Category: housing

IN THE CHAIR: ROBERTA METSOLA
President

  President. – I declare resumed the session of the European Parliament adjourned on 3 April 2025.

(The sitting opened at 17:01)

  President. – On 26 April the world came together to mourn the passing of His Holiness Pope Francis. Together with a number of you, we represented this House at the Pope’s funeral in Rome, where hundreds of thousands gathered to commemorate his life and honour his legacy.

Pope Francis will be remembered for his inspirational leadership, his moral authority and his kindness, taking every opportunity to speak up for a more humane, more peaceful and unified world. In 2014, His Holiness addressed this Plenary and he called for every Member to ’work to make Europe rediscover the best of itself.’

E proprio in occasione della sua visita Papa, Francesco scrisse un messaggio, nel libro che raccoglie le firme e i pensieri delle più alte personalità che hanno visitato l’Istituzione nel corso della sua storia, e io desidero condividere con voi le parole che ha voluto dedicarci:

“Auguro che il Parlamento europeo sia sempre più la sede dove ogni suo membro concorra a far sì che l’Europa, consapevole del suo passato, guardi con fiducia al futuro per vivere con speranza il presente.”

Whilst this House grieves his loss, we also remember his call to action and work together every day for a better, more compassionate and more courageous Europe.

I invite you now to join me in a moment of silence.

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

We will now have a round of Group speakers to pay tribute to His Holiness Pope Francis.

  Manfred Weber, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, for me personally, meeting Pope Francis and speaking with him was a lifetime honour and he remains, for me and for us as the EPP Group, a profound source of inspiration. His hope, his wisdom, his faith still speak to all of us. It was a moment of deep sadness when we learned about his passing away and we will miss him.

Above everything, as our President already said, it was always the person, the human being he put at the centre. He never spoke about migrants, he spoke about human beings and not about a prisoner, about a human being, not about homeless people, about human beings. Christianity at its best: everybody is important, recognised by God, and also has a perspective beyond our life on earth.

In November 2014, when he was here speaking in this European Parliament 11 years ago, he spoke about the deep Christian identity of our continent. Europe without Christian roots is simply unthinkable.

However, Christian values never were pure Christian symbolism. He did not look at the questions of what divides us in Europe, he was always committed to what unites us. Not race, not religion, and not social status are allowed to divide us. And that was also his red line to all extremists who were misusing Christianity for their egoistic interests.

His Christian view on a human approach of a society was also for dignified work, for a society where everybody feels involved, and an economy which also serves the people’s interests. And that’s why our model of a social market economy was deeply rooted also in his Christian thinking.

And finally, on this Christian democratic tradition – like my party is representing it – I also want to underline that he himself, and all his predecessors in the 20th and 21st century, was committed to European integration. He was always arguing in favour of a united Europe, not as a functional entity, not as a cash machine, not as a huge market, but as a community with shared identity, united in the European way of life.

In a letter addressed to the European People’s Party group, Pope Francis wrote to us that, and I quote, ‘To build Europe, it takes a strong inspiration, a soul. It takes dreams, it takes values and a high political vision. Ordinary management, good, normal administration is not enough.’ That is what Pope Francis told us. And this is his legacy. This is his job description for us as the European People’s Party, also as a European Parliament. He rightly saw the European way of life as a path to a bright future, and also our offer to the rest of the world. That’s why, thank you to Pope Francis.

  Iratxe García Pérez, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, hoy alzamos la voz en esta Cámara para rendir tributo al papa Francisco, un hombre de fe profunda y coraje inmenso que supo estar a la altura de los tiempos. Fue el papa de los pobres, de los marginados y de los que se encuentran en las periferias de la sociedad.

Tuve el honor de encontrarme con el papa Francisco. Con su voz clara y su mirada compasiva, nos recordó que la justicia social no es solo una opción, sino una exigencia irrenunciable.

Señorías, la mejor manera de rendir tributo al papa Francisco no es solo recordar sus palabras, sino cumplir con ellas. El 25 de noviembre de 2014, en este mismo Parlamento, nos pidió que construyéramos Europa sobre la piedra angular de la dignidad. Nos interpeló con preguntas que hoy siguen doliendo: «¿qué dignidad es posible sin un marco jurídico claro que limite el dominio de la fuerza y haga prevalecer la ley sobre la tiranía del poder?», «¿qué dignidad puede tener un hombre o una mujer cuando es objeto de todo tipo de discriminación?», «¿qué dignidad podrá encontrar una persona que no tiene qué comer o el mínimo necesario para vivir o, todavía peor, que no tiene el trabajo que le otorga dignidad?».

También nos exigió con firmeza cuidar la tierra, al decir que Europa ha estado siempre en primera línea de un loable compromiso en favor de la ecología.

Al hablar de migración, nos suplicó no mirar hacia otro lado: «no se puede tolerar que el mar Mediterráneo se convierta en un gran cementerio».

Y en su último mensaje urbi et orbi, levantó la voz por una paz justa y duradera en Ucrania y en Tierra Santa. Hoy hemos conocido su último deseo, y es que el papamóvil se pueda convertir en un hospital infantil para los niños en Gaza. Gran signo y gran deseo.

Señorías, si queremos estar a la altura del legado, hagamos nuestras sus palabras: «abandonar la idea de una Europa atemorizada y replegada sobre sí misma para suscitar y promover una Europa protagonista y transmisora de valores humanos; la Europa que camina sobre la tierra segura y firme, precioso punto de referencia para toda la humanidad».

Esa es la Europa que el papa Francisco soñó; que sea también la Europa que entre todos sigamos construyendo.

  Jordan Bardella, au nom du groupe PfE. – Madame la Présidente, mes chers collègues, c’est avec gravité et recueillement que je prends la parole à mon tour pour saluer la mémoire du pape François. Parce qu’il est une figure universelle, sa disparition aura ému, au-delà des 1,4 milliard de catholiques dans le monde.

Homme de foi, homme de dialogue et de paix, autorité morale rare dans un monde en perte de repères, le pape François le fut incontestablement. Son pontificat fut celui d’une attention constante portée aux plus fragiles et aux plus démunis. Que l’on partage ou non ses opinions politiques, ses prises de position – elles ont été nombreuses et multiples –, le respect solennel dû aux morts nous oblige.

En ce moment solennel, je veux redire avec fierté que la France, fille aînée de l’Église, n’oublie ni ses racines chrétiennes, ni le lien millénaire qui l’unit à la foi et à l’Église catholique. Ce lien historique et précieux fonde une part inestimable de notre identité, de notre civilisation, de nos valeurs et, pour beaucoup, de notre espérance. Que le pape François repose en paix.

  Nicola Procaccini, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, ‘a Church that goes out’ is how Pope Francis summed up the mission of his pontificate, a Church that doesn’t remain confined within its physical spaces, but instead opens itself spiritually to the world, a Church that reaches out to people, cares for them – even physically – wherever they may be.

I’ve shared many of Pope Francis’s messages, even those considered ‘politically incorrect’, but I would be hypocritical if I didn’t also admit some different points of view, particularly regarding the governance of migration. I think that for some here it’s quite the opposite. Yet despite our differences, Christianity represents all of us. It’s the only cultural bond that still holds us together. It’s the common root of Europe, even if the European Union denies it every day.

In October 2020, Pope Francis wrote to us:

‘Europe, find yourself again! Rediscover your ideals, which have deep roots. Be yourself. Don’t be afraid of your millennia‑old history, which is more a window to the future than to the past’.

Addio, Papa Francesco.

  Billy Kelleher, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, sadly, Pope Francis’s death did not come as a shock to most of us. Unfortunately, his health had been waning, and while we had all hoped for the best, it was clear that his time was coming to an end.

His time, however, as supreme pontiff was different, to say the very least. His recommitment to the church being a ‘church of the poor’ was profound and real. And while he could not make all the changes he wanted, he has, I believe, changed the Catholic Church for the better. His pontificate will be known as one committed to decency, human dignity, social justice and the raising of those on the margins of society. On behalf of the Renew Europe group. I want to extend my deepest sympathies to the 1.4 billion Catholics across the globe who are mourning over the loss – not just of their spiritual leader, but also of a man who lived each day committed to the service of the poor, the marginalised and the vulnerable.

In 2018, the people of Europe welcomed Pope Francis to our shores as we hosted the World Meeting of Families. Pope Francis was welcomed with open arms and with deep respect by my fellow citizens. To everyone elected in this Parliament and to parliaments across the world who claim to profess the Christian faith: I would urge you to listen to Pope Francis’s words and his teachings. There is nothing Christian about cheering when migrants drown in the seas. There is nothing Christian about making those in the margins fear for their safety just because they are different to us. Pope Francis’s death is a loss to us all. Whether we are Catholic, another kind of Christian, practice another religion or indeed are non-believers – his humanity transcended denominations. Society has lost a great leader and a great teacher with his passing. Ar dheis Dé go raibh a anam dílis.

  Martin Schirdewan, on behalf of The Left Group. – Madam President, Christianity and socialism might not share the closest link at first glance, but Pope Francis used his mandate to advance the Christian social doctrine that is also deeply rooted in socialist politics. The fight for social justice and against poverty – one of the cornerstones of Francis’s pontificate – remains a central responsibility for both the progressive Left and the progressive Church.

Pope Francis has all my respect for always taking sides for the vulnerable and for defending humanity and human rights for all, regardless of origin, status, colour or belief. And, in an increasingly hostile world, Pope Francis’s voice has constantly been one of peace. Relentlessly, he called for an end of the wars in Ukraine and in Gaza. Every single day, he cared for the Palestinian civilians whose unjust suffering he felt painfully.

Let us make his prayers for justice and peace a reality. Let’s the end politics of injustice and division. And I wish his successor all possible success in transforming the Catholic Church into a Church for the 21st century.

I’d like to conclude, in a rather secular way – I’m sure he would have understood – farewell, Francis.

  René Aust, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Im Jahre 2013 suchten die Herren Kardinäle einen neuen Papst, und sie fanden ihn, wie er selbst sagte, am anderen Ende der Welt. Sie fanden einen streitbaren Hirten, einen Papst, der seine Kirche reformieren wollte und der wusste, dass echte Erneuerung im Herzen der Menschen beginnt. Über bestimmte Aspekte wie seinen Ansatz zum Synodalen Weg wird noch lange diskutiert werden. Doch dies ist nicht der Moment für Bewertungen – heute halten wir fest: Die Welt hat einen guten Menschen verloren – einen, der als Bischof von Rom diente, der nicht thronte, sondern tröstete.

Sein Pontifikat war geprägt von seinen Erfahrungen als Seelsorger, von Bescheidenheit und dem Blick auf die Ärmsten. Möge Papst Franziskus in Frieden ruhen. Auch deshalb habe ich in der vergangenen Woche in der wunderschönen Kirche in Paris in Saint-Sulpice für ihn eine Kerze angezündet. Und mögen die Kardinäle im bevorstehenden Konklave eine weise Wahl treffen. Ich wünsche ihnen dabei Gottes Segen.

  President. – The minutes and the texts adopted of the sitting of 3 April are available. Are there any comments?

I see that is not the case. Therefore they are approved.

  Ilhan Kyuchyuk (Renew). – Madam President, dear colleagues, on 19 March this year, the Commission put forward the SAFE regulation proposal and based it on Article 122 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, JURI considered the use of Article 122 of TFEU as the basis of the SAFE regulation proposal under Rule 138(2) of the Rules of Procedure.

On 23 April, the committee unanimously decided that Article 122 was not the appropriate legal basis for the proposed regulation. JURI came to this conclusion after having considered the aim of the SAFE proposal and in the absence of proper justification by the Commission of the choice of the legal basis. JURI also observed that Article 122 contains two paragraphs, and each of those confers on the Council a distinct competence to adopt legal acts subject to specific conditions. However, the SAFE proposal is based on Article 122, and it entirely hangs on both paragraphs. The Commission fails to explain why both paragraphs should be relied upon as the legal basis. There is also no justification why other possible legal bases under the TFEU were discarded, in particular in the context of Article 122(1), which can only apply ‘without prejudice to any other procedures provided for in the treaties’.

At the same time, although JURI discussed and analysed alternative legal bases which appear appropriate, such as Article 173(3) of the TFEU, it decided at this stage not to pronounce itself conclusively. It is enough to say at this point that JURI does consider that another legal basis under the treaties could be used, and therefore that the Union’s competence to act under a legal basis other than in Article 122 TFEU does exist.

  President. – Thank you very much, Mr Kyuchyuk. So I will write, in accordance with your argumentation, to the presidents of the Council and Commission to inform them of the procedure.

  President. – This Wednesday at 10:30, there will be a wreath-laying ceremony on the Parvis Louise Weiss to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the end of the Second World War in Europe. Then, at 11:30, there will be a further ceremony in this Chamber to mark this solemn occasion with a number of veterans.

I invite you attend both of these events, and I truly count on your presence.

  President. – The competent authorities of Germany have notified me of the election of Volker Schnurrbusch to the European Parliament replacing Maximilian Krah with effect from 4 April 2025. I wish to welcome our new colleague and recall that he takes his seat in Parliament and on its bodies in full enjoyment of his rights pending the verification of his credentials.

  President. – I have received a request from the competent authorities in Hungary for the parliamentary immunity of Péter Magyar to be waived. The request is referred to the Committee on Legal Affairs.

  President. – I have received a letter from the competent authorities in Belgium withdrawing the request for the waiver of the parliamentary immunity of Jaak Madison. The procedure is therefore closed.

  President. – Malika Sorel is no longer a member of the PfE Group and sits with the non‑attached Members as of 19 April 2025.

  President. – The EPP and PfE groups have notified me of decisions relating to changes to appointments within committees and delegations. The decisions will be set out in the minutes of today’s sitting and take effect on the date of this announcement.

  President. – The LIBE, PECH and – jointly – the SEDE and ITRE committees have decided to enter into interinstitutional negotiations pursuant to Rule 72(1) of the Rules of Procedure. The reports, which constitute the mandates for the negotiations, are available on the plenary webpage and their titles will be published in the minutes of the sitting.

Pursuant to Rule 72(2), Members or political groups reaching at least the medium threshold may request in writing by tomorrow, Tuesday 6 May at midnight, that the decisions be put to the vote. If no request for a vote in Parliament is made before the expiry of that deadline, the committees may start the negotiations.

  President. – The ENVI Committee has decided to enter into interinstitutional negotiations ahead of the Council’s first reading, pursuant to Rule 73 of the Rules of Procedure. The position adopted by Parliament at first reading, which constitutes the mandate for those negotiations, is available on the plenary webpage, and its title will be published in the minutes of the sitting.

  President. – I would like to announce that, pursuant to Rule 47(2) of the Rules of Procedure, I have declared admissible a proposal for a Union act repealing Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC. This proposal is referred to the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety, as the committee responsible, and to the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, for an opinion.

  President. – I would like to inform you that, since the adjournment of Parliament’s session on 3 April, I have signed, together with the President of the Council, three acts adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure in accordance with Rule 81 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure.

I would also like to inform you that on Wednesday, I shall sign, together with the President of the Council, another three acts adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure.

The titles of the acts will be published in the minutes of this sitting.

  President. – I would like to inform you that I have received the following requests for urgent procedure pursuant to Rule 170(6):

– from the ECR Group, and jointly from the EPP, S&D and Renew groups, on the following legislative file: CO2 emission performance standards for new passenger cars and new light commercial vehicles for 2025 to 2027;

– from the ENVI Committee on the following legislative file: The protection status of the wolf (Canis lupus);

– from the ECON Committee: amendments to the Capital Requirements Regulation as regards securities financing transactions under the net stable funding ratio.

The vote on these requests will be taken tomorrow.

Now I would like to inform the House that I have received requests for points of order. I will start by giving the floor to Bas Eickhout.

⁂

  Katrin Langensiepen (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Heute ist der Europäische Protesttag zur Gleichstellung von Menschen mit Behinderung, und hier reden wir über 100 Millionen Menschen mit Behinderungen in der Europäischen Union. Da habe ich eine schlechte und eine gute Nachricht: Alle Mitgliedstaaten haben bei der Umsetzung der UN-Behindertenrechtskonvention komplett versagt. Noch immer haben Menschen mit Behinderungen keinen gleichberechtigten Zugang zum Wahllokal, zum Recht auf Wahl, zu selbstbestimmtem Leben, gleichberechtigter Teilhabe, wenn es um Bildung, Arbeit und Entlohnung geht.

Das habe nicht ich mir ausgedacht, das hat sich die UNO ausgedacht, und die UNO hat es festgehalten und hat die EU dafür massiv gerügt. Wir sind immer noch nicht gut, wenn es um die Umsetzung der UN-Behindertenrechtskonvention geht. Aber ich habe auch eine gute Nachricht: Wir können es besser machen. Heute ist der Europäische Protesttag von 100 Millionen Menschen mit Behinderungen – Frauen, Kindern, Geflüchteten, Menschen, die queere Personen sind, die intersektional betroffen sind. Da ist es ein Menschenrecht – ich weiß, Menschenrechte sind gerade nicht der heiße Scheiß in diesem Haus –, aber wir müssen uns endlich um die Menschenrechte kümmern, wenn wir Wettbewerbsfähigkeit halten wollen und gleichberechtigt teilhaben wollen.

  Hilde Vautmans (Renew). – Madam President, colleagues, I would like to make this point of order, because 25 April marked the ninth anniversary since Swedish-Iranian academic Ahmad Reza Djalali was arrested in Iran.

In October 2017, he was sentenced to death after a grossly unfair trial. He is currently, colleagues, the longest standing EU citizen held hostage by the Iranian authorities, and as a consequence of years in prison, malnutrition, not being given the medical care he needed and torture, his situation is really serious. He said in a video: ‘I am at my breaking point’.

So, colleagues, on this heartbreaking anniversary, I call on you, Madam President, and all my colleagues to take action and repeat our call: we ask for the immediate and unconditional release of Professor Djalali, just like we voted for here in this House.

  Özlem Demirel, im Namen der Fraktion The Left. – Frau Präsidentin! Am 2. Mai wurde das Schiff der NGO Freedom Flotilla in internationalen Gewässern in der Nähe Maltas von zwei Kriegsdrohnen mehrfach angegriffen. An Bord des Schiffes befanden sich 30 Aktivistinnen und Aktivisten und humanitäre Helfer. Mit ihnen dabei Lebensmittel, Medikamente, Hilfsgüter für das von Israels Krieg gebeutelte Volk in Gaza. Der Angriff löste ein Feuer an Bord aus. Die Besatzung sendete einen Notruf. Doch der nahe gelegene Inselstaat Malta ignorierte dies zunächst einmal und reagierte nicht sofort.

Kolleginnen und Kollegen, was hier passiert ist, ist ein äußerst schwerwiegender, inakzeptabler Vorfall! Sowohl der militärische Angriff auf ein ziviles Schiff als auch die Missachtung des internationalen Rechts ist inakzeptabel. Deshalb beantragen wir eine Debatte dazu, und wir fordern auch die Kommission zu einer Stellungnahme zu diesem Vorgang auf. Kolleginnen und Kollegen, zu Beginn der Debatte haben Sie den Papst Franziskus gewürdigt. Wenn Sie gleich abstimmen, denken Sie bitte daran, wie der Papst jetzt abstimmen würde.

  President. – I will give the floor to any colleague who would like to speak against. I see no one does, so we will vote by roll call.

(Parliament rejected the request)

So the agenda is unchanged.

Also for Wednesday, the Greens Group has requested that a Commission statement on ‘EU response to the Israeli Government’s plan to seize the Gaza strip and promote the so-called “voluntary departure” of Gazans’ be added in the afternoon before the debates under Rule 150. As a consequence, the sitting would be extended until 23:00.

I give the floor to Mounir Satouri to move the request on behalf of the Greens Group.

  Mounir Satouri, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Madame la Présidente, cette nuit, le cabinet de sécurité israélien a approuvé un plan offensif. Il vise à s’emparer de toute la bande de Gaza et à s’y installer indéfiniment. Ce plan vise aussi à organiser des départs soi-disant volontaires de la population de Gaza. Ce sont en réalité des déplacements forcés de population.

Sur le plan politique, nous avons, c’est vrai, des divergences. Mais nous sommes une majorité, ici, à être attachés à la solution à deux États. Cette décision du gouvernement israélien remet en cause de manière définitive la perspective de cette solution à deux États. L’accaparement du territoire est inacceptable. Cela viole toutes les règles du droit international. Notre Parlement ne peut rester muet.

Je demande un débat sans résolution qui porte le titre «Déclaration de la haute représentante/vice-présidente sur la réponse de l’UE au projet du gouvernement israélien de s’emparer de la bande de Gaza et de promouvoir le soi-disant départ volontaire des Gazaouis».

Chers collègues, avec cette proposition, ce Parlement a pour une fois la capacité d’être dans le bon timing et d’être au rendez-vous pour rappeler son attachement au droit international.

  Iratxe García Pérez (S&D). – Madam President, only one question: I would like to ask, please, the services to give the group leaders and the groups all the information, very clearly, about this from the beginning, because if we have information that, for example, this debate will be for the May II plenary, and we decide as a group to support it in May II, it’s so difficult now to take a decision about this time. Only to clarify, we as the S&D Group wanted this debate for May II.

  Γεάδης Γεάδη, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας ECR. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, με βάση το Πρωτόκολλο 10 της Συνθήκης Προσχώρησης της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας, αυτή εντάχθηκε εδαφικά στην ολότητά της στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, με αναστολή της εφαρμογής του κεκτημένου στις περιοχές όπου δεν ασκεί αποτελεσματικό έλεγχο, συνεπεία της τουρκικής εισβολής και συνεχιζόμενης παράνομης κατοχής.

Δυστυχώς, το περασμένο Σάββατο αφίχθηκε στην παράνομη αποσχιστική οντότητα στην Κύπρο —στο ψευδοκράτος, ο Tayyip Erdoğan, στέλνοντας μήνυμα εδραίωσης της κατοχής, βάζοντας —όπως δήλωσε— «μία ακόμη σφραγίδα της Τουρκίας στο νησί».

Η στάση του Τούρκου προέδρου όχι μόνο δεν δείχνει τον απαιτούμενο σεβασμό απέναντι στις αρχές και τις αξίες που πρεσβεύει η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, αλλά δείχνει και απαξίωση σε ολόκληρη την ευρωπαϊκή οικογένεια, αφού αποτελεί ξεκάθαρη πρόκληση, παραβίαση του διεθνούς δικαίου και της διεθνούς νομιμότητας. Το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο επιβάλλεται να αντιδράσει, καταδικάζοντας με τον πιο έντονο τρόπο.

Ως εκ τούτου, παρακαλώ όπως γίνει αποδεκτό το αίτημα για εγγραφή του θέματος με τίτλο «Η παράνομη επίσκεψη του προέδρου Erdoğan στις κατεχόμενες περιοχές της Κύπρου και οι κλιμακούμενες απειλές ενάντια στην Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία».

  President. – OK, so let me get this clear. We’re going to vote on the debate with the title as amended by the S&D Group which was accepted by the ECR Group. What is not clear to me is whether the S&D would want the debate on Wednesday or on Thursday. You say Wednesday? OK, Wednesday. Fine. We’ll do it on Wednesday. We just add to our debates on Wednesday.

So we vote first by roll call on adding the statements.

(Parliament approved the request)

Now we vote by roll call on whether we will have a resolution.

(Parliament rejected the request)

We will see with Mr Mavrides what he meant and how we can do it.

Thank you very much. The agenda is adopted. Have a good week.

(The sitting was briefly suspended)

PRESIDENZA: ANTONELLA SBERNA
Vicepresidente

(La seduta è ripresa alle 17:52)

  Adam Szłapka, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, honourable Members, Mr Commissioner, with European security being the top priority of the Polish Presidency, we are striving to exploit the full potential of the EU’s relations with the United Kingdom.

Last March, the Council exchanged views on the state of play. The upcoming first EU‑UK summit will provide a unique opportunity to strengthen our relationship. We are like‑minded partners, allies and good neighbours. Therefore, we are very much welcoming the EU governments’ approach, seeking to further strengthen our relations.

We work together from sanctions against Russia to support for Ukraine through security summits and joint diplomatic efforts. The ongoing Russian aggression against Ukraine, and our joint support for Ukraine, is a strong reminder of why our unity matters more than ever.

At the summit, we will seek to reaffirm our mutual commitment to the full, faithful and timely implementation of our agreements, including rights of our citizens. At the same time, there is still untapped potential and room for improvement in our relations. Ahead of the upcoming EU‑UK summit, the Council presidencies work closely with the Commission to identify and explore areas for deepening our cooperation.

A whole range of areas will be discussed with our British hosts during the summit: security and defence; sanitary and phytosanitary rules for agricultural products; stronger cooperation on energy; access to waters for EU fishermen; and opportunities for young people to live, work and study across the border. Together we are working on a package in key areas that will bring tangible benefits to citizens and businesses on both sides of the Channel. Let me stress that our partnership is about more than just trade flows: it’s about people.

Madam President, honourable Members, Commissioner, we should not forget about some challenges that remain. The situation in Northern Ireland requires careful monitoring, as does the situation of Union citizens that live in the United Kingdom.

In the relations with the UK, we are following the principles, among which there are the indivisibility of our four freedoms, safeguarding the integrity of our single market and customs union, and protecting the autonomy of the Union’s decision‑making. These guiding principles remain relevant. We will carry them forward, united and speaking with one voice.

At the same time, the Government of the United Kingdom reaffirmed its position of not rejoining the single market, the customs union and on the free movement of people. Within these parameters, leaders will engage pragmatically and respectfully at the summit. We are confident to achieve solid results for moving ahead with the strengthening of our relations with the United Kingdom.

A final word on the parliamentary dimension of EU‑UK relations. To underline the importance that the Council attaches to the input of this House in this process, achieving a mutually beneficial partnership between the EU and our British partners is a shared goal of the EU institutions. Let us continue to exchange on how to make this partnership stronger.

  Maroš Šefčovič, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, Honourable Minister, Honourable Members of the European Parliament, I am happy to participate in today’s plenary debate on the preparation of the EU‑UK summit. As you will be aware, we have been working intensely with our UK partners to prepare for the summit on 19 May. As you well know, this will be the first such summit at leaders‑level since the UK left the EU, and it marks an important milestone in our post-Brexit relationship.

President von der Leyen has met with UK Prime Minister Starmer on several occasions over the last few months, including most recently in London on 24 April. They have agreed that the summit offers an opportunity to strengthen EU‑UK cooperation across a number of areas, and it is clear that both sides want to deliver a positive summit. Exploratory discussions with the United Kingdom on a broad range of issues have taken place over the past weeks. This is part of an ongoing process which will further take shape at the summit and beyond.

The EU and the UK are like‑minded partners, and in recent times we have worked closely together on shared challenges, notably in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Given that we live in an increasingly uncertain and complex geopolitical environment, it is all the more important that we continue to cooperate in this manner. For our part, we see three broad areas where there is scope to further develop the EU‑UK relationship.

Firstly, security and resilience. This includes deeper and more structured cooperation between the EU and the UK as close partners and like‑minded allies in the face of unprecedented geopolitical challenges in our neighbourhood. This means defence and security will likely be a focus of the summit.

Secondly, something very important to this House: people‑to‑people contacts, which includes rebuilding bridges for our young people. This reflects our long‑standing policy of putting citizens at the heart of EU‑UK relations.

Thirdly, the protection of our planet and its resources. We aim to consolidate and advance cooperation on sanitary and phytosanitary matters, sustainable fisheries, climate and energy. We are working with our United Kingdom partners in pursuit of a balanced package that delivers tangible benefits to citizens across the EU and the United Kingdom.

Madam President, Honourable Members, while we are committed to strengthening our relations with the United Kingdom, we continue to insist on the full, timely and faithful implementation of our existing agreements – the Withdrawal Agreement, including the Windsor Framework, and the Trade and Cooperation Agreement. These agreements are the cornerstone of our bilateral relations and form a solid foundation for our cooperation. As regards the Withdrawal Agreement, last week, I co-chaired a meeting of the Joint Committee in London with my UK counterpart, Nick Thomas-Symonds. This was an important step on the road to the summit. Together, we expressed a clear commitment to the full, timely and faithful implementation of the agreement in all its parts. We welcomed the important progress made in the areas of citizens rights as regards the true and extra cohort, and on the Windsor Framework as regards parcels and customs arrangements.

Nevertheless, further work remains to be done on the other systemic citizens’ rights issues and on the Windsor Framework, for example on SPS. As regards the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, it remains the most ambitious free trade agreement the EU has concluded with any third country, and it responds to the UK Government’s red lines, which remain in place. But this does not mean that we cannot more fully exploit the potential of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement and look at what more it has to offer. It does not mean that we cannot further develop our cooperation in the areas I mentioned previously. On the contrary, there is much we can still do together to strengthen our relationship.

The first EU‑UK summit will therefore be an important moment to do just that. I am looking forward to hearing your views during this debate, and of course I will be very happy to answer your questions. Thank you very much, Madam President.

  Nina Carberry, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, since arriving in Parliament, I’ve been struck by an assumption often made here that Brexit is a settled matter. In reality, its consequences continue to shape political and economic life in Ireland, the UK and across Europe. Anticipation is building ahead of the upcoming EU‑UK summit on 19 May, and in a world where economic stability, security and trade openness matter more than ever, the EU and the UK have everything to gain from resetting relations.

Although the TCA lays a crucial foundation, the world has changed considerably since its signing four years ago. It remains a framework that can and should be built upon. A comprehensive veterinary agreement would be an immediate and impactful step forward, unlocking significant opportunities for farmers and agri‑food businesses. Progress on mutual recognition for professional qualifications would have major benefits. In the same way, bringing the UK closer to Erasmus+ would be an undeniable win for students and apprentices.

In an era where tackling climate change requires coordinated global efforts, closer alignment on emissions trading schemes would be a logical step to prevent carbon leakage. Closer integration of electricity markets and fully harnessing the North Sea’s potential would enhance energy security, reduce consumer costs, increase resilience to external shocks and support progress towards net zero.

Stabilising the EU‑UK relationship will bolster both peace and prosperity in Northern Ireland. As 19 May draws near, we are presented with a historic opportunity, one that should serve as a foundation for an ambitious and forward‑looking agenda. This is our moment to reshape a new chapter in EU‑UK relations.

  Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, as the world feels more fragile than ever, the upcoming UK‑EU summit cannot be a photo opportunity. It is a chance to show what kind of Europe and what kind of world we want to build. Trump’s foreign policy is rooted in egomania. As the US steps back, Europe and the UK must step forward; we must stand in solidarity with Ukraine and in defence of freedom and democracy. But our values mean nothing if we apply them selectively. In Gaza, international law is being torn apart as children are bombed and starved. Their blood drips from the hands of EU and UK leaders. We should know better.

For decades, the UK and the EU worked as one to build a fairer, better and more peaceful Europe. Nowhere was that more true than in Northern Ireland. Brexit took the people of the North out of the EU against their will. Northern Ireland needs an enhanced voice in the EU, given its unique citizenship rights, its automatic right to re‑accede, and its obligations under EU law. The UK Government needs to seize the opportunity of a new EU relationship, not cower in the face of Farage’s fads army. Failure is not an option.

  Matthieu Valet, au nom du groupe PfE. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Ministre, Monsieur le Commissaire, mes chers collègues, ici, nous devons être concrets, donc je vais vous parler de manière concrète du pays dont je suis élu, la France, et de ma région de France. Mes compatriotes de Calais, de Boulogne-sur-Mer et de Dunkerque n’en peuvent plus. Enfant du Nord, je ne reconnais plus ce si beau littoral du Pas-de-Calais transformé en Alcatraz pour lutter contre l’immigration irrégulière et les clandestins. N’en déplaise à l’extrême gauche, les passeurs sont des mafieux et des assassins. En 2024, 82 migrants sont morts dans la Manche pour avoir voulu rejoindre la Grande-Bretagne.

Que dire des accords du Touquet? C’est un fiasco! La France dépense un demi-milliard d’euros par an pour protéger une frontière qui n’est pas la sienne. Policiers, CRS, gendarmes mobiles sont engagés sur le littoral: autant d’effectifs en moins pour lutter dans nos villes, dans nos campagnes, contre l’ensauvagement, contre les narcotrafiquants qui gangrènent mon pays.

Lors du prochain sommet, l’Europe doit être courageuse aux côtés de la France, face aux Britanniques. Dites à la Grande-Bretagne: «Tu es une grande fille, tu ne dois plus délocaliser ta frontière en France et, comme une grande, tu dois gérer, comme tous les grands pays du monde, tes migrations, tes problèmes et ta frontière.» Je dis donc à ce grand pays ami: «Non, la France ne peut pas accueillir et gérer toute la misère du monde, elle a déjà fort à faire avec les siens.»

Je compte sur la Commission et sur la Pologne pour aider notre grand pays à lutter contre ces migrations, notamment en affirmant que la Grande-Bretagne doit gérer aujourd’hui seule ces problèmes puisque la France n’y arrive plus.

  Kris Van Dijck, namens de ECR-Fractie. – Voorzitter, ik blijf een sterke voorstander van nauwe, pragmatische en op wederzijds respect gebaseerde betrekkingen tussen de Europese Unie en het Verenigd Koninkrijk. Mijn delegatie heeft zich in het verleden altijd consequent verzet tegen elke vorm van strafmaatregel jegens het Verenigd Koninkrijk, nadat het land de soevereine keuze maakte om de EU te verlaten. We betreuren evenwel de Brexit.

Ik verwelkom het aangekondigde streven van de Britse regering naar een reset van de relatie met de EU. Hoewel ik het jammer vind dat het Verenigd Koninkrijk hierdoor niet naar onze interne markt of naar onze douane-unie zal terugkeren, geloof ik dat het van cruciaal belang is om onze samenwerking te versterken en enkele struikelblokken weg te werken.

Ik pleit specifiek voor een nieuwe veiligheidsovereenkomst waarmee onze samenwerking op het gebied van defensie, cyberveiligheid en het delen van inlichtingen wordt versterkt. Ten tweede moeten we een overeenkomst sluiten om de sanitaire en fytosanitaire controles aan de grenzen efficiënter te maken. Dit zou een concrete win-winsituatie opleveren voor onze landbouwers, bedrijven en consumenten. Ten derde hoop ik dat het Verenigd Koninkrijk zich opnieuw bij het Erasmusprogramma zal aansluiten. Ten vierde moet het positieve momentum worden benut om de samenwerking op het gebied van energie, visserij en kernfusieonderzoek te versterken. Dit geldt ook voor mijn eerdere pleidooi om de JET-kernfusiereactor (Joint European Torus) te behouden. Tot slot moeten we de mobiliteit van artiesten en inwoners van beide regio’s vergemakkelijken. Het is van groot belang dat onze burgers, jongeren maar ook ouderen, weer gemakkelijk kunnen reizen.

Laat deze top het begin zijn van een volwassen partnerschap tussen twee gelijkwaardige bondgenoten, gebaseerd op gedeelde belangen, wederzijds vertrouwen en een gezamenlijk engagement voor vrijheid en veiligheid.

  Sandro Gozi, au nom du groupe Renew. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Ministre, Monsieur le Commissaire, cher Maroš, le sommet UE-Royaume-Uni du 19 mai doit être un tournant. Les événements à Kiev, Washington ou Gaza ont déjà changé le monde et nous voyons dans plusieurs pays surgir des acteurs extrémistes qui se pensent comme des Churchill, alors qu’ils agissent comme des nouveaux Chamberlain.

Face à ces bouleversements et ces dangers, un nouveau partenariat stratégique euro-britannique s’impose. Mais, pour avancer, il faut avant tout une base solide, la confiance: construire la confiance, respecter pleinement les accords existants et les enrichir avec de nouvelles opportunités pour la défense et la jeunesse, l’intelligence artificielle et le climat, et, surtout, trouver des solutions concrètes sur les dossiers encore ouverts, comme la pêche et l’énergie.

C’est ce que nous avons demandé dans la recommandation votée lors de l’Assemblée parlementaire UE-Royaume-Uni, en mars, en vue de ce sommet. Sur cette base, nous devons repenser l’architecture de sécurité en Europe et travailler ensemble sur la scène globale pour une nouvelle alliance des démocraties.

  Pär Holmgren, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, this upcoming EU‑UK summit of course offers an opportunity to rebuild bridges and strengthen cooperation, which is really crucial given the current turbulent times. But it’s also highly beneficial from a long‑term strategic perspective. We, as Greens, recognise the mutual benefit of knowledge‑sharing and research collaboration, and we warmly welcome the UK’s re-entry into Horizon Europe. However, we would also like to see similar developments in Erasmus+, to give young people a chance to study and work on either side of the channel. We therefore call on the Commission and the UK Government to be proactive in restoring and strengthening such programmes.

We would also like to see a better regulatory dynamic between the EU and the UK, for example, the better alignment of biosecurity border controls and the emissions trading schemes to endorse sustainability practices and to facilitate trade.

Last but not least, as you all know, there is a war on European soil. Geopolitical tensions are growing in many, many corners of the world, and humanity is threatened by an escalating climate crisis. We cannot be wasting time and resources conducting parallel research on both sides of the channel, and we cannot be wasting an opportunity to foster a sense of unity among the future generations of Europe. So let this summit be a starting point for a deepening relationship between the EU and the UK for the benefit of all.

  David McAllister (PPE). – Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, as previous speakers have already mentioned, the upcoming EU‑UK summit marks a pivotal moment to recalibrate our partnership. Ever since the Windsor Framework, agreed in March 2023, we have seen greater political stability in our relations. The much anticipated EU Security and Defence Pact could be a real milestone. Enhanced cooperation in military mobility, joint research and development, and cyber resilience – this is all urgently needed. The EU and the UK should rise to the occasion and ensure an agreement that also fosters deeper cooperation on intelligence sharing, sanctions coordination as well as foreign information manipulation and interference.

Yet, a mature partnership should go beyond security and defence. The Commission has put substantial proposals on the table on everything from energy to youth mobility. We should deepen cooperation in further key sectors: energy interconnectivity and offshore renewables in the North Sea, financial services through regulatory equivalence, and a pragmatic sustainable fisheries arrangement for the time after 2026. As for the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, the TCA is due for review next year. Long‑term stability in our relations is more important than ever. Commissioner Šefčovič, we look forward to discussing the outcome of this summit with you in the Foreign Affairs Committee.

  Γιάννης Μανιάτης (S&D). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η εκλογή Trump στις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες έχει αλλάξει τις παγκόσμιες ισορροπίες. Για να μπορέσει να αντεπεξέλθει η Ευρώπη στις γεωπολιτικές προκλήσεις, όπως είναι ο πόλεμος στην Ουκρανία, η κρίση στη Μέση Ανατολή και η εξάλειψη των αμερικανικών εγγυήσεων ασφαλείας για την ήπειρό μας, πρέπει να ενισχύσει τις σχέσεις της με εταίρους με τους οποίους έχει κοινές αρχές και αξίες, όπως είναι το Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο, ο Καναδάς, η Αυστραλία, η Ιαπωνία.

Εννέα χρόνια μετά το δημοψήφισμα για το Brexit και την καταστροφική διακυβέρνηση των Συντηρητικών, η εκλογή των Εργατικών δημιουργεί μια νέα ευκαιρία. Η επικείμενη σύνοδος Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης – Ηνωμένου Βασιλείου μπορεί να αποτελέσει το πρώτο βήμα για την εξεύρεση ενός θεσμικού πλαισίου που θα επιτρέψει την εμβάθυνση της συνεργασίας μας, ιδιαίτερα σε τομείς όπως είναι η ασφάλεια, η άμυνα, το εμπόριο, η κλιματική αλλαγή και η ενέργεια, όπως και οι ευκαιρίες για τους νέους μας. Σε αυτή την κατεύθυνση πρέπει να κινηθούμε.

  Ernő Schaller-Baross (PfE). – Elnök Asszony! A közelgő londoni EU-Egyesült Királyság csúcstalálkozó rendkívüli lehetőséget kínál számunkra, hogy kapcsolatainkat új, erősebb alapokra helyezzük. Sajnálatos módon az elmúlt időszakban nem tudtuk maradéktalanul kihasználni a rendelkezésünkre álló lehetőséget, és úgy tűnt, hogy az EU inkább büntetni próbálta a briteket döntésükért, mintsem konstruktív párbeszédet folytatott volna velük.

Most azonban elérkezett az idő, hogy pragmatikus, hatékony alapokra helyezzük az együttműködésünket. Közösen dolgozunk ki olyan egyezményeket, amelyek valóban a jövőnket formálják. Fontos hangsúlyozni, hogy a briteken kívül az amerikai partnereinkkel is folyamatosan tárgyalnunk kell, és olyan megoldásokra van szükség, amelyek minden fél számára előnyösek és tartósak. Az együttműködés kulcsa a kölcsönös tiszteleten és közös érdekeken alapuló partnerség, amely hosszútávon biztosíthatja Európa stabilitását és sikerét. A következő hónapok döntőek lesznek abban, hogy hogyan alakítjuk közösen a jövőnket.

  Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR). – Madam President, dear colleagues, Mr Commissioner, the upcoming first EU-United Kingdom summit after Brexit is an opportunity to open a new chapter in rebuilding our relationship. The most important issue to be addressed is, above all, cooperation in the field of defence. European defence policy is not possible without the United Kingdom.

In the face of global threats, we need a joint response to hybrid challenges, cybersecurity and the protection of our borders. Our key topics include a mobility programme for young people, trade issues, as well as the fight against illegal immigration. One of the most troubling consequences of Brexit for young people was the UK’s withdrawal from the Erasmus+ programme. I therefore welcome plans for new solutions regarding youth mobility.

Brexit has changed the formal framework of our relationship, but it has not broken the bonds between us. We must do everything we can to make everyday life easier – we cannot allow political or bureaucratic obstacles to make it harder. We need cooperation based on trust and concrete solutions, cooperation with a response to take needs of people on both sides of the English Channel.

  Barry Cowen (Renew). – Madam President, colleagues, as we look ahead to the upcoming summit, I want to commend the Commission for its ongoing efforts to strengthen our relationship with the UK. Despite the challenges posed by Brexit, the UK remains a valued and like‑minded partner of the EU in the face of global challenges. In light of the recent tariff decisions by the US, it is more important than ever to deepen our engagement with our British neighbours. I urge the Commission to be ambitious in our dialogue with the UK, to work to align our trade regulations and enhance cooperation on energy, particularly on offshore wind and grid infrastructure, and, of course, to preserve the Common Travel Area.

Above all, our united and unwavering support for Ukraine must remain a central priority. With that said, any lasting partnership must begin with the full implementation of existing agreements, including the Windsor Framework. The unique status of Northern Ireland must be protected in all future negotiations, and the peace and stability secured by the Good Friday Agreement must never, ever be taken for granted. Only through trust, cooperation and mutual respect can we secure a prosperous future for both EU and UK citizens alike.

  Malika Sorel (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, les crises actuelles le démontrent, l’histoire ne s’efface pas d’un trait de plume. Le Royaume-Uni a quitté l’Union européenne, mais il demeure européen. Washington menace de se distancer de l’Europe, aussitôt la France et le Royaume-Uni se retrouvent et prennent la tête d’un engagement pour la sécurité européenne.

En matière de coopération, beaucoup de progrès ont été faits, mais certains domaines restent en suspens, tels que la mobilité des citoyens, en particulier des jeunes. Plutôt que l’approche purement comptable, le Royaume-Uni doit considérer la richesse humaine et culturelle que permet Erasmus. C’est le vœu de nos collègues britanniques que nous avions reçus récemment ici, dans notre Parlement.

Pour notre compétitivité, nous devons intégrer, dans nos alliances, les universités britanniques de sciences et technologie.

Concernant l’intelligence artificielle, les Britanniques sont pragmatiques et souhaitent avancer très vite en unissant nos efforts. Nous devons tempérer notre obsession réglementaire en la matière.

Dernier point: l’immigration. Plusieurs pays de l’Union subissent les conséquences d’un appel d’air créé par le laxisme d’employeurs britanniques. Ce sujet doit être traité.

Chers collègues, œuvrons à une relation confiante, équilibrée, tournée vers l’avenir.

  Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). – Señora presidenta, el nuevo contexto internacional —con inclusión de la guerra de agresión rusa contra Ucrania y el cambio de la Administración en Washington— hace muy conveniente reforzar la cooperación en política exterior y de defensa con el Reino Unido. Necesitamos un marco profundo e institucionalizado de cooperación en este ámbito.

Fue una lástima que, por negativa de los conservadores británicos, este capítulo quedase fuera del Acuerdo de Comercio y Cooperación. Yo espero que la cumbre del día 19 produzca avances sustanciales en este sentido, y también en otros temas de mutuo interés como, por ejemplo, la movilidad de los jóvenes, la energía, la mayor agilización de los intercambios comerciales y la pesca.

Me detengo brevemente en este último punto: el llamado «periodo de ajuste» de los últimos cinco años ha supuesto un importante recorte de capturas para la flota europea. A partir de 2026 no deben producirse nuevos cambios. Necesitamos previsibilidad y estabilidad para la flota europea. Quiero recordar una vez más que, aunque es verdad que barcos europeos pescan en aguas británicas, también es cierto que el mercado europeo es el que recibe la gran mayoría de las exportaciones británicas de productos del mar.

Termino con una pregunta: señor comisario, ¿puede decirnos algo sobre en qué situación se encuentran las larguísimas negociaciones con el Reino Unido respecto de Gibraltar?

  Nathalie Loiseau (Renew). – Madam President, dear British friends. The EU-UK summit gives us the historic opportunity to repair our relationship. There are thousands of good reasons to do it, whereas there was none to damage old ties in the first place.

We share the same aspirations and face the same challenges on both sides of the channel. All leaders have expressed political will to work more and better together. Now is the time to turn words into deeds.

A credible European defence must partner with the UK as a priority, building on the coalition of the willing for Ukraine. Let’s make it happen.

Let’s also prioritise the young generations in our decisions. Since Brexit, London deprives itself of talented young Europeans for no reason. Let’s build a youth mobility scheme.

Every side has to make efforts. We must be more welcoming towards British touring artists. You, dear British friends, must be more welcoming towards European fishermen. Because in both cases, it would make only winners and no losers.

Dear British friends, it is time to get out of splendid isolation and to enjoy again a European entente cordiale.

  Thijs Reuten (S&D). – Madam President, colleagues, Commissioner, Council, in today’s geopolitical reality, we need to stand together with our best friends, and the EU and the UK are each other’s best friends. We have to join forces to preserve our freedom, democracy and security – these core values, which were re‑established with the UK’s strong involvement also 80 years ago. As today we celebrate Liberation Day in the Netherlands, I want to thank our British liberators for their incredible contribution in this regard.

A united Europe is needed more than ever to face today’s challenges. Being a member of the EU or not should be insignificant in this. We cannot be driven apart. The upcoming summit is an excellent opportunity to turn the page and to reshape our future and relationship for our citizens, for Europe. This should start with a new formal security and defence partnership to protect our people, strengthen our deterrence and ensure stability in Europe. Let’s get this done together.

  Elisabeth Dieringer (PfE). – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, geschätzte Bürger! Ich begrüße es ausdrücklich, dass die Vertreter der Europäischen Union sich nun anders verhalten als in der letzten Zeit, ja vielleicht – bildlich gesprochen – auch von ihrem hohen Ross herabsteigen und auch persönliche Befindlichkeiten hintanstellen. Man erkennt wohl nun, dass Großbritannien auch nach dem EU-Austritt keineswegs so geschwächt dasteht, wie man es sich vielleicht auch erhofft hat, und dass europäische Unternehmen sowie besonders junge EU‑Bürger weiterhin nach England streben. Ein Grund dafür: Vier der zehn besten Universitäten der Welt stehen im Vereinigten Königreich, keine einzige davon in der EU. Für EU‑Bürger sind die Studiengebühren dort inzwischen zwei- bis dreimal so hoch wie vor dem Brexit, und in der EU gibt es kaum gleichwertige Alternativen.

Doch es geht nicht nur um Studienplätze. Junge Menschen aus Europa möchten im Vereinigten Königreich leben, lernen, arbeiten – und stoßen auf Visapflicht, Sponsorship‑Systeme und einen Dschungel aus Bürokratie. Die EU hat hier einen wesentlichen Teil ihrer Jugendpolitik preisgegeben. Es gilt daher nun, den Brexit als Realität anzusehen, als demokratische Realität. Unsere Antworten sollten daher nicht in der Vergangenheit sein, sondern auf die Zukunft ausgerichtet.

  Barry Andrews (Renew). – Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, I made my very first speech in the hemicycle in February 2020, and I called on the Commission to treat the UK not as a rival but as a partner. Given that we had two more years of Boris Johnson to deal with, that was probably a tall order. But, I believe, together with the voices of so many Members today in this debate, that we need to go even beyond partnership and talk about a like-minded strategic ally.

I believe the time has long passed to continue to punish the UK for Brexit, or to make an example of the UK, to discourage them. I believe that way of thinking is long over, and I believe it’s a very much a minority view among in the European Commission.

So, we need to approach the TCA review from a position of maximum ambition, including, obviously, SPS, the emissions trading scheme and youth mobility. We need to widen the scope to include finance, given the questions raised about the role of the US.

I believe it is in our towering mutual interest to work together to make our respective economies as strong as possible.

  Željana Zovko (PPE). – Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, the summit of 19 May represents a unique opportunity to deepen our cooperation with the UK in areas such as defence, trade, foreign affairs and energy. We urgently need to enhance our partnership with the UK on security and strategic questions. However, in our dialogue with the UK, we must take into account the problems of every Member States, and notably the interest of coastal countries. We must make clear that the strengthening of our relations with the UK must lead to a win‑win outcome. Moreover, the UK Government must understand that for relations to be solid, it needs to be transparent. In this regard, we need clarification on the reasons why the UK Government is not willing to cooperate more with the European Union in the Western Balkans. Only by having in mind this transparent and mutually beneficial approach will we be able to take momentum of a reset in our relations.

  Ana Catarina Mendes (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário, Senhor Ministro, eu sou das otimistas que acreditam que o Reino Unido ainda voltará a fazer parte da União Europeia. É por isso que vejo com muito bons olhos a próxima parceria, e sobretudo a próxima parceria porque deve ser uma parceria estratégica e o reforço das relações entre a União Europeia e o Reino Unido.

Se é verdade que já avançámos muito no Acordo de Parceria Económica, que tem sido absolutamente essencial para reforçar os nossos laços económicos, não é menos verdade que o Reino Unido tem dado sinais, neste momento de instabilidade, sinais muito fortes de presença na definição da política de defesa e segurança na Europa. E é absolutamente essencial que mantenhamos esta relação com o Reino Unido — ela é estratégica, ela é antiga, ela é absolutamente essencial.

Mas, se é verdade que estamos perante as novas ameaças, e estes são dois sinais muito bons, não é menos verdade, Senhor Comissário, que aquilo que peço aqui hoje, neste plenário, é que voltemos a trazer os jovens para o programa Erasmus. Façamos da cultura uma prioridade também na nossa relação com o Reino Unido, fazendo derrubar as barreiras que ainda existem na mobilidade dos nossos artistas.

Uma Europa de valores é uma Europa que partilha também a educação e a cultura — é isto que peço à Comissão neste momento.

  Michał Szczerba (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Wysoka Izbo! Wspólna odpowiedzialność za bezpieczeństwo kontynentu wyznacza kierunek naszych relacji z Wielką Brytanią. Szczyt Unii Europejskiej i Wielkiej Brytanii, zaplanowany na 19 maja, musi być impulsem do sformalizowania strategicznej współpracy w dziedzinie obronności, produkcji uzbrojenia, bezpieczeństwa energetycznego i ochrony infrastruktury krytycznej. Stawiając na nowe partnerstwa, Unia Europejska realizuje cele polskiej prezydencji. Zmieniamy Unię Europejską poprzez wprowadzenie bezpieczeństwa w główny nurt naszych prac. Kompas strategiczny to narzędzie, którym dysponuje Unia Europejska do budowy strategicznych partnerstw. I Unia dostrzega konieczność zacieśniania współpracy z krajami trzecimi. Cieszymy się z dotychczasowych partnerstw z takimi krajami jak Norwegia, Japonia, Korea Południowa, Mołdawia, Macedonia Północna i Albania, ale mówimy: chcemy więcej. Chcemy więcej współpracy, chcemy więcej sojuszy, chcemy więcej partnerstw i więcej bezpieczeństwa.

Procedura “catch-the-eye”

  Billy Kelleher (Renew). – Madam President, thank you very much. I do really welcome the reset of EU-UK relations, and I do look forward to a positive outcome in the summit. And there’s just a few points I want to allude to, Commissioner, in terms of the important issues: one being the issue of the Erasmus programme. It has been spoken about a lot, but it really is hugely fundamental to the concept of young people being able to travel, to live, to learn, to love in other cultures. And it would be a shame if over the next number of years, we were unable to see another generation of UK citizens travelling to Europe and European citizens travelling to the UK.

From my perspective, sharing a jurisdiction on the island of Ireland, it is critically important that we have that continual building of personal relationships, and universities and third-level institutions are a great way to do that.

The other key areas where I believe we have to make a lot of progress – again, I look at it from the context of Ireland being offshore – offshore in terms of wind energy and the distribution of electricity from Ireland through the UK and onwards into Europe. I believe we have to have a full and open and honest debate with the UK around that particular issue to ensure the simplification of the export and import of electricity via the UK itself. Otherwise, our ability to export the large sums of wind energy that will hopefully be generated in the years ahead would be significantly challenged, because there will have to be interconnectors directly from Ireland to France otherwise.

  Lukas Sieper (NI). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Menschen Europas! Ich hatte vor drei Wochen die große Freude, mit britischen Kollegen aus dem House of Commons und dem House of Lords Syrien zu besuchen. Und dort, am Ende der zivilisierten Welt, in einem Land, gebeutelt von Bürgerkrieg und Unterdrückung, da findet man zusammen mit den Menschen, die einen begleiten. Genauso kam ich zusammen mit meinen britischen Kollegen. Und ich habe gespürt: Während nicht alle von ihnen erkennen, dass der Brexit ein Fehler war, so sehnen sich doch alle von ihnen nach Europa. Und deswegen denke ich, dass dieser anstehende Gipfel eine wichtige Gelegenheit ist, die Probleme aus dem Weg zu räumen, die wir in der Vergangenheit schon hatten.

Ein großes Thema ist der Handel, und ein kleines Thema in diesem großen Thema ist die Fischerei. Wir werden uns alle daran erinnern, dass die Fischerei und die rechtlichen Fragen hinsichtlich dieses Problems einer der Gründe waren, der der Brexit-Bewegung damals erlaubt hat, Fahrt aufzunehmen. Ich möchte daher alle Vertreter der Europäischen Union aufrufen, insbesondere bei diesem Thema eine gute Lösung mit unseren britischen Freunden zu finden.

  Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă (NI). – Doamnă președintă, atunci când veți vorbi cu Marea Britanie, o să vă rog frumos să apărați și interesele românilor care muncesc în Marea Britanie. Avem foarte mulți români acolo, este una dintre cele mai importante grupări de cetățeni români pe care o avem în afara granițelor țării.

Din păcate, este discriminată total. Nu există săptămână să nu fiu anunțată că un copil este luat din rândul familiilor române. Nu este zi să nu fiu anunțată că un copil a fost atacat și înjunghiat de către alți britanici, și unii copii au murit.

Mă adresez ambasadei Marii Britanii la București, dar și aici, dar și pe lângă Comisia Europeană – nu vor să ne primească, nu vor să vorbească cu noi. Nu-i interesează situația românilor din Marea Britanie și vă întreb: românii care muncesc în Europa, în Marea Britanie, în Uniunea Europeană, sunt chiar de clasa a șaptea a populațiilor lumii? Chiar așa, trebuie să ne batem joc de ei, iar copilul unui român nu contează absolut deloc și nimeni nu îi apără?

Solicit Comisiei Europene, solicit Parlamentului European să ne apere și nouă copiii românilor din Marea Britanie care sunt discriminați și omorâți ca niște animale pe străzi.

(Fine della procedura “catch the eye”)

  Maroš Šefčovič, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, my dear colleague, Honourable Minister, Honourable Members of the European Parliament, first and foremost, thank you very much for all your contributions. I would like to start by showing my appreciation, in particular, for the interventions of Mr McAllister, Madam Loiseau, Mr Gozi and Mr Andrews, because they have been with the file on EU‑UK cooperation from the very beginning, since the first moment of Brexit. They can see the change, they can feel the difference, and they can also judge the progress which we are achieving. I totally agree with them that, on both sides, on the side of the United Kingdom and on the on the side of the EU, we see the upcoming summit as a very important turning point, as a pivotal moment. Therefore, we are putting in all our efforts and we are very much focused on delivering tangible results, because we believe that this would clearly contribute to the strengthening of EU‑UK relations.

I absolutely agree with Mr Maniatis and Mr Reuten, who are highlighting the fact that we are now living in a different world. Indeed, the geopolitical landscape has changed dramatically and, therefore, you need to forge new partnerships, new friendships, and you have to work on the relationships you have, especially with important and close neighbours. Therefore, it’s very important for all of us for the EU and UK to work closely together and to make sure that, in all aspects of what is currently being discussed on the geopolitical level, we behave like like‑minded parties, exactly like Madam Mendes and Mr Cowen highlighted.

If you allow me to just bring you a little bit more detail of my visit to London last week, on top of a very well prepared joint committee, where we went through the entire inventory of issues linked to the Windsor Framework, with the Withdrawal Agreement and with the citizens’ rights. I want to expressly say here how much was achieved, how much we focused on this area, how much we fight for the rights of every single EU citizen in the United Kingdom, and how much we work with our Member States to make sure that British nationals who live in the EU also have also the rights which belong to them under the Withdrawal Agreement. I want to reassure everyone that this is a top priority for us. We are really taking care of every person here because we know that we are talking about families, we are talking about children, and we are talking about the fair treatment of our citizens in the UK and British nationals in the EU.

On top of the joint committee session, in one day I had very productive sessions with four ministers, with Minister Nick Thomas-Symonds, with Secretary of State Jonathan Reynolds, with whom we discussed trade, with Mr Hilary Benn, where we delved into the issue of Northern Ireland and our cooperation over the Northern Ireland Protocol, and with Mr David Lammy, where we managed not only to discuss geopolitics, but also our good and positive cooperation on the issues linked with Gibraltar. This is also reflecting the new wave of partnership and positive atmosphere between EU and UK.

Coming back to the more concrete points the Honourable Members have made. Indeed, on security and defence, it’s very clear that we can do more to strengthen our cooperation in this area. The points of Madam Zovko and Mr Van Dijck are very well taken, and we are working with this clearly in our minds. I am sure that if you look at the White Paper on the future of European defence already there, we are making it very clear that the UK is an essential European ally, and we are stating that cooperation should be enhanced in our mutual interest. Therefore, I can confirm that we want to be ambitious in this area, and we see it as a core part of a renewed EU‑UK agenda.

Many Honourable Members have been referring to the importance of the area of people‑to‑people contacts. I can assure you that not only for our Member States, which I’m sure Minister Szłapka can confirm, but also for the Commission, very clearly, this is one of the top priorities. We want, again, to build bridges. We want to give our youth the experience of talking to British peers, of having these exchange programmes. Of course, we will be very happy if we can manage to find a solution on Erasmus+ and other other areas of cooperation, as Madam Wiśniewska and Mr Holmgren have been calling for. Therefore for us, in this particular regard, it is very important not to look at each other’s citizens as mere statistics, but as future bridge‑builders, as people who would remember that experience for the rest of their lives. Of course, therefore, in this regard, we want the summit to bring tangible benefits to the people on both sides. For us, clearly, the ambition in this area is an indispensable part of the renewed EU‑UK agenda.

Honourable Members have been referring, among other areas, to the importance of fisheries, and I would like to reassure all of you that this is clearly a priority for us, as it was raised by Mr Millán Mon and Mr Ruissen. The current arrangements for reciprocal access to waters expires in the middle of next year, so it is essential for us to reach an early agreement that protects the rights of our fishers and provides them with certainty and predictability. We have also been open to an SPS agreement with the UK, as Madam Carberry was calling for. We do that because we are convinced that this would further facilitate the flow of SPS goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, beyond what has already been achieved with the Windsor Framework.

On top of this, the ideas mentioned by Mr Andrews, like linking the emissions trading system or strengthening cooperation in the field of energy, as was called for by Mr Kelleher and Mr Cowen – all these are areas we are currently looking at where I believe we can progress further. When you follow the statement of Commission President von der Leyen, she was very clear on this as well. So there is more that the EU and UK can do together to exploit our potential in this area, and we will be using every single remaining day to achieve this result.

Mr Millán Mon was asking about Gibraltar. I will partially respond to this: I have to underline at this stage that we are progressing in a positive direction, and I really would like to thank both Foreign Minister Alvarez and Mr Lammy for their exemplary cooperation and for understanding the position of all sides, because this will help us to advance on these very complex and difficult discussions. We will be working on this at the top level. I believe that we will be successful in that result as well.

Madam President, Honourable Members, my dear colleague, Minister Szłapka, I would like to conclude by thanking you once again, not only for the exchange we had this afternoon, but also for the very vigilant eye and constructive spirit this house has always demonstrated towards the development of EU‑UK relations. We’ve been working very closely on these issues throughout the years, and I believe that the progress which we can see right now is also thanks to your vigilance, to your support and to your to your constructive ideas. Once again, thank you very much, and I’m also looking forward to this constructive cooperation in the future. Thank you, Madam President.

  Adam Szłapka, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, thank you very much, honourable Members, Commissioner, the European Union and the United Kingdom are more than neighbours, we are like-minded democracies that share a deep commitment to the rule of law, human rights, market economy and the international order. We are united by a set of values that underpin stability in a world that has become increasingly uncertain.

Our relationship with the UK is about being close partners in peace, prosperity, democracy and about global leadership. We will reaffirm our commitment to this relationship at the summit in pursuit of our shared strategic interests and for the benefit of our citizens.

  Presidente. – Dichiaro chiusa la discussione.

  Gilles Boyer, rapporteur. – Madame la Présidente, mes chers collègues, Monsieur le Commissaire, le rapport annuel sur la protection des intérêts financiers de notre Union est bien plus qu’un exercice administratif. C’est le miroir de notre capacité collective à défendre notre budget contre les attaques dont il fait l’objet. Notre Parlement accorde une attention toute particulière aux résultats de ce rapport de la Commission, car ils mettent en lumière les failles, les risques, mais aussi les progrès qui sont réalisés dans la lutte contre la fraude. Grâce à notre architecture anti-fraude, le rapport est désormais enrichi des données du Parquet européen, d’Europol et d’autres acteurs-clés.

Nous devons cependant aller plus loin. L’architecture actuelle doit être modernisée, consolidée et surtout rendue pleinement opérationnelle. Avec la création du Parquet européen, nous avons franchi une étape. Il est maintenant temps de renforcer les synergies entre les différentes branches de notre architecture.

En parallèle, nous faisons face à une mutation rapide des menaces. L’intelligence artificielle est désormais utilisée par les organisations criminelles pour détourner des fonds européens. Notre riposte doit donc être aussi technologique. Nous devons mettre à jour nos outils: IMS, Arachne, EDES. Nous devons aussi investir massivement dans des outils numériques avancés et renforcer notre capacité d’analyse des risques, sinon nous aurons toujours un temps de retard sur les criminels.

Les chiffres sont clairs: les actions menées par les entités luttant contre la fraude ont un véritable impact financier. Les recouvrements de paiements indus par l’OLAF et la restitution au budget de l’Union des fonds confisqués grâce au Parquet européen doivent devenir des priorités stratégiques. Les montants détournés doivent être récupérés rapidement; ils doivent l’être au niveau européen et être réaffectés aux politiques communes.

Nous faisons également face à des défis structurels. Les systèmes nationaux restent trop fragmentés. Les capacités de certaines autorités anti-fraude demeurent insuffisantes. Nous devons donc poursuivre l’harmonisation de nos législations, renforcer la coopération transfrontalière et protéger celles et ceux qui ont le courage d’alerter.

Les trois grandes menaces que nous avons identifiées cette année – le crime organisé, la corruption et les conflits d’intérêts – sapent l’intégrité de la dépense publique et détournent nos fonds communs. Ces menaces ne sont pas des fatalités, mais elles appellent une réponse ferme, coordonnée, technologique, éthique et résolument européenne.

Je souligne aussi dans mon rapport l’importance du règlement sur la conditionnalité qui permet de faire le lien entre l’état de droit et la protection des intérêts financiers de l’Union. Il rappelle que l’accès aux fonds européens exige des garanties solides en matière d’indépendance de la justice et de prévention des conflits d’intérêts. Nous ne pouvons pas tolérer que des fonds européens financent des systèmes qui sapent l’état de droit.

Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, nous avons la volonté. Il faut désormais nous donner pleinement les moyens de passer à l’action. Je compte sur vous pour que le prochain cadre financier pluriannuel prenne pleinement en compte nos priorités communes de lutte contre la fraude et contre le crime organisé, ainsi que l’application rigoureuse du principe de conditionnalité. Le budget européen ne peut rester vulnérable face à des réseaux criminels et à la complaisance de certains États ou à la technicité de la fraude moderne.

  Piotr Serafin, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, first of all, I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Boyer, and the members of the Committee on Budgetary Control for their report, which is balanced, forward-looking and that we not only appreciate, but we share most of the observations that have already been made.

The European Parliament has always supported and, I would say even more, inspired the European Commission to make the anti-fraud architecture more effective and up to the task – for that, I would like to thank you also today. Because of the time constraints, I will concentrate only on a few most prominent aspects of the report that have been already mentioned by the rapporteur.

First, the review of the anti-fraud architecture – this is one of the tasks for this Commission. As the rapporteur has mentioned we have new actors already in place, we might have even more, and it will be absolutely necessary to look and see for the synergies and to facilitate cooperation between the actors. So, from our perspective, to achieve efficient and effective cooperation among all anti-fraud actors will be the priority of the review of the anti-fraud architecture. That is also the precondition for effective and swift recovery of EU funds.

We have already started this process in the Commission. We had consultations with the main actors, including EPPO, OLAF, European Court of Auditors, Eurojust and Europol with a view to drawing up an action plan. I stand ready to inform the European Parliament about the progress and I will also count on the support of this House for the future implementation.

I can only echo what was said by the rapporteur on the conditionality regulation – this is clearly progress and very welcome developments, and the one that, looking ahead in view of the next Multiannual Financial Framework, we will keep in place. We would also like to build on the experience to ensure that the EU budget can be used to promote reforms that strengthen the rule of law in Member States. Therefore, there should not be any doubt – respect for the rule of law is a must for EU funds and even more in the future MFF.

Thirdly, the digitalisation and integration of data. The rapporteur has already referred to a few systems that we have in place – I will talk about them later. But what I want to say is that we are fully aware that digitalisation, interoperability of databases and integration of AI tools for fraud detection and prevention are already present in the revised action plan that accompanies the Commission anti-fraud strategy. We are progressing on its implementation, despite the challenges, and we will report about these developments in the next PIF report.

However, at the heart of any significant development in this direction lies the issue of data quality, without which any technical solution will remain fruitless. We are significantly investing in this by providing detailed guidance to national authorities and engaging in structured dialogue with those that need additional assistance.

Fourthly, refining our tools – IMS, which has been mentioned several times in your report, received an important upgrade at the end of last year to make it technologically ready for other significant developments that will follow. When it comes to Arachne – the tool already supports control and audit and helps protect the Union’s financial interests, and we will continue to strengthen it in line with financial regulation. A Member States expert group, in which the European Parliament sits as an observer, formalises the cooperation towards the development of the future system. We will also be happy to continue to update you on the progress in this project.

When it comes to the early detection and exclusion system, it is currently applicable in direct and indirect management modes as of 2028. Its scope will be extended to short management and direct management with Member States and that is something for which the European Parliament can also take credit.

Let me also mention whistleblower protection that is supporting the prevention and detection of fraud. To strengthen the culture of ethics and maintain a high level of awareness about fraud, corruption or other serious wrongdoing, the Commission will provide updated guidance to its staff on whistleblowing procedures and protection, in light of the EU standards of protection in this area.

And finally, our attention is already set on the future and on the design of the next Multiannual Financial Framework, drawing from good practices and lessons learned during the current MFF. We will need to make sure, in particular, that the legal provisions underlying the future MFF ensure transparency of fund recipients and meaningful and mandatory reporting of quality data about detected irregularities and fraud, and a strong anti-fraud architecture to ensure adequate protection of the EU budget. When the moment of the negotiations of the legislative package for the future MFF comes, the Commission will count once more on your support to ensure that the resulting legal framework will be up to the challenges we are confronted with. I thank you again for your attention and look forward to the constructive debate.

PREȘEDINȚIA: NICOLAE ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ
Vicepreședinte

  Caterina Chinnici, a nome del gruppo PPE. – Signor Presidente, Signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, io voglio innanzitutto ringraziare il relatore, l’onorevole Boyer, e gli altri relatori ombra per il lavoro che insieme abbiamo svolto su questa importante relazione. Importante perché tutelare gli interessi finanziari dell’Unione e contrastare le frodi significa non solo proteggere il bilancio ma anche la stessa sicurezza interna dell’Unione.

Infatti, come la Procura europea ed Europol costantemente ci segnalano e come ricorda anche la relazione, dietro le frodi e gli altri reati che ledono gli interessi finanziari dell’Unione ci sono sempre più spesso – direi ormai sistematicamente – le organizzazioni criminali, le stesse responsabili anche dei crimini più violenti.

E allora, a fronte dell’aumento dei casi di frode e irregolarità nel quinquennio 2019-2023, occorre rafforzare la cooperazione e lo scambio di informazioni a tutti i livelli, intensificare digitalizzazione e trasparenza, consolidare i sistemi di gestione e controllo, in particolare nell’ambito dell’RRF, dove, secondo la Corte dei conti europea, permangono carenze preoccupanti.

Ma soprattutto, e più in generale, dobbiamo rafforzare l’architettura antifrode dell’Unione, migliorando il coordinamento tra le componenti, sia a livello orizzontale degli organismi dell’Unione, sia a livello verticale di rapporti UE-autorità nazionali degli Stati membri, che devono adottare un approccio sempre più proattivo in tale settore.

Ed è necessario, sempre in quest’ottica, procedere alla revisione dei mandati dei due attori chiave nella lotta alla criminalità economico-finanziaria: EPPO ad Europol, già prevista negli ordinamenti della Commissione, e questo non solo per rafforzarne ulteriormente il ruolo, ma anche per rendere la cooperazione fra di loro ancora più strutturale e sistematica.

Prevenzione, individuazione, indagini e repressione delle frodi non solo per un ritorno in termini economici ma per tutelare opportunità, diritti e sicurezza dei cittadini europei.

  Eero Heinäluoma, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, I also would like to thank our rapporteur and the shadows for excellent cooperation in preparing this report.

Combating fraud is about protecting the EU budget. Equally much, it is about protecting European citizens and businesses.

Through European cooperation, we have managed to combat trade in faulty protection equipment during the pandemic, prevented unsafe toys from reaching our children and hindered dangerous food products from ending up on our plates.

Together, we are able to better ensure that EU financial support benefits businesses that live up to our common rules and objectives, instead of those undermining European policies of fair competition on the single market.

To be successful, however, we need all of our society to participate. A zero-tolerance culture against fraud begins with public authorities, including national governments, leading by example and condemning fraud and corruption wherever they occur.

We need an open democratic society with media and civil society free from political pressure or attempts to restrict their participation in public dialogue.

Here, the Commission has a key responsibility in ensuring that our safeguards are robust enough to meet a growing volume of EU funds and an ever more challenging fraud landscape, as our rapporteur told us. Reality shows the need for strengthened safeguards for protecting the EU budget against misuse, be it fraud or violations of the rule of law, not least in view of the upcoming MFF.

Ultimately, we need to ensure that every euro is spent to the benefit of European citizens and businesses.

  Virginie Joron, au nom du groupe PfE. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, Monsieur le Commissaire, ce rapport sur la protection des intérêts financiers de l’Union est trop clément. En effet, à l’exception du lobbying des ONG vertes financées par Bruxelles, la plupart des scandales majeurs ne figurent ni dans le rapport ni dans les statistiques présentées.

Comment excuser l’inaction du Parquet européen dans l’affaire Pfizer-Von der Leyen? Aucune enquête n’a été menée sur d’éventuels conflits d’intérêts et sur les erreurs systématiques dans la négociation des contrats, sur les 71 milliards d’euros gaspillés en vaccins contre la COVID, sur les doses annulées de Pfizer à 10 € la dose, sur l’achat de plus de 1 milliard d’euros pour le Remdesivir du laboratoire Gilead – traitement pourtant jugé inefficace contre la COVID –, ou encore sur l’emprunt géant post-COVID à taux variable.

Il y a de grandes spoliations et il y a des décisions inexcusables de la Commission qui ne figurent dans aucun rapport. Comment autoriser le pantouflage de Thierry Breton à la Bank of America? Ou confier à BlackRock le soin d’imaginer notre futur bancaire? Laisser sans conséquences majeures le directeur général de la DG MOVE voyager aux frais du Qatar? Confier le recrutement des fonctionnaires européens à une entreprise américaine? Ou encore le blanchiment présumé de 1 million d’euros par le commissaire à la justice via des tickets de loto achetés dans une station-service? De quelle crédibilité la Commission peut-elle se targuer quand elle ne respecte pas ses propres principes?

Cette Commission «VDL II» veut aujourd’hui contrôler les urnes, car les citoyens refusent cette mauvaise gestion. C’est ça, la solution?

  Lucia Yar, za skupinu Renew. – Vážený pán predsedajúci, pán eurokomisár, kolegovia, kolegyne, dnes presne dnes, keď tu diskutujeme o ochrane európskych peňazí, sa v krajine, z ktorej pochádzam, na Slovensku, vo veľkom diskutuje o okrádaní bežných ľudí na úkor oligarchov. Tí si z eurofondov, dámy a páni, stavajú na Slovensku haciendy. Eurofondy na podporu vidieka a turizmu opakovane končia v rukách vyvolených s prepojením na premiéra Fica a jeho vládnu moc. Už pred rokmi na tieto schémy s dotáciami upozorňoval zavraždený novinár Ján Kuciak. Od jeho smrti ubehlo sedem rokov, no podvodné praktiky pretrvávajú. Presne tieto prípady ukazujú, prečo je potrebné, aby sme na úrovni Európskej únie dôsledne chránili naše financie. A presne k tomu nabáda aj táto správa. Je dôležité, a to nielen pre krajiny, ktoré najviac prispievajú do európskeho rozpočtu, ale je to dôležité aj pre obyvateľov krajín ako Slovensko, ktorí vedia vďaka eurofondom dobiehať západ a vďaka tomu aj dobiehajú. My tu v europarlamente musíme urobiť všetko pre to, aby európske peniaze slúžili tam, kde sú potrebné, a najviac ľuďom v najmenej rozvinutých regiónoch.

  Daniel Freund, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, 228 bottles of champagne, turning a former royal palace into a private golf club, yachts, private jets, Ferraris, vacations in the Maldives – dear colleagues, these are all things that have been purchased by the French Rassemblement National and by the Hungarian Fidesz with money that they stole from the European Union. EU funds that were meant to improve the lives of ordinary Europeans have instead been misused for the luxury lives of a few individuals from the extreme right.

The Rassemblement National and Fidesz – it’s a match made in extremist heaven, and together they form the most corrupt group in this European Parliament: PfE. And while they’re giving their hate and lie-filled speeches – and we just heard it here a couple of seconds ago – blaming people’s problems on Soros, on Eurocrats, on trans people, on NGOs, on refugees, whatever is the matter of the day, they just can’t hide the fact that Viktor Orbán and Marine Le Pen are ultimately the biggest risk to EU taxpayers’ money.

And while Marine Le Pen, who has defrauded this Parliament of EUR 4.6 million, has been rightfully convicted and is not allowed to run for election for five years, Viktor Orbán remains yet unpunished. But it is time that he gets punished for the EUR 14 billion that he and his cronies have stolen from EU taxpayers.

Commissioner, we need to do something about this. We cannot keep sending billions of euros to what is the biggest financial risk in this Union. It’s the corrupt system of Viktor Orbán. So, the best thing we can actually do to protect the EU’s financial interests from fraud, from embezzlement, from corruption, is that we stop paying the corrupt autocrat in Budapest.

  Rudi Kennes, namens de The Left-Fractie. – Voorzitter, het vertrouwen in de Europese Unie heeft een dieptepunt bereikt. Het is onze verantwoordelijkheid ervoor te zorgen dat overheidsgeld niet wordt verspild of verduisterd. Het verslag benadrukt hoe veel er nog moet gebeuren om de capaciteit van de fraudebestrijdingsarchitectuur te versterken. De opsporing en de melding van fraude blijven ontoereikend, hoewel er aanzienlijke aantallen onregelmatigheden zijn gemeld.

We moeten de rol van ngo’s en journalisten erkennen bij het blootleggen van misbruik van EU-middelen; we moeten respect opbrengen voor hun werk en hun moed.

Digitalisering is van cruciaal belang om de besteding van overheidsgeld te kunnen volgen; de systemen en het personeel voor grensoverschrijdende onderzoeken moeten toereikend zijn. Wanneer criminelen zich geld toe‑eigenen, moet dat geld snel worden teruggevonden.

Een belangrijk deel van het verslag houdt ook verband met sancties. Persoonlijk vind ik het verkeerd om hele bevolkingsgroepen sancties op te leggen. Ten eerste werken sancties niet. Ten tweede zijn sancties enkel nadelig voor de gewone mensen.

Tot slot stel ik met teleurstelling de gebruikelijke dubbele standaarden vast bij het aan de kaak stellen van corruptie, crimineel gedrag en schendingen van de mensenrechten. Ik zou willen dat de Europese Unie zich met evenveel toewijding voor de rechtsstaat in het Midden-Oosten inzet als ze dat voor Oekraïne doet.

  Arno Bausemer, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Der vorliegende Bericht konstatiert für das Kalenderjahr 2023 einen historischen Höchststand der Korruptions- und Betrugsfälle in der Europäischen Union: 13 563 Fälle von Betrug und Unregelmäßigkeiten wurden von den Behörden der EU und der Mitgliedstaaten gemeldet. Die betroffenen Mittel belaufen sich auf 1,9 Milliarden EUR.

Nun sind wir als Abgeordnete dieses Hauses hier verantwortlich für den Umgang mit den Mitteln der Steuerzahler – für den verantwortungsbewussten Umgang. Aber wie soll dieses Ziel erreicht werden, wenn wir mit Ursula von der Leyen eine Kommissionspräsidentin haben, deren Handeln sehr viele Fragen aufwirft? Die Ermittlungen der EU-Staatsanwaltschaft zur Beschaffung von zig Millionen Corona-Impfdosen sind offensichtlich mittlerweile eingeschlafen, denn davon hat man seit dem Sommer letzten Jahres nicht mehr viel gehört. Trotz Aufforderung der EU-Ombudsfrau hat Frau von der Leyen bis heute ihre damaligen Chatverläufe mit dem CEO von Pfizer nicht öffentlich gemacht.

Schaffen Sie, Frau von der Leyen, bitte endlich die notwendige Transparenz, denn Sie stehen nicht über dem Recht und können hier machen, was Sie wollen. Denn Ihnen fehlt im Gegensatz zu uns allen – uns 720 Abgeordneten – nicht nur die demokratische Legitimation, sondern offensichtlich auch jeglicher Anstand. Werte Frau von der Leyen – Sie sind ja nicht da, vielleicht kommen Sie irgendwann mal wieder –, denken Sie daran, dass die Opposition von heute die Regierung von morgen ist. Denken Sie daran, dass man eine Opposition vielleicht kurzfristig behindern kann, aber dass man einen demokratischen Wandel und den damit verbundenen Willen der Bevölkerung niemals aufhalten kann. Und denken Sie daran, dass in der Geschichte schon der eine oder andere Machthaber in seinem Elfenbeinturm eingeschlafen und im Gefängnis wieder aufgewacht ist.

  José Cepeda (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario Serafin, muchas gracias por este trabajo. Es un trabajo importante que, de verdad, nos tomamos —como muy bien decía mi colega del PPE— muy en serio, porque hay algo que nos preocupa de una forma muy especial, y es el incremento del fraude.

Hemos visto que en este presupuesto de 2023 se investigaron 13 563 casos, con un impacto financiero de 1 900 millones de euros. Es verdad que, además, estamos evaluando una sofisticación cada vez más creciente. La utilización de las nuevas tecnologías va en aumento, como la de la inteligencia artificial, sin lugar a dudas, para suplantar identidad, desarrollar clonaciones de bots o llevar a cabo ataques cibernéticos.

Yo creo que la Comisión todo esto se lo tiene que tomar muy en serio. Desde luego, yo quiero apostar muy fuerte por las nuevas tecnologías y la implementación de la inteligencia artificial, pero tenemos también que saber proteger. Tenemos que dar formación también a los trabajadores de la Comisión y de nuestras instituciones. En definitiva, es muy importante que desarrollemos muchas capacidades, pero sobre todo que sepamos cada vez protegernos mejor.

  Julien Sanchez (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, ce rapport confirme que les intérêts financiers de l’Union ne sont pas protégés. En 2023, les fraudes et irrégularités ont atteint un record historique: 13 563 cas et 1,90 milliard d’euros détournés de leur objectif, et ce ne sont que les chiffres officiels.

Vu le peu de contrôles effectués dans les dépenses, ici, c’est en réalité bien davantage. Pire, 233 enquêtes du Parquet européen sont en cours sur les fonds de la FRR avec 1,86 milliard d’euros en jeu. Et cela ne fait que commencer, car vous confiez le contrôle de la FRR à ceux qui en perçoivent les fonds: c’est affligeant d’amateurisme!

J’étais en mission en Lettonie en avril et la Cour des comptes locale n’a pu répondre à aucune de mes questions sur le sujet. Un scandale! Si je peux me rendre compte de cela, moi, vous, vous ne le pouvez pas? Vous préférez faire l’autruche?

En tant qu’ancien maire, je suis dégoûté par ce que je vois ici. Si nos concitoyens étaient conscients de votre légèreté dans le contrôle des dépenses, ils demanderaient vos têtes. Votre responsabilité est immense. Pendant que la Commission tergiverse, l’argent des contribuables européens alimente la corruption et les mafias. Ça suffit!

Ce ne sont pas des rapports ou des vœux pieux que nous voulons, mais de la transparence, un contrôle systématique et exhaustif au centime près et donc des résultats. En attendant, nous continuerons à dénoncer vos lacunes et à proposer des moyens d’éviter ce qui se passe ici. Il est temps que le laxisme cède sa place à l’exigence.

  Alexander Jungbluth (ESN). – Herr Präsident! Der größte Betrugsskandal in der Geschichte der EU wird in dem vorliegenden Bericht nicht einmal erwähnt. Rund 35 Milliarden EUR hat der Impfstoffdeal von von der Leyen den Steuerzahler in etwa gekostet. Nach wie vor verweigert sie die Aufklärung, was die Europäische Staatsanwaltschaft nicht zu stören scheint. Betrug auf allerhöchster Ebene ist in dieser EU längst Standard geworden. Und an die Adresse der Grünen: Herr Freund, es ist immer ganz interessant, dass Sie hier Frau Le Pen ansprechen.

Wir wollen an dieser Stelle doch mal feststellen, dass Ihre Parteivorsitzende, Frau Brantner, dem Magazin Tichys Einblick zufolge genau im Verdacht steht, das Gleiche gemacht zu haben. Im rheinland-pfälzischen Wahlkampf 2011, als die Grünen nicht im Parlament vertreten waren, hat sie genau das gemacht, was Sie heute Le Pen vorwerfen. Sie haben Mitarbeiter dazu verwendet, ihren Wahlkampf zu unterstützen. Sie sind an Korruption in diesem Haus überhaupt nicht zu übertreffen. Sie machen nämlich zwei Dinge: Sie haben eine korrupte Parteivorsitzende Brantner auf der einen Ebene, und mittelbar nutzen Sie über Ihre NGOs diesen Staat, nutzen Sie die EU als Selbstbedienungsladen. Sie sind der korrupteste Haufen, den dieses Parlament überhaupt zu bieten hat, Herr Freund!

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

  Lukas Sieper (NI), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Schauen Sie mal, Herr Jungbluth, mit Ihnen diskutiere ich so gerne. Da opfere ich sogar mein Catch the eye, nur um Ihnen hier diese Frage zu stellen. Ich hoffe, Sie sind bereit. Sie sagen, dass dieser oder jener Teil der korrupteste Haufen hier im EU‑Parlament ist oder auch die Kommission. Ich meine, dass die Berichte da mal öffentlich gemacht werden müssen und die SMS, da sind wir uns ja alle einig. Was da drin steht, das weiß auch nur der liebe Gott. Aber ich schweife ab. Meine Frage an Sie lautet: Wie können Sie eigentlich sagen, dass jemand anderes der korrupteste Haufen ist, wenn es Ihre Partei ist, die sich von ausländischen Agenten schmieren lässt, weswegen wir hier die Immunität aufheben müssen?

  Alexander Jungbluth (ESN), Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Der Kollege hat es gerade richtig gesagt. Sie haben hier eine Märchenstunde, die Sie erzählen. Und wissen Sie was? Folgendes ist der Fall: Es ist doch tatsächlich so, dass bei uns immer Kleinigkeiten hervorgehoben werden und dann ein angeblicher Korruptionsskandal daraus gemacht wird. Da gibt es irgendwelche dubiosen Geschichten, die Leute wie Sie dann immer gerne erfinden. Auf der anderen Seite haben wir tatsächliche Korruption, die eben nicht geahndet wird, weil wir eben unter anderem keine unabhängige Gerichtsbarkeit haben.

Wir sehen das gerade in Deutschland, was passiert. Wir haben einen abhängigen Inlandsgeheimdienst, wir haben eine abhängige Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit, und das ist das eigentliche Problem. Das eigentliche Problem ist, dass eine Rechtsstaatlichkeit innerhalb dieser EU kaum noch gegeben ist.

  Evin Incir (S&D). – Mr President, every misuse of taxpayers’ money is essentially theft. Viktor Orbán, the leader of the far right in Europe, is one of the biggest ones. The European Commission is currently withholding … So are the colleagues going to be silent or am I allowed to continue?

(The President asked for silence in the room)

Every misuse of taxpayers’ money is essentially theft. Viktor Orbán, the leader of the far right in Europe, is one of the biggest ones. The European Commission is currently withholding many billions in EU funds from Hungary due to rule of law and corruption concerns.

This is corruption. Anti‑democrats remain anti‑democrats. Transparency and accountability are their greatest enemies. Their shamelessness knows no bounds, even extending to spying on investigators from the EU Anti‑Fraud Office, OLAF.

Those who misuse public funds and target our anti‑corruption agencies also attempt to demonise the cornerstone of democracy: civil society. A vibrant civil society is a vital pillar of healthy democracies, which explains why Orbán is attacking it.

Let us also not forget the baseless allegations against important international organisations like UNWRA. Democracy is currently in jeopardy.

  András László (PfE). – Elnök Úr! Képviselő Asszonynak rögtön válaszolnék is. Magyarország uniós forrásait részben azért tartják vissza, mert nemet mondunk az ukrajnai háborúra, nemet mondunk az illegális migrációra, és nemet mondunk a genderideológiára. De ami Brüsszelt illeti, az NGO-k finanszírozási botránya végre elérte az Európai Uniót is. Az Európai Számvevőszék jelentése egészen megdöbbentő, egyértelműen átláthatatlan finanszírozásról beszél. Még az sincs rendesen szabályozva, hogy mi számít ténylegesen nem kormányzati szervezetnek.

Az EU egyszerűen elfogadja azt, hogyha egyes szervezetek annak vallják magukat, miközben fontos politikai kérdésekben rájuk hivatkozik az Európai Bizottság mint akik az európai polgárok akaratát képviselik. Az elmúlt években az Európai Parlament korrupciós botránya, a legutóbb zöld botrányban érintett Frans Timmermans esetében is kiderült, hogy NGO-k a politikai befolyásszerzés eszközei voltak. A Magyarországon működő legnagyobb, magukat civilnek hazudó szervezetek pedig támogatásuk túlnyomó részét nem magyar magánszemélyektől kapják, hanem külföldről. Ennek véget kell vetni, véget kell vetni a politikai árnyékhatalomnak, és át kell világítani ezt a rendszert. A bújtatott politikai lobbinak véget kell vetni.

Intervenții la cerere

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, stimați colegi, discutăm o problemă extrem de importantă și este păcat că suntem atât de puțini.

Apărarea intereselor financiare ale Uniunii ține, de fapt, de credibilitatea instituțiilor europene și cum le putem apăra?

În primul rând, toate instituțiile care sunt desemnate și plătite pentru a apăra interesele financiare și a combate frauda trebuie să lucreze transparent, să ne informeze, să transmitem în țara noastră, în țările noastre, ce fac aceste instituții, pentru că le plătim și nu cu bani puțini.

Am exemple concrete – Parchetul European – am fost raportor în mandatul trecut, Parchetul European nu este eficient. A recuperat 1%, circa 1% din sumele pentru care au cheltuit bani, au controlat. Mai mult, sunt cazuri extrem de grave: trei ani de zile terorizează o companie și, în final, nu este vinovată compania de a o scoate din piață.

Deci, dacă nu lucrează pentru cu adevărat pentru recuperarea pagubelor și evitarea fraudelor, ne pierdem credibilitatea și să nu ne mirăm că se dezvoltă extremismul.

Asta cer Comisiei Europene: transparență și eficiență în munca pe care o fac.

  Lukas Sieper (NI). – Mr President, dear people of Europe, dear Commissioner, when I was researching the most important administrative body of the European Union regarding the topic of this debate, OLAF – who, by the way, also has one of the funniest names of all European institutions, at least from a German or maybe Scandinavian perspective – I found a shocking truth: this so important administrative body does not have Instagram, no TikTok, nothing but a LinkedIn account and a website.

Everyone in this room, maybe because of different political ideas, agrees on the fact that fraud is hurting this Union, is hurting the trust in our Union. And so I’m wondering, why do we not publish this important work of OLAF in a system that is modern, that reaches the young generation? How can this be?

And maybe we should also ask ourselves, which other institutions make the same mistake? I hope you can take this with you, Commissioner, even though you are not directly responsible.

(Încheierea intervențiilor la cerere)

  Piotr Serafin, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, many thanks for the debate. I appreciate a number of suggestions and remarks that have been raised and that can help us to improve the way in which the anti-fraud architecture operates.

And as I said already in the opening remarks, the work on the reform and the review of the anti-fraud architecture will be absolutely key during this mandate.

I think a lot of positive developments took place in the last few years. The fact that we have in place EPPO is clearly a positive development. The fact that we have been and we will continue to invest also European taxpayers’ money into the development of the anti-fraud architecture, let me just make a reference to the announcement of President von der Leyen to increase financial resources available for Europol, that is also a positive development.

But it’s also true that since we have new actors, since we are also going to have a few new players in the area of anti-fraud architecture, that’s why that review is really necessary. And I believe that that review is not just important from the perspective of the protection of the financial interests of the EU, not only from the perspective of the protection of the EU budget, but also from the perspective of our Member States. Because the truth is that the single market is an opportunity not only for our companies, not only for our citizens, but it is also an opportunity for fraudsters. And I’m absolutely certain that without a system that we have at EU level, Member States alone would not be able to detect and fight against fraud. And that is one of the important takeaways that we will also keep in mind while looking into the future of the anti-fraud architecture.

The second point that I would like to make refers to the data on the detection of fraud. Many of you have referred to that data. Yes, it is an issue of concern. That is an issue that we would need to continue to address. But that is also a measure that we have put in place: an anti-fraud system that is able to detect fraud, that is able also to fight fraud and corruption. The system is not perfect, that’s why we would need to review it. That’s why we need to continuously work to improve it. Because as we know, one thing that the fraudsters are not missing is creativity. They will continue to look for ways in which they can misuse public money, including the EU budget money.

But that system is already is already bringing results. And to be frank, I’ve heard about some countries, not necessarily in the European Union, in which those in power say there is no fraud, there is no corruption – I don’t believe it. I think there is fraud and there is corruption everywhere because that risk is everywhere. The question is whether we have a system in place that can address it and fight it.

And that is another point that I would like to share with you, and one last on the NGOs: I think it has to be stated clearly, we’ll discuss it also tomorrow, there is no fraud. There has never been fraud. And those who are referring to NGOs, they know it. I have more and more the impression that they are doing that, because they would like to eliminate NGOs from the public debate at the European level.

  Gilles Boyer, rapporteur. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, merci pour ce débat utile qui fait émerger des positions non pas unanimes, parce que l’unanimité n’est pas de ce monde, mais des positions largement consensuelles ou en tout cas une volonté partagée de faire, tous ensemble, le meilleur usage de l’argent public européen, de lutter contre une fraude protéiforme, massive, inventive et souvent plus rapide que nous, décideurs européens.

À partir de ce consensus, j’aimerais que l’ensemble des groupes qui partagent cette vision, au-delà des nuances que nous pouvons avoir, ne se laissent pas polluer par un sujet important, mais finalement marginal dans notre architecture européenne, celui des ONG. Ce sujet, vous l’avez évoqué, il a été évoqué dans ce débat et il sera à nouveau évoqué dans cet hémicycle, j’en suis certain, à plusieurs reprises.

J’ai proposé une formulation, dans le rapport, qui me semble équilibrée, qui rappelle le rôle important des ONG dans le débat public européen, que nous devons préserver, et qui rappelle aussi que tous ceux qui perçoivent des fonds européens doivent la transparence aux contribuables européens et aux autorités de contrôle. Je crois que c’est ce que nous pouvons dire dans le cadre de ce rapport.

Je pense que c’est un bon rapport, non pas parce que c’est le mien – pas seulement parce que c’est le mien –, mais parce qu’il est issu d’un travail réfléchi avec l’ensemble des rapporteurs fictifs que je remercie pour leur collaboration. Je souhaite que, lors du vote de demain, nous gardions en tête, comme on dit en bon français, «the big picture».

  Preşedinte. – Cu acest anunț am încheiat dezbaterea. Votarea va avea loc mâine.

  Preşedinte. – Am un anunț de făcut: deputații neafiliați au comunicat președintelui o decizie referitoare la modificări cu privire la numirile în cadrul comisiilor.

Această decizie va fi consemnată în procesul-verbal al ședinței de astăzi și produce efecte de la data prezentului anunț, respectiv, domnul Volker Schnurrbusch îl înlocuiește pe domnul Taner Kabilov în Comisia pentru petiții.

  Ondřej Knotek, rapporteur. – Mr President, good afternoon colleagues, Vice-President Fitto and Vice-President of the EIB de Groot. Despite the fact that the main scope of the report is dedicated to the financial activities of the bank in 2023, we considered, on top of this scope, other useful elements to better understand the EIB’s operational model, internal system and also strategy in current vibrant times. Why? Because the EIB already now plays a crucial role in implementing EU policies, and its role might grow in the near future. Therefore, I am extremely grateful for the openness and hospitality that the bank provided while drafting this report.

I would like to also remind all of us that the EIB is not the subject of the standard discharge procedure we are used to. To sum up the activities we have done: firstly, there was a questionnaire based on the inputs from the CONT committee members that was effectively answered by the bank. Then on 11 December 2024, we held a one-day working visit in the EIB, meeting eight representatives of departments and one vice-president. And on 25 January, we held a follow-up video conference on topics like transparency and prevention of the conflict of interest.

Now, on the substance, the EIB maintained in 2023 the triple A rating and liquidity ratio within the limits and had a positive result of EUR 2.3 billion. Also, the 2023 signed investments are expected to create 1.4 million new jobs in coming years, and this shall contribute growth of one percentage in GDP.

The EIB manages up to 130 mandates, both from the Commission and the shared management, and produces 450 reports every year. Therefore, simplification is not only needed here, but as well has been recognised within the system and addressed in the system, and of course not at the cost of sound management. By the way, EIB manages six mandates from the RRF, namely for Greece, Italy, Romania and Spain.

On energy security, the bank focuses on the security of supplies via grids reinforcement, cross-border infrastructure, but also introduces new modern elements like demand response and energy storage projects, and also value chains for critical materials.

Another important topic is security – EIB supports the EU defence and security industry under the dual-use principle, and the budget has been increased here from EUR 6 billion to EUR 8 billion and newly includes also activities in space. The bank cooperates with the European Defence Agency and, in order to mobilise money for innovative projects, has opened the One-Stop-Shop.

When we look at the climate, it is one of the main priorities of the bank – there has been EUR 40 billion in climate, EUR 25 billion in sustainability and also many projects newly in climate adaptation. The bank is active also outside the EU, namely in Ukraine, Western Balkans, Moldova but also Africa. When it comes to accountability, the bank cooperates within OLAF and EPPO and has its own ethics and compliance committee.

We are running slowly out of time, so to sum up, the EIB has demonstrated, I would say, unprecedented engagement with the Parliament in preparing this report. I am very thankful, in my opinion, as also an auditor outside the European Parliament, the EIB is running a successful operational model applying risk prevention and continual improvement approach and tries to address existing challenges and opportunities effectively. I would like to thank all the representatives of the CONT committee, of course, of the bank, of the Secretariat, and I am looking forward to the debate to come.

  Robert de Groot, Vice-President of the EIB. – Mr President, honourable Members, it’s my pleasure to be with you here today to address some important issues raised in the report and update you on the activities of the EIB Group. And I want to thank the rapporteur, Mr Ondřej Knotek, for his thorough work and the excellent cooperation to reach a well‑balanced report.

Your report rightly acknowledges the bank’s achievements in 2023, and since then, a lot has happened. 2024, the first year of President Calviño at the helm of the bank was a year of change. The bank signed EUR 89 billion in new financing for high‑impact projects supporting EU policy priorities. Our investments help close the investment gap Europe faces. Investment strengthens European competitiveness, it bolsters our strategic autonomy and makes the European economy more resilient in this increasingly complex world.

Last year alone, nearly 60 % of our financing went to supporting the green transition, including circular economy and climate adaptation. The EIB Group made more investments than ever to strengthen the EU’s energy security, mobilising over EUR 100 billion for projects in the new and upgraded infrastructure, such as grids and interconnectors, renewables, net zero industries, efficiency and energy storage.

At the same time, higher risk operations for Europe’s most innovative companies have sharply increased, with EUR 8 billion in equity and quasi‑equity investment for start‑ups, scale‑ups and European pioneers. This number will increase in 2025.

We operate with clear priorities set out by our shareholders in our 2024‑2027 strategic roadmap. We have significant progress in simplification – the rapporteur alluded to it – resulting in cutting red tape for clients and shortening the time to market required to improve and deploy new investments, and, thanks to the support of your House, with the change of our statute to increase the gearing ratio, allowing us to invest more while maintaining our equity base.

The EIB Group plans to increase its overall investments, as I said, to EUR 90‑95 billion in 2025, with flagship initiatives to support European tech champions through a dedicated Tech EU programme, contributing to a deeper and broader European capital markets union, which is essential to support our start‑up and scale‑up companies and to keep them in Europe.

We will act on critical raw materials, water management, energy efficiency of SMEs, as well as sustainable and affordable housing. Housing is a top priority for the EIB Group, as it is for so many citizens all over Europe. That’s why we have designed an action plan, working closely with the Commission to set up a pan‑European investment platform. Our aim is to generate about EUR 10 billion of investment over the next two years. This is a good example of how the bank is willing and able to evolve, adapt and be part of the solution to the multiple challenges Europe currently faces.

InvestEU is a success story with a multiplier effect of close to 15 times, according to the Commission. It’s an excellent example of how leveraging is realised. Indeed, the market demand and pace of deployment are such that we are even at risk of missing the firepower to deliver some of our projects in the last years of the budget cycle.

I turn now to another area which is highly relevant in the current geopolitical context, namely defence and security. The EIB board decided in March to broaden the EIB Group’s eligibility criteria for security and defence investments, ensuring that excluded activities remain as minimal as possible. This allows us to finance large‑scale strategic projects in areas such as border protection, military mobility, space, cybersecurity, anti‑jamming technologies, radar system, seabed and other critical infrastructure and critical raw materials. These changes will further facilitate investment to bolster Europe’s industrial defence capabilities. I think this is very important at this moment in time.

Mr President, once again, many thanks to the rapporteur for the report and thank you very much for this opportunity.

  Raffaele Fitto, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, Vice-President of the EIB, dear rapporteur, honourable Members, I would like to thank the European Parliament for the opportunity to present the Commission’s views in this regard. This was another year of positive cooperation with our long-standing partner, the European Investment Bank group, which we value very much. It is essential that our institutions keep working together as strategic partners.

Today, the EIB group has been provided indispensable financial support to ensure implementation of the EU priorities on the ground. This concerns areas such as energy, electricity distribution, networks, water, social and affordable housing, education and the mobile network, to name just a few. We welcome the eight strategic priorities of the EIB Strategic Roadmap adopted last year. They are well-aligned with EU priorities, including new ones such as defence and security.

The projects and the investments carried out by the EIB also contribute to the competitiveness agenda of the current Commission. This agenda critically depends on the ability of highly innovative start-ups. This is especially relevant in areas such as AI, quantum computing and deep tech, biotech and clean tech, or in the defence sector.

Given the scale of the investment needed, as mentioned in the Draghi report, we will have to strive to attract institutional investors, such as the insurers and the pension funds to leverage all available resources. The Commission and the EIB group should continue working together to identify all options available. At the same time, we encourage the EIB group to further exploit the risk-taking potential, to foster higher additionally in its interventions and avoid the risk of crowding out other investors.

In March, the Commission published the communication on the Savings and Investments Union. I therefore welcome the EIB’s recent initiative to address the most challenging needs of strategically important, innovative companies. These initiatives, such as the European Tech Champions Initiative 2.0, aimed to scale-up venture capital investments, facilitate easier exits of the venture funds, thus allowing circularity of investment and better use of available funds.

The Commission has strongly connected competitiveness to simplification: one cannot exist without the other. Our strategy on implementation and simplification for the next five years aims at making sure that EU rules are as simple and cost-effective as possible, and that they deliver on the ground to achieve our economic, social, security and environmental goals. We are working closely with the EIB to deliver on our simplification agenda, for example via the Invest EU omnibus regulation.

Outside the EU, the role of EIB Global will be crucial in delivering EU policy priorities and enhancing the EU’s visibility and development impact. The EIB remains our important partner in ensuring continued support to Ukraine now and in the long-term. In April, the Commission witnessed the signature of four new EIB operations, which will address Ukraine’s most pressing recovery needs, supporting municipalities in renewable energy and energy efficiency, water infrastructure and district heating.

These projects, backed by the EU budget through the Ukraine Facility, reflect our commitment to Ukraine’s long-term resilience and to its people. In this regard and in view of an increasingly difficult geopolitical context, strengthening EU security and defence has been brought to the forefront of our agenda. Rebuilding Europe’s defence capabilities requires urgent and significant investment.

In March, the Commission presented the ReArm Europe Plan/Readiness 2030 initiative to facilitate a unique surge in defence investment. It aims to unlock up to EUR 800 billion of additional defence expenditures – a game changer for European defence. The EIB has a clear role to play here, particularly in supporting the investments needed to ramp up the defence industry. This also includes targeted support for small and medium enterprises across the supply chain. In this sense, we welcome the recent amendment of the EIB group’s exclusion policy to further boost its investment in security and defence, while safeguarding the group’s financial capacity. I believe that by working together, focusing investment and maintaining a coherent regulatory framework, we can ensure Europe’s continued growth, technological leadership and resilience in the face of an increasingly volatile and competitive global environment.

I welcome the EP report, which brings important insights and recommendations. The EIB has been successful in ensuring a balance between being a bank with public commission and maintaining agility to ensure it remains an attractive partner for projects, promoters and to advance our important investment policies, often with private partners. I hope this balance will be further retained.

  Kinga Kollár, a PPE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Elnök Úr! Európa következő évei az óriásberuházásokról fognak szólni: évi 800 milliárd euró az európai vállalkozásokba, további 800 milliárd euró Európa védelmi iparába. Végül, de semmiképpen sem utolsósorban, jelentős összegek a kohézió, a jólét és az egészséges környezet fenntartására, különösen a megfizethető lakhatásra és a kapcsolódó egészségügyi, oktatási és közlekedési infrastruktúra finanszírozására.

Az Európai Beruházási Bank több szempontból is előnyös helyzetben van, hogy ezeket a nagymértékű befektetéseket mozgósítani tudja. Egyrészt tőkeerős helyzete, az EU által biztosított garancia és kiváló hitelminősítése lehetővé teszi számára, hogy előnyös feltételek mellett tudjon hitelt nyújtani. Másrészt jelentős tapasztalata van a privát befektetők és a tőke bevonásában, amire mindenképpen szükség lesz a célok eléréséhez. Kérem ezért a bankot, hogy a prudens és gazdaságos működés megtartása mellett, fokozza a beruházási tevékenységét és merjen bátrabban kockázatot vállalni.

Az EIB-nek a tagállamok beruházási bankjaként arra is figyelnie kell, hogy finanszírozási tevékenysége földrajzilag is kiegyensúlyozott legyen. Magyarországon például a bank által befektetett összeg jelentősen elmarad az európai átlagtól, pedig Magyarországon külön kiemelt szerepe is lenne a banknak, a magyar kormány korrupciója miatt kiesett uniós támogatások pótlásában. A bank az EU pénzügyi érdekeinek védelme mellett tudna a magyar gazdaságba és vállalkozásokba, infrastruktúrába pénzt pumpálni.

Végül kiemelném, hogy az, hogy a jelentéstevő a Patrióta csoport tagja, nem szoríthatja háttérbe azt, hogy mi mindannyian azért vagyunk itt, hogy a választópolgárok érdekeit szolgáljuk. A Tisztelt Ház előtt lévő jelentés ezt teszi, ezért remélem, hogy széles körű támogatásra talál a holnapi szavazáson.

  Maria Grapini, în numele grupului S&D. – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, domnule vicepreședinte, sunt raportor din partea grupului meu la acest raport și, așa cum am spus și la audierea în comisie, apreciez activitatea Băncii Europene de Investiții. Vin din mediul privat, știu procedurile de lucru în bănci, știu că nu își asumă de multe ori riscuri, vor să fie acoperiți.

Ce mi-aș dori, domnule vicepreședinte, este ca în viitor, din acele multe zeci de miliarde pe care ați spus că le-ați investit, să crească procentul investițiilor și creditelor acordate întreprinderilor mici și mijlocii. Am spus asta și în dezbaterea din comisie.

De asemenea, mi-aș dori să flexibilizați, și mai multă transparență, să eliminăm aceste bariere în calea celor care ar dori să investească, să aibă credite. De asemenea, în mediul rural, foarte puțini din mediul rural pot să aibă acces la credite. Poate vă gândiți la alte mecanisme.

Femeile care conduc afaceri, de asemenea, am pus amendament, îmi doresc să aibă mai mult acces, și poate la următorul raport ne aduceți, așa întreg, procentele de creștere la investițiile, la creditele acordate IMM-urilor, femeilor, apoi în domeniul sanitar.

Și avem o mare problemă cu locuințele. S-a mai spus aici: este o criză de locuințe, în special la tineri și aici trebuie să ne gândim cum putem să facem prin Banca Europeană de Investiții să acordăm credite tinerilor pentru a avea locuințe.

  Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, în numele grupului ECR. – Domnule președinte, stimate domnule Fitto, stimați colegi, în calitate de raportor al ECR pentru dosarul cu privire la activitatea anuală a Băncii Europene de Investiții, mi-am asumat un rol activ în protejarea intereselor financiare ale Uniunii Europene.

Fondurile publice ale Uniunii Europene trebuie să fie utilizate eficient și transparent, fără a risipi vreo resursă. De aceea, am cerut ca evaluările de impact să fie riguroase și să garanteze că fiecare euro cheltuit aduce beneficii concrete cetățenilor europeni, în special în contextul crizelor economice și sociale cu care ne confruntăm.

Consider că este esențial ca alocarea banilor europeni să se facă pe baza unor principii raționale și nu pe fundamente ideologice care pot pune în pericol stabilitatea economică a Uniunii.

În virtutea acestui raționament, prin amendamentele pe care le-am susținut, am cerut ca Fondul European de Investiții să fie orientat clar către creșterea competitivității, a rezilienței și a dezvoltării economice. Cerințele privind obiectivele climatice nu trebuie să devină scopuri în sine și nici să afecteze competitivitatea.

Împreună cu colegii deputați din Grupul ECR, voi continua să urmăresc cu atenție modul în care Banca Europeană de Investiții gestionează fondurile și să mă asigur că deciziile financiare sunt luate în interesul tuturor cetățenilor europeni.

  Vlad Vasile-Voiculescu, în numele grupului Renew. – Domnule președinte, apreciez rolul Băncii Europene de Investiții în arhitectura instituțională a Uniunii Europene. Este o instituție cheie pentru coeziune, dezvoltare durabilă, tranziție verde.

Dar tocmai pentru că știm ce rol esențial are, avem datoria să spunem și acolo unde lucrurile nu merg bine.

Am evaluat din partea grupului politic Renew activitatea băncii în 2023. Doar un sfert, doar un sfert din finanțările BEI au mers către regiunile mai puțin dezvoltate din Uniunea Europeană în 2023. Este un procent care ar trebui să ne îngrijoreze, dacă ne pasă cu adevărat de reducerea inegalităților între Est și Vest, între centrul și periferia Uniunii.

România este un exemplu elocvent. Este o țară cu nevoi uriașe în infrastructură, digitalizare, sănătate, tranziție energetică, dar cu o prezență relativ modestă în portofoliul BEI.

Este clar că trebuie să înțelegem ce nu funcționează, și ce nu funcționează este colaborarea cu autoritățile naționale și locale. Există blocaje administrative și de capacitate și parteneriatele public-private sunt prea puțin folosite și ar trebui să fie o prioritate pentru viitor.

În final, salut cooperarea cu OLAF și Parchetul European. Cred că este un pas esențial pentru întărirea transparenței și a încrederii cetățenilor.

  Rudi Kennes, namens de The Left-Fractie. – Voorzitter, de Europese Investeringsbank (EIB) werkt op basis van een non-profitmandaat, met als doel projecten te financieren die ten goede komen aan gewone mensen in de Europese Unie en daarbuiten. In werkelijkheid heeft de EIB echter vooral bijgedragen aan het verhogen van bedrijfswinsten met belastinggeld. Miljarden euro’s aan overheidsleningen zijn toegekend aan zeer winstgevende bedrijven die hun projecten perfect zonder overheidssubsidies hadden kunnen financieren.

Tussen 2020 en 2023 ontvingen zeven zakelijke EIB-klanten – Iberdrola, Stellantis, Intesa San Paolo, Leonardo, Orange, Nordfolk en Gavi (the Vaccine) Alliance – meer dan 11 miljard EUR aan EIB-leningen. In dezelfde periode boekten deze bedrijven samen 100 miljard EUR winst, keerden zij 38,7 miljard EUR aan dividend uit, besteedden zij €11,9 miljard EUR aan aandeleninkoop en betaalden zij hun CEO’s maar liefst meer dan 146 miljoen EUR.

Sommige van deze bedrijven liggen bovendien onder vuur vanwege betrokkenheid bij sociale onregelmatigheden en milieumisstanden, corruptie en het leveren van wapens aan landen die het internationale recht schenden. Dit moet veranderen.

De EIB moet prioriteit geven aan publieke partnerschappen en onze publieke diensten financieren. Zij moet hoge sociale en milieunormen hanteren voor alle projecten, strenge voorwaarden stellen aan bedrijfsleningen en nauwer samenwerken met de EU en nationale publieke financiële instellingen om de positieve impact van overheidsinstellingen te maximaliseren.

  Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE). – Pane předsedající, vážený pane komisaři, vážený pane místopředsedo, vážení kolegové, rád bych poděkoval všem kolegům za velmi dobrou práci. Je to jasný signál, že Evropská investiční banka musí převzít klíčovou roli v oblasti strategické obrany Evropy – technologie dvojího užití, tedy ty, které slouží k civilním i obranným účelům, zásadní pro naši bezpečnost a suverenitu. A Evropská investiční banka se musí s touto výzvou utkat. Je skvělé, že Evropská investiční banka opustila zastaralý model příjmového testu. Evropská investiční banka ale musí investovat i do oblastí, jako je kybernetická bezpečnost nebo inovace v oblasti obrany. Potřebujeme také cílené investice do energetické bezpečnosti, což jsme viděli jako Evropská lidová strana ve Španělsku minulý týden. Ale řekněme si to otevřeně – bez bezpečnosti nebude stabilita. Právě proto musí být obranné schopnosti a duální technologie jádrem budoucího mandátu Evropské investiční banky. Podporuji tuto zprávu, protože nevidím v Evropské investiční bance jenom banku, ale i instituci, která chrání odolnost Evropy.

  Jonás Fernández (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, en primer lugar, me gustaría felicitar y agradecer el trabajo del Banco Europeo de Inversiones en todos estos años, y especialmente —como ha dicho el vicepresidente— en esta última etapa con una nueva presidenta, que sin duda está reactivando el trabajo del Banco Europeo de Inversiones, tan necesario ante el volumen ingente de financiación que debemos acometer en los próximos años.

Quisiera quizá hacer dos apuntes. En primer lugar, necesitamos más financiación para la vivienda social. Y tengo un mensaje para la Comisión: la propuesta de reforma de la definición de pequeña y mediana empresa que está en la revisión del Reglamento por el que se establece el Programa InvestEU he de decir que a los socialistas no nos gusta mucho, porque creo que no define bien lo que es una pyme y podría distraer la atención y los esfuerzos del Banco Europeo de Inversiones en financiar a las pequeñas y medianas empresas.

En todo caso, y para terminar, me gustaría anunciar que el Grupo Socialista votará en contra de este informe, porque realmente entendemos que el Grupo parlamentario de los Patriotas, que ha estado haciendo uso fraudulento de la financiación europea en Francia con Le Pen, en Hungría con Orbán o en España con VOX, no puede firmar un documento como este.

  Sandra Gómez López (S&D). – (inicio de la intervención fuera de micrófono) … especialmente al ponente del informe. ¿Cómo se puede hablar del Banco Europeo de Inversiones sin mencionar a las personas que más lo necesitan? Este informe olvida lo que es el corazón de Europa: nuestras empresas, nuestras pymes, nuestros jóvenes agricultores y nuestras zonas rurales. Y también se borran referencias importantísimas como el pilar europeo de derechos sociales, los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible o el impacto de la guerra de Rusia contra Ucrania.

Así que nosotros no queremos que se refleje que el BEI tiene que ser un banco técnico y distante; queremos que se refleje que es un banco humano y social, que está comprometido con las personas que viven en Europa, con la cohesión social y con nuestro futuro, y por eso vamos a votar en contra de este informe como grupo.

La buena noticia que tenemos es que, pese a lo que ustedes querrían, hoy contamos con un gran liderazgo, Nadia Calviño como presidenta del BEI, que va a permitirle ser garante de los valores que nos representan como Unión Europea.

Intervenții la cerere

  Lukas Sieper (NI). – Mr President, first of all, I beg your forgiveness for being too loud a few minutes ago. Actually, being present in this room sometimes requires having a conversation and listening to the debate at the same time.

Herr Präsident, liebe Menschen Europas! Wir haben ein Recht darauf zu wissen, was mit dem Geld der Europäischen Union passiert. Die Europäische Investitionsbank verwaltet einen wesentlichen Teil dieses Geldes. Sie nimmt wichtige Investitionen vor in Klimaschutz, in unsere Wirtschaft, in die Transformation zu einer gerechteren Gesellschaft – und sie unterstützt unsere Partner auf der ganzen Welt, wie etwa die Ukraine.

Umso schockierender ist es, dass der Bundesrechnungshof der Europäischen Investitionsbank vor allen Dingen mangelnde Transparenz vorwirft. Wir leben in einer Zeit, in der die Skepsis an der Demokratie wächst, in der Populisten überall auf diesem Kontinent auf dem Vormarsch sind. Wir können es uns nicht erlauben, dass unsere Bevölkerung nicht genau weiß, was mit unserem Geld geschieht.

(Încheierea intervențiilor la cerere)

  Raffaele Fitto, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, thank you for this very engaging and substantive discussion. It is clear that we all are determined to act together to push the European agenda of competitiveness and security, and deliver on our main priorities.

The EIB Group will remain an important player in this. I want to say this now, because we are working, for example, for the mid-term review of the cohesion policy, with the five new priorities. I heard during this discussion some of these points – for example, water, housing, competitiveness. I think this can be an important occasion to reinforce this cooperation in this way. The EIB Group is our natural closest partner, and we are aligned on our strategic priorities.

We will continue to rely on the EIB Group to support the implementation of our agenda and adjust our support in view of new and emerging priorities when needed. I look forward to continuing our close cooperation, with the common goal of achieving greater impact inside and outside the Union.

  Robert de Groot, Vice-President of the EIB. – Mr President, thank you for the words of the Vice-President of the Commission, honourable Members, thanks for your remarks and questions. Let me go into more detail on some of the points you have made.

First, on cohesion – cohesion was the number one obligation of the European Investment Bank group when we started in 1958, and today, 48 % of our national budget is still spent on cohesion. It is in the least advantageous areas of Europe, it is in rural areas where public services are under pressure, and we will continue to work in that direction.

Secondly, we are a demand-driven organisation, which implicates that we do not go out into the Member State and force upon them a loan by the European Investment Bank group. It is the other way around; people knock on our doors and we try and help as much as possible. One of the first criteria we look at is if there is a market failure – the EIB is active and will be active in those areas where other financial institutions will not go.

One of the most important elements, which makes us such an important player in Europe, is that we have a very large unit of hundreds of engineers and economists, which not only work on making a loan and a financial proposition possible, but also look at the content and help each and every applicant, whether in the private sector or in the public sector, to bring about a project which really gives a return to European taxpayers.

I noticed very well the remarks on small- and medium-sized enterprises, but also micro businesses, and I fully agree the access to credit for these companies, these very small companies, who are so important when it comes to the labour market inside the EU, is still an issue we really have to worry about and work on, and that’s what we are doing as the EIB group. We cannot do this directly with SMEs and micro businesses in Europe. We always go through a financial intermediary, mostly European commercial banks – a very important element of our business.

I listened very carefully to the remarks on agriculture, and especially young farmers receive our attention when it comes to the area of agriculture. For this year, we envisage to invest at least EUR 3 billion in this area.

In the area of housing, which was also mentioned by honourable Members, we are trying to leverage the financing we are going to make available to a couple of billion euro, hopefully in a couple of years, to EUR 300 billion annually. We have three priorities in the area of housing: one – innovation, supporting innovative building technologies like modular housing to make construction faster, cheaper and easier; second – sustainability, scaling up energy efficient renovation to reduce living costs when it comes to energy prices; and three – affordability, strengthening support for public investment tailored to the specific needs of each country and piloting private investments.

Now, on the issue of climate, which is also close to a bit more than half of what we are doing annually. This is about climate adaptation; this is about dealing with droughts, it is about dealing with floods – we have seen both inside many countries of the European Union, and they require large-scale investment to counter. But also in the area of energy, we have to be more self-sufficient when it comes to energy. This requires investments, not only in the energy carriers but also in the grids, which is a big and very expensive investment too.

Now, when it comes to high risk, some of the honourable Members have called for more risk. Others have said: no, we should not take risks. We are in the banking business and banking business is about giving a loan and getting a loan paid back with interest. But there are cases where this will not happen, and one of the examples was mentioned. But I want to stress here that when it comes to becoming more self-sufficient in the area of energy: we have provided more than EUR 6 billion over the past years to finance the sector and trying to find the best, innovative and technologically sound way forward when it comes to the energy sector. And we have to take into account too that sometimes we will fail by taking risks. But it’s part of the business of finding the best answer.

Finally, Mr President, when it comes to the auditing that the European Investment Bank is undergoing, I have to say we are one of the most audited financial institutions in the European Union. Whether it’s from the Central Bank of Luxembourg, because we have our headquarters there, whether it’s from external accountants, external audit committees, I think we fulfil every obligation and every best bank banking practice around.

Finally, on security and defence, we have done away with the concept of dual use, which means that today we can also invest directly in the domain of defence. Let’s talk about military mobility across Europe and the big corridors. And let’s also talk about the military bases we need to have more and more, especially in Central Europe.

  Ondřej Knotek, rapporteur. – Mr President, thank you Vice-President Fitto, Vice-President de Groot, thank you colleagues for the debate – the debate shows the high importance of the European Investment Bank, and also it shows the high level of expectation that the members in this House have of the institution, of the bank, about the role of the bank in achieving its goals and addressing risks, not only for you as such, but also for our Member States and, in the end, for our citizens and communities.

I have been very grateful for many of the topics that have been put on the table during the debate: geographical balance, taking higher risks, focus on SMEs, climate adaptation, security, cybersecurity, housing, agriculture and cohesion, and, of course, many others. I am happy that the Budgetary Control Committee has put forward the report which touches on those topics, clearly describes the development and successes of the bank, but also the expectations and needs of the Parliament when it comes to the needs for investment and the future role of EIB, which this House, I believe, sees as a partner, and is looking forward to cooperating with in the very long term. Allow me once again to thank you for the chance of being a rapporteur, and I would like to invite all of you voting tomorrow to support the report.

  Preşedinte. – Mulțumesc, domnule raportor și vă urez succes cu acest raport.

Cu această contribuție, dezbaterea este închisă. Votarea va avea loc mâine.

  Jacek Protas, Sprawozdawca. – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowni Państwo! Panie Komisarzu! Debatujemy dzisiaj nad bardzo ważnym sprawozdaniem, które po przegłosowaniu stanie się stanowiskiem Parlamentu Europejskiego na temat przyszłości polityki spójności po 2027 roku. Dokument, którego jestem sprawozdawcą, był szeroko konsultowany z organizacjami i instytucjami reprezentującymi różne środowiska oraz z Komitetem Regionów Unii Europejskiej. Odzwierciedla poglądy zdecydowanej większości grup politycznych reprezentowanych w Parlamencie Europejskim.

Oto 10 podstawowych tez, które w tym krótkim wystąpieniu chcę uwypuklić. Po pierwsze, polityka spójności jest głównym narzędziem Unii Europejskiej służącym inwestycjom w zrównoważony rozwój gospodarczy, społeczny i terytorialny, sprzyjającym zmniejszeniu różnic rozwojowych europejskich regionów.

Po drugie, aby polityka spójności nadal odgrywała tę ważną rolę, musi mieć zapewnione po 2027 roku wystarczająco ambitne i łatwo dostępne finansowanie, co najmniej na poziomie obecnych wieloletnich ram finansowych w ujęciu realnym.

Po trzecie, Parlament Europejski opowiada się za zdecentralizowanym modelem programowania i wdrażania polityki spójności, opartym na zasadzie partnerstwa i na wielopoziomowym sprawowaniu rządów. Tylko wtedy może być ona skuteczna i akceptowalna dla naszych obywateli. Sprzeciwiamy się wszelkim formom centralizacji i ograniczania roli władz regionalnych i lokalnych.

Po czwarte, wzywamy do dalszych wysiłków na rzecz uproszczenia i uelastycznienia przepisów i procedur administracyjnych regulujących fundusze polityki spójności na szczeblu unijnym, krajowym i regionalnym. Kluczem do sukcesu może być zwiększenie elastyczności na etapie programowania i wdrażania z odejściem od sztywnych ram koncentracji tematycznej i z uwzględnieniem specyfiki regionów.

Po piąte, podkreślamy jednocześnie konieczność zapewnienia przejrzystego, sprawiedliwego i odpowiedzialnego wykorzystywania zasobów Unii Europejskiej przy należytym zarządzaniu finansami, podkreślając rolę Europejskiego Urzędu do Spraw Zwalczania Nadużyć Finansowych i Prokuratury Europejskiej. Uznając także warunkowość w zakresie praworządności jako warunek podstawowy finansowania w ramach polityki spójności. Podkreślamy strategiczne znaczenie silnych regionów przygranicznych dla bezpieczeństwa i odporności Unii Europejskiej. Wzywamy Komisję Europejską do szczególnego wspierania regionów graniczących z Rosją, Białorusią i Ukrainą, by mogły radzić sobie ze skutkami społeczno-gospodarczymi wojny dla ich ludności i terytoriów.

Zwracamy uwagę na konieczność specjalnego podejścia do problemów regionów najbardziej oddalonych i wyspiarskich, które stoją w obliczu wyjątkowych i skumulowanych wyzwań strukturalnych. Wyrażamy zaniepokojenie rosnącą liczbą regionów znajdujących się w pułapce rozwoju, które dotknięte są stagnacją gospodarczą, problemami demograficznymi i ograniczeniem dostępu do usług publicznych.

Specyficznym i ukierunkowanym wsparciem powinny też być objęte obszary wiejskie, ale także miasta i obszary metropolitalne borykające się z własnymi poważnymi wyzwaniami. I w końcu nalegamy także, by polityka spójności dążyła do zwiększenia innowacyjności i ukończenia tworzenia jednolitego rynku Unii Europejskiej zgodnie z wnioskami zawartymi w sprawozdaniu Draghiego w sprawie konkurencyjności Europy.

I na koniec, apelujemy o przestrzeganie zasady “nie szkodzić spójności”, by żadne działania nie utrudniały procesu konwergencji europejskich regionów.

  Raffaele Fitto, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you for the opportunity to address you today. First, let me thank the rapporteur, Mr Protas, for preparing this important report. This is particularly timely. I very much welcome the strong alignment with the Commission’s perspective. This shared perspective reinforces the fundamental message of the 9th Cohesion Report.

Cohesion policy has a positive and significant impact in terms of convergence. It reduces the disparities among EU Member States and regions, it stimulates long-term growth and competitiveness, and it plays a key role in supporting public investment. To continue to achieve our goals, we need to bring the cohesion policy up to date, considering the current situations and challenges that we are facing. If we want a stronger, more resilient and competitive Europe, we must reinforce and relaunch the cohesion policy – both for the present and for the future.

As many of you know, the mid-term review of the cohesion programme has been a central focus for me during these past months. The Commission’s recent proposals respond directly to many of your concerns. The proposal will bring more flexibility, more incentives and simple rules to allow Member States and the regions to respond to urgent challenges now – not waiting for the next period.

In this regard, I would like to stress certain important aspects. First, the new priorities identified are affordable housing, water resilience, energy transition, competitiveness and defence.

Second, since compliance with the review is voluntary, it will be up to each Member State to decide whether and how to update its programmes.

Third, the cohesion policy funds remain under the shared responsibility of Member States and the regions under shared management.

My ambition is clear: to modernise, simplify and strengthen cohesion policy so that it is more targeted and responsive, keeping our regions at the centre, and fully respecting the diversity and specific needs of our territories. This ambition is based on four key pillars.

First, a tailor-made solution for the Member States will include the key reforms and investment, focusing on our joint priorities. They will be designed and implemented in close partnership with the national, regional and local authorities. I would like to underline that the principles of partnership, shared management, multilevel governance and the place-based approach will remain core principles of the cohesion policy.

Second, we must also make cohesion policy more accessible, with fewer administrative burdens. We will work to reduce complexity and offer a more performance-based delivery mode to increase speed and efficiency, as underlined in your report.

I will continue to advocate for a strong territorial dimension. This will ensure the cohesion policy addresses the real challenges faced by regions undergoing structural transitions, as your report rightly identifies. This includes our eastern border regions as well as less developed peripheral, remote and rural areas, islands and outermost regions.

Honourable Members, I remain fully committed to the principles this House defends. The cohesion policy core mission has always been to stimulate growth and development across the EU. This mission remains as vital as ever, and this report marks an important step forward in that journey. Let us work together, speaking with one strong and united voice to make this mission a success.

  Andrey Novakov, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, Mr Vice-President, dear colleagues, we are having this debate at a very crucial moment. I would like to start by thanking Mr Protas for his work, because he dedicated a lot of his time, and he is a decent man who is doing a good job. In times when such crucial decisions are taken, I think those who contribute have to be mentioned.

I would like to congratulate Mr Fitto for his efforts to increase the absorption rate of cohesion policy, and to speak to those who don’t believe in the future of cohesion. Because the future of the cohesion policy means the future for Europe. The Founding Fathers put cohesion policy in the Treaty on the Functioning of the Union. So, no cohesion policy means no European Union.

I hope that with this we are going to put an end to the debate about the future of cohesion. Very rightly so, the Founding Fathers decided to have cohesion policy to balance the imbalances of the single market. So we need regions and cities in.

I am against – and a lot of other colleagues are against – further centralising cohesion policy and isolating mayors, regions and cities from the governing of this policy. We need more Europe at local level, not less. Every euro spent at local level solving local problems means more Europe tomorrow.

  Sérgio Gonçalves, em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Vice-Presidente Raffaele Fitto, gostaria de começar por agradecer ao relator e a todos os grupos políticos pela postura construtiva demonstrada ao longo das negociações deste relatório. Acredito que o Parlamento Europeu envia hoje uma mensagem clara: a política de coesão deve ser mantida descentralizada, onde as autoridades locais e regionais tenham um papel fundamental, quer na definição das políticas, quer na sua implementação.

Estamos conscientes dos desafios estruturantes que a Europa enfrenta, como a defesa e a segurança, o alargamento ou as migrações. Mas não podemos desvirtuar o objetivo principal da política de coesão de reduzir as disparidades entre as várias regiões europeias, promovendo o desenvolvimento sustentável e dando respostas a problemas específicos, como é o caso da habitação.

Este relatório reafirma a necessidade de a Europa se adaptar aos desafios que tem pela frente, assegurando, em simultâneo, o respeito pelo princípio da subsidiariedade que sempre norteou a política de coesão. É nesta Europa que acreditamos, é por esta Europa que continuaremos a lutar.

  Séverine Werbrouck, au nom du groupe PfE. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, une fois de plus, nous constatons l’inquiétante dérive fédéraliste de l’Union européenne au travers de ce rapport sur la bien mal nommée «politique de cohésion» – celle-là même qui sert à financer à perte le développement des pays fraîchement intégrés, sur le dos des travailleurs français qui n’ont malheureusement plus le luxe de la charité.

Dans l’Union, quand une politique dysfonctionne, la solution consiste toujours à augmenter son budget et à élargir son champ d’application. Vous demandez plus de largesse pour utiliser les fonds, vous les superposez – fonds de cohésion, fonds d’urgence, politique sectorielle –, vous éparpillez les objectifs – climatiques, numériques, démographiques et bien d’autres –, vous offrez un statut de quasi-État aux régions et enfin, vous en arrivez à votre serpent de mer habituel, celui de la prétendue nécessité de percevoir des ressources propres, dernier clou dans le cercueil de notre souveraineté.

Mais ne pourrait-on pas mieux utiliser cet argent? Le rendement annuel surévalué et médiocre est d’environ 4 % sur chaque euro investi, ce qui correspond à des centaines de milliards, alors que des politiques industrielles nationales, que vous interdisez, permettraient, par exemple, des profits bien supérieurs et des résultats plus concrets pour la France.

Nous continuerons de nous opposer à votre agenda fédéraliste spoliateur pour les Français.

  Antonella Sberna, a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, la politica di coesione è il volto visibile dell’Europa nei territori: è quella che riapre un asilo nido in un piccolo comune dove i genitori erano costretti a fare diversi chilometri al giorno per portare i figli a scuola; è quella che permette a un’impresa di digitalizzarsi e restare sul mercato o che finanzia un’unità mobile di assistenza sanitaria che porta cure e visite mediche a chi non ha alternative.

Eppure, leggendo questa relazione, emerge chiaramente che la distanza tra le intenzioni e la realtà è ancora troppo ampia. Se vogliamo che la coesione resti una leva per la crescita e non solo un capitolo di spesa, dobbiamo cambiare approccio: lo sta facendo il Commissario Fitto con la proposta di modifica di medio termine della politica di coesione, la cui procedura d’urgenza abbiamo appena votato in commissione REGI.

Il gruppo ECR ha presentato diversi emendamenti che vanno in una direzione molto chiara: anche i comuni devono accedere direttamente ai fondi insieme alle regioni. Un sindaco che vuole riqualificare un edificio scolastico, creare uno spazio per giovani e anziani, non può affrontare ostacoli amministrativi da grande ente. Tutto deve essere più semplice e flessibile. Chi lavora con persone fragili non può impiegare mesi solo per capire come rendicontare un finanziamento.

Servono regole che si adattino ai territori e non territori che devono seguire regole troppo rigide, perché la politica di coesione serve là dove il mercato non arriva. Io credo in una coesione che non misuri solo la spesa ma il cambiamento che genera; che non si perda nella burocrazia, ma che parli il linguaggio della concretezza, della prossimità e dell’equità.

  Ľubica Karvašová, za skupinu Renew. – Vážená pani predsedajúca, na Deň Európy organizujem podujatie s regiónmi. Volá sa Ruka v ruke za našu Európu. Prečo? Pretože regióny sú miesto, kde začína, ale veľakrát, bohužiaľ, aj končí podpora pre našu Úniu. Počúvam županov, primátorov, ľudí, ktorí v nich žijú. A posolstvo je jasné: chceme byť súčasťou EÚ. Dnes ale napríklad hrozí, že slovenská vláda sa chystá presunúť 400 miliónov EUR z rúk samospráv na svoje priority. Aj keď mnohé projekty sú už pripravené a obce na ne vyčlenili svoje zdroje. To je neprípustné. Kohézna politika v prvom v prvom rade patrí ľuďom v regiónoch na ich dlhodobý rozvoj. Zároveň zohráva kľúčovú úlohu v podpore Európskej únie v regiónoch. Ako tieňová spravodajkyňa som preto presadila dôležitý princíp, aby mali regióny a mestá priamejší prístup k európskym zdrojom, a to vďaka nástrojom ako integrované územné investície. A chcem sa poďakovať spravodajcovi Jacekovi Protasovi za prácu na celej správe, ale aj za to, že sa nám v tejto téme podarilo nájsť nateraz dobrý kompromis.

  Gordan Bosanac, u ime kluba Verts/ALE. – Poštovani predsjedavajući, povjereniče, kohezijska politika je valjda uz politike proširenja jedna od najuspješnijih politika Europske unije i to će ovaj deveti izvještaj također potvrditi, o tome koliko smo smanjili nejednakosti, i regionalne i socijalne, diljem teritorija Europske unije.

Posebno mi je zanimljivo da se govori o tome kako je ona važna u borbi protiv klimatskih promjena i nastavljamo dalje u tom smjeru, a naravno, mene će posebno zanimati uloga malih gradova i gradova i regija, koji ponovno u ovom devetom izvještaju se naglašava da im je potreban direktan pristup financiranju. Jer znate, često se govori o tom multi level, načinu konzultacija, razgovorima, ali u realnosti stvari su drugačije – konzultacije izostaju, gradovi ostaju izbačeni.

Vi imate, na primjer, mog premijera moje zemlje koji govori da je on sam donio koheziju i fondove iz Europske unije u Hrvatsku. Kao da gradovi ne provode tu politiku. Vjerojatno ga vi možete, povjereniče, ispraviti.

Ali ono što je sada pred nama je nova era kohezijske politike i vi ste došli pred ovaj parlament s novim prijedlogom, u vrlo vrlo brzoj proceduri. Maloprije smo na Odboru regija izglasali, nažalost, brzu proceduru i ono što se ja sada brinem da je EPP zajedno s ekstremnom desnicom išao na neki način poniziti ovaj parlament i gurnuti sve ovo kroz vrlo vrlo brzu proceduru, a radi se o temeljnoj politici koja je jedna od najuspješnijih politika Europske unije zajedno s proširenjem.

Ja ću vas još jednom pozvati, vrijeme je možda da ipak povučemo hitnu proceduru i vratimo budućnost kohezije u redovnu parlamentarnu proceduru.

  Kathleen Funchion, on behalf of The Left Group. – Mr President, thank you, Commissioner, for being here. I firstly want to thank Mr Protas and all his team for their cooperation and work, as in many ways this is the report the European Parliament needs. It is ambitious for a well-budgeted and progressive cohesion policy.

However, it has a major flaw, which means it fails the litmus test for myself and for my colleagues on the Left. It opens the door to the militarisation of cohesion policy.

Let’s take a step back and think about what that means. Cohesion policy, the flagship policy of solidarity of the EU, is now on the road, with the Parliament’s blessing, to being just another military policy. This is shameful.

We are, of course, all aware of the geopolitical realities. But is nothing sacred? Is absolutely everything now just fuel for the fire and drive towards the militarisation agenda of the EU? Our regions, all of them, need investment and need the EU to help protect jobs, develop our environment and support our workers in these very uncertain times.

Yet this report, which I acknowledge has many strengths, says that spending on military infrastructure, disguised as so-called dual technology, is as important as investing in our workers or our infrastructure.

Let’s be clear that each cent diverted into military spending is a cent taken away from my constituency of Ireland South, and all of our regions. The EU cohesion policy that funded roads and funded jobs and funded some of our community childcare facilities in Ireland is now being used to feed the war machine. This is a new low and I call upon all MEPs, especially our Irish MEPs, to reject it.

  Irmhild Boßdorf, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Kaum Erfolge, Milliarden an deutschen Steuergeldern versickern – das ist die traurige Bilanz der REGI‑Förderung. Weniger Armut, mehr Jobs, weniger Abwanderung aus ländlichen Regionen – Fehlanzeige, trotz 270 Milliarden Euro Förderung. Doch was ist eigentlich mit dem vielen Geld passiert? Ich habe Elisa Ferreira, die letzte REGI‑Kommissarin, danach gefragt. Sie hat zugegeben, dass es nicht um Kosten und Nutzen geht, sondern um Frieden, Freiheit und Wohlstand. Schließlich würden diese Mittel auch helfen, rechtspopulistische Parteien im ländlichen Raum einzudämmen.

Tatsächlich gab es im vergangenen Jahr eine Studie der Uni Kiel, die nachgewiesen hat, dass ohne die REGI‑Mittel rechte Parteien in entlegenen Regionen zwei bis drei Prozent mehr bekommen hätten. 270 Milliarden umgewidmet in den Kampf gegen Rechts – das ist ungeheuerlich. Machen wir den ländlichen Raum wieder lebenswert. Setzen wir die REGI‑Mittel endlich für unsere Heimat ein.

  Gabriella Gerzsenyi (PPE). – Tisztelt Kollégák! Tisztelt Alelnök Úr! Szeretném megköszönni mindazoknak az eddigi munkáját, akik ezen a jelentésen dolgoztak. Kulcsfontosságú megállapításokat tartalmaz, olyanokat, hogy a beruházások helyben tudnak jobban megvalósulni, hogy a források felhasználási szabályait egyszerűsíteni szükséges, hogy a vállalkozások adminisztratív terheit csökkenteni kell, és hogy ne üres szólam maradjon az az alapelv, hogy senkit nem hagyunk hátra, senkit nem hagyunk magára. Hogy gondolnunk kell a fogyatékossággal élő személyekre, a vidéki területekre, az elnéptelenedő régiókra, hiszen Európa biztonságának záloga, hogy együtt maradunk, együtt vagyunk erősek a globális kihívások közepette. Külön öröm számomra, hogy a helyi és regionális szereplők partnerségének megemlítése és megerősítése a szövegben hangsúlyt kap. Külön öröm ez magyarként, a Tisza képviselőjeként, hiszen mi azon dolgozunk, hogy a helyi és regionális szereplők, a városok, az önkormányzatok szót kaphassanak, hogy meghallgassák őket, hogy bevonják, hogy partnerként kezeljék, és hogy forrásokhoz jussanak. Kormányra kerülése után a Tisza Párt azon fog dolgozni továbbra is, hogy minél több uniós forrást hazahozhasson és biztosíthasson a kedvezményezetteknek, akiknek ezek járnak.

  Marcos Ros Sempere (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor vicepresidente, la política de cohesión es la política social de la Unión Europea, la política que invierte en hospitales, la política que invierte en centros de salud, en escuelas, la política que invierte en carreteras. Es la política que nos ayudará a alcanzar nuestros objetivos a pesar de los retos que tenemos por delante.

Nos ayudará a completar la transición ecológica, digital y social; a que todas las regiones de la Unión Europea avancen al mismo ritmo. Y lo hará a pesar de las dificultades: la pandemia, la guerra en Europa, la nueva era de Trump.

Para conseguirlo, necesitamos una política de cohesión que refuerce sus cimientos, que tenga en mente a los ciudadanos, que tenga menos trabas burocráticas, que potencie la participación de regiones y de ciudades. Necesitamos una política de cohesión que invierta en un parque público de viviendas y que esté condicionada a cumplir con el Estado de Derecho. Necesitamos una política de cohesión que tenga presupuestos suficientes para afrontar los nuevos retos.

  Mélanie Disdier (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, la proposition de résolution dont nous débattons ce soir porte sur la cohésion entre tous les territoires d’Europe. Ceci est censé être une bonne chose, mais, malheureusement, même lorsque les propositions se fondent sur les meilleures intentions, la Commission européenne et ses soutiens réussissent à y injecter leur poison.

C’est ainsi qu’on y retrouve insidieusement la promotion de la conditionnalité des aides. Selon eux, ceux qui s’opposent à la Commission devraient se voir priver des aides auxquelles ils ont droit, alors même qu’ils ont participé à leur financement. Au nom d’un état de droit à géométrie variable, certains voudraient donc faire pression sur un gouvernement démocratiquement élu – les mêmes qui, par ailleurs, sont étrangement silencieux lorsque l’on révèle que la Commission finance des ONG pour faire du lobbying.

Les Européens méritent mieux que vos discours creux où les bonnes intentions ne sont que de façade – des discours où vous déplorez la diminution des fonds nationaux tout en étant responsables des causes, des discours qui prônent la décentralisation alors que vous voulez contourner la volonté nationale.

La cohésion de l’Europe ne doit pas être uniquement sociale, elle doit être aussi démocratique.

  Ciaran Mullooly (Renew). – Mr President, I welcome this report and its well-rounded assessment of what cohesion funds and policy actually stand for today. I compliment the rapporteurs.

The report makes it clear, however, that stark disparities remain among the EU’s regions, especially in rural areas. And in this context, I support the report’s call for the need to address these disparities and simplify access to the funds, Commissioner: simplification.

As a rapporteur of Parliament’s own-initiative report on the just transition, I am glad to see the report calling for the continuation of that process and ensuring its reinforced financial means for the post-2027 period.

However, I’m less happy with the announcement in the mid-term review of the cohesion policy of what seems to be the exclusion of my country, Ireland, from the one-year extension of the current year transition fund? I don’t understand it. We must seek adequate flexibility in the capacity for Member States, such as Ireland, to have full access to the extended timeline to provide extra time to spend their allocations.

As an MEP, I know how vital cohesion policy is for the regions. As we prepare for the next programming period, let’s ensure cohesion policy remains properly funded, simplified and accessible to all the regions.

  Valentina Palmisano (The Left). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, per il Movimento Cinque Stelle i fondi di coesione sono quella straordinaria opportunità di investire nelle persone, nella loro istruzione, nella loro crescita professionale, nelle infrastrutture, nella sanità pubblica. In una parola: per ridurre il divario tra territori ricchi e territori poveri.

Il rapporto che discutiamo oggi introduce in modo ambiguo la possibilità di utilizzare questi fondi per tecnologie militari, nascondendosi dietro la dicitura dual use, doppio uso. Ecco, per fare un esempio, potremmo utilizzare i fondi di coesione per comprare droni da impiegare anche nei teatri di guerra.

Per noi questo cambiamento di rotta è inaccettabile: la politica di coesione non è nata per sostenere le industrie belliche della difesa ma per dare risposte concrete ai bisogni sociali, economici e ambientali dei territori più fragili.

E Lei, Commissario Fitto, lo sa bene, visto che proveniamo entrambi da una regione che ha una necessità vitale di questi fondi. Quindi, per noi nessun euro va dirottato verso la logica del riarmo. Difendere la coesione significa difendere la pace, l’equità e il diritto di ogni territorio ad avere un futuro sostenibile.

  Krzysztof Hetman (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Ile to już razy na tej sali rozmawialiśmy o tym, co trzeba zrobić, jeśli chodzi o politykę spójności? Ile razy omawialiśmy tego typu sprawozdania, z których płynął zawsze ten sam wniosek, który mamy także i tym razem – uelastycznić i uprościć politykę spójności.

Panie Komisarzu, wielu przed Panem to zapowiadało. Nikomu nie udało się tego zrobić. Może być Pan pierwszy, może stać się Pan bohaterem wszystkich beneficjentów polityki spójności w całej Unii Europejskiej, tych beneficjentów, którzy z coraz mniejszym zainteresowaniem patrzą w stronę polityki spójności, biorąc pod uwagę tę całą biurokrację, którą muszą przebrnąć, aby te pieniądze uzyskać. Szczególnie, gdy porównują to do procedur związanych z krajowymi planami odbudowy.

Cieszę się, że w sprawozdaniu przygotowanym przez Parlament Europejski, znalazło się miejsce dla obronności, dla wsparcia produktów podwójnego zastosowania na rynek wojskowy i cywilny. To niezwykle ważne w tej chwili.

I na koniec chciałbym, Panie Komisarzu, odnotować z zadowoleniem, że dostrzega Pan potrzebę pomocy regionom przygranicznym, które odczuwają skutki agresji Rosji na Ukrainę. Jeśli chce Pan rzeczywiście im pomóc, trzeba natychmiast zmienić mapę intensywności pomocy publicznej. Każdy przedsiębiorca ocenia ryzyko. Jeśli będzie mógł uzyskać wsparcie, które to ryzyko zmniejszy, z pewnością tam zainwestuje.

  Sabrina Repp (S&D). – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar! Die Kohäsionspolitik ist eine europäische Erfolgsgeschichte – sichtbar, wirksam und unverzichtbar für den Zusammenhalt in unseren Regionen. Wie der neunte Kohäsionsbericht zeigt, entfalten die Investitionen spürbare Wirkung, insbesondere in strukturschwachen Gebieten. Der wiederholte Vorwurf vom Kommissar, dass zu wenig Gelder abgerufen würden, ist irreführend. Die Mittel sind verplant, Projekte sind längst auf dem Weg.

Kohäsionspolitik und Kohäsionsmittel sind keine Reservekasse für spontane politische Richtungswechsel. Sie dienen einer langfristigen Entwicklung, gerade auch im ländlichen Raum. Doch genau diese Räume drohen nun erneut, ins Hintertreffen zu geraten. Der Gesetzentwurf zur Halbzeitbewertung verlagert Mittel zugunsten urbaner und industrieller Zentren – entgegen dem Versprechen, insbesondere ländliche Räume in den Blick zu nehmen. Wer Kohäsionspolitik ernst nimmt, muss ländliche Räume stärken. Wir sollten die Prinzipien der Kohäsionspolitik wahren, statt die dafür vorgesehenen Gelder gießkannenartig und zweckfremd auszuschütten. Denn Kohäsionspolitik ist das Fundament eines widerstandsfähigen und vor allem demokratischen Europas, das wir gerade mehr denn je brauchen.

PRESIDENZA: PINA PICIERNO
Vicepresidente

  Julien Leonardelli (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire Fitto, chers collègues, ce neuvième rapport sur la cohésion économique et sociale ne peut passer sous silence l’une des urgences vitales pour nos territoires: l’eau.

En France, chez moi, en Occitanie, comme dans tant d’autres régions européennes, les sols s’assèchent, les nappes s’épuisent et les conflits d’usage se multiplient. L’agriculture est menacée, la santé publique est fragilisée et nos villages perdent leur souffle, car, oui, l’eau, c’est la vie. Cependant, au lieu d’aider les peuples à faire face à cela, les technocrates imposent une vision centralisée, hors sol et obnubilés par le réchauffement climatique.

À chaque urgence concrète, ils répondent par des rapports abstraits. Ils freinent les retenues d’eau, ils entravent les initiatives locales et ils accablent ceux qui nourrissent nos nations, nos paysans.

Cela n’est pas notre Europe. L’Europe que nous voulons, c’est l’Europe des peuples, celle qui défend les nations – les nations gardant la maîtrise de leurs ressources – et où les décisions sont prises au plus près du terrain et non imposées par une bureaucratie lointaine et idéologique.

L’heure est venue de redonner aux nations leur souveraineté hydraulique, de protéger l’eau comme un bien commun, nécessaire au développement urbain et touristique, indispensable à notre agriculture, à notre industrie et à nos territoires. Sans eau, il n’y aura ni renaissance rurale, ni cohésion, ni avenir pour nos enfants.

  Rasmus Andresen (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin! Viele Menschen haben Angst in diesen Zeiten. Menschen, die in ländlichen Regionen oder in Grenzregionen leben, haben Angst, ihren Job zu verlieren oder abgehängt zu werden, weil die Bahn nicht mehr fährt oder das Krankenhaus vor Ort schließt. Viele Menschen in Metropolen haben Angst, dass ihre Einkommen durch die hohen Mieten oder hohe Lebenshaltungskosten aufgefressen werden und sie nicht mehr mithalten können. Viele Menschen merken, dass das Leben nicht mehr so einfach ist. Und ich finde, dass die Europäische Union ein klares Versprechen für ein gutes Leben an alle Menschen in der Europäischen Union abgeben muss. Dafür kann die Europäische Union zuständig sein, und die Kohäsionspolitik ist dafür ein sehr zentrales Element.

Es ist wirklich sehr schön zu hören, dass sich der Kommissionsvizepräsident Fitto hier heute dem Bericht angeschlossen hat, den wir im Parlament verhandelt haben. Aber ich muss auch ganz ehrlich sagen: Das passt nicht zur Realität, wie wir sie wahrnehmen. Die Realität ist, dass die EU‑Kommission weiter Zentralisierungspläne hat, dass die Kohäsionsgelder zukünftig in nationalen Plänen ausgezahlt werden müssen, dass Regionen die Gelder nicht mehr bekommen, dass soziale Organisationen, dass kleine Unternehmen, dass Gewerkschaften in Zukunft ausgeschlossen werden. Und das will ich ganz deutlich sagen: Das darf nicht passieren, und dafür setzen wir uns auch mit diesem Bericht zur Wehr.

Wir sagen aber auch, dass die Kohäsionspolitik besser werden muss. Es muss einfacher werden, EU‑Fördermittel zu bekommen, es muss weiterhin klare Ziele geben – soziale Ziele und grüne Ziele –, und wir brauchen direkte Instrumente für Städte, damit auch sie besser an EU‑Fördermitteln partizipieren können. Hier im Parlament sind wir uns einig. Jetzt kommt es darauf an, dass Sie handeln und dass Sie im Sommer den richtigen Vorschlag machen und sich an der Position des Parlaments orientieren.

  Έλενα Κουντουρά (The Left). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριε Επίτροπε, η πολιτική συνοχής έχει βασικό στόχο την επίτευξη ισόρροπης ανάπτυξης σε όλη την Ευρώπη μέσω της κοινωνικής, οικονομικής και εδαφικής σύγκλισης όλων των περιφερειών. Ωστόσο, παρά την πρόοδο, είμαστε ακόμα πολύ μακριά από την επίτευξη αυτών των κρίσιμων στόχων.

Η πράσινη και η ψηφιακή μετάβαση, η στεγαστική κρίση, η κλιματική κρίση, το υψηλό μεταφορικό και ενεργειακό κόστος δημιουργούν νέες προκλήσεις για τις τοπικές κοινωνίες, ειδικά στα νησιά και στις απομακρυσμένες περιοχές.

Η ιδέα χρηματοδότησης αμυντικών τεχνολογιών από τα Ταμεία Συνοχής πρέπει να απορριφθεί. Χρειαζόμαστε ενίσχυση της χρηματοδότησης της πολιτικής συνοχής στο νέο Πολυετές Δημοσιονομικό Πλαίσιο. Πρέπει να διασφαλίσουμε ότι θα βασίζεται στις ιδιαίτερες ανάγκες των τοπικών κοινωνιών, στην αρχή της πολυεπίπεδης διακυβέρνησης, στο αποκεντρωμένο μοντέλο προγραμματισμού και στην ενισχυμένη συμμετοχή των περιφερειακών αρχών.

Τέλος, θα πρέπει να αντιμετωπιστούν οι ενδοπεριφερειακές ανισότητες σε επίπεδο NUTS 3, συνυπολογίζοντας παράγοντες πέραν του περιφερειακού ΑΕΠ, όπως η δημογραφική ερήμωση, η νησιωτικότητα, η περιβαλλοντική επιβάρυνση και η ποιότητα ζωής.

  Isabelle Le Callennec (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire Fitto, la politique de cohésion vise la réduction des disparités économiques, sociales et territoriales au sein de l’Union européenne, et pèse pour un tiers de son budget. La politique de cohésion, parfaitement identifiée et incarnation de l’Europe dans nos territoires, est au cœur du projet européen et ne saurait être remise en cause. A contrario, elle doit être renforcée dans ses budgets et améliorée dans sa mise en œuvre.

Non à une ponction des fonds de cohésion à d’autres fins que celles pour lesquelles ils ont été créés. Oui à un régime spécial et légitime pour les régions ultrapériphériques, non à une recentralisation de la gestion. Oui à une simplification du fonctionnement; non à une utilisation des fonds inadéquate et oui à une meilleure synergie avec les programmes sectoriels de l’Union et le soutien de la BEI dans les investissements d’avenir.

À vous écouter, Monsieur le Commissaire Fitto, j’ai bon espoir que nous soyons enfin entendus.

  Maravillas Abadía Jover (PPE). – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, la política de cohesión es una palanca esencial de la competitividad europea, pero Europa sufre hoy un déficit de ejecución para su ambición global. La revisión intermedia muestra avances, pero también revela un problema grave: las tasas de absorción son inaceptablemente bajas.

En España, donde Eurostat confirma una vez más el triste liderazgo del paro en Europa, la ejecución del Fondo Social es del 0 %. Esta parálisis no es un fallo de Bruselas, sino de una gestión centralizada ineficaz y de una burocracia que bloquea inversiones estratégicas. La cohesión no se consigue con papeles, sino invirtiendo en la vida cotidiana: en empleos de calidad, en trenes que circulen con normalidad, en el acceso garantizado al agua, en luz encendida cada día y no en apagones de los cuales aún no hay respuesta.

Para lograrlo, los entes locales y regionales deben tener un papel protagonista. Son ellos los que mejor conocen las necesidades reales. La política de cohesión debe garantizar una ejecución eficaz, promover inversiones de calado y seguir siendo el motor de una Europa fuerte, solidaria y competitiva.

  Paulo Do Nascimento Cabral (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Vice-Presidente Raffaele Fitto, a política de coesão tem de ter um orçamento robusto, e recorda-se que cada euro investido através desta política deverá ser multiplicado por três até 2040. Isto só será possível se envolvermos as autoridades regionais e locais numa abordagem multinível no seu desenho e gestão, respeitando o princípio da subsidiariedade e de parceria.

Este tem de continuar a ser o principal instrumento no combate às desigualdades regionais. No último quadro, a política de coesão representou 13 % de todo o investimento público na União Europeia e 51 % nos Estados-Membros das regiões menos desenvolvidas. Isto mostra que é a maior política de investimentos da União Europeia e beneficia todos os Estados-Membros, direta ou indiretamente.

O relatório refere ainda flexibilidade na gestão que defende, quer para os beneficiários, quer para as administrações, e saúdo, portanto, o nosso relator Protas por isto.

Destaco apenas as regiões ultraperiféricas, com os seus desafios estruturais permanentes, que devem continuar a ter uma abordagem específica, como estabelecido no artigo 349.º do Tratado. Mas são também territórios de elevado potencial estratégico para a União, com condições únicas para liderar processos de inovação territorial.

É essencial que a Comissão Europeia promova sempre avaliações de impacto nessas regiões de novas propostas legislativas, para evitarmos erros como o ETS e evitarmos sobrecargas regulatórias que possam comprometer o seu desenvolvimento económico e social. E termino com um desafio: os transportes são a principal limitação da competitividade das empresas nas RUP e por isso precisamos urgentemente de um POSEI Transportes.

(O orador aceita responder a uma pergunta «cartão azul»)

  João Oliveira (The Left), Pergunta segundo o procedimento «cartão azul». – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Deputado Paulo do Nascimento Cabral, os fundos de coesão são um instrumento absolutamente essencial para países como Portugal, para garantir o desenvolvimento e a coesão nas suas três dimensões — económica, social e territorial.

Ora, este relatório faz uma referência direta à promoção do investimento em projetos e bens de dupla utilização, ou seja, com dimensão militar e civil. E as perguntas que lhe faço são duas: primeiro, se o senhor deputado está de acordo com esta possibilidade de desvio de fundos da coesão para fins militares e, em segundo lugar, como é que o senhor deputado entende que o desvio de fundos de coesão para objetivos militares pode servir o desenvolvimento de países como Portugal.

  Paulo Do Nascimento Cabral (PPE), Resposta segundo o procedimento «cartão azul». – Senhor Deputado, de facto, há esta referência numa lógica facultativa, não é obrigatório — os Estados-Membros podem utilizar esta possibilidade para desenvolver a sua indústria militar, como foi apresentado também aqui na revisão intercalar da política de coesão.

Neste caso específico, a indústria militar pode ser considerada de várias formas. Falamos também daquilo que mais valoriza o território, desde logo a ocupação do território, a promoção das zonas rurais, e falo também daquilo que tem que ver com a possibilidade que nós temos para desenvolver estes mesmos locais, essas mesmas zonas rurais com alguma indústria. Pode estar diretamente relacionado, ou não, com as questões militares, mas, por exemplo, a agricultura também pode ser considerada segurança e defesa, autonomia alimentar — a autonomia estratégica da União Europeia também tem de ser considerada.

Não vejo no relatório uma obrigação; vejo uma possibilidade para aumentar a taxa de execução dos fundos de coesão.

  Nikolina Brnjac (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, povjereniče, drage kolegice i kolege, deveto izvješće o koheziji potvrđuje ono što znamo iz prakse, a to je da kohezijska politika donosi konkretne i donosi mjerljive rezultate.

Kao zastupnica iz Republike Hrvatske iz prve ruke svjedočim koliko su upravo kohezijska ulaganja ključna za ravnomjerni razvoj naših regija, za jačanje naših gospodarstava, za prometnu i socijalnu infrastrukturu, ali koliko su važna i za očuvanje radnih mjesta. No, pred nama su i dalje važni i ozbiljni izazovi: od demografskog pada i administrativnih prepreka do niske apsorpcije sredstava.

Kao koordinatorica EPP-a u Odboru za stambenu krizu, posebno pozdravljam što izvješće prepoznaje stratešku važnost ulaganja u priuštivo stanovanje. To je temelj socijalne kohezije, zadržavanje mladih i obitelji i radne snage u našim regijama te borbe protiv depopulacije.

Za Hrvatsku i druge članice, manje države članice, snažna, fleksibilna i pojednostavljena kohezijska politika i nakon 2027. godine mora ostati prioritet. Europska unija mora ostati savez jednakih prilika za sve.

Procedura “catch-the-eye”

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señor vicepresidente Fitto, lo ha escuchado usted claramente: una mayoría de este Parlamento Europeo concuerda en que la política de cohesión es la razón de ser de Europa, correctora de desigualdades –también territoriales– en origen.

Tiene que ser particularmente sensible con regiones expuestas a conflictos en su frontera inmediata –como es el caso de la guerra de Ucrania– y en regiones particularmente expuestas por ser la primera línea ante el hecho migratorio –como es el caso de las regiones ultraperiféricas–. Pero, además de eso, este Parlamento subraya que sí es posible simplificar la gestión de los fondos de cohesión y los fondos de solidaridad distintivos de la Unión Europea sin que ello perjudique su gestión compartida y su gobernanza multinivel, y que –por tanto– le permita rendir cuentas asimismo en su gestión regional.

Se presenta, además, un objetivo muy importante: que tengan financiación suficiente para atender las nuevas prioridades, las emergencias y las catástrofes climáticas –cada vez más frecuentes– y, sobre todo, la extrapolación de la política social europea a la política de vivienda, que es el gran desafío de la solidaridad intergeneracional en la Unión Europea.

  João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, a política de coesão é, de facto, um instrumento absolutamente essencial para combater desigualdades económicas, sociais e territoriais, e garantir que todos os países possam, efetivamente, ter a possibilidade de estar no mesmo patamar de desenvolvimento.

Mas, para isso, é absolutamente essencial aumentar o investimento dos fundos de coesão e garantir que eles não sejam negligenciados. E, também, não associar a política de coesão a um modelo de financiamento baseado em objetivos ou resultados, como muitas vezes a Comissão Europeia procura querer, porque isso é, naturalmente, um elemento de limitação na possibilidade da utilização mais adequada dos fundos de coesão à realidade e à circunstância de cada país.

É também absolutamente essencial garantir uma governação descentralizada, com o nível adequado de articulação entre governos nacionais, regionais e locais, e assegurando que as estratégias locais de desenvolvimento sejam de responsabilidade partilhada e que não sejam impostas a cada região e a cada localidade.

Por fim, é absolutamente essencial garantir que o próximo quadro financeiro plurianual tenha um nível adequado de investimento na política de coesão, garantindo que o princípio da coesão seja um princípio horizontal que atravessa todas as políticas setoriais como critério de decisão para que esses objetivos de coesão possam ser alcançados.

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar, stimați colegi, politica de coeziune este esența Uniunii Europene. Nu o să putem, domnule comisar, să consolidăm și să fie puternică piața unică în raport cu piața globală dacă nu vom rezolva politica de coeziune.

Și cred că s-au făcut câteva greșeli: nu analizăm prea des efectele, pentru că dacă nu reușim să avem coeziune socială, să eliminăm disparitățile sociale, uitați-vă între est și vest, uitați-vă între regiunile periferice, între rural și urban. Deci, dacă nu reușim să facem aceste lucruri, înseamnă că nu avem politică de coeziune.

Apoi, ca să poată să aibă acces la bani, și cei din rural, și întreprinderile mici și mijlocii și zonele îndepărtate, trebuie foarte multă flexibilitate, foarte mult pus accent pe rezultate, simplificare, descentralizare, foarte important. Și sigur că trebuie, așa cum s-a și spus aici, trebuie să avem grijă acum ca țările care sunt în regiunile vecine cu Rusia, cu Bielorusia, cu Ucraina, cum este și țara mea, România, să aibă fonduri alocate, pentru că aceste state au preluat cetățeni ucraineni, copii ucraineni și nu putem să susținem singuri.

Politica de coeziune este cea care va da viitorul Uniunii Europene!

(Fine della procedura “catch the eye”)

  Raffaele Fitto, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, Members, thank you for this debate. Let me begin by thanking you all for your valuable contributions. I have listened closely to your comments and concerns. Your insights this evening confirm a strong, shared commitment to the future of cohesion policy, one that is modern, responsive and grounded in the real needs of our regions. The status quo is not an option.

You spoke about the role of the regions, the role of the cities, less bureaucracy, defending the principles of cohesion, defending the financial dimension, the simplification; these are the most important issues that you raised and I agree with you, but it’s important to underline some points. For example, we cannot defend the cohesion policy as it is if we want to give a future to this policy. About defence, for example, you know that – some of you know that and said that –defence now is a new opportunity that the Commission gives with the mid-term review. Well, you know that the current programmes are already financing some projects on defence. The mid-term review gives the possibility on a voluntary basis to use all of the five priorities, or some of the priorities, or, if the Member States can simply decide to not use the mid-term review, solve the problem. There is not an obligatory decision of the European Commission. There is not a transfer of money from cohesion. I want to be clear, it’s important to be clear about this point. This is a voluntary basis. And now we have these opportunities because in the current programmes, without a mid-term review, there is the opportunity, the possibility, to use the resources of cohesion for defence. We have some clear examples in this way. It’s important to have the right approach between us, because I think that for the mid-term review to be successful, we must act swiftly and a modernised policy framework needs to be in place as soon as possible so that Member States and the regions can choose which investments should be directed towards our new and emerging priorities without delay. At the same time, we must remain attentive to the ongoing challenges that many EU regions continue to face – challenges clearly highlighted in the Cohesion Report. We also have a duty to ensure that every euro we spend delivers maximum impact.

Honourable Members, cohesion policy has proven its value time and again. Its core principles – partnership, shared management, multi-level governance, place-based approach – are not just a technical terms, they are what makes this policy work, what brings Europe closer to its citizens. With a renewed vision and determination, we can build on these foundations and shape a cohesion policy fit for the future. I will continue to engage closely with this House, with the Member States, with the regions, with the mayors, and with all authorities in the weeks and months ahead to listen, to learn, to create tailored solutions for every region. This has been and will always remain my approach. T.

hank you once again for this valuable exchange and for your continued commitment to Europe’s regions and citizens. And thank you again, Mr Protas, for this report. I think that this is a very positive basis for our work for the next weeks or the next months. It is not simple, the debate for the future, but I think that it’s important to build one position between us. I think that there isn’t a different approach. Now we need to have only one voice, not to defend cohesion policy, but to relaunch and modernised cohesion policy. These are our challenges and I count on you about this future and for the next steps that together we will have for these important challenges.

  Jacek Protas, Sprawozdawca. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowni Państwo! Drogie Koleżanki i Koledzy! Bardzo serdecznie dziękuję zarówno za tą dzisiejszą debatę i za ciepłe słowa skierowane również do mnie, ale bardzo też serdecznie dziękuję za prace nad tym ważnym dokumentem, który – tak jak powiedziałem – moim zdaniem będzie naszym mocnym stanowiskiem, mocnym stanowiskiem Parlamentu Europejskiego w dalszej debacie, tak jak powiedział pan komisarz, na temat modernizacji polityki spójności.

Pozwólcie państwo, że podobnie jak pan komisarz, odniosę się do produktów podwójnego zastosowania, bo wydaje mi się, że nie wszyscy rozumieją, o co chodzi. Otóż, po pierwsze, rzeczywiście to nie jest obligatoryjne podejście. Tylko te regiony, te państwa, które czują taką potrzebę, żeby przesuwać środki na niektóre działania, mogą to uczynić. Komisja Europejska zarówno w czasie przeglądu śródokresowego, jak i – mam nadzieję – w przyszłości pozwoli na takie działania. I nie jest to przesuwanie środków na wspieranie zakupów zbrojeniowych, jak tutaj też słyszałem. W żadnym wypadku.

Ja, szanowni państwo, mieszkam 30 kilometrów od granicy z Rosją, 30 kilometrów od granicy z agresorem, z wrogim państwem. I chciałbym, żeby w moim regionie można było budować nowe hale sportowe ze schronem pod tą halą, żeby można było modernizować wskazane szpitale, które w razie zagrożenia wojennego będą również pełniły rolę wsparcia dla wojska. Chciałbym móc wzmacniać mosty, modernizować drogi dojazdowe czy budować je w takich parametrach, żeby mogły również służyć celom obronnym. I to nie jest militaryzowanie polityki spójności, ale danie możliwości tym regionom, które czują taką potrzebę, realizowania tych celów.

Szanowni państwo, panie komisarzu, bardzo serdecznie dziękuję za te dzisiejsze wystąpienia. Dziękuję za współpracę. Mam głębokie przekonanie, że ten dokument, który w czwartek przegłosujemy, również pomoże panu, bowiem znamy pana historię zawodową. Wiemy, że jest pan samorządowcem. Był pan szefem regionu, ministrem odpowiedzialnym również za politykę regionalną, więc wiemy, że rozumie pan potrzeby regionu, potrzeby społeczności lokalnych. Ale u nas w Polsce się mówi, że diabeł tkwi w szczegółach. Co do głównych założeń polityki spójności zgadzamy się również, że trzeba iść w kierunku modernizacji, ewolucji, nie rewolucji. Ale będziemy dyskutować na temat tego, jak to w praktyce ma wyglądać i jak Komisja Europejska to widzi. Mam nadzieję, że wspólnie osiągniemy sukces.

  Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.

La votazione si svolgerà giovedì.

  Rody Tolassy (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, voici le vrai visage du pacte vert quand il affecte les Outre-mer: un cataclysme économique déguisé en vertu écologique.

Costa Croisières quitte la Guadeloupe, non pas parce que notre territoire est moins attractif ou compétent, mais parce que Bruxelles impose aux régions ultrapériphériques (RUP) une transition énergétique restrictive et destructrice. Résultat: 15 000 à 20 000 passagers en moins, des dockers au chômage, des transporteurs en détresse, un port affaibli, et ce n’est que le début. L’augmentation du prix des billets d’avion frappait déjà nos familles, maintenant ce sont nos entreprises ainsi que notre tourisme qui sont touchés. Ce n’est plus une alerte, c’est un signal d’alarme.

Je vous pose donc une question simple: que compte faire la Commission pour compenser concrètement ces pertes? Mieux encore, arrêtez de faire les poches de nos compatriotes. Ainsi, je vous demande la suppression du dispositif d’échange de quotas d’émission dans les RUP sur la base de l’article 349 du traité FUE.

  Daniel Buda (PPE). – Doamnă președintă, stimați colegi, în România s-a încheiat primul tur al alegerilor prezidențiale. Mi-aș fi dorit ca domnul Crin Antonescu, un lider cu viziune, cu experiență, capabil să fie un pilon de stabilitate pe scena politică europeană, să fi ajuns în turul al doilea. Din păcate, la doar câteva zeci de mii de voturi distanță, alegătorii au ales alt drum, plasând România într-un moment de răscruce.

Privind înainte, îmi doresc ca țara noastră să-și continue parcursul european și să rămână un punct de stabilitate într-o regiune marcată de războiul din Ucraina.

Astăzi, mai mult ca oricând, Europa are nevoie de o Românie puternică, responsabilă, fidelă valorilor democratice, o Românie care să nu cadă pradă extremismului sau populismului.

O Europă puternică este o Europă unită, unită în jurul valorilor care garantează pacea, libertatea, stabilitatea și prosperitatea.

Tocmai de aceea, România trebuie să aleagă candidatul pro-european Nicușor Dan, rămas în cursă și să spună nu izolării și nu întoarcerii în trecut.

  Ciaran Mullooly (Renew). – Madam President, the housing crisis is crippling thousands of families and young couples all over Europe and especially in Ireland. I went to the town of Naas in County Kildare, a town which had 5 000 people in 1971, now a car-based town with 30 000 people in housing estates, and another 4 500 waiting for homes. A town that’s been forgotten. Planning is terrible. The demand is just incredible.

I spoke to Angela Garrett. She has two children, one aged 32, who has autism, the other 28. They’re still living at home. She tells me the average price of a family home in this town is half a million euro – five hundred thousand euro! It is out of control. And what does our government do in Ireland? We put in charge a man who’s paid a salary of almost half a million euro in another job to come in to take over this job.

We lack ideas. We lack strong thinking. We lack an ability to consider the people who are involved here, the people who are suffering because of the lack of a home. It is an absolute disgrace. We need, throughout Europe and in Ireland, to focus on real progress for families like these.

  Nicolae Ştefănuță (Verts/ALE). – Doamnă președintă, România are de ales. Între Europa și extrema dreaptă. Între viitor și frică.

Nu mai e despre „îmi place de tine, tu mă placi pe mine”. Nu mai e nici măcar despre negocieri banale, despre funcții, ministere și mai știu eu ce.

Este despre direcția în care merge România, despre ce alegem să fim: o țară europeană, liberă, demnă, sau o țară închisă, izolată, vulnerabilă, slabă.

Fac un apel sincer și direct către toate partidele europene prezente în sală și cele de acasă: să ne unim în sprijinul pentru turul doi, pentru democrație. E momentul să fim împreună. Nu pentru un om, ci pentru un drum. Pentru drumul european al României.

Tinerii din România nu vor să trăiască în ură, nu vor să aibă un președinte care ne izolează, care alimentează ura, care ne scoate din Europa.

Pe 18 mai avem o singură opțiune cu toții: să ieșim la vot și să încurajăm unitatea europeană a României.

  Anthony Smith (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, les secteurs stratégiques de l’économie comme l’industrie de l’acier doivent devenir des secteurs publics sous contrôle des États. Oui, nous n’hésitons pas à le dire dans cet hémicycle, qui continue de faire du néolibéralisme moribond son étendard.

Depuis des mois, les syndicats européens et français du secteur sonnent l’alarme sans réponse ni action de la Commission.

En France, c’est la direction d’ArcelorMittal qui a annoncé, fin avril, la suppression de centaines de postes qui s’ajoute aux annonces précédentes, laissant des milliers de familles sur le carreau. C’est toute la filière de l’acier en France et en Europe qui est menacée, alors qu’elle a été gavée d’argent public sans contrepartie. Au lendemain de cette annonce, le commissaire européen français Séjourné a même osé exprimer son incompréhension face à la décision du géant de la sidérurgie; mais de qui se moque-t-on?

La Macronie applique ici et au sein de la Commission le laissez-faire capitaliste pour permettre aux industriels d’accumuler toujours plus. Avec La France insoumise, nous le répétons sans faiblir: nationalisez ArcelorMittal!

  Tomasz Froelich (ESN). – Frau Präsidentin! Die Opposition bespitzeln, die Opposition kriminalisieren, die AfD verbieten? Das sind Zustände wie in einem autoritären Staat – das sind Zustände in Deutschland. Wer so was tut, rettet nicht die Demokratie. Wer so was tut, der schafft die Demokratie ab, weil er Angst vor ihr hat, weil er zu schwach für sie ist. Veranlasst hat all dies Nancy Faeser, scheidende Innenministerin, gesichert linksextrem, Autorin des Antifa‑Magazins.

Das Gutachten gegen die AfD, auf das sie sich beruft, bleibt geheim. Es bleibt geheim, weil es harmlos ist. Der Presse wurde es dennoch gesteckt. Weil wir das deutsche Volk erhalten wollen, sollen wir rechtsextrem sein? Lächerlich! Marco Rubio hat völlig recht – das ist keine Demokratie, das ist verkappte Tyrannei. Und dann erdreistet sich diese Bundesregierung auch noch, dem Rest der Welt Demokratiedefizite vorzuwerfen. Einfach nur frech! Wer keine Argumente hat, muss auf Repression setzen, aber ich verspreche Ihnen: Wir halten das aus, denn unsere Überzeugungen sind stärker als diese Arroganz der Macht.

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar, am ales să vorbesc astăzi despre criza de locuințe pentru tineri. O locuință decentă este o condiție esențială pentru aspirațiile tinerilor și există studii făcute de Banca Mondială, există studii, are Comisia Europeană rezultatele acestor studii?

Este clar că sunt mai ales state cum ar fi Grecia, Bulgaria, România, chiar și Germania, unde criza locuințelor a crescut. Există însă și soluții.

Am vorbit mai devreme de politica de coeziune. Ține și acest lucru de politica de coeziune. Aceste rapoarte și analize dau și niște recomandări. De exemplu, să se acorde teren din spațiile publice neutilizate, tinerilor. Să aibă acces, așa cum am spus mai devreme, la finanțare, de exemplu la Banca Europeană de Investiții, simplificarea procedurilor prin care să se primească, dar și construcția de locuințe sociale.

Cum facem să asigurăm aceste lucruri? Pentru că tot rapoartele arată că există o legătură între productivitate, competitivitate, dar chiar și legătură cu sănătatea mintală, nu mai spun de demografie.

Deci trebuie să găsim soluții pentru ca tinerii să aibă acces la locuințe.

  Tiago Moreira de Sá (PfE). – Senhora Presidente, quando James Madison elaborou as primeiras 10 emendas à Constituição dos Estados Unidos, que ficaram conhecidas como «Bill of Rights», fê-lo para garantir que, mesmo numa república acabada de nascer de uma guerra, a liberdade era constitucionalmente protegida.

O acordo «Pandemic», que deverá ser aprovado na próxima sessão da World Health Assembly, em Genebra, evoca intenções nobres, como proteger a saúde global. Está bem, mas deve ser encarado com cautelas e máxima vigilância. Há quatro áreas onde essa vigilância é absolutamente crítica — as liberdades individuais, a soberania nacional, a confidencialidade dos dados genéticos e a liberdade de expressão.

A responsabilidade histórica que temos hoje é a mesma que Madison teve no seu tempo: assegurar que a prevenção de um mal nunca se faça à custa da liberdade, seja dos indivíduos, seja, neste caso também, dos Estados. Porque a liberdade não é o preço da segurança; é a sua condição moral.

  Cristian Terheş (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, dragi colegi, am atras atenția din toamna lui 2019 că programul utopic Green Deal, promovat de Ursula von der Leyen, va conduce la o criză energetică în Europa, cu efect dezastruos asupra populației și economiilor europene.

Pe de o parte, aceste politici au condus deja la creșterea consumului de energie, pe de altă parte, în loc să diversifice sursele și să asigure independența energetică, UE a impus statelor să-și închidă surse de energie, cum sunt termocentralele pe cărbune, ceea ce a redus producția de energie.

Efectul a fost că prețul energiei a crescut peste tot în UE, cu efect devastator, în special asupra pensionarilor și celor mai săraci europeni. Acest lucru a afectat și economia, făcând bunurile și serviciile europene mai scumpe și mai greu de vândut pe piața mondială.

Această politică centralizată de tip comunist, care pornește de la premisa că cei de la Bruxelles știu mai bine decât guvernele statelor membre UE ce e mai bine pentru țările lor, și-a dovedit eșecul și trebuie să înceteze.

Pentru a gestiona cu adevărat criza energetică, statele membre trebuie să-și definească propriul mix energetic. Viitorul nu poate fi dictat de dogme verzi impuse de birocrații de la Bruxelles, ci de soluții funcționale specifice fiecărei țări.

  Michael McNamara (Renew). – (start of speech off mic) … I suppose the instability and unprecedented level of conflict in the world is such that when two of the world’s greatest powers, two of the world’s most populous nations, both nuclear armed, are squaring up and threatening each other, it barely receives a word here in the European Union, or indeed from this Parliament. I would like to take this opportunity to express my condolences to the families of those slaughtered so savagely in Kashmir recently. But I think it is also important for this Parliament to call for restraint and dialogue.

The speech of Pakistan’s army chief, General Munir, to representatives of the diaspora a couple of days before the attack is viewed as inflammatory in India. However, there is no evidence of any link between Pakistan and the heinous attack and, in the absence of such evidence, any attack by India and Pakistan, which is itself a frequent victim of terrorist attacks, would be unjustified.

However, one cannot help but reflect on the benefits of democratically elected leaders speaking on behalf of their country rather than military men. In that regard, one might recall that when the Great Leader Jinnah outlined his vision of Pakistan in 1947, he spoke of no distinction between one community and another.

  Jaume Asens Llodrà (Verts/ALE). – Señora presidenta, con el genocidio en Gaza, la historia nos mira y nos va a juzgar.

Albert Camus decía que no hay mejor combate –combate más fuerte– que el del ser humano que se enfrenta al mundo con las manos vacías, pero con la dignidad intacta. Israel ha atacado un buque de ayuda humanitaria: Flotilla por la Libertad. Se trata de un crimen de guerra gravísimo que nos recuerda esa distinción moral, la de quienes tienen las manos limpias porque ayudan a las víctimas, y las de los que las tienen manchadas de sangre porque ayudan a los verdugos y callan ante esos crímenes.

Ningún líder europeo ha dicho nada. ¿Qué habría sucedido si hubiera sido Putin –y no Netanyahu– quien hubiera intentado hundir un barco europeo?

El ministro español Albares ha condenado hoy el ataque al aeropuerto sin víctimas, pero no ha dicho nada del hundimiento del barco ni de los más de mil asesinados –cooperantes, médicos y enfermeras– que intentan salvar vidas. Esas muertes son una mancha indeleble en la conciencia de los líderes europeos que siguen cooperando con el genocidio en Gaza.

Nuestra obligación como ciudadanos es movilizarnos como garantes del Derecho internacional y recordar que, cuando la barbarie se normaliza, la desobediencia es una obligación moral.

  Γεώργιος Αυτιάς (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριε Επίτροπε, η άσκηση οικονομικής πολιτικής, πέραν της ανταγωνιστικότητας και της σταθερότητας —και το ξέρετε πολύ καλά αυτό, γιατί η πατρίδα μου πέρασε από τρία μνημόνια— πρέπει να έχει και έντονο κοινωνικό χαρακτήρα, δηλαδή στήριξη μισθών και συντάξεων, στήριξη φορολογικών ελαφρύνσεων, λύση δημογραφικού, στέγη. Το ξέρετε πολύ καλά, κύριε Επίτροπε, το θέμα, και εσείς, αξιότιμοι συνάδελφοι. Μείωση της ανεργίας και φθηνή ενέργεια.

Προς αυτή την κατεύθυνση, η χώρα μου κινείται με ταχύτατο ρυθμό, αποπληρώνει δάνεια δεκαετίες μπροστά, έχει άριστες κριτικές από οίκους αξιολόγησης και, παράλληλα, πλεόνασμα. Αυτό το πλεόνασμα, λοιπόν, επιστρέφεται στην κοινωνία.

Να ξέρετε, κύριε Επίτροπε, ότι αυτός ο βηματισμός θα συνεχιστεί και το επόμενο χρονικό διάστημα και προς αυτή την κατεύθυνση σας ενημερώνω συνεχώς.

  Anne-Sophie Frigout (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, enfin, après avoir mené l’industrie automobile au bord de la mort, la Commission européenne revient à la raison et nous propose d’offrir un court répit aux constructeurs automobiles, avec davantage de flexibilité dans l’application des objectifs d’émissions de CO2.

Cela fait des années que nous alertons sur les conséquences désastreuses de l’écologie punitive imposée par les technocrates bruxellois. Sans cet assouplissement, nos constructeurs auraient dû payer jusqu’à 15 milliards d’euros d’amende dès cet automne.

Ce revirement partiel est une première victoire, mais le combat continue. Il est essentiel de revenir sur la fin des moteurs thermiques neufs en 2035, une décision absurde et complètement hors sol qui menace nos emplois et le pouvoir d’achat des Européens.

Avec notre groupe des Patriotes pour l’Europe, nous avons déposé des amendements de bon sens pour défendre notre industrie et une transition écologique réaliste. Ils seront, je l’espère, votés par tous les collègues qui déplorent comme nous cette désastreuse politique de sabotage industriel.

Quoi qu’il en soit, nous ne lâcherons rien et nous ne laisserons pas Bruxelles sacrifier l’Europe qui travaille.

  Mélanie Disdier (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, dans mon département du Nord, ArcelorMittal, une industrie structurante du secteur métallurgique, est contrainte de licencier des salariés par centaines. À cause d’une concurrence déloyale et des prix de l’énergie exorbitants, ce sont plus de 600 salariés et, à travers eux, plus de 600 familles qui vont se retrouver en difficulté. Je peux déjà voir venir le programme d’aide de l’Union pour aider face aux désastres de la mondialisation et donc poser un nouveau pansement sur une jambe de bois, mais les Français en ont marre, les Européens en ont marre!

Ce dont l’Europe a besoin, ce n’est pas de cacher la misère, mais de créer les conditions de son éradication. C’est en se donnant les moyens de produire des richesses que l’Europe pourra se redresser. Si vous vous contentez de nier les conséquences désastreuses de votre politique, vous n’arriverez à rien et l’Europe continuera de décliner. Si, à l’inverse, vous regardez la vérité en face et qu’enfin vous décidez de sortir de votre idéologie régressive et criante, peut-être que nous pourrons enfin lancer le chantier du redressement économique de l’Europe.

  Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza (ECR). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, après l’annulation abusive du premier tour des élections présidentielles roumaines de décembre 2024, le premier tour a été de nouveau organisé hier.

L’humiliation et la trahison du peuple roumain par l’annulation de son vote, simplement parce qu’il avait exprimé une préférence européenne, mais souverainiste, ont provoqué une vague de colère sociétale sans précédent contre le parti globaliste au pouvoir en Roumanie depuis 35 ans. Parce que le vote en faveur de Călin Georgescu a été annulé et qu’il lui a été interdit de se présenter à nouveau, les Roumains ont voté massivement pour George Simion.

Le message des Roumains est extrêmement clair: ils exigent d’être respectés tant par les dirigeants de Bruxelles que par leurs représentants nationaux et rejettent de nombreuses décisions absurdes, contraires à leurs intérêts, à leurs traditions, à leur foi et à leur identité, imposées de manière autoritaire. Les Roumains ont commencé à prendre leur pays en main.

Nous sommes un peuple européen avec des aspirations dignes de la grande famille européenne, et en même temps un peuple conservateur, fier.

  Δημήτρης Τσιόδρας (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, τα νέα γεωπολιτικά δεδομένα ωθούν την Ευρώπη από καταναλωτής ασφάλειας να πάρει τις τύχες στα χέρια της και να οικοδομήσει κοινή άμυνα. Κοινή άμυνα, όμως, δεν σημαίνει μόνο κοινή παραγωγή αμυντικών συστημάτων. Σημαίνει κοινή πολιτική άμυνας. Και, σε αυτή την πολιτική, προφανώς χωρούν και τρίτες χώρες. Όμως, χώρες οι οποίες μοιράζονται κοινές αρχές και κοινές αξίες. Όχι χώρες, όπως η Τουρκία, που κατέχουν παράνομα ευρωπαϊκό έδαφος στην Κύπρο, απειλούν χώρες μέλη και έχουν βρεθεί απέναντι στην Ευρώπη σε μια σειρά από περιοχές, όπως στη Μέση Ανατολή, στη Λιβύη και στον Καύκασο.

Η διάθεση εθνικών κονδυλίων για άμυνα αποτελεί, προφανώς, απόφαση κάθε χώρας, όμως δεν μπορεί να μη λαμβάνονται υπόψη οι ευρωπαϊκές αρχές. Διαφορετικά, δεν θα διαμορφώσουμε κοινή πολιτική, που είναι ακριβώς αυτό που χρειαζόμαστε. Οι Ευρωπαίοι πολίτες θα αισθάνονται ασφαλείς όταν νιώθουν ότι τα σύνορα της χώρας τους είναι ευρωπαϊκά σύνορα και ότι η απειλή εναντίον ενός είναι απειλή εναντίον όλων.

  Ştefan Muşoiu (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, dragi colegi, am fost invitat recent să le explic unor elevi de clasa a doua ai unei școli din Slobozia, orașul din România din care provin și eu, despre arhitectura Uniunii Europene și despre rolul său decizional reflectat în viața cetățenilor ei, indiferent de vârsta, sexul, statutul sau preocupările lor.

Bucuria mi-a fost răsplătită de interesul viu al școlarilor și de numeroasele cunoștințe pe care le au despre Uniunea Europeană. La rândul lor, copiii mi-au cerut să dau citire aici, în plen, scrisorii pe care mi-au adresat-o, astfel încât dezvoltarea Uniunii Europene și un viitor mai bun și mai sigur să se edifice și pe interesele lor.

Vă citez: „Vă rugăm să aveți grijă de planeta noastră. Vrem o Europă cu aer și ape curate, cu păduri verzi și cu animale protejate. Ne dorim să trăim în pace, să mergem în siguranță la școală și să ne facem prieteni în toate colțurile continentului. Vrem ca toți copiii europeni să aibă acces la educație, sănătate, să nu sufere de foame sau să fie speriați de război. Vă rugăm să ne ascultați rugămințile, pentru că noi suntem viitorul Europei. Dacă ne ajutați să creștem într-o lume mai bună, promitem că vom avea grijă de ea și de ceilalți când vom fi și noi mari. Vă mulțumim!” Am încheiat citatul.

Întrebarea mea este: le lăsăm o lume mai bună?

  Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.

La prossima seduta si svolgerà domani 6 maggio 2025 ore 9:00.

  Presidente. – L’ordine del giorno è stato pubblicato ed è disponibile sul sito internet del Parlamento europeo.

  Presidente. – Il processo verbale della seduta sarà sottoposto all’approvazione del Parlamento domani.

La seduta è tolta.

(La seduta è tolta alle 22.05)