—

having regard to the Commission communication of 12 May 2021 on strategic guidelines for a more sustainable and competitive EU aquaculture for the period 2021 to 2030 (COM(2021)0236),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 25 March 2021 on an action plan for the development of organic production (COM(2021)0141),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 20 May 2020 entitled ‘A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system’ (COM(2020)0381), and to Parliament’s resolution of 20 October 2021 (1) thereon,

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 20 May 2020 entitled ‘EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 — Bringing nature back into our lives’ (COM(2020)0380), and to Parliament’s resolution of 9 June 2021 (2) thereon,

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 11 December 2019 on the European Green Deal (COM(2019)0640), and to Parliament’s resolution of 15 January 2020 (3) thereon,

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC (4),

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1004 (5),

—

having regard to Directive 2014/89/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 establishing a framework of maritime spatial planning (6),

—

having regard to Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (7) (the ‘Birds Directive’),

—

having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 of 24 September 2009 on the protection of animals at the time of killing (8),

—

having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 of 22 December 2004 on the protection of animals during transport and related operations (9),

—

having regard to Council Directive 98/58/EC of 20 July 1998 concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes (10),

—

having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 22 September 2021 on strategic guidelines for the sustainable development of EU aquaculture,

—

having regard to the draft opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 1-3 December 2021 on sustainable blue economy and aquaculture,

—

having regard to the Opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 17 December 2015 on the future of European aquaculture,

—

having regard to the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO) 2030 Strategy for sustainable fisheries and aquaculture in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea,

—

having regard to the interim evaluation of the Open Method of Coordination for EU aquaculture (11),

—

having regard to Special Eurobarometer 515 of 2021 on EU consumer habits regarding fishery and aquaculture products,

—

having regard to the study requested by its Committee on Fisheries (PECH) on the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on EU fisheries and aquaculture, published on 7 July 2021,

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 June 2018 entitled ‘Towards a sustainable and competitive European aquaculture sector: current status and future challenges’ (12),

—

having regard to its resolution of 4 December 2008 on the adoption of a European Cormorant Management Plan to minimise the increasing impact of cormorants on fish stocks, fishing and aquaculture (13),

—

having regard to Articles 3, 4, 38 and 43 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

—

having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU),

—

having regard to Rule 54 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries (A9-0215/2022),

A.

whereas the common fisheries policy states that aquaculture should contribute to the preservation of food production potential on a sustainable basis throughout the Union so as to guarantee long-term food security, including food supplies, growth and employment for Union citizens, and contribute to meeting the growing world demand for aquatic food; whereas the common fisheries policy should pay full regard to animal health, animal welfare, food and feed safety; whereas it is crucial to reduce the administrative burden and implement Union law in a more efficient manner that is more responsive to the needs of stakeholders;

B.

whereas the shellfish and aquaculture sectors play an important and valuable role in the EU from an economic, social and environmental perspective, and help to improve the quality of life in coastal, interior and outermost regions of the EU;

C.

whereas the food security and livelihoods that these industries provide are crucial in many coastal, riverine, island, inland and lagoon regions;

D.

whereas the European Green Deal, the biodiversity strategy and the farm to fork strategy aim to achieve a carbon neutral Europe by 2050 and make food systems fair, healthy and environmentally friendly across the Union; whereas aquaculture can provide healthy food with a smaller climate and environmental footprint than that of non-aquatic land-based farming;

E.

whereas the FAO Declaration for Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture acknowledges that aquaculture has been the fastest growing global food production industry over the last five decades, and that it is responsible for the doubling of global per capita fish consumption since 1960 and has increasingly provided food and livelihoods to a growing population;

F.

whereas the EU strategic guidelines for a more sustainable and competitive EU aquaculture, the FAO Shanghai Declaration of September 2021 on aquaculture for food and sustainable development, and the 2021 Aquatic Animal Health Code of the World Organisation for Animal Health establish animal welfare objectives in aquaculture to support producers and consumers;

G.

whereas EU aquaculture production accounts for just 1,15 % of global production, according to the most recent figures (2018) (14);

H.

whereas the establishment or expansion of an aquaculture farm in the EU requires various licences and authorisations and is generally a slow, complex procedure that sometimes lacks legal certainty and economic predictability; whereas this situation hinders the development of the sector, discouraging corporate investment and generating excessive costs for the sector, while promoting imports from third countries;

I.

whereas the FAO 2020 report on the state of world fisheries and aquaculture indicates that globally, the proportion of women in the total aquaculture workforce (19 %) is larger than that in fisheries (12 %) and that overall, women play a crucial role throughout the fish and aquaculture value chain and provide labour relating to both general commercial practices and artisanal practices; whereas the aquaculture sector in general directly employs more than 74 000 people in the EU in more than 12 000 companies (15);

J.

whereas one in every four seafood products consumed in Europe comes from aquaculture; whereas between 2018 and 2019, per capita apparent consumption of farmed products increased by 2 %; whereas considering that in 2019, the EU was 41,2 % self-sufficient in fish and seafood, only 10 % of EU seafood consumption comes from EU aquaculture, which accounts for less than 2 % of global production;

K.

whereas almost 70 % of aquaculture production in the EU is concentrated in four Member States (Spain, France, Italy and Greece), with mussels, trout, seabream, oysters, seabass, carp and clams accounting for the vast majority of production; whereas there is still a lot of potential for further growth and diversification in terms of producing countries and species farmed;

L.

whereas although nearly two thirds of Europeans ate fishery or aquaculture products at home at least once a month in 2021, this is a downward trend compared to 2018; whereas consumers in 2021 were divided regarding their preference for wild or farmed products, with around a third preferring wild products, a third preferring farmed products and a similar proportion having no preference;

M.

whereas some initial estimates point to a 17 % reduction in sales volume and an 18 % reduction in total income, with a particularly harsh impact on the shellfish sector;

N.

whereas EU shellfish production consists mainly of molluscs, specifically mussels, oysters and clams, and is generally a traditional, labour-intensive aquaculture activity carried out by family businesses, that is fully integrated into the local environment;

O.

whereas the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean 2030 strategy for sustainable fisheries and aquaculture in the Mediterranean and Black Sea specifies that aquaculture production needs to meet demand, grow sustainably, capitalise on innovation, digitalisation and knowledge sharing and enhance its attractiveness for investment; whereas the strategy further states that monitoring and reducing the sector’s environmental footprint, dealing with climate change and pollution and securing animal health and welfare are crucial in achieving sustainability;

P.

whereas the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries’ 2020 economic report on the EU aquaculture sector indicates that almost 80 % of all aquaculture enterprises in the EU are microenterprises with fewer than 10 employees;

Q.

whereas the interim evaluation of the Open Method of Coordination concluded that the Member States should make greater efforts to expand the EU’s aquaculture sector, enhancing its resilience and competitiveness, and guaranteeing, in particular, access to space and water, and a transparent and efficient regulatory and administrative framework;

R.

whereas, despite the sector’s potential, the development of aquaculture in the outermost regions still lags seriously behind;

S.

whereas the European Market Observatory for fisheries and aquaculture’s fishmeal and fish oil report from September 2021 indicates that most fishmeal in aquaculture feed is consumed in Asia and that in 2019, 34 % of fishmeal was used in China, 35 % in other Asian countries, and 9 % of fishmeal was used in Europe; whereas 20 million tonnes of wild fish are captured yearly for non-human feed purposes; whereas there is increasing competition for fishmeal on the global animal feed markets between aquaculture and livestock producers; whereas higher feed prices increase the need for further development of alternative feed products as well as feed efficiency to ensure profitability for high-value aquaculture products;

T.

whereas the FAO fisheries and aquaculture technical paper of 19 February 2019 entitled ‘A third assessment of global marine fisheries discards’ shows that discards amount to a total of 9,1 million tonnes, which represents 10,8 % of the annual average catch between 2010 and 2014;

U.

whereas the European Market Observatory for fisheries and aquaculture’s report of May 2017 on EU organic aquaculture from indicates that organic aquaculture production is increasing significantly in some Member States, while others are still in the early stages of developing this production method;

V.

whereas aquaculture is especially sensitive to extreme weather events in riverbeds and coastal areas that are increasingly occurring due to global warming, including droughts, floods, storms and waves, which cause severe damage to aquaculture infrastructures and the species cultivated;

W.

whereas Directive 2014/89/EU on maritime spatial planning calls for all coastal Member States to present national maritime spatial plans to the Commission ‘as soon as possible, and at the latest by 31 March 2021’;

X.

whereas the outermost regions are particularly exposed to unstable climates and severe weather events, which may jeopardise the sector’s potential in those regions;

Y.

whereas the population of cormorants has seen a massive increase; whereas this increase is causing serious damage to many marine sectors, including aquaculture;

Z.

whereas in its resolution on the adoption of a European cormorant management plan to minimise the increasing impact of cormorants on fish stocks, fishing and aquaculture, adopted 13 years ago, Parliament proposed several possible actions to solve the problems that cormorants continue to pose;

AA.

whereas its resolution entitled ‘Towards a sustainable and competitive European aquaculture sector: current status and future challenges’ highlights the importance, among many other actions, of minimising the increasing impact of cormorants on aquaculture;

AB.

whereas financial compensation is available to aquaculture and fisheries operators for losses deriving from cormorants’ interaction with fisheries;

AC.

whereas the entire aquaculture sector in Europe will have to bear the burden of increasing electricity and gas costs, with an even worse outlook due to rising production costs and marketing uncertainty caused also by the COVID-19 pandemic crisis;

AD.

whereas large fish and fish product producers in the EU neighbourhood area are planning by 2030 to double their aquaculture production compared to 2020 levels, which could ramp up the pressure on the EU’s production;

AE.

whereas not all Member States are giving sufficient consideration to the potential of aquaculture development or its potential socioeconomic and environmental effects;

AF.

whereas the annual consumption of fish products per capita in the EU varies very widely, from approximately 6 kg to approximately 60 kg; whereas demand for aquaculture products in the EU could therefore increase in the foreseeable future;

AG.

whereas many enterprises are finding it difficult to maintain their market share, both domestically and abroad;

AH.

whereas, according to the most recent data from Eurostat and the FAO, in 2019 around 76 % of the fish consumed in the EU was wild and 24 % was farmed;

AI.

whereas there are only 62 products with protected geographical indication (PGI) registered in Class 1.7. — Fresh fish, molluscs, and crustaceans and products derived therefrom, out of a total of 1 382 PGI products; whereas protection procedures are under way for 14 other products; whereas the register of Traditional Specialities Guaranteed (TSG) foods contains just four products in that class; whereas some of the successful registrations have been for aquaculture products;

AJ.

whereas the EU fisheries funds (the European Fisheries Fund (EFF), the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) and the European Maritime, fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF)) have provided financial support to the EU aquaculture sector;

AK.

whereas escapees from aquaculture farms can cause genetic alterations in wild populations;

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

43.

44.

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

53.

54.

55.

56.

57.

58.

59.

60.

61.

62.

63.

64.

65.

66.

67.

68.

69.

70.

71.

72.

—

having regard to the Commission communication on 15 July 2020 entitled ‘An action plan for fair and simple taxation supporting the recovery strategy’ (COM(2020)0312),

—

having regard to the Commission proposal of 24 September 2020 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on markets in crypto-assets (COM(2020)0593),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 24 September 2020 on a digital finance strategy for the EU (COM(2020)0591),

—

having regard to the report of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) of 12 October 2020 entitled ‘Taxing Virtual Currencies: An Overview of Tax Treatments and Emerging Tax Policy Issues’,

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 18 May 2021 entitled ‘Business Taxation for the 21st Century’ (COM(2021)0251),

—

having regard to the 2021 working paper on taxation and structural reforms by the Joint Research Centre of the Commission entitled ‘Cryptocurrencies: an empirical view from a tax perspective’,

—

having regard to the Commission proposal of 20 July 2021 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on information accompanying transfers of funds and certain crypto-assets (COM(2021)0422),

—

having regard to the World Bank’s working paper entitled ‘Crypto-Assets Activity around the World: Evolution and Macro-Financial Drivers’ published on 8 March 2022,

—

having regard to the public consultation document of the OECD released on 22 March 2022 entitled ‘Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework and Amendments to the Common Reporting Standard’,

—

having regard to its study of 15 October 2018 entitled ‘VAT fraud: economic impact, challenges and policy issues’, its study of July 2018 entitled ‘Cryptocurrencies and blockchain — Legal context and implications for financial crime, money laundering and tax evasion’ and its study of 15 February 2018 entitled ‘Impact of Digitalisation on International Tax Matters’,

—

having regard to its study of 21 October 2021 entitled ‘Exploring the opportunities and challenges of new technologies for EU tax administration and policy’,

—

having regard to Rule 54 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A9-0204/2022),

A.

whereas the use of new technologies in the EU single market and the digitalisation of tax administrations across Europe are transforming relations between taxpayers, namely citizens and companies, on the one hand, and national tax authorities on the other; whereas the EU could play a leading role in ensuring that the procedural and technical aspects of the digitalisation of tax administrations are coordinated to avoid barriers to the interoperability of national technical platforms;

B.

whereas the different characteristics of different types of crypto-assets and the boundaries between different kinds of crypto-assets might be relevant for determining their tax treatment;

C.

whereas the market dynamic of crypto-assets shows that there is a need to create a clear, stable and transparent legal framework;

D.

whereas tax authorities today face many challenges regarding effective tax enforcement and in particular cross-border cooperation, given the acceleration of digital transactions, the increasing mobility of taxpayers, the number of cross-border transactions and the internationalisation of economic operations and business models, as well as the risks of double taxation or complex aggressive tax schemes;

E.

whereas tax authorities need to keep up with potential risks for the sustainability of tax systems and their ability to enforce national and European legal frameworks regarding taxation;

F.

whereas new technological solutions, such as blockchain, can be used by tax administrations to better serve the needs of tax payers, to exchange information between jurisdictions, for various types of record-keeping, and to deter and/or address corruption, while such technologies can also be abused and serve as vehicles for illicit activities, with the criminal intent to avoid paying taxes; whereas the increased visibility of blockchain transactions, in particular, might facilitate tax administrations’ efforts to combat tax fraud;

G.

whereas several tax administrations across Europe are already taking important steps towards the digitalisation of processes, although to varying degrees, making tax compliance easier, faster and more effective; whereas the use of new technologies still varies considerably between Member States; whereas national tax administrations, in general, need a further push for more incentives and awareness-raising measures to realise the potential in the field of technological and digital transformation; whereas technology can help facilitate cooperation between different government bodies, namely on matters related to taxation;

H.

whereas the increasing use of crypto-assets is forcing tax administrations to adapt current tax practices within the single market; whereas within the crypto-assets market, the identification of tax-relevant activities is complex, as it relies less on traditional financial intermediaries, who typically provide information for tax purposes;

I.

whereas five of the 27 Member States have specific legal provisions on the taxation of crypto-assets; whereas 19 Member States have administrative guidance on the taxation of crypto-assets;

J.

whereas the OECD Common Reporting Standard (CRS) has improved international tax transparency by requiring jurisdictions to obtain information on offshore assets held with financial institutions and automatically exchange that information with the jurisdictions of residence of taxpayers on an annual basis; whereas in most instances, however, crypto-assets will not fall within the scope of the CRS, which applies to traditional financial assets and fiat currencies;

K.

whereas there is an international effort and commitment to better regulate the fair taxation of the digital economy; whereas crypto-assets could be exploited to undermine existing international tax transparency initiatives, as recognised by the OECD; whereas, in this context, it is crucial for the EU to take a leading role, in particular through close cooperation between Member States to tax crypto-assets in a fair and transparent way;

L.

whereas the global economy is changing and becoming progressively digitalised, and whereas the principles underpinning the current international tax framework are progressively being outdated and can no longer ensure that profits are taxed where the economic activities generating those profits are performed and where value is created;

M.

whereas there is no international instrument regarding the taxation of crypto-assets and there is a wide spectrum of approaches to this matter taken by different countries; whereas the EU must lead the way to more inclusive financial participation of citizens, both within and outside its borders, in the relevant international platforms;

N.

whereas the OECD identifies, in its 2020 report on the taxation of virtual currencies, a number of material points to address, namely the definition of taxable events, the forms of income that are associated with virtual currencies, and how taxation can be adjusted to the nature and dynamics of crypto-assets in order to capture profits in a fair and efficient manner, among other aspects;

O.

whereas the Union has already taken important steps towards a clear definition of certain crypto-assets and crypto-asset service providers and, more broadly, towards establishing a suitable regulatory framework for crypto-assets — the Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) Regulation; whereas this framework and these definitions will facilitate the fair and simple taxation of these assets; whereas definitions of such crypto-assets must be aligned with international standards, namely those developed by the OECD and the Financial Action Task Force;

P.

whereas definitions of crypto-assets need to be uniform across the EU and aligned with international standards; whereas the same crypto-asset may be categorised as a ‘tax object’ in a number of different ways across the EU, resulting in different tax treatment;

Q.

whereas certain fields of tax policy are a national competence and cooperation between Member States remains essential and necessary to respond to the challenges posed to the integrity of the single market and the sustainability of tax systems, inter alia the increasing use of crypto-assets; whereas a framework of 27 significantly different approaches to crypto-asset taxation could lead to significant obstacles to the fulfilment of the objectives of the digital single market; whereas there is therefore a clear case for coordination and cooperation at EU level;

R.

whereas the EU and its single market must ensure an innovation-friendly environment for companies (in particular for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and start-ups) regarding new technologies in the area of financial services and crypto-assets; whereas this main goal requires a strong commitment from Member States with policies, namely on taxation, to ensure a stable, clear and secure regulatory framework for businesses to thrive and contribute to economic growth; whereas, finally, this effort requires strong commitment to safeguard citizens’ rights, as taxpayers and consumers of financial services;

S.

whereas clear guidelines are essential for a fair and efficient taxation system that, if efficiently implemented by the Member States, could achieve beneficial reforms through reducing administrative costs and time, lowering barriers to entry and ensuring certainty and stability, which are prerequisites for competitiveness, as well as for bridging gaps among companies, especially for SMEs;

T.

whereas crypto-assets are a fast moving environment and policymakers need to deliver on equal terms; whereas the tax policy and tax evasion implications still need to be looked at closely, as they form an important aspect of the overall regulatory framework;

U.

whereas Parliament has already underlined that ‘current international corporate tax rules are no longer suitable in the context of digitalisation and globalisation of the economy’, and that ‘developments in digitalisation and a stronger reliance on intangible assets and their increase in value chains create prospects and challenges in terms of traceability of economic operations and taxable events, including enabling of tax avoidance practices, especially when these operations are cross-border or take place outside the Union’ (1);

V.

whereas, unlike in traditional finance, the crypto world is sometimes organised in a decentralised way, making it more difficult to draw on intermediaries to assist tax authorities; whereas such intermediaries often serve as relevant information providers in traditional third-party tax reporting regimes; whereas on the intersection between the crypto sector and the traditional financial system, an intermediary such as an exchange is usually involved;

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

43.

44.

—

having regard to Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union,

—

having regard to Articles 19, 48, 67(4), 153, 165, 168 and 174 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

—

having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular Articles 3, 21, 24, 26, 34, 35, 41 and 47 thereof,

—

having regard to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), and its entry into force on 21 January 2011 in accordance with Council Decision 2010/48/EC of 26 November 2009 concerning the conclusion, by the European Community, of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (1),

—

having regard to the general comments on the CRPD, drawn up by the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities as the authoritative guidance on its implementation, and in particular general comment No. 2 on Article 9: Accessibility, adopted on 11 April 2014,

—

having regard to the Code of Conduct between the Council, the Member States and the Commission setting out internal arrangements for the implementation by and representation of the European Union relating to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2),

—

having regard to the concluding observations of the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of 2 October 2015 on the initial report of the European Union,

—

having regard to the European Ombudsman’s strategic inquiry into how the Commission monitors EU Funds used to promote the right of persons with disabilities and older persons in independent living,

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 3 March 2021 entitled ‘Union of Equality: Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030’ (COM(2021)0101),

—

having regard to the Commission proposal for a Council Directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation (COM(2008)0426, ‘the anti-discrimination directive’) and Parliament’s position of 2 April 2009 thereon (3),

—

having regard to its resolution of 18 June 2020 on the European disability strategy post-2020 (4),

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/782 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2021 on rail passengers’ rights and obligations (5),

—

having regard to Directive (EU) 2019/882 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on the accessibility requirements for products and services (6) (European Accessibility Act),

—

having regard to Directive (EU) 2016/2102 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2016 on the accessibility of websites and mobile applications of public sector bodies (7),

—

having regard to Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing the European Electronic Communications Code (8),

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) 2022/612 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 April 2022 on roaming on public mobile communications networks within the Union (recast) (9),

—

having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘2030 Digital Compass: the European way for the Digital Decade’ (COM(2021)0118),

—

having regard to Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (10),

—

having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy — putting European transport on track for the future’ (COM(2020)0789),

—

having regard to the New Consumer Agenda (COM(2020)0696), that has amongst its five priorities the specific needs of certain consumer groups, amongst them, persons with disabilities,

—

having regard to Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC (11) (Public Procurement Directive),

—

having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2093 of 17 December 2020 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 (12),

—

having regard to Council Decision (EU) 2018/254 of 15 February 2018 on the conclusion on behalf of the European Union of the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons who are Blind, Visually Impaired, or otherwise Print Disabled (13),

—

having regard to the accessibility standards resulting from Commission mandates 376, 554, 420 and 473,

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 181/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 concerning the rights of passengers in bus and coach transport and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 (14),

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1177/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 concerning the rights of passengers when travelling by sea and inland waterway and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 (15),

—

having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 concerning the rights of disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility when travelling by air (16),

—

having regard to Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (17),

—

having regard to Commission Regulation (EU) No 1300/2014 of 18 November 2014 on the technical specifications for interoperability relating to accessibility of the Union’s rail system for persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility (18),

—

having regard to Rule 54 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A9-0209/2022),

A.

whereas persons with disabilities have equal rights on an equal basis with others in all fields of life and have the inalienable rights to dignity, equal treatment, independent living, autonomy and full participation in society, which benefits all levels of society;

B.

whereas more than 87 million people in the Union have some form of disability, and whereas the ageing demographic trend in the Union must be taken into account;

C.

whereas accessibility is an essential precondition for persons with disabilities to fully enjoy human rights and fundamental freedoms; whereas according to Article 9 of the CRPD on accessibility, in order to enable persons with disabilities to live independently and participate fully in all aspects of life, state parties must take appropriate measures to ensure that they have access, on an equal basis with others, to the physical environment, to transportation, to information and communications, including information and communications technologies (ICT) and systems, and to other facilities and services open or provided to the public, both in urban and in rural areas;

D.

whereas Member States must ensure that accessibility becomes mainstreamed at all levels, not only in public buildings and transport, but also in health and education, as well as increasing mobility for and the integration of people with disabilities;

E.

whereas the CRPD defines ‘universal design’ as the design of products, environments, programmes and services to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialised design and without excluding assistive devices for particular groups of persons with disabilities; whereas accessibility is one of the CRPD’s general principles, and the EU and Member States are legally bound by the CRPD under Decision 2010/48/EC; whereas general comment No. 2 on the CRPD notes the obligation of state parties to adopt action plans and strategies to identify existing barriers to accessibility, set time frames with specific deadlines and provide both the human and material resources necessary to remove the barriers; whereas accessibility is crucial for persons with disabilities to enjoy the rights to privacy, non-discrimination, employment, inclusive education, political participation, and other rights enshrined in the CRPD;

F.

whereas local authorities play a crucial role in supporting Member States in the development of social policies, including policies on disability and accessibility, through the analysis of the needs on the ground and the implementation of specific measures;

G.

whereas ensuring high-quality and affordable assistive technologies will foster the full inclusion of persons with disabilities in society and benefit both persons with disabilities and the providers of these technologies, as well as society as a whole; whereas assistive technologies will help to reduce disparities among Member States and whereas these technologies can only work in accessible environments;

H.

whereas higher levels of employment of people with disabilities, greater accessibility and greater inclusion of this group in the workforce have clear economic potential;

I.

whereas the Union has established a comprehensive legal framework for accessibility in the internal market, notably with the adoption of specific accessibility legislation such as the European Accessibility Act, and including accessibility obligations in various pieces of sectoral legislation, including the EU funds regulations; whereas the European Accessibility Act, which will apply from 28 June 2025, will introduce significant new requirements in respect of accessibility for products and services;

J.

whereas the actual implementation of policies related to disabilities will contribute positively to the competitiveness of the EU’s internal market and therefore represents an integral resource for the EU economy;

K.

whereas the evaluation of the European disability strategy 2010-2020 showed that its contribution improved the situation in a number of areas, but also highlighted the fact that persons with disabilities still face considerable barriers to access to healthcare, education, transport, the built environment, ICT, employment and recreational activities, as well to participation in political life and other areas of life;

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

—

having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

—

having regard to the European Social Charter,

—

having regard to the European Convention on Human Rights,

—

having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,

—

having regard to the Council of Europe legal framework for minority protection, the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, particularly on manifestly discriminatory practices of segregating Roma children in education, and the case law of the Court of Justice,

—

having regard to Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (1) (the Racial Equality Directive),

—

having regard to Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (2),

—

having regard to Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives (3) (the Waste Framework Directive),

—

having regard to Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law (4),

—

having regard to the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,

—

having regard to the European Pillar of Social Rights and the Commission communication of 4 March 2021 on the European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan (COM(2021)0102),

—

having regard to its resolution of 18 February 2011 on an EU Strategy on Roma Inclusion (5),

—

having regard to its resolution of 10 December 2013 on gender aspects of the European Framework of National Roma Inclusion Strategies (6),

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 February 2019 on the need for a strengthened post-2020 Strategic EU Framework for National Roma Inclusion Strategies and stepping up the fight against anti-Gypsyism (7),

—

having regard to its resolution of 18 June 2020 on the European Disability Strategy post-2020 (8),

—

having regard to its resolution of 17 September 2020 entitled ‘The implementation of National Roma Integration Strategies: combating negative attitudes towards people with Romani background in Europe’ (9),

—

having regard to its resolution of 21 January 2021 on access to decent and affordable housing for all (10),

—

having regard to its resolution of 11 March 2021 on children’s rights in view of the EU Strategy on the rights of the child (11),

—

having regard to its resolution of 7 April 2022 on the EU’s protection of children and young people fleeing the war in Ukraine (12),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 4 December 2018 entitled ‘Report on the evaluation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020’ (COM(2018)0785),

—

having regard to the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) Second European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey (EU-MIDIS II),

—

having regard to the FRA monitoring framework for an EU Roma Strategic Framework for Equality, Inclusion and Participation,

—

having regard to the FRA bulletin of 29 September 2020 entitled ‘Coronavirus pandemic in the EU — Impact on Roma and Travellers’,

—

having regard to the FEANTSA (European Federation of National Organisations Working with the Homeless) statement of 26 October 2020 entitled ‘The Housing Situation for Roma in the EU Remains Difficult’,

—

having regard to the European Network on Statelessness briefing of 10 March 2022 entitled ‘Stateless people and people at risk of statelessness forcibly displaced from Ukraine’,

—

having regard to the Unicef position paper of June 2012 entitled ‘The Right of Roma Children to Education’,

—

having regard to Special Report No 14/2016 of the European Court of Auditors of 28 June 2016 entitled ‘EU policy initiatives and financial support for Roma integration: significant progress made over the last decade, but additional efforts needed on the ground’,

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 18 September 2020 entitled ‘A Union of equality: EU anti-racism Action Plan 2020-2025’ (COM(2020)0565),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 7 October 2020 entitled ‘A Union of Equality: EU Roma strategic framework for equality, inclusion and participation’ (COM(2020)0620),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 24 November 2020 entitled ‘Action plan on Integration and Inclusion’ (COM(2020)0758),

—

having regard to the Council recommendation of 12 March 2021 on Roma equality, inclusion and participation (13),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 24 March 2021 entitled ‘EU strategy on the rights of the child’ (COM(2021)0142),

—

having regard to Council Recommendation (EU) 2021/1004 of 14 June 2021 establishing a European Child Guarantee (14),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 5 March 2020 entitled ‘A Union of Equality: Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025’ (COM(2020)0152),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 3 March 2021 entitled ‘Union of Equality: Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030’ (COM(2021)0101),

—

having regard to the Commission proposal for a Council directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation (COM(2008)0426),

—

having regard to Council Directive 2001/55/EC of 20 July 2001 on minimum standards for giving temporary protection in the event of a mass influx of displaced persons and on measures promoting a balance of efforts between Member States in receiving such persons and bearing the consequences thereof (15) (the Temporary Protection Directive),

—

having regard to the questions to the Council and to the Commission on the situation of Roma people living in settlements in the EU (O-000022/2022 — B9-0018/2022 and O-000023/2022 — B9-0019/2022),

—

having regard to Rules 136(5) and 132(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the motion for a resolution of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs,

A.

whereas EU values prevail in a society which respects diversity, pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and gender equality; whereas the Member States have a particular responsibility to guarantee these values for all, including Roma people;

B.

whereas ‘Roma’ is an umbrella term that encompasses a wide range of different people of Romani origin such as Roma, Sinti, Kale, Romanichels and Boyash/Rudari; whereas it also encompasses groups such as Ashkali, Egyptians, Yenish, Dom, Lom, Rom and Abdal, as well as traveller populations, including ethnic Travellers or those designated under the administrative term gens du voyage, and people who identify as Gypsies, Tsiganes or Tziganes, without denying their specificities;

C.

whereas Roma people are Europe’s largest ethnic minority; whereas an unacceptably high number of Roma people in Europe still live in poverty and are socially excluded, enduring extremely precarious, unsafe and overcrowded living conditions in segregated rural and urban areas; whereas the issue of Roma people living in settlements is not limited to one country and is therefore a European problem and needs to be addressed as such; whereas spatial segregation represents a key cause of and mutually reinforces unequal access to healthcare, early childcare and education, employment and basic services, including road access, water supplies, sanitation and sewage facilities, electricity and waste collection; whereas it not only has physical and economic consequences, but also psychological and sociological ones, both for individuals and communities; whereas intergenerational poverty in Roma settlements is of a socioeconomic nature, with serious ramifications for Roma people’s physical and mental health and well-being, life opportunities and enjoyment of their fundamental human rights;

D.

whereas Roma face higher rates of low work intensity, job insecurity and unemployment, and are often in atypical or precarious employment situations, hindering their access to unemployment schemes and pension entitlements; whereas Roma lack employment networks and suffer discrimination in access to employment and in the workplace, and are also concentrated in socio-economically disadvantaged regions; whereas the 6 million Roma people residing in the EU represent a significant and growing part of its population and have enormous potential, which it will only be possible to realise if their employment and social inclusion situations are improved;

E.

whereas according to the EU-MIDIS II, only one in four Roma aged 16 years or older reported being employed or self-employed as their main activity and whereas Roma women reported much lower employment rates than Roma men — 16 % compared with 34 %; whereas the situation of young people was particularly worrying with, on average, a Roma NEET (not in education, employment or training) rate of 63 % compared with the EU average of 12 %; whereas, for this age group, the results also showed a considerable gender gap, with 72 % of young Roma women being classed as NEET compared with 55 % of young Roma men; whereas this is in stark contrast with the rest of the population (35 %); whereas as many as 80 % of Roma people were reported as living below their country’s at-risk-of-poverty threshold; whereas every third Roma person lived in housing without tap water and 1 in 10 people lived in housing without electricity; whereas every third Roma child experienced one of their family members going to bed hungry at least once a month and almost half of Roma aged 6-24 did not attend school;

F.

whereas the lack of significant policy measures or investment, limited availability and low quality of social housing, discrimination in the housing market and segregation keep the gap in accessing housing between Roma and non-Roma almost unchanged (16);

G.

whereas Roma people living in settlements should have access to decent housing that is accessible, affordable, environmentally safe, healthy and desegregated;

H.

whereas deep-rooted structural and institutional anti-Gypsyism continues to exist at all levels of EU society and is a major barrier to Roma people fully enjoying their fundamental rights as EU citizens in all spheres of life, including employment, housing, education, healthcare, care, social protection and other key public services; whereas 41 % of Roma in the nine EU Member States surveyed for the EU-MIDIS II felt discriminated against because of their Roma background in at least one area of daily life, such as looking for work, work, housing, health and education; whereas the integration of Roma requires sensitivity to local contexts, to intra-Roma ethnic and socioeconomic diversity and social mobility barriers and to intersecting forms of discrimination, particularly with regard to gender, age and disability; whereas gender equality and the situation of Roma children and young people are two key areas of intervention for the social inclusion of Roma that are insufficiently addressed both at EU and national level;

I.

whereas the situation in Roma settlements is in violation of human and fundamental rights as enshrined in the EU Treaties, the European Convention on Human Rights, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the European Social Charter, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, as well as of the principles recognised in the European Pillar of Social Rights; whereas it is alarming that these rights are not being respected in practice with regard to Roma people living in settlements;

J.

whereas the vicious circle of intergenerational poverty in marginalised Roma settlements is a complex phenomenon that needs to be addressed horizontally across different interconnected policy areas, in a comprehensive manner and with the close cooperation of all relevant stakeholders; whereas effective solutions require full engagement at the EU, national, regional and local levels in cooperation with civil society initiatives, including charitable and church-based organisations, social partners and private actors, learning from best practices and innovative solutions across Member States and replicating them on a wider scale;

K.

whereas many local and regional authorities and representatives of civil society have been actively working with Roma people living in settlements over time with proven and innovative approaches and projects, but often do not make use of available European structural and investment funds (ESIF) because the processes are highly burdensome and complex; whereas the most common barriers to access to ESIF identified are the absence of a partnership approach; late reimbursement of payment requests; payment of ESIF to the beneficiary based on a reimbursement system being the most frequent option, making the beneficiary dependent on own resources; lengthy and repeated public procurement checks; lack of consistency between the findings of the checks, resulting in beneficiaries being blamed for mistakes which can require the return of funding, thus risking the reallocation of resources from other areas or even insolvency; poor involvement and cooperation with beneficiaries by controllers from managing or intermediate authorities during the procurement process; and the setting of arbitrary limits and requirements for different aspects of projects;

L.

whereas Roma face disproportionate barriers in accessing health services, which are exacerbated by a lack of insurance or personal identification documents, discrimination by health professionals and segregation in healthcare facilities; whereas persisting health inequalities, including the specific impact of spatial segregation and overcrowded housing on health, puts Roma in a vulnerable position;

M.

whereas all 27 Member States have committed to work towards ending homelessness by 2030 by signing the Lisbon Declaration of June 2020 and setting up the European Platform on Combating Homelessness, which aims to promote policies based on a person-centred, housing-led and integrated approach;

N.

whereas the EU provides significant financial support for social inclusion measures, including for measures promoting the inclusion of Roma, especially the most deprived; whereas the Member States’ planning documents indicate that EUR 1,5 billion was earmarked for the socioeconomic integration of vulnerable groups of individuals during the 2014-2020 programming period (17);

O.

whereas there is a persisting gap between Roma and non-Roma populations at all levels of education; whereas in 2018, only 53 % of Roma children aged 4-6 participated in early childhood education according to the EU-MIDIS II; whereas there is widespread segregation of Roma students in schools despite the legal prohibition of such practices and their incompatibility with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights; whereas such educational segregation usually takes three different forms: attendance by disproportionate numbers of Roma children of ‘special’ schools for children with intellectual disabilities, segregated classes or sections for Roma pupils within ‘mixed’ schools and the prevalence of ‘ghetto schools’; whereas Roma children face additional obstacles to equal participation in education, including failure to cover the costs associated with education (including early childhood education and care), spatial segregation, lack of childcare facilities nearby or unequal or no access to online and/or distance learning; whereas poverty and lack of access to basic services has a considerable impact on children’s physical, mental and emotional development, and increases their chances of lagging behind in all aspects of their adult life;

P.

whereas low pre-school attendance is a principal determinant of premature dropout rates among Roma, which are further exacerbated by starting school late and irregular school attendance; whereas early dropouts occur mostly at the point of transition between school types; whereas secondary education participation is obstructed by factors such as travel, segregation in housing and ill-functioning guidance services; whereas educational gaps are further aggravated by the growing digital divide between Roma and non-Roma children;

Q.

whereas during the pandemic, Roma people faced higher risks of contracting COVID-19 owing to entrenched health and social inequalities and were disproportionately affected by measures taken to contain the virus; whereas the negative social and economic consequences of the pandemic have been particularly detrimental for the Roma population in the EU owing to high shares of Roma being involved in the informal economy and seasonal work and the lack of measures adapted to their specific situations in policies for mitigating the consequences of the health crisis; whereas the pandemic gave rise to public scapegoating and hate speech against Roma; whereas the health emergency has once again revealed a critical discrepancy between the scale of local-level needs and the capacity to address them and has highlighted the need for immediate and long-term policy measures, particularly in the areas of employment, education and housing (18);

R.

whereas equality data collection refers to the collection of all types of disaggregated data used to assess the comparative situation of specific groups at risk of discrimination, design public policies that contribute to promoting equality and assess their implementation, based on evidence and not mere assumptions; whereas the planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of EU and national measures for the social inclusion of Roma have been impeded by the lack of comprehensive quality data disaggregated by ethnicity;

S.

whereas many Roma people live in areas where they are disproportionally exposed to environmental degradation and pollution stemming from waste dumps and landfills or contaminated sites and deprived of access to basic environmental services and public utilities;

T.

whereas Roma women are subjected to multiple and intersectional forms of discrimination based on a combination of their ethnicity, gender and social status as well as to gender-based violence, which was particularly visible during the COVID-19 pandemic; whereas equality between women and men must be ensured and fostered in all areas, including labour market participation, employment conditions, including wages, education and training, and career changes and progression;

U.

whereas approximately 10-20 % of the estimated 400 000 Roma people living in Ukraine are stateless or at risk of statelessness (19); whereas Roma refugees fleeing war in Ukraine without documentation confirming their Ukrainian citizenship or their residence status are in a particularly vulnerable situation;

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

—

having regard to the 2019 global assessment report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) on biodiversity and ecosystem services,

—

having regard to the 2020 report of the UN Environment Programme and the Food and Agriculture Organization entitled ‘State of the World’s Forests 2020’, which underlines the key role of forests in providing a habitat for more than 80 % of the world’s terrestrial biodiversity, offering countless ecosystem services and ensuring a livelihood for many communities, including indigenous people,

—

having regard to marine and coastal biodiversity,

—

having regard to the forthcoming 19th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), to be held from 14 to 25 November 2022 in Panama (CoP19),

—

having regard to UN General Assembly resolution 75/311 of 26 July 2021 on tackling illicit trafficking in wildlife,

—

having regard to CITES Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev.CoP15) on registration of operations that breed Appendix-I animal species in captivity for commercial purposes,

—

having regard to CITES Decisions 18.226 and 18.227 on trade in Asian elephants (Elephas maximus),

—

having regard to CITES Decisions 18.81-18.85 on wildlife crime linked to the internet,

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 20 May 2020 entitled ‘EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 — Bringing nature back into our lives’ (COM(2020)0380), and to the European Parliament resolution of 9 June 2021 thereon (1),

—

having regard to the Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (2), which aims to promote the maintenance of biodiversity and forms the cornerstone of the EU’s nature conservation policy,

—

having regard to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the CBD, to be held from 7 to 19 December 2022 in Montreal, Canada,

—

having regard to the Commission proposal for a directive of the European Parliament of the Council on the protection of the environment through criminal law and replacing Directive 2008/99/EC (COM(2021)0851),

—

having regard to the questions to the Council and to the Commission on key objectives for the Conference of the Parties to CITES in Panama from 14 to 25 November 2022 (O-000038/2022 — B9-0023/2022 and O-000039/2022 — B9-0024/2022),

—

having regard to Rules 136(5) and 132(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas the unprecedented global decline in biodiversity, which is currently occurring at a rate tens to hundreds of times faster than the natural rate of species extinction, is the direct result of human activity and is threatening around 1 million animal and plant species with extinction; whereas available evidence suggests that it is not too late to halt and reverse current trends in biodiversity loss;

B.

whereas biodiversity contributes positively to the health of the human population; whereas up to 80 % of medicines used by humans are of natural origin;

C.

whereas the oceans, which represent 95 % of the biosphere, are one of the most important carbon sinks, as they regulate the climate and absorb CO2 from the atmosphere;

D.

whereas it is important to protect marine and coastal biodiversity and tackle the threats posed to it by the unregulated or poorly regulated use of living marine resources; whereas it is also important to protect freshwater biodiversity, which is declining to a greater extent than marine and terrestrial ecosystems, with freshwater populations declining 83 % between 1970 and 2014;

E.

whereas the vast majority of species subject to trade are not protected by CITES; whereas international trade in such species remains unregulated and contributes significantly to driving wild populations towards extinction;

F.

whereas CITES is the largest global wildlife conservation agreement, with 184 signatory parties, including the EU and its 27 Member States; whereas it recognises that wild fauna and flora in their many unique and varied forms are an irreplaceable part of the natural systems of the Earth that must be protected for generations to come;

G.

whereas the aim of CITES is to ensure that international trade in wild animals and plants does not pose a threat to the survival of the species in the wild;

H.

whereas both the illegal and legal trade in and the use of wildlife and the destruction of natural habitats contribute significantly to biodiversity decline, undermine global efforts in the fight against climate change and are both a cause and a consequence of corruption;

I.

whereas Appendix I of CITES includes all species threatened with extinction that are or may be affected by trade; whereas Appendix II includes all species that may become threatened with extinction unless trade in specimens of such species is subject to strict regulation to avoid utilisation incompatible with their survival and unless trade in these species is brought under effective control;

J.

whereas wildlife trade increases contact between humans and wildlife and creates a potentially high risk that zoonoses will emerge and spread; whereas as 70 % of all emerging infectious diseases in humans are zoonotic, wildlife trade poses serious risks to the health of both animals and humans; whereas there is a need for better and more exhaustive control of the meat trade and the trade in live animals; whereas experts advise limiting zoonotic risks by addressing markets with live animals and by developing a ‘positive list’ of animal species that may be transported internationally, taking into account zoonotic risks and other considerations such as animal welfare, conservation status and population trends;

K.

whereas the cost of global strategies to prevent pandemics through reducing the illegal wildlife trade, avoiding land-use changes and increasing surveillance is estimated to be between USD 22 billion and USD 31 billion (3), only a small fraction of the cost incurred by a pandemic;

L.

whereas 19 Member States have supported the Cypriot Government’s position paper on a new EU legislative framework for an EU-wide positive list of animals allowed as pets, which was presented at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council meeting of 24 May 2022;

M.

whereas the EU is a major hub, transit point and destination for legally and illegally sourced specimens of wild fauna and flora, whether living or dead, body parts or products thereof; whereas in 2019, reported import transactions of CITES-protected wildlife into the EU accounted for 36 % of the total volume of imports;

N.

whereas between 2014 and 2018, the EU imported the second-most hunting trophies from CITES-listed wildlife species, following only the United States; whereas an increasing number of European countries are taking or considering steps to ban imports of hunting trophies;

O.

whereas international trade in wild fauna and flora amounts to billions of euros each year and involves millions of such plants and wildlife; whereas wildlife trafficking has become the fourth largest black market, after the drug, people and arms markets; whereas wildlife trafficking offences are often not punished severely enough to act as a deterrent and whereas middle-to-high level actors are rarely prosecuted;

P.

whereas the internet plays a key role in facilitating wildlife trafficking;

Q.

whereas increased efforts to improve transparency and the effective participation of civil society in decision-making are essential;

R.

whereas the EU has a clear role to play to set up constructive collaborations and exchanges between governmental and non-governmental sanctuaries and rescue centres to secure long-term and species-appropriate solutions for seized wildlife;

S.

whereas traditional medicines are among the main CITES-related commodity seizures reported by Member States; whereas the use of wild animals in traditional medicines damages biodiversity, especially when red-listed species are concerned; whereas demand for traditional medicines with animal ingredients is leading to increased illegal trade in wild animals;

T.

whereas pelagic shark populations have dropped by 71 % since 1970, more than 50 % of shark species are threatened or near threatened with extinction (4), and hunting them for trade in their body parts is one of the main causes of this decline; whereas 20 % of reef shark populations have been found to be functionally extinct; whereas in 2020, EU Member States were the source of over 45 % of all shark fin-related products imported into three major trading centres: Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan;

U.

whereas following population declines across Africa by more than 60 % for African savannah elephants (Loxodonta africana) and 86 % for African forest elephants (Loxodonta cyclotis) within three generations, in 2021, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) raised the threat level for the African savannah elephant from vulnerable to endangered and separately listed African forest elephants as critically endangered (5);

V.

whereas poaching for the ivory trade is the main driver of population declines in African elephants; whereas the illegal ivory trade harms economic development, fosters organised crime, promotes corruption and fuels conflicts; whereas ivory trafficking has increased significantly following the introduction of legal sales;

W.

whereas it is forbidden to trade wild tigers; whereas EU wildlife trade regulations nonetheless fail to prevent the trade of captive-bred tigers and their body parts, even though CITES Decision 14.69 on captive-bred and ranched specimens opposes the commercial breeding and trade in tigers for their parts; whereas Member States continue to import and export live tigers and tiger parts registered under the CITES code of commercial trade;

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

43.

44.

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

53.

54.

55.

56.

57.

58.

59.

60.

61.

62.

63.

64.

65.

66.

67.

68.

69.

70.

71.

72.

73.

74.

75.

76.

77.

78.

79.

80.

81.

82.

83.

84.

85.

86.

87.

88.

89.

90.

91.

92.

93.

94.

95.

96.

97.

98.

99.

100.

101.

102.

103.

104.

105.

106.

107.

108.

—

having regard to UN General Assembly Resolution 64/292 of 28 July 2010, which recognises the human right to clean drinking water and sanitation,

—

having regard to UN General Assembly Resolution 68/157 of 18 December 2013 entitled ‘The human right to safe drinking water and sanitation’,

—

having regard to UN Human Rights Council Resolution 45/8 of 6 October 2020 entitled ‘The human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation’,

—

having regard to UN Human Rights Council Resolution 48/13 of 8 October 2021 entitled ‘The human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment’,

—

having regard to UN General Assembly Resolution 71/222 of 21 December 2016 entitled ‘International Decade for Action, “Water for Sustainable Development” 2018-2028’,

—

having regard to UN General Assembly Resolution 75/212 of 21 December 2020 on the United Nations Conference on the Midterm Comprehensive Review of the Implementation of the Objectives of the International Decade for Action, ‘Water for Sustainable Development’, 2018-2028 (UN 2023 Water Conference),

—

having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,

—

having regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,

—

having regard to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the General Comments of the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,

—

having regard to the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,

—

having regard to the European Pillar of Social Rights, as proclaimed by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on 17 November 2017,

—

having regard to General Comment No 15 (2002) of the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights on the right to water,

—

having regard to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the International Labour Organization (ILO) Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention of 1989 (No 169),

—

having regard to the 1992 Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (Water Convention), initially negotiated as a regional instrument and opened up in 2016 for accession to all UN Member States,

—

having regard to the 1997 Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses (Watercourses Convention),

—

having regard to the 1999 UNECE-WHO Protocol to the Water Convention on Water and Health, which provides a framework to translate the human rights to water and sanitation into practice,

—

having regard to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in particular SDG 6 on safe drinking water and sanitation, and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,

—

having regard to the UN report of 19 March 2019 on the development of the world’s water resources entitled ‘Leaving no one behind’,

—

having regard to the 2020 and 2021 ‘State of Food and Agriculture’ reports published by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization,

—

having regard to the report of 16 July 2021 by the Special Rapporteur on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation on risks and impacts of the commodification and financialisation of water on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation, and to his report of 21 July 2020 on human rights and the privatisation of water and sanitation services,

—

having regard to the UN World Water Development Report 2021: Valuing Water,

—

having regard to the EU Human Rights Guidelines of 17 June 2019 on Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation,

—

having regard to Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy (1) (Water Framework Directive),

—

having regard to Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources (2),

—

having regard to Directive 2006/118/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the protection of groundwater against pollution and deterioration (3),

—

having regard to Directive (EU) 2020/2184 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on the quality of water intended for human consumption (4),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 19 March 2014 on the European Citizens’ Initiative ‘Water and sanitation are a human right! Water is a public good, not a commodity!’ (COM(2014)0177),

—

having regard to Directive 2008/99/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on the protection of the environment through criminal law (5),

—

having regard to the Council conclusions of 19 November 2018 on water diplomacy, of 17 June 2019 on the EU Human Rights Guidelines on safe drinking water and sanitation and of 19 November 2021 on water in the EU’s external action,

—

having regard to the European Citizens’ Initiative ‘Right2Water’ and its resolution of 8 September 2015 on the follow-up to the European Citizens’ Initiative Right2Water (6),

—

having regard to its resolution of 9 June 2021 on the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives (7),

—

having regard to its resolution of 10 March 2021 with recommendations to the Commission on corporate due diligence and corporate accountability (8),

—

having regard to existing successful methods of cross-border cooperation such as exchanges of views between water and wastewater utilities in the Nordic countries dating back to the 1980s, the 1970 formation of a joint Nordic Association for Hydrology, the annual Nordic Water Advisers Meeting, the Nordic water forums and extensive Nordic cooperation regarding water management issues,

—

having regard to Rule 54 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Development,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A9-0231/2022),

A.

whereas Resolution 64/292 of the UN General Assembly recognises ‘the right to safe and clean drinking water and sanitation as a human right that is essential for the full enjoyment of life and all human rights’; whereas the absence of water is incompatible with life and both rights are interdependent and essential for a dignified life; whereas there can be no sustainable and universal access to clean water without functioning sanitation chains; whereas water and waterways also have a strong cultural, spiritual and religious dimension stemming from their fundamental role in society’s life;

B.

whereas Principle 20 of the European Pillar of Social Rights on access to essential services includes an explicit reference to the right of citizens to water and sanitation;

C.

whereas the denial of the human right to water has repercussions on enjoyment of the right to life and health, considering that contaminated water, the inadequate management of wastewater and poor sanitation are linked to the transmission of serious diseases and even death; whereas water and sanitation services are one of the cornerstones of public health; whereas diarrhoeal diseases are the fourth cause of death among children under five and a leading cause of chronic malnutrition; whereas access to clean water, sanitation and hygiene is indispensable for ensuring global resilience against pandemics and other infectious diseases, and to combat the emerging threat of antimicrobial resistance;

D.

whereas the COVID-19 pandemic has hit the most vulnerable people the hardest and has once again highlighted the need for clean and sufficient water and sanitation globally; whereas availability and access to water supply, sanitation and hygiene services (WASH), including for vulnerable or marginalised people, is fundamental to fighting COVID-19;

E.

whereas 80-90 % of wastewater in developing countries is discharged directly into rivers, lakes and seas, causing water-borne diseases and severely damaging the environment; whereas the lives of millions of impoverished persons depend on the good status of water sources, not only for the supply of drinking water but also for the production of food through agriculture, livestock rearing and fishing;

F.

whereas the lack of respect for, protection of and compliance with the human right to water and sanitation often hinder the right to education; whereas children, and in many cases girls, have to walk an average distance of six kilometres every day to fetch water, which prevents them from attending school; whereas the opportunity costs of collecting water are high and have far-reaching effects as they shorten considerably the time available for other important activities;

G.

whereas many children stop going to school because of illnesses related to unsafe water or poor hygiene practices; whereas one in three children does not have appropriate access to water and sanitation in schools; whereas the UN’s 2021 Sustainable Development Goals Report shows that globally, more than a fifth of primary schools lacked access to basic drinking water or single-sex toilets and more than a third lacked basic handwashing facilities; whereas many girls are also forced to drop out of school when they are unable to access gender-appropriate toilets and manage their menstruation in a dignified manner;

H.

whereas children with disabilities also suffer difficulties in accessing education due to the lack of adapted toilets and sanitation facilities; whereas UNESCO reports that more than 90 % of all children with disabilities do not attend school, and girls with disabilities are far more likely to drop out of school than boys with disabilities; whereas drinking water is imperative for concentration during learning;

I.

whereas the disadvantages faced by many women and girls, people with certain disabilities and elderly people with regard to water, sanitation and hygiene manifest themselves in multiple ways that impact on their overall health, well-being and dignity, reproductive health, education, nutrition, security, and economic and political participation; whereas mainly mothers of children with disabilities are forced out of work life to manage their children’s toileting activities and in order to take care of their children’s home-schooling when schools lack accessible toilets;

J.

whereas in many countries of the Global South, women and girls are traditionally responsible for domestic water supply and these responsibilities make them more vulnerable to disease and violence; whereas women and girls are more at risk of being victims of attacks, sexual and gender-based violence, harassment and other threats to their security when they are collecting water for the household, when they visit sanitation facilities outside their homes;

K.

whereas, as indicated in the EU Human Rights Guidelines on safe drinking water and sanitation, the human right to water and sanitation encompasses the dimensions of availability, accessibility, acceptability, quality and affordability and the principles of the human rights-based approach (non-discrimination, accountability, transparency, participation, etc.);

L.

whereas the sixth UN SDG is to ensure that the entire world has universal and equitable access to safe drinking water and sanitation by 2030; whereas despite progress, this goal remains severely off-track and under-financed, according to the latest status report by UN-Water, and significant challenges remain both to its achievement and in addressing great inequalities between and within countries in access to basic water and sanitation services;

M.

whereas the UN’s 2021 Sustainable Development Goals Report shows that, in 2020, 2 billion people still lacked safely managed drinking water, 3,6 billion lacked safely managed sanitation, and 2,3 billion lacked basic hygiene provisions, and that 129 countries were not yet on track to having sustainably managed water resources for 2030; whereas access to water creates conditions propitious for economic development and these conditions will allow vulnerable people to gain financial independence;

N.

whereas achieving a universal safely managed water supply and sanitation would yield net benefits of between USD 37 billion and USD 86 billion per year between 2021 and 2040;

O.

whereas water is a limited resource; whereas per capita freshwater availability has drastically fallen over the past two decades; whereas an unbalanced distribution of population growth and depopulation of rural areas, agricultural intensification, the effects of climate change and environmental degradation, as well as certain unlawful and polluting practices in water use, are posing ever-greater water access problems in many regions and will cause even more access problems in the future;

P.

whereas much of the net growth in global population up to 2050 will occur in the cities of developing countries, thus increasing urban demands for water and food; whereas according to the UN World Water Development Report 2019, by 2050 we could be using 20-30 % more water than we do today, and whereas according to the World Bank, urban water demand is projected to increase by 50-70 % over the three next decades;

Q.

whereas 125 out of 154 developing countries have included freshwater resources and terrestrial and wetland ecosystems as the highest priority areas in their national climate adaptation plans, in line with SDG 13;

R.

whereas global warming is a major cause of water scarcity; whereas the ongoing climate crisis, with increasing droughts, floods and torrential rains, is exacerbating inequalities in distribution of water; whereas about 90 % of all natural disasters are water-related and water accounts for 70 % of all deaths linked to natural disasters; whereas according to the World Meteorological Organization’s Atlas of Mortality and Economic Losses from Weather, Climate and Water Extremes (1970 — 2019), out of the top 10 disasters during this period, the hazards that led to the largest human losses during the period have been droughts, storms and floods; whereas, according to the OECD, nearly 20 % of the world’s population will be at risk from floods in 2050;

S.

whereas water stress, defined by the UN as the point at which the demand for water is higher than the quantity available or when its use is restricted by its low quality, could in some cases be a driver of induced displacement and migration; whereas, according to the UN’s water development reports, five of the world’s eleven regions, accounting for two thirds of the global population, are currently experiencing water stress; whereas, according to the UN’s 2020 Sustainable Development Goals Report, water scarcity could displace some 700 million people by 2030;

T.

whereas deforestation, land grabbing and natural resource overexploitation and extraction activities, including by organised crime groups, have a considerable impact on the water level of rivers and lakes, alter the water cycle, and contribute towards the drying-up of rivers and lakes as well as the pollution of the exploited areas;

U.

whereas freshwater ecosystems, while covering less than 1 % of the earth’s surface, harbour more than 10 % of all species and delicate biodiversity; whereas around 70 % of the world’s fresh water is used for agriculture, while the remainder is divided between industrial use (19 %), mainly in the food, textile, energy, industrial, chemical, pharmaceutical, and mining sectors, and domestic use (11 %), including human consumption;

V.

whereas healthy ecosystems enable the improvement of water quantity and quality, while increasing resilience to climate change;

W.

whereas agriculture is the largest consumer of the world’s freshwater resources; whereas one third of arable land worldwide is used to feed livestock; whereas the FAO’s 2020 report entitled ‘The State of Food and Agriculture — Overcoming water challenges in agriculture’ suggests that food productivity and rural incomes can be significantly enhanced through investments in new irrigation systems or the adaptation and modernisation of existing ones, and that this should be combined with improved water management practices including improved agricultural practices; whereas land grabbing has negative implications for water availability and quality, dispossesses local communities of water sources and violates their human right to safe drinking water;

X.

whereas the energy sector is currently responsible for 10 % of global water extraction and its water consumption is expected to rise by almost 60 % by 2040;

Y.

whereas certain abusive and in many cases illegal extractive industries have a considerable impact on surface and groundwater resources, pollution and the destruction of glaciers, forests, wetlands, rivers and other water sources vital for human consumption;

Z.

whereas the textile industry counts among the sectors that consume the most water in the world, and whereas apparel and textiles are produced in some of the world’s most water-scarce regions; whereas this industry is ranked as the second-most polluting in the world and a large part of that pollution ends up in bodies of water; whereas the Commission plans to adopt, in the first quarter of 2022, the ‘EU strategy for sustainable textiles’, which sets out to help the EU to move towards a circular economy in which textile products are designed to last longer and be reusable, repairable, recyclable and energy efficient;

AA.

whereas the growing demand for water is causing water resources to be overexploited and water’s scarcity has made it a disputed resource; whereas, according to the UN, conflicts over water are expected in some 300 areas across the world by 2025;

AB.

whereas the preservation of water resources is under attack and damages to the quality of water have been made a criminal offence in many countries; whereas in recent years, environmental and water rights defenders have been subjected to an ever-increasing number of attacks including killings, kidnappings, torture, gender-based violence, threats, harassment, intimidation, smear campaigns, criminalisation, judicial harassment, forced eviction and displacement, and whereas there is an urgent need to support them proactively and protect their life and safety; whereas several finalists for the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought are under attack for their role in defending water and common goods; whereas the defenders of the waters of the Guapinol river were imprisoned for more than two years before their release; whereas Lolita Chávez has been in exile for four years for her defence of the territory against the activities of hydroelectricity companies in Iximulew (Guatemala); whereas Berta Cáceres was assassinated in 2016 for her defence of the Blanco and Gualcarque rivers, and those who ordered the crime have still not been convicted;

AC.

whereas, according to Global Witness, more than a third of the land and environmental defenders murdered worldwide between 2015 and 2019 belonged to indigenous communities, whose land and water management skills are crucial in combating the climate crisis and biodiversity loss;

AD.

whereas denying access to water and destroying water infrastructure have been used as an essential tactic by occupying powers to annex occupied territories and displace people from their lands;

AE.

whereas the EU Water Framework Directive recognises that ‘water is not a commercial product like any other but, rather, a heritage which must be protected, defended and treated as such’;

AF.

whereas since 6 December 2020, water has been traded on the Wall Street commodities futures market; whereas, in the words of Pedro Arrojo, UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation, ‘water has a set of vital values for our society that the market logic does not recognise and therefore, cannot manage adequately, let alone in a financial space so prone to speculation’; whereas, according to various UN experts, the application of a speculative approach to the management of goods that are essential for individuals’ lives and dignity infringes the human rights of people in situations of poverty, worsens gender inequality and increases the vulnerability of marginalised communities;

AG.

whereas governments have a duty to guarantee minimum essential levels of water and sanitation for all; whereas the report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation of 16 July 2021 stresses that water should be considered as a public good and should be managed under an approach grounded on human rights, guaranteeing the right to water and sanitation and the sustainability of aquatic ecosystems; whereas water supply and sanitation are services of general interest, and revenues from the water management cycle should cover any related expenses and improvement costs, provided that the public interest is safeguarded;

AH.

whereas, as recognised by the EU Human Rights Guidelines on Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation, states are obliged to respect, protect and fulfil these rights and third parties should strictly refrain from interfering with the enjoyment of the rights to water and sanitation;

AI.

whereas workers who work in the sanitation chain face many risks, including health risks resulting from precarious working conditions; whereas they are often informal workers who are not protected by labour laws; whereas the enjoyment of the rights to water and sanitation should not come at the expense of the safety, dignity and well-being of sanitation workers;

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.