti su visų šalių narių biudžetais ir jeigu mes žiūrim į priekį apie plėtrą, apie tai, kad reikės priimti 10 naujų narių, kaip gi galima su tokiu mažu Europos Sąjungos biudžetu galvoti apie perspektyvas? Akivaizdu, kad mums reikia ir Lisabonos sutarties peržiūrą skatinti, stimuliuoti debatus apie ateitį. Kitaip mes tikrai nepasieksime savo tikslų.
                  

Salvatore De Meo (PPE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il bilancio del 2025 è fondamentale per affrontare le sfide che ci attendono e siamo tutti consapevoli della necessità di dover utilizzare queste risorse in modo appropriato e funzionale rispetto alle nostre strategie.
                  

                     Sicuramente la politica agricola si conferma tra le nostre priorità, per aumentare la competitività e la sicurezza e autonomia alimentare dell'Europa.
                  

                     Certo, la nostra architettura finanziaria e le nostre risorse economiche non sono sufficienti rispetto a quelle che sono le nostre sfide. Ecco perché necessiterebbe il tutto di essere rivisto, magari ricorrendo al debito comune, per avere più risorse e favorire maggiormente il raggiungimento degli obiettivi.
                  

                     Ad ogni modo, i 60 miliardi circa di euro destinati alla PAC continuano ad essere un'opportunità fondamentale per sostenere i nostri agricoltori, affinché siano ovviamente impegnati nella transizione verde.
                  

                     Sono risorse destinate a promuovere pratiche agricole sostenibili, la ricerca e l'utilizzo delle tecnologie innovative. Ma soprattutto sono risorse con cui i nostri agricoltori vogliono essere protagonisti nella lotta ai cambiamenti climatici, perché sono alleati dell'ambiente e non avversari.
                  

Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE). – Paní předsedající, evropský rozpočet je největší investiční nástroj, jaký máme. My se musíme naučit pracovat s rozpočtem tak, aby byly investice efektivní, správně zacílené a s co největším dopadem. Dámy a pánové, rozpočet musí podporovat růst a vytvářet konkurenceschopná pracovní místa. Evropa musí být globálně první, ne naopak. Už si nesmíme sami házet klacky pod nohy a pomáhat Spojeným státům a Číně udržet se na světové špičce. V rozpočtu se musí více projevit Draghiho zpráva. Musíme více investovat do podpory výzkumu a inovací. Stejně tak i efektivní řízení migrace a hraniční infrastruktura, to všechno musí být naše priority nejen na rok 2025, ale i do dalších let. Zcela zásadní je i obrana, a to jak produkce, tak i výzkum a vývoj. Investice do těchto položek rozhodnou o budoucnosti Evropy a já chci, aby Evropa byla na špičce, ne v jejím závěsu.
                  

Procedura ‘catch-the-eye’
                        


Anna Stürgkh (Renew). – Madam President, any young person whose life has been enriched by living, studying or working abroad, whose horizon has been broadened by immersing themselves in a foreign culture or foreign language, any young person who's been able to make Europe their home through the Erasmus programme knows that this is one of the greatest achievements of the European Union. So why doesn't the Council know?
Erasmus is so much more than a simple exchange programme. Erasmus has increased national GDPs. Erasmus has decreased unemployment rates. Erasmus has fathered quite literally more than 1 million babies. So why do nation states want to cut its budget?
Dear Council, keep your hands off Erasmus, for the European youth and for the European future.

Marc Botenga (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, je veux quand même réagir à la perfidie de certaines propositions formulées ici.
                  

                     Certains collègues voient Israël effectuer un génocide à Gaza, un nettoyage ethnique en Cisjordanie, ils voient Israël attaquer le Liban et, malgré tout cela, ils ne demandent pas de sanctions, ils continuent de soutenir les livraisons d'armes à Netanyahou, rendant par là même l'Union européenne complice de crimes de guerre.
                  

                     Aujourd'hui ces mêmes collègues proposent, après plus de un an de génocide, de sanctionner les Palestiniens, de sanctionner les Nations unies, de demander à ce que l'on retire les fonds de l'Autorité palestinienne et que l'on s'en prenne à l'agence qui gère les réfugiés dans cinq pays.
                  

                     Non mais vous n'avez pas honte? Vous n'avez plus aucune limite! Alors quoi, même l'aide humanitaire est un problème? Vous voulez vraiment aider Israël à parachever le nettoyage ethnique de la Palestine? Ayez honte, franchement, de venir ici avec ce genre de proposition, avec ce genre d'amendement! Cela ne doit pas passer!
                  

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Mitmenschen! In dieser Generaldebatte über den Haushalt der EU für das Jahr 2025 möchte ich als letzter auch noch einmal Ihr Augenmerk auf einen Aspekt legen, der hier zum Glück schon öfter angesprochen wurde: das Erasmus+-Programm. Dieses Leuchtturmprojekt der EU ermöglicht es jungen Menschen in Ausbildung und Studium, Lehrpersonal und allgemeinen Verwaltungspersonen, den Schritt nach Europa zu machen. Es ist Grundpfeiler von Erhalt und Weiterentwicklung der europäischen Idee.
                  

                     Und deshalb – nicht nur, weil ich selbst mein Erasmus in Amsterdam geliebt habe oder meine Freundin ihr Erasmus in Paris gerade liebt – kann ich nicht verstehen, wieso Rat und Kommission dieses Budget für Erasmus+ im kommenden Jahr kürzen wollen. In diesen Zeiten von Wirtschaftskrise, Krieg, Bedrohung der Demokratie und Klimawandel – was bleibt uns, außer in eine bessere Zukunft zu investieren? Bildung ist die beste Investition in diese bessere Zukunft.
                  

                     Lassen Sie uns nicht daran sparen, lassen Sie uns nicht am Erasmus+-Programm sparen!
                  

(Fine della procedura ‘catch the eye’)


Wopke Hoekstra,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of my dear friend and dear colleague Commissioner Hahn, thank you for today's debate. We carefully note the positions expressed by this House and, of course, by the Council.
To facilitate the upcoming negotiations, the Commission will present an assessment of all the amendments proposed by Parliament and of the Council's position in the so-called 'letter of executability'. We will have the opportunity to discuss again on 5 November, when we meet in the Conciliation Committee format. And we believe that successful negotiations require both institutions to set clear priorities so that we can focus our discussions in conciliation on those programmes where meaningful adjustments actually could be made.
The Commission, as always, will act as an honest broker and our services will do their utmost to prepare the ground for fair and informed negotiations. We, of course, in particular Commissioner Hahn, look forward to having constructive negotiations to reach a timely agreement on making this annual budget also a quality budget.

Péter Benő Banai,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, honourable Members, I have listened carefully to the arguments raised during this interesting debate, and I will inform my colleagues in the Council accordingly. Not all, but most of the suggestions I have heard were on increasing expenditure in various areas. Let me mention three points here.
The first one: I haven't seen the budget of a country, nor of the European Union, nor of any international agreements, where all issues, all expenditure items, could be financed as priority items. We have to distinguish clearly between more and less important issues. As I see, the position of the Parliament and the Council is quite close to each other as regards cohesion, agriculture, border protection, humanitarian aid and defence. And of course there are some differences.
The second point: unfortunately, I haven't heard about the source of additional financing. It's not the Member States but the European taxpayers who pay the additional cost of additional expenditures. Do we want to increase taxes? Do we want to increase the indebtedness of the European Union? Just look at the 2025 budget proposal. Interest expenditures for NextGenerationEU should be something like double the original amount. Something like an additional EUR 2.5 billion we have to find to pay the interest costs.
Point three: the Council proposal does not include cuts as regards the total sum. On the contrary, if I compare the proposal made by the Council on the 2025 EU budget, that includes an increase in the total sum as regards both commitments and payments. What we would like to avoid is the non-justified, non-underpinned increase. And this is true as regards the case of Erasmus+. And we would like to stress here that the draft budget included additional funds originating from the previous MFF period and which was not associated with the current financial programming. This is why the Council has suggested keeping the appropriations of the programme at the level of its financial programming. This way, we can assure you that no originally planned demands for 2025 are taken away, and no students will be harmed by this adjustment.
The Council will do its utmost to engage in a constructive dialogue, allowing us to come to an agreement on a budget for 2025 within the deadlines foreseen by the Treaty.

Victor Negrescu,
rapporteur. – Madam President, thank you, and thank you, Minister and Commissioner, I have listened carefully to all the points of views expressed, and I respect all positions. I'm even more grateful for the strong support expressed in the BUDG Committee for the report and the resolution.
The EU budget maze is already complicated enough, and I am happy with the balanced language we have managed to reach on the most complex issues, including on ensuring EU funds are not used to finance terrorism, border protection or the situation in the Middle East. I am particularly happy with the strong language that we have in relation to the fight against corruption. Any amendments that go against these fragile, but strong, compromises will hurt the European Parliament and our capacity to actually make our priorities heard.
With regard to the Council position, we understand the challenges faced by our Member States, but cutting the EU budget would actually accelerate our budgetary and financial challenges, because everyone knows that the euros we have invested at EU level have a multiplication effect that benefits everyone. If we want the German economy to recover or the French deficit to be resolved, we also need to invest in our economy, our competitiveness and in our common development.
I'm confident we will move forward and find a good compromise in a timely manner. We will also count on the Commission to act as an honest broker. I'm confident that after the votes tomorrow, the European Parliament will enter negotiations with a clear and ambitious position that will allow us to work together in building a 2025 EU budget that matches citizens' expectations.

Niclas Herbst,
Berichterstatter. – Frau Präsidentin, meine Damen und Herren! Vielen Dank für die Debatte. Die vielen Wortmeldungen haben mir gezeigt, dass es sehr weitgehende Wünsche gibt, aus den Fachausschüssen, von den Kolleginnen und Kollegen, und wir haben, glaube ich, auch gemerkt, dass die komplizierte Verfasstheit unseres Haushalts dazu führt, dass wir die notwendige Flexibilität nur sehr begrenzt haben. Die Debatte hat ja auch den zukünftigen MFR angesprochen. Ich glaube, wir müssen gemeinsam daran arbeiten, diese Flexibilität zu erreichen, um das dann auch stärker politisch umsetzen zu können.
                  

                     Mir ist wichtig, dass deutlich geworden ist, dass öffentliche Ausgaben auch im Personalwesen durchaus ihren Sinn haben können, dass wir dort sehr zurückhaltend sein müssen, dass wir mit dem Geld der Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahler sehr sinnvoll umgehen müssen, aber dass wir auch in der Lage sein müssen, Dinge durchzusetzen.
                  

                     Ich finde es gut, dass, anders als in den Vorjahren, andere Einzelpläne oder Rubrik 7 keine große Rolle gespielt haben, weil uns in der Tat – Sie haben über die Priorisierung gesprochen – völlig klar sein muss, dass wir uns auf die wichtigen Dinge konzentrieren müssen und dort auch keine Nebenkriegsschauplätze haben dürfen.
                  

                     Ich glaube, dass, wenn wir es schaffen, uns auf die wichtigen Themen zu konzentrieren, wir es trotz der komplizierten Ausgangslage schaffen können, ein gutes Ergebnis für die Menschen in Europa zu erzielen. Ich freue mich auf die Verhandlungen, bedanke mich für die Debatte und bin Optimist, und das werde ich auch bis zum Ende bleiben.
                  

Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.
                  

                     La votazione si svolgerà domani.
                  
12.   Protection of European journalists reporting on Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine (debate)

Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca in discussione la dichiarazione della Commissione sulla tutela dei giornalisti europei che coprono la guerra di aggressione della Russia contro l'Ucraina (2024/2895(RSP)).
               

Wopke Hoekstra,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, let me start with something that you unfortunately already know: Russia lacks any respect for media freedom inside its own country, and it also blatantly disrespects the protection of journalists in conflict zones. Inside the country, the space for media has dramatically shrunk since the start of the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine. Many media outlets were forced to terminate their operations. The majority of independent journalists have left the country and many are actually being persecuted. And it is this appalling crackdown on independent media that has also spilled over to the frontline and the territories of Ukraine temporarily – temporarily! – occupied by Russia. And it is there that Russia harasses, intimidates and uses violence against journalists and media workers.
And this is exactly what you think it is: a clear attempt to silence them, in order to not let the world receive full and impartial information about what is actually going on. They are trying to prevent the exposure of Russian state-sponsored disinformation about the war they wage in Ukraine. According to Reporters Without Borders, more than 100 journalists have been victims of Russian crimes since the beginning of the full-scale invasion. That includes at least 35 wounded, 12 detained, as well as 233 media outlets closed in the territories occupied by Russia.
Ladies and gentlemen, the appalling case of last week's death of a Ukrainian freelance journalist, Victoria Roshchyna, while in illegal, arbitrary Russian detention, is yet another example of Russia's utter disregard for media freedom and international commitments. Victoria Roshchyna was a renowned Ukrainian journalist covering Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine, and she was the recipient of the Courage in Journalism Award for her work, and was determined to bring the truth – the truth about Russia's brutal war of aggression and its illegal occupation of Ukraine – to the world. That is what she was doing. And according to the available information, Victoria died while being transferred to Moscow from a prison in Taganrog. And it is the Russian authorities, and no one else, who, by doing so, assumed full responsibility for her safety, for her health and physical integrity when they arbitrarily detained her in the temporarily occupied Ukrainian territories in August 2023.
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to make it worse: she is the 13th murdered journalist since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and it is absolutely outrageous. Lately, the Russian Federal Security Service decided to initiate criminal cases against journalists covering Ukraine's counteroffensive operation in Kursk. And now, already 14 journalists are subject to such utterly ridiculous charges. It is again a clear attempt to intimidate journalists and to discourage them from performing their professional duties. We cannot allow that.
Honourable Members, the European Union's position is straightforward: journalists and media workers alike play an indispensable role in providing accurate and timely coverage from war zones, ensuring that information about the realities and impact of war can actually reach a global audience, including us. Journalists are considered civilians under international humanitarian law and should be actively protected in all conflict situations. The EU has and will condemn any form of Russia's ongoing harassment, intimidation and violence against journalists and media workers covering war zones and frontlines. For them, safety and protection must be ensured at all times. There can be no impunity, and I say that again: there can and will be no impunity for human rights violations and abuses against journalists.

Isabel Wiseler-Lima,
au nom du groupe PPE. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, merci pour vos paroles. Elle s'appelait Victoria Rochtchyna, elle avait 27 ans, elle était journaliste, elle était ukrainienne. Elle a disparu le 3 août, alors qu'elle se trouvait en Russie pour enquêter sur les frappes menées par l'armée russe contre l'Ukraine. Quelque 25 journalistes ukrainiens se trouvent aujourd'hui emprisonnés en Russie. Victoria Rochtchyna était elle aussi enfermée dans une prison russe. Et c'est là qu'elle est décédée.
               

                  Les journalistes indépendants à la recherche des faits sont particulièrement haïs des tyrans, car ils sont dangereux pour les régimes qui imposent une vision tronquée, mensongère de la réalité. Les journalistes sont des piliers de la démocratie. Ils éclairent les gens, relatent les faits, démystifient les mensonges et dénoncent la corruption et les abus de pouvoir. Le travail d'information – leur travail d'information – nous est indispensable.
               

                  Le gouvernement russe n'hésite pas à emprisonner des journalistes qui ne font que leur métier, honnêtement. D'ailleurs, tout comme d'autres simples civils ukrainiens, eux aussi sont nombreux à avoir disparu dans les geôles russes.
               

                  Je ne peux terminer cette intervention sans mentionner tous les enfants ukrainiens déportés en Russie. Il est grand temps que le monde occidental fasse bien plus pour aider l'Ukraine à gagner cette guerre.
               

                  Chère famille de Victoria, nous vous présentons nos très sincères condoléances et vous assurons que Victoria ne sera pas oubliée. Nous appelons à ce que les circonstances de son décès soient élucidées.
               

Sandro Ruotolo,
a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, come delegazione italiana del gruppo dei Socialisti e Democratici al Parlamento europeo, abbiamo sollecitato il dibattito sulla protezione dei giornalisti che raccontano la guerra in Ucraina.
               

                  La decisione del governo russo di emettere i mandati di cattura nei confronti di due giornalisti italiani, Stefania Battistini e Simone Traini, è gravissima: informare non è mai un crimine. I due, accusati di attraversamento illegale del confine e riprese non autorizzate, rischiano fino a cinque anni di reclusione. Queste accuse violano la convenzione di Ginevra, minando la libertà di stampa e la trasparenza. Non è un caso isolato: altri giornalisti stranieri si trovano nella stessa situazione. Questo è un chiaro tentativo di intimidazione che condanniamo con grande fermezza.
               

                  Quando i servizi segreti russi entrano in campo, occorre vigilare. La Russia ha intensificato la repressione del giornalismo indipendente, definendo i media europei e internazionali ‘agenti segreti’. L'Europa deve farsi sentire, esprimendo solidarietà ai giornalisti nel mirino di Putin, ma anche con azioni concrete: dobbiamo pretendere la revoca dei mandati di arresto per questi giornalisti. Chi vi parla è uno dei 22 giornalisti minacciati che l'Italia protegge.
               

                  Voglio concludere facendo un appello a tutti i 27 Stati membri dell'Unione europea: proteggete i vostri giornalisti quando sono minacciati! La democrazia ha bisogno della libera informazione e quando muore un giornalista per il suo lavoro, non solo nei teatri di guerra ma anche nei Paesi cosiddetti ‘di pace’, democratici, come in Europa, è un pezzo di democrazia che muore.
               

Juan Carlos Girauta Vidal,
en nombre del Grupo PfE. – Señora presidente, es urgente, sí, proteger a los periodistas que se juegan la vida cubriendo la guerra de agresión de Rusia contra Ucrania: las muertes y agresiones sufridas por periodistas en el frente son inadmisibles y este Parlamento debe exigir más protección para quienes arriesgan su vida por informarnos.
               

                  Tampoco puedo dejar de mencionar el caso del espía Pável Alekséyevich Rubtsov, alias Pablo González: durante años, la izquierda en este Parlamento se dedicó a defenderlo acusando a Polonia de retener a un inocente periodista; hoy sabemos la verdad: Pavel ha sido reconocido y condecorado por Putin, confirmándose que trabajaba para el Kremlin. Ahora, los que alzaban la voz contra el Gobierno del PiS en Polonia guardan un sospechoso silencio.
               

                  Pável, alias Pablo González, trabajaba en La Sexta, una cadena de televisión en España conocida por su apoyo incondicional a Pedro Sánchez y su blanqueamiento del golpismo separatista del 1 de octubre de 2017, un golpe en el que también estuvo implicada Rusia: nada de esto es una coincidencia.
               

                  Nuestros amigos del PiS han sido demonizados en esta Cámara, pero su Gobierno es el que más ha luchado contra la agresión rusa: merecen nuestro respeto, no nuestra crítica. Aprendamos a distinguir a nuestros verdaderos aliados en la defensa de la libertad y de la democracia.
               

Małgorzata Gosiewska,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! O tym, jak ważną i niebezpieczną pracę wykonują dziennikarze relacjonujący przebieg rosyjskiej wojny przeciwko Ukrainie, nie muszę Państwa przekonywać. Służą prawdzie i za prawdę przychodzi im ponosić wysoką cenę, czasami najwyższą. Chciałabym oddać szczególny hołd Wiktorii Roszczynie, 28-letniej ukraińskiej dziennikarce. Porwana i przetrzymywana przez Rosjan w jednym z najbrutalniejszych aresztów. Była na liście do wymiany. Nie doczekała. Na Ukrainie ruszyło śledztwo w sprawie zbrodni wojennej i morderstwa z premedytacją – kolejnej rosyjskiej zbrodni.
               

                  Nie uchronimy dziennikarzy przed takim ryzykiem, ale możemy utworzyć europejski fundusz, który zapewniłby stypendia i ubezpieczenie dla dziennikarzy pracujących na terenach objętych wojną oraz wsparcie dla ich rodzin. Ubezpieczenia w takich miejscach są często niedostępne albo bardzo kosztowne. Funduszem takim mogłyby zarządzać organizacje dziennikarskie z krajów przyfrontowych oraz z Ukrainy. Szanowni Państwo, powołajmy fundusz imienia Viktorii Roszczyny. To będzie konkret.
               

Helmut Brandstätter,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, dear Commissioner, Thomas Jefferson, the third President of the United States, said, 'If I had to choose between a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I would prefer the latter'.
Freedom of media is the basis of democracy. Putin, of course, kills democracy. But as we see these days, in his country, in Ukraine and in other countries, he kills human beings; he kills journalists. There is an incomplete list of more than 100 journalists who have been tortured or wounded or even killed. And why are they in Ukraine? Because they give us the possibility to understand what's happening there. They give us the possibility to learn the facts. As a lifelong journalist, I know that the most important job of a journalist is to report the facts so that the public can understand what's going on.
There are so many documentaries about what Putin and his soldiers are doing in Ukraine. We are very grateful to those wonderful journalists who told us these stories, and the sad story is that many of them were killed.
E io so, signora Presidente, che non si può mostrare un libro. Ma oggi io voglio mostrare alcune fotografie.

(The speaker showed photos of victims)

These are human beings. These are people we knew. These are people who worked for us. They are, of course, from Ukraine, but also from Russia. Oksana Baulina worked for Navalny and she was also killed because she wanted to show us the truth.

Presidente. – Non è consentito mostrare le foto.
               

Ville Niinistö,
Verts/ALE-ryhmän puolesta. – Arvoisa puhemies, demokratia ja vapaa yhteiskunta kuolevat pimeydessä. Vahva, riippumaton media ja sananvapaus ovat demokratian ydintä, ja ne takaavat sen, että meidän arvojamme puolustetaan nyt ja tulevaisuudessa. Toimittajien on pystyttävä tekemään työnsä turvallisesti. Se on avoimen ja vapaan yhteiskunnan tiedonvälityksen pohja, ja sitä Putin myös syvästi pelkää.
               

                  Venäjän hyökkäykset niin Venäjällä kuin Ukrainan sotaan liittyen toimittajia ja median vapautta vastaan ovat tuomittavia. Venäjän turvallisuuspalvelu FSB on nostanut syytteitä kansainvälisiä toimittajia vastaan laittomasta maahantulosta. Toimittajat, muun muassa Deutsche Wellestä ja CNN:ältä, ovat ylittäneet Venäjän Ukrainan-rajan Sudzhassa Kurskin alueella Länsi-Venäjällä raportoidessaan sodasta. Jos toimittajat todetaan syyllisiksi, he voivat saada jopa viiden vuoden vankeusrangaistuksen. On ilmeistä, että syytteiden tarkoitus on hankaloittaa ja sensuroida sodasta raportoivien kansainvälisten toimittajien työtä, ja tämä on kansainvälisen oikeuden vastaista.
               

                  Mutta Venäjän toiminta mediaa vastaan ei rajoitu tähän. Venäjän toimien ilmiselvä tarkoitus on estää avoin raportointi sodasta ja Venäjän tekemistä sotarikoksista. Monet toimittajat, etenkin ukrainalaiset, ovat joutuneet vangituiksi tai jopa kuolleet Venäjän vankeudessa ja kiduttamina, kuten viime kuussa kuollut Viktoriya Roshchyna, joka urhoollisesti toi esille Itä-Ukrainassa Venäjän miehityksen alla tapahtuvan kärsimyksen tosiasioita.
               

                  Meidän Euroopassa on oltava tinkimättä vapaan median puolella. Meidän on pidettävä huoli siitä, että vapaa media ylläpitää demokratiaa ja toivoa paremmasta tulevaisuudesta niin Ukrainassa kuin laajemmin Euroopassa.
               

Γιώργος Γεωργίου,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας The Left. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριε Επίτροπε, πολλοί δημοσιογράφοι σκοτώνονται άδικα στα πεδία των μαχών στην Ουκρανία αλλά και στη Γάζα, για την οποία δεν άκουσα λέξη βέβαια. Αυτούς τιμούμε σήμερα. Ακούσατε, όμως, τι μας είπε χτες η κυρία Metsola; Να μη μιλήσουμε, λέει, για την κατάσταση που επικρατεί στη Γάζα, γιατί τις τελευταίες μέρες δεν έχει συμβεί εκεί κάτι το δραματικό. Ντροπή. Δεν ακούει κανείς το κλάμα των παιδιών που σκοτώνονται από τις ισραηλινές βόμβες; Το κλάμα είναι το ίδιο είτε ακούγεται από την Ουκρανία είτε από τη Γάζα. Πώς μπορείτε να κοιμάστε τα βράδια;
               

                  Εμείς δεν θα γίνουμε μέρος αυτής της υποκρισίας και του παραλογισμού. Θα μιλάμε και για τα θύματα της Χαμάς και για τους δημοσιογράφους, όπου και να σκοτώνονται. Δεν θα μας φιμώσετε. Θα μιλάμε για τα 50 000 θύματα της ισραηλινής θηριωδίας, για την γενοκτονία του Νετανιάχου, για τα 16 000 νεκρά παιδιά της Παλαιστίνης, για την ισοπέδωση της Γάζας, που η ίδια η UNICEF λέει ότι έχει μετατραπεί σε ενσάρκωση της κόλασης επί της Γης. Κύριε Επίτροπε, θα μιλάμε για να μην ντρεπόμαστε στο μέλλον, όταν θα μιλήσει η πραγματική ιστορία.
               

Petar Volgin,
от името на групата ESN. – Уважаеми колеги, самото заглавие на тази дискусия е сбъркано, защото всички журналисти трябва да бъдат защитавани, а не само европейските. За жалост и в тази сфера се сблъскваме с крещящи двойни стандарти. Когато пострада някой журналист, подкрепящ Украйна, всички световни медии говорят за това, но когато същото се случи с критичен към Киев журналист, случаят тотално се неглижира.
               

                  Колко от вас са чували за чилийско-американския журналист Гонсало Лира? В началото на войната той живееше в Харков и беше арестуван, защото критикуваше правителството на Зеленски. На 12 януари тази година Лира почина в затвора от пневмония, както казаха властите. Руско-испанският журналист Пабло Гонсалес пък беше задържан в Полша, след като отразяваше преминаването на украински бежанци на полско-украинската граница и изкара близо три години в затвора. Руският военен кореспондент Владлен Татарски беше убит в центъра на Санкт Петербург с взривно устройство. По време на войната в Украйна са загинали над 30 руски журналисти, и украински журналисти са загинали. Десетки и стотици пострадаха и всички те трябва да бъдат помнени, и не трябва да бъдат разделяни на добри и лоши.
               

Wopke Hoekstra,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, thank you, and thank you very much, dear Members. Our approach towards Russia will continue to be crystal clear. We support Ukraine for as long as is necessary. We will isolate Russia. We will impose sanctions to hinder Russia's war machine. We will stand up for human rights and we will stand up for the press, for our journalists. Today's debate highlights the vital role of journalists and the role they play in war zones, including and covering Russia's invasion of Ukraine. And thank you for bringing more of the names of the brave men and women who have been there and who have been reporting to this debate.
We will also continue to call Russia out for its violations of international law. And we did so most recently at the OSCE, regarding Russia's ongoing intimidation and ongoing harassment of journalists in war zones and frontlines. And it was the High Representative's spokesman who issued a public statement on the death of Victoria in Russian captivity on 11 October. In our view, it is absolutely essential that we have a thorough and independent investigation that fully clarifies all the circumstances of Victoria's death as soon as possible. And we will demand Russia to stop the abuse of its criminal system to intimidate journalists and other citizens by launching politically motivated criminal investigations against them.
In short, the European Union will remain steadfast in its commitment to protect media freedom and the safety of journalists, both at home and abroad.

Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.
               

                  La seduta è sospesa per alcuni minuti e riprenderà alle ore 15:00 con il tempo delle interrogazioni alla Commissione.
               

(La seduta è sospesa alle 14.49)


PRESIDENZA: PINA PICIERNO


Vicepresidente

13.   Resumption of the sitting

(La seduta è ripresa alle 15.03)

14.   Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting

Presidente. – Il processo verbale della seduta di lunedì 21 ottobre 2024 e i testi approvati sono stati distribuiti.
               

                  Vi sono osservazioni? Non ci sono osservazioni.
               

                  Il processo verbale è approvato.
               
15.   Question Time with Commissioners – Situation of animal health in Europe: how to prevent and prepare for future sanitary crises in agriculture

Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno che reca il tempo delle interrogazioni alla Commissione, a norma dell'articolo 143 del nostro regolamento, dedicato al tema: ‘Situazione riguardante la salute degli animali: come prevenire le future crisi sanitari in agricoltura e prepararsi ad affrontarle’.
               

                  Alcune informazioni per i colleghi. La durata prevista per il tempo delle interrogazioni è di 90 minuti. Avete a disposizione un minuto per formulare l'interrogazione e la commissaria avrà a disposizione due minuti per la risposta.
               

                  Per il primo turno di oratori sarà possibile porre un'interrogazione supplementare di 30 secondi con due minuti per la risposta a disposizione della Commissaria.
               

                  Vi ricordo che l'eventuale interrogazione supplementare è concessa soltanto se correlata all'interrogazione principale. Non consiste dunque in una nuova interrogazione.
               

                  Chi intende formulare l'interrogazione è invitato a registrare sin d'ora la propria richiesta, utilizzando la funzione catch sul vostro dispositivo di voto. Dopo, ovviamente, aver inserito la vostra tessera di voto durante il tempo delle interrogazioni, i deputati interverranno dal proprio scranno e invito, naturalmente sin d'ora, a rispettare i tempi che ci siamo dati.
               

                  Siccome i deputati potrebbero aver bisogno di alcuni minuti per registrare la loro richiesta, Vi concederemo naturalmente questo tempo e Vi chiedo, come Vi anticipavo prima, di presentare sin d'ora la vostra richiesta, così da poter procedere in maniera celere con i nostri lavori. Quindi, avete a disposizione qualche minuto di tempo per registrarVi, così da iniziare subito.
               

                  Mi comunicano che l'onorevole Blaha aveva fatto richiesta di parlare per un fatto personale all'inizio della seduta.
               

Ľuboš Blaha (NI). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, včera som bol neoliberálnym poslancom z Litvy obvinený, že som bol v Moskve poďakovať za slobodu a za mier. Áno, hrdo sa hlásim k tomu, že som bol v Rusku, pretože verím v mierový dialóg. A áno, ďakoval som ruskému národu za to, ako sa obetoval v druhej svetovej vojne, aby nám priniesol slobodu a mier od fašizmu. Neviem, či ctený neoliberálny kolega z Litvy ďakuje Adolfovi Hitlerovi, ale my na Slovensku za oslobodenie od fašizmu ďakujeme Rusom a Červenej armáde. Neoliberálny poslanec zároveň požiadal vedenie Parlamentu, aby ma potrestalo, lebo nedodržujem nejakú politickú líniu, ktorú si schválila rusofóbna väčšina. Ako keby sme boli v Tretej ríši. Ja som slobodný človek, mám slobodné názory a za svoje súkromné peniaze budem cestovať,kam len chcem. A ubezpečujem vás, že som si v Ru u zo svojich peňazí zaplatil všetko do posledného boršču. Mám silný mandát od Slovákov, aby som bojoval proti vojne a proti rusofóbii. A mám ešte silnejší morálny záväzok, že mám tri malé deti a nechcem, aby jedného dňa umierali v jadrovej vojne. A preto do Ruska pôjdem znova. A môžete ma aj upáliť.
               

Presidente. – Onorevole Blaha, lei è certamente libero di esprimere le sue opinioni purché siano naturalmente conformi ai valori fondanti su cui le nostre istituzioni europee si basano e che quest'Aula è impegnata a rispettare ogni giorno.
               

                  Quindi, naturalmente, la Presidenza prenderà visione del suo intervento ed eventualmente le comunicherà una decisione al riguardo.
               

                  E ora procediamo con le nostre interrogazioni. Ha facoltà di intervento, e di porre la sua interrogazione alla commissaria, l'onorevole Glavak.
               

Sunčana Glavak (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, poštovana povjerenice, željela bih zapravo uputiti pitanje koje je vezano i uz temu o kojoj želimo govoriti, a to je na koji način se možemo pripremiti za iduće krize i na koji način Komisija može i našim poljoprivrednicima, ali i građanima osigurati da imaju dobre opskrbne lance hrane, a s druge strane poljoprivrednici da imaju što manje štete.
               

                  Nedavno i u mojoj domovini Hrvatskoj, nažalost, bili smo suočeni i sa svinjskom kugom i s novim izazovima. Prema tome, trebamo i financijsku potporu i trebamo sigurnost u onom zdravstvenom smislu kako za dobre i sigurne dobavne pravce, a jednako tako smatram da moramo imati i bolju razmjenu informacija na razini Europske unije. Suočeni smo, naravno, i s crnim tržištem, koje još uvijek nismo iskorijenili, i s lošom robom, koja se još uvijek pojavljuje na našem tržištu.
               

                  Stoga vas molim odgovor na moje pitanje na koji način možemo to spriječiti, pomoći građanima i pomoći poljoprivrednicima.
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – Thank you very much for that question. It's true that the EU has recently been affected by several animal diseases, and I would say that these have been more frequent and more severe than in the past. And because you specifically mentioned African swine fever, we, as a Commission, have been closely monitoring the epidemiological situation of African swine fever and providing support, including financial support, with over EUR 230 million through veterinary programmes and emergency measures to support Member States. We have been holding daily exchanges between the Member States and the Commission services and this is very important, when we have these kind of situations, to have very close networking, and we've learned how this can help.
On a technical level, we have had on-the-spot visits to Member States by our EU Veterinary Emergency Team, EU VET. I think there have been a number of visits to different Member States. We have the scientific advice that we receive from EFSA, and we also have the EU reference laboratories, which have diagnostic capabilities and technical expertise.
So there is a variety of actions that we can do because it is important that we provide this kind of support in order to make sure that we deal with any emerging diseases which appear in EU territory, in not only a preventive way, but also in a rapid response way. And, at the same time, working very closely with the Member States so as to give them the tools that they need, if possible, and to allow them to know that we are there to support their initiatives. But I would also say that it has, as I said, been true, that we have had more severe animal diseases than in the past in the last few years.

Dario Nardella (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signora Commissaria, mi lego a quanto appena detto sulla peste suina africana, che sta allarmando molti paesi europei, tra cui anche il mio, l'Italia.
               

                  Attualmente 27 focolai attivi si registrano in diversi allevamenti italiani: 19 in Lombardia, sette in Piemonte, uno in Emilia Romagna. Ma la situazione è in continua evoluzione. Oltre 120.000 suini sono stati abbattuti nel tentativo di arginare l'epidemia, tre quarti dei quali solo negli ultimi mesi.
               

                  A questo si aggiunge anche in Europa la preoccupazione per la ‘blue tongue’, la malattia della lingua blu: non è nuova ma preoccupa il fatto che nelle scorse settimane si è registrata un'impennata di questi casi, soprattutto in Paesi come i Paesi Bassi, la Germania, il Belgio, il Lussemburgo e la Francia.
               

                  Allora, signora Commissaria, noi vorremmo sapere qual è lo sforzo sulla ricerca scientifica per la vaccinazione, necessaria a dare una soluzione di lungo termine contro la peste suina africana e altri tipi di malattie. E se il vaccino sviluppato dal Vietnam, in collaborazione con gli Stati Uniti, contro la peste suina africana è considerato un valido strumento per arrivare ad una soluzione permanente per questo problema.
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – As I said, in terms of animal diseases – and this includes African swine fever, which is a deadly virus, we are looking at it very closely, epidemiologically, since 2014. It has affected several EU Member States, in particular those on the eastern EU border, but also we are seeing outbreaks in western Europe. Altogether, just for information, 14 Member States have been affected so far. We are closely monitoring it, providing financial support, over EUR 230 million, for the temporary programmes and emergency measures to support our Member States and their neighbouring countries, with the daily exchanges that are already mentioned with the Commission services and the Member States, the EU VET team, EFSA and, of course, the EU reference laboratories' diagnostic capabilities.
It's also important when we are dealing with animal diseases that we have national awareness campaigns, and we are working with Member States for that and also have trainings.
In terms of the vaccines which you mentioned, we contribute to ongoing research projects related to African swine fever, including the development of vaccines, with over EUR 30 million. Due to the particularities of this virus, we do not have an effective and safe vaccine against the ASF, which would comply with the high quality criteria which is in EU legislation, but we have been supporting research projects for a long time and we are now, in 2024, supporting two new research projects through Horizon Europe.
You also mentioned bluetongue disease. I just wanted to tell you that this is exactly one of the diseases that we are also looking at. The EU frameworks that have been set don't envisage EU funding for the bluetongue virus veterinary eradication programmes. So we're following that closely. But funding of emergency measures to control or eradicate bluetongue virus isn't possible, as funding is allocated to other major priority animal diseases such as ASF.

Dario Nardella (S&D). – Una breve replica: a proposito della vaccinazione, signora Commissaria, la Commissione è in grado di prospettare un tempo entro il quale si può raggiungere il risultato di un vero e proprio vaccino? Perché i nostri allevatori sono estremamente preoccupati e hanno bisogno di una prospettiva chiara da questo punto di vista.
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – I fully understand the concern of farmers. Of course, when you're dealing with animal diseases and the animal health situation, of course it's a concern to farmers. But I'm not able to provide a timeframe. What I can tell you is that we are, in fact, investing in research towards a vaccine. But, as I have mentioned in my original response, due to the particularities of this virus, for the moment there is not a safe and effective vaccine which complies to the criteria established for safety under EU legislation.
We will continue, and I think this is vital in the area of health and animal health, to support research projects which are relevant to finding and developing vaccines, which are going to be able to be used for ASF.

Csaba Dömötör (PfE). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Az egyre gyakoribbá váló járványok egyre nagyobb terhet rónak az európai állattenyésztőkre, különösen, hogy a járványok közül több, például a madárinfluenza lassan endemikus betegséggé válik, tehát jó eséllyel folyamatosan jelen lesz. Tovább súlyosbítja mindezt, hogy a klímaváltozás újabb és újabb betegségek terjedését teszi lehetővé, illetve gyorsítja fel. A járványok miatt hozott kényszerintézkedések, például a kényszervágás óriási károkat okoznak a termelőknek. Elvileg létezik egy kártalanítási eljárás, de az erre szánt forrás a jelenlegi uniós költségvetési keretben nem elégséges. Létezik ugyan egy általános tartalék is, de ezt az Európai Bizottság más célokra fordította, például Ukrajna támogatására.
               

                  Mindezek alapján az a kérdésünk, hogy az Európai Bizottság konkrétan hogyan tudja biztosítani a gazdák kártalanítását, kártalanítást azért, mert végrehajtják az előírt uniós járványügyi intézkedéseket? Egyáltalán célja-e az Európai Bizottságnak, hogy legyenek erre további források?
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – First of all, I will start with a general comment on the financial support to deal with animal diseases and then say a few specific words on the highly pathogenic avian influenza.
As I'm sure you know, the CAP strategic plans envisage a comprehensive set of tools to mitigate and prevent the economic impacts of animal diseases while also supporting biosecurity. And there's a support rate of up to 100 % of eligible costs allowed in the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development. And where included in a Member State's plans, support can also be provided for risk management and actions aimed at improving farm biosecurity, such as mobile slaughterhouses and investments. There are also the exceptional market measures under the Common Market Organisation Regulation, which can be adopted to cover the losses incurred by farmers in an area where there are movement restrictions in place, and such measures can be activated at the request of a Member State, which is then responsible for 50 % of the co-financing of the measure. But the conditions are very strict.
For the pathogenic avian influenza, the Commission has been taking measures for this for almost 20 years now, and because of its zoonotic risk, under the Union surveillance mechanism, programmes were updated to require surveillance in mammals and areas in periods of infection. The enhanced surveillance of birds and mammals is carried out directly by the Member States, and the Commission is funding surveillance programmes under both the single market programme (with about EUR 2 million available) and the EU4Health budget programme (which has 20 million available for 24-25). We have the reference laboratories to tackle the risk of infections, which issue guidance. And we are working closely with the Member States. As you know, these epidemics of highly pathogenic avian influenza and, as was mentioned, African swine fever do generate extremely high costs. At the same time, it is true that the limited budget is available and the EU co-financing could not be sustained at the same level as before. So this is where we stand now.

Carlo Fidanza (ECR). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signora Commissaria, io naturalmente condivido gli interventi dei colleghi, la necessità di intervenire per dare il massimo sostegno, anche economico, agli allevatori che sono sempre più colpiti, purtroppo, da queste epidemie animali.
               

                  Penso che si debba fare di più anche in previsione della prossima PAC, creando uno specifico fondo per indennizzare le perdite subite dagli allevatori: perdite che sono sia dirette – naturalmente mi riferisco a quelle legate al numero dei capi che vengono perduti in queste occasioni – ma sono anche indirette, come quelle legate alla catena del valore e alle eventuali perturbazioni di mercato dovute ai blocchi del commercio internazionale.
               

                  Lei poco fa faceva riferimento alla possibilità di intervenire con le misure di mercato previste dalle OCM. Ma volevo chiederle se non ritiene che, in questa direzione, sia fondamentale impegnarsi per far riconoscere effettivamente ai Paesi terzi il principio di regionalizzazione, evitando così di generare allarmismi ingiustificati tra i consumatori di quei Paesi ed evitando anche quindi una concorrenza sleale sulle esportazioni agroalimentari, come sta avvenendo purtroppo in molti casi.
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – In terms of the trade partners and what we are doing in order to support Member States, I just wanted to inform you that we are supporting our Member States in shaping their national vaccination strategies through dedicated working groups. For example, on the recent experience of France, in terms of vaccinated poultry, there are five countries that have banned imports from there. We're working with scientific evidence and experience. I would also say that it is important that we put all the measures that we can into place to mitigate the effect that animal diseases have on farmers, to mitigate the economic impacts of animal diseases, while also stressing biosecurity.
But it is true that in the last years, the EU has recently been affected by several animal diseases and more severely than in the past. Just to also add that we also have a harmonised legal framework for animal health, which allows the Commission to adopt emergency measures in order to support measures in a specific country. We work globally in very close cooperation with key international standards setting bodies such as the World Organisation for Animal Health, such as the Food and Agriculture Organisation and WHO. So, I can assure you that we are more committed than ever to strengthening our efforts to support Member States in all the necessary measures to control and eradicate these diseases.
At the same time, we need to continue to, as I said, raise awareness of animal diseases and work better on biosecurity and all the available tools, including vaccination, to stop the diseases.

Carlo Fidanza (ECR). – Signora Commissaria, lei ha parlato di un quadro armonizzato dal punto di vista sanitario e sicuramente questo è, dal punto di vista delle norme.
               

                  In realtà, molto spesso ci troviamo di fronte a una situazione non armonizzata per quanto riguarda invece il tema della sorveglianza, che in alcuni Stati membri appare non essere né adeguata né tanto meno armonizzata, spesso provocando segnalazioni tardive che finiscono poi col gravare sulle tasche dei nostri agricoltori e, non solo, su tutta la catena e, in ultimo, sui consumatori.
               

                  Ecco, lei ha in mente anche di provare ad armonizzare la seconda fase, cioè quella dell'applicazione delle misure di sorveglianza?
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – When working with Member States, we provide scientific advice through ECDC and EFSA on preparedness and prevention and, of course, on control measures. At the end of this year, the Commission will be receiving a scientific opinion to update the guidance on risk management. We also have the EU reference laboratories, which jointly assess the epidemiological situation, and then they provide recommendations for response and to identify the risks.
We regularly discuss the epidemiological situation at EU level with joint meetings of the public health authorities through the Health Security Committee and of the chief veterinary officers. And we are engaged in simulation exercises to improve the emergency preparedness and to provide a coordinated response. So surveillance is a part of the work that is ongoing in very close contact with the Member States, which, as I said, is done through different mechanisms, but is an almost daily activity.

Hilde Vautmans (Renew). – Voorzitter, ik denk dat al heel wat collega's het gezegd hebben: we staan voor een ongekende situatie van sanitaire crisis in de landbouw. Ik wil namens België één groot punt voorleggen, namelijk blauwtong. Onze minister van Landbouw heeft de crisis in de sector al erkend.
               

                  Wat mij echter vooral opvalt, is dat er toch een gebrek is aan Europese coördinatie voor de aanpak van deze crisis. Ik denk dat we echt moeten kijken hoe we het vaccinbeleid gaan organiseren. Collega's hebben het al gezegd: er zijn lidstaten waar het verplicht is, waar het ondersteund is, en andere lidstaten waar dat niet zo is, terwijl we natuurlijk een eengemaakte markt hebben. Dat betekent dus oneerlijke concurrentie. Ten eerste: wat gaan we doen aan die eengemaakte markt en natuurlijk het vaccinbeleid rond blauwtong? Ten tweede: de chaos rond dierentransport moet echt wel stoppen. Ook hier zie je dat lidstaten de grenzen sluiten terwijl zij nog wel exporteren. Hoe gaat Europa daarmee om?
               

                  En last but not least: een hele grote shout out: ik vind dat we landbouwers meer moeten ondersteunen die getroffen worden door deze crisis. België heeft het al gevraagd: laten we de landbouwreserves activeren en de getroffen landbouwers financieel ondersteunen. Hoe staat u daar tegenover, commissaris?
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – As has already been said, bluetongue is a viral disease that affects ruminants. It's mainly transmitted by midges. For this disease, Member States may voluntarily implement eradication programmes, and the Commission will grant disease-free status at EU level where appropriate.
In the EU, there are four serotypes of the bluetongue virus which are circulating: 1, 3, 4 and 8. The situation is more dynamic for serotype 3, which was recently introduced in central and in northern Europe. I think, as you have said, vaccines are available, which can protect animals against bluetongue. However, these vaccines are not available for all types. In such cases, the disease can have serious consequences, as we saw this year in the Netherlands also.
For serotype 3, the process of developing vaccines is still ongoing, but at least one vaccine is showing efficacy. And voluntary vaccinations are starting in five Member States. So, I think that was mostly the first question.
In terms of the question on animal transport, an interinstitutional decision is in progress on the transport proposal. The discussions in the Council so far are encouraging. Some topics remain controversial. All Member States seem willing to bring about improvements in the area of the existing situation and of the legal task in a way that is going to be both realistic and manageable in practice. So we are in that process now.

Hilde Vautmans (Renew). – Toch heel kort één reactie rond de vaccinstrategie. Ik denk dat collega's er al toe hebben opgeroepen. We hebben een eengemaakte interne economische markt, dus zouden we ook rond vaccins een eengemaakt Europees vaccinatiebeleid moeten ondersteunen.
               

                  Op mijn laatste vraag heb ik helaas geen antwoord gekregen. Ik zou echt wel een pleidooi willen houden. Er zijn in België meer dan 500 boerderijen getroffen. Bij die landbouwers staat het water aan de lippen. Waar blijft de financiële ondersteuning voor de getroffen landbouwers?
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – As I said in an earlier question, we have support that can be provided through the CAP where this was included in Member States' plans. But the EU also allocates funds for financial support for emergency measures and long-term financial measures under the eradication programmes, and this can be compensation for culled animals and for destroyed animal products, for sampling, for surveillance, for testing and vaccination. This is subject to budget availability.
The budget for the single market programme, which was EUR 146 million per year, has not decreased in recent years, but due to the large number of outbreaks of animal diseases – mainly pathogenic avian influenza and African swine fever – as well as plant pests in 2020 and 2021, the original allocation of co-financing of emergency measures covered an insufficient amount of what was needed. To stay within budget, the co-financing rates for emergency measures and veterinary and phytosanitary programmes had to be reduced by 60 % from 2023 onwards. So for that reason, the EU can now only reimburse 20 % to 30 % of the expenses which are incurred.

Tilly Metz (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin! Die Art und Weise, wie wir Tiere in Europa behandeln, muss sich drastisch ändern. Es kann nicht sein, dass wir so viele Tiere auf so engem Raum halten, sie mit Medikamenten vollpumpen, sie dann einmal quer durch Europa und darüber hinaus transportieren.
               

                  Erst vor wenigen Tagen wieder kam es zu einer Tiertransportkatastrophe im Zusammenhang mit dem Blauzungenvirus, die durch die Abschaffung der intensiven Tierhaltung eingedämmt werden könnte: zwei LKW mit hochträchtigen Kühen und Kälbern, gestrandet an der türkisch-bulgarischen Grenze. Die Tiere standen wochenlang in ihrem eigenen Kot, umgeben von krepierenden Tieren. Mit der intensiven Tierhaltung wird nicht nur das Wohlbefinden der Tiere beeinträchtigt, sondern auch die menschliche Gesundheit bedroht.
               

                  Für die neue Kommission muss es eine Priorität sein, das Konzept ‘Eine Gesundheit’ fächerübergreifend umzusetzen, um die Pandemie der Antibiotikaresistenz wirksam zu bekämpfen. Wir brauchen auch eine Reduzierung der antimikrobiellen Mittel in der EU-Tierhaltung bis 2030, eine Verbesserung von Biosicherheits- und Hygienemaßnahmen und eine stark überarbeitete Gesetzgebung für die Tierhaltung insgesamt.
               

                  Ich frage deshalb wiederum die Kommission, wann es endlich zu den anderen Texten kommt, den Tierschutzvorschlägen, damit die so schnell wie möglich umgesetzt werden. Und ich frage nach einer Timeline, wann die endlich von der Kommission publiziert werden.
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – Of course, animal welfare has been a priority for us throughout the last five years. It's important to stress, though, that the exact role going forward will depend on the incoming Commission's, and of course, Commissioners' priorities. But we need to continue building on the existing animal welfare legislation, and the Commission will be gradually modernising the rules on animal welfare to make sure that they are aligned with the latest science.
You mentioned the concept of 'one health'. I think that this has been a priority for us moving in the last five years, understanding how 'one health' impacts and that we can no longer continue to look at health in terms of separating animal health, human health, the environment and plant health. So the concept of 'one health' is horizontal in the way we look at health now.
It is important that we have the same standards across the European Union for animal welfare. But it is also important that we have their consistent implementation and that we design a balanced approach to ensure the welfare of animals on farms. We, as a Commission, have been listening very carefully to stakeholders, to citizens, and we acknowledge the need to change to improve animal welfare standards. As you may know, we have enhanced animal welfare measures, for example, for dogs and cats, and we have put forward a proposal for improvement of animal transport. This shows our commitment to the well-being of animals.
I am pleased to say that the progress on the legislative proposal on dogs and cats in Council was very fast, with the Council mandate achieved within one single presidency. And I'm confident that this proposal will continue with constructive work within the European Parliament. We are expecting longer discussions, as I said, on the transport proposal, but so far this is encouraging. We will wait to see because the specific agendas are going to be set up by the incoming Commission, but, of course, the current Commission, the EFSA projects and opinions provide a very sound foundation for the way forward.

Tilly Metz (Verts/ALE). – If I may, I'd like to insist on the question on the three remaining legislative proposals, where we know that the studies have been done. Is there no possibility to know something about the timeline? So I'm speaking about 'End the Cage Age' – so the husbandry of farmed animals – and also slaughtering and labelling. I think they go hand in hand with also reducing the risk of spreading zoonoses, etc. So we need to stop these intensive farming methods where we have all the studies showing what we need to do.

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – As I said, the way going forward will be taken up by the next Commission. You mentioned 'End the Cage Age', and here preparatory work is ongoing. There are elements which are being pulled together from the different consultations and an ongoing impact assessment, that show how important this issue is to citizens, but also that the transition for our agricultural sector requires proper management and support.
So at the moment we have been assessing all these important aspects, looking at, for example, the appropriate length of time of the transition period, the relevant measures that import the costs, and it will be the next Commission that will be taking this forward.

Anja Hazekamp (The Left). – Commisaris, de vraag is: hoe kunnen we gezondheidscrisissen door de landbouw voorkomen? Er is eigenlijk maar één mogelijk antwoord: veel en veel minder dieren houden in de vee-industrie. Ik hoop dat u dat met mij eens bent.
               

                  Deze dieren zitten op elkaar gepropt, nog steeds in kooien of in megastallen en worden ook nog eens door heel Europa gesleept. Dat leidt ons van crisis naar crisis. Q-koorts, mond- en klauwzeer, varkenspest, vogelgriep en veel recenter covid. Deze ziektes zijn funest voor dieren en een tikkende tijdbom voor mensen. Waarom is er nog steeds niets veranderd? Niet in de vee-industrie en ook niet in de bontindustrie. Want ook daar worden dieren in kooien gehouden. Ze worden gemarteld voor bontjassen en kragen en fungeren als een mengvat voor virussen.
               

                  1 miljoen mensen hebben gevraagd om een bontvrij Europa. Het ene na het andere land sluit de bontindustrie; vandaag Roemenië nog. Waarom heeft u nog geen einde gemaakt aan de bontindustrie in Europa?
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – I have already alluded to the fact that we have, in the EU, been affected by several animal diseases and, I would say, more frequently and more severely than in the past. What I think is also important is the concept that has been raised by Members: one health. The concept of 'one health' has become central in all our policies. I believe that we saw with COVID how important it is that this is included in all our policies.
I would also say that what the Commission is doing in these areas of animal diseases is multi-layered. There is a harmonised legal framework for animal diseases. The Commission adopts emergency measures, if necessary, to deal with a specific outbreak. We've established a network of EU reference laboratories for animal diseases to enable a harmonised animal diagnosis and to support early detection and the surveillance of animal diseases.
Whatever way we move forward needs to be supported by science, so we work very closely with EFSA and the ECDC. We co-finance veterinary measures, like disease surveillance. And in 2023, the Commission also introduced vaccination-friendly rules that enable a broader use of vaccines. We also have vaccines available in EU vaccine banks, which can be used by Member States, or even by third countries, if needed to prevent and control diseases. This, together with the ongoing research that is going on and the support given through the EU VET team, already shows that a great deal is being done.
Now in terms of the question on animal fur, we are processing the 'Fur Free Europe' ECI. Recognising the complexity of the issue, we have mandated EFSA to conduct a very comprehensive scientific review by March 2025. We are committed to a rigorous and science-based evidence approach and will communicate our assessment by March 2026, considering all the economic, social and legal impacts and the feasibility of alternative welfare standards. Pending this assessment, however, we are taking several steps in relation to animal welfare and 'one health', and the environmental impacts of farming. We have convened several meetings of the HSC, the Health Security Committee. We have joint meetings with the EU Chief Veterinary Officers, so that we are constantly monitoring the health situation. And we're also organising on-site visits to Member States, to their mink farms and fur farms, exploring the controls and the 'one health' mechanisms in place.

Herbert Dorfmann (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin! Leider sind die Herausforderungen – und das haben die Kolleginnen und Kollegen schon gesagt – im Bereich der Tiergesundheit zunehmend; das betrifft die Afrikanische Schweinepest, das betrifft aber auch die Hühnergrippe und vor allem in den letzten Wochen auch die Blauzungenkrankheit, die sich in Europa ausbreitet. Und es ist natürlich nicht nur ein Problem für die Tierhalter, für die das oft an den Rand des finanziellen Ruins geht, sondern auch für das Tierwohl selbst. Man darf ja nicht vergessen, dass bei einem Ausbruch z. B. bei der Hühnergrippe oft tausende von Tieren gekeult werden müssen, auch Tiere, die noch gesund sind.
               

                  Deswegen wollte ich Sie fragen – wir haben in diesem Haus vor nicht allzu langer Zeit, im Jahr 2022, die Verordnung 2370 beschlossen, das Europäische Zentrum für die Prävention und die Kontrolle von Krankheiten: Wie weit ist die Umsetzung des Ganzen? Und wie sehen Sie die Entwicklung oder den Vorteil, den diese Verordnung auch mit sich bringen sollte?
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – As you have said, there are a number of animal diseases affecting the EU. You mentioned the African swine fever, we have heard about bluetongue, we have sheep pox and goat pox, which has appeared in some countries, and, of course, the highly epidemic avian influenza. In the last year, we have seen fewer infections in 23/24 of avian influenza in wild birds and consequently less outbreaks in poultry. However, the risk of infection of this continues to exist, as it continues to be detected in migratory birds. We are asking EFSA and ECDC to monitor the situation.
Also, I would say that we are working on the management of these diseases through the CAP, where the Member State plans include the risk management and the actions to improve biosecurity and to support the farmers. We have the exceptional market measures under the Common Market Organisation Regulation, which can be adopted to cover the losses incurred by farmers located in areas where they have movement restrictions. And we also have the funds which can be allocated to tackle animal diseases through financial support for emergency measures and through long-term financial support under eradication programmes.

Christophe Clergeau (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, j'étais le 13 septembre à l'assemblée générale de la Fédération nationale ovine à Troyes, en France. J'ai partagé la détresse des éleveurs qui voient leurs bêtes mourir en s'étouffant lentement à la suite de la fièvre catarrhale ovine. J'ai vu la détresse d'une filière à l'équilibre économique fragile et qui peut s'éteindre faute de soutien.
               

                  Oui, ils réclament des vaccins gratuits et généralisés. Oui, ils réclament une indemnisation pour les pertes directes et indirectes, ainsi qu'un plan de relance de la filière. Mais ils veulent aussi que l'Europe les aide à éviter les futures épidémies. C'est ce qu'ils m'ont dit.
               

                  Pourquoi la réponse aux alertes a-t-elle été aussi lente? Pourquoi a-t-il fallu attendre l'été pour vacciner en France alors que la campagne de vaccination avait démarré en avril aux Pays-Bas? Pourquoi la production de vaccins est-elle encore trop souvent insuffisante?
               

                  Alors oui, nous devons aujourd'hui envisager de créer une agence européenne de préparation aux crises de santé animale pour surveiller les risques, prévenir les crises, rendre rapidement les vaccins disponibles. Nous l'avons fait pour la santé humaine après la crise de la COVID-19 avec la création de l'Autorité européenne de préparation et de réaction en cas d'urgence sanitaire. Pourquoi ne serions-nous pas capables de faire aujourd'hui la même chose pour la santé animale?
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – As has already been said, we are providing expertise to Member States through our network of EU reference laboratories for animal diseases, and this is very important because it enables to have a harmonised quality diagnosis, which supports, then, to have correct early detection and correct surveillance. And we are working constantly together with the Member States, with scientific work supported by EFSA and the ECDC. We also, as I mentioned before, have introduced vaccination-friendly rules last year that enables us a broader use of vaccines, and the Commission has vaccine banks available that can be used in Member States and by third countries.
Now, in terms of specifically sheep and goat pox, this is another, of course, severe viral disease of sheeps and goats. This is endemic in Türkiye, which in the past entered the EU mostly along its eastern frontier. In 2023 it was Greece that experienced an outbreak of this disease. This was eradicated rapidly by early 2024. However, since August, the country is affected by a new wave of outbreaks of this disease along its eastern border, and Bulgaria also had experienced two isolated outbreaks. One was quickly eradicated and all measures were lifted, and for the other ones, all necessary measures were put into place.
For dealing with sheep and goat pox, the EU financial support, which is up to 30% for control measures taken by Member States – including the compensation of farmers for the cost of the animals culled and the products destroyed, and the cleaning of establishment – was mobilised. We provide the technical support. The EU VETs organise field missions and, if necessary, there is a provision of vaccines up to 500 000 doses to support the early stages of sheep pox and goat pox vaccination campaigns. But so far, no request has been received for that.

Manuela Ripa (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin! Vorbeugen ist besser als heilen – dies war noch nie so wahr wie während der COVID-19-Pandemie. Wir haben jetzt hier schon vieles gehört, aber ich möchte trotzdem noch mal nachfragen. Zoonosen: Die gibt es nicht nur auf Märkten in China, sondern die haben wir auch genauso in Europa in etlichen Pelztierfarmen. Ein neuester Bericht belegt, dass gerade durch die Haltungsbedingungen von Pelztieren generell eine besondere Gefahr für die öffentliche Gesundheit ausgeht. Und weil Sie es angesprochen haben, Frau Kommissarin: Impfungen alleine – das haben auch Untersuchungen ergeben – reichen hier nicht immer.
               

                  Und dann haben wir auch Zoonosen und andere Krankheiten bei Nutztieren. Das Parlament hat hier mehrfach das Konzept ‘Eine Gesundheit’ gefordert – wir haben es eben schon angesprochen –, denn Studien belegen, dass das Risiko für Krankheiten reduziert werden kann, wenn Tiere gut und artgerecht gehalten werden; auch der Antibiotikaeinsatz kann hier minimiert werden.
               

                  Deswegen meine Fragen: Worin sehen Sie noch eine Legitimation für die Aufrechterhaltung der Pelzproduktion in Europa? Und zweitens, bezüglich des Gesetzes zur Haltung und dem Wohlergehen von Nutztieren: Sie können nicht sagen, wann es kommt, aber könnten Sie denn wenigstens sagen, wie hier das Konzept ‘Eine Gesundheit’ aussehen könnte, damit es Bauern und den Tieren zugutekommt?
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – The importance of a 'one health' approach is evident, and we have seen the importance of this, of course, being recognised more and more since the COVID-19 pandemic. I have already said that in terms of the 'Fur Free Europe' Citizens' Initiative, we have already mandated EFSA to conduct a comprehensive scientific review, which will be by March 2025, and we are, as always, committed as a Commission to a science-based approach. We will be communicating our assessment and, of course, pending this, we will be taking this forward.
I want to go back, if I may, to say that there is a great deal that the Commission is already putting into place in order to deal with animal diseases. We have mentioned the laboratories, the harmonised framework, the EU VET service, the co-financing, working very closely with Member States. And this has been the way forward, in terms of animal diseases, that you need to work through the 'one health' approach. But in order to work in the 'one health' approach, you also need to ensure that Member States are also on board with this, and they're working at different levels for the 'one health' approach.
This includes having communication and awareness campaigns for the different diseases in the Member States, and this is all part of the toolbox that we have been building together. And this is relevant to African swine fever, to sheep and goat pox, to bluetongue, in order to be able to deal with the threats that we have seen, which have affected the EU definitely more severely and frequently than before, in the last few years.

Cristina Maestre (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, desde luego que cada vez se producen más crisis sanitarias animales, y tenemos una crisis bien grande de norte a sur de la Unión Europea con la propagación de la lengua azul entre los rumiantes: miles y miles de explotaciones afectadas, los veterinarios no dan abasto. Si escuchamos a los ganaderos, las expresiones más comunes son ‘incertidumbre’ y ‘desesperación’: la ruina para muchos ganaderos que sufren otro mazazo más en una actividad que está sumamente precarizada. Por lo tanto, urgen medidas ya.
               

                  Sobre la lengua azul ha dicho, comisaria, que no pueden dar un calendario: ¡pero si se detectó en primavera y estamos a finales de otoño! Esto es intolerable; los agricultores y los ganaderos, especialmente, no pueden esperar, porque esto es urgente: están muriendo miles de cabezas de ganado y esto es una crisis económica con un impacto muy grande también en el sector agroalimentario.
               

                  Nosotros pedimos una vacunación masiva, urgente y financiada por la Unión Europea. ¿Está dispuesta la Comisión Europea a financiarla? Y no me digan que esto se acaba y que tiene que venir el nuevo Colegio de Comisarios: esto no puede esperar, los agricultores y ganaderos no pueden esperar. Exigimos ayudas directas compensatorias para los afectados por la lengua azul y la activación de los fondos y mecanismos necesarios.
               

                  Hay una ley de vigilancia que tiene que ser cumplida y que tiene que ser cofinanciada, y usted ha dicho claramente que la Comisión Europea cada vez cofinancia menos: eso no puede ser, no se puede depositar en los Estados miembros toda la responsabilidad, porque para eso tenemos también una normativa europea, y la ayuda y la vigilancia de la Unión Europea, desde luego, no han funcionado. Me gustaría que nos diera explicaciones sobre si va a arreglar esta situación desde el ámbito competencial de la Unión Europea.
               

Presidente. – (in reazione ad un intervento senza microfono di un collega) No, questo non è accettabile. Mi scusi, onorevole: io permetto a tutti di terminare i loro interventi e chiedo cortesemente di rispettare il tempo di parola per tutti e ho chiesto più volte collaborazione. Però la prego stia calmo e rispetti il lavoro che si fa in quest'Aula.
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – As has already been raised, I have said that, for bluetongue, Member States can voluntarily implement eradication programmes, and I have said that there are four serotypes of this bluetongue virus. The vaccines are available which can protect animals against bluetongue. However, these vaccines are not available for all types. And in such cases, the disease can have serious consequences in sheep farms. For serotype 3, which is the more dynamic, the process of developing vaccines is still ongoing. One vaccine is showing efficacy, and Member States are already starting vaccinations. I think it's five Member States.
In terms of the support, the EU framework and the priorities that have been set do not envisage EU funding for bluetongue virus veterinary eradication programmes, and funding of emergency measures to control or eradicate bluetongue virus isn't possible, as funding is allocated to other major priority animal diseases such as highly pathogenic avian influenza or African swine fever.
However, I will go back to saying that the Commission has several mechanisms in Member States to help them fight animal diseases, which include the the support of the reference networks, the EU VET team, the support we have with EFSA and ECDC, and the research, of course, is ongoing. Research is crucial. And we're looking at ways and solutions and innovative ways to eradicate and control animal diseases. So this is work which is continuously ongoing.

Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE). – Señora comisaria, ha hablado ya de la importancia de la vacunación y de utilizar todas las herramientas para mitigar el riesgo de enfermedades en el ganado, como ha dicho usted literalmente. Precisamente por eso quiero insistir en las políticas de sanidad animal. Es crucial e importantísimo que se efectúe el control sanitario y poblacional de animales silvestres a nivel local, pero también el control de las fronteras en Europa.
               

                  Está comprobado que enfermedades como la peste porcina, de la que ya se ha hablado en este Parlamento, la lengua azul o la viruela ovina entran a España por las fronteras; de hecho, la última viruela que sufrimos en España se debió a la entrada de carneros de Argelia. Lo mismo ocurre con las plagas, que han resultado desastrosas para nuestro campo, como la de la avispa asiática, procedente también de un barco carguero de China.
               

                  Frente a una Europa rendida a una política de puertas abiertas que sucumbe ante los intereses de terceros países antes que proteger los suyos propios, para VOX y para el Grupo Patriotas por Europa la defensa de nuestras fronteras es una política esencial para garantizar la sanidad animal, la seguridad alimentaria, la preferencia comunitaria y la defensa de nuestro espacio social y económico europeo. En este sentido tenemos gran interés por conocer, señora comisaria, la postura de la Comisión respecto a cómo tienen previsto reforzar los controles de frontera tanto a nivel fitosanitario como zoosanitario.
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – In terms of the priority of animal health and animal welfare, we now, going forward, have a commissioner of health and animal welfare, which I think in itself sends a strong message.
Now, in terms of your question, the EU provides financial support for surveillance and detection of emerging diseases, including sheep and goat pox in high-risk areas. For transboundary animal diseases, there are co-financed programmes in Bulgaria and Greece and Türkiye. These are coordinated by the European Commission for the control, for example, of foot and mouth disease and by FAO. We have the EU reference networks for emerging diseases support the national reference networks of neighbouring third countries so that they have the appropriate diagnostic capacity. And this way we have early detection of diseases in third countries and then can quickly warn the EU about their presence in its vicinity. We can also organise our EU VET expert team field missions to go to neighbouring countries upon their request, in order to ensure that we work closely with them, to prevent the incursion of emerging diseases into the EU.
There are EU vaccine banks available for several diseases, and if needed, the shipment of vaccines can support vaccination campaigns in neighbouring third countries as well. And we have ongoing training workshops for animal diseases, not only for Member States, but also for third countries. In 2024, there are I think it's two training workshop going on in Spain and in Bulgaria. So all this is work done in parallel in order to support also third countries, but also to support them in being able to diagnose early and, in this way, prevent and control.

Jessika Van Leeuwen (PPE). – Voorzitter, het debat van vandaag gaat over het voorkomen van crisissen met dierziekten in de landbouw. Vaak worden er dierwelzijnsnormen bedacht die juist het tegengestelde bereiken.
               

                  Het verdwijnen van kooien, wat zojuist een aantal keer is genoemd, heeft in veel gevallen een verslechtering van de sanitaire status opgeleverd, dus deze oproepen voegen vandaag niks toe aan de discussie die we hier hebben over hoe we dierziektecrisissen kunnen voorkomen in Europa. Wat echter wel een groot probleem is, is dat we geen Europese harmonisatie hebben op het gebied van beheersmaatregelen en bioveiligheid, wat het tegengaan van de verspreiding van dierziekten tussen lidstaten erg bemoeilijkt.
               

                  Ik wil dan ook de Commissie verzoeken om zich met spoed te gaan richten op de uniformering van de beheersmaatregelen en een EU-brede standaard voor bioveiligheid in het leven te roepen. Hierbij zal er ook geld moeten gaan naar en geïnvesteerd moeten worden in het opzetten van diagnostische infrastructuur om in elke lidstaat snel en effectief een diagnose vast te kunnen stellen. Alleen als er in de hele EU uniform gehandeld wordt, kunnen we daadwerkelijk spreken over een ‘één gezondheid’-benadering.
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – I think it's very important that again we stress that we need to have several mechanisms in place in order to fight animal diseases and support the Member States. I spoke of a harmonised legal framework for animal health in order to be able to adopt emergency measures where we have specific outbreaks. And in terms of having this harmonised approach, I believe it's extremely important to emphasise, again, the network of EU reference laboratories, because this allows a harmonised quality diagnosis. And unless you have a harmonised quality diagnosis across the Member States, so they are all able to detect early and in a way that you have early detection, then you can also have surveillance. So the set-up of the EU reference laboratory networks was extremely important in terms of the bringing-together and the harmonisation of how Member States detect diseases and then how quickly they move. Of course, all of this needs to be based on science. And this is why we are supporting Member States through EFSA and the ECDC.
Furthermore, I said before that when dealing with animal diseases, we are in constant communication with the Member States, and we have called in different situations meetings of the Health Security Committee, in order to bring everyone on board. We have seen when dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, the importance of collaboration, coordination of Member States in order to be able to work together. And this is not only true for human health. And when we're talking about 'one health', those principles that talk about coordination and collaboration, the use of science, of evidence-based, the importance of preparedness, are also very relevant when we're dealing with animal diseases. We need to have good diagnostics. We need to have harmonised diagnostics. We need to allow preparedness and then pick up early to respond quickly. This is what we've been working for at Member States level.

Eric Sargiacomo (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, grippe aviaire, fièvre catarrhale ovine, maladie hémorragique épizootique, fièvre porcine: les élevages sont mis à rude épreuve aux quatre coins de l'Europe. Face au désarroi qui touche nos éleveurs, il est temps de réagir et d'adapter les stratégies sanitaires.
               

                  Sur mon territoire, les Landes, dans le sud-ouest de la France, nous avons dû attendre six ans avant de pouvoir disposer d'un vaccin contre la grippe aviaire. Tout ça pour pouvoir exporter. En vain. Cela a coûté des dizaines de millions d'euros aux finances publiques, et une filière a failli disparaître. C'est absurde.
               

                  Nous devons prévenir plutôt que guérir, car cela coûte moins cher. Nous devons disposer d'une véritable stratégie européenne de vaccination. C'est un impératif économique, social, de santé animale et de santé publique. Nous devons également garantir à nos éleveurs que leurs animaux vaccinés pourront être commercialisés au sein de l'Union européenne, mais également dans les pays avec lesquels nous avons des accords commerciaux.
               

                  Alors, Madame la Commissaire, je voudrais savoir: quelle est votre stratégie pour que notre marché unique puisse fonctionner dans un contexte de flambée des zoonoses, si chacun de nos pays ferme ses frontières?
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – As has been said, the Commission is closely monitoring the situation in terms of African swine fever and, of course, highly pathogenic avian influenza. In terms of African swine fever, we do a number of initiatives: providing financial support, daily exchanges with Member States, the EU VET team's scientific advice and diagnostic capabilities. More specifically, in terms of the highly pathogenic influenza, because of the zoonotic risk, the Union's surveillance programmes were updated to require surveillance in mammals in periods of infection.
We are funding surveillance programmes under the single market programme and the EU4Health programme. We have issued guidance under the EU reference networks – and for vaccination against the seasonal influenza, it's offered to individuals who are exposed to avian influenza at work. In addition to this, we are engaged in a simulation exercise on HPAI to improve the emergency preparedness and coordinated response. EFSA and ECDC and the EU reference laboratories are assessing the epidemiological situations and providing recommendations for response to identified risks.
Based on the recent experience of France, only five countries have banned imports from France or vaccinated poultry and products thereof. And the Commission is supporting Member States in shaping their national vaccination strategy through a dedicated working group on this. Based on the updated scientific evidence and experience with vaccination, the Commission will advocate for acceptance by third countries of vaccination as a complementary tool to help prevent and control highly pathogenic avian influenza for compliance with the international standards. Already, in May 2023 and in May 2024, at the World Organisation for Animal Health assemblies, the Commission organised side events to present its new rules on vaccination and the new scientific knowledge on vaccination. So, work on this is ongoing.

Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Szanowni Państwo! Z niepokojem obserwuję pogarszającą się sytuację zdrowotną zwierząt hodowlanych w Unii Europejskiej. W Polsce kolejne ogniska ASFu przynoszą ogromne straty naszym hodowcom. Niekiedy zmuszają do likwidacji całej hodowli. Czy zatem Komisja rozważa utworzenie funduszu dla rolników, którzy ponieśli tak ogromne straty, że musieli zlikwidować swoje gospodarstwa?
               

                  Pani Komisarz. Nasi rolnicy i hodowcy nie potrzebują jednak kolejnych ideologicznych konceptów, ale uproszczenia przepisów, większej wiedzy i łatwiejszego dostępu do środków zapobiegawczych. Obecnie naszych hodowców i producentów rolnych wiąże ponad 400 różnych aktów prawa weterynaryjnego. Ich obowiązki i zakres odpowiedzialności nie są niestety zawsze jasno określone. Przepisy często są niespójne i różnie interpretowane w różnych państwach członkowskich. Czy rozważany jest przegląd prawa w celu jego uproszczenia?
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – In terms of African swine fever, we have already said this, it has affected several EU Member States in the last 10 years. Outbreaks also occur in western Europe and not only in the eastern EU border, and altogether 14 Member States have been affected so far.
Now, there have been successes when it comes to eradication in some territories, for example, like Sardinia, but so far only Belgium and Sweden have managed to completely eradicate the disease after it occurred in their territories. But these successes show that where we have concerted efforts at national level and at EU level, eradication is possible if we base our actions on the science.
In terms of support, through the CAP, the strategic plans of Member States envisage a comprehensive set of tools to mitigate the economic impacts of animal diseases, while supporting biosecurity measures, where they're included in Member States' plans. Support can be provided for risk management actions including on farm biosecurity, and investments to restore agricultural potential following the outbreaks. In terms of funds, which can be allocated for emergency measures, these can be done through through co-financing, as has already been said.
For ASF, we do not yet have an effective and safe vaccine against ASF because of the peculiarities of this virus, vaccines which meet the high quality criteria established by the EU legislation, but we'll continue, of course, to support the research projects over a long period. And we have two new research projects for the vaccine of ASF in 2024 under Horizon Europe.

Borja Giménez Larraz (PPE). – La ganadería es un pilar fundamental para el desarrollo rural y hoy enfrenta problemas serios: las enfermedades animales pueden dar lugar a importantes pérdidas de ganado y costes económicos. La Unión Europea debe poner en marcha políticas que permitan contener y prevenir enfermedades animales, pero también debe garantizar que la normativa que se aprueba no lastra la competitividad de nuestro sector primario.
               

                  Los primeros interesados en garantizar la salud de los animales son los ganaderos. Normativas como la propuesta para regular el transporte animal no tienen base científica; lo que sí es una evidencia es el impacto negativo que esta regulación tendría en la industria agrícola y ganadera y en el medio ambiente. Pongamos a las personas en el centro, no queremos más problemas.
               

                  ¿Es consciente la Comisión Europea de la necesidad de lograr un equilibrio entre la protección de la salud y bienestar animal y la competitividad del sector primario? ¿Cree que la propuesta de Reglamento relativo a la protección de los animales durante el transporte cumple con estas premisas?
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – We need to, of course, strike a balance, but this balance in itself is exactly the concept of one health: that we cannot have health without having the health of animals, humans, environment and plants put together. This is the concept of one health. And you, of course, need to have a balance of this. And health and competitiveness go together. We are very well aware of this, and this is why we need to work at different levels in order to to mitigate and to improve the animal health situation in the EU, because we have been affected by several animal diseases in the last years, and I would say more severely than in the past. And in order to deal with this, you need to have a toolbox of measures, work very closely with Member States in order to mitigate and always to have a balance between the different aspects.

Michal Wiezik (Renew). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, ďakujem, pani komisárka, za dnešnú hodinu otázok. Mal by som jednu špecifickú k africkému moru ošípaných. Vieme, že zdrojom tejto nákazy je voľne žijúca populácia diviačej zveri. Uplatňujeme rôzne preventívne opatrenia, väčšinou spočívajúce na masívnom odlove, no pritom ignorujeme vlastne efekt, ktorý na šírenie tejto choroby – a ten efekt je pozitívny – majú prirodzené predátory diviakov, a v tomto kontexte najmä vlk. Vieme, že je veľmi efektívny vo vyraďovaní oslabených, nakazených jedincov z tej populácie, takisto požieraním mŕtvych nakazených jedincov bez rizika ďalšieho šírenia toho ochorenia. Preto moja otázka znie, či Komisia vlastne zohľadňuje aj tento potenciál prirodzených predátorov voľne žijúcich zvierat pri tlmení šírenia takýchto chorôb a či plánuje zahrnúť tento potenciál ako nástroj naozaj do integrovaného systému ochrany zdravia zvierat.
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – In terms of the African swine fever situation in the EU, we are, as I said, closely monitoring the epidemiological situation and in order to to deal with this, we are providing support in different ways. This is a deadly virus, it's a disease of the highest concern. As we said, it has affected 14 Member States so far.
There have been successes. So far, only two countries, Belgium and Sweden, have managed to completely eradicate the disease after it occurred in their territories. But the fact that they were able to do so and these successes show that when we have concerted levels at national and EU level, we are able to to eradicate. We need to take all the factors into consideration together, and I would say that other than the financial support and the exchanges between Member States, a very important part is the advice provided by EFSA, but also the need to have support of national awareness campaigns and organisation of trainings. The diagnostic capabilities and the expertise by the EU reference laboratory network has been very important in trying to deal with African swine fever, and it is a disease that we are we are constantly monitoring and also providing specific research projects related to this, including one for the development of vaccines. But in order to deal with it, you need to horizontally work in all areas.

Carmen Crespo Díaz (PPE). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, en primer lugar, de lo que está hablando es de la actuación normal que se hace en cuestiones de sanidad animal, pero en estos momentos tenemos una crisis importante en Europa: especialmente, le hablo de mi país, donde, con la lengua azul y la enfermedad hemorrágica epizoótica, tenemos un problema muy grave.
               

                  Creo que en estos momentos habla de 230 millones de euros, pero con una crisis de estas características, lo que tiene que plantearse —y, si no, la nueva Comisión— son unos presupuestos adicionales para una situación de crisis como la que estamos pasando. Fundamentalmente, se debe plantear la coordinación en la investigación con los Estados miembros y también la financiación de la vacunación desde Europa. Creo, además, que en estos momentos se está perdiendo cabaña ganadera a grandes pasos, y es un drama ver también la situación ganadera y a los ganaderos y las zonas rurales europeas que están siendo afectados. Por tanto, necesitamos un protocolo que sea coordinado y posibilidades, con un control …
               

(la presidenta interrumpe a la oradora)


Presidente. – Come potete ascoltare, è in corso un'esercitazione di evacuazione.
               

                  Quindi, purtroppo, dobbiamo lasciare l'Aula e, appena terminata l'esercitazione si potrà riprendere la seduta.
               

(La seduta è sospesa alle 16.26 per ragioni tecniche)

16.   Resumption of the sitting

(La seduta è ripresa alle 17.01)

17.   Question Time with Commissioners – Situation of animal health in Europe: how to prevent and prepare for future sanitary crises in agriculture (continuation)

Presidente. – Cari colleghi e colleghe, possiamo riprendere il tempo delle interrogazioni alla Commissione dopo questa esercitazione.
               

                  Darei la parola all'onorevole Crespo Díaz, che è stata interrotta dall'esercitazione appena effettuata.
               

Carmen Crespo Díaz (PPE). – Para finalizar, porque el principio creo que lo han escuchado ustedes, hablábamos de que teníamos una crisis, y especialmente en algunos países. Les comentaba que teníamos una crisis en España especialmente, con la lengua azul o con la enfermedad hemorrágica epizoótica, y que, además, había una crisis en toda Europa.
               

                  Las medidas que está poniendo la Unión Europea en marcha son medidas normalizadas, pero con esas crisis necesitamos aumentar los recursos, poner más recursos en investigación pero que también cohabiten con las inversiones de las vacunas. Además, hay que contar con administraciones que están poniendo los protocolos en marcha y que no son necesariamente los Estados miembros: en mi país, las comunidades autónomas están moviendo más recursos que el propio Estado miembro, y además están estableciendo todos los protocolos; por tanto, hay que contar con ello.
               

                  Somos conscientes de que hemos perdido cabaña ganadera en Europa de forma dramática. Además, tenemos que tener un protocolo más ambicioso. La PAC es un instrumento, pero la PAC no es interminable, por lo que creemos que hay que contar con más recursos adicionales a la PAC y, por supuesto, hace falta un control más estricto de las fronteras. Creo que esto es un tema fundamental para el asunto que nos trae hoy aquí.
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – I would agree, as you have said, that we are facing a situation where the EU is affected more frequently and more severely by animal diseases than in the past. This is why we have put together a number of measures in order to help Member States, and support the Member States, to fight animal diseases. One of these includes, of course, the CAP strategic plans, but also the exceptional measures that can be put in place under the Common Market Organisation Regulation which can be adopted to cover losses incurred by farmers located in an area where there are restrictions in place. These measures can be activated at a Member State's request, which is responsible for 50 % of the co-financing of the measures, but the conditions are strict. Other than this, there is also budget for financial support for emergency measures for eradication programmes. But these co-financing rates for these emergency measures had to be reduced from 2023 onwards.
A number of animal diseases have already been mentioned, and again I would emphasise the importance of having harmonised ways of tackling it, but also of supporting Member States. And unless we are able to invest, as we are doing, in supporting Member States to build up their laboratory capacity, their diagnostic capacity, and – not only Member States – support others outside the EU, we will not be able to regulate the situation effectively. But what we have seen is, in the case, for example, of Belgium and Sweden, who have managed to eradicate African swine fever by concerted efforts at national and at EU level. And we can do this with other animal diseases as well, always keeping within the framework of the priority of our 'one health' approach in dealing with health.

Valérie Deloge (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, les épidémies sont devenues un sujet d'une telle importance que je m'étonne que les autres groupes de ce Parlement n'aient pas vu émerger d'autre demande d'un vrai débat sur le sujet.
               

                  Vous parlez aujourd'hui de prévenir ces crises, et c'est bien. Pourtant, en même temps, les vétérinaires disparaissent en Europe, surtout dans les zones rurales, surtout pour les animaux de ferme. Et même lorsque les éleveurs ont la chance d'avoir un vétérinaire disponible, le prix des médicaments a tellement flambé que la question de laisser mourir l'animal se pose malheureusement.
               

                  D'où ma question: si l'Europe n'est pas capable de produire les médicaments et les vaccins vétérinaires dont elle a besoin à des prix abordables, si elle n'a plus de vétérinaires pour les prescrire et pour les administrer, comment espérez-vous empêcher la propagation des futures épidémies?
               

Stella Kyriakides,
Member of the Commission. – What you mentioned in terms of the veterinarians, I would just say again that we offer support via the EU Veterinary Emergency Team, so in cases where the Member States ask for support to fight animal diseases, an EU VET team is able to go. And in 2024 alone, seven missions were organised in several Member States in the EU and some neighbouring countries to combat African swine fever and highly pathogenic avian influenza, and also peste des petits ruminants, PPR. So this is the way that we, at the EU level, can support Member States in the level of expertise they may need in order to fight animal diseases.

Presidente. – Dichiaro chiuso il tempo delle interrogazioni alla Commissione.
               

PREȘEDINȚIA: VICTOR NEGRESCU


Vicepreședinte

18.   Guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (debate)

Președinte. – Următorul punct de pe ordinea de zi este dezbaterea privind raportul dnei Li Andersson în numele Comisiei pentru ocuparea forței de muncă și afaceri sociale referitor la propunerea de decizie a Consiliului privind orientările pentru politicile de ocupare a forței de muncă ale statelor membre (COM(2024)0599 - C10-0084/2024 - 2024/0599(NLE)) (A10-0004/2024). Începem dezbaterea cu o intervenție din partea dnei Anderson, în calitate de raportor.
               

Li Andersson,
rapporteur. – Mr President, the employment guidelines provide guidance to Member States for their employment policies and the setting of national targets. The employment guidelines must be consistent with broader economic policies, but Member States should also work to incorporate the recommendations of these guidelines into their economic policies.
The employment guidelines are drawn up annually. This year, the Commission proposed a number of changes to the employment guidelines. There is a strong emphasis on education and training, on new technologies, such as artificial intelligence and algorithmic management, as well as on recent policy initiatives, such as platform work, affordable housing, and addressing labour and skills shortages.
I very much welcome these changes, and I particularly welcome the emphasis on social dialogue and collective bargaining. The changes proposed by the Commission were also widely supported by the EMPL Committee. In addition to these proposals, there were some policy areas that we wanted to strengthen in this text.
Member States must provide good wages and decent working conditions, in order to support both social and economic development and the green transition. In addition, strengthening democracy at work, social dialogue and collective bargaining play an important role in the development of working life. Member States must protect workers' rights, address labour and skills shortages, and promote quality and inclusive education, with a particular focus on improving basic skills of disadvantaged students. Member States should take preventive measures to reduce early school leaving, with a particular focus on students at risk.
In addition, gender equality policies should be anchored and mainstreamed in all phases of economic governance. Adequate working conditions for employees, including occupational safety and health, and physical and mental well-being, must be ensured. Thus, in this legislative mandate, it is necessary to develop a comprehensive framework for quality jobs, including legislative initiatives on working conditions for teleworking, the right to disconnect and artificial intelligence in the workplace.
Access to affordable housing is a precondition for ensuring equal opportunities, and therefore the Union and Member States should take immediate action to provide affordable housing for all. Homelessness is one of the most extreme forms of exclusion, negatively affecting the health, well-being and quality of life of homeless people, as well as their access to employment and social services.
Member States must prevent employment relationships that lead to precarious working conditions, such as bogus self-employment, and it is therefore important that they, without delay, implement the Platform Work Directive, which will improve the working conditions of people working via digital platforms. In addition, Member States should swiftly implement recently adopted EU legislation on issues such as pay transparency and minimum wages.
The strong message in these guidelines is that good employment policies are based on good treatment of workers, on respecting workers' rights. They are based on education and training accessible for all, on comprehensive collective agreements and social dialogue, and, of course, decent working conditions for all workers in Europe.

Nicolas Schmit,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, I would like to thank Ms Andersson, rapporteur and Chair of the Employment and Social Affairs Committee, and the shadow rapporteurs for the report on the employment guidelines, which provides an important contribution in the framework of our common work on the European Semester.
I would like to stress that the cooperation with the European Parliament on the European Semester has been instrumental to the many successful outcomes achieved over the last few years. Together, we have made important progress. We have integrated the principles of the social convergence framework in the European Semester to strengthen the assessment of risks to upward social convergence in the EU and the Member States. And thanks to your effective support, the social convergence framework is now also integrated in the new EU economic governance framework.
We embedded the ambitions in the EU and national targets on employment, skills and poverty reduction by 2030 in the European semester cycles.
And more broadly, we brought the new impetus into the further implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights. This fruitful cooperation should continue to support the strong employment and social dimension in the renewed European Semester, alongside the fiscal and macroeconomic dimensions. I am happy to note that most elements raised in Parliament's report are in line with those to which the Commission proposal brings new emphasis.
The Commission's proposal on the table reinforces the call for addressing labour and skills shortages, in line with the pressing need to remove bottlenecks to inclusive and sustainable economic growth. It also reinforced the call for strengthening social dialogue in line with the 2023 Council recommendation. And furthermore, Member States are called on to support the uptake of new technologies, AI and algorithmic management.
And now, as the directive on platform work has been approved, also by the Council, we can build on the different provisions in this directive, particularly relative to algorithmic management. It is also necessary to progress on reaching the 2030 national targets on employment, skills and poverty reduction next to EU-level targets and ensure affordable housing.
I see these elements also taken up in your report, and you recalled it just now: the need to address labour shortages, to retaining and attracting workers through decent working conditions and this means also protection of health and safety, which should remain high on the EU agenda, social dialogue and collective bargaining as key elements in facilitating the green and digital transitions, and you mentioned it, access to affordable housing, which is essential, especially in the high cost of living context, but also in the context of job mobility.
I also note that the Parliament stresses the further promotion of gender equality and the employment of young people, as well as persons above 50.
The 2024 cycle of the European Semester has a specific focus on competitiveness. This was reflected in many countries' specific recommendations on skills and education and on equal opportunities, whether in relation to access to the labour market or to education and training.
But the need for adequate and sustainable social protection also received EU attention against the background of population ageing and the need to ensure adequate coverage to workers under atypical contracts. All this mirrors the fact that our economic and societal model relies strongly on resilience and fairness; competitiveness and fairness must go hand in hand. The employment guidelines will play a key role in steering employment and social policy coordination in the forthcoming European Semester cycle.
This is all the more important at the current juncture, with a new EU economic governance framework implemented in the 2025 cycle. The heart of the new framework are the medium-term fiscal structural plans that Member States have submitted or are about to submit. These plans must appropriately cover labour market skills, social reforms and investments responding to the main challenges identified in the semester. This plan should contain how the Member States will address the common priorities of the Union, among which, the economic and social resilience, including the European Pillar of Social rights. The employment guidelines can serve as guidance for the content of these new medium-term plans by Member States in the employment and social domains.
Over the past years, we have moved to a more integrated way of designing policy solutions, where the social dimension is given full consideration, together with the fiscal and macroeconomic dimensions, to ensure sustainable and inclusive growth and successful green and digital transitions.

Giusi Princi,
a nome del gruppo PPE. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il testo che voteremo ha un'importanza fondamentale, in quanto ridefinisce il quadro delle politiche occupazionali, rispondendo alle esigenze di un mondo del lavoro che sta velocemente evolvendo i suoi paradigmi.
               

                  Le linee guida che il Parlamento dovrà votare abbracciano infatti le profonde transizioni in atto, indirizzando gli Stati membri affinché il progresso avvenga in modo etico, sicuro e vantaggioso per la società.
               

                  Nel documento parliamo di orientamenti per l'occupazione, riconoscendo anche il ruolo cruciale che rivestono istruzione e formazione, vera risposta alle trasformazioni lavorative, sociali ed economiche e al profondo disallineamento che si sta registrando in Europa tra domanda e offerta di competenze.
               

                  Ogni Stato membro è invitato pertanto a rafforzare l'intera struttura educativa, investendo in istruzione e formazione, ricerca e innovazione per formare e valorizzare le competenze, legandole al tessuto produttivo in costante, reciproco rapporto con il mercato del lavoro, alle pari opportunità e all'inclusione sociale e lavorativa.
               

                  Qualsiasi strategia di sviluppo non può però prescindere da un sistema educativo efficace e quindi da una classe docente competente e motivata. Da questo punto di vista, sono lieta che il testo che voteremo ponga anche l'accento sulla situazione degli insegnanti, veri motori dello sviluppo sociale oltre che economico.
               

                  In alcuni Stati membri, come l'Italia, nonostante il loro ruolo strategico, sussistono discriminazioni salariali. Allineare in tutti gli Stati membri i salari dei docenti alla media europea significa sostenere l'approccio integrato delle politiche di coesione. Investire sui docenti significa potenziare il capitale umano, migliorare la società civile, rendere la forza lavoro più competitiva e più preparata ad affrontare le sfide del mercato globale.
               

                  Le presenti linee guida sull'occupazione sono pertanto un prezioso strumento con cui possiamo costruire un'Europa che guida il cambiamento con coraggio e con determinazione.
               

Klára Dobrev,
a S&D képviselőcsoport nevében. – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! Mindannyian egyetértünk abban, hogy Európának erősebbnek, gazdagabbnak kell lennie, és ezen is dolgozunk, vagy legalábbis a többség ebben a Házban egyetért ezzel.
               

                  A kérdés csak az, hogy Európa gazdagsága az mit jelent? Egy pár milliárdos gazdagságát, egy pár nagyvállalat, egy multicég, oligarchák gazdagságát jelenti, vagy pedig sok százmillió európai ember gazdagságát? Ez a jelentés, ami Önök előtt lesz holnap, és szavazni fognak róla, amellett teszi le a voksát, hogy Európa gazdagsága csak úgy képzelhető el, ha ebben sok százmillió európai honfitársunk osztozik. Hogy nincs olyan, hogy a vállalatok fejlődnek, a versenyképesség nő, a gazdaság nő, és közben pedig milliók szegényednek el. Hogy nincs olyan, hogy egy-két nagy multicég kinövi magát, miközben tömegek nyomorognak.
               

                  Európa csak akkor lesz erős és versenyképes, ha tisztességes béreket fizet, ha megszünteti a megkülönböztetés bármilyen formáját, ha a nyugdíjasokkal foglalkozik, a fiatalokkal foglalkozik, a munkanélküliekkel foglalkozik, ha megszünteti a munkahelyi kizsákmányolást. Erről szól ez a jelentés. És igen, Önök holnap arról is szavazni fognak, hogy hogyan képzelik el a mi közös Európánkat. Vannak, akik úgy gondolják, hogy Európa csak egy gazdasági szövetség, akik úgy tekintenek az európai emberekre, mint mondjuk erőforrásra, emberi erőforrásra, vagy éppen hiteladósként, vagy maximum fogyasztóként.
               

                  Mi itt, az Európai Parlamentben, és nagyon remélem, hogy holnap a nagy többség azt fogja mondani, hogy az európai emberek hús-vér emberek, hétköznapi problémákkal, akik nélkül nincsen sikeres Európa. Ezért én azt javaslom Önöknek, hogy ezt a jelentést fogadják el, hiszen az Európai Parlament egyik legjobb arcát mutatta a jelentés elkészítése közepette. Konzervatív, liberális, baloldali, zöld, szociáldemokrata képviselők közösen, sok vitával és végül kompromisszummal fogadták ezt el. Ezt javaslom Önöknek is.
               

Nikola Bartůšek,
on behalf of the PfE Group. – Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, there is no doubt that employment policy is important, because it helps create job opportunities and promotes economic stability by reducing unemployment. Above all, it should be the competence of national states to ensure fair wages, protect workers' rights and address the specific needs of its labour market to reduce inequality. It is the Member States that should decide what is the best fit for their employment market.
On the one hand, we are opening pathways for migrants, who are coming to work here. And on the other hand, some Member States need to fund social benefits for unemployed citizens. This system is constantly lowering working conditions for European citizens. Above all else, due to this system, Europe is committing economic suicide. We are promoting green and digital jobs at the expense of regular jobs, and because of that, we are making Europe more vulnerable and dependent on foreign powers.

Chiara Gemma,
a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, sicuramente accogliamo con favore alcuni aggiornamenti integrati nei nuovi orientamenti per le politiche degli Stati membri a favore dell'occupazione.
               

                  I nostri emendamenti hanno rafforzato l'importanza dell'istruzione e riportato al centro il problema degli stipendi degli insegnanti, così come il ruolo fondamentale della formazione professionale e del sostegno a persone anziane e con disabilità.
               

                  Tuttavia, le criticità nel testo finale restano troppe: penso all'accesso al lavoro per le persone con disabilità, che necessita di ulteriori sforzi per migliorare la loro indipendenza; penso al settore dell'istruzione, che soffre ancora di carenze croniche e di programmi scollegati dal mercato del lavoro; e poi nel testo rimangono troppi riferimenti ideologici al mainstreaming di genere e troppe richieste ridondanti di nuove proposte legislative da parte della Commissione.
               

                  Tutto questo, quando invece dovremmo concentrarci, ad esempio, sullo sviluppo delle competenze in Europa, evitando di ricorrere sistematicamente alla migrazione come soluzione alle carenze di manodopera.
               

Jana Toom,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, colleagues, Commissioner, the European Semester is an important exercise. I welcome wholeheartedly the Commission's proposal to adjust the employment guidelines, and include the importance of social progress and the need to combat social exclusion and discrimination.
However, guidelines and recommendations, as good as they are, are not legally binding, and Member States have an ever dropping implementation rate when it comes to country-specific recommendations, only amounting to about 30 %. While there is an increased rate of social recommendations, the implementation is even lower. Where the Commission has recommended social reforms, particularly those concerning poverty reduction, minimum income or labour market integration in previous years, it is clear that they have not been followed. That is therefore why the European Parliament also took the opportunity to stress the need for legislation, as the rapporteur already said.
There is a need for legislative initiatives on telework and the right to disconnect, prevention of work-related deaths, psychological risks, the framework directive on minimum income, setting standards on adequate safety nets and an increase of the child guarantee. And I very much hope that the next new Commission will deliver.
And as I have 10 seconds, I have to say that it was quite shameful to listen that you managed to link this topic with migration.

Maria Ohisalo,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, dear colleagues, Commission, a just, green and social transition is the most critical challenge in our hands at the moment. It is imperative that employment measures support this huge transition. As the labour market is undergoing profound changes, we must ensure that new jobs that are created are quality jobs that enjoy the highest standards and labour rights.
Workers in a vulnerable situation cannot be left behind. Everyone has a right to safety at work and protection from dangerous conditions arising from, for example, climate change and loss of biodiversity, such as extreme weather events. Everyone has a right to social dialogue and collective bargaining, and to work in a place where artificial intelligence is used for their protection, not to undermine them.
All workers have a right to be treated with respect and dignity, without discrimination. All workers across the EU now have a right to a minimum wage. And I ask the Member States: why are you still not living up to this commonly agreed principle?

Rudi Kennes,
namens de The Left-Fractie. – Voorzitter, we praten heel veel over een sociaal Europa. De Europese Unie legt België echter deregulering op, wil het indexmechanisme afschaffen, dringt flexibiliteit op zonder deftige lonen, wil slechtere pensioenen en een hogere pensioenleeftijd. De Europese Unie doet niets om de toeleveranciers aan te pakken die werknemers in onzekere banen dwingen en zelfs een commissaris voor Werkgelegenheid en Sociale Zaken is er niet meer.
               

                  We moeten ons verzetten tegen de terugkerende bezuinigingen die in heel de EU verwoestingen hebben aangericht: jongeren die soms 2 tot 3 nepjobs moeten combineren, gepensioneerden die moeten kiezen tussen verwarming of eten, vrouwen die moeten stoppen omdat er geen zorg meer is.
               

                  De door het Parlement voorgestelde ideeën gaan weliswaar een stuk in de goede richting, maar de vraag is wat er in de praktijk van gaat komen wanneer de EU pertinent enkel de belangen van de werkgevers blijft vertegenwoordigen. De Europese arbeidersklasse zal krijgen wat ze nodig heeft als ze verenigd is. Daarom roep ik alle Europese werknemer op zich aan te sluiten bij een vakbond zodat ze de goedbetaalde banen krijgen die ze verdienen.
               

Sarah Knafo,
au nom du groupe ESN. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, je veux vous parler de l'emploi de ceux sans lesquels l'Europe serait incapable de survivre, mais dont vous rendez la vie impossible. Je veux vous parler d'une des filières qui perd le plus d'emplois dans mon pays. Je veux vous parler des agriculteurs français.
               

                  Laissez-moi vous dire en face ce qu'ils vivent. Ils travaillent plus durement que le plus travailleur d'entre vous et dans des conditions si inconfortables que vous ne les supporteriez pas plus d'une semaine. Levés avant l'aube, couchés après la nuit, ils endurent tout. Depuis des siècles, par amour de leur métier, ils surmontent les intempéries, les blessures, la fatigue. Ils nourrissent vos appétits, ils satisfont vos envies de gastronomie.
               

                  Je sais que tous, ici, vous aimez la cuisine française, et pourtant… Pourtant, vous imposez aux gens qui rendent possible ce miracle des traités de libre-échange, qui sont systématiquement conclus à l'avantage des pays étrangers et au détriment de nos 400 000 emplois agricoles. Vous leur imposez des normes innombrables, qui rendent leur métier impossible. Oui, vous leur imposez ceci: un code rural français de 3 300 pages. Lequel d'entre vous l'a lu, ce code? Pas un. Mais la majeure partie de ce code, qui les condamne, pour survivre, à devenir experts-comptables, juristes, fonctionnaires et fiscalistes – comme s'ils n'avaient rien d'autre à faire –, elle a été votée ici.
               

                  Avant-hier, dans les Vosges, j'ai rencontré Sophie, agricultrice. En à peine un an, elle a subi, par votre faute, cinq contrôles. Cinq humiliations, cinq pertes de temps – donc d'argent, alors qu'elle en a si peu –, cinq angoisses, cinq preuves que la colère des paysans, tout entière dirigée contre vous, est une colère juste.
               

                  Avec Reconquête!, je veux donner à leur colère un siège dans cet hémicycle. Parce que ce matin, à 5 heures, pendant que vous dormiez du sommeil du bureaucrate, des gens honnêtes et courageux se sont levés partout en France pour que vous puissiez manger. Tous les jours, ils travaillent pour vous. Alors demain, levez-vous à 5 heures du matin et travaillez enfin pour eux.
               

President. – I want to remind you that, based on Rule 10 of the Rules of Procedure, it is forbidden to show signs or other images.

Maravillas Abadía Jover (PPE). – Señor presidente, estas orientaciones representan una clara voluntad desde Europa de promover la sostenibilidad y el crecimiento, sin olvidarnos del pilar social. Sin embargo, en mi país, en España, los datos y recomendaciones que se presentarán en el paquete de otoño indicarán un estancamiento del empleo, especialmente entre los jóvenes.
               

                  Como país líder del paro juvenil europeo, es urgente atajar este problema. Estamos hablando de que casi medio millón de jóvenes en España no pueden desarrollar su carrera profesional en condiciones, no pueden independizarse o no pueden construir sus propias familias.
               

                  Frente al sostenimiento artificial del empleo con actitudes populistas —inundadas de gasto público— de Gobiernos como el de España, necesitamos un marco que impulse la inversión y la innovación y fomente la iniciativa privada. Estos son pilares fundamentales para cualquier economía próspera.
               

                  Señorías, la Unión Europea debe ser firme ante los Estados miembros para elaborar estrategias a largo plazo de creación de empleo de calidad. Aumentar la Administración pública sin fomentar la productividad es seguir lanzando balones al futuro, aumentando la deuda que nuestras próximas generaciones deberán seguir pagando.
               

                  No hipotequemos de más el futuro de nuestros jóvenes. Que la única hipoteca que tengan sea para comprarse una casa donde poder construir una familia.
               

Estelle Ceulemans (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, le rapport sur lequel nous allons voter demain, et qui a été présenté par notre présidente ici présente, montre l'importance de l'engagement du Parlement dans l'élaboration des politiques de l'emploi. Les nombreux amendements qui ont été déposés, adoptés et soutenus par une large majorité de la commission de l'emploi et des affaires sociales montrent que l'engagement de ce Parlement doit être entendu et respecté.
               

                  Les amendements déposés se concentrent notamment sur les jeunes, et plus particulièrement les NEET – ni en emploi, ni en études, ni en formation, âgés de 15 à 25 ans. Ces NEET sont passés, grâce aux politiques européennes, de 17 % à 10 % aujourd'hui. Malheureusement, 10 %, cela reste beaucoup trop, puisque cela signifie que 1 jeune sur 10 n'est ni en emploi ni en formation.
               

                  Les politiques européennes – c'est ce à quoi nous nous engageons – visent à donner à ces jeunes accès à une formation et à un emploi, mais à un emploi de qualité, à un emploi qui leur permette de se construire un avenir et de participer non seulement à la prospérité, mais surtout au bien-être global de notre société.
               

                  Il ne suffira pas de fixer des lignes directrices. Cette nouvelle législature doit aussi servir à créer des initiatives législatives avec un cadre clair pour la qualité de l'emploi, la prise en compte des risques psychosociaux et du surmenage, la garantie de salaires suffisants, un véritable droit à la formation, un cadre sur l'intelligence artificielle sur le lieu de travail et un cadre pour une juste transition. Et tout cela, dans le respect du dialogue social. Voilà ce que plus de 200 millions de travailleurs et de travailleuses attendent de nous.
               

Mélanie Disdier (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, qu'obtient-on quand une organisation néolibérale sans colonne vertébrale, telle que la Commission européenne, cherche à se mêler des politiques sociales de ses États membres? Étonnamment, nous n'obtenons pas de proposition programmée pour protéger les gens, mais plutôt une politique antisociale.
               

                  D'un côté, affublée de sa novlangue orwellienne, elle parlera de ‘vieillesse active’ pour éviter d'assumer sa volonté de nous faire travailler toujours plus longtemps. De l'autre, sous couvert de pénurie de travailleurs, elle promeut toujours plus d'immigration, cherchant à ouvrir les vannes au profit d'une main-d'œuvre étrangère et corvéable à merci.
               

                  Ce projet politique est intolérable, et il pénalise toujours les mêmes. Il se construit contre les nations et est profondément antieuropéen. Nous nous devons de nous y opposer, pour préserver nos peuples et nos retraités.
               

(L'oratrice refuse une question carton bleu de Anthony Smith)


Marlena Maląg (ECR). – Szanowni Państwo! Cieszę się, że w zaktualizowanych wytycznych dotyczących zatrudnienia znalazło się wiele elementów związanych z kształceniem i szkoleniem zawodowym oraz nowymi technologiami. To bardzo ważne z punktu widzenia przede wszystkim niedoboru pracowników i umiejętności w wielu branżach. Jednak nie podzielam tego, co sprawozdawczyni powiedziała, że odpowiedzią na wyzwania rynku jest migracja. To droga na skróty. Od lat słyszymy ze strony lewicy, że na łodziach do Europy płyną fachowcy. A jak naprawdę jest, wiemy wszyscy. Dziś przed tymi fachowcami drzwi zamykają nawet ci, którzy przed laty ich tutaj zapraszali.
               

                  Dlatego potrzebne jest inwestowanie w pracowników, którzy już na unijnym rynku są, promowanie nowoczesnego szkolnictwa zawodowego oraz poprawa warunków pracy w tych zawodach, w których brakuje rąk do pracy. Musimy pamiętać, że edukacja winna być priorytetem, bo wiedza teoretyczna i praktyczna to szczepionka przeciwko biedzie.
               

Христо Петров (Renew). – Осем от всеки десет работодатели в Европейския съюз имат проблем при намирането на подходящи кадри и за да решим този проблем, трябва да действаме на няколко нива.
               

                  Първо, трябва да инвестираме в образованието, за да получат децата и младежите правилен набор от умения и да станат активни граждани. Второ, трябва да улесним плавния преход от училище към работа с помощта на професионално образование и обучение. Обучението през целия живот също трябва да бъде наш приоритет. Задължително е да осигурим равни възможности на всички хора на пазара на труда, да се справим с пречките, пред които са изправени маргинализираните общности, като например ромите. Първата стъпка би била да се борим с дискриминацията от момента на наемане на работа до работното място. И всички тези политики трябва да имат една и съща цел – да развият пълния потенциал на всеки европеец и да задържат нашите таланти.
               

                  Колеги, обръщам внимание на гласуването утре на бюджета на детската гаранция за уязвими деца. Този Парламент поиска увеличение на бюджета от 20 милиарда за финансиране на този инструмент. Само след месец е Международният ден на детето. Надявам се да не стигнем до ситуация, в която да кажем Честит празник, мили деца! За съжаление няма да увеличим парите ви за следващите години.
               

Estrella Galán (The Left). – Señor presidente, cuando hablamos de políticas de empleo, lo que estamos diciendo es que hay que mejorar la vida de la gente.
               

                  ¿Saben cómo ha logrado España alcanzar números históricos de empleo? Mejorando las condiciones laborales, reduciendo la tasa de temporalidad y con una reforma laboral que garantiza puestos de trabajo más estables, lejos de la incertidumbre que generan los contratos precarios y temporales. Una reforma que ha puesto en el centro a las personas trabajadoras. Una reforma que, por primera vez, da derechos en vez de reducirlos.
               

                  En el lado opuesto tenemos la propuesta de la nueva Comisión, que elimina cualquier referencia a las personas trabajadoras y al trabajo bajo el eufemismo de la productividad. Señora Von der Leyen, el mundo no se mueve por las skills, se mueve por las trabajadoras y los trabajadores. El trabajo decente y los derechos laborales deben ser un eje central en el proyecto europeo.
               

                  Y hay que seguir avanzando. Debemos reducir la jornada laboral para ganar tiempo y calidad de vida, porque cuando mejoramos la vida de la gente, cuando ganamos en derechos, ganamos en democracia.
               

Jan-Peter Warnke (NI). – Herr Präsident, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Arbeitsbedingungen für Europäer innerhalb des Binnenmarktes zu verbessern, ist eine wichtige Aufgabe dieses Hauses. Auch das vorliegende Ergebnis der EMPL-Tätigkeit kann ich begrüßen, und ich möchte mich bei Li Andersson ganz besonders für die kollegiale und konstruktive Zusammenarbeit bedanken.
               

                  Im Gegensatz zu den Entwürfen der Kommission weist der Text vom EMPL-Ausschuss viel Realismus und einen tiefen sozialen Grundgedanken auf; ich verweise hier auf die Änderungsanträge 20 und 26. Eine freie Arbeitsplatzsuche im europäischen Binnenmarkt mit erhaltenen sozialen Grundrechten ist ein hohes Gut der EU. Aber gilt das auch für Beschäftigungsfelder in der kritischen Infrastruktur unserer Gesellschaften mit permanentem Personalmangel wie den Gesundheitssystemen?
               

                  Was ist, wenn labour mobility zu brain drain für einzelne Nationen wird? Konkret bemängele ich hier die Tatsache, dass Ärzte und Pflegepersonal, in Deutschlands Nachbarländern ausgebildet, nach Deutschland wechseln, weil die Gehälter vier- bis fünfmal so hoch sind. Gerecht wäre eine Arbeitsmigration in beide Richtungen, aber das grundsätzliche Abwandern teurer ausgebildeter Fachkräfte im Gesundheitssektor ist keine gelebte europäische Solidarität.
               

                  Es existiert bereits ein Kodex der WHO, der Regeln für die Rekrutierung von Gesundheitsfachkräften aus dem Ausland beschreibt. Mein Vorschlag wäre es, diesen Kodex an die europäischen Verhältnisse zu adaptieren und für die EU in Kraft zu setzen.
               

Sérgio Humberto (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Caros Colegas, I will speak in Portuguese, a quarta língua mais falada no mundo como língua materna.
               

                  O que é que podemos fazer para combater o desemprego, para reter os nossos talentos, para sermos atrativos para os jovens, para melhorar as condições de emprego e proporcionar, finalmente, a toda a população ativa as oportunidades que merece? Precisamos de investir na reindustrialização, diminuir a burocracia, ter uma imigração regulada, qualificada e integrada e apostar, entre muitas outras coisas, também no nosso capital humano.
               

                  Caras e Caros Amigos, não tenhamos medo de inovar, não tenhamos medo de abraçar a mudança, de nos adaptarmos às necessidades do mercado e de crescer. Todos juntos somos muito mais do que 27 e, se trabalharmos todos juntos, ninguém ficará para trás.
               

Idoia Mendia (S&D). – Señor presidente, querido comisario, primero quería empezar agradeciendo el trabajo a los ponentes. El empleo está en el corazón de las transformaciones verde, digital y demográfica, conectado a la competitividad, sí, pero con un compromiso social para seguir construyendo una Europa más justa e inclusiva.
               

                  Defendemos el empleo digno, de calidad e inclusivo con el foco puesto en los colectivos infrarrepresentados en el mundo del empleo, como son las mujeres y los jóvenes: debemos garantizar su plena incorporación al mundo del empleo, como estamos haciendo en España, donde tenemos más de diez millones de mujeres trabajando —más que nunca— y estamos reduciendo el desempleo de los jóvenes. Y, sobre todo, tampoco debemos olvidar el derecho al acceso al empleo ordinario de las personas con discapacidad.
               

                  Necesitamos todo el talento para afrontar el futuro en Europa y debemos impulsar el papel de los servicios públicos de empleo para lograr estos objetivos, para garantizar el derecho a la formación de toda la ciudadanía: más digitalización y más integración europea de los servicios públicos de empleo.
               

                  Y defendemos la protección de los derechos de los trabajadores en materia de salarios y condiciones laborales, con el foco puesto, sobre todo, en la salud laboral y en los sistemas de protección social. Exigimos que se cumplan las directivas sobre salarios mínimos, transparencia salarial y plataformas digitales. Europa tiene que estar del lado de sus ciudadanos e invertir en una sociedad más justa e igualitaria.
               

Juan Carlos Girauta Vidal (PfE). – Señor presidente, señorías, siento decirles que las orientaciones presentadas siguen teniendo un tufillo ideológico del que parece que la Unión Europea es incapaz de liberar, o de librar, a ninguna de sus propuestas.
               

                  Mi país, España, sufre una de las mayores tasas de desempleo y la mayor de paro juvenil de la Unión. Ese tufillo ideológico es un lujo que no podemos permitirnos; lo que se necesita son propuestas estructurales con vistas a la creación de empleo de calidad, para lo cual es necesario contar con un entorno adecuado.
               

                  Algunas de estas propuestas son: reducción de impuestos para las empresas —especialmente para las pymes— y de las cuotas de autónomos, un modelo real de conciliación familiar —especialmente para las mujeres que quieren ser madres y trabajadoras—, el fomento de la contratación indefinida de nacionales frente a inmigrantes ilegales que tiran de los sueldos hacia abajo, la retirada de subvenciones a unos sindicatos que ya son meros títeres del poder político sin representatividad efectiva…
               

                  En definitiva, frente a propuestas contaminadas de ideología, proponemos la aplicación de políticas alternativas de sentido común.
               

Francesco Torselli (ECR). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, come membro della commissione per l'occupazione e gli affari sociali, vorrei condividere oggi con voi il piacere e l'orgoglio nell'intervenire – da italiano – su un tema come quello delle politiche in favore dell'occupazione e di potervi presentare i risultati raggiunti dall'Italia negli ultimi due anni.
               

                  Noi oggi chiediamo all'Unione europea di favorire l'occupazione. In Italia negli ultimi due anni sono aumentati di 834.000 i posti di lavoro e gli occupati hanno raggiunto la cifra record di 24 milioni.
               

                  Chiediamo all'Unione europea di promuovere l'istruzione STEM, per favorire l'inserimento dei giovani nel mercato del lavoro. Ebbene, in Italia negli ultimi due anni abbiamo investito 950 milioni nell'istruzione STEM e 545 per contrastare la dispersione scolastica.
               

                  Colleghi, oggi l'Italia di Giorgia Meloni può guardarvi negli occhi a testa alta e offrire a tutti voi una strada per arrivare a contrastare la disoccupazione e a favorire il rilancio del mercato del lavoro.
               

Catarina Martins (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, como explicar salários diferentes entre trabalhadores lado a lado, mesmas funções, o mesmo posto de trabalho, responsabilidades e qualificação? Chama-se outsourcing, subcontratação ou outro esquema para baixar salários, proteger patrões e colocar trabalhadores contra trabalhadores. Chama-se também xenofobia: recusar a regularização de trabalhadores migrantes é outra forma de baixar salários. Chama-se abuso de quem está mais desprotegido porque é subcontratado, indocumentado, mulher ou minoria, para baixar os salários de toda a gente.
               

                  O esquema é velho: concorrência direta entre trabalhadores e entre países, numa corrida dos salários para o fundo, nos setores tradicionais, como na economia digital. A Comissão Europeia também podia chamar-lhe concorrência desleal, mas não chama. Diz coisas bonitas sobre o emprego e, depois, impõe as piores práticas económicas e laborais.
               

                  Cumprimento a relatora Li Andersson por lembrar isso mesmo, ao exigir contratação coletiva, responsabilidade social e transição justa. Saibam as instituições europeias e os governos responder por isso mesmo.
               

Μαρία Ζαχαρία (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, συνάδελφοι, οι κατευθυντήριες γραμμές για την εργασία δεν είναι τίποτα άλλο από ευχολόγια των ευρωβουλευτών που συνήθως τα κράτη μέλη αγνοούν. Στην Ελλάδα από το 2012 μέχρι σήμερα κατήργησαν τις ελεύθερες συλλογικές διαπραγματεύσεις. Ο υπουργός Εργασίας αποφασίζει τον κατώτατο μισθό. Μας επιβλήθηκαν περαιτέρω περιορισμοί στο απεργιακό δικαίωμα, εξαήμερο και εντεκάωρο. Οι εργαζόμενοι στο έλεος των εργοδοτών.
               

                  Γιατί; Γιατί είναι βασικό συστατικό της ευρωπαϊκής ένωσης ελεύθερης αγοράς να περικόπτει τα εργασιακά δικαιώματα. Ποιες είναι οι αγορές; Οι τραπεζίτες, βιομήχανοι, εφοπλιστές, τα πολυεθνικά και επενδυτικά κεφάλαια που νοιάζονται μόνο για το κέρδος τους. Το κεφάλαιο είναι οι αγορές. Επομένως, όταν λέτε ότι ο κατώτατος μισθός θα προσδιορίζεται από την αγορά, εννοείτε κουμάντο θα κάνουν οι εργοδότες. Επιστροφή ολοταχώς στο δουλοκτητικό μοντέλο με δουλειά νύχτα με νύχτα για ένα ξεροκόμματο.
               

                  Μάλιστα, η Επιτροπή στο αρχικό κείμενό της μάς ζητά την αύξηση των ορίων συνταξιοδότησης, να δουλεύουμε μέχρι να πεθάνουμε. Αυτές οι πολιτικές εξυπηρετούν αποκλειστικά τα κέρδη τους. Καλώ τα εκατομμύρια εργαζόμενους στην Ευρώπη να αντισταθούμε.
               

Henrik Dahl (PPE). – Hr. formand! Tak for ordet. Det forslag vi diskuterer i dag, er super sympatisk. Det er styret af gode hensigter, men som altid er det sådan, at djævlen gemmer sig i detaljen. Den detalje, jeg som dansker finder særligt djævelsk, er, at medlemsstaterne hurtigst muligt skal implementere mindstelønsdirektivet. Danmark har for første gang i historien indledt en retssag mod EU med det formål at fjerne mindstelønsdirektivet – den har Sverige tilsluttet sig. I de to lande mener vi nemlig ikke, at forslaget er inden for rammerne af traktaten. Den fastslår nemlig, at borgernes lønforhold ligger uden for EU's kompetence. Alligevel blev mindstelønsdirektivet vedtaget for år tilbage, og nu står vi her i dag. Med et nyt Parlament og snart en ny Kommission er tiden så ikke kommet til, at vi begynder at tage subsidiaritetsprincippet alvorligt? Vores system er ikke i stykker. Der er ikke nogen grund til at reparere det.
               

Romana Jerković (S&D). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, europsko tržište rada suočava se danas s brojnim izazovima. Nedostatak radne snage, nedostatak vještina, zelena i digitalna tranzicija, sve to ukazuje na važnost inovativnog, konkurentnog i prilagodljivog tržišta.
               

                  Međutim, u stvaranju konkurentnog tržišta ne smijemo zaboraviti na socijalne vrijednosti. Ne smijemo žrtvovati temeljna radnička prava. Mi danas trebamo snažne sindikate koji će pomoći i štititi ta prava, prava poput prava na sigurne i dostojanstvene uvjete rada i prava na plaću od koje se može dostojanstveno živjeti.
               

                  Ove ažurirane smjernice za politike zapošljavanja država članica o kojima danas govorimo potiču države na stvaranje kvalitetnih radnih mjesta, uz rješavanje manjka radne snage u ključnim sektorima poput zdravstva, obrazovanja i STEM područja. Fokus je i na cjeloživotnom učenju i obrazovanju koje će radnike učiniti konkurentnijima na tržištu rada. Ove smjernice ukazuju i na važnost zaštite najranjivijih skupina na tržištu rada, kao što su mladi, žene i osobe s invaliditetom.
               

                  To ne smiju ostati samo lijepe riječi na papiru. Važno je da stvorimo jednake mogućnosti za sve radnike s adekvatnom i održivom socijalnom zaštitom.
               

                  Da, mi trebamo Europsku uniju koja će biti ekonomski stabilna i jaka te konkurentna, ali mora biti i socijalno pravedna. To je jedini ispravni put.
               

Pál Szekeres (PfE). – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! Én a helyemről beszélek. Egyetértek vele, hogy a tagállamoknak támogatniuk kell a mikro-, kis- és középvállalkozások létrehozását és növekedését, többek között a finanszírozáshoz való egyszerűbb hozzáférés biztosítása révén.
               

                  A magyar kormány ebben a hónapban hirdette meg a kis- és középvállalkozásokat segítő beruházásélénkítő programját, amelynek keretében tőkefinanszírozással támogatják a fejlesztéseket. Alacsony kamatozású beruházási hitelt és exportösztönző hitelt nyújtanak. Forrásokkal segítik a digitalizációt, csökkentik a kis- és középvállalati szektor adminisztrációját.
               

                  Fontosnak tartom, hogy a fogyatékos uniós polgárokban rejlő kiaknázatlan lehetőséget használjuk ki. A bevándorlók helyett fókuszáljunk a megváltozott munkaképességű munkavállalókra, hiszen milliókat integrálhatunk a munkaerőpiacra, akik beszélik a nyelvünket és azonos a kultúránk. Először minket kell választani! Semmit rólunk nélkülünk!
               

Kathleen Funchion (The Left). – A Uachtaráin, firstly, I wish to commend Li Andersson for this progressive report. I welcome the emphasis on education, training, better pay and conditions. And I also note the key message that affordable housing is key to addressing social inequalities. A decent home is fundamental for every worker to thrive and prosper. In Ireland, workers are burdened with sky-high house prices and also rip-off rents. As we speak today, 14 000 people are homeless, which includes 4 000 children.
For too long, the government in Ireland and, indeed, European institutions have been putting vested and financial interests ahead of workers and families. As legislators, we must act. We must repeal the Non-Performing Loans Directive, which is a directive for vulture funds, and we need to amend state aid rules and an exemption in the fiscal rules to enable us to invest in housing, which every single citizen of Europe should have as a right. We need to ensure workers are supported.

Λευτέρης Νικολάου-Αλαβάνος (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η ουσία των κατευθυντήριων γραμμών, όπως ομολογεί η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, είναι ευπροσάρμοστο εργατικό δυναμικό για την πράσινη και ψηφιακή μετάβαση, την ανταγωνιστικότητα των επιχειρήσεων, την πολεμική οικονομία της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Να θυσιαστούν, δηλαδή, τα δικαιώματα των εργαζομένων για τη θωράκιση της καπιταλιστικής κερδοφορίας, με προγράμματα κατάρτισης και επανακατάρτισης, δηλαδή περαιτέρω ‘φτήνεμα’ της εργατικής δύναμης και υπερεκμετάλλευση, με ευρωπαϊκή κινητικότητα, με συστάσεις κλιμάκωσης των ελαστικών μορφών απασχόλησης για γυναίκες, άτομα με αναπηρία, Ρομά, πρόσφυγες από την Ουκρανία. Τα ευχολόγια περί ποιοτικών θέσεων με καλούς μισθούς και προστασία δικαιωμάτων δεν μπορούν να κρύψουν ότι η πρόσφατη οδηγία της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης για τον δήθεν επαρκή κατώτατο μισθό οδηγεί στη γενικευμένη κατάργηση συλλογικών συμβάσεων και στην επιβολή από κυβερνήσεις μισθών γαλέρας.
               

                  Οι εργαζόμενοι στην Ελλάδα ήδη απαντούν στην κυβέρνηση της Νέας Δημοκρατίας και στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση με την πάλη τους, με κλαδικές απεργίες στον τομέα της υγείας, στην παιδεία, στις πλατφόρμες, στον τουρισμό, τον επισιτισμό, στα λιμάνια, στις κατασκευές, οργανώνοντας πανεργατική πανελλαδική απεργία στις 20 Νοεμβρίου για μισθούς, παιδεία, υγεία. Έξω τώρα από τα πολεμικά σφαγεία.
               

András Tivadar Kulja (PPE). – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! A közép-kelet-európai régió olyan komoly kihívásokkal néz szembe, amelyek komolyan veszélyeztetik társadalmaink jólétét. A szellemi tőke elvándorlása, a népességcsökkenés kritikussá vált ebben a régióban.
               

                  Magyarországon is jól látható a magasan képzett munkavállalók külföldre távozása, ami munkaerőhiányhoz vezet az egészségügyben, oktatásban és gyermekvédelemben. A vidéki kórházak személyzethiánnyal küzdenek, az iskolák pedig alulfinanszírozottak, ami régiós oktatási válság egyik példája.
               

                  A szakszervezetek szerepe meggyengült, a munkavállalói jogok nem érvényesülnek. A magyar kormány évi 400 órára emelte a túlórák maximális számát, miközben a minimálbér nem éri el a 700 eurót.
               

                  Hazánkban az inkompetens kormány elhibázott döntései miatt fokozottan érezzük a közép-kelet-európai régió nehézségeit. Emiatt fontos, hogy ha egyes kormányok figyelmen kívül is hagyják a munkavállalók, kiszolgáltatott sorsú emberek helyzetét, mi olyan uniós megoldásokat dolgozunk ki, amelyek ezekkel a társadalmi csoportokkal hosszú távon és fenntartható módon foglalkoznak, és gondoskodnak róluk.
               

Johan Danielsson (S&D). – Herr talman! Händer som domnar när man lyfter barnen, knyter skorna eller försöker knäppa skjortan. Det här är verkligheten för många byggnadsarbetare och en direkt konsekvens av en arbetsmiljö som inte håller måttet.
               

                  Förra veckan presenterade fackförbundet Byggnads en rapport. Den visar att tre av fyra byggnadsarbetare upplever symptom på vibrationsskador, även unga arbetare.
               

                  Många skadas trots att man håller sig under lagens gränsvärden. Det här är ett svek från det offentliga mot alla drabbade arbetare.
               

                  Det här måste bli en väckarklocka för politiker över hela Europa. Gränsvärden från EU finns till för att skydda människor, och gör gränsvärdena inte det så måste de skärpas. En god arbetsmarknad kräver en god arbetsmiljö. Det budskapet måste vara alldeles glasklart också från den här kammaren.
               

Marie Dauchy (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, alors qu'Audi Brussels risque de fermer ses portes, alors que la production du médicament français a disparu et qu'on sait que le Doliprane finira par être vendu aux États-Unis, alors que les peuples européens rejettent de plus en plus l'immigration tant au niveau économique qu'au niveau sécuritaire, à la commission de l'emploi et des affaires sociales rien ne change.
               

                  Les lignes directrices proposées cherchent à influencer des politiques sociales sur lesquelles l'Union européenne n'a pourtant aucune compétence. Pis encore, elles persistent dans une voie pourtant rejetée par nos citoyens: toujours plus d'immigration, toujours plus de pacte vert, toujours plus de libre-échange.
               

Vous nous condamnez à rester spectateurs impuissants pendant que des intérêts étrangers démantèlent notre économie. Vous continuez à avancer aveuglément sur votre calendrier du pacte vert et sur le projet Mercosur, qui progressent sans une minute de retard.
               

                  L'urgence, c'est la relocalisation de nos productions. Allez-vous vraiment attendre que l'Europe entière s'effondre avant d'ouvrir les yeux?
               

PRÉSIDENCE: YOUNOUS OMARJEE


Vice-Président


Isabelle Le Callennec (PPE). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, malgré ses plus de 13 millions de chômeurs, l'Europe est confrontée non pas à une pénurie d'emplois, mais à une pénurie de main-d'œuvre. Le taux de chômage moyen y est de 5,9 %. Onze pays font moins bien, dont la France, avec 7,5 %.
                  

                     Ces lignes directrices invitent les États membres à accorder aux personnes sans emploi des prestations chômage appropriées pendant une durée raisonnable, en fonction des cotisations versées et des règles nationales, dans le respect du principe de subsidiarité. Le texte précise: ‘Ces prestations ne devraient pas décourager un retour rapide à l'emploi et devraient s'accompagner […] de mesures de perfectionnement et de reconversion professionnels’. C'est précisément l'une des vocations du Fonds social européen, doté de près de 143 milliards d'euros pour la période 2021-2027. Il convient donc de mesurer la contribution du FSE à ce retour rapide à l'emploi.
                  

                     Chers collègues, Monsieur le Commissaire, les transitions numérique et écologique se répercutent fortement sur le marché de l'emploi. Les outils d'accompagnement des potentielles victimes collatérales se doivent d'être efficients et simples d'accès.
                  

Marit Maij (S&D). – Voorzitter, commissaris, als we het hebben over onze arbeidsmarkt en over werkgelegenheid, dan gaat het opvallend vaak alleen over concurrentievermogen, vaardigheden en ook over hoe bedrijven met zo min mogelijk mensen in dienst zoveel mogelijk winst kunnen maken. Van die winst zou iedereen moeten profiteren. Toch blijkt dat vooral bedrijven, werkgevers en hun aandeelhouders ervan profiteren.
                  

                     We moeten af van dit frame. Het frame dat werk er alleen maar is om te zorgen voor winst. Want werk, dat is ook zingeving voor mensen en een manier om een boterham te verdienen. Werk is ook een manier om in een sociale omgeving terecht te komen en dat moeten we beschermen met goede lonen, goede arbeidsvoorwaarden en goede ontwikkelingsmogelijkheden.
                  

                     Ik hoop dat dit ook een prioriteit zal zijn bij de Europese Commissie, de lidstaten en de bedrijven zelf. Want werk is echt heel veel meer dan alleen maar een winstmachine.
                  

Angelika Winzig (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Während die USA in den letzten Jahren mit günstiger Energie, wenig Bürokratie und mit dem Inflation Reduction Act ihre Wettbewerbsfähigkeit steigern konnten, hinkt Europa nach. Timmermans Grüner Deal hatte ursprünglich auch einen Deal für die Wirtschaft versprochen; was kam aber, waren Belastungen für Landwirtschaft und Wirtschaft, und das Wirtschaftswachstum stagniert.
                  

                     Europa war nie reich an Rohstoffen, aber reich an klugen Köpfen, die allerdings aufgrund der demografischen Entwicklung auch leider weniger werden. Daher braucht es umfassende Maßnahmen, denn gut ausgebildete Fachkräfte sind der Schlüssel, um im globalen Wettbewerb bestehen zu können.
                  

                     In Österreich, aber auch in der Schweiz und in Deutschland hat sich die duale Ausbildung, die praktische Berufserfahrung mit theoretischem Wissen verbindet, als Erfolgsmodell erwiesen. Das könnte auch als Vorbild für Europa dienen, denn Bildung ist der Garant gegen Arbeitslosigkeit und für Wohlstand in der EU.
                  

Niels Geuking (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar Schmit! Gestern nahm ich an der Debatte zur Stärkung des Binnenmarktes zur Schaffung einer nachhaltigen Zukunft und von Wohlstand für alle Bürgerinnen und Bürger in der EU teil. Und eines wurde unter anderem klar deutlich: Wir brauchen auch sozialökonomische Standards innerhalb der Europäischen Union, um einerseits Wettbewerbsverzerrungen zu verhindern und andererseits den erarbeiteten Wohlstand auch vielschichtiger zu ermöglichen.
                  

                     Die Leitlinien haben das Potenzial, das Leben von Millionen Menschen positiv zu beeinflussen. Die Mitgliedstaaten sind jetzt in der Pflicht. Der Schwerpunkt liegt diesmal insbesondere auf allgemeiner und beruflicher Bildung – bei der hohen Jugendarbeitslosigkeit in Europa auch ein Schlüssel, um dem Fachkräftemangel effektiv zu begegnen. Der Fokus liegt zudem auf den neuen Technologien: künstliche Intelligenz, bezahlbarer Wohnraum usw.
                  

                     So sind die Leitlinien ein wichtiger Beitrag zur Umsetzung der europäischen Säule sozialer Rechte und ein weiterer Schritt zu einem sozial zusammenwachsenden Europa. Wir müssen dranbleiben und gerade für unsere Kinder und Familien mehr machen.
                  

Sunčana Glavak (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, svima je jasno da se politika za promicanje zapošljavanja i socijalne zaštite Europske unije suočava s nizom izazova koji zahtijevaju daljnje prilagodbe i reforme.
                  

                     Digitalizacija, zelena tranzicija, borba protiv nezaposlenosti mladih i nesigurnih oblika rada, kao i borba protiv socijalnih nejednakosti, to su problemi koje bismo morali riješiti kako bismo osigurali ono što želimo, a to je prije svega održivi rast, socijalna kohezija i visokokvalitetna radna mjesta, a ovdje smo čuli danas i priuštivo stanovanje za mlade, koje čini veliki problem u brojnim članicama Europske unije.
                  

                     Ja dolazim iz Hrvatske koja ima najmanju nezaposlenost i najveću zaposlenost u posljednjih desetak godina. Stvoreno je 308 000 radnih mjesta. Prosječna neto plaća porasla je za 76 posto. Kreditni rejting moje zemlje je a minus, s pozitivnim izgledima. Preduvjet za to bila je, naravno, politička stabilnost, koja je omogućila i kontinuitet politika, i to ispravnih politika.
                  

                     Međutim, postoji značajna razlika u stopama zaposlenosti i socijalnoj zaštiti među državama članicama. Suočavaju se s većim izazovima, uključujući visoku nezaposlenost, slabije socijalne mreže.
                  

                     Kolegice i kolege, 2017. godine usvojili smo dokument Europski stup socijalnih prava, između ostalog 20 načela, a jedno od njih je jednake mogućnosti i pristup tržištu rada. Ono što mi sada apostrofiramo da to nismo apsolvirali i da je pred nama još puno posla, a pred nama su i zaposlenja mogućnosti s kojima se još nismo susreli.
                  

                     Zaključit ću, kako bi se osigurala dugoročna stabilnost, potrebne su dodatne mjere i rješavanje strukturnih problema, kao i demografskih izazova koji su pred nama.
                  

Interventions à la demande


João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, a posição do Parlamento sobre as orientações das políticas de emprego melhora a proposta da Comissão ao Conselho, mas não apaga o enquadramento destas orientações políticas, nem os seus prejuízos para os trabalhadores. Apesar de curtas e insuficientes, consideramos positivas as referências aos salários justos, a condições de trabalho dignas, à contratação coletiva, aos objetivos do pleno emprego e da erradicação da pobreza, à necessidade de dar resposta à crise da habitação.
                  

                     Mas, estas orientações estão enquadradas no processo da governação económica e do Semestre Europeu, essa teia de imposições, chantagens e condicionamentos às políticas soberanas dos Estados, incluindo em matéria de emprego. Não é possível apagar as consequências negativas dessas imposições para os trabalhadores, no aumento do desemprego, na degradação das condições sociais e laborais, na desregulamentação das relações de trabalho, na contenção dos salários, reformas e pensões.
                  

                     Queremos uma política de emprego e de aprofundamento dos direitos laborais e sociais, livre do Semestre Europeu e de outros mecanismos de constrangimentos e condicionamentos.
                  

Branislav Ondruš (NI). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, pracovné miesta musia poskytovať férové pracovné podmienky a dôstojné odmeňovanie. Preto vyzvime členské štáty, aby spoločne s týmto Parlamentom podporili takú zmenu legislatívy o verejnom obstarávaní, aby sa na verejných tendroch mohli zúčastniť iba firmy, ktoré majú podpísanú kolektívnu zmluvu. Nastavme vysoké štandardy pracovných podmienok pre dodávateľov verejných orgánov a inštitúcií a to donúti aj ostatných, aby svojich pracovníkov odmeňovali lepšie. Presne taký efekt má minimálna mzda. A realita potvrdzuje, že zvyšovanie minimálnej mzdy vyvoláva rast aj ostatných platov. Ak už míňame peniaze daňovníkov, míňajme ich tak, aby naši pracujúci z nich mali čo najväčší úžitok. Nedovoľme z verejných financií podporovať zisky korporácií na úkor ľudí, ktorí pre nich pracujú, a ich rodín. Okrem toho posilnime zvýhodnenia sociálnych podnikov, odstráňme bariéry pre ich prístup k investičnému kapitálu, poskytnime im daňové úľavy, uprednostnime ich vo verejnom obstarávaní, lebo práve sociálne podniky poskytujú pracovné miesta najzraniteľnejším ľuďom, ľuďom, ktorých nikto iný zamestnať nechce.
                  

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Herr Präsident, liebe Mitmenschen! Die Arbeitspolitik ist aus einem ganz entscheidenden Punkt ein wesentlicher Bestandteil jeder politischen Entscheidung, die wir hier in der EU treffen; schließlich ist die eigene Arbeit den Menschen, die wir vertreten, am nächsten.
                  

                     Wenn wir wirklich wollen, dass sie zu Europa stehen, dass sie zu dieser Idee eines gemeinsamen Kontinents stehen, eines gemeinsamen Raums von Frieden, Freiheit und Recht, dann brauchen sie dafür eine vernünftige Grundlage, und diese Grundlage wollen sie sich selber schaffen. Deswegen sind, wie einige Kollegen hier zu Recht gesagt haben, die Leitlinien ein wichtiger Beitrag zur Umsetzung der europäischen Idee.
                  

                     Wir sollten uns immer darauf zurückbesinnen, dass diese Menschen, die wir vertreten, vor allen Dingen Menschen sind, die einen ganz normalen Job haben; keine Menschen, die in einem großen, halbrunden Saal sitzen und über wichtige Dinge debattieren.
                  

(Fin des interventions à la demande)


Nicolas Schmit,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, first, I would like to thank you for this rich debate. I am confident that your report will be successfully adopted tomorrow. Taking your important work into account, the employment guidelines will help steer employment and social policy coordination in the European Semester, following the economic governance review, alongside, and in a more integrated fashion, vis-à-vis fiscal and macroeconomic policies.
It is true that we have a big shortage of labour and of skills in Europe, and this is a big problem in most of our Member States. But at the same time, and it has been mentioned, we should not forget that we still have more than 13 million people out of a job. Unemployed people. Young people, elderly workers, vulnerable categories have all the difficulties to find a job. So I think there is a need still for strong employment policies and especially very strong skills and reskilling policies.
Only with our joint efforts and commitments can we ensure that our European social market economy continues to be successful in Europe and on a global scale. It's true, yes, Europe needs to be even more competitive. But competitiveness is not an aim in itself. The real objective should be quality jobs, which means decent wages, good working conditions with social protection and the opportunity for lifelong learning.

Li Andersson,
rapporteur. – Mr President, I want to thank all colleagues for this wide-ranging discussion and debate, and also for the broad support that was voiced for this report. Some colleagues pointed out that you think these things should be dealt with on a national level, but as one colleague said, rightly, this is not a legally binding instrument. So if you think that, on a national level, Member States should focus on decent working conditions, on ensuring a balanced labour market, securing jobs for everyone, then you should absolutely vote in favour of a recommendation to the Member States to do exactly this.
I think these guidelines are also an important policy document, a statement from the Parliament regarding how we want to ensure fair and balanced employment policies in Europe, how we think Member States should address issues facing working life, and all of the millions of Europeans who have not yet found their own place and their own role in the labour market. As has been pointed out, this legislative term will be much about competitiveness, but it's worth stating that there can be no competitiveness in Europe without worker well-being, without making sure that not a single European worker will get sick from his or her working environment. We need to make sure that we secure decent working conditions, education and training, and that we also put social dialogue and collective bargaining at the heart of how we define European competitiveness.

Le Président. – Le débat est clos.
                  

                     Le vote aura lieu demain.
                  


Déclarations écrites (article 178)



Waldemar Tomaszewski (ECR),
raštu. – Užimtumo politika valstybėse narėse turi būti reformuojama pirmiausia siekiant paremti darbuotojų teises. Šiuo atžvilgiu Europos Sąjungai tikrai yra ką veikti. Ji turėtų padėti šalims kurti naujas darbo vietas jauniems žmonėms ir skatinti didesnę priešpensinio amžiaus darbuotojų apsaugą. Kaip rodo duomenys, abi šios darbuotojų grupės yra labiausiai veikiamos besikeičiančių ekonominių sąlygų ir darbo rinkos svyravimų. Investavimas į jaunimą yra ilgalaikė, į ateitį orientuota veikla, o vyresnio amžiaus darbuotojų ir jų darbo vietų apsauga yra darbo teisės įtraukumo veiksnys ir turi sustabdyti vyresnio amžiaus žmonių profesinę atskirtį.
                  

                     Kitas klausimas – tai veiksmai, kurių turi imtis Sąjunga ir valstybės narės, siekdamos užkirsti kelią neigiamoms socialinėms nedarbo ir skurdo pasekmėms visuomenėje. Todėl jos turėtų skatinti teisingą atlyginimą ir tinkamas darbo sąlygas, remti neįgaliuosius darbo vietoje, socialinį dialogą ir kolektyvines derybas, ginti darbuotojų teises ir skatinti kokybišką bei įtraukų švietimą ir mokymą, ypatingą dėmesį skirdamos pagrindinių ir tarpinių įgūdžių gerinimui, ypač tarp mokinių esančių nepalankiose situacijose. Be to, turėtų būti remiamas į ateitį orientuotas profesinis švietimas ir mokymas, kvalifikacijos kėlimas ir perkvalifikavimas visą gyvenimą, taip pat veiksminga aktyvi darbo rinkos politika ir geresnės darbuotojų darbo sąlygos ir tobulinimosi galimybės.
                  
19.   Corrigenda (Rule 251) (action taken)

Le Président. – Je voudrais faire une annonce en application de l'article 251, paragraphe 4, du règlement intérieur, pour vous informer qu'il n'y a pas eu de demande de mise aux voix des neuf rectificatifs annoncés en séance plénière hier, à l'ouverture de la séance. En conséquence, les rectificatifs sont réputés approuvés.
               
20.   Situation in Azerbaijan, violation of human rights and international law and relations with Armenia (debate)

Le Président. – L'ordre du jour appelle le débat sur la déclaration de la Commission sur la situation en Azerbaïdjan, la violation des droits de l'homme et du droit international, et les relations avec l'Arménie [2024/2890(RSP)].
               

Nicolas Schmit,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, Honourable Members, today's debate is taking place less than three weeks before the beginning of the COP29 UN Climate Change Conference in Baku. The conference will gather world leaders and the international climate community to advance on the global climate agenda. But it will also draw the world's attention to the conference's host country.
Our debate today is therefore very timely. COP29 is an opportunity for the Azerbaijani authorities to demonstrate a commitment to their international human rights obligations. It is an opportunity to reverse the worrying trend of the past year of an increasingly shrinking space for civil society, intensifying repression of independent media and dissenting voices, and the growing number of arbitrary arrests.
This House has drawn attention to a number of particularly unsettling cases, including the fate of Gubad Ibadoghlu, Ilhamiz Guliyev, Bakhtiyar Hajiyev, Alasgar Mammadli, and Anar Mammadli. There are more, many more, including, since this summer, Bahruz Samadov, a young scholar and peace activist studying in Prague who was arrested while visiting family in Azerbaijan.
Our position is clear: the Government of Azerbaijan should release all those who have been detained for exercising their fundamental rights, including journalists, human rights defenders and political activists. Torture and ill treatment are absolutely prohibited under international law, and any reports of abuses should be promptly and impartially investigated. The authorities must ensure due process, dignified treatment of all detainees and access to proper healthcare in accordance with international standards.
We, in particular, urge the government to lift Dr Ibadoghlu's travel ban without delay to allow him to access the medical treatment he needs abroad. We also hope that the Azerbaijani Government reconsiders the travel ban imposed on 76 PACE members, merely for how they voted in the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly.
Azerbaijan's participation in the Council of Europe is in the fundamental interest of all Azerbaijanis and all of Europe. COP29 offers the international community an opportunity to reiterate these messages. And during these two recent visits to Baku, Commissioner Hoekstra raised the human rights situation with the authorities and met with civil society representatives, including 2024 Sakharov Prize finalist Dr Ibadoghlu.
COP29 is also an historic opportunity for peace. Azerbaijan and Armenia have never been so close to overcoming decades of conflict. The conference will be a historic chance for the Azerbaijan and Armenia to demonstrate to the world their commitment to peace and to muster the political will to sign a peace agreement. As European Union, we continue to lend our full support to the normalisation process, and we stand ready to mobilise the necessary resources to allow all sides to reap the benefits of a lasting and sustainable peace.
Azerbaijan faces important choices both as regards the human rights situation in the country and the peace process with its neighbour. We should keep our channels of communication open and use our relationship to promote human rights, peace and stability in Azerbaijan and in the whole region.

François-Xavier Bellamy,
au nom du groupe PPE. – Monsieur le Président, dans trois semaines, la COP 29 commencera à Bakou. Chez Ilham Aliyev. Aliyev, bourreau du peuple arménien, qu'il a attaqué à plusieurs reprises pour le chasser des terres qu'il occupait historiquement dans le Haut-Karabagh, et qu'il attaque aussi désormais sur son territoire même, la République souveraine d'Arménie. Aliyev, qui s'attaque à nos pays, qui s'attaque à toute l'Europe en déstabilisant la France: en Nouvelle-Calédonie, comme dans de nombreux autres départements et territoires d'outre-mer, et jusque dans nos médias.
               

                  Aliyev, qui, sur notre sol, vient pourchasser ses opposants politiques. Je pense à Mahammad Mirzali, victime de plusieurs tentatives d'assassinat sur le sol français. Je pense à Toural Sadigli. Je pense évidemment à Vidadi Isgandarli, qui a été enterré hier après avoir été assassiné à Mulhouse. Mahammad, Toural et le frère de Vidadi sont avec nous aujourd'hui dans cet hémicycle. Nous voulons leur dire que nous sommes à leurs côtés dans ce combat pour la liberté du peuple azerbaïdjanais.
               

                  Monsieur Aliyev, si vous croyez tant à votre propre pouvoir, pourquoi tenter de faire taire les voix qui vous contestent? Si vous croyez tant à votre légitimité, pourquoi user de la violence? Il est temps, chers amis, que l'Europe sorte enfin de son inconscience. Monsieur le Commissaire, merci pour les mots forts que vous avez eus à l'instant. Enfin! Mais non, la COP 29 n'est pas une chance. La COP 29 est un scandale, une honte qui salira l'histoire même de l'engagement pour la protection de l'environnement. Ce gaz que nous achetons à ce pays témoigne, là encore, de notre lâcheté collective.
               

                  Il est temps de dénoncer aujourd'hui l'accord gazier qui lie la Commission européenne à l'Azerbaïdjan, de prendre les sanctions qui s'imposent contre Ilham Aliyev et son régime, et de dire enfin que la démocratie et le cœur battant de l'Europe sont du côté du peuple arménien, qui se bat pour la liberté, pour la paix, pour la sécurité, dans cette région du Caucase comme dans le monde entier.
               

Γιάννης Μανιάτης,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας S&D. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, σε λίγες μέρες το Αζερμπαϊτζάν θα φιλοξενήσει την COP 29, την Παγκόσμια Διάσκεψη για την Κλιματική αλλαγή. Ωστόσο, το καθεστώς Aliyev, αντί να συμμορφωθεί με τις υποχρεώσεις του, συνεχίζει να παραβιάζει τόσο το διεθνές δίκαιο όσο και τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα. Πάνω από 300 δημοσιογράφοι, υπερασπιστές των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων, ακαδημαϊκοί, ακόμα και διαδηλωτές βρίσκονται φυλακισμένοι υπό απάνθρωπες συνθήκες, χωρίς πρόσβαση σε υπηρεσίες υγείας, δικηγόρους και τις οικογένειές τους. Ο Δρ Ibadoghlu, ένας από τους τρεις φετινούς υποψηφίους του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου για το βραβείο Ζαχάρωφ, βρίσκεται σε κατ' οίκον περιορισμό, ενώ η υγεία του κινδυνεύει.
               

                  Παράλληλα, το Αζερμπαϊτζάν τα τελευταία χρόνια λειτουργεί αποσταθεροποιητικά για την ευρύτερη περιοχή, παραβιάζοντας συνεχώς το διεθνές δίκαιο. Οι συνεχείς επιθέσεις στο έδαφος της Αρμενίας, η πρόσκληση στο ψευδοκράτος της κατεχόμενης Βόρειας Κύπρου να συμμετάσχει στην άτυπη σύνοδο του Οργανισμού Τουρκικών Κρατών, οι δύο πόλεμοι στο Ναγκόρνο Καραμπάχ, με τους Ρώσους στρατιώτες να παρακολουθούν ως θεατές την κατάληψη του αρμενικού αυτού θύλακα, με αποτέλεσμα τον ξεριζωμό πάνω από 100 000 Αρμενίων από τις πατρογονικές τους εστίες, οι όμηροι και αιχμάλωτοι πολέμου που βρίσκονται ακόμα υπό κράτηση, η προσπάθεια καταστροφής της πλούσιας πολιτιστικής κληρονομιάς των Αρμενίων στην περιοχή του Αρτσάχ, όλα αυτά δεν μπορούν να γίνουν αποδεκτά.
               

                  Η διεθνής κοινότητα και η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση πρέπει να χρησιμοποιήσουν αυστηρές κυρώσεις και κάθε μέσο πίεσης που έχουν στη διάθεσή τους, ώστε να διασφαλίσουν την τήρηση του διεθνούς δικαίου και τον σεβασμό των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων από το Αζερμπαϊτζάν.
               

Jordan Bardella,
au nom du groupe PfE. – Monsieur le Président. Monsieur le Commissaire, mes chers collègues, après l'effondrement de la République du Haut-Karabakh, survenu à la suite des opérations militaires menées par l'Azerbaïdjan en septembre 2023, l'Arménie est aujourd'hui la cible des velléités expansionnistes du régime d'Aliyev. Le régime azerbaïdjanais, enrichi par l'argent que lui verse l'Europe pour l'achat de son gaz et aidé par le sultan Erdoğan, intensifie ses actions militaires pour maintenir l'Arménie dans une position de faiblesse et d'isolement dans le Caucase.
               

                  Depuis 2023, une campagne de désinformation orchestrée par le régime de Bakou, documentée par la presse et dénoncée par le ministère de l'intérieur français, vise des territoires d'outre-mer de notre pays, notamment la Nouvelle-Calédonie et la Martinique. Nous devons condamner ici ces pratiques avec la plus grande force et avec la plus grande fermeté. L'Azerbaïdjan cherche à attiser, auprès d'une frange minoritaire mais radicalisée, un sentiment antifrançais indépendantiste appelant à la violence contre les biens et les personnes représentant la France par-delà les mers.
               

                  Cette stratégie de déstabilisation outrancière de la part d'une puissance étrangère dans nos territoires d'outre-mer constitue une atteinte grave à la souveraineté française et à la paix civile. Ces opérations que mène l'Azerbaïdjan sont bien évidemment la réponse au soutien français à l'Arménie, plus vieux pays chrétien de l'histoire et véritable pont entre l'Orient et l'Occident.
               

                  Cette réalité ne peut plus être délibérément occultée, par lâcheté ou par complaisance vis-à-vis des ambitions d'expansion portées par Erdoğan et par ses alliés aux portes de l'Europe. Si rien ne change, alors les lâchetés d'aujourd'hui seront les chaînes de demain. Le sang des Arméniens vaut plus que le gaz d'Aliyev.
               

Șerban Dimitrie Sturdza,
în numele grupului ECR. – Domnule președinte, stimați colegi, condamn cu fermitate deficiențele și derapajele grave cu care se confruntă azi Azerbaidjanul în domeniul libertăților fundamentale și al respectării minorităților de pe teritoriul său. Este trist să vedem cum acest stat se îndepărtează tot mai mult de normele democratice și de standardele internaționale din domeniul respectării drepturilor omului.
               

                  Deși dorim să privilegiem relațiile comerciale și energetice cu Azerbaidjanul, este clar că trebuie să fim mult mai vigilenți cu privire la proveniența gazului care este livrat Europei. Nu putem să acceptăm gaz rusesc în Europa venind pe alte căi. În același timp, trebuie să fim atenți să nu periclităm securitatea energetică a statelor membre ale Uniunii Europene.
               

                  Doresc să-mi exprim profunda solidaritate cu poporul armean, creștin ortodox și îndeosebi cu cei peste 120 000 de armeni care au fost forțați să își părăsească locuințele din regiunea Nagorno-Karabah din cauza agresiunilor repetate ale Azerbaidjanului.
               

                  În final, solicit Uniunii Europene și comunității internaționale să se asigure că Azerbaidjanul conservă patrimoniul cultural, istoric și religios al poporului armean. Acest conflict necesită o soluție bazată pe echilibru și respectarea drepturilor omului întru stabilitatea regiunii și a vecinătății Uniunii Europene.
               

Nathalie Loiseau,
au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, en accueillant la COP 29 à Bakou, l'Azerbaïdjan a souhaité faire parler de lui. Eh bien, exauçons-le et parlons-en. Je voudrais remercier ceux qui, avec moi, ont préparé le texte que nous soumettrons à votre vote, c'est-à-dire tous les groupes à l'exception des Patriotes pour l'Europe et de l'Europe des nations souveraines, qui n'ont pas pris la peine de travailler sur cette résolution.
               

                  Passons sur l'écoblanchiment offert à un pays qui n'exporte pratiquement que des hydrocarbures. Arrêtons-nous un instant sur une bizarrerie: Bakou importe des hydrocarbures, depuis la Russie, et de plus en plus. Quand nous signons avec Aliyev et que nous lui achetons du gaz, nous aidons indirectement Poutine. Bel exemple d'incohérence.
               

                  Il faudrait plus d'une minute pour faire la liste complète des violations des droits de l'homme dont le régime d'Ilham Aliyev est coupable. Je voudrais simplement citer deux personnes, pour saluer leur courage et les protéger de la vindicte de Bakou: Goubad Ibadoghlou, dont nous avons fait à juste titre un finaliste du prix Sakharov, et Mahammad Mirzali, réfugié en Europe, et qui a pourtant subi trois tentatives d'assassinat. Il est présent avec nous aujourd'hui, et je voudrais le saluer. Nous devons tenir Ilham Aliyev personnellement responsable de leur sort.
               

                  Permettez-moi d'insister encore sur les 100 000 Arméniens du Haut-Karabakh, à qui l'Azerbaïdjan a imposé un nettoyage ethnique en règle, sur les prisonniers de guerre toujours détenus, sur le patrimoine arménien détruit et sur les prétextes que ne cesse d'invoquer Bakou pour repousser la paix avec l'Arménie.
               

                  Non, l'Azerbaïdjan n'a décidément rien d'un partenaire fiable. Et oui, il faut boycotter la COP 29 à Bakou.
               

Sergey Lagodinsky,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, Anar Mammadli has been a known critic of Azerbaijani authorities and a fierce advocate for human rights and environmental justice, also ahead of COP29. He has long been a target of persecution. He was subjected to smear campaigns. They were following him in the streets. In fact, this April, while he was on his way to pick up his own child, he was arrested and driven away. Ever since, he is in a pre-trial detention; his home has been searched.
He is just one of many stories of this harsh reality in Azerbaijan today. Activists and critics are being imprisoned for executing their basic freedoms. As we speak, dozens of others, journalists like Sevinj Vagifgyzy. Activists like Bahruz Samadov are also behind bars for nothing more than their courage to speak out.
This is unacceptable and it is happening just weeks before Azerbaijan is set to host the United Nations climate conference. Azerbaijan is not just a regional player. It is a key partner for the European Union in energy and security issues. The President of the Commission even called the country a reliable partner. But with such partnerships comes responsibilities and this responsibility is to respect the fundamental principles of human rights, democracy and the rule of law.
We demand the immediate release of Anar Mammadli, of Gubad Ibadoghlu. This is not just about individual cases, it is about the future of this country and of our relationship. Azerbaijan has a choice: it can continue down the path of repression or become a democracy. We urge you to choose wisely.

Γιώργος Γεωργίου,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας The Left. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριε Επίτροπε, το Αζερμπαϊτζάν είναι το μέρος όπου η δήθεν έγνοια της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης για τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα και το διεθνές δίκαιο συναντά το φυσικό αέριο. Φαίνεται απίστευτο; Το 2022, ωστόσο, η κ. Ursula von der Leyen δήλωνε ότι το Αζερμπαϊτζάν αποτελεί έναν αξιόπιστο προμηθευτή και υπέγραφε συμφωνίες για διπλασιασμό των ετήσιων εξαγωγών φυσικού αερίου του Αζερμπαϊτζάν προς την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση. Ούτε παραβιάσεις ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων είδε ούτε παράνομες συλλήψεις και φυλακίσεις πολιτικών κρατουμένων, δημοσιογράφων και υπερασπιστών των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων είδε· ούτε για τον βίαιο διωγμό 100 000 Αρμενίων άκουσε ούτε για την προσπάθεια αναβάθμισης και αναγνώρισης του ψευδοκράτους στην Κύπρο έμαθε. Ενώ συμβαίνουν όλα αυτά, έχουν κάποιοι το θράσος να κουνούν το δάκτυλο σε τρίτες χώρες και να παρουσιάζονται ως ο παγκόσμιος υπερασπιστής των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων. Εμείς συμμέτοχοι σε όλα ετούτα δεν θα γίνουμε. Γι' αυτό ζητούμε την άμεση ακύρωση της συμφωνίας για στρατηγική εταιρική σχέση ανάμεσα στο Αζερμπαϊτζάν και την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση στον τομέα της ενέργειας.
               

Alexander Sell,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Im vergangenen Jahr hat die Armee von Aserbaidschan Bergkarabach angegriffen und besetzt. Über 100 000 Armenier mussten fliehen; das kulturelle Erbe des ersten christlichen Staates der Welt wird systematisch zerstört. Warum erfahren wir so wenig über diesen Konflikt? Im Januar dieses Jahres hat die Generalstaatsanwaltschaft in München Anklage gegen Politiker von CDU und CSU erhoben. Der Vorwurf: Bestechung durch die Regierung von Aserbaidschan.
               

                  Es geht um vier Millionen Euro. Vier Millionen Euro Schmiergeld für die Deckung der ethnischen Säuberungen in Bergkarabach. Europaweit sollen über 30 Millionen geflossen sein. Es ist deshalb kein Wunder, dass wir so wenig über die Christenverfolgung in Bergkarabach erfahren. Die armenischen Christen werden vertrieben, weil deutsche Christdemokraten fürs Wegschauen bezahlt werden.
               

                  Impfdeals, Maskenskandal, Aserbaidschan-Affäre: Ob im Deutschen Bundestag oder hier im Europäischen Parlament – die Politik dieser CDU ist nicht wertegeleitet, sie ist käuflich.
               

Rasa Juknevičienė (PPE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, this year's Nobel Prize in Economics was awarded to scientists who demonstrated that societies with poor rule of law and institutions that exploit their population do not generate prosperity or positive change. The South Caucasus region is now exactly the place where this theory can be tested. While today it may appear that regimes – like the Aliyev regime – trampling on the rule of law and democracy are strong, we need to take the long view.
That is why Armenia's shift away from Russia and towards a European way of life must be a priority for the European Union. This weekend showed the toxic role the Kremlin played in Moldova's elections, and revealed the extent of its infiltration in Georgia's current government. We also clearly see how Putin is exploiting long-standing historical tensions between Azeris and Armenians.
Therefore, today we agreed among the groups on a resolution, and we are very clear: the European Parliament condemns the direction that the Aliyev regime continues to take and expresses clear support for Armenia's chosen European way of life.

Nacho Sánchez Amor (S&D). – Señor presidente, hay una tensión tradicional entre los regímenes autoritarios, que buscan ser blanqueados mediante la organización de grandes eventos, y quienes piensan que estas ocasiones son una oportunidad también para, precisamente, subrayar esa represión política. Malas noticias: van ganando los primeros.
               

                  El evento es la excusa para una vuelta de tuerca a la represión, justo para no enturbiar la celebración. Y sin consecuencias. Ese es el centro de la cuestión: sin consecuencias. Pensemos en el Mundial de Qatar, los Juegos Olímpicos de Pekín o los Juegos de Invierno de Sochi. Y sigue sin haber consecuencias, lo que es, en sí mismo, un incentivo para repetir; sobre todo, si el país tiene gas o petróleo, porque entonces recibes amables visitas de la Comisión, palmaditas en la espalda y te llaman ‘socio fiable’, mientras tu Policía sigue aterrorizando, acosando, silenciando y encarcelando, como pasó en Azerbaiyán en Eurovisión 2012 o en los Juegos Europeos de 2015.
               

                  Los defensores de derechos humanos ya temen que sus países sean elegidos para grandes eventos, porque será la señal para limpiar las calles, las redacciones de los medios, las redes sociales, de cualquier atisbo de crítica, pues habrá muchos periodistas: a más testigos, más represión.
               

Pierre-Romain Thionnet (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, avant comme après la tempête, il peut régner un calme qui vous fait baisser la garde. Dans le Caucase du Sud, étalant devant eux des cartes soviétiques, autorités arméniennes et azerbaïdjanaises discutent du traité de leurs frontières. Et pourtant, c'est une guerre sans fin qui se perpétue contre les Arméniens, commencée il y a plus de un siècle par les Turcs, aujourd'hui poursuivie sous d'autres formes par le régime d'Aliyev.
               

                  L'Artsakh est tombé, et demain c'est la frontière même de la République d'Arménie qui pourrait être visée, en particulier la région du Syunik, dont le contrôle permettrait aux Azerbaïdjanais de réaliser une continuité territoriale turque de la Méditerranée à la Caspienne. La protection de l'Arménie chrétienne par la Russie était une illusion. Elle avait pour condition l'alignement d'Erevan sur Moscou.
               

                  C'est l'honneur de la France, et ce devrait être l'honneur de toute l'Europe, que de se substituer à cette alliance insincère et de garantir la souveraineté et l'intégrité territoriale de l'Arménie. Pour Paris, cela passe par le renforcement du partenariat de défense avec l'Arménie, que ce soit en matière de formation au combat – notamment en montagne – ou de contrats d'armement.
               

                  Dans les contreforts du Caucase, là aussi, la recherche de la paix n'exclut pas – mais, au contraire, nécessite – le rapport de force pour mettre un terme à certaines ambitions impériales.
               

Małgorzata Gosiewska (ECR). – Wojna o Górski Karabach spowodowała ogromny kryzys humanitarny, szczególnie dotykający dzieci. Trzy lata temu jako wicemarszałek Sejmu RP zaprosiłam do Polski dzieci z regionu Karabachu, sieroty, półsieroty, których rodziny straciły domy i środki do życia w wyniku działań wojennych. Te dzieci nadal potrzebują wsparcia, aby normalnie się rozwijać. Azerbejdżan odzyskał kontrolę nad tym regionem, a na ludność ormiańską nałożono blokadę prowadzącą do niedoborów żywności, lekarstw, przerw w dostawach prądu. W efekcie nastąpił exodus Ormian, w tym dzieci. Czym dla dziecka jest utrata bliskich, a potem domu rodzinnego? To utrata wszystkiego, co do tej pory znały i kochały. I choć konflikt został oficjalnie zakończony, jego skutki są nadal odczuwalne. Społeczność międzynarodowa ma obowiązek upominać się o przestrzeganie praw człowieka, zwłaszcza praw dzieci i nieść im stale pomoc. O co apeluję.
               

Helmut Brandstätter (Renew). – Mr President, Mr Commissioner, if I understood you rightly, you said that COP29 is a chance for Mr Aliyev to show that there are human rights in Azerbaijan. I'm afraid he doesn't care for human rights. He probably doesn't even know the word. If I think back to Sochi 2014, what happened a few months after Sochi? Did Putin care for human rights? No, he occupied Crimea.
And with Aliyev you also see a clear pattern. He cracks down on anyone who dares to criticise him. And this way we are even legitimising COP29. The billions of euros he spends on luxury properties in London, Dubai and wherever else is not his money. He stole it from the people of Azerbaijan.
What is also a topic: he does not only throw people into the prison in his country or kill people in his country, he even does it in Europe. There's the case of Vidadi Isgandarli. He was attacked in France by three men and died from his injuries. So we have to see Azerbaijan. It's a cruel dictatorship and it's wrong to give him the COP29.

Marie Toussaint (Verts/ALE). – Monsieur le Président, nous discutons aujourd'hui de l'Azerbaïdjan, parce que Bakou s'apprête à accueillir une conférence mondiale pour le climat et qu'évidemment on demande à celles et ceux qui dénoncent ce fait-là de se taire. Eh bien, nous ne nous tairons pas, parce que la défense du climat ne peut se faire au détriment des droits de l'homme. Jamais.
               

                  La vérité, c'est qu'il aurait fallu boycotter cette COP et suspendre les accords gaziers tant que l'intégrité territoriale de l'Arménie n'est pas pleinement et absolument respectée, qu'un accord de paix n'est pas signé et que les prisonniers politiques azerbaïdjanais et arméniens ne sont pas libérés.
               

                  Alors, disons ce qui doit être dit: Aliyev muselle la presse pour cacher, entre autres, ses relations avec la Russie et avec l'industrie fossile écocidaire, mais aussi pour masquer ses attaques répétées contre ses opposants politiques, qui subissent parfois la torture. Ilham Aliyev n'est pas un démocrate.
               

                  Hier encore, pourtant, la Commission européenne signait de nouveaux contrats gaziers avec le régime azerbaïdjanais, indifférente à l'épuration ethnique à l'œuvre dans le Haut-Karabakh. C'est une faute morale et politique majeure. Nous l'avons dénoncée, car nous connaissons notre histoire et que nous n'avons pas oublié le génocide subi par le peuple arménien. Mais ce souvenir ne suffit pas.
               

                  Alors, il faut aujourd'hui agir, pour faire reculer une fois pour toutes le régime d'Aliyev.
               

Pernando Barrena Arza (The Left). – Señor presidente, señorías, hace un año Azerbaiyán culminó una limpieza étnica de absolutamente toda la población armenia de Nagorno Karabaj, su tierra ancestral, donde los armenios habían vivido durante miles de años, una limpieza étnica precedida de todo tipo de crímenes de guerra.
               

                  En este momento, la situación de lo que ocurre allí ha quedado desdibujada por la magnitud de otras crisis y conflictos, pero la realidad es que decenas de miles de armenios de Karabaj ahora están refugiados fuera de su hogar y hay decenas de presos políticos en poder de Bakú.
               

                  Las conversaciones entre Armenia y Azerbaiyán pueden ser un buen paso para dar paz y estabilidad a la región, pero no podemos olvidar la realidad de los karabajíes ni tomar Azerbaiyán por un país aliado de la Unión Europea por mucho gas que tenga o por mucha diplomacia del caviar que siga ejerciendo en los pasillos de esta Casa. No podemos olvidar que Azerbaiyán es un Estado autoritario donde se detiene a periodistas, activistas y defensores de derechos humanos, se reprimen protestas pacíficas y se restringe ilegítimamente el trabajo de medios de comunicación y organizaciones independientes.
               

                  Europa no puede mirar hacia otro lado porque necesite compensar el embargo a Rusia: el gas azerí que llega a Europa lo hace manchado de sangre armenia y de la vulneración de derechos humanos contra la ciudadanía de Azerbaiyán.
               

Massimiliano Salini (PPE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, nel settembre del 2023 le 100.000 persone che abitavano la regione del Nagorno-Karabakh sono state, di fatto, deportate attraverso una un'operazione di pulizia etnica, come giustamente è stata definita.
               

                  L'Europa ha reagito ma timidamente. Ed è inaccettabile che continuino le forniture – senza condizioni – di gas che arricchiscono un Paese totalmente sprezzante dello Stato di diritto, come l'Azerbaigian, Paese che ha addirittura definito l'operazione di cui parliamo un'operazione ‘contro il terrorismo armeno’. Addirittura il territorio non viene definito neanche armeno: viene definito l'‘Azerbaigian occidentale’. Questo prelude a quello che potrebbe accadere in futuro.
               

                  Bene, la cosa più grave, però, è la violenza e il cinismo con cui tutti i segni della presenza cristiana-armena in Nagorno-Karabakh vengono distrutti. Quello dimostra la falsità e la mistificazione della narrazione azera e ci incarica di una grande responsabilità, come cristiani europei, verso quel popolo.
               

Raphaël Glucksmann (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, vous pouvez donc enfermer les opposants et les journalistes, vous pouvez mettre en péril la vie de personnes aussi courageuses que le Dr Ibadoghlou, vous pouvez poignarder vos opposants jusque dans les rues de nos villes, vous pouvez commettre un nettoyage ethnique dans le Haut-Karabakh et menacer constamment votre voisin, l'Arménie, vous pouvez contourner les sanctions européennes contre le régime poutinien en nous vendant le gaz russe, que nous boycottons par ailleurs… et vous pouvez quand même recevoir la terre entière en grande pompe lors de la COP.
               

                  C'est profondément lunaire. Cette tyrannie gazière organise la lutte internationale contre le réchauffement climatique. La faiblesse de nos dirigeants vis-à-vis de ce régime est insigne.
               

                  Alors il est temps. Il est temps de défendre les dissidents qui ont trouvé refuge sur notre sol. Il est temps de soutenir plus fortement l'Arménie, de suspendre l'accord gazier entre l'Union européenne et l'Azerbaïdjan, de montrer que les crimes ont des conséquences, même quand vous jonglez avec les milliards. Il est temps de montrer que nous avons encore quelques principes et que nous ne sommes pas prêts à les vendre.
               

Marion Maréchal (ECR). – Monsieur le Président, il y a un an, je rencontrais les réfugiés de l'Artsakh en Arménie. J'ai encore en tête leurs témoignages poignants: blocus et sous-nutrition, meurtres, bombardements de civils, profanations d'églises et de cimetières. Comment ne pas condamner cette épuration ethnique? Mais cela n'est pas suffisant. Il est impératif que les chancelleries européennes appliquent des sanctions fortes contre cette dictature de l'Azerbaïdjan, qui musèle des journalistes et retient des prisonniers politiques de l'Artsakh.
               

                  Nous condamnons l'hypocrisie de la Présidente de la Commission, qui se félicitait alors de son accord énergétique avec ce qu'elle qualifiait de ‘partenaire fiable’. Loin de nous soustraire à la dépendance au gaz russe, nous continuons de l'importer en Europe via l'Azerbaïdjan. Nous devons boycotter la COP 29, qui se déroulera à Bakou, tant que ces réfugiés n'auront pas l'assurance de pouvoir revenir en sécurité sur leurs terres et tant que la protection de leurs biens culturels ne sera pas assurée. La vie d'un réfugié de l'Artsakh ne vaut pas moins que le gaz azerbaïdjanais.
               

                  Enfin, l'Arménie ne peut pas rester seule face aux velléités expansionnistes de l'Azerbaïdjan et de la Turquie. L'Europe doit la soutenir, y compris par des moyens militaires, pour lui permettre de garantir son intégrité territoriale et de négocier la paix à son avantage. C'est un enjeu de civilisation pour nous, et il en va de notre honneur.
               

Silvia Sardone (PfE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, da anni assistiamo alla tragedia degli armeni e dei cristiani: pulizia etnica, crimini di guerra, chiese distrutte. Nel Nagorno-Karabakh abbiamo visto una politica distruttiva supportata dalla Turchia, che ha portato alla fuga di migliaia di persone. Cosa volete fare per tutelare il patrimonio millenario armeno e cristiano?
               

                  L'Unione europea è zitta e cieca. Silenzio anche sui prigionieri detenuti oramai da anni. Il popolo armeno deve sopportare il continuo tentativo della sua cancellazione come enclave cristiana da parte di nuove dittature, spesso supportate da milizie di fanatici jihadisti.
               

                  Nel mondo ci sono 365 milioni di cristiani perseguitati. Il Parlamento europeo però si preoccupa solo di islamofobia, quando l'Europa o è cristiana o non è. Ed evidentemente per la maggioranza qui va bene anche non essere nulla.
               

                  A me tutto ciò non va bene. Io non ci sto. Bisogna alzare la testa e difendere ciò che siamo, le nostre radici cristiane.
               

Petras Auštrevičius (Renew). – Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, first of all, I would like to reassure our opponents for their allegedly unfounded criticism of Azerbaijan: the Council of Europe suspended the country's membership in the Parliamentary Assembly at the beginning of this year – a clear proof. This is the result of a long-term and systematic crackdown by the Baku authorities on political opponents, dissidents, non-governmental organisations and human rights activists.
As we speak, dear colleagues at plenary tonight, the health of Gubad Ibadoghlu is in a very, very critical state. But authorities do not allow him to travel abroad for proper medical treatment. Let me call on EU leaders, who willingly will take part in COP29 meeting, to bring out Gubad Ibadoghlu by their planes from Baku. It's the only way to save his life.

Catarina Vieira (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, dear Commissioner, Famil Khalilov, Anar Mamadli, Bahruz Samadov, Iqbal Abilov. These are among the ever-growing list of political prisoners in Azerbaijan – a list that also includes Gubad Ibadoghlu, shortlisted for this year's Sakharov Prize. Jailed under dubious charges and currently under house arrest, he is being detained and denied the urgent medical care that he requires.
Yet, Commission President von der Leyen refers to Azerbaijan as a reliable partner, signaling perhaps that protecting oil and gas imports matters more than upholding our values. We must use the approaching COP29 in Baku to shine a spotlight on Azerbaijan's human rights situation and prevent the regime from misusing the events to whitewash its reputation.
Let us, in words and in action, reaffirm that a reliable partnership is one built not just on economic interests, but also on shared values.

Reinhold Lopatka (PPE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, our Lithuanian colleague mentioned that the Council of Europe opposed to give Azerbaijan credentials for the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. I was one of these 75. We are now blacklisted by Azerbaijan. We are not allowed to enter this country, even on official missions. That is the real face of Azerbaijan.
There are currently six inter-state cases pending before the European Court of Human Rights concerning Azerbaijan. In addition, Freedom House has designated Azerbaijan as one of the most authoritarian states globally. Arbitrary arrests, torture are a common feature in the country, and more than 300 individuals are currently in prison for political charges.
At the heart of all this, now the COP conference is coming to Baku next month. I think we should not give Azerbaijan a chance to create a false impression of a country of tranquillity and of respect for human rights. This is not Azerbaijan: it is the opposite.

Alessandra Moretti (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, poche volte, anche in quest'Aula, abbiamo sentito parlare di Nagorno-Karabakh. Eppure il conflitto tra Azerbaigian e Armenia ha causato centinaia di vittime e il trasferimento forzato di una popolazione: un vero crimine contro l'umanità. Le autorità azere continuano a ridurre gli spazi della società civile, chiudendo ONG e arrestando giornalisti con dubbie accuse.
               

                  Proprio mentre accade tutto questo, l'Azerbaigian, però, ha ricevuto un grande appoggio per diventare paese ospite della COP29: Baku vuole presentarsi al mondo come un Paese dall'irreprensibile profilo istituzionale.
               

                  Ma non possiamo farci incantare dall'utilizzo diplomatico del gas azero svendendo i nostri principi per interessi economici. Ogni accordo tra UE e Azerbaigian deve essere condizionato al rispetto dei diritti umani e del diritto internazionale, fino anche a considerare la sospensione dell'attuale memorandum.
               

                  Non solo: chiediamo indagini sulle atroci violenze compiute nel Nagorno-Karabakh e che i responsabili siano sanzionati, per poi lavorare ad un processo di pace costruttivo e rispettoso tra Azerbaigian e Armenia.
               

Γεάδης Γεάδη (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, καλοδεχούμενη η ειρηνευτική συμφωνία μεταξύ Αρμενίας και Αζερμπαϊτζάν. Όμως, κάθε ειρηνευτική προσπάθεια πρέπει να τύχει του ίδιου σεβασμού. Κανείς δεν μπορεί να παραβλέψει τα εγκλήματα που διαπράττει το Αζερμπαϊτζάν. Ο δημοκρατικός κόσμος δεν μπορεί να ανέχεται την παραβατική του συμπεριφορά ούτε να σιωπά απέναντι σε μια χώρα με πλούσιο ιστορικό παραβιάσεων. Τι να πρωτοθυμηθούμε από τα πρόσφατα γεγονότα; Την εθνοκάθαρση του αρμενικού πληθυσμού στο Ναγκόρνο Καραμπάχ και την εννιάμηνη επιβολή ολοκληρωτικού αποκλεισμού; Ότι συνεχίζει μέχρι σήμερα να κρατά παράνομα αιχμαλώτους πολέμου, παρά τις διεθνείς εκκλήσεις; Ότι καταστρέφει την πολιτιστική και θρησκευτική κληρονομιά των Αρμενίων της περιοχής, που συνιστά επίσης έγκλημα πολέμου; Ότι κατέχει παράνομα κυρίαρχο έδαφος της Αρμενίας, καταπατώντας το διεθνές δίκαιο; Τα επικοινωνιακά τεχνάσματα των Αζέρων μέσω της διοργάνωσης της COP 29 δεν μπορούν να ξεπλύνουν τα εγκλήματα. Γι' αυτό δεν πρέπει να παρευρεθούν αντιπρόσωποι υψηλού επιπέδου. Φτάνει πια η ανοχή. Ήρθε η ώρα να βάλουμε ένα τέλος σε όσους δεν σέβονται το διεθνές δίκαιο και να φέρουμε το Αζερμπαϊτζάν προ των ευθυνών του.
               

Michael McNamara (Renew). – Mr President, colleagues, Azerbaijan is a country that I came to know well when I worked in the OSCE, came to know even better when I was a member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, just beside this building, where I, along with a lot of others, encountered what was called at the time 'caviar diplomacy', where very large sums of money were washing around to encourage people to ignore Azerbaijan's human rights record.
Because of that, I suppose, I wasn't surprised to meet a delegation from Azerbaijan in the Irish parliament building as streams of refugees were leaving Nagorno-Karabakh. Money talks, and nothing talks as loudly as petrodollars. For similar reasons, I'm not surprised that COP29 is going to be held there, and a minister of the Irish government, no less, is going to go over there and expound his environmental credentials to the world.
Nevertheless, I think it's also time to be positive and to look at the possibilities that this offers. If there is a possibility of peace, then I would urge the Azeri Government to seize that opportunity, because otherwise COP29 will be no more than a farce. I would urge them to seize a possibility of peace with Armenia.

Lena Schilling (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, 'My father is suffering. He's in pain. His heart aneurism is getting worse. If his arteries rupture, he will die and I will lose my father forever. He's being held hostage by the Azerbaijani Government for investigating the corrupt oil and gas sector before the COP. I'm begging the world to save my father.' This message comes from Zhala, a daughter who's fighting for her father, Dr Gubad. And she's not alone: there are 300 innocent political prisoners currently imprisoned in Azerbaijan.
To the Azerbaijani Government, I say this: we will not allow you to greenwash your actions ahead of the COP. We will not let you bury the truth. We will shine a light on your violent crackdown on human rights and inhumanity. We demand the immediate release of political prisoners and to get Zhala's father the medical treatment he needs. Dignity and human rights are something we fight for everywhere.

Davor Ivo Stier (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, kolegice i kolege, promjene u međunarodnom poretku dovele su do toga da su se promijenili odnosi i na Južnom Kavkazu i jasno je da je učvršćena pozicija Azerbajdžana, ali to ne daje pravo Azerbajdžanu da krši ljudska prava.
               

                  Azerbajdžan ima pravo na svoj teritorijalni integritet, ali ne na kršenje ljudskih prava. Mora poštivati pravo Armenaca da se vrate u svoje domove u Gorskom Karabahu.
               

                  Europska unija ima razvijene odnose s Azerbajdžanom, ima energetsku suradnju, ali ima i politički dijalog i to mora iskoristiti da naglasi kako se moraju poštivati ljudska prava.
               

                  Moramo puno snažnije podržati i naše kolege iz Parlamentarne skupštine Vijeća Europe. I ja sam u tom broju koji je na crnoj listi Azerbajdžana jer smo samo digli glas protiv kršenja ljudskih prava.
               

                  Na kraju, želio bih pozvati Baku da iskoristi ovu situaciju i da sklopi mir s Armenijom za stabilnost cijele regije Južnog Kavkaza.
               

Costas Mavrides (S&D). – Mr President, Azerbaijan's aggression to force the displacement of a 100 000 indigenous Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh remains a crime against humanity, while today prisoners of war are still being held captive, and Armenia's territory is violated.
As for Azerbaijan's record for human rights and fundamental freedoms, it is simply deplorable, with a wave of arrests and criminal cases against human rights defenders and journalists.
We do welcome the Commissioner's strong words, but we also strongly denounce the President of the Commission's statement that characterised Azerbaijan as a 'trustworthy energy supplier'. The Aliyev regime does not even respect the International Court of Justice order to respect the religious and historical heritage.
And a final word: we also deplore any attempt to facilitate in any way the international recognition of the secessionist entity in the occupied part of the Republic of Cyprus, as promoted by the criminal regime of Erdoğan and Aliyev at the same time.

Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR). – Voorzitter, vorig jaar bezocht ik de Lachin-corridor, waar ik onder andere sprak met Armeniërs uit Nagorno-Karabach. Eén keer raden hoe de ambassadeur van Azerbeidzjan reageerde? Hij plaatste een afbeelding van een geweer op X, inclusief de dreigende boodschap dat ik me daar niet nog een keer moest laten zien. Dit ontoelaatbare incident valt natuurlijk in het niet bij wat de mensen uit Nagorno-Karabach moeten ervaren: verbanning uit hun regio, vernietiging van hun religieus erfgoed en blijvende militaire aspiraties van Aliyev richting Armenië. En dan de bevolking van Azerbeidzjan zelf. Zij worden ernstig beperkt in hun rechten. Ik denk bijvoorbeeld aan Gubad Ibadoghlu.
               

                  Ondertussen blijven de Raad en de Commissie Azerbeidzjan beschouwen als een betrouwbare partner. Ik vind dat onbegrijpelijk. Het wordt de hoogste tijd voor een andere koers, Te beginnen met de instelling van sancties tegen personen die de mensenrechten schenden en de soevereiniteit van Armenië bedreigen.
               

Emma Wiesner (Renew). – Mr President, we are approaching the global climate conference and our focus right now should be on the global existential climate crisis.
But at the same time, we cannot ignore what is happening all over Azerbaijan, in Baku and in the host country of the COP29. Azerbaijan has violating human rights for a really long time, but this year they have really been stepping it up. Opposition figures, journalists, fighters and civil rights defenders are thrown into jail, just like Gubad Ibadoghlu, one of the finalists for the Sakharov Prize this year, nominated for his work on anti-corruption in the oil and gas sector, kept in house arrest in a frightening medical condition.
If that wasn't enough, Azerbaijan is also engaged in a war with ethnic cleansing of Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh, a clear violation of international law. And given these violations, it's a shame that the UN framework allows a country like Azerbaijan to host the COP29. Lets have now the world's attention on Azerbaijan to keep that on the government, to remind them of their international obligations and to make sure that regimes like Azerbaijan cannot host the COP in the future.

Michael Bloss (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, what a shame! The climate conference will once again be held in a fossil autocracy. Azerbaijan profits from fossil fuels while repressing its own people. And it should not be entrusted with the presidency of the climate conference. I know – and we know – that Azerbaijan's security is watching us right now as we expose their dirty business, because President Aliyev is scared of the truth getting out.
Dr Gubad Ibadoghlu's case – that we all refer to here – makes it painfully clear: a respected economist who dared to speak out against Azerbaijan's corrupt regime. For this he was imprisoned, he was tortured, and now he suffers from heart failure. President Aliyev, give your citizens the freedom they deserve and release Dr Ibadoghlu immediately.
And to my colleagues: Dr Ibadoghlu is a nominee for the Sakharov Prize. Let's award him this prize and save his life.

Λουκάς Φουρλάς (PPE). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριε Επίτροπε, στο Αζερμπαϊτζάν, τον αξιόπιστο τάχα εταίρο, βασανίζονται και φυλακίζονται πολιτικοί που αντιτίθενται στο καθεστώς, δημοσιογράφοι που τόλμησαν να το επικρίνουν φυλακίζονται, Αρμένιοι αιχμάλωτοι πολέμου καθημερινά δέχονται τον εξευτελισμό και την ταπείνωση στο Ναγκόρνο Καραμπάχ, δεκάδες χιλιάδες Αρμένιοι εκδιώχθηκαν από τα σπίτια τους, καθετί χριστιανικό καταστρέφεται.
               

                  Την ίδια ώρα, το Αζερμπαϊτζάν προσκαλεί το ψευδοκράτος, το παράνομο μόρφωμα των κατεχομένων στην Κύπρο, ως παρατηρητή στον Οργανισμό Τουρκικών Κρατών, ενέργεια που έρχεται σε αντίθεση με τις αποφάσεις του Συμβουλίου Ασφαλείας των Ηνωμένων Εθνών. Το Αζερμπαϊτζάν με αυτή τη στάση υπονομεύει τις αρχές της κυριαρχίας και της εδαφικής ακεραιότητας ενός κράτους μέλους της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Θα το ανεχθούμε;
               

                  Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση και η διεθνής κοινότητα δεν μπορούν να μείνουν απαθείς μπροστά σε τέτοιες παράνομες ενέργειες. Ας μη βάζουμε το φυσικό αέριο του Αζερμπαϊτζάν πάνω από αρχές, αξίες και ανθρώπινες ζωές.
               

Miriam Lexmann (PPE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, the regime of Ilham Aliyev is using the upcoming COP conference to hide its aggressive posture against Armenia, oppression at home and evasion of the sanctions targeting the Kremlin. But we will not be fooled. That is why I call for the imposition of sanctions against those regime officials, responsible for human rights abuses, including the continued imprisonment of Dr Gubad Ibadoghlu and other political prisoners.
We must also spell out concretely the cost of Aliyev's continued threats against Armenia and sabotaging by the regime of regional peace.
Finally, we need to reduce our energy dependency, and especially to stop buying the Russian gas that Aliyev continues to send to Europe. It's also time for our governments to stop selling weapons that are used to threaten Armenia, including my own government in Slovakia. Not doing so undermines not only our values, but also our commitments and efforts to protect human rights and restore peace.

Interventions à la demande


Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente, antes que la Unión Europea fue el Consejo de Europa, una organización que nació en 1949 con diez Estados miembros y creció hasta 46, y que dejó de ser una referencia de garantía de la democracia, de los derechos humanos y de la paz en Europa con la entrada de Rusia, que le hizo la guerra a Georgia —miembro también del Consejo de Europa— y a Ucrania —miembro del Consejo de Europa— y ha hecho la guerra por proxy —es decir, por interposición— con dos antiguas repúblicas soviéticas: Azerbaiyán y Armenia (con un enclave azerí en Armenia, Najicheván, y un enclave armenio en Azerbaiyán, Nagorno Karabaj, que ha sido objeto de una limpieza étnica incompatible con los derechos humanos).
               

                  Esto plantea dos desafíos para la Unión Europea. El primero, completar el proceso de adhesión al Consejo de Europa y al Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos, todavía pendiente. En segundo lugar, crecer diplomáticamente para poder afrontar el desafío de participar en la COP29 sin incurrir en la contradicción flagrante con su compromiso en materia de derechos humanos de hacerlo en un país que viola, de manos de jerarcas de la antigua Unión Soviética como Ilham Aliyev, los derechos humanos continuamente en el continente europeo.
               

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Mr President, dear colleagues, I would like to take the time to do a little sensibility training with all of you on the 'caviar diplomacy' that a colleague of ours mentioned. I am not speaking from personal experience, because as yet I am not important enough for Azerbaijan to spend any caviar on me. But I have some information on how it works when the state of Azerbaijan wants to bribe you as a Member of the Parliament. So I want to tell you so you can recognise it when it happens.
Once you are in Azerbaijan and you are in a hotel room – that is, of course, filled up with cameras and microphones – the first thing that they do is they will lay a golden pen on your table. And when you leave the hotel and you have taken the pen, then they know, okay, he took the pen of gold and he's about to be bought.
The second stage, after you take the pen, is that they send a sex worker to your hotel room at night. And of course, it goes the same way: if you let this person in, then they know you can be bought.
And then, of course, the third stage is the briefcase of money that some people here are, unfortunately, familiar with. So watch out, don't get bribed!

Le Président. – Merci beaucoup pour cette recommandation.
               

Grzegorz Braun (NI). – Mr President, I'm very glad that I can hear such a wide condemnation of the atrocities, the ethnic cleansing that Azerbaijan is committing against the nation – the oldest Christian nation that once was a kingdom, the first Christian kingdom in the world.
But probably not everybody knows, not everybody understands, that Azerbaijan has an ally that it can always count on – and this is the state occupying Palestine. This is the state of Israel selling guns, selling drones that make it much easier for Azerbaijan to conduct, to execute its deadly program. And this should be much easier for you, condemning ethnic cleansing in Nagorno-Karabakh, to condemn the state occupying Palestine and committing atrocities, committing genocide in Gaza…

(The President cut off the speaker)


Le Président. – Merci beaucoup, vous avez largement abusé de votre temps de parole. Nous arrivons au terme du débat. Je remercie toutes celles et tous ceux qui y ont participé, le rendant très vivant, et je donne la parole à M. le Commissaire en soulignant, et vous l'avez noté, que la condamnation de l'Azerbaïdjan est unanime parmi les orateurs qui se sont exprimés.
               

(Fin des interventions à la demande)


Nicolas Schmit,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, this debate has shown that very strong attention on the human rights situation in Azerbaijan remains absolutely crucial. As European Union, we are determined to use the momentum of COP29, which has been obviously criticised but now it's a fact that it will take place, to reiterate our expectations that Azerbaijan honours its international human rights obligations.
Retaliation for exercising freedom of expression is a clear violation of international human rights law. All those arbitrarily detained should be released and must have full access to the medical care they need. It is thanks to this Parliament that these messages are passed loudly and clearly.
We have to reiterate our concern over the human rights situation in Azerbaijan as regards to freedom of expression, assembly and association, and democracy.
We also have to continue to appeal to Azerbaijan to facilitate international access to Karabakh, to allow for the independent monitoring of the situation on the ground, and especially to allow Karabakh Armenians to have a right to a safe return.
It is true – yes, it has been mentioned indeed – that we have relationships with Azerbaijan in the energy sector and a few other areas. But this, and I think this should be a very clear message also before the COP29, does not and should not prevent us to strongly voice our concern and condemnations. I think we all have heard this condemnations and this concern here. It has been unanimously expressed in this debate, and this has to be fully taken into account.
We also condemn comments and actions taken by Azerbaijan authorities against some Member States, and particularly in the case of the Republic of Cyprus.

Le Président. – Avant de clôturer définitivement ce débat, je veux donner la parole pour une minute à Mme Maria Zacharia, qui avait fait une demande d'intervention à la demande arrivée tardivement sur le plateau. Vous avez la parole.
               

Interventions à la demande


Μαρία Ζαχαρία (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, έλαβα ένα e-mail από τον πρέσβη του Αζερμπαϊτζάν στο Βέλγιο, στο οποίο ήμουν σε κοινοποίηση μαζί με άλλους 20 συναδέλφους. Απαντούσε σε μια επιστολή συναδέλφου βουλευτή, η οποία ποτέ δεν μου εστάλη, και απαντούσε με ύφος έντονο, σχεδόν απειλητικό στην εισαγωγή, για να ακολουθήσει το αφήγημά του. Προφανώς, με συμπεριέλαβε στην κοινοποίηση γιατί υπέγραψα κείμενο που ζητάει την απελευθέρωση των φυλακισμένων Αρμενίων.
               

                  Θέλω να δηλώσω εδώ, από την Ολομέλεια, με τον πιο επίσημο τρόπο, ότι δεν τρομοκρατούμαι. Το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο δεν τρομοκρατείται. Εκφράζω την αλληλεγγύη μου στους Αρμένιους που υπέστησαν τον εκτοπισμό από τον τόπο τους μετά τον άδικο πόλεμο εναντίον τους από το Αζερμπαϊτζάν, με τη βοήθεια της τουρκικής πολεμικής μηχανής. Ζητώ την απελευθέρωση των φυλακισμένων Αρμενίων.
               

                  Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση δεν μπορεί να συνεργάζεται με χώρες που έχουν κάνει τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα και το διεθνές δίκαιο ‘κουρελόχαρτο’. Πρέπει να πάρουμε θέση να υποστηρίξουμε τους Αρμένιους που ιστορικά δικαιούνται την επιστροφή στον τόπο τους.
               

(Fin des interventions à la demande)


Le Président. – Chers collègues, j'ai reçu, conformément à l'article 136, paragraphe 2, du règlement intérieur, sept propositions de résolution pour clore ce débat.
               

                  Le débat est clos.
               

                  Le vote aura lieu jeudi.
               


Déclarations écrites (article 178)



Tomasz Froelich (ESN),
schriftlich. – Der Konflikt zwischen Armenien und Aserbaidschan ist Teil der Erbmasse der Sowjetunion. Eine langfristige Lösung ist nur dann in Sicht, wenn geopolitische Realitäten anerkannt werden. Denn tatsächlich ringen dort drei Groß- und eine Weltmacht um die Kontrolle: Iran unterstützt Armenien. Die Türkei ist die Schutzmacht Aserbaidschans. Russland versucht seine Stellung als Hegemon zu halten. Und die USA sehen eine historische Chance, gleich zwei Gegnern eine Niederlage zuzufügen. Ausgetragen wird dies auf dem Rücken der Armenier, die sich mit ihrer alten Schutzmacht Russland überworfen haben und nun in der Defensive sind.
               

                  Zur Erinnerung: Als der Konflikt in Bergkarabach erneut ausbrach, kam Russland, das in der Ukraine gebunden war, seinen Bündnisverpflichtungen gegenüber Armenien nicht nach. Für eine langfristige Lösung braucht es einen runden Tisch unter Einschluss Armeniens und Aserbaidschans sowie der drei regionalen Großmächte. Die EU kann dabei als ehrlicher Makler auftreten und dabei gleich zwei Probleme angehen: einen schwelenden Krisenherd in unserer Nachbarschaft und die Sicherung zuverlässiger Gaslieferungen aus Aserbaidschan. Die Entschließung betont zurecht, dass das christliche Erbe Armeniens geschützt werden muss. Daher ist die Kritik am Vorgehen Aserbaidschans gerechtfertigt. Die gegen Aserbaidschan geforderten Sanktionen, darunter die Begrenzung der Gaslieferungen, sind hingegen nicht in unserem Interesse. Deshalb: Enthaltung!
               
21.   People's Republic of China's misinterpretation of the UN resolution 2758 and its continuous military provocations around Taiwan (debate)

Le Président. – L'ordre du jour appelle le débat sur la déclaration de la Commission sur l'interprétation erronée de la résolution 2758 des Nations unies par la République populaire de Chine, et les provocations militaires constantes de celle-ci autour de Taïwan (2024/2891(RSP)).
               

Nicolas Schmit,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, since the beginning of this year, tensions in the Taiwan Strait have risen again. First, let me recall that the EU maintains our One China policy, and this means that we recognise the government of the People's Republic of China as the sole legal government of China.
Second, at the same time, we have an interest in maintaining close relationships with Taiwan. Taiwan is a vibrant democracy. Our cooperation and dialogue with Taiwan are getting more intense on a broad range of issues, in line with our interests and values. Taiwan's system is based on democracy, the rule of law and human rights. In many ways, the European Union and Taiwan are like-minded. In short, we engage with Taiwan in the absence of diplomatic relations.
Thirdly, peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait are of strategic importance for regional and global security and prosperity. Displays of force and increasing tensions and threats in regional hotspots, such as the South and East China Sea and the Taiwan Strait, have a direct impact on European security and prosperity. Thus, the EU has a direct interest in the preservation of the status quo in the Taiwan Strait. We oppose any unilateral actions that change the status quo by force or coercion.
It is for this reason that we follow very closely all developments around the Taiwan Strait. China's military activities around Taiwan increase cross-Strait tensions. We have called on both parties to exercise restraint and avoid any actions that may further escalate cross-Strait tensions, which should be resolved through dialogue. We have always encouraged mainland China and Taiwan to engage constructively with one another and to restart dialogue between them. We are willing to support initiatives aimed at promoting dialogue, cooperation and confidence-building between the two sides.
United Nations resolution 2758 is very short – only 150 words – and among those 150 words, the word 'Taiwan' does not appear. The resolution switched representation in the United Nations from the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek to the representatives of the Government of the People's Republic of China.
I welcome the European Parliament's focus on this issue and this important debate. We should take all opportunities to promote a more positive dynamic in cross-Strait relations, which contribute to peace not only in this region, but also globally.

VORSITZ: SABINE VERHEYEN


Vizepräsidentin


Michael Gahler,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, colleagues and comrades, tongzhi in the gallery and online, there are two issues that need to be addressed with this debate. One is the call on the PRC to stop their repeated military exercises around Taiwan and the military build-up and the increasingly assertive and aggressive behaviour in the South China Sea, not only towards Taiwan, to end the threat of any violent unilateral change of the status quo across the Taiwan Strait. And there is no reunification possible because, according to my knowledge, Taiwan was never part of the PRC since it was established in 1949.
Perhaps you should seek ways to become attractive for the Taiwanese who live in a democracy and dislike a prospect of being treated like the Hongkongers. So you should release the Uyghurs from the so-called reeducation camps, end the cultural repression of the Tibetans, end the incarceration of Falun Gong practitioners, end the prosecution of the underground churches, abide by the international agreement with the UK on 50 years of internal democracy for Hong Kong, stop harassing your neighbours by ignoring the provisions of the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea and, that is the other aspect of this resolution, allow meaningful participation of Taiwanese international organisations who formally do not require statehood to have an observer status. This is in line with our One China policy, that is what G7 has demanded on 23 September 2024, and the 2758 General Assembly resolution does not refer to Taiwan's status other than member state. Indeed, it cannot be a member state, but between full member and nothing, a lot of meaningful participation must be possible.

Francisco Assis,
em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário, Taiwan tem, ao longo dos anos, procurado ocupar um lugar no concerto das Nações Unidas, e a China procura torná-la invisível nesse concerto, através de uma interpretação distorcida da Resolução 2758 das Nações Unidas de 1971. A China, sob a batuta do Partido Comunista chinês, prossegue com os seus jogos de guerra em torno da ilha, num esforço cada vez mais ostensivo de intimidar Taiwan.
                  

                     E há aqui um aspeto que é preciso relevar, do meu ponto de vista, que é a dignidade e a maturidade do povo e das autoridades de Taiwan. Eles têm conseguido conciliar um invejável sangue frio com um desejo ardente de liberdade. É um caminho corajoso, que pode e deve inspirar outros povos oprimidos. A China, por seu lado, já não consegue disfarçar o quanto essa estratégia a perturba e a desorienta. Só isso explica a exibição desmesurada de aparato bélico ocorrida na semana passada.
                  

                     A União Europeia deve, assim, manter-se firme no apoio a Taiwan e à sua estratégia de afirmar uma soberania suave contra a força bruta do Golias chinês. Acreditamos que Taiwan poderá, um dia, assumir um papel determinante na promoção dos valores democráticos naquela região do mundo e ser um aliado-chave da União Europeia.
                  

António Tânger Corrêa,
em nome do Grupo PfE. – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário, thank you for your speech, I think it was very to the point. Caros Colegas, hoje, discutimos uma questão central e muito importante para a estabilidade global, que é a interpretação da Resolução 2758 de 1971 das Nações Unidas. É evidente que a China faz uma interpretação política bastante alterada daquilo para que a resolução foi feita e que foi para dar à República Popular da China a representatividade nas Nações Unidas, mas não se pronuncia sobre Taiwan. E isso é grave, porque nós sabemos que o fim, o objetivo da China relativamente a ‘uma China, dois sistemas’ é precisamente Taiwan.
                  

                     Mas, vemos com grande desagrado aquilo que tem sido feito em Hong Kong e em Macau, com grandes atropelos aos direitos humanos e aos direitos societários que por ali existem. Portanto, Taiwan não seria diferente do tratamento dado a Macau e Hong Kong.
                  

                     Nós, a União Europeia, não nos enganemos. Senhora Presidente, eu servi na China e conheço relativamente bem aquele povo e aquele país. Os chineses não vão recuar e são um perigo global e regional, porque fazem o mesmo com Taiwan, com as Filipinas, com a Indonésia, com o Vietname e com outros países mais pequenos na região. Isso é extremamente grave e é muito grave para a segurança e a estabilidade naquela região e globalmente. Pois, Meus Caros Amigos, a posição da União Europeia deve ser uma posição de equilíbrio, de estabilidade.
                  

Mariusz Kamiński,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Szanowni Państwo! W latach siedemdziesiątych z nadzieją na stabilność i pokój Chińska Republika Ludowa zyskała miejsce w ONZ, co otworzyło przed nią drzwi do niespotykanego rozwoju gospodarczego i technologicznego. Pekin wykorzystał tę szansę, czerpiąc korzyści z bliskich kontaktów z Zachodem. Jednak dzisiaj, poprzez swoje działania, takie jak wsparcie dla barbarzyńskiej agresji Rosji na Ukrainę oraz agresywnej ekspansji w regionie, Pekin nie wywiązuje się ze swoich zobowiązań, które przynależą członkom Rady Bezpieczeństwa oraz wynikają z Karty Narodów Zjednoczonych. Szczególnie niepokojąca jest groźba inwazji na Tajwan, który jest naszym partnerem. Ostatnie manewry wojskowe wokół Tajwanu podważają stabilność w regionie.
                  

                     Unia Europejska przestrzega swojej polityki jednych Chin, wspierając pokój i stabilność w regionie, podkreślając znaczenie status quo. Tajwan to wiarygodny i sprawdzony partner, który od lat buduje relacje oparte na wzajemnym zaufaniu. Dlatego z pełnym przekonaniem popieram rezolucję, którą, mam nadzieję, przyjmiemy jako Parlament Europejski.
                  

Engin Eroglu,
im Namen der Renew-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar! Wir diskutieren heute über zwei wichtige Punkte, in der Überschrift steht es: die militärischen Aggressionen Chinas in der Taiwanstraße, aber auch der Indopazifik, der dann sicherlich davon betroffen ist. Wir haben dort eine Spirale der Eskalation, und wir als Europäisches Parlament setzen heute hier in einer der ersten Sitzungen, die wir im neuen Mandat haben, ein klares Zeichen, dass wir deeskalierend wirken wollen – und das ist das, wofür wir stehen. Wir stehen für Frieden, Freiheit und letztendlich Rechtsstaatlichkeit, und das werden wir in dieser Entschließung auch noch mal ganz klar darstellen.
                  

                     Und meine Bitte an die Kommission, das auch mitzunehmen bei allen Gesprächen, die dort geführt werden – wir sprechen mit einer Stimme. Vielen Dank an Miriam Lexmann, die wirklich diese Verhandlungen eben gerade vor zwei Stunden mit allen Schattenberichterstattern geführt hat. Ich glaube, wir werden eine tolle Entschließung am Ende haben, mit einer breiten Mehrheit, und das ist ein wichtiges Zeichen, was wir in die Region Indopazifik stellen. Wir zeigen genau, wo dieses Parlament steht als Volksvertretung der Europäischen Union.
                  

                     Anderes wichtiges Thema ist die UN-Resolution. Diese wird – aus meiner Sicht – wirklich falsch ausgelegt, und wir zeigen auch hier, dass wir europäischen Volksvertreter mit Rückgrat klare Politik machen und nicht sozusagen an der Verfälschung der Politik arbeiten. Und dieses klare Rückgrat, Herr Kommissar, geben Sie das Frau von der Leyen mit. Sie hat ja eine starke Meinung von vielen Sachen. Ich würde mir ihr starkes Rückgrat auch wünschen in der Außenpolitik zu China, und das ist meine große Bitte an Sie, denn alle anderen hören mit.
                  

Erik Marquardt,
im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar! Ich glaube, dass es ein wichtiges Zeichen ist, dass wir heute hier diskutieren, dass wir aber auch mit großer Geschlossenheit diese Entschließung verabschieden werden. Es ist wichtig, jetzt ein Zeichen der Solidarität mit Taiwan zu senden vom Europäischen Parlament aus, auch von den anderen EU-Institutionen, in einer Zeit, wo die Volksrepublik China fast täglich mit dem Einsatz von Militär in der Region provoziert. Wir haben erst heute wieder von einer Militärübung erfahren, die nur 100 Kilometer entfernt von Taiwan stattgefunden hat, nur eine Woche nach der vorangegangenen Übung.
                  

                     Ich glaube – und ich habe mir die Entschließungen alle angeschaut –, dass es ein sehr wichtiges Zeichen ist, dass wir so geschlossen da stehen. Ich habe eine Entschließung eher vom rechten Rand des Parlaments her gelesen, wo so ein bisschen der Eindruck erweckt wurde, ja, man wisse ja auch nicht so genau, wer jetzt gerade daran schuld ist, dass es da Spannungen gibt. Ich glaube, es ist aus Sicht dieses Parlaments sehr wichtig zu sagen, dass wir schon wissen, wo die Spannung herkommt, dass wir schon wissen, wer hier provoziert, dass wir schon wissen, an welcher Seite wir stehen.
                  

                     Taiwan ist ein sehr wichtiger Partner der EU. Taiwan ist einen erstaunlichen Weg gegangen in den letzten 30 Jahren als Demokratie, z. B. auch mit der Einführung der gleichgeschlechtlichen Ehe als erstes Land in Asien. Und es gibt eine große Einigkeit im Parlament, dass wir für Stabilität, für Frieden in der Region sorgen wollen, dass wir alles dazu beitragen wollen, dass wir aber auch entschlossen sind und diese Provokation nicht weiter hinnehmen.
                  

                     Ich glaube auch, neben der Entschließung wäre es wichtig, dass wir als Parlament auf vermehrte wissenschaftliche, auf kulturelle, auf politische Interaktion mit Taiwan setzen, dass wir auch den Beginn der Legislatur nutzen, um die Beziehung mit Taiwan zu stärken und hier in einen vermehrten Austausch zu kommen.
                  

Danilo Della Valle,
a nome del gruppo The Left. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, il titolo di questo dibattito è ‘Interpretazione errata della risoluzione ONU 2758 da parte della Repubblica popolare cinese e le sue continue provocazioni militari intorno a Taiwan’.
                  

                     Ebbene, onestamente io vedo poco spazio per le interpretazioni sbagliate. È una risoluzione ONU di sole cinque righe, dove si dice chiaramente che la Repubblica popolare cinese e il suo governo sono gli unici legittimi rappresentanti della Cina alle Nazioni Unite e che chiede l'espulsione dei rappresentanti di Chiang Kai-shek dalle cariche che illegittimamente occupavano presso l'ONU.
                  

                     Quello che sembra essere evidente, ancora una volta, è che si vuole provare a convincere i cittadini europei che in ballo non ci sia uno scontro tra l'egemonia geopolitica e la sopravvivenza dell'impero statunitense ma una battaglia per la libertà e la democrazia. Gli Stati Uniti, mentre riconoscono ufficialmente la ‘One China Policy’, fanno pressioni sui partner europei affinché rompano le relazioni diplomatiche e commerciali con la Cina, utilizzando la retorica dell'indipendenza di Taiwan.
                  

                     Hanno disseminato l'Indo-Pacifico di basi militari e di loro flotte e continuano a fornire sistemi militari di difesa a Taiwan, con la speranza di far scoppiare l'ennesima guerra. Ma abbiamo già visto questo schema ripetersi in Libia, in Sud America o anche nelle famose provette sventolate all'ONU.
                  

                     Non possiamo inseguire l'ennesima escalation militare: non possiamo permettere che i cittadini delle nostre nazioni vivano altri anni di sacrifici economici e magari bellici. A differenza vostra, noi crediamo che l'Unione europea dovrebbe agire nel solco tracciato dalla comunità internazionale, scegliendo strumenti di diplomazia e cooperazione.
                  

Hans Neuhoff,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Zwei Drittel der Weltbevölkerung, 90 % der neuen globalen Mittelschicht, leben heute im indopazifischen Raum – Zeit und Anlass, sich darum zu kümmern. Jahrzehntelang hatten die USA in der Folge von Resolution 2758 eine systematische Aufbaupolitik in China betrieben, haben das Land so stark gemacht, dass es jetzt eingedämmt werden muss.
                  

                     2020 gründete sich die Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, finanziert unter anderem von George Soros' Open Society Foundation. In diesem Sommer beschloss die Alliance against China, zu der auch viele Kollegen aus dem Haus gehören, eine breite internationale Kampagne auf den Weg zu bringen. Im Strategiekonzept der NATO von 2022 wird China erstmalig als strategischer Gegner des Bündnisses markiert. Zeitgleich bringt der German Marshall Fund eine Studie heraus, die China eine Verfälschung von Resolution 2758 vorwirft.
                  

                     Strategische Autonomie, wie sie der Hohe Vertreter für die EU ausgerufen hat, darf nicht länger bedeuten, dass europäische Interessen mit amerikanischen verwechselt werden. In einer Zeit zunehmender geopolitischer Spannungen ist es unerlässlich, dass die EU eine pragmatische Haltung einnimmt. Stabilität in der Region, die Funktionsfähigkeit der globalen Lieferketten sollten für uns oberste Priorität besitzen. Taiwan darf nicht zur Ukraine Chinas werden.
                  

Miriam Lexmann (PPE). – Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, we are not here this evening to provoke or to be alarmist. We are here because we are facing a serious geopolitical situation. We observe the PRC's distortion of UN resolution 2758, its dangerous military exercises around Taiwan and threats against neighbours. We see its actions to weaken our democratic institutions, divide societies and undermine economic security. We monitor growing evasion of sanctions and increasing coordination between the axis of evil.
In short, the Chinese Communist Party today represents the biggest threat to global peace and security, and we need to wake up. This resolution is an important step in communicating clearly that we will not tolerate distortion of international law, because preventing and preserving the respect for international law is the first step for preserving peace.

Hannes Heide (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, geschätzter Herr Kommissar! Taiwan steht heute im Mittelpunkt einer äußerst sensiblen Debatte. Auch wenn die Ein-China-Politik Grundlage internationaler Beziehungen ist, dürfen wir nicht schweigen, wenn es um die demokratischen Rechte und den internationalen Status Taiwans geht. Es ist unerlässlich, dass Taiwan in internationalen Organisationen wie der WHO oder der Zivilluftfahrtorganisation vertreten ist. Diese Institutionen dienen dem globalen Wohl, und das ist im Interesse der gesamten Weltgemeinschaft, dass Taiwan einen Platz am Tisch hat. Hier geht es um praktische humanitäre Kooperation.
                  

                     Die EU und die Mitgliedstaaten müssen die Zusammenarbeit mit Taiwan vertiefen, um Einmischungsoperationen und Desinformation aus China entgegenzuwirken. Als Mitglied im Pegasus-Untersuchungsausschuss möchte ich auch den Bereich Cybersicherheit ansprechen. Zudem bedrohen besorgniserregende militärische Provokationen seitens China nicht nur Taiwan, sondern gefährden die Stabilität in der gesamten Region.
                  

                     Es ist an der Zeit, die Rolle Taiwans in der globalen Gemeinschaft zu überdenken. Wir müssen uns für eine gerechte, friedliche Lösung einsetzen. Mit dieser Entschließung stärken wir unsere wirtschaftliche Partnerschaft und demokratische Verbindungen im indopazifischen Raum.
                  

Hermann Tertsch (PfE). – Señora presidente, la República Popular China lleva demasiado tiempo ya utilizando la Resolución 2758 para impedir toda posibilidad de entrada en los organismos internacionales de Taiwán, para marginarlo, esquinarlo, y encima multiplica su acoso —en este momento también militar— contra la isla, contra la democracia china, la única democracia china que hay.
                  

                     Taiwán es una vibrante democracia que está injustamente marginada. Tenemos que ayudarla y hay que ser conscientes de que esa isla de la libertad que existe con idioma chino es realmente el baluarte que debería llevarnos en un futuro quizás lejano, quizás soñado, a tener una China que deshaga esa monstruosa dictadura que, en este momento, la somete: una dictadura con unas terribles violaciones, sistemáticas y sistémicas, de los derechos humanos.
                  

                     La República Popular China es una gran potencia con la que Europa debe tener unas relaciones correctas, pero tenemos que ser muy conscientes de que Taiwán es la forma de sociedad que nosotros queremos también para China y, por eso, tenemos que ayudar a que Taiwán tenga visibilidad internacional y entre en esos organismos internacionales en los cuales injustamente se le veta la entrada.
                  

Bernard Guetta (Renew). – Madam President, surprisingly enough, Mr Xi happens to be right. There is only one China, which means that one day the Republic of China and the People's Republic of China will be united.
But I have a question for you, Mr Xi: why should it be inevitable, and even mandatory, that Taiwan would adopt the political regime of mainland China, and not the opposite? It would certainly be preferable for the reunited China to be a democracy, and the choice will have to be made freely by the citizens of the two existing states and not by yourself, Mr Xi.
Our second message to you is also a question. How could we, Europeans, consider China a reliable partner when your country is supporting Russia's aggressive war against Ukraine and, in doing so, trying to destabilise our continent? Power goes with responsibilities, and in Ukraine, as in Taiwan, your responsibility, Mr Xi, is not to nurture dangerous and frightening international tensions.

Merja Kyllönen (The Left). – Arvoisa puhemies, Kiina aloitti lokakuun puolessa välissä jo neljännet laajamittaiset sotaharjoitukset Taiwanin ympärillä kahden vuoden aikana. Kiinan armeijan mukaan sotaharjoitukset keskittyvät muun muassa taisteluvalmiuteen merellä ja ilmassa sekä merkittävien satamien ja alueiden saartamiseen. Lisäksi harjoituksen aiheena ovat iskut maa- ja merikohteisiin. Armeijan edustajan mukaan sotaharjoitus toimii vakavana varoituksena Taiwanin joukoille. Taiwanin puolustusministeriö tuomitsi Kiinan sotaharjoituksen ja ilmoitti lähettäneensä omia joukkoja alueelle.
                  

                     Puolustuspolitiikkaa pitkään seuranneena olen arvioinut asian niin, että Kiina on pitänyt Taiwania itselleen kuuluvana alueena jo pitkään, eikä se ole sulkenut pois mahdollisuutta käyttää voimaa saadakseen saaren hallintaansa. Näen tässä myös tietynlaisen yhteyden Venäjään ja Ukrainaan. Hiljalleen voimankäyttö kasvoi ja laajeni ja huoleni on, että Kiina seuraa Venäjän mallia, mikäli kansainvälinen yhteisö ei puutu tähän vahvemmin.
                  

Станислав Стоянов (ESN). – Г-жо Председател, Резолюция 27/58 на Общото събрание на ООН признава правителството на Китайската народна република за единствен законен представител на Китай в ООН. Тя е основен инструмент в международното право.
                  

                     Политиката за единен Китай е дългогодишна позиция на Европейския съюз и ние не бива да се отказваме от нея. Напрежението в региона не е в интерес на Европейския съюз, защото Тайванският пролив е от ключово значение за международната търговия и глобалните вериги на доставки в ключови сектори, като например полупроводниците. Едностранните и провокативни действия биха могли да предизвикат хуманитарна и политическа криза. Поведението на Европейския съюз трябва да се основава на международното право. Нека се концентрираме върху дипломацията и избегнем милитаризацията.
                  

                     Призовавам всички политически сили да работим заедно, за да предотвратим поредния потенциален конфликт и да се съсредоточим върху мирно дипломатическо решение на кризата в Тайванския пролив.
                  

Ruth Firmenich (NI). – Frau Präsidentin! Mehr als 50 Jahre nach Verabschiedung der UN-Resolution 2758 soll die bisherige Ein-China-Politik infrage gestellt werden. Das ist Wahnsinn! Wollen wir nach Russland noch einen Konflikt mit China, einem der wichtigsten Handelspartner der EU?
                  

                     Die folgenden Fragen hat ein Journalist gerade dem ehemaligen NATO-Generalsekretär Stoltenberg gestellt, der sie übrigens nicht beantworten konnte. Welche Länder hat China in den letzten 40 Jahren überfallen? Ich sage es Ihnen: keines; die USA dagegen 13. Und wie viele Militärbasen betreibt China weltweit? Exakt eine; die USA mehr als 700.
                  

                     Worin besteht eigentlich die chinesische Bedrohung? Das Schüren der Spannungen mit China muss sofort beendet werden. Es gibt ein China, Taiwan ist nicht Mitglied der UNO – das ist eine Realität, die akzeptiert werden muss. Kriegsbesoffenheit ist kein Konzept internationaler Politik. Die EU sollte sich für Diplomatie und Abrüstung einsetzen.
                  

Sebastião Bugalho (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário, Caros Colegas, numa década assombrada por guerras e conflitos, não devemos ignorar aqueles que, quando rodeados de escuridão, não desistem de uma luz que nos une. O povo de Taiwan é definitivamente um deles, e a democracia é definitivamente algo que nos une.
                  

                     Nos anos mais recentes, a União Europeia apurou o seu instinto geopolítico, nomeou a China como rival sistémico e desenhou uma bússola estratégica que identifica ameaças e adversários da nossa União. No melhor cenário, a China nunca será uma e outra ao mesmo tempo. No pior, o seu comportamento é suficiente para levantar dúvidas.
                  

                     Meus Amigos, os últimos anos ensinaram-nos que o silêncio não é a resposta certa à intimidação e que o realismo também pode acabar por ser um ato de ingenuidade. O povo de Taiwan merece o nosso respeito. Cada míssil disparado na direção daquela ilha é um aviso lançado na nossa direção. Reconhecer a política de ‘Uma só China’ não é – não pode ser – reconhecer o direito a uma invasão.
                  

                     Agradeço aos colegas que não esquecem. Eu também não esquecerei.
                  

Svenja Hahn (Renew). – Madam President, in the conflict of our time between autocracies and democracies, Taiwan is a key democratic partner and anchor for stability. And with autocratic regimes supporting each other – with know-how, with resources, with weapons – we democracies are not doing nearly enough to strengthen our cooperation. And, particularly, economic cooperation is the key to boost our resilience against autocratic pressure and to protect our societies and democracies, especially as China's threats to Taiwan and the military exercises in the Taiwan Strait are an unacceptable provocation. They are a threat to international trade, and a risk for peace and security in the Asia-Pacific region.
China's economic coercion against Taiwan and EU countries is as unacceptable as it is against WTO rules. The EU should not shy away from working with Taiwan, but rather step it up and work on a bilateral investment agreement, because together we can strengthen our economies and build a stronger alliance for democracies, for a safer and more prosperous future for us all.

Davor Ivo Stier (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, kolegice i kolege, Europska unija se drži politike jedne Kine i to je politika koja je utemeljena na rezoluciji Opće skupštine 2758.
                  

                     Ali Kina krivo interpretira tu rezoluciju kako bi isključila Tajvan i marginalizirala u međunarodnoj zajednici. Tajvan bi zapravo trebao moći sudjelovati u radu agencija tamo gdje je to korisno, na primjer Svjetska zdravstvena organizacija ili Međunarodna organizacija za civilno zrakoplovstvo.
                  

                     Mi danas šaljemo još jednu važnu poruku, a to je da se sporovi ne smiju rješavati primjenom sile. Kina pokazuje mišiće vojnim vježbama oko Tajvana i to je jako opasno, opasno za demokraciju na Tajvanu, za regionalnu sigurnost, za međunarodnu trgovinu i svjetsku ekonomiju, za međunarodni poredak.
                  

                     I zato šaljemo jasnu poruku da rezolucija 2758 ne daje Kini pravo na prijetnje niti na primjenu sile protiv Tajvana.
                  

Dainius Žalimas (Renew). – Madam President, dear colleagues, today we are discussing the UN General Assembly resolution, which is used by the People's Republic of China to ground its claims to Taiwan. This is the most deplorable resolution in UN history. It is inconsistent with the UN aim to be a universal organisation that respects equal rights and self-determination of all peoples.
The resolution has settled only the issue of representation of China in the UN; in no way does it deny the specific sui generis status of Taiwan, which has never been a part of the People's Republic of China. The Taiwanese people have already realised their right to self-determination by establishing a liberal democracy, which shares with us the same values of the rule of law and human rights.
They have their own representative government. Neither the UN charter nor any UN General Assembly resolution can be invoked in forcing them to be represented by the PRC Government that itself is not representative at all.
In conclusion, upholding our principles and values, we must do our utmost to make the voice of the 23 million Taiwanese people heard at all available international organisations and forums.

Spontane Wortmeldungen


Niels Geuking (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar! Autokratische Staaten fürchten vor allem eins: Freiheitsbestrebungen. Entsprechend gehen sie mit allen Mitteln gegen jeden vor, der die eigene Machtbasis auch nur im Ansatz stören oder gefährden könnte. Taiwan steht für den Anfang vom Ende des chinesischen Machtapparats. Taiwan ist der Fortschritt, verkörpert ein alternatives Lebensmodell. Ich befürchte, dass wir in unserem Mandat einerseits das Ende des russischen Krieges sehen werden, aber andererseits ein Aufkeimen eines chinesischen Krieges.
                  

                     Umso entschlossener müssen wir handeln und demokratische Bestrebungen, die aus dem eigenen Volk herausgehen, unterstützen und das Ausbrechen von einem erneuten Krieg mit allen Mitteln versuchen zu verhindern, denn die Chance auf Frieden, Freiheit und Demokratie muss jedem Menschen auf diesem Planeten zustehen. Die internationale Sichtbarkeit für Taiwan ist unerlässlich.
                  

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, todo el mundo sabe que, desde 1971, es la República Popular China la que ocupa el asiento que representa al pueblo chino en el sistema de las Naciones Unidas y en su Consejo de Seguridad, y que el principio de ‘una sola China’ ha sido asumido en la doctrina exterior de las cancillerías de todos los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea.
                  

                     Pero el alto representante de la Unión para Asuntos Exteriores y Política de Seguridad hace lo correcto recordando que Taiwán sí es una vibrante democracia desde hace cuarenta años, que practica elecciones libres y respeta los derechos de ciudadanía, y que es incluso el único país de esa región donde es legal el matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo. Y eso es un mensaje de contención y moderación con respecto a las maniobras militares en el estrecho de Taiwán, cuyas aguas, por cierto, no están delimitadas pacíficamente en Derecho internacional; maniobras que pueden crear una escalada de tensión en una región en la que conviven tres potencias nucleares: China, Rusia y Corea del Norte.
                  

                     Por tanto, el mundo no necesita otro conflicto que pueda amenazar la estabilidad y la paz mundiales como el que estamos conociendo, tan sangrienta y tan dolorosamente, en Oriente Medio.
                  

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Arvoisa puhemies, samaan aikaan kun Kiina uhkailee naapureitaan Etelä-Kiinan merellä, Eurooppa tuntuu olevan täysin kyvytön Kiinasta irtautumiseen. Olemmeko tosiaan näin rähmällään itään päin, että jatkamme sallivaa ja meidät Kiinasta riippuvaiseksi tekevää kauppapolitiikkaa, kun uiguureja sorretaan, Taiwania saarretaan ja filippiiniläisten kalastusalusten kimppuun hyökätään? Kiinan kommunistinen puolue on jo vuosia sortanut kansaansa, joten Euroopalla ei pitäisi olla minkäänlaisia tekosyitä, joiden taakse piiloutua.
                  

                     Elämme viimeisiä mahdollisia hetkiä napanuoran katkaisemiseksi. Kiinaa ei voi painostaa, mikäli sitä ei eristetä maailmanpoliittisella areenalla. Kiina käyttää hyväksi maailmalla raivoavia konflikteja kuvitellen, että olemme unohtaneet sen muodostaman uhan. Siksi Euroopan tulisikin sanoa niin selkeästi kuin mahdollista: me emme ole unohtaneet ja tulemme myös toimimaan sen mukaisesti.
                  

Marc Botenga (The Left). – Mr President, thank you, Commissioner. I think in this House, we need to choose the titles of our debates and resolutions with more care, because we're speaking about a resolution of over 50 years ago, over half a century ago. And as far as I know, the interpretation of this resolution by the People's Republic of China has not changed. It's always been the same as it is today.
In line with this, the EU has developed its One China policy. So if today we are debating this, that has little to do with the interpretation of a resolution. And indeed, if this resolution is misinterpreted by anyone, this should be assessed by the United Nations.
It has, of course, to do with what is really going on over there. And it has to do, indeed, I'm afraid, with certain of you stirring up tensions, because that's why we're sending warships. Why are European countries sending warships to the other side of the world? Let's not do that. Let's insist on international law, dialogue, diplomacy. That's what this should be about. We don't need another conflict. We don't need to send our armies to the other side of the world. There are problems enough in Europe.

Grzegorz Braun (NI). – Madam President, the majority of this House is persistently trying to take European nations to war with Russia, as we could observe in previous weeks. Now you are taking us to war with China. Does Europe deserve to be a proxy in some Anglo-Saxon, American-Jewish wars fought all over the world? Do European nations deserve to be blackmailed and be held hostages of foreign affairs of foreign empires. No, they don't!
I don't want to go to this war. Let's stabilise the situation. Let's not bring more tension where there is enough. Let's remember that China, by its mere existence, saved Europe at least twice in the 20th century from the aggressive policy of the Soviet Union. The mere existence of China – also a communist country – saved us a lot of trouble, a lot of horror.

(The President cut off the speaker)


Nicolas Schmit,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, this has been a very useful exchange and I thank the Members for their intervention. From this debate, I conclude that we maintain the EU's One China policy, and at the same time, we condemn all forms of escalation in the region.
We also share the common commitment to continuing to develop our relations with Taiwan. The EU will not compromise in its efforts to preserve stability and the status quo in the strait. Those efforts mean preserving our space for engagement with Taiwan, not permitting it to be reduced by force or intimidation. Much is at stake in Taiwan and we are invested in it fully.
May I close by stressing my appreciation of Parliament's role in putting this important issue on the international agenda of the European Union? And I must say, these antisemitic remarks are shocking.
22.   State sponsored terrorism by the Islamic Republic of Iran in light of the recent attacks in Europe (debate)

Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärung der Kommission zu von der Islamischen Republik Iran gefördertem Terrorismus vor dem Hintergrund der jüngsten Anschläge in Europa (2024/2872(RSP)).
               

                  Wir warten noch kurz, bis die Kommissarin angekommen ist.
               

                  Frau Dalli hat das Wort stellvertretend für den Vizepräsidenten der Kommission bzw. den Hohen Vertreter der Union für die Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik.
               

Helena Dalli,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, EU relations with Iran are at their lowest point.
Iran's negative behaviour is evident on several fronts. Iran continues to support Russia in its illegal war of aggression against Ukraine through the provision of weapons, such as drones and, more recently, missiles. The human-rights situation in Iran remains dire. Iran's role in the region and its support to several armed groups contributes to instability, while the spiral of attacks and retaliations with Israel risks causing a wider regional conflict. Iran's nuclear programme continues its dangerous expansion.
Concern is also growing these days about Iranian hybrid threats on European soil, and there are credible reports about the role of Iranian state bodies in planning and aiding recent attacks in a number of Member States, about threats to members of the Iranian diaspora in Europe, about cyber actions or influence campaigns trying to create divisions in our societies.
In cases of such deplorable activities, the EU has always taken a position of clear condemnation, publicly and in our direct contacts with the Iranian authorities. Also, in the past, we have always shown zero tolerance towards such unacceptable actions – to which we have responded, including with targeted actions.
As EU institutions, we must base our positions and actions on the outcomes of investigations and legal proceedings conducted by the competent national authorities, who establish facts, responsibilities and the level of threat in line with the legal and law enforcement order at national level. We have full trust in the national authorities to complete the respective ongoing investigations of recent cases.
I can assure you that the EU remains vigilant and continues to coordinate policies with our 27 Member States, looking for appropriate collective response where national processes are completed. In this regard, allow me to recall that the EU has put in place sanctions regimes to target all aspects of Iran's negative behaviour, and we will continue to use them whenever appropriate.

Javier Zarzalejos,
en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, ¿alguien puede dudar de que el régimen iraní patrocina, impulsa y financia el terrorismo en Europa? Bueno, si alguien tiene dudas, que se acuerde simplemente de lo que ocurría hace un año en pleno centro de Madrid, cuando un exvicepresidente de esta Cámara, Alejo Vidal-Quadras, sobrevivía milagrosamente a un intento de asesinato perpetrado por sicarios contratados por Irán.
               

                  En Irán continúan las ejecuciones, la represión generalizada, la violencia institucionalizada contra las mujeres, la supresión radical y violenta de toda crítica. Después de años en los que Irán consiguió engañar a quienes lo aceptaban como un socio posible para la estabilidad de Oriente Medio, seguimos enviando mensajes de impunidad al régimen de los ayatolás.
               

                  La llamada ‘diplomacia de rehenes’ provee de recursos al régimen. Agentes iraníes condenados en Europa por graves delitos de terrorismo escapan a sus responsabilidades mediante acuerdos de entrega, lo que significa que no van a cumplir las condenas, sino que son recibidos en Teherán como héroes.
               

                  Irán es socio y aliado de Rusia en su agresión contra Ucrania, mueve los hilos de Hamás, es el amo de Hezbolá, ha convertido el Líbano en un Estado fallido, comparte con Moscú el control de Siria, arma y utiliza a los hutíes para atacar una ruta marítima esencial como la del mar Rojo. ¿Y cuál es la respuesta a todo esto que algunos piden? El embargo de armas a Israel. En fin, si no fuera trágico, esto sería una mala broma.
               

                  La matanza del 7 de octubre lo ha cambiado todo. No creo que sea realista ya pensar que dentro de un tiempo Hamás volverá a controlar Gaza, que Hezbolá recuperará armas y dirigentes o que Teherán continuará engañándonos con su programa nuclear. Hay que actuar ya, ¿y por qué no empezar declarando a la Guardia Revolucionaria como lo que es: una organización terrorista?
               

Ana Catarina Mendes,
em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, Caros Colegas, há muito tempo que sabemos que o regime iraniano tem uma agenda clara de opressão interna da sua própria população, que se traduz na intensificação dos ataques contra os direitos humanos, tendo desencadeado uma guerra contra as mulheres e raparigas através de uma repressão cada vez mais violenta, reforçando o recurso à pena de morte para silenciar a dissidência.
               

                  O regime iraniano tem-se também empenhado numa clara agenda de desestabilização da região e da Europa, apoiando e patrocinando direta e indiretamente grupos não estatais de índole terrorista, facilitando o seu envolvimento em atividades ilícitas. É preciso também não esquecer que o regime iraniano continua a fornecer aeronaves não tripuladas e começou a transferir mísseis para a Rússia, reforçando, assim, o seu claro apoio ao regime autocrático de Putin, na guerra da invasão contra a Ucrânia.
               

                  As recentes informações dos serviços de segurança europeus – segundo os quais o Irão poderá ter estado envolvido nas explosões e tiroteio junto às embaixadas israelitas de Estocolmo e Copenhaga, recorrendo a grupos criminosos locais – são bem o espelho dessa tentativa assumida de desestabilização do espaço europeu, semeando um clima de terror e de medo. É por isso mesmo que, perante estas ameaças, a Europa tem que agir já, sem qualquer complacência, tomando medidas que permitam reforçar os meios dos serviços de segurança e a cooperação em matéria de inteligência e informação a nível europeu.
               

                  É importante, também, dar à Europol e à Eurojust mais meios, de modo a prevenir novos ataques e atuar antecipadamente em caso de ameaça, garantindo sempre o respeito pelos direitos, liberdades e garantias de todos os cidadãos. A União Europeia tem a responsabilidade de alargar as medidas restritivas contra o regime iraniano através da inclusão na lista de terroristas da União Europeia do corpo de guarda da Revolução Islâmica, tal como já foi pedido por este Parlamento.
               

                  E, perante estas graves ameaças que se colocam perante todos nós, a União Europeia tem mesmo que reforçar os instrumentos que tem ao seu dispor para que se garanta, todos os dias, o respeito pelos direitos humanos – viver no Irão livre, democrático e respeitador dos direitos fundamentais.
               

António Tânger Corrêa,
em nome do Grupo PfE. – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, Caros Colegas, não há dúvida nenhuma de que o Irão se transformou num Estado terrorista. Já não é um patrocinador de terroristas, é ele, em si próprio, um Estado terrorista. Vemos isso na região, patrocinando o Iraque, patrocinando o Hamas, patrocinando o Hezbolá, patrocinando os hutis e todos aqueles que, de alguma forma, querem combater aquilo que é a sociedade como nós a concebemos.
               

                  Nós não podemos deixar que isso aconteça, uma vez que estão a exportar a instabilidade para a Europa. Já aqui foram referidos os vários atos terroristas, e eu só vou dizer uma coisa: tenho muito medo que o Irão, como Estado, e a Irmandade Muçulmana se tenham unido numa guerra contra os valores e contra o Ocidente. É esse o grande medo que eu tenho neste momento e espero que não aconteça. E, para isso, os serviços secretos ocidentais e americanos têm que se unir num esforço gigantesco para parar esta invasão de terrorismo na Europa Ocidental e, eventualmente, noutras partes e noutros continentes.
               

Charlie Weimers,
för ECR gruppen. – Fru talman! Nyligen attackerades Israels ambassader i Stockholm och Köpenhamn. Rawa Majids kriminella gäng genomförde dessa terrordåd på uppdrag av mullorna i Teheran. Islamistregimen har tidigare använt gängmedlemmar för att utföra liknande attacker och även skickat sina agenter för att mörda svenskar i Sverige.
               

                  Det är dags att slå tillbaka, och vi måste slå tillbaka tillräckligt hårt för att avskräcka islamistregimen och terrorregeringen. Annars väntar många blodiga år, när andra skurkstater börjar agera efter samma mönster.
               

                  Sverige och EU bör givetvis terrorklassa Islamiska revolutionsgardet, som beställt terrordåden. Det har Sverigedemokraterna länge förespråkat, men det är inte tillräcklig avskräckning. Vi bör även stänga de iranska ambassaderna i Europa. Men inte heller det räcker. Iran och andra skurkstater kommer inte att avskräckas förrän vi uppvisar kapacitet och vilja att slå tillbaka lika hårt som Israel.
               

                  Efter decennier av massinvandring har vi nu en egen hemodlad femtekolonn av gängsoldater villiga att slå till mot mål i Europa på order av skurkstater – när som helst, var som helst, bara de får betalt. Gängen avskräcks inte förrän vi lär av och samarbetar med USA och Israel för att likvidera gängledare som sitter säkert i tredje land och lejer ut sina soldater till högstbjudande terrorstat.
               

                  Barack Obama fattade beslutet att likvidera jihadisten Anwar al-Awlaki. Han var amerikansk medborgare. Han gömde sig i Jemen. Låt oss göra samma sak med Rawa Majid.
               

Petras Auštrevičius,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, Iran, a country with ancient and rich traditions and culture, has become a hostage to religious fanaticism, military terrorism and political terror. The Iranian regime cooperates with, supports and directs the criminal activities of Hamas, Hezbollah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Ansar Allah and other terrorist organisations.
The Iranian regime does not limit its terrorist actions against single countries, such as Ukraine or Israel, and initiates armed attacks against individuals, such as our former colleague Alejo Vidal-Quadres, who luckily escaped from hitman's shots.
Dear colleagues, I invite you to support the decision of the Lithuanian Parliament adopted earlier this month to designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organisation. It must be done as soon as possible on EU level.
We must take concrete action at the EU level to stop the Iranian regime's terrorism at sea and on land. Tehran's regime presents a real regional and international risk and domestic threat for Iranians themselves.

Hannah Neumann,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, countries export what they know best: cars, champagne, sausages. The Iranian regime exports terror and repression.
From the moment refugees set foot in Europe, Iranian agents seek to intimidate them. They smear dissidents with lies and death threats, kidnap journalists and even plant bombs in public spaces and these attacks are happening here on European soil.
And they don't just stop at their own people, those of us standing against this regime are also targeted: members of the Jewish community, human rights networks, even Members of this very Parliament, including myself and my team. Those they cannot crush within Iran, they seek to destroy abroad. Towards this end, the regime cooperates with organised crime, smuggling weapons and drugs, uses these networks to fund its operations and expands its terror.
And let's be clear: Iran is not alone. China, Russia, Türkiye, Eritrea, Belarus, Rwanda all use similar tactics to silence dissent and undermine our security. And while these regimes expand their global web of fear, our security services work fragmented and reactive. In the EU, we have no shared definition of transnational repression, no comprehensive data collection and no joint operational pictures. And with every moment that we hesitate to join forces, we give them more room to expand their brutal repression.
So, dear colleagues, we have to protect those being attacked regardless of their passports and share intelligence about transnational repression, regardless of borders.

Merja Kyllönen,
The Left-ryhmän puolesta. – Arvoisa puhemies, vuosikausien koston kierre, jatkuva tappaminen ja oikeutuksen hakeminen silmittömälle väkivallalle. Jännitteellä on monien sukupolvien pitkä historia, eikä loppua valitettavasti näy. Vaarallinen hyökkäysten ja kostotoimien kierre uhkaa ruokkia myös hallitsematonta alueellista eskalaatiota, joka ei ole kenenkään edun mukaista. Sivulliset uhrit maksavat aina kaikkein kovimman hinnan henkensä tai terveytensä menettämisen kautta. Toiminta ja iskut muuttuvat entistä laajemmiksi ja julmemmiksi. Salamurhia, uhkailua, terroristioperaatioita, järjestäytynyttä rikollisuutta, joiden yhteydet ovat viranomaisille haastavampia havaita ajoissa iskujen ehkäisemiseksi.
               

                  Naiset ja tytöt, seksuaali- ja sukupuolivähemmistöt sekä etniset ja uskonnolliset vähemmistöt joutuvat järjestelmällisen syrjinnän ja väkivallan kohteeksi. Ihmisoikeustilanne, toisinajattelijoiden vaino ja poliittisten vastustajien ajojahti teloituksineen osoittavat hallinnon valmiutta rikkoa kansainvälistä oikeutta suojellakseen omia etujaan. Me tarvitsemme kansainvälistä yhteistyötä ja päättäväisiä toimia, jotta saamme vastuulliset vastaamaan teoistaan.
               

Lena Düpont (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin! Diese Debatte heute ist nicht nur eine außenpolitische. Sie ist eine innenpolitische, weil wir zu wenig getan haben. Zu wenig gegen einen Akteur, der unsere freie europäische Welt fundamental infrage stellt, zu wenig für die mutigen Frauen im Iran selbst, zu wenig, um unsere Bürgerinnen und Bürger in Europa zu schützen. Denn das Bild auf unseren Straßen sind Demonstrationen, die zunehmend gewalttätiger werden gegenüber Gegendemonstranten, gegenüber Journalisten, gegenüber Polizisten.
               

                  Wir sehen das Ausspähen und Beobachten iranischer Dissidenten, Angriffe auf Israels Botschaften oder jüdische Einrichtungen, das Ganze verstärkt durch einen höchst alarmierenden Trend: die Verbindung zwischen organisierter Kriminalität und radikalisierten und terroristischen Gruppierungen oder Einzelpersonen. Deswegen: Machen wir in Europa endlich die Schultern gerade! Treten wir ein für und verteidigen wir unsere freie europäische Gesellschaft; sie ist es wert, verteidigt zu werden.
               

                  Die Revolutionsgarden gehören auf die Terrorliste, die Sanktionen ausgeweitet und verschärft. Unsere europäischen, aber viel mehr noch auch die nationalen Sicherheitsagenturen und Behörden brauchen alle Instrumente an der Hand, um effektiv gegen die Terrorgefahr, gegen organisierte Kriminalität und die Verbindung von beidem vorzugehen, denn im Übrigen kann auch nur dann der Informationsaustausch sinnvoll und effektiv sein. Wenn ich keine Informationen habe, kann ich sie auch nicht austauschen.
               

                  Zu guter Letzt: Die Mitgliedstaaten können und müssen die bisherige Arbeit an der gemeinsamen Gefährderdatenbank wieder aufnehmen. Ein Kompendium, eine Verständigung ist gut, aber es reicht bei Weitem nicht aus, um der aktuellen Gefahr entgegenzutreten.
               

Evin Incir (S&D). – Madam President, colleagues, from the streets of Tehran to outside of the Israeli embassies in Stockholm and Copenhagen, the tentacles of the dreadful mullahs reach. Its influence extends far beyond what one can imagine, and its regime of terror knows no limitation.
The sacrifices the 'woman, life, freedom' movement have made seem to not have been enough for the European governments to label IRGC as a terrorist organisation and properly sanction the mullahs, even though our Parliament have asked for it for almost two years now.
Many governments, including the Swedish right wing in my country, had been sleeping while the Tehran regime plotted its heinous attacks against the Israeli embassies in Stockholm and Copenhagen. The mullahs in Iran are now seemingly exploiting our children, forcing them to conduct the crimes of the mullahs via their regime's proxies: organised criminal gangs, such as Foxtrot. Europol must prioritise these cases and our governments must start acting.

Juan Carlos Girauta Vidal (PfE). – Señora presidente, el régimen teocrático iraní acumula más de cuatrocientas acciones terroristas documentadas y probadas fuera de sus fronteras, y un número significativo de ellas han tenido lugar en suelo europeo.
               

                  Quiero referirme, en particular, al atentado sufrido por el que fuera quince años vicepresidente de este Parlamento —ya se ha mencionado aquí, y yo lo repito—, mi compatriota Alejo Vidal-Quadras, que salvó milagrosamente la vida tras recibir un disparo en plena cara, en pleno rostro. El atacante fue un sicario francotunecino, detenido cuando se disponía a asesinar a un disidente iraní en el exilio.
               

                  Estas reiteradas agresiones a disidentes iraníes o a políticos europeos que apoyan a la resistencia contra la dictadura islámica de Irán demuestran que la política de apaciguamiento y diálogo ha sido un rotundo fracaso. ¿Cuántos muertos hacen falta para que se den cuenta de que Irán es el enemigo de Europa?
               

                  Debe alzarse la voz en este Parlamento, especialmente cuando el régimen de los ayatolas ha financiado a determinados partidos políticos en Europa.
               

Adam Bielan (ECR). – Madam President, dear Commissioner, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has long been implicated in activities that destabilise regions and endanger lives. From the brutal crackdown on Iranian protests to transferring arms to Russia and launching ballistic missiles against Israel, the IRGC has constantly shown a disregard for international law and human rights. Their support for extremist groups across the Middle East amplifies the global threat they pose.
By engaging diplomatically with such a regime, the EU compromises its security and moral standing, jeopardises our credibility and weakens the principles we uphold.
We cannot afford complacency. The EU must adopt a firmer stance on Iran, including enhanced sanctions, and unequivocally condemn its involvement in Russia's war. It is imperative that all Member States unite to designate the IRGC as a terrorist organisation. This is not merely symbolic, but a necessary step to protect our citizens and uphold international law.

Alice Teodorescu Måwe (PPE). – Fru talman! Kopplingen mellan den inre och yttre säkerheten i Europa har sällan varit tydligare. Den iranska bläckfisken för ett asymmetriskt proxykrig mot Europa i allmänhet och Sverige i synnerhet. I Sverige använder Iran gängkriminella för att attackera israeliska beskickningar och företag, liksom judar.
               

                  För ett år sedan hackade Irans underrättelsetjänst en svensk sms-tjänst som en del av en kampanj mot svenskt Nato-medlemskap, och i våras kom uppgifter om att två av de svenska gängen upprättat ett direkt samarbete med den iranska underrättelsetjänsten.
               

                  Irans handlingar – som syftar till att destabilisera Mellanöstern, understödja Rysslands aggression i Ukraina och omkullkasta den regelbaserade säkerhetsordningen, behöver bemötas med kraftfulla åtgärder innan landet uppnår kapacitet att hota omvärlden med kärnvapen.
               

                  EU behöver skärpa och utvidga sanktionerna mot Teheran, terrorstämpla Islamiska revolutionsgardet och öka pressen på regimen att fullfölja sina åtaganden inom ramen för kärnvapenavtalet. Om vi upplever läget som allvarligt nu är det ingenting mot vad som kommer att hända om inte mullorna stoppas.
               

Hana Jalloul Muro (S&D). – Señora presidenta, nos preocupan los recientes acontecimientos relacionados con las explosiones en Estocolmo y en Copenhague. Esto no es nuevo: llevamos tiempo diciendo que hacer las cosas bien en Oriente Próximo implica no tener problemas de seguridad.
               

                  Cuando hablamos de desarmar Hezbolá en el Líbano o a los hutíes en Yemen, ya vimos y vivimos la implicación del régimen iraní en la guerra siria, en la que cientos de miles de árabes —seres humanos— fueron asesinados, también con la ayuda de Hezbolá. Estamos de acuerdo en que hay que condenar y sancionar las acciones de la Guardia Revolucionaria. El régimen islamista iraní, revestido de revolucionario, no ha hecho más que oprimir a su pueblo y las más afectadas han sido las mujeres. Ya vimos lo que le pasó a Mahsa Amini, muerta en custodia policial, o asesinada, más bien. El año pasado, este Parlamento le otorgó el Premio Sájarov. No podemos dar premios y olvidarnos de las personas que siguen sufriendo. Debemos seguir denunciando a un régimen expansionista. Lo hemos visto en países que hoy están sufriendo la injerencia constante, como el Líbano, que incumple los derechos humanos y que tiene una visión social reaccionaria.
               

                  Del mismo modo, igual que solicitamos medidas con Irán, no debemos tener dobles raseros y hemos de aplicarlas a otros países de la región que no cumplen con el Derecho internacional. Son muy relevantes las políticas de prevención de la radicalización violenta para combatir las narrativas de la República iraní.
               

Jaroslav Bžoch (PfE). – Paní předsedající, vážené kolegyně, vážení kolegové, stále častější teroristické útoky nám ukazují, jak vážnou hrozbou zůstává státem sponzorovaný terorismus. Íránská islámská republika hraje klíčovou roli ve financování výcviku a vyzbrojování teroristických organizací. Nejen Hizballáh, ale také Hamás, Palestinský islámský džihád a další skupiny představují přímé hrozby nejen pro Blízký východ, ale pro bezpečnost Evropy i světa. Íránský režim využívá tyto organizace jako své prodloužené ruce v tzv. zástupných válkách. Tyto konflikty destabilizují region od Jemenu přes Irák, Sýrii, Libanon až po Gazu. Íránský režim touto strategií systematicky rozšiřuje svůj vliv, podporuje násilí a vytváří zónu nestability, která ohrožuje jak naše spojence, tak i evropské zájmy. Íránský režim nesmí mít volné ruce k podpoře terorismu.
               

                  Pouze koordinovaným tlakem ze strany Evropy, Spojených států amerických a našich spojenců na Blízkém východě můžeme tento vliv omezit a zajistit větší bezpečnost nejen pro naše občany. A na závěr mi dovolte pro kolegy z levého spektra: Pokud hledáte viníka toho, co se aktuálně děje v Libanonu a v Gaze, tak jím není Izrael, ale právě íránský režim.
               

Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR). – Voorzitter, november vorig jaar werd in Madrid Vidal Qadras, oud-ondervoorzitter van het Europees Parlement, op straat neergeschoten. Hij overleefde de aanslag ternauwernood. Enkele maanden later volgde een aanslag in Londen op een Iraanse journalist en in juni een verijdelde aanslag op een Iraanse activist in Nederland. Wie zit hier toch achter? Alles wijst erop dat we naar Teheran moeten kijken. Iran blijkt niet alleen een bedreiging te zijn voor Israël, maar ook voor Europa.
               

                  Ik roep de Commissie en de Raad er daarom toe op: 1) diepgaande onderzoeken in te stellen naar de manier waarop Iran, onder andere via bestaande criminele netwerken, infiltreert in Europa, 2) intensieve samenwerking aan te moedigen tussen de nationale veiligheidsdiensten onderling en met de Israëlische Mossad om de Iraanse dreiging op Europees grondgebied te neutraliseren, en 3) de Islamitische Revolutionaire Garde nu eindelijk op de lijst van terroristische organisaties te plaatsen.
               

Henrik Dahl (PPE). – Tak, fru formand! De svenske myndigheder har en formodning om, at Iran står bag to angreb på den israelske ambassade i Stockholm. Det viser, hvor alvorligt man skal tage den statssponsorerede terrorisme, der udgår fra Teheran. Men formodninger, som jeg godt vil understrege, er formodninger, er vildere endnu. Den 2. oktober lød der to eksplosioner tæt på den israelske ambassade i København, og det er den fredelige by i Nordeuropa, jeg selv kommer fra. Det viste sig, at to unge svenske indvandrere stod bag. De havde kastet håndgranater. Antagelsen er, at den iranske regering nu rekrutterer svenske kriminelle for at forfølge visse befolkningsgrupper i både Sverige og Danmark. Det er jo nye metastaser af en gammel cancer, der allerede i mange år har angrebet Mellemøsten og Europa, og derfor skal vi selvfølgelig ikke acceptere, at iranske agenter rekrutterer eller agerer på europæisk jord. Jeg hilser denne debat meget velkommen. Tak for ordet.
               

Francisco Assis (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, o Irão é um exemplo de como um grande povo, com uma extraordinária história e uma excecional riqueza cultural e artística, pode ser subjugado por um grupo de fanáticos religiosos; um povo que vive oprimido pela violência de um Estado teocrático, embora acalente um indesmentível desejo de liberdade.
               

                  Não contentes com violentar o próprio povo, os aiatolas de Teerão transformaram a violência num produto exportável para vários pontos do mundo. Fazem-no, desde há muito, no Médio Oriente e, por isso, são um dos principais obstáculos à paz na região. E, agora, estão empenhados em exportar essa violência para a Europa, através da radicalização de jovens em solo europeu e, até, de parcerias com organizações criminosas. Isto tem um nome: terrorismo, terrorismo internacional.
               

                  A ditadura religiosa iraniana é hoje, provavelmente, o regime que mais patrocina e promove o terrorismo, porque está também convencido de que a sua sobrevivência depende disso mesmo. Cremos, por isso, que não podemos continuar a hesitar. O nosso próximo passo deve ser o de inserir os guardas da revolução na lista de grupos terroristas da União Europeia, como já o fizeram o Canadá e os Estados Unidos.
               

Anna Maria Cisint (PfE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il regime degli Ayatollah, quello che fustiga le donne, che sposa le bambine, che impicca gli omosessuali, quello che vuole l'eliminazione di Israele, quello che perfino una parte dell'Occidente sostiene, è quello che supporta le organizzazioni terroristiche come Hamas, Hezbollah e gli Huthi.
               

                  Un terrorismo di Stato sostenuto dalla Repubblica islamica dell'Iran che, anche attraverso le Guardie rivoluzionarie iraniane, ha compiuto atti terroristici gravissimi, con l'obiettivo di esportare l'ideologia fondamentalista islamica.
               

                  Eppure qualcuno, e forse anche in quest'Aula, li difende, giustificando queste atrocità nel nome dell'ideologia woke, progressista o, peggio, di un antisemitismo latente, comunque sempre contro l'Occidente.
               

                  Dopo le morti di Nasrallah e Sinwar, in alcuni Paesi arabi si festeggiava, purtroppo anche in Europa è accaduto, senza mai una condanna vera contro l'Iran. E la sinistra in Europa e in Italia che fa? È ambigua: rivoluzionari da salotto.
               

                  È necessaria e urgente un'azione forte dell'Unione europea per sterilizzare e annientare il diffondersi della piaga del terrorismo.
               

Kristoffer Storm (ECR). – Mange tak fru formand. Jeg er virkelig glad for, at Parlamentet har lyttet til vores ønske om at få denne debat, da terrorisme skaber stor frygt blandt vores befolkninger, og vi er nødsaget til at reagere på truslen fra Iran og den stigende uro i Mellemøsten, som iranerne forsøger at flytte hertil. For få uger siden blev Israels ambassader i Sverige og Danmark angrebet af bandemedlemmer, som efter alt at dømme er støttet af Den Islamiske Republik Iran. Disse angreb er dog ikke enestående. Efterretninger siger, at præstestyret i Iran gennem Revolutionsgarden har støttet terrorangreb i flere andre europæiske lande i mange år. Man kan uden at overdrive kalde Ayatollah Khameneis for Godfather of terror. Derfor er det vigtigt, at Europa-Parlamentet stopper med at være en modspiller og modarbejder de medlemslande, der ønsker at stramme deres indvandrerpolitik. Det er på tide, at vi siger fra over for det rædselsfulde regime i Teheran. Det er på tide, at vi sender et klart signal og sætter Revolutionsgarden på terrorlisten, ligesom de har gjort i USA. Tak for ordet.
               

Michał Szczerba (PPE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, Iran is a leading state sponsor of terrorism, providing financial, logistical and military support to militant groups. It allocates USD 700 million annually to train a fund the regime's various proxies, including Hezbollah and Hamas. They conduct terrorist activities across Europe and the Middle East. The Iranian regime also supplies drones and missiles to Russia for its terror war against Ukraine and trains Russian soldiers on occupied Ukrainian territory. There has been recently an increase in Iran-linked threats, a rise of Iranian intelligence activities in Europe.
We need to urgently address state-sponsored terrorism by Iran to protect European citizens. We need to advocate for sanctions targeting Iranian officials and entities implicated in terrorism. We need to designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist group.

Daniel Attard (S&D). – Kollegi, it-terroriżmu sostnut jew ippjanat minn Stat huwa inaċċettabbli f'kull ċirkostanza, u dan il-Parlament m'għandu qatt joqgħod lura milli jitkellem u jitlob azzjoni. Madankollu, biex inkunu kredibbli rridu noqogħdu attenti illi ma napplikawx il-prinċipji tagħna b'mod selettiv. It-terroriżmu rridu nikkundannawh f'kull forma tiegħu, u mhux skont kunsiderazzjonijiet ġeopolitiċi. Ikkundannajna azzjonijiet f'postijiet oħra u sewwa għamilna, iżda sfortunatament, nibqgħu siekta meta l-vjolenza mill-Istat tiġi ppreżentata bħala difiża tat-territorju. Għalhekk ejja niżguraw illi t-talbiet tagħna għall-ġustizzja jkunu ħielsa minn standards doppji. Fl-aħħar nett, nemmen illi filwaqt illi s-sanzjonijiet jibqgħu għodda importanti, m'għandhomx jintużaw f'iżolament. Id-diplomazija, anki fl-iktar ċirkostanzi diffiċli tibqa' l-aktar triq b'saħħitha għall-paċi dejjiema fil-Lvant Nofsani u lil hinn.
               

Marieke Ehlers (PfE). – Madam President, Commissioner, Iran has a long track record of organising and funding terrorist attacks in Europe. The Iranian regime uses Islamic extremists who live in our countries to carry out these crimes. We have allowed them into our cities like a Trojan horse.
The 2015 nuclear deal gave the regime even more resources to advance the scope and aggression of their malicious activities.
The Islamic regime of Iran is a serial offender. For over 40 years, it has sown death and destruction throughout the Middle East and across the world. Just this weekend, Iran's proxies carried out an attempted assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.
No matter how many sanctions we adopt, no matter how many terrorists we apprehend and convict, they will never stop spreading their hate in our Europe. We are fools if we maintain relations with a regime that spreads death and destruction in Europe. We are fools if we continue to allow these extremists into our countries. If we do continue down this road, we are responsible for facilitating our own demise.

Carlo Ciccioli (ECR). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ho ascoltato con molta attenzione i precedenti interventi e anche l'ultimo. Sono quasi interventi a senso unico.
               

                  Siamo tutti convinti che l'Iran è uno Stato terrorista e comunque promuove il terrorismo anche in altri Paesi: è stato ricordato il Libano, con gli Hezbollah, a Gaza, con Hamas, in Yemen, con Huthi, in Iraq e altri Paesi dell'area circostante.
               

                  Però, parliamoci chiaro: l'Occidente e l'Unione europea hanno sempre avuto un atteggiamento di tolleranza, di lasciar fare, cioè di voltarsi dall'altra parte. Certo, sanzioni; certo, provvedimenti e anche se ci sono prove ineccepibili che i capi militari delle milizie iraniane – i Pasdaran, i Basij, milizia paramilitare – partecipano a questa attività, non sono stati presi provvedimenti.
               

                  Esiste un'aggressività verso l'esterno, quella che ho citato, ma anche un'aggressività interna, contro le donne, contro l'opposizione, le esecuzioni, le carcerazioni. Esiste un programma nucleare attivo che, ovviamente, è pericoloso per il nostro Occidente.
               

                  I tentativi di cambiamento interno, citavo l'onda verde di qualche anno fa, di un Islam democratico non hanno funzionato. Occorre dunque passare a un programma chiaro e certo, con l'obiettivo di cambiare programma.
               

Lukas Mandl (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich werde nicht müde zu betonen, dass Islam und Islamismus verschiedene Dinge sind. Der Islam als Religion wird von nichts so sehr bedroht wie vom Islamismus, dem politischen Islam und seiner Neigung zu Hass, Gewalt und Terror. Von wem wird das finanziert auf diesem Planeten? Vom iranischen Mullah-Regime.
               

                  Heute war eine Gruppe von Schülerinnen und Schülern der Höheren Technischen Lehranstalt Krems aus Österreich hier im Europäischen Parlament zu Besuch, und die Schülerinnen und Schüler haben mich gefragt, warum ich vom iranischen Regime sanktioniert worden bin. Gut, warum die das gemacht haben mit ihrer Begründung, das kann man nachlesen in den Presseagenturen. Ich denke, weil ich nicht schweige, und ich schweige selbstverständlich weiterhin nicht, auch wenn ich unter Sanktionen stehe, weil es wichtig ist, die Bürgerinnen und Bürger Europas zu schützen vor ein und demselben islamistischen Terror, der vom islamischen Mullah-Regime ausgeht mit den verschiedenen Stellvertreterorganisationen: politische Arme, Terror-Arme, Gewalt rund um den Planeten.
               

                  Das ist es, wogegen wir gemeinsam als Zivilisation auftreten müssen.
               

Tonino Picula (S&D). – Madam President, dear colleagues, blasts in Stockholm and Copenhagen, as well as the verdict of the court in Düsseldorf two years ago, should be convincing arguments for the European Union to take decisive actions against the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
While we fully respect the heritage of the JCPOA agreement, our relations with Iran are multifaceted and more complex. Women's and human rights in Iran in general, Iran's growing foreign interference within the European Union, rising global challenges such as the Russian aggression on Ukraine, escalation of military actions in the Middle East and involvement of Iran, to name just a few.
We should keep the dialogue and comprehensive approach with Iran, but we must not shy away from directly addressing all growing issues of concern, to be critical, and to make decisions to protect our interests.
Sanctioning the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps would be a possible step in the right direction.

Dominik Tarczyński (ECR). – Madam President, a very, very important debate on Iran. We know, and everyone knows for years, that Iran is sponsoring terrorism. That's obvious.
Let's talk about those who led Islamists and terrorists into Europe. Who's responsible? Leftists. Who's responsible? So-called democrats. None of you in here. Just a couple of you. Not many. You know why? Because it is a shame for Europe to let terrorists with the flood of illegal migrants into Europe.
We are having this debate. And in the same time, mayor of Warsaw from EPP is about to let and rent another flat and another building for the people from the radical Muslim Brotherhood. They are connected. That's what we heard from the media. It's your man from EPP. So we are having a discussion on Iran. We should have a discussion on illegal migration, radical Islamists who were led in Europe by leftists and by so-called democrats. But we, conservatives, republicans, will save Europe Mr Commissioner, we're going to save Christian Europe.

Antonio López-Istúriz White (PPE). – Madam President, that Iran is a terrorist state, we all know. But you didn't know, and we have to know, that a year ago I denounced it. Once again, I need to remind you of the assassination attempt against our colleague Alejo Vidal-Quadras, a former Vice-President of this House, of this Parliament, who was shot in his face in bright daylight in the streets of Madrid. This is unacceptable.
Today, as we speak, the President of Iran is arriving in Russia for the BRICS summit. He will shake hands with Mr Putin and discuss further steps in their comprehensive strategic partnership. Do you know the meaning of that? It means the end of democracy, our freedoms and the end of Europe.
Maybe it's time now to understand this. The Iranian regime is helping Russia with weapons and was behind the attacks of 7 October. We have to put an end of this and we have to do it from Europe.

Brando Benifei (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, le esplosioni e le sparatorie avvenute vicino alle ambasciate israeliane a Stoccolma e Copenaghen ci preoccupano enormemente. Attendiamo che le indagini proseguano ma le ipotesi sembrano portare proprio alla pista del terrorismo sponsorizzato dallo Stato iraniano.
               

                  Di fronte a questi gravi avvenimenti non possiamo restare inermi: dobbiamo essere inflessibili come europei. Questo Parlamento denuncia già da tempo il regime iraniano, le sue infiltrazioni, la sua attività di repressione dei diritti umani e delle aspirazioni democratiche del suo stesso popolo.
               

                  Voglio ricordare come nel 2023 furono proprio le donne iraniane a ricevere il premio Sacharov per la libertà di pensiero. Oggi chiediamo ancora il rispetto dei diritti umani in Iran e abbiamo chiesto l'inserimento del Corpo delle Guardie Rivoluzionarie islamiche nella lista delle organizzazioni terroristiche.
               

                  L'Europa non si faccia strumentalizzare, ma resti vigile e non ignori il grido d'aiuto del popolo iraniano e denunci qualunque tentativo di interferenza e, ovviamente, di sostegno al terrorismo.
               

Ana Miguel Pedro (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, França, Dinamarca, Alemanha, Áustria: em 2024, a Europa volta a ser sacudida pela violência, com pelo menos sete ataques terroristas e 21 tentativas registadas. A maioria destes ataques são alimentados por movimentos extremistas, que encontram no regime iraniano o seu apoio. Este quadro não é um mero acaso, é um aviso claro da crescente ameaça que o Irão representa para a segurança interna da Europa.
               

                  O terrorismo não faz distinções, não respeita inocentes ou culpados, crianças ou adultos. Não conhece fronteiras, nem limites. Não se trata apenas de ideologia, é uma ofensa cínica e orquestrada contra o nosso modo de vida. Perante um regime que promove e sustenta o terror, a inação é tão perigosa quanto o próprio terror que combatemos.
               

                  A luta contra o terrorismo não se consegue com romantismo. Precisamos de sanções rigorosas. Precisamos de antecipar estas ameaças. Precisamos de prevenir a radicalização em todas as suas formas e proteger as nossas fronteiras, negando aos terroristas os meios para agir. Mas, sabemos que isso não pode ser feito isoladamente e a cooperação entre os Estados-Membros é vital.
               

                  Liberdade e segurança são indissociáveis. Não podemos permitir que o medo nos faça abdicar dos valores que defendemos.
               

Nicolás Pascual de la Parte (PPE). – Madam President, Iran is a big country. It holds a three-millennia culture, natural resources and a really qualified, very skilled population. It has all the features to be a driving force for good, but it is not; it's a driving force for evil. Iran exports and sponsors terrorism throughout the Middle East and throughout the world. Iran spreads destabilisation – political destabilisation – around the four corners of the world. In addition to this, Iran has the shameful record of being at the top for executions around the world. Last year, more people were executed in Iran than in the rest of the world together. How shameful!
It is scary to think that this country can have access to atomic energy. According to data from the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran has more than five tons of enriched uranium – enough to produce two atomic bombs in the coming months. If the Joint Comprehensive Action Plan is in shambles, we have to think of something to substitute it. It is a multilateral negotiation scheme with a very strong sanctions regime against the economy of Iran. And our hope is that youngsters and the women of Iran will stand up against this regime.

Spontane Wortmeldungen


Niels Geuking (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin! Der Terror im eigenen Land, im Iran, und in der Region hat einen Namen: die Armee der Wächter der Islamischen Revolution. Ein Staat im Staate, der brutal gegen seine eigene Bevölkerung vorgeht, nachweislich foltert und misshandelt. 2009, 2019, 2022 nach dem Tod von Mahsa Amini: tausende Festnahmen, Folterungen, unzählige Tote. Zudem regionale Terroraktivitäten – wir haben es heute mehrfach gehört: Überall, wo der Iran herrscht, überall, wo der Iran sich einmischt, herrschen Chaos, Tod.
               

                  Das Aufnehmen der Revolutionsgarden auf die Terrorliste ist daher nur ein weiterer notwendiger Schritt. Am Ende müssen auch wir uns ehrlich machen und den Handel mit dem Tod bekämpfen und am Ende auch einstellen – zum Wohle des iranischen Volkes und letztendlich auch, um die Familien zu schützen, denn sie haben schon mehr als genug gelitten bei all den Hinrichtungen.
               

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, atentados criminales en Estocolmo, en Copenhague, en Bochum (Alemania) y un intento de asesinato brutal contra un exvicepresidente del Parlamento Europeo, Alejo Vidal-Quadras: da igual que sus posiciones políticas no sean las mías o estén en sus antípodas, es un ciudadano europeo, y todas las investigaciones policiales y judiciales detrás de esta cadena de atentados señalan a los servicios secretos iraníes, al Cuerpo de los Guardianes de la Revolución Islámica, en definitiva, al régimen iraní.
               

                  Irán es una potencia regional y, desde luego, no es el único actor internacional que viola el Derecho internacional y los derechos humanos con una cadena incesante de ejecuciones de activistas de los derechos humanos y personas que ejercen lo que en Europa entendemos como derechos fundamentales.
               

                  Por tanto, es imprescindible que la Unión Europea deduzca las consecuencias y active todas las sanciones; hace falta no solamente la cooperación para esclarecer esos atentados criminales, incluido el que atentó contra la vida de Vidal-Quadras, sino que cualquier acción que viole los derechos humanos y el Derecho internacional merece las sanciones más enérgicas de la diplomacia y de la política exterior de la Unión Europea.
               

Silvia Sardone (PfE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'incubo dell'islamismo è sempre più forte in Europa. Dietro alcune azioni terroristiche, come le sparatorie nei pressi delle ambasciate israeliane a Stoccolma e Copenaghen, pare ci sia il coinvolgimento dell'Iran che utilizzerebbe bande criminali del luogo. Altri allarmi dell'intelligence segnalano l'aumento dei tentativi di assassinio finanziati a Teheran nei confronti di ebrei e critici del regime.
               

                  Da tempo critichiamo la brutalità della Repubblica islamica dell'Iran verso le donne. Donne che vogliono essere libere di non portare il velo islamico e che per questo vengono picchiate, abusate, arrestate e persino uccise. Dobbiamo immaginare che futuro vogliamo.
               

                  In Europa promuovete l'immagine di una donna con il velo islamico, lo stesso velo che quelle donne coraggiose combattono tutti i giorni. Dobbiamo comunicare che l'Europa supporta le donne libere, non oppresse, oppresse come le donne in Iran e, purtroppo, anche in tante comunità musulmane nelle nostre città.
               

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Arvoisa puhemies, Iranin valtion tukema terrorismi ei rajoitu pelkästään Lähi-itään. Nyt se on levinnyt jopa Euroopan rajojen sisäpuolelle. Lähi-idän valtioiden vaikuttamistoimet ovat siis siirtyneet Euroopan islamisaation rahoittamisesta nyt jo suoran toiminnan keinoihin. Iran on jo pitkään ollut terroristivaltio esimerkiksi Israelin näkökulmasta. Nyt EU:n pitääkin omaksua tiukempi suhtautuminen maahan, johon on virrannut miljardeja ja miljardeja dollareita rahaa EU:n ja Yhdysvaltain irtauduttua Iraniin kohdistuneista pakotteista.
               

                  Jo Iranin ydinsopimus oli erittäin hyvä osoitus eurooppalaisten naiiviudesta, mutta aivan viimeistään meidän olisi pitänyt oppia läksymme Iranin rahoitettua Hamasin terroritekoja lokakuun seitsemäntenä. Nyt Iranin terrori on kuitenkin löytänyt myös meidän ovestamme sisään. On viimeinen hetki herätä.
               

Tiago Moreira de Sá (PfE). – Senhora Presidente, o Irão, em cada guerra de procuração que instiga, em cada milícia terrorista que sustenta, ergue-se, hoje, como a grande sombra que paira sobre o Médio Oriente, e a cegueira complacente do Ocidente, esquecendo as lições da história, repete Munique em 1938. Apaziguar o tirano não evita o confronto, pelo contrário, torna-o inevitável. O Irão não é apenas um regime entre regimes, é um projeto de escuridão, um eclipse civilizacional, um longo véu de fanatismo que cobre os rostos das mulheres que sonham com a liberdade e os anseios dos homens que lutam pela paz.
               

                  Contra essa escuridão, os acordos de Abraão, liderados pela Administração Trump, foram e são uma explosão de luz. Para que a chama de Abraão prevaleça na região, devemos muni-la de sanções implacáveis, do reforço da dissuasão e do isolamento que a tirania iraniana merece. O que está em jogo não é só o destino das nações da região, mas o destino do espírito humano. Esta é uma batalha civilizacional entre a madrugada clara da razão e a noite sombria do fanatismo.
               

                  Entre a luz de Abraão e as trevas de Khomeini, a Europa também é um legado abraâmico, só pode escolher a luz.
               

Γεάδης Γεάδη (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, οι λανθασμένες, δήθεν προοδευτικές, μεταναστευτικές πολιτικές οδήγησαν στην αύξηση της λαθρομετανάστευσης και αναντίλεκτα επέφεραν αύξηση των τρομοκρατικών επιθέσεων στην Ευρώπη. Οι ισλαμιστικές επιθέσεις και τα συνεχή επεισόδια στη Γερμανία, το Βέλγιο, τη Γαλλία, την Ιταλία, την Ισπανία, την Ολλανδία, τις Σκανδιναβικές χώρες, την Ελλάδα και την Κύπρο αποδεικνύουν ότι οι Ευρωπαίοι πολίτες δεν είναι ασφαλείς πλέον ούτε στις χώρες τους. Πριν από λίγες μέρες, σε δύο πόλεις της Κύπρου, τη Λεμεσό και την Πάφο, έγιναν συλλήψεις λαθρομεταναστών για αδικήματα που σχετίζονται με τη συμμετοχή σε εγκληματική οργάνωση και την τρομοκρατία.
               

                  Αποτελεί πλέον θέμα ασφάλειας αλλά ταυτόχρονα και επιβίωσης όλων των Ευρωπαίων η εφαρμογή αυστηρής πανευρωπαϊκής μεταναστευτικής πολιτικής. Επιβάλλεται να απαγορευτεί η είσοδος στην Ένωση σε όποιον δεν σέβεται την ευρωπαϊκή φιλοξενία. Για να μην κλάψουμε επί ερειπίων, θα πρέπει να εισακουστούν οι προτάσεις των εθνικά σκεπτόμενων συντηρητικών δυνάμεων στο μεταναστευτικό, αλλιώς η Ευρώπη θα χαθεί.
               

Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE). – Paní předsedající, je potřeba říct na začátku, že Írán se k nám chová velmi nepřátelsky. Írán dlouhodobě podporuje Hizballáh a další teroristické skupiny, které bytostně ohrožují celou Evropu. Státem podporovaný terorismus je absolutně nepřijatelný a musí být razantně potlačen. Každý den stojí Izrael v boji proti teroristům, ať už z Hamásu, tak z Hizballáhu. Izrael dnes bojuje nejenom za svoji bezpečnost, ale i za bezpečnost nás tady v Evropě. Nesmíme zapomínat ani na Muslimské bratrstvo, které Írán čile dotuje, nebo na to, že vlastně další teroristické skupiny jsou Íránem podporovány nebo jsou vyzbrojovány nebo dokonce cvičeny. Írán podporuje i Rusko a právě to, jakým způsobem to dělá, je nebezpečné pro nás tady, kteří žijeme v Evropě.
               

Grzegorz Braun (NI). – Madam President, I ask what you are trying to do here, guys? Preparing some false-flag attack in Europe? This today's debate is jumping on Iran; attacking: this is a clear, ready propaganda-line narration preparing some terrorist attack. The next step will obviously be some journalists, functionaries of the propaganda front presenting the public with evidence that it was from Persia that the rocket came, or that here there is that half-burned Iranian passport that this terrorist had on himself before, you know, committing his deadly attack here.
This is crazy. Iran is not an enemy for Polish people who I represent, and I don't want to go to the world that you are trying to drag Europe in as American proxies.

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)


Helena Dalli,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, the debate today shows the importance of maintaining a high-level attention on Iran's hybrid threats. Attacks by any foreign country on European soil are, of course, unacceptable. I stress that again, as the EU, we will keep coordinating common policies and responses among Member States in full observance and respect of the different competencies of national authorities.
Let me also confirm that the EU will continue to show zero tolerance for hybrid threats on its soil, and stands ready to respond with all measures at its disposal, including sanctions, whenever needed. Let me just recall that the EU has already listed individuals and entities of the IRGC under the Iran human rights sanctions regime, the territorial integrity of Ukraine sanctions regime, the Syria sanctions regime, as well as the Iran weapons of mass destruction sanctions regime.
Moreover, the EU listed the IRGC in its entirety under the Iran weapons of mass destruction sanctions regime, which already comprises an asset freeze and the prohibition to make funds and economic resources available.
In particular, the European Parliament has expressed through resolutions – and a number of you have requested today – to list the Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organisation. The High Representative and other colleagues have previously shared explanations on the steps required for such a listing. The prerequisite is a national decision by a competent national authority – such as a court decision, for instance – for acts that fall under the definition of terrorist acts under the sanctions regime Council Common Position 931.
Such a national decision has been brought to the EU Council. The next step is for the EU Council to take a political decision based on the Member State evaluation of all necessary elements. Ultimately, the listing of the Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps is subject to a decision by the Council of the EU by unanimity of all EU 27 Member States.

PREDSEDÁ: MARTIN HOJSÍK


Podpredseda


Predsedajúci . – Táto rozprava sa skončila.
                  
23.   Situation in Tunisia (debate)

Predsedajúci . – Ďalším bodom programu je vyhlásenie Komisie o situácii v Tunisku (2024/2892(RSP)).
               

Helena Dalli,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, the EU has built a solid and long-standing partnership with Tunisia, one of our closest southern neighbours. Due to this proximity, what happens in Tunisia may also have implications on the EU. It is therefore extremely important that the EU continues to support the Tunisian population in this challenging socio-economic context.
Since 2011, the EU has invested significantly in the country, both politically and financially. And for the right reasons: our aim is to build a true partnership of equals. And we have worked hard, hand in hand with Tunisia, to make progress across the board of our wide-ranging relations, as we did when agreeing on a strategic and comprehensive partnership in July of last year.
The joint priority remains to continue advancing in the implementation of the strategic partnership across its five pillars within the overall framework of the association agreement: macroeconomic stability, trade and economy, green energy transition, people-to-people contacts, and migration and mobility. Presidential elections took place in Tunisia on 6 October, as announced by the electoral commission. Kais Saied obtained 90.69 % of the votes cast, with a voter turnout of 28.8 %.
The EU has taken note of the announced result, but also of the controversies around the electoral process, with the imprisonment of some presidential candidates, the exclusion of others, and a competition between the electoral commission and the administrative tribunal over who has the final word on the eligibility of candidates.
Furthermore, the Tunisian parliament passed a law ten days before the elections that transferred authority for settling electoral disputes from the administrative tribunal to the Tunis appeals court. Such an important change to the electoral framework so late in the electoral process is clearly not in line with best practices and international standards on democratic elections.
The low voter turnout is striking, particularly that of young voters. According to preliminary data, only 6 % of Tunisians aged between 18 and 35 cast their ballots. This follows similar outcomes already seen during the constitutional referendum in 2022, 30 %, and the legislative elections in 2023, only 11 %. This indicates a persistent disaffection among the Tunisian electorate.
Since 2021, the EU has regularly raised matters of concern with the Tunisian authorities, mainly in direct conversations with them, but also publicly through statements and declarations of High Representative Borrell on behalf of the 27 Member States. The EU maintains a keen interest in the continued strengthening of its strategic partnership with Tunisia, and it is in our interest to continue effective and comprehensive cooperation in various sectors in the framework of the memorandum of understanding signed in July 2023. It is very important to keep channels of communication between the EU and Tunisia open, and we will continue to do so.

Francisco José Millán Mon,
en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señor presidente, señora comisaria, Túnez es un vecino importante de la Unión, goza del estatuto de socio privilegiado en la vecindad meridional. Desde la Primavera Árabe, hemos venido respaldando los esfuerzos de transformación de su sistema político y de estabilización de su economía.
               

                  Ahora, Túnez atraviesa una coyuntura difícil: en el plano económico, la situación ha mejorado ligeramente respecto al año anterior, en parte gracias al repunte del turismo, pero persisten graves problemas económicos y sociales, elevadas cifras de desempleo, deuda pública e inflación, y una situación política muy complicada, como demostraron las recientes elecciones presidenciales: celebradas en circunstancias muy cuestionables, como acaba de describir la comisaria, contaron solo con una participación del 28 %, lo que muestra que la población se aleja del sistema político; hay también un deterioro de la figura del presidente, cuyos apoyos reales están descendiendo claramente. Pero no podemos abandonar al pueblo tunecino: contamos con el Acuerdo de Asociación y el Memorando de Entendimiento, firmado hace poco más de un año, que busca, entre otras cosas, apoyar la estabilidad de la economía tunecina, impulsar la transición energética y gestionar ordenadamente los flujos migratorios.
               

                  En el plano migratorio, los datos de llegadas de migrantes irregulares a las costas italianas son alentadores, han descendido en más del 80 %, aunque aún queda trabajo por hacer en materia de economía, de comercio, de transición energética, pero, por otra parte, tenemos que reiterar a las autoridades tunecinas la necesidad de una apertura política, de retomar el camino democrático y de garantizar el respeto a los derechos humanos, incluidos los de los migrantes.
               

                  Creo conveniente un gran diálogo inclusivo con la oposición y la sociedad civil y buscar consensos. Espero que en próximas visitas de la Comisión a Túnez se puedan pasar estos mensajes a las autoridades tunecinas, y, en este sentido, recuerdo que el artículo 8 del Tratado dice que la Unión desarrollará con los países vecinos relaciones preferentes sobre la base de los valores de la Unión, como la democracia, el Estado de Derecho, etc.
               

                  Túnez tiene que seguir siendo objeto de atención preferente para Europa. Tenemos que evitar, además, que otras potencias ocupen, en perjuicio nuestro, el vacío que podríamos dejar en este importante país vecino.
               

Nikos Papandreou,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, colleagues, I understand our good Commissioner's balanced approach – highly diplomatic. I'd like to stress, however, the problem of democracy. Tunisia, for many of us, was the birthplace of the Arab Spring, and I think we have to be a little bit tougher. I understand Mr Millán Mon's approach with trade – that's one policy. We need to use that trade to push Tunisia, because these elections, with 90 %, which are dictatorial numbers, and very low participation rate, as you pointed out, is a big problem for us.
One would hope that Tunisia would continue to have high participation rates. This means that people have given up. It's for us to give them hope. We hope, we ask the Tunisian authorities to release all those they put in prison during the elections – journalists, activists, members of the opposition. We believe that the Tunisian people deserve a political system that reflects all voices and fundamental freedoms.
I call on the Commission to ensure that No EU funding is disbursed to the entities that undermine democracy – not the whole country, the entities.

António Tânger Corrêa,
em nome do Grupo PfE. – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, Caros Colegas, toda a gente fala da situação atual na Tunísia, mas ninguém fala do que originou esta situação. Esta situação foi originada quando da chamada Primavera Árabe, que foi empurrada pela Irmandade Muçulmana, tal como no Egito, na Jordânia, em Marrocos, na Argélia. Aí é que começou a desestabilização da Tunísia e é isso que nós não queremos compreender. E, se não o compreendermos, não podemos ajudar a Tunísia – e ajudar a Tunísia é fundamental.
               

                  Com eleições mais ou menos democráticas, o que é facto é que a Tunísia é um país importante para a União Europeia. A Tunísia é importante para os países do sul da União Europeia e não podemos viver sem a margem sul do Mediterrâneo. Isso é um facto.
               

                  E nós temos que ajudar a Tunísia de uma forma inteligente. Não é despejando dinheiro, não é dando conselhos, não é fazendo sanções que nós vamos ajudar a Tunísia. Nós vamos ajudar a Tunísia de dentro para fora: apoiar as forças vivas da nação e, com elas, construir a democracia.
               

Alberico Gambino,
a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, la cooperazione con la Tunisia, consolidata con il Memorandum d'intesa del 2023, è essenziale per la stabilità e la sicurezza del Mediterraneo. Questo accordo ha già portato a una riduzione delle partenze irregolari, così come è stato detto poc'anzi, di circa l'80%, un risultato concreto che dimostra l'efficacia del nostro impegno.
               

                  Il recente colloquio tra la Presidente del Consiglio italiana, Giorgia Meloni, e il presidente tunisino, Kais Saied, ha confermato la volontà comune di rafforzare il partenariato, specialmente nell'ambito del piano Mattei per l'Africa e della cooperazione migratoria. È stata ribadita l'intenzione di organizzare il prossimo anno in Tunisia la seconda conferenza del processo di Roma.
               

                  È fondamentale, a mio avviso, che i 150 milioni di euro stanziati dall'Unione europea siano gestiti con trasparenza ed efficacia. Sebbene le ONG svolgano un ruolo importante, dobbiamo garantire che i fondi vengano utilizzati senza sprechi, rispettando gli obiettivi prefissati. Sosteniamo con forza quindi questo memorandum, convinti che la partnership solida tra la Tunisia e l'UE sia cruciale per il futuro della regione.
               

Jan-Christoph Oetjen,
im Namen der Renew-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Frau Kommissarin, Sie haben sehr richtig dargestellt, wie die Situation in Tunesien bei den Wahlen gewesen ist, und man kann es ja eigentlich gar nicht richtig Wahlen nennen, was da passiert ist. Das Einzige, was mir fehlt, ist die Antwort auf die Frage: Was sind denn eigentlich die Konsequenzen?
               

                  Wir hatten schon das Referendum, das hochgradig gefaked war. Die Belohnung für das Referendum war eine strategische Partnerschaft mit vielen Millionen Euro. Und jetzt haben wir eine Wahl gehabt, wo wir Kandidaten hatten, die nicht zugelassen wurden, die wurden einfach eingeknastet; das Gericht, das dann gesagt hat, diese Kandidaten müssen aber zugelassen werden, das wird dann durch Parlamentsbeschluss entmachtet – das ist doch kein ordentlicher Partner für die Europäische Union.
               

                  Ich erwarte, dass diese Europäische Kommission mehr Druck macht auf Tunesien, mehr Druck macht dafür, dass alle politischen Gefangenen umgehend freigelassen werden. Ich möchte insbesondere Sihem Bensedrine an dieser Stelle nennen, die die frühere Vorsitzende der tunesischen Kommission für Wahrheit und Würde ist. Ich möchte die Kommission auch dazu auffordern, dass Sie dringend dafür kämpfen, dass die Gewaltenteilung in Tunesien wiederhergestellt wird, dass Gerichte frei entscheiden können und nicht alles unter der Kontrolle einer einzelnen Person, nämlich des Staatspräsidenten, ist.
               

                  Und ich erwarte von Ihnen, dass Sie das auch mit finanziellem Druck hinterlegen, denn das ist das einzige Mittel, das die wirklich verstehen.
               

Mounir Satouri,
au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, nous sommes au lendemain d'une élection présidentielle qui aura marqué profondément la Tunisie. C'en est fini de la démocratie tunisienne. Nous avons vu l'effondrement de tous ses piliers: sa constitution, son Assemblée, son système juridique, sa société civile, ses journalistes. Kaïs Saïed a été réélu avec plus de 90 % des suffrages: un score normal pour un dictateur qui a éliminé tous ses opposants.
               

                  On vient d'apprendre aujourd'hui même la condamnation de l'ancien candidat à la présidentielle Ayachi Zammel à plus de soixante et un ans de prison! Vous avez entendu? Soixante et un ans de prison! Aujourd'hui, j'ai la fierté de dire que je suis Ayachi Zammel.
               

                  L'élection est passée, une dictature s'installe. Une dictature que l'Union européenne n'a pas le droit de légitimer. Nous devons soutenir les démocrates, et je veux porter ici la voix de la société civile qui défend avec acharnement la Tunisie et sa population. Exprimons-nous clairement contre le délit de solidarité, qui criminalise les associations, en particulier celles qui travaillent auprès des migrants. Le migrant ne peut devenir une monnaie d'échange entre nous et la Tunisie. Exprimons-nous contre le décret-loi no 2022-54, fait pour détruire toutes les voix dissidentes, et qui enferme aujourd'hui l'avocate Sonia Dahmani. Exprimons-nous contre les détentions de prisonniers politiques. Sihem Ben Sedrine est victime d'un acharnement judiciaire; elle doit être libérée. Exprimons-nous contre la fermeture de l'espace civique et contre la peur.
               

                  Aucun financement européen ne peut aller à ce régime et à sa dictature. Dans nos textes et dans nos déclarations publiques, nous avons nous aussi notre part de responsabilité, pour conjurer le sort terrible que connaissent les Tunisiennes et les Tunisiens.
               

Mimmo Lucano,
a nome del gruppo The Left. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, lo scorso 6 ottobre i risultati delle elezioni in Tunisia hanno confermato, senza alcuna sorpresa, il secondo mandato per Saied.
               

                  Con una campagna elettorale inesistente, un'opposizione silenziata da misure repressive e un gioco politico corrotto e antidemocratico, queste elezioni sono state una farsa svolta in un clima di repressione e persecuzione politica. In Tunisia non vengono rispettati i diritti umani, la libertà di espressione, di associazione e il diritto dei migranti.
               

                  Assurdo, se non vergognoso, che questo Paese possa essere considerato sicuro, al punto anche da avere sottoscritto un memorandum d'intesa per fermare le migrazioni: un altro vergognoso esempio in cui facciamo finta di lavarci la coscienza, mettendo persone nelle mani di criminali, dimenticandoci del tutto dei diritti umani.
               

Tomasz Froelich,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Vom Arabischen Frühling ist in Tunesien nicht mehr viel übrig – Tunesien tendiert zur Autokratie, die Wahlen dort sind eine Farce. Wir mögen das beklagen, aber wir werden es nicht ändern, und wir sollten es auch nicht versuchen, denn die Instabilität in Tunesien ist auch Folge unserer Interventionsfreude. Die Bilanz ist fatal. Bei all den Versuchen des nation-building steht man am Ende zumeist wieder am Anfang. Dazwischen gibt es viel Chaos, viel Leid – das ist die Realität. Sie muss uns nicht gefallen, aber wir müssen damit leben, und wir müssen endlich lernen, gemäß eigener Interessen damit umzugehen.
               

                  Das heißt, wer auch immer in Tunesien regiert, für uns muss es darum gehen, die illegale Migration übers Mittelmeer zu stoppen. Wir brauchen deshalb ein stabiles Rückführungsabkommen mit Tunesien – selbst der Europäische Auswärtige Dienst sieht das so. Das wäre in unserem Interesse, und es wäre auch im Interesse Tunesiens, denn die Massenmigration aus Ländern südlich der Sahara erschüttert nicht nur unsere Gesellschaft, sondern auch die tunesische. Das Gebot der Stunde lautet daher Remigration.
               

Davor Ivo Stier (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, kolegice i kolege, Tunis je naš stari partner.
               

                  Odnosi započinju još 76. godine, ali vrlo važan moment u tim odnosima bilo je prošle godine potpisivanje Memoranduma o razumijevanju i strateškom partnerstvu između Europske unije i Tunisa. Taj memorandum pruža jedan sveobuhvatan okvir, alate za Komisiju kako bi podržala Tunis u suočavanju s nizom aktualnih izazova, uključujući makroekonomsku stabilnost, upravljanje migracijama, ali i iskorištavanje prilika za suradnju u sektorima od zajedničkog interesa.
               

                  Točno je da se Tunis u zadnje vrijeme nije približio nego udaljio od koncepta liberalne demokracije, ali isto tako moramo reći Tunis jest i mora ostati naš partner jer imamo veliki prostor za suradnju i za dijalog, imamo zajedničke interese i taj prostor jednostavno ne smijemo ostaviti našim geopolitičkim suparnicima.
               

Leoluca Orlando (Verts/ALE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signora Commissaria, le contraddizioni dell'Europa: il presidente Saied è stato eletto con oppositori in carcere, in una condizione sociale e politica ben lontana da una democrazia. Il presidente Saied ha, in particolare, alimentato odio contro africani subsahariani, definendoli pericolosi criminali.
               

                  La Presidente della Commissione e i capi di governo di Italia e Paesi Bassi hanno, nel luglio 2023, reso omaggio al presidente Saied, affidandogli paradossalmente ingenti risorse finanziarie con il compito di aver cura proprio di quei migranti, provenienti dal sub-Sahara, discriminati ed insultati dallo stesso Saied.
               

                  Adesso, un episodio illuminante delle contraddizioni europee: dopo aver ricevuto ingenti finanziamenti per questa assurda esternalizzazione delle frontiere a danno dei migranti, il governo tunisino ha poi rifiutato la richiesta di ingresso in Tunisia della commissione Affari esteri del Parlamento europeo, a settembre del 2023, due mesi dopo la firma di quel protocollo di intesa.
               

                  Chiediamo che la Presidenza della Commissione, che la Commissione, che la Presidente del Parlamento intervengano per garantire il diritto di ingresso di una delegazione parlamentare in un Paese finanziato dall'Europa, per consentire di avere incontri istituzionali e, soprattutto, di contattare la società civile tunisina e di conoscere le condizioni di trattamento dei migranti affidati alla Tunisia.
               

Hana Jalloul Muro (S&D). – Señor presidente, hace trece años, en este Parlamento se otorgaba el Premio Sájarov a la Primavera Árabe, entre otros a Mohamed Buazizi, el joven vendedor ambulante que inició, tras inmolarse, un cambio histórico en Túnez y en el mundo árabe.
               

                  Sin embargo, el país donde triunfó la revolución democrática se ha convertido en el país donde se arrestan políticos, periodistas, activistas, se restringe la libertad de expresión, se censuran organizaciones civiles y se niega el derecho a la participación política a candidatos de partidos políticos históricos. El 72 % de la población que decidió no votar el 6 de octubre merece tener alternativas reales; es un mensaje claro.
               

                  Hemos sabido que las fuerzas de seguridad tunecinas han estado implicadas en graves abusos, como torturas o violaciones contra los migrantes. También hemos conocido la dramática situación que viven en el campamento de El Amra. Sin embargo, no he visto a la derecha de este Parlamento preocuparse por que ningún euro de los 105 millones que invierte la Unión Europea en el marco de su acuerdo fronterizo con Túnez sea para financiar estos abusos.
               

                  Su labor, desde el inicio de la legislatura, ha sido la de cuestionar sistemáticamente la financiación de la Unión Europea a reputadas organizaciones por acusaciones infundadas. ¿No es un poco hipócrita que ahora que las pruebas son reales estén callados?
               

                  Solicitamos que la Comisión vele por el respeto de los derechos humanos en Túnez, en el marco del memorando de entendimiento de la Unión Europea. La solución migratoria no debe pasar por el ‘todo vale’.
               

Marco Tarquinio (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signora Commissaria, sono italiano e vedo e sento bene ciò che accade sulle sponde del Mediterraneo. Non ripeterò le cose che sono state dette stasera, nel bene e nel male, sull'amico popolo tunisino.
               

                  Nella Tunisia del plebiscitario presidente-padrone Saied c'è una pace apparente e sconvolgente. In Tunisia c'è guerra alla democrazia e all'umanità.
               

                  Qui oggi cito un solo nome: Sihem Bensedrine, già presidente della commissione indipendente Verità e dignità, paladina dei diritti umani, detenuta senza colpa, sottoposta a vessazioni. Immaginatela – anzi vedetela – denudata, svegliata a forza, costretta a inginocchiarsi davanti agli aguzzini che la percuotono.
               

                  Qui oggi cito la caccia xenofoba, propugnata dallo stesso Saied, ai migranti dalla pelle nera – una caccia che si fa detenzione violenta e dura ma arriva anche all'abbandono criminale di persone inermi ai confini desertici con Algeria o Libia.
               

                  Tutto ciò avviene all'ombra del memorandum d'intesa che, tra l'altro, esautora il Parlamento. Lo chiedo con le parole di Bob Dylan: fino a quando l'Europa volgerà lo sguardo dall'altra parte?
               

Vystúpenia na základe prihlásenia sa o slovo zdvihnutím ruky


Giorgio Gori (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, abbiamo preso atto dell'esito delle elezioni in Tunisia, consapevoli del contesto politico altamente compromesso in cui si sono svolte. Sappiamo anche delle pratiche di discriminazione ai danni dei migranti e di intimidazione verso esponenti della società civile. Di fronte alle violazioni dello Stato di diritto e dei diritti umani, l'Unione europea non può essere ovviamente silente.
               

                  Dobbiamo tuttavia riflettere sul futuro delle nostre relazioni con la Tunisia, considerando la posizione strategica di questo Paese per la stabilità del Mediterraneo. Dobbiamo sapere che ogni spazio lasciato scoperto dall'Unione europea sarà occupato da altre potenze, con tutte le conseguenze.
               

                  Il prossimo anno ricorre il trentennale della firma degli accordi di associazione con la Tunisia. Propongo di usare questa occasione per rilanciare il dialogo politico e la cooperazione, cercando di bilanciare gli interessi strategici di entrambe le parti e promuovendo con pazienza la legalità e il rispetto dei diritti. È proprio ora che rafforziamo i legami con la Tunisia: se le voltiamo le spalle, altri attori prenderanno il nostro posto.
               

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Mr President, over the years, Tunisia has benefited from a number of EU programmes and initiatives. These include, for example, Erasmus+, Horizon Europe and Creative Europe. We are talking about huge sums. Between 2014 and 2022, the EU devoted around EUR 1.4 billion to overall bilateral cooperation with Tunisia. The question is, can this investment be assessed as being worth it? Another question to keep in mind is, how much is it the European taxpayers' responsibility to support Tunisia's green energy transition, as an example? The focus should be on combating the migratory pressure to Europe, enhancing border management and preventing the trafficking of human beings.

Tineke Strik (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, dear Commissioner. Today we must deplore the total destruction of Tunisian democracy and the rule of law after high hopes following the Arab Spring. We must criticise the detention of opposition journalists, activists and academics; the systematic torture, rape, expulsion and death of migrants and refugees. But what we should condemn the most is the contribution of the Commission and so-called 'Team Europe' to this growing repression. In a blind attempt to halt migration, the EU has cemented Saied's power: no conditionality, complete silence to any violation, and leaving civil society out there in the cold.
Commission: your credibility is at stake. So finally fulfil your obligation to promote democracy, good governance and human rights in the EU's external action in a consistent and firm manner. Finally put your values first.

(Koniec vystúpení na základe prihlásenia sa o slovo zdvihnutím ruky)


Helena Dalli,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, this debate continues to confirm the importance of our strategic partnership with Tunisia, which we need to continue to strengthen, and some of the challenges we are facing and need to address together. We need to maintain a balance and pursue both in parallel. The lack of protection, the suspension of registration of migrants by UNHCR and the targeting of civil society organisations supporting migrants, including some funded by the EU are, of course, all of very, very, very serious concern. We will continue to raise these issues with the Tunisian authorities.
The respect for and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms are at the core of our relations with all third countries and addressed through dialogue with governments and through targeted development assistance aimed at protecting the human rights of the population.
Tunisia remains a key partner in the EU's southern neighbourhood, and we will continue to support the Tunisian population in a very challenging socio-economic context.

President. – Thank you very much, Commissioner, and also thank you to all the colleagues who were here until the end of this debate.
24.   Explanations of vote

Predsedajúci . – Ďalším bodom programu sú vysvetlenia hlasovania.
               
24.1.   Establishing the Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism and providing exceptional macro-financial assistance to Ukraine (A10-0006/2024 - Karin Karlsbro)

Predsedajúci . – Teraz prejdeme k vysvetleniam hlasovania o Zriadení Mechanizmu spolupráce v oblasti úverov pre Ukrajinu a poskytnutie výnimočnej makrofinančnej pomoci Ukrajine.
                  

                     A keďže tu nevidím kolegu Kellyho, tak poprosím kolegu Tynkkynena, nech sa páči.
                  

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Arvoisa puhemies, Ukrainan tukeminen on samalla myös turvallisuusratkaisu koko Euroopalle. Vaikka käymämme keskustelu antaakin Ukrainalle toivoa, pelkkä toivo ei riitä sodan voittamiseen. Siihen tarvitaan varoja, ammuksia ja kalustoa. Niiden saamista olemme tänään edistäneet – ja hyvä niin.
                  

                     Äänestin tämän uuden Ukrainan tukemisen mekanismin puolesta, mutta nimestä johtuen on hyvä selventää, että kyse ei ole yhteisvelasta vaan siitä, että Ukraina pääsee maksamaan velkojaan neljälläkymmenelläviidellä miljardilla eurolla Venäjän jäädytetyistä varoista.
                  

Predsedajúci . – Tento bod programu je ukončený.
                  
25.   Agenda of the next sitting

Predsedajúci . – Nasledujúce rokovanie sa uskutoční zajtra v stredu 23. októbra 2024 so začiatkom o 9:00 h. ráno. Program schôdze bol uverejnený a je k dispozícii na webovom sídle Európskeho parlamentu.
               
26.   Approval of the minutes of the sitting

Predsedajúci . – Zápisnica z tohto rokovania bude predložená parlamentu na schválenie zajtra po hlasovaní.
               
27.   Closure of the sitting

(Rokovanie sa skončilo o 21.38 h.)



ELI: 
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)