Verbatim report of proceedings of 10 March 2025
Date: 2025-03-10
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Parliament, parliamentary debate








C_202506061EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series














13.11.2025







            10 March 2025
            VERBATIM REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF 10 MARCH 2025
            
         
(C/2025/6061)

Contents







1.

Resumption of the session
3










2.

Opening of the sitting
3










3.

Statements by the President
3










4.

Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting
4










5.

Composition of committees and delegations
4










6.

Corrigenda (Rule 251)
4










7.

Proposals for Union acts
4










8.

Parliament's calendar of part-sessions - 2026
4










9.

Order of business
6










10.

Resumption of the sitting
9










11.

Supporting the EU's most vulnerable regions against devastating effects of climate change, such as the recent cyclone hitting La Réunion (debate)
9










12.

Resumption of the sitting
14










13.

Requests for the waiver of immunity
14










14.

Request for the defence of immunity
14










15.

Resumption of the sitting
14










16.

Cutting red tape and simplifying business in the EU: the first Omnibus proposals (debate)
14










17.

Establishing the Reform and Growth Facility for the Republic of Moldova (debate)
38










18.

European Social Fund Plus post-2027 (short presentation)
51










19.

One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
54










20.

Agenda of the next sitting
61










21.

Approval of the minutes of the sitting
61










22.

Closure of the sitting
61










23.

Closure of the session
61




Verbatim report of proceedings of 10 March 2025
                  


IN THE CHAIR: ROBERTA METSOLA


President

1.   Resumption of the session

President. – I declare resumed the session of the European Parliament adjourned on 13 February 2025.
2.   Opening of the sitting

(The sitting opened at 17:01)

3.   Statements by the President

President. – Good afternoon, dear colleagues. We start with a few announcements on my side.
First of all, dear colleagues, two years ago, on 28 February 2023, in Tempi, Greece, a tragic railway accident cost 57 people their lives and injured even more. We mark a sad anniversary today as our hearts go out to the victims, to those who lost their loved ones and to the injured who still bear the scars of that day. This House remembers them and honours them.
Over the coming months, we will celebrate also the 35th anniversary of the assertion of state continuity of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, enshrining their independence de jure under international law throughout different illegal occupations and annexations of the 20th century.
These anniversaries remind us again of the sacrifice of so many for the liberty that we enjoy today, and underscore our determination never to allow another generation of Europeans to be lost behind an Iron Curtain.
Tomorrow at noon, we will once again welcome national leader of Belarus, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, to this plenary, along with other brave women from Ukraine and Belarus, who are standing up for liberty in order to mark International Women's Day. May I ask that you are present. I count on you and your colleagues to be here then, because this week will also serve to reaffirm this House's steadfast support for the people of Belarus and their struggle for freedom, including political prisoners.
And to express this solidarity and to mark the International Day of Solidarity with Belarus, the European Parliament is once again offering you, as Members of this Parliament, the opportunity to sign postcards addressed to the 1 250 political prisoners who are unfairly imprisoned by Lukashenka's regime. I urge you to join in this action to show them that their sacrifice will not remain unanswered.
Last year, this initiative was extremely successful – in the previous mandate, in the previous Parliament. I ask that we make this year's even more so. We know their names, we see their struggle and we stand with them. So this message and this initiative will send the strongest of messages that they are not alone.

(Applause)

4.   Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting

President. – The minutes and the texts adopted of the sitting of 13 February 2025 are available.
Are there any comments? If not, the minutes will be deemed approved.
5.   Composition of committees and delegations

President. – The ECR and Greens/EFA groups and non-attached Members have notified me of decisions relating to changes to appointments within committees and delegations.
These decisions will be set out in the minutes of today's sitting and take effect on the date of this announcement.
6.   Corrigenda (Rule 251)

President. – The LIBE and ENVI committees have transmitted corrigenda to texts adopted by Parliament. Pursuant to Rule 251, these corrigenda will be deemed approved unless, no later than 24 hours after their announcement, a request is made by a political group or Members reaching at least the low threshold that they be put to the vote.
The corrigenda are available on the plenary webpage. Their titles will be published in the minutes of this sitting.
7.   Proposals for Union acts

President. – I would also like to announce that, pursuant to Rule 47(2), I have declared admissible two proposals for a Union act.
The first is on employment protection for the activities of police officers, military personnel, prison officers, and customs and border officials, classifying them as high-risk occupations in the EU. The proposal is referred to the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs.
The second is on the need to extend the period for implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility. This proposal is referred to the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, as committees responsible, and to the Committee on Employment, the Committee on the Environment, the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the Committee on Transport and Tourism, for opinion.
8.   Parliament's calendar of part-sessions - 2026

President. – On Wednesday, 5 March 2025, the Conference of Presidents adopted the proposal for the calendar of part-sessions for the parliamentary year 2026.
The dates are available on the plenary webpage and the deadlines are as follows: amendments, today at 7 p.m.; roll-call votes, Tuesday, 11 March at 4 p.m. The vote will then take place on Wednesday, 12 March at noon.
I would like to inform the House that I have received multiple requests for points of order. I will go through them one by one.
First, I give the floor to Ms Iratxe García Pérez.

Iratxe García Pérez (S&D). – Madam President, dear colleagues, today marks five years since the start of COVID-19. We remember those who died and honour their memory. Faced with a difficult challenge, the European Union worked together in a way we hadn't seen before. We bought vaccines together. We made a digital certificate to help travel safely. We created NextGenerationEU to help our economies recover. This initiative showed that the EU acted together to protect its citizens.
Now we face new challenges, like the threat of war. Let us not forget how we handled COVID-19. We need to be bold and stay united. By learning from that time we can build a more resilient and cohesive Europe. This will help us face any future crisis with determination and unity.

Željana Zovko (PPE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, I would like to draw your attention to the situation of minorities in Syria. In recent days, multiple sources indicated that both the Alawite population and Syria's shrinking Christian community have been deliberately targeted.
Extremist factions associated with militant groups have reportedly executed civilians, including women and children. Christian families have endured brutal killings and violent raids at the hands of armed militants who have stormed homes, seized belongings and claimed innocent lives.
The European Union must take decisive action in support of stability and humanitarian relief efforts to alleviate the suffering of the Syrian people, including Christians and other affected communities.
Christianity in Syria and in some other parts of the Middle East-North Africa region is at a critical crossroads. It will either endure or it will vanish, leaving behind a profound religious, ethnic and cultural void.
Europe must not remain indifferent to this existential threat. An External Action Service with its press release – it is shameful that they did not take this into account.

Αφροδίτη Λατινοπούλου (PfE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, ευχαριστώ. Τοποθετούμαι επί της εφαρμογής του κανονισμού βάσει των άρθρων 10 και 164. Μετά την τελευταία Διάσκεψη των Προέδρων, που υιοθέτησε την ημερήσια διάταξη, ο ευρωβουλευτής του ECR, o κύριος Φράγκος, με επίσημη ανακοίνωσή του και με το λογότυπο του ECR πάνω της, διέσπειρε fake news στους Έλληνες πολίτες, πως η συγκεκριμένη Ολομέλεια είναι αρμόδια να διερευνήσει το σιδηροδρομικό δυστύχημα των Τεμπών, διαβάλλοντας τόσο τους Πατριώτες όσο και εμένα προσωπικά, ότι δήθεν εμποδίσαμε την έρευνα του εγκλήματος.
               

                  Όλοι γνωρίζουμε, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, πως αυτό είναι μία χυδαία συκοφαντία κατά όλων μας. Είμαι σίγουρη πως το ECR θα καταδικάσει τα ψέματα του κ. Φράγκου, ο οποίος όχι μόνο προσπάθησε να εξαπατήσει τους Έλληνες, με μόνο σκοπό να διασύρει την πατρίδα του αλλά και να πατήσει πάνω σε νεκρούς, πηγαίνοντας χέρι χέρι με τους αριστερούς. Κύριε Φράγκο, να χαίρεστε τον πατριωτισμό σας. Εσκεμμένα συκοφάντησατε τους θεσμούς που υποτίθεται πως υπηρετείτε. Και, αγαπητό ECR, να χαίρεστε το μέλος σας που ακόμα κρύβεται αντί να ζητήσει συγνώμη. Σε αυτήν την Ολομέλεια οι σοβαροί πατριώτες έχουμε ιερό χρέος να προστατεύουμε τόσο τους θεσμούς όσο και τις πατρίδες μας. Ευρωβουλευτές και συμπεριφορές τύπου Φράγκου δεν είναι ανεκτές.
               

Alice Kuhnke (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, I take the floor under Rule 39.
The right to be who you are, to love who you want and to live your life free from discrimination is a fundamental European right. That right is clearly under attack.
At this critical moment, the decision by the European Commission to announce the withdrawal of the horizontal anti-discrimination directive came as a shock. It also represents a betrayal of all the EU citizens who are currently lacking protection against discrimination.
It is time for the EU to show global leadership against discrimination, not to back down. As the European Parliament's rapporteur for this directive, I strongly condemn this decision and I urge the European Commission to immediately reconsider it.

Fabio De Masi (NI). – Frau Präsidentin! Ich beziehe mich auf Artikel 167 der Geschäftsordnung für Angelegenheiten von besonderem Interesse – eine Kollegin hat es bereits angesprochen: Wir sind Zeuge von schlimmsten Gräueltaten in Syrien gegen die alevitische Minderheit geworden in den letzten Tagen. Und der European External Action Service hat ein wirklich groteskes Pressestatement herausgegeben, in dem er die Verantwortung für diese Gräueltaten im Prinzip implizit Pro-Assad-Kräften zugesprochen hat.
               

                  Man muss nun wirklich kein Freund des Assad-Regimes sein, um zu erkennen, dass das wirklich groteske Fake News waren, und ich finde, es muss ein deutliches Signal von diesem Parlament ausgehen, dass wir so etwas nicht dulden hier in diesen heiligen Hallen.
               

Lynn Boylan (The Left). – Madam President, I wish to raise a point of order relating to the agenda item on the deteriorating situation in Gaza.
On February 24, the official mission of this Parliament's delegation for relations with Palestine, of which I am the Chair, was supposed to take place. Instead, myself, Rima Hassan, MEP, and two officials of this Parliament were detained by the Israeli authorities and subsequently deported.
While detained by the Israeli authorities, our electronic devices held by Members and staff of the delegation were confiscated for over 90 minutes. Our passports, including an Irish diplomatic passport, were confiscated and were not returned to us until we arrived back in Brussels.
This all took place on the same day that the EU-Israel Association Council was taking place, and EU leaders were committing themselves to continue business as usual with Israel, while the Israeli authorities were not allowing us, as elected officials, to do our jobs.
So I ask you, Madam President, that you address this matter urgently.

President. – Thank you, I will.

Costas Mavrides (S&D). – Madam President, I will be quite short because the subject has already been mentioned by some of my colleagues. It is with regard to the situation in Syria.
Based on reports by agencies that were our sources of information during the Assad regime, hundreds of people have been murdered in their homes, thousands were tortured and kidnapped, including kids and women and men. Much more were expelled by the new jihadist regime simply because the victims are Alawites, Druze or Christians.
For this reason, I will kindly ask the following: let's show our conscience by observing a one-minute silence.

President. – Thank you very much. Let's see how we take it. We have also a debate on this matter, and I ask all the Members to speak also during that debate.
9.   Order of business

President. – We now come to the order of business. The final draft agenda, as adopted by the Conference of Presidents on 6 March 2025 pursuant to Rule 163, has been distributed.
In accordance with Rule 9(9), the following report is added to the final draft agenda for a vote on Tuesday: report by Dainius Žalimas on the request for waiver of the immunity of Adam Bielan.
With the agreement of the political groups, I also wish to put to the House the following proposal for changes to the final draft agenda for Tuesday. The order of debates in the afternoon will change as follows.
The debate on the presentation of the proposal for a Critical Medicines Act will be taken as the second point, and the debate on the presentation of the proposal on a new common approach on returns will be taken as the third point.
If there are no objections to this, then the change will be approved.
We now move to changes requested by the political groups, starting with Wednesday.
The ECR Group has requested that Council and Commission statements on 'Recent events in Romania: the ongoing investigation into the presidential candidate' be added as the fifth point in the afternoon, before the debate on frozen Russian assets. As a consequence, the sitting would be extended to 11 p.m.
I give the floor to Gheorghe Piperea to move the request on behalf of the ECR.

Gheorghe Piperea,
în numele grupului ECR. – Doamnă președintă, în decurs de trei luni, România a reușit recordul de a interzice doi candidați, de a anula o rundă de alegeri și de a aresta un candidat, fără probe. Sistemul judiciar este acum o armă politică utilizabilă împotriva oricui.
               

                  Ambii competitori care au câștigat turul unu al alegerilor din 24 noiembrie 2024, ambii, inclusiv Lasconi, și cărora li s-a refuzat turul doi, consideră că anularea alegerilor și interzicerea unor candidați sunt ilegitime.
               

                  Precedentul românesc s-ar putea extinde în toată Uniunea, fapt care ar determina destrămarea încrederii poporului în democrație și în justiție. Nu ne dorim asta, stimați colegi.
               

                  Fundamentul democratic al Uniunii Europene este reprezentat de pluralism politic și alegeri libere. Dar sistemul birocratic european nu are încredere în opțiunile omului de rând, pe care îl vede inapt de decizii de vot responsabile.
               

                  Pentru binele mai mare, Uniunea Europeană a instituit scutul democratic european ca un fel de vaccin anti disidenți. Dar cu ce ne face asta diferiți de Uniunea Sovietică?
               

President. – Do any colleagues want to speak against?
Mr Ștefănuță, go ahead.

Nicolae Ștefănuță (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, based on the rule of law and based on democracy, having such a debate would undermine the very principle of legality in the middle of an ongoing election. Let me tell you something: the proponent that came with this proposal tonight, his party leader yesterday incited 'skinning alive' those who he considers responsible for this – and this in the middle of riots that were violent.
Enough with the violence. He said it was a metaphor. Well, a metaphor is what Shakespeare said, that the world is a stage. A metaphor is not when you say 'skinning people alive', when you put women down, when you put minorities down, when you go against the constitutional base of the country, when you say that ethnicities are less than people.
So enough with the hate. Let's not export the hate. Romanians deserve a European, modern, democratic life.

President. – Thank you. We will put the request of the ECR Group to a vote by roll call.

(Parliament rejected the request)

So the agenda is unchanged.
We move now to a request by the ESN Group – for Wednesday as well – which has requested that a Commission statement on 'Presidential elections in Romania, particularly the Constitutional Court's ruling of 8 March' be added as the second point in the afternoon.
I give the floor to Christine Anderson to move the request.

Christine Anderson,
on behalf of the ESN Group. – Madam President, Romania has now barred Călin Georgescu, as my colleague Mr Piperea just pointed out. This is unprecedented in the EU Member States.
Ladies and gentlemen, if democracy were to effect change, that is the sole reason for having a democracy. You can effect change. But what we are seeing now is actually that people can vote for whoever they want and if they don't like the candidate, they just bar him or put him in jail.
As democrats, we cannot stand for this. The European Commission states that in a healthy democracy, citizens can freely choose their leaders. If the Romanian people choose Georgescu, why do we interfere and why do we stop it?
This has nothing to do with democracy. We need to have a debate on this to get back to our senses. I urge you to vote for this proposal.

President. – Does any colleague want to speak against?
I see a hand up there. Go ahead, Mr Panayiotou. Sorry, Mr Sieper. I can't see that far.

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Madam President, dear colleagues, yes, the moustache is gone, if you do not recognise me.
I was just wondering about that colleague that said the people elected this candidate. They didn't elect this candidate in a fair election; it was an election that was scammed by Russian propaganda and Russian bots and Russian influence. I know that you are fond of stuff like this, because it tends to help you as well in our elections.
But democracy also includes the free will of the people without manipulation, without foreign interference. That is the problem here. It is not that a fair election was taken away; it is that a scammed election was taken away. If the institutions – the Constitutional Court, the board of elections – decide like this, you have to respect it. You cannot just cry aloud because the candidate that you wanted to run was taken away.

President. – Thank you very much. So let's put the group's request to a vote by roll call.

(Parliament rejected the request)

So the agenda remains unchanged.
The final request is from the Greens/EFA Group. For Wednesday, it has requested that a Commission statement on 'Secessionist threats in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the recent escalation' be added as the last point in the afternoon. As a consequence, the sitting would be extended to 11 p.m.
I give the floor to Ms Strick to move this request on behalf of the Green Group.

Tineke Strik,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, colleagues, amidst all major recent geopolitical developments and our discussions about increasing European security, we must make sure to pay attention to the developments in Bosnia.
In recent weeks, the situation became extremely explosive after the President of Republika Srpska, Milorad Dodik, took further illegal steps towards judicial succession from the State of Bosnia and Herzegovina in response to his conviction by the Bosnian Constitutional Court for undermining the Dayton Peace Accords. And as Putin's puppet in the Balkans, Dodik may do anything the Kremlin tells him, including waging war.
So this escalation requires a rapid and strong EU response, as we are not secure without a secure Bosnia.
So the Greens/EFA Group therefore proposes the debate with a title ‘Commission statement on secessionist threats in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the recent escalation, without resolution’, and we would like to extend the meeting on Wednesday then, to 11pm.

President. – Thank you. I will now give the floor to any colleagues who want to speak against. Ms Zovko?

Željana Zovko (PPE). – Madam President, I strongly commend the intention to speak on Bosnia and Herzegovina and the situation of Bosnia-Herzegovina regarding the recent US approach towards Bosnia, towards multilateral organisation and towards the unresolved situation regarding electoral law reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
30 years after the Dayton Agreement, we still have a High Representative who is receiving EUR 26 000 a month to keep Bosnia and Herzegovina in what? In disarray? We have to address the real issue that is electoral law reform. We have to close our OHR office. We have to bring Bosnia and Herzegovina to the European Union because America is leaving.
The OHR office is staying only with Christian Schmidt and the Peace Implementation Council is highly influenced by Turkey and Russia. This is something that we cannot neglect in this debate. I will join the debate, I'm not speaking against the debate, but this debate and the title should be extended to: 'Urgent need to change electoral law reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina and end with international presence.'

President. – Thank you. There is an issue with the timing here because, with the deadlines we have, the title cannot be changed.
So we vote on the Greens' request by a show of hands.

(Parliament approved the request)

The agenda is now adopted and the order of business is thus established.

(The sitting was briefly suspended)


PREDSEDÁ: MARTIN HOJSÍK


Podpredseda

10.   Resumption of the sitting

(Rokovanie pokračovalo od 17:28 h.)

11.   Supporting the EU's most vulnerable regions against devastating effects of climate change, such as the recent cyclone hitting La Réunion (debate)

Predsedajúci . – Ďalším bodom programu je vyhlásenie Komisie o podpore najzraniteľnejších regiónov EÚ v súvislosti s ničivými účinkami zmeny klímy, ako bol nedávny cyklón na Réunione (2025/2587(RSP)). Informujem poslancov, že bude len jedno kolo rečníkov politických skupín. Preto sa nebude uplatňovať postup prihlásenia sa o slovo zdvihnutím ruky a nebudú akceptované žiadne modré karty.
               

Andrius Kubilius,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, in recent weeks, many communities have faced hardship caused by the devastating effects of climate change. The recent cyclones – Garance in Réunion and Chido in Mayotte – serve as stark reminders of the vulnerability faced by our outermost regions.
Let me express the European Commission's unwavering solidarity with our fellow Europeans in Réunion and Mayotte. These regions are on the frontline of climate change, facing extreme weather events and their devastating impacts. As a Union, we are committed to assisting in their recovery from the current disasters. At the same time, we stand ready to support them in building resilience, improving preparedness and adapting.
In immediate terms, the European Union can offer support upon request from the French authorities. For example, the Copernicus Emergency Management Service has been instrumental in providing satellite-based damage assessments, ensuring a rapid and effective response. In addition, the European Union Civil Protection Mechanism enables swift coordination of aid, including the deployment of disaster response experts and critical equipment. We have already demonstrated the effectiveness of this mechanism in Mayotte. Five European Union Member States – Belgium, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and Sweden – responded swiftly to Cyclone Chido, providing essential emergency supplies such as family tents and medical shelters. This is European solidarity in action. Concrete, practical support when it is needed most.
However, beyond immediate assistance, our focus must also be on long-term resilience. First, we are mobilising financial resources to aid recovery efforts. The European Regional Development Fund and the European Social Fund Plus are key instruments for reconstruction. The RESTORE regulation – which Vice-President Fitto had the pleasure of discussing with many of you – is allowing major flexibilities for Mayotte. The European Union Solidarity Fund, established as a post-disaster relief instrument, stands ready to provide financial support. Last Friday, France submitted an application to the European Union Solidarity Fund regarding the damage caused by Cyclone Chido in December 2024. The Commission will now proceed with an assessment of the application.
In the longer term, the Commission is currently working on the first European climate adaptation plan to enhance preparedness and protection for our communities. This is being developed alongside the preparedness Union strategy, which will enable a more proactive approach to crisis management across the European Union. Among the key risks identified are climate change, extreme weather events and environmental degradation, all of which demand our urgent attention.
Second, disaster risk management is a key priority under cohesion policy, allowing Member States to allocate resources according to their specific risks. A total of 21 Member States, including France, have planned direct investments in disaster risk management, with a total of EUR 14.4 billion allocated between 2021 and 2027. These investments focus on prevention and preparedness, including nature-based solutions that not only reduce risks but also offer wide environmental and societal benefits. The mid-term review of cohesion policy will also provide Member States with an opportunity to allocate additional resources to meet emerging needs. For every euro invested in disaster prevention, the return in avoided recovery costs can range from 2 to 10 euros. These investments are already making a difference: by strengthening resilience, we are reducing the flood risk for over 40 million people and lowering wildfire vulnerability for over 130 million people.
And third: beyond financial support, cohesion policy promotes climate adaptation through nature-based solutions and the development of resilient infrastructure. To ensure the effectiveness of investments, Member States intending to invest in risk management are required to submit risk management plans guiding their decisions. This is a precondition for receiving cohesion policy support. Additionally, under the current programming period, all EU-funded infrastructure projects must undergo a climate-proofing assessment. This ensures climate neutrality and resilience, aligning with the 'Do No Significant Harm' principle. To support these efforts technical assistance is available.
Honourable Members, cohesion policy will continue to strengthen the resilience of our Member States and regions, reducing their vulnerability to climate change and future disasters. Let me assure you that the Commission remains fully committed to supporting disaster risk management efforts and enhancing the European Union's resilience to large-scale disasters. Together, through solidarity and strategic investment, we can build a safer and more resilient future for all.

Isabelle Le Callennec,
au nom du groupe PPE. – Monsieur le Président, le 28 février 2025, un cyclone d'une intensité inédite s'est abattu sur l'île de La Réunion. Il aura fait cinq victimes et de très lourds dommages. L'État français a annoncé 200 millions d'euros et des avances pour les agriculteurs. La région a voté en commission permanente, ce 5 mars, 100 millions d'euros consacrés à la reconstruction de l'île. Sa présidente, Huguette Bello, a également fait appel à l'Union européenne.
               

                  La Réunion peut et doit pouvoir bénéficier du Fonds de solidarité de l'Union comme du dispositif Restore: le FSUE pour la remise en état rapide des bâtiments, le soutien au relogement des familles et les aides d'urgence versées aux sinistrés, notamment par les CCAS; le dispositif Restore pour flécher utilement les fonds du FEDER, du FSE Plus et du Feader vers la reconstruction la plus rapide possible des infrastructures et des équipements publics, mais aussi pour soutenir les entreprises fortement touchées. L'accès aux fonds européens est souvent réputé difficile et complexe. L'Union européenne, en partenariat avec les pouvoirs publics français, a là l'occasion de prouver le contraire. Le retour à une vie normale sur l'île de La Réunion en dépend.
               

                  À l'heure où la situation géopolitique accapare les esprits, il ne faudrait pas oublier notre devoir de solidarité envers les sinistrés des régions européennes qui subissent des catastrophes naturelles, à commencer par celles d'outre-mer. Les événements subis par l'île de Mayotte sont encore dans toutes les mémoires. Pour les territoires ultrapériphériques, Monsieur le Commissaire, simplification, célérité et efficience.
               

Nora Mebarek,
au nom du groupe S&D. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, le dérèglement climatique frappe encore et toujours plus fort. La Réunion vient d'en faire l'amère expérience après le passage dévastateur du cyclone Garance. Cinq morts, des centaines de sinistrés, des dizaines de milliers de foyers privés d'électricité, la distribution d'eau potable affectée, des infrastructures ravagées et une agriculture mise à genoux. L'île est défigurée, la population durement éprouvée: voilà pourquoi il est important que notre Parlement puisse exprimer toute sa solidarité avec les Réunionnaises et les Réunionnais. L'Europe doit être au rendez-vous de la détresse engendrée par ces catastrophes à répétition.
               

                  Comme pour Mayotte après Chido, l'État français doit demander la mobilisation du Fonds de solidarité de l'Union européenne pour aider La Réunion à reconstruire. Nous devons aussi activer des mesures Restore pour réparer aujourd'hui, mais surtout pour préparer demain: indemniser les pertes agricoles et soutenir les filières dans leur reprise d'activité, reconstruire en mieux pour protéger davantage les populations, et permettre à l'île d'accélérer son adaptation aux nouvelles réalités climatiques.
               

                  Au-delà de l'urgence immédiate, cette catastrophe nous rappelle une fois de plus qu'il est impératif de mettre en place une politique européenne plus ambitieuse pour nos régions ultrapériphériques, qui sont en première ligne face au dérèglement climatique. Nous devons renforcer nos capacités d'anticipation, d'adaptation et de reconstruction en investissant durablement dans des infrastructures résilientes, des dispositifs d'alerte plus performants et des mécanismes de soutien plus réactifs.
               

                  Face à ce drame, la solidarité européenne ne doit pas être un vœu pieux, mais une réponse concrète. Aux Réunionnaises et aux Réunionnais nous ne devons pas offrir notre seule compassion, mais l'assurance que l'Union ne laissera pas tomber ses régions ultrapériphériques, à commencer par l'île de La Réunion.
               

Marie-Luce Brasier-Clain,
au nom du groupe PfE. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, c'est la deuxième catastrophe naturelle en deux mois qui frappe le territoire français. Après Mayotte, le passage du cyclone Garance, le 28 février 2025, a révélé la vulnérabilité de La Réunion face aux aléas climatiques. Avec des rafales atteignant 230 km/h au Piton Sainte-Rose, il a causé la mort de cinq personnes et d'importants dégâts matériels, de l'ordre de centaines de millions d'euros: 160 000 foyers privés d'électricité, 310 000 sans eau potable, des routes détruites et des pertes agricoles estimées à des dizaines de millions d'euros.
               

                  À l'heure où nous parlons, des milliers de foyers subissent des coupures d'eau, d'électricité et de communications. Il est urgent d'investir dans des infrastructures résilientes, notamment paracycloniques, et de garantir une autonomie énergétique pour mieux préparer l'île à ces épisodes extrêmes. Cette préparation passe bien sûr aussi par l'accélération du déploiement des fonds européens. Je pense ici au dispositif Restore, que les récentes catastrophes sur le sol européen ont rendu plus nécessaire que jamais. L'outre-mer est un atout pour l'Europe, ne les oublions pas.
               

Grégory Allione,
au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, le 28 février, à peine plus de deux mois après que le cyclone Chido a ravagé Mayotte, l'île de La Réunion a été balayée par la tempête Garance. Elle a touché de plein fouet 900 000 habitants et causé la mort de cinq personnes. À ce triste bilan s'ajoute un lourd bilan matériel: routes coupées, maisons détruites, coupures d'électricité et d'eau courante… C'est aussi tout le secteur agricole réunionnais qui a été frappé. Des rafales de vent à plus de 200 km/h n'ont laissé aucune chance aux cultures et aux plantations de bananes, de fraises, de tomates et de canne à sucre. Au nord de l'île, typiquement, les planteurs de canne ont perdu près de 90 % de leur récolte.
               

                  Cette situation tragique, force est de le constater, ne relève plus de l'exceptionnel. Les catastrophes naturelles font dorénavant partie de notre quotidien, bouleversé par les conséquences du changement climatique. En particulier, les régions ultrapériphériques, de par leurs caractéristiques géographiques, sont en première ligne face au changement climatique. Elles nous éclairent avec un temps d'avance sur les problèmes auxquels l'ensemble des régions de l'Union seront confrontées prochainement. En les soutenant aujourd'hui, nous investissons dans la résilience de l'Union pour notre avenir.
               

                  Ma présence répétée ici, devant cette assemblée, alors que c'est mon premier mandat, atteste tristement ce phénomène. Depuis septembre dernier, c'est à cinq reprises que je me suis adressé à vous à la fois pour livrer un message de soutien aux régions et aux communautés touchées par de telles catastrophes, mais aussi pour exhorter l'Union européenne à être à la hauteur de ce défi, notamment grâce à la stratégie à venir sur la préparation de l'Union et au prochain budget européen.
               

                  Il faut continuer à se préparer activement et à mettre l'accent sur la préparation et la réparation. Nous devons renforcer notre soutien aux communautés et aux régions touchées par de telles catastrophes, notamment via le mécanisme de protection civile de l'Union, le Fonds de solidarité et une plus grande flexibilité dans l'utilisation des fonds de cohésion. D'autre part, nous devons instaurer une véritable culture de la préparation, afin que tous les citoyens, en particulier dans les régions les plus exposées aux risques naturels, soient en mesure de se prémunir, de se préparer et de réagir face aux événements climatiques. En tant que sapeur-pompier, je peux vous assurer que chaque geste compte et peut sauver des vies.
               

Marie Toussaint,
au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Monsieur le Président, voici à nouveau La Réunion frappée par un cyclone d'une intensité sans précédent. L'an dernier, Belal avait déjà provoqué de graves dégâts, mais Garance est pire encore. Après Chido à Mayotte, voilà un nouvel épisode climatique qui défie les habitudes dans l'océan Indien. Quand comprendrons-nous que nous devons accélérer, plutôt que mettre en pause, la lutte contre le dérèglement climatique?
               

                  Le peuple réunionnais a perdu cinq des siens. Des milliers de foyers ont perdu l'accès à l'électricité et à l'eau. Les paysans perdent à nouveau leurs récoltes, des chouchous à la canne, et à Saint-Benoît, l'une des villes les plus pauvres de l'île, des centaines de familles vivent encore en centre d'hébergement.
               

                  La France a déclaré l'état de calamité naturelle. Elle doit aussi déclarer le blocage des prix, et l'Europe doit prêter main forte. Nous devons aussi impérativement développer une culture du risque. D'abord, dans l'aménagement du territoire: il faut cesser de construire en zone inondable et dans les ravines, tenir compte des conclusions des scientifiques et investir l'argent public dans la protection des populations et de la nature, plutôt que dans de nouveaux projets routiers, inutiles. Ensuite, dans la solidarité, parce que les plus vulnérables sont toujours en première ligne; alors plaçons-les au cœur de la future stratégie européenne d'adaptation au dérèglement climatique.
               

                  Chers collègues, ne faisons pas de La Réunion un nouveau symbole de notre inaction, mais au contraire plaçons-la au cœur de toutes nos actions.
               

Younous Omarjee,
au nom du groupe The Left. – Monsieur le Président, permettez-moi tout d'abord, en tant que Réunionnais, de remercier l'ensemble des groupes politiques pour ce débat, qui dit la solidarité du Parlement européen avec les Réunionnais et les Réunionnaises, éprouvés par les dégâts immenses causés par le cyclone Garance. Mes pensées vont avant tout, ce soir, vers les victimes, vers les familles endeuillées ainsi que vers celles et ceux qui ont tout perdu. De cette tribune, je veux leur dire que nous sommes à leurs côtés et que tous les moyens de solidarité de l'Union européenne sont immédiatement disponibles, comme vous l'avez dit, Monsieur le Commissaire.
               

                  Je veux saluer la décision de la présidente du conseil régional de La Réunion, Huguette Bello, d'activer le fonds Restore, que j'ai eu l'honneur de défendre ici, devant ce Parlement, en tant que rapporteur, et qui va permettre de mobiliser immédiatement 100 millions d'euros: 100 millions d'euros pour venir en aide aux familles qui ont perdu leur maison, réparer les routes détruites et pouvoir réparer les infrastructures endommagées. Je veux aussi saluer les modifications que nous avons apportées au Feader, qui va permettre de venir immédiatement en aide aux agriculteurs en leur attribuant 40 000 euros par exploitation agricole sinistrée.
               

                  Pour conclure, Monsieur le Président, je veux dire que ces catastrophes naturelles nous rappellent le devoir que nous avons de continuer à agir contre le réchauffement planétaire, et que nous devons placer les îles particulièrement fragiles au cœur de la politique d'adaptation au réchauffement climatique. Je veux terminer en disant aux Réunionnaises et aux Réunionnais que je salue leur courage et leur résilience. Ils se tiennent debout, et c'est ainsi qu'ils pourront se relever.
               

Irmhild Boßdorf,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Traumhafte Strände, tropisches Klima, Vulkanlandschaften, schwungvolle Musik, kreolische Tänze, herrliches Essen – wer möchte nicht Urlaub auf den Vanille-Inseln machen? Eine davon ist die Insel La Réunion. Sie liegt im Indischen Ozean und ist eine französische Enklave. Atemberaubend sei ein Urlaub dort – so wirbt die Insel auf ihrer Webseite. Aber – auch das wird dort vermeldet – die Insel wird von Zyklonen geprägt. Faszinierend und gefürchtet seien diese, aber eben auch nicht selten, und deshalb werden die Verhaltensregeln beim Auftreten von Zyklonen abgestuft in fünf Eskalationsstufen – von gelb bis blau – gleich mitgeliefert auf dieser Seite.
               

                  Just ein solcher Zyklon suchte die Insel in der vergangenen Woche heim. Windgeschwindigkeiten von über 200 Stundenkilometern sorgten für Überschwemmungen, Strom- und Wasserausfälle, und tatsächlich sind leider auch fünf Todesopfer zu beklagen.
               

                  Doch was macht die EU daraus? Statt unbürokratisch zu helfen, so wie es Frankreich sofort getan hat, beeilt sich die EU erst einmal, einen Zusammenhang zwischen diesem Wetterereignis und einem menschengemachten Klimawandel herzustellen. Statt einfach hinzunehmen, dass Zyklone die Insel schon immer geprägt haben, hören wir die ewig gleiche Leier vom menschengemachten Klimawandel.
               

                  Klima ändert sich stets. Niemand von uns kann genau sagen oder gar ausrechnen, wie groß unser Einfluss darauf ist. Niemand von uns kann die Frage beantworten, ob wir mit unseren Maßnahmen zum vermeintlichen Klimaschutz unserer Umwelt, unserem Wetter, unserer Heimat nicht sogar Schaden zufügen.
               

                  Schaden werden wir aber auf jeden Fall nehmen, wenn wir es zulassen, dass demokratisch gewählte Ministerpräsidenten wie Călin Georgescu in Rumänien ihr Amt nicht antreten dürfen und sogar von der Wiederholungswahl ausgeschlossen werden. Da zieht ein Sturm auf in Europa, und das ist der Sturm, den Europa fürchten muss, denn der kann sich sehr schnell zu einem Zyklon entwickeln, dessen Folgen dramatisch sein dürften.
               

Andrius Kubilius,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you for sharing your insights during this very meaningful discussion. And thank you for advocating for those in some of our most vulnerable regions.
The recent cyclones affecting Mayotte and Réunion remind us of the urgent need to reinforce disaster-resilience and climate-adaptation measures across the Union.
The European Union's response to these events demonstrates our unwavering solidarity and commitment to supporting affected communities, not only in the immediate aftermath, but also in the long-term rebuilding process.
Through disaster risk-management investments and strategic climate adaptation planning, we are working to reduce vulnerability and strengthen preparedness. The importance of early warning systems, nature-based solutions and targeted financial instruments cannot be overstated. They are essential components of a comprehensive approach to disaster resilience, ensuring that regions can withstand future challenges.
The Commission remains a steadfast partner in these efforts. We will continue to mobilise resources, provide technical assistance and foster collaboration between Member States. Our goal is clear: to build a more resilient and better prepared Europe in the face of an increasingly unpredictable climate.
As always, we count on the cooperation and support of the Parliament as we strive to achieve this goal. Let us work together to protect our people, our communities and our shared future.

Predsedajúci . – Rozprava bola prerušená. Takže, ospravedlňujem sa, musíme na pár minút rokovanie prerušiť, pokiaľ sa nedostaví niekto za Komisiu. Takže poprosím o trochu strpenia.
               

(Rokovanie bolo prerušené o 17.53 h.)


IN THE CHAIR: ROBERTA METSOLA


President

12.   Resumption of the sitting

(The sitting resumed at 17.56)

13.   Requests for the waiver of immunity

President. – I have received requests from the competent authorities in Belgium for the parliamentary immunity of Elisabetta Gualmini and Alessandra Moretti to be waived.
These requests are referred to the Committee on Legal Affairs.
14.   Request for the defence of immunity

President. – Former Member Helmut Geuking has submitted a request for defence of his parliamentary immunity in the context of legal proceedings in Germany.
This request is referred to the Committee on Legal Affairs.

(The sitting was briefly suspended)


PREDSEDÁ: MARTIN HOJSÍK


Podpredseda

15.   Resumption of the sitting

(Rokovanie pokračovalo od 17.58 h.)

16.   Cutting red tape and simplifying business in the EU: the first Omnibus proposals (debate)

President. – The next item is the debate on the Commission statement on cutting red tape and simplifying business in the EU: the first Omnibus proposals (2025/2602(RSP)).
Dear colleagues, we will start the debate on the Commission statement without the Commission present. I have to say this is really appalling. This is not really a time for us to sit and relax, and I think it is going to be made quite clear to the Commission that it is unacceptable not to have a Commissioner here for this actually really important debate.
Ďalším bodom programu je vyhlásenie Komisie o znižovaní byrokracie a zjednodušovaní podnikania v EÚ: prvé súhrnné návrhy.

Manon Aubry (The Left). – Monsieur le Président, je crois que nous étions tous là en train d'attendre que la Commission européenne daigne s'intéresser à nos débats, daigne venir dans l'hémicycle et daigne venir présenter le plus grand paquet de dérégulations qu'elle ait jamais eu.
               

                  Je ne sais pas si la commissaire est en train d'avoir des réunions avec des lobbys ou avec des banques pour continuer à déréguler le devoir de vigilance, mais je pense qu'on ne peut pas avoir de débat aussi important que celui-ci sans la présence de la Commission européenne.
               

                  Aussi, je vous demanderai s'il est possible d'envisager de reprogrammer ce débat, pour s'assurer que la Commission européenne sera présente et que, au bout d'un moment, elle arrête de nous manquer de respect, comme elle l'a fait à de trop nombreuses reprises, malheureusement.
               

President. – I was informed that the reason is a traffic jam, not a meeting with lobbyists. I'm sorry to disappoint you there.
But I still believe that there are enough Commission officials listening to this broadcast anyway. And I think that this House should not be stuck because of this.
So I would like to give the floor to Tomas Tobé to open the debate.

Tomas Tobé,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, Europe is falling behind in growth and competitiveness, and in these uncertain times, we must act decisively and, of course, try to boost our economy. Europe needs a game changer and the Omnibus proposal is a step in the right direction, but more is needed.
Growth, not bureaucracy, will drive our economy forward and power the green transition. To deliver, we need two key things. First, clarity and breathing room for our European companies. The 'stop-the-clock' proposal must enter into force as soon as possible. That is why EPP is calling for a faster approach under an urgent procedure.
Second, we have to deliver on content. We can do more to simplify this legislation and the EPP will push for further measures in the upcoming negotiations. We can, and we also call on all constructive forces of this House to join us in this.
Europeans expect us to protect their jobs and improve their lives. The EPP is ready to lead and try to unlock the potential of our economy. This is also what is best for climate and for sustainability. I would argue that a growing European economy is the best climate policy that we could have. On our continent, we have the highest standard and also the most ambitious climate policy in the world. Taking down European economy is counter-productive.
So the big debate here now, and especially I'm turning to my friends and colleagues on the Left, now the question is: will you stand for growth and jobs or red tape and bureaucracy? Europe cannot afford to wait. It is time to act.

Gabriele Bischoff,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, colleagues, who does not like to have simple legislation with a high level of legal certainty? We call it 'the art of doing legislation'. Anyone? I don't think so, even though the Commission is not here.
We as S&D support this. We engage in simplification, and we want to better protect SMEs from multinationals putting their obligations on them. But – surprise! – if you really look at the package, you can see that quite a few of these proposals don't deliver on simplification. And Omnibus: I think the term is to maximise people's confusion because they don't know what an 'omnibus' is here. If you look at these four very different legal proposals, you will find out that these are legal proposals we worked on. We found compromises in this House. We found majorities in the last mandate.
If you look at two of these four omnibus packages – especially if you look at the due diligence proposals – it is pure deregulation. It is not simplification. And it's not rational proposals for simplification: it affects real people. You're talking about growth and jobs; we are talking about growth and good jobs, also for the fruit picker from Morocco, also for the child that has to dig minerals or the transport worker that works here and delivers our products. These proposals were written by multinationals, by business lobbyists that lobbied for that for a long time.
And EPP, Mr Tobé, instead of talking with the other political groups, like S&D, like Renew and the Greens, you cowboy-like march through without any talking to come up with a fast procedure here. But I think the art of doing law in Europe was finding good compromises. It was not the cowboy style of marching through and just push, push, push without having good legislation. Because what good legislation can come out of this – without any consultation, without any legal assessments here – to march through?
I have to say, Mr Tobé, but also to Mr Weber, it has consequences if you leave how we did legislation in the past and you want to do it with the far right in this House. You have the choice: to negotiate with us for simplification, for better protecting SMEs, or you march through with the right here, but this will have consequences for the whole legal term. In this sense, I hope you come to your senses.

Klara Dostalova,
za skupinu PfE. – Pane předsedající, Evropská komise slavnostně slibuje, že sníží byrokracii o 25 %. Prý to přinese podnikům úlevu 6 miliard EUR a mobilizuje investice za 50 miliard EUR. Zní to krásně, že jo? Tak proč si podnikatelé stále rvou vlasy? Protože místo, aby Brusel uvolnil ruce našim firmám, vymýšlí další pravidla, další výjimky, další dotace pro ty správné sektory. V případě odkladu reportingu v rámci ESG to zase zapomněl říct bankám a tak dále.
               

                  A zatímco Komise pořádá tiskové konference a chlubí se novými plány, naše podniky kolabují. A co průmysl? Německé ocelářství, kdysi pýcha evropského hospodářství, dnes kolabuje. A co české firmy? České automobilky, které zaměstnávají tisíce lidí, čelí dalším a dalším regulacím. České strojírenské firmy bojují s nesmyslnou administrativou, která je brzdí ve výrobě a inovacích. Evropě nepomůže kosmetická úprava byrokracie. Evropa nepotřebuje další papírové triky. Potřebuje reálné kroky, méně regulací, více podpory pro podnikatele a méně zasahování do života běžných občanů a návrat zdravého rozumu do politiky.
               

                  Evropská komise dnes hrdě hlásí: Podnikatelé, my vás zachráníme! Jen zapomněla dodat, že jim přišroubovala k nohám betonové boty. Podnikatelé potřebují jasné kroky a právní jistotu, a zejména u reportingu ESG je to více než důležité. Proč nehlasujeme o odložení reportingu už na této schůzi? Vážení kolegové, měli bychom zařadit v případě snižování byrokracie dvojku.
               

Tobiasz Bocheński,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, nearly all Members of the European Parliament agree that we have to rapidly change the direction of the EU. The Commission and the bureaucracy it created generate time spent on idleness and overcoming obstacles, which were invented in the mind of the leftists.
Because of that reckless attitude, we, the Europeans are in huge danger. EU is losing the international race. China and US are growing faster, more stable and more innovative. Many nations are mocking the EU with such excessive bureaucracy. Our continent has become a sick man of the world.
We urgently need to deregulate our economy, we have to break the chains that hinder our growth. The Commission is proposing the Omnibus package. It is a step in the right direction, but it's a very small step. It's not enough. The Omnibus initiative is shallow. You are trying to avoid making – Madam is absent, of course – you are trying to avoid making hard decisions.
We need new deregulations with which we shout: cut, cut, cut and, once again, cut. We have to throw a lot of directives into trash where they belong. There is a lot of work ahead of us to get rid of the unnecessary burdens from our economy. The Omnibus proposal needs to be amended and extended.

Pascal Canfin,
au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, je voudrais m'adresser aujourd'hui aux représentants du PPE qui sont devant moi pour dire que vous avez le choix, aujourd'hui, d'aller vite, avec nous, dans ce processus de simplification sans tomber dans les outrances que nous venons d'entendre de la part des groupes de la droite et de l'extrême droite. Vous avez le choix, et nous, Renew, nous sommes prêts à aller très vite, sur la base des propositions de la Commission. On peut discuter des détails, mais le point d'équilibre, par exemple sur la CSRD, qui est l'un des textes de ce paquet ‘omnibus’, nous convient globalement, puisqu'il y a certes des reports, mais les éléments qui nous semblaient absolument essentiels, comme le principe dit de la double matérialité, sont maintenus.
               

                  Autrement, vous avez le choix de ne pas faire cette négociation avec nous, mais avec l'extrême droite. Si vous négociez avec l'extrême droite, alors cela veut dire que vous cassez la capacité à avoir une confiance dans cette majorité von der Leyen, qui a élu la présidente de la Commission. Or vous avez besoin de cette majorité von der Leyen; l'Europe a besoin de cette majorité von der Leyen pour répondre à la crise géopolitique que nous connaissons et construire cette Europe-puissance dont on a plus que jamais besoin. Ce n'est pas avec l'extrême droite que vous allez le faire. Ce n'est pas avec ceux qui viennent de rappeler que la pire responsabilité sur le secteur de l'acier, ce serait le texte sur la CSRD, alors que ce sont évidemment les amis de l'extrême droite, comme Donald Trump, qui veulent imposer des droits de douane qui vont faire très mal au secteur de l'acier.
               

                  Vous avez le choix: soit vous faites une simplification intelligente avec nous, soit vous faites la tronçonneuse avec l'extrême droite. C'est l'Histoire qui vous regarde.
               

Marie Toussaint,
au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, je vais moi aussi m'adresser à la droite européenne, faute de pouvoir m'adresser à la Commission. Sous couvert de simplification, ce que vous proposez, c'est un affaissement inédit des protections de l'économie européenne. Alors que l'Europe est menacée, vous choisissez la dérégulation plutôt que la souveraineté. En effet, vous nous proposez d'abandonner les rares outils qui nous permettent, par exemple, de refuser l'entrée de produits issus du travail forcé des Ouïghours sur le marché européen et la concurrence déloyale du gaz de schiste américain ou des firmes voyous façon Rana Plaza. Et vous osez appeler cela la défense de l'emploi? Ressaisissez-vous!
               

                  Oui, nous avons besoin de simplifier et nous le dirons tous ici aujourd'hui. Cependant, vous ne simplifiez pas; vous avez décidé d'emprunter à tombeau ouvert l'autoroute de la dérégulation. Ce faisant, vous mettez à mal notre souveraineté, nos valeurs et la transition vers une économie responsable, parce que, en défaisant ce que nous avions commencé à construire, vous découragez et vous sanctionnez les entreprises et les investisseurs responsables qui ont déjà engagé le changement. Pour résumer, vous sanctionnez la vertu et vous encouragez le vice.
               

                  Vous osez écrire que les entreprises qui ne respecteront pas leurs obligations climatiques, Madame la Commissaire, pourront poursuivre leurs activités en toute tranquillité. Faut-il vraiment encourager les activités climaticides? Vous avez également pour objectif de réduire de 90 % le nombre d'entreprises concernées par des obligations de transparence, dont des secteurs à haut risque, comme l'industrie minière. Est-ce vraiment raisonnable? Non.
               

                  Nous ne sommes pas dupes. Si vous choisissez effectivement l'alliance avec l'extrême droite, vous ferez le choix non pas de réduire la bureaucratie, mais bien d'étendre sans limite le domaine de l'impunité. Cette politique, nous la combattrons.
               

Manon Aubry,
au nom du groupe The Left. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, Madame la Commissaire – ravie que vous ayez finalement trouvé le chemin du Parlement européen; je ne sais pas, peut-être y avait-il un ‘omnibus’ sur votre route? –, je vais commencer avec une question assez simple pour vous: est-ce que Donald Trump est devenu votre modèle? Parce que, manifestement, son grand vent de dérégulation a soufflé jusque de ce côté-ci de l'Atlantique.
               

                  Je vous imagine à la Commission européenne: la planète est en train de cramer à + 4 oC, les multinationales continuent d'engranger des profits en violant les droits de l'homme, et là vous vous dites: ‘Eurêka! Débarrassons-nous des seules régulations qui existent pour demander des comptes aux entreprises!’
               

                  Avec ce paquet ‘omnibus’, vous offrez un blanc-seing aux entreprises qui vont détruire la planète et exploiter les travailleurs. Vous jetez le devoir de vigilance des multinationales à la poubelle, en limitant la responsabilité aux seuls partenaires directs, trahissant son principe même, et en supprimant les sanctions financières. Tant pis si des entreprises comme Shein, Total ou Vinci continuent allègrement de violer les droits de l'homme et de détruire l'environnement en toute impunité.
               

                  Aussi longtemps que nous serons ici, vous pouvez compter sur mon groupe pour se battre afin de protéger ces réglementations et d'empêcher les multinationales de faire leur loi et de générer des profits au détriment de nos vies.
               

Marcin Sypniewski,
w imieniu grupy ESN. – Panie Przewodniczący! Bruksela obiecuje deregulację, ale wygląda tak jak wilk, który założył owczą skórę na chwilę. Komisja Europejska, która od dekad dławi nas wszystkich regulacjami, teraz mówi, że chce je uprościć. To tak, jakby podpalacz nagle ogłosił, że zostaje strażakiem. Omnibus to tak naprawdę nie jest żadna rewolucja. Jest to krok w dobrym kierunku, ale nie jest to żadna rewolucja. To raczej kosmetyczne poprawki. Unia Europejska nie chce ciąć biurokracji, ona chce nią lepiej zarządzać. I omnibus to takie delikatne przycinanie formularzy, a nie prawdziwe cięcie biurokracji i regulacji.
               

                  Jeśli naprawdę chcemy uwolnić biznes, potrzebujemy piły łańcuchowej, takiej, jak ma prezydent Milei, a nie nożyka do papieru. Jeżeli mówimy o harmonizacji regulacji, to oznacza, że zamiast trzech dokumentów będziemy mieli jedną, ale za to napisaną bardzo małą czcionką. To nie jest żadne rozwiązanie.
               

                  Komisja Europejska mówi o uproszczeniach, ale jednocześnie wprowadza i podtrzymuje Zielony Ład, ESG i kolejne normy. To tak, jakby kazać komuś biec sprint z ciężkim plecakiem pełnym kamieni, ale obiecać mu, że dostanie nowe sznurówki. To nic nie zmieni. Jeżeli godzimy się na to, że z ESG ma być zwolnione 80% firm, to dlaczego nie zwolnić pozostałych 20%? Po co w ogóle firmy mają raportować te wszystkie rzeczy? To jest kompletnie zbędny ciężar i powinniśmy zacząć od zawieszenia tego, żeby pokazać, że przynajmniej mówimy realnie o jakiejś deregulacji.
               

                  Bo problemem nie jest złożoność przepisów, problemem jest ich liczba. Nie potrzebujemy przepisów o tym, jak upraszczać przepisy. Potrzebujemy, żeby Unia Europejska przestała tworzyć nowe przepisy. Już teraz mamy wszyscy dosyć papierologii, a uzyskujemy kolejne obowiązki. Z tym sobie poradzą duże korporacje, ale nie poradzą sobie wszystkie małe przedsiębiorstwa, które po prostu z tymi obowiązkami nie wyrabiają.
               

                  Musimy poważnie się wziąć za cięcie regulacji, za zaprzestanie tworzenia nowych przepisów i wtedy będziemy rzeczywiście mówić o zdejmowaniu tej czerwonej taśmy z Unii Europejskiej.
               

Maria Luís Albuquerque,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, apologies for the delay. Still, thank you for the opportunity to join you today to outline the main elements of the Commission's communication on implementation and simplification.
The strong simplification dimension of the 2025 Commission work programme and our first Omnibus proposals, which we presented at the end of last month.
Allow me to begin with the bigger picture. The world is changing in front of our eyes. We see dramatic shifts in the geopolitical landscape. We need to treat these developments as a call to action. The freedoms that we enjoy and the values that we cherish can no longer be taken for granted in a complex and more conflictual world.
For the EU, they also depend on maintaining and further developing our economic base by adapting, innovating and competing in the world. This is why the Commission has prioritised enhancing Europe's competitiveness in this new mandate. Cutting red tape is an important element of building that competitive Europe. We have set out ambitious targets for administrative costs, reducing them by 25 % for all companies and 35 % for SMEs, all while ensuring cost effective delivery of the underlying policy priorities.
This translates into cutting roughly EUR 37.5 billion in annual administrative costs by the end of this Commission's mandate. And in the end, more innovation and investment will bring prosperity and wealth for our citizens.
Put simply, we cannot hope to successfully compete in a perilous world with one hand behind our backs.
I want to be very clear that we remain deeply committed to building a greener and fairer society and economy. Simplification is about making sure that EU rules help deliver, rather than impede, the achievement of our economic, social, environmental and security goals, and bring wealth and prosperity to our citizens. It is about achieving those goals in a smarter and less burdensome way.
Less bureaucracy means more innovation and investment that will secure our long-term prosperity. It means creating new and quality jobs for European workers.
Our Communication on implementation and simplification outlines a comprehensive set of tools to sharpen the quality of our regulatory framework, and to deliver on our agreed objectives. It is constructed around four building blocks: ensuring EU policies deliver results, making Europe simpler and faster, improving the way we make new rules and strengthening our work with co-legislators and stakeholders.
Taken together, it signals a change in the regulatory culture of the European Commission, focussed on making sure that EU rules are as simple and cost effective as possible while they deliver on the ground.
We are already translating the principles of this second bloc into concrete actions, starting with those announced in the 2025 Commission work programme. 11 out of the 18 new initiatives in the work programme aim at simplification and they are complemented by 37 fitness checks and evaluations, which will in turn feed future simplification work.
The main simplification proposals for 2025 are the following:
- A first Omnibus proposal on sustainability reporting, which we already presented last month, and to which I will return in a moment.
- Investment simplification. Facilitating the deployment and reporting of InvestEU and the European Fund for Strategic Investments, a package including a new definition of small mid-caps so that they can benefit from more targeted, proportionate requirements.
- A digital package to ensure a simplified and more agile means to facilitate once-only reporting, to avoid duplications.
- A proposal to reduce complexity and administrative burden for farmers and national administrations in the context of the Common Agricultural Policy, and.
- The Omnibus proposal to further simply rules in the defence sector.
As I have mentioned, the Commission already presented the first two Omnibus proposals to simplify EU rules at the end of last month. The Omnibus package covers a far reaching simplification in the fields of sustainability reporting, sustainability, due diligence and taxonomy. The Omnibus package on investment simplification facilitates, amongst others, the deployment and reporting of InvestEU and the European Fund for Strategic investments, and simplifies reporting.
Briefly, these proposals provide for a stop-the-clock proposal to delay the application of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive for companies that have not started reporting yet, freeing around 80 % of companies currently under the scope of CSRD from mandatory reporting requirements and protecting them from excessive information requests by large companies,
They make taxonomy reporting more proportionate by limiting mandatory reporting only to very large companies.
They provide for a major simplification to the carbon border adjustment mechanism that limits obligations for approximately 182 000, or 90 % of importers, most of which are SMEs.
These first two Omnibus packages mark a strong start to delivering our simplification agenda. A conservative estimate puts the annual savings stemming from these two packages at EUR 6.3 billion.
To conclude, honourable Members, as you can see, this Commission is firmly committed to improving implementation and delivering simpler and more cost-efficient rules. We hope to count on your support so that we can deliver fast and sustained changes on the ground in the coming months and years. I will stop here and look forward to our discussion.

Lídia Pereira (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, ao longo dos últimos meses temos ouvido falar de défices. Défice de investimento, défice de inovação, défice de competências, e outros.
               

                  Estes défices, de facto, existem. Mas hoje quero falar-vos de excessos: a Europa tem excesso de regulação, de percentagens e de debate inconsequente.
               

                  Nos últimos anos, o PPE, o PSD e eu própria temos alertado para o excesso regulatório que estrangula a capacidade das empresas europeias de investir, criar empregos e gerar riqueza. Finalmente, temos relatórios que nos dão razão e um ambiente político que nos dá — a todos — a oportunidade de fazer diferente.
               

                  Por outro lado, há excesso de percentagens no discurso político. Falamos de 99,8 % de PME na Europa, esquecendo que isto representa 26 milhões de empresas. Referimo-nos a 52 % de valor acrescentado das PME, mas esquecemo-nos de que, por detrás, estão 90 milhões de trabalhadores. Nós não temos de decidir para as percentagens, temos de agir para as pessoas.
               

                  Finalmente, temos excesso de debate inconsequente. Um debate alimentado por uma esquerda que acusa a Comissão de querer matar o Green Deal quando foi a mesma presidente da Comissão quem o lançou e por uma extrema-direita que na Europa só vê o único alvo para alimentar a sua propaganda.
               

                  Nós aqui estamos, como sempre estivemos, no espaço da moderação. Naquele espaço que aprovou o Green Deal e que quer libertar recursos para as empresas o poderem cumprir. O espaço que quer que as empresas invistam e criem emprego e não se percam em burocracias. O espaço que quer simplificar a vida a quem gera riqueza e facilitar a vida de quem trabalha.
               

                  To conclude, Ms Bischoff and dear Pascal, the EPP is ready to work with everyone – with everyone. We are just not ready to destroy whatever is left of our European competitiveness.
               

João Oliveira (The Left),
Pergunta segundo o procedimento ‘cartão azul’
                     . – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Deputada Lídia Pereira, se o problema é a burocracia, porque é que não se combate a burocracia em vez de se permitirem atropelos às regras de exigência em matérias ambientais e de controlo e prevenção da poluição?
               

                  Se o problema é a burocracia que atinge as pequenas e médias empresas, porque é que não se facilita a vida às pequenas e médias empresas e se opta, por outro lado, por atribuir a empresas que não são pequenas e médias empresas, nomeadamente as designadas small mid-caps, o mesmo tratamento que às PME?
               

                  Essas são opções erradas, que escondem um problema de fundo que a senhora deputada devia explicar: a forma como este pacote Omnibus verdadeiramente favorece as grandes multinacionais e as grandes empresas, em vez de contribuir para os objetivos que lhe servem de pretexto.
               

Lídia Pereira (PPE),
Resposta segundo o procedimento ‘cartão azul’
                     . – Muito obrigada, Senhor Deputado, pela pergunta.
               

                  Eu posso responder-lhe o seguinte: esta proposta dá resposta àquilo que tem sido um equilíbrio necessário e uma liderança da União Europeia. E esse equilíbrio está em encontrarmos capacidade e respostas, em entregar resultados para o ambiente e para a economia. Nós só podemos ir ao encontro dos desígnios do ambiente se tivermos o nosso tecido económico capacitado para o fazer.
               

                  E, para terminar, nós temos um modelo social europeu para pagar e só é possível pagarmos esse modelo social com mais competitividade, com mais crescimento económico e aliviando a carga burocrática das nossas PME.
               

Lara Wolters (S&D). – Mr President, the European Commission promised us a simplification of EU rules for companies without compromising on the landmark green ambitions of the last mandate.
What's not to like, you would think? After all, with the current economic backdrop, efforts to simplify, digitise, streamline, those are to be welcomed and we as a Group could certainly see room for doing that. But I will tell you what's not to like and that this is not the simplification of EU rules. This is the simplification of a debate. It's an oversimplification of a debate and it's a harmful one.
What we're presented here with is removing liability from a law that says to check and address things like child labour and deforestation. Now, clearly that's not simplification, that's obstructing justice. That's purposefully making things harder for the victims of wrongdoing and NGOs. That's making a mockery of EU law, essentially. Liability is not just there for the sake of it. It's there to guarantee fairness and a level playing field between cowboy companies and companies that give a damn.
Also, asking companies to only check their direct suppliers, that's pointless box-ticking for companies. You're asking them to look at places where there's no issues and no risks, and you're giving them a blank cheque to ignore risks that are further down their supply chain. Another example: banning companies from requesting information from companies of less than 1 000 employees. That will just mean that their reporting is going to be inaccurate, incomplete and very difficult to comply.
And now we talk about red tape. Make no mistake, this is regulatory schizophrenia that's going to end up increasing compliance costs. Companies have already invested in sustainability and now the Commission is pulling the rug from underneath their feet. I think this is the kind of nonsense that can only be come up with when people go on what must be an ideological crusade, and that at breakneck speed, refusing to consider real evidence or with a public consultation.
Truly, the European Commission should be ashamed of this proposal. It claims that this is the middle ground, that it's a sensible proposal that is sorely needed, but it is an extreme proposal, let's be clear on that. It radically slashes human rights and environmental standards, and it actually makes things more complicated. And what's more, this is a dishonest reading of what the Draghi report has called for.
No company is leaving the EU because of sustainability reporting. Could things be improved? Yes, of course, let's have a sensible conversation about that. But there's no company that risks bankruptcy unless we tell them that it's okay to have children make their products. This House now has a responsibility to get things back on track, to deliver actual simplification.
Unfortunately, the EPP has already been mind-blowingly open about their willingness to work here with the extreme right, and that's not even plan B for the EPP, it seems that's plan A. The Commission has been absolutely fine to present its proposal under these circumstances. They knew that this couldn't gain a pro-European majority in this form, but it went ahead anyway. It's time to call this out for what it is. It's an extreme proposal. It's blatantly misguided and it's backed by the fossil fuel industry and the far right.

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


Tomas Tobé (PPE),
blue-card question. – Thank you, colleague Wolters, for your intervention. I understand that S&D is not welcoming this proposal, but I think it is extremely important for our competitiveness and that we understand that we need also to grow our European economy. That is actually also good for sustainability and for our climate goals – we have the most ambitious climate policy on our continent.
And my question is – to S&D – you ask to work with us, we are ready to work with everybody here. But the question is, what is S&D actually ready to change in the current proposals? What is it?

Lara Wolters (S&D),
blue-card answer. – Mr Tobé, you say that you're ready to work with us and yet you didn't appoint people from the EPP for a long time to talk to us. Then, after we talked together, you made statements in Politico that made it clear that you would only work with us if it suited you. So, that's a difficult basis to start from.
But when it comes to what we could actually do to simplify, there's many things that we could be discussing reasonably, but there hasn't been time for that because of a PR stunt from the European Commission that insists on proposing things within the first 100 days.
I don't think there's any necessity to rush things like that and, therefore, we're now faced with proposals that are misguided. I think it's a little bit like saying that if you're driving on the motorway, cars will be able to drive faster without speed limits. That's certainly true, but you're also going to have collisions.

Enikő Győri (PfE). – Elnök Úr! Jó reggelt, Európai Bizottság, örülök, hogy felébredtek! Az előző testület a baloldali ideológiák és az átgondolatlan zöldítés jegyében körülbelül 850 új kötelezettséget és 5000 oldalnyi jogszabályt varrt az európai vállalkozások nyakába, amihez ez a Ház a Néppártól a kommunistákig asszisztált. Az pedig az álszentség csúcsa, hogy ugyanezek a frakciók most egyszerűsítési mámorban úsznak.
               

                  Az omnibusz 1. és 2. túl későn jött és kevés. Annyi történik, hogy kozmetikázni próbálják a korábbi balfogásokat. Mi, a jobboldalon, az üzleti érdekképviseletekkel közösen szóltunk, hogy rossz az irány. Önök ártottak Európának, Önök európaellenesek. Habár a javaslat egyszerűsíteni próbál, az ambíciószint elmarad a szükségestől. A szépészeti beavatkozásoknál többre van szükség. Azt kellene megnézni, melyek szabályozási oldalról a fő problémák, tehát mi akadályozza leginkább a cégeket abban, hogy forráshoz jussanak, fejlesszenek és az alaptevékenységükre koncentrálhassanak jelentésirkálás helyett.
               

                  Nem nyúlnak eléggé bátran a taxonómiához, tehát továbbra is ideológiai alapon diszkriminálnak befektetések között. Marad a zöld ideológia, s újra le fogja győzni a versenyképességet. A forráshoz jutás persze azáltal is javulna, ha Önök politikai okokból nem tartanák vissza az én hazámtól is az uniós forrásokat. Az Unióban nem nevelni kell egymást, hanem közösen dolgozni a prosperitásért. Sajnos Önök ez ellen is tesznek. Az európai vállalkozások ennél többet érdemelnek. Valódi üzletbarát fordulatra van szükség, igazi tehercsökkentéssel. Mi, patrióták ezért fogunk dolgozni.
               

Antonella Sberna (ECR). – Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, sapete qual è la prima richiesta di chi vuole aprire un'attività in Europa? Regole chiare, tempi certi, meno ostacoli, in altre parole meno burocrazia.
               

                  I numeri parlano da soli: 80 miliardi di euro l'anno spesi solo dalle piccole e medie imprese italiane per adempiere a procedure amministrative. Se consideriamo anche l'impatto sulle famiglie e sulle aziende, la cifra supera i 225 miliardi di euro: l'Europa non può permetterselo; l'Italia non può permetterselo.
               

                  Il primo pacchetto Omnibus rappresenta un riconoscimento tardivo ma necessario. Perché accorgerci solo oggi che bastava alzare la soglia da 250 a 1000 dipendenti per escludere l'80% delle imprese dall'applicazione della direttiva CSRD sulla rendicontazione di sostenibilità ambientale?
               

                  La burocrazia è come un dazio invisibile: non si paga alla dogana ma ogni giorno pesa sulle imprese, rallenta gli investimenti e blocca la crescita. Il primo Omnibus ritengo che abbia aperto una strada. Ma non bastano le intenzioni: è il momento di trasformare le parole in azioni concrete.
               

Svenja Hahn (Renew). – Herr Präsident! Ich bin ja erleichtert, dass Frau von der Leyen bereit ist, die Geburtsfehler ihrer eigenen schlecht gemachten Gesetze zu korrigieren. Vor allen Dingen beim Lieferkettengesetz hatten wir als FDP ja schon damals gesagt, der Anwendungsbereich und der Haftungsbereich müssten beschränkt werden – von daher gut, dass es kommt. Ich würde sogar noch weiter gehen und sagen, es wäre besser, die Kommission würde das Lieferkettengesetz zurückziehen, denn es steckt immer noch viel unnötige Bürokratie drin und nicht genug effektiver Schutz von Menschenrechten. Trotzdem: Das Omnibusgesetz muss kommen, denn es ist ein Minimum, um Bürokratie abzubauen und Wettbewerbsfähigkeit zu stärken.
               

                  Deshalb frage ich mich auch ganz ehrlich: Haben einige Kollegen von Sozialdemokraten und Grünen noch nicht mitbekommen, wie schlecht es um die europäische Wirtschaft steht? Ich finde es wirklich unverantwortlich, wie sich hier einige jedweder Vereinfachung und Bürokratieabbau verweigern. Und leider, wenn ich nach Berlin kucke, macht mir das schwarz-rote Sondierungspapier auch nicht sehr viel Hoffnung, dass die Union es tatsächlich ernst meint mit echten Reformen jenseits des Wahlkampfs.
               

                  Deswegen mein absoluter Appell an die Kommission: Wir brauchen noch viel mehr Vereinfachung, wir brauchen Abbau von überflüssigen Gesetzen und Regulierungen, und deswegen brauchen wir jede Menge neue Omnibusse. Und der nächste muss ein Digital-Omnibus sein, denn wir müssen die überbordenden Digitalgesetze vereinfachen. Wir müssen endlich bei Innovationen an der Weltspitze sein und nicht bei der Regulierung.
               

Anna Cavazzini (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es darf null Toleranz geben bei der Kinderarbeit. Genau das hat Ursula von der Leyen hier in diesem Haus gesagt und hat riesenviel Applaus dafür bekommen. Das war vor ein paar Jahren, doch was ist heute übrig von diesem Bekenntnis? Das EU-Lieferkettengesetz soll geopfert werden, bevor es überhaupt in Kraft ist. Ausgerechnet das Gesetz, was furchtbare Arbeitsbedingungen und Ausbeutung verhindern soll.
               

                  Erst einmal zuvor, liebe Kommissarin: Das ist ein extrem schlechter Stil. Die Tinte von dem Gesetz ist noch nicht mal trocken. Es gibt keinerlei Erfahrung mit diesem Gesetz, ob es überhaupt zur Bürokratie beiträgt. Unternehmen, die wenden sich an mich und sind total verunsichert. Die haben investiert, die haben Systeme umgebaut. Die Bürgerinnen und Bürger schreiben mir: Wir wollen keine Kinderarbeit in unserem Kaffee, wir wollen keine Umweltverbrechen in unseren Textilien, und die EU hat uns das garantiert. Und jetzt so ein kurzfristiges, undurchdachtes Hin und Her. Das zerstört Vertrauen in EU-Gesetzgebung.
               

                  Und jetzt zweitens zum Inhalt: Die Kommission hatte angekündigt, Berichtspflichten zurückzuschrauben. Ja, wir brauchen Entlastungen insbesondere für kleine und mittelständische Unternehmen. Aber dieser Vorschlag ist keine Entlastung, es ist keine einfache Reduktion von Berichtspflichten. Dieser Vorschlag ist eine massive Deregulierung, die die Ziele des Gesetzes gefährdet. Was hat es denn mit Berichtspflichten zu tun, wenn die zivilrechtliche Haftung gestrichen wird? Was hat es mit Berichtspflichten zu tun, wenn Bußgelder gesenkt werden? Was hat es mit Berichtspflichten zu tun, wenn Unternehmen nur noch den ersten Zulieferer prüfen müssen, wo doch die meisten Menschenrechtsverletzungen am Anfang der Lieferkette passieren?
               

                  Das ist mit uns Grünen nicht zu machen. Vereinfachung ja, aber keine Deregulierung. In dem Sinne werden wir nachverhandeln.
               

Li Andersson (The Left). – Arvoisa puhemies, ‘kyse ei ole sääntelyn purkamisesta, vaan yksinkertaistamisesta. Haluamme vain tehdä asioita paremmin.’ Näitä viestejä olemme kuulleet komissiolta useampaan otteeseen, mutta viimeistään nyt tämä omnibus-paketti osoittaa, että nämä väitteet eivät pidä paikkaansa. Koko tämä niin sanottu valmisteluprosessi on osoittanut, kenen etuja sääntelyn purku ajaa – suurten yritysten ja vielä sellaisten, joita parhaillaan syytetään ihmisoikeusloukkauksista ja ympäristöongelmista.
               

                  Komission esittämät muutokset vesittävät esimerkiksi yritysvastuudirektiivin rajaamalla soveltamisalasta ulos pienemmät alihankkijat sekä heikentämällä ihmisoikeusloukkausten uhrien asemaa. Jos huolellisuutta vaaditaan vain ensimmäisessä tuotantoportaassa, kuten komissio nyt esittää, valvotaan esimerkiksi ananasmehun tuotannon ihmisoikeusvaikutuksia jatkossa vain Suomen Kuopiossa, ei Thaimaassa, mistä alihankintaa tehdään.
               

                  Tällaisessa sääntelyssä ei ole mitään järkeä, ja se myös tuhoaa tämän koko direktiivin alkuperäisen ajatuksen.
               

Maravillas Abadía Jover (PPE). – Señor presidente, Europa necesita urgentemente innovación, crecimiento y empleo. Para lograrlo es fundamental reducir la burocracia que asfixia a nuestras empresas. Por eso, desde el Partido Popular Europeo celebramos el paquete ómnibus y los avances que proponen la eliminación de trabas innecesarias, creando un entorno económico más competitivo y favorable a la innovación.
               

                  Este paquete supone un paso en la dirección correcta, pero aún hay margen de mejora. La reducción de cargas administrativas debe ir más lejos para que las empresas europeas puedan crecer sin obstáculos regulatorios innecesarios. Un ejemplo claro son las obligaciones impuestas por la Directiva sobre información corporativa en materia de sostenibilidad que impone a muchas empresas la redacción de informes de sostenibilidad, incluso cuando ya forman parte de grupos empresariales que presentan estos datos de una manera consolidada.
               

                  Con el paquete ómnibus se han introducido cambios que eliminan redundancias, pero las empresas europeas siguen dedicando muchos recursos a cumplir con exigencias burocráticas en vez de centrarse en su negocio. La autonomía estratégica de la que tanto hablamos no será posible si no facilitamos las cosas a quienes producen, innovan y crean riqueza en Europa. Debemos competir en igualdad de condiciones con otras regiones del mundo. Seguimos trabajando para que este paquete sea aún más ambicioso en la eliminación de cargas administrativas.
               

Mohammed Chahim (S&D). – Mr President, I remember on this day, exactly four years ago, the Parliament adopted a resolution on WTO compatibility of CBAM. I remember my colleague Yannick Jadot from the Greens that did an extraordinary job. And that was quite some consensus here in the room.
The same holds, actually, for the ambition that we had as Commission and Parliament. The Green Deal and the European climate law, those were more than just policies. They formed our vision for a sustainable, innovative and strong Europe. We made a promise to industry, to businesses and to workers, who believed and worked on this vision, that if you innovate, if you invest in green technologies, if you are committed to decarbonise, we will have your back. With stable and predictable legislation, we will help you invest, grow and provide secure jobs that we all need.
And now we are here today. I challenge everyone in this room to explain to me how creating simplification helps us form a robust response to China and other global players. I fear that this so-called vision of competitiveness and simplification is not enough, and it distracts us from the real solutions we need, like a market creation for green and digital European technologies. And I cannot stress this enough. Market creation, not deregulation, market creation, not deregulation. That's what we need. That's what we need to create jobs, to grow our economy and really become competitive.
By simplification, we somehow believe that the investments that we need will pop up, that they will magically appear. As we say in Dutch, costs always come before the profits. It doesn't mean that there are no rules that we can simplify, but emphasising only on this, only on simplification, will not do the job.
And while we focus on this, while we create more uncertainty and step away from our regulatory stability, the world invests in clean tech. China's economy today, its growth is more than 40 % attributed to green investments, and we are failing ourselves to meet the targets that we set, whether it's for cars or whether it's, for example, when it comes to hydrogen for REPowerEU, our strategy to become less dependence on autocrats outside Europe.
I really believe that that is how we could improve our competitiveness, by reaching these targets, by investing in green technologies, by becoming less dependent on energy coming from outside Europe.
We have to create this through regulatory stability. We have to create this by growing these sectors within our market.
Mazzucato, the famous economist, states that in transitions we should not distinguish between winners and losers, but between those who are willing and those who are not. And I fear that we listen to much to companies that are not willing to change and do not see a future in Europe. And by listening to them, we are ignoring innovative companies that can become future tech leaders. Those companies can use a push. We can use a push by creating a green market so that they can have a foot on the ground. That's the question today. Are we supporting them or are we ignoring them? And with that, not creating competitiveness in Europe.

Julie Rechagneux (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, la Commission s'essaye à un exercice d'humilité et décide de revenir sur certaines de ses réglementations. Elle redécouvre un principe de sagesse: des petites choses le législateur ne se soucie pas. L'allégement des obligations de déclaration, c'est bien, mais est-ce suffisant? Certainement pas, car ces ajustements ne mettent pas fin à l'économie administrée qu'elle a créée. Pour rappel, la directive CSRD, ce sont 50 000 entreprises concernées, jusqu'à 600 indicateurs ESG à renseigner et un coût supérieur à 100 000 euros par an pour certaines entreprises.
               

                  La Commission prétend simplifier, mais elle ne fait qu'exempter temporairement certaines entreprises de réglementations excessives, sans remettre en cause la logique bureaucratique qui les sous-tend. Qui peut croire que l'on sauvera l'industrie européenne avec des formulaires? L'‘omnibus’ ne change rien au fond du problème. Ce problème, c'est la surréglementation structurelle, qui asphyxie notre économie. Aujourd'hui, la mise en conformité coûte 3 à 4 % du PIB, et une entreprise européenne dépense 2,5 fois plus en formalités qu'une entreprise américaine. L'éléphant dans la pièce, c'est ce bloc de réglementations vertes, qui nous prive de croissance. Tant que nous ne remettrons pas à plat cette machine bureaucratique, ces ajustements resteront anecdotiques.
               

Kosma Złotowski (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Wspaniale, że kolejny już raz na przestrzeni pół roku debatujemy tutaj, jak co miesiąc, o planach deregulacji i uproszczenia Unii Europejskiej. To oczywiście dobrze, że Komisja w końcu zdaje sobie sprawę, jak daleko odleciała w swoich pomysłach. Jeśli już ma się ona czymś zajmować, to lepiej niech się zajmuje tym, a nie papierowymi słomkami czy przymocowywaniem nakrętek do butelek. Temat debaty to Cutting red tape. Jest jeszcze jedno podobne hasło, również z kolorem w nazwie, które też należałoby w końcu uciąć. Tym hasłem jest Green deal, który jest największym obciążeniem.
               

                  Kiedy my tutaj debatujemy, w moim okręgu, w Janikowie, w powiecie inowrocławskim, koszt Zielonego Ładu płacą mieszkańcy, samorząd i pracownicy zakładów chemicznych, które za chwilę zostaną zamknięte, a co za tym idzie cały łańcuszek przedsiębiorstw zostanie zamkniętych. Ludzie tracą pracę, a cały powiat wkrótce będzie powiatem widmem. Tak działa Zielony Ład.
               

Jeannette Baljeu (Renew). – Voorzitter, Europa moet ondernemender worden, niet bureaucratischer. Ondernemers willen innoveren en groeien. Vergeet niet: het merendeel van de ondernemers in Europa is midden- en kleinbedrijf. Zij raken verstrikt in een woud aan rapportageverplichtingen. Wat mij betreft, moeten we het MKB als uitgangspunt nemen.
               

                  Dus daarom deze vraag: kan de Commissie zich standaard committeren aan het ‘think small (business) first’-principe in de Europese wetgeving? Daarnaast ben ik geen voorstander van dubbele afspraken, zoals de CSRD en de CSDDD. Daarnaast bestaan de OESO-richtlijnen al jaren, inclusief een handhavingsinstrument via nationale contactpunten.
               

                  Wat denkt de Commissie ervan om bestaande internationale afspraken, zoals de OESO-richtlijnen, te hanteren als uitgangspunt? Het Omnibus-voorstel is een goede eerste stap, maar er is nog veel werk aan de winkel. Minder rapportages zijn nodig, want het gaat uiteindelijk om vertrouwen in de ondernemers, om innovatie en concurrentiekracht.
               

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen (Verts/ALE). – Hr. formand! Vi får at vide, at vi skal vælge mellem en stærk økonomi eller en stærk klimapolitik. Men intet kunne være mere forkert. Den grønne omstilling er forudsætningen for konkurrenceevne, for vi skal nemlig udbygge grøn energi, så både virksomheder og forbrugere får lavere energipriser. Vi skal skabe stabile rammer, så virksomhederne ved, at det kan betale sig at investere grønt. Og vi skal gøre det nemmere og mere attraktivt at investere i grønne løsninger. Desværre er Kommissionen i gang med at gøre det stik modsatte De ruller bæredygtighedsregler tilbage og skaber usikkerheder. Det straffer de virksomheder, der allerede har investeret grønt og belønner dem, der har sovet i timen. Det er hverken retfærdigt over for virksomhederne eller over for klimaet. Og EU står over for et afgørende valg. Skal vi gå forrest i den grønne omstilling, eller skal vi følge amerikanernes eksempel og ofre klimaet for kortsigtede gevinster? Lige nu ser det ud til, at Kommissionen vælger den forkerte vej. Det er ærgerligt, for grøn omstilling er den bedste forudsætning for europæisk konkurrenceevne.
               

Hanna Gedin (The Left). – Herr talman! Det är lite ‘goddag yxskaft’ över det här förslaget. Det får man ändå säga. Att konstant ändra spelreglerna för företagen skapar osäkerhet och i längden faktiskt dålig konkurrens. Om kommissionen inte vill lyssna på mig så kan man ju lyssna på VD:n för Volvo Cars när han uttalar sig om att EU nu backar från sina tidigare klimatkrav. Vi är enormt besvikna på EU, säger han. Genom Omnibuspaketet låtsas EU-kommissionen att färre miljö- och klimatkrav och sämre regler för arbetare ökar konkurrensen. Men det är precis tvärtom. Avreglering och minskade samhällskrav på företag leder till sämre produkter och service och dessutom ofta folklig ilska. Tro mig, jag kommer från Sverige: Våra apotek har knappt mediciner, men det finns smink och choklad i överflöd. Våra skolor ägs av riskkapitalister. Våra tåg går sällan i tid. Men jag tycker faktiskt att kommissionen ska lyssna på chefen på Volvo när han säger att de som inte klarade kraven har lagt kraften på att få spelreglerna ändrade så att de passar dem. Jag är enormt besviken.
               

Peter Liese (PPE). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Unternehmen und insbesondere die Bürgerinnen und Bürger ächzen unter übertriebener Bürokratie. Ein Unternehmensvertreter aus meinem Wahlkreis hat mir kürzlich erzählt anlässlich des Omnibus, er ist für Nachhaltigkeit zuständig in dem Betrieb, aber er kommt überhaupt nicht mehr dazu, Energieeffizienzprojekte zu planen, weil er den ganzen Tag Berichte für die Europäische Union ausfüllen muss. Das kann doch nicht der Sinn unserer Gesetzgebung sein, dass Papierkram vor wirklichem Umweltschutz steht. Deswegen unterstütze ich die Vorschläge der Europäischen Kommission.
               

                  Ich möchte noch einmal ganz besonders, weil der Umweltausschuss da federführend ist, die Vorschläge für CBAM unterstützen. Wir brauchen einen Grenzausgleichsmechanismus, um unsere Unternehmen, die sich auf den Weg zur Klimaneutralität gemacht haben, vor billigen, dreckigen Importen zu schützen. Das ist nötig. Aber wenn ein Mittelständler ein Paket Schrauben bestellt, dann brauchen wir doch keine Berichtspflichten für den. Oder ein 16-jähriger Jugendlicher, der ein Ersatzteil für sein Moped bestellt hat und dann einen Fragebogen zu CBAM zugeschickt bekommt – das ist doch absurd!
               

                  Wir müssen uns auf die großen Mengen konzentrieren. Das macht der Kommissionsvorschlag. Deswegen sollten wir diesen Vorschlag so schnell wie möglich annehmen, Vereinfachung einfach mal machen.
               

(Der Redner ist damit einverstanden, auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der ‘blauen Karte’ zu antworten.)


Marie Toussaint (Verts/ALE),
question ‘carton bleu’
                     . – Monsieur Liese, merci de votre intervention. Nous écoutons depuis tout à l'heure les intervenants du PPE, qui nous expliquent qu'ils sont prêts à travailler avec tous les groupes démocratiques du Parlement européen. Pourtant, le PPE n'a pas répondu présent à l'appel quand il s'est agi de s'asseoir ensemble pour regarder ce qui pouvait être fait pour simplifier la vie des entreprises tout en maintenant un haut niveau d'ambition sociale et environnementale.
               

                  Nous n'avons eu de cesse, avec mes collègues de gauche et, d'ailleurs, du centre, de demander aux représentants du Parti populaire européen ce que vous comptiez faire sur ce texte. Je vous le redemande donc: comptez-vous discuter avec nous, les groupes démocratiques, ou comptez-vous soutenir les amendements de suppression de l'extrême droite, voire en déposer vous-mêmes?
               

Peter Liese (PPE),
Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der ‘blauen Karte’
                     . – (Beginn der Antwort bei ausgeschaltetem Mikrofon) Deswegen habe ich verstanden, was Sie gesagt haben, Frau Kollegin, aber Ihre Anschuldigung in der Sache habe ich nicht verstanden. Ich habe gerade dort mit Mohammed Chahim, dem S&D-Berichterstatter für CBAM, geredet, und ich rede natürlich auch mit den Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Grünen, und ich rede auch mit den Kolleginnen und Kollegen von Renew. Ich bin mir sicher, dass wir bei CBAM eine Mehrheit finden, die sehr breit ist und die die proeuropäischen Kräfte – mindestens einmal die von der Leyen-Koalition – umfasst. Das halte ich für richtig, und ich würde mich freuen, wenn Sozialdemokraten und Grüne bei den anderen Themen genauso konstruktiv auf den Kommissionsvorschlag reagieren würden wie bei CBAM.
               

César Luena (S&D). – Señor presidente, señora comisaria, estamos ante una muy mala propuesta de la Comisión Europea: mala porque se va a plasmar en recortes y en inseguridad jurídica.
               

                  Desmantelan, casi por completo, la diligencia debida. Esto significa que dejan abandonados a los eslabones más vulnerables de la cadena, que recortan la responsabilidad civil obligatoria y que limitan muchísimo el acceso a la justicia de las víctimas. Eso es lo que ustedes hacen.
               

                  En materia de sostenibilidad, lo abandonan todo a la voluntariedad: el que quiera que lo haga y el que no, no. Y eso es nefasto para el medio ambiente, pero es muy injusto para quienes sí cumplen las normas. Nefasto e injusto a la vez.
               

                  Y la guinda de este pastel —un pastel envenenado— es que debilitan la taxonomía.
               

                  Señora comisaria: flexibilidad, simplificación… sí, siempre sí. Ahora bien, desregulación, retroceso… ¡nunca!
               

                  Por supuesto que hay que ayudar a las empresas, especialmente a las pequeñas y medianas empresas, pero con esta propuesta ustedes someten el interés general a los intereses privados de unos pocos poderosos, y ese no es el camino, señora comisaria.
               

Sebastian Kruis (PfE). – Voorzitter, we hebben het vandaag over de eerste Omnibus-voorstellen: de vereenvoudiging van regels oftewel – in Brusselse termen – ‘cutting red tape’. Dat klinkt hoopgevend, maar wie zich er een beetje in verdiept, komt tot een bedroevende conclusie. Terwijl een handjevol wetten onder de loep ligt, worden dit jaar alleen al vijftig nieuwe wetten en regels van kracht. Het hele Europese systeem dat hier is opgetuigd, is maar gericht op één ding: meer wetten en meer regels. En dat gebeurt dan ook. Wat heeft het dan voor zin om de ‘rode tape’ te verwijderen als tegelijkertijd ons hele huis wordt dichtgetimmerd door een Europees leger van 60 000 superbureaucraten?
               

                  Voor onze bedrijven schiet het helemaal niet op. Zij zinken steeds verder weg in een oceaan van regels, formulieren en verplichtingen. Wat we echt nodig hebben, is niet een ‘omnibus’, maar een kettingzaag. Massale deregulering, het afschaffen van overbodige EU-agentschappen, het mes in de ambtenarij: niet pappen en nat houden en procedures, maar snijden, schrappen en slopen.
               

PRESIDENZA: PINA PICIERNO


Vicepresidente


Beatrice Timgren (ECR). – Fru talman! I osäkra tider, när vanliga familjer och företag verkligen sliter för att få ihop ekonomin, då är det absolut sista vi ska göra att hämma tillväxten. Men det är precis det man gjorde förra mandatperioden i den här kammaren. Tvinga företag att betala miljoner för att uppfylla EU:s hållbarhetskrav. Pengar som hade kunnat användas till att anställa fler. Ny teknik. Det är sådant som faktiskt ökar konkurrenskraften. Och visst låter det bra när EPP säger att man vill minska rapporteringsbördan med 25 %. Men har man infört över tusen uppgiftskrav, då räcker det inte att avskaffa en fjärdedel. Om EU ska bli konkurrenskraftigt igen, då måste vi göra samma sak som Argentina. Ta fram motorsågen och börja kapa byråkratin, planekonomin och släpp ekonomin fri från onödiga skadliga EU-regleringar.
                  

Billy Kelleher (Renew). – Madam President, when I met business owners throughout the campaign, without fail, they would raise their concerns about the burdens of regulation and compliance, and when I continue to meet them, they still raise it. Regardless of whether it is a local high street business, a family farm or even a large multinational, they all felt the heavy weight of compliance and felt stifled because of it.
Finally, the EU has woken up to the fact that the complex and duplicated regulatory requirements are weighing on European businesses. I urge my colleagues in this House and all Member States to act swiftly on these proposals, to keep their eyes on the objective and not try to reopen and rehash political debates that were settled when these pieces of legislation were adopted.
I call on the Commission to keep up the momentum and continue to simplification agenda without diluting our ambition or its intent. We must assess the framework for each of our industries and ensure they're not being unnecessarily burdened.
However, acting swiftly does not mean acting recklessly. This Parliament needs to carefully scrutinise the Omnibus proposals to ensure that they are truly bringing forward simplification measures and not deregulation for the sake of it.
I think there is a big debate that is required in this particular House with regard to deregulation and simplification, and I do not think that we should be using deregulation to throw out the ambition that this Parliament, the Commission and the Council set in the last mandate.

Sara Matthieu (Verts/ALE). – Voorzitter, het is een absolute illusie dat de hakbijl zetten in onze duurzaamheidswetten de structurele problemen van onze industrie zal oplossen. Toch wil de Commissie nu snijden in wat ik beschouw als essentiële bescherming van onze natuur en de rechten van onze arbeiders. Waarom? Omdat de Commissie denkt dat dit bedrijven competitiever zal maken. Dat is absolute onzin.
                  

                     Deregulering zorgt niet voor broodnodige investeringen in innovatieve, groene, in Europa vervaardigde producten en creëert al helemaal geen banen in Europa. Wie dat gesnoei in wetgeving zomaar toejuicht, kijkt niet vooruit maar achteruit, naar een tijd waar multinationals straffeloos het milieu, de werknemersrechten en de mensenrechten om zeep hielpen. Denk maar aan Rana Plaza, waar duizenden arbeiders het leven lieten door de nalatigheid van de ‘fast fashion’-industrie. Laat ons koers houden. Administratieve lasten verminderen waar mogelijk? Ja. Maar laten we vooral innovatie en duurzame investeringen stimuleren in plaats van onze duurzaamheidswetten verder uit te kleden.
                  

Lynn Boylan (The Left). – A Chathaoirligh, maraíodh 196 dhuine as a dtalamh, a gcearta agus a gcomhshaol a chosaint in 2023. Fuair 245 oibrí teicstíle bás an áit oibre i 2021. Gach bliain, maraítear os cionn 200 duine i dtimpistí mianadóireachta sa DRC. Bhí seans ag an CSDDD dul i ngleic le sáruithe ar chearta an duine agus scriosadh an chomhshaoil. Ach má laghdaímid na dualgais ar chomhlachtaí móra, tugaimid cluas bhodhar do mholtaí na Náisiún Aontaithe maidir lena ngnó agus cearta an duine. Tá Sinn Féin ag iarraidh an téip dhearg agus na costais do chomhlachtaí beaga a laghdú nuair is féidir, ach ní aontaímid le dí-rialachán. Go simplí, téann an pacáiste Omnibus seo siar ar chearta an duine go seasaimid go léir leis an dlí seo againn maidir le gnó agus cearta an duine.
                  

François-Xavier Bellamy (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, le premier problème pour toutes les entreprises aujourd'hui en Europe, ce n'est pas de satisfaire leurs clients ou de gérer leurs concurrents, c'est d'affronter le poids de la réglementation. Au cours du dernier mandat – c'est la raison pour laquelle, avec le groupe PPE, nous n'avons cessé d'alerter à ce sujet –, l'Union européenne a adopté 13 000 nouveaux actes – entre 2019 et 2024 –, et Eurostat indique que ce poids administratif coûte aujourd'hui 150 milliards d'euros par an aux entreprises européennes.
                  

                     La Commission propose un premier paquet ‘omnibus’, qui va permettre d'économiser, nous dit-elle, 6 milliards, soit au mieux 4 % de ces 150 milliards. C'est très, très, très loin d'être à la hauteur des enjeux. C'est bien de faire sortir 80 % des entreprises européennes de l'essentiel de ces règles, mais à quoi cela sert-il, vu que les 20 % d'entreprises qui demeurent concernées représentent 80 % de l'économie européenne et que leur charge administrative se répercutera sur toutes les PME et entreprises intermédiaires avec qui elles travaillent? Où est la solution pour les économies de nos pays? Il est très sympathique de ne vouloir asphyxier que les grands groupes à coups de formulaires, mais une telle démarche n'a aucun sens si elle revient à leur demander de diffuser ces contraintes à l'intégralité de leurs entreprises partenaires.
                  

                     Des ingénieurs d'une entreprise industrielle m'ont raconté, il y a quelques jours, que la réglementation européenne allait leur demander de contrôler que tous les produits qu'ils utilisent aient été fabriqués en respectant les meilleures exigences, fondées sur 1 200 critères. Une intention louable, certes, sauf que ces ingénieurs ont, en première ligne, 6 000 fournisseurs, qui ont eux-mêmes 1 million de fournisseurs. Comment voulez-vous contrôler? Pour ces ingénieurs aujourd'hui, l'alternative est simple: arrêter de produire ou aller en prison.
                  

                     Maintenant, ça suffit! Si nous voulons sortir de cette crise économique majeure qui est en train de se dessiner, il ne faut pas simplement simplifier, il faut supprimer des règles. Partout dans nos pays, ceux qui font tourner notre économie disent simplement: ‘Laissez-nous bosser! Laissez-nous faire, créer, développer, innover et inventer! Laissez-nous respirer! Laissez-nous vivre!’ Pour cela, il ne suffira pas de déplacer trois virgules; il va falloir renverser la table.
                  

Brando Benifei (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, semplificare serve, deregolamentare no. Saremo sempre disponibili a lavorare per sburocratizzare i meccanismi europei, ad esempio di accesso ai fondi, ma non siamo disponibili a buttare a mare il modello sociale europeo.
                  

                     Il pacchetto Omnibus, oggi, è un attacco ai progressi della scorsa legislatura su sostenibilità sociale e ambientale. La semplificazione è solo apparente: le proposte sono affrettate e creano incertezza giuridica.
                  

                     Questa deregolamentazione tocca anche l'ambito digitale, come la scelta sbagliata di ritirare la proposta di direttiva sulla responsabilità civile per danno da intelligenza artificiale.
                  

                     Ci troviamo così con un sistema che non offre abbastanza tutele legali ai cittadini e che confonde le piccole e medie imprese. L'assenza di regole chiare non crea innovazione.
                  

                     Dobbiamo lavorare per rendere l'Europa più competitiva con la qualità del lavoro, delle competenze, dei prodotti, e non fare una rincorsa verso il basso a danno dei nostri lavoratori, imprenditori e territori.
                  

                     Sicuramente, qui dal Parlamento europeo, ci impegneremo per impedire queste scelte contrarie ai veri interessi europei.
                  

Juan Carlos Girauta Vidal (PfE). – Señora presidenta, durante la pasada legislatura esta Cámara insistió e insistió en el tema del Pacto Verde, que iba a resolver todos nuestros problemas. Unos meses después de terminada aquella legislatura, tienen ustedes que desdecirse tácitamente, implícitamente.
                  

                     Aquella agenda ideológica resultaba ser un lastre para nuestras empresas y la competitividad europea. Aun así, este paquete ómnibus no supondrá la eliminación de aquellas trabas. Lo que se está haciendo es aplazar los problemas. Que nadie piense que el consenso de populares y socialistas va a retractarse de la oportunidad de llevar todos esos disparates hasta el final.
                  

                     Lo que necesitan las empresas europeas es más libertad, menos impuestos, menos burocracia, menos regulación y acabar con la hiperinflación legislativa. Solo así se crece y se genera empleo.
                  

                     Si Europa pretende ocupar el lugar en el mundo que merece, lo primero, lo más aconsejable, es que los emprendedores europeos no se encuentren en la Unión Europea con El castillo de Kafka, que es la gran pesadilla de la modernidad, que toma forma de burocracia absurda, infinita y desalentadora, como esta casa.
                  

Nora Junco García (NI). – Señora presidente, la Comisión nos vende su nuevo plan como un gran paso hacia la simplificación, pero lo que tenemos delante es más de lo mismo: retórica vacía y medidas insuficientes que llegan tarde y mal. Nos prometieron menos burocracia y más competitividad, pero lo que vemos es un parche que mantiene intacto este lastre regulatorio que asfixia a nuestras empresas.
                  

                     Europa sigue enredada en su propia telaraña de normativas mientras que la industria china avanza con agilidad y sentido práctico. En lugar de crear un entorno flexible para la innovación y la inversión, seguimos añadiendo más reglas, más condiciones, más obstáculos… Y, mientras tanto, nuestras empresas pagan el precio en forma de pérdida de competitividad, deslocalización y destrucción de empleo. Un ejemplo claro es la reciente normativa sobre la prohibición definitiva de la venta de motores de combustión para el 2035, que pone en jaque a la industria automotriz europea.
                  

                     Esta imposición está empujando a nuestras empresas al cierre. Es hora de devolver la libertad a nuestras empresas y dejar de castigar al progreso con burocracia.
                  

Rasmus Andresen (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin! Das ist kein Bürokratieabbau, sondern ein Kahlschlag. Es ist richtig: Die EU hat ein Bürokratieproblem, und EU-Regularien sind für Unternehmen viel zu kompliziert; Unterschiede zwischen nationaler und europäischer Gesetzgebung kommen dann noch dazu. Aber einfach die Augen zu verschließen und so zu tun, als ob die Klimakrise, Raubbau an der Natur oder Zwangsarbeit nicht stattfinden, kann keine Antwort sein.
                  

                     Kommissionspräsidentin von der Leyen hat versprochen, an den Zielen der Gesetze festzuhalten, aber die Anwendung praktikabler zu machen. Klingt gut, stimmt aber nicht. Wenn man pauschal 90 % der Unternehmen weitestgehend vom Anwendungsbereich von zentralen Gesetzen ausnehmen will, dann legt man die Axt ans Gesetz. Statt die Gesetze unbrauchbar zu machen, müssen wir darüber reden, wie wir sie besser umsetzen können. Dazu gehören beispielsweise Übergangspläne statt pauschale Ausnahmen. Dazu gehört auch, ja, eine stärkere Unterscheidung zwischen großen Konzernen und kleinen Handwerksbetrieben.
                  

                     Aber das, was jetzt vorliegt, schießt deutlich über das Ziel hinaus. Deshalb bleiben wir Grüne sehr skeptisch und hoffen, dass im Gesetzgebungsprozess noch Änderungen gemacht werden können.
                  

Emma Fourreau (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, voici une définition simple de la législation ‘omnibus’ pour les non-initiés: la Commission européenne se soumet au capital et cède aux demandes des multinationales écocidaires et de l'extrême droite productiviste, au détriment des travailleurs et de la planète. Les citoyens européens se souviendront de Mme von der Leyen comme de celle qui a anéanti tous les efforts déployés pour parvenir à une législation environnementale digne de ce nom. En effet, le pacte vert était loin d'être parfait, mais il allait dans le bon sens, celui de la protection des gens et de la planète, cette voie dont vous vous détournez aujourd'hui au nom du ‘tout-marché’.
                  

                     Tel le fasciste argentin Javier Milei – et sa tronçonneuse –, vous détricotez méthodiquement le pacte vert. La taxonomie verte européenne? Dehors. Le devoir de vigilance? Dehors. L'obligation de transparence sur la durabilité des entreprises? Dehors. L'ajustement carbone aux frontières? Dehors. Vous donnez carte blanche à Shein, à Lactalis et à TotalEnergies pour polluer et maltraiter leurs salariés à loisir, en Europe comme à l'étranger. La simplification, c'est l'alibi des multinationales pour massacrer les droits sociaux et environnementaux. Vous pensez à leur argent; nous pensons aux vivants. Vous êtes avec les puissants; nous sommes avec les gens.
                  

Jörgen Warborn (PPE). – Madam President, Commissioner, my key message today is that this is a good first step. But it is not enough. We have to continue to work with this suggestion and this is really important for the competitiveness of Europe.
We have been falling behind. We have been falling behind a lot of other great economic powers around the world and we have to change this situation. And there is a lot of things that we need to change. But one of the most important parts is to cut red tape. This is important for all companies, but it is most important for the small and medium-sized enterprises.
It was a colleague that mentioned the 'Think Small First' principle – I think that is really important. That is a good solution. We have to do that. And this can be done in the negotiation about these files as well, to continue with the 'Think Small First' principle.
Multinationals were mentioned like they are bad guys – no, they are good guys. They are providing jobs and economy and growth to Europeans. That is also important. It is good that we do a reality check on this package, on the CSDDD, on the CSRD, on the taxonomy act, on the CBAM. We need that reality check.
So let's work with it, but we need to move this forward. This is a good first step but we need to continue to cut red tape. It's been speaking about 'deregulation', about 'simplification', about 'cutting red tape' – it doesn't matter which word you use, you have to cut the cost for businesses. That's how you get back to growth.

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


Kira Marie Peter-Hansen (Verts/ALE),
blue-card question. – As a fellow Scandinavian, dear colleague, I would like to ask you if you recognise that a green economy is a strong economy, and that the green transition and competitiveness go hand in hand? And why EPP could support the taxonomy, the CSRD, the CSDDD as a way to fulfil our transition goals, but now want to roll it back?

Jörgen Warborn (PPE),
blue-card answer. – Thank you very much for that question. I think we can work with issues regarding sustainability and climate change. They are important.
But I also see – and this is important for the Greens as well to see – that we have a problem with the competitiveness. That is why it's so important to open up these files. That's so good that the Commission comes up with the first Omnibus package to change this.
This is not enough, though. We have to continue. We have to cut red tape even more than in these proposals. And for all the political groups that would like to do that, I am sure that EPP will work together with you to cut the red tape, to increase the growth, to come back to competitiveness. That is what we can do. And then we get the resources also to focus on the green issues.

Evelyn Regner (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Frau Kommissarin! Das Lieferkettengesetz hat einen Paradigmenwechsel eingeleitet. Es stellt klar: Unternehmen müssen dafür haften, wenn sie einen Schaden anrichten, so wie Privatpersonen auch. Sie müssen das Arbeitsrecht, das Umweltrecht, fundamentale Menschenrechte respektieren.
                  

                     Das Omnibuspaket der Kommission ist ein Synonym für Verantwortungsflucht. Es ist ein Kniefall der Kommissionspräsidentin vor einigen wenigen großen Konzernen, auf deren Druck hin beschlossene Gesetze wieder aufgemacht werden. Was bedeutet das: Unternehmen haften nicht mehr. Es wird nahezu unmöglich, die Mutterfirma zur Verantwortung zu ziehen, wenn bei einer Tochterfirma Probleme identifiziert wurden. Strafzahlungen werden gestrichen.
                  

                     Unser Wettbewerbsvorteil in der Europäischen Union ist, dass die Europäische Union für Qualität steht, dass Investorinnen und Investoren, dass Konsumentinnen und Konsumenten, dass Unternehmen und Staaten weltweit darauf zählen können, dass bei uns hohe Standards eingehalten werden – und das dürfen wir nicht aufgeben.
                  

Roman Haider (PfE). – Frau Präsidentin! Die europäische Industrie steckt in einer existenziellen Krise, und hauptverantwortlich dafür ist die EU mit ihrer völlig irrsinnigen Green Deal-Politik. Völlig überzogene Energiepreise und immer neue Sinnlosvorschriften der EU zerstören die Existenzgrundlagen der Industrie.
                  

                     In dieser Situation sollte man meinen, dass die EU bereit ist, endlich wirklich gegenzusteuern, dass die EU bereit ist zu einem echten Politikwechsel, dass die EU bereit ist, die Industrie zu retten – sollte man meinen, passiert aber nicht; es geht einfach so weiter wie bisher. Es wird stur weitergemacht, und das ist die ganze Wahrheit hinter Ihrem Omnibus: weiter wie bisher. Und das Schlimmste ist, dass Sie das auch wissen. Sie wissen ganz genau, dass es der Green Deal ist, der unsere Wirtschaft zerstört.
                  

                     Sie wissen, dass Sie seit fünf Jahren einem Irrweg folgen, aber das zuzugeben, hieße für Sie Gesichtsverlust, und darum machen Sie weiter wie bisher. Darum opfern Sie aus Eitelkeit lieber unsere wirtschaftlichen Grundlagen und die Zukunft unserer Jugend. Dieser Omnibus, diese Änderungen, ist viel zu wenig und kommt viel zu spät.
                  

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Madam President, companies are the backbone of the European economy. However, Brussels has been shutting off the engine of Europe by being the champion of overregulating. These new Omnibus proposals cut regulation and limit sustainability reporting to major corporations. A small step forward, but nowhere near enough.
The real obstacle remains massive climate regulation compared to our competitors. Let's face it, too strict policies are killing our competitiveness and putting jobs at risk. What Europe needs is not endless directives from Brussels, but policies that will give Europe the chance to win. It is time to break the chains of too strict climate regulation, let businesses thrive and restore Europe to the top of the global economy.

Νικόλας Φαραντούρης (The Left). – Αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, παρακολουθώ τη συζήτηση. Θλίβομαι που σε μεγάλο βαθμό ερχόμαστε να αναθεωρήσουμε πράγματα για τα οποία είχαμε συμφωνήσει και στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο και στην Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή. Χαίρομαι όμως που από διάφορες πτέρυγες του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου ακούγονται φωνές και θα ενώσω κι εγώ τη δική μου φωνή, ώστε να μην προχωρήσει μία απορρύθμιση που, τουλάχιστον στα δικά μου τα μάτια, φαντάζει λίγο προσχηματική. Λέμε ‘ναι’ στην απλούστευση των διαδικασιών για την επιχειρηματικότητα. Τη θέλουμε την επιχειρηματικότητα και την ανταγωνιστικότητα. Λέμε ‘όχι’ όμως στον προσχηματικό χαρακτήρα.
                  

                     Πώς αλλιώς να εξηγήσει κάποιος το γεγονός ότι η περίφημη αυτή απλούστευση ξεκινάει από τη βιωσιμότητα; Υπάρχουν τόσες δεκάδες, εκατοντάδες διαδικασίες που θα μπορούσαν να απλουστευθούν. Γιατί να ξεκινήσουμε από τη βιωσιμότητα, κυρίες και κύριοι συνάδελφοι; Θεωρώ ότι πρέπει να το απορρίψουμε και να μείνουμε εκεί που συμφωνήσαμε.
                  

Markus Ferber (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Wir müssen uns ehrlich machen, alleine mit dem Erfüllen von Berichtspflichten, mit dem Ausfüllen von Formularen ist im Kampf gegen den Klimawandel oder für den Arbeitsschutz in Entwicklungsländern noch überhaupt nichts erreicht. Richtlinien wie die über die Nachhaltigkeitsberichterstattung oder das europäische Lieferkettensorgfaltspflichten-Gesetz sind allenfalls Hilfsmittel, aber keine Lösung.
                  

                     Wir müssen uns wirklich fragen, ob diese Hilfsmittel das erreichen, wofür sie mal von einer Mehrheit hier im Hause gegen meine Stimme geschaffen wurden. Bei der Richtlinie über Nachhaltigkeitsberichterstattung und beim Lieferkettensorgfaltspflichten-Gesetz fällt die Antwort eigentlich klar aus: In der heutigen Form sind sie kein hilfreiches Instrument, um die Ziele zu erreichen. Sie sind unnötig kompliziert, sie sorgen für hohe Bürokratielasten, sie schaffen höchstens Arbeitsplätze für Consultants und Rechtsanwälte, aber Wettbewerbsfähigkeit schaffen sie nicht.
                  

                     Deswegen ist es richtig, dass die Europäische Kommission nun zielgerichtet Anpassungen vorgeschlagen hat. Die Vorschläge gehen in die richtige Richtung, aber ich hätte mir schon etwas mehr Ambitionen gewünscht, liebe Frau Kommissarin. Insbesondere im Bereich der Taxonomie wollen Sie alles nur auf Level zwei mit delegierten Rechtsakten lösen. Ich glaube, die Mutter aller Probleme ist die Taxonomie, und hier erwarte ich noch weitere Vorschläge von der Kommission. Auch an der Stelle müssen wir noch deutlich entrümpeln.
                  

José Cepeda (S&D). – Señora presidenta, ¿desregular? Sí, yo creo que estamos todos de acuerdo en hacer cada vez a nuestra Europa más competitiva. El Informe Draghi lo dice de una forma especial. Pero yo creo que, más que desregular y quitar burocracia, el objetivo fundamental es ser líderes en el mundo en algo.
                  

                     Me ha resultado chocante que alguno de los intervinientes anteriores ha puesto como ejemplo, como si fuera el faro de Occidente, a la economía china. En fin, es un tanto sorprendente dar pasos hacia atrás.
                  

                     Me resulta muy problemático que las reglas de diligencia debida, que sin lugar a dudas son un riesgo, se coloquen en el frontispicio de esa gran arma que debemos de utilizar para desregular. Yo sí que comparto que no se puede recortar la burocracia sin pensar en lo que el propio Informe Draghi nos pone encima de la mesa, que es liderar. Ese es nuestro objetivo realmente, señora comisaria, liderar, y para eso tenemos que ser muchísimo más competitivos, pero no desregulando, no. Lo que tenemos que hacer es quitar burocracia para ser competitivos en el mundo. Claro que sí.
                  

Julien Leonardelli (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, la Commission européenne nous présente aujourd'hui ses premières propositions ‘omnibus’ pour réduire les formalités administratives et simplifier la vie des entreprises. Cependant, les chefs d'entreprise français attendent bien plus qu'un simple toilettage réglementaire.
                  

                     En France, nos artisans, nos agriculteurs et nos industriels sont submergés par une avalanche de normes et de contraintes bureaucratiques. En cinq ans, 850 nouvelles obligations européennes ont été imposées, représentant près de 5 000 pages de réglementation supplémentaires. Résultat: des délais interminables pour obtenir un simple permis de construire, des démarches absurdes pour accéder aux aides publiques et des TPE/PME pénalisées face aux grandes entreprises, qui, elles, disposent d'une armée de juristes pour naviguer dans ce labyrinthe administratif.
                  

                     Un exemple frappant: nos agriculteurs croulent sous les exigences de la PAC, pendant que leurs concurrents extra-européens bénéficient de règles plus souples. Nos PME industrielles, notamment dans l'automobile, voient leur compétitivité affaiblie par des surtranspositions absurdes.
                  

                     Nous proposons une révolution administrative, passant par une pause réglementaire, la suppression des surtranspositions nationales et un droit de dérogation pour les États membres. Il est temps de libérer nos entreprises de cette asphyxie bureaucratique et de redonner à nos économies les moyens de croître et d'innover.
                  

Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR). – Voorzitter. In de discussie over CSRD en CSDDD heeft de ECR altijd gezegd: houd het uitvoerbaar en ontzie het MKB. Precies daar gaat het om in deze Omnibus. Wij zien dit dan ook als een noodzakelijke correctie op doorgeslagen beleid, waarbij regeldruk exorbitante proporties aannam.
                  

                     Maar er zijn ook best wel vragen te stellen bij deze voorstellen. Hoe denkt de Commissie bijvoorbeeld misstanden als kinderarbeid en slavernij te bestrijden als bedrijven niet langer verder hoeven te kijken dan hun directe zakenrelaties? We willen graag een verduidelijking van dit specifieke punt.
                  

                     Ondertussen roep ik de Commissie op om ook andere wetgeving onder handen te nemen. Denk aan de eveneens doorgeslagen natuurherstelwet en de sterk verouderde nitraatrichtlijn: wetgeving die met name het agrarisch bedrijfsleven heel wat hoofdbrekens kost. Deze vereenvoudigingsoperatie mag niet beperkt blijven tot de voorstellen die nu voorliggen.
                  

Andreas Schwab (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Zunächst einmal möchte ich der Europäischen Kommission gratulieren, weil ich glaube, dass sie mit dem Vorschlag dieser Zusammenfassung einer ganzen Reihe von Änderungsvorschlägen den Weg in die richtige Richtung geht. Denn eins ist klar: Europäische Unternehmen stehen in einem weltweiten Wettbewerb, und in diesem weltweiten Wettbewerb geht es darum, Talent in die Firmen zu bringen und sich auf Innovation und Produktion zu konzentrieren. Das muss natürlich nachhaltig sein, aber das sind am Ende vor allem Entscheidungen vor Ort in den Firmen, die hierfür eine Rolle spielen, und deswegen müssen wir uns darauf konzentrieren, den Unternehmen dabei zu helfen, diesen Weg entsprechend gehen zu können.
                  

                     Dass jetzt hier in diesem Parlament so viel Kritik kommt, Frau Kommissarin, zeigt eigentlich, dass Sie relativ gut einen Mittelweg gefunden haben, der am Ende auch mehrheitsfähig sein kann. Ich glaube, dass wir an einigen Stellen einfach auch noch Beispiele brauchen, die zeigen, dass das, was hier teilweise von Sozialdemokraten und Grünen vorgebracht wurde, einigermaßen fehl am Platz ist. Denn es geht nicht darum, zu deregulieren in breitem Stil.
                  

                     Es geht darum, die Verantwortung bei den Unternehmen vor Ort zu belassen, die sich ja alle mit der Gesetzeslage auch selber konform erklären müssen, aber darüber eben künftig nicht mehr jedes Jahr im Einzelnen berichten müssen. Das ist ein wichtiger Fortschritt, der viel zur Vereinfachung beiträgt, der auch viel zu Vertrauen von Unternehmen wieder im Markt beiträgt.
                  

                     Und Bürokratie bedeutet ja nichts anderes als Verwaltungsaufwand. Das Gesetz bedeutet nicht, dass nichtkonformes Handeln künftig akzeptiert würde, sondern es bedeutet, dass über die Einhaltung der Gesetze nicht zusätzlich berichtet werden muss – andere Staaten der Welt schaffen das auch. Deswegen sollten wir den Weg, den Mario Draghi in seinem Bericht durchaus klar vorgelegt hat, jetzt weiter konsequent verfolgen und zügig auf seine Umsetzung setzen. So kann Europa wieder wettbewerbsfähig werden.
                  

Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, stimați colegi, simplificarea regulilor este necesară. Am repetat acest lucru aici, în plen, de mai multe ori, atunci când Comisia tot introducea noi reguli.
                  

                     Dar nu trebuie să creăm noi inegalități sau să penalizăm tocmai antreprenorii care au respectat deja standardele europene.
                  

                     În propunerea Omnibus vedem măsuri utile, cum ar fi reducerea birocrației pentru IMM-uri sau facilitarea achizițiilor publice pentru companiile europene, dar vedem și riscuri majore. Dacă eliminăm dintr-odată raportările pentru multe companii, ce facem cu firmele care deja au investit în aceste standarde? Dacă schimbăm regulile de la un an la altul, ce garanție mai oferă Europa investitorilor? Cine a greșit: Comisia din mandatul precedent sau cea din mandatul actual? Cine suportă costurile?
                  

                     Avem nevoie de o tranziție echilibrată care sprijină IMM-urile. Europa trebuie să fie un model de predictibilitate, nu de reguli care vin și pleacă peste noapte. Da, simplificăm, dar să nu introducem noi soluții care riscă să afecteze economia noastră. Trebuie să păstrăm valorile sociale și totodată trebuie să ajutăm firmele să crească. În același timp, trebuie să spun: nu trebuie să facem un pas înapoi în materie de responsabilitate.
                  

André Rougé (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, nous débattons ce soir de la simplification administrative. Les régions ultrapériphériques qui composent nos outre-mer en France sont directement concernées par ce besoin de simplification. Elles subissent en effet une bureaucratie qui freine leur développement économique et empêche les acteurs locaux de prospérer. Ces lourdeurs administratives, souvent imposées depuis la Commission européenne, sont un carcan pour les entrepreneurs, les agriculteurs et les pêcheurs ultramarins. Comment créer des emplois et dynamiser ces régions quand tant de ces projets sont entravés par des procédures interminables et des normes inadaptées?
                  

                     Il conviendrait également de mettre en place une avance sur recettes garantie par l'Union européenne. Cet outil permettrait aux entreprises locales de mieux accéder aux financements et éviterait que des projets importants pour le développement de nos outre-mer ne se retrouvent mort-nés pour des questions de délais de financement.
                  

                     Il est temps de simplifier les démarches et d'adapter les réglementations aux réalités ultramarines. L'Union européenne a choisi d'intégrer les régions ultramarines depuis 1992, en créant les régions ultrapériphériques. Elle ne doit pas être un frein, mais un véritable soutien à leur développement.
                  

Adrián Vázquez Lázara (PPE). – Señora presidenta, en los últimos cinco años la Unión Europea ha producido más de 13 000 normas; en el mismo tiempo, los Estados Unidos han producido 3 500. Según el informe Draghi, esta avalancha normativa ha supuesto un gasto y una pérdida de 150 000 millones EUR a los europeos, o lo que es lo mismo, un 1,3 % del PIB.
                  

                     Es insostenible seguir lastrando de esta manera nuestra competitividad en un momento en el que necesitamos, más que nunca, competir en un mundo cada vez más complejo e inseguro. Y la Comisión hace bien rectificando el camino; sin embargo, nuestras empresas ya han invertido millones para adaptarse a la normativa sobre divulgación de información no financiera y ahora se preguntan cuánto más tienen que reinvertir para readaptarse de nuevo.
                  

                     Por ello es vital no retrasar, sino congelar, la aplicación de estas reglas y trabajar en una nueva norma que sea seria, que dé certidumbre y seguridad a nuestros sectores productivos, que favorezca la creación de un ecosistema europeo de pequeñas y medianas empresas y empresas emergentes, que permita la atracción y la retención del talento y que permita innovar.
                  

                     Competir no es una opción, por mucho que los socialistas y los verdes digan lo contrario: es una necesidad para mantener nuestro Estado de bienestar y hoy, más que nunca, nuestra seguridad.
                  

                     Pero toda revisión ha de hacerse con cabeza y evaluando su impacto. Si no, por muchas Brújulas que aprobemos, seguiremos perdidos buscando el norte.
                  

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (S&D). – Madam President, the 'simplification agenda' – like most right-wing phrases, it sounds so benign, but it is also very dangerous. Right-wing politicians are experts at presenting themselves as responsible and sensible, but it is the politics of the right that have plunged Europe into disaster after disaster.
Right-wing politics gave us the banking and economic crash, the climate crisis, the rise of homophobia and racism and the vaccine hesitancy that cost lives. It is right-wing policies that fuel homelessness and lead to poorer pay, more discrimination and unsafe work environments. And it is the politics of the right that pours petrol on the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza.
So we must greet the promotion of 'simplification' and 'cutting red tape' with deep suspicion. Our environmental and social standards were hard fought for. We cannot allow the rest of this Parliament to be driven by a deregulation agenda.
The market has no conscience – neither, it seems, do those who worship it.

Lukas Mandl (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ein offenes Wort: Mir blutet das Herz, dass ich jeden Tag von Bürgerinnen und Bürgern meines Heimatlandes Österreich, von Unternehmerinnen und Unternehmern Beschwerden darüber bekomme, wie Überregulierung das unternehmerische Wirken schwieriger macht, wie Überregulierung Arbeitsplätze zerstört, wie Überregulierung Wachstum verhindert, weil Aufträge gar nicht kommen oder nicht wahrgenommen werden können, wie Überregulierung dazu führt, dass wir auf dem Weltmarkt mit unseren Unternehmen, die qualitativ höchste Leistungen erbringen, nicht bestehen können, weil Überregulierung die Preise antreibt. Mir blutet deshalb das Herz, weil die Europäische Union, die brauchen wir für unsere Sicherheit, die brauchen wir für unsere Wirtschaft, wenn wir an den Binnenmarkt denken und alles, was dieser Binnenmarkt möglich gemacht hat, über Jahrzehnte.
                  

                     Wenn aber der Ruf der Europäischen Union bei den eigenen Unionsbürgerinnen und -bürgern Schaden nimmt aufgrund dieser Überregulierung, dann ist es höchste Eisenbahn, dass gehandelt wird. Die Europäische Kommission muss verstehen, dass der Weg der vergangenen Periode der Holzweg war. Es war falsch, was gemacht wurde. Das Lieferkettengesetz war falsch, es hat nicht meine Zustimmung bekommen hier im Europäischen Parlament.
                  

                     Jetzt, mit der Wortschöpfung Omnibus, soll es dazu kommen, dass dereguliert wird, dass Unternehmen frei arbeiten können, dass der europäische Wirtschaftsmarkt sich erholen kann und dass es Zukunft gibt für Österreichs und Europas Unternehmen und Europas Arbeitnehmer.
                  

Kamila Gasiuk-Pihowicz (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowni Państwo! To krytyczny moment. Bezpieczeństwo to nie tylko dobrze uzbrojone wojsko. Bezpieczeństwo to także konkurencyjna i silna gospodarka, w której przedsiębiorcy wytwarzają usługi i produkty, a nie wykonują dziesiątki niepotrzebnych obowiązków nałożonych przez administrację. Polska została doświadczona szaleństwem legislacyjnym przez poprzedni rząd PiS, który uchwalił 200 tys. stron aktów prawnych. I z tym doświadczeniem powstrzymanie szaleństwa legislacyjnego to jeden z priorytetów polskiej prezydencji. W Polsce już działamy. Mamy zbiór propozycji deregulacji polskiej gospodarki wypracowany razem z przedsiębiorcami. Wiemy, że nadmiarowe regulacje są kulą u nogi także europejskiej gospodarki. W świecie, który stał się jeszcze bardziej konkurencyjny, musimy to zmienić i nie mamy czasu do stracenia.
                  

                     W ubiegłym tygodniu uczestniczyłam w wydarzeniu z udziałem przedstawicieli polskiego przemysłu kosmetycznego, którzy przedstawili nam ‘tsunami unijnych regulacji’, do których muszą się dostosowywać. Istnieje ponad 300 szczegółowych przepisów sektorowych dotyczących tylko kosmetyków. Zmieniają się tak często, że prowadzenie firmy staje się nieprzewidywalne. Dlatego cieszę się, widząc pierwszą propozycję Omnibusa, i doceniam zaangażowanie przewodniczącej von der Leyen w ułatwianie życia naszym przedsiębiorcom. Ale deregulacja musi być czymś więcej niż zmianą przepisów na nowe czy odroczeniem ich stosowania. Regulacji musi być po prostu radykalnie mniej. Zawalczmy o naszych przedsiębiorców. To oni generują bogactwo Unii Europejskiej. I obudźmy się, żeby nie było za późno.
                  

Željana Zovko (PPE). – Madam President, Commissioner, Europe stands at the crossroad, a crossroad of security, trade and growing global threats. But above all, our economy is at a crossroad to survive or to thrive.
SMEs represent 99.8 % of all active businesses in Europe, employing nearly 90 million people. In today's volatile times, we cannot afford for our businesses and industries to be the ones to fall behind, suffocated by excessive regulation. From the automotive and energy industries to steel and aluminium, we cannot allow them to be held back by unbalanced green policies and red tape.
The Omnibus package is a final call, a final call for Europe to introduce simpler rules, stronger investments and unlock potential to boost our competitiveness.
Alongside with increased defence spending, the only way forward is to create a more favourable business environment.
The EUR 6 billion that we can cut in annual administrative costs must be reinvested in our innovation, research and development. History will not forgive us if we don't do this step now.

Nina Carberry (PPE). – Madam President, Commissioner, over 60 % of EU companies today identify excessive regulation as a significant barrier to investment and 55 % of SMEs cite regulatory and administrative burdens as their main challenge.
In the current EU political climate, marked by concerns over tariffs, trade tensions and the spectre of Donald Trump, simplification in EU rules have never been more crucial. The Commissioner's latest simplification package could save our companies EUR 6.3 billion in administrative costs.
However, as we streamline, we must maintain regulatory certainty and clarity. I welcome proposals to revise the scope of the CSRD, reducing heavy burdens on SMEs and enabling them to prioritise innovation. Yet, simplification cannot compromise our climate commitments. With clear climate targets for 2030 and beyond, the fundamental course of direction is not changing and so regulatory adjustments must reinforce, not weaken our green objectives.
In this context, I have two questions for the Commission. Firstly, will the upcoming agricultural simplification be as ambitious as those in the first Omnibus proposal and can you provide more detail here, please? Secondly, in the context of the EU-UK reset, could you clarify how simplifications within the CBAM may affect alignment with the UK's ETS?

Dirk Gotink (PPE). – Voorzitter, we staan op een keerpunt in Europa. Oude vrienden keren ons de rug toe en oude vijanden worden steeds sterker. Vooral als Europa de leiding neemt op het vlak van bijvoorbeeld klimaat, volgen andere werelddelen ons niet meer.
                  

                     We zijn geen ‘market makers’ meer. Met name tegen de collega's van de S&D wil ik graag zeggen dat de wereld echt is veranderd. We zijn niet meer de baas. De kracht van onze economie en de concurrentiekracht van onze bedrijven zijn nu essentieel om ons te beschermen en relevant te blijven in de wereld. En dat gaat niet goed.
                  

                     Het afgelopen mandaat was dit Huis massaproducent van meer wetten en regelgeving, met meer complexiteit: taxonomie, CSRD en CSDDD zijn daar heel goede voorbeelden van. Het is veelzeggend dat er nu wetgeving wordt aangepast die nog niet eens is ingegaan.
                  

                     Als we onze bedrijven en vooral het MKB niet ontzien, kunnen ze hun positie op de wereldmarkt wel vergeten. Dat is al gebeurd met de staal-, chemie- en cementsector. We moeten vereenvoudigen om concurrerend te blijven. Maar laten we ook eens beginnen met onze bedrijven gewoon te vertrouwen en te verwachten dat ze hun werk goed willen doen.
                  

                     Uit onderzoek blijkt dat de complexiteit van de regelgeving een van de belangrijkste redenen is voor ondernemers om hun activiteiten stop te zetten. Daarom is deze eerste Omnibus een stap in de goede richting. Ik hoop op een hele serie van Omnibussen. Ons verzet tegen de complexiteit van de regelgeving moet langdurig en vasthoudend zijn, op alle niveaus. Dit is nodig voor onze bestaanzekerheid en om het vertrouwen van ondernemers in het Europese project te herstellen.
                  

Dóra Dávid (PPE). – Elnök Asszony! A kkv-k gazdaságunk motorjai és versenyképességünk fontos reményei. Az őket támogató környezet megteremtésének fontos eleme a szabályok egyszerűsítése, hogy cégeink ne fulladjanak a bürokráciába, hanem a működésre és növekedésre tudjanak összpontosítani. Tudjuk például, hogy jelenleg mennyi szabálynak kell egy átlagos kkv-nak megfelelnie? Adószabályok, pénzügyi szabályok, vámszabályok, munkaügyi szabályok, fogyasztóvédelmi szabályok, adatvédelmi szabályok és még folytathatnám. Ehhez jön még az ESG-megfelelés, mely a magyar kkv-k számára is különösen nagy kihívást jelent. Sokuk most először szembesül az új követelményekkel, miközben sem dedikált szakemberük, sem elegendő erőforrásuk nincs ezek kezelésére.
                  

                     A Bizottság omnibusz csomagja ezért biztató és jó kezdet a kkv-barát környezet megteremtésére, hiszen a cégek akár 80 százalékát mentesítheti a jelentéstétel alól. De gyorsan kell cselekednünk, mert a vállalkozások már dolgoznak az ESG elvárásoknak való megfelelésen, nagy erőforrások árán. 2025-ben csak Magyarországon ez a kihívás több tízezer kkv-t érint. Az egyszerűsítés mellett fontos, hogy a szabályokat a vállalkozások meg is értsék. Ha már omnibusz csomagról beszélünk, értse meg a Clapham-omnibuszon utazó hétköznapi ember is. Ő ugyanis az angol jogrendszerben használt átlagember mércéje. Hagyjunk tehát levegőt a vállalkozásainknak, hogy ne csak túléljenek, hanem boldoguljanak is. Ha ők sikeresek, Európa is az.
                  

Procedura ‘catch-the-eye’
                        


Sunčana Glavak (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, povjerenice, kolegice i kolege, više od polovine BDP-a u Europskoj uniji generiraju mala i srednja poduzeća. Još jednom ću ponoviti, ti ljudi zapošljavaju gotovo sto milijuna ljudi.
                  

                     Kolege s lijeve strane, vi kažete, ne treba nam omnibus paket. Pa kažite to tim ljudima koji svakog dana moraju pronaći novac kako bi imali za proizvodnju, kako bi mogli platiti svoje radnike. Naravno da omnibus paketom nećemo sve riješiti, ali ćemo osloboditi vrijeme i resurse koji su sada zarobljeni u beskrajnoj papirologiji, birokratskim labirintima i prekomjernom administrativnom opterećenju.
                  

                     Tako ćemo omogućiti tvrtkama ono o čemu govorimo, što imaju SAD, što imaju neke druge razvijenije zemlje, a mi nemamo, a to je: inovacije, rast i konkurentnost.
                  

                     I zaključit ću, pojednostavljenje nije samo sebi svrha. Ono je alat za jačanje naših poduzetnika i ostvarivanje snažnijeg, konkurentnijeg i otpornijeg europskog tržišta.
                  

                     To ne smije biti ideološko pitanje. To je pitanje razuma.
                  

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisară, stimați colegi, problema Europei acum este nu numai cea legată de conflict, este și problema economică.
                  

                     Și, doamna comisară, suprareglementarea poate să ducă la ștergerea locurilor de muncă. Trebuie să înțelegem, am lucrat mult mai mult în economie, în industrie decât în politică, trebuie să înțelegem că trebuie să tratăm la pachet drepturile lucrătorilor, cu condiții pentru IMM-uri, mai ales, și pentru companii, pentru că doar companiile creează locuri de muncă și dacă reglementăm, suprareglementăm, pot să se erodeze aceste locuri de muncă.
                  

                     Dar și dacă dereglementăm, putem să ajungem pe termen lung să erodăm locurile de muncă.
                  

                     De aceea trebuie o analiză foarte bună, și poate vina cea mai mare pe care o are Uniunea Europeană, Comisia Europeană, este aceea că se fac reglementări care se bat cap în cap. Și un agricultor, un fermier, o IMM nu mai știe ce să facă în momentul în care apar în conflict aceste legislații.
                  

                     De aceea, trebuie cu foarte mare atenție să analizăm ce dereglementăm și mai ales, să nu mai adăugăm birocrație care nu aduce nimic, nici competitivitate, nici siguranța locului de muncă, nici sustenabilitate, nici posibilitatea companiilor de a mări salariile.
                  

Sander Smit (PPE). – Voorzitter, het is positief dat de Commissie eindelijk langzaam aan inziet dat we met de Green Deal in sommige elementen zijn doorgeschoten, dat er te veel regeldruk is ontstaan en dat onze concurrentiekracht hieronder lijdt. Maar laten we niet vergeten dat dit voorstel slechts een eerste stap kan zijn. Zojuist werd ook door andere collega's benadrukt dat we verder moeten gaan. We zullen moeten herzien. Er is een herziening nodig van de natuurherstelverordening en niet alleen van de CSRD, maar ook van andere wetgeving die onze boeren, tuinders, vissers, maar vooral ook ons MKB belemmeren.
                  

                     Ik roep de Commissie dan ook op om de komende tijd meer ambitie te tonen. Dit is een heel goed voorstel, maar het gaat nog niet ver genoeg. U bevindt zich op een betere weg. Zoals we in Nederland zeggen: ‘Beter ten halve gekeerd dan ten hele gedwaald’. Ik wens u daarbij heel veel succes.
                  

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, este paquete ómnibus es la primera gran iniciativa legislativa de la Comisión Von der Leyen II y marca el tono de la legislatura. Pero el tono de la respuesta de este Parlamento Europeo ha sido anunciado: simplificar no es desregular.
                  

                     ¿Puede caminar en la buena dirección la reforma del Reglamento InvestEU porque permite optimizar todos los instrumentos y fondos actualmente disponibles —hasta los heredados— para intentar incentivar la innovación, la investigación y la competitividad sin renunciar al compromiso con la sostenibilidad y el medio ambiente, al que se dedica prácticamente la mitad de las inversiones del Reglamento? Puede, pero no camina en la buena dirección la degradación de la diligencia debida, ni de los objetivos climáticos, ni del compromiso medioambiental.
                  

                     Porque si la Comisión hace eso al servicio de los grandes intereses económicos que se quejan del exceso de regulación, tenemos derecho a sospechar que hará lo mismo a la hora de degradar la Agenda Digital al servicio de las grandes corporaciones tecnológicas, o el Pacto sobre Migración y Asilo para devolver a los Estados la competencia que hemos conseguido, por fin, que sea de la Unión Europea. Y frente a eso decimos con toda claridad que encontrará un no rotundo en este Parlamento Europeo a cualquier retroceso.
                  

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Menschen Europas! Die Omnibus-Vorschläge der Kommission bringen nötige Entlastungen für kleine und mittlere Unternehmen und stärken unsere Industrie-Champions im globalen Wettbewerb. Gleichzeitig machen mir die gelockerten Klimaschutzstandards große Sorgen. Vor allem aber ignorieren wir weiterhin einen entscheidenden Schritt in der Entwicklung des Völkerrechts und verpassen so erneut, Vorreiter zu sein, anstatt bloß reaktive Politik zu betreiben.
                  

                     Große transnationale Unternehmen sind nicht bloß eine Ansammlung europäischer Mutter- oder Tochtergesellschaften, sondern eigenständige globale Akteure. Aber so betrachten wir sie nicht. Wir kleiden sie legislativ immer lediglich in unser eigenes Gesellschaftsrecht ein und sind nicht in der Lage, über unsere Grenzen hinauszudenken.
                  

                     Erst wenn wir multinationale Unternehmen endlich als eigenständige Völkerrechtssubjekte anerkennen, können wir sie wirksam an internationale menschenrechtliche und ökologische Standards binden. Europa muss hier Vorreiter sein. Lasst uns multinationale Unternehmen als eigenständige Völkerrechtssubjekte anerkennen!
                  

Michał Szczerba (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Wysoka Izbo! Temat deregulacji powraca jak bumerang, również przy okazji tej dyskusji o pakiecie omnibus. Ale najważniejsza sprawa, która jest również podsumowaniem tej debaty, to kwestia zmiany myślenia, zmiany myślenia instytucji europejskich, państw, ale również urzędników. Trzeba zderegulować myślenie, że przedsiębiorca to wróg. To jest najważniejsze. Trzeba skończyć ze złą legislacją, która opiera się na dominacji instytucji państwa nad obywatelami. To prowadzi do nadmiernych regulacji. Ale przy okazji dyskusji na temat tego konkretnego pakietu chcę bardzo wyraźnie powiedzieć: bezpieczna Europa potrzebuje konkurencyjnej gospodarki. I pakiet omnibus to ważny krok, bo przedsiębiorcy potrzebują dalszych uproszczeń przepisów. Potrzebujemy zwiększania konkurencyjności przedsiębiorstw Unii Europejskiej również w obszarze przemysłu obronnego.
                  

(Fine della procedura ‘catch the eye’)


Maria Luís Albuquerque,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, thank you for your contributions to this important discussion.
To deliver on our ambitious goals, we must continue this positive engagement and work together. We want to move forward swiftly, without delay and with the co-legislators' support.
Going forward, I would like to highlight that each Commissioner will present an annual progress report on implementation and enforcement to the respective Parliament committee. The reports will present progress towards key policy objectives, enforcement and simplification actions and take stock of stakeholder dialogues, stress tests and reality checks.
We also wish to work closely with you to deliver fast progress on simplification measures. To this end, I would like to emphasise that this legislation is urgent and requires prioritisation, in particular our 'stop the clock' proposal contained in the first Omnibus proposal on sustainability reporting. This is why we identify them as such in our work programme and are consulting actively with Parliament on them and would encourage you to handle them with priority.
We also hope to count on your support to minimise additional administrative burdens introduced during the legislative process. For this purpose, we will put forward a simple methodology that could help you assess the impacts of significant amendments. We also believe that it is important that each institution sets the resources to deliver on this commitment in our existing interinstitutional agreement.
To conclude, honourable Members, as you can see, this Commission is firmly committed to improving implementation and delivering simpler and more cost-efficient rules. We hope to count on your support so that we can deliver fast and sustained changes on the ground in the coming months and years.

Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.
                  

                     La votazione si svolgerà domani.
                  
17.   Establishing the Reform and Growth Facility for the Republic of Moldova (debate)

Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca la relazione di Siegfried Mureșan e Sven Mikser, a nome della commissione per gli affari esteri e della commissione per i bilanci, sull'istituzione dello strumento per le riforme e la crescita per la Repubblica di Moldova !COM(2024)0469 – C10-0127/2024 – 2024/0258(COD)) (A10-0006/2025).
               

Siegfried Mureșan,
rapporteur. – Madam President, dear colleagues, Commissioner, today we are sending a very strong signal. We are sending a very strong signal to citizens of the European Union, but also to citizens in our immediate neighbourhood in candidate countries: Europe is delivering!
Tomorrow, we are going to have the final vote here in the plenary of the European Parliament on the EUR 1.9 billion growth facility for the Republic of Moldova. We believe in this project. The way in which it was agreed by the European Parliament and the Council, with the support of the European Commission, will allow the Republic of Moldova to become economically, socially, institutionally even stronger. It will be closer to European standards after the implementation of this growth and reform facility: EUR 1.9 billion to support the economy, to support private sector, to support citizens over the next three years. Money for investments in parallel with reforms that will strengthen the public administration, that will improve the competitiveness of the country.
We are doing this because the Republic of Moldova is a country deeply rooted in European values. We still vividly remember the first weeks of the illegal and illegitimate invasion of Russian armed forces into Ukraine. The people of Moldova opened their houses for refugees in Ukraine. For people coming from Ukraine and looking for security, they found it in the Republic of Moldova, with some Moldovan authorities and some Moldovan citizens acting in line with European values.
We saw people of Moldova expressing themselves in elections, in a referendum, in this direction. They share our values. They want to become members of the Union. So it is our obligation to support. And we know this is good for Moldova, but it will also be good for Europe, because the Republic of Moldova is a direct neighbour. It is not only an EU candidate country, but it is neighbouring the European Union, and we know that Moldova's security is Europe's security.
We can only be secure and safe inside the borders of the Union if our neighbours are safe. This is why strengthening Moldova, supporting Moldova is also in the fundamental interest of the European Union, even more so now when we are seeing our long-standing partner across the Atlantic unfortunately disengaging from Europe – in terms of trade, in terms of economy, in terms of security and defence, in terms of defending, unfortunately, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. We are seeing the threat in the East. We are seeing the uncertainties across the Atlantic. So the reaction for us and the answer for us is clear: we stick together as EU Member States, we support each other and we also support the candidate countries.
These were the principles on the basis of which here, in the European Parliament, we worked throughout the process of adopting this growth and reform facility for the Republic of Moldova. Sven Mikser, my co-rapporteur on behalf of the Foreign Affairs Committee, and myself were lucky enough to work closely with the shadow rapporteurs from the other groups. And last week we had a vote with a large majority in a joint meeting of the two committees that were decisive here.
We had a vote with a large majority because the key objectives of Parliament for this process were fulfilled. We said we want to adopt this facility fast, and we want to adopt it in a way in which it is good for Europe and good for Moldova. We set two primary objectives. Firstly, as soon as the Moldovan authorities put forward a reform and growth plan and the European Commission adopts it, we want the pre-financing paid to the Republic of Moldova to be more comprehensive.
The European Commission proposed 7 %. The Council agreed to 7 %. We demanded a fundamental increase and, due to the unity of the European Parliament, we managed to agree, together with the Council and Commission, on an increase to 18 %. That is EUR 200 million more for the people of Moldova due to the work that we have done together here in the European institutions, at European Union level.
The second objective was to increase the grant component, to make more grants available for the people of Moldova. We have achieved all this. The mandate is achieved. This is why tomorrow, with a large majority, we are going to give a positive vote to this facility – a clear signal to the people of Moldova that Moldova is Europe, and Europe is Moldova.

Sven Mikser,
rapporteur. – Madam President, Commissioner Kos, dear colleagues, we worked in a very good spirit of cooperation – the two co-rapporteurs as well as the two committees responsible for this file. Establishing a Reform and Growth Facility for the Republic of Moldova is significant in several ways. Moldova is a candidate country which, despite a multitude of different challenges, has a pro-European government that is truly committed to carrying out an ambitious reform agenda. As demonstrated by the constitutional referendum as well as the presidential election last year, a majority of Moldovan people also see their country's future in our Union.
The growth facility – which at EUR 1.9 billion for the years 2025 to 2027 is the largest ever financial support package for Moldova – demonstrates that the European Union is also living up to our end of the bargain, and is helping Moldovan people and the country's institutions to prepare to assume the responsibilities of an EU Member State as soon as possible.
There is a real urgency to our action. The Commission submitted its proposal for the growth facility, which was modelled on the Western Balkans facility, last year. Since then, the already previously complicated political and economic situation in Moldova has become even more challenging, exacerbated by the energy crisis that was caused by the discontinuation of gas supply by Russia's Gazprom. Meanwhile, the true extent and nature of Russia's brazen interference in Moldova's democratic processes has become increasingly apparent.
We do understand the existential nature of these challenges. Therefore, I would like to commend the Commission for the decision to provide emergency energy assistance to Moldova, launching the comprehensive energy strategy. I would also like to underline how swiftly we managed to complete our parliamentary debates on the growth facility, and the interinstitutional negotiations with the Council and Commission.
Meanwhile, even despite the unprecedented swiftness of these talks, we managed to strengthen the facility by raising the pre-financing rate that my co-rapporteur already mentioned and increasing the non-repayable component of the facility by another EUR 100 million, to a total of EUR 520 million.
I am optimistic that after the adoption of the growth plan, the implementation of the facility will start delivering towards the long-term strategic goals of boosting Moldova's economic competitiveness, and making its institutions and its energy infrastructure more resilient. It will also help the country to further strengthen its ability to withstand and resist attempts by malicious external actors in Russia to interfere in Moldova's democratic processes.
But alongside the strategic transformation of Moldova's economy, it is also important for the implementation of the facility to make an immediate positive impact on the Moldovan people's lives. Let us recall that, even before the recent acute energy crisis, Moldova's economy had suffered a lot because of the effects of Russia's aggression against Ukraine.
So there is a real urgency, and we need to show that we are truly committed. In that light. I would also like to commend the Polish Presidency, which is working hard to see the opening of the first clusters in the accession negotiations.
During the AFET visit to Moldova less than two weeks ago, we saw the magnitude of the challenges, we saw who we are up against, but we also saw the dedication of Moldovan pro-European leaders. I hope that at tomorrow's vote Parliament will once again show our overwhelming support to the legitimate aspirations of the Moldovan people to live in a democratic, prosperous and European country.

Marta Kos,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, in the past months, Moldova withstood the biggest hybrid attack in its history. This included vote buying, disinformation campaigns and cyber attacks. At the end of last year, Russia cut off gas supplies to Moldova and subjected the country to aggressive energy blackmail. This was clearly meant to destabilise the government, spike inflation and discredit the country's European path only months before an election.
In such turbulent times, reliable friends matter. This is what the EU has demonstrated in the past month. How?
First, we provided Moldova with immediate budget support to push the energy prices back down to the pre-crisis level.
Second, we seize the moment with a strategy for energy independence and resilience. It will integrate Moldova into the European electricity market and help it gain full control over their energy supplies. They will be completely decoupled from Russian energy by the end of next year. This is very ambitious. For comparison, it took the Baltic states 15 years to do this integration. With Moldova, we want to do it just in two years.
And third, we approach Moldova respecting its full territorial integrity. Our offer included the Transnistria region, where a humanitarian crisis was looming. Of course, we attached important conditions. One of the results was that for the first time ever, Moldova's public television can be watched in the Transnistria region. Romanian language schools became accessible, illegal checkpoints were removed, and political prisoners were freed in a bit less than one month.
Ultimately, Russia felt compelled to restart gas transfers to keep the Transnistria region afloat, but to do so, they now need to pay market prices, which will cost them hundreds of millions of euros just until the end of this heating season.
Our intervention matched the cynical games of Moscow. It ensured that nobody in Moldova had to go without light or heating because of skyrocketing prices. It defused the topic as a vote winner for those who want to weaken Europe. It demonstrated that in turbulent times, the EU is a partner to rely on.
We are now adding another piece to our support for Moldova, the Reform and Growth Facility. It amounts, as we have heard, to EUR 1.9 billion and it's the largest EU financial support package for Moldova since its independence. The plan aims to double Moldova's economy in the next decade and start integrating the country in key parts of the European internal market.
I would like to personally thank the AFET and Budget Committee, rapporteurs Sven Mikser and Siegfried Mureșan, and all Members of the European Parliament who worked on the facility. The speed of the negotiations reflects the urgency on the ground and we did it really excellent.
Together, as we have already heard, we have adapted the pre-financing rate to the new circumstances. The higher rate of 18 % will further help Moldova mitigate the impact of energy crises and free itself of future Russian blackmail. We have also agreed to add an additional EUR 100 million in non-repayable support. On this, the Commission has a formal declaration on the source of funding for the increased assistance provided under the facility, which has been sent to the Parliament's services for inclusion in the verbatim record of this debate.
Decisions with the Moldovan authorities on the reform agenda are advancing well, and we expect it this week. This will allow us to disburse the pre-financing at the end of March or at the beginning of April, and provided that all necessary requirements are met, the first regular payment under the growth plan will follow in July. We have, and I'm very happy about this, also just pass the decision on the integration on Moldova into the Single Euro Payment Area. This will allow faster and cheaper euro transfers across Europe, as we expect from autumn on, and we are working with Moldova to integrate them into the EU Roaming Area by the end of the year. This will make it cheaper for Moldovans to call, text and use the internet when travelling or doing business in the EU.
The Republic of Moldova has set itself the ambitious goal of EU membership by 2030. This is technically possible. To achieve it, Moldova needs to keep up its impressive reform path and align with EU legislation, and in particular reform its public administration, judiciary and anti-corruption frameworks. Because of efforts to integrate Moldova deeper and faster into our single market can only pay dividends if European investors and businesses know they will find a business climate that is predictable and safe,
In times of crisis, true partnerships are tested. Moldova has seen a Europe of action and not mere words. Moldova belongs to our European family. As it moves forward on its EU path, it will never walk alone.

Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski,
sprawozdawca komisji opiniodawczej – komisji INTA. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Cieszy tempo prac. Dlatego też zacznę od podziękowań dla obu sprawozdawców i dla komisji. Bardzo dziękuję za tę efektywną współpracę, która występowała zarówno na poziomie parlamentarnym, jak i pomiędzy poszczególnymi komisjami. Dzięki temu mamy szybko wypracowany nowy instrument pomocy finansowej, szansę na to, by był także źródłem wsparcia dla Mołdawii w dłuższym okresie. Wiemy, w jakiej sytuacji jest Mołdawia. To przecież nieduży kraj, borykający się z rozmaitymi kryzysami, usytuowany na granicy wielu konfliktów, dziś posiadający skromną rezerwę energetyczną. Aspiruje – mam nadzieję – stabilnie do przynależności do Unii Europejskiej. Jako sprawozdawcę opinii Komisji Handlu Międzynarodowego cieszy mnie, że w ostatecznej wersji kompromisu znalazły się zarówno mechanizmy ułatwiające procesy długoterminowego rozwoju gospodarczego, jak i warunki budowania funkcjonującej i konkurencyjnej gospodarki. Nie jest więc to pomoc bez warunków. Bardzo dziękuję wszystkim współpracującym przy tym nowym mechanizmie.
               

Jonas Sjöstedt,
rapporteur for the opinion of the CONT Committee. – Madam President, I would like to thank the two rapporteurs, Sven Mikser and Siegfried Mureșan. You've been working in a very inclusive way, you've been working with the highest possible speed and you nevertheless achieved substantial improvements of this facility, especially when it comes to the part that is grants and when it comes to the pre-financing. That is really needed now, at a time when Russia used energy as a weapon against Moldova, at a time when USAID withdraws essential support for the country.
The Committee on Budgetary Control adopted with great unanimity a number of amendments that would have improved the transparency and the auditing of the facility. Most of them were not taken on board because the rapporteurs wanted to have a swift negotiation with the Council. I can understand that, but the challenge is still there to strengthen the auditing in Moldova and to make sure that taxpayers' money is used in the best possible way. I am sure that we will have many opportunities to come back to that debate on strengthening the national auditing system in Moldova.

David McAllister,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, Madam Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, two weeks ago, I had the privilege of leading the three-day AFET mission to Chișinău. It was indeed a timely visit, just a few days after the provisional trilogue agreement on the Moldova Reform and Growth Facility, which previous speakers have already explained.
In Chișinău my impression was – and I felt – a profound sense of optimism surrounding the transformative potential of a EUR 1.9 billion facility, because it offers much more than just financial assistance: it brings hope for a brighter future.
The facility will significantly improve the country's infrastructure. Thanks to our support as a European Union, Moldova can finally reduce its dependence on Russia.
But this brings me to a critical point. With more and more malign interference and an intentionally orchestrated energy crisis, the Kremlin is trying to destabilise Moldova's democracy and foster discontent ahead of the upcoming parliamentary elections in autumn.
Moldova embodies Europe's core values, showing unwavering solidarity with Ukrainian refugees, demonstrating remarkable resilience in the face of Russia's blackmail, and displaying immense courage in aligning the country's future with a united Europe. President Maia Sandu has done tremendously in addressing the impact of the war on Moldova's doorstep, while bringing the country closer to the European Union.
Our message to the people of Moldova is and remains: we hear you, we see you, and we will stand by you.

Victor Negrescu,
în numele grupului S&D. – Doamnă vicepreședintă, doamnă comisară, dragi colegi, planul de creștere pentru Republica Moldova reprezintă o investiție semnificativă a Uniunii Europene în dezvoltarea sa economică și socială, dar mai ales un semnal de încredere în cetățenii Republicii Moldova.
               

                  Cele 1,9 miliarde de euro nu sunt doar un cec de solidaritate, ci un angajament ferm pentru modernizare, stabilitate și integrare europeană. Aceste fonduri trebuie să producă rezultate vizibile pentru cetățeni.
               

                  Am propus amendamente esențiale care au fost adoptate și care vor contribui direct la succesul acestui plan și le mulțumesc raportorilor:
               






—



                        sprijinirea zonelor rurale și a politicilor pentru copii, fonduri europene care au să ajungă acolo unde este cea mai mare nevoie,
                     










—



                        implicarea diasporei în implementarea măsurilor – milioane de moldoveni trăiesc și muncesc în alte state europene și vor juca astfel un rol esențial în dezvoltarea țării,
                     










—



                        investiții strategice în interconectări cu România, mai ales pe zona de energie.
                     





                  Mai mult, pentru utilizarea eficientă a acestor fonduri am propus și se va deschide chiar acum, s-a aprobat, un birou al Parlamentului European la Chișinău, o inițiativă pe care am avut-o în calitate de vicepreședinte al Parlamentului European, responsabil de relația cu Republica Moldova.
               

                  Iată că Republica Moldova are ușa deschisă în Europa. Europa sprijină Republica Moldova. Republica Moldova are o oportunitate istorică pe care nu o poate rata.
               

                  Aveți tot sprijinul din partea Parlamentului European.
               

Auke Zijlstra,
namens de PfE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, Moldavië wil snelle toetreding tot de Unie. En dat is geen sinecure, want er zijn forse problemen. De economie, de rechtsstaat, mensenrechtenschendingen — ook bij vrouwen en minderheden —, de staat van de gevangenissen, de kwaliteit van het bestuur en het feit dat een fors deel van de arbeidsbevolking al is vertrokken naar de EU.
               

                  De discussie ging echter niet over deze kwesties, maar voortdurend over Oekraïne, waarbij Moldavië zelfs als frontlinie werd aangeduid. Daar kunnen ze zelf toch ook niet blij mee zijn.
               

                  Er is al forse financiële steun gekoppeld aan het toetredingsproces, maar er is nog meer hulp nodig: twee miljard aan leningen en giften. De Europese Commissie heeft tegen de regels in geen risico-inschatting gemaakt. De wensen van de Commissie begrotingscontrole, waaronder een onafhankelijke rekenkamer en transparantie inzake de bestedingen, werden afgewezen. Het gaat om heel veel geld, meer dan 10 % van het bnp, dus kan een land dat überhaupt verwerken?
               

                  Ik heb tegengestemd. Niet alleen vanwege het ontbreken van een analyse vooraf, het ontbreken van controle tijdens het proces en achteraf en het ontbreken van een overzicht van wie uiteindelijk het geld krijgt, maar omdat ik vind dat je voortgang in het toetredingsproces niet kunt kopen. Je onderschat de menselijke factor als je denkt met subsidies corruptie te bestrijden of het gevangeniswezen humaner te maken of de 45 % tegenstemmers in Moldavië ook enthousiast te maken voor de Unie. Straks zijn op papier alle maatregelen doorgevoerd, maar is er praktisch niets veranderd, behalve dan dat het land lid is.
               

                  Samenlevingen kunnen groeien naar een hoger niveau, maar dat gaat niet sneller als je dat aan de Europese Unie uitbesteedt. Ook niet voor twee miljard.
               

Adrian-George Axinia,
în numele grupului ECR. – Doamnă președintă, stimați colegi, stimați reprezentanți ai Comisiei Europene, vreau să se audă în plenul Parlamentului European o expresie în care noi, AUR, credem cu tărie: Basarabia e România!
               

                  Soluția la problemele de securitate, economice, sociale și politice din Republica Moldova ar fi unirea celor două state. Plăcile tectonice ale istoriei se mișcă în acest moment – cu sprijinul Uniunii Europene, visul românilor de o parte și de alta a Prutului s-ar putea îndeplini.
               

                  Știm foarte bine însă că stilul Bruxelles-ului și al Strasbourg-ului este trasul de timp, în speranța că problemele se vor rezolva de la sine. Fără susținere adecvată, fără o diversificare a opțiunilor politice pro-europene și pro-românești de la Chișinău, pot exista surprize neplăcute la alegerile parlamentare. Inclusiv unioniștii trebuie sprijiniți.
               

                  Revenind la mecanismul pe care vreți să-l instituiți, AUR consideră că orice sprijin pentru frații basarabeni este de bun augur. Dar vreau să fac trei observații:
               






—



                        în primul rând, moldovenii vor vedea că din acea sumă totală de 1,9 miliarde de euro, doar 520 de milioane de euro sunt granturi, restul fiind împrumuturi condiționate. Raportul dintre banii nerambursabili și credite trebuia să fie invers;
                     










—



                        în al doilea rând, reformele cerute în Republica Moldova vor fi întoarse de pro-ruși împotriva actualei administrații și folosite în alegerile parlamentare. A se vedea și blocajul PNRR din România, condiționat tot de reforme care nu s-au realizat. Cereți mai mult decât poate duce un guvern de la Chișinău aflat sub asediu necontenit;
                     










—



                        și nu în ultimul rând, dacă vreți să rezolvați problema energetică a Republicii Moldova, trebuie revizuită situația pieței unice europene. România, care este autosuficientă pe gaze și electricitate, a ajuns să plătească cele mai mari facturi din Uniunea Europeană. Acest lucru este relevant pentru că Republica Moldova a scăpat de dependența de Rusia, importând toate gazele și tot curentul din România. Noi producem și importăm în acest moment pentru două state.
                     





Dan Barna,
în numele grupului Renew. – Doamnă președintă, salut elaborarea planului de creștere pentru Republica Moldova și felicit Comisia și pe doamna comisar Kos pentru atitudinea foarte constructivă arătată în negociere.
               

                  La referendumul privind aderarea Republicii Moldova la Uniunea Europeană, Rusia a risipit peste 100 de milioane de euro în bani murdari, încercând să influențeze rezultatul. Însă Chișinăul a rezistat într-un mod absolut exemplar, iar Moldova este astăzi un adevărat model pentru statele deja membre ale Uniunii în ceea ce privește combaterea amenințărilor hibride. Un stat care din 1992 rezistă cu Armata a 14-a a Rusiei pe teritoriul său, care a sărit în ajutorul Ucrainei odată cu invazia rusă și care nu se abate nicio secundă de la viitorul european, merită tot sprijinul nostru.
               

                  Iar pentru Vladimir Putin mesajul este unul foarte clar: Europa știe să se mobilizeze și să sprijine concret un stat prieten și candidat la aderare. Putin a încercat să păcălească o țară cu 100 de milioane pentru propagandă. Noi răspundem cu 2 miliarde, cu aproape 2 miliarde pentru dezvoltare. Da, domnule Putin, Uniunea există și nu pleacă nicăieri.
               

                  Oricât s-ar schimba direcția din care bate vântul geopolitic, un lucru este confirmat astăzi din nou: Europa nu-și va abandona aliații și prietenii. Avem capacitatea și avem determinarea de a păstra Europa un continent al păcii și bunăstării pentru oameni. Mâine, la votul pentru facilitatea de creștere, vom face un pas ferm în această direcție. În cazul Moldovei vom mai face pași la negocierea viitorului buget multianual, în care ea și celelalte state candidate trebuie să primească fonduri de preaderare.
               

                  Nimic nu ne va abate de la acest drum, la fel cum Moldova nu a ezitat niciodată să probeze cu fapte aspirația europeană.
               

Kai Tegethoff,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, the Moldovan people decided to turn to the EU to amend their own constitution and to ask for our support on their way to EU accession.
Now we have to deliver. And we do. With this EUR 1.9 billion Reform and Growth Facility for Moldova, we support Moldova's path to EU accession. We help to mitigate the challenges that arise from the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine. We help to strengthen Moldova's administration, civil society and judicial system. And we help Moldova to gain independency in their energy supply. And on this, the Moldovan Government was quite clear: Moldova wants to build up renewables; Moldova wants to increase energy efficiency; Moldova wants to work on building renovation.
In this way, we support the Moldovan Government and we are proud to help prepare Moldova to become a member of the European Union.

Jussi Saramo,
on behalf of The Left Group. – Madam President, the most important thing is to stand with the Moldovan people consistently. Moldovans have been trying to balance and survive between the EU and Russia, to sell their products wherever they can. But the truth is that Russia wants to preserve the frozen conflicts it has created.
Putin is not afraid that NATO would want to attack by coming close to Russia's borders. He has moved his troops from the NATO borders into Ukraine. And Putin is not concerned about the safety of the Russian-speaking minority in Moldova. He's bombing Russian speakers in Ukraine.
But Putin is afraid of democracy and successful states near the Russian borders. He wants their neighbours to be poor and miserable. Now, when the US is leaving Moldova, Russia still wants to suppress Moldova. Moldova needs us now more than ever. We must stand up and take responsibility for this facility and more broadly.

PRZEWODNICTWO: EWA KOPACZ


Wiceprzewodnicząca


Alexander Sell,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Deutschland ist ein armes Land – laut Europäischer Zentralbank. Bei Medianvermögen liegen deutsche Haushalte auf Platz 15, weit hinter Franzosen, Italienern oder Spaniern. Trotzdem zahlen wir Deutschen den höchsten Beitrag zur EU – knapp 30 Milliarden Euro jährlich. Das entspricht der Einkommenssteuer von über 3 Millionen Deutschen; über 3 Millionen Deutsche gehen arbeiten, um den Laden hier zu finanzieren. Diese Menschen erwarten zu Recht, dass wir sparsam mit ihren Steuern umgehen, weil das Geld nicht vom Himmel fällt, sondern mit harter Arbeit verdient werden muss.
                  

                     2 Milliarden Euro wollen Sie jetzt nach Moldawien schicken, als Vorschuss für die EU-Mitgliedschaft. Wir lehnen diese Verschwendung ab, weil der größte Teil dieses Geldes in den Taschen von korrupten Politikern und Oligarchen verschwinden wird. Im Korruptionsindex von Transparency International steht Moldau auf den hinteren Plätzen. Weil wir die Interessen der Steuerzahler in Deutschland und Frankreich und anderen Mitgliedstaaten verteidigen müssen, lehnen wir die 2 Milliarden Euro für Moldawien ab, denn für die Spendierfreudigkeit in diesem Haus müssen wir Deutschen horrende Steuern zahlen.
                  

                     Selbst die Rente wird in Deutschland versteuert. Über 7 Millionen Rentner in Deutschland haben weniger als 1 000 Euro im Monat nach vielen Jahrzehnten harter Arbeit. Insgesamt zahlen die Deutschen fast 1 000 Milliarden Euro Steuern im Jahr, und trotzdem fehlt es an allen Ecken und Enden. Brücken und Straßen verfallen, Schulen und Universitäten sind marode, Krankenhäuser müssen schließen. Der desolate Zustand Deutschlands lässt sich nur noch mit gigantischen Schulden verschleiern. Deshalb müssen wir die Verschwendung beenden, und wir werden dieser EU den Geldhahn abdrehen.
                  

                     Margaret Thatcher hat mal gesagt: Das Problem der Sozialisten ist, dass ihnen irgendwann das Geld fremder Leute ausgeht. So ist es auch hier. Wenn Deutschland nicht mehr zahlt, dann ist die Party vorbei. Europa kann nur eine Zukunft haben, wenn europäische Politiker die Interessen ihrer Wähler an erste Stelle setzen, und genau das werden wir tun. Spätestens nach der nächsten Bundestagswahl gilt: Schluss mit der Großzügigkeit auf Deutschlands Nacken, Schluss mit den unsinnigen Geldgeschenken an alle Welt.
                  

Karlo Ressler (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, povjerenice Kos, kolegice i kolege, ovaj tjedan imamo priliku odobriti uspostavu Instrumenta za reforme i rast za Moldovu, važnog koraka u europeizaciji i modernizaciji zemlje.
                  

                     Ovaj fond, vrijedan gotovo 1,9 milijardi eura, potaknut će Moldovu na provedbu nužnih reformi, jačanje institucija i ubrzanje integracije u europske, gospodarske i političke tokove kroz usko povezivanje investicija s reformama, slično kao i za plan rasta za takozvani zapadni Balkan.
                  

                     Povećano pretfinanciranje i dodatna bespovratna sredstva osigurat će ne samo da država izdrži trenutne izazove, već i ostvari konkretne pomake na svom europskom putu. Ulaganje u sigurnost, ulaganje u demokraciju i stabilnost našeg susjedstva ulaganje je u sigurniju i prosperitetniju Europu za sve nas.
                  

                     Čestitam izvjestiteljima Siegfriedu Mureșanu i Svenu Mikseru na njihovom trudu i na uspješnom završetku pregovora.
                  

Carla Tavares (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, a aprovação deste instrumento de reforma e crescimento demonstra o forte apoio da União Europeia à Moldávia no desafiante contexto geopolítico em que nos encontramos. É inquestionável o empenho dos correlatores e deste Parlamento na construção deste mecanismo.
                  

                     Neste processo, ficou patente que, quando chamado com urgência a pronunciar-se, o Parlamento Europeu está apto a responder, fazendo da solidariedade europeia a sua prioridade. E, enquanto codecisor, autoridade orçamental, está à altura daquelas que são as suas atribuições pelo Tratado — e continuará a estar, sem dúvida, em todos os processos.
                  

                     O Parlamento fez ainda ajustes importantes neste mecanismo, nomeadamente no aumento da taxa de pré-financiamento de 7 % para 18 % e na alteração da componente ‘subsídio’ de 16 % para 20,5 %. Defendemos também uma maior capacidade administrativa da Moldávia e, por isso, temos mais financiamento dedicado ao fortalecimento das suas instituições.
                  

                     Por fim, o Parlamento tem ainda uma supervisão reforçada, num diálogo entre o Parlamento e a Comissão, para rever o progresso na implementação deste mecanismo.
                  

                     Fica claro o nosso compromisso com o povo moldavo e o nosso empenho no percurso da Moldávia rumo à adesão à União Europeia.
                  

Julien Sanchez (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, alors que la situation financière de l'Union européenne est préoccupante et que les groupes de droite et de gauche nous préparent déjà à la création de nouvelles ressources propres, qui vont encore racketter un peu plus les citoyens pour pouvoir rembourser les emprunts fous de NextGenerationEU, soit 800 milliards souscrits par la Commission, on aurait pu imaginer que vous feriez désormais attention à la pertinence des dépenses votées ici. Hélas, il n'en est rien. Énième preuve: aujourd'hui, nous débattons d'un soutien financier colossal en faveur de la Moldavie, réévalué à 1,88 milliard d'euros pour la période 2025-2027, dont 520 millions d'euros non remboursables.
                  

                     Si ces choix se faisaient par référendum, les contribuables d'Europe diraient non à vos délires. Pourquoi spolier les citoyens européens à travers des subventions non remboursables et des prêts à un pays dont le PIB par habitant reste à 29 % de la moyenne des pays de l'Union? Croyez-vous réellement que la Moldavie pourra rembourser le volet composé de prêts? C'est un véritable gaspillage des ressources européennes.
                  

                     Nous nous y opposerons et nous nous opposerons aussi à la candidature de la Moldavie à l'Union européenne, tout comme à l'élargissement aux Balkans et à l'Ukraine, qui ne seraient en plus pas contributeurs nets au budget de l'Union. À la catastrophe financière s'ajouterait aussi une catastrophe agricole.
                  

Mariusz Kamiński (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Szanowni Państwo! Mołdawia potrzebuje naszej pomocy w budowie niepodległego i demokratycznego państwa. Nie wystarczą tylko słowa solidarności. Jeśli chcemy wyrwać Mołdawię z rosyjskiej strefy wpływów, musimy działać szybko i konkretnie. Cieszę się, że debatujemy dziś nad ustanowieniem instrumentu wsparcia, reform i wzrostu gospodarczego w Mołdawii. Realne wsparcie finansowe to konkret, na który czekają władze i mieszkańcy tego państwa.
                  

                     Polska wspiera Mołdawię od momentu uzyskania przez nią niepodległości. Mam osobistą satysfakcję, że jako minister spraw wewnętrznych mogłem uczestniczyć w tej pomocy. W 2023 r. w obliczu prorosyjskich prób destabilizacji, prorosyjskich bojówek na ulicach Kiszyniowa przekazaliśmy mołdawskiemu MSW bardzo dużą ilość sprzętu policyjnego, w tym broń i amunicję, aby Mołdawia była samowystarczalna w zakresie zapewnienia porządku publicznego. Dajmy szansę Mołdawii uciec przed dyktaturą Putina. Jestem przekonany, że wsparcie finansowe, nad którym jutro będziemy głosować, dobrze się do tego przyczyni.
                  

Eugen Tomac (Renew). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisară, stimați colegi, vreau să felicit raportorii pentru această realizare. Republica Moldova aștepta acest mesaj de susținere și cred că este un angajament extrem de puternic pentru relația Uniunii Europene cu un viitor stat al Europei, așa cum este Republica Moldova.
                  

                     Însă, doamnă comisară, vreau să știți, Republica Moldova este singurul stat aflat în imediata vecinătate a Uniunii Europene, unde peste jumătate din cetățenii săi sunt deja cetățeni ai Uniunii Europene. Deci avem toată legitimitatea pentru a ne preocupa în mod constant de viitorul Republicii Moldova, s-o sprijinim în fața provocărilor care vin dinspre Kremlin în mod constant.
                  

                     De asemenea, este foarte bine că acordați o atenție sporită regiunii ocupate în mod ilegal de către armata Federației Ruse de mai bine de 30 de ani. Este important ca Republica Moldova să trăiască în pace și să beneficieze de suportul Uniunii Europene.
                  

Reinier Van Lanschot (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, Moldova chose Europe. Recently, Moldova was at a crossroads and in its history, and despite all the Russian interference, they chose to walk the path that leads to Europe.
In the quickly changing world order, we need to start backing words with deeds. And this growth plan shows that we will invest to lift people out of poverty, build solar panels, schools and hospitals. This growth plan shows strong reforms will make Moldova ready to join the EU. And this growth plan shows Europe chose Moldova.
And it tells it tells those that want to join our Union, if you walk the path to Europe, Europe will walk with you. We did this in four months, which for the EU is as fast as travelling at the speed of light. And the Moldovans are not wasting time either. Last week they joined the Single Euro Payments Area.
So let's vote in favour of this growth plan and show the people in Moldova, you'll never walk alone.

Thomas Geisel (NI). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die EU möchte der Republik Moldau Mittel in Höhe von 2 Milliarden Euro zur Verfügung stellen; damit soll das Land fit für einen bevorstehenden EU-Beitritt gemacht werden. Aber wer will diesen Beitritt eigentlich? Die Bevölkerung Moldaus ist in dieser Frage tief gespalten. Beim Referendum im November letzten Jahres konnten sich die Befürworter eines EU-Beitritts nur äußerst knapp durchsetzen, nämlich aufgrund der Stimmen der gar nicht in Moldau lebenden Auslandsmoldauer. Die Bevölkerung in Europa wird zu dieser Sache gar nicht befragt.
                  

                     Immerhin wurde uns im Haushaltsausschuss des Parlaments eine Studie präsentiert, der zufolge die Aufnahme der drei ehemaligen Sowjetrepubliken Moldau, Georgien und Ukraine die Union an die Grenzen ihrer Belastbarkeit führen würde. Ohne einen dramatischen Anstieg der Zahlungsverpflichtungen der Mitgliedstaaten oder drastische Kürzungen bei der Gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik oder den Kohäsionsfonds wird sich das nicht machen lassen.
                  

                     Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, angesichts ohnehin schon wachsender Spaltungstendenzen innerhalb der Union gefährden wir mit diesen Erweiterungsplänen die Zukunft unserer Union. Das sollten wir nicht tun.
                  

Reinhold Lopatka (PPE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, dear Commissioner, like many speakers before, I want to underline that Moldova has made significant progress, particularly in areas of governance, the rule of law and anti-corruption. Under the leadership of President Sandu, the country has demonstrated strong political will and commitment to reforms.
However, Moldova still faces substantial external challenges. The ongoing threats from Russia, including the instability in the region of Transnistria, continue to jeopardise Moldova's sovereignty and European aspirations.
Despite these pressures, Moldova has remained determined, pushing forward with its reforms and advancing EU standards with unwavering resolve. And the growth facility is not just a financial tool, it is a clear message of our united support for Moldova.

Vasile Dîncu (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, stimați colegi, Republica Moldova se află într-un proces de transformare rapidă. Este uimitor ce se întâmplă. Se apropie pas cu pas de Uniunea Europeană. Aceste schimbări, pentru a fi sustenabile, este nevoie de a crește capacitatea de a rezista în fața șocurilor, de a crește reziliența societală.
                  

                     Moldova se află într-un context geopolitic fragil, marcat de multe riscuri și amenințări. De aceea, trei elemente sunt foarte importante aici: reziliența democratică și instituțională. Aici vedem foarte multe progrese în combaterea corupției și transparența instituțională.
                  

                     De asemenea, reziliența economică – Moldova trebuie să-și diversifice economia, să stimuleze investițiile și să-și reducă dependența de surse externe. Strategia de independență și de eficiență energetică făcută cu ajutorul Uniunii Europene este foarte importantă.
                  

                     Și, de asemenea, reziliența societală și coeziunea comunitară – aici, trebuie să sprijinim protecția socială, accesul la educație și sănătate și grupurile vulnerabile. De aceea, reziliența societală este importantă și este o investiție.
                  

                     Felicitări raportorilor! Felicitări, doamnă comisară, pentru muncă!
                  

Virginie Joron (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, pendant que vous célébrez votre retour sur investissement en Moldavie, le peuple roumain est dans la rue, car vous êtes complices d'un énorme scandale antidémocratique. Un candidat ne vous plaît pas? Vous l'éliminez. Ceux qui vous suivent, vous les gavez à coups de prêts et de subventions, comme cela se fait dans les pays mafieux. Pour vous, tout s'achète – avec l'argent des contribuables européens – dès lors qu'il est question de sauver le discours de Bruxelles.
                  

                     La Moldavie s'en est tirée de peu, après les élections gagnées de justesse par la candidate de Bruxelles. Pour les remercier, des milliards d'euros ou de dollars sont envoyés du monde entier. Par exemple, Arte affirme que des ONG en Moldavie ont touché 2,5 milliards de dollars des États-Unis – les fameuses aides d'USAID. Aujourd'hui, Bruxelles veut encore envoyer 1,9 milliard d'euros en Moldavie pour deux ans. Pour faire quoi? Pour remercier qui? Pour éliminer encore des candidats locaux? Pour acheter les voix de qui? Pour payer des pseudo-journalistes ou de faux experts, qui chassent la désinformation tout en produisant de fausses informations? N'est-ce pas là la définition de l'ingérence? De qui vous moquez-vous?
                  

                     Moldavie, Slovaquie, Géorgie, Roumanie: vous ne pourrez pas acheter toutes les voix. Le peuple, lui, n'est pas corruptible.
                  

Claudiu-Richard Târziu (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisară, stimați colegi, Republica Moldova are două șanse istorice în parcursul său spre Uniunea Europeană:
                  






—



                           în primul rând, o bibliografie legislativă și administrativă completă pentru reformele pe care trebuie să le implementeze, tradusă în limba română și testată în practică de autoritățile de la București;
                        










—



                           în al doilea rând, un parteneriat solid cu România, care a rezolvat operativ cam toate crizele și incidentele de natură economică prin care au trecut frații noștri de dincolo de Prut.
                        





                     România a străbătut un drum complicat și plin de provocări în procesul de aderare la UE, iar unele dintre greșelile și cedările făcute atunci își produc efectele devastatoare pentru economia națională și astăzi, la aproape 20 de ani distanță. Ar fi cu atât mai dureros să vedem asemenea erori repetându-se în anii care vin.
                  

                     Mecanismul de reformă și creștere este în mod evident o oportunitate majoră pentru Republica Moldova, mai ales în aceste vremuri tulburi.
                  

                     Deși credem în continuare că parcursul natural către Uniunea Europeană pentru Republica Moldova ar fi fost reunificarea cu România, vom continua să fim primii care să sprijine în mod necondiționat procesele de modernizare și democratizare asumate cu sinceritate de administrația de la Chișinău.
                  

Vlad Vasile-Voiculescu (Renew). – Doamnă președintă, felicitări raportorilor, felicitări Comisiei pentru realizarea de astăzi, prezentată astăzi.
                  

                     Astăzi, Uniunea Europeană face mai mult decât să-și reafirme sprijinul pentru Republica Moldova. Astăzi, Uniunea Europeană face un pas decisiv pentru viitorul pe care cetățenii Republicii Moldova îl merită. Un viitor al prosperității, al reformelor reale, al unei economii care creează oportunități pentru toți. Acolo unde Rusia încearcă să păcălească cu propagandă mincinoasă, Moldova alege Europa, iar Europa își respectă cuvântul dat.
                  

                     Prin acest program de 2 miliarde de euro investim nu doar în infrastructură, energie, ci și în viitorul fiecărui copil, în siguranța fiecărei familii, în puterea fiecărui antreprenor care crede într-o Moldovă europeană.
                  

                     Știm că provocările sunt mari, dar știm și că cetățenii Republicii Moldova au demonstrat iarăși și iarăși că au curajul și hotărârea de a merge înainte.
                  

                     Astăzi, Uniunea Europeană nu doar sprijină, ci crede în Moldova. Faptele probează asta. Viitorul este în mâinile voastre, dragi cetățeni ai Republicii Moldova, noi suntem aproape.
                  

Krzysztof Brejza (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowni Państwo! Prawda jest taka, że w Mołdawii wygrały siły demokratyczne. Prawda jest taka, że należy im się największy podziw i szacunek. I prawda jest taka, że mieszkańcy Mołdawii oparli się rosyjskim atakom hybrydowym. Ale prawda jest większa. Prawda, drodzy patrioci Putina, jest taka, że trwa wojna cywilizacyjna. Trwa wojna z rusopopulistami, rusokonserwatystami, patriotami Putina, którzy chcą zniszczyć cywilizację europejską. To nie jest tylko problem Mołdawii. To problem wojny wartości pomiędzy ludźmi, którzy chcą zniszczyć Unię Europejską, a tymi, którzy chcą chronić wartości Unii, stawiające na pierwszym miejscu człowieka, jednostkę, godność i szacunek wobec człowieka. I tak jak pod koniec lat 40. imperium wschodu, które chciało eurazjanizm narzucić Europie Zachodu, stawiało na partie komunistyczne, francuską partię komunistyczną, włoską partię komunistyczną, tak dzisiaj stawiają na takich jak wy. Wstyd, że stoicie po stronie Moskwy.
                  

Andi Cristea (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, noi în Uniunea Europeană facem ce am făcut dintotdeauna pentru Republica Moldova: sprijinim reformele, oferim bani, 2 miliarde de euro, susținem programe de finanțare și în trecut am oferit statutul de candidat, am liberalizat regimul de vize pentru Republica Moldova și am fost alături de Republica Moldova și de cetățenii săi de câte ori a fost nevoie.
                  

                     În același timp, Federația Rusă și-a închis piața pentru produsele din Republica Moldova, Federația Rusă a întrerupt gazele în plină iarnă, și a exportat război hibrid.
                  

                     Este interesată Moscova de Republica Moldova? Da, cu siguranță, pentru că pentru Moscova, Republica Moldova are o valoare de întrebuințare, ca zonă tampon pe care și-o doresc.
                  

                     Pentru noi, oamenii sunt importanți și ăsta e motivul pentru care vom fi alături de cetățenii din Republica Moldova, indiferent de etnie, de limba pe care o vorbesc și de origini. Puteți să contați pe noi în continuare.
                  

Rihards Kols (ECR). – Madam President, dear colleagues, it is clear that the Reform and Growth Facility for Moldova is essential, especially now: with USAID withdrawing, a major gap has opened in strengthening Moldova's institutions, leaving it vulnerable to external threats. Russia will exploit this. As Moldova nears its parliamentary elections, the risk of foreign interference is high. Russian meddling is well-documented.
We must bolster Moldova's resilience now. This is about more than financial aid. It is about resilience, reforms and Moldova's EU path. Strengthening institutions, independent media and electoral integrity must be immediate, not gradual.
The first payout is set at 20 %, but in this critical moment, that's not enough. We should amend the plan and increase it by an additional 5 %. Moving faster and further sends a clear message: Moldova belongs in Europe, free from malign influence.

Șerban Dimitrie Sturdza (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisară, stimați colegi, Republica Moldova aparține familiei europene nu doar geografic și istoric, ci și prin valorile și aspirațiile cetățenilor săi. Jumătate dintre aceștia sunt deja cetățeni ai Uniunii Europene prin cetățenia română pe care o dețin. Este, așadar, responsabilitatea noastră să sprijinim fără echivoc parcursul de integrare europeană al Chișinăului.
                  

                     Planul de creștere al Uniunii Europene este un semnal clar. Republica Moldova trebuie sprijinită să se decupleze definitiv de influențele răsăritene. Reforma, modernizarea, distanțarea față de moștenirea sovietică, toate acestea trebuie încurajate cu fermitate.
                  

                     Am votat pentru un sprijin de 1,9 miliarde de euro pentru Republica Moldova. Nu este doar un ajutor financiar, este o declarație politică că suntem alături de frații noștri de peste Prut.
                  

                     Uniunea face puterea și poate într-o zi această reunire politică, economică și sufletească va fi desăvârșită sub același tricolor în Uniunea Europeană.
                  

                     Până atunci, Republica Moldova are nevoie de sprijinul nostru. Acum, aici, concret.
                  

Zgłoszenia z sali


Liudas Mažylis (PPE). – Gerbiama pirmininke, Moldovoje vyks egzistenciniai rinkimai – ‘DO OR DIE’, anot Mahatmos Gandhi. Jie turi vykti skaidriai, eliminuojant rusų įtaką. Juk Rusija vėl veiks pagal jiems sėkmingą Rumunijos prezidento rinkimų šabloną. Gal per ‘TikTok’, ar kitose Moldovai pritaikytose platformose. Būtina užkardyti ir kitomis formomis vykdomą manipuliaciją informacija. Antra, regiu išskirtinę būtinybę mobilizuoti provakarietišką Moldovos diasporą. Trečia, ypatingą dėmesį būtina skirti į ekonomikos ir energetikos duobę patekusiam Padnestrės regionui. Visa tai būtų patikima investicija į šalies klestėjimą. Privalome ne tik laikytis įsipareigojimo priimti Moldovą į Europos Sąjungą, o ir suteikti ekonominės konvergencijos perspektyvą jau dabar – per eksporto palengvinimą ir kitomis reikiamomis priemonėmis.
                  

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Madam President, this proposed investment package is a crucial step for Moldova's EU integration. However, Moldova still faces major challenges like poverty and inequality, requiring real development beyond financial figures. These are challenges we must not forget.
Yet their greatest threat is Russia. The terrorist state does not only focus on Ukraine. No. They are trying their best to destabilise Moldova, an EU candidate country. This is why our job is to ensure that not a single cent of this facility benefits those who seek to undermine Moldova's sovereignty.
While the facility is a positive step, the ultimate goal is to ensure long-term stability and prosperity in the region. Moldova's future lies in Europe, where democracy and security prevail.

Helmut Brandstätter (Renew). – Madam President, first of all, I want to say Austria has a good tradition, more than 20 years of development cooperation with Moldova, so we know very good development. And so thank you, Commissioner, that you talked about the enlargement of the EU also with Moldova within the next years.
Of course, we see the geopolitical situation. We see what Russia is doing. Russia is destroying; Europe helps – Europe helps with development solidarity. Russia uses energy to blackmail you; the EU installs solar panels and connects the energy centres. Russia divides; the EU unites.
And – that I saw as an election observer – the Moldovans are strong. They defend their democracy, and we have to help them there as well.
One more thing: there is beautiful soil there, they are great agriculture, wine we know, and also wonderful culture. It's always great to listen to Moldovan singers, like Valentina Nafornița. If she is in Vienna State Opera, in any other opera, please go listen to her, she's wonderful, like many others as well.

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Madam President, to the people of Moldova.
In Moldova's steadfast home tonight, a family gathers, brave in fight; outside lurks shadow, dark and cold, yet freedom's fire burns so bold.
From Europe's hearts comes aid anew, financial locks to see them through; this firewood feeds hopeful flames, that warms their dreams and breaks their chains.
With every lock their courage grows, as Europe's strength through aid bestows; defying shadows, fierce and grim, Russian threats shall not break in.
And so Moldova, proud and free, takes up the chance for all to see; Europe's support a beacon bright, turns darkness into hopeful light.

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)


Marta Kos,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, dear Mr Mikser, dear Mr Mureșan, we did it. We achieved a lot, and I hope that we will get all the necessary support tomorrow. Thank you, all the honourable Members of the European Parliament, for this debate and for your support for Moldova's European path. Your commitment demonstrates that the European Parliament stands firmly behind those who choose democracy, reform and a future within our Union.
Today's discussion reinforced the crucial message: in times of crisis, reliable friends matter. Moldova faced an unprecedented attempt at destabilisation through energy blackmail, disinformation and economic pressure. The EU responded with action. With the Reform and Growth Facility, we are accelerating this path. And to be on the side of facts, meaning to be on the side of the truth, we agreed to allocate EUR 520 million in grants, alongside with EUR 1.5 billion in low-interest loans.
Hearing about lack of transparency, my message: we haven't started yet. And I will make sure with my services that every euro will be spent as it should be spent.
So Moldova's future is in Europe, and we are helping the country advance on its reforms and strengthen its institutions. As Moldova advances, it will not walk alone. The EU will remain a reliable partner, helping the Moldovan people move closer to their home in Europe, which is a free, secure and prosperous society.

Siegfried Mureșan,
rapporteur. – Madam President, dear colleagues, thank you for this debate in which we showed clearly all here in the House almost, that we understand the importance that the Republic of Moldova has for the European Union, for our safety, for our stability, for our prosperity.
We have worked together. I would like to first and foremost thank my co-rapporteur Sven Mikser on behalf of the AFET Committee, but also the shadow rapporteurs that have worked closely with us. We have managed to reach a common agreement with the Council, which includes the top priorities of the European Parliament. As a result of our work, the support for Moldova will come fast and will come in a more comprehensive form.
I would like to thank Commissioner Kos and all colleagues from the Commission for acting really and truly as an honest broker. And I would also like to thank the Polish Presidency of the Council of the European Union, who understood the strategic importance of this file.
In these difficult times, when we are seeing that our common European values, that human rights, the democracy, that the rule of law are challenged by autocrats all around the world, we are giving a strong signal of unity. 27 Member States of the European Union stand by the side of a candidate country, understanding that supporting a candidate country, making it stronger, makes us stronger as well.
Thank you everyone following this positive debate, we are encouraged that tomorrow the planning of the European Parliament will give its final and positive vote by a large majority to this Reform and Growth Facility for the Republic of Moldova.

Sven Mikser,
rapporteur. – Madam President, I would like to add my words of gratitude to, first of all, my co-rapporteur, Siegfried Mureșan, but also to all the shadow rapporteurs from the two committees. We had some very substantive discussions and debates, but I think there was very much a shared sense of urgency and also a shared sense of purpose.
And the same can be said about the trilogues, so I would like to also thank the Commission, particularly Commissioner Marta Kos, as well as the Polish Presidency and Ambassador Agnieszka Bartol, for those very, very constructive negotiations that helped us to come to a swift and very good outcome.
I'm also reassured by the debate here in this plenary hall today. I think that there is a very strong degree of unity and also a shared sense of purpose, with a very few exceptions. I do believe that Moldova, at this critical moment, needs our help, and I do believe that we also need Moldova. It's not perhaps the largest of the European countries, but it is far too important to be neglected. They deserve their place in our Union.

Przewodnicząca. – Zamykam debatę. Głosowanie nad tym punktem porządku obrad odbędzie się jutro, 11 marca 2025 r.
                  
18.   European Social Fund Plus post-2027 (short presentation)

Przewodnicząca. – Kolejnym punktem porządku obrad jest krótka prezentacja sprawozdania sporządzonego przez Marit Maij w imieniu Komisji Zatrudnienia i Spraw Socjalnych w sprawie Europejskiego Funduszu Społecznego Plus po roku 2027 (2024/2077(INI)) (A10-0014/2025).
               

Marit Maij,
rapporteur. – Voorzitter, elke nacht hebben meer dan 900 mensen in de Europese Unie geen dak boven het hoofd: zij slapen op straat of in opvangcentra. 15 % van de jongeren is werkloos. Te veel vrouwen komen in armoede terecht, vaak na een scheiding. Maar liefst één op de vier kinderen in de Europese Unie groeit op in armoede. Armoede bij kinderen neemt niet af, maar neemt toe. Te veel mensen komen niet mee en hebben geen perspectief. Sociale uitsluiting heeft verschrikkelijke gevolgen en kan leiden tot sociaal isolement of erger. Deze problematiek moeten we samen, op Europees niveau, aanpakken.
               

                  Morgen stemmen we over de toekomst van het Europees Sociaal Fonds, dat sinds het Verdrag van Rome bestaat. Het is een van de oudste programma's van de Europese Unie en een fonds waar we trots op mogen zijn, omdat het juist opkomt voor de mensen in kwetsbare omstandigheden. Het is bedoeld voor iedereen in Europa: voor mensen met een basisbaan in Groningen, voor gevluchte Oekraïners in Polen, voor vrouwen die slachtoffer zijn van geweld en voor arbeidsmigranten die soms moeilijk meekomen in onze samenleving. Laten we ook niet vergeten dat sociaal beleid bijdraagt aan sociale samenhang en daarmee aan veiligheid. Dit is het moment om als Parlement onze prioriteiten duidelijk te maken. In een tijd waarin vooral gesproken wordt over hoe bedrijven nog concurrerender kunnen worden, zeggen wij: vergeet mensen in kwetsbare situaties niet. Daarom stellen we voor dat minstens 25 % van het fonds naar sociale inclusie gaat, zodat iedereen kan meedoen in de samenleving.
               

                  Het fonds moet een rol gaan spelen in het tegengaan van dakloosheid en jeugdwerkloosheid en er moet speciale aandacht uitgaan naar vluchtelingen, ongeacht hun status. Het fonds moet zich richten op de bestrijding van armoede bij kinderen. Nu de Commissie onder het mom van vereenvoudiging het mes zet in veel sociale en progressieve wetten, is het ook ontzettend belangrijk dat het Europees Sociaal Fonds een zelfstandig fonds blijft, dat niet wordt samengevoegd met andere fondsen die andere doelen nastreven. Zo niet, zullen de focus en de prioriteiten vervagen indien er een groot paraplufonds komt voor het volgende financiële kader.
               

                  Onze boodschap is duidelijk: houd het Europees Sociaal Fonds buiten deze plannen en zorg ervoor dat het geld aan de juiste doelen wordt besteed. Dat is nu bij uitstek zorgen dat kinderen niet in armoede opgroeien. Daarom maken wij heel duidelijk dat er minstens 20 miljard euro moet worden vrijgemaakt voor het tegengaan van kinderarmoede via de kindgarantie. De EVP-Fractie probeert dit nu via amendementen uit het verslag te verwijderen. Dit is onbegrĳpelĳk, vooral omdat zoveel kinderen in armoede opgroeien en armoede en ongelijkheid alleen maar toenemen. Dit is bovendien gevaarlijk. Veiligheid in Europa kunnen we alleen bereiken als we sociale inclusie bewerkstelligen en kinderen perspectief bieden. We zijn het aan de huidige en toekomstige kinderen verplicht om een bedrag te koppelen aan deze ambities. Niet alleen woorden, maar ook daden. Boter bij de vis, zodat we kunnen garanderen dat het geld hiervoor ook beschikbaar komt en om duidelijk te maken dat we onze prioriteiten op dit vlak serieus nemen. Morgen moeten we dus stemmen voor het ESF, inclusief de kindgarantie en de benodigde financiële middelen. Ik reken op de steun van iedereen.
               

Zgłoszenia z sali


Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Arvoisa puhemies, ‘moni kakku päältä kaunis’, kuuluu suomalainen sananlasku. Euroopan sosiaalirahasto plus on juuri sellainen kakku.
               

                  Rahaston julkilausuttuna tavoitteena on muun muassa integroida ulkomaalaisia henkilöitä työmarkkinoillemme sekä edistää sukupuolten välistä tasa-arvoa. Mutta näistä osataan päättää paremmin kansallisesti, koska jokaisen yhteiskunnan tilanne on erilainen. EU:n kautta tämä touhu maksaa veronmaksajille vuosittain noin 20 miljardia euroa.
               

                  Mitä tällaisilla poskettomilla summilla sitten muka on saatu aikaan? Onko kukaan tämän rakennuksen ulkopuolella edes kuullut moisen rahaston olemassaolosta? Kun nykyinen monivuotinen rahoituskehys siis tulee päätökseensä ja minulta kysytään, mikä on mielestäni paras mahdollinen tulevaisuus tälle sosiaalirahastolle, vastaus on hyvin yksinkertainen: rahat puolustukseen.
               

Estrella Galán (The Left). – Señora presidenta, no sé si todo el mundo que está aquí sabe, por lo que estamos oyendo, que uno de cada cuatro niños en Europa crece en estos momentos en riesgo de pobreza. ¿Creen ustedes que podemos permitirnos seguir argumentando que necesitamos incrementar en armas cuando tenemos a los niños en esa situación? Es claramente vergonzoso.
               

                  Vivimos en una Unión Europea donde más de 92 millones de personas siguen en riesgo de exclusión o en riesgo de pobreza. No son simples cifras, son seres humanos y es una realidad que nos interpela y que tenemos que atender. Este Fondo Social Europeo Plus lo hace y ustedes están presentando enmiendas para restar las garantías de los más vulnerables, de los niños, de las niñas, de quienes nos necesitan. Nos están pidiendo que saquemos a esta infancia de la pobreza y ustedes quieren más armas. Desde luego, con esta actitud demuestran la Europa que quieren, y esta no es la que defendemos las personas progresistas que queremos una Europa igual para todas y todos.
               

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Menschen Europas! Wenn wir heute über die Zukunft des Europäischen Sozialfonds Plus nach 2027 sprechen, dann sprechen wir über die Zukunft Europas selbst. Diese Zukunft beginnt nicht erst morgen, sie beginnt heute – in unseren Klassenzimmern, in den Hörsälen und in den Ausbildungsstätten.
               

                  Bildung ist keine Nebensache. Bildung ist die absolute Grundlage für nachhaltige gesellschaftliche Entwicklung. Wer Bildung fördert, investiert in die demokratischen Werte, soziale Gerechtigkeit und wirtschaftliche Entwicklung. Deshalb muss der ESF+ nach 2027 vor allem eins sein – eine Bildungsoffensive für Europa. Setzen wir gemeinsam den Fokus dort, wo die Zukunft gemacht wird – in klugen Köpfen, neugierigen Herzen. Denn nur Bildung schafft Chancen, baut Brücken und gestaltet Gesellschaften – unsere europäische Gesellschaft – nachhaltig. Investieren wir in Bildung, investieren wir in Europas Zukunft!
               

Μαρία Ζαχαρία (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η έκθεση, για την οποία έκανε η Επιτροπή Απασχόλησης μια τεράστια προσπάθεια και μάλιστα αξιόλογη, δίνει πραγματικά κάποιες νέες διαστάσεις, τις οποίες είμαι και στην ευχάριστη θέση να έχω καταθέσει και με τροπολογία στην Επιτροπή Απασχόλησης. Δίνει, λοιπόν, σε οικογένειες πολύτεκνες, οικογένειες μονογονεϊκές, άτομα με αναπηρία, σε ανέργους, τη δυνατότητα, μέσω του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινωνικού Ταμείου, να είναι πλέον δικαιούχοι και να μπορούν να βοηθηθούν αυτοί οι άνθρωποι μέσα σε έναν ορυμαγδό ακρίβειας και πολύ μεγάλου χτυπήματος από την αγορά. Επίσης, με τροπολογία υπογράμμισα και τη σημασία των εκπροσώπων των εργαζομένων στις συλλογικές διαπραγματεύσεις, πράγμα για το οποίο υπάρχει σήμερα πρόβλημα σε αρκετές χώρες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, όπως και την αναγκαιότητα για αξιοπρεπείς μισθούς. Εγώ θέλω να καλέσω όλους τους συναδέλφους μου να υπερψηφίσουν αυτή την έκθεση. Είναι πάρα πολύ σημαντική για τους Ευρωπαίους πολίτες και για τους λαούς μας.
               

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)


Marta Kos,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, madam Rapporteur Marit Maij, honourable Members, thank you for delivering this timely report on the European Social Fund Plus post-2027. The European social model is an intrinsic feature of Europe's growth model now and also in the future.
As you just rightly recalled it, Madam Rapporteur, economic, social and environmental dimensions are interlinked for an EU growth strategy in a context of shifting geopolitical dynamics. Let me say from the outset that ensuring no one is left behind must be a key aspect of our economic policy, because we should not only look at the short term, but we want to leave a world behind in which our children and grandchildren can prosper and be educated. It must be a key dimension of the future, and it must be core to our social policies.
It is not just about the fairness, it is a precondition for transformative policies. It is a precondition for growth and de-risking.
First and foremost, it is a precondition for addressing emerging challenges, amongst others, demographic change is putting the sustainability and adequacy of the European welfare system under pressure. At the same time, increasing labour and skills shortages in the labour market are putting substantial pressure on economic growth and competitiveness. Between now and 2040, the European working age population will decline by 1 million persons each year.
Disparities and social difficulties persist today. Still, some 95 million Europeans are at risk of poverty or social exclusion. This does not only imply social hardship, but especially also a lost potential for our economy. Social and affordable housing are increasingly important concerns for EU citizens, especially for the most vulnerable groups. This situation has important consequences for the EU's territorial, economic and social cohesion, including, I believe, a strong impact on the functioning of our democracies.
To effectively address the challenges that Europe faces, we need to continue to invest in Europe's most important resource, its human capital. We must be ambitious and find ways to be more efficient to deliver on our common goals, given the complicated budgetary context we are facing. This is but one of the reasons that this Commission has issued last week the Union of Skills, a collective effort including all stakeholders across government, education and businesses. There is an urgent need for a transformative shift in Europe's approach to skills. It is vital for our future growth.
But we need more. To ensure fair transition and strengthen resilience and preparedness to economic and social shifts, we must do more on providing equal opportunities and quality jobs. Cohesion policy and the ESF+ specifically have made important contributions to this.
It will be essential that our proposals for the future support the continued implementation of our European way of growth, the European Pillar of Social Rights. The Commission is now preparing the proposals for the next MFF and remains in listening mode. This is a complex process. Status quo is not an option anymore. In current conversations, there are some recurrent topics that come up which you recall: the unanimous call for simplification, but also the acknowledgement of the important budgetary pressures that need to be dealt with.
On 11 February, the Commission set out the road to the next Multiannual Financial Framework, a communication that builds on the political guidelines of President von der Leyen. This marks the beginning of a crucial debate on how we shape Europe's future budget, one that must reflect our shared priorities, address emerging challenges and, importantly, be designed with those who will implement it. Your contribution is crucial in shaping the future. The Commission stands ready to work, hand in hand with the European Parliament to build a strong and resilient MFF in the complex economic, social and geostrategic situation we are facing.
I look forward to a fruitful common work to come.

Przewodnicząca. – Zamykam debatę. Głosowanie odbędzie się jutro, we wtorek 11 marca 2025 r.
               
19.   One-minute speeches on matters of political importance

Przewodnicząca. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego są wystąpienia jednominutowe w ważnych kwestiach politycznych (art. 179 Regulaminu). Pragnę poinformować, że podczas wystąpień jednominutowych powinni Państwo zabierać głos z przydzielonych Państwu miejsc.
               

Eva Maydell (PPE). – Madam President, colleagues, Europeans, I've heard these days that Europe is in denial, that we are a political dwarf and that we are weak. So I very much wanted to take the floor today in order to disagree with this statement.
We have faced various crises – one after the other – and every time we have proven that we are stronger when tested. We have delivered vaccines to our citizens in record time; we secured gas supplies when Russia cut them off; we tackled economic turmoil. And every time there was talk about disunity, we proved we can succeed.
Today we face yet another situation, where our closest ally often sounds like an adversary, and that makes us feel threatened and uncertain. And at the beginning of this plenary, I want us to remember the words of Robert Schuman, who said: 'Europe will not be made at once […]. It will be built through concrete achievements which first create a de facto solidarity'. It is the moment of solidarity where words turn into actions, because words do not build Europe.

Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, dragi colegi, România a atins un prag istoric la 18 ani de la aderare: 100 de miliarde de euro primite ca fonduri europene nerambursabile. Suma reprezintă investiții concrete în spitale, școli, infrastructură și locuri de muncă mai bine plătite. Dar acest rezultat nu a fost garantat. A fost nevoie de muncă pentru a ne asigura că România primește și folosește aceste resurse financiare.
               

                  În ultimii ani, prin activitatea mea din Parlamentul European, am salvat miliarde de euro din fondurile neutilizate, modificând regulamentele europene pentru a faza proiectele europene. Am contribuit la simplificarea regulilor privind accesarea programelor europene și am amendat bugetul Uniunii Europene pentru ca aceste resurse să ajungă în regiunea noastră.
               

                  Dar aceste fonduri nu sunt doar cifre pe hârtie. Trebuie să privim înainte: avem nevoie de o absorbție mai bună, mai eficientă, mai multă flexibilitate și o strategie pentru viitor.
               

                  100 de miliarde de euro sunt un succes, dar și o responsabilitate. Extremismul caută să distrugă aceasta oportunitate pentru România.
               

                  Voi continua să lupt pentru ca fiecare euro să fie folosit acolo unde este cel mai necesar pentru români și europeni.
               

Tiago Moreira de Sá (PfE). – Senhora Presidente, recentemente, o Departamento de Eficiência Governamental, liderado por Elon Musk, revelou financiamentos ocultos da USAID a órgãos de comunicação como o Politico e a BBC, bem como a ONG associadas a ideologias específicas. Este escândalo expôs a falta de transparência no uso de fundos públicos nos Estados Unidos.
               

                  Na União Europeia, enfrentamos desafios semelhantes. Temos o direito de saber para onde vai o dinheiro dos nossos contribuintes, que projetos são financiados, quem beneficia dos fundos europeus destinados à Ajuda Pública ao Desenvolvimento.
               

                  Que think tanks, que órgãos de comunicação social foram financiados pela Comissão Europeia? Que política estamos, sem saber, a subsidiar? Sem respostas claras, a confiança nas instituições europeias é abalada e a democracia, enfraquecida.
               

                  É imperativo criar um Departamento Europeu para a Eficiência Governamental. Este organismo vai garantir que cada euro é gasto de forma transparente e responsável, assegurando que os financiamentos não servem interesses ocultos, mas, sim, o bem comum.
               

Șerban Dimitrie Sturdza (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, stimați colegi, democrația, statul de drept, pluralismul politic și votul liber au dispărut din România. Alegerile sunt deturnate de la scopul lor democratic și transformate într-un instrument de luptă politică. Dreptul de a candida este astăzi brutal încălcat, iar legea electorală este interpretată doar în avantajul clasei politice conducătoare. Jucăm după cum comandă Comisia Europeană, un fel de Înalt Comisariat pentru justa represiune din perioada sovietică.
               

                  Abuzul electoral, interzicerea unor cetățeni de a candida și împiedicarea unei pături importante a societății de a-și exercita dreptul legitim de vot, par să fi devenit noua regulă din România.
               

                  Prin cenzura electorală, autoritățile române au reușit performanța de a inflama populația, creând tensiune maximă într-o societate în care milioane de oameni se simt astăzi neîndreptățiți și neascultați. Cum pot să mai aibă românii încredere în democrație sau în justiție? Acest coșmar trebuie să înceteze. Trebuie să revenim imediat la valorile democratice și la libertate.
               

Jana Toom (Renew). – Madam President, colleagues, the Treaty on European Union starts with the objective of creating an ever closer union, and continues in Article 2 with the shared values that this Union shall be based on, including freedom, equality, and respect for the rights of minorities.
Many of the citizens that voted for their countries to enter the Union after the 1990s did so with the hope that their countries and societies will converge to these European values.
What we are seeing in the Commission work programme is that the anti-discrimination directive – and many other measures for which we did not reach an agreement in five years – gets withdrawn.
This means that the Council gets handed the perfect weapon: if they ever think that we're asking for too much in the Parliament or in the Commission, they just need to drag their feet for long enough and then make the problem disappear.
In the meantime, the message we are sending to Europeans is clear: these values you hoped for will remain unreachable.
It is unacceptable that we allow a couple of holdout countries to prevent the adoption of European rules that deal with values central to the European project. We need to be looking immediately at another proposal for horizontal rules to combat discrimination.

Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE). – Señora presidenta, el mundo está cambiando a un ritmo tan acelerado que tiembla el multilateralismo y la paz. El presidente de Estados Unidos, el señor Trump, amenaza a sectores industriales europeos, como el sector del metal en mi país, Galiza. Como eurodiputada galega, quiero transmitir la preocupación de miles de trabajadores del sector del metal y de las empresas de construcción naval por las recientes amenazas de aplicar el 25 % de aranceles a la industria metalúrgica.
               

                  Es una amenaza comercial muy grave, porque esta guerra arancelaria tampoco tiene en Europa quién la defienda, señora comisaria. ¿Qué está haciendo la Unión Europea para potenciar sus propios astilleros y la industria auxiliar local? Nada.
               

                  Desde el BNG hemos defendido durante muchos años que se potenciara y apoyara la industria europea con ayudas públicas. En el caso de la industria galega, hemos defendido que da trabajo a muchos miles de trabajadores y esta industria ha sufrido recortes, reconversiones, limitaciones de producción y competencia desleal. Y, el último clavo que faltaba, la imposición de aranceles a una industria que es exportadora. ¿Qué va a hacer la Unión Europea para defender al sector del metal?
               

Lynn Boylan (The Left). – Madam President, as the EU commits itself to a dangerous policy of rearmament, which is only going to make the world more dangerous, the Irish Government is also getting ready to jettison our triple lock on the deployment of Irish troops.
Let us be very clear: Ireland's neutrality and our long-standing commitment to UN peacekeeping missions has made the world safer. It is attacks on the UN and on neutrality that is making the world less safe.
From our role in leading negotiations on the Treaty of the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons to being the only country to have an unbroken record of UN peacekeeping service since 1958, Ireland's neutrality has been a beacon in this world.
The cynical moves to scrap the triple lock will move us away from the UN and threatens Ireland's neutrality. The most recent poll shows that 75 % of Irish people support our continued neutrality. Yet the Irish Government seems determined to throw its lot in with the EU, to undermine our neutrality at every turn, while the EU is engaging in an arms race. It's time to save the triple lock.

Marcin Sypniewski (ESN). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Rok 2024 na świecie był rokiem węgla, dlatego że globalne zużycie światowe węgla wyniosło blisko 9 mld ton i był to rekord w historii. Globalne zużycie nigdy nie było tak wielkie i za to odpowiadają głównie Chiny, Indie i Stany Zjednoczone, A może być w przyszłości jeszcze wyższy wynik, dlatego że Stany Zjednoczone zapowiadają zwiększenie wydobycia węgla.
               

                  Europa w ten sposób traci konkurencyjność i poza tym oddaje się polityce klimatycznej, która do niczego nie doprowadzi. Bo co z tego, że my ograniczamy co roku zużycie węgla, skoro cały świat jeszcze więcej go zużywa? Przecież nie jesteśmy otoczeni żadną szklaną kopułą. No i proszę spojrzeć też, jak to wygląda. Pani przewodnicząca von der Leyen była ostatnio w Indiach, zapowiadała współpracę handlową z Indiami, z Indiami, które stoją na węglu, czyli u nas zamykamy kopalnie po to, żeby importować rzeczy z krajów, które tego węgla jeszcze więcej zużywają niż wcześniej. To jest śmieszne. I ten cały Zielony Ład nadaje się tylko do kosza.
               

Thomas Geisel (NI). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Eines hat Präsident Trump geschafft: Europa redet nur noch von Verteidigung, Aufrüstung und Waffen. 800 Milliarden will die Kommissionspräsidentin von der Leyen ausgeben, to rearm Europe, um Europa wieder zu bewaffnen. Noch besorgniserregender als die schieren Summen scheint mir aber zu sein, wofür das Geld ausgegeben werden soll.
               

                  Eine Studie von Rüstungslobbyisten aus Deutschland mit dem bezeichnenden Namen Sparta gibt darüber nun Auskunft. Es geht um die Schaffung einer ‘asymmetrischen Überlegenheit’. Es geht um ‘digitale Führungsüberlegenheit, Aufklärungs- und Wirküberlegenheit, die sofort verfügbar und kurzfristig einsetzbar sein sollen’.
               

                  Mit Landesverteidigung hat dies ganz offensichtlich nichts mehr zu tun. Auch nicht mit einem Gleichgewicht der militärischen Kräfte und noch weniger mit der strukturellen Nichtangriffsfähigkeit, wie sie die NATO früher für sich postuliert hat. Hier soll der Krieg als Mittel der Politik wieder hoffähig gemacht werden. Dafür hat die Europäische Union sicherlich nicht den Friedensnobelpreis erhalten.
               

Branko Grims (PPE). – Gospa predsednica! Svoboda govora je danes najbolj ogrožena temeljna človekova pravica v Evropski uniji. Zato je nujno odpraviti vse oblike cenzure in akt o digitalnih storitvah, ki to cenzuro omogoča.
               

                  Pasti mora skrajno nedemokratični cordon sanitaire. In nedopustna je zloraba pravosodja, da se nekomu onemogoči kandidaturo na volitvah. Potrebujemo popolno svobodo govora in spoštovanje volilnih odločitev ljudstva.
               

                  Potrebujemo vrnitev k pravim vrednotam. To so krščanske vrednote. Bog vas živi, Bog živi Evropo. Bog živi mojo domovino, Slovenijo.
               

Andi Cristea (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, accesul egal la tratament și diagnostic precoce trebuie să includă și soluții practice pentru viața cotidiană a pacienților. Astăzi, pacienții tratați cu radioizotopi medicali se confruntă cu situații dificile în aeroporturi și puncte de control, deoarece urmele reziduale de radiații pot declanșa alarme de securitate. Astfel de incidente cauzează întârzieri, costuri suplimentare și mai ales un stres psihologic profund pentru pacienți.
               

                  Propun, în acest sens, introducerea unui pașaport european pentru radioizotopi medicali, integrat în dosarul digital european de sănătate. Acest instrument digital ar permite identificarea rapidă și discretă a pacienților tratați recent cu radioizotopi, simplificând controalele de securitate și protejând totodată confidențialitatea datelor personale.
               

Mélanie Disdier (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, je souhaite attirer votre attention sur les conséquences dramatiques liées au largage massif dans la Manche, la mer du Nord et la mer Baltique d'armes et de munitions chimiques lors des deux conflits mondiaux qu'a connus le XXe siècle. Ce sont des millions de tonnes de munitions en tout genre qui ont été déversées au large des côtes et qui représentent aujourd'hui un véritable danger. Les spécialistes indiquent qu'après plus d'un siècle d'immersion, l'étanchéité des enveloppes métalliques n'est plus assurée. Selon des experts et des scientifiques, une telle catastrophe environnementale et écologique pourrait aboutir à l'élimination de toute vie – faune et flore – pendant plusieurs décennies, voire plus d'un siècle.
               

                  Par ailleurs, un projet d'implantation de parc industriel éolien au large de Dunkerque est à l'étude. Cette implantation, prévue sur une surface de plus de 50 kilomètres carrés, ne peut que se heurter à cette question, qui devient dès lors très urgente et particulièrement délicate. Il faut également noter qu'une partie de la mer du Nord est classée en zone Natura 2000. Il est donc primordial que ce problème ne soit pas ignoré, ni par les États membres ni par notre institution. Il en va de la pérennité de notre écosystème et de la bonne santé économique de la moitié nord de l'Europe.
               

Fernand Kartheiser (ECR). – Madam President, we are all deeply concerned about Europe's competitiveness. Business aviation plays a key role in strengthening the attractiveness of our continent. It allows business leaders and decision-makers to save time and reach destinations not served by commercial airlines. Medical flights fall also under the sector, further highlighting its importance.
A well-functioning business aviation industry helps attract investment to Europe, yet it was excluded from the Taxonomy Regulation. This omission is baffling. I urge the Commission to address this in the upcoming Omnibus initiatives.
Regarding sustainable fuels – the so-called SAFs – we need a globally standardised definition. The Commission must push for this. SAFs should also be available in sufficient quantities at all European airports, big and small.
Finally, I call on the Commission to actively support the development of electric vertical take-off and landing technology in Europe.

Vicent Marzà Ibáñez (Verts/ALE). – Señora presidenta, millones de europeos viven con miedo a que puedan afectar a sus vidas las políticas de Trump. Viven con miedo a que puedan perder su trabajo: por ejemplo, en la industria cerámica (que, en mi país, en mi comarca, representa uno de cada tres trabajos), y también en la agricultura. Las familias también viven con miedo a cómo les puede afectar la subida de los precios con la subida de los aranceles.
               

                  Mientras tanto, en este Parlamento tenemos varios grupos parlamentarios que aplauden las medidas de Trump y algunos de ellos hasta se arrodillan ante sus intereses y luego se hacen llamar ‘Patriotas’. ¿Patriotas de qué? De la única patria que entienden: la del dinero y la del poder.
               

                  Por eso, yo animo al conjunto de los grupos parlamentarios democráticos a que protejamos Europa, a que protejamos a la mayoría trabajadora, a que protejamos nuestros puestos de trabajo; a que lo hagamos con más reindustrialización, con más políticas de cohesión, con más políticas de integración; y a que lo hagamos para protegernos de las políticas de Trump, pero también de las políticas de aquellos que desde aquí trabajan para los intereses de las grandes multinacionales.
               

Anthony Smith (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, je dispose d'une minute pour vous parler d'un homme, Georges Ibrahim Abdallah, dont je suis fier de prononcer le nom dans cet hémicycle. Georges Ibrahim Abdallah, militant communiste libanais, défenseur de toujours de la cause palestinienne, est emprisonné depuis 1984: quarante et un ans dans les geôles de l'État français.
               

                  Pourtant, ici, pas d'expression, pas de résolution pour exiger sa libération immédiate, celle du plus ancien prisonnier politique d'Europe. Pas un mot pour Georges Ibrahim Abdallah, pourtant libérable depuis vingt-cinq ans. Ici, c'est toujours cette même hypocrisie des bourgeois bien-pensants et de leur ‘deux poids, deux mesures’.
               

                  La cour d'appel de Paris, qui devait se prononcer le 20 février dernier sur sa libération, a ajourné sa décision au 19 juin prochain. Le maintien en détention de Georges Ibrahim Abdallah est un scandale d'État et une honte pour l'État français. Assez d'acharnement! Libérez Georges Ibrahim Abdallah! Libérez Georges Ibrahim Abdallah!
               

Рада Лайкова (ESN). – Г-жо Председател, В тази зала много често се говори за европейска демокрация и европейски ценности. Но нека ви разкажа какво представляват европейските ценности и европейската демокрация в моята страна България.
               

                  Вече 16 дни в България са държани политически затворници – млади хора, студенти без криминално минало, без досиета и без присъда. Защо? Защото са изразили своята гражданска позиция, най-демократичното си право на глас, правото да бъдат питани, правото за референдум за запазване на българския лев.
               

                  На 22 февруари моята партия ‘Възраждане’ организира мащабен протест в София заради незаконното погазване на гражданските права на българите и отказаното ни право на референдум. Как отговори държавата? Държавата отговори с арест на петима студенти. Европейската общественост и Европейският парламент трябва да са наясно с престъпния режим на управляващите в България.
               

Γεώργιος Αυτιάς (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, Κυρίες και κύριοι συνάδελφοι, η ανταγωνιστικότητα για μια οικονομία είναι η βάση ζωής για τους πολίτες. Γίνεται καλύτερη η ζωή τους, έχουμε καλύτερη ποιότητα ζωής, έχουμε καλύτερους μισθούς και έχουμε ισχυρότερο ασφαλιστικό. Αυτό είναι το τετράπτυχο πάνω στο οποίο θα πρέπει να οικοδομήσουμε πλέον την ευρωπαϊκή οικονομία, γιατί από τον Ατλαντικό κάποιος περιμένει έτοιμος να κατασπαράξει την Ευρώπη και την οικονομία της. Τριακόσια δισεκατομμύρια κάθε χρόνο φεύγουν και πηγαίνουν στις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες και χιλιάδες νέοι, κατά τον κύριο Ντράγκι, φεύγουν από την Ευρώπη. Πρέπει να τρέξουμε γρήγορα. Ακρογωνιαίος λίθος η ανταγωνιστικότητα, καλύτερη ζωή, καλύτεροι μισθοί, καλύτερο ασφαλιστικό και να βιαστούμε γρήγορα, γιατί ο χρόνος τελειώνει.
               

Ștefan Mușoiu (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, dragi colegi, mai avem puțin timp până în august 2026, când se vor încheia procedurile de punere în practică a programelor naționale de redresare și reziliență, dar majoritatea statelor întâmpină dificultăți în implementarea proiectelor finanțate prin acest mecanism și a reformelor programate, necesare realizării lui. Și asta pentru că războiul din Ucraina a generat o criză energetică, urmată de o criză economică și de prețuri foarte mari pentru materiile prime și pentru materialele de construcții. Explozia acestor costuri a provocat disfuncționalități în majoritatea economiilor și decalaje de implementare a multor proiecte aflate în curs.
               

                  La fel ca și alte state, nici România nu a reușit să atragă toți banii previzionați, deși au fost operate la nivel guvernamental o serie de eforturi de optimizare a procesului de implementare și suntem preocupați să folosim toți banii ca să asigurăm redresarea economică și coeziunea socială.
               

                  Așadar, resimțim nevoia unei abordări mai adaptabile pentru acest mecanism.
               

                  Concret, propun Comisiei prelungirea calendarului PNRR cu încă doi ani, ca să ne ducem la bun sfârșit toate angajamentele.
               

Annamária Vicsek (PfE). – Elnök Asszony! Szerbia ma politikai válságot él át. Egyre gyakrabban lehetünk szemtanúi utcai erőszaknak és polgári engedetlenségnek, sőt, március 4-én, a szerbiai parlament plenáris ülésén súlyos rendbontás történt, amikor ellenzéki képviselők füstbombákat és pirotechnikai eszközöket vetettek be az ülésteremben. Ezzel nemcsak az ülés lebonyolítását, hanem kollégáik és a személyzet biztonságát is súlyosan veszélyeztették. A zűrzavarban több képviselő megsérült, közöttük egy nyolc hónapos várandós képviselőnő is.
               

                  Néhány nappal később Nikola Selaković kultuszminisztert támadták meg és bántalmazták politikai alapon az utcán. Ezek az események mélységesen felháborítók, egy európai tagjelölt országban nincs helye az erőszaknak. Az agresszió nem a demokrácia eszköze, hanem annak megcsúfolása. A kormánynak és a hatóságoknak kötelességük megvédeni a közrendet és biztosítani a polgárok biztonságát. Az Európai Uniónak világos üzenetet kell küldenie, a politikai nézetkülönbségeket demokratikus keretek között kell rendezni. A polgároknak normalitásra van szüksége.
               

Maciej Wąsik (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Kilka dni temu wiceprzewodnicząca Komisji Europejskiej Henna Virkkunen w wywiadzie dla niemieckiego Deutsche Welle zapowiedziała okrągły stół w sprawie wyborów w Polsce. Polacy traktują tę wypowiedź jako groźbę ingerencji Komisji Europejskiej w nadchodzące polskie wybory prezydenckie i przygotowanie do wariantu rumuńskiego. Odbieramy tę wypowiedź jako ingerencję w polską demokrację i zielone światło dla obecnych władz Polski dla podważania demokratycznego wyniku wyborów w przypadku, gdy wygra kandydat niezgodny z linią obecnej władzy, co jest coraz bardziej nieuchronne.
               

                  Chciałbym oświadczyć pani Virkkunen i Komisji Europejskiej, że Polacy nie życzą sobie ingerencji w polskie wybory. Organizacja czegokolwiek ponad głowami Polaków w sprawie wyborów będzie potraktowana jako atak na polską demokrację. Nie życzymy sobie ingerencji w nasze sprawy. Komisja Europejska powinna w myśl traktatów trzymać ręce z dala od wyborów w Polsce.
               

Cynthia Ní Mhurchú (Renew). – A Chathaoirligh, gach aon bhliain, cuirtear na mílte Eorpach ar liostaí feitheamh fada d'orgáin riachtanacha. Faoi láthair, tá an Eoraip breac le córais éagsúla agus gach Ballstát i bhfeighil ar a shocruithe trasphlandaithe féin. Tá cláir dheonaithe ag roinnt tíortha atá go maith forbartha, ach tá tíortha eile ann atá ag streachailt chun freastal ar an éileamh. Is minic gur crannchur tíreolaíochta é an mairfidh nó nach mairfidh othar. Níl sé sin inghlactha. Má dhéantar acmhainní agus sonraí a roinnt thar teorainn, d'fhéadfadh an tAontas Eorpach creat roinnte a chur ar bun. Le cleachtas caighdeánaithe agus stór sonraí aontaithe, d'fhéadfaimid an t-am a thógann sé chun orgáin oiriúnacha a aimsiú d'othair a laghdú agus beathaí a shábháil. Cé go bhfuil an tAontas Eorpach tar éis céimeanna a ghlacadh chun cur chuige níos aontaithe a chruthú leis an Treoir um Dheonú Orgáin, tá i bhfad níos mó le déanamh. Is ceist Eorpach é trasphlandú orgáin. Caithfidh an tAontas Eorpach creat a thógaint a chinnteoidh go mbeidh córas trédhearcach tapa ar fud na mBallstát go léir. Go raibh maith agaibh.
               

Андрей Новаков (PPE). – Г-жо Председател, българската държава е създадена през 681 г., което я прави най-старата в Европейския съюз. За тези почти 14 века сме научили, че да си имаш работа с империи не е лесна работа. Започнахме първо с Византийската, после Османската и накрая съветската. И научихме по трудния начин, че тогава, когато една империя ти каже ‘превземаме още малко и повече няма’, обикновено не можеш да вярваш на това.
               

                  Затова мъдрият българския народ е казал, че когато мечката заиграе у съседите, най-вероятно ще дойде и у вас. А мечката, уважаеми колеги, не спира да играе и не ми се струва, че го осъзнаваме. Ще бъда спокоен, ако видя ентусиазъм в тази зала да защитим себе си и Европа така, както съм виждал ентусиазъм да спасим планетата, Вселената и какво ли още не.
               

                  Зависи само от нас и е добре ние да дадем пример. Време е да се погрижим за себе си. Можем да се въоръжаваме колкото си искаме, но ни трябват хора, които да покажат кураж.
               

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, en este debate del Parlamento Europeo se ha hablado de paquete ómnibus y nos hemos referido a las necesidades de las regiones ultraperiféricas. Se habla también del Fondo Social Europeo y de la reformulación de la política regional, por la que requerimos que se respete esa dimensión regional en la definición y en la ejecución de la política que corresponde a las regiones ultraperiféricas particularmente vulnerables, pero con base jurídica específica también.
               

                  También se hablará de regiones ultraperiféricas cuando discutamos mañana la Directiva sobre retorno, porque son regiones de frontera exterior que, en todo caso, ponen de manifiesto —como sucede cuando discutimos la catástrofe en la isla de la Reunión y la necesidad de especializar la respuesta de emergencia y de protección civil en regiones cada vez más expuestas a fenómenos climáticos extremos— que tenemos una base jurídica especial para proteger a aquellas regiones especialmente vulnerables que son frontera exterior de la Unión Europea.
               

                  Comisaria, ese es el hilo conductor y, por tanto, ha de haber compromiso con las regiones de frontera exterior y con las regiones ultraperiféricas en todos los capítulos definitorios de la Unión Europea porque, si queremos reformular la política europea, no podemos ignorar que se retrata donde más se necesita: en las regiones de frontera.
               

Julien Sanchez (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, mes chers collègues, le Bureau du Parlement européen a décidé en catimini, en décembre 2023, une rénovation pharaonique d'un bâtiment du Parlement européen à Bruxelles, le bâtiment SPAAK, pour 455 millions à 490 millions d'euros, de 2025 à 2030, et ce malgré Strasbourg comme siège officiel – 455 millions à 490 millions d'euros!
               

                  Vous voulez donc commencer cela cette année, alors que la situation financière de l'Union est déjà catastrophique et que, très souvent, vos projets immobiliers aboutissent à des dérapages scandaleux. Je citerai le projet Berlaymont, de la Commission, qui a coûté plus de cinq fois le prix estimé au départ, le projet Europa, ou encore ceux de la Cour de justice et de l'EMA. Quelles garanties éviteront cette fois un fiasco? Où est la ventilation détaillée de ce budget? Un audit par la Cour des comptes sur cet échec ne devrait-il pas être un préalable?
               

                  Alors que le siège officiel de notre Parlement est ici à Strasbourg, vos doublons de sièges, aberration logistique, coûtent 114 millions d'euros par an. Sont-ils compatibles avec les objectifs du pacte vert, que vous défendez? Quels critères environnementaux chiffrés imposez-vous pour justifier ces travaux? Maintenir deux sites, avec leurs déplacements incessants, ne ridiculise-t-il pas notre exemplarité écologique?
               

                  Au lieu de dépenser 455 millions, pourquoi ne vendez-vous pas Bruxelles? C'est le moment: cela vous permettrait de rediriger ces fonds vers les PME, l'agriculture et d'autres sujets utiles aux citoyens.
               

Claudiu-Richard Târziu (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, stimați colegi, trag un semnal de alarmă foarte puternic asupra democrației din România, care este într-un pericol de moarte.
               

                  Pe 6 decembrie anul trecut, a avut loc un fapt fără precedent în Uniunea Europeană, și anume anularea alegerilor prezidențiale din România. Pe 9 martie anul acesta, candidatul care avea cele mai mari șanse să câștige alegerile prezidențiale și care a câștigat primul tur de scrutin de anul trecut, a fost interzis pentru o nouă candidatură, i s-a interzis să candideze din nou.
               

                  Mâine-poimâine vor fi interzise probabil și partidele care nu corespund noii politici a României, care a luat-o pe un drum al dictaturii.
               

                  Ce face UE în această situație? Comisia Europeană nu are niciun fel de reacție. Sunt oficiali care acoperă acest abuz, iar reacțiile Statelor Unite ale Americii sunt ignorate pur și simplu de către autoritățile din România.
               

                  Vă atrag atenția că astăzi se întâmplă în România, iar mâine se poate întâmpla în oricare țară a Uniunii Europene.
               

Ciaran Mullooly (Renew). – Madam President, motorists all over Europe are being driven to disillusionment over the lack of consistency in the price being charged for insurance premiums. The European Community was established as a single market where strength in numbers across over 20 Member States, was supposed to mean a more competitive market for insurance and cheaper premiums for the over 400 million people who live here.
But this has not materialised in my country. The price of car insurance continues to rise every year, especially for young drivers, like Patrick O'Reilly from Cornafean in County Cavan: a 19-year-old boy who could insure his 2020 Volkswagen Golf for EUR 1 212 in Belgium, yet is asked to pay a staggering EUR 4 679 in Ireland.
Commissioner, this is nothing short of a rip-off and no amount of prevarication over injury claims or legal costs can excuse it. We need our new Consumer Commissioner, Michael McGrath, to be brave and to seize on this issue, challenge the main players in Europe and make the single market work for European consumers.

Hélder Sousa Silva (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, água é fonte de vida! E pergunto: qual a estratégia europeia para a gestão da água?
               

                  O objetivo é que possamos garantir que as gerações futuras tenham acesso a água para consumo e também para as várias atividades económicas, particularmente a agricultura.
               

                  O sul da Europa e, particularmente, Portugal sofrem atualmente uma elevada escassez de água. No nosso caso, as regiões do Alentejo e do Algarve são as mais afetadas.
               

                  Portugal apresentou ontem a Estratégia Nacional para a Gestão da Água, que tem por nome ‘Água que une’, que prevê resolver a escassez de água, quer para consumo humano quer para outras utilizações. Está previsto um investimento de mais de 5 mil milhões de euros. Por isso, espero que a União Europeia seja solidária, que assuma as suas responsabilidades e que ajude os Estados-Membros.
               

                  Água é vida nos territórios, água é coesão social, água é economia, água é segurança. Sim, falo da água e da água que nos une na União Europeia.
               

Fabrice Leggeri (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, il y a quelques semaines, nous apprenions que la Commission finançait, via l'argent des contribuables, un gigantesque réseau d'ONG écologistes, véritables relais de sa propagande. À présent, nous apprenons que la Commission finance aussi d'autres ONG dans divers domaines à coups de centaines de millions d'euros.
               

                  Derrière ces financements se cache un véritable réseau militant qui, avec l'argent des contribuables, encourage l'immigration massive, bloque les expulsions et combat les États qui défendent leur souveraineté. Bruxelles finance ceux qui sabotent nos démocraties, répandent le poison wokiste ou imposent une écologie punitive aux Européens, pendant que nos industries s'effondrent et que nos peuples s'appauvrissent.
               

                  Il est temps de mettre fin à cette propagande financée par l'Union européenne. L'argent des Européens doit servir à l'intérêt des Européens, pas aux idéologies bruxelloises et à ses lobbys.
               

Δημήτρης Τσιόδρας (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, Αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, με φρίκη και αποτροπιασμό παρακολουθούμε απ' όλο τον κόσμο τις διώξεις και τις δολοφονίες χριστιανών και άλλων εθνοτικών και θρησκευτικών ομάδων στη Συρία. Δεν αρκεί όμως να παρακολουθούμε. Ήρθε η ώρα η Ευρώπη να δείξει την αποφασιστικότητά της και να καταστήσει σαφές στο νέο καθεστώς της Συρίας ότι θα υπάρξουν συνέπειες. Πρέπει να σταματήσουν οι δολοφονίες και να τιμωρηθούν οι ένοχοι. Οι χριστιανοί βρίσκονται στη Συρία χιλιάδες χρόνια, και σήμερα, εν έτει 2025, κινδυνεύουν με αφανισμό. Είναι κάτι που σε καμία περίπτωση δεν μπορούμε να παρακολουθούμε απαθείς.
               

Przewodnicząca. – Zamykam punkt porządku obrad.
               
20.   Agenda of the next sitting

Przewodnicząca. – Następne posiedzenie odbędzie się jutro, we wtorek 11 marca 2025 r. o godz. 9.00. Porządek obrad został opublikowany i jest dostępny na stronie internetowej Parlamentu Europejskiego.
               
21.   Approval of the minutes of the sitting

Przewodnicząca. – Protokół z dzisiejszego posiedzenia zostanie przedłożony Parlamentowi do zatwierdzenia jutro, wczesnym popołudniem.
               
22.   Closure of the sitting

(Posiedzenie zostało zamknięte o godz. 21.58)

23.   Closure of the session

(Sesja Parlamentu Europejskiego 2024-2025 została zamknięta.)



ELI: 
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)