Indhold

1.

Genoptagelse af sessionen

3

2.

Åbning af mødet

3

3.

Godkendelse af protokollerne fra de foregående møder

3

4.

Udvalgenes og delegationernes sammensætning

3

5.

Berigtigelse (forretningsordenens artikel 241)

3

6.

Forhandlinger forud for Parlamentets førstebehandling (forretningsordenens artikel 71)

4

7.

Arbejdsplan

4

8.

Forberedelse af det ekstraordinære møde i Det Europæiske Råd den 9.-februar, navnlig behovet for at udvikle bæredygtige løsninger på migrations- og asylområdet (forhandling)

7

9.

Gennemsigtighed og målretning i forbindelse med politisk reklame (forhandling)

33

10.

Behov for en hurtig ajourføring af EU-listen over højrisikotredjelande med henblik på bekæmpelse af hvidvask af penge og finansiering af terrorisme (forhandling)

43

11.

Situationen in Afghanistan (forhandling)

49

12.

Udvalgenes og delegationernes sammensætning

56

13.

Valgs prøvelse

56

14.

Indlæg af et minuts varighed om politisk vigtige sager

56

15.

Dagsorden for det følgende møde

63

16.

Hævelse af mødet

63

Fuldstændigt forhandlingsreferat den 1. februar 2023

PRESIDENZA: ROBERTA METSOLA

President

1.   Genoptagelse af sessionen

President. – I declare resumed the session of the European Parliament adjourned on Thursday, 26 January 2023.

2.   Åbning af mødet

(The sitting opened at 15:02)

3.   Godkendelse af protokollerne fra de foregående møder

President. – The minutes and the texts adopted of the sittings of 19 and 26 January are available. Can I ask if there are any comments?

This does not seem to be the case, and therefore the minutes are approved.

4.   Udvalgenes og delegationernes sammensætning

President. – The S&D Group has notified me of decisions relating to changes to appointments within committees and delegations. These decisions will be set out in the minutes of today's sitting and take effect on the date of this announcement.

5.   Berigtigelse (forretningsordenens artikel 241)

President. – The ENVI Committee has transmitted a corrigendum to a text adopted by Parliament. Pursuant to Rule 241(4) this corrigendum will be deemed approved unless, no later than 24 hours after its announcement, a request is made by a political group or Members reaching at least the low threshold that it be put to the vote.

The corrigendum is available on the Plenary webpage; its title will be published in the minutes of this sitting.

6.   Forhandlinger forud for Parlamentets førstebehandling (forretningsordenens artikel 71)

President. – The LIBE Committee has decided to enter into interinstitutional negotiations pursuant to Rule 71(1) of the Rules of Procedure. The report which constitutes the mandate for the negotiations is available on the plenary webpage and its title will be published in the minutes of the sitting.

Pursuant to Rule 71(2), Members or political groups reaching at least the medium threshold may request in writing by tomorrow, Thursday 2 February at midnight, that the decision be put to the vote. If no request for a vote in Parliament is made before the deadline, the committee may start the negotiations.

7.   Arbejdsplan

President. – We now come to the order of business. The final draft agenda as adopted by the Conference of Presidents on 18 January pursuant to Rule 157 has been distributed.

With the agreement of the political groups, I wish to put to the House the following proposals for changes to the final draft agenda.

On Thursday, first of all, four reports by Mr Dzhambazki, Mr Halicki and Ms Aubry on the requests for the waiver of the immunity of four Members and one report by Mr García del Blanco on the request for the defence of the immunity of a Member are added to the votes. Then, the vote on the resolution on »An EU strategy to boost industrial competitiveness, trade and quality jobs« is postponed to the February II part-session. If there are no objections, these changes are approved.

We now move to changes requested by political groups, starting with today, Wednesday.

The EPP Group has requested that the debate on the Council and Commission statements on »Preparation of the Special European Council meeting of February, in particular the need to develop sustainable solutions in the area of asylum and migration« be wound up with a resolution to be voted at the next part-session.

I give the floor to Jeroen Lenaers to move the request on behalf of the EPP Group.

Jeroen Lenaers, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, you already introduced our request quite well, I would say.

We have this very important debate this afternoon. Ideally, we would like to wind it up with a resolution this week, so we can also very clearly express our expectations to the European leaders about what we expect them [inaudible]. I am given to understand that this is not possible in a short Brussels plenary session. So then we would like to request a resolution to wind up the debate in the next plenary session in Strasbourg, so we can assess what the European leaders have done in this summit and to also give our opinion on that.

This is a crucial European Council meeting. 70 % of Europeans are concerned about migration, and I think they would very much like to know where this House stands.

President. – Can I ask whether any colleague would like to speak against that proposal? If not, we will go straight to the vote.

(Parliament rejected the request)

Also for Wednesday, the EPP Group has requested that a Commission statement on »Transparency in the funding of NGOs and the protection of EU financial interests« be added as the third point in the afternoon before the debate on the report by Mr Gozi.

As a consequence, the sitting would be extended until 21:00.

I give the floor to Monika Hohlmeier to move the request on behalf of the EPP Group.

Monika Hohlmeier, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, in line with Rule 158 of the Rules of Procedure, I would like to ask for a debate to be added to the agenda with the title »Transparency in the funding of NGOs and the protection of EU financial interests«.

The debate is meant as a reaction to the revelations newly appearing every day about the misconduct of certain NGOs like »Fight against Impunity« and »No Peace without Justice«, which have been directly involved in the latest scandal shaking the European Parliament.

Every day there appear new articles about new NGOs, as they have received EU funding for projects, and that means taxpayers' money. It is our responsibility to look into whether the funds are spent in line with EU rules. The public expects us to address this urgent matter now.

President. – I give the floor to any Member who would like to speak against the request.

Manon Aubry (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, merci. Quel sens de la démocratie, chers collègues: je n'ai même pas pris la parole que vous me huez déjà! Chers collègues du PPE, je vois bien l'intransigeance que vous avez auprès des ONG – que je partage –, mais je vous inviterai alors, dans ce cas, à faire preuve de la même intransigeance vis-à-vis des pratiques de corruption dans notre Parlement européen et à vous assurer que toutes les leçons politiques soient tirées de ce »Qatargate«.

Je vois bien la tentative de votre groupe d'enterrer la résolution du mois de décembre qui a été votée, qui prévoit notamment l'obligation du registre de transparence, qui prévoit notamment une commission d'enquête sur le »Qatargate«, qui prévoit notamment la création d'une autorité éthique indépendante.

Toutes ces propositions, vous continuez, ici, à les rejeter en bloc, au Parlement européen. Alors, cessez de vous moquer du monde, quand il faut pointer du doigt les ONG, mais que vous ne tirez aucune leçon en matière politique pour imposer la transparence qui est nécessaire.

(Parliament rejected the request)

President. – Also for Wednesday – today – the ECR Group has requested that a Commission statement on »Public security and the terrorist threat in Europe in the light of the recent knife attacks in Germany and Spain« be added as the fourth item in the afternoon.

I give the floor to Jorge Buxadé Villalba to move the request on behalf of the ECR Group.

Jorge Buxadé Villalba, en nombre del Grupo ECR. – Señora presidente, el pasado 25 de enero, como ustedes saben, un terrorista con orden de expulsión no ejecutada asesinó a machetazos a un sacristán e hirió a un sacerdote y a varios feligreses en una iglesia de Algeciras (España). El 24 de enero, otro terrorista asesinó a dos personas y dejó múltiples heridos en un tren en Alemania. El 30 de enero, en Bruselas, hubo otro ataque con cuchillos, con al menos tres heridos graves.

De acuerdo con el artículo 3 del Tratado de la Unión Europea, la Unión debe ofrecer a los europeos un espacio de libertad, seguridad y justicia en el que esté garantizada la libertad de circulación en el ámbito del control de las fronteras exteriores, el asilo, la inmigración, la prevención y la lucha contra la delincuencia.

Los ataques terroristas se extienden por las ciudades de Europa y nuestros compatriotas nos exigen, por lo menos, un debate serio, profundo y con datos. Por ello, proponemos la celebración, en este período parcial de sesiones, de una declaración sobre la seguridad pública y la amenaza terrorista en Europa a la luz de los recientes ataques con cuchillos en España y Alemania.

President. – Can I give the floor to any Member who would like to speak against the request? I don't see that to be the case.

(Parliament rejected the request)

The ECR Group has requested that a Commission statement on »Violent left-wing extremism and the terrorist actions of anarchists in Europe« be added as the fifth item in the afternoon. As a consequence, the sitting would be extended until 21:00. The debate would be wound up with a resolution to be voted on during the next part-session.

I give the floor to Vincenzo Sofo to move the request on behalf of the ECR Group.

Vincenzo Sofo, a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, noi chiediamo, chiedo a nome dell'ECR, che venga inserito con urgenza un dibattito in Aula su questo tema, quindi sull'estremismo violento di sinistra e sulle azioni terroristiche dei movimenti anarchici in Europa.

Come sapete, infatti, in queste settimane le istituzioni italiane sono oggetto di un moltiplicarsi di azioni intimidatorie, di veri e propri atti a sfondo terroristico messi in atto da movimenti anarchici come ritorsione per l'imposizione di un regime di carcere duro per uno dei loro leader, Alfredo Cospito, condannato per aver gambizzato un dirigente d'azienda e aver piazzato due ordigni esplosivi fuori da una caserma.

Il fatto che queste azioni terroristiche non si svolgano soltanto in Italia, ma anche in Spagna, in Grecia, in Germania, dimostra il preoccupante livello di organizzazione e di ramificazione a livello europeo che caratterizza queste realtà, il cui scopo dichiarato è di destabilizzare le nostre democrazie.

Quindi, ancor più preoccupante, tra l'altro, è che ci possano essere delle aree estreme di sinistra, già peraltro protagoniste di tantissimi episodi di violenza politica, solidali, se non addirittura conniventi, con queste organizzazioni.

Ecco perché è urgente un dibattito che porti a una risoluzione chiara, forte e di unanime condanna a queste… (la Presidente toglie la parola all'oratore)

Elisabetta Gualmini, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, actually, we are not against the topic itself, but for the sake of compromise we do suggest eventually to leave the debate in this mini-plenary with no resolution, and with a changed title that is »Commission statement on anarchist terrorist actions and violent extremism in Europe«.

I can explain why. It is because we think that anarchism is anarchism. It is not left or right. If you are an anarchist, you are not left or right; you are an anarchist against the institutional order. This is our proposal.

Alexandra Geese, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, on behalf of my group, I would propose a debate with a different title that actually focuses on the facts that we want to debate here. So, the title would be »Commission statement on recent violent attacks against diplomatic personnel in the European Union and counter-measures, including improving detention conditions«. I think this is a lot more accurate description of the facts we want to debate.

President. – So Mr Sofo, would you agree with either the proposal from the S&D Group or the Green Group?

Vincenzo Sofo, a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, non possiamo accettare queste richieste di modifiche e ci preoccupa il fatto che la sola preoccupazione di questi gruppi politici sia di cancellare la scritta »sinistra« da questo titolo, il che ci lascia, appunto, preoccupati per un'eventuale complicità di certe forze politiche.

Io ricordo che in quest'Aula sono state perse innumerevoli ore in dibattiti inutili su presunti rischi per la democrazia dovuti all'ascesa dei movimenti politici di destra e ci avete tenuto tantissimo a specificare il nome »destra« in questi dibattiti, però, guarda caso, ora che invece si evince che il vero pericolo per la nostra democrazia si trova in movimenti che sono vicini ad aree che invece non sono affatto di destra, ma sono semmai più riconducibili alla sinistra, guarda caso il vostro obiettivo qual è? Quello di cercare di nascondere questa piccola, ma importantissima verità.

Quindi non accetteremo questa modifica specifica e questa modifica.

President. – We will therefore vote on the ECR request.

(Parliament rejected the request)

We will now vote on the S&D Group's alternative proposal.

(Parliament rejected the alternative proposal)

We will now vote on the Green Group's alternative proposal.

(Parliament rejected the alternative proposal)

Wednesday's agenda therefore remains unchanged.

We move to Thursday – tomorrow. The ECR Group has requested that the Council and Commission give statements on »The situation of the former President of Georgia Mikheil Saakashvili«. These would be added as the second item in the morning. I understand this could go with one round of political group speakers and the start of the sitting would be brought forward to 8:30. The debate would then be wound up with a resolution to be voted at the next part-session.

I give the floor to Anna Fotyga to move the request on behalf of the ECR Group.

Anna Fotyga, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, colleagues, all of us were able to see videos and photos of the third President of Georgia, Mikheil Saakashvili, testifying remotely to the Court of Tbilisi. We were able to see the very shaky, fragile condition of his health. In many documents, we have voiced our concern and appealed for his humanitarian release from prison enabling him to be cured abroad in proper conditions. Nowadays, his health state was confirmed in court by a world-renowned neurologist, showing, among other things, multiple disorders as well as the wrong administration of medicines to the prisoner. I kindly ask you to accept our request.

President. – We will put to the vote the request to have a resolution to wind up the debate.

(Parliament agreed to the request)

The debate will therefore be wound up with a resolution at the next part-session.

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

8.   Forberedelse af det ekstraordinære møde i Det Europæiske Råd den 9.-februar, navnlig behovet for at udvikle bæredygtige løsninger på migrations- og asylområdet (forhandling)

President. – The next item is the Council and Commission statements on the Preparation of the Special European Council meeting of February, in particular the need to develop sustainable solutions in the area of asylum and migration (2023/2508(RSP)).

Dear colleagues, next week's Special European Council will be an important moment for us to discuss our economy and migration. Let us remember the open and global approach that has always been the European way. We need to bring back growth and focus on European competitiveness. We have always embarked and had an ambitious roadmap on our EU rules on migration and asylum, and this is what we are working on right now. In Parliament we expect the leaders to commit to completing the Migration and Asylum Pact with us before the next elections, because Europe has what it takes if we act together.

I'll give the floor – to open the debate for the Council – to the Minister for EU Affairs, Jessika Roswall.

Jessika Roswall, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, honourable Members, Madam President of the Commission, Commissioners, on 9 February leaders will convene for a special meeting in the European Council, focusing on Ukraine, the economic agenda and migration.

The meeting will start with the usual exchange with the President of the European Parliament. Leaders will discuss the situation in Ukraine, assembling less than a week after the EU-Ukraine summit on 3 February. They will discuss the latest developments on the ground and take stock of the EU support to Ukraine and its people. Leaders are also expected to consider further ways to increase pressure on Russia and to touch upon the important issues of accountability and upon frozen assets.

The date 24 February, two weeks after the Special European Council, will mark the tragic anniversary of the start of the Russian war. The European Council is expected to reaffirm the EU's resolute determination to support Ukraine and the Ukrainian people for as long as it takes. I know the Parliament is steadfast in its support to Ukraine, and I would like to thank you all for this.

Regarding the economic agenda, leaders will discuss how the EU can tackle challenges facing Europe's economic, industrial and technological base in the short term. In doing so, they will build on today's contribution by the Commission on a Green Deal Industrial Plan.

Among other things, leaders are expected to discuss possible temporary adjustments on state aid policy and how to streamline procedures while preserving the integrity of the single market.

By the time of the meeting, we will probably have a deeper understanding of the challenges for the European industry, as the Commission is expected to prepare an analysis. But it is necessary to look at other policy tools too. Much can be achieved by improving the business environment and by cutting red tape. We also need a fully-developed and integrated European capital market and an ambitious, robust and sustainable trade agenda.

In the long term, it is crucial for the EU to realise the full potential of the single market as it celebrates 30 years. At the March European Council, leaders will discuss competitiveness and increased productivity in the longer term. This is essential for the EU to remain an attractive place to invest, for our prosperity and for our role on the world stage.

Migration will be another major topic at this meeting. Leaders are expected to discuss ways in which the EU can intensify its joint actions, such as strengthening control of the EU's external borders, including through Frontex support for Member States' actions and the use of IT tools, working with countries of origin and transit along all routes on partnerships to avoid further death and counter illegal migration, and also issues of return and readmission, alignment with the EU visa policy and the fight against trafficking and smuggling, as well as the unacceptable use of migration for political purposes and, finally, calling upon the co-legislators to continue work on the Migration Pact as foreseen in the Joint Roadmap on Migration and Asylum.

Thank you very much for your attention. I am looking forward to hearing your views.

Ursula von der Leyen, President of the Commission. – Madam President, dear Roberta, Madam Minister, honourable Members. Last year, Frontex reported 330 000 irregular border crossings. This is a 64% increase compared to the year before and the highest figure since 2016. In parallel, there were 924 000 asylum applications across the European Union.

There are, without any doubt, increasing pressures at our external borders, and it is our duty to make sure that Europe continues to be a space for protection for those who need it. However, the asylum and reception systems across Member States are under considerable strain, and the fact is that the majority of those who apply for asylum are not in need of protection, but return rates are at a low of 22% and there is an increasing number of secondary movement.

Honourable Members, migration is a European challenge which must be met with a European response. This might sound like common sense, but it took us almost 10 years to acknowledge this reality. At the European Council next week, I will propose to the Heads of State and Government two separate work strands. The legislative process is one and the operational actions we can take already now is the second.

On the legislative process, the best response we can give is to advance the new pact on migration and asylum. Since the Commission presented its proposals, we've seen quite some good progress. We have agreed on the EU blue card to attract highly skilled personnel. We have established a new EU asylum agency. In December, a political agreement was reached on three important legislative proposals. Trilogues started to upgrade our biometric database, the Eurodac, and we hope for trilogues to start soon on screening. So we must keep up the good pace, and here the role of this House is key.

I'm glad that on your initiative, Madam President, dear Roberta, Parliament and the Council agreed on a roadmap to conclude all the legislative work before March next year, and you can count on the full support of the Commission to achieve that. I know that Vice-President Margaritis Schinas and Commissioner Ylva Johansson are working tirelessly on that.

The second work strand is immediate action. This is what the European Council will focus on. Over time, we have developed a migration and border management toolbox. We have stronger agencies and we are better coordinated. We have proven to be able to respond to sudden demands if we work together. Take the instrumentalisation of migrants by Belarus, or the sudden rise of irregular migration in the Western Balkans, or our response to Russia's brutal aggression against Ukraine: a whole continent has mobilised for our Ukrainian friends. Volunteers rushed to the borders, families opened their homes and not only their homes, but also their hearts. And at the institutional level, we immediately activated temporary protection for Ukrainians.

We know that we can address increasing challenges if we take action together and now we can do this again. Here I want to outline four points of action where we can make a real difference on the ground. The first is we have a shared interest in strong external borders. The most pressing issues right now are at the land border between Bulgaria and Türkiye. We can strengthen the border with management capabilities. We can also provide infrastructure and equipment like drones and radar and other means of surveillance, as we have done in the last years, for example, in Romania, we've done it in Spain and Greece and in Poland, and we can increase the presence of Frontex.

On the other hand, we must urgently address the situation in the central Mediterranean. The migratory pressure has increased significantly – and all too often tragically – at the expense of human life. We need to support our Member States as well as our North African partners in coordinating their search-and-rescue capacities. And we will continue supporting UNHCR and IOM on the ground to help build capacities for asylum, reception and return. At the same time, we will continue supporting Member States to address challenges along the Western and Eastern Mediterranean routes.

Honourable Members, behind all this there are criminal networks. They are organising ruthlessly – the shabby life vests, the boats, they are robbing the migrants, they are trading in human life. We have to intensify our fight against those smugglers. And we will launch a new anti-smuggling partnership with key third countries. This will bring together prosecutors and law enforcement authorities supported by Europol and supported by Eurojust. Together, we have to stop this business of exploitation.

My second point is focusing on faster and dignified returns. Every year there are around 300 000 return decisions taken by Member States, but only around 70 000 people are actually returned. We have to get better. Some of the shortcomings we can act on now. For instance, a return decision that is taken in one Member State should be valid in all Member States. So if a person with a return decision issued by Italy is found in France, that person can be directly returned to his country of origin. This will become possible now with the Schengen Information System that enters into force, into operation in March. And we want Member States to make use of this possibility.

Thirdly, we have to address secondary movements while ensuring effective solidarity. Solidarity and responsibility are two sides of the same coin. And therefore these two issues can only be addressed together. Let me give you some figures and some elements that are important for us. We must work together to reduce the incentives for secondary movements. It is very good that we have the Dublin Roadmap now since December in place, but Member States of course need to implement it now. And at the same time, if we look at the voluntary solidarity mechanism agreed last summer, this should not only be on paper. It needs to deliver. Until today, there are only 8 000 pledges for relocation and just round about 400 have actually been transferred. So European solidarity must and can be stronger than that. And we will need to see to this with a permanent solidarity mechanism in the new pact on migration and asylum.

Last but definitely not least, there is the external dimension. We need to engage more closely with key partners. Migration management must be built in as one important aspect of the European Union's relations with partners. Overall, our relations need to reflect a strategic engagement in a spirit of cooperation. We should recognise the interests of our partners and cooperate with them by supporting education, by creating new businesses, business opportunities, by fostering job creation. That same spirit of cooperation should help us to reduce irregular departures and step up returns. Talent partnerships, visa policy, trade and investment play an important role here, as well as opportunities for safe and legal pathways as part of our overall comprehensive approach to migration management. It is a fair balance that we need to find.

Honourable Members, migration is very complex. It's a matter of understanding each other's challenges and a matter of working together. This is what we will present to the European Council on 9 February.

On a completely different sheet of paper, let me ask you for your kind understanding that I have to leave the plenary right now because I am, together with the College of Commissioners, now on my way on a mission to Ukraine where we want to go together as a college of Commissioners.

Manfred Weber, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, dear minister, dear President of Commission, good luck in Kyiv and send good signals to our friends there. Full support.

Wir können zunächst stolz sein als Europäer, wenn wir uns die großen Krisen der letzten Jahre vergegenwärtigen – den Jugoslawienkrieg zum Beispiel: 800 000 Flüchtlinge willkommen geheißen, den Syrienkrieg: über eine Million Menschen auf europäischem Grund und Boden willkommen geheißen, und jetzt bei der Ukraine: fast acht Millionen Menschen auf der Flucht. Wir haben in den letzten Jahren gezeigt: Wann immer große Krisen sind, hat Europa ein weites Herz und will helfen.

Das Asylrecht ist eine der großen Errungenschaften der Europäischen Union, auf die wir stolz sind. Es ist die Basis der heutigen Diskussion. Wir haben auch große Erfolge in der europäischen Dimension. Ich möchte ausdrücklich Frontex danken, den Beamten danken, die jeden Tag einen guten Dienst machen, Leben retten und versuchen, unser Recht an der Außengrenze durchzusetzen.

Das Herz ist weit, aber die Möglichkeiten sind begrenzt, haben andere Politiker formuliert. Im letzten Jahr gab es 60 Prozent mehr illegale Grenzübertritte, die Aufnahmekapazitäten hier in Belgien beispielsweise sind voll. Bürger verlieren das Vertrauen, ob unser System noch funktioniert. Vor der Herausforderung stehen wir.

Ich möchte heute vier Punkte einbringen, die über das hinausgehen, was Ursula von der Leyen bereits beschrieben hat. Zum Ersten: Wir müssen die Außengrenze Europas sichern, wir müssen Recht an der Außengrenze durchsetzen. Dafür sind technische Maßnahmen notwendig. Aber ich sage ausdrücklich auch für die EVP: Auch Zäune sind im Ausnahmefall kein Tabu. Ich war überrascht, als die Kommissarin Johansson sich öffentlich positioniert und gesagt hat: Zäune sind nicht nötig, um Außengrenzen zu sichern. Ich sage: An allen Landgrenzen, die wir haben, sind Zäune gebaut worden. In Spanien, Ceuta und Melilla, in Griechenland, in Bulgarien – überall sind Zäune gebaut worden! Ich glaube, jeder, der heute Verantwortung trägt, weiß, dass das im Ausnahmefall leider Gottes auch möglich sein muss, auch von der Kommission finanziert werden muss.

Als Zweites müssen wir uns um die NGO-Boote im Mittelmeer kümmern. Leben retten ist dort das zentrale Prinzip, und jedes zivilgesellschaftliche Engagement ist willkommen im Mittelmeer. Wenn es dort Menschen gibt, die helfen, dann ist das richtig, dann ist das gut und es ist willkommen. Aber wir brauchen Regeln, wie gearbeitet wird im Mittelmeer. Wir brauchen ein gemeinsames Verständnis von allen, die dort im Mittelmeer tätig sind. Deshalb fordern wir einen Verhaltenskodex, wie wir im Mittelmeer mit diesen Maßnahmen umgehen. Beispielsweise müssen nicht alle aufgegriffenen Migranten dann auch in Italien an Land gebracht werden. Auch andere Länder können Verantwortung übernehmen, Leben retten, gemeinsam Verantwortung tragen.

Das Dritte, was zu sagen ist, ist die Rückführung. 340 000 ausreisepflichtige Menschen in der Europäischen Union alleine letztes Jahr, nach einem ordentlichen und rechtlichen Verfahren, und nur 40 000 sind ausgereist. 300 000, die eigentlich ausreisen müssen, sind nach wie vor hier. Die Bürger fragen zu Recht: Kann der Staat das Recht durchsetzen, das er selbst beschließt? Deswegen müssen wir uns darum kümmern, dass wir mit Drittstaaten Rückführungsabkommen verhandeln, um diese Rückführung möglich zu machen. Da muss ich leider schon sagen, dass es auf europäischer Ebene in diesem Mandat gerade mal gelungen ist, ein einziges Flüchtlingsabkommen abzuschließen – und überraschenderweise haben wir es mit Belarus abgeschlossen. Das ist ein sehr überzeugender Fall, wo wir rückführen könnten, aber natürlich alle nicht rückführen wollen. Deshalb brauchen wir mehr Engagement mit den behandelnden Drittstaaten, solche Rückführungsabkommen durchzuführen.

Das Vierte: Wir brauchen auch legale Wege in die Europäische Union, zweifellos. Beispielsweise hat Kanada in Syrien, in den dortigen Lagern für Bürgerkriegsflüchtlinge, Büros eröffnet, wo sie Menschen einen legalen Weg nach Kanada anbieten – kontingentiert, nach festen Kriterien. Das hat Kanada gemacht. Warum macht das Europa nicht? Warum sind wir nicht in Ägypten, in Tunesien mit dortigen Büros tätig, um Menschen einen legalen Weg anzubieten? Warum machen wir das nicht?

Es war eine sozialdemokratische Regierung in Dänemark, die den Vorschlag zum ersten Mal eingebracht hat, auch außerhalb der Europäischen Union diese Lager aufzubauen. Wir müssen legale Wege finden, um Menschen eine sichere Perspektive nach Europa zu geben. Es ist gut, dass der Sondergipfel stattfindet, es ist gut, dass die Staats- und Regierungschefs sich diesem großen Thema wieder zuwenden. Aber nach sieben Jahren Debatte seit der letzten großen Flüchtlingskrise sind der Worte genug gewechselt. Jetzt brauchen wir Taten. Es ist Führung notwendig. Europa hilft, aber Europa muss auch Recht durchsetzen.

Iratxe García Pérez, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, los grandes movimientos de seres humanos son un signo de nuestro tiempo. Aproximadamente noventa millones de refugiados y desplazados internos han abandonado su hogar por la fuerza. Huyen de la guerra, del terrorismo o de la persecución. Y muchas de esas personas se juegan la vida por tierra y mar en su camino a Europa. Nuestra responsabilidad es acogerlas para que puedan tener una vida digna.

El próximo Consejo Europeo no puede ser una cumbre vacía. A partir del próximo 10 de febrero debe quedar claro el compromiso de la Unión Europea para concluir el Nuevo Pacto sobre Migración y Asilo antes de que termine la legislatura. Les adelanto la plena disposición de la familia socialdemócrata para lograr un acuerdo que incluya un mecanismo de solidaridad obligatorio, en el que cada Estado miembro asuma su parte de responsabilidad.

Los sucesivos planes de la Comisión para reforzar la acción de la Unión Europea después de cada tragedia ni son nuevos ni pueden solucionar por sí mismos el drama que se vive en el Mediterráneo. Recomendar una mejor coordinación entre los Estados miembros es una obligación, por supuesto, de la Comisión, pero resulta preocupante la incapacidad de adoptar medidas concretas que aborden la gestión, por ejemplo, de los barcos de las ONG dedicados al rescate.

No hay duda de que debemos luchar coordinadamente contra el tráfico de personas y ofrecer nuestro apoyo a los países de origen y tránsito. Pero también debemos dar protección internacional a los demandantes de asilo, favorecer la integración de los refugiados y garantizar las vías legales para la inmigración, incluyendo la educación, el empleo y los visados humanitarios.

La Comisión y el Consejo no pueden centrar exclusivamente su atención en el retorno. Por supuesto que quienes han sido expulsados y expulsadas de su país tienen derecho a volver a su tierra. Pero el regreso requiere el fin de las guerras, la derrota del terrorismo, el nacimiento de sociedades inclusivas. La criminalización de las ONG y la construcción de muros que impulsan la derecha y la ultraderecha nunca podrán borrar la huella más visible de nuestra realidad. Las sociedades de hoy y del mañana son y serán siempre diversas. La diversidad cultural y religiosa es una realidad inalterable, una realidad que puede y debe ser compatible con el respeto a los valores de los países de acogida. No podemos cambiar la diversidad de nuestras sociedades, pero sí podemos cambiar la gestión de los flujos migratorios.

Hay que perder el miedo a hablar de la inmigración como solución al desequilibrio demográfico y a la falta de mano de obra en Europa. La propia Comisión Europea nos recuerda que, si actualmente un 70 % de la población europea se encuentra en edad de trabajar, en 2070, el porcentaje bajará hasta el 54%. Los Países Bajos, Bélgica o la República Checa tienen casi un 5 % de empleos sin cubrir. Alemania, un 4,5 %. Francia e Italia, el 2,5 %. España, el 0,8 %. Varios Estados miembros ya han empezado a legislar para atraer inmigrantes. No podemos perder esa perspectiva a la hora de abordar nuestras decisiones.

Señorías, la responsabilidad compartida es el único faro que alumbrará las soluciones a un desafío que nos afecta a todos y que nadie podrá solucionar de manera individual. Entre quienes aspiran a la Europa de la fortaleza y quienes defendemos la Europa de la solidaridad estamos obligados a entendernos. Es difícil, después de escuchar las palabras del señor Weber hablando de alambradas y de muros, entender que es necesario un acuerdo. Es muy difícil. Ni siquiera la presidenta de la Comisión Von der Leyen ha hecho referencia a eso.

Vamos a trabajar pensando en la solidaridad. Vamos a trabajar pensando en los valores europeos. Vamos a trabajar pensando en el horizonte que tenemos, en la responsabilidad, con especial determinación y generosidad, y mirando al horizonte.

Malik Azmani, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, in a year, European elections will determine the future of Europe. And what are the biggest concerns of our voters? Well, we know it. Certainly, the high cost of living; the war in Ukraine.

But I assure you that also migration will be on the top of their minds. We see this as a concern of many citizens, but I do not see the urgency to deliver. Colleagues, it's time to wake up. This mismatch between what we need to do and what is being achieved is dangerous.

First, we need real progress on the Migration and Asylum Pact. Responsibility and solidarity must go hand in hand. A third element to come to an agreement is missing, however, and that is trust. Trust between Member States. And here lies also a role for the Commission.

The Commission has to step up to break the cycle of mistrust existing between Member States by enforcing also current rules towards the new package. Dublin rules do not seem to exist now, and because of it, trust has been eroding from the moment Commission has made its proposals.

Our focus should be on concrete results for our citizens to provide immediate relief to our external borders. We must do everything in our power to strike new agreements with third countries to counter irregular migration and increase returns, including by using our trade and visa policy as a leverage. This should be a top priority for the Commission.

Colleagues, when faced with a pandemic, Europe delivered. When faced with war, we act quickly together. Migration cannot be the Cinderella of EU achievements this mandate. Instead of rhetoric and fairy tales, we need real focus and concrete delivery. It's time for action.

Terry Reintke, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, Minister, colleagues, ahead of the EUCO meeting next week, we are facing a crucial moment for the future of our economy and our competitiveness. But let me be clear, it is not with senseless deregulation, dismantling workers' rights or environmental standards, or this so-called moratorium on regulation that we can make the European Union strong and competitive for the 21st century.

Our competitiveness will depend on how well we can lead the Green transformation globally, supporting green industries, being the first when it comes to climate-friendly and environmentally-friendly technologies. Yes, for that we will actually need green and sustainable regulation to give planning security to our companies and, yes, for setting the scene globally to move ahead with the green transformation. Indeed, we will need money for that. We will not need random investment, but we will need very targeted green investment in order to make this possible.

I've read the letter that the Commission President sent to the Member States on migration and let me be honest, to me, it sounded – in a very technocratic and depoliticised language – like a plan to create a Fortress Europe. Not once was there was a mention of human rights, not once there was a mention of the suffering of those who are trying to find shelter in the European Union, and not once there was a mention of international law – international law that binds the European Union when it comes to asylum. But also, in the framing, we are talking about migration here – and migration is not only about asylum and returns. This whole initiative can only work if we look at migration in its entirety.

I negotiated recently a coalition agreement between the Conservative Party and the Greens in North Rhine-Westphalia, and I can tell you what the number one concern of the SMEs, of the care homes and the citizens was: it was the question of how we can attract trained workers, trained labour in order to fit the shortages in our labour market. If we are not looking at this, if we are not looking at what our citizens need, then we are falling short of what we actually need to address.

Don't get me wrong. We all want orderly border management. We want legal provisions to be applied, but orderly border management, Mr Weber, also applies to border guards and we have seen in the past that there were illegal pushbacks. We have seen that this has been covered up. We have seen that there was no punishment for this. We have seen that there was no accountability. This, colleagues, is definitely unacceptable.

The European Union received the Nobel Peace Prize not for building walls, not for encircling this continent in fences, not for pushing back boats of people who are looking for shelter. We received the Nobel Peace Prize because this Union stands for a promise, and, for me, the responsibility and the duty that we have learned from the horrors of the past – from nationalist devastations, but also from the suffering that this continent has brought to the world; a promise that we will be a beacon of human rights and of shared values. This, Commission President, does not end at how we behave at our external borders.

Marco Zanni, a nome del gruppo ID. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, finalmente il Consiglio riprende in mano un fascicolo fondamentale, una pratica fondamentale che l'Unione europea e le istituzioni europee stanno discutendo da anni senza la capacità di porre in atto delle azioni finalmente risolutive.

Nutriamo grandi speranze nelle parole che abbiamo sentito anche oggi sia dalla presidenza svedese, che in queste prime settimane si è espressa molto chiaramente sui suoi obiettivi, sia dalla Presidente della Commissione von der Leyen, che finalmente mi pare abbia messo a fuoco qual è il problema e quali sono le soluzioni reali che dobbiamo mettere in campo per risolvere il problema dell'immigrazione.

Parlare esclusivamente di redistribuzione e di porte aperte, come abbiamo fatto in questi anni, vuol dire non voler risolvere il problema perché la redistribuzione qui, con questi numeri, non la vuole nessuno: non l'ha voluta il governo di Macron, non l'hanno voluta i governi socialisti in Spagna o in altri paesi, non l'ha voluta nessuno in Europa. Quindi continuare oggi a parlare di redistribuzione e di responsabilità senza ridurre i numeri vuol dire non risolvere il problema.

I punti sono stati delineati anche da chi mi ha preceduto, il focus deve essere messo sulle frontiere esterne e sulla protezione delle nostre frontiere esterne; questo è quello che fanno gli Stati civili, questo è quello che fanno gli Stati evoluti, questo è quello che fanno gli Stati in cui vige lo Stato di diritto e penso che l'Unione europea dovrebbe far parte di questo gruppo.

Condivido la proposta che è stata fatta spesso in passato, dal mio paese e dal mio partito: abbiamo la necessità di processare le domande di asilo fuori dai confini dell'Unione europea, perché la percentuale delle domande che vengono accettate è bassissima e il resto rimane in capo ai paesi che condividono un confine esterno dell'Unione europea.

Lo possiamo fare, perché diamo un sacco di finanziamenti a tanti paesi terzi alle nostre frontiere esterne e penso che quando facciamo accordi per distribuire questo denaro possiamo anche chiedere delle strutture per processare le domande, dove le istituzioni dell'Unione europea si assumono il compito di controllare il rispetto dei diritti umani delle persone che vi transitano.

L'ultimo punto fondamentale: le ONG. Non possiamo, un'autorità pubblica non può appaltare il controllo dei suoi confini esterni a delle organizzazioni private e su questo, molto spesso, abbiamo rilevato profili di potenziale illegalità.

Questo dobbiamo fare: ridurre le partenze. Solo riducendo le partenze ridurremo i morti in mare e avremo un'Unione europea più civile.

Charlie Weimers, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, Commissioner Hahn, EU Minister Roswall, soaring illegal migration, an effective return rate of 24% of individuals who should not be on European soil, unsustainable migration levels in Austria, the Netherlands and Belgium. These are among the main reasons why migration is topping the European Council agenda. Italian and Swedish voters also played a role there, I might add.

Last week, EU migration ministers declared there is an urgent need to strengthen the external borders, increase returns and prevent irregular migration. How? The Commission claims there isn't money for walls in the EU budget. But there is taxpayers' money to waste on a EUR 387 000 Metaverse party that had less attendance than a July after-ski party in Denmark.

What about increasing returns? The Commission loves to dangle those development aid carrots, but it's afraid to stop funding countries that refuse to take back their own citizens. Here's some advice: finance border barriers, cease funding countries who refuse returns and stop talking about »irregular« migrations. When citizens hear you talk about »illegal« migration, that's when they will believe you're sincere on border protection.

Manon Aubry, au nom du groupe The Left. – Madame la Présidente, les prix explosent, les salaires stagnent, la vie est de plus en plus dure, l'Europe fait face à une crise sociale sans précédent, et l'austérité fait son grand retour au pire moment, avec des attaques brutales contre notre système de protection sociale, comme dans mon pays, en France, où près de trois millions de citoyens ont manifesté hier contre la casse des retraites.

Mais de tout cela, nous n'en parlerons pas aujourd'hui, car, quand tout va mal, le bouc émissaire est toujours le même: l'étranger. L'extrême droite nous impose une nouvelle fois son agenda xénophobe, face à une invasion migratoire qui n'existe pas. Il suffit de voir la mine ravie de Marco Zanni, qui vient ici, avec le tapis rouge déroulé, en disant: »Chouette, un nouveau débat sur l'immigration!«, alors que nous connaissons aujourd'hui la crise d'inflation la plus grave de notre histoire, et que des gens galèrent à terminer leurs fins de mois.

Je ne suis pas surprise des horreurs que l'extrême droite propose – ce n'est pas nouveau –, mais je m'inquiète qu'elles soient désormais reprises par la droite, par vous, Monsieur Weber, mais aussi par de plus en plus de libéraux. Je me souviens qu'il y a quelques années nous dénoncions tous ici les délires dangereux de M. Trump. Mais voici qu'une majorité de cet hémicycle s'inscrit aujourd'hui directement dans ses pas, jusqu'à Mme von der Leyen, qui n'exclut plus de soutenir ces murs de la honte en Europe. Alors non, pardon: pas les murs, mais tout ce qui sera autour – légère nuance, vous l'aurez compris.

La forteresse, elle existe pourtant déjà: 1 000 kilomètres de murs actuellement, et des milliers d'autres en projet, des cages à migrants en Bulgarie, des ONG qui sont criminalisées, Frontex qui viole quotidiennement les droits de l'homme et ceux des exilés. Voilà cette réalité que la Commission européenne, comme une partie de cet hémicycle, ici, veut cacher, ces vies humaines dont Mme von der Leyen n'a pas dit un seul mot.

Alors, je voudrais ici vous lire des témoignages d'exilés maltraités qui sont issus de ce »Black Book«, recueillis dans le »Livre noir des refoulements«, que notre groupe a édité, en lien avec les ONG. Je lis: »Après nous avoir violemment battues pendant trente minutes avec une matraque en métal, ils ont fait une pause pour fumer. Un officier a écrasé sa cigarette sur la tête de mon amie. Il m'a retiré mon foulard, frappée et crié dessus, a déchiré ma robe et continué à me fouiller en me touchant le corps devant mon enfant.« Que voulez-vous de plus? Des tirs à balles réelles contre ceux qui tentent de traverser? Des naufragés qu'on laisse se noyer? Des réfugiés fuyant la guerre à qui on refuse le droit d'asile? Tout cela a déjà été fait, et vous voulez le généraliser.

Alors, pour conclure, l'Europe peut encore reprendre ses esprits, respecter ses soi-disant valeurs. Mais, ici, nous n'aurons de cesse de le dire: organisons enfin l'accueil digne des exilés comme il se doit et comme il est possible de le faire.

Laura Ferrara (NI). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il Consiglio europeo sia occasione per ribadire che in Europa non abbiamo bisogno di muri, di filo spinato e di finanziamenti per erigere nuove barriere fisiche ai confini esterni e interni. Abbiamo bisogno di solidarietà ed equa ripartizione delle responsabilità, così come previsto dall'articolo 80 del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea.

Per alleviare gli oneri sproporzionati ricadenti sugli Stati in prima linea, maggiormente sotto pressione, non si può prescindere da un meccanismo di solidarietà obbligatorio basato su ricollocamenti tra tutti gli Stati membri dell'Unione europea.

Cooperazione con i paesi di origine e di transito e vie legali di accesso all'Unione europea rimangono necessari per contrastare il traffico di migranti e la tratta di esseri umani, tutelare le vite e tutelare i diritti fondamentali. In tale contesto bisogna rafforzare gli accordi in materia di rimpatrio e di reinserimento e migliorare le opportunità occupazionali nei paesi terzi.

Dopo due anni dalla presentazione del nuovo patto sulla migrazione e l'asilo e dopo circa sette anni dalle precedenti proposte di riforma del sistema comune europeo di asilo, l'Unione europea non sprechi altro tempo per dare un nuovo corso alla gestione dei flussi migratori.

PRESIDÊNCIA: PEDRO SILVA PEREIRA

Vice-Presidente

Paulo Rangel (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Conselho, Senhores Comissários, a verdade é que a questão das migrações testa o nosso sistema democrático e o nosso sistema de direitos fundamentais, mas o Grupo PPE, caros colegas dos Verdes, S&D, não recebe lições sobre direitos fundamentais de ninguém, nem sobre o tratamento digno das pessoas porque as nossas raízes cristãs são claras e estão presentes em todas as nossas políticas.

O problema aqui é saber como é que se protegem melhor os direitos humanos daqueles que são vulneráveis, e são verdadeiramente vulneráveis, e não daqueles que, muitas vezes, estão a tentar entrar de uma forma ilegal e irregular.

Nós, se tivermos fronteiras mais fortes, sobre as quais temos verdadeiro controlo, verdadeiro domínio, estaremos em muito melhores condições de respeitar os direitos humanos dos mais vulneráveis, de organizar a migração legal para os trabalhos de que nós necessitamos aqui, dada a nossa queda demográfica, e estaremos também em condições de ajudar os países terceiros a desenvolverem-se e a terem um menor fluxo migratório.

Essa sim é que é uma política humana, essa sim é que é uma política que respeita os direitos fundamentais.

Gabriele Bischoff (S&D). – Herr Präsident, Frau Ministerin! Enttäuschung und Hoffnung liegen ja bei dem Thema Migration sehr eng beieinander. Wenn man noch einmal zurückguckt auf die Zukunftskonferenz, kann man sehen, dass die Bürgerinnen und Bürger extrem enttäuscht sind, dass Europa nicht handlungsfähig ist in dem Feld Migration, und dass viele Probleme dadurch entstehen, dass Europa nicht handlungsfähig ist. Und deshalb ist es wirklich extrem wichtig zu sehen, dass es hier nur mit europäischen Lösungen geht. Ich denke, die Hoffnung ist in der Tat die Roadmap hier und dass das Parlament mit fünf Ratspräsidentschaften sich auf einen Fahrplan verständigt hat.

Aber wenn ich hier so zuhöre und dem Tempo zugucke, dann frage ich mich, ob man das so in der Zeit, die uns noch bleibt, überhaupt erreichen kann. Und wenn ich sehe, dass man hier immer Rosinen rauspicken will – einzelne Punkte, die einen das Screening, die anderen andere Punkte: Das wird nur funktionieren, wenn es ein Paket ist, das wirklich auf internationalem Recht, unseren Werten, Menschenrechten basiert. Und eins möchte ich nochmal sagen: Ich komme aus der Mauerstadt. Mauern zu bauen und Zäune, war immer eine Bankrotterklärung, nie Teil der Lösung.

Sophia in 't Veld (Renew). – Mr President, the debate on migration at the next Council summit is most necessary and not a day too soon, because after seven years of complete stagnation on the asylum and migration package in the Council, it's time for action.

Seven years sur place, no summit on massive illegal pushbacks, on thousands of deaths as a result. No summit on dramatic reception conditions in Moria, Calais, Ter Apel, Brussels. No summit when local communities became overburdened as national governments are cutting budgets for reception capacity or are busy blaming migrants for the failure of their own policies.

Government leaders have indeed agreed a very timid, voluntary relocation mechanism. But as President von der Leyen pointed out, so far it has resulted in no fewer than 8 000 pledges and 400 actual relocations – hardly impressive.

We need effective and credible policies, but always in line with our values. I hear colleague Weber say »Yeah, human rights, sure, but …«. I say »human rights«. Full stop. No buts.

As to walls, colleagues, many have been built throughout history. None of them were successful. None. It's a distraction and not a solution as Ms Bischoff also said.

Council and Parliament are currently working in a spirit of good cooperation following the joint roadmap towards the common goal of adopting the entire asylum and migration package by 2024 at the latest. And I therefore call on the government leaders to not disrupt or derail the process, but to throw their weight behind the roadmap.

Jordi Solé (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, we have had to tear down many walls, both physical and psychological, to make the Union that Europe is today. It is therefore regrettable that some Member States and some political families are again insisting upon building new walls and fences and financing them with EU money to seal off Fortress Europe.

They say walls will better help stop migration. But what they will stop is our European values. We know how quickly they fade away in outrageous episodes like the one at the Melilla wall, on the beaches of Lesbos and in so many other places. We need safe and legal pathways for migrants, amongst other reasons to ensure that we tackle the demographic and labour market challenges that we face. We need to guarantee the right to asylum for those who need shelter so they are not shamefully piled up in refugee camps or illegally pushed back or drowned in the Mediterranean Sea.

The far right and a complacent reaction to them must not dictate the fundamentals of our common migration and asylum policy.

Jean-Paul Garraud (ID). – Monsieur le Président, les années passent, et la pression migratoire continue d'asphyxier l'Europe. En 2022, l'agence Frontex a comptabilisé 330 000 franchissements irréguliers des frontières extérieures de l'Union européenne. Ces chiffres alarmants devraient réveiller l'Union européenne et lui faire prendre conscience de la gravité de la situation actuelle.

Alors que nous vivons une véritable submersion migratoire, qui nécessiterait des mesures fortes, Mme la commissaire Johansson refuse toujours de financer des murs et des barrières aux frontières de l'Europe, sous prétexte que l'Union européenne n'aurait pas de fonds à dépenser pour cela. La Commission est pourtant beaucoup moins regardante sur les moyens financiers lorsqu'il s'agit de subventionner certaines associations et des campagnes de promotion sur l'avenir de l'Europe avec le voile islamique. Quelle crédibilité accorder aux mesures annoncées par Mme von der Leyen pour faire face à la crise migratoire, alors qu'elle maintient dans le même temps une position pro-immigration?

En voulant intensifier les corridors qualifiés d'»humanitaires« pour encourager l'immigration de masse et en désirant attirer davantage de travailleurs prétendument qualifiés, Bruxelles continue de créer des appels d'air, des pompes aspirantes, que beaucoup de candidats à la migration suivront.

L'Union européenne doit pourtant contrôler ses frontières, arrêter de financer les ONG de bateaux-taxis pour migrants, cesser de légaliser l'immigration illégale, renvoyer dans leurs pays d'origine tous ceux qui doivent partir et ne plus donner un euro aux États qui ne reprendraient pas leurs ressortissants. C'est une question vitale pour l'avenir de l'Europe.

Il est grand temps de faire preuve de bon sens et de fermeté car, si l'Europe ne peut être repliée sur elle-même, elle doit protéger ses nationaux, ses entreprises, son identité. L'Europe ne sera forte que si les États qui la composent le sont. C'est exactement l'inverse qui est en train de se produire. Nous nous y opposons résolument.

Assita Kanko (ECR). – Voorzitter, morgen stemmen we over de opheffing van de onschendbaarheid van collega Nadine Morano, die in eigen land, Frankrijk, aangeklaagd wordt, omdat zij durft te zeggen dat het redden van illegale migranten in de Middellandse Zee en hen vervolgens naar Europese bodem brengen, gelijkstaat aan medeplichtigheid aan mensensmokkel. Ik geef haar gelijk en ga zelfs een stapje verder. Als we dit toelaten, zijn we niet alleen medeplichtig, maar doen we zelf aan mensensmokkel. Europese reddingsboten die illegale migranten overbrengen naar de EU zijn het verlengstuk van de schamele bootjes van de smokkelaars.

Vorig jaar kwamen bijna honderdduizend asielzoekers de EU binnen. Dat is de helft meer dan in 2021. Een meerderheid kan geen beroep doen op internationale bescherming. Dat zijn de letterlijke woorden van commissaris Johansson zelf. Deze situatie is niet alleen onhoudbaar, maar ook onmenselijk. Johansson zei ook dat aan onze plicht om mensen te redden niet mag getornd worden. Dat is zo. We redden hen en brengen hen vervolgens terug van waar ze zijn vertrokken, en dus niet naar de EU. Zo pakken we illegale immigratie aan bij de bron: illegale migranten ontmoedigen en mensensmokkel geen kans geven. Daar begint het.

Κωνσταντίνος Αρβανίτης (The Left). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, αυτό που είπε ο κ. Weber, ότι τα τείχη δεν είναι ταμπού, με τρόμαξε λίγο. Το τείχος του Βερολίνου δεν το είδα ποτέ ως ταμπού, ούτε και το τείχος στη Λευκωσία. Οπότε θεωρώ τη δήλωσή του μάλλον άστοχη —για να μην πω ανιστόρητη. Η ρεαλιστική και ανθρωπιστική αντιμετώπιση του θέματος μπορεί να επιτευχθεί μόνο σε ευρωπαϊκό επίπεδο μέσω νόμιμων και ελεγχόμενων ασφαλών οδών, με αίτηση για άσυλο σε συνδυασμό με υποχρεωτική ισότιμη και αναλογική μετεγκατάσταση των προσφύγων σε όλα τα κράτη μέλη. Συμφωνώ με αυτό που είπαν και οι Σοσιαλιστές: αναγκαστική αλληλεγγύη και όχι παιχνίδια με τη λέξη. Η ευρωπαϊκή ηγεσία πρέπει να σταματήσει να χρηματοδοτεί και να ενισχύει πρωτίστως τις αιτίες που γεννούν την προσφυγική κρίση, όπως είναι ο πόλεμος και η κλιματική κρίση, και να επικεντρωθεί σε σχέδια που στοχεύουν στην ευημερία των ανθρώπων στον τόπο τους.

Αυτό που βλέπουμε σήμερα είναι μια αποτυχημένη διαχείριση και έχουμε δημιουργήσει μια μηχανή που τρώει δισεκατομμύρια των πολιτών της Ευρώπης για να παράγει νέα αδιέξοδα, καταπίεση και θάνατο. Και, βεβαίως, υπάρχει ένα απλό ερώτημα: τείχη ανάμεσα στην Ευρώπη και σε υπό ένταξη χώρες όπως η Τουρκία; Είναι τελικά ασφαλής χώρα η Τουρκία ή όχι; Μεγάλο ερώτημα είναι αυτό. Ας μην κοροϊδεύουμε τους ανθρώπους και —βεβαίως— ας μην παίζουμε με τα ακροδεξιά σενάρια.

Kinga Gál (NI). – Tisztelt Elnök Úr, Biztos Úr! Tisztelt Képviselőtársak! Az Unió külső határaira nehezedő migrációs nyomás offenzív, ráadásul aggasztó mértékben növekszik. A nyugat-balkáni migrációs útvonalon rendszeresek a határőrökkel szembeni erőszakos megnyilvánulások. A megoldást csak az Unió külső határainak védelme és az illegális migráció megállítása jelentheti. Ezért károsak azok a javaslatok, amelyek még mindig nem megállítani, hanem csak menedzselni akarják az illegális bevándorlást. A szolidaritáson alapuló elosztási rendszer továbbra is csak ösztönzést jelent majd az illegális bevándorlók százezrei és az embercsempész bűnszervezetek útvonalainak számára.

Az unió menekültügyi rendszere láthatóan megbukott. A tagállamok maguk lépnek fel az illegális migráció megfékezése érdekében. Magyarországot a közös külső határaink védelme érdekében tett áldozatvállalásai ellenére csak bírósági eljárás, hátba támadás érte Brüsszel részéről. Az Európai Bizottságnak meg kell térítenie végre Magyarország határrendészeti intézkedésekre fordított költségeit, támogatva végre a külső határokat védő tagállamokat azokért az erőfeszítésekért, amelyeket az Unió egészének biztonsága érdekében tesznek.

Jeroen Lenaers (PPE). – Mr President, 70% of Europeans are concerned about migration, and rightly so: 330 000 people illegally crossed our borders last year. This is the highest number since 2016 and we are sleepwalking into a new crisis – literally, because our Dutch Prime Minister, Mark Rutte, admitted last week that he dozed off on migration. It's unacceptable. Colleague Azmani, on behalf of the Liberals, referred to Cinderella, while the Dutch Prime Minister really was more like Sleeping Beauty.

European citizens deserve leaders that are awake and that take their concerns seriously. And the upcoming summit is the opportunity to actually show this, to show the commitment, the commitment we need for real solutions. And we do not have the luxury to dismiss practical solutions just like that.

And that is my question also to the European Commission. President von der Leyen today here underlined the importance to strengthen our external borders and she mentioned the Turkish-Bulgarian border as a priority, but when Bulgaria then asks the European Union for help to protect that border, to have permanent infrastructure on that border, they hear from Commissioner Johansson that they cannot expect a single euro cent from the European budget. Is that solidarity? Is that the European response that the Commission is talking about? I think the Bulgarians and all European citizens deserve an answer to that question.

Javier Moreno Sánchez (S&D). – Señor presidente, señora ministra, señor comisario, señorías, si en esta cumbre queremos de verdad adoptar soluciones sostenibles, debemos cambiar el paradigma. Querido Manfred, debemos cambiar el paradigma.

Debemos entender que la solución al desafío migratorio no puede centrarse solo en tratar de contener la migración irregular. Debemos desarrollar canales de migración legal para atraer la mano de obra que necesita Europa, y canales humanitarios para proteger a las personas que huyen de la guerra y de la pobreza. Solo así podremos quitar el control a las mafias y atajar la trata de seres humanos, de tal manera que por fin se ponga en marcha una política migratoria común que se base en los principios del respeto de la dignidad humana y de la solidaridad, en cooperación con los terceros países.

Y, por último, señora ministra, yo entiendo que a Suecia le pueden quedar lejos el Mediterráneo y el Atlántico. No obstante, pedimos que la Presidencia impulse la creación de un mecanismo común de salvamento marítimo, porque, con la llegada de la primavera, miles de personas pondrán en riesgo su vida al intentar llegar a nuestras costas.

Fabienne Keller (Renew). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire – cher Johannes Hahn –, Madame la Ministre – chère Jessika Roswall –, la seule solution au défi migratoire, c'est le nouveau pacte européen sur la migration et l'asile. Non, ce ne sont pas les murs, Monsieur Weber. Non, chers collègues du PPE, ce ne sont pas non plus les centres d'examen des demandes d'asile situés loin des territoires européens. Cela ne serait pas digne des valeurs humanistes qui sont les nôtres. Ce n'est pas en pactisant avec l'extrême droite que vous poserez les bases d'un accord européen indispensable.

C'est notre responsabilité: unissons plutôt nos forces pro-européennes et modérées pour un vrai pacte européen sur la migration et l'asile, pour une Europe responsable, qui maîtrise ses frontières et qui respecte les droits de l'homme, pour une Europe solidaire, qui épaule les États les plus exposés – je pense en particulier à l'Espagne, l'Italie, la Grèce, Malte et Chypre –, pour une Europe qui assure des procédures d'asile respectueuses des droits de l'homme et efficaces.

Tom Vandendriessche (ID). – Voorzitter, collega's, wij worden letterlijk overspoeld door ongewenste migratie. Dit is geen natuurfenomeen dat ons overkomt, maar het gevolg van doelbewuste politieke keuzes. Ze weigeren de Europese buitengrenzen te beveiligen en illegalen effectief terug te sturen. Asielrecht wordt misbruikt als migratiekanaal en dat zorgt voor onveiligheid, ondermijnt asielrecht voor echte vluchtelingen en houdt het businessmodel van de mensensmokkel in stand. Dat is niet duurzaam, onhoudbaar en compleet immoreel.

We moeten en kunnen andere politieke keuzes maken. Asielrecht betekent geen verblijfsrecht. Opvang moet per definitie in de regio van herkomst. Landen die hun illegalen niet terugnemen, moeten we straffen met economische sancties, en we moeten elke ontwikkelingshulp stopzetten. Onze mensen willen niet meer, maar vooral minder migratie.

Veronika Vrecionová (ECR). – Pane předsedající, Evropská rada se na svém nadcházejícím zasedání bude věnovat i nelegální migraci, která v minulém roce opět nabrala na síle. U nás v České republice, ale i v sousedním Rakousku, Slovensku, Maďarsku narostl meziročně počet zachytávaných migrantů nelegálně překračujících hranici o stovky procent. Česká republika na to reagovala zvýšeným množstvím kontrol na česko-slovenské hranici, které zafungovaly a nyní jsou ukončovány. Zároveň se českému předsednictví podařilo dosáhnout sjednocení vízových povinností se státy západního Balkánu, což omezí příchod migrantů touto trasou.

Je tedy určitě potřeba další diskuze o ochraně vnější hranice a o spolupráci se zdrojovými zeměmi. A tady mluvím o potřebě podmiňovat naši rozvojovou pomoc a spolupráci o součinnost v oblasti migrace. Také doufám, že je u konce debata o povinných kvótách pro přerozdělování uprchlíků, protože se ukázalo, že státy, které proti tomuto systému dlouhodobě protestují, nyní v důsledku ruské agrese na Ukrajině přijaly daleko větší množství uprchlíků, než tomu bylo u jiných zemí v minulosti.

Nicolas Bay (NI). – Monsieur le Président, mes chers collègues, les Africains seront 2 milliards et demi en 2050 et 52 % de leur jeunesse a l'ambition de venir en Europe. Ils sont déjà plus de 7 millions à avoir demandé l'asile depuis 2014, l'équivalent de la région Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes en France ou de la Bulgarie tout entière. Chaque manifestation de faiblesse les pousse à tenter leur chance, à quitter leur pays et leurs racines pour se jeter dans les griffes des mafias de passeurs, et, pour certains, à mourir en mer. Ils savent que, s'ils parviennent chez nous, vous les accueillerez, au nom de vos bons sentiments, mais au mépris de la volonté de nos peuples. Vous êtes ainsi les artisans de la destruction de notre civilisation.

En accueillant l'Afrique et le Moyen-Orient, nous ne les aidons pas, nous ne faisons que devenir nous-mêmes l'Afrique et le Moyen-Orient. La seule solution durable et humaine, c'est de les dissuader de partir, les empêcher d'entrer et les expulser systématiquement s'ils arrivent. Il faut bien sûr financer les protections érigées, par exemple par la Grèce, la Hongrie et la Bulgarie à nos frontières extérieures. Il faut sanctionner les pays de départ qui ne coopèrent pas et favoriser le développement de ceux qui maîtrisent leur flux, sans les infantiliser ni leur imposer nos schémas européens. Et, au lieu de répartir les migrants, il faut surtout les faire repartir chez eux.

(L'orateur accepte de répondre à une intervention »carton bleu«)

Janina Ochojska (PPE), blue-card speech. – As it was told, last year there were 330 000 migrants who enter to Europe. Do you know what percentage is 330 000 of migrants to the number of inhabitants of European Union?

Nicolas Bay (NI), réponse »carton bleu« . – Chère collègue, vous ne prenez en considération que les migrants officiels. En réalité, rien que dans un pays comme la France, nous avons 400 000 entrées légales par an, quand on compte les titres de séjour, plus les mineurs isolés, plus les demandeurs d'asile, dont l'immense majorité ne répond pas aux critères d'obtention du droit d'asile. Et ce phénomène-là, on l'a sur les 27 pays de l'Union européenne, ce qui aboutit évidemment à des millions et des millions de migrants qui arrivent, soit légalement, soit illégalement, mais avec tous comme caractéristique, finalement, de rester, parce que très peu sont expulsés, même lorsqu'ils sont entrés ou se maintiennent illégalement ou sont déboutés du droit d'asile.

Donc, aujourd'hui, on est face à une véritable submersion. Il faut mettre fin à cette submersion. Ce n'est pas rendre service à ces populations, qui viennent principalement d'Afrique subsaharienne et du Maghreb, que de les accueillir. On les déracine, on empêche le développement de ces pays. La politique authentiquement humaine, juste et responsable, ça consiste à tout faire pour qu'ils restent dans leur pays d'origine, au lieu de venir provoquer des troubles importants, aussi bien identitaires que sécuritaires, économiques et sociaux en Europe.

Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez (PPE). – Señor presidente, en 2022, más de 300 000 personas cruzaron ilegalmente las fronteras de la Unión Europea. En la actualidad, todavía hay 600 000 peticiones de asilo pendientes de resolución. El 79 % de las decisiones de retorno del año anterior todavía no han sido ejecutadas. Cerca de 270 000 personas que deberían haber sido retornadas a sus países de origen no lo han sido. Personas como el responsable del asesinato de un sacristán la semana pasada en Algeciras, en España. Un dramático suceso que debemos evitar que se repita en cualquier sitio de Europa.

Para evitarlo, Europa debe redoblar la protección de sus fronteras exteriores, dotar a nuestras fuerzas de seguridad de los adecuados recursos legales y materiales, reformar nuestra política migratoria y de asilo, y mejorar los mecanismos de retorno. Para lograrlo, Europa debe actuar unida. La gestión migratoria no es solo responsabilidad de unos pocos Estados fronterizos.

Y, para terminar, no podemos olvidar el necesario equilibrio entre solidaridad y responsabilidad.

Brando Benifei (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, condivisione solidale delle responsabilità: questo è il principio che deve guidare l'Unione europea e tutti gli Stati membri nell'affrontare il fenomeno migratorio con umanità e sostenibilità.

È positiva la volontà della Commissione di accelerare sul patto sulla migrazione per non oltrepassare il 2024 e la presidenza di turno svedese non può trascurare l'argomento. Questo però non basta.

Mi rivolgo alla Presidente von der Leyen e al Presidente Michel: non è accettabile che la risposta europea alla migrazione si limiti a un'accelerazione sui rimpatri, ignorando la debolezza strutturale del sistema di asilo europeo.

Così come non accettiamo che l'Unione finanzi gli Stati membri per costruire muri alle frontiere, né scandalosi respingimenti illegali nei confronti di chi scappa da guerre e povertà.

Non ci stancheremo di ricordare che l'azione prioritaria deve essere la revisione del regolamento di Dublino, affinché la gestione della prima accoglienza non sia più onere di pochi ma impegno permanente di tutti.

La logica emergenziale di facciata imposta dai nazionalisti ha solo sortito più irregolarità e più morti. È giunta l'ora di creare, anche tramite cooperazioni rafforzate, anche tramite la partenza da chi ci sta, regole più chiare e più umane senza essere preda di veti.

Jan-Christoph Oetjen (Renew). – Herr Präsident, verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich höre wohl die Worte der Christdemokraten hier im Saal, dass wir vorankommen sollen beim Migrationspakt. Allerdings fehlt mir mittlerweile der Glaube, dass sie das wirklich wollen.

Haben Sie heute diese hässliche Fratze der extremen Rechten in den Reden hier in diesem Saal gesehen? Wollen Sie das wirklich nachmachen, verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der EVP, und sich selbst verzwergen, so wie es die französischen Konservativen getan haben, weil sie der extremen Rechten nachgeeifert haben?

Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir haben hier in diesem Parlament einen Fahrplan vereinbart, gemeinsam, um beim Asyl- und Migrationspakt voranzukommen. Seien Sie kompromissbereit! Gehen Sie auf die Mitte zu und versuchen Sie nicht, am rechten Rand zu fischen und dort Stimmen einzusammeln, denn das wird Ihnen nicht gelingen. Lassen Sie uns gemeinsam dafür sorgen, dass wir ein einheitliches europäisches System haben. Wenn Sie wirklich möchten, verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, dass im Mittelmeer weniger Menschen ertrinken, dann sorgen Sie doch nicht dafür, dass NGOs hier irgendwie Knüppel zwischen die Beine geworfen werden, sondern sorgen Sie dafür, dass es eine staatliche Seenotrettungsmission gibt, damit wir das endlich nicht mehr den NGOs überlassen müssen.

Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich glaube wirklich, dass Sie sich fragen müssen, wohin Sie gehen wollen. Ich sage Ihnen: In der Mitte sind wir bereit, mit Ihnen zusammenzuarbeiten und Kompromisse zu finden, um eine gute europäische Lösung auf den Weg zu bringen. Aber wir werden Ihnen nicht hinterherlaufen, wenn Sie in die extreme Rechte laufen.

Anders Vistisen (ID). – Hr. formand! Det nærmer sig desværre det tragikomiske at overvære de debatter, som vi har år efter år omkring den ulovlige migration til Europa. I 2016 viste EU med alt tydelighed, at man ikke kunne klare situationens alvor. Den alvor, der betød, at titusindvis af ulovlige migranter flygtede hele vejen op igennem Europa. Og hvad er der sket i mellemtiden? Meget lidt. Sidste år alene kom over 300.000 ulovligt til Europa. Langt over halvdelen af dem, der søger asyl, får afslag. Men de ved også godt, når de ser statistikkerne fra EU, at chancen for at blive sendt hjem – selv med et afslag på asyl – er forsvindende lille. Derfor er det desværre en stor fejl, når man her taler om europæiske løsninger på det asylproblem, der er, for Europa har spillet fallit. Det eneste, der virker, er, at man tillader medlemsstaterne fortsat at fastholde deres nationale grænsekontrol, og arbejder efter en rigtig solidarisk løsning. En push back-model, som den man kender fra Australien, hvor vi ikke bliver ved med at give folk falske forhåbninger om, at man ulovligt kan komme til Europa og bosætte sig, men rent faktisk sætter effektivt ind mod menneskesmugling og den kriminalitet, det medfører.

Carlo Fidanza (ECR). – Signor Presidente, signora Ministra, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, nutriamo aspettative importanti sul prossimo Consiglio straordinario che, anche grazie alla determinazione del primo ministro italiano Giorgia Meloni, affronterà il tema immigrazione.

Ci auguriamo che alle tante dichiarazioni di questi giorni, che sembrano andare nella giusta direzione, seguano finalmente i fatti.

Bisogna uscire dalla logica fallimentare della redistribuzione indistinta di rifugiati e migranti economici e dalla falsa contrapposizione tra movimenti primari e secondari.

Dobbiamo collocare i centri di identificazione il più vicino possibile ai paesi di partenza e di transito, varare una nuova politica verso l'Africa per prevenire i flussi irregolari, rafforzare quindi le frontiere esterne, coordinare un'efficace politica di rimpatri, limitare il pull factor determinato dalle ONG, richiamando alla propria responsabilità anche gli Stati di bandiera, e garantire asilo e vera integrazione a chi davvero ne ha diritto.

Ora è il tempo della concretezza, facciamolo.

Κώστας Παπαδάκης (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση επιταχύνει το ψηφιακό φακέλωμα για γρήγορο ξεδιάλεγμα φτηνών και ευέλικτων εργαζόμενων προσφύγων. Όσους »κουμπώνουν« στην ευρωενωσιακή καπιταλιστική μηχανή εκμετάλλευσης με διακρατικές συμφωνίες κάθε κράτος μέλος της τους διεκδικεί για λογαριασμό του, ενώ για όσους δεν χρειάζονται επισπεύδουν απελάσεις με τον εύηχο όρο »επιστροφές« σε ένα άθλιο παζάρι με τις χώρες καταγωγής τους.

Στην Ελλάδα, η Νέα Δημοκρατία, ο ΣΥΡΙΖΑ και το ΠΑΣΟΚ, με μια φωνή και μια ψήφο, προωθούν συμφωνίες »σύγχρονου σκλαβοπάζαρου«, όπως αυτή με το Μπανγκλαντές. Ταυτόχρονα, από κοινού υπερασπίζονται άθλια τείχη καταστολής, με χωροφύλακα τον Frontex, για να μακροημερεύουν οι απαράδεκτες ευρωενωσιακές απαγορεύσεις δευτερογενών μετακινήσεων και η επιζήμια δήλωση Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης-Τουρκίας. Αυτές οι συμφωνίες δημιουργούν το πρόβλημα εγκλωβισμού στα ελληνικά νησιά και διευκολύνουν την εργαλειοποίηση από την πλευρά της αστικής τάξης της Τουρκίας στον ανταγωνισμό με την ελληνική. Απαιτούνται εδώ και τώρα υπηρεσίες ασύλου στην Τουρκία, με ευθύνη Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και ΟΗΕ, με ανθρώπινη φιλοξενία και πλήρη δικαιώματα για να πάνε οι ξεριζωμένοι των ιμπεριαλιστικών πολέμων στις χώρες πραγματικού προορισμού τους.

Tomas Tobé (PPE). – Mr President, I listen to colleagues that rightfully point out that it is terrible that people are dying in the Mediterranean Sea. But they are not willing to do anything to go after the smugglers. They say completely no, that we should work with third countries and try to have cooperation. I also listen to some colleagues that say migration is a huge problem for Europe, but they are not interested at all at delivering any European solutions.

But I must say that I think it is possible to build a political majority in this House and also in the Council that could agree that we need to have control of the borders; that we need to decrease irregular migration; that we need to increase returns; and yes, also, that we need to offer protection to people in Europe that have the right to asylum; and that we need a stronger solidarity between the Member States. This is possible to do. I wish the Council good luck on your next meeting. The most important thing you can do is to get ready for trilogues because it is time to deliver.

Birgit Sippel (S&D). – Herr Präsident! Sondergipfel Migration und Asyl: Die Europäische Union bekennt sich ja gerne zu Demokratie und Grundrechten, zum Grundrecht auf Asyl und zur Einhaltung von Menschenrechten. Und das ist auch die Grundlage aller Beschlüsse aller Mitgliedstaaten – deren Praxis allerdings allzu oft anders aussieht.

Und jetzt kramen konservative Teile dieses Hauses altbekannte Ideen aus der Mottenkiste der Migrationspolitik hervor. Herr Weber meint, Zäune müssen denkbar sein. Doch gerade unsere deutsche Geschichte zeigt: Zäune und Mauern sind keine Lösung. Und die EU, basierend auf gemeinsamen Werten als Friedensprojekt, darf Mauern nicht finanzieren. Und ist es nicht ein Armutszeugnis für die starke Europäische Union, darüber zu reden, Asylverfahren in Drittstaaten auszulagern?

Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir müssen eine Lösung finden, die unsere gemeinsamen Werte stärkt, die europäisches und internationales Recht respektiert und schützt. Das ist unsere Aufgabe, und ich bin bereit, sie anzugehen.

Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Pani Minister! Szanowni Państwo! Trzeba odpowiedzieć sobie na pytanie, jakiej polityki migracyjnej chce lewicowo-liberalna większość. Czy takiej polityki, która nie szanuje regulacji unijnych, które mówią, że zewnętrzne granice Unii Europejskiej winny być strzeżone, że odpowiednie przepisy regulują przekraczanie granic zewnętrznych strefy Schengen? Trzeba sobie na to pytanie wyraźnie odpowiedzieć, bo mam wrażenie, że ta lewicowo-liberalna większość chciałaby, żeby do Unii Europejskiej wchodził każdy, kiedy chce i w jaki sposób chce.

Uważam, że polityka azylowa powinna być dedykowana uchodźcom azylowym – i z takimi uchodźcami mamy do czynienia w Polsce. W pierwszych tygodniach wojny wywołanej przez Rosję w Ukrainie, po 24 lutego zeszłego roku, do Polski weszło ponad dziewięć milionów uchodźców wojennych. W jaki sposób Unia Europejska wsparła państwo polskie w zabezpieczeniu podstawowych potrzeb uchodźców wojennych? Ano w taki sposób, że zablokowano Polsce dostęp do niezbędnych, koniecznych środków w ramach KPO. To pokazuje waszą głęboką hipokryzję i niezrozumienie prawdziwych problemów.

Ioan-Rareș Bogdan (PPE). – Domnule președinte, excelențele voastre, România își dorește ca Uniunea Europeană să devină un loc mai sigur pentru cetățenii ei, dar și românii sunt cetățeni europeni. Românii contribuie esențial la stăvilirea migrației ilegale și, cu toate acestea, au fost jigniți cumplit. Românilor li s-a refuzat pe 8 decembrie accesul în spațiul Schengen, iar aceasta s-a întâmplat din cauza josniciei politice a cancelarului austriac Nehammer, care, iată, a și plătit la alegeri: partidul său a luat la alegerile de duminică cel mai prost scor de la al Doilea Război Mondial încoace.

Doamnelor și domnilor, Uniunea Europeană nu trebuie să devină un loc unde mai marii zilei dispun discreționar de soarta a milioane de cetățeni. Ce au făcut românii care să merite un asemenea tratament nemernic? Au investit un miliard de euro în securizarea frontierelor, au ajutat milioane de refugiați - 3,5 milioane de ucraineni - i-au hrănit, i-au luat acasă, le-au cumpărat medicamente și lapte praf și nu s-au plâns, deoarece românii sunt chiar creștini, nu doar spun că sunt creștini.

Românii își asumă un risc major în vecinătatea Ucrainei, având 650 de km de graniță, dar își fac acest lucru asumat. Și vă spun ceva, și luați aminte: Românii nu sunt fraierii Uniunii Europene! Sper ca Suedia, care este o țară cu o democrație consolidată, să repună pe agenda Uniunii Europene în unul dintre cele două consilii JAI din martie sau luna iunie de sub președinția sa extinderea spațiului Schengen pentru România și Bulgaria.

Jorge Buxadé Villalba (ECR). – Señor presidente, señora ministra, soluciones sostenibles en el área de asilo y migración. Lo que sabemos es lo que no es sostenible. No es sostenible confundir refugiado e inmigrante. No es sostenible definir como irregular al que entra ilegalmente, cuando el peso de los Estados recae sobre cualquier europeo cuando presenta sus impuestos un día más tarde. No es sostenible ofrecer trabajo a los ilegales cuando hay millones de parados europeos. No es sostenible que un ciudadano marroquí, con orden de expulsión no ejecutada por el Gobierno de Sánchez, asesine a un sacristán e hiera a un sacerdote y a varios feligreses en una iglesia en Algeciras. No es sostenible que, de 682 000 inmigrantes ilegales que, según Eurostat, había en 2021, solo haya orden de expulsión para la mitad y se ejecute el 10 % de estas órdenes. En España, aún peor: más de 30 000 ilegales, solo 7 000 órdenes de expulsión y ni siquiera sabemos cuántas han sido ejecutadas.

¿Quién de ustedes les dirá a los familiares de los asesinados que siguen con su política de fronteras abiertas? La única solución es proteger las fronteras. Tolerancia cero. Decirle a todo el mundo: »Los que cumpláis la ley tenéis esperanza. Los que no cumpláis la ley no tendréis ninguna esperanza«. Reforzar las fronteras con dinero europeo, combatir el terror, luchar contra las mafias y, por supuesto, plataformas de desembarco en los países de origen, como viene solicitando nuestro grupo político. Y, al parecer, ahora el Partido Popular Europeo se ha unido a esta idea.

François-Xavier Bellamy (PPE). – Monsieur le Président, enfin le Conseil va se pencher sur la question migratoire, qui est critique pour l'avenir de l'Europe, à plus forte raison dans les mois qui viennent – au moins 330 000 entrées illégales en 2022: un record depuis 2016! L'explosion constatée par rapport à l'année précédente se vérifie aussi dans le fait que près d'un million de demandes d'asile ont été reçues dans nos pays, dont 150 000 rien qu'en France.

Soyons clairs: aucun d'entre nous, ici, sans doute, ne vivra directement les conséquences de ces flux migratoires massifs, qui durent et s'amplifient. Et quand j'entends notre chère collègue Manon Aubry qui ironise sur le fait que ce débat migratoire servirait à cacher le malaise social profond dans nos pays, je suis toujours aussi surpris que la gauche ne fasse pas le lien et qu'elle ne prenne pas fait et cause pour les milieux sociaux les plus modestes, ceux qui n'ont pas, contrairement aux riches, les moyens de se mettre à l'écart des conséquences de ce grand bouleversement de leur monde.

La Commission dit vouloir prendre au sérieux l'ampleur de ce défi, mais, pour avoir des résultats après avoir tant tardé, il faut sortir de l'ambiguïté. Nous avons soutenu l'augmentation massive du budget de Frontex, mais la commissaire Johansson a obtenu l'éviction de son directeur au motif que ses gardes-frontières empêchaient des migrants d'entrer illégalement en Europe. L'Europe dit vouloir organiser un vrai partenariat avec les pays d'émigration, mais des États membres comme la France ou l'Allemagne persistent à aller chercher chez eux les travailleurs qui pallient les déficiences de leur économie et de leur démographie. Nous voulons accélérer les retours, mais la jurisprudence européenne sur l'asile contribue chaque jour au détournement de ce droit. La présidente de la Commission dit soutenir les pays limitrophes, mais elle leur refuse aujourd'hui encore tout soutien pour construire les murs qui protégeraient leurs frontières. Que de contradictions! Chers collègues, pour avoir des résultats sur ce sujet si essentiel, il faut sortir enfin de l'ambiguïté.

Salvatore De Meo (PPE). – Signor Presidente, signora Ministra, onorevoli colleghi, dopo i tanti interventi dei miei colleghi mi viene naturale chiedere per quanto tempo ancora questo Parlamento, prima di un Consiglio, debba parlare per avere una risposta concreta.

Questo Parlamento lo ha ribadito più volte, pur con sensibilità diverse: abbiamo bisogno di una soluzione politica ed europea. Finché gli Stati membri continueranno ad anteporre logiche nazionali a quelle comunitarie, purtroppo non sarà possibile trovare una risposta concreta e pragmatica. Se non agiamo subito, continueremo ad assistere impotenti a ondate di migrazioni che diventeranno, come lo sono state in passato, vere e proprie emergenze.

Allora faccio appello a Lei, affinché la presidenza svedese possa avere la forza di far trovare un accordo basato sulla solidarietà e sull'idea che i confini meridionali e orientali sono confini europei.

Dobbiamo lavorare con i paesi terzi per efficientare i rimpatri, favorendo al contempo il reinserimento sociale e lavorativo; dobbiamo rafforzare le frontiere esterne che andranno senza dubbio finanziate e implementate per esaminare le domande di asilo.

Infine sosteniamo un codice di condotta per le ONG nelle operazioni di ricerca e di salvataggio, perché vengano responsabilizzate, con i relativi Stati, affinché il diritto internazionale e nazionale venga rispettato.

In bocca al lupo a questo Parlamento e buon lavoro per un impegno difficile, che sia veramente concretizzato.

Catch-the-eye procedure

Στέλιος Κυμπουρόπουλος (PPE). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, το μεταναστευτικό είναι και πάλι στην ατζέντα της ερχόμενης συνόδου κορυφής ως αποτέλεσμα της δραματικής αύξησης των μεταναστευτικών ροών. Οι χώρες πρώτης υποδοχής στην Ευρώπη, όπως η χώρα μου —η Ελλάδα, καλούνται και πάλι να επωμιστούν δυσανάλογα μεγάλο βάρος, ενώ παράλληλα συμμορφώνονται πλήρως με τις διεθνείς και ευρωπαϊκές υποχρεώσεις και τους κανόνες. Αυτό ασκεί ολοένα και μεγαλύτερη πίεση στα συστήματα ασύλου και υποδοχής και η σύνοδος κορυφής της ερχόμενης εβδομάδας πρέπει να είναι η αφετηρία εξεύρεσης μιας πραγματικής ευρωπαϊκής λύσης. Μιας λύσης η οποία πρωτίστως θα εξασφαλίζει δίκαιο και μόνιμο επιμερισμό ευθυνών μεταξύ των κρατών μελών, που θα αντιμετωπίζει στη ρίζα τους τις προσπάθειες εργαλειοποίησης του ανθρώπινου πόνου από τα κυκλώματα των διακινητών και που θα έχει συγκεκριμένο πλαίσιο για τις οργανώσεις που υλοποιούν δράσεις στον τομέα της μετανάστευσης. Δεν υπάρχει άλλος χρόνος για χάσιμο.

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente, señora presidenta en ejercicio del Consejo, desde el inicio de la guerra de agresión de Putin contra Ucrania, once millones de personas desplazadas del horror han entrado en el territorio de la Unión Europea y, al menos, cuatro millones han decidido permanecer en él indefinidamente. Y nada de eso ha cuestionado el modelo social europeo ni nuestra capacidad de inclusión.

Por tanto, señora presidenta en ejercicio del Consejo, ¿por qué no cambiar la mirada predominantemente negativa hacia el hecho migratorio y hacia los demandantes de asilo, que es la única manera eficaz, no solamente de desactivar la explotación electoral del pánico y del rechazo a los migrantes y a los demandantes de asilo, sino de desmantelar el modelo de negocio de los traficantes que explotan la desesperación de los seres humanos?

El Pacto sobre Migración y Asilo y su hoja de ruta son una oportunidad para establecer por fin el equilibrio entre solidaridad vinculante y responsabilidad compartida. Pero la tarea no estará completa hasta que no abramos vías legales y establezcamos visados humanitarios y un mecanismo europeo de salvamento y rescate en la mar que permitan cumplir a todos los Estados miembros —y les obligue a hacerlo— sus obligaciones de Derecho internacional humanitario.

Tineke Strik (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, we are generously hosting refugees from Ukraine, and rightly so. But the EU seems to forget that a refugee is a refugee, no matter the country of origin. And most asylum seekers in Europe, they come from Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Turkey. Those refugees are pushed back at Europe's borders or face huge obstacles in asking for asylum and getting a proper reception.

And what is the EU answer to these protection gaps? More walls, more drones, more returns, more funding to Libyan detention centres and to autocratic regimes like Egypt, Turkey and Morocco; deterrents and shifting responsibility instead of respecting the rights of all refugees. But there is no space for selective morality. So I urge the Commission and the Council: care for our credibility, care for our values.

Beata Kempa (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Pani Minister! Szanowni Państwo! Tak, Europa ma dzisiaj problem z nielegalną migracją. Właściwie ta cała dotychczasowa polityka mocno zbankrutowała. Cieszę się, że dzisiaj pani przewodnicząca Ursula von der Leyen mówiła o wzmocnieniu granic, ale przede wszystkim mówiła też o tym, że należy bezwzględnie walczyć z przemytnikami, z tymi wszystkimi, którzy powodują napływ nielegalnych migrantów, ale też dają złudzenie, nadzieję tym ludziom tam, w kraju pochodzenia, i biorą za to jeszcze gigantyczne pieniądze.

Ale dzisiaj wiemy też, że inne kraje członkowskie, służby krajów członkowskich, jak i służby Stanów Zjednoczonych mówią o tym, że znaczna część problemu jest napędzana przez siły zewnętrzne. Mówię tutaj o Rosji i Białorusi. Te reżimy stoją za próbami szturmu wschodnich granic Europy i jest niezwykle ważne, żeby o tym mówić. To jest ta destabilizacja, o której oni marzą. Dlatego trzeba wzmacniać Frontex, trzeba dawać nakłady na Frontex, na straże graniczne, wzmocnić ochronę granic i zrewidować politykę Unii Europejskiej w tym zakresie. I najważniejsze kwestia – pomoc humanitarna na miejscu. To znacznie ograniczy te zjawiska niekorzystne dla Europy.

Clare Daly (The Left). – Mr President, Europe's population is aging. Over the next 30 years, our active workforce will decrease by 50 million. Without migration, we face enormous problems to keep our societies going.

Yet we have the senseless spectacle of governments all over Europe freaking out about the pensions time bomb, while at the same time standing over migration and asylum policies designed to violently keep out the very young people who could defuse that bomb. Our already-overwhelmed health services will sink altogether without the migration needed to redress the balance between young and old.

Our political attitudes to migration, frankly, are a form of collective lunacy. At the end of 2021, the share of refugees in the EU was 0.6% compared to its total population – 0.6%! It's embarrassing that we spend so much time on this tiny number of people.

This is not a hard problem to deal with. It's actually not a problem at all. It's an opportunity. We need safe and legal pathways for people who want to come here. Stop pushing them back. Stop sending them back. Stop beating them at the borders. Stop allowing the opportunists on the right to set the terms of this debate. Let people in. Let them access good jobs and let them guarantee, in that, a future for Europe.

Janina Ochojska (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Unia Europejska mówi, że buduje mosty zamiast murów. Tak, teraz wokół Europy powstają mury oraz różnego rodzaju przegrody. Ja mam wrażenie, że my budujemy bogatą fortecę Europy.

W tej chwili w Europie znajduje się tysiąc osiemset kilometrów murów – to jest dwanaście murów berlińskich. 320 tysięcy uchodźców czy migrantów, nawet nielegalnych, to jest 0,06 procenta całej ludności Unii Europejskiej. Czy te 0,06 procenta tak bardzo nam przeszkadza? Przecież można tych ludzi przyjąć, zbadać, czy powinni zostać w Europie, i wtedy ich odesłać, a nie przetrzymywać w ośrodkach, gdzie spędzają czasami nawet trzy lata w bardzo trudnych warunkach. Tak się dzieje na przykład w moim kraju.

Wszyscy chcemy cieszyć się wolnością przemieszczania się. Dlaczego mówimy, że migracja jest nielegalna? Każdy ma prawo przemieszczać się i nikt nie jest nielegalny.

Margarida Marques (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Ministra, Senhor Comissário, sobre o ponto Economia na agenda do Conselho Europeu: a criação de um fundo soberano é um dos pilares do novo plano industrial para o Pacto Verde. Terá de cumprir dois objetivos: primeiro, apoiar a autonomia estratégica da União Europeia e uma política industrial europeia verde, segundo, assegurar que as novas regras de ajudas de Estado garantem um »level playing field« no funcionamento do mercado interno, evitando a sua fragmentação, como acontece com a recente suspensão dessas regras. E, tudo isto, no respeito das regras da Organização Mundial do Comércio.

Precisamos de um novo fundo, como fizemos com a criação do NextGenerationEU ou do SURE. Mobilizar verbas teoricamente disponíveis não é suficiente.

Sim, a União Europeia tem de fortalecer a sua base económica, industrial e tecnológica, tem de reforçar as competências das pessoas, tem de aprofundar a sua agenda comercial.

Erik Marquardt (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident! Ich bin ehrlicherweise so ein bisschen ratlos, wenn ich die Beiträge von der rechten Seite des Parlaments zu diesem Thema höre, und zwar eigentlich auch schon seit Jahren.

Es ist ja nicht neu, dass man jetzt vorschlägt, Zäune zu bauen, dass man sagt, wir müssen die Abschiebungen steigern, dass man sagt, wir müssen die Leute auf dem Mittelmeer dorthin bringen, wo sie hergekommen sind. Das sind ja alles keine neuen Ideen! Das erzählen diese Menschen auf der rechten Seite des Parlaments seit mindestens 20 Jahren, und die Konservativen regieren auch in vielen Ländern seit 20 Jahren, und trotzdem passiert nichts. Da frage ich mich: Liegt das vielleicht daran, dass Abschottung gar nicht die Lösung ist für unser Problem? Könnte ja sein.

Es könnte ja sein, dass, wenn man vorschlägt, Leute nach Libyen zurückzubringen, obwohl der Europäische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte einem das verboten hat, das dann am Ende gar nicht passiert. Ich meine, warum verwirren wir denn mit wirklich merkwürdigen Beiträgen immer wieder die Leute, statt ihnen klarzumachen, dass Migration Realität ist, Migration Realität sein wird – dass wir die Aufgabe haben, das alles zu managen, aber dass wir nicht mit irgendwelchen wilden Verschwörungstheorien verdecken sollten, dass wir seit Jahren scheitern, sondern dass wir unsere Aufgabe ernst nehmen sollten und jetzt wirklich zusammen anpacken? Und zwar nicht nur mit dem Migrationspakt, denn am Ende wird er nicht alle unsere Probleme lösen, sondern indem wir auch mal den politischen Willen, dieses Problem wirklich anzugehen, nach vorne stellen. Das fehlt mir ehrlicherweise bei vielen Beiträgen, die ich heute gehört habe.

Ladislav Ilčić (ECR). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, poštovani kolege, ključna stvar u upravljanju ilegalnim migracijama je poruka koju šaljemo potencijalnim ilegalnim migrantima i dosljednost u provođenju te poruke.

Ilegalne migracije će rasti ako šaljemo poruku: samo vi dođite, već će vam netko poput nevladinih udruga pomoći, makar da i ilegalno prijeđete granicu. Ako pak šaljemo poruku: mi poštujemo zakone o granicama i nema šanse da ilegalno uđete u Europsku uniju - tada će se ilegalne migracije smanjiti.

A što se legalnih migracija tiče, i tu trebamo misliti na posljedice. Doseljenici imaju vrlo snažan identitet, a europski mainstream već godinama sustavno radi na uništenju nacionalnog, vjerskog, pa čak i spolnog identiteta. I u susretu jakog i slabog identiteta, jednostavno pobjeđuje onaj jaki. Tako da je očekivati asimilaciju tog jakog identiteta tih doseljenika u europski identitet dosta nerealno, a to potvrđuje i realnost koja pokazuje no-go zone i daljnju ugrozu identiteta i svih vrijednosti koji proizlaze iz kršćanske tradicijske kulture.

Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Mr President, the European Union may be confronted soon with a new migration crisis. Many EU countries have difficulties in fighting traffickers and organised crimes. We also did not provide all the proper support to the countries of origin, and we have neighbouring countries that transform migration into a business.

Moreover, according to the Commission reports, we also have too many Member States that do not respect what we have already decided together. Interestingly enough, some of the leaders that do not respect the current provisions are exactly those that blame the EU on this issue. For example, the right-wing Austrian chancellor, Mr Nehammer, contradicts the European Commission and is opposing the accession of Romania into Schengen by presenting false data on migration while ignoring his capacity to manage the situation.

In Romania, after being crossed by more than two million refugees with thousands remaining in our countries, we do not complain like the populist leaders. We act, we help people, we also support the country of origin. We are also investing a lot in border protection, but also in offering proper support to refugees. But we cannot ignore that help provided is too little. We have to do more. We have to act very precisely on this issue while at the same time caring about people.

Karlo Ressler (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, situacija na europskim granicama, nažalost, dramatično počinje podsjećati na veliku migracijsku krizu 2015. Tisuće i tisuće nepoznatih ljudi očito nezakonito ulazi na teritorij Europske unije. Stravično je skandalozno čuti, s one strane ljevice, i ovdje u Europskom parlamentu, strastveno zalaganje za nepoštivanje naših europskih zajedničkih propisa. Europa ne može to više dalje gledati. Europa mora djelovati.

Potreban nam je što skoriji dogovor o novom sustavu migracija i azila, dogovor koji može odgovoriti na ovu krizu, dogovor koji uključuje solidarnost između država jer predugo su države na vanjskim granicama podnosile najveći migracijski pritisak, ali i dogovor o sustavu u kojem je temelj također i nepokolebljivost prema krijumčarima, koji iskorištavaju našu neodlučnost i ugrožavaju živote tisuća ljudi. Moramo zaustaviti nezakonite ulaske i ustrajati u zaštiti europske granice.

Dacian Cioloș (Renew). – Domnule președinte, doamna ministră, în urmă cu câțiva ani, în 2016, reprezentam țara mea în Consiliul European cu același subiect pe agendă, politica de azil și migrație, și am impresia că de atunci discursul, din păcate, nu a avansat prea mult, nici problemele pe care le avem pe agendă, dar nici soluțiile. Mă aștept ca de data aceasta liderii, șefii de stat și de guvern, să ia decizii. E o chestiune de responsabilitate față de cetățenii europeni.

Și tot o chestiune de responsabilitate față de cetățenii români și bulgari este ca aceștia să nu fie luați ostatici în discuțiile acestea despre politica de azil și migrație și mă aștept de la președinția suedeză să joace un rol proactiv în a găsi o soluție pentru aderarea la Schengen a României și Bulgariei, la care cele două țări au drept prin tratat și știm cu toții că au îndeplinit condițiile.

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Mr President, if the EU wants a sustainable solution in the area of asylum and migration, it should end all its support to NATO and the military industrial complex. We need to stop bombing people's homes. We should stop sending arms into conflict zones. We should pursue a policy of peace and diplomacy in Ukraine. We should stop impoverishing the people of the Global South with financial imperialism.

The EU must immediately end the systematic criminalisation of asylum seekers, end pushbacks and end the externalisation of the EU's borders now. Abolish Frontex.

The EU rightly acted quickly to provide protection and reception conditions to millions of Ukrainians in a matter of months under the Temporary Protection Directive. This proves that humane treatment of non-Ukrainian asylum seekers and refugees from Syria, Afghanistan and Libya is absolutely possible. We should welcome people fleeing persecution or repression from all places and not be selective about it.

Κώστας Μαυρίδης (S&D). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, προσδοκούμε ότι το Συμβούλιο θα καταλήξει επιτέλους σε ένα ευρωπαϊκό δεσμευτικό πλαίσιο για τη νόμιμη μετανάστευση και την προστασία του ασύλου για όσους το χρειάζονται, στη βάση της αλληλεγγύης και —επιτέλους— για αντιμετώπιση των γενεσιουργών αιτίων. Όμως, τώρα, τα κράτη μέλη της πρώτης γραμμής επωμίζονται όλο το βάρος, κοινωνικό και οικονομικό, μόνα τους. Ειδικά στην Ανατολική Μεσόγειο, η παράνομη μετανάστευση έχει θεσμικό, οργανωμένο διακινητή που έχει όνομα —είναι η Τουρκία του Ερντογάν, η οποία κατέχει παράνομα το 37% του εδάφους της Κύπρου της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Από εκεί διοχετεύονται συστηματικά και σκόπιμα αιτούντες άσυλο και παράνομοι μετανάστες. Τελειώνω, κύριε Πρόεδρε, με έναν αριθμό: στην Κύπρο τώρα έχουμε πέραν του 10% παράνομους μετανάστες και αιτούντες άσυλο. Αυτό για τον πληθυσμό της Γερμανίας αντιστοιχεί σε περίπου 8,5 εκατομμύρια ανθρώπους.

Milan Brglez (S&D). – Gospod predsednik. Otroci, ki so prisiljeni v begunstvo in migracije, so posebej ranljiva kategorija. Izpostavljeni so ponižujočemu ravnanju, izkoriščanju, trgovini z ljudmi ter spolnim zlorabam. Vse to povzroča uničujoče posledice za njihovo duševno zdravje, ki pa se še povečujejo zaradi sistemskega nezakonitega vračanja prebežnikov ali »push-backov«, ki jih je bilo leta 2022 na evropski ravni 5700, 12 odstotkov od tega pa otrok.

Zato pričakujem, da bo mehanizem EU na področju azila spoštoval človekove pravice, zagotovil varne in zakonite poti ter odgovornost za nepravilnosti na mejah, hkrati pa naj odpravi dvojna merila in upošteva tudi otrokove pravice. Že danes pa lahko države marsikaj naredijo, ker imamo mehanizma evropskega jamstva za otroke in evropske strategije za otrokove pravice. V nacionalne načrte pa morajo države prav posebno mesto nameniti otrokom z migrantskim in begunskim ozadjem.

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, doamna ministră, domnule comisar, sigur, așa cum a spus și doamna președintă, trebuie rezolvată problema migrației - auzim aceste lucruri, cel puțin eu le aud din 2014 — cred că nu cu garduri, așa cum s-a spus aici, pentru că ar fi întoarcerea în primitiv, cred că prin măsuri foarte clare, prin implementare foarte clară, prin proceduri foarte clare în care să definim ce înseamnă migrația ilegală.

Eu sunt umanist în țara mea, într-un partid umanist, și vreau să ajutăm orice om care poate să fie ajutat, dar nici nu trebuie să vindem iluzii că mutăm continentele în Europa. Aici trebuie să fim foarte clari și cred că înțeleg supărarea statelor membre în care au ajuns migranții ilegal, dar nu cred că trebuie să rezolvăm o nedreptate cu altă nedreptate și confuzia voită făcută de Austria, prin care invocă migrația ca motiv pentru care să nu intre România și Bulgaria, este de fapt o încălcare a regulamentului. Și cer, doamna ministră, președinției suedeze și vă cer, domnule comisar, cunoașteți foarte bine România, să nu mai amestecăm lucrurile: un regulament european votat este obligatoriu pentru toate statele membre, deci și pentru Austria.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)

Johannes Hahn, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, dear Minister, honourable Members, this debate provided – and it was not really a surprise – almost the full spectrum of views of what our European approach to migration could be.

President Ursula von der Leyen presented the important figures candidly. Yes, irregular crossings are up by over 60% in 2022. Tragically, innocent lives continue to be lost. No, not all of these arrivings are in need of protection. Of those not in need of protection, indeed too few are returned. Asylum procedures take too long.

That is why we continue to push hard for a common and structural solution and today's debate showed again that such a solution is necessarily complex. In terms of legislation, we need to complete the new pact on migration and asylum. We need more cooperation between EU Member States and speedier domestic procedures. We need to further strengthen our partnerships with those third countries most concerned, including through visa policy, trade and investment cooperation.

As Ursula von der Leyen showed earlier that there is momentum and concrete progress. We have proven to be able to respond to sudden demands through the instrumentalisation of persons by Belarus, the situation in the Western Balkans and the triggering of temporary protection for Ukrainians. Over time we have developed a migration and border management toolbox. We have stronger agencies and we have improved coordination.

I am grateful for the clear message of ambition and support heard from the Swedish Council Presidency. All of us are aware that this is a priority for Europeans, independently from which angle they look at the very complex challenges of migration. We owe them to keep building a comprehensive solution which leads us to cover all the different aspects, uphold the law, control borders, save lives and provide opportunities, indeed, for legal migrants and our partner countries.

VORSITZ: KATARINA BARLEY

Vizepräsidentin

Jessika Roswall, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, honourable Members, Commissioner, thank you for your remarks and your comments. You have really raised many important aspects of migration. It is, as many said, a complex and sensitive issue as to how we can develop a sustainable solution in the area of asylum and migration.

As mentioned by the Commission President and several of you, we are currently facing a large number of irregular migrants. During the informal meeting of the Ministers of Justice and Home Affairs last week in Stockholm, the Ministers discussed the external dimension of migration. There were interesting discussions on returns, readmission and external borders. It is important that we continue moving forward with this work.

Regarding the Pact on Migration and Asylum, we are all aware that the negotiations of the pact will be difficult and are difficult and sensitive and that this will require time. The negotiations within Council have been progressing at a very good pace and much progress was made last year. Many of you have asked for the Council to deliver, but I would also like to recall that the European Parliament must do its part also to adopt its negotiating mandate before negotiations on all the files can be initiated. One such case is the Return Directive.

Since the beginning of the Swedish Presidency, work has started on the legislative text on the asylum and migration management regulation. We are confident that there is a general willingness among all the Member States to make progress and agree on a system which would provide solidarity and alleviate the burden of the effect on Member States and improve the functioning of the current system, including addressing secondary movements.

We recall that the joint roadmap agreed between the five rotating Presidencies and the European Parliament foresees an agreement on all legislative proposals by the end of the 2019-2024 legislature. We will do our best to make this happen.

Thank you again for the debate. The Presidency we will convey this to the European Council.

Die Präsidentin. — Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 171)

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (ECR), na piśmie. – Jednym z najważniejszych tematów zbliżającego się, specjalnego posiedzenia Rady Europejskiej będzie konieczność opracowania zrównoważonych rozwiązań w dziedzinie azylu i migracji. Jest to zagadnienie szczególnie ważne w obliczu trwającej już prawie rok brutalnej, nielegalnej i nieuzasadnionej inwazji na suwerenną i niepodległą Ukrainę. Oby za dzisiejszymi słowami Ursuli von der Leyen poszły i czyny: wzmocnienie granic, konieczność bezwzględnej walki z przemytnikami, którzy powodują napływ nielegalnych migrantów oraz dają złudzenie i nadzieję ludziom w kraju ich pochodzenia, biorąc za to gigantyczne pieniądze. Polska zdała wzorowo egzamin, najpierw w odpowiedzialny sposób odpowiadając na białorusko-rosyjskie prowokacje na polskiej, a jednocześnie zewnętrznej granicy UE jeszcze przed agresją Rosji na Ukrainę. Później w sposób bezprecedensowy przyjęła miliony tych, którzy uciekali przed wojną. Polacy przyjęli ich nie w obozach dla uchodźców, lecz do swoich domów. Europa ma już od dawna problem z nielegalną imigracją, a dotychczasowa polityka migracyjna i azylowa coraz mocniej wykazuje swoje braki. Służby, które bronią granic – jak Frontex – są obiektem wielu ataków i krytyki. Wobec aktualnej sytuacji w Europie należy zwiększać nakłady na tę agencję, na straż graniczną, wzmacniać ochronę granic i zrewidować politykę w Unii Europejskiej w tym zakresie.

Josianne Cutajar (S&D), in writing. – It is high time that the EU delivers a credible migration and asylum policy, suitable to face the increasing challenges, with sustainable and long-lasting solutions. As one of the border Member States, my own country, Malta, has, on the one hand, constantly witnessed people fleeing for a better hope and future, sometimes ending up in sad tragedy, and, on the other hand, seen irregular migration which requires a more efficient returns system to counter it. I cannot stress enough the importance of our commitment and efforts to address this. Despite being on the agenda for so long, however, proper solidarity within the EU has failed. The EU is not acting effectively to avoid these tragedies, and is not ensuring adequate measures to alleviate the disproportionate burden from those at the border. Commission President von der Leyen stressed today that migration is a European challenge that requires a European response. However, a European response must embody effective solidarity, which cannot appropriately take place without mandatory burden-sharing mechanisms.

Estrella Durá Ferrandis (S&D), por escrito. – Tanto desde el Grupo S&D como desde la DSE hemos puesto mucho énfasis en la necesidad de llegar a acuerdos tangibles para la gestión migratoria antes del final de la legislatura. Estos deben pasar por aprobar el Nuevo Pacto sobre Migración y Asilo alcanzando compromisos en materia de: responsabilidad compartida, el mecanismo de solidaridad, lucha contra la trata de seres humanos, ayuda a los países de origen y de tránsito, protección internacional para los solicitantes de asilo, mejor integración en los Estados miembros de llegada, refuerzo de las vías legales de migración…

Destacamos así la importancia de no focalizar los esfuerzos de las negociaciones en el retorno, sino en mejorar las vías para la migración regular y en fortalecer los canales humanitarios para los solicitantes de asilo. Consiguiendo, de esta forma, no solamente un alivio de la crisis humanitaria sino, en adición, presentar soluciones al reto demográfico y a la falta de mano de obra en algunos sectores económicos de la Unión.

Cyrus Engerer (S&D), in writing. – It's been eight years since the negotiations started to find a common solution on migration. The 27 Heads of State or Government are meeting again and we're still at the starting point because, rather than thinking of a common European solution, all are simply interested in their own borders, leading to a crisis for those at the periphery and a humanitarian crisis at sea. On one hand, the fight to dismantle smugglers' business models is stuck, while on the other Member States do not want arrivals; on one hand, Member States are not voluntarily relocating refugees, on the other hand they oppose mandatory solidarity leaving peripheral states on their own; on one hand, trying to stop boat arrivals, on the other not creating legal pathways for those entitled to seek refuge or migrate; on one hand, wanting to send back those who are not entitled to asylum, on the other refusing to create European partnerships with third countries. This is the ridiculous situation we are in. At the European Parliament, we have legislated. You know where the people's direct representatives stand on each and every single part of the migration pact. It's time for the European Council to get its act together. Time's up!

Ibán García Del Blanco (S&D), por escrito. – Tanto desde el Grupo S&D como desde la DSE hemos puesto mucho énfasis en la necesidad de llegar a acuerdos tangibles para la gestión migratoria antes del final de la legislatura. Estos deben pasar por aprobar el Nuevo Pacto sobre Migración y Asilo alcanzando compromisos en materia de: responsabilidad compartida, el mecanismo de solidaridad, lucha contra la trata de seres humanos, ayuda a los países de origen y de tránsito, protección internacional para los solicitantes de asilo, mejor integración en los Estados miembros de llegada, refuerzo de las vías legales de migración…

Destacamos así la importancia de no focalizar los esfuerzos de las negociaciones en el retorno, sino en mejorar las vías para la migración regular y en fortalecer los canales humanitarios para los solicitantes de asilo. Consiguiendo, de esta forma, no solamente un alivio de la crisis humanitaria sino, en adición, presentar soluciones al reto demográfico y a la falta de mano de obra en algunos sectores económicos de la Unión.

Lina Gálvez Muñoz (S&D), por escrito. – Tanto desde el Grupo S&D como desde la DSE hemos puesto mucho énfasis en la necesidad de llegar a acuerdos tangibles para la gestión migratoria antes del final de la legislatura. Estos deben pasar por aprobar el Nuevo Pacto sobre Migración y Asilo alcanzando compromisos en materia de: responsabilidad compartida, el mecanismo de solidaridad, lucha contra la trata de seres humanos, ayuda a los países de origen y de tránsito, protección internacional para los solicitantes de asilo, mejor integración en los Estados miembros de llegada, refuerzo de las vías legales de migración…

Destacamos así la importancia de no focalizar los esfuerzos de las negociaciones en el retorno, sino en mejorar las vías para la migración regular y en fortalecer los canales humanitarios para los solicitantes de asilo. Consiguiendo, de esta forma, no solamente un alivio de la crisis humanitaria sino, en adición, presentar soluciones al reto demográfico y a la falta de mano de obra en algunos sectores económicos de la Unión.

György Hölvényi (PPE), írásban. – Az Európai Unió folyamatos migrációs nyomás alatt áll. A Frontex adatai szerint 2020-ban 124 ezer illegális határátlépés történt, 2022-ben ez már 330 ezerre nőtt. Magyarország csak tavaly mintegy 270 ezer illegális határátlépést akadályozott meg a nyugat-balkáni útvonalon. Ennek ellenére hazám eddig gyakorlatilag semmilyen uniós segítséget nem kapott a határkerítések felépítésében. Az egyik legsürgetőbb feladat a külső határok védelme, vagyis a határvédelmi rendszerek létesítése. Emellett az Unió partnerországainak is felelősséget kell vállalniuk az illegális migránsok visszafogadásában. Legfőbb ideje felhagyni a migráció képmutató támogatásával. Ehelyett az európai polgárok sok milliói által tapasztalt, a szó szoros és tágabb értelmében vett biztonsági kihívásokra kell megoldást találni.

A migráció megfékezéséhez annak kiváló okait kell kezelnünk. Ilyen okok a biztonság, az oktatás és a munkalehetőségek hiánya. Látnunk kell, az elvándorlás nem jelent igazi megoldást sem az európai elöregedésére, sem pedig az afrikai országok társadalmi, gazdasági kihívásaira. Európa kapui nem állhatnak nyitva mindenki számára. Ne hagyjuk, hogy az illegális migráció és a menekültkérdés összemosásával a valóban rászorulóknak fordítsanak hátat.

Javi López (S&D), por escrito. – Tanto desde el Grupo S&D como desde la DSE hemos puesto mucho énfasis en la necesidad de llegar a acuerdos tangibles para la gestión migratoria antes del final de la legislatura. Estos deben pasar por aprobar el Nuevo Pacto sobre Migración y Asilo alcanzando compromisos en materia de: responsabilidad compartida, el mecanismo de solidaridad, lucha contra la trata de seres humanos, ayuda a los países de origen y de tránsito, protección internacional para los solicitantes de asilo, mejor integración en los Estados miembros de llegada, refuerzo de las vías legales de migración…

Destacamos así la importancia de no focalizar los esfuerzos de las negociaciones en el retorno, sino en mejorar las vías para la migración regular y en fortalecer los canales humanitarios para los solicitantes de asilo. Consiguiendo, de esta forma, no solamente un alivio de la crisis humanitaria sino, en adición, presentar soluciones al reto demográfico y a la falta de mano de obra en algunos sectores económicos de la Unión.

César Luena (S&D), por escrito. – Tanto desde el Grupo S&D como desde la DSE hemos puesto mucho énfasis en la necesidad de llegar a acuerdos tangibles para la gestión migratoria antes del final de la legislatura. Estos deben pasar por aprobar el Nuevo Pacto sobre Migración y Asilo alcanzando compromisos en materia de: responsabilidad compartida, el mecanismo de solidaridad, lucha contra la trata de seres humanos, ayuda a los países de origen y de tránsito, protección internacional para los solicitantes de asilo, mejor integración en los Estados miembros de llegada, refuerzo de las vías legales de migración…

Destacamos así la importancia de no focalizar los esfuerzos de las negociaciones en el retorno, sino en mejorar las vías para la migración regular y en fortalecer los canales humanitarios para los solicitantes de asilo. Consiguiendo, de esta forma, no solamente un alivio de la crisis humanitaria sino, en adición, presentar soluciones al reto demográfico y a la falta de mano de obra en algunos sectores económicos de la Unión.

Benoît Lutgen (PPE), par écrit. – Nous voterons demain sur le rapport qui a trait aux règles relatives à la transparence et au ciblage de la publicité à caractère politique. Des manipulations et des abus comme lors des élections présidentielles américaines de 2016 ou du referendum sur le Brexit sont intolérables. C'est pourquoi il faut tout faire pour empêcher les acteurs malveillants du web de compromettre les futures élections dans notre Union.

En tant que décideurs politiques, nous devons prendre toutes nos responsabilités pour apporter des réponses pour lutter contre toutes les formes d'ingérence dans nos démocraties, tout en préservant l'ouverture qui doit toujours caractériser nos débats politiques. Je me réjouis particulièrement du fait que – et c'est là un point central du dossier — notre assemblée interdise aux entités non basées dans l'UE de financer des publicités politiques au sein de l'UE.

De même, ces »entités« devront dorénavant être localisées, identifiées et sanctionnées. Je me réjouis aussi du fait que les données personnelles des mineurs ne puissent pas être utilisées. Il est urgent que ce texte soit effectif avant les élections européennes de 2024.

Adriana Maldonado López (S&D), por escrito. – Tanto desde el Grupo S&D como desde la DSE hemos puesto mucho énfasis en la necesidad de llegar a acuerdos tangibles para la gestión migratoria antes del final de la legislatura. Estos deben pasar por aprobar el Nuevo Pacto sobre Migración y Asilo alcanzando compromisos en materia de: responsabilidad compartida, el mecanismo de solidaridad, lucha contra la trata de seres humanos, ayuda a los países de origen y de tránsito, protección internacional para los solicitantes de asilo, mejor integración en los Estados miembros de llegada, refuerzo de las vías legales de migración…

Destacamos así la importancia de no focalizar los esfuerzos de las negociaciones en el retorno, sino en mejorar las vías para la migración regular y en fortalecer los canales humanitarios para los solicitantes de asilo. Consiguiendo, de esta forma, no solamente un alivio de la crisis humanitaria sino, en adición, presentar soluciones al reto demográfico y a la falta de mano de obra en algunos sectores económicos de la Unión.

Pedro Marques (S&D), por escrito. – Senhora Presidente, Senhoras e Senhores Deputados, o Conselho Europeu de fevereiro vai discutir de que forma poderemos ter na União Europeia, de forma sustentada e sustentável, políticas sérias, solidárias e responsáveis quando o assunto são migrações e pedidos de asilo.

Sobre este assunto, cada vez de forma mais ruidosa e mais despudorada, as Senhoras e os Senhores Deputados têm ouvido o regresso da apologia dos muros, que julgávamos, se não ultrapassada, pelo menos adormecida. Quero apenas deixar registada a seguinte posição: não podemos deixar que a construção de cercas e de muros seja o eixo central da política de asilo e de migrações da União Europeia. O humanismo e o respeito pelos direitos humanos têm de estar no centro das nossas políticas. Os migrantes e refugiados não são menos humanos que qualquer um de nós.

Marcos Ros Sempere (S&D), por escrito. – Tanto desde el Grupo S&D como desde la DSE hemos puesto mucho énfasis en la necesidad de llegar a acuerdos tangibles para la gestión migratoria antes del final de la legislatura. Estos deben pasar por aprobar el Nuevo Pacto sobre Migración y Asilo alcanzando compromisos en materia de: responsabilidad compartida, el mecanismo de solidaridad, lucha contra la trata de seres humanos, ayuda a los países de origen y de tránsito, protección internacional para los solicitantes de asilo, mejor integración en los Estados miembros de llegada, refuerzo de las vías legales de migración…

Destacamos así la importancia de no focalizar los esfuerzos de las negociaciones en el retorno, sino en mejorar las vías para la migración regular y en fortalecer los canales humanitarios para los solicitantes de asilo. Consiguiendo, de esta forma, no solamente un alivio de la crisis humanitaria sino, en adición, presentar soluciones al reto demográfico y a la falta de mano de obra en algunos sectores económicos de la Unión.

Domènec Ruiz Devesa (S&D), por escrito. – Tanto desde el Grupo S&D como desde la DSE hemos puesto mucho énfasis en la necesidad de llegar a acuerdos tangibles para la gestión migratoria antes del final de la legislatura. Estos deben pasar por aprobar el Nuevo Pacto sobre Migración y Asilo alcanzando compromisos en materia de: responsabilidad compartida, el mecanismo de solidaridad, lucha contra la trata de seres humanos, ayuda a los países de origen y de tránsito, protección internacional para los solicitantes de asilo, mejor integración en los Estados miembros de llegada, refuerzo de las vías legales de migración…

Destacamos así la importancia de no focalizar los esfuerzos de las negociaciones en el retorno, sino en mejorar las vías para la migración regular y en fortalecer los canales humanitarios para los solicitantes de asilo. Consiguiendo, de esta forma, no solamente un alivio de la crisis humanitaria sino, en adición, presentar soluciones al reto demográfico y a la falta de mano de obra en algunos sectores económicos de la Unión.

Nacho Sánchez Amor (S&D), por escrito. – Tanto desde el Grupo S&D como desde la DSE hemos puesto mucho énfasis en la necesidad de llegar a acuerdos tangibles para la gestión migratoria antes del final de la legislatura. Estos deben pasar por aprobar el Nuevo Pacto sobre Migración y Asilo alcanzando compromisos en materia de: responsabilidad compartida, el mecanismo de solidaridad, lucha contra la trata de seres humanos, ayuda a los países de origen y de tránsito, protección internacional para los solicitantes de asilo, mejor integración en los Estados miembros de llegada, refuerzo de las vías legales de migración…

Destacamos así la importancia de no focalizar los esfuerzos de las negociaciones en el retorno, sino en mejorar las vías para la migración regular y en fortalecer los canales humanitarios para los solicitantes de asilo. Consiguiendo, de esta forma, no solamente un alivio de la crisis humanitaria sino, en adición, presentar soluciones al reto demográfico y a la falta de mano de obra en algunos sectores económicos de la Unión.

Alfred Sant (S&D), in writing. – On three major fronts, European policy on asylum and migration is either stagnant or deadlocked. What should be a common policy for regular migration to Europe remains an undeveloped framework that if properly mounted could serve as a reasonable and effective way to counter illegal migration. Ironically, Europe needs migrants to refresh its demographic base and replenish labour markets. Then, real tough action against people smuggling has been prioritised in verbal terms but ineffectually implemented. To be honest, the new initiatives that are being touted do not inspire confidence that there will be progress soon in dismantling the criminal networks involved. Finally, solidarity between Member States in sharing the burdens of incoming migration flows remains in limbo, caught in a stalemate which makes the Commission's attempts to achieve a compromise sound like diplomatic fudge. To be sure, EU action over the Ukrainian refugee emergency has been admirable. But that very success has served to cloud the issues that need to be resolved over asylum and migration from Africa and Asia. Additionally, it is fuelling perceptions outside the EU that Europe applies discriminatory standards according to who arrivals are and where they come from. That hardly provides a good basis on which to deal with relevant third parties.

Waldemar Tomaszewski (ECR), raštu. – Atviros viešos konsultacijos rodo, kad dauguma piliečių laikosi nuomonės, kad politinės reklamos leidėjai turėtų atkreipti dėmesį į pranešimo skaidrumą ir sąžiningumą. Politinės reklamos paslaugos Europos Sąjungoje plečiasi. Labai išaugęs tokio pobūdžio internetinių paslaugų skaičius, esant netolygiai vykdomam ir fragmentiškam reglamentavimui, sukėlė susirūpinimą, kad vidaus rinka šiuo metu nėra pasirengusi teikti politinės reklamos paslaugas, kurios atitiktų aukštus skaidrumo standartus, kad būtų užtikrintas sąžiningumas. ir atviras demokratinis procesas visose valstybėse narėse. Toks susirūpinimas dėl spragų ir nepakankamo skaidrumo jau paskatino kai kurias valstybes nares imtis atitinkamų veiksmų. Nacionaliniai politinės reklamos veiklos reglamentai nustato politinės reklamos paslaugų teikėjams pareigas, kurios nustato politinės reklamos prieinamumą ir nurodo jos turinio elementus, kad būtų užtikrintas ypatingas skaidrumas. Tokios nacionalinės taisyklės, tarp kitko, padeda užtikrinti atskaitomybę ir bendrą sąžiningo ir atviro politinio proceso organizavimą, be kita ko, padedant stebėti, ar politiniai veikėjai vykdo savo atitinkamas pareigas. Spartūs technologiniai pokyčiai, didėjantis reguliavimo susiskaidymas ir vis problemiškesnis reglamentavimo kontekstas, kartu su vis didėjančiomis pinigų sumomis, išleistomis politinės reklamos veiklai, rodo, kad reikia imtis veiksmų siekiant užtikrinti laisvą politinės reklamos paslaugų judėjimą visoje Sąjungoje, kartu užtikrinant aukštus skaidrumo standartus, kad rinkimų procesai ES būtų atviresni ir sąžiningesni.

Carlos Zorrinho (S&D), por escrito. – O Conselho Europeu de Fevereiro tem que manter a capacidade de articulação e ação colaborativa que tem permitido à União Europeia dar uma resposta consistente aos grandes desafios globais e em particular à invasão da Ucrânia e aos seus impactos.

A conjunção das políticas na energia, no apoio à economia e na política monetária, começa a dar sinais de poder conter o pico inflacionista e esmagar menos as perspetivas de crescimento. Neste quadro, é fundamental que a União avance rapidamente com as medidas de modernização e investimento previstas para manter a competitividade económica face aos estímulos aplicados pelas grandes potências concorrentes e, em particular, pelos Estados Unidos da América.

A ação colaborativa deve também ter um foco social acentuado, protegendo os cidadãos europeus mais vulneráveis e apoiando as classes médias, numa lógica de dignidade, justiça e prevenção dos avanços populistas. No plano das migrações, é fundamental tomar medidas claras, tornando mais operacionais os processos de asilo, cooperando com os países de origem e apostando em corredores de imigração que se interliguem não apenas com a dimensão humanitária, mas também a inserção dos migrantes no tecido socioeconómico da União, quando essa for a vontade das duas partes.

9.   Gennemsigtighed og målretning i forbindelse med politisk reklame (forhandling)

Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über den Bericht von Sandro Gozi im Namen des Ausschusses für Binnenmarkt und Verbraucherschutz über den Vorschlag für eine Verordnung des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates über die Transparenz und das Targeting politischer Werbung (COM(2021)0731 – C9-0433/2021 – 2021/0381(COD)) (A9-0009/2023).

Sandro Gozi, rapporteur. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Ministre, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, le constat est clair: il y a trop de manipulations et d'abus dans nos élections et dans nos démocraties. L'ingérence étrangère est devenue un véritable fléau. Cambridge Analytica, »Qatargate«, et je pourrais continuer – le contexte dans lequel nous nous trouvons parle de lui-même.

En tant que décideurs politiques, nous devons prendre toutes nos responsabilités, apporter des solutions et des réponses appropriées pour lutter plus efficacement contre toutes les formes de désinformation et d'ingérence dans nos démocraties tout en préservant l'ouverture qui doit toujours caractériser le débat public européen.

Ce règlement était une première réponse à la demande accrue de transparence politique, question qui est évidemment en lien avec les actions que mène, contre les ingérences, notre assemblée depuis plusieurs mois au sein de la commission spéciale d'enquête INGE sur la désinformation et les fake news.

Nous sommes à un moment de notre histoire où nous devons envoyer un message très fort à nos concitoyens. Nous voulons plus de transparence, nous voulons une meilleure protection contre la désinformation et l'ingérence étrangère, nous voulons construire un véritable marché unique des services dans la publicité politique – notamment pour nos petites et moyennes entreprises européennes –, nous voulons plus de sécurité juridique et moins de barrières, d'obstacles et de bureaucratie pour les fournisseurs de services de publicité politique. Les partis politiques européens ne seront plus bloqués par 27 régimes différents, mais auront la possibilité de faire plus facilement de véritables campagnes transnationales. Plus de libéralisation du marché, donc, et plus de protection pour nos libertés.

Nous avons tous dénoncé les attaques à nos démocraties, les manipulations sur les réseaux sociaux, les dangers des fake news. Nous devons nous demander si nous sommes sérieux avec ces intentions ou si nous faisons tout simplement semblant. Nous avons vraiment bien travaillé avec tous les groupes de ce Parlement en commission du marché intérieur. Tous ont fait preuve de sens des responsabilités et de coopération, et j'espère vraiment que ce travail sera récompensé et soutenu par un très large consensus demain en plénière.

En ce qui concerne l'utilisation des données personnelles pour le ciblage de la publicité politique et les débats animés qui l'entourent – je me réfère bien évidemment à l'article 12 –, je me permettrai de citer Mark Twain: »Les rumeurs concernant la mort de la publicité politique sont largement exagérées.« Pardon, je devrais dire: »sont largement amplifiées« par certaines grandes plateformes, très actives, avec leur propagande, ces derniers temps, contre notre initiative. Nous nous battrons toujours pour la liberté d'expression de tous, mais pas nécessairement pour le pouvoir d'amplification sans règle et sans consentement des grandes plateformes numériques. C'est l'objectif, il me semble, du compromis sur lequel ma collègue Anna Donáth a travaillé en commission des libertés publiques.

Dans l'affaire Cambridge Analytica, 87 millions de données personnelles ont été utilisées sans consentement. Les règles que nous voulons introduire feront en sorte qu'aucun autre Cambridge Analytica ne puisse se produire. Dans le même temps, ces règles ne bloquent ni les discours politiques personnels, ni la liberté de chacun de nous, pas plus qu'elles n'interfèrent avec eux. Elles réglementent uniquement les contenus liés aux services rémunérés des publicités politiques.

Je voudrais remercier tous mes collègues, qui ont beaucoup contribué pour ce que ce texte soit aujourd'hui sur la table. Merci pour votre coopération et merci pour votre volonté politique de travailler ensemble. Chers collègues, nous avons une occasion unique d'œuvrer pour une meilleure démocratie et pour un meilleur marché européen; saisissons-la.

Sabine Verheyen, Verfasserin der Stellungnahme des mitberatenden Ausschusses für Kultur und Bildung. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Desinformationskampagnen und versuchte Einflussnahme auf Wahlen haben auch in Europa zugenommen. Sie sind mittlerweile eine ernst zu nehmende Gefahr für unsere Demokratie. Die Verordnung zur Transparenz politischer Werbung ist ein nicht ganz leichtes, aber richtiges und wichtiges Vorhaben.

Ich glaube, dass wir im Parlament einen ausgewogenen Ansatz finden konnten. Während wir im Offline-Bereich ja schon oftmals strengere Maßnahmen hatten durch Medienregulierung, durch Verordnungen und Gesetze, die auf der nationalen Ebene erhoben wurden, um Inhalt und Werbung sauber zu trennen, wurde nun auch der Online-Bereich entsprechend angepasst.

Unbezahlte Inhalte sind nicht erfasst, und freier und kritischer Journalismus sowie politische Berichterstattung und Informationen sind keine Werbung und fallen daher auch nicht unter diese Verordnung. Sie sind ein essentieller Bestandteil unserer Demokratie, und das war uns gerade im Ausschuss für Kultur und Bildung besonders wichtig.

Wir ziehen auch die besonderen Voraussetzungen der traditionellen Medien in Betracht, denn auch wenn sich unser Leben heute oftmals digital abspielt, erfreuen sich die traditionellen Medien noch großer Beliebtheit und erfüllen einen wichtigen gesellschaftlichen Auftrag. Sie sind nach wie vor eine zuverlässige Informationsquelle und sollten nicht mit überbordender Bürokratie überzogen werden.

In einer Zeit, in der wir genauer hinschauen, kann diese Verordnung uns allen Rechtssicherheit und mehr Transparenz geben und vor allem eine wichtige Rolle beim Schutz unserer Demokratie spielen.

Dragoș Tudorache, rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. – Madam President, dear colleagues, I'm actually speaking today on behalf of my colleague Anna Donáth, who is the rapporteur on this file on behalf of LIBE and worked alongside the shadows to arrive to the result today.

Online targeting and ad delivery techniques have grown to be the business model for the big tech industry. It capitalises on our personal data, including very sensitive one, and not only the data that we consciously provide, but also the one that is inferred from our daily online activities. The use of such data creates specific audiences, fosters polarisation, causes deep divisions in our societies, risking the integrity of public debate, of electoral processes and ultimately of our democracies.

As LIBE rapporteur, my colleague, Anna Donáth, is proud of the broad agreement and the solid text found in this House to counter these unhealthy practices and to protect our democracies and fundamental rights by restricting the use of those data. Instead, we propose a system based only on consent on personal data provided by the users.

Additionally, this House worked hard to achieve an effective European enforcement mechanism with the European Data Protection Board in the lead. Our EP report gives protection to our citizens from the misuse of personal data and preserves European democracies from interference, manipulations and disinformation from malicious political actors.

Jutta Urpilainen, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, the Commission welcomes the rapid progress you have made on this proposal. We appreciate that the European Parliament and the Council share the main objectives of our proposal to create a high standard of transparency of political advertising and to limit the use of potential opaque and data-hungry targeting techniques. We need these rules in place ahead of the 2024 Parliament elections.

Preserving the articulation between the internal-market and data-protection acquis established in the Commission's proposal is essential to guarantee legal certainty and effective protection of individual rights. This will guarantee compliance with the existing acquis and ensure proportionality. We also should pay attention to expression of political debate and ensure individual rights to receive information about politics.

We are all convinced that Union-level measures are needed to address the challenges associated with a rapidly evolving, diverse digital and multimedia landscape. New technologies offer many benefits to enhance the democratic debate, but can be misused, also for foreign interference and disinformation. We all can name examples of undue campaign methods affecting results of various elections – a stark warning to limit the tools that allow this to happen.

The Commission's proposal was carefully calibrated to balance the rights and interests involved in this sensitive area. Its scope is carefully defined to preserve Member State competence to organise elections and regulate political parties and the different checks and balances in our national democratic traditions, while making sure that legal certainty is provided and political ads with specific common measures. We drafted this regulation with an aim to enable an unprecedented high standard of transparency into provision of political advertising. The regulation also offers individuals stronger protection of personal data when political advertising is targeted and amplified. Finally, the proposal prevents the use of potentially problematic targeting techniques.

Vice-President Jourová will work with you and the Council to find suitable solutions and achieve rapid agreement in good time ahead of the electoral campaign.

Angelika Niebler, Verfasserin der Stellungnahme des mitberatenden Rechtsausschusses. – Frau Präsidentin, verehrte Kolleginnen, verehrte Kollegen! Meinungsmache im Internet, manipulative Botschaften, Fake News und Social Bots – der Einsatz von künstlicher Intelligenz kann in der Tat Wahlen und Abstimmungen beeinflussen. Wir haben das ja im Falle von Cambridge Analytica erlebt.

Mit der Verordnung über die Transparenz und das Targeting politischer Werbung sollen solche Wahlmanipulationen künftig unterbunden werden. Die Regeln sollten aber so ausgestaltet werden, dass künftig auch noch Wahlkampf stattfinden kann, und hierzu erlaube ich mir, einen kritischen Punkt anzumerken: Ich denke, dass die Regeln nicht für Kommunalwahlen gelten sollten. Kommunalwahlen beispielsweise in einer kleinen Gemeinde mit ein paar hundert Bürgerinnen und Bürgern werden künftig gleichgesetzt mit beispielsweise den Europawahlen, die 440 Millionen Menschen betreffen.

Die neuen Vorschriften müssen also künftig bei jeder Bürgermeister-, Gemeinderats-, Landrats- und Kreistagswahl befolgt werden. Ich finde, das ist einfach nicht gut. Kommunalpolitikerinnen und Kommunalpolitiker sind ja meist ehrenamtlich tätig und werden wohl auch nicht Ziel von Wahlmanipulationen sein. Deshalb sollten sie eigentlich von bürokratischen Auflagen entlastet werden.

Daniel Freund, Verfasser der Stellungnahme des mitberatenden Ausschusses für konstitutionelle Fragen. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der nächste Europawahlkampf steht vor der Tür, und das heißt natürlich für uns hier, dass es in den nächsten Monaten hitziger wird im Europäischen Parlament. Wir werden noch mehr streiten, wir werden uns gegenseitig angreifen, es werden auch mal Kampagnen gefahren. Das alles gehört ein Stück weit zur Demokratie dazu, das Streiten um die beste Vision für Europa.

Was aber nicht sein kann, ist, dass Kampagnen von Dritten bezahlt werden, von außen, von Diktatoren im Zweifel, die nichts anderes zum Ziel haben, als unsere Demokratie kaputtzumachen. Die ganz Rechten hier im Haus kennen sich damit ganz besonders gut aus. Da lässt man sich auch mal Luxusreisen, Hotels von Putin sponsern auf dem Weg nach Moskau. Immerhin muss das offengelegt werden, aber wenn Putin ihnen die nächste Hasskampagne im Internet finanziert, dann können wir das bisher nicht sehen.

Und es ist gut, dass das jetzt endlich transparent werden soll, dass man in Zukunft sehen kann, wer solche Wahlkampagnen finanziert. Europas Bürgerinnen und Bürger haben ein Recht darauf, zu wissen, wer nur einfach Hass sät oder wer sich um eine gute Vision für die Europäische Union bemüht, und deshalb ist dies ein guter Gesetzesvorschlag.

Pablo Arias Echeverría, en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, este Reglamento pretende garantizar la transparencia de los procesos electorales mediante la armonización de los servicios de publicidad política para proteger nuestras democracias y a nuestros ciudadanos. Con él adoptamos un instrumento con base en la Ley de Servicios Digitales, que establece obligaciones de transparencia sobre estos servicios. También minimizamos los intentos de injerencia extranjera, que ya hemos visto por parte de algunos países, como Rusia.

Lejos de establecer prohibiciones, buscamos reforzar las obligaciones de transparencia que debe cumplir cualquiera que quiera hacer publicidad política en la Unión Europea. Con la obligación de publicar quién está detrás del anuncio, quién lo financia y por cuánto, y qué técnicas se han utilizado para dirigirlo, evitaremos escándalos como el de Cambridge Analytica.

Será posible hacer campañas electorales como hasta ahora, solo que habrá que dejar constancia de los medios utilizados. Además, se podrá hacer directamente en cualquier Estado miembro, ya que se eliminan las barreras que existen hoy. Esto es especialmente importante para las elecciones europeas.

Espero un apoyo mayoritario de esta Cámara al texto para empezar los diálogos tripartitos con una posición fuerte de este Parlamento. Será importante mantener la rigurosidad, tomando la Ley de Servicios Digitales como referencia y sin pisar otra legislación vigente, como el Reglamento General de Protección de Datos, a nivel europeo, ni entrar en la legislación electoral de cada Estado miembro.

Por último, quiero agradecer al ponente, Sandro Gozi, y a los ponentes alternativos el espíritu constructivo que hemos mantenido durante las negociaciones. Todos debemos compartir el mismo objetivo: avanzar hacia una Europa más democrática, más transparente y fuerte frente a aquellos que quieren debilitar nuestras democracias.

Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques, em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, os problemas com as campanhas políticas sempre existiram, no entanto, a era digital veio trazer novos problemas que requerem novas soluções.

Primeiro, ela permite que as mentiras e as promessas falsas sejam escondidas mais facilmente de quem as pode escrutinar. Para o evitar, o Parlamento propõe a criação de uma base de dados com todos os anúncios políticos online e com a informação sobre quem os promove, quem os paga e a quem se dirigem. Este repositório é particularmente importante para o escrutínio e a investigação de jornalistas, académicos e autoridades.

Segundo, a era online permite ajustar as mentiras a quem as vai ouvir e ler, graças ao recurso a dados pessoais que todos nós deixamos para trás quando navegamos online. Para evitar campanhas de manipulação, o Parlamento propõe que seja banido o uso de dados pessoais que não tenham sido explicitamente fornecidos pelos cidadãos para aquele efeito.

Há ainda outros dois aspetos que gostaria de destacar. Para evitar a manipulação das nossas eleições por agentes externos à União, introduzimos uma proibição de patrocínios a campanhas políticas por todos os que não sejam cidadãos da União ou residentes. Não queremos também que este regulamento tenha impacto em nenhum direito fundamental, nomeadamente nas liberdades de expressão e políticas. Por isso, o nosso Grupo exigiu que as regras se apliquem apenas à publicidade propriamente dita, àquela que é prestada enquanto serviço remunerado e não às comunicações normais de qualquer cidadão.

A confiança nas eleições e nos processos políticos é um dos pilares essenciais do regime democrático. Com o relatório que aprovámos na Comissão do Mercado Interno, e que espero que seja aprovado amanhã com a sua ambição intacta, estaremos a dar um forte contributo para reforçar e atualizar a nossa democracia.

Róża Thun und Hohenstein, w imieniu grupy Renew. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Przede wszystkim chciałabym podziękować posłom z Renew Europe, Sandro Goziemu i nieobecnej tutaj Annie Donáth, która musiała zostać w Budapeszcie, ponieważ ma małe dziecko, a także kontrsprawozdawcom z innych grup politycznych za wielkie zaangażowanie w prace nad tym rozporządzeniem. Cieszę się, że jako Unia Europejska nareszcie należycie odpowiadamy na skandal Cambridge Analytica.

Dzięki zaproponowanym przepisom obywatele będą lepiej chronieni przed niechcianymi reklamami. Nasze dane, w tym również te bardzo osobiste dane, będą dużo lepiej chronione. Będą bezpieczniejsze w obliczu działań dezinformacyjnych, od których przecież roi się w mediach społecznościowych. Mam też nadzieję i życzyłabym sobie, żeby to rozporządzenie przykróciło również hejt i manipulowanie wyborcami, które tak niszczá przecież dzisiaj nasze społeczeństwa.

To rozporządzenie jest absolutnie konieczne po to, aby demokratyczna konkurencja była wreszcie w pełni uczciwa, oraz by to, co wydarzyło się w Stanach przy wyborze Trumpa czy przy referendum brexitowym w Wielkiej Brytanii, nigdy nie powtórzyło się w Unii Europejskiej.

Alexandra Geese, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Ministerin! Der Begriff Cambridge Analytica ist heute schon mehrmals gefallen und ist auch vielen bekannt. Aber was hat diese Firma denn eigentlich getan?

Sie hat psychologische Profile – ganz genaue Datenprofile – von Menschen erstellt, um dann ihr Wahlverhalten zu beeinflussen, und zwar durch ganz genau auf sie persönlich zugeschnittene Inhalte. Das kann im harmlosesten Fall bedeuten, dass eine politische Kandidatin sich mit einer Katze ablichten lässt, um eine Anzeige an Katzenliebhaber zu schicken, und mit einem Hund, um Anzeigen und Werbung an Hundeliebhaber zu schicken. Aber im schwerwiegenderen Fall – und das ist das, was heute passiert – heißt es, dass man zum Beispiel schwarze Wählerinnen und Wähler in den Swing Districts, den wahlentscheidenden Wahlkreisen in den USA, 2016 davon abgehalten hat, zur Wahl zu gehen, indem man ihnen mit Facebook-Anzeigen suggeriert hat, das lohne sich gar nicht. Das ist heute eher der Normalfall der politischen Werbung als die Ausnahme.

Mithilfe solcher Datenprofile kann eine Partei aber auch ganz unterschiedliche Botschaften an unterschiedliche Wählergruppen aussenden, also zum Beispiel: »Freie Fahrt für alle – keine neuen Gesetze!« an ältere Menschen und »Klimaschutz first!« an jüngere Menschen. Das passt doch nicht mit unserer öffentlichen Demokratie zusammen, dass man als Partei nicht mehr dafür geradestehen muss, was man sagt.

Es ist unsere Verantwortung, klar zu kommunizieren und dafür Verantwortung zu übernehmen. Demokratie braucht eine gemeinsame Öffentlichkeit, und das bringen wir mit diesem Gesetz nach vorne. Das zielgerichtete Ausspielen von politischer Werbung auf der Grundlage von sehr persönlichen Eigenschaften wird eingeschränkt und 60 Tage vor der Wahl ganz verboten. Das ist ein wichtiger Schritt in Richtung starker Demokratie und fairer Wahlen.

Virginie Joron, au nom du groupe ID. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, après les milliards dans la santé et dans l'armement, Bruxelles s'aventure dans la réglementation des élections européennes de 2024, jusque dans nos villages. Vous êtes tous terrorisés par la démocratie, terrorisés à l'idée de revivre la vague Trump, terrorisés par le Brexit, terrorisés par la liberté d'expression. Vos commanditaires subventionnent et contrôlent la presse, les chaînes de télévision assènent votre propagande vingt-quatre heures sur vingt-quatre, mais la flamme de la liberté s'est réfugiée sur les réseaux sociaux et les médias alternatifs.

La transparence de la publicité politique, nous y sommes évidemment favorables, comme la transparence des SMS entre Bourla et Ursula, comme la transparence des contrats d'achat de vaccins Pfizer, comme la transparence des lobbies des ONG. Oui, que la Commission clarifie si le laboratoire Orgenesis, où le mari d'Ursula est directeur médical, touche des fonds européens, et pourquoi la Commission achète encore un demi-milliard de doses Pfizer jusqu'en 2024 à des prix cachés!

Personne n'est dupe. Ce n'est pas la transparence des publicités des partis politiques qui est visée, mais votre peur de la démocratie, du résultat des urnes.

Adam Bielan, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, during today's debate I've heard plenty about transparency and the need to better protect citizens from foreign actors that might interfere in elections. And I of course agree with these points. Citizens have the right to know who the sponsors of political advertising are.

But while you portray a success story of the Parliament negotiations, I feel some key points are still missing. Transparency does not mean creating a framework which incentivises big online platforms to remove content out of a fear of liability. It does not mean, either, asking platforms to decide which ads are political or not, while complaining that they have too much power.

And finally, protecting citizens is not equal to introducing a general monitoring obligation that introduces constant surveillance of the online content by online actors.

I urge all Members to support our amendments that improve the Parliament's position and defend fundamental freedoms in the EU.

Στέλιος Κούλογλου, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας The Left. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, είναι πολύ θετικό το ότι καταφέραμε να έχουμε μια συμφωνία πάνω σε αυτό το σχέδιο κανονισμού, παρά τις επιφυλάξεις και τις αντιρρήσεις της πιο συντηρητικής πτέρυγας του Σώματος. Είναι πολύ σημαντικό ότι αυτή η συμφωνία επιτεύχθηκε παρά τις αντιδράσεις των μεγάλων πλατφορμών, που θέλουν να μονοπωλούν την πληροφορία και τη διαφήμιση στο διαδίκτυο και θέλουν να αντιμετωπίζουν τους πολίτες όχι σαν πραγματικούς πολίτες που μπορούν να αποφασίζουν μόνοι τους αλλά απλώς και μόνο σαν αριθμούς ή χρήματα. Δεν φτάνουν όλα αυτά. Πρέπει επίσης να προωθήσουμε θετικά μέτρα, να βοηθήσουμε τα μικρά μέσα ενημέρωσης, τα ανεξάρτητα μέσα ενημέρωσης σε κάθε χώρα να αντέξουν τον ανταγωνισμό από τις μεγάλες πλατφόρμες και να προβάλλουν διαφανώς και με δημοκρατικότητα τις πολιτικές πλατφόρμες των κομμάτων, έτσι ώστε οι πολίτες να μπορούν να ψηφίζουν ελεύθερα.

Tom Vandenkendelaere (PPE). – Voorzitter, commissaris, collega's, transparantie en duidelijke regels zullen voortaan duidelijkheid scheppen over wie politieke advertenties sponsort, waarom gebruikers ze te zien krijgen, en meer toegang geven tot gegevens voor onderzoeksjournalistiek. Vorige maand nog hebben Vlaamse onderzoekers aangetoond dat politieke partijen in mijn land recordbedragen uitgeven aan advertenties op sociale media en daarmee veruit de koploper zijn in de Europese Unie.

Met het akkoord waarover we morgen stemmen, kunnen we een einde maken aan het tijdperk waarbij socialemediaplatformen ongevraagd – en vaak ook ongeweten bij de gebruikers – enorme hoeveelheden data van kiezers verzamelen om zo toe te laten stemgedrag te beïnvloeden, of erger nog, om groepen mensen tegen elkaar op te zetten. Politieke advertenties gericht op minderjarigen of gebaseerd op gevoelige gegevens horen echt niet thuis in de Europese Unie.

Ik ben ervan overtuigd dat dit een belangrijke stap vooruit zal zijn om onze democratieën beter te beschermen in de aanloop naar alle verkiezingen in 2024. Lokaal, regionaal, nationaal en Europees.

Paul Tang (S&D). – Madam President, colleagues, how many political advertisements of different political groups do you see in your timeline daily? In fact, I've counted and all the ads on my Instagram account came from just three political parties, while in the Netherlands we have at least 20. So why is that? In a proper functioning democracy, the voter decides. So no tracking. The voter decides on what data to share for political ads, but also limited to no targeting.

Indeed, it is segmentation with different messages to different groups of voters that give ample opportunities for manipulation and for polarisation, based sometimes on the most sensitive personal data such as religion, ethnic background and age. Those ads can sow division and hate.

So, that is why we need finally to make political ads subject to strict data protection, in order to avoid another Cambridge Analytica, to prevent another Trump campaign targeting black voters and to ensure that, indeed, the voter decides.

Katalin Cseh (Renew). – Madam President, dear colleagues, I am very glad that the Cambridge Analytica scandal, the Brexit campaign, the Trump campaigns, finally served as a wake-up call for the European Union. Because social media platforms can give malign actors a powerful tool to undermine our democracies; they can open the door to foreign interference, they can amplify misinformation and propaganda, and they can be used to stoke up hatred and divide our societies.

And in both of these cases, the practice called micro-targeting was a very big part of the problem. Tailoring messages to audiences, of course, can be legitimate, but gathering sensitive data without voters' consent and then exploiting this to manipulate them is certainly not.

So, I am very thankful for the amazing work of Sandro Gozi and Anna Donáth, because this regulation is so very important and especially the transparency requirements. Voters have the right to know who is trying to persuade them and how, so that persuasion does not become illegitimate manipulation. Because democracy is so much more than drawing an »x« at the ballot box; it depends on a meaningful public debate and an informed electorate – also in the online space.

Beata Kempa (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Reklama polityczna w internecie odgrywa dzisiaj kluczowe znaczenie i na pewno bez wątpienia w dokumencie, o którym dzisiaj dyskutujemy, pozytywnie należy ocenić kwestie dotyczące transparentności i wymogów publikacji informacji o finansowaniu. I tak naprawdę całe to rozporządzenie powinno dotyczyć w szczególności tej sfery. Chociaż zapisy, które mamy, dotyczą 10-letniego okresu przechowywania treści, warto się przyjrzeć rozporządzeniu TERREG, gdzie okres przechowywania treści terrorystycznych ustalono minimum na 2 lata lub na czas trwania śledztwa. Warto, żeby treści te przechowywać również przez 10 lat – ale to tak na marginesie.

Kręgosłupem całego rozporządzenie jest artykuł 12, czyli wprowadzenie zakazu targetowania. Tekst zaproponowany przez komisję LIBE idzie dalej, znacznie dalej niż propozycja Komisji Europejskiej. Zabrakło mi jednak tutaj bardzo rzetelnej i dokładnej analizy tej kwestii.

Krzysztof Hetman (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Szanowni Państwo! Chyba nikogo nie trzeba przekonywać do tego, że zjawisko ingerowania w proces wyborczy jest niezwykle niebezpieczne, o czym przekonaliśmy się chociażby na słynnym przykładzie Cambridge Analytica. Kwestia ochrony, przejrzystości i uczciwości procesu wyborczego to już nie tylko ochrona naszych podstawowych wartości, ale wręcz »być albo nie być« państwa prawa czy też wspólnego projektu europejskiego.

Jest zatem niezmiernie ważne, aby nasi wyborcy mieli pełną świadomość tego, że dany przekaz stanowi reklamę polityczną, jak również jakie jest źródło finansowania takiej reklamy. Uważam, że proponowane rozporządzenie jest też wyrazem szacunku dla wyborcy, gdyż wyposażamy go tym samym w narzędzia potrzebne do podejmowania świadomych decyzji. Jednocześnie też będziemy w stanie skutecznie przeciwdziałać zjawisku dezinformacji czy zewnętrznej ingerencji w wybory.

Tiemo Wölken (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Als Sozialdemokrat im Europäischen Parlament stehe ich heute hier, um über die Regulierung politischer Werbung zu sprechen.

Wir müssen uns darüber im Klaren sein, dass eine Regulierung politischer Werbung nicht jede politische Äußerung regulieren soll. Freie politische Meinungsäußerung ist ein wichtiger Teil unserer Demokratie. Sie gibt den Bürgern eine Stimme und ermöglicht es ihnen, sich über politische Angelegenheiten zu informieren und zu diskutieren. Wir dürfen diese freie politische Meinungsäußerung nicht gleichsetzen mit bezahlter Werbung.

Eine Überregulierung politischer Werbung kann dazu führen, dass der freie politische Diskurs online gefährdet wird. Wir müssen sicherstellen, dass politische Meinungsäußerungen und Diskussionen weiterhin frei und ungehindert stattfinden können, ohne von Regulierungen behindert zu werden. Dennoch müssen wir uns auch der Realität stellen, dass es Praktiken gibt, die die Integrität politischer Werbung gefährden können, wie beispielsweise irreführende Informationen oder Interessenkonflikte. Hier müssen wir regulieren, aber auf eine Weise, die sicherstellt, dass freie politische Meinungsäußerung nicht beeinträchtigt wird.

Bart Groothuis (Renew). – Madam President, dear Commissioner, colleagues, many voters in modern democracies base their choice on who to cast their vote for on what they read online on social media. I can hardly think of a bigger threat to our democracies than this because if Twitter, for example, is that town square Mr Musk is talking about, then should it be allowed for just one or two political parties to give speeches on that town square and not for others? Should it be allowed for just one or two political parties on the town square to paste posters? Hell no! Yet this is exactly what is happening online when social media algorithms draw voters into that rabbit hole and isolate them from pluralistic offerings of political views.

On that town square, it may also never ever be allowed for authoritarian states such as Russia or China to finance, and therefore dictate, which political advertisements the people in that town of Mr Musk would get to see.

The legislation we have before us today fills me with pride because it is tackling exactly such problems for the entire EU. We take matters into our own hands and we keep our democracy safe. My thanks to the rapporteur, Mr Gozi.

Spontane Wortmeldungen

Sunčana Glavak (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedateljice, kolegice i kolege, ono što je nama potrebno jesu svakako visoki standardi transparentnosti i time napraviti svojevrsni odmak od manipulacija i dezinformacija. U kontekstu političkog oglašavanja i transparentnosti, izbori koji su pred nama, dakle iduće godine, zapravo će pokazati koliko je povjerenje građana u Europski parlament.

Kolege s moje desne strane mogu se posebno zbog toga brinuti. Svjedoci smo i stalnih pokušaja uplitanja u demokratske procese, koji su posebno intenzivirani pred izborne cikluse. Moramo znati tko stoji iza oglasa, tko oglase plaća, a građani i birači imaju pravo na politički pluralizam. Imajući to na umu, važno je da što prije nastavimo s mehanizmima koji će omogućiti poštivanje najviših standarda transparentnosti i univerzalnih pravila političkog oglašavanja.

U zemlji iz koje dolazim, u Hrvatskoj, postoje i poseban račun za financiranje troškova izborne promidžbe, i izborna izvješća, i izvješća o medijskom oglašavanju. To je dobar pokazatelj i dobar put. Točno se zna tko je koliko novaca u kojem mediju i za što potrošio.

Patrick Breyer (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin! Morgen wird ein guter Tag für die europäische Demokratie. Mit breiter Mehrheit wird sich das Europäische Parlament hinter dem Ziel versammeln, politische Überwachungswerbung im Netz zu stoppen, um unsere Demokratie vor Manipulation zu schützen. Morgen wird übrigens auch ein guter Tag für Youtuber wie Rezo, für die keinerlei Einschränkungen geplant sind. Also, lieber Rezo, wenn du das nächste Mal die Zerstörung der CDU forderst oder vielleicht auch das nächste Mal die Zerstörung der Pläne zur Chatkontrolle, bist du safe – Hand drauf!

Auf der anderen Seite aber wollen EU-Kommission, EU-Regierungen und auch die Big-Tech-Konzerne überhaupt nichts an den jetzigen Zuständen ändern. Und das würde bedeuten: Antidemokratische und antieuropäische Kräfte könnten unverändert mithilfe von Überwachungswerbung Hassbotschaften und Lügen gezielt bei denjenigen Wählerinnen und Wählern platzieren, die dafür empfänglich sind, und auf diese Weise unsere Demokratie zersetzen. Und wir werden dafür kämpfen, dass sich dieser Ansatz des Zuschauens nicht durchsetzt, wir werden dafür kämpfen, dass unser Privatleben, unsere Demokratie vor diesen Machenschaften geschützt werden.

Carlo Fidanza (ECR). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, porgo un ringraziamento al relatore per il suo lavoro.

Trasparenza e contrasto alle ingerenze straniere nella democrazia europea sono una nostra priorità assoluta. Purtroppo, però, il testo in votazione rischia di limitare in modo pesante la libertà di espressione sul web.

Ponendo in capo ai fornitori di servizi obblighi stringenti e ingenti sanzioni, peraltro in parziale contrasto con la normativa sui servizi digitali appena entrata in vigore, si rischia una censura generalizzata da parte degli stessi fornitori.

Allo stesso modo, il confine tra pubblicità politica e comunicazione politica è diventato troppo sottile e prevedere le stesse regole per ciò che è servizio a pagamento e ciò che non lo è finirà anche in questo caso per alimentare censure preventive.

Così non va, riteniamo che su un tema così importante serva una pausa di riflessione per arrivare a una normativa più coerente e più ordinata, che difenda la nostra democrazia dalle ingerenze straniere e colpisca le vere pratiche illegali, garantendo però la libertà di espressione fino in fondo.

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, of course we need transparency in political advertising, but this regulation is in danger of creating more problems than it solves. It mischaracterises the mere expression of political ideas and civic engagement as political advertising. This would impose severe obligations on individuals and civil society and therefore hinder democratic discourse and public participation.

The EU's so-called »war on disinformation« has little to do with protecting the public from false or dangerous content, and more to do with censoring and suppressing dissenting voices. So much of the moral panic in relation to political advertising comes from the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Yes, the company clearly broke Facebook's terms of service, but the reality is that, after a three-year investigation, the UK Information Commissioner's Office found no evidence that Cambridge Analytica misused data to influence the Brexit referendum.

The people of the UK voted for Brexit because too many felt let down by the EU's neoliberal policies, and the people of America voted for Trump because they were tired of the Democrats' neoliberal policies and Obama's endless wars.

Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, I was the shadow for the LIBE opinion on this file and I'd really like to be getting behind it for the things that it's trying to achieve – but it doesn't achieve them, so I can't. In fact, it's a major intervention by the EU into the political culture of its Member States, which will have far-reaching implications for freedom of political expression, for civil society, for the media and for citizens.

Now, the regulation places a range of complex obligations not just on politicians, but on every single civil society actor, on every grassroots network, every group of neighbours, every activist, on anyone who seeks to intervene in public debates on laws or regulations, and who spends any sum of money at all on advertising, including posters and leaflets. If they fail to fulfil their obligations, they will face sanctions and penalties, and you can be damn sure that political opponents will be making sure and jumping on the chance of the slightest hint of an error or an omission.

If this was about politicians only I'd support it. If it was a directive I'd support it, if it was about targeting I'd support it, and if it succeeded in truly dealing with the pernicious effect of big money advertising and protecting political advertising, I would agree with it. But it does none of these things. It's an overreach, it's worrying. It's not the EU's job to regulate political expression.

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)

Jutta Urpilainen, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, thank you for the debate. I have noted your support, as well as concerns, and I will definitely convey them to the Vice-President Jourová.

The Commission really appreciates the fact that the Parliament and the Council share the main objective of the proposals. It remains the Commission view that this regulation will enable an unprecedented high standard of transparency in the provision of the political advertising. It will also prevent the use of potentially problematic targeting methods.

We have a chance to set global standards of transparency of the political advertising process and shouldn't miss this opportunity. The Commission supports your rapporteurs' aims to present a negotiation mandate to the Parliament to open the way for trilogues to begin fast.

There is still time to get this done ahead of the European Parliament elections next year, and we definitely stand ready to support you to ensure we do it well. Thank you very much for this discussion.

Sandro Gozi, rapporteur. – Madame la Présidente, je ne saurais trop insister sur la pertinence et l'importance de ce dossier dans le contexte politique actuel. Avec le vote de demain, nous devons disposer d'une position très forte, à une très large majorité du Parlement européen, pour bien entamer les trilogues, et nous n'avons pas de temps à perdre si nous voulons que ces nouvelles règles soient mises en œuvre avant les prochaines élections européennes – Pablo Arias Echeverría l'a justement rappelé. Je suis convaincu qu'une fois ce texte en vigueur les élections dans l'Union européenne seront plus transparentes et plus résistantes – comme tous les collègues de mon groupe, Renew, l'ont rappelé. Bien évidemment il n'existe aucun risque pour les médias indépendants et le journalisme – cela, Mme Verheyen l'a aussi très bien expliqué.

Chers collègues, le bilan est évident: vous savez bien que les plateformes doivent tout simplement vérifier l'existence des sponsors politiques, et si les infos qu'elles font figurer à leur sujet sont complètes. Nous n'allons introduire aucune obligation générale de surveillance et encore moins de forme de censure. Mais, comme Paul Tang l'a dit, à la fin ce sont les électeurs qui doivent décider, pas les plateformes numériques. Daniel Freund et Alexandra Geese l'ont bien souligné: il est indispensable qu'il y ait plus de transparence pour protéger nos démocraties – et, sur ce point, Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques a raison: la base des données européenne que nous allons introduire avec notre proposition va sans doute aider à cela.

Dernier point, Madame la Présidente: pour répondre à Angelika Niebler, je ne crois pas que la proposition ajoute des obligations disproportionnées. Il est peu probable que l'on rende la vie plus difficile à nos candidats ou à nos élus lors des élections locales; je ne vois donc pas de danger de ce point de vue, compte tenu du caractère proportionné des obligations que nous allons introduire.

Nous sommes donc en train de donner une réponse très importante et très attendue. Allons-y, chers collègues: ce que nous faisons relève du bon sens.

Die Präsidentin. — Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet am Donnerstag, 2. Februar 2023, statt.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 171)

Andrus Ansip (Renew), kirjalikult. – Toetan määruse eesmärki kehtestada ELi siseturul poliitilise reklaami tegemise ühtlustatud reeglid. Poliitilise reklaami puhul on oluline teada, kes on reklaami eest maksnud. Olen vastu kolmandate riikide sekkumisele meie poliitilistesse süsteemidesse ja igasugustele pahatahtlikele katsetele inimestega manipuleerida. Poliitilise reklaami läbipaistvusnõudeid tuleb tugevdada. Ma ei nõustu eelnõu artikliga 12, mis käsitleb poliitilise reklaami suunamist ja selle sisuliselt ära keelamist. Pärast Facebook/Cambridge Analytica skandaali on kõigile selge, et demokraatias on sobimatu olukord, kus ühtedel huvigruppidel on võimalus manipuleerida ka inimese alateadvusega ja teistele pole need vahendid kättesaadavad. Demokraatlikel valimistel peaksid olema kõigil kandideerijatel võrdsed võimalused. Ma ei arva, et me peaksime poliitilise reklaami sihitlemisel pöörduma tagasi internetieelsesse aega, kuid poliitilise reklaami sihitlemiseks peavad olema kõigil võrdsed võimalused ning sihitlemise ulatus peaks olema selgelt piiritletud.

Romana Jerković (S&D), napisan. – Cilj ove Uredbe je uskladiti obveze transparentnosti za pružatelje usluga političkog oglašavanja te uvesti usklađena pravila o političkom oglašavanju. Važno je naglasiti da će se nova uredba odnositi na sve vrste izbora: izbore za Europski parlament, kao i sve izbore ili referendume koji se organiziraju na nacionalnoj, regionalnoj i lokalnoj razini u državama članicama te izbore za utvrđivanje vodstva političkih stranaka.

Naša je grupa bila predvodnik u zagovaranju primjene strožih pravila vezanih uz transparentnost političkog oglašavanja, kako bi se građanima pomoglo da prepoznaju političke oglase i ostvaruju svoja demokratska prava na informiran način, jačajući njihovo povjerenje u demokraciju i izbore u EU-u.

Primjena ove Uredbe pomoći će nam u borbi protiv dezinformacija i spriječiti nezakonito uplitanje drugih država u naše izborne procese. Primjenom ove Uredbe štitimo našu demokraciju.

Dan-Ștefan Motreanu (PPE), în scris. – Îmi exprim suportul pentru acordul ambițios la care s-a ajuns la nivelul comisiilor pentru sporirea normelor de transparență a publicității politice plătite în țările UE. Publicitatea politică plătită trebuie să fie marcată/etichetată în mod clar și să furnizeze o serie de informații-cheie, printre care numele sponsorului, suma cheltuită, proveniența fondurilor utilizate, legătura dintre publicitate și alegerile sau referendumurile relevante, precum și perioada în care se intenționează publicarea și difuzarea.

Cetățenii trebuie să știe din ce motiv văd un anunț publicitar, cine și cât a plătit pentru acesta și ce categorii de populație au fost vizate. Guvernele sau Parlamentele naționale vor trebui să adopte reglementări de transparență în privința cheltuirii banilor alocați pentru partide. Atrag atenția că banii publici trebuie să fie folosiți pentru a prezenta proiectele și politicile publice ale partidelor și nu pentru atacarea adversarilor politici.

Victor Negrescu (S&D), în scris. – Campaniile de dezinformare și încercările de a influența alegerile au crescut în Europa și au devenit o amenințare serioasă pentru democrațiile noastre. De aceea, salut reglementarea publicității politice ce va contribui la consolidarea procesului democratic. Am insistat pentru reguli mai clare, pentru publicitatea politică, iar prin eforturile noastre, se va implementa Registrul european de publicitate politică online, care va contribui în mod semnificativ la sporirea transparenței.

Nu vrem ca regulamentul să îngrădească dreptul fundamental al libertății de exprimare, nu punem egal între opiniile politice și publicitatea politică. Vrem să protejăm cetățenii de tehnici folosite în mediul online, în special în context electoral, și care amenință, deseori, datele cu caracter personal ale cetățenilor.

Prin aceste modificări se vizează, totodată, limitarea puterii actorilor din afara Uniunii de a influența procesul democratic și vom avea un instrument important pentru a combate dezinformarea. Acesta ne va permite să evităm intervențiile străine, prin reguli clar definite.

Tot în acest sens, am făcut propunerea de a consolida partidele politice europene prin promovarea siglelor acestora în cadrul anunțurilor publicitare de la nivel național. Trebuie să respectăm libertatea de exprimare dar, în același timp, trebuie să ne protejăm cetățenii în fața tehnicilor de manipulare.

Matjaž Nemec (S&D), pisno. – Sivih con političnega oglaševanja, ki zajedajo v srčiko demokratičnih procesov, tudi volitve in referendume, je preveč, da bi jih lahko ignorirali.

Zato sem za strožja pravila političnega oglaševanja. Zato sem podprl spremembe, ki se nanašajo na pravila političnega oglaševanja v EU. Te so usmerjene v večjo transparentnost in sledljivost političnega oglaševanja, več bo na voljo informacij za javnost glede naročnikov oglaševanja, prepovedano bo tudi izvajanje tako imenovanega mikro-usmeranja, oglaševanja ter financiranja oglaševanja v EU za subjekte izven Unije, kršitelji pa bodo deležni strožjih sankcij.

Podpiram spremembe tudi v luči spomina na slabe prakse iz Slovenije. Pred vsakokratnimi volitvami smo bili tudi sami žal deležni številnih slabih praks političnega oglaševanja, ki se izogibajo transparentnosti ali jo povsem ignorirajo. Tovrstna dejanja načenjajo zaupanje ljudi v politiko. Širi se neko vsesplošno prepričanje, da politiko usmerjajo neka ozadja, katerih interesi so vse prej kot dobronamerni.

Transparentnost, preglednost in sledljivost političnega oglaševanja bodo s spremenjenimi pravili o političnem oglaševanju dobili jasna zakonska določila. Sprejete spremembe bodo močno omejile prakse hoje po robu in zaščitile demokratične procese v EU.

Ivan Štefanec (PPE), písomne. – Služby politickej reklamy v EÚ sa neustále vyvíjajú, a to najmä v online priestore a takéto služby sú často poskytované aj cezhranične. Digitálna transformácia a technologické zmeny umožnili šírenie rôznych nových médií a metód financovania, prípravy, umiestňovania, propagácie, uverejňovania a šírenia politickej reklamy. Tento vývoj v kontexte roztrieštenej a nerovnomerne presadzovanej vnútroštátnej regulácie jasne dokazuje, že pravidlá vnútorného trhu by sa mali prispôsobiť tak, aby sa zabezpečila primeraná úroveň transparentnosti politickej reklamy, ktorá je potrebná pre spravodlivý a otvorený volebný proces vo všetkých členských štátoch. Preto je v dobe, keď sú nové digitálne technológie čoraz viac rozšírené a sociálne siete využívané na šírenie politickej reklamy, nesmierne dôležité stanoviť harmonizované povinnosti transparentnosti pre poskytovateľov služieb politickej reklamy a zaviesť harmonizované pravidlá používania techník cielenia a zosilňovania vplyvu politickej reklamy, ak sa používajú osobné údaje.

Edina Tóth (NI), írásban. – A politikai hirdetések szabályozásával a brüsszeli bürokrácia valódi célja az, hogy beleszóljon a tagállami választási kampányokba és befolyásolja azok kimenetelét, továbbá korlátozza a neki nem tetsző véleményeket. A valóban fontos célok, mint az európai választások tisztaságának megőrzése, és az átláthatóság mögött sajnos hamis szándék húzódik. A rendelettervezet semmibe veszi a nemzeti érdekeket és lehetőséget biztosít az uniós szerveknek, hogy megmondják, mi elfogadható egy politikai kampány során, és mi nem az. Ez egy újabb példája a lopakodó hatáskörbővítésnek, amely megsérti a tagállamok szuverenitását.

Szomorú, hogy az Európai Unió saját korrupciós botrányainak vizsgálata helyett ismét azzal foglalkozik, hogyan vonhat el hatásköröket a tagállamoktól. A brüsszeli korrupció vesztegetési botrányai miatt kialakult politikai válságban Brüsszelnek nem a tagállamok újabb megregulázásán kéne ügyködnie.

10.   Behov for en hurtig ajourføring af EU-listen over højrisikotredjelande med henblik på bekæmpelse af hvidvask af penge og finansiering af terrorisme (forhandling)

Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärungen des Rates und der Kommission zu dem Erfordernis einer umgehenden Aktualisierung der EU-Liste der Drittländer mit hohem Risiko zum Zweck der Bekämpfung von Geldwäsche und Terrorismusfinanzierung (2023/2532(RSP)).

Jessika Roswall, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, honourable Members, Commissioner, thank you for inviting me, the Presidency, to join this debate. The fight against money laundering and terrorist financing is a key task for our Presidency and connects to one of our four priorities: security. This is also an area where the Council is firmly engaged.

Last December, the Council reached an agreement on the negotiation mandates for the Anti-Money Laundering Regulation and the Anti-Money Laundering Directive. In addition to that, we have a mandate for negotiating the substance of the Anti-Money Laundering Authority. Moreover, on the Transfer of Funds Regulation, we have, together with you, reached an agreement, which is now in the final stage before adoption. I look forward to engaging with the European Parliament on the remaining negotiations as soon as you are ready.

But let me come to the issue on hand – the Commission delegated act on the EU list of high-risk third-countries for anti-money laundering and terrorist financing purposes. As is always the case, the Council stands ready to examine any list put forward by the Commission. The Commission adopted this delegated act on 19 December. After this, we initiated without delay an internal process to assess Member States' intentions regarding the Act.

However, given the date of adoption, the period for this assessment largely overlapped the holiday period in our Member States. This is especially relevant because the scrutiny period for this delegated act is one month as opposed to the normal three months for financial market regulations.

Because of this, the objection period was extended. This was later confirmed by the Council on 17 January, and therefore the deadline to object is now 20 February and we are currently assessing Member States' intentions regarding the delegated act.

Our current understanding is that the Council is not interested in objecting to the delegated act. For the Council's examination, we are taking into consideration the lessons learned from the 2019 update of the list. We believe that, since then, the Commission has worked hard to improve the method and has engaged closely with Member States, which was appreciated by the Council.

I would like to conclude by reaffirming the Presidency's full commitment to maintaining close cooperation between the institutions and the money laundering area.

I look forward to hearing your views. Thank you for your attention.

Jutta Urpilainen, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, I am pleased to speak to you today on this important issue on behalf of my colleague, Commissioner McGuinness.

For this Commission, as for this House, the fight against money laundering and the financing of terrorism is a top priority. We need to keep strengthening our defences against money laundering and terrorist financing. This means we must also address risks that come from outside the EU.

The Anti-Money Laundering Directive requires the Commission to list high-risk third country jurisdictions. These jurisdictions have strategic deficiencies in their national frameworks on anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism. Under the directive, any third-country jurisdiction publicly identified as a risk to the international financial system by the Financial Action Task Force is also presumed to be a risk to the EU internal market.

This is justified because the international financial system is highly interconnected. Market operators are closely connected. Our market is very open, and there is a high volume of cross-border transactions to or from the Union.

Against this background, the EU list of jurisdictions must be aligned with the list published by the task force. This is a legal requirement that was decided by the co-legislators when they agreed the Anti-Money Laundering Directive. The Commission therefore adopted the delegated act after a full analysis of the situation, and according to all the information at our disposal.

We respect the position of the Council that they need more time to scrutinise the act – and this is the right, of course, of the co-legislator. Let me underline that this updated list is essential for the integrity of our financial system and for the EU's commitment to combat money laundering globally. We remain confident that it will enter into force as soon as possible.

Finally – and this is very important for me – let me add that the Commission, together with the European External Action Service and the EU delegations concerned, work closely with jurisdictions that are already listed or soon will be. We help them address shortcomings in their national anti-money laundering and countering terrorism financing frameworks. We provide them with technical assistance to help them fully implement their action plans agreed in the task force, because listing is not the end but the start of a process. The aim is to help jurisdictions improve their anti-money laundering frameworks. We regularly de-list jurisdictions who make improvements, as indeed we are doing in this same act.

The Commission will continue to work closely with this House and keep you fully informed of future developments. I look forward to hearing your views.

Markus Ferber, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Die Europäische Union hat schon seit Jahren ein Geldwäscheproblem. Es gibt Schätzungen, nach denen sich das Volumen von verdächtigen Transaktionen innerhalb Europas auf einen dreistelligen Milliardenbetrag beläuft. Zum Teil handelt es sich dabei um ein importiertes Problem. Klar ist nämlich: Unsere Abwehr von Geldwäsche und Terrorismusfinanzierung ist nur so stark wie das schwächste Glied in der gesamten Kette. Deswegen ist es richtig, dass wir bei Drittstaaten mit offensichtlichen Defiziten ganz genau hinschauen. Genau dafür haben wir die Liste mit Hochrisiko-Drittstaaten ja mitinitiiert als Europäisches Parlament, und die muss natürlich aktuell bleiben, da gibt es keine Frage.

Zur Wahrheit gehört aber auch, dass wir im Bereich der Geldwäsche auch innerhalb der Europäischen Union eine große Aufgabe vor uns haben. In dem Mitgliedsland, das ich am besten kenne, da haben wir eine beim Zoll angesiedelte Geldwäsche-Spezialeinheit, die einen riesigen Berg von unbearbeiteten Verdachtsfällen vor sich herschiebt. Wir reden hier von über 50 000 nicht bearbeiteten Verdachtsfällen. Wenn nur jeder hundertste Verdachtsfall wirklich ein Geldwäsche- oder ein Terrorismusfinanzierungsproblem ist, dann ist es natürlich klar: Hier geht viel durch die Lappen, wenn das nicht ordentlich aufgearbeitet wird. Bevor wir also jetzt hier einen Skandal machen, weil der Rat einmal einen Monat länger braucht – wir brauchen das manchmal auch –, sollten wir uns darauf konzentrieren, dass der Rat kein Land von der Liste streicht. Dann sind wir auf dem richtigen Weg.

Eero Heinäluoma, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, 2022 was a record year at international level in terms of AML fines. Financial institutions paid more than EUR 5 billion in fines for breaching AML rules – an astonishing figure.

It is clear AML rules need to become stricter, better enforced, and loopholes need to be closed. Therefore, we have to look into the procedure to identify high-risk third countries. Although the Council has the right to ask for a postponement, the listing of these countries should be a no-brainer as it follows clearly the FATF assessment.

However, to avoid any geopolitical pressure in future and to make the AML rules more effective, we need to reform this procedure, today more than ever.

As co-rapporteur for the AML regulation, I therefore support an autonomous EU listing process as proposed by the Commission and stand ready to work with the Council to reform the process in order to ensure robust action.

Ramona Strugariu, în numele grupului Renew. – Domnule Președinte, în luna iulie 2022, ca urmare a revizuirii listei GAFI, care a inclus Emiratele Arabe Unite pe lista jurisdicțiilor supuse unei monitorizări mai atente în materia spălării banilor, am trimis Comisiei o întrebare scrisă cu privire la includerea Emiratelor Arabe Unite pe lista europeană a țărilor terțe cu risc ridicat privind combaterea spălării banilor.

În decembrie, Comisia a propus revizuirea acestei liste și includerea Emiratelor Arabe, împreună cu alte țări, însă Consiliul nu a considerat o prioritate această propunere și a amânat discuția pe acest subiect.

Pe de altă parte, nici astăzi, după atâtea scandaluri cu dictatori corupți și »laundromate« de spălat bani care au afectat Uniunea, nu am interzis clar și ferm pașapoarte și vize de aur în Uniune. Vreau să cred că nu închidem ochii nici acasă, nici în jurisdicții terțe în materie de combatere a spălării de bani, cu atât mai mult cu cât știm foarte bine că Rusia ocolește sancțiunile impuse de UE cu ajutorul unora dintre aceste jurisdicții.

Întreb Consiliul de ce și astăzi încă reflectăm? De ce nu avem curaj, ci doar interese? Dacă nu acum, atunci când?

Ernest Urtasun, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, identifying jurisdictions that pose a threat in terms of money laundering is extremely relevant for our policy in that field. Unfortunately, we know in the last years this exercise of listing has been highly politicised. That is the reason why my group suggested to have this debate in this plenary today, because when the Council decided to postpone the deadline to adopt the delegated act, immediately alarms started to ring because we do not want to repeat what happened in 2019 when a delegated act was objected to because a certain Member State was in it and, due to political pressure, the delegated act was then rejected. We do not want that to happen again.

I think that the exercise that the Commission did when they defined the jurisdictions is perfectly technical and clean. Also, it mirrors what the FATF has already done at the international level, and thus we believe that this delegated act should be adopted as soon as possible.

I am happy to hear that nobody in the Council so far has been signalling the intention to objecting to it, and then we expect the Council to adopt it as soon as possible.

Now I think that for the future we need to reflect how to better strengthen this exercise and for that – and we have a good opportunity now that we are in the middle of reforming our anti-money laundering legislation – we need to strengthen the process to make it more technical, less political. Also, I think with the creation of the new agency for anti-money laundering we can give it a role in order to have this exercise done in a better way.

Gunnar Beck, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Die Katar-Affäre beweist, dass die EU ihren Kampf gegen Geldwäsche verstärken muss. Ein wichtiger Schritt in diese Richtung wäre die ehrgeizige Erweiterung der EU-Liste von Hochrisiko-Drittstaaten, die wenig gegen Geldwäsche oder Terrorfinanzierung unternehmen. Die Liste umfasst derzeit 25 Länder, darunter übliche Verdächtige wie Afghanistan, Nordkorea, Iran, Panama und Marokko.

Allerdings gehören laut der NGO Tax Justice Network auch Länder wie die Vereinigten Arabischen Emirate und selbst die USA zu den zehn geldwäschefreundlichsten Staaten der Welt. Die Emirate stehen sogar auf der Financial-Action-Task-Force-blacklist der Rechtsräume, die verstärkt überwacht werden. Wir unterstützen Ihren Kampf gegen Geldwäsche, aber bitte nicht nur gegen Pjöngjang, sondern auch gegen Ihre Freunde in Dubai und Delaware.

José Gusmão, em nome do Grupo The Left. – Senhora Presidente, a lista dos países terceiros de alto risco para a lavagem de dinheiro tem sido uma lista marcada por muitos critérios do que se pode chamar simpaticamente diplomacia política.

No entanto, há um grande elefante na sala que são as responsabilidades da União Europeia e da Comissão em relação ao que se passa dentro da União Europeia. E o que sucessivos escândalos têm mostrado, Luanda Leaks, Pandora Papers e muitos outros, é que o grande risco de lavagem de dinheiro no território europeu está mesmo dentro da União Europeia. E sobre isso tem faltado a coragem, quer da parte da Comissão, quer da parte do Conselho, para responsabilizar os países que continuam a ser canais fáceis para a lavagem de dinheiro dentro da União Europeia.

A lista dos países terceiros de alto risco serve para que nós, nós não, a União Europeia se livre de responsabilidades em relação àquilo que não tem se conseguido fazer em relação aos seus próprios Estados-Membros e em relação às suas próprias jurisdições. Se há jurisdição de alto risco para a lavagem de dinheiro é a própria União Europeia, saibamos olhar para dentro.

Ivan Vilibor Sinčić (NI). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, kad govorimo o riskantnim trećim zemljama za pranje i skrivanje novca, moramo se sjetiti da prvo taj novac treba ukrasti, odnosno da ga treba negdje protupravno steći. Govorimo o novcu koji se ne krade na Jamajci ili Barbadosu. Govorimo o novcu koji se krade upravo ovdje u Europi. Što napraviti kada godinama upozoravate vlasti da se besramno kradu stotine milijuna kuna našeg novca, a vlast niti organi progona po tom pitanju ne učine baš ništa?

Imali smo slučaj takozvanog antipoduzetnika Tomislava Debeljaka, upropastitelja hrvatske brodogradnje, kojem je vlada uplaćivala stotine milijuna kuna godišnje, a on je s njima mutio i varao. A sve je išlo preko računa fiktivne firme na Maršalovim Otocima. A bila je i plejada drugih firmi.

Unatoč konstantnom upozoravanju svih revizija, pa i državne revizije, premijer Plenković je uporno dozvoljavao da se isplaćuje novac na ovaj način i da se posluje na ovaj način. Maršalovi Otoci su u to vrijeme odbijali surađivati s Europskom unijom, a bili su završili na crnoj listi. Sustav mora reagirati na kriminal, a vlada Andreja Plenkovića, koja je upućivala Debeljaku novac, uživa veliki ugled u ovim institucijama. Što to govori o nama kao organizaciji? Vrijeme je da prekinemo tolerirati ovakve kriminalne prakse na vlastitom kontinentu, a onda će biti i manje ukradenog novca koji bi se mogao prati u nekim trećim zemljama, u ovom slučaju na Maršalovim Otocima.

José Manuel García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE). – Señora presidenta, señorías, Gibraltar: no se preocupen, no les voy a hablar de soberanía, porque, si eso no le importa al presidente Sánchez, no veo por qué les va a importar a ustedes. Les voy a hablar de dinero y de dinero oscuro.

Gibraltar tiene 6,7 kilómetros cuadrados, 34 000 residentes, ningún recurso natural, 30 000 sociedades y la tercera renta per cápita más alta del mundo. Casi cinco veces más que la de El Tesorillo, un pueblo vecino.

Los gibraltareños son ingeniosos, pero probablemente hay algo más. Por ejemplo, la fiscalidad. Los impuestos indirectos allí son bajos. El impuesto de sociedades no grava los beneficios obtenidos fuera del Peñón, es decir, todos. Pedro Sánchez firmó en 2019 un acuerdo que consolida este privilegiado régimen y, además, permite a los allí residentes el libre acceso al mercado interior europeo. ¿Quién va a invertir en Algeciras en vez de hacerlo en el Peñón? Ahora sabemos que hay dudas sobre su legislación en materia de blanqueo de capitales y financiación del terrorismo.

Se está negociando ahora el acuerdo entre la Unión Europea y el Reino Unido sobre Gibraltar. Presten mucha atención a lo que hacen, no se fijen en paraísos lejanos y consagren unas Islas Caimán en nuestra frontera sur.

Paul Tang (S&D). – Madam President, sex traffickers, corrupt officials, fraudulent businessmen – the common denominator: they own property in the United Arab Emirates. Not only does the UAE host criminal EU citizens, they also host sanctioned Russians. In Dubai, Russians are among the largest group of foreign real estate investors or barefaced money launderers – it's »Moscow on the Gulf«.

The Emirates do not comply with international agreements. They rank eighth in a financial secrecy index. So it's no surprise that, in early 2022, the international FATF grey-listed the Emirates. Ever since, the S&D Group has been calling on the Commission to mirror this and we were happy to see that the Commission did, rightfully proposing the list to include the Emirates. But the Council delays; it's more than a year gone. Trying to avoid a confrontation? I hope not. But this is undermining the sanctions against Russia. This gives exactly the wrong signal. We cannot be complacent in the fight against dirty money – not then and certainly not now.

Damien Carême (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, Madame la Ministre, les criminels jouent avec les règles du jeu pour financer des attaques terroristes ici ou blanchir de l'argent là-bas. Sans scrupules, ils exploitent nos failles. La Commission et le Conseil ne peuvent rester sans réaction quand un pays tiers présente une menace spécifique et grave pour le système financier de l'Union européenne.

Dernier exemple en date: les Émirats arabes unis. Nous savons que ce pays sert de refuge aux oligarques et aux criminels souhaitant échapper à nos règles du jeu et aux sanctions. Le Groupe d'action financière, le GAFI, référence internationale en la matière, a identifié ce pays comme une menace grave pour le système financier dès mars 2022 — cela a été dit à plusieurs reprises. Pourtant, il a fallu attendre neuf mois pour que la Commission mette à jour notre liste noire. Neuf mois auxquels le Conseil a ajouté un délai supplémentaire, nous rendant davantage vulnérables aux menaces et pressions extérieures.

Notre liste européenne devrait s'aligner dans les plus brefs délais sur celle du GAFI. La révision de notre liste noire est trop politisée, opaque et lente. Corapporteur avec Eero sur le règlement antiblanchiment, je prône une réforme en profondeur de cette procédure. La future autorité européenne doit également avoir un rôle clé. Il nous faut aller plus vite. Il nous faut frapper plus fort. Chaque semaine d'inertie du Conseil expose nos systèmes financiers et nos sociétés aux attaques des pires criminels.

Емил Радев (PPE). – Г-жо Председател, поискахме яснота относно мотивите на Съвета за забавеното решение по делегирания акт, затова благодаря на министър Джесика Розуел за дадените обяснения.

За всички ни е важно борбата с изпирането на пари да се води ефективно, не само на вътрешно ниво, имам предвид в целия Европейски съюз, но и на международно ниво, тъй като мръсните пари не признават граници. В тази връзка подходът ни към юрисдикции със стратегически недостатъци в защитата срещу финансовите престъпления е изключително важен. Затова и се отнасям с разбиране към нетърпението на другите политически групи по този въпрос, но не трябва да забравяме, че все още сме в рамките на нормалната процедура и няма място за сериозни притеснения.

Длъжни сме да подходим отговорно въз основа на факти, а не на пристрастия. Това е начинът да изградим адекватна обща европейска позиция спрямо високорисковите трети държави. Позиция, която да е максимално изчистена от задкулисни политически интереси или лобизъм. Призовавам все пак Съвета да вземе възможно най-бързо решение относно делегирания акт.

Spontane Wortmeldungen

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora Presidenta, señora presidenta en ejercicio del Consejo, todo lo que sea fortalecer la unión de la Unión Europea en la lucha contra el blanqueo y la financiación del terrorismo es ir en la dirección correcta y tiene el apoyo decidido de este Parlamento Europeo. Por supuesto, lo tiene el acto delegado, la lista de terceros países de alto riesgo a efectos de blanqueo de dinero. Pero importante es también que la Presidencia sueca se emplee a fondo en impulsar el nuevo paquete antiblanqueo y contra la financiación del terrorismo, que consiste nada menos que en cinco nuevos reglamentos, incluida la autoridad europea contra el blanqueo.

Pero el trabajo no estará completo hasta que no seamos capaces de cumplir el mandato persistente de este Parlamento Europeo de acabar también con todo lo que posibilite blanquear el dinero procedente de negocios ilícitos en el territorio de la Unión Europea, a través del margen de maniobra de sus Estados miembros.

Hablamos de golden visas y de golden passports, que han sido prohibidos terminantemente por este Parlamento Europeo. Y el trabajo no estará completo hasta que no los saquemos por completo de la legislación de los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea.

Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, if you read down the EU's anti-money laundering blacklist, one of the things that immediately strikes you is that not one of the countries on the list is majority white and not one of them is what we would call the West. Because this blacklist is biased and inconsistent and has a lot more to do about lobbying power than a genuine assessment of risk.

Vanuatu, one of the world's poorest countries, is on the list. Yet the EU says that the criteria for inclusion is about the economic relevance of the third country jurisdiction for the EU and the systemic impact on the integrity of our financial systems. Seriously? Vanuatu, with a GDP of 9% of Greece's, is a threat to our financial integrity? Is it not really the fact that we're picking countries that can't kick us back?

Nothing being said about the Netherlands, nothing about Ireland, nothing about the US, nothing about the UAE, which is currently leaning on the EU to keep it off the blacklist. And they'll probably succeed, because we want their oil, just as the Qataris would have succeeded, if they'd only just stopped to bribe us with oil.

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, the countries on this list are all non-white Global South countries. It's uncannily similar to the EU's tax haven blacklist. The rules are applied unilaterally and are often imposed on acutely vulnerable former European colonies.

For centuries, European economies were built and sustained on the backs of the very colonies which are now desperate to survive and compete in whatever limited way they can. Yet the EU is destroying the ability of these weaker states to compete by weaponising its unilaterally, disproportionately and unfairly applied rules on tax and anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism list.

How can we accept the methodology for this list when the US is not on the list? The US financed al-Qaeda in Syria. The US financed the Mujahedin in Afghanistan. The US gives almost 4 billion every year to the settler-colonial apartheid State of Israel which carries out state terrorism against the people of Palestine. Why aren't they on the list?

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)

Jutta Urpilainen, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, thank you very much for your interventions in this debate. I have to say that I take note of all your remarks. Let me also emphasise that we will continue working together with you and our partner countries as the fight against money laundering and terrorist finance is our common endeavour.

So we look forward to continuing our good cooperation and thank you again for your support.

Jessika Roswall, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, honourable Members, Commissioner, thank you again for giving me the floor. I followed your valuable contributions with great interest on this issue and also about the future, and I also heard the Commission's contribution.

As I said in my introductory remarks, we expect the Council's examination of the new list to be concluded fairly soon, and certainly by the 20 February deadline. Preliminary views expressed by the Member States lead me to think that the Council will not object to the delegated act, as I said also in my first statement, and also I explained why the delay of one month.

As Mr López Aguilar stressed, we will also soon start the negotiations on anti-money laundering legislative files. That is currently on the table. The anti-money laundering regulation, in particular, will further codify EU rules as regards third countries. We look forward to our negotiations on those files as soon as you are ready. The Swedish Presidency will maintain close contact with Parliament and all the rapporteurs for the anti-money laundering legislative files.

I will finally just take the opportunity to again reaffirm the importance that the Presidency attaches to the fight against money laundering and the financing of terrorism. As I said in my introductory remarks, this is one of the Swedish priorities: security. Thank you again very much for the debate and for your attention.

Die Präsidentin. — Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

11.   Situationen in Afghanistan (forhandling)

Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärung des Vizepräsidenten der Kommission und Hohen Vertreters der Union für Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik zur Lage in Afghanistan (2023/2533(RSP)).

Jutta Urpilainen, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, I have engaged with this House on a regular basis since August 2021 on the situation in Afghanistan. Today, unfortunately, is an appropriate time to discuss this with you again. I appreciate the opportunity to open this debate also on behalf of HR/VP Borrell.

In mid-December, we saw the Taliban introduce additional restrictions on Afghan women. They are now excluded not only from secondary level, but also from university level, education. On 24 December, the Taliban issued a decree barring Afghan women from working in NGOs. The European Union strongly denounced these decisions. Furthermore – and this is worth emphasising – the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation made it clear that these decisions had been taken in violation of the purposes of Islamic law.

The humanitarian community has been forced into an operational pause in Afghanistan as female staff are essential for the effective delivery of aid, particularly to women and children. Let me be clear about what this means. In the depth of winter, with temperatures now dropping as low as -30 degrees Celsius and with more than 28 million Afghans in need of humanitarian support, the Taliban have taken a decision to prevent the delivery of aid and assistance services to Afghans most in need.

Even though some of our partners are now able to resume services in areas where exceptions have been made – these are mainly related to the delivery of health services and in primary education – there are still ongoing debates on the way forward.

We discussed these latest developments with the EU foreign ministers last week, who also manifested strong concerns. The United Nations Deputy Secretary General, Amina Mohammed, was in Brussels last week after her visit to Afghanistan and other countries in the region. She shared with us the results and her engagements with the Afghan de facto authorities and the search for a common position for the international community. Maintaining unity and coordination with our partners, the United Nations and NGOs, will be crucial.

One thing is clear: the current context is not business as usual, and we cannot act as if nothing had happened. We are assessing the different options at hand, yet our response to the Taliban must be calibrated against the need to protect Afghans, save lives and deliver assistance to the most vulnerable – especially women and children. We cannot allow the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan to deepen even further. That is our priority and it underscores everything we do in Afghanistan and all our engagements.

A year ago now, the EU delegation returned to Kabul to help the Afghans in need and to show our continued support for the Afghan people. Since August 2021, the European Union has mobilised EUR 419 million for humanitarian aid and more than EUR 400 million for basic needs and livelihoods. The EU's presence and engagement show our continued commitment to the Afghan people and their future.

I look forward to hearing your views on the way forward.

Hildegard Bentele, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir stehen in Afghanistan vor einem riesigen Dilemma. Sollen wir die leidende Zivilbevölkerung weiter mit humanitärer Hilfe unterstützen, angesichts der Tatsache, dass die Taliban gegen unsere fundamentalsten Prinzipien verstoßen und nun auch gegen das Menschenrecht von Frauen auf gesellschaftliche Teilhabe und auf Bildung?

Ich glaube, diese Frage zerreißt viele von uns. Aber die EU ist der größte Geber an Hilfe, und wir sind als Parlament Mithaushaltsgesetzgeber, wir müssen uns dieser Frage stellen. Ich spreche heute in persönlicher Funktion zu Ihnen als Christdemokratin, als Mutter von zwei Kindern, davon eine Tochter. Und ich denke: Gerade wir in der EU haben den Frauen in Afghanistan viel Hoffnung gemacht, sie gefördert, wo wir nur konnten. Wir können uns jetzt, wo es um das bloße Überleben geht, nicht von ihnen abwenden. Wir müssen darauf hoffen – und dafür gibt es Anzeichen –, dass die neuen Regeln vor Ort weiter ausgelegt werden und dass es gelingen wird, sie durch den Pragmatismus der Hilfsorganisationen vor Ort weiter auszudehnen.

Was nicht sein darf, ist, dass die Taliban einen Teil der Hilfsgelder abzweigen für ihre Zwecke. Hier bitte ich die Kommission, eine klare Linie zu fahren und uns Rechenschaft abzulegen. Derzeit sehe ich den einzigen Hoffnungsfunken auf Veränderung bei den afghanischen Frauen. Wir dürfen sie nicht noch schwächer, kränker und ausgegrenzter werden lassen. Sie müssen wieder Zugang zu Bildung bekommen. Das müssen unsere Forderungen sein. Ich denke, wir haben größere Chancen, sie umzusetzen, wenn wir über die humanitäre Hilfe einen Fuß in der Tür behalten, als wenn wir uns verabschieden.

Elena Yoncheva, au nom du groupe S&D. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, pour trouver des solutions aux problèmes qui sont à l'origine de la déstabilisation en Afghanistan, ce que nous faisons n'est pas suffisant. Oui, l'aide humanitaire à l'Afghanistan devrait être augmentée, mais l'aide humanitaire n'est pas une solution à long terme. Nous ne pouvons pas espérer une amélioration des droits des filles et des femmes si nous n'arrêtons pas le flux financier qui alimente ceux qui imposent leurs normes.

Par conséquent, nous devrons au moins commencer à parler. Nous devrons au moins commencer à discuter de la grave menace que la culture illégale d'opium et la production de méthamphétamine représentent pour le pays. Il existe un lien étroit entre le trafic de la drogue et le terrorisme en Afghanistan. Le trafic génère des ressources financières qui sont utilisées par les groupes terroristes opérant dans la région. Vous devez augmenter votre pression sur les talibans pour qu'ils cessent de cultiver l'opium, et leur fournir des moyens de subsistance grâce à des cultures alternatives.

Petras Auštrevičius, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, the Taliban regime in Afghanistan is reversing the progress of the last 20 years, which we helped to build. Life in the country is becoming a misery. Half of its population – Afghan women and girls – have become victims of gender apartheid.

We, as the European Union, and the rest of the world cannot accept this situation and remain silent. The United Nations framework with active participation of Islamic countries need to be used to find a solution and to promote the transition from the Taliban's political-social totalitarian regime towards a balanced situation. Aid to Afghanistan must continue in the context of restoring and ensuring the rights of women and girls.

For the sake of Afghan's present and future generations, we must not allow the Taliban to further isolate the country, erase Afghanistan from the world map and allow the gender apartheid.

Tineke Strik, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, dear Commissioner – there is no one from the Council – since our last resolution on Afghanistan, both the human rights and the humanitarian situation have dramatically worsened by new radical measures taken by the Taliban against women and girls. Girls from the age of 12 were already banned from schools, deprived of their future, their dreams and their ambitions. But women have now been banned from universities. Women and girls are systematically erased from public life, and female aid workers are banned as well, which affects 28 million people in desperate need of aid.

Especially because women are only allowed to receive aid from female workers, this ban will push people over the cliff. Let us not be misled, this is not just a way to pressure the West into negotiations, this is simply how the Taliban view society and the role of women. »I feel like I am in prison, treated like an animal that has no goal. This is not a life. I am dead and yet alive«, says a young female aid worker.

Commissioner, I agree with you, we must prioritise the well-being and the rights of Afghan women, children and men left behind in this horror and we can do so much more. Step-up the funding of aid organisations, they cannot resolve all the humanitarian aid at the moment. Use diplomacy to convince partner countries to join the sanctions and isolate the Taliban internationally, and offer sustainable protection to Afghan women and girls who are on our territories. The EU Asylum Agency has concluded that they are entitled to asylum, but many of them are still in a legal limbo and suffer from uncertainty. Commission, follow up this instruction from our agency and enforce their right to protection. Words of solidarity and grief mean nothing without concrete support.

Thierry Mariani, au nom du groupe ID. – Madame la Présidente, l'Union européenne est tout à fait paradoxale au sujet de l'Afghanistan. Nous savions parfaitement que les talibans ne respecteraient rien de ce que souhaitaient les puissances occidentales. Ces hommes vivent, combattent et meurent pour défier nos pays, qu'ils jugent barbares et décadents. La place des femmes, de la liberté religieuse, des minorités chiites ou ethniques en Afghanistan ne sera jamais stable sous leur joug. Il fallait toute la naïveté de nos institutions pour croire que leur idéologie rétrograde s'apaiserait au contact des émissaires de Bruxelles.

En 2009-2010, j'ai eu l'honneur d'être le représentant spécial de la France en Afghanistan. J'ai rencontré des femmes afghanes qui en imposaient bien plus que notre appareil institutionnel. Instruites, libres, courageuses, elles ne se battaient pas contre des moulins à vent, mais bien pour leur dignité et leur avenir. Elles ont été les grandes oubliées de nos institutions. Car pour aider les femmes afghanes, concrètement, il fallait assurer un compromis géopolitique à Kaboul. Il fallait cesser de choyer le Pakistan. Il fallait travailler avec toutes les composantes de la vie politique afghane, et pas uniquement avec un gouvernement fantoche qui a fui le pays en ayant ruiné l'armée et volé le peuple. En un mot: en Afghanistan, défendre les femmes nécessitait d'être réaliste – tout ce que nous n'avons pas souvent su faire.

Clare Daly, on behalf of The Left Group. – Madam President, I find it a bit hard to take some of the hand-wringing in here about the terrible plight of women and girls in Afghanistan when, outside of these doors, hundreds of young Afghans are on the streets of Brussels without a bed, without enough food, and we say nothing, when the claims of Hazara genocide are met with silence and our borders locked to them, when six times as many Afghan households are fleeing the impact of drought than they were two years ago with 3.2 million children acutely malnourished, two thirds of the population dependent on humanitarian aid – 4 million more than last year – and hardly ten people out of 700 could bother to come in here and even talk about it.

Well, I'm glad to see the leaked documents from November, when the Commission had finally woken up to the fact that humanitarian aid is not enough, no matter who distributes it. But even the conservative Human Rights Watch has acknowledged that the shortfalls in food, education and health will not be met without a plan that involves the Taliban. We might hate it, but it's the reality. Otherwise, we're condemning millions of Afghans to poverty, misery, death and destruction.

The Afghan people don't deserve to be punished as retribution for the West losing its unjust war. We have to lift the sanctions. We have to unfreeze the financial flows. We have to let the Afghans survive and live. Shutting our minds and closing our eyes is not good enough any longer!

Fabio Massimo Castaldo (NI). – Madam President, dear Commissioner, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross, 55% of the Afghan population is in dire need of humanitarian assistance. And numbers are set to rise due to the winterisation of the crisis.

The decision to ban women from working in the public sector is not only unacceptable in itself, but it also constitutes a crime against humanity as it directly hampers the delivery of the humanitarian aids. Therefore, apart from expanding our individual sanctions to the Taliban leadership, we should also submit a formal request to the International Criminal Court to investigate and prosecute those responsible.

Nevertheless, we ask you, Madam Commissioner, to encourage and support the United Nations and engage NGOs to find workarounds that can prevent the halt of the humanitarian assistance.

Dear colleagues, we cannot look the other way while children, women and men, to which we promised a better future, are starving and do not have access to medicines. While we strongly and unwaveringly condemn the abhorrent policies put in place by the Taliban regime, we must do all we can for avoiding that Afghanistan becomes the hell on earth.

Željana Zovko (PPE). – Madam President, Madam Commissioner, we should not close our eyes after our retreat from Afghanistan and forget about the peacebuilding efforts of the last decades. We should not let apartheid against women flourish.

With the takeover by the Taliban, the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan has severely deteriorated, and I deeply deplore the recent ban by the Taliban of all the activities of female aid workers. In a humanitarian crisis, women and children are the most vulnerable, and it is often female aid workers that can deliver the highly-needed assistance to these groups and reach the most remote communities.

I call on the EU diplomatic service therefore to work on the removal of these restrictions and to make further humanitarian aid conditional on lifting this ban. Furthermore, more needs to be done against the threat posed by terrorist groups that reside, train and operate in Afghanistan.

While the international engagement in Afghanistan was exactly to fight against terrorism, these groups are getting stronger again. They form a danger for Afghani people, their neighbouring countries and the wider world. Mistakes from the past should not be repeated. Security should be safeguarded.

Dietmar Köster (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin! Die Taliban haben 35 Verordnungen gegen Mädchen und Frauen erlassen. Sie treiben den Prozess ihrer Unsichtbarmachung immer weiter voran. Nun dürfen afghanische Frauen nicht länger für internationale Organisationen und NGOs arbeiten. Tausende Frauen können ihre Familien nicht mehr ernähren. Die Gesundheitsfürsorge droht zusammenzubrechen. Frauen und Mädchen werden von der Gesundheitsversorgung ausgeschlossen. Menschenleben stehen auf dem Spiel.

Die Asylagentur der EU kam letzte Woche zu dem Schluss, dass afghanische Frauen und Mädchen generell von Verfolgung bedroht sind und daher Anspruch auf den Flüchtlingsstatus in der EU haben. Dem folgend hat der dänische Beschwerdeausschuss für Flüchtlinge jetzt beschlossen, einem bereits bestehenden Ansatz Schwedens und der Asylagentur zu folgen, Frauen und Mädchen aus Afghanistan als eine Gruppe von Konventionsflüchtlingen zu betrachten. Dem müssen alle EU-Mitgliedstaaten folgen.

Die Kommission muss endlich ein EU-Aufnahmeprogramm für afghanische Flüchtlinge auf den Weg bringen. Das sind wir den Frauen und Mädchen und den Menschen in Afghanistan schuldig.

Nicola Beer (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin! Afghanische Mädchen und Frauen durchleben einen vernichtenden Albtraum: kein Zugang zu Schulen, kein Zugang zu Universitäten, regelrecht verbannt aus dem Leben des Wissens und der Bildung!

Einer ganzen weiblichen Generation droht in Afghanistan das gesellschaftliche Vergessen. Die weibliche Stimme Afghanistans, sie wird von den Taliban erstickt. Den Frauen und Mädchen wird ihre Existenz zynisch, beispiellos und brutal zerstört. Das Ausbildungsverbot der Taliban ist vernichtend und skrupellos. Tun wir bitte etwas!

Jeder Tag, den wir nicht handeln, ist eine Kapitulation vor den Taliban. Jeder Tag, den wir nicht handeln, lassen wir die Frauen und Mädchen in Afghanistan im Stich. Wir brauchen jetzt eine breite Allianz für eine afghanische Online-Universität. Diese Online-Universität bietet mit Bachelor- und Masterstudiengängen Afghaninnen und Afghanen sowohl in Afghanistan wie auch im Exil die Möglichkeit, ein Studium zu beginnen oder fortzuführen.

Viele afghanische Hochschullehrerinnen und Hochschullehrer mussten fliehen und könnten an der Online-Universität weiter unterrichten und forschen. Damit halten wir das Fenster auf für die jungen Menschen in Afghanistan, für eine selbstbestimmte und mutige Perspektive jenseits von Unterdrückung und Feindseligkeit.

Alessandra Moretti (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, sono più di un milione le ragazze che in Afghanistan non possono andare a scuola.

Vietare l'istruzione alle ragazze non solo nega un diritto fondamentale, ma priva l'Afghanistan del contributo professionale, culturale, economico e sociale delle donne, perché senza il lavoro delle donne il paese non potrà riprendersi dalla situazione attuale, che vede il 97 % della popolazione in povertà e 20 milioni di persone che soffrono di fame acuta.

A essere a rischio sono tutti quei servizi essenziali, normalmente gestiti da donne, indispensabili per salvare vite, soprattutto di ragazze e bambini. Sono loro oggi a trovarsi vittime di violenze, torture e abusi sessuali, senza poter far appello ad assistenza legale e sanitaria.

Chiedo alle istituzioni europee di esprimersi a favore della concessione di visti temporanei per ragazze e donne afgane, affinché possano trovare un ambiente sicuro in Europa e scappare dall'inferno.

Non spegniamo i riflettori sull'Afghanistan, continuiamo a denunciare gli abusi e le violenze che subiscono le donne per mano dei talebani. Non lasciamole sole.

Samira Rafaela (Renew). – Madam President, the situation for women in Afghanistan is very alarming, more than that. What is happening in Afghanistan right now is gender apartheid. That's what it is. It's not gender segregation, it's gender apartheid.

We have a duty as the international community to first understand that the Taliban will not restore the situation of women and girls. They will not do it. They will keep doing this, undermining women's rights in Afghanistan. The international community should not be naive. We should offer these women and girls in Afghanistan a way out. That's why I'm asking, Mr Borrell, for the EU to introduce special visas for Afghan women and girls. That's their way out to make sure that they have a safe life in the European Union and that they can continue their lives and can choose their own future.

Let me be clear, we knew that this would happen. We were waiting to see what would happen, and so many people were already warning for this. So let's take our responsibility now. The Taliban has shown that they don't know anything about women's rights. They don't respect women's rights. And they will never do so!

Spontane Wortmeldungen

Stanislav Polčák (PPE). – Paní předsedající, na počátku 20. století byl Afghánistán poměrně perspektivní země. Na konci 20. století to byla země už v rozvalu. Jakkoliv jsme udělali řadu chyb v Afghánistánu, tak je patrné, že tato země měla alespoň určitou naději. Myslím si, že nemůžeme opustit afghánský lid, který nám důvěřoval. A je důležité, abychom jednoznačně odsoudili násilí, které je pácháno na ženách, protože to je skutečně násilí, je to apartheid, s tím naprosto souhlasím, násilí na minoritách, drakonické tresty, které byly zavedeny, to jsou všechno naprosto nepřijatelné způsoby afghánského režimu a je třeba zastavit zdroje, kterými je financován. A také je třeba zastavit teroristické a náboženské džihádistické skupiny. Myslím si, že je také důležité říct, že je dobře, že mluvíme o Afghánistánu zde v Parlamentu, ale také si musíme uvědomit, že je i řada skutečně hladovějících a opuštěných Afghánců v Evropské unii.

Isabel Santos (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, depois do descalabro da retirada do Afeganistão, que só nos chegam notícias absolutamente perturbadoras desse país.

Em dezembro passado, foi definitivamente barrado o acesso das mulheres à educação. A exclusão das mulheres das universidades e a proibição da frequência do ensino pelas jovens afegãs constituem uma flagrante violação do direito à educação. A interdição da participação das mulheres no trabalho atingiu de uma forma atroz a ajuda humanitária num país onde o apoio internacional e das organizações não governamentais é fundamental para a sobrevivência de homens, mulheres e crianças.

Mas não basta estarmos aqui a fazer o diagnóstico da situação, é preciso sermos ativos e unirmos esforços com as Nações Unidas no sentido de fazermos chegar à população a ajuda humanitária, evitando que ela seja feita refém pelo regime talibã. E é preciso também que avancemos com sanções direcionadas para os perpetradores de violações dos direitos humanos.

Mas não podemos esquecer de dar vistos humanitários também aos advogados e a todos aqueles que estão a ser vítimas de perseguição no Afeganistão e que necessitam destes vistos humanitários.

Juozas Olekas (S&D). – Gerbiama Pirmininke, gerbiama Komisijos nare. Man teko lankytis Afganistane keletą kartų ir mačiau, kokios rūpestingos ir talentingos yra Afganistano moterys ir merginos. Ir šiandien, man atrodo, mums turi būti labai aišku, mes turime spausti režimą, kad jis negalėtų pasinaudoti tais finansiniais resursais, kuriais dabar naudojasi. Čia buvo paminėtas narkotikų biznis. Aš manau, kad jeigu mes sumažintume narkotikų vartojimą čia, Europoje, tai ir jų pardavimas Afganistane taip pat mažėtų. Taip pat mes turime tęsti ir pagalbą toms svarbiausioms, silpniausiom Afganistano grupėms kaip moterys, merginos, vaikai ir mažumos. Bet taip pat mes turime atkreipti dėmesį, kad tie, kurie pasitraukė iš Afganistano, čia, į Europos Sąjungą, sulauktų tinkamos pagalbos, kad ypatingai vaikai galėtų lankyti mokyklas, įgyti išsilavinimą ir galbūt sugrįžti kada nors tvarkytis Afganistane pagal jų norus ir pagal jų supratimą. Nes ta talentinga karta, kuri užaugo, kuri gavo išsilavinimą, Afganistane, kada mes ten dalyvavome ir rėmėme juos, šiandien, iš tikrųjų, gali padėti savo šaliai, jeigu mes užtikrinsime jiems pagalbą.

Barry Andrews (Renew). – Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, I spoke in the January plenary imploring NGOs to stay the course and to fight the ban on female staff working in NGOs in Afghanistan. NGOs were right to suspend programmes, and in many cases, of course, they had no choice.

Now there is some progress, and I commend Martin Griffiths and Amina Mohammed of the UN for taking the time to visit Afghanistan. Clearly they have extracted some concessions. It's also clear that the Taliban is not homogenous and that there are agreements being made at local levels and that they have extracted guidelines from the Taliban to allow exemptions for female workers.

Humanitarian principles, however, should be applied, and principled aid means female workers and practical aid means female workers. I would also commend the idea of humanitarian visas for Afghanistan, but would also suggest there is no reason why we should not apply the Temporary Protection Directive to those who are now almost inevitably fleeing Afghanistan.

VORSITZ: RAINER WIELAND

Vizepräsident

Erik Marquardt (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident! In Afghanistan gibt es inzwischen 65 Prozent Arbeitslosigkeit, 90 Prozent der Menschen hungern und 20 Millionen Frauen – man hat es in den Reden davor ja gut beschrieben –, 20 Millionen Frauen in Afghanistan werden entrechtet und, man kann das auch sagen, ihrer Zukunft beraubt.

Das ist wirklich grausam, wie die Taliban mit diesem Land umgehen, wie sie die Gesellschaft zum Spielball ihrer Ideologie machen. Und ich kann sagen: Ich glaube, es geht nicht nur mir so, sondern auch vielen anderen, die sich an der Debatte beteiligen, dass man sich eigentlich langsam hilflos fühlt. Was soll man denn noch machen, um endlich die Taliban zur Vernunft zu bewegen? Ich glaube, es ist richtig, dass man nach Hebeln sucht, aber ich glaube, es wäre falsch, zu einfache Hebel zu finden, zum Beispiel zu sagen, wir müssen jetzt bei der humanitären Hilfe kürzen, weil die Taliban so schlecht mit der Bevölkerung umgehen.

Ich glaube, es ist wichtig, die humanitären Prinzipien aufrechtzuerhalten. Die humanitäre Hilfe darf nicht politisiert werden. Wir müssen aber auch nach anderen Ideen suchen. Eine Idee – ich glaube, die könnten wir einfach gemeinsam umsetzen mit der EU-Kommission, dem Parlament und den Mitgliedstaaten – ist, dass wir in den Nachbarländern Afghanistans vielen afghanischen Frauen und Mädchen Stipendien geben. Wir könnten ein Stipendienprogramm zum Beispiel in Tadschikistan, in Pakistan auflegen und damit, ich würde sagen, in den nächsten Jahren sogar Hunderttausenden Frauen und Mädchen eine Zukunft bieten, die sie in Afghanistan wahrscheinlich leider nicht bekommen.

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Mr President, the aftermath of NATO's criminal intervention in Afghanistan worsens every day. At the centre of the humanitarian disaster is Washington's assets freeze and the fear it creates among foreign banks about breaching restrictions. Twenty-eight million people will be in need of humanitarian assistance this year, and the Taliban are a total nightmare. What is Europe's response? We want to weaponise our tariff system in order to threaten Afghanistan and force them to take back people fleeing this disaster that we helped to create.

We have to stop punishing Afghanistan. We must pressure the US to unfreeze the assets, and we must provide assistance to other countries in the region bearing the brunt of the crisis, like Iran and Pakistan, both suffering already from sanctions and natural disasters, and they're struggling to cope with the refugees. And we have to stop fuelling the war in Ukraine and work for peace instead. The war is compounding multiple problems all over the world, affecting billions of lives.

Özlem Demirel (The Left). – Herr Präsident! Die deutsche Außenministerin hat ein neues Wort kreiert: feministische Außenpolitik. Und auch Frau von der Leyen spricht gerne von Frauenrechten.

Dann gucke ich aber nach Afghanistan. 20 Jahre lang führte die NATO in Afghanistan einen Krieg, um angeblich die Frau zu verteidigen. Nach 20 Jahren NATO-Bomben: Wie geht es der Frau in Afghanistan? Es ist schlimmer denn je. Jetzt können die Taliban die Bevölkerung und die Frauen in Afghanistan unterdrücken, auch mit Westtechnologie und westlichen Waffen. Sie haben nichts als Schutt und Asche dort hinterlassen.

Und als ob das nicht reicht, sagt jetzt die deutsche Außenministerin, sie möchte die Gelder, die Hilfsgelder für Afghanistan in diesem Winter kürzen. Ich sage ganz deutlich: Wenn das die grüne Außenpolitik, die feministische Außenpolitik ist, dann sage ich: Nein danke! Die NGOs laufen zu Recht Sturm gegen die Kürzungspläne auch der deutschen Bundesregierung in Afghanistan.

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)

Jutta Urpilainen, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, honourable Members, I would like to thank you for this very timely exchange on the crisis in Afghanistan. In February, the Foreign Affairs Council will return for a discussion on Afghanistan with the objective to define the way ahead and on concrete actions to hold the Taliban accountable for their actions and the violations of basic human rights.

For now, I want to underline that all options are on the table, both with regard to humanitarian assistance and support for basic needs. The European Union will continue to stand firmly to protect the human rights of Afghan women and girls and is ready to coordinate the common way forward with our international partners. We need to ensure international coherence, including a division of labour. Your support in the process will continue to be fundamental, so thank you for the discussion.

Der Präsident. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 171)

Dominique Bilde (ID), par écrit. – La dégradation de la situation humanitaire en Afghanistan est sidérante. Pour autant, concernant l'aide humanitaire — sujet qui m'intéresse au premier chef dans le cadre de ma commission du développement, l'Union européenne ne saurait se plier aux diktats des talibans. Parlons de l'inexorable recul en matière de condition féminine.

Fin décembre, les talibans ont interdit au personnel féminin des ONG d'exercer en Afghanistan. Cette décision n'est pas surprenante. Elle signifie, toutefois, que de nombreuses Afghanes n'auront pas accès aux secours occidentaux, par exemple en matière médicale. Il est aisé de comprendre que l'Union européenne, qui prétendait en 2021 presque quadrupler son aide humanitaire au pays, risque, ce faisant, de cautionner de telles pratiques.

Du reste, le débat sur le classement des talibans dans la catégorie des organisations terroristes continue d'agiter le Canada, démontrant que les craintes quant à de potentiels détournements de l'aide restent prégnantes. Bref, l'Union européenne doit clarifier sa position concernant un régime que les Européens réprouvent et qui s'inscrit résolument en faux avec leurs valeurs. Je vous remercie.

12.   Udvalgenes og delegationernes sammensætning

Der Präsident. — Die S&D-Fraktion hat der Präsidentin Beschlüsse über Änderungen von Ernennungen in Ausschüsse und Delegationen übermittelt. Diese Beschlüsse werden in das Protokoll der heutigen Sitzung aufgenommen und treten am Tag dieser Ankündigung in Kraft.

13.   Valgs prøvelse

Der Präsident. – Auf Vorschlag des Rechtsausschusses prüft das Parlament die Gültigkeit der Mandate von Herrn Bergur Løkke Rasmussen, von Herrn Erik Poulsen und von Herrn Anders Vistisen mit Wirkung vom 22. November 2022 und von Frau Beatrice Covassi mit Wirkung vom 6. Dezember 2022.

14.   Indlæg af et minuts varighed om politisk vigtige sager

Der Präsident. — Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgen die Ausführungen von einer Minute zu wichtigen politischen Fragen (Artikel 172 GO).

Άννα-Μισέλ Ασημακοπούλου (PPE). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η υπόθεση των 38 μεταναστών που βρέθηκαν εγκαταλειμμένοι υποτίθεται σε ελληνικό έδαφος, καθώς και ο δήθεν θάνατος ενός μικρού κοριτσιού από δάγκωμα σκορπιού σε νησίδα στον Έβρο, απεδείχθη περίτρανα ότι ήταν φέικ νιουζ και συκοφαντίες κατά της Ελλάδας. Το επιβεβαίωσε Σύριος πρόσφυγας. Η ΜΚΟ που είχε μπλέξει με την υπόθεση και είχε ασχοληθεί αναγνώρισε δημόσια το λάθος της και το περιοδικό Der Spiegel απέσυρε τα σχετικά άρθρα. Ωστόσο, οι ευρωβουλευτές της Αριστεράς, οι κύριοι Κούλογλου και Αρβανίτης, είχαν το θράσος να καταθέσουν σχετική γραπτή ερώτηση και το κόμμα τους στην Ελλάδα, ο ΣΥΡΙΖΑ, επιμένει ακόμα και σήμερα να αρνείται την αλήθεια. Ο κ. Κούλογλου δε συνεχίζει να διασύρει την Ελλάδα με πρόσφατη επιστολή του, εξαπολύοντας ύβρεις και λασπολογίες κατά του ελληνικού Υπουργείου Μετανάστευσης. Κυρίες και κύριοι συνάδελφοι, όσοι διέδωσαν ψεύδη και συκοφαντίες κατά της Ελλάδας για την υπόθεση της υποτιθέμενης νεκρής Μαρίας στη νησίδα στον Έβρο, οφείλουν σήμερα να ζητήσουν μία μεγάλη συγνώμη και από το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο αλλά κυρίως από τον ελληνικό λαό.

Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Domnule președinte, vreau să spun foarte clar: Europa trebuie să se trezească! Suntem într-o situație tot mai dificilă, din care putem să ieșim acționând. Trebuie soluții europene care să conducă la un trai mai bun pentru cetățeni, pentru că am văzut că inflația a crescut prețurile și este greu de suportat, am văzut că multe persoane nu au acces la servicii medicale sau la servicii pe zona de educație de calitate.

Am văzut că dumpingul social din afara Uniunii afectează direct companiile europene și, de asemenea, că fondurile europene sunt insuficiente. Vorbim de lucruri mari, dar uităm de elementele simple și importante pentru viața de zi cu zi a cetățenilor. Luăm decizii, dar ignorăm faptul că multe state nu respectă reglementările în vigoare. Pretindem egalitatea, dar avem cetățeni care sunt discriminați și state tratate ca fiind de rang secund.

Cu toate acestea, Europa este cel mai de succes proiect la nivel global, dar nu este finalizat. Populismul de dreapta a folosit fricile noastre pentru a ne divide, pentru a ne convinge să nu ne mai apărăm valorile. Astăzi, în Marea Britanie, vedem eșecul clar al euroscepticismului și nu trebuie să ezităm să îl demascăm. Fondatorii Europei și-au dorit mai mult, noi trebuie să oferim mai bine pentru cetățeni ca să ne urmeze. Fiecare dintre noi este Europa și trebuie să acționăm pentru a-i reda forța de altădată.

Nicolae Ștefănuță (Renew). – Domnule președinte, cine minte: cancelarul Austriei sau Comisia Europeană? România este plimbată din poartă în poartă, cu dosar cu șină, pentru intrarea în Schengen. Nu pot să stau cu mâinile în piept și să aud toate declarațiile politice, nu pot să-l aud pe Nehammer cum face campanie politică în Austria pentru ceva ce ne este cuvenit de drept. Suntem în Parlamentul European. Nu putem să ne prefacem că nu vedem o nedreptate adusă a 20 de milioane de oameni din România, unui stat european care face parte din Uniunea Europeană.

Doamna comisară, Johansson, cancelarul Nehammer spune că România este rută de migrație. Eu știu că nu este cazul. Avem toate aceste date. Frontex spune că nu este deloc cazul. Trebuie să clarificăm asta, ori, dacă nu, ne pierdem credibilitatea noastră. Cine minte: Nehammer sau Frontex?

Grace O'Sullivan (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, later this month the European Parliament plans to send a delegation of MEPs to Palestine. It comes at a time when 35 Palestinians and seven Israelis have been killed in January alone.

Just last week, the President of Israel addressed this Parliament and said that his country is, I quote, »open to criticism, like all members in the family of nations«. Yet, this time last year, our delegation of MEPs was barred from travelling to the West Bank and Gaza, where Israel controls almost every facet of Palestinian life.

This is not the behaviour of a country that is »open to criticism«. MEPs must be allowed to travel through Israel this month to assess the situation in Palestine. If they are not, this House must back its MEPs with swift action.

Gilles Lebreton (ID). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, dans son arrêt du 19 janvier dernier, la Cour de justice de l'Union a interdit l'utilisation des néonicotinoïdes par le procédé de l'enrobage des semences de betteraves. Cette décision place les betteraviers français dans une situation très préoccupante. Un betteravier sur quatre a déjà manifesté sa volonté de jeter l'éponge pour se tourner vers d'autres cultures. À court terme, c'est donc la production française de sucre qui risque de s'effondrer. Le ministre français de l'Agriculture vient de s'engager à indemniser à 100 % les pertes éventuelles de production de betteraves qui seraient imputables à l'absence de traitement. Répondant à mon interpellation, le commissaire à l'agriculture a déclaré qu'il accepterait cette aide nationale exceptionnelle. Je souhaite donc que ces engagements soient respectés afin d'encourager les betteraviers français à continuer leur production.

Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-н Председател, на 19 януари тази година млад мъж, Кристиан Пендиков, беше нападнат от група въоръжени лица в Охрид и пребит заради неговото българско национално самосъзнание. Класическо престъпление от омраза, записано и установено и от прокурора в Охрид, който описва и казва, че младият мъж е бил нападнат заради самоопределението си като българин.

Това престъпление от омраза беше предшествано от няколко нападения върху български културни клубове в Македония, включително в Битоля, включително в Охрид, от приемането на едно ксенофобско и по същността си нацистко законодателство, което забранява формирането на неправителствени организации на хора с българско национално самосъзнание и забравя техните имена. Всички тези престъпления са престъпления от омраза и са насочени срещу една етническа група в Република Северна Македония, която се самоопределя като българска. Всички тези престъпления са насърчавани по един друг начин, явно или тайно, или по-видимо, или по-невидимо от различни лица на властови функции в Република Северна Македония, включително президентството и в Министерския съвет.

Това нещо трябва да бъде остро осъдено от тази зала и от Европейската комисия, и Република Северна Македония трябва да бъде заставена да спазва абсолютно всички норми по защита на човешките права и правото на самоопределение.

Chris MacManus (The Left). – Mr President, last week the Irish Government failed to support a Sinn Féin motion demanding the end to a deal between Coillte, the Irish state-owned forestry service and the British Investment Fund Gresham House. Irish public farmers and environmentalists alike are united in their indignation. The use of our natural assets in a deal with foreign investment funds adds insult to injury. Again, another example of an Irish Government standing idly by as cuckoo vulture and investment funds profit off the backs of Irish workers and families.

This deal won't benefit the environment. It won't help Ireland reach our climate goals. The deal only lines the pockets of corporations with no regard for our resources or citizens. As shareholders on behalf of the Irish people, I am calling on the Irish Government to abandon this deal, which flies in the face of real and meaningful climate action. If the Irish Government fails on this, they fail rural Ireland, they fail forestry and will fail biodiversity.

Tomislav Sokol (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, pravom Europske unije štite se oznake zemljopisnog podrijetla za poljoprivredne i prehrambene proizvode kao što su nadaleko poznati dalmatinski pršut i slavonski kulen. Međutim, europsko zakonodavstvo ne poznaje pravni instrument zaštite neprehrambenih tradicijskih proizvoda, a takvih je hrvatska kulturna baština prepuna. Uz različita nacionalna pravila o zaštiti neprehrambenih proizvoda, dodatni problem je činjenica da na unutarnjem tržištu ne postoji prekogranični sustav za uzajamno priznavanje nacionalnih sustava zaštite.

Paška čipka, šibenski botun ili pak slavonski zlatovez samo su neki od tradicijskih dragulja našeg kraja čija se tehnika izrade brižno čuvala i prenosila s generacije na generaciju. Predugo su tradicijski prehrambeni proizvodi bili nezaštićeni i stoga je krajnje vrijeme da europskim zakonodavstvom prepoznamo vrijednost naše kulturne baštine i zaštitimo vrijedan rad lokalnog stanovništva od krivotvorina iz trećih država. Pozdravljam, stoga, prijedlog Europske komisije o zaštiti oznaka zemljopisnog podrijetla za obrtničke industrijske proizvode i pozivam Vijeće i Europski parlament da što prije usuglase stajališta kako bismo zajamčili da nitko neće ostvariti korist nauštrb tradicionalne proizvodnje.

Sara Cerdas (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, o Ano Europeu das Competências tem como objetivo potencializar os trabalhadores com os conhecimentos necessários e garantir que ninguém fica à margem na transição ambiental e na transição digital.

Atualmente, as regiões ultraperiféricas são muito afetadas pelo declínio da população ativa, mas também pela migração dos jovens e é por isso urgente desenvolver e executar estratégias abrangentes para atrair e fixar os talentos nestas regiões. Daí a importância de criarmos redes de desenvolvimento de talentos jovem através de políticas adaptadas à realidade regional e local, combater a escassez de mão-de-obra em alguns setores, vocacionando as pessoas para as especificidades de cada mercado de trabalho e apostar na formação de empregos verdes e empregos azuis tão essenciais para a economia destas regiões.

O talento na União Europeia tem de ser potenciado e as regiões ultraperiféricas têm pessoas com talento. Que 2023 seja o ano para o fazer!

Vlad-Marius Botoș (Renew). – Domnule președinte, stimați colegi, doamna comisară, dreptul la opinie și libera exprimare sunt unele dintre cele mai importante drepturi democratice în Uniunea Europeană. Dreptul la opinie însă nu este dreptul la dezinformare și nici dreptul de a prezenta păreri personale ca pe niște adevăruri absolute. Nu este dreptul extremiștilor de a promova ura, de a-i minți pe oameni.

Comunicarea online a făcut ca dezinformarea să se propage mult mai ușor și mai rapid către oameni care nu știu sau nu pot să verifice informațiile. Ceea ce este mult mai grav, este că aceste dezinformări se propagă și prin intermediul mass mediei tradiționale, unde sunt canale de știri în toate țările membre ale Uniunii Europene, care par că nu mai respectă nicio regulă în afară de interesul financiar.

Dezinformarea este extrem de periculoasă pentru democrație, pentru că folosește buna-credință a oamenilor și schimbă comportamentele în relațiile sociale, ducând la un grad mare de polarizare, la ură. Trebuie să ne aplecăm cu cea mai mare seriozitate, dragi colegi, și cât mai repede asupra acestui subiect.

Erik Marquardt (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident! Ich wollte darauf eingehen, dass es inzwischen ja so normal geworden ist – besonders auf der rechten Seite des Parlaments –, dass man einfach behauptet: Schuld daran, dass Menschen über das Mittelmeer fliehen, sind eigentlich die Hilfsorganisationen, die Menschen aus Seenot retten. Das ist so normal geworden, dass man es nicht mal mehr begründet. Es gibt auch gar keine Argumente dafür, aber man behauptet einfach, schuld an der Flucht über das Mittelmeer sind die NGOs. Die sind daran schuld, dass Menschen ertrinken. Und es fällt kaum noch auf, dass nie ein Argument kommt. Deswegen wollte ich noch einmal ganz kurz anmerken, dass es einfach keinen Sinn macht, das immer wieder zu behaupten.

Diese NGOs haben sich erst gegründet, nachdem so viele Menschen ertrunken sind. Es gibt viele Studien, die belegen, dass die NGOs nicht dazu beitragen, dass mehr Schiffe ablegen. Und es ist, auch wenn man sich die Zahlen letztes Jahr 2022 anguckt, einfach so – und das kann man ja mal zur Kenntnis nehmen –, dass 90 Prozent der Menschen in Italien ankommen, indem sie entweder von der Küstenwache oder gar nicht gerettet wurden, sondern sie kommen selbstständig an. Nur etwas weniger als zehn Prozent der Menschen wurden von zivilen Seenotrettungsorganisationen gerettet. Es ist also gar nicht wichtig für die Menschen oder auch die kriminellen Schleppergruppen in Libyen. Dass die Menschen ablegen, liegt nicht daran, dass es NGOs gibt. Es ist einfach wichtig, dass wir diese Realität zur Kenntnis nehmen.

(Der Präsident entzieht dem Redner das Wort.)

Alessandro Panza (ID). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, sono passati ormai ottant'anni da quel 26 gennaio del 1943, in cui gli Alpini sopravvissero all'esercito russo nella battaglia di Nikolajewka. Una sopravvivenza scaturita dal sacrificio e dal profondo senso del dovere nell'affrontare una ritirata straziante da una guerra immotivata, tragica, ingiusta e sbagliata.

Ancora oggi, a ottant'anni di distanza, gli Alpini evocano quei valori di solidarietà, fratellanza e abnegazione che li porta a mettersi a disposizione dei propri concittadini e non solo ogni qualvolta un'alluvione, un terremoto o, peggio ancora, una guerra mettono in ginocchio le popolazioni inermi, ma ogni giorno, al servizio delle loro comunità, in gesti grandi e piccoli, con il solo scopo di fare del bene.

Oggi più che mai gli Alpini, nella loro incrollabile forza d'animo, incarnano concretamente quei valori fondamentali sui quali vogliamo costruire le nostre società: la pace, la condivisione, la solidarietà e l'altruismo.

È per questo che ritengo doveroso onorare il glorioso Corpo degli Alpini in quest'Aula. Viva gli Alpini, »di qui non si passa«.

Cristian Terheș (ECR). – Domnule președinte, stimați cetățeni ai statelor Uniunii Europene, asistăm de mai mult timp la cel mai insidios, îndelungat și periculos atac la adresa drepturilor noastre fundamentale, individuale și la adresa suveranității țărilor noastre, ce are ca finalitate înrobirea noastră, ca persoane și națiuni. Acest atac nu se face pe calea armelor, ci de către instituții europene, prin fel și fel de mecanisme administrative și jurisdicționale care au ca mijloc subminarea supremației constituțiilor noastre și preluarea deciziilor de la reprezentanții aleși de către popor, de către o birocrație sau funcționărime europeană ce nu este aleasă de nimeni și nu răspunde în fața nimănui.

Asistăm astăzi la cel mai mare atac, astfel, la suveranitatea și la independența statelor noastre. Am ajuns, astfel, în UE, ca supremația constituțiilor votate prin referendum de către cetățeni să fie subminate de acte ale unor birocrați necunoscuți și nealeși de nimeni ce nu răspund în fața nimănui. Aceasta nu e democrație, ci tiranie, o tiranie a birocraților și funcționarilor care trebuie să fie oprită acum, înainte de a fi prea târziu.

Sandra Pereira (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, cada vez mais o trabalho e os salários minúsculos não garantem direitos fundamentais, como o direito à habitação.

O aumento do custo de vida é de tal forma gravoso que vemos hoje famílias que, trabalhando, são obrigadas a partilhar a casa ou a voltar para casa dos pais, ou mesmo a enfrentar a vida em situação de sem abrigo. Não podemos aceitar o modelo social em que a inflação, acompanhada pela especulação financeira imobiliária, favorecida por regimes fiscais benevolentes, leva trabalhadores a terem de escolher entre a alimentação e ter uma casa para viver e dormir.

Esta visão de que as casas constituem um lucrativo setor de investimento, em vez de cumprirem a sua função habitacional enquanto garante de bem-estar social, é um espelho cada vez mais reluzente das desigualdades sociais que nos assolam.

Urge o aumento dos parques habitacionais públicos e que o Estado cumpra o seu papel, garantindo o direito à habitação constitucionalmente consagrado, regulando o mercado e protegendo as pessoas dos efeitos da política de subidas de taxas de juro do BCE.

Miriam Lexmann (PPE). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, v auguste 2020 sme v šoku sledovali zábery z cely na letisku v Charleroi, na ktorých príslušníci belgickej polície brutálne zasahujú proti Slovákovi Jozefovi Chovancovi, ktorý následne zomrel. V nadväznosti na to aj tento parlament formou listu vyzval na rýchle vyšetrenie tohto prípadu a spravodlivé vyvodenie zodpovednosti. Rovnaký šok vyvolalo aj nedávne rozhodnutie belgickej prokuratúry, podľa ktorého nevyplýva pre policajtov zasahujúcich proti Jozefovi Chovancovi žiadna trestnoprávna zodpovednosť. A ja sa pýtam, ako je možné, že v srdci Európskej únie, kde úzkostlivo sledujeme čo i len náznaky porušovania právneho štátu, sa prijme rozhodnutie, ktoré sa javí ako v príkrom rozpore so spravodlivým zaobchádzaním a právom na spravodlivý proces? Vyzývam preto na okamžitú pozornosť tomuto prípadu a koordinované kroky na zabezpečenie riadneho a spravodlivého vyšetrenia.

Katarína Roth Neveďalová (S&D). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, 1. januára 2023 sme oslávili tridsiate výročie mierového rozdelenie Československa, a tým aj vzniku samostatnej Slovenskej republiky. Považujem to za významný míľnik, ktorý si zaslúži okrem oslavy aj to, aby sme sa obzreli späť a ocenili, čo všetko sme v ére samostatnosti dosiahli. Slovensko sa postupne stalo členom všetkých dôležitých medzinárodných organizácií a v roku 2004, čiže takmer pred dvadsiatimi rokmi, aj Európskej únie. Vďaka práci a nasadeniu ľavicovej vlády sme v roku 2009 vstúpili do Schengenu a od toho roku používame aj euro. Našich občanov sme tak významne ochránili pred ekonomickými výkyvmi a aj dnes profitujeme z tejto spoločnej meny viac ako krajiny, ktoré si svoje meny ponechali. Teším sa, že tento rok sa k nám v Schengene a eurozóne pridalo aj Chorvátsko a naši občania tak môžu slobodne bez hraníc cestovať ku všetkým moriam v Európe. Slovenské predsedníctvo v Európskej únii v roku 2016 je dodnes vnímané ako veľmi úspešné, čo je takisto pozitívom. Nie vždy máme možno rovnaký názor a postoj k otázkam, ktorým čelíme, ale vždy sme ako krajina boli konštruktívny partner v diskusii.

Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE). – Senhor Presidente, na Galiza, de onde eu venho, mais de 7600 meninas e meninos carecem de pediatra. Em 194 municípios não há serviço de pediatria. Há uma tendência à centralização que deixa parte do território sem serviços. Além disso, a situação continua a agravar-se, já que mais de 25 % dos pediatras ativos tem mais de 63 anos.

A assistência pediátrica é um serviço essencial para garantir a qualidade da assistência médica a crianças e adolescentes que necessitam de atendimento especializado. A deterioração da saúde pública no Estado espanhol é um facto. A despesa com saúde em relação ao Produto Interno Bruto está abaixo da média da União Europeia e na Galiza a situação é pior.

Há protestos para o direito básico de as nossas meninas e meninos serem tratados de forma igual a noutros lugares da Europa e terem um pediatra em todos os municípios.

Patricia Chagnon (ID). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, je suis élue de la France, et plus précisément de la Somme, en Picardie, première région betteravière de France. Je veux ici, à cette tribune, être la porte-parole de dizaines de milliers d'agriculteurs français, et en réalité d'une filière entière qui risque de mourir d'une décision disproportionnée et, je le crois, totalement inadaptée au but écologique poursuivi. La décision de la Cour de justice européenne d'imposer aux betteraviers la suppression immédiate, pure et simple des néonicotinoïdes dans les États membres est d'une brutalité inouïe. Les insecticides sont indispensables pour protéger les cultures de betteraves des attaques de pucerons.

Vous ne pouvez pas ignorer que la décision par le gouvernement Macron d'imposer la décision de l'Union européenne va entraîner la prolifération de pucerons, la chute des rendements de betteraves et, par conséquent, la faillite des exploitations. Au lieu de donner aux chercheurs et aux agriculteurs le temps de trouver un traitement de substitution, le ministre français de l'Agriculture a annoncé qu'il cédait aux injonctions bruxelloises, désastreuses pour la filière betteravière française. Le gouvernement français préfère abandonner les agriculteurs en rase campagne plutôt que de déplaire à ses amis de l'Union européenne. Vous leur permettez de vendre aujourd'hui encore plus de sucre, notamment de sucre de canne d'Amérique du Sud. (Le Président retire la parole à l'oratrice.)

Johan Nissinen (ECR). – Herr talman! Tandkräm, parfym och solkräm är tre produkter som riskerar att försvinna om kommissionen får igenom sitt förslag. Dess utkast till en ny kosmetikaförordning skulle reglera sönder marknaden för dessa produkter.

EU:s världsbild krockar återigen med verkligheten. Byråkrater hittar ämnen som är »farliga«. I tandkräm är det fluor som är farligt. I solskydd är det UV-skyddet som är boven, och i parfymen är det etanol som skrämmer.

Men dessa ämnen är inte farliga om de används i lagom och små mängder. Ta fluor till exempel – det är farligt att få i sig för mycket fluor, men i tandkräm har det visat sig ge väldigt god tandhälsa.

Varför ska man begränsa sådana här saker? Varför vill man göra livet krångligare och tråkigare för vanliga människor? Det är inte farligt att ha fräscha tänder. Det är inte farligt att lukta gott. Så sluta upp med det här tramset nu och låt folk vara ifred!

João Pimenta Lopes (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, sobre o crescimento do PIB em Portugal no ano que passou, o maior desde 1987, dois apontamentos.

Primeiro, este crescimento é acompanhado da maior queda do peso dos salários no PIB no mesmo período. Os salários reais reduziram-se, os trabalhadores perderam poder de compra, muitos empobrecem a trabalhar.

Os grupos económicos aumentam os seus lucros, aumentam as desigualdades e as injustiças. Uma realidade que é indissociável das orientações, pressões e imposições da União Europeia, a que sucessivos governos se têm submetido, dos ataques à contratação coletiva, das restrições salariais do setor público, do desinvestimento nos serviços públicos e nas funções sociais do Estado.

Segundo, pese o enviesamento económico deste crescimento e as circunstâncias excecionais que o explicam, ele põe a nu o absurdo da insistência na redução da dívida por via de excedentes orçamentais da ditadura do défice.

Como se comprova, é o crescimento económico o caminho para uma mais rápida e sustentada redução da dívida.

Peter Pollák (PPE). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, napriek rozviazaniu rúk polícii sú na Slovensku stále chránení nominanti bývalých vlád Smeru a ich mecenáši. Generálny prokurátor bez hanby využíva paragraf 363, ktorým ruší stíhanie, najmä keď sú obvinení kamaráti, rodina, nominanti, sponzori, spolustraníci bývalých premiérov Fica a Pellegriniho. Túto medzeru v zákone dokonca využil na zrušenie obvinení samotného Roberta Fica či Roberta Kaliňáka. Zakaždým rovnaký scenár. Tesne pred odovzdaním výsledkov vyšetrovania na súd použije generálny prokurátor paragraf 363 a korupčné obvinenia sú zrušené. Polícia vyhotovila dokonca video z poľovníckej chaty, na ktorom sa sám Robert Fico chváli práve koordináciou s generálnym prokurátorom. Existujú preto dôvodné podozrenia, že generálny prokurátor nadužíva medzeru v zákone v prospech kumpánov Smeru a Hlasu. Bez hanby nevidí ani trestný čin súvisiaci s únosom Vietnamca, ktorého doviezli z Nemecka na Slovensko a odkiaľ ho vládnym špeciálom prepravili potajomky do Ruska. Kým v Nemecku všetci, ktorí spolupracovali na tomto únose, boli odsúdení, na Slovensku generálny prokurátor dodnes nevidí dôvod na trestné stíhanie. To, čo je trestným činom v Nemecku, nie je trestným činom na Slovensku.

Michiel Hoogeveen (ECR). – Voorzitter, in de nacht van 20 op 21 juli 2020 stond het vliegtuig van de Franse president Macron warm te draaien op de luchthaven van Brussel. De onderhandelingen rond het Europees coronanoodfonds zijn voorbij. Premier Mark Rutte heeft nee gezegd. Nederland weigert op te draaien voor een EU-herstelplan. Maar dan gebeurt het! De telefoon van Europees voorzitter van de Raad Charles Michel rinkelt. Het is premier Rutte. Op orders van zijn D66-vicepremier Sigrid Kaag wil hij toch onderhandelen. Resultaat: ruim 800 miljard EUR aan gemeenschappelijke EU-schuld op conto van de AAA-garantie van Nederland. Vandaag komt Macron opnieuw bedelen, deze keer voor een groen industriefonds. Opnieuw zegt Mark Rutte nee. Maar wie gelooft hem nog?

Voorzitter, het moet echt anders. Lidstaten en regeringen moeten hun eigen verantwoordelijkheid nemen. De Nederlandse belastingbetaler kan dat niet voor hen blijven doen. Voor JA21 is het nee, en blijft het nee.

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Mr President, on 6 March last year the security services of Ukraine, the SBU, arrested the First Secretary of the Ukrainian Komsomol, Mikhail Kononovich, and his brother, Aleksander. They were accused of treason and spreading pro-Russian views. These two young communists are subjected to physical and psychological torture, beatings, lashings, sleep deprivation and threats of execution.

Political repression of communists, peace activists and progressive forces is common in both Ukraine and Russia. If Russians do it, it's a travesty. Yet, when Ukrainians do it, it is to spread democracy and representing European values.

Member States are divided on speeding up accession for Ukraine, and rightly so. The level of corruption is comical. The Zelenskyy government empowers far-right extremists and neo-Nazis while destroying workers' rights and banning 12 opposition parties – and, as we can see from the case of the Kononovich brothers, are busy persecuting them.

We cannot just ignore this oppression! We can start by calling for the release of these two men.

Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Domnule președinte, doamna comisară, doresc astăzi să abordez un subiect ce ține de Serbia, un stat care aspiră să adere la Uniunea Europeană, însă atunci când și-a asumat acest drum, România a condiționat respectarea acestui statut de acordarea de drepturi pentru minoritățile naționale.

Minoritatea românească este extrem de numeroasă în această țară, dar în continuare sunt îngrădite drepturi fundamentale. Și aici vreau să aduc un omagiu vicarului Bisericii Ortodoxe Române din Serbia, care a fost extrem de puternic persecutat de către autorități de-a lungul celor 20 de ani de activitate, a Protopopiatului »Dacia Ripensis« din Valea Timocului, din Serbia de Răsărit. Îl asigur de tot respectul și cred că Serbia trebuie să ajungă în Uniunea Europeană, dar are obligația să respecte pe toți cetățenii ei, inclusiv pe minoritarii români.

Łukasz Kohut (S&D). – Panie Przewodniczący! Tylko od nas zależy, jak urządzimy nasz wspólny europejski dom. Czy będzie silny i oparty na zasadach, czy słaby i ograbiony z wartości. Tak, Unia to dom, a naszą rolą jest wzmacnianie tego domu. Po to zostaliśmy wybrani: aby był zabezpieczony przed wrogami, aby chronił najsłabszych i aby jego mieszkańcy żyli w zgodzie i w dostatku.

Jednak w tym naszym domu są tacy, którzy szkalują rodzinę i wynoszą z domu srebra rodowe. Są tutaj tacy. Jedni torpedują sankcje na Putina i nie dają broni Ukrainie, drudzy, dzień w dzień, opluwają Unię, powielając kremlowską propagandę.

To jest ten moment w historii Europy, kiedy potrzeba silniejszej i bardziej zintegrowanej Unii. Po pierwsze, koniec z patologią zasady weta w Radzie, która umożliwia Orbanowi blokowanie sankcji. Po drugie, niezależność energetyczna całej Unii Europejskiej. Po trzecie, czarny sen Putina: wspólna europejska armia i wspólna polityka zagraniczna.

Silna Unia Europejska to bezpieczna przyszłość dla milionów Europejek i Europejczyków.

Stanislav Polčák (PPE). – Pane předsedající, mnohé horské regiony, ale také strukturálně postižené regiony, chudé regiony se dále propadají, vylidňují se, jako by neměly budoucnost. Pro mladé nejsou atraktivní, rozvoj je spíše stagnující a zároveň je třeba říci, že tyto regiony jsou vlastně opuštěné, opuštěné v naší Evropské unii. Ono to vypadá, jako kdyby kohezní politika v některých oblastech selhávala, jako by náš Fond spravedlivé transformace nezafungoval tak, jak my si představujeme. Bohužel mnohé regiony naopak fungují jako trychtýř, jako pól růstu, kde všichni chtějí bydlet. Myslím si, že tyto otázky selhávání naší kohezní regionální politiky musíme vyřešit daleko lépe než doposud. Je důležité zatraktivnit zemědělství, je důležité najít i atraktivní lukrativní práci a příležitosti pro mnohé firmy v těchto regionech. Jinak se náš venkov stane vylidněný a stagnující.

Lívia Járóka (NI). – Tisztelt Elnök Úr és kedves Képviselőtársaim! A múlt héten róhattuk le tiszteletünket a holokauszt áldozatainak emléke előtt, többek között azon roma családok emléke előtt, akik ennek a felfoghatatlan erőszaknak az áldozataivá váltak, és akiknek leszármazottjai közül sokan ma is a megkülönböztetés és a kirekesztés bizonyos formáit tapasztalják. Ezért ez a Ház 2010-ben, 2011-ben a magyar elnökséget arra kényszerítette, hogy egy európai romastratégiát fogadjanak el, majd ezután ez a Ház 2020-ban ezt az európai romastratégiát, ami a legszegényebb nem romákat is érintette, felülvizsgálja.

Most viszont a Covid és a háború után arra van szükségünk, hogy a megerősített, általunk, pártok által, összpártok által megerősített svéd elnökség a Tanács asztalára tudja hozni ezt a kérdést is. Hisz megjelent ezekben a közösségekben az éhezés. Tulajdonképpen a nulláról indulunk, ezért kérem, hogy az összpárti roma-rezolúciót április 8-ára, a nemzetközi roma napra mindenki, így a svéd elnökség is támogassa.

Clare Daly (The Left). – Mr President, I had my name on the list. I was told that there wasn't enough time and there were too many speakers, but we've only had 27. We still have time and some people didn't turn up. So I'm just wondering what the story is. I can go on? Thank you so much, I really appreciate it, you are a gentleman.

Italian anarchist Alfredo Cospito is on his 105th day of hunger strike against the »41-bis« prison regime under which he is incarcerated. It's a prison regime which authorises the violation of human rights: no phone calls, no parcels, no mixing with other prisoners, 22-hour lockup, one visit a month; a prison regime condemned by the European Court of Human Rights for breaching two of its articles. Yet this regime continues to exist in an EU Member State, unchallenged in our so-called democracies.

Alfredo has lost over 40 kilos. His potassium levels have dropped. He will die unless action is taken. The Minister for Justice, who must rule on the revocation by 12 February, has said he's going to leave the decision to the judiciary until 7 March. This is a death sentence. Alfredo doesn't have that time left.

So the question is, will the EU remain silent? This is a human rights issue. Over 200 jurists and lawyers have condemned his treatment. 41-bis must be revoked.

Save Alfredo Cospito.

President. – Thank you, colleague. This is not a question of gentlemen likeness. And don't mix up with the standby-queue at Ryanair.

Clare Daly (The Left). – Mr President, the definition of a gentleman, my colleague says, is someone who treats others the way they would like to be treated themselves. And I very much appreciate your intervention and understanding.

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Mr President, believe it or not, the definition was first spoken by Francis Bacon in the 17th century in Britain. And when someone challenged him and asked him what was a gentleman or a lady, he said it's one who treats others as he would like to be treated by them.

President. – Yes, but I'm sure that Francis Bacon also would have judged that the 30-minute-speech topic is not a question for the Ryanair standby queue.

15.   Dagsorden for det følgende møde

Der Präsident. – Die nächste Sitzung findet am Donnerstag, 2. Februar 2023, um 8.30 Uhr statt. Die Tagesordnung wurde veröffentlicht und ist auf der Website des Europäischen Parlaments verfügbar.

16.   Hævelse af mødet

(Die Sitzung wird um 19.50 Uhr geschlossen.)