9. september 2025.
9. SEPTEMBER 2025. AASTA ISTUNGI STENOGRAMM

(C/2026/2982)

Sisukord

Osaistungjärgu avamine

Ukraina (ühine arutelu)

Viimase piirini viidud Gaza: ELi tegevus näljahäda leevendamiseks ning pakiline vajadus vabastada pantvangid ja liikuda kahe riigi kooseksisteerimisel põhineva lahenduse suunas (arutelu)

Istungi jätkamine

Pidulik istung – Moldova Vabariigi presidendi Maia Sandu kõne

Istungi jätkamine

Juhataja teadaanne

Hääletused

8.1.

Heiteta raskeveokitega seotud erandi pikendamine (hääletus)

8.2.

Jäätmete raamdirektiiv: tekstiili- ja toidujäätmed (A10-0144/2025 - Anna Zalewska) (hääletus)

8.3.

Sõidukite konstruktsiooni ringluspõhisuse nõuded ja romusõidukite käitlemine (A10-0158/2025 - Jens Gieseke, Paulius Saudargas) (hääletus)

8.4.

ELi ja Brasiilia vaheline leping: Europoli ja Brasiilia föderaalpolitsei vaheline ja nende kaudu tehtav koostöö (A10-0142/2025 - Nikola Bartůšek) (hääletus)

8.5.

ELi ja Kirgiisi Vabariigi vaheline laiendatud partnerlus- ja koostööleping (A10-0105/2025 - Nacho Sánchez Amor) (hääletus)

8.6.

ELi ja Kirgiisi Vabariigi vaheline laiendatud partnerlus- ja koostööleping (resolutsioon) (A10-0111/2025 - Nacho Sánchez Amor) (hääletus)

8.7.

Kontrollikoja liikmete koosseisu osaline uuendamine – Joëlle Elvinger (A10-0148/2025 - Cristian Terheș) (hääletus)

8.8.

Kontrollikoja liikmete koosseisu osaline uuendamine – Stef Blok (A10-0149/2025 - Tomáš Zdechovský) (hääletus)

8.9.

Avalikud hanked (A10-0147/2025 - Piotr Müller) (hääletus)

8.10.

Ukrainat käsitlevad komisjoni 2023. ja 2024. aasta aruanded (A10-0154/2025 - Michael Gahler) (hääletus)

Istungi jätkamine

10.

Eelmise istungi protokolli kinnitamine

11.

Laastavad maastikupõlengud Lõuna-Euroopas: vajadus suurendada ELi abi, et taastada massiliselt hävinud metsi, ja parandada ELi valmisolekut (arutelu)

12.

Euroopa Sotsiaalfond+ (ESF+): erimeetmed strateegiliste probleemide lahendamiseks (arutelu)

13.

ERFi, Ühtekuuluvusfondi ja Õiglase Ülemineku Fondi muutmine seoses erimeetmetega strateegiliste probleemide lahendamiseks vahehindamise raames (arutelu)

14.

Ühtekuuluvuspoliitika (ühine arutelu)

15.

Süsiniku piirimeetme lihtsustamine ja tugevdamine (arutelu)

104

16.

Vägivallalaine ja pidev jõu kasutamine meeleavaldajate vastu Serbias (arutelu)

109

17.

Moldova vastupanuvõime tugevdamine Venemaa hübriidohtude ja pahatahtliku sekkumise suhtes (arutelu)

121

18.

Olukord Colombias pärast hiljutist terrorirünnakute lainet (arutelu)

133

19.

Kirjalikud selgitused hääletuste kohta (kodukorra artikkel 201)

139

20.

Järgmise istungi päevakord

139

21.

Käesoleva istungi protokolli kinnitamine

139

22.

Istungi lõpp

139

9. september 2025. aasta istungi stenogramm

IN THE CHAIR: CHRISTEL SCHALDEMOSE

Vice-President

1. Osaistungjärgu avamine

(The sitting opened at 09:04)

2. Ukraina (ühine arutelu)

President. – The first item on the agenda is the joint debate on Ukraine:

—	the statement by the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on EU action to ensure security guarantees and just peace for Ukraine (2025/2851(RSP));

—	the report by Michael Gahler, on behalf of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, on the 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Ukraine (2025/2026(INI)) (A10-0154/2025).

Kaja Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Good morning, President, dear Members of the European Parliament, international efforts to end Russia's war have stepped up in the last few months. But Russia's response is more aggression: over the weekend, Russia launched the largest aerial assault of this war so far. Putin has zero interest in peace, and he will not stop the war until he's forced to.

This is why the European Union and our Member States have provided almost EUR 169 billion of financial support since the full-scale war started in 2022. This includes over EUR 63 billion in military support for Ukraine, and this year alone, Member States will provide more than ever before: EUR 25 billion to date. They have now also provided 80 % of our target of two million rounds of ammunition. Our aim is to get to 100 % by October, and this is all so that Ukraine can defend itself and its civilians and push back the aggression.

Europe is also the largest backer of Ukraine's own defence industry through windfall profits from the Russian frozen assets, and Europeans have stuck together through 18 rounds of sanctions against Russia and those who enable Russia's war – four in the last nine months alone. International sanctions have already deprived Russia of at least USD 450 billion in war funds, including USD 154 billion in revenues from oil. Europe was one of the largest markets of Russian energy, but not anymore: hopefully, by 2027, we won't be importing any Russian gas and oil at all. The European Union has also sanctioned 444 shadow fleet ships that circumvent our sanctions and bring Russia illegal oil revenues.

Ukraine's bravery, backed up by international support, has already prevented Russia from achieving its military goals. But it is not enough. The only option we have is to pile more pressure on Russia, provide more support to Ukraine and prepare for the day after.

Honourable Members, more pressure on Russia means more sanctions and continued work to address circumvention, including dismantling the shadow fleet. Regarding sanctions, like I said, we are now working on the 19th package and collecting input from the Member States. We are also coordinating with our partners because the impact of the international coordinated sanctions is much stronger than the EU acting alone.

Our message to Russia is simple: the war is not winnable. Leave the battlefield and come to the table with Ukraine. When this happens, Russia must not be allowed to rearm and attack again. We have been there before, and Putin has made no secret that Ukraine is just the start: Putin wants to re-establish Russia's pre-1991 Soviet sphere of influence.

But the West is united in providing security guarantees to Ukraine. There are now serious pledges on the table of the coalition of the willing. That is why, the day after the coalition of the willing met last week, Putin threatened attacks on any Western presence on the ground, including peacekeepers. This is a serious escalation from Russia and directly undermines European security. Russia does not have a say in how we defend ourselves.

Honourable Members, that is why the European Union will keep doing its part to protect the security of our continent. Work is undergoing on the three main pillars. First, the European Union has already trained close to 80 000 Ukrainian soldiers. We are the largest training provider of Ukraine's armed forces, and we have also started working on changing the mandate of our mission so that we can also train soldiers in Ukraine. The strongest security guarantee is a strong Ukrainian army.

Second, the European Union will also keep supporting internal security and resilience in Ukraine through our civilian mission. We have already supported Ukraine's police force and help strengthen the rule of law in the country. And today there are many more challenges to address, including those related to war.

Third, we will keep strengthening Ukraine's defence industry, including helping Ukraine produce more military hardware in the European Union. The EU is already actively encouraging Member States to team up with Ukraine to support them and learn from Ukraine's war experience, and we are steadily integrating Ukraine into the European defence industrial base, including incentivising joint procurement through SAFE.

Honourable Members, Ukraine's accession to the European Union is something that gives hope to the Ukrainian people: the possibility to live free and prosper again. Ukraine has already shown a remarkable evolution in its reforms, even in the midst of war, but my colleague will talk about that more. Accession is a merit-based process, and Ukraine merits progress. It is time to open negotiations on Cluster 1.

The war will end, and when it does, Ukraine will recover and Russia will pay for the damage it has done. Russian sovereign assets should remain immobilised until Russia stops its war of aggression against Ukraine and compensates Ukraine for the billions of euros of damage it has caused and keeps causing. This is what the European Council has stated. It is essential that we deliver on this commitment.

Honourable members, what Russia may have thought inevitable is far from it: Russia has not broken Ukraine's resolve, and it must not break ours. For those who doubt, don't: Ukraine's security is European security, and so long as Russia pursues its illegal war, we must continue to fight.

Michael Gahler, Berichterstatter. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, sehr verehrte Hohe Vertreterin, liebe Erweiterungskommissarin! Wir haben heute eine verbundene Debatte, und ich danke zunächst der Hohen Vertreterin für ihre klaren Aussagen im Hinblick auf die jüngsten russischen Terrorangriffe.

Putin will nichts weniger, als den russischen Endsieg über die Ukraine erzwingen. Der unrechtmäßige, ungerechtfertigte und unprovozierte Angriffskrieg hat nicht nur Tod und Zerstörung über ein souveränes Land gebracht, er ist zugleich ein Angriff auf die Grundwerte von Frieden, Freiheit und Demokratie in Europa.

Dieser Krieg muss beendet werden, doch Frieden entsteht nicht durch Worte allein. Russland hat in den vergangenen Monaten mit unseriösen Vorschlägen und unehrlichen Verhandlungen gezeigt, dass es seinen Krieg fortsetzen will. Daher betonen wir: Ein bedingungsloser Waffenstillstand ist Voraussetzung für jede ernsthafte Friedensverhandlung! Solange dieser nicht gegeben ist, müssen wir unsere militärische, materielle und finanzielle Unterstützung für die Ukraine verstärken, damit das Land sein Recht auf Selbstverteidigung wahren kann.

Die Ukrainer verteidigen nicht nur ihr Territorium, sondern auch ihren europäischen Weg. Nie zuvor war allen Bürgern und politisch Handelnden so klar, warum sie angegriffen werden – nämlich deswegen, weil sie diesen europäischen Weg zu Rechtsstaatlichkeit und Demokratie erfolgreich vollenden wollen. Die Alternative ist offensichtlich: Entweder man wird Teil des freien Europa oder man wird zurück in den sowjetischen Gulag gezwungen.

Wir unterstützen die Ukraine in ihrem Reformprozess, der im Detail im Anhang zur Ukraine-Fazilität quartalsweise aufgeführt ist. Hierbei haben wir auch einen Hebel, denn die Zahlungen sind gebunden an die Erfüllung dieser Quartalshausaufgaben, und wenn die nicht erfüllt werden, werden auch die Zahlungen gekürzt.

Auf diesem Reformweg kann es auch Rückschritte oder Fehltritte geben. Hervorzuheben ist aber auch, dass die Reife der Gesellschaft inzwischen so weit fortgeschritten ist, dass solche Fehltritte durch den Druck der Gesellschaft auch wieder korrigiert werden können. Beeindruckend fand ich die Reaktion der Zivilgesellschaft auf den Versuch, das nationale Antikorruptionsbüro der Ukraine, NABU, und die Sonderstaatsanwaltschaft SAPO für Korruptionsbekämpfung unter die Kontrolle des Generalstaatsanwalts zu stellen. Da gingen viele trotz des Krieges auf die Straße, und auch wir sahen darin den Versuch, unabhängige Ermittler unter die Kontrolle der Regierung zu bekommen. Der ursprüngliche Zustand wurde wiederhergestellt – das ist gut. Wir sehen daneben beachtliche Fortschritte, die oftmals mithilfe und durch das Beharren der internationalen Gemeinschaft erreicht werden.

Die Ukraine muss ihr Reform-Momentum weiterhin nutzen: zur Stärkung ihrer demokratischen Institutionen, zur Angleichung an die Gemeinsame Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik der EU, zur Bekämpfung von Korruption und Missständen in der Justiz. Diese Schritte sind nicht nur entscheidend für den EU-Beitritt, sie sind auch ein Fundament für das Vertrauen der eigenen Bevölkerung in Staat und Rechtsordnung. Daher fordern wir auch, dass politische Vielfalt, unabhängige Justiz und transparente Verfahren geschützt und gestärkt werden. Wir fordern, unzeitgemäße und politisch motivierte Gerichtsverfahren und Sanktionen gegen Vertreter der Opposition zu unterlassen, den parlamentarischen Pluralismus zu wahren und einen konstruktiven Dialog zwischen den politischen Gruppierungen in der Werchowna Rada zu fördern; außerdem alle Beschränkungen für mandatsbezogene und politische Auslandsreisen für Mitglieder der Werchowna Rada aufzuheben.

Der Europäische Rat hat im Dezember 2023 den historischen Beschluss zur Aufnahme von Beitrittsverhandlungen gefasst. Die erste Regierungskonferenz fand im Juni 2024 statt. Nun gilt es, entschlossen weiterzugehen – ohne Blockaden oder Vorwände. Wir rufen alle Mitgliedstaaten dazu auf, konstruktiv zu handeln und den Weg der Ukraine in Richtung EU-Mitgliedschaft zu ebnen. Es gilt, zeitnah Clusterverhandlungen aufzunehmen, damit möglichst viele schnelle Fortschritte in Bezug auf den EU-Beitritt des Landes erzielt werden können.

Lassen Sie uns gemeinsam ein klares Signal senden! Die Ukraine gehört zur europäischen Familie, und wir werden alles daransetzen, dass sie ihren Platz in der Europäischen Union so bald wie möglich einnimmt. Mit guten Reformen kann die Ukraine dieses Ziel schneller erreichen.

Slawa Ukrajini!

Marta Kos, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, I would like to begin with a big thank you and deepest gratitude to this House for your resolute commitment and continued support to Ukraine.

Your strong voice has been a source of strength in Kyiv. They need it. It is a beacon of hope that Ukraine's sacrifices are not in vain. Let me in particular thank you, dear Mr Gahler, the rapporteur on Ukraine, for your work in steering this House's positions forward with clarity, conviction and optimism.

Today, as we consider the Commission's enlargement reports for 2023 and 2024, and as we look ahead soon to the 2025 report already in preparation, we must remind ourselves what is truly at stake.

Ukraine's path to accession is a matter of survival, sovereignty and long-term security, not only for Ukraine, but for Europe as a whole. Ukraine has chosen this path freely and legitimately. It is what Ukrainians are fighting for day after day, night after night, under continuous attacks. Their choice is clear: a future anchored in peace, stability and prosperity – a future within the EU family.

But it is not an easy road. While heavy fighting continues, Russia's brutal attacks on civilian targets have intensified. As we know, on Sunday, Russia struck the Cabinet of Ministers building in Kyiv for the first time – a direct attack on the seat of Ukraine's Government. And of course, we know that this attack was not an accident. It was a message. Russia does not want peace. Russia fears Ukraine's European aspirations and dismisses democracy. That is why our response must be resolute and united.

Despite this brutal war, Ukraine has advanced steadily on reforms. The Commission's assessment shows progress across key areas such as energy, customs, and foreign and security policy. That is a clear demonstration of determination.

But accession is not only about ticking boxes. It is about transforming a state and society to guarantee the rule of law, the fight against corruption, the independence of institutions and a functioning democracy, meaning following the Copenhagen criteria. This requires the whole of Ukraine: government, civil society, stakeholders and particularly the Verkhovna Rada, the Parliament of Ukraine.

We saw in July – Mr Gahler, you mentioned it – how fragile progress can be. Attempts to undermine the independence of the anti-corruption bodies NABU and SAPO were deeply troubling. We were crystal clear that such moves are unacceptable. These institutions are the very foundations of the Ukraine that Ukrainians want to build: transparent, accountable, European.

On 31 July, Ukraine corrected course. Key safeguards were restored. Other measures, including the appointment of the head of the Economic Security Bureau – we waited for months for this – were unblocked. These are positive steps and that calls for the vigilance of every actor for the sake of Ukraine's European future.

In this context, the Commission has said that Ukraine has met conditions to open Cluster 1, while we encourage them to continue work on the implementation of roadmaps and especially on an action plan for minorities. At this crucial moment, a strong sign of support is more than symbolic. It is strategic and it is deserved.

I would love to stress that it is not true what some people claim that we are stuck in the accession process. From the technical point of view, we are working really a lot and in a few weeks we will be in the position to be able to open all the clusters. But the decision has to be made in the Council. So, I call on the Council to decide on the opening of Cluster 1 without further delays on the only legitimate ground: the merits of Ukraine.

Much has already been achieved together and together we must continue. Honourable Members, Ukraine's EU accession is the most powerful guarantee of its security. Each reform consolidated, each cluster open, each step forward is a step that locks Ukraine more firmly into our common European home.

It is also a signal to Moscow that Ukraine's European destiny is irreversible. Let us not underestimate what this means. Ukrainians are defending not only their territory, but also freedom and democracy in Europe. The least we can do is match their courage with our political determination.

We will continue to support Ukraine in advancing reforms, particularly in the rule of law, and we will continue to ensure that the accession process remains merit-based, credible and predictable. I count on this House to remain fully engaged, to encourage all political forces in Ukraine to work constructively and to remind all Member States that the time for hesitation has passed.

Ukraine's future is in Europe. Its people have chosen this path with courage, with sacrifice and with hope. Now it is for us, all of us, to be up to these circumstances, to help make this choice irreversible and to ensure that one day soon, Ukraine takes its rightful place also in this House, in the European Parliament.

Pekka Toveri, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, I totally agree with Commissioner Kallas in her very wise words.

Europe is not safe before Ukraine is safe, and to safeguard Ukraine's safety and freedom, it is crucial that Ukraine can join the EU. Even though Ukraine is fighting existential war to survive, it has been able to take big steps towards its future EU membership. It is extremely important that this positive development can continue, that we stay on our course to accept Ukraine to the Union as fast as possible when Ukraine is fulfilling the requirements.

At the same time, we have Member States like Hungary which are working with Russia to sabotage and prevent Ukraine's EU integration. This is totally unacceptable. EU Parliament, Commission and Council must use all tools and pressure to prevent Hungary or any other Member State to sabotage our joint future with Ukraine.

Slava Ukraini!

Thijs Reuten, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, with this report Parliament sends a strong signal. Ukraine is part of our European family, and our support for its accession is unwavering.

Despite the war, Ukrainian authorities continue to deliver on reforms, and we recognise the progress, but also the difficulties. As true partners, we offer honest, constructive recommendations to Ukraine and to the Commission, so momentum is not lost.

But let's be clear. Accession is overshadowed by Ukraine's – and therefore our – existential fight against Russia's aggression, and here it's time to be blunt. We see the same cycle. The US pretends that there will be additional pressure. Putin pretends to talk. Europe hesitates. Pressure fades. Then Putin escalates his violence – and repeat.

Ukraine suffers while defending itself and us, and we need to be honest: an unchecked Russia would be a disaster for the whole Union, from Poland to Ireland, from Finland to Greece.

Too many Member States still fail to face the truth. We talk in circles – too much talk about Trump, too little action and too little leadership.

Let's not fool anyone. This war is not over. Ukraine is brilliantly defending itself and holding the line. It is not losing, but there is no fair and just peace on the horizon, because Putin doesn't want it. Every signal says the opposite, and there's no point talking about security guarantees when we cannot pressure Putin into wanting peace.

So our strategy must change: more pressure; more weapons; stronger sanctions; real enforcement; seizing the assets – the Russian assets.

Avoiding risk now only guarantees greater risk later. The level of our support determines the level of Ukrainian suffering.

We know what to do. We can do more than we think as Europeans, and it's time for Europe not just to support, but to lead. That is how we achieve a just, fair and lasting peace.

Thank you to the rapporteur for the cooperation, and Slava Ukraini!

Kinga Gál, a PfE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony, Főképviselő Asszony, Biztos Asszony! Mikor olyan javaslatokat hallok, hogy az EU csapatokat állomásoztatna Ukrajnában, akkor négy fiúgyermek édesanyjaként rémület tölt el. Minden ilyen megállapítás még inkább a háborút hozza közelebb az Európai Unióhoz, nem pedig a békét az ukránoknak.

Európa ma gyengébb, mint valaha. Ez az amerikai elnök béke iránti erőfeszítései kapcsán nyilvánvalóvá vált. Ukrajna ma továbbra is az orosz agresszió, a pusztítás legszörnyűbb formáit tapasztalja. Mi itt pedig számtalan vita és határozat, rengeteg Ukrajnába küldött pénz ellenére, egyhelyben toporgunk, hiszen hiányzik a beismerés és a tettek sora, hogy ezt a háborút nem csatatéren, hanem csakis diplomáciai úton lehet megnyerni.

Nem lehet a bővítéspolitikát összemosni a biztonsági garanciákkal. A Bizottság álságosan úgy tesz, mintha Ukrajna már most teljesítené a feltételeket, miközben messze nincs felkészülve a gyorsított csatlakozásra. Ez nem érdem alapú bővítéspolitika, hanem politikai hiba, súlyos következményekkel, amelyeket nem szabad elhallgatni. Különösen cinikus mindez a sok éve teljesítő nyugat balkáni tagjelölt országokkal szemben. Az egész Unió alapvető érdeke, hogy csak egyhangúsággal lehessen ezeket a komoly döntéseket meghozni, nem pedig tagállamokat megkerülve. Az emberek feje felett nem születhetnek meg elhamarkodott döntések, hiszen ezek arról is szólnak, milyen Európai Uniót hagyunk a következő generációkra. Egy legyengítettet, vagy olyat, amelyik képes saját érdekei mellett kiállni? Ha nem nézünk őszintén szembe a valósággal, Európa hamarosan hideg zuhanyra ébred.

Michał Dworczyk, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Sprawozdanie, nad którym dziś debatujemy, to nie tylko dokument analityczny. To również świadectwo niezwykłej determinacji Ukrainy, która pomimo trwającej rosyjskiej agresji nie tylko broni swoich granic, ale również nieprzerwanie reformuje instytucje oraz wzmacnia demokratyczne mechanizmy, dostosowując swoje prawo do wymogów Unii. Sprawozdanie wskazuje na znaczące postępy, od walki z korupcją po reformę systemu sądownictwa. Jednocześnie widzimy również wyzwania: reforma administracji państwowej na poziomie lokalnym, potrzeba większej niezależności sądów, skuteczniejszej ochrony wolnych mediów i wsparcia społeczeństwa obywatelskiego.

Dla Polski niezwykle ważne jest wznowienie od końca 2022 roku wydawania przez ukraińskie władze pozwoleń na prace poszukiwawcze i ekshumacje Polaków zamordowanych przez ukraińskich nacjonalistów z UPA w czasie II wojny światowej. To bardzo istotny proces, który musi być kontynuowany nie tylko dla dobra relacji dwustronnych, polsko–ukraińskich, ale również w duchu wartości chrześcijańskich będących fundamentem zjednoczonej Europy.

Członkostwo Ukrainy leży w strategicznym interesie całego kontynentu. To większe bezpieczeństwo energetyczne i stabilność wschodnich granic. Europa silna to Europa z Ukrainą. Dziś zatem naszym obowiązkiem jest nie tylko solidarność, ale odwaga, by tę przyszłość zbudować razem, wspierając Ukrainę w jej walce oraz w drodze dalszych reform.

Petras Auštrevičius, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, dear Kaja, dear Marta, dear colleagues, Russia's unprovoked and illegal aggression against Ukraine, which has been ongoing for 42 months, has undermined the foundations of European security.

To stop Russia, we must create a security and defence mechanism which is stronger than its militaristic ambitions. To deter the aggressor, Europe has no choice but to extend the European security system to Ukrainian territory and strengthen its defence forces.

Applying Newton's principle of physics – energy cannot be created or destroyed – security guarantees will be effective if they are genuine and sufficient. A secure sky over Ukraine, the deployment of EU Member States' military forces on its territory, and further military assistance to Ukraine are only part of the security guarantees that can truly deliver.

Russia must pay military reparations to Ukraine. I warmly welcome the 9 July decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia, which found Russia guilty of systematic violations in Ukraine, including the downing of MH17.

This court decision provides the legal basis for using Russia's frozen assets to compensate the Ukrainian people for immense damages and losses.

Security and justice are integral parts of European life. Let us extend them to the people of Ukraine now.

Sergey Lagodinsky, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Es muss klar sein, es muss uns allen klar sein: Es wird keinen Frieden geben ohne Friedensgarantien. Es ist nicht möglich, eine Demokratie, einen Investitionsstandort, einen unabhängigen Staat abzusichern im Schatten der militärischen Erpressung durch den Nachbarn. Die EU muss für Einsatz sorgen, die USA für mehr Klarheit – Klarheit, dass die Ukraine nicht den russischen Drohungen ausgeliefert wird und dass Europa nicht alleine steht, wenn es zu einem Ernstfall kommt.

Das bedeutet dreierlei. Erstens: Europäische Präsenz ist kein Krieg; sie ist Frieden, sie ist Teil der Diplomatie. Wenn wir nach einer Befriedung Präsenz sichern, dann ist das eine Friedensgarantie und kein Kriegseinsatz.

Zweitens: Amerikaner müssen beteiligt sein. Es kann nicht sein, dass Brüssel mehr unter Druck steht als Moskau. Es kann nicht sein, dass wir Kooperation im Bereich Abwehr der Desinformation, wie heute bekannt wurde, beenden, dass Amerikaner diese Kooperation beenden. Nein, der Zusammenhang zwischen Russland und China muss auch unseren amerikanischen Partnerinnen und Partnern klarer werden. Es ist in der Verantwortung der EU, dass die Ukraine sicher bleibt, aber es ist auch im Interesse der USA, dass dies gelingt.

Und drittens: Die Führungsverantwortung Deutschlands steht außer Frage. Vorbei sind die Zeiten, wo Deutschland durch Zurückhaltung Gewähr für Frieden war. Jetzt müssen wir Verantwortung übernehmen, nicht mit Söder'schem Provinztum, sondern mit dem europäischen Geist, und das bedeutet auch Präsenz der europäischen und der deutschen Soldaten, auch bei einer Friedensabsicherung.

Özlem Demirel, im Namen der Fraktion The Left. – Frau Präsidentin! Frau Kallas, voller Stolz haben Sie hier jetzt das 19. Sanktionspaket angekündigt. Aber ich möchte Sie fragen: Welche Maßnahme haben Sie denn jetzt während des Genozids an den Palästinensern gegenüber Israel ergriffen? Wann wollen Sie das EU-Assoziationsabkommen endlich mal aussetzen? Ich finde, an dem Punkt wird Ihre Doppelmoral ziemlich, ziemlich deutlich.

Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, seit drei Jahren höre ich mir Reden an, dass es in der Ukraine um einen Krieg “Autokratie versus Demokratie” ginge. Und selbstverständlich steht das Putin-Regime für eine autokratische Politik. Aber stimmt es, dass Herr Selenskyj und die Ukraine so demokratisch sind? Ich meine, Herr Selenskyj ist nicht nur für seine korrupten Offshore-Deals bekannt. Es ist auch so, dass in der Ukraine im Moment Gewerkschaftsrechte ausgehöhlt werden, jegliche Oppositionspartei verboten wurde, und ganz egal, wie man zu diesen Parteien steht – das steht nicht unbedingt für Demokratie! Was ist mit den Arbeitnehmerrechten? Was ist mit den Gewerkschaftlern, die in Hausarrest sitzen? Das alles, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, verdeutlicht, dass es hier nicht um Demokratie geht, sondern um knallharte Geopolitik von Ihnen.

Ich will es deutlich sagen: Wenn Sie jetzt schon sagen – bevor Sie am Verhandlungstisch sitzen –, dass Sie jetzt Truppen in der Ukraine installieren wollen, Frau Kallas, wie Sie und Frau von der Leyen es angekündigt haben, ist das einfach unhaltbar. Das verdeutlicht: Sie wollen keinen Frieden. Die Menschen in Europa stehen aber für den Frieden in der Ukraine, in Europa und weltweit!

Hans Neuhoff, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Die einzige wirksame Sicherheitsgarantie für die Ukraine wäre ihre Rückkehr zur Neutralität. Die EU behauptet, einen Waffenstillstand anzustreben. Doch indem sie verlangt, dass EU- und NATO-Staaten ihn überwachen, gibt sie Russland nur den Anreiz, noch mehr ukrainisches Territorium zu besetzen.

Warum dieses widersinnige Handeln? Erstens: Jeder Kompromiss mit Russland gilt als geopolitischer Gesichtsverlust – Moral schlägt Realismus. Zweitens: Die EU-Kommandeure wollen sich als Gestalter inszenieren, obwohl sie in Wahrheit Getriebene sind. Drittens: Sie alle stecken in der Psychologie eskalierender Selbstbindung fest – too much invested to quit.

Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Frau Präsidentin, erwachen Sie, bevor Sie alles verspielt haben!

Rasa Juknevičienė (PPE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, let's be clear: Ukraine and its European future are as important to European security today as the United States was to Europe in the decades after World War II.

All normal people want peace. However, peace at the expense of Ukraine and on Russia's terms could be the beginning of a major catastrophe for all of Europe.

Europe needs a strategy for Ukraine if Trump's bid to end the war fails. We need a European plan to lead the fight for Ukraine's and our future. Its core is to help contain Russia and integrate Ukraine into a pan-European defence alliance.

What must we do today? Provide significantly greater financial support for Ukraine's defence. This is money for our own defence as well.

Tobias Cremer (S&D). – Madam President, colleagues, I want to begin by thanking Donald Trump. Seriously. Because this summer he's disproven once and for all a zombie theory that some in this House have been riding like a dead horse and have been riding again today, that we, if only we accommodated Putin, only reached out to him, we could have an easy peace.

That's what Trump tried and he failed. He has given everything to Putin. He rolled out the red carpet. He made concessions. And what did he get? Nothing. Nothing at all. No ceasefire. No compromise. Only more attacks, more escalation, more aggression. And in a despicable mockery of diplomatic solutions, Putin bombed our own embassy in Kyiv, endangering the very men and women who sacrifice their life, and who dedicate their life to diplomatic solutions.

So what more do we need to finally understand that the only language that Putin speaks is strength, strength and strength?

So let's finally show some strength and strengthen Ukraine's armed forces, strengthen our sanctions regime, and strengthen Western unity by showing European rather than Trumpian leadership. Appeasement has failed. Now it's time to get real about strength in peace.

Pierre-Romain Thionnet (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, permettez-moi tout d'abord de rendre hommage aux nombreuses victimes civiles ukrainiennes des derniers jours. Les engins russes qui traversent impunément le ciel ukrainien leur ont apporté la mort.

On nous dit que les plans d'une force européenne de réassurance sont prêts. Fort bien. Mais ces plans sont des plans de l'esprit. Leurs détails sont certainement savants, leurs logistiques bien pensées, mais ils valent pour l'après.

Tandis que la guerre fait toujours rage et que le sang des Ukrainiens macule les forteresses du Donbass, ces plans sont un terrible aveu d'impuissance. Non seulement ils ne valent qu'en cas de feu vert américain, sans lequel il n'y aura ni renseignement, ni surveillance, ni détection, mais, surtout, ils disent au monde: “Nous, Européens, n'avons pas su prévenir cette invasion, nous n'avons pas pu dicter l'issue du conflit, mais croyez-nous, nous agirons quand ce sera fini et si on veut bien nous y autoriser.”

Au milieu de l'ensauvagement du monde, l'Europe court vers de grands malheurs si elle persiste à croire que la puissance se donne plutôt qu'elle ne se prend.

Alberico Gambino (ECR). – Signora Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, dopo anni in cui Mosca pretendeva soltanto la resa di Kiev, oggi, a mio avviso, si aprono spiragli di dialogo, resi possibili dalla resistenza del popolo ucraino e dal sostegno compatto dell'Occidente, come ha ricordato la presidente Meloni.

In questo quadro, l'Italia ha avuto un ruolo significativo al recente vertice della Casa Bianca, proponendo un sistema di garanzia di sicurezza ispirata all'articolo 5 della NATO: non un invio di truppe, ma l'impegno a una risposta rapida e credibile contro nuove aggressioni.

Eppure, purtroppo, ahi noi, la realtà resta drammatica: la Russia ha appena lanciato un vasto attacco aereo dall'inizio della guerra, con centinaia di missili e droni su Kiev, che hanno provocato morte e devastazione.

Di fronte a questa ferocia non possiamo cedere allo scoraggiamento. Come ha ricordato papa Leone XIV, serve il coraggio di uscire dalla spirale dell'odio e percorrere la via del dialogo. È questa la bussola che deve guidare l'Europa: libertà, sicurezza e dignità per l'Ucraina.

Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin, ich möchte mich erst mal bei Ihnen beiden bedanken für Ihr Engagement. Meine Damen und Herren, die Ukraine wurde angegriffen in einem unvorstellbaren Maße; Trump hofiert Putin; von der Leyens Flugzeug wird gejammt auf dem Anflug nach Bulgarien; unsere EU-Vertretung wird zerstört in Kyjiw – was muss noch passieren?

Ich höre von der Koalition der Willigen, sehe aber vor allen Dingen nationale Egoismen. Wenn die EU in Zukunft eine Rolle spielen will im Theater auf dieser Welt, dann nicht als Zwerg, sondern als Riese, als Riese um die USA, neben China, neben Russland; anders haben wir überhaupt keine Chance.

Das bedeutet, meine Damen und Herren, dass wir alle in unsere Heimat zurückfahren müssen, in unsere Nationen, um unseren Regierungen – egal ob wir zur Regierung oder zur Opposition gehören – klarzumachen: Wir alle sind verantwortlich für 450 Millionen Menschen, die in Frieden und Freiheit leben wollen. Deswegen muss die EU präsent sein und darf sich nicht ducken, und vor allen Dingen dürfen sich die Nationen nicht wegducken.

(Die Rednerin ist damit einverstanden, auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der “blauen Karte” zu antworten.)

Lukas Sieper (NI), Frage nach dem Verfahren der “blauen Karte”. – Frau Präsidentin, im Einklang mit unserer Geschäftsordnung würde ich gerne auch auf die Antwort reagieren können, die Frau Strack-Zimmermann gibt. Frau Strack-Zimmermann, Sie haben darüber gesprochen, dass wir keine nationalen Alleingänge mehr machen dürfen, und Sie haben darüber gesprochen, dass wir nach Hause gehen müssen und unseren Regierungen in den Arsch treten müssen.

Es gibt ein Konzept, das bisher nur eine europäische Regierung fährt, und zwar, dass man seinen Staatsbürgern erlaubt, in der ukrainischen Armee zu kämpfen. Das erlaubt allein Polen. Würden Sie mir zustimmen, wenn ich sage, dass wir das europaweit erlauben sollten, um jenen Staatsbürgern unserer Nationen, die für die Freiheit kämpfen möchten, das auch ermöglichen zu können?

Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (Renew), Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der “blauen Karte”. – Ich bin der Meinung, dass jeder Staat sich im Klaren sein muss: Er ist Teil der Europäischen Union, und das heißt nicht nur, die Give-aways zu bekommen, nicht nur das Geld zu nehmen, sondern auch Verantwortung zu übernehmen. Wie das im Einzelnen aussieht, das sollten wir hier ganz genau diskutieren; darum geht es. Weil ich immer noch Länder sehe, die reden viel, aber es passiert wenig. Andere machen etwas, das reicht aber vorne und hinten nicht.

Wenn wir ernst genommen werden wollen in diesem Dreiklang – was im Indopazifik passiert, was Russland nach wie vor macht und wie sich der amerikanische Präsident geriert –, kann ich nur sagen: Wir haben eine Chance, wenn wir hier zusammen auftreten. Darin liegt unsere Stärke, und das sollten wir auch tun.

Lukas Sieper (NI), Reaktion nach dem Verfahren der “blauen Karte”. – Ich stimme allem zu, was Sie gesagt haben. Ich hätte mir allerdings gewünscht, dass Sie meine konkrete Frage etwas deutlicher beantwortet hätten. Trotzdem, denke ich, können wir zusammen weiter für die Unterstützung der Ukraine kämpfen.

Virginijus Sinkevičius (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, High Representative, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, Ukrainian cities are under the heaviest bombardment in months, and this just after the red carpet was rolled out to Putin in Alaska. Power stations, hospitals and homes are being hit night after night, and yet Ukraine still finds the strength to push forward with reforms from justice to decentralisation, because the Ukrainian people know their future is European. Last week in Paris, 26 nations pledged to form a reassurance force to protect Ukraine once there is a peace agreement. This is not a theory anymore: it is Europe showing it can act even when Washington hesitates.

Dear colleagues, let us be honest: Moscow has zero interest in peace. It wants time to rearm, not to reconcile. And that is why the EU must lead. Our responsibility is to deliver weapons fast, close all the loopholes in sanctions, and keep Ukraine's accession path alive while giving it real security guarantees. That will deter the next possible attacks.

If we get this right, we will not be protecting just Ukraine. We will be protecting…

(The President cut off the speaker)

Ivan David (ESN). – Vážená paní předsedající, bezpečnost je nedělitelná. Podmínkou míru je zajištění bezpečnostních záruk pro všechny. Strana konfliktu, jejíž bezpečnostní záruky nebudou zajištěny, se nutně bude cítit ohrožena a podle toho bude jednat. Takový stav je zárukou pokračování konfliktu. Obávám se, že přesně o to jde.

Mír, který jako spravedlivý uznává jen jedna strana, není mír. Takový mír nebude přijat, jedině pokud by šlo o mír po kapitulaci, kterou musí přijmout poražená strana. Neznám nikoho, kdo by si při zdravém rozumu myslel, že Rusko je blízko kapitulace. Jestliže politika je umění možného, pak to, co provádí Evropská unie, není politika. Za podmínek prosazovaných Evropskou unií nemůže být dosaženo míru a lidské ztráty a materiální škody se budou nadále stupňovat s rizikem vzniku třetí světové války.

Michał Szczerba (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Dzień dobry Polsko! Dzień dobry Europo! Dzisiaj jest dzień dobrych wiadomości. Fundusz Safe został rozdysponowany. Mój kraj, Polska, będzie największym beneficjentem środków na uzbrojenie. To inicjatywa z czasów polskiej prezydencji. Za Donaldem Tuskiem mogę powiedzieć: robimy, nie gadamy.

Przed nami dwa kluczowe zadania. To gotowość i odstraszanie. Nie jest to możliwe bez silnego potencjału obronnego. Konieczna tu jest współpraca z ukraińskim przemysłem dronowym. Zaczynają się manewry rosyjsko-białoruskie Zapad 2025. Nieustannie pojawiają się prowokacje. Fundusz Safe to także budowa systemu obrony powietrznej, w tym antydronowej. Tu jest przestrzeń na współpracę z Ukrainą. Osiągnęli w tym zakresie mistrzostwo.

Ale również bardzo ważna rzecz. W tym sprawozdaniu nie zapominamy o historii, inwestując w przyszłość. Rzeź wołyńska. Każda ofiara tej rzezi musi zostać upamiętniona. Rozpoczęły się ekshumacje, rozpoczęły się pochówki. Bardzo dziękuję, że w tym sprawozdaniu na temat Ukrainy ta sprawa została podkreślona.

Heléne Fritzon (S&D). – Fru talman! Världsordningen är i gungning och Europa står inför sin svåraste prövning på decennier. Ukraina kämpar inte bara för sitt land utan för hela vår kontinent. De senaste dagarna har Ukraina drabbats av nya stora drönarattacker, bland annat träffades en regeringsbyggnad i Kiev. En mamma och hennes bebis dödades och många fler skadades.

Ändå ser vi att flera EU-länder fortfarande inte lever upp till sitt ansvar i stödet till Ukraina. Norden och Baltikum visar vägen, men flera medlemsstater ligger långt efter. Nu kräver vi socialdemokrater ett nytt handslag: att varje medlemsstat, senast vid årsskiftet, ger minst en halv procent av BNP i stöd till Ukraina, för vår gemensamma säkerhet, för Europas fred och för det ukrainska folkets frihet. Slava Ukraini.

Roberto Vannacci (PfE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, nella mia vita non avrei mai pensato di dover dar ragione a una pasionaria del socialismo, del green deal e della cessione della sovranità nazionale alla tecnocrazia di Bruxelles. Ma una cosa giusta, nella sua vita, il commissario Teresa Ribera l'ha detta: questa Unione europea ha fallito.

Ha fallito sui dazi, così brillantemente negoziati da “Frau von der Leyen”; ha fallito sull'immigrazione, riempiendo l'Europa dei disperati della Terra; ha fallito sull'energia, che prima compravamo economicamente dai russi, e oggi spendiamo 700 miliardi di euro per comprarla da Washington; ha fallito sulle armi, che oggi compriamo dagli Stati Uniti per darle e regalarle agli ucraini; ha fallito sulla guerra, pensando di poterla vincere con sanzioni economiche, con roboanti dichiarazioni e con tanta propaganda.

Oggi continua a fallire sulla pace, rinunciando alla pace possibile e giusta, quella che si può ottenere subito, e ubriacando i popoli europei con il concetto di “pace giusta”, che non è mai esistito nella storia dell'umanità.

E fallisce anche sulle garanzie di sicurezza, perché non esiste garanzia senza il rischio di dover andare a combattere, se necessario.

E ve lo dico da patriota e sovranista convinto: non una goccia di sangue italiano verrà versato per questa guerra che non difende la nostra patria e non difende i nostri interessi nazionali.

Adam Bielan (ECR). – Madam President, High Representative, the ECR Group has always been clear: there can be no long-lasting peace without justice and no justice without Ukraine's full territorial integrity and sovereignty.

Any so-called compromise that rewards the Russian aggression will be seen as weakness and will only embolden the imperialist regime.

We must stand with Ukraine, not only out of solidarity, but because their victory is paramount to European security.

In light of this, I applaud newly inaugurated Polish President Nawrocki's recent success in obtaining clear security guarantees from US President Donald Trump – a powerful signal for the entire region.

I would like to thank you very much for raising the issue of genocide in this resolution. The Ukrainian side must finally start exhuming the murdered.

Dan Barna (Renew). – Madam President, I stand before you not just as a European, but as a Romanian as well. My country shares the longest EU border with Ukraine. We are not just neighbours; we are brothers and sisters who have sheltered millions from the storms of Russian aggression. We have seen their fear in their eyes and heard the sirens first-hand.

We talk of peace, and we must. But let us be clear: a peace dictated by the aggressor is not peace, it is surrender. And a 'just peace' is not a negotiation over how much of a sovereign nation is fed to the wolves.

That peace will never hold without real ironclad security guarantees. Vague promises are an invitation for future aggression. Ukraine needs more than our resolutions. It needs our resolves.

So I ask you, look east from this Chamber. See the courage of a people fighting for their very values we represent. History will not forgive us if we answer their sacrifice without hesitation. Let our legacy be that when tyranny challenged our continent, we did not flinch. We acted. We secured a just peace.

Ewa Zajączkowska-Hernik (ESN). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Polska przyjęła milion Ukraińców uciekających przed wojną. Ci Ukraińcy dostali od nas świadczenia socjalne, dostęp do państwowej ochrony zdrowia i edukacji w polskich szkołach. Przekazaliśmy Ukrainie pomoc militarną wartą ponad trzy miliardy euro. Daliśmy Ukrainie nasze czołgi, transportery i samoloty. I mimo naszego gigantycznego zaangażowania spotkaliśmy się z ogromną niewdzięcznością ze strony ukraińskiej. Ukraina nie chce przeprosić, potępić i nazwać ludobójstwem rzezi wołyńskiej, mordów dokonanych na polskiej ludności cywilnej przez ukraińskich nacjonalistów podczas II wojny światowej.

Na Ukrainie kwitnie kult Bandery, zbrodniarza i inicjatora mordów na Polakach. Na polskich ulicach można spotkać mnóstwo młodych Ukraińców, mężczyzn, którzy zamiast bronić swojego kraju, imprezują w Polsce. Nasz rynek został zalany ukraińskimi produktami spożywczymi, a polskie firmy transportowe mierzą się z nieuczciwą konkurencją ze strony ukraińskich przewoźników. Czas najwyższy, by Europa dowiedziała się, jak niewdzięcznym i skorumpowanym państwem jest Ukraina. Zdecydowane “nie” dla obecności Ukrainy w Unii Europejskiej.

Sandra Kalniete (PPE). – Cienītā sēdes vadītāja! Kolēģi! Vai šeit, Eiropas Parlamentā, ir vēl kāds, kas tic, ka Putins tiešām vēlas mieru? Ja ir, tad tie ir naivi ļaudis vai arī – Kremļa draugi. Krievija ir pastiprinājusi iznīcinošus uzbrukumus Ukrainas civiliedzīvotājiem, infrastruktūrai, nesaudzējot arī valdības mītni.

Tā Kremlis ņirgājas par ASV un Eiropas Savienības centieniem apturēt karu.

Vienīgais ceļš uz mieru ir turpināt palielināt spiedienu uz agresoru un pastiprināt sankcijas pret Krieviju.

Ikvienam ir jāapzinās, ka Ukraina ir Eiropas drošības garantija pret Kremļa impēriskajiem plāniem.

Tāpēc ir ļoti svarīgi turpināt apbruņot Ukrainu, nodrošinot, ka Ukrainai ir spēcīga, robusta, moderna, labi aprīkota un labi apmācīta armija, kā arī attīstīta militārā industrija.

Un galvenais – mums ir jānodrošina maksimāls atbalsts Ukrainas integrācijai Eiropā, ir jāsāk Eiropas Savienības pievienošanās sarunas. Slava Ukrainai!

Brando Benifei (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il tappeto rosso americano per il criminale di guerra Putin ha prodotto solo altre bombe su Kiev, uccidendo civili inermi. A sentire Trump, la guerra doveva finire a 24 ore dal suo insediamento, invece siamo ancora qui a farci prendere in giro da un autocrate assassino.

Nessun cessate il fuoco è stato raggiunto, mentre doveva essere questa la precondizione per proseguire le negoziazioni.

Basta perdere tempo, serve un passo avanti concreto nell'utilizzo degli asset russi congelati per sostenere l'Ucraina in modo che paghi davvero chi ha causato tutto questo, superando le divisioni fra i paesi europei.

Ora la comunità internazionale si unisca nel definire condizioni giuste per una pace sostenibile e sicura, che sia rispettosa del popolo ucraino e dell'Europa, di cui l'Ucraina è parte, e che ricostruisca un ordine internazionale fondato sul diritto e non sulle sfere di influenza e sulla prepotenza.

Csaba Dömötör (PfE). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Két dolgot szeretnék felvetni. Először is azt szeretnénk kérni, hogy amikor kidolgozzák az Ukrajna-politikájukat, akkor végre vegyék figyelembe a gazdasági következményeket is. Európa eddig elköltött 169 milliárd eurót a háborúra, és az új hétéves költségvetésben további 100 milliárd eurót adnának. A közvetett kiadásokat is beleértve, a költségvetés akár 20%-a is mehet Ukrajna irányába. Így ez a vita nem csak Ukrajnáról szól. Mert ha az európai gazdaság stagnál, akkor ezeket az összegeket máshonnan kell elvenni. Ezért akarják leépíteni a kohéziós támogatásokat és az agrárkasszát is. Nem lehet úgy Ukrajnának segíteni, ha az európai gazdaság közben belerokkan.

És még valami: azt szeretnénk kérni a külügyi főképviselő asszonytól, hogy ha Ukrajna bombázza az egyes tagországok számára kritikus energetikai infrastruktúrát, akkor legyen szíves, ne hagyja szó nélkül. Főleg, ha az ukrán elnök bevallja, hogy célzottan, nyomásgyakorlási célból bombáztak. A Barátság kőolajvezetékkel ez történt. Szóval csak annyit kérünk, hogy az ukrán zászló mellé néha tűzzék ki a tagországok zászlaját is.

Reinis Pozņaks (ECR). – Labdien, cienījamie kolēģi, komisāres kundze, priekšsēdētāja! Kopš iepriekšējās debates par Ukrainu vēl tūkstošiem raķešu un dronu ir raidīti uz Ukrainas civiliedzīvotājiem. Vēl simtiem cilvēku gājuši bojā, tai skaitā daudz bērnu. Bet viena nosacīti laba lieta gan ir notikusi šajā laikā, un te piekrītu, ka jāsaka paldies Trampa kungam par to, ka viņš parādīja visai pasaulei, kā diplomātija darbojas attiecībās ar Krieviju. Katras sarunas nozīmē jaunus, rekordlielus uzbrukumus Ukrainas pilsētām ar raķetēm un droniem, jo Krievijas politika ir ļoti vienkārša – runāšana tās izpratnē ir vājums, un Krievijas robežas ir tur, kur tā dabū pa zobiem. To viņi paši deklarē ik pa laikam. Tā kā tikai agresora bailes palikt bez šiem zobiem ir tas, kas var nodrošināt drošības garantijas gan Ukrainai, gan Eiropai. Un šīs bailes nevar panākt ne ar ko, kas ir no papīra. Tikai un vienīgi spēcīga armija un aizsardzības industrija var nodrošināt patiesas drošības garantijas Eiropā, un es apzināti nenodala Ukrainu, jo Ukraina ir Eiropa.

Helmut Brandstätter (Renew). – Madam President, Madam Vice-President, dear Commissioner, Ms Kos, you rightly said that it's a strong sign that Ukraine comes to Europe. It's also a strong signal to Moscow.

But there are other signals to Moscow from the very left and from the very right. These signals are that they are parrots. They just say the same as Putin, we just heard it.

And then, Ms Gál – she already left – talked about her boys. But you know, when Putin kills children, she shrugs her shoulders. She doesn't care.

You know, think about the children in Ukraine. They can't go to school. Think about them. They can't go to a hospital because he's also bombing hospitals. You don't care about that and we know that.

On the other hand, we know that if Ukraine flourishes, that's a great sign that being part of the European Union is a better life and also that democracy is a better life. That's also our sign to them.

One message to the people in Ukraine: there is a huge majority that are in favour of you. Don't listen to those extremists. There's a huge majority for you and we will fight for you. We will work for you. Let's work together for a better Europe.

Петър Волгин (ESN). – Госпожо Председател, има няколко основни теми, за които привържениците на бързото приемане на Украйна в Европейския съюз не говорят нищо.

Първо, ендемичната корупция, за която самите украинци казват, че е най-големият проблем в страната след войната. Наскоро президентът Зеленски се опита да постави под свой контрол двата основни органа за борба с корупцията, като това щеше напълно да ги обезсили. Второ, изобщо не се говори за гоненията, на които са подложени духовниците от Украинската православна църква. Без никакви доказателства те са набеждавани за руски шпиони и са преследвани, затваряни и осъждани. Трето, оглушително мълчат евроинституциите по повод насилственото събиране на млади хора по улиците и автобусните спирки на украинските градове, за да бъдат пратени на фронта, често без никаква сериозна подготовка. Четвърто, въобще не се обсъжда въпросът за това, че много от земеделските производители в държавите – членки на Европейския съюз, ще загубят субсидиите си, които ще отидат при украинските им колеги, когато Украйна влезе в Европейския съюз.

Обаче мълчанието не решава тези проблеми. Напротив, задълбочава ги.

Nicolás Pascual de la Parte (PPE). – Madam President, High Representative, I extend my congratulations to the rapporteur on the report on Ukraine. I think that it is time for the European Union to cobble together a comprehensive initiative on peace for Ukraine.

During the summer we have been attending a lot of meetings and encounters in Alaska and in Washington, and I think that the people, our public opinion outside, need to have a clear idea of what the European Union stands for with regard to Ukraine. We have to put together, to cobble together, an integral, comprehensive peace plan together with our Ukrainian friends.

The main idea is that Russia cannot win this war. We have to support our Ukrainian friends – not to defend themselves, but to win the war, which is something quite different. And for that, we have to promise them a quick integration into the European Union. We have to strengthen and reinforce their armed forces and to integrate the army into our European defence infrastructure. Only with these clear messages can we set up a clear deterrence against Putin.

Javi López (S&D). – Señora presidenta, mientras la brutal invasión ilegal por parte de Putin y Rusia a Ucrania continúa, durante estos últimos meses estamos viendo una resistencia heroica de Ucrania en defensa de su integridad territorial y, también, de los valores europeos.

Pero ¿qué hemos visto durante este verano? Hemos visto la rehabilitación de Putin en la escena internacional —con una alfombra roja—, cómo la guerra en Ucrania se sitúa en los términos que interesan a Putin —ganar tiempo— y, en tercer lugar, cómo Washington ha dejado de pedir el alto el fuego, que es la petición central que nosotros estamos haciendo como europeos. Esto es lo que hemos visto este verano.

Yo lo que les diría, señorías, es que tenemos que acabar con nuestra posición de dependencia en materia de seguridad y defensa y en relación a Ucrania. ¿Por qué? Porque sin un nuevo papel autónomo, sin una autonomía estratégica y propia de la Unión Europea, no vamos a poder defender nuestra seguridad, nuestra democracia y el futuro de Ucrania.

Lo que reclamamos es reforzar y mejorar la competitividad de nuestra industria, fortalecer nuestras democracias y redoblar el apoyo a Ucrania, porque la seguridad de su futuro no puede depender de la vanidad de líderes extranjeros.

Petra Steger (PfE). – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Frau Kallas, ich muss Sie genauso wie Frau von der Leyen ernsthaft fragen, ob Sie mittlerweile wirklich von allen guten Geistern verlassen sind. Was wollen Sie eigentlich bezwecken? Wollen Sie Europa mitten in den Krieg ziehen, ist das Ihr Ziel? Sie wollen die Ukraine aufnehmen – ein Kriegsland, ernsthaft?

Sie sprechen von über 10 000 Mann für sogenannte Friedenstruppen, sprich Bodentruppen, die nicht nur einmal in der Vergangenheit von Russland als Provokation bezeichnet wurden; Truppen, von denen offenbar nicht einmal irgendwer etwas wissen will, weder der deutsche Verteidigungsminister noch US-Präsident Trump. Ihre angeblichen Friedenstruppen sind genauso real wie der russische Angriff auf das GPS-System von Frau von der Leyens Flugzeug oder Ihre Führungsmacht auf der Welt – reine Fake News.

Zuerst lassen Sie sich bei den Zollverhandlungen über den Tisch ziehen, und dann sitzen Sie auch noch in Washington vor der Tür, wenn die Staatschefs die wichtigen Gespräche führen. Wissen Sie eigentlich, was Sie für ein Bild auf der Welt abgeben, Frau von der Leyen genauso wie Sie, Frau Kallas? Auch in Zukunft – das kann ich Ihnen jetzt schon prophezeien – werden Sie bei Gesprächen oder potenziellen Friedensverhandlungen draußen vor der Tür sitzen. Warum? Weil Sie keiner mehr ernst nimmt, und das haben Sie allein sich und Ihrer Politik zu verdanken.

Alexandr Vondra (ECR). – Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, efforts to draw Vladimir Putin to the negotiation table led nowhere. Our experience proves that Russia understands only one language, and that is power, not the nice talks which we have here.

Therefore, we must follow two goals at the same time. Firstly, arming Ukraine and rearming ourselves. With the EU machinery, any project can become a bureaucratic nightmare. We must make the development, production and distribution of weaponry in the EU as simple as possible. Don't forget, our enemy is not environmentally considerate.

Secondly, keep the relations with the US. Gigantic fines of Google will not improve our relationship. In this sense, a pragmatic Maroš Šefčovič is doing more sensible work than the ideologue Teresa Ribera.

Hilde Vautmans (Renew). – Madam President, dear colleagues, it is very good that there is a coalition of the willing who want to provide Ukraine with security guarantees, but let us not get ahead of ourselves. Europe has increased its military help for Ukraine, but it is far from enough. Last week we all saw Russia launch one of its deadliest attacks on Ukraine.

The Russian economy is not collapsing as predicted. Our sanctions, colleagues, don't bite hard enough. We are now on our 19th sanctions package. We are slow. The implementation remains weak and we lack a central authority for enforcement. We are also – and the Commissioner and Kaja know this – too soft on third countries and companies who still supply Russia with chips and other precision tools that allow them to build strategic weapons. So please, colleagues, let us strengthen Ukraine to the point where they can win the peace.

Commissioner Kos, I really want to say I appreciate your efforts for enlargement, but I didn't hear anything on the reform of Europe, so please…

(The President cut off the speaker)

Isabel Wiseler-Lima (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, trois ans et demi. Trois ans et demi que les Ukrainiens sont réveillés, nuit après nuit, par les sirènes. Trois ans et demi qu'ils enterrent leurs morts, tombés sous les coups de l'armée russe. Une guerre menée contre l'Ukraine de manière tout à fait injustifiée, sans qu'il n'y ait aucune provocation. Nous n'oublierons jamais les horreurs de Boutcha.

Nous continuons à demander que les prisonniers civils soient libérés, que les enfants déportés reviennent en Ukraine. Nous avons décidé de soutenir les Ukrainiens aussi longtemps qu'il le faudra, et c'est le minimum que nous puissions faire, non seulement parce que nous devons cette aide à nos voisins, qui ont décidé qu'ils voulaient vivre libres et en démocratie, comme nous, mais aussi parce qu'ils sont notre rempart contre un régime autoritaire qui profère des menaces militaires contre nous et mène une guerre hybride bien réelle et dangereuse contre nos démocraties.

Nous devons donc apporter tout le soutien militaire possible à l'Ukraine, intensifier les sanctions à l'égard de la Russie et aussi accompagner les efforts de l'Ukraine pour l'accueillir, comme nous l'avons promis, dans l'Union européenne.

Maria Guzenina (S&D). – Madam President, last weekend, Russia launched 818 drones against Ukraine. Meanwhile, President Putin is laughing in Moscow.

President Trump sends mixed signals: one day promising peace; the next, praising the leader of Russia.

In Beijing, President Xi gave Putin yet again a global stage and Europe were absent. Peace talks are shaped by others.

The days when trade power gave us leverage is over. This has given Putin a clear table to push harder and further crush Ukraine's fight for freedom.

As said in the report, Ukraine is the single most important area of EU activity in the external relations realm.

Madam President, if Europe is not at the table, we are on the menu.

Viktória Ferenc (PfE). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Fontos, hogy a mai vita címe a béke szó említésével végre tükrözi azt, ami az embereknek fontos. Ugyanis az Európában és az Ukrajnában élő emberek is békét szeretnének. Túl régóta szenvednek már – és nemcsak szenvednek, hanem meg is halnak a harctéren vagy már a besorozások során átélt embertelen bánásmód következtében. A kárpátaljai magyarok a háború szörnyűségei mellett jogaik korlátozását is elszenvedik. Visszatértek a megfélemlítő, magyarellenes feliratok. Diszkriminatív bánásmódban részesülnek határátkeléskor, s mindez egy Unióba törekvő országban történik.

Eközben a jelentés elfogultan méltatja Ukrajna nemzeti kisebbségeket érintő látszattevékenységeit, és felszólítja Magyarországot, hogy vegye semmibe az Európai Unió koppenhágai kritériumait. Ez elfogadhatatlan. Magyarország tiszteletben tartja az Európai Unió csatlakozási feltételeit, a nemzeti kisebbségek jogait és a békét szorgalmazza. Ez Önöktől is joggal elvárható. Elég a kettős mércéből!

Bernard Guetta (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, rien n'est fait, hélas, rien n'est joué, mais il semble pourtant bien que ses yeux s'ouvrent. Déçu, dit-il, par Vladimir Poutine et surtout inquiet du resserrement des liens entre la Chine et la Russie, Donald Trump paraît enfin comprendre – commencer à comprendre – qu'il a besoin d'alliés pour faire face à l'entente sino-russe.

Nous verrons si ce président passe maintenant à l'acte, mais une chose est sûre: depuis l'humiliation subie par Volodymyr Zelensky dans le bureau ovale, nous avons, nous, l'Union européenne, resserré nos rangs, fait front avec la Grande-Bretagne et arrimé à notre bataille pour la liberté le Canada, l'Australie, le Japon et bien d'autres démocraties de taille. Nous instaurons de nouveaux rapports de force qui affirment un nouveau pôle de puissance sur la scène internationale.

Mais tout reste à faire. Le martyre de l'Ukraine et notre propre sécurité exigent de nous bien plus encore.

Željana Zovko (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, poštovana povjerenice, žao mi je što nije ovdje visoka predstavnica Kaja Kallas, ona je na kolegiju. Želim pozdraviti ministra pravde Bosne i Hercegovine koji je ovdje s nama i govori o proširenju i u stvari o potrebi da se sačuva Bosna i Hercegovina u ovom trenutku.

Ukrajina je problem s kojim se susrećemo i s kojim ćemo se susretati u budućnosti jer odjednom nema interesa s lijeve strane da budu ovdje. Kada je agresija pošla na Ukrajinu ovdje je bila puna lijeva strana spektra, a sada ih nema. Gdje su oni?

Čestitam Michaelu Gahleru koji se toliko godina bori i sada konačno imamo Izvješće o Ukrajini, ali činjenica jest – proširenje je jedini način obrane Europe.

Jedini način obrane Europe, i svim mojim kolegama koji su ovdje govorili da mi moramo promijeniti neku taktiku sa Sjedinjenim Američkim Državama, to nije točno. Bez Amerike ni Hrvatska nije mogla biti spašena. Hrvatska se sama obranila, bez Amerike…

(Predsjedavajuća je govornici oduzela riječ)

Tonino Picula (S&D). – Madam President, Madam Commissioner and colleagues, when our peace efforts are responded to with drones and missile attacks on civilian infrastructure, government buildings and the EU representation office, the conclusion should be clear to all: there is no genuine will from Putin to talk or act towards peace.

While discussions on security guarantees are welcomed, there are more concrete actions we can do now: bolder decisions related to immobilised Russian state assets, energy independence from Russia, and to pursue it in general, to work on a genuine and predictable partnership globally to support international law and Ukraine.

Apart from military and economic support, we need sufficient assistance for Ukraine to strengthen its judiciary and the rule of law, while fighting corruption, as rightfully underlined by the report. Progress in these areas is vital for Ukraine now.

By defending itself, Ukraine is defending Europe. And by strengthening itself, the European Union can better support Ukraine. Slava Ukraini!

Mika Aaltola (PPE). – Arvoisa puhemies, arvoisat komission jäsenet, Thukydides, kreikkalainen historioitsija, totesi aikoinaan, että sodan eskalaation ajurit ovat nousevan, nousukkaan suurvallan yli-itsevarmuus ja sen muissa aiheuttama pelko. Kun Putin katsoo meitä silmiin, hän näkee meissä pelkoa. Hän näkee hajanaisen lännen ja hän uhittelee.

Eilen Venäjän turvallisuusneuvoston varapuheenjohtaja, entinen presidentti, uhkaili Suomea sodalla. Nämä eivät ole leikin asioita ja voisi sanoa, että olemme yhden hävityn sodan päässä isosta eurooppalaisesta sodasta. Meidän on pakko mobilisoitua. Euroopan historia on nähnyt koalitioita tahtovien koalitioita Iberian niemimaan vapauttamisesta Wienin porteille ja Suureen Pohjan sotaan. Nyt on tärkeää, että tässä mobilisaatiossa me kerrankin olisimme ajoissa liikkeellä ja onnistuisimme.

Massimiliano Salini (PPE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, alcuni analisti hanno utilizzato una metafora efficace per descrivere lo scontro tra Ucraina e Russia: quello delle clessidre, una gara tra clessidre.

La clessidra russa è una clessidra economica: il tempo avverso alla Russia, il tempo dell'economia di guerra che non dovrebbe reggere per più di 18-24 mesi, si dice.

Spetta a noi il compito di rallentare, anzi in questo caso di velocizzare, il tempo della scadenza del flusso di quella clessidra, con sanzioni vere, più forti, soprattutto secondarie, per evitare l'elusione delle sanzioni che fino ad ora abbiamo applicato.

Poi c'è la clessidra ucraina, che è militare. Anche in questo caso, il nostro compito è quello di intervenire fornendo gli strumenti perché si rallenti il corso di quel tempo negativo per l'Ucraina, consapevoli che l'azione ucraina, difendendo l'Ucraina, difende l'Unione europea; così come l'attacco russo, attaccando l'Ucraina, attacca l'Unione europea.

Davor Ivo Stier (PPE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, once again we need to stress that it was Putin who started this war of aggression against Ukraine, and it's Putin who doesn't want to end it. The attacks on Kyiv, including the government building and the EU delegation, are the clearest reminder.

The fact that Putin fiercely opposes the deployment of Western peacekeeping forces, even after a deal is reached, shows everyone that his intention is not to stop, but to carry out his plan of total submission of Ukraine into the so-called Russian world. And for that, obviously he has the support of China, since Beijing wants a multi-polar world based on spheres of influence dominated by regional hegemony. The initial attempt of the Trump administration to distance Moscow from Beijing has not borne fruit, and we should now continue to work with Washington on the careful design of secondary sanctions.

Finally, it is imperative for Kyiv to avoid any back-pedalling on European values and standards, and for us in Europe it's imperative to unblock the EU accession negotiations with Ukraine.

Matej Tonin (PPE). – Madam President, dear Commissioners, dear colleagues, it seems that we are waiting for the war in Ukraine to end on its own, or for President Trump or the Pope to bring it to an end. None of this has happened. The war will end when Putin realises that he has nothing to gain on the battlefield.

That is the reason for our unwavering support for Ukraine. Our support for Ukraine is the path towards peace. History teaches us a clear lesson: an aggressor does not stop by choice, but only when confronted with limits.

The unity of this House is more important today than ever. Europe is stronger when we stand together. Our response must be clear. Putin will not stop on his own. Only together we can stop it.

Liudas Mažylis (PPE). – Pirmininke, nė minutės netikėjau agresorių rusų gera valia ir kad jie panorės taikos. Ne, tikrai ne. Mums lieka tik ginkluoti Ukrainą, ginkluotis patiems, pajungiant mokslą ir pažangiausias technologijas, finansus, nusiteikti hibridiniam karui. Mūsų pasirinktas sankcijų paketo metodas turėjo suveikti daug anksčiau. Depozitus būtina konfiskuoti, narystės derybų neatidėlioti. O dabar agresoriaus žiaurumas didėja dešimteriopai. Norma jau dabar nebe 600 dronų, o 6000. Tiek kraujo dar nebuvo. Terminas “Realpolitik” keičia prasmę ir reiškia grubią realybę. Kraujo kaina – lemtingai perlaužti karą. Nesame karo kurstytojai, bet agresorius mus verčia vaikus nuo mažens mokyti konstruoti dronus ir dronų uždangas. Sakydami rūsčią teisybę būtume bent jau sąžiningi. Slava Ukraini!

Alvise Pérez (NI). – Señora presidente, yo ya suelo evitar venir a este tipo de debates sobre Ucrania porque me resulta muy incómodo escuchar las opiniones de tantísimas marionetas.

¿Podemos hablar con cierta sinceridad por una vez? ¿Podemos decir en voz alta mirándonos los unos a los otros que los muertos en Ucrania nos dan exactamente igual? Igual que nos importan absolutamente nada los 5 000 cristianos asesinados en África, en un país de los muchos que están en guerra.

Al final, de lo que tenemos que hablar es de que aquí somos marionetas de poderes más allá de Europa. Somos marionetas y nos vestimos de traje y corbata y nos sentamos en estos 720 escaños como si pintáramos algo.

No, no, esa es la verdad. Al final, “Von der Lucifer”, ¿ante quién se arrodilla? Ante Estados Unidos. ¿Bases militares de Estados Unidos en Europa? Treinta y ocho, cientos de ojivas nucleares en Europa. Somos, literalmente, esclavos de intereses estadounidenses; que no es que lo critique, digo única y exclusivamente que hablemos con sinceridad, porque ya que hemos sido elegidos por tantísimos europeos, que menos que, por una vez, digamos las cosas claras, ¿no?

VORSITZ: SABINE VERHEYEN

Vizepräsidentin

Spontane Wortmeldungen

Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis (S&D). – Posėdžio pirmininke, gerbiamos komisarės, kolegos. Kai klausausi šioje salėje pasisakymų iš tų atstovų, kurie save įvardija patriotais, nenorom prisimenu sentenciją: patriotizmas dažnai būna paskutinė niekšų prieglauda. Ar taip save vadinantys patriotai kartais nesuvokia šios sentencijos prasmės? O ypač prancūzų patriotai galėtų atsisukti į istoriją ir paklausti savęs, kokia taika su Hitleriu? Įdomi būtų istorinė pamoka prancūzų patriotams? Ir dėl to atsakymas labai akivaizdus. Šiandien, be kita ko, mes minime 50-metį Helsinkio baigiamojo akto, kuris labai aiškiai pasakė: sienų neliečiamumas, teritorinis integralumas ir jėgos nenaudojimas. Putinas privalo būti nugalėtas! Tai vienintelis kelias.

Reinier Van Lanschot (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, while Trump rolled out the red carpet for Putin in Alaska, the largest air strike on Ukrainian civilians happened. It seems that the more we talk about peace, the more aggressive Putin becomes. The more the US bows, the more bombs he throws, and the more we are paralysed, the more he prolongs this war.

We want this war to end as soon as possible and to prevent it from ever restarting. So make sure that Putin realises that he will not gain anything.

Conversations about security guarantees are good, but should never become a substitute for making Ukraine win, and the coalition of the willing should never become a substitute for building a true European Defence Union.

Siegbert Frank Droese (ESN). – Frau Präsidentin! Die sehr, sehr Hohe Vertreterin kommt zu dieser wichtigen Debatte erstmal zehn Minuten zu spät: auch eine Missachtung dieses Scheinparlaments. Was Kallas zu berichten weiß, ist ziemlich viel gequirlter Mist. Das einzig Richtige, was sie sagte: Der Ukraine-Krieg ist nicht zu gewinnen. Richtig, die Ukraine kann diesen Krieg nicht gewinnen. Warum berichtet Kallas nicht davon, wie das korrupte Regime der Ukraine unsere Infrastruktur angreift?

Und wenn der Berichterstatter Gahler, CDU, vom Endsieg Russlands redet, dann scheint das tief aus seinem Bewusstsein zu kommen, endlich an Russland Revanche zu nehmen für die Ergebnisse des Zweiten Weltkrieges. Das ist widerlich, Kollege Gahler, das ist widerlich, schämen Sie sich!

Die Präsidentin. – Ich bitte Sie, demnächst Respekt vor diesem Haus zu haben. Dieses Haus ist die Vertretung der Bürgerinnen und Bürger Europas und kein Scheinparlament.

Diana Iovanovici Șoșoacă (NI). – Doamnă președintă, cred că nu ați înțeles că sferele de influență s-au schimbat și polii de putere sunt alții. Cred că nu ați înțeles că Uniunea Europeană a rămas singură și s-a format o cu totul altă putere la nivel mondial, cu toate acele țări pe care dumneavoastră le numiți dictaturi, în timp ce în Europa se instaurează cea mai cumplită dictatură.

Prin România au trecut și trebuiau să treacă vreo 270 de miliarde de dolari din Statele Unite ale Americii către Ucraina. Știți ce s-a întâmplat în timpul prim-miniștrilor Ciucă și Ciolacu, pe care i-ați susținut? 100 de miliarde de dolari au dispărut și sunt implicați în furtul lor nu numai prim-miniștrii români, dar și personalități din conducerea Uniunii Europene. Și nimeni nu vă spune asta.

Românii nu sunt de acord să murim pe front pentru Ucraina, dar să știți că avem și noi acolo un milion de români care sunt asupriți și discriminați de regimul dictatorial …

(Președinta a retras cuvântul vorbitoarei)

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, alta representante Kallas, hay dos debates esta mañana en el pleno sobre Ucrania y Gaza, conflictos de causalidad y naturaleza muy distintas, pero con un hilo conductor que denuncia la impotencia que amenaza la irrelevancia y la hipocresía de la política exterior de la Unión Europea.

La “coalición de los dispuestos” es un subrogado para la ausencia de unanimidad, lo que significa que no existe una posición de la Unión Europea, y parte de esa coalición integra a países que ya no están en la Unión Europea, como el Reino Unido.

Lo más grave no es que la premisa sobre la seguridad de Ucrania requiera una paz que está muy lejos de la vista, ni que Putin diga, con claridad, que la implicación de la Unión Europea en la seguridad de Ucrania no se traduce en seguridad para Ucrania sino en inseguridad para el conjunto de la Unión Europea. Lo más grave es que, en los escenarios en los que todo esto se discute, la Unión Europea no está ni se la espera, en flagrante traición a la promesa proclamada de su autonomía estratégica.

Alexander Sell (ESN). – Frau Präsidentin! 169 Milliarden Euro hat die EU in den vergangenen drei Jahren nach Kyjiw überwiesen, Frau Kallas hat es gerade gesagt. Frau Kallas hat außerdem angekündigt, dass Europa ab 2027 kein russisches Gas mehr importieren werde. Was Sie allerdings nicht erwähnt haben, Frau Kallas, sind die Konsequenzen Ihrer Politik.

In Deutschland geht nämlich gerade die Chemieindustrie kaputt, und zwar infolge von Ihrer Politik. Infolge von viel zu hohen Energiepreisen gibt es Massenentlassungen bei Bayer, BASF usw. Tausende Familien in Leverkusen, in Ludwigshafen, in Bitterfeld werden ihrer Existenzgrundlage beraubt, und zwar wegen Ihrer Politik. Mit vollen Händen geben Sie Geld aus, was eigentlich gar nicht mehr vorhanden ist.

Gestern ist in Frankreich die Regierung geplatzt, weil sie sich nicht auf einen Sparhaushalt einigen konnten. Die Bundesregierung in Deutschland sucht händeringend nach neuen Einnahmequellen. Der Bundeskanzler sagt, die Deutschen müssten mehr arbeiten, die Deutschen sollten erst mit 70 in Rente gehen. Der Sozialstaat sei nicht mehr finanzierbar, sagt Friedrich Merz.

Diese Abgehobenheit hier in diesem Haus in Straßburg, aber auch in Berlin, überrascht mich jedes Mal aufs Neue. Die Missachtung, Ihre Missachtung für die Menschen, die das alles hier finanzieren müssen, das ist der Grund, weshalb meine Partei in den Umfragen so stark ist. Der Krug geht so lange zum Brunnen, bis er bricht.

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)

Marta Kos, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, today's debate has proven support to Ukraine's path to the European Union, even while challenges remain.

What distinguishes Ukraine is its determination to confront these challenges, even while fighting for its very survival. We have seen that Ukraine is willing to take the difficult decisions needed to stay on course.

At the same time, we cannot forget that Ukraine's accession is not only about reform, it is also a strong security guarantee for Ukraine and for Europe. Each step forward is a step that makes our Union safer, stronger and more complete.

This House, the Commission and the Council must remain united. We must send a clear message: Ukraine's European destiny is irreversible. Ukrainians are defending our shared values with their lives. The least we can do is rise to the occasion with political courage. Ukraine's future is in Europe and together we must ensure that the future becomes reality.

Michael Gahler, Berichterstatter. – Frau Präsidentin! Eine Vorbemerkung: Ich finde, es ist eine Schande, wenn es nach zwei gescheiterten deutschen Diktaturen immer noch Leute gibt hier im Hause, die sich einer dritten Diktatur andienen. Schämen Sie sich!

We could note the usual coalition of the willing of five political groups and additional individual Members that send a clear message: Ukraine's future is in the EU. On the way, we are supportive of the reform process and as Putin does not want peace, not even a ceasefire, we agree to demand from our governments to strengthen Ukraine's ability to defend itself. Everyone must deliver what they can provide.

For the German part, to fulfil their task, we should start training Ukrainians on the Taurus missile and deliver it as soon as possible to make a difference, hitting production sites of weapons, launch sites of missiles and important logistical infrastructure that transport the lethal weapons and soldiers to the frontline. Contrary to certain claims, no German soldiers are needed to install it all.

And there is one aspect that has not been addressed, and I think that is one of the motivations why the Ukrainians continue to fight and we should support them: it is about the Ukrainians, millions of them, who live in the Russian occupation zone. Their daily fate is incredible: torture, arrests, no rule of law at all. I think that is the population that is at risk especially, and that is why this motivation is so strong to regain these occupied territories. It's about the people and not about the territory that is in the focus, and I think we have all reason to support Ukraine in these efforts as well.

And in so far, I thank you once again, dear colleagues from these five groups and additional Members, for this solidarity that we have pursued over the years. I am confident that we will succeed with our efforts. Thank you very much.

Once again, slava Ukraini!

Kaja Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, honourable Members, I want to thank the European Parliament for your unwavering support for Ukraine and its people. They are living very hard times and you have been with them for three and a half years, so that is also reflected in Mr Gahler's report.

Your commitment has been crucial not only for Ukraine, but also in defending the very principles that we as Europeans stand for. And we have stood united in these very turbulent times, so thank you for that.

President. – The debate is closed.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 178)

Urmas Paet (Renew), kirjalikult. – Ukraina on ELi välissuhete valdkonna kõige olulisem tegevusvaldkond. Ukrainas jätkuv sõda on juba avaldanud ELile sügavat mõju ja teeb seda ka edaspidi. Selle sõja tulemus on ELi jaoks eksistentsiaalse tähtsusega ning EL peab andma endast kõik, et tagada Ukraina võit agressorriik Venemaa vastu. Seepärast on EL ja selle liikmesriigid andnud Ukrainale järjepidevat poliitilist, diplomaatilist, rahalist ja sõjalist abi. Praeguse Ameerika Ühendriikide administratsiooni järsk suunamuutus muudab ELi vastutuse veelgi suuremaks. Euroopa Komisjonil tuleks avada läbirääkimisklastrid, edendamaks Ukraina ELiga ühinemist võimalikult kiires tempos. Selle protsessi edukas lõpuleviimine annab tunnistust juhtrollist, otsusekindlusest ja ettenägelikkusest ning see on üha muutlikumas rahvusvahelises keskkonnas geostrateegiline investeering ühtsesse ja tugevasse Euroopasse.

3. Viimase piirini viidud Gaza: ELi tegevus näljahäda leevendamiseks ning pakiline vajadus vabastada pantvangid ja liikuda kahe riigi kooseksisteerimisel põhineva lahenduse suunas (arutelu)

Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärung der Vizepräsidentin der Kommission/Hohen Vertreterin der Union für Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik zu dem Thema “Der Gazastreifen am Rande der Belastbarkeit – Maßnahmen der EU zur Bekämpfung der Hungersnot sowie dringend notwendige Freilassung der Geiseln und Umsetzung der Zweistaatenlösung” (2025/2852(RSP)).

Kaja Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, honourable members of the European Parliament, unlike in Ukraine, the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza is testing Europe's resolve, because we are not united.

Europe has not sat on its hands. Europe has been the most active actor for Gaza in the world. We are the largest humanitarian donor and a constant supporter of the Palestinian Authority and the two-state solution. We have helped more than any other international actor.

Day in and day out, I've pushed for aid to reach those in desperate need and I have applied the political leverage we have. I negotiated directly with my counterpart to reach humanitarian understanding with Israel, with specific benchmarks, because earlier efforts had not resulted in any change.

For example, I tasked our Special Representative for the Middle East Peace Process to work with the External Action Service and DG ECHO to engage directly with Israel to open the gates of Gaza for humanitarian assistance. Not a single truck entered the Gaza Strip from March to July. Since our humanitarian understanding with Israel, there have been some positive developments: 2904 trucks entered between 10 July and 1 September, the reopening of more crossing points, the reopening of the Jordanian and Egyptian routes, an increasing the amount of fuel entering Gaza – the minimum agreed 196 000 litres was reached in mid-August. However, we see fluctuations in quantities entering the strip in the last two weeks. On structural interventions, repairs to vital infrastructure have improved water access, and the South Gaza desalination plant is also operational. However, three main water pipelines suffer recurrent damages due to ongoing hostilities. And, in August, a ship carrying 1200 tonnes of aid departed from Limassol, Cyprus, and further shipments will continue. I would like to thank Cyprus in particular for their efforts. I agree with you: it is not enough. It is not enough. We need to do more.

I also have led a full review of Israel's compliance with Article 2 of our Association Agreement. We drew up an inventory of possible options to pressure the Israeli Government to change its course of action. The Commission then followed with a proposal to suspend parts of Horizon, but there is no required support for that yet, and I note that this is a qualified majority decision.

While there was support for these steps, there is no unity on what should come next. Now we have a statement of famine in northern Gaza. There are major safety and security concerns for international humanitarian staff, which hinder efforts to distribute aid. Trucks are looted and aid is not distributed properly. War continues, including now in Gaza City. And so I ask you, what more can we do?

Honourable Members, I believe we must continue diplomatic efforts with the Israeli Government, because we cannot get anywhere if we do not talk. In my contacts with the Foreign Minister, I have consistently raised the restrictive requirements for international NGOs to register. He has informed me that the deadline for registration was now extended to December.

Now how we uphold the European values internationally is a collective responsibility that demands a collective European response. On my side, I can reassure you that I leave no stone unturned in my efforts to make progress. I will continue this way.

Our options for more action are clear and remain on the table, but Member States disagree on how to get the Israeli Government to change course. That is why several Member States have now taken national measures in response to the actions of the Israeli Government. But we cannot move as a union until Member States share the same view on what to do. This is not the time to point fingers, but to unite for solutions. And there are many places where we do agree. We all agree on the diagnosis and on the goals, and the suffering and the conflict, and securing the release of all hostages.

Yesterday's attack in Jerusalem underlines the incredible dangers facing both Palestinians and Israelis. Aggression breeds more aggression and radicalisation. If there was a military resolution, the war in Gaza would have long been over. Now we must summon the political will to agree on a European way forward, and I call on the European Parliament's support in this endeavour. Member States actions are crucial, but only our unity can have amplified effect.

Antonio López-Istúriz White, en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señora presidenta, señora alta representante, la situación que estamos viviendo en Gaza e Israel es insostenible y requiere de este Parlamento una respuesta firme, serena y responsable.

La prioridad debe ser siempre la protección de las vidas humanas y el respeto al Derecho internacional. No podemos permitir que el sufrimiento de las víctimas se convierta en un instrumento de confrontación política dentro de la Unión Europea, como sucede y está sucediendo y lo veremos en este Parlamento en la Resolución, desgraciadamente.

Mientras un atentado terrorista en Jerusalén arrebató la vida a seis civiles —entre ellos un ciudadano español—, no solo se condenaba, sino que, además, en mi país se anunciaban medidas que, lejos de favorecer la paz, corren el riesgo de debilitar la lucha contra el terrorismo y de aumentar la inestabilidad de la región.

Ya no puedo negar, como hacía antaño, pecando tal vez de cierta ingenuidad, que no hay antisemitismo en Europa, cuando veo a ciudadanos judíos que nada tienen que ver con las políticas del Gobierno de Israel perseguidos en la Vuelta ciclista de mi país, en bares, en restaurantes o en aviones. Se me hiela la sangre. Empiezo a ver que la historia se repite.

Nuestro deber aquí no es defender a Gobiernos ni legitimar narrativas unilaterales: nuestro deber es defender a las personas, a los rehenes que permanecen en manos de Hamás, a los niños y las mujeres que sufren en Gaza y a quienes en Israel y Cisjordania viven bajo el miedo constante a la violencia.

La Unión Europea tiene una responsabilidad de actuar como mediador honesto, con coherencia, unidad y determinación. La paz, la dignidad y la prosperidad para israelíes y palestinos no serán posibles si no dejamos atrás los discursos de odio y apostamos por la reconciliación y la convivencia.

Γιάννης Μανιάτης, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας S&D. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, δεν μας επιτρέπεται να κάνουμε ότι δεν βλέπουμε τι συμβαίνει στη Γάζα. Η ανθρωπιστική καταστροφή και η πείνα δεν είναι φυσικά φαινόμενα που τυχαίνει να συμβαίνουν. Είναι αποτελέσματα της πολιτικής της κυβέρνησης Νετανιάχου που δεν διστάζει να χρησιμοποιήσει την πείνα ως όπλο, και όπως αναφέρει και το ψήφισμά μας, να διαπράξει εγκλήματα κατά της ανθρωπότητας, ακόμα και γενοκτονία για να παραμείνει στην εξουσία.

Κάθε μέρα εκατοντάδες χιλιάδες Ισραηλινοί διαδηλώνουν ενάντια σε αυτή την απάνθρωπη πολιτική. Είναι πλέον φανερό, ακόμα και στους πιο δύσπιστους, ότι ο Ισραηλινός πρωθυπουργός δεν ενδιαφέρεται για ειρήνη. Δεν τον ενδιαφέρει μια συμφωνία που θα σταματούσε τον πόλεμο και με την οποία θα επέστρεφαν όλοι οι όμηροι στους αγαπημένους τους. Μόνος στόχος είναι η απόλυτη καταστροφή της Γάζας και η εκδίωξη του πληθυσμού της. Άλλωστε, η ενεργοποίηση, παρά τις διεθνείς αντιδράσεις, του σχεδίου εποικισμού Ε1 προσβλέπει στην ουσιαστική διχοτόμηση της Δυτικής Όχθης και τον ενταφιασμό της λύσης των δύο κρατών.

Ως Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο δεν μπορούμε να παραμένουμε άλλο σιωπηλοί. Την Πέμπτη πρέπει να έχουμε ένα ισχυρό ψήφισμα το οποίο: πρώτον, θα ζητάει την απελευθέρωση όλων των ομήρων και την άμεση παύση των εχθροπραξιών· δεύτερον, θα καταδικάζει ξεκάθαρα τη χρήση της πείνας στη Γάζα ως όπλου και θα καλεί το Ισραήλ να επιτρέψει άμεσα την ελεύθερη πρόσβαση ανθρωπιστικής και ιατρικής βοήθειας· τρίτον, θα ζητάει το άμεσο πάγωμα της συμφωνίας σύνδεσης με το Ισραήλ, σύμφωνα και με τη γνωμοδότηση της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής, που έδειξε ότι υπάρχει παραβίαση των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων· τέταρτον, θα ζητάει τον άμεσο τερματισμό των εποικισμών και την επιβολή κυρώσεων σε όσους συνεχίζουν αυτή την πολιτική· και πέμπτον, θα στηρίζει στην πράξη τη λύση των δύο κρατών και την αναγνώριση του κράτους της Παλαιστίνης.

Αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, την Πέμπτη πρέπει να αποδείξουμε ότι ως Ευρώπη στηρίζουμε το διεθνές δίκαιο και τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα παντού. Κρίνεται η αξιοπιστία μας, κρίνεται η ανθρωπιά μας.

António Tânger Corrêa, on behalf of the PfE Group. – Madam President, Ms Kallas, while everybody speaks about Israel and the surrounding problems, today I'm going to speak about Hamas – the other side – because the conflict has two sides.

Hamas is a terrorist organisation recognised by all countries represented here. Hamas must be held accountable if it refuses to release hostages and shoot them at point blank in a cold way, refuses to disarm and deliberately steals or blocks food aid meant for civilians.

Hamas is not a partner for peace, it is an obstacle to peace. All countries, nations or institutions that provide Hamas with manpower, weapons and money should be considered as terrorism supporters.

And let's say one thing here: if they want the war to end tomorrow, they just release the hostages and put the weapons down, and in 24 hours, there will be no more war in Gaza, I can guarantee you.

The other thing is recognising the Palestinian states, very nice. What are you going to recognise? The Gaza Strip? The West Bank, where the most corrupt government takes over and they don't have geopolitical continuity? They hate each other. Abu Mazen is hated as Netanyahu by the Palestinians.

Now, one thing is that if you want to create a state, you must have elections, you must have a parliament and you must have a government. And who's going to be the government? Hamas or its proxies? I leave this thought with you.

The other thing is Jordan. 60-70 % of the people living in Jordan are Palestinians. Remember the Black September in 1970? Once you give them the statehood, they will say, we national Palestinians, we want to be in this country because it's our country. It means to destroy Jordan.

Bert-Jan Ruissen, namens de ECR-Fractie. – Voorzitter, aan eenieder die vandaag ook alle schuld weer bij Israël legt, zou ik willen vragen: bent u soms 7 oktober vergeten? En wat eraan voorafging: de jarenlange regen aan raketten en brandballonnen vanuit Gaza op Israël? En de missie van Hamas, nl. de totale vernietiging van Israël?

Ik zeg niet dat Israël geen fouten maakt, maar als we het zicht verliezen op het moorddadige karakter van Hamas, dan dreigen we verkeerde keuzes te maken. Dan dreigen we “oplossingen” aan te reiken die helemaal geen oplossingen blijken te zijn, zoals bijvoorbeeld een Palestijnse staat erkennen, terwijl dat Hamas alleen maar langer in het zadel houdt. Zo komt er echt nooit vrede.

Wie echt vrede dichterbij wil brengen, concentreert zich op drie dingen: ten eerste de onmiddellijke vrijlating van de gijzelaars, ten tweede de ontmanteling van Hamas en ten derde royale humanitaire hulp aan en bescherming van de burgerbevolking in Gaza. Israël heeft daarbij een zeer grote verantwoordelijkheid.

Maar sancties tegen Israël moeten we in mijn beleving echt niet willen. Daarmee geven we een verkeerd signaal af. Ik kan dat niet anders zien dan een indirecte steunbetuiging aan Hamas. Niet doen dus!

Hilde Vautmans, namens de Renew-Fractie. – Voorzitter, we hebben hier al wat partijen gehoord. Ik houd mijn hart vast voor de onderhandelingen deze namiddag als ik mijn voorganger hoor spreken. Als we alleen focussen op 7 oktober, als we alleen focussen op wat de terroristische organisatie Hamas heeft gedaan, zonder te kijken naar de daden van Israël, dan komen we er niet deze namiddag. Ik doe echt een oproep: ik zal straks de onderhandelingen leiden tussen alle partijen.

Het is de eerste keer dat de Verenigde Naties officieel een hongersnood heeft uitgesproken over Gaza, en niet zomaar een hongersnood, maar een door mensen veroorzaakte hongersnood. Meer dan 132 000 kinderen dreigen te sterven, terwijl de voedseltrucks, en we zien de beelden, door mensen worden tegengehouden. Burgers worden doodgeschoten omdat ze aanschuiven voor een stuk brood. Dat is geen tragedie, maar dat is een misdaad. Ik wil dat Europa niet langer medeplichtig is door toe te kijken.

Mevrouw Kallas heeft al heel veel dingen gedaan, heeft meer gedaan dan al uw voorgangers. Toch som ik hier eens op wat er naar mijn mening dringend moet gebeuren: 1) Open alle grensovergangen nu en laat de hulp ongehinderd binnen. 2) Hamas moet vandaag dringend alle gijzelaars vrijlaten. 3) Leg sancties op én aan de Israëli's die de wet overtreden én aan de terroristische organisatie Hamas én aan de Israëlische ministers die de wetten met voeten treden. 4) Stop alle wapenexporten die oorlogsmisdaden aanwakkeren. 5) Erken de Palestijnse staat. Dat is het enige wat mogelijk is om tot een tweestatenoplossing te komen. Ik reken op deze goodwill …

(De Voorzitter ontneemt de spreker het woord)

Villy Søvndal, for Verts/ALE-Gruppen. – Fru formand! Jeg er altid så imponeret over de her debatter. Over at det ekstreme højre ikke med et enkelt ord er i stand til at omtale den smerte, man udsætter det palæstinensiske folk for lige nu. Det, der sker, er, at Israel straffer et helt folk for terroristernes uhyrlige handlinger. De bruger sult som våben, de tæppebomber hospitaler, teltlejre og skoler. De skyder børn, de sulter børn, de bomber børn. Intet af det her kan undskyldes med hverken bibelcitater eller selvforsvar. Og derfor har EU-landene og EU et meget stort ansvar for at stoppe de krigsforbrydelser, der foregår.

Det er pinligt, at vi ikke er i stand til at stille dem til ansvar. Vi har indflydelse, og jeg synes, vi skal bruge den langt bedre, end vi gør det nu, og derfor er det nødvendigt at sanktionere som det ene, men det er også vigtigt som det andet at suspendere den handelsaftale, som er det virkeligt stærke middel, vi har til at lægge pres på Israel. Der er jo ingen tvivl om, at Israel bryder menneskerettigheder og alle humanitære love. Vi har et utal af internationale retssystemers ord for, at det, der foregår, er forbrydelser mod menneskeheden. Det er det ikke kun i Gaza, det er det også på Vestbredden. Jeg tror stadig på, at tostatsløsningen med internationalt anerkendte grænser fra 1967 er den eneste holdbare løsning for begge folk. Men det kræver, at vi først sikrer palæstinensernes ret til at overleve. Og hvis man går ind for en tostatsløsning, er det i sagens natur, at man også anerkender en palæstinensisk stat.

Manon Aubry, au nom du groupe The Left. – Madame la Présidente, 700 jours, il vous aura donc fallu 700 jours de génocide à Gaza pour qu'il y ait enfin une résolution au Parlement européen.

Pendant 700 jours, la plupart des groupes ici ont refusé chacune de nos demandes et ont préféré fermer les yeux sur le pire carnage humanitaire que notre siècle ait connu. Et ce n'est que grâce à l'abnégation de notre groupe de la gauche, qui n'a jamais rien lâché pour le peuple palestinien, qu'enfin le Parlement se saisit de la question.

Il aura donc fallu attendre que l'ONU déclare l'état de famine et dénonce la rhétorique génocidaire de Netanyahu, que des bombes israéliennes visent des distributions humanitaires, que plus de 60 000 civils, dont 30 000 enfants, soient lâchement assassinés, que plus de 200 journalistes soient tués, que Benjamin Netanyahou étende son projet génocidaire à la Cisjordanie pour que ce Parlement se saisisse, enfin, du génocide à Gaza.

Mais que les choses soient claires: nous ne nous contenterons pas de vagues condamnations. Nous voulons des actes. Madame Kallas, qu'attendez-vous pour décréter un embargo strict sur l'envoi d'armes, alors que des pays comme la France en ont livré un nombre record? Qu'attendez-vous pour suspendre l'accord d'association entre l'Union européenne et Israël, alors que votre propre Commission a reconnu que les droits humains étaient violés? Qu'attendez-vous aussi pour offrir la protection diplomatique à la Flottille de la liberté, attaquée cette nuit par drone, alors qu'elle est en route pour briser l'embargo humanitaire à Gaza? Je veux dire, ici, solennellement, que ces centaines de membres de l'équipage démontrent qu'ils ont 1 000 fois plus de courage que vous, Madame Kallas, et que vous, les dirigeants européens.

Les Palestiniens ne pourront pas attendre 700 jours supplémentaires de génocide, tout simplement parce qu'ils ne seront plus là pour être sauvés. Ils n'ont plus d'abris où se protéger des bombes, plus d'hôpitaux pour sauver leurs blessés, plus de pain pour se nourrir, plus de journalistes pour rapporter leur martyre, plus de terres pour inhumer leurs dépouilles et plus de larmes pour les pleurer. Ils n'ont plus rien. Mais vous, Madame Kallas, vous, dirigeants européens, vous qui avez tout ça, vous perdez une chose qu'ils ont encore, vous perdez votre morale et votre humanité. L'Histoire vous regarde. Agissez, sinon il sera trop tard.

Alexander Sell, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Seit dem Überfall der Hamas auf Israel hat die Europäische Union über 1,6 Milliarden Euro an Gaza gezahlt; Deutschland hat nochmal eine Milliarde draufgelegt. Ohne deutsche Steuergelder könnten sich die Palästinenser nicht ernähren.

Das war aber schon vor dem Krieg so. In Gaza wird nämlich nichts produziert. Zwei Drittel der Lebensmittel müssen importiert werden. Die Hilfsleistungen von der EU haben in Gaza zu einer beispiellosen Bevölkerungsexplosion geführt: Im Jahr 2000 lebten dort knapp über eine Million Menschen, heute sind es 2,3 Millionen – eine Verdoppelung in nur 25 Jahren.

Nirgendwo sonst auf der Welt wächst die Bevölkerung so rasant wie in Gaza – trotz Krieg. Jede Frau bekommt zwischen drei und vier Kinder. Ich muss sagen, ich bewundere die Palästinenser für ihren Kinderreichtum, ich will aber, dass wir uns diesen Reichtum auch leisten können. Deshalb müssen wir die Hilfszahlungen stoppen, weil deutsche Steuergelder deutschen Familien dienen sollen. Ich will, dass junge Europäer sich wieder trauen, eine Familie zu gründen. Wir müssen in unsere Zukunft investieren und nicht in den Babyboom in Palästina.

Hildegard Bentele (PPE). – Madam President, dear Vice-President, dear colleagues, after more than 700 days of war, Israel and Gaza may be entering the final phase: the complete defeat of Hamas's military wing, and hopefully the liberation of the last 20 hostages, including at least 7 Europeans.

The EU has no boots on the ground, no role in the ceasefire talks and no seat at the table for Gaza's political future, but we do have a responsibility where we can act, and this is on improving the humanitarian situation. More aid is needed. Humanitarian zones must be real and all actors must cooperate politically. We must set clear boundaries: no deportations, no annexations, no new settlements, but a chance for a terror-free and prosperous Palestinian state.

And finally, we should help Israelis and Palestinians rebuild trust: something we as the EU know from our own history of peace after war.

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

Lukas Sieper (NI), blue-card question. – Thank you, Ms Bentele, for accepting my question. I have been following your position on this situation quite closely, and I also saw that you visited the German-Israeli summer festival in Berlin just a few days ago. I take that your support for Israel stems from the right of Israel to exist, which is enshrined in our German national ideals, and I'm just wondering, in your opinion, does this also include the necessity to protect Israel from its internal enemies, and not only its external enemies?

Hildegard Bentele (PPE), Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der “blauen Karte”. – Ich würde darauf jetzt auf Deutsch antworten. Dafür stehe ich: dass wir eben anerkennen, dass die Israelis eine Demokratie sind, in der sie ihre Regierung wählen, in der sie ihre Entscheidungen treffen. Und insofern tue ich mich auch schwer – was ja hier viele im Raum tun –, die Militäraktion in Gaza, in Gaza-Stadt zu kritisieren, denn wir haben keinen besseren Rat, militärisch, von keinem Verteidigungsminister.

Sie sagen, man kann die Krise nicht militärisch lösen. Das steht im Raum, sozusagen. Die Israelis lösen diese Krise jetzt militärisch, indem sie die letzten Zellen der Hamas beseitigen. Und ich glaube, das ist auch ein richtiger Ansatz, wenn wir sicherstellen wollen, dass wir wirklich eine Zukunft ohne den militärischen Arm der Hamas haben. Insofern – sage ich nur – sind wir hoffentlich bald am Ende, wir sind schon bei 40/50 % von Gaza-Stadt, und ich hoffe eben – ja, dann höre ich eben auf.

Nacho Sánchez Amor (S&D). – Señora presidenta, el aluvión de palabras sobre Gaza no es solo un ejemplo gráfico de impotencia política, sino que se está convirtiendo en un obstáculo para la acción, en una coartada para la inacción.

Hay que romper este círculo vicioso y pasar de la mera descripción del horror a su calificación política y jurídica y a la atribución de responsabilidades, dentro y fuera de la Unión Europea. Hay que abandonar las frases hechas y hacer algo muy importante en política: llamar a las cosas por su nombre, sin jerga diplomática.

Intentémoslo en la Resolución de hoy, porque esta notoria falta de credibilidad ya no es solo algo que sufriremos por décadas en nuestra relación con el Sur Global, sino que ya está afectando a los ciudadanos europeos; y no me refiero solo a los manifestantes, sino a cualquiera que mira un telediario, con esas imágenes que no se emiten en la televisión pública de Israel.

Nombrar al mal moral es necesario. Recordemos el aviso de la “banalidad del mal” de Hannah Arendt y llamemos las cosas por su nombre. Por eso nuestra propuesta incluye la expresión “genocidio”, se señala a las autoridades israelíes como responsables de crímenes de guerra, se pide la suspensión del Acuerdo de Asociación UE-Israel y se piden sanciones, embargos, el reconocimiento de Palestina y la liberación de los rehenes.

Fabrice Leggeri (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, depuis plus de 700 jours, 48 otages sont détenus par le Hamas. 48 vies suspendues, la moitié présumée morte, l'autre toujours retenue. Des visages que l'on oublie trop vite. Des cris que personne ne doit ignorer.

Et que fait l'Europe? Elle parle. Elle parle beaucoup, mais dans le vide. À l'image du roi Lear, de Shakespeare, elle manie les grands discours, mais n'agit jamais pour sauver ceux qui en ont besoin. L'Europe se veut puissante, mais elle est en réalité fantomatique.

Pendant ce temps, la famine progresse à Gaza. Oui, il faut venir en aide aux civils, mais sans jamais renforcer une organisation terroriste. Or, l'Union européenne distribue des millions d'euros et vote des résolutions, sans contrôle, sans résultat. Tandis que d'autres prennent des initiatives concrètes, l'Europe se ridiculise par son impuissance.

On nous parle encore d'une solution à deux États. C'est un horizon de long terme que nous ne rejetons pas. Mais aujourd'hui, la réalité, c'est qu'un tel projet conduirait à un État Hamas, c'est-à-dire un État terroriste. Tant que cela perdure, la paix restera une illusion. La politique, ce ne sont pas les mots, ce sont les actes: des actes pour libérer les otages, des actes pour protéger les innocents, des actes pour garantir la sécurité d'Israël.

Alberico Gambino (ECR). – Signora Presidente, signora Alta Rappresentante, onorevoli colleghi, a Gaza la sofferenza della popolazione civile e la prigionia degli ostaggi gridano al mondo che questa guerra deve trovare assolutamente fine.

Bisogna individuare al più presto percorsi di pace, ma sappiamo anche che la pace non si costruisce con gli slogan. Occorre sicurezza per Israele, libertà e dignità per i palestinesi e il coraggio di una nuova narrazione che non alimenti odio e disumanizzazione, come ha ricordato il patriarca latino di Gerusalemme.

Per Fratelli d'Italia la linea è chiara: sostegno al diritto di Israele a difendersi dal terrorismo, ma richiesta altrettanto ferma di proporzionalità e di tutela del popolo palestinese e di corridoi umanitari.

Inoltre, non possiamo tacere di fronte alla sofferenza delle comunità cristiane, colpite anch'esse da questa spirale di violenza, eppure fondamentali nell'equilibrio della regione.

L'Europa non può e non deve limitarsi a fare proclami, si ha il dovere di agire. L'Italia ovviamente farà la sua parte, perché solo due popoli e due Stati liberi e sicuri possono aprire la strada a una pace duratura.

Barry Andrews (Renew). – Madam President, High Representative and colleagues, last month, Major General Haliva of the IDF said that for every one person killed on 7 October, 50 Palestinians must die. A leak from the IDF last month also revealed a civilian death rate of 83%. International humanitarian law is clear: civilians must never be a target of war. This is something that used to bother Israel.

Back in 2002, the head of the legal unit of the IDF said, and I quote, 'I was present when we diverted a missile because we saw that a target standing on a roof had picked up a child. We had one clear rule. We were all parents. We could never approve of killing children.' And now we have more than 50 000 children killed or injured in Gaza.

This is something that Israel used to agonise about – the legal and moral implications of civilian deaths. So I implore those who consider themselves true friends of Israel to recognise that this is no longer in any way defensible.

Hannah Neumann (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, famine has reached Gaza City. People are told to leave but have nowhere to go. Children are starving. Families are bombed.

While Trump and Netanyahu dream of turning Gaza into the Riviera, the European Union is paralysed by shameful infighting. While we debate, they create facts on the ground. And yes, it's above all the German Government that blocks action in the Council. That is unacceptable.

Because if we are serious about ending the suffering, about offering a real alternative to the Trump-Netanyahu alliance, we must stand united, and with our regional partners, and with the hundreds of thousands in Israel demonstrating for an end to this brutal war.

The Israeli Government has promised again and again to let in more humanitarian aid. Before the summer, High Representative Kallas, you announced another such deal. But people in Gaza are still starving. Isn't it time to suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement, then? For months, Israeli ministers have incited violence and pushed new settlements to bury a two-state solution. Isn't it time to sanction them, then?

So instead of shouting at each other in here, let's unite behind a simple truth. From the river to the sea, all people should be free. Free from hunger. Free from bombs and missiles. Free from hostage-taking and terror attacks. Free from repression, antisemitism and racism. Free to love, live and to raise their children in peace.

Marc Botenga (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Haute représentante, chers collègues, s'il y a une chose qui est claire, c'est que la boussole morale de l'Europe, aujourd'hui, ne se trouve pas ici. La boussole morale se trouve chez les centaines de milliers d'Européens qui se mobilisent contre l'inaction et la complicité européenne – certains d'entre vous, sans doute –, avec ce qui est en cours à Gaza et ce qui est un génocide.

C'est un génocide que tout le monde arrive à voir, sauf certains d'entre vous qui continuent à soutenir Israël, et l'Union européenne qui continue à soutenir Israël avec des centaines de millions d'euros, avec des armes qui passent encore, des massacres qu'on soutient. C'est un peu genre quelqu'un qui rentrerait dans une école, dans un immeuble, et qui dit: “Je vais buter tout le monde, et après cet immeuble je vais m'en prendre à l'école et après ce sera l'hôpital qui y passe.” Et l'Union européenne qui vient dire: “Voilà, vous voulez un fusil encore? Vous avez besoin d'une balle pour qu'on vous aide?” C'est ça, aujourd'hui.

Madame Kallas, vous avez dit que vous avez beaucoup discuté avec le ministre israélien et que vous avez trouvé un bon accord sur l'aide humanitaire avec des termes de référence. Vous aviez oublié de mentionner qu'il ne fallait pas la famine, parce que, depuis que vous avez eu votre accord, il y a la famine à Gaza. C'est ça votre responsabilité, Madame Kallas.

Λευτέρης Νικολάου-Αλαβάνος (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, χωρίς τέλος είναι οι θηριωδίες του κράτους-κατακτητή. Αμέτρητοι νεκροί, επιβεβαιωμένα πάνω από 63.000, μεταξύ τους 20.000 παιδιά. Αυτό είναι το Ισραήλ, ο “στρατηγικός εταίρος” της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, της κυβέρνησης της Νέας Δημοκρατίας και άλλων κομμάτων που αναβάθμισαν τη συνεργασία. Η ισοπέδωση, η προσάρτηση της Γάζας, η γενίκευση των εποικισμών στη Δυτική Όχθη, ο απάνθρωπος εκτοπισμός των Παλαιστινίων, έχουν έναν σκοπό: να μην επιτρέψουν τη δημιουργία ανεξάρτητου, ελεύθερου, βιώσιμου παλαιστινιακού κράτους, για να προωθηθούν τα σχέδια των ομίλων.

Καταγγέλλουμε την απαγόρευση εισόδου της παλαιστινιακής αντιπροσωπείας στον ΟΗΕ από τις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση συνεχίζει να “κάνει πλάτες” στο Ισραήλ και να συνεργάζεται μαζί του και τώρα τάχα κόπτεται για τον λιμό. Η υποκρισία σας είναι προκλητική.

Όμως, οι λαοί της Ευρώπης εκφράζουν μαζικά αλληλεγγύη παρά την καταστολή. Εργάτες μπλοκάρουν στα λιμάνια ισραηλινά πολεμικά φορτία. Απαιτούν να σταματήσει η γενοκτονία, η κατοχή, το μπλοκάρισμα της ανθρωπιστικής βοήθειας, κάθε συνεργασία με το Ισραήλ. Απαιτούν αναγνώριση παλαιστινιακού κράτους στα σύνορα του '67 με πρωτεύουσα την Ανατολική Ιερουσαλήμ.

Sander Smit (PPE). – Voorzitter, high representative, commissaris, collega's, oorlog is gruwelijk. Oorlogsmisdaden tegen journalisten, moskeeën, kerken en hulpverleners zijn onacceptabel. Toch maakt een niets ontziende contraguerrilla tegen terroristen die burgers als menselijk schild misbruiken, nog geen genocide. We mogen het volkenrecht niet uithollen. Waar is uw bewijs van genocidale intentie? Israël levert voedsel en laat zieke kinderen via Eilat evacueren. Wie dan toch genocide blijft schreeuwen, bezondigt zich aan bloedsmaad en smerig antisemitisme. Dergelijke retoriek, gevoed door de Moslimbroederschap, zet onze straten en samenleving in brand.

Hamas, dat op 7 oktober een bloedige pogrom pleegde, heeft deze oorlog doelbewust over Gaza afgeroepen. Hun plan: burgers doden voor politieke winst. En u beloont hen met de voortijdige erkenning van Palestina.

De EU moet de vredesplannen van de Arabische Liga omarmen: Hamas moet worden uitgeschakeld en ontwapend, zich overgeven en alle gijzelaars vrijlaten. Wederopbouw van Gaza moet plaatsvinden zonder verdrijving van burgers. Laten we leren van de Emiraten en aan vrede bouwen.

(De spreker stemt ermee in om te antwoorden op verschillende “blauwe kaart”-vragen)

Marc Botenga (The Left), blue-card question. – You have just accused us of the most horrible things. You should be ashamed. Let me ask you, what are your sources? The International Court of Justice has spoken about a plausible risk of genocide, the International Association of Genocide Scholars, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Doctors Without Borders, Palestinians on the ground, Israeli NGOs and even Israeli genocide scholars and Holocaust experts. So what are your sources? Who are you to deny the genocide? What is it, like 'Trust me, bro'? That's not going to work here. Do better!

Sander Smit (PPE), “blauwe kaart”-antwoord. – Dit is het typische links-extremistische discours. Als enkele wetenschappers een bewering lanceren, dan is dat nog geen wetenschappelijke consensus. Er is geen internationale consensus, er is geen uitspraak van het Internationaal Gerechtshof hierover.

En nogmaals, waarom spreekt u niet over Sudan? Ik hoor niemand spreken over de 150 000 doden in Sudan, de 11 miljoen ontheemden en de 26 miljoen personen in acute voedselnood. Bij u lijkt het wel: No Jews, no news.

Cecilia Strada (S&D), domanda “cartellino blu”. – Volevo anch'io tornare sulla parola genocidio.

La Convenzione per la prevenzione e la punizione dei crimini di genocidio del 1948 è la base legale sulla quale noi osserviamo, leggiamo e confrontiamo quello che accade a Gaza e in Cisgiordania e concludiamo, come tutte le organizzazioni che citava il collega Botenga, che è in corso un crimine.

Non sono pagine Facebook, è una cosa molto, molto seria: sono descritti tutti gli atti e li confrontiamo con quello che sta succedendo a Gaza e in West Bank, e il risultato è: vengono commessi atti di genocidio. C'è anche l'intenzione di pulizia etnica, espressa da ministri israeliani in televisione.

Quindi la mia domanda per Lei è: ha mai letto la Convenzione per la prevenzione e la punizione dei crimini di genocidio?

Sander Smit (PPE), blue-card answer. – Of course I have read the document, and we should not make international law into a political instrument, as you do, because, as you know, we have seen acts, as I have said: food deliveries, evacuation of Gazan children through Eilat to Italy. That's what Israel is doing as well. And genocide requires genocidal intent to be proven.

So you think that evacuating Palestinian children to Italy for treatment can be reconciled with having a genocidal intent? Then you make a laugh, then you are really insulting the victims of real genocides like the Armenian Genocide and the Shoah.

Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D). – Voorzitter, ik moet eerlijk zeggen dat ik toch plaatsvervangende schaamte voel over deze tussenkomst van de Europese Volkspartij. Ik wens Hilde heel veel succes met de onderhandelingen straks; het zal niet gemakkelijk worden. Het is hoog tijd dat we in dit Parlement een resolutie neerleggen! De excuses zijn op. De Commissie verschuilt zich achter de Raad en de Raad achter de Commissie en achter de unanimiteit.

Maar wie zich niet kan verschuilen voor de genocide, dat zijn de Palestijnen in Gaza en de bezette gebieden. Neem actie, voer economische sancties in, schort het associatieverdrag op, stop de subsidies aan Horizon. Stop ook met het kopen van wapens. Vandaag las ik in de krant dat er op een groot wapenevenement in Londen talloze Israëlische bedrijven aanwezig zijn. We gaan ons geld in Europa toch niet besteden aan Israëlische wapens?

Europeanen eisen actie! En iets heel belangrijks: het internationaal recht verplicht ons te handelen. Wie wegkijkt bij genocide, schendt dat recht en is medeverantwoordelijk. Dat geldt zowel voor ons als voor de Commissie. De excuses zijn op.

Anders Vistisen (PfE). – Madam President, a March 2024 poll relieved a shocking fact: 71 % of Palestinians support Hamas's horrific terrorist attack on 7 October, and 59 % believe that armed struggle is the best way forward. These are not fringe views. They are a majority in a society based on fanatical Islamism and support for terrorism. Every Arab country knows this and recognises it. That is why neighbouring countries such as Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon, or even the rich Arab oil states of the Gulf, have not taken any of these Palestinian extremists.

But in Europe the naivety is without limits. Denmark has already seen the consequences. In 1992, 321 stateless Palestinians were granted residence by special law. Today, the results are clear: 74 % live on welfare; 57 % have criminal convictions; and for the children, the stats are even worse.

This is not humanity. This is a generational betrayal. Europe must finally learn: importing radicalised people means exporting security and prosperity for the next generations.

(The speaker agreed to take several blue-card questions)

Catarina Vieira (Verts/ALE), blue-card question. – Dear colleague, you say this is not humanity.

You just called all Palestinians extremists: is it humanity to call the 55 000 or more children who have been killed or injured in this horrible genocide extremists? Where is your humanity? How dare you call an entire nation extremist?

Anders Vistisen (PfE), blue-card answer. – The polls define it as extremist when you support horrific acts of terrorism, but I can't bear any more of your hypocrisy on the left. There are genocides committed in many places in the world, but it is only when it is the Jewish state, the only Jewish state in the world, the State of Israel, that you care. You even walk in demonstration, in capitals like my own in Copenhagen, with Palestinians using the Nazi salute. How can people from the S&D Group, from Renew and other places accept that kind of fanaticism in a cause you claim is carried out in the name of humanity? I am appalled.

President. – This is the last time that I am going to accept two blue cards for one person, because we are really running out of time.

Erik Marquardt (Verts/ALE), blue-card question. – You were talking about hypocrisy. You were quoting polls which were done in Gaza, so do you believe that Hamas is an organisation which accepts scientific freedom, free press and polls? Because in the end you would rely on numbers which are based on Hamas propaganda, maybe.

So, do you believe that the polls are trustworthy if they are done in Gaza at the moment, which the Hamas government is governing?

Anders Vistisen (PfE), blue-card answer. – No, I generally don't tend to believe Hamas, not when they claim how many victims there are, or when they decide how many of them are combatant and non-combatants, because I do not in general put my trust in terrorist organisations. But I recognise, just like you can in an autocracy like Russia, you can have polling done in a population even though it lives in an unfree society, just as well as we can today see how Germans felt about the Nazi regime in the 1930s, if you look at the historical sources for that.

So, no, I don't believe that you can just pick and choose the facts, so believe Hamas when it comes to the number of their children, and not when it comes to the support in the general population. You have to pick a side.

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! W cieniu tego ogromnego dramatu, jakim jest wojna Izraela z Hamasem, w cieniu niewyobrażalnego cierpienia, jakim są cierpiące miliony cywilów, śmierć, wysiedlenia, głód, brak dostępu do podstawowych środków do życia dla mieszkańców Gazy, zapowiedzi władz Izraela o otwarciu bram piekła pokazują, do czego prowadzi nienawiść i brak gotowości do pojednania ze strony tych, którzy odwołują się do tego samego ojca, biblijnego Abrahama.

W tej tragedii, jaką jest wojna wyznawców judaizmu i islamu, trwa olbrzymie cierpienie chrześcijan, którzy od wieków żyją w Izraelu i Palestynie. Dziś ich liczba gwałtownie maleje. Barbarzyńskie zbombardowanie w lipcu bieżącego roku przez armię Izraela katolickiego kościoła Świętej Rodziny w centrum Gazy, jak również ataki ze strony islamskich ekstremistów wobec chrześcijan wpisują się nie tylko w długą historię cierpienia chrześcijan w Ziemi Świętej, ale pokazują, że wielowyznaniowe dziedzictwo Izraela nieuchronnie przechodzi do historii. Warto przywołać tutaj słowa chrześcijańskich patriarchów Jerozolimy, którzy zaznaczają, że nie będzie pokoju bez prawdziwego odwołania się do źródeł cywilizacji judeochrześcijańskiej.

Bernard Guetta (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, que voulaient-ils, ces assassins d'hier à Jérusalem? Ils voulaient, diraient-ils, venger les morts de Gaza, les bombardements, la faim et la destruction de toutes villes, villages, écoles et hôpitaux. Mais quel est l'objet de ces bombardements qu'ils voulaient venger? On ne le sait que trop: venger la sanglante barbarie du 7 octobre et l'intolérable détention d'otages qui s'est ensuivie. La preuve nous est ainsi donnée de la totale absurdité, non, pardon, de la totale imbécilité de cette odieuse tragédie. La vengeance ne mène qu'à la vengeance.

Notre rôle, à nous Européens, nous qui ne sommes ni pro-israéliens, ni pro-palestiniens, mais pro-paix, est d'inlassablement marteler qu'il n'est pas d'autre solution que la coexistence de deux États. C'est une utopie, diront beaucoup, mais non, non et non! C'est un impératif auquel tous les fanatiques devront se résoudre avant que l'un et l'autre de ces deux peuples n'aient tout perdu, même l'espoir.

Mounir Satouri (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, après 23 mois de génocide, hier, nous avons observé une minute de silence pour Gaza. À l'heure où je vous parle, 1 million de Gazaouis ont reçu l'ordre de quitter le nord de la bande. Israël poursuit son nettoyage ethnique. Et nous, que faisons-nous? Notre première minute de silence.

Les Gazaouis n'ont qu'un choix, l'exil ou la mort. Et nous, Européens, avons contribué à ce crime et sommes complices et coupables. Coupables de fournir des armes, coupables de refuser d'imposer l'entrée de l'aide humanitaire, coupables de ne pas sanctionner Israël, coupables de détourner les yeux de la Cisjordanie et de Jérusalem-Est. Assez de silence! Suspendons l'accord d'association, passons aux sanctions, à l'embargo sur les armes, isolons Israël sur la scène internationale! Les Palestiniens n'ont pas besoin de notre minute de silence. Ils ont besoin de nos actes. Alors il est temps d'agir.

Catarina Martins (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, senhora Kallas, é genocídio, não é um conflito — é genocídio. Vinte e oito crianças morrem por dia na Faixa de Gaza, às mãos de Israel e às mãos de todos os que são cúmplices.

Não venha para aqui chorar os milhões de ajuda humanitária que estão a apodrecer porque Israel decidiu matar à fome em Gaza.

Na verdade, o que precisava de estar a fazer era apoiar quem está a tentar que a ajuda humanitária chegue a Gaza. Não lhe ouvi uma palavra sobre a Flotilha Global. Esta noite, um dos barcos com bandeira portuguesa onde viajam Greta Thunberg, Ada Colau, Mariana Mortágua e muitos outros cidadãos europeus foi atingido por um drone. Já aconteceu antes. Sabemos que é assim que Israel age.

E o que dizem? Roberta Metsola, Ursula von der Leyen, António Costa, onde está a vossa condenação a este ataque? Onde está a vossa garantia de proteção à Flotilha Liberdade? Onde está a garantia de proteção a quem está a fazer o que todos nós devíamos estar a fazer, que é fazer chegar ajuda humanitária a Gaza?

O vosso silêncio é cúmplice. Israel está a matar com as armas e os meios europeus. Os cúmplices do genocídio são também genocidas.

Alice Teodorescu Måwe (PPE). – Fru talman! Kommissionär Kallas! Två palestinska terrorister genomförde under gårdagen ännu ett kallblodigt attentat när de mördade oskyldiga på en buss i Jerusalem. Minst sex personer miste livet och ytterligare många, däribland en höggravid kvinna på väg till jobbet, är allvarligt skadade. Hamas och palestinska islamistiska jihad firar terrorn och instruerar i ett färskt klipp morgondagens terrorister i att döda fler oskyldiga bussresenärer.

All den ondska som västvärlden felaktigt anklagar Israel för, utför och firar islamisterna. Ändå är det Israel som ska pressas till underkastelse enligt naiva västerlänningar, som inte förstår att vi är näst på tur. EU måste klargöra att det inte finns någon fred att bygga med en dödskult till motpart. Ingen fred kan gro där skolbarn indoktrineras till att drömma om martyrdöden, där den palestinska administrationen belönar terroristers familjer ekonomiskt. Hamas måste besegras en gång för alla. Misslyckas Israel återstår fler terrordåd tills inget Israel finns kvar, tills alla judar förintats.

René Repasi (S&D). – Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Mit 17 Jahren nahm ich an einem Schüleraustausch mit deutschen, jüdischen und arabischen Jugendlichen aus Israel teil. Meine Freunde sagten damals: Wir wollen so etwas wie eure EU – zwei Staaten, in Vielfalt geeint.

Fast 30 Jahre später ist der Traum zerplatzt. Die Terrororganisation Hamas verübt den größten Massenmord an jüdischen Menschen seit dem Holocaust. In Gaza erleben wir menschengemachten Hunger, zerstörte Familien, verlorene Leben. Die Zivilgesellschaft auf beiden Seiten blutet und leidet – wegen der Hamas und wegen der Regierung Netanjahu.

Auch der israelischen Zivilgesellschaft will ich hier zurufen: Wir sehen euch, und wir unterstützen euch! Euer Protest gegen den Krieg und gegen Netanjahu verhallt nicht. Auch für euch darf mein Europa, das für Frieden und Völkerrecht steht, nicht schweigen – es muss handeln! Dabei darf es keine Tabus geben.

Darum fordere ich die sofortige Freilassung aller Geiseln, einen sofortigen Waffenstillstand und ein sofortiges Ende der humanitären Blockade.

Marco Squarta (ECR). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, a Gaza non assistiamo più a un conflitto, ma al progressivo annientamento di una popolazione inerme: bambini uccisi, madri in lacrime, ospedali ridotti in macerie. Immagini che non possono essere giustificate in nome della difesa.

Hamas resta un'organizzazione terroristica, il 7 ottobre ha lasciato una ferita incancellabile. Gli ostaggi vanno liberati subito, ma non possiamo accettare che la risposta diventi punizione collettiva.

L'Italia con “food for Gaza” ha dimostrato che la solidarietà può tradursi in gesti concreti: tonnellate di aiuti inviati, bambini accolti e curati. È un esempio che l'Europa deve raccogliere senza indugi.

Ora serve una sola voce, autorevole e decisa, che chieda il cessate il fuoco, la protezione dei civili e la liberazione di tutti gli ostaggi. Solo un'Europa forte potrà contribuire a una pace duratura, con due popoli che vivono in due Stati, liberi e sicuri nella dignità e nella umanità.

Ignazio Roberto Marino (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, I visited Birkenau and Auschwitz with Sami Modiano, who was deported there at the age of 13 and lost his father and young sister there. I visited Hiroshima, a museum that shows tragedy and destruction.

I will not live long enough to visit the Museum of the Destruction of Gaza and to hear the voices of my great-grandchildren asking 'but where was great-grandfather in those years? How could this have happened?'

Thanks to your young age, High Representative Kallas, you will still be there and you will need to change the subject or hide, because you will not be able to explain to your grandchildren how, in a position of power representing Europe, you did not do the impossible to stop those shooting children begging for water and bread. Nor did you raise your voice when your President called to express solidarity to a war criminal who, in your silence, carried out a genocide.

Kathleen Funchion (The Left). – Madam President, we are now more than 700 days into Israel's genocide in Gaza, and the response from world leaders, including those here in Europe, continues to be one of shameful, resounding silence. More than 64 000 people murdered was not enough for President von der Leyen to say 'Stop', and it seems that the images of enforced starvation of children is not enough for the Commission and the Council to take real action against Israel.

The EU and all Member States must suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement, ban trade with illegal settlements and finally work towards the delivery of a two-state solution where all children can live without hunger and without fear of Israeli bombs falling from the sky.

I do want to comment on some of the comments we have heard here today from people in this Chamber who are denying the genocide. I ask, how can you watch children being shredded to pieces by Israeli weapons and do nothing, and deny the genocide?

History will not forgive silence. 'Never again' means 'never again for everyone'.

Saoirse don Phalaistín!

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

Tomislav Sokol (PPE), blue-card question. – You speak about genocide all the time – you and the other colleagues from the left. My question is: are you aware of a statement signed by almost 500 legal and history scholars which, with various strong arguments, says that there is no genocide in Gaza?

So, are you also aware of that, or do you just plan to not hear this because it doesn't suit your narrative?

Kathleen Funchion (The Left), blue-card answer. – The first thing I want to say is, I will call out a genocide wherever it happens. Wherever there is a genocide, it will be called out by me.

We know very well in Ireland what it's like to be under occupation. So that is why we have such empathy, rightly so, with the Palestinian people.

It has already been stated by my colleague, Marc Botenga. All of the various organisations – the International Court of Justice, Amnesty, all of the organisations – the list is as long as your arm – that know that this is a genocide.

You are the one that is denying a genocide, and history will not look well on you at all, and rightly so.

Shame on you to look at kids starving – enforced starvation – trucks and boats trying to get in with food and aid, and you sit there and you laugh. Shame on you!

President. – Colleagues, you have 30 seconds for an answer.

As we are already late, I have to close the catch-the-eye requests now. We have already given blue cards, and we already have a lot of requests for catch-the-eye. So the blue card is closed, and now the catch-the-eye requests are closed.

Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, here we are again debating the undebatable. Colleagues will defend what is indefensible and we will be here until Netanyahu achieves his goal: total destruction of Gaza.

Words cannot do justice to the human indignity that Netanyahu's enforced famine imposes on innocent Gazans. It is just heartbreaking to see young children with a bowl in their hands begging for food every day.

Netanyahu has also created the deadliest period for journalists in contemporary history. A generation of accountability has been wiped out, granting Netanyahu carte blanche to starve, kill and destroy.

As we speak, Gaza is on its knees and Israel bombards Gaza City. Meanwhile, activists like Kitty O'Brien face police brutality for standing against these atrocities.

We cannot give up on a two-state solution, we cannot stand idly against annexation and we cannot stand by violence when peace is possible. Free the hostages and free Gaza.

Lucia Annunziata (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, parlerò intanto del perché bisogna in questo momento difendere i palestinesi.

La prima ragione è che sono un popolo vessato dal '48 e la loro sofferenza continua a riprodurre tragedie.

La seconda ragione è che la guerra non si sta rivelando una soluzione nemmeno per Israele: dopo due anni di applicazione di tutto il suo potere militare in un piccolo territorio, il governo di Israele continua a sostenere di non essere riuscito a neutralizzare Hamas. Questa è una sconfitta.

La pace, anche per Israele, deve prendere un'altra strada, che è quella che ci indicano e ci suggeriscono i parenti degli ostaggi riservisti e le migliaia di cittadini che, in questi anni e tuttora, sfilano contro Netanyahu.

Infine, la pace si fa facendo chiarezza, anche tra noi: il punto che ci divide qui dentro, che ha reso impossibile fare niente o fare anche poche cose, è quello del genocidio. Ma se noi anche non usassimo questa parola, non cambierebbero i fatti, come hanno detto molti prima di me: il modo, il luogo e i tempi dell'uccisione di decine di migliaia di persone.

Come gruppo S&D abbiamo deciso di pronunciare questa parola, e se per uscire dall'impasse in cui dobbiamo oggi dividerci sul genocidio…

(La Presidente toglie la parola all'oratrice)

Carola Rackete (The Left). – Madam President, as of now, at least 2 361 Palestinians have died of malnutrition, and more than 2 000 were murdered trying to reach food distribution.

Everyone in the world with a smartphone can see images of starving people, starving children on their phones. It is heartbreaking and disgusting to watch, and it is impossible to talk about this famine without talking about the intent of Israel: it's genocide.

It is disgusting to watch because the European Commission, European governments like the German one, and also many people here in the room are still choosing to be complicit instead of doing the obvious thing: impose sanctions, suspend the Association Agreement, and stop selling weapons to kill defenceless people who have lived in an open-air prison for decades.

We are living and shaping a historic moment when international cooperation falls apart on so many levels, but everyone here has a choice, and the Commission has a choice: to fulfil your obligation to prevent genocide.

Wouter Beke (PPE). – Voorzitter, mevrouw Kallas, collega's, 6 000 doden geleden — dat is vijf weken geleden — stonden wij hier te discussiëren over de oorlog in Gaza. Toen vroegen we: wanneer gaat dat stoppen? 6 000 doden geleden. Wanneer schiet Europa eindelijk in actie? Wanneer gaan we dat handelsakkoord, dat associatieakkoord opschorten? Wanneer zetten we Israël onder druk? Wanneer voeren we dat importverbod uit de bezette gebieden door? Wanneer voeren we een Europees inreisverbod door? Dit moet stoppen!

Sommige lidstaten, waaronder België, nemen initiatieven. Maar Europa blijft doof. Wel, Europa kan niet doof blijven. Als Europa enige morele verantwoordelijkheid heeft, dan moet het nu ageren. Dat doen we ten aanzien van Oekraïne. Dat moeten we ook doen ten aanzien van de gruwelen die in Gaza plaatsvinden. Voorzitter, mevrouw Kallas, neem uw verantwoordelijkheid, neem actie en zorg ervoor dat we volgende maand hier niet opnieuw moeten discussiëren en zeggen: er zijn opnieuw 5 000 doden bijgekomen.

Evin Incir (S&D). – Madam President, refusing to acknowledge a genocide doesn't make it less of a genocide. Refusing to call a starvation a starvation doesn't make it less of a starvation. Refusing to name an occupation an occupation doesn't make it less of an occupation. International law is not a matter of left and right – it's a matter of principle, but the reality is undeniable.

For over a year in this European Parliament, there has been a right-wing majority that has refused to name atrocities for what they are and has been even less willing to act. You have the possibility now to show that you can spell 'humanity' through joining us in our demands for action, and to call a spade a spade. For how many more Palestinians must die before international law is enforced? How many more children must cease to see the daylight? Tell me how many!

Freeze the EU-Israel Association Agreement, adopt an EU-wide weapon embargo, sanction the criminal government of Israel, implement ICC and ICJ decisions, recognise Palestine. Shame on this current silence. Shame on hypocrisy. Shame on the inactions. Shame, shame, shame.

Tomislav Sokol (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, islamski fundamentalizam je najveće zlo današnjice. Od sjeverne Afrike, Bliskog istoka, Indijskog potkontinenta do Europe, kršćani, Židovi i pripadnici drugih vjera žrtve su ove totalitarne zločinačke ideologije.

Primjer toga upravo je Izrael, država koja se od svog osnutka 1948. bori za opstanak. Nemojmo imati iluzije. Da Hamas pobijedi u ovome ratu, izraelska država bi nestala, a njezin narod bio zbrisan.

Za ono što se događa u Gazi isključivo je kriv Hamas i dok on ne bude uklonjen, ne može biti mira. Islamistička ideologija koju predstavlja Hamas genocidna je i predstavlja rizik i za Europu.

Meni, gospodo s ljevice, nije normalno da za Božić duge cijevi moraju čuvati crkve u Njemačkoj ili da se blagdanski sajmovi moraju štititi betonskim blokovima. Nemojte imati iluzije. Da oni s kojima zajedno demonstrirate protiv Izraela dođu na vlast u Europi, vi progresivci bili biste im prve mete.

Zato se jasno odredimo protiv islamizma i spasimo Europu dok još nije kasno.

Marta Temido (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, senhora Alta Representante, caros colegas, Gaza está a morrer de fome diante dos nossos olhos e com ela a credibilidade das instituições europeias, individual e coletiva.

Nós falamos de valores, mas aceitamos a violação sistemática do direito internacional, com as crianças de Gaza condenadas à fome infligida, o disparo contra civis nas filas de ajuda alimentar e o bombardeamento repetido de serviços de saúde.

Nós aplicamos sanções financeiras contra a Rússia, mas adiamos a suspensão do acordo comercial com Israel, a interrupção das trocas comerciais com os colonatos e o congelamento da compra e venda de armas.

Reconhecemos todos os indícios e sinais de que um genocídio se desenrola em Gaza, mas não queremos usar a palavra. Como é possível que a Europa, que jurou “nunca mais”, esteja aqui hoje outra vez? Perdemos a autoridade moral perante terceiros países, perante os nossos concidadãos.

Como fez na Ucrânia, Senhora Alta Representante, apelo para que a União Europeia possa voltar a estar do lado certo da história em Gaza, na exigência de um cessar-fogo imediato, na entrada de ajuda alimentar e na concretização da solução de dois Estados.

Lukas Mandl (PPE). – Madam President, first, I want to make the remark that also during this war and after this war, we in this Chamber have to talk to each other also on different matters. This is why I advocate for a bit of a de-escalation in the language. I hear 'shame, shame, shame' all the time and things like that – I do not think this is the way to deal with it.

Secondly, the whole mess has been started by the Iranian regime. I am very happy, Ms Kallas, that we have you here and not your predecessor during these times and generally, but I also want to remind you that the Iranian regime is very much aligned with the Russian regime at the moment. These are those who fight the political West, which we are supposed to defend, I think.

The Iranian regime might already regret this attack, but it is still there and Hamas is also still there. Usually, we are against political Islam, we are against Islamic terrorism. Usually, we are for democracy. Israel is a vibrant democracy.

Of course, I am very much in favour of supplying help to Gaza. I very much recognise that Israel itself is also supplying help to Gaza. I am not against the two-state solution. I am for a two-state solution, but after a long process of deweaponisation of the Palestinian territories.

Céline Imart (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Haute représentante, 703 jours. 703 jours depuis que le Hamas a arraché des civils à leur vie lors d'un attentat d'une brutalité sans précédent. 703 jours d'angoisse insoutenable pour les familles et 703 jours que nous martelons, avec mes collègues du groupe PPE, la même exigence: la libération immédiate des otages, incontournable pour toute négociation.

Pourtant, pendant ce temps, certains pays comme le mien ont choisi de reconnaître l'État de Palestine, mais les conditions ne sont pas encore réunies, car ce sont, en reconnaissant l'État de Palestine, les massacres du 7 octobre qu'on valide.

La reconnaissance de l'État de Palestine devrait être envisagée après la libération des otages israéliens, avec un apport effectif de l'aide humanitaire à la population de Gaza et l'instauration d'un cessez-le-feu de part et d'autre.

L'Europe ne peut pas négocier sous la menace des armes. La reconnaissance mutuelle des deux États est indispensable, mais vouloir bâtir cela au milieu du chaos, c'est une folie qui compromettrait la crédibilité et l'unité de l'Europe. L'heure n'est plus à la diplomatie des bons sentiments. Nous devons mobiliser notre énergie pour une seule priorité: la libération des otages et la fin de la souffrance de tous les civils.

Spontane Wortmeldungen

Nina Carberry (PPE). – Madam President, genocide, famine, war: the EU was formed on the promise that we would stop such atrocities from happening again. Yet the people of Gaza are dying in their tens of thousands.

I have said it before in this Chamber: Israel must end its siege. Military operations must cease. Aid must flow freely.

It is unacceptable that the Commission and the European Council have failed to take action more than 18 months on from Ireland and Spain calling for the review of the EU-Israel Association Agreement. That agreement must be suspended. Israel must be held accountable. We need a ceasefire, the release of all hostages and the unrestricted aid flow now.

Daniel Attard (S&D). – Madam President, colleagues, after the horrors of the Second World War, our forefathers said 'never again'.

Yet today in Gaza, genocide is unfolding before our eyes. This is not anti-Semitism: this is the declared policy of Netanyahu, Ben-Gvir, Smotrich and their extremist government.

We present ourselves as the guardians of international law, yet when political conviction clashes with convenience, when human dignity clashes with commercial interests, we compromise. We look away.

So let us act. Because every day we allow the Israel Association Agreement, every day we allow trade and arms to flow, we betray the promise of 'never again'. Because, colleagues, 'never again' must mean something, or else it would mean nothing at all.

Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez (Renew). – Señora presidenta, mire, yo estoy harta de volver a Euskadi, a mi casa, semana tras semana y estar escuchando cómo estamos viendo que asesinan y que matan de hambre a niños y niñas y a civiles, y que desde la Unión Europea no estamos haciendo nada. No podemos seguir escuchando que no hay acuerdo, porque esto ya no nos vale. Debemos ejercer nuestra responsabilidad y hay que buscar vías para poder actuar.

¿Nos quieren decir que podemos firmar un acuerdo comercial que no gusta a nadie con los Estados Unidos y que no podemos avanzar en sanciones o en algún tipo de presiones políticas y económicas hacia el Gobierno de Israel? Pues nos negamos a creer esto, y nos preguntamos también si tienen ojos en la cara los líderes de las instituciones europeas y de las formaciones políticas europeas y no ven las crecientes quejas, demandas, manifestaciones, que tenemos en distintos puntos de Europa.

No es difícil encontrar artículos que hablan sobre cómo se deben respetar los derechos humanos y cumplir con el Derecho europeo internacional en el Convenio Europeo para la Protección de los Derechos Humanos. La calle no entiende de tratados, no entiende que no seamos contundentes con este tema, y la paciencia de muchos eurodiputados y eurodiputadas se está agotando, incluyendo la mía. Actuemos ya.

Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE). – Señora presidenta, señora Kallas, recientemente usted hizo unas declaraciones, en las que decía que sentía frustración por el genocidio en Gaza. Usted no usa la palabra “genocidio”, pero la usa mucha gente, harta de ver cómo se mata a niños.

Quiero desde aquí transmitir toda la solidaridad con las personas que se manifiestan en toda Europa, incluido en mi país, en Galiza, donde recientemente, por manifestarse, han sido atacadas por la Policía. Y quiero decirlo, además, alto y público. ¡Es el mundo al revés, denunciar un genocidio y resulta que te pegan! ¿En qué mundo vivimos, señora Kallas? Yo también me siento frustrada. Creo que Europa está cometiendo un error muy grande, pero no pararé de pelear hasta que este genocidio acabe.

La Vuelta está pasando hoy por el concello de Mos, un concello de Galiza, de mi tierra, que por cada kilómetro representa 6 000 niños muertos. Cada kilómetro de los 18 000 niños asesinados, de los 6 000 kilómetros de la Vuelta. No se puede amparar este tipo de actos. ¿Por qué? Porque el equipo de Israel está participando. Y desde aquí, toda esa solidaridad, con toda la solidaridad palestina…

(la presidenta retira la palabra a la oradora)

Özlem Demirel (The Left). – Frau Präsidentin! Die CDU-Abgeordnete Hildegard Bentele hat sich vorhin hier hingestellt und allen Ernstes behauptet, dass Israel gerade den Nahostkonflikt militärisch löse. Ich will in aller Deutlichkeit sagen: Israel löst gerade gar nichts. Israel begeht einen Genozid, einen Genozid im Livestream, und bekommt noch Applaus von der konservativen Ecke hier im Hause. Das ist unerträglich!

Doch Hildegard Bentele ist unwichtig. Frau Kallas, Sie und Frau von der Leyen und Herr Merz und alle anderen geben noch grünes Licht für diese menschenverachtende Politik.

Heute wurde die Freedom Flotilla angegriffen; das ist illegal. Die Blockade Gazas ist illegal. Warum schweigen Sie dazu? Warum verurteilen Sie das nicht? Es braucht Gerechtigkeit für die Palästinenser, es braucht Frieden für die Palästinenser – Sie reden nur.

Ihre Doppelmoral wird von niemandem in dieser Welt mehr akzeptiert, verstehen Sie es endlich. Sie müssen aufstehen! Die Geschichte wird über Sie urteilen, Frau Kallas! Sie wird über alle urteilen, die das doch unterstützt haben.

Die Präsidentin. – Ich möchte hier nur einmal darauf hinweisen, dass jeder Abgeordnete in diesem Hause das gleiche Gewicht hat.

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Frau Präsidentin, Hohes Haus! Lange bevor dieser Krieg, der schon so viele Jahrzehnte die Völker der Israelis und der Palästinenser beutelt, in die neueste Runde gegangen ist, gab es eine Reihe von Gerichtsverfahren und Demonstrationen innerhalb des israelischen Rechtsstaates. Diese richteten sich gegen die Korruption von Benjamin Netanjahu. Glücklicherweise für Benjamin Netanjahu konnte er sodann einen Krieg führen, der sein Volk und die Weltöffentlichkeit von dieser offensichtlichen Korruption ablenkte.

Diesen Krieg, ausgelöst durch das furchtbare Verbrechen der Hamas am 7. Oktober, das Israel auf völkerrechtlicher Ebene durchaus das Recht zur Selbstverteidigung gab, führt er seitdem unter eklatanter Missachtung des Völkerrechts. Zusammen mit seinen rechtsextremen Ministern fährt er eine Politik, die Israel unwürdig ist und Israel den Hass und die Wut der arabischen Völker auf Generationen sichern wird. Benjamin Netanjahu und seine Regierung sind innere Feinde Israels, gegen die wir uns stellen sollten.

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)

Kaja Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, honourable Members, thank you for this debate. I have a few remarks. First, we have not been silent. On famine we had a statement on 22 August. We have been very clear about this.

When I say that I'm frustrated, I'm frustrated that we can't do more, and this is what I'm constantly working on. And that is why we are trying to improve the situation. If you think that I don't empathise with the people, that I don't feel the suffering of the people, this is not true. That is why I work hard to really improve the situation and help the people on the ground.

To the leader of The Left Group here, Ms Aubry, and Ms Martins – of course, neither of them are here when I respond – I understand that the people of Europe don't know how Europe functions. So you can point at one person and say, why don't you make this decision and everything works out well, whereas the MEPs, especially leaders of the groups, should know how Europe functions. We are not run by executive orders. We are run by collective decision-making, which means that we have 27 countries in the Council, and as we have proposed measures that require qualified majority, we don't have that. So work with the Member States of yours. I was hearing many representatives of Member States here. Work with them so that they also agree to these decisions.

Also in the Commission we are rendering decisions by consensus, and we also have those Member States represented in the Commission. So you can point your finger at me, but I really assure you, I try to do my best to improve the situation on the ground, and I will remain in contact with my counterpart in Israel, because I will also be raising all these difficult issues that you are mentioning here. And I also urge you to call your Israeli counterparts and say that you do not approve of this situation, also to address the difficult questions we have.

Of course, we must be calling for a permanent ceasefire and the release of the hostages. The EU is committed to supporting the two-state solution. This is where we are united and we will continue the work. So I do not agree with Ms Demirel that I have given a green light for what Israel is doing. That is not true. I have raised all these issues with my Israeli counterpart every time.

But I urge you to also learn how the European Union functions. Here you could also see the division amongst the Member States. This is the same that I'm up against in the Council and in the College. I haven't been silent at all, but I'm not yelling, maybe, as you are yelling. So I haven't been silent at all. We have had strong statements and of course, like I said, we try to do more every day, and I urge you to support us in this endeavour.

President. – I have received seven motions for a resolution to wind up this debate.

This debate is now closed.

The vote will be held on Thursday.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 178)

Matjaž Nemec (S&D), pisno. – Spoštovani! V Gazi ljudje živijo v peklu. Vsak dan še naprej umirajo v vrstah za hrano. Izrael Gazo sistematično briše z zemljevida zgodovine, strada prebivalstvo in izvaja genocid. To potrjujejo tako Združeni narodi, najuglednejši pravni strokovnjaki kot tudi številne izraelske organizacije.

Ravnanje Izraela mora jasno obsoditi tudi Evropski parlament, ki od marca 2024 molči. Resolucija mora biti zato sprejeta! Evropska unija mora končno zavzeti nedvoumno stališče do vojnih zločinov in uvesti sankcije proti storilcem. Potrebujemo premirje in odpravo blokade humanitarne pomoči.

Jasneje moramo podpreti tudi glasove miru in razuma, ki opravljajo svoje delo kljub sankcijam Združenih držav proti sodnikom in tožilcem Mednarodnega kazenskega sodišča – med njimi tudi slovenski sodnici Beti Hohler.

Pozivam Komisijo, da čim prej aktivira akt EU o blokiranju, kot sta to zahtevali Belgija in Slovenija, in se odzove na nedavne sankcije ZDA proti sodnikoma Mednarodnega kazenskega sodišča. Podpreti moramo tudi Francesco Albanese, kandidatko za Nobelovo nagrado za mir. Ta teden imamo vsi priložnost, da se postavimo na pravo stran zgodovine. Ne zamudimo je! Hvala.

(Die Sitzung wird um 12:01 Uhr unterbrochen.)

IN THE CHAIR: ROBERTA METSOLA

President

4. Istungi jätkamine

(The sitting resumed at 12:09)

5. Pidulik istung – Moldova Vabariigi presidendi Maia Sandu kõne

President. – The next item is the address by Maia Sandu, President of the Republic of Moldova.

Dear colleagues, it is my pleasure to introduce the President of the Republic of Moldova, Maia Sandu, who is with us here once again today.

Dear Maia, you have long been a valued friend to this Parliament and it is truly an honour to welcome you back to Europe's House of Democracy. We are all deeply impressed by your determination, your courage, and your steadfast commitment to the Moldovan people. Your tireless work steering Moldova along the path of democracy and integration with our Union is an inspiration to us all, and a testament to your leadership.

As Moldova takes its next steps on its European journey, know, dear Maia, that this Parliament stands firmly with you and all Moldovans in upholding our shared European values of democracy, peace and the rule of law. We are ramping up investment in Moldova's future via the EU-Moldova Facility, and we look forward to opening Moldova's accession negotiations.

These are challenging times for Europe. Freedoms that we thought were permanent are being tested, disinformation is weakening public trust in democracy, and Russia's brutal war continues in Ukraine. But Europe is resilient, and I know that together we will emerge stronger and more united than before.

Just weeks ago – we were just talking about this – European leaders gathered in Chișinău in just such a display of unity, reaffirming Europe's unwavering support for Moldova's European future. And today, in this Hemicycle, this House stands with you once again, dear President Sandu, dear Maia, united in our support for the Republic of Moldova and its democratic path to Union membership.

So, President, the floor is yours.

Maia Sandu, President of the Republic of Moldova. – Madam President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, thank you for this invitation. It is a great honour to speak on behalf of Moldova's people in this House of Democracy.

Today I would like to focus on the growing threats to our democracies and how we defend them together, because no one can be defended alone. I will do so through the story of Moldova, because our stability is your stability and our peace is Europe's peace.

On 28 September 2025, Moldova will hold the most consequential election in its history. Its outcome will decide whether we consolidate as a stable democracy on the path to EU membership, a safe neighbour to Ukraine and a security provider to the Union, or whether Russia destabilises us, pulls us away from Europe and turns us into a threat on Ukraine's southwestern border and Europe's eastern frontier.

Ladies and gentlemen, before I begin, let us recall one truth: most of your democracies were not complete when you joined this Union. You fought dictatorships, overcame economic hardships, and not one of you did it alone. Every democracy in this Chamber was built, supported and protected with the help of others. Germany and France, devastated by war, chose reconciliation. With Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg, they laid Europe's foundation: fragile at first, but together strong. When Ireland joined, solidarity transformed it. Denmark showed that even established democracies chose the Union to secure their future. Then came southern Europe: Greece, Spain, Portugal, less than a decade after dictatorship. Their democracies were sheltered and consolidated inside the Union. Austria, Finland and Sweden followed – neutral countries, they reinforced their own security and Europe's. Then came the great enlargement of central and eastern Europe: Czechia, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia. Barely 15 years after communism, they grew stronger and more prosperous inside the EU. Cyprus and Malta also entered – proof that no democracy is too small to matter. Romania and Bulgaria followed, less than two decades after shaking off their socialist past. Still with much to build at the time, accession gave them stability and the space to grow. Croatia, scarred by war, found peace and security in this family.

Today, Moldova, Ukraine and the Western Balkans stand at the gates, living proof that the European project is thriving – still expanding, still protecting. Both Moldova and Ukraine are ready to advance to the next stage of negotiations in a merit-based process that reflects our progress, and both our democracies will be safer once we are inside the Union. That is why I say: this Union was never about perfection. It was about the protection of fragile democracies until they grew strong. And it should remain so today, because democracy does not come automatically. It comes after hardship, after sacrifice and above all, with support from friends. That is Moldova's lesson. And it is also Moldova's warning. If our democracy cannot be protected, then no democracy in Europe is safe.

Honourable Members, last month we celebrated 34 years of independence. In the past three decades, Moldova built and preserved a living democracy. Fragile, yes, but enduring. We survived a Russian-backed separatist conflict, an economic collapse, energy blackmail, trade embargoes, even a banking fraud that shook the very foundations of our state. Each crisis could have broken us, but democracy resisted. When democracy was in danger, people protested. When oligarchs tried to capture the state, we resisted. And when power changed, it changed peacefully at the ballot box. Unlike in some other places across the former Soviet Union, Moldova did not become an autocracy. We preserved pluralism. We protected free elections. We remained faithful to who we are: Europeans. For the past two decades, the European Union, together with the United States, has been our steadfast partner – helping us reform, modernise and build institutions strong enough to resist pressure, giving Moldovans hope that our place was and is in Europe.

Then came 24 February 2022; when Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, we knew we could not wait. We needed safety and we understood that the sooner we are inside the European Union – a peace project that has never seen war between its members – the safer our democracy and our people will be. That is why we applied for accession just days after Russian tanks rolled into our neighbourhood. We have obtained candidate status and opened accession talks. We are not asking for shortcuts, we are doing our homework diligently. But for us, accession is not just a technocratic process. It is a race against time to anchor our democracy inside the Union, where it will be protected from the greatest threat we face: Russia.

Ladies and gentlemen, Moldova cannot escape its geography. We feel the long arm of Russian aggression. We share a 1 200-kilometre border with Ukraine – longer than any of your countries. And the reason Moldova still enjoys peace today is because Ukraine stands. Ukrainians are fighting to defend their country and their freedom, and they also shield Moldova. We owe our peace to them.

But their sacrifice is also a reminder: peace is never guaranteed. That is why our European path is not just a matter of values – it is a matter of survival. And precisely because we have advanced greatly on this path, Russia has unleashed its full arsenal of hybrid attacks against us. The battlefield is our elections. Last year, during the presidential poll and the referendum to anchor EU accession into our constitution, interference was unprecedented. But democracy prevailed: Moldovans stood their ground and, through their authentic votes, they defeated the Kremlin's political fronts. Our institutions stood with them: alert, determined, resilient. Now the next battle is upon us: the parliamentary elections at the end of this month.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have resisted many pressures from Moscow in the past. Our independence was hard-won through economic and political hardships and the Russian-backed conflict on our soil. And whenever we exercised our free choice for real, Moscow struck back, cutting gas, banning our wine and fruit, stirring the Transnistrian region. But today we face an unlimited hybrid war on a scale unseen before the full invasion of Ukraine. The Kremlin's goal is clear: to capture Moldova through the ballot box, to use it against Ukraine, and to turn us into a launchpad for hybrid attacks in the European Union. That is why this election is very important: by defending it, we protect not only Moldova, but also regional security and stability.

Ladies and gentlemen, interference does not begin and end on election day; it starts months before and lingers long after. Like a virus, it finds the cracks and attacks. We had barely recovered from Russia's interference last year when, in January, we were plunged into a manufactured energy crisis designed to raise prices, leave the Transnistrian region in cold and darkness, and divide citizens on both banks of the Nistru River. Then came the money: illicit financing poured in through crypto, shell companies and prepaid cards. Last year, in a single day, over EUR 1 million in cash was intercepted at Chișinău airport and our institutions estimated that, over the course of the year, Russia spent the equivalent of 1 % of Moldova's GDP to influence last year's elections. Today, new money bankrolls Kremlin-backed parties, buys influence, poisons democracy.

Last year, it went further into something our democracy had never faced before: a vote-buying scheme. A sanctioned Russian bank opened 138 000 accounts to sway results with direct payments. It is not something we are proud of, but it shows how Russia identifies vulnerabilities and exploits them. This is democracy itself turned into a target.

Russian proxies also fund protests orchestrated on Telegram, with transport arranged, people lured by promises of thousands of euros, lies spread, fake emails in the names of state institutions, deepfakes of politicians and fabricated international sites posing as impartial news but serving the Kremlin's propaganda. And on social media, a Romanian think-tank found that just 100 coordinated accounts pushed videos with 13 million views in a single month. Their comments – thousands of copy-pasted lines – reveal manipulation, not genuine debate. Cyberattacks hit government services. Last year, the postal service was struck because it delivers pensions where banks cannot. Phishing campaigns target officials, religion is weaponised, criminal groups are recruited for sabotage and intimidation. A judge ruling recently on political corruption received death threats. Our diaspora is targeted with online campaigns to divide families abroad and at home. Last year, 14 polling stations across EU countries received false bomb threats to disrupt the vote. In Gagauzia, false claims spread that autonomy is under threat. In the Transnistrian region, calls for more polling stations are nothing more than a tactic to fabricate turnout well beyond real voter levels.

And this is happening now. It is coordinated so as to overwhelm our institutions and stretch limited resources. It is financed with hundreds of millions of euros – dirty money – and amplified by propaganda. It is made more dangerous by three features. It constantly changes: new money channels, new tricks, new narratives of disinformation. It is digital: payments on telegram, lies on TikTok, deepfakes on Facebook and Instagram – more than 80 % of toxic content on TikTok is AI-generated. And it exploits democracy itself: freedom of religion turned into propaganda, freedom of assembly into paid protests, freedom of association into instant Kremlin-backed parties and free capital flows into illicit money into politics. This is not only Moldova's story: crypto schemes tested in Chișinău now help evade EU sanctions and fund Russia's war machine. Vote-buying schemes tried in Moldova have surfaced elsewhere. False bomb threats, first seen in our elections, have already disrupted elections in other countries. Moldova may be the testing ground, but Europe is the target.

Honourable Members, this brings me to the heart of today's challenge: defending our democracies with teeth, and together. The threats we face are faster, sharper, less visible. If the threats are new, our responses must be new. Too often we face 21st century dangers with tools designed for peacetime. Yet war has returned to Europe, and we, Europe, must rethink how we defend our democracies. The Cold War offers lessons. Fragile democracies were shielded by economic resilience – the Marshall Plan rebuilt shattered economies. They were defended in an ideological fight: Radio Free Europe exposed dictatorships, poverty and repression. And they survived because citizens knew freedom was not given, it was safeguarded. That is the spirit we need today, and Moldova knows this not from theory, but from experience. On the front line of democracy, we have learned what works and what fails.

These are our lessons. First, cut off illicit financing and protect elections. Dirty money is the lifeblood of foreign malign influence. Unless we cut it, every other defence is undermined. Elections especially must be shielded from it. Election observation must go beyond polling stations and follow the money, track information manipulation across platforms and expose covert influence. Second, build resilience. Resilience means energy security, interconnected infrastructure and market integration so that no democracy can be blackmailed. But resilience also means democracy that delivers: jobs, justice and opportunities. Third, engage citizens and win the ideological fight. Even when democracy delivers, we must involve people directly with clear information, free media and open debate while exposing autocracies for what they are: war, corruption and destruction. Fourth, strengthen deterrence and coordination. Aggression must be made too costly with stronger defences, intelligence and cyber capabilities, but also with stronger coordination. Hybrid threats exploit weak links. Europe must join forces and act faster. And fifth, integrate and innovate. Candidate countries must be part of the defence of democracy. No one is safe until everyone is safe. And, just as the Marshall Plan and Radio Free Europe were created then, today we need new tools: rapid digital forensics, AI labelling, joint cyber defence, new ways to organise citizens.

That is how Europe has endured: by adapting, rebuilding, turning fragility into strength. By protecting fragile democracies until they grow strong. The only way forward is to defend our democracies with teeth, and also defend them together.

Honourable Members, Moldova is not alone in protecting its democracy: the European Union has stood with us financially, technically and politically, and we are deeply grateful. This solidarity strengthens our ability to protect democracy at home while also allowing us to contribute to Europe's common security. At the same time, Moldova has gained hard experience in countering hybrid threats and we are ready to share it, because Moldova already thinks like a member and acts like a member, and that too is part of Europe's security.

Ladies and gentlemen, allow me now, from this House of European Democracy, to turn to my own people on the eve of a decisive choice.

Dragi cetățeni, sa fim mândri că am construit o democrație vie și am păstrat-o timp de trei decenii, chiar și atunci când unii au vrut să o distrugă. Am trecut prin multe încercări și am rezistat și de fiecare dată am ieșit mai puternici. Astăzi însă, independența și pacea noastră sunt din nou puse la încercare: ingerințe în alegerile noastre, finanțări ilegale din afară, campanii de minciuni, atacuri cibernetice, proteste plătite, tactici de a semăna ură între oameni. Acestea sunt metodele prin care se încearcă oprirea Moldovei din drumul ei european. Depinde de noi dacă aceste presiuni vor reuși să ne oprească sau, dimpotrivă, ne vor face mai uniți și mai hotărâți.

Anul trecut am arătat lumii întregi că putem sta drepți, prin vot, în fața unor forțe mult mai mari. Acum trebuie să facem pasul decisiv, să alegem un Parlament care să ducă Moldova în Uniunea Europeană. Aceasta este responsabilitatea noastră. Viitorul Moldovei depinde de curajul și unitatea cu care vom merge la vot.

Honourable Members, I thank you for giving me the chance to speak to you today and for standing with Moldova on our European path.

(The House rose and accorded the speaker a standing ovation)

(The sitting was briefly suspended)

6. Istungi jätkamine

(The sitting resumed at 12:35)

7. Juhataja teadaanne

President. – We start with the extension of the term of office of the Special Committee on the European Democracy Shield and of the Special Committee on the Housing Crisis in the European Union. The Conference of Presidents, at its meeting of 3 September 2025, approved the requests by the Special Committee on the European Democracy Shield and the Special Committee on the Housing Crisis to extend their mandate by six months.

These extensions are necessary, dear colleagues, to enable the special committees to fulfil their mandates and tasks. If there are no objections – and you will need to tell me if there are – to the decision of the Conference of Presidents, these extensions will be deemed adopted.

8. Hääletused

President. – Let's proceed with the vote.

8.1. Heiteta raskeveokitega seotud erandi pikendamine (hääletus)

President. – The next vote is on the request for urgent procedure by the Committee on Transport and Tourism on the extension of the derogation for heavy-duty vehicles with zero emissions (see minutes, item 8.1).

8.2. Jäätmete raamdirektiiv: tekstiili- ja toidujäätmed (A10-0144/2025 - Anna Zalewska) (hääletus)

President. – The next vote is on the recommendation for second reading by Anna Zalewska, on behalf of the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety, on the Waste Framework Directive: textiles and food waste (see minutes, item 8.2).

I give the floor to the rapporteur Anna Zalewska.

Anna Zalewska, Sprawozdawczyni. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Podczas negocjacji dyrektywy odpadowej przyświecały mi dwa cele: zapewnienie realnego ograniczenia odpadów poprzez zmiany w legislacji przy jednoczesnym zapewnieniu realistycznego i proporcjonalnego w swojej implementacji podejścia do potrzeby redukcji odpadów żywnościowych i tekstylnych.

Cieszy mnie podejście wypracowane w kwestii obowiązku ograniczenia odpadów spożywczych przez państwa członkowskie. Wprowadzone cele są niskie i akceptowalne dla państw członkowskich. Nie są one oparte na karach, ale na wspieraniu państw członkowskich w podejmowaniu działań mających na celu ograniczenie wyrzucania i marnotrawienia żywności. W trakcie negocjacji udało nam się zapewnić, iż rolnictwo i rolnicy nie będą objęci celami dyrektywy, czyli obowiązkami redukcji odpadów żywnościowych. Wzmocniliśmy również pozycję rolników w stosunku do nieuczciwych praktyk prowadzonych przez operatorów supermarketów, takich jak na przykład anulowanie na ostatnią chwilę zamówień świeżych produktów bądź dyskryminacja tak zwanych brzydkich owoców i warzyw.

W ramach wynegocjowanej dyrektywy udało nam się również znacznie zmniejszyć nadmierną biurokrację, między innymi przez wykluczenie z zakresu dyrektywy mikroprzedsiębiorców i wprowadzenie uproszczonego raportowania dla pewnych podmiotów. Ponadto wsłuchaliśmy się w potrzeby państw członkowskich i znacznie wydłużyliśmy terminy implementacyjne dla administracji. Dzięki temu będziemy mieli pewność, że planowane zmiany będą dobre, realistyczne do spełnienia i zapewnią prawdziwą redukcję odpadów, czyli cel, który łączy nas wszystkich na tej sali.

Wierzę, że porozumienie w sprawie dyrektywy odpadowej to świetny przykład na to, jak mądrze można połączyć troskę o środowisko naturalne z uproszczoną legislacją, która zmniejsza biurokrację. Proszę Państwa o głosowanie za wynegocjowaną przeze mnie dyrektywą. Liczę na powtórzenie wyniku w głosowaniu nad porozumieniem w komisji ENVI i dziękuję współpracownikom i sprawozdawcom.

President. – I have received no amendments or motions to reject the Council position.

The Council decision is therefore deemed approved and the act is deemed adopted.

8.3. Sõidukite konstruktsiooni ringluspõhisuse nõuded ja romusõidukite käitlemine (A10-0158/2025 - Jens Gieseke, Paulius Saudargas) (hääletus)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Jens Gieseke and Paulius Saudargas on circularity requirements for vehicle design and management of end-of-life vehicles (see minutes, item 8.3).

– After the vote on the Commission proposal:

Paulius Saudargas, rapporteur. – Madam President, dear colleagues, first of all, thank you for the positive outcome. I hope that in the end we will get even more of you on board.

But in order to do that, we have to go into interinstitutional negotiations. So, under Rule 60(4), I ask for the referral back to the committee responsible for the institutional negotiations.

(Parliament approved the request for referral back to committee)

8.4. ELi ja Brasiilia vaheline leping: Europoli ja Brasiilia föderaalpolitsei vaheline ja nende kaudu tehtav koostöö (A10-0142/2025 - Nikola Bartůšek) (hääletus)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Nikola Bartůšek, on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, on the EU Brazil-Agreement: cooperation with and through Europol and the Federal Police of Brazil (see minutes, item 8.4).

– Before the vote:

Nikola Bartůšek, rapporteur. – Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues, cooperation between Europol and the Brazilian police is the key to tackling crimes that affect both our regions. By sharing information, we can identify criminals, trafficking routes and illegal shipments much earlier. Drug trafficking into the EU remains a growing threat. Human trafficking and smuggling networks exploit migration routes. Money laundering of drug profits corrupts our financial systems. And firearms trafficking can escalate the violence on our streets.

These problems are infiltrating our cities and putting the lives of our citizens and children at risk. That is why it is essential for the authorities to exchange information and cooperate. All of this will be done with respect to personal data safeguards.

Thank you for supporting this report and the partnership between Europol and Brazil's Federal Police. It will help improve the safety of our citizens.

8.5. ELi ja Kirgiisi Vabariigi vaheline laiendatud partnerlus- ja koostööleping (A10-0105/2025 - Nacho Sánchez Amor) (hääletus)

President. – The next vote is on the recommendation by Nacho Sánchez Amor, on behalf of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, on the EU-Kyrgyz Republic Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (see minutes, item 8.5).

– Before the vote:

Nacho Sánchez Amor, ponente. – Señora presidenta, en primer lugar, quiero agradecer el trabajo de los ponentes alternativos, con los que he tenido una colaboración excelente.

La República Kirguisa es uno de nuestros principales socios en una región en la que tenemos intereses en materia de seguridad, conectividad, diversificación estratégica, resolución de conflictos y defensa del multilateralismo.

El anterior Acuerdo tenía ya veinticinco años y parece lógico que se haya revisado a esta altura. Tiene un ambicioso capítulo de comercio y de desarrollo sostenible, con una inclusión de derechos laborales bastante notable, políticas de cambio climático y apertura a empresas e inversores europeos y la importancia también de las materias primas críticas. También refuerza la cooperación en el ámbito de la política exterior y de seguridad, en prevención de conflictos y en terrorismo.

Sin embargo, seguimos con preocupación la tendencia hacia un modelo político securitario que está erosionando rápidamente los estándares democráticos de lo que un día fue considerada una isla de democracia. Y esperamos que este Acuerdo ofrezca a la Comisión nuevos instrumentos para invertir esta tendencia.

8.6. ELi ja Kirgiisi Vabariigi vaheline laiendatud partnerlus- ja koostööleping (resolutsioon) (A10-0111/2025 - Nacho Sánchez Amor) (hääletus)

8.7. Kontrollikoja liikmete koosseisu osaline uuendamine – Joëlle Elvinger (A10-0148/2025 - Cristian Terheș) (hääletus)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Cristian Terheș, on behalf of the Committee on Budgetary Control, on the partial renewal of Members of the Court of Auditors – Joëlle Elvinger (see minutes, item 8.7).

8.8. Kontrollikoja liikmete koosseisu osaline uuendamine – Stef Blok (A10-0149/2025 - Tomáš Zdechovský) (hääletus)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Tomáš Zdechovský, on behalf of the Committee on Budgetary Control, on the partial renewal of Members of the Court of Auditors – Stef Blok (see minutes, item 8.8).

8.9. Avalikud hanked (A10-0147/2025 - Piotr Müller) (hääletus)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Piotr Müller, on behalf of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, on public procurement (see minutes, item 8.9).

8.10. Ukrainat käsitlevad komisjoni 2023. ja 2024. aasta aruanded (A10-0154/2025 - Michael Gahler) (hääletus)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Michael Gahler, on behalf of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, on the 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Ukraine (see minutes, item 8.10).

– After the vote on paragraph 5:

Petras Auštrevičius (Renew). – Madam President, dear colleagues, let me move the following oral amendment based on factual events and happenings:

'Welcomes the European Court of Human Rights judgment of 9 July 2025 in the case of Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia, which held Russia responsible for widespread and flagrant human rights abuses in Ukraine – including the downing of MH17, torture, the use of rape as a weapon of war, summary executions, unlawful and arbitrary detentions, and the organised removal and adoption of children in Russia.'

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

President. – Have a good afternoon.

(The vote closed)

(The sitting was briefly suspended)

PRESIDE: JAVI LÓPEZ

Vicepresidente

9. Istungi jätkamine

(Se reanuda la sesión a las 13:21 horas).

10. Eelmise istungi protokolli kinnitamine

El presidente. – Como bien saben, el acta de la sesión de ayer y los textos aprobados en ella están a su plena disposición. Entiendo que nadie quiere intervenir al respecto, por lo que se aprueba el acta de la sesión.

11. Laastavad maastikupõlengud Lõuna-Euroopas: vajadus suurendada ELi abi, et taastada massiliselt hävinud metsi, ja parandada ELi valmisolekut (arutelu)

El presidente. – El punto siguiente en el orden del día es el debate a partir de las declaraciones del Consejo y la Comisión sobre los incendios forestales devastadores en el sur de Europa y la necesidad de reforzar la ayuda de la Unión para revertir la pérdida masiva de bosques y mejorar la preparación de la Unión (2025/2854(RSP)).

Marie Bjerre, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, honourable Members, Commissioner, this summer, wildfires caused major destruction in Europe. They severely damaged our environment, but also our towns and economies. Sadly, human lives were lost. Our thoughts are with the families of those lost.

The situation is tragic. During only 10 days in mid-August, the burned area in both Portugal and Spain was over 500 000 hectares. This is the highest surface of burned areas ever recorded in mid-August in those two countries. In recent years, wildfires have also hit regions in Europe which were not so exposed earlier. They now go well beyond the Mediterranean region. This is the new normal.

Climate change is an underlying cause of wildfire. It is not a coincidence that 2025 was the warmest summer recorded in Europe. With climate change, wildfires have become more common and more severe. We talk less about climate change than we did just five years ago, but it is still happening and we still need to deal with it.

That is why the fight against climate change is a priority for us. The Danish Presidency aims to reach an agreement in Council this month on our 2040 climate target and the EU contribution to the COP30 in Brazil. It is ambitious and we don't have much time. We are working very hard to make it happen. That is why preventing wildfires starts with strong policies to mitigate and adapt to climate change.

On mitigation: the EU has been supporting global efforts with one of the most ambitious climate frameworks. The EU and its Member States are also committed to increasing the capacity to adapt, building resilience and reducing exposure to extreme events like wildfires. This is a key aspect of the EU adaptation strategy.

When the wildfires came this summer, Member States made huge efforts to respond as quickly as possible. The Union Civil Protection Mechanism was activated several times, again showing its worth. Yet, this summer proved that dealing with wildfires in the middle of heatwaves is very challenging. We need to be better prepared to respond to wildfires, just like other risks and threats that the Union faces.

Our leaders have stressed several times the importance of more coordination in the areas of preparedness and resilience. The presentation of the Preparedness Union strategy by the Commission and the High Representative in March this year must be seen in this context. Europe needs to move from a reactive approach to a preparedness-by-design approach – one that anticipates, prevents and responds to a wide range of crises.

Madam President, honourable Members, Commissioner, preparedness, resilience and crisis management are a clear priority of the Danish Presidency. Our citizens expect us to do better. Some of the policy actions in the Preparedness Union strategy have been, or will be, presented by the Commission during our Presidency, and we will examine them closely in the Council.

In particular, we welcome the legislative proposal on the revision of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism presented in late July. We have started its examination as a priority and aim to get as far as possible. The mechanism is certainly an EU success story. It coordinates the support to a Member State that is overwhelmed. Since its start, the mechanism has helped many communities. This includes those hit by forest fires. This is why the revision of the mechanism is so important. It needs to keep delivering the successful cooperation it does today.

Once our respective institutions have agreed on our position on the proposal, we look forward to negotiating with the Parliament on this important matter.

Hadja Lahbib, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, Minister Bjerre, honourable Members, this has been a record summer of wildfires across southern Europe, but this has also been a summer of action and a summer of solidarity. Year after year, we see how climate change makes disasters worse, including wildfires. The 2024 European climate risk assessment ranked them among the top climate risks.

Global warming makes extreme weather like this about 40 times more likely and not all regions are heating at the same pace. Europe is the fastest warming continent. Since the 1980s, Europe has warmed at twice the global average. That means we must be more ready than ever for heatwaves and wildfires.

Dear colleagues, this year's wildfires did not take us by surprise. The Commission took strong action to prepare for this summer. A team of wildfire experts were monitoring the situation hour by hour at our Emergency Response Coordination Centre. The Commission also prepositioned more than 670 firefighters from 14 European countries in Spain, Portugal, Greece, France and Italy, ready to support local teams on the ground. Our wildfire fleet was ready for action and our Copernicus Emergency Management Service stood ready to provide satellite images to Member States.

Despite all these preparations, more than one million hectares had burned in the EU by 3 September. This is over three times the 2006-2024 average for this time of year and the most since 2006. That's an area, for instance, larger than Cyprus, or almost a third the size of my country, Belgium. Spain and Portugal alone account for more than half of the destruction.

Since the start of the summer, the Union's Civil Protection Mechanism has been activated 18 times to fight wildfires in Europe and beyond, including in Israel and in Syria. Albania, Greece and North Macedonia each called for help three times. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cyprus, Bulgaria, Montenegro, Spain and Portugal also relied on this support. Yes, this has been a challenging summer for wildfires, but it has also been what I call the summer of solidarity. When one country calls, the European Union responds, united and in solidarity.

At the heart of this solidarity was the UCPM and its 24/7 Emergency Response Coordination Centre. Together they deployed 58 aircrafts, 38 planes and 20 helicopters, and more than 740 firefighters and rescuers. I want to pay tribute to them, particularly those who lost their lives while fighting the fires. My thoughts are with their families, their loved ones and their colleagues. Their courage and dedication save lives, homes and landscapes.

Our wildfire fleet showed once again that it is indispensable. Soon, the EU will be equipped with its own fleet of 12 new planes and several helicopters, and Copernicus provided its rapid mapping service 32 times to guide operations in real time.

Honourable Members, this year's wildfires send a clear message. We are improving, anticipating, preventing and responding better and quicker, but we must do much more on prevention and preparedness.

That is why this spring, the Commission adopted the preparedness Union strategy, a forward-looking plan to make Europe better prepared for the crises of tomorrow. It takes an all-hazards approach, embedding preparedness into every EU policy and strengthening cooperation across all levels of government and society. It will make our Emergency Response Coordination Centre more proactive and integrate Copernicus more closely into national early warning and planning systems.

We are also strengthening rescEU, our strategic reserve of disaster response capacities and stockpiles. Originally created for wildfires, rescEU now responds to earthquakes, storms, floods and supports Ukraine. But to stay effective, it needs investments, fresh capacity, replenished stockpiles, and long-term readiness.

As part of the stockpiling strategy, the Commission proposes to bring existing reserves together and explore new capacities where Europe can add the most added value. These efforts are part of the ongoing revision of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism, including in the MFF package. Preparedness by design is at the heart of the preparedness Union strategy. It means building preparedness into every policy area, including wildfires of course.

Preparedness investments will also be central to the new national and regional partnership plans, part of the MFF proposal. Preparedness is now a core objective of the national and regional partnership plans, giving Member States a chance to design tailor-made investments for their own needs.

Population preparedness is central to our preparedness Union strategy. It gives citizens, local communities and vulnerable groups the knowledge and skills to prevent response, but also to recover from wildfires. The citizens, local communities and vulnerable groups also bring their valuable expertise and skills to support societal preparedness and resilience.

Dear colleagues, the message from this summer is, I think, loud and clear: Europe must focus more on preventing wildfires before they start. We need more well-targeted investment and smarter policies to build fire-resilient landscapes.

This is not only about forests and farmland. Whole ecosystems have been destroyed, biodiversity is under threat and rural communities are left with deep and long-lasting scars. The economic costs are also rising. Lost crops damage infrastructure and disrupt livelihoods, all adding to the human suffering.

That is why we are developing an ambitious European framework for climate resilience, to be adopted in the second half of next year. It will set out how the EU will tackle the climate challenges ahead, supporting Member States, candidate countries and our wider neighbourhoods.

Preventing catastrophic wildfires will take both traditional investment in infrastructure and ecosystem-based strategies. Active management of high risk areas through measures like grazing or even controlled burning, can greatly reduce the risk of future fires. Nature restoration and wildfire prevention go hand in hand and we encourage Member States to integrate both in their landscape planning.

Of course, primary responsibility lies with Member States, but the EU supports prevention through several funds: the Agricultural Fund for Rural Development, the cohesion policy, and the Recovery and Resilience Facility. Together, these instruments help across the full disaster cycle: prevention, preparedness, response and recovery.

According to the European Court of Auditors, at least EUR 3.5 billion in EU funding has been allocated to tackle forest fires between 2021-2027, reducing the vulnerability of more than 130 million people. Our common agricultural policy, for instance, helps maintain landscapes that can resist and recover from wildfires, reducing losses.

The EU also funds forest restoration and fire prevention through direct grants like the LIFE programme, research under Horizon Europe and transition support via the Just Transition Mechanism. All of this is aligned with the European Green Deal and global biodiversity goals. And just as importantly, these efforts protect local economies and help revive rural areas.

The EU also shows solidarity after disasters by helping Member States and candidate countries recover. This is the role of the European Union's Solidarity Fund. It provides support when the total damage of a disaster exceeds the threshold set out in the regulation. Since the creation of the fund in 2022, four Member States have received assistance from the EUSF in relation to wildfires for a total amount of EUR 151 million.

Reliable data on wildfire risk is essential for effective prevention and response. That is the main goal of the Commission's proposal for a forest monitoring regulation. So I urge you, honourable Members, to support this proposal in your plenary vote. They are vital for tracking and tackling wildfires.

Honourable Members, wildfires will remain a challenge, but we can still prepare better and reduce their impact to the minimum. With stronger prevention, smarter preparedness and deeper solidarity, Europe can protect its people, its forests and also its future.

Raúl de la Hoz Quintano, en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señor presidente, quiero comenzar agradeciendo las palabras de quienes me han precedido en el uso de la palabra. Lo digo especialmente yo, que vengo de Castilla y León, de una de las regiones que, desgraciadamente, más ha sufrido este verano los devastadores fuegos que han asolado el sur de Europa. Circunstancias meteorológicas extraordinarias que han provocado incendios extraordinarios en un número también extraordinario.

Frente a ello, dos actitudes: la que acaban de mostrar la Comisión y el Consejo, que es la nuestra, la de la responsabilidad, la de la solidaridad, la unidad y el compromiso de cara al futuro, y la de aquellos que, una vez más —lo vamos a ver después—, intentan hacer una utilización partidista, intentando obtener ventaja política de la desgracia, de la desolación, hasta de la muerte.

No vamos a caer en la trampa, no vamos a utilizar ni esta intervención ni este debate para evidenciar lo que el Gobierno de España u otros Gobiernos han podido hacer mal, mejor o antes. Utilicemos este debate para que sirva de punto de inflexión para conseguir que, en el futuro, cuando vuelva a haber incendios —que los va a volver a haber—, seamos capaces desde la Unión Europea —y también desde los Estados— de dar una respuesta más ágil, más eficaz y más rápida a los mismos.

Y eso no se consigue en absoluto con discursos demagógicos. Se consigue, en primer lugar, implicando a los Estados en los planes de prevención y también en las estrategias forestales. Se consigue, igualmente, mejorando la coordinación y la cooperación transfronteriza. Y, por último, por supuesto, mejorando la financiación de las políticas de prevención, de extinción y también de recuperación de las zonas afectadas.

Se consigue, en definitiva, con ese compromiso que ha expresado la Comisión —y que nosotros compartimos plenamente— de que la política forestal ha de convertirse, en el futuro, realmente en una política de todos, en una política comunitaria.

Leire Pajín, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señor presidente, señora comisaria, señorías, este verano ha sido especialmente doloroso en Europa: Portugal, Grecia, Italia, España, la montaña de León, el Bierzo, Orense, Cáceres, Asturias, Palencia han vivido los peores incendios en treinta años, 130 incendios en un solo mes, 330 000 hectáreas quemadas por el fuego.

Hemos visto este verano, señorías, arder, con rabia y dolor, nuestro patrimonio cultural y natural, nuestros bosques, nuestra fauna, nuestros pueblos, nuestros recuerdos. Hemos perdido a vecinos que luchaban contra el fuego. Y, desde ese dolor, señorías, es donde estamos obligados a comprometernos más contra estos incendios y, sobre todo, a ser conscientes de que vivimos en una emergencia climática —como ha dicho la comisaria— que multiplica hasta cuarenta veces los riesgos y las probabilidades de que estos incendios se vuelvan a producir. También las danas, que ocurrieron por ejemplo en Valencia.

Por eso, es importante una vez más que entendamos que no basta con responder, debemos prevenir y prepararnos. Necesitamos planes de gestión forestal durante todo el año. Necesitamos especies autóctonas e infraestructuras de última generación y, sobre todo, recursos humanos bien dotados y bien pagados. Necesitamos meter en la ecuación la despoblación, porque el abandono del pastoreo y el abandono de las tierras tienen mucho que ver. Necesitamos, por supuesto, un gran acuerdo político, como plantea el presidente del Gobierno de España. Necesitamos a todo el mundo y, sobre todo, necesitamos entender —de una vez por todas— que invertir no es despilfarrar, como han dicho algunos dirigentes, es prepararnos mejor para la respuesta.

Y necesitamos cumplir las leyes, esas que hemos aprobado aquí: la de la restauración de la naturaleza, el Pacto Verde Europeo, todas las leyes que nos aprovechan para luchar mejor contra estos incendios.

Pero lo que no necesitamos, señorías, son la demagogia, pero sobre todo el negacionismo y la negligencia de quienes niegan el cambio climático, de quienes siembran la desinformación y los bulos en las catástrofes, porque eso causa mucho más dolor y retarda la respuesta.

António Tânger Corrêa, on behalf of the PfE Group. – Mr President, Madam Commissioner, Madam Minister, first of all, I'd like to thank you very much for all the solidarity that was displayed by this House and by our friends in the European Union towards, not only this terrible happening that 3 % of Portugal this year burned out and the loss of lives, but also for the solidarity vis-à-vis the terrible accident with our elevator which killed 16 people in Lisbon.

Thank you for the solidarity. I'll speak Portuguese now.

Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, Senhora Ministra, eu devo dizer que todos os anos é a mesma coisa, ou seja, todos os anos temos incêndios. Este ano, arderam 3 % da área de Portugal. E não me venham com histórias que é uma alteração do clima — não é. Grande parte são fogos postos; há mão humana nestes fogos. Portanto, não vale a pena estarem com grandes teorias de alterações climáticas se nós não prevenirmos que a mão humana faça estragos nos nossos países, por um lado.

Por outro lado, mais importante do que a solidariedade e os meios usados para combater os fogos: é preciso que eles não existam. É preciso prevenção para que não haja fogos. Porque todos os anos é a mesma coisa.

Nós dizemos isso em Portugal, mas agora estou aqui, perante a Europa, para dizer o seguinte: se nos querem ajudar, ajudem-nos a regulamentar o nosso território, ajudem a repopular as árvores e a vegetação do nosso país, ajudem com técnicas que evitem fogos porque, uma vez que o fogo é declarado, muito obrigado pela ajuda, mas já é tarde.

Nós não queremos palavras; nós queremos ação. E é isso que eu vos peço, principalmente à Comissão Europeia e ao Conselho: sejam ativos, pró-ativos, e tenham ação.

Diego Solier, en nombre del Grupo ECR. – Señor presidente, señora comisaria, ya lo dijimos en junio: los incendios se apagan en invierno, con prevención, y ayudando al medio rural, a los campesinos, ganaderos y a quienes entienden y conocen los montes. Pero no se sabía… ¿No se podía prevenir? Precipitaciones altas en primavera son gasolina para los montes en verano.

En lo que va de 2025 se han quemado cerca de 350 000 hectáreas en 223 incendios, batiéndose el récord histórico del Sistema Europeo de Información sobre Incendios Forestales. Y mientras, las Administraciones regionales y nacionales se echan la culpa unas a otras, sin aportar soluciones efectivas. Y otra vez —una vez más— la sociedad civil saliendo al rescate de nuevo.

Invertir en prevención durante todo el año es igual a menos gestión de crisis en verano. En la era de los datos tenemos información suficiente para actuar acorde y evitar pérdidas humanas, agrícolas, medioambientales y patrimoniales.

Actuemos desde ya o el año que viene estaremos en la misma situación.

Grégory Allione, au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, Madame la Ministre, chers collègues, de toute ma carrière de sapeur-pompier, je n'ai jamais vu un été aussi dévastateur. J'ai été engagé dans l'Aude, et l'ampleur des feux de forêt en Europe me laisse sans voix. Pour autant, nous n'avons pas le luxe de nous taire.

Inutile de vous dresser un bilan, les images ont parlé et chacun le sait: des milliers d'hectares partis en fumée, des personnes décédées et des gens qui ont tout perdu. Une évidence s'impose: ces feux hors norme sont une conséquence directe du dérèglement climatique.

Pourtant, face à cette réalité, on vient de l'entendre encore, l'extrême droite s'enferme dans le climato-scepticisme. Mais une certitude s'impose, le déni ne nous protégera jamais des flammes. Seules des actions concrètes le pourront.

Tout d'abord, face à cette nouvelle génération de feux hors norme, la lutte ne suffit plus. Et oui, Madame la Commissaire, la prévention doit devenir notre premier pare-feu. Développer une véritable culture du risque et de la préparation n'est plus une option, c'est une nécessité vitale.

Ensuite, vous le savez, il nous faut des bombardiers d'eau européens. Comme avec les masques venus de Chine, notre souveraineté ne peut plus dépendre d'avions venus du Canada. L'Europe a les savoir-faire. Il ne manque qu'une volonté politique pour bâtir une production européenne et durable.

Enfin, sans les femmes et les hommes, il n'y a pas de combat. Les sapeurs-pompiers, dont la majorité sont volontaires, sont notre premier bouclier face aux flammes. Alors que tant de citoyens veulent s'engager, notre devoir est simple: il faut lever les obstacles à leur mobilisation et reconnaître leur rôle.

Les feux de forêt ont changé de nature, à nous de changer notre réponse.

Terry Reintke, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, dear colleagues, wildfires in Europe have reached a new terrible record this summer. More than one million hectares went up in flames in the European Union this year. One million hectares. Our thoughts are, of course, first and foremost with the people in Portugal, in Spain, in France, in Greece, Bulgaria and actually so many other countries across Europe, and a very special thanks goes out to all the firefighters who have risked their lives across Europe to help their neighbours, also from my home region in North Rhine-Westphalia. That is real European solidarity in action, and we must further step up exactly this solidarity in the future. But we must also finally tackle the problem at its root.

Last year, at this time, people's homes were drowning in massive floods. Now, they are burning in flames. Climate change is here. To mitigate its destructive consequences, we finally need an ambitious climate adaptation law. And what doesn't help in this crisis is an EPP that is trying to kill the forest-monitoring law while forests are burning all across Europe – because nature is a powerful ally in the fight against these wildfires. We need to protect and restore it. Wetlands, healthy forests and soils will help us to reduce the risks in the future. And yes, colleagues, let's also talk about money, because we all know that disaster prevention costs much less than dealing with the consequences, and prevention means nature-based solutions and nature restoration.

But dear Commissioner, how is this reflected in the next European budget without a LIFE programme, for example? We need a dedicated and meaningful budget for this. And finally, and most importantly, after 2024, the summer of 2025 was again the hottest summer ever recorded. The time for inaction is over. What we don't need is an EPP gambling away our future. What we don't need is Paris killing the Paris Agreement. We need to cut emissions, colleagues. We need a strong EU climate law. Let's act now.

Γιώργος Γεωργίου, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας The Left. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κυρία Επίτροπε, άκουσα στην ομιλία σας 10 “θα” και 20 “πρέπει”. Οι πυρκαγιές που έκαψαν φέτος την Ευρώπη απέδειξαν ότι οι πολιτικές λιτότητας είναι καταστροφικές. Η Κύπρος δυστυχώς κατέχει την αρνητική πρωτιά της δεκαετίας με βάση το συνολικό έδαφός της. Κάηκαν 104 τετραγωνικά χιλιόμετρα. Δεν είδαμε την αλληλεγγύη σας. Ζητήσαμε δύο αεροπλάνα από την Ισπανία, μετά από τρεις μήνες δεν έχουν έρθει ακόμη. Οι ευθύνες της κυπριακής κυβέρνησης βέβαια είναι τεράστιες, παραμένουν όμως ορφανές, αφού δεν παραιτήθηκε κανείς από τους αρμόδιους υπουργούς. Από το 2016, εμείς ως Αριστερά ζητάμε να εγκαθιδρυθεί στην Κύπρο μια ευρωπαϊκή βάση αεροπυρόσβεσης. Μας αγνοείτε επιδεικτικά. Αντί για κοινωνική πολιτική, τα ρίχνετε όλα στην κλιματική αλλαγή και στην ατομική ευθύνη. Ο μηχανισμός rescEU διαιωνίζει τις ελλείψεις των χωρών της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, ανακυκλώνοντας τα λειψά μέσα. Μας είπατε χρειάζονται επενδύσεις. Δώστε από τα δισεκατομμύρια των εξοπλισμών και αφήστε τους πολεμικούς ομίλους να κερδίζουν λιγότερα επιτέλους.

Станислав Стоянов, от името на групата ESN. – Г-н Председател, това лято опустошителните пожари в Южна Европа доведоха до истинска катастрофа. И към днешна дата в страни като България те все още не са напълно овладени. Опожарените площи, както стана дума, вече надхвърлят 1 милион хектара, което е най-голямото опустошение от 2006 г. насам.

Мобилизирането на ресурси чрез механизма за гражданска защита е важно, но не е достатъчно. Нужни са по-бързи финансови инструменти, своевременна доставка на оборудване и най-вече изграждане на по-силен национален капацитет. Комисията трябва по-строго да следи разходването на средствата и да настоява за конкретен напредък, за да могат държавите членки ефективно да защитават хората. Интересът на гражданите трябва да бъде на първо място. Не можем да си позволим отново да останем неподготвени пред бедствия, които се повтарят всяка година и унищожават гори, домове и цели общности.

Peter Liese (PPE). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Zunächst einmal möchte ich – auch im Namen der gesamten EVP-Fraktion – den Opfern in allen Ländern Mitgefühl und Solidarität ausdrücken. Als Zweites ein großes Dankeschön an die Helferinnen und Helfer, auch und gerade die, die über rescEU außerhalb ihres Heimatlandes geholfen haben. Als Drittes möchte ich die Mitgliedstaaten auffordern, das Thema rescEU noch ernster zu nehmen, und zwar als Geber und als Empfänger.

Mein eigenes Mitgliedsland war immer kritisch, und ich bin sehr dankbar, dass im letzten Jahr, als in Sachsen-Anhalt ein Waldbrand war, Minister Sven Schulze Hilfe aus der EU angefordert hat und dass die auch kam, obwohl Deutschland lange skeptisch war. Ich glaube, auch in Spanien hätte die Hilfe schneller angefordert werden können in diesem Sommer.

Als Letztes: Klimawandel. Natürlich müssen wir über den Klimawandel reden, aber das darf nicht unser erster Satz sein, wenn wir konkrete Opfer sehen. Ich kann auch nicht als Arzt zu einem Patienten mit Herzinfarkt kommen und sagen: Vor allen Dingen musst du deine Ernährung umstellen. Konkrete Hilfe steht an allererster Stelle – das muss auch politisch klar sein.

Wenn wir über Klimaschutz reden, dann sollten wir sehr viel stärker als bisher über die internationale Dimension reden. Ich habe manchmal den Eindruck, als ob die Frage “Klimaziel für 2040: 90 Prozent” das globale Klima alleine rettet. Wir reden viel zu wenig über die Vorbereitung von Belém, und, Frau Ratspräsidentin, wir reden zu wenig über das Ziel für 2035. Das, was da diskutiert wird mit maximal 72,5 Prozent, das ist mir zu wenig; darauf sollten wir uns stärker konzentrieren. Also erstens, globaler Klimaschutz, und zweitens, sehr schnelle, konkrete Hilfe.

Marta Temido (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, caros colegas, os incêndios rurais sempre estiveram presentes num país com floresta mediterrânica, como o meu, Portugal, mas as alterações climáticas estão a acontecer cada vez mais depressa, com repetição de fenómenos meteorológicos extremos e num quadro nacional do mais elevado número de ignições de entre todos os Estados-Membros.

Depois de 2021, passámos a investir mais em prevenção do que em combate e verificámos diminuição da área ardida até 2025. Este ano, Portugal voltou a viver o pesadelo dos incêndios rurais. Mais de 274 000 hectares de área ardida, no pior ano desde que, em 2017, não só arderam 540 000 hectares, como perderam a vida 116 pessoas. Sabugal, Covilhã, Trancoso, Ponte da Barca, o Norte e o Centro de Portugal foram mais uma vez devastados pelo fogo este ano.

O apoio da União Europeia foi fundamental no combate — e não foi só o meu país que precisou da intervenção dos meios do mecanismo europeu. Mas, por muito eficiente que seja um país ou a União Europeia na resposta a incêndios rurais, a outras ameaças florestais transfronteiriças, a melhor chave está na prevenção. Para tal, é preciso conhecer os territórios, as florestas, a sua cartografia, as suas características.

Nós estamos a poucos dias da votação nas Comissões ENVI e AGRI da proposta de regulamento europeu que cria um quadro de monitorização das florestas, e aquilo que foi uma proposta ambientalmente progressista da Comissão, baseada no conhecimento, corre o risco de ser esvaziada pelo Parlamento Europeu depois de o ter sido pelo Conselho.

A partilha de dados florestais para a gestão nacional é essencial para proteger as florestas, para proteger as pessoas. Sem elas, as nossas lágrimas serão apenas lágrimas de crocodilo sobre muito sofrimento.

Jorge Buxadé Villalba (PfE). – Señor presidente, cientos de miles de hectáreas de bosque, tierras de cultivo, pueblos enteros han ardido en España. Decenas de miles de vidas afectadas o destruidas.

En España, el Estado autonómico ha provocado que hubiera equipos de bomberos dispuestos a ayudar, esperando que los políticos que gobiernan se pusieran de acuerdo con las competencias. Otra vez, los más humildes han sufrido las consecuencias. A ese hombre de campo, los políticos que gobiernan —con expresión de psicópata— le dicen que la culpa es del cambio climático, pero todo el mundo sabe que la culpa es de los pirómanos, los que encienden la mecha y los que impulsan leyes criminales. Mientras se baten récords de recaudación de impuestos, los servicios públicos están degradados y los españoles abandonados en las catástrofes.

Socialistas y populares se echan la competencia, el reglamento y los presupuestos a la cabeza, intentando distraer a la gente, pero ni uno solo ha asumido su responsabilidad, ni los de aquí ni los de aquí. En otoño, las riadas; en verano, los incendios. La España que arde es la España rural, abandonada, criminalizada durante décadas por el bipartidismo y el fanatismo ideológico.

Soluciones: pues que los políticos que gobiernan pidan perdón y se vayan a casa. Como no lo hacen, hemos tenido que acudir a los tribunales para que rindan cuentas de su negligencia grave y culpable. Recuperar las actividades tradicionales, el pastoreo de ganadería extensiva, los cortafuegos, la limpieza de montes, el desbroce, la recogida de leña y que la política forestal no se haga por ecologistas de salón, que cuando llega el fuego no están ni se les espera.

Y, por último, paguen las ayudas: en La Palma siguen esperando, en Valencia siguen esperando. A ver cuánto tardan en compensar a las víctimas, porque para la emigración masiva siempre tienen dinero.

(El orador acepta responder a una pregunta formulada con arreglo al procedimiento de la “tarjeta azul”)

Grégory Allione (Renew), question “carton bleu”. – Cher collègue, vous dites que ce n'est pas le changement climatique. Alors, moi, j'ai deux questions. Vous dites que ce sont des pyromanes qui allument les feux. Moi, je voudrais connaître la part, justement, des feux liés aux pyromanes – première question.

Et, deuxièmement, comment expliquez-vous qu'en 20 ans la vitesse de propagation des feux ait doublé, voire triplé?

Jorge Buxadé Villalba (PfE), respuesta de “tarjeta azul”. – Pues mire, le voy a dar dos datos de España: 220 incendios, 150 pirómanos detenidos o investigados ahora mismo por la policía, teniendo en cuenta que en Galicia se detuvo a una persona que, al parecer, había provocado más de diez incendios. Es decir, los porcentajes son altísimos.

Y en cuanto a la propagación del fuego… porque no se limpia el bosque. Este año ha llovido como nunca en España, ha crecido toda la maleza, nadie hace labores de limpieza, se prohíbe a los ganaderos el pastoreo extensivo y, además, se exige a todo el mundo —hasta para recoger una piña— una puñetera licencia administrativa.

Ивайло Вълчев (ECR). – Пред нас стои тревожната истина, че опустошителните пожари, които Южна Европа преживява, пожарите, които изпепеляват милиони декари гори, унищожават домове и нарушават поминъка на хиляди хора, са не просто едно природно бедствие, а едно общоевропейско предизвикателство, което изисква нашия солидарен отговор.

Тази година само в моята страна България пожарите унищожиха над 300 000 декара земя. Дори в момента, сега, ситуацията остава сложна с пожари високо в планината Рила, където огънят се разпространява в много труднодостъпен район. Благодарим на всеки един пожарникар и на всеки един доброволец, който участва в гасенето на пожарите, но нашата работа е да направим така, че те да имат възможността да работят професионално, а не да създаваме обстоятелства, в които насила да ги превръщаме в герои.

За да отговорим на тази стихия, трябва да инвестираме в модерна техника, в допълнително обучение на пожарните екипи и да подобрим координацията. Освен тези мерки, Националния синдикат на пожарникарите и спасителите в България предлага и увеличаване задължително на човешкия ресурс. За да възстановим разрушенията от пожарите трябва да засилим финансовата и техническата помощ за пострадалите региони, да инвестираме в устойчиво управление на отпадъците.

PRESIDE: ESTEBAN GONZÁLEZ PONS

Vicepresidente

Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez (Renew). – Señor presidente, vemos que se repiten, en este Parlamento, debates y ataques que tuvimos cuando sucedió la dana. Se usan de nuevo desastres naturales y dramas para mentir sobre el cambio climático, para atacar al de enfrente o para enredar en ámbitos competenciales.

¿Saben ustedes que mientras suben las temperaturas, los montes se queman y algunos discuten, la extrema derecha sube?

Cada cual, desde su ámbito competencial: prevención todo el año, elección de especies con criterio de riesgo, profesionales estables, restauraciones inteligentes tras los fuegos, protocolos ágiles, no al negacionismo climático…

“Este calor no es normal” es una de las frases que más hemos escuchado este verano. Cuidemos, por tanto, nuestros montes, pero cuidemos también nuestros servicios públicos, que son necesarios para velar por ellos a lo largo de todo el año, porque luego no vale echarse las manos a la cabeza.

Orgullosa de Euskadi, un país que tuvo la capacidad de ayudar a comunidades vecinas que lo estaban pasando mal.

Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE). – Senhor Presidente, como eurodeputada galega, promovi este debate porque tenho a responsabilidade de denunciar a solidão que sofreu Galiza, o meu país, nestes terríveis incêndios de lume devastador. Casas queimadas, animais mortos, árvores e terras agrárias, colheitas perdidas convertidas em cinzas, vidas destruídas, imagens apocalípticas e paisagens devastadas.

O povo galego ficou só. Unicamente graças ao trabalho inesgotável de bombeiros, vizinhança e gente solidária se apagaram os incêndios. Fica o meu reconhecimento dentro do Parlamento Europeu.

Olhem os dados impactantes: arderam 145 000 hectares, segundo o Copernicus, Comissária, como a cidade de Londres. Ourense tem 10 % da superfície queimada.

Comissária, o povo galego conheceu a magnitude real dos incêndios pelo Copernicus, porque o governo galego ocultou dados nos meios públicos. O meu país ardeu pela incompetência na prevenção contra os fogos, por gastar mal os fundos europeus que, em vez de estarem destinados à política preventiva, não são gastos.

Toda a Europa deve saber que há um responsável: Alfonso Rueda Valenzuela, presidente do Governo galego. Um governo do Partido Popular que mostra, uma vez mais, a sua incompetência. Ocultaram a realidade e mentiram, faltou transparência. O governo do PP minimizou a tragédia do meu país ardendo, dizendo que só arderam pedras e silvas.

Com os incêndios, perdeu-se o modo de vida rural, o sustento das gentes, as explorações agropecuárias e a biodiversidade. Precisamos de medidas urgentes, como empregar o instrumento RESTORE, que poderia financiar as infraestruturas afetadas. Como queremos no Bloco passar da cinza à vida com um plano de futuro para o rural?

Catarina Martins (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, senhora Comissária, em 2025, Portugal foi o Estado-Membro com mais área ardida em toda a União Europeia. Centenas de bombeiros arriscaram a vida, e houve populações que ficaram sozinhas a combater o fogo para salvar as suas aldeias. O Governo português falhou, desvalorizou, não preparou, pediu ajuda internacional tarde demais, não foi capaz de uma resposta coordenada. Deixou as populações, os bombeiros, GNR, autarcas, entregues à sua sorte.

E agradecemos a solidariedade europeia, mas acho que também devemos discutir se não podemos fazer melhor. Na verdade, a União Europeia também não esteve à altura do que se esperava: o Mecanismo Europeu de Proteção Civil demorou cinco dias a enviar os meios aéreos, depois de ser ativado. Cinco longos dias.

Enquanto continuam a exportar armas para Israel e a prometer a Trump mais negócio para o complexo industrial militar, os Estados-Membros e as instituições europeias estão a falhar no mais básico para garantir a segurança da sua população — a proteção civil —, como se a segurança dos cidadãos europeus fosse secundária.

As aldeias cercadas pelo fogo, a desesperar por ajuda, são o trágico resultado do desprezo pelas populações e deviam ser a primeira razão para arrepiar caminho e dar prioridade à coesão e à transição climática.

Νικόλαος Αναδιώτης (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, στην Ολομέλεια του Ιουλίου συζητήσαμε μέτρα για την πρόληψη και την ετοιμότητα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης ενόψει καλοκαιρινών δασικών πυρκαγιών. Μετά την τεράστια απώλεια δασικών εκτάσεων, καλούμαστε και πάλι να συζητήσουμε το θέμα, προς αναζήτηση τρόπων βελτίωσης.

Στη χώρα μου και φέτος καήκαμε – κυριολεκτικά. Η Ελλάδα είναι από τις πλέον πληττόμενες χώρες σε όλη την ήπειρο. Οι φωτιές εκδηλώθηκαν παντού, έφτασαν έως τον αστικό ιστό στην πόλη μου. Κινδύνεψαν ανθρώπινες ζωές, χάθηκαν ζώα, ολόκληρες περιουσίες και τεράστιες δασικές εκτάσεις. Επλήγησαν ανεπανόρθωτα περιοχές Natura και, δυστυχώς, μεγάλο μέρος οικοσυστημάτων είναι στα πρόθυρα εξαφάνισης. Όλη η Μεσόγειος βρέθηκε στις φλόγες, από την Ιβηρική έως τα Βαλκάνια και την Κύπρο. Η Νότια Ευρώπη κινδυνεύει περισσότερο. Ενδεικτικά, στην Ελλάδα, στη Χίο, το 1/3 της συνολικής έκτασης έγινε στάχτη. Στην Ευρώπη κάηκαν σχεδόν 10 εκατομμύρια στρέμματα.

Πυροσβέστες και εθελοντές δίνουν κάθε καλοκαίρι άνιση μάχη με τις φωτιές ηρωικά. Τους είμαστε ευγνώμονες. Ο Ευρωπαϊκός Μηχανισμός Πολιτικής Προστασίας, το rescEU, το πρόγραμμα Copernicus λειτούργησαν, αλλά δυστυχώς δεν αρκούν. Χρειαζόμαστε μεταξύ άλλων, ικανότητα διαχείρισης καταστάσεων εκτάκτου ανάγκης, καλύτερο συντονισμό, αναβάθμιση της εργαλειοθήκης, αποτελεσματικότερο rescEU, δράσεις δημιουργίας αποθεμάτων σε στενή συνεργασία των κρατών μελών.

Ana Miguel Pedro (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, as minhas condolências às vítimas e a todos os afetados pelos incêndios, com o reconhecimento à coragem de quem combate estas tragédias.

Senhores deputados, quando falamos de incêndios florestais não falamos apenas de hectares de floresta ou de estatísticas — falamos de pessoas. Aldeias inteiras evacuadas, famílias que perdem casas, agricultores que veem o trabalho de uma vida reduzido a cinzas, ecossistemas e solos férteis que levam décadas a recuperar.

Este verão, a União Europeia ardeu como nunca: mais de 1 milhão de hectares destruídos, dois terços só em Portugal e Espanha. Todos os anos sabemos que a península Ibérica vai arder. Sabemos que os verões são mais longos e mais quentes. Somos a linha da frente das alterações climáticas. Somos o terreno onde a Europa mais arde e temos também de ser a linha da frente da prevenção europeia.

A resposta europeia já não pode ser a rotina da emergência eterna; precisamos de prevenção e prontidão. Senhor Comissário, o mecanismo rescEU tem de se tornar uma força verdadeiramente permanente de combate a incêndios, com meios aéreos e brigadas multinacionais pré-posicionadas nas regiões de maior risco, como a península Ibérica, prontas a atuar em horas e não em dias. Ao mesmo tempo, o próximo Quadro Financeiro Plurianual tem de canalizar verbas significativas para a limpeza de combustíveis, reconstrução de ecossistemas resilientes e apoio ao mundo rural.

Mas não esqueçamos a outra frente: a justiça. Uma parte significativa das ignições é crime de fogo posto. Este é um crime grave que destrói vidas, aldeias e património natural. A lei existe — o que falta é justiça firme, sem complacência.

Senhoras e senhores deputados, isto é um imperativo moral e geracional. Ou governamos o território no inverno, ou seremos governados pelas chamas no verão.

Giuseppe Lupo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, in Italia nel 2025 sono andati in fumo circa 35 000 ettari; anche le aree protette sono state pesantemente colpite. Tra le regioni più interessate la Sardegna e la Sicilia, dove si sono verificati centinaia di incendi.

L'aumento della temperatura, conseguenza del cambiamento climatico, è indubbiamente un grave fattore di rischio.

Per fronteggiare queste catastrofi, che sono costate la vita a troppe persone, arrecando gravi danni all'ambiente e all'economia, serve una nuova strategia europea basata sulla prevenzione, che il meccanismo di protezione civile rappresenta certamente, e comunque svolge un ruolo cruciale.

È necessario un piano che preveda, tra l'altro, l'occupazione stabile e qualificata dei lavoratori forestali e dei vigili del fuoco, con l'utilizzo di nuove tecnologie come droni e sistemi satellitari.

I lavoratori forestali e i vigili del fuoco devono poter operare in assoluta sicurezza. Li ringrazio per il loro difficile lavoro contro gli incendi.

Mathilde Androuët (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, cet été, 16 000 hectares sont partis en fumée dans l'Aude, en France. Des agriculteurs, des viticulteurs ont tout perdu: leurs terres, leurs récoltes, leurs outils de travail. Le fruit d'une vie réduit en cendres. Pourtant, la vigne comme le débroussaillage sont les meilleurs Canadairs, n'en déplaise à la gauche bobo, qui pense que la nature peut s'autoréguler.

À cette anarchie dans l'entretien de la nature s'est ajoutée une autre, tout aussi révoltante: plus de 2 500 fêtards venus de toute l'Europe ont organisé une rave party en plein cœur des terres calcinées, en toute illégalité. Sur ces sols fragiles qui auraient pu renaître, ils ont tout piétiné, aggravant encore la détresse des exploitants. Voilà la réalité: quand nos paysans pleurent, l'État les abandonne, seuls face au feu, puis seuls face à l'anarchie, à cette complaisance.

Nos campagnes ne sont pas des terrains vagues pour marginaux. Elles sont le cœur battant de la nation. Elles méritent protection, respect et reconnaissance. Car derrière chaque champ, chaque vigne, chaque ferme, il y a des familles, des traditions, une histoire qui se transmet. Et quand on piétine nos terres, ce ne sont pas seulement des hectares qu'on détruit, ce sont des vies entières qu'on sacrifie.

Γεάδης Γεάδη (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, μαύρο το καλοκαίρι που μας πέρασε, στο χρώμα της στάχτης από τις πυρκαγιές, αποδεικνύοντας τις τεράστιες ελλείψεις του rescEU που άφησε έρμαιο της πύρινης λαίλαπας την Ευρώπη, από την Ισπανία μέχρι την Κύπρο. Από τις 7 Οκτωβρίου 2024 είχα προειδοποιήσει προτείνοντας σειρά μέτρων, όπως δημιουργία ισχυρού πανευρωπαϊκού πυροσβεστικού σώματος και μηχανισμού συνεργασίας των κρατών μελών, αυστηροποίηση ποινών για κακόβουλες πυρκαγιές, αύξηση των ευρωπαϊκών κονδυλίων για πυρόπληκτους και ουσιαστική αξιοποίηση των εθελοντών. Τόσο ως ευρωβουλευτής όσο και ως άτομο που συμμετείχε εθελοντικά στις κατασβέσεις, οφείλω να δώσω τα συγχαρητήριά μου στους αφανείς ήρωες, τους πυροσβέστες, τους νοσοκόμους, τα μέλη των σωμάτων ασφαλείας αλλά και τους εθελοντές που με τόλμη και αυταπάρνηση σπεύδουν στο κάλεσμα της πατρίδας τους. Τέλος, οφείλω να εκφράσω την ευγνωμοσύνη μου στον συνάδελφο Nicola Procaccini που προθυμοποιήθηκε να βοηθήσει μέσω της ιταλικής κυβέρνησης και να ευχαριστήσω την κυβέρνηση του Ισραήλ με τον κύριο Σάαρ που ανταποκρίθηκε άμεσα στο κάλεσμα στέλνοντας πυροσβεστικά αεροσκάφη.

(Ο αγορητής δέχεται να απαντήσει σε ερώτηση με γαλάζια κάρτα)

Grégory Allione (Renew), question “carton bleu”. – Je n'ai pas bien compris votre intervention parce que vous dites que, finalement, le mécanisme de protection civile européenne ne sert à rien. Et, pour autant, vous réclamez d'augmenter les fonds pour ce même mécanisme. C'est quoi votre idée?

Γεάδης Γεάδη (ECR), απάντηση σε ερώτηση με γαλάζια κάρτα. – Ως άτομο που ήμουν μέσα στις πυρκαγιές, έχω ιδίαν άποψη για το τι συνέβη. Είδα τις ελλείψεις, είδα ότι υπήρχαν τεράστια κενά. Γι' αυτό υπογράμμισα την αναγκαιότητα αυτός ο μηχανισμός να ισχυροποιηθεί, για να μπορέσει να καταστεί επιτέλους η Ευρώπη ασφαλής.

Stine Bosse (Renew). – Europa står i flammer. 10.000 kvadratkilometer skov er i sommer brændt væk i Sydeuropa. Svarer til hele Sjælland og Fyn. Tre gange så meget som en normal sommer og det største areal, siden man begyndte at måle. Og det er ikke mærkeligt, for Europa er det kontinent i verden, der varmer hurtigst op. Men imens det sker, forsøger Dansk Folkeparti og de såkaldte patrioter helt at sabotere klimaloven, som skal komme til at bremse den globale opvarmning. Tillad mig at spørge. Tillad mig at spørge Dansk Folkeparti og de såkaldte patrioter: Hvor mange aktuarer fra forsikringsbranchen, hvor mange brandfolk, hvor mange meteorologer, landmænd med ødelagt høst og ofre for flammerne skal vi samle her i salen, før I ser, hvad der sker? Jeres provokationer i lovgivningsarbejdet er en skændsel. Sidder I virkelig og søger svar i bunden af jeres kaffekop? Eller ønsker I bare ikke at vide, hvad der sker? Ja, det vil koste at ændre vores vaner og forebygge katastrofer, men hvis vi ikke handler, vil prisen blive vores velstand og vores velfærd. Lad os handle sammen nu.

Pär Holmgren (Verts/ALE). – Herr talman! Då står vi här nu igen, en septembersession i Strasbourg, och diskuterar konsekvenser av extrema väderhändelser. För ett år sedan var det översvämningar runtomkring i Europa. Den här sommaren extrema skogsbränder, framför allt i Spanien och Portugal. Jag är säker på att vi kommer stå här om ett år igen och diskutera någon annan form av extrem väderhändelse.

Samtidigt har vi en högerhalva här i parlamentet som konsekvent motarbetar ambitiös klimatpolitik, och kopplat till just skogsbränderna. Ännu allvarligare: just nu motarbetar man också någon form av skogsövervakningslag – Forest Monitoring Law – fastän vi vet att just data om hur vår skog mår, runtomkring i Europa, skulle kunna vara ett av de absolut viktigaste verktygen för att motarbeta och lindra konsekvenserna i framtiden. Det är en fullständig skandal. Det är ett svek mot de offer som vi tyvärr har haft den här sommaren. Men det är faktiskt ett ännu större svek mot framtida offer av katastrofer som vi skulle kunna undvika.

Νικόλας Φαραντούρης (The Left). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, ασφάλεια δεν δίνουν μόνο τα όπλα. Ασφάλεια είναι, επίσης, η ανθεκτικότητα δικτύων και υποδομών, η πρόληψη, η δυνατότητα ταχείας αποζημίωσης και αποκατάστασης. Στο επόμενο πολυετές δημοσιονομικό πλαίσιο που κατέθεσε η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή, οι πόροι γι' αυτά τα πράγματα είναι ελλιπείς, φτωχοί. Γι' αυτό, ζητώ σήμερα, εδώ στην Ολομέλεια, ρήτρα διαφυγής από τους αυστηρούς δημοσιονομικούς κανόνες, για να μπορούν οι χώρες μας, οι χώρες του Νότου, η Ελλάδα, η Κύπρος, η Πορτογαλία και οι υπόλοιπες χώρες που επλήγησαν από θεομηνίες και πυρκαγιές αυτό το καλοκαίρι, να επενδύσουν σε ανθρώπινο δυναμικό, σε πυροσβέστες, σε μέσα, να κάνουν επενδύσεις στην ανθεκτικότητα, στην καινοτομία, να επενδύσουν στην πρόληψη και στην αποκατάσταση. Ρήτρα διαφυγής τώρα για την εσωτερική ασφάλεια.

Fidias Panayiotou (NI). – Mr President, my country, Cyprus, faced the biggest wildfire in the last 50 years, and the European Union did almost nothing to help us.

If you look at Cyprus on the map, you can very easily understand the main problem: we are too far away from continental Europe. This means all the help sent from the EU doesn't reach us on time. This is such a big issue.

With this wildfire, we actually received more help from third countries like Jordan, Egypt, Israel and Lebanon than from the EU countries. This is not a good look for the European Union, and us Cypriots feel abandoned by the EU.

Don't get me wrong; we are very grateful for all the help, but sadly it is not enough. We need more investment for prevention through the EU Cohesion Fund and more firefighting equipment in Cyprus through the rescEU programme.

European Union – you were not in Cyprus when we needed you the most, and this needs to change. I love you all.

Μιχάλης Χατζηπαντέλα (PPE). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η πατρίδα μου, η Κύπρος, για μια ακόμη φορά πληρώνει πολύ ακριβά το τίμημα της κλιματικής αλλαγής, όπως και άλλες χώρες του Νότου, οι οποίες πλήττονται από ακραίες θερμοκρασίες. Από την καταστροφική πυρκαγιά που ξέσπασε τον περασμένο Ιούλιο στην ορεινή Λεμεσό, δύο άνθρωποι έχασαν τη ζωή τους και περισσότερα από 120 τετραγωνικά χιλιόμετρα γης, σπίτια, περιουσίες και καλλιέργειες, έγιναν στάχτη.

Κυρία Επίτροπε, η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση δεν μπορεί να θεωρεί ότι έπραξε το καθήκον της με μερικά λόγια συμπάθειας. Δεν χρειαζόμαστε συμπάθεια, χρειαζόμαστε πράξεις. Έχουμε υποχρέωση να επενδύσουμε στην πρόληψη και την ετοιμότητα με ενίσχυση του μηχανισμού RescEU. Οι Ευρωπαίοι πολίτες περιμένουν έμπρακτη στήριξη. Θα πρέπει να εγκατασταθούν μόνιμα ευρωπαϊκά εναέρια και επίγεια μέσα σε στρατηγικές τοποθεσίες για άμεση αντίδραση σε περιπτώσεις έκτακτης ανάγκης. Κανένα κράτος μέλος δεν πρέπει να είναι αβοήθητο. Aν ξαναζήσουμε ανάλογες στιγμές χωρίς δυνατότητα και σχέδιο αντίδρασης, η ευθύνη θα βαρύνει εσάς προσωπικά.

Nikos Papandreou (S&D). – Mr President, Commissioner, I agree with much of what you said.

We have the 2022 Wildfire Prevention Plan, but we can do more. I'm not going to criticise. We have a new world. Mega fires – and I went to the town of Patras – double in size in 30 seconds.

So the main concept is prevention – and our firemen will tell you that; I'm a part of a volunteer firefighting group. And I want to propose, not a democracy shield, but a firefighting shield that would include the new technology: drones.

We have hired drones in our local neighbourhood that can see a fire from 15 km away, even from a match. We are looking at little machines: AI robots that clear the forest floor and new condensers that take water and spread it around or can fill the container.

Basically, we need best practices from Europe to propose, for all countries, very practical – not expensive – solutions to prevent the fires. If we prevent the fires, we've won the game. The main problem is when the fire starts.

And my slogan in Greece is: 'patriotism is not a political decision, not a political ideology; we have environmental patriotism'. That should be our slogan. To protect the environment is being patriotic.

Juan Carlos Girauta Vidal (PfE). – Señor presidente, yo creo que en este asunto se mezclan al menos tres factores.

Por una parte, está la negligencia de los que, desde sus puestos de gestión política, debían haber hecho más de lo que han hecho. En ese sentido, mi formación política ha presentado las oportunas acciones judiciales penales por las responsabilidades que se pudieran derivar.

Por otro lado, tenemos una multiplicación bastante inexplicable de incendiarios. Es decir, en el caso español, la mayoría de los incendios han sido provocados. Se ha detenido a más de cien personas por provocar incendios. Mientras el Gobierno, en sus comparecencias públicas, hablaba del cambio climático, no se dejaba de detener a provocadores de incendios.

En tercer lugar, yo creo que hay una cierta arrogancia por parte del ecologismo urbanita que cree que tiene mejores soluciones que aquellas que, durante toda la vida, han aplicado los que desde el campo han procedido a protegerse de los fuegos creando cortafuegos, desbrozando o limpiando los montes, cosa que ahora pueden hacer con tantas dificultades burocráticas que, de hecho, no pueden hacerlo. Así que aprendamos de ellos.

Nora Junco García (ECR). – Señor presidente, el sur de Europa ha vuelto a arder: miles de hectáreas devastadas, familias evacuadas y la izquierda repitiendo el eslogan fácil de “es por el cambio climático”.

No es negacionismo. Hemos tenido —por lo menos en España— el invierno y la primavera más lluviosos en años. El problema no es el clima, es la incompetencia política.

Con fondos europeos disponibles para prevención seguimos viendo montes sin limpiar, cortafuegos inexistentes y brigadas mal organizadas. Mientras tanto, antes que asumir su responsabilidad, las Administraciones prefieren hablar de la Agenda 2030 y del cambio climático.

Solo un dato: en España se destina un 48 % menos a prevención que hace siete años. Esto pone de manifiesto una falta de visión estratégica y una gestión ineficaz tanto del Gobierno central como de los Gobiernos autonómicos en materia forestal.

¿Hablamos de cambio climático o de cambio propagandístico? Se trata solo de destinar fondos con inteligencia: fortalecer la prevención implica menos extensiones quemadas, menos costes en extinción y, sobre todo, menos tragedias.

Los incendios no se combaten con ideología, sino con gestión y prevención. Necesitamos más gestión y menos propaganda.

Marjan Šarec (Renew). – Gospod predsednik. Spoštovani, julija smo imeli razpravo o temi požarov v naravi in danes na pragu jeseni ugotavljamo, da nam je narava spet pokazala zobe. Ne gre vedno samo za naravo, temveč se v vsaki družbi najdejo posamezniki, ki požare tudi podtikajo.

A ne glede na izvor požarov so posledice enake. Uničeni hektarji površin, premoženje ljudi in, kar je nepopravljivo, izgubljena življenja. Vendarle je treba povedati, da evropski mehanizem dobro deluje, prav tako solidarnost med državami.

Požari pa ne izbirajo med državami članicami in tistimi, ki to še niso. Omenil bom Črno goro, ker sem tam požare spremljal od blizu, in moram povedati, da je bila pomoč EU zelo učinkovita. V prihodnje moramo takšnim državam pomagati pri izgradnji še bolj učinkovitega sistema zaščite in reševanja, kar pa ni povezano samo s finančnimi sredstvi, temveč vključuje tudi naše znanje in izkušnje.

Slovenija, ki ima sama dober sistem, to že izvaja. Seveda je najboljše zagotoviti preventivo, a ko do požarov pride, je treba imeti zagotovljen dobro delujoč sistem same države, hkrati pa hitro pomoč Evropske unije na zaprosilo prizadete države.

(Govornik se je odločil odgovoriti na vprašanje, postavljeno z dvigom modrega kartončka)

Sunčana Glavak (PPE), pitanje koje je podizanjem plave kartice postavio. – Kolega Šarec, spomenuli ste Crnu Goru. Hvala lijepa što ste bili tamo.

Ja bih željela podsjetiti da je Republika Hrvatska pomagala Crnoj Gori, da je Republika Hrvatska jedan od sjajnih primjera na razini Europske unije kako se ulaže u prevenciju, kako se ulaže u sustav zaštite, prije svega civilne zaštite. 634 milijuna eura je Republika Hrvatska uložila.

Dakle, ja mislim da bismo trebali poslati poruku i zemljama članicama jer postoji veliki nesrazmjer volje njihovih vlada na koji način će pomoći u sprječavanju šumskih požara, jednako tako i poplava. Solidarnost nam je potrebna, jačanje rescEU flote, prevencija i jačanje otpornosti. Mislim da smo tu suglasni.

Marjan Šarec (Renew), odgovor na vprašanje, postavljeno z dvigom modrega kartončka. – Seveda se strinjam z vami. Jaz sem omenil svojo državo kot primer, ki pomaga državi pri izgradnji sistema, se pravi tudi pri formalnopravnih zadevah, in načina organiziranja same zaščite in reševanja kot sistema. Seveda se pa strinjam z vami, da je tudi Hrvaška pomagala in seveda tudi mnoge druge države in zagotovo ni nikoli tako dobro, da ne bi moglo biti boljše.

Estrella Galán (The Left). – Señor presidente, señora comisaria, llegamos a este pleno con el corazón encogido, un millón de hectáreas arrasadas por el fuego en toda Europa y en España, en particular, pues ha sido el país más afectado. Las tierras de Galicia, de Castilla y León, de Extremadura, han vivido los peores momentos de la última historia. Detrás de este desastre hay personas que lo han perdido todo y profesionales exhaustos, en condiciones precarias, jugándose la vida para protegernos. Desde aquí quiero dar un abrazo y todo nuestro reconocimiento a todos los bomberos y bomberas y también a las familias afectadas.

Quiero aprovechar para preguntar a los diputados del Partido Popular, ¿hasta cuándo van a seguir atados al negacionismo de la extrema derecha? Tienen el mayor poder territorial en nuestro país. Y con esto se puede proteger a la gente y, en lugar de ofrecer seguridad, están desinvirtiendo en protección, están compitiendo con VOX en desacreditar el consenso científico. ¿Cuántos desastres naturales más hacen falta para que se tomen en serio el cambio climático?

La negligencia cuesta vidas: ya lo hemos visto en Valencia y ahora lo estamos viendo —lo hemos visto— en media España. Dejen de recortar y privatizar servicios públicos básicos y fundamentales. Dignifiquen a los profesionales que se juegan la vida apagando incendios y, además, velan por nuestra seguridad, antes de que arda lo que nos queda de país.

Željana Zovko (PPE). – Mr President, I will just reply to the previous speaker. I'm very proud that, in 2017, the European People's Party was the leader in adopting the rescue mechanism when everybody else in this room was against it. I was fighting, together with my colleague Elisabetta Gardini, to get this budget that would be EUR 100 million at the EU level. Now Croatian firefighters are fighting so that all firefighters in the European Union are together. As an intergroup we are fighting for them.

They recently organised themselves into the European Federation of Firefighters. We have to help these people to prepare them for the future fires. So no more demagogic speeches – we have to give firefighters the means, the money and the means for civil protection, for solidarity and the emergency aid reserve, for the early warning system and for the equipment.

So I'm saying this in English for everybody else to understand me: don't play with people's lives. We have to improve conditions for firefighters in the European Union. The European People's Party was very proud to have the rescue mechanism that helped, even in the Covid times, and that is helping to protect all European citizens to be saved wherever they are.

Claire Fita (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, en moins de 24 heures, un mort, plus d'une cinquantaine de maisons détruites, 16 000 hectares de cultures, et notamment des vignes, ravagés, c'est une partie du lourd bilan qu'a subi le département de l'Aude, en Occitanie. Mais ce drame n'est pas isolé. Le sud de l'Europe, et en particulier le pourtour méditerranéen, de l'Espagne à la Grèce, fait face aux mêmes dévastations, aux mêmes angoisses des populations et aux mêmes conséquences économiques.

Il est donc crucial que nos politiques européennes intègrent absolument cette spécificité méditerranéenne, tant en matière de sécurité civile, pour faire face aux incendies, qu'en matière de politique agricole. En clair, reconnaître la spécificité méditerranéenne, c'est admettre que notre agriculture est aussi un véritable bouclier contre les flammes. Il est temps de lui donner la place qu'elle mérite.

Quand les flammes avancent, ce sont nos choix politiques qui déterminent si la terre brûle ou si elle résiste.

Georg Mayer (PfE). – Herr Präsident, geschätzte Kollegen! Die Waldbrände dieser Saison – ich glaube, die zeigen eines ganz deutlich: Katastrophenschutz ist nationale Aufgabe, und das muss er auch bleiben, denke ich. Mitgliedstaaten und die Menschen vor Ort kennen die Gegebenheiten weitaus besser und daher natürlich auch den Umgang mit der Gefahr.

Subsidiarität wahren: Das ist einmal mehr die Devise, die wir uns auf unsere Fahnen schreiben sollten. Brüssel nutzt Krisen ja ganz gerne für mehr Macht und teure überbürokratisierte Programme. Milliarden verschwinden dann in dunklen Kanälen, während den Helfern vor Ort die Ausrüstung fehlt.

Solidarität: Ja, freiwillig, ohne EU-Zwang. Klimamodelle sind unterschiedlich groß; lokale Präventionen verlangen verschiedene Zugänge. Mehr Mittel in die Mitgliedstaaten und nicht nach Brüssel, das ist die Devise.

Anna Zalewska (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! W płonących lasach giną ludzie, giną zwierzęta, niknie bioróżnorodność, są ogromne straty dla majątków ludzkich i gospodarki. Ale również cierpi cel klimatyczny, o którym Państwo chcą tutaj dyskutować, to znaczy pochłanianie dwutlenku węgla. I informacja dla tych, którzy chcą zwiększać cel do 90% – nie zrealizujemy celu do 2030 r.

Czego potrzebują lasy? Lasy potrzebują człowieka, gospodarki leśnej, pieniędzy, monitoringu, dobrych systemów przeciwpożarowych, wreszcie systemów hydrologicznych. Nie można postawić, bez głębokiej analizy, na określone środki, wydatkować tych środków. Zresztą Trybunał Obrachunkowy upomina Komisję Europejską, że nie ma żadnych dowodów, że te środki są właściwie wydatkowane. Potrzebne są bardzo szczegółowe analizy państw członkowskich, między innymi po to, żeby pokazać, kto za te płonące lasy odpowiada.

Emma Wiesner (Renew). – Mr President, here we go again. We have had another summer with a record of forest and wildfires: almost 1 million hectares have burned this year. At the same time, cities like Stockholm have faced severe water shortages. And this week, more regions in Sweden are hit by devastating floods.

New studies from this summer also shows that the Gulf Stream might collapse within our lifetime. Climate change is here and now, but where is the political response? Where is the climate leadership? What are we doing in this House? We can't even agree on a 2040 target – a new climate target in between two existing targets. We don't even have the leadership for that.

So I'm turning to you, EPP, the conservative group of this House: my very cynical conclusion is that with the current climate leadership, the Paris Agreement would not be possible today. We do not have enough leadership. But I am looking to you, EPP. You can change this. Please show us leadership. Don't hesitate. Don't join forces with the climate sceptics. You say it's expensive. But this change – this climate change – that is what will be expensive and that is what will ruin us. Please show us the leadership we need.

Giuseppe Antoci (The Left). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, quest'estate la Sicilia è stata la regione d'Italia più colpita dagli incendi, con decine di migliaia di interventi dei vigili del fuoco e vaste aree agricole e forestali andate in fumo.

In Sardegna, dove si registrano in media 2 500 roghi l'anno, a inizio settembre se ne sono contati ben 26 in un solo giorno, con Canadair ed elicotteri in azione.

Il 2025 è già record per l'Europa in termini di ettari bruciati, un dramma che colpisce con particolare violenza le regioni del Mediterraneo. A pagarne il prezzo più alto sono cittadini, agricoltori e comunità locali, ma a bruciare insieme ai boschi è anche la fiducia nelle istituzioni, soffocata da inefficienze e ritardi.

Per questo l'Europa deve rafforzare la prevenzione e rendere più efficace l'allerta precoce, potenziare la flotta rescEU con basi permanenti nelle regioni del Sud e investire nella riforestazione delle aree distrutte, nella formazione e nel welfare del personale antincendio.

La credibilità dell'Unione si misura anche con la capacità di proteggere le sue terre fragili e i suoi cittadini.

Δημήτρης Τσιόδρας (PPE). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κυρία Επίτροπε, οι πυρκαγιές, οι πλημμύρες και η ξηρασία δυστυχώς είναι η νέα μας πραγματικότητα. Δεν είναι πια απειλές του μέλλοντος. Η κλιματική κρίση είναι εδώ. Η πατρίδα μου η Ελλάδα και οι μεσογειακές χώρες βιώνουμε αυτά τα φαινόμενα με αυξανόμενη ένταση και κόστος. Γι' αυτόν τον λόγο, οφείλουμε να δώσουμε ακόμη περισσότερη έμφαση στην πρόληψη και την έγκαιρη προειδοποίηση. Χρειαζόμαστε μια πραγματική Ένωση ετοιμότητας, με συντονισμό σε ευρωπαϊκό και εθνικό επίπεδο, ενισχυμένη χρηματοδότηση στα πλαίσια του επόμενου επταετούς προϋπολογισμού της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και ενίσχυση του μηχανισμού RescEu, ταχύτερη πρόσβαση στο Ταμείο Αλληλεγγύης της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης μετά από πυρκαγιές και πλημμύρες, δημιουργία ευρωπαϊκής πλατφόρμας έγκαιρης προειδοποίησης με αξιοποίηση της τεχνητής νοημοσύνης, συντονισμένες δράσεις για τη βελτίωση της ανθεκτικότητας των πόλεων και την ενίσχυση των πληγεισών περιοχών. Η πρόληψη, η προετοιμασία και η αλληλεγγύη είναι απαραίτητοι όροι για την αντιμετώπιση των συνεπειών της κλιματικής κρίσης.

Eric Sargiacomo (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, nos forêts brûlent et nous regardons ailleurs. Mes pensées vont aux familles qui ont perdu un proche, aux habitants des régions touchées par les graves incendies de cet été. Espagne, Portugal, Grèce, France, c'est tout notre continent qui brûle, plus d'un million d'hectares.

Dans cette assemblée, nous avons une responsabilité, c'est celle de faire advenir un système européen de suivi des forêts pour mieux anticiper les différents périls que le changement climatique leur fait courir. La Commission européenne a fait une proposition ambitieuse en la matière afin de développer des coopérations entre les États membres et l'Union européenne.

Mais, aujourd'hui, j'entends sur les bancs de la droite, Messieurs les PPE, et de l'extrême droite des voix qui s'opposent à ce projet. Je le dis avec gravité, ce n'est pas entendable. Arrêtons les larmes de crocodile. Les forêts sont aussi une compétence européenne. Que direz-vous à vos enfants qui vous demanderont pourquoi vous n'avez pas agi?

Alors, en tant que corapporteur de ce règlement, j'appelle l'ensemble des groupes à la responsabilité pour trouver un chemin et mettre en place ce système européen de suivi des forêts.

Julien Sanchez (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, mes chers collègues, vous nous proposez aujourd'hui un débat sur les incendies dévastateurs de cet été en Europe et notamment dans ma région, dans l'Aude. Je pourrais me contenter de penser aux victimes et saluer l'action des secours, puis m'en aller. Mais je ne suis pas là pour ça. Je suis là pour faire avancer les choses, et ces incendies posent plusieurs problèmes que je vais aborder.

D'abord, ils montrent encore une fois que le meilleur rempart face aux incendies est la vigne. Or, par vos politiques criminelles, anti-agriculture, anti-viticulture, par tous ces arrachages que vous encouragez, vous participez aussi à augmenter l'ampleur de ces incendies dévastateurs. Si vous voulez vraiment améliorer la situation, aidez nos vignerons, soutenez le maintien et le développement de l'agriculture et de la viticulture sur ces terres magnifiques.

Ensuite, je voudrais dénoncer la responsabilité d'Emmanuel Macron et de ses gouvernements, qui avaient promis le renouvellement et même l'extension de la flotte de Canadairs. Promesse hélas non tenue. Comment comprendre que ces gouvernants évoquent un réchauffement climatique, des risques de plus en plus prégnants et, dans le même temps, ne prévoient pas les moyens de lutte à la hauteur des enjeux? Nos ruraux, nos paysages sont-ils pour eux une variable d'ajustement?

Enfin, je ne peux terminer sans saluer l'action des pompiers: plus de 2 000 mobilisés en quelques heures. Quel courage, quel dévouement! Là aussi, l'Europe veut tuer ce qui fonctionne, puisque votre directive européenne sur le temps de travail met directement en danger le statut de sapeur-pompier volontaire, alors même que le volontariat représente près de 80 % des effectifs en France. Comment pouvez-vous imposer une telle aberration aux peuples d'Europe?

Dans ce domaine, les pyromanes, c'est aussi vous et cela doit cesser maintenant. Les sinistrés vous regardent.

Pascal Arimont (PPE). – Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident, sehr geehrte Frau Kommissarin, sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir debattieren jedes Jahr immer wieder über Waldbrände. Lasst uns vielleicht auch über diejenigen reden, die diese Waldbrände löschen: unsere Feuerwehrleute, insbesondere die vielen Freiwilligen. Sie verdienen nicht nur unseren Respekt, sondern auch konkrete Unterstützung. Sie brauchen Strategien, die sich in der Praxis umsetzen lassen, die ihnen den Einsatz erleichtern und nicht erschweren.

Zwei Punkte, auf die ich hinweisen möchte: Das eine ist das Sozialstatut der vielen freiwilligen Feuerwehrleute; es darf kein Hindernis sein. Wer freiwillig unser Leben schützt, darf dadurch aufgrund der Regeln der Sozialversicherung keine finanziellen Nachteile haben.

Zweiter Punkt – ein schwieriges Wort: Löschschlauchkupplungen. Ein konkretes Beispiel: Während die belgischen Feuerwehrleute DSP-Kupplungen des Guillemin-Systems verwenden, ist in Deutschland und in den Niederlanden das sogenannte Storz-System Standard, und das sind direkte Nachbarländer. Das führt dazu, dass bei gemeinsamen Einsätzen wertvolle Zeit verloren geht, und das kann Leben kosten.

Schlussfolgerung: Katastrophenschutz muss europäischer gedacht werden als je zuvor. Lassen Sie uns gemeinsam daran arbeiten!

César Luena (S&D). – Señor presidente, la comisaria ha dicho que los incendios de este verano son consecuencia directa del calentamiento del Mediterráneo. Gracias por decirlo. Y hago una reflexión: no es hora de reducir el Pacto Verde Europeo, sino que es hora de reforzarlo. Lo estamos escuchando. Por tanto, más Pacto y menos negacionismo.

Sobre los fondos, comisaria, necesitamos más fondos de políticas medioambientales, pero el marco financiero no va por ese camino.

Respecto a la Ley de Restauración —hemos hablado tanto en esta Cámara sobre la Ley de Restauración de la Naturaleza—, hay que acelerar su aplicación en los Estados miembros.

Y, por cierto, están pulverizando la legislación de seguimiento forestal. Respecto a la política forestal, he oído al señor De la Hoz que tiene que ser comunitaria. Espero que sí, porque luego suelen estar en contra.

Quiero señalar algunas responsabilidades de la derecha y de la extrema derecha con estos incendios, aquí, por su negacionismo destructivo. Pero también en los Estados miembros, porque recortan y desprecian las políticas forestales: lo han hecho en Galicia, lo han hecho en Extremadura… Señor De la Hoz, lo han hecho en Castilla y León, donde han reducido el 90 % desde 2009 en políticas de prevención y en políticas forestales. Por tanto, más pactos y menos negacionismo.

France Jamet (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, la technocratie bruxelloise tue. En s'acharnant sur notre monde paysan, elle nous a privés de moyens pour lutter efficacement et préventivement contre les incendies. En 1981, nous avions 13 millions de moutons qui débroussaillaient gratuitement nos territoires 12 heures par jour et 365 jours par an. Aujourd'hui, nous en avons 6 millions. Nous avons perdu 7 millions de débroussailleurs qui, préventivement, entretenaient nos territoires et nos zones à risque.

De 65 000 éleveurs, nous sommes passés à 35 000. Nous avons perdu 30 000 vigies permanentes, non-stop, sur le terrain. Sans parler du statut particulier des sapeurs-pompiers volontaires que l'Union européenne remet en cause et des moyens financiers dont elle nous prive pour renouveler notre flotte de Canadairs.

Déprise agricole, désertification rurale, austérité budgétaire, déconnexion de la réalité – la technocratie bruxelloise tue.

Carmen Crespo Díaz (PPE). – Señor presidente, en primer lugar, lamento los fallecidos y envío mi apoyo a todos los equipos de extinción.

Necesitamos más rescEU y más coordinación, pero también más ayudas rápidas a los damnificados —incluidos agricultores y ganaderos— y cambiar la política de la estrategia forestal europea. Hay que luchar contra el cambio climático, claro que sí. Pero ¿cómo? Cada vez hay más científicos que sostienen que las zonas forestales sobreprotegidas están abandonadas y, tarde o temprano, son pasto de las llamas. Por lo tanto: más pastoreo conducido, más ganadería, más agricultura y más medios para el mundo rural, que no se vea despoblado.

Las cubiertas vegetales no pueden estar todo el año, y es un error que, en nuestro país, solo se hayan ejecutado 221 millones del Mecanismo de Recuperación y Resiliencia cuando Portugal ya va por 615 en prevención de incendios. Esto es un gran error, no sigamos perdiendo oportunidades.

Quiero lamentar el populismo y el aprovechamiento que se hace de las tragedias humanas porque vienen unas elecciones. ¿A las comunidades les faltaban medios en algún momento? Por supuesto que sí, pero, sobre todo, a los ciudadanos. Así que más rigor y más trabajo entre todos.

Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). – Señor presidente, quiero comenzar expresando mi apoyo a todos los damnificados por los incendios en Europa y, en especial, en mi tierra, en Galicia.

El sur de Europa ha sufrido incendios sin precedentes, de gran intensidad y velocidad impredecibles y, según los expertos, prácticamente fuera de la capacidad de extinción humana. Frente al relato falso que algunos pretenden dar, lo cierto es que los medios en la Xunta de Galicia —con su presidente, Alfonso Rueda, al frente— trabajaron sin descanso y de manera eficaz en la lucha contra el fuego. Pero la situación, también climatológica, fue tan extraordinaria que incluso uno de los mejores servicios de extinción de incendios de Europa tuvo muchas dificultades para contener el avance de las llamas.

El nuevo contexto climático nos exige seguir aprendiendo y adaptarnos para el futuro. Por supuesto, hay que mejorar la prevención —por cierto, la Xunta de Galicia gasta este año más de 50 millones de euros solo en prevención— pero también debemos ser capaces de reaccionar con rapidez y eficacia.

Algunas conclusiones, señora comisaria, si me permite: los fondos europeos deben garantizar un rural con futuro y evitar la despoblación, el Mecanismo de Protección Civil de la Unión debe ser más ágil en su funcionamiento, debemos reforzar el instrumento rescEU y hemos de fortalecer los códigos penales contra los incendiarios.

Gracias a quienes ayudaron a la extinción, incluyendo los medios europeos, y mi rechazo más profundo a quienes quieren aprovechar una catástrofe como esta para sacar rédito político y hacer barullo.

(El orador acepta responder a una pregunta formulada con arreglo al procedimiento de la “tarjeta azul”)

Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE), Pergunta segundo o procedimento “cartão azul”. – Senhor Millán Mon, vive em Madrid, não é verdade? Vive em Madrid? Não sei, parece que vive em Madrid. Nota-se que não está a par do dia a dia das políticas da Junta da Galiza. Nota-se muito, demais, porque está totalmente alheio à realidade do país.

Leu o relatório do Tribunal de Contas Europeu que afirma que se reduziu precisamente a política preventiva do Governo galego presidido pelo senhor Rueda? Diga-me se o leu, porque creio que está a indicar dados totalmente erróneos.

Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE), respuesta de “tarjeta azul”. – Señoría, tuvo usted todo el mes de agosto. No sé si estuvo allí, si estaba usted en Bruselas o si estuvo en otros países: en Chile, en Guatemala o en Gaza. ¿Dónde estaba usted? Yo sí estaba allí, en la provincia de Pontevedra, y estuve en Santiago en el mes de agosto. No se preocupe tanto por dónde estoy yo; yo estoy trabajando siempre, y ocupándome de Galicia.

La extinción es una prioridad para el presidente Rueda, que este año se está gastando más de 50 millones de euros, incluyendo también —porque es la gestión ordinaria de los fondos— fondos europeos con esa finalidad. Y si usted ha escuchado el debate esta mañana, sabrá el importante número de iniciativas del señor Rueda para seguir luchando contra los incendios.

Más de 3 000 profesionales estuvieron apagando los incendios. No hubo falta de medios, ni de prevención, ni de fondos. Son unos incendios que se denominan de sexta generación, extraordinarios, a los que se ha tenido que hacer frente.

Sérgio Humberto (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, cara Comissária, caros colegas, antes de mais, agradecer a todos os que arriscam a vida a combater os incêndios e os fogos. Não esquecemos também as vítimas mortais e não esquecemos aqueles que perderam tudo.

Este verão de 2025 foi o mais quente no meu país, Portugal, nos últimos 94 anos — sinal claro e inegável das alterações climáticas. Os incêndios no sul da Europa são cada vez mais devastadores: florestas destruídas, comunidades afetadas, ecossistemas fragilizados.

Até agosto, mais de 1 milhão de hectares arderam na Europa. A União Europeia precisa de agir antes da catástrofe. O rescEU não pode continuar a ser temporário; precisamos de uma frota permanente, em especial nos países mais fustigados.

É hora de mudar, é hora de uma política florestal europeia que proteja as nossas vidas, as nossas florestas e o nosso futuro.

(O orador aceita responder a uma pergunta “cartão azul”)

Bruno Gonçalves (S&D), Pergunta segundo o procedimento “cartão azul”. – (início da intervenção com o microfone desligado) … acompanhá-lo nos seus pedidos, nas suas exigências, a bem dos destinos nacionais.

Mas, este ano, arderam em Portugal cerca de 2,35 % do nosso território nacional. São mais de 200 000 hectares, bem acima do dobro da média dos últimos dez anos.

Permita-me colocar-lhe uma questão que inquieta os portugueses e que me inquieta certamente a mim: por que razão é que o Governo de Portugal decidiu sucessivamente adiar o pedido de apoio do Mecanismo Europeu de Proteção Civil? Porque a imagem que passa é de um governo que estava mais preocupado com a cobertura televisiva de um evento partidário do que em salvar o país atempadamente.

Sérgio Humberto (PPE), Resposta segundo o procedimento “cartão azul”. – Antes de mais, Senhor Deputado Bruno Gonçalves, quanto a estas políticas florestais, nós não podemos fazer política com catástrofes, com perda de vidas e com perdas materiais para as pessoas. Estamos a falar de um flagelo.

Quanto à festa do Pontal, aquilo que lhe posso dizer é que, pela primeira vez, tivemos um primeiro-ministro em agosto a dar a cara, a responsabilizar-se e a estar preocupado com tudo aquilo que estava a acontecer em Portugal.

As políticas não mudam de um momento para o outro; têm de ser planeadas. Por exemplo, quando o Partido Socialista esteve, durante oito anos e meio, a governar o país, anulou a aquisição dos Canadair para combate a incêndios — este é um dos exemplos que têm de ser desenvolvidos e planeados para não acontecerem catástrofes como aconteceu este ano.

Γεώργιος Αυτιάς (PPE). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κυρία Επίτροπε, οι πυρκαγιές είναι πραγματική μάστιγα για τις χώρες του Νότου. Ζούμε απίστευτες καταστάσεις από την Πορτογαλία έως την Ελλάδα. Γι' αυτό, λοιπόν, πρέπει να είμαστε ρεαλιστές. Τις επόμενες ημέρες, στην Επιτροπή Οικονομικής και Νομισματικής Πολιτικής του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου, της οποίας είμαι μέλος, καταθέτω πρόταση για τη δημιουργία ενός κεντρικού οργάνου κατάσβεσης πυρκαγιών, γιατί επί του παρόντος εναπόκειται στην ευσπλαχνία του εκάστοτε πρωθυπουργού, αν θα στείλει αεροπλάνα. Πρόκειται για ένα κεντρικό όργανο που θα εδρεύει στις χώρες του Νότου. Επίσης, δεν αρκεί αυτό μόνο, το ίδιο όργανο θα πρέπει να καταγράφει και τις ζημιές, ώστε εντός 12 ημερών, να μπορεί να αποζημιώνει όλους όσοι έχουν καταστραφεί. Κύριε Πρόεδρε, έχετε ζήσει τις πυρκαγιές στη χώρα σας και ξέρω πόσο αγώνα έχετε κάνει, όπως και οι υπόλοιποι συνάδελφοι. Πρέπει να δράσουμε τώρα, γιατί η φωτιά είναι ό, τι χειρότερο για τα κράτη μας.

Daniel Buda (PPE). – Domnule președinte, stimați colegi, în ultimele luni, focul a transformat în cenușă aproape un milion de hectare de teren agricol și păduri în Uniunea Europeană. În Spania, în doar 10 zile, focul a mistuit peste 300 de mii de hectare. Portugalia se confruntă cu peste 180 000 de hectare, în timp ce în România unele recolte ar putea fi cu 30 % mai mici comparativ cu anul trecut, din cauza secetei și a focurilor.

Nu vorbim doar despre terenuri și păduri arse, vorbim despre destine, familii și hrana noastră cea de zi cu zi. Avem nevoie de o Uniune Europeană care să răspundă prin acțiuni concrete, sprijin pentru fermieri și o politică agricolă comună mai puternică. Doamnă comisar, am auzit prea puțin vorbindu-se despre ceea ce ar trebui să fie o rezervă europeană de apă, care trebuie să fie scutul nostru împotriva secetei la nivelul fiecărui stat membru. Acest lucru se poate face doar cu ajutorul fondurilor europene.

În același timp, trebuie să înțelegem că pădurile arse înseamnă pierderi ireparabile pentru biodiversitate și pentru viitorul generațiilor următoare. Reconstrucția lor trebuie să devină o prioritate. Nu în ultimul rând, în încheiere, mulțumesc pompierilor europeni, inclusiv celor români, care au mers să sprijine alte state membre în lupta cu flăcările.

Lena Düpont (PPE). – Mr President, before the summer recess, we already had a debate and the outlook was gloomy even then. The reality now is that we have faced a devastating wildfire season, and the scale and intensity were as bad as expected.

So let me, first of all, thank all the firemen and women that have done the almost impossible, that have been fighting day and night against the odds. We – the European Union, the people of the European Union – owe you for that.

Nevertheless, a few messages cannot be repeated and stressed enough. This is indeed European solidarity in action, so we need to make it easier. We need to scale up on readiness and deployability. We need to scale down on administrative procedures and ease the financing. We need to enlarge the pool of experts and the equipment.

Everyone has a role to play. Local, regional and European measures for preparedness and prevention – especially if there is European money connected to that – need to go hand in hand. The division of competences and the territorial organisation of Member States can never – and I repeat, can never – be an excuse to not protect the people. It's the central task of any government to do so.

European foresight is key, so you need to improve the information exchange there. But it will only help if the information we provide is taken into consideration on strategic and on operational levels.

And lastly, we need to protect our first responders, our firefighters, better than we are able to do now. It concerns their health, it concerns their working conditions, the statutes and so on and so forth.

So this is European solidarity in action.

Solicitudes incidentales de uso de la palabra (“catch the eye”)

Adrián Vázquez Lázara (PPE). – Señor presidente, ante una situación extraordinaria, sobre todo en mi región, en Galicia, ha habido una reacción extraordinaria, porque la lucha contra el fuego es una lucha colectiva de instituciones, de por supuesto nuestros funcionarios, nuestros bomberos, nuestras bomberas y, sobre todo, de nuestra ciudadanía, que han respondido como un pueblo unido. Pero debemos hacer más: la capacidad de reacción frente a esas emergencias tiene que mejorar. Tenemos que trabajar hacia una neutralidad climática por ley, como, por cierto, ha hecho la Xunta de Galicia como primera comunidad autónoma en España; crear bases permanentes de las UME en aquellas regiones que más lo necesiten, como también ha pedido la Xunta de Galicia. Y, en ese sentido, también exigir mayor prevención a la Comisión Europea. Y, comisaria, le pido que en ese sentido reabran la Directiva relativa a la protección del medio ambiente mediante el Derecho penal. Tenemos que ser mucho más severos con aquellos que son reincidentes en los delitos medioambientales.

Y, para terminar, permítanme simplemente dirigirme a la señora Miranda. Señora Miranda, ya está bien. Estamos cansados de que usted venga a esta Cámara a intoxicar y a emitir bulos. Ya está bien de que usted solo venga aquí a restar. Le propongo que, por una vez en la vida, suba a ese atril y sume y haga una propuesta en vez de solo criticar. Y, por eso, también le digo que estoy tan orgulloso de que haya un Gobierno de la Xunta de Galicia con profesionales, con gente responsable, y no con gente como usted.

PRÉSIDENCE: YOUNOUS OMARJEE

Vice-Président

Sunčana Glavak (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, prije svega dozvolite na početku da zahvalim svim vatrogascima, pilotima i pripadnicima civilne zaštite na njihovom iznimnom doprinosu.

Svakako se slažem, kolegice i kolege, da moramo najprije pokazati solidarnost. Međutim, zaboravili smo spomenuti nešto tijekom ove cijele rasprave, a u proteklih pet godina, nažalost, u poplavama i požarima izgubili smo tri tisuće ljudskih života. To su životi, obitelji i zajednice koji nose teret katastrofa.

Kako možemo iskazati na drukčiji način solidarnost? Upravo kao odgovorni političari, kroz jačanje mehanizma rescEU, kroz jačanje flote europskih vatrogasnih timova, naravno da bi trebalo modernizirati sustave ranog upozoravanja, prije svega satelitima i dronovima, ulaganje u prevenciju i otpornost zajednica. Treba nam proaktivni pristup.

Učinke ekstremnih vremenskih događanja možemo smatrati i sistemskim rizikom, rekla bih. Naravno, prije svega moramo zaštititi ljudske živote i imovinu, ali moramo to shvatiti i kao prijetnju ekonomiji, financijama i društvenoj stabilnosti.

Nicolás González Casares (S&D). – Señor presidente, he visto arder Galicia otra vez y el Gobierno autónomo competente ha fallado estrepitosamente. Un fracaso sin paliativos que sigue hoy todavía con la ocultación de zonas quemadas como Pena Trevinca. El 13 de agosto decían que sobraban medios y el 14 pedían la asistencia al Ejército —que ya estaba allí— y todos los aviones de Europa.

A los populares les digo que su mimetismo con la extrema derecha no contribuye a resolver ese problema. Rechazar pactos contra el cambio climático contribuye a los incendios. No contratar a bomberos en condiciones dignas o contratarlos en agosto contribuye a los incendios. Cuando se incumplen leyes europeas y no se gestiona la Red Natura 2000, como pasa en Galicia, se contribuye a los incendios. Cuando ustedes proponen rebajar el presupuesto de la PAC, dañan al campo, favorecen la despoblación y contribuyen a los incendios. Y cuando tratan de engañar a la ciudadanía, diciendo que solo han ardido rocas y malezas, olvidando a las personas, como ha hecho el presidente Rueda, generan indignación y dañan a la democracia.

Rudi Kennes (The Left). – Voorzitter, ik wil natuurlijk ook in mijn naam alle brandweerlieden en iedereen die zich heeft ingezet voor de civiele bescherming en dergelijke, bedanken voor al hetgeen zij hebben gedaan tijdens de catastrofe van deze zomer. Velen van hen hebben immers een hoge prijs betaald, zelfs met hun leven.

Ik ben blij dat er nu veel wordt gezegd en beloofd, maar ik hoop ook dat er daadwerkelijk iets wordt ondernomen. Ik ben Belg, net zoals mevrouw de commissaris. Bij ons zijn er geen bosbranden geweest, maar enige tijd geleden hadden we wel overstromingen. Dat zijn ook natuurfenomenen. Er kunnen veel beloftes worden gedaan, maar ik zie in veel lidstaten dat hulpdiensten worden kapot bezuinigd.

Men moet zich realiseren dat het beschermen van burgers niet alleen met soldaten gebeurt, maar ook met hulpdiensten, met brandweerlieden en met mensen van de civiele bescherming. Ik hoop dan ook dat hier iets meer wordt nagedacht: minder blinde uitgaven voor legermaterieel en meer investeringen in hulpdiensten.

Elena Nevado del Campo (PPE). – Señor presidente, veo a muchos pirómanos políticos aquí, intentando sacar partido de las desgracias. Frente a los oportunistas que se querellan, frente a los “ecolojetas”, señora comisaria, lo que le pedimos desde el Partido Popular es más campo y más mundo rural, que es lo que están clamando los presidentes de nuestras comunidades autónomas desde el Partido Popular español, como Guardiola, Mañueco, Rueda o Moreno, quienes luchan por combatir las políticas que atentan contra el campo y contra nuestros pueblos.

Nuestra solidaridad con Portugal, Grecia, los Países Bajos, Italia y con tantos países devastados este verano por el fuego. Pero, sobre todo, nuestro agradecimiento a quienes nos han ayudado desde el corazón de Europa, y también desde nuestra tierra, para combatirlos.

Yo recordaría a los miembros del Partido Socialista que averigüen quién gestiona, por ejemplo, en Extremadura la prevención de incendios, porque son las diputaciones y las gobierna el propio Partido Socialista. Menos cerillas, no vaya a ser que se acaben quemando.

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, doamnă comisar, stimați colegi, încep prin a mulțumi pompierilor din țara mea și din toată Europa, care în această vară s-au confruntat poate cu cele mai multe și cele mai grave incendii, și-au expus viața. În țara mea, să știți că pompierii se află pe locul 1 la popularitate și încredere a populației, dar trebuie, doamnă comisar, să avem un program coerent la nivelul Uniunii Europene.

Am auzit colegi care spuneau că nu, nu, nu … subsidiaritate, în fiecare țară. Nu, este nevoie de bani și de resursă umană. Niciodată la un incendiu devastator nu se va putea descurca o singură țară. Trebuie să avem pe termen lung – și legat de statutul pompierilor, de statutul pompierilor voluntari, de dotarea pompierilor și sigur că trebuie să existe acest spirit de solidaritate. Pe asta s-a bazat Uniunea Europeană, pentru că nu putem să fim singuri într-o Uniune în care am pus împreună o piață comună, resursă umană, resurse bugetare.

De aceea ar trebui să acționăm și pe prevenție, pentru că prea multe cazuri de piromani au fost în această vară, dar și pe dotare și pe resurse bugetare.

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Señor presidente, queridos pueblos de Europa: con casco, valor y corazón, ustedes luchan sin condición. Cuando el bosque llora y arde, ahí están, firmes, sin alarde. El cambio climático no espera ni pregunta frontera o bandera. Pero ustedes sí responden unidos, por pueblos grandes y pequeños queridos. No pelean con palabras ni falsedades, sino con agua, coraje y redes. Contra incendios, tormentas, calor, ustedes luchan por nuestro honor. Por eso, hoy alzo la voz con respeto: gracias por cada paso discreto. Ustedes son héroes sin medalla, la fuerza que nunca falla.

(Fin des interventions à la demande)

Hadja Lahbib, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, Honourable Members, The fires of this summer reminds us of our shared responsibility, our shared vulnerability and the extraordinary strength of Europe banding together to help each other in hard times. This summer was a summer full of challenges, but also a summer full of solidarity. Our Union's Civil Protection Mechanism has been at the forefront of this solidarity.

This mechanism has been activated 18 times; it is getting overstretched. Firefighters from across Europe are standing shoulder to shoulder on the ground. EU-funded resources are deployed fast, saving lives and protecting communities. This is not talk – this is real action that people can see, touch and feel. It's Europe at its best. Now our task is clear: to turn these lessons into lasting resilience. Prevention and response are two sides of the same coin.

The Preparedness Union Strategy, strengthening rescue and the reforms of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism are not abstract plans. They are concrete shields for our people, our environment, our forests, our rural economy and our future, and we must prioritise more and smarter investment in wildfire prevention. A key part of this is managing and, where needed, transforming our landscapes so they are less flammable, slowing the spread of fires and becoming truly fire-resilient.

After so much destruction, EU funds must help restore the forests we have lost and prevent future catastrophic fires so that our natural heritage is rebuilt and safeguarded for generations to come. We must also invest more together – more together – in preparedness. Let us use this momentum to make sure that Europe is not just reacting to crises, but ready for whatever comes our way.

We count on your continued support in this very vital effort.

Marie Bjerre, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, honourable Members, Commissioner, thank you for inviting me to take part in such an important debate today.

Many Members stressed the severity of the wildfires and the fact that 2025 was the warmest summer recorded. I also noted several Members mentioning the fight against climate change and the need for an ambitious climate policy. That is exactly what the Danish Presidency is working for.

As I already mentioned, it is a top priority for us to reach an agreement on the 2040 climate target. We also agree with MEP Mr Liese from the EPP, who said that it is essential to have a climate policy on a global level. A 2040 climate target should work as a contribution to COP30 in Brazil, to push for an ambitious global climate policy.

On preparedness, we welcome the Preparedness Union Strategy that involves all sectors of society in an all-hazards approach. This is very important when preventing, preparing for, and responding to wildfires. And, as Mr Papandreou from S&D said, it is important to take also new technologies into account.

We look forward to further examining the proposals from the Commission in the Council and also to negotiating with Parliament.

Le Président. – Merci beaucoup, Madame la Ministre.

Le débat est clos.

Déclarations écrites (article 178)

Λουκάς Φουρλάς (PPE), γραπτώς. – Οι πρόσφατες καταστροφικές πυρκαγιές στην ορεινή Λεμεσό κατέδειξαν για ακόμη μια φορά ότι ο μηχανισμός πολιτικής προστασίας της ΕΕ, RescEU, αδυνατεί να ανταποκριθεί έγκαιρα και αποτελεσματικά σε καταστάσεις έκτακτης ανάγκης σε απομακρυσμένα κράτη μέλη όπως η Κύπρος. Η γεωγραφική απομόνωση του νησιού, σε συνδυασμό με την απουσία μόνιμης εγκατάστασης ενισχυμένων εναέριων και επίγειων πυροσβεστικών μέσων, οδηγεί σε απαράδεκτες καθυστερήσεις. Οι συνέπειες είναι τραγικές: ανθρώπινες ζωές χάνονται, το φυσικό περιβάλλον καταστρέφεται και η οικονομία πλήττεται ανεπανόρθωτα.

Είναι αδιανόητο ένα κράτος μέλος να μένει ανοχύρωτο απέναντι σε αυτήν την απειλή. Είναι ντροπή η αλληλεγγύη να περιορίζεται σε μεγάλα λόγια και κούφιες υποσχέσεις. Αλληλεγγύη σημαίνει παρουσία στην πρώτη γραμμή, με μόνιμα εναέρια και επίγεια μέσα, με έτοιμες δομές, όχι με “εκπρόθεσμες αποστολές βοήθειας”. Καλώ το Συμβούλιο και την Επιτροπή να αναλάβουν άμεσα ευθύνη. Να αναθεωρήσουν τον μηχανισμό RescEU, να ενισχύσουν την ετοιμότητα με μόνιμα μέσα στην Κύπρο και να διασφαλίσουν ότι κανένα κράτος μέλος δεν θα μείνει ξανά απροστάτευτο απέναντι σε αυτήν την καταστροφική απειλή.

Susana Solís Pérez (PPE), por escrito. – Este verano en España hemos asistido a una devastación sin precedentes: casi 400 000 hectáreas quemadas en incendios, la cifra más alta en un siglo. En mi tierra, Asturias, más de 5 000 hectáreas de monte han ardido en cuestión de días.

Los incendios de mañana se apagan hoy. Y, como lamentablemente hemos visto este verano y tantos otros, los incendios no conocen de fronteras. Es por eso que la política forestal debe convertirse en una auténtica política europea. Europa necesita más inversión en prevención de incendios, reforzar la cooperación transfronteriza y más ayudas rápidas para la reconstrucción de las zonas afectadas. Y, por supuesto, urge también reabrir la Directiva sobre delitos medioambientales para sancionar con dureza a quienes atentan contra nuestro patrimonio natural.

También ruego que no nos olvidemos de quienes mejor conocen y cuidan el campo: los ganaderos, los agricultores y la población rural. Un monte abandonado es combustible que multiplica el riesgo y la intensidad de los incendios. Necesitamos más pastoreo conducido, más ganadería, más agricultura y más medios para el mundo rural.

12. Euroopa Sotsiaalfond+ (ESF+): erimeetmed strateegiliste probleemide lahendamiseks (arutelu)

Le Président. – L'ordre du jour appelle à présent le débat sur le rapport de Marit Maij, au nom de la commission de l'emploi et des affaires sociales, sur la proposition de règlement du Parlement européen et du Conseil modifiant le règlement (UE) 2021/1057 instituant le Fonds social européen plus (FSE+) en ce qui concerne des mesures spécifiques visant à relever des défis stratégiques (COM(2025)0164 – C10-0064-2025 – 2025/0085(COD)) (A10-0122/2025).

J'attire votre attention sur le fait qu'il n'y aura qu'un tour de parole des orateurs des groupes politiques pour ce débat. Il n'y aura donc pas d'intervention à la demande ni de carton bleu.

Roxana Mînzatu, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, I want to congratulate the European Parliament for having reached an agreement with the Council on this proposal. This agreement allows Member States and regions to address critical strategic challenges in light of the geopolitical and economic situation, and this is how we aim to show our citizens that Europe delivers.

Investing in people is essential for advancing our strategic priorities and forms an integral part of the deal. We see major shortages in skills in crucial sectors like civil preparedness, defence, cybersecurity, new digital and green technologies, just to name a few sectors. Member States and regions should focus investments on the development of skills in these strategic areas for our own competitiveness and sovereignty.

This amendment underlines the role of the European Social Fund Plus as the Union's main fund for supporting employment and skills development. It will encourage Member States to use the European Social Fund Plus to reinforce investment in people. It will equip workers with the skills our industries are looking for to support our strategic defence, preparedness and decarbonisation efforts.

Member States and regions will benefit from an immediate financial injection to kickstart such investments and, in turn, this also helps to reduce social exclusion and prevents inequalities from growing further. This is how we aim to strengthen our competitiveness while remaining true to our social model.

The Commission welcomes the compromise that strengthens the respect for the rule of law to protect the EU budget, where funding between and within programmes is reallocated.

The Commission made a formal statement on the respect for rule of law and fundamental rights. The statement reiterates the Commission's firm commitment to ensure that these principles are upheld in the implementation of the funds, in line with the provisions in the Common Provisions Regulation, the Conditionality Regulation and the Mid-Term Review Regulation. This statement has been sent to the Parliament's services for inclusion in the verbatim record of this debate.

I thank you, and I am, of course, looking forward to the debate on this topic.

Marit Maij, rapporteur. – Mr President, dear colleagues, dear Executive Vice-President, dear Roxana, today we are discussing the already much discussed European Social Fund Plus. The ESF+ is the core fund for the European social agenda and is so important in achieving skills development, social inclusion and in ending, for example, child poverty. Just before the summer, the Commission proposed a revision of the ESF+ to address today's strategic challenges. What we see happening everywhere, when it comes to the Commission agenda, is what we also saw here. The revision paved the way to add the so-called competitiveness agenda by increasing the possibilities for large companies to receive funds, especially in the defence sector. This should happen in an urgent matter, something we still oppose.

As the S&D, we stand for a Europe that defends its external safety and, at the same time, ensures that we leave no one behind within our European common ground. The ESF+ does exactly that, making Europe more social, as we promised our voters. Together with the colleagues, during the negotiations with the Council and with the Commission, we achieved great successes in this matter. We ensured that the money that will be allocated for the defence industry will be for skills development in dual-use, and ensuring that people possess the right skills to have a place in our society. We also ensure that smaller beneficiaries should have a priority in access to the funding, ensuring that our civil society can still access the funding. I want to thank not only the shadow rapporteurs, but also the Council for ensuring this good achievement.

On the rule of law. As the Commissioner already mentioned, we ensure that all funding that could possibly be reprogrammed to the new programmes will be checked by the rule of law mechanism, the Common Provisions Regulation and the horizontal enabling conditions. We have it in black and white from the whole College of Commissioners that they will do so, and we will hold them accountable. For this, the Executive Vice-Presidents Mînzatu and Fitto take the responsibility.

Let me make one thing clear: when the rule of law is not respected, we cannot accept showing any flexibility. So far, we have managed to safeguard the main mission of the ESF+, supporting people and children in the most vulnerable situations, and supporting smaller beneficiaries in civil society. What we want for the future of the ESF+ is clear. It must be said that what we have seen for now is worrying. The ESF+ should be a separate, independent fund with a dedicated budget. The aim of the fund should always be to help people – to help people find a place in the labour market and to to promote social inclusion. It should be a fund that has a clear objective and that ensures that no one is left behind, that has earmarked funding for specific objectives, like the Child Guarantee, like the Youth Guarantee, for the most deprived and, of course, to support the much-needed skills development. I am ready to fight for the ESF to be of meaning for the coming period in the future of Europe, because we cannot have a European Union without a strong social foundation. The social foundation is also the security that we have in Europe.

Urmas Paet, rapporteur for the opinion of the SEDE Committee. – Mr President, dear colleagues, Europe faces unprecedented strategic challenges. Our security and resilience depend not only on political will, but on the ability to make funds quickly and efficiently available for defence, training and critical industries.

Bureaucracy cannot slow down Europe's response to evolving threats.

The amendment to the ESF+ provides exactly this flexibility. It allows resources to be redirected swiftly to strategic priorities, supporting defence-related skills, innovation and resilience across the Union.

In particular, the report foresees that the security of our eastern borders should benefit from these measures. The aim is to ensure that resources are deployed where they are most needed, reinforcing Europe's preparedness and resilience in a rapidly changing geopolitical environment.

The credibility and security of Europe depend on making our funds work as fast and flexibly as our ambitions and needs demand.

Jean-Marc Germain, rapporteur pour avis de la commission BUDG. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, Madame la Commissaire, vous savez combien le groupe S&D est attaché au Fonds social européen. C'est l'âme sociale de l'Europe et nous nous battrons pour qu'elle ne disparaisse pas dans le prochain budget pluriannuel.

Nous approuvons la possibilité offerte de redéploiement pour répondre aux nouveaux enjeux. Mais autoriser la Hongrie à en profiter pour récupérer les fonds bloqués pour non-respect de l'état de droit est incompréhensible et, je vous le dis, même choquant. La Hongrie, c'est la mise sous coupe, par le pouvoir central, de la presse, des syndicats et des ONG, sous prétexte de se protéger contre les ingérences étrangères. C'est la remise en cause de l'indépendance de la justice, pour laisser le champ libre à la corruption. C'est l'interdiction de manifester, comme on l'a vu avec la Gay Pride.

En trilogue, vous avez pris l'engagement d'assurer le maintien de l'état de droit dans l'évaluation de toute demande d'amendement des programmes. Cela ne suffit pas. Vous devez prendre ici l'engagement que pas un euro des fonds gelés ne sera redirigé vers la Hongrie tant que perdure la violation de nos principes les plus fondamentaux. La main de l'Europe ne doit pas trembler quand il s'agit de faire respecter l'état de droit par l'un de ses membres.

Sandro Gozi, rapporteur pour avis de la commission REGI. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, défense, décarbonation, lutte contre les inégalités sociales, protection de notre frontière orientale, ce sont là quatre de nos grandes priorités pour une union de la défense, que nous devons bâtir, et une transition écologique et juste, que nous devons réussir. À cette fin, nous devons aussi repenser nos politiques et adapter nos ressources. La révision du Fonds social européen permet justement d'orienter les financements vers ces priorités stratégiques et nous la soutenons. Mais cela doit se faire dans le plein respect de nos valeurs. Permettre à Viktor Orbán de réutiliser des fonds européens gelés pour non-respect de l'état de droit, c'est là une ligne rouge. On ne peut pas financer la cohésion sociale tout en tolérant la dérive autoritaire d'un État membre.

Le respect de l'état de droit doit rester une condition non négociable, et la Commission devra être très rigoureuse et totalement transparente là-dessus. Nous utiliserons tous les moyens à notre disposition pour veiller au plein respect de l'état de droit, car notre Union n'est pas un simple distributeur de fonds. Elle est surtout et avant tout une union des valeurs et des droits fondamentaux.

Maravillas Abadía Jover, en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señor presidente, la política de cohesión no es un lujo ni un recurso de última hora. Es la columna vertebral del proyecto europeo, la que garantiza que ninguna región quede atrás y la que transforma la vida de los ciudadanos europeos.

Con esta revisión intermedia hemos demostrado que el Parlamento cumple. Hemos trabajado con rapidez y hemos logrado un acuerdo equilibrado que permita reforzar y flexibilizar los fondos, pero sin desvirtuar su esencia. Cohesión no significa improvisar ni tapar cualquier emergencia. Significa invertir con inteligencia en prioridades que importan de verdad: el agua, la vivienda, la descarbonización o la defensa. Sectores que son estratégicos para nuestra economía, para nuestra seguridad y para la vida cotidiana europea.

Hemos introducido incentivos claros, realistas y que motiven a los Estados miembros a reprogramar con rapidez. Ahora, la responsabilidad está en su tejado.

Me dirijo especialmente a aquellos Gobiernos con baja o nula ejecución: ya no hay más excusas. No basta con anuncios o ruedas de prensa sin preguntas. Hay que invertir, hay que gestionar, hay que transformar los fondos en respuestas concretas para la ciudadanía.

Esta revisión intermedia llega en tiempo y forma. Corresponde ahora a los Estados miembros y a la Comisión demostrar con hechos que Europa funciona, que los fondos se traducen en proyectos y que la cohesión sigue siendo la mejor herramienta para dar respuestas reales. Cohesion Policy is Europe at its best. Defendámosla, usémosla con rigor y hagamos de ella una palanca para un futuro de crecimiento, competitividad y seguridad.

Gabriele Bischoff, im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, verehrte Kommissarin, Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir sprechen hier über die Bewertung und – ein Stück weit haben das Kollegen und Kolleginnen schon getan – auch die Neuausrichtung des Europäischen Sozialfonds. Ich will noch einmal in Erinnerung rufen: Das ist das älteste Instrument. Das ist viel älter, als zum Beispiel ich es bin, und es war immer anpassungsfähig, aber es war die Garantie an die schwächeren Gruppen in der Gesellschaft; es war die Garantie an die Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer, die große Veränderungen bewältigen mussten, dass sie auch in Zukunft qualifiziert werden, um auf dem Arbeitsmarkt bestehen zu können, dass Europa sich um sie kümmert.

Die europäische Sozialpolitik stand immer auf drei Säulen. Das eine war die Gesetzgebung, das zweite war auch der soziale Dialog, und das dritte waren die europäischen sozialen Fonds, die auch Mittel bereitgestellt haben, damit wir die Ziele erreichen, die wir politisch formuliert haben. Deshalb bin ich der Berichterstatterin sehr, sehr dankbar, dass sie hart dafür gearbeitet hat, dass wir hier Kompromisse finden, dass Sie aber auch gleichzeitig der Kommission eine Orientierung geben und sagen: Schüttet das Kind nicht mit dem Bade aus; was ihr da macht, gefährdet das soziale Fundament Europas, wenn es nicht wirklich garantierte Mittel gibt und – ich möchte hier meinen Kollegen Sandro Gozi noch einmal zitieren – die Fonds zu einem Geldautomaten für die Mitgliedstaaten werden.

Deshalb möchte ich wirklich noch einmal dafür plädieren, dass wir den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern, den Menschen draußen weiter garantieren können, dass Europa sozial bleibt und dass es nicht nur Versprechen macht – und dann guckt mal, wie die Krise läuft und ob wir das Geld für was anderes aufwenden –, sondern dass wir wirklich sicherstellen, dass wir soziale Unterstützung geben, dass wir wichtige, innovative Projekte unterstützen.

Und auch noch eines: Es geht nicht um Zentralisierung. Ich glaube nicht, dass das der Weg ist, sondern dass wir in den Regionen, mit den Ländern, mit den Menschen vor Ort, mit dem Partnerschaftsprinzip darüber entscheiden, wie diese Mittel verwandt werden, um die Ziele zu erreichen.

Séverine Werbrouck, au nom du groupe PfE. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, voici beaucoup de temps perdu pour aboutir à ce texte qui est à l'image de cette institution: rempli d'injonctions contradictoires, étouffé par l'idéologie décroissante et aussi coûteux. Enfin, saupoudrez le tout d'une petite pincée de contrôle arbitraire et vous obtiendrez le saccage de ce texte qui était pourtant initialement intéressant.

Intéressant, notamment parce qu'il permettait de rediriger des fonds dans un secteur stratégique: la défense. Qui plus est, économiquement vertueux, puisqu'il crée des emplois durables, qualifiés et non délocalisables. Ce texte fait en réalité un constat très simple: les règles du Fonds le rendent inefficace, bureaucratique, et la seule façon d'en sortir, c'est de rendre la liberté aux États membres. C'est ce que nous disons depuis longtemps.

Cependant, à lire la version finale de ce texte, on se rend compte qu'il est rempli d'injonctions contradictoires: soutenir les compétences dans le domaine de la défense, tout en excluant les entreprises de taille intermédiaire, ou l'étouffement de l'idéologie décroissante, parce qu'il permet de réallouer des fonds vers les compétences de l'économie du pacte vert, qui nous précipite vers un désastre économique et social.

Une mesure également coûteuse, car les décaissements anticipés vont avoir une incidence budgétaire lourde à court terme, notamment sur les pays contributeurs nets, qui font déjà face à une pression budgétaire critique.

Enfin, la conditionnalité de ces fonds à l'appréciation arbitraire des politiques souveraines des nations est particulièrement dangereuse. Elle a déjà frappé la Hongrie, mais elle crée aussi un précédent grave. La Commission pourrait accepter des programmes ou non sur cette base, sans autre argument. Vous comprendrez facilement que malgré la bonne intention de ce texte, il nous est impossible de le soutenir.

Marlena Maląg, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Szanowni Państwo! Z wielkim zadowoleniem przyjmuję fakt, że Komisja Europejska ostatecznie dostrzegła i uznała zagrożenie, z jakim na co dzień borykają się regiony graniczące z Rosją, Białorusią i Ukrainą. Szkoda, że tak późno. Brakowało tego, zwłaszcza gdy rząd Prawa i Sprawiedliwości w Polsce skutecznie zabezpieczał wschodnią granicę Polski, a tym samym Unii Europejskiej, przed nielegalną migracją, inspirowaną właśnie przez Łukaszenkę i Putina.

Mam nadzieję, że propozycje, których celem jest wzmocnienie obronności, wsparcie wschodnich regionów, zostaną wdrożone terminowo, a przeznaczone na nie środki zostaną wydane zgodnie z przeznaczeniem. Deklaruję w imieniu grupy ECR, że będziemy z uwagą monitorować ten proces, aby zapewnić, że Europejski Fundusz Społeczny Plus, którego głównym celem jest wspieranie integracji społecznej, równości szans, nie będzie przedmiotem kontrowersji, a środki finansowe zostaną właściwie wykorzystane.

Brigitte van den Berg, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, ESF+: let's talk about the successes we've gained, but also about the rule of law.

During trilogues, this was discussed thoroughly and we have made steps. But some members of our group still have concerns, and I hope that Madam Executive Vice-President can respond to them.

First, on the fund itself. It is important to renew the European Social Fund Plus because it is a fund that invests in people, their opportunities and their skills. To invest in people means asking: 'What do Europeans need to thrive in times of change?' And that is why we have worked hard to make the ESF+ ready to respond to our crises. Whether it is helping someone to gain new skills for a greener economy or to gain new skills for defence for a safer Europe, for example, through vocational education and training. For Renew, this is of great importance and we are happy with the results – and also thank you to the rapporteur for providing those.

But then, the rule of law. Let me be clear, we have made important steps, but my concern is that with this revision, we still leave open the possibility to reprogramme funds in a way that allows the circumvention of rule-of-law provisions.

And I want to hear from the European Commission. Do we agree that money from this fund cannot go to Hungary through any route, for as long as they have not made real progress and change? The European Commission gave us this statement during the trilogues, but can you please confirm that we agree on this position here in plenary?

Estrella Galán, en nombre del Grupo The Left. – Señor presidente, Europa sigue aumentando su gasto en defensa cuando millones de personas continúan sin acceso a lo más básico: empleos y vivienda digna, sanidad y educación de calidad o protección contra la pobreza.

Mientras las autoridades europeas se preocupan por amenazas futuras que no vemos, vemos cómo se comete un genocidio en Palestina sin que Europa levante un solo dedo. No podemos dejar de recordárselo: dejen de ser cómplices con Israel y suspendan el Acuerdo de Asociación ya.

La reforma del Fondo Social Europeo es un ataque a la gente trabajadora de toda Europa. Porque, una vez más, cuando se trata de elegir entre el bienestar de la gente o enriquecer a la industria de las armas, eligen fomentar las armas. El Fondo Social Europeo debería fomentar la cohesión, apoyar a quienes más lo necesitan y reducir las desigualdades, porque nuestra seguridad no es la que cabe en un misil. Redirigir este Fondo hacia la defensa es un golpe directo a los más vulnerables y es un desprecio a la justicia social. El Fondo Social Europeo es para mejorar la vida de la gente, no para fines militares.

La verdadera fortaleza de Europa no se mide por los ejércitos más grandes, sino por una ciudadanía que tenga oportunidades reales, que pueda estudiar, que tenga trabajo digno y que pueda vivir en una vivienda en condiciones. Europa será fuerte cuando proteja socialmente a su gente, no cuando aumente su arsenal y sus armas.

Alexander Jungbluth, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident! In Deutschland liegt die Wirtschaft am Boden; seit Jahren stecken wir als einzige Industrienation der Welt in einer Dauerrezession. Verantwortlich dafür ist die Politik von Altparteien und EU: Hunderttausende Arbeitsplätze werden von ihnen in kürzester Zeit vernichtet, weitere Hunderttausende oder gar Millionen werden folgen. Die Marke von 3 Millionen Arbeitslosen wurde kürzlich überschritten.

Jetzt hätte die EU die Möglichkeit, mit dem Sozialfonds Plus diesen dramatischen Entwicklungen entgegenzuwirken. Eines der Hauptziele dieses 100 Milliarden schweren Fonds ist es bekanntlich, Arbeitslose wieder in Lohn und Brot zu bringen. Deutschland profitiert allerdings bisher kaum von diesem Fonds. Dies liegt daran, dass wir über Jahre wirtschaftlich sehr, sehr stark waren, doch diese Zeiten sind aufgrund der Auswirkungen Ihrer Politik nun vorbei.

Aber die EU wäre nicht die EU, wenn sie nicht selbst potenziell sinnvolle Maßnahmen komplett verbocken würde. Um strategische Herausforderungen meistern zu können, sollen jetzt Mittel in die Rüstungsindustrie und die sogenannte grüne Transformation umgeleitet werden, also gerade jene Technologien, die in Deutschland gerade zu einer historisch beispiellosen Vernichtung von Wohlstand geführt haben. Diesen strategischen Herausforderungen, wie Sie es nennen, soll mit größtmöglicher Flexibilität begegnet werden. Das klingt sehr nach dem typischen “EU-Sprech” für “ohne parlamentarische Kontrolle”; wir kennen das bereits vom 150 Milliarden schweren Rüstungspaket.

Deutschland hat als mit Abstand größter Nettozahler hunderte Milliarden in den EU-Haushalt eingezahlt und viel zu wenig zurückerhalten. Angesichts der dramatischen Wirtschaftskrise in meinem Heimatland, für die die EU eine erhebliche Mitverantwortung trägt, ist es an der Zeit, meinen Landsleuten etwas zurückzugeben.

Roxana Mînzatu, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, I thank you for your observations and for your points. They were indeed listened to. Of course, I want to give some remarks.

I do believe that the oldest of the funds, one of the traditional funds that supports the social fibre of the European Union, the European Social Fund Plus, is able to modernise and to invest in people while responding to the current challenges that we face.

So, with this amendment, we are able to create jobs, to invest in skills in sectors that are extremely relevant for our present-day realities – starting from sectors that are strategic. I mentioned some of them: of course, defence is one of them, but it's not only defence; it's cybersecurity, it's cutting-edge technology. We need talent, and we need to create jobs in these sectors for Europe to be able to thrive and for people to be able to thrive.

Continuing to the adjustments and amendments that are done to the ERDF Regulation and concern investment in infrastructure, it is important to show that this amendment brings the fund closer to the everyday realities, to the current challenges and problems that are faced by citizens, by communities and by our society.

Regarding the concerns that have been re-expressed here about the way we will apply the rule of law and the respect for our fundamental rights in the reallocation of funds by Member States, I will reaffirm what I have stated during the trilogues: there is a formal declaration that I have made on behalf of the Commission – and I stand by it – that the Conditionality Regulation, the Common Provision Regulation, the rule of law, the respect for the fundamental rights principles will be strictly observed and strictly applied by the Commission, as it is done normally for all the other funds and in all other situations.

So, this is my commitment. It is already put in writing, but I can of course reiterate it from this microphone in this Hemicycle to you distinguished Members of Parliament again.

We will work closely with Member States in the amendment of their ESF-based programmes so that they really deliver quickly calls for proposals and projects that are really able to support citizens in concrete jobs and in skills deployment.

Marit Maij, rapporteur. – Voorzitter, commissaris, ik wil ook alle collega's bedanken voor hun waardevolle bijdrage tijdens dit belangrijke debat en ook tijdens de onderhandelingen en het proces daarnaartoe. We hebben keer op keer gezien dat het ESF+ onmisbaar is om de Europese Unie te ontwikkelen op een manier zoals wij die graag willen. Een Europese Unie waar de fysieke veiligheid en de sociale veiligheid hand in hand gaan. We kunnen niet ingeven op een van de twee, want zonder sociale weerbaarheid is onze samenleving verloren.

Morgen stemmen we over het resultaat van de onderhandelingen van de ESF+-herziening. Maar voor mij markeert dit het begin van de volgende uitdaging. Ervoor zorgen dat het toekomstige meerjarig financieel kader en daarmee ook het volgende Europees Sociaal Fonds er één is voor iedereen. Dat mensen kunnen worden omgeschoold met ESF+-geld. Dat we ervoor zorgen dat mensen die niet vanzelf meekomen in de samenleving een duwtje in de rug meekrijgen. Dat we kinderarmoede bestrijden. Dat we dakloosheid bestrijden en dat we zien dat het mantra van concurrentievermogen niet moet leiden tot gratis geld voor grote bedrijven.

We eisen een afgeschermd budget voor het ESF+ met doelen die we serieus kunnen nemen. Ik heb zin om daarmee aan de slag te gaan, want een sterk Europa is een sociaal Europa.

Le Président. – Merci beaucoup, Madame la rapporteure.

Le débat est clos et le vote aura lieu demain.

Déclarations écrites (article 178)

Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D), raštu. – “Europos socialinis fondas +” jau seniai yra mūsų Sąjungos socialinio aspekto pagrindas. Tai priemonė, kuri socialinius principus paverčia realiomis galimybėmis mūsų žmonėms, todėl pasiūlymas sujungti ESF+ su nacionaliniais ir regioniniais partnerystės planais 2028–2034 m. laikotarpiui kelia didelį susirūpinimą.

Susijungimas verčia mūsų socialinius prioritetus konkuruoti su galingomis politikos sritimis, pavyzdžiui, žemės ūkiu ar sienų valdymu. Žinome, kaip baigiasi tokios varžybos: socialinės investicijos pralaimi, o labiausiai pažeidžiami žmonės sumoka kainą. ESF+ negali tapti likutine politika, finansuojama tik po to, kai patenkinti kiti interesai.

Nepamirškime ir atskaitomybės. Dabartinis fondas užtikrina skaidrumą per stebėseną ir vertinimą, į kuriuos aktyviai įtraukiami vietos subjektai. Nacionaliniai planai be privalomų apsaugos priemonių kelia pavojų, kad bus pakenkta šiam pasitikėjimui, o kartu ir piliečių tikėjimui Sąjungos teisingumo ir solidarumo pažadu.

Kaip socialistai ir demokratai, turime laikytis tvirtos pozicijos. ESF+ turi išlikti tvirtas ir ryžtingai orientuotas į žmones. Jo silpninimas reiškia pačios Europos silpninimą.

13. ERFi, Ühtekuuluvusfondi ja Õiglase Ülemineku Fondi muutmine seoses erimeetmetega strateegiliste probleemide lahendamiseks vahehindamise raames (arutelu)

Le Président. – L'ordre du jour appelle le débat sur le rapport de Dragoș Benea, au nom de la commission du développement régional, sur la proposition de règlement du Parlement européen et du Conseil modifiant les règlements (UE) 2021/1058 et (UE) 2021/1056 en ce qui concerne des mesures spécifiques visant à relever des défis stratégiques dans le cadre de l'examen à mi-parcours (COM(2025)0123 – C10-0063/2025 – 2025/0084(COD)) (A10-0129/2025).

J'attire votre attention sur le fait qu'il n'y aura qu'un tour de parole des orateurs des groupes politiques pour ce débat. Il n'y aura donc pas d'intervention à la demande ni de carton bleu.

Dragoș Benea, Raportor. – Domnule președinte, domnule vicepreședinte executiv Raffaele Fitto, dragi colegi, politica de coeziune reprezintă pilonul de bază al solidarității europene, fiind expresia concretă a angajamentului nostru comun de a reduce disparitățile și de a promova dezvoltarea echilibrată în toate regiunile Uniunii Europene.

Astăzi ne aflăm într-un moment important pentru politica de dezvoltare regională, iar evaluarea de la mijlocul perioadei ne oferă o oportunitate unică, nu doar de a analiza progresul realizat în actuala perioadă de programare, ci și de a ajusta, unde este necesar, instrumentele și intervențiile, pentru a putea răspunde prompt și ferm noilor provocări cu care se confruntă regiunile noastre.

Discuțiile din ultimele luni nu au fost întotdeauna ușoare, și pe bună dreptate. Politica de coeziune atinge inima solidarității și a investițiilor europene și este firesc să existe opinii ferme și viziuni diverse cu privire la direcția și prioritățile acesteia.

În ciuda diferențelor de perspectivă, am reușit să construim un teren comun în care contează asigurarea faptului că politica de coeziune, politica de dezvoltare regională continuă să servească cetățenii și regiunile noastre în cel mai eficient și echitabil mod posibil.

Acordul provizoriu prevede măsuri semnificative pentru adaptarea instrumentelor noastre la realitățile actuale, prin introducerea a cinci priorități noi, aliniate la noile provocări emergente, precum și creșterea flexibilității și a capacității de absorbție a fondurilor. Această evaluare intermediară reflectă atât continuitatea, cât și evoluția politicii de coeziune. Păstrarea valorilor sale fundamentale în paralel cu o ajustare a implementării pentru a asigura un impact mai mare.

Permiteți-mi să rezum câteva dintre acordurile importante la care am ajuns împreună cu președinția daneză, fiind sprijiniți de Comisia Europeană în aceste negocieri.

Parlamentul a acceptat apărarea ca fiind o nouă prioritate. Cu toate acestea, în ceea ce privește investițiile în capacități industriale sau în infrastructuri trebuie acordată întotdeauna prioritate celor cu dublă utilizare. În viitor, vom solicita Comisiei să verifice dacă această prevedere a fost respectată de către statele membre.

De asemenea, am reușit să introducem pregătirea civilă în toate tipurile de teritorii, aspect deosebit de important pentru Parlamentul European.

Un alt element esențial convenit este gestionarea integrată a apei și reziliența sa, pe care am reușit să le aliniem la Strategia europeană pentru reziliența apei.

Am reușit să facem referire la locuințele durabile, alături de locuințele la prețuri accesibile în întregul text al regulamentului. În această după-amiază lansăm un mesaj clar miilor de familii europene care se confruntă cu dificultăți în găsirea unei locuințe la prețuri accesibile, și anume că am extins domeniul de aplicare a acestei prevederi atât pentru familiile social vulnerabile, cât și pentru cele din clasa de mijloc.

Aș dori să transmit o veste bună regiunilor situate la frontiera estică a Uniunii Europene, și anume că acestea vor beneficia de o prefinanțare suplimentară unică, în valoare de 9,5 % din totalul sprijinului acordat prin programele ESF+ și FEDER.

În cele din urmă, permiteți-mi să menționez faptul că am limitat sprijinul acordat întreprinderilor mari la cele din țările beneficiare ale Fondului de Coeziune, menținând în același timp un accent principal pe întreprinderile mici și mijlocii.

Vă propun să reafirmăm, prin intermediul votului de mâine, angajamentul față de o politică de coeziune care să funcționeze pentru toți, pentru toți cetățenii din zonele urbane și rurale, din regiunile mai puțin dezvoltate și cele mai dezvoltate, pentru tineri și vârstnici, pentru comunitățile în tranziție și pentru cele care se confruntă cu provocările venite în urma războiului din Ucraina, astfel încât nimeni să nu fie lăsat în urmă și fiecare regiune să aibă șansa să se dezvolte în mod durabil și echitabil. Aștept cu interes intervențiile dumneavoastră.

Raffaele Fitto, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you for the opportunity to address today's debate. Let me first thank the rapporteur, Mr Benea, the shadow rapporteurs and the Council for your work, for your spirit of cooperation and for reaching this important agreement.

The EU has faced significant challenges in recent years. Some are being addressed. Many are still ongoing, while new ones continue to emerge. In a context of uncertainty and rapid change, cohesion policy is one of our best instruments and resources to face these challenges and to enable Europe to act and react, to make Europe able to continue its mission of reducing disparities, promoting balanced territorial development, ensuring that every European, wherever they choose to live, shares in our success and prosperity, and to do it now.

The compromise package that you will vote tomorrow is a unique opportunity to modernise cohesion policy, to respond effectively to the challenges of competitiveness, defence, housing, water resilience and the energy transition, to enable regions to invest even more in these joint EU priorities areas and to support citizens with effective action.

I am glad to say that the mid-term review reflects the efforts of all of us. It is the result of our exchanges, the discussions in the REGI Committee, the debates in this chamber, the meetings with the rapporteurs, the meetings with the regions and the territories. Many times, we have agreed on the need for greater flexibility. The areas of intervention and the priorities for allocating resources are also widely shared. The mid-term review prioritises widening investment in affordable and sustainable housing. The package also reflects Parliament's support for a comprehensive approach to civilian preparedness, as well as the new priority areas, such as promoting energy flows across Europe.

To boost Europe's competitive edge and to close the innovation gap, the legislation includes measures to increase investment in strategic technologies, in particular those contributing to the Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform. We also focus our support for the decarbonisation of production capacities, the development of resilient defence infrastructure, prioritising TEN-T of a dual use in nature, including to foster military mobility in the Union and for eastern border regions. The package includes many other useful flexibilities as well as additional incentives, including higher pre- and co-financing rates. The compromise also strengthens the respect for the rule of law. As reiterated in our statement, the Commission remains committed to ensuring the rule of law is haphazard in the implementation of cohesion funds.

Dear Members, the mid-term review is very important and highly needed by the territories, which is why the Commission has already received many requests. A positive outcome will mean greater opportunities for the territories, as well as certainty in timing and implementation. Through these targeted amendments of the mid-term review, the cohesion policy will be more agile and responsive, aligned both with EU values and today's realities.

Many thanks again for your work and for this agreement. I look forward to our discussion.

Riho Terras, rapporteur for the opinion of the SEDE Committee. – Mr President, Mr Vice-President, dear colleagues, our priorities have changed since the breakout of full-scale war in Europe, especially when it comes to the increase of defence spendings.

This is why we create the possibility of the Member States to use the money from the cohesion funds, the European Regional Development Fund and the Just Transition Fund for defence purposes. To be clear, we are not taking money away from cohesion, we are simply creating the possibilities for the Member States to strengthen their defence.

As the rapporteur for the SEDE opinion for this report, I urge you to confirm the trilogue outcome tomorrow. This is urgent, since Members who wish to reprogramme some of their funds need to do so before the end of this year.

Danuše Nerudová, rapporteur for the opinion of the BUDG Committee. – Mr President, Mr Commissioner, dear colleagues, the major priority of the European Union must be security for our citizens. Without security, there is no growth, no social justice. All EU policies, including cohesion, must contribute to this goal.

Today we have achieved a good result: a tax that enables stronger investment in defence. I welcome the changes to national allocation rules, and I am glad that the rule of law has been safeguarded. But this question is not settled: some governments will try to lower our ambition.

Let me be clear: Parliament will remain a watchdog of the rule of law, especially in the next long-term budget.

Krzysztof Hetman, w imieniu grupy PPE. – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Mam takie głębokie przekonanie i poczucie, że po raz pierwszy od bardzo długiego czasu tutaj, w Unii Europejskiej, w instytucjach europejskich, odpowiedzieliśmy w prawdziwy sposób na wyzwania i oczekiwania, i potrzeby, jakie słyszymy od poszczególnych społeczności, od obywateli i grup zawodowych na terenie naszych państw członkowskich.

Szanowni Państwo, przy okazji tego przeglądu śródokresowego polityki spójności podjęliśmy tu wspólnie bardzo dobre decyzje dotyczące kwestii przesunięcia, przekazania tych pieniędzy na obronność, szczególnie jeśli chodzi o produkty podwójnego zastosowania. To są bardzo ważne środki dla naszych przedsiębiorstw, które będą podnosić swoją konkurencyjność, a pieniądze przekazane na obronność mogą być nowym kołem zamachowym dla europejskiej gospodarki.

Szanowni Państwo, drugim elementem, niezwykle istotnym, na który chcielibyśmy priorytetowo zwrócić uwagę, jest kwestia transformacji energetycznej, czystej i taniej energii, bezpiecznej, dostępnej po cenach takich, które będą akceptowane przez przedsiębiorców oraz gospodarstwa domowe na odpowiednim poziomie.

Szanowni Państwo, kolejna sprawa to dostrzeżenie kwestii związanej z regionami wschodnimi graniczącymi z Rosją, Białorusią i Ukrainą, bo one wszystkie borykają się z ogromnymi wyzwaniami, zagrożeniami oraz z niepewnością. Chciałem za to bardzo serdecznie podziękować.

Kolejna kwestia to odporność wodna i zrównoważona gospodarka wodna. Kolejny priorytet, niezwykle istotny, biorąc pod uwagę wszystkie zdarzenia, które mamy na terenie Unii Europejskiej, jeśli chodzi o powodzie i susze.

Wreszcie kwestia związana z elastycznością i uproszczeniami w ramach polityki spójności. Musimy jak najszybciej to prawo wprowadzić w życie. Jeszcze teraz musimy to przegłosować na sesji plenarnej, tak aby te wszystkie bardzo dobre zmiany weszły w życie od 1 stycznia 2026 roku.

Marcos Ros Sempere, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señor presidente, la política de cohesión es la bandera social de Europa. Es la política que crea empleo, que genera inversiones allí donde se necesitan. Es la política que convierte la desafección en europeísmo, mejorando infraestructuras, construyendo centros de salud o escuelas. Es, además, un instrumento de solidaridad dentro de la Unión y ha dado respuesta a los desafíos que hemos afrontado en los últimos años, que no han sido pocos.

Vivimos en un contexto lleno de retos y la política de cohesión ha respondido. Por eso, abrimos en esta revisión la puerta a que los Estados que lo necesiten reprogramen necesidades. Flexibilidad, sí, pero no a costa de extender un cheque en blanco a los Estados ni de olvidarnos de las políticas comunes, como vemos en la propuesta del próximo marco financiero. Porque ese camino desmonta la idea de una Europa que actúa integrada y cohesionada y nos devuelve a ser una mera suma de países con enfoques muy dispares.

Europa necesita garantizar su propia seguridad y defensa y, por eso, nosotros, desde el Grupo S&D, hemos trabajado para que cada euro de cohesión y defensa tenga un uso dual para los ciudadanos. También hemos reforzado la estrategia de resiliencia hídrica, incorporando la desalinización para garantizar agua para regiones como la mía —la Región de Murcia— que sufren sequías cada vez más duras e impredecibles a causa del cambio climático. Y hemos reforzado también la necesidad de apoyar vivienda asequible para evitar los estragos de un mercado descontrolado. Y hemos añadido salvaguardas al Estado de Derecho, para que ni un euro de la política de cohesión vaya a quien no respete las reglas comunes.

Señor comisario, este Grupo va a dar la batalla por una política de cohesión con financiación suficiente, reglas claras y garantías. No podemos aceptar que se vuelvan a imponer recortes, la austeridad y los hombres de negro, porque, para los socialistas, la cohesión es un principio irrenunciable de nuestra idea de Europa.

Séverine Werbrouck, au nom du groupe PfE. – Monsieur le Président, en fait, quel gâchis! Cela ne commençait pourtant pas si mal. À notre grand étonnement, vous étiez enfin prêts à assouplir les règlements d'application des fonds de transition juste et de développement régional, notamment en ce qui concerne la défense, l'énergie et le logement: l'augmentation du plafond de cofinancement par l'Union européenne, la prolongation des procédures de dépenses, l'intégration des grandes entreprises de la défense et surtout plus de liberté laissée aux États pour la réaffectation des fonds.

Mais nous voilà rassurés à présent, comme à votre habitude, votre idéologie vous a rattrapés: aucune mesure pour garantir que les fonds bénéficient aux seules entreprises européennes et n'aillent pas enrichir l'industrie militaire américaine, comme à chaque fois. De plus, vous conditionnez l'accès aux fonds sur la base arbitraire du prétendu respect de l'état de droit, argument moral dont vous vous servez en réalité pour restreindre les politiques menées par les gouvernements d'opposition.

C'est pourquoi nous ne pouvons naïvement cautionner ni la gabegie européenne par le décaissement et la prolongation des fonds inutilisés, payés en grande partie par la France, ni l'esprit de censure qui préside à ce texte par l'alignement du calendrier budgétaire sur votre agenda fédéraliste.

Denis Nesci, a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signor Presidente, signor Vicepresidente esecutivo, onorevoli colleghi, oggi più che mai la politica di coesione deve dimostrarsi un vero motore di sviluppo per i nostri territori.

Di fronte alle sfide sempre più complesse che l'Europa si trova ad affrontare, è fondamentale garantire maggiore flessibilità e strumenti concreti agli enti locali, affinché possano rispondere in modo efficace e tempestivo alle esigenze reali delle comunità.

Con la nuova revisione, ogni paese avrà la possibilità – su base volontaria – di adattare i propri programmi di coesione in base alle priorità specifiche dei propri territori, per conseguire gli obiettivi stabiliti dall'articolo 174 del TFUE.

Questo significa riconoscere che non esiste un'unica soluzione, ma che è necessario valorizzare le diversità e le peculiarità di ogni realtà locale. Un risultato che è stato reso possibile anche grazie al lavoro prezioso del Vicepresidente Fitto, che ha saputo portare avanti con determinazione un dialogo costruttivo tra Istituzioni europee e Stati membri.

Tra le priorità, ritengo fondamentale sottolineare l'attenzione alla competitività e all'innovazione per sostenere il tessuto produttivo e occupazionale; il contrasto alla crisi abitativa, un problema che oggi colpisce sempre più famiglie in molte regioni europee; e la gestione sostenibile delle risorse idriche, con un focus particolare sulla lotta alla siccità, emergenza che non possiamo più ignorare.

È fondamentale sottolineare come gli Stati membri sollecitano una rapida adozione del regolamento per consentire agli enti locali di avviare immediatamente i progetti.

Si tratta di un segnale particolarmente rilevante per le aree rurali, che più di altre scontano divari storici e che devono affrontare problemi che solo con la politica di coesione si possono superare, perché la politica di coesione è uno strumento di equità e crescita, capace di garantire uno sviluppo solido e duraturo.

Ľubica Karvašová, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, throughout negotiations, Renew had worked hard to improve the Commission's proposal to better serve Europe's regions and its citizens. Cohesion funds now do not cover only defence, but also other key investment pillars, from electricity grids and civil preparedness – which has been mentioned – to affordable but also sustainable housing.

We defended poorer regions over rich ones. We focussed on SMEs. We extended the Just Transition Fund, so important also for our Irish friends and, most importantly, we advanced the respect for the rule of law.

In relation to frozen funds, we know the outcome of the negotiations is a compromise between three institutions. Of course, we would have wished to go further, as reflected in our plenary amendment. But for Renew, the mid-term review is only the start of the discussions on the future of the MFF, where we really want to see much stronger safeguards for the for the rule of law and the role of the rule of law in EU funds. Let me now switch to Slovak as well.

Mid-term review priniesol aj riziká. Slovenská vláda zmrazila 200 miliónov eur samosprávam, mestám, obciam. Na škôlky, školy aj zdravotnícke centrá. Nie preto, že by neboli pripravené projekty, ale preto, že vláda má iné priority pre ľudí v regiónoch. Ľudia to nie sú.

Ja budem vždy stáť na strane regiónov, tu v Štrasburgu, v Bruseli aj na Slovensku. Ako tieňová spravodajkyňa som preto presadila aj poistku, aby vlády nemohli len tak svojvoľne rozhodovať o zdrojoch, ktoré patria samosprávam, bez konzultácie miest a obcí, a som rada, že je súčasťou tohto návrhu. Európska únia nie je zlý Brusel. Je to podaná ruka.

Cristina Guarda, a nome del gruppo Verts/ALE. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, è vero, la politica di coesione ha un problema di utilizzo dei fondi, ma invece di correggere gli errori fatti qui, all'interno di questa istituzione, la burocrazia l'ha trasformata in un bancomat per grandi imprese e per fare mega infrastrutture.

E con la scusa della difesa da domani potrete dirottare miliardi destinati alle regioni meno sviluppate, o avvelenate, per la costruzione, per esempio, di un ponte sullo Stretto: ottimo investimento, che classificate pure come climatico.

Oppure, dare una valanga di soldi pubblici a poche grandi imprese della difesa, che è evidentemente un metodo più semplice di utilizzare questi fondi immediatamente, piuttosto che darli a tante piccole e medie imprese locali, no?

Ecco il tutto, pensate un po', con meno trasparenza. Perché sia mai che sappiamo dove e come utilizzano realmente i nostri fondi e questo, mi dispiace, non è rispettare il fondamento della politica di coesione.

Cosa resterà per difenderci della crisi climatica, per difendere le nostre politiche sociali, le piccole e medie imprese, la sanità, i servizi e le comunità rurali?

Ecco, ma tanto Orbán vi ringrazia, visto che con questo voto potrà continuare a usare i fondi pur violando, ancora, i diritti fondamentali. Un aspetto su cui noi Verdi continueremo a combattere.

Valentina Palmisano, a nome del gruppo The Left. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la proposta di regolamento che oggi esaminiamo segna, a nostro avviso, una deviazione grave dalla missione originaria della politica di coesione.

Una politica, lo ricordiamo, nata per ridurre i divari territoriali e sostenere comunità e cittadini in difficoltà rischia ora di trasformarsi in un bancomat per spese militari e per l'industria della difesa, perché questo è quello che avverrà inserendo tra le nuove priorità di investimento proprio la difesa.

E noi non possiamo accettare che i fondi destinati a scuole, ospedali, trasporti sostenibili, lavoro, sostegno alle piccole e medie imprese vengano dirottate sugli armamenti. Innanzitutto, questo sarebbe un tradimento dei valori storici su cui è fondata l'Unione europea, e poi sarebbe catastrofico per le nostre regioni, le regioni più fragili che noi oggi, qui, rappresentiamo.

E lo voglio dire chiaramente: noi non saremo mai dalla parte di chi priva i nostri territori di risorse essenziali, perché significa privare questi territori di qualcosa di essenziale, appunto, e significa condannarli a restare indietro ancora una volta.

Guardate, anche noi abbiamo a cuore la difesa e la sicurezza dei nostri cittadini, ma riteniamo che queste non si costruiscano con più armi, ma con più cooperazione, più giustizia sociale e più resilienza economica.

Per questo continueremo a lavorare affinché l'Europa rimanga un progetto di pace e non diventi un cantiere di guerra.

Irmhild Boßdorf, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Fast 800 Milliarden Euro, so Ursula von der Leyen, sollen für die Kriegstüchtigkeit der EU ausgegeben werden. Wer ihre Rede beim Besuch in Bulgarien letzte Woche verfolgt hat, wundert sich, mit welcher Hartnäckigkeit und Schnelligkeit die Hochrüstung auf den Weg gebracht werden soll.

Die bulgarische Rüstungsindustrie sei nicht nur ein Grund für bulgarischen Nationalstolz, sondern auch für einen europäischen Stolz. Fast 60 der angekündigten 800 Milliarden sollen aus Kohäsionsmitteln fließen. Statt Kindergärten werden im ländlichen Raum dann eben Rüstungsfabriken gebaut; die Dorfsanierung muss dem Drohnentest weichen; Infrastruktur wird es allenfalls geben, um die noch zu bauenden Panzer in künftige Kriegsgebiete transportieren zu können.

Wir rüsten hier für einen Krieg, den nur die EU will, sonst niemand. Eine echte strategische Herausforderung wäre es, die Regionen zu stärken und Europa damit wieder zu einem zukunftsfähigen und lebenswerten Kontinent zu machen.

Raffaele Fitto, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, many thanks for this rich and interesting discussion, it will frame my thinking as we continue our work together in the coming months and years.

With this package, we are creating a unique opportunity. Now it is up to the Member States and regions to answer the call to make the necessary programme amendments. The European Commission is ready to support, because we must all continue our collective efforts, further adapting the cohesion policy to Europe's new challenges: modern, ready for the future and continuing its mission to leave no region behind.

I look forward to continuing our collaboration. Even during the preparation of this package, dialogue with the REGI Committee and Members of the European Parliament has been extremely valuable. We will maintain the same openness and willingness to work together on cohesion, particularly as we approach the next multiannual financial framework.

Regarding the rule of law that has been mentioned by several Members, I want to be clear: as I told you before, I sent a letter to Mr Benea that underlines that the Commission remains committed to ensuring that rule of law is upheld in the implementation of the funds, and will assess any request for programme amendments in line with the CPR, the conditionality and the Medium Term Review Regulation.

Dragoș Benea, Raportor. – Domnule președinte, dragi colegi, mulțumesc tuturor pentru intervențiile dumneavoastră. Prin intermediul acordului provizoriu privind revizuirea la mijlocul perioadei a politicii de coeziune, transmitem un mesaj clar tuturor europenilor: Uniunea Europeană rămâne receptivă și unită în efortul de a combate disparitățile și de a promova o dezvoltare echilibrată în toate regiunile europene, iar politica de coeziune este flexibilă și capabilă să se adapteze la noile realități de pe teren.

Permiteți-mi să mulțumesc tuturor colegilor, raportori alternativi, vicepreședintelui Comisiei, Raffaele Fitto, reprezentanților Comisiei Europene și ai Consiliului, precum și președinției daneze pentru cooperarea excelentă și munca intensă depusă în regim de urgență pe acest raport. Mâine, Parlamentul European își va exprima votul asupra acordului provizoriu, atât de mult așteptat de autoritățile de management din țările noastre.

Îmi exprim speranța că acordul provizoriu va fi susținut de membrii Parlamentului European în cadrul votului care se va desfășura mâine, iar ulterior adoptării noului regulament, statele membre, regiunile și autoritățile de management vor transforma acest acord în proiecte și beneficii concrete pentru comunitățile din toate regiunile Uniunii Europene. Vom continua să monitorizăm și să sprijinim acest proces pentru ca beneficiile politicii de coeziune să ajungă în fiecare colț al Europei și să se reflecte în viața fiecăruia dintre cetățenii europeni.

Le Président. – Merci beaucoup, cher rapporteur.

Le débat est clos et le vote aura lieu demain.

Déclarations écrites (article 178)

Mihai Tudose (S&D), în scris. – Am votat rezoluția legislativă ce aprobă revizuirea regulamentelor din domeniul politicii de coeziune, astfel încât aceasta să fie aliniată noilor priorități strategice ale UE și statelor membre.

Modificările permit redirecționarea de fonduri din bugetul pentru coeziune către o serie de sectoare nevralgice: apărare, securitate, regiunile de la frontiera estică și competitivitate. În contextul evaluării intermediare permise de cadrul juridic al programelor politicii de coeziune, ne asigurăm că parte din bugetul acestora poate merge rapid spre investițiile în capabilități de apărare, în infrastructura cu dublă utilizare – mai ales pentru a stimula mobilitatea militară -, precum și în consolidarea rezilienței comunităților din regiunile frontaliere estice ale Uniunii, care se învecinează cu Rusia, Belarus și Ucraina.

Susțin prefinanțarea suplimentară de 20 % în cazul sumelor realocate acestor priorități specifice, majorarea ratelor de cofinanțare din partea UE cu 10 % și sprijinul suplimentar de 9,5 % pentru regiunile de la granița estică a Uniunii.

Am votat, de asemenea, în favoarea măsurilor pentru gestionarea durabilă a apelor, promovarea accesului la locuințe la prețuri accesibile, protecția infrastructurii energetice critice și instalarea infrastructurii de reîncărcare electrică.

14. Ühtekuuluvuspoliitika (ühine arutelu)

Le Président. – L'ordre du jour appelle à présent la discussion commune sur la politique de cohésion, qui porte sur trois rapports:

—	le rapport de Ciaran Mullooly, au nom de la commission du développement régional, sur le rôle de la politique de cohésion dans l'accompagnement de la transition juste (2024/2121(INI)) (A10-0137/2025),

—	le rapport de Marcos Ros Sempere, au nom de la commission du développement régional, sur le rôle des investissements de la politique de cohésion dans la résolution de l'actuelle crise du logement (2024/2120(INI)) (A10-0139/2025),

—	le rapport de Vladimir Prebilič, au nom de la commission du développement régional, sur les possibilités de simplification des fonds de cohésion (2024/2106(INI)) (A10-0138/2025).

Ciaran Mullooly, rapporteur. – Mr President, dear Commissioner Fitto, colleagues, we all share the same ambition. We want to see a Europe that delivers for our citizens in the changing world in which we find ourselves.

However, we know that ambition alone will not really deliver results. That's why cohesion policy matters. That's why I'm proposing targeted measures to ensure it delivers for people whose lives have been upended by the transition away from carbon-intensive industry. It's about making sure we see social justice before transition. It's about ensuring that no region, no community and no worker is left behind.

Colleagues, this is the core message of my report before you today. In this report, we highlight what many regions are experiencing – the green transition is not an abstract policy objective, but a daily reality for communities, families and businesses. The reality of this transition is clearly visible in my own region: in Lanesborough in County Longford, at the Bord Na Móna Mount Dillon works, hundreds of workers lost their jobs and their livelihoods when the local power station was shut down. This is very real.

The same story has been repeated from Shannonbridge in County Offaly and right across Europe to Silesia in Poland, where I visited this year, and countless regions in between. Workers who have given decades of service have found themselves facing unemployment. If we fail to address these issues adequately, we risk deepening regional inequalities, Commissioner.

That is why I am bringing forward these new policies to ensure that workers are treated fairly and properly supported in every step of the transition. No one should face redundancy without a clear plan for retraining and reskilling, because, colleagues, without their buy-in the transition will never succeed. That is why Just Transition as a fund plays an important role within cohesion. It is not about idealism, but about ensuring the plan and the change is achievable and fair.

The Commission's mid-term review earlier this year recognised this reality by expanding the scope of the fund and ensuring that, under certain conditions, just transition projects are entitled to another year to spend funds. This is good. The Regional Development Committee of this Parliament has gone further, proposing practical reforms to make just transition work even better.

So first and foremost, Commissioner, the Regional Development Committee has made a strong call for a Just Transition Fund II, with adequate resources and firmly based on shared management and partnership principles. As you will be aware, the proposal from the Commission on the future MFF did not contain any proposal for a second fund.

Colleagues, in order to bring citizens with us, in order to ensure no one is actually left behind, we must send a clear and unequivocal message today. We need a second fund for just transition. We need it. Anything less is unacceptable. We must continue the work we have started.

We have also put further forward a concrete proposal for the creation of special economic zones in the regions hardest hit by closures. Crucially, these zones will not be a quick fix. They will remain in place until such a time as the majority of jobs last locally are actually replaced in the local area. That is the key to this, Commissioner.

I have long championed education and training at the heart of transition, and therefore I am particularly pleased and happy to say that we have made bold proposals for investment in apprenticeships and training within local areas. However, crucially, this must be tailored to the needs of the local economy.

This report also advocates for multiple simplification methods, bringing forward the idea of social justice before transition and specifically acknowledging the plight of seasonal workers, such as peat harvesters, that have not had adequate alternative work options created; they have been left behind. We have called for the establishment of new social training programmes for older unemployed workers who are unable to retrain and acquire new jobs to ensure they are supported until retirement.

So, in conclusion, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to leave with one clear message: the future MFF proposal from the European Commission has been a wake-up call to us all. That future MFF proposal is no longer business as usual. Let's send a clear message from this House that we reject centralisation and stand up for our regions and communities by proposing a strengthened Just Transition Fund II, with simplified procedures, empowering local communities to chart a path not only towards a just transition, but towards a truly fair and just Europe.

Commissioner, I give you this letter as I leave. This is the worker who says he is being left behind. He feels no options were provided after he lost his job. I hope you read it and you take his message to heart. This is real. This is a real person.

Marcos Ros Sempere, ponente. – Señor presidente, señor vicepresidente, el Estado del bienestar empieza en la puerta de casa. Si eso no está asegurado, todo lo demás se tambalea. Y, para demasiada gente, la vivienda se ha convertido en un motivo de angustia, de asfixia. Y es algo que se repite cada principio de mes. Cada día 1 llega el momento de pagar el 40 %, el 50 % o hasta el 60 % de su renta solamente para pagar un techo. Cuando un derecho básico se traga más de la mitad de la renta disponible de la ciudadanía, eso tiene un nombre. Y ese nombre es emergencia social, porque la vivienda debería ser el pilar sobre el que construir un proyecto de vida propio y el derecho a acceder a una vivienda digna no puede ser un privilegio reservado a una minoría ni un bien para especular.

El problema es bien claro: entre 2015 y 2023 el precio de la vivienda en la Unión Europea aumentó un 48 %. En 2023, uno de cada diez hogares urbanos destinó más del 40 % de su renta a vivienda y cuando el mero acceso a una casa ahoga, asfixia y determina de arriba abajo la vida de la mayoría, ha llegado la hora de que los poderes públicos actuemos.

Por eso, en la elaboración de este informe hemos escuchado a quienes el alquiler les asfixia cada mes. Hemos escuchado a jóvenes que no pueden ni plantearse salir de casa de sus padres. Hemos escuchado a expertos y a instituciones que reclaman para sus ciudades una política de vivienda nueva, una política de vivienda digna. Y eso es, precisamente, lo que hacemos hoy: traemos propuestas concretas, traemos soluciones concretas para una nueva política de vivienda a nivel comunitario. Porque la Unión Europea puede y debe hacer más.

Lo he repetido muchas veces: la política de cohesión es la política social de la Unión Europea. Es la herramienta que convierte las prioridades europeas en proyectos reales, en oportunidades allí donde más falta hace. Y con la política de cohesión podemos aumentar la oferta de vivienda asequible ya, tanto en la revisión intermedia como en el marco financiero plurianual a partir de 2027.

En primer lugar, habilitando el FEDER, el Fondo de Cohesión y el Fondo de Transición Justa para dar apoyo específico a inversiones que resuelvan los problemas de la crisis de vivienda, incluyendo la vivienda asequible y sostenible dentro de estos objetivos. Solo así aumentaremos la oferta y facilitaremos su acceso a parte de la ciudadanía.

En segundo lugar, financiación estable y a largo plazo. La Comisión y el Banco Europeo de Inversiones deben crear nuevas inversiones en vivienda asequible y sostenible, vinculadas a los fondos de cohesión, y combinadas con presupuestos nacionales, regionales y locales. Y hay que hacerlo con una condición irrenunciable: las viviendas que se financien con dinero público deben seguir siendo asequibles y de uso social público durante años, prohibiendo taxativamente la venta especulativa a largo plazo. El dinero público debe convertirse en vivienda para vivir y no para especular.

En tercer lugar, simplifiquemos, porque se trata de un problema acuciante. Menos trámites y plazos más cortos para licencias, ayudas, contratación clara, colaboración público-privada. Un enfoque territorial no es solo urbano: también zonas rurales, islas, regiones remotas.

Y, en cuarto lugar, prioricemos a los colectivos más vulnerables. Necesitamos proteger de alquileres abusivos a trabajadores y estudiantes que residen en zonas turísticas, recordando la necesidad de garantizar viviendas sostenibles.

Quiero terminar agradeciendo el trabajo generoso y constructivo de mis colegas en la Comisión de Desarrollo Regional, así como el de todos los diputados que han contribuido al mismo. Porque la vivienda es uno de los principales factores de desigualdad y es hora de pasar del diagnóstico a la acción. Es hora de ponerse manos a la obra.

Vladimir Prebilič, Poročevalec. – Spoštovani predsednik, spoštovani komisar, drage kolegice in kolegi.

Naj začnem s preprostim vprašanjem. Ali bomo dokončno pokopali kohezijo? Če je tako, potem je ogrožena Evropska unija kot projekt v celoti. Danes ne razpravljamo le o tehničnem poročilu, ampak o prihodnosti evropske solidarnosti.

Moje poročilo o poenostavitvi kohezijskih skladov prihaja v času, ko se Evropska unija pripravlja na naslednji večletni finančni okvir. In bodimo iskreni – za vsemi razpravami o učinkovitosti, pogojevanju in proračunski disciplini se skriva ena kruta resnica, in to je nevarnost koheziji. Kohezijska politika ni le še ena proračunska postavka. Je obljuba Evrope, da noben državljan, nobena regija, nobena skupnost ne bo ostala pozabljena. Je najjasnejši dokaz, da Unija ni le trg, ampak solidarna skupnost, kjer naj bi vsi imeli enake možnosti za razvoj. A vendar, ko se približujemo naslednjemu večletnemu finančnemu okviru, slišim nevarno razmišljanje. “Zmanjšajte sredstva za kohezijo. Združite jih in centralizirajte, prerazporedite jih za orožje.” Bodimo iskreni – zmanjšanje kohezijskih sredstev pomeni povečanje neenakosti, pomeni Evropo dveh hitrosti.

Moje poročilo o poenostavitvi kohezijskih skladov zato ne obravnava le obrazcev, postopkov ali informacijskih sistemov. Je politična izjava. Kohezijo je treba braniti, poenostaviti in okrepiti. Poenostavitev ni le zmanjšanje administrativnih opravil, je vprašanje preživetja. Župani in podjetniki dvigujejo roke nad kohezijo in teh virov ne koristijo, saj je vlaganje zahtevkov za evropska sredstva postalo tekma z ovirami v obliki obrazcev, kontrol in zamud. Kohezija bi morala regije okrepiti, ne pa izčrpati. Poenostavitev pomeni odpravo dodatnih pravil nacionalnih ministrstev, ki se še nalagajo na pravila Evropske unije. Poenostavitev pomeni načelo enotne revizije. En pregled, ne pet. Poenostavitev pomeni dejanske digitalizirane kontaktne točke, ki tudi najmanjšim vasem omogočajo dostop do evropskih sredstev. Namreč, če kohezija izgubi verodostojnost na terenu, če se zdi prepočasna in preveč zapletena, potem damo argumente tistim, ki jo želijo popolnoma uničiti. Naj bom konkreten: Slovenija, moja država, je živ dokaz, zakaj je kohezija tako pomembna.

Pred dvema desetletjema se je regionalna neenakost med glavnim mestom in vzhodnim delom države povečevala. Zahvaljujoč kohezijskim skladom je Slovenija vlagala v ceste, raziskovalna središča ter komunalno in vodno infrastrukturo. Zato je danes med najuspešnejšimi državami pri zmanjševanju regionalnih razlik. Naj bom kristalno jasen, kohezija nikoli ne sme biti centralizirana na nacionalni ravni. Enoten nacionalni program, ki bi ga vodili iz prestolnic, bi pomenil konec lokalne politike. In ravno na tej ravni najbolj vedo, kje so potrebne naložbe. Poenostavitev nikakor ne pomeni bližnjic do goljufij ali korupcije. Potrebujemo pameten, ne več nadzora.

Kolegice in kolegi, vprašanje je preprosto: ali hočemo unijo, ki pušča svoje regije ob strani, spodbuja neenakost in besedo solidarnost zreducira le na slogan? Ali pa hočemo unijo, ki vlaga dolgoročno v razvoj in skupnosti ter daje pošteno priložnost vsem? In zakaj mora biti Parlament tukaj jasen? Ker gre za prihodnost kohezije in prihodnost naših regij, teh ne smemo izdati. Te so bistvene za stabilnost naše Evropske unije. Če oslabimo kohezijo, oslabimo Evropo.

Raffaele Fitto, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, let me start by thanking the REGI Committee for the great work, especially the rapporteurs and the shadow rapporteurs. The three reports we discuss today show your strong commitment to cohesion policy. In the coming months, we will work together to shape the future EU budget and the modernisation of cohesion policy. Today's reports show the way.

First, honourable Member Mullooly, my thanks for your report on cohesion policy and the just transition. Our shared goal is clear: a climate-neutral competitive economy that leaves no person and no region behind. The Just Transition Fund has already made a real difference, supporting the region's workers and communities that are most affected. Fourty-six per cent of just transition funding is now contracted, with over EUR 12 billion worth of projects selected. This instrument will deliver on its objectives. The local plans are key. Stakeholders and decision-makers work together to define the way forward, which adds legitimacy and value. But the Member States and the regions are not alone in implementation. The Commission provides targeted support, for example, through the Just Transition Platform. In addition, the flexibilities introduced by the mid-term review will accelerate Just Transition Fund investment.

Second, honourable Member Ros Sempere, my thanks for your report on cohesion policy and the housing crisis. We all agree: this is one of the most pressing social challenges across Europe, and we are determined to meet this challenge with the new European affordable housing plan. We are enabling Member States to double cohesion investment in affordable housing. As you know, housing is one of the five new priorities of the mid-term review, and the proposal offers flexibilities and incentives.

But we do know that the housing crisis is a very complex phenomenon, and that cohesion policy alone cannot solve it. Complementary funding sources and measures, including revised state aid rules, are essential. That is why we will continue to work closely with the European Parliament, and we will continue to raise awareness and encourage Member States to use all possible sources of investment to support affordable housing. The New European Bauhaus prizes, which will be awarded in the plenary room in Brussels at the end of the month, shows that cohesion policy has a role to play to support affordable, sustainable and inclusive housing solutions for our citizens.

Finally, honourable Member Prebilič, my thanks for your report on simplification and cohesion policy. We agree that the current period has already introduced significant simplification measures, and the mid-term review will take simplification a step further. We all agree that flexibility and simplification are key to making cohesion policy work. They were the main reason behind the mid-term review and the approach we used to shape the proposal for the next multiannual budget.

The Commission's proposal for the future financial framework already addressed many of your recommendations. Our proposal reaffirmed the fundamental principles of cohesion policy: shared management, partnership, multi-level governance and a place-based approach. The next budget also has a strong focus on less developed and disadvantaged regions. Regions will continue to play a crucial role in shaping the policy actions which benefit them. In terms of funding in the national and regional plans, EUR 450 billion will be available for cohesion policy, rural development and fisheries communities. On this, at least EUR 218 billion must be dedicated to the less developed regions.

The spirit of shared management and partnership is dear to me. I firmly believe that partnership is the key for cohesion policy success, and it is in this spirit of partnership that I am here today. I look forward to our discussion and to work together.

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, ponente de opinión de la Comisión BUDG. – Señor presidente, señor comisario, como usted sabe bien, este Parlamento es un firme defensor de la política de cohesión. Y lo es porque es una política de éxito, y como española sé muy bien de lo que hablo.

Desde la Comisión de Presupuestos damos la bienvenida a toda reforma que venga de la Comisión encaminada a que este pilar de la Unión gane en eficiencia. Por lo tanto, apoyamos esa necesaria simplificación de programas, la eliminación de trabas administrativas y duplicidades o la reducción de cargas burocráticas innecesarias, todo ello pensando en los destinatarios finales: ciudadanos, familias y empresas.

Pero todo intento de simplificar programas y ganar eficiencia no puede ser a costa de diluir la política de cohesión, de centralizar la gestión y de sustituir la participación activa de las autoridades regionales y locales. Por eso vemos con preocupación la propuesta del marco financiero plurianual que presentaron ustedes en julio y les animamos a recapacitar.

Simplificar para ganar eficiencia, sí; simplificar para recortar o recentralizar, no. Esta ha de ser la máxima que guíe el futuro de la política de cohesión.

PRESIDENZA: PINA PICIERNO

Vicepresidente

Jacek Protas, sprawozdawca komisji opiniodawczej – komisji CONT. – Szanowna Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Polityka spójności jest fundamentem, kręgosłupem jedności i spójności Unii Europejskiej. Wyrównywanie szans rozwojowych, niwelowanie różnic w poziomie i warunkach życia mieszkańców europejskich regionów jest naszym podstawowym zadaniem. Jeżeli o tym zapominamy, to utracimy spoiwo budujące wspólnotę europejską.

Mówię o tym dlatego, by przestrzec przed zakusami, żeby wprowadzać radykalne zmiany w polityce spójności i wspólnej polityce rolnej po 2027 roku, które zmierzają do jej nacjonalizacji i centralizacji. Nie da się uruchomić potencjałów rozwojowych regionów, reagować na ich najważniejsze potrzeby, przykładając do wszystkich jednakową miarę. Regiony muszą mieć narzędzia do realizacji własnej polityki rozwoju ze wsparciem europejskim. Nie wystarczy, że będą pośrednikami w rozdzielaniu funduszy zarządzanych centralnie. Dekoncentracja to nie to samo co decentralizacja. Powinniśmy sobie wszyscy zdawać z tego sprawę, planując politykę spójności i wspólną politykę rolną na kolejne lata.

Giusi Princi, relatrice per parere della commissione EMPL. – Signora Presidente, signor Commissario e Vicepresidente Fitto, onorevoli colleghi, vengo dalla Calabria, una regione che affronta lo spopolamento delle aree interne, aggravato dal declino demografico e dalla fuga dei nostri giovani.

Ma la Calabria ha tutto: sole per le rinnovabili, talenti per il digitale, bellezza per attrarre investimenti. La vera sfida è però fare delle nostre ricchezze opportunità per il futuro di chi vuole restare.

Per questo, nel mio lavoro in commissione EMPL sulla politica di coesione, ho messo al centro il capitale umano, perché ogni giovane che rimane è fonte di crescita e sviluppo per i territori.

La nuova politica di coesione può essere ancora più generativa se continuerà quindi a mettere al centro la dimensione sociale, al pari della ricerca, dell'industria e delle infrastrutture.

La Calabria e il Sud, nel nuovo quadro semplificato e più flessibile, possono allora sì diventare un laboratorio di coesione e innovazione che dà voce ai territori e ai suoi bisogni; perché la questione è anche garantire ai giovani le condizioni per cui scelgano di restare.

Estrella Galán, ponente de opinión de la Comisión EMPL. – Señora presidenta, en mi país tenemos un Gobierno de coalición empeñado en mejorar la vida de la gente. Sin embargo, siempre aparece el mismo problema: el de la vivienda.

Les voy a dar un clarísimo ejemplo para que se pongan en situación: desde 2018 el salario mínimo se ha incrementado en España un 61 %, pero las familias siguen sin poder llegar a fin de mes. Y ¿saben cuál es la razón? Pues es sencilla: en los últimos años el alquiler medio ha subido un 78 %, mucho más que lo que van subiendo los salarios. La vivienda se ha convertido en una aspiradora de rentas, es el agujero negro adonde se va el dinero de las familias y que aumenta la desigualdad e impide que la gente viva dignamente.

No estamos hablando de estadísticas vacías, estamos hablando de nuestras hijas, de nuestros hijos y de nuestras vecinas expulsadas de nuestros barrios por los fondos buitre. Que el precio de la vivienda esté disparado no es fruto de la casualidad, es resultado de las políticas que han entregado nuestras ciudades y nuestros barrios a estos especuladores que han convertido un derecho en un lujo inaccesible.

La solución es sencilla: intervenir el mercado de la vivienda. Y este Parlamento debe decidir si está del lado de la gente o de la élite que ha hecho de nuestra precariedad un negocio.

Marit Maij, rapporteur voor advies van de commissie EMPL. – Voorzitter, commissaris, het cohesiebeleid is een essentieel onderdeel van de Europese Unie en zorgt ervoor dat alle regio's zich economisch en sociaal kunnen blijven ontwikkelen en dat iedereen een voordeel heeft van die o zo belangrijke Europese interne markt. Het cohesiebeleid speelt een belangrijke rol bij het ontwikkelen van banen — baancreatie — én sociale inclusie. Dat moet het cohesiebeleid ook in de toekomst kunnen blijven doen.

Daarvoor moeten we ons in de toekomst ook inzetten voor een apart Europees Sociaal Fonds, met een eigen budget, in het volgende meerjarig financieel kader van de Europese Unie. Een volgend Europees Sociaal Fonds moet meer zijn dan een wassen neus; het moet een fonds zijn waar mensen gebruik van kunnen maken, of dat nu is om vaardigheden voor een volgende baan te ontwikkelen, of om sociaal mee te komen in de Europese Unie en in de samenleving. Want met een asociaal Europa zijn wij verloren.

Nikolina Brnjac, u ime kluba PPE. – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, povjereniče, drage kolegice i kolege, danas mladi ostaju živjeti s roditeljima jer ne mogu priuštiti najamninu, a obitelji u gradovima troše prevelik dio prihoda na stanovanje. To je stvarnost milijuna naših građana u Europskoj uniji. Kohezijska politika mora biti alat koji odgovara na te potrebe. Zato sam predložila i konkretne mjere.

Prvo, da se ulaganje u priuštivo stanovanje priznaje kao ulaganje u naše klimatske ciljeve, čime ćemo imati jednostavnije financiranje priuštivog stanovanja u državama članicama, što do sada nije bio slučaj. Drugo, naglasila sam potrebu za boljom integracijom Socijalnog fonda za klimatsku politiku s kohezijskom politikom kako bi ulaganja u socijalno stanovanje i ciljana pomoć mladima za pristupačne najamnine bila brža i učinkovitija. I treće, kroz ESF+ predložila sam da se financiraju doplatci za stanovanje i mjere socijalne uključenosti povezane s priuštivim stanovanjem.

U izvješću o kojem danas raspravljamo jasno se poziva na proširenje djelokruga Kohezijskog fonda ne samo na energetsku učinkovitost i obnovljive izvore energije nego i na inovativne pristupe koji povećavaju upravo priuštivost stanovanja. Ovo izvješće daje snažan temelj Europske komisije za izradu europskog plana priuštivog stanovanja najavljenog za sljedeću godinu.

Ako želimo očuvati konkurentnost, demografsku ravnotežu i socijalnu pravednost, moramo stambeno pitanje tretirati strateški jer dom nije luksuz, dom je temeljna potreba i pravo svakog građana.

Nora Mebarek, au nom du groupe S&D. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, Monsieur le Vice-président, notre transformation écologique sera équitable ou elle échouera, et le Fonds pour une transition juste a été obtenu, vous l'avez entendu, de haute lutte sous la précédente législature, pour éviter que la neutralité carbone ne soit vécue comme une punition.

Ce fonds est vital pour accompagner les travailleurs, les familles et les territoires les plus exposés. Dans mon département des Bouches-du-Rhône, où l'industrie pétrochimique est un pilier de l'économie, décarboner est un impératif. Mais, sans soutien, cela signifie des pertes d'emplois et le désespoir social. Grâce à une contribution forte de l'Union européenne, cette mutation peut devenir une chance, avec un financement sur le chômage partiel, des reconversions aux formations professionnelles et surtout le maintien du droit de vivre dignement dans sa région.

Or, ce n'est pas du tout ce que nous propose la Commission lorsqu'elle fait disparaître purement et simplement le Fonds pour une transition juste du prochain cadre budgétaire 2028-2034. À la place, elle lui préfère une transition propre, concentrée sur des grands projets industriels au détriment des besoins sociaux et territoriaux. C'est un recul inacceptable, vous l'avez entendu sur tous les bancs de ce Parlement. Aussi, notre Parlement trace une autre voie, un nouveau fonds, une directive sur la transition juste et l'implication totale des régions et des partenaires sociaux. Notre message est clair: sans solidarité européenne, pas de transition juste et durable sur notre continent.

Klara Dostalova, za skupinu PfE. – Paní předsedající, pane komisaři, kohezní politika včetně investic do bydlení mají sloužit jednomu jasnému účelu – zlepšit život Evropanů, mají snižovat rozdíly, rozvíjet infrastrukturu a zajistit dostupné bydlení. Jenže místo praktických řešení je Komise proměňuje v nástroje politického nátlaku a ideologických experimentů. Slyšíme sliby o zjednodušení – méně byrokracie, více digitalizace, silnější podpora pro obce. To všechno zní dobře, ale realita je bohužel jiná. Fondy jsou stále častěji vázány na podmínky, které s růstem nemají nic společného – na Zelenou dohodu, genderové agendy nebo právní stát.

Kohezní politika se přitom nesmí stát rukojmím politických sporů ani laboratoří nových ideologií. Pokud má kohezní politika mít smysl, musí se vrátit ke svému poslání podporovat občany investicemi, snižovat regionální rozdíly, a ne je zatěžovat centralizovanou kontrolou. Lidé venku nepotřebují další Green Deal, nepotřebují genderové příručky ani nekonečné bruselské podmínky. Potřebují práci, potřebují bydlení a potřebují normální život. Je potřeba si připomínat, že kohezní peníze nejsou peníze Komise. Jsou to peníze občanů. A tyto peníze mají jít na inovace, silnice, nemocnice, školy a bydlení. Mějme na paměti, že kohezní politika je jedním z mála pozitivně vnímaných nástrojů evropské politiky. A na to bychom neměli nikdy zapomínat.

Antonella Sberna, a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signora Presidente, signor Vicepresidente Fitto, onorevoli colleghi, la crisi abitativa oggi è una delle più grandi emergenze sociali in Europa. I numeri parlano chiaro: secondo Eurostat, oltre il 7 % degli europei spende più del 40 % del proprio reddito per la casa e in alcuni paesi la percentuale è molto più alta.

Senza una casa accessibile e dignitosa i giovani non costruiscono famiglie, i lavoratori non mettono radici e i territori si svuotano. Ecco perché la politica di coesione ha un ruolo decisivo in questo, e grazie al suo lavoro, Commissario Fitto, i fondi strutturali stanno diventando più flessibili, meno burocratici e capaci di rispondere ai bisogni concreti delle persone.

Oggi abbiamo una grande opportunità, che è quella di armonizzare tutti gli strumenti a disposizione, dalla revisione del PNRR alla revisione di medio termine della politica di coesione, fino alla più ampia programmazione europea per la casa.

In Italia il governo guidato da Giorgia Meloni ha lanciato un piano casa nazionale, che vuole trasformare l'abitare in una leva di crescita e coesione.

Io credo che questa intuizione debba e possa diventare anche una sfida che tutti noi possiamo cogliere in Europa: un piano casa europeo, sostenuto dalla politica di coesione, capace di contrastare lo spopolamento delle aree interne e rafforzare la tenuta demografica, perché la vera forza dell'Europa non sarà misurata dai palazzi e dalle istituzioni, ma dalle case in cui le famiglie potranno mettere radici.

Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, the cohesion policy is a foundational policy for our Union. We invest in our weakest link to create a stronger chain. All of our regions and all of our citizens should benefit.

As times change and new challenges arise, we want and need cohesion policy to adapt and modernise. We can simplify access to funds without lowering the standards. We can strengthen our European defence while investing in smaller companies and poorer regions. We can address one of the biggest concerns of the European citizens present here today, namely the housing crisis, and meet our green ambitions.

Cohesion policy is valuable, literally. It is the best ambassador of our values and the desire for an ever closer Union. Therefore, we have to be fierce and ruthless in defending its foundation. Centralisation, as proposed by the European Commission, undermines these fundaments.

And this Parliament, also today, has been very clear: regions should remain at the core of this policy and we need to ensure that not one single euro from European funds ends up in the hands of those who want to destroy the rule of law and our shared European values. No money to autocrats and their cronies ever.

Cohesion policy is worth improving and worth investing. It sends a message of an idea dear to all of us: a Europe that protects.

Gordan Bosanac, u ime kluba Verts/ALE. – Poštovani predsjedavajući, povjereniče Fitto, jako mi je drago da smo kroz ovo prvo izvješće koje će Parlament donijeti o stanovanju jasno detektirali probleme stambene krize.

Prvo su spekulativna ulaganja i prepuštanje politike stanovanja privatnom kapitalu. Dalje to tako više ne može. Drugo je manjak investicija u priuštivo i socijalno stanovanje, mobilizaciju praznih stanova i energetsku obnovu. To je smjer u kojem moramo ići dalje. I treći problem je rast kratkoročnog najma odnosno nekontroliranje kratkoročnog najma. Tomu isto tako trebamo stati na kraj.

Dobra vijest je da je u kohezijskoj politici sada prepoznato stanovanje i to ću pozdraviti, da je novac sada na raspolaganju državama članicama da se bave ovim temeljnim uzrocima. Ali loša vijest je da je na neki način Komisija kapitulirala pred državama članicama i u stvari pustila sve u ruke država članica da same odluče hoće li se ili neće baviti ovom krizom ili će se baviti nekim drugim prioritetom. I to je loša vijest.

Isto tako, hoću naglasiti još jednom kako bez obzira na napade koje slušamo o zelenoj tranziciji u ovom Parlamentu, ona je otišla već predaleko i neće je zaustaviti niti moje kolege iz ECR-a, niti nitko iz desnice.

I zbog toga mislim da uistinu moramo shvatiti da je pravedna tranzicija koja će biti adekvatno financirana ključ daljnjeg napretka. Ona ne može biti prepuštena samo državama članicama i volio bih jaču ulogu i Parlamenta i Komisije, da ne radimo kapitulaciju pred državama članicama.

Έλενα Κουντουρά, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας The Left. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση μπορεί να ξεπεράσει τις πολλαπλές κρίσεις των τελευταίων ετών μέσω περισσότερης συνοχής και σύγκλισης. Αυτός είναι εξάλλου και ο στόχος των διαρθρωτικών ταμείων που την βοήθησαν να οικοδομηθεί. Η πολιτική συνοχής αποτελεί το κρισιμότερο ευρωπαϊκό εργαλείο για τη μείωση των ανισοτήτων. Όμως η πρόταση της Επιτροπής για το νέο πολυετές δημοσιονομικό πλαίσιο δεν ανταποκρίνεται στις πραγματικές ανάγκες των περιφερειών, ούτε ενισχύει επαρκώς τα εργαλεία που θα μας επιτρέψουν να μειώσουμε αυτές τις ανισότητες. Οφείλουμε να διασφαλίσουμε ότι στο νέο πολυετές δημοσιονομικό πλαίσιο, το Ταμείο Δίκαιης Μετάβασης θα συνεχιστεί με αυξημένο προϋπολογισμό –και δυστυχώς η Επιτροπή δεν το έχει συμπεριλάβει στην πρότασή της– διότι συμβάλλει καθοριστικά στον στόχο για κλιματική ουδετερότητα με όρους κοινωνικής δικαιοσύνης και διαδραματίζει κρίσιμο ρόλο στην κατάρτιση, μετεκπαίδευση και επανεκπαίδευση των εργαζομένων, στην ενίσχυση της απασχόλησης και στη στήριξη των μικρομεσαίων επιχειρήσεων.

Κύριε Επίτροπε, για την αντιμετώπιση της στεγαστικής κρίσης που πλήττει δυσανάλογα τις ευάλωτες ομάδες, η πολιτική συνοχής διαδραματίζει καθοριστικό ρόλο και οι ανάγκες τους πρέπει να τεθούν στο επίκεντρό της. Θα πρέπει, επίσης, να εξαιρούνται από τους δημοσιονομικούς περιορισμούς οι επενδύσεις σε δημόσιες κοινωνικές κατοικίες. Είμαι, τέλος, πολύ περήφανη που στην έκθεσή μας αναδείξαμε τις ιδιαίτερες προκλήσεις των ευρωπαϊκών νησιών, ζητώντας ειδική στήριξη με ενισχυμένη χρηματοδότηση για στοχευμένες στεγαστικές πολιτικές, ώστε τα νησιά να πετύχουν ουσιαστική ανάπτυξη και οι κάτοικοί τους να μπορούν να παραμείνουν στον τόπο τους. Σας ευχαριστώ πολύ.

Irmhild Boßdorf, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Klimagerechtigkeit, schöner Wohnen, blühende Landschaften – was soll eigentlich noch alles aus den Kohäsionsmitteln bezahlt werden? Machen wir uns ehrlich: Einen großen Teil der Probleme, die wir nun mühsam lösen müssen, haben wir selbst verursacht. Niemand zwingt uns, Klimaneutralität bis zum Jahr 2050 herzustellen; dieses Ziel wurde losgelöst von der Realität festgelegt. Produktionsverlagerung, carbon leakage, Investitionsabwanderungen sind eine erste Folge; Hunderttausende von Arbeitsplätzen gehen verloren. Die Deindustrialisierung des Kontinents hat längst begonnen.

Auch die Wohnungskrise ist hausgemacht. Wer Millionen von Einwanderern, Asylsuchenden, Fremdlingen in den Kontinent lässt, darf sich am Ende nicht wundern, dass der Wohnraum nicht mehr ausreicht.

Kohäsionsmittel sind nicht dafür gedacht, eine schlechte Politik zu heilen; sie sollen den ländlichen Raum wieder lebenswert machen. Die einfache und unkomplizierte Zuteilung der Kohäsionsmittel ist der einzig vernünftige Vorschlag, der heute hier gemacht worden ist.

Φρέντης Μπελέρης (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, χρειαζόμαστε πιο απλές διαδικασίες χρηματοδότησης και ελέγχου για τους δικαιούχους. Ένας πολίτης στο ακριτικό Καστελόριζο πρέπει να έχει τις ίδιες ευκαιρίες με έναν πολίτη στις Βρυξέλλες. Αυτό είναι το σαφές μήνυμα που πρέπει να στείλουμε με την έκθεση απλούστευσης των Ταμείων Συνοχής, ύστερα και από τις ανακοινώσεις της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής για τον νέο προϋπολογισμό μετά το 2027. Πρέπει να στηρίξουμε περισσότερο τις αρχές των νησιωτικών και των απομακρυσμένων περιοχών, οι οποίες δυσκολεύονται στην απορρόφηση των ευρωπαϊκών πόρων για αντικειμενικούς λόγους και χωρίς δική τους ευθύνη. Τα εμπόδια που περιορίζουν αυτή την απορρόφηση πρέπει να αντιμετωπιστούν. Γι αυτό, το κείμενο που ψηφίζουμε αύριο τονίζει την ανάγκη να ενισχυθεί η ικανότητα των τοπικών και περιφερειακών αρχών μέσω της δημιουργίας μόνιμου δικτύου υποστήριξης, ώστε να αξιοποιούν αποτελεσματικά τα διαθέσιμα κονδύλια.

Ζητούμε επίσης περισσότερη στήριξη για τον σχεδιασμό και την προετοιμασία έργων, ώστε να ενισχυθεί η ανταγωνιστικότητα και να αξιοποιηθούν πόροι του δημοσίου και του ιδιωτικού τομέα. Ταυτόχρονα, γνωρίζοντας τα προβλήματα ρευστότητας, ζητούμε αύξηση των προχρηματοδοτήσεων για να υλοποιούνται τα έργα συνοχής, ειδικά σε αγροτικές, διασυνοριακές και νησιωτικές περιοχές. Τέλος, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, χρειαζόμαστε περισσότερο από ποτέ μια αποτελεσματική πολιτική συνοχής με ταμεία απλά και στοχευμένα που θα στέκονται δίπλα στην τοπική και περιφερειακή αρχή, δίπλα στην επιχείρηση, δίπλα στον πολίτη.

Klára Dobrev (S&D). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Hadd mondjak el Önöknek egy történetet, különösen az Európai Parlament jobb oldalán ülő jobboldali képviselőtársaimnak. Orbán Viktor 15 éve papol nekünk versenyképességről. Ennek oltárán feláldozta a munka törvénykönyvét, létrehozta a “rabszolgatörvényt”, és Európa legolcsóbb és legkiszolgáltatottabb munkaerejével látja el elsősorban a milliárdos nagyvállalatokat. Eltörölte gyakorlatilag a környezetvédelmet. A világ legmocskosabb akkumulátorgyárai szennyezik szinte korlátok nélkül a magyar mezőgazdasági földeket, termőföldeket és vizeket, és például nem vezeti be az eurót, hogy a gyenge forinttal segítse a multik versenyképességét – akarom mondani a profitját.

Szóval 15 éve papol versenyképességről. Megtette mindezeket a lépéseket, amelyeken látom, hogy néha Önök is készülnek. Úgyhogy feltehetjük a kérdést: de sikerült? És az a válaszom, hogy nem. Totális kudarc, totális kudarc. 15 évvel ezelőtt Magyarország Kelet-Közép-Európa egyik legmenőbb országa volt. Ma Európa legszegényebb országává váltunk, és ennek mind ez a jobboldali gazdaság- és társadalompolitika az oka. Éppen ezért én azt javasolnám az Európai Parlamentnek, hogy a holnapi napon kövessék a baloldal útját, a baloldal javaslatait: tisztességes fizetések, nyugdíjak, lakásépítés, egészségügy, oktatás. Ezek teszik versenyképessé az európai embereket. A nagyvállalatok helyett álljunk az emberek oldalára!

Julien Leonardelli (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, l'attribution des fonds européens est aujourd'hui un véritable scandale. La France contribue massivement au budget de l'Union et pourtant nos territoires sont trop souvent oubliés.

Chez moi, en Occitanie, la réalité est simple. Les infrastructures de transport se dégradent. Nos zones rurales restent enclavées. L'eau manque chaque année un peu plus et, chaque été, nos campagnes brûlent, tandis que nos pompiers manquent de moyens pour protéger les habitants. Voilà la vraie vie de nos concitoyens.

Dans ce contexte, on nous présente le Fonds pour une transition juste comme un outil de justice sociale. Mais la réalité est tout autre. Ce fonds, financé par les Européens eux-mêmes, est noyé sous la complexité administrative. Résultat: les collectivités locales, les agriculteurs et les associations se retrouvent face à une jungle de procédures. L'aide arrive trop tard ou n'arrive jamais.

Il y a plus grave encore. Ce fonds n'a pas pour objectif de répondre aux besoins urgents des Européens. Il sert avant tout à accompagner une transition écologique imposée, qui détruit nos industries, qui sacrifie nos emplois et qui plonge nos territoires dans la précarité.

Bruxelles trouve toujours des milliards pour financer des projets pharaoniques à l'autre bout du monde, pendant que nos paysans, nos pêcheurs, nos ouvriers luttent pour survivre. Notre position est claire: l'argent des Européens doit rester en Europe. Il doit servir nos nations, nos régions, nos travailleurs, nos agriculteurs, et non financer une transition écologique punitive ni arroser des projets extérieurs. C'est une question de justice. C'est une question de bon sens. Il est temps de bâtir une Europe au service de ses peuples et non une Europe au service du reste du monde.

Waldemar Buda (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Tutaj przed nami powinna stać wielka czarna trumna. My dzisiaj dyskutujemy o propozycjach budżetowych na następną perspektywę z polityką spójności mniejszą o połowę, o 50%. To jest śmierć kliniczna, to jest katastrofa. I ja nie mam tutaj żadnych pretensji do pana komisarza Fitto, ponieważ, o zgrozo, ten budżet przygotował Polak – Piotr Serafin. Ale, Szanowni Państwo, my się nie możemy na to zgodzić. Jeżeli są inne zadania, proszę bardzo, ale nie kosztem polityki spójności i nie kosztem regionów. A ten projekt niestety tak wygląda.

I jeszcze mam uwagę, żeby te środki były po prostu rzetelnie i przyzwoicie dysponowane. My w Polsce mamy rozkradzione środki KPO na jachty, na muzykę techno na balkonie i tego typu podobne projekty. Więc ja tutaj apeluję również do Pana Komisarza o przyjrzenie się, jak są środki europejskie w Polsce wydawane, kiedy ja za środki europejskie wydatkowanie odpowiadałem w Polsce, byliśmy liderami w Europie. Dzisiaj się kupuje jachty, ponad sto jachtów kupiono za środki z KPO i to jest skandal. Nie może to się przełożyć na politykę spójności.

Joachim Streit (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar! Wenn Kohäsionsmittel ein Drittel des Haushaltes der EU ausmachen, dann ist das ein ganz wichtiger Punkt, zu dem wir heute sprechen dürfen, und es beeindruckt mich auch als Mitglied des Haushaltsausschusses.

Ganz, ganz wichtig ist es, dass wir die Vielzahl von Fonds zusammenfassen und es einfacher machen – einfacher für diejenigen, die vor Ort Verantwortung tragen. Deshalb bin ich froh, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar Fitto, dass Sie hier mitverantwortlich sind, denn Sie sind von Geburt an Regionalpolitiker, und als Regionalpolitiker weiß man ganz genau, was Politiker vor Ort haben wollen: Sie wollen keinen Zentralismus, sie wollen keine komplizierten Verfahren, sie wollen nicht abhängig sein von der Politik des Heimatlandes, sondern vor Ort mit den Menschen einen Plan aufstellen, wie ihre Region für die Zukunft aufgebaut werden soll.

Deshalb müssen wir uns hüten, bei der Kohäsionspolitik einen zentralistischen Ansatz zu wählen, wie ihn Frau von der Leyen möchte, sondern wir müssen im Grundsatz dort bleiben, wo Kohäsionspolitik immer war, nämlich bei den Kommunen. Das heißt: Subsidiarität; es wird entschieden vor Ort.

Und zweitens: Was ich auch verlange, ist eine Konnexität. Wenn die EU etwas haben will, was vor Ort noch nicht stattfindet, dann muss man auch die Mittel dafür geben, sowohl für das Personal als auch für die Dinge.

Katrin Langensiepen (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kommission! Klimawandel ist keine Phase, Hase. Das ist nicht irgendwas, was man sich mal ausgedacht hat, was gerade mal passt, und dann kickt infantiles Verhalten ein, und ich mache die Augen zu, und den Klimawandel gibt es gar nicht.

Wir haben Anfang der Woche, also gestern, drüber gesprochen, über die Landstriche, die vertrocknen, wo es Waldbrände gibt, wo Menschen ihr Heim verlieren; und dann heißt es, ja, der Klimawandel, aber eigentlich gibt es den ja gar nicht. Den Klimawandel werden wir nicht stoppen können, aber die Folgen, die können wir abfedern für die armen Menschen.

Wie ist die Wohnungssituation für obdachlose Menschen? Wir haben ja eine Beschlusslage, Obdachlosigkeit in der EU bis 2030 zu beenden. Da müssen wir die Kommunen unterstützen, denn die sagen: “Mach ich gerne, aber von welchem Geld? Und wer bekommt es?”

Ich glaube, die Akzeptanz für die EU und für die Arbeit, die wir hier leisten, ist: Was macht die EU, dieses Brüssel für mich? Kann ich von der Miete leben? Kann ich auch als armer Mensch Wohnraum bekommen? Wie kann eine Kommune von Brüssel profitieren? Und das stärkt die Demokratie, und das ist unsere Aufgabe – Kürzen, Intransparenz ist da keine Lösung.

Kathleen Funchion (The Left). – Madam President, I was happy to contribute positively to a report on simplifying access to EU funds. As many of us know, it is the simple fact that many groups in communities are very frustrated at and by the maze of paperwork drawing down EU funds involves. So in my contribution to this report, I tackled things like streamlining the number of data requests and listening to the people on the ground who were actually applying for funds.

However, I cannot support a report which cannot talk about the simplification without pushing for the militarisation of cohesion funds. This should be completely out of bounds politically, yet other groups lined up to accept without any resistance. How can allowing funds for regional development for defence purposes even be countenanced? Changing the rules so that the ESF+ and the ERDF can be put to use for the military industry is a gross betrayal.

Growing up in Ireland, we learned the value of EU funds to our economy and to our infrastructure. They were a symbol of practical solidarity for economically lagging regions. Now they are just to be used as another fund for topping up arms and the war-making industry. It is a shameful move, showing how nothing is safe from this agenda but will be an excuse in the future to cut funds from vital social projects in order to pay for weapons.

Танер Кабилов (NI). – Г-жо Председател, приветствам усилията на Европейската комисия и лично на вицепрезидента Фито за това, че извеждат водната устойчивост като стратегически приоритет в рамките на средносрочния преглед на политиката на сближаване.

За да отговорим на настоящите предизвикателства, ще бъдат нужни сериозни финансови ресурси и по-силна координация между институциите, по-конкретно в държавите членки, където загубите на вода надвишават средноевропейските нива. Там трябва да се инвестира в нови водоизточници, да изградим модерна ВиК инфраструктура, да създадем реални стимули за задържане на хората, особено в уязвимите и обезлюдаващи се региони, чрез нови работни места и достъп до чиста вода.

Вярвам, че е време да започнем стратегически разговор за мястото на изкуствения интелект и дигиталните технологии в бъдещето на водния сектор като инструменти за по-прецизно управление, ранно предупреждение и мониторинг, включително по отношение на оползотворяването на отпадните води, което остава сериозно предизвикателство. Надявам се, че водата няма да остане просто приоритет в рамките на кохезионната политика, а ще получи по-сериозен акцент в новата многогодишна финансова рамка. Убеден съм, че политиката на сближаване е шанс да превърнем предизвикателствата във възможности.

Elena Nevado del Campo (PPE). – Señora presidenta, señor comisario y vicepresidente de la Comisión Europea. Durante décadas, la política de cohesión se ha erigido como parte sustancial del acervo comunitario: el nexo de Europa con sus territorios, la herramienta de su propio crecimiento conforme a sus necesidades reales.

Queremos regiones más competitivas y queremos hacer frente a las diferentes situaciones y retos: desde la transición justa hasta las infraestructuras o la vivienda. Pero, ciertamente, con el 0,3 % del PIB europeo tampoco se pueden obrar milagros.

Y yo también tengo una historia que contarles. En España, el gobierno de izquierdas, progresista, de coalición, nos prometió la construcción de 184 000 viviendas que ni están ni se las espera. Planes estatales de vivienda que ni están ni se los espera. Y un gran parque público de vivienda que ni está ni se lo espera.

Por eso necesitamos también los fondos de cohesión europeos. Y por eso tampoco queremos una política de cohesión que elimine a las regiones y a los municipios de la ecuación. Usted sabe lo importante que es para las regiones y los municipios la política de cohesión para su progreso y para su salida hacia delante.

Por eso tampoco queremos dejar la cohesión en manos de los Gobiernos centrales. Europa pasa por ser y estar cohesionada. La cohesión hace Europa y no al revés.

Matthias Ecke (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Morgen verabschieden wir drei Initiativberichte über die Zukunft der Kohäsionspolitik, und ich muss ehrlich sagen: Vielleicht hätten wir uns die ganze Arbeit sparen können, vielleicht war sie umsonst.

Was nützt denn ein Vorschlag für eine simplifizierte Förderung, wenn die Kommission plant, die Regionalpolitik, wie wir sie kennen, ab 2028 quasi abzuschaffen? Was bringt denn ein Mechanismus für einen gerechten Übergang, wenn wir den einzigen Fonds für diesen Strukturwandel, der genau dafür da ist – den JTF –, im nächsten EU-Haushalt nicht wiederfinden?

Ich hatte gerade in meiner Region eine große Konferenz zum JTF mit dem Grußwort von Ihnen, Herr Fitto, wo Sie begeisternde Projekte vorgestellt haben: KMU, Transfer, Forschung. Und was kann ich denen sagen: “Toll, was ihr gemacht habt, aber es wird gestrichen!”?

Die EU-Förderpolitik war immer das sichtbarste Zeichen Europas: Wir lassen euch nicht allein beim Weg in die Klimaneutralität, beim Zusammenwachsen der Regionen, bei einer Wirtschaftsentwicklung, die überall ankommt. Und jetzt scheint dieses Versprechen gebrochen.

Wir sind weiterhin für eine Kohäsionspolitik, die die Regionen in den Mittelpunkt stellt. Wir sind gegen eine Zentralisierung mit den Hauptstädten. Wir wollen Wohlstand in allen Teilen Europas.

Tamás Deutsch (PfE). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Beszéljünk a lényegről! Elfogadhatatlan, hogy a kohéziós források folyósítását Brüsszel az elmúlt években a politikai zsarolás eszközeként használta. Az Európai Unió nem parancsuralmi rendszer. Az EU úgy nem működhet, hogy a brüsszeliták hatalmi szóval megmondják, meghatározzák, megparancsolják, jogállamisági eljárásokkal kikényszerítik, hogy hogyan is éljenek a magyarok. A tagállamok szuverenitását, a nemzetek szabadságát nem lehet uniós pénzügyi eszközökkel csorbítani. A jelenlegi többéves keretköltségvetésből az európai régióknak járó pénzeknek még csak körülbelül a tizedét, 40 milliárd eurót fizettek ki, ellenben az ukrajnai háborút már több mint 165 milliárd euróval támogatták.

Önök azonban most ennél is többet akarnak. Ursula von der Leyen olyan költségvetést javasol, amely az uniós források 20-25%-át Ukrajnába küldené. Elfogadhatatlan, hogy Önök el akarják venni a pénzt az európaiaktól, hogy Ukrajnának adják. Ráadásul a háború további finanszírozására és Ukrajna gyorsított uniós csatlakozására már megint közös uniós hitelfelvétellel adósítanák el Európát.

Mi, magyarok köszönjük, de nem akarjuk, hogy Brüsszel közös hitelfelvétellel eladósítson bennünket, sőt még a gyerekeinket és az unokáinkat is. Nem kérünk a brüsszeli giga hitelfelvételből, az adósrabszolgaságból.

(A felszólaló hajlandó válaszolni egy kékkártyás kérdésre)

Gordan Bosanac (Verts/ALE), pitanje koje je podizanjem plave kartice postavio. – Mene zanima kako govorite o političkoj ucjeni u kohezijskim fondovima iz vaše perspektive većine u Mađarskoj, gdje ste potpuno politički marginalizirali bilo koje oporbene političare?

Koliko ste, na primjer, novaca europskih fondova dozvolili da ode u grad Budimpeštu? Ne puštate taj novac samo zato što je netko iz druge stranke na čelu toga grada.

I onda mi nije jasno kako Vas nije sram govoriti o nekakvim političkim ucjenama kada je upravo vaša Vlada u Mađarskoj tipičan primjer kako reketarite sa kohezijskim fondovima i nadam se da ćemo tome stati na kraj.

Tamás Deutsch (PfE), kékkártyás válasz. – “kékkártyás kérdésre” adott válasz. Tisztelt Képviselő Úr! Itt ezen a helyen állt Ursula von der Leyen, és azt mondta, hogy mindazzal szemben, amit a jogállamisági eljárás kezdeményezésekor mondtak, azért nem adják oda az Európai Bizottság részéről a Magyarországnak járó forrásokat, mert Magyarország nem hajlandó beengedni az illegális migránsokat. Igen, nem vagyunk hajlandóak beengedni őket a politikai zsarolás ellenére, és azért, mert a genderérzékenyítőkkel szemben megvédjük a magyar gyerekeket.

Budapest minden létező fejlesztésére európai uniós forrást kapott. Kérdezze meg a fővárosi főpolgármestert és a kerületi polgármestereket! Minden ezzel ellentétes állítás hazugság.

Aurelijus Veryga (ECR). – Pirmininke, komisare, norėčiau kalbėti apie būsto krizę, kuri kiekvienoje Europos Sąjungos valstybėje reiškiasi skirtingai, tačiau šios krizės poveikis visiems bus vienodai blogas. Europos Sąjungai susiduriant su demografine krize, jaunoms šeimoms nuosavas būstas tampa tik svajone. Jos dažnai atideda šeimos kūrimą ir vaikų gimimą. Ši problema ilgą laiką buvo laikoma vietiniu savivaldos ar nacionaliniu rūpesčiu, tačiau ji yra susijusi ne tik su vietiniais sprendimais. Nėra normalu, kai būsto kainos per pastaruosius 15 metų auga kelis kartus sparčiau nei darbo užmokestis. Labai svarbu, kad būsto įperkamumo krizė nebūtų dirbtinai didinama keliant nepakeliamus reikalavimus dėl būsto energetinio efektyvumo, nes tai gerokai pabrangina naujo būsto statybą. O brangstant naujam būstui, iš paskos kyla ir senų būstų kainos. Europos Parlamentas privalo dėti visas pastangas, siekdamas sušvelninti šią krizę, nes tai nebe tik nacionalinė, bet ir europinė problema, tiesiogiai veikianti socialinę sanglaudą, jaunimo ateities perspektyvas ir žmonių pasitikėjimą Europos Sąjungos institucijomis.

Elsi Katainen (Renew). – Arvoisa puhemies, komission ehdottama rahoituskehys on muuttamassa EU:n koheesiopolitiikkaa huolestuttavalla tavalla. Yksinkertaistamisen ja tehostamisen nimissä komissio esittää sekä aluekehityksen että maaseudun kehittämisen rahoituksen leikkauksia ja jäsenmaiden kansallisen päätösvallan lisäämistä. Alueet itse eivät siis voi enää suunnitella varojen käyttöä pitkäjänteisesti, mikä on vastoin koheesiopolitiikan perusajatusta ja myös läheisyysperiaatetta. Tällä esityksellä komissio heikentää aluekehittämistä huomattavasti.

Erityisen huolissani olen itäisten rajaseutujemme puolesta. Ne ovat kantaneet raskasta taakkaa Venäjän hyökkäyssodan alkamisesta saakka, ja niille olisi varattava riittävä rahoitus välttämättömiin elinvoimainvestointeihin. Jos itäraja heikkenee, koko Euroopan turvallisuus kärsii. Kokonaisturvallisuuden ehdoton edellytys on, että alueet pidetään kehityksessä mukana. Komission tyhjien lupausten sijaan itäiselle rajalle tarvitaan nyt selkeästi korvamerkittyjä varoja.

Vicent Marzà Ibáñez (Verts/ALE). – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, tan solo en los últimos dos años, en Valencia ha aumentado el precio del alquiler un 40%. Solo en dos años. En Elx, el 70% de las viviendas del mercado de alquiler de la ciudad están secuestradas para alquiler turístico, ¡el 70%!, y no van para los vecinos y para las vecinas.

O en mi ciudad, en Castelló, resulta que hay estudiantes que han dejado de estudiar la carrera universitaria que querían porque no se pueden pagar una habitación, y eso estamos viendo que ocurre en toda Europa.

Por eso no podemos hablar de políticas de cohesión sin hablar de vivienda. Y usted tiene una responsabilidad, la tiene, la puede ejercer usted, no solo el Estado miembro.

Y por eso le voy a proponer dos cuestiones. La primera, que los fondos de cohesión que se dedican a vivienda solo se puedan dedicar a viviendas asequibles y que si se destinan a viviendas asequibles, que esas viviendas no puedan luego pasar al libre mercado, que no se pueda especular con ellas.

Y la segunda, que los fondos no se recentralicen, porque tienen que ir a aquellos que más saben lo que están sufriendo sus ciudadanos: las ciudades y las regiones. Y para ello, señor comisario, usted tiene una obligación. Porque no podemos hablar de cohesión si no hay un techo digno.

Dan-Ștefan Motreanu (PPE). – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar, stimați colegi, încep prin a mulțumi colegilor responsabili pentru rapoartele dezbătute astăzi și doresc să fac referire la necesitatea simplificării politicii de coeziune.

Există încă regiuni ale Uniunii Europene în care autoritățile locale și întreprinderile mici și mijlocii preferă să apeleze la credite bancare sau să aștepte după fonduri guvernamentale, în loc să acceseze fonduri europene, deoarece procedurile birocratice complexe, costurile ridicate și condiționalitățile stricte fac ca finanțarea europeană să fie dificil de obținut și de gestionat.

Această situație este cauzată atât de regulile stabilite de la nivel european, dar mai ales de regulile suplimentare impuse de la nivel național și care adesea sunt inutile. Din acest motiv, am depus o serie de amendamente la Raportul privind simplificarea, prin care solicit un set unic de reguli pentru accesarea fondurilor europene, precum și aplicarea auditului unic în ceea ce privește implementarea, monitorizarea și controlul.

Numai astfel ne putem asigura că beneficiarii, fie ei autorități locale sau regionale, IMM-uri, ONG-uri, mediul academic sau persoane fizice, își concentrează resursele pe dezvoltarea și implementarea proiectelor europene și nu pe depășirea obstacolelor administrative.

Totodată, susțin crearea unei platforme europene unice, conectate cu platformele naționale, care să ofere tuturor beneficiarilor acces rapid la diferitele fonduri europene relevante pentru sectorul în care activează.

Irene Tinagli (S&D). – Signora Presidente, signor Vicepresidente Fitto, onorevoli colleghi, parlo italiano così ci capiamo subito.

Il tema della casa è un tema ormai enorme e i fondi di coesione sono spesso le poche risorse e i pochi strumenti che hanno gli amministratori locali sui territori, nelle regioni, nelle città, per dare un po' di sollievo e di risposte ai cittadini, e quindi sono importantissimi.

Però, come si direbbe, non basta la parola, non basta mettere i fondi sulla carta: bisogna capire come vengono spesi, con quali strategie, con quali tempistiche, con quali condizionalità.

Gli porto solo due o tre esempi.

Primo: a noi ha fatto molto piacere la revisione di medio termine dei fondi, con il raddoppio da 7 a 15 miliardi di euro sull'housing, però molti sindaci e amministratori ci dicono che era tardi, che non ci sono le condizioni, che molti erano già stati spesi. Non so se Lei ha dei dati su questo, però solo per dire che la capacità di avere dei tempi lunghi di programmazione per questo tipo di investimenti è fondamentale.

Secondo: le condizionalità. Essere sicuri che queste risorse vadano davvero a progetti che hanno un impatto sociale rilevante, perché è lì dove noi abbiamo bisogno: il disagio sociale.

Terzo: riguardo alla nuova proposta per le politiche di coesione, la preoccupazione è per la centralizzazione delle decisioni a livello nazionale. Non possiamo togliere dei margini di manovra laddove c'è più bisogno a livello locale e territoriale.

Quindi, per favore, agiamo, perché abbiamo milioni di cittadini e di amministratori che hanno bisogno del nostro sostegno.

Valérie Deloge (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, le rapport qui nous est présenté ici illustre une dérive inquiétante, toujours plus inquiétante. Cette dérive, c'est celle du pacte vert, qui occupe de plus en plus l'espace mental et politique des centristes du Parlement.

La politique de cohésion, dont la raison de vivre est de soutenir l'économie de nos territoires, est désormais transformée en instrument politique du pacte vert de la Commission européenne. Le Fonds pour une transition juste devient conditionné à des critères idéologiques, et la vision de ce rapport n'est rien de plus que la transformation de nos régions en bureaucratie bruxelloise centralisée.

La véritable transition juste, c'est celle qui soutient nos agriculteurs et nos territoires ruraux, sans idéologie, en soutenant l'innovation de terrain, la souveraineté alimentaire et la baisse des normes, pas celle qui conditionne nos fonds à des dérives inquiétantes, toujours plus inquiétantes.

Șerban Dimitrie Sturdza (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, stimate domnule Fitto, stimați colegi, mă bucur că acest raport recunoaște, în sfârșit, realitatea. Tranziția verde a adus puține beneficii, dar mai ales pagube majore pentru multe dintre regiunile europene. Astăzi nu facem altceva decât să încercăm să reparăm aceste pagube și să fim sinceri, regiunile cele mai puțin dezvoltate din Uniunea Europeană au plătit prețul cel mai mare al politicii Pactului Verde, atât din punct de vedere economic, cât și social, în timp ce regiunile bogate au știut să profite de pe urma acestuia. Asta pentru că politicile și soluțiile europene trebuie să fie adaptate realităților și nevoilor fiecărei regiuni. În plus, avem nevoie de o economie europeană mai eficientă și mai competitivă.

Este momentul să lăsăm deoparte ideologiile și să privim cu adevărat la interesul cetățenilor, pentru că Europa nu arată la fel peste tot. Ceea ce se vede din Bruxelles nu seamănă deloc cu realitatea dintr-o comună din estul României, Poloniei sau Bulgariei. O singură soluție nu se potrivește tuturor. Până când acest mozaic regional nu va fi cu adevărat integrat în planificarea economică europeană, nu putem vorbi cu adevărat despre coeziune în Uniunea Europeană.

Marta Wcisło (PPE). – Szanowna Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Polityka spójności nie odzwierciedla swoich założeń w rzeczywistości, co widać w niskim wykorzystaniu środków. Fundusze unijne z polityki spójności muszą być łatwiej dostępne zarówno dla samorządów, przedsiębiorców, jak i dla obywateli. Zbiurokratyzowana machina europejskich procedur paraliżuje i zniechęca podmioty gospodarcze – zwłaszcza te małe, mikro i średnie – do sięgania po środki europejskie z polityki spójności. Konieczne jest zmniejszenie biurokracji oraz zrozumiały system pełnych informacji o dostępnych środkach, programach, gdzie i kto może aplikować.

Pieniądze z polityki spójności dedykowane są na rozwój regionów, firm, infrastrukturę i wiele innych zadań. Dziś, w obliczu wojny w Ukrainie i zagrożeń ze strony Rosji powinny być dodatkowo wykorzystywane na wzmocnienie bezpieczeństwa poprzez tak zwane projekty inwestycyjne dual use, czyli podwójnego zastosowania. Na przykład hale, stadiony, które w czasie pokoju służą mieszkańcom jako obiekty kulturalno-oświatowe, sportowe, a w czasie zagrożenia jako schrony, oczywiście zgodnie z potrzebami danego państwa. To zwiększy wykorzystanie środków i spełni oczekiwania mieszkańców Europy Wschodniej, zwłaszcza Polski Wschodniej, regionów takich jak Lubelszczyzna.

Sérgio Gonçalves (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, senhor Vice-Presidente Raffaele Fitto, a um ano do fim do prazo de execução do Plano de Recuperação e Resiliência, 60 % dos marcos e metas a nível europeu continuam por cumprir. Estes números demonstram que os fundos centralizados em programas nacionais, que foram apresentados como uma solução para melhorar a eficiência dos mesmos, não trouxeram melhores resultados.

E, no entanto, na proposta para o próximo Quadro Financeiro Plurianual, a Comissão sugere aplicar a mesma lógica de centralização à política de coesão, transferindo para programas nacionais o que foi construído como política partilhada, ameaçando assim o papel que as regiões têm na definição das prioridades de investimento no seu território.

A pergunta que se impõe, então, Senhor Vice-Presidente, é a seguinte: se a descentralização do plano de recuperação e resiliência não acelerou a execução nem melhorou os resultados, porque insiste a Comissão em repetir o modelo, pondo em causa a política de coesão, que é uma das políticas mais bem-sucedidas da União Europeia?

Mélanie Disdier (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, la politique de cohésion est un élément central de la construction et de la solidarité européennes. Que les plus riches aident les plus pauvres, c'est le ciment de l'Europe.

Malheureusement, ces beaux principes sont souvent ternis quand la Commission s'en mêle. Aujourd'hui, l'argent collecté passe par une bureaucratie bruxelloise qui n'hésite pas à se servir de l'argent des États membres pour faire avancer son propre agenda, quitte à déborder de ses compétences.

Faire transiter des fonds par la Commission, c'est lui donner du pouvoir dont on sait qu'elle se servira invariablement pour écraser les volontés nationales. Dernier débordement en date: certains veulent détourner l'usage de la politique de cohésion pour investir dans la défense, compétence qui, comme tout le monde le sait, ne relève en aucun cas des attributions de la Commission.

De plus, le principe de solidarité est que les plus forts aident les plus faibles. Encore faut-il garantir la prospérité de ceux qui produisent l'effort financier. Or, le comportement de paillasson de Mme von der Leyen face à Donald Trump cet été démontre de manière flagrante qu'elle est incapable de protéger nos intérêts européens.

Nora Junco García (ECR). – Señora presidente, señor comisario, este informe INI, aunque no es vinculante, incide en lo esencial: hace un llamamiento serio a adoptar estrategias nacionales de vivienda, a simplificar las normas, a usar bien los fondos europeos y a proteger la propiedad privada y el derecho a permanecer en comunidad.

Pero, en España, el Gobierno de Sánchez sigue convirtiendo estas prioridades en eslóganes. La implementación real brilla por su ausencia. Los fondos europeos no se desbloquean, se malgastan o permanecen sin justificar, lo que ha convertido a España en uno de los países menos eficaces en absorción de fondos de cohesión. Mientras tanto, en lugar de aliviar la crisis de la vivienda con promesas, se atascan en la burocracia y en las denuncias de corrupción.

Apoyamos el informe precisamente por señalar el camino. El Gobierno socialista de España debe ahora demostrar con hechos que es capaz de transformar los fondos de cohesión en soluciones.

Jan Farský (PPE). – Paní předsedající, každý řetěz je jen tak silný, jak silný je jeho nejslabší článek. A každá země je jen tak silná, jak silný je její nejslabší region. Proto nesmíme zanedbávat regiony, kde jsou lidé nuceni se kvůli uplatnění přesouvat hromadně do center. Řešíme na jednom místě nedostatek kapacit ve zdravotnictví, zatímco jinde nám tyto kapacity přebývají. Roste problém s nedostupností bydlení a s přetíženou dopravou. Proto se musíme postarat o takové podmínky, aby lidé nemuseli kvůli naplnění svého potenciálu opouštět svoje město, svůj kraj, aby měli možnost zde rozvíjet své znalosti a dovednosti. Šance uspět se prostě nesmí odvíjet od poštovního směrovacího čísla.

Mnozí na regiony a lidi v nich zapomínají. Jsem moc rád, že to není případ hnutí Starostové a nezávislí, jehož jsem hrdým místopředsedou. Význam regionů a kvality života v nich si uvědomujeme. Největší kapitál Česka i celé Evropy je v lidech. Nesmíme ztrácet jejich kvality jenom proto, že jsme jim my, politici, neumožnili uspět. Ne je vodit za ručičku, ale dát jim šanci. Když tu nedáme, pozdější záchranné akce jsou nesmírně nákladné a způsobenou škodu už nenapraví. Evropská unie k tomu má nástroje. Na nás je, jak je využijeme a jestli za ně dáme možnost lidem uspět, nebo jestli za ně postavíme rozhlednu v údolí. Rozhodnutí je na nás.

Sofie Eriksson (S&D). – Fru talman! Jag ska berätta om Kiruna i Sverige. För det var slow men storslagen TV när vi för några veckor sedan såg den 40 meter breda och 672 ton tunga kyrkan rulla genom Kiruna till sin nya plats. Orsaken: att möjliggöra fortsatt gruvbrytning. Staden rivs och ska byggas upp igen. Mer än hälften av befolkningen i kommunen ska flyttas. Ovanför gruvan ligger hem och liv för människor som tillsammans med Malmberget och Svappavaara står för 80 procent av Europas järnmalm. Den järnmalm som har lagt grund för vår välfärd och vår industri. Man gör detta med stolthet.

Men gruvbrytningen är ett gemensamt intresse för hela unionen. Industripolitiken och regionalpolitiken måste hänga ihop. När Kiruna försörjer stora delar av EU med järnmalm kan inte Kirunaborna lämnas ensamma med notan. Det är dags för EU och den svenska regeringen att kliva fram.

Isabella Tovaglieri (PfE). – Signora Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, la sinistra ha un problema con la proprietà privata, lo ha dimostrato di fatto candidando e dando voce a figure come Ilaria Salis, che hanno fatto delle occupazioni abusive la loro bandiera politica e che difendono sempre e comunque l'illegalità, come nel caso dell'opposizione allo sgombero del Leoncavallo.

Noi invece stiamo dalla parte del buon senso. Grazie al nuovo decreto sicurezza – osteggiato con tutte le forze dalla sinistra – difendiamo la proprietà privata a spada tratta, prevedendo sgomberi immediati e pene severe per chi occupa abusivamente.

Purtroppo anche l'Europa è succube di questa sinistra radicale e lo dimostra con provvedimenti assurdi, come le case green, che andranno ancora una volta a penalizzare i proprietari di casa.

L'Europa non ha capito che per gli italiani la casa non è un capriccio o un bene qualunque, ma è famiglia, è tradizione ed è cultura. La casa è sacra.

E allora non basta stanziare qualche fondo, peraltro condizionato come sempre ad assurde norme green, ma dobbiamo proteggere la proprietà, come diceva il politologo Walter Lippmann: senza proprietà non esiste libertà.

(L'oratrice accetta di rispondere a una domanda “cartellino blu”)

Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle (Renew), blue-card question. – I will speak in English. I was wondering, given your your very fierce defence of private property, which I share with you – and I wish that that we all shared those thoughts – if you're willing to defend so fiercely the good use of European funds, because that is a huge problem in Italy. The amount of fraud that there is in Italy at this moment is gigantic, and I don't see your government doing much about that. So I would like to ask you to put as much energy into defending the Europeans' property, our funds, in your country.

Isabella Tovaglieri (PfE), risposta a una domanda “cartellino blu”. – La ringrazio per la domanda, perché io faccio parte di un partito, la Lega, il cui ministro dell'Economia e delle finanze, il ministro Giorgetti, è stato tra i principali osteggiatori di un provvedimento che era nato con buoni auspici, che era quello di tutelare la casa alla fine del COVID e di consentire agli italiani di ristrutturarla a spese dello Stato attraverso il bonus del 110 %, il famigerato “superbonus”, che si è rivelato fallimentare e si è rivelato un buco nero enorme per le casse dello Stato.

E solo grazie alla presenza della Lega al governo, con il ministro Giorgetti, che oggi quello scempio che ci rendeva ridicoli agli occhi degli altri cittadini europei e anche a livello internazionale – perché è servito per rifare le case a chi aveva la seconda casa al mare – non c'è più e noi oggi possiamo avere ancora credibilità nell'utilizzo dei fondi.

Lara Magoni (ECR). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, domani voteremo in plenaria la riforma di medio termine della politica di coesione, fortemente voluta dal Vicepresidente Fitto, al quale va il mio plauso sincero per l'attenzione al tema dell'housing e per la capacità di aggiornare la politica di coesione alle sfide attuali.

La crisi abitativa è ormai un fenomeno gravissimo: quasi il 9 % delle famiglie in Europa spende il 40 % del proprio reddito per l'alloggio e circa 14 milioni di famiglie vive in condizioni di sovraffollamento. È evidente che non possiamo più considerarla un'emergenza marginale, è una priorità sociale.

Inserire l'housing tra gli obiettivi della coesione significa offrire strumenti concreti a territori svantaggiati, a giovani e famiglie che troppo spesso sono costretti a rinunciare a costruire un futuro.

Ma ai fondi europei servirà affiancare anche i capitali privati per costruire alloggi dignitosi e accessibili e creare nuova occupazione; solo così l'Europa potrà incidere davvero sulla vita delle persone, invece di perdersi in politiche ideologiche come quelle della casa green.

Gabriella Gerzsenyi (PPE). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Tisztelt Alelnök Úr! Van egy ember Magyarországon, akinek a családja és a baráti köre is milliárdokat érő kastélyokban lakik, zebrákat tart, nyáron luxusjachton ringatózik a tengeren. Ezt az embert úgy hívják: Orbán Viktor. Eközben a magyar lakosság közel harmada, hárommillió ember él lakhatási szegénységben. Nemhogy saját otthonra, de albérletre sem futja sokaknak. Elnéptelenedik a vidék, a fiatalok nem mernek gyereket vállalni, ezrével hagyják el az országot. Az idősek számára is megfizethetetlen a lakhatás. Tudják, hogy az Orbán család uradalmi birtokából hány 60 négyzetméteres lakást lehetne építeni? 300-at. 300 családnak lehetne otthont teremteni, de nem épülnek lakások, mert az építőipart is kormányközeli cégek uralják, és lakásépítésből nem lehet eleget lopni.

A magyar emberek nevében is üdvözlöm az Európai Bizottság és az Európai Parlament munkáját a lakhatás terén. A Tisza-kormány 2026 áprilisa után hazahozza az uniós forrásokat. Ezekkel, valamint állami és magántőkével bérlakásprogramot indítunk, energetikai- és fűtéskorszerűsítési beruházásokat hajtunk végre. Mindenkinek megadjuk a megfizethető lakhatás esélyét.

Andreas Schieder (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar! Gerade Wohnen ist eines der Probleme der europäischen Bürgerinnen und Bürger, die in allen europäischen Mitgliedstaaten gleich sind. In den letzten 15 Jahren sind die Mieten um 26 Prozent im Durchschnitt angestiegen, und die Menschen mit den niedrigsten Einkommen zahlen 40 oder mehr Prozent ihres verfügbaren Einkommens bereits fürs Wohnen.

Das ist ein unzumutbarer Zustand, denn Wohnen ist ein Grundrecht, das Dach über dem Kopf ist ein Grundrecht. Deshalb müssen wir mehr tun: nicht nur Kohäsionsmittel dafür verwenden, sondern noch viel, viel mehr.

Wir brauchen europäische Gelder in der Höhe von 300 Milliarden Euro. Wir müssen die Spekulation eindämmen, wir müssen die short-term rentals wie Airbnb und dergleichen regulieren und eindämmen. Wir müssen mehr geförderte Wohnungen, auch für die Mittelschicht, in unserem Wettbewerbsrecht ermöglichen. Wir müssen den Mieterschutz stärken, um die Leute vor ungerechtfertigten Kündigungen und extremen Erhöhungen zu schützen. Und wir dürfen nicht auf den Klimaschutz vergessen, denn auch dafür braucht es Gelder – für thermische Renovierung. Denn Wohnen ist ein Grundrecht, das sich jeder und jede leisten können soll in Europa.

Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar, politica de coeziune este de neînlocuit. Ea nu poate să fie comasată, diluată sau condiționată de reforme sau criterii netransparente sau antisociale. Politica de coeziune trebuie rămână așa cum e stipulată în tratate. Localitățile noastre, regiunile noastre, s-au dezvoltat grație acestor fonduri.

Spun un stop clar PNRR-izării fondurilor structurale. Am căutat să arăt, prin demersurile mele că, prin simplificare și consultarea directă a autorităților locale și a beneficiarilor direcți, putem salva atât din banii europeni existenți, cât și creiona o programare viitoare mai eficientă.

Avem nevoie de mai multă flexibilitate și posibilitatea de a transfera o parte din fondurile, chiar necheltuite, către noi nevoi de finanțare, în mod special către infrastructură, către zonele afectate de calamități sau proiectele inovative. Trebuie să protejăm această politică europeană în sensul acesta. Doresc să felicit raportorii pentru faptul că au acceptat amendamentele mele și vin cu un mesaj puternic de sprijin pentru politica de coeziune.

Procedura “catch-the-eye”

Nina Carberry (PPE). – Madam President, let me start by saying that the current MFF proposal undermines cohesion policy. Cohesion must remain properly funded and accessible, not merged with CAP infrastructure and other priorities. By centralising management through single national plans, this proposal sidelines regional programmes and risks silencing the voices closest to citizens.

In Ireland, I recently visited the Laois Public Participation Network. That partnership now has over 700 registered groups, representing more than 51 000 people. They've used cohesion funds to launch climate projects, help with Storm Éowyn recovery and kick-start sports initiatives. These are precisely the kinds of initiatives that would be threatened by this merger.

That is why the Just Transition Fund and other mechanisms must remain dedicated instruments under the cohesion policy. Their scope must be broadened so that more regions in transition can benefit. Because cohesion is about people and solidarity, it must not be watered down.

Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). – Señora presidenta, la política de cohesión constituye un pilar fundamental de la Unión para reducir las diferencias entre países y entre regiones. Por ejemplo, en mi tierra, en Galicia, los fondos de cohesión han sido esenciales para la modernización económica y el desarrollo de infraestructuras, y Galicia y su Gobierno son un modelo en la ejecución de fondos europeos.

Quiero mencionar un par de elementos sobre la propuesta de la Comisión Europea para el próximo marco financiero plurianual. En primer lugar, lamento la propuesta centralizadora de la Comisión, pues los Gobiernos regionales conocen de primera mano las necesidades de las subregiones, y este conocimiento debe aprovecharse: el modelo de los Next Generation EU no ha sido bueno.

En segundo lugar, lamento el recorte presupuestario a la cohesión. Los fondos de cohesión se reducen en cerca de un 15 % respecto al marco financiero actual. Por supuesto, es importante el impulso a las políticas de innovación y competitividad, pero no a cuenta de reducir el apoyo a la política de cohesión.

Y hablando de recortes, también tengo que mencionar la reducción que ha sufrido la financiación en agricultura y pesca. La pesca me preocupa mucho. La propuesta de la Comisión solo contempla una asignación específica de 2 000 millones para pesca frente a 6 000 millones, un recorte de más de un 60 %. Trabajaremos para revertirlo, y espero que el Gobierno español también trabaje en la misma línea.

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar, stimați colegi, dezbatem politica de coeziune, poate cel mai important lucru pentru proiectul european. Cele trei rapoarte: tranziție justă, criza locuințelor, simplificarea fondurilor de coeziune, toate, domnule vicepreședinte, pot duce la o coeziune reală.

Problema pe care eu o pun aici și vă rog să răspundeți: Credeți că luați aceste rapoarte – Comisia – și veți ține cont de ceea ce noi spunem acum? Dacă veți lua fonduri de la politica de coeziune pentru înarmare – da, trebuie să ne apărăm, dar nu luați fonduri de la politica de coeziune. Inițial, doamna președintă a spus că vom găsi resurse suplimentare, nu să luăm de la Fondul de coeziune sau de la politica agricolă comună.

Locuințele, criza de locuințe, păi dacă toate prețurile cresc, evident că va crește și costul locuinței, iar veniturile multor, multor cetățeni europeni scad, nu cresc. Și mai e o problemă, Uniunea Europeană are o problemă demografică și acest lucru are legătură cu criza locuințelor. Nu putem să avem întemeiere de familii, familii tinere, care să facă copii dacă nu își pot permite o locuință.

Domnule comisar, puteți să ne spuneți la sfârșit dacă veți prezenta în colegiul comisarilor cele trei rapoarte și veți ține cont că politica de coeziune este o necesitate, nu este un moft?

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Madam President, dear colleagues, the green transition will only succeed if it's just. We cannot reach climate neutrality by 2050 by sacrificing the livelihoods of miners in Sicily, young workers in Asturias or entire communities in Western Macedonia.

Cohesion policy is not just a funding tool. It's Europe's promise that no region and no citizen will be left behind. This report reminds us that the transition must be territory-based, socially inclusive and economically resilient. That means reskilling, local investment and active social policies, not just CO2 targets.

It also means that cohesion must work hand in hand with instruments like the Just Transition Fund, the European Social Fund+ and the Recovery and Resilience Facility, with less bureaucracy, more flexibility and real local ownership.

Let's be clear: this is not just about climate, it's about democracy, solidarity and the future of Europe's regions. Because if the Green Deal is our destination, cohesion is the road that gets us there.

Daniel Buda (PPE). – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar Fitto, politica de coeziune este inima solidarității europene. Ea trebuie să rămână instrumentul prin care reducem decalajele și sprijinim regiunile rămase în urmă. Tocmai de aceea, domnule comisar, aș dori să transmiteți mesajul nostru foarte ferm în cadrul colegiului comisarilor.

Avem nevoie de o politică de coeziune puternică. Avem nevoie de o politică de coeziune independentă și avem nevoie de o politică de coeziune finanțată în mod adecvat. Doar așa vom putea avea o Uniune Europeană puternică. Pentru că trăim vremuri complicate, într-un context geopolitic dificil, cu război la graniță, schimbări climatice, presiuni sociale și economice, cum ar fi criza locuințelor. Or, această criză a locuințelor trebuie să cunoască un răspuns european, deoarece statele membre astăzi și-au demonstrat, din nefericire, incapacitatea de a rezolva această problemă.

Dublarea investițiilor în locuințe accesibile nu este doar un gest social, domnule comisar, ci un răspuns la speranța unui viitor sigur, pe care milioane de tineri și familii îl așteaptă de la Europa.

Alicia Homs Ginel (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señor vicepresidente, ante nosotros tenemos una crisis habitacional sin precedentes. ¿Qué hacemos cuando millones de jóvenes en Europa no pueden iniciar sus proyectos vitales? ¿Cuando las familias más vulnerables destinan más de la mitad de su sueldo a un alquiler o cuando se expulsa a vecinas y vecinos de sus barrios? Llegados a este punto, la Unión no solo tiene una posibilidad, sino que tiene la obligación de actuar.

¿Y cómo? Lo explica muy bien el informe del compañero Marcos Ros: modificando las reglas y permitiendo que los fondos de cohesión se puedan destinar a vivienda asequible y sostenible, facilitando a los Estados las herramientas y los recursos para construir, rehabilitar y garantizar una vivienda digna para todas y para todos, y asegurando que cada euro que Europa invierta en un parque de vivienda público quede siempre ahí y no acabe en manos de los especuladores.

Vicepresidente, lo que está en juego no es una mercancía más, sino la vida, la dignidad y el futuro de generaciones enteras. La Unión Europea tiene que estar a la altura. No perdamos esta oportunidad.

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, la pervivencia de un escalón de gobernanza regional en la política de cohesión no es solamente un examen existencial para la razón de ser de Europa, sino para el sentimiento de pertenencia de la ciudadanía a la que este Parlamento representa, especialmente en las regiones insulares y alejadas, como las regiones ultraperiféricas.

Y no se puede hacer más con menos. Por tanto, las prioridades para el Grupo Socialista están señaladas en la política de cohesión que se identifica con la política social: financiación para las emergencias —que cada vez son más frecuentes y devastadoras— pero también financiación para una nueva prioridad: la política de vivienda.

Este nuevo pilar de cohesión resulta divisivo ideológicamente, porque hay quien se aproxima a la vivienda como un bien de mercado y de especulación, pero los socialistas lo hacemos como un derecho que la Unión Europea tiene la obligación de atender, con una financiación suficiente, y tiene que estar incrustado en la política de cohesión con un escalón de gobernanza regional.

(Fine della procedura “catch the eye”)

Raffaele Fitto, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, many thanks for this rich and useful discussion, and to the rapporteurs and the shadow rapporteurs for their work. I have taken good note of your views. You raised many valid and useful points, for example, on simplification. The new MFF proposal introduced a single set of rules for more funds. Concerning flexibility, dedicated financial reserves will allow Member States and regions to address emerging needs or unforeseen shocks. Regions will remain central – they will be central in the design and implementation of the National and Regional Partnership Plans in the new MFF.

The other points you mentioned should form the basis of our continuing discussions on the work. There is a long road ahead of us. We are just at the beginning. Let us continue to work together for a modernised cohesion policy which delivers for all regions.

Ciaran Mullooly, rapporteur. – Madam President, thank you to all the contributors this afternoon. I was delighted to hear, Commissioner, you talk about the 46 % of the Just Transition Fund contractors and the EUR 12 billion gone out to projects.

But of course, as you have heard from our colleagues today, if we had greater simplification, a more straightforward system of applying and less red tape, I believe it would be much higher. And I think we need to focus on that in the future. Many of my colleagues have raised very fair points: there must be a social dimension to the heart of this policy, not just in housing but in other areas. We need that social dimension. We must, of course, include young people, and we must look out for them.

Just transition cannot be left to Member States. This is a crucial part, Commissioner, going forward: we cannot just say, 'here is the fund, do what you wish with it.' I have seen firsthand what they do with it, Commissioner, it is not pretty. In my region, they closed the peat-burning power station down, but they were not ready to transition to renewables, so in the car park of this power station today, they burn diesel oil in a peaker plant. This is crazy. It is nuts.

So we must ensure our Member States are ready for this. Similarly, they now propose to take down power stations in my community and they have no major renewable project lined up. Instead, they say they will spend between EUR 10 and EUR 15 million taking away these power stations, and the workers who have lost their jobs read reports in the newspapers that companies in India and elsewhere will buy some of the materials and the equipment from the old power stations and bring them to India. This type of report drives the people in the community absolutely berserk. They say 'where is the sense in this? Where is the organisation?'

That is why, Commissioner, we need the Commission to be essentially involved as we go forward, we need the Commission to take control of the Just Transition Fund and ensure it works for the people who lost their jobs.

Marcos Ros Sempere, ponente. – Señora presidenta, señor vicepresidente, vivimos una emergencia habitacional, y una situación de emergencia merece una respuesta de los poderes públicos que esté a la altura.

No votamos un texto más: votamos el primer documento sobre la crisis de vivienda de esta legislatura. Votamos para que parte del presupuesto europeo se traduzca en bienestar para una mayoría social que está agotada y ahogada por este problema.

Este informe fija otro rumbo. Este informe abre la puerta a una inversión en vivienda que no tiene precedentes en la historia de la Unión Europea. Y lo hace con un principio irrenunciable: cuando hay dinero público encima de la mesa, la vivienda permanecerá siempre asequible y de uso público, porque las casas son para vivir, no para especular con ellas.

Este no es un informe más para guardar en un cajón. Es una propuesta con un marcado perfil social y que pone soluciones claras encima de la mesa. Aprobemos este informe y con él aumentemos la oferta pública de vivienda, contribuyamos a través de la política de cohesión a crear un gran parque público que equilibre el efecto de un mercado privado que está descontrolado.

Si aprobamos este texto, si aprobamos este mandato del Parlamento, estaremos poniendo la primera piedra de un gran parque público de vivienda europeo y estaremos devolviendo a las personas lo que nunca debió perderse: ver en su casa un hogar, un lugar que signifique tranquilidad y sosiego, un lugar para desarrollar su proyecto de vida y no un motivo de angustia cada primero de mes.

Este Parlamento votará mañana un cambio de rumbo decisivo. Votamos poner a la Unión Europea a la vanguardia, para ayudar a resolver una de las crisis más graves que afronta nuestro continente.

Vladimir Prebilič, Poročevalec. – Gospa predsednica, spoštovani, naj zaključim z zahvalo vsem – poročevalcem v senci, kolegom iz odbora, sekretariatu in predvsem številnim partnerjem iz regij, civilne družbe, ki so prispevali ideje in predloge sprememb. To je bil resnično skupen napor in skupaj smo opravili veliko delo.

A danes je šele začetek, saj sta pred nami vsaj še dve bitki. Prva je poenostavitev. Ne smemo pustiti, da se kohezija utopi v papirologiji. Občine, mala podjetja in srednja podjetja, organizacije civilne družbe, vsi morajo imeti možnost dostopa do sredstev, brez strahu, da bodo ostali pokopani pod obrazci in nadzornimi postopki. Kohezija je namenjena opolnomočenju, ne izčrpavanju; in poenostavitev mora pomeniti predvsem partnerstvo, obvezno vključevanje lokalne uprave, socialnih partnerjev in drugih lokalnih akterjev v vsako fazo načrtovanja in implementacije. Brez njih namreč kohezija izgubi svojo legitimnost.

Druga bitka pa je večletni finančni okvir. Odločil bo, ali bo kohezija ostala hrbtenica solidarnosti Evropske unije ali pa jo bomo izvotlili z zmanjšanji in preusmeritvami sredstev. Kolegi, to je bistvenega pomena. Brez močnega namenskega proračuna za kohezijo ne bo konvergence, ne bo uravnotežene rasti in na koncu ne bo zaupanja v Evropsko unijo.

Zatorej, ko glasujete o tem poročilu, ne glasujete samo o poenostavitvah. Glasujete za ohranitev nedotakljivosti kohezijske politike kot take. S tem pošiljate sporočilo Svetu in Komisiji: v naslednjem finančnem okviru ne bomo dopustili oslabitve kohezijske politike. Kohezija je obljuba Evropske unije njenim državljankam in državljanom, zato moramo izpolniti obljubo.

Presidente. – Ringrazio tutte e tutti per il dibattito ricco e interessante.

La discussione congiunta è chiusa.

La votazione si svolgerà domani.

Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 178)

Gabriela Firea (S&D), in writing. – I supported this report because it brings concrete solutions, not abstract debates. With European cohesion funds, we can build homes for young people and families who today spend over 40 % of their income only on rent or mortgages.

In the last few years, housing prices have gone up by almost 50 % across Europe. For many young Romanians, buying a house has become nearly impossible, and two out of three say they postpone this step because of costs. And yet, cohesion policy currently dedicates only 2 % of its budget (about EUR 7.5 billion) to housing, when the real need is at least EUR 270 billion per year.

This report asks for more ambition: doubling European funds for affordable housing, investing in social housing and energy-efficient renovations, creating a European platform together with the Investment Bank, and using public buildings that today stand empty to give people a decent home.

For Romania, this means real chances for our young people, security for families, and stronger communities. A home is not a luxury but a right, and it is our duty to make it possible.

Pál Szekeres (PfE), írásban. – Több mint egymillió uniós polgár kérte: az Európai Unió kohéziós politikája kezelje kiemelt figyelemmel azokat a régiókat, amelyek nemzeti, nyelvi, kulturális vagy etnikai sajátosságaik miatt külön figyelmet és anyagi támogatást érdemelnek. A nemzeti régiók védelmében indított európai polgári kezdeményezés nem egy tagállam belügye, hanem mélyen európai ügy: a sokszínűség megőrzésének ügye, a diszkriminációmentes, harmonikus fejlődés ügye.

Az Európai Bizottság polgári kezdeményezésre adott válasza kiábrándító: inkább tűnik jogi kifogásgyűjteménynek, mint valódi politikai válasznak. A Bizottság az uniós hatáskörök szűk értelmezésére hivatkozva gyakorlatilag elutasítja a kezdeményezés lényegét: a nemzeti és etnikai régiók különleges figyelemben részesítését. Ez cinikus hozzáállás, hiszen miközben az EU a kulturális és nyelvi sokszínűséget zászlajára tűzi, a gyakorlatban nem hajlandó semmilyen új garanciát adni azok megőrzésére. A több mint egymillió aláíró akaratát így formai érvekkel söprik félre, miközben hosszan sorolják a már meglévő, sokszor csak papíron létező programokat.

Ez a dokumentum világosan mutatja, hogy a Bizottság fél szembenézni a politikai realitással: a nemzeti régiók és kisebbségi közösségek jogai, fejlődése és gyarapodása továbbra is kiszolgáltatottak a tagállamok kénye-kedvének. Az ilyen elutasító, bürokratikus megközelítés aláássa a polgári kezdeményezés intézményének hitelességét, és azt üzeni az állampolgároknak: az EU-ban hiába él a részvételi demokrácia illúziója, valójában a politikai akarat hiányzik a változtatáshoz.

15. Süsiniku piirimeetme lihtsustamine ja tugevdamine (arutelu)

Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca la relazione di Antonio Decaro sul meccanismo di adeguamento del carbonio alle frontiere: semplificazione e rafforzamento (COM(2025)0087- C10-0035/2025 - 2025/0039(COD)) (A10-0085/2025)

Ricordo agli onorevoli deputati che per questa discussione si terrà un solo giro di interventi di oratori dei gruppi politici, pertanto non è prevista la procedura “catch-the-eye” e non saranno accettati interventi “cartellino blu”.

Antonio Decaro, relatore. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, all'inizio di questa legislatura abbiamo preso un impegno chiaro con i cittadini europei: fare tutto quello che è nelle nostre possibilità per salvare il nostro pianeta.

In questo primo anno abbiamo lavorato per tutelare l'ambiente, contrastare i cambiamenti climatici, stimolare le nostre imprese a investire con coraggio sulle tecnologie verdi, fornendo loro gli strumenti per tornare finalmente ad essere competitive nel mondo.

Abbiamo ben chiare le difficoltà che oggi il settore industriale ed economico vive, sapendo che le conseguenze di una nuova crisi ricadrebbero in parte anche sui lavoratori. Per tale ragione, da subito ci siamo messi al lavoro sulle semplificazioni, che sono un pilastro importante della nuova politica europea, tenendo fissati però gli obiettivi ambientali che sono sanciti nel green deal.

In questo scenario si inserisce la modifica al regolamento CBAM, che ci apprestiamo a votare domani: intendiamo mantenere gli obiettivi ambientali ambiziosi e, allo stesso tempo, ridurre la burocrazia per le piccole imprese.

Nello specifico, sostituiamo la soglia de minimis basata sul valore delle merci con una soglia di 50 tonnellate annue di importazioni per settori strategici come l'acciaio, il ferro, l'alluminio, il calcestruzzo e i fertilizzanti. Questo permetterà di esentare il 90 % degli importatori responsabili solo dell'1 % delle emissioni complessive, mantenendo alti quindi i livelli di attenzione sugli obiettivi climatici e sui grossi produttori di inquinamento.

Questa proposta prevede anche semplificazioni nelle procedure autorizzative, nella raccolta dei dati e nella verifica delle emissioni finali, fissando la data di avvio del CBAM a febbraio 2027, concedendo quindi alle nostre imprese il tempo necessario per adeguarsi ai nuovi standard.

Inutile dirvi, colleghe e colleghi, che questa proposta mira a proteggere le imprese europee contro una politica economica nemica dei paesi inquinatori e, nel caso specifico, degli Stati Uniti, che hanno imposto anche dei dazi tra il 30 e il 50 % proprio sui prodotti che sono coperti dal CBAM.

Inutile, quindi, che debba essere io a spiegarvi l'importanza di questa proposta in questo momento delicato e, a riprova di quello che sto dicendo, pongo alla vostra attenzione proprio il lavoro che è stato fatto in commissione ENVI, dove ci siamo impegnati a lavorare solo sulle modifiche proposte dalla Commissione europea senza riaprire altre disposizioni, volendo dare un segnale chiaro di compattezza e di unità di intenti rispetto al contesto che oggi ci circonda.

Confido in questo approccio pragmatico e responsabile, che domani possa trovare il sostegno necessario per confermare la proposta sul CBAM nella sua interezza e dando piena efficacia; spero che possa diventare un modello di lavoro che possa ispirare tutti noi nelle prossime azioni future dove affronteremo dei fascicoli complicati, come la nuova PAC, il quadro finanziario pluriennale e la gestione dei fondi di coesione.

Se vogliamo davvero costruire una cittadinanza europea forte e radicata, occorre che siamo innanzitutto noi che rappresentiamo le istituzioni europee a fare il primo passo, dimostrando cura del territorio, cura dei cittadini, attenzione alle imprese, attenzione al mondo del lavoro e soprattutto una visione strategica nelle politiche ambientali.

Solo così potremo dire di aver fatto un buon servizio per le nostre comunità, che oggi tutti noi, in quest'Aula, abbiamo l'onore di poter servire.

IN THE CHAIR: SABINE VERHEYEN

Vice-President

Wopke Hoekstra, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, and could I also start by thanking Mr Decaro very much for his great work.

Final doesn't exist in life, but I think we are as close to finalising as we could possibly be in terms of one hugely important part of CBAM, and that is simplification.

You know that I've always advocated for street smarts and ambitious climate policy. And, at the very heart of this endeavour – and making sure that we bridge between climate and competitiveness – in my view, is the ETS, which is a market-based system which functions very well and which has been at the heart of interest throughout the world at present day.

CBAM is a natural addition to our ETS system, but we do have the opportunity to further beef up, to further streamline and to further improve our CBAM system. And we do so through a four-step approach. One is simplification, which we're discussing today. The second one is exports, which we've already touched upon as well, and which I hope to also finalise by the end of this calendar year. The third is scope. And the fourth – hugely important for our industry – is making sure that we deal with circumvention, or attempts to circumvent, in a very thorough way.

Again, today is about simplification. Why is this important? Well, because we're taking 90 % of companies out of scope while upholding 99 % of emissions. So, a huge win for those who are in favour of, on the one hand, climate action and, at the same time, simplification. That is what we're doing today. And I think that is a huge win for both climate and industry, but could I say, also for common sense.

There's one last thing, Madam President, that I wanted to mention, and that is that the legislators – and certainly also this Parliament – have delivered on this proposal with considerable speed, and that is hugely important. We're often stuck in bureaucratic processes. It often takes too long for a good idea to be put into practice. And yes, even here it might not be the speed of light, but it is as close as possible as we could get in political life. So I wanted to thank all co-legislators, but Parliament in particular, for their speedy delivery on this proposal.

Karin Karlsbro, föredragande av INTA-utskottets yttrande. – Fru talman! Kommissionen! Kollegor och åhörare! EU fortsätter att vara världens bästa miljöorganisation, och idag visar vi att det går att förenkla men samtidigt hålla fast vid klimatambitionerna. I en global ekonomi måste alla ta ansvar och minska utsläppen, inte bara flytta dem någon annanstans, till någon annan del i världen.

EU:s klimattullar är ett utmärkt exempel på hur vi kan använda EU:s handelspolitik som verktyg för att nå våra klimatmål. Det ska inte löna sig att flytta sina utsläpp till något annat ställe. Usel klimatpolitik ska inte vara en konkurrensfördel. I en tid när USA lämnar Parisavtalet måste vi fortsätta visa att det är möjligt och koppla tillväxt till grön omställning. Våra väljare röstade för det vår industri efterfrågade, och klimatet kräver det.

President. – As Sandra Gómez López for the Committee on Budgets is not there at the moment, I give the floor to Filip Turek on behalf of the ITRE Committee.

Filip Turek, rapporteur for the opinion of the ITRE Committee. – Madam President, let me tell you a little story. The European Union puts billion-euro fines on its own factories for producing CO2. The EU produces only about 6 % to 8 % of global emissions, yet the world's emissions keep rising. To make this look fairer, the CBAM was introduced, but the reality is different.

In the end, we are punishing ourselves: production and investment just leave the European market. Only the biggest players with armies of officers can still afford to trade with the EU. And we believe this will change the climate. It will not. The planet is not cooling anyway.

European companies go bankrupt, consumers pay more and Europe is simply turning into a green open-air museum. If you are serious about your favourite world competitiveness, I have one solution for you: cancel all emission targets, taxes and tariffs. Cancel the Green Deal!

Marie-Luce Brasier-Clain, au nom du groupe PfE. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, tout le monde sait que les mesures proposées ici sont clairement insuffisantes. Nous avons toujours défendu l'idée d'une taxe carbone aux frontières de l'Europe, mais jamais sous cette forme. Il fallait réussir le tour de force de faire croire à un outil protectionniste enfin, quand, par rejet de ce même protectionnisme, on n'impose qu'une mesure environnementale.

La question du marché carbone est centrale. C'est elle qui rend ce mécanisme nocif pour notre industrie, puisqu'en supprimant les quotas gratuits dont elle bénéficiait jusque-là il lui cause un préjudice qui ne sera jamais compensé.

Dans le contexte économique actuel – droits de douane américains, surcapacité chinoise, coût de l'énergie –, une disparition des quotas gratuits est un nouveau coup dur porté à notre compétitivité. La balle est dans le camp des États et de la Commission. C'est leur écologisme politique qui nous a conduits à cette situation. À eux de sortir de leur logiciel dépassé et d'entrer de plain-pied dans le XXIe siècle.

Anna Zalewska, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! To krok w dobrym kierunku. Po raz pierwszy Komisja tak wyraźnie posłuchała państw członkowskich, które wdrażają CBAM i przemysł. Ale to jest niewystarczające, bo wykluczenie małych przedsiębiorstw to jeszcze nie uratowanie europejskiego przemysłu, o czym przecież w sprawozdaniu pisze Draghi.

Czas na kolejny krok i wprowadzenie pilnych rozwiązań, które realnie obniżą ceny produkcji energii w Europie. Potrzebujemy realnych zmian w dyrektywie ETS, która jest w największym stopniu odpowiedzialna za wzrost kosztów produkcji. Potrzebujemy konkretnych rozwiązań wspierających europejski przemysł, w tym powrotu do darmowych uprawnień. Przemysł europejski eksportujący swoje produkty poza granice Unii, do państw o znacznie mniej restrykcyjnej polityce klimatycznej, znajduje się w coraz gorszej sytuacji, tracąc swoją pozycję konkurencyjną na globalnym rynku. Czyli robimy dobrze, ale za mało. Czas podjąć następne kroki.

Sara Matthieu, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, well, I'm not sure where all the colleagues are, but I'm glad to be here. Commissioner, Parliament.

Voorzitter, de koolstofgrensheffing zorgt ervoor dat grote vervuilers betalen, en bevordert eerlijke concurrentie, want zij geldt ook voor niet-Europese bedrijven.

Het stapsgewijs verminderen van de gratis uitstootrechten zorgt voor miljarden aan inkomsten, die broodnodig zijn. Europa heeft momenteel immers een investeringskloof van 344 miljard EUR om klimaatneutraal te worden. Deze rekening gaan we niet bij onze gezinnen leggen, maar wel bij de grote vervuilers.

Die inkomsten moeten we slim investeren om onze industrie te helpen vergroenen. We moeten echter ook de uitvoering goed aanpakken; daarom verminderen we nu de administratieve lasten, zonder de klimaatbescherming op te offeren.

Tot slot heb ik één heldere boodschap voor de Amerikaanse president Trump: Europa bepaalt zijn eigen regels. Wij laten ons niet dicteren door bullebakken. Alle aanvallen op deze koolstofgrensheffing mogen dus stoppen. Wij gaan niet bougeren.

Jonas Sjöstedt, för The Left gruppen. – Fru talman! När EU-kommissionen talar om förenkling, då ska man vara försiktig. Då ska man läsa förslaget noga. För förenkling betyder alltför ofta försvagning av bra lagstiftning. Men så är det inte den här gången. Den här gången är förenkling förenkling. Därför stöder vi det här förslaget till att förenkla klimattullarna, CBAM. De kommer att bli enklare att genomföra. De kommer att bli enklare att hantera, men över 99 procent av effekten kommer att finnas kvar. Det är ett bra förslag.

Men klimattullarna kommer att möta motstånd i omvärlden. Inte minst tror jag att de kommer att möta motstånd från USA. Man måste ta en konflikt för att sätta klimatet före kommersiella intressen, och där måste kommissionen stå på sig. Men samtidigt som vi pratar klimattullar åker Ursula von der Leyen till golfspelande president Trump i Skottland och sluter ett avtal om att köpa amerikansk fossilgas och fossilolja för 750 miljarder dollar. Fossila bränslen som framställts med fracking, den sämsta metod man kan tänka sig både ur klimat- och miljösynpunkt.

Vi behöver lite bättre sammanhållning i kommissionens politik på klimatområdet. Jag föreslår att kommissionär Hoekstra tar ett allvarligt samtal med Ursula von der Leyen om det här med fossila bränslen.

Anja Arndt, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Der CO2-Grenzausgleichsmechanismus soll vereinfacht werden. Durch den neuen Vorschlag würden aber immer noch 99 Prozent unserer Importe von Eisen, Stahl, Zement, Düngemitteln und Aluminium mit untragbar hohen CO2-Abgaben belastet werden. Und wofür? Für ein völlig unbedenkliches CO2-Edelgas und für Emissionen, die darüber hinaus im Ausland entstanden sind. Wie verrückt ist das eigentlich?

Es geht hier nicht um Peanuts, sondern um Milliarden Euro. Das Geld wandert übrigens direkt zur Kommission. Für Bürger und Unternehmen würde alles daraus Hergestellte ab 2027 spürbar teurer, wie zum Beispiel Autos, Waschmaschinen, Dünger und deshalb alle Lebensmittel und auch das Bauen.

Und noch etwas: Die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit sollte durch diese Verordnung wiederhergestellt werden, aber dass unsere Exporte durch diese Preissteigerung noch stärker ihre Wettbewerbsfähigkeit verlieren, das wurde ganz außer Acht gelassen. Die Vereinfachung war sicher gut gemeint, aber sie treibt die Deindustrialisierung Europas völlig verantwortungslos weiter voran.

CBAM und der gesamte CO2-Zertifikatehandel gehören komplett abgeschafft. Sie zerstören, und retten gar nichts. Mit diesem Klimazoll will die Kommission Geld machen, darum geht's. Deutschland braucht die AfD …

(Die Präsidentin entzieht der Rednerin das Wort.)

Mohammed Chahim, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, first of all, I very much welcome our swift trilogue agreement between Parliament, the Commission and the Council. This is not a small achievement, and we should really be proud of what we have done. It shows that within this Parliament, pro-European parties can work together and we are capable of moving fast and delivering when climate and industry and our credibility is at stake.

CBAM matters. It's the backbone of our climate trade policy. It ensures that the polluter pays, that our European producers are not undercut by imports from producers that refuse to decarbonise. In short, and I've said it many times here: you are welcome to sell your products in Europe, but only if you play by the same rules – either you reduce your emissions or you pay a CO2 tariff at the border.

But colleagues, my intervention today is not only one of praise; I also need to raise the alarm. The signals that the Commission has hinted at the extra flexibility for President Trump in CBAM deeply concern me. What do these flexibilities mean and why would we undermine our own instrument? No European industry has asked for this.

And let me remind you what we've always stood for: no exemptions, no carve-outs, no special deals for anybody. Not for our neighbours, and certainly not for a global superpower. Our Parliament's position is crystal clear. I don't see what has changed here.

If the Commission starts undermining CBAM by doling out perks before it has even fully entered into force, then the credibility of the entire system is at risk. This would not be a success story, but the beginning of the end of CBAM and maybe even the end of the beginning before it's fully in place in January.

Colleagues, we owe it to the climate and to our industry to defend CBAM as it has been agreed: firm, fair and future-proof.

Wopke Hoekstra, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, apologies – I was just stuck in a Dutch tête-à-tête with the architect of CBAM.

Madam President, it's one down, three to go. We have dealt with simplification – or we have almost dealt with simplification – and exports, scope and circumvention are very high on our list to deal with during this calendar year. Again, we have delivered on this with considerable speed, and that is hugely important in the type of times we are living in.

So again, let me thank the co-legislators, and the European Parliament in particular, for making sure that this was dealt with in this particular way and in this time frame. We will continue with the other three parts of the equation, and I hope to be back here again soon on exports, on scope and on circumvention.

Antonio Decaro, relatore. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, abbiamo detto più volte che il green deal è un grande piano di tutela dell'ambiente e di contrasto ai cambiamenti climatici, ma è anche un piano per la competitività delle nostre aziende che, investendo nelle tecnologie verdi, diventano competitive nel mondo.

Credo che in questo momento, con queste modifiche del CBAM, stiamo dando dimostrazione di un impegno anche sulla semplificazione, perché in fase di prima attuazione ci siamo resi conto che alla fine il 90 % degli importatori sono responsabili dell'1 % delle emissioni complessive e quindi abbiamo ritenuto giusto, tutti insieme, concentrarci su quel 10 % di importatori che, invece, sono responsabili del 99 % – pensate – delle emissioni complessive.

È un modo per ridurre la burocrazia, semplificare la vita delle aziende ma mantenere gli obiettivi strategici di tutela dell'ambiente e di contrasto ai cambiamenti climatici, che sono previsti all'interno del grande piano che abbiamo chiamato green deal.

Questa operazione del CBAM serve a evitare delocalizzazioni, serve ad evitare la concorrenza sleale, serve anche a proteggerci da azioni che arrivano da paesi esteri; ho citato prima nel mio intervento i dazi che arrivano tra il 30 e 50 % proprio sui prodotti del CBAM o su quei prodotti che hanno al loro interno i prodotti del CBAM.

Credo che domani dovremmo dare una dimostrazione di unità, come abbiamo fatto nella prima approvazione in Parlamento e come abbiamo fatto nelle due approvazioni in seno alla commissione ENVI – che mi onoro di rappresentare – perché, come ho detto nel mio primo intervento, io credo che le condizioni di contorno, quello che sta accadendo nel resto del mondo, oggi ci portano a stare insieme, a difendere le nostre aziende e a difendere il futuro del nostro pianeta.

Die Präsidentin. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet morgen, Mittwoch, den 10. September 2025, statt.

16. Vägivallalaine ja pidev jõu kasutamine meeleavaldajate vastu Serbias (arutelu)

Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärungen des Rates und der Kommission zu der Welle der Gewalt und der anhaltenden Gewaltanwendung gegen Demonstranten in Serbien (2025/2810(RSP)).

Marta Kos, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, the Commission appreciates the opportunity for another debate on the situation in Serbia, which the Commission has been following very closely for many months, and with increasing concern. After ten months of protests, Serbian society is left with deep divisions and feelings of hatred and frustration, and all of this is reflected on the streets of Serbian towns and cities.

We expect police action to be proportionate and respect fundamental rights. We condemn all acts of hate, vandalism and violence, and continue to call on all sides to de-escalate the tension. Respect for fundamental rights and values – including freedom of peaceful assembly, and media and academic freedom – are key elements of Serbia's EU path and need to be adhered to by everyone.

This also implies avoiding any kind of violence against representatives of government and their families, as well as to party premises as a means of political protest. The Commission has consistently emphasised the importance of respecting and proactively defending the independence of judicial institutions, and we condemn violence or threats against representatives of the judiciary, including the prosecution.

Media freedom is one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and is a fundamental right in the EU, and therefore is a crucial element of, and a prerequisite for, Serbia's EU accession process. In this context, political and economic influence on the media in Serbia remains a grave concern and needs to be addressed.

We expect Serbia to create an enabling environment for media freedom and ensure that freedom of expression can be exercised without hindrance. We are calling for the de-escalation of tensions and for the authorities to allow an increasing space for journalists to freely express their voices. The attacks that journalists have been facing in the context of the protests need to stop, including reported cases of police involvement and verbal attacks from high-level officials. It is crucial that journalists can do their job free from any threat of violence, harassment and intimidation to ensure that citizens have access to all information.

The Commission also stresses that spreading disinformation and hostile political rhetoric, including against the EU and its citizens, runs contrary to EU values and standards.

Honourable Members, Serbia is a candidate country to the EU. We want a truly democratic Serbia inside the EU. As Commissioner for Enlargement, I am truly devoted to this. We will continue with constructive engagement and will do everything possible to help Serbia move forward on its accession path.

But for this to happen, concrete steps on democratic principles and reforms are needed. The participation of President Vučić in military parades in Moscow and in Beijing, accompanied with critical statements towards the EU and respectful Members of Parliament – as of last time, towards the Members of the European Green Party delegation – is not what is expected from a candidate country.

The sincerity of Serbia's commitment to the EU path and its political will to credibly implement the required reforms have to be strengthened via communication and concrete action. Serbia needs to step up efforts and overcome the current stagnation in the implementation of the fundamental reforms. It is time to deliver concrete results in fighting corruption and strengthening the rule of law, including the independence of the judiciary and media freedom, and on electoral reforms.

The Commission expects Serbia to create an enabling environment for civil society. Independent voices need to be heard and protected. Intimidation and pressure on civil society is not the way we operate in the Union, and must not be tolerated. All these reform steps are key to Serbia's progress on its European path, and they are imperative to exiting the current political impasse and divisions in Serbian society.

History has proven that democratic changes can only come from within the country through internal democratic processes, and this is what the Commission respects and abides by. We support ODIHR's recommendations on electoral legislation, especially the audit of voter registers. This would improve the political climate and could serve as an example that advancement is possible if there is the will and a constructive approach by all.

Again, it is imperative for Serbia to create the conditions for a renewed dialogue between stakeholders across the political spectrum and across society. In our view, this should be based on a renewed societal consensus on key reforms. We hope to see steps towards dialogue concerning the election of the new council of the media regulator, REM, and a successful completion of this procedure in the upcoming weeks. This is one of the commitments for opening cluster 3. EU accession is an all-of-society project and, at the same time, a joint responsibility of all political parties and other stakeholders.

Dear honourable Members, we will continue engaging with the authorities and all stakeholders, political actors and civil society, encouraging them to find a way out of the current political impasse and to establish a genuinely inclusive process for the benefit of all its citizens and the whole Serbian society, and for the EU path and EU membership in the future.

Davor Ivo Stier, u ime kluba PPE. – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, deset mjeseci nakon novosadske tragedije Srbija je puno više polarizirana. Povećan je nivo nasilja i represije, što jasno osuđujemo. EPP će donijeti odgovarajuće odluke glede odnosa prema SNS-u, kao što je danas najavio predsjednik Weber.

O naravi Vučićeve vlasti smo puno puta govorili. S kolegom Piculom i ostalim izvjestiteljima u sjeni pripremili smo rezoluciju u kojoj je gotovo sve već rečeno, a i u prijašnjim rezolucijama Parlamenta se upozoravalo na probleme. Međutim, bilo bi naivno misliti da se problemi mogu riješiti smjenom samo jednog čovjeka.

Problemi u Srbiji su puno dublji. Oni su strukturni i oni također obuhvaćaju dio oporbe i studentskog pokreta. To je postalo očito još u lipnju na velikom mitingu u Beogradu. Radio Slobodna Europa je okarakterizirala taj protestni skup s ovim naslovom: Nacionalizam nadjačao borbu protiv korupcije. To se i vidjelo kada je na tom protestu profesor Milo Lompar sa Sveučilišta u Beogradu ponovio gotovo sve postulate velikosrpske nacionalističke ideologije.

I stoga, kao što je kriva dosadašnja popustljiva politika prema Vučiću, tako bi bilo krivo dati bjanko ček oporbi. Naš posao nije mijenjati vlast u Srbiji, već tražiti ispunjavanje kriterija za koje se sama Srbija obvezala predajom EU kandidature i to tražiti u prvom redu od vlasti, ali također od oporbe.

Možemo u tome pomoći, ali je na Srbiji da sama odluči kojim putem želi ići.

Tonino Picula, u ime kluba S&D. – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, eskalacija nasilja nad prosvjednicima, provokativni vanjskopolitički potezi, najnoviji napadi na novinare i projekt potpune kontrole medija razlozi su za još jednu ozbiljnu raspravu o Srbiji u Europskom parlamentu.

Uvrede koje je uputio zastupnicima ovog parlamenta, predsjednik Vučić već godinama koristi protiv svojih neistomišljenika u samoj Srbiji. Ni susjedne zemlje nisu pošteđene od posljedica politika iz Beograda.

U međuvremenu, izostaju europske obveze i reforme dok se godinama ponavljaju fraze o ozbiljnoj zabrinutosti Komisije uz nastavak politike popuštanja Vučićevom Beogradu. Paradoksalno je provoditi 19 generacija sankcija ruskom režimu, a šutjeti o državi kandidatkinji za članstvo čiji šef javno odbija uvođenje istih agresorskom režimu.

Ukratko, Bruxelles ne smije Vučiću nuditi mrkve da bi on isporučivao batine svojim građanima.

Poštovana povjerenice, nadam se da Vaša izjava od jučer signalizira početak jedne kredibilnije politike prema Beogradu od strane Komisije. Europski parlament, institucija koja najaktivnije podržava nastavak politike proširenja, ali i najglasnije kritizira nedemokratska postupanja u Srbiji, dat će Vam na tom putu punu podršku.

Annamária Vicsek, a PfE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Az Európai Parlament balliberális szárnya ismét Szerbiát állította napirendre. Ahelyett, hogy az ország mielőbbi uniós csatlakozásáról beszélnénk, ismét a tüntetésekről vitázunk. De ha már így alakult, beszéljünk a valóságról. Szerbiát két szörnyű tragédia rázta meg rövid időn belül. A 2023-as Ribnikar iskolai lövöldözés, amelyben 14 ártatlan vesztette életét, majd tavaly novemberben az újvidéki tragédia, amelyben tizenhat ember, köztük gyermekek és fiatalok haltak meg. Mindkét eset utcai mozgalmakat indított el. A társadalmi megrázkódtatás érthető volt, a követelések pedig indokoltak. De amit ebből az ellenzék csinált, az már nem a demokrácia, hanem a polgári engedetlenség és az anarchia receptje lett.

Képzeljék el, mi történne, ha Önök valamely egyetemén tíz-tizenöt ember megbénítaná az oktatást, vagy ha itt az Európai Parlamentben egy tucatnyi ember füstbombával és petárdával akadályozná a munkát? Ez felháborító és elfogadhatatlan lenne. Pedig ezek pontosan így megtörténtek Szerbiában. Az Európai Parlament nem alkalmazhat kettős mércét. Igen, el kell ítélni a tüntetőkkel szembeni túlkapásokat, de ugyanígy el kell ítélni a rendőrök elleni erőszakot is. Én Újvidéken élek. A történésekről nemcsak a médiából, hanem polgártársaim, ismerőseim videóiból, történeteiből is tájékozódom. Innen tudom, hogy rendőrök százai sérültek meg, de láttam olyan felvételt is, amelyen fém husángokkal verték őket. Nem fogadhatjuk el, hogy huligánok próbálnak polgárháborút kirobbantani. Az erőszakot el kell ítélni, a politikai vitákat pedig az utcákról vissza kell vinni a parlamentbe.

Arkadiusz Mularczyk, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Wysoka Izbo! Z niepokojem obserwujemy falę przemocy wobec pokojowych demonstrantów w Serbii. Od jesieni ubiegłego roku użycie siły wobec obywateli sprzeciwiających się decyzją władz jest dla nas nie do zaakceptowania. Bałkany to region, w którym silną obecność dzisiaj ma Rosja, ale też Chiny.

Nasze wsparcie dla proeuropejskiego ducha społeczeństw, nie tylko serbskiego, ale też całej bałkańskiej szóstki jest kluczowe i bardzo ważne. Nie możemy jednak uważać, że Unia Europejska nie jest bez winy. Droga Bałkanów Zachodnich do członkostwa trwa zbyt długo, a brak wyraźnej perspektywy czasowej wyraźnie rozzuchwala tych, którzy chcą destabilizacji regionu w sercu europejskiego kontynentu.

Musimy jasno określić naszą solidarność z obywatelami Serbii, wsparcie ich europejskich aspiracji i stanowczo powiedzieć “nie” dla przemocy wobec protestujących.

Helmut Brandstätter, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, dear Commissioner, I want to start with some very good news. My group, the Renew Group, will propose the Serbian students for the Sakharov Prize of this year, together with Irena Joveva. Thank you very much, Irena, for working with us for that. This is a very important sign. It was awarded for the first time in 1988 by Parliament to Nelson Mandela. It's a human rights prize, and that is the message to all parts of Serbian society, not only to those freedom-loving students and freedom-loving citizens, but also to Mr Vučić and his people. Human rights are important for the European Union. They are an important part of our values. The Serbian people are welcome in the European Union, but the authoritarian Vučić regime is not. That is a very important message.

The next thing is, Ms Vicsek, you talked about the tragedy in Novi Sad. It was not a tragedy – it was corruption. It was corruption with China, and it was corruption of the Vučić regime, and we have to say that openly. Yes, there is also corruption in the European Union, but we fight it here and we say very openly, you should fight it there if you want to be a member of the European Union.

One more point: he even has political prisoners now. That does not work in the European Union. I want to welcome here Biljana Đorđević – she is here today from the Green Party – and my friends from the Liberal Party, Pavlo Grbović and Natan Albahari, and also Borko Stefanović from the Social Democrats. We had a very good conversation today. We feel that we want to be European and we want to work together. Of course, it's the decision of the Serbian people to decide which kind of government you want, but we want human rights.

Vladimir Prebilič, v imenu skupine Verts/ALE. – Gospa predsednica, spoštovani. Srbija obupano kliče na pomoč. Namesto napredka se njeni državljani soočajo z represijo, nadzorom medijev in nasiljem nad tistimi, ki si drznejo nasprotovati. Študenti in demokratična opozicija pogumno vztrajajo na ulicah ter zahtevajo svobodo, resnico in odgovornost. In nekaj morajo vedeti. Evropa vas sliši!

Ne moremo sprejeti Srbije, kjer huligani napadajo mirne protestnike. Ne moremo sprejeti Srbije, kjer predsednik Vučić predstavnike te institucije označuje za drhal. Ne moremo sprejeti ukradenih volitev, utišanih glasov in strahu kot orodja moči.

Demokratična Srbija ni le potreba njenih državljanov, temveč evropska nujnost, ključna za stabilno, napredno in mirno regijo. In naj bom jasen. EPP mora prenehati z opravičevanjem Aleksandra Vučića. Vsakič, ko njegove napake ignorirajo, študentje in državljani plačajo ceno. Srbija si zasluži demokracijo, Srbija si zasluži svobodo in skupaj moramo poskrbeti, da bodo dobili oboje. Spoštovani voditelji srbske opozicije, hvala, ker ste danes z nami.

Sebastian Everding, im Namen der Fraktion The Left. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In Serbien treten Presse, Studierende und viele andere für unsere europäischen Werte ein, und wie werden diese Proteste beantwortet? Mit Blendgranaten, Tränengas und Verhaftungen. Diese Menschen und auch Kolleginnen und Kollegen aus diesem Haus wurden von Präsident Vučić auf übelste Art und Weise beleidigt und angegriffen. So ein Verhalten kann die EU und auch dieses Haus nicht tolerieren.

Novi Sad ist die Partnerstadt meiner Heimatstadt Dortmund, und Deutschland darf als wichtiger EU-Partner zu der Situation in Serbien nicht schweigen. Statt strategischer Interessen, Lithium-Deals und Co. müssen wir Menschen und auch die Umwelt über den Profit stellen.

Die Situation des Tierschutzes ist ebenso alarmierend: Tierheime sind überfüllt, staatliche Unterstützung nahezu nicht existent; dennoch kämpfen engagierte Menschen für Tierrechte, für Menschenrechte vor Ort, und damit verkörpern sie all unsere europäischen Werte.

Wir müssen ganz entschieden handeln: gezielte Sanktionen gegen diejenigen verhängen, die die Demokratie unterdrücken, mutige proeuropäische Stimmen unterstützen und unmissverständlich klarmachen, dass Europa für gemeinsame Werte steht. Die Spirale von Gewalt in Serbien muss durchbrochen werden.

Tomasz Froelich, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Serbien droht zu einer zweiten Ukraine zu werden. Es begann mit Studentenprotesten gegen Korruption; die Mehrheit der Serben unterstützte das Anliegen. Nun mischen fremde Kräfte von außen mit, die Proteste werden für geopolitische Zwecke missbraucht. Warum? Weil Serbien pragmatische Beziehungen zu Russland und China unterhält. Das ist Serbiens gutes Recht, denn Serbien ist ein souveräner Staat, aber das passt manchen hier nicht – daher nun die Eskalation.

Es geht um Destabilisierung, die Westbindung Serbiens, den Sturz von Vučić und um Chaos. Chaos, das Sie befeuern, Sie und vermummte Schläger, die auf serbische Polizisten einprügeln. Lassen Sie das! Schluss mit diesem Pseudoimperialismus! Sie erreichen damit nur das Gegenteil, denn die Serben reagieren allergisch auf fremde Einmischung.

Der Westen hat dort ohnehin einen miserablen Ruf. Die NATO hat das Land in den Neunzigern platt gebombt. Die Wunden sitzen bis heute tief. Nur jeder zehnte Serbe wünscht sich heutzutage eine pro-westliche Ausrichtung; nur jeder fünfte fühlt sich emotional mit der EU verbunden, und mittlerweile lehnt sogar die Mehrheit der Serben einen EU-Beitritt ab. Sie haben kein Recht, sich in serbische Angelegenheiten einzumischen.

Reinhold Lopatka (PPE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, the recent events in Serbia remind us that European integration is much more than technical negotiations. Respect of our common values and fundamental human rights is crucial.

The ongoing protests started peaceful, but the reaction at the same time was the wrong one. We have received many reports of disproportionate use of force by security services, and we must stress that Serbia's authorities have to ensure that fundamental rights are fully respected.

A candidate country aspiring to join the European Union should show that it upholds our key principles. Yes, Serbia is an essential partner in the Western Balkans, and I still see the future of Serbia ultimately in the European Union. But the road to membership must be based on common democratic standards, and hopefully Serbia will come back to its path towards EU membership. Now it's not on this path.

Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D). – Voorzitter, commissaris, je vraagt je soms af hoe diep een regime kan zinken. Enerzijds maakt men grote sier bij Poetin en Xi Jinping — voor alle duidelijkheid, leiders van uitgesproken autocratische regimes — terwijl men anderzijds thuis vredevol, vreedzaam protest van studenten, maar ook van de bevolking tegen de neergang van de democratie en tegen corruptie, onderdrukt.

Laat me commissaris Kos bedanken voor haar duidelijke introductie. Ik hoop dat de boodschap wordt gevolgd door de hele Commissie en de Raad. Ik hoop ook dat de zogenaamde EP appeasement — het ondersteunen van en het gezellig samen op de foto gaan met president Vučić — stopt.

Servië is immers niet eender welk land, maar een toetredingsland. Het wordt tijd voor actie en om de toetredingsonderhandelingen ook daadwerkelijk te gebruiken om het verschil te maken op de grond.

Daarvoor wil ik de commissaris alle steun geven. Het is heel belangrijk dat de pro-Europese meerderheid een duidelijk standpunt inneemt, voor de democratie en de rule of law in Servië.

Thierry Mariani (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, comme en Géorgie, l'Union européenne choisit, en Serbie, d'encourager le chaos, là où elle devrait au contraire soutenir un gouvernement démocratiquement élu.

Depuis déjà neuf mois, la Serbie fait face à une vague de manifestations dont la nature n'a plus rien de pacifique. Un désordre qui affecte la majorité de la population, captive du comportement violent et organisé d'une minorité. 23 000 rassemblements illégaux, 12 000 blocages de routes, 750 attaques de locaux politiques et déjà 170 policiers blessés. Ce n'est plus une contestation démocratique classique. Il s'agit d'une violence dirigée contre l'État et ses institutions. Un essai pour changer un gouvernement.

Face à cela, le gouvernement serbe a multiplié les gestes d'ouverture. Un dialogue a été proposé aux étudiants. Le président Vučić a même proposé un référendum consultatif sur la confiance en son mandat ainsi que des élections anticipées.

Chaque fois, les manifestants, bloqués dans des postures stériles, ont refusé ces propositions. Car derrière ces mouvements se cachent des éléments radicaux et des ONG politisées dont l'agenda n'est pas la réforme démocratique et pacifique du pays, mais la déstabilisation de la Serbie par des calculs géopolitiques.

Le président Vučić a été élu avec plus de 60 % des voix. À ce titre, son mandat et sa majorité sont clairs, légitimes et démocratiques. Bruxelles doit cesser de harceler ce pays sous le moindre prétexte. Cette résolution est une nouvelle ingérence contre un gouvernement démocratiquement élu, mais qui a le défaut de vous déplaire.

Stephen Nikola Bartulica (ECR). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, kolegice i kolege, kada se govori o Srbiji moramo govoriti realno, a ne o pustim željama u ovom visokom domu.

Prvo treba reći da u Srbiji i dalje političari njeguju stare mitove i žive u nekom paralelnom svijetu. Nije samo pitanje Vučića i smjene vlasti, potrebna je dublja katarza cijelog društva koje ne priznaje svoju odgovornost, pogotovo u agresiji prema Hrvatskoj 90-ih godina.

Zato ću još jednom ponoviti, za normalizaciju odnosa i za europski put Srbija treba priznati odgovornost iz 90-ih godina i ne samo riječima, nego konkretnim djelima pokazati da je pokrenula novo poglavlje. To znači isplatu ratne odštete svim žrtvama iz Domovinskog rata u Hrvatskoj.

Čuli smo puno riječi, puno deklaracija i sl., ali konkretno u politici jedino vrijede djela, konkretna djela i zato još jedna poruka opoziciji – ostavite velikosrpsku retoriku i priznajte svoju odgovornost iz rata 90-ih godina.

Irena Joveva (Renew). – Gospa predsednica. “Budno spremljamo situacijo v Srbiji in res smo zelo zaskrbljeni.” To je uradna linija vodstva oziroma predsednice Komisije in članic. Ampak oni mižijo.

Čakajo, da mine? Da še kdo umre, mogoče? Ne vem. Vem pa, da ni razumevanja, ni odgovornosti, ni niti najmanjše geste solidarnosti z ljudmi na ulicah. Ker je lažje “tam zgoraj” ignorirati brutalnost režima kot pritiskati nanj.

Protestniki vztrajajo, ampak seveda izgubljajo zaupanje v Unijo. Mi pa s tem izgubljamo tiste, ki v Srbiji sploh še verjamejo v to Unijo.

Tisti, ki mižite, torej in dopuščate nasilje in dušite upanje za boljšo prihodnost. Pa ne samo njihovo. Ker, veste, to upanje bo morda nekoč potrebno tudi v vaših državah. Se boste takrat spomnili na gnile kompromise in še bolj gnilo tišino?

Vas bom jaz spomnila. Tudi brez dejanj, besede brez dejanj so izdaja.

(Govori v jeziku, ki ni uradni jezik EU)

(Govornica se je odločila odgovoriti na vprašanje, postavljeno z dvigom modrega kartončka)

Tomislav Sokol (PPE), pitanje koje je podizanjem plave kartice postavio. – Hvala lijepa kolegici na Vašem govoru, imam samo jedno pitanje.

Kako tumačite razne govore političara koji su vezani uz oporbu i uz prosvjedni pokret za vrijeme Vidovdana, od kojih su neki notorni promotori srpske odnosno velikosrpske ideologije, i smatrate li da je tako nešto prihvatljivo?

Odnosno drugim riječima, može li oporba u kojoj su očito nacionalističke velikosrpske snage itekako važan dio doista odvesti Srbiju u Europu? Hvala lijepa.

Irena Joveva (Renew), odgovor na pitanje postavljeno podizanjem plave kartice. – Hvala Vama, potrudit ću se da pričam na hrvatskom. Izvinjavam se, ide na neku drugu stranu, ali potrudit ću se.

Ja ne podržavam nacionalizam nikad. Nikad.

Ne podržavam ni one koji su za dom spremni, a ne podržavam ni bilo koje druge koji su toliko borbeni u svom nacionalizmu da nekad zaboravljaju da to ustvari, ta prošlost nije najbitnija, nego je bitnija ljepša budućnost za ljude.

A to ne važi samo za Srbiju. Znate što mislim?

Rasmus Nordqvist (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, Friday evening I was in Novi Sad. I met students, ordinary families, health workers, veterans, all kinds of people peacefully protesting for democracy. It all began with 10 minutes of silence to commemorate the people that lost their lives in the tragic collapse at the railway station last year, 10 months ago. Never have I been at a place where thousands of people were so silent and it was only broken by the sounds of bird screams, almost like an alarm of the future that Serbia faces if we let Vučić lead Serbia down the authoritarian path.

The free media have been suffocated, young people detained. And this for 10 months. Hundreds of thousands have taken the streets to protest Vučić's oppressive policies, widespread corruption and the police brutalities. We cannot have a leader right at the doorsteps of the EU, who kisses Putin's hands on one day and shakes hands with von der Leyen the next. The EU needs to review all funds that we give to Serbia, because I know for sure that right now the funds do not benefit the people of Serbia, but only Vučić.

Ľuboš Blaha (NI). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, vážení kolegovia, Slováci a Srbi sú bratské slovanské národy a Slovensko plne podporuje Aleksandara Vučića, demokraticky zvoleného srbského prezidenta.

Západ sa v Srbsku pokúša o Majdan. Chcú násilím zvrátiť demokratické voľby, tak ako kedysi na Ukrajine. Násilné protesty v Srbsku viedli už k 750 útokom na stranícke centrály. Výsledkom je 170 zranených policajtov. Srbská vláda naopak ponúka dialóg, či dokonca referendum. Ale nie, majdanisti v Srbsku nechcú rešpektovať demokraciu. Ich cieľom je režimová zmena.

Srbsko sa previnilo tým, že udržiava priateľské vzťahy s Ruskom a chce mier, rovnako ako Slovensko. A áno, aj u nás sa Západ pokúšal o Majdan. Britská vláda dokonca chcela zmanipulovať demokratické voľby a financovala aj súčasnú europoslankyňu z frakcie Renew pani Ostrihoňovú, ktorá tu sedí priamo predo mnou.

My odmietame takéto imperiálne zásahy do národnej suverenity našich krajín. Nestačilo vám, že ste v roku 1999 bombardovali Belehrad a kvôli vám umierali deti? Nestačí vám, že v rozpore s medzinárodným právom uznávate Kosovo? My stojíme za Srbskom a demokratickým prezidentom Vučićom.

Λουκάς Φουρλάς (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η Σερβία είναι μια χώρα που πορεύεται στον ευρωπαϊκό δρόμο, έναν δρόμο που απαιτεί διάλογο, σεβασμό και δημοκρατική ωριμότητα. Η βία δεν έχει θέση και είναι απολύτως καταδικαστέα από όπου κι αν προέρχεται, είτε από την αστυνομία είτε από τους πολίτες. Η βία φέρνει μόνο βία, δεν λύνει προβλήματα, τα οξύνει. Οι κυβερνήσεις έχουν καθήκον να ακούν, να αφουγκράζονται την κοινωνία, να δίνουν χώρο στη φωνή του πολίτη. Οι πολίτες από την άλλη έχουν ευθύνη να εκφράζουν τη διαμαρτυρία τους με σεβασμό στο Σύνταγμα, στους θεσμούς και στην ίδια τους τη χώρα.

Ο δρόμος προς την Ευρώπη περνά μέσα από την εμπιστοσύνη και η εμπιστοσύνη χτίζεται με διάλογο. Η Σερβία και οι πολίτες της αξίζουν το μέλλον που ονειρεύονται. Η Ευρώπη είναι εδώ, όχι ως κριτής και τιμωρός, αλλά ως εταίρος, ως συνοδοιπόρος σε αυτή την προσπάθεια. Η λύση είναι πάντα ο διάλογος. Η ευθύνη είναι όλων μας και η ελπίδα η μεγαλύτερη δύναμη, για μια Σερβία ειρηνική, για μια Σερβία ευρωπαϊκή. Αυτό θα συνεχίσω να υποστηρίζω.

Alessandra Moretti (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, una cosa è certa: in Serbia non si può più tornare indietro. Gli ultimi dieci mesi di protesta e di presa di coscienza da parte dei cittadini serbi, non solo studenti, hanno marcato una svolta profonda nella storia del paese, che non può essere ignorata né dalla leadership serba, né tantomeno dalle istituzioni europee.

Da qui e dalle richieste di migliaia di cittadini scesi in piazza serve ripartire, per costruire un paese nuovo.

Da parte dell'Unione europea e di questo Parlamento non si tratta di sostenere un candidato o un partito serbo, si tratta di sostenere i valori europei.

È ingenuo chi pensa che il Parlamento europeo possa appoggiare un governo che permette la repressione violenta delle manifestazioni, provvede a licenziare i dipendenti pubblici perché partecipano alle proteste, imbavaglia la stampa, gioca sporco con il processo elettorale: per tutto questo non c'è posto nell'Unione europea.

Ci aspettiamo, invece, e vi assicuro lo speriamo davvero, di accogliere nella nostra famiglia europea una Serbia diversa, una Serbia democratica e libera.

Eugen Tomac (Renew). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisar, stimați colegi, poporul sârb este un popor cu vocație europeană. Ceea ce însă nu înțeleg politicienii de la Belgrad este că trebuie să renunțe. Este timpul să renunțe la discursul duplicitar prin care una spun și cu totul alta fac atunci când discută despre calea europeană a Serbiei.

Este evident că libertatea de exprimare, drepturile fundamentale trebuie garantate, iar practicile pe care actualul guvern le aplică în relația cu propriii cetățeni sunt condamnabile. Nu poți să fii în poză cu Putin și, în același timp, să îi minți pe cetățeni că îți dorești integrare europeană. Nu se poate așa ceva întâmpla astăzi. De aceea cred că trebuie să fim alături de cetățenii care își doresc o Serbie europeană alături de noi.

Thomas Waitz (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, Madam Commissioner, I want to turn to the Serbian people. If you want a future for your children, and if you want to have a proper income, if you want to have functional institutions and good healthcare, if you want to have an independent justice system and serious and fair elections, please realise that you have to overcome your current authoritarian rulers. No matter if you want to join the European Union one day or not.

And I turn to us – to our colleagues here, to the Commission and to the heads of states. Please stop your appeasement policy. It is harming the credibility of the European Union, it is harming our common values and it is harming the stability of the Western Balkan region. Let's come to reason. Let's support the opposition. Many people in Serbia have understood that their future lies in their hands. Let's openly support them. That is what I am advocating for.

Judita Laššáková (NI). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, vážení kolegovia, účasť občanov na demokratických procesoch je dôležitá. Politická angažovanosť tiež. Každé jedno zhromaždenie demokraciu posilňuje a diktatúru oslabuje.

Zároveň však platí, že ochranu si zaslúži iba zhromaždenie, ktoré je vykonávané pokojne. Takto to definuje aj Európsky súd pre ľudské práva sídliaci tiež tu v Štrasburgu. Lebo ak zhromaždenie nie je pokojné, štát je povinný ochrany života, zdravia a majetku ostatných, ktorí nie sú zapojení do zhromaždenia.

Vieme, čo sa dialo v Srbsku. Naozaj to vieme. A ak sme si istí, čo sa tam deje, čo chceme urobiť? Postupuje sa tam nejako brutálne proti menšinám, ako sme počuli napríklad od slovenských kolegov? Nech už prijmeme akékoľvek rozhodnutie, dúfam, že to nechceme spraviť ako Putin. Pri ochrane menšín žijúcich v Srbsku tam vtrhnúť na tankoch, keď už tak statočne zbrojíme.

Tomislav Sokol (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, Srbija pod vlašću Vučića je autokratska država. To je režim koji je preuzeo medije, ugušio slobodu izražavanja i pretvorio javnu sferu u instrument vlastite propagande.

Europska politika udovoljavanja Beogradu pokazala se potpunim promašajem. Srbija godinama vodi politiku sjedenja na dvije stolice. Deklarativno teži članstvu u EU-u, a istodobno održava posebne odnose s Rusijom i provodi hegemonistički projekt “srpskog sveta”.

Problemi Srbije dublji su, međutim, od Vučića. Srpska pravoslavna crkva i velik dio intelektualne elite glavni su tvorci širitelji velikosrpske ideologije. Najbolje se to vidi u Crnoj Gori u kojoj se pokušava uništiti crnogorski identitet i ponovno svesti ovu zemlju na privjesak Beograda.

Ako oporba u Srbiji doista želi europsku podršku, mora se jasno i nedvosmisleno ograditi od takve politike. Vidovdanski prosvjed pokazao je da je velikosrpska ideja itekako prisutna i u redovima oporbe, a to je ono što Europa ne može prihvatiti.

Ovakvoj Srbiji nije mjesto u Europskoj uniji. Sve dok se Beograd konačno ne odrekne velikosrpske politike prema susjedima, vrata EU-a za Srbiju moraju ostati zatvorena.

Thijs Reuten (S&D). – Madam President, colleagues, for years, the Commission allowed Vučić to steadily undermine popular support for the EU. Instead, Vučić publicly praises his real friends, Russia and China. For years, the EU has not held Vučić to account. Instead, he became more autocratic, shrank the space for free media, civil society and fair elections. For years, all this disenfranchised supporters of a European Serbia and fed ethnonationalism again. For years, the Commission has not defended our values. Instead, we gave Vučić public praise, hoping for him to choose the EU, hoping for stability – but getting the opposite.

These failures now represent a serious challenge, and I am glad this House and Commissioner Kos understand that. But where are the Member States, the HR/VP or the President of the Commission? Your appeasement did not work. We need a strong, coordinated EU position, four-square behind those asking for transparency, democracy and fundamental rights, for Serbian citizens and for Europe.

Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová (Renew). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, vážená pani komisárka, vážení kolegovia, kolegyne, chcem podporiť a poďakovať každému, kto dôrazne a pokojne odsúdil násilie voči demonštrujúcim v Srbsku.

V auguste tohto roku sa s násilnou a neakceptovateľnou reakciou stretla aj slovenská menšina v Báčskom Petrovci a dnes chcem vyslať jasný signál mojim krajanom a krajankám na severe Srbska, ale aj všetkým občanom Srbska: študenti a aktívni ľudia nie sú a nikdy nesmú byť naším nepriateľom.

Protesty nevypukli pre nejaký zástupný problém. Protesty sú, pretože korupcia, nedbanlivosť a arogancia moci si tragicky vyžiadali ľudské životy.

Chcem, aby naši priatelia a krajania v Srbsku vedeli: vidíme, čo sa deje, stojíme pri vás a podporujeme vaše úsilie o dôstojnejší a slobodnejší život. Chceme sebavedomé Srbsko na európskej ceste. Sebavedomé Srbsko ale nie je také, ktoré akýmkoľvek spôsobom bráni svojim občanom a občiankam uplatňovať ich základné práva.

Dámy a páni, podržavamo vas.

Gordan Bosanac (Verts/ALE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, bliži se godina dana od one povijesne press konferencije predsjednice Komisije von der Leyen s Vučićem kada je rekla da je on veliki borac za vladavinu prava. Evo, prošlo je 11 mjeseci i stvari su se drastično, za 180 stupnjeva promijenile.

Promijenile su se zahvaljujući građanima Srbije koji su izašli na ulicu i hvala im još jednom da su promijenili atmosferu i u ovom parlamentu, a dobro je da se ta atmosfera sada jako mijenja i u Komisiji.

Kao što smo čuli iz dosadašnje rasprave, svega nekoliko uistinu radikalno desnih neofašističkih zastupnika podržava Vučića. Mislim da je velika većina shvatila što se dešava u Srbiji. I pred nama je sada samo pitanje: Kako i što dalje?

Ja očekujem da će građani Srbije nastaviti sa svojom borbom i da će se zalagati ne samo za vladavinu prava nego i za ljudska prava i za demokraciju.

Ja im mogu obećati da ćemo mi to raditi s naše strane u Europskoj uniji i nadam se da ćemo se onda jednoga dana zajednički naći u ovoj prostoriji.

Matej Tonin (PPE). – Gospa predsednica. Protesti. Pravica do zbiranja je nekaj najbolj normalnega v vseh zahodnoevropskih demokratičnih državah, zato to ne bi smelo biti niti presenečenje za srbsko vlado.

Demokrata od avtokrata lahko zelo hitro razločiš po tem, kako obvlada same proteste. Demokrat se bo zatekel k dialogu, avtokrat pa k nasilju.

Če kaj, potem me v zadnjem obdobju skrbi nervoza predsednika Vučića. Nedavno si je celo privoščil, da je obtožil Slovenijo in Hrvaško paktiranja proti Srbiji, in to na popolnoma nedolžni bazi, ker Slovenija in Hrvaška sta zaveznika v Natu in v Evropski uniji. Mislim, da to marsikaj sporoča.

In zato moramo tudi mi v tej hiši jasno sporočiti protestnikom, da smo na njihovi strani in na njihovi demokratični pravici.

Chloé Ridel (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, depuis près d'un an, le mouvement citoyen contre la corruption et pour la démocratie en Serbie ne faiblit pas. Ce mouvement non violent est mené par la jeunesse: des jeunes travailleurs, des étudiants qui occupent leurs facultés, dorment à même le sol dans leurs salles de classe, organisent les plus grandes manifestations de l'histoire du pays, parcourent leur pays, même à vélo, jusqu'aux plus petits villages, pour informer leur peuple et le convaincre de se lever contre la dérive autoritaire du chef de l'État, Aleksandar Vučić.

Aujourd'hui, ce mouvement citoyen pacifique est durement réprimé. Les manifestants sont frappés, arrêtés, intimidés par des forces supplétives composées de nervis du pouvoir, qui sont masqués, qui sont armés de barres de fer. Le pouvoir explique désormais que le mouvement citoyen en Serbie est un complot étranger. Les manifestations serbes sont traitées, au choix, de terroristes ou de nazies.

Alors que faisons-nous? Presque rien. En France, Emmanuel Macron a même accueilli Aleksandar Vučić à l'Élysée, sans rien dire à propos des manifestations. Nous nous aplatirions, nous l'Europe, devant Trump, mais nous ne serions pas capables de soutenir un mouvement citoyen pour la démocratie qui se déroule sur notre continent, dans un pays candidat à l'Union européenne et qui demande notre soutien? Que deviendront nos valeurs si nous ne les défendons pas? Elles s'éteindront.

Je veux dire à la jeunesse serbe et à tous les citoyens qui la suivent: votre combat est le nôtre. L'Europe doit tendre la main et elle doit peser pour l'organisation d'élections réellement libres et démocratiques en Serbie.

Dan Barna (Renew). – Madam President, let us set the scene in the streets of Belgrade: what we are witnessing is a Government, a candidate for EU membership, unleashing brutal violence against its own people.

The Vučić regime's crackdown on peaceful, democratic protesters is an affront to everything this Union stands for. The images of police beating students, of citizens being tear-gassed are a stain on the conscience of Europe.

Let me be clear: a government that attacks its own youth, that silences dissent with batons, is walking away from Europe, not towards it. The principles of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law are not negotiable talking points; they are the very foundations of our community.

To the brave students and citizens of Serbia: we see you. We stand with you. Your fight for a democratic future is our fight. This Parliament will not look away.

Serbia's place is in Europe, but a European Serbia cannot be built on fear and violence.

Liudas Mažylis (PPE). – Pirmininke, komisare, kolegos. Serbijoje šiandien regime demokratijos nuosmukį. Protestai prieš valdžią malšinami brutalia jėga, smurtaujama prieš opoziciją ir nepriklausomus žurnalistus, sistemingai silpninama teisinė valstybė. O vaizdai Belgrade labai aiškiai primena įvykius 2020 m. Baltarusijoje. Visgi Serbija dar netapo diktatūra, bet reikia pripažinti, kad dabartinė valstybės kryptis nėra suderinama su Europos Sąjungos vertybėmis. Jeigu šiandieninė Baltarusija simbolizuoja Kremliaus pergalę, Serbija vis dar turi pasirinkimo galimybę – grįžti į demokratinį kelią. O Europa privalo tikslingai veikti ir padėti priimti teisingą pasirinkimą. Situacijai nesikeičiant, nereikėtų atmesti ir tikslinių sankcijų atsakingiems už smurtą valdžios pareigūnams. Neleiskime Serbijai tapti dar vienu Rusijos satelitu.

Matjaž Nemec (S&D). – Gospa predsednica. Spoštovani državljanke in državljani Republike Srbije! Naj vam najprej izrazim globoko spoštovanje in priznanje. Vsem nam, ki verjamemo v demokratične institucije, svobodo, pravno državo in mir, dajete upanje in moč.

Bitki, ki traja mnogo dlje od zadnjih 10 mesecev, ste novembra lansko leto dodali novo dimenzijo, in sicer jakost in moč.

Vi, vaša vztrajnost in enotnost ste sprememba, ki jo država potrebuje, da se upre sistematičnemu pogromu demokracije, trdovratni korupciji in obračunavanju z vsemi kritičnimi glasovi na čelu z javnimi uslužbenci, profesorji, mediji, dekani in vsemi ostalimi.

Zabeleženih je na stotine napadov na novinarje v zadnjem letu, desetine priprtih državljanov, uveden je politični nadzor nad še zadnjimi neodvisnimi medijskimi hišami.

Vseh obsodb vredna dejanja političnega vrha zahtevajo ukrepanje tudi Unije, in ne le v medlih, zaskrbljenih odzivih.

Kako dolgo bomo še financirali režim, ki deluje proti svojim ljudem? Trdno stopimo na stran ljudi, ki si želijo svobodnih volitev in boljše evropske prihodnosti. Represija je zadnje orožje tistih, ki vedo, da so oblast že izgubili.

Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, a Choimisinéir, the scenes of force used against protesters in Serbia are completely unacceptable.

Let us be clear: the right to assemble and to voice opposition to government is a basic democratic freedom, and it must be upheld, particularly in an aspiring EU Member State.

Reports of unlawful crowd control tactics, intimidation, misuse of personal data, arrests of students and activists, and even spyware aimed at journalists have no place in an EU candidate country.

We all want Serbia to succeed on its path to membership, but the enlargement process is and must be about the values put into practice. The rule of law situation in Serbia and, above all, the State's response to protests and the ambivalent attitude to Russia and Ukraine must change if accession is to move forward.

President Vučić's SNS remains an associate member of the EPP, but it is precisely for that reason that our group is firm in our demand for change and for greater respect and adherence to fundamental rights and values.

Andreas Schieder (S&D). – Madam President, Madam Commissioner, since the tragic collapse of the roof in Novi Sad, too many peaceful protesters have been threatened, tear gassed, defamed as terrorists and beaten up. Too many heads of students have been beaten by police batons and commanded by Vučić, the President of Serbia, himself. Too many red lines have been crossed. Yet still Vučić is a member of the European People's Party, but hopefully not for very long in the future.

What we need is targeted sanctions, clear words. We have rightfully condemned the police brutality and the oppression through violence and everything that happened. Now we need to do more than just to condemn; we need to act. Targeted sanctions and also clear words by the European institutions like also the Commissioner was finding yesterday. It is our duty to support the people of Serbia and their fight for their freedom. It is in favour of Serbia, but against the brutal regime of Aleksandar Vučić.

Ingeborg Ter Laak (PPE). – Voorzitter, er vallen doden bij de protesten in Servië, terwijl het in dit Parlement vrij stil blijft over dit toetredingsland. Ik wil de commissaris dan ook bedanken voor haar sterke opening. Inmiddels zijn er honderden mensen gearresteerd, pleegt de overheid grootschalige corruptie, maakt de politie zich schuldig aan excessief geweld en worden de laatste onafhankelijke media in Servië bedreigd. Partijkantoren worden in brand gestoken.

De inwoners van Servië vragen om nieuwe, onafhankelijke en geobserveerde verkiezingen. De greep van president Vučić wordt echter steeds strakker en tegenstanders vrezen steeds meer voor verdere repressie. Democratische waarden, zoals de rechtsstaat, worden niet gewaarborgd.

Wij, als Europese lidstaten, hebben gezegd dat Servië kandidaat-lidstaat is voor de EU. Dan verwacht je dat Europa actie onderneemt en dat wij naast de inwoners van Servië gaan staan en hen helpen bij het hervormen en het verankeren van een sterke democratie en rechtsstaat voor Servië.

Marta Temido (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, na Sérvia, os confrontos entre manifestantes, sobretudo jovens estudantes, e os apoiantes do Partido Progressista Sérvio e do presidente Vučić sucedem-se desde há quase um ano, quando aconteceu a tragédia de Novi Sad.

A exigência inicial de apuramento de responsabilidades transformou-se em denúncia do autoritarismo, da corrupção, e na exigência de eleições antecipadas, fazendo subir a intensidade da repressão policial, que o comissário para os Direitos Humanos do Conselho da Europa já classificou como desproporcional.

É, por isso, preciso que as instituições europeias condenem claramente esta situação, apelem para a urgente redução das tensões e se envolvam na mediação do conflito, para que o respeito pelas regras do Estado de Direito seja reposto.

O risco de fratura da sociedade civil e de radicalização das forças políticas pró- e anti-União Europeia é real e perigoso. E não será só o futuro europeu da Sérvia que dará um passo atrás se isso acontecer, mas também as nossas expectativas políticas de alargamento.

Sunčana Glavak (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, poštovana povjerenice, kolegice i kolege, ono što danas vidimo u Srbiji definitivno nije demokracija. To su prosvjedi ugušeni silom, to su studenti nazivani neprijateljima države, to su mediji pod pritiskom i istina ušutkana. Takvo ponašanje vlasti nije dijalog, to je logika straha, rekla bih, postmodernog autokrata.

I zato moramo jasno reći: to nije put u Europsku uniju, jer Europa se gradi na slobodi govora, odgovornosti, poštovanju ljudskog dostojanstva.

Vlada koja guši medije i proglašava vlastite građane prijetnjom udaljava Srbiju od europske obitelji, ali i retorika nekih iz oporbe i s prosvjeda o Velikoj Srbiji, otvorena ili prikrivena, nedopustiva je.

Europska integracija nije trgovina vrijednostima. S jedne strane dodvoravanje Rusiji i Kini za jačanje legitimiteta, otvoreni nacionalizam, a s druge strane očekivanje potpore Europske unije. Takvu dvostruku igru ne smijemo nagraditi.

Zaključit ću, put u Europu vodi preko reformskih procesa, preko demokracije, nikada preko represije.

Catch-the-eye procedure

Sandro Ruotolo (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ringrazio la Commissaria per il suo intervento e per le sue parole.

Io vorrei sviluppare un piccolo, come dire, paragrafo del suo intervento, che è fondamentale a mio giudizio perché dove non c'è libertà di stampa non c'è democrazia, e quindi ci dobbiamo porre il problema dell'adesione della Serbia in Europa.

In Serbia fare il giornalista significa essere esposti a minacce e a violenze quotidiane. Secondo Reporters sans frontières, dall'inizio dell'anno si contano 65 aggressioni fisiche, mentre la Federazione europea dei giornalisti parla di oltre 180 casi di minacce, violenze e pressioni politiche nei primi otto mesi del 2025: cronisti picchiati, inginocchiati e immobilizzati dalla polizia, criminalizzati dal governo e definiti addirittura terroristi.

La situazione peggiora anche dal punto di vista del pluralismo: canali indipendenti subiscono restrizioni nella distribuzione, Al Jazeera ha chiuso, Radio Free Europe rischia la stessa sorte.

La Serbia è oggi al 96o posto nell'indice della libertà di stampa nel mondo, penultima tra i paesi candidati all'Unione europea.

PREȘEDINȚIA: NICOLAE ȘTEFĂNUȚĂ

Vicepreședinte

Petr Bystron (ESN). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kollegen! Ich bin schon sehr erstaunt darüber, was Sie hier erzählt haben, und vor allem auch über die unwürdige Veranstaltung, die Sie zu Serbien heute hier im Hause abgehalten haben. Sie haben hier Opposition aus einem Land angekarrt, die hier darum betteln sollte – gegen Korruption. Die EU soll gegen Korruption in Serbien helfen? Hallo, bitte schön! Hier: Die Chefin der EU-Kommission steht unter Korruptionsverdacht, gegen die wird ermittelt, und da soll jemand helfen!

Nächster Punkt: Unterdrückung der Opposition, und Sie wollen den Protesten helfen. Wo waren Sie denn, als die Menschen in Bulgarien protestiert haben gegen die Regierung, weil sie ihnen ein Referendum verweigert hat, worauf sie ein Recht haben? Wo waren Sie, als die Rumänen demonstriert haben, weil ihnen die Präsidentschaftswahlen gestohlen wurden?

Sie sind totale Heuchler, Sie picken sich immer nur die Länder heraus, in denen es noch keine Pro-EU-Regierungen gibt. Und Vučić ist ein starker Anführer, der will ein starkes Serbien, und das stinkt Ihnen, und deswegen unterstützen Sie seine Gegner.

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Herr Präsident, liebe Menschen Europas! Es wundert mich überhaupt nicht, dass der Kollege von der AfD einen starken Führer bewundert. Was mich ein bisschen mehr wundert, ist, dass der Abgeordnete, gegen den strafrechtliche Ermittlungen laufen, weil er sich von den Russen hat schmieren lassen – mutmaßlich –, nun die Korruption hier anprangert. Was mich wiederum gar nicht so wundert, ist, dass er etwas gegen Opposition hat, weil er sich ja von einem Regime schmieren lässt, das Opposition auch nicht zulässt.

Mr President, dear colleagues, the Serbian students show a strong commitment against one-man rule.

And let me say this directly to President Vučić: the joy that you take in watching the police beat down peaceful students, it will not last – because the Serbian people will hold you accountable, if not now, then at the ballot box. This is a fight for a pluralist, democratic future, fought by the youth. So it's not a question of if you lose this fight, but only when.

Diana Iovanovici Șoșoacă (NI). – Domnule președinte, da, vă aud pe toți vorbind aici. Nu știu câți dintre dumneavoastră aveți legături cu Serbia. Bunicul meu patern era sârb, așa că știu foarte multe lucruri de acolo.

Știu că tot ceea ce se întâmplă acum este sub imperiul divide et impera, pentru că Serbia, evident, a fost un proiect al Uniunii Europene pornit de către Fundația Soros împreună cu Departamentul de Stat al Statelor Unite ale Americii. După venirea lui Trump, evident că proiectul USAID s-a retras și atunci Uniunea Europeană a trebuit să compenseze ceea ce Statele Unite nu au mai dat acolo.

Eu îi rog pe sârbi să nu cadă în această capcană și să nu facă jocul fundațiilor sorosiste, care, ca și în România, ca și în Bulgaria, încearcă să pună sârbi contra sârbi. Îi rog frumos să se unească și să lupte împotriva acestor interese meschine ale Uniunii Europene, pentru că Serbia poate să dețină acolo un important hub al Balcanilor în ceea ce privește hidrocarburile rusești și chiar, în cazul în care Ucraina pierde, și chiar acolo un punct economic important.

(Încheierea intervențiilor la cerere)

Marta Kos, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, I have taken good note of your concerns as regards the developments in Serbia and their impact on Serbia's European path. And I am concerned, too.

Today's debate has once again shown the importance of adherence to EU values in our candidate countries. It has also shown that we should speak up. This is – and will remain – at the heart of the EU accession process, and it also extends to the EU common foreign and security policy. The people in Serbia deserve a European future. The prospect of EU membership offers to transform societies in a comprehensive and sustainable way, based on democratic values and principles.

The Commission will continue with our strong engagement with Serbia to ensure that it remains on its EU path and overcomes the current political impasse. We will continue engaging with the authorities and other stakeholders, especially civil society, addressing developments, the tensions and establishing of conditions for a dialogue across society for Serbia to advance on its EU path.

For this to happen, very important trust among all the stakeholders has to be restored, pressure on civil society stopped and violence against the protesters, too. I will in particular continue with constructive engagement on the requirements for opening Cluster 3, as I truly believe in Serbia's European future. But Serbia has to deliver.

At the same time, trust in the sincerity of Serbia's commitment to the EU path has been decreasing, and we should really look at what is happening and where the politicians of Serbia are going. This is making the Commission's engagement and my engagement more difficult. An ambiguous narrative on the EU, coupled with the latest derogatory statements on some Members of the European Parliament, are certainly not what the EU expects from a candidate country.

We count on the European Parliament. We count on you, dear Members of Parliament, to continue supporting the Commission in bringing democratic Serbia to the European family.

When there is a candidate country, there are two important responsibilities and commitments: first, the candidate country has to deliver, but it is also our responsibility to help a candidate country to remain on the EU path. We owe this to the people of Serbia, too.

Președinte. – Dezbaterea este închisă.

17. Moldova vastupanuvõime tugevdamine Venemaa hübriidohtude ja pahatahtliku sekkumise suhtes (arutelu)

Președinte. – Următorul punct de pe ordinea de zi este dezbaterea privind Declarații ale Consiliului și ale Comisiei referitoare la întărirea rezilienței Republicii Moldova în fața amenințărilor hibride și a ingerințelor răuvoitoare ale Rusiei (2025/2811(RSP)).

Colegi, o întreagă națiune ne privește în acest moment. Pentru mine este o onoare să conduc această dezbatere și aștept să avem o dezbatere bună. Am avut-o și pe președinta Maia Sandu astăzi, alături de noi, așa că o invit din nou pe doamna comisar Kos, care cunoaște bine Moldova, a fost de mai multe ori acolo, să ne prezinte situația din partea Comisiei.

Marta Kos, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I think this is a very special occasion also for you. I am very happy to be able to speak about Moldova, and yes, indeed, I know the country more and more, but before Moldova will become a member of the EU, I will visit it many, many times.

Now, I have just returned from a three-day trip to Moldova and I can share from first-hand experience – it is really not an exaggeration – that, in less than three weeks from now, Moldova faces parliamentary elections of historic significance, for the country's future place in Europe and for the security at our eastern borders. More than ever, Europe stands by Moldova's side. Despite the war in neighbouring Ukraine and despite the hybrid war Russia is waging against the country, Moldova and its people have shown incredible resilience. The country is rapidly progressing on its EU path. It deserves our full support.

The EU-Moldova summit in July was another sign of our deep and intense engagement with the country. It has reaffirmed our shared objective to firmly support Moldova on its path to EU membership. People of Moldova want security, prosperity, better salaries and pensions. They want a justice system that serves justice, not oligarchs, and that puts corrupted politicians and officials behind bars. The positive change in Moldova is real. This is visible to anyone who visits the country regularly. Moldova's security is inseparable from Europe's own.

As the parliamentary election on 28 September approaches, we can clearly see Russia intensifying its hybrid attacks on Moldova's democracy and stability with blatant lies, like that once Moldova will become a member of the EU, the EU will tear down all the Orthodox churches. This is a strategy of disinformation campaigns, illicit financing of political proxies, cyber attacks, energy blackmail and unprecedented vote-buying. The EU will always defend the right of Moldovan people to choose its representatives freely and without external interference and coercion. We are actively responding – and I am very proud of this – to Moldovan authorities' requests to add our support to their relentless efforts to protect the integrity of democratic processes that Russia and its proxies are constantly trying to undermine. To do so, we are mobilising all available instruments of EU support.

First, in February, I have signed a historic energy package that lays out a strategy to decouple Moldova from Russian energy supplies. It will make Moldova fully energy independent by 2027. The implementation is currently ahead of schedule.

Secondly, in May, with the overwhelming support of this House – and I really thank you, I signed the growth plan, a historic investment and reform package of MDL 38 billion last week – EUR 1.9 billion. I already announced the second disbursement, bringing it to a total of almost EUR 300 million. Also here, implementation of the reforms is ahead of the schedule.

Third, Moldova was the first country with which the EU signed the security and defence partnership in 2024. It offers a robust political framework to enhance our existing cooperation. We provide targeted support to enhance cyber security and to combat illegal financial flows, as well as foreign information manipulation and interference.

Under the European Peace Facility, we have allocated EUR 197 million to strengthen Moldova's armed forces, making Moldova the second-largest recipient of bilateral EPF support after Ukraine. In addition to this support, EU sanctions against those seeking to destabilise Moldova, in place since 2023, includes 4 rounds of listings, bringing the total of 23 individuals and 5 entities.

We stand always ready to extend support with our hybrid rapid response teams whenever deemed necessary by the Moldovan authorities to reinforce their capacities. Our experts are also learning from such partnerships with the Moldovan counterparts, and we will use this knowledge and skills in the future for all of us.

President, honourable Members, Moldova's future is in the European Union, and we are doing what it takes to bring the country closer, accelerate the benefits of EU accession, integrate its economy in the single market, and improve the lives of Moldovan citizens. Moldova has shown determination and results to deliver on reforms. The bilateral screening process is set to finish later this month. It means that all the clusters will be ready to be open. The speed at which it has been completed is a testament to Moldova's commitment to its EU path. For our part, we are committed – and me especially – to advancing Moldova's accession process as swiftly as possible, without compromising the quality of the reforms. Yes, we are committed to Moldova's European future in words, but also in actions, and this is a strategic investment in the country, its neighbours and the European Union.

Andrzej Halicki, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, Madam Commissioner, dear colleagues, we've heard a very strong message today.

President Maia Sandu said clearly to us that this is about the security of Moldova, but also the security of Europe. And this is true. The Republic of Moldova currently is a security provider for Europe.

This is the reason the disinformation campaign is so huge, and this is the reason Russian activity is so visible. Why? Because the Kremlin and Putin want to change the government, want the government to collapse. Why? Because they would like to change the pro-European way into a pro-Russian way.

Is it expected by the Moldovans? Of course it is not. Moldovans would like to live in peace. They would like to live with a better standard of life. They would like to be with us, together with a safe Europe, integrated with also our market.

So, I would like to say to all Moldovans, you can count on us. The report is also on security; it is not only on the technical process of enlargement. And I would like to say: Moldova will resist. The Russian plan will fail. Trăiască Moldova! Long live Moldova!

Sven Mikser, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, earlier today, we had the chance to listen to a very clear and powerful address by Moldovan President Maia Sandu. And I am happy to say that her words express exactly the same sentiment that forms the core of the resolution that we are going to be voting on tomorrow.

As President Sandu stressed, the outcome of the parliamentary elections that will take place on 28 September is going to be crucial for the future direction of the country, but it is also going to be a test for all of Europe. This election will decide whether Moldova manages to consolidate its democratic path towards EU membership, or is going to be pulled in a different direction by the external forces that want to derail the legitimate aspirations of the Moldovan people and also want to destabilise our continent. By those dark forces, of course, I mean Putin's Russia and its proxies.

Our Parliament's resolution on strengthening Moldova's resilience is a direct response to the challenges of this critical moment. It's a statement of unwavering solidarity built on three central pillars. First, we strongly condemned Russia's malicious interference, or what President Sandu called an 'unlimited hybrid war' of 'unseen scale'. The resolution denounces these actions from illicit financing and vote-buying to a broad variety of disinformation and intimidation operations, and calls on Russia to respect Moldova's sovereignty and integrity.

Secondly, we remain committed to helping Moldova to boost its resilience against these malicious operations. The tactics that Russia is deploying against Moldova are a blueprint for future similar operations targeting other European nations.

And finally, we remain committed to supporting Moldova's European aspirations. The impressive progress Moldova has made is a testament to its commitment to reform process, and we must recognise these achievements by upholding the principle that a candidate country's path to EU membership is determined by its own merit. We therefore urge the Council and Commission to swiftly open talks on the first clusters.

Pierre-Romain Thionnet, au nom du groupe PfE. – Monsieur le Président, qui peut nier que la Moldavie intéresse au plus haut point la Russie?

L'observateur attentif qui ouvre une carte de l'Europe trouvera ce petit État niché entre la Roumanie et l'Ukraine, pays avec lequel il partage près de 1 000 kilomètres de frontières. Relativement éloigné de la Russie, dépourvu d'une armée ayant les moindres capacités modernes, la Moldavie ne représente en rien une menace pour la sécurité de la Russie. En revanche, par sa situation géographique, elle serait un saillant idéal dans les plans du Kremlin contre l'Ukraine. Plus que cela, la Moldavie est le terrain d'essai de Moscou dans sa politique de parrainage de forces loyales ou soumises aux ambitions russes en Europe et dont Ilan Șor et sa galaxie sont la déplorable incarnation.

Ce constat indéniable ne peut suffire à expliquer tous les tenants et les aboutissants de la démocratie moldave. Gardons-nous de polariser outre mesure des enjeux électoraux qui ne se réduisent pas à être pro-européens ou pro-russes. Le soutien à l'intégration européenne ne fait que diminuer dans le pays depuis des années, dès avant la guerre en Ukraine, car les réformes mises en œuvre et les dons généreux de Bruxelles sont loin d'avoir rendu florissantes l'activité économique et les conditions de vie des citoyens les plus modestes.

L'électeur qui ne soutient pas ou ne soutient plus Maia Sandu ne veut pas pour autant que son pays devienne un satellite de Moscou. Si nous devons à la Moldavie notre solidarité et notre soutien face à toute tentative russe d'en saper l'indépendance, nous lui devons aussi la vérité et éviter de donner l'impression que son ancrage européen n'est tenu qu'à bout de bras depuis l'étranger.

Cristian Terheș, în numele grupului ECR. – Domnule președinte, dragi colegi, Republica Moldova merită să fie în UE nu ca o favoare, ci pentru că a demonstrat deja prin fapte că este un partener demn și pregătit pentru acest parteneriat mutual avantajos cu restul țărilor din UE.

În primul rând, populația Republicii Moldova a demonstrat că dorește integrarea europeană din convingere.

În al doilea rând, Republica Moldova a făcut deja importanți pași spre formarea democratică și spre statul de drept.

În al treilea rând, aceasta și-a deschis economia și a construit punți solide cu partenerii europeni.

Povestea Moldovei este și povestea țărilor din estul Europei ce s-au eliberat de sub jugul tiraniei comuniste, care, după ce și-au depășit propriile provocări, mai repede sau mai târziu, au intrat în UE. E important să nu lăsăm Republica Moldova în urmă, mai ales în aceste vremuri tulburi.

Ezitarea și nehotărârea țărilor vestice de a accepta Ucraina și Georgia în NATO, la summitul de la București din 2008, a dat curaj Rusiei imperialiste să anexeze teritorii din Georgia în 2008 și din Ucraina în 2014 și 2022. E important să învățăm din lecțiile istoriei. De aceea vă solicit să primim rapid Moldova în UE. A dovedit că merită.

Dan Barna, în numele grupului Renew. – Domnule președinte, rezoluția pe care o dezbatem astăzi abordează o amenințare reală și gravă la adresa unei democrații europene. Moldovenii sunt chemați pe 28 septembrie să își aleagă Parlamentul, iar rezultatul acestor alegeri va stabili dacă Moldova își continuă drumul spre aderarea la Uniunea Europeană sau dacă este din nou destabilizată de Rusia.

Moscova desfășoară un război hibrid feroce pentru a readuce Moldova în sfera sa de influență. În aceste luni, Moldova este laboratorul de încercare al strategiilor de război hibrid dezvoltate de Kremlin, care injectează sute de milioane de euro în societatea moldovenească pentru a cumpăra voturi și a otrăvi democrația. Folosește atacuri cibernetice, deepfake-uri și campanii masive de dezinformare pentru a manipula buna-credință și temerile cetățenilor și se folosește de tot și de orice, de la energie la religie.

Președinta Maia Sandu ne-a avertizat chiar acum câteva ore de la acest microfon. Moldova este astăzi terenul de testare a acestei noi ofensive, dar ținta reală este Europa. Suntem și rămânem pe deplin solidari cu Republica Moldova, care și-a păstrat democrația în fața unor presiuni teribile și vom continua să sprijinim eforturile sale de a-și apăra democrația și a-și ancora viitorul acolo unde îi este locul, în interiorul Uniunii Europene.

Villy Søvndal, for Verts/ALE-Gruppen. – Om få uger går Moldova til valg, og der er heldigvis mange, der ønsker at blive en del af Det Europæiske Fællesskab. Jeg synes i øvrigt, det er bemærkelsesværdigt, at lande står i kø for at blive medlem af EU. Det siger noget om attraktionen, mens der er andre lande, der truer med at tvinge landet ind, der ikke ønsker det. Det siger noget om det modsatte. Jeg ser frem til at rejse til Moldova for at følge valget som observatør her om et par uger, og derfor har jeg også været mere diplomatisk i min tale i dag, end jeg egentlig havde lyst til. Men presset fra Øst og forsøget på fra en række lande at trække væk fra Europa med bølger af desinformation er voldsomt stort. Der er tale om et koordineret angreb for at undergrave et demokrati. Derfor er vi nødt til at fortælle moldoverne, både dem, der bor i Moldova, og dem, der bor her i EU. Hvis det er jeres ønske, så er I velkommen i vores europæiske fællesskab. Jeg er glad for, at præsident Sandu i dag stod her i Parlamentet og mindede os om, hvor meget der er på spil. Vi kan ikke se passivt til, mens et europæisk demokrati bliver udsat for hybride angreb af udefrakommende magter, og vi bliver nødt til at understrege, at der er en vej frem for Moldova i vores europæiske fællesskab. Hvis det er det, de ønsker.

Jonas Sjöstedt, för The Left gruppen. – Herr talman! Om drygt två veckor går Moldavien till val. Det är inte bara ett val utan det är ett vägval om landets framtid. Moldavien förtjänar att vara ett i verklig mening självständigt land och en levande demokrati. Men det kräver att man avvisar Rysslands försök att fjärrstyra såväl ekonomin som politiken i landet. Ryssland vill styra, med desinformation, med ekonomiska påtryckningar, med oligarker som finansierar lögner och desinformation på sociala medier.

Inför förra valet såg vi en rad exempel på rena röstköp. Det är vår uppgift att stödja Moldaviens demokrati och självständighet, att värna deras möjligheter att stå emot de ryska påverkansoperationerna, att hjälpa dem att bygga upp sin ekonomi. Därför att i botten finns också stora ekonomiska och sociala utmaningar. Moldavien behöver framtidshopp. De behöver arbeten till sina ungdomar. De behöver en höjd levnadsstandard och det går hand i hand med att välja den demokratiska vägen, och att välja frihet istället för auktoritärt fjärrstyre från Ryssland.

Petr Bystron, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, liebe Frau Kos, Kollegen! Maia Sandu, die Präsidentin von Moldawien, hat hier in diesem Hause heute Morgen gesagt: Moldawien denkt und handelt schon jetzt wie die EU.

Was das in der Praxis bedeutet, davon konnte sich unser tschechischer Kollege Ondřej Dostál noch vor wenigen Wochen überzeugen. Er wollte in Moldawien an einer Konferenz teilnehmen, und man hat ihn an der Grenze mehrere Stunden festgehalten, trotz Diplomatenpass nicht reingelassen und ausgewiesen, obwohl er gewählter Repräsentant ist hier im Europäischen Parlament. Genauso ist es auch amerikanischen Journalisten ergangen.

Ja, die ach so demokratische Pro-EU-Regierung in Moldawien denkt und handelt tatsächlich jetzt schon wie die EU: Sie will keine Diskussion, sie will keine Menschen bei einer EU-kritischen Konferenz, sie will unbequeme Stimmen einfach wegsperren.

Und was macht derweil die EU? Die Kommission musste gerade jetzt zugeben, dass sie einem höchst umstrittenen Journalisten-Netzwerk – OCCRP – 600 000 Euro gezahlt hat – direkt nach der EU-Wahl. Nur dass Sie wissen, was OCCRP ist: Der Chef dieser Organisation, Drew Sullivan, hat gesagt, diese Organisation hat geholfen, fünf Regierungen zu stürzen. Die Medien in diesem Netzwerk haben das Impeachment gegen Donald Trump betrieben, sie haben die Ibiza-Affäre in Österreich kurz vor der EU-Wahl vom Zaun gebrochen, dadurch die EU-Wahlen beeinflusst und die letzte EU-Wahl durch die Voice-of-Europe-Affäre.

Also, liebe Moldawier, willkommen in dieser EU! Hier wird der Machterhalt zelebriert durch Machtmissbrauch. Steuergelder werden dafür missbraucht, Institutionen und Medien – nur so kann man gegen das eigene Volk regieren.

Siegfried Mureșan (PPE). – Domnule președinte, doamnă comisară, stimați colegi, în ultimii patru ani, Republica Moldova a depus cerere de aderare la Uniunea Europeană. A primit statutul de stat candidat. Statele membre ale Uniunii Europene, la solicitarea Parlamentului European, ca urmare a recomandării Comisiei Europene, au decis în mod unanim că Republica Moldova devine stat candidat pentru aderarea la Uniunea Europeană și a decis, de asemenea, că Republica Moldova poate începe negocierile de aderare.

Aceste negocieri sunt pregătite și ele trebuie să înceapă foarte curând. Acest lucru îl cerem și prin rezoluția Parlamentului European. Republica Moldova a început reforme esențiale, inclusiv în domeniul justiției. Republica Moldova a depășit două crize energetice. A răspuns, cu sprijinul nostru, la două șantaje energetice din partea Federației Ruse, iar Republica Moldova a oferit ajutor oamenilor din Ucraina care căutau securitate.

În același timp, noi, Uniunea Europeană, am sprijinit un pachet de sprijin economic de 1,9 miliarde pentru următorii trei ani, prin care vom ajuta ca în Republica Moldova școlile să devină mai moderne, spitalele să devină mai moderne, drumurile să devină mai bune și Republica Moldova să fie legată, inclusiv energetic, de țări libere, democratice din Uniunea Europeană, pentru ca niciodată, în viitor, Federația Rusă să nu mai poată șantaja și amenința Republica Moldova, cum a făcut-o în trecut.

Spunem foarte clar: Republica Moldova nu este singură. O vom ajuta pe drumul integrării europene, fiindcă știm că a ajuta Republica Moldova este și sprijin pentru Uniunea Europeană. O Republică Moldovă puternică și sigură înseamnă și o Uniune Europeană mai sigură și vreau să spun foarte clar: în timp ce Rusia dorește să slăbească Republica Moldova, noi dorim să întărim Republica Moldova, o republică Moldovă cât mai puternică, condusă de un guvern pro-european, fiindcă doar un guvern pro-european poate duce Republica Moldova în Uniunea Europeană.

Marta Temido (S&D). – Presidente, Senhora Comissária, a Moldávia simboliza hoje a escolha e o compromisso de todo um povo com um futuro europeu. Não apenas porque essa foi a vontade que os seus eleitores exprimiram no referendo de há um ano sobre a inclusão na Constituição da via pró-europeia, mas também porque, perante a constante interferência maligna da Rússia e as várias ameaças híbridas — e falo apenas do corte de abastecimento energético pela Rússia à região da Transnístria no início do inverno —, o país mantém-se firmemente comprometido com o processo de reformas tendente à integração europeia.

As próximas eleições legislativas, de 28 de setembro, serão um momento decisivo para consolidar este caminho. Não é, por isso, surpreendente o receio de novas campanhas de desinformação, de ciberataques, de compra de votos. É, assim, essencial que a União Europeia reforce o seu apoio político, económico e em matéria de segurança, ajudando a Moldávia a resistir.

Como disse hoje a presidente Sandu, a Moldávia é o laboratório, mas nós somos o alvo — não nos esqueçamos disso. Contamos com o seu trabalho, Senhora Comissária.

Adam Bielan (ECR). – Mr President, Madam Commissioner, in recent years, Moldova has emerged as a key partner for the European Union in the Eastern Neighbourhood, choosing the path of reform, democracy and European integration. Yet this path is under relentless assault from the Kremlin. Russia is waging a sophisticated hybrid war, flooding the country with disinformation, financing criminal networks, manipulating religious institutions and funneling illicit money through cryptocurrencies to buy votes and destabilise elections. These are not isolated incidents. They are part of a coordinated campaign to derail Moldova's democratic development and European future.

Our message is clear: we commend Chișinău's rapid reform progress and resilience. Now, the EU institutions should match their resolve by opening cluster one swiftly and advancing negotiations strictly on merit. In parallel, Russia must cease its provocations and withdraw its forces and equipment from Transnistria. Any future settlement must uphold Moldova's sovereignty, territorial integrity and European path.

Eugen Tomac (Renew). – Domnule președinte, doamnă comisar, în urma Pactului Ribbentrop-Molotov, nu doar țările baltice au fost anexate, ci și teritoriul de peste Prut al României în Uniunea Sovietică. Pe acest ținut, numit Basarabia, Stalin a creat o republică și, odată ce a fost creată, a început deportările, asasinatele în masă și românii din această zonă au fost supuși unui proces de deznaționalizare cum nu s-a mai întâmplat nici într-o altă zonă a Uniunii Sovietice.

Odată cu destrămarea URSS, pentru ca Republica Moldova să nu se unească cu România, Rusia a declanșat conflictul militar în Transnistria și de atunci își menține prezența militară ilegală tocmai pentru a ține Republica Moldova blocată. Așa se explică că astăzi limba română este limbă oficială a Uniunii Europene, iar peste 50 % din cetățenii Republicii Moldova sunt și cetățeni ai Uniunii Europene prin cetățenia română. De aceea, Rusia nu permite Republicii Moldova să avanseze pe drumul european, iar președinta Maia Sandu, astăzi, a demonstrat cât se poate de clar că interferența Moscovei în procesul de democratizare este extrem de periculoasă.

De aceea, vă cer să susținem cu toată forța procesul de integrare europeană a Republicii Moldova.

Петър Волгин (ESN). – Господин Председател, уважаеми колеги, тези, които обясняват каква прекрасна демокрация е Молдова и как тя уверено крачи по светлия евроатлантически път, никога не споменават името Евгения Гуцул. Евгения Гуцул доскоро ръководеше автономната република Гагаузия, беше силно критична към молдовските управляващи, а сега е в затвора. Осъдиха я на 7 години по обвинение, че е получавала пари от Русия. Посланието на тази присъда е ясно – всеки опозиционер в Молдова рискува да бъде осъден като руски шпионин.

Миналата година там се проведоха президентски избори и референдум, и се очакваше те да бъдат спечелени с лекота от управляващите и от президентката Мая Санду. Само че Санду, на която тук така ентусиазирано се радваха много хора, победи с много мъка, въпреки че по време на цялата предизборна кампания всички държавни структури и медии работеха в полза на управляващите и заглушаваха гласа на опозицията. Мая Санду и нейните съпартийци в управлението изобщо не са пример за демократично упражняване на властта, но понеже се движат изцяло по конспекта, спуснат от Брюксел, евробюрократите ги славословят.

“Може да е кучи син, но е наш кучи син”, както казват американците.

Luis-Vicențiu Lazarus (NI). – Domnule președinte, am auzit cu foarte mare atenție discursul doamnei președinte Maia Sandu, președinta pseudo Republicii Moldova. “Pseudo” pentru că, așa cum spunea și domnul Tomac, da, într-adevăr, în conformitate cu toate tratatele internaționale, de fapt, Moldova este a României, nu? Dar în 1940, doi dictatori nebuni au executat un rapt teritorial și au luat-o. Culmea ironiei e că, după căderea blocului de est, deși Germaniile s-au reunit, iată că Moldova nu s-a mai reunit cu România.

Acum eu stau și mă gândesc că doamna Maia Sandu își face probleme în legătură cu alegerile. Eu zic să nu-și facă probleme, pentru că, așa cum în România ați reușit să puneți președinte, anulând alegerile și interzicând candidați, dacă, în caz că dânsa pierde alegerile, se anulează alegerile și acolo și până la urmă tot dânsa e, pentru că, nu-i așa, dânsa este omul Bruxelles-ului.

Dar vreau să vă întreb ceva care mi se pare important: Oare Uniunea Europeană nu era aceea în care am intrat în ideea de a fi mai puternici și atunci toate statele puternice împreună, să constituie o uniune puternică? Pentru că în acest moment constat că România este falimentată în urma punerii acestei conduceri, a acestui președinte, care e mai mult absent și care nu se ocupă de treburile țării și turist în Moldova, ca să se ocupe, eventual, de cum să …

(Președintele a retras cuvântul vorbitorului)

Președinte. – Mulțumesc, ați depășit timpul de vorbire cu mult, și subiectul. În fața plenului, Maia Sandu este președinta legitimă a Republicii Moldova.

David McAllister (PPE). – Mr President, Madam Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues, as we have heard from so many speakers tonight, and rightly so, as the Republic of Moldova approaches parliamentary elections later this month, the stakes are high – not just for the country, but for Europe as a whole.

These elections on 28 September are not only about the future political direction of Moldova. They are a test of trust in democratic institutions, and a test of our commitment to defending democracy where it is most under attack.

The European Parliament's resolution to be adopted tomorrow builds on our growth plan for Moldova, investing in economic resilience, democratic governance and strategic infrastructure. It is a signal of our long-term commitment. I can only echo what colleagues have said: Moldova's security is Europe's security, and we stand with the brave Moldovan citizens in their democratic choice.

Vasile Dîncu (S&D). – Domnule președinte, doamnă comisar, Republica Moldova este astăzi una dintre țările cele mai expuse în fața agresiunilor hibride ale Rusiei: campanii de dezinformare, presiuni energetice, tentative de destabilizare economică și politică.

În fața acestui atac permanent, este foarte frumos gestul nostru de solidaritate și acest lucru ne emoționează și pe noi, românii, ca și pe frații noștri moldoveni, dar trebuie să facem câteva lucruri concrete. Au fost apreciate aici, menționate câteva lucruri concrete, ajutoarele noastre pentru Moldova, dar mai precizez câteva lucruri.

În primul rând, trebuie să-i ajutăm să consolideze securitatea energetică prin programe comune de apărare digitală și prin conectarea la mecanismele noastre de răspuns rapid.

În al doilea rând, trebuie accelerată interconectarea energetică, astfel încât Chișinăul să nu mai fie prizonierul dependențelor multiple energetice, chiar dacă s-au făcut progrese în ultima vreme.

Și nu în ultimul rând, este vorba de reziliența democratică, sprijin pentru mass-media independentă, combaterea dezinformării și susținerea administrației publice locale, mai ales.

Sprijinind Moldova, ne protejăm și pe noi, întărim flancul estic, întărim încrederea cetățenilor în proiectul nostru și arătăm un lucru: Europa nu își abandonează vecinii, îi sprijină să reziste și să prospere în fața acestei agresiuni.

Mariusz Kamiński (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Pani Komisarz! Już za kilka tygodni w Mołdawii odbędą się wybory parlamentarne. Te wybory zadecydują, czy Mołdawia będzie kontynuować swój marsz ku wolności, czy też z tej drogi zostanie zawrócona. Chcemy, żeby Mołdawia była nowoczesnym demokratycznym państwem europejskim, żeby trwale wyrwała się z postsowieckiej strefy wpływów. Celem Rosji w tych wyborach jest przejęcie władzy przez skorumpowanych oligarchów realizujących imperialne interesy Putina.

Wspieranie niepodległej Mołdawii to nie tylko oczywisty nakaz ludzkiej solidarności, ale również imperatyw geopolityczny. Unia musi działać konsekwentnie i odpowiedzialnie. Nie jest jednak odpowiedzialnym ani mądrym wzywaniem w rezolucji, którą mamy przyjąć, władz Mołdawii do wspierania lokalnych organizacji LGBT. Takie tematy zastępcze są wygodne dla rosyjskiej propagandy. Dziś Mołdawia walczy o sprawy fundamentalne, o swoją wolność i niepodległość. Jesteśmy z wami, Mołdawianie.

Helmut Brandstätter (Renew). – Mr President, Commissioner Kos, dear citizens of Moldova, your President was very welcome here today. And so are you: you are welcome to the European Union if the negotiations go well.

I visited Moldova many times, and I saw this Russian influence firsthand. This time, Russia has reportedly allocated USD 350 million for buying votes, corruption, intimidation and so on. That is a huge sum for a small country.

Moldova's resilience is Europe's resilience. If the Kremlin succeeds, it will embolden further aggression against Ukraine, the Western Balkans and beyond. The EU must act now. We must oppose the Russian lies with facts and truths. We need to increase our support for independent media, cybersecurity and civil society in Moldova.

We must also accelerate Moldova's EU accession process and send a clear signal: Europe stands with the Moldovan people.

Michael Gahler (PPE). – Mr President, colleagues, Commissioner, I was the head of the EP election observation delegation last year for the presidential election and the referendum, and what we saw of malign influence from Russia and the proxies was already incredible. The President here today illustrated what had happened last time, and we need to be aware of what will happen next time on the 28th, when we have the next election.

That is why it is so important to support all ways, means and measures that the Moldovans can take to get their own voters in a position where they can make an informed vote, and not one where we find that they are informed through the social media in a way that they are irritated and confused about what the European Union is actually all about. That is our task, and I think we will be able to fulfil it.

Chloé Ridel (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, c'était en Ukraine, en Biélorussie et, maintenant, c'est en Moldavie: quand les citoyens déclarent leur attachement aux valeurs démocratiques, au projet européen lors d'un référendum comme celui qui a eu lieu en Moldavie en 2024, Vladimir Poutine déchaîne sa folie impériale. Vexé, frénétique, manipulateur et ridicule, il s'agite et s'ingère là où personne ne l'avait invité. Ce sont de fausses informations, des montages, des anecdotes grotesques, mais aussi des achats de votes. Tous les moyens sont bons pour la Russie, pour le tyran et ses oligarques, relayés par des plateformes peu scrupuleuses.

Lorsque celle qui dérange est une femme cheffe d'État comme Maia Sandu, c'est la double peine. On l'accusera tantôt d'être psychologiquement instable, vénale, menteuse ou même d'être dépendante à la drogue. Cette campagne de désinformation russe en Moldavie s'appelle “Matriochka”. Elle cherche à priver 2 millions et demi d'Européens de démocratie.

Alors, à nos voisins moldaves, à vous, Madame la Présidente Maia Sandu, nous vous le redisons, vous pouvez compter sur nous pour dénoncer cette ingérence insupportable et défendre la paix et la démocratie sur notre continent européen. Vous avez toute votre place dans la famille européenne. Vous méritez des élections libres, équitables et justes. Ne laissons pas des tyrans mégalomanes et corrompus voler votre avenir, qui est aussi le nôtre.

Małgorzata Gosiewska (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! 28 września obywatele Mołdawii zdecydują o przyszłości swojego państwa. Te wybory są nie tylko ich wewnętrzną sprawą – to również test odporności demokracji na brutalne metody Rosji, która cały czas próbuje destabilizować Mołdawię i wpływać na nią. Tak samo jak wcześniej niszczyła Ukrainę czy Gruzję, wpływała na społeczeństwa poprzez dezinformację, cyberataki, nielegalne finansowanie partii czy manipulacje opinią publiczną. To również próba “rozmontowania” bezpieczeństwa w regionie.

Dlatego naszym obowiązkiem jest wspierać Mołdawię w ochronie uczciwych wyborów, w walce z propagandą, w budowie silnych instytucji państwa czy wspieranie rozwoju gospodarczego. Czekamy na uruchomienie pierwszej transzy środków na pobudzenie gospodarki, na infrastrukturę, na unowocześnienie Mołdawii. Tylko bezpieczna i suwerenna, silna gospodarczo Mołdawia może być gwarantem stabilizacji i bezpieczeństwa w regionie.

Jako społeczność międzynarodowa musimy inicjować i wspierać działania przede wszystkim w obszarze bezpieczeństwa informacyjnego, cyberobrony, ochrony procesu wyborczego. Kolejnym działaniem musi być nałożenie sankcji na rosyjskich oligarchów i ich lokalnych agentów operujących w Mołdawii. Trzeba wyraźnie powiedzieć: Rosja nie będzie decydować o przyszłości Mołdawii ani przyszłości Europy.

Ivars Ijabs (Renew). – Mr President, dear colleagues, I want to thank you, Madam Commissioner, for helping Moldova on its way to Ukraine, especially in those fields of fighting hybrid warfare and disinformation, because Moldova belongs to Europe and Moldovan people have clearly demonstrated that.

But this is also about our own strategic considerations: to lose Moldova to Russia would mean a big geopolitical loss for Europe and our own security. Moldova is a key partner in containing Putin's Russia. We have to be serious about that, and we have to draw our lessons from the Georgian experience, where Russia succeeded in organising the anti-European backlash with all the consequences. And right now, approaching elections, we have to do everything to show Moldovans that they are welcome in Europe and we stand with them.

Ioan-Rareș Bogdan (PPE). – Domnule președinte, Excelențele Voastre, Kremlinul duce un război atât pe frontul din Ucraina, cât și pe cel din Republica Moldova. În Ucraina răpește și ucide copii, distruge orașe, în Moldova, vrea să asasineze speranța. Campaniile de dezinformare din Moldova seamănă ură împotriva Uniunii Europene, înfricoșează cetățenii și răspândesc minciuni, toate cu investiții fără precedent.

Moldova, cu un pas în Eurosistem, este pentru Kremlin un coșmar. El vrea să folosească Moldova împotriva Uniunii, nu să o consolideze. De ce? O Uniune cu o fundație puternică, incluzând Moldova mai mare și mai prosperă, este un partener solid al Americii, adică o nucă pe care nu o va putea sparge niciodată. Moscova vrea aliați să distrugă Europa și Statele Unite ale Americii, care cred în democrație, libertate, presă liberă și demnitate, nu în război, foamete și tiranie – instrumentele Kremlinului.

Suntem aici și ne vom apăra casa, pentru că Europa nu este a mea sau a dumneavoastră, ci a urmașilor copiilor noștri. Suntem 500 de milioane de europeni împreună cu Moldova și Ucraina și nu cedăm la șantajul Kremlinului. Frații mei din Basarabia istorică, azi Republica Moldova, au alegeri parlamentare vitale peste trei săptămâni. Ei trebuie sprijiniți să rămână pro-Europa și împreună cu Europa și în curând integrați deplin în Europa, alături de România.

Andreas Schieder (S&D). – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es sind nur mehr knapp zweieinhalb Wochen bis zu dieser richtungsweisenden Wahl in Moldawien am 28. September, und wir sehen das, was wir auch schon in der Vergangenheit bei Wahlen dort gesehen haben, nämlich dass die russische Einflussnahme auf diese Wahlen schon jetzt im Vorfeld massiv zunimmt.

Präsidentin Maia Sandu hat heute betont, dass das, was in Moldawien passiert, eine ernste Warnung für ganz Europa sein muss, und sie hat vollkommen recht, denn die moldawische und damit auch die europäische Demokratie ist durch diese Einflussnahme von Russland massiv gefährdet; es gibt die Beispiele aus der Vergangenheit.

Gleichzeitig zeigt sich auch, dass dieses Beitrittsland ein wichtiges Bollwerk gegen diese russische Aggression ist; daher ist es wichtig, dass wir nicht nur jetzt vor den Wahlen, sondern grundsätzlich als Europäische Union Moldawien aktiv unterstützen, um die Einflussnahme abzuwehren, um den demokratischen Prozess zu stärken und die europäischen Grundwerte zu sichern.

Maciej Wąsik (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Życzymy Mołdawii wolnych, demokratycznych wyborów. Wspierajmy Mołdawię i wolną wolę jej obywateli wyrażoną w wolnych wyborach, wolnych od ingerencji Rosji.

O działaniach Rosji mówiła dziś na tej sali pani prezydent Sandu. Ale w wybory demokratyczne potrafi ingerować nie tylko Rosja. W 2023 roku Polska podczas ostatnich wyborów parlamentarnych doświadczyła bezprawnego nacisku Komisji Europejskiej. Wstrzymując fundusze KPO i stosując mechanizm warunkowości, Unia Europejska ingerowała w polskie wybory parlamentarne. To szkodliwe narzędzie podważające demokrację i suwerenność państw członkowskich.

Dziś Mołdawia zmaga się z rosyjską ingerencją, dezinformacją i manipulacjami przed wyborami. Wojna na Ukrainie pokazuje, jak cenna jest wolność. Życzymy Mołdawii uczciwych wyborów, wolnych od zewnętrznych nacisków, ale mówimy jasno: mechanizm warunkowości Unii Europejskiej, podobnie jak działania Rosji, to niedopuszczalna ingerencja w demokratyczny wybór narodów. Brońmy suwerenności Mołdawii, Polski i każdej wolnej ojczyzny.

Krzysztof Brejza (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Jest mi przykro Parlamencie Europejski, że musicie być świadkami takiego donoszenia na Polskę, jaką mój przedmówca zaprezentował, i porównywania Unii Europejskiej do Rosji, i porównywania tego, że Unia Europejska działa rzekomo jak Rosja. Przecież to jest bzdura. To jest właśnie ten głos rosyjskich populistów, prorosyjskich wszystkich marionetek, które atakują Unię Europejską. Bo o co walczy Mołdawia? Mołdawia, Panie Wąsik, walczy o to, żeby dołączyć do Unii Europejskiej, do tych wartości, którymi jest między innymi praworządność.

Szanowni Państwo, i dzisiaj, jakie to wszystko jest czytelne, jakie to wszystko jest widoczne. Ile tych głosów takich antymołdawskich, antyeuropejskich mogliśmy usłyszeć na czele z panem, chyba z partii SOS Rumunia, który atakował mołdawskie aspiracje, ale wcześniej jego partia wielokrotnie opowiadała się za Rosją, wysuwając nawet żądania terytorialne wobec Mołdawii. Mołdawio, jesteśmy z Tobą, trzymamy kciuki, bo jesteś narodem wielkim, małym terytorialnie, ale wielkim duchem.

Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Domnule președinte, doamnă comisar, Consiliul trebuie să aprobe de îndată începerea de către Republica Moldova a negocierilor de aderare pe capitole la Uniunea Europeană. Primul cluster trebuie să fie deschis de îndată. Acesta este mesajul puternic de sprijin pe care îl transmitem astăzi cetățenilor din Republica Moldova, de la tribuna Parlamentului European.

În rezoluția pe care o dezbatem astăzi și printre ai cărei inițiatori mă număr, explicăm clar că susținerea europeană înseamnă securitate, fonduri europene și independență energetică pentru Republica Moldova. De fapt, un trai mai bun. Alegerile parlamentare din această toamnă sunt cruciale pentru ca parcursul european să devină ireversibil.

În rezoluția noastră, condamnăm cu fermitate interferențele Federației Ruse și ne exprimăm susținerea totală pentru organizarea de alegeri libere. De altfel, la inițiativa mea și a Președintei Parlamentului European, în parteneriat cu Parlamentul Republicii Moldova, am operaționalizat un birou al legislativului european la Chișinău, menit să sprijine direct eforturile de aderare și, de asemenea, să combată activ dezinformarea. Doar forțele politice pro-europene pot negocia și implementa legislația europeană și duce astfel la îndeplinirea obiectivului aderării la Uniunea Europeană, sperăm, prin finalizarea negocierilor în anul 2028.

Rasa Juknevičienė (PPE). – Mr President, dear Moldovan brothers and sisters, we once suffered together under the Soviet Empire – losing lives, freedom and prosperity, and enduring forced Russification. Today, the absolute majority of Lithuanians are happy to live as a free European state. My country is the best example of what EU membership can give a nation.

The upcoming elections in Moldova are existential. The Kremlin wants to drag you back with lies, saying Europe will ban your religion, force you to change your gender, make you participate in gay Pride parades or involve you in war. None of this is true!

The Kremlin proxies will offer you money for your vote. They will scare you and lie to you. But I assure you: the EU strongly supports your membership.

However, the choice is yours. I trust you will choose freedom, truth and your European future. Good luck, dear friends.

Thijs Reuten (S&D). – Mr President, colleagues, Commissioner, Moldova is Europe, and its upcoming elections are the next frontline in Russia's hybrid war: disinformation, dirty money, cyberattacks and even priests spreading Kremlin propaganda. As was said before, this is not just about Chișinău; it's about us. If Russia can break Moldovan democracy, it weakens Europe.

And like with the referendum last year, this is a test of our common resolve. I was there in Chișinău, and many in Europe, like myself, were happy with the 50.34 %. Yes! But the real news was that Putin almost succeeded.

The EU must stand shoulder to shoulder with Moldovans who want a European future. I welcome the support that the EU has been providing to Moldova, and we must continue to do what's needed to guarantee free elections – free from Russian interference.

Democracy is under attack. Let's defend it together!

Sandra Kalniete (PPE). – Godātais sēdes vadītāj! Kolēģi! Tas ir lieliski, ka šodien Eiropas Parlamentu uzrunāja prezidente Maia Sandu. Viņa ir politiska un morāla autoritāte ne tikai moldāviem, bet arī visiem eiropiešiem.

Moldovas progress ceļā uz Eiropas integrāciju ir tik iespaidīgs, ka mums pēc iespējas ātrāk ir jāatver pievienošanās sarunas. Moldova kopā ar Ukrainu pieder Eiropas Savienībai, un tām kopā ir jāvirzās uz priekšu pievienošanās procesā.

Gaidāmās parlamenta vēlēšanas būs izšķirošas Moldovai tās ceļā uz Eiropas Savienību. Mēs zinām, cik lielas pūles Kremlis pieliek, lai destabilizētu Moldovu un kavētu tās progresu ar toksisku dezinformāciju, kiberuzbrukumiem un miljoniem, pērkot vēlētāju balsis.

Eiropas Savienībai ir jāpieliek visas pūles, lai novērstu Kremļa iejaukšanos demokrātiskajos procesos Moldovā, tostarp stiprinot vēlēšanu infrastruktūras drošību un sniedzot atbalstu dezinformācijas apkarošanā.

Droša, plaukstoša un stabila Moldova ir Eiropas Savienības vitālās interesēs.

Liudas Mažylis (PPE). – Pirmininke, komisare, kolegos. Rugsėjo 28-ąją Moldova dar kartą turės patvirtinti europinę kryptį. O Kremlius primeta aršų hibridinį karą. Rusai įsivaizduoja tebegalintys destruktyviai veikti posovietinėj erdvėj ir tam negaili įprastinių ir sumodernintų priemonių. Tai – kriptovaliutų kanalais finansuojami neva protestai, balsų pirkimas šešėliniais milijonais, žaidimas separatistų korta, brukama neva “balanso tarp Rytų ir Europos” idėja, paremiama įsteigtų neva “vidurio” partijų greta atvirai promaskvietiškų. O Moldovos pilietinė visuomenė privalo atsilaikyti – atmesti praeities šmėklas ir palaikyti ne tik savo pačių demokratiją ir klestėjimą, regiono stabilumą, bet ir visos Europos atsparumą. O geriausia, ką galime padaryti mes – neuždelsiant konkretizuoti Moldovos narystės Europos Sąjungoje procesą.

Intervenții la cerere

Michał Szczerba (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Pani Komisarz! Przede wszystkim nadchodzące wybory w Mołdawii będą najważniejsze w historii tego kraju. Tak naprawdę przesądzą o tym kierunku proeuropejskim, który Unia Europejska i nasze kraje członkowskie wspierają. Ale również chodzi o bezpieczeństwo Europy. Chodzi o kraj sąsiadujący z pogrążoną w wojnie Ukrainą.

Kreml intensyfikuje kampanie dezinformacyjne w Mołdawii, wykorzystuje deepfake i spreparowane artykuły w mediach społecznościowych, aby podważyć zaufanie obywateli do instytucji państwa i do kierunku proeuropejskiego. To pokazuje, jak wygląda rosyjska ingerencja w wybory. Rosja stara się przedstawić Zachód jako źródło problemów Mołdawii. Skąd my to znamy? Także z naszych krajów – ze środowisk absolutnie skrajnych i radykalnych. Ta lekcja mołdawska pokazuje, że odporność społeczna, czyli zdolność obywateli do odrzucania manipulacji i dezinformacji, jest kluczowym wymiarem bezpieczeństwa.

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente, cuando debatimos aquí sobre las amenazas híbridas y las intereferencias que se ciernen sobre las inminentes elecciones en Moldavia estamos llamando al elefante en la habitación por su nombre: la Rusia de Putin, que mantiene presencia militar en Transnistria (secesionista de Moldavia) y que además ha dicho con claridad que cualquier extensión de la Unión Europea hacia el este —no ya digamos de la OTAN— no solamente no contribuirá a la seguridad del continente sino que, por el contrario, ampliará los objetivos militares en lo que reivindica como su zona de influencia. Por tanto, para apoyar la progresión de Moldavia hacia la Unión Europea no basta con aplaudir a su presidenta como hemos hecho esta mañana, ni con resoluciones y buenas palabras. Hace falta, además, una voluntad política y una unidad de acción exterior que en esta legislatura se ha debilitado gravemente con respecto de la promesa de la autonomía estratégica. Y eso significa que, cuando hemos aprobado extender el mandato de la Comisión Especial sobre el Escudo Europeo de la Democracia, lo que hay que hacer es deducir las lecciones para que la Comisión adopte iniciativas concretas, que demuestre que no bastan las palabras y las buenas intenciones ni el poder blando para defender la idea europea de democracia.

Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis (S&D). – Gerbiamas posėdžio pirmininke, gerbiama komisare, gerbiami kolegos. Šiandien Moldovos prezidentės Maios Sandu kalba čia, Europos Parlamente, buvo paremta faktais, skaičiais ir neatremiamais argumentais. Putino režimo pastangos paveikti Moldovos rinkimų į parlamentą rugsėjo 28 d. rezultatus ir užvaldyti Moldovą per balsadėžes, pačiu grubiausiu būdu pažeidžiant tarptautinę teisę, – tai mums, pasisakantiems šiandien už Moldovos kelią į Europos Sąjungą, už teisės viršenybę teisinėje valstybėje, yra visiškai akivaizdu. Mes čia visi esame sąjungininkai. Man, kaip Lietuvos atstovui Europos Parlamente, labai svarbu pasakyti, kad Moldova buvo pirmoji respublika buvusioje Tarybų Sąjungoje, 1990 metais pripažinusi Lietuvos Respublikos nepriklausomybę. Todėl šiandien mano ir mūsų visų pareiga – padaryti viską, kad Moldovos kelias į Europos Sąjungą būtų sklandus ir rugsėjo 28 d. pasiektų geriausius rezultatus.

Thierry Mariani (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, toutes les ingérences en Moldavie sont intolérables, toutes, comme celle qui consiste, dix jours avant la présidentielle moldave, quand Mme von der Leyen se rend à Kichinev, à promettre 1,8 milliard d'euros. De même, en ce mois d'août, le président Macron, le chancelier allemand et Donald Tusk se sont rendus en Moldavie pour soutenir Maia Sandu et peser sur les législatives de septembre prochain. Dans les deux cas, le message est clair: votez Sandu et vous aurez l'argent de l'Europe.

Toutes les manipulations sont intolérables. Que dire quand un référendum est gagné d'extrême justesse grâce au vote de la diaspora moldave à l'étranger, et que cette diaspora moldave en Russie n'a pas pu voter, où résident pourtant 500 000 Moldaves?

Toute la justice doit être équitable. Que dire quand un gouverneur, celui de la Gagaouzie, prend sept ans de prison, tout simplement pour être d'un parti qui n'est plus accepté en Moldavie?

Toutes les ingérences doivent être dénoncées, y compris celles qui viennent de cet hémicycle.

Diana Iovanovici Șoșoacă (NI). – Domnule președinte, am văzut că v-a deranjat pe cei mai mulți dintre dumneavoastră că am spus “Moldova este România”, dar și acuzați – putinism și așa mai departe. Se vede că sunteți tabula rasa în istorie. Habar nu aveți de istorie! Moldova se numea Basarabia și Basarabia e România.

Știți cine este împotriva istoriei adevărate și spune că Moldova nu a fost niciodată a României și nu trebuie să ne unim și că nu avem drepturi asupra Moldovei? Rusia lui Putin și Putin.

Aveți aceeași retorică ca și Putin și ca și Federația Rusă în privința unirii României cu Moldova. Vorbiți de democrație în Moldova, în Basarabia noastră? Interdicția partidelor opozante și a candidaților – asta face Maia Sandu – alegeri fraudate cu ajutorul puterii de la București, instituirea terorii împotriva opozanților și aruncarea lor în pușcărie, închiderea televiziunilor care nu susțin linia Maiei Sandu, închiderea și cenzurarea ziarelor, atât cele care se vând la tarabe, cât și cele din online, cenzurarea social media, închiderea conturilor organizațiilor care sunt opozante. Moldova este un stat artificial, Basarabia e …

(Președintele a retras cuvântul vorbitoarei)

(Încheierea intervențiilor la cerere)

Marta Kos, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, the message of today's debate is loud and clear -Moldova is not alone. The EU is firmly by its side, now, to protect the integrity of the elections and, on the road ahead, toward full EU membership.

I therefore warmly welcome that the Parliament intends to adopt a resolution recognising the challenges Moldova faces against Russia's hybrid threats and malign interference. We stand firmly behind your strong support for Moldova's EU integration and reaffirm once again our commitment to support Moldova on this path.

And of course, the European Commission is also of the opinion that there are all the conditions fulfilled, that the Council could open cluster one in the negotiations.

The EU and all Member States are strongly united behind these commitments. Why is this very much important? Because somehow what is happening now in Moldova is a kind of contest between the Europe way and the authoritarian way. What we are doing, we are supporting Moldova to become economically strong and independent. We are helping Moldova to build up institutions which will be strong enough to protect democracy, the rule of law and human rights. Why? Because we want to see Moldova equal with us.

What Putin is doing is the opposite. He wants to see a weak economy. He does not want democracy. He does not want the rule of law and human rights. Why? Because otherwise he is not capable to control the countries. And of course, he wants to subordinate them.

And if I may add, the upcoming parliamentary elections are a test for the Moldovan people to determine their future, but also to show Europe their commitment to the EU path. Let us not shy away from reality. Without such a clear signal and a future Moldovan Government and parliament that is firmly committed to its European path and reform agenda, we risk losing the progress made over the past years.

Georgia stands as a stark reminder no progress is to be taken for granted. A reversal can never be business as usual. And that is why I believe Moldova poate, Europa poate, Moldova can and Europe can.

Președinte. – Vreau să vă spun că dezbaterea asta, dincolo de punctele politice ale fiecăruia, este și despre oameni și despre niște așteptări pe care le au și despre viitorul lor. Ne privesc cu toții cu sufletul la gură. Mulțumesc tare mult tuturor care au contribuit la dezbaterea asta și apreciez acest final. Moldova poate, Uniunea Europeană poate. Moldova vrea, Uniunea Europeană vrea.

Dezbaterea a fost închisă.

18. Olukord Colombias pärast hiljutist terrorirünnakute lainet (arutelu)

Președinte. – Următorul punct de pe ordinea de zi este dezbaterea privind Declarația Vicepreședintei Comisiei/Înaltei Reprezentante a Uniunii pentru afaceri externe și politica de securitate, referitoare la situația din Columbia după valul recent de atacuri teroriste (2025/2855(RSP)).

Kaja Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, since I addressed you in June on this topic, we learned with great sadness of Senator Miguel Uribe Turbay's murder, and we have witnessed new deadly attacks against the civilian population and the security forces of Colombia. I will meet with Colombia's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Yolanda Villavicencio, in two weeks' time and I will convey our condemnation of these despicable actions.

I want to also reiterate our deepest condolences to the families of the victims and their loved ones, and I want to pay special tribute to the 13 police officers killed on the 21 August in the line of duty. Those responsible must be swiftly brought to justice, and I welcome the commitment of the Colombian Government in this regard. The European Union will keep doing what it can to support the brave men and women of the Colombian security forces, including by providing training, facilitating the sharing of best practices, and promoting police and judicial cooperation in the pursuit of criminals and terrorists.

Colombia's active participation in EU-funded programs and its close cooperation with agencies like Europol and the European Union Drugs Agency is of enormous value. This is not only important for the security of Colombians, but also for Europe. Likewise, the joint work we conduct in law enforcement, maritime safety and criminal justice – to name just a few areas – contributes to our joint security. We will continue to work together to combat the organised crime and drug trafficking that brings corruption to our institutions and violence to our streets.

The European Union is committed to supporting the Colombian Government in the pursuit of peace. Peace will always be the best guarantee for long-term security for all Colombian citizens. Current challenges should not obscure the historic progress achieved since the demobilisation of the FARC. The European Union will continue to support Colombia in the implementation of the 2016 peace agreement, in the provision of transitional justice, and in all efforts to negotiate peace and bring socio-economic development to its territories and communities. The success of the Colombian peace process remains a key priority for the European Union.

Finally, as Colombia prepares to hold general elections in 2026, it is especially important to guarantee a safe and conducive political environment free from threats and interference. We call upon all political actors, candidates and the media to do their part, including in rejecting political polarisation and hate speech and uniting in defence of Colombia's democratic institutions. As always, the European Union stands ready to do what it can to support these efforts, including by deploying an electoral observation mission upon invitation by the relevant authorities.

Honourable Members, the pursuit of peace, the fight against organised crime and the protection of democracy in Colombia are strands that pull Colombia in the same positive direction. And as Colombia enters a delicate pre-electoral period and faces important security challenges, I reiterate the European Union's continued commitment to do its part in the pursuit of our shared objectives.

Gabriel Mato, en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señor presidente, señora vicepresidenta, no es habitual que hablemos de Colombia en este Pleno, pero hoy lamentablemente lo hacemos por las dificultades que atraviesa un país amigo. La violencia se ha convertido en un hecho cotidiano en muchos departamentos del país y el crimen organizado ha medrado a la sombra de un conflicto que no parece terminar.

Este verano hemos vivido el asesinato de Miguel Uribe Turbay, senador y precandidato presidencial, en un acto que no es un hecho aislado. Hay atentados letales en Antioquia, Florencia y Cali. La violencia contra actores políticos, defensores de derechos humanos, periodistas, líderes sociales y fuerzas de seguridad se recrudece y pone en cuestión no solo las garantías electorales, sino la confianza en las instituciones.

Exigimos a las autoridades que se investiguen estos hechos y que se persiga a los autores y a sus instigadores, porque frente a la violencia no cabe la equidistancia y mucho menos los discursos de odio que contribuyen a incrementar la polarización y la violencia política, generando una gran inestabilidad en el país.

Inestabilidad que viene alimentada también porque el régimen de Maduro, en su alianza con los narcos, permite que organizaciones como el ELN o algunas disidencias de las FARC se refugien y operen en su territorio, desde donde pueden seguir sembrando el terror en Colombia. Precisamente por ello es el momento de que se declaren como organizaciones terroristas a las disidencias de las FARC y también al Cartel de los Soles. Y de que exijamos que se persiga a quienes tanto hacen por acabar con la paz de un país amigo.

Ante la violencia y el crimen organizado, Colombia necesita todo nuestro apoyo, y la Resolución que hoy presentamos va en esa dirección. No más violencia.

Robert Biedroń, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, High Representative, when the Colombian peace agreement was signed in 2016, it brought an end to half a century of terrible violence and destruction. It was a remarkable achievement.

The situation ahead of the upcoming presidential elections is already very tense and polarised. What this House should do is to offer our condolences to the families of murdered Senator Miguel Uribe Turbay and other victims of violence.

But what we need to do also is to support the Colombian authorities in their efforts to bring the perpetrators to justice, fight against criminal organisations and to build a real, sustainable and just peace. The EU has to play a constructive role in Colombia, and I want to thank the High Representative for her words on that.

The people of Colombia should not be paying the price for this Parliament's political tricky games on the situation in Colombia: what we should do is to focus on how to bring peace and stability instead of accusations and allegations, and I call on all my colleagues from different political groups to do so.

Fabrice Leggeri, au nom du groupe PfE. – Monsieur le Président, à Bogota, des attentats frappent des civils innocents. Ces crimes sont l'œuvre de groupes armés qui prospèrent grâce à l'argent du narcotrafic. Dans certaines régions, l'État a reculé et c'est la loi clanique qui s'impose, celle de la peur et de la violence. Mais ne nous y trompons pas, ce fléau n'est pas circonscrit à l'Amérique latine.

À Marseille, en 2023, 47 personnes ont été tuées par les règlements de comptes liés à la drogue: un record macabre qui illustre l'implantation profonde de ces réseaux criminels dans nos quartiers. À Anvers, principale porte d'entrée de la cocaïne en Europe, des centaines de tonnes transitent chaque année. Elles alimentent une criminalité qui gangrène nos sociétés, fragilise nos institutions et menace la sécurité de nos concitoyens. Ces exemples appartiennent à une même chaîne criminelle qui relie les zones de culture de cocaïne en Colombie aux rues de nos grandes métropoles européennes. C'est une économie parallèle d'une puissance colossale qui nourrit la violence, le terrorisme et la corruption. Face à cela, deux devoirs s'imposent.

La Colombie doit pouvoir restaurer sa souveraineté et rétablir l'ordre sur son territoire. L'Union européenne, quant à elle, ne peut se contenter de condamnations verbales. Elle doit agir: renforcer la coopération policière et judiciaire, tarir les circuits financiers et sécuriser ses frontières extérieures. Fermer les yeux sur le lien direct entre terrorisme et narcotrafic, c'est accepter que cette violence s'installe durablement chez nous. Il n'y a pas d'autre voie responsable que celle de la fermeté. Tout renoncement serait une faute et tout retard un danger pour nos peuples.

Carlo Fidanza, a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signor Presidente, signora Alta Rappresentante, onorevoli colleghi, l'11 agosto scorso il senatore Miguel Uribe, candidato dell'opposizione democratica e conservatrice alle prossime presidenziali, è morto a seguito dell'attacco subito il 7 giugno. Un crimine di cui il governo Petro è politicamente responsabile, anche per aver rifiutato di rafforzare la sicurezza personale di Uribe.

Nelle settimane successive si sono verificati nuovi gravi attentati terroristici, che hanno causato decine di morti e di feriti tra i civili e tra le forze dell'ordine. Episodi non isolati che dimostrano la gravità della crisi colombiana.

La cosiddetta pace totale del presidente Petro si è rivelata un fallimento clamoroso: i gruppi armati si sono riorganizzati, i cartelli del narcoterrorismo hanno rafforzato il loro potere e la produzione di cocaina ha raggiunto livelli record. Il ruolo del Cártel de los Soles, totalmente compenetrato dalle alte sfere del regime venezuelano di Nicolas Maduro e di Diosdado Cabello, destabilizza l'intera regione, inclusa la Colombia.

Per questo l'Unione europea deve lanciare messaggi chiari: condanna della polarizzazione politica attuata da Petro; individuazione dei mandanti dell'omicidio Uribe; protezione dei candidati in vista delle elezioni del 2026; sostegno a ogni iniziativa volta a smantellare le reti criminali, a partire dall'inserimento del Cártel de los Soles nell'elenco delle organizzazioni terroristiche per interrompere definitivamente le loro reti finanziarie e sanzionare i loro mandanti politici.

Leoluca Orlando, a nome del gruppo Verts/ALE. – Signor Presidente, signora Alta rappresentante, onorevoli colleghi, in Colombia l'accordo del processo di pace avviato nel 2016 è in grave crisi per le azioni violente di gruppi armati che dissentono dal processo di pace e che hanno prodotto un continuo scontro armato per il controllo dei territori dell'intera Colombia, con coinvolgimento del narcotraffico e della criminalità organizzata transnazionale, come le differenti mafie italiane Cosa Nostra, 'Ndrangheta, Camorra, e gruppi criminali in paesi confinanti con il Venezuela.

In questo scenario si è registrato l'attentato al senatore Miguel Uribe Turbay, candidato di opposizione alle prossime elezioni presidenziali, e la sua morte dopo due mesi di agonia. E ancora si registrano fughe dai territori di migliaia e migliaia di cittadini impauriti e attentati e atti di violenza a danno di esponenti della società civile ed esponenti politici istituzionali, come il sindaco di Medellín, Federico Andrés Gutiérrez Zuluaga, che – ricordo ancora per essere stato io presente in quel momento – nel 2019 aveva significativamente fatto esplodere e distruggere il Monaco, simbolo della prepotenza criminale di Pablo Escobar.

Le prossime scadenze elettorali, signora Alta rappresentante, quelle parlamentari nel marzo 2026 e le presidenziali nel giugno 2026, costituiscono un momento di grande importanza per la tenuta democratica e per la legalità in Colombia.

Ho scritto una mia lettera alla Presidente della Commissione von der Leyen e ho scritto una mia lettera alla Presidente del Parlamento Roberta Metsola, che ringrazio per la sua attenzione, chiedendo la massima attenzione delle istituzioni europee per rispettare i valori democratici e di legalità in un Paese così importante dell'America Latina, legato da numerosi accordi con l'Unione europea, e per contrastare una miscela esplosiva che, purtroppo, rischia di trovare spazio anche in quest'Aula tra lotta politica e criminalità organizzata, che rischia di minacciare e pregiudicare le prossime scadenze elettorali.

Anthony Smith, au nom du groupe The Left. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, la Colombie subit depuis plusieurs mois une vague d'attaques terroristes en lien avec le trafic de drogue ciblant civils et militaires. Nous condamnons ces attaques. Nous nous tenons aux côtés des familles de victimes et leur apportons notre soutien, tout comme nous apportons notre appui au président Petro et à son gouvernement dans leur lutte contre le narcotrafic. Nous saluons la mise en œuvre d'une politique de paix totale, basée sur le respect des droits de l'homme et la nécessité de s'attaquer aux causes profondes de la criminalité que sont notamment la pauvreté et l'exclusion sociale.

L'indécente instrumentalisation politique du terrorisme à des fins électorales par la droite et l'extrême droite doit cesser. Plutôt que de jeter l'opprobre en espérant obtenir la chute du pacte historique en 2026, l'opposition devrait mettre son énergie dans la mise en œuvre des recommandations du secrétaire général de l'ONU liées à l'accord de paix. Nous appelons à ce que l'Union européenne agisse afin que cet accord soit pleinement appliqué. Le peuple colombien doit être protégé des logiques mafieuses et prédatrices, seule manière pour qu'il puisse jouir de sa tranquillité.

Davor Ivo Stier (PPE). – Señor presidente, los violentos nuevamente aterrorizan Colombia y amenazan la estabilidad regional, la democracia y la misma soberanía colombiana. Los grupos terroristas y narcos han dejado en claro que la estrategia de paz total, impulsada por el gobierno, lamentablemente no ha dado resultados, pero, además, fue interpretada por estos grupos como un “¡Piedra libre!” para sus planes nefastos.

Las masacres de Catatumbo, los ataques terroristas contra civiles y fuerzas de seguridad, el asesinato del senador Uribe… son claras señales del fortalecimiento y proliferación del crimen organizado y el terrorismo, ligado también a estructuras transnacionales.

Por ello, es imprescindible evitar una escalada mayor de la violencia en Colombia y brindar nuestro apoyo y cooperación. Es importante también que los actores políticos y sociales —en primer lugar, las autoridades— eviten la polarización y los discursos inflamatorios.

Finalmente, es necesario que la Unión Europea incluya en la lista de organizaciones terroristas al clan del Golfo, a las facciones disidentes de las FARC y al cartel de los Soles.

Leire Pajín (S&D). – Señor presidente, señora alta representante, quiero expresar mi más firme condena a los recientes atentados en Colombia y transmitir nuestra solidaridad con las víctimas y sus familias.

Desde el acuerdo de paz de 2016, los sucesivos Gobiernos en Colombia han realizado ingentes esfuerzos por llevar esos acuerdos a la práctica. Es también el caso del presidente Petro y de su apuesta por la paz total.

Y en todo este proceso la Unión Europea no ha dejado de demostrar un liderazgo indiscutible que reconocemos, con un apoyo político firme y asistencia financiera continuada, también esfuerzos del enviado especial. El camino por recorrer —lo sabemos— es muy largo y muy difícil y los actuales desafíos, la fragmentación de grupos armados y una mayor presencia de bandas criminales organizadas requieren más apoyo a Colombia.

Por eso, les pedimos que los fines electoralistas no arruinen todo lo que se ha construido hasta aquí, que construyamos unidad de acción y no más polarización también en esta Cámara, porque Colombia necesita más apoyo al diálogo, no menos. Más apoyo para crear oportunidades económicas, no menos. Más apoyo y participación de los Gobiernos locales, de los activistas, de la sociedad civil y de las mujeres. Y, por supuesto, necesita más apoyo porque es además un socio estratégico de la Unión Europea y nuestra responsabilidad es clara: seguir acompañándole en este complejísimo proceso y que siga habiendo esperanza.

Sebastian Kruis (PfE). – Señor presidente, el brutal asesinato del senador Miguel “el Guerrero” Uribe Turbay nos llena de dolor. Este hecho atroz evoca nuevamente los capítulos más oscuros de la historia reciente de Colombia: asesinatos, secuestros y miedo.

El pueblo de Cali, Bogotá, Medellín y todas las regiones del país merecen vivir en seguridad y tranquilidad. Las próximas elecciones representan una oportunidad decisiva para cambiar el rumbo. Es el momento de reafirmar un compromiso con la libertad y la justicia, aún estamos a tiempo de construir un camino diferente. No queremos seguir el ejemplo de Venezuela, queremos una Colombia libre.

Colombia volverá a levantarse. El futuro de la nación está en manos de su pueblo. ¡Viva Colombia!

Adam Bielan (ECR). – Mr President, there can be no tolerance for terrorism. Colombia has come a long way since it was terrorised by drug cartels for decades. Today, its citizens fear these dark times have returned. Terrorism is present once again on a large scale. The recent terrorist attacks on civilians and the assassination of Senator Turbay are not only isolated tragedies; they are attacks on democracy. It demonstrates the complete failure of President Petro's so-called total peace policy, which has only created space for armed groups and cartels to expand their power and spread violence.

I call on the European Union to support Colombia in countering the influence of terrorism and the Cártel de los Soles. We should stand firmly with the Colombian people by imposing stronger sanctions against trafficking networks. We must defend Colombia's democratic institutions. Colombia's future belongs to peace. It will never belong to terrorists or cartels.

Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). – Señor presidente, continúa el deterioro de la seguridad en Colombia, con un preocupante aumento de la violencia armada en los últimos meses. Recientemente falleció el senador Uribe, tras el ataque del 7 de junio, y en agosto se registraron muy graves atentados en Cali y Antioquia.

Los grupos armados ilegales que aumentan su poder en el país tienen vínculos con el narcotráfico y con redes criminales transnacionales. Son una grave amenaza para la seguridad y estabilidad de Colombia y de otros países de la región.

Tras el proceso de paz, Colombia no debe retroceder a una etapa marcada por el miedo y la violencia extrema. Las autoridades tienen la responsabilidad de evitar esta alarmante escalada de violencia, garantizar la seguridad de todos los ciudadanos y candidatos electorales y asegurar la presencia efectiva del Estado en todo el territorio.

Desde la Unión Europea tenemos que seguir ayudando a Colombia, país clave en América Latina. Además —como pide la Resolución que el jueves votaremos— debe estudiarse la posible inclusión de los grupos armados en la lista europea de organizaciones terroristas.

En Colombia es necesario rebajar la polarización y buscar consensos. Me temo que en este país —como en otros de América Latina— sobran visionarios y analistas, cuando lo que necesita son gobernantes y gestores. Esta es una idea muy presente en los libros de un escritor colombiano muy brillante, Carlos Granés, que me parece muy acertada.

Lamentablemente, este tipo de problemas de América Latina también, últimamente, se extiende a Europa.

Arkadiusz Mularczyk (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Rozmawiamy dzisiaj o dramatycznej sytuacji, w której znalazła się sterroryzowana przez kartele międzynarodowe Kolumbia. Symbolicznym w tym kontekście wydarzeniem jest zabójstwo senatora Miguela Uribe, który chciał ubiegać się o urząd prezydenta. Jego śmierć doskonale ilustruje, jak daleko sięgają wpływy organizacji przestępczych Ameryki Łacińskiej.

Aktywność karteli nie ogranicza się tylko do zachodniej półkuli. W coraz większym stopniu wywiera negatywny wpływ na bezpieczeństwo także Europy. Kartele typu de los Soles współpracują dzisiaj z krajami wrogo nastawionymi do wspólnoty transatlantyckiej, w tym z Chinami, Rosją i Iranem. Pieniądze pozyskiwane z kryminalnej działalności karteli zasilają budżety naszych geopolitycznych przeciwników, a ich działalność w coraz większym stopniu zagraża bezpieczeństwu naszych obywateli.

Zaledwie kilka dni temu polskie służby aresztowały dwóch członków meksykańskiego kartelu Sinaloa. Według uznawanych powszechnie obliczeń skala globalnych zysków karteli i obrotów to kwota rzędu półtora biliona do dwóch bilionów 200 miliardów dolarów rocznie. Dla porównania jest to około 5% rocznego światowego PKB. By stawić czoła temu geopolitycznym wyzwaniu, Europa musi ściśle współpracować ze Stanami Zjednoczonymi. W tym kontekście istotnym krokiem będzie uznanie kartelu de los Soles za organizację terrorystyczną.

Reinhold Lopatka (PPE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, the horrible terrorist attacks in Colombia must be condemned in the strongest possible terms. These acts of violence not only claim innocent lives, but also represent an attack on our shared values, and here we have to support the government of Colombia in its fight against terrorism.

As Vice-Chair of the Eurolat Committee on Political Affairs, Security and Human Rights, I always stress in our exchanges with politicians from Latin America that, on the one hand, democratic principles and, on the other hand, our fight against extremism and against terrorism must be in the centre of our political dialogue and our work we are doing together.

So, Colombia is a key partner for the European Union, and we have to do more than only to work on a trade agreement, which we renewed in 2024. Colombia is a strategic partner for development, prosperity and also in the fight against crime and organised terrorism.

Alma Ezcurra Almansa (PPE). – Señor presidente, señora alta representante, lo que Pablo Escobar un día soñó, hoy Maduro lo ha conseguido: ha secuestrado un Estado colombiano, controla un Ejército fiel, tiene embajadas en nuestras capitales y se sienta en las Naciones Unidas. ¿Maduro es un narco? Sí, pero con poder de Estado y utiliza el terror para someter a su pueblo con la connivencia de Gobiernos y líderes europeos y españoles, como el socialista José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero.

Así que nos va a tocar entender una cosa: lo que está pasando en Venezuela, como lo que pasa en Colombia, no son asuntos internos, son una amenaza global.

Por eso, el Partido Popular hoy quiere pedir en esta Cámara dos cosas. La primera es que los europeos, juntos, declaremos que el cartel de los Soles, dirigido por Maduro junto con el narco colombiano, es una organización terrorista. Y la segunda es que esto solo sea el primer paso hacia acciones mucho más decididas, mucho más profundas y mucho más valientes, porque el mundo y Europa no pueden permanecer impasibles ante lo que están sufriendo los pueblos de Venezuela y de Colombia. Y porque quien no vote a favor no será neutral, sino culpable por complicidad.

Kaja Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you for this debate. Once again, I also want to thank you for your continued attention to the situation in Colombia and I think we are sharing the same views, so that is very clear.

As Colombians confront difficult security challenges and enter a delicate electoral period, the people should know that they can count on the European Union as a reliable and strong and credible partner.

We have a busy agenda with Colombia in the coming months: we will have the EU-CELAC Summit in November, we will negotiate a new bilateral partnership and cooperation agreement and we will hold ministerial-level dialogues on human rights and the fight against illicit drugs. One of these contact points is an opportunity to reflect the priorities and sensitivities that emerge from today's debate.

So the European Union will continue to convey our concern for the escalating violence in the country, reaffirm our support to Colombia in the fight against crime and the pursuit of peace and explore ways to further strengthen bilateral cooperation for the benefit of our citizens as well as their citizens on the other side of the Atlantic.

Thank you again for this very good debate.

President. – The debate is closed.

The vote will take place on Thursday.

19. Kirjalikud selgitused hääletuste kohta (kodukorra artikkel 201)

(Explicațiile privind votul prezentate în scris figurează pe paginile deputaților de pe site-ul Parlamentului)

20. Järgmise istungi päevakord

Președinte. – Următoarea ședintă va avea loc mâine, miercuri, 10 septembrie 2025, la ora 9.00. Ordinea de zi a fost publicată și este disponibilă pe site-ul Parlamentului European.

21. Käesoleva istungi protokolli kinnitamine

Președinte. – Procesul-verbal al acestei reuniuni va fi înaintat Parlamentului spre aprobare mâine, după vot.

22. Istungi lõpp

(Ședința a fost ridicată la ora 21:00)