Verbatim report of proceedings of 12 March 2025
Date: 2025-03-12
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Parliament, parliamentary debate








C_202506063EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series














13.11.2025







            12 March 2025
            VERBATIM REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF 12 MARCH 2025
            
         
(C/2025/6063)

Contents







1.

Opening of the sitting
4










2.

Request for an urgent decision (Rule 170)
4










3.

European Semester (joint debate)
4










4.

Action Plan for the Automotive Industry (debate)
18










5.

Resumption of the sitting
39










6.

Voting time
39










6.1.

Parliament's calendar of part-sessions - 2026 (vote)
39










6.2.

EU-Norway Agreement: modification of concessions on all the tariff-rate quotas included in EU Schedule CLXXV as a consequence of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union (A10-0017/2025 - Željana Zovko) (vote)
39










6.3.

Agreement between Canada and the European Union on the transfer and processing of Passenger Name Record (PNR) data (A10-0013/2025 - Nikola Minchev) (vote)
40










6.4.

European Semester for economic policy coordination 2025 (A10-0022/2025 - Fernando Navarrete Rojas) (vote)
40










6.5.

European Semester for economic policy coordination: employment and social priorities for 2025 (A10-0023/2025 - Maravillas Abadía Jover) (vote)
40










6.6.

Continuing the unwavering EU support for Ukraine, after three years of Russia's war of aggression (RC-B10-0156/2025, B10-0156/2025, B10-0158/2025, B10-0159/2025, B10-0161/2025, B10-0163/2025, B10-0165/2025, B10-0166/2025, B10-0168/2025) (vote)
40










6.7.

White paper on the future of European defence (RC-B10-0146/2025, B10-0144/2025, B10-0145/2025, B10-0146/2025, B10-0147/2025, B10-0148/2025, B10-0149/2025, B10-0150/2025, B10-0151/2025) (vote)
41










6.8.

The need for EU support towards a just transition and reconstruction in Syria (RC-B10-0157/2025, B10-0154/2025, B10-0155/2025, B10-0157/2025, B10-0160/2025, B10-0162/2025, B10-0164/2025, B10-0167/2025, B10-0169/2025) (vote)
42










7.

Resumption of the sitting
42










8.

Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting
42










9.

Composition of committees and delegations
42










10.

100 days of the new Commission – Delivering on defence, competitiveness, simplification and migration as our priorities (topical debate)
43










11.

Union of Skills: striving for more and better opportunities to study, train or work in the EU and to bring our talents back home (debate)
64










12.

Social and employment aspects of restructuring processes: the need to protect jobs and workers' rights (debate)
80










13.

Adoption of the proposal for a Parenthood Regulation (debate)
92










14.

Frozen Russian assets (debate)
101










15.

Accelerating the phase-out of Russian gas and other Russian energy commodities in the EU (debate)
113










16.

EU Consumers Day: filling the gaps in protecting 440 million consumers in the EU (debate)
125










17.

Debate on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law (debate)
132










17.1.

Democracy and human rights in Thailand, notably the lese-majesty law and the deportation of Uyghur refugees
132










17.2.

Severe political, humanitarian and human rights crisis in Sudan, in particular the sexual violence and child rape
136










17.3.

Unlawful detention and sham trials of Armenian hostages, including high-ranking political representatives from Nagorno-Karabakh, by Azerbaijan
140










18.

Welcome
145










19.

Secessionist threats in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the recent escalation (debate)
145










20.

Explanations of vote
152










20.1.

The need for EU support towards a just transition and reconstruction in Syria (RC-B10-0157/2025)
152










21.

Agenda of the next sitting
152










22.

Approval of the minutes of the sitting
152










23.

Closure of the sitting
152




Verbatim report of proceedings of 12 March 2025
                  


IN THE CHAIR: ESTEBAN GONZÁLEZ PONS


Vice-President

1.   Opening of the sitting

(The sitting opened at 09:00)

2.   Request for an urgent decision (Rule 170)

President. – I would like to inform you that the President has received a request for urgent procedure from the EPP Group, pursuant to Rule 170(5), on the following legislative file: European Defence Industry Programme and a framework of measures to ensure the timely availability and supply of defence products.
The vote on this request will be taken tomorrow. If adopted, the vote will be added to the draft agenda of a future part-session.
3.   European Semester (joint debate)

President. – The next item is the joint debate concerning the European Semester on:






—


the report by Fernando Navarrete Rojas, on behalf of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, on the European Semester for economic policy coordination 2025 (2024/2112(INI)) (A10-0022/2025); and.










—


the report by Maravillas Abadía Jover, on behalf of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, on the European Semester for economic policy coordination: employment and social priorities for 2025 (2024/2084(INI)) (A10-0023-2025).





Fernando Navarrete Rojas,
ponente. – Señor presidente, señora comisaria, señorías, este informe es especialmente pertinente para Europa en el momento actual. No en vano el Semestre Europeo es la principal herramienta de coordinación de las políticas económicas entre los Estados miembros.
               

                  Hace poco más de un año que alcanzamos un acuerdo sobre las nuevas reglas fiscales, unas reglas más flexibles que incorporan una orientación de medio plazo para anclar la sostenibilidad de las cuentas públicas y que preservan la capacidad de inversión de los países en las prioridades comunes europeas, como las transiciones verde o digital, la seguridad energética o —muy pertinente para los debates de estos días— la creación de capacidades de defensa.
               

                  Además, gracias al impulso de este Parlamento, el cálculo del gasto neto excluye toda la cofinanciación nacional en los programas financiados por la Unión Europea. Esto dota de mayor margen fiscal y flexibilidad a corto plazo a los Estados miembros para invertir en las prioridades comunes sin minar la sostenibilidad a medio plazo.
               

                  Pero lo que no podemos olvidar es que para poder utilizar de forma efectiva esta flexibilidad en el corto plazo cuando sea necesario —y actualmente parece serlo— resulta absolutamente imprescindible que el marco de reglas fiscales europeas sea creíble frente a los ciudadanos y los mercados. Sin esta credibilidad, la restricción presupuestaria relevante no será la que se discuta en este Parlamento o en el Consejo, sino la que dictamine una prima de riesgo de mercado. No podemos caer en el error de olvidar las duras lecciones de la última crisis de deuda soberana.
               

                  Las bases más sólidas para nuestras legítimas aspiraciones de progreso social y seguridad son la prosperidad y la estabilidad económica. Sin ellas, ni el progreso ni la seguridad serán duraderos: de ahí la importancia de que este informe haga una primera valoración preliminar de la aplicación del nuevo marco de reglas fiscales.
               

                  ¿Y qué nos encontramos? Pues este informe incide en la imperiosa necesidad de que los compromisos generados adquiridos en los planes fiscales estructurales se vean traducidos en acciones concretas en los planes presupuestarios anuales. Por eso pedimos la presentación de estos planes presupuestarios lo antes posible para aquellos países que, sin tener elecciones o estar en procesos de formación de Gobierno, no lo han hecho todavía.
               

                  Por otro lado, los supuestos macroeconómicos en los planes fiscales estructurales suelen ser más optimistas que las orientaciones de la Comisión, a veces incluso de forma no justificada, lo que suele implicar posponer el esfuerzo de consolidación para el final del periodo de ajuste. La mayoría de los Estados miembros no han consultado su plan fiscal estructural con sus instituciones fiscales independientes o con otras partes interesadas. En algunos casos, no se ha involucrado siquiera los Parlamentos nacionales ni informado de ello.
               

                  Finalmente, y en previsión de la necesidad de afrontar grandes retos que afectan al conjunto de la Unión, el informe también apunta a los límites de lo que se puede conseguir solo con la coordinación de las políticas económicas. Así, por ejemplo, se apunta la conveniencia de mecanismos de inversión y financiación conjunta que permitan, gracias a la escala europea, minimizar el coste para los ciudadanos y contribuyentes en la provisión de bienes públicos europeos, como pueden ser, de nuevo, ciertas capacidades de defensa que trascienden las fronteras nacionales.
               

                  También se pone de manifiesto que la mera coordinación de las políticas fiscales a nivel nacional a través de reglas que garanticen su sostenibilidad a medio plazo no garantiza que, en todo momento, la posición fiscal agregada del conjunto de la Unión sea la más adecuada para estabilizar la economía.
               

                  En suma, la coordinación efectiva de las políticas económicas, y en particular las fiscales, a través de un Semestre Europeo efectivo es una condición necesaria para nuestro éxito colectivo, pero debe complementarse con otros mecanismos conjuntos para afrontar los importantes retos de futuro.
               

Maravillas Abadía Jover,
ponente. – Señor presidente, señora comisaria, el informe sobre el Semestre Europeo es un documento clave para coordinar nuestras políticas económicas, fiscales y sociales en la Unión Europea. A través de él, buscamos que la Comisión garantice que las prioridades que le marcamos se vean reflejadas en su posterior elaboración del Semestre y que, en definitiva, los Estados miembros adopten medidas eficaces para fomentar el crecimiento sostenible, la creación de empleo y la estabilidad fiscal.
               

                  Pero vayamos a lo más relevante del informe. Lo primero de todo es la responsabilidad fiscal. Debemos garantizar que el sostenimiento de la deuda en los Estados miembros esté respaldado por un crecimiento económico sólido. Para ello, es imperativo que los Gobiernos alineen su política fiscal asegurando que el endeudamiento no hipoteque a las futuras generaciones.
               

                  El nuevo modelo de gobernanza es claro y los planes fiscales ya incluyen reformas necesarias. Pero debemos ser más exigentes. Solo mi país, España, lleva años incumpliendo las mismas recomendaciones. Subrayamos la importancia y la urgencia de acelerar la ejecución de los fondos Next Generation EU, que finaliza en diciembre de 2026. Es la vez que más fondos han tenido los Estados miembros y debemos exigirles responsabilidad y gestión. ¿Están haciendo uso de estos fondos? ¿En qué los están gastando? Son preguntas legítimas que exigen responsabilidad.
               

                  Por otro lado, el empleo y la formación son elementos clave para la competitividad de la Unión Europea, ya lo dijo la vicepresidenta Mînzatu. Es necesario apoyar la mejora y el reciclaje de habilidades para garantizar competencias preparadas para el futuro. Por ello, proponemos una mayor inversión en formación profesional, adaptando las competencias de los jóvenes a las necesidades del mercado. No podemos permitirnos que tantos jóvenes europeos sigan sin oportunidades. Recuerden: ellos son el futuro de Europa. Facilitemos el trabajo también a nuestras empresas, a las pymes, a los autónomos: son quienes están creando empleo de calidad en nuestro continente. Si las empresas tienen futuro, el empleo europeo también.
               

                  Respecto a la vivienda, los Estados miembros tienen que aumentar la inversión en vivienda social y asequible mientras aplican una regulación más ágil. No habrá solución a la crisis de la vivienda si no aumentamos la oferta. Para ello, es necesario acabar con tanta burocracia y hacer que los fondos existentes respondan verdaderamente a esta crisis. Y, sobre todo, protejamos a quienes tienen sus ahorros en el mercado inmobiliario, que son quienes más rápido pueden ayudar ahora mismo a aumentar la oferta. Démosles seguridad jurídica, que no tengan miedo a que puedan perder su vivienda, su seguro de vida.
               

                  Quiero hacer mención a la demografía. Esta debe ser una prioridad de todos para que los europeos no se vean obligados a abandonar su lugar de origen para tener oportunidades. Les invito, por ello, a que declaremos el Año Europeo de la Demografía para que el derecho a quedarse sea una realidad.
               

                  Señores Comisarios, la economía social es un activo clave para nuestro Estado de bienestar. Su labor es incalculable y debemos protegerla. Instamos también a que lleven a cabo una actualización de la Estrategia Europea sobre Discapacidad, creando una garantía europea de empleo y capacitación.
               

                  Y no me olvido de las familias, claves del proyecto europeo y de nuestro futuro. Creemos una tarjeta europea para las familias numerosas, cuya aportación a nuestra sociedad debe ser reconocida por todos los Estados miembros.
               

                  Concluyo: espero que este informe sirva a la Comisión como hoja de ruta y marco sólido para garantizar un crecimiento equilibrado, sostenible e inclusivo en la Unión Europea. Cuento con su apoyo para impulsar estas prioridades.
               

Adam Szłapka,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, Madam Commissioner, honourable Members, it is a pleasure to be here today and have the opportunity to discuss the European Semester with Parliament.
We are undergoing a rapidly changing political landscape, when our Union faces great challenges, both immediate and long term, impacting our social economic outlook. From the perspective of economic activity, Europe's recovery has been slow, and the recent forecasts point to subdued economic growth also due to geopolitical uncertainties.
On the positive side, the labour market has shown resilience and remains strong, while the services sector in particular is expanding. In the course of the year, inflation is expected to decrease further. Yet the risks that led to its step rise remain valid.
The Council has been focusing on the issues covered by the European Semester in a wider context of European competitiveness. We must acknowledge that Europe faces shifting global economic dynamics, changing demographics and a rather volatile geopolitical situation, and therefore we firmly believe that solid economic and financial foundations are more important than ever.
This brings me to one of the key deliverables of the Polish Presidency in the field of economic policy, namely our determination to continue implementing the new economic governance framework.
So far, 23 Member States have submitted their fiscal structural plans based on the Commission's assessment. The Council has set fiscal adjustment paths for all the plans submitted last year and is ready to do so swiftly for the newly submitted ones. Thanks to the plans, Member States now have certainty as regards the budgetary paths which they will follow in the upcoming years and they can plan accordingly.
The Council has also adopted the recommendation to eight Member States under the excessive deficit procedure to correct their excessive deficits. It has also approved the Euro Area Recommendation. These various strands will help to ensure that collectively we strengthen our competitiveness, resilience and macroeconomic and financial stability.
We are also very much looking forward to the Commission's timely submission of the European Semester spring package, including the upcoming country specific recommendation.
The time has come to ensure the proper implementation of what we have agreed. We are working very hard to strengthen our economic and fiscal policy coordination for the benefit of citizens and businesses throughout the Union.
Looking ahead, the path to sustainable growth in the in the EU will depend on our ability to enhance competitiveness and productivity. We should address these challenges while also capitalising on the opportunities of the green transition. I am looking forward to continuing our fruitful dialogue and collaboration.

Roxana Mînzatu,
Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, I will first thank you for this report. It highlights the importance of new fiscal rules, the need to boost investment and the urgency of addressing critical issues such as housing.
The European Semester has proven to be an essential tool for policy coordination, allowing the European Union to respond effectively to economic shocks while ensuring social fairness, fiscal sustainability and resilience. By boosting evidence-based guidance. It helps Member States develop policies that foster investment, stability and inclusive and sustainable growth.
Today, supporting Europe's competitiveness is our key priority, with productivity growth stagnating for two decades now and falling behind global counterparts, the Semester will remain instrumental in incentivising structural reforms in Member States and mobilising both public and private investment to meet these competitiveness challenges.
The autumn package introduced the new economic governance framework, fully integrating economic, social and fiscal policy coordination under the European Semester umbrella. Overall, the medium-term plans submitted by Member States are delivering on the objectives of strengthening debt sustainability and fostering sustainable and inclusive growth through ambitious reforms and investments.
This Semester cycle marks also the first implementation of the new EU economic governance framework, featuring a strengthened social dimension and full integration of the social convergence framework. This is also thanks to the strong engagement of this House for a more integrated approach to policy coordination that creates stronger incentives for social reforms and social investments.
Although we are still in the early stages, we can already say that the implementation of the new framework is progressing steadily. So far, the Council has adopted the Commission's recommendation regarding all medium-term plans for the 22 Member States. I am particularly pleased to note that five Member States that requested a more gradual fiscal adjustment path have included commitments to a number of social investments and reforms that are expected to benefit directly to economic growth and to fiscal sustainability.
Beyond the content of the plans, I welcome that most Member States have provided information on the consultations that were organised prior to the submission of the plans, with social partners, with civil society or stakeholders and other relevant organisations.
The macro-economic context surrounding the 2025 surveillance cycle is – we see that – one of high uncertainty and exceptional challenges. In particular, the geopolitical situation requires a fast and sharp increase in spending on defence in Europe. We will shortly come out with a proposal for Member States to activate the national escape clause under the new economic governance framework.
Overall, the European economy has remained remarkably resilient and the outlook is for a gradual pickup in growth. Imbalances are generally receding as the recent period was characterised by the fading of the inflationary shock. Newly emerging concerns are mainly related to competitiveness, but the high risks and uncertainties and the multiple challenges require us to collectively implement the right policies if we want to preserve our prosperity. Greater emphasis will be placed on making it easier to do business, unlocking investment and advancing our Clean Industrial Deal. Also, tackling effectively skills, housing and demographic challenges will be adequately reflected in the semester framework. This approach will ensure that the European Union objectives are addressed in a comprehensive manner.
To that effect, the Commission will set up the competitiveness coordination tool, which will work in conjunction with the streamlined European Semester. Both will form part of a coherent and lean steering mechanism to inform decisions for investments and reforms at EU and national level. This new steering mechanism will also link European Union priorities and the European Union budget.
In conclusion, our challenges are clear, they are massive and need to be tackled urgently. We have the tools in place to address them. Together, we can take the actions necessary to improve our economic strength and boost our future prosperity.

Markus Ferber,
im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Das Europäische Semester ist das zentrale Instrument für die Koordinierung der Wirtschaftspolitik. In diesem Jahr sind die Herausforderungen besonders groß. Nicht nur haben wir noch immer ganz maue Wachstumsraten in der Europäischen Union, wir müssen auch mit den steigenden Verteidigungsausgaben fertigwerden – alles das vor dem Hintergrund einer bereits sehr hohen Staatsverschuldung.
               

                  Das zeigt einmal mehr, wie wichtig es ist, für den Krisenfall fiskalische Spielräume zu haben. Wir haben als EVP-Fraktion schon vor Jahren darauf hingewiesen: Man muss das Dach dann reparieren, wenn die Sonne scheint. Und was ist passiert? Die Sonne hat geschienen, wir hatten gute wirtschaftliche Jahre, und in vielen Mitgliedstaaten wurde das Dach nicht repariert. Und jetzt fehlen die Spielräume, die notwendig sind, um diese Herausforderungen auch zu schultern.
               

                  Inzwischen haben wir einen gefährlichen Punkt erreicht: hohe Staatsverschuldung, hohe Defizite, hohe Zinsen, hohe künftige Ausgaben im Verteidigungssektor, niedrige Wachstumsaussichten aufgrund mangelnder Wettbewerbsfähigkeit. Das ist die Situation, wie sie sich momentan darstellt – die Lage ist also ernst.
               

                  Für das Semester bedeutet das, dass wir uns wieder viel mehr auf den Kern des Europäischen Semesters konzentrieren müssen – eine verantwortungsvolle Fiskalpolitik und Maßnahmen, die die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der Europäischen Union und der Mitgliedstaaten nachhaltig stärken. Im Bericht des Wirtschafts- und Währungsausschusses haben wir das, glaube ich, gut erreicht; ich würde mich freuen, wenn das der Beschäftigungsausschuss auch irgendwann einmal schaffen würde.
               

Claire Fita,
au nom du groupe S&D. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Vice-Présidente, Monsieur le Ministre, chers collègues, je tenais tout d'abord à remercier le rapporteur pour son travail. Le texte proposé dans le cadre de ce Semestre européen nous permet d'affirmer nos ambitions et nos valeurs. L'Europe est à un moment de bascule dans un monde en recomposition. Dans ce contexte, un emprunt commun est plus que jamais nécessaire pour construire l'Europe de la défense. Pour renforcer l'aide à l'Ukraine, nous avons besoin d'un instrument d'investissement européen.
               

                  Cependant, l'Europe ne doit pas seulement réagir; elle doit aussi relever ses défis internes: cohésion, souveraineté et investissements dans l'innovation, l'éducation et la transition écologique et numérique. Nous devons le faire en accord avec nous-mêmes et avec nos valeurs européennes: droits sociaux, pacte vert et, par-dessus tout, la démocratie, car c'est en elle que résident la dignité des peuples et la grandeur de l'Europe.
               

Enikő Győri,
a PfE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Elnök Úr! Az európai szemesztert még 2011-ben, magyar elnökség alatt hoztuk létre, hogy összehangoljuk a tagállamok gazdasági folyamatait és biztosítsuk a pénzügyi fegyelmet. A baloldal ma ehelyett a téma helyett is saját ideológiai meggyőződéseit erőlteti. Nem elég, hogy a keretrendszer mára elvesztette eredeti makrogazdasági fókuszát, Önök baloldalon azért küzdenek, hogy a Bizottság minél több nemzeti hatáskörbe tartozó kérdésben kérhesse számon a tagállamokat.
               

                  Köszönet illeti a jelentéstevőt, hogy lehetőségéhez mérten igyekezett ennek gátat szabni. Az országspecifikus ajánlások kizárólag az uniós hatáskörbe tartozó területeket fedhetik le, és semmiképp sem alkalmazhatnak kettős mércét. Sajnos Önök nem akartak utalást látni erre ebben a jelentésben. Önök továbbra is kiállnak a zöld ideológia mellett, mikor mára kristálytisztává vált, hogy az mennyire káros az európai gazdaságra. Önök további hitelfelvételre buzdítanak, mi, patrióták nem akarjuk, hogy az Önök ideológiai hadjáratának árát az unokáink fizessék meg. Ehelyett mi a tagállamok versenyképességét szolgáló együttműködésében hiszünk, ahol senkit sem kényszerítenek ideológiai alapú gazdaságpolitikára.
               

Giovanni Crosetto,
a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, relatore, onorevoli colleghi, il ruolo del Semestre europeo è quello di coordinare le politiche economiche e di bilancio degli Stati membri, avendo quindi un fortissimo impatto sulla stabilità macroeconomica dell'Unione.
               

                  E nonostante questo insieme di procedure nasca per contrastare la crisi del debito sovrano nell'Eurozona, oggi la contingenza macroeconomica in termini di rating, spread e rendimenti sui titoli di Stato fa sì che il focus non sia più solo esclusivamente sul numeratore del rapporto debito/PIL.
               

                  Oggi c'è la consapevolezza che la sostenibilità del debito vada perseguita tramite crescita economica e investimenti strategici, consentendoci di lavorare sempre di più su quello che è il denominatore del rapporto debito/PIL.
               

                  Ed è per questo che abbiamo accolto favorevolmente il recente annuncio circa l'attivazione delle clausole di salvaguardia del Patto di stabilità e crescita, patto che da sempre, come Fratelli d'Italia, chiediamo di migliorare ed il cui allentamento consentirebbe di aumentare le spese della difesa che sono fondamentali in questo momento storico.
               

Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, Madam Commissioner, Minister, dear colleagues, the European Semester is at the heart of what the EU is all about: mutual trust. United in diversity, we have to trust that we work towards our mutual goals, delivering on the necessary change to give Europe an independent, sustainable, secure, economically stable future.
That doesn't happen on its own, it requires hard work. In a family, you correct each other. In a European family, you give country-specific recommendations – sorry, it is what it is. Every country has its peculiarities that make no economic sense, but that are politically hard to shake. The Semester is the time to encourage difficult reforms, and the Council needs to stop its lacklustre attitude, its silent non-intervention agreement to addressing long term reforms in each Member State.
My appeal to you, colleagues, is to join me in this quest to find mechanisms to foster the growth of our ever closer economic union.

Benedetta Scuderi,
a nome del gruppo Verts/ALE. – Signor Presidente, relatrice, onorevoli colleghi, il Semestre europeo è un momento fondamentale per trovare risposte ambiziose all'attuale crisi sociale. Tra una povertà dilagante, salari che non tengono il passo con l'inflazione, la perdita di potere d'acquisto e una crisi abitativa senza precedenti, dobbiamo avere il coraggio di proporre risposte comuni.
               

                  Solo che ci sono due pesi e due misure: per la corsa al riarmo si mette in discussione tutto, dal Patto di stabilità e crescita al considerare addirittura un debito comune. E per la spesa sociale invece? Nulla. Anzi, dobbiamo lottare costantemente contro una destra che ci dice di essere al fianco delle persone ma poi si oppone alle nostre richieste su temi occupazionali e sociali.
               

                  Qualche esempio? Una direttiva sul salario minimo e il reddito di inclusione sarebbe una zavorra; una direttiva che tuteli i lavoratori dell'uso dell'intelligenza artificiale, anche. Come Verdi ci siamo battuti per chiedere alla Commissione raccomandazioni sul diritto all'abitare e proporre investimenti all'interno del Semestre europeo, per poi ritrovarci un emendamento del Partito popolare che vuole eliminare queste richieste.
               

                  Gli stessi che chiedono un Anno europeo per la demografia ma poi vogliono cancellare lo stanziamento di un fondo di 20 miliardi per la povertà infantile. Chi può fare figli in povertà e senza casa?
               

                  Colleghe e colleghi, mi rivolgo a voi: abbiamo bisogno di legislazione e risorse a livello europeo per ridurre le disuguaglianze interne e rendere le nostre società sicure e resistenti in senso ampio, partendo dai diritti e da un accesso equo ai servizi essenziali.
               

Manon Aubry,
au nom du groupe The Left. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, il paraît que vous avez trouvé de l'argent, sonnant et trébuchant, de l'argent pour les chars d'assaut, mais, étrangement, pas pour les hôpitaux. En effet, voilà ce que vous nous proposez: une économie de guerre, où, tout d'un coup, les milliards pleuvent pour les dépenses militaires, mais pas pour les dépenses sociales et écologiques.
               

                  Alors que la dette des États était censée être un point insurmontable, voilà que l'Europe sort de son chapeau 800 milliards pour l'armement. Alors que l'on nous disait qu'il fallait couper dans les dépenses pour nos écoles et nos retraites, voilà qu'il faut investir massivement dans les missiles et les canons. Alors que nous nous battons depuis des années – bien seuls, il faut le dire – contre les règles d'austérité, voici que ces mêmes règles volent soudainement en éclats pour financer l'armée. C'est comme si, tout d'un coup, il n'existait plus de réchauffement climatique ni de pauvreté, et que la seule priorité était les blindés.
               

                  La vérité, c'est que la seule guerre que vous préparez, c'est une guerre sociale. Déjà, les plus fervents défenseurs de l'ordre économique établi y voient l'occasion rêvée de pousser encore plus leur entreprise de casse sociale et de dérouler leur feuille de route austéritaire. Puisqu'il faut de l'argent pour les canons, ils s'empressent de tirer à boulets rouges sur notre protection sociale. Certains proposent déjà de travailler jusqu'à 70 ans et de ne partir à la retraite qu'après. Pourquoi s'arrêter en si bon chemin? Assurance chômage, temps de travail, services publics, protection de l'environnement… Tous les sacrifices sont bons pour les peuples européens, tant que l'on ne touche pas à l'argent des plus riches.
               

                  L'économie de guerre, en réalité, ce sont les grands patrons et les actionnaires qui s'en frottent les mains. Eux qui ont déjà vécu l'âge d'or des superprofits à l'occasion d'une pandémie voient désormais poindre la manne financière de la course aux armements. En 2024 déjà, ce sont pas moins de 750 milliards de dollars de dividendes qui ont été versés dans le monde – 69 milliards rien qu'en France. Chaque année, c'est un record qui est battu et qui en chasse un autre. L'enrichissement sans fin d'une poignée aggrave la plaie béante des inégalités. Pourtant, aux yeux des dirigeants européens et de la majorité de ce Parlement, ce n'est toujours pas une raison suffisante pour taxer les plus riches et les multinationales. Étrangement, du côté de la Commission européenne, vous préférez toujours sabrer dans nos dépenses sociales, plutôt que d'aller chercher l'argent là où il est.
               

                  Nous n'accepterons pas de nous laisser enfermer dans ce faux dilemme entre la défense de l'Europe et notre sécurité d'un côté, et l'État social et la bifurcation écologique de l'autre. Il est temps de reconstruire une économie qui est fondée sur nos besoins de défense, mais aussi sociaux et écologiques, parce qu'aucun bien commun ne peut être sacrifié sur l'autel de la guerre ou de la sainte austérité.
               

René Aust,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Das Europäische Semester soll dafür sorgen, Stabilität in Europa herzustellen. In der Tat wäre es notwendig, dass wir in Europa wieder zu Stabilität finden, doch das, was Sie planen in der Europäischen Union, in der Europäischen Kommission, ist die weitere Entmachtung der Parlamente, ist ein weiteres Aussetzen des Volkswillens.
               

                  Wir wollen, dass Austerität nicht weiter in Europa stattfindet. Wir wollen nicht, dass die europäischen Parlamente weiter entmachtet werden. Wir wollen, dass der Volkswille wirklich voll zur Geltung kommt. Das, was wir derzeit in Europa sehen, ist: Die Entmachtung der Völker selber destabilisiert. Schauen Sie nach dem, was in Rumänien gerade stattfindet: Ein Kandidat, der vom Volk gewollt wird, der in allen Umfragen vorne liegt, wird von der Kandidatur ausgeschlossen. Schauen Sie, was in Bulgarien geschieht: Ein Referendum zur Einführung des Euros wird abgelehnt. Schauen Sie, was in Deutschland geschieht, wo darüber diskutiert wird, ob eine Partei verboten werden soll, oder wo eine Nachzählung des Ergebnisses der deutschen Bundestagswahl abgelehnt wird, obwohl möglicherweise einer Partei dort der Einzug in den Bundestag deshalb verwehrt wird.
               

                  Wir müssen wieder dazu finden, dass der Volkswille in ganz Europa zur Geltung gebracht wird. Dadurch sorgen wir für Stabilität, nicht durch zusätzlichen Zentralismus durch die Europäische Kommission.
               

Dirk Gotink (PPE). – Voorzitter, ik maak mij grote zorgen. Lage economische groei, een escalerend handelsconflict. De economische vooruitzichten zijn somber. Een echte test voor de nieuwe regels. En nu praten we in de EU vooral over meer uitgaven voor defensie en hoe we dat gaan betalen. En geloof me, ik ben de eerste die zegt dat Europa voor zijn eigen veiligheid moet gaan betalen. Dat zal een opdracht van decennia zijn, niet van jaren.
               

                  Tegelijkertijd hebben we een aantal landen met een schrikbarend hoge staatsschuld en heel veel druk op de financierbaarheid van die schuld. Het maakt voor deze landen niet uit als uitgaven uitgezonderd worden. De financiële markten kijken naar echte risico's, niet naar de papieren werkelijkheid van een stabiliteits- en groeipact. Dat vraagt dus vooral verantwoordelijkheid van lidstaten en een stevig toezicht van de Europese Commissie. Daar roep ik dan ook echt toe op.
               

                  Als we de schulden en tekorten verder laten oplopen, dan zullen we binnen de kortste keren tegen een muur oplopen. Dan dreigt het ReArm-plan een financieel kamikazeplan te worden. Want een nieuwe schuldencrisis is niet ondenkbaar. Iedere euro moet effectief worden uitgegeven met een duidelijke toegevoegde waarde. Dat betekent meer samenwerking op defensie, meer samen plannen maken ook, maar niet meteen meer samen schulden maken. Ik roep de Commissie dan ook op om hier streng op te zijn. Werk aan schuld en houdbaarheid, voorkom een diepere crisis en zadel onze kinderen niet met een onbetaalbare schuld op. Alleen zo zorgen we voor een blijvende en stabiele bestaanszekerheid.
               

Idoia Mendia (S&D). – Señor, presidente, señora vicepresidenta, lo que hoy aprobamos no es un informe más porque estamos al inicio del nuevo marco financiero plurianual y, en este momento crítico para Europa, necesitamos una visión clara que combine prosperidad económica y justicia social.
               

                  Quiero destacar la importancia de continuar desarrollando el pilar europeo de derechos sociales. Esta debe ser nuestra brújula, la que guíe todas nuestras políticas. Es fundamental avanzar en un marco que permita mayor protección de los derechos de los trabajadores, mejores condiciones laborales y que apueste por el diálogo social. Si queremos que las transiciones ecológica y digital sean exitosas, es necesario el reciclaje y perfeccionamiento profesional de los trabajadores, con especial atención a jóvenes, mujeres, personas mayores y personas con discapacidad.
               

                  Debemos luchar contra la pobreza, especialmente la infantil, y garantizar una vivienda asequible porque necesitamos cuidar la salud física y mental de las personas. Todos estos aspectos son fundamentales. La señal que debemos mandar como Parlamento es una apuesta clara por la Europa social.
               

Pál Szekeres (PfE). – Elnök Úr! Remélem, egyetértenek Önök is azzal az alapelvvel, hogy egyetlen EP-képviselőt sem szabad itt a Parlamentben a politikai véleménye miatt hátrányosan megkülönböztetni. Miért mondom ezt? Mert a ‘cordon sanitaire’ szövetség minden patrióta módosító javaslatot olvasatlanul söpört le. Ezért újra benyújtjuk javaslatainkat. Miért? Mert hiszünk a tagállami szuverenitásban, ezért a szemeszternek továbbra is nem kötelező eszköznek kell maradnia.
               

                  Mert hiszünk benne, hogy Európa jövője azon múlik, hogy erősítsük a versenyképességet, a budapesti versenyképességi nyilatkozattal összhangban. Mert hiszünk abban, hogy az Európát az innováció és a mesterséges intelligencia területén a globális élvonalba kell helyezni. Mert hiszünk abban, hogy a gyermekek jóléte a családok jólétén múlik, ezért támogatjuk a családokat. Miért? Mert hiszünk abban, hogy nem szabad a családokra terhelni az energiahatékonysági átalakítások költségeit, ezért megóvjuk a rezsicsökkentést. Ezért be fogjuk nyújtani ezt a 10 módosító javaslatot, és kérem Önöket, hogy támogassák.
               

Marlena Maląg (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Europejski semestr miał zapewnić stabilność finansową i koordynować politykę gospodarczą, jednak efekty są rozczarowujące. Brakuje skuteczności, brakuje poczucia potrzeb. Brak skuteczności to konsekwencja ideologicznego podejścia. Zielone ambicje doprowadziły do recesji i wydrenowały przestrzeń fiskalną. Dług publiczny wielu państw przekracza 60%, a nawet 100% PKB.
               

                  Zwiększenie władzy Komisji i centralne planowanie to nie odpowiedź na bolączki. Zamiast wspierać kolejne inicjatywy, blokuje się i utrudnia. Europejski przemysł motoryzacyjny zderzył się ze ścianą Zielonego Ładu. Chaotyczna i kosztowna transformacja podniosła koszty, wypychając innowacje z Europy. Dziś ze światowego lidera innowacji staliśmy się klientem stojącym w kolejce po amerykańskie i chińskie technologie. W taki sposób wielkiej Europy nie zbudujemy. Narzućmy sobie zdrowy rozsądek. Dopiero wtedy zaczniemy być skuteczni.
               

Христо Петров (Renew). – Г-жо Мизату, Европейският социален семестър трябва да бъде инструмент за постигане на целите ни до 2030 г. в областта на заетостта, уменията и намаляване на бедността.
               

                  На първо място поставям нашите деца, понеже те са нашето бъдеще. Трябва да приемем специален бюджет за Европейската гаранция за детето. Децата трябва да бъдат и неразделна част от новата стратегия на Европейския съюз за борба с бедността. За хората с увреждания предлагаме създаване на Европейска гаранция за заетост и умения. Полагаме грижи за завършване на деинститунализацията и за първи път в Европейския социален семестър призоваваме Комисията да изпълни своя ангажимент относно статуса на артистите.
               

                  По отношение на уязвимите групи като ромите са необходими конкретни действия и въпросът вече не е да се заявява равенство, а действително да осигурим достъп до образование, заетост и основни услуги.
               

Marie Toussaint (Verts/ALE). – Monsieur le Président, ce dont nous discutons aujourd'hui, le Semestre européen, est un outil crucial pour coordonner les politiques budgétaires – et donc économiques et sociales – des États membres. Je regrette le dogme de la croissance et de l'austérité dans lequel l'Europe reste enfermée, malgré la capacité de dialogue dans l'examen de ce rapport. Croire que nous pouvons tenir en périphérie la question climatique est une folie. Ce n'est que dans le respect des limites planétaires que les États pourront déployer des budgets sains et durables. Les lois de l'économie ne sont pas au-dessus des lois de la nature.
               

                  J'ajoute que, sans justice sociale, la cohésion européenne ne durera pas longtemps. Séparer la question budgétaire des droits sociaux n'a aucun sens, non plus. Nous devons garantir que plus aucun budget des États membres de l'Union européenne ne viendra empirer les conditions de vie des plus vulnérables. Nous faisons face à une immense contradiction: d'un côté, des règles budgétaires qui imposent une camisole de force aux États, les conduisant à mener des politiques austéritaires aux conséquences catastrophiques; de l'autre, une Commission qui reconnaît les besoins massifs en investissements.
               

                  En proposant de contourner les règles budgétaires au profit de la défense, la Commission ne fait que démontrer l'inefficacité du pacte de stabilité budgétaire. Soyons cohérents et changeons les règles du jeu.
               

(L'oratrice accepte une question carton bleu)


João Oliveira (The Left),
Pergunta segundo o procedimento ‘cartão azul’
                     . – Senhora Deputada Marie Toussaint, queria perguntar-lhe, nesta discussão que fazemos sobre o Semestre Europeu, se não lhe parece que há um contraste entre a secundarização de questões sociais, como a pobreza, como a necessidade de combate à pobreza e à exclusão social, a necessidade de melhoria das condições de vida dos trabalhadores, e, por outro lado, o favorecimento de políticas como as dos gastos militares ou de medidas que favorecem as grandes empresas, como a liberalização de setores estratégicos ou apoios, até do ponto de vista fiscal.
               

                  Não lhe parece que essa secundarização e esse contraste prejudicam uma resposta que era necessária à melhoria das condições de vida dos povos no espaço da União Europeia?
               

Marie Toussaint (Verts/ALE),
réponse carton bleu. – Je vous remercie, Monsieur Oliveira, pour cette question. Ce que l'on a observé pendant les années, peut-être même les décennies, qui se sont écoulées, c'est que cette camisole de force budgétaire qui a été imposée aux États membres a parfois conduit à couper dans les politiques sociales, la justice sociale et les services publics – c'est la cas avec les écoles et les hôpitaux, par exemple, dont nous avons absolument besoin pour nos populations – au profit d'un libéralisme qui finissait par détruire des emplois du fait de délocalisations. Les peuples européens souffraient de cette incapacité des États et de l'Union européenne d'investir pour leur protection et leur sécurité.
               

                  Aujourd'hui, on nous explique que le pacte de stabilité budgétaire doit être levé pour pouvoir produire des armes, mais sans reconnaître les besoins massifs pour la transition écologique, qui sera pourtant bénéfique pour toutes et tous, ni pour la précarité. Il y a là un ‘deux poids, deux mesures’ qui doit absolument être dénoncé. Je partage donc votre remarque.
               

Kathleen Funchion (The Left). – A Uachtaráin, whilst I welcome certain aspects of this report, particularly in recognition of the role of formal and informal carers in society, I ultimately cannot vote in favour. We are not fooled by calls for debt sustainability, which is in reality calls for a return to the failed policies of austerity. The call for sustainable pension systems is nothing more than Eurospeak for increasing the pension age on workers right across our Member States.
The report speaks of demographic challenges without identifying the cause of these challenges. We have permitted regional imbalances and inequalities to persist and indeed deepen over the years. The challenges faced by our regions are down to bad policy, which makes education and housing so unaffordable for ordinary workers and families, and the challenges are due to a lack of opportunities. If we are serious about tackling these challenges, let us first recognise what has caused them, which is bad policy.
What we need is to promote the social economy which puts workers and families front and centre. We need to lay the groundwork that gives them and their communities certainty and enables everyone to reach their full potential. It is incumbent upon us as legislators to address and improve working and living conditions for all of our citizens, and I suggest that we strive in this Chamber to achieve that in this term.

Henrik Dahl (PPE). – Hr. formand! Kære kolleger! I hele Europa møder EU kritik fra en højrefløj, der vokser. En højrefløj, der har valgt at alliere sig med Putins synspunkter i mange tilfælde, og som ser EU som en institution, der stjæler de nationale kompetencer. Men den hårde højrefløj bliver alt for ofte skabt af midterpartierne, enten fordi de gør for lidt som på immigrationsområdet, eller fordi de gør for meget som på blandt andet det sociale område. Mange vælgere føler, at EU har overskredet sine beføjelser, og ikke sjældent så er det desværre noget, jeg er enig i. Lad mig give nogle eksempler: EU's lovgivning om barsel, lovgivning om timeregistrering og lovgivning om mindsteløn. Alle de ting, jeg har nævnt, de bidrager til at skabe en borgerlig/centrum-højre EU-skepsis, fordi vælgere blandt andet mig selv mener, at det er nogle tiltag, der ikke burde blive vedtaget her i kamret. Hvorfor skal EU blande sig i, hvordan barsel tilrettelægges, hvordan tidsregistrering bliver foretaget i virksomheder, og hvad man helt nøjagtigt skal tjene i timen? Vi må anerkende, at den slags følsom lovgivning skal vedtages så tæt på borgeren som muligt. EU har rigeligt at tage sig til med internationale konflikter og problemer i stedet for at blande sig i, hvordan den enkelte familie for eksempel fordeler sin barsel. Det gør ingen glade for EU, og jeg tror, at det forhøjer den borgerlige modstand imod EU, som vi absolut ikke har brug for.
               

(Taleren accepterede at besvare et blåt kort-spørgsmål)


Maria Grapini (S&D),
întrebare adresată conform procedurii ‘cartonașului albastru’
                     . – Stimate coleg, discutăm despre semestrul european. Nu prea ați spus în intervenția dumneavoastră nimic.
               

                  Vreau să vă întreb concret: de ce credeți că semestrul european pe care îl avem de mult timp nu a dat rezultate din punct de vedere al coeziunii sociale, al creșterii veniturilor salariaților, al creșterii numărului de IMM-uri, al sustenabilității? Pentru că asta este dezbaterea, ce să facă Uniunea Europeană, ce să facă Comisia Europeană pentru ca semestrul european să aducă și rezultate? Guvernanța despre care vorbea domnul ministru, guvernanța economică, care să aducă coeziune socială.
               

                  Care ar fi, din punctul dumneavoastră de vedere, măsurile care trebuie luate?
               

Henrik Dahl (PPE),
blåt-kort-svar. – Jeg kommer fra et land, der har fuld fart på den grønne omstilling, hvor vi har gode mindstelønninger, hvor vi har gode sociale ordninger, barselsordning for eksempel. Det peger på, at vi i det land, jeg kommer fra, har gjort vores eget hjemmearbejde. Det er ikke EU's opgave. Det er politisk hjemmearbejde, man skal gøre i de nationale parlamenter, Og det er det, jeg prøver at sige, tak.
               

Gabriele Bischoff (S&D). – Herr Präsident, werte Vizepräsidentin Mînzatu, Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn man hier zuhört, dann hat man so den Eindruck: schwere Zeiten, neue Regeln, aber altes Spiel – wenn man sich hier so die Redebeiträge anhört. Dabei zeigt, dass eine nachhaltige Fiskalpolitik und Zukunftsinvestitionen jetzt essenziell sind, wenn wir wirklich als Europa unseren Bürgerinnen und Bürgern Stabilität, Prosperität und Sicherheit in unsicheren Zeiten geben können. Wir haben hier als neues Element den Rahmen für soziale Konvergenz, einen Warnmechanismus, und wir als Parlament unterstreichen das im Bericht, wir werden ganz genau hinschauen, wie der umgesetzt wird.
               

                  Wir haben sieben Mitgliedstaaten, die ein erhöhtes Risiko haben, wenn es um soziale Sicherung geht, wenn es um gute Arbeit geht, auch wenn es um das Thema Armutsbekämpfung geht. Und deshalb ist es wichtig, dass hier nachgelegt wird, denn all das – genauso wie Schulen, wie Investitionen in digitale Infrastruktur – stärkt die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit, auch wenn das ideologische Lager, das hier vom Volkswillen redet usw., das nicht einsehen kann. Wettbewerbsfähigkeit braucht eine stabile soziale Balance.
               

Francesco Torselli (ECR). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la relazione sottolinea l'importanza di sostenere le zone rurali spopolate, investendo in servizi ed opportunità. Parla di sfide demografiche, di invecchiamento e di lavoro.
               

                  Ora vi do una notizia, che notizia non è: se di fianco ad ogni euro investito nel ripopolamento e nella valorizzazione delle aree interne spopolate non vi saranno un altro euro da investire in infrastrutture digitali e uno da investire in sanità, l'euro investito diventerà un euro sprecato.
               

                  Chi andrà mai a creare lavoro dove non esiste connessione? Chi metterà mai al mondo un figlio sapendo che partirà già svantaggiato nei confronti di chi nasce nelle grandi aree urbane? Chi ci vorrà invecchiare, laddove, non esiste sanità di prossimità? La risposta è: nessuno.
               

                  Ora, vogliamo che le nostre priorità sociali in materia di occupazione per il 2025 siano rivolte a nessuno? No. Quindi, riflettiamoci adesso, prima che sia troppo tardi.
               

Irene Tinagli (S&D). – Mr President, the European Semester coordinates economic and social policies across the Union, ensuring alignment from fiscal discipline to social policies.
But this is not an abstract exercise. It has to be adapted and aligned with emerging priorities. So let's not forget two priorities that we have today that entail the security and safety of our citizens.
The first type of security, of course, is what we are all discussing in these days. We are expanding fiscal flexibility to allow for more investment in security, but let's not forget there is one unresolved issue, which is the lack of a structured coordination mechanism for defence financing. Without this, Member States risk acting independently, leading to fragmentation and inefficiency.
The other priority we shouldn't forget when we talk about safety is the safety that the European citizens need and feel in their daily lives. This entails housing, having a safe roof over their head. We agreed on this priority at the beginning of this mandate. Let's not forget about it and include it in our semester report and in our fiscal and social policies.

Nikos Papandreou (S&D). – Mr President, Commissioner, this report is supposed to help us to coordinate for our future and to look at what we've done in the past, and it has some things that are worth pointing out. It talks about a financial instrument for private sector competition, coordinated defence spending and even the Green Deal, which upsets this side of the aisle. However, it also assumes that the Recovery and Resilience Fund is ending, and this goes to the heart of our ideological problem: do we grow through more spending, or do we grow through reducing our deficit? We can't have both.
On this side of the aisle, we have the philosophical issue that we need more spending to grow. Of course, we want the spending to be more efficient. As Gabriele Bischoff pointed out, we want it to take place in a coordinated way and for the countries not to be at risk, but that's the heart of our problem. How can we manage both sides, where we increase spending and we have the defence budget? Can the defence budget be a green budget? In other words, can we include issues of environment when we make all the new weapons? Shouldn't there be a way of looking at pollution when we do those things? We've never discussed that. What does defence spending mean? How about education included in the defence spending for AI?
We need to make sure this new budget, which is all right with the right so that we suddenly waive the deficit rules, includes some social elements in it.

Matthias Ecke (S&D). – Herr Präsident, Frau Vizepräsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Investitionen und Wettbewerbsfähigkeit, Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und Investitionen – das gehört aufs Engste zusammen. Dieser Bericht erinnert ja auch die Kommission daran, dass sie eine Investitionskommission sein will. Und das ist auch nötig, weil es muss dieser Kommission gelingen, die Investitionslücke in Europa zu schließen.
               

                  Das hat natürlich mit Verteidigung zu tun, und deswegen ist es ja auch richtig, die Ausweichklausel zu nutzen. Aber es geht auch um zivile Investitionen. Es geht um Krankenhäuser, es geht um Schulen, es geht um Wohnungen. Diese völlig kaputten Wohnungsmärkte in Europa sind doch aufs Engste verbunden mit den makroökonomischen Ungleichgewichten, die wir auch haben.
               

                  Deswegen müssen wir jetzt beherzt vorgehen, die Investitionslücke schließen, damit es nicht mehr reinregnet, Herr Ferber, in das gemeinsame Haus Europa, damit das Dach gedeckt ist, auch wenn stürmische Zeiten kommen.
               

Catch-the-eye procedure


Kinga Kollár (PPE). – Elnök Úr! Hiába történik gazdasági koordináció uniós szinten, ha egyes országok vezetői összevissza rángatják a kormányrudat, vagy éppen fejjel lefelé tartják a térképet. Az elhibázott gazdasági intézkedéseknek köszönhetően Magyarország kiugróan magas kamatot fizet adóssága után, háztartásonként közel 900 ezer forintot.
               

                  Orbán Viktor repülőrajtot is hirdetett. Az infláció, ami a szegények adója, valóban újra elstartolt. Több mint 7 százalékkal nőtt az élelmiszerek ára egy év alatt. A költségvetés tervezése összeomlott. A kormány már februárra elérte az egész évre tervezett hiány 40 százalékát. Ezzel Nagy Márton azt is veszélyezteti, hogy még több uniós forrástól esünk el. Újból felszólítom a magyar kormányt, hogy ne gyermekeink terhére akarják megtartani a hatalmukat. A szavazatok vásárlása és ígérgetések helyett, végre a magyar emberek hosszú távú érdekeit tartsák szem előtt. Kormányzásuk tizenötödik évére végre itt az idő!
               

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, doamnă comisară, stimați colegi, este foarte important ceea ce facem, nu numai ce spunem.
               

                  Semestrul european a fost o concepție, un concept care, sigur, aducea multe așteptări în statele membre, aducea multe așteptări la cetățeni, pentru că, până la urmă, noi trebuie să lucrăm pentru cetățeni. Rezultatele muncii noastre de aici, a reglementărilor, trebuie să ducă la creșterea nivelului de trai, creșterea locurilor de muncă, creșterea competitivității în Uniunea Europeană.
               

                  De aceea, doamnă comisară, sper că transmiteți Comisiei Europene că este nevoie ca în semestrul european, și ce vom face în acest program 2025, până ni se termină mandatul, să aducem măsuri care să ducă la creșterea coeziunii sociale și, așa cum spuneam, la bunăstarea oamenilor. Nu putem cu o energie care are preț de trei ori mai mare ca în Statele Unite, nu putem cu inputuri foarte mari, nu putem numai cu restricții. În domeniul agriculturii este iarăși o problemă. Sigur că avem nevoie și de mediu curat, dar avem nevoie și de o industrie europeană care să poată să reziste la competiția globală.
               

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Arvoisa puhemies, talouden laittaminen kuntoon, leikkaaminen, ei ole mukavaa hommaa. Kun valtion menot on paisutettu liian suuriksi, niiden karsiminen tarkoittaa, että joltain on otettava pois. Mutta näin vastuullisten hallitusten tulee toimia. Laittaa taloutta tasapainoon, sillä velkaa ei voi ottaa loputtomiin tai pommi räjähtää käsiin.
               

                  Kun oma velkapiikki alkaa olla tapissa, moni maa on alkanut kääntää katseitaan kohti Brysseliä. Mitä jos velkaantuminen hoidettaisiin EU:n ja siten muiden jäsenvaltioiden kautta? Tälle minä sanon jyrkästi ei.
               

                  Hiljattain Espanjan keskustavasemmistolaisen hallituksen kerrottiin havittelevan EU-budjetin tuplaamista ja että tämä tulisi toteuttaa maiden ottamalla yhteisvelalla. Se olisi jälleen yksi EU-katastrofi.
               

                  Ei ole Brysselin tehtävä ottaa velkaa. Tämä on selvä peli. Velanotto ja sen pitäminen kurissa kuuluvat jokaisen jäsenvaltion omalle vastuulle.
               

Billy Kelleher (Renew). – Mr President, I welcome the debate. I suppose sitting in the centre of this Chamber and listening to the ideological debates from the left and the right probably points out that I'm sitting in the right place.
We are obliged to put in place a sustainable financial and monetary policy in Member States and across the European Union, if we are to preserve, first and foremost, the integrity of the Euro currency. Of course, there are also immediate difficulties facing the EU in escalating geopolitical tensions and now, more recently, the trade tariff and tax distortion and threats to global trade.
But of course, we also have to address some very fundamental challenges facing us in the European Union from a social perspective as well, and that is the whole issue of housing and unemployment and weak economies not giving opportunities to our younger people. And therein lies the significant challenge that we face: to try and get budgets in line that are sustainable, but equally, to ensure that we have the capacity to invest into the economies, to ensure that we provide services for people and also stimulate housing, etc. And Draghi identifies the majority of those particular challenges.
Of course, it is up to the Commission and ourselves here to come up with funding bases that will sustain that in a sustainable way. And of course, the big debate will be around the mutualisation of risk, the mutualisation of debt and how we fund the European Union and the Multiannual Financial Framework into the future.

Μαρία Ζαχαρία (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κυρίες και κύριοι, η θρησκευτική ευλάβεια με την οποία οι Ευρωπαίοι ηγέτες προσκυνούν τα νούμερα, τις αγορές και τα κέρδη των επιχειρήσεων έχει οδηγήσει στην καταστροφή του κοινωνικού κράτους. Έχει θυσιάσει την κοινωνία στον βωμό της ανταγωνιστικότητας. Αυτή είναι και η ρίζα του δημογραφικού προβλήματος. Κυρία Mînzatu, η στήριξη των συλλογικών διαπραγματεύσεων και των συλλογικών συμβάσεων παντού, χωρίς εξαιρέσεις, χωρίς ειδικές ζώνες εκμετάλλευσης, είναι αδιαπραγμάτευτα για τους εργαζόμενους. Όσον αφορά την τεχνητή νοημοσύνη και την κβαντική τεχνολογία, δεν θα δεχτούμε μια νέα τεχνολογική φεουδαρχία, όπου οι μέτοχοι θα καρπώνονται την υπεραξία και οι εργαζόμενοι θα πληρώνουν το τίμημα με απολύσεις και φτώχεια. Η υπεραξία που θα παράγει αυτή η πρόοδος ανήκει στην κοινωνία. Συνάδελφοί μου, θα καταψηφίσω το ευρωπαϊκό εξάμηνο, που είναι θηλιά στον λαιμό μας, γιατί αποθεώνει την ανταγωνιστικότητα έναντι της ευημερίας των λαών και θα δώσω τη μάχη για μια Ευρώπη που θα σέβεται και θα υπερασπίζεται τους ανθρώπους της και δεν θα είναι το μακρύ χέρι της εργοδοσίας. Ευχαριστώ.
               

João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, esta discussão sobre o Semestre Europeu demonstra que as necessidades dos povos estão em segundo lugar face à opção por uma economia de guerra e ao desvio de fundos para os lucros e para a acumulação de capital.
               

                  Sobretudo num momento de estagnação económica, as prioridades na discussão de políticas económicas, sociais e orçamentais deviam ser as do reforço dos serviços públicos e das funções sociais do Estado, do aumento de salários e de pensões, de investimento na habitação, de recuperação do controlo público de setores estratégicos da economia.
               

                  O investimento público poderia servir o desenvolvimento económico e social, mas essa, infelizmente, não é a opção que aqui é feita. O Semestre Europeu e as recomendações específicas por país continuam centrados na liberalização e privatização de setores económicos, na liquidação de direitos laborais, na contenção e redução salarial, na diminuição da despesa com a proteção social, com apoios sociais, com a saúde e a educação.
               

                  Para o militarismo, o aumento das despesas militares e a corrida aos armamentos, estende-se a passadeira vermelha com o anúncio do programa Rearmar a Europa, deixando para trás, infelizmente, essas importantes prioridades sociais.
               

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


Roxana Mînzatu,
Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, thank you for the debate. I will comment on some aspects that were mentioned here, but the main one is that we need to explain clearly that the European Semester has a structure that puts fiscal sustainability and social convergence on an equal footing. This has to be stated again and I will say it again, because it is very important that we now have the social convergence framework in the Semester. It is exactly the kind of tool that is meant to make sure that all the reforms and measures that we are putting forward, all the procedural investments that we are designing, are not at the cost of people and are not bearing social costs. This is very important.
Today I speak also on behalf of Commissioner Dombrovskis, but I am in charge with employment, social, and I am very much involved in the work of the European Semester, taking care exactly of the social dimension of the Semester. That is why I mentioned that I am so happy that many Member States – not enough, but some Member States – put forward social reforms and social investments in the fiscal adjustment plans that are meant to support the quality of life of the people.
I would also emphasise that the Semester is a coordination tool that is very necessary to tackle challenges that are relevant for the entirety of the European Union. We have seen COVID. We have seen the energy crisis, the aggression war of Russia, we now see the geopolitical tensions that exist. They don't affect countries or regions or cities separately. They affect us as a Union. Of course, Member States have competences and are free to act according to those competences. But the European Union also needs to support and coordinate the efforts of Member States.
We are putting forward European money. RRF is just one of the examples – EUR 650 billion still being invested in education, in infrastructure, in healthcare, in digital, in green transition. It is such an important tool, where we have shown that together we can support the quality of lives and the growth and the recovery of our economies. This is an important signal that should be well understood.
I thank you for the debate. Of course, it is important that we continue to have a dialogue together on how we set our priorities. My message to you as again, Vice-President of the European Commission in charge of social rights, employment and preparedness, is that what we put in our policies is always meant to protect, empower, benefit every European citizen, no matter the age, no matter the country, gender and so on.

Adam Szłapka,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, Madam Commissioner, Honourable Members, as the Presidency, we remain committed to tackling the key challenges which we face today: strengthening European security and boosting the competitiveness of our economy. I can assure you that we will take work forward on the implementation of the economic governance framework and on the European Semester, in line with what was agreed with this Parliament last year. After all, ensuring the smooth coordination of Member States' economic and fiscal policies is a shared interest of us both.

Fernando Navarrete Rojas,
rapporteur. – Mr President, thank you, and thank you all, colleagues, for all your all your comments and discussions.
I would like to close this session on my side thanking all the Members and all shadow rapporteurs from all groups for the hard work, trying to find a compromise that I think is reasonable and acceptable for most of us.
So, I would like to ask for the support of all of you, colleagues, for this report. I think it addresses properly, in a reasonable manner, based on some sort of analytical thinking, some of the deep concerns you've expressed here today – so, basically, why we are having mediocre-at-best economic results in the medium and long run, the causes and its consequences, the need to establish fiscal buffers in order to accommodate crises, the ones we are currently facing and the ones that will come in the future as well, the need for an alignment in terms of the management and responsibility of the different policies and its financing.
It's equally absurd, in my view, to have a common policy that is financed nationally. And it's also absurd to have a national policy financially common. We have to align both things: responsibility and funding in order to make not just economic but political sense out of our policies.
So, I'd like to thank also the collaboration with the Employment Committee. So, we have two separate reports on our side as Parliament, but they are working together. So, I think there's been no undue overlap. We have a common message for the Commission and the Council on this important European Semester.

Maravillas Abadía Jover,
ponente. – Señor presidente, muchas gracias a todos los oradores, a la Comisión y al Consejo.
               

                  Los Grupos han mencionado diversos temas: demografía, economía social, pobreza, vivienda, empleo… y este informe habla de todo esto. Por eso les vuelvo a pedir: a la Comisión, responsabilidad frente a los cambios estructurales que necesitamos y, al Consejo, cumplimiento activo de estas reformas; porque cumplir con las recomendaciones específicas por país es cumplir con la sociedad europea, especialmente con las futuras generaciones.
               

                  Nuestro objetivo está claro: trabajar por el largo plazo del proyecto europeo. Por eso no podemos permitirnos crecimientos de deuda descontrolados o, lo que es lo mismo, que no estén ligados al crecimiento económico sólido. Hablamos de simplificación y, aun así, algunos Grupos siguen queriendo regular sin que la sociedad lo haya pedido. Este ha sido el problema de los últimos años: regulación sobre regulación; y hoy estamos aquí intentando quitar los palos que se han puesto en la rueda del tejido empresarial europeo.
               

                  Y finalmente, en materia de empleo también hay que cumplir. ¿Cómo es posible que haya países con grandes tasas de desempleo que tengan unos datos de ejecución del Fondo Social Europeo Plus mínimos? En algún caso, incluso, no han llegado a gastar ni un solo euro, señorías. Exigencia, compromiso y cumplimiento. Eso es lo que les pido a todos.
               

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


Written Statements (Rule 178)



Marc Angel (S&D),
in writing. – Social rights in Europe are at a crossroads. While we have made important progress, the risk of social fragmentation remains all too real if our economic governance and our quest for competitiveness do not fully integrate social priorities. The future of employment policies will be decisive in determining whether Europe can turn economic transformation into an opportunity for social progress. We can make this a reality, but only if we ensure that every European, regardless of background, has access to quality work, fair wages and strong social protections.
At the same time, the current geopolitical context demands substantial investments to guarantee the security of our continent. However, this cannot come at the expense of our social model. On the contrary, defence and social cohesion must go hand in hand. To achieve this, we must prioritise investments that create a common European defence that is made for Europeans and by Europeans, fostering industrial cooperation at EU level and strengthening our strategic autonomy.
As we navigate these challenges – economic uncertainty, climate change, digital transformation, security – we have a collective responsibility: to ensure that economic growth, social justice and defence are not competing forces but complementary pillars of a stronger Europe.

IN THE CHAIR: ROBERTA METSOLA


President

4.   Action Plan for the Automotive Industry (debate)

President. – The next item on the agenda is the Council and Commission statements on the action plan for the automotive industry (2025/2591(RSP)).

Adam Szłapka,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, Commissioner, honourable Members, thank you for inviting me to address the Chamber today to discuss the automotive industry in the EU shortly after the presentation of the Commission's industrial action plan for the European automotive sector. This shows how important the automotive sector is for the EU economy and I would like to underline that competitiveness and simplification is a top priority of the Polish Presidency.
Let us simply remind ourselves that the automotive industry supports over 30 million direct and indirect jobs in the European Union, and contributes approximately EUR 1 trillion to our GDP. But the EU automotive sector is currently facing significant challenges, including rapid technological advancement and intensifying global competition. Urgent action is needed to safeguard the industry's future and ensure its continued growth and success within the EU.
This is why we should look at the new action plan in the context of other recent proposals from the Commission, namely the Clean Industrial Deal and the Competitiveness Compass. When presenting new comprehensive plans that will impact a specific industrial sector it is important that the views and the concerns of that sector are heard. That is why we welcome the direct contribution to the action plan from stakeholders of the automotive sector, including industry leaders.
The Council has yet to examine the action plan and its various proposed actions. Today the Commission will present it at the Competitiveness Council meeting and then work will start at the technical level in the Council. I would like, however, to make a few preliminary remarks.
The regulation on CO2 emission performance standards for cars and vans is a key piece of legislation for the industry, in light of slower than expected uptake of battery electric vehicles and following calls from the industry, the Commission has now announced targeted amendment of this legislation to allow car manufacturers more flexibility. We understand that the proposal will be tabled soon. The Polish Presidency will treat this proposal swiftly and as a matter of priority. We count on the Parliament to do the same. It is essential to provide the industry with certainty without any delay.
In parallel, the Commission states that it will advance the regulatory review originally due in 2026. This review must be – as foreseen in the regulatory authority itself – comprehensive and holistic. It should strike a balance between decarbonisation targets and the need to boost innovation and the competitiveness of the European automotive industry. The action plan also addresses many other important challenges for the sector: autonomous driving, batteries, decarbonisation of corporate fleets, charging infrastructure, skills, level playing field – to name just a few.
But as always, the devil will be in the details. Therefore, we are looking forward to receiving more details on all the planned measures from the Commission, preferably sooner rather than later. More details on the expected timelines of the initiatives listed in the action plan would be also very welcome.

Apostolos Tzitzikostas,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, the Commission very much welcomes this opportunity to present to Parliament the Industrial Action Plan for the automotive sector, which was adopted on 5 March.
It is a plan to keep Europe's carmakers, suppliers and related service sectors innovative, competitive and firmly anchored in Europe. And of course, it's a plan of which I'm very proud. The automotive industry contributes today 7 % of the EU's GDP and employs around 14 million people directly and indirectly.
But it's not just about figures; the automotive industry is part of our history and a source of pride. Today, however, supply chain risks, energy costs, staff shortages, protectionism and overreliance on imported supplies are taking their toll. Our companies are falling behind on strategic technologies like batteries, software and autonomous driving.
Now, before putting pen to paper for this action plan, I spoke extensively with the industry, with manufacturers, suppliers and many more. I listened to their concerns and their proposals. And the resulting action plan actually introduces flagship initiatives in five game-changing areas: innovation and digitalisation, clean mobility, competitiveness and supply chain resilience, skills and a level playing field in the sector.
We already have the finance to turn ambition into reality: up to EUR 50 billion under InvestEU for clean tech and clean mobility. EUR 1.8 billion from the Innovation Fund for battery manufacturing, EUR 1 billion from Horizon Europe for connected and autonomous vehicles and batteries, EUR 570 million under the Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Facility for charging points with a focus on trucks, funding for skills and development including EUR 90 million from Erasmus+ for training and, of course, additional funding for SMEs.
Now, starting with innovation and digitalisation, we urgently need to regain our leadership in AI powered, connected and automated vehicles, including the in-car experience, and legislation must keep up. No country in the EU today has a complete rulebook for autonomous vehicle use. But China and the US are ahead with on-road testing and commercial operators.
So now it is time to draw on one of our biggest strengths: the single market. We need to gradually harmonise EU legislation on driverless vehicles. Large scale cross-border testbeds will help us understand traffic implications in a European connected and an autonomous vehicle alliance will target cutting-edge solutions.
Now moving on to clean mobility, Europe's emission standards for new cars and vans provide long-term certainty for investors, so they remain. But we must also be pragmatic: instead of annual compliance, we propose giving companies three years – 2025, 2026, 2027 combined – to comply with the targets. We will present a focused amendment on this, and I would urge you, honourable Members, to approve it without any delay for the benefit of our automotive industry, because this is not the moment – and I want to stress that – to reopen discussions on the broader legislation. We will, however, have the chance to start the review of this legislation in the second half of 2025 instead of 2026.
Now, in the meantime, electric vehicles already account for 15 % of EU sales. To grow that, we need to boost demand, starting with corporate fleets, they currently account for 60 % of EU car registrations. Their mileage is higher and they enter the second-hand market faster than private vehicles, making them an important market segment.
While we work on the legislative proposal, we have shared national success stories. We are also encouraging social leasing schemes for lower income citizens and faster installation of charging points. Both are crucial, because mobility is a right no matter where you live or what your income is.
Now, I said it during my hearing and once again I want to emphasise that no one should be left behind in this transition to cleaner mobility.
Now for charging points, soon we will publish recommendations on shortening the grid connection waiting time and we are looking into whether this should become mandatory for Member States. We need to consider the entire process as a top priority so that permits can be approved faster.
Let me now move to competitiveness and supply chain resilience and, in particular, batteries: they account for 30 to 40 % of a typical electric car's value and drive both jobs and economic competition in Europe. Now to compete, we need to develop a resilient battery production inside the EU, which contributes to the long-term competitiveness of the industry. We are also considering European content requirements for batteries, the components that are sold here.
We must never forget, however, honourable Members, the social dimension. Changes to global demand and production, economic shocks, geopolitical political changes and uncertainties have closed automotive plants all across Europe. Meanwhile, our workforce is ageing, so we need to train and attract workers with the skills of a digital future.
A European fair transition observatory will track employment trends across the automotive value chain, predicting threats and planning targeted support in advance. And we want to update the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund for Displaced Workers so that it supports companies restructuring, reducing the risk of layoffs.
Let me conclude with the fifth pillar, Madam President, the international business environment. Foreign investment in the EU automotive sector needs to contribute to the industry's long-term competitiveness, and we are looking into measures to make sure that this is the case. At the same time, we will continue to pursue free trade agreements and international partnerships for enlarged market access and, of course, for critical materials.
This is how the EU will ensure a level playing field and these actions, together with many others that are outlined in the action plan, will ensure that the next generation of vehicles is not just made in Europe, but innovated in Europe, powered by European technology and built on European values. Thank you very much and I look forward to your views.

Jens Gieseke,
im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar Tzitzikostas, Minister Szłapka, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In der Automobilbranche bestimmen aktuell wirtschaftlicher Abschwung und Krise die Schlagzeilen. Klar ist, ein ‘Weiter so’ kann es nicht geben; gut, dass die Kommission dies nun ebenfalls erkannt hat. Wir brauchen eine pragmatische und ausgewogene Politik. Der Aktionsplan zur Automobilwirtschaft, über den wir heute diskutieren, ist ein erster wichtiger Schritt hin zu einem dringend notwendigen Kurswechsel der Kommission. Und die Zeit drängt. Die Industrie braucht jetzt die Flexibilisierung bei den Zielen für das Jahr 2025. Niemand würde es verstehen, wenn in diesen harten Zeiten mit Werksschließungen und Entlassungswellen auch noch Strafzahlungen fällig würden. Die Kommission muss den Vorschlag wie angekündigt bis Ende des Jahres auf den Tisch legen. Wir müssen schneller werden. In Zukunft müssen Innovation, Digitalisierung und Wettbewerbsfähigkeit eine deutlich stärkere Rolle spielen. Die angekündigten Initiativen zum autonomen Fahren oder zur Unterstützung von Forschung und Entwicklung in Europa sind daher ausdrücklich zu begrüßen.
               

                  Aber obwohl der Aktionsplan viele positive Elemente enthält, ist es nicht der erhoffte große Wurf. Anstatt beim Verbrennerverbot endlich Klarheit zu schaffen, verpasst die Kommission diese Chance, sich klar zu einer technologieoffenen Gesetzgebung zu bekennen. Stattdessen bleibt sie vage und unkonkret; nur die Ankündigung, dass die Überprüfung vorgezogen werden soll, reicht nicht. Die Kommission muss hier zügig nachliefern.
               

                  Für die EVP ist klar: Wir brauchen einen umfassenden Ansatz, eine vollständige Technologieneutralität bis zum Jahr 2035, eine Anerkennung der Rolle von Plug-in-Hybrid-Elektrofahrzeugen. Wir brauchen eine Verbesserung der Ladeinfrastruktur, insbesondere für Elektro-LKW, und eine vorgezogene Überprüfung der Ziele für schwere Nutzfahrzeuge und Trailer, weil diese nicht realistisch sind. Als EVP sind wir entschlossen, Millionen gut bezahlter Industriearbeitsplätze in Europa zu sichern und die technologische Führungsposition zu wahren. Wir wollen die Klimaziele Europas erreichen, indem wir die Industrie nicht abwürgen, sondern auf die Innovationskraft setzen. Es ist Zeit für einen Kurswechsel. Packen wir es an!
               

Mohammed Chahim,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, we all have strong feelings when it comes to the car industry, we all have the same nostalgic feelings. But I must say that nostalgia is good, but not if it lets you stick in the past. Not if it blocks innovation, not if it blocks change.
Today, I feel like I'm in the boardroom of Nokia when the iPhone was just released. The touch screen, the ability to browse on the internet and play music – it was revolutionary. The response of Nokia was to try to make the keyboard phone more attractive instead of responding to innovation – and we all know how that story ended.
Because by allowing carmakers to not fulfil the mid-term goal it's like telling Nokia to keep on producing the keyboard phone. It will not cut it for our industry. And with these plans, with these delays to switch to zero-emission vehicles in Europe, I only see two winners: the companies that are lagging behind, that are only looking at short-term gains, and China, who already leads the EV market and sees the competition sabotaging itself. Because with this delay, we also delay the second-hand market, which is very important to the access of electric vehicles.
We need to create the conditions for EV cars to thrive within Europe. We need to push for an electric corporate fleet, introduce social leasing to make EVs accessible for all Europeans. And while we are talking about range extenders and debate on flexibilities of penalties of companies that made more than 100 billion in profits in the last few years, China invests in solid-state batteries with a range of more than 1 500 kilometres.
This could not be our answer to plan for a successful response to these developments. And just like Nokia, it's the lack of innovation that threatens our future, not the goals we've set eight years ago.

Klara Dostalova,
za skupinu PfE. – Paní předsedající, bruselská byrokracie se rozhodla vsadit vše na jednu kartu – na elektromobily – a přitom zcela ignoruje realitu trhu, ekonomickou situaci členských států i osud stovek tisíc zaměstnanců v automobilovém průmyslu. Komise plánuje podporu bateriové výroby, ale kde vezmeme suroviny? Evropa je z devadesáti procent závislá na dovozech klíčových materiálů z Číny. Komise mluví o podpoře pracovních míst a přitom tiše připouští, že stovky tisíc lidí přijdou o práci. Místo férové podpory tradičního automobilového průmyslu nabízí vágní sliby o rekvalifikaci, jako by se lidé z montážních linek mohli ze dne na den stát programátory umělé inteligence.
               

                  A konečně plán mluví o spravedlivé transformaci. Jak může být spravedlivá transformace, která likviduje tradiční technologie, ignoruje vodíková řešení a hybridní modely a zároveň tvrdě postihuje ty, kteří na elektromobil zkrátka nemají peníze? Potřebujeme skutečný plán, který kombinuje inovace, konkurenceschopnost a respekt k ekonomické realitě a technologickou neutralitu. Tento akční plán není bohužel řešením. Je to krok k hospodářskému úpadku Evropy.
               

Alexandr Vondra,
za skupinu ECR. – Paní předsedající, budu mluvit česky, protože pro mou zemi je politika Evropské komise vůči automobilovému průmyslu katastrofou. Pět let tu kritizuji, že cesta, kterou nám Evropská komise silou vnutila, cesta zákazů, příkazů a nesmyslných regulací a dotací, cesta, která je v rozporu s přáním zákazníků i s ekonomickou realitou, je cestou do katastrofy. Tato katastrofa se teď odehrává. Jedná se o výkrm Číny a Elona Muska za peníze evropských daňových poplatníků. Už si to uvědomuje i Komise a začíná opravovat to, co nám vnutila. Fajn, ale je to málo.
               

                  To, o co jde teď, jsou tři věci. Za prvé, rozložení pokut na tři roky nestačí, potřebujeme více. Alespoň pět let. Za druhé, jednostranná fixace na elektromobilitu musí skončit. Je třeba jít cestou opravdu technologické neutrality, včetně spalovacích motorů na syntetická paliva a další nástrojů. A za třetí, review v roce 2025 je fajn, ale vůbec neřešíte nákladní automobily. Musíme udělat daleko, daleko více.
               

Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy,
namens de Renew-Fractie. – Voorzitter, commissaris, de Europese auto-industrie zit in een perfecte storm. De markt in China is ingestort, terwijl daar de grootste winsten gemaakt werden. De Chinezen en Tesla hebben een technologische voorsprong. Zij maken gewoon betere en goedkopere auto's. De Europese stimuleringsmaatregelen worden afgebouwd, de laadinfrastructuur loopt achter, de Europese batterijfabriek is net failliet gegaan en nu komen daar ook nog de Amerikaanse heffingen bovenop.
               

                  Het basisprobleem is dat de Europese auto-industrie veel te laat is overgestapt op elektrische voertuigen. We weten allemaal dat te lang vasthouden aan verouderde technologie een industriële doodzonde is. Experts verwachten dat elektrische auto's in 2028 al goedkoper zullen zijn in aanschaf en gebruik dan auto's met een verbrandingsmotor. Daarom moeten we nu gezamenlijk, publiek en privaat, ervoor zorgen dat Europa zo snel mogelijk betere en goedkopere elektrische auto's produceert, op basis van een overeenkomst tussen de Commissie en de industrie. Dit moet een brede overeenkomst zijn, die investeringen en innovatie inhoudt. De industrie moet dan wel ophouden te vertragen, zoals ze nu weer achter de rug van de Commissie om de voorstellen proberen uit te stellen. Als we nu niet versnellen richting elektrische voertuigen, kan over enkele jaren het licht in werkelijk elke Europese autofabriek uitgedaan worden.
               

Michael Bloss,
im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wirklich niemand in der Industrie bestreitet, dass die Zukunft der Automobilwirtschaft elektrisch ist. Die Zahl der Neuzulassungen von Elektroautos in Europa ist im Februar um 37 % gestiegen. Was machen Sie? Sie bremsen diesen Trend aus mit einem Angriff auf den Green Deal. Sie beugen sich einer Lobbykampagne gegen Regeln, die seit acht Jahren bekannt sind, und machen sich damit als EU-Kommission klein und schwach. Sie öffnen die Büchse der Pandora und geben den Prozess in die Hand von Verbrenner-Ideologen, die das gesamte Gesetz in Stücke reißen wollen. Und Sie schaffen damit maximale Unsicherheit bei den Konsumentinnen und Konsumenten, bei der Industrie, bei den Investoren.
               

                  Ich meine, Sie zeigen noch nicht einmal den Anspruch, mit der Konkurrenz aus China mitzuhalten. Herzlichen Glückwunsch! So kann man seine Industrie auch zerstören. Die Verlierer, das sind die Beschäftigten in der Automobilindustrie. Rechnen Sie mit dem Widerstand von uns Grünen, denn wir kämpfen für die Zukunft.
               

Jonas Sjöstedt,
för The Left gruppen. – Fru talman! Framtidens arbetsplatser i bilindustrin kommer inte att skapas med gårdagens teknik. När EU-kommissionen nu försämrar och skjuter fram miljökraven gynnas de företag som inte har gjort sin hemläxa. Det är istället dags att stödja bilindustrins omställning. Det är dags att ge skatterabatter till den som köper en elbil tillverkad i Europeiska unionen – en billig elbil.
               

                  När Kina öser på med statsstöd måste vi kunna stödja vår industri. Men när stödet betalas ut ska det ställas krav på goda arbetsvillkor, kollektivavtal och att det inte går till aktieutdelningar. Vi måste reformera en elmarknad som pressar upp elpriserna till två eller tre gånger det som betalas i konkurrentländerna. Det är nödvändigt och det går att ställa om. Det vet alla vi som faktiskt har arbetat i en bilfabrik.
               

Markus Buchheit,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Ja, meine Damen und Herren, man möchte fast sagen better late than never. Wobei leider schon 2019 klar war – der eine oder andere von uns war ja vielleicht schon damals vor den Werkstoren diverser Automobilhersteller –, dass uns Flottenstrafzahlungen, fehlende Technologieneutralität, das Ende des Verbrenners und andere Maßnahmen, wie z. B. die Verteuerung von Vorprodukten wie Stahl durch den Green Deal, am Schluss 200 000 bis 400 000 Arbeitsplätze kosten würden im Fahrzeugbereich alleine in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland.
               

                  Nun, damals war es der Green Deal – man wacht jetzt langsam auf in der Europäischen Kommission. Doch was sagt man denn jetzt wieder? Jetzt ist es das internationale Marktumfeld, das plötzlich ganz schwierig ist. Ja, das ist korrekt. Aber wenn dieses Marktumfeld so schwierig ist, wieso nimmt man dann den Firmen genau die Nische, die sie sich über Jahrzehnte zum Marktführer ausgebaut haben, nämlich den Verbrenner, und nimmt ihnen die unternehmerische Freiheit, die sie am Schluss zum Erfolg führt?
               

                  Wir müssen zurück zum Pragmatismus. Wir müssen zurück zur wirtschaftlichen, unternehmerischen Freiheit – das ist der Punkt. Und meinem Vorredner sei gesagt: Wenn die Grünen sich für die Zukunft einsetzen, dann würden sie sich auch für die Freiheit des Unternehmers einsetzen. Es sind nicht Subventionen, es sind nicht Verbote, die uns voranbringen. Es ist die wirtschaftliche Freiheit, es ist der Unternehmenswille der Firmen am Schluss, der uns nach vorne bringt – danke, Herr Bloss, für Ihre Zustimmung.
               

                  Und deswegen: Wenn die EVP, wenn die Kommission diesen Wechsel hin zum Pragmatismus will, weg von der gesteuerten Wirtschaft, hin zur unternehmerischen Freiheit, dann geht das nur mit uns, und dann geht das nur gegen die grüne Laus, die sich die EVP jetzt bitte aus dem Pelz schüttelt.
               

Peter Liese (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Beschäftigten in der Autoindustrie und bei den Zulieferern machen sich Sorgen. Eine Schlüsselindustrie in der Europäischen Union ist in einer schweren Krise. Die Hauptverantwortung dafür tragen die nationalen Regierungen, die zum Beispiel wie in Deutschland über Nacht die Förderung eingestellt haben, und natürlich auch die Unternehmen, die schwere Managementfehler begangen haben. Trotzdem begrüße ich Ihren Pragmatismus, Herr Kommissar. Wir müssen jetzt flexibel sein bei dem 2025-Ziel – das ist zwar nicht überambitioniert, aber es ist eben im Moment wichtig, eine Entlastung zu geben und keine Strafzahlungen für die Industrie.
               

                  In einem zweiten Schritt brauchen wir so schnell wie möglich Technologieneutralität – das Verbrennerverbot muss weg. Aber wir brauchen sofort gezielte Förderung, gezielte Förderung auch für Menschen mit mittlerem und niedrigem Einkommen.
               

                  Ich begrüße Ihre Idee zum Leasing, aber Sie sollten weiter gehen. Erstens sprechen Sie nur vom Klimasozialfonds: Die nationalen Einnahmen aus dem ETS2 sind sehr viel größer als der Klimasozialfonds. Und bitte reden Sie mit der Europäischen Investitionsbank, damit wir diese Förderung auch sofort machen können und nicht erst 2027, wenn das ETS eingeführt wird.
               

                  Mein letztes Wort gilt dem Pooling. Als wir das eingeführt haben, war das ein Instrument, um der europäischen Industrie Flexibilität zu geben. Wenn wir es jetzt so machen, wie es im Gesetz steht, und Ihren Vorschlag nicht annehmen, führt das dazu, dass Geld nach China und nach Tesla geht. Auch deswegen ist es wichtig, dass wir Ihren Vorschlag schnell annehmen. No money for Musk, liebe Freundinnen und Freunde!
               

Tiemo Wölken (S&D). – Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar! Die Automobilindustrie in Europa ist ein wichtiger Arbeitgeber, und deswegen sind die Ränge hier heute auch einigermaßen gut gefüllt. Gleichzeitig gilt aber auch, dass viele Menschen sich keinen Neuwagen kaufen, sondern dass sie einen gebrauchten Wagen kaufen. Deswegen müssen wir bei unseren Maßnahmen endlich für die breite Mehrheit der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher Unterstützung schaffen, wie sie in die Elektromobilität kommen – das ist ein wichtiger Punkt.
               

                  Für mich ist aber auch wichtig, dass wir anerkennen, dass wir die Klimaziele mit Verbrennungsmotoren nicht schaffen und dass wir die Klimaziele nicht damit schaffen, dass wir weiterhin Öl aus Saudi-Arabien und Russland kaufen. Und diejenigen, die immer erzählen, wir müssen uns als Europäische Union unabhängig machen, begeben sich hier wieder mit offenen Armen in die Hände der Erdölländer, und das ist falsch. Die Zukunft der Mobilität ist elektrisch, und sie ist die effizienteste Form der Fortbewegung.
               

                  Und Entschuldigung, synthetische Kraftstoffe sind ein Hirngespinst im Automobilsektor. Der normale Bürger wird sich das niemals leisten können, und wir müssen Politik für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger und nicht für Porschefahrerinnen und Porschefahrer machen. Deswegen vielen Dank für den Aktionsplan – viel zu tun, aber ich glaube, wir sind auf einem guten Weg.
               

Paolo Borchia (PfE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'automotive europeo è un malato, ha una patologia seria e la risposta che viene data è un brodino tiepido, per giunta. Mancano meno di dieci anni alla messa al bando del motore endotermico ma in Europa le auto elettriche non arrivano al 2%. Ma dove volete andare?
               

                  La regolamentazione ha avuto un impatto crescente sulla gamma dei modelli offerti ma non è stata in grado di condizionare gli orientamenti dei consumatori. E poi resta il grandissimo tema di come generare tutta l'energia elettrica che sarà necessaria per alimentare il parco auto degli europei.
               

                  Questo piano avrebbe dovuto invertire la tendenza a creare fiducia tra le case automobilistiche, tra le piccole e medie imprese dell'indotto, tra i consumatori. E, invece, non ha avuto il coraggio di riconoscere che l'approccio dell'Europa all'auto elettrica è fallimentare.
               

                  Avete messo tante aziende alla carità. Questo piano poteva essere il riscatto: invece è l'ennesima occasione persa.
               

Carlo Fidanza (ECR). – Signora Presidente, Ministro, Signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, non userò giri di parole. Il nostro gruppo si aspettava molto di più da questo piano.
               

                  Bene il rinvio delle multe per i costruttori, da noi fortemente richiesto; malissimo non aver previsto una deroga anche per il settore dei veicoli pesanti, la cui elettrificazione non è sostenibile sul piano tecnologico e di mercato, danneggiando pesantemente un settore nel quale ancora competiamo con l'industria extra-europea in condizioni di vantaggio.
               

                  Bene l'anticipo della revisione del regolamento CO2, anch'esso da noi fortemente richiesto; malissimo il mancato riferimento alla neutralità tecnologica, nonostante le rassicurazioni del Vicepresidente Séjourné.
               

                  Siamo, purtroppo, ancora di fronte a un piano intriso di ideologia full electric in stile Timmermans, per quanto annacquata dai continui richiami alla guida autonoma e i contenuti digitali: un errore scientifico, industriale, geopolitico imperdonabile.
               

                  Qualcuno probabilmente considera già perso l'automotive europeo e ci lascia intendere che dovremmo dedicarci alla riconversione verso la difesa della nostra industria pesante, con tanto di beatificazione di quel debito pubblico un tempo visto come fumo negli occhi.
               

                  Lo dico con chiarezza: noi non ci rassegniamo questa idea e continueremo a difendere l'industria e il lavoro europeo, la libera scelta dei consumatori e la neutralità tecnologica, la filiera della componentistica e la sovranità industriale e politica dell'Europa.
               

                  Questo ci hanno chiesto i cittadini nelle urne a giugno 2024 e con buona pace degli orfani di Timmermans: per questo continueremo a batterci.
               

Pascal Canfin (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, au nom de la délégation française du groupe Renew, je voulais dire à quel point nous soutenons aujourd'hui le plan d'action de la Commission européenne pour l'industrie automobile, et ce dans toutes ses dimensions. La première dimension, c'est le soutien à la demande. Vous l'avez dit, on a investi beaucoup d'argent public et de capitaux privés sur l'offre; il nous faut maintenant absolument soutenir la demande.
               

                  Le deuxième élément, c'est de soutenir le ‘made in Europe’. Pour la première fois, il y a dans ce plan pour l'industrie automobile un élément extrêmement clair qui dit que tout l'argent public européen doit être réservé à ceux qui produisent en Europe, que ce soit des autos ou l'ensemble de la chaîne de valeur, y compris les sous-traitants et les batteries. Nous avons malheureusement aujourd'hui une mauvaise nouvelle, avec Northvolt, mais nous devons soutenir notre industrie européenne de la batterie.
               

                  Le troisième élément, c'est que nous devons garder le cap que nous avons fixé. Nous sommes prêts à faire ce que vous nous demandez de faire, à savoir aller vite dans le soutien à la modification des sanctions en 2025, et ce de manière ciblée, stable et rapide. J'espère que l'ensemble des groupes de ce Parlement européen aura la sagesse de suivre cette proposition.
               

Majdouline Sbai (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, quand j'écoute certains d'entre vous, je me demande bien où vous avez grandi. Moi, j'ai grandi dans un territoire qui a perdu des dizaines de milliers d'emplois industriels en deux décennies, à cause de l'augmentation des capacités de production dans des pays tiers et de l'absence d'anticipation des mutations économiques en cours de la part des entreprises et des pouvoirs publics.
               

                  Aujourd'hui – et déjà dès le mandat précédent –, avec le pacte vert, les pouvoirs publics sont enfin au rendez-vous pour que nous puissions rattraper notre retard quant à la décarbonation de notre économie et à notre indépendance énergétique. C'est une chance pour notre industrie.
               

                  Alors, oui au soutien aux infrastructures de recharge, aux véhicules professionnels, au crédit-bail social et au ‘made in Europe’! Ne reculons pas aujourd'hui face à des entreprises qui ont versé des milliards de dividendes en 2023! Soyons même visionnaires, en investissant vraiment dans une stratégie pour l'écomobilité!
               

Rudi Kennes (The Left). – Madam President, honourable Members, Commissioner, millions of jobs were lost in the automotive sector in the last 20 years – in Spain, Italy, France, Belgium and now also Germany.
In the Commission's plan, there is one page about workers. They want to give them a little bit of unemployment benefits, then give them random jobs and waste their skills.
Like Audi Brussels, for example: highly qualified workers trained to produce electric cars, now all fired. Instead of making electric cars, now they want to build weapons and move the production to Mexico. Absurd.
It is the same with Van Hool, an ultra-modern bus company going bankrupt because the Flemish Government decided to buy buses outside of the EU.
And the EU wakes up now, but this crisis started a long time ago, and they want again to give billions of your taxpayers' money to the same companies that created this crisis. As a former car worker, I refuse to be silent while my colleagues are getting fired by the thousands.
We can make electric cars here for modern, clean mobility. We have the capacity, we have the skills, so let's do it.

Marcin Sypniewski (ESN). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Kiedyś europejski samochód to była prawdziwa marka, symbol klasy i jakości. Mój świętej pamięci wujek, który mieszkał we Francji, jeździł tylko francuskimi autami, po kolei peugeotem, renault, citroenem, bo to była duma, tradycja i styl. My, Polacy, sprowadziliśmy miliony niemieckich świetnych aut, bo Niemcy robili solidne i wytrzymałe maszyny. Nawet w Stanach doceniano europejską motoryzację, bo to były najlepsze auta, najlepszy design. Nawet James Bond nie chciał niczego innego przecież.
               

                  A potem przyszli niestety szaleńcy, którzy wymyślili elektryczną ładę. Katastrofa. I niestety dzisiaj widzimy tego skutki. To nie jest żaden kryzys, tylko rezultat tej szalonej polityki. Ostatnio nawet pod waszym nosem w Brukseli zamknęła się fabryka Audi. A co ciekawe, to była pierwsza fabryka, która osiągnęła neutralność energetyczną, emitowała zerowy ślad węglowy. I co? Teraz już też jest zerowy ślad węglowy, ale nie ma już miejsc pracy i nie ma samochodów.
               

Katarína Roth Neveďalová (NI). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, kolegovia, Európska únia dnes stojí pred zásadnou otázkou, či budeme pokračovať v nereálnych zelených experimentoch alebo konečne začneme počúvať priemysel, odbory a občanov. Na Slovensku chceme rozumnú, a nie ideologickú transformáciu automobilového priemyslu.
               

                  Vítam, že zavládol aspoň trošku zdravý rozum a Komisia predložila možnosť pre automobilky na splnenie štandardov CO2 o tri roky a nezačne už dnes vyberať pokuty, ako to bolo navrhnuté pôvodne, pretože to by bolo skutočne likvidačné.
               

                  Vieme, že termín zákazu spaľovákov do 2035 je nezmyselný a škodlivý. Musíme celé rozhodnutie opäť prehodnotiť a zároveň dať priestor na vývoj syntetických palív, hybridov a vodíka, nielen elektromobilov, ktoré sú extrémne drahé. Európske automobilky nepotrebujú byrokratické obmedzenia. Potrebujú férové podmienky. Ak Európska únia nevie ochrániť vlastnú výrobu, o pár rokov sa budú predávať len zahraničné autá, naše fabriky zatvoria brány a stratíme milióny pracovných miest.
               

                  Elektrické autá zároveň potrebujú na výrobu menej pracovníkov. Ak chceme podporovať transformáciu, musíme dať jasné financie na rekvalifikáciu, a nie iba rozprávať o sociálnej zodpovednosti.
               

Danuše Nerudová (PPE). – Paní předsedající, žijeme v bezprecedentní době. Naše bezpečnost visí na vlásku a náš průmysl je oslaben, počínaje tím automobilovým. Spolu s kolegy ze skupiny Evropské lidové strany jsme ale ukázali, že jsme pragmatická síla, která přináší konkrétní řešení. Předložili jsme jasný plán, jak dostat evropský automobilový průmysl z kritické situace, a Evropská komise nás vyslyšela. Díky. Přijala přesně ten směr, který jsme navrhli, tedy technologickou neutralitu a omezení dopadu emisních sankcí, které tíží automobilky a brzdí investice. Je to první krok na cestě k posílení konkurenceschopnosti evropského průmyslu. Tuto změnu ale musíme dotáhnout do konce a opatření schválit. Já doufám, že to zvládneme co nejdříve.
               

                  Dámy a pánové, plníme naše sliby a z Green Deal děláme real deal. Když jsme aktivní, konstruktivní a máme ambici, můžeme Evropu změnit.
               

Dan Nica (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar, este o veste foarte bună – un plan de acțiune pentru o revitalizare a industriei europene de automobile este ceea ce toată lumea așteaptă, pentru că situația este una foarte proastă.
               

                  De ce este situația aceasta atât de nefericită pe care o traversăm în această perioadă? Motivele sunt simple: o piață internă care este invadată, inundată de produse care vin din afara Uniunii Europene, mașini din China, un milion și jumătate anual, exact trei fabrici de producție a mașinilor în Uniunea Europeană, care nu plătesc taxe. Și evident că mașinile lor sunt și mai ieftine. La România, la Pitești, Dacia plătește pe tot ceea ce cumpără, au încorporate în ele taxele pe bioxid de carbon. China nu. Și atunci cum este o competiție reală?
               

                  A doua chestiune: baterii buster. Da, deci această chestiune de a-i ajuta pe cei care produc baterii în Uniunea Europeană este un lucru care este absolut vital. Avem și tehnologia necesară, avem și programe de cercetare și toate aceste lucruri trebuie să se regăsească într-un preț final care să fie accesibil.
               

Roman Haider (PfE). – Frau Präsidentin! Mit dem Verbrennerverbot und immer strikteren Emissionsnormen zerstört die EU die europäische Autoindustrie vorsätzlich, und wegen der Emissionsnormen müssen unsere Autobauer sogar CO2-Kredite bei der Konkurrenz aufnehmen, und dann drohen auch noch Strafzahlungen in der Höhe von mindestens 15 Milliarden Euro. Und wer jetzt glaubt, er rettet die europäische Autoindustrie, wenn er diese Strafzahlungen einfach nur verschiebt um ein paar Jahre, dem sage ich: Die Einzigen, die von dieser Politik eine Hilfe zu erwarten haben, das sind die chinesischen Autobauer; die werden unsere europäische Autoindustrie nämlich vom Markt fegen, wenn die EU weiter am Green Deal festhält.
               

                  1 Billion Euro an Wertschöpfung, ein Drittel der privaten Forschungs- und Entwicklungsinvestitionen, 14 Millionen Arbeitsplätze: Das ist die europäische Autoindustrie heute – noch. Und das wird mit dieser ideologiegetriebenen, ja geradezu religiös wahnhaften Netto-Null-Emissions-Green-Deal-Politik zerstört. Damit müssen Sie endlich aufhören, Herr Kommissar! Mit dem Green Deal müssen Sie aufhören. Dann brauchen wir keine Aktionsrettungspläne, dann wird unsere Industrie von selbst überleben können.
               

Massimiliano Salini (PPE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, abbiamo sbagliato un po' tutti in questo dibattito. Come istituzioni, abbiamo invertito l'ordine dei fattori e abbiamo deciso che, oltre a definire il quadro generale e gli obiettivi da raggiungere – compito della politica – abbiamo inventato un nuovo modello in cui la politica decide anche tutti i passaggi, le tecniche e le tecnologie con cui perseguire quei risultati.
               

                  Per cui da un'economia sociale di mercato, abbiamo forzato verso un'economia dirigista, molto rigida e, quindi, molto contraria a un modello innovativo capace di accettare le sfide più rilevanti.
               

                  Infatti, le abbiamo anche dimenticate alcune di queste. Il tema della guida autonoma, giustamente, ritorna nel piano che la Commissione europea propone oggi ma è mancato durante tutto il dibattito: ci siamo limitati a parlare di motori.
               

                  Quindi ci sono alcuni punti su cui il piano della Commissione, eccezionalmente, coglie il punto, perché da un lato, interviene sul tema delle multe e interviene bene. Sul tema dell'innovazione interviene correttamente e ringrazio il Commissario ai Trasporti per aver anticipato con chiarezza che, entro la fine di quest'anno, vi sarà la revisione: quindi, non attenderemo il 2026.
               

                  Che revisione avremo? Una revisione ambiziosa: sì, un'ambizione che è la tipica ambizione della politica che non va in un'unica direzione ma che apre il mercato e che guarda ai cittadini e alle imprese esattamente secondo i loro interessi e non secondo gli interessi della politica. Aprire al mercato e aprire alla libertà tecnologica.
               

Johan Danielsson (S&D). – Fru talman! Kommissionären! Det enda sättet att säkra jobben i fordonsindustrin är att leda teknikutvecklingen. Det kommer att kräva kunnande och produktion i hela värdekedjan, inte minst när det kommer till batterier. Vi behöver också öka den europeiska efterfrågan på elektriska fordon, och jag ser därför fram emot ett ambitiöst förslag om gröna företagsflottor så snart som möjligt.
               

                  Mycket av debatten i dag handlar om bilindustrin, men jag vill också understryka vikten av att vi skapar förutsättningar för de europeiska företag som i dag leder utvecklingen av elektriska bussar och lastbilar. Då behöver vi ökade ambitioner för laddinfrastruktur, anpassade regler för vikter och dimensioner som gör att vi kan fortsätta att leda utvecklingen.
               

                  Till sist, om vi skapar flexibilitet i 2025-målen måste vi säkerställa att det inte drabbar de företag som redan klarar målen med marginal, som har gjort investeringarna, såsom Volvo, och att de nu inte straffas när vi skapar flexibilitet. För det är bara genom att leda omställningen som vi kan rädda 14 miljoner arbetstillfällen i Europa.
               

Ondřej Krutílek (ECR). – Paní předsedající, pane komisaři, jsem rád, že věnujete automobilovému průmyslu speciální akční plán. Je tam řada dobrých kroků do budoucna, třeba důraz na autonomní řízení anebo výrobu baterií v Evropě. U klíčové otázky pokut jste ale průmyslu přijeli na pomoc jenom na půl plynu. Dejte mu pět let, jak požaduje ACEA, která agreguje postoje všech evropských automobilek. Pak je tu revize legislativy CO2 z aut. Pokud začnete pracovat hned dnes, do konce roku nám můžete doručit nejenom zprávu, ale i příslušný legislativní návrh.
               

                  Kritický je cíl 2035, který absolutně nedává smysl. Potřebujeme technologickou neutralitu a dostupná auta, která si lidé budou chtít kupovat. A úplně jste zapomněli na nákladní auta. I tam potřebujeme revizi ještě letos.
               

Jan-Christoph Oetjen (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar, Herr Minister! Es zeugt von Klugheit, wenn man auf eine Regulierung, die aus der Zeit gefallen ist, die entstanden ist, als die Welt noch eine andere war, damit reagiert, dass man diese Regulierung überarbeitet. Deswegen ist es richtig, Herr Kommissar, dass wir jetzt diese Regulierung anfassen und verhindern, dass Strafzahlungen für Automobilbauer fällig werden, oder sogar, dass diese Automobilbauer an ihre chinesischen oder amerikanischen Konkurrenten Geld überweisen müssen – das wäre aus meiner Sicht aberwitzig.
               

                  Diese Flexibilität, die Sie einführen, findet daher meine volle Unterstützung. Ich möchte Sie aber bitten, auch Flexibilität in der Regulierung zum Erreichen der Klimaziele hervorzubringen. Denn ich möchte nicht die Klimaziele abschwächen, aber ich möchte, dass wir die Erreichung dieser Klimaziele auch durch alternative Kraftstoffe erreichen können, denn das zielt eben auch auf die CO2-Reduktion ab, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar. Von daher wäre ein Vorziehen der Revision aus meiner Sicht richtig. Und dann sollten alle alternativen Kraftstoffe, die am Markt verfügbar sind, auch in der Automobilindustrie eingesetzt werden können.
               

                  Und eine Bitte: Kucken Sie bitte nicht nur die Autos an, sondern kucken Sie auch den LKW-Bereich an, da ist auch Handlungsbedarf.
               

Dariusz Joński (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Panie Ministrze! Branża motoryzacyjna w Europie jest na zakręcie i wszyscy o tym wiemy. Są chociażby trzy powody, dlaczego tak właśnie jest. Po pierwsze, agresywna konkurencja z Chin, po drugie, rosnące koszty produkcji, a po trzecie, transformacja w kierunku niskoemisyjności. I chcę powiedzieć bardzo jasno. To nie jest czas na wahanie. To jest czas, kiedy musimy zapewnić wsparcie dla naszego sektora motoryzacyjnego, bo jeśli tego nie zrobimy, to ryzykujemy utratę milionów miejsc pracy i osłabienie naszej gospodarki. To jest dokładnie 14 mln miejsc pracy i prawie 1,2 bln europejskiego PKB. No i dochodzi jeszcze ta duma, ta europejska duma właśnie z branży motoryzacyjnej. To możemy stracić. I dlatego musimy po prostu o to dbać. Ten plan działania, który został przedstawiony, to jest krok we właściwym kierunku, ale on jest jeszcze niewystarczający, chcę powiedzieć. Europa też nie może tylko i wyłącznie patrzeć biernie, i dyskutować, i debatować w nieskończoność. Musimy działać zdecydowanie, aby przyszłość europejskiej motoryzacji była bezpieczna i konkurencyjna. I chcę zwrócić się do pana komisarza. Otóż uważam, że zakaz sprzedaży samochodów od 2035 r. to jest zagrożenie, a nie szansa. I to jest ostatni dzwonek na to, żebyśmy to zmienili. Do dzieła, Europo!
               

(Mówca zgodził się na pytanie zasygnalizowane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki)


Bogdan Rzońca (ECR),
pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki. – Chciałem zapytać Pana, bo słuchałem uważnie wypowiedzi Pańskiej, mianowicie powiedział Pan, że przemysł motoryzacyjny powinien otrzymać wsparcie finansowe. Proszę mi wskazać źródła tego wsparcia finansowego, w sytuacji, kiedy brakuje 800 miliardów euro na bezpieczeństwo Unii Europejskiej, kiedy brakuje 30 miliardów euro na spłatę zadłużenia Unii Europejskiej po New Generation od 1 stycznia 2028 r., kiedy wszyscy tu mówią, że trzeba wspierać zielony przemysł. Proszę mi wskazać budżetowe wsparcia finansowe dla tego przemysłu.
               

Dariusz Joński (PPE),
odpowiedź na pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki. – Debatę na temat obronności mieliśmy wczoraj. Mówiliśmy o 800 mld, które chcemy zainwestować w obronę Europy. Wydaje mi się, że chyba tu wszyscy jesteśmy zgodni, że te 650 mld, które kraje będą mogły wydać plus te 150 mld pożyczki, która będzie udzielona krajom, to jest to, na co czeka dzisiaj Europa. Oprócz tego debata na temat aktywów rosyjskich, te 280 mld, które moglibyśmy ruszyć między innymi po to, żeby obronić Europę, to jest odpowiedź. Natomiast w propozycji komisarza: 50 mld zainwestowane w miejsca pracy, 50 mld zainwestowane m.in. w europejską branżę motoryzacyjną, to jest odpowiedź, oczywiście. To jest odpowiedź na to, żebyśmy uratowali miejsca pracy. W Pana kraju, w moim kraju 200 tys. ludzi pracuje w branży motoryzacyjnej, która daje 7% PKB. Jeśli Pan się zastanawia, skąd, to musimy właśnie znaleźć te pieniądze, żeby zainwestować, bo chodzi o miejsca pracy.
               

Jorge Buxadé Villalba (PfE). – Señora presidente, esto va de mal en peor. El plan de acción para el sector de la automoción es otra oportunidad perdida. No renuncian a su objetivo de prohibir en Europa la venta de coches diésel o gasolina en 2035, aunque reconocen que los consumidores no los quieren y las ventas van a la baja. Pero ustedes insisten en imponer al productor qué debe hacer y al consumidor qué debe conducir. Keynes, a su lado, parece Von Mises. Tenían una oportunidad para rectificar y lo único que proponen es retrasar las sanciones a las empresas tres años, proponer esquemas de arrendamiento social a cargo de los impuestos y, por supuesto, gasto público, subvenciones, impuestos y deuda para que el desastre no se note en la cuenta de resultados de los directivos.
               

                  Convertir a la Unión Europea en una empresa pública de leasing es una puñetera broma. Valencia con Ford, Barcelona con el Grupo Volkswagen, Galicia y Zaragoza con Stellantis y Castilla y León con Renault se verán muy afectadas; pero eso a ustedes parece que les da igual. Los problemas son demoledores para el mercado de componentes. En España hay más de mil empresas y quince centros tecnológicos, la mitad en peligro de extinción. Y la pregunta que se hacen los europeos es: ¿para quién trabajan ustedes?
               

Susana Solís Pérez (PPE). – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, este Plan de Acción para la industria del automóvil es muy bienvenido. El sector está en un momento crítico y miles de empleos, en peligro. Es muy buena noticia que la Comisión reaccione, por fin, para evitar multas millonarias a los fabricantes europeos. Sería incomprensible castigar a nuestra industria —a la que hemos obligado a electrificarse— para beneficiar luego a los coches chinos.
               

                  Pero también necesitamos autocrítica. ¿Es este Plan suficiente para que Europa recupere su liderazgo? Se pone mucho énfasis en la tecnología del futuro: en el coche autónomo y conectado. Es muy necesario, pero esto no resuelve los problemas del presente: los incentivos a la compra de vehículos o la mejora de la infraestructura de recarga se limitan a recomendaciones a los Estados miembros. Apenas se trata el problema de los camiones. ¿Es realista electrificar el transporte pesado en este momento? No, no lo es. ¿Por qué no flexibilizar ya sus objetivos? ¿Dónde queda la neutralidad tecnológica en todo este Plan?
               

                  Señor comisario, este Plan es un gran paso, pero para que haya un futuro de la automoción europea necesitamos antes asegurar que haya una industria fuerte en el presente.
               

Elena Sancho Murillo (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, el sector automovilístico europeo se encuentra en un momento crucial y por eso no podemos permitirnos más incertidumbre.
               

                  Reabrir la legislación vigente pone en riesgo la competitividad de nuestra industria. El objetivo 2035 debe ser inamovible. Cambiarlo solo generaría retrasos e inestabilidad y afectaría a los miles de trabajadores que dependen de este sector. Lo que debemos hacer es dar soluciones dentro del Reglamento actual y no más debates interminables.
               

                  Europa debe enfocarse en la electrificación, porque —no nos dejemos engañar— la neutralidad tecnológica no beneficiaría la industria, porque eso significa apostar por tecnologías más caras y menos eficientes que los vehículos eléctricos. Debemos invertir en baterías y proporcionar estabilidad en el sector.
               

                  La solución no es postergar objetivos, sino crear políticas que ayuden tanto a ciudadanos como a productores. Por eso, necesitamos incentivos directos para la compra, un leasing social europeo o acciones de recapacitación de los trabajadores del sector. La transición debe ser justa, ambiciosa y sin marcha atrás.
               

Aleksandar Nikolic (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, le monde de demain sera probablement constitué de voitures autonomes et hyperconnectées. Vous en prenez acte et prévoyez un plan pour faciliter l'autonomisation, harmoniser les règles et fixer des normes communes. Cependant, la vraie question, c'est: comment ces nouvelles voitures vont-elles rouler?
               

                  Vous prenez tout dans le désordre: vous prônez le tout-électrique, sans que les écosystèmes industriels français et européen y soient prêts et sans qu'on arrive à produire de moteurs électriques abordables et efficaces. En forçant les Européens à passer à l'électrique, vous les forcez à payer leur voiture plus cher, à recharger leur véhicule pour faire moins de kilomètres qu'avec le thermique, qui plus est avec une électricité plus onéreuse, à cause de votre idéologie pro-éolienne.
               

                  Il y a cent ans, le progrès – le vrai progrès, le progrès technologique – avait permis aux Français de passer de la charrette à la voiture. Cent ans après, votre progrès idéologique obligera une majorité de Français à renoncer à la voiture, sans solution de remplacement. Le progrès a toujours permis aux humains de vivre mieux. Désormais, à cause de vous, il est synonyme d'appauvrissement et de déclin.
               

Siegfried Mureșan (PPE). – Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, the automotive industry accounts for millions of jobs in Europe, much of the taxes and also a big part of our exports. It is in our fundamental interest that it does well here in Europe. Every car manufacturer that you meet and visit will proudly report to you how they reduce CO2 emissions and how they invest more in renewable energies.
I think, today, car manufacturers can be a partner in protecting the environment, in reducing CO2 emissions, in improving energy efficiency. This is why we need to do the transition to the green economy with them, not against them. We cannot establish rules here which endanger production in Europe, because that would mean more unemployment, fewer taxes, fewer jobs here in Europe. The first and most important thing that we have to provide to every investor is long-term predictability.
Commissioner Tzitzikostas, I think you did very well in giving certain flexibilities to this important industry over the course of the next three years, solving an urgent problem that we have. But the most important thing that investors need is long-term predictability. We have a target in place, which is rigid, regarding 2035. The most important thing that we have to do right now is look at that target, and see if and how we can achieve it with the industry, not against it, and give employers that sense of long-term predictability.

Diego Solier (NI). – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, hoy no hablamos solo de normativas o plazos, hablamos de miles de empleos, de fábricas que son el alma de nuestra economía, de una industria automotriz que ha hecho de España el segundo mayor productor de Europa. Y, sin embargo, la estamos dejando caer.
               

                  Mientras China y los Estados Unidos protegen y subsidian a sus fabricantes, Europa impone regulaciones que asfixian a los nuestros. ¿De verdad creemos que flexibilizar hasta el 2027 salvará nuestras fábricas? No basta. No podemos resignarnos a ser el mercado de todos y el motor de nadie.
               

                  Necesitamos acción, no excusas: incentivos reales a la producción local, apoyo decidido a la innovación y una política industrial firme que defienda nuestro mercado; porque proteger nuestra industria es proteger a nuestros trabajadores, a nuestras familias y nuestro futuro.
               

                  No esperemos a reaccionar cuando sea demasiado tarde. Actuemos ahora.
               

Matteo Ricci (S&D). – Signora Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, l'Europa ha davanti a sé una sfida cruciale: mantenere la leadership tecnologica industriale nell'era della mobilità sostenibile. Il piano d'azione va nella giusta direzione ma, per farlo, servono scelte chiare e coraggiose.
               

                  Primo: una stabilità normativa. Non possiamo permetterci di cambiare le regole in corsa. Le aziende devono poter investire con certezza e fiducia nel futuro. Ma stabilità non significa immobilismo: al contrario, significa creare le condizioni per il cambiamento. Dobbiamo rafforzare l'infrastruttura digitale europea, garantire la produzione di semiconduttori in Europa e investire nella filiera industriale delle batterie, dove oggi siamo troppo dipendenti da altri continenti.
               

                  Dal lato della domanda servono strumenti concreti per rendere i veicoli elettrici accessibili a tutti e, allo stesso tempo, dobbiamo spingere su un'infrastruttura di ricarica privata capillare.
               

                  Ma diciamolo con chiarezza: tutto questo non sarà possibile senza risorse adeguate. Il livello di finanziamenti di cui si discute oggi è semplicemente insufficiente. Se vogliamo un'industria competitiva, posti di lavoro, qualità e una transizione che non lasci indietro nessuno, dobbiamo essere più ambiziosi e determinati, anche negli investimenti pubblici.
               

Engin Eroglu (Renew). – Sehr geehrte Frau Parlamentspräsidentin Metsola, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar! Halten wir fest, wo wir stehen: Bis 2019 hatte die Europäische Union eine gesunde und funktionierende Automobilindustrie. Dann ist Frau von der Leyen ins Amt gekommen, und wir haben es geschafft, mit ihrer Agenda und ihrer Kommission unsere Automobilindustrie in die Krise zu schieben – das ist ja die Realität. Wir haben also politische Fehler in der Kommission gemacht, und leider hat das Parlament mit einer Mehrheit diese Fehler auch bestätigt. Nun haben wir Abermilliarden versenkt und andere Automobilkonzerne finanziert mit den europäischen Fehlern.
               

                  Nun lassen Sie uns doch nicht an den Fehlern weitermachen! Herr Kommissar, haben Sie den Mut, geben Sie unseren Automobilkonzernen die Möglichkeit, ihre Autos zu verkaufen! Am Ende des Tages ist es doch wie mit dem Smartphone: Die Menschen googeln das Smartphone mit der längsten Laufzeit und kaufen es, ob sie es brauchen oder nicht. Und so ist es auch mit dem Auto, Herr Kommissar: Bevor nicht eine Batterie da ist, die 1000 Kilometer schafft, werden die Menschen den Autos nicht vertrauen, den Elektroautos; ob sie es brauchen oder nicht, sei dahingestellt.
               

                  Aber wir müssen die Technologie vorantreiben und nicht irgendwelche Verbote. Geben Sie alle Technologien frei, lassen Sie den Markt entscheiden! Ich glaube an unsere Automobilkonzerne und nicht an die Ideen von Frau von der Leyen.
               

Kai Tegethoff (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, I hear every day that the automotive industry is struggling to meet its targets, cannot afford to pay its fines, will have to lay off its workers. Yes, the sector faces struggles, but these are of its own doing. Some fail to recognise global headwinds and stick their heads in the sand instead of adapting.
Here's a fact: the CO2 targets work. We parliamentarians love to gather here in this Chamber and talk about European competitiveness, but do we genuinely think that rolling back our targets, damaging investment certainty, rewarding laggards and penalising first movers will do anything for Europe's car industry other than leave it further behind China's?
There's blood in the water and the sharks have smelt it. If you think the car industry has any intention to comply with the targets in 2027, you are sadly mistaken. Instead, the next goal will be to tear down the 2035 goal in total.
Yes, the automotive plan contains some nice ideas. Give us a legislative proposal for the electrification of corporate fleets as soon as possible. But opening the targets is a huge mistake and the Commission needs to take it off the table.

Raúl de la Hoz Quintano (PPE). – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, gracias por la celeridad, gracias por escuchar al sector antes de adoptar decisiones y gracias también por la importancia que por fin se está dando al sector de la automoción. Hemos de reconocer en primer término que este Plan supone un importante avance, principalmente porque da solución a algunos de los problemas inmediatos a los que se enfrenta el sector, como es el tema de las sanciones. Pero, sin embargo, hemos de ser también sinceros: el Plan, desde nuestro punto de vista, se queda corto. La neutralidad tecnológica no solamente es un eslogan, es una absoluta necesidad. No podemos encadenar nuestro futuro a una solución cuando la innovación y la tecnología nos ofrecen múltiples caminos para descarbonizar y, además, ganar en competitividad.
               

                  Tengamos una visión tecnológica mucho más abierta, mucho más realista. Apostar como única solución por la electrificación nos condena a la dependencia y, por lo tanto, a la deslocalización. La descarbonización es un objetivo irrenunciable, por supuesto, pero en absoluto puede resultar una trampa para nuestro desarrollo industrial. Por lo tanto: menos dogmas, más libertad, más neutralidad, pero también menos limitaciones, menos prohibiciones y más incentivos.
               

Thomas Pellerin-Carlin (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, je souhaite aujourd'hui vous raconter l'histoire de Soizic. Elle est infirmière à domicile à Torigni-sur-Vire, dans la Normandie rurale. Chaque jour, elle prend sa voiture pour aller dispenser des soins médicaux à domicile. À la fin de la journée, elle a souvent fait 120, 150, 180 kilomètres. Depuis que Soizic a une petite voiture électrique, une Renault Zoé, elle économise plus de 1 000 euros par an, car conduire une voiture électrique coûte trois fois moins cher que conduire une voiture à pétrole. L'histoire de Soizic, c'est l'histoire – banale – de cette révolution écologique en marche: un gain de pouvoir d'achat, une meilleure qualité de vie et une énergie propre et européenne, pour une voiture fabriquée en Europe par une entreprise européenne.
               

                  La question qui se pose à nous, désormais, est simple: comment rendre la voiture électrique accessible non seulement aux infirmiers, mais aussi aux aides-soignants, qui gagnent moins d'argent? C'est pour elles et eux que nous devons créer un crédit-bail social européen, un système simple, un loyer de 50 à 150 euros par mois, pour que des millions de travailleurs de nos ruralités puissent enfin accéder à la liberté qu'offre la voiture électrique.
               

Filip Turek (PfE). – Madam President, the European Commission has listened to our warnings about the fleet emissions fines on European car manufacturers, and I thank the Commission for it. It's a small but important change, because now they will have more time to comply with the targets, but we must stop the obsession with emissions and cancel these fines completely. We need to reduce or eliminate green regulations – for example, the new proposal on end-of-life vehicles – which do not help save the environment. They are simply taxes that make everything – not only cars – more expensive for our citizens.
Tens of thousands of workers have already lost their jobs because our industry, especially the car industry, is not competitive against Asia and the United States. The utopia of the Green Deal was created thanks to von der Leyen and Timmermans' manipulation and corruption.

PRESIDENZA: PINA PICIERNO


Vicepresidente


Beata Szydło (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowny Panie Komisarzu! Europejska branża samochodowa jest ofiarą Zielonego Ładu i myślę, że to dla nas wszystkich jest tutaj oczywiste. I my dzisiaj debatujemy, zastanawiamy się, w jaki sposób uratować miejsca pracy, w jaki sposób nie dopuścić do tego, żeby Europejczycy byli wykluczeni komunikacyjnie. Możemy sobie te mrzonki o tym, że ludzi będzie stać na zakup elektrycznych, drogich samochodów, włożyć między bajki. Tak nie będzie i wiele tysięcy ludzi będzie pozbawionych możliwości przemieszczania się.
                  

                     Z drugiej strony mówimy o miejscach pracy. Praktycznie każdego dnia dostajemy informacje o tym, że kolejne zakłady dokonują zwolnień pracowników. Ale my dzisiaj zastanawiamy się, co zrobić, żeby ten Zielony Ład dalej kontynuować i jeszcze ratować branżę samochodową, czyli de facto dokładać do czegoś, co i tak wiemy, że będzie zniszczone, bo projekt Zielony Ład prowadzi do tej katastrofy gospodarczej, konkurencyjnej. Rozwiązanie jest tylko jedno: my potrzebujemy przemysłu samochodowego w Europie i ze względów właśnie społecznych i gospodarczych. I rozwiązanie jest jedno proste: trzeba odrzucić Zielony Ład.
                  

Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez (Renew). – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, sabe, por conversaciones que hemos tenido, que este sector también es estratégico para Euskadi, con más de 38 000 puestos de trabajo, y que también está sufriendo, al igual que en el resto de Europa.
                  

                     Los pasos firmes y la estabilidad son clave para materializar las inversiones necesarias para innovar, descarbonizar y fortalecer las cadenas de valor y los ecosistemas que rodean este sector. En ese sentido, valoramos positivamente la apuesta que se ha hecho por mantener objetivos de descarbonización y electrificación y, a su vez, por tener la cintura necesaria para proteger esos 38 000 puestos de trabajo en un momento en que es difícil.
                  

                     Pero también queremos pedirles avanzar en positivo a partir de ahora, con esa evaluación que tienen que hacer, sin descartar ninguna opción que nos ayude a descarbonizarnos —insisto, ninguna— incluyendo también cualquier tipo de combustible sostenible y, por lo tanto, apoyando a aquellas industrias y consumidores y consumidoras que estén dispuestos a remar con nosotros y con nosotras en el camino.
                  

Angelika Niebler (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Europa ist Autokontinent. Die europäische Automobil- und Zulieferindustrie ist eine unserer Kernindustrien in der Wirtschaft. Über 13 Millionen Menschen arbeiten in der Automobilindustrie, in meinem Heimatland, in Deutschland, alleine über 600 000. Ich will, dass das so bleibt. Ich will, dass diese Arbeitsplätze erhalten bleiben, und deshalb begrüße ich den Aktionsplan der Kommission. Es ist ein richtiges und wichtiges Signal für unsere Betriebe und unsere Mitarbeiter in dieser so wichtigen Industrie.
                  

                     Ich halte es für richtig, dass den Automobilherstellern mehr Zeit gegeben wird, die CO2-Grenzwerte zu erreichen und damit eben hier die Strafzahlungen zu vermeiden. Die Situation ist wirtschaftlich sehr herausfordernd. Das ist ein richtiger Vorschlag.
                  

                     Das, was mir bei der Kommission jedoch im Aktionsplan fehlt, ist ein ganz klares Bekenntnis, dass sämtliche alternativen Antriebstechnologien auch in Zukunft uneingeschränkt zugelassen werden. Das Aus für den Verbrenner für das Jahr 2035 muss weg. Ich hoffe sehr, dass wir dafür auch hier in diesem Parlament eine Zustimmung bekommen.
                  

Viktória Ferenc (PfE). – Elnök Asszony! Az európai autóipar a szakadék szélén áll. Az iparág súlyos versenyképességi problémákkal küzd és lemarad a globális piacon. A háború miatt elszabadult energiaárak, valamint a Bizottság által kikényszerített túlzott zöld szabályozások ellehetetlenítik a fenntartható, de versenyképes autóipar működését.
                  

                     A Bizottság által bemutatott cselekvési terv sajnálatos módon egy elszalasztott lehetőség. Egyrészt késve érkezett, másrészt nem eléggé átfogó. A stratégiai párbeszéd során – szégyenteljes módon – nem történt megfelelő konzultáció az iparág minden szereplőjével, és ez az irány továbbra is változatlan. Az autóipart egy túlzó és rugalmatlan szabályozási rendszer fogságában tartja a Bizottság. A felesleges és iparromboló büntetések felszámolásán túl szükség van pozitív ösztönzőkre is. Csökkenteni kell az energiaárakat, az elektromos töltőinfrastruktúrát erősíteni, és támogatni kell valamennyi alternatív üzemanyagtípust. Európának egy erős autóiparra van szüksége.
                  

Ľudovít Ódor (Renew). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, komisár, milí kolegovia, v minulosti boli ľudia po celom svete unesení z európskych áut. Boli synonymom pokroku, kvality, exkluzivity. Odvetvie však postupne stráca svoju konkurencieschopnosť, ohrozujú ho štátom dotované elektroautá z Číny, ako aj úplne súkromne financované modely zo Spojených štátov. Navyše nové clá z druhej strany Atlantiku môžu uštedriť ďalšiu ranu tomuto odvetviu.
                  

                     Treba konať. Už včera bolo neskoro. Pre mňa sú tri kroky veľmi kľúčové.
                  

                     Po prvé, Európska únia bude úspešná, len ak sa medzinárodný obchod vráti od mocenských hier k zmysluplným pravidlám. Treba maximálne využiť silu trhu so 450 miliónmi ľudí na tvrdé a sebavedomé negociácie.
                  

                     Po druhé, treba investovať, inovovať a prepájať. Kľúčovým slovom sú siete: nabíjacie stanice, elektrické siete, siete užívateľov, autonómnych áut…
                  

                     Po tretie, cena: bude nutné nájsť mechanizmy na cenové zvýhodnenie počiatočnej investície.
                  

Pär Holmgren (Verts/ALE). – Fru talman! Jag vill börja med att betona att vi nu för första gången någonsin har uppmätt över 430 miljondelar (ppm) koldioxid i vår atmosfär. Det är högt ovanför det planetära gränsvärde på 350 som vi måste sikta på för att undvika de mest allvarliga konsekvenserna av klimatförändringarna. Vi vet också att av de senaste 20 månaderna har alla utom en varit över en och en halv grad över de förindustriella nivåerna, ur ett globalt perspektiv. Vi befinner oss mitt i en extremt allvarlig klimatkris.
                  

                     Det här är verkligen inte rätt tillfälle att försvaga, minska kraven på bilindustrin och samtidigt givetvis också bestraffa de delar av bilindustrin som redan har investerat i omställning. Kommissionen har lovat att stå upp när det gäller klimatmålen. Gör verkligen det! Lyssna på klimatlarmen och inte på de mest konservativa delarna av bilindustrin och av politiken, som tyvärr verkar ha lagt i backväxeln när det gäller klimatomställning.
                  

Alexandra Mehnert (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Europäische Kommission hat einen guten Aktionsplan vorgelegt, um die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der europäischen Automobilindustrie zu stärken. Auch für meine Heimat Sachsen-Anhalt ist der Aktionsplan wichtig – zum einen aus Sicht der Autofahrer, denn gerade im ländlichen Raum ist das Auto unverzichtbar, andererseits aber auch aus Sicht der Automobilwirtschaft, die mit der Nähe zu Wolfsburg, auch in Sachsen-Anhalt, gute Arbeitsplätze schafft.
                  

                     Dieser Aktionsplan bietet Chancen für die Schaffung von Arbeitsplätzen und für Investitionen in zukunftsfähige Technologien, aber auch den Erhalt der bereits existierenden Strukturen. Wir unterstützen besonders die Förderung der Batterieproduktion innerhalb der EU, die auch im ländlichen Raum Arbeitsplätze schaffen wird.
                  

                     Ebenso wichtig ist die Unterstützung für die Entwicklung von Fachkräften. Gerade in den ländlichen Regionen müssen wir die vorhandenen Potenziale nutzen und durch gezielte Umschulung und Weiterbildungsprogramme wettbewerbsfähige und nachhaltige Wirtschaft erfolgreich gestalten. Die CDU setzt sich dafür ein, dass dieser Aktionsplan die Balance zwischen ökologischer Transformation und sozialer Verantwortung wahrt. Es geht darum, die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit unserer Industrie zu sichern und gleichzeitig den Menschen im ländlichen Raum Perspektiven zu bieten. Nur so kann eine gerechte und nachhaltige Zukunft für ganz Europa gelingen.
                  

Procedura ‘catch-the-eye’
                        


Nikolina Brnjac (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, povjereniče, automobilska industrija nije samo ekonomski stup, već je i ključni pokretač inovacija.
                  

                     Suočena je s globalnom konkurencijom, tehnološkim promjenama i nužnom zelenom tranzicijom. Povjereniče, pozdravljam akcijski plan koji osigurava 1,8 milijardi eura za stvaranje sigurnog i konkurentnog lanca opskrbe sirovinama za baterije, što će pridonijeti našoj strateškoj autonomiji. Elektrifikacija je važan smjer, no ne smijemo zanemariti i ulogu alternativnih goriva i vodika. Europska automobilska industrija može biti predvodnik inovacija, ali samo ako stvorimo pravedne uvjete na globalnom tržištu, spriječimo nelojalnu konkurenciju iz trećih zemalja i osiguramo poticaje za čistu mobilnost.
                  

                     Ako želimo da sljedeća generacija vozila bude proizvedena u Europi, sada moramo djelovati s vizijom, hrabrošću i odgovornošću.
                  

Rosa Serrano Sierra (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, la industria de la automoción en Europa se enfrenta a una crisis sin precedentes. En Aragón, donde representa casi el 31 % del empleo industrial y el 35 % de las exportaciones, el impacto es evidente: la producción diaria en la planta de Stellantis en Zaragoza estuvo por debajo de la mitad de sus posibilidades en 2024 y se prevé que caiga un 22 % en 2025, y cerca de mil trabajadores han perdido su empleo —temporal o definitivamente— en un año.
                  

                     El Plan de Acción Industrial para la automoción es un primer paso para revitalizar este sector —y nos alegra que incluya incentivos a la demanda de coches eléctricos, a facilitar la instalación de puntos de recarga y a impulsar las baterías con marca Europa—, pero se queda corto en la dimensión social.
                  

                     Necesitamos una Directiva de transición justa para las regiones más afectadas y condicionar los fondos que deriven del nuevo Pacto por una Industria Limpia a la protección de los trabajadores, además de medidas para apoyar la formación y el reciclaje profesional.
                  

                     Europa debe ser competitiva, pero con justicia social.
                  

Silvia Sardone (PfE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, malafede, ignoranza, incapacità: ecco, diciamo, che queste sono le parole d'ordine del disastro da voi provocato nel mondo dell'auto, in questi anni.
                  

                     Malafede? Malafede, perché avete portato avanti politiche industriali mascherate da ambientali, un suicidio economico con più disoccupati in Europa mentre a Pechino festeggiano.
                  

                     Ignoranza? Beh, diciamo non ci voleva un genio: avete imposto cambiamenti epocali senza studiare gli effetti che avrebbero provocato.
                  

                     Incapacità? Avete fatto male a imprese, famiglie e lavoratori senza ottenere nessun miglioramento dal punto di vista ambientale.
                  

                     Ora correte ai ripari. Ma non basta spostare la scadenza delle multe per dare ossigeno ai produttori: dovete cancellare il blocco diesel e benzina del 2035. Gli incentivi non servono a nulla, non convincono i consumatori.
                  

                     Attendete il crollo di tutta la filiera? Dovete chiedere scusa e cambiare rotta una volta per tutte.
                  

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Arvoisa puhemies, hyvät poliitikot, teitä on syyttäminen. Eurooppalainen autoteollisuus on ajettu kriisiin hölmöllä vihreällä politiikalla, muun muassa ylikireillä päästömääräyksillä.
                  

                     Emme pysty kilpailemaan esimerkiksi kiinalaista teollisuutta vastaan niin kauan kuin ylimääräinen ja ylikireä sääntely jarruttaa investointiamme sekä kurittaa yrityksiämme. Autoteollisuus on tästä silmiinpistävä esimerkki.
                  

                     Tuen eurooppalaista autoteollisuutta, sillä se muodostaa taloutemme ja omavaraisuutemme selkärankaa: seitsemän prosenttia koko EU:n bruttokansantuotteesta ja työpaikkoja yli 13 miljoonalle ihmiselle. Kuka hölmö haluaa tällaista voimavaraa lähteä mäiskimään? Meidän tulee varmistaa, että siirtymä vähäpäästöiseen liikenteeseen tapahtuu kantokykymme rajoissa – kuluttajien, teollisuuden ja koko yhteiskunnan.
                  

Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE). – Senhora Presidente, no meu país, a Galiza, o setor automóvel é estratégico e, a minha cidade, Vigo, onde se situa uma das fábricas da Stellantis, é um dos motores industriais.
                  

                     Qualquer plano ou medida implementada deve ter em conta o seu impacto social, Comissário. A Galiza perdeu 22 empresas no setor automóvel entre 2008 e 2024 e um total de 24 000 postos de trabalho. Precisamente a fábrica da Stellantis, entre 2007 e 2023, aumentou a sua produtividade em 33 %, enquanto a força de trabalho foi reduzida em 35 %, passando de 10 000 trabalhadores a 6 300. Neste sentido, como dado curioso, em 2007, cada trabalhador produzia 56 veículos, enquanto em 2024 produzia 84.
                  

                     Como denuncia o sindicato CIG, esta é uma das fábricas mais produtivas da empresa, graças a uma política extensiva de precariedade laboral em todas as áreas. O que não pode ser é que a classe trabalhadora esteja cada vez mais empobrecida.
                  

                     Tenha isso em conta, Comissário, tenha em conta as zonas altamente dependentes do setor automóvel e o seu impacto social.
                  

João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, ‘Tanques em vez de carros’: é este o slogan que faz retumbar os tambores da guerra na Alemanha e na União Europeia. Transformar fábricas automóveis em fábricas de armamento é o que aponta o plano de reconversão de fábricas da maior empresa de armamento da Alemanha.
                  

                     Para as multinacionais, há apoios e planos multimilionários, como o Rearmar a Europa; para os trabalhadores, há despedimentos, formação e requalificação profissional, subsídios. Às classes exploradoras, servem-se privilégios em bandejas de prata; aos trabalhadores, à classe trabalhadora, servem-se balas e paliativos. As prioridades e opções políticas têm de ser outras, e também os trabalhadores do setor automóvel em Portugal precisam de outra resposta.
                  

                     Garantir os postos de trabalho e defender e aprofundar os direitos dos trabalhadores, reforçar e desenvolver a capacidade de produção industrial, orientar a política económica e a produção industrial em função da satisfação de necessidades sociais e do desenvolvimento nacional, em vez dos lucros das multinacionais, combinar a produção industrial, a política de mobilidade e transportes e a proteção ambiental, promovendo a melhoria dos transportes públicos.
                  

                     Essas são algumas das referências para uma política alternativa pela qual continuamos a lutar.
                  

Alexander Sell (ESN). – Frau Präsidentin! Vor fünf Jahren hat Frau von der Leyen hier den Green Deal vorgestellt; Europa solle als erster Kontinent klimaneutral werden. Greta Thunberg würde jetzt sagen: Wir sind auf einem guten Weg. Seit Jahren sinkt der CO2-Ausstoß in Deutschland. Das liegt aber vor allem an der rückläufigen Industrieproduktion. Stahl-, Chemie- und Automobilindustrie sind nicht mehr wettbewerbsfähig wegen hoher Abgaben und viel zu teurer Energie.
                  

                     Das Ergebnis sind massive Gewinneinbrüche und Stellenabbau. 30 % weniger Gewinn bei Mercedes und Volkswagen, 35 000 Stellen bei Volkswagen gestrichen, bis zu 300 000 Arbeitsplätze in der gesamten Automobilindustrie. Besonders irre ist: Durch die willkürlich gesetzten Klimaziele der EU werden europäische Autohersteller gezwungen, CO2-Zertifikate von der chinesischen Konkurrenz zu kaufen, um Strafen aus Brüssel zu vermeiden. So finanzieren wir den Aufstieg Chinas und den Ausverkauf unserer Industrie.
                  

                     Verantwortlich für diesen industriepolitischen Harakiri Europas ist die Kommission. Frau von der Leyen und ihre CDU sind eine Gefahr für die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und den Wohlstand Deutschlands und Europas. Hier helfen keine Kurskorrekturen, hier hilft nur abwählen.
                  

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Madam President, dear people of Europe, imagine Karl and Bertha Benz sitting here in our Chamber today, listening to our debate on the future of the automotive industry. Karl – the visionary, the man who invented the car – would probably shake his head and say, 'Again, the same old arguments.' And Bertha – the true pioneer, the woman who took the first long-distance drive to prove the world wrong – would roll up her sleeves and say, 'Enough talking, let's move forward'.
Back then, people called their invention a 'devil's carriage', they threw stones at it, they laughed at it. Now, 140 years later, some of you sound just like those sceptics. Some deny the need for green transition, when in reality you're just (with another round of green-bashing) clinging to power, and some cling to outdated models under the pretext of technological neutrality, when in reality you know change is never free.
Yes, our automotive industry faces challenges, but progress never comes looking backwards. Instead of protecting the past, we need to move forward.

Zala Tomašič (PPE). – Gospa predsednica! Pozdravljam korake Evropske komisije nasproti avtoindustriji. Moramo pa se zavedati, da eden od glavnih razlogov za nedoseganje ciljev ni nepripravljenost avtomobilskih podjetij k premiku k elektrifikaciji, ampak je pomanjkanje povpraševanja. Trg je manjši kot pričakovano, pri čemer trga za težka in pa, poudarjam, tudi za lahka gospodarska vozila sploh ni. In ta vozila uporabljajo dizel. In ne verjamem, da se bo to spremenilo v prihodnjih letih.
                  

                     Zelo podpiram premik k tehnološki nevtralnosti in upam, da bomo čim prej ukinili prepoved prodaje motorjev na notranje izgorevanje po letu 35. Na splošno mislim, da bi politika morala postaviti določene okvire in ustvarjati pogoje za razvoj, investicije in inovacije in da je bolj efektivno ponujati ekonomske iniciative, kot pa se zatekati k prepovedim in kaznim.
                  

Matthias Ecke (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin! Ja, die Automobilindustrie ist eine extrem wichtige Industrie in Europa – ein Rückgrat für Wertschöpfung, für Innovation und Beschäftigung. Und ja, aktuell ist sie in der Krise – es ist richtig, das anzuerkennen. Und deswegen ist es auch gut, dass die Kommission handelt mit diesem Aktionsplan. Aber sie ist doch nicht in der Krise wegen dem Green Deal. Sie ist in der Krise, weil sie zentrale Innovation in der Branche verschlafen hat in vielen Bereichen, und deswegen ist es jetzt wichtig, regulatorische Stabilität zu wahren. 2035 muss erhalten bleiben: der Ausstieg für den fossilen Verbrenner. Und gleichzeitig hat die Kommission mit dem pragmatischen Weg für die Strafzahlungen jetzt den richtigen Weg beschritten.
                  

                     Aber wir brauchen noch mehr; wir brauchen Nachfrageimpulse. Im Moment ist die E-Mobilität noch etwas teurer in der gesamten Lebensspanne als ein Verbrenner – das wird sich ändern, sobald auch mit dem ETS die Preise für fossile Brennstoffe hochgehen. Aber bis dahin braucht es noch Nachfrageimpulse, und das fehlt mir ein bisschen in dem Plan der Kommission. Wir brauchen social leasing, wir brauchen Prämien, wir brauchen Support für die europäische Autoindustrie.
                  

Anna Zalewska (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Prezentacja Komisji to plan przedłużenia agonii przemysłu motoryzacyjnego. Żadnych dat, terminów, dokumentów, które trzeba zmienić jutro, pojutrze, najpóźniej za tydzień. Mówicie Państwo o pieniądzach. Przecież te pieniądze są w budżecie, żadnych nowych. Przecież mówicie o tym samym od bardzo wielu lat i nic się nie zmienia. Mówicie o tym, że trzeba wesprzeć, wzmocnić łańcuchy dostaw. Które? Jeżeli chodzi o metale ziem rzadkich, w większości wypadków jesteśmy uzależnieni od wszystkiego co zewnętrzne, co na zewnątrz Unii Europejskiej. Wreszcie mówicie Państwo, że trzeba wesprzeć, że trzeba pomóc, zapominając o tym – bo tego dzisiaj nie było – o ETS2, czyli o zbliżającym się podatku, karze dla obywateli, którzy będą jeździć samochodami spalinowymi. Trzeba traktować Europejczyków poważnie, zadania wykonywać i planować tak, żeby były wykonywalne.
                  

Diana Riba i Giner (Verts/ALE). – Señora presidenta, hoy, al hablar de la industria de la automoción europea, mi primer pensamiento va para esos trabajadores y trabajadoras que han sufrido las consecuencias de la deslocalización y, entre ellos, pienso en las más de 20 000 personas que perdieron sus puestos de trabajo con el cierre de la planta de Nissan en Barcelona.
                  

                     La Comisión sabe que la crisis del sector de la automoción no viene de la noche a la mañana. Llevamos años, ERE tras ERE, viendo el traslado de nuestra producción y cómo Europa no se anticipa al reto de la electrificación ni estimula la inversión pública y privada necesaria. Europa ha dejado que China adquiera nuestro conocimiento tecnológico y compita de manera desleal.
                  

                     Aunque celebramos el Plan de Acción de la Comisión, también sabemos que las prisas ahora no pueden ser una excusa para reducir los objetivos de la reducción de emisiones. Centrémonos en ofrecer estabilidad legal a la inversión, en impulsar la oferta de coches eléctricos asequibles, infraestructuras de carga y en construir una cadena de valores europea resiliente. Y todo ello creando lugares de trabajo seguros y de calidad.
                  

Андрей Новаков (PPE). – Колеги, имам една задача за вас. В Европа има 285 милиона автомобила. Да допуснем, че утре сутрин всички те до един станат електрически и заживеем в унисон с майката природа.
                  

                     Въпрос: Какво ще се случи в осем вечерта тогава, когато всеки един от тези електроавтомобили се включи в електропреносната система? Отговор: Нито една крушка в Европа няма да свети. Извод: Не ни трябват никакви забрани, а свободен пазар. Хората знаят по-добре от нас как да си похарчат парите.
                  

                     Да насърчаваме новите технологии е едно, да забраняваме другите е съвсем друго и е погрешно.
                  

(Fine della procedura ‘catch the eye’)


Apostolos Tzitzikostas,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, thank you, first of all, very much for your comments and your questions today. I have listened carefully and taken note of your concerns. These indeed include emission standards, technology neutrality, the need to boost innovation and the lack of relief for heavy duty vehicles. I also recognise the social aspect of the sustainable and smart transition, as well as the need to safeguard Europe's automotive competitiveness.
Now we need to balance long-term certainty with realism, with pragmatism. I know that the sector has been concerned about the risk of excessive penalties this year, linked to the 2025 CO2 emission standards target. This is why we are proposing this very targeted amendment by the end of March, offering manufacturers breathing space in the form of greater flexibility.
Now, let me be clear: reaching the 2035 targets for cars will require a technology-neutral approach. We said we said already that e-fuels will have a role to play and we will look into issues as part of the review, which, as I said earlier, is now brought forward to this year. But as part of this review, we will also look at all technological developments across the board in a fact-based analysis. And a bit later we will also look at trucks and heavy buses.
Our top priority, honourable Members – my top priority – is not only to save the EU automotive sector, but to give it the opportunity to thrive globally. Now, when I presented the plan, I set out how we want to de-risk the value chain and build new capacities. The Critical Raw Materials Act will prioritise strategic mining and refining projects in Europe, streamlining permits and providing financial support. We are also negotiating supply agreements with key resource-rich countries. We will facilitate private sector investments and reduce dependency on external suppliers. The battery booster package will further support the EU-based production of battery cells and components.
Now, I heard many of you on corporate fleets. More details will follow in our proposal. However, I can already assure you that it will strike a balance promoting the adoption of technology-neutral vehicles while at the same time avoiding extra burden for SMEs. We are conducting a study to assess various options and I will gladly share the results with you once they are available.
Finally, we must never forget the social dimension. We need to support workers during this difficult transition. That is why there will be more money out of the ESF plus for training, and also money out of the European Globalisation Fund that will be available for those whose jobs are at risk.
Honourable Members, with all these actions, together with many others that are outlined in the action plan, we will de-risk value chains and build new capacities. We will balance long-term certainty with pragmatism and we will step up political, economic and regulatory support. Tackling the challenges head on will create a future for Europe's automotive industry that is as impressive as its past. We can do it, and I really look forward to working with you in the coming months and years on this subject.

Adam Szłapka,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, Commissioner, honourable Members, I have listened carefully to your interventions, and it seems clear that the importance of the automotive sector for the EU economy cannot be overstated. Urgent action is needed to address the challenges currently facing carmakers and to restore the sector's competitiveness.
We now need to see how the announcement contained in the action plan will translate into concrete proposals. It will then be up to us, the Council and the European Parliament, to steer action in the right direction in the coming months and years.
We need to act in a determined manner and send clear messages to both the automotive sector and to European customers. Let us work together to that end.

Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.
                  

                     La votazione si svolgerà nel corso della prossima tornata.
                  

                     La seduta è sospesa per pochissimi minuti e riprenderà tra poco con le votazioni.
                  


Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 178)



Laura Ballarín Cereza (S&D),
por escrito. – El Grupo S&D en el Parlamento Europeo considera que el Plan de Acción para la industria del automóvil es un primer paso importante para revitalizar este sector, que enfrenta una crisis sin precedentes. Sin embargo, es esencial que el Plan se enfoque en aplicar las normas existentes, sin reabrir debates sobre los objetivos, para proporcionar certidumbre a los fabricantes y la industria automotriz. Nos complace que el Plan incluya medidas para facilitar la instalación de puntos de recarga e impulsar la producción de baterías con marca Europa. No obstante, creemos que la dimensión social no se aborda lo suficiente.
                  

                     El Grupo S&D considera que el Plan debería incluir incentivos reales para hacer los vehículos de cero emisiones (ZEV) más asequibles y atractivos para toda la ciudadanía. Para ello, consideramos que la Comisión Europea debería crear un instrumento europeo de incentivos y un esquema de arrendamiento social para ZEV nuevos y de segunda mano. Además, necesitamos una Directiva de Transición Justa para apoyar a las regiones más afectadas. Los fondos europeos destinados a abordar los retos del sector automotriz deben estar condicionados a la protección de los trabajadores, incluyendo medidas para formación y reciclaje profesional.
                  

Nicolás González Casares (S&D),
por escrito. – El Grupo S&D en el Parlamento Europeo considera que el Plan de Acción para la industria del automóvil es un primer paso importante para revitalizar este sector, que enfrenta una crisis sin precedentes. Sin embargo, es esencial que el Plan se enfoque en aplicar las normas existentes, sin reabrir debates sobre los objetivos, para proporcionar certidumbre a los fabricantes y la industria automotriz. Nos complace que el Plan incluya medidas para facilitar la instalación de puntos de recarga e impulsar la producción de baterías con marca Europa. No obstante, creemos que la dimensión social no se aborda lo suficiente.
                  

                     El Grupo S&D considera que el Plan debería incluir incentivos reales para hacer los vehículos de cero emisiones (ZEV) más asequibles y atractivos para toda la ciudadanía. Para ello, consideramos que la Comisión Europea debería crear un instrumento europeo de incentivos y un esquema de arrendamiento social para ZEV nuevos y de segunda mano. Además, necesitamos una Directiva de Transición Justa para apoyar a las regiones más afectadas. Los fondos europeos destinados a abordar los retos del sector automotriz deben estar condicionados a la protección de los trabajadores, incluyendo medidas para formación y reciclaje profesional.
                  

Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska (PPE),
na piśmie. – Europejski przemysł motoryzacyjny znajduje się w kluczowym momencie transformacji. W obliczu rosnącej konkurencji globalnej i wyzwań związanych z cyfryzacją oraz zrównoważonym rozwojem, nasze regulacje muszą wspierać innowacje, a nie je blokować.
                  

                     Przede wszystkim dostęp do danych z systemów pojazdów musi być uregulowany w sposób dostosowany do specyfiki branży motoryzacyjnej. Umieszczenie tych zapisów wyłącznie w Data Act nie wystarczy – potrzebujemy legislacji sprofilowanej dla sektora. Brak takich regulacji grozi niepewnością prawną i opóźnieniami, które osłabią konkurencyjność europejskiego przemysłu.
                  

                     Po drugie, przepisy dotyczące dopuszczania pojazdów do ruchu powinny być dynamiczne i dostosowane do tempa rozwoju technologicznego. Stałe aktualizowanie wymogów zapewni bezpieczne wdrażanie nowych rozwiązań i uniknie sytuacji, w której innowacje będą blokowane przez przestarzałe regulacje.
                  

                     Po trzecie, musimy wspierać ponowną produkcję komponentów i ich ponowne wykorzystanie. Odpowiednie regulacje powinny promować lokalną produkcję, co przełoży się na większą niezależność europejskiego przemysłu. Kluczowe jest także stworzenie ram prawnych ułatwiających naprawę baterii i rozwój technologii silników oraz inwestowanie w szkolenia pracowników.
                  

                     Silna europejska motoryzacja to przyszłość naszej gospodarki. Potrzebujemy skutecznej legislacji już teraz, a nie w odległej perspektywie.
                  

(La seduta è sospesa alle 11:51)


IN THE CHAIR: ROBERTS ZĪLE


Vice-President

5.   Resumption of the sitting

(The sitting resumed at 12:00)

6.   Voting time

Priekšsēdētājs. – Nākamais darba kārtības punkts ir balsošanas laiks.
               
6.1.   Parliament's calendar of part-sessions - 2026 (vote)

Priekšsēdētājs. – Pirmā balsošana attiecas uz Parlamenta 2026. gada sesiju kalendāru (2025/2593(RSO)) (skatīt protokola 6.1. punktu).

6.2.   EU-Norway Agreement: modification of concessions on all the tariff-rate quotas included in EU Schedule CLXXV as a consequence of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union (A10-0017/2025 - Željana Zovko) (vote)

Priekšsēdētājs. – Nākamā balsošana attiecas uz Željana Zovko ziņojumu par ES un Norvēģijas nolīgumu: visu ES CLXXV sarakstā iekļauto tarifa kvotu koncesiju grozīšanu sakarā ar Apvienotās Karalistes izstāšanos no Eiropas Savienības (2023/0341(NLE)) (skatīt protokola 6.2. punktu).

6.3.   Agreement between Canada and the European Union on the transfer and processing of Passenger Name Record (PNR) data (A10-0013/2025 - Nikola Minchev) (vote)

Priekšsēdētājs. – Nākamā balsošana attiecas uz Nikola Minchev ziņojumu par nolīgumu starp Kanādu un Eiropas Savienību par pasažieru datu reģistra (PDR) datu pārsūtīšanu un apstrādi (2024/0051(NLE)) (skatīt protokola 6.3. punktu).
                  

– Before the vote:


Nikola Minchev,
rapporteur. – Mr President, honourable Members, today's vote on the agreement between Canada and the EU on the transfer and processing of passenger name record (PNR) data is a strong statement that the EU will not compromise on security or fundamental rights. And it demonstrates that the two can go hand in hand.
The collection and analysis of PNR data can provide the authorities with important elements, allowing them to detect suspicious travel patterns and identify associates of criminals and terrorists. Of course, we should acknowledge that the processing of passenger data does interfere with passengers' privacy and data rights. However, it should be considered that the limited and strictly regulated intervention by law enforcement provided for in the present agreement is necessary and proportionate in light of the role that the international exchange and processing of PNR data plays.
Contrary to the previous version of the agreement, the current renegotiated version does contain the necessary safeguards in order for it to be compatible with the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) explicitly confirmed this prior to the execution of the agreement.
Dear colleagues, I am convinced both by the objectives of the agreement and the guarantees contained therein. The conclusion of the agreement is a positive development in the fight against serious crime and terrorism, whilst maintaining the necessary limits and safeguards to ensure respect of the fundamental rights of passengers.
Last but not least, I would like to extend my thanks to the shadow rapporteurs, the EDPS and the LIBE Secretariat for their cooperation.
6.4.   European Semester for economic policy coordination 2025 (A10-0022/2025 - Fernando Navarrete Rojas) (vote)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Fernando Navarette Rojas on the European Semester for economic policy coordination 2025 (see minutes, item 6.4).
6.5.   European Semester for economic policy coordination: employment and social priorities for 2025 (A10-0023/2025 - Maravillas Abadía Jover) (vote)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Maravillas Abadía Jover on the European Semester for economic policy coordination: employment and social priorities for 2025 (see minutes, item 6.5).
6.6.   Continuing the unwavering EU support for Ukraine, after three years of Russia's war of aggression (RC-B10-0156/2025, B10-0156/2025, B10-0158/2025, B10-0159/2025, B10-0161/2025, B10-0163/2025, B10-0165/2025, B10-0166/2025, B10-0168/2025) (vote)

President. – The next vote is on the joint motion for a resolution on continuing the unwavering EU support for Ukraine, after three years of Russia's war of aggression (see minutes, item 6.6).
Colleagues, before we continue with the vote, I will give the floor to Nicola Procaccini.

– Before the vote:


Nicola Procaccini,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, according to Rule 264, on behalf of the ECR Group, I would like to propose the postponement of the resolution on Ukraine. This resolution doesn't take into account what happened yesterday evening. The agreement between the US and Ukraine seems to be the good news we were waiting for. For the first time, a cease-fire is possible, and it's what Ukraine wants. I'm afraid that a resolution that is not up to date can only serve to unleash hatred against Trump and the US, rather than favour the Ukrainian cause.

(Parliament rejected the request)


– Before the vote on Amendment 4:


Michael Gahler,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, colleagues, we heard the good news yesterday of a Ukrainian and American agreement to offer a ceasefire, which may help end fighting and prepare for negotiations of a peace agreement.
This should be reflected in our resolution, and that is why I propose to add, after this paragraph 13, the following text:
'Welcomes the joint statement by Ukraine and the Unites States following their meeting in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on 11 March 2025, including the resumption of US military assistance and intelligence sharing as well as a proposal for a 30 day ceasefire agreement; reminds that a ceasefire can be an effective tool of suspension of hostilities, only if the aggressor fully adheres to it; expects therefore Russia to agree to it and follow it by ceasing all attacks on Ukraine, its military positions, civilian population, infrastructure and territory;'

(Parliament agreed to put the oral amendment to the vote)


IN THE CHAIR: ROBERTA METSOLA


President

6.7.   White paper on the future of European defence (RC-B10-0146/2025, B10-0144/2025, B10-0145/2025, B10-0146/2025, B10-0147/2025, B10-0148/2025, B10-0149/2025, B10-0150/2025, B10-0151/2025) (vote)

President. – The next vote is on the white paper on the future of European defence (see minutes, item 6.7).
I would like to inform you that the name of Péter Magyar appeared in error on the joint motion for a resolution on the future of European defence. This editorial misprint will be corrected.

– Before the vote on Amendment 37:


Péter Magyar (PPE). – Madam President, as you mentioned, my name is mistakenly mentioned on the paper.
I would like to have an official explanation from the Presidency or from the EPP Presidency as to how it could happen that my name is on this paper? I have never signed this paper. And I would like the guarantee for the future that it will never happen again.
I was already attacked harshly by the Orbán and Fidesz propaganda because my name is on this paper.
How could it happen in the European Parliament? I have never undersigned this document. I need an official explanation from you, Madam President, and the EPP Presidency.

President. – Okay.

– Before the vote on Amendment 49:


Γεάδης Γεάδη,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας ECR. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, θέλω να καταθέσω την εξής τροπολογία: ‘Επαναλαμβάνει την έκκλησή του προς την Τουρκική Δημοκρατία, κράτος μέλος του ΝΑΤΟ και υποψήφια για ένταξη στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, να τηρήσει το διεθνές δίκαιο, να αναγνωρίσει την Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία και να τερματίσει αμέσως την κατοχή και να αποσύρει τα στρατεύματά της από το νησί.’ Παρακαλώ όπως αποδεχθείτε την κατάθεση και στηρίξετε την τροπολογία. Η άμυνα της Ευρώπης δεν αφορά μόνο την Ουκρανία αλλά και τα ευρωπαϊκά εδάφη της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας. Εισβολέας δεν είναι μόνο η Ρωσία αλλά και η Τουρκία. Πάνω από κάθε πολιτική και ιδεολογική διαφορά επιβάλλεται η ενότητα του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου απέναντι στα κράτη που παραβιάζουν το διεθνές δίκαιο. Ως εκ τούτου, οφείλουμε να στείλουμε ως σώμα ένα καθαρό μήνυμα σε ένα κράτος που τελεί υπό παράνομη κατοχή, την Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία.
                  

(Parliament agreed to put the oral amendment to the vote)

6.8.   The need for EU support towards a just transition and reconstruction in Syria (RC-B10-0157/2025, B10-0154/2025, B10-0155/2025, B10-0157/2025, B10-0160/2025, B10-0162/2025, B10-0164/2025, B10-0167/2025, B10-0169/2025) (vote)

President. – The next vote is on the joint motion for a resolution on the need for EU support towards a just transition and reconstruction in Syria (see minutes, item 6.8).

(The vote closed)


(The sitting was suspended at 13:26)


VORSITZ: KATARINA BARLEY


Vizepräsidentin

7.   Resumption of the sitting

(Die Sitzung wird um 13:30 Uhr wieder aufgenommen.)

8.   Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting

Die Präsidentin. – Das Protokoll der gestrigen Sitzung und die angenommenen Texte sind verfügbar.
               

                  Gibt es Einwendungen gegen das Protokoll?
               

                  Das ist nicht der Fall.
               

                  Das Protokoll ist somit genehmigt.
               
9.   Composition of committees and delegations

Die Präsidentin. – Die PPE-Fraktion und die ECR-Fraktion haben der Präsidentin Beschlüsse über Änderungen von Ernennungen in den Ausschüssen übermittelt. Diese Beschlüsse werden im Protokoll der heutigen Sitzung veröffentlicht und treten am Tage dieser Ankündigung in Kraft.
               
10.   100 days of the new Commission – Delivering on defence, competitiveness, simplification and migration as our priorities (topical debate)

Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über ein aktuelles Thema (Artikel 169 GO) über 100 Tage Amtszeit der neuen Kommission – Erfolge bei Verteidigung, Wettbewerbsfähigkeit, Vereinfachung und Migration als unseren Prioritäten.
               

                  Ich darf die Mitglieder darauf hinweisen, dass bei dieser Aussprache weder spontane Wortmeldungen noch blue cards akzeptiert werden.
               

Jeroen Lenaers,
author. – Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear Minister, yesterday marked the 100th day since the second von der Leyen Commission took office. As the President of the Commission said herself last Sunday, the 1 December 2024 now feels like a lifetime ago. Of course, we knew that the world was not going to remain the same, that change was coming, but the scope, the speed and intensity of global developments have really been unprecedented. In unprecedented times, Europe needs leadership and strong leadership – I can say after these first 100 days – is what we get from this Commission, leadership on making Europe competitive again.
With the Draghi report as the foundation, this Commission has put competitiveness at the heart of its mission, not by making incremental changes here and there, but by presenting real game changers like the Competitiveness Compass and the Clean Industrial Deal. We are looking forward to working on these concrete proposals, because it's clear that we can no longer afford business as usual. That was the message of the voters in the election, and it's the message that has been clearly heard by the Commission. For the first time since I can remember, we don't only have beautiful words about the need to reduce bureaucracy and red tape, we actually have the first concrete proposals on the table to slash the disproportional bureaucratic burden for our SMEs and industries. It's a promising start to what President von der Leyen has called the unprecedented simplification to unleash opportunities, innovation and growth, and you can count on our support.
We have also seen this leadership on keeping Europe secure and taking responsibility for our neighbourhood. The unwavering support for Ukraine has rightfully intensified in these past months, and ReArm Europe is a historic step on the way to a Europe that will finally be able to defend itself, allowing us to take our future into our own hands again. After years of beautiful words on European defence investment and cooperation, we now have concrete actions and concrete, ambitious proposals on the table. We disagree on the procedure used, but on the substance, you have our full support and we welcome the ambition shown. This ambition now needs to be translated into concrete, immediate and tangible European action and European projects.
Leadership, ambition and concrete action are perhaps the best words to characterise these first 100 days. We saw it this morning, on the 101st day, with a strong but proportional response to the unjustified US tariffs. We saw it yesterday when the Commission presented the new Return Regulation, a missing piece in the puzzle to really manage migration in the EU. After this Parliament had been discussing the previous proposal for over six years, the Commission shows that it can deliver in 100 days.
This brings me to my final point. The European Commission, or its President, does not have the same executive powers as, for instance, a US President. So next we are discussing the first 100 days of the European Commission, and we should ask ourselves the same question. I am also specifically asking this to our Platform colleagues from S&D and Renew. Have we truly understood the monumental global changes, and are we ready to deliver with the same speed and ambition? What can this Parliament achieve in the next 100 days? Can we swiftly conclude the Omnibus package? Can we agree on the Return Regulation? Can we finalise the work on the European Defence Industrial Strategy.
The European Commission has delivered in these first 100 days. She has heard the message that voters delivered in the polling station and has understood that we live in unprecedented times that need unprecedented measures. This Parliament now needs to mirror that ambition and determination and get to work as well. There are roughly 18 100-day periods in a five-year mandate. The first is gone now, so we still have 17 to work. Let's get to work. The bar is set high and you can count on our support.

Adam Szłapka,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, Madam Commissioner, honourable Members, the Council appreciates the efforts undertaken by the Commission to deliver on the priorities it had identified in its first 100 days of office. Let me outline a wide range of essential commission initiatives in the pipeline in the Council.
On defence and security, we look forward to the white paper on the future of European defence next week. We continue to work intensively on the European Defence Industry Programme (EDIP) Regulation, with the ambition of reaching a negotiation mandate as soon as possible. Last week, the European Council reiterated its call on the co-legislators to conclude the negotiations on the EDIP Regulation as soon as possible.
On competitiveness, the Council has taken a good note of the Competitiveness Compass, the Clean Industrial Deal and the Union of Skills. A policy debate on the first two initiatives is being held today in the Council. Additionally, the Council pursues its work on legislative proposals reflecting the objectives of the vision for agriculture and food, which includes strong competitiveness dimensions. In particular for the Presidency, the proposal amending the Common Market Organisation Regulation is a political priority for the first half of 2025, with a view to strengthening the position of farmers in the food supply chain. By the end of June, we will aim to advance the work in the Council as far as possible.
On simplification, the Presidency regards this as a priority and is committed to advancing work on the reduction of reporting obligations and administrative burden to support the competitiveness of EU businesses. The Council started working on the first two omnibus packages presented in February without delay. Ministers for economic and financial affairs had a policy debate on them in the Council yesterday.
We are also holding an exchange of views on the Carbon Burden Adjustment Mechanism in today's Competitiveness Council, and we look forward to the presentation on the third omnibus package and the common agricultural policy simplification package.
Looking ahead in the field of migration, we will continue our work on a new common approach on returns.

Henna Virkkunen,
Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, Council Presidency, this is a watershed moment for Europe. We face a clear and present danger. We must be able to protect ourselves and to defend ourselves, just as we have to put Ukraine in a position to protect itself and to push for lasting and just peace.
That is why last week President von der Leyen presented the ReArm Europe Plan to mobilise up to EUR 800 billion for defence investment. The plan will give Member States fiscal space to invest in defence. They will have the possibility to invest in the Ukrainian defence industry or to procure military capabilities that go right away to Ukraine. The plan is to the benefit of rearming the European Union, but also arming Ukraine in its fight for its sovereignty and territorial integrity. With the Heads of State and Government's endorsement of this package at the European Council last Thursday, we will now move full steam ahead.
In today's ever more dangerous world, it's time to build a true European Defence Union. This starts with the swift adoption of proposals already on the table, including the European defence industry programme, as a priority. We need to invest better together and European. We must strengthen our defence production capacities. We must break silos between civil and military research and innovations, and leverage the transformative nature of deep tech to level up our defence readiness. The white paper on the future of European defence that we will present next week will propose concrete ways forward on this.
We are also improving the resilience of our societies overall to be able to respond to all types of threats. On cybersecurity, we have presented the cybersecurity blueprint to enhance cyber crisis coordination, as well as measures to improve cybersecurity of hospitals and healthcare providers. We have also taken strong actions to enhance security of our submarine cables, and we have taken measures to help Member States to counter the weaponisation of migration. Europe's security will always be our priority.
Our security also depends on our ability to compete, innovate and produce. That is why, in our first 100 days, our main priority has been to boost European competitiveness. We have listened with great attention to the concerns of our industry and workers. Under the umbrella of our Competitiveness Compass, we have aimed to close the innovation gap to China and US to ensure our industry's decarbonisation and competitiveness and to reinforce our economic security.
Last month, we adopted the Clean Industrial Deal, a bold business plan to support pioneering cleantech and accelerate decarbonisation. We also presented the affordable energy action plan, aimed at lowering energy bills for industries, businesses and households. We have launched an action plan to drive innovation, sustainability and competitiveness in the European automotive sector based on the strategic dialogue. A similar process has been also been starting on the steel sector.
And because industry requires a skilled workforce to prosper, we tabled a Union of Skills, which will improve both competitiveness and also social fairness.
Access to capital is also vital for our companies to succeed and scale up. Next week we will present the European Savings and Investment Union to fix underperforming capital markets and unleash investment flows. This will not only serve competitiveness and innovation in Europe, but also investments in our security and defence.
Since taking office, we have been working to safeguard our economic security and adapt to harsher global competition, with the groundbreaking partnership agreement with Mercosur in December, the one with Switzerland before Christmas, our Mexico trade deal, the launch of negotiations with Malaysia, and also our colleagues' visit to India to cement our much valued partnership.
Following up President von der Leyen's announcement of the InvestAI initiative, we will next month deliver an AI continent action plan to carry forward the European approach to AI. In parallel, our work continues on other major initiatives such as a start-up and scale-up strategy, the 28th regime, the data union, quantum strategy and preparedness union. Competitiveness will be also at the heart of the future multiannual financial framework.
Honourable Members, reducing regulatory burden is also vital to Europe's competitiveness. We need to make things easier for our companies. With our first Omnibus proposal presented in February, we have cut reporting obligations to save over EUR 6 billion every year from European companies. Our second Omnibus proposal will increase the investment capacity of InvestEU by around EUR 50 billion and reduce reporting obligations and costs for implementing partners and financial beneficiaries by an estimated EUR 350 million.
And more simplification is on the way. A total 37 evaluations and fitness checks planned for this year will contribute to stress testing our EU acquis to identify and also eliminate overlaps, contradictions and obsolete provisions. A European business wallet will also ease administrative compliance for businesses. Additional Omnibuses will target red tape and administrative burden on other areas.
It's also crucial to underline here that our climate and social goals do not change. The simplifications we are proposing will have a huge positive impact for EU businesses, especially our SMEs, without undermining our sustainability objectives.
Honourable Members, this Commission is fully committed to upholding the unique quality of life of Europeans, as well as the values that make us who we are. The Migration and Asylum Pact was a major step forward. We put solidarity and responsibility at the heart of our common response. Now we are focusing on its implementation and on supporting Member States in making it a reality on the ground. We are also delivering to modernise our rules on returns. Yesterday's proposal is the missing piece of the puzzle for the pact.
Honourable Members, Madam President, together we can deliver these first 100 days proposals to serve all Europeans.

Andrzej Halicki,
w imieniu grupy PPE. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowna Pani Komisarz! Tak, musimy być silni, musimy być razem i musimy szybko działać, bo ta sama przewodnicząca Ursula von der Leyen przewodniczy dziś Komisji Europejskiej, ale to zupełnie nowa Komisja, w zupełnie nowych okolicznościach, mająca zupełnie nowe wyzwania, przed którymi stoimy.
               

                  ‘Bezpieczeństwo, Europo’ to nie tylko hasło polskiej prezydencji. To już dzisiaj konkretne działania. I tu chciałbym powiedzieć kilka bardzo pozytywnych rzeczy, bo przed chwilą przyjęliśmy strategię, w której znalazła się na przykład Tarcza Wschód. Ten projekt, który nie jest projektem narodowym, nie jest projektem polskiego rządu, a projektem, który służy ochronie granic od Finlandii po Rumunię. Służy bezpieczeństwu Europy. Granice wreszcie mogą być wspomagane europejskimi środkami. Infrastruktura graniczna. Wreszcie. Ile lat straciliśmy na to, żeby się o to wreszcie skutecznie upomnieć? A przecież to jest bezpieczeństwo od wschodu po zachód, od południa do północnych krańców naszego kontynentu.
               

                  Polityka migracyjna musi być zweryfikowana i dobrze, że uzupełniona jest dzisiaj o propozycję dyrektywy powrotowej, nową politykę azylową czy finansowanie. Ale tych rewizji musi być znacznie więcej, bo jeżeli mówimy o konkurencyjności, to dlaczego w obliczu tych zagrożeń, które mamy dzisiaj, gospodarka europejska ma ponosić koszty, które przecież powinny być wyeliminowane, a przynajmniej niektóre mechanizmy zamrożone. Myślę głównie o mechanizmie ETS-u. Czy w ogóle nie powinno być nie tylko zamrożone, zlikwidowane hasło ETS2? Po co? Dlaczego ma nad nami wisieć, dzisiaj, rok 2027? Dzisiejsze wyzwania wymagają natychmiastowych odpowiedzi i reakcji. Cieszę się, że komisarz Tzitzikostas mówi o weryfikacji daty 2035. Przecież nasi wyborcy są użytkownikami samochodów. To oni jako użytkownicy będą głosować na tak lub nie, jeżeli chodzi o działania Komisji.
               

                  I wreszcie biurokracja i to simplification, to ułatwienie życia wszystkim obywatelom. Europa musi być dla obywateli. Europa musi być dla nich, jeżeli ma być przez nich akceptowana.
               

Camilla Laureti,
a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, nei primi 100 giorni della Commissione europea il Partito popolare indica come priorità difesa, competitività, semplificazione e migrazione. Per noi non è abbastanza. Dove sono le persone, le preoccupazioni per i salari che non crescono, il lavoro di qualità, una sanità efficiente e accessibile, la salvezza del pianeta e la tenuta sociale delle nostre comunità?
               

                  Devono essere anche queste le parole d'ordine di questo tornante della storia europea, nel quale bisogna dare corpo all'autonomia strategica dell'Europa e a una difesa che sia davvero comune.
               

                  Un aumento della spesa militare per i 27 eserciti nazionali non è la soluzione: difesa comune per noi significa progetti comuni, acquisti comuni, maggiore coordinamento per una capacità di deterrenza che sia dell'Unione europea e non dei singoli Stati.
               

                  Sicurezza per noi non vuol dire soltanto armi: vuol dire rilanciare il ruolo politico dell'Europa e difendere e rafforzare il nostro modello sociale. Non possiamo pensare di costruire una difesa nazionale e non una difesa europea a discapito dei fondi di coesione e dei fondi del Next Generation.
               

                  Sono stati 100 giorni densi e difficili. Continueremo a tenere la barra dritta e continueremo a farlo per un'Europa forte, libera, giusta e che sia sociale.
               

António Tânger Corrêa,
on behalf of the PfE Group. – Madam President, Madam Commissioner, well, in its first 100 days the European Commission promised transparency but instead we have seen allegations of corruption, abuse of power and lack of accountability. The European Union should serve its citizens, yet it has become an isolated bubble, funding its own narrative rather than fostering democratic debate.
The European Commission, in the former legislature, and the former Vice-President, Frans Timmermans, funnelled millions of euros into environmental NGOs to push the Green Deal without proper oversight. This raises serious concerns about the misuse of public funds to shape policy behind closed doors at the expense of business, jobs and families.
The European Commission allocated EUR 45 billion to the resilience and values programme, including EUR 1.5 billion to NGOs aligned with its political agenda. The issue is not defending itself, but the lack of pluralism. Public money should foster open democracy, debate, not reinforce a single political perspective.
When confronted about these things, the European Commission refuses to provide concrete answers and avoids open debate. The double standard is evident. When the EU establishment pushes its narrative, it is considered legitimate policy, but if it is challenged, it is dismissed as misinformation.
The European Commission cannot continue to operate without scrutiny. European citizens deserve to know where their money is going. Democracy cannot be just a slogan, and we will accept nothing less than full pluralism, transparency and accountability.

Patryk Jaki,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Więc tytuł debaty jest: 100 dni Komisji Europejskiej, dowozimy obronność, migracje i konkurencyjność. I generalnie można byłoby to uznać za ironię, gdyby nie to, że temat jest tak poważny. Więc rozbijmy to na czynniki pierwsze, to znaczy co takiego dowieźliście rzekomo. Fundusz obronności ma się składać z trzech elementów: dania państwom dobrowolnej możliwości przesuwania środków z Funduszu Spójności. Powodzenia, żeby ktoś się na to zgodził. Dwa: zachęcenia państw do zwiększenia wydatków na obronność. I aby uzbierać ten fundusz, wszystkie państwa muszą się na to zgodzić. Już wczoraj nie zgodziła się Holandia. No i trzy: kolejny wspólny dług, na który muszą zgodzić się wszystkie państwa. I patrz tutaj punkt wyżej. Więc jedyne, co dowieźliście w tej sprawie póki co, to jest prezentacja w PowerPoincie. Gratulacje!
               

                  Ponadto nie będzie bezpieczeństwa w Europie bez własnego rolnictwa. A historia uczy, jak kończą państwa, które w czasie konfliktu nie mają własnej żywności. A wy chwalicie się w tym dokumencie umową z Merkosurem, która zniszczy europejskie rolnictwo.
               

                  Migracja. Tu nie dowozicie, tylko odwozicie. Ja polecam każdemu, żeby zobaczyć, co dzieje się na granicy polsko- niemieckiej, gdzie migranci po prostu są odwożeni na parkingi obok polskich hipermarketów. A dodatkowo w ogóle nie wiadomo na jakiej zasadzie właściwie zawieszono strefę Schengen. A w przyszłym roku wejdzie w życie pakiet migracyjny, który wygeneruje kolejną falę migracyjną. I będziecie rzeczywiście dowozić migrantów do ośrodków migracyjnych, co spowoduje, że zamiast na obronę zewnętrzną, będziemy więcej wydawali na obronę wewnętrzną przed obcymi we własnych krajach.
               

                  No i najzabawniejsze, że dowozicie konkurencyjność. Owszem, przedstawiliście kompas konkurencyjności, w którym np. proponujecie zmniejszyć obowiązki ideologicznego raportowania przedsiębiorcom, czyli znosicie zasadę, którą chwaliliście się pod koniec poprzedniej kadencji. Więc bardzo dzielnie walczycie sami ze sobą. Pogratulować.
               

                  Jeżeli jednak poważnie chcemy rozmawiać o konkurencyjności i silnej gospodarce i przez to o większych możliwościach na zbrojenie, nie da się tego zrobić bez wyrzucenia na śmietnik ETS1 i ETS2 i całego tego zielonego szaleństwa. Ciągle trzeba wam powtarzać, że Unia Europejska odpowiada tylko za 7% emisji dwutlenku węgla na świecie. I aby ta walka miała sens, wszystkie państwa muszą to robić jednocześnie. A emisja dwutlenku węgla co roku na świecie rośnie, więc to, co robimy, jest kompletnie bez sensu. Obciążacie europejskich przedsiębiorców i europejskich obywateli ideologicznym podatkiem, który ogranicza nasze możliwości zbrojeniowe, gospodarcze i społeczne. I z tym trzeba skończyć.
               

Irena Joveva,
v imenu skupine Renew. – Gospa predsednica! Spoštovani kolegice in kolegi! Prvih 100 dni delovanja nove Komisije je zaznamovalo turbulentno geopolitično okolje.
               

                  Nova administracija ZDA je pretresla na pravilih temelječo ureditev sveta. Res ne želim biti preveč kritična, ker trdno verjamem, da moramo v Evropski uniji nujno stopiti skupaj, ampak v teh zadnjih stotih dneh se je spet potrdilo, da potrebujemo korenite reforme delovanja Unije v smeri večje učinkovitosti.
               

                  In v praksi se poleg nekaj predlogov Komisije v zadnjih tednih nismo premaknili nikamor, medtem ko nam konkurenčne sile v enem dnevu lahko marsikaj postavijo na glavo in tudi nam.
               

                  Predlogi o nujnem znižanju cene energije, povečanju vlaganja v tehnologijo in ukrepi o povečanju konkurenčnosti evropskega gospodarstva so absolutno koraki v pravo smer, se pa bojim, da so premalo ambiciozni in prepozni. Zdaj je čas za bolj odločne ukrepe in Evropska unija ima še ogromno manevrskega prostora. Manjka seveda politična volja in to, da bi države članice končno uvidele, da je nacionalni interes prepleten z močjo in enotnostjo Unije.
               

                  Strinjam se s poenotenjem Evropske vojske in skupnimi viri financiranja, ampak to ne bi smelo pomeniti, da druga področja zanemarjamo. Potrebujemo investicije v infrastrukturo, energetiko, predvsem pa v ljudi. To je najboljša obramba Evropske unije.
               

Alice Kuhnke,
för Verts/ALE gruppen. – Fru talman! Klimatförändringar, demokrati på tillbakagång, ännu ett krig på vår kontinent, handelskrig och stora hot mot vår säkerhet. Med Putin, Trump, Musk och Xi Jinping och kompani är världen i desperat behov av en motkraft. EU måste vara den motkraften. EU har möjligheten att vara svaret på våra gemensamma utmaningar.
               

                  Men EU kan bara vara det om EU är en gemenskap där demokrater håller ihop. Under de senaste 100 dagarna har vi sett hur kommissionen gång på gång gått extremhögern till mötes: uppluckring och urvattning förklätt till förenkling, förhalning och försinkning av klimatmål, antidiskrimineringslagstiftning som dras tillbaka, beslutad klimatlagstiftning som ligger i skottgluggen. Att att tävla med Xi Jinpings kommunism, Trumps maktfullkomlighet och Putins aggression genom ett ‘race to the bottom’ är inte hur vi, hur EU blir starkt.
               

                  Rättigheter och friheter är vår styrka. Ett kompromisslöst försvar av den regelbaserade världsordningen är vår styrka. Och vårt främsta vapen, det är ett starkt samarbete mot alla de krafter som vill att EU ska splittras och tvingas huka under auktoritära krafter.
               

Leila Chaibi,
au nom du groupe The Left. – Madame la Présidente, ‘ces cent jours semblent aussi long qu'une vie’, a dit Ursula von der Leyen. Je vous assure qu'ils sont encore plus longs lorsque l'on doit choisir entre remplir son frigo et payer ses factures. Depuis cent jours, la Commission européenne ne cesse de prêcher la compétitivité, la simplification et la défense. Cela se fait contre les peuples européens, qui subissent toujours plus d'austérité: contre les travailleurs, les soignants, les enseignants, les chercheurs, les agriculteurs, les étudiants – contre tous ceux qui font tenir l'Europe.
               

                  Vous trouvez 800 milliards d'euros pour l'armement en cent jours, mais en six ans vous n'avez pas daigné trouver un centime pour garantir des salaires dignes et lutter contre les inégalités ou contre la crise du logement. Imaginez, si vous aviez mis autant d'ardeur à débloquer les investissements dans le logement qu'à débloquer les dépenses militaires.
               

                  L'urgence, c'est avant tout l'urgence sociale et climatique. C'est cela, Madame von der Leyen, qui aurait dû être votre priorité en cent jours. Comme c'est long, cent jours – et il en reste encore 1 725! Courage aux Européens pour tenir durant ces mille sept cent vingt-cinq jours!
               

Ewa Zajączkowska-Hernik,
w imieniu grupy ESN. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Mija 100 dni Komisji Europejskiej i jakie są efekty? Zero realnych reform dotyczących deregulacji. Zero realnych reform dotyczących ograniczenia Zielonego Ładu i zero realnych reform dotyczących wycofania paktu migracyjnego. Zwykle rządy podczas swoich pierwszych stu dni są rozliczane z pierwszych reform, z pierwszych rozwiązań i pierwszych działań. A my w trakcie stu dni Komisji Europejskiej możemy Komisję Europejską ocenić czy rozliczyć z debat, z postów w social mediach czy z różnego rodzaju PR-owych sztuczek, którymi Komisja Europejska chce przykryć swoją totalną bezradność.
               

                  Komisja Europejska Ursuli von der Leyen udaje, że dostrzega problemy z konkurencyjnością Unii Europejskiej i ubiera to w PR-owe sztuczki. Tymczasem sami tworzycie problem i bohatersko z tym problemem próbujecie walczyć. Sequel Komisji Europejskiej Ursuli von der Leyen powinien być podsumowany wzrostem długu Unii Europejskiej, wzrostem biurokracji, wzrostem liczby nielegalnych imigrantów, wzrostem kosztów związanych z Zielonym Ładem i wzrostem zagrożenia ekonomicznego i społecznego dla wszystkich Europejczyków.
               

Tomas Tobé (PPE). – Madam President, Vice-President, a clear EPP priority for the coming years is to make Europe safer and more secure. We need reforms that ensure an independent, free and prosperous Europe, speedy investments in security and defence, and we also need to pave the way for economic growth and job creation and keep cutting red tape. Citizens also rightfully want to have a European migration policy that is firm, fair and enforced.
The EPP called on the Commission to take decisive action in the first 100 days. We now welcome that we have concrete proposals on the table. But this is just the start. In Parliament, the EPP Group will push to make these initiatives even more ambitious. We need a new European security architecture. We need it actually now, I would say.
The omnibus needs to be a true game changer for our European companies. The new regulation on returns must come with strong and effective measures to ensure that those who do not have the right to be in Europe should be returned. And future initiatives – for example, the internal security strategy and the strengthening of Frontex and Europol – will be crucial to protect our Union and citizens. Europe must step up and the EPP is ready to do the task.

PRÉSIDENCE: YOUNOUS OMARJEE


Vice-Président


Gabriele Bischoff (S&D). – Herr Präsident, Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Indeed, seit diese Kommission im Amt ist, hat sich die internationale Situation weiter verschlechtert, aber genauso wie die soziale Lage vieler Europäerinnen und Europäer. Wir brauchen hier mutige Initiativen für die Zukunft Europas. Und was kommt von der Kommission? Ein schlecht vorbereiteter erster Omnibus, der keinen einzigen Arbeitsplatz schafft und wo man sieht, dass die Multis da den Stift geführt haben.
                  

                     Wir – und das ist auch meine Antwort an Jeroen Lenaers und die EVP – wir haben gestern mit Renew deutlich gemacht, dass wir hier über ein Paket zusammen sprechen wollen. Aber was macht die EVP? Cowboylike marschiert sie vor mit eben Verfahren, ohne mit Renew oder mit uns zu sprechen. Wenn ihr mit den Rechten das durchziehen wollt, dann hört euch noch einmal die Debatte von gestern zum Omnibus an, was für eine schiefe Ebene das ist.
                  

                     Und in einer Zeit, wo wir mutige Schritte bräuchten zum europäischen gemeinsamen Beschaffungswesen: Das Parlament hat einen Vorschlag dazu vorgelegt, da zaudert die Kommission und traut sich nicht. Wir brauchen mehr Effizienz, und die schaffen wir nur europäisch.
                  

Fabrice Leggeri (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, en cent jours, la nouvelle Commission von der Leyen fait montre d'une incohérence inquiétante. Alors qu'elle avait promis plus de compétitivité, plus de simplification et un contrôle migratoire renforcé, aucun progrès concret n'est perceptible. L'industrie européenne demeure entravée par une bureaucratie pesante, tandis que l'immigration clandestine s'aggrave.
                  

                     Face à la montée du rejet populaire, Ursula von der Leyen tente de rectifier le tir, abandonnant certains engagements écologiques jugés trop contraignants et durcissant sa position sur certains dossiers. Toutefois, ces ajustements semblent opportunistes et dépourvus de vision à long terme. Pis encore, la Commission continue de s'arroger un rôle en matière de défense, bien que ce domaine ne relève pas de ses compétences, selon les traités.
                  

                     Plutôt que de corriger ses erreurs, Bruxelles persiste dans une dérive centralisatrice, s'éloignant toujours plus des attentes des citoyens européens. Ces cent jours confirment une chose: sous cette présidence, l'Union européenne est à la fois incohérente et déconnectée des réalités. Il est urgent de changer de cap.
                  

Nicola Procaccini (ECR). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, in questi primi 100 giorni della nuova Commissione ci siamo occupati di competitività e rilancio della crescita economica, di semplificazione, di rimpatri degli immigrati illegali. L'Unione europea finalmente decide di governare il fenomeno della migrazione, anziché farsi governare dagli scafisti o dai fanatici immigrazionisti No Borders.
                  

                     Stiamo anche discutendo della difesa e della sicurezza dei popoli europei: non un'avventura militarista, come sostengono l'estrema sinistra e l'estrema destra, ma un'assunzione di responsabilità nei confronti dei nostri figli. Si tratta di riconoscere quanto è preziosa la pace che stiamo vivendo in Europa da pochi decenni, e quanto sia importante difenderla da chi, purtroppo, ama la guerra.
                  

                     Insomma, in questo inizio di legislatura europea ci stiamo occupando di temi su cui è normale avere opinioni diverse; ma, finalmente, ci stiamo occupando di cose serie, vere, grandi, come dovrebbe fare un'istituzione politica che cura gli interessi di mezzo miliardo di persone.
                  

                     Vi ricordate di cosa ci occupavamo nei primi 100 giorni della scorsa Commissione? Ve lo dico io: di come aprire le porte all'immigrazione, a tutti indiscriminatamente; di come appesantire la competitività del nostro sistema produttivo con una montagna di direttive e regolamenti pseudo-ambientalisti; di quanto fosse fascista occuparsi di difesa e sicurezza.
                  

                     Nella scorsa legislatura, dominata dalle forze socialiste e verdi, ci siamo occupati per mesi del problema dei peti delle mucche che emettono gas metano. Abbiamo avuto come priorità la difesa dei diritti LGBTQIAPK+ in Uganda.
                  

                     Ora, io non so come andranno le cose nei prossimi giorni. Ma so che i cittadini europei ogni volta che sono andati a votare negli ultimi anni ci hanno indicato un'altra strada: percorriamola senza paura.
                  

Ivars Ijabs (Renew). – Dārgais priekšsēdētāja kungs! Dārgā Virkunenas kundze! Man ļoti patīk, ka tajā mūsdienu debates nosaukumā tomēr drošība un aizsardzība ir pirmajā vietā. Un tajā ziņā es domāju, ka mums visiem ir pamats būt optimistiskiem, raugoties uz šo jauno ReArmEU fondu, kurš nozīmē to, ka pamazām Eiropa sāk drošību uztvert nopietni. Nu, mēs, protams, visi šobrīd gaidām White paper. Vienlaikus ir divi lieli jautājumi, kuri noteiks, vai šis projekts turpināsies veiksmīgi vai neveiksmīgi.
                  

                     Pirmkārt, tas ir jautājums, vai izmaiņas budžeta deficīta nosacījumos patiešām ir pietiekoši, lai motivētu dalībvalstis ieguldīt vairāk savos nacionālos budžetos aizsardzībai, arī ar šo jauno 150 miljardu kopējo aizņēmumu, vai arī tur ir nepieciešami citi instrumenti, kopīgi fondi.
                  

                     Otrām kārtām, kā tad Eiropa palīdzēs stiprināt šo kopējo austrumu robežu ar agresoru valstīm, ar Krieviju un Baltkrieviju? Šajā mājā ir ļoti daudz dzirdētas runas, ka Putina un Lukašenko režīmi ir drauds visai Eiropai un nevis tikai dažām dalībvalstīm. Nu, šī te pārliecība būtu beidzot jāstiprina ar darbiem.
                  

Vladimir Prebilič (Verts/ALE). – Gospod predsednik! Spoštovani! Prava nevarnost za prihodnost Evropske unije se nahaja znotraj nje. Posamezne regije so nekajkrat bolj razvite kot druge in vse bolj se ustvarja prepričanje o prvorazrednih in drugorazrednih Evropejcih.
                  

                     Načelo vzajemnosti, kjer tisti z več pomagajo tistim z manj, je vgrajeno v kohezijsko politiko. Zato razmišljanja o tem, da bi ta sredstva namesto regionalnemu razvoju namenili za obrambo, pomeni, da bodo manj razviti plačali za varnost mnogo bolj razvitih. To je nedopustno.
                  

                     Danes so postopki prezapleteni. Povedano drugače, če igralci na igrišču začnejo igrati nogomet, morajo v drugem polčasu igrati košarko in na koncu še vaterpolo. Tako se namreč spreminjajo pravila na področju kohezijske politike.
                  

                     Namesto negotovosti potrebujemo predvidljivost. Namesto nezaupanja, zaupanje in predvsem moramo dati glas tistim, ki se z izzivi srečujejo vsak dan, to pa so ljudje. To je Evropa, ki si jo vsi zaslužimo.
                  

João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, os primeiros 100 dias de mandato da Comissão Europeia ficam marcados por três ‘mais’: mais militarismo e guerra, mais neoliberalismo, mais federalismo.
                  

                     A Comissão Europeia não encontrou nem tempo nem vontade para denunciar o genocídio do povo palestiniano, para se demarcar do regime genocida de Israel, de Netanyahu. Não encontrou tempo nem recursos para investir na paz e em soluções que garantam a segurança coletiva em toda a Europa. Não encontrou tempo nem recursos para afetar ao combate ao problema da habitação, para melhorar o acesso à saúde e à educação, apoiando as políticas nacionais dos Estados-Membros. Não encontrou tempo nem recursos para nada disso, mas encontrou 800 mil milhões de euros para fazer a corrida aos armamentos e para apontar ao prolongamento da guerra na Ucrânia.
                  

                     A Comissão Europeia, nestes primeiros 100 dias, não encontrou soluções para as pequenas e médias empresas, soluções de apoio ao aproveitamento dos recursos produtivos de cada país, mas encontrou uma bússola para a competitividade, para abrir uma autoestrada às grandes multinacionais.
                  

                     Tal como não encontrou o tempo para respeitar os Estados-Membros nas suas competências próprias, seja em relação ao acordo Mercosul, seja em relação ao 28.o regime jurídico, e quer avançar no sentido do federalismo. Este não é o caminho certo para os povos no espaço da União Europeia.
                  

Christine Anderson (ESN). – Herr Präsident! 100 Tage von der Leyen – 100 Tage Politik der leeren Versprechungen. Die Christdemokraten versprechen Entbürokratisierung. Sie versprechen Verbesserungen für die Autoindustrie. Sie versprechen ein härteres Asylrecht. Liebe Kollegen von der EVP, nichts von alledem werden Sie ohne die drei rechtskonservativen Fraktionen in diesem Haus durchsetzen können. Ohne uns gibt es keine Migrationswende. Ohne uns gibt es keinen Erhalt des Verbrenners. Ohne uns gibt es keinen Regulierungsabbau. Ohne uns gibt es in diesem Haus keine Mehrheit für eine Politik im Interesse der europäischen Völker.
                  

                     Und dennoch halten Sie geradezu masochistisch an Ihrer selbstzerstörerischen Brandmauer fest, sowohl in Brüssel als auch in Deutschland. Das, was der von mir sehr geschätzte Franz Josef Strauß einst über die FDP sagte, würde er heute so formulieren: Bei der CDU kann man sich auf eines verlassen, nämlich eine berechenbare Komponente – ihre Charakterlosigkeit. Kommen Sie endlich zur Besinnung! Sie brauchen uns für eine Politik im Interesse der europäischen Völker. Dafür stehen wir bereit.
                  

Siegfried Mureșan (PPE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, in the past 20 years, the European Union was good and the European Commission played an important role in reacting to crises: the economic/financial crisis, the migration/refugee crisis, Brexit, the COVID-19 pandemic and then the illegal and illegitimate invasion of Russian armed forces into Ukraine.
But very often the European Commission has ignored topics which were important but never urgent: completing the single market (particularly the digital single market), reducing bureaucracy and improving competitiveness were never urgent, but 20 years later we see that we have lost competitiveness in comparison to other regions of the world – in comparison to China and the United States of America.
Vice-President, Minister, colleagues, my appeal today is the following: we have seen in the first 100 days of the European Commission that many unexpected developments occurred – unexpected developments will continue to occur also in the next months – but my appeal is let us focus on what we have agreed together at the beginning of this mandate and let us implement it. We have together said that security and defence on the one side and improving the competitiveness of our economy should be the priorities for the next years, and I believe we have to we have to implement this methodically, as we have agreed at the beginning of the term.
When we say 'improve security and defence', of course, we mean protecting external borders as well. We mean protecting food security, strengthening our agriculture – and this can only work with the farmers, not not against the farmers. When we want more security for the people of Europe and a stronger economy, of course, one of the key tools that we have as the European Union is the budget of the European Union.
We are seeing the first developments in the European Commission on the next Multiannual Financial Framework. We, in the European Parliament, are ready to start working with the Commission and with the Member States on the Multiannual Financial Framework to make sure that it will become more flexible, simpler for the beneficiaries, in line with our priorities, not ignoring the traditional priorities. Agriculture and cohesion remain priorities remain important, but, of course, security and defence has to be properly financed. And all of this, we are ready, as the European People's Party, to do, together with the pro-European groups here in the House, together with everyone who is ready to build Europe and to bring it forward in the next month.

Ana Catarina Mendes (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, caros colegas, o mandato da Comissão Europeia é muito claro: uma Europa forte e fiel aos seus valores, respeitando o papel central deste Parlamento.
                  

                     Os primeiros 100 dias deixam preocupações sobre o método de trabalho e também sobre a relação com a plataforma pró-europeia que a sustenta.
                  

                     Em primeiro lugar, assistimos com preocupação ao pacote da migração que cede a um discurso securitário, confundindo imigração com segurança, e também com preocupação o chamado pacote de simplificação, sob o pretexto da desburocratização que nos empurra para uma perigosa desregulamentação, pondo em risco algumas das conquistas sociais e ambientais.
                  

                     Mas este início de mandato, Senhora Comissária, devia estar focado nos problemas centrais das pessoas. Em 2026, termina o prazo de execução do PRR. Eu vejo com particular preocupação o atraso e a reprogramação do PRR, por exemplo, em Portugal e julgo que deviam estar focados também nesta matéria, porque ela decide a vida das pessoas.
                  

                     Por último, são 100 dias de grandes mudanças geopolíticas, e a defesa tem de ser uma prioridade — mas não pode ser à custa da política de coesão.
                  

Jorge Buxadé Villalba (PfE). – Señor presidente, como pollo sin cabeza, así va la Comisión Von der Leyen II. No es fácil engañar a todos todo el tiempo, ni siquiera para el Partido Popular Europeo, porque hablar de competitividad y cerrar un acuerdo en Alemania con socialistas y verdes, hablar de proteger las fronteras y cerrar un acuerdo en Austria con socialistas y progres, pues realmente para el Partido Popular Europeo es un equilibrio muy difícil.
                  

                     Simplemente porque son incapaces de decir perdón, no piden perdón al campo europeo y los estafan con su nueva visión de la agricultura, que es el Pacto Verde 5.0. No piden perdón a la industria del automóvil y mantienen la prohibición del motor de combustión para 2035. Hablan de vivienda, pero su política es inyectar dinero en las administraciones, como ese crédito para un proyecto urbanístico con perspectiva de género que la señora Calviño le ha dado a sus amigos socialistas en Barcelona.
                  

                     Durante años, los partidos que votaron a esta Comisión han rechazado en sus países las inversiones en gasto militar, en defensa y en seguridad. Y ahora, con prisas, anuncian deuda pública masiva para su plan de rearme; pero, en realidad, su intención es aprovechar la crisis para tomar el control de las capacidades militares de los Estados miembros.
                  

                     Se llenan la boca con la soberanía de Ucrania, pero atacan la soberanía de los Estados miembros. Ni una palabra de la Comisión sobre la quiebra total del Estado de Derecho y de la democracia en Rumanía, donde les han robado las elecciones a los rumanos. Se ponen del lado del Estado Islámico, que masacra a minorías musulmanas, drusos y cristianos en Siria. Cien días, señora Von der Leyen, como pollo sin cabeza.
                  

Johan Van Overtveldt (ECR). – Voorzitter, de eerste honderd dagen van de Commissie moeten uiteraard een moment van reflectie zijn, maar meer nog een moment van urgentie. De volgende honderd dagen zijn immers nog belangrijker. Een oorlog aan onze grenzen, disrupties in de internationale handel en een nieuwe technologiewedloop. Meer dan genoeg redenen om onszelf minder afhankelijk te maken van externe machten.
                  

                     Maar dat vergt een fundamentele koerswijziging. De afgelopen jaren werden we verlamd door een dogmatische groene agenda die de economische realiteit te veel negeerde. Onze concurrentiekracht moet aangescherpt worden. Er bestaat bovendien een directe link tussen competitiviteit en de dringend noodzakelijke wederopbouw van defensiecapaciteit.
                  

                     Om de hiervoor benodigde private investeringen te genereren, zullen we inderdaad een forse aanscherping van ons concurrentievermogen moeten nastreven. Het is ook van belang dat de Commissie inzake die defensie-inspanningen al het nodige doet om de nodige coördinatie tussen de lidstaten te waarborgen. Anders wordt deze operatie, deze inhaaloperatie, een slag in het water.
                  

Morten Løkkegaard (Renew). – Hr. formand! Vi ved det jo alt for godt. Europa sakker bagud. Vi kan undskylde os med krig og tvivl om alliancer, at nogen vil rulle den grønne omstilling tilbage, at Trumps tariffer ødelægger alle vores muligheder. Men lad os nu være ærlige og sige ligesom Mario Draghi også gør det. Vi må kigge indad. Hvis vi skal styrke Europas konkurrenceevne, skal vi starte med at rydde op i den regel-jungle, vi har skabt, og gøre EU smartere. Derfor lancerer jeg i dag på vegne af miljøgruppen et ‘call for action’, en udrykningsstyrke for simplificering og en konkret køreplan for eksisterende og kommende lovgivning. Vi foreslår, en 25 %-reduktion af den samlede reguleringsbyrde – 35 % for SMV'er. Vi kræver et systematisk eftersyn af EU-lovgivning, så lov ikke bare vedtages, men også fungerer i praksis. Og så insisterer vi på håndhævelse – at medlemsstaterne implementerer reglerne ensartet, så virksomhederne ikke møder 27 forskellige fortolkninger. Ja, det lyder jo alt sammen meget enkelt, og det er det selvfølgelig overhovedet ikke. Ellers så var det jo sket. Men arbejdet skal gøres, kolleger, forenkling er ikke en teknisk detalje. Det er nøglen til vækst, og pengene skal gøres stærkere. Vi skal levere resultater, og kampen starter nu.
                  

Kai Tegethoff (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, 100 days: that's all it has taken President von der Leyen to give in to the dinosaurs of industry and to the pressure of her own party. By butchering important corporate sustainability laws before they were even implemented. By advancing immigration policy that gives in to the far right and paves the way for detention centres in third countries. And by weakening essential rules for reducing CO2 emissions of cars.
We are at risk of heading in the wrong direction. My suggestion for the next 100 days: stop giving into the panic. Come forward with a bold plan to reform our European Union. Empower innovators instead of dinosaurs. Attract the best talent from all around the world. Increase female participation. Get the maximum value for citizens from the EU budget. Pave the ground for a European army, now. And prepare the EU for ambitious enlargement. We want the United States of Europe. This is getting more urgent than ever before, day by day.

Estrella Galán (The Left). – Señor presidente, en estos primeros cien días, la nueva Comisión ha comenzado una guerra feroz contra las personas migrantes y contra el Derecho internacional.
                  

                     En estos cien días ha dado luz verde a la suspensión del derecho de asilo en las fronteras, ha criminalizado a la solidaridad y, además, también pretende —con ideas muy innovadoras— abrir Guantánamos en terceros países para expulsar a personas migrantes cuyo único delito es no haber tenido otra opción que llegar por una vía alegal.
                  

                     Parece que competir con los anuncios reaccionarios de la Casa Blanca, sobre todo en materia migratoria, es ya un hecho. Y sabemos cómo puede seguir la historia, porque cuando se persigue y criminaliza a las personas migrantes se allana también el camino para retroceder en otros derechos —que están en el punto de mira de la ultraderecha— como son los derechos de las mujeres, los derechos de las personas LGTBIQ+ o los derechos laborales y las libertades civiles.
                  

                     ¿Por qué siguen haciéndole la agenda a la extrema derecha? Esto solo nos lleva a un modelo de sociedad autoritaria y a poner en peligro nuestra democracia. Desde nuestro punto de vista —y desde el punto de vista de los derechos humanos— la Comisión no supera el período de gracia.
                  

Petar Volgin (ESN). – Уважаеми колеги, единственото, което Европейската комисия направи за 100 дни съществуване, е да усили до крайност упадъка на Европа. Европейският съюз е замислен като съюз на мира. Да го превърнеш във военно плашило, да го загробиш в дългове заради превъоръжаване, както прави настоящата Еврокомисия, е път към нищото.
                  

                     Докато новите американски ръководители полагат реални усилия, за да бъде спряна войната в Украйна, шефовете на европейските институции, включително и на Европейската комисия, са се посветили на обратното. Те искат войната да продължи не просто до последния украинец, но и до последния европеец. Евросъюзът се управлява от хора, обладани от маниакална идеология и тотално лишени от здрав разум.
                  

                     Вчера представителите на милитаристичното мнозинство в тази зала, начело с председателката на Еврокомисията ни заливаха със словесни безумия от сорта на това ‘мир чрез сила’. Както предишната, така и тази Еврокомисия не са нищо друго освен партии на войната, защото за тези три години не излязоха с нито една мирна инициатива. От евроначалниците чуваме само войнолюбиви стенания, които не вещаят нищо добро за Европа. Европейските държави, Европейският съюз имат нужда от мъдри и смели ръководители, от лидери, които не са слуги на глобалистките елити и на мрежите на Сорос.
                  

                     Бъдещето на Европа трябва да се определя от разумни политици, а не от истерично подскачащи пинчери като Макрон, фон дер Лайен, Кая или Мерц. Колкото по-бързо си отиде настоящата Еврокомисия, която е олицетворение на евроупадъка, толкова по-голям е шансът за възраждане на Европа.
                  

Andreas Schwab (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Frau Vizepräsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn wir die Fakten zur Grundlage nehmen, haben die ersten 100 Tage der neuen Kommission gezeigt, dass Ursula von der Leyen und ihre 26 Kolleginnen und Kollegen Verantwortung übernehmen in einer schwieriger gewordenen Welt. Wir haben mit dem Projekt ReArm Europe gezeigt, dass wir europäische Interessen in den Mittelpunkt stellen können und gleichzeitig für unsere Sicherheit künftig selber aufkommen können.
                  

                     Wir haben mit dem neuen Migrationspaket gezeigt, dass wir sicherstellen, dass menschenwürdige Behandlung von denjenigen Flüchtlingen auch in Zukunft möglich bleibt, die darauf ein Recht haben, aber wir gleichzeitig eine Überforderung Europas vermeiden.
                  

                     Und wir haben zum Dritten in 100 Tagen auch eine klare Botschaft für weniger Bürokratie und mehr Wettbewerb gesehen. Auch das ist ein starkes Signal auf der Basis des Draghi-Berichts, der ja klar und deutlich gesagt hat: Europa muss die eigenen Ressourcen, Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter und finanzielle Ressourcen besser einsetzen, wenn wir in den nächsten Jahren wieder wirtschaftliches Wachstum generieren wollen – was wir müssen, wenn wir in einer globalen Welt des 21. Jahrhunderts durchkommen wollen und wenn wir andere Ziele, wie sozialen Ausgleich und grünen Klimaschutz, hinbekommen wollen.
                  

                     Deswegen glaube ich – auch wenn wir den ganzen Schabernack beiseitelassen, der jetzt in dieser Aussprache schon erwähnt wurde: Wir sind auf dem richtigen Weg, und die EVP-Fraktion steht an der Seite der Europäischen Kommission, wenn wir hier mutig weitergehen.
                  

Γιάννης Μανιάτης (S&D). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, είναι κοινός τόπος πια ότι δεν μπορούμε να βασιζόμαστε μόνο στο ΝΑΤΟ και στη νέα αμερικανική κυβέρνηση για την ασφάλειά μας. Αυτό σημαίνει ότι, αν πρέπει να επενδύσουμε παραπάνω στην άμυνα, αυτό πρέπει να το κάνουμε όλοι μαζί. Η πρόταση για το ReArm EU επιτρέπει την αύξηση των δαπανών για την άμυνα, όμως με νέα δάνεια· δάνεια τα οποία ασφαλώς θα επιβαρύνουν τους εθνικούς προϋπολογισμούς. Δυστυχώς, απουσιάζει κάθε κίνητρο για κοινές δράσεις. Δημιουργείται έτσι ένα αρνητικό προηγούμενο στο οποίο είμαστε κάθετα αντίθετοι: η δυνατότητα μεταφοράς των χρημάτων των ταμείων, του Ταμείου Συνοχής και των πολιτικών συνοχής σε άλλους σκοπούς. Για μας τους σοσιαλιστές δεν υπάρχει κοινωνική συνοχή χωρίς ασφάλεια. Δεν υπάρχει ασφάλεια χωρίς κοινωνική συνοχή. Αν δεν επενδύσουμε και στα δύο ταυτόχρονα, ενισχύοντας την ανθεκτικότητα της οικονομίας, της κοινωνίας και της άμυνάς μας, θα παραμένουμε ευάλωτοι σε ξένες παρεμβάσεις και επιθέσεις. Σας ευχαριστώ.
                  

Susanna Ceccardi (PfE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, sono passati 100 giorni dall'inizio della nuova Commissione: 100 giorni di annunci, di slogan, di dichiarazioni. Se in Europa si governasse a colpi di conferenze stampa, su piani ambiziosi della Commissione, saremmo già il continente più sicuro, competitivo e prospero del pianeta.
                  

                     Parliamo di difesa: ci dite che serve un esercito europeo, il riarmo, la difesa comune ma poi non riuscite nemmeno a proteggere i nostri confini dall'invasione dei clandestini.
                  

                     Competitività: mentre l'America rilancia l'economia e abbassa le tasse alle imprese, voi confermate il Green Deal e aumentate la burocrazia. Bravi, applausi. Così le aziende chiudono e scappano in Cina.
                  

                     E sulla semplificazione: l'unica cosa che Bruxelles riesce a semplificare è il modo in cui ci mette i bastoni tra le ruote. Più regolamenti, più vincoli, più follie green che penalizzano i nostri agricoltori e le nostre imprese.
                  

                     Insomma, dopo 100 giorni la musica è la stessa di sempre: tanta Europa a parole, sempre più Europa sulla carta e zero soluzioni per cittadini e imprese. Basta con le promesse vuote! Presidente von der Leyen: cambiate rotta o cambiate mestiere!
                  

Nicolas Bay (ECR). – Monsieur le Président, mes chers collègues, ‘simplification’, ‘protection’ et ‘compétitivité’: on croirait que la Commission von der Leyen est encore en campagne électorale, alors qu'elle oublie qu'elle sera jugée évidemment sur les actes, et non sur les mots. Vous prétendez simplifier: alors, abrogez le pacte vert et son cortège de normes délirantes, qui viennent plomber notre industrie, nos entreprises et notre agriculture! Vous prétendez protéger les peuples: mais renoncez donc au pacte migratoire, qui organise ou aggrave l'invasion de notre continent! Vous voulez la compétitivité de l'Europe? Eh bien, renoncez aux ressources propres, qui ajoutent une fiscalité européenne à une fiscalité nationale qui est souvent déjà confiscatoire!
                  

                     En cent jours, vous avez d'ores et déjà fait exactement le contraire de ce que vous annoncez: vous vous obstinez à mettre fin au moteur thermique d'ici 2035; vous dilapidez l'argent public, l'argent des Européens, en subventions à tort et à travers aux migrants, aux activistes LGBT ou encore dans le cadre des fonds de préadhésion; vous signez un accord de libre-échange avec les pays du Mercosur, qui tue nos filières agricoles, comme le sucre, la volaille et la viande bovine. Écoutez enfin la colère des peuples! Changez radicalement de cap! Il y a des bouleversements majeurs qui sont en cours dans le monde, et le risque aujourd'hui pour l'Europe, c'est de sortir de l'histoire.
                  

Anna-Maja Henriksson (Renew). – Herr talman! Värderade kommissionär Virkkunen! De första 100 dagarna för kommissionen har infallit samtidigt som USA:s politik i förhållande till Ukraina har förändrats radikalt efter att Donald Trump tillträdde som president i USA. EU och Europa måste nu ta ett större ansvar för såväl stödet till Ukraina som för sitt eget försvar och sin egen säkerhet.
                  

                     De säkerhetspolitiska förändringar som vi nu ser kommer att ha långtgående konsekvenser såväl ekonomiskt som geopolitiskt. Därför behöver vi nu våga göra saker. Vi behöver stärka försvaret, och vi behöver också stärka vår strategiska autonomi. Vi måste också ha mod att förstärka vår inre marknad, och det hoppas jag att kommissionen nu ska ha.
                  

                     Vi behöver mindre byråkrati, vi behöver lättare företagsklimat. Men vi behöver göra rätt saker. I slutändan handlar det om våra värderingar, om demokrati, om rättsstatsprincipen och de mänskliga rättigheterna, att försvara rörlighet för människor, varor och tjänster inom EU.
                  

Merja Kyllönen (The Left). – Mr President, dear Commissioner, look to the future. Connect security of supply, transport, mobility and new defence policy to secure Europe. We do not need new European troops. We need smart use of existing powers, smart cooperation with supportive NATO countries. We need technological cooperation, smart use of European taxpayers' money, workable security of supply and wider perspective to security policy.
Check out TEN-T maps. Build Arctic knowledge, logistical security of supply throughout Europe. Check weak links, analyse, understand dual use also in transport and act wisely. Never lose the connectivity in the EU – it is our security wide backbone. Workable defence needs smart use of money and resilient bases, security of supply, transport, energy, fuels, food, water, healthcare, mentally strong people, a resilient Europe, a new way of defence thinking. Build a functional supply chain together with strong old companies, with smart new companies.
Together we can solve the problems, and I trust you to lead the forces, Commissioner.

Andrey Novakov (PPE). – Mr President, Madam Vice-President, dear colleagues, I think those 100 days are among the toughest and hardest in the post-war history of Europe. I think it's time for leadership and for tough decisions, and only the strongest one will remain in history.
I think the lessons have been learned from COVID, from the war in Ukraine, from the energy crisis and inflation. I think this time the European Commission is doing it by the book.
It's quite easy to sit and criticise and look for a reason to be critical, but I think this is an unprecedented situation in which the Union has to take decisions. I think so far we are adapting very well. We are adapting our legislation, we are adapting our approach. Even the European Parliament changed and created a committee on defence because the times have changed and this is normal.
Here, when somebody is calling for peace and at the same time is encouraging war on another fellow Member State, it's like trying to lose weight eating burgers. It's not the same. We have to make an effort.
I think Ms von der Leyen and the Commission deserves respect, that they took that enormous responsibility in these hard times and preparing their budget, their staff and their way of work in a wartime manner. That deserves support and at least a bit of understanding from our side: cooperation and finding a way to contribute, not to make things worse.

Heléne Fritzon (S&D). – Herr talman! Europa befinner sig i ett mycket allvarligt läge, och jag ser två existentiella hot globalt. Det handlar om vår fred och frihet och om vår överlevnad, och därför handlar det om både säkerhet och vårt klimat. Vägen framåt handlar därför om att vi i Europa stärker vår egen säkerhet, vårt försvar, samtidigt som vi fullföljer den gröna omställningen.
                  

                     Det går inte som högern vill, att nu trycka på pausknappen när företag och medborgare förväntar sig att vi tar ansvar. I dag köper vi rysk gas för mer pengar än vad vi ger i stöd till Ukraina. Det är helt oacceptabelt. Vi måste stänga den ryska gaskranen nu. Det är absolut helt avgörande att vi håller fast vid våra 2030-mål och tar ansvar för en grön, ren och säker planet för oss och för kommande generationer.
                  

Nikola Bartůšek (PfE). – Pane předsedající, sto dní této Komise stačilo k tomu, aby bylo jasné, komu slouží. Ne Evropě, ale Zeleným a jejich ideologii. Od prvního dne se Komise vzdala strategického myšlení a vsadila všechno na nesmyslnou dekarbonizaci, zatímco Evropa čelí největším bezpečnostním hrozbám za poslední dekády. Clean Industrial Deal, to není plán pro konkurenceschopnou Evropu, ale další hřebíček do rakve našeho průmyslu, který býval nejlepší na světě. Evropa nemůže zároveň dekarbonizovat a zbrojit a každý, kdo tvrdí opak, buď lže, nebo nerozumí realitě.
                  

                     Zatímco USA a Čína budují sílu a prosperitu svých firem, Evropa páchá ekonomickou a geopolitickou sebevraždu. Tato Komise nemá jako prioritu bezpečnost, boj proti nelegální migraci ani náš průmysl. Jediná priorita je udržet si přízeň a zelenou politiku. Komise selhává v diplomacii i v ochraně evropského života. Je potřeba vrátit se k realitě, pomoci našim firmám, zamezit nelegální migraci a především být tu pro naše občany.
                  

Stephen Nikola Bartulica (ECR). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, kolegice i kolege, isti ljudi koji su doveli Europu u ovo stanje danas, ranjivo stanje, sigurno nisu ti koji mogu spasiti Europu, trebamo hitno promjene.
                  

                     Kad se govori o konkurentnosti, slušamo velike izjave i čekamo nove studije, ali imam jednostavan prijedlog. Europa bi trebala uspostaviti svoj DOGE, dakle, Europski odjel za učinkovitost vlasti. Po modelu Trumpove administracije vidimo na koji način se može uštedjeti porezni novac naših poreznih obveznika. Europska unija je skupila zapravo jednu izvanrednu propagandnu mrežu nevladinih organizacija i popustljivih novinara koju plaćaju naši porezni obveznici, često radeći protiv želja naših građana.
                  

                     Na kraju, 800 milijardi novih eura za obranu nije put, pogotovo ako se ide zajedničkom nabavom, vidjeli smo iz Covida u kojem smjeru to vodi.
                  

Илхан Кючюк (Renew). – Г-н Председател, днес отчитаме 100-те дни от началото на мандата на тази Европейска комисия и не може да не отбележим със задоволство многото законодателни предложения, които са направени от самата Европейска комисия. Разбира се, ние очакваме резултати, не просто законодателни предложения.
                  

                     Посланието на европейските граждани е ясно, не можем да продължим по същия начин по отношение на икономиката ни, тя трябва да бъде заздравена. Необходими са мерки, необходими са правила за опростяване на бизнеса. Не може да продължаваме по същия начин европейският интелект да създава продукт тук, на на наша територия, но да напуска толкова бързо, че ние да не можем да видим резултатите от него. И затова правилата за опростяване на правене на бизнес трябва да бъдат много адекватни и мерките много навременни.
                  

                     Разбира се сигурността ще продължава да бъде част от дневния ред на Европейския парламент, защото ние живеем в нова среда на несигурност. Европейската архитектура изисква да бъде изградена с наши собствени сили и затова нямаме време и призовавам всички действия да бъдат много забързани в тази посока.
                  

Özlem Demirel (The Left). – Herr Präsident! Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und Aufrüstung, Scheindebatten über Migranten – das scheint das neue Nonplusultra in diesem Haus und auch bei der Kommission zu sein. Die 100-Tages-Bilanz der Kommission verdeutlicht leider, wie abgehoben und weit weg von den täglichen Nöten der Menschen die Kommission agiert. Während abertausende Menschen Schwierigkeiten haben, über die Runden zu kommen, Mittelschichten nach wie vor erodieren: Was macht die Kommission da? Sie kümmert sich um die Belange der Multis. Austerität und Kürzungspolitik für die Menschen und 800 Milliarden Euro für die Aufrüstung ist die Ansage aus der EU.
                  

                     Während abertausende Kolleginnen und Kollegen Angst um ihre Industriearbeitsplätze haben, verliert die Kommission mit keiner Silbe ein Wort über die Nöte der Arbeiterschaft, aber sagt dann – die Beruhigungspille: Dann könnt ihr ja bald in Zukunft in der Rüstungsindustrie arbeiten.
                  

                     Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, liebe Kommission, wir brauchen keine Beruhigungspille für die Menschen, wir brauchen keine Sozialkürzungen, wir brauchen nicht die Industriearbeitsplätze bei der Rüstungsindustrie, sondern nachhaltige Arbeitsplätze für die Menschen und soziale Sicherheit. Nur so schaffen Sie Sicherheit für alle.
                  

Lena Düpont (PPE). – Mr President, Madam Vice-President, just yesterday, Commissioner Brunner presented the new proposal on returns. It is not only a welcome proposal, it is a missing piece to the pact and it's signalling to our citizens that we do hear and see their concerns. But it also proves that the Commission is delivering on key aspects, in time.
Mutual recognition, harmonised procedures, new balances of rights and obligations for third-country nationals, tools and means to address security cases and suspected criminals, stronger measures to prevent absconding, and a way forward for enhanced third-country cooperation: these elements will not only strengthen our ability to increase the number of returns, it will put the common asylum and migration system back on its feet.
Still, the proposal is only the start and the EPP stands ready, of course, to work constructively and in a good spirit in the upcoming negotiations. Looking ahead, we also welcome the Commission's announcement to follow up swiftly with the safe third country concept – another crucial part of the pact.
But yet again, the world does not stop changing. We will need to further follow developments on the eastern border of the Union, not only as regards instrumentalisation, but also in the broader security context. So, looking ahead, there is an urgent need for a broad understanding of security, ranging from defence, to internal security and preparedness.
So citing the Niinistö report, our security landscape requires a whole-of-government, whole-of-society, all-scenario approach. And in that sense, I am looking forward to another quick delivery on the closely linked defence white paper, the internal security strategy and the preparedness strategy.

Christophe Clergeau (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, je veux interpeller aujourd'hui la droite européenne du PPE. Bien sûr, je salue le travail fait par la Commission depuis cent jours, notamment sur la défense et sur l'industrie, mais nous n'avons pas voté pour retenir du rapport Draghi uniquement la simplification, en oubliant l'investissement en commun ou dans les compétences humaines. Nous n'avons pas voté pour voir tomber du ciel des textes ultralibéraux élaborés sans concertation. Nous n'avons pas voté pour autoriser les grandes entreprises à vendre en Europe des produits fabriqués par des enfants, en détruisant l'environnement, et sans rendre aucun compte.
                  

                     Alors, Mesdames et Messieurs du PPE, allez-vous comprendre que vous n'avez rien à attendre de cette extrême droite qui vous traîne dans la boue depuis une heure et qui joue ici les laquais de Poutine? Allez-vous comprendre que la simplification ne fait pas la compétitivité? Qu'il faut pour cela de l'innovation, des investissements, des compétences humaines? Qu'il faut aussi aider les PME, et pas seulement les grands groupes? Allez-vous comprendre que, pour que l'Europe soit forte, il faut agir pour les citoyens, le logement, la santé, les prix de l'énergie et de l'alimentation, ainsi que pour les droits des femmes?
                  

                     Alors oui, j'espère que les cent prochains jours seront différents des cent derniers.
                  

Anders Vistisen (PfE). – Mr President, Ursula von der Leyen wants to be remembered for her Green Deal, the migration pact and the ReArm Europe project. And yes, we will remember them, but not as a success.
Her Green Deal has made European energy more expensive, especially after her own government shut down functioning nuclear power plants. The results: Europe is less competitive and Europeans can't pay their electricity bills.
Her migration pact was sold as a solution. Yet just weeks after its adoption, even her own colleagues in the EPP turned against it. It was weak, inefficient and without real impact – just as expected.
Her ReArm Europe plan is nothing more than a power grab – another attempt to centralise power here in Brussels. But let's not forget that Ms von der Leyen was the defence minister who ran the German military into the ground, and now she wants to rearm Europe. It's a joke!
One hundred days were all we needed to confirm that her leadership truly means expensive failures, power abuse and a Europe that pays the price.

Dick Erixon (ECR). – Herr talman! Extraordinära tider kräver extraordinära åtgärder, det säger kommissionens ordförande. Hon talar om djärva och beslutsamma handlingar, men ändå förmår kommissionen inte att göra just detta: fokusera. Man fortsätter att tala i termer av ‘mer av allt’.
                  

                     För att verkligen vara djärv måste EU våga prioritera. En rad tidigare uppsatta ambitioner måste prioriteras ned eller skrotas. Den stora frågan är om gröna klimatmål ska få försena militära och säkerhetspolitiska mål, exempelvis genom höga energikostnader. Vad sätter kommissionen först? Det geopolitiska läget kräver klarspråk. Vi kan inte ha både och. Det leder till varken eller. Frihet eller grönt, det är frågan.
                  

Fabienne Keller (Renew). – Monsieur le Président – cher Younous Omarjee –, Madame la Vice-Présidente de la Commission – chère Madame Virkkunen –, Monsieur le représentant du Conseil, c'est bien que la migration fasse partie des priorités de la Commission pour les cent premiers jours. Nous le savons, c'est une préoccupation importante pour nos concitoyens européens. C'est d'ailleurs dans ce cadre que la Commission a présenté hier la directive sur les retours. C'était le volet manquant du pacte sur la migration et l'asile, que nous avons adopté au printemps 2024.
                  

                     C'est à nouveau de ce pacte, Madame la Vice-Présidente et Monsieur le Président, que je voudrais parler aujourd'hui, car l'enjeu n'est pas tant de proposer de nouveaux textes que de mettre en œuvre concrètement, dans chaque État membre, ce que nous avons déjà voté. Ce pacte permettra à la Commission et à tous les États membres de mettre rapidement en place une politique migratoire européenne dotée des mêmes règles, caractérisée par la cohérence et la solidarité, et plus efficace.
                  

                     C'est pourquoi, au-delà de ces cent premiers jours, je vous invite à mettre toute votre énergie, Madame la Vice-Présidente, à assurer la mise en œuvre complète du pacte – l'échéance est en juin prochain –, partout en Europe. C'est en agissant concrètement que nous répondrons efficacement aux préoccupations de nos concitoyens.
                  

Sven Simon (PPE). – Herr Präsident, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! 100 Tage EU-Kommission: In der Tat, Zeit für eine erste Bilanz. Ein Umdenken hat eingesetzt, ein Kurswechsel. Dass die linke Seite des Hauses darüber nicht erfreut ist, das freut mich wiederum. Sie haben gedacht, Sie haben die Demokratie überwunden, und dieser ganze linke, illiberale Kurs geht weiter – aber es hat eine Wahl stattgefunden. Und deshalb ist es gut, Frau Kommissarin, dass die neue Kommission jetzt verstärkt auf wirtschaftliche Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und Sicherheit setzt.
                  

                     Das ist deshalb gut, weil Sie gemerkt haben, dass die kleinteilige Regulierung und übermäßige Bürokratie die Europäische Union seit Langem daran gehindert haben, ihr volles Potenzial auszuschöpfen. Die zentrale Frage, die man sich immer stellen muss: Erstens, brauchen wir überhaupt eine Regulierung? Und zweitens, wird mit der Regulierung das Ziel erreicht, was Sie erreichen wollen? Im Bereich des Green Deals und bei vielen anderen Regelungen, die den europäischen Kontinent ins Hintertreffen geraten haben lassen, ist das nicht der Fall.
                  

                     Deshalb: sehr gut, Glückwunsch zu den Omnibuspaketen. Man muss sich mal vorstellen, dass wir es geschafft haben, 13 000 neue Regulierungen in fünf Jahren zu schaffen – die Amerikaner sind mit 3000 ausgekommen. Glückwunsch zu den Vorschlägen im Bereich der Verteidigung – allerdings, die Rechtsgrundlage ist falsch gewählt, und wir müssen jetzt endlich wach werden, gemeinsam europäisch Waffen zu entwickeln und zu produzieren, damit wir autonom verteidigungsfähig werden.
                  

Matthieu Valet (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, l'heure du conseil de classe a sonné. Il nous revient donc, comme élus du peuple, d'attribuer les premières notes à la Commission européenne. Je vous l'annonce, elles sont d'ores et déjà catastrophiques au bout de cent jours. D'abord, Mme von der Leyen doit arrêter son projet funeste de vouloir détruire notre agriculture. Pour l'achever, la présidente de la Commission européenne a sorti l'artillerie lourde: Mercosur et pacte vert. Ces armes de destruction massive visent à mettre à genoux nos agriculteurs, qui, en France, voient l'un des leurs se suicider tous les trois jours.
                  

                     Ensuite, elle parle de défense européenne. Niveau marketing, très bien; niveau patriotisme, zéro. Est-ce que Mme von der Leyen sait que treize pays européens ont acheté des avions militaires américains F-35, contre seulement trois pays européens pour les Rafale français? Si elle défendait vraiment la France, et donc l'Europe, elle inciterait toute l'Union européenne à acheter du ‘made in France’.
                  

                     Enfin, sur l'Algérie, pendant que le président Tebboune laisse moisir notre compatriote Boualem Sansal, détenu politique dans ses geôles depuis quatre mois, Mme von der Leyen dort tranquillement à Bruxelles. La résolution du 23 juin dans ce Parlement n'y a rien changé. Pis encore, ce pays continue d'humilier la France, mon pays, comme le montre le récent attentat islamiste à Mulhouse.
                  

                     Alors, je dis à la Commission européenne ainsi qu'à sa présidente: ‘Reprenez-vous, sinon vous risquerez le conseil de discipline.’
                  

Stefano Cavedagna (ECR). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, come sapete, noi a luglio scorso, abbiamo votato contro la riconferma di Ursula von der Leyen alla presidenza della Commissione europea perché non condividevamo larga parte delle proposte che erano in continuità col mandato precedente.
                  

                     L'idea di andare verso una continua decarbonizzazione che, purtroppo, distruggeva il nostro sistema produttivo. Un piano come quello sul settore dell'auto che massacra letteralmente la nostra produttività. E una scelta sbagliata, a nostro avviso, in campo di immigrazione clandestina.
                  

                     Ma, finalmente, qui, in Parlamento europeo, c'è una grande componente: la componente dei conservatori, che può davvero cambiare il futuro della nostra Europa, ripartendo dalle nostre identità e tradizioni, tutelando quelli che sono i nostri valori fondanti, credendo nel piano della competitività e tutelando le nostre aziende.
                  

                     Ultimo ma non ultimo fare la scelta di difenderci davvero, senza però parlare di guerre, di invasione che non è quello che vogliamo fare. Il futuro dell'Europa deve essere questo.
                  

Svenja Hahn (Renew). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kollegen! 100 Tage neue Von der Leyen-Kommission – und wir reden mal wieder über Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und Bürokratieabbau; ich könnte meine Rede von vor einem Monat auch noch mal genau so halten. Ich bin davon überzeugt, Europa muss endlich aus dem Reden rauskommen und Resultate liefern. Deswegen kann der erste Omnibus auch nur der Anfang sein. Wir müssen rigoros überflüssige Regulierungen und Berichtspflichten streichen.
                  

                     Deswegen auch mein erneuter Appell an die Kommission: Bitte ziehen Sie die offenen und noch überflüssigen Gesetzesvorschläge aus dem letzten Mandat zurück, denn autokratische Regime setzen uns wirtschaftlich unter Druck, Tech-Oligarchen wollen sich nicht an EU-Gesetze halten, und Trumps Zoll-Launen sind Gift für Handel.
                  

                     Europas wirtschaftliche Stärke wird über unsere Zukunft in der Welt entscheiden. Aber wenn ich hier heute schon wieder höre, wie viele auf Zombiewachstum durch Subventionen und Staatswirtschaft setzen, kann ich nur sagen: Wir brauchen die soziale Marktwirtschaft. Die Kommission und die Hauptstädte müssen jetzt Bürokratieabbau pushen, die künstlichen Hürden im Binnenmarkt einreißen, pragmatische Handelspartnerschaften schließen und Europa endlich zum Hotspot für Kapital und Innovation machen.
                  

Javier Zarzalejos (PPE). – Señor presidente, señora vicepresidenta, nadie puede negar que en estos cien días lo que ha aparecido de manera muy clara son los grandes retos que la Comisión tiene ante sí. La simplificación probablemente será el menor si lo comparamos con la inmigración, con la defensa, con la competitividad.
                  

                     A eso hay que añadir la negociación de un marco financiero que no será fácil, que requerirá decisiones importantes sobre la financiación de la Unión, y la preocupación que debemos mantener por el Estado de Derecho. A eso, además, hay que añadir que, si en los últimos años hemos tenido que enfrentarnos al caballo de Troya de la izquierda populista por Putin, ahora nos enfrentamos también al caballo de Troya de la extrema derecha populista y trumpista en Europa.
                  

                     Por tanto, no va a ser fácil, entre otras cosas, señora vicepresidenta, porque desde hace demasiado tiempo demasiados Estados vienen gastando y legislando sin restricción y quieren seguir haciéndolo. Necesitamos, por tanto, una Comisión fuerte —pero no a expensas del Parlamento, sino con el Parlamento— para afrontar estos grandes retos que tenemos ante nosotros.
                  

Csaba Dömötör (PfE). – Elnök Úr! Van egy ügy, amelyről beszélnünk kell, ha már egyszer túl vagyunk az első száz napon. Egyre többet tudunk arról, hogy az Európai Bizottság hogyan finanszíroz baloldali aktivista hálózatokat szerte Európában. Ezeket civilnek állítják, de valójában politikai akciókat folytatnak. Illegális bevándorlókkal együttműködve perelnek államokat, cenzúrát szerveznek, vagy éppen azért kampányolnak, hogy csökkentsék az agrártámogatásokat. És hogyha valaki egy nyilvános listát szeretne arról, hogy összesen hány ilyen csoportot pénzelnek és mennyiért, azt hiába keresné, nincs egységes nyilvántartás erről.
                  

                     Az adatigényléseket pedig botrányos érvelésekkel utasítják el. Például azzal, hogy az igénylő túl sok infót kér. Pár EP-képviselőnek küldenek ugyan listákat, de megtiltják nekik, hogy ezeket nyilvánosságra hozzák. Miért? Mennyire botrányos ez? A baloldali koalíció itt most azt akarja elérni, hogy az eddigi fedett kasszák mellé a Bizottság vegye át a USAID-árvák finanszírozását is. Na még mit nem! Mi nem bővíteni akarjuk ezeket a pénzcsapokat, hanem elzárni. Addig is követeljük, hozzák nyilvánosságra az eddigi szerződések listáját.
                  

Nora Junco García (NI). – Señor presidente, señora vicepresidenta, hoy hablamos de reducir la burocracia para mejorar la competitividad europea, pero hablemos claro: el cuello de botella más grave para la reindustrialización de España y de Europa es la energía, y no por falta de generación, sino por incapacidad o la negativa deliberada de garantizar el suministro donde se necesita.
                  

                     Por ejemplo: en España, el 50 % de las solicitudes de alta de potencia para industria fueron rechazadas en 2024; el resultado: 60 000 millones de euros de inversión privada perdidos. Mientras nos inundan de normativas y discursos sobre transición energética, la realidad es que no hay infraestructuras suficientes ni voluntad política para modernizar.
                  

                     Sin energía fiable y accesible no hay industria, no hay empleo y no hay soberanía económica. Mientras otros países multiplican su inversión en redes eléctricas, en España seguimos atrapados entre intereses políticos y burocracia asfixiante.
                  

                     Si queremos un futuro industrial competitivo, es hora de acabar con esta parálisis: menos trabas, más infraestructura y más libertad para crecer.
                  

Marie-Pierre Vedrenne (Renew). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Ministre, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, ces cent jours ont bouleversé l'Europe et notre histoire. Désormais, l'Europe ne doit pas hésiter, attendre ou se soumettre. Le temps des discours entendus et des consensus mous est révolu. Face aux prédateurs extérieurs et aux saboteurs intérieurs, nous n'avons plus le choix.
                  

                     Qui veut d'une Europe impuissante? Ceux qui, au nom de la dérégulation, servent des puissances étrangères, affaiblissent nos industries et détruisent notre souveraineté, comme les Patriotes. D'autres refusent le changement, paralysent nos avancées et condamnent l'Europe à l'attentisme, comme une partie de la gauche.
                  

                     Une Europe faible est une Europe qui se tait. Nous refusons cette résignation. Nous avons enclenché le réarmement; nous avons posé les bases d'une Europe industrielle forte; toutefois, cela ne suffit pas. Nous devons aller plus vite, frapper plus fort et imposer notre volonté. L'heure est venue d'assumer notre puissance et de défendre ce qui nous appartient: une Europe qui ne quémande pas son avenir mais l'impose. Ceux qui veulent la voir chuter nous trouveront sur leur chemin.
                  

                     L'histoire ne pardonnera pas à une génération de lâches, alors agissons! Agissons maintenant!
                  

Lukas Mandl (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich habe es mir nicht leicht gemacht, Ursula von der Leyen als Kommissionspräsidentin einen Vertrauensvorschuss für eine zweite Amtszeit zu geben. Ich habe auch viele kritische E-Mails von Bürgerinnen und Bürgern für dieses Stimmverhalten, das ich transparent gemacht habe, bekommen. Ich kann aber nach 100 Tagen dieser neuen Europäischen Kommission sagen, ich würde es wieder so machen, weil es kein ‘Weiter wie bisher’ gibt mit Blick auf die alte Periode.
                  

                     Wir haben mit Ursula von der Leyen vor ihrer Wahl hier im Europäischen Parlament intensiv darüber diskutiert, dass es ein Raus geben muss aus dieser Überregulierung, dass Europa den Weg einschlagen muss, den Montesquieu beschrieben hat mit dem wahrhaft liberalen Grundsatz: Wenn es nicht nötig ist, ein Gesetz zu machen, dann ist es nötig, kein Gesetz zu machen. Und jetzt mit dem exzellenten Vorschlag zur Migration, mit dem exzellenten Vorschlag zum sogenannten Omnibus-Paket zur Deregulierung, mit dem Global Gateway, der unsere Wettbewerbsfähigkeit steigern wird, und mit der Sicherheitspolitik gibt es viele gute Gründe, die Stabilität Europas gesichert zu sehen in einer Welt mit hohen Wellen.
                  

Julien Sanchez (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, vous nous proposez de débattre des cent premiers jours de la nouvelle Commission européenne. Ayant voté contre votre nomination, nous ne pouvons qu'être confortés dans notre vote par votre bilan. En effet, qu'avez-vous fait en cent jours? Vous n'avez tellement rien fait que nous ne votons ici presque rien depuis le début de ce mandat. Oui, vous maîtrisez l'ordre du jour et n'avez strictement rien à faire voter.
                  

                     Peut-être est-ce parce que vous avez vidé les caisses, car les caisses sont vides. C'est pourquoi vous imaginez instaurer de nouvelles ressources propres, soit en créant un impôt, soit en créant de nouvelles taxes, soit en augmentant la participation des États membres, par une hausse de leur contribution sur la base de leur revenu national brut. Le groupe Patriotes pour l'Europe s'y oppose.
                  

                     Nous vous invitons plutôt à mieux dépenser, à arrêter la gabegie et à arrêter de distribuer notre argent de manière irresponsable, comme hier encore avec 1,88 milliard d'euros distribués à la Moldavie, dont 520 millions d'euros non remboursables – une folie! L'argent ici est mal dépensé, et l'Europe est à la traîne dans tous les domaines. Elle laisse entrer sans contrôle des islamistes, véritables bombes humaines; elle désindustrialise; elle saccage notre agriculture.
                  

                     Il est temps que les élus de droite de ce Parlement cessent d'être les paillassons de la gauche et des écologistes pour changer de cap, pour plus de sécurité, plus de contrôle budgétaire et améliorer notre compétitivité et la vie des gens, en simplifiant plutôt qu'en créant toujours de nouvelles normes, qui font crever l'économie réelle et avantagent nos concurrents.
                  

Kristoffer Storm (ECR). – Hr. formand! Jeg vil gerne rose Kommissionen for, at de ikke har ført den samme ødelæggende politik, som deres forgængere gjorde, da de sad i Kommissionen. Vi har fået en Kommission, der har trukket lidt mere på bremsen i forhold til at udsende skadelige forslag, skadelig regulering af Europa. Forslag, der gang på gang har sat vores konkurrenceevne på prøve, har ødelagt mulighederne for, at vores virksomheder kunne konkurrere med andre virksomheder i resten af verden. Den nye Kommission har lovet os, at nu skal der ske noget andet. Der skal nye boller på suppen, som man siger. Der skal gang i dereguleringen. Der skal gang i konkurrenceevnen igen i Europa. Det har vi hørt dem snakke om nu i 100 dage. Men vi mangler stadig at se handling, og det ser jeg rigtig meget frem til. For kære Kommission, når der kommer noget, så skal vi nok være klar til at handle her fra Parlamentets side, for Europa skriger virkelig på deregulering, så vores virksomheder kan klare sig i den globale verden. Jeg ser også rigtig meget frem til, at I begynder at levere på at hjemsende nogle af de mennesker, der opholder sig ulovligt i Europa. Det har I lovet europæiske borgere, at I vil gøre, så det ser vi også rigtig meget frem til. For det er på tide, at vi får sikret borgerne i Europa, at de kan leve trygt og ordentligt her i denne verdensdel.
                  

Hilde Vautmans (Renew). – Voorzitter, mijnheer de minister, commissaris, van de eerste honderd dagen kunnen we inderdaad zeggen dat Europa goed uit de startblokken is geschoten. Maar eerlijk gezegd, als de Commissie met 100 kilometer per uur vooruitgaat, dan is de wereldpolitiek met 200 kilometer per uur vooruitgegaan. Wat mij betreft, hebben Trump en Poetin opnieuw een voorsprong genomen.
                  

                     Wat mij nu vooral interesseert, zijn de volgende honderd dagen. Daarover ga ik een oproep doen aan de Raad, de Commissie, aan onszelf. Laten we het tempo verhogen. Twee heel duidelijke dingen: tempo verhogen en radicaal genoeg zijn in de keuzes die we maken. Radicaal op vier gebieden: 1) Vervolledig de interne markt, gooi die helemaal open. Geen remmen meer. 2) Deregulering. Veel minder regels, meer vrijheid voor de ondernemers. 3) Radicaal gaan voor die roadmap, voor die Europese defensie en dat Europese leger. 4) Radicaal pro-Europa. Keer je af van extreem-rechts, dat Europa te allen tijde zal vernietigen. Focus u op degenen die vooruit willen gaan. En alsjeblieft, zorg dat Orbán ons niet langer kan chanteren.
                  

Tomasz Buczek (NI). – Panie Przewodniczący! Pierwsze 100 dni nowej Komisji Europejskiej to 100 dni smutnej prawdy o pozycji Europy w aktualnym świecie geopolitycznym i gospodarczym. To również 100 dni prawdy o przywództwie Unii Europejskiej, któremu zawdzięczamy aktualną, marginalną pozycję Europy. Dzisiejsza polityka Komisji Europejskiej Ursuli von der Leyen to kontynuacja polityki jej niechlubnych poprzedników sprowadzających nam na głowę kryzys migracyjny, gospodarczy, militarny i kryzys demograficzny. Możecie obrażać się na tych, którzy powiedzieli królowi, że jest nagi, ale to nie zmienia faktu, że mieli rację. Możecie otaczać nas kordonem sanitarnym, bojąc się prawd, które głosimy, ale prawda przez to się nie zmieni. Komisjo Europejska, pokazałaś, że w jednej dziedzinie nie masz sobie równych. Tą dziedziną jest kreatywność w tworzeniu nowych, ale nic niezmieniających haseł i programów, których jedynym skutkiem jest poprawa waszego samopoczucia. Aktualna Komisja Europejska jest największym zagrożeniem dla Europy i najlepsze, co Europejczyków mogłoby spotkać, to jej dymisja.
                  

Séverine Werbrouck (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, Mesdames et Messieurs les Commissaires, on peut mettre à votre crédit que, depuis votre nomination, vous n'avez pas chômé. Votre programme est sorti, et on devine parfaitement quelle est votre ligne directrice: le pillage de la compétence des États. Assis bien confortablement sur les traités qui vous ont institués, vous vous permettez d'endetter l'Union européenne. Vous luttez, comme Don Quichotte, contre des ingérences étrangères que vous voyez partout, sauf dans vos propres rangs. Vous avez pourtant récidivé, en matière de scandale, avec le ‘Greengate’. L'affaire sera-t-elle étouffée, comme l'ont été le ‘Qatargate’ et le ‘Pfizergate’?
                  

                     Bien sûr, on ne peut pas vous reprocher de regarder notre continent sombrer sans rien faire. C'est bien vous qui plantez un ultime poignard dans le dos de nos paysans, avec le traité conclu avec le Mercosur; vous qui précipitez la ruine de nos entreprises, avec le pacte vert; vous encore qui condamnez notre avenir, en laissant volontairement nos frontières grandes ouvertes.
                  

                     Durant les cinq ans qu'il nous reste à passer ensemble, nous vous rappellerons toujours quelle est votre place. Nous avons bon espoir bientôt de pouvoir compter sur de nombreux gouvernements, tout particulièrement une fois passées les élections en France, afin que les cent jours que nous avons connus ne se transforment pas en cinq années, desquelles il n'est pas sûr que nous puissions nous relever.
                  

Silvia Sardone (PfE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, un dibattito sui primi 100 giorni della nuova Commissione, con toni trionfalistici. Eh niente, fa già ridere così.
                  

                     Ursula von der Leyen ha commentato (vi leggo le sue dichiarazioni): ‘Questa Commissione è pronta ad affrontare le crisi. Abbiamo bisogno di velocità e determinazione. Abbiamo un'occasione unica per costruire un' Europa più forte, più sicura e più prospera.’
                  

                     Affermazioni comiche. In questi mesi avete lavorato solo per modificare i piani, dal Green Deal all'auto, passando per il regolamento rimpatri, perché vi siete resi conto degli enormi errori che voi avete fatto. Prima fate disastri danneggiando imprese, famiglie e consumatori, e poi dovete intervenire, spesso male, per rimediare. Ridicoli!
                  

                     Inoltre siamo qui a celebrare il vostro piano di riarmo dell'Europa e le vostre considerazioni di patetica sfida agli Stati Uniti di Trump: 100 giorni di proclami, slogan, inutili riunioni, clamorosi dietrofront e vergognosa arroganza.
                  

                     I cittadini europei alle elezioni vi hanno già fatto capire che state sbagliando tutto: ma voi continuate a far finta di nulla!
                  

Philippe Olivier (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, mes chers collègues, construite sur une prétendue promesse de paix, l'Union européenne se mue peu à peu en actrice de guerre. Avant même de consulter le Parlement, dont l'activité est en réalité cosmétique, la Commission se barricade dans une posture belliciste quand les circonstances exigent la paix. Pis, vous entretenez des guerres dans le monde, par exemple en vous faisant la receleuse des matières premières pillées par le Rwanda au Congo.
                  

                     Chaque crise est l'occasion de s'accaparer des prérogatives indues, en dehors même du cadre juridique des traités. Vous ne trahissez pas seulement la promesse de paix, la lettre des traités, mais également l'exigence de démocratie quand vous admettez l'interdiction de chaînes de télévision en France, ou quand vous cautionnez l'annulation d'élections dès lors qu'elles vous sont défavorables, comme en Roumanie.
                  

                     L'Union révèle en réalité sa vraie nature: celle d'un empire qui – c'est l'essence des empires – repose sur une quête insatiable d'expansion territoriale, juridique et politique. La raison et l'indispensable respect des peuples, comme les leçons de l'histoire, devraient vous rappeler que cette feuille de route impériale est vouée à l'échec.
                  

Pierre Pimpie (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, la simplification, la compétitivité, la défense, l'immigration: je vois là de nombreux objectifs incantatoires que la Commission brandit, sans autre cap que l'obsolescence programmée de l'Europe. Qui paiera les 800 milliards d'euros de la défense, dont nous n'avons pas le premier centime, pour surréagir à une guerre dont l'issue nous est, hélas, déjà connue?
                  

                     Comment comptez-vous simplifier le système normatif, dont la complexité se trouve dans les gènes mêmes de cette Union européenne que vous avez voulu couper de ses racines comme de son âme? Comment croyez-vous rendre à l'Europe sa compétitivité après l'avoir affublée du fardeau du pacte vert? Je n'ose parler de votre folie migratoire et de ses conséquences sur notre identité et notre sécurité.
                  

                     J'appelle la Commission à plus d'humilité face au chaos dont elle porte la responsabilité, tel un pompier pyromane.
                  

Jean-Paul Garraud (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, cent jours se sont écoulés depuis l'installation de la nouvelle Commission européenne, et un triste constat s'impose: celui d'une continuité avec l'ancienne Commission, pourtant largement désavouée par les Européens lors des dernières élections.
                  

                     Loin d'entendre le message des urnes, la Commission persiste dans une politique qui cherche à s'imposer face à la volonté des peuples. Ainsi en matière migratoire, avec le nouveau pacte sur la migration et l'asile; en matière environnementale, avec le pacte vert; en matière agricole, avec le Mercosur et la perspective de nouveaux accords de libre-échange, qui sacrifient nos agriculteurs sur l'autel du mondialisme.
                  

                     La Commission persiste et signe dans sa volonté centralisatrice et interventionniste, dans des domaines qui ne sont pas de sa compétence, comme la défense. La Commission profite toujours et encore des crises internationales pour progresser dans son emprise, au détriment de la souveraineté de nos nations, quitte à faire acte d'ingérence dans le processus démocratique de certains États membres.
                  

                     Pendant ce temps, rien pour protéger nos frontières extérieures; rien contre la menace du terrorisme islamiste, alors que, récemment encore, la France, l'Autriche et l'Allemagne ont été durement touchées; rien pour sauver nos industries et endiguer la pauvreté, qui s'aggrave partout en Europe. Pourtant, les constats sont clairs: le rapport Draghi, commandé par la Commission elle-même, dresse un tableau accablant du décrochage économique et technologique de l'Europe. Pourtant, au lieu d'y répondre, la Commission accentue ses politiques, qui ont échoué.
                  

                     Alors qu'elle est menacée par une Europe des nations, que nous voulons, l'Union européenne accentue le rythme pour devenir ce supra-État antidémocratique qu'elle désire tant. Les Européens n'en peuvent plus. L'heure de la souveraineté et de l'Europe des nations approche, dans le seul intérêt de nos peuples.
                  

Henna Virkkunen,
Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, I want to thank you very much for your very valuable comments and remarks.
It's clear that bold and swift collective action is needed for our security, for our economy, and also our way of life. The proposals the Commission has been tabling in these first 100 days are based on extensive dialogue with civil society businesses, experts and the policy makers.
As you as a co-legislator, as Members of the European Parliament, you play a very crucial role here in ensuring that our agenda also reaches our citizens and companies on time, showing also certainty and determination in a very increasingly unstable world.
So we need also your support to fast track our proposals where possible, in particular when it comes to simplification and burden reduction of our businesses and SMEs. So if we want to create a new momentum for European safety and European prosperity, we all need to work very hard in the same direction and also we have to work together.

Adam Szłapka,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, Madam Commissioner, honourable Members, thank you very much for this rich discussion. We have received a new proposal from the Commission during its first 100 days in office regarding the future of European defence, competitiveness, simplification and migration. What I take from today's debate is our common determination to make progress in these key areas for Europe's future. The Council is actively working on all of them and counts on the European Parliament to deliver on these priorities.
Mr President, honourable Members, since the agenda is running late – and I may need to leave before the debate on frozen assets starts – please let me say that collective support for Ukraine takes many different forms. Among others, we have immobilised Russia's assets.
Last year, windfall revenues from immobilised assets started to benefit Ukraine. Last year's revenues were predominately channelled to Ukraine through the European Peace Facility. Now they will be used to service and repay the loans under the Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration initiative, set up with our G7 partners. When it comes to seizing Russian assets themselves, the Council will consider all possible solutions.

Le Président. – Merci beaucoup, Monsieur le Ministre. Le débat est clos.
                  


Déclarations écrites (article 178)



Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (ECR),
na piśmie. – W ciągu pierwszych 100 dni kadencji nowa Komisja Europejska skoncentrowała się na realizacji kluczowych celów w zakresie obrony, konkurencyjności, uproszczenia oraz migracji. Niestety, wiele dotychczasowych decyzji budzi co najmniej zdziwienie, np. decyzja by nie finansować barier fizycznych na granicach zewnętrznych UE, mimo rosnącego zagrożenia migracją wykorzystywaną jako broń przez wrogie mocarstwa. Ochrona granic zewnętrznych UE musi zostać uznana za priorytet, mający na celu utrzymanie bezpieczeństwa na terytoriach państw członkowskich. Komisja musi realnie wspierać budowę i utrzymanie barier oraz rozwój infrastruktury granicznej, a także zwiększenie nadzoru granicznego, by realnie – a nie tylko deklaratywnie – rozwiązać problem nielegalnej migracji.
                  

                     Polityka migracyjna musi stać się jednym z najważniejszych priorytetów UE, musi skupić się na lepszym zabezpieczeniu granic przed nielegalnymi migrantami oraz na usprawnieniu kontroli migracyjnych i współpracy z państwami trzecimi. Nie osiągniemy tego bez walki z siatkami przemytniczymi, które współpracują z wrogimi służbami specjalnymi. Trzeba rozwiązać kwestie powrotów osób nielegalnie przebywających w UE, z naciskiem na wzajemne uznawanie decyzji i intensyfikację działań dyplomatycznych w celu wymuszenia współpracy z państwami trzecimi.
                  

                     Komisja musi być gotowa do konstruktywnej współpracy w celu zabezpieczenia granic Europy i przywrócenia porządku w zarządzaniu migracjami.
                  
11.   Union of Skills: striving for more and better opportunities to study, train or work in the EU and to bring our talents back home (debate)

Le Président. – L'ordre du jour appelle la déclaration de la Commission intitulée ‘Union des compétences: multiplier et améliorer les possibilités d'étude, de formation ou de travail dans l'Union et faire revenir nos cerveaux’ (2025/2563(RSP)).
               

                  Nous attendons que Mme la commissaire Roxana Mînzatu puisse arriver. Nous en avons pour quelques secondes, et je lui demanderai de bien vouloir se diriger immédiatement vers la tribune pour sa déclaration.
               

                  Madame la Vice-Présidente, bienvenue, et je vous donne la parole immédiatement.
               

Roxana Mînzatu,
Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, I'm sorry to have to come so abruptly, but we talked today about a labour of love and the labour of passion for our European Union, the Union of Skills, it is about us, about the people. We talk a lot about competitiveness these days, but we all know that competitiveness starts with people, with giving girls and boys the best education, with giving workers the right skills that they need.
Right now, we are not where we would want to be and where we know that we could be. Our European Union is home to a skilled workforce, cutting-edge companies, and great education and training institutions, but our education system and workers are still struggling to keep up with the pace of change. Young Europeans are lagging behind their peers in the United States, in Canada or Japan when it comes to basic skills. Skills gaps and labour shortages are at a record high in our European Union. Too many young Europeans leave to start their future elsewhere. We cannot keep the pace with the rhythm of transformation of our industries, and with the type of skills that they demand.
We need to address these failures as a matter of urgency, and that is why we have launched the Union of Skills. It is first and foremost about stronger educational foundations, about better basic skills. And basic skills start with education.
We are putting forward, in the Union of Skills, a series of targets to reverse the alarming decline in performance in basic skills like maths, reading or science. Today, 1 in 3 teenagers do not have basic math competencies – 1 in 3. We want to bring the level of underachievers, meaning children that are not able to perform such basic skills, to below 15 %, that is, to half the current rate. We have a separate target for vocational and educational training in scientific and engineering areas, where we want to get to at least 45 % of enrolments, and 1 in 4 to be girls. Equally, for tertiary education, we want to get to 32 % of enrolments in STEM education, 2 out of 5 to be women. We have an ambitious target on that on this dimension and I would emphasise it: we want to train 1 million girls in STEM by 2028.
The second pillar of the Union of Skills is about the upskilling and reskilling of workers. Four in 5 businesses struggle to find the workers that they need with the right skill set. There are more than 40 occupations with EU-wide shortages, especially in important sectors like construction, trades, transport and some healthcare professions. Only 40 % of European adults do some form of training – far below the target of 60 % by 2030. We do have ongoing actions such as the Pact for Skills and the EU skills academies, and we will work to strengthen these tools. But we propose, in the Union of Skills, new tools.
I will mention just one for this pillar: the Skills Guarantee. It is a Skills Guarantee for workers, and we want to pilot it starting this year. Similar with to Youth Guarantee, the idea is to support companies hiring or training people that are at risk of losing their employment, to support their training and to support their job for a number of months, to ensure that they have job security and good employment perspectives in a transforming industry or company. The pilot will start with a budget of EUR 10 million this year. If it works well, our intention is to scale it up in the next MFF.
The third pillar, which is very important: allowing skills to circulate. And it is about our single market inside the European Union. We all know freedom of movement, of people, as being one of the four fundamental freedoms. And yet that freedom hits a wall when skills as such are not recognised across Member States. These are barriers to opportunity and growth that we must bring down. A real Union of Skills is one where skills can circulate freely, and that is why we will put forward a skills portability initiative next year, in 2026. This will be a win-win for workers and businesses alike. For workers, it will open new opportunities to find jobs that match their qualifications, and it will give businesses a much larger talent pool to fill their positions that they are looking for.
The fourth pillar of the Union of Skills is indeed about attracting, developing and retaining talent. It is about making the European Union a global magnet for talent. We must encourage our own citizens and the world's brightest minds to choose Europe. 'Choose Europe' is indeed one of our flagship initiatives in this strand of the Union of Skills. We intend to pilot it, with a budget of some EUR 23 million, in order to develop the right tool that can be then scaled and through which we attract to Europe top researchers from all over the world, including countries such as the United States, India – that we visited in recently – and other parts of the world.
Later this year, we will also present a visa strategy to support the arrival of top students, researchers and skilled workers. And, once adopted by the European Parliament and the Council, we will set up the EU talent pool.
One horizontal aspect about the Union of Skills is extremely important for its success, and it shows that it's not business as usual in this policy field: it's the governance of the Union of Skills. Nothing will work if we don't change the governance, and this is the most innovative part of our Union of Skills. We need policymakers, companies, social partners, civil society and education and training institutions to come together and for their work together to matter. That is why we will set up a European Skills Board that will bring together CEOs, social partners, education providers, so that they look at where the skills gaps lie and how they can be tackled best. They will also rely on their experience on the ground but their work will be supported by the data provided by the Skills Intelligence Observatory, a tool that we intend to launch in order to look at current use of skills and to better anticipate future skills needs across the European Union.
We will bring together policy decisions rooted in reality with a swift decision making process, with stronger links between that reality, policy action and investment. This can be a real game changer.

Dennis Radtke,
im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Frau Vizepräsidentin, liebe Roxana, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ganz herzlichen Dank an die Europäische Kommission für diese Initiative. Und es gibt ja nicht wenige, die sagen: Ja, Union of Skills, was soll das schon sein? Das ist irgendwie alles so unkonkret, das ist mal wieder so typische Wolkenschieberei der Kommission. So kann man natürlich da rangehen. Oder man kann auch sagen, es ist ein guter Anfang – und dieser Anfang ist zwingend notwendig.
               

                  Ich will einfach einmal aus meiner Sicht sagen, warum er so zwingend notwendig ist. Wir haben in Deutschland eine Bundeskanzlerin gehabt, Angela Merkel, die hat mal mit Blick auf die Situation in Deutschland darauf hingewiesen und gesagt: Das, was wir teurer sind als andere, das müssen wir auch besser sein, und dann wird es weiter funktionieren. Und dieser Satz gilt eigentlich nicht nur für Deutschland, sondern er gilt, wenn man sich den globalen Wettbewerb ansieht, für die gesamte Europäische Union, denn wir werden niemals bei Lohnkosten mit Chinesen, mit dem Oman, mit Singapur konkurrenzfähig sein können – es geht nicht. Egal wie unterschiedlich das Lohnniveau in der EU ist, wir werden niemals auf diesem Level konkurrenzfähig sein können. Konkurrenzfähig werden wir am Ende nur sein können, wenn wir das, was wir teurer sind, auch besser sind.
               

                  So, und darum geht es am Ende auch bei der Union of Skills: auf der einen Seite zu schauen, wie können wir sozusagen die, die schon hier sind – egal ob sie irgendwann mal zugewandert sind, egal, ob sie hier in der Europäischen Union geboren worden sind –, wie können wir die besser qualifizieren, gerade auch diejenigen, die formal eine geringe Bildung haben. Wie können wir auch gemeinsam mit den Sozialpartnern sicherstellen, dass auch ältere Arbeitnehmer noch in den Genuss von Qualifikation und Weiterbildung kommen? Das halte ich für ganz zentral.
               

                  Und zweiter Punkt ist: Du hast das Thema talent pool angesprochen. Auch das halte ich für wichtig, weil jedem klar ist: Den Fachkräftebedarf, den wir haben, den werden wir aus eigener Kraft, aus unseren eigenen Reserven, nicht befriedigen können, und deswegen brauchen wir Projekte wie talent pool, um ganz gezielt Menschen aus aller Welt hierher zu bringen, die in diese Lücken reingehen.
               

                  Von daher: Wir werden als Parlament diese Initiative weiter positiv begleiten, die Kommission ist da auf dem richtigen Weg.
               

Estelle Ceulemans,
au nom du groupe S&D. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Vice-Présidente exécutive, chers collègues, aujourd'hui, en Europe, un tiers de la population active, soit 75 millions de personnes, ne possède qu'un faible niveau de qualification, voire aucune qualification. Dans le même temps, 15 % des jeunes quittent l'école sans diplôme. Pourtant, la nécessaire réindustrialisation de l'Europe et la transition numérique et climatique exigent des compétences nouvelles et adaptées. C'est pourquoi nous, au sein du groupe S&D, nous réclamons un véritable droit à la formation, rémunéré pendant les heures de travail, pour les travailleurs et les travailleuses. Il ne suffit pas d'encourager la formation; il faut garantir ce droit.
               

                  Nous souhaitons aussi rappeler que, si 50 % des employeurs dans les secteurs en tension peinent à recruter, il ne s'agit pas seulement d'un problème de compétences. Les conditions de travail sont essentielles, particulièrement pour les jeunes, et elles doivent être améliorées.
               

                  L'Union des compétences présentée par la Commission est ambitieuse, mais elle reste une déclaration d'intention. Elle doit être concrétisée et devenir un levier de progrès social et économique. Sinon, sans engagement fort et clair, elle restera une coquille vide.
               

Annamária Vicsek,
a PfE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Elnök Úr! Ha versenyképes Európai Uniót akarunk, akkor megfelelő készségekkel rendelkező munkaerőt kell biztosítanunk, amely alkalmazkodik a digitális és zöld átálláshoz, valamint a demográfiai változásokhoz is. Mindeközben nem szabad elfelejtenünk, hogy az oktatás és a képzés tagállami hatáskör, amit az EU iránymutatással, pénzeléssel és koordinációval támogathat. A mobilitás az EU-ban kiváló lehetőség a fiatalok előtt, amit több uniós program is támogat.
               

                  Ugyanakkor a hátrányai is érezhetők, hiszen az elvándorlás, a demográfiai kihívások és az agyelszívás minden tagállamot sújt. Ezért fontos a tehetséges fiatalok megtartásának és visszatérésének ösztönzése. Szeretném jó példaként említeni a magyar kormány által létrehozott Hazaváró programot, amely a költözés, a lakhatás és a munkalehetőségek támogatásával ösztönzi hazatérésre a külföldön élő magyar állampolgárokat. A jelentős érdeklődés bizonyítja a program létjogosultságát és sikerét. A fiatalok visszatérése hozzájárul a magyar gazdaság versenyképességének növeléséhez, ezzel közvetve növeli az EU versenyképességét is.
               

Chiara Gemma,
a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signor Presidente, Vicepresidente esecutivo, onorevoli colleghi, la competitività europea non può prescindere dalla polarizzazione delle competenze, dal sostegno alla formazione di qualità e dal contrasto alla fuga dei cervelli, un fenomeno trasversale ma che colpisce in modo drammatico il mio Paese.
               

                  Questa emorragia di talenti è una sconfitta per tutti noi: un fenomeno che ha gravi conseguenze poiché comporta una perdita del capitale umano, riducendo la capacità di innovazione e sviluppo dello stesso Paese.
               

                  L'Unione deve far sì che la mobilità esista ma, soprattutto, deve creare le condizioni affinché i cittadini europei possano costruire il proprio futuro all'interno dei propri Paesi. Per farlo occorre garantire loro il diritto a restare, la libertà di permanenza, come il diritto a rientrare.
               

                  Fermiamo allora la fuga dei cervelli con un impegno concreto nel garantire opportunità adeguate a chi possiede competenze chiave, evitando che il Paese perda il suo potenziale più prezioso. Arginiamo la fuga dei cervelli adottando un approccio multidimensionale che coinvolga diversi settori della società, dall'istruzione alla politica economica, dalla ricerca scientifica alle politiche sociali.
               

                  Servono soluzioni concrete e tra queste penso ad alcune: favorire politiche fiscali, creare reti di ex-studenti e professionisti che hanno avuto esperienze all'estero, ma anche, ad esempio, promuovere una visione positiva del proprio Paese, lanciando campagne informative per mostrare come il talento locale possa contribuire al miglioramento del Paese e al suo sviluppo, contrastando così l'idea che solo all'estero ci siano opportunità formative.
               

Brigitte van den Berg,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, Commissioner, during the hearing, I asked you the question: 'can you commit to making skills truly transferable and vocational training diplomas recognised across Europe by the end of this term?' And we are very happy to see in a Union of Skills, first of all, that there is a good amount of attention for vocationally educated professionals, and, second of all, that diploma recognition is one of the core ambitions. Thank you very much for listening.
We are looking forward to working closely with you on this, also on the pilot that you propose. And seeing that the Benelux cooperation is often a frontrunner in unifying policy, I want to suggest that we start piloting diploma recognition in the Benelux.
But I do want to ask for your attention regarding some other things. First of all, I want to ask for your attention in involving people with practical skills in policy-making. I want to ask for your attention for fair salaries for professionals with practical skills. And I want to ask for your attention in investing in VET teachers.
And I want to echo my colleague Radtke on this: skilled people are at the core of every policy. Especially in these unfortunate times, it is where Europe has to find its strength. We need to invest in the people now more than ever.

Nela Riehl,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, dear Commissioner, it's time to acknowledge the reality. An unreliable US, an emboldened Russia and hybrid warfare knocking at our doors. But let's be clear: peace isn't just secured by military alone, it's safeguarded by people upholding our democracies. To protect European democracy, we must strengthen it against these destabilisation efforts. This is why we need widespread, high-quality education in Europe. Everyone has has the right to be active citizens, be trained for coming changes and leverage their potential against destabilisation.
Many of the high costs Europe faces today are a result of failing to prepare for them in the past in time, whether on defence, energy or climate. When we act too late, we end up paying dearly. So one thing is very clear: we need a Union of Skills now, so thank you very much for that. Investing in people is not just a choice; it's a necessity, and an urgent one.
Let's be even more ambitious. When we say people need training, let's make a wider training directive. When we say strengthen Erasmus, let's significantly increase the budget. When we say active citizenship and hybrid war, let's define strategic targets of civic education.

Li Andersson,
on behalf of The Left Group. – Mr President, Executive Vice-President, who is at the centre of all of the transformations that are ongoing in Europe? It is the workers. They are the first to face the emergence of new technologies, and every day they feel the rising costs of living. As a response, we need action to secure good working conditions and quality jobs and an ambitious skills agenda.
At the moment, EU Member States are far behind when it comes to participation in adult education. By 2030, the number should be 60%, yet at the moment it's only 34%. The common starting point should be: how do we find the right tools to change this? Member States need new incentives to invest in high-quality vocational education and training, but increasing the supply of training for individuals is not enough. We also need new proposals to secure the right of workers to training. Investing in people and investing in skills is essential to reduce poverty and to deliver quality jobs in all sectors.

Marc Jongen,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Nichts wie raus aus der EU – so denken rund 270 000 Hochqualifizierte, die Deutschland jährlich verlassen, vor allem in die USA und die Schweiz. Als Ersatz haben wir seit 2015 hunderttausende gering bis gar nicht Qualifizierte ins Land geholt, direkt in unsere Sozialsysteme. Die Kommission will jetzt abgewanderte Talente zur Rückkehr bewegen und definiert planwirtschaftliche Zielgrößen.
               

                  Warum sollte ein wirklich Hochqualifizierter sich für Deutschland entscheiden, wo eine exorbitante Steuerlast auf ihn wartet, die noch weiter steigen wird aufgrund ungebremster Schuldenaufnahme durch die Regierung und der hemmungslosen Gelddruckerei der EZB? Was soll Deutschland, was soll die EU attraktiv machen für echte Talente, wenn sie dort auf der Straße Angst vor Messerattacken und Anschlägen haben müssen und wenn jetzt auch noch EU-weit zum Krieg gegen die angrenzende Atommacht Russland aufgerüstet wird?
               

                  Zwar wurde richtig erkannt, dass wir mehr Studenten in MINT-Fächern und mehr Ingenieure brauchen, aber dann wird alles wieder durch Frauenquoten und andere Auflagen zunichte gemacht, und die vielen hundert Genderprofessuren europaweit, die für ein restriktives geistiges Klima sorgen, fördert man auch fröhlich weiter.
               

                  Die Busfahrer aus Kenia in Flensburg in allen Ehren – sie gelten der EU ja auch als Fachkräfte –, aber den Softwareentwickler in den USA werden Sie mit EU Talent Pool und Beobachtungsstelle für Kompetenz nicht zurückholen nach Deutschland. Beenden Sie die großen politischen Irrwege, die ich angesprochen habe, und die Leistungsträger kommen ganz von selbst wieder, ganz ohne planwirtschaftliche Sonderprogramme.
               

Zoltán Tarr (PPE). – Elnök Úr! A legtehetségesebb fiatalok és a jól képzett munkaerő Magyarországról is és sok más európai országból gyakran máshol keresi a lehetőségeket és a boldogulást, és ezt meg is találja, mert máshol könnyebb a cégalapítás, könnyebb az innovációs fejlesztés, sok egyéb más feltételben könnyebbséget találnak ahhoz képest, ami Európában fogadja őket. Van olyan is, hogy a gazdasági és jogszabályi nehézségeken túl politikai nyomás is nehezedik az emberekre, mint ez történik ma Magyarországon is. Ez is sokakat elűz hazájukból.
               

                  Ezért tartom az egyik nagyon fontos elemének ennek az előterjesztésnek annak az ösztönzését, hogy hazatérjenek a harmadik országokban dolgozó tehetségek, és munkájukkal saját hazájuk és Európa prosperitásához járuljanak hozzá. Nekünk Magyarországon is ez az egyik fontos kilábalási lehetőségünk a gazdasági válságból, de ennek megvalósításához politikai változásra van szükség. Ugyanakkor tudjuk, hogy megfelelő munkaerő nincsen képzés, továbbképzés nélkül. Ezért szükséges már a közoktatásban is korszerű módszerek alkalmazása. Az előterjesztés is azt javasolja, hogy tovább kell erősíteni az oktatás és az ipar kapcsolatát, támogatni a társadalmi mobilitást. Így kell és így lehet egy olyan Uniót fejleszteni, ahol a készségek és a munkalehetőségek együtt fejlődnek, és így egy erős Európát tudunk építeni.
               

Idoia Mendia (S&D). – Señor presidente, señora vicepresidenta, la disputa por atraer el talento es hoy la gran batalla, porque el talento es una prioridad estratégica de la Unión Europea si quiere seguir siendo competitiva a nivel global. Invertir en las personas es invertir en nuestro futuro y en la competitividad de nuestras empresas en un mundo lleno de amenazas.
               

                  La tarea la ha señalado claramente la vicepresidenta Mînzatu: debemos desarrollar un sistema de formación permanente sólido que asegure que los trabajadores cuenten siempre con las capacidades adecuadas y, así, garantizar empleos de calidad. Debemos mejorar el reciclaje y perfeccionamiento profesional, impulsando las transiciones ecológica y digital. Esta tarea requiere un firme compromiso con el diálogo social, apostando por una Directiva de transición justa para poder adelantarse a los cambios en un entorno en transformación constante. Asimismo, debemos garantizar el libre movimiento de los trabajadores dentro del mercado único, reconociendo sus titulaciones, y ser capaces de atraer y retener el talento en Europa. Esto lo conseguiremos ofreciendo buenos empleos, condiciones laborales dignas, buenos salarios y desarrollo profesional.
               

                  Pero, para que esta iniciativa tenga éxito, es crucial que la Comisión Europea proponga una Directiva sobre el derecho de los trabajadores a la formación con el fin de garantizar ese derecho a la formación y educación remunerada relacionada con el trabajo y durante la jornada laboral. Nuestro futuro —el futuro de la Unión Europea— se garantiza con formación y educación de calidad. Invirtamos en nuestra ciudadanía para construir un futuro más justo, más sostenible y más competitivo.
               

Tiago Moreira de Sá (PfE). – Senhor Presidente, a fuga dos jovens europeus mais talentosos é um sintoma de um problema mais de fundo: o declínio da Europa. Essa fuga é um alerta, um sistema de sinalização na estrada da História.
               

                  É nos seus jovens que as civilizações veem o seu próprio futuro, e aquilo que eles nos dizem, ao partir, é claro: a Europa não tem futuro e perde todos os dias terreno para os Estados Unidos, a Ásia e mesmo partes do Médio Oriente.
               

                  Devolvamos aos jovens a Europa que vive de acordo com o famoso imperativo normativo transmitido por Polónio ao seu filho Laertes, no Hamlet, de Shakespeare: ‘Sê fiel a ti mesmo e disso há de seguir-se, como a noite ao dia, que a ninguém poderás ser falso.’
               

                  Devolvamos aos jovens a Europa amiga da liberdade. A Europa centrada no indivíduo e nas famílias, não no Estado. A Europa com menos regulação, menos impostos, mais competitividade económica e tecnológica.
               

                  Devolvamos aos jovens a Europa capaz de controlar a imigração ilegal, de defender a sua identidade e de fazer um combate sem tréguas à corrupção que corrói as instituições democráticas. A Europa das Ivy Leagues, das universidades de referência.
               

                  A solução não está apenas em fazer regressar os nossos novos talentos, mas em reverter o declínio que os expulsa. Só assim seremos, não uma fábrica de exilados, mas um polo de talentos.
               

Georgiana Teodorescu (ECR). – Domnule președinte, doamnă comisară, stimați colegi, Comisia vorbește despre o uniune a competențelor și despre aducerea talentelor acasă. Suntem de acord. Noi, cei de la AUR, vorbim de mult despre necesitatea repatrierii diasporei. Dar unde era această îngrijorare a birocraților UE acum 20 de ani, când milioane de români și est-europeni au fost forțați să plece pentru că propriile lor economii au fost sufocate de politicile impuse de Bruxelles?
               

                  Se discută despre crearea de oportunități mai bune în UE, dar ce fel de oportunități și pentru cine? Pentru că, în timp ce UE deschide brațele larg pentru migranți și trimite bani pentru a sprijini țări de pe alte continente, tinerii noștri par a nu fi prioritizați. Un viitor european al europenilor și nu al altora, înseamnă soluții financiare concrete și generoase pentru sprijinirea educației și reconversiei profesionale. Înseamnă școli profesionale, burse și sprijin financiar pentru tineri în scopul finalizării ciclului de studii, precum și politici reale de combatere a sărăciei. Dacă vrem o Europă puternică, fiecare stat trebuie să fie puternic, nu doar câteva capitale. Nu migrația forțată și mobilitatea salvează Europa, ci șansele reale și educația cât mai bună pentru toți cetățenii.
               

Laurence Farreng (Renew). – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Vice-Présidente, chers collègues, l'Union des compétences est un réel progrès pour l'Union européenne. Enfin, nous concrétisons les préconisations du rapport Draghi pour notre compétitivité – parce que, oui, derrière nos économies il y a surtout des femmes et des hommes qui la font fonctionner et qui doivent être formés tout au long de la vie.
               

                  Les initiatives annoncées sont un progrès, et je retiens particulièrement celles pour la reconnaissance européenne des diplômes et pour la création d'un diplôme européen pour les apprentis, mais également les bourses pour attirer les chercheurs à haut potentiel, l'observatoire pour prévoir les besoins en compétences futures ou encore votre engagement à renforcer le programme Erasmus+.
               

                  L'Union des compétences est un pas de géant pour l'Europe de l'éducation, et parce que c'est une compétence nationale, voire régionale, il relève de la responsabilité de nos États membres de coordonner leurs politiques éducatives, de faire progresser le niveau et de permettre à tous nos talents de rivaliser avec le monde entier.
               

Gordan Bosanac (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, Madam Commissioner, the importance and the beauty of this debate is that we are finally talking again about the people. After one and a half days of talking about defence and regulation, now we are going back to talking about the people.
But maybe there is one trap that we can get into, and this is that we also talk about work and competitiveness, because skills are not only about that. We also need the new generation not to be just skilled workers in the labour market, but also to be people who are empathic, who can understand and feel what fake news is, who can think with their own heads. And this is what should also count as a skill. And this is why education should be available and accessible to each and every person in Europe throughout life.
And one more thing, when we talk about the talent pool and about needing talent, I also want to remind all of us that sometimes we should also take care of untalented people, because we have also seen that sometimes untalented people make a big difference. So don't forget about those people as well.

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


Tomislav Sokol (PPE),
pitanje koje je podizanjem plave kartice postavio. – Poštovani predsjedavajući, gospodine Bosanac, doista se zahvaljujem na vašem izlaganju, ali pogotovo je interesantan ovaj dio kad kažete da obrana nema veze s ljudima.
               

                  Mislim, to mi je malo čudno jer, kao što vjerojatno i sami znate, kad ne bi bilo vojske, kad ne bi bilo obrane, kad ne bi bilo izdvajanja, ta vaša država bila bi puno izloženija agresiji nego što je kad imate jaku vojsku, kad ulažete puno obranu itd. Mislim da je svima jasno da smo imali jaku vojsku, da smo imali borbene avione Rafale, da smo imali tenkove i slično 1991. ne bi se dogodili svi zločini koji su se dogodili u Vukovaru, Škabrnji, Dubrovniku, itd., itd.
               

                  Tako da mislim da kad govorimo o ljudima da je upravo sigurnost ljudi jedan od temelja svake države i da bismo zaštitili ljude, trebamo imati jaku vojsku, tako da molim da ne prodajemo ovdje demagogiju o tome da nam vojska ne treba, da nam izdvajanja za vojsku ne trebaju, jer ljude i sigurnost njihovu ne možemo zaštititi bez jake vojske, bez ulaganja u obranu.
               

Gordan Bosanac (Verts/ALE),
odgovor na pitanje postavljeno podizanjem plave kartice. – Poštovani predsjedavajući, zahvaljujem, gospodine Sokol, ali naravno, ponovno ste pobrkali lončiće.
               

                  Nisam govorio o tome da ne treba vojska, govorio sam o tome da napokon raspravljamo o ljudima i kada se okrene malo stvar drugačije, kada se počne više ulagati u ljude, kada ljudi počnu dobivati kvalitetan građanski odgoj, kada krenu brinuti jedni o drugima, tada je onda i puno manje sukoba i to čini nas sve puno snažnijima i rezistentnijima nego li je situacija sada kada, nažalost, evo, vidimo da i diktatori koriste i lažne vijesti i ostale manipulacije da manipuliraju ljudima.
               

                  Zato uložimo u edukaciju i učinimo naša društva otpornijima.
               

Νίκος Παππάς (The Left). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, καλησπέρα. Η πρόταση μιας Ένωσης Δεξιοτήτων για την ενίσχυση των ευκαιριών για σπουδές, εκπαίδευση και εργασία στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση νομίζω είναι χωρίς αμφιβολία αναγκαία. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση όμως συχνά προβάλλει την έννοια της ανταγωνιστικότητας και της ανάπτυξης ως πανάκεια για την κοινωνία μας. Δεν μπορούμε να αγνοήσουμε όμως ότι υπάρχει και μια συνεχώς αυξανόμενη ανισότητα. Ο στόχος δεν πρέπει να είναι μόνο η ενίσχυση της ανταγωνιστικότητας αλλά και η διασφάλιση της κοινωνικής δικαιοσύνης, της ισότητας και της αλληλεγγύης. Το μέλλον και τα όνειρα των νέων δεν πρέπει να θυσιάζονται στον βωμό του χρηματοπιστωτικού συστήματος και στις απαιτήσεις των μεγάλων επιχειρήσεων. Νέοι άνθρωποι με υψηλό επίπεδο εκπαίδευσης αναγκάζονται να εγκαταλείψουν τις χώρες τους αναζητώντας ένα καλύτερο μέλλον, καθώς στις πατρίδες τους οι ευκαιρίες είναι περιορισμένες. Η Ένωση Δεξιοτήτων, λοιπόν, πρέπει να είναι μια ευκαιρία για την επιστροφή αυτών των νέων στις πατρίδες τους, για την ενίσχυση της κοινωνικής συνοχής και της δημοκρατίας. Οι δεξιότητες δεν είναι απλά ένα μέσο για την οικονομία αλλά η δύναμη για την κοινωνία. Ευχαριστώ πολύ.
               

Jan-Peter Warnke (NI). – Herr Präsident, Frau Vizepräsidentin! Eigentlich ist es ja eine gute Idee, die Umsetzung wird aber von den Rahmenbedingungen und dem Arbeitsklima in der EU abhängen. Solange die Bedingungen für Entrepreneurs, Wissenschaftler und Spezialisten außerhalb der EU besser sind, werden diese nicht zurückkehren.
               

                  Auf der anderen Seite schlummern die Talente aber ungehoben bei uns in Europa. In Deutschland leben 2,48 Millionen junge Menschen ohne Schul- und beruflichen Abschluss; in Europa sind es im Schnitt 14 % der jungen Menschen ohne Abschluss. 3 Millionen Menschen in Deutschland, vorrangig Mütter, können wegen Betreuungspflichten zu Hause und fehlender Betreuungsinfrastruktur nicht oder nicht vollständig arbeiten.
               

                  Bei guter Intention bleibt zu befürchten, dass wir wiederum einen bürokratischen Akt schaffen, der letztendlich zu einem neuen Potemkinschen Dorf wird. Heben wir doch zuerst die Schätze in den Köpfen der jungen Europäer! Geben wir Frauen endlich die gleichen beruflichen Chancen und beenden wir die Augenwischerei, dass unsere EU die Hausaufgaben der Nationalstaaten übernimmt, die wir nur ungenügend erfüllen können.
               

Romana Tomc (PPE). – Gospod predsednik! Spoštovane kolegice in kolegi, spoštovana komisarka! Evropa se vzporedno s številnimi problemi sooča z enim največjih izzivov tega časa, z ohranjanjem in razvojem svojih talentov. Vse preveč naših najboljših ljudi išče priložnosti izven naših meja, s čimer seveda izgubljamo mi in izgubljamo tiste, ki so temelj našega gospodarskega in socialnega razvoja.
               

                  Če želimo ostati globalno konkurenčni, potem moramo ta trend nujno zaustaviti. Trenutno je v Evropski uniji na voljo tri milijone nezasedenih delovnih mest. Mlade bi morali informirati o tem, po katerih poklicih je največ povpraševanja, že v času njihovega študija. Velikokrat smo slišali, da morajo izobraževalni sistemi bolje sodelovati z industrijo in da potrebujemo več vseživljenjskega učenja, ki ni dostopno samo v velikih mestih, ampak tudi okoli.
               

                  Seveda imamo znotraj Evropske unije nekatere države, ki so zelo uspešne pri tem, in od njih bi se morali učiti, kako usklajujejo spretnosti, ponudbo in povpraševanje na trgu dela. Evropa mora biti, ker je lahko privlačna za talente, je prostor, ki spodbuja inovacije, kjer nudimo ogromno poslovnih priložnosti in, kar je najpomembnejše, zmanjšujemo administrativna bremena za podjetja. Da ustvarimo takšno okolje, pa je na nas, spoštovane kolegice in kolegi. Tukaj odločamo o tem, kakšen prostor bomo imeli.
               

Marc Angel (S&D). – Mr President, Commission Vice-President, colleagues, the belief that deregulation disguised as simplification will solve labour market problems in Europe and make Europe more competitive is misleading.
Weakening our values and backtracking on achievements will not strengthen our economy. Real competitiveness comes from unlocking the full potential of our workforce, of human capital. This is why we must build a true Union of Skills, an integrated European labour market where talent moves freely. I welcome the Union of Skills Roadmap, Commission Vice-President, as it goes in the right direction.
Today, businesses struggle to find skilled workers while too many Europeans face barriers to mobility. This fragmentation holds us back, and instead of lowering standards, we must remove obstacles to talent mobility by automatically recognising diplomas and qualifications so that professionals can work anywhere in Europe without bureaucratic hurdles for SMEs.
We have to invest in cross-border training because our economies are interconnected and our education system must also better cooperate, and we must ensure social rights portability and guarantee real social security coordination.
The Union of Skills, the Union of Talents will give Europe a real competitive advantage. Let's make it a reality together, European Parliament, European Commission, Member States, regions, social partners, academia and civil society.

Julie Rechagneux (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, l'Europe décroche. Mario Draghi l'a rappelé: nous perdons la bataille des talents. Chaque année, 20 % des chercheurs européens partent à l'étranger, tandis que les États-Unis attirent plus de talents qu'ils n'en perdent. Prenons la Toulouse School of Economics, qui – ironie du sort – a accueilli un Prix-Nobel ayant lui-même fait carrière aux États-Unis. Lors de son dernier recrutement, elle a proposé six postes à de brillants chercheurs. Pour quel résultat? Six refus. Deux chercheurs ont rejoint le privé aux États-Unis; les autres des universités étrangères.
               

                  Les établissements américains offrent jusqu'à 300 000 dollars par an. Ici, même en doublant les salaires, nous restons loin derrière. Pourquoi? Parce que nos entreprises ne sont pas suffisamment incitées à investir dans l'innovation. Ce n'est toutefois pas qu'une question d'argent. Précarité, carrières bloquées, bureaucratie étouffante… La recherche, qui devrait être un espace de liberté, est saturée de contraintes. Pendant ce temps, la Chine et les États-Unis déroulent le tapis rouge.
               

                  L'Europe a été un bastion scientifique, à l'avant-garde du progrès technologique et de la rationalité. Aujourd'hui, nous dévalorisons nos chercheurs et nous laissons partir nos talents. Si nous ne réagissons pas, nos découvertes, nos brevets et notre compétitivité de demain se construiront ailleurs.
               

Marlena Maląg (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Komisja dostrzega wreszcie problem niedoboru umiejętności w Unii. To dobrze, ale dlaczego tak późno? Od lat było jasne, że brak specjalistów branżowych stanie się jednym z największych wyzwań. Tymczasem w Polsce, za rządów Prawa i Sprawiedliwości już dawno rozpoczęto modernizację szkolnictwa zawodowego, przygotowując młodych ludzi do realnych potrzeb rynku pracy.
               

                  Jednak prawdziwy kryzys dotyka dzisiaj rolnictwo i rybołówstwo. Państwo wskazują na dramatyczny brak pracowników, ale czy zastanawiają się, dlaczego tak się dzieje. Zielony Ład, kolejne limity połowowe, biurokracja – to wszystko nie służy temu, aby wielopokoleniowe gospodarstwa przetrwały. Dlatego bardzo ważne jest, jeżeli chcemy naprawić tę sytuację, nie wystarczą piękne hasła i deklaracje. Trzeba wreszcie spojrzeć prawdzie w oczy i zacząć działać tu i teraz.
               

Христо Петров (Renew). – Колеги, в Европа все още има деца, които не умеят да четат, да пишат и да смятат, да не говорим за уменията им по химия, по физика, биология, и докато не се погрижим за тях, как можем да говорим за конкурентна Европа?
               

                  Аз се радвам, че Съюзът на уменията на първо място предлага схема за финансово подпомагане на деца и младежи, които имат проблеми с придобиването на тези умения. Трябва да задълбочим още повече и фокуса върху гражданско образование в плана за действие за основните умения. Затова предлагам да се направи пилотна инициатива за детски лагери за гражданско образование.
               

                  Много се радвам, че има прогрес по идеята за ‘European Schools Alliance’. Ако искаме децата ни да получават най-доброто образование и възможности за мобилност, както и най-добрите учители, на нас ни трябва постоянно структурирано и улеснено европейско сътрудничество. ‘European Schools Alliance’ е една голяма стъпка в тази посока.
               

VORSITZ: SABINE VERHEYEN


Vizepräsidentin


Luis-Vicențiu Lazarus (NI). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisară Roxana Mînzatu, m-am bucurat foarte mult atunci când am văzut că, iată, o româncă, o compatrioată de-a mea, vine cu un program care vizează aducerea înapoi a talentelor. Eu m-am gândit atunci că este vorba de aducerea înapoi a talentelor în țara mea, dar am văzut că aveți o deviză aici, care se numește, dacă am înțeles bine, ‘Europa, alegem Europa’.
                  

                     Eu aș propune o deviză: ‘să alegem fiecare țara noastră’. Pentru că, dacă în 1998, când eram lider al studențimii române, am făcut un simpozion cu sute de studenți și am remarcat faptul că, aducându-l și pe președintele care fusese până în 1996, Ion Iliescu, ce făcea parte din partidul dumneavoastră de astăzi, am remarcat faptul că ne pleacă talentele, că ne pleacă materia cenușie. Și asta s-a întâmplat. Și în toți acești ani am pierdut milioane de oameni din cauza corupției, a politicienilor și a sărăciei. Poate că ar trebui să ne gândim, așa cum spunea o colegă din Ungaria, și la un proiect de asemenea nivel pentru fiecare țară în parte, pentru că, dacă fiecare țară în parte este puternică, Europa este puternică.
                  

Sunčana Glavak (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, povjerenice, kolegice i kolege, ako želimo snažnu Europu, moramo ljudima dati razlog da ostanu i razlog da se vrate.
                  

                     Iako je primarno obrazovanje, to i sami znate, u nadležnosti država članica Europa može ovdje pomoći. Primjerice, program Erasmus+ već je omogućio da više od 13 milijuna mladih studira i usavršava se u inozemstvu. Ne zaboravimo i inicijativu ALMA koja otvara vrata onima koji teško pronalaze posao. No, ti programi moraju pružiti stvarne prilike, ne samo privremena iskustva. Također, moramo učiniti naše zemlje mjestima prilika. Geopolitički izazovi i globalna konkurencija upozorenje su kako moramo osigurati da naša radna snaga ostane konkurentna.
                  

                     Hrvatska, zemlja iz koje dolazim nudi, primjerice olakšice za povratak mladih stručnjaka, a povjerenice, i Vi ste spominjali STEM područje, pa dozvolite da kažem da u Hrvatskoj 35,4% studentica je upravo u STEM području i po tome smo u top pet zemalja Europske unije. Moramo ulagati, naravno, u dobro plaćene poslove, digitalne vještine i industrije budućnosti, jer snažna Europa je ona Europa iz koje ljudi ne moraju otići kako bi uspjeli. Da bi ostala relevantna Europska unija mora prilagoditi svoj koncept Unije vještina novim tehnološkim, ekološkim i društvenim izazovima.
                  

                     To znači reformu obrazovanja, jačanje prekvalifikacije i cjeloživotnog učenja te naravno, usmjeravanje na digitalnu i zelenu ekonomiju.
                  

Sabrina Repp (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin! Vielen Dank, Frau Kommissarin! Bildung muss für alle zugänglich sein, unabhängig von sozialer Herkunft oder dem Wohnort. Ein starkes Europa braucht gleiche Chancen. Erasmus+ steht dabei für das, was die EU stark macht: Austausch, Bildung, Chancengleichheit. Es hat Millionen von jungen Menschen Türen geöffnet. Doch noch immer profitieren nicht alle: Was ist mit den jungen Menschen in ländlichen Regionen, mit den Azubis, mit den Handwerkern, mit den Pflegekräften? Finanzielle Hürden und fehlende Informationen halten sie oft zurück; das darf nicht so bleiben.
                  

                     Wir brauchen eine bessere Ausstattung von Erasmus+, gezielte Informationskampagnen. Gleichzeitig müssen wir die Kosten besser abdecken, damit sich alle einen Erasmus+-Aufenthalt leisten können. In all den Debatten über Wettbewerbsfähigkeit ist wichtig: Bildung ist ein Grundrecht. Erasmus+ dient nicht nur der Stärkung des Arbeitsmarktes; es stärkt den gesellschaftlichen Zusammenhalt, fördert interkulturelle Kompetenzen und macht ein vereintes Europa erfahrbar.
                  

                     Kurz gesagt: Erasmus+ bringt nicht nur Fachkräfte hervor, sondern weltoffene, engagierte Bürgerinnen und Bürger. Lasst uns eine echte Union of Skills schaffen, die allen die gleichen Chancen gibt!
                  

Francesco Torselli (ECR). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ‘cercalo su Internet’, ‘dammi la password del WiFi’, ‘giramelo per email’: quante volte in una settimana ripetiamo queste frasi? Ebbene, dobbiamo pensare che per una percentuale che oscilla tra il 42 e il 56% dei cittadini dell'Unione europea, staremmo parlando arabo. Non capirebbero cosa stiamo dicendo.
                  

                     Se parliamo di garantire opportunità concrete di studio, formazione, lavoro per le generazioni future, addirittura,pensando di poter riportare in Europa quei cervelli che se ne sono andati, dobbiamo offrire loro un habitat alfabetizzato digitalmente. Ed esiste una sola via: l'innovazione, la formazione e gli investimenti.
                  

                     Noi abbiamo chiesto questa settimana alla Commissione di conoscere nel dettaglio quanti sono i soldi sul tavolo per formare le nostre imprese, le nostre aziende, le nostre università a riportare quei cervelli oggi lontani dall'Europa, in un ambiente digitalmente performante.
                  

Maravillas Abadía Jover (PPE). – Señora presidenta, señora vicepresidenta, señorías, la iniciativa Unión de Capacidades es una propuesta clave para fortalecer la competitividad de Europa a través del desarrollo profesional de los europeos. La inteligencia artificial, la automatización y la transición ecológica están cambiando la dinámica del mercado laboral europeo. Si queremos liderar estos cambios debemos asegurarnos de que los ciudadanos tienen las herramientas para aprovechar estas oportunidades y no quedarse atrás.
                  

                     Desde nuestro Grupo apoyamos esta iniciativa, pues defendemos una estrategia que impulse la innovación y la capacitación, promoviendo la educación tecnológica desde edades tempranas, fortaleciendo la formación profesional, alineando la educación con las necesidades del mercado y facilitando la reconversión laboral. También apostamos por un reconocimiento más ágil de las competencias a nivel europeo, eliminando barreras para la movilidad laboral y garantizando que cualquier europeo pueda trabajar en cualquier país con las mismas oportunidades.
                  

                     La competitividad de Europa no vendrá de más burocracia, sino del talento, de la preparación de los ciudadanos y del apoyo a las empresas, pymes y autónomos. Si las empresas tienen futuro, el empleo europeo, también. Es un paso importante al que deben seguir reformas y propuestas concretas, porque de buenas palabras está el mundo lleno, pero lo que es verdaderamente real es el porcentaje de europeos en paro. Esa debe ser nuestra absoluta prioridad.
                  

Marit Maij (S&D). – Voorzitter, commissaris, ze isoleren onze huizen, ze bouwen onze windmolens, ze verzorgen onze mensen, ze repareren onze treinen en leggen onze wegen aan. Ze helpen ons in onze winkels. Mensen met praktische vaardigheden zijn onmisbaar. Het zijn essentiële beroepen en toch schatten we ze vaak niet op waarde.
                  

                     Een student van het middelbaar beroepsonderwijs krijgt een bos bloemen of een boekenbon bij een – onbetaalde – stage. Daar kan je natuurlijk de huur niet van betalen. Ook voor mbo-studenten is een stagevergoeding noodzakelijk. Mbo-studenten kunnen vaak niet naar een studentenkroeg en kunnen geen gebruik maken van een studentenverzekering. Ongelooflijk! Geen wonder dat velen van hen afhaken. Ook in de Europese instellingen is geen plaats voor mbo-studenten. Hun kennis en hun vaardigheden zijn van grote waarde, maar zij kunnen hier geen stage lopen, en dat moet echt anders. Mbo-studenten geven vorm aan het Europa van de toekomst. Zij verzorgen het Europa van de toekomst en bouwen het op. Laten we deze studenten de erkenning geven en de kansen geven die zij verdienen.
                  

Marco Squarta (ECR). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'Europa non può permettersi di formare talenti che poi sceglieranno di costruire il loro futuro altrove. Se vogliamo davvero un'unione delle competenze, dobbiamo creare le condizioni perché studio, formazione, lavoro siano strumenti di crescita reale per le persone e per le nostre economie.
                  

                     Oggi, il problema non è solo la formazione, ma il valore che diamo alle competenze. Un ingegnere, un medico, un ricercatore, un tecnico qualificato in Europa spesso guadagnano meno, hanno meno prospettive di carriera e vivono in un sistema fiscale più penalizzante rispetto ai loro colleghi in altre parti del mondo.
                  

                     E allora la domanda è semplice: perché dovrebbero restare? L'Unione europea deve intervenire su tre fronti: salari adeguati alla competenza e alla responsabilità, condizioni di lavoro competitive, incentivi per chi sceglie di restare o tornare.
                  

                     Se siamo in grado di mobilitare miliardi per il riarmo, dobbiamo essere altrettanto determinati nell'investire nelle persone, perché senza talento e competenze non ci sarà alcuna sovranità europea.
                  

Ελεονώρα Μελέτη (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κυρία Επίτροπε, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, μέσα σε άλλα η Ένωση Δεξιοτήτων έχει και δύο μεγάλους στόχους: να γίνει η Ευρώπη όσο το δυνατόν πιο ανταγωνιστική και να γίνει και όσο το δυνατόν πιο συμπεριληπτική. Η εκπαίδευση και η επαγγελματική κατάρτιση δεν είναι μόνο εργαλεία μάθησης και απόκτησης δεξιοτήτων του μέλλοντος για ένα εξελιγμένο και ανταγωνιστικό εργατικό δυναμικό. Είναι και εργαλεία ενδυνάμωσης, ανεξαρτησίας και ισότητας για τα άτομα με αναπηρία. Η φυσική και ψηφιακή προσβασιμότητα μέσω της προσαρμογής υποδομών, εξοπλισμού και ειδικά σχεδιασμένων μαθησιακών εργαλείων, η διαμόρφωση συμπεριληπτικών προγραμμάτων εκπαίδευσης και κατάρτισης, όπως το Erasmus+, η χρηματοδότηση για τεχνολογικές καινοτομίες που θα αγκαλιάζουν τις ανάγκες των 92 εκατομμυρίων Ευρωπαίων με αναπηρία, η αποτελεσματική σύνδεση αυτής της επαγγελματικής κατάρτισης με την αγορά εργασίας είναι μερικές μόνο από τις πολιτικές και τις δράσεις που μπορούν να βοηθήσουν στη δημιουργία μιας κοινωνίας όπου όλοι θα έχουν ίσες ευκαιρίες. Αν θέλουμε να λεγόμαστε μια κοινωνία που αναγνωρίζει την αξία κάθε ανθρώπου, πρέπει να εργαστούμε πάνω σε αυτές τις πολιτικές, ώστε να διασφαλίσουμε πως κάθε άτομο θα έχει τη δυνατότητα να αξιοποιήσει τις ικανότητές του, να εργαστεί, να συνεισφέρει και να ζήσει με αυτονομία. Ευχαριστώ.
                  

Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Doamnă vicepreședintă, doamnă comisară, dragi colegi, 80 de milioane de adulți din Uniunea Europeană nu au competențe digitale de bază. 20 % dintre tinerii europeni riscă să intre pe piața muncii fără abilități adecvate, iar 40 % dintre angajatori spun că nu găsesc forță de muncă pregătită. Cifrele ne arată că trebuie să acționăm acum.
                  

                     Uniunea competențelor poate fi un pas important pentru viitor. Educația și competențele trebuie însă să devină cu adevărat priorități strategice, iar pentru acest lucru trebuie să ne asigurăm că această inițiativă are un impact real asupra cetățenilor și nu rămâne doar o strategie pe hârtie.
                  

                     De aceea, alături de colegii mei din intergrupul Parlamentului European privind viitorul educației și competențelor, solicităm ca 20 % din viitorul cadru financiar multianual să fie alocat pentru educație și formare. Dacă vrem o Europă competitivă și echitabilă, trebuie să investim în primul rând în oameni.
                  

                     Mai mult, propunem un drept la formare, un plan european pentru educație și competențe, un Erasmus 2.0 eficient, eliminarea barierelor de timp și de cost care împiedică adulții să-și îmbunătățească competențele.
                  

                     Uniunea competențelor trebuie să fie mai mult decât o strategie și un angajament concret pentru viitorul Europei.
                  

Denis Nesci (ECR). – Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, acquisire competenze significa valorizzare le concrete opportunità offerte dal territorio. L'obiettivo è potenziare simultaneamente formatori e apprendisti, incentivando l'ingresso nel mondo del lavoro di professionalità che si pensavano ormai perdute.
                  

                     Il nostro impegno deve essere quello di riuscire a bilanciare una strategia di sviluppo europea condizionata dall'avvento di nuove tecnologie attraverso l'utilizzo delle competenze e dei talenti. Il sistema economico europeo deve saper garantire ai nostri giovani le condizioni per poter investire nel loro futuro nei paesi d'origine, senza le difficoltà di doversi spostare per avere una vita lavorativa all'altezza delle loro aspettative.
                  

                     Ogni giovane deve sentirsi libero di scegliere il proprio cammino, consapevole che il suo territorio non è solo un punto di partenza, ma una risorsa infinita di opportunità. È così che si darà nuova linfa ai nostri Paesi e all'intera Europa. È così che un giovane avrà la motivazione di rimanere, sentendosi al contempo parte di un mondo innovativo e proiettato verso il futuro.
                  

                     È un impegno che dobbiamo a noi stessi, ai nostri giovani e alle nostre economie.
                  

President. – Before I give the floor to the next speaker, I would like to announce that I am closing the catch-the-eye procedure. And as we are already half an hour over the time, we will not accept any more blue cards.

Hélder Sousa Silva (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, a Europa enfrenta claramente um grande desafio. Falo da escassez de qualificações e do desajuste entre a formação e o mercado de trabalho.
                  

                     Para superar este obstáculo, precisamos de uma verdadeira união de competências, em que a educação e a formação profissional sejam motores de crescimento, de inovação e também de coesão social. A formação profissional é fundamental para a aprendizagem contínua, preparando indivíduos para o mercado de trabalho.
                  

                     Em Portugal, 74 % dos alunos do ensino profissional já participam em aprendizagem em contexto de trabalho, mas é necessário ir mais longe.
                  

                     Mas este desafio não pode ser só enfrentado pelos Estados-Membros, precisamos de uma estratégia europeia para o ensino e formação profissional, incluindo o diploma de ensino profissional europeu, que alinhe a formação com as necessidades do mercado de trabalho e facilite a mobilidade de jovens e de trabalhadores.
                  

                     Apostemos, por isso, no talento e apostemos, acima de tudo, mas sempre acima de tudo, no futuro da Europa.
                  

Evelyn Regner (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Frau Vizepräsidentin Mînzatu! Die Union of Skills, die Union der Kompetenzen, das ist ein guter Anfang; wir wollen Sie darin unterstützen, aber wir wollen weitergehen. Wir brauchen ein europäisches Recht auf Weiterbildung, ein Recht, das Arbeitnehmern und Arbeitnehmerinnen die Möglichkeit gibt, ihre Arbeitszeit ohne Lohneinbußen und Kostenaufwand dazu zu verwenden, ihre Kompetenzen zu erweitern.
                  

                     Wir befinden uns mitten in einem Wandel des Arbeitsmarktes, es fehlen hinten und vorne die Fachkräfte. Wir müssen den Menschen in den Mittelpunkt stellen, und vor allem müssen wir allen dieselben Chancen geben, um von diesem Wandel zu profitieren.
                  

                     Der ökonomische Erfolg eines Unternehmens steht und fällt mit qualifizierten, mit gut ausgebildeten Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern, und betriebsinterne Weiterbildungen binden die Mitarbeiter an das Unternehmen. Ich wiederhole: Betriebsinterne Weiterbildungen sind ganz besonders wichtig, es profitieren also die Unternehmen. Es ist eine Win-win-Situation.
                  

Giusi Princi (PPE). – Signora Presidente, gentile Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, il quadro educativo europeo ci ha imposto una riflessione urgente.
                  

                     Troppi studenti mancano delle competenze di base e la carenza di insegnanti mette a rischio il futuro dell'istruzione. L'età media del corpo docente è elevata e la professione poco attrattiva. Troppi giovani non scelgono più l'insegnamento, scoraggiati da retribuzioni non competitive e da un riconoscimento sociale insufficiente.
                  

                     Su mio input, il PPE ha sollevato il tema in commissione CULT con uno studio tuttora in corso; il Piano d'azione per i docenti, previsto all'interno dell'unione delle competenze, rappresenta certamente un'iniziale importante risposta: rafforza le prospettive di carriera degli insegnanti e prospetta una retribuzione adeguata al ruolo sociale che ricoprono.
                  

                     Le chiedo ora che la Commissione si faccia garante di questo processo, spronando maggiormente gli Stati membri ad adottare misure concrete. Investiamo nei docenti, perché senza un corpo docente qualificato e motivato, l'Europa non potrà restare al passo con la storia.
                  

Lina Gálvez (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora vicepresidenta, la riqueza de las naciones o los territorios a lo largo de la historia no siempre ha bebido de las mismas fuentes, pero hay una que es muy importante, sobre todo ahora: tener una población bien formada. Por eso las y los socialistas damos la bienvenida a la Unión de las Competencias y a todas las iniciativas que contiene; también al plan estratégico para la formación en las ciencias, tecnologías, ingenierías y matemáticas, con especial atención a las niñas y mujeres. Muchas gracias, vicepresidenta.
                  

                     Pero tenemos también que formar, romper los estereotipos y romper la segregación entre hombres y mujeres. Y, para eso, tenemos también que prestar atención a los niños y a los hombres e incluirlos en profesiones feminizadas, porque solo una utilización adecuada de los recursos será la clave para nuestra competitividad. Esto también debe incluir no solo el derecho a moverse, sino también ese ‘derecho a quedarse’ del que habla Enrico Letta y ese ‘elegir Europa’ del que habla Manuel Heitor. Les aseguro que, como mujer y como andaluza, sé de lo que hablo. Muchas gracias y mucha suerte.
                  

Jagna Marczułajtis-Walczak (PPE). – Szanowna Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowna Pani Komisarz! Wdrożenie w państwach członkowskich konwencji na rzecz osób z niepełnosprawnościami, konwencji o prawach osób z niepełnosprawnościami, a w szczególności zapewnienie im niezależnego życia dzięki asystencji osobistej, będzie skutkować powrotem ich rodziców i opiekunów na rynek pracy. Takie osoby chcą pracować, ale po wielu latach opieki nad swoimi, często już dorosłymi dziećmi, aby wrócić na rynek pracy, będą potrzebować odpowiedniego wsparcia, odpowiednich szkoleń, które spowodują, że będą mogli z powrotem normalnie pracować. Tacy opiekunowie zasługują na nasze szczególne wsparcie. Nie możemy zmarnować ich potencjału, bo ich praca to realne odciążenie systemów opieki społecznej w krajach członkowskich. Ich powrót na rynek pracy wszystkim nam się będzie opłacał. Dlatego cieszę się z tej propozycji, którą przedstawiła Komisja Europejska, i mam nadzieję, że wdrożymy takie rozwiązania, które będą skutecznie wspierać opiekunów.
                  

Regina Doherty (PPE). – Madam President, Commissioner, the Union of Skills must include everybody. Because for every mother who stepped away from her career to raise her children, for every woman who moved abroad but wants to bring her skills back home, and for every woman who took a career break and was told she has no longer got the skills, Europe has to do better.
Women don't lose skills when they step away from the workforce; they gain new ones. Leadership, resilience, problem-solving: these are qualities that our workplaces need. Yet too often, women returning to work face barriers instead of opportunities. A career break cannot be a career end. We need to end that stigma.
That is why returnships are so crucial – supported pathways back to the workforce that offer training, mentorship and real job placements. Because without them, we are absolutely wasting talent. And if we want to remain competitive, we need skilled workers to return to our workforce.
Ireland led the way with the launch of its ARC programme last year, and I really hope that Europe uses this model, ensuring that skilled workers, especially women returners, have the opportunity they deserve to re-enter the workforce and to contribute to our shared success.

Spontane Wortmeldungen


Nikolina Brnjac (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, povjerenice, kolegice i kolege, Europska unija prolazi kroz velike izazove, digitalnu i zelenu tranziciju te demografske promjene, a istovremeno mora očuvati konkurentnost.
                  

                     Ključ za uspjeh u svim tim procesima su ljudi: obrazovani, vješti i spremni prilagoditi se novim zahtjevima tržišta rada i novim tehnologijama. No, podaci su poražavajući. Samo 40% odraslih sudjeluje u programima osposobljavanja, a cilj je do 2030. 60%. To znači da moramo ulagati u obrazovanje, digitalne vještine i STEM područje, ali i osigurati bolje uvjete za razvoj talenata u Europi. U tom kontekstu, želim istaknuti pozitivne iskorake koje je poduzela hrvatska Vlada ulažući značajna sredstva u programe cjeloživotnog učenja i razvoj digitalnih vještina.
                  

                     Stoga podržavam ovu inicijativu i vjerujem da će Unija vještine doprinijeti stvaranju pravednijeg i prosperitetnog društva.
                  

Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D). – Gerbiama pirmininke, konkurencingos Europos pagrindas yra kvalifikuoti darbuotojai ir su rinkos poreikius atitinkančiais įgūdžiais. Bet žiūrėkime realybei į akis, kokia gi yra iš tikrųjų situacija Europos Sąjungoje? Kokie yra jaunų žmonių pagrindiniai įgūdžiai, įskaitant skaitmeninį raštingumą? Jie tikrai yra nepakankami ir kai kuriose srityse situacija yra netgi prastesnė, negu buvo prieš dešimtmetį. Vis mažiau jaunimo baigę matematikos, tiksliųjų ar informacinių technologijų mokslų studijas. Todėl raginu Komisiją dirbti su valstybėmis narėmis pritaikant valstybių narių švietimo sistemas prie naujų rinkos pokyčių ir įtraukiant įgūdžių darbotvarkę į Europos semestrą. Reikia skubiai užtikrinti tarpvalstybinį įgūdžių ir kvalifikacijų pripažinimą, užtikrinti, kad jauni žmonės plačiau naudotųsi stažuotėmis, kurios privalo būti apmokamos. Reikia skatinti ilgalaikį mokymąsi bei persikvalifikavimą.
                  

Malika Sorel (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, Madame la Vice-Présidente Roxana Mînzatu, ce dossier exige une approche globale. Trop de variables sont laissées de côté. L'échec commence dès le jeune âge. Quel est le rôle des parents? Accompagnent-ils leurs enfants dans leurs apprentissages scolaires ou les entravent-il? Que fait-on sur ce point? Rien. Que faisons-nous sur le problème du mauvais climat dans les classes, qui nuit aux apprentissages? Rien. L'Europe valorise-t-elle suffisamment les jeunes qui réussissent brillamment, comme le font les États-Unis, sans même parler des salaires? Non. Dans ces conditions, il est naturel que les meilleurs partent et quittent l'Union européenne.
                  

                     Pour l'orientation des filles vers les métiers de l'ingénierie – je suis moi même ingénieure –, le premier obstacle est le manque de confiance en soi, qui est transmis au sein des familles et aussi, il faut le dire, par une partie des enseignants eux-mêmes, dont beaucoup sont d'ailleurs des femmes dans les premières années scolaires. Cela détermine le reste de la scolarité. Que faisons-nous sur ce point? Rien.
                  

                     Il y aurait beaucoup à dire, mais je voudrais terminer sur un point: cessons de voler à l'Afrique et au Maghreb leurs talents, car ce faisant vous condamnez ces pays à la pauvreté et au désespoir, et cela entraîne l'explosion des flux migratoires qui déstabilisent l'Europe. J'appelle le retour au bon sens.
                  

(La Présidente retire la parole à l'oratrice)


Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Arvoisa puhemies, komission juuri esittelemä osaamisstrategia on oikeassa siinä, että koulutetut kansalaiset ovat Euroopan kilpailukyvyn kivijalka. Ihmisiin ja heidän osaamiseensa tulee satsata. Samoin on tärkeää, että eurooppalaisten veronmaksajien rahoilla koulutetut osaajat saataisiin jäämään Eurooppaan omien maiden talouksia ja yhteiskuntia rakentamaan.
                  

                     Katsotaanpa kuitenkin komission tiedonannon otsikkoa. Siinä puhutaan osaamisunionista. Tämä ei ole sattumaa. Tämä on selkeä valinta, jolla yritetään edistää alati jatkuvaa EU:n syventymistä ja lipumista liittovaltion suuntaan.
                  

                     Hyvät kollegat, se ei ole EU, joka ratkaisee nämä kysymykset osaamisen, koulutuksen, elinikäisen oppimisen tai työpaikkojen suhteen, eikä sen tulekaan olla. Koulutus- ja työllisyyspolitiikkaan liittyvät kysymykset ovat jäsenvaltioiden vastuulla ja niin niiden tuleekin olla. Päätöksenteon on pysyttävä jatkossakin kansallisissa käsissä.
                  

Μαρία Ζαχαρία (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, συνάδελφοι, η κατεύθυνση της Ένωσης Δεξιοτήτων είναι προβληματική. Η εκπαίδευση είναι ο θεμέλιος λίθος της δημοκρατίας, της ισότητας και της κοινωνικής συνοχής. Δεν μπορούμε να επιτρέψουμε η ανταγωνιστικότητα να καθορίζει αποκλειστικά τους στόχους της. Η εκπαίδευση δεν είναι απλώς εργαλείο παραγωγής εργατικού δυναμικού αλλά ο δρόμος για την καλλιέργεια ελεύθερων, κριτικά σκεπτόμενων και ενεργών πολιτών. Όταν οι πολιτικές εκπαίδευσης υπηρετούν μόνο την αγορά, παραμελούμε τη σημασία της ανθρωπιστικής παιδείας και της κοινωνικής δικαιοσύνης. Οφείλουμε να επενδύσουμε σε ένα εκπαιδευτικό σύστημα που προάγει τη γνώση, την κριτική σκέψη και τις αξίες της αλληλεγγύης, που προάγει τον πολιτισμό. Η καλλιτεχνική εκπαίδευση δεν αναγνωρίζεται δυστυχώς ισότιμα ως ανώτατη εκπαίδευση —ένα παράδειγμα λέω.
                  

                     Η εκπαίδευση, λοιπόν, πρέπει να διαμορφώνει ανθρώπους, όχι απλώς εργαζόμενους. Για να φέρουμε πίσω τα ταλέντα, πρέπει να εξασφαλίσουμε πρώτα αξιοπρεπείς μισθούς, όρους και συνθήκες εργασίας, κοινωνικές παροχές, ελευθερία και χρηματοδότηση στην έρευνα των επιστημόνων και ποιότητα ζωής που θα εξασφαλίζει την ευημερία τους. Αυτοί είναι οι λόγοι που φεύγουν. Ευχαριστώ.
                  

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)


Roxana Mînzatu,
Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, first of all, I'm so happy that we are joined by so many young people in the audience. Thank you for hearing this debate about skills. It's about your choices, your future. I hope you find it interesting.
Thank you, honourable Members, for an important conversation today on the Union of Skills. There is so much I would want to comment on and join you on so many of the topics that you have mentioned here.
First of all, I heard each and every one of you. When we say 'choose Europe', for example, what does 'Europe' mean? Does Europe exist outside our own Member States? Choosing Europe means choosing Spain, choosing Italy, choosing Romania, choosing Sweden, choosing the countries where we are born or the countries where we are working. It always means a right to stay, a right to return or a right to choose a different path inside our European Union. The entire strategy of the Union of Skills is about that: about freedom of choice and freedom of opportunity.
Second of all, I would want you to know that we are addressing what many of you mentioned in the basic skill set. First of all, it's not just a strategy. We are proposing concrete actions. The Union of Skills was accompanied by the first two action plans, one on basic skills, the other on STEM. We will follow up soon with an action plan on vocational and education training and one that is very important about the career and working condition of teachers – the teachers' agenda. So these will be very concrete actions.
Just to answer a few of your concerns, we propose a new set of basic skills. An extended set. The fifth basic skill is citizenship education, critical thinking, media literacy, respect and understanding each other, different values. This is very important for you to know. So beyond maths, reading, beyond digital literacy and science, citizenship education. So, so important.
We propose a support scheme for basic skills in those schools where there is systemic underachievement. This is a concrete type of support that we want to offer. We are looking at using a 'skills guarantee' for workers to really empower them in the transformation of their industries. We want to strengthen Erasmus+. But let me tell you, it's not just about Erasmus.
We are currently investing EUR 150 billion EU-wide from the Recovery and Resilience Facility, cohesion policy, Erasmus+, InvestEU. More than that. So we are really looking at how we can better spend the current funding and use the Union of Skills to look into the next budget post-2027 for a strong commitment to support our education and skills.
Clearly, skills and education are the competence of Member States. Nobody is questioning that. But I ask you: if you need to develop a certain skill to work in an IT company or in the automotive sector or in the steel sector, are the skills so different according to different Member States? Are our challenges not common? Should we not work together to address these needs together so that we have quality training, a good skill set, and so that our young generation is really powerful in the skills that we provide? I think the answer is yes. There is no border to skills. There is no border to the quality that we want to provide. But, of course, decisions remain in the Member States and that is beyond questioning.
Finally, I will just invite you to join us in implementing the Union of Skills. This is not just a strategy. It's a vision that empowers Europeans. It's about stronger workers, stronger citizens and it is about making our Europe not just more competitive, but a better place that we choose every day.

Die Präsidentin. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.
                  
12.   Social and employment aspects of restructuring processes: the need to protect jobs and workers' rights (debate)

Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärung der Kommission zu sozial- und beschäftigungspolitischen Aspekten im Zusammenhang mit Umstrukturierungsprozessen und dem notwendigen Schutz von Arbeitsplätzen und Arbeitnehmerrechten (2024/2829(RSP)).
               

Roxana Mînzatu,
Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, it is not just about skills but equally about quality jobs – always remember my commitment to that.
So dear President, honourable Members, I thank you for the opportunity to address you on a matter that lies at the heart of our Union's mission: to protect workers, especially in times of change.
Restructuring in our industries is the reality of a dynamic, competitive economy, especially in a time of rapid transformations. It can drive innovation, productivity. It can secure Europe's place as a global leader. Yet we must never forget that in every restructuring there are lives, there are livelihoods at stake – workers, their families, their communities.
The European Union was built on a promise – a promise of solidarity, of fairness, of opportunity for all. If restructuring comes at the cost of jobs, of workers' rights or dignity at work, then it can endanger that promise, it can endanger our social model. When workers are supported through transitions, when their skills are upgraded, when their voices are heard, we build resilience, not just for individuals, but for our economies and for our societies as a whole. If restructuring processes are poorly managed, we risk having more inequality, less trust, more discontent that threatens our democracies.
Across the Union, we see industries undergoing profound change, in automotive, in steel, in energy, just to name a few. Thousands of manufacturing jobs are being impacted. We cannot simply react; we must anticipate. Allow me to outline a few areas for action.
First, that we need stronger social protection mechanisms. Workers in transition should be able to negotiate short-time work arrangements or have access to adequate unemployment benefits. Restructuring processes should be managed and anticipated to guarantee a just transition. Reinforcing collective bargaining and social dialogue, as well as promoting employee involvement and workers' and their representatives' right to information, consultation and participation – these are key for an inclusive adaptation to the upcoming changes in the European labour market.
Also, we must invest in skills as the backbone of resilience – it was mentioned before. The green and digital transition are not threats to jobs, they are – can be – opportunities, but only if we keep our workforce to really seize them. This is one of the pillars of the Union of Skills, and one of our proposals is to introduce a Skills Guarantee to support companies hiring or training people that are at risk of being laid off. Every worker facing redundancy should have a clear pathway to a quality and secure job.
For all this and beyond, the Commission will engage with social partners to present a quality jobs roadmap by the end of this year. This roadmap will support fair wages, high standards for health and safety at work, good working conditions for men and women, training and fair job transitions for workers and the self-employed, notably by increasing collective bargaining coverage.
Honourable Members, we all know it: the cost of inaction is far greater than the cost of ambition. If we fail to act, we risk a two-speed Europe, one where some prosper and may change, while others are left to fend for themselves. That is not the Union I believe in, nor the one you have fought to build.
This Parliament has a critical role to play. Together, we can turn restructuring from a moment of crisis into an opportunity for renewal. Let us send a clear message: in Europe, progress does not come at the expense of our workers, it comes with our workers and because of them.

Dennis Radtke,
im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Vielen Dank für die Debatte, morgen stimmen wir auch noch über einen entsprechenden Bericht von der Kollegin Ceulemans dazu ab. Ich glaube, es ist wirklich wichtig, sich mit dieser Frage auseinanderzusetzen, denn die Umwälzungen, die wir zurzeit erleben, europaweit, in der Wirtschaft, in der Industrie, sind wirklich gigantisch.
               

                  Und wissen Sie, dieses Armband hat meine 7-jährige Tochter für mich gebastelt, weil sie gesagt hat, es wäre ihr wichtig, mir das zu schenken, damit der Papa immer an sie denkt. Natürlich weiß dieses Mädchen nicht, dass der Papa auch ohne dieses Armband immer an sie denkt. Aber ich will hier auch mal sagen, dass ich mich auch als Politiker ganz häufig mit der Frage auseinandersetze, in was für eine Welt meine Tochter eigentlich reinwächst – nicht nur mit Blick auf die geopolitischen Umwälzungen, die wir gerade erleben, sondern auch mit Blick auf die Disruptionen in der Arbeitswelt, einer Arbeitswelt, wo man aktuell das Gefühl hat, unser Sozialmodell, unsere Vorstellung von sozialer Marktwirtschaft kommt aktuell genauso unter die Räder wie die Würde des Einzelnen am Arbeitsplatz.
               

                  Und auch bei der Frage: Was ist eigentlich noch gute Arbeit? Es geht ja nicht nur darum, Menschen in Beschäftigung zu bringen, sondern wir haben ja politisch eigentlich auch einen Anspruch, Menschen in gute Arbeit zu bringen, in tarifvertraglich abgesicherte Arbeit, in mitbestimmte Arbeit – all das steht zurzeit auf dem Prüfstand. Und deswegen ist, glaube ich, auch wichtig, dass wir von der Europäischen Union die Mittel und Wege nutzen, die wir haben, um unsere Vorstellungen vom Sozialmodell und der sozialen Marktwirtschaft zu stärken.
               

                  Deswegen, danke für die Debatte und danke für deinen Bericht morgen, liebe Estelle!
               

Estelle Ceulemans,
au nom du groupe S&D. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Vice-Présidente exécutive, chers collègues, plus que jamais, l'Europe est confrontée à des transformations majeures, non seulement de l'activité industrielle, mais aussi de nombreux secteurs comme la distribution, l'énergie ou le transport. Il y a des défis liés aux transitions climatique et numérique. C'est pourquoi il est indispensable de s'engager à mieux prévenir et accompagner les restructurations. Trop souvent, des entreprises décident du sort de milliers de personnes, sans respect du dialogue social, pour répondre à l'appétit de leurs actionnaires. Les travailleurs et les travailleuses ne sont pas des mouchoirs jetables ou des pièces de rechange. Ne pas accompagner les mutations est aussi dommageable d'un point de vue économique, car cela risque d'entraîner des pertes de main-d'œuvre qualifiée, dont les entreprises ont pourtant cruellement besoin.
               

                  Demain, une résolution sera votée ici, dans ce Parlement. Cette résolution réclame un cadre clair des restructurations, pour maintenir et sauver les emplois autant que possible (notamment par des mécanismes de reconversion dans les mêmes secteurs ou dans les régions), pérenniser le programme SURE, garantir un vrai dialogue social, interdire les licenciements abusifs et assurer un meilleur soutien aux travailleurs sous-traitants, souvent directement touchés. Cette résolution insiste aussi sur la nécessité d'une politique industrielle et économique ambitieuse au niveau européen en proposant la création d'un outil d'investissement permanent et une révision de la directive sur les marchés publics, pour enfin favoriser les entreprises respectant les droits sociaux et environnementaux.
               

                  Ainsi, cette résolution trace un cadre qui est essentiel à la relance de la compétitivité européenne, et qui fait pourtant l'objet d'attaques de la part des lobbys patronaux, mais malheureusement aussi de l'extrême droite, qui non seulement refuse une directive sur la transition juste, mais rejette également le rôle des syndicats dans le processus de restructuration. Cette position dogmatique est étonnante, plus qu'étonnante, même. Le dialogue social, la protection et la formation des travailleurs sont une force, pas un frein.
               

                  Il est temps d'agir pour une transition juste, pour des politiques économiques et industrielles qui profitent à tous, et non à quelques-uns.
               

Mélanie Disdier,
au nom du groupe PfE. – Madame la Présidente, Madame le rapporteur, comme à son habitude, l'Union européenne joue au pompier pyromane. L'objectif de cette résolution n'est en effet ni plus ni moins que de corriger les travers des autres décisions prises par l'Union européenne. Sa politique néolibérale baigne dans l'idéologie verte, délétère pour notre économie et qui est en train de détruire nos entreprises et nos emplois.
               

                  Face à ce constat alarmant, loin de vouloir se remettre en question, certains dans cette assemblée jouent aux apprentis sorciers pour camoufler leur incompétence. Ils prétendent éviter les licenciements économiques en mettant nos entreprises aux mains des syndicats, espérant ainsi éviter les licenciements et faire payer la note directement aux entrepreneurs et aux investisseurs européens. Cependant, quand tous auront déserté l'Europe et sa technocratie stérile, qui restera-t-il pour investir dans notre économie et éviter les licenciements?
               

                  En vérité, cette résolution, c'est l'incarnation de la politique de l'autruche. Avec vous, seules les apparences comptent – et priez pour que le château de cartes ne s'effondre qu'après votre départ! Et après vous, le déluge! Ce qu'il faut, ce n'est pas ajouter de l'Europe au-dessus de l'Europe. Vous proposez de corriger les symptômes; nous proposons de traiter la maladie. Vous voulez atténuer les conséquences du pacte vert? Comme le proposent Jordan Bardella et les Patriotes pour l'Europe, prenez vos responsabilités et supprimez-le! Comme nous l'indiquons dans notre résolution alternative, pour améliorer la compétitivité de nos entreprises, il faut les aider et non les étouffer.
               

Carlo Ciccioli,
a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, nessuno dovrà essere lasciato indietro: così la Commissione cerca di rassicurarci da anni. Non solo qualcuno è stato lasciato indietro ma intere famiglie e territori sono stati travolti da un'ondata di chiusure, di delocalizzazioni e licenziamenti.
               

                  Nelle mie Marche, regione dell'Italia centrale, stiamo assistendo a un vero e proprio declino industriale. Il marchio Beko, ex Indesit Whirpool, leader negli elettrodomestici, ha annunciato esuberi nei suoi stabilimenti di Fabriano e Comunanza, trasferendo molte produzioni in Turchia.
               

                  La Caterpillar di Jesi, nonostante registrasse utili ogni anno, ha chiuso e trasferito la produzione in Messico. Le cartiere di Fabriano, storico simbolo della nostra manifattura, hanno dismesso una linea produttiva.
               

                  Queste non sono semplici crisi aziendali ma il sintomo di un'Europa che non sa più proteggere il proprio tessuto produttivo e occupazionale. Le aziende delocalizzano altrove perché trovano condizioni imprenditoriali migliori, meno burocrazia, un quadro normativo certo, energia a prezzi accessibili e più incentivi agli investimenti.
               

                  O l'Europa cambia rotta o il suo declino sarà irreversibile. Dobbiamo difendere il lavoro, l'industria e la nostra comunità.
               

Brigitte van den Berg,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, change is Europe's biggest challenge, but we are not always very good at it. Sometimes Europe seems to wait until it's an absolute crisis for things to change. But to face climate change, the digital transition and the unstable world, Europe needs to anticipate the future and transform itself. This resolution helps in some ways to do that. We should support companies in adapting to a new economy. Reskilling and upskilling our workforce should be the primary way of helping citizens to get better jobs, and where companies cannot avoid major restructuring, regions and citizens should be able to rely on the EU and the Member States for help to find new economic opportunities. We should not resist change by imposing more rules on companies. We should embrace it, and we should turn it into an opportunity for a better Europe.

Maria Ohisalo,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, for years we've known that governments and companies must be able to innovate and plan for the needed green and digital transitions. Still, we have almost a million jobs lost in manufacturing in only four years, proving that they haven't.
The green and digital transition has a huge impact on work and the lives of workers. Now, honourable Commissioner, you really have the possibility to make a difference in millions of people's lives. By giving a voice to the workers and social partners, embracing social dialogue – there is a way to make this transition a just one.
While we welcome the Commission's plans aimed at preparing workers in a rapidly changing labour market, the Commission must put forward a proposal for a just transition directive now. This needs to happen sooner, not later, in order for us not to leave anyone behind.

Rudi Kennes,
on behalf of The Left Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, 'restructuring' – it's a kind of newspeak, isn't it? Companies are ashamed to say 'massive firing', so they call it 'restructuring'.
In Belgium, we've had a few of them – in Limburg, 3 000 people fired in Liège, in Namur 500 people. How long will we allow the lives of workers to be collateral damage?
Restructuring also happens in the public sector, which has been privatised. Automotive, steel, energy, chemical, airlines, communications, railways, mail, banks, insurance – you name it. Privatised and then restructured. No job security any more. Bosses want no rules, no administrative burdens. Governments want to run everything like a business, including healthcare. There is no funding for public services, but always for weapons. This cannot go on. You can't fix neoliberalism by putting a plaster on it, just like you cannot put lipstick on a pig.
We need to put ordinary people at the heart of Europe. If you have a bad employer, it shouldn't be you who pays for their mistakes. They should respect the rules and cooperate with trade unions.
We can develop a 21st century industrial policy. We can take back our public services and natural resources. We can create quality jobs and provide good services. Europe has the choice now. Continue to create uncertainty or invest and bring back a good standard of living for all.

Raúl de la Hoz Quintano (PPE). – Señora presidenta, si de verdad queremos apostar por la competitividad de nuestra economía, es evidente que no podemos seguir aceptando que las relaciones laborales sigan atrapadas en modelos que, sabemos, son caducos y, sobre todo, están sirviendo única y exclusivamente para frenar la inversión y el crecimiento de nuestras empresas.
               

                  Necesitamos, por supuesto, introducir herramientas que sirvan para dinamizar, agilizar y simplificar, también en el ámbito de las relaciones laborales. Pero no nos engañemos: eso no se puede conseguir —ni se va a conseguir nunca— con iniciativas que buscan limitar y condicionar decisiones que son puramente empresariales, ni tampoco introduciendo más burocracia o más normas que sirvan única y exclusivamente para introducir más trabas dentro de las empresas.
               

                  Somos conscientes de que, ante la inminencia de una crisis, se generan momentos de conflictividad laboral; pero lo que no podemos hacer ante la inminencia de una crisis es actuar intentando reforzar el papel de los sindicatos dentro de las empresas. Creo que sería bastante más sensato si nos preocupáramos, en primer lugar, por intentar evitar que las crisis empresariales sucedan y que, si estas tienen lugar, tengan el menor impacto económico posible, también, por supuesto, en términos de empleo. No es una cuestión de ideologías, es una cuestión —simple y llanamente— de sensatez.
               

Gabriele Bischoff (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Vizepräsidentin der Kommission, Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wo immer man im Moment in Betrieben unterwegs ist, haben die Beschäftigten große Sorgen, wie dieser Wandel ausgeht und was er für sie bedeutet. Und deshalb ist es so wichtig, dass man in diesem Wandel die Beschäftigten mit einbezieht und es nicht über ihre Köpfe hinweg macht, denn wenn sie nicht ordentlich eingebunden werden, lehnen sie am Ende den Wandel komplett ab. Und dieses Übergehen von Beschäftigten schadet den Unternehmen, schadet der Wirtschaft, schadet unserer Wettbewerbsfähigkeit.
               

                  Ich stimme Frau Kommissarin zu, die gesagt hat: Wenn die Stimme der Beschäftigten gehört wird, stärkt das die Resilienz in den Unternehmen. Und wir wissen aus so vielen Studien: Da, wo wir mitbestimmte Unternehmen haben, die sind nachhaltiger, die sind innovativer, die sind krisenfester und am Ende auch wirtschaftlich erfolgreicher – und deshalb ist es ein Wettbewerbsvorteil.
               

                  Und wenn jetzt die Arbeitgeber Mails rumschicken und alle Abgeordneten auffordern, gegen den Bericht zu stimmen, weil sie sagen, das schadet der Wettbewerbsfähigkeit, beeinträchtigt die Geschwindigkeit von Entscheidungen, kann ich nur sagen: Hören Sie nicht auf diese Argumente aus der Mottenkiste – das schadet uns, unserer Wirtschaft und auch dem europäischen Sozialmodell.
               

Pál Szekeres (PfE). – Elnök Asszony! Magyarországon az elmúlt tíz esztendőben több mint egymillió új munkahelyet teremtettünk, soha ennyien nem dolgoztak. Most az a cél, hogy hazánk gazdasága élen járjon a globális technológiai forradalomban is. Ezért 100 új gyárat építünk, 4000 milliárd forintnyi új beruházást hozunk Magyarországra. Több száz mikro-, kis- és középvállalkozás részesül a Demján Sándor Tőkebefektetési Programból.
               

                  Egy új kutatási-fejlesztési rekordberuházással pedig magas képzettséget igénylő munkahelyeket hozunk létre. Mindezek azonban nem célok, hanem eszközök ahhoz, hogy tudjuk támogatni a családokat, hogy jobban éljenek, több gyermeket vállalhassanak, kevesebb adót fizessenek. Magyarországon a két- vagy többgyermekes édesanyáknak életük végéig nem kell személyi jövedelemadót fizetni a munkabérük után. Ez egyedülálló a világon. A nemzetközi nőnap alkalmából javaslom, hogy kövessék ezt a jó példát Önök is.
               

Marlena Maląg (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Dialog społeczny i respektowanie układów zbiorowych powinny stanowić fundament procesu restrukturyzacji, tak aby w tym trudnym czasie otoczyć pracowników specjalną ochroną. Jak to wygląda w praktyce? W moim kraju, kolebce Związku Zawodowego Solidarność, który zmienił bieg historii w Europie, prawa pracowników, prawa związkowców dziś nie są respektowane.
               

                  Czy słyszeli Państwo o wielotysięcznych zwolnieniach w Poczcie Polskiej, PKP Cargo? To nie tylko zwolnienia doświadczonych pracowników i dramat wielu polskich rodzin, ale także uderzenie w strategiczne sektory z punktu widzenia bezpieczeństwa i rozwoju państwa.
               

                  Omawiana dziś rezolucja powstała na skutek zwolnień w branży motoryzacyjnej. Trzeba powiedzieć jasno: te zwolnienia to jeden z wielu negatywnych efektów polityki klimatycznej i bez jej rewizji nie może być mowy o obronie miejsc pracy i konkurencyjności w Unii Europejskiej. Czy mamy odwagę działać? Czy dalej będziemy udawać, że problem nie istnieje?
               

Jana Toom (Renew). – Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, there is no doubt that economic difficulties will affect many companies across the EU during these very turbulent times, and the structuring of other types of changes will be necessary so that companies can return to a more profitable situation. However, these changes will be difficult and they will hurt many workers. So it is extremely timely to talk about the need to protect jobs and workers' rights.
What I am concerned about is the growing trend in some Member States about thinking of jobs as numbers on a table, or about workers as some faceless individuals that will go on with their lives unaffected by any jobs cuts. We have to stop this nonsense trend and remember that behind every job, there is a worker that relies on their job to provide for their family, or a worker that worked hard to get where they are.
Let us not forget that many people take pride in their work and feel a sense of purpose for doing that job. We need to be bold in protecting our workers that are stuck in the crossfire. First of all, by focusing on real – not fake – social dialogue, so that workers are involved in all plans for change, and also by having a framework that ensures new jobs will be created, so that workers will have concrete, decent alternatives available.

Leila Chaibi (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, Renault à Flins, Audi à Bruxelles, ArcelorMittal à Reims, Michelin à Cholet… La liste des fermetures d'usines est de plus en plus longue. La transition écologique et numérique est devenue le nouveau prétexte à la destruction de millions d'emplois, alors qu'au contraire la transition peut et doit créer des emplois. Cependant, pour cela, il faut soutenir l'industrie; il faut soutenir les reconversions professionnelles; il faut une politique interventionniste, à mille lieues du dogme bien ancré à Bruxelles, qui pense que le marché et l'économie se gèrent tout seuls.
               

                  Aujourd'hui, nos usines doivent fermer. Elles ne font pas le poids face à la concurrence des panneaux solaires et des voitures électriques hypersubventionnés provenant des États-Unis et de la Chine, qui subventionnent à coups de milliards. Que fait la docile Europe pendant ce temps? Elle regarde passer les trains – ou les Tesla.
               

                  Réveillons-nous! Conditionnons les aides publiques au maintien des emplois! Relocalisons l'industrie! Subventionnons la production! Garantissons l'implication des travailleurs dans les projets de reconversion! C'est de cette façon que nous pouvons à la fois créer des millions d'emplois, assurer notre indépendance industrielle et donner à notre continent les moyens de peser sur la scène internationale.
               

Branislav Ondruš (NI). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, dámy a páni, dnes môžeme ukázať, že slúžime pracujúcim ľuďom a ich rodinám, že stojíme na ich strane, aj keď to nevyhovuje veľkým korporáciám. Keď totiž ony hovoria o reštrukturalizácii, myslia tým prepúšťanie, zhoršovanie pracovných podmienok a znižovanie miezd, ale nie manažmentu.
               

                  Volkswagen Group ohlásila potrebu reštrukturalizácie v roku, keď za prvých deväť mesiacov zarobila 16 miliárd eur. Zatiaľ čo v roku 2018 zarobil každý člen jej predstavenstva štyri a pol milióna eur, v krízovom roku 2021 už zarobil každý člen predstavenstva 7 miliónov. A robotníci vo Volkswagene na Slovensku v ten istý rok zarobili 27 tisíc eur, čo je vyše 250-násobný rozdiel.
               

                  Toto je realita pre všetky medzinárodné korporácie, preto musíme zabrániť tomu, aby ich manažmenty rozhodovali o reštrukturalizácii bez ohľadu na dopady na pracujúcich. Týmto hlasovaním môžeme nastaviť pravidlá, aby naša ekonomika slúžila ľuďom, a nie ľudia sebeckým záujmom nadnárodných korporácií a oligarchom.
               

András Tivadar Kulja (PPE). – Elnök Asszony! Tisztelt képviselőtársaim, engedjék meg, hogy feltegyek egy kérdést. Hányan éreznék magukat biztonságban, hogyha holnap megszűnne a munkahelyük? Európa-szerte, különösen Közép-Kelet-Európában ez nem elméleti kérdés, ez a mindennapi valóság. A munkahelyi bizonytalanság egyre nő. A kiszámíthatatlan szerződések, a túlzott bürokrácia és az elavult nyilvántartási rendszerek miatt rengetegen maradnak munka és segítség nélkül. S ne feledjük, ezek nem puszta statisztikák, valódi emberekről, családokról és gyermekeik jövőjéről beszélünk. A munkavállalók megérdemlik a stabilitást, a tisztességes béreket és a megfelelő védelmet. Ehhez pedig cselekednünk kell.
               

                  Először is modernizálnunk kell a foglalkoztatási szolgáltatásokat. A munkakeresők képességeit és igényeit a foglalkoztatási formákkal jobban összehangoló hivatali rendszerekre van szükség, modern és dinamikus átképzési rendszerek kialakítása mellett. Be kell fektetnünk a vidéki infrastruktúrába, hogy a munkavállalók biztonságban érezzék magukat, és ne kelljen választani a munkájuk és a gyermekük modern oktatása között. Olyan új keretrendszerekre van szükség, amelyek erősítik a helyi gazdaságokat, fejlesztik a közlekedési hálózatokat és munkahelyeket teremtenek ott, ahol az emberek élnek. Hiszen ha valóban versenyképes Európát szeretnénk, akkor nem csak a gazdasági mutatókat kell figyelnünk, hanem az emberek életminőségét is.
               

Marit Maij (S&D). – Voorzitter, commissaris, de industrie in de Europese Unie verkeert in zwaar weer. Fabrieken sluiten, en dit wordt dagelijks in het nieuws gemeld. Een recent voorbeeld is de sluiting van de Audi-fabriek in Brussel twee weken geleden, die we bezochten. Daar spraken we met werknemers die goede ideeën hadden over de toekomst van de fabriek. Maar vaak wordt er niet naar geluisterd.
               

                  In Europa staan miljoenen banen onder druk, wat enorme onzekerheid met zich meebrengt voor de betrokken werknemers. We moeten nadenken over de industrie van de toekomst, maar dat kunnen we alleen doen met vakmensen. Voor die transitie hebben we vakmensen nodig. We moeten nadenken over wat zij nodig hebben. We moeten hen laten meebeslissen over veranderingen binnen bedrijven. We moeten omscholing en direct nieuw werk bieden. Daarnaast is het van belang om onze werknemers en industrie te beschermen tegen goedkope import en oneerlijke concurrentie.
               

                  We hebben behoefte aan garanties voor vaste banen, eerlijke lonen en veilige arbeidsomstandigheden. De transitie naar de industrie van de toekomst moet recht doen aan de mensen die erin werken. Laten we er vooral voor zorgen dat niemand achterblijft.
               

Marie Dauchy (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, l'industrie européenne meurt sous nos yeux, et ce n'est pas un accident: c'est un choix politique. Des décennies de libre-échange et de soumission aux intérêts étrangers ont détruit nos usines, sacrifié nos ouvriers et ruiné nos territoires. Maintenant, vous voulez nous faire croire que vos quelques ajustements suffiront à réparer les dégâts? Trop tard, trop peu: vous faites seulement une opération de communication pour masquer votre responsabilité dans ce naufrage.
               

                  L'interdiction des moteurs thermiques pour 2035 est une folie qui menace des millions d'emplois, qui détruit notre industrie et qui, pis encore, pénalise les plus modestes, ceux qui n'habitent pas dans les grandes villes, et dont la voiture n'est pas un luxe mais une nécessité. Qui peut croire qu'ils auront tous les moyens d'acheter un véhicule électrique hors de prix? Qui peut croire que les infrastructures suivront?
               

                  Alors aujourd'hui, chers collègues, il faut se rendre à l'évidence: les petites mesures ne suffiront pas, et reporter l'interdiction des moteurs thermiques est loin d'être suffisant. Arrêtons avec cette écologie punitive! Arrêtons avec cette idéologie délirante! Un pays sans industrie est un pays sans avenir. L'Europe doit défendre ses peuples, pas les sacrifier.
               

Elena Donazzan (ECR). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, per quattro generazioni, questa azienda aveva trasformato le proprie produzioni perché lo chiedeva il mercato; nell'ultima stagione, perché lo chiedono le leggi europee e il mercato non le segue.
               

                  Questo ci dice l'azienda Gnutti nella visita che la commissione ITRE ha fatto in Italia. Questa mozione nasceva – e la relatrice lo sa – per rispondere al tema dell'automotive e per la perdita di lavoro e chiusura delle imprese. Ma l'automotive viene completamente ignorato.
               

                  La relatrice, addirittura, dice che è una grande opportunità il Green Deal. L'opportunità è quella di vedere chiuse le aziende e persi posti di lavoro. La relatrice in quest'Aula ha detto che la destra, le destre, vogliono escludere il sindacato. Ho gestito crisi aziendali per 15 anni: il sindacato è sempre stato il mio grande partner, ma non in contrapposizione con l'azienda, per cercare di andare nella continuità produttiva e nella difesa dei posti di lavoro.
               

                  Questa mozione non va in questa direzione. Il gruppo ECR domani voterà contro e proporremo una risoluzione alternativa proprio per mettere al centro impresa e lavoratori.
               

Nicolae Ștefănuță (Verts/ALE). – Doamnă președintă, (începutul intervenției nu a fost făcut la microfon) suntem amândoi români și aseară am auzit o voce cunoscută în România, a populismului, care spunea că Uniunea Europeană nu îți vrea diaspora acasă, fiindcă Europa are nevoie de salahori.
               

                  Și sincer, eu detest acest termen, salahori, pentru că nimeni care muncește nu trebuie înjosit. Munca, meseria sunt brățări de aur. Nu este rușine să faci nicio muncă. Și trebuie să-i protejăm pe toți în Europa, cei care construiesc Europa de astăzi, oameni care lucrează în construcții și din mâinile lor se construiesc azi șantiere peste tot în Europa, inclusiv la noi. Moni, care lucrează în agricultură și care din sudoarea mâinilor ei, ne hrănește pe noi toți, așa cum spun celebrele poze de pe internet și nu apreciază nimeni. Pe Cristina, doctor într-o țară din Occident care are grijă de pacienți, mulți dintre ei și români.
               

                  Așa că mesajul meu către toți acești oameni este următorul: fiți mândri de ceea ce faceți, pentru că este o mândrie să construiți acest continent. Iar dacă aveți probleme, veniți la noi, veniți la Roxana Mînzatu, să le rezolvăm. Nu mergeți la populiști, că ei nu au niciun fel de soluții.
               

Pasquale Tridico (The Left). – Signora Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, l'Europa deve scegliere se tutelare il lavoro e la dignità o cedere alla precarietà e alle disuguaglianze.
               

                  La deindustrializzazione, la transizione ecologica, in particolare nel settore automotive, e le tensioni commerciali globali non possono essere un pretesto per ridurre i salari; serve un salario minimo dove ancora non c'è, come in Italia, per garantire redditi dignitosi e fermare il dumping salariale.
               

                  Ma non basta. Commissaria, il lavoro da solo non basta, molto spesso, a uscire dalla povertà. Serve un reddito minimo europeo, un reddito di cittadinanza europeo, finanziato con una tassazione equa sulle grandi multinazionali, calibrato sulla soglia di povertà di ciascuno Stato membro. La transizione tecnologica deve rafforzare il nostro modello sociale, non ampliare le disuguaglianze.
               

                  Per questo come Movimento Cinque Stelle chiediamo un fondo per accompagnare i lavoratori nel cambiamento, l'introduzione della settimana corta e la riduzione dell'orario di lavoro, insieme a un reddito minimo universale.
               

                  Vogliamo stare a fianco del lavoro contro la povertà, contro le disuguaglianze.
               

Sérgio Humberto (PPE). – Cara Presidente, Cara Comissária, caros colegas, sem populismos, sem demagogias, o que interessa é a União Europeia agir.
               

                  E é por isso que estamos aqui. Proteger os postos de trabalho e os direitos dos trabalhadores na Europa deve estar, e está!, no topo das nossas prioridades.
               

                  A globalização, a automação, a transição ecológica e digital têm pressionado o nosso mercado de trabalho, que pressiona, por sua vez, a adaptação urgente dos trabalhadores.
               

                  E a solução passa — e nós estamos a agir — por investir na requalificação, educação contínua e formação profissional, reforçar a legislação laboral e a fiscalização das condições de trabalho, apostar numa imigração regulada com o respeito pelos direitos fundamentais, atrair talento qualificado para a Europa e concretizar a aprendizagem ao longo da vida, que é a chave para a empregabilidade e o desenvolvimento económico sustentável.
               

                  A reestruturação laboral precisa de equilibrar inovação e proteção social para criar um mercado de trabalho mais inclusivo e justo.
               

Alicia Homs Ginel (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora vicepresidenta, ¿reestructuraciones para despedir mientras se reparten beneficios? Por supuesto que no. ¿Transición industrial con empleo digno? Sí, y es posible.
               

                  Las reestructuraciones no pueden ser la excusa para precarizar el empleo o debilitar la negociación colectiva. Por eso, exigimos que los trabajadores y trabajadoras tengan voz, que las empresas que reciben dinero público inviertan en empleo de calidad y que existan reglas claras para frenar los abusos de la subcontratación.
               

                  España ya ha demostrado que hay otro camino: con diálogo social, con una regulación firme y con medidas valientes. Así hemos protegido empleos y derechos.
               

                  No podemos permitir que la modernización industrial de Europa se convierta en un ‘sálvese quien pueda’. Queremos inversión, sí, pero con condiciones sociales, empleos estables y sindicatos fuertes, porque sin justicia social no habrá una transición justa.
               

Konstantinos Arvanitis (The Left). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κυρία Επίτροπε, κυρίες και κύριοι, η αναδιάρθρωση πηγαίνει με μια σκληρή κληρονομιά: 3.200 νεκρούς εργαζόμενους τον χρόνο έχουμε εδώ, στην Ευρώπη της δημοκρατίας, και αυτό πρέπει να το πάρουμε πολύ σοβαρά υπόψη μας, διότι η αναδιάρθρωση των επιχειρήσεων στην Ένωση δεν μπορεί να περιορίζεται σε στρατηγικές μόνο για την ενίσχυση της ανταγωνιστικότητας, αλλά να ιεραρχεί και τη διασφάλιση των εργασιακών δικαιωμάτων, των θέσεων εργασίας, με ισχυρή, ενεργή συμμετοχή των κοινωνικών εταίρων στις διαδικασίες, —τα είπε η συνάδελφος πριν— σις συλλογικές συμβάσεις εργασίας.
               

                  Και ήθελα να πω και κάτι άλλο, ότι η βιομηχανική πολιτική της Ένωσης πρέπει να θέσει τους εργαζόμενους και το περιβάλλον στον πυρήνα της, ώστε η μετάβαση σε αυτό που λέμε ‘καθαρή βιομηχανία’, να συμβαδίζει με αυτό που λέμε ‘ωραία και σωστή δημοκρατία’, πράγμα που σημαίνει ότι τα εργαλεία που έχουμε στα χέρια μας, όπως η τεχνητή νοημοσύνη, πρέπει να είναι και προς όφελος των εργαζομένων, δηλαδή, την υπεραξία που παράγει το ρομπότ, η τεχνητή νοημοσύνη, δεν μπορεί να την παίρνει όλη το κεφάλαιο. Πρέπει να πάρουν και οι εργαζόμενοι από αυτό, για να μπορούν να αντέξουν και τα ασφαλιστικά ταμεία και βεβαίως και οι άνθρωποι. Μια βιομηχανία ή μια ανάπτυξη λοιπόν για τους πολλούς και όχι για μια ελίτ. Σας ευχαριστώ.
               

Isabelle Le Callennec (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, cette résolution m'évoque la destruction créatrice décrite par Joseph Schumpeter. Quand les innovations rendent les activités du moment obsolètes, les emplois nouvellement créés viennent remplacer les emplois existants, mais parfois avec un décalage dans le temps, et donc une poussée du chômage. C'est ce qui arrive précisément quand une entreprise est contrainte de licencier.
               

                  Pour l'anticiper et protéger les salariés de ma région, la Bretagne – où je vous invite, Madame la Commissaire –, nous travaillons à la gestion prévisionnelle des emplois et des compétences avec les partenaires sociaux – considérant que l'accompagnement des salariés qui doivent changer d'emploi va de pair avec la lutte contre la pénurie de main-d'œuvre. Or, le soutien à la reconversion et à la formation professionnelle nécessite de mettre en place des moyens humains et financiers.
               

                  Ma question est donc de savoir comment, en période de mutation, la Commission favorise avec les États membres l'adéquation entre l'offre et la demande d'emploi.
               

Raffaele Topo (S&D). – Signora Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, riformare l'economia europea, investire sulla competitività e tutelare allo stesso tempo i diritti dei lavoratori e la qualità dell'occupazione sono oggi entrambe le priorità assolute dell'Europa.
               

                  È necessario in primis promuovere una politica industriale europea al passo con i tempi, con investimenti a sostegno dei servizi di interesse generale e, naturalmente, per la creazione di posti di lavoro di qualità, con l'istituzione di un Fondo europeo per la competitività, come ribadito più volte dalla Commissaria alla Presidente della Commissione.
               

                  Ora, nello stesso tempo affrontiamo il tema di processi di ristrutturazione, accelerati dalla transizione digitale e verde e che vanno gestiti con efficaci strumenti di protezione dell'occupazione, dei diritti dei lavoratori e delle imprese; quindi strumenti come SURE, istituito per attenuare i rischi di disoccupazione, che ha salvato milioni di posti di lavoro durante la crisi.
               

                  Quindi devono essere rafforzati questi strumenti, affinché si possa sostenere il reddito di dipendenti ed esuberi. Ci aspettiamo, quindi, dalla Commissione iniziative su queste materie, in linea con la risoluzione approvata dalla commissione EMPL.
               

Özlem Demirel (The Left). – Frau Präsidentin! Die Dividenden steigen, und die Arbeiter verarmen. Derzeit schlagen zwei Herzen in meiner Brust – Sorge und Hoffnung. Auf der einen Seite die immer lauteren Töne und Rufe an die Arbeiter, den Gürtel enger zu schnallen. So bestimmen zum Beispiel Rufe nach Arbeitszeitverkürzung oder die Abschaffung von Feiertagen zur Finanzierung der gigantischen Aufrüstung in Deutschland den Diskurs. All das scheint alles nur der Anfang zu sein.
               

                  Doch ich sage klar und deutlich: Diejenigen, die danach rufen, haben ihre Rechnung ohne die Arbeiterinnen und Arbeiter und die Jugend in Europa gemacht, die sich derzeit bewegen und wehren. Das ist die Hoffnung. So werden in Deutschland am 15. März die Kollegen der Metall- und Industrieberufe mit ihrer Gewerkschaft demonstrieren für sozial-ökologische und zukunftsfähige Jobs. Die Kolleginnen und Kollegen von ver.di streiken aktuell im öffentlichen Dienst für anständige Löhne zum Leben und auch für bessere Arbeitsbedingungen: Wir stehen klar und deutlich an ihrer Seite.
               

                  Jede Allianz, die die Interessen des Kapitals tatsächlich vertritt, wird ihre Gegenbewegung bekommen, und die Linke wird immer an ihrer Seite stehen.
               

Dariusz Joński (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Firma Beko, która produkuje pralki, lodówki, zwalnia prawie 1800 osób w Łodzi i we Wrocławiu. Audi zamyka fabrykę w Brukseli i pozbawia pracy 3000 osób. Co ciekawe, od 2018 r. zajmuje się produkcją modeli tylko elektrycznych. Po 170 latach upada francuska palarnia kawy Cafés Legal. A do Brukseli przyjeżdżają tysiące pracowników europejskiego przemysłu, który łącznie zatrudnia około 30 mln pracowników w całej Unii Europejskiej, i protestują. Jeden z nich, z Polski, ze związków zawodowych, mówi tak: ‘Przemysł jest podstawą gospodarki, ale widzimy, że miejsca pracy są likwidowane m.in. przez regulacje związane z dążeniem do neutralności klimatycznej. Z tego powodu zamknięto fabrykę silników spalinowych w Bielsku-Białej, a problemy ma hutnictwo i wygaszane są piece, jak ten w Krakowie. Pracę tracą tysiące ludzi. Chcemy Europy socjalnej, a nie pełnej bezrobocia’. To jest tylko kilka tygodni, ale taka jest sytuacja w Europie. I tym się Europa musi różnić od reszty świata, że reaguje na takie sytuacje i pomaga tym ludziom. Uważam, że inwestycje w gospodarkę, obniżenie ceny energii dla przemysłu, uproszczenie procedur i rewizja ETS1 i ETS2 – to może zbudować konkurencyjną gospodarkę względem Chin i Stanów Zjednoczonych.
               

(Mówca zgodził się na pytanie zasygnalizowane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki)


Bogdan Rzońca (ECR),
pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki. – Panie Pośle, wymienił Pan wiele firm, które zwalniają ludzi w tej chwili w Unii Europejskiej. Dlaczego nic Pan nie wspomniał o tym, że rząd, z którego Pan pochodzi, rząd Donalda Tuska, w tej chwili w ogóle nie dba o spółki Skarbu Państwa? Dziesięć tysięcy zwolnień zapowiadanych w Poczcie Polskiej, kilka tysięcy zwolnień w spółce Skarbu Państwa PKP Cargo. Dlaczego Pan o tym nie wspomina, tylko mówi Pan o prywatnym biznesie, który zwalnia? Dlaczego nie chce Pan przyznać tego, że w Polsce mamy potworny problem z funkcjonowaniem…
               

(Przewodnicząca odebrała mówcy głos)


Dariusz Joński (PPE),
odpowiedź na pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki. – Bardzo dziękuję posłowi partii Kaczyńskiego z Polski, który przez osiem lat rządził Polską. Wymienił Pan dwie spółki: PKP Cargo i Poczta Polska. PKP Cargo – kiedy Państwo przejmowaliście władzę, cena akcji wynosiła blisko 80 zł. Kiedy oddawaliście władzę, wynosiła 16 zł i spółka była na skraju bankructwa. Jeśli chodzi o Pocztę Polską, Państwo chcieliście ukraść wybory w Polsce i zamiast Państwowej Komisji Wyborczej chcieliście, żeby to Poczta Polska organizowała wybory. Oczywiście ona tego nie zorganizowała, bo nie była w stanie, ale poniosła z tego tytułu ogromne, ogromne koszty. Państwo doprowadziliście do upadku wiele firm. Dziwię się tylko, że Pan tutaj dzisiaj wstaje bezczelnie na tej sali i próbuje zganiać na kogokolwiek innego. Osiem lat waszych rządów to są właśnie likwidacje wielu firm.
               

Johan Danielsson (S&D). – Fru talman! Kommissionären! ‘Över 10 % arbetslösa’ – den rubriken mötte de svenskar som slog på nyheterna härommånaden. Bakom varje nytt varsel: en människa och hela orter som tvingas ställa sig frågan, ‘vad händer nu’? Senast nu på morgonen kom nyheten om att den svenska batteritillverkaren Northvolt försätts i konkurs. Det är oroande att de varsel som nu läggs görs i sektorer som är helt centrala för Europas industriella framtid, inte minst inom bil- och batteritillverkning.
               

                  Hur vi hanterar det här kommer att bli avgörande för vår kontinents framtida konkurrenskraft. Ska vi klara det här måste vi skapa arbetsmarknader med större motståndskraft, med starka fack, med trygga arbetstagare, där företag har möjlighet att ligga i framkant och övervintra i en svacka utan att tappa personal och viktig kompetens. För utan yrkeskunniga arbetare blir det inga nya industrier i Europa.
               

Giuseppe Antoci (The Left). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, oggi, voglio esprimere la mia profonda indignazione per una vicenda inaccettabile che riguarda la STMicroelectronics di Catania, il maggiore produttore europeo di semiconduttori.
               

                  Nonostante i 2 miliardi di euro di aiuti di Stato approvati dalla Commissione europea, destinati alla costruzione di un nuovo impianto, incredibilmente l'azienda ha annunciato la cassa integrazione per 2500 lavoratori su un totale di 5400. Un vero e proprio scandalo che getta migliaia di lavoratori e le loro famiglie nell'angoscia.
               

                  È fondamentale che l'Europa, il governo e la regione garantiscano e pretendano che i finanziamenti pubblici previsti si traducano in investimenti reali a favore dell'occupazione stabile.
               

                  Pertanto, invito la Commissione e tutte le parti interessate a garantire che i finanziamenti accordati restituiscono a territori, come l'Etna Valley il ruolo di punta del futuro tecnologico europeo.
               

Spontane Wortmeldungen


Michał Szczerba (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Rozmawiamy o rzeczy absolutnie ważnej, a tak naprawdę mówimy o jednym: że w centrum europejskiej gospodarki jest człowiek. I tym różnimy się od innych krajów. Różnimy się od krajów, które są autorytarne, ponieważ najważniejsze jest to, żeby każdy człowiek miał zapewnione swoje prawa, również prawa pracownicze.
               

                  Ale chcemy rozmawiać również o konkurencyjnej gospodarce. Chcemy rozmawiać o nowych rozwiązaniach związanych z uproszczeniami, które są bardzo potrzebne po to, żeby europejskie firmy mogły konkurować, również konkurować z innymi krajami.
               

                  Co jest bardzo istotne w tej sprawie? Potrzebny jest dialog społeczny. I proszę również Komisję Europejską o to, żeby zawsze, w każdej sytuacji, z którą się mierzymy – ten dialog społeczny był: z jednej strony strona związkowa, strona pracownicza, z drugiej pracodawcy – żebyśmy zawsze dochodzili do kompromisów. Tak to próbujemy robić w Polsce. Uważam, że to są najważniejsze rozwiązania i szczególnie teraz, kiedy również przekierowujemy naszą uwagę na przemysł obronny. To także muszą być te działania, które podejmujemy w dialogu z tym środowiskiem.
               

Elena Sancho Murillo (S&D). – Señora presidenta, aprovecho este debate y la presencia de los comisarios para hablarles de mi tierra, de Navarra, y de la empresa BSH, donde 660 personas ven en peligro su futuro tras el anuncio del cierre de la empresa.
               

                  No podemos jugar con el trabajo y la vida de la gente. Nuestra industria —la navarra, la española y la europea— es competitiva y, en el caso de BSH, es una fábrica y una empresa competitiva. Nos debemos a la ciudadanía y, por ello, me dirijo a la Comisión para que mueva ficha: no podemos quedarnos de brazos cruzados, 660 familias y su futuro están en juego.
               

                  Señores comisarios, 660 personas están luchando día a día, con uñas y dientes, para que en junio no cierre su fábrica, su trabajo, su futuro. Por favor, no les dejemos solos y actuemos junto a ellos ya. En junio será tarde.
               

Margarita de la Pisa Carrión (PfE). – Señora presidente, señorías, la mejor manera de proteger el empleo y a los trabajadores es facilitar la iniciativa, crear oportunidades, tanto por cuenta ajena como por cuenta propia.
               

                  En España las pymes conforman el 99 % del tejido empresarial, muchas en el sector agroalimentario, y hoy tienen que compaginar su intenso día a día con venir aquí a defenderse de las regulaciones europeas que pueden hacer inviable su actividad, como el Reglamento relativo a la protección de los animales durante el transporte. Vienen a vernos alarmados por la falta de sensatez de la propuesta de la Comisión.
               

                  También en el sector de la automoción se han perdido casi un millón de puestos de trabajo por su empeño en el Pacto Verde Europeo. Saben perfectamente de las graves consecuencias sociales que tendrá esta transición y, aun así, no se replantea.
               

                  Es lamentable la hipocresía de los populares, quienes hoy se llevan las manos a la cabeza por la pérdida de competitividad y puestos de trabajo, ofrecen declaraciones pidiendo sensatez, pero a la vez siguen votando con socialistas a favor de las regulaciones que son la soga en el cuello de los europeos.
               

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Arvoisa puhemies, työntekijät ovat Euroopan menestyksen tukipilari. Työntekijöiden tulevaisuus näyttää kuitenkin monella alalla sumuiselta. EU-tasolla tehdyt massiiviset virheet, esimerkiksi löysän maahanmuuttopolitiikan ja yltiöpäisen ilmastopolitiikan muodossa, eivät ole olleet ilmaisia. Kuka nämä virheet maksaa? Viime kädessä eurooppalainen työntekijä.
               

                  Esimerkiksi Euroopan komission Green Deal -aloite toimii käsijarruna uuden teollisuuden synnylle Eurooppaan ja kaasuna vanhan teollisuuden pakenemiselle ulos Euroopasta. Lopputuloksena on vähemmän työpaikkoja.
               

                  Tehokasta työntekijöiden oikeuksien puolustamista olisi vastustaa tätä politiikkaa, jota vasemmistopuolueet Euroopassa ovat viime vuosina ajaneet. Se ei kuitenkaan tunnu punavihreiksi muuttuneita ammattiliittoja kiinnostavan. Mutta minua ja montaa muuta oikeistokonservatiivia kiinnostaa, ja siksi tulen puolustamaan eurooppalaisia työntekijöitä tämän salin pähkähulluutta vastaan.
               

Majdouline Sbai (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, je voudrais mettre en lumière un sujet qui n'a pas été abordé lors de notre débat. Ce n'est pas surprenant, car lorsque l'on parle de restructuration, on pense aux grands secteurs et aux grandes entreprises industrielles. Il y a pourtant un secteur qui emploie en Europe plus de 8 millions de personnes, dont 86 % sont des femmes, dont un quart sont nées hors d'Europe, dont 70 % ne sont pas déclarées. Je parle du secteur du travail domestique et de l'aide à la personne, c'est-à-dire ceux qui font votre ménage et prennent soin de nos aînés. C'est un secteur atomisé, morcelé, déstructuré.
               

                  En 2030, 37 millions d'Européens auront plus de 80 ans, ce qui signifie que ce secteur va continuer à se développer. Malgré le socle européen des droits sociaux et la stratégie européenne en matière de soins, l'accompagnement de la structuration de ce secteur est largement insuffisant. La preuve: le 7 janvier 2025, la Cour de justice de l'Union européenne a jugé que les employeurs nationaux ne respectaient pas les obligations prévues par la directive sur le temps de travail. Quelles actions allez-vous mener pour mieux encadrer les mutations de ce secteur?
               

Μαρία Ζαχαρία (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, πιστεύω έχει έρθει η στιγμή να δούμε το μπροστά που έρχεται και να τολμήσουμε τομές που θα προστατέψουν τους εργαζόμενους από την αυτοματοποίηση που θα φέρει η τεχνολογία, για την οποία αυτοματοποίηση θεωρώ ότι θα πρέπει να συζητήσουμε από τώρα και να θέσουμε το πλαίσιο ότι την υπεραξία που θα δημιουργήσει θα την καρπωθεί η κοινωνία και όχι οι καπιταλιστές, διότι η κοινωνία είναι αυτή που έχει χρηματοδοτήσει την ανάπτυξή της. Συνάδελφοί μου, τι επιφυλάσσει το κεφάλαιο πίσω από τη λέξη ‘αναδιάρθρωση’ για τους εργαζόμενους; Ανεργία, εργοδοτική ασυδοσία και καταπάτηση εργατικού δικαίου.
               

                  Σήμερα οι διαδικασίες αναδιάρθρωσης γίνονται συχνά χωρίς ουσιαστική συμμετοχή των εργαζομένων. Οι εκπρόσωποί τους καλούνται προσχηματικά, απλώς για να ενημερωθούν, χωρίς καμία δυνατότητα ουσιαστικής παρέμβασης ή διαπραγμάτευσης. Αυτό πρέπει να αλλάξει. Μόνο έτσι θα διασφαλιστούν οι θέσεις εργασίας και τα δικαιώματα στην πράξη και όχι στα χαρτιά, όταν οι εργαζόμενοι έχουν νομοθετημένη, πραγματική, ουσιαστική παρέμβαση στην εργασία τους. Αυτό που θα ήθελα να πω στους συναδέλφους από τη Δεξιά είναι ότι η δουλεία έχει πάψει από τον 18ο και 19ο αιώνα. Ας έρθουμε στην πραγματικότητα. Ευχαριστώ.
               

Niels Geuking (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, geehrte Kommissarin! Unsere Unternehmen sind geforderter denn je und damit, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, insbesondere wir. Wir müssen stets im Dialog miteinander die bestmöglichen Lösungen entwickeln, um größtmöglich sozialverträglich die Umbrüche der Zeit zu bewältigen. Dabei dürfen wir unsere Unternehmen nicht unnötig aus Brüssel belasten. Es braucht insbesondere verlässliche Rechtsrahmen, um ein investitionsfreundliches Klima zu schaffen, um das Kapital am Ende auch nicht zu bekämpfen, denn das Bekämpfen von Kapital hat am Ende des Tages noch nie Arbeitsplätze geschaffen.
               

                  Hinter jedem Unternehmen stehen Millionen von Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern, die am Ende des Tages ihr Lohn und Brot dafür benötigen, um auch in der heutigen Zeit die Lebenshaltungskosten überhaupt noch bestreiten zu können, eine Familie zu gründen und letztendlich damit auch die Zukunft Europas in die nächste Generation zu tragen.
               

                  Das heißt, starke Arbeitnehmerrechte im Einklang mit starken Unternehmen sind die Zukunft und bilden die Zukunft Europas. Eine starke europäische Wirtschaft und der soziale Schutz sind entsprechend keine Gegensätze.
               

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)


Roxana Mînzatu,
Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Thank you, Madam President, for this important debate. I thank the rapporteur, Estelle Ceulemans, for bringing this topic to our attention, to your attention.
I will start with an example in my conclusions, looking at one of the industries that is undergoing transformations: the automotive sector. We looked at what we need to do there to protect quality jobs, because indeed this is a sector where, in the quality of the working conditions of professionals, there have been investments – in their training, and their health and safety. So these are jobs that we really do not want to lose, and we want to protect the expertise and the knowledge of these people.
So in the automotive action plan, we proposed several concrete measures. One that I would mention is to really adjust and to improve the power of the Global Adjustment Fund, so that it is a fund that can really support workers before they are laid off, so that we can really intervene with EU funding to support companies, to support those workers before they are exposed to being laid off.
But beyond that, I would mention that there are several solutions that we need to look at. First, social dialogue and collective bargaining. We have just signed the pact for social dialogue last Wednesday, and it is an important step, it is an important process that creates trust between employers and trade unions. No transition – and there will be many types of transitions and we have to be prepared for this ever-changing landscape – can be done properly for the benefit of entrepreneurs and the equal benefit of workers without equality and strong social dialogue.
Also, I would underline what I mentioned a bit earlier, the Skills Guarantee that we propose to the Union of Skills. We cannot protect workers better than by training, retraining, upskilling, reskilling them so that they are able to find a job in the same company, in the same industry, in similar industries, without losing their expertise, their knowledge, protecting them, giving them a secure access to better work.
And third, of course, it's the quality jobs roadmap and the initiatives that will follow. Many of the things that you have mentioned here will be dealt with in this quality jobs roadmap, from working conditions to fair wages, to health and security in the workplace, to fair transition, anticipation and management of change, dealing with third-country nationals, for all industries.
And let us not forget, while we are talking about restructuring and job loss, there are still industries where millions of jobs are still unoccupied, from ICT to construction, where we need to still fill the gaps. We need to work to match these deficits with the surplus, wherever this will be possible, and to use EU funding and our policies to do that in coordination with the Member States.
I thank the Parliament for having this important conversation. We cannot end now. It is clearly an important part of our mandate, and I'm looking forward to your support in our work.

Die Präsidentin. – Zum Abschluss der Aussprache wurden zwei Entschließungsanträge eingereicht.
               

                  Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.
               

                  Die Abstimmung findet morgen, Donnerstag, den 13. März 2025, statt.
               
13.   Adoption of the proposal for a Parenthood Regulation (debate)

Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über.
               






—



                        die Anfrage zur mündlichen Beantwortung an den Rat über die Annahme des Vorschlags für eine Verordnung zur Elternschaft von Ilhan Kyuchyuk im Namen des Rechtsausschusses (O-000004/2025 – B10-0003/25) (2025/2545(RSP)) und.
                     










—



                        die Anfrage zur mündlichen Beantwortung an die Kommission über die Annahme des Vorschlags für eine Verordnung zur Elternschaft von Ilhan Kyuchyuk im Namen des Rechtsausschusses (O-000005/2025 – B10-0004/25) (2025/2545(RSP)).
                     





Ilhan Kyuchyuk,
author. – Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear representatives of the Council – they are not present yet. 'If you are a parent in one country, you are parent in every country', said Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in her 2020 State of the Union speech. This gave a political impulse for the European Commission to prepare rules on the cross-border recognition of parenthood.
Two years after, on 7 December 2022, the proposal for a Council regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition of decisions and acceptance of authentic instruments in matters of parenthood, and on the creation of a European certificate of parenthood, was announced under the equality package. The proposal sets rules of jurisdiction and applicable law for establishing parenthood and provides for an automatic recognition of decisions in parenthood matters. It also provides for a unified form of European certificate of parenthood that is optional and should not replace national documents, but should ease the confirmation of parenthood if needed in another Member States.
The future regulation is to apply only for the establishment of parenthood in a cross-border situation and the recognition of instruments issued in another Member State. The Commission's ultimate goal was to safeguard the rights of all children, also those derived from national rules, arguing that, by resolving the parenthood of the child as a preliminary question, the regulation will facilitate the application of excusing Union instruments on parental responsibility, maintenance and succession as regards the child.
Parliament expressed support for the main objective of the proposed regulation to address the issue of the non-recognition of parenthood status by assuring that if a child-parent relation has been established in one Member State, all other Member States should recognise it without additional proceedings.
In its deliberations, the European Parliament focused thoroughly on safeguarding the rights of the child, as they should be guaranteed in all European Union Member States, regardless of a child's family arrangements or how the child was born into this world.
Taking into account that the Council has been working on the proposal for more than two years, on behalf of the Committee on Legal Affairs, allow me to present the following questions for an oral answer to the Council.
First, dear Council, what progress has been made by the Council so far in terms of the adoption of the parenthood regulation by all Member States? On which parts of the proposal have discussions already been concluded, if any?
Second, what solutions have been discussed to accommodate certain Member States' concerns related to the most contentious matters, such as the establishment and recognition of the parenthood of children born via surrogacy and children of same-sex parents?
Third, is the Council considering, in the event of not being able to obtain unanimity, triggering the enhanced cooperation mechanism under Article 20 of the Treaty on European Union and Article 326 and 334 of TFEU?
And, additionally, the following questions refer to the Commission. How has the Commission facilitated the discussion on the proposal in the Council? Is the Commission prepared – or is it planning – in the event that unanimity among the Member States cannot be reached to pursue the objectives of the proposed regulation using alternative legislative instruments or mechanisms provided already in the Treaties?

Christophe Hansen,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, let me start by thanking the European Parliament for its positive opinion on the Commission proposal on the recognition of parenthood between Member States. And let me also thank the European Parliament for its continued interest in the ongoing legislative discussions on the proposal in the Council, as shown by this oral question on the matter.
Member States are already required by Union law on free movement to recognise parenthood established in another Member State for the purposes of children's rights under the European Union law, and this includes their right to travel or to take up residence in another Member State, their right to obtain a travel documentation or their right to be treated equally in a host Member State on all matters within the scope of the Treaty.
The Court of Justice confirmed in 2021, in its judgment in the V.M.A. case, that this recognition obligation also applies to children with same-sex parents, even if the Member State where recognition is sought does not allow parenthood by same-sex couples.
Indeed, the recognition in a Member State of parenthood established in another Member State is essential for the right to free movement. But families may still face difficulties in having the parenthood of their children recognised in another Member State for all purposes, that is, beyond the existence of children's rights under free movement law, notably for the purposes of children's rights under national law, such as their right to inherit from either parent in another Member State, to receive financial support from either parent in another Member State, or to be represented by either parent in another Member State on matters such as schooling and health.
It is with this in mind that the Commission adopted the proposal under discussion and considered that, in line with international law, the Treaties and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the proposal should require Member States to recognise parenthood established in another Member State for all children, irrespective of how the child was conceived or born and irrespective of the child's type of family. The proposal does not affect substantive family law, which is a competence of the Member States, and the proposal is an essential element to build a Union of equality and implements the EU strategy on the rights of the child.
Moving now to the two questions you have asked. In the oral question first, the Commission has followed and supported thoroughly the ongoing discussions in the Council, which, however, need time, and mostly for two main reasons.
First, the proposal is a measure of family law with cross-border implications. The Member States have different approaches towards certain matters of family law. They therefore want to ensure that the proposal does not affect their competences to adopt rules on substantive family law, such as their rules on the definition of family adoptions or their rules on surrogacy. In addition, as the proposal needs to be adopted by unanimity, every Member State needs to be on board for every sensitive matter under discussion.
Second, the proposal is technically quite complex. The proposal aims to facilitate the recognition of parenthood by harmonising the Member States' rules of private international law, that is, the rules on international jurisdiction, applicable law on the recognition of judgements and authentic instruments, and by creating a European certificate of parenthood such as you have mentioned it. Currently, beyond existing rights under free movement law, each Member State addresses the recognition of parenthood according to different principles and procedures. Therefore, the Member States want to ensure that they find the provisions of the proposal acceptable from their policy viewpoint and that their authorities will find the provisions clear.
In view of the various policy and legal facets of the proposals, since the adoption of the proposal, the Commission has at all times lent its assistance to the Member States, both in the Council and in bilateral discussions to clarify points, address their questions and listen to their concerns, to try to find common ground with other Member States.
Likewise, the Commission has always been available to discuss with all the Council presidencies technical and policy solutions within the scope of the proposal, to help the discussions progress. The Commission also considers that all Member States have approached discussion in the Council on the proposal in a constructive manner, and that progress is gradually being made.
Concerning your second question here. If unanimity cannot be reached in the Council, the Commission recalls in this matter that, as the proposal goes beyond recognition of parenthood for the purposes of rights under EU law, it has to be adopted pursuant to Article 81(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, under the Union's competence to adopt measures on family law with cross-border implications.
As the European Parliament noted in its oral question, this means that, after having consulted the European Parliament, the proposed regulation must be adopted by unanimity in the Council. Given that important provisions must still be discussed in detail, it is not possible at this stage to predict how negotiations will unfold. However, Member States will eventually need to take a stand on whether they can support the proposal resulting from the negotiations in the Council. And if unanimity cannot be reached in the Council, the Commission remains ready to consider possible avenues at that precise moment.

Die Präsidentin. – Bevor wir jetzt mit der Debatte starten, möchte ich mitteilen, dass ich das Catch the Eye jetzt schließe, denn eigentlich haben wir die Regel, dass diejenigen, die sich unter Catch the Eye zu Wort melden wollen, während der Debatte präsent sein sollen, und die Debatte hat schon vor über zehn Minuten mit den Statements des Berichterstatters und der Kommission begonnen. Dadurch, dass wir durch die lange Abstimmung heute Mittag recht weit hinter dem eigentlichen Zeitplan hinterherhängen, bitte ich um Verständnis, dass ich in diesem Fall die Regeln sehr strikt auslege.
               

Michał Wawrykiewicz,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, I would like to thank the European Commission for this important legislative proposal. President von der Leyen once said, 'if you are a parent in one country, you are a parent in every country'. I want to thank also the Council and Minister Szłapka for the declaration to work on this fight during the Polish Presidency. The Polish Presidency understands the real issue at the heart of this proposal, and is not afraid to address it head on.
As a lawyer, I must underline that this proposal is not about interfering in national rules on family law, or it is not about regulating surrogacy or imposing any new definitions on parenthood on Member States. This is about guaranteeing that each child in the European Union has a full package of rights, regardless of the circumstances of their birth. It is about ensuring that the child does not lose legal parents, access to healthcare, nationality or inheritance rights simply because their family moves to another country of the European Union.
One of the most practical and urgent issues addressed by this proposal is 'limping parenthood'. 'Limping parenthood' refers to the situation where a child's legal parenthood is recognised in one Member State, but not in another. This leads to, for example, loss of parental rights by one of both parents, restriction of the child's rights, including losses in access to citizenship, inheritance, social benefits or parental care, costly and lengthy legal proceedings, and the risk of family separation.
The European Union is built on the principle of freedom of movement, non-discrimination and legal certainty. It is our duty to ensure that these principles apply equally to all families. This proposal is not about politics, it's about people and, in particular, children.

Alessandro Zan,
a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, un genitore in uno Stato membro è un genitore in tutti gli Stati membri. Ursula von der Leyen lo aveva promesso nel 2020 e cinque anni dopo non è ancora così. Pensate che in Europa possono circolare le merci e i capitali ma non possono circolare i diritti. E, soprattutto, questo a scapito dei figli di queste famiglie, dei più piccoli.
               

                  Un esempio drammatico ne è l'Italia, dove il governo di Giorgia Meloni ha messo in atto una crociata contro le famiglie omogenitoriali, trascinando in tribunale – per effetto di una circolare del ministro dell'Interno – decine di famiglie con due madri, in tribunale, come se fossero dei criminali a difendere il proprio diritto di essere genitori dei propri figli. E nel silenzio più completo, mi dispiace dirlo, della Commissione europea.
               

                  La democrazia, lo Stato di diritto, la stessa Unione europea si rafforzano e si difendono anche così. Allora pensiamoci: finché questo regolamento resta bloccato, a rimetterci saranno sempre, e prima di tutto, i bambini.
               

                  La destra si preoccupa tanto delle famiglie e a questi bambini cosa direbbero? Come spiegherebbero ad un bambino che, una volta passata la frontiera, con un altro Stato membro, come l'Italia, rischiano di perdere uno dei due genitori, o addirittura tutti e due, come se fossero perseguitati penalmente?
               

                  Allora la presidente Van der Leyen continua a dirci che la libertà e la democrazia sono sotto attacco. È vero, ma non lo sono solo quando dobbiamo svegliare le coscienze sulla necessità di una difesa comune ma anche quando non riusciamo a garantire che una famiglia resti una famiglia a prescindere da dove si trova e da come è composta.
               

                  Allora mi rivolgo al Consiglio e alla Presidenza di turno, perché sblocchi subito il regolamento sulla genitorialità e mi rivolgo ovviamente a Ursula von der Leyen …
               

(La Presidente toglie la parola all'oratore)


Ernő Schaller-Baross,
a PfE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Elnök Asszony! A családjogi kérdések mélyen gyökereznek a tagállamok jogrendszereiben és társadalmi hagyományaiban, ezért elengedhetetlen, hogy az ezzel kapcsolatos uniós szabályozás tiszteletben tartsa a szubszidiaritás elvét. Önök ezzel a javaslattal páros lábbal kívánják eltiporni a tagállamok demokratikus döntését, a közös szerződéseinket és hazám Alaptörvényét.
               

                  Nincs lehetőség arra, hogy a baloldali és liberális képviselőtársaim és NGO-k által szorgalmazott szülői jogállás és a leszármazás kérdését közösségi szinten szabályozzuk. Fontos, hogy tiszteletben tartsuk a tagállamok kulturális és jogi hagyományait. Fontos, hogy az Európai Unió ne lépje túl ismét hatáskörét, és a tagállamok pedig szabadon dönthessenek családjogi és leszármazási kérdésekben. Nem Ursula von der Leyen dönti el, hogy egy tagállamban ki szülő. Szerencsére.
               

Jadwiga Wiśniewska,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Szanowni Państwo! Zgodnie z artykułem 18 polskiej konstytucji małżeństwo jest związkiem kobiety i mężczyzny, co oznacza, że małżeństwa jednopłciowe, ani rodzicielstwo osób tej samej płci, nie są uznawane, a surogacja w większości państw członkowskich jest nielegalna. Tymczasem Komisja Europejska, niczym komunistyczna egzekutywa narzuca tęczową ideologię. Znów szuka drogi, by forsować kolejne przywileje dla par jednopłciowych, tym razem cynicznie wykorzystując dobro dzieci. Ale nie dajmy się zwieść. Wzajemne uznawanie rodzicielstwa to nie obrona praw dzieci, to forsowanie tęczowej ideologii. Zgodnie z polskim prawem matką jest kobieta, która je urodziła, a ojcem mężczyzna. Z kolei surogacja to nic innego jak budowanie systemu, w którym dziecko staje się przedmiotem transakcji. Czy naprawdę chcemy Europy, gdzie dziecko traktuje się jak produkt do zamówienia? Bruksela nie będzie nam dyktować, czym jest rodzina. Czas stanowczo powiedzieć: dość tęczowej ideologii… (Przewodnicząca odebrała mówczyni głos)


Moritz Körner,
im Namen der Renew-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich weiß gar nicht, wo ich anfangen soll, ehrlich gesagt, bei dem, was ich hier gerade gehört habe. Also, member state competence, dann irgendwie Sexual-LGBT-Propaganda, dann wird gesagt, wir wollen irgendwie die Privilegien von Regenbogenfamilien auf irgendetwas aufzwingen. Und dann haben Sie noch die Dreistigkeit, von Kindern und Kinderrechten zu sprechen. Das Allerschlimmste, was Sie einem Kind antun können, ist, dass es den Schutz durch seine Eltern nicht mehr hat, wenn es dann in einem anderen Land in der Europäischen Union ist; das ist doch das Allerschlimmste, was passieren kann.
               

                  Sie wollen Kindern das Wichtigste wegnehmen, was sie haben, nämlich die Eltern. Sie wollen Kindern das Wichtigste wegnehmen, was sie haben, nämlich die Liebe und den Schutz. Darum geht es Ihnen! Ihnen geht es in Wahrheit, wenn Sie über Familie sprechen, wenn Sie über Werte sprechen, nicht darum. Es geht Ihnen um Ihre konservative Ideologie. In Ihrem Bild darf nicht sein, was nicht sein darf, auch wenn Regenbogenfamilien für Kinder …
               

                  Deswegen werden wir dagegen kämpfen, und die Kommission muss jetzt endlich …
               

(Die Präsidentin entzieht dem Redner das Wort.)


Kim Van Sparrentak,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, I hope we all agree family life shouldn't be a privilege, let alone something that we deprive a child of, and the same goes for the rights of free movement. Unfortunately, right now, this does not reflect the situation of many rainbow families. When a child in Europe has two mothers or two fathers and moves to another country, from one minute to the other, they can legally lose their parent – one parent that, for example, can't take medical decisions in case of dire need. This is simply unacceptable!
Meanwhile in 2020, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen already said, 'If you are a parent in one country, you are a parent in every country'. And I want to emphasise, the Commission President did not say if you are a parent in one country, I will definitely keep my fingers crossed and hope that one day you are a parent in every country.
Since 2022, we've had a legislative proposal on the table that could make sure that many children in the EU don't lose their parents when they move to another Member State. The European Parliament has been very clear about its support. The European Court of Justice has ruled that parents shouldn't lose their rights when they cross a border within the EU. The Commission President was pretty clear. The courts are clear. We, Parliament, have been clear. We even called for a change in legislative instruments to make sure that governments who discriminate against rainbow families can't simply block this legislative proposal.
I think it is high time that the European Commission shows some commitment to the Union of Equality that you're always talking about, especially after the incomprehensible withdrawal of the Equality Directive. Commission, do the work, and please make sure that the parenthood regulation is adopted.

Mario Furore,
a nome del gruppo The Left. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, chi è padre o madre in uno Stato membro deve essere padre o madre in qualsiasi altro Paese dell'Unione. Questo principio, che dovrebbe essere la normalità in Europa, non viene, invece, rispettato in moltissimi Paesi, a dimostrazione che l'Europa dei diritti deve ancora nascere.
               

                  Da oltre due anni il certificato europeo di genitorialità langue in un cassetto del Consiglio e non viene approvato. Questo grave ostruzionismo lede l'interesse superiore del minore, che dovrebbe essere la stella polare di qualsiasi regolamento europeo.
               

                  Due milioni di bambini oggi non possono viaggiare liberamente nella nostra Unione perché non è riconosciuta la loro identità, nonché il rapporto di filiazione con i loro genitori.
               

                  Non c'è più tempo da perdere: se vi sono Paesi che per motivi ideologici oppongono il loro veto, ci auguriamo che i restanti procedano attivando il meccanismo di cooperazione rafforzata, prendendo una decisione di civiltà e di rispetto dei diritti fondamentali dell'UE.
               

                  E l'Italia, ci auguriamo, possa far parte di questo gruppo di Paesi che guarda al futuro e non guarda invece al Medioevo.
               

Irmhild Boßdorf,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Baby Sara kann nichts dafür: Wer sie geboren hat, ist nicht bekannt; wer ihre biologischen Eltern sind, nur teilweise. Fest steht nur, dass zwei Frauen, die in einem westlichen EU-Land einander geheiratet haben, die Homo-Ehe auf diesem Weg auch in Osteuropa durchsetzen wollen. Bulgarien, Herkunftsland einer der beiden Frauen, erlaubt nämlich eine solche gleichgeschlechtliche Ehe bislang nicht. Ob die Mutter von Baby Sara Bulgarin ist, ist unbekannt. Dennoch bekam Sara nach einem Urteil des Europäischen Gerichtshofs dort die Staatsbürgerschaft. Ursula von der Leyen freut das. Sie behauptet: Wer in einem Land Elternpaar ist, muss dies in jedem anderen Land auch sein, nur dann kann die LGBTQ-Agenda durchgesetzt werden. Zitat: Ursula von der Leyen.
               

                  Bei der heutigen Debatte geht es mitnichten um eine grenzübergreifende Stärkung der Elternschaft, sondern nur um das ideologiegetriebene Gender-Mainstreaming: Jeder kann sich überall und jederzeit zu Eltern erklären. Lassen wir diese Übergriffigkeit der EU nicht zu, stärken wir unsere Familien, schützen wir unsere Kinder!
               

Maria Walsh (PPE). – Madam President, these debates always make me incredibly disappointed in our democratic policies and belief systems. We represent millions of Europeans – LGBTI and other, all – and it saddens me that in this House, that is built on bringing people together, that we forget that in many, many of our speeches.
Let me bring it back to why we're discussing this very important parenthood regulation. An estimated 2 million children currently face difficulties in having their parents recognised in another Member State – 2 million children. Not children of gay people or straight people. Just children across our EU right now have difficulties in their parents being recognised by the 27 Member States. This much needed and timely EU parenthood regulation provides that clarity and consistency in helping families navigate the legal systems that have now, up to this point, been fragmented. This is not just a legal case. It's a human issue. No matter where you live in Europe, your rights as a parent must be respected.
I want to pay particular attention to the regulation, which will ease burdens on folks like me who may decide one day to have children. As an LGBTI individual and ally, I should, too, face the same rights as everyone in this House and, most importantly, everybody we represent in this House. We cannot afford to let prejudice stand in the way of progress. Europe must treat all families equally, and we must have a Commission and a Council that fight to do that.

Evin Incir (S&D). – Madam President, the question of whether we should adopt the parenthood regulation to ensure the families can stay together, no matter where they choose to live in our Union, shouldn't even be up for debate. This should have been approved a long time ago – yesterday, a week ago, a month ago, a year ago, two years ago.
Let's clarify this: we have the freedom of movement for goods, services, capital and people in the EU. Article 21 of the EU Treaty states, 'Every citizen of the Union shall have the right to move and reside freely within the territory of all the Member States'. Similarly, Article 45 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights affirms, 'Every citizen of the Union has the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States'. So what is the far right doing here today? The only correct answer is that you are doing an exercise in homophobia and an attempt to deprive children of their parents.
Commissioner, the worst part, I must say, is that, at a time when we need to strengthen protection against far-right hate, the Commission has chosen to withdraw the proposal for the EU anti-discrimination directive – I must say that that is very disappointing. But now let us ensure we can adopt a piece of legislation that would let families be families, regardless of where they move in our Union.

Margarita de la Pisa Carrión (PfE). – Señora presidente, señor comisario, señorías, todo niño tiene un padre y una madre. Tiene derecho a conocerlos y a ser cuidado por ellos en la medida de lo posible. Este Reglamento pone en riesgo este principio natural, entrometiéndose en el derecho de familia, sobre el que la Unión Europea no tiene competencias.
               

                  Con el pretexto de simplificar el papeleo de situaciones complejas de por sí, se plantea que cada cual pueda elegir una legislación a conveniencia, forzando a los países a aceptar disposiciones ajenas a su propio Derecho, lo que crearía no solo un caos regulatorio, sino que dejaría resquicios que pueden amparar prácticas ilegales con graves agresiones a la dignidad de las personas, como la gestación subrogada, adopciones ilegales… Aquí se ha hablado incluso de la multiparentalidad. Saben el resultado de abrir estos cauces: cada vez más niños en situaciones nada deseables y la peligrosa normalización de la ruptura de los lazos naturales.
               

                  Los derechos del niño se defienden fortaleciendo la familia, no desconfigurándola.
               

Paolo Inselvini (ECR). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, chi è davvero genitore non è mai discriminato quando circola in Europa. Chi pretende di esserlo, invece, sofisticando la realtà o comprando bambini, incontra ostacoli oggettivi e giusti.
               

                  Con questo nuovo regolamento l'UE ingerisce pesantemente nel diritto di famiglia degli Stati membri con il pretesto della libertà di circolazione. Quanti minori non vedono riconosciuti i loro genitori in un altro Stato dell'Unione europea? Da come ne parlate sembra che ogni famiglia debba temere di muoversi: ma non è così.
               

                  Gli adulti invece, in stati civili come il mio, non vedono riconosciuti alcuni loro desideri: chi viene o torna in Italia e si è macchiato del reato di utero in affitto troverà problemi e ostacoli. È vero ed è giusto. Lo facciamo per proteggere i bambini da un mercato che li riduce a oggetti di contratto. Non accetteremo nessun regolamento che serva per aggirare le nostre leggi nazionali e per legittimare la barbara pratica dell'utero in affitto.
               

(L'oratore accetta di rispondere a una domanda ‘cartellino blu’)


IN THE CHAIR: VICTOR NEGRESCU


Vice-President


Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle (Renew),
blue-card question. – Mr Inselvini, here we are again with the blue-card, I hope that this time you will answer my question instead of answering something else.
You always talk about the interests of children – and I agree with you, we are all here trying to protect the interests of children.
Now, would you be able to explain to me how the interests of a child who has always known two mothers, of whom one of the mothers now may be terminally ill and might die, will be taken care of, the interests of that child, if the other mother – who is not his biological mother – is not recognised as a mother? Because that is what is happening in Italy at the moment.

Paolo Inselvini (ECR),
risposta a una domanda ‘cartellino blu’
                        . – Grazie alla collega per il classico cartellino blu. La ringrazio per la domanda e la ringrazio per il fatto che mi fa sottolineare ancora una volta come noi ci basiamo su dati di realtà.
                  

                     Purtroppo, per quello che è la vostra ideologia, il 100% - ve lo svelo – dei bambini in Europa è nato da un padre e una madre; lo 0% da due madri o da due padri.
                  

                     Oppure ci sono persone invece che comprano i bambini e in quel caso il diritto del bambino è quello a conoscere un padre, suo padre, e sua madre. Questo è tutelare i diritti dei bambini, non raccontare loro ideologie LGBT e arcobaleno come le vostre.
                  

Saskia Bricmont (Verts/ALE). – Monsieur le Président, ‘si vous êtes parent dans un pays, vous êtes parent dans tous les pays’. Ce sont effectivement les mots de Mme von der Leyen, présidente de la Commission européenne, dans son discours sur l'état de l'Union de 2020. Le Parlement européen est aussi de cet avis; il est pour la reconnaissance mutuelle de la parentalité. Or, depuis décembre 2023, c'est le Conseil que l'on attend. Pourquoi les États membres jouent-ils de cette manière avec l'avenir de 2 millions d'enfants?
                  

                     Ceux qui s'y opposent encore sont homophobes. La preuve: les propos tenus dans cette assemblée, aujourd'hui. Les droits des familles de la communauté LGBTQIA+ sont de plus en plus menacés. Aujourd'hui plus que jamais, la protection par la loi des enfants des familles LGBTQIA+ doit être une priorité. Nous demandons donc à la Commission européenne et au Conseil d'avancer rapidement et de prendre acte qu'un enfant est un enfant, qu'une famille est une famille, et que toutes et tous ont des droits. Love is love!


Έλενα Κουντουρά (The Left). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, το διεθνές δίκαιο ορίζει ότι όλα τα παιδιά πρέπει να έχουν τα ίδια δικαιώματα χωρίς διακρίσεις. Στην πράξη όμως, όταν μια οικογένεια μετακινείται από ένα ευρωπαϊκό κράτος μέλος σε ένα άλλο, μπορεί να αντιμετωπίσει την απαράδεκτη πραγματικότητα της μη αναγνώρισης της γονικής σχέσης που έχει θεμελιωθεί σε ένα άλλο κράτος μέλος. Αυτή η νομική ανασφάλεια δημιουργεί σοβαρά εμπόδια στην καθημερινότητα χιλιάδων οικογενειών, από την πρόσβαση στην υγειονομική περίθαλψη και την εκπαίδευση, μέχρι ζητήματα διαμονής και κληρονομικών δικαιωμάτων.
                  

                     Ο κανονισμός για τη γονική σχέση είναι ένα απαραίτητο βήμα για να διασφαλίσουμε ότι, αν είσαι γονέας σε ένα ευρωπαϊκό κράτος μέλος, πρέπει να αναγνωρίζεσαι ως γονέας σε όλες τις χώρες της Ένωσης, και ότι κάθε παιδί στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση έχει αναγνωρισμένα και προστατευμένα τα δικαιώματά του, ανεξαρτήτως του τόπου διαμονής του και του τύπου της οικογένειάς του. Το Συμβούλιο πρέπει να υιοθετήσει άμεσα τον κανονισμό, για να τερματιστεί αυτή η απαράδεκτη διάκριση σε βάρος εκατομμυρίων παιδιών στην Ευρώπη. Ευχαριστώ πολύ.
                  

Ivan David (ESN). – Pane předsedající, návrh nařízení o rodičovství, který vyžaduje, aby všechny členské státy uznávaly rodičovství za stejných podmínek, nerespektuje rozdíly v národních tradicích a vůli jednotlivých komunit. Konstatuje, že práva dětí vyplývající z rodičovství mají být chráněna bez ohledu na právní vztah mezi rodiči a způsob, jakým bylo dítě počato. Práva dětí dnes nikdo nezpochybňuje. Mimomanželské děti nejsou vystaveny opovržení jako před sto lety. Ale v tomto nařízení jde ve skutečnosti o práva rodičů bez ohledu na to, jak dosáhli rodičovství. Ne každý je způsobilý řádné péče o děti, ale nelze postupovat tak, jak činí Barnevernet v Norsku, který odebírá rodičům více než 1 000 dětí ročně. Hrozí legalizace obchodu s dětmi, který už funguje. Děti nesmějí být předmětem obchodu. Předložené nařízení by umožnilo děti koupené v jedné zemi legalizovat v celé EU.
                  

(Řečník souhlasil s tím, že že odpoví na otázku položenou zvednutím modré karty)


Bruno Gonçalves (S&D),
blue-card question. – Mr David, thank you very much for your intervention. Every time we hear someone from your political family, you are speaking about families, you are speaking about defending them, and you are truly right about that.
But just today, in the plenary, you voted against the European care strategy to defend all types of large families in your vote in the plenary.
So, my question is very simple: are these only words or are you really working to defend the working-class people and working-class families?

Ivan David (ESN),
odpověď na otázku položenou zvednutím modré karty. – S dovolením, já jsem přesvědčen o tom, že to, co jsem tady řekl, má reálný základ, neboť jsem se seznámil se skutečností, že skutečně existuje způsob, který umožňuje prostřednictvím náhradního mateřství získávat děti. Existují takové nabídky a tento systém se skutečně uplatňuje.
                  

Miriam Lexmann (PPE). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, nariadenie o uznávaní rodičovstva bolo od začiatku, žiaľ, veľmi kontroverzné. Upozorňovali sme na to v Európskom parlamente a zablokovali ho niektoré členské štáty v Rade práve z tohto dôvodu. Dlhodobo sa pýtam: Chceme nájsť skutočné riešenie na problémy, alebo tu ide o to, kto si presadí svoju ideologickú prevahu?
                  

                     Áno, to, že v niektorých štátoch, v niektorých prípadoch prichádza k problémom, napríklad s cestovným pasom alebo povinným pobytom alebo dovolením pobytu a povolením pobytu, je fakt. Hrubé zasahovanie do dohodnutých kompetencií členských štátov však rozhodne nie je riešením. Rodinné právo vždy patrilo a musí aj naďalej patriť do rúk jednotlivých členských štátov. Naviac, doteraz sme nedostali žiadnu odpoveď na naše obavy, že nariadenie otvorí dvere pre obchod s deťmi v rámci praxe takzvaného náhradného materstva.
                  

                     Hľadajme preto praktické postupy, na ktorých sa vieme zhodnúť. Neriešme problémy pretláčaním ideológie a zasahovaním do výlučnej kompetencie členských štátov. Lebo neustále pretláčanie textu, ktorý je od začiatku kontroverzný, nebude viesť k dohode, ale bude viesť k polarizácii. A to je to posledné, čo dnes, v dnešnej zložitej situácii, Európska únia potrebuje. Únia sa má sústrediť na to, čo dostala do kompetencie a neriešiť problémy, ktoré sme nechali vo výlučnej kompetencii členských štátov.
                  

(Rečníčka súhlasila s tým, že odpovie na dve otázky položené zdvihnutím modrej karty)


(Rečníčka súhlasila, že odpovie na viaceré otázky položené zdvihnutím modrej karty)


Evin Incir (S&D),
blue-card question. – I just wanted to ask our colleague a question. First and foremost, we are not talking about surrogacy, because on the issue of surrogacy I can subscribe to that – I also see it as a human trafficking use of women's body. We're not talking about surrogacy.
What we're talking about is children who already have two parents and they are of the same sex. This could be in different ways: adoption is one way and there are other different ways, but they do exist today.
What are we going to do with them? Are we going to deprive children who already exist today, who have parents who are of the same sex? Deprive their parents because they move from one country to the other? Because right now, freedom of movement doesn't apply to all our citizens.

Miriam Lexmann (PPE),
blue-card answer. – First of all, regarding surrogacy, even this Parliament has recognised it partially as human trafficking, an inhuman and criminal act. Secondly, many Member States ban surrogacy.
And my answer to your question is that I called on the Member States to look into the solutions of the individual children and problems of access to their passports or free movement or their ability to stay in a country.
But we cannot breach and interfere in the competences of the Member States. The solutions are there, but this proposal by the Commission, which we have seen, brings the solution by breaching the competences of the Member States, and we cannot agree with that.

Kim Van Sparrentak (Verts/ALE),
blue-card question. – You are the umpteenth person talking about ideology today, and saying that you're worried about ideology going over biology. And I just want to ask you: what do you mean by this?
Because in the animal kingdom we have swans, ducks, geese, dolphins, bisons, giraffes, lions, bats, elephants, whales, monkeys, sheep, hyaena, lizards, dragonflies – and this is a non-exhaustive list – that are also homosexuals, like me. Can you please tell me what is ideological about this and not biological?

Miriam Lexmann (PPE),
blue-card answer. – Sorry, I think we are in the European Parliament and not in a biology class. I am talking about ideology interfering in the competences of the Member States – an ideology which believes that it is above the law. The international treaties, the EU treaties, set very clearly what is the competence of the Member States and what is not.
And the only thing I am asking is that we look for solutions for the problems of the children – which I believe we definitely should – but such solutions must be in line with European law. I hope that you believe in the rule of law. I do believe in it and that's why I believe in such solutions.

Gilles Pennelle (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, le certificat européen de parentalité, inscrit au programme officiel de la Commission européenne pour 2025, confirme sa volonté d'imposer ce règlement, telle une dictature, malgré l'opposition formulée par plusieurs États membres (Italie, Suède, Slovaquie, Croatie, Bulgarie, Roumanie) au sein du Conseil en juin 2024. Pourquoi la Commission et le Parlement européen persévèrent-ils sur ce sujet controversé, alors que le droit de la famille est une compétence nationale?
                  

                     En effet, cette proposition impliquerait d'obliger des États à reconnaître des filiations issues de mères porteuses, alors que leur loi nationale l'interdit. Les États membres seraient donc contraints de valider indirectement des pratiques contraires à leur législation nationale et à leurs choix politiques et éthiques. Ce forcing consisterait à faire reconnaître de fait la GPA et à faciliter sa pratique, pourtant interdite dans plusieurs États européens, comme la France. La légalisation de la marchandisation du corps de la femme est, en fin de compte, la véritable intention de ce règlement scandaleux. Tous ceux qui prétendent défendre les droits des femmes et des enfants devraient se mobiliser contre cela.
                  

Catch-the-eye procedure


Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario Hansen, los supuestos argumentos jurídicos que invocan el derecho soberano de los Estados miembros sobre sus legislaciones de familia y la necesidad de unanimidad para modificar esa competencia en realidad esconden prejuicios —eso sí, ideológicos— que son incompatibles con la obligación de los Estados miembros de respetar la Carta de los Derechos Fundamentales de la Unión Europea, que consagra la libre circulación sin discriminación y, particularmente, protege el interés superior del menor.
                  

                     Este es exactamente el objetivo del Reglamento sobre filiación europeo, que es imprescindible sacar adelante para asegurar que ningún menor es discriminado en ningún Estado miembro por su origen; porque no es aceptable que se haga al menor culpable de la supuesta familia de la que procede y que no gusta en determinados Estados miembros. A ninguno se le exige ni aceptar el matrimonio homosexual ni aceptar la filiación subrogada. Lo que se les exige es respetar la Carta de los Derechos Fundamentales de la Unión Europea que, con el mismo valor jurídico que los Tratados, es vinculante para todos los Estados miembros.
                  

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Mr President, dear people of Europe, I would like to touch on two main arguments that were brought before this House.
The first one is that all of this is an infringement within the competences of the Member States. I just ask those people: 'why do you think our beautiful flags are at that end of the room?' Because this whole thing here, this whole Union, is about giving competences to the Union instead of letting the Member States regulate that. Yes, we have to have discussions about this, but it will happen more and more and more, whether you like it or not. You can cry about sovereign nations all day. Those sovereign nations – all of them – decided to form this Union.
The second point is ideology. That just makes me smile, because while one part of the aisle just really wants to talk about the rights of people and self-determination and children's rights, the other ones are actually imposing religion – the religious idea that only a man and a woman can have a family and only a man and a woman can raise a child. If that's the baseline of your politics, please go back to 300 years ago.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


Christophe Hansen,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, as mentioned earlier, with this proposal, the Commission aims to ensure the continuity of parenthood status between Member States so that all children can fully enjoy their rights in all Member States for all purposes.
By requiring the recognition of parenthood, Union law does not interfere with the Member States substantive family law, which is a competence of the Member States. However, with the proposal, Union law would require the Member States' mutual recognition of parenthood beyond the existing rights under free movement law, to strengthen all children's rights in cross-border situations without leaving any child behind.
And, as Ms Bricmont rightly said, it is now up to the Member States to come to a conclusion and a mutual recognition. And that is where the ball lies now currently.
Parliament and the Member States, and the current and upcoming Council presidencies, can continue to count on the full support of the Commission in the effort to reach a well-balanced solution in this essential piece of legislation for our citizens.
And please let me conclude by saying we should, in all our efforts, put the best interest of the children into the centre of the discussion, irrespective of who their biological or non-biological parents are.

President. – The debate is closed.
14.   Frozen Russian assets (debate)

President. – The next item is the debate on the Council and Commission statements on frozen Russian assets (20025/2570(RSP)).

Christophe Hansen,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this debate on Russian frozen and immobilised assets. As you may well know, the restrictive measures on these assets are a key element of the sanctions adopted by the EU in close cooperation with Western partners against Russia.
Let me first clarify upfront that Russian assets are subject to different restrictive measures, depending on whether they are public or private assets and on their ultimate owner. As part of the sanctions imposed by the EU on Russia in response to its war of aggression against Ukraine, the assets of the Central Bank of Russia held by financial institutions in the Member States have been immobilised since February 2022. The immobilised sovereign assets held in the EU are worth EUR 210 billion and represent the largest share of such immobilised assets worldwide. This is the most relevant and sizeable part of the Russian assets under EU sanctions, for the purposes of today's debate.
In May 2024, EU Member States agreed to set aside the extraordinary profits of Russian immobilised assets and to use them for the benefit of Ukraine. The assets and reserves of the Central Bank of Russia should remain immobilised until Russia pays for the damage it has caused to Ukraine. The position has been repeatedly affirmed by the G7 countries and the European Union.
The prohibition of transactions on these assets generates an extraordinary cash accumulation on the balance sheets of central security depositories. EU central securities depositories prudently manage the cash balances and thereby earn an interest income. These extraordinary and unexpected profits could reach about EUR 3 billion per year, after tax of course, subject to the prevailing level of interest rates. These interest revenues and profits do not constitute sovereign assets and do not have to be made available to the Central Bank of Russia under applicable rules, even after immobilisation ends.
The decision to re-allocate the interest, revenues and profits to support Ukraine is made within the windfall contribution framework, which was adopted in 2024 following thorough discussions in the ad hoc Council working party established for that same purpose. This allowed us to take the necessary implementing actions to fulfil the commitments made by the European Council and the G7 leaders to provide Ukraine with approximately EUR 45 billion in loans, to be repaid by future flows of extraordinary revenues from immobilised Russian assets. This money will be used to support Ukraine's urgent budgetary, military and reconstruction needs.
As part of the G7-led extraordinary revenue acceleration (ERA) loans initiative, in January 2025, the European Commission disbursed the first EUR 3 billion tranche of its exceptional macro-financial assistance loan for Ukraine, which will be repaid with the proceeds from immobilised assets of the Central Bank of Russia in the EU. Additional disbursements will follow throughout this year, bringing total support to some EUR 18 billion.
The Commission warmly thanks the European Parliament for its swift action to approve this MFA loan. This underscores the unwavering commitment of the EU and its G7 partners to support Ukraine in its fight for its freedom, recovery and reconstruction.
There have been calls in the past to proceed towards the confiscation of these immobilised assets. This is being discussed with Member States and with our international partners currently. The Commission remains open to discuss any legally and financially sound options to continue pressuring Russia to stop its war of aggression. At this stage, the Commission's priority is to operationalise the G7 ERA loans and to make available funding to Ukraine.

Michael Gahler,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, thank you very much, colleagues, Commissioner, in our resolution today, we demanded the substance of the frozen assets and not only the windfall profits.
States have an obligation under international law to make reparation for internationally wrongful acts. The Permanent Court of International Justice held that it is a principle of international law, and even a general conception of law, that any breach of an engagement involves an obligation to make reparation.
The articles on state responsibility for international wrongful acts of the United Nations International Law Commission provide that the responsible state is under an obligation to make full reparation for the injury caused by the internationally wrongful act. Such reparation must, as far as possible, wipe out all the consequences of the illegal act and re-establish the situation, which would in all probability have existed if that act had not been committed, and includes reparation for both material and moral damage. The obligation to provide reparation can be invoked by any state under international law.
The General Assembly of the United Nations has already recognised that Russia must bear the legal consequences of all of its internationally wrongful acts, including making reparation for the injury, including any damage caused by such acts.
I am aware we are not at war with Russia, so we cannot directly do it. But the point is that Russia has caused not only to Ukraine, but also to us so much damage in costs of that aggressive act that we, I would say, are in a position to claim it also from Russia. So, let's get hold of the substance.

Raphaël Glucksmann,
au nom du groupe S&D. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, il est louable et nécessaire de répéter que nous soutiendrons la résistance ukrainienne aussi longtemps qu'il le faudra, mais c'est encore mieux de le prouver. Les Européens doivent envoyer un signal puissant à Moscou et à Washington et montrer que nous pouvons pallier le soutien américain, si fragile. Les Européennes et les Européens le savent: ce soutien n'est pas simplement un acte de solidarité vis-à-vis de l'Ukraine; c'est un acte qui permettra d'assurer la sécurité de notre continent.
               

                  Alors, comment expliquer que 210 milliards d'avoirs publics russes soient toujours gelés en Europe actuellement? L'argument juridique contre leur saisie ne tient pas, parce que le droit international prévoit des contre-mesures légitimes à condition qu'elles soient proportionnelles et réversibles. La Russie devra payer des réparations: il s'agit donc d'un acompte, qui est parfaitement proportionnel.
               

                  La seule raison de notre inaction, c'est notre faiblesse politique, et cela, Moscou et Washington l'ont extrêmement bien compris.
               

Hermann Tertsch,
en nombre del Grupo PfE. – Señor presidente, la criminal invasión rusa en Ucrania ha causado una colosal devastación en todo el país agredido. Ucrania va a necesitar planes masivos y un titánico esfuerzo inversor. Es lógico que muchos países quieran que se utilicen para ello los depósitos del agresor, de Rusia, para compensar al agredido, que es Ucrania.
               

                  A finales de 2023 había inmovilizados en Occidente unos 335 000 millones de dólares en depósitos rusos, aparte de los intereses que se han ido generando y que se han gastado en diferentes cuestiones. Para dedicarlos a estos fines de reconstrucción, todos estos fondos inmovilizados tendrían que ser confiscados. Hay países que se oponen a ello.
               

                  Todo el contexto internacional en el que se baraja este dilema ha cambiado radicalmente en dos meses. Con un alto el fuego a la vista y unas complejas negociaciones que incluirán infinidad de factores, cabe sospechar que los depósitos entrarán automáticamente, en gran parte, en materia de negociación.
               

                  La prioridad ahora es acabar con la guerra y también en este campo se va a quedar por el camino gran parte de los anhelos de justicia. Pero hay una clara necesidad de que esté en la mesa alguna forma de compensación —también con esos depósitos— por una agresión que sabemos que nunca se castigará como merece.
               

Johan Van Overtveldt,
namens de ECR-Fractie. – Voorzitter, commissaris, collega's, de brute aanval van Rusland op Oekraïne kan uiteraard niet onbestraft blijven. Het is onze plicht om de frozen assets doordacht en strategisch te gebruiken om de druk op Poetin maximaal op te voeren. Wat we echter niet kunnen en niet mogen doen is regelrechte confiscatie. En dit om minstens twee redenen. Ten eerste, als we dat doen, verliezen we een cruciale onderhandelingshefboom om Poetin tot concessies te dwingen. Ten tweede, en belangrijker, deze middelen zonder meer in beslag nemen is in alle opzichten een complexe operatie met veel onzekerheden. Bijvoorbeeld wat betreft de ware herkomst van de bevroren middelen. Ook zijn er vele neveneffecten. Een dergelijke ingreep, een regelrechte confiscatie, zou bijvoorbeeld Euroclear in een juridisch moeras kunnen trekken, met, geloof me, rampzalige gevolgen voor onze economische en financiële stabiliteit. Laat ons niet in die val trappen. Strategische wijsheid is net zo belangrijk als kracht en volharding.
               

Petras Auštrevičius,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, the freezing and use of the Russian assets is as inevitable as a paradigm of Fyodor Dostoevsky's novel Crime and Punishment. Russia's illegal, unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression against Ukraine, and the losses and damage caused to Ukraine and its people, are among the necessary reparations of the Russian side. International law supports this obligation. Humanity demands it.
The state assets of Russia located abroad must be used directly for the needs of Ukraine to restore its urban and civil infrastructure, environment and property lost by the people. The use of interest from frozen Russian assets is good, but it's not enough to compensate for the losses suffered by Ukraine. Russian assets must be frozen and used either to directly compensate for the needs of Ukraine and reconstruction, or to become a guarantee when issuing state bonds or taking out the necessary loans.
I call upon the Member States to find and agree on a comprehensive legal approach.

Ville Niinistö,
Verts/ALE-ryhmän puolesta. – Arvoisa puhemies, Venäjän hyökkäys Ukrainaan oli törkeä kansainvälisen oikeuden rikkomus. Sen lisäksi Venäjä rikkoo Budapestin sopimusta, jossa se sitoutuu vastineeksi siitä, että Ukraina luopuu ydinaseista, turvaamaan sen itsenäisyyden ja vapauden. Venäjä rikkoo kansainvälistä oikeutta toistuvasti tekemällä sotarikoksia siviilejä vastaan. Euroopan unioni ja myös Euroopan neuvosto ovat kirjanneet toistuvat sotarikokset, joita Venäjä on tehnyt, ja on ilmiselvää, että myös YK:n päätösten pohjalta ja lainsäädännön pohjalta Venäjällä on velvollisuus korvata nämä vahingot.
               

                  Nyt me olemme tilanteessa, jossa on arvioitava se, miten laittomuuksien ketju pysäytetään. Meillä on eettinen ja moraalinen velvollisuus takavarikoida nyt Venäjän varat, jotka ovat jäädytettyinä, jotta me voimme estää laittomuuksien jatkumisen Ukrainassa. Voimme alistaa tämän päätöksen myöhemmin kansainvälisen erityistuomioistuimen harkintaan, joka arvioi Venäjän sotarikosten mittaluokkaa. Mutta on ilmeistä, että rikosten mittaluokka ja Venäjän korvausvastuu ylittää jopa 210 miljardin euron summan, joka on Euroopan hallussa, Venäjän keskuspankin varoja. Joten nämä on nyt takavarikoitava ja varmistettava, että Ukraina voi puolustaa oikeutta.
               

Merja Kyllönen,
on behalf of The Left Group. – Mr President, dear colleagues, history will remember how we responded in this moment. Will we stand firmly with Ukraine or will we waver? The answer must be clear. The European Union must step up. We have seen what is happening in the United States. Europe is the continent that Ukraine trusts.
Within the EU, we hold over EUR 200 billion in frozen Russian assets, most of which are government bonds. Unlocking these resources for Ukraine would strengthen not only its defence but also its positions in negotiations.
It is true that there are risks and legal obstacles associated with the transfer of these funds. As a Finn, living next to Russia, I cannot afford to hide behind legal technicalities. For this reason, I demand solutions that will allow us to transfer the funds to Ukraine, or who will be the next?

Alexander Jungbluth,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Eingefrorene russische Vermögenswerte sind nichts anderes, als Öl ins Feuer zu gießen. Dieses Vorgehen ist ein klares Signal, dass die EU sich zunehmend zu einer Kriegsunion entwickelt. Während die USA und andere Länder ernsthaft an Friedensverhandlungen zur Eindämmung des Konflikts arbeiten, sieht die EU Sanktionen, Waffenlieferungen und die Beschlagnahmung von Vermögenswerten vor. Die EU müsste zur Vernunft zurückfinden und als Verhandlungspartner auftreten, nicht als Möchtegernkrieger.
               

                  Bedenken Sie bitte eines: Mit der Maßnahme bestrafen Sie alle russischen Bürger im Kollektiv und bringen sie gegen die EU auf; das kann nicht das Ziel sein.
               

                  Ein Weiteres: Herr Gahler hat eben eine ganz große rechtliche Analyse vorgenommen, und er hat im Nebensatz genau das Richtige gesagt: Wir bewegen uns hier auf ganz dünnem rechtlichen Eis, wenn wir diese Vermögenswerte einfrieren. Wir werden hier rechtliche Schritte gegen uns haben, und wir werden diese rechtlichen Schritte verlieren. Wir haben wieder nur Risiken und keine Chancen.
               

                  Wahre Unterstützung für die Ukraine bedeutet, den Konflikt am Verhandlungstisch zu lösen, nicht durch Waffen und beschlagnahmtes Geld.
               

Sandra Kalniete (PPE). – Godātie kolēģi! Atgādināšu, ka Krievija šogad karam tērē 9 % procentus no IKP jeb 41 % no sava budžeta. Pašlaik Eiropas valstis tālu atpaliek, tāpēc mums ir jāapņemas aizsardzībai tērēt vismaz 3,5 % no katras valsts IKP. Mums neatliekami ir jāstiprina Ukrainas aizsardzības spējas. Tas ir visu Eiropas valstu interesēs, jo Ukrainā izšķiras, cik droša būs Eiropas nākotne.
               

                  Mums ir jāturpina militāri atbalstīt Ukrainu visiem iespējamiem līdzekļiem. Tāpēc neatliekami ir jāpieņem lēmums par Krievijas iesaldēto aktīvu izmantošanu Ukrainas apbruņošanai un atjaunošanai. Puspasākumu un kompromisu laiks ir beidzies. Eiropai ir jārīkojas ātri, vienoti un izlēmīgi. Liksim Putinam maksāt par agresijas noziegumu un izlietajām ukraiņu tautas asinīm.
               

Thijs Reuten (S&D). – Mr President, Commission, colleagues, Europe is sitting on hundreds of billions of frozen Russian assets, and I have great difficulty explaining all the objections and the excuses for not getting this sorted, despite the fact that Ukraine needs more money to defend itself from Russia's illegal aggression.
We have to see what happens next with the possible interim ceasefire, but our task of supporting Ukraine remains unchanged. And this must include seizing the frozen assets and providing them to Ukraine.
I do not need to quote the excellent research by Parliament's services on how to do it. We have been asking for a proposal for a long time. We need political will. Some are afraid of their own sovereign assets and the impacts on the eurozone. But imagine the impacts on the eurozone if we fail to support Ukraine to defend itself.
Our answer should be clear and simple: do not commit war crimes or the crime of aggression and your assets are safe. See it as a down payment on the reparations and the compensations. We have the option. Let's do it. Confiscate, and support Ukraine.

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


Lukas Sieper (NI),
blue-card question. – I wholeheartedly agree with what you just said. I was just wondering, in the very end, you said that it should be seen as a down payment on the reparations. Wouldn't you agree with me that the reparations should be on top? Because that is what Russia actually deserves for its behaviour.

Thijs Reuten (S&D),
blue-card answer. – Thanks for asking. No, what I mean, of course, is that the possible reparations or compensations will exceed this amount by far. But to reassure people who are afraid of taking this step, we can say: 'Look, the European Union, of course, guarantees that if Russia pays the full amount of reparations and compensations, then we will also look again at these assets.' Because then we will have no problem in making them available again. But I don't see that happening. I think we have to act now in the interest of Ukraine.

Michał Dworczyk (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowni Państwo! Od trzech lat rosyjskie rakiety niszczą ukraińskie miasta, zabijając cywilów, a działania wojenne zamieniają całe regiony w ruiny. Przez cały ten czas sojusznicy Ukrainy szukają środków finansowych, by wesprzeć ją w tej nierównej walce. Jednocześnie w zachodnich bankach leży prawie 300 miliardów dolarów zamrożonych rosyjskich aktywów. Pieniędzy, które mogłyby wesprzeć Ukrainę. Najwięcej tych środków znajduje się w Unii Europejskiej, która w kolejnych rezolucjach i dokumentach z upodobaniem podkreśla swoją rolę we wspieraniu Ukrainy. W rzeczywistości wsparcie Unii doskonale oddaje powiedzenie, że gdy Rosjanie zajmują kolejne terytoria Ukrainy, Unia Europejska zajmuje tylko stanowisko. Dlaczego od ponad 10 lat to zdanie wciąż jest aktualne? Dlaczego za słowami nie idą konkretne działania – prawdziwe, a nie tylko na papierze? Kwestia zamrożenia rosyjskich aktywów to kolejny dobitny przykład takiego papierowego działania. Istnieją mechanizmy prawne pozwalające na przekazanie tych funduszy na pomoc Ukrainie. Rosja nie ma żadnych moralnych ani prawnych podstaw, by żądać zwrotu tych pieniędzy. Dlatego apeluję do rządów państw, w których znajdują się rosyjskie aktywa: nadszedł czas, by działać. Musimy przekazać pierwsze miliardy już teraz. Każdy dzień zwłoki oznacza więcej ofiar na Ukrainie.
               

Nathalie Loiseau (Renew). – Monsieur le Président, on entend beaucoup de choses sur les avoirs russes gelés, notamment que leur confiscation serait illicite. Je conseille la lecture de ‘La responsabilité de l'État pour fait internationalement illicite’, document que la commission du droit international des Nations unies a adopté en 2001. Ce document reconnaît à un État agressé le droit de prendre, à l'encontre de l'État agresseur, des contre-mesures en réparation des dommages causés.
               

                  La responsabilité de la Fédération de Russie en tant qu'État agresseur vient d'être rappelée par l'Assemblée générale des Nations unies, et il ne fait pas de doute que l'Ukraine est en droit de prendre des contre-mesures en guise de réparation. Ce serait donc à l'Ukraine d'agir; mais, voilà, les avoirs russes se trouvent ailleurs, notamment chez nous. Nous ne pouvons pas les saisir nous-mêmes, mais nous pouvons prêter à l'Ukraine un montant équivalent à ces avoirs, garanti par la revendication ukrainienne de recevoir réparation de la part de la Russie.
               

                  Quant à ceux qui craignent de faire fuir les investisseurs, je voudrais leur rappeler que lesdits investisseurs nous ont vus geler les avoirs russes. Ils savent à quoi s'en tenir et ne se sont pas enfuis. Nous leur avons passé un message clair et, je crois, salutaire: on n'envahit pas impunément son voisin.
               

                  Vous le voyez, chers collègues, tout est affaire de volonté politique. Quand il y a une volonté, il y a un chemin. Alors, prenons ce chemin sans attendre.
               

Sergey Lagodinsky (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, colleagues, let me be blunt. I have not been an outspoken proponent of confiscating frozen Russian assets in the past due to its legal sensitivity.
But times have changed. In our new world, where the United States is joining the side of Moscow and stepping back, the EU has no other choice but to take responsibility. We cannot afford to be hesitant.
The EU needs to fill the void. The calculation is very simple. What we have is not enough – not for Ukraine, not for our own security – and the responsibility of Moscow will probably never materialise if Washington joins and supports them. The compensation will probably never come. The tribunal will now materialise, but the damages remain.
Under those circumstances, the solution is clear. We must prepare now to confiscate USD 300 billion in frozen assets, so we can act in the moment as needed. This means the EU must find a legally secure solution to make the frozen assets of the Russian central bank available to Ukraine and to us.

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


Maximilian Krah (NI),
Frage nach dem Verfahren der ‘blauen Karte’
                     . – Den Wandel – interessant zu sagen, wegen der amerikanischen Haltung müssten wir jetzt konfiszieren. Der amerikanische Außenminister hat heute erklärt, dass die Freigabe der russischen Finanzmittel Teil eines Friedensdeals sein wird. Besteht damit nicht die Gefahr, dass aufgrund einer internationalen Konferenz – und nur die wird dies am Ende entscheiden – die EU, wenn sie diese Mittel konfisziert, sie Russland erstatten muss? Und kann man vor dem Hintergrund allen Ernstes guten Gewissens hier solche Reden schwingen, wenn man weiß, dass man es am Ende aus dem eigenen Haushalt zurückzahlen muss, denn die Ukraine wird dazu nicht in der Lage sein?
               

Sergey Lagodinsky (Verts/ALE),
Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der ‘blauen Karte’
                     . – Das kann man sehr wohl, Herr Kollege. Das liegt daran, dass wir eine selbstbewusste Seite sind, und weil wir bereit sind, die 300 Milliarden auch einzusetzen, muss auch mit uns gesprochen werden. Und die Amerikaner müssen sich entscheiden: Es kann nicht sein, dass noch vor zwei Monaten Trump verlangt hat, dass wir dieses Geld konfiszieren, und jetzt wollen sie dieses Geld an Russland wieder zurückschenken – das spielen wir nicht mit.
               

                  Wenn Amerikaner und Russen mit uns verhandeln wollen, dann müssen Ukrainer und wir mit am Tisch sitzen, und dann werden wir über das Schicksal dieses Geldes entscheiden. Aber entscheidend ist: Wir müssen bereit sein, das Geld auch zu konfiszieren.
               

Рада Лайкова (ESN). – Г-н Председател, правото на собственост е основен стълб на западната цивилизация. Дори само обсъждането на конфискация на руски активи подкопава този принцип и изпраща изключително опасен сигнал и той е вашата собственост в Европейския съюз не е защитена, можем да я отнемем по всяко време.
               

                  Говорим за подобряване на капиталовите пазари, а в същото време се тестват механизми за заграбване на чужди активи. Как да привлечем инвестиции, ако заплашваме с конфискация? Ако милиарди чужди капитали напуснат Европа, кого ще накажем повече Русия или самите нас? Това не е просто санкция, това е експроприация на експроприаторите в нова форма. Пролетарии от всички страни, обединете се и вземете каквото смятате за свое. Днес е Русия, а утре може да е друга държава или всеки един от нас.
               

                  Така Европейският съюз отваря кутията на Пандора и унищожава репутацията на Европа като надеждно място за инвестиции.
               

Ľuboš Blaha (NI). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, vážení kolegovia, keď fašisti na Slovensku vyvlastňovali majetok Židov počas druhej svetovej vojny, hovorili tomu arizácia. Dnes terčom nie sú Židia, ale Rusi. Keď im budete na etnickom princípe zmrazovať majetky, nazvete to takisto arizácia? Lebo o tom to je. Je to obyčajný fašizmus proti Rusom. Toto nie je cesta k mieru.
               

                  Európa sa mení na vojnovú ríšu, na Reich. Willy Brandt či Altiero Spinelli sa musia v hrobe obracať. Ja neverím vo vojnu ani v zbrojenie. Verím v dialóg a diplomaciu, a preto som bol minulý týždeň ako prvý poslanec Európskeho parlamentu v ruskom parlamente diskutovať s našimi ruskými partnermi tak z vládnej strany Jednotné Rusko, ako aj z opozičných strán vrátane Komunistickej strany a Liberálnodemokratickej strany. A odkazujem: Rusi sú pripravení na dialóg s Európou. Problém nie sú oni. Problém ste vy. Už ste ostali jediní na svete, kto odmieta mierový dialóg s Ruskom a stále rinčí zbraňami. My na Slovensku odmietame nenávisť voči Rusku a budeme ďalej chodiť viesť dialóg do Moskvy.
               

Michał Szczerba (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Dziś przyjęliśmy przełomową rezolucję dla przyszłości europejskiej polityki obronnej. To nie tylko uznanie Tarczy Wschód za wiodący projekt dla bezpieczeństwa Europy. W naszej rezolucji jest jasna deklaracja, że zamrożone aktywa rosyjskie, aktywa państwowe muszą być natychmiast wykorzystane dla obrony Ukrainy. To nie czas na półśrodki. Dość gadania, czas działać, bo chodzi również o wiarygodność Europy jako pewnego sojusznika.
               

                  Pieniądze państwa terrorystycznego muszą zostać przekazane Ukrainie. 300 miliardów euro może zmienić wynik tej wojny. Agresor musi ponieść odpowiedzialność za swoje niszczycielskie działania. Prawo międzynarodowe dopuszcza środki zaradcze. Unia musi wykorzystać wszystkie możliwości prawne. Wzywamy do natychmiastowego przekazania rosyjskiego kapitału Ukrainie. Ukraina, mając te środki, osłabia zdolność Rosji do prowadzenia wojny i odstrasza od przyszłych agresji. Unia Europejska musi działać zdecydowanie i opóźnienie tylko ośmiela Kreml. Sprawiedliwość wymaga, aby to agresor, a nie europejscy podatnicy, ponieśli koszty obrony Ukrainy.
               

Marina Kaljurand (S&D). – Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, I deeply regret that so far there has not been a formal decision on the seizure of Russia's immobilised central bank assets. Repeatedly, we hear from the Council and Commission that they have not found a legally sound way to use the seized assets. My advice is very simple: try harder.
Try harder to find a political willingness as well as a solution compatible with the rule of law principles. Russia has to pay for the violation of international law and the UN Charter, for causing immense human sufferings and destruction. Let me reiterate that customary international law, a state responsible for an international wrongful act must provide full reparation.
Commissioner, please come up with legally and financially sound proposals in order to use Russian frozen assets to compensate for the damages inflicted by Russia's actions. The sooner, the better. Ukraine is waiting.

Karin Karlsbro (Renew). – Herr talman! Kommissionen! Kära kollegor! Rysslands krig mot Ukraina har ett mycket högt pris. Kostnaderna kan mätas i många dimensioner, i skador och förluster för hela samhället och enskilda människor, ytterst människoliv. Det är ingen annan än Ryssland som ska betala för det krig man valt att starta när man invaderar ett fredligt grannland.
               

                  I höstas beslutade vi att skicka avkastningen av de frysta ryska tillgångarna till Ukraina. Nu är det dags att ta nästa steg och frigöra själva tillgångarna som bara i Europa uppgår till runt 200 miljarder euro. Europas finansiella institutioner och marknader ska inte vara ett redskap för krigsherrar att säkra sina tillgångar i skydd av våra rättssystem. Ryssland ska betala! Slava Ukraini!
               

Alvise Pérez (NI). – Señor presidente, bueno, en fin, expropiar a la gente solo por ser rusa… A mí no me caen bien los pelirrojos, podemos expropiarles a ellos también. ¡Qué circo! De verdad, ¡qué ganas tengo de alistarme e irme a morir a Ucrania! ¡Qué emoción! ¡Qué ganas tengo de darle más poder a estos burócratas de la Comisión Europea que jamás han sido elegidos por nadie directamente, pero que deciden por las vidas de todos!
               

                  Porque si algo nos falta en esta Unión Europea —con su inflación desbocada, con su industria en caída libre— es más centralización, más control, más obediencia ciega y más miles de millones de euros para las armamentísticas. Porque aquí no importa absolutamente nada la sangre de los ucranianos; importa hacer millonarias a las empresas armamentísticas.
               

                  Y qué ganas tengo, de verdad, de entender cómo es posible que Von der Leyen dijera hace dos años que Rusia solo tenía armamento de la Segunda Guerra Mundial. Pero ahora resulta que necesitamos congelar los fondos a todos los rusos para poder defendernos de una Rusia que tiene cuatro veces menos tanques que los europeos. En fin, ¡qué ironía! Con un tirano —¡tirano!— como es Putin, incapaz de conquistar más del 20 % de Ucrania…
               

                  Pero, sobre todo, lo digo de verdad, más que morir, ¡qué ganas tengo de acabar con este circo belicoso que se llama Unión Europea! Porque, si hay algo más peligroso que esta guerra, es dejar la Unión Europea en manos de burócratas, tiranos y asesinos, como todos ustedes.
               

President. – Please also take into consideration that interpretation is needed for your speeches. So if you speak too fast, it will be complicated for the interpretation.

Mika Aaltola (PPE). – Arvoisa puhemies, komission jäsen, tänään meillä on edessämme historiallinen mahdollisuus osoittaa oikeudenmukaisuutta ja päättäväisyyttä. Venäjä on hyökännyt Ukrainaan, rikkonut kansainvälistä oikeutta ja aiheuttanut mittaamatonta kärsimystä. Samaan aikaan Euroopassa lepää satoja miljardeja euroja Venäjän jäädytettyjä varoja – rahaa, joka on pysäytetty vastauksena tähän aggressioon.
               

                  Varat on siirrettävä Ukrainalle. Rikoksista seuraa vastuu, ja kerätyt varat voivat auttaa jälleenrakentamaan tuhottuja kaupunkeja ja vahvistamaan Ukrainan puolustusta. Tämä taasen tuottaa Euroopalle turvallisuutta. Jotkut saattavat pelätä eskalaatiota, mutta päättämättömyys on se, mikä rohkaisee sitä.
               

Francisco Assis (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, os tempos são de uma enorme exigência para a União Europeia. Esperam-se dela, hoje, todas as respostas e todas as soluções para os graves problemas do mundo.
               

                  Espera-se que ela atue com prontidão imediata, que ela substitua, da noite para o dia, aqueles que, como é o caso dos Estados Unidos, recuaram nos seus compromissos com a segurança, com a ajuda humanitária. E muitos dos que, ainda há pouco, eram europeístas apressam-se, à primeira contrariedade, a retratar a UE como fraca ou falhada.
               

                  Mas a verdade é claramente outra. Desde a crise pandémica, e ainda com a mesma armadura jurídica do Tratado de Lisboa, a União Europeia tem estado à altura de circunstâncias dificílimas. Tem agido, tem respondido, tem-se reinventado.
               

                  Ainda agora, perante as ameaças à segurança que se desenham no horizonte, a União Europeia concebeu um plano de 800 mil milhões de euros para se rearmar. Ainda agora, a União Europeia prepara-se para responder à hostilidade tarifária do seu velho aliado com um pacote de pesadas tarifas.
               

                  A notícia de um cessar-fogo de 30 dias na Ucrânia é um pequeno alívio, mas nada está garantido quando, do outro lado, há um interlocutor sem palavra: Vladimir Putin.
               

                  Por isso, a União Europeia não pode baixar a guarda. A Ucrânia está enfraquecida e nós temos de ter a coragem de usar os 200 mil milhões de bens russos congelados nos nossos territórios para manter à tona a capacidade de os ucranianos garantirem a sua independência e os valores democráticos que partilham connosco.
               

Arkadiusz Mularczyk (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Jako autor raportu o stratach wojennych Polski podczas II wojny światowej wiem, jak kluczowe są środki na odbudowę kraju po wojnie. Polska nigdy nie otrzymała planu Marshalla, a Niemcy do dzisiaj uchylają się od zapłacenia Polsce reparacji wojennych. Skutki wojny są odczuwalne przez dekady i tak samo się będzie działo w przypadku Ukrainy, jeśli nie podejmiemy realnych działań. Dziś historia się powtarza. To opieszałość unijnych instytucji oraz rządów niektórych unijnych krajów z przekazaniem zamrożonych rosyjskich aktywów. Tylko sama Belgia ma 250 mld euro, które zamiast leżeć na kontach, powinny trafić na odbudowę Ukrainy. Apelujemy do Komisji Europejskiej, do Rady Europejskiej o podjęcie stosownych działań. Wojna niszczy na pokolenia. Jeśli nie działamy teraz, skazujemy Ukrainę i jej społeczeństwo na dekady strat i stagnacji. Nie pozwólmy, by historia II wojny światowej ponownie stała się lekcją, której nikt nie odrobił.
               

Dan Barna (Renew). – Domnule președinte, după rușinosul comportament al președintelui Trump față de președintele Zelenskîi, Uniunea Europeană nu mai are astăzi niciun fel de scuză.
               

                  Utilizarea activelor rusești înghețate în Europa pentru finanțarea și sprijinul Ucrainei este o consecință firească și o chestiune de justiție, dreptate și necesitate strategică. Pentru cine mai are încă vreo dilemă, nu vorbim de confiscare pe criterii de rasă, așa cum tocmai ne-a spus extrema dreaptă că au făcut naziștii. Victimele nazismului nu au fost agresorii nimănui. Vorbim de răspundere, așa cum fiecare dintre noi răspundem pentru ceea ce facem, așa și Putin trebuie să răspundă pentru, să nu uităm, invazie și război, pentru că acesta este adevărul.
               

                  Folosirea activelor rusești va transmite și un mesaj clar: agresiunea nu poate rămâne nepedepsită în Europa. Acesta este un continent al egalității și statului de drept, iar din punct de vedere strategic, o Ucraină victorioasă în acest război, și apoi o țară suverană, stabilă și reconstruită, sunt esențiale pentru securitatea Europei.
               

                  Refuzul sau ezitarea de a folosi aceste active sunt echivalente cu renunțarea la principiile fundamentale ale Uniunii din care facem parte.
               

(Președintele a retras cuvântul vorbitorului)


Markus Ferber (PPE). – Herr Präsident! Russland hat mit seinem brutalen Angriffskrieg unermessliches Leid über die Ukraine gebracht. Gleichzeitig lagern in der Europäischen Union eingefrorene russische Vermögenswerte in der Höhe von rund 200 Milliarden Euro nur allein von der Zentralbank. Es ist schlichtweg eine Frage der Gerechtigkeit, dass dieses Geld zur Unterstützung der Ukraine genutzt wird.
               

                  Es gilt das Verursacherprinzip: Wer Zerstörung verursacht, muss auch für die Beseitigung der Folgen aufkommen. Die Nutzung dieser Vermögenswerte wäre ein klares Signal: Aggression zahlt sich nicht aus. Natürlich müssen rechtliche Fragen sorgfältig geprüft werden, aber wir dürfen uns nicht hinter bürokratischen Hürden verstecken, während die Menschen in der Ukraine um ihr Leben kämpfen.
               

                  Bei der Nutzung eingefrorener russischer Vermögenswerte handelt es sich um eine Ausnahmesituation. Wenn es nämlich die Hürde ist, dass man einen illegalen Angriffskrieg beginnen muss, damit staatliche Vermögenswerte konfisziert werden, hängt die Latte sehr hoch, und die Märkte sind auch in der Lage, das zu verstehen. Mit diesen Eventualitäten muss sich der normale Investor nicht beschäftigen, wir schaden Europa damit nicht.
               

Pina Picierno (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il sostegno dell'Europa all'Ucraina non si concretizza soltanto nell'assistenza militare ma ha una sua fondamentale estensione nelle sanzioni e nella confisca degli asset russi.
               

                  E occorre fare di più per far applicare le sanzioni negli Stati membri, per aumentare gli strumenti legislativi per permettere l'azione incisiva contro il dumping e contro il riciclaggio.
               

                  L'economia russa nel corso di questi anni di guerra ha trovato, lo sappiamo, nuove vie di approvvigionamento e di aggiramento delle sanzioni, anche attraverso strumenti di criptovalute o di società fantasma.
               

                  E noi abbiamo la necessità di reperire risorse, sia per le necessità belliche dell'Ucraina, sia per quelle di sostentamento sociale. E gli asset che l'Unione europea ha congelato devono essere messi a disposizione di queste esigenze subito. Occorre farlo subito, prima che tra le possibili concessioni di Donald Trump a Putin vi sia un allentamento drammatico delle sanzioni.
               

Anna-Maja Henriksson (Renew). – Arvoisa puhemies, komission jäsen, yli kolmen vuoden ajan Venäjän hyökkäyssota Ukrainaa vastaan on aiheuttanut käsittämätöntä kärsimystä, kuolemaa ja tuhoa. Ukrainalaiset eivät taistele vain oman vapautensa puolesta, vaan myös meidän koko Euroopan puolesta joka päivä.
               

                  Pakotteiden seurauksena EU:ssa on tällä hetkellä jäädytettynä yli 200 miljardia euroa venäläisiä varoja. Viime syksynä teimme tärkeän päätöksen alkaa rahoittaa Ukrainan tukemista niiden tuotoilla.
               

                  Nyt on korkea aika, että myös pääoma käytetään Ukrainan hyväksi. Komission on nyt löydettävä tie eteenpäin, koska Venäjä jatkaa kansainvälisen oikeuden loukkaamista joka päivä, ja se ei ole oikein. Sen sijaan on oikein, että näitä jäädytettyjä varoja käytetään ja että hyökkääjä joutuu maksamaan.
               

Davor Ivo Stier (PPE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, if the question is 'What is the legal basis for seizing the frozen assets of the Russian Federation?' let me draw your attention to one of the resolutions of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. All our countries are members of the Council of Europe. That was adopted actually here in this very place in June last year. I know it because I was the rapporteur there. And in paragraph 15.3, we explained why the seizure and repurposing of Russian state assets would constitute lawful countermeasures under international law against the Russian Federation's aggression against Ukraine and explained why is this proportionate and how it all works.
So, the legal basis is there. Obviously, it is then a political decision whether to activate it or not. But at a time when we are discussing what is the role of the European Union in seeking a just peace for Ukraine, I think this is giving us the leverage we need to pursue that path of a just peace for Ukraine.

Niels Fuglsang (S&D). – Hr. Formand! Kære kommissær, ærede kollegaer. I over 3 år har Ukraine kæmpet med at forsvare sit land fra en ulovlig og uprovokeret invasion. I over 3 år har Ukraine kæmpet mod tyranni og for frihed, og helten Zelenskyj har stået op mod diktatoren og aggressoren, Putin, og i EU har vi stået bag ham, støttet ham, og det bliver vi ved med. Det er en kæmpe uret, som er blevet begået, og som bliver begået – et overgreb af dimensioner. Og fra EU's side har vi støttet Ukraine med over 100 milliarder kroner, og mere er på vej. Men derudover er der også de mange penge, som ligger i Europa i form af indefrosne russiske aktiviteter – over 15 hundrede milliarder kroner. Nogle af pengene kommer fra oligarker, men langt de fleste kommer fra det russiske regime direkte. Putin er i gang med at smadre et land. Det skal han betale for, og derfor mener jeg, det er på tide, at vi forholder os til dette, om ikke vi skal bruge de indefrosne aktiviteter til at genopbygge Ukraine. Det er Putin, der skal betale. Det er ikke Ukraines befolkning. Lad os komme i gang med det.
               

Dainius Žalimas (Renew). – Mr President, dear colleagues, lex semper dabit remedium - the law must always provide appropriate remedies against any breach. This maxim fits the best in seeking the legal solution on the frozen Russian assets.
The legal and moral imperatives in this case, indeed, are more than clear. There is no doubt that Russia, as an aggressor, must stop the war and provide the full reparation to Ukraine. There is also no doubt that the war of aggression is the grossest possible breach of international law. Therefore, other states must cooperate in bringing to an end the aggression. This cooperation includes legitimate countermeasures.
This is the answer as to how to justify under international law the use of frozen Russian assets for self-defence and the reconstruction of Ukraine. We must weigh what has to be safeguarded: the sovereign immunity of the aggressors' assets or the survival of a victim, independent and democratic state of Ukraine, as well as the whole rules-based international order.
Therefore, Europe must be decisive by developing progressively international law with the decision to transfer frozen Russian assets to Ukraine at the account of future reparations. Let us ensure that the aggressor always pays.

Łukasz Kohut (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! To Rosja jest agresorem i to za jej zamrożone aktywa powinno się odbudowywać niezależną, suwerenną, demokratyczną i proeuropejską Ukrainę. Przekażmy rosyjskie pieniądze, tak jak zrobili to Brytyjczycy. Cieszę się bardzo, że to właśnie dziś, w 26. rocznicę przystąpienia Polski do NATO, my tutaj w Parlamencie Europejskim przegłosowaliśmy ważne wzmocnienie wspólnej polityki obronnej Europy.
               

                  I w ramach tego dokumentu przegłosowaliśmy ważny zapis uznający Tarczę Wschód za flagowy projekt dla wspólnego bezpieczeństwa całej Unii Europejskiej. I maski dzisiaj opadły. Posłowie PiS-u i Konfederacji ręka w rękę z putinistami z AfD i od Orbana nie zagłosowali za tym dokumentem. To nie jest Duma, to jest Parlament Europejski. Powtórzę więc jeszcze raz. Zamrożone rosyjskie aktywa powinny być wykorzystane w odbudowie Ukrainy. Odwagi, Europo!
               

Catch-the-eye procedure


Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario Hansen, este debate sobre la confiscación de los activos rusos ha estado presidido por la conciencia viva de este Parlamento Europeo de haber hecho cuanto estaba en su mano para ayudar a Ucrania frente a una guerra de agresión de Rusia —que, por cierto, es un crimen internacional cuya jurisdicción corresponde a la Corte Penal Internacional como ha declarado también este Parlamento—.
               

                  Hemos apoyado la congelación de 250 000 millones de euros y estamos dispuestos a apoyar el objetivo político, a dar una base jurídica sólida, modificando el Reglamento, que permita transformar la congelación en confiscación. Pero esto afecta no solamente a la política exterior y de seguridad y defensa, sino también al mercado interior en su variante de mercado financiero. Por tanto, hay que hacerlo con toda la seguridad jurídica, que es lo que marca la diferencia con cualquier arbitrariedad y crea un régimen jurídico permanente.
               

                  Así, este precedente —que permite efectivamente financiar la reconstrucción necesaria de Ucrania y cumplir, por tanto, el pronóstico de que apoyaremos a Ucrania as much as it takes, no solamente as long as it takes— tiene continuidad y lanza un mensaje al mundo de que estamos dispuestos a confiscar los activos ante…
               

(el presidente retira la palabra al orador)


Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Mr President, over EUR 200 billion in frozen Russian assets. Assets that could make a real difference on the battlefield. Assets that hold the power of life and death have been gathering dust in European bank vaults for a third year in a row.
I ask: what are we waiting for? Last May, more than two years after the war began, Member States agreed to use the profits from these frozen assets for Ukraine's benefit. Even this decision took ages. The decision to use the frozen assets was postponed, waiting for potentially darker days.
Now, if ever, is the moment. Europe's slowness is a real threat to our own security. If we truly want to show our support for Ukraine and defend our continent, Russia's frozen assets must be released for Ukraine's use.
Tough times call for tough measures.

Eugen Tomac (Renew). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, Rusia niciodată nu a respectat regulile, cum nu le respectă în prezent, așa cum nu le-a respectat nici acum un secol, când a confiscat întregul tezaur al României.
               

                  Mă adresez, domnule comisar, către Comisie, pentru că în urmă cu un an de zile am votat aici, în Parlamentul European, o rezoluție privind confiscarea în mod ilegal a întregului tezaur al Băncii Naționale a României de către Rusia.
               

                  Comisia are obligația să utilizeze inclusiv acest instrument prin care sunt blocate activele Federației Ruse în Europa, pentru a putea recupera ceea ce ne aparține. Tezaurul Băncii Naționale a României a fost în mod ilegal reținut în Rusia, și cred că este extrem de important să ne putem recupera bunurile.
               

                  Sper că Comisia va înțelege mesajul politic pe care l-am transmis anul trecut aici, cu o largă majoritate în Parlamentul European, când am cerut să fie restituit tezaurul Băncii Naționale a României.
               

Barry Andrews (Renew). – Mr President, Commissioner Hansen, I want to add my voice of support to the argument for the use of immobilised Russian assets for Ukraine. At the very least, we should assert the legal right to seize those assets and apply them to the reconstruction of Ukraine.
I have to say, I find it very hard to take seriously the sovereign right argument made by Russia and its sympathisers, in circumstances where Russia has demonstrated a complete and consistent disregard for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of its neighbours. It would be a proportional response by the EU to apply these assets to Ukraine, given the estimated EUR 500 billion in damage done to Ukraine's economy.
I have to say that I am informed that the Irish Government will bring forward legislation in the next two weeks called the Criminal Justice Violation of EU Restrictive Measures Bill.
The legal basis for the use of these assets is sound and made out by other speakers. All that remains is for us to send a strong political signal reinforcing the international norm against aggression.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


Christophe Hansen,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, I believe that the discussion today has clearly shown that we need to continue to show our unwavering support to Ukraine. With the support by Europe and our partners, Ukraine will be in a position to achieve a just and lasting peace.
For this reason, the assets of the Central Bank of Russia shall remain immobilised until Russia pays for the damage it has caused in Ukraine. The Commission fully supports exploring all possible avenues to aid Ukraine in obtaining compensation from Russia, consistent with our respective legal systems and international law.
We need to continue to signal to Russia that our support to Ukraine will be sustained, broad-based and steadfast. Looking ahead, our priority is to work closely with international partners to ensure the successful completion of the IMF programme to guarantee that Ukraine has sufficient resources to counter Russia's aggression. This includes ensuring the full implementation of the G7 ERA loan initiative by all G7 partners in the coming months.
To conclude, let me also add that we need to be mindful of the challenges that lie ahead of us, especially in a context where the EU will need to step up its efforts to support Ukraine's defence and financial needs.
Thank you for letting have the opportunity to participate in this very important debate.

President. – The debate is closed.


Written Statements (Rule 178)



Rihards Kols (ECR),
in writing. – Russia's frozen assets must be seized and used to support Ukraine. Asset seizure is not just a moral obligation but a strategic necessity. If we were able to adjust legal frameworks to freeze these assets, we can – and must – take the next step toward confiscation. Anything less undermines accountability and sets a dangerous precedent that aggression and genocide can go unpunished.
Ukraine's reconstruction costs are now estimated at EUR 383 billion, and they continue to rise as Russia's brutal war of destruction persists. Meanwhile, Russia's Central Bank assets frozen in the EU and G7 amount to approximately EUR 300 billion. These funds rightfully belong to the victims of this war – not to the regime that launched it. Seizing even a portion of these assets would provide significant relief for Ukraine's rebuilding efforts, without shifting the financial burden onto Western taxpayers.
Directing tax revenues from frozen Russian assets to Ukraine sets an example of how these funds can be mobilised for justice. But this is not enough: we need a coordinated effort to seize the principal assets themselves.
Europe must act. Justice demands action. Russia must pay for the devastation it has caused. Seize Russia's frozen assets and ensure they serve Ukraine's recovery.
15.   Accelerating the phase-out of Russian gas and other Russian energy commodities in the EU (debate)

President. – The next item is the debate on the Commission statement on accelerating the phase-out of Russian gas and other Russian energy commodities in the EU (2025/2571(RSP)).

Dan Jørgensen,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, it has been three years since Ukraine was hit in the most atrocious way by Russia's unjustified aggressions. They are still ongoing. Three years where our continent has witnessed what we had believed was unthinkable.
Meanwhile, the geopolitical context has changed even more, and we are all aware that energy is at the heart of geopolitics at the moment. It is not a sustainable situation that can be justified over time for our continent to rely on energy imports as heavily as we do. We need a strategy to eliminate the imports of all fossil fuels, whatever their origin. It will make us safer and more resilient.
Our historic reliance on Russian imports left the EU exposed to the weaponisation of energy and consequent supply risks, enabling Russia to influence prices and harm our economy. As seen in the past, this behaviour has far-reaching consequences for Europe, sparking market volatility and threatening the stability of the EU's energy market.
In response to Russia's aggression against Ukraine in February 2022, and in line with the Versailles Declaration of Heads of State and Government, the Commission launched the REPowerEU plan in May 2022. The plan called for ending Europe's dependency on Russian energy by enhancing energy efficiency and accelerating the deployment of renewable energy and advised diversifying supply.
Since the start of the unjustified war of aggression of Russia and Ukraine, the EU has also adopted 16 sanction packages, including a ban on Russian coal and oil imports, and prohibited the reloading of Russian liquefied natural gas cargoes in EU ports.
EU sanctions also target Russian oil imports and significant progress has been made in this area. Russian oil now accounts for only 3 % of the EU's total oil imports – a notable decrease from the pre-war level of 25 %. Furthermore, as a result of the coordinated action between the Commission and Member States and the enhanced EU energy diplomacy with its international partners, gas imports – both LNG and pipeline – from Russia have already decreased from 45 % in 2021 to 19 % in 2024, and have been replaced by domestically produced renewable energy and supplies from more renewable sources. On top, the continuous implementation of the energy transition and the effects of the recently adopted affordable energy action plan are expected to have significant impacts and reduce gas imports even further.
A great achievement was also recently shown when the synchronisation of the Baltic states to the continental European electricity grid on 9 February was celebrated. This means that they are now fully independent from Russia's and Belarus's electricity systems and it shows that together we can achieve historical changes.
Similarly, due to the work with the Member States, we have ensured that security of supply would not be affected with the end of the Russian gas transit agreement through Ukraine in December 2024.
Last, on nuclear, the Commission has called to accelerate the efforts for diversification in line with the REPowerEU plan. We are also working with Member States and progress has already been made. Today, four out of the five Member States operating Russian-designed reactors have supply contracts in place with alternative suppliers of nuclear fuel. But we need to continue our diversification and further strengthen EU capabilities and cooperation with like-minded countries.
Honourable Members, our progress under REPowerEU has been substantial, but we must continue to work together to address the remaining imports while not creating new import dependencies. I am strongly committed to this.
The energy transition, through clean energy sources, energy efficiency, domestically produced renewable gases such as biogas and electrification, reduces our reliance on fossil fuels. It is imperative that we stop paying Russia for its energy exports, which are financing its unjustified war against Ukraine.
We continue working intensively to phase out remaining Russian energy import dependency, building on REPowerEU's progress. We are and will continue working closely with Member States to identify remaining challenges, to address them, and to put forward robust European solutions to protect our companies from paying contractual penalties to Russia.
The position of the European Parliament is also well heard. I can assure you that the work on the roadmap to phase out Russian energy imports is ongoing. I am sure that a coordinated European approach will ensure that we can effectively address the threat of Russia's weaponisation of energy and build a more resilient, decarbonised and diversified energy market.
So, dear Members of the European Parliament, I know most of you agree with me on these core principles. We shall stay united and defend our core values. I now look forward to this important debate and your ideas on how we can best join our efforts.

Sandra Kalniete,
PPE grupas vārdā. – Godātie kolēģi!
               

                  Ir sācies ceturtais kara gads, bet Eiropa vēl arvien pērk naftu un gāzi no Krievijas, tā finansējot agresiju pret Ukrainu. Arvien aktīvāk medijos tiek stāstīts, ka sankcijas nedarbojas, ka Eiropas interesēs ir atjaunot fosilo resursu importu no Krievijas. Satraucoši ir dzirdēt, ka ASV apsver daļēju sankciju atcelšanu Krievijas enerģijas sektoram.
               

                  Turpināt Krievijas enerģijas importu ir bīstami. Tas nav Eiropas interesēs. Tas ir bīstami, tas ir nedroši, tas kaitē Eiropas drošībai, ekonomikai, noturībai un videi.
               

                  Mēs Baltijas valstīs vairs nepērkam ne Krievijas gāzi, ne naftu, ne elektrību. Kopš februāra mēs esam pilnīgi atvienojušies no BRELL elektrotīkla un pievienojušies Eiropas tīklam. Baltijas valstis ir kļuvušas pilnīgi neatkarīgas no agresora.
               

                  Ticiet, mēs no savas pieredzes zinām, ka jebkura atkarība no agresora ir ievainojamība. Tā vājina Eiropu. Lai palielinātu Eiropas enerģētisko drošību, ir konsekventi jāturpina dažādot enerģijas resursus. Enerģijas importa palielināšana no Amerikas Savienotajām Valstīm var kļūt par tiltu, kas stiprina satricinātās transatlantiskās attiecības. Tas ir Eiropas un ASV interesēs.
               

Mohammed Chahim,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, every solar panel we place, every windmill we build, every heat pump we install weakens Vladimir Putin's war machine and should be seen as an act of resistance, because last year we imported Russian fossil fuels worth billions of euros. The sooner we step away, the better.
Relying on fossil fuels, on imports from abroad only prolongs price shocks, the blackmail and the uncertainty. We have seen it. One tweet from Trump, one incident in the Middle East, one natural disaster and the price rockets. With renewable energy and the energy independence we achieve, we protect ourselves from this uncertainty, so households no longer have to deal with gas price shocks and rising prices in the supermarkets. And we can finally benefit from cheap, reliable energy.
We have every reason to phase out Russian gas. The sooner the better.

Angéline Furet,
au nom du groupe PfE. – Monsieur le Président, la politique énergétique européenne actuelle est un leurre. Nous prétendons réduire notre dépendance au gaz russe, mais nous l'importons désormais via des pays tiers, qui se contentent de revendre à prix d'or ce qu'ils achètent à Moscou. Cette hypocrisie coûte cher à l'Europe. Nos industries paient des surcoûts insupportables, nos emplois sont menacés et notre souveraineté s'effrite. Pis, nous enrichissons des intermédiaires qui profitent de nos faiblesses, sans régler le fond du problème.
               

                  La solution n'est pas dans ces contournements, mais dans la relance immédiate de notre industrie énergétique. Pourquoi importer du gaz russe estampillé ‘Turquie’ ou ‘Inde’ quand nous avons en France le nucléaire, filière d'excellence créatrice d'emplois et garante d'indépendance? Pourquoi subventionner des intermédiaires douteux quand nous pourrions investir dans nos infrastructures, nos ressources locales et nos innovations?
               

                  Bruxelles doit cesser d'imposer des dogmes et libérer les États membres. Laissons-les développer des stratégies énergétiques réalistes, ancrées dans leurs réalités nationales. Protégeons nos entreprises, stabilisons les prix et bâtissons une Europe qui compte sur ses propres forces, et non sur les caprices des marchés tiers. La dignité européenne passe par l'audace industrielle, pas par des combines hypocrites.
               

IN THE CHAIR: JAVI LÓPEZ


Vice-President


Adam Bielan,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, Russia's war against Ukraine has exposed Europe's fundamental vulnerability: energy dependence. For too long, Russian gas has been a tool of blackmail, financing a regime that destabilises our continent.
The European Parliament has repeatedly called for stronger measures, full sanctions on Russian LNG, a ban on trans-shipments via EU ports, and a legal framework preventing companies from circumventing restrictions through intermediaries. These loopholes must be closed. As such, I deeply regret the European Commission's repeated postponement of its plan to fully phase out Russian natural gas imports by 2027.
We must accelerate diversification, securing reliable partners like Norway and the US, while investing in nuclear and hydrogen. At the same time, we must support the Member States most affected by this transition. Energy security cannot be achieved at the cost of economic hardship for our citizens. We a need targeted financial mechanism to help industries and households adapt. Finally, let us not sacrifice our industries on the altar of green ideology.

Sigrid Friis,
for Renew-Gruppen. – Hr. Formand! Tak og tak for gennemgangen for initiativer siden 2022. Vi må desværre konstatere, at der er meget arbejde foran os. Donald Trump, han havde ret i en ting, da han i sidste uge foran kongressen borede sin finger direkte ned i et åbent europæisk sår. Nemlig det, at vi siden krigen brød ud, har givet flere penge til Putin gennem vores import af gas og olie, end vi har givet til ukrainerne. 206 milliarder euro til Putins krigsmaskine. 135 milliarder til Zelenskyjs kamp for frihed. Og vi er jo enige om, at vi skal blive fri af Putins gas. Derfor har jeg svært ved at forstå, hvorfor vi ikke har handleplanen for at komme derhen. Det, selvom I har en målsætning om at slukke for Putins gas i Europa allersenest i 2027. Den plan burde ligge her, men er blevet forsinket grundet den geopolitiske situation. Men det er da netop på grund af den geopolitiske situation, at Europa skal stå mere i egen ret. Og det kan vi kun gøre ved at blive fri af fortidens fossile brændsler og skifte til vedvarende energikilder. Så kære Dan, hvor længe skal Donald Trump blive ved med at have ret?
                  

Virginijus Sinkevičius,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, it's unacceptable that despite some efforts since 2022, the EU continues to finance Russia's war of aggression in Ukraine through the purchases of Russian fossil fuels. And the stark reality is that some EU countries remain complicit in funding the very conflict we claim to oppose.
Just today, this House adopted two important resolutions, supporting Ukraine and regarding the defence white paper. So our continued reliance on Russian energy severely undermines our security.
It is unbelievable that EU spending on Russian fossil fuels exceeded its financial aid to Ukraine in 2024. On 1 January, Ukraine took a courageous step by cutting off Russian gas transit. Yet some countries still treat Russian gas as just another commodity. It's not; it's a weapon that is used to divide and weaken us. In 2025, the EU is still importing a significant amount of Russian pipeline gas and LNG, and this must end immediately, not by 2027.
Commissioner, you outlined it correctly. The phase-out of Russian gas is essential for our autonomy and defence, and that can be achieved by prioritising clean energy, by rapidly scaling up renewables and energy efficiency: this can reduce Russian gas imports quickly. Let us seize this moment to transform our energy landscape and stand firmly against Russian aggression.

Jonas Sjöstedt,
för The Left gruppen. – Herr talman! Det är inte bara klimatet som kräver att vi avvecklar beroendet av fossila bränslen. Rysslands export av olja och gas finansierar det brutala angreppskriget i Ukraina. Vi behöver en avvecklingsplan med datum (beställning till EU-kommissionen!) för användandet av fossila bränslen. Vi bör också göra klart att det blir inget återöppnande av Northstream framöver, som Ryssland sannolikt vill.
                  

                     Vi vill göra klart att sanktionerna mot Ryssland ska fortsätta så länge den sista kvadratmetern av ukrainsk jord inte har återlämnats till ett fritt Ukraina. Vi kan också göra mer när det gäller den ryska skuggflottan. Uppemot 50 % av den ryska råoljeexporten går nu via Östersjön, och den måste gå via danska eller svenska vatten på vägen ut till världsmarknaden. Vi kan tillsammans sätta stopp för det.
                  

Markus Buchheit,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Die Diversifizierung unserer Rohstoffverbindungen ist richtig und nötig und wäre schon viel früher erforderlich gewesen. Alleine, jetzt bei dieser Diskussion stellt sich mir die Frage, wer sich hier gegenübersitzt: auf der einen Seite diejenigen pragmatischen Politiker, die auch an eine Nachkriegsordnung denken wollen, und auf der anderen Seite, so scheint es zumindest, verbrämte Ideologen.
                  

                     Meine Damen und Herren, diejenigen, die zupacken wollen, die verändern wollen, die sehen, dass meine Partner von heute vielleicht nicht meine Partner von morgen sind, dass meine Feinde von heute vielleicht nicht meine Feinde von morgen sein werden: Wir müssen uns die Brücken und die Türen des Handels offenhalten. Wir können nicht noch mehr Embargos beschließen, jetzt, zu einer Zeit, wo Waffenstillstandsverhandlungen in der Ukraine in greifbare Nähe gerückt sind.
                  

                     Auch Russland braucht offene Türen. Wir hatten hier in diesem Hause einmal den Satz vom Wandel durch Handel, und das möchte ich jetzt nicht begraben sehen. Wir wollen nicht weitere Gräben aufmachen, wir wollen Gräben schließen. Wir müssen uns an morgen orientieren und müssen schauen, dass es auch eine Zeit nach diesem Konflikt geben wird.
                  

Pilar del Castillo Vera (PPE). – Señor presidente, gracias, comisario, por estar con nosotros. Efectivamente, en el año 2022 —como usted mismo ha comentado— la Declaración de Versalles nos llevó a comprometernos a eliminar gradualmente y lo antes posible las importaciones de gas, petróleo y carbón rusos. Y, como respuesta a ese compromiso también mencionado, ahora el plan REPowerEU ha permitido reducir la dependencia de gas y otros combustibles fósiles, de manera que, en el año 2023, las importaciones de gas ruso de la Unión caían por debajo del 15 %.
                  

                     Pero aún queda un largo camino por recorrer. Ese porcentaje que he mencionado no lo comparten todos los países. Lamentablemente, todavía faltan países, como el mío propio que sigue siendo uno de los principales compradores de gas. Está claro que necesitamos esfuerzos adicionales: continuar con la diversificación de suministros, fortalecer nuestras relaciones con socios fiables y explorar nuevas alianzas con otras regiones. Desde luego, también esperamos contar pronto con la hoja de ruta para la eliminación gradual del gas ruso que ha sido anunciada por la Comisión.
                  

(La oradora acepta responder a una pregunta formulada con arreglo al procedimiento de la ‘tarjeta azul’)


Nicolás González Casares (S&D),
pregunta de ‘tarjeta azul’
                        . – Señora del Castillo, comparto con usted buena parte del diagnóstico. Ha mencionado el suministro de gas ruso a España. Usted sabe —lo sabe mejor que yo— que buena parte es para surtir a Europa. Nosotros tenemos buena parte de las terminales de gas natural licuado y surtimos al resto de Europa. Pero ¿sabía usted que una de las principales empresas que importan gas ruso es propiedad en un 50 % del Gobierno de Galicia, de su partido? ¿Sabía usted eso? ¿Que el principal importador del noroeste de la península Ibérica es una empresa participada por un Gobierno de su partido?
                  

Pilar del Castillo Vera (PPE),
respuesta de ‘tarjeta azul’
                        . – (inicio de la intervención fuera de micrófono) … para comprobar estos datos que me está dando y que yo pueda también ofrecerle otros datos distintos, porque me parece que es lo que podemos hacer en este contexto de la pregunta que usted me hace. Así que, con mucho gusto, podemos compartir esos datos en otro momento.
                  

Niels Fuglsang (S&D). – Hr. Formand! 163 milliarder kroner. Så mange penge brugte vi i EU sidste år på at importere russisk energi. Det er 24 milliarder kroner mere, end vi brugte til at støtte Ukraine. Det er hårdt at se på, og derfor skal den russiske gas udfases så hurtigt som muligt. Det er allerede gået for langsomt, men det er klart, at vi skal ikke udskifte en afhængighed med en anden. Det nytter ikke at udskifte den russiske afhængighed med at blive afhængige af Saudi-Arabien eller Qatar eller USA for den sags skyld, når det kommer til gas og olie. Derfor tror jeg, at kommissærens plan er rigtig. Et rigtigt godt bud på, hvad vi skal gøre, nemlig mere vedvarende energi, mere energieffektivitet. Vi skal blive uafhængige, vi skal have vores egen energi i Europa. Det var den tyske vicekansler, der, da krigen brød ud, kaldte vedvarende energi for frihedsenergi. Det tror jeg stadig holder, og det tror jeg, det er den plan, som kommissæren lægger frem, som vi skal støtte os op af.
                  

Jana Nagyová (PfE). – Pane předsedající, omezování závislosti Evropské unie na dovážených energetických komoditách z Ruska je rozhodně v pořádku, ale je nutné vidět věci v souvislostech, jinak se střílíme do vlastní nohy a pomáháme agresorovi. Zemní plyn totiž není používaný jen jako energetická komodita, ale je základní složkou pro výrobu dusíkatých hnojiv. A ta v Evropě poslední roky skomírá. Proč? Jednoduchá matematika. Od roku 2020 cena emisní povolenky vzrostla trojnásobně, od roku 2021 raketově vzrostla cena zemního plynu – v současné době na 2,5násobek ceny před touto dobou – a za stejnou dobu začal výrazně narůstat dovoz ruských dusíkatých hnojiv. V tunách vyjádřeno se dovoz zdvojnásobil, za posledních pár let ho tady máme dvakrát tolik. Takže měníme jednu závislost za druhou, výrazně závažnější. A nutno v této souvislosti dodat, že dusičnan amonný je základním komponentem pro výrobu výbušnin.
                  

Mariateresa Vivaldini (ECR). – Signor Presidente, Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, condividiamo l'ambizione che emerge dall'Affordable Energy Action Plan di perseguire la sovranità energetica, considerando le specificità dei singoli Stati membri.
                  

                     Ci preoccupano però le strategie per realizzarla. Viviamo in un'epoca di contraddizioni, Commissario, e il fatto che la Francia abbia aumentato dell'81% i flussi di gas naturale liquefatto russo nel 2024 è una di queste, soprattutto se paragonata agli sforzi di Paesi come l'Italia per aprire nuovi canali di approvvigionamento.
                  

                     Ecco, non vorrei che queste contraddizioni contaminino l'obiettivo finale: staccarci per sempre dal gas russo. Ad oggi la Commissione ha annunciato e rinviato a data da destinarsi il piano per il phase out. Non indago sulle ragioni, ma non le sembra una contraddizione?
                  

                     Quanto alle soluzioni, le rinnovabili non bastano. Serve una strategia per il nucleare e investimenti in ricerca sulla fusione; serve l'idrogeno, servono i biocarburanti, serve il coraggio di estrarre le riserve di gas che abbiamo in Europa ma che non sfruttiamo.
                  

                     Coraggio, ecco, è la parola chiave: è la chiave per vincere quella che, a mio avviso, è una sfida epocale su cui si gioca l'esistenza stessa dell'Europa.
                  

Katri Kulmuni (Renew). – Mr President, if we wish honestly to be self-sufficient and independent in security, then defence isn't enough. The only way to be really self-sufficient, independent and strategically autonomous is to also be independent when it comes to local food and energy production.
While the EU doesn't pose significant fossil fuels, the only way to truly secure our backs is by strong independent defence, an independent and renewable energy sector and local food production.
And I hope that there are no forces here that wish to return to fossil energy, for as long as you rely on fossil-based energy solutions, one cannot be truly self-sufficient. Hopefully, not a single country wishes to be relying on Russian gas, but not only on Russian gas – the lifeline network with any other fossil energy producer is not promoting our European self-sufficiency neither.
So if you're going to be cold or dependent on imported food or armoury, as long you can be oppressed. And that is not the way forward for Europeans; the way forward is with strong defence, renewable energy and local food production.

Isabella Lövin (Verts/ALE). – Herr talman! Kommissionär Jørgensen! 206 miljarder euro. Mer än 2 300 miljarder svenska kronor. Så mycket har Ryssland tjänat på att exportera fossila bränslen till EU sedan krigets start. EU-länderna har alltså bidragit mer till Putins krigskassa än vad vi gett Ukraina i finansiellt stöd. Att kalla det en skandal är en underdrift.
                  

                     EU måste strypa kranarna omedelbart. Vi måste så snabbt som möjligt genomföra den gröna omställningen och investera i förnybar energi. Det handlar inte bara om klimatet. Det handlar om säkerheten och det handlar om freden i Europa. För med ena handen håller vi just nu på med en historisk upprustning. Med den andra handen ger vi pengar direkt till fienden och ökar hotet mot oss själva. Det måste vara nog med det nu.
                  

                     Tre år in i kriget kan vi fortfarande inte garantera att EU-pengar inte går till att bomba skolor i Ukraina. Importen av den ryska energin måste upphöra omedelbart. Allt annat är ett självskadebeteende.
                  

Станислав Стоянов (ESN). – Г-н Председател, прекъсването на руските енергийни доставки не е стратегическо решение. Това е погрешна и, както се доказа, неефективна мярка, която излага гражданите на високи цени и води към икономическа несигурност и дори деиндустриализация. Ако искаме стабилност, трябва да използваме всички налични ресурси – от природния газ до ядрената енергия и въглищата.
                  

                     Редица страни вече усещат последствията от грешната и неефективна енергийна политика на Европейския съюз, която доведе до рекордни цени на електроенергията и спъва икономическото развитие. Докато наказваме икономиките си, трети страни с охота приеха ресурсите, от които ние се отказахме. Трябва да бъдем прагматични. Европейският съюз не бива да следва лековато политики, които отслабват неговата конкурентоспособност и водят до обедняване. За да имаме икономическа стабилност, са ни необходими изгодни енергийни доставки. А за да се случи това, е крайно време европейската дипломация да се събуди. Време е да изберем отговорен път, който решава проблемите на континента, а не ги трупа.
                  

(Ораторът приема да отговори на въпрос ‘синя карта’)


Thomas Pellerin-Carlin (S&D),
blue-card question. – Good evening, honourable Stoyanov. In your speech, you said that we should have more production of natural gas in Europe. I wanted to ask you if you knew what is the percentage of the natural gas we consume in Europe today that we are actually able to produce in Europe today?

Станислав Стоянов (ESN),
отговор на въпрос, зададен чрез вдигане на синя карта. – Не сте ме разбрали правилно, не съм казал такова нещо в моето изказване. На всички е ясно, че Европа не е мащабен производител на природен газ.
                  

Erik Kaliňák (NI). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, pred tromi rokmi sme sa v EÚ rozhodli odstrihnúť od ruského plynu. 53-percentný pokles jeho dovozu oproti roku 2021 sme však nedosiahli inovatívnosťou či diverzifikáciou, ale rituálnym obetovaním nášho priemyslu. Trojnásobné ceny energií vyhnali chemického giganta BASF z Nemecka do Číny, vypli pece najväčšieho výrobcu ocele ArcelorMittal v Nemecku a Španielsku, zastavili produkciu hnojív v talianskej továrni Yara a na Slovensku padla za obeť naša najstaršia hlinikáreň v Žiari nad Hronom.
                  

                     Dámy a páni, takto nevyzerá energetická nezávislosť, ale ekonomická samovražda. A jediný dôvod, prečo ešte stále žijeme, je, že sme pokrytci a dovoz ruského skvapalneného plynu do EÚ za rovnaké obdobie stúpol o 61 %. Ja rozumiem vznešeným dôvodom, prečo sme toto rozhodnutie urobili v roku 2022. Ale svet nie je rozprávka. V skutočnosti rozhodujú fakty a čísla a tie hovoria jasne. Až tak jasne, že ešte aj Ukrajina po prerušení tranzitu ruského plynu rúrou z Východu musela začať nakupovať skvapalnený ruský plyn zo Západu. Prosím, začnime už vnímať realitu.
                  

Mika Aaltola (PPE). – Mr President, two years ago, Russia's brutal invasion of Ukraine demanded a unified European response. We declared a bold ambition to sever our dependency on Russian natural gas by 2027. Yet a stark reality reveals a troubling fact: we are falling short.
Russian LNG imports into EU have increased recently, according to some reports. This is not merely a statistical anomaly; it is a strategic vulnerability. Exemptions for pipeline crude oil and the insidious refining loophole continue to funnel vital revenue into Russia.
Let us be clear: we cannot credibly rearm Europe while our energy dependence fuels the very aggression we seek to deter.

Nicolás González Casares (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, debemos actuar con inteligencia. Cada electrón producido en Europa, cada molécula verde producida en Europa, es menos beneficio para Rusia y para Putin. Por lo tanto, debemos reforzar el plan REPowerEU y apoyar una hoja de ruta clara para reducir la dependencia energética de Rusia.
                  

                     Al mismo tiempo, comisario, le agradezco que haya establecido como una de sus principales prioridades la eliminación de las dependencias energéticas de Rusia, las de petróleo, las de gas, por barco, también por gaseoducto y las de uranio —también hay que recordarlo—.
                  

                     También entiendo que los recientes terremotos geopolíticos hayan retrasado algo el plan; pero debemos ser inteligentes en esta reducción de dependencia. Hay que cortar el gas con Rusia, pero saber que nos vamos a tener que defender de aquellos que quieren manejar ese suministro. No está bien salir de una dependencia y caer en la dependencia de otros que también quieren jugar con los precios del gas.
                  

                     Además, debemos poner en marcha medidas de emergencia, válvulas de escape, porque cuando suben los precios del gas también suben automáticamente los de la electricidad. Tendremos que saber defendernos en esas situaciones, pero cortemos ya la dependencia con Rusia y hagámoslo de manera inteligente.
                  

                     Y, por último, no a Nord Stream 2, que quede claro ya.
                  

Csaba Dömötör (PfE). – Elnök Úr! A helyzet súlyos, a Draghi-jelentés szerint az európai vállalatok négyszer ötször többet fizetnek a gázért az amerikai árhoz képest. Ez nem véletlenül történt így. Az EU ugyanis ideológiai válaszokat adott egy gazdasági problémára. Arról döntöttek, hogy lecserélik az olcsóbb keleti vezetékes gázt, például LNG-re. A következmény az lett, hogy a kieső mennyiséget Amerikából kell beszerezni, de drágábban. Abszurd módon az orosz gáz, az orosz LNG behozatala is növekedett. A legnagyobb vásárlók: Franciaország, Belgium és Spanyolország.
                  

                     Nézzük az olajat: Európa háromszor annyi olajat importál most Indiából, mint a háború előtt. Olyan olajról van szó, amely valójában Oroszországból érkezik. Tehát úgy áll a dolog, hogy Oroszország nem jár rosszabbul, nagyot kaszálnak az amerikai LNG-vállalatok, és szépen gazdagodnak a közvetítő kereskedők is. S hogy kifizet mindezért? Hát Európa. A családok a rezsiszámlájukkal, a vállalkozások pedig a versenyképességükkel. Ide vezetett az itteni elit politikája, amely mindent csak ideológiai szemüveggel nézett, és semmit a valóság talaján. Itt az idő az irányváltásra.
                  

(A felszólaló hajlandó válaszolni egy kékkártyás kérdésre)


Niels Fuglsang (S&D),
blue-card question. – I just need to understand the position of the Patriots for Europe. You criticise the policy of the European Union trying to become independent of Russian gas? Is your solution that we should just keep on importing Russian gas? Or what is your position besides the criticism that you come with?

Csaba Dömötör (PfE),
kékkártyás válasz. – Nagyon köszönöm a kérdését. Szerintem minden típusú függőség ellen küzdenünk kell, legyen az orosz függőség, legyen az bármely külső kitettség. Az nem jó pálya szerintem, hogy az egyik típusú függőséget lecseréljük egy másik típusúra. Az meg végképp nem jó pálya, hogy olyan döntéseket hoznak itt, ebben a Házban, amelynek az az eredménye, hogy az európai vállalkozásoknak sokszor többet kell fizetni a gázért, mint az amerikai versenytársaiknak.
                  

                     Ez óriási versenyképességi hátrányt okoz, ezért zárnak be gyárak Európa-szerte. Ezért van arról szó Németországban is, hogy bezárják-e például a Volkswagen-gyárat. Hogyha megemelkednek az energiaárak, abból Európa nem jön ki jól, a gazdasági versenyképesség hanyatlani fog.
                  

Piotr Müller (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowni Państwo! Błędem kluczowym, który był popełniony względem Rosji, było rozwijanie infrastruktury, która pozwala na przesyłanie gazu. Ta infrastruktura ma swoje imię, nazywa się Nord Stream. W 2014 r., gdy Rosja po raz pierwszy zaatakowała Ukrainę, Niemcy podjęły decyzję, aby dalej kontynuować budowę gazociągu Nord Stream 2. W takim razie, jeżeli wy naprawdę chcecie uniezależnienia od Rosji, to ja mam jedną prostą propozycję. Niech Niemcy udowodnią, że chcą tego uniezależnienia. Niech zlikwidują, niech zniszczą gazociągi Nord Stream i Nord Stream 2 skutecznie. Niech wycofają się z jego dalszej eksploatacji w przyszłości. Niech pokażą, że rzeczywiście nie chcą płacić Rosji euro za gaz, który stamtąd będzie płynął lub będzie mógł płynąć w przyszłości. Udowodnijcie swoje prawdziwe intencje i powiedzcie stop rosyjskiemu gazowi na zawsze.
                  

Stine Bosse (Renew). – Hr. Formand! Når man lytter til nogen her i Europa-Parlamentet, kan man bedre forstå, at vi stadig bruger russisk gas. Jeg behøver ikke nævne navne. Vi ved jo godt, hvem det er. Der sidder nogen her, som ikke mener, at Putin har gjort noget som helst galt, og som i øvrigt mener, at døren skal stå på vid gab. Det efterlader et større arbejde og ansvar til os andre, og det skal vi tage på os. Hver dag vi importerer russisk gas, betaler vi for de missiler, som rammer familiers hjem. Det skal stoppe, koste hvad det vil. Alle lande skal stoppe import af russisk gas, og vi skal støtte, at det bliver muligt nu. Vi skal sætte fart på udbygningen af anden energi, vind i nord og sol i syd, brint og Power-to-X og, hvad det hedder alt sammen. Og vi skal investere massivt i Europas energiinfrastruktur, så vi kan transportere energien i Europa. Sådan bliver vi frie af russisk gas. Sådan hjælper vi ukrainerne. Sådan hjælper vi klimaet, og sådan bevarer vi vores egen frihed.
                  

Jutta Paulus (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, honourable Commissioner, dear colleagues, it has been three years now since REPowerEU was launched and the promise to end fossil fuel imports is still not fulfilled. Twice has the Commission announced a roadmap, and yet we still wait for a concrete proposal.
Yes, a lot has been achieved. Gas imports have decreased by two thirds, being replaced mostly by renewables and efficiency, which is a much more viable solution than replacing an old dependency with a new one, especially considering the slippery slope US democracy has gotten on.
Oil and coal are sanctioned, thus reaching the EU now via the ominous shadow fleet or via third countries. So what I want to see in the Commission's roadmap – besides, of course, doubling down on renewables and efficiency – is a clear concept to trace imports back to their source. We have to end the whitewashing of bloodstained Russian energy commodities.

Milan Uhrík (ESN). – (začiatok vystúpenia mimo mikrofónu) … treba zrušiť, a nie ešte viac pritvrdzovať. Prosím vás, sa prebuďte do reality, sa tu hráte na nejakých moralistov. Hovoríte, že stredná Európa sa musí odstrihnúť od zlého ruského plynu, ale do západných krajín dovážate sami rekordné množstvá skvapalneného LNG plynu priamo z Ruskej federácie.
                  

                     Kvôli vašej greendealovej zelenej politike a sankčnej politike máme v Európe najdrahšie ceny energií na celom, celučičkom svete. Plyn máme päťkrát drahší ako v Spojených štátoch amerických a vy teraz hovoríte, že treba ešte viac sankcií a ešte viac ten plyn zdražiť. Toto je váš plán? Toto je vaša ponuka pre európsky priemysel, pre európskych obyvateľov? Ešte viac zdražovania, ešte viac problémov, ešte viac likvidácie európskych firiem?
                  

                     V žiadnom prípade s týmto nesúhlasíme a žiadame presný opak: zrušiť nezmyselné energetické sankcie. Nech si majú firmy možnosť vybrať najlacnejšieho dodávateľa, pre mňa za mňa z celého sveta, ale nech majú obyvatelia a európsky priemysel cenovo dostupné, lacné energie.
                  

(Rečník súhlasil, že odpovie na otázku položenú zdvihnutím modrej karty)


Emma Wiesner (Renew),
blue-card question. – My question is simple: do you want to end the war? Because if you want to end the war, it's quite clear that the more finance, the more euros we put in Putin's pockets, the harder it would be for Ukraine to win.
So, sanctioning Russian energy, sanctioning the oil and gas – well, it's the obvious answer. If we want to end the war, we cannot finance a war. So, do you really want to end it?

Milan Uhrík (ESN),
blue-card answer. – Thank you, colleague, for the question, but I will answer in Slovak.
Áno, vojnu chceme ukončiť. Áno, chceme obnoviť dodávky ruského plynu. Tá vaša politika sankcií bola maximálne neúspešná. Doteraz nepriniesla žiadne výsledky. Len teraz prichádzajú správy, že Ukrajina prehráva, stratila kurdskú oblasť. Čiže všetky tieto riešenia, čo tu boli doposiaľ prezentované, boli jednoducho neúspešné, neplatné, nefungovali. Bohužiaľ, to je realita. To je výsledok, ktorý vidíme na fronte. Vidíme to na Ukrajine a uvedomili si to Spojené štáty americké, uvedomil si to zvyšok sveta a ja by som bol rád, keby si to uvedomila konečne už aj Európa.

Maximilian Krah (NI). – Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Ich muss zugeben, nach diesen Debatten bin ich erstaunt, wie disconnected wir von der Realität sind. Es laufen die Friedensgespräche in Saudi-Arabien. Sind Sie darauf vorbereitet, dass der Krieg ein Ende haben kann? Und was machen Sie dann mit Ihrer Kriegsrhetorik?
                  

                     Und wenn wir über Energie sprechen – Energie hat auch einen Preis. Es ist nun einmal ein Fakt, dass es keine preiswertere Energie gibt als Erdgas aus Pipelines. Und wenn Sie Energie teurer kaufen wollen, dann sind wir nicht mehr konkurrenzfähig. Und wenn Sie zugleich aufrüsten wollen, dann müssen Sie produzieren. Wie wollen Sie produzieren, wenn Ihre Energiekosten nicht konkurrenzfähig sind? Alles, was Sie hier bieten, ist eine Realität, die nicht existiert – das ist eine Scheinwirklichkeit.
                  

                     Und genau deshalb ist diese EU irrelevant. Deshalb verhandelt man ohne die EU. Deshalb bekommt Kaja Kallas keinen Termin im State Department, weil man sagt: Mit Leuten, die im Zauberwald leben, mit denen reden wir nicht, wir reden nur mit denen, die in der Realität sind.
                  

                     Deshalb nutze ich die Chance, mich heute hier von Ihnen zu verabschieden. Ich gehe dahin, wo die Realität jetzt wieder gemacht wird – in den nationalen Parlamenten, im Deutschen Bundestag.
                  

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


Jutta Paulus (Verts/ALE),
Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der ‘blauen Karte’
                        . – Ich wollte nur wissen, ob Sie inzwischen auf der payroll von Putin stehen, weil bisher war es ja China, die Sie unterstützt haben.
                  

Maximilian Krah (NI),
Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der ‘blauen Karte’
                        . – Wissen Sie, diese Frage offenbart die gesamte Argumentationslosigkeit, die Sie haben. Weil Sie keine Sachargumente haben, werden Sie persönlich und billig. Die Wahrheit ist sehr einfach: Ich unterstütze Donald Trump, der die Wirklichkeit endlich verändert, der einen Plan hat, den Krieg zu beenden. Wir wollen Frieden, und wir wollen nicht Ihre billige Rhetorik ohne strategisches Ziel.
                  

                     Sie haben keinen Plan für die Industrie, Sie haben keinen Plan für die Energie. Was Sie wollen, ist Krieg forever – da sind wir nicht dabei. Und wenn Sie nichts anderes haben als einen peinlichen Ad-hominem-Angriff, dann beweisen Sie, dass wir richtig sind und Sie überwunden.
                  

                     Deshalb gewinnen wir Wahlen, und Sie losen ab.
                  

Jüri Ratas (PPE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, Commissioner, Russia's brutal and illegal war against Ukraine has continued for the fourth year, but Europe still depends on Russian gas. It is unacceptable that imports of LNG from Russia to the European Union have even increased, reaching record levels earlier this year.
By continuing to buy Russian cars, Europe is giving the Kremlin billions of dollars that it can use to finance its evil deeds against humanity. It is well known that Moscow is using the money to bomb Ukraine, its cities and villages, its homes and people, hospitals and infrastructure. Those EU countries that continue to import Russian cars are also responsible for this.
This must stop. We must do whatever it takes to weaken the Russian war machine.

Bruno Tobback (S&D). – Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, Europe has performed a remarkable feat in reducing its dependency on Russian gas and oil after the attack on Ukraine. But the work is only half done. Not only are we still importing Russian gas, but by simply switching to other suppliers, we have found little more than a quick fix. Because if depending on Vladimir Putin was naive, then repeating the mistake by making our economies dependent on a gas cartel between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump would be outright irresponsible.
Some in this Parliament do not like the idea of reducing fossil fuel use; it reminds them too much of Greta Thunberg, and she scares them. And since we are all woke, we must respect their feelings. But we cannot change geology, and that means that any European economy dependent on gas or oil will eventually find itself in the shoes of President Zelenskyy – facing blackmail and extortion, whether it be in the Oval Office or at the end of a very long table in the Kremlin.
So, colleagues, let us at least spare our economies, our businesses and our citizens that fate by making the transition work.

Lena Schilling (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Zuerst möchte ich uns alle beglückwünschen, dass (Ton aus) dieses Parlament verlässt.
                  

                     Und nun zur Sache. Ja, wir diskutieren zu Recht über unsere Sicherheit. Wir diskutieren zu Recht darüber, wie wir die Ukraine unterstützen, und zu Recht über Sanktionen gegen Russland – aber dann müssen wir schon auch konsequent sein. Und konsequent sein heißt, uns nicht mehr wirtschaftlich abhängig zu machen von Russland, von Putin und auch nicht von Gas- und Ölexporten von anderen Autokraten; dann müssen wir konsequent sein und drei Jahre nach Putins brutalem Angriffskrieg feststellen, dass wir vielleicht ein bisschen spät dran sind.
                  

                     Vorgestern wäre der beste Moment gewesen, um aus Fossilen auszusteigen und diese Abhängigkeit zu beenden. Aber heute? Heute ist vielleicht der zweitbeste Moment, das zu tun und nicht mehr einzuknicken. Weil es geopolitisch richtig ist, weil es klimapolitisch richtig ist und weil es die einzige Entscheidung ist, die wir treffen können, wenn wir an eine europäische, gemeinsame, starke, solidarische Zukunft glauben.
                  

Andrea Wechsler (PPE). – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar Jørgensen! Russlands Krieg gegen die Ukraine hat uns sehr schmerzhaft vor Augen geführt, dass Europas Energieabhängigkeit von autokratischen Regimen ein strategischer Fehler war. Und die Europäische Union hat darauf reagiert – und das erfolgreich –, und sie wird es weiterhin tun; herzlichen Dank auch dafür.
                  

                     Aber lassen Sie mich eines klarstellen: Die entscheidende Frage ist nicht nur der phase-out von russischen fossilen Energieträgern. Die entscheidende Frage ist: Wie stellen wir sicher, dass wir nicht von der einen Abhängigkeit in die nächste geraten? Wir dürfen nicht den Fehler begehen, in neue Abhängigkeiten zu geraten. Und wenn wir über erneuerbare Energien reden, dürfen wir nicht vergessen, dass es jüngst auch Warnungen über die Risiken in chinesischen Wechselrichtern in europäischen PV- und Windkraftanlagen und damit in unserer kritischen Infrastruktur gegeben hat – und das muss uns ein Weckruf sein. Wer unsere Energieversorgung auch digital kontrollieren kann, der hat die Kontrolle über unsere Energiesicherheit.
                  

                     Und deswegen ist die Zeit geopolitischer Naivität vorbei. Wir müssen auch an uns denken: die eigenen Kapazitäten aufbauen und unsere eigene Energietechnologie und -produktion voranbringen.
                  

Γιάννης Μανιάτης (S&D). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, αγαπητέ Επίτροπε, ευχαριστούμε θερμά για τις εξαιρετικές πρωτοβουλίες σας. Στην προσπάθεια απεξάρτησης από το ρωσικό φυσικό αέριο η Ανατολική Μεσόγειος μπορεί να παίξει ένα σπουδαίο ρόλο. Είναι μια νέα πηγή, αξιόπιστη πηγή, τροφοδοσίας της Ευρώπης με πράσινο ηλεκτρισμό και αέριο. Τα κοιτάσματα φυσικού αερίου στην ελληνική και κυπριακή Αποκλειστική Οικονομική Ζώνη είναι εξαιρετικά σημαντικά. Υπάρχουν δύο σπουδαία έργα που ξεκίνησαν επί υπουργίας μου: Το πρώτο είναι το ηλεκτρικό καλώδιο Ισραήλ-Κύπρος-Ελλάδα 1000 μεγαβάτ, που πρόκειται να μεταφέρει πράσινο ηλεκτρισμό για πρώτη φορά από την Ασία στην Ευρώπη, και το δεύτερο είναι ο αγωγός φυσικού αερίου EastMed, που μπορεί να μεταφέρει έως και 20 bcm κάθε χρόνο. Δυστυχώς, η τουρκική προκλητικότητα εμποδίζει τις έρευνες για το πράσινο καλώδιο ακόμα και μέσα στην ελληνική Αποκλειστική Οικονομική Ζώνη. Δεδομένου ότι τα δύο αυτά έργα είναι και ευρωπαϊκής ιδιοκτησίας, θεωρώ πως είναι απαραίτητο η Ένωση να αναλάβει πρωτοβουλία, στο πλαίσιο πάντα του διεθνούς δικαίου και του δικαίου της θάλασσας, για την υλοποίησή τους. Ευχαριστώ πολύ.
                  

Miriam Lexmann (PPE). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, napriek pokračujúcim diskusiám, ako podporiť našu ekonomickú bezpečnosť a odolnosť, ešte stále nemáme jasnú víziu, ako sa vysporiadať s našou závislosťou od totalitných režimov.
                  

                     Už v roku 2014, po ruskej anexii Krymu, sme sa dohodli na diverzifikácii našich energetických zdrojov. Považovali sme to za krok, ktorý má chrániť naše ekonomické a bezpečnostné záujmy. Žiaľ, Európa robila presný opak toho, na čom sa dohodla. Našu závislosť od ruských energetických zdrojov sme zvýšili. Aj dnes, tri roky po začiatku brutálnej agresie proti Ukrajine, ktorá denne spôsobuje ľudské utrpenie a smrť, stále vidíme podobný scenár. Vyzývame na diverzifikáciu, avšak len za posledný rok sme zvýšili náš import ruského LNG.
                  

                     Takáto dvojtvárnosť nás oslabuje v časoch najväčších geopolitických výziev. Ak nevieme plniť svoje ciele, treba si to priznať a riešiť. Nie pchať hlavu do piesku, to je len loptička na smeč extrému. Dnes potrebujeme principiálnu zahraničnú politiku. Práve tá je totiž našou silou, nie slabosťou.
                  

Thomas Pellerin-Carlin (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, Vladimir Poutine a déclaré la guerre aux démocraties européennes. Cette guerre, il la mène depuis plus de dix ans: cyberattaques, désinformation, invasion militaire… Comment Poutine réussit-il à financer sa guerre? La réponse est simple: les énergies fossiles. 140 milliards d'euros, c'est le budget militaire de la Russie en guerre. 250 milliards d'euros, ce sont les revenus que Vladimir Poutine tire de ses ventes de pétrole et de gaz. C'est donc en s'en prenant au pétrole et au gaz russe que nous priverons Poutine des moyens de gagner sa guerre.
                  

                     Alors, que faire? D'abord, ne plus importer d'énergie russe: Nord Stream doit rester fermé et les livraisons de GNL russe doivent cesser. Il faut cependant aller plus loin. En Europe comme en Inde, les énergies renouvelables sont les énergies de la liberté. C'est en investissant à l'échelle mondiale dans les énergies renouvelables que nous ferons reculer le pétrole et le gaz russe. Notre pacte vert, c'est la kryptonite de Vladimir Poutine.
                  

Catch-the-eye procedure


Krzysztof Hetman (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Obecna sytuacja geopolityczna na świecie sprawia, że kwestia bezpieczeństwa energetycznego staje się jednym z kluczowych aspektów. W tym kontekście przyspieszenie odejścia od rosyjskiego gazu i innych rosyjskich surowców energetycznych staje się jeszcze bardziej pilne. Konieczne jest zwiększenie inwestycji w źródła odnawialne, ale również w energię atomową, co pozwoli nam na dywersyfikację źródeł energii i zwiększenie naszej niezależności energetycznej.
                  

                     Jednocześnie musimy dokonać rewizji Zielonego Ładu, ETS-u oraz zrezygnować z ETS2. W innym przypadku koszty energii całkowicie pozbawią polski i europejski przemysł konkurencyjności. Aby sprostać tym wyzwaniom, Polska podejmuje szereg działań, jak chociażby budowa terminalu LNG w Gdańsku, który umożliwi odbiór gazu ziemnego z różnych kierunków świata i znacząco wzmocni bezpieczeństwo energetyczne Polski oraz regionu Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej.
                  

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Mr President, every cent that we spend on Russian oil and natural gas results in the loss of Ukrainian lives. Last week, in a single night, Putin launched over 60 missiles and 200 drones towards Ukraine. These weapons are funded by Russia through the sale of natural resources.
If we want to stop Putin's imperialistic regime, we must increase our efforts to completely end our reliance on Russian energy. The only appropriate amount of Russian oil and natural gas in Europe is zero. We have to invest in our energy infrastructure and close every loophole that allows importing of refined Russian oil to Europe through third countries, like India and Türkiye.
It is our responsibility to do everything we can so that the brave people of Ukraine can live their lives in peace. Let's cut our reliance on Russia!

Emma Wiesner (Renew). – Mr President, in 2015, the Commission launched the plans for the energy union in order to make us more independent from Russian gas. Now, seven years later, we see the results from the major investment in LNG terminals and gas infrastructure and so on. And the result is very clear: at the start of this war, we were more dependent on Russian gas than ever. We import more, we use more gas and we import more gas from Russia.
We cannot afford to make the same mistakes again. So my question is to you, Commissioner: how will you make sure we don't repeat our mistakes? How will you make sure that the affordable energy action plan actually phases out gas and Russian gas for good?
We cannot afford to make the same mistakes again, and our new plans really need to make sure that we get rid of these dependencies, not dig us deeper into them.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


Dan Jørgensen,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, and thank you, honourable Members, for an excellent debate. Many numbers have been shared, and I also want to share one with you: if we look at how much Europeans have paid Russia for energy since February 2022, the amount equals the cost price of 2 400 new F-35 fighter jets. This puts things into perspective. On one hand, you could say that we have put in place policies that are a huge success. I don't know of any other continent on the planet that could so fundamentally change its energy systems and dependencies, as we have done (45 % of our gas came from Russia just three years ago). But on the other hand, you could also argue that, well, okay, we still import 13 % of our gas from Russia, and this will obviously not stand. We are indirectly putting money into Putin's war chest.
Now the good news is, although this is a very sad situation, we do have the tools to do this. And the things that we need to do to become independent of gas from Russia are also the things we need to do to decarbonise our economy. It's also the things we need to do to become more competitive. Because it is wrong what some Members said here on this podium during this debate, that gas and fossils are the cheapest form of energy. That is simply not right. On the contrary, we are actually saving money every year by deploying more renewables and by being more energy efficient. The cheapest energy is the energy you don't use.
And things are going in the right direction. Last year, we deployed 78 GW of new renewable energy in Europe. Last year was the first year ever when solar took over from coal in producing most electricity. So it is going in the right direction, but it's not going fast enough. That's why we put forward, recently, a plan on on bringing down the prices significantly in Europe – the affordable energy action plan – with a whole range of different measures that we will implement, together with the Member States, that will bring the speed up significantly whilst bringing the prices down, also significantly. I will also be putting forward very soon the roadmap that many of you have been asking for impatiently; I understand that. We are working hard on it. I can assure you that we are committed to delivering on this.
I want to finish here by repeating what President Ursula von der Leyen has said many times: there will be no backtracking on the green transition in Europe. I will add to that: if anything, there will be fast-tracking, because we want to do things even more efficiently, even faster than before.

President. – The debate is closed.


Written Statements (Rule 178)



Mirosława Nykiel (PPE),
na piśmie. – Polska udowodniła, że odejście od rosyjskich surowców energetycznych jest nie tylko możliwe, ale przede wszystkim konieczne dla bezpieczeństwa energetycznego. Nasz kraj całkowicie zaprzestał importu gazu z Rosji, pokazując, że odpowiedzialna polityka energetyczna to racja stanu w tych trudnych czasach.
                  

                     Polska dziś opiera swoje bezpieczeństwo energetyczne na gazie sprowadzanym z Norwegii przez Baltic Pipe jak również poprzez terminal w Świnoujsciu z amerykańskim i katarskim LNG. Kluczową rolę odgrywają magazyny gazu jakie posiadaliśmy jeszcze przed wybuchem wojny.
                  

                     Ponadto Polska poprzez interkonektory z naszymi sąsiadami z UE oraz Ukrainy jest w stanie w każdej chwili przesyłać surowiec w obu kierunkach, co zapewnia nam elastyczność w zarzadzaniu energią i równocześnie stabilizuje bezpieczeństwo dostaw.
                  

                     Dziś Polska jest przykładem dla Europy – pokazujemy, że można uniezależnić się od rosyjskich surowców i jednocześnie zabezpieczyć dostawy energii. Czas, aby cała Unia poszła tą drogą. Nie możemy zwalniać tempa – bo bezpieczeństwo energetyczne to podstawa bezpieczeństwa w tak niepewnych czasach.
                  

Petra Steger (PfE),
schriftlich. – Wir diskutieren heute darüber, wie wir uns ökonomisch weiter von Russland abkoppeln können – das ist gleich zweimal idiotisch. Zum einen ist ein Waffenstillstand in der Ukraine in greifbarer Nähe – die Verhandlungen in Riad laufen gut. Sie mögen das vielleicht nicht mitbekommen haben, unsere Außenbeauftragte hat wirklich nichts getan, um diesen Frieden möglich zu machen. Zum anderen beziehen wir weiterhin Gas und Öl aus Russland – wir zahlen nur viel mehr dafür. Drittstaaten kaufen in Russland billig ein und liefern teuer an uns weiter. Was für absoluter Wahnsinn!
                  

                     Meine Damen und Herren, haben Sie denn den Schuss nicht gehört? Sind Sie so gefangen in Ihrer eigenen Welt, dass Sie einfach die Realität ignorieren? Europa ist keine Insel, wir werden auch in Zukunft mit Russland handeln – im beidseitigen Interesse. Wenn Sie weiter auf Abschottung unseres Energiemarktes von russischem Gas und Öl setzen, ruinieren Sie nicht nur europäische Haushalte, Sie machen Russland außerdem zur permanenten Tankstelle Chinas. Dann können die Chinesen ihre Wettbewerbsvorteile weiter ausbauen, und wir können unserer Industrie beim Sterben zuschauen. Nehmen Sie bitte endlich Vernunft an und beenden Sie diesen Wahnsinn!
                  
16.   EU Consumers Day: filling the gaps in protecting 440 million consumers in the EU (debate)

President. – The next item is the Council and Commission statements on EU Consumers Day: filling the gaps in protecting 440 million consumers in the EU (2025/2597(RSP)).
Given the absence of the Council in the debate, I will give the floor directly to Commissioner Jørgensen.

Dan Jørgensen,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you for having included this debate on the agenda on the occasion of World Consumer Rights Day.
We can be proud in the EU: we enjoy some of the strongest consumer protection rules in the world. For example, on product safety. Our framework ensures fairness by building on strong legal principles, complemented with more detailed safeguards that guarantee transparency, remedies and cross-border enforcement.
However, consumers are still faced with many challenges and they count on us in Europe to deliver better than we do today. Consumer confidence in the economy remains below the historic average. Obstacles such as unjustified geoblocking still prevent consumers from fully accessing goods and services in the single market. Consumers are exposed to problematic marketing practices online, such as scams, dark patterns and addictive design features. Children are particularly vulnerable to these. Children can also be exposed to dangerous and unsafe products. This is especially the case as we see an increase of harmful products directly shipped to consumers from third countries. That is why it is so critical that together we continue advancing consumer rights in our Union.
Later this year, the Commission will put forward the consumer agenda for 2025-2030, defining the key EU priorities and actions in this area, with a view to better protecting consumers and to ensuring a level playing field for EU businesses. It will look at how to better protect vulnerable consumers and assess the need to update our legislation and strengthen its enforcement. Consumers play a key role in our social market economy, contributing to sustainable growth and to a more competitive single market. But we need to ensure that in cross-border situations, they do not face unfair discrimination and are protected when buying goods or services. That is why the consumer agenda will include an action plan on consumers in the single market. We aim to also help ensure a level playing field for businesses operating in the single market.
We want the consumer agenda to be a shared vision that makes a real difference in people's lives, and we look forward to engaging with Parliament and all other stakeholders.
Let me focus on three priorities.
First, digital fairness. Over the past years, the European Union has significantly strengthened its digital rulebook, adopting landmark laws such as the Digital Services Act, Digital Markets Act and Artificial Intelligence Act, while continuing to rely on the rules of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive. Complementing this framework with updated horizontal consumer protection rules is a missing piece of the puzzle to ensure a fair digital single market for all. Unethical techniques and commercial practices related to dark patterns, marketing by social media influencers, the addictive design of digital products and online profiling, especially when consumers' vulnerabilities are exploited for commercial purposes, are costing consumers time and money, and are distorting competition in the single market. The future Digital Fairness Act that Commissioner McGrath will propose in 2026 will fill these gaps. We will pay particular attention to the protection of children online – a priority that I know you all fully share.
The Digital Fairness Act will not duplicate or reopen matters already addressed in recently adopted legislation. We will stay focused on the gaps and seek simplification in the areas identified in the fitness check that was published in autumn last year, and ensure consistency with existing rules. We will also pay attention to views from companies to ensure that rules are easy to implement and very little burdensome.
The second main priority is enforcement. Our consumer acquis is solid, but we need to enforce it better. Recently coordinated enforcement actions by the Consumer Protection Cooperation Network against operators like Temu and Shein demonstrate how effective enforcement upholds consumers' rights and contributes to a level playing field. These enforcement actions show how the Digital Services Act and the CPC can reinforce each other.
The Commission's role of coordination is often crucial to ensure that Member States' authorities can effectively address EU-wide breaches of consumer law, but coordinated actions can take time and result only in voluntary commitments. We must be bolder, simpler and faster. We are therefore reflecting on ways to enhance and strengthen the existing cooperation system under the CPC Regulation.
Our third priority concerns product safety. In line with our recent e-commerce communication adopted on 5 February, we need to effectively work on the enforcement of product safety legislation. The new General Product Safety Regulation started to apply on 13 December last year. It aims to ensure safety for all products, including those sold online. We are now focusing on our efforts on effective and predictable implementation and enforcement, fostering stronger cooperation between national market surveillance authorities and customs. We will organise the first product safety sweep before the summer. We will also support joint product-testing activities with a focus on chemical safety. Moreover, we are committed to boosting cooperation with customs authorities and maintaining dialogue with China to enhance compliance with EU safety rules and ensure a level playing field within the single market.
Honourable Members, the Commission knows it can count on the support of this Parliament to advance consumers' rights. While I have outlined our long-term objectives, the Commission also stands ready to facilitate the swift adaptation of two proposals currently in the interinstitutional negotiations, namely the Package Travel Directive and Alternative Dispute Resolution Directive. I am confident that together we are stronger and we will protect the rights of our 440 million consumers.

Kamila Gasiuk-Pihowicz,
w imieniu grupy PPE. – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowni Państwo! Dzisiaj jednym z największych wyzwań dla ochrony 450 mln europejskich konsumentów jest handel internetowy. W 2024 r. 70% konsumentów robiło zakupy właśnie online i kupowali artykuły absolutnie pierwszej potrzeby, takie jak odzież, kosmetyki czy zabawki. A w takich produktach używanych na co dzień nieprzestrzeganie przepisów bezpieczeństwa może mieć bardzo poważne konsekwencje dla zdrowia, a nawet dla życia. Problem ten dotyczy w szczególności towarów kupowanych przez azjatyckie platformy, takie jak Shein i Temu. Podam kilka przykładów: plastikowe zabawki zawierające substancje zaburzające gospodarkę hormonalną 240 razy powyżej dopuszczalnego limitu, nosidełka dla niemowląt pękające w szwach, zabawki rozpadające się w rękach, stwarzające ryzyko zadławienia, kosmetyki uczulające, a nawet zawierające rakotwórcze składniki, ubrania nasączone toksycznymi chemikaliami.
               

                  Europa posiada prawodawstwo chroniące konsumentów. Europejscy przedsiębiorcy podejmują olbrzymi wysiłek i ponoszą znaczące koszty, aby dostarczać konsumentom bezpieczne i jak najlepsze produkty. Nie pozwalajmy na nieuczciwą konkurencję sprzedawców spoza Unii Europejskiej, na łamanie prawa, lekceważenie zdrowia ludzi. Dlatego, po pierwsze, wzywam Komisję do utworzenia grupy zadaniowej ds. handlu elektronicznego w celu koordynacji działań wszystkich służb na szczeblu Unii Europejskiej. Po drugie, nadszedł w końcu czas, aby znieść zwolnienie z ceł dla produktów o wartości do 150 euro. Wszyscy wiemy, że ta regulacja jest nadużywana do unikania cła za produkty w rzeczywistości wyższej wartości. W ubiegłym roku do Europy trafiło ponad 4 miliardy chińskich przesyłek zwolnionych z ceł, a ta liczba podwoiła się od 2023 r. I po trzecie, z okazji dnia konsumenta życzę 450 mln mieszkańców Unii, by kupowali europejskie produkty, bo są bezpieczne, zdrowe i dobrej jakości. A Komisji życzę zorganizowania silnej i skutecznej kampanii ‘Buy European’.
               

Alex Agius Saliba,
f'isem il-grupp S&D. – Sur President, jekk irridu li l-proġett Ewropew jibqa' wieħed rilevanti rridu nkunu ċerti li s-suq Ewropew jaħdem b'mod ġust favur il-konsumaturi kollha.
               

                  F'dinja fejn ix-xiri mill-pjattaformi, kulma jmur, qed ikompli dejjem jikber, hemm bżonn li jkollna regoli li jagħtu l-istess drittijiet lill-konsumaturi li jixtru fuq bażi online bħal dawk li jixtru b'mod fiżiku mill-ħwienet madwar l-istess Unjoni.
               

                  Hemm bżonn li nipproteġu lit-tfal tagħna b'leġiżlazzjoni b'saħħitha sabiex ġugarelli li jidħlu minn barra mill-Unjoni Ewropea jkunu tal-istess livell bħal dawk prodotti fi ħdan l-Unjoni Ewropea.
               

                  Hemm bżonn li niġġieldu prattiċi bħal dawk tad-dynamic pricing, fejn eluf ta' konsumaturi kuljum li qegħdin jixtru biljetti tal-logħob jew tal-futbol jew tal-kunċerti ta' mużika qegħdin jinsterqu.
               

                  Hemm bżonn suq Ewropew li jiġġieled l-inflazzjoni fejn jidħlu prodotti tal-ikel u prodotti bħal dawk tal-enerġija, li huma essenzjali, li mingħajrhom ma ngħaddux.
               

                  Ma jistax ikun li r-riġidità tas-suq Ewropew twassal biex fi Stati Membri żgħar u gżejjer bħal Malta nispiċċaw b'suq uniku li jaħdem favur ftit importaturi l-kbar u kontra l-ġid komuni taċ-ċittadini tagħna.
               

                  Hemm bżonn, illum qabel għada, li nestendu l-libertajiet tal-moviment Ewropew għall-prodotti mediċinali – ma jistax ikun li l-pazjent Malti u Għawdxi jkompli jħallas hu l-prezz ta' Brexit, hekk kif is-sistema ta' leġiżlazzjoni u reġistrazzjoni frammentata tal-prodotti mediċinali kompliet twassal sabiex Stati Membri żgħar ikomplu jiġu esklużi.
               

                  Hemm bżonn li jkollna leġiżlazzjoni aktar b'saħħitha, aktar ambizzjuża, fejn jidħlu d-drittijiet tal-konsumaturi li jibbukkjaw il-btajjel tagħhom, u għalhekk hemm bżonn li jkollna liġi tal-package travel li taħdem favur il-konsumaturi tagħna.
               

                  Ejja naħdmu flimkien favur suq Ewropew li jaħdem favur id-drittijiet tal-ħafna u mhux tal-ftit.
               

Jorge Martín Frías,
en nombre del Grupo PfE. – Señor presidente, señorías, la Comisión asume más y más competencias que no le corresponden a la vez que no cumple con sus funciones más básicas: aquellas que protegen al consumidor y garantizan la libertad de mercado.
               

                  A día de hoy, la Comisión no ha hecho nada para impedir que China engañe a los consumidores con la copia del marcado de conformidad europea. Ya llevamos veinte años, ¡veinte años! Eso sí, mientras la Comisión se dedica a regular y asfixiar a nuestra industria y nuestras empresas, China inunda el mercado único con productos que no cumplen los estándares europeos y que, en muchos casos, suponen un peligro para el consumidor sin que este lo sepa; casi un 40 %, según datos de la propia Comisión.
               

                  Mientras esa promesa de simplificación de burocracia sigue sin llegar —porque no saben cómo de grande es el monstruo que han creado— nuestros competidores se burlan de nosotros ante la clara dejación de funciones. La Comisión debe registrar sin más demora el logotipo de conformidad europea y ejercer de una vez un liderazgo que acabe con la competencia desleal y con los riesgos para los consumidores.
               

Stéphanie Yon-Courtin,
au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, aujourd'hui, 440 millions de consommateurs européens comptent sur nous pour garantir leurs droits dans un marché en pleine mutation. Chaque jour, Temu, Shein et d'autres inondent le marché de produits peu chers, souvent non sécurisés, non conformes ou contrefaits, et dangereux.
               

                  Pendant ce temps, sur TikTok, on trouve des apprentis influenceurs, parfois des adolescents depuis leur chambre, qui vous vendent des placements financiers ou de la chirurgie esthétique. Alors que la publicité télévisée est encadrée, cette influence en ligne, parfois très risquée, échappe à tout contrôle.
               

                  En parallèle, les grandes plateformes perfectionnent des techniques de manipulation, des interfaces trompeuses, comme les faux comptes à rebours, qui créent un sentiment d'urgence pour pousser à l'achat, ou encore le défilement infini, conçu pour garder nos enfants et nous-mêmes scotchés à l'écran. Résultat: nos choix ne sont plus les nôtres.
               

                  L'Europe a déjà posé des règles, mais elles doivent être appliquées efficacement et il faut aller plus loin: protéger les consommateurs partout, tout le temps, dans un marché numérique qui ne connaît pas de frontières. La protection des consommateurs est une avancée concrète de l'Europe, que nous ne voyons même plus, tant que nous la tenons pour acquise. Ne laissons pas le numérique créer une zone de non-droit ni des consommateurs de seconde zone. Nous devons donc avancer sur une législation ambitieuse pour l'équité numérique, qui protège les consommateurs dans l'environnement numérique du XXIe siècle.
               

Anna Cavazzini,
im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir wissen es alle: In der Europäischen Union haben wir die höchsten Verbraucherschutzstandards weltweit, egal, ob wir in Tschechien, Belgien oder in Italien einkaufen. Diese hohen Verbraucherschutzstandards müssen wir auch im Online-Handel durchsetzen; viele Kolleginnen und Kollegen haben das heute schon gesagt. Das ist die große Aufgabe dieser Legislaturperiode.
               

                  Immer mehr Billigprodukte kommen direkt aus Drittstaaten in unsere Wohnzimmer, in unsere Kinderzimmer; und hier werden die Produkte zum Sicherheitsrisiko. Eine Zahl vielleicht mal: 95 % der bei Temu gekauften Spielzeuge verstoßen gegen unsere Sicherheitsvorschriften. Daher appelliere ich an die Mitgliedstaaten – der Rat ist heute nicht da –, endlich mit uns in die Verhandlungen zur Zollreform zu gehen, um diesen Paket-Tsunami endlich handhaben zu können.
               

                  Ich fordere die Kommission auf, dem Verbraucherschutz endlich ein wirkliches Update für das digitale Zeitalter zu geben. Dazu gehören: die konsequente Umsetzung des DSA, das Ende der Manipulation durch einen Digital Fairness Act, eine effizientere Marktüberwachung und endlich mehr Enforcement bei der Kommission und mehr Verantwortung für die Online-Marktplätze, wenn sie ihren Auflagen nicht nachkommen. Dann sind endlich Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher auch im Online-Shopping sicher.
               

Leila Chaibi,
au nom du groupe The Left. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, Monsieur le Commissaire, bientôt, c'est l'anniversaire de ma fille et de mon neveu. Alors, pour fêter cela, j'ai fait des achats sur internet. Mon neveu est fan de manga, alors je lui ai acheté de petites figurines de One Piece. Ma fille, en ce moment, adore les animaux. J'ai trouvé plein de jouets de bain en forme de vache et d'hippopotame. Pour la déco, j'ai commandé plein de ballons de baudruche.
               

                  Je suis loin de me douter que je suis sur le point de tous nous empoisonner, ma fille, mon neveu et moi. Ces objets viennent de plateformes comme Amazon, Shein et Temu, qui échappent aux réglementations européennes. En gonflant ces ballons de baudruche, j'avalerai des substances cancérigènes nommées nitrosamines; en jouant avec leurs cadeaux tout mignons, tout colorés, mon neveu et ma fille respireront du phtalate, un produit chimique qui altère le système hormonal des enfants et leur développement cérébral.
               

                  Si nous tombons malades, personne n'est responsable, parce que ces vendeurs se trouvent hors de l'Union européenne. Il faut mettre un terme à cette impunité. Les plateformes doivent être responsables de ce qu'elles vendent. Ces objets ont leur place à la poubelle, pas entre les mains de nos enfants (l'oratrice présente quelques exemples de jouets).
               

President. – (addressing the previous speaker) I want to remind you that we cannot show items when we have the floor.

Dóra Dávid (PPE). – Elnök Úr! Julcsi egy átlagos magyar tinédzser, aki imád sminkelni. Egyik nap kedvenc influenszere ajánlására megrendeli álmai sminkkészletét egy online áruházból. Legnagyobb örömére már másnap csenget a postás. A doboz ugyan kisebb, mint amire számított, de boldogan nyitja ki. Azonnal ki is próbálja, de pár perc múlva allergiás reakciókkal szembesül. Duzzadó szájjal megnyitja a webshop oldalát, hogy panaszt tegyen az ügyfélszolgálaton. Meglepetésére semmilyen elérhetőséget nem talál. Miután konzultált az orvosával, édesanyja biztatására a fogyasztóvédelmi hatósághoz fordul.
               

                  De mit kell tenni ahhoz, hogy a hasonló helyzetek ellenére a fogyasztók úgy érezzék, biztonságban vannak Európában? És itt az üzenet: nem feltétlenül új jogszabályok kellenek, hanem határozottabb, bátrabb és gyorsabb hatósági fellépés. Akár új technológiák bevetésével, akár honlapblokkolással. Ne féljünk ezeket használni! Ezenkívül tudatos vásárlók is kellenek, akik ismerik a jogaikat, és nem félnek azokkal élni. Julcsi megtapasztalhatta, hogy érdemes panaszt tenni a jogsértőkkel szemben, hiszen mindenkinek az az érdeke, hogy a szabályokat betartó cégek megbízható és jó minőségű termékei kerüljenek az európai fogyasztók kosarába. Ehhez erős fogyasztóvédelem kell, amitől Európa még jobb hely lesz.
               

Laura Ballarín Cereza (S&D). – Señor presidente, con ocasión del Día Mundial de los Derechos del Consumidor, tenemos un debate en esta Cámara para celebrar todo lo que hemos avanzado en Europa para proteger a nuestros consumidores como en ninguna otra región del mundo: el cargador universal, el derecho a reparar, la seguridad de los productos que vienen de fuera de Europa o los derechos digitales frente a las grandes plataformas. Pero todavía nos queda mucho más por hacer. ¿Quién no ha sufrido una cancelación de vuelo en el último minuto sin obtener ninguna compensación? Este Parlamento seguirá trabajando para acabar con las estafas, los diseños adictivos y las malas prácticas en la futura Ley de Equidad Digital que saludamos y que la Comisión nos ha presentado, y para tener también un buen acuerdo en la resolución alternativa de litigios para dar más herramientas a los consumidores para defender sus derechos.
               

                  On this World Consumer Rights Day, Europe faces two big challenges due to the current geopolitical context. First, Europe is not the land of the rule of the strongest, but the place in which real laws are made to defend our citizens and consumers. But these laws must be enforced if we really want to protect the more vulnerable users, like minors or women, from online hate and cyberbullying, and also protect our democracies from disinformation. In front of any attempt at blackmail, the EU needs to choose its side. Either we defend the strongest – the big tech oligarchs who hate women, migrants and European democracy – or we protect European consumer rights. For me, the choice is clear.
               

                  Second, in the current context of trade wars, European consumers have the opportunity to defend European businesses by choosing products made in Europe. We are a market, or 440 million consumers. This is our strength, our leverage. Let's use it. So think global, buy local.
               

Ernő Schaller-Baross (PfE). – Elnök Úr! A Fogyasztók Európai Napja alkalmat ad arra, hogy számot vessünk a jelenlegi helyzettel, a brüsszeli adminisztráció felelősségével. Joggal várjuk el, hogy az Európai Unió határozottan és következetesen érvényt szerezzen 440 millió polgárának védelmének. Ehelyett azonban azt látjuk, hogy a belső piacot elárasztják a bizonytalan eredetű, kétes biztonságú termékek, miközben a saját vállalkozásaikat túlburjánzó bürokrácia sújtja. Olyan Európát kell építenünk, ahol a belső piaci szabályozás valóban a polgárok érdekeit szolgálja, nem pedig kiszolgáltatja őket silány minőségű termékeknek.
               

Cynthia Ní Mhurchú (Renew). – A Chathaoirligh, a Choimisinéir, nuair a cheannaíonn duine carr dara láimhe san Eoraip, cosnaíonn sé lear mór airgid air. Tá súil aige go mbeidh an carr sin ar chaighdeán maith. Ní meicneoir é agus dá bhrí sin tá muinín aige go ndéanfaidh caighdeáin an Aontais é a chosaint mar thomhaltóir. Níl uaidh ach praghas cóir, agus níos tábhachtaí, carr sábháilte. Ach is minic go gcuirtear an dubh ina gheal ar dhaoine maidir le líon na gciliméadar atá curtha de ag an gcarr. Calaois choitianta é i margaí gluaisteán athláimhe ar fud an Aontais Eorpaigh agus nílimid ag cosaint tomhaltóirí mar ba cheart dúinn. Ardaím an chalaois sin anocht ar Lá Tomhaltóirí an Aontais, mar léiríonn sé na bearnaí fós i gcosaint tomhaltóirí san Aontas agus go gcaithfimid iniúchadh a dhéanamh ar na slite lenar féidir linn iad a dhúnadh ach gan a bheith ag cruthú rómhaorlathais do ghnóanna beaga Eorpacha ag an am céanna. Déanaimis gníomh anois. Tá feidhmiú an mhargaidh aonair ag brath air. Go raibh míle maith agaibh.
               

Kim Van Sparrentak (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, today we celebrate consumer protection in the EU. But when I look at addictive apps like TikTok, Tinder, Instagram and Netflix, I don't see so much to celebrate. Too many platforms and websites manipulate consumers into spending time and attention there. This is one of the challenges of our time. Nearly everyone – children, youngsters, students, adults and grandparents alike – feels they have lost control over their time spent online.
More than a year ago, Parliament was very clear: stop manipulative tricks to glue us to our screens in the Digital Fairness Act and ban the most harmful features, like the autoplay of videos and the endless scroll. But there are plenty of rumours that the Commission will actually go soft on US tech companies to please Trump. Surely it's us determining our own rules, not the tech oligarchy across the ocean? We should take control of our own time, with our own rules, on our own ethical design of apps. Commissioner, I expect you to deliver on this.

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


Lukas Sieper (NI),
blue-card question. – My question to you, colleague, would be: in times where the tech oligarchs, as you said, develop more and more into the enemies of democracy, should we maybe think about taking away these companies on European soil from them?

Kim Van Sparrentak (Verts/ALE),
blue-card answer. – Thank you for this question. I think there are very important decisions to be made around what we do with these companies. I think that they are very harmful. I think that these companies are a danger to our democracy and to our health and to our societies as a whole.
That's why I think it is very important that we start doing a cost-benefit analysis on what these companies actually bring to the European Union and what harm they bring. If the decision is that they are more harmful than actually beneficial, then maybe they don't belong in the European Union.

Δημήτρης Τσιόδρας (PPE). – Κύριε. Πρόεδρε, κύριε Επίτροπε, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, οι καταναλωτές βρίσκονται αντιμέτωποι με ένα περιβάλλον που γίνεται όλο και πιο περίπλοκο. 14 δισεκατομμύρια ετησίως, σύμφωνα με την Επιτροπή, κοστίζουν οι αδικαιολόγητοι γεωγραφικοί εφοδιαστικοί περιορισμοί (territorial supply constraints). Γι' αυτό, μαζί με άλλους συναδέλφους από διαφορετικές πολιτικές ομάδες και διαφορετικές χώρες, στείλαμε επιστολή στην Επιτροπή, για να τονίσουμε ότι είναι αδιανόητο εταιρείες να εκμεταλλεύονται τη δεσπόζουσα θέση τους στην αγορά και να πωλούν ίδια προϊόντα σε διαφορετικές τιμές, ανάλογα με το μέγεθος της αγοράς εις βάρος των καταναλωτών. Η Επιτροπή πρέπει να λάβει άμεσα και αποφασιστικά μέτρα για την εξάλειψή τους μέσω της ενίσχυσης της νομοθεσίας περί ανταγωνισμού και με νέα εργαλεία για την αντιμετώπισή τους.
               

                  Συνάδελφοι, οι καταναλωτές βρίσκονται επίσης αντιμέτωποι με τις προκλήσεις του ηλεκτρονικού εμπορίου. Αθέμιτες εμπορικές πρακτικές που βρίσκονται στα ψιλά γράμματα των ιστοσελίδων, αλλά και εκατοντάδες χιλιάδες εισαγόμενα πακέτα που μπαίνουν στα σπίτια μας καθημερινά με ρούχα, παιχνίδια, καλλυντικά που δεν πληρούν τις ευρωπαϊκές προδιαγραφές για την υγεία και την ασφάλεια. Πρέπει να φροντίσουμε για την επιβολή της ευρωπαϊκής νομοθεσίας και να καλύψουμε τα όποια νομοθετικά κενά. Να ενισχύσουμε τη συνεργασία μεταξύ των αρμόδιων αρχών και των εποπτικών μηχανισμών και, τέλος, να επενδύσουμε ακόμη περισσότερο στην καλή ενημέρωση των καταναλωτών για τα δικαιώματά τους και πώς να τα διεκδικούν. Σας ευχαριστώ.
               

Christel Schaldemose (S&D). – Hr. Formand! Kommissær! Europa er verdens bedste sted at være forbruger. Det skyldes årtiers kamp for stærke rettigheder og god beskyttelse. Men vi må ikke hvile på laurbærrene. Selvom der er meget at være stolte af, så må vi aldrig tage vores resultater for givet. Forbrugerbeskyttelse er en konstant kamp, og hver dag opstår nye trusler, der skal håndteres. Og lige nu svigter vi især de yngste af vores forbrugere, når de er online. De møder ulovligt indhold, de bliver manipuleret, de bliver kommercielt udnyttet, og de bliver afhængige. Techgiganterne har haft deres chance for at tage ansvar. De ved, at deres services gør skade på de unge mennesker, og alligevel fortsætter de. Derfor skal vi handle. Vi skal sikre, at de unge ikke bliver en vare, som udnyttes for profit. Så derfor skal vi ikke stoppe her. Vi skal fortsat kæmpe for at få håndhævet de regler, vi har, og om nødvendigt også få flere regler, så vi kan beskytte de alleryngste forbrugere. Vi skal fortsat kæmpe for de europæiske forbrugerrettigheder også i en verden, som stiller andre krav til os. Det handler om tryghed for alle vores 440 millioner forbrugere.
               

Tomislav Sokol (PPE). – Poštovani potpredsjedniče, povjereniče, kolegice i kolege, uvođenje jedinstvenog punjača, donošenje novih pravila o označavanju meda, rješavanje problema minusa na računima ili pak uvođenje prava na popravak proizvoda, sve su to inicijative na kojima smo radili da bismo unaprijedili položaj potrošača i dodatno ih zaštitili na zajedničkom tržištu.
               

                  U novom mandatu suočavamo se s bitno različitim geopolitičkim okolnostima koje utječu i na poziciju potrošača. Generirana inflacija smanjuje kupovnu moć građana, a velike međunarodne kompanije sve češće se služe nepoštenim poslovnim praksama. Jedan od velikih problema koji je prisutan u nekoliko država članica, uključujući Hrvatsku, tiču se istih proizvoda koji se prodaju po bitno drugačijim cijenama u različitim državama članicama. Postoje proizvodi koji se u jednoj državi prodaju po dva do tri puta višoj cijeni nego u istom trgovačkom lancu u susjednoj državi članici, a najveći je problem s prehrambenim proizvodima. Takvom ponašanju treba stati na kraj. Zato pozivam Europsku komisiju da se u strategiji za potrošače posebno pozabavi ovim problemom i što prije revidira Direktivu o nepoštenoj poslovnoj praksi.
               

                  U Europi ne smiju postojati potrošači prvog i drugog reda.
               

Pierfrancesco Maran (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, in occasione della Giornata dei diritti dei consumatori, vorrei portare all'attenzione di quest'Aula un tema caro alle associazioni dei consumatori, che ci ricorda il nostro ruolo in difesa dei consumatori anche in soggetti ben regolati e a forte concorrenza, come quello delle assicurazioni auto.
               

                  Il costo delle assicurazioni sta crescendo in Europa: infatti, sono aumentate di quasi il 20% nell'ultimo triennio. Questo aumento colpisce tutti ma in particolar modo i giovani neopatentati, che spesso hanno anche un potere di acquisto minore.
               

                  Il mondo assicurativo lo spiega con l'inflazione e l'incremento dei costi di riparazione che incidono, sì, ma, dati alla mano, non nella misura degli aumenti delle polizze: il sospetto è che queste due cause siano anche la scusa per aumentare i prezzi a discapito dei consumatori.
               

                  Caro Commissario, la Commissione europea, garante del mercato interno, deve vigilare affinché nel 2025 il mercato riporti i prezzi sotto controllo. Ce lo chiedono le associazioni dei consumatori ma, soprattutto, è un'esigenza delle famiglie europee.
               

Biljana Borzan (S&D). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, sretan dan potrošača svim našim građanima! Ili možda ne baš svim? Jer bolje je biti potrošač u jednom dijelu Europske unije nego u drugom.
               

                  Negdje su rasprodaje stvarne, a drugdje su samo marketinški trik. Neki lako kupuju preko interneta, a za vašu zemlju možda nema dostave. Negdje je cijena telefonskog poziva razumna, a vama je preskupa jer vas je teleoperater stavio u isti koš s Marokom ili Novim Zelandom. Potrošačka prava uvijek završavaju na istoj granici, onoj između zapadne i istočne Europe. Svjedoci smo najvišeg rasta cijena osnovnih proizvoda upravo u zemljama s najnižim primanjima. Pola kile tjestenine je dva puta skuplje u Hrvatskoj nego u Francuskoj. Pasta za zube tri puta skuplja u Bugarskoj nego u Njemačkoj. Često nam se kaže, morate bolje upoznati svoja prava. Kao da je naša krivnja što nitko na tržištu ne radi u skladu s njima. Što vrijedi imati pravo na povrat novca ako ga trgovac ne želi vratiti. Potrošačka prava ne smiju biti mrtvo slovo na papiru.
               

                  Samo efikasan nadzor i stroge kazne mogu donijeti promjenu.
               

Catch-the-eye procedure


Nina Carberry (PPE). – Mr President, the European single market has been the foundation of our economic success, connecting 450 million consumers across 27 countries. But let's be honest: it's not yet finished. And by leaving it unfinished, we are letting down European consumers and businesses alike.
The biggest gap is services: 70 % of the EU economy. Yet complex regulations and red tape make it tough for companies, especially SMEs, to expand across borders. Then there's the Capital Markets Union. We currently rely too much on banks for funding. We need to let savings and investments flow more freely across Europe. And let's not forget digital and energy markets – still fragmented. The solution for this? Simplified EU-wide rules.
And the only final point: European consumers also expect safe and traceable products, particularly in agri-food goods. But when imports fail, we must meet standards, and we must react swiftly to protect businesses, farmers and consumers alike.
So 30 years after the single market was born, it's time to finish what we started.

SĒDI VADA: ROBERTS ZĪLE


Priekšsēdētāja vietnieks


Lukas Sieper (NI). – Herr Präsident, werte Menschen Europas! Herr Kommissar, ich gebe Ihnen einen Moment. Ich bin Jurist, ich habe Jura studiert, und eine der ersten Stellen, an denen ich mich ernsthaft mit der Europäischen Union auseinandersetzen musste, war das Verbraucherschutzrecht. Das Verbraucherschutzrecht ist in der deutschen Juristenausbildung ein sehr beliebtes Thema. Wir müssen uns alle sehr genau damit befassen, und dementsprechend hat es aber auch eine Bedeutung: Es ist eine der Grundlagen dieser Union, die Idee, dass in unserem Binnenmarkt, in diesem Raum des freien Handels, die Menschen, die an der ungeschütztesten Stelle des Marktes stehen, durch die Union den Schutz erhalten, um eine faire Position zu bekommen.
                  

                     Und dementsprechend möchte ich diesen EU Consumers Day nutzen, um Ihnen diese Geschichte mitzugeben. Bitte denken Sie immer daran, dass das Verbraucherschutzrecht der Europäischen Union einer der Bereiche ist, in dem unsere Bürgerinnen und Bürger am allermeisten berührt werden.
                  

Julien Sanchez (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, la Commission ose aujourd'hui lancer un débat sur la protection des consommateurs. Quelques vérités doivent donc être rappelées. D'abord, sans votre marché européen de l'énergie, les Français pourraient avoir le nucléaire, EDF et l'électricité la moins chère, et être un eldorado pour les entreprises en Europe. Au lieu de cela, vous spoliez les Français, avec la complicité de Macron.
                  

                     Ensuite, n'est-ce pas l'Union européenne qui, via son accord avec le Mercosur, veut importer de la viande nourrie aux hormones de croissance et aux antibiotiques? Vous osez nous faire croire qu'il y aura des contrôles? Je serais curieux d'aller faire des contrôles-surprises moi-même au Brésil, avec des organismes indépendants. En voulant mettre cela dans nos assiettes, quelle légitimité avez-vous pour parler de protection des consommateurs? Nous continuerons à nous y opposer fermement, pour notre souveraineté alimentaire, notre santé publique et nos agriculteurs.
                  

                     N'est-ce pas aussi vous qui voulez interdire l'acquisition de voitures neuves émettant du CO2 à compter de 2035, plombant la filière automobile européenne, faisant un beau cadeau à nos concurrents et sacrifiant nos consommateurs au nom d'idéologies? Je n'oublie pas le pacte vert ni les contrats de Pfizer négociés par SMS.
                  

                     Alors, de grâce, cessez de nous faire perdre notre temps ici avec des débats cyniques sur la protection des consommateurs. Parlez plutôt de ce que vous connaissez mieux: l'opacité, les taxes, les interdictions délirantes et les contraintes ubuesques. C'est vous qui êtes les premiers spoliateurs des consommateurs; mais les peuples européens se réveillent.
                  

(Brīvā mikrofona uzstāšanos beigas.)


Dan Jørgensen,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, thank you, honourable Members, for an interesting debate. I'm sure you, like me, often experience when speaking to citizens in our Member States that sometimes they feel that maybe what we do in Brussels and Strasbourg seems a little bit far away from their everyday lives, because they hear about directives and regulations and acquis communautaire. But what we've discussed here today, that is exactly about the everyday living of ordinary citizens in our community.
The consumer protection rights that we have in the European Union, the legislation that we've made, protect citizens every day. We all consume from the moment we get up in the morning until we go to bed at night. Whether we want it or not, we are part of an internal market where we consume products that are produced under pretty strict rules. I say 'pretty' because we're not there yet. We've come a far way – Christel Schaledemose and others spoke about that – but we need to go even further. And as the world changes, and more become part of an online marketplace, then also, of course, our regulation needs to follow that development.

Priekšsēdētājs. – Debates ir slēgtas.
                  
17.   Debate on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law (debate)
17.1.   Democracy and human rights in Thailand, notably the lese-majesty law and the deportation of Uyghur refugees

Priekšsēdētājs. – Nākamais darba kārtības punkts ir debates par sešiem rezolūciju priekšlikumiem par demokrātiju un cilvēktiesībām Taizemē, jo īpaši likumu par valsts zaimošanu un uiguru bēgļu deportēšanu (2025/2594(RSP)).
                  

Daniel Attard,
author. – Mr President, Thailand is a country I have visited, a place of rich culture and resilience. We see Thailand as a valued partner of the European Union and today I am not here to preach, but to strengthen that partnership – one which is rooted in democracy, human rights and mutual respect. Yet, real partnerships require honesty, and we must be honest about our deep concern over the prosecution of Thai parliamentarians, opposition figures and human rights defenders under the lese-majesty law.
Peaceful democratic discourse should never be a crime. Their voices should be heard, not silenced. Democracy thrives when dissent is debated, not punished. For this reason, we strongly urge the Thai authorities to grant an amnesty to those who are prosecuted or imprisoned for the peaceful exercise of their rights.
We are also concerned about the deportation of Uyghur asylum seekers and the reports of mistreatment they face. By strengthening its refugee protection, Thailand has an opportunity to lead by example.
Our resolution today is not about condemnation. It's about engagement. Thailand has made progress and we recognise that. But meaningful reforms, particularly to the lese-majesty law, must continue to ensure fundamental freedoms are upheld. We urge the Thai Government to take concrete steps forward towards greater democracy, political inclusivity and human rights protections.
The free trade agreement negotiation is a process that can bring prosperity anchored in shared values. A thriving, open democracy strengthens Thailand's global position and reassures its partners that economic and political progress can go hand in hand.
To our Thai friends, we stand ready to work with you, not against you. This is not just about an EU resolution. It is about the future of Thai democracy and the fundamental rights of its people. Let us use this moment not as a division, but as an opportunity – one to engage, to reform and to move forward together.

Engin Eroglu,
Verfasser. – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar! Über was reden wir heute? Es sind 40 Menschen aus Thailand nach China abgeschoben. Und das eigentlich Tragische ist, dass wir heute darüber diskutieren, denn über die Abschiebung wissen wir schon mehrere Wochen Bescheid. Und wir hatten mit einer Gruppe von Abgeordneten schon in der letzten Plenarwoche zu Straßburg gefordert, dass wir diese Aussprache haben, bevor die Menschen von Thailand nach China abgeschoben werden. 40 Menschen, die – und das ist das eigentlich Tragische daran – auch noch von anderen Staaten, nicht-europäischen Staaten, aufgenommen werden sollten. Wir haben glaubhafte Berichte gesehen, dass andere Länder gesagt haben: Wir nehmen diese 40 Menschen auf, schiebt sie nicht zurück nach China.
                  

                     Und wir verschieben diese Debatte, weil eine Delegation des Europäischen Parlaments, Herr Vizepräsident – die ja das Präsidium, in dem Sie sitzen, genehmigt hat –, nach Thailand fährt. Also, wenn das nicht eine Tragödie ist und wenn wir uns dafür nicht schämen müssen, dann weiß ich auch nicht, was wir richtig und falsch machen. Und deswegen, bitte, wenn das wiederkommt: Das darf nicht wieder passieren.
                  

                     Und das andere ist: Das sind 40 Menschen, die gehören einer Minderheit an, den Uiguren, und glauben Sie mir, die kommen dort nicht im Guten an, sondern die werden dort wahrscheinlich genauso wie die anderen Uiguren sehr schlimme Repressalien erleben müssen, und das darf nicht sein.
                  

Erik Marquardt,
Verfasser. – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar! Ich möchte auch zuallererst klar machen: Wir wollen eine gute Partnerschaft mit Thailand, aber zu einer guten Partnerschaft gehört eben auch ein gemeinsames Wertefundament. Deswegen ist diese Entschließung auch ein Anlass, unsere Besorgnis auszudrücken darüber, dass dieses gemeinsame Wertefundament immer weiter zu erodieren droht.
                  

                     Es ist nicht akzeptabel, wenn in Thailand Oppositionspolitiker unter Druck gesetzt werden, wenn ihnen angedroht wird, dass sie ihr Leben lang nicht mehr Politik ausüben können, nur weil sie andere Meinungen haben, wenn die Meinungsfreiheit beschränkt wird. Es ist auch nicht akzeptabel, dass in den letzten Jahren 2000 Menschenrechtsverteidigerinnen und Menschenrechtsverteidiger, Journalistinnen und Journalisten strafrechtlich verfolgt wurden. Natürlich ist es auch nicht akzeptabel, dass Uiguren nach China deportiert werden, wo ihnen willkürliche Inhaftierung, aber eben auch Folter droht.
                  

                     Wir erwarten, dass die Rechte von Minderheiten wie der Uiguren geschützt werden. Und in der Tat erwarte ich auch vom Parlament und von der Delegation des Parlaments, dass sie sich für diese Rechte ganz aktiv auch bei diesen Delegationsreisen einsetzt. Ich glaube, es ist deswegen wichtig, dass wir diese Entschließung beschließen, dass wir mit großer Geschlossenheit, aber auch Entschlossenheit, Verbesserungen einfordern, diese aber auch gemeinsam mit den thailändischen Behörden versuchen zu erringen.
                  

Susanna Ceccardi,
autrice. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'11 settembre 2018 la dottoressa Abbas, medico in pensione, è stata prelevata con la forza; un arresto che sembra legato alle critiche pubbliche espresse da sua sorella, meno di una settimana prima, durante un evento presso un think tank statunitense, in cui denunciava la repressione degli uiguri.
                  

                     Da allora la sua famiglia non ha più avuto notizie di lei. Il 27 febbraio 2020 almeno 40 uiguri sono stati rimpatriati dalla Thailandia in Cina, un'azione che desta profonda preoccupazione e che viola gli standard internazionali assunti dal Paese.
                  

                     In Cina gli uiguri affrontano detenzioni arbitrarie, condizioni di lavoro forzato e restrizioni alle libertà fondamentali. Inoltre, il governo cinese sta estendendo la sua influenza ben oltre i propri confini, esercitando pressioni su altri Stati affinché collaborino al rimpatrio forzato di dissidenti e minoranze perseguitate.
                  

                     L'Unione europea deve andare oltre le semplici dichiarazioni di condanna ma è necessario adottare misure concrete, una maggiore trasparenza nelle filiere produttive e restrizioni commerciali per i prodotti legati allo sfruttamento del lavoro forzato, che danneggiano le nostre imprese, sottoposte a standard rigidi e a regolamentazioni spesso folli, applicate da burocrati inflessibili.
                  

Miriam Lexmann,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, colleagues, Commissioner, just in the recent years, the Chinese Communist Party has built an Orwellian state that has introduced mass surveillance, forced labour and placed over a million Uyghurs in a concentration camp.
This is the reason why many Uyghurs escape the brutal regime while placing their trust in the hands of the international community. Thailand has completely failed these victims and violated international guarantees of their dignity and rights. They were kept in inhumane conditions before being sent back to China, where they face the risk of torture and imprisonment.
Dear colleagues, this is yet another proof of why we have to rethink our relations with China, ensuring a value-based and consistent approach towards the Chinese Communist Party. Only such a principled foreign policy can protect human rights and our economic interests. Thailand and our partner countries have to decide where they want to stand.

Brīvais mikrofons


Lukas Sieper (NI). – Mr President, dear people of Europe, Thailand has just deported Uyghurs back to China.
Let's not sugarcoat it – and I thank you, colleague, that you did not. These people are being sent to concentration camps – not prisons, not re-education centres. Concentration camps.
And no, as far as we know, there are no gas chambers, but there is torture, there is forced sterilisation, there is forced marriage and the complete eradication of their culture.
This is not a political exaggeration. This is not based on rumours. This is based on facts reported by Der Spiegel, by the Fraunhofer Institute and by other renowned institutions.
Europe knows the horrors of concentration camps. We know what happens when the world stays silent in the face of such madness. We must be clear: no country in the world shall send Uyghurs back to China. We in this House, across all political divides, must agree on one thing: when people are thrown into concentration camps, we stand up. Because if we don't, who will?

Ondřej Dostál (NI). – Mr President, dear colleagues, I had an opportunity to be a part of a European Parliament mission to Thailand, and we tried to build friendly relations, which we need because we are in danger of trade wars and Thailand is and can be a valuable partner to the European Union.
Firstly, I see it as wrong to 'strongly condemn' somebody who should be our partner – and 'strongly condemn' is the wording of the declaration – in case we are not a court of law and we cannot assess what actually happens there.
The position of Thailand is that the Uyghurs are safe. There are safeguards in China that are put in place. The opinions of our colleagues are different, but we should leave it to the court to resolve these things.
Another issue is the critique of internal laws like the criminal lese-majesty law. Thailand has a kingdom for 800 years, and it is not very respectful from us to intervene in their domestic affairs. Please reconsider.

(Brīvā mikrofona uzstāšanos beigas.)


Dan Jørgensen,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, Thailand is among the EU's longest-standing partners in Asia. In 2022, we signed the partnership and cooperation agreement. And in 2023, free trade agreement negotiations resumed. The EU and Thailand have started a successful cooperation on security issues, including maritime security, the law of the sea and the fight against organised crime. The partnership and cooperation agreement with Thailand marks an important step towards strengthening bilateral relations based on shared universal values, such as democracy and human rights.
Thailand is also an important partner in the region within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, and multilaterally within the United Nations, where Thailand recently supported the EU-sponsored resolution on a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine.
In 2023, Thailand successfully held parliamentarian elections, which resulted in a peaceful transfer of power to a new civilian government for the first time since the 2014 coup. It is important that the political space in Thailand remains open, and that restored political pluralism and fundamental freedoms are protected.
Regarding the human rights right situation, while there has been some progress, challenges remain in some areas. Sedition and computer crime charges are used to limit free speech. Failure to comply with the royal defamation legal framework was at the origin of the motion for the dissolution of the main opposition party. We hope that Thailand will refrain from imposing disproportionate sentences in the lese-majesty cases, especially on children and young people.
On 27 February 2025, Thailand proceeded with the deportation of 40 Uyghur refugees to China. The EU deeply regrets the decision by the Thai Government, taken in violation of the principles of non-refoulement, as well as of Thailand's obligation under national and international law. It is detrimental to Thailand's international image. We have expressed our serious concerns directly to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Bangkok.
We also noted positive developments on the human rights situation in Thailand, like the recently adopted Marriage Equality Act, which enshrines into law the equal recognition of relationships for same-sex couples. The EU welcomes this step. Thailand became the first Southeast Asian country to recognise same-sex unions. Thailand was also elected a member of the Human Rights Council for 2025 and 2026, and continues its efforts to ratify the core human rights instruments. In 2024, Thailand ratified the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances and started enforcing the Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Disappearance Act.
The EU supports the universal principles of democracy and human rights everywhere in the world. This is one of the fundamental tenets of the European common foreign policy. Therefore, we continue to raise human rights issues in the political dialogue with the Thai authorities and in multilateral forums, including at the Human Rights Council. The EU will also continue to support civil society stakeholders to promote dialogue and their effective participation.

Priekšsēdētājs. – Debates ir slēgtas.
                  

                     Balsošana notiks rītdien.
                  


Rakstiski paziņojumi (178. pants)



João Oliveira (The Left),
por escrito. – Condenamos toda e qualquer violação de direitos humanos, seja na Tailândia, seja em qualquer país que integra a UE, ou noutra qualquer parte do mundo. Quando a situação da Tailândia tem sido praticamente ignorada nos últimos anos pelo PE, é num momento de aproximação deste país à República Popular da China que surge esta resolução, instrumentalizando cinicamente as migrações e os uigures (detidos há dez anos em centros de detenção tailandeses sem que tal tivesse merecido anteriormente qualquer consideração). A UE não tem moral, pelas políticas que defende, promove e implementa no que aos migrantes e refugiados diz respeito, para ditar juízos sobre terceiros quanto a esta questão. Não acompanhamos e denunciamos a instrumentalização dos direitos humanos, para que, a seu pretexto, sejam promovidas políticas coercivas de relacionamento ou encobertas e dissimuladas operações de ingerência externa e políticas de confrontação no plano internacional, que visam, além da Tailândia, a República Popular da China. A relação da UE e dos seus Estados-Membros com outros países deve ser pautada pelo respeito pela sua soberania e independência, no cumprimento dos princípios da Carta das Nações Unidas e do Direito Internacional, respeitando o direito dos povos a decidir do seu destino, livre de ingerências externas, promovendo a paz, e uma cooperação mutuamente vantajosa.
                  
17.2.   Severe political, humanitarian and human rights crisis in Sudan, in particular the sexual violence and child rape

Priekšsēdētājs. – Nākamais darba kārtības punkts ir debates par septiņiem rezolūciju priekšlikumiem par smago politisko, humanitāro un cilvēktiesību krīzi Sudānā, jo īpaši seksuālo vardarbību un bērnu izvarošanu (2025/2595(RSP)).
                  

Lukas Mandl,
author. – Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, humanitarian organisations call Sudan and the situation there literally one of the worst humanitarian nightmares of recent history. So, rightly, late at night now in the European Parliament, we use the time to reflect on this worst humanitarian nightmare of recent history.
We all know the Russian attack against Ukraine is close geographically and is also close to our way of life. But there are also other crises on earth. In terms of quantity, Sudan is one of the major crises, and also in terms of cruelty – even sexual violence is used as a weapon of war in this crisis.
Many among the most evil powers on our planet are present in Sudan, among others: Islamist terror, Islamist ideology and violence, as well as Putin's Russian forces who try to exploit the soil and to torture the population there as well.
I thank Hilde Vautmans and the other co-negotiators on this file and I'm happy that we explicitly mention the World Food Programme in this file, which has rightly received the Nobel Peace Prize a few years ago. Three World Food Programme workers were killed some time ago in Sudan. And we can see that the funding of the World Food Programme today is the same as ten years ago, while the number of starving people is four times as much as that time.
And my proposal today is that maybe it can be, even in these times, a cooperation project between EU and US to provide more funding to the World Food Programme, because fighting starvation must be something that's common ground for the EU and US.

Marta Temido,
Autora. – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, o Sudão vive uma catástrofe humana sem precedentes desde que, há quase dois anos, as Forças Armadas do Sudão e as Forças de Apoio Rápido iniciaram uma guerra civil. Presos neste confronto estão milhões de sudaneses, em particular mulheres e crianças.
                  

                     A violência sexual, a violação de mulheres, de meninas, de meninos — incluindo a violação coletiva — são sistematicamente utilizadas como arma de guerra, com os seus corpos a tornarem-se parte do campo de batalha.
                  

                     As Nações Unidas consideram o estupro o crime de guerra mais antigo, mais silenciado e menos condenado, mas esta prática também é utilizada para semear o terror. Por isso, temos a obrigação de exigir a investigação e responsabilização dos autores destes crimes. Mas temos também a obrigação de manter o apoio firme às suas vítimas, através de mecanismos e fundos disponíveis no contexto da ajuda humanitária, designadamente de saúde.
                  

                     Podemos não ter nas nossas mãos pôr fim à guerra, mas temos nas nossas mãos aliviar o sofrimento das suas vítimas.
                  

Catarina Vieira,
author. – Mr President, as the brutal war rages in Sudan, the population is confronted with an unprecedented humanitarian crisis: over 150 000 people have been killed, 13 million were forced to flee their homes and 30 million are dependent on humanitarian aid. Rape has become a method of warfare, leaving permanent scars and destroying lives.
The sad conclusion is that the Western world is failing humanity in Sudan. USAID cuts deeply hit the most vulnerable people directly, putting their lives at risk. And while the EU is preoccupied with the latest nonsense coming from the White House, the United Arab Emirates delivers weapons to a party that is standing accused of genocide.
The EU must take its responsibility: install the monitoring mission, support the work of the ICC and adopt sanctions against those responsible for the violations. If we believe that human rights are universal, we need to act now!

Rima Hassan,
auteur. – Monsieur le Président, en 2019, les femmes soudanaises ont courageusement pris les rues pour faire la révolution. Aujourd'hui, elles se suicident par peur de subir des viols. Depuis avril 2023, la guerre qui oppose les forces armées soudanaises aux Forces de soutien rapide a déjà fait des dizaines de milliers de morts, trois millions de réfugiés et neuf millions de déplacés internes. La guerre a provoqué une famine, qui risque de s'aggraver depuis que Trump a gelé les fonds de l'USAID. Ce même Trump sanctionne la CPI au moment où elle mène des enquêtes sur des crimes contre l'humanité et des actes de génocide perpétrés au Soudan.
                  

                     L'Union européenne porte, elle aussi, une énorme responsabilité: en externalisant ses frontières, elle finance des autorités qui se rendent coupables de graves violations des droits de l'homme. Les Soudanais et Soudanaises fuient la guerre; sur la route de l'exil, ils trouvent la torture. Depuis les enquêtes d'Amnesty International, nous savons également que des systèmes d'armements français sont utilisés par les Forces de soutien rapide, bien qu'un embargo sur les armes soit décrété par les Nations unies. Il est temps que l'Union européenne soutienne l'ardente société civile soudanaise matériellement, financièrement et politiquement.
                  

                     Je terminerai par le slogan de leur révolution confisquée.
                  

(L'oratrice conclut son intervention dans une langue non officielle.)


Barry Andrews,
author. – Mr President, Commissioner Jørgensen, colleagues, we're having this debate about the tragedy in Sudan at a time when we're dismantling the tools that we would otherwise use to address this issue. We're having it at a time when USAID has been decapitated by the US Government, when the UK has reduced its overseas aid from 0.7 % of GNI a few years ago down to 0.5 % and now to 0.3 %. But the reality is it's about 0.15 %, when you take account of funding that is applied for domestic migration management.
The same is happening in the Netherlands, where they've halved their overseas aid, and they don't want to talk about gender equality anymore in the Netherlands. In Belgium, they reduced it by a quarter; in Sweden, in Switzerland, and now the German Government will probably do the same thing.
So we can say a lot of fine words in this Chamber, in this Hemicycle – as we've done before – but what we've done is surrender soft power on an industrial scale, surrender influence, and power hates a vacuum. So we have made this decision to retreat from an order of global solidarity and replace it with nothing.
And now we're surprised that you find fragile states like Sudan, which is on the brink of starvation, which is so desperately impacted that the US Government in January declared a genocide. I often think, 'pity the soul that has forgotten how to shudder'; you might call it compassion fatigue. But somehow or other, this is the worst humanitarian crisis in the world.
We have no policy that has addressed this. There has been no statement from the Commission about this collapse in overseas aid. So it's all very well to say fine words here, but until we get a clear statement and establish a floor on European policy on these issues, those fine words will just disappear in dust.

Marit Maij,
namens de S&D-Fractie. – Voorzitter, de rijke geschiedenis van Sudan en de rijke bodem van Sudan vormen een schril contrast met de situatie van de Sudanezen zelf. Er valt in Sudan ook wat te halen, zoals goud. Ook voor ónze telefoons, voor ónze sieraden, voor ónze apparaten. Landen, bijvoorbeeld in het Midden-Oosten, maar óók in de Europese Unie, hebben baat bij de grondstoffen uit Sudan en blijven zo het conflict faciliteren en financieren. De Sudanese gemeenschap is daar het slachtoffer van. Miljoenen gevlucht, losgerukt van hun huis, tienduizenden vermoord. Vrouwen en kinderen worden seksueel misbruikt met als doel gemeenschappen te ontwrichten.
                  

                     Verkrachting als oorlogswapen. Het is de vierde keer in zes maanden dat we hier aandacht vragen voor Sudan en over de situatie in het land debatteren, nu met een resolutie. De Commissie en de lidstaten moeten meer humanitaire hulp bieden nu USAID is weggevallen. Vooral vrouwenorganisaties direct financieren, landen verantwoordelijk houden die het conflict in stand houden, grip krijgen op de herkomst van onze grondstoffen, vooral ook goud dat onze markt binnenkomt en sancties opleggen aan de personen die verantwoordelijk zijn voor deze vreselijke mensenrechtenschendingen.
                  

Chloé Ridel (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, c'est l'histoire d'une mère qui s'interpose entre les miliciens qui ont forcé la porte de chez elle et ses deux filles de 10 et 17 ans: ‘Si quelqu'un doit être violée ici, que ce soit moi.’ C'est l'histoire de huit garçons partis ramasser des fruits, pris en embuscade, menacés avec une arme et violés. L'un d'eux avait six ans. C'est l'histoire de 130 femmes qui, en octobre dernier, ont préféré se suicider collectivement, plutôt que de vivre brisées dans un pays anéanti où elles seraient fatalement violées. C'est la tragédie du Soudan: 60 000 morts, 14 millions de blessés, des violences sexuelles massives, des viols en réunion, des mariages forcés, des enlèvements et de l'esclavage sexuel. C'est la litanie des violences de genre commises au Soudan, aujourd'hui, qui visent clairement à l'anéantissement physique et moral d'une population entière.
                  

                     Quand j'entends que dans cet hémicycle, une partie des députés refusent que nous parlions des droits sexuels et reproductifs des Soudanaises, de leur droit à la contraception et à l'avortement, j'en tremble de honte, parce qu'ils ne savent pas que les femmes qui, là-bas, tombent enceintes après être violées vont jusqu'à se tuer ou à être reniées par leur propre famille.
                  

                     Il faut voir qu'au chevet des milices du Soudan, il se trouve des pays étrangers qui les fournissent en armes. Nous attendons de la Commission européenne qu'elle fasse enfin respecter l'embargo sur les armes, décrété depuis 2004 et qui n'est toujours pas accepté. Il faut tout faire pour mettre fin à la tragédie des Soudanaises et des Soudanais.
                  

Leire Pajín (S&D). – Señor presidente, señorías, la situación humanitaria en Sudán es el espejo donde se reflejan todos los fracasos de la comunidad internacional: el impacto del cambio climático, la pobreza extrema de más de la mitad de la población, la violación y la violencia sexual sistemática contra niñas y niños como arma de guerra, la desaparición de los hospitales y de cualquier tipo de infraestructura…. uno se pregunta qué más tiene que pasar para que nos tomemos en serio la situación de Sudán. Porque lo peor de todo es el olvido sistemático al que hemos sometido a los ciudadanos de Sudán.
                  

                     Y por si esto fuera poco, entrará en vigor este lunes la decisión de la Administración norteamericana de retirar su ayuda oficial al desarrollo. Y eso obliga a la Unión Europea a redoblar sus esfuerzos, a estar todavía más presente si cabe. Hemos hablado hoy de seguridad. Y yo les digo: la seguridad no es solo una cuestión de defensa, es una cuestión también de resolución de conflictos y de lucha contra la pobreza.
                  

Hannes Heide (S&D). – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar! Im Sudan ereignet sich die größte humanitäre Krise der Welt. Regelmäßig und wiederholt beschäftigen wir uns hier im Plenum mit dieser Katastrophe unfassbaren Ausmaßes, aber nach wie vor ist keine Lösung der Situation in Aussicht. Diese Woche haben wir den Internationalen Frauentag hier im Parlament begangen. Gleichzeitig werden im Sudan Frauen und Kinder systematisch vergewaltigt, verschleppt und versklavt. Allein in diesem Jahr hat Unicef über 220 Fälle sexueller Gewalt gegen Kinder dokumentiert; einige Opfer sind erst wenige Monate alt. Frauen werden in Lagern gefangen gehalten und vergewaltigt.
                  

                     Wie reagiert die Welt? Die USA ziehen sich zurück – ein fatales Signal. Mehr und effektive humanitäre Hilfe ist notwendig. Die Opfer benötigen vor allem Schutz, Betreuung und medizinische Versorgung. Nur gezielte Maßnahmen werden diese unhaltbaren Zustände beenden können: ein Waffenembargo, internationale Strafverfolgung, aber auch Sanktionen gegen all jene, die diesen Krieg finanzieren oder, wie die Vereinigten Arabischen Emirate, die paramilitärische RSF, die für sexuelle Gewalt verantwortlich ist, mit Waffen versorgen.
                  

Nikos Papandreou (S&D). – Mr President, Commissioner, it's four months and we've spoken about Sudan three times. We haven't changed much.
The previous speaker said something I agree with: setting up an 'EUAID', but that will take time. It won't happen tomorrow. We need, of course, to come in with humanitarian support.
Tomorrow's vote, though, does have some concrete proposals to send peacekeeping forces right away to protect civilians, create safe spaces for women and children, sanction the commanders and impose an arms embargo on Sudan, as we have done on Darfur.
I would like to remind the Chamber that one of our NATO allies is supplying drones to both sides of the conflict, an incredible profit-making machine from the death of the Sudanese.
So, let's impose our vote tomorrow. Let's ask the international community to send in peacekeeping forces, because this will be a ruined generation borne from violence.

Brīvais mikrofons


Murielle Laurent (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, mes chers collègues, le débat qui vient de se tenir ce soir le montre: il faut que les violences sexuelles, et notamment l'utilisation du viol comme arme de guerre, cessent. L'indifférence collective autour de ces actes est tout simplement inadmissible.
                  

                     De plus, depuis la guerre du Soudan, en 2023, plus d'un million de personnes ont fui les combats vers le Tchad, qui, je le rappelle, fait partie des pays les plus pauvres du monde. Fin février, je me suis notamment rendue dans le camp d'Adré, à l'est du Tchad, où résident un grand nombre de réfugiés soudanais dans des conditions de vie précaires, malgré le travail important des ONG. Les besoins en aide humanitaire sont immenses et les financements sont soit supprimés, comme les financements américains, soit insuffisants, soit menacés. Nous devons être à la hauteur et l'Union européenne se doit de venir en aide à ces millions de personnes, qui en ont plus que besoin.
                  

Sandra Gómez López (S&D). – Señor presidente, Sudán vive una de las peores crisis humanitarias del mundo y hoy quiero hablarles de su peor cara. Actualmente la violencia sexual que sufren niños y niñas está estremeciendo al mundo. Y me gustaría decirlo así, pero no es verdad, porque es uno de los conflictos más invisibles que hoy vivimos mientras hay bebés de menos de un año que están siendo violados.
                  

                     Y miren, hoy no les quiero hablar como política, les quiero hablar como madre, y me gustaría pedirles que se pongan en la situación de una madre que no puede proteger a su hijo, de un bebé que ni siquiera es capaz aún de hablar y que ha sufrido una de las peores atrocidades. Y, como decía antes, este conflicto no llena los grandes titulares. Ni siquiera es protagonista de nuestros debates políticos. Y por eso yo quiero pedirles que desde aquí hoy exijamos justicia. Porque si no somos capaces de proteger a un niño de un violador con uniforme, de un militar, ¿qué estamos haciendo exactamente aquí en este Parlamento?
                  

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Mr President, people of Europe, let me be clear: I support the authors in their motion. But I'm also wondering, Mr Andrews, you talked about soft power and about humanitarian aid. But are we talking about economic collapse? Are we talking about a pandemic, about political instability or a natural disaster?
Ms Pajín said we have to take the situation seriously. I am asking what is a serious reaction to war? Mr Heide said we need to protect the victims. How do you protect people from armed killers and rapists? Look up again on this board. It says 'child rape' – child rape. And that is something, in my opinion, where we need to send something named after this Union of ours: Eurofighters.

(Brīvā mikrofona uzstāšanos beigas.)


Dan Jørgensen,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, as we are fast approaching the second anniversary of the war in Sudan, neither belligerent party wants to end it. The responsibility for this human-made calamity rests with the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces, as well as their respective affiliated militias.
Because of this war, the people of Sudan are facing a catastrophic humanitarian situation. Sudan is the country with the most people in need: over 30 million. To put this in perspective, Sudan accounts for 10 % of all people requiring humanitarian aid across the world. Yet Sudan represents less than 1 % of the world's population.
The Sudanese people are facing an unprecedented worsening of the nutrition and food crisis, which is leading to a severe famine, as evidenced in Darfur and Kordofan. Unfortunately, many more regions are likely experiencing famine-like conditions. Again, as a comparison, it is only the third time in the 21st century that famine is declared worldwide.
Sudan is also the epicentre of the largest protection crisis in the world. Appalling reports of atrocious international humanitarian law and human rights violations have been witnessed throughout the country, in particular in the most conflict-affected areas.
To further aggravate things, rape and gender-based violence committed by both belligerent parties are also used as tactics on the battlefield. Some 6.7 million people are at risk of gender-based violence. Displaced refugees, migrant women and girls and even little boys are particularly vulnerable. Sex crimes and violence in conflict is a war crime.
In Sudan, we have to continue to push for peace. Together with our regional and international partners, including the African Union and the United Nations, we call for an immediate ceasefire and a sustainable political solution to the conflict. The EU continues to engage with both warring parties, mainly through the work of the EU Special Representative for the Horn of Africa. There must be accountability for crimes committed too. This is also part and parcel of rebuilding Sudan once the war is over.
Finally, the EU will keep funding initiatives across the globe that provide survivors with healthcare, legal assistance and psychosocial support. We call on others to do so as well. For the victims, wherever you are, the EU's message is clear: you are not alone.

Priekšsēdētājs. – Debates ir slēgtas.
                  

                     Balsošana notiks rītdien.
                  
17.3.   Unlawful detention and sham trials of Armenian hostages, including high-ranking political representatives from Nagorno-Karabakh, by Azerbaijan

Priekšsēdētājs. – Nākamais darba kārtības punkts ir debates par astoņiem rezolūciju priekšlikumiem par armēņu ķīlnieku, tostarp Kalnu Karabahas augsta ranga politisko pārstāvju, nelikumīgo aizturēšanu un fiktīvo tiesāšanu Azerbaidžānā (2025/2596(RSP)).
                  

Miriam Lexmann,
author. – Mr President, over 20 political hostages who were imprisoned during the ethnic cleansing of Christian Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh are still detained in Azerbaijan. They are facing inhuman conditions and sham trials which could result in their life imprisonment. This is the real face of Aliyev's regime – a regime which oppresses its own citizens and disregards international obligations.
While the European Union comes with a strategic partnership, the regime in Baku continues to threaten its neighbours and world efforts toward regional peace. In the current geopolitical environment, there is a strong need for the EU to defend its values, especially in its closest neighbourhood. Instead, we are again appeasing the oppressor and rewarding Aliyev's actions with enhanced trade. Have we not learned our lesson?
It's time to stop dreaming about a strategic partnership, face reality and act in accordance with our values and principles. We have to take urgent action and address claims and these clear violations of basic human rights, and ensure that the hostages are immediately and unconditionally released. Leading judges and prosecutors who play a role in these unjust trials should face sanctions, and we have to make sure that any future cooperation with Azerbaijan is based on conditions of the release of all the political prisoners and demonstrated readiness of Baku to engage in a peace agreement which would respect the rights of Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians.

Vasile Dîncu,
autor. – Domnule președinte, dragi colegi, situația prizonierilor politici armeni din Nagorno-Karabah ridică întrebări fundamentale despre justiție, stabilitate și viitorul păcii în Caucazul de Sud.
                  

                     Desigur, regiunea Caucazului, așa cum o descrie James Forsyth, este una din cele mai colorate și vii din lume, iar diversitatea intereselor locale complică orice situație diplomatică și orice acțiune diplomatică. Totuși, când este vorba despre pace și stabilitate în Caucaz, Parlamentul European nu s-a abătut deloc de la principiile și valorile sale.
                  

                     Suveranitatea, integritatea teritorială și independența Armeniei au animat rezoluții precum cea din 13 martie sau din 24 octombrie 2024. Din păcate, autoritățile azere persistă în încălcarea drepturilor omului, promovând o retorică agresivă împotriva Armeniei, persecutând oficiali armeni din Nagorno-Karabah.
                  

                     Pe acest fond, propunem ca Uniunea și statele membre să vegheze asupra proceselor și să viziteze ostaticii armeni. Am mers chiar mai departe, susținând sancțiuni împotriva oficialilor azeri responsabili pentru abuzurile judiciare. Regimurile sancționatorii ale Uniunii ne permit să adoptăm măsuri strict împotriva oficialilor, ca un prim pas pentru descurajarea unor abuzuri viitoare.
                  

                     Perspectivele nu sunt unele pozitive, de aceea, având în vedere mișcările militare din zonă, cred că trebuie să nu așteptăm ca o mare tragedie să se întâmple pentru a adopta măsuri concrete. Este un fel de întrebare pentru Comisie în acest moment.
                  

                     Dragi colegi, așa cum am mai spus, Caucazul de Sud este o regiune deosebit de complexă. Trebuie deci să acționăm cu dibăcie diplomatică, inteligent, dar ferm, pentru protejarea valorilor noastre și a drepturilor omului. Prizonierii nu sunt doar un număr, sunt frați, părinți și copiii cuiva, merită libertate. Eliberarea prizonierilor politici ar trebui să fie parte dintr-un efort mai amplu de construire a unui viitor bazat pe încredere reciprocă și cooperare, dar mai ales pe respect față de ordinea globală și reguli. Trebuie să luptăm pentru ca să ținem această viziune în viață.
                  

Γεάδης Γεάδη,
συντάκτης. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, έναν και πλέον χρόνο από την επίθεση του Αζερμπαϊτζάν στο Ναγκόρνο Καραμπάχ συνεχίζουν οι Αρμένιοι να βρίσκονται μακριά από τις πατρογονικές τους εστίες. Ανεπούλωτες παραμένουν οι πληγές από την καταστροφή της πολιτιστικής και θρησκευτικής τους κληρονομιάς. 23 Αρμένιοι παραμένουν παράνομα κρατούμενοι, υπομένοντας την κακομεταχείριση και τον εξευτελισμό τους. Δυστυχώς, το καθεστώς του Αλίεφ όχι μόνο δεν σέβεται το διεθνές δίκαιο και τα ανθρώπινα θεμελιώδη δικαιώματα αλλά συνεχίζει να κατέχει παράνομα κυρίαρχο έδαφος της Αρμενίας.
                  

                     Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση οφείλει να θωρακίσει τις δημοκρατικές αξίες όπως αυτές πηγάζουν από την αρχαία Ελλάδα. Καλείται να δράσει αποφασιστικά απέναντι στο Αζερμπαϊτζάν και την Τουρκία, που δεν αποτελούν τίποτε άλλο από κράτη εγκληματίες. Φτάνει η ανοχή σε αυτούς που διέπραξαν εθνοκάθαρση κατά των Αρμενίων, των Ελλήνων του Πόντου, της Μικράς Ασίας και της Κύπρου.
                  

Nathalie Loiseau,
auteur. – Monsieur le Président, nous sommes réunis aujourd'hui pour exiger la libération des 23 otages arméniens détenus par Bakou et qui font face à un procès inique. J'ai voulu cette résolution et je remercie mes coauteurs. Le procès en cours n'a rien à envier aux procès staliniens. Les accusés sont privés de tout et subissent des mauvais traitements. Leur seul crime est d'être Arméniens.
                  

                     Je voudrais m'adresser à Kaja Kallas, en regrettant qu'une fois de plus, elle ne soit pas là pour nous écouter. Madame la Haute Représentante, je voudrais vous féliciter pour l'envoi de matériel à l'Arménie, dans le cadre de la Facilité européenne pour la paix. Je voudrais aussi saluer l'extension du mandat de la mission de l'Union européenne en Arménie, EUMA, qui fait un excellent travail. Je vous encourage même vivement à aller le constater sur le terrain par vous-même.
                  

                     Madame la Haute Représentante, j'étais en Arménie récemment et j'espère que vous vous y rendrez bientôt. Vous y verrez un pays qui veut la paix, qui rêve d'Europe, mais qui est confronté à un voisin, l'Azerbaïdjan, qui continue à le menacer et qui est l'un des meilleurs alliés de la Russie. J'espère que vous résisterez à ceux qui vous conseillent l'équidistance entre Erevan et Bakou. J'espère aussi que vous vous souviendrez que l'Azerbaïdjan mène vis-à-vis de la France une politique d'ingérence hostile, qui ne peut pas rester sans conséquence. Je vous demande en clair d'écouter et de mettre en œuvre ce que ce Parlement vous demande depuis longtemps et avec insistance.
                  

Marina Mesure,
auteur. – Monsieur le Président, il y a au moins deux ans, aux confins de l'Europe, se déroulait sous nos yeux un crime contre l'humanité dans un silence assourdissant: plus de 100 000 personnes forcées à l'exil au Haut-Karabagh parce qu'Arméniennes; une tentative délibérée du régime d'Aliev d'effacer une culture, une histoire et une identité qui remontent à des millénaires.
                  

                     Devant cette tragédie, l'Europe n'a pas été à la hauteur, en privilégiant son accord gazier avec Bakou. Aujourd'hui, elle peut et elle doit agir pour exiger la libération des prisonniers arméniens détenus par l'Azerbaïdjan. Ils sont encore des centaines à être emprisonnés et torturés, dont le seul crime est d'avoir défendu leur terre, leur peuple et leurs droits. Ne pas agir, c'est envoyer un message clair à Aliev. C'est dire qu'il peut prolonger sa politique expansionniste à l'encontre de l'Arménie, qu'il considère comme une province, et cela en toute impunité. Ainsi, le silence n'est pas une option.
                  

                     Nous envoyons un message clair: l'Arménie n'est pas seule. Nous sommes unis à ses côtés pour faire respecter son intégrité territoriale, sa souveraineté et son droit à vivre en paix et en sécurité, sans craindre de nouvelle agression de son voisin azerbaïdjanais.
                  

Matthieu Valet,
auteur. – Monsieur le Président, une fois de plus, nous déplorons et condamnons les agissements hostiles de l'Azerbaïdjan à l'encontre des Arméniens du Haut-Karabagh. Malheureusement, nous savons d'avance que ce débat ainsi que la résolution qui suivra tomberont dans une oreille sourde, car l'accord gazier signé par la Commission européenne ne sera nullement remis en cause, malgré nos demandes répétées. Il est incompréhensible que l'Union européenne coupe les flux gaziers en provenance de la Russie, mais garde un silence assourdissant face à l'épuration ethnique qui se déroule au Haut-Karabagh.
                  

                     De plus, qu'attend l'Union européenne pour condamner la posture agressive de l'Azerbaïdjan envers la France, un État membre, lorsqu'elle voit son intégrité territoriale menacée par ce pays, qui soutient les mouvements indépendantistes violents et diffuse de la désinformation en Nouvelle-Calédonie? À cette occasion, je tiens à remercier nos policiers, nos gendarmes, nos militaires et nos sapeurs pompiers qui, en Nouvelle-Calédonie, par leur bravoure et leur courage, témoignent d'un engagement indéfectible pour la défense de ce territoire européen. Il est d'une importance primordiale et stratégique de défendre la souveraineté française de ces territoires de l'Indo-Pacifique. En effet, que serait l'Union européenne sans cette zone maritime d'une importance primordiale et capitale dans les domaines de la pêche, de la science, de la défense et de l'énergie de l'Union européenne dans le monde?
                  

Catarina Vieira,
author. – Mr President, dear colleagues, Azerbaijan is facing a deep human rights crisis. The government installed severe restrictions on freedom of expression, assembly and association, and weaponised the legal system against critical voices.
Armenian detainees are one of the groups most severely affected by the government's policies. Ill-treatment is widespread and fair trials have become an illusion.
I am glad that this Parliament is consistently and strongly addressing the situation, but sadly we seem to be the only EU institution doing so. We cannot allow continuing business as usual with Azerbaijan, sacrificing our values because of economic and energy interests. This is not only hypocritical, but it generates dependencies, making us vulnerable for blackmail.
Have we not learned any lesson from our dependencies with Russia in the past? It is time we prioritise human rights above cheap oil and gas.

Tomasz Froelich,
Verfasser. – Herr Präsident! Die Armenier sind ein stolzes Volk, das einem nur leid tun kann: schlecht regiert von Nikol Paschinjan, angegriffen von Aserbaidschan und im Stich gelassen von der EU, aber auch von Russland. In den letzten Jahren hat Baku Fakten geschaffen: Angriff auf Berg-Karabach, Auflösung der Republik Arzach, hunderte Tote, über 100 000 Armenier auf der Flucht, viele Gefangene, viele Geiseln – bis heute. Hinzu kommt die systematische Zerstörung des kulturellen Erbes des ersten christlichen Staates der Welt. Warum hört man eigentlich so wenig davon?
                  

                     Vielleicht, weil europäische Politiker bei alledem eine beschämende Rolle spielen. Gegen Politiker der CDU wurde Anklage erhoben. Der Vorwurf: Bestechung durch die aserbaidschanische Regierung, 4 Millionen Euro Schmiergeld, damit deutsche Christdemokraten wegschauen, wenn armenische Christen vertrieben werden. Kaviar-Diplomatie nennt sich das – eine Schande! Europaweit sollen sogar über 30 Millionen Euro geflossen sein. Das muss diese wertegeleitete Außenpolitik sein, von der hier ständig die Rede ist.
                  

                     Stabilität im Südkaukasus ist auch in unserem Interesse. Diplomatie, Friedensgespräche und eine respektvolle Behandlung der armenischen Geiseln, des armenischen Volkes und seines christlichen Erbes sind die Voraussetzung dafür.
                  

Michał Szczerba,
w imieniu grupy PPE. – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowny Panie Komisarzu! Szanowny Panie Wiceprzewodniczący! Czas tej debaty jest kluczowy i tak naprawdę wszystko, jeśli chodzi o treść tej rezolucji, tego projektu rezolucji zostało powiedziane, ale pozwólcie Państwo, że podzielę się kilkoma spostrzeżeniami.
                  

                     Armeńskie władze od czasu utraty kontroli nad Górskim Karabachem rozpoczęły zmianę kursu polityki zagranicznej i cieszy nas tutaj zbliżenie Armenii z Unią Europejską. Jeśli chcemy wzmocnienia procesu integracji Armenii z Zachodem, powinniśmy zdecydowanie wzmacniać więzi gospodarcze. Unia Europejska powinna też dążyć do zwiększenia aktywności i widoczności w Armenii. Przedłużenie działalności misji cywilnej Unii Europejskiej w Armenii o kolejne dwa lata to przykład naszego zaangażowania. To umacnia pozycję Unii jako mediatora między Armenią a Azerbejdżanem. A celem nas wszystkich powinien być trwały pokój na Kaukazie Południowym.
                  

                     Alarmujące doniesienia o torturach, bezprawnych zatrzymaniach, złym traktowaniu nie mogą pozostać niezauważone. Ta sytuacja jest testem dla europejskich wartości. Musimy twardo stać na straży podstawowych europejskich wartości: praw człowieka, godności ludzkiej i rządów prawa.
                  

Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis,
S&D frakcijos vardu. – Pirmininke, komisare, kolegos. Po Azerbaidžano karinių veiksmų Artsakh Kalnų Karabacho, kuriame gyvena etniniai armėnai, nebeliko. Liko tik keliolika vietinių armėnų, visi kiti turėjo pasitraukti į Armėniją. Iš esmės, Azerbaidžanas įvykdė etninį valymą ir tai – nusikaltimas, kuris priklauso sunkiems nusikaltimams pagal tarptautinę teisę. Azerbaidžanas pažeidė savo tarptautinius įsipareigojimus, įskaitant Ženevos konvenciją ir Europos žmogaus teisių konvenciją. Todėl tie Azerbaidžano pareigūnai, kurie tai įvykdė, nusipelno sankcijų.
                  

                     Azerbaidžanas įkalino 23 asmenis – armėnų kilmės gyventojus ir Armėnijos Respublikos piliečius. Jie laikomi nežmoniškose sąlygose. Ypač sunki būklė Rubeno Vardaniano, jis paskelbė bado streiką. Jo būklė kelia didžiulį susirūpinimą, todėl ES ir kitos tarptautinės organizacijos turi dėti visas diplomatines pastangas užtikrinant armėnų politinių kalinių teisių apsaugą ir siekiant jų kuo skubesnio ir besąlyginio paleidimo. Smerkiu Azerbaidžano sprendimą uždaryti Jungtinių Tautų ir Tarptautinio Raudonojo Kryžiaus komiteto biurus, nes tai rodo Azerbaidžano nenorą užbaigti šį konfliktą kuo greičiau ir priimti tarptautinės bendruomenės reikalavimus.
                  

Małgorzata Gosiewska,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Przed nami kolejna ważna rezolucja. Porusza temat bezprawnego zatrzymania i pokazowych procesów ormiańskich zakładników, w tym wysokich rangą przedstawicieli politycznych z Górskiego Karabachu. Całkowita aneksja Górskiego Karabachu przez Azerbejdżan wywołała kryzys humanitarny i masowy eksodus ormiańskiej ludności cywilnej. Sytuacja ta wymaga konkretnych działań, takich jak ustanowienie misji obserwacyjnej ds. przestrzegania praw człowieka, zorganizowania rozmów między przedstawicielami Azerbejdżanu i Armenii oraz uzależnienia przyszłej współpracy Unii Europejskiej z Azerbejdżanem od postępu w zakresie przestrzegania praw człowieka. Od lat Unia Europejska ingeruje w polski porządek demokratyczny. Teraz planuje zorganizowanie okrągłego stołu w sprawie demokratycznych wyborów prezydenckich w Polsce, by nie wygrał kandydat obywatelski, ale nie reaguje tam, gdzie naprawdę łamane są prawa człowieka, gdzie ta reakcja powinna być szybka. Europo, to nie czas na głośne wystąpienia i oklaski. Domagam się stanowczych działań w celu rozwiązania realnego problemu, jakim bez wątpienia jest sytuacja na Kaukazie.
                  

Michael McNamara,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, colleagues, the deterioration in respect for human rights in Azerbaijan should be a source of concern to this Parliament. But so, too, should the Commission's silence in the face of that.
The ongoing detention and trial of 16 persons from Nagorno-Karabakh, including eight former leaders, must be condemned for what it is: a Stalinist show trial. So, too, the denial of access to the media and observers, even though the trials are supposedly being held in public.
This is exacerbated by Azerbaijan's ongoing refusal to cooperate with the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment, and this, too, should be noted by this Parliament and the European Commission. The Red Cross, the only external organisation with access to these prisoners, has now been asked to withdraw from Azerbaijan and this, too, needs to be noted.
It does seem that the Commission is only capable of condemning one country at a time, and that should not be the case when there is such a clear deterioration in standards, as there is in Azerbaijan.

Pernando Barrena Arza,
on behalf of The Left Group. – Mr President, Azerbaijan holds the painful record of having made a country disappear overnight without the international community paying too much attention. It's almost two years since Azerbaijan completed an ethnic cleansing of the entire Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh: it emptied the country of Armenians and replaced them with Azeri individuals. Furthermore, we cannot forget that Azerbaijan is an authoritarian state where any legitimate political dissent is cracked down.
We must demand the release of the 23 Armenian prisoners of war who are being subjected to sham trials, violations of due process and trumped-up charges. In this regard, it's particularly important for the International Criminal Court to investigate the cases submitted by the Ombudsman of Nagorno-Karabakh and provide a judicial response to the cases of forced expulsion and ethnic cleansing committed by Azerbaijan against the Armenian population of Artsakh.
As this violent approach by Azerbaijan has the whole Armenian community in its sights, I have a direct question to High Commissioner Kallas: are you ready to impose the same sanctions against Aliyev if he invades Armenia, as the European Union has imposed against Putin after the invasion of Ukraine?

Massimiliano Salini (PPE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, lo Stato dell'Azerbaigian continua indisturbato le proprie violenze nei confronti del popolo armeno. Dopo l'invasione militare del settembre 2023 nel Nagorno Karabakh e la relativa deportazione di 100.000 cittadini, sono iniziati queste detenzioni illegali di 23 cittadini armeni e, oggi, questi processi totalmente opachi.
                  

                     Le colpe che non non vengono perdonate al popolo armeno sono di due nature: la prima è geografica: interrompere la continuità territoriale tra Azerbaigian e Turchia; e la seconda, è culturale: il popolo armeno è un popolo cristiano.
                  

                     Le domande che il popolo armeno rivolge all'Europa sono domande degne di un popolo europeo. Diciamolo chiaramente! Questo significa, che a noi europei, è chiesto di valutare se siamo disposti a riservare agli azeri lo stesso trattamento che riserviamo ai russi per come non rispettano la libertà dell'Ucraina.
                  

                     Sanzioni vere e la libertà per questi 23 cittadini illegalmente detenuti.
                  

François-Xavier Bellamy (PPE). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, le comble de l'indécence est atteint. Aliev attaque le Haut-Karabagh. Aliev s'en prend à une population qui ne demandait rien d'autre que de vivre en paix sur sa terre, sur la terre sur laquelle elle vit depuis des millénaires maintenant. Aliev déporte des populations civiles. Aliev utilise des bombes à sous-munitions et des mercenaires djihadistes. Au terme de toute cette horreur, que fait-il? Il met en accusation ses victimes. Aujourd'hui, 23 prisonniers arméniens sont soumis à un simulacre de procès, qui rappelle les grandes heures du stalinisme. Que fait l'Europe? L'Europe se tait. Nous l'avons déjà tellement dit.
                  

                     Monsieur le Commissaire, vous êtes responsable de l'énergie. Comment pouvons-nous, comment pouvez-vous justifier qu'aujourd'hui, l'Europe importe du gaz d'Azerbaïdjan avec un contrat particulier avec ce ‘partenaire fiable’, pour reprendre les mots de la Commission européenne? Comment pouvons-nous justifier que les criminels courent encore en Europe, et que le gaz coule encore vers nos pays? Est-ce que c'est plus indécent aujourd'hui de faire venir du gaz de Bakou que du gaz de Moscou? Est-ce que ce n'est pas le même gaz? Monsieur le Commissaire, nous avons besoin d'une réponse sur cette question.
                  

Dan Jørgensen,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, like this House, the Commission is following the trials against the 16 Karabakh Armenian defendants that are taking place at the Baku Military Court since 17 January of this year. We are aware that human rights organisations have expressed concerns over the fairness of the trials and treatments of the accused. Many of you have expressed similar concerns here today.
We take these concerns very seriously and are closely following the developments. The right to a fair trial must be ensured and respected. The EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus is also closely following related issues and relaying our concerns to the authorities in Baku.
Our relationship with Azerbaijan is founded on principles both sides have committed themselves to. First and foremost, respect for human rights and the rule of law. The European Union will therefore continue to call on the government of Azerbaijan to abide by its international obligations, which include the rights to due process and fair trial. We will use every opportunity to urge Azerbaijan to ensure dignified and safe conditions for detainees. The reports of torture and ill treatment should be promptly and impartially investigated.
The trials of the Baku Military Court touch on the much larger question of achieving lasting and sustainable peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan, of building a peaceful, stable and prosperous South Caucasus. We therefore continue to call on both Armenia and Azerbaijan to build on their achievements and to continue making progress on their path towards full normalisation of relations.
It is important that the governments of both countries take their societies along on the path. The EU will continue to support this process with all the tools at our disposal. We stand ready to help the parties in their dialogue aimed at achieving lasting and sustainable peace.
Honourable Members, I am grateful for this House's persistence in drawing attention to the situation in Azerbaijan and the wider region. It is an expression of our shared commitment to human rights and the rule of law as a guiding principle in our engagement with Azerbaijan and other partners around the world.

President. – The debate is closed.
The vote will take place tomorrow.
18.   Welcome

President. – I would like to welcome a delegation from the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which is participating in the 6th EU-Bosnia and Herzegovina Stabilisation and Association Parliamentary Committee meeting. It is late at night, but welcome!
19.   Secessionist threats in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the recent escalation (debate)

Priekšsēdētājs. – Nākamais darba kārtības punkts ir debates par Komisijas paziņojumu par separātisma draudiem Bosnijā un Hercegovinā un neseno saspīlējuma pieaugumu (2025/2606(RSP)).
               

Christophe Hansen,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, one year has passed since the historic decision of the European Council to open EU accession negotiations with Bosnia and Herzegovina. It seems the reform enthusiasm has evaporated, and Bosnia and Herzegovina has again entered into an institutional and political crisis. To get back on track, we call on all political actors to continue taking resolute action to finalise reforms in line with the EU acquis and European standards. In this regard, it is crucial to continue addressing the relevant steps to move forward on the EU path. It is what the vast majority of the citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina expect.
The Commission continuously supports the country in this endeavour. Despite the turbulence in the ruling majority, the adoption in Parliament on 30 January of the Law on Personal Data Protection – a precondition for cooperation with Eurojust – and of the Law on Border Control was a good signal into the right direction.
We need further progress and this means, in particular, the adoption of the Law on Courts and the Law on High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council being fully in line with European standards. The appointment of a chief negotiator also remains important. Let us also remind Bosnia and Herzegovina not to lose the opportunity of over EUR 1 billion of investments through the Growth Plan for the Western Balkans. Therefore, it is important for the country to submit its reform agenda without further delay. It is even more important in view of the Western Balkans Leaders' Summit on the Growth Plan in Skopje next week on 19 and 20 March.
Contrary to the progress on the EU path, recent actions by the Republika Srpska leadership following the first instance ruling in the criminal trial against Milorad Dodik on 26 February present a serious setback. On Thursday 27 February, the Republika Srpska National Assembly adopted four laws in urgent procedure, including to ban state level judicial and police bodies from operating in the entity, to set up a separate Judiciary Council and to target NGOs as foreign agents. These legal acts undermine the constitutional and legal order of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the functionality of its institutions. Specifically, the Republika Srpska law on foreign agents adversely affects democratic values and threatens fundamental freedoms, marking a step backwards.
These actions directly contradict the repeated commitments of the Republika Srpska entity leadership to advance on the EU accession path of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The EU therefore urges all political actors to renew the focus on progressing on the EU path. On Friday 7 March, the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina issued interim measures suspending the application of all legal acts adopted by the Republika Srpska National Assembly on 27 February.
As we have recalled on several occasions, the EU expects all political actors to respect the decision of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, to acknowledge its independence and impartiality, and to refrain from actions that may deepen divisions and create further tensions.
Further, last week, the operational commander of EUFOR-Althea decided to temporarily increase the size of its force by activating the reserves as a proactive measure aimed at assisting Bosnia and Herzegovina in the interest of all citizens. An increased and visible EUFOR presence is directly related to its task of supporting the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina in ensuring a safe and secure environment for all citizens.
Dear colleagues, to conclude, the EU answer has been firm and unequivocal. We now expect the Republika Srpska authorities to respect the decision of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina to suspend the laws threatening the legal order. We urge all political actors to enter into dialogue rapidly, to de-escalate the situation and to focus efforts on delivering progress for citizens, including on the EU path.
Progress on the EU path is the best guarantee for stability in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and has multiple benefits for the citizens of the country. The Commission remains committed to Bosnia and Herzegovina's accession perspective as a single, united and sovereign country. Thank you for your attention and I am looking forward to a fruitful discussion.

Ondřej Kolář,
za skupinu PPE. – Pane předsedající, drazí kolegové z Bosny a Hercegoviny, já se vám přiznám, že mě udivuje, že mezi námi stále jsou lidé, kteří tvrdí a jsou přesvědčeni o tom, že Rusko není náš nepřítel, že nám neškodí, že s ním nejsme ve válce. My s ním bohužel jsme ve válce, jsme s ním v hybridní válce, která se bojuje mimo jiné na Balkáně. A já si tak říkám, jestli nám ta situace v Bosně a Hercegovině něco nepřipomíná. Politický představitel jedné entity v evropské zemi, v zemi, která aspiruje na členství v Evropské unii, žádá otevřeně Rusko o pomoc. Žádá Rusko, aby na půdě Spojených národů hlasovalo proti závěrům Daytonské dohody a tomu, co vlastně v Bosně a Hercegovině udržuje mír.
               

                  Jak to dopadlo na Ukrajině, všichni víme. Zažíváme to teď každý den. My jsme teď v situaci, kdy do Bosny a Hercegoviny musíme posílat vojáky, aby se neopakovalo to, na co jsem se jako malý kluk díval v televizních zprávách v polovině devadesátých let. A jestli někomu nedochází, že se nás tímhle snaží Rusko oslabit, tak je, omlouvám se, buď úplně mimo, anebo straní Rusku a jeho podřízenému Miloradu Dodikovi. Já nechci, abychom do Bosny museli posílat vojáky. Já chci, abychom tam mohli posílat prostředky na výstavbu škol, školek, nemocnic, infrastruktury, a mimo jiné proto se s kolegyněmi a kolegy z Evropského parlamentu chystáme na začátku dubna na cestu do Bosny, abychom se na vlastní oči přesvědčili, jaký je stav věcí, a podle toho tady dál mohli pracovat na tom, aby se Bosna a Hercegovina úspěšně stala členem Evropské unie.
               

Matjaž Nemec,
v imenu skupine S&D. – Gospod predsednik. Dragi prijatelji iz Bosne in Hercegovine. Bosna in Hercegovina si zasluži vso pozornost mednarodne skupnosti in še posebej Evropske unije, ki je do danes v državo in njeno evropsko integracijo vložila veliko energije in političnega kapitala, kot tudi moja država, Republika Slovenija.
               

                  A dejstvo je, da Milorad Dodik uresničuje separatistične grožnje. Njegove poteze pa resno ogrožajo ozemeljsko celovitost in suverenost Bosne in Hercegovine, prav tako pa tudi njeno evropsko prihodnost.
               

                  Poglabljanju destabilizacije in varnostnih tveganj se lahko učinkovito zoperstavimo. Bolečine Bosne in Hercegovine Evropi niso tuje. Zgodovina pa ponuja mnogokatere rešitve.
               

                  Evropska unija mora tako konstruktiven partner postati in biti, ki si aktivno prizadeva za vzpostavitev dialoga z vsemi tremi narodi v državi ter za omehčanje destruktivnega in močnega kremeljskega vpliva na Dodikovo Republiko Srbsko.
               

                  Zavedajoč se, kaj je na kocki, in moralna dolžnost tako Unije in političnih akterjev v Bosni in Hercegovini je vnovič doseči notranjo spravo, s tem pa odpreti pot konsenzu o evropski poti in reformni agendi. To je navsezadnje tudi predpogoj za vzpostavitev predvidenih finančnih sredstev za Bosno in Hercegovino iz načrta za rast za Zahodni Balkan.
               

                  Zato, spoštovani komisar, kolegice in kolegi, Unija mora ostati v središču političnega dogajanja in stopiti korak dlje. Rešitev za Bosno je polnopravno članstvo v EU, ne več samo v Daytonu.
               

                  Dragim prijateljem v Bosni in Hercegovini pa želim položiti na srce, da je zdaj skrajni čas za politično zrelost in konstruktivizem. Samo skupaj lahko premikamo meje Evropske unije in ohranimo mir in stabilnost. Srečno.
               

André Rougé,
au nom du groupe PfE. – Monsieur le Président, Mesdames et Messieurs les représentants du Parlement de Bosnie-Herzégovine, chers collègues, la demande d'interpellation du président de l'entité serbe, Milorad Dodik, par le parquet fédéral de Bosnie-Herzégovine n'est pas seulement une infamie; c'est aussi une faute grave. Dans le contexte déjà troublé de notre continent, le devoir et la responsabilité de l'Union européenne sont de stabiliser les Balkans occidentaux, et non de jeter de l'huile sur le feu, en rajoutant un nouveau foyer de tensions en Bosnie-Herzégovine.
               

                  Par conséquent, cessons de nous acharner contre Banja Luka, en violation de l'esprit de Dayton. Cessons de soutenir des mesures provocatrices, comme les poursuites judiciaires, en réalité de nature politique, lancées par une Cour constitutionnelle et un parquet illégitimes aux yeux de la Republika Srpska. Cessons surtout d'appliquer un ‘deux poids, deux mesures’, qui n'honore pas l'Union européenne et risque de rouvrir les plaies du passé. Appliquons donc les accords de Dayton, rien que les accords de Dayton et tous les accords de Dayton. Déployons toutes les virtualités de coexistence et de développement qu'il recèle, plutôt que de nous livrer à la pyromanie.
               

Abir Al-Sahlani,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, there will be a time when it is too late to act. Bosnia and Herzegovina is wrapped up in a conflict that is driven by Milorad Dodik and his boy band: Putin, Orbán and Vucic. Together they struck a serious blow to the Dayton peace agreement.
Mr President, Commissioner, esteemed colleagues, let us not fail the people of Bosnia again. We failed them as we watched the first genocide after the Holocaust unroll in front of our eyes in July 1995, in Srebrenica. We failed them when we watched concentration camps built where Bosnians were systematically murdered, tortured, raped, starved. We failed them when we watched Sarajevo be under siege for three long years.
The time for press releases is over. It's time to act! Impose swift sanctions on those who are breaching the Dayton peace agreement. Strengthen our EUFOR mission so we can keep the peace. And continue the support to the Bosnian legal system and institutions, with the aim for them to become members of the EU. Do not let the people of Bosnia down again. Never forget Srebrenica!

Tineke Strik,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, the latest illegal moves towards succession by Mr Dodik are a direct threat to the peace and integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina and its future into the EU. Mr Dodik is not acting in the interest of the citizens of Republika Srpska or their well-being. Acting as Putin's puppet on the Balkans, Dodik stands ready to fulfil any request from Moscow, even if this means war affecting the citizens he claims to represent. He's a convicted criminal whose only goal is to sustain power and enrich himself through corrupted politics.
The EU must impose sanctions on Dodik and his partners in crime, freeze foreign assets and issue entry bans and, if needed, without Hungary, to protect the security of the Bosnian and Herzegovinian and the European people. We must, and we can, offer a real perspective to all citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina if we respect the rule of law, make these corrupted politicians harmless and start listening to the will of the citizens.

Michael Gahler (PPE). – Mr President, colleagues, Commissioner, in Milorad Dodik's wet dreams, he sees Bosnia and Herzegovina disintegrate and he leads the Republika Srpska into a Greater Serbia. That is why he acts the way he acts.
The law on the protection of the constitutional order would, if adopted and implemented, actually result in the opposite of what it claims in its title. Today they initiated the adoption of a new constitution. A special session will be held tomorrow to adopt the draft constitution and the law.
The RS is clearly not abiding by the BiH Constitutional Court interim measures to annul earlier decisions of the RS Assembly of 27 February. But fortunately, Dodik is quite alone. Not even the relevant opposition parties in the RS support him. His best supporter, whom he visited at least three times last year, is Vladimir Putin, who is always willing to promote any activities that can cause us trouble.
It is good to see that we are upgrading our EUFOR military presence in the country as a preventive measure. A contingent from the Czech Republic, Romania and Italians are arriving. From the European Commission and other executive bodies, I expect that they will be very explicit. You did it with regard to our demands towards all stakeholders, including Dodik. You have to accept that the framework for policymaking is the Dayton Agreement, the constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and that includes the respect of the verdicts of the Constitutional Court.
What was started today is clearly anti-constitutional. If the constitutional authorities of BiH can eventually not prevent this process being finalised, it would be up to Christian Schmidt to act. I hope it is not necessary, but we have also possibilities from Brussels to have appropriate pressure to apply.
Can we afford to send funds to an anti-constitutional structure? Can you prevent that? I think only together can we make Bosnia and Herzegovina advance towards the EU. And that is what the people …

(The President cut off the speaker)


Thijs Reuten (S&D). – Mr President, Commission, colleagues, Milorad Dodik's toxic mix of secessionism, autocratic tendencies, cosying up to Putin, ethnic hatred and systemic corruption has finally hit an obstacle.
For months now, he tried to negotiate a way out of an inevitable conviction. Years of neglect, hollowing out of institutions and appeasement out of fear of instability have created a problem that the country – held back by a constitutional straitjacket of power sharing – cannot solve on its own.
Tomorrow, the Commission representatives are on a fool's errand in Bosnia to discuss the growth plan. The Commission should stop appeasement, wishful thinking and pretending that things are fine. They are not.
Instead, hold firm and support Bosnia and Herzegovina's institutions in their duties across the country, be crystal clear about EUFOR's role safeguarding Bosnia and Herzegovina's security and territorial integrity, sanctions against Dodik and those aiding him, and finally support actors who are really willing to work on European integration.

Gordan Bosanac (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, Commissioner, I guess it will be much more pleasure to you and to us that tonight we speak about agriculture of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the food of Bosnia and Herzegovina. But unfortunately, I will speak about something else.
Poštovani predsjedavajući, ove godine obilježit ćemo 30 godina od uspostave mira u Bosni i Hercegovini Daytonskim sporazumom.
Nažalost, nakon 30 godina ovih dana ponovno slušamo zabrinjavajuće vijesti o separatističkim nastojanjima komadanja BiH. Mislim, te vijesti sporadično slušamo iz godine u godinu, ali danas gledamo i postupke Dodika koji s riječi prelazi na djela. Večeras je važno dati podršku cjelovitoj i suverenoj Bosni i Hercegovini i osuditi svaki pokušaj separatizma, ali još je važnije da takvo ponašanje osude sami građani BiH, jer ono je kruna neuspjelih politika, okarakteriziranih primarno nacionalizmom, nepotizmom i korupcijom. Ovaj sustav imao je šansu zadnjih 30 godina isporučiti neki napredak, a isporučuje danas strah i nemir. Zato je vrijeme za promjene. Vrata EU moraju biti širom otvorena za BiH, a ja pozivam ljude u Bosni i Hercegovini koji žele normalan, pravedan i ravnopravan život da zbiju redove, odupru se svakom separatizmu i svakom pozivu na nasilje. Ne dozvolite da vas uvuku u mržnju i drugi puta.
Čekamo vas u Europskoj uniji.

Jan-Peter Warnke (NI). – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar! Das EU-Bosnien und Herzegowina-Assoziationsabkommen war bisher nicht erfolgreich. Die Ursachen sind vielfältig und liegen unter anderem in der fragilen interstaatlichen Struktur. EUFOR-Truppen, eine Militärmacht, sollen die Stabilität fördern – bisher verhindert dies bestenfalls ein Aufflammen von Waffengewalt. Ein Land kann nur von innen zusammenwachsen; ich glaube nicht an die Kraft von Waffen.
               

                  Unter NATO-Dominanz bei schwindendem Rückhalt der Menschen für einen EU-Beitritt müssen wir uns nicht wundern, dass die Regierung und die Bevölkerung der Republika Srpska in Banja Luka immer weniger auf die EU setzen, da durch die Verknüpfung von NATO und EU diese nicht mehr als Friedensprojekt wahrgenommen wird. Wie sollte sie auch?
               

                  Es fällt einigen in diesem Parlament nichts anderes ein, als fremde Mächte für diese Entfremdung verantwortlich zu machen, frei nach dem Motto: Wer mit dem gegenwärtigen Zustand der EU nicht konform geht, muss fremd beeinflusst sein. Wie irrwitzig zu glauben, dass die serbische Bevölkerung dort sich der russophoben außenpolitischen Doktrin der EU anschließen wird.
               

                  Basteln wir bitte nicht weiter an einem Potjomkinschen Dorf und stellen wir unsere Politik auf realistische und glaubwürdige Grundlagen! Akzeptieren wir, dass wir die EU so, wie sie derzeit ist, nicht unbedingt …
               

(Der Präsident entzieht dem Redner das Wort.)


Davor Ivo Stier (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, kolegice i kolege, Bosni i Hercegovini trebaju mir, sigurnost, europska perspektiva, a ne podjele i podrivanje ustavnog poretka.
               

                  Nije vrijeme za podizanje tenzija, već za poštivanje ustava i institucija BiH te rješavanje političkih problema dijalogom. Taj dijalog mora, dakako, biti sadržajan, djelotvoran i s jasnom svrhom poštivanja neovisnosti i suverenosti, teritorijalne cjelovitosti BiH kao države triju jednakopravnih konstitutivnih naroda i svih njenih građana. BiH je kandidat za članstvo u Europskoj uniji i fokus se mora staviti na reforme vezane za europski put, a one kao prioritetno pitanje uključuju i reformu izbornog zakona. Potrebno je otvoriti pregovore, to je ključno za mir i sigurnost. EU, SAD i NATO pokazali su ovih dana da neće dozvoliti destabilizaciju Bosne i Hercegovine.
               

                  Očekujemo i od Srbije da odustane od koncepta srpskog svijeta te osudi separatističku politiku koja podriva suverenost i cjelovitost Bosne i Hercegovine.
               

Željana Zovko (PPE). – Mr President, first of all, I would like to say 'hi' to the delegation of parliamentarians from Bosnia and Herzegovina who are watching us. It's quite a shame that we are having this debate so late at night and that there's no interest in Bosnia and Herzegovina, because in Bosnia and Herzegovina, there is no war. There is no incident. But it's a conflict waiting to happen for the past 30 years.
Poštovani predsjedavajući, u ovoj godini, kad obilježavamo 30 godina od potpisivanja ključnog sporazuma za osiguravanje mira, svjedočimo potpunoj nesposobnosti da se osigura njegovo osnovno načelo, a to je ravnopravnost svih konstitutivnih naroda.
Separatističke, ali i unitarne politike i nepoštovanje osnovnih prava svih naroda i građana doveli su do ozbiljne eskalacije o kojoj sada svjedočimo. Jedini način stabilizacije Bosne i Hercegovine je reforma izbornog zakona bez kojeg će Bosna i Hercegovina, nažalost, nastaviti biti tempirana bomba u našem najbližem susjedstvu. Bez osiguranja ustavne zaštite i jednakopravnosti svih konstitutivnih naroda Bosna i Hercegovina će ostati država u krizi, otvoren prostor za vanjske utjecaje, čak i od svih ljudi koji nemaju pojma o čemu govore, koji nemaju nikakvu namjeru osigurati stabilnost, već upravo suprotno. Ovo je veliki propust naše preventivne formacije, a prostor koji smo ostavili popunjavaju Turska i Rusija.

Reinhold Lopatka (PPE). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kollegen! 30 Jahre nach dem Ende des Bosnienkriegs mit 100 000 Opfern steht Bosnien und Herzegowina erneut an einem entscheidenden Punkt seiner Geschichte. In einer Zeit, in der das Land Stabilität und gelebte Rechtsstaatlichkeit bräuchte, um Richtung EU zu gehen, wird es von gefährlichen separatistischen Tendenzen zurückgehalten.
               

                  Einerseits unternimmt der Hohe Repräsentant Christian Schmidt alles, um seiner Aufgabe bei der Unterstützung der regelbasierten Ordnung nachzukommen; seine Arbeit ist von wesentlicher Bedeutung, um das Dayton-Abkommen umzusetzen. Andererseits untergräbt Milorad Dodik systematisch die staatlichen Institutionen, verweigert die Umsetzung von Entscheidungen des Verfassungsgerichts und droht immer wieder mit der Abspaltung der Republika Srpska.
               

                  Bosnien und Herzegowina braucht keine Spaltung, sondern einheitliches Vorgehen. Hier ist auch die EU-Kommission gefordert: Sie muss klar und unmissverständlich Maßnahmen setzen gegen jene, die ständig gegen dieses Vorgehen verstoßen.
               

Hélder Sousa Silva (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, a recente missão da Comissão da Segurança e da Defesa à Bósnia-Herzegovina, que tive o privilégio de integrar, revelou uma verdade incontornável: o país encontra-se numa encruzilhada perigosa, com elevados desafios internos e inaceitáveis pressões externas que ameaçam a sua estabilidade.
               

                  As forças desestabilizadoras, alimentadas por narrativas nacionalistas e separatistas, são impulsionadas por potências que pretendem afastar a Bósnia-Herzegovina do seu caminho europeu.
               

                  Perante esta realidade, a União Europeia não pode hesitar. Precisamos de diálogo e precisamos de reforçar a nossa presença política e económica e de apoiar as reformas estruturais, para garantir que o país convirja rapidamente com os requisitos da União Europeia e não recue no seu processo de adesão.
               

                  A história da Bósnia está intrinsecamente ligada à segurança dos Balcãs, que, por sua vez, está ligada à segurança da nossa Europa. Não fechemos os olhos.
               

Karlo Ressler (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, nema neke druge države koja je hrvatskom narodu bliža od Bosne i Hercegovine.
               

                  Stoga boli vidjeti da je tri desetljeća od Daytona, tri desetljeća od Srebrenice, tri desetljeća od zajedničke pobjede nad velikosrpskim zločinačkim projektom BiH u najdubljoj političkoj i sigurnosnoj krizi. Oni koji se danas neodgovorno poigravaju s krhkim mirom, sada i s početkom nekakvih ustavnih promjena vode zemlju prema opasnom rubu.
               

                  Međutim, kriza koja je nastala nije se dogodila preko noći. Godinama se razgrađuje jedinstvena formula jedne države, dva entiteta, ali i tri konstitutivna naroda i to s različitih strana. Međutim, teško da ima, malignijeg utjecaja od koncepta takozvanog srpskog svijeta koji negira suverenitet i integritet svojih susjeda, često i uz hibridno djelovanje, uz dezinformacije i uz krivotvorenje povijesti. U ovim prijelomnim trenucima ključno je smiriti tenzije, ali i biti spreman na sve scenarije.
               

                  Europa ne smije i ne može stajati po strani.
               

Brīvais mikrofons


Tomislav Sokol (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, dok jedni u BiH gledaju prema Moskvi i Beogradu, a drugi prema Ankari, Hrvati dosljedno zagovaraju europske vrijednosti poput demokracije i jednakopravnosti.
               

                  Danas se često govori o opasnosti od separatizma, a manje o drugom problemu u BiH, a to je unitarizam. Pokušaji da se BiH centralizira i podredi volji Sarajeva razaraju njezinu unutarnju stabilnost i negiraju temeljno načelo na kojem počiva, a to je konstitutivnost triju naroda.
               

                  Ono što u velikoj mjeri doprinijelo današnjoj situaciji jesu pogrešne politike Zapada iz prošlosti koje su godinama poticale unitarističke ambicije, mada upravo to najviše destabilizira BiH. Umjesto da podrže pravedan i održiv model konsocijacije, često su podržavali rješenja koja vode k dominaciji jednog naroda, a time i nestabilnosti. Sjetimo se samo Berija i Petrića. Zato je danas ključno inzistirati na poštivanju Daytonskog sporazuma i prava svih konstitutivnih naroda na legitimne predstavnike, što uključuje pravo Hrvata da napokon sami izaberu svojeg člana predsjedništva države.
               

                  Stabilna BiH može postojati samo ako se poštuje konstitutivnost naroda i u tome Hrvati ostaju ključni nositelji europske perspektive i istinski partneri EU-a.
               

(Brīvā mikrofona uzstāšanos beigas.)


Christophe Hansen,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, many thanks for this debate. The Commission remains unequivocally committed to Bosnia and Herzegovina's EU accession perspective as a single, united and sovereign country. The sovereignty, territorial integrity and constitutional order of Bosnia and Herzegovina must be respected.
Bosnia and Herzegovina has the historic opportunity to open EU accession negotiations. Its citizens want a European future, and it is the responsibility of political actors to make it a reality. We urge all political actors to renew the focus on progressing on the EU path with resolute action to take the relevant steps.
The EU path brings multiple benefits for the country's citizens. Bosnia and Herzegovina is key for the Western Balkans, whose future is in the European Union. EU accession is the agenda with real gains and real benefits for everyone. It is the agenda that brings prosperity, stability and peace. And it is the agenda which we need to work together on.
The Commission will continue supporting Bosnia and Herzegovina in this endeavour with all its instruments. We continue to follow developments very closely, including the possibility of Republika Srpska adopting a new constitution for the entity.

President. – Thank you very much, Commissioner, and thank you very much to the delegation for being with us so late tonight.
The debate is closed.
20.   Explanations of vote

President. – The next item is the explanations of vote.
20.1.   The need for EU support towards a just transition and reconstruction in Syria (RC-B10-0157/2025)

Priekšsēdētājs. – Tagad pievērsīsimies balsojumu skaidrojumiem par vajadzību pēc ES atbalsta nolūkā veicināt taisnīgu pāreju un rekonstrukciju Sīrijā.
                  

Michael McNamara (Renew). – Mr President, I voted in favour of this resolution supporting a just transition and reconstruction in Syria today. The people of Syria have suffered for too long at the hands of a brutal dictator to have it replaced by an equally brutal regime.
I acknowledge the suspension and revision of the sanctions regime, which – we must acknowledge – had little or no impact on Assad's reign and worsened the lives of the ordinary people of Syria, 90 % of whom now live in poverty.
I look on with great dismay at the persecution and revenge killings of 1 225 civilians and members of the Alawite majority faith in recent days, and even greater dismay at the Commission's silence in the face of that killing. The silence of the European Union's chief diplomat on the slaughter of civilians – even if they were once protected by, or may even have supported, leaders that she doesn't like – is a failure on her part; one that lowers her and lowers the EU further on the world stage.

President. – That concludes the explanations of vote.
21.   Agenda of the next sitting

Priekšsēdētājs. – Nākamā sēde sāksies rītdien, proti, ceturtdien, 2025. gada 13. martā, plkst. 9.00.
               

                  Darba kārtība ir publicēta un ir pieejama Eiropas Parlamenta tīmekļa vietnē.
               
22.   Approval of the minutes of the sitting

Priekšsēdētājs. – Šīs sēdes protokolu iesniegs Parlamentam apstiprināšanai rītdien pēcpusdienas sākumā.
               
23.   Closure of the sitting

(Sēde tika slēgta plkst. 22.43.)



ELI: 
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)