PRESIDENZA: ROBERTA METSOLA
President

(The sitting opened at 9.07)

  President. – Good morning, can I please ask you to take your seats for this important occasion.

I am very pleased this morning to welcome the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, to our European Parliament for the annual State of the European Union address.

Over the last years we have overcome a financial crisis, a pandemic. We have gone through Brexit and found new ways forward. We have stood up and stood firm against Russia’s illegal and brutal invasion of Ukraine. We are addressing the climate emergency, we have disengaged from toxic Russian energy and we have set the foundations for the years to come. The European Union today is stronger and more united than ever before.

The world is changing and Europe must adapt and change with it too. We must keep striving to make our Europe a place of equality of opportunity, of access, of prosperity – where everyone can reach their potential. We must keep reforming.

We have come a long way, but even so, too many people across our Union are still struggling: too many women still face unfair barriers, too many of our young people still face an uncertain future. We need to keep our people’s concerns at the centre of all our actions.

And to underline how we will do that, it is truly my pleasure to introduce the President of the European Commission, to deliver her 2023 State of the European Union address, which for the first time, I am extremely proud to say, will be interpreted in international sign language.

Dear Ursula, the floor is yours.

  Ursula von der Leyen, President of the Commission. – Madam President, Ministers, honourable Members, in just under 300 days, Europeans will take to the polls in our unique and remarkable democracy. As with any election, it will be the time for people to reflect on the State of our Union and the work done by those that represent them. But it will also be a time to decide on what kind of future and what kind of Europe they want. Among them will be millions of first-time voters, the youngest of whom were born in 2008 – the economic and financial crisis. As they stand in that polling booth, they will think about what matters to them. They will think about the war that rages at our borders. Or the impact of destructive climate change. About how artificial intelligence will influence their lives. Or their chances of getting a house or a job in the years ahead.

Our Union today reflects the vision of those who dreamt of a better future after World War II. A future in which a Union of nations, democracies and people work together to share peace and prosperity. They believed that Europe was the answer to the call of history. And when I speak to the new generation of young people today, I see that same vision for a better future. That same burning desire to build something better. That same belief that, in a world of uncertainty, Europe once again must answer the call of history. And that is what we have to do together.

This starts with earning the trust of Europeans to deal with their aspirations and anxieties. And in the next 300 days we must finish the job that they entrusted us with.

I want to thank this House for its leading role in delivering on the most ambitious transformations this Union has ever embarked on. When I stood in front of you in 2019 with my programme for a green, digital and geopolitical Europe I know that some had doubts. And that was before the world turned upside down with a global pandemic and a brutal war on European soil. But look at where Europe is today. We’ve seen the birth of a geopolitical Union – supporting Ukraine, standing up to Russia’s aggression, responding to an assertive China, investing in partnerships. We now have a European Green Deal as the centrepiece of our economy and unmatched in ambition. We have set the path for a digital transition and become global pioneers in online rights. We have the historic NextGenerationEU, combining EUR 800 billion of investment and reform, and creating decent jobs for today and tomorrow. We have set the building blocks for a Health Union, helping to vaccinate an entire continent and large parts of the world. We’ve started making ourselves more independent in critical sectors like energy, chips and raw materials. I would also like to thank you for the groundbreaking and pioneering work we did on gender equality. As a woman, this means a lot to me. We’ve concluded files that many thought would be blocked forever, like the Women on Boards Directive and the historic accession of the EU to the Istanbul Convention. With the directive on pay transparency we have cast into law the basic principle that equal work deserves equal pay. There is not a single argument why, for the same type of work, a woman should be paid less than a man. But our work is far from over and we must continue pushing for progress together. I know this House supports our proposal on combating violence against women. And here too, I would like that we cast into law another basic principle: ‘no means no’. There can be no true equality without freedom from violence.

(Applause)

And thanks to this Parliament, to Member States and to my team of Commissioners, we have delivered over 90% of the political guidelines I presented in 2019. Together, we have shown that when Europe is bold and united, it gets things done. And our work is far from over, so let’s stand together. Let’s deliver today and prepare for tomorrow.

Honourable Members, four years ago the European Green Deal was our answer to the call of history. And this summer – the hottest ever on record in Europe – was a stark reminder of that. Greece and Spain were struck by ravaging wildfires and were hit again only a few weeks later by devastating floods. And we saw the chaos and carnage of extreme weather from Slovenia to Bulgaria and right across our Union. This is the reality of a boiling planet. The European Green Deal was born out of this necessity to protect our planet. But it was also designed as an opportunity to preserve our future prosperity. We started this mandate by setting a long-term perspective with the climate law and the 2050 goals. We shifted the climate agenda to being an economic one, and this has given a clear sense of direction for investment and innovation. And we have already seen this growth strategy delivering in the short term. Europe’s industry is showing every single day that it is ready to power this transition. Proving that modernisation and decarbonisation can go hand in hand.

In the last five years, the number of clean steel factories in the European Union has grown from zero to 38. We’re now attracting more investment in clean hydrogen than the United States and China together. And tomorrow I will be in Denmark with Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen to see that innovation at first hand. We will mark the launch of the first container ship powered by clean methanol made with solar energy. This is the strength of Europe’s response to climate change. The European Green Deal provides the necessary frame, incentives and investment, but it is the people – the innovators, the inventors, the engineers – who develop the solutions. And this is why, honourable Members, as we enter the next phase of the European Green Deal, one thing will never change: we will keep supporting European industry throughout this transition. They can rely on that.

(Applause)

We started with a package of measures, from the Net-Zero Industry Act to the Critical Raw Materials Act. With our industry strategy, we are looking at the risks and needs of each ecosystem in this transition, and we need to finish this work. And with this we need to develop an approach for each industrial ecosystem. Therefore, starting from this month, we will hold a series of Clean Transition Dialogues with industry. The core aim will be to support every sector in building its business model for the decarbonisation of industry. Because we believe that this transition is essential for our future competitiveness in Europe. And this is just as much about the people and their jobs today. Our wind industry, for instance, is a European success story, but it is currently facing a unique mix of challenges. And this is why we will put forward a European wind power package, working closely with industry and Member States. We will fast-track permitting even more. We will improve the auction systems across the European Union. We will focus on skills, access to finance and stable supply chains. But this is broader than just one sector. From wind to steel, from batteries to electric vehicles, our ambition is crystal clear: the future of our clean tech industry has to be made in Europe. This is our task.

(Applause)

Honourable Members, this shows that when it comes to the European Green Deal, we stay the course, we stay ambitious, and we stick to our growth strategy. And we will always strive for a fair and just transition. That means a fair outcome for future generations to live on a healthy planet. A fair journey for all those impacted – with decent jobs and a solemn promise to leave no one behind.

Just think about manufacturing jobs and competitiveness – a topic we’re discussing a lot these days. Our industries and tech companies like competition, they know that global competition is good for business and that it creates and protects jobs here in Europe. But competition is only true as long as it is fair. Too often, our companies are excluded from foreign markets or are victims of predatory practices. They are often undercut by competitors benefiting from huge state subsidies. We have not forgotten how China’s unfair trade practices affected our solar industry. Many young businesses were pushed out by heavily subsidised Chinese competitors. Pioneering companies had to file for bankruptcy. Promising talents went searching for fortune abroad. This is why fairness in the global economy is so important – because it affects lives and livelihoods. Entire industries and communities depend on it. So we have to be clear-eyed about the risks we face.

Take the electric vehicles sector: it is a crucial industry for the clean economy, with a huge potential in Europe. But global markets are now flooded with cheaper Chinese electric cars. And their price is kept artificially low by huge state subsidies. This is distorting our market. And as we do not accept this distortion from the inside in our market, we do not accept this from the outside. So I can announce today that the Commission is launching an anti-subsidy investigation into electric vehicles coming from China.

(Applause)

Europe is open to competition, but not for a race to the bottom. We must defend ourselves against unfair practices, but equally, it is vital to keep open lines of communication and dialogue with China. Because there are also topics where we can and have to cooperate. De-risk, not decouple: this will be my approach with the Chinese leadership at the EU-China Summit later this year.

Meine Damen und Herren Abgeordnete! In der Europäischen Union sind wir stolz auf unsere kulturelle Vielfalt. Wir sind das „Europa der Regionen“ mit einer ganz besonderen Vielfalt an Sprachen, Musik, Kunst, Traditionen, Handwerk und kulinarischen Köstlichkeiten.

Wir sind auch das Europa einer einzigartigen biologischen Vielfalt. Etwa 6 500 Arten kommen nur allein in Europa vor, nirgendwo anders auf der Welt. Im Norden Europas liegt das Weltnaturerbe Wattenmeer, ein einzigartiger Lebensraum der seltenen Tier- und Pflanzenarten, der ihnen eine Heimat bietet und für Millionen von Zugvögeln überlebenswichtig. Und mit der Ostsee haben wir das größte Brackwassermeer der Welt. Nach Süden schließen sich europäische Tiefebenen an, die von großen Mooren und Feuchtgebieten geprägt waren und sind. Diese Regionen sind wichtige Verbündete gegen das Fortschreiten des Klimawandels. Geschützte Moore und Feuchtgebiete binden große Mengen an Treibhausgasen, sichern nationale Wasserkreisläufe, regionale Wasserkreisläufe und beheimaten eine einzigartige Biodiversität.

Europas Waldreich: Von mächtigen Nadelwäldern im Norden und Osten über die letzten Urwälder von Eichen und Buchen in Mitteleuropa bis hin zu den Korkeichenwäldern Südeuropas liefern alle diese Wälder für uns nicht zu ersetzende Güter und Leistungen. Sie binden Kohlenstoff, sie liefern Holz und andere Produkte, sie erzeugen fruchtbare Böden, filtern Luft und Wasser. Biodiversität und Ökosystemleistungen sind für alle Menschen in Europa überlebensnotwendig.

Der Verlust dieser Natur zerstört nicht nur die Lebensgrundlage, sondern auch das Heimatgefühl von Menschen. Wir müssen sie schützen.

(Beifall)

Und gleichzeitig muss auch die Sicherung unserer Lebensmittelversorgung mit und in der Natur Aufgabe sein und bleiben. Ich möchte heute unseren Landwirten meine Anerkennung aussprechen.

(Beifall)

Meine Anerkennung und mein Dank dafür, dass Sie uns Tag für Tag mit Lebensmitteln versorgen. Gesunde Lebensmittel, für uns in Europa ist diese Aufgabe der Landwirtschaft die Grundlage der Agrarpolitik. Und auch die Unabhängigkeit in der Lebensmittelversorgung ist uns wichtig. Das leisten unsere Landwirte. Das ist nicht selbstverständlich. Denn die Folgen der russischen Aggression gegen die Ukraine, der Klimawandel mit Dürren, Waldbränden und Überflutungen, aber auch neue Verpflichtungen prägen zunehmend die Arbeit der Landwirte und ihre Einkommenssituation. Wir müssen dem Rechnung tragen. Viele setzen sich schon heute für eine nachhaltigere Landwirtschaft ein. Wir müssen zusammen mit den Menschen in der Landwirtschaft diese neuen Herausforderungen bewältigen. Nur so können wir unsere Lebensmittelsicherheit auch in Zukunft absichern.

Das heißt, wir brauchen mehr Dialog und weniger Polarisierung. Und aus diesem Grund möchten wir einen strategischen Dialog zur Zukunft der Landwirtschaft in der Europäischen Union starten. Denn ich bin und bleibe davon überzeugt, dass Landwirtschaft und Naturschutz zusammengehen können. Beides ist wichtig.

(Beifall)

Honourable Members, a fair transition for farmers, families and industry: this is the hallmark of this mandate. And it is all the more important as we face strong economic headwinds. I see three major economic challenges for our industry in the year ahead: labour and skills challenges, inflation, and making business easier for our companies.

The first has to do with our labour market. We have not forgotten the early days of the global pandemic when everyone predicted a new wave of 1930s-style mass unemployment. But we defied this prediction. With SURE – the first ever European short-time work initiative – we saved 40 million jobs. This is and was Europe’s social market economy in action, and I think we can be proud of it.

We then immediately restarted our economic engine thanks to NextGenerationEU. And today we see the results: Europe is close to full employment. Instead of millions of people looking for jobs, millions of jobs are looking for people. Labour and skills shortages are reaching record levels, both here and across all major economies. Seventy-four per cent of SMEs are saying they are facing skills shortages. In the peak of the tourist season, restaurants and bars in Europe are reducing their hours because they cannot find the staff they need. Hospitals are postponing treatments because of a lack of nurses and doctors. And two thirds of European companies are looking for IT specialists – two thirds! At the same time, millions of parents – mostly mothers – are struggling to reconcile work and family because there is no appropriate childcare. And 8 million young people are neither in employment, nor in education, nor in training – 8 million. Their dreams put on hold, their lives on standby. This is not only the cause of so much personal distress. It is also one of the most significant bottlenecks for our competitiveness. Because labour shortages hamper the capacity for innovation, growth and prosperity. So we need to improve access to the labour market, most importantly for young people, for women. And we need qualified migration.

In addition, we need to respond to the deep-rooted shifts in technology, society and demography. And for that we should rely on the expertise of businesses and trade unions, our collective-bargaining partners. It is almost 40 years ago since Jacques Delors convened the Val Duchesse meeting that saw the birth of European social dialogue. Since then, social partners have shaped the Union of today, ensuring progress and prosperity for millions. And as the world around changes faster than ever, social partners must again be at the heart of the future. Together we must focus on the challenges facing the labour market, from skills and labour shortages to new challenges like AI. This is why, together with the Belgian Presidency next year, we will convene a new Social Partner Summit, once again at Val Duchesse. The future of Europe will be built with and by the social partners. This is our task.

(Applause)

The second major economic challenge is persistent high inflation. Christine Lagarde and the European Central Bank are working hard to keep inflation under control. We know that returning to the ECB’s medium-term target will take some time. The good news is that Europe has started bringing energy prices down. We have not forgotten Putin’s deliberate use of gas as a weapon and how it triggered fears of blackout and an energy crisis like in the 70s. Many thought we would not make it through the winter because of a lack of energy. But we made it. We made it because we stayed united, pooling our demand and buying energy together. And at the same time – and different to the 70s – we used this crisis to massively invest in renewable energy and fast-track the clean transition. We used Europe’s critical mass to bring prices down and secure our supply. Just take this: the price of gas in Europe was over EUR 300 per megawatt hour one year ago. It is now around EUR 35: it was 300, today it is 35. So we need to look at how we can replicate this model of power – purchasing power at the market. A model of success also in other fields like critical raw materials and, for example, clean hydrogen.

The third challenge of European companies is about making it easier to do business. Small companies do not have the capacity to cope with complex administration. Or they are held back by lengthy processes. This often means they do less with the time they have, and that they miss out on opportunities to grow. This is why, before the end of the year, we will appoint an EU SME envoy reporting directly to me.

(Applause)

We want to hear directly from small and medium-sized enterprises about their everyday challenges. For every new piece of legislation we conduct a competitiveness check by an independent board. And next month we will make the first legislative proposal towards reducing reporting obligations at the European level by 25%.

(Applause)

Honourable Members, let’s be frank – this will not be easy. And we will need your support because this is a common endeavour for all European institutions. So we also have to work with Member States to match the 25% of reduction also at national level. I think it’s time to make business easier in Europe.

(Applause)

But European companies also need access to key technologies to innovate, develop and manufacture. And this is a question of European sovereignty, as the leaders underlined in Versailles. It is an economic and national security imperative to preserve a European edge on critical and emerging technologies. This European industrial policy also requires common European funding. And this is why, as part of our proposal for a review of our budget, we proposed the STEP platform. With STEP we can boost, leverage and steer EU funds to invest in everything from microelectronics to quantum computing and AI, from biotech to cleantech. Our companies need this support now. So I urge for a quick agreement on our budget proposal, and I know I can count on this House.

And there’s more when it comes to competitiveness. We have seen real bottlenecks along global supply chains, including because of the deliberate policies of other countries. Just think about China’s export restrictions on gallium and germanium, which are essential for goods like semiconductors and solar panels. This shows why it is so important for Europe to step up on economic security – de-risking, not decoupling. And I’m very proud that this concept has found broad support from key partners, from Australia to Japan and the United States. And many other countries around the world want to work together. Many are overly dependent on a single supplier for critical raw materials. Others, from Latin America to Africa, want to develop – rightly so – local value chains, local industries for processing and refining, instead of just shipping their resources abroad. This is why later this year we will convene the first meeting of our Critical Raw Materials Club.

At the same time, we will continue to drive open and fair trade. So far, we have concluded new free trade agreements with Chile, with New Zealand, with Kenya. We should aim to complete deals with Australia, Mexico and Mercosur by the end of this year, and soon thereafter with India and Indonesia. I think smart trade delivers good jobs and prosperity.

(Applause)

Honourable Members, these three challenges – labour, inflation and business environment – come at a time when we are also asking industry to lead on the clean transition. So we need to look further ahead and set out how we remain competitive as we do that. And that is why I have asked Mario Draghi – one of Europe’s great economic minds – to prepare a report on the future of European competitiveness. Because Europe will do ‘whatever it takes’ to keep its competitive edge.

(Applause)

Now, when it comes to making business and life easier, we have seen how important digital technology is. It is telling that we have far overshot the 20% investment target in digital projects in NextGenerationEU. Member States have used that investment to digitise their healthcare systems, justice systems, transport networks, and at the same time Europe has led on managing the risks of the digital world. The internet was born as an instrument for sharing knowledge, opening minds and connecting people. It still is, but it has also given rise to serious challenges – disinformation, spread of harmful content, risks to the privacy of our data. All of this led to a lack of trust and sometimes a breach of fundamental rights of people.

In response, Europe has become the global pioneer of citizens’ rights in the digital world. The DSA and DMA are creating a safer digital space where fundamental rights are protected. They are ensuring fairness, with clear responsibilities for big tech. This is a historic achievement and I think we should be proud of it.

The same should be true for artificial intelligence. It will improve – without any question – healthcare, boost productivity, address climate change. We need it. But we also should not underestimate the real threats coming from AI – mostly GenAI. Hundreds of leading AI developers, academics and experts warned recently in the following words, and I quote: ‘Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.’

AI is a general technology that is accessible, powerful and adaptable for a vast range of uses, both civilian and military. And it is moving faster than even its developers anticipated. So we have a narrowing window of opportunity to guide this technology responsibly. And I believe Europe, together with partners, should lead the way on a new global framework on AI, built on three pillars: guardrails, governance and guiding innovation.

First, guardrails. Our number one priority is to ensure AI develops in a human-centric, transparent and responsible way. And this is why, in my Political Guidelines, I committed to setting out a legislative approach in the first 100 days. You remember we put forward the AI Act, the world’s first comprehensive pro-innovation AI law. And I want to thank this House and the Council for the tireless work on this groundbreaking law. Our AI Act is already a blueprint for the whole world. We must now focus on adopting the rules as soon as possible and turn to implementation.

The second pillar is governance. We are now laying the foundations for a single governance system in Europe. But we should also join forces with our partners to ensure a global approach to understanding the impact of AI on our societies. Now, think about the invaluable contribution of the IPCC for climate. This is a global panel that provides the latest science to policymakers. I believe we need a similar body for AI – on the risks and on its benefits for humanity. Yes, with scientists, but also tech companies and independent experts all around the world. This will allow us to develop a fast and globally coordinated response, building on the work done by the Hiroshima Process and others.

The third pillar is guiding innovation in a responsible way. Thanks to our investment in the last years, Europe has now become a leader in supercomputing, with three out of the five most powerful supercomputers in the world. So we need to capitalise on that. And this is why I can announce today a new initiative to open up our high-performance computers to AI start-ups, that gives them the opportunity to train their models, but in a responsible way. But this will only be one part of our work to guide innovation. What we need is an open dialogue with those that develop and deploy AI. This dialogue happens already in the United States. As you know, seven major tech companies have already agreed to voluntary rules around safety, security and trust. It happens here, where we will work with AI companies so that they voluntarily commit to the principles of the AI Act before it enters into force – because we cannot lose time anymore. So now we should bring all of this work together towards minimum global standards for safe and ethical use of AI. Our people deserve it.

(Applause)

Honourable Members, when I stood here four years ago, I said that if we are united on the inside, nobody will divide us from the outside. And this was the thinking behind the Geopolitical Commission. Our Team Europe approach has enabled us to be more strategic, more assertive and more united. And that is more important than ever.

Our heart bleeds when we see the devastating loss of life in Libya and Morocco after the violent floods and earthquake. Europe will always stand ready to support in any way we can.

Or think about the Sahel region – one of the poorest yet fastest growing demographically. The succession of military coups will make the region more unstable for years ahead. Russia is both influencing and benefiting from the crisis, and the region has become fertile ground for the rise of terrorism. This is of direct concern for Europe, for our security and our prosperity. So we need to show the same unity of purpose towards Africa as we have shown towards Ukraine. This is a must. We need to focus on cooperation with legitimate governments and regional organisations. We need to develop a mutually beneficial partnership which focuses on common issues for Europe and Africa. And this is why, together with HR/VP Borrell, we will work on a new strategic approach to take forward at the next EU-AU Summit.

Honourable Members, history is on the move. Russia is waging a full-scale war against the founding principles of the UN Charter. This has raised immense concerns in countries from Central Asia to the Indo-Pacific. They are worried that in a lawless world they might face the same fate as Ukraine. We see a clear attempt by some to return to bloc thinking – trying to isolate and influence countries in between. And it comes at a time when there is a deeper unease in many emerging economies about the way institutions and globalisation work for them. These concerns are legitimate. These emerging economies – with their people and natural assets – are essential allies in building a cleaner, safer and more prosperous world. So Europe will always work with them to reform and improve the international system. We want to lead efforts to make the rules-based order fairer and make distribution more equal.

This will also mean working with new and old partners to deepen our connections, and here Europe’s offer with Global Gateway is unique. Global Gateway is more transparent, more sustainable and more economically attractive. Just last week when I was in Delhi, we signed I think the most ambitious project of our generation. The India-Middle East-Europe economic corridor. It will be the most direct connection to date between India, the Arabian Gulf and Europe: with a rail link that will make trade between India and Europe 40% faster; with an electricity cable and a clean hydrogen pipeline to foster clean energy trade between Asia, the Middle East and Europe; and with a high-speed data cable to link some of the most innovative digital ecosystems in the world and create business opportunities all along the way. These are state-of-the-art connections for the world of tomorrow: faster, shorter, cleaner. We need more of them.

(Applause)

And Global Gateway is making a real difference: I have seen it in Latin America, South-East Asia and across Africa, from building a local hydrogen economy with Namibia and Kenya, to a digital economy with the Philippines. These are investments in our partners’ economies and they are investments in Europe’s prosperity and security in a fast-changing world.

Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, chaque jour, les conflits, le changement climatique et l’instabilité poussent les populations à chercher refuge ailleurs. J’ai toujours eu la ferme conviction que la migration doit être gérée. Cela nécessite de la patience, des efforts de longue durée avec nos partenaires, et surtout de l’unité au sein de notre Union. Et c’est l’esprit du nouveau pacte sur la migration et l’asile.

Lorsque j’ai pris mes fonctions, il ne semblait pas y avoir de compromis possible en vue. Mais avec le pacte, nous avons trouvé un nouvel équilibre entre la protection des frontières et la protection des personnes, entre souveraineté et solidarité, entre sécurité et humanité. Nous avons écouté tous les États membres. Nous nous sommes penchés sur toutes les routes migratoires et nous avons traduit l’esprit du pacte en solutions pratiques.

Nous avons réagi rapidement et de manière unie à l’attaque hybride de la Biélorussie. Nous avons travaillé en étroite collaboration avec nos partenaires des Balkans occidentaux, et réduit les flux migratoires. Nous avons signé avec la Tunisie un partenariat qui apporte des avantages mutuels, au-delà de la migration, de l’éducation et des compétences professionnelles à l’énergie et la sécurité, et nous voulons maintenant travailler sur des accords similaires avec d’autres pays. Nous avons renforcé la protection des frontières. Les agences européennes ont augmenté leur coopération avec les États membres. Je veux remercier en particulier la Bulgarie et la Roumanie d’avoir montré la voie en mettant en avant les bonnes pratiques en matière d’asile et de retour. Elles l’ont prouvé, la Bulgarie et la Roumanie font partie de notre espace Schengen, laissons-les enfin entrer sans plus de retard!

(Applaudissements)

Mesdames et Messieurs, notre travail sur la migration se fonde sur la conviction que l’unité est à notre portée. Un accord sur le pacte n’a jamais été aussi proche. Le Parlement et le Conseil ont une occasion historique de le faire aboutir. Montrons que l’Europe peut gérer les migrations avec efficacité et compassion. Finissons le travail.

Honourable Members, we know that migration requires constant work, and nowhere is that more vital than in the fight against human smugglers. They attract desperate people with their lies and put them on deadly routes across the desert, or on boats that are unfit for the sea. The way these smugglers operate is continuously evolving. But our legislation is over 20 years old and needs an urgent update. So we need new legislation and a new governance structure. We need stronger law enforcement, prosecution and a more prominent role for agencies – Europol, Eurojust and Frontex. And we need to work with our partners to tackle this global plague of human trafficking. And this is why the Commission will organise an international conference on fighting people smuggling. It is time to put an end to this callous and criminal business.

(Applause)

Honourable Members, on the day when Russian tanks crossed the border into Ukraine, a young Ukrainian mother set off for Prague to bring her child to safety. When the Czech border official stamped her passport, she started to cry. Her son didn’t understand, and he asked his mother why she was crying. She answered, ‘Because we are home.’ ‘But this is not Ukraine,’ he said. So she explained ‘This is Europe.’ On that day, that Ukrainian mother felt that Europe was her home, because home, as she said, ‘is where we trust each other’. And the people of Ukraine could trust their fellow Europeans. Her name was Victoria Amelina. She was one of the great young writers of her generation and a tireless activist for justice. Once her son was safe, Victoria returned to Ukraine to document Russia’s war crimes. One year later she was killed by a Russian ballistic missile while having dinner with other writer colleagues. She was the victim of a Russian war crime, one of the countless attacks against innocent civilians.

Amelina was with three friends that day, including Héctor Abad, a fellow writer from Colombia. He is part of a campaign called ‘Aguanta, Ucrania’ – ‘Resist, Ukraine’ – created to tell Latin Americans of Russia’s war of aggression and attacks on civilians. But Héctor could never imagine becoming the target himself. Afterwards he said he did not know why he lived and she died. But now he is telling the world about Victoria to save her memory and to end this war. And I am honoured that Héctor is with us here today. I want to thank you, Héctor. I want to thank you and I want you to know that we will keep the memory of Victoria and all other victims alive. ¡Aguanta, Ucrania!

(Loud and sustained applause)

Honourable Members we will be at Ukraine’s side every step of the way for as long as it takes. Since the start of the war, four million Ukrainians have found refuge in our Union. And I want to say to them that they are as welcome now as they were in those fateful first weeks. We have ensured that they have access to housing, healthcare, the job market and much more, and, honourable Members, this was Europe answering the call of history. And so I am proud to announce that the Commission will propose to extend our temporary protection to Ukrainians in the European Union. Our support to Ukraine will endure.

(Applause)

We have provided EUR 12 billion this year alone to help pay wages and pensions, to help keep hospitals, schools and other services running. And through our ASAP proposal we are ramping up ammunition production to help match Ukraine’s immediate needs. But we are also looking further ahead. And this is why we have proposed an additional EUR 50 billion for over four years for investment and reforms. This will help build Ukraine’s future to rebuild a modern and prosperous country. And that future is clear to see. This House has said it out loud: the future of Ukraine is in our Union. The future of the Western Balkans is in our Union. The future of Moldova is in our Union.

(Applause)

And I know how important the EU perspective is for so many people in Georgia.

Honourable Members, I started by speaking of Europe responding to the call of history. And history is now calling us to work on completing our Union. In a world where some are trying to pick off countries one by one, we cannot afford to leave our fellow Europeans behind. In a world where size and weight matters, it is clearly in Europe’s strategic interest to complete our Union. But beyond the politics and geopolitics of it, we need to picture what is at stake. We need to set out a vision for a successful enlargement. A Union complete with over 500 million people living in a free, democratic and prosperous Union. A Union complete with young people who can live, study and work in freedom. A Union complete with vibrant democracies in which judiciaries are independent, oppositions are respected and journalists are protected. Because the rule of law and fundamental rights are always and will always be the foundation of our Union in current and in future Member States.

(Applause)

And this is why the Commission has made the Rule of Law reports a key priority. We now work closely with Member States to identify progress and concerns, and make recommendations for the year ahead. This has ensured accountability in front of this House and national parliaments. It has allowed for dialogue between Member States and it is delivering results. I believe that we can do the same for future Member States, and this is why I’m very happy to announce that we will open the Rule of Law reports to those accession countries who get up to speed even faster. This will place them on an equal footing with Member States and support them in their reform efforts, and it would help ensure that our future is a Union of freedom, rights and values for all.

Honourable Member States ... honourable Members!

(Laughter in the Chamber)

The next sentence is, ‘This is in our shared interest: Parliament, Member States and Commission’!

This is in our shared interest. Just think about the great enlargement of 20 years ago, we called it the European Day of Welcomes. And it was a triumph of determination and hope over the burdens of the past. And in the 20 years since, we have seen an economic success story which has improved the lives of millions.

I want us to look forward to the next European Day of Welcomes and the next economic success stories. I know this is not an easy road. Accession is merit-based, and the Commission will always defend this principle. It takes hard work and leadership. But there is already a lot of progress. We have seen the great strides Ukraine has already made since we granted them candidate status, and we have seen the determination of other candidate countries to reform. So honourable Members, it is now time for us to match this determination. And that means thinking about how we get ready for a completed Union. We need to move past old, binary debates about enlargement. This is not a question of deepening integration or widening the Union. We can and we must do both, to give us the geopolitical weight and the capacity to act. And this is what our Union has always done. Each wave of enlargement came with a political deepening. We went from coal and steel towards full economic integration. And after the fall of the Iron Curtain, we turned an economic project into a true Union of people and states.

I believe that the next enlargement must also be a catalyst for progress. We have started to build a Health Union at 27, and I believe we can finish it at 30+. We have started to build a European Defence Union at 27. I am convinced we can finish it at 30+. We have proven that we can be a Geopolitical Union and show that we can move fast when we are united. And I believe that Team Europe also works at 30+.

Honourable Members, I know this House believes the same. And the European Parliament has always been one of the main drivers of European integration. It has been so throughout the decades and it is once again today. And I will always support this House and all of those who want to reform the European Union to make it work better for citizens. And yes, that means including through a European Convention and Treaty change if and where it is needed.

(Applause)

But we cannot – and we should not – wait for Treaty change to move ahead with enlargement. A Union fit for enlargement can be achieved faster. That means answering practical questions about how a Union of over 30 countries will work in practice, and in particular about our capacity to act. The good news is that with every enlargement those who said it would make us less efficient were proven wrong. Take the last few years: we agreed on NextGenerationEU at 27. We agreed to buy vaccines at 27. We agreed on sanctions in record time – also at 27. We agreed to purchase natural gas not only at 27, but already including Ukraine, Moldova and Serbia. So it can be done.

But we need to look closer at each policy and see how they could be affected by a larger Union. And this is why the Commission will start working on a series of pre-enlargement policy reviews to see how each area might need to be adapted to a larger Union. We will need to think about how our institutions would work, how the Parliament and the Commission would work. We need to discuss the future of our budget in terms of what it finances, how it finances it and how it is financed. And we need to understand how to ensure credible security commitments in a world where deterrence matters more than ever.

These are questions we must address today if we want to be ready for tomorrow. And the Commission will play its part. This is why we will put forward our ideas to the leaders’ discussion under the Belgian Presidency. We will be driven by the belief that completing our Union is the best investment in peace, security and prosperity for our continent. So it is time for Europe to once again think big and write our own destiny.

(Applause)

Honourable Members, Victoria Amelina believed that it is our collective duty to write a new story of Europe. This is where Europe stands today. At a time and place where history is written. The future of our continent depends on the choices we make today, on the steps we take to complete our Union. The people of Europe want a Union that stands up for them in a time of great power competition, but also one that protects and stands close to them as a partner and ally in their daily battles. And we will listen to their voice. If it matters to Europeans, it matters to Europe. Think again about the vision and the imagination of the young generation I started my speech with. It is the moment to show them that we can build a continent where you can be who you are, love who you want, aim as high as you want. A continent reconciled with nature and leading the way on new technologies. A continent that is united in freedom and peace.

Once again, this is Europe’s moment to answer the call of history. Long live Europe!

(Applause)

  Manfred Weber, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President of the European Parliament, Madam President of the European Commission, Spanish Presidency, dear colleagues.

Madam President, thank you for your speech today. You are right: the state of the Union is strong, also thanks to your leadership and the good cooperation with this European Parliament. Together – you said it – we made the right decisions in the last years. The decision on the European vaccines – not to have first- and second class Europeans – right. The decision on setting up a recovery fund – right. The decision to make Europe the front-runner against climate change – right. The decision to stop EU funds if the rule of law is not respected – right. The decision on the Brexit agreement, on sanctions against Russia and the decision to support Ukraine and its accession to the European Union – right. Together we are stronger: that is the message we can deliver to European citizens.

Dear Iratxe, dear Stéphane, I also want to thank you for our successful cooperation during these crucial moments. The political engine of Europe works. The von der Leyen majority made it possible. For us, Europe is people’s home. We have to deliver for everyone and leave nobody behind. We must listen to the people’s concerns and not lecture them. And we have to build our bridges and not deepen the divisions in our society, and set people’s priorities for Europe.

I want to speak today about three EPP priorities.

First, this week, the European Commission lowered the economic outlook. Inflation is hitting all Europeans hard, the poorest even harder. That’s the biggest social question today. We need growth. We need jobs. We need decent incomes. We need prosperity. We need a strong industry. That is why your proposals today to reduce the bureaucratic burden with a competitiveness check, with a special envoy, with a moratorium, and to conclude new trade deals and to invest more in innovation is the right way. Competitiveness must be a priority for us. And that’s why I also thank you for the consideration to invite Mario Draghi to bring up further ideas.

And we welcome the new phase of the Green Deal. To be clear, we as the EPP supported 32 out of 34 Green Deal files. We believe in the basic idea of the Green Deal. It is our generation’s obligation to deliver. But we also listen to workers, to farmers, to SMEs, to youth. Producing, for example, more food, not less, is our answer to cut inflation on food prices. The EPP is the farmers’ party and we are the party of the rural areas. Innovating more, not selling our technologies to China is our answer to lead a world free of CO2. We want a European Green Deal, not a Chinese one. We do not want to see, as you said, Chinese electric vehicles benefiting from our ambitious climate approach. We have to think more in business, not in prohibition models for our industry. We need green jobs for Europeans.

And we have to be stronger and tougher when it comes to trade. Tougher because we need to activate now our trade defence instruments and to avoid a second solar panel attack from China, as you said today. And yes, also stronger on trade to build up a union of democracies founded on trade with Mercosur, Australia, India, Africa, and others. For us, trade and values go hand in hand. We have to strengthen our innovation union. Let us pull now the best minds together to be really on the front of innovation when it is about artificial intelligence and cancer research.

A second priority for EPP is migration. Europe today welcomes so many refugees as never before in our history. Look what we do currently for the Ukrainians. We help, we welcome, we protect – that’s the European DNA. But on our external borders, we must decide who can enter and who not. The state decides – and not the smugglers – who can enter into Europe. That’s why we welcome the moratorium of understanding between the European Union and Tunisia. We must work with our neighbours to solve the challenges like we did it also in the past with Turkey, and we must finalise the migration pact. It is a unique, even historic opportunity to give a proper answer. Now it is in our hands. Let’s do it. I count again on the von der Leyen majority to achieve this.

The third point I want to mention: what’s next for our European project. Twenty-five years ago, the euro was born. Despite many who criticised him, Helmut Kohl had a vision for Europe. What is the Europe of today? What is our project? First, Ukraine must win the war. And yes, Ursula, the merit-based approach of enlargement process is key to our approach towards Western Balkans, Moldova and Ukraine. We have to keep our promises.

But we need to go further. De Gasperi already knew what is needed for a good future. That is why he burst into tears when they told him in 1954 that the European defence community was rejected. I think we have to come back to De Gasperi’s idea. We need a European defence union, with a defence commissioner, joint European forces on land, sea and air by 2030, and all this embedded into a strengthened NATO as a strong European pillar. That is the leading project of our generation. We need to lead – that’s the best medicine against extremists. Not fear, anger or even hate shall define the debate. Optimism, vision, values and the readiness for the next step to become a real European Union is the answer. Let’s start today.

  Iratxe García Pérez, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, asistimos al último debate de la legislatura sobre el estado de la Unión, que tiene lugar en un momento de profundos cambios. Presidenta von der Leyen, comisarios, comisarias, gracias por su capacidad de diálogo para alcanzar consensos.

En el Grupo de los socialistas y demócratas estamos muy orgullosos de haber contribuido y de haber liderado históricas decisiones que han puesto a Europa nuevamente en el corazón de nuestra ciudadanía. Frente a la respuesta dada por la crisis financiera en 2008, lastrada por la política de austeridad impuesta por la derecha, la respuesta a la pandemia y a la guerra de Rusia contra Ucrania, liderada por la socialdemocracia, ha estado marcada por la unidad y por la solidaridad.

Ahora nuestra principal prioridad tiene que ser impulsar la reindustrialización para garantizar la autonomía estratégica abierta, con una mirada hacia África y hacia América Latina.

Junto a la reindustrialización, debemos avanzar en la transición ecológica. Frenar los efectos del cambio climático es una obligación legal y una obligación moral. Tenemos que impulsar la reforma del mercado eléctrico para acelerar el despliegue de las energías renovables y reducir los precios de la electricidad.

Señora von der Leyen, frente a quienes apuestan por el negacionismo climático, es fundamental que hoy haya roto su silencio con un mensaje claro de apoyo al Pacto Verde, comprometiéndose a impulsar las leyes sobre la restauración de la naturaleza y la calidad del aire. Vamos a prestar mucha atención a que estas afirmaciones se cumplan.

Pero, para crear riqueza y nuevas oportunidades, tenemos que consolidar el pilar social. Y sobre eso, señora von der Leyen, me hubiera gustado escuchar un mayor compromiso. La inflación, los altos tipos de interés y el encarecimiento de las hipotecas dificultan un proyecto de vida justo. La vivienda pública como derecho y no como bien de especulación, la paridad en el empleo, la prohibición de las prácticas no remuneradas, el ingreso mínimo vital y una estrategia antipobreza con objetivos vinculantes deben ser una realidad.

Y también debemos proteger a las mujeres que sufren violencia de género. Señora von der Leyen, comparto su afirmación sobre el «no es no», por supuesto que sí. Y ahora ha llegado el momento de dar un paso adelante e incorporar la violencia contra las mujeres en la lista de delitos de la Unión Europea.

Nuestra lucha por la justicia es irrenunciable. Porque la cohesión social no solo dignifica a las personas, sino que nos permite actuar con peso y con voz en el mundo. Hoy estamos unidos frente al agresor. Putin es un criminal que pasará sus últimos días en un tribunal internacional. Y la Comisión debe presentar, sin más retraso, una propuesta para invertir los activos rusos congelados en la reconstrucción de Ucrania.

Estamos unidos, pero no caigamos en la autocomplacencia. Ha llegado el momento de reforzar la unidad de la Unión Europea. Tenemos que agilizar la toma de decisiones avanzando hacia una mayoría cualificada y también debemos seguir apoyando al resto de países de nuestra vecindad que quieren unir su destino al de la Unión Europea.

Y a la vez que afrontamos los principales desafíos, necesitamos dar solución a otros retos que marcarán el futuro de Europa: el Pacto sobre Migración y Asilo, para evitar la pérdida de vidas en el Mediterráneo. Y permítame decir aquí una cosa, señora von der Leyen, el dinero de los contribuyentes europeos no puede terminar en los bolsillos de Gobiernos que están atacando los derechos fundamentales de las personas.

Necesitamos una capacidad fiscal permanente para afrontar futuras crisis, una reforma de las reglas fiscales, una mayor justicia social. Y es imprescindible una economía no solo más competitiva. No sirve solo crecer económicamente. Ese crecimiento económico se tiene que traducir en que la gente viva mejor, en que se distribuyan los beneficios para todos y no los privilegios para unos pocos.

Señorías, vivimos en la Unión Europea, un proyecto de vida que ha construido el mejor lugar para la democracia, los derechos, la igualdad y la solidaridad. Hoy, la alianza de la derecha y la extrema derecha representa un fracaso rotundo que va hacia la involución.

Señor Weber, en política es fundamental ser coherente y ser coherente significa que las palabras vayan acordes con los hechos. Usted no puede apelar y referirse a la mayoría von der Leyen y luego sumar sus votos a la extrema derecha para conformar Gobiernos y para conformar mayorías en este Parlamento. Eso no se puede hacer.

Pero no hay marcha atrás. Seguiremos construyendo una Unión próspera, abierta e integradora; una Unión orgullosa en su pluralidad y su diversidad; una Unión que abraza el Estado de Derecho, firme en la lucha por la igualdad y la justicia social; una Unión de tolerancia y progreso.

Siempre hay tiempo para un sueño. Hace 70 años, Europa soñó su mejor destino y lo hizo realidad. Hoy, un año más, vivimos ese sueño. Sigamos haciéndolo realidad.

  Stéphane Séjourné, au nom du groupe Renew. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Présidente de la Commission, chers collègues, cette session plénière sur l’état de l’Union n’est pas comme les autres. C’est la dernière de la mandature, c’est la dernière avant les élections européennes. Vous l’avez dit, Madame la Présidente, ces quatre dernières années ont été parmi les plus marquantes de l’histoire récente de la construction européenne. Renew Europe est fier d’avoir été en responsabilité pendant cette période, fier d’avoir été utile au sein d’une coalition qui n’était pas évidente, mais qui a rassemblé les pro-européens de bonne volonté. Je voudrais également remercier les groupes qui ont travaillé à des majorités, parfois différentes, à droite et à gauche, parfois coordonnées en format «Von der Leyen», avec les critiques qu’a formulées ma collègue. Mais nous avons réussi à avancer, avancer de manière coordonnée, avancer pour l’Europe.

Si je veux résumer l’état d’esprit de mon groupe, nous sommes fiers du bilan commun. Nous souhaitons que ces derniers mois soient utiles, à l’image de ces quatre dernières années. Mais Renew Europe est aussi lucide sur certaines priorités, et certaines priorités de mon groupe – nous n’y sommes pas encore, j’y reviendrais à la fin de mon intervention, Madame la Présidente.

Si je commence par les éléments positifs, je considère que l’Europe a été utile à nos concitoyens, plus que jamais dans cette période: elle a été là dans la pandémie, elle a été là face à l’agression russe en Ukraine pour unir les Européens. L’Europe est là pour les générations futures. Le pacte vert fait de l’Europe le continent le plus exemplaire en matière de transition écologique. Nous n’avons pas à avoir l’écologie honteuse. Je ne connais aucune autre chambre parlementaire dans le monde qui a pris des décisions aussi courageuses que celles que nous avons prises ces quatre dernières années sur ce sujet.

Nous sommes là pour nos travailleurs, nos entreprises. La réindustrialisation du continent est désormais une réalité enclenchée, au nom de notre souveraineté, de nos emplois, du pouvoir d’achat. Nous sommes là pour chacun de nos concitoyens sur leurs droits. Le «Far West» numérique est désormais régulé par des lois européennes. L’indépendance de nos médias sera bientôt garantie par une législation spécifique. Nous sommes là pour la sécurité collective et le fondement d’une défense commune. Et sur tous ces sujets, nous irons jusqu’au bout – je pense notamment au pacte vert.

Si je continue sur ce qui nous reste à faire – vous l’avez dit également, Madame la Présidente –, il faut trouver une solution durable pour les questions migratoires. Cela fait partie des textes que nous devons finaliser, avec le paquet énergie, avec une réponse industrielle européenne. Ces neuf derniers mois, je le répète, devront être utiles. Et par ailleurs, je me félicite que vous ayez également entendu mon groupe. Être utile ne veut pas dire réguler pour réguler. Nous devons réduire la bureaucratie qui pèse sur nos citoyens, sur nos entrepreneurs. Être utile, c’est aussi investir à la hauteur de nos objectifs. Les transitions vertes et digitales ne seront réussies que si nos lois sont simples, intelligibles et financées.

Madame la Présidente, pour terminer, un sujet qui fâche. Mon groupe, vous le savez, est déterminé à défendre le modèle démocratique. Je mesure le travail qui a été fait par nos commissaires. Je me tourne également vers les représentants du Conseil, en tant que colégislateurs, nous avons vu que parfois, ça traînait des pieds du côté des chefs d’État et de gouvernement. L’Europe ne répond pas encore aux appels désespérés des juges polonais et hongrois, de la presse indépendante, de la société civile. Je reste sidéré quand des procureurs italiens changent l’état civil d’enfants et donc retirent des droits à des mères parce qu’elles sont lesbiennes. Mon groupe appelle à toujours plus d’efficacité, toujours plus de simplicité, toujours plus de réformes. Nous savons que l’unanimité est un poison. Rendez-vous compte: l’ampleur de notre soutien ukrainien, notre solidarité commune, dépendent aujourd’hui de Viktor Orban. Madame la Présidente, nous refusons le basculement de l’Europe, nous refusons l’orbanisation de notre continent. C’est un réel danger, pas seulement du point de vue politique, mais aussi du point de vue économique et social. Le risque de corruption endémique, le risque de voir des communautés prises pour cible: le contraire de notre ADN européen, en somme; je dirais même le contraire de notre projet civilisationnel pour notre Europe.

Madame la Présidente, vous vouliez une commission géopolitique, vous l’avez évoqué dans votre discours. Elle a été, par le gré de l’histoire, bien plus que cela. Mais attention, les démocraties meurent rarement des menaces extérieures, elles meurent souvent des menaces intérieures. À nous, démocrates, d’agir à temps. Merci pour votre discours. Nous en partageons l’essentiel, et que ces neuf prochains mois soient utiles.

  Philippe Lamberts, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, President von der Leyen, dear colleagues, it is not without emotion, having been in this Parliament for 14 years, that I am taking part today in my last State of the Union debate. For ten years, I witnessed the European Union blinded by economic orthodoxy, deaf to the social and climate emergencies.

But 2019 marked the turning point. For the first time in its history, the European Union made the fight against climate change a top priority. And against all odds, the European Green Deal withstood the pandemic and the war that rocked the European Union. Each time it was put front and centre in our response. We owe very much of this to you, Madam President, to your vision, your persistence, and your leadership.

Unsurprisingly, those who never embraced the European Green Deal in the first place are now calling for a pause, a moratorium to weaken its ambition in the name of protecting our competitiveness, if you see what I mean. To them, I say this: we are not above nature. Humanity is part of nature. Whether we like it or not, there are limits to what our planet can take and to what it can give.

Respecting those limits is not the Greens’ hobbyhorse. It is a question of survival. And this struggle for survival, all too many European citizens are now seeing first hand. Can you imagine a Greek firefighter walking away from the raging inferno or a rescue worker when floods hit Slovenia saying: ‘let’s take it easy’? No, they are giving everything they have to get these climate events under control. We owe it to them and to every citizen caught up in the extremes unleashed by climate change to act with all we have. We have waited for too long.

So stand firm, Madam President! We cannot content ourselves with just implementing what has already been decided, which in itself is not enough to meet the 1.5-degree warming target. So much remains to be done.

Instead of carbon sinks, our agriculture and forestry have become net carbon emitters. Our land, water and air are so polluted by forever chemicals, heavy metals, fine particles, plastics that they are causing massive death and disease. And this leads to a collapse in biodiversity, which endangers our lives and livelihoods.

But as you said, Madam President, the ecological transition is not just a necessity. It is the single biggest economic opportunity for Europe. Shying away from it would make us followers, also-rans, condemned to import the solutions we need from the rest of the world. The key to competitiveness, dear colleagues, is for economies to embrace the green transition, to support entrepreneurs who want to lead it and to ditch the rent-seekers. This is the surest route to EU prosperity.

La viabilité politique du pacte vert pour l’Europe dépendra cependant de notre capacité à demander plus à ceux qui ont le plus et moins à ceux qui ont le moins. Car s’il y a des limites à ce que nous pouvons faire subir à la planète, il y en a tout autant aux injustices que nos sociétés peuvent tolérer. Crise financière, crise de l’euro, pandémie, guerre en Ukraine, crise énergétique, ce sont à chaque fois les citoyens ordinaires qui passent à la caisse pendant que les détenteurs de capitaux accumulent sans relâche. Même Christine Lagarde le dit, le gros de l’inflation actuelle est dû au gonflement abject – mon adjectif – des profits des grandes entreprises.

Vous m’objecterez sans doute, Madame la Présidente, que les grands leviers de la justice sociale et fiscale sont du ressort des États membres, et c’est vrai. Mais si, par le passé, la Commission européenne a su pousser nos gouvernements à adopter des réformes injustes, elle peut tout autant aujourd’hui les inciter à faire ce qui est juste. Elle dispose de moyens d’action directe. Prenons le cas du logement. La plupart des jeunes ne savent plus se loger dans les villes où ils travaillent. En cause, la spéculation causée par la financiarisation du secteur immobilier. Bonne nouvelle: la régulation financière est une compétence de l’Union. Qu’attendez-vous donc pour agir sur ce front explosif? Pas plus que la nature, les biens communs ou l’énergie, le logement ne peut être un simple actif financier laissé aux aléas du marché.

Si la transition écologique et solidaire doit être notre projet fédérateur, ne perdons jamais de vue que notre Union est d’abord une communauté de valeurs. Or, partout en Europe, les libertés fondamentales sont en danger, que ce soit la remise en cause des droits des femmes, le sous-financement et la mise sous tutelle de la justice, l’hyper-concentration des médias, l’espionnage de journalistes, d’activistes, de leaders politiques ou encore les violences policières à l’encontre de manifestants et de personnes racisées. Madame la Présidente, malgré les pressions juridiques et financières que vous avez exercées sur deux États membres, les dérives se poursuivent et s’accentuent. En tant que gardienne du droit européen, la Commission va devoir redoubler d’efforts, et pas seulement à l’égard de la Pologne ou de la Hongrie.

Speaking of fundamental values, the one that comes first in Article 2 is human dignity, and there is no greater denial of this fundamental value than the way we treat people seeking protection from us.

Today, European asylum policy boils down to making Europe a fortress and relying on autocrats, dictators and failed states to keep refugees and migrants away from our shores. This has made smugglers rich and turned the Mediterranean into a mass grave. And I’m afraid, Madam President, that I don’t share your optimism. The EU’s pact on asylum and migration does not fundamentally change this deadly logic. Our Union has a duty, a responsibility and I would even say a need to take its fair share in welcoming forcibly displaced people. And it can, if we only harness our collective capabilities. Our moral credit is at stake, not least in Africa.

For decades, the fear of migration has been instrumentalised by the far right. And now it seems that the fight against climate change has become their new target. But what concerns me even more, Madam President, is the fact that a growing number of your party colleagues are embracing the same strategy, the same language, in the hope, probably, of bringing voters back into the EPP fold.

Several EPP member parties are considering or have chosen to form coalitions with far-right parties, and some of their representatives were not even ashamed to admit to me that they ‘share so much with them’ in terms of values and programmes.

So, in the name of the Greens/European Free Alliance, I appeal you: don’t let Robert Schumann’s party drift away from its values – the values on which the European Union was founded.

Chers collègues, et c’est ma conclusion, la pandémie et la guerre sur fond de bouleversement climatique, ont convaincu la majorité de nos concitoyens que ce n’est qu’ensemble, que nous, Européens, pourrons relever les défis de ce siècle. L’Union européenne a retrouvé crédit à leurs yeux, au point que même ceux ici – ils ne sont plus très nombreux, d’ailleurs – qui plaidaient la sortie de leur pays n’oseraient plus le faire ouvertement aujourd’hui.

À nous de consolider cet acquis en gardant le cap et en nous assurant que les efforts seront justement répartis. C’est à ce prix que notre union sera un espace de paix et de liberté, à la prospérité à la fois partagée et durable. Nos concitoyens, et en particulier une jeunesse légitimement anxieuse de son avenir, n’en attendent pas moins de nous. Sachons susciter et garder leur confiance.

  Ryszard Antoni Legutko, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, is the EU in better shape today than, shall we say, 20 years ago? The answer is an emphatic ‘no’.

To paraphrase Shakespeare’s Hamlet, something is rotten in the State of the Union. There is more than ever instability, conflict, tension and uncertainty. Let me quote a recent issue of The Economist: ‘Inflation remains hot [...] officials are increasingly worried by the cloudy growth outlook [...] the bloc is facing recession.’

It is, to your credit, Madam President, that you initiated and continue the sanctions against Russia. But again, one cannot be all too happy. Before the invasion, the Commission did not dare to do something about the German-Russian energy alliance. Through this refusal to act, the Commission bears some responsibility for the depth of the energy crisis.

The migration policy has been a failure. Despite the Commission’s hustle and bustle and fiery rhetoric, the people-smuggling business is thriving and the disintegration of the social fabric continues. In Western Europe, the number of thefts, robberies and rapes has soared: about 30 rapes for 100 000 inhabitants in France and Belgium, compared to less than 2 in my country.

The Green Deal – the Commission’s flagship – instead of being a vehicle of growth, is a costly extravaganza: over EUR 300 billion by 2030 with rising living costs, energy bills and other unpleasant aspects of the Commission’s and Parliament’s fantasies. The Commission has been unsurprisingly silent on this matter.

The last sinister fantasy is the Nature Restoration Law. The curator of these harmful reveries, Mr Timmermans, has taken a convenient exit and seeks his luck in national politics. I hope that voters will give him what he deserves.

Another financial extravaganza has been the common debt of EUR 800 billion by 2026. We already know the predictions were erroneous. The cost of all this will be at least twice as high. The EU budget is in shambles: -EUR 66 billion as of today. You apparently calculated that the markets would have had more trust in the financial credibility of the EU than that of the Member States. Unfortunately, you mistook the EU propaganda for the real thing.

And finally, politics. When I compare the past Commission with yours, I see a continuous slide towards oligarchy with a growing disregard for any restraints the Treaty stipulated. The Commission turned into a partisan machine, meddling in national politics, trying to topple the governments they don’t like.

You, yourself, Madam President, threatened the Italian voters before the elections. Let me quote you: ‘If things go in a difficult direction, we have tools’, you said. Let me remind you, you don’t have any tools to interfere with the democratic process of the nation state. Mr Lukashenko has such tools. You don’t.

You made the rule of law a caricature. There is an old proverb: ‘Physician, heal thyself.’ Heal thyself, Madam President. For one thing, let the Commission stop juggling with the legal basis, claiming, for instance, that taxes are not taxes but contributions, thus sidestepping the necessary procedures, and perhaps start by providing all the documents relevant to the vaccines deal, including the text messages. That would be a good example of how to be a law-abiding person.

And the last point. Believe it or not, but this Commission will go in history as one that tried to regulate the language of the European Union and to establish a sort of officially sanctioned indoctrination. For instance, by abolishing certain words such as ‘Christmas’. Yes, you withdrew from this idiotic move, but the fact is that the bureaucrats were planning it – a large bunch of the European Commission had been working on how we should avoid the word ‘Christmas’. I mean, this is simply outrageous.

But this gives us an insight into how the Commission works, and what we see should be a warning to us all.

  Marco Zanni, a nome del gruppo ID. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Presidente von der Leyen, non è che mi aspettassi i fuochi d'artificio dal suo discorso, che mi è parso più un manifesto elettorale che lancia la campagna per la sua riconferma alla Presidenza. Però, sinceramente, sono un po' disarmato nel pensare che le armi che lei ci ha annunciato in risposta alle crisi che oggi i cittadini europei stanno vivendo, siano tutto quello che la Commissione europea ha in programma di fare nei prossimi mesi.

E vado a snocciolare punto per punto quelli che sono stati i temi che lei ha sollevato, a partire dal Green Deal. Oggi abbiamo un'occasione storica, perché serve meno ideologia e più pragmatismo nel fare questa transizione, e con la dipartita del Commissario Timmermans, lei ha l'occasione di rimettere questa transizione su un binario davvero giusto, partendo da delle considerazioni che devono essere dette chiaramente: quando parliamo di cambiamento climatico non è l'Unione europea il problema, il problema non sono i nostri agricoltori, il problema non sono le nostre imprese, il problema non sono i nostri proprietari di immobili.

Ci vuole davvero meno ideologia e più pragmatismo, altrimenti l'unico vincitore di questa transizione non sarà l'ambiente, non saranno i cittadini europei, ma sarà la Cina e ne abbiamo le avvisaglie. E passo a questo punto. Lei ha annunciato che la Commissione ha intenzione di agire su questo problema, con un'indagine sui sussidi. La mia domanda è: davvero oggi, nel 2023, la Commissione ha ancora bisogno di lanciare un'indagine su questo tema, quando è chiaro che la Cina fa concorrenza sleale? Lo sa anche mio figlio che non ha ancora cinque anni, quindi non ci aspettiamo indagini: ci aspettiamo che la Commissione europea faccia quello che deve fare per proteggere le nostre imprese, cioè imporre dazi a chi non rispetta le regole.

E passo poi alla seconda proposta che lei ha annunciato: questa indagine sull'impatto della burocrazia e – se ho capito bene – ha intenzione di nominare un inviato speciale che farà da collettore tra lei e le piccole e medie imprese. Ancora una volta rimango di sasso: non abbiamo bisogno di un inviato speciale. Questi, gli eletti di quest'Aula, sono gli inviati speciali. Noi che parliamo tutti i giorni con le imprese non abbiamo bisogno di fare indagini, di fare i comitati o di fare tante altre belle cose. Serve meno burocrazia, le imprese ci chiedono meno leggi, leggi fatte meglio e più libertà, cosa che sembra ormai non più una priorità per la Commissione europea.

E l'ultimo punto, l'immigrazione. Sono stati annunciati tanti provvedimenti, tante iniziative, ma ancora oggi a me non pare che l'Unione voglia risolvere questo problema e che a qualcuno faccia comodo che il peso di flussi migratori insostenibili ricada solo su pochi paesi. Questo punto è molto semplice: finché la linea dell'Unione europea su questo tema non sarà chiara, cioè che chi non ha diritto a entrare nell'Unione europea deve stare fuori, che l'immigrazione illegale è un reato e che non esiste che si possa parlare di redistribuzione se non si riducono le partenze, il problema non lo risolveremo mai.

Mi auguro davvero che in questi mesi si cambi rotta e si cerchi di dare più spazio a quello che ci chiedono i cittadini e che non ha bisogno di comitati o inviati ma è abbastanza chiaro.

  Martin Schirdewan, im Namen der Fraktion The Left. – Frau Präsidentin! Politischer Erfolg bemisst sich ja nicht in schönen Sonntagsreden, Frau von der Leyen, sondern in der Lebensrealität der Mehrheit der Menschen.

Sie benutzen in Ihren Reden ja immer gern große Worte. Heute wurde der Ruf der Geschichte bemüht. Wir sprachen vor einiger Zeit vom Man-on-the-Moon-Moment beim Klimaschutz, von sozialer Gerechtigkeit, Steuergerechtigkeit, Tierschutz, Respekt und Würde. Das sind Begriffe, die Sie in ihren Reden immer wieder benutzen. Und dann machen Sie gefühlt 100 000 neue Initiativen, die angekündigt werden. Im Grunde genommen – kurz gesagt – versprechen sie den Europäerinnen und Europäern in jeder Rede das Blaue vom Himmel.

Aber die Realität sieht anders aus. Ein einfacher Arbeiter in der EU hat im letzten Jahr allein circa 4 % Reallohnverlust hinnehmen müssen. Dieser Arbeiter kann sich den wohlverdienten Urlaub mit seiner Familie nicht mehr leisten, weil Strom, Heizung und Miete immer teurer werden. Der versteht doch die Welt nicht mehr, wenn Sie hier mit keinem einzigen Wort darüber reden, dass die Situation der Beschäftigten immer härter wird in der Europäischen Union.

Die alleinerziehende Mutter empfindet das Gerede von der Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der europäischen Wirtschaft, und darüber müssen wir diskutieren, aber die alleinerziehende Mutter empfindet dieses Gerede als den reinen Zynismus, weil sie tagtäglich darum kämpft, die mittlerweile während ihrer Präsidentschaft um 34 % teurer gewordenen Lebensmittel zu kaufen, um ihre Kinder zu ernähren. Und Sie haben nichts gegen die Lebenshaltungskostenkrise gemacht. Sie haben keine Preisdeckel eingezogen. Sie haben die Spekulation nicht verhindert, Sie haben sie nicht beendet. Sie haben der Preistreiberei keinen Riegel vorgeschoben und Sie haben keine nachhaltige Übergewinnsteuer eingeführt.

Die Situation ist derzeit, dass – die Zahlen sind die jüngsten Zahlen – 95 Millionen Menschen in der Europäischen Union von Armut bedroht sind. Das ist doch die Bilanz, an der Sie sich messen lassen müssen.

Ich habe einen Rentner in meinem Wahlkreis in Ostdeutschland getroffen. Der bekommt eine monatliche Rente von 660 € ausgezahlt, nachdem er sein Leben lang hart geschuftet hat. Das ist zum Leben zu wenig und zum Sterben zu viel. Und so geht es jedem vierten Rentner in der Europäischen Union, der seinen Lebensabend nicht in Würde verbringen kann und so viele Lichtjahre von einem Lebensabend in Würde entfernt ist wie diese Europäische Kommission von der Lebensrealität der meisten Menschen.

Aus dem Haus Europa, in dem alle ein Zuhause haben sollten, ist für viele mittlerweile eine abgewirtschaftete Bruchbude geworden, und das ist auch Ihre politische Verantwortung, Frau von der Leyen. Ihr Man on the Moon stürzt längst im freien Fall ohne Fallschirm auf den harten Boden der Realität. Und was machen Sie? Sie rüsten auf – da steht meine Fraktion dagegen. Und gegen jede wirtschaftliche Vernunft halten Sie am kaputten Energiemarkt fest und an der europäischen Schuldenbremse und pflegen Steueroasen. Aber wir reden hier doch nicht über Guerilla Gardening, sondern darüber, dass Sie auch in der Zukunft wieder eine Spar- und Kürzungspolitik fortsetzen wollen und damit trotz all der schönen Worte, die Sie hier heute verloren haben, Zukunftsinvestitionen, die Stärkung der öffentlichen Daseinsvorsorge und auch den Kampf gegen Armut effektiv verhindern. Das grenzt doch mittlerweile an politische Realitätsverweigerung.

Die Leute sind zu Recht wütend, denn zur selben Zeit, während sie von Existenzsorgen geplagt werden, machen die großen Konzerne, Energieunternehmen, Lebensmittelkonzerne, Wohnungskonzerne und vor allem aber die Rüstungsindustrie immer weiter ihre obszönen Profite. Und ich frage mich, Frau von der Leyen, wie Sie nachts manchmal – und Sie nehmen es nicht persönlich – überhaupt noch schlafen können?

11 000 Menschen sind seit 2020 an den EU-Außengrenzen gestorben. Acht Tote an jedem einzelnen Tag. Und Sie reden dann hier von Ihrem Migrationspakt, reden von Respekt und Würde und von Humanität. Frau von der Leyen, Abschiebelager, zerstörte Familien, die Militarisierung der Grenzpolizei und tödliche Pushbacks haben rein gar nichts mit Respekt und Würde zu tun.

Also hören Sie auf mit Ihren Sonntagsreden. Machen Sie endlich eine Politik für die Mehrheit der Menschen. Dieser Kommission mangelt es an Respekt gegenüber der Lebenssituation der normalen Leute. Und wer ein Europa will, das sozial gerecht, demokratisch, ökologisch und friedlich ist, der muss sich der Politik dieser Kommission entgegenstellen und es den Reichen und Konzernen nehmen.

  Tiziana Beghin (NI). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Presidente von der Leyen, in questi quattro anni lei ha dimostrato di essere più una maratoneta che una velocista. E questo in politica è un merito. Mi permetto però un suggerimento: anche in questo ultimo anno di lavoro continui a perseguire unicamente il bene comune e il futuro dell'Unione europea e non ascolti le sirene che provengono dalle capitali europee.

Il nostro e il suo traguardo non sia il Consiglio europeo del giugno 2024, ma il 2050, data in cui dobbiamo raccogliere i frutti delle politiche di oggi. Per il Movimento 5 Stelle l'Europa non deve prendere a modello l'austerity del 2011-2012, ma il Next Generation del 2020.

Il patto di stabilità non può dunque essere il copia e incolla degli errori del passato ma deve diventare il trampolino di lancio per un'Europa più verde, più tecnologica, più sociale e più giusta.

Presidente, la guerra in Ucraina è la principale minaccia per il futuro e la vita dei cittadini europei. Fermiamola! Solo diplomazia e dialogo potranno riportare la pace nel nostro continente, non le armi.

  Ursula von der Leyen, President of the Commission. – Madam President, thank you very much for the replies and the discussion that we have started here together. As you know, with the State of the Union, it is not only the speech to be delivered, but there is a letter of intent that I have put forward and there are a limited number also of additional initiatives. Let me address some of them that have been mentioned here.

My first point is on the topic of the rule of law. The rule of law is the glue of our Union. And we’ve brought forward the historic NextGenerationEU package because we knew it was of paramount importance that we had to invest in the European Union. This is common European Union taxpayers’ money and, therefore, there is a strong obligation that we connect it with necessary reforms in the respective Member States.

And if in Member States there are issues of the rule of law, we’ve connected it to the investment of NextGenerationEU. And it is absolutely not acceptable that a Member State wants to access the funds of NextGenerationEU without having the reforms that we have agreed upon when closing the contract for NextGenerationEU. So if you want to have taxpayers’ money as investment in your Member State, you have to abide by the rule of law and you have to do the reforms that are necessary.

(Applause)

Second point, on our defence capabilities. First of all, let me step one step backwards, looking at Ukraine. We all know we want peace in Ukraine, but it has to be a just peace and a lasting one. And for that, Ukraine needs security guarantees. Kyiv must be able, and have the capabilities, to deter a new Russian attack.

And here Europe comes into play by ensuring Ukraine’s long-term security, which has strong implications for our defence industry. Europe’s defence industry is running at maximum speed – we know this – but it is not enough, because to empower Ukraine’s deterrence, we must step up the production of our military capabilities. And this is what we are doing with ASAP, for example, the Act in Support of Ammunition Production. And I would like to thank the European Parliament and the Council for passing it in record time.

We must also look beyond this ammunition topic, to air defence, maritime, space and cyber, for example. And these capabilities are European by nature. No single Member State can alone develop them, so they require European cooperation, not only on research and development, but also on the industrial front.

And this is why we will work on a European defence industry strategy to look into how we can support our industry and ramp up the production of critical equipment, of course in synergy with NATO – this is absolutely paramount. No industrial bottlenecks should prevent us from protecting Europe and giving our full support to Ukraine.

And my third point I wanted to address – because it was mentioned by many of you – is the European Green Deal. Politics is always also personal. During this mandate, since 2019, I was blessed in my family to have three grandchildren. I was not a grandmother before that. And since my mandate, the experience of welcoming three little babies to this world changes also the deep conviction that you have for the future of these children.

Because my perspective is a very limited one, but if I look at these children or babies, toddlers that they are, in 2030 they will be of school age. In 2050 perhaps they want to have a family and children. And now I, of course, over and over ask myself and you do the same: will they have a spring, a summer, a fall and a winter like we had when we were children? How will their future be? Will they be able to have their own family? How will the world be?

And I know this is definitely linked also to how we will decide today about the European Green Deal. So what I can only say here in front of you, honourable Members, is that I am deeply, personally committed to the European Green Deal. I know it is paramount for our survival, but it is also paramount for our future prosperity – if we make it, and we can make it together if we stand united.

(Applause)

  José Manuel Albares Bueno, presidente en ejercicio del Consejo. – Señora presidenta, señora presidenta de la Comisión, señorías, eurodiputadas y eurodiputados del Parlamento Europeo, señoras y señores, comparezco hoy en nombre del Consejo en la casa de la democracia europea, el Parlamento Europeo. Todos ustedes son el reflejo de la diversidad y la pluralidad de Europa y también el contacto más directo de la Unión con su ciudadanía.

Quiero agradecer, en primer lugar, a la presidenta von der Leyen su discurso y su liderazgo a lo largo de toda la legislatura. Son años de desafío en Europa: la pandemia, ahora la agresión rusa a Ucrania... La Unión ha sabido estar a la altura. También gracias a la presidenta, gracias también a la Comisión y gracias también a este Parlamento Europeo y a sus eurodiputadas y eurodiputados.

En estos momentos decisivos para Europa, la agresión rusa a Ucrania pone de relieve el valor de la unidad europea y, por eso, exactamente el primer día de la Presidencia española, el presidente del Gobierno de España, Pedro Sánchez, transmitió un mensaje claro en el Parlamento ucraniano en Kiev: estamos y estaremos con el pueblo ucraniano el tiempo que sea necesario. Y hace unas semanas reforzamos juntos en Toledo nuestro compromiso de ayuda en favor de la paz en Ucrania.

Nos encontramos en un momento decisivo igualmente desde el punto de vista del calendario europeo. La Presidencia española es la última completa antes de las elecciones europeas y del próximo ciclo legislativo europeo. Debemos negociar una gran cantidad de expedientes clave desde el punto de vista de la integración europea, que suponen grandes avances en el ámbito social, en el ámbito ambiental y en el ámbito económico porque repercuten positivamente en el bienestar de nuestros conciudadanos. Y es fundamental que las relaciones entre las instituciones sigan siendo lo más fluidas posibles. Comisión y Parlamento son fundamentales para que la Presidencia española tenga éxito. Consciente de ello, nuestra Presidencia trabaja con la máxima determinación, imbuida de la profunda vocación europeísta que mueve al Gobierno de España. Hemos realizado ya veinticinco trílogos. El ritmo aumentará todavía más en estos meses venideros. La Unión cuenta con toda la dedicación de la Presidencia española para hacer avanzar el proyecto europeo con ambición.

Me alegra constatar que los elementos principales que ha destacado hoy aquí la presidenta von der Leyen están en línea con las prioridades de la Presidencia española.

La primera, la reindustrialización verde y la autonomía estratégica abierta. No se trata de construir una Europa fortaleza. La apertura internacional ha sido y es beneficiosa para la Unión Europea. Sin embargo, esta apertura ha provocado, en ocasiones, unas dependencias excesivas en sectores claves para el bienestar de nuestros ciudadanos. Lo hemos constatado en el ámbito sanitario durante la pandemia de la COVID-19, que tanto sufrimiento trajo en forma de insoportables pérdidas humanas; en el ámbito energético, tras la invasión injusta e injustificada rusa de Ucrania. En ambos casos nos enfrentamos a estos grandes retos con más unión, porque juntos somos más fuertes.

Es por eso que, desde la Presidencia española, agradecemos las respuestas lideradas por la Comisión Europea, fundamentales para afrontar todos estos desafíos. Y acogemos favorablemente el informe sobre prospectiva estratégica de 2023. Con visión de futuro, seguimos trabajando juntos para construir más Unión. A este objetivo, precisamente a este objetivo, dedicaremos uno de los grandes momentos de la Presidencia española: la Cumbre de Granada del próximo 6 de octubre. Para conseguirlo, debemos diversificar y estrechar lazos con nuestros socios más fiables. Y por eso agradezco a la presidenta von der Leyen y a este Parlamento su implicación con la región de América Latina y el Caribe. La Cumbre Unión Europea—CELAC ha sido un éxito colectivo, esperado durante mucho tiempo, que va a redundar en beneficio de todos los europeos.

La segunda prioridad es avanzar en la transición verde y la adaptación medioambiental. Frenar la emergencia climática y la degradación del medio ambiente no es solo una necesidad ineludible, sino también una gran oportunidad para reducir drásticamente nuestra dependencia energética y nuestra factura eléctrica, haciendo más competitivas a las empresas europeas, eliminando la pobreza energética entre nuestros ciudadanos. Es también una oportunidad de crear empleo de calidad impulsando la economía circular. La reforma del diseño del mercado eléctrico, el paquete de gas e hidrógeno, la normativa relativa a la conservación y restauración de la biodiversidad, la Net Zero Industry Act (Ley sobre la industria de cero emisiones netas) forman parte de los expedientes centrales de la Presidencia española.

En tercer lugar, necesitamos impulsar una mayor justicia social y económica. Necesitamos una economía más competitiva, sin duda, pero también necesitamos una economía más justa y más solidaria. Ambos objetivos no son solo perfectamente compatibles, sino indispensables. Entre los grandes expedientes de esta prioridad se encuentra la revisión del marco financiero plurianual y también la reforma de las reglas de gobernanza económica. Ambos tienen un carácter estructural para la Unión Europea. La Presidencia española del Consejo impulsa y apoya los esfuerzos de la Comisión y del Parlamento para conseguir una Unión más inclusiva. Y en esa línea progresamos en las iniciativas y objetivos fijados en el Plan de Acción del Pilar Europeo de Derechos Sociales, así como en la adopción de medidas a favor de la igualdad de trato entre personas y su inclusión, prestando una atención especial a la igualdad de género y a la lucha contra la violencia a las mujeres. También a las cuestiones de infancia y de discapacidad. Por eso damos especialmente la bienvenida a la propuesta de Directiva de la Tarjeta Europea de Discapacidad que presentó la Comisión el 5 de septiembre y que responde a los ochenta y siete millones de europeos con discapacidad, para que Europa sea un espacio único también para ellos.

Y, finalmente, la cuarta prioridad es reforzar la unidad europea. La unidad es el elemento que posibilita todo lo demás. Es el motor que nos permite avanzar. En un contexto marcado por el aumento de las tensiones geopolíticas, la Unión debe permanecer unida y los Estados miembros debemos seguir desarrollando herramientas que nos permitan afrontar juntos los grandes retos de nuestro tiempo. Es crucial que sigamos apoyando a Ucrania con unidad y con solidaridad. Como también es esencial ofrecer un encaje real a nuestros socios de los Balcanes Occidentales. Ante la visión de una Unión Europea más amplia, debemos abogar por optimizar los procesos de toma de decisiones. Debemos ser capaces de acordar también una gestión más eficiente y coordinada de los procedimientos de inmigración y asilo, una gestión de flujos migratorios que sea humana, ordenada, solidaria y responsable. No podemos resignarnos a que el Mediterráneo sea, año tras año, el cementerio de cientos, miles de personas. Tampoco podemos renunciar al control de nuestras fronteras.

Señora presidenta, señora presidenta de la Comisión, señorías, la Presidencia española está firmemente convencida de que el futuro y el bienestar de todos los europeos solo puede pasar por una Unión más unida, más fuerte, más social, más sostenible y más cercana a los ciudadanos. Pueden contar con nuestro total compromiso para seguir haciendo de la Unión un proyecto de futuro en el que quepamos todos y todas, en el que todo europeo pueda reconocerse, en el que nadie se quede atrás.

La Presidencia española quiere, en suma, encarnar los valores europeos en beneficio de nuestros ciudadanos. Muchas gracias, presidenta, por su discurso. Sigamos trabajando juntos para que Europa avance.

  Esther de Lange (PPE). – Madam President, with this State of the Union debate, we are looking into the fifth year of this Commission, but it also allows us to look back at the previous four. And I have to say, it feels like a lifetime, but I mean that in a good way, because in 2019, we knew that we had to embark on a double mission – the green and digital transitions – to ensure sustainable growth and competitiveness in Europe.

But we did not know that soon after we would be fighting an unknown virus. We did not know what awaited us on 24 February 2022, and we did not know that we would be facing an unprecedented energy price crisis.

But we did react, and we reacted in a strong way. In English, you would say we ‘manned up’. But I think in this House with good examples of female leadership, I should say – and thank you, by the way, for your words on gender equality – but in this context, I should say we ‘womaned up’.

And in a way, I think the Commission President has still been very modest. Yes, the state of the European Union is strong, but it was also agile. Europe reacted in a speed and in a flexibility that was unprecedented, that is unknown in a number of Member States, my own included.

And if I look forward to the fifth year of this Commission – and in what also, Philippe Lamberts, might be my last participation in a State of the Union debate – let me put aside party politics and simply say this: as elections come nearer, many politicians at home and some in this House – and thank you, Mr Legutko, for underlining that and then leaving the room – some, even in this House, will simply blame the EU for everything that is wrong in their eyes. To them, I say: be careful. Be careful what you wish for. Our common European House is the best thing that happened to us. Don’t set it on fire, but man up, ‘woman up’ and make sure it stands the test of time.

  Elisabetta Gualmini (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Commissaria, in Europa sono cambiate tante cose in questo mandato. Siamo contenti che anche punti della nostra agenda come Socialisti e Democratici siano diventati i punti della sua agenda, specialmente dopo la pandemia.

Abbiamo sostenuto la svolta sociale dell'Unione, al posto dell'austerità la solidarietà; l'Europa ha trovato per un attimo la sua anima, ci siamo scordati del mercato. Ma ci sono cose che non tornano. Il suo partito, il Partito Popolare, sta bloccando oggettivamente provvedimenti più importanti del Green Deal: è la verità. Lei ci ha rassicurato alla fine del suo discorso, e le vogliamo credere: we want to believe you, but we are a little bit sceptical about that.

Per non parlare dei migranti: lei è andata a braccetto mano nella mano in Tunisia con Giorgia Meloni, la leader di un partito euroscettico e sovranista, sperando di pagare un leader autocratico perché si tenga tutti i migranti in Tunisia. Non penso che questa sia una buona strategia: a braccetto con una leader che diceva che bisogna uscire dall'euro, che l'Europa è l'Europa degli usurai, che la Commissione europea è come l'Unione Sovietica e che vuole un'Europa minima al servizio degli Stati nazionali.

Allora, non ci si inventa europeisti dalla sera alla mattina. Serve un'Europa forte sui migranti, con competenze robuste e solidarietà obbligatoria e lei ci deve dire veramente da che parte sta: se dalla parte dell'Europa come libertà, come democrazia, come pluralismo, come accoglienza responsabile, o dell'Europa dei muri, del nativismo; dell'Europa dell'estrema destra, dei nazionalismi; dell'Europa che chiude le porte. Perché o si sta da una parte o si sta dall'altra.

E noi vogliamo essere europeisti veri, non europeisti riluttanti. Vogliamo l'Europa come progetto di liberazione dell'uomo, quella che voleva David Sassoli, con quell'ansia di giustizia e di libertà a cui tutti aspirano: l'Europa delle donne, dei diritti, l'Europa della crescita e dello sviluppo, l'Europa della fraternità e della speranza. Ci dica davvero da che parte sta.

  Malik Azmani (Renew). – Madam President, dear President von der Leyen, dear Ursula, first I would like to express my deepest sympathy to the Moroccan and Libyan people, who have been impacted by a massive earthquake and a flood. I expect also our Union to continue to help them to overcome this tragedy.

Dear President, one more year to go. Together we have achieved a lot in the last four years that for some reason feel like also much longer. My message to you today is – and I know you would agree – do not rest on your laurels. There is more work and less time. If you ask me, this term cannot be successful without quick results from the EU-Tunisia deal; finishing the migration pact; continuous and increased support to Ukraine – we cannot back down in our support for the brave Ukrainian people; and finally, our economy. We need to boost our competitiveness, focus on our industry in small and medium-sized enterprises, and provide access to critical raw materials and enhance our defence capabilities.

People throughout Europe continue to struggle with inflation, energy prices are not predictably stable, and the cost of living continues to rise. This means that what we spend our money on and how is under immense scrutiny. We know the populists will exploit this. We cannot allow them to do so.

Dear President, we only have a few months before the elections to show that this term was your best term so far. So let’s do just that.

  Jordi Solé (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, Commission President, during your and our mandate, some circumstances – mostly unexpected – pushed us to have to kind of reinvent ourselves as a union. We took decisions that were unthinkable a few years ago and we became more aware of ourselves as a political community with values and interests to stand for.

And I must admit, Madam von der Leyen, that this has happened under your impulse with cross-party alliances in this Parliament, and despite the fact that in the EU we still have rather sclerotic ways of functioning.

This political ambition cannot decay now. We cannot bow down to those who call with misleading arguments for an end to much needed policies like those of the Green Deal. We need to go on facing our challenges with political ambition, without leaving anyone behind, with more attention to social issues, which has been the big missing thing in your speech, and guided by a sense of responsibility towards future generations.

And you mentioned Europe’s diversity. I hope next time in next debates, I can address you in my mother tongue, which is Catalan.

  Carlo Fidanza (ECR). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Presidente von der Leyen, abbiamo ascoltato una sorta di manifesto elettorale, in parte condivisibile, in parte no, in parte in estremo ritardo.

Ecco le nostre priorità per i prossimi mesi: occorre riformare la governance economica mettendo al centro crescita e investimenti, interrompendo i continui insensati rialzi dei tassi da parte della BCE, che non abbattono l'inflazione ma causano recessione.

Occorre una transizione ecologica fondata sul realismo e non su obiettivi ideologici che uccidono manifattura e agricoltura, consegnandoci mani e piedi alla Cina. Occorre ridurre la proliferazione normativa che uccide le nostre imprese con vincoli e burocrazia e riportare in Europa le produzioni strategiche.

Infine, le decisioni assunte ieri dai governi francese e tedesco – a proposito, la sinistra delle porte aperte su questo non ha avuto nulla da dire – rendono ancora più urgente una soluzione concreta contro il traffico di esseri umani e contro l'immigrazione illegale che rende insicure le nostre città. Dalle parole ai fatti.

  Jordan Bardella (ID). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Présidente Von der Leyen, le temps du bilan est donc venu. Jamais il n’y a eu un tel écart entre les mots qui forment votre discours et la réalité vécue par des millions d’Européens. Vous voyez, en présidente d’une puissance mondiale respectée, vous êtes à la tête d’une administration froide, affaiblie, dans laquelle les peuples d’Europe ne croient plus. Vous ne jurez que par l’élargissement à tout prix. Nous voyons un rétrécissement sans précédent de l’influence de l’Europe dans le monde.

Par une écologie punitive empruntée à la gauche, vous menacez notre industrie automobile avec la fin annoncée des moteurs thermiques, tout comme vous fragilisez notre autonomie alimentaire avec la stratégie dite «de la ferme à la fourchette» et la décroissance agricole qui en découle. Par les règles absurdes du marché européen de l’énergie, comme par vos atermoiements sur la question du nucléaire, vous faites payer à mon peuple, le peuple français, une facture salée qui prend à la gorge nos entreprises et les familles les plus modestes. Par votre croyance sans limite dans le village global, vous organisez les conditions du désordre de demain en acceptant une immigration de peuplements venus du Sud qui changent notre culture et bouleverse notre art de vivre. Par votre naïveté, les institutions européennes auront été le relais des idéologies islamistes dans d’indécentes campagnes de publicité. Quelle étrange organisation que celle qui finance ses propres ennemis.

L’Europe est entrée dans le temps des incertitudes: le Covid, le retour de la guerre à nos portes, l’intelligence artificielle, le défi démographique, climatique, et je dirais en somme civilisationnel, nous imposent un sursaut, au risque de disparaître. Nous devons exister. La construction européenne doit exister, mais elle ne trouvera le chemin de la puissance et la voie de la confiance des peuples que dans une alliance des nations libres, souveraines, indépendantes, capables d’investir les grands projets du siècle en cours pour rivaliser avec les États-Unis ou la Chine.

J’invite les peuples à prendre date: du 6 au 9 juin, ils pourront mettre un terme définitif à plusieurs années de renoncement pour renouer avec le fil de l’espoir. Vivement le 9 juin.

  Sira Rego (The Left). – Señora presidenta, se lo hemos dicho otras veces, señora Von der Leyen, son ustedes unos genios del marketing y de la propaganda. Nos acaba de deleitar con un discurso lleno de verdades a medias y cero autocrítica, eso sí, con un lenguaje impecable. Tanto que no le ha dejado margen para hablar de las verdaderas causas de la inflación, de los más de 2 000 muertos que solo este año ha ocasionado la política migratoria de la UE o de la subida de las hipotecas perpetrada por los salvajes del Banco Central Europeo.

¡Qué lejos de la gente corriente queda su discurso, señora Von der Leyen! Porque ¿sabe lo que le falta a su propuesta? Derechos humanos o trabajadores. Ni una sola mención en todo su discurso. Ni una. Le diré más: le falta una política económica que deje de exprimir a las familias y que deje de engordar a la banca y a las multinacionales, o un cambio de verdad que resuelva el problema de la crisis energética. En definitiva, le falta una propuesta para la gente corriente.

  Balázs Hidvéghi (NI). – Madam President, we see the current State of the Union quite differently. Brexit, illegal migration, COVID, the war in Ukraine and the ensuing economic crisis would all have required capable leadership and the right decisions. Instead, we see ad hoc reactions, grandiose self-congratulatory statements, and consequently the loss of credibility.

The pointless centralisation efforts in all policy areas in Brussels or the shameful ideological jihad against conservative governments all create division and weaken Europe. Also a huge corruption scandal in this Parliament and the scandalous vaccine procurement by the Commission must be tackled head on – we’ve been waiting for your text messages, Madam President, for over 863 days now, still counting. Not to mention the intolerably slow disbursement of RRF money to Member States, or the failed sanctions policy – sorry to say – that hasn’t really helped Ukraine in any meaningful way. It hasn’t brought the end of the war any closer, but it’s hurting the European economy and European people.

Europe must find its way back to unity and credibility by accepting itself first as an alliance of free Member States and then defining its own strategic interests in the world.

  Siegfried Mureşan (PPE). – Madam President, I would like to thank President von der Leyen for putting competitiveness back at the heart of Europe’s agenda. This will make our economy stronger and it will allow us to safeguard higher social standards in Europe.

Thank you very much for putting farmers back on the European agenda. Farmers had to manage high uncertainty since the Russian invasion. They need all our support and we have to make sure that grain from Ukraine gets to where it is needed in northern Africa and the Middle East, and doesn’t flood the markets in central and eastern Europe and doesn’t become a risk for farmers in EU Member States.

Thank you for also supporting the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the Schengen area. Romania and Bulgaria joining the Schengen area will make the whole Schengen area stronger, will make Europe as a whole safer.

Two points from my side. Firstly, whenever people are in need of support in Europe, support is coming. We have shown this in the pandemic and in times of war. One of our main tools to provide support is the budget. You have put forward a proposal for the revision of the Multiannual Financial Framework because it is getting to its limits. It has to do more than it was anticipated. Let’s work together to get this done before the end of the year, to provide stable finances for the next years, to be able to do more for defence, for military mobility, for people who are coming to Europe and who need support for tackling illegal migration, because whatever is illegal has to be tackled of course.

My second and last point, we can only live in safety and stability within the borders of the European Union if we are surrounded by countries which are safe and stable. So let us start accession negotiations with Ukraine and Moldova. That does not mean that the countries will join now; it just means that we make them stronger and fitter for accession, which is good for those countries and good for the European Union. There is a wide majority in Parliament for this.

  Pedro Marques (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Presidente da Comissão Europeia, Caros Comissários, olhando para este mandato, a senhora Presidente vê o copo meio cheio. Outros ainda veem meio vazio. É com orgulho que encontramos, na parte mais cheia, condições que os socialistas colocaram para apoiar a sua eleição.

A Agenda Social do Porto e os salários mínimos europeus; o reforço da igualdade de género; o Pacto Verde para enfrentar a emergência climática; a efetiva penalização de quem não respeita o Estado de Direito – e vimos ainda agora como isso custa tanto ao Senhor Orban; os eurobonds que permitiram criar o plano de recuperação da crise COVID. Foram medidas de enorme importância.

Mas, Senhora Presidente, há ainda meio copo para encher e tem que decidir, portanto, como acabar o mandato. E, por isso, tenho que lhe perguntar: como vai colocar as políticas europeias ao serviço dos que sofrem com a inflação e o aumento do custo de vida e da habitação? Tenho que lhe dizer, foi gritante o seu silêncio, ao longo de uma hora, sobre os que mais sofrem hoje na Europa.

E quanto aos que sofrem nas nossas fronteiras? Falou do Pacto das Migrações corretamente, mas, ao mesmo tempo, vem de pactuar com um regime autoritário para exportar os nossos desafios para o outro lado do Mediterrâneo.

E também nada disse sobre como impulsionar novas regras orçamentais que nos ajudem a evitar a recessão na Europa e a colocar uma forte prioridade à coesão social. Mas quero dizer-lhe, de modo claro, gostámos de a ouvir e, certamente, o Senhor Weber também ouviu, dando prioridade ao Pacto Verde e à restauração da natureza. Por isso, está nas suas mãos, Senhora Presidente, é agora o tempo de decidir como quer concluir o seu mandato.

Os europeus estão atentos. Os mais frágeis precisam de ação. Não defraude as expetativas de centenas de milhões de cidadãos.

  Katalin Cseh (Renew). – Madam President, dear colleagues, looking back on our mandate so far, there is a lot to be proud of. We stood united in the face of unprecedented challenges during the pandemic or during Putin’s brutal invasion of Ukraine.

But this mandate is far from over. The global political climate is extremely turbulent and liberal democracy is under increasing threat. We have to ask ourselves the question: is the EU prepared for the prospect of a second Trump presidency? Because we have to be. Strategic autonomy is the place to start, and we have to put treaty change on the table, and we have to abolish the unanimity rule, at least in foreign affairs.

Madam President, you told us ‘if and when it’s necessary’. Well, I have to tell you, the time is now for that because for Europe to be a bulwark of democracy, for us to be a strong ally of Ukraine, we have to put our own house in order. We cannot fight Putin without fighting the Putinisation of our very own Member States.

In the past years – after some hesitation, I have to say – the Commission indeed took firm steps to address democratic backsliding. Clearly there is growing pressure to abandon this path. But we cannot and we must not do this. Our values and an unwavering commitment to rule of law action is simply non-negotiable.

Colleagues, the world needs Europe’s voice and leadership like never before. But Europe is only as strong as our values are.

  Marie Toussaint (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, l’extrême droite affirme que le 9 juin prochain, nous aurons un choix à faire, un choix de civilisation. Eh bien, c’est vrai. Soit nous choisissons le déclin et l’enfermement national populiste, soit nous faisons le choix de l’écologie pour répondre au nouveau régime climatique et à la justice sociale. C’est ce choix que nous aurons à faire.

Madame la Présidente, j’ai bien écouté votre discours, à certains égards courageux, mais je veux vous parler de l’écologie, parce que j’ai entendu vos paroles, mais j’ai aussi entendu vos silences. Vous nous parlez de la beauté des forêts européennes, de la mer des Wadden, mais vous persistez dans votre silence sur la restauration de la nature. Or, cette loi doit être adoptée, vous le savez, il faut tenir bon. Votre discours, finalement, est celui d’une captive prise au piège de la prison rétrograde des dogmes de votre famille politique. Mais le nouveau régime climatique ne nous laisse pas le choix, et vous le savez aussi.

Il faut comprendre que les lois de l’économie ne sont pas au-dessus des lois de la nature et qu’il faut réencastrer l’économie dans les limites planétaires. Les écosystèmes ont des droits qui doivent être reconnus. Nous devons sortir de la civilisation des substances toxiques, des PFAS, des menaces environnementales, et ça c’est le règlement sur les substances chimiques. Nous devons aussi interdire l’exportation de pesticides et de substances chimiques que nous considérons trop dangereuses pour être autorisées sur notre territoire. Nous avons aussi besoin d’une loi sur le bien-être animal.

La bataille pour l’écologie est une bataille pour sauvegarder la possibilité de vivre sur notre planète. Notre devoir commun et de tenir bon face aux marchands de mort et aux bonimenteurs climatosceptiques.

  Charlie Weimers (ECR). – Fru talman! Fru von der Leyen! Ni utlovade en politisk kommission, och det har vi sannerligen fått.

Ni strösslar EU-pengar till superbonusar i Italien – 110 % i ersättning för renoveringar, samtidigt som ni vill att villaägare i Sverige ska betala över en halv miljon kronor för att renovera sina hus. För att inte tala om hyreshöjningar för hyresgäster.

Jag talar naturligtvis om de tvångsrenoveringar som ni vill tvinga på europeiska medborgare. 35 miljoner fastigheter i hela Europa, varav 1,8 miljoner i Sverige, ska uppnå energiklass D år 2033. Alla energiklass A år 2050.

Ni var tydlig med er miljöpartistiska vision, fru von der Leyen, redan från början. Därför röstade vi emot er. Min fråga till de svenska borgerliga är: ”Är ni nöjda nu?” Min fråga till svenska socialdemokrater är: ”Hur kan ni driva på för dessa tvångsrenoveringar när ni vet hur det slår mot arbetarfamiljer?”

Fru von der Leyen, ni kommer att bli ihågkommen för dessa tvångsrenoveringar – dessa attacker på äganderätten – när människor ser värdet på sina fastigheter rasa, när de inte kan somna på kvällen för att de oroar sig för om de kan bo kvar.

  Gunnar Beck (ID). – Frau Präsidentin! Im März 2000 verkündete die Kommission die Lissabonner Strategie, die EU bis 2010 zum weltweit dynamischsten und wettbewerbsfähigsten Wirtschaftsraum zu machen. 2010 verstrich die Strategie, wurde um zehn Jahre verschoben und scheiterte dennoch. 2020 räumten Sie, Frau Präsidentin, hier ein, sich fortan mehr um unser Wohl als unseren Wohlstand zu kümmern.

Für Deutschland ist dieses Ziel erreicht: 6,2 % Inflation – weit über OECD Durchschnitt –, kaum Produktivitätszuwachs, die Halbierung des deutschen Exportüberschusses, ein Rückgang der ausländischen Direktinvestitionen um 80 % gegenüber dem Vorjahr und mit —0,3 % die schlechteste Wachstumsprognose des IWF.

Wie nie zuvor verlagern deutsche Unternehmen die Produktion ins Ausland, um hohen Energiepreisen zu entfliehen. Ich gebe zu, Frau Präsidentin, Sie erreichen Ihre Ziele, aber zuträglicher für unser Wohl als Ihr Erfolg war das Scheitern Ihrer Vorgänger allemal.

  Nikolaj Villumsen (The Left). – Fru formand! Kære kommissionsformand. Undskyld, men virkeligheden kalder! Dette burde handle om EU's tilstand, ikke om konservativ valgkamp. Det burde handle om helt almindelige mennesker i Europa, der presses af stigende priser, mens energispekulanterne skovler penge ind. Det burde handle om en klode, der brænder under vores fødder, om den akutte klimakrise. I stedet ser vi, at landbrugs og industrilobbyens kortsigtede profitinteresser nu står øverst på dagsordenen. Vi ser, at klimahandling og miljøbeskyttelse udvandes. Vi ser, at den lovede dyrevelfærdslovgivning måske opgives. Vi ser, at reformen af kemikalielovgivningen REACH og det længe ventede forbud mod PFAS alligevel ikke kommer. Det kan ikke passe! Kære kommissionsformand, du løber fra dine valgløfter, men du må ikke svigte! Europa har brug for klimahandling, dyrevelfærd og social tryghed. Ikke flere brudte valgløfter!

  Antoni Comín i Oliveres (NI). – Madame la Présidente, le futur de l’Union est indissolublement lié au futur de ses États membres. En 1978, l’État espagnol a vécu une négociation politique cruciale qui a permis la transition de la dictature à la démocratie et a ouvert la voie à l’adhésion de l’Espagne à l’Union européenne quelques années plus tard. À l’époque, l’Europe a compris que cette négociation qui a abouti au régime de 1978 était déterminante, non seulement pour l’Espagne, mais aussi pour l’Europe, son avenir et sa stabilité.

Aujourd’hui, l’État espagnol s’approche de ce qui pourrait probablement être la négociation politique la plus transcendante et décisive depuis la transition. Et comme à l’époque, la stabilité de l’Europe en dépend également. Car ce n’est que si l’État espagnol est capable de trouver une solution à son conflit avec la Catalogne basée sur les droits de l’homme, la démocratie et le respect des principes du pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques, c’est-à-dire le droit à l’autodétermination, que cette solution sera solide et durable.

C’est pourquoi nous pensons que la Commission devrait suivre de près cette éventuelle négociation, qui est si importante non seulement pour la Catalogne, mais aussi pour l’Union et pour l’État espagnol lui-même, et l’aborder avec une attitude responsable et constructive.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE). – Madam President, President von der Leyen, on this occasion of the last debate of the State of the Union of this mandate, let me thank you for your outstanding leadership, namely in the pandemic and in the support to Ukraine. You are leading worldwide our fight in Ukraine for democracy and values of human rights and that is a major achievement for a geopolitical European Union.

Senhora Presidente, venho de um país em que a inflação se conjuga com as taxas de juro altas e a política de António Costa de impostos máximos e serviços mínimos, em que 90 % das famílias têm crédito à habitação com taxa variável. Neste país, famílias e empresas estão a sofrer muito e, por isso, é muito importante e fundamental que a União Europeia também tenha uma estratégia de combate à inflação que possa suavizar a necessidade que o Banco Central Europeu tem tido de subir as taxas de juro. Temos de fazer como fez os Estados Unidos e ter uma estratégia de combate à inflação.

E é importante e fundamental dizer aqui ao meu colega Pedro Marques que, grande parte dos problemas que ele referiu, são aqueles que são resultado dos oito anos em que a política de António Costa esqueceu as famílias e as empresas e se concentrou em impostos máximos e serviços mínimos.

  Rovana Plumb (S&D). – Madam President, dear President von der Leyen, first I welcome your recognition that Romania and Bulgaria are part of Schengen. Let us say that today is the day for a commitment to Romania and Bulgaria in Schengen by the end of this mandate.

(Applause)

Second, you mentioned the important role of the European regions. Therefore, it is crucial to have a strong cohesion policy, strong cohesion funding, to ensure the convergence of all the regions within the European Union.

Third, to continue addressing the challenges of today and tomorrow, a timely agreement on all the components of the MFF revisions is absolutely necessary. The Parliament is working hard and is committed to having a revised MFF in place on 1 January 2024, and we call on President Charles Michel to put the MFF on the European Council’s October agenda.

We count on your support and leadership.

  Nicola Danti (Renew). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signora Presidente della Commissione, la nostra Unione ha affrontato in questi anni sfide che solo quattro anni fa sembravano inimmaginabili e a cui abbiamo dato risposte all'altezza: dal COVID-19 e al Recovery Plan all'assistenza all'Ucraina. Ma tutto ciò non può renderci tranquilli rispetto alle enormi sfide che ci attendono. Ne cito rapidamente tre.

La prima: l'Europa rischia di essere marginale nel mondo, fa fatica nella competizione digitale, ha un problema demografico, si trova a gestire un importante flusso migratorio. Certo, siamo ancora una grande potenza commerciale, ma soffriamo a causa di una globalizzazione senza regole multilaterali. E bene ha fatto la Presidente a mettere tra le priorità un'azione contro il dumping cinese.

Il secondo: l'allargamento della nostra Unione. Un'Europa più grande sarà un bene solo se sarà in grado di decidere. Le regole odierne non lo garantiscono e mi aspettavo di più dal suo intervento rispetto alla riforma dei trattati.

Il terzo punto: le dipendenze strategiche nel campo della difesa, dell'energia e delle materie prime critiche ci hanno portato a lanciare un programma di reindustrializzazione, ma serve fare di più.

Davanti a questo quadro, c'è solo una risposta e questa risposta siamo noi: l'Europa. Un'Europa con nuove regole di funzionamento, più protagonista del mondo e più solidale. Soltanto prendendo di petto i problemi, come abbiamo fatto durante il COVID, saremo in grado di sfidare il futuro.

  Rasmus Andresen (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissionspräsidentin! Ich mache mir Sorgen um die Zukunft Europas. Ich mache mir Sorgen, weil Rechtsradikale und Antieuropäer in vielen Mitgliedstaaten an Einfluss gewinnen und es leider auch hier im Haus wieder möglich scheint, dass sie Teil von Mehrheiten werden.

Und in diesen Zeiten ist es wichtig, dass Sie sich als Kommissionspräsidentin vor dieser Frage nicht wegducken, sondern dass Sie Haltung zeigen. Denn es ist viel ins Rutschen geraten. Viele Menschen haben Existenzängste. Mieten, fossile Energiepreise und hohe Lebensmittelpreise: Die Mehrheit der Menschen leidet unter Einkommensverlusten und den hohen Preisen. Arm trotz Arbeit ist die Realität von vielen Millionen Europäerinnen und Europäern geworden.

Die Antwort ist nicht etwa weniger Klimaschutz, sondern eine soziale Politik für alle Menschen. Die EU muss Menschen soziale Sicherheit geben.

Deshalb sollten wir beispielsweise die EU-Mindestlohnrichtlinie verbindlich machen, damit beispielsweise der deutsche Mindestlohn in einem ersten Schritt auf knapp 14 Euro steigt. Wir müssen die Vergabe von Fördermitteln davon abhängig machen, ob Unternehmen faire Arbeitsplätze anbieten oder halt eben nicht. Und wir brauchen eine Infrastrukturoffensive, um unsere marode Infrastruktur nicht verrotten zu lassen.

Sie hatten einen Souveränitätsfond vorgelegt. Daraus ist leider nichts geworden. Wir würden uns wünschen, dass Sie wieder mutiger werden und sich stärker an US-Präsident Biden und dem Inflation Reduction Act orientieren.

  Robert Roos (ECR). – Voorzitter, ik ben optimistisch. Vorig jaar stond ik hier vol pessimisme. Torenhoge energieprijzen als gevolg van de ondoordachte energietransitie, verstoorde bevoorradingketens door zinloze lockdowns, wokisme om onze westerse waarden te ondermijnen en hyperinflatie door de geldpers van de ECB.

Maar de wal heeft het schip gekeerd. Mensen laten zich horen. Het kan zo niet langer. De peilingen veranderen. Realisme wint aan terrein, ook hier. Niet alleen de kiezer, maar ook de EVP heeft zich qua toon van links afgekeerd. De Duitse economie gaat heel slecht, en dan volgt de rest van Europa altijd. En nu staan we aan de vooravond van de Europese verkiezingen.

Wie ziet wat er in de samenleving gebeurt, begrijpt dat er een grote verandering aankomt. Het is mijn vurige hoop dat na 9 juni 2024 een nieuw tijdperk begint, een tijdperk waarin de realistische krachten in dit Parlement een nieuwe meerderheid vormen, waarin de EU doet waar ze ooit voor bedoeld was ‒ het leven van de mensen verbeteren ‒, waarin we werken aan herstel van de democratie.

Voorzitter, ik ben optimistisch.

  Gerolf Annemans (ID). – Voorzitter, collega’s, we wisten al na Brexit dat deze Commissie niet kalmerend zou optreden met het Europese gegeven, maar dat er integendeel een radicalisering zou optreden, een EU-fanatisme, een EU-extremisme dat nooit gezien was. En deze Commissie heeft hier vandaag nog eens onderstreept dat dat programma doorgaat.

U bent begonnen met bevoegdheden naar zich toe te trekken die niet aan u toebehoren: het onderwijs, de gezondheidszorg – dat hadden we al gezien.

U hebt bevestigd dat het immigratiepact verder doorgaat, dat wil dus zeggen meer immigratie, dat u ook op een uitbreidingsagenda staat die van de Europese Unie een imperium wil maken, en met de wankele groen-linkse meerderheid zet u hier verder nog die groene agenda door, die een ramp dreigt te worden voor landbouw, voor de industrie en voor het individueel vervoer van de burger, ook voor de huizenprijzen van de burger die de milieuvoorwaarden allemaal over hun nek gaan krijgen – ik laat het geknoei met de geldhoeveelheid en met de geldcreatie nog opzij.

Deze Commissie voert dus eigenlijk een degrowth-programma uit naar communistisch voorbeeld – de Great Reset, die al in Davos was afgekondigd, komt u hier presenteren.

Deze Commissie moet dringend weg. Er moet een minder fanatieke, minder EU—extremistische Europese Unie komen, en ik hoop dus dat het uw afscheidstoespraak was.

  Λευτέρης Νικολάου-Αλαβάνος (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, ως επίτευγμα παρουσιάσατε την κλιμάκωση του πολέμου στην Ουκρανία με χιλιάδες νεκρούς στην ιμπεριαλιστική σύγκρουση Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, ΗΠΑ, ΝΑΤΟ, καπιταλιστικής Ρωσίας, ενώ οξύνονται ανταγωνισμοί και με την Κίνα για τον έλεγχο αγορών και πλουτοπαραγωγικών πηγών. Η τροφοδότηση του πολέμου με δεκάδες δισεκατομμύρια από τη ληστεία των εργαζομένων στερεί αναγκαίους πόρους για την προστασία της ζωής του λαού από πυρκαγιές, πλημμύρες που μετατρέπονται σε τραγωδίες, αφού οι ευρωενωσιακές κατευθύνσεις θεωρούν υπερβολικό το κόστος προστασίας. Η χρηματοδότηση-μαμούθ πράσινων ψηφιακών ομίλων αύξησε τον πληθωρισμό, τις τιμές που ροκανίζουν το εισόδημα. Με την οδηγία αδιαφανών όρων εργασίας επιταχύνθηκαν σκληρά αντεργατικά μέτρα υπέρ των εργοδοτών. Δεκατρείς ώρες δουλειάς για ψίχουλα σε πολλούς εργοδότες, απλήρωτες υπερωρίες, αύξηση της ηλικίας συνταξιοδότησης.

Αυτή είναι η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση. Δεν διορθώνεται. Οι λαοί μπορούν να κάνουν παρελθόν τον πόλεμο, τη φτώχεια, την προσφυγιά, την αβεβαιότητα, παίρνοντας την εξουσία και την οικονομία στα δικά τους χέρια. Με αποδέσμευση από κάθε ληστρική συμμαχία, όπως η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση και το ΝΑΤΟ. Για μια Ευρώπη πραγματικά των δικών τους συμφερόντων.

  Rasa Juknevičienė (PPE). – Madam President, thank you President for your strong leadership. I have a very realistic dream. We must achieve the EU enlargement no later than 2030. For this, it is necessary to invite Ukraine and Moldova for negotiations already this year. There has never been in history such a case: a nation fighting horrific military war carries out reforms and strengthens democracy all at the same time. The Ukrainians are doing it with a strong determination. Does the EU have the same?

We also need to prepare to reform without delay. But some EU countries are dragging their feet. Some forget solidarity slogans and complain, even over grain. Some are afraid of Ukraine’s crushing military victory over Russia. ‘What will happen to Russia?’ they ask. I can answer with certainty: Ukraine’s victory will open the way for democratic change in Russia and in Belarus. It will free all Russia’s neighbours from the Kremlin’s blackmail and threats. Ukraine’s victory will bring lasting peace in Europe. Therefore, I say not ‘as long as it takes’, but ‘until Ukraine’s victory, until our victory’.

  Alex Agius Saliba (S&D). – Sinjura President, Sinjura President tal-Kummissjoni, huwa biss bil-kuraġġ u bl-ambizzjoni li nistgħu naslu sabiex nagħtu protezzjoni sħiħa liċ-ċittadini tagħna fid-dinja diġitali.

Konna kuraġġużi meta mexxejna ’l quddiem, kif għedt tajjeb inti, l-Att dwar is-Servizzi Diġitali, l-Att dwar is-Swieq Diġitali Ewropej. Konna kuraġġużi meta sena ilu approvajna l-liġi taċ-charger komuni Ewropew. Kien hemm min daħaq bina dak iż-żmien. Ilbieraħ rajna l-akbar kumpanija fid-dinja illi, wara 13-il sena ta’ reżistenza, implimentat hija wkoll l-istandard illi qbilna aħna madwar sena ilu.

Bl-istess ħeġġa, bl-istess ambizzjoni u bl-istess determinazzjoni, hemm bżonn illi nagħmlu aktar. Hemm bżonn illi jkollna aktar infurzar b’saħħtu sabiex ma tibqax biss liġi sabiħa fuq il-karta - il-liġi tad-DSA u d-DMA fuq bażi Ewropea. Hemm bżonn illi nikkonkludu mill-aktar fis possibbli x-xogħol fuq l-Att dwar l-Intelliġenza Artifiċjali, l-Att dwar il-Ħaddiema tal-Pjattaformi, l-Att dwar id-Data.

Hemm bżonn li l-Kummissjoni Ewropea tiċċaqlaq u timplimenta, mill-aktar fis possibbli, il-proposta li approvajna fil-Parlament Ewropew tar-Right to Disconnect. Hemm bżonn li ninvestu fit-tisħiħ tal-għarfien diġitali sabiex dawk l-aktar vulnerabbli ma jkunux esklużi u ddiskriminati. Hemm bżonn li nipproteġu l-konsumaturi tagħna meta jixtru fuq bażi online. Hemm bżonn li nkomplu nipproteġu l-privatezza taċ-ċittadini tagħna fuq bażi online mis-sorveljanza.

  Dacian Cioloş (Renew). – Doamnă președintă, dragi colegi, am ascultat cu atenție prezentarea stării Uniunii cu realizările și sunt de acord cu multe dintre priorități, dar haideți să nu ne facem că nu vedem elefantul din cameră. Blocarea spațiului Schengen pentru România și Bulgaria, încălcând tratatele, nu e un subiect secundar. Ca român, nu văd cum putem avansa împreună pe aceste priorități câtă vreme Consiliul are o datorie față de 27 de milioane de cetățeni ai Uniunii Europene, români și bulgari, cărora li se refuză un drept prevăzut de tratat.

Comportamentul abuziv și sfidător al Guvernului Austriei nu poate continua. E de ajuns. Enough is enough. Doamnă președintă, doamnă reprezentantă a Consiliului, Comisia și-a făcut treaba și vă mulțumesc pentru asta. Parlamentul și-a făcut treaba pe acest subiect și mulțumesc colegilor. Acum e rândul Consiliului, care are datoria să rezolve această problemă care sapă credibilitatea Uniunii.

We cannot pretend building a stronger Europe as long as we are not able to solve an apparently simple problem, but with a strong and important impact on some citizens of European Union, in that case, Romanians and Bulgarians.

  Roberts Zīle (ECR). – Priekšsēdētājas kundze! Komisijas priekšsēdētājas kundze! Jūsu runā bija daudz ambiciozu akcentu, kam, protams, tādās runās ir jābūt. Bet mēs zinām, ka cilvēki tic darbiem, un ir darbi, kas veikti labi, piemēram, par pagājušās ziemas enerģētikas krīzes pārvarēšanu, par to, kā politiski un finansiāli atbalstīt Ukrainu.

Ir arī labas apņemšanās šodienas runā pastiprināt cīņu ar cilvēku kontrabandas noziedzību vai arī uzņemt Ukrainu Eiropas Savienībā, nesasaucot Konventu, ne ilgi grozot Eiropas Savienības līgumus. Bet jūsu runā, prezidentes kundze, nebija ne vārda par militāro kapacitāti Eiropā, kas tālu atpaliek no mūsu transatlantiskajiem partneriem, un to pavisam noteikti redz ukraiņi un arī Austrumeiropas pilsoņi, kuri dzīvo blakus agresoram.

Pilsoņi redz arī, kas notiek globālās pārmaiņās un ģeopolitiski svarīgākās puses. Ir ārkārtīgi svarīgi turēt visu maksimālo sadarbību ar mūsu globālajiem Rietumu partneriem. Un tas būtu, manuprāt, svarīgāks vēstījums drošībai runas nobeigumā nekā aicinājums domāt lieli. Un citiem vārdiem īstenībā pateikt “Let's make Europe great again!”. Akcenti varēja, manuprāt, būt labāki.

  Jaak Madison (ID). – Austatud president von der Leyen, head kolleegid! Räägime siis eesti keeles. Kui Te vastasite esimese ringi kõnelejatele ja tõite väga emotsionaalse näite lastest, kes peavad kasvama Euroopas ka aastal 2050 puhtas keskkonnas, ja sellega Te rõhusite rohepöörde väärikusele, mis iseenesest on väga õige; ma olen täiesti nõus sellega, et laste eest tuleb hoolitseda, selle pärast tuleb muretseda, nende elukeskkond peab olema kvaliteetne, kuid loomulikult mis puudutab rohepöörde edasiajamist, siis ega Te ei ole rumal inimene, ma usun; ma arvan, et Te teate ju väga hästi ka numbreid ja fakte, et kui me räägime rohepöördest ja vajalikkusest CO2 neutraalsuse järele, siis umbes 4 % kogu CO2-st atmosfääris on inimtekkeline. Euroopa moodustab umbes 7 % kogu CO2-st. Seega me võime ka siin peapeal seista ja teha ükskõik mis revolutsioone, see ei muuda mitte vähimatki kliimamuutustel. Paraku. Kuid mis puudutab lapsi, siis kõige olulisem küsimus, mis jäi mulle kuulmata Teie kõnest – Te rääkisite vajadusest rohepöörde järele, immigratsioonipakti järele, vajadusest tehnoloogia arendamise järele, kuid ma ei kuulnud mitte ühtegi sõna demograafiaprobleemist. Teie komisjoni volinik Ylva Johansson on korduvalt siin parlamendis rõhutanud, et me vajame migrante, sest me oleme vananev (Thank you) rahvastik, meil on vaja uusi inimesi, kuid meil on vaja omaenda lapsi ja siin ma ootaksin Euroopa Komisjonilt mingit sõnumit, kuidas suurendada sündivust, et meil oleks rohkem lapsi, kes tõesti peavad Euroopat üleval.

  Tatjana Ždanoka (NI). – Madam President, President, in your speech, you told that it is a moment for the EU to answer the call of history. One of the calls of history now is the unprecedented crisis taking place, it’s the crisis of falling capital efficiency, the element of which is the structural recession of the economy.

The world is breaking up into currency zones, and we have to pose the question: ‘What is the place of the EU in the new world map? Will the EU manage to create an own economic zone?’ And this is a strategic, the existential question to pose now.

Four times, I was elected to the European Parliament, the programme of my party contained the slogan of Charles de Gaulle: ‘Europe from Lisbon to the Ural’. To our regret, it was being in 2004 a real opportunity. Now it is a lost opportunity and the characteristic of modern history is, regrettably, the time of lost opportunities.

  Daniel Caspary (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin! In den vergangenen vier schwierigen Jahren haben wir gemeinsam viel erreicht.

Wir sind so gut wie keine andere Region durch die Corona-Pandemie gekommen. Wir haben es geschafft, beim Krieg Russlands gegen die Ukraine in der Frage von Krieg und Frieden zusammenzuhalten. Wir haben es geschafft, den European Green Deal auf den Weg zu bringen und damit unseren Beitrag gegen den menschlichen Anteil am Klimawandel zu leisten.

Vielen herzlichen Dank, Frau Präsidentin, für Ihren unermüdlichen Einsatz in dieser schwierigen Zeit.

Doch bei allem Erfolg – Sie haben es deutlich angesprochen: In manchen Bereichen müssen wir besser werden oder auch einen Neustart hinlegen. Wir müssen jetzt wirklich beweisen, dass Klimaschutz und wirtschaftliche Wettbewerbsfähigkeit Hand in Hand gehen. Wir müssen jetzt wirklich beweisen, dass wir Unternehmertum in Europa wieder mehr Spielraum und Perspektive geben. Wir müssen jetzt wirklich beweisen, dass es mit der Landwirtschaft und den ländlichen Räumen mehr Dialog und weniger Polarisierung gibt. Wir müssen jetzt wirklich beweisen, dass wir politisch die Weichen stellen, dass die Inflation sinkt und die soziale Frage nicht neu aufbricht. Wir müssen wirklich beweisen, dass wir in Fragen der Gemeinsamen Außen-, Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik besser werden und Europa besser nach außen schützen können.

Sie haben heute alle diese Themen angesprochen. Lassen Sie uns Europa gemeinsam zu den nächsten Erfolgen führen.

  Gabriele Bischoff (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissionspräsidentin! Wir haben uns zusammen zum Ziel gemacht, 15 Millionen weniger Menschen in Europa in Armut zu haben bis 2030. Und wenn wir so weitermachen wie bisher, werden wir 15 Millionen mehr Menschen haben, die in Armut sind.

Wenn man mit den Menschen spricht, dann fühlen sie sich gerade wie in einen Schraubstock gepresst: dass die Preise steigen für Lebensmittel, für Energie, dass gleichzeitig die Obdachlosigkeit wächst, die Tafeln an ihre Grenzen kommen etc. Deshalb ist es wichtig, dass Europa guckt, welchen Teil der Lösung es beitragen kann, um eben den Druck zu minimieren. Und hier zum Beispiel zu gucken bei den EU-Fonds: Können wir stärker sozialen Wohnungsbau unterstützen, können wir bei den Vergaberegeln schauen, ob wir hier schneller Lösungen finden? Das ist enorm wichtig für das Vertrauen.

Und Sie rufen nach Fachkräften aus Drittstaaten – ich unterstütze das. Aber ich bitte Sie, gehen Sie mal zu den Truckern in Gräfenhausen, die da streiken, und reden Sie mit denen, wie die ausgebeutet werden. Was macht Europa, um stärker zu verhindern, dass mobile Arbeit tatsächlich am Ende die Drecksarbeit wird?

Deshalb: Ein gemeinsamer Gipfel für faire Mobilität oder ein Runder Tisch wären eine gute erste Lösung.

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew). – Madam President, I hope that you’re going to be flexible for me, for once, because it’s my last intervention on the State of the Union after 15 years in Parliament and 10 years in the Council.

I have to tell you, Madam President, that I missed something, and I’m really in disagreement with you on one thing.

What I missed was the European Defence Union. And it’s more than the common production of ammunition for Ukraine. Can you imagine if we are in the same situation, in a war with Ukraine, with Trump back as a president and without having the backing of NATO? So the European Defence Union is absolutely clear and necessary for the future.

The second thing, where I am in complete disagreement with you – and you are the first President of the Commission who has tried to do that – is your suggestion to decouple the enlargement of the European Union from the deepening of the European Union. Yes, you said ‘let’s try with 30, with 35, with 36’. I can tell you, look at a European Union before your eyes with 35, 36 Commissioners or something like that – we already have no tasks for them today with 27! Or secondly, can you imagine the European Union with still the unanimity rule? You said, ‘Yeah, but we managed it.’ You managed it? Let’s give the examples. Migration we managed, it’s a breakthrough, because we skipped the unanimity, because for seven years the Council said ‘We’re going to do it with unanimity. It’s better than with qualified majority’, even when in the Treaty it’s foreseen by qualified majority. So the breakthrough came because we skipped unanimity and the same in sanctions.

And Mr Zelenskyy, the President of Ukraine, is right. He is saying that the counteroffensive of Ukraine goes at the speed of light compared to the sanction policy of the European Union. We are not capable anymore of deciding on additional sanctions against Russia because of unanimity in the European Union – because one or two countries oppose it.

So I think we absolutely need this reform of the Treaties and in my opinion, I ask in any way the Spanish Presidency by the end of the year when they open the negotiations with the candidate Member States not to do it if at the same time we don’t also open the debate on the reform of the Treaties.

  Harald Vilimsky (ID). – Frau Präsidentin, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Im deutschen Sprachraum gibt es das Sprichwort „Eigenlob stinkt“. Und das, was hier gerade an Selbstbeweihräucherung zelebriert wird, ist angesichts einer erbärmlichen Faktenlage und des desaströsen Zustandes der Europäischen Union völlig deplatziert.

Geben Sie mir die Möglichkeit, in dieser kurzen Zeit nur in den drei zentralen Bereichen, warum überhaupt europäische Einigung stattgefunden hat, das Versagen zu dokumentieren: Frieden, Freiheit, Wohlstand – die drei Grundprinzipien der europäischen Einigung.

Frieden – nach über elf Sanktionspaketen, nach einem Ruf nach immer mehr kriegerischen Auseinandersetzungen, nach Waffen, die dorthin beordert wurden, nach einer Vielzahl von Geldmitteln, die dorthin beordert wurden, den Krieg am Laufen zu halten und nachdem nie das Wort Frieden wirklich in den Mund genommen wurde, nie wirklich aktiv Friedensverhandlungen eingemahnt wurden – ist ein zentrales Scheitern in diesem Bereich.

Freiheit: Schauen Sie sich doch an, was gerade in Europa mit dem Digital Services Act passiert etwa und mit der Bargeldabschaffung, die voranschreitet. Menschen sollen immer mehr kontrolliert werden, es sollen Chatnachrichten kontrolliert werden. Man möchte eine Wahrheitsinstanz einziehen, was Fake News sind und was in den Augen der Europäischen Union tatsächlich Wahrheit ist. Wahnsinn, das kann so nicht sein!

Letzter Punkt Wohlstand: Bei einer Inflation, die im zweistelligen Bereich war, nach einer irrwitzigen Lockdown-Politik, die wir in der Corona Phase hatten, nach irrwitzigen Zahlungen in den Bereich der Ukraine zahlen jetzt die Europäer die Zeche dafür. Die Amerikaner machen das Geschäft, die Russen machen ein anderes Geschäft, wir zahlen. Also auch im Bereich Wohlstand: völliges Versagen.

Es wäre Schweigen angebracht, anstatt diese Selbstbeweihräucherung weiter voranzutreiben.

  Miroslav Radačovský (NI). – Pani von der Leyen, prečítam Vám časť Vašej správy o stave Únie zo septembra minulého roku.

„Ruský priemysel je v troskách. Aeroflot uzemňuje lietadlá, pretože nemá náhradné diely. Ruská armáda berie čipy z umývačiek riadu a chladničiek na opravu svojej vojenskej techniky.“

Aká je realita? Na ruskom fronte horia vaše nemecké tanky. Zomierajú desaťtisíce Slovanov. A ekonomika Ruska nie je katastrofálna.

Všetci vieme, čo je skutočnou príčinou tejto vojny. Je to pani von der Leyen, je to pani Metsola, je to náš eurokomisár pán Šefčovič, je to aj náš podpredseda, Slovák, Európskeho parlamentu, pán Šimečka.

Síce pán Šimečka nevie nič. On sa nevie pozdraviť ani staršiemu kolegovi Slovákovi. Keby sa môj syn nepozdravil jeho otcovi, tak mu takú vypálim, že bude tri dni nad Štrasburgom lietať s holubmi.

Skutočnou príčinou tejto vojny sú globálne záujmy Spojených štátov v snahe obsadiť Európu, ekonomicky obsadiť svet, obsadiť prístavy v Čiernom mori, obsadiť Krym. Začnime rokovania o prímerí. Začnime rokovania o mieri. A nebudú problémy v Európe.

  Andrzej Halicki (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowni Państwo! Europa odważna, silna, wkrótce większa, szybko odpowiadająca na oczekiwania obywateli, gwarantująca nam bezpieczeństwo – wspieramy ten kierunek.

Cieszę się, że w dzisiejszym wystąpieniu także duża część była poświęcona rolnikom – ciężko pracującym ludziom, którzy gwarantują nam bezpieczeństwo żywnościowe. Ale polscy rolnicy, ciężko pracujący, też oczekują jednego zdania prawdy, bo stoją u progu bankructwa: co po 15 września z wygasającym embargiem? Pomoc Ukrainie nie stoi w sprzeczności z pomocą polskim rolnikom. Oni mają magazyny pełne zboża jeszcze z zeszłego roku. Teraz jesteśmy po żniwach. A następny rok? Co robić z niespłaconymi kredytami?

Pani Przewodnicząca! Racjonalna decyzja leży w rękach Komisji, a z konfliktu cieszyć się będzie tylko szantażująca nas Rosja. To jest moment, w którym polscy rolnicy oczekują jasnego stanowiska i liczą na pomoc.

  Marek Belka (S&D). – Madam President, the challenge of Russian aggression and geopolitical shift in the world heavily influences our international trade policy. Distorted value chains and problems with access to critical raw materials weaken our EU strategic autonomy. We need to defend our global interests as the main exporting superpower, increase our strategic independence and support our industry with the inflow of needed raw materials. For this reason, I urge you to finalise important trade deals with Latin American countries, implement the New Zealand FTA and advance negotiations with Australia and India.

Our trade deals need to be supported by revised TSD chapters, with a sanctions mechanism whenever possible. This should go along with the implementation of the Due Diligence Directive to cover international value chains and a working ban on imports of products coming from forced labour.

  Dita Charanzová (Renew). – Madam President, since the start of this mandate, we have been fighting a crisis – first COVID and now the war. These have had a direct negative impact on our citizens and European competitiveness. From energy prices to inflation, Europe is struggling to maintain our place in regard to the US, China and the rest of the world. Without a renewed focus on competitiveness, we will end up in the world where we are merely consumers of products and services from elsewhere.

Madam President, our answer to this problem cannot be solved solely with unlimited state aid or subsidising our industries. Instead, Europe needs to invest in new industries, new sectors and new technologies. Focus on fewer and better regulations, because overregulation holds innovation back. Let China keep the factories of the 20th century. Europe should create a new business environment of the 21st century.

  Jörg Meuthen (NI). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissionspräsidentin, werte Kollegen! Europa steckt, anders als Sie es hier darstellen, in einer tiefen Krise.

Millionen Europäer wissen kaum noch, wie sie sich die alltäglichsten Dinge leisten sollen. Unternehmen wandern zuhauf ab, Deindustrialisierung läuft. Die unkontrollierte illegale Massenmigration hat Europa wieder fest im Griff. Es wäre dringend an der Zeit zu handeln.

Diese Probleme sind existenziell. Doch die EU, Ihre Kommission, fokussiert sich in unerträglicher Hybris und fataler Missachtung all dieser Probleme nahezu allein auf das absurde Ziel, den stattfindenden Klimawandel aufzuhalten, und irrt auch darin, denn Sie werden ihn mit Ihren Plänen definitiv nicht stoppen.

Statt das Weltklima bis auf die Nachkommastelle den Menschen anpassen zu wollen – was nur misslingen kann –, müssen die richtigen Vorkehrungen getroffen werden, unsere Gesellschaften den klimatischen Veränderungen anzupassen. Das ginge, aber da passiert rein gar nichts.

Sie verabsolutieren eine einzige Aufgabe, und die gehen Sie auch noch grundfalsch an! Mit diesem Irrweg kann und wird die EU im Ganzen grandios scheitern. Und das ist das Letzte, was in dieser Zeit historischer Weichenstellungen geschehen sollte.

  Ioan-Rareş Bogdan (PPE). – Doamnă președintă, excelențele voastre, ne-ați mințit! Ne-ați mințit în mod repetat, ne umiliți și păcăliți constant, deși suntem cetățeni europeni model, responsabili și deschiși, toleranți și muncitori.

Am făcut eforturi uriașe și am deschis larg ușile pentru 6 milioane de ucraineni ce fugeau din fața agresiunii lui Putin. Ne punem la grea încercare fermierii noștri rămași cu mii de tone de cereale în hambare sau pe câmp pentru a primi cereale ucrainene ce trebuie să ajungă în nordul Africii și Europa, însă care rămân în cantități uriașe și pe teritoriul României. Ne-am securizat granițele și, tocmai azi dimineață, românii de la granița sudică cu Ucraina au primit mesaje de alertă din cauza bucăților de drone ce cad de pe celălalt mal atacat în rafale de ruși.

Nu sunteți capabili să puneți presiune și să-l opriți pe cancelarul Nehammer al Austriei de a umili și sfida o țară cu 23 de milioane de cetățeni europeni. Nehammer sfidează și umilește nu doar România, el își bate joc de Eurosistem, de voi toți, de la Consiliu până la tine, în mod special, dragă Ursula. Tu, Roberta, Charles Michel ne faceți promisiuni peste promisiuni, iar noi privim cum România, exemplul al toleranței etnice și religioase, al parteneriatului corect și asumat pentru forțele militare NATO, este bântuită de stafia extremismului, antieuropenismului și intoleranței.

Partide marginale au devenit periculoase din cauza refuzului Austriei de a ne accepta în Schengen și al vostru de a fi incapabili de a-l convinge pe cancelarul austriac că greșește grav față de Europa comună. Aud cuvinte ca solidaritate, unitate și alte glume. Care solidaritate?

Ce au cerut românii care sunt umiliți pe coridoare marginale în aeroporturi? Ce unitate și egalitate de șanse când românii stau la cozi kilometrice la granițe? Ne-ați hrănit cu iluzii, asta în timp ce Austria vânează contracte, iar România așteaptă un singur lucru, respectul cuvenit. Atât, respect și șanse egale pentru Europa comună.

  Biljana Borzan (S&D). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, dobro ste rekli, gospođo predsjednice, prije četiri godine nitko od nas nije mogao zamisliti da ćemo živjeti u ovakvom svijetu, u ovakvoj Uniji.

Živimo u Uniji, gdje 37 milijuna ljudi si ne može priuštiti pošten obrok. U Uniji u kojoj u nekim državama članicama dvije trećine ljudi ne može spojiti kraj s krajem. U Uniji, gdje svaka peta osoba živi na rubu siromaštva. S druge strane, živimo u Uniji gdje tvrtke vrijedne milijarde plaćaju porez u promilima, a građani u mojoj zemlji, Hrvatskoj, ali i drugdje u Uniji, osjećaju kako se za svaku krizu samo njima ispostavi račun, bilo većim cijenama ili manjim sadržajem.

Vaša obećanja o socijalnoj uniji na osnovi kojih smo vam dali povjerenje prije četiri godine važnija su nego ikada. Ne možemo ostaviti građane na milost i nemilost tržištu. Europska unija mora raditi za ljude.

  Nicola Beer (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin! Geopolitisch befinden wir uns in schwerer See. Auf die brutale Aggression Russlands gegen die Ukraine haben wir – Parlament, Rat und Kommission – geschlossen und geeint reagiert.

Diesen Schulterschluss hätte ich mir, Frau Kommissionspräsidentin, auch in der Umsetzung Ihres Versprechens, das Europäische Parlament zu stärken, gewünscht. Denn ein entscheidungsstarkes, gestaltendes Parlament bildet die Grundlage für eine im Inneren und Äußeren handlungsfähige EU.

Gerade diese Handlungsfähigkeit garantiert Sicherheit, Wohlstand und Wettbewerbsfähigkeit in Europa. Treibende Kraft dabei: unser Mittelstand. In Zeiten politischer Umbrüche braucht es starke Unternehmen, um den Weg in Richtung eines souveränen, offenen Europas zu gehen. Dafür darf die Wirtschaft nicht durch bürokratischen Ballast blockiert werden.

Vor vier Jahren sind Sie, Frau von der Leyen, dafür angetreten, unseren Mittelstand von bleierner Bürokratie zu befreien. Stichwort: one in, one out. Doch bis heute fehlt konkreter Bürokratieabbau. Das Mittelstandspaket: zu spät. Nur viele Worte, kaum Taten. Jetzt gilt es, unsere Wirtschaft zu beflügeln, um für unsere Bürger Kurs in Richtung Zukunft zu nehmen.

  Dolors Montserrat (PPE). – Señora presidenta, señora presidenta von der Leyen, coincido con usted en los desafíos que tenemos por delante y tiene nuestro apoyo.

Pero hoy debo hablar de la gravedad de lo que está pasando en España, país que preside ahora el Consejo. Es insólito e inadmisible que el presidente del Gobierno español no comparezca en este Pleno a defender las prioridades de la Presidencia española y que no lo haga por su interés de poder. Pedro Sánchez no quiere que se vea en público lo que negocia en privado. No quiere coincidir con Puigdemont, un prófugo de la justicia que está aquí y que le exige una amnistía a cambio de hacerle presidente. Un prófugo al que este Parlamento le suspendió la inmunidad.

Una amnistía supone negar la existencia de delitos y fulminar la separación de poderes. No tiene cabida y vulnera nuestro Estado de Derecho. En el Partido Popular Europeo no vamos a callar mientras el presidente de mi país pretende ceder ante este ataque al Estado de Derecho. El precio de la derrota electoral de Sánchez no puede ser la humillación de España. Evitar este atropello es una obligación para cualquier demócrata europeo.

  Heléne Fritzon (S&D). – Fru talman! Kommissionens ordförande! Stormar, skyfall, värmeböljor i Europa – klimatförändringarna påverkar oss här och nu.

Vi har krig i Europa med högre matpriser och dyrare elräkningar som följd. Våld och övergrepp ökar i en orolig tid, inte minst mot flickor och kvinnor. Vi ser ett bakslag för jämställdheten i EU.

Föräldrar oroar sig för vilken planet vi ska lämna över till våra barn och barnbarn. Jag välkomnar därför von der Leyens besked här i dag att vi ska fullfölja den gröna given, trots de högerkonservativa krafterna här inne och trots de regeringar, likt den som vi har i Sverige, som motarbetar klimatomställningen. Men jag saknade ett tydligt mål om EU:s klimatambitioner för 2040.

Slutligen var beskedet från Ursula von der Leyen om samtycke i lagen om att bekämpa mäns våld mot kvinnor viktigt. Ett nej betyder alltid ett nej, ”no means no”!

  Adrián Vázquez Lázara (Renew). – Señora presidenta, señora presidenta von der Leyen, usted ha dicho hoy en esta Cámara que el Estado de Derecho son los pilares y el pegamento de nuestra Unión. Pero ya sabemos que existen países que poco a poco han ido degradando sus democracias y solo hemos actuado cuando ya era demasiado tarde. Y sí, tenemos por delante grandes retos económicos, sociales y medioambientales. Pero créame, presidenta, no hay Estado de la Unión si no hay Estado de Derecho.

Y hoy hay un Gobierno europeo que nombra y cesa a dedo al fiscal general para nombrar a uno de sus ministros, que tiene caducado y bloqueado el órgano de elección de los jueces porque no lo puede controlar, que aprueba rebajar penas por malversación y corrupción y concede indultos a cambio de votos y que está negociando con un fugado de la justicia la impunidad de aquellos que atacaron el Estado de Derecho con tal de mantenerse en el poder. Y no le hablo de Hungría ni de Polonia. Le hablo del país que ostenta hoy la Presidencia rotatoria del Consejo.

Por eso, hoy le pido que escuche esta llamada de SOS de millones de ciudadanos españoles, ciudadanos europeos. Le pido que no mire para otro lado. Y después no podrá decir que no le hemos avisado.

  François-Xavier Bellamy (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, en évoquant le bilan de la Commission, vous parlez de la force de l’Europe et de son efficacité, mais la réalité semble parfois bien éloignée de cet hémicycle. Au moment où nous parlons, le Secours populaire annonce que 20 % des Français vivent à découvert. Dans toute l’Europe, une personne sur trois se prive d’un repas pour tenir. Des millions de foyers, d’artisans, d’entreprises n’arrivent plus à payer leur énergie. Malgré ce retour de la pauvreté, la Commission n’aura cessé de multiplier les contraintes sur ceux qui travaillent et produisent en Europe.

La directive énergétique sur les bâtiments aggravera la crise du logement. La stratégie «de la ferme à la fourchette» fait baisser la production alimentaire. La taxonomie accélère encore le décrochage industriel. Vous avez longuement parlé d’électricité pour accélérer l’implantation des éoliennes, mais toujours pas un mot sur le nucléaire, pourtant première source d’énergie décarbonée et accessible en Europe. Vous promettez de réduire les normes, mais elles n’auront cessé de s’empiler ces dernières années. La multiplication des contraintes ne protège pas l’environnement. Elle nous rend seulement dépendants des autres pays du monde qui n’assument pas les mêmes coûts. Nous ne sauverons pas la planète en achetant des voitures électriques en Chine. De même, nous ne relancerons pas notre économie en augmentant une immigration qualifiée, comme vous l’avez dit, mais en qualifiant ces millions de jeunes dont vous avez parlé, qui sont encore aujourd’hui si loin de l’emploi.

La seule réponse à l’hiver démographique en Europe, c’est de soutenir les familles et non de déstabiliser encore plus nos pays, en nous appuyant sur elles, sur les talents de nos pays, sur le savoir, la culture des citoyens en Europe. Oui, nous pouvons retrouver la prospérité et l’élan de notre continent, mais cela suppose d’ouvrir les yeux sur la réalité.

  Javier Moreno Sánchez (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora presidenta de la Comisión, señora Montserrat, señor Vázquez, en esta casa estamos en el debate sobre el estado de la Unión, no en el debate sobre el estado desastroso de sus respectivos partidos y líderes. Por favor, respetemos esta Cámara.

Dicho esto, señorías, en esta legislatura hemos superado con unidad y solidaridad dos grandes crisis y la Unión Europea se ha fortalecido. A pesar de lo que grita la extrema derecha, la ciudadanía europea se ha sentido protegida y pide más Europa y menos nacionalismo. Hemos avanzado hacia la Unión de la salud y hemos superado el tabú de la deuda común para reconstruir nuestras sociedades. Ante la guerra de Putin, hemos avanzado también hacia la unión energética y la autonomía estratégica abierta.

Ahora, de la mano de la ambiciosa Presidencia española, debemos cerrar un pacto migratorio que incluya también la migración regular que necesitamos, debemos fortalecer el pilar social, conseguir la igualdad de género y, sobre todo, proteger el planeta, especialmente con el Reglamento sobre la restauración de la naturaleza.

Querida presidenta, espero que consiga que el Partido Popular Europeo suelte la mano de la extrema derecha y vuelva a la senda europeísta tradicional.

El presidente Jacques Delors decía que cuando el Parlamento y la Comisión van de la mano, la construcción europea avanza. Ahora, además, contamos con la mano firme y la intervención de la Presidencia española. ¡Adelante!

  Angelika Winzig (PPE). – Geschätzte Frau Präsidentin! Die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung Europas geht gerade in eine gefährliche Richtung: Niedrige Energiepreise, geringe bürokratische Hürden sowie attraktive Förderungen machen andere Weltmärkte interessant für europäische Unternehmen, die investieren möchten. Selbst die mittelständische Wirtschaft liebäugelt damit, Neuinvestitionen vor allem in den USA zu tätigen.

Daher ist es höchste Zeit, dass wir uns um die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit Europas kümmern. Denn ansonsten ist auch der Green Deal zum Scheitern verurteilt, den wir übrigens mit mehr wirtschaftlichem Sachverstand umsetzen sollten.

Frau Präsidentin, ich begrüße ausdrücklich Ihre vorgeschlagenen Maßnahmen für den Transformationsprozess in der Industrie ebenso wie das KMU-Entwicklungspaket. Wir dürfen unsere europäischen Betriebe nicht im Regen stehen lassen, denn geht es der Wirtschaft gut, geht es uns allen gut.

  Katarina Barley (S&D). – Liebe Frau Präsidentin! Ich muss es leider sagen: Ihre Rede hat mich diesmal nicht überzeugt. Und ich vermute, sie lässt auch die Bürgerinnen und Bürger relativ ratlos zurück.

Eine ganze Handvoll neuer Kommissionen, Beauftragter, Berichte kurz vor der Wahl. Wie soll das noch umgesetzt werden? Dafür sehr wenig Konkretes für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger in diesen schwierigen Zeiten.

Sie sagen, 90 % haben Sie umgesetzt. Da sind aber, glaube ich, ein paar fremde Federn dabei. Also: Frauen in Führungspositionen. Warum ist das nicht gekommen? Weil die Bundesregierung – wegen der CDU/CSU – es ewig blockiert hat. Warum ist es jetzt entblockiert? Wegen der neuen Bundesregierung. Weil die CDU nicht mehr an Bord ist.

Kein Wort zum Rechtsextremismus. Das finde ich wirklich schlimm. Zum Antisemitismus, der Einzug hält in immer mehr Regierungen in Europa, weil Ihre Parteienfamilie mit ihnen gemeinsame Sache macht. Und die Auswirkungen? Wir sehen sie in diesen Ländern: Sozialhilfe wird per SMS gestrichen, das Recht auf Abtreibung beschränkt. Rechtsstaatlichkeit ist nur noch eine hohle Phrase.

Die EVP sabotiert außerdem grundlegend den European Green Deal, Ihr Flaggschiff, Ihr Prestigeprojekt. Wer setzt sich da am Ende durch? Unsere Position ist klar: Wir brauchen ein wirtschaftlich starkes, klimaneutrales und soziales Europa. Dafür setzen wir uns ein. Es wird Zeit für einen klaren Kompass für Europa.

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, obrigada pela sua liderança, perseverança, competência que ajuda todos os cidadãos da União Europeia. Os Estados—Membros não quiseram 93 mil milhões de euros no âmbito dos planos de recuperação e resiliência e tinham até 31 de agosto deste ano.

A minha pergunta é se a Comissão Europeia está disponível para que se possa reutilizar estes montantes, por exemplo, para o reforço da autonomia estratégica da União Europeia, por exemplo, para a Plataforma de Investimentos Estratégicos para Projetos e Tecnologias, a plataforma denominada STEP. Não devemos perder estes recursos.

Para além disso, em termos da energia, é essencial que Portugal não seja uma ilha energética. Nós precisamos de interconexões. É necessário que a energia e as interconexões existam e existam, nomeadamente, nos Pirenéus.

Para terminar, também Portugal não pode ser uma ilha ferroviária e a ferrovia é essencial. A discussão entre a bitola ibérica e europeia não está terminada e nós precisamos e a Comissão Europeia defende bitola europeia em 2030. Parece me que não é justo, não é correto, nem eficiente se apostar na bitola ibérica. E o diferendo que existe, porventura com a Espanha, espero que a Comissão Europeia o ajude a resolver.

  Brando Benifei (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Presidente von der Leyen, l'Europa risponderà all'appello della Storia solo se riuscirà a liberarsi dal ricatto dei nazionalismi che mettono il veto sul futuro delle nuove generazioni.

La pandemia, la guerra alle nostre porte e il cambiamento climatico hanno costretto l'Europa a rispondere unita con misure straordinarie per uscire dalle emergenze. Ma reagire non basta più: serve un'Europa capace di anticipare e governare il cambiamento.

Rendiamo permanente il NextGenerationEU e dotiamo l'unione di un vero bilancio federale. Riformiamo la governance economica per promuovere una crescita giusta e sostenibile. Agiamo con coraggio per mettere al servizio degli esseri umani tecnologie straordinarie come l'intelligenza artificiale.

Non facciamoci intimidire, anzi, Presidente von der Leyen, non si faccia intimidire lei da quelle forze politiche, alcune a lei vicine, che tentano di affossare le norme europee necessarie per salvare il pianeta.

Alle prossime elezioni ci sarà, da una parte, chi saprà dare risposte alla chiamata della Storia e, dall'altra, chi fornirà giustificazioni e capri espiatori. Gli europei sanno già di chi fidarsi: gli europei sono pronti.

  Luděk Niedermayer (PPE). – Madam President, in my comments I want to focus on the economy. It took a big part of your speech – a very good speech – and I guess this is a big, if not central, issue. We are not facing a problem of high unemployment; we are facing different problems, with low income and big uncertainty. And this must be addressed.

I guess it’s fair to say that the European economy is lagging behind the best in many fields. We have to do something with that, in spite of the fact that we are doing well in some others. I guess it is the right time to call someone like Mario Draghi, who is best suited to do a really good analysis of our competitive situation, and Member States and politicians must listen to him and act. It’s almost late.

Concerning the initiatives, I can appreciate what you said. Wind energy – key for cheap and available energy. Red tape for SMEs – this is absolutely essential because they are costing us the growth and they are the prosperity. And as well, the other topics that you have mentioned are very important, for example, promoting fair trade and not allowing the others to be undermined through unfair subsidies. So I hope we will act and we will act quickly, because time is running out.

  Ivan Štefanec (PPE). – Madam President, thank you for your wise words. I also do believe that after many crises, the EU is stronger than before. And also it is thanks to your leadership, to the first action and also our ability to cooperate.

Nowadays, many countries want to join the EU and we know that Ukrainians are even dying for this goal. Our European response to the criminal Russian aggression was strong and we should continue with this approach. We significantly limited Russian income from the EU, but still there is gas and nuclear fuel, which should be included into sanctions.

Madam President, I was really very pleased with your words about making business easier and with the objective to reduce administrative burden by 25%. We need to do it for our SMEs and for our competitiveness. But still there is one more goal which should be achieved and this is the completion of our single market. This objective does not require any resources, just political will and it is feasible and achievable.

It is the same with, for example, the Energy Union, the Defence Union and the Capital Market Union. I do believe also that the improvement of our competitiveness will result in the improvement of quality of life of all citizens.

  Angelika Niebler (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissionspräsidentin! Sie sagten heute, wir müssen heute liefern und uns auf morgen vorbereiten. Insbesondere müssen wir auch unsere Wettbewerbsfähigkeit stärken. Ich kann Ihnen nur zustimmen, und ich möchte mich auch bedanken, dass Sie heute Wertschätzung und Anerkennung gegenüber unseren Landwirtinnen und Landwirten zum Ausdruck gebracht haben.

Wir haben natürlich in der Europäischen Union Reformbedarf. Die Zahlen in der Wirtschaft sind eindeutig, die Konjunktur schwächelt. Investitionen werden zurückgehalten und auch die Haushalte haben immer weniger Spielraum.

Wir müssen alles tun, um unseren Standort zu stärken, und vor allen Dingen sicherstellen, dass die Wertschöpfung bei uns hier in Europa, in den Mitgliedstaaten stattfindet. Wir brauchen – viele Kolleginnen und Kollegen haben es angesprochen – Deregulierung. Entlastung ist das Gebot der Stunde. Wir müssen runter vom Regulierungswahn. Und ich warte wirklich auf die konkreten Vorschläge, die jetzt auch im Oktober kommen.

Und ein Letztes: Wir müssen uns auch um unsere eigene Sicherheit kümmern. Wir brauchen eine gemeinsame europäische Vision für Bereiche wie Weltraum, Maritimes, kritische Infrastrukturen und Cyber. Das ist die Lehre, die wir auch aus dem schrecklichen Ukrainekrieg ziehen müssen.

Catch-the-eye procedure

  Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Paní předsedající, vážená paní předsedkyně Komise, dear Ursula, chci Vám poděkovat za Váš odvážný a optimistický přístup a také realistický. Potřebujeme realistická řešení. Konkurenceschopnost evropského průmyslu včetně malých a středních podniků, omezení levných dovozů, které omezují rozvoj evropského průmyslu a ničí naše podnikání. Snížení byrokracie. Děkuji za tento jasný návrh. Buďme odvážní ve vizích, ale realističtí v jejich řešeních. Mám jen jeden dotaz. Jste velmi citlivá k situaci deportovaných dětí, které jsou odváženy z Ukrajiny do Ruska. Zmínila jste, že budete organizovat velkou konferenci na vysoké úrovni, která by měla pomoci návratu těchto dětí. Chci se Vás zeptat, zda v této věci hodláte pokračovat. V každém případě děkuji a přeji hodně štěstí.

  Margarida Marques (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, eu queria começar por agradecer à Presidente Von der Leyen o ter lembrado aqui aquilo que são os resultados das políticas da União Europeia ao longo destes quatro anos. E foram muitos e resultam de uma cooperação interinstitucional forte e do trabalho conjunto entre a Comissão Europeia e o Parlamento. Destaco a criação do SURE ou a criação do NextGenerationEU, que temos que olhar para pensarmos como é que pode ser usado no futuro.

Mas queria destacar aqui duas ausências significativas no discurso de Von der Leyen. O primeiro, a revisão do orçamento plurianual da União Europeia. E, sobretudo, temos que pensar que não haverá novos alargamentos se não conseguirmos modificar a arquitetura do orçamento da União Europeia. Segunda lacuna, nenhuma referência à revisão das regras de governação económica. Ora, nós sabemos que só conseguimos continuar a apoiar o investimento e a apoiar os cidadãos, os europeus, se o fizermos... (A Presidente retira a palavra à oradora)

  Vlad-Marius Botoş (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissionspräsidentin! Erstmal will ich Ihnen als Rumäne, als EU-Abgeordneter, aber auch als stolzer Europäer Danke sagen. Danke, dass Sie heute erneut erläutert haben, dass das Projekt „Rumänien und Bulgarien im Schengen-Raum“ fortbesteht.

Aber ich erinnere daran, dass Jean-Claude Juncker im Jahr 2017 in seiner Rede in diesem Raum zum State of the Union genau das auch unterstützt hat. Seitdem sind sechs Jahre vergangen, und leider verlieren unsere Bürger in Rumänien und Bulgarien täglich den Glauben an dieses Ziel.

Frau von der Leyen, Rumänien und Bulgarien müssen bis Ende dieses Jahres Mitglieder des Schengen-Raums werden. Ansonsten wird es zu spät sein – für sie, aber auch für uns alle, die den Glauben noch haben und täglich unermüdlich für dieses Projekt arbeiten, für die Europäische Union.

  Caroline Roose (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, Madame Von der Leyen, vous avez plusieurs fois aujourd’hui répété votre attachement au pacte vert, mais vous n’avez rien dit, pas une seule phrase, pas un seul mot sur le bien-être animal et la révision des règles européennes sur le bien-être animal. C’est pourtant l’un des pans du pacte vert les plus attendus par les citoyens européens.

Cette réforme est un engagement répété de la Commission européenne par rapport à la stratégie «de la ferme à la fourchette», suite à la commission d’enquête sur le transport des animaux – on a travaillé plus d’un an et demi dessus –, suite à l’initiative citoyenne «End the cage age». Abandonner cette réforme après s’y être engagé porterait un sérieux coup à la crédibilité de la Commission européenne. Abandonner cette réforme – il ne faut absolument pas vous cacher derrière de faux arguments comme celui de l’inflation. Si nous voulons vraiment nous attaquer à l’inflation, il existe d’autres solutions, comme s’attaquer aux marges des transformateurs et des distributeurs. Les animaux ne doivent pas faire les frais de calculs politiques à quelques mois des élections et nous comptons sur vous.

  Annika Bruna (ID). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Présidente de la Commission, je vous interrogerai brièvement sur vos futurs arbitrages également en matière de bien-être animal. Vos services rendent en principe leur copie vers novembre, mais la presse indique que le paquet de propositions sur le bien-être animal pourrait être renvoyé à la prochaine Commission, c’est-à-dire après les élections européennes. J’aimerais donc savoir si la refonte des législations sur le bien-être animal sera effective.

Je souhaite, comme de nombreux citoyens, qu’elle ait lieu et qu’elle inclue l’élevage, le transport, l’abattage ou encore l’étiquetage. Diverses initiatives citoyennes européennes telles que «Pas de fourrure en Europe» ou «Pour une Europe sans expérimentation animale» ont connu un grand succès. Le bien-être animal est donc aussi un sujet qui compte pour les Européens. Compte-t-il aussi pour vous, Madame la Présidente?

  Ladislav Ilčić (ECR). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, poštovani kolege, poštovana gospođo von der Leyen, sad vidim što znači živjeti u Brussels bubbleu.

Od tamo dolazi vaš govor, a na drugoj strani imamo realnost, imamo konkretne brojke koje pokazuju da je europsko gospodarstvo u vrlo lošoj situaciji, da su cijene energije više nego ikada, da mnogi dijelovi Europe pucaju po šavovima od nekontroliranih migracija, da demografski izumiremo, što neće imati samo posljedice na gospodarstvo, nego jednostavno da nestaje budućnost za naše europske narode i iznad svega da situacija što se tiče demokracije na koju se pozivate i povjerenja, nije takva kakvu govorite.

Naime, na europske izbore imamo dvostruko manju izlaznost nego na nacionalnoj, što pokazuje da ljudi ne vjeruju vama, ne vjeruju toj vašoj demokraciji, ali vi ne brinete za male ljude, nego samo za ideologije koje namećete, dakle, od kontraučinkovite zelene ideologije do različitih društvenih koncepata.

I to je stanje nacije i to stanje mogu promijeniti samo novi ljudi, a ne vi.

  Marc Botenga (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Présidente de la Commission européenne, vous avez exprimé avec une vraiment grande éloquence tout votre mépris pour la classe travailleuse en Europe aujourd’hui. Je sais que vous gagnez 30 000 Euros par mois, mais est-ce que vous savez que, aujourd’hui, en Europe, 30 % des gens doivent sauter un repas parce qu’ils n’ont pas l’argent pour trois repas par jour? Est-ce que vous savez que 46 % des Européens ont peur de monter le chauffage, et donc ne le font pas et restent dans le froid? Que 100 millions d’Européens risquent la pauvreté?

Et quel est votre bilan, votre bilan à vous? Est-ce que vous avez bloqué les factures de l’énergie? Non. Est-ce que vous avez taxé les millionnaires? Non. Est-ce que vous avez taclé les surprofits des multinationales énergétiques, pharmaceutiques, militaires? Non. Et que faites-vous aujourd’hui donc? Aujourd’hui, vous inondez, vous garantissez des milliards d’euros au secteur militaire, aux multinationales de l’armement, tandis qu’aux travailleurs vous proposez le retour du pacte budgétaire, le retour de l’austérité. Madame Von der Leyen, cette Europe – votre Europe – ne sera jamais la nôtre, on vous combattra, vous et votre coalition.

  Fabio Massimo Castaldo (NI). – Madam President, I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to you for your clarity and courage today. You are right: history is calling for a geopolitical union to diligently protect our companies and workers from deceptive trade practices, subsidies and dumping employed by China. None of our Member States has the size, the strength nor the authority to safeguard our technological and industrial sovereignty in isolation. What has happened in recent years demonstrated this conclusively. Selling to public opinion the opposite at this juncture is much more than recklessly naive.

Similarly, failing to publicly and unequivocally condemn the intolerable crimes against humanity perpetrated by Russia against the Ukrainian people is an act of profound hypocrisy. No pursuit of fleeting, easy electoral consensus can justify immoral silences and ambiguities. Our duty extends far beyond the next election. It encompasses the well-being of future generations of Europeans – a commitment I will continue to uphold no matter the risks.

Yes, we must combine enlargement with political deepening. Yes, we must create an adequate budget financed by permanent common debt to protect our European common good. And yes, we must implement the necessary Treaty changes and launch a real European bottom up ...

(The President cut off the speaker)

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)

  Ursula von der Leyen, President of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, many of you described where we came from: the double mission that we had at the very beginning in 2019 – the green and the digital transition. Then came a virus. Then came the atrocious Russian war against Ukraine.

I was glad to hear many of you comment that Europe managed to be strong and agile. And we will not rest, Malik. We will keep up the high ambition. Rest assured of that.

So the main messages of today are certainly, first of all: we are living in an uncertain world, without any doubt. But Europe will deal with it – be it the Russian war, be it climate change, be it how to keep AI human centric.

The second message is that we are preparing the EU economy for the future, so that the clean industry made in Europe is here at home, that we will address the lack of skilled labour, that we will cut red tape.

The third point is, of course, on enlargement. And because I heard you, let me – which is a bit funny – quote myself from the speech I just gave: ‘This is not a question of deepening integration or widening the Union. We can and must do both.’ And the second point is that I always will support this House and all of those who want to reform the EU and make it work better for citizens. And yes, that means including through a European Convention and Treaty change if and when needed. But we cannot wait until we have done this Treaty change to move ahead with enlargement. That was the message of the speech.

Finally, a strong message that we have to strengthen our democracy. That is a daily work because they are never perfect, but they are perfectible and this is our task. So thank you for a very lively, rich discussion with support and criticism, with ideas and warnings. This is the beauty of democracy, that it is possible to do all this, and this is what democracies do – they answer to the aspirations and the anxieties of their citizens by action.

So for us, it is important that in this electoral year we must continue to be active, that this is a year of action. Thank you very much for your tireless engagement and I am looking forward to the months to come. There are lots of uncertainties, but one thing is for sure: long live Europe!

  Márton Gyöngyösi (NI). – Elnök Asszony! Európa jövőjére nézve a legnagyobb veszélyt gazdasági szuverenitásának elvesztése és idegen hatalmak befolyásszerzése jelenti. Az elmúlt évtizedben rengeteg olyan gyártástechnológia került kizárólagosan ázsiai, főleg kínai dominancia alá, amely nélkül gazdaságaink nem is léteznének. Ilyen például a chipgyártás vagy a manapság divatos akkumulátorgyártás.

Az USA már felismerte, hogy gazdasága túlságosan kitett Kínának ezen technológiák terén, és szükséges ellenlépéseket tesz. A kínai befolyásszerzés Európában is elindult, az EU-nak azonban erre semmilyen válasza nincs, sőt a probléma felismeréséig sem jutott el.

Az, hogy a kínai elektromos autók ügyében csak egy szubvencióellenes vizsgálat szükségességéig jutott el (mármint a Bizottság), pont ezt mutatja. A helyzet még ennél is rosszabb! Van ugyanis néhány uniós tagállam, amelynek a kormánya az európai érdekekkel szemben, trójai falóként, a gazdaságilag ellenséges hatalmak befolyásszerzését segíti, ezzel aláásva Európa közös jövőjét. Itt az idő, hogy Európa végre... (az elnök megvonja a szót a felszólalótól)

  Manon Aubry, au nom du groupe The Left. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Présidente de la Commission, je vous ai bien écoutée, et je dois dire que j’ai été assez sidérée par votre niveau de déconnexion totale avec la réalité. Descendez de votre tour dorée!

Vous dites répondre à l’appel de l’histoire, mais vous ne répondez pas à l’appel de millions de gens, d’un tiers des Européens, qui ne mangent pas à leur faim à cause de l’inflation et pour qui vous avez réussi l’exploit de ne pas avoir un seul mot aujourd’hui. Alors, puisque vous refusez d’entendre notre appel pour un plan d’urgence social financé par les plus riches et les super-profits, je vais faire un truc qui est assez peu commun au Parlement européen, c’est donner mon micro à un citoyen européen que vous n’avez pas écouté – c’est très court: [Mme Aubry lance un enregistrement audio sur son téléphone] «Chaque soir, on commence un peu à avoir faim [inaudible] et proche du repas du midi». Il s’appelle Yassine. Des gens comme lui, il y en a des millions dans l’Union européenne et c’est pour eux que vous devriez agir, Madame von der Leyen.

Victor Hugo écrivait: «Vous voulez des miséreux secourus? Je veux la misère supprimée». J’ai l’impression aujourd’hui, Madame von der Leyen, que vous ne voulez ni l’un ni l’autre. Alors comptez sur notre groupe pour continuer à nous battre pour en faire une priorité.

  Marco Zanni, a nome del gruppo ID. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, da questo dibattito sicuramente usciamo con una notizia positiva, cioè che questo è l'ultimo dibattito del collega Verhofstadt e, quindi, una prospettiva migliore per l'Unione europea.

Per il resto, ribadisco quanto detto: non è il momento dei comitati, non è il momento dei gruppi di lavoro, non è il momento degli inviati speciali. Sappiamo quali sono i problemi e abbiamo bisogno di risposte concrete e veloci che ci aspettiamo dalla Commissione europea sui tre grandi temi: una revisione del Green Deal, perché questa transizione sia davvero giusta; un approccio davvero radicalmente diverso sull'immigrazione, soprattutto quella illegale, che deve essere dichiarata tale e, sull'economia, risposte concrete e non burocrazia e complicazioni.

Fare meno e fare meglio deve essere la linea guida della Commissione nei prossimi mesi.

  Beata Szydło, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Szanowna Pani Przewodnicząca! Porównajmy Pani słowa z faktami. Po pierwsze, mówi Pani o praworządności. To sama Komisja Europejska łamie traktaty europejskie, ingerując w kompetencje suwerennych państw.

Po drugie, rozwój gospodarczy Europy, konkurencyjność Europy. Zielony Ład doprowadza do tego, że coraz więcej obciążeń mają gospodarstwa domowe, europejskie, każdy Europejczyk i europejskie przedsiębiorstwa.

Polityka migracyjna? To jest kryzys migracyjny. Tylko wczoraj dwa i pół tysiąca nielegalnych migrantów przypłynęło na Lampedusę.

Ale jest jedna rzecz, którą może Pani zrobić i okazać, że solidarność europejska to nie tylko słowa, ale to fakty. Za dwa dni mija termin zakazu importu zboża z Ukrainy do Unii Europejskiej. Proszę ten zakaz przedłużyć. Proszę okazać solidarność europejską, między innymi, polskim rolnikom. Naprawdę to jest bardzo potrzebne, Pani Przewodnicząca!

  Philippe Lamberts, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, I think we share your idea that indeed, we need to deepen and to widen the European Union, but we cannot use that as an excuse to keep people waiting longer than needed. It has to be merit-based, but only merit-based. Now, the thing is, if Ukraine would join today, all 27 Member States except one would be net contributors to the EU budget. I hope that this will make Member States realise that we need the European Union to be funded by its own resources and I hope it will dawn upon them that that’s the only way to keep it going. And, well, we can do that without treaty revision, you know, and I will quote Vladimir Ilyich Lenin: when there’s the will, there’s a way.

  Stéphane Séjourné, au nom du groupe Renew. – Madame la Présidente, notre collègue Lamberts a toujours de bonnes citations de fin. Je voudrais d’abord remercier l’ensemble des orateurs, prendre au mot également mes collègues du PPE, du S&D et des Verts sur la fin de mandat et le fait d’être utiles sur les derniers textes – il y en a encore cet après-midi, des textes, notamment sur la qualité de l’air. Il faut qu’on trouve des majorités et des procédés ambitieux pour y arriver.

Vous l’avez compris, Madame la Présidente, nous souhaitons être utiles sur les neuf mois qui restent. Évidemment, la question de l’énergie, la question de l’immigration sont nos priorités. Il faudra, à un moment donné, parler aussi des institutions et de notre capacité à renforcer les pouvoirs de ce Parlement. Je n’ai évidemment pas évoqué ce sujet. Ce n’est jamais le moment de parler des institutions, mais à un moment donné, à force de repousser une réforme, notre capacité à modifier, notre capacité aussi à décider, en Europe, plus rapidement, on perd finalement de l’efficacité politique.

Voilà, Madame la Présidente, le maître-mot est «l’ambition» pour ces neuf derniers mois, évidemment. Et puis la question de la démocratie, comme je l’ai évoqué dans mon discours à la fin, est précieuse. L’état de droit sera toujours l’ADN de mon groupe.

  Iratxe García Pérez, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, el lema de Europa de «Unida en la diversidad» cobra hoy más sentido que nunca en este debate.

He escuchado algunas afirmaciones realmente preocupantes y por eso voy a clarificar una cosa: la mejor manera de defender el Estado de Derecho es asumir los resultados democráticos que emanan de las urnas. Y, por lo tanto, no pone en peligro la unidad de un país aquel Gobierno que avanza por el progreso social, por la creación de empleo, por subir las pensiones, por abrir el diálogo, por la convivencia. Quien rompe y pone en peligro la unidad de un país es quien avala o quien plantea una rebelión ciudadana contra los resultados democráticos de las urnas.

Y, por lo tanto, los socialistas vamos a seguir trabajando por ese espacio de convivencia, por ese espacio de entendimiento y de diálogo y por una Europa más fuerte. Porque la historia de Europa siempre termina bien.

  Frances Fitzgerald, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, the President of the Commission stressed the need to answer the call for history. This Parliament will do just that. The challenges are greater than ever, as we all know, and it was illustrated in the debate here this morning.

That’s why Europe needs to be ambitious. That’s why I welcome your proposals on leading the world in artificial intelligence, wind energy, strengthening our security and, crucially, working to enlarge our Union to include our eastern partners, including Ukraine. That’s why Europe needs to be competitive. That’s why we must reduce red tape on business. That’s why Europe must stay open for business. Strategic autonomy must not mean protectionism, subsidies and trade barriers. That’s why Europe needs to put people first. That’s why your words on combating violence this morning are vital. You were right: no means no. You have done outstanding work on gender equality. But this must become a legal reality across all the Member States, and they must examine their approach to the inclusion of rape in the Directive on Violence against Women. We have free movement, but we do not have common protections against violence for women. There can be no true equality without freedom from violence.

  President. – Thank you to everybody. The debate is now closed.

Written statements (Rule 171)

  Clara Aguilera (S&D), por escrito. – Los socialistas hemos reclamado a la presidenta de la Comisión Europea, Ursula von der Leyen, un mayor compromiso con el pilar social en un momento crítico para las familias y los trabajadores con la subida de precios actual.

Por ello, pedimos que la vivienda pública sea un derecho, la paridad en el empleo, la prohibición de las prácticas no remuneradas, el ingreso mínimo vital y una estrategia antipobreza con objetivos vinculantes. Asimismo, hemos defendido que se incorpore la violencia contra las mujeres a la lista de delitos de la Unión Europea. Que nuestros esfuerzos y recursos para impulsar la reindustrialización UE vayan de la mano del objetivo de avanzar en la transición ecológica. Y que seamos capaces de afrontar retos como el Pacto de Migración y Asilo, la creación de una capacidad fiscal permanente, la reforma de las reglas fiscales y una mayor justicia fiscal para acabar con la evasión de las grandes fortunas.

Por último, los socialistas hemos pedido a la presidenta de la Comisión que su partido, el Partido Popular Europeo, suelte la mano de la extrema derecha y vuelva a la senda europeísta.

  Andrus Ansip (Renew), kirjalikult. – Ursula von der Leyeni juhitud komisjon on hallanud hästi kolme kriisi. Tervishoiu ja julgeoleku küsimused pole Euroopa Liidu ühispädevuses, kuid Ursula von der Leyen on tegutsenud nendes kriisides julgelt. Ilma vaktsiinide ühishanketa oleksid väikesed liikmesriigid võinud vaktsiine oodata veel pikka aega ja selle ootamise hind oleks olnud ränk. 2021. aastal oli korrelatsioon vaktsineerimise taseme ja liigsuremuse vahel riigis väga tugev. Riikides, kus vaktsineerimine õnnestus hästi, nagu näiteks Taanis, liigsuremus praktiliselt puudus. Ja riikides, kus vaktsineerimine ebaõnnestus, oli liigsuremus kõrge. Tänu Ursula von der Leyeni juhitud komisjoni julgele tegutsemisele hoiti ära palju surmasid. Euroopa Komisjon on olnud julge ka Ukraina abistamises. Me oleme Ukrainale andnud abi 76 miljardi euro ulatuses. Komisjon on võtnud initsiatiivi ka relvatööstuse arendamises ja relvade ühishankes. Energiakriisile reageerisime otsustavalt ja vabanesime Vene gaasi sõltuvusest. Komisjon on tugevdanud Euroopa strateegilist autonoomiat. Nagu Ursula von der Leyen neli aastat tagasi lubas, ongi komisjonist saanud geopoliitiline komisjon. Vastu on võetud kriitiliste toormaterjalide akt ja kiibimäärus. Komisjoni ettevõtmisi on saatnud edu.

  Andor Deli (NI), írásban. – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! A migrációs helyzettel kapcsolatban kérdezném, hogy eljutnak-e Önhöz a hírek arról, hogy olyan nem uniós országokban, mint például Szerbia, a határ közelében lévő városokban, falvakban szinte minden héten migránsok közötti fegyveres leszámolások és lövöldözések vannak, amik a helyi lakosság életét és biztonságát veszélyeztetik, így például a múlt héten Szabadkán egy bevásárlóközpont parkolójában.

Szerbia tagjelölt ország, amely abban reménykedik, hogy egyszer az EU tagja lesz, és ezért már évek óta próbál megfelelni az uniós elvárásoknak a migrációs kérdésekben. Azonban az elhibázott uniós migrációs politika hatásait a helyi lakosság a saját bőrén érzi, hiszen az elmúlt években csak tovább növekedett az illegális migránsok száma, sőt, amint látjuk, egyre gyakrabban érkeznek fegyverekkel felszerelve az EU határához.

Mit üzen Elnök Asszony azoknak a szerbiai polgároknak, akiknek a külső határokon uralkodó migrációs állapotok miatt a immár a napi bevásárlás is életveszélyt jelent? Itt az ideje, hogy a Bizottság az európai polgárok biztonságát végre prioritásként kezelje.

  Estrella Durá Ferrandis (S&D), por escrito. – Los socialistas hemos reclamado a la presidenta de la Comisión Europea, Ursula von der Leyen, un mayor compromiso con el pilar social en un momento crítico para las familias y los trabajadores con la subida de precios actual.

Por ello, pedimos que la vivienda pública sea un derecho, la paridad en el empleo, la prohibición de las prácticas no remuneradas, el ingreso mínimo vital y una estrategia antipobreza con objetivos vinculantes. Asimismo, hemos defendido que se incorpore la violencia contra las mujeres a la lista de delitos de la Unión Europea. Que nuestros esfuerzos y recursos para impulsar la reindustrialización UE vayan de la mano del objetivo de avanzar en la transición ecológica. Y que seamos capaces de afrontar retos como el Pacto de Migración y Asilo, la creación de una capacidad fiscal permanente, la reforma de las reglas fiscales y una mayor justicia fiscal para acabar con la evasión de las grandes fortunas.

Por último, los socialistas hemos pedido a la presidenta de la Comisión que su partido, el Partido Popular Europeo, suelte la mano de la extrema derecha y vuelva a la senda europeísta.

  Nicolás González Casares (S&D), por escrito. – Los socialistas hemos reclamado a la presidenta de la Comisión Europea, Ursula von der Leyen, un mayor compromiso con el pilar social en un momento crítico para las familias y los trabajadores con la subida de precios actual.

Por ello, pedimos que la vivienda pública sea un derecho, la paridad en el empleo, la prohibición de las prácticas no remuneradas, el ingreso mínimo vital y una estrategia antipobreza con objetivos vinculantes. Asimismo, hemos defendido que se incorpore la violencia contra las mujeres a la lista de delitos de la Unión Europea. Que nuestros esfuerzos y recursos para impulsar la reindustrialización UE vayan de la mano del objetivo de avanzar en la transición ecológica. Y que seamos capaces de afrontar retos como el Pacto de Migración y Asilo, la creación de una capacidad fiscal permanente, la reforma de las reglas fiscales y una mayor justicia fiscal para acabar con la evasión de las grandes fortunas.

Por último, los socialistas hemos pedido a la presidenta de la Comisión que su partido, el Partido Popular Europeo, suelte la mano de la extrema derecha y vuelva a la senda europeísta.

  Maria Grapini (S&D), în scris. – Doamnă Președintă Ursula von der Leyen, astăzi ați prezentat o sinteză a activității din mandatul dumneavoastră, plin de promisiuni și laude, dar nu ați vorbit nimic despre dubla măsură pe care o practicați. Din păcate, discursul dumneavoastră nu a ajuns la inima românilor din cauza ipocriziei instituționale. Nu puteți lăuda România de bună practică la frontiere și în același timp să nu folosiți instrumentele pe care le aveți ca și gardian al tratatelor pentru ca România să fie în spațiul Schengen.

Dubla măsură și lipsa de respect practicată de UE de 16 ani, față de România a dus la scăderea încrederii în UE. Românii doresc fapte, nu declarații. De 16 ani, fermierii, transportatorii, românii așteaptă tratament egal în UE și să nu fie tratați ca cetățeni de mâna a doua. Ați creat pagube economice României și ați contribuit la sărăcirea românilor!

Și dacă vreți să vă convingeți de ceea ce vă spun, veniți în România și încercați să vă faceți campanie electorală anul viitor și veți vedea reacția românilor. Închei, cerând imperativ ca până la sfârșitul anului 2023, România să fie acolo unde are dreptul- în spațiul Schengen, altfel veți contribui la distrugerea proiectului european.

  Eugen Jurzyca (ECR), písomne. – Oceňujem, že Ursula von der Leyen podporila uzatváranie ďalších obchodných zmlúv s demokratickými krajinami. Pozitívne tiež vnímam, že zdôrazňuje potrebu kvalitného podnikateľského prostredia a podporila ďalšie rozširovanie EÚ. Za najväčšie mínus považujem, že sa nevyjadrila k potrebe znižovať dlhy a tým vlastne celú zodpovednosť za infláciu preniesla na ECB. Súčasne naznačovala silnejší izolacionizmus a masívne investície do priemyselnej politiky, čo je v rozpore so znižovaním dlhov. Konštatovala úspechy investícií do digitalizácie, zelenej ekonomiky a ďalšie, ale nepodložila svoje tvrdenia analýzou, že investície do týchto oblastí boli efektívne a doručili občanovi maximum.

  César Luena (S&D), por escrito. – Los socialistas hemos reclamado a la presidenta de la Comisión Europea, Ursula von der Leyen, un mayor compromiso con el pilar social en un momento crítico para las familias y los trabajadores con la subida de precios actual.

Por ello, pedimos que la vivienda pública sea un derecho, la paridad en el empleo, la prohibición de las prácticas no remuneradas, el ingreso mínimo vital y una estrategia antipobreza con objetivos vinculantes. Asimismo, hemos defendido que se incorpore la violencia contra las mujeres a la lista de delitos de la Unión Europea. Que nuestros esfuerzos y recursos para impulsar la reindustrialización UE vayan de la mano del objetivo de avanzar en la transición ecológica. Y que seamos capaces de afrontar retos como el Pacto de Migración y Asilo, la creación de una capacidad fiscal permanente, la reforma de las reglas fiscales y una mayor justicia fiscal para acabar con la evasión de las grandes fortunas.

Por último, los socialistas hemos pedido a la presidenta de la Comisión que su partido, el Partido Popular Europeo, suelte la mano de la extrema derecha y vuelva a la senda europeísta.

  Dan-Ştefan Motreanu (PPE), în scris. – Dacă tot discutăm despre starea Uniunii, aș vrea să abordăm și starea sectorului agricol din România, care se află în pragul colapsului în urma influxului necontrolat de cereale ucrainene la prețuri reduse, la care Comisia Europeană a venit cu măsuri financiare compensatorii tardive și insuficiente. Exporturile de cereale din Ucraina trebuie să ajungă în țările în care este nevoie de ele și nu să perturbe piața internă.

Subliniez faptul că, deși sunt printre cei mai afectați în acest context geopolitic, agricultorii români primesc în continuare cele mai mici subvenții din UE. Vă reamintesc pe această cale o rezoluție adoptată recent de acest plen prin care solicităm Consiliului să accelereze procesul de convergență al plăților directe și să elimine astfel decalajele nejustificat de mari dintre subvențiile pe care le primesc fermierii în diferitele state membre și vă solicit în numele fermierilor români să exercitați presiunea necesară în calitate de membru în Consiliu pentru a realiza acest deziderat cât mai curând.

  Victor Negrescu (S&D), în scris. – Doamnă Președinte von der Leyen, apreciem mesajul de sprijin pentru România, însă este nevoie astăzi de propuneri concrete și de măsuri rapide. Avem nevoie din partea dumneavoastră de o dată certă privind aderarea României la spațiul Schengen sau de soluții alternative pentru a invalida veto-ul guvernului de dreapta din Austria, inclusiv prin folosirea căilor legale prevăzute în tratate.

Dorim să auzim din partea Comisiei Europene că provocările pe care le traversează țările din prima linie sunt înțelese. Avem nevoie de solidaritate cu fermierii români, de sprijin pentru comunitățile aflate la frontiera cu Ucraina, de suport pentru dezvoltarea infrastructurii și de flexibilitate, prin adaptarea regulilor la condițiile speciale pe care le traversăm. Ne trebuie un plan pozitiv, incluziv și realist pentru Europa în care fiecare stat și fiecare cetățean să fie tratat cu respect și în mod echitabil!

  Nacho Sánchez Amor (S&D), por escrito. – Los socialistas hemos reclamado a la presidenta de la Comisión Europea, Ursula von der Leyen, un mayor compromiso con el pilar social en un momento crítico para las familias y los trabajadores con la subida de precios actual.

Por ello, pedimos que la vivienda pública sea un derecho, la paridad en el empleo, la prohibición de las prácticas no remuneradas, el ingreso mínimo vital y una estrategia antipobreza con objetivos vinculantes. Asimismo, hemos defendido que se incorpore la violencia contra las mujeres a la lista de delitos de la Unión Europea. Que nuestros esfuerzos y recursos para impulsar la reindustrialización UE vayan de la mano del objetivo de avanzar en la transición ecológica. Y que seamos capaces de afrontar retos como el Pacto de Migración y Asilo, la creación de una capacidad fiscal permanente, la reforma de las reglas fiscales y una mayor justicia fiscal para acabar con la evasión de las grandes fortunas.

Por último, los socialistas hemos pedido a la presidenta de la Comisión que su partido, el Partido Popular Europeo, suelte la mano de la extrema derecha y vuelva a la senda europeísta.

  Alfred Sant (S&D), in writing. – The 2023 State of the Union address by President von der Leyen deserves both praise and criticism.

It will have resonated with Brussels insiders given its broad-ranging and commendable promise to keep the Commission’s current programmes on track and to deliver on all commitments made.

However, it fell short of convincingly connecting with the larger electorate. On three critical issues, the speech failed to adequately address people’s concerns: inflation; the uncertainties being triggered by the war in Ukraine; and the social consequences of Green Deal initiatives.

Ms von der Leyen seemed to be brushing off inflation worries to the side, delegating them to the ECB. On the Ukraine war, the open-ended commitment to back Ukraine was in no way linked to any idea of how the war could be brought to an acceptable end, which is what people want to hear. On the social consequences of Green Deal initiatives, we listened to more of the same.

A better clarification of the commitments made by the Commission on such issues was desirable. Actually, instead of highlighting the EU’s hopes and expectations, the President leaned more towards showcasing the Commission’s past achievements. A sense of progress and guidance for the future was therefore rather weak overall in her presentation.

  Iuliu Winkler (PPE), in writing. – Trade is a key EU competence, and a geopolitical Commission is surely aware of the fact that Trade Policy is a powerful tool in EU global action. Trade and values go hand in hand when the EU is negotiating and implementing trade agreements. Feasibility is also a key element, and we should never forget that European Industries are legitimate stakeholders whose voice must be heard during the legislative process. I am sincerely convinced that there is no Green Transition, no Digital Transition, no shift towards sustainable energy and no decarbonisation of our economies without a strong European Trade Policy. We must build global value-based coalitions to implement European initiatives on raw materials, global value chains, climate action and more.

I think that we should have heard more about international trade in the 2023 State of the Union speech. Not enough has been achieved on the trade front in the current Commission mandate. The last FTA ratified by our House was the EU-Vietnam FTA, back in 2019. I think that re-instating the dedicated Trade Commissioner portfolio in the new European Commission to be installed after the 2024 European elections is a must.

  Carlos Zorrinho (S&D), por escrito. – O último debate sobre o Estado da União neste ciclo político ocorreu num tempo-chave para a clarificação do futuro da União Europeia. Úrsula von der Leyen, no seu primeiro discurso perante o Parlamento Europeu sublinhou a vontade de presidir a uma comissão geopolítica. A evolução da realidade e, em particular, a invasão da Ucrânia tornaram essa opção geopolítica não apenas desejável como decisiva para assegurar a relevância global e a sobrevivência da União num mundo em mudança acelerada. Numa intervenção consistente e mobilizadora, a Presidente demarcou-se no plano político do seu próprio grupo (PPE), ao recusar qualquer travagem na aplicação do Pacto Ecológico Europeu e ao apostar na continuação da liderança estratégica da União na transição energética, na sustentabilidade e no combate às alterações climáticas. Sublinho a aposta na conclusão do pacto das migrações, num alargamento articulado da União e na liderança europeia da transição digital com valores e centrada nas pessoas e na sua segurança e bem-estar. Os instrumentos de concretização das políticas não estiveram, no entanto, à altura da ambição. A não referência ao anteriormente anunciado fundo de investimento e resposta a crises e à necessidade de garantir a flexibilidade inteligente das regras orçamentais, exemplificam esta constatação.

(The sitting was suspended at 12.57)

(The sitting resumed at 13.03)

  President. – Dear colleagues, today, after a very important morning, we continue with our heavily packed, crucial agenda.

We have with us one of the bravest, toughest, most resilient leaders I have the honour of calling a friend: Belarus’ Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya.

(Applause)

Dear Sviatlana, the world has witnessed your determination, bravery and perseverance. The values that underpin your and your people’s struggles bind us together as Europeans. It is a pleasure to welcome you back to the European Parliament. You are here, as we have just seen, among allies and among friends.

The Lukashenko regime in Belarus represents everything that Europe was built to stand against: autocracy, arbitrary detention, torture. Three years ago, the Belarusian people spoke. They chose to end the age of dictators and their will must be respected.

The situation in Belarus has reached a tipping point. Some 1 500 people remain political prisoners, including your trailblazing husband Sergei Tikhanovsky, Maria Kalesnikava, Maksim Znak and Mikola Statkevich. From here let me reiterate our demand for their immediate and unconditional release.

(Applause)

I have said this before but it bears repeating for as long as it takes: the people of Belarus must be able to live in freedom, free from autocracy, free from oppression. It is what they want. It is what they chose. It is what they deserve.

We will continue to support Belarusian democratic forces and to play an active role in shaping the European Union’s response to the ongoing political crisis in Belarus. It is critical that we further expand European Union sanctions against the regime and do not lose sight, ever, of what they have done.

To quote you, Sviatlana, ‘We’re not strangers, we’re family members who have been away for too long. We’re the forgotten Europeans returning home. Belarusians have always been a part of Europe and will always be.’

Let me assure you have never been forgotten. We will always stand with you and help you return home.

Sviatlana, you have the floor.

  Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya. – Madam President Metsola, dear Roberta, distinguished Members of the European Parliament, when I was here two years ago, I spoke about tyranny as a virus – a virus that will not be contained by borders. And the past two years have shown that the virus of tyranny can mutate into the deadly cancer of war.

Unlike the war in Ukraine, ours is a quiet war. The goal of the Kremlin in this war is the same as in Ukraine: to turn a sovereign country – Belarus – into yet another servile Russian colony. And Putin is not doing this alone. He is doing it in collaboration with Lukashenka, who is selling our country and selling our independence piece by piece. Quietly, they are tightening their grip on our economy, our military, our institutions. Quietly, they destroy our civil society, political parties, media. Quietly, they eradicate our national identity.

Their goal is clear: to absorb and assimilate. They cut all links to our values, history and culture – anything that anchors us to Europe. Their ultimate goal is to prevent Belarus from becoming a truly European democratic nation. To keep an open wound at the heart of the European continent, so that Europe, too, cannot become whole and free and at peace.

But they will fail. The terror they unleashed against Belarusians has made us even more determined. No tyranny, KGB or Wagner thugs can kill the desire for freedom in Belarus.

(Applause)

Brave Belarusians demonstrate true heroism and enduring resilience. In this quiet war, there are many quiet heroes. Heroes like Dzmitry Klimau. When Russians tried to make a shortcut to Kyiv from Belarus, he destroyed railway equipment by halting trains loaded with Russian tanks. And what did the KGB do? They arrested him and put bullets through his knees. Dzmitry and 11 other ‘railway partisans’ were sentenced to a total of 200 years in prison.

Heroes like Marfa Rabkova, who volunteered for Viasna, a human rights organisation led by Ales Bialiatski, our Nobel Prize laureate behind bars. Marfa was sentenced to 15 years of prison for documenting the atrocities of the regime.

Many quiet heroes are carrying out small acts of defiance: in factories and ministries, in the schools and in the army. Teachers who refuse to instruct children in ‘state ideology’. Honest officers who leak valuable information. Businessmen who secretly donate to families of the repressed.

Heroes like our pensioners. You know, recently, a few grannies called me to say that they quietly gather to read ‘extremist’ media together. They also asked me: ‘Tell Europeans that we haven’t given up’. Even speaking the Belarusian language today is an act of heroism. The museum worker who conducted tours in Belarusian language was interrogated as if he was a terrorist.

Our heroes are also countless Belarusians who lost their homes and well-paid jobs, and are now in exile helping Belarusian military volunteers in Ukraine. Heroes like Natallia Suslava, a university teacher from Homel, whose son Pavel ‘Volat’ gave his life fighting for Ukraine. She went there and became a caring mother to his brothers in arms. Our brave warriors fight because they know that the battle for Ukraine is a fight for the freedom of us all.

Heroes like Ales Pushkin, a famous painter who raised the European Union flag in front of the police cordon. Later, he was arrested and accused of promoting Nazism. And now he is dead, murdered in prison in Hrodna.

Today in this Chamber, I would like to honour the memory of all my compatriots who have lost their lives for the freedom of Belarus and Ukraine. These are our heroes: Belarusians, Europeans.

(Applause)

Unfortunately, the war and repression became a part of our life. My seven-year-old daughter recently asked me to give her some money. I asked her what for, and can you imagine what she replied? ‘I want to buy a tank to free my daddy.’ Every week, she writes postcards to her father, though she doesn’t receive any answer. For me, she is my little hero.

(Applause)

Her father, my husband Siarhei, was sentenced to 19 years and I haven’t had a word from him for six months already. And he is my big hero – the biggest in my life.

(Applause)

Dear ladies and gentlemen, tyrants want to see the European Union as a decadent house of cards ready to collapse. But for us, Europe is home and a family. And we, Belarusians – just like Ukrainians or Moldovans and other freedom-loving countries – want to be part of that family, too. We want to return home, back to Europe. You know, Europe is in our DNA. From Francysk Skaryna, who brought the European Renaissance to Belarus, to Mark Chagall, who brought his unique vision from Belarus to Europe. We chose Europe centuries ago.

And we reconfirmed this choice in 2020. You know, sometimes I can hear people say: ‘How come that in 2020 there were no European flags at the protests?’ Of course they were there! Our national white-red-white flag is a European flag. These colours symbolise freedom, our European past and our European future.

(Applause)

Europe is where we come from and it is where we are heading. One month ago, Belarusian democratic forces passed a joint declaration defining our strategic objective: Belarus’s membership of the European Union. I know it will take time. I know it will not be easy. But there is no way back for us – the European Union is our ultimate destination, period.

(Applause)

When I see all these beautiful flags, I can imagine how proud you feel seeing yours among others. And I wish, one day, to see our white-red-white flag here as well. I wish to see democratically elected representatives of Belarus sitting in this room. And I want the Belarusian language, which suffered so much through centuries of Russian domination, to become one of the EU’s official languages. Without Belarus and Ukraine, the European project will not be completed.

The European Union – from Lisbon to Minsk — is a nightmare for Putin. But for us, it’s a reality we thrive to live in. Belarus and Ukraine in the European Union will lead to the ultimate collapse of the evil empire, once and for all.

Dear friends, I came here to the European Parliament to ask you to support the European perspective for Belarus. Belarusians want to hear from you that the EU is waiting for us. Belarusians want to hear that our country will not be given to Putin as a consolation prize. So I urge you to support the resolution introduced by Petras Auštrevičius that highlights the European aspirations of Belarusians.

(Applause)

I propose to take the relationship between Democratic Belarus and the European Parliament to a new level and institutionalise our cooperation. I am confident that we can do it before the upcoming EP elections.

Hundreds of thousands of my fellow citizens had to flee repression. Hundreds of thousands found a safe haven across the European Union, and now also contribute to the welfare and prosperity of your countries. I would like to thank all countries – especially Poland, Lithuania and Latvia – who, against all odds, opened their arms and issued life-saving visas and permits to fleeing Belarusians. PACE prepared an excellent report on the migration challenges Belarusians are facing. I call on all European states to follow the recommendations of this resolution.

Now the situation is going to become worse. Last week, Lukashenka signed a decree to deny passports and property rights to Belarusians abroad unless they return to Belarus. It puts at risk the legal status of hundreds of thousands of people. We need a quick and lasting solution that will allow them to stay safe.

And now we are working to start issuing national Belarusian passports. We are grateful to your governments and experts in the European Commission for their advice on this matter. This document will confirm Belarusian citizenship and will serve as a travel document for exiled Belarusians. Actually, here we are taking lessons from the Baltic states who were issuing their passports in exile during the Soviet occupation. Very soon, we will come to your governments asking to recognise our new passports.

Let’s not stop putting pressure on dictators. Sanctions must not have loopholes or derogations. We are dealing with professional thugs who abuse the rules and institutions.

And finally, help us to bring Lukashenka to account. Murdering opponents by death squad, the torture of peaceful protesters, the abduction of Ukrainian kids, launching a quiet war against Belarusians and collaboration in the war against Ukraine: he has a long record of crimes. He doesn’t deserve any place in international fora. The only thing he deserves is a one-way ticket to The Hague.

(Applause)

And I really wonder how some people still dare to call him President? Let me make it clear: he is a fraud! Belarusians hate lies. We hate dictatorship. We Belarusians love freedom and we are Europe.

Dear Members of the European Parliament, I want to thank each of you and your political groups for your support and solidarity. I know and I feel how strongly you stand for our cause. Especially, I want to thank my close friend Roberta: your leadership and your dedication to free Belarus inspires me and sets an example for others.

(Applause)

The great European Václav Havel once said: ‘I believe that the future of Belarus is closely connected with the future of Europe. And the future of Europe is connected with the future of democratic and independent Belarus. I do believe that one day we will welcome Belarus into the European Union’. So let’s make this come true!

Zhyve Belarus! Slava Ukraini! Long live Europe!

(Loud and sustained applause)

(The sitting was suspended for a few moments)

(The sitting resumed at 13.23)

  Javi López (S&D). – Señora presidenta, invoco el artículo 10 del Reglamento de esta Cámara sobre las obligaciones de los diputados, tras escuchar ayer en el debate sobre América Latina al diputado Hermann Tertsch, de Vox, del Grupo ECR, como decía literalmente: «Nadie asesinó a Allende. Allende estuvo preparando una dictadura como la cubana y eso se frenó». La libertad de expresión no ampara justificar un magnicidio ni ampara justificar una dictadura de diecisiete años con decenas de miles de asesinados, desaparecidos y torturados.

Por eso, reclamo a la Presidencia que estudie consecuencias legales para estas injustificables e intolerantes declaraciones.

  President. – Thank you, Mr López, I will look at the text with the services and I will get back to you.

This is not a debate, it was a point of order, Mr Tertsch. Mr López had asked for it before.

  President. – In relation to the decisions by several committees to enter into interinstitutional negotiations pursuant to Rule 71(1), announced at the opening of the session on Monday 17 April, I have received requests for a vote in Parliament pursuant to Rule 71(2) from the ECR and The Left groups and by individual Members reaching the medium threshold, on the decision of the ITRE Committee to enter into negotiations on the following file: ‘The Union’s electricity market design’. The vote will be held tomorrow.

Concerning the other decisions to enter into negotiations, I have received no request for a vote in Parliament by Members or a political group or groups reaching at least the medium threshold. The committees may therefore start negotiations.

  President. – The next item is the vote.

(For the results and other details concerning the vote: see minutes)

– Before the vote:

  Johan Van Overtveldt, Chair of the Committee on Budgets. – Madam President, as Chair of the Budget Committee, I would propose a statement in the resolution to make clear that the draft decision on the composition of the European Parliament is without prejudice to the prerogatives of the European Parliament and the Council in the annual budgetary procedure, and that recital 5 of that draft decision concerns matters that do not fall within the scope of the European Council’s competences under Article 15(1) and the legal basis of Article 14(2). It is for the European Parliament and the Council alone to decide on the content of the Union’s budget in accordance with the procedures laid down in Article 314 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

  President. – Thank you, Mr Van Overtveldt, point made, taken, and will be transmitted.

VORSITZ: EVELYN REGNER
Vizepräsidentin

– Nach der Abstimmung über den Vorschlag der Kommission:

  Andreas Schwab, Berichterstatter. – Frau Präsidentin! Ganz kurz ein Dank an die Kollegen für die Zustimmung. Und ich würde einfach die Rücküberweisung an den Ausschuss beantragen.

(Das Parlament nimmt den Antrag auf Rücküberweisung an.)

– Vor der Abstimmung über Änderungsantrag 157:

  Terry Reintke (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, can we just do all the votes electronically if the majorities are so tight? I think it will speed up the procedure.

  Die Präsidentin. – Ich nehme diesen Vorschlag sehr gerne an, da die Abstimmungsergebnisse jeweils knapp sind, und lasse ab jetzt sofort die Abänderungsanträge elektronisch abstimmen.

– Nach der Abstimmung über den Vorschlag der Kommission:

  Javi López, ponente. – Señora presidenta, en primer lugar, querría agradecer el apoyo y el trabajo de todo el sector de la salud pública para este dosier, dar las gracias a los médicos, las enfermeras, los profesionales de la salud pública, que nos pedían que diéramos un paso hacia adelante en favor de una calidad del aire mayor, de un aire más limpio. Y lo hemos hecho. Por cierto, son los mismos que hace dos y tres años estaban jugándose la vida por nosotros, contra la pandemia, y que hoy nos han pedido este voto y lo hemos hecho.

Sin más, querría devolver la propuesta, según el artículo 59, apartado 4, a la Comisión de Medio Ambiente para empezar las negociaciones interinstitucionales.

(Das Parlament nimmt den Antrag auf Rücküberweisung an.)

  Die Präsidentin. – Damit ist die Abstimmungsstunde geschlossen.

(Die Sitzung wird für kurze Zeit unterbrochen)

PRESIDÊNCIA: PEDRO SILVA PEREIRA
Vice-Presidente

(The sitting resumed at 14.36)

  Presidente. – A ata da sessão de ontem e os textos aprovados já foram distribuídos.

Há alguma observação?

A ata está aprovada.

  Presidente. – Segue-se o debate (artigo 162.º do Regimento) sobre a revisão do estatuto de proteção dos lobos e de outros grandes carnívoros na UE.

Gostaria de informar os Senhores Deputados de que, neste debate, não haverá procedimento «catch the eye» nem perguntas «cartão azul».

  Herbert Dorfmann, Verfasser. – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Am vergangenen 24. November haben wir uns hier in diesem Haus mit großer Mehrheit dafür ausgesprochen, den Schutzstatus des Wolfes und der großen Beutegreifer in der Europäischen Union der heutigen Situation anzupassen.

Heute gibt es in der Europäischen Union rund 20 000 Wölfe – Population wachsend. Das ist das Ergebnis von 30 Jahren strengem Schutz im Rahmen der Natura-2000-Richtlinie. Und selbst die IUCN stuft die Wolfspopulation in Europa inzwischen als nicht mehr bedroht ein.

Diesen Erfolg der Richtlinie sollten wir zur Kenntnis nehmen. Der gilt im Übrigen nicht nur für Wölfe, der gilt auch für andere große Beutegreifer und für viele andere Arten. Aber wir müssen auch zur Kenntnis nehmen: Die Konflikte zwischen Wölfen, Bären, Menschen und vor allem Nutztieren nehmen tagtäglich zu.

Ich komme aus Südtirol, einem Land mitten in den Alpen. Wir haben noch einen lebendigen ländlichen Raum, in dem Menschen wohnen, die Landwirtschaft betreiben, die Tiere züchten, die oft extreme Berghänge bewirtschaften und beweiden. Das ist auch eine Grundlage für Biodiversität. Eine nicht bewirtschaftete Alm ist ungleich weniger, hat ungleich weniger Biodiversität als eine bewirtschaftete.

In der Region wurde leider in den vergangenen Monaten ein 26-jähriger Mann von einem Bären getötet, weil auf engstem Raum inzwischen mehr als 100 Braunbären leben, und es gibt keine Möglichkeit, diese Population zu reduzieren. Angriffe von Wölfen auf Schafe und Ziegen – und immer öfter auch auf Rinder – sind inzwischen fast tagtäglich. Allein in meiner Region wurden in diesem Jahr 500 Tiere gerissen. Und ich war leider bei Schafherden, wo in der Nacht vorher der Wolf gewütet hat. Ich habe tote, halbtote und schockierte Tiere zusammengesammelt.

Und ich wundere mich jedes Mal über sogenannte Tierschützer, die jeden Wolf und jeden Bär mit Klauen verteidigen, denen hunderte gerissene Nutztiere aber offensichtlich egal sind. Wundert es jemand da, wenn Menschen sich nicht mehr in den Wald trauen? Wenn Tierzüchter Almen auflassen, aus der Schafzucht aussteigen?

Stellen wir uns die Frage: Wie viel Biodiversität bringt der Wolf? Wie viel Biodiversität zerstört er? Die Antwort der Kommission auf diese Frage war bisher mehr als dürftig. Man solle die Tiere schützen, Weideschutzmaßnahmen umsetzen. Gut gemeint, manchmal schlecht möglich. Vielleicht sollte man einfach vor Ort öfter die Situation anschauen. Es gibt Flächen, wo Weideschutz möglich ist, aber es gibt auch Flächen, wo es schwierig ist, mit nur sehr hohem Aufwand möglich ist. Und ich frage mich auch für was? Damit eine Art, die nicht bedroht ist, auch die letzte Ecke Europas besiedelt?

Einen Fehler dürfen wir in dieser Debatte nicht machen. Wir dürfen nicht so tun, als wären unsere ländlichen Räume, unsere Dörfer, unsere Wiesen und Weiden, unsere Wälder reine Naturräume. Sie sind vom Menschen geprägte Räume, sie sind Kulturlandschaften. Wenn wir diese Kulturlandschaften erhalten wollen, dann gibt es eben nicht nur das Interesse der Natur, es gibt auch das Interesse der Menschen. Es gibt das Interesse der Bauern, die mit viel Aufwand und oft wenig Lohn diese Flächen bewirtschaften. Und es braucht einen Ausgleich zwischen beiden.

Ein streng geschützter Wolf und ein schutzloses Schaf passen schlicht und einfach nicht zusammen. Das ist ein unfaires Gleichgewicht. Deshalb: Es braucht einen neuen Ansatz, und ich danke der Frau Kommissionspräsidentin Ursula von der Leyen, dass sie letzte Woche das Heft selbst in die Hand genommen hat. Der Schutz des Wolfes und der großen Beutegreifer ist der heutigen Situation anzupassen.

Es geht nicht darum, den Wolf wieder zu gefährden. Es geht darum, Eingriffe zu ermöglichen, wo es notwendig ist, damit beide eine Chance haben. Die Bauern und Bäuerinnen, die Nutztiere und auch die großen Beutegreifer. Ich danke der Kommissionspräsidentin, dass sie die demokratische Entscheidung dieses Hauses, die wir vor einem halben Jahr getroffen haben, aufgegriffen hat. Und ich hoffe, dass wir nun wirklich dazu kommen, schnell zu handeln und damit eine zügige Antwort zu geben.

  Mairead McGuinness, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, good afternoon, colleagues, thank you, Herbert, for setting out the debate today. We are talking about the situation of wolves and other large carnivores in the European Union. And I do recall the resolution of this House of 24 November last year on the protection of livestock farming and large carnivores in Europe. The Commission submitted detailed replies on 7 March and we are making good progress on all of the elements set out in that reply.

The wolf, the bear and the lynx are large carnivores that are native species here in Europe. They are part of Europe’s biodiversity and natural heritage, and we are all committed to their protection and conservation through European and international law. They play an important role, helping to keep ecosystems balanced and healthy. In practice, they help to regulate the density and distribution of overabundant wild species like wild boar or deer. Wolves remove the most vulnerable wild animals, which are very often diseased. And this in turn helps reduce the incidence of diseases that are transmitted to livestock.

But of course, this is only one part of the story. It is clear that the return of wolves to regions of the EU where they have long been absent and the growth of wolf populations in new areas is a delicate topic. It is increasingly leading to conflicts with local communities and farmers. And this is especially the case where measures to prevent attacks on livestock are not widely implemented.

We fully understand the reality of attacks on livestock and we acknowledge the problem for the farmers concerned. So I want to stress that the Commission takes the problem of wolves preying on livestock very seriously.

Mitigating the impact of wolf attacks on livestock is a priority, and indeed, it has been a priority for a long time – at the very start of the Habitats Directive and the LIFE programme. This goal has become even more prominent in recent years. More and more Member States are using the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development to support action and investment to prevent damage to livestock. For the period up to 2027, 15 Member States have included measures in their CAP strategic plans, providing concrete solutions for farmers and local communities, and many authorities provide full compensation to farmers whenever wolves or other large carnivores cause damage. But I do acknowledge that for farmers, when this happens, it is a traumatic event.

To support national and regional authorities, in October 2021, the Commission published new guidance with practical tips on how to reconcile protecting wildlife with human activities. This also clarified the scope and conditions for derogations to manage the wolf and other species.

Now, in parallel, we have had to make sure we base our policies on the most accurate and up-to-date information. So in March this year, the Commission committed to carrying out an in-depth analysis on wolves in the EU, taking into account all available scientific and technical data. And this analysis is now underway. It started in April in cooperation with Member States and stakeholder representatives in the relevant expert group.

Last week we launched a new phase in our work. We broadened our data collection exercise in order to obtain a complete picture. We are inviting local communities, scientists and all interested parties to submit up-to-date data on wolf populations and their impacts by 22 September. And based on the analysis of all the collected data, the Commission will draw conclusions on the situation of the wolf in the EU.

We will then decide on a proposal to modify, if appropriate, the protection status of the wolf within the EU and whether to update the legal framework to introduce, where necessary, additional flexibility in the light of the information we gather. So thank you for this debate and I look forward to your contributions.

  Norbert Lins, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Seit mehr als 30 Jahren haben wir nichts mehr am Schutzstatus des Wolfs geändert.

In einem Viertel dieser Zeit erwarten wir mit den Gesetzen des Green Deals, Europas gesamte Umwelt und Biodiversität bis 2030 zu transformieren.

Die FFH-Richtlinie wurde 1992 verabschiedet. Damals waren Wölfe in meinem Heimatland praktisch ausgerottet. Heute leben dort über 1 500 Tiere, in der Europäischen Union um die 20 000. Die Reißzahlen steigen exponentiell. Die Gefahr, die vom Wolf ausgeht, muss klar und deutlich benannt werden.

Wie konnte der Wandel so lange ignoriert werden? Eine Neubewertung ist überfällig.

Ich danke Frau Kommissionspräsidentin von der Leyen, dass sie nicht nur die Stimmen des ländlichen Raums, sondern auch dieses Parlament ernst genommen und die Initiative ergriffen hat. Denn wir dürfen nicht zulassen, dass der Wolf einen Keil zwischen die städtischen und ländlichen Gebiete in Europa treibt.

Wir brauchen eine europäische Lösung. Wölfe halten sich nicht an nationale Grenzen. Und wir sehen ja, dass in manchen Mitgliedstaaten praktisch nichts passiert. Wir brauchen auch einen klaren Überblick, was die Kommission vorhat und selbstverständlich auch, wann sie es vorhat. Es ist Dringlichkeit geboten.

Ich fordere Klarheit für das Leben im ländlichen Raum, für die Landwirtschaft, für die Weidetierhalter.

  Tiemo Wölken, im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrte Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich komme aus Niedersachsen, und in Niedersachsen gibt es mittlerweile auch sehr viele Wölfe. Viele Niedersächsinnen und Niedersachsen freuen sich darüber, denn es ist ein Zeichen dafür, dass Naturschutz funktioniert.

Aber es gibt immer wieder Stellen und Konflikte, an denen es tatsächlich zu Problemen kommt. Beispielsweise, wenn der Deichschutz dadurch gefährdet wird, dass der Wolf die Schafe auf den Deichen bedroht.

Damit wir weiterhin zu einem guten Zueinander und Miteinander in der Umweltpolitik und in der Naturschutzpolitik kommen, müssen wir tatsächlich an vielen Stellschrauben drehen. Das gilt für die Kommunen oder für die nationalen Länder, die Regeln schaffen können, um Herden zum Beispiel vor Wölfen zu schützen. Das gilt für die Mitgliedstaaten, die bestehenden Spielraum im europäischen Recht bereits ausnutzen können und müssen. Und da passiert im Moment insbesondere in Deutschland noch zu wenig. Das gilt aber auch für die europäische Ebene. Allerdings dürfen wir – entschuldigen Sie das Wortspiel – keinen Schnellschuss an dieser Stelle machen, sondern es ist richtig, dass wir uns die Überarbeitung der Richtlinien sehr genau anschauen und das Für und Wider miteinander abwägen. Denn klar ist, den bestehenden Rechtsrahmen nutzen viele Mitgliedstaaten noch nicht aus.

Und das hilft am Ende des Tages den Betroffenen von Wolfrissen auch nicht, wenn immer nur gesagt wird: Wir müssen auf europäischer Ebene nur den Schutzstatus ändern und dann löst sich das Problem von alleine auf. So einfach ist es nicht.

  Ulrike Müller, im Namen der Renew-Fraktion. – Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin! Durch die einseitige Betrachtung des Artenschutzes haben wir in einigen Regionen der Europäischen Union die absurde Situation herbeigeführt, dass ein nicht vom Aussterben bedrohtes Raubtier absolut schützenswerte Lebensräume und Biotope bedroht. Der Wolf ist ein Kulturfolger und kann im Grunde auch auf Müllkippen bestens überleben. Unzählige Pflanzenarten können das nicht, zum Beispiel seltene Orchideen brauchen bestimmte Lebensräume, die von Weidetieren offen gehalten werden müssen. Unsere Kommissionspräsidentin hat ja heute die Biodiversität und die Artenvielfalt explizit angesprochen und auf 6 500 Arten hingewiesen, die es nur innerhalb der Europäischen Union gibt. Hier sind wir alle gemeinsam in der Verantwortung.

Brüssel muss selbst handeln, wenn in manchen Mitgliedstaaten die echten Bestände der Raubtiere aus ideologischen Gründen nicht gemeldet werden. Fehler, die bereits zu Genüge mit sinnlosen und teuren Herdenschutzmaßnahmen gemacht wurden, müssen nicht erst in allen anderen Regionen durchexerziert werden. Unsägliches Leid bei Weidetieren muss nicht erst vertausendfacht werden. Jetzt ist es höchste Zeit zu handeln. Die EU muss selbst aktiv werden und den Regionen Rechtssicherheit bieten.

  Thomas Waitz, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Kommissar, geschätzte Kolleginnen und Kollegen – vor allem der deutschsprachigen Konservativen! Ich glaube, Sie lieben den Wolf, also zumindest als Thema.

Und Sie haben auf einmal auch die Liebe zu den extensiven Weidehaltern entdeckt, zu jenen, die die Almen bewirtschaften, zu jenen, die die Tiere noch hinaus in die Natur, auf die Wiese lassen. Die gute Form der Tierhaltung, die haben Sie jetzt auf einmal entdeckt.

Allerdings sind diese extensiven Weidetierhalter wirtschaftlich sehr angeschlagen. Sie stehen mit dem Rücken an der Wand. Warum? Weil ihre Produkte nicht den entsprechenden Preis bekommen, weil ihre Form der Landwirtschaft nicht die entsprechende Unterstützung auch durch europäische Agrargelder bekommen, weil vieles von dem Geld in agrarindustrielle Betriebe geht.

Aber jetzt, wo es ein Thema gibt, wo man wunderbar polarisieren kann, da haben Sie die Weidehalter entdeckt. Und es stimmt, viele von den Betrieben sind wirtschaftlich in einer schwierigen Situation. Und wenn der Wolf dazukommt und die notwendigen Maßnahmen für Weideschutz, dann wird es wirtschaftlich tatsächlich eng.

Aber es gibt wunderbare Methoden, unter anderem Behirtung – auch in hochalpinen Räumen. Und der Wolf ist Teil unseres Naturraumes und in vielen Teilen der Europäischen Union nach wie vor nicht weitverbreitet.

Wir haben ja bereits zwei Resolutionen dazu verabschiedet und wir haben festgestellt, die Landwirte müssen unterstützt werden. Und wir haben auch festgestellt, Problemwölfe können entnommen werden. Und dort, wo ein nachweislich guter Erhaltungszustand ist, kann die Population auch gemanagt werden.

Und nun wollen Sie den Wolf nutzen, um auf andere Beutegreifer auszudehnen. Den Luchs vielleicht oder den Bären, oder ich weiß nicht, haben Sie noch den Otter und den Biber und ich weiß nicht, was Sie noch alles zum Abschuss freigegeben wollen.

Das ist eine falsche Debatte, und es wird sehr viel Angst und Panik verbreitet. Wölfe fressen weder Großmütter noch Kinder. Kehren Sie zurück zu einer vernünftigen Debatte und lassen Sie uns ordentliche Lösungen suchen.

  Mazaly Aguilar, en nombre del Grupo ECR. – Señor presidente, pues es de agradecer que la Comisión Europea, a través de la señora von der Leyen, lance una iniciativa para modificar el estatuto de protección del lobo de la Unión Europea, reconociendo que, y abro comillas, «las concentraciones de las manadas de lobos se han convertido en un verdadero problema para el ganado y, potencialmente, para los humanos».

Miren ustedes: en España, desde el año 2021, los lobos están protegidos, al haber sido incorporados al Listado de Especies Silvestres en Régimen de Protección Especial. Y los ganaderos tienen prohibido defenderse de estos ataques.

La población de lobos en España ha crecido un 20 % en los últimos diez años. Solo un ejemplo: en las regiones de Castilla y León, Cantabria y Asturias han pasado de 400 a 2 000 ejemplares. Y, si hablamos de los ataques al ganado, en el año 2021, en la región de Castilla y León, se perdieron 4 256 cabezas; en el año 2022, un 19 % más: 5 080. Y, si hablamos de pérdidas, en el año 2022, en esta misma región, 2 millones de euros; y en el año 2023 se prevé justo el doble: 4 millones de euros.

En las altas zonas con mucha densidad de lobos, la ganadería extensiva es prácticamente un milagro, y es insostenible. Es necesario hacer un verdadero control poblacional. Y para ello hay que empezar con una evaluación de esta población de lobos. Una evaluación neutral, rigurosa y sin intereses espurios.

Así que, de esta manera, podremos tener una forma fiable de saber si la población está aumentando, disminuyendo o es estable. De ahí que podamos hacer unas estrategias de gestión equilibradas. Porque las actuales son de hiperprotección de los lobos, en detrimento de los ganaderos, y de escasas y tardías compensaciones por la pérdida de sus animales.

No nos confundamos: los lobos, en las reservas. Porque a quienes hay que proteger es a los ganaderos.

  Alessandro Panza, a nome del gruppo ID. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signora Commissaria, mi faccia capire: con i milioni di euro che ha speso la Commissione europea per il programma LIFE WolfAlps, non avete i dati? Interessante da sapere, soprattutto per i contribuenti europei.

Ringrazio i colleghi che hanno proposto il dibattito, con la speranza che finalmente si passi dalle parole ai fatti e sperando che questo dibattito non avvenga per il sacrificio di un pony.

Oltre 20 000 lupi in Europa: oltre 3 000 in Italia, di questi la metà in Piemonte. E parliamo solo dei dati ufficiali, che sappiamo tutti essere molto al ribasso rispetto alla situazione reale. Stessa cosa può essere analoga anche per gli orsi. Oltre 43 000 predazioni dal 2015 al 2019; oggi arriviamo tranquillamente a 50 000; oltre 9 milioni di euro spesi per risarcire gli allevatori, parlo solo dell'Italia, senza contare i soldi spesi – qualcuno dice buttati, e forse a ragion veduta – dalla commissione per i programmi LIFE.

Ma questi sono solo una parte del problema, perché non si tiene conto di tutti coloro che ormai non denunciano nemmeno più gli attacchi o delle conseguenze psicologiche di quegli animali che assistono agli assalti, dimostrando che la situazione è ben peggiore di quello che sembra.

Alla luce di questi numeri, la domanda non è se declassare il lupo o no ma è perché non sia ancora stato fatto. Si parla sempre di convivenza: ma due entità che convivono in un territorio in cui una è intoccabile e l'altra obbligata a subire, non è convivenza, è sudditanza. E se qualcuno dei colleghi ha ancora dei dubbi, o lei Commissaria, sarà un mio piacere o un mio onore invitarla a visitare gli allevatori e gli alpeggi delle valli dell'Ossola, della Val Susa, della Val Varaita, della Val d'Aosta, della Valtellina, della Valchiavenna, dove non passa giorno in cui non ci sia una predazione.

Oggi abbiamo il dovere di dare un segnale a tutti coloro che da troppo tempo sono vittime di questa situazione: questi cittadini si sentono abbandonati da questa istituzione che sembra non curarsi minimamente di chi vive nelle valli e nelle montagne europee, pretendendo una visione ideologica e utopistica.

Il lupo non è più in pericolo di estinzione. Lo sono gli abitanti delle zone rurali che, per quanto mi riguarda, hanno invece la priorità su qualsiasi ideologia ambientalista e animalista. Almeno questo abbiate il buon senso di capirlo.

  Anja Hazekamp, namens de fractie The Left. – Voorzitter, wolven zijn prachtige en indrukwekkende dieren die een belangrijke rol vervullen in de natuur. Toch werd 150 jaar geleden de laatste wolf in Nederland gedood en ook elders in Europa werden de dieren vrijwel overal uitgeroeid door jacht en door het kapotmaken van hun leefgebied. Na anderhalve eeuw wonen er eindelijk weer enkele wolven in Nederland. En opnieuw is afschieten de eerste reactie van enkelen. Hoe kortzichtig kun je zijn?

Dat de wolf weer terug is, is vooral te danken aan de strikte bescherming die het dier vanaf de jaren tachtig heeft. Maar nog steeds is het merendeel van de wolvenpopulaties in Europa kwetsbaar. Ministers van twaalf Europese landen en milieuorganisaties roepen daarom op om de strikte bescherming van de wolf te blijven houden en niet dezelfde fout te maken als we hebben gedaan in de afgelopen eeuwen.

Eurocommissaris Sinkevičius heeft zich altijd sterk gemaakt voor de wolf, en afgelopen week bevestigde hij in de Milieucommissie dat de positie van de Europese Commissie ook niet veranderd is. De poging tot machtsmisbruik door Commissievoorzitter von der Leyen is mislukt.

Ik condoleer mevrouw von der Leyen met haar overleden pony, maar dit persoonlijk drama is geen reden om dan maar alle wolven in Europa af te schieten. De Partij voor de Dieren pleit voor vreedzame co—existentie tussen wolven, beren, mensen en andere dieren. Stoppen met de vervolging van roofdieren en volop inzetten op krachtig natuurherstel zijn hiervoor de sleutel.

  Hervé Juvin (NI). – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, voici qu’un jour je rencontrais un agriculteur breton à Saint-Gildas-de-Rhuys, qui a cessé de produire des céréales en raison des dommages causés par les hordes de sangliers et de cervidés.

La première menace qui pèse aujourd’hui sur l’agriculture dans nombre de nos régions vient de la prolifération incontrôlée des sangliers, des chevreuils et des cerfs. Or, ces animaux ont un prédateur naturel et un seul, c’est le loup. Au moment de discuter du statut du loup, animal en danger ou non, nous devons écouter les enseignements des spécialistes du comportement animal, qui nous disent que les loups attaquent les troupeaux et les animaux domestiques essentiellement quand les meutes ont été désorganisées. Ce sont les individus faibles, vieux ou malades, qui s’attaquent à des animaux domestiques, quand les meutes hiérarchisées s’attaquent essentiellement à leurs proies naturelles que sont les animaux sauvages.

Faisons donc attention à maintenir le principe du tir sélectif. Ne désorganisons pas les meutes, ce qui pourrait se traduire par une augmentation des dommages causés aux troupeaux. Nous devons apprendre à coexister avec les animaux sauvages, nous féliciter des résultats d’une politique de conservation qui a porté ses fruits. Nous devons apprendre à coexister pour préserver la biodiversité.

  Daniel Buda (PPE). – Domnule președinte, doamnă comisar, stimați colegi, Directiva privind habitatele, adoptată acum 30 de ani, și-a atins obiectivele. Populațiile de urși, lupi sau alte prădătoare mari au ajuns la un număr semnificativ. În acest moment, nu doar că nu le mai este amenințată existența, dar efectivele lor, raportat la dimensiunea habitatelor pe care le au la dispoziție, creează probleme cu consecințe incomensurabile pentru noi toți.

A sosit momentul, stimați colegi, ca acum să protejăm oamenii, așa cum în urmă cu 30 de ani am început să apărăm marile prădătoare. România are astăzi mai mult de jumătate din populația de urși a Uniunii Europene, peste 10 000 de exemplare, iar în ultimii patru ani au fost mutilate pe viață 264 de persoane, 25 de persoane au fost omorâte și milioane de euro au fost cheltuiți pe despăgubiri acordate fermierilor. Miile de urși au invadat nu doar orașele și satele din zonele de deal sau de munte, dar astăzi avem urși și la Marea Neagră.

Din nefericire, în proximitatea școlilor, în loc de glasul fericit al copiilor se aude mormăitul urșilor, spre disperarea părinților care aleargă să-și salveze copiii. Pășunile, care până mai ieri erau pline de turme întregi de animale, astăzi sunt lăsate pârloagă de frica lupilor sau a urșilor, iar în multe zone turistice ajungi să-ți bei cafeaua de dimineață cu ursul pe terasă. Tocmai de aceea salut acțiunea Comisiei de evaluare a populațiilor marilor prădătoare și îndemn actorii relevanți să se implice activ în acest demers, iar Comisiei Europene îi solicit ferm să ia măsurile care se impun pentru atingerea unui echilibru indispensabil, a unei vieți de calitate, indiferent de regiunile în care trăim.

  Clara Aguilera (S&D). – Señor presidente, señora comisaria McGuinness, yo creo que, evidentemente, después de la Resolución y el debate que ya tuvimos el año pasado, bien está que la Comisión Europea esté moviendo ficha y esté realmente preocupándose por la situación actual.

Yo creo que la protección del lobo ha sido un éxito. Hay un fuerte crecimiento y eso está bien. Debido a esa protección había un riesgo. Pero ahora hay que corregir algunas cuestiones. Han pedido ustedes, la Comisión, datos a los Estados sobre la situación del lobo. Pero hay problemas con más grandes carnívoros: el problema del oso en algunas partes de España y también en Rumanía. Por lo tanto, no olviden el resto de otros grandes depredadores.

Nos preocupa la ganadería extensiva. El lobo acomete y ataca, sobre todo a la ganadería extensiva, la que genera más biodiversidad, la de los pequeños rumiantes, el ovino y el caprino. Por tanto, algo hay que hacer y hay que continuar. Bien está lo que la Comisión está promoviendo y la opción no es quedarse sin hacer nada. Hay que conseguir una buena coexistencia, pero teniendo en cuenta el problema de los ganaderos.

  Róża Thun und Hohenstein (Renew). – Mr President, when we start talking about wolves, there are always mixed feelings – a lot of emotions – and this, in fact, blocks all our serious, honest discussion on this issue. The political propaganda pushes away the real serious information, of which there is plenty; we just need to try to find it.

Large carnivore conservation must be based on scientific data and not on our fears that derive from horrible white teeth, which we all remember from the story of Little Red Riding Hood. Let us liberate ourselves from that and listen to science.

Science shows that large carnivores have not yet achieved a favourable conservation status in most Member States, which also says that shooting wolves will neither help us nor farmers. Damage to farm animals is often linked to mismanagement by humans, by proprietors, and inadequate measures taken against those predators.

Instead, what we really need is a better prevention system and prompt compensation for farmers. We must change our habits. For decades, we didn’t have any wolves in our surroundings, now they are there, but intelligence is ability to adapt to change.

For many centuries in Europe, and even today, in many parts of Europe, we see that it is possible to coexist between shepherds, dogs, livestock in areas highly populated by carnivores. So let us profit from those good examples and coexist instead of shoot.

  Anna Deparnay-Grunenberg (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Abermals versuchen die Konservativen, mit Fake News den Naturschutz auszuhebeln.

Heute: Kapitel Wolf. Und auch Sie, Frau von der Leyen – auch wenn Sie heute Morgen den unendlichen Wert der Biodiversität hier gelobt haben – machen leider mit, die Angst vor dem bösen Wolf zu schüren.

Fakt ist: Es ist ein Erfolg, dass das beinahe ausgerottete Tier Wolf sich wieder ausbreitet – unser Naturschutz wirkt.

Fakt ist auch: Über 95 % der Nahrung des Wolfes besteht aus Wildtieren. Damit reguliert der Wolf das Ökosystem Wald. Gerade dort, wo Wildtiere die Triebe junger Bäume verbeißen, kann er auch ein Verbündeter werden für einen klimafitten Wald der Zukunft.

Fakt ist auch noch: Der Wolf ist keine Gefahr für den Menschen. Seit 2 000 gab es keinen einzigen fatalen Wolfsangriff in Europa. Da brauchen wir keine Märchenstunde.

Letzter Fakt: Abschüsse von einzelnen Wölfen haben sich weder bewährt, um Wolfspopulation zu regulieren, noch, um Herden vernünftig zu schützen.

Wir dürfen mitten in dieser Biodiversitätskrise, die wir erleben, keine Abschwächung der Habitat-Richtlinie zulassen. Lasst uns doch lieber gemeinsam unsere Kräfte und Energie nutzen, um innovativ zu werden, damit wir Landwirte und Weidetiere effektiv schützen.

Puhetta johti HEIDI HAUTALA
varapuhemies

  Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR). – Voorzitter, mevrouw de commissaris, beste collega’s, 30 jaar geleden was de wolf zonder meer een bedreigde diersoort en was er ook alle reden om hem de hoogste Europese beschermingsstatus te geven. De situatie is nu echter totaal anders. Inmiddels zijn er in Europa meer dan 21 000 wolven. Bedreigd is de wolf dus zeker niet meer. De wolf is nu juist zélf een bedreiging geworden voor schapen, pony’s, kalveren en grazers die worden ingezet bij het natuurbeheer, zoals moeflons bij ons op de Veluwe.

Ik ben blij dat de Europese Commissie onze resolutie serieus neemt, de lidstaten nu duidelijk oproept om maatregelen te treffen op grond van artikel 16 van de richtlijn en serieus overweegt om de beschermingsstatus aan te passen en te verlagen. Daar is alle reden voor. Laten we de wetgeving in lijn brengen met een nieuwe realiteit. Ik roep de Commissie op om daar ook echt vaart mee te maken. En laten we de regionale overheden meer ruimte geven om beheermaatregelen te treffen waar dat nodig is.

  Marie Dauchy (ID). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, une attaque de loup sur le poney de Madame von der Leyen a enfin amené ce débat à l’ordre du jour. Mais nos éleveurs subissent ces attaques depuis des années sans recevoir les moyens nécessaires pour y faire face. Le problème qui préoccupe nos éleveurs depuis longtemps semblait jusqu’à présent bien éloigné de vos préoccupations de technocrates retranchés dans votre tour d’ivoire.

Mais aujourd’hui, c’est en tant qu’élue savoyarde que je prends la parole, parce que je rencontre chaque semaine des éleveurs qui sont à bout, ne sachant plus quoi faire pour s’en sortir. À la pénibilité du travail, à la faible reconnaissance sociale, à l’étouffement fiscal, etc., on ajoute la problématique du loup, qui est un véritable fléau pour nos éleveurs. La Savoie est le troisième département le plus touché avec 4 à 8 constats d’attaque par jour. Pour être indemnisé en cas d’attaque, il est demandé à nos éleveurs d’être équipés de moyens de protection, mais aujourd’hui, aucun n’est véritablement efficace. J’ai rencontré une éleveuse en Maurienne qui, malgré l’utilisation de filets électrifiés, d’un berger et de plusieurs patous, a été attaquée à plusieurs reprises.

La mise en place de moyens de protection est complexe, comme les chiens par exemple, qui doivent être en nombre suffisant, issus d’une bonne lignée et bien dressés. Mais malheureusement, les centres de dressage spécialisés sont rares ou inexistants – aucun en Savoie par exemple. De plus, les chiens de protection font l’objet de nombreuses plaintes de la part des voisins, des promeneurs, et même des maires.

Il est de bon ton de voter contre l’abattage du loup au nom du bien-être animal. Mais où est ce bien-être animal lorsque le loup attaque des dizaines de brebis et les laisse agoniser pendant des heures? Face à l’augmentation de la prédation et à la détresse immense de nos éleveurs, il est urgent d’agir. Si vous restez spectateurs de cette situation désastreuse, nous perdrons bientôt tous nos éleveurs, qui sont pourtant la richesse et l’identité de nos territoires. Chaque jour en France, un agriculteur se suicide. Derrière ce chiffre, il y a des vies et des familles brisées, plongées dans un deuil inconsolable. Et comme le disait Jean de La Fontaine: «les belles paroles ne valent rien sans les actions qui les accompagnent».

  Maria Angela Danzì (NI). – Signora Presidente, Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, oggi mi sembra che l'Europa inizi un evidente percorso di contraddizioni.

In questi anni, con la legge del ripristino della natura e con la strategia europea per la biodiversità, abbiamo intrapreso un percorso verso il rispetto dell'ecosistema. Dall'altra parte, però, oggi si propone di rivedere lo status di protezione dei lupi e questo senza che ci sia una vera e reale emergenza unionale.

Durante la mia precedente esperienza di funzionario pubblico ho imparato che le decisioni si prendono sempre se c'è un'effettiva emergenza e che le stesse devono essere adeguate, congrue e proporzionate al pericolo. Francamente, io oggi non vedo queste condizioni.

Perché vogliamo declassare il lupo nel suo attuale sistema e livello di protezione? A chi giova questa decisione? Sicuramente non alla collettività e neanche ai nostri allevatori, che probabilmente vogliono essere sostenuti negli investimenti per acquisire strumenti di dissuasione e in quanto piccoli agricoltori.

  Anne Sander (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, aujourd’hui, je crois, est un grand jour, parce que non seulement la présidente de la Commission européenne parle d’agriculture pour la première fois dans son discours sur l’état de l’Union, mais en plus, nous avons aujourd’hui l’occasion de remettre sur la table le statut du loup.

Cela, Madame la Commissaire, je voudrais vous en remercier, parce que nous ne pouvons pas continuer à ignorer la colère et le désarroi des éleveurs. Cela fait des années que nous appelons un moratoire sur le loup en Europe en vue de son déclassement. Les populations de loups ont prospéré en Europe et leur territoire s’est accru de 25 % en dix ans, augmentant ainsi les interactions avec l’homme, de même que la prédation des élevages européens. En dix ans, le nombre d’attaques a doublé, décimant un certain nombre d’élevages.

Le statu quo actuel de la protection du loup est une punition qui s’étend bien au-delà de l’aspect financier pour les éleveurs. Comment donner aux jeunes agriculteurs l’envie de s’installer, en particulier dans les zones de montagne, mais, bien au-delà, dans les zones dont l’économie et les paysages souffriront aussi de la perte progressive du pastoralisme? La biodiversité elle-même pourrait être remise en cause, victime directe du loup.

C’est pourquoi je vous remercie vraiment d’avoir ouvert la discussion. Nous devons maintenant passer des paroles aux actes. C’est urgent et nous attendons avec impatience une proposition de la Commission européenne.

  César Luena (S&D). – Señora presidenta, yo creo que la Comisión y particularmente la presidenta de la Comisión se han equivocado —no sé si son las prisas o los nervios ante las próximas elecciones de junio— y que han caído en el juego de una parte, de un sector. Y creo que eso es peligroso porque se corre el riesgo de animar la confrontación, y no estamos aquí para eso.

Yo defendí en noviembre el acuerdo y dije que teníamos que trabajar para lograr la coexistencia, para proteger al lobo y para adoptar medidas de prevención y de compensación para los ganaderos. Y sigo pensando lo mismo.

Según las disposiciones de la Directiva sobre los hábitats y decisiones anteriores del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea, solo las autoridades nacionales pueden conceder excepciones para matar a una especie protegida. Por tanto, ¿sobre qué base la presidenta insta a las autoridades locales a tomar medidas inmediatas, como se dice? ¿Sobre qué base?

La Comisión, en ese mismo escrito, se refiere a la posibilidad de cambiar el estatuto de protección, de los lobos en este caso, sobre la base de los datos que recaben esas autoridades locales. ¿Nos puede clarificar, señora comisaria, qué opciones tiene la Comisión en mente y qué implicaciones van a conllevar?

Creo, de verdad, que se han precipitado, que se han equivocado, que se han puesto de un lado cuando lo que hay que hacer es buscar el acuerdo y la coexistencia.

  Hilde Vautmans (Renew). – Voorzitter, mevrouw de commissaris, na zo’n hele ochtend over de State of the Union dan hier na de middag een debat over de wolf, dan moet ik u zeggen dat je hier in het halfrond voelt dat dat debat over de wolf de gemoederen heel erg beroert. Je voelt het heel duidelijk: je hebt de voorstanders, je hebt de liefhebbers, en dan heb je de tegenstanders.

En ja, sedert 1992 wordt de wolf met een heel hoge beschermingsstatus beschermd. Hij was toen ook met uitsterven bedreigd. Nu, 30 jaar later, zijn er heel veel cijfers die circuleren en stellen we vast dat er toch – naar raming – meer dan 20 000 wolven in Europa rondzwerven. En dan denk ik dat ik heel blij mag zijn dat de Commissie nu gezegd heeft: “Kijk, we gaan een oproep doen. We gaan proberen om juiste cijfers te verzamelen, omdat we toch ook voelen dat de aanwezigheid van die wolf drukt op de landbouwgebieden.”

En dan moet ik u zeggen dat een wolf in het dichtbevolkte Vlaanderen – in het hele mooie Limburg – is toch iets helemaal anders dan een wolf in een afgelegen gebied in Duitsland. Het gezond boerenverstand – en dan rond ik af – zegt me eigenlijk: geef die wolf een gebied waarin hij mag leven en zorg dat de boeren gebieden hebben waarin hun dieren beschermd worden.

  Francisco Guerreiro (Verts/ALE). – Senhora Presidente, pelo partilhado aqui, eu acho que o Partido Popular Europeu devia mudar de nome e designação para Partido Populista Europeu. Porque fala em animais, e está muito preocupado com os animais de pecuária, mas não vejo esta dimensão e esta vontade de proteger os animais quando se fala da revisão de toda a legislação em torno do bem-estar animal. Zero. Não há nada que tenham feito para pôr a legislação na mesa. Zero.

Depois, falam de biodiversidade, de proteger a biodiversidade e estão tão preocupados com a diversidade, mas quando se falou da lei para o restauro da natureza, zero. Foram aqueles que se aliaram à extrema-direita para tentar rejeitar esta proposta. Zero.

Depois, falam em agricultores, estão também muito preocupados com o mundo rural e com os agricultores, mas quando é para apoiar os pequenos e médios agricultores, quando é para apoiar verdadeiras medidas para expandir a agricultura regenerativa, zero. Apoiam a PAC, a Política Agrícola Comum, que constrói todas estas práticas intensivas nas monoculturas.

Portanto, a credibilidade do Partido Populista Europeu nesta matéria é zero.

  Alexandr Vondra (ECR). – Paní předsedající, vlk je zpátky a já si myslím, že to je debata, kterou nesmíme vést ideologicky, ale v zásadě velmi prakticky a pragmaticky. Na jedné straně ochrana přírody dosáhla velkého úspěchu, vlk je zpátky, já sám mám venkovské stavení na severu Čech, to bylo vůbec první místo, kam vlk se vrátil po těch 200 letech k nám. Viděl jsem smečku, mám na mobilu nahrané vytí. Je to krásný zpěv. Mám z toho radost a tam je výhoda, že to je bývalý vojenský prostor, tak tam nedochází k interakci s těmi malými chovateli ovcí. Pojedete kousek dál, 50 kilometrů, a tam zase vidíte, jak dva vlci přes noc pro potěšení zmasakrují 80 ovcí. A ten farmář nemá na to, aby si udělal nákladná opatření a ani ta pomoc státu není dostatečná.

Čili myslím si, že tady jde o to najít řešení. Prostě situace v různých regionech, v různých zemích je různá a Evropská komise by tohle měla reflektovat a řešit to skutečně na místě tak, jak to vyžadují ty poměry tam v dané zemi. Všichni tady řešíme oslíka paní předsedkyně Komise, ale jsou tady prostě tisíce farmářů, chovatelů malých ovcí, kteří jsou daleko v složitější situaci, než ona je.

  Sylvia Limmer (ID). – Frau Präsidentin, verehrte Kollegen! Es ist bemerkenswert, dass die EU-Kommission erst jetzt die längst fällige Diskussion um den Schutzstatus von Wölfen anstößt. Da musste erst das geliebte Pony Dolly der Familie von der Leyen dem Beutegreifer zum Opfer fallen. Die seit Jahren von Landwirten, Viehzüchtern, Jägern und Bürgern vorgebrachten Klagen und Befürchtungen zur Sicherheit von Mensch und Tier hinsichtlich der besorgniserregenden Ausbreitung der Wölfe wurden schlicht ignoriert. Soviel zum Thema Bürgernähe.

Aber um es klarzustellen: Ich begrüße diese Diskussion. Der Wolf hat nichts in unserer dichtbesiedelten Kulturlandschaft verloren. Er war weltweit gesehen nie vom Aussterben bedroht. Und es gibt keine einzige ökonomisch sinnvolle Wolfsschutzmaßnahme, wie die kürzlich in einer einzigen Nacht von einem Wolfsrudel 55 gerissenen Schafe zeigen, die sich innerhalb eines wolfsabweisenden Schutzzaunes befanden. Allein für diese nutzlosen Herdenschutzmaßnahmen wurden in Deutschland letztes Jahr 8,5 Millionen Euro Steuergelder ausgegeben. Da sind die Schadensausgleichszahlungen und die Kosten für Gutachten noch nicht einmal mit eingerechnet. Kosten, die von 2013 bis 2019 um das 30-fache explodiert sind. In Brandenburg allein sind das Kosten von fast einer Million Euro.

Es ist schlicht irre, dass es hier die weltweit höchste Wolfspopulation gibt. Die Landbevölkerung, die tagtäglich mit dieser Situation zu kämpfen hat, ist es einfach leid, von Wolfsschwärmern als Zoo für ihre realitätsfernen Spinnereien missbraucht zu werden.

  Balázs Hidvéghi (NI). – Elnök Asszony! Az elmúlt években jelentősen megnőtt az európai nagyragadozó-állomány, ami – mivel korábban veszélyeztetett fajokról volt szó –egyrészt jó hír, másrészt mára a túlszaporodás és a teljes vadászati tilalom miatt súlyos problémák alakultak ki szerte a kontinensen.

A farkasok és a medvék már nemcsak a haszonállatokat tizedelik, hanem az élettér csökkenése és a megemelkedett egyedszám miatt egyre többször lakott településeken is megjelennek, és emberekre támadnak. Az egyre gyakoribb és veszélyesebb medvetámadásokat például mi, magyarok Erdélyben, a Székelyföldön régóta tapasztaljuk. Ezek jelentős anyagi károkat okoznak a gazdáknak, és gyakran a megtámadott ember súlyos, maradandó sérülésével vagy akár halálával végződnek.

Erre a helyzetre kizárólag a szilárd szakmai alapokon álló vadgazdálkodás adhatja meg a választ. Túlzásoktól mentes megközelítésre van szükség, olyan egyensúlyra, amely egyaránt figyelembe veszi az emberi élet és a nagyragadozók védelmét, ugyanúgy, mint a mezőgazdaság és az állattenyésztés szempontjait. Ennek megfelelően ismét lehetővé kell tenni a túlszaporodott nagyragadozók vadászatát Európában. Szoros együttműködésben a vadászati, vadgazdálkodási, szakmai szervezetekkel.

  Alexander Bernhuber (PPE). – Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Frau Kommissarin! Es hat leider ganz schön lange gedauert, bis uns die Europäische Kommission geglaubt hat, dass der Wolf in Europa wirklich ein Problem ist und dass hier die Regeln endlich einmal geändert gehören.

Die Wolfspopulation in Europa wächst und wächst rasant. Mittlerweile haben wir bereits über 20 000 Wölfe in Europa. Und genauso geht es auch mit den Rissen von Schafen oder Rindern durch den Wolf hier, die rasant ansteigen. Ja, es stimmt, es gibt Möglichkeiten, dass man Herdenschutzzäune baut oder dass man Hirtenhunde einsetzt. Und das funktioniert mancherorts auch gut.

Aber genauso gibt es schlichtweg Regionen, wo es einfach nicht funktioniert. Und das sind speziell im alpinen Gebiet unsere Almen. Dort entstehen dann wirklich schreckliche Bilder, wenn man weiß, wie es ausschaut, wenn hier ein Wolf mehrere Schafe oder Rinder gerissen hat. Solch leidende und tote Tiere finden unsere Bäuerinnen und Bauern dann täglich auf ihren Almen. Und dass diese dann irgendwann einmal sagen: Sie werden hier keine Tiere mehr auf den Almen auftreiben, das muss auch verständlich sein.

Sehr geehrte Frau Kommissarin, haben Sie bitte endlich Verständnis, dass es hier eine klare Regel braucht auf europäischer Ebene, die die Realität widerspiegelt. Und lassen Sie unsere Regionen und Länder einfach selbst entscheiden, wie wir mit dem Wolf umgehen, der hier wirklich sehr großen Schaden anrichtet. Denn der Wolf ist einfach längst kein schützenswertes Tier mehr.

In dem Sinne: Herzlichen Dank! Ich freue mich, wenn wir jetzt wirklich auch intensiv daran arbeiten, dass es hier in den nächsten Monaten eine vernünftige Lösung für alle Beteiligten gibt.

  Camilla Laureti (S&D). – Signora Presidente, Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, abbiamo un compito importante oggi, e lo abbiamo visto da tutti gli interventi che stiamo facendo, chi in una direzione chi nell'altra: perché la sfida è quella di coniugare la protezione della biodiversità e della fauna selvatica con le attività dell'agricoltura e dell'allevamento in Europa, un tema che si sta facendo sempre più urgente.

Per questo, ben venga l'iniziativa della Commissione per avere stime sempre più precise rispetto al fenomeno, perché prima di prendere qualsiasi decisione, è importante conoscere lo stato dell'arte.

Nello stesso tempo, iniziamo a dare risposte anche ai nostri allevatori. In Italia, per esempio, come Partito Democratico abbiamo presentato la scorsa settimana una proposta di legge in cui chiediamo risarcimenti in tempi certi per danni diretti e indiretti agli agricoltori e agli allevatori e anche fondi per interventi di prevenzione.

Dobbiamo ritrovare l'equilibrio della coesistenza, evitando di trasformarlo però in uno scontro tra esseri umani e animali. Perché in alcuni casi tutto questo sta già accadendo.

  Martin Hojsík (Renew). – Pani predsedajúca, strašenie zlými vlkmi patrí naspäť do rozprávok. Blížia sa však európske voľby a konzervatívci znova strašia, a útočia na ochranu prírody.

Predsedníčka Komisie žiada regióny a autority o dáta populácie vlka a ich vplyve. Kvalitné dáta sa však zbierajú roky. Sú za nimi komplexné genetické analýzy.

Aj na Slovensku sme počuli o tom, koľko tisícok medveďov máme, a nie je to pravda. Nedajú sa vycucať za tri týždne z prsta, ako to žiada Komisia, pokiaľ záleží na ich kvalite a objektívnosti, a tie sú kľúčové.

Pritom riešenia máme v rukách už teraz. Nástroje na manažment populácie vlka vrátane selektívneho usmrcovania problematických jedincov.

Namiesto toho počúvame o tom, ako treba rýchlo otvoriť smernicu o biotopoch, prestať chrániť vlka. To by bolo bezprecedentné obchádzanie pravidiel a noriem Komisie. Bol by to populistický krok v rámci predvolebnej kampane a dôvod na žalobu na Európskom súde.

Strašenie vlkmi sú totiž iba rozprávky.

  Caroline Roose (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, en parlant du loup comme d’un danger pour l’homme, Ursula von der Leyen a ravivé la peur culturelle du grand méchant loup. La consultation publique qui a été lancée en même temps est opaque et précipitée. Le but est de revenir sur le statut de protection des loups pour introduire plus de flexibilité et faciliter leur abattage. Ces déclarations font partie d’une stratégie politique bien ficelée qui vise à sacrifier le loup sur l’autel des élections.

Parler du loup comme d’un danger pour l’homme, c’est de la désinformation. Promettre aux agriculteurs que l’abattage est la solution, c’est un mensonge. C’est même contre-productif. La cohabitation est possible. Construisons les solutions avec les éleveurs au lieu de crier au loup, le PPE et Madame von der Leyen feraient mieux de s’intéresser aux alternatives comme une meilleure surveillance des troupeaux par des patous, le renforcement des clôtures, des compensations financières, etc.

Le nombre de loups augmente, c’est vrai, mais l’espèce reste menacée et doit rester protégée par la directive «Habitats». Alors après la restauration de la nature, on est sur le loup, et ensuite, quelle sera la prochaine cible? Ne laissons pas le cynisme de la droite l’emporter sur la nature et notre futur.

  Pietro Fiocchi (ECR). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, declassifichiamo il lupo. Ci sono decine di migliaia di attacchi tutti gli anni, non solo a pecore, asini, capre e vacche, ma anche ad animali da compagnia e cani. Tra l'altro, l'Italia è particolare, perché se il mio cane morde una persona viene soppresso dalle autorità ma se io sparo a un lupo che attacca un bambino rischio fino a quattro anni di galera perché è penale.

Gli aiuti agli allevatori, i rimborsi, i recinti e i cani da guardia ci sono ma non sono sufficienti e, soprattutto, denotano un'ignoranza pazzesca, perché il concetto di portare gli animali in alta montagna è per l'allevamento semibrado per cui, se io devo chiuderli, li tengo in un capannone in pianura e me ne frego, perché mi costa di meno, con dei danni grossissimi dal punto di vista del rischio antincendio e del rischio idrogeologico.

Sono stato recentemente in Valtellina un'ora dopo una predazione da parte di lupi e c'erano quattro pecore, tre capre e un asino che stavano morendo davanti ai miei occhi perché i lupi gli avevano mangiato le interiora e le stavano mangiando piano piano, per cui sono dovuto intervenire – ho ancora gli occhi di questi animali qui dentro la mia mente – e li ho uccisi, ho aiutato il pastore a ucciderli perché comunque sarebbero morti tra i più atroci tormenti.

Gli animalisti vogliono a tutti i costi difendere i lupi: forse dal loro comodo salotto nel centro di Milano, con il gatto, hanno questa idea che bisogna eliminare l'uomo e difendere i lupi. Però la ricetta non è quella: allora, se io devo scegliere tra la pecora e il lupo, scelgo la pecora! Io sto con la pecora.

  Elena Lizzi (ID). – Signor Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, ho sentito che lei ha ricordato la quantificazione del ristoro dei danni provocati dai grandi carnivori e lo apprezzo. Ma come possiamo quantificare il valore della vita di un ragazzo morto aggredito da un orso in Italia? O i 25 di cui abbiamo sentito poco fa testimoniare dalla Romania? Come possiamo lenire il dolore di queste famiglie che devono affrontare un lutto così assurdo?

La presenza di lupi e di grandi carnivori in Italia continua a crescere, generando continui attacchi agli animali d'allevamento e a volte, purtroppo, anche all'uomo. Ormai in alcune aree, soprattutto nel nord Italia, tra cui il Friuli Venezia Giulia, il Trentino-Alto Adige, il Veneto e l'Emilia Romagna, registrano il sovrappopolamento di queste specie.

Il gruppo Identità e Democrazia ha depositato una risoluzione con due richieste: l'attenuazione dello stato di protezione del lupo, con il declassamento da specie di fauna rigorosamente protetta a specie protetta poiché, grazie alle politiche di ripopolamento, il lupo non è più una specie in via di estinzione. Seconda cosa: un coinvolgimento più attivo degli attori regionali, dato che le nostre regioni, soprattutto quelle gestite dalla Lega Salvini premier, hanno dimostrato grande capacità di amministrazione del problema tramite le politiche svolte alla salvaguardia degli allevatori. Lasciamoli intervenire.

Qui chiediamo anche che si attuino a livello europeo politiche di contenimento dei grandi carnivori, prevedendo anche maggiori spostamenti nelle aree senza la presenza dell'uomo. Cerchiamo di essere concreti, diamo risposte: ci sono lutti, oltre che danni, di cui dobbiamo rispondere e che dobbiamo affrontare.

  Marlene Mortler (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin! Wollen wir Weidetierhaltung auch in Zukunft? Wenn wir diese Frage mit einem klaren Ja beantworten, dürfen wir die schnell wachsende Wolfspopulation nicht ausblenden. Denn immer mehr Weidetiere werden gerissen, verletzt oder vermisst, 4 400 alleine letztes Jahr in Deutschland.

Und ein kurzes Wort an die Grünen: Schwarzer Humor ist mir wirklich lieber als Ihr grüner Humor heute. Dazu eine Freundin: Marlene, wir machen das, was die Politik von uns will: geschlossene Kreisläufe, kurze Wege. Wir halten Weidetiere, wir vermarkten diese in unserer Metzgerei oder in unserem Gasthaus. Aber wir haben jeden Tag Angst, dass der Wolf wieder zuschlägt. Und wir stellen uns immer häufiger die Frage: Sollen und können wir noch weitermachen?

Herdenschutzzäune, Herdenschutzhunde haben ihre Grenzen – technisch, zeitlich, finanziell und vor allem psychisch. Leider stellt sich die deutsche Bundesregierung bisher taub. Umso wichtiger ist es, dass wir als EU-Parlamentarier zusammen mit Frau von der Leyen eine klare Ansage an alle Mitgliedstaaten machen: Liefert eure Daten bitte vollständig. Der hohe Schutzstatus des Wolfs muss schnell, lückenlos und unbürokratisch überprüft werden. Wer Weidetierhaltung sichert, sichert nicht nur die Artenvielfalt im Grünland, sondern auch Landwirtschaft und Tourismus in den ländlichen Räumen.

  Niels Fuglsang (S&D). – Fru formand! Kære Kommissær, kære kollegaer! Kender I eventyret om hyrdedrengen Peter, som for sjov råber: "Ulven kommer”, selvom det er løgn? Som I måske ved, så ender historien på tragisk vis, for da ulven en dag rent faktisk kommer, så er Peter overladt til sig selv og ulven. Desværre virker det som om, visse kollegaer – også Kommissionsformand Ursula von der Leyen – har misforstået historiens morale, som er, at det er farligt at opildne til frygt uden nogen grund. Og det er det, som Kommissionsformanden gør, når hun påstår, at bestanden af ulve er potentielt til fare for mennesker. I hendes eget land, Tyskland, har ulven været siden 2000. Der er ikke et eksempel på, at ulve angriber mennesker. Så vi skal ikke opildne til frygt. Vi skal hellere hjælpe de landmænd, der rent faktisk har problemer med, at deres bestande bliver angrebet af ulve. De skal have hjælp til at få et ulvehegn, og det kan godt finansieres af EU. Det er i øvrigt sådan, at det allerede er muligt at skyde ulve, der er problemulve, som kommer igen i forhold til landmandens besætning. Så lad os ikke opildne til skyderi, men lad os hjælpe landmændene.

  Jérémy Decerle (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, contrairement à ce que certains pensent, pour les victimes, le problème de la prédation n’a rien d’anecdotique. 11 000 animaux tués, déchiquetés, en France, 4 000 en Allemagne, 700 en République tchèque. Face à ces chiffres, le bénéfice pour la biodiversité est largement discutable. On peut admirer le loup, l’ours et autres carnivores, mais on ne peut pas fermer les yeux sur les dégâts qu’ils causent, sur le stress et la détresse qu’ils engendrent chez les éleveurs.

J’invite donc ceux qui n’assument pas cette réalité, qui aiment ces gentilles bêtes mais les aiment de loin, depuis leurs villes, à leur offrir une place de choix sur leur balcon, dans leur parc urbain ou leur forêt péri-urbaine. Les prédateurs ne connaissent pas de frontières, et comme l’a dit Ursula von der Leyen: «face aux grands carnivores, l’élevage européen est en danger». Pour apporter des réponses concrètes, harmonisons le comptage, facilitons l’abattage et ayons le courage politique de réviser le statut du loup et des autres si nécessaire.

  Margrete Auken (Verts/ALE). – Fru formand! Vi ved jo, at ulve spiser bedstemødre. Så selvfølgelig skal de udryddes. Alle de, der spiser bedstemødre, skal vi lige komme et andet sted hen. I Danmark dør der mere end 20 000 smågrise om dagen. Så skulle vi ikke – hvis vi er så optaget af dyrevelfærd – kigge den anden vej. Og lad mig så sige, at vi ved godt, at hvis vi passer på vores egne husdyr – sådan som ikke mindst Róża Thun beskrev rigtigt godt – så kan der være fin sameksistens mellem ulve og mennesker og ulve og dyrehold – hvis vi altså passer godt på det. Men vi skal også lige lægge mærke til – og det er meget høj grad til dig, kommissær: Hvad er det for et signal, vi er lige ved at sende til Afrika og Indien? Hvad med deres elefanter? Hvad med Indiens tigre? De er vitterligt farlige! Og jeg har da hørt folk sige, at de skal passe på deres dyr. Men vi skal ikke ofre det, det koster at sikre, at vi bare har så meget omsorg for det, at vi kan være der allesammen. I vil høre om det fra en anden dansker. Han mener, at alle dyr, der ikke kan spises eller jages eller kløes bag ørerne, skal udryddes. Læg lige mærke til det, det kommer om lidt, fra Danmark.

  Teuvo Hakkarainen (ECR). – Arvoisa puheenjohtaja, suurpetokannat täytyy pitää sillä tasolla, joka ei vaaranna ihmisten normaalia elämää ja elinkeinoa. Hyvä, että komissiokin on tähän viimein herännyt. Täytyy ehkä kiittää sutta, joka taannoin raateli puheenjohtaja von der Leyenin rakkaan ponin.

Meillä Suomessa sudet raatelevat karjan lisäksi kotieläimet, kuten koirat ja lampaat. Eilen susi tappoi 30 lammasta Jurvassa. Lammastarhassa tämmöinen elukka on tappokone eikä mikään muu. Ei se tapa syödäkseen vaan tappaakseen. Lampurille aiheutui 35 tuhannen euron kustannukset siitä. Sitten on vielä näitä aitoja ja muita vippaskonsteja, joita siellä käytetään ja joista sudet eivät välitä mitään. Meillä on Venäjän raja lähellä. Siellä metsästetään susia, ja silloin ne tulevat syömään Suomeen. Kannanhoidolliset toimet täytyy voida aloittaa myös Suomessa, että tämä touhu loppuu.

  Gilles Lebreton (ID). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, le loup n’est plus une espèce en danger en Europe. On estime par exemple qu’il y a aujourd’hui plus de 1 100 loups en France, alors qu’il n’y en avait plus du tout au début des années 1990. Plus de 10 000 animaux d’élevage, en grande majorité des moutons, y sont désormais tués par eux chaque année.

On ne peut plus continuer sur cette voie sans mettre gravement en péril les activités d’élevage. C’est pourquoi je demande qu’on déclasse le loup à l’intérieur de la liste des espèces protégées par la directive «Habitats» de 1992. Plus précisément, je demande qu’on le fasse passer de son annexe IV, qui concerne les espèces en danger, à son annexe V relative aux espèces qu’on peut réguler. Cette opération permettrait d’augmenter le nombre des prélèvements pour empêcher la croissance exponentielle de la population des loups, tout en continuant à assurer la sauvegarde de l’espèce. Soyons raisonnables, tâchons de concilier la défense du loup avec la nécessaire protection de nos activités d’élevage.

  Franc Bogovič (PPE). – Spoštovana gospa komisarka! Spoštovana podpredsednica! Zelo pozdravljam to, da v tem prostoru danes toliko govorimo o kmetijstvu. Predsednica Evropske komisije je v svojem letnem nagovoru omenila kmetijstvo in tudi dejala, da želi ustvariti normalne pogoje za kmetovanje. Mislim, da je tudi ta razprava, ki je posledica pisma komisarke von der Leynove, predsednice, da stroka spregovori o populacij volkov, del te razprave.

Sam imam vnuke. Berem pravljice o njih, vendar samo o volkovih ne govorim zato, ker bi bral pravljice, ampak zato, ker se srečujem s slovenskimi kmeti, ki doživljajo velike travme zaradi zelo velike populacije v zadnjih desetih letih, populacije volkov in medvedov. V zadnjih desetih letih se je kar potrojila. In prihajajo te zveri na dvorišče, hleve in delajo veliko škodo.

Tudi lovci opozarjajo, da se dela velika škoda v gozdovih, kajti volkovi, medvedi nimajo naravnih sovražnikov in se zmanjšuje populacija srnjadi, jelenjadi, tam, kjer se razrastejo volkovi, kjer je večja populacija volkov.

Zato mislim, da je prav, da odgovorno spregovorimo o tej temi in da tudi najdemo rešitve, ki bodo na dolgi rok ohranile zveri. Veseli smo lahko, da ta Natura deluje, da imamo to populacijo, nikakor pa ne sme preiti teh številk, ki so normalne za sobivanja. Zato zelo podpiram to razpravo in verjamem, da bodo strokovnjaki postregli s kvalitetnimi podatki.

  Paolo De Castro (S&D). – Signora Presidente, Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, poche ore fa, in quest'Aula, la Presidente von der Leyen ha sottolineato come la natura e l'agricoltura debbano andare di pari passo.

La situazione dei lupi e dei grandi carnivori rappresenta un tema centrale per questo equilibrio, che tocca da vicino gli allevatori, alle prese con centinaia di attacchi ai propri animali, soprattutto quelli delle aree remote e di montagna.

La Presidente ha ragione: agricoltura e natura devono tornare ad andare di pari passo, ma la relazione tra uomo e ecosistemi evolve nel tempo e gli equilibri vanno governati attentamente, secondo le esigenze dei diversi territori. Per questo, cara Commissaria, la ringraziamo dell'annuncio di una revisione dello status di protezione del lupo.

Ora però devono seguire azioni concrete, non ideologiche, per garantire la flessibilità necessaria a far fronte a una sovrappopolazione che sta mettendo a repentaglio non solo gli equilibri ecosistemici, ma anche decenni di impegno da parte dell'Unione per la tutela della salute e del benessere degli animali da allevamento.

  Asger Christensen (Renew). – Fru formand! Jeg er virkelig glad for at få lov til at tale her i Europa-Parlamentet i dag. Det kan jeg ikke længere på Twitter, for jeg er blevet udelukket fra den konto. Min konto er blevet suspenderet, fordi jeg har talt kritisk om ulve. Jeg mener, at Kommissionen skal give os nogle flere redskaber i værktøjskassen til at regulere den voldsomt stigende ulvebestand, Margrethe Vestager. Med andre ord, vi skal have lov til at skyde problemulvene her og nu. Tak til Kommissionen for at kigge på sagen. For det er med at lytte til de mange borgere og virksomheder, som har sendt ophold ind. De lever i frygt for, om deres husdyr bliver dræbt om natten. Nogle tør ikke lade deres barnevogn stå ude i haven på grund af ulvene. Man kigger sig om næste gang, når man løber en tur i skoven. Sådan skal det ikke være!

  Sergio Berlato (ECR). – Signora Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, siamo qui ancora una volta a parlare della necessità di porre rimedio all'eccessiva presenza di lupi nei nostri territori, che sta creando problemi devastanti all'economia e all'ecosistema. Qualcuno ritiene che ci si debba schierare a favore dei lupi, qualcun'altro contro.

Noi riteniamo che tutta la fauna selvatica debba essere gestita per garantire un giusto equilibrio tra le varie specie e la compatibilità tra le stesse con le attività umane, soprattutto in territori fortemente antropizzati. Come avviene per un albero da frutto che, per poter dare frutti rigogliosi, sia per le presenti che per le future generazioni, deve essere oggetto di continue manutenzioni, deve essere tenuto libero dalle erbe infestanti, deve essere irrigato quando serve, ma deve essere soprattutto potato, anche il patrimonio faunistico ha le stesse esigenze gestionali.

Conservazione non significa imbalsamazione; protezione non significa intoccabilità. Gestire significa anche potare. L'obiettivo delle istituzioni è quello di garantire lo stato di conservazione della specie, non l'intoccabilità dei singoli individui, soprattutto se problematici.

Prima che coloro che hanno sempre garantito la manutenzione e la salvaguardia dell'ambiente, cioè i nostri agricoltori, i nostri pastori, i nostri allevatori, i nostri malghesi, siano costretti ad abbandonare i nostri territori a causa delle continue predazioni al loro bestiame, è necessario che le istituzioni intervengano prontamente attraverso l'attuazione di piani nazionali di gestione e di contenimento, dando piena applicazione all'articolo 16 della direttiva Habitat.

  Simone Schmiedtbauer (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Frau Kommissarin! Ich habe unzählige Male über die wachsende Gefahr durch die zunehmende Ausbreitung von Wölfen geredet. Unzählige Briefe an die Kommission adressiert, unzählige Gespräche geführt und unzählige Stunden an einer Entschließung des Europäischen Parlaments zu Wölfen gearbeitet.

Aber immer noch sterben in jeder Weidesaison unzählige Nutztiere einen qualvollen Tod. Und immer noch ertragen unsere Bauernfamilien schwerstes Leid wegen der Großraubtiere. Und immer noch sehen wir, dass sich die Wölfe jedes Jahr um rund 30 % vermehren, sodass wir mittlerweile wissenschaftlich nachgewiesen knapp 20 000 Exemplare in Europa haben. Wir können und wir wollen das ganz einfach nicht mehr hinnehmen.

Die Präsidentin hat ihren Kurs geändert und spricht von einer wachsenden Gefahr für Nutztiere und einer potenziellen Gefahr für Menschen. Jetzt ist es aber an der Zeit, dass diesen Worten Taten folgen. Wir brauchen eine Anpassung des Schutzstatus an die Realität, der einem sinnvollen Wolfsmanagement in der EU den Weg ebnet. Ansonsten wird sich jemand in diesem Haus für das Ende der Alm- und Weidewirtschaft verantworten müssen. Handeln und Verständnis ist jetzt gefragt.

  Carmen Avram (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, un urs brun se plimbă nestingherit o lună pe străzile unui oraș de două sute de mii de oameni. Localnicii îl botează Rambo și urmăresc cu interes aventurile până când ursul e prins. S-a întâmplat în august, aproape de capitala București, unde, dacă voia, Rambo putea ajunge în doar două zile de mers. România deține recordul european la numărul de urși. Interacțiunea lor cu omul ne-a costat deja 300 de răniți, 24 de morți, 7 milioane de euro daune și multă spaimă.

Urșii au ajuns pe șoselele aglomerate, unde sunt uneori omorâți de mașini, în curtea oamenilor sunt, la porțile școlilor și în magazine, unde mai sparg câte un frigider căutând mâncare. E bine să vorbim despre cei 19 000 de lupi din UE, dar să nu ignorăm cei aproape 9 000 de urși dintr-un singur stat membru. E momentul să rediscutăm o directivă depășită de realitate și să concepem o strategie europeană de relocare a animalelor sau de orice altă metodă umană de control pentru speciile care s-au înmulțit și devin periculoase pentru oameni.

  Elsi Katainen (Renew). – Arvoisa puhemies, arvoisa komission edustaja, on todella huojentavaa, että vuosien väännön jälkeen komissio on vihdoin kuullut jäsenmaiden vakavan huolen susista. Parlamentti on ottanut asiaan selkeän kannan niin, että yhteinen ratkaisu on löydyttävä eikä pallottelu vastuusta enää voi jatkua. Kenenkään ei enää pidä joutua pelkäämään oman turvallisuutensa, kotieläintensä tai elinkeinonsa puolesta.

Valitettavasti olemme kuitenkin jo osin myöhässä, sillä esimerkiksi viime vuonna yksistään Suomessa yli 500 lammasta kuoli petovahinkojen takia. Susien takia lapsille joudutaan järjestämään erillisiä koulukyytejä, ja myös nautoja ja metsästyskoiria on menetetty susille.

Komission konsultaatio ei saa jäädä vain tiedonkeruun tasolle, vaan sen on johdettava todellisiin joustoihin susien kaatoluvissa. Susikannan tulee olla riittävä ja susi kuuluu luontoon, mutta ei ihmisten pihoille eikä eläinsuojiin. Suden siirtäminen luontodirektiivin tiukan suojelun liitteestä neljä liitteeseen viisi on siis välttämätöntä.

  Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Szanowni Państwo! Nie ulega wątpliwości, że tak zwana dyrektywa środowiskowa nie jest narzędziem doskonałym, ponieważ nie uwzględnia odpowiednio uwarunkowań lokalnych i regionalnych. Widać to dokładnie na przykładzie populacji wilka. Dzięki ścisłej ochronie wprawdzie populacja wilka została odbudowana, ale są regiony, gdzie jest ich nadreprezentacja. Dochodzi do ataków wilków na zwierzęta domowe. Ten argument powinien skłonić Komisję do przyjęcia bardziej elastycznego podejścia dającego władzom lokalnym prawo różnicowania statusu ochrony wilka. Nie może być tak, że wilki atakujące zwierzęta gospodarskie mają pełną ochronę, a zrozpaczony rolnik nie ma skutecznych narzędzi do ochrony własnego gospodarstwa i własnego dorobku. Trzeba zarządzać populacją wilka w sposób rozsądny.

  Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez (PPE). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria McGuinness, la creciente amenaza de las manadas de lobos se ha expandido por comunidades rurales de toda Europa, hasta el punto de que la propia presidenta de la Comisión Europea la ha sufrido de primera mano. Y es tan dramática la situación que la Comisión Europea está urgiendo a todos los Estados miembros a tomar las medidas necesarias para hacerle frente.

Pero, en España, en lugar de permitir una gestión cinegética efectiva del lobo, el Gobierno de Sánchez ha hecho justo lo contrario, extremando su nivel de protección sin ningún respaldo científico. Una decisión fruto de la ceguera ideológica que está disparando la presencia de manadas de lobos en las regiones más septentrionales de España. Por eso, es hora de que el Gobierno de España preste atención a las demandas y a los requerimientos de la Unión Europea. Hora de que sea transparente y publique los datos de que dispone. Hora de que dialogue con las regiones afectadas y de que ponga a disposición de los ganaderos los fondos de compensación que tanto necesitan.

  Jan-Christoph Oetjen (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin! Ich habe der Debatte hier gefolgt, und es ist schon spannend zu hören, wie unterschiedlich die Sichtweisen auf das Thema sind – je nachdem, ob man aus einer Region kommt, wo es den Wolf gibt oder nicht.

Ich komme aus Niedersachsen, im Norden von Deutschland, und Ende August wurden in Gräpel, das ist etwa 60 Kilometer von mir, 55 Schafe gerissen und 50 weitere verletzt von 112 insgesamt, die auf dieser Weide gewesen sind. Das ist südlich von Hamburg. Das ist kein flaches und das ist kein unbewohntes Gebiet. Nach dem offiziellen Wolfsmonitoring in Niedersachsen gibt es bei uns 50 Rudel, zuzüglich Einzeltiere, zuzüglich Paare. Niedersachsen ist ein Land mit etwa 8 Millionen Einwohnern und etwas größer als die Niederlande. Nur damit Sie sich das bildlich vorstellen können, wie groß der Druck auf die Weidetierhaltung im Moment bei uns ist. Denn der Wolf ist ein Kulturfolger. Er läuft durch unsere Dörfer und er reißt bevorzugt Weidetiere, weil das die einfachste Beute ist.

Noch vor einigen Jahren haben wir auch gesagt: Ja, man muss einzelne Tiere schießen. Ja, man muss die Zäune erhöhen. Ja, man muss das Monitoring verbessern. Aber das reicht heute nicht mehr bei dem Bestand an Wölfen, den wir haben. Wir brauchen endlich eine Absenkung des Schutzstatus, wenn es auch nur regional für einzelne Gebiete ist. Aber wir brauchen diese Absenkung des Schutzstatus, damit wir endlich in ein aktives Wolfsmanagement einsteigen können.

  Jorge Buxadé Villalba (ECR). – Señora presidenta, el lobo es al ganado lo que muchos de ustedes a los ganaderos. No hay mayor depredador de los trabajadores del campo que un fanático urbanita en Bruselas o en Madrid.

El lobo no está en peligro de extinción. Nuestro campo sí lo está. Llevamos cuatro años y medio denunciando que los ganaderos están desprotegidos y desamparados frente a los ataques del lobo, pero ustedes solo actúan cuando padecen las consecuencias de sus propias políticas.

En una región de España, Castilla y León, desde que el lobo fue introducido en el Listado de Especies Silvestres en Régimen de Protección Especial se han incrementado los ataques del lobo en un 29 % y se cuentan ya por miles las cabezas de ganado muertas. Y detrás de cada cabeza de ganado hay una familia, hay un ganadero, hay una explotación.

Es bastante fácil: modificar la Directiva de hábitats para posibilitar la convivencia del lobo con la población rural. Impulsen planes de gestión del lobo a nivel nacional para evitar la descoordinación entre regiones. Permitan la caza con fines de control de las poblaciones, como pide el sector. Establezcan ayudas que cubran no solo el daño emergente, sino las ganancias dejadas de percibir. Y faciliten la instalación de barreras de protección, ya sean acústicas, lumínicas, físicas o con perros guardianes.

Es bastante fácil: es cuestión de voluntad.

  Emma Wiesner (Renew). – Fru talman! Varg, säl och skarv. Dessa är tre rovdjur som har någonting gemensamt. De har varit hotade, men bestånden har nu återhämtat sig så pass mycket att det skapar problem runt om i Europa.

Vad är då problemet? Jo, trots att dessa arter har återhämtat sig skyddas de fortfarande av EU:s lagstiftning, som agerar bromskloss för en hållbar förvaltning av dessa djurstammar.

Lagstiftningen är statisk, men naturen är inte statisk, naturen är dynamisk. Det som en gång var sant gäller inte alltid.

Vargen sliter hundratals får i stycken hos de svenska bönderna. Sälen och skarven rensar haven på fisk, och vildsvinen sprider sig så pass mycket i de svenska skogarna att de just nu sprider den afrikanska svinpesten.

Detta är ett rejält problem, och politiken på EU-nivå står i vägen för många lösningar. Vi behöver en hållbar förvaltning. Centerpartiet gläds åt att kommissionen nu äntligen verkar vilja ta tag i problemet. Detta har vi efterfrågat länge, och vi hoppas att vi nu får på plats de lösningar som den svenska landsbygden behöver.

  Vlad Gheorghe (Renew). – Doamnă președintă, lăsați pădurile, lăsați animalele, doar oamenii contează, dar ce să vezi, oamenii nu contează fix pentru cei care țipă cel mai tare chestiile astea. Oamenii nu contează pentru autoritățile locale care nu iau fonduri europene ca să asigure siguranța caselor cetățenilor. Oamenii nu contează pentru autoritățile care nu văd cum se fură păduri întregi și cum ajung munți de bușteni la Viena. Viena le-a mulțumit cu veto pentru Schengen. Oamenii nu contează pentru miniștrii vânători, care se gândesc doar la trofee și cum să zboare ele din România.

Bineînțeles, dacă vreți trofee, vânătoare de trofee, vă spun eu de unde să începeți. Haideți să începem cu marii corupți. Acolo e vânătoarea de trofee. Știu niște trofee prin Parlamentul României, prin Guvern și pe aici, prin Parlamentul European, mergeau niște trofee cu sute de mii de euro la sacoșă. Acolo e vânătoarea de trofee. Hai să băgăm trofeele astea la pușcărie și să vedeți cum se rezolvă celelalte probleme.

  Mairead McGuinness, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, thank you, colleagues, it’s true to say that there were many speakers in this debate, so the issue is of concern to both sides of this debate. I very much welcome not just the personal stories of where farmers have been very badly impacted by attacks on their livestock by wolves, but also those who are concerned about changes that might occur.

I don’t have experience of wolf attacks in the Member State I know best, but I do know and have seen what dogs can do when they attack sheep. Not only do they kill them, but they traumatise.

So we must at this point extend sympathy and empathy to those farmers who are impacted. Indeed, as some colleagues raise the issue of bear attacks and fatalities equally, we have to here in this House express our sympathy to those who are so impacted.

I want to refer to this morning’s speech by President Ursula von der Leyen when she spoke about farmers and rightly recognised the important role of our farming community. She called for more dialogue and less polarisation, she said, ‘I am and remain convinced that agriculture and protection of the natural world can go hand in hand.’

I think with that in our minds, I will again repeat the work we are doing in the Commission on this topic. We have listened to the concerns. We are collecting the information and we will decide on a proposal to modify, if that is appropriate, the protection status of the wolf in the European Union and whether to update the legal framework to introduce, where necessary, additional flexibility in light of the information that we will gather.

So we are being proactive on this. We will respect the many different views in this House, and I hope that we can come to a conclusion which will satisfy all, because restoring nature is important, but also the concerns of farmers need to be taken into account.

I think the work we are doing, with the support of Parliament, will help bring some closure, if you like, to this important debate.

On the issue of coexistence, as many of you have spoken about, I think that is the desirable place that we need to be. I would also say that Member States do have instruments that they can use at the moment to take action where there are serious problems. So I think working together we can find the solution.

I know there are some visitors in the gallery and they have been listening to horrible bedtime stories of the wicked wolves and poor grandmothers, and whatever. I suppose all of us know that in our childhood about the wolf. But we know the wolf also has a place in nature, and that needs to be respected as well.

I will say that the Commission intend to work rapidly on this and, by the end of the year, come forward with a response to the information that we receive.

Lastly, we often hear about Europe needing to be closer to people. I hope that this debate reflects how close we are, because many of the people – the farmers – we’re talking about live in very remote regions. And I think it is really important that they know that we are debating issues of concern to them while also recognising that in other parts of Europe there are huge concerns about restoring nature. So let us go back to what the President spoke about: more dialogue, less polarisation.

  Puhemies. – Keskustelu on päättynyt.

Kirjalliset lausumat (171 artikla)

  Loránt Vincze (PPE), írásban. – Elnök Asszony! Ismét napirendre kértük néppárti kollégáimmal a nagyragadozók uniós szintű védelmének felülvizsgálatát. Beszélni kell erről a kérdésről, hiszen a nyári hónapokban is téma maradt a nagyragadozók és az ember közötti konfliktus. Európa számos részén egyes nagyragadozók elterjedési területe bővül, de ismerünk olyan régiókat is, ahol újra megtelepedtek a farkasok vagy medvék. A konfliktusok, az ember és haszonállatokra irányuló támadások, valamint balesetek megelőzésére kell gyors és hathatós megoldást találnunk. Tavaly a parlament elfogadott egy állásfoglalást, amely arra kérte a Bizottságot, hogy tegye lehetővé, hogy a nagyragadozók védettségi helyzetének módosítása kedvező helyzet esetén lehetséges legyen. Üdvözlöm a minap megjelent bizottsági közleményt, amely sürgeti a pontos adatgyűjtést a farkasok populációjának valós nagyságát illetően, ehhez platformot kínál és ígéri, készen áll a jogszabályi módosításra, és meglépi a védettségi helyzet változtatását azokban a régiókban, ahol ezt az adatok indokolják. Mindez biztató, kérem a Bizottságot, hogy ne csak a farkas esetét vizsgálja, hanem terjessze ki a medvére is. Az erdélyi barnamedve populáció megnövekedése nagy gondot okoz az ott élő közösségeknek. A Bizottságnak nem csupán a németországi szétszaggatott póniról, hanem a súlyosan vagy halálosan megsebesített székelyföldi emberekről is tudomást kell vennie, és foglalkoznia ügyükkel. Itt az EP-ben a Petíciós Bizottság májusi terepszemléjének következtetéseit októberben tárgyaljuk meg.

  Puhemies. – Neuvosto esittelee kantansa esitykseen yleiseksi talousarvioksi – Varainhoitovuosi 2024 (2023/2767(RSP)).

  Esperanza Samblás, presidenta en ejercicio del Consejo. – Señora presidenta, señorías, señor comisario Hahn, es para mí un honor estar aquí hoy, ante ustedes, para presentar la posición del Consejo sobre el proyecto de presupuesto de la Unión Europea para el ejercicio 2024.

En el Consejo hemos trabajado sobre la propuesta de la Comisión, desde su presentación el 7 de junio, tomando en consideración la complicada situación que atraviesa Europa. Tras el análisis de cada una de las partidas, el Consejo adoptó por unanimidad su posición el 5 de septiembre, posición con la que tratamos de proporcionar recursos adecuados para apoyar de forma equilibrada las prioridades claramente establecidas para 2024.

Es importante subrayar que el Consejo ha examinado el proyecto de presupuesto para 2024 únicamente en el marco del procedimiento presupuestario anual y teniendo en cuenta que la propuesta de la Comisión se basa en el actual marco financiero plurianual.

Entrando en el detalle de las cifras, la posición del Consejo prevé un importe de 187 010 millones de euros en créditos de compromiso y 141 170 millones de euros de euros en créditos de pago en las rúbricas dentro del marco financiero plurianual, manteniendo la propuesta de la Comisión para la dotación de los mecanismos de solidaridad dentro y fuera de la Unión, los instrumentos especiales temáticos, para los cuales proponemos 1 561 créditos de compromiso y 1 371 créditos de pago, con lo que el total de créditos de compromiso y pago pasa a ser de 188 570 millones de euros y 142 540 millones  de euros, respectivamente. La notable diferencia entre los créditos de compromiso y de pago está en línea con la propuesta de la Comisión.

Podemos observar, además, que, si se suman los pagos del marco financiero plurianual y del Instrumento de Recuperación de la Unión Europea, el nivel de pagos de 2024 estará prácticamente en el mismo nivel que en 2023.

En relación con el detalle de los créditos de compromiso, la posición del Consejo incluye como prioridad muy clara la respuesta a las consecuencias de la guerra de agresión de Rusia contra Ucrania. Por ello, proponemos un aumento de la ayuda humanitaria dentro de la rúbrica 6 «Vecindad y resto del mundo» en comparación con la propuesta de la Comisión.

Respecto a los gastos administrativos, el Consejo apoya el planteamiento horizontal establecido por la Comisión para reducir los presupuestos de todas las instituciones, ateniéndose a la estabilidad en la dotación de personal y a un aumento limitado de los gastos no salariales.

Para las rúbricas 1 «Mercado único, innovación y economía digital», 2 «Cohesión, resiliencia y valores», 3 «Recursos naturales y medio ambiente», 4 «Migración y gestión de las fronteras» y 5 «Seguridad y defensa», el Consejo propone algunos ajustes muy concretos en líneas que habían sido incrementadas por la Comisión en comparación con el presupuesto votado para 2023, con el fin de reducir los riesgos en términos de capacidad de absorción.

El Consejo también propone un ajuste específico en la subrúbrica 2b «Resiliencia y valores» para la línea del Instrumento de Recuperación de la Unión Europea, de acuerdo con un enfoque de presupuestación prudente con respecto a los costes de financiación de Next Generation EU. Este ajuste ha permitido eliminar la necesidad de recurrir al Instrumento de Margen Único para la subrúbrica 2b propuesto por la Comisión y reducir el uso propuesto del Instrumento de Flexibilidad.

Por lo que se refiere a los créditos de pago, el ajuste propuesto se deriva del efecto combinado, por una parte, de la reducción propuesta en los compromisos de la línea no disociada del Instrumento de Recuperación de la Unión Europea y, por otra parte, de nuestra propuesta de fijar los créditos para ayuda humanitaria en la rúbrica 6 al mismo nivel que en el presupuesto aprobado para 2023.

Muchas gracias por su atención. Devuelvo la palabra en espera de sus comentarios y poder así participar en el debate.

  Johannes Hahn, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, dear Secretary of State, honourable Members, I would like to congratulate the Spanish Presidency for reaching an agreement in the Council on the draft budget for 2024 and to thank you for presenting it today.

I am here to defend the Commission’s proposal again. The draft budget is a balanced proposal to finance the 2024 budget within the MFF as it currently stands, in line with the Union’s political priorities to stimulate the recovery and facilitate the greener digital transition, while always ensuring EU added value, impact and results on the ground. The draft budget does not yet address some of the challenges and uncertainties stemming from the war in Ukraine, which we have included in the mid-term review for the multiannual financial framework, and I will come back to this in a moment.

The Council-proposed cut of the commitments by EUR 772 million, in our reading, is again not accompanied by adequate justifications and it does not reflect the priorities expressed by the Council itself. Of course, I have to admit the Council’s cut is smaller than last year’s at this stage. In particular, the cuts on heading one – it’s about single market innovation and digital – are at odds with the priority given to this heading by many Member States. The proposed cuts to Horizon Europe and Digital Europe would mean that programmes which should be boosting European competitiveness may be hampered and delayed. Based on today’s Council position, the Commission would not be able to fully implement the European Chips Act and the Union’s secure connectivity programme, which we approved only recently.

As regards the cut to the financing costs of NextGenerationEU, the EURI interest line in heading 2b, we will include an updated amount in the amending letter in October, when we will have a better view of the volume of disbursements in the second half of the year. Contrary to most other budget lines, the amount to be put on that line is really a technical exercise, rather than a political decision. We will probably be able to lower the amount needed.

As regards heading seven, I appreciate that the Council has recognised the efforts made by the Commission to contain the level of administrative expenditure and to apply the same rigour for all institutions. The mobilisation of the single margin instrument is necessary to offset the impact of high inflation and soaring energy prices on the administrative expenditure of the institutions. We are currently reassessing the exact needs for both 23 and 24, notably based on more up-to-date information on the salary adjustment for 23. It is, however, clear that the administration remains under substantial pressure, both because of high inflation but also because of new political demands for Union action, which require additional resources.

So what are the next steps? We will revise – as appropriate and if needed – our proposal for the EURI interest line and heading seven in the amending letter. This will also include the usual update to agricultural expenditure and possibly some further elements of a more technical nature. Following Parliament’s reading, I will send you the usual executability letter just before the start of the conciliation. I will do my best to facilitate the process and reach a successful outcome on all budgetary files. We all understand the challenges for the Union budget, including the rising interest rates and inflation. This will need to be addressed in the revision of the multiannual financial framework.

Before I conclude, let me touch upon the link between the annual budget and the MFF mid-term review. These are formally, of course, two separate files and have to be negotiated in parallel. It is inevitable that the two discussions impact one another. I hope that we can make quick progress in the mid-term review negotiations to allow the implementation of the 2024 budget to be based on the revised MFF. I cannot stress enough how important it is for all of us to have the budget for next year adopted before the end of this year, in particular, ahead of the European elections.

  Siegfried Mureşan, rapporteur. – Madam President, Madam State Secretary, Commissioner, welcome back to the European Parliament. We, as the European Parliament, are looking forward to a swift and meaningful decision of the European institutions on the budget of the European Union for next year.

We have to work together; we have to deliver as institutions of the European Union, because whenever people in Europe face difficulties, they expect support from the European Union. And throughout the last years, we have shown that the European Union is there to support; in the pandemic, in times of war, people, farmers, enterprises, NGOs, students, researchers were supported with European funds. The budget of the European Union is one of the main tools that we have to support the people in Europe, and we have indeed agreed in 2020 a Multiannual Financial Framework.

But many things have happened since. We had to help Ukraine, we had to tackle inflation, high energy prices and we are now seeing that the Multiannual Financial Framework is reaching its limits. The European Commission has put forward a proposal to revise this and we will have to work together with the Spanish Presidency to conclude this revision as soon as possible – not later than the end of this year – so that we can include space of manoeuvre, reserves, margins, resources allocated to new priorities into the budget for next year and have a meaningful budget for next year.

Unfortunately, the Multiannual Financial Framework is tight, following pressure from the Council, and we are now seeing the negative consequences of that tightness. We will have to correct some of the mistakes made by the Council when the MFF was negotiated in the yearly budget procedure this year and in the MFF negotiations. When looking at the position of the Council for the draft budget of the Union for next year, we as a Parliament do not understand it. We do not support it. And I have to say, very clearly, we reject the reading of the Council to the draft budget put forward by the Commission for 2024.

We have joint priorities. We have agreed to do more in some areas. We have understood that migration is a challenge. People who come to Europe need to be supported. Illegal migration has to be tackled because anything that is illegal has to be tackled, of course. The Eastern and Southern Neighbourhoods need more support; military mobility, defence needs more support. We have to continue with the transition to the green and the digital economy.

This is why the reading of the Council proposing cuts throughout the budget is something that is not understandable. We cannot agree that we want to do more in the area of health and then cut the budget when it comes to research in the area of health or when it comes to new health care projects. This is why we will not support this.

We, as a parliament, will put forward the proposal, which will start from the draft budget of the European Commission, which we believe is the bare minimum required. And I think the Commissioner has very eloquently reiterated this in front of Parliament, and we are going to propose some moderate increases to some budgetary lines which are oversubscribed, where financing is clearly needed: in the area of research, in the area of health, in the area of supporting creative people, supporting young farmers to make the rural areas more attractive, Erasmus scholarships and of course, as I said, asylum, migration, the Southern and the Eastern Neighbourhoods.

To conclude, Madam President, we will, in the reading of Parliament, align our budget for next year with the revision of the Multiannual Financial Framework proposed by the Commission. We are going to align it with everything proposed on industrial policy and we are looking forward to a swift and successful negotiation with the colleagues in the Council.