MIL EU Ngin

  Der Präsident. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgen die Anfragen zur mündlichen Beantwortung an den Rat und die Kommission betreffend die Schaffung des europäischen Bildungsraums bis 2025 – Microcredentials, individuelle Lernkonten und Lernen für eine nachhaltige Umwelt (O-000012/2022 – B9-0014/22) (O-000011/2022 – B9-0013/22) (2022/2568(RSP)).

Ich erinnere Sie daran, dass mit Ausnahme der ersten beiden Reihen, die für die Fraktionsvorsitzenden vorgesehen sind, freie Sitzplatzwahl besteht.

Nachdem Sie Ihre Abstimmungskarten in das Abstimmungsgerät eingeschoben haben, können Sie über Ihr Abstimmungsgerät spontane Wortmeldungen und blaue Karten beantragen. Bitte führen Sie daher Ihre Abstimmungskarte stets mit sich. Entsprechende Anleitungen sind im Plenarsaal verfügbar.

Wenn Sie sich für eine spontane Wortmeldung melden möchten, ersuche ich Sie, dies ab jetzt zu tun und nicht bis zum Ende der Aussprache zu warten.

Außerdem möchte ich Sie darauf hinweisen, dass blaue Karten auch für eine kurze Wortmeldung hochgehalten werden können und dass danach eine Anschlussfrage zulässig ist.

Ich weise Sie auch darauf hin, dass Wortmeldungen im Plenarsaal weiterhin vom zentralen Rednerpult aus erfolgen, außer spontane Wortmeldungen, blaue Karten und Bemerkungen zur Anwendung der Geschäftsordnung. Ich ersuche Sie daher, die Rednerliste im Blick zu behalten und sich kurz vor Beginn Ihrer Redezeit zum Rednerpult zu begeben.

  Dace Melbārde, deputising for the author. – Mr President, Commissioner, the European Parliament’s Culture and Education Committee is delighted to witness a real progress being made in order to strive for establishing a European education area by 2025. The three proposals for the Council recommendations, namely to develop a European approach to micro—credentials, individual learning accounts, as well as learning for environmental sustainability, are a welcome start.

At the European Parliament we have five priorities for these three aforementioned proposals. First, that these initiatives make learning paths more inclusive, accessible and flexible. Second, that they broaden learning opportunities for all. Third, that they foster mutual recognition of qualifications across all Member States. Fourth that they create ties between lifelong learning on the one hand and the digital and green transitions on the other hand. And fifth, that they strengthen the role played by higher education, vocational education and training institutions throughout people’s life.

We believe the EU must support Member States to establish high—quality, competitive and tailored education frameworks that cater for everyone, everywhere and according to their specific needs. Micro—credentials and individual learning accounts are pieces in the puzzle that will aid these objectives. What is more, we need to ensure that educational attainments are recognised throughout the Union, as removing such barriers would help promote educational and professional mobility and, by extension, the economic growth and social development of the EU.

Even though the European Parliament is not the decision—maker in the adoption of these three Council resolutions, we see it as our responsibility to support the Commission and the Council and the Member States by providing political guidance. It is essential that each building block contributes towards achieving a true and comprehensive European education area. With this in mind, I have seven questions on behalf of the Culture Committee.

First, how will the Commission and the Council ensure that the relevant Council recommendations and other initiatives come together to create a clearly visible and coherent European education area, including flexible, high—quality learning paths for EU citizens?

And second, do the Council and the Commission intend to promote the recognition of non—formal and informal learning experiences such as volunteering and youth work through micro—credentials? Will this pave the way for a framework for the recognition and automatic transfer of skills and competences acquired through informal and non-formal learning?

Third, will the Member States include strategies in the plans they submit to make micro—credentials relevant and accessible to those who are usually left behind? We believe that lifelong learning is key to personal development and well-being, as well as upward social mobility. So we also would like to ask how will the right options be determined for everyone without eliminating alternative choices which may not seem suitable initially?

Then, fifth question, will the successful pilot model used to launch the European Universities Initiative be replicated in order to encourage Member States to make significant legislative and administrative efforts to adopt micro—credentials as a European tool to certify learning outcomes?

What will the Member States do with the Council and the Commission’s support to develop a coherent approach and to achieve the goals of the European Green Deal? Will there be adequate funding and support to embed sustainability in all processes and deliver a systemic change in education and training?

And finally, what are the Commission, the Council and the Member States doing to develop within the European Education Area the knowledge, attitudes and skills needed to carry out ambitious plans to better protect Europe’s rich cultural heritage from the impact of climate change and make greener choices for new cultural buildings?

  Didier Reynders, membre de la Commission. – Monsieur le Président, Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, permettez-moi tout d’abord de vous remercier pour ce débat dans lequel j’interviens aujourd’hui, vous l’aurez remarqué, en remplacement de ma collègue, la commissaire Gabriel.

Pour mettre en place l’espace européen de l’éducation, la Commission européenne a proposé une série d’objectifs et 40 actions différentes. Leur mise en œuvre est en bonne voie. Par exemple, sur les treize propositions de recommandations du Conseil et d’autres actions stratégiques relatives à l’espace européen de l’éducation envisagées par la Commission, nous en avons déjà publié sept, y compris les propositions de cinq recommandations.

Le Conseil a déjà adopté trois de ces recommandations – sur la mobilité des jeunes volontaires dans l’ensemble de l’Union, sur des approches d’apprentissage mixte pour un enseignement primaire et secondaire inclusif et de qualité, et sur la création de ponts pour une coopération européenne efficace dans l’enseignement supérieur. Les propositions relatives à l’apprentissage pour un environnement durable et aux microcertifications devraient être adoptées par le Conseil en juin.

L’approche européenne en matière de microcertifications facilitera la reconnaissance et la validation des différentes expériences d’apprentissage, y compris, le cas échéant, un apprentissage informel. Nous devons faire participer davantage de personnes aux possibilités d’apprentissage et de formation en ne laissant effectivement personne de côté. La proposition est actuellement en cours de discussion au Conseil, en ce compris en ce qui concerne les mécanismes de rapports. Les microcertifications peuvent favoriser l’accès à l’éducation et à la formation, ainsi que l’entrée ou la réinsertion sur le marché du travail pour un plus large éventail d’apprenants, notamment des groupes les plus vulnérables et défavorisés.

La Commission collabore avec les États membres pour soutenir et renforcer le développement des compétences clés pour l’éducation et la formation dès le plus jeune âge et tout au long de la vie. Notre outil, le cadre de référence européen commun pour les compétences clés, identifie et définit les compétences clés pour l’employabilité, l’épanouissement personnel et la santé, la citoyenneté active et responsable et l’inclusion sociale.

Au niveau de l’Union, nous disposons également d’un cadre européen qui peut servir de base à l’élaboration de programmes d’études et d’activités d’apprentissage favorisant le développement personnel et social et l’apprentissage des compétences clés. Nous accompagnons également les États membres et nous allons poursuivre cet accompagnement en fournissant l’orientation et en soutenant la coopération avec les parties prenantes, y compris les alliances universitaires européennes.

Finalement, permettez-moi de mentionner brièvement la partie de l’espace européen de l’éducation consacrée à la durabilité environnementale. Pour contribuer à l’intégration de la transition écologique et de la durabilité dans l’éducation et la formation, la Commission a adopté en janvier de cette année une proposition de recommandation du Conseil sur l’apprentissage pour un environnement durable. La transition écologique ne peut avoir lieu que si nous parvenons à changer les comportements et les compétences des citoyens. Et grâce aux connaissances et aux compétences en matière de durabilité environnementale, nous pouvons mieux protéger le riche patrimoine culturel de l’Europe contre les effets du changement climatique et faire des choix plus écologiques pour de nouveaux bâtiments culturels.

D’autres initiatives, en dehors de l’espace européen de l’éducation, contribuent également à cette cause. Par exemple, l’initiative du nouveau Bauhaus européen et le travail réalisé au sein du groupe d’experts sur le renforcement de la résilience du patrimoine culturel face aux changements climatiques.

Je vous remercie pour votre attention et je vais évidemment écouter avec beaucoup d’attention l’ensemble de vos interventions.

  Tomasz Frankowski, w imieniu grupy PPE. – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Europejczycy muszą stale uaktualniać swoją wiedzę, swoje umiejętności i kompetencje, aby wypełnić lukę między kształceniem i szkoleniem a wymogami szybko zmieniającego się rynku pracy.

Kryzys związany z COVID-19 spowodował nagły wzrost zapotrzebowania na możliwości w zakresie krótkich i dostosowanych do potrzeb możliwości uczenia się. To zapotrzebowanie na nowe formy nauki doprowadziło do wzrostu zainteresowania mikropoświadczeniami.

Dlatego z zadowoleniem przyjmujemy trzy inicjatywy Komisji dotyczące opracowania do 2025 r. europejskiego podejścia do mikropoświadczeń, indywidualnych rachunków szkoleniowych i uczenia się na rzecz zrównoważenia środowiskowego w ramach europejskiego obszaru edukacji. Pomogą one poszerzyć możliwości uczenia się, pogłębić wzajemne uznawanie, stworzyć powiązania z transformacją cyfrową i ekologiczną. Mają również na celu wzmocnienie roli instytucji szkolnictwa wyższego oraz kształcenia i szkolenia zawodowego w uczeniu się przez całe życie.

Jak wiemy, pomyślny przebieg kariery zawodowej, włączenie i integracja w dużym stopniu zależą od rozwoju umiejętności i kompetencji. Pomagają one ludziom przystosować się do zmian, osiągać sukcesy i angażować się. Umiejętności mają również kluczowe znaczenie dla wzrostu gospodarczego. Stąd też mam nadzieję, że przedstawione inicjatywy pomogą zapewnić dostęp do edukacji dla wszystkich w dowolnym momencie ich życia oraz jej elastyczność.

My, jako Parlament Europejski, popieramy tę ideę.

  Alex Agius Saliba, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, the right to quality and inclusive education, training and lifelong learning is the first principle in the pillar for social rights. In the aftermath of the COVID pandemic, the EU reinforced its growth strategy, and its green and digital transition policies. But what about education? We need to move this to the top of the political agenda, because education is crucial to surviving and thriving in the changing world.

The fixed skills or knowledge young people receive today is no longer enough. Many of today’s children will work in jobs that do not even exist yet. They have to be prepared to adapt to change and turn challenges into opportunities. I welcome, therefore, the efforts to achieve the European Education Area. Still, EU leaders need to be more ambitious and commit to have 2025 as a clear target date for completing the EEA. We need micro—credentials, individual learning accountants and training for all adults, for all young people.

Continuous efforts are needed to recognise all qualifications and learning experiences across our borders, strengthen European higher education networks, and ensure a quality start for all our youngsters by putting an end to unpaid internships.

Let’s keep up the work and prepare ourselves for the future.

  Ilana Cicurel, au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, au sortir de cette pandémie et devant les effets potentiellement dévastateurs de l’agression de l’Ukraine par la Russie sur nos économies, jamais nous n’avons eu autant conscience de la nécessité impérieuse d’investir dans le capital humain, c’est-à-dire les compétences. Je salue donc les propositions de la Commission en faveur de la mise en place des comptes individuels de formation, inspirés du dispositif français, et de l’introduction des microcertifications. Ces dispositifs, à la fois accessibles et souples, sont indispensables pour nous permettre de changer la donne en matière d’apprentissage tout au long de la vie.

Je voudrais insister sur l’utilisation des microcrédits, des microcertifications, la reconnaissance des compétences psychosociales acquises lors d’une expérience de mobilité européenne ou d’un engagement solidaire. Je peux témoigner que nos jeunes reviennent absolument métamorphosés de ces expériences en termes de confiance en soi, de capacité d’écoute et de communication, de sortie de leur zone de confiance, de capacité d’adaptation et d’innovation, et de travail en équipe.

Il faut créer un référentiel de compétences psychosociales à l’échelle européenne qui se traduise par une meilleure employabilité auprès des entreprises comme des administrations. Cela aura le double avantage de répondre à une attente forte de notre jeunesse et de servir de levier majeur pour embarquer dans Erasmus, le corps européen de solidarité, ou ALMA, les jeunes les plus éloignés de l’Europe. Nous avons besoin d’un big bang des compétences non techniques. Avec de la volonté, c’est désormais possible grâce aux microcertifications. Êtes-vous prêts à lancer ce chantier? Dans quel délai?

  Diana Riba i Giner, en nombre del Grupo Verts/ALE. – Señor presidente, señor comisario, en 2020, un 46,1 % de la población adulta necesitaba formación y reciclaje. Sin este upskilling o reskilling, es evidente que no tendremos empleos de calidad, ni menos aún una transición verde y digital justa.

Por eso necesitamos un Espacio Europeo de Educación exitoso, pero sobre todo inclusivo, accesible y cohesionado. Un espacio que promueva una mentalidad de aprendizaje permanente, que, además de habilidades y competencias, ponga a las personas en el centro y que tenga en cuenta las soft skills y la sostenibilidad e incluya los sectores de la creación y la cultura.

Necesitamos ir más allá de la educación formal e integrar la formación profesional, el voluntariado y los modos informales de aprendizaje, de manera que todas y todos podamos ser realmente activos en una sociedad más inclusiva y sostenible.

  Christine Anderson, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Microcredentials – eine Art Pass, der den Zugang zum Arbeitsmarkt für jene sicherstellen soll, die grüne und digitale Kenntnis erlangt haben. Ausdrücklich betont wird, diese Initiative orientiere sich nicht am Bedarf des Arbeitsmarktes, den es zu decken gilt. Gut, dass wir darüber gesprochen haben! Denn wer die Arbeitsweise der EU kennt, weiß, dass das, was explizit verneint wird, genau das ist, was verfolgt wird.

Dass diese Initiative gar nicht der Regelungskompetenz der EU unterliegt, wird dadurch deutlich, dass die Kommission aufgefordert wird, ein nachdrücklich motivierendes Instrument zu implementieren, welches die Mitgliedstaaten nötigt, diese vertragswidrige Kompetenzanmaßung zu dulden. Das merkt der Berichterstatter offenbar auch selbst, wenn er vorsorglich die Blendgranate der freiwilligen Umsetzung einbaut.

Deshalb der Merksatz von heute: Die EU unterwirft die Mitgliedstaaten nicht mit der Peitsche, sondern mit der Illusion der Freiwilligkeit. Na bravo!

  Margarita de la Pisa Carrión, en nombre del Grupo ECR. – Señor presidente, comisario, señorías, tras una propuesta interesante de microcredenciales, las cuales pueden ofrecer una formación útil y flexible adaptada al momento actual y a la situación de cada persona a lo largo de su vida profesional, también se plantea otra idea, difusa: el concepto del Espacio Europeo de Educación con objetivos de aquí a 2025. Preocupa que esta idea pueda suponer una intromisión que reste soberanía a los Estados miembros en cuanto a competencias educativas al servicio de promover ideologías como la de género y la climática en un afán de homogeneizar los intereses de las personas en Europa que limita las materias, como se ha mencionado hoy aquí, a la consagración de la sostenibilidad ecológica: parece que solo existe necesidad de formación en esta línea.

Es inquietante también que se pretenda promover una educación para la ciudadanía europea y mundial y el llamamiento activista de los jóvenes defensores de una sociedad más inclusiva y sostenible; es decir, adoctrinamiento. Sean claros.

  Pernando Barrena Arza, en nombre del Grupo The Left. – Señor presidente, comisario, esta moción que debatimos hoy viene de la pregunta con solicitud de respuesta oral que hicimos varios diputados con relación a las microcredenciales en la enseñanza en el contexto del Espacio Europeo de Educación de aquí a 2025. El texto recoge propuestas ambiciosas en el marco de la accesibilidad universal a la educación haciendo hincapié en temas como la relación estrecha entre el aprendizaje permanente y la empleabilidad, el afianzamiento de los lazos con la transición verde, la formulación de un marco de reconocimiento de habilidades y competencias adquiridas a través del aprendizaje informal y no formal, y la insistencia en el hecho de que las opciones disponibles no deben limitarse estrictamente a las necesidades del marco laboral.

En todo caso, en las microcredenciales debería tenerse en cuenta la situación de las personas que estudian en lenguas minorizadas de la Unión. Cabe subrayar que estas lenguas son vehiculares en el sistema educativo —en mi país, por ejemplo, casi el 70 % del alumnado elige el euskara como lengua vehicular— y no deberían ser ignoradas por el Espacio Europeo de Educación, y las microcredenciales también deberían servir para promover el movimiento de estudiantes a escala transfronteriza, ayudando así a que puedan completar sus estudios en nuestras lenguas europeas.

  Andrea Bocskor (NI). – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! Üdvözlöm az Európai Oktatási Térség létrehozására tett erőfeszítéseket, hiszen fontos, hogy minél több európai polgár részesülhessen minőségi és átjárható oktatásban. Az egész életen át tartó tanulást és a foglalkoztathatóságon segítő mikrotanúsítványokra vonatkozó ajánlást is támogatom, hiszen segíteni kell, hogy akinek arra szüksége van, az akár egész életen át részt vegyen az oktatásban, képzésben, továbbképzésben. Mivel a rohamos munkaerőpiaci változások miatt az alapképzésben megszerzett képességek és kompetenciák hamar elavulnak, ezért gyakran szükség van átképzésre vagy külföldi tapasztalatszerzésre. Ezért is nagyon fontosak a mikrotanúsítványok és lényeges, hogy ezeknek a bevezetése maradjon önkéntes a tagországok számára, tiszteletben tartva a tagországi hatásköröket.

Az európai oktatási térség és a mikrotanúsítványok bevezetése előrelépést jelenthet a képesítések automatikus és kölcsönös elismerése terén, az európai és harmadik országbeli, így például az Ukrajnából a háború miatt áttelepült diákok számára is, ami már most, a jelenlegi helyzetben is nagy segítség lenne számukra.

  Agnès Evren (PPE). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, les derniers chiffres sur le taux de chômage en France viennent d’être publiés. La reprise économique post-COVID a permis de faire diminuer ce taux, mais il reste évidemment préoccupant, notamment chez les moins de 25 ans, puisqu’il s’élève à 14,9 % en moyenne dans l’Union européenne. Le marché du travail européen a changé et doit répondre à plusieurs enjeux majeurs. Je pense notamment à l’impact de la mondialisation, à la rapidité des évolutions technologiques, à l’accélération de la transition verte et aux pénuries de forces vives dans certains secteurs.

La création d’un espace européen de l’éducation va dans ce sens et doit permettre de réaligner les compétences des travailleurs avec celles recherchées par les employeurs. Dans ce cadre, le développement de nouvelles opportunités d’apprentissage tout au long de la vie, comme le sont d’ailleurs les comptes de formation individuelle et les microcertifications, me semble essentiel. Ces opportunités rendent la formation plus accessible, plus flexible et plus inclusive. Elles permettent d’acquérir à n’importe quel moment de son parcours des compétences utiles et par là même de renforcer son employabilité. Mais tout ceci ne sera efficace qu’en éliminant les obstacles en matière de reconnaissance des qualifications.

  Massimiliano Smeriglio (S&D). – Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, la commissione per la cultura e l’istruzione accoglie favorevolmente le ambizioni della Commissione nell’ambito dell’istruzione e della formazione con queste tre iniziative che potranno aprire la strada a un più ampio accesso alle opportunità di apprendimento per tutti e tutte.

È importante che queste iniziative siano pienamente inclusive, rivolgendosi a tutti, indipendentemente dall’età, dall’occupazione o dal sesso.

Gli Stati membri devono tener presente che le opportunità disponibili attraverso i conti individuali di apprendimento e il sistema delle microcredenziali non devono limitarsi a soddisfare le esigenze del mercato del lavoro, ma anche le scelte individuali di chi vuole cambiare percorso di sviluppo personale.

È fondamentale mettere in atto un meccanismo di monitoraggio e rendicontazione delle iniziative affinché si possano verificare eventuali limiti.

Infine, l’apprendimento finalizzato alla sostenibilità ambientale deve essere integrato nei programmi scolastici anche attraverso l’educazione alla cittadinanza, per permettere agli studenti di diventare promotori attivi di società sostenibili e inclusive.

  Peter Pollák (PPE). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, som veľmi rád, že vytvorenie európskeho vzdelávacieho priestoru dnes naberá na konkrétnych rysoch. Musíme zaviesť mechanizmy, ktoré napomôžu našim občanom, aby boli schopní čeliť sociálno-ekonomickým zmenám, napríklad transformácie na zelenú či digitálnu ekonomiku.

Už dnes máme v Európe armádu nezamestnaných, dlhodobo nezamestnaných, ako sú napríklad Rómovia, ktorí sú často neuplatniteľní na pracovnom trhu. Dôvodov je viacero. Spomeniem neschopnosť vzdelávacích systémov pripraviť rómske deti na pracovný trh, radšej ich umiestnia do špeciálnych škôl, čím strácajú šancu na kvalitné vzdelávanie, prácu či budúcnosť. Diskriminácia, rasizmus či katastrofálne životné podmienky bez prístup k pitnej vode, to je každodenná realita mnohých chudobných a aj chudobných, teda rómskych detí v celej Európskej únii. Vážení priatelia, pomôžu nástroje, ako sú mikro-certifikáty či individuálne vzdelávacie účty, aj zraniteľným a znevýhodneným skupinám? Budú postačujúce aj v súčasnej rýchlo meniacej sa digitálnej dobe? Ja osobne verím, že áno. Nezabudnime však, že tieto aktivity treba kontrolovať a vyhodnocovať ich reálne dopady.

  Marcos Ros Sempere (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, tenemos una fecha marcada en rojo en el calendario: 2025. En 2025, el Espacio Europeo de Educación debe ser el motor que impulse una educación de calidad, inclusiva, accesible y asequible para todos.

En este camino contamos con tres instrumentos complementarios: las microcredenciales, una herramienta que debe ser pública para reconocer los períodos breves de aprendizaje; las cuentas de aprendizaje individuales, una vía para contribuir a la formación continua; y la educación para la sostenibilidad, para crear ciudadanos concienciados con la defensa del planeta. Son tres buenos instrumentos, pero no deben distraernos de nuestro objetivo principal: la fecha en rojo en el calendario.

A pesar de que hace un año aprobamos el informe en el Parlamento Europeo, no vemos acciones de la Comisión para crear este Espacio. No podemos perder el futuro.

En 2025, debemos disponer de un espacio educativo sin fronteras, con reconocimiento automático de títulos en todos los niveles. El Espacio Europeo de Educación debe ser el motor para construir una mejor Unión Europea. Y debe ser una realidad sin demora.

  Maria Walsh (PPE). – Mr President, the future of education lies in an integrated European education area, where fundamental values, automatic recognition of degrees and qualifications, and effective student representation on all levels are practised. We must ensure that in creating this European education area, the EU promotes minimum standards on investments in education, in areas of mental—health support services and outreach for those and our most vulnerable students, in line with the European pillar of social rights.

It is essential that Ukrainian students and its institutions can easily interact with the programme and partake in it. And we look to the best example, like the Erasmus+ programme, which is currently proving to be a powerful tool to support Ukrainian students. Finally, the COVID—19 pandemic, the climate crisis and the rise of authoritarianism make the role of education and exercising our engagement more important than ever.

  Dominique Bilde (ID). – Monsieur le Président, Mesdames, Messieurs, entendez-vous cette petite musique qui monte? À l’instar des propositions de la conférence sur l’avenir de l’Europe, qui en appellent clairement à une politique éducative européenne, on sent que la pression sur les États s’accentue pour les faire renoncer à leur souveraineté. Cette résolution sur l’espace européen de l’éducation va totalement dans ce sens en franchissant plusieurs lignes rouges.

Tout d’abord, la reconnaissance des microcertifications ne figure pas dans les recommandations du Conseil, comme il est mentionné dans le texte. Votre européisme invasif va donc bien au-delà des demandes des États.

Ensuite, le texte fait référence à des rapports qui ne sont pas encore adoptés, comme celui sur le nouveau Bauhaus. Nous n’acceptons pas cette politique du fait accompli. Pour nous, les choses sont claires: nous refusons de placer le destin des Français dans les mains d’une Europe responsable du saccage social, de la désindustrialisation, mais qui reste persuadée de transformer en or tout ce qu’elle touche. Qualifications, formations et certifications doivent rester dans le giron des nations. Avec nous, l’éducation devra rester nationale.

  Isabella Adinolfi (PPE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, come diceva il grande Eduardo De Filippo, gli esami non finiscono mai. Ma allora perché bisognerebbe smettere di imparare, di acquisire nuove abilità o qualifiche? L’apprendimento permanente deve essere incentivato a ogni livello e le microcredenziali hanno la funzione di creare percorsi di apprendimento fruibili da tutti, in particolare dai cittadini svantaggiati e da persone che sono uscite dal mercato del lavoro e che non riescono a rientrarvi.

Importante è però vigilare affinché non si trasformi anche questo in un nuovo tipo di lavoro non pagato.

In ogni caso, prima di innovare il sistema con queste nuove introduzioni, bisogna rinsaldare le fondamenta del sistema formativo, altrimenti l’Europa sarà inesorabilmente sorpassata nelle prossime sfide globali. Occorrono investimenti importanti nelle nostre università, nella ricerca, nella sicurezza degli studenti impegnati in percorsi misti di alternanza scuola-lavoro e per le borse di studio.

Questa nuova corsa agli armamenti, per esempio, e le continue emergenze stanno già incidendo sui programmi europei e sulle manovre finanziarie dei paesi, e il rischio è che tutto passi in secondo piano, anche la formazione della prossima classe dirigente, che guiderà l’Europa in futuro.

Spontane Wortmeldungen

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, sigur că educația este foarte importantă pentru competența și pentru competitivitatea economică și pentru ordinea socială, până la urmă, în cadrul Uniunii Europene.

Sigur că trebuie să pornim de la ideea că educația este subsidiaritate, este competența statelor membre. Întrebarea adresată Comisiei este cum s-ar putea ca, în mod complementar, Comisia Europeană, Uniunea Europeană să susțină educația și aici cred că sunt trei lucruri esențiale.

Pe de o parte, recunoașterea calificărilor – și eu aș sugera, domnule comisar, la nivel de Uniune Europeană, să putem să avem alocate bugete pentru studii legate de educația vocațională și de educația pe tot parcursul vieții, pentru că aceste două lucruri sunt deficitare în multe state membre și putem veni cu exemple de bună practică, cu studii, cum să facem ca educația să fie făcută pe structura economică din fiecare stat membru și, evident, ca în întreg spațiul european să avem educație vocațională, profesională, pe ceea ce avem nevoie acum, pentru că știm cu toții că avem un deficit de calificări și, bineînțeles, recunoașterea calificărilor, domnule comisar.

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)

  Didier Reynders, membre de la Commission. – Monsieur le Président, Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, notre vision pour l’espace européen de l’éducation consiste à soutenir la reprise, à stimuler la modernisation du système dans le cadre des transitions écologique et numérique, et à mettre en place des systèmes d’éducation et de formation inclusifs et résilients.

La plupart des 40 actions de l’espace européen de l’éducation sont transversales. Nombreuses d’entre elles présentent des synergies avec d’autres cadres d’action de l’Union et sont co-créées avec de multiples acteurs de l’écosystème éducatif. Par exemple, les actions de l’espace européen de l’éducation mentionnées dans la discussion d’aujourd’hui sont également étroitement liées à la stratégie européenne en matière de compétences et à son action phare, la proposition de recommandation du Conseil relative aux comptes de formation individuelle. En outre, en ce qui concerne l’environnement durable, un large engagement de la société en faveur du climat et de l’environnement est essentiel pour une Europe durable et pour la réussite du pacte vert pour l’Europe et du pacte européen pour le climat.

La Commission se réjouit que nous ayons pu partager en permanence des informations sur les progrès accomplis au sein de la commission de la culture et de l’éducation. La publication du premier rapport sur l’état d’avancement de l’espace européen de l’éducation est prévue pour la fin de cette année. En 2023, un échange à mi-parcours sera organisé avec le Parlement, les parties prenantes et la société civile au sujet de ce qui a été réalisé et, bien entendu, des prochaines étapes. À cet égard, nous étudierons avec grand intérêt votre rapport sur l’établissement d’un espace européen de l’éducation d’ici à 2025.

Je voudrais terminer en vous remerciant à nouveau pour votre soutien, mais surtout pour le fait que vous soyez encore notre partenaire dans les mois et les années à venir – un partenaire de confiance dans la construction de l’espace européen de l’éduction.

  Der Präsident. – Gemäß Artikel 136 Absatz 5 der Geschäftsordnung wurde ein Entschließungsantrag eingereicht*.

Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet heute statt.

_______________

* Siehe Protokoll.

  Didier Reynders, membre de la Commission. – Monsieur le Président, Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, je vous remercie pour ce débat relatif à la lutte contre l’impunité en ce qui concerne les crimes de guerre en Ukraine. Il est en effet important de s’assurer que ceux qui ont commis et commettent encore des atrocités en Ukraine soient tenus pour responsables de ces crimes.

Soyez assurés que l’Union européenne condamne avec la plus grande fermeté l’agression militaire menée par la Russie contre l’Ukraine. Il s’agit d’une agression injustifiée qui viole le droit international et notamment la charte des Nations unies.

Cette agression porte atteinte à la sécurité et à la stabilité de notre continent, mais aussi de l’ensemble du monde. Nous avons tous vu les terribles images de Boutcha et d’autres villes qui ont été touchées. Nous avons lu des rapports à ce sujet ou, parfois, nous avons même été en contact avec des personnes confrontées à la situation sur le terrain.

Comme vous le savez, l’Union a adopté des sanctions sans précédent à l’encontre de certains individus et de certaines entreprises russes et biélorusses. Nous avons aussi rapidement mis en place une task force «Freeze and Seize» composée de représentants des États membres, de la Commission, mais également de nos agences Eurojust et Europol.

Le principal objectif de cette task force est de garantir la coordination entre les différents acteurs au niveau européen et des États membres pour la mise en œuvre cohérente et effective de ces sanctions, y compris l’identification rapide des avoirs des personnes sanctionnées ainsi que le gel administratif de ces avoirs. De plus, la Commission prépare actuellement une proposition visant à étendre la liste des «eurocrimes» pour y inclure la violation des règles européennes en matière de sanctions.

Par ailleurs, la Commission est pleinement engagée pour que les crimes commis en Ukraine fassent l’objet d’enquêtes et de poursuites pénales appropriées, afin que leurs auteurs soient tenus pour responsables. Je suis notamment en contact avec le ministre de la justice et avec la procureure générale d’Ukraine, entre autres, pour clarifier ce dont les autorités ukrainiennes ont besoin pour mener à bien les enquêtes pénales en cours, dont le volume et la complexité exigent à la fois des moyens humains et techniques considérables ainsi qu’une expertise spécialisée.

Les autorités ukrainiennes ont déjà ouvert plus de 9 000 enquêtes à l’encontre de plus de 600 suspects. Je me félicite que onze États membres aient déjà également ouvert des enquêtes sur les principaux crimes internationaux commis en Ukraine.

Une équipe conjointe d’investigation comprenant l’Ukraine, la Lituanie et la Pologne a été créée en mars avec le soutien d’Eurojust. Cette équipe conjointe d’investigation s’élargira d’ici la fin du mois à l’Estonie, la Lettonie, la Tchéquie et la Slovaquie. Et j’ai poursuivi des contacts avec d’autres États membres pour voir si certains d’entre eux ayant déjà ouvert des enquêtes à l’échelon national peuvent encore rejoindre cette équipe conjointe d’investigation.

Eurojust a également intensifié sa coopération avec la Cour pénale internationale, qui est désormais aussi impliquée dans l’équipe conjointe d’investigation, une première dans l’histoire de la Cour. Europol apporte également son soutien et son expertise aux unités de police des États membres qui sont spécialisées dans les crimes de guerre. Cela démontre l’importance cruciale de la coopération entre toutes les autorités compétentes aux niveaux européen, national et international.

Afin de poursuivre les auteurs de ces crimes de guerre en justice, il est par ailleurs essentiel d’intensifier la collecte de preuves de manière coordonnée. Un travail important devra être mené sur la centralisation du stockage des preuves en dehors de l’Ukraine, mais également sur l’aide apportée aux procureurs ukrainiens pour préserver ces preuves en toute sécurité, avant leur transmission.

On 25 April the Commission adopted a legislative proposal for the amendment of the Eurojust Regulation. This is an important step to ensure that the agency has the necessary legal basis to receive and store evidence relating to genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Together with the Genocide Network, which is hosted at Eurojust, the agency has the expertise to provide support to national investigations into such crimes.

However, when the Eurojust Regulation was adopted, we did not envisage a situation of this scale. The current legal framework does not allow Eurojust to support the Member States with the storage and analysis of evidence of such crimes, including evidence collected by civil society organisations. The technical infrastructure of Eurojust is also not prepared for the storage of such a large volume of evidence.

Therefore, we also need to upgrade the agency’s technical infrastructure to allow Eurojust to support the Member States, the Ukrainian authorities and the International Criminal Court in their investigations. Against this background, the Commission proposed amendments to the Eurojust Regulation, which would allow Eurojust to receive, preserve and analyse evidence and to process additional data such as videos and audio recordings.

I count on the support of your Parliament to ensure that this proposal can be adopted as soon as possible. It should contribute to our common objective to hold those responsible for the crimes committed in Ukraine accountable and to deliver justice for the victims.

I would like to thank you already for our fruitful cooperation on this file so far. We need to make progress on different kinds of amendments, different kinds of regulations or new regulations, but we need also to continue to work on the ground in good collaboration with the Ukrainian authorities, different authorities in the national Member States, but also with the International Criminal Court. Thank you very much for your support for that and thank you also for your attention this morning. I will listen closely to your observations.

  Rasa Juknevičienė, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, dear colleagues, today is Ukrainian Vyshyvanka Day, so that’s why I am happy to wear a vyshyvanka today.

In 1945 Nazi Germany was defeated and their atrocities were revealed and condemned during the Nuremberg trials. The Soviet Union, from the war it started as an aggressor, ended it regarded as an ally, rewarded with new territories.

An invisible link between Soviet KGB and current Russian leadership is evident also in this community of crime. The legacy of genocide is transferred from generation to generation. The West wrongly decided to please its conscience with silence over Soviet crimes. They were allowed to call themselves the liberators of Europe, despite having committed the same horrendous crimes in the territories they occupied. The exact same narrative is repeated today in Ukraine; the same unimaginable atrocities follow.

But for these outrageous crimes, not only should soldiers be punished, but also their political leaders and military commanders of the Russian Federation, as well as their allies. Also, President Putin and his proxy Lukashenko must be held accountable and tried by a special international tribunal. We therefore call on the EU institutions, in particular the European Commission, to support the creation without any delay of such tribunal and to provide as soon as possible all necessary resources and support for the establishment of this tribunal. Don’t repeat the mistakes of yesterday.

  Maria Arena, au nom du groupe S&D. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, nous sommes témoins d’un fait tragique. Chaque jour, dans le monde, il y a une prolifération des crimes de guerre, d’agressions territoriales et maritimes, de violations systématiques des droits humains fondamentaux.

L’agression de la Russie en Ukraine nous confronte au plus haut point à cette réalité. Les horreurs vécues par le peuple ukrainien malgré sa formidable résistance, les violations graves des lois internationales humanitaires conduisant à des massacres, des viols, des enlèvements peuvent être qualifiées de crimes de guerre, de crimes contre l’humanité et de génocide.

Ces crimes, vous l’avez dit, ne peuvent rester impunis. Il est nécessaire de mettre en place une collecte sans faille de toutes ces preuves. Le procureur de la Cour pénale internationale doit pouvoir disposer du maximum d’éléments pour mener à bien son enquête. Mais aussi, il faut que les juridictions nationales de compétence universelle puissent également s’en saisir.

Mais, on le sait, la CPI est malheureusement non compétente, ici, pour le crime d’agression. Il faut donc combler ce vide par la création d’un tribunal spécial qui aurait cette compétence de juger les autorités russes pour ce crime d’agression. La lutte contre l’impunité est cruciale et urgente. Il en va de la survie des peuples. Il en va de la sécurité du monde qui ne peut et qui ne doit être régi par les lois sauvages du plus fort.

  Dragoş Tudorache, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, war is back in Europe in its most dehumanising form – a war which has gone past the battlefield, past tanks and guns, past any logic of combat.

People queuing for breads are shot dead. Families waiting for a bus or waiting for a train are being bombed. Children are being raped. Women are being raped. Old men are being raped. All these people are innocent. Their lives shattered. Their livelihoods being stolen. These are barbaric acts, part of a sinister vision of the world that seeks to systematically break down the will and the identity of a free nation.

We must fight for justice for these victims of war crimes. We must work with international institutions, with national authorities and with civic platforms to secure evidence and prepare the framework for delivering much—needed accountability.

I want to thank you, Commissioner, for the work that you have done with EU agencies, mobilising them, putting forward legislative frameworks to prepare for that accountability. Impunity is not an option. Putin must know that he and his gang will respond for the atrocities they’ve committed, and they continue to commit.

  Sergey Lagodinsky, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, I say to our Ukrainian friends, first and foremost, we owe you our support in fighting back against this war of aggression. That’s why military deliveries are necessary to fight back and to push back.

But in cases of murder, rape, torture, ‘fighting back’ means for families of victims, for survivors and also the fact that the perpetrators must be brought to justice. This is why it is important that any Russian soldier, private, any commander, any politician in Russia knows that they will be held accountable for their crimes. If not today, then tomorrow. If not tomorrow, then in the face of history, in front of tribunals and in the history books. They will not be remembered as glorious heroes, but as criminals who tied people’s hands behind their back before shooting them in the neck. We say to you, you will be held accountable. Wars are not a free pass for atrocities. Even wars have rules. And breaking them is a severe crime. It’s that simple.

That’s why we applaud the Commission’s efforts to secure evidence to support investigation teams and task forces. We call on Member States who practise universal jurisdiction to practise it actively. We call on those who don’t to join universal jurisdiction and to support the International Criminal Court, Eurojust and Europol. We owe it to survivors and to the families of victims, and we owe it to ourselves.

  Jaak Madison, on behalf of the ID Group. – Mr President, first of all, I absolutely agree with everybody who is saying that there has to be responsibility for all the war crimes.

There is responsibility also for the political leaders, but to take them to court or take them to really pay for the war crimes, first you have to win the war because without the winning of the war, there would be no responsibility, and to win the war, you just have to give so many weapons as much as possible to Ukraine. I have to remind you that in the last three months, from 24 February, the EU has paid EUR 50 billion for energy from Russia. At the same time, we have provided – for a few billion euros – arms and military technique to Ukraine. So it’s not very well balanced, but of course I fully understand it’s difficult for Germany, difficult for Hungary. We have to deal with this. But at the same time, if we pay EUR 50 billion to Russia, we have to pay as much as possible to Ukraine, especially for weapons.

Second thing, everybody is shocked about the war crimes – how it’s possible in 21st century. The problem is that Russia hasn’t changed. It’s basically the same country. The problem is that in 1945, they did exactly the same war crimes. They raped the same way, they killed in the same way like today, because they didn’t have to pay for the war crimes, because at that time, of course, the common enemy was Nazi Germany. The US, the UK and France were together allies with the Soviet Union and they were the winners.

Today I’m most afraid that we are doing the same mistake because, for the last sentence, when I heard last week that Emmanuel Macron proposed to Mr Zelenskyy that we need peace and we have to save the face of Vladimir Putin, I was really shocked. And of course, Macron says, ‘no, it’s false’, but in this case, I believe Zelenskyy more than Macron. There will be no saving the face of the aggressor and dictator. We have to ….

(The President cut off the speaker)

  Francesca Donato (NI). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, tutti noi vogliamo che i crimini di guerra contro civili e militari prigionieri in Ucraina non restino impuniti, ma purtroppo ciò avverrà, come accaduto sino ad oggi. Sono rimasti impuniti, ad esempio, gli autori del massacro di Odessa del 2014, in cui nella casa dei sindacati decine di uomini e donne sono stati massacrati e bruciati vivi, così come altre migliaia di civili nel Donbass sono stati sterminati dall’esercito ucraino, come accertato dalle relazioni delle missioni umanitarie dell’ONU e dell’OSCE; da ben otto anni ci aspettavamo giustizia per quelle vittime, ma non è mai arrivata.

Oggi sul banco degli imputati c’è Putin, e l’esercito russo, e soltanto quello, indipendentemente dalle responsabilità che oggettivamente si potranno ascrivere all’una o all’altra milizia. L’Unione europea ha cessato di essere credibile nel perseguire la giustizia quando ha smesso di essere imparziale per schierarsi acriticamente con un leader non immune da responsabilità rispetto alla degenerazione della crisi con la Russia che ha portato a questa guerra.

Solo se e quando l’Unione, a partire da quest’Aula, recupererà autonomia e obiettività, questo nostro proposito diverrà credibile e realizzabile.

  Jeroen Lenaers (PPE). – Mr President, we have all witnessed the atrocities committed by the Russian armed forces against innocent Ukrainian men, women and children. These images speak for themselves, even when there are simply no words to describe the horror they depict.

There can be no impunity for war crimes in Ukraine. The perpetrators must be held to account. For that we need evidence; evidence that is collected on the ground in Ukraine as we speak. And we need to make sure that this evidence is safely stored – something that is obviously not possible on the ground in Ukraine at the moment as the war is still ongoing.

Therefore, we fully support the Commission’s proposal to give Europol, or Eurojust, a crucial role in the collection, preservation and the sharing of such evidence. We need this, and we need this fast. We cannot risk losing valuable evidence, and this is why our group will support the text as it stands now. We still believe it would be even better to also include the crime of aggression. But for now, speed is of the essence. So let’s get to work. Let’s make sure that those responsible are brought to justice.

  Nacho Sánchez Amor (S&D). – Señor presidente, la agresión a Ucrania representa del modo más dramático la contraposición de dos modelos de sociedad y de dos actitudes respecto de la centralidad del Derecho internacional. Esto tiene que ser evidente también en la diferente aproximación a las consecuencias penales de la agresión rusa.

Nosotros —y, en este «nosotros», por supuesto, incluyo a Ucrania— tenemos que ser extremadamente cuidadosos en nuestros procedimientos. Tenemos que ser decididos, dada la gravedad de los hechos, pero también tenemos que ser irreprochables, ejemplares, transparentes y conducirnos siempre anclados en la legalidad. Cualquier error en este ámbito será más gasolina para la maquinaria rusa de desinformación respecto de Ucrania y del mundo occidental.

Señor comisario, este Parlamento, como autoridad presupuestaria, aprobó hace dos años la creación de un observatorio europeo de la lucha contra la impunidad. La Comisión ha arrastrado los pies durante dos años y solo tiene, al parecer, un estudio, y en esta situación el observatorio de la lucha contra la impunidad de la Unión Europea hubiera sido muy útil. La Unión Europea tiene que dotarse de ese observatorio y de otros mecanismos que, aunque no sean permanentes, puedan activarse inmediatamente en situaciones como la que estamos viviendo.

  Katalin Cseh (Renew). – Mr President, more than four months after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine started, I have to say I am still shaken when I say out loud that there is war in Europe. It sounds surreal. Yet, it’s all too real, and all too close to us.

During these four months, there have been not dozens, not hundreds but thousands of war crimes documented in Ukraine, perpetrated by Russia. Every single day civilians die, women are raped, and families are dragged deep into Russia against their will, never to be heard from again. All across the country, mass graves bear witness to the unspeakable human suffering inflicted on an entire nation.

So, colleagues, this resolution is long overdue. It is just about time that this House officially calls Putin’s Russia for what it is – a war criminal, and war criminals cannot go unpunished.

So that’s why we are calling for an ad hoc tribunal to prosecute Russia’s crime of aggression. And that’s why we will support the ICC in its quest to bring the perpetrators to justice. And this is why we have to seize Russia’s frozen foreign reserves to finance the reconstruction of Ukraine. And once this horrendous war is over, once Ukraine emerges victorious, we will be there to help in any way we can.

So let this document be a foundation on which we can build legal precedents, on which the brave people of Ukraine can place hope that there is a world where actions have consequences, a world where impunity is impossible.

But let this also be a warning for the Council as well, because without meaningful further sanctions, these atrocities will continue. We have to move quickly with further sanctions, because let’s not forget: Europe might not be fighting this war, but it’s Europe that Ukraine has been defending from the Russian aggressor in the past four months.

  Nicolaus Fest (ID). – Herr Präsident! Verehrte Kollegen! Verehrte Gäste aus der Ukraine! Kriegsverbrechen sind selbstverständlich unentschuldbar, und sie müssen genauso selbstverständlich aufgeklärt werden, und zwar unabhängig davon, wo sie begangen wurden – ob in Butscha, Mariupol oder Charkiw – und unabhängig davon, von welcher Seite sie begangen wurden, und natürlich auch unabhängig davon, ob die Täter nun reguläre Soldaten, Söldner oder Milizionäre waren. Daher unterstützen wir jede Aufklärung.

Das Elend dieses Antrags allerdings ist: Er vermischt die notwendige Forderung nach Aufklärung und Bestrafung der Täter mit Sanktionsforderungen, die vor allem Europa schaden werden. Das eine hat mit dem anderen nichts zu tun. Es ist ein Missbrauch der Kriegsverbrechen für die Durchsetzung einer idiotischen politischen Agenda.

Zudem ist nicht die EU für die Aufklärung von Kriegsverbrechen zuständig und sollte es auch nie sein. Das sollten unabhängige Gerichte tun, und wir haben einen Internationalen Gerichtshof in Den Haag, der genau das machen sollte.

So sehr wir die Aufklärung von Kriegsverbrechen auch unterstützen, so sehr lehnen wir ihre Instrumentalisierung zugunsten von Sanktionen und einer Ausweitung von EU-Kompetenzen ab. Nur und allein deshalb stimmen wir gegen diesen Antrag.

  Witold Jan Waszczykowski (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Na początku chciałbym zaznaczyć, że całkowicie podzielam i popieram stanowisko zaprezentowane przez komisarza Reyndersa. Dziękuję mu za wzmiankę o tym, iż Polska jest jednym z pierwszych krajów, które rozpoczęły badanie zbrodni rosyjskich.

To nie jest wojna Putina, to jest wojna Rosji. Sądzę, że Rosja powinna być oskarżona i osądzona za zbrodnie agresywną, za złamanie prawa międzynarodowego. Powinniśmy skarżyć i osądzić decydentów politycznych i wojskowych, skarżyć i osądzić propagandystów, oficerów politycznych, którzy zachęcają do zbrodni, skarżyć żołnierzy za sprawstwo.

Ale powinniśmy też dostarczyć technologię do wykrywania sprawców, np. badanie rozmów i postów na mediach społecznościowych oraz dostarczyć technologie, mobilne laboratoria i testy DNA do badania zwłok zarówno ofiar, jak i zbrodniarzy.

  Janina Ochojska (PPE). – Szanowni Goście! Szanowni Państwo! Dziś mija 85. dzień putinowskiej inwazji na Ukrainę. Teraz, kiedy przemawiamy na tej sali, Rosjanie nie przestają celowo atakować ludności cywilnej, szkół, szpitali i domów mieszkalnych. Wzrasta też liczba zbrodni wojennych. Są to między innymi zabójstwa, gwałty, wywózki i stosowanie zabronionej broni. Bardzo niepokoi fakt, że ponad milion obywateli Ukrainy przymusowo wywieziono w głąb Rosji, a znaczna część z nich – około pół miliona – na Syberię oraz na koło podbiegunowe. To są informacje podane przez prezydenta Zełeńskiego. Służba Bezpieczeństwa Ukrainy poinformowała, że ustalono tożsamość 1140 Rosjan, którzy popełnili różnego rodzaju zbrodnie na ludności cywilnej.

Naszym obowiązkiem jest pomoc Ukrainie w doprowadzeniu do osądzenia i wymierzenia kary wszystkim, którzy dokonali zbrodni wojennych, również ich zwierzchników wydających rozkazy. Ofiary zbrodni muszą wiedzieć, że każdego spotka odpowiednia kara i sprawiedliwości stanie się zadość.

  Isabel Santos (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, as atrocidades a que temos assistido em Bucha e um pouco por toda a Ucrânia, cometidas pelas forças invasoras russas, trazem—nos à memória cenários que já pudemos observar na Chechénia, na Síria e em muitos outros lugares. E são bem o espelho daquele que é o estado a que a impunidade nos tem vindo a conduzir. E este é um combate que temos que fazer todos: o combate contra a impunidade!

Para isso, é fundamental que se deem meios e mandato à Europol e ao Eurojust para que atuem, de forma veemente e com total eficiência, na recolha e proteção de provas e que apoiemos o Tribunal Penal Internacional na sua acção.

Mas isto não basta. Não basta julgar os crimes de guerra e os crimes contra a Humanidade. É preciso também julgar o crime de agressão e esse crime de agressão só poderá ser julgado num tribunal especial. Por isso, é importante que a União Europeia, também aqui, assuma um papel claro e evidente de apoio à criação deste tribunal.

Mas precisamos também de cuidar das vítimas, das mulheres violadas e garantir-lhes o acesso ao aborto e o acesso à sua saúde sexual e reprodutiva em condições que defendam a sua dignidade.

  Malik Azmani (Renew). – Mr President, dear Commissioner, dear Ukraine, MPs, we have all seen the horrific images coming from Ukraine, and still today reports are coming in of widespread executions, rape and torture by the Russian army. It is our duty to help the victims of Putin’s aggression and bring those responsible to justice.

A joint investigation team was established by Lithuania, Poland and Ukraine to investigate war crimes in Ukraine, and it was joined for the first time ever by the International Criminal Court in The Hague. We will vote today on an extended mandate for Eurojust that will allow it to coordinate and support such efforts even better, and we will support also the Commission and the Commissioner in their efforts.

But the time to collect and safely store the daily terabytes of evidence is now, and more can be done. First, we should channel and coordinate efforts of all the parties involved, and to avoid duplication, the JIT should be at the centre of this coordination.

Second, more Member States should join the Joint Investigation Team to improve the collection of evidence.

Finally, we should make available more forensic and digital experts to the ICC to support its efforts on the ground.

(The President cut off the speaker)

  Marina Kaljurand (S&D). – Eile algas Kiievis kohtuprotsess Vene sõduri üle, kes tappis Ukrainas tsiviilisikuid. Just nii tuleb kohtu ette tuua kõik sõjakurjategijad, mitte ainult need, kes tapsid ja tapavad, vägistasid ja vägistavad Ukrainas, vaid ka need, kes alustasid agressiooni ja istuvad täna Kremli kaitsvate müüride taga. Mul on valus kuulata arutelusid selle üle, kuidas tuleb aidata Putinil ja Venemaal nägu päästa, kuidas tuleb Putiniga arutada Euroopa sõjajärgset julgeolekut. Ei, ei tule! Nad on kurjategijad, kes tuleb tuua kohtu ette samamoodi, nagu toodi Kiievis kohtu ette mõrtsukast Vene sõdur. Putin ja tema kaassüüdlased väärivad oma Nürnbergi, sest ainult siis tuleb rahu ja stabiilsus Ukrainasse, sest meil on aeg õppida oma vigadest, sest ainult siis võin ma kindel olla, et siin saalis ei pea ütlema „We told you so!“ ja mis peamine – me võlgneme selle ukrainlastele. Slava Ukraini!

  Sandra Kalniete (PPE). – Priekšsēdētāja kungs! Komisāra kungs! Godātie kolēģi! Ukraiņu tautas varonība ir apbrīnojama. Pēc uzvaras karā Briselē ir jāuzceļ piemineklis Ukrainai par Eiropas pasargāšanu no agresīvas diktatūras tīkojumiem. Ukraiņu tauta šo mūsu pateicību ir godam pelnījusi.

Es nešaubos, ka par kara noziegumiem, kas pastrādāti pret sievietēm, vīriešiem, bērniem, vainīgie tiks saukti pie kriminālatbildības. Tāpat pie atbildības ir jāsauc tie, kas masveidīgi izlaupa Ukrainas mākslas, kultūras un vēstures objektu kolekcijas, tās aizvedot uz Krieviju. Atliek vien cerēt, ka tie nepazudīs privātkolekcijās, bet, kaut arī nelikumīgi, nonāks Krievijas muzejos un pēc uzvaras karā tiks atdoti Ukrainai.

Kā kara noziedznieki ir sodāmi arī tie, kas iekarotajās teritorijās ar tumsonīgu barbarismu posta zinātnes kolekcijas un arhīvus. Ir iznīcināts Ukrainas lielākais sēklu ģenētiskais fonds Harkivā, Černobiļas pētnieciskais arhīvs un daudz citu zinātnisku vērtību. Tie ir kara noziegumi, jo tāpat kā cilvēka dzīvība, tā arī iznīcinātās zinātniskās kolekcijas un arhīvu krājumi ir neatgūstami — tie ir zaudēti — Ukrainai un cilvēcei uz mūžiem.

  Bernard Guetta (Renew). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, mes chers collègues, le déchaînement de barbarie auquel nous assistons aujourd’hui en Ukraine n’est malheureusement pas une nouveauté au XXIᵉ siècle. Souvenons-nous de ce qui s’est passé à Alep. Souvenons-nous de ce qui s’est passé dans l’ensemble de la Syrie gouvernée par un allié de M. Poutine. C’était la même chose, c’était la même chose.

Et c’est pour cela que, aujourd’hui, quand nous jetons les bases – car c’est ce que nous faisons – d’une nouvelle justice internationale contre les crimes de guerre, nous ne faisons pas qu’exprimer notre solidarité avec l’Ukraine et notre indignation. Nous nous souvenons aussi d’Alep et nous essayons de prévenir d’autres crimes demain dans d’autres pays, sur d’autres continents. Nous jetons les bases, Monsieur le Commissaire, d’une nouvelle action de l’Union européenne contre les crimes de guerre.

  Raphaël Glucksmann (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire. Viols systématiques, civils ligotés et abattus en pleine rue, tortures, hôpitaux et écoles rasés… La stratégie de la terreur des soldats russes en Ukraine est sans limites. Pourquoi se gêneraient-il? L’impunité existe depuis 20 ans: impunité face aux crimes commis en Tchétchénie, impunité face aux crimes commis en Syrie, impunité face aux crimes commis en Russie même, impunité face aux crimes commis en Géorgie. L’impunité a transformé les massacres de l’armée russe en norme. Il est temps de briser cette impunité, de mettre fin à cette impunité.

La justice, ce n’est pas simplement ce que l’on doit aux victimes: c’est prévenir les crimes de demain. Et donc, c’est aussi empêcher la tentation – qui fait jour dans certaines capitales – d’envisager un retour au «business as usual» après la guerre. On ne discute pas, on ne festoie pas, on ne s’allie pas avec des criminels de guerre et des criminels contre l’humanité. La place de Vladimir Poutine est devant un tribunal, pas à Brégançon.

  María Soraya Rodríguez Ramos (Renew). – Señor presidente, ¿quién es el responsable último de esta guerra, de tanto sufrimiento? Pues aquel que, controlando la acción política o militar de un Estado, planifica, decide y ordena una invasión militar contra otro Estado soberano: artículo 8 bis del Estatuto de Roma. No cabe duda, Putin y la cúpula criminal del Kremlin son los responsables de este crimen de agresión.

Nosotros tenemos la obligación de que no quede impune. Por eso, en esta Resolución pedimos que los Estados miembros introduzcan en sus ordenamientos nacionales el crimen de agresión, condición necesaria para poder crear un tribunal especial ad hoc para llevar a Putin y a su Gobierno criminal ante la justicia.

Señorías, o condenamos a Putin, o Putin nos condenará a nosotros a la amenaza de una guerra permanente. Tenemos que llevar también ante la justicia a los autores materiales y los crímenes, a los autores de las violaciones. Esta Resolución es un mensaje a Putin: señor Putin, la impunidad no es para siempre.

  Pina Picierno (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la strage di Bucha, gli stupri di guerra, gli ospedali bombardati, la deportazione di bambini: sono questi gli orrori a cui abbiamo assistito nel corso degli ultimi mesi e non possiamo non pretendere giustizia per queste atrocità che vanno al di là di ogni possibile e immaginabile atto di guerra. Una guerra che, come ripetiamo da mesi, è totalmente ingiustificata, intollerabile. E allora è il momento di pretendere giustizia e di incriminare chi ha commesso, ordinato questi crimini contro l’umanità.

È di poche ore fa la notizia dell’arrivo di 42 investigatori ed esperti forensi per indagare su possibili crimini di guerra contro l’umanità. È il team più numeroso mai inviato sul campo nella storia della Corte penale internazionale, e questo, cari colleghi e care colleghe, è assolutamente un buon inizio.

Non ci sarà pace e noi non avremo pace finché non saranno puniti tutti gli orribili crimini di guerra a cui stiamo ancora assistendo in queste ore. È questo il nostro impegno e, insieme, la nostra responsabilità.

PRESIDÊNCIA: PEDRO SILVA PEREIRA
Vice-Presidente

Intervenções “catch the eye”

  Miriam Lexmann (PPE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, every day we hear new evidence of Russian war crimes in Ukraine – military attacks, including on civilian targets, rape, torture, mass executions, forced deportations, looting and many other barbaric acts continue to be perpetrated against Ukraine and its people. They remind us of some of the worst excesses of Stalinism.

We must ensure that these crimes are thoroughly documented, investigated and those responsible are brought to justice. That is why I welcome the setting-up of a UN International Commission of Inquiry and the launching steps of the ICC prosecutors’ investigation into war crimes and crimes against humanity.

However, we must also do all in our power to establish a special tribunal for the punishment of crimes of aggression. We are witnesses of a tragedy that we thought we would never see, and to which we said ‘never again’. Unfortunately, this is not the case, and we must stand up to those seeking to suppress human freedom and dignity. It’s our moral duty.

  Domènec Ruiz Devesa (S&D). –Señor presidente, gracias en particular a Maria Arena, la autora de esta Resolución, que yo apoyo en su integridad, particularmente la iniciativa de crear este tribunal especial para juzgar el crimen de agresión, no porque queramos debilitar a la Corte Penal Internacional; hemos solicitado también apoyo financiero para ella. Hace poco hemos sabido que el Servicio de Instrumentos de Política Exterior va a dar esa financiación ad hoc para que la Corte Penal Internacional pueda investigar los crímenes de guerra y los crímenes contra la humanidad. Pero ahora mismo no está en su ámbito de competencia juzgar e investigar el crimen de agresión, que, por otro lado, como ya se ha dicho, es absolutamente evidente.

Y en ese sentido, aprovecho estos segundos para dirigirme directamente al comisario Reynders, que está aquí y al que agradezco su presencia, para que sea la Unión Europea la que lidere una propuesta de establecimiento de este tribunal especial, así como una propuesta legislativa para que podamos utilizar para la reconstrucción de Ucrania los activos del Banco Central de Rusia.

  Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, Yana Stepanenko, un copil de 11 ani, a rămas, pe 8 aprilie, după atacul de la gara din Kramatorsk, fără ambele picioare. Mama ei, Natalia Stepanenko, de 43 de ani, a rămas fără piciorul stâng.

Pentru toate aceste crime îndreptate împotriva cetățenilor civili există un responsabil. El are chip și nume. Vinovatul principal pentru toate tragediile din Ucraina poartă un singur nume, este Putin. Și avem obligația politică să facem tot ce ne stă în putință pentru a-l aduce în fața tribunalului pe acest criminal. Altfel nu vom fi în stare să ne apărăm mai departe valorile ce stau la baza Uniunii Europene.

(Fim das intervenções “catch the eye”)

  Didier Reynders, membre de la Commission. – Monsieur le Président, Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, je dois d’abord vous remercier pour ce débat et pour votre engagement aux côtés du peuple ukrainien. C’est depuis le début de l’agression russe en Ukraine que cet engagement s’est exprimé. Je voudrais, dans ces conclusions, revenir sur les priorités d’aujourd’hui dans la lutte contre l’impunité et les quelques éléments que nous tentons de mettre en place ou de promouvoir pour lutter contre cette impunité.

Tout d’abord, je voudrais particulièrement vous remercier pour les efforts que vous déployez afin d’examiner, dans un délai très court, la proposition visant à amender le règlement Eurojust. Je suis confiant de voir votre Parlement voter sur ce texte aujourd’hui même. Cela montre une très grande célérité et la volonté effective d’avancer de manière efficace, parce que chaque jour le risque augmente que des preuves, qui pourraient aider à traduire en justice les responsables des atrocités commises, se perdent ou soient définitivement détruites. Il est dès lors crucial d’adopter et de mettre en œuvre cette législation le plus rapidement possible, étant donné la situation sur le terrain.

Le deuxième élément sur lequel je veux revenir, c’est le soutien apporté aux autorités ukrainiennes, en particulier à la procureure générale, Irina Venediktova, et à la Cour pénale internationale. La Cour pénale internationale a déjà bénéficié d’un certain nombre de soutiens financiers, d’États membres ou de l’Union, et je crois qu’il est important de continuer à accompagner les travaux de la Cour pénale internationale, comme d’ailleurs des autorités ukrainiennes.

J’ai eu l’occasion de demander à tous les ministres de la justice européens de se pencher sur les expertises qu’il serait utile d’envoyer en Ukraine. Je pense notamment à des médecins légistes, il y en a de plus en plus sur le terrain. Je crois aussi que l’on doit continuer à travailler à l’envoi d’équipements de sécurité, parce que les conditions d’enquête sont très dangereuses pour l’instant sur le terrain en Ukraine. Il faut aussi réfléchir à la manière de sécuriser les communications entre les enquêteurs et les différents experts présents sur le terrain. Nous allons donc continuer à travailler dans cette voie pour renforcer nos démarches auprès des autorités ukrainiennes, comme auprès de la Cour pénale.

Puis, un troisième élément sur lequel je veux revenir, c’est l’équipe conjointe d’investigation. Je voudrais insister sur le fait que c’est la meilleure manière de coordonner les activités entre les autorités ukrainiennes et les autorités des États membres qui ont souhaité – je les ai cités tout à l’heure – participer à cette équipe conjointe d’investigation, mais aussi les autorités de la Cour pénale internationale. C’est la première fois que la Cour pénale internationale participe à une telle démarche. Et je voudrais à nouveau inviter les autres États membres qui ont déjà lancé des enquêtes sur leur propre territoire sur la base de témoignages ou de preuves collectées à rejoindre cette équipe conjointe d’investigation. C’est vraiment la meilleure façon de coordonner les travaux entre les différents enquêteurs.

Enfin, je voudrais confirmer que la Commission va continuer à envisager toutes les pistes possibles pour lutter contre l’impunité, notamment en collaboration avec plusieurs partenaires internationaux. Je pense aux États-Unis et à la Grande-Bretagne, mais aussi à d’autres, notamment au sein du G7, qui souhaiteraient travailler dans la même direction. Je suis vraiment confiant dans le fait que nous mettons en place des outils permettant de lutter contre l’impunité. Que cette impunité se traduise dans un certain nombre de dossiers que vous avez évoqués, c’est possible. Mais il y a en tout cas, dans le dossier de l’agression russe en Ukraine qui nous occupe aujourd’hui, un élément très clair: depuis le début, nous collectons des preuves et nous continuerons à mener toutes les actions possibles pour traduire les responsables en justice.

Ce sera peut-être demain, ce sera peut-être le mois prochain. Ce sera peut-être l’année prochaine. Mais nous ne cesserons pas de relancer ces procédures auprès des différents États membres, auprès des cours internationales, pour faire en sorte qu’il y ait réellement une responsabilité qui soit assumée par les auteurs de crimes de guerre, de crimes contre l’humanité ou de génocide, quelle que soit la qualification qui sera donnée par des cours et des tribunaux dans les années à venir. Je vous remercie en tout cas à nouveau de votre engagement et soyez certain que nous allons continuer ce travail de manière acharnée.

  Sylwia Spurek (Verts/ALE), na piśmie. – Większość ofiar dzisiejszych wojen stanowią osoby cywilne, głównie kobiety i dzieci. Ich doświadczenia to także przemoc seksualna, stosowana przez sprawców po to, aby osiągnąć militarne lub polityczne cele, aby upokorzyć i pokazać władzę. Bo gwałty to część systemowej strategii wojennej, znana od wieków. Gwałty wojenne nie są zatem niczym nowym ani niczym wyjątkowym i są, niestety, powszechne. Nadal dochodzi do nich także w XX i XXI wieku, co wyraźnie pokazały wojna w byłej Jugosławii i w Rwandzie, gdzie gwałty ze strony żołnierzy nie były aktem niesubordynacji, ale sposobem na prowadzenie działań przeciwko wrogowi, jaką była określona grupa etniczna. Ale nadal, mimo że żyjemy w XXI wieku, gwałty wojenne często są zjawiskiem, które się przemilcza.

Potrzebujemy systemu, który weźmie pod uwagę wszystkie destrukcyjne konsekwencje, jakie niesie ze sobą przemoc seksualna wobec kobiet w czasie wojny. Systemu, w którym priorytetem będą potrzeby ofiar i ich prawa i który powie stop okrucieństwu i bezkarności. Systemu, który uwzględni w krzywdzie wojennej i wśród ofiar – obok rannych i zabitych – także zgwałcone. Niesprawiedliwość musi zostać nazwana i ukarana, a sprawcy muszą wiedzieć, że będą skazani. Bo za gwałt odpowiada sprawca, to on jest winny i ma się wstydzić, a nie ofiara. I musimy przestać mówić „została zgwałcona”, musimy zacząć mówić „zgwałcił”.

  Kadri Simson, Member of the Commission. – Honourable Members, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for inviting me to speak today.

Three weeks ago, Russia cut gas supplies to Poland and Bulgaria, making the threat of losing gas and fossil fuel supplies for the whole EU more tangible. This shows again that Russia is not a reliable trading partner.

Yesterday, the Commission presented the REPowerEU plan to phase out Russian fossil fuels from our system and replace them with stable, affordable, clean energy. To open up the session, I will give you some concrete details included in the REPowerEU plan.

First, I want to mention infrastructure. This is the time to implement many long—pending projects, with a particular focus on cross—border connections to build an integrated energy market that secures supply in a spirit of solidarity. The TEN-E has played, and will continue to play, an important role to achieve this goal.

REPowerEU shows that it will be possible to fully compensate the equivalent of Russian gas imports by a combination of demand reduction and increase of domestic production of biogas, hydrogen and other renewables, and limited additions of infrastructure. Gas storage will be the key part of this plan.

Just an hour ago, we achieved agreement between the co—legislators on the gas storage obligation proposal, and I am immensely grateful for the Members of Parliament and the French Presidency for a very constructive approach, because this crucial piece of legislation helps us to be better prepared for the situation where there will be full disruption of Russian gas flows.

But of course we will also boost the transition to renewables and accelerate the European Green Deal. Until now, we have been climate leaders across the globe, but this shift in gear means we will be able to leapfrog even faster towards sustainability, energy independence and more local industry. To do this, we have proposed to increase the share of renewables in our energy mix to 45% by 2030.

To achieve this goal, we need unprecedented actions at unprecedented speed. That brings me to the elephant in the room: we have to make this process shorter, we have to streamline as much as possible. Of course, we can give recommendations to the Member States, but at this current geopolitical context, we need to do much more.

Therefore, we propose to amend the Renewable Energy Directive to give Member States the right tools to significantly accelerate the permitting process. To do this, we introduce ‘go to’ areas, where permitting procedures would be done much faster, taking no more than one year. And let me be clear, this will not come at the expense of the environment.

For solar energy deployment on existing building structures, we are proposing a three month permitting process. With the solar strategy proposed yesterday, we aim to double solar PV capacity by 2025 already. And to ensure the availability of the skilled workforce, we will establish EU large—scale skills partnership. We also want more of the solar panels to be manufactured here, in the EU, and we will launch the European Solar PV Industry Alliance to facilitate that.

Of course, more efficient use of energy goes hand in hand with cheaper and renewable energy, and there is no cheaper and more secure energy than the one that we do not use. So, with today’s security concerns and energy prices, the case for investing in energy efficiency has never been stronger.

While most of the Russian gas will be replaced by renewables and savings, 155 bcm of gas cannot be phased out overnight. In the earlier stages of the shift, we need to diversify supplies to make up this shortfall, and we will need to secure around 50 bcm of LNG and 10 bcm of additional pipeline gas annually from non—Russian sources.

Intense work on this has been going on since last autumn, and they have yielded results. So April broke the monthly LNG deliveries record again with 12.6 bcm. Sustaining this level throughout the year would put us well on track to reach the additional 50 bcm.

At the same time, pipeline gas supply from Russia went down to 26% of EU gas consumption last month, this April, compared to 40%, which was the level last year, last April. To maintain the momentum, we have set up the EU Energy Platform to aggregate the demand for those who want to join, to coordinate the use of infrastructure, and reach out to our global partners both for gas and hydrogen. The first regional task force was set up in Sofia on 5 May, and others will follow. As a strong signal of support to our close neighbours, the Platform will also be open to Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia and the Western Balkan countries.

After joint statements with the United States and Canada, the work continues to reach political agreement for LNG deliveries also with other partners. Speaking of our international partners, yesterday we also adopted our new External Energy Strategy.

Russia’s aggression against Ukraine has had the unintended consequence of deeper cooperation between the EU and our partners. We intend to build long—term energy partnerships that go beyond the immediate energy security needs, for example, by extending cooperation on gas to renewable hydrogen or tackling methane emissions.

As we wean ourselves off Russian imports, we want to avoid simply creating another dependency elsewhere. So we will continue to establish partnerships on critical raw materials.

The Strategy also renews our commitment to Ukraine and other close neighbours closely affected by that war. We will continue to provide energy supplies and work towards making electricity trade with Ukraine possible in the near future. The Commission will also launch the REPowerUkraine Initiative to rebuild a clean and modern energy system after the war.

Ladies and gentlemen, all these different strands of our work in the end reach the same destination. It is clear that the green transition is the only way to be the masters of the EU energy system, and to provide secure, sustainable and affordable energy for the EU and the world. This remains our ultimate goal.

Given the urgency and unpredictability of current events, we would need to move quickly to through the co—legislative process, and I’m counting on your support to move this proposal forward. Thank you for your attention, and I am looking forward to the questions.

  Cristian-Silviu Buşoi, în numele grupului PPE. – Domnule președinte, aș vrea să mulțumesc, să felicit Comisia Europeană în numele Grupului PPE și în calitate de președinte ITRE, pentru lansarea pachetului de măsuri REPowerEU. Starea de urgență necesită măsuri de urgență, așa cum a menționat și doamna comisară Kadri Simson.

În această dimineață am concluzionat negocierile între instituții pe gas storage și Parlamentul European și-a onorat promisiunea de a acționa foarte rapid atunci când urgența este iminentă.

Acționând împreună și urmărind planul REPowerEU, vom reuși să scăpăm de dependența energetică față de Rusia, asigurându-ne, în același timp, că vom avea grijă ca prețurile la energie, care deja pun o presiune economică pe populație și pe întreprinderile europene, nu vor crește încă și mai mult.

Ca reprezentant al PPE, vreau să subliniez că instrumentele și politicile din REPowerEU reprezintă, în același timp, și oportunități mari de dezvoltare economică prin investiții masive în energii regenerabile, hidrogen, eficiență energetică.

Banii pentru REPowerEU vor proveni în mare parte din Facilitatea de redresare și reziliență a Uniunii Europene; 20 de miliarde de euro în granturi din vânzarea certificatelor de emisii de CO2 și, de asemenea, din dreptul statelor membre de a transfera din fondurile politicii de coeziune și politicii agricole.

Este un plan ambițios, dar realizabil, care ne va asigura independența energetică față de Rusia, va contribui major și la atingerea țintelor noastre climatice, vom avea un sistem energetic mai curat, mai eficient, independent față de jocurile geopolitice și cu prețuri mai stabile și mai decente pentru cetățeni și pentru economia europeană.

  Цветелина Пенкова, от името на групата S&D. – Уважаема г-жо Комисар, уважаеми г-н Председател, скъпи колеги, основната цел на всяка енергийна политика е сигурност на доставките и достъпни цени.

Първо, ние трябва да гарантираме достъпни цени. Конкурентни цени се постигат само, ако работим с всички възможни партньори, а не чрез еднолична зависимост от един доставчик. Нека да развиваме и наличните собствени ресурси. Само така ще гарантираме сигурност и независимост. Трябва ни диверсификация, а не просто замяна на една зависимост с друга. Второ, имаме нужда от инфраструктура. В годините назад сме изпуснали възможността да изградим устойчива газопреносна система. Интерконекторът между България и Гърция все още не е завършен и ние трябва бързо да поправим тази грешка. Трето, европейската солидарност отново ще е ключова за преодоляването и на тази криза. Страните със запазени количества по тръбопроводите ще трябва да покажат солидарност и да помагат на държави като България, чиито основни доставки в момента са прекъснати.

И не на последно място, балансираният енергиен микс, който искаме да развиваме оттук нататък, трябва да бъде зелен и устойчив. А решенията пред нас за жалост са ограничени. Възобновяеми източници на енергия и стабилни базови енергийни мощности в лицето на ядрената енергетика.

  Искра Михайлова, от името на групата Renew. – Уважаеми г-н Председател, уважаема г-жо Комисар, едностранното спиране на доставките на газ от Русия към България и Полша е част от военната агресия на Русия в Украйна и доказателство за измеренията на вражеските действия срещу Европа по отношение на нарушаване на енергийната сигурност и независимост на Европа.

Прекратяването на доставките поставя поредица от въпроси, на които България и Полша, но също така и целият Европейски съюз трябва да намерят отговор през близките месеци. Как и до каква степен ще се задейства европейската солидарност? Има ли потенциал Европейският съюз да даде бърз, ефективен и дългосрочен отговор на действията на руската страна? Да, категорично да. Ние вече имаме отговора: „Renew Power EU“ – амбициозен и същевременно реалистичен план. От нас, в Европейския парламент, зависи и доколко бързо ще се задейства и пакетът „Fit for 55“, за да можем да дадем инструменти на страните членки и на Европейската комисия.

Но има въпроси, които засягат и България, и Полша. Имат ли готовност да противодействат и да задвижат комплекс от мерки, които да компенсират спирането на доставките, ускоряването на алтернативни доставки, запълване на хранилищата с газ, развитие на национален енергиен микс с акцент върху възобновяемата енергия и водорода, спешни инвестиции в енергийната ефективност, разглеждане на възможностите за добив на газ в национални граници? България и Полша трябва да развият тези мерки с подкрепата на Европейската комисия. Спирането на доставките на газ за нашите страни е шок за домакинствата и бизнеса, но пълното прекъсване на зависимостта от енергийните доставки от Русия е и възможност.

  Ville Niinistö, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, the Greens largely welcome the proposal made yesterday by the Commission and are delighted to see that the Commission now is focusing very much on cutting our fossil fuel reliance and shifting our solutions to renewables and energy efficiency – so not just on short-term sourcing and ensuring security of gas supplies. This is very much welcomed by the Greens.

Energy efficiency and renewables are both a short- and long—term solution to increase our energy independence and it’s what our climate commitments require. We should invest now in sustainable solutions straight away to make sure that we have energy sovereignty for Europe, and it’s also good for our economies.

Especially, we welcome the legislative amendments increasing the energy efficiency target, the solar roof obligation in the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive and the target increase acting on permitting in the Renewable Energy Directive. I think these are bold steps, even though we Greens would have liked to see even higher targets. We appreciate the move to higher targets from the Commission as it is a level which was previously seen as impossible. But we see that impossible things are made possible by bold change.

On permitting, we welcome the proposal to speed up project approval, including through the identification of go—to areas. However, here we would also like to state that we need to be careful that existing legislation to protect biodiversity is not undermined or ignored. And we will be looking into this closely. We also appreciate the switch to timelines for rooftop solar projects and the increase in obligations.

On the negatives, the sale of ETS allowances from the Mortgage Stability Reserve is the biggest mistake, from our point of view, in this proposal, as it increases emissions in the ETS. Also, while we acknowledge some specific gas infrastructures may be needed, especially in eastern Europe, we have concerns on the building timeframes of these new and sometimes competing pipeline projects, which likely lead to over capacities, lock-in or stranded assets and potentially being completed late. These infrastructures should only be built with private money if they have economic viability. Finding new EU money is always difficult, but we cannot do the energy transition only with EU money. We need Member States and companies to also step up and ensure that they contribute to this transition away from fossil fuels to an energy efficient and renewable EU. But we are happy that the Commission has done its part.

  Paolo Borchia, a nome del gruppo ID. – Signor Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, tante ombre, poche luci, troppi propositi che sono destinati a rimanere sulla carta. REPowerEU sancisce che la Commissione sta vivendo in una bolla.

L’Europa si prende il rischio delle emissioni zero, non tenendo conto degli indicatori economici e delle drammatiche stime sulla crescita. Questo è un piano che parte dal presupposto sbagliato, vale a dire che la crisi attuale coincida soltanto con il conflitto in Ucraina, ignorando anni di politiche sbagliate su energia e clima. E c’è una gravissima mancanza: si punta tutto sulle rinnovabili, ma non su una filiera europea in grado di sviluppare le tecnologie essenziali per la transizione.

Via dalla dipendenza energetica da Mosca per aumentare quella tecnologica da Pechino. Geniale. L’estrazione, la trasformazione e il trasporto di minerali e metalli impiegati intensivamente nei pannelli solari delle turbine eoliche dipendono da un adeguato approvvigionamento di diesel e da altri prodotti fossili realizzato, guarda un po’, da chi l’energia la produce sfruttando ancora la capacità a carbone.

Scrivere che il risparmio energetico è il modo più rapido ed economico per far scendere le bollette mi sembra un tantino banale, direi alle soglie dell’offensivo; non serviva che fosse la Commissione a farci questa rivelazione. REPowerEU è soltanto l’ultimo tassello di una narrativa ideologizzata; Timmermans detta legge, con una Commissione totalmente incapace di riportarlo alla realtà.

  Beata Szydło, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Pani Komisarz! Szanowni Państwo! Porozumienie w sprawie magazynowania gazu, o którym przed momentem mówiła Pani Komisarz, to bardzo dobra wiadomość. To dobra informacja i życzmy sobie wszyscy, żeby zostało ono dopełnione i żebyśmy nie byli za jakiś czas rozczarowani, że chociaż zawarto je, to była to kolejna deklaracja, której z różnych powodów różne strony nie dotrzymują. Dlaczego o tym mówię? Dlatego, Szanowni Państwo, że przyjmowaliśmy już kilka pakietów sankcji wobec Rosji, a ciągle spotykamy się i mówimy, że to nie działa.

W związku z tym potrzebujemy przede wszystkim skuteczności i właśnie solidarności. Solidarność jest obecnie kluczowym słowem i kluczowym działaniem. Nie może być tak, że niektórzy przywódcy państw europejskich zachowują się tak, jakby bardziej zależało im na wspieraniu Putina niż Ukrainy i wypełnianiu tych zobowiązań, które tutaj w Unii Europejskiej podejmujemy. Nie może być tak, że podejmowane są kolejne kroki, kolejne projekty sankcji i są one niedotrzymywane. Więc przede wszystkim tej solidarności potrzebujemy. I to jest również praca nas wszystkich, abyśmy konsekwentnie i szybko – bo czas jest tutaj niezwykle istotny – wdrażali te projekty i te pomysły, które są przygotowywane.

  Manon Aubry, au nom du groupe The Left. – Monsieur le Président, quand nos factures explosent, il y a une chose à faire, c’est simple, c’est basique, et surtout ça peut soulager des millions de gens dans la galère: bloquer les prix pour que s’éclairer, se chauffer ou se déplacer ne soit pas un luxe. Mais, aussi simple que cela puisse sembler, il vous a fallu près d’un an, Madame la Commissaire, pour commencer à envisager timidement dans votre plan REPowerEU un blocage des prix du gaz, ou même vous résoudre à parler de taxation des entreprises qui en ont profité pour se gaver.

Je pourrais croire à un exploit, mais je sais que, si la Commission a accepté de déroger à ce sacro-saint marché de l’énergie, c’est notamment parce que l’Espagne et le Portugal avaient déjà montré la voie sans attendre le feu vert de l’Union européenne. Comme quoi, la désobéissance, ça peut finalement ramener la Commission européenne à la raison. Mais je vous propose de ne pas nous arrêter en si bon chemin.

La guerre en Ukraine ne fait pas exploser que les prix de l’énergie. C’est aussi l’essence, le blé et de nombreux produits alimentaires de base qui augmentent chaque jour. Alors, maintenant que la Commission européenne a découvert l’utilité de la régulation des prix, je vous propose une chose: il est temps de faire de même pour tous les produits de première nécessité.

  Ева Майдел (PPE). – Г-жо Комисар, скъпи колеги, почти три месеца Путин води кървава и опустошителна война срещу Украйна. Той не прави разлика между военни и цивилни, между домове и военни обекти. Русия излива целия си военен капацитет върху една суверенна държава.

Ние искаме да спрем притока на средства към Русия, за да не може тези средства да се използват за още повече убийства в Украйна. Затова искаме да наложим ембарго върху петрола и казваме, че ще откажем да плащаме за газ в рубли. Но държави в Европейския съюз всъщност продължават да купуват руски газ. Така, както прави българското правителство. Други искат изключение от ембаргото за петрол. Отново, както българското правителство. Трети казват, че ще наложат вето на тези санкции. Отново, както прави българското правителство. А пък други просто плащат и някои от тях плащат в рубли.

И затова се питам. Къде са нашите ценности днес? Къде е нашият избор? Ние, европейците и нашите правителства, наистина е време да започнем да правим само това, което говорим, и да говорим само това, което смятаме да правим.

  Marek Paweł Balt (S&D). – Panie Przewodniczący! Pani Komisarz! Dziękuję za plan RepowerEU. Wszyscy widzimy, że Rosja prowadzi wojnę nie tylko na terenie Ukrainy, ale i wojnę hybrydową, energetyczną z krajami Unii Europejskiej. Rosja, wiedząc, że nie może wygrać z całą Unią, atakuje pojedyncze kraje, takie jak Polska, Bułgaria, Finlandia, chcąc rozbić wspólnotę Unii Europejskiej. Nie możemy na to pozwolić.

Dlatego zgodnie z pkt 42 ppkt 7 Traktatu o Unii Europejskiej musimy dać wspólną odpowiedź na ewidentną agresję ze strony Rosji. Odpowiedzią powinno być ustanowienie prawdziwej wspólnoty energetycznej. Dziękuję Komisji za utworzenie energetycznej platformy oraz wzywam do natychmiastowego utworzenia wspólnego mechanizmu zakupu surowców energetycznych, tak jak to zostało zrobione dla zakupów szczepionek.

Już dzisiaj widzimy konkurencję cenową pomiędzy naszymi krajami, które chcą się szybko uniezależnić od zakupów paliw z Rosji. Wspólne zakupy zapewnią niższe ceny paliw, dywersyfikację dostaw oraz większe bezpieczeństwo energetyczne Europy.

  Jordi Solé (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, Madam Commissioner, Putin’s criminal adventures make it very urgent now to disconnect from Russian fossil fuels. But we must not only become independent of Russian gas and oil: we need to disconnect from all gas and oil, no matter where it comes from, because all of it accelerates climate change. We must avoid that the urgency of finding alternatives to the supply of Russian gas and oil leads us to strategies, investment and contracts that will end up prolonging the use of these fossil fuels.

It wouldn’t be wise to get rid of a politically uncomfortable dependency on gas to generate others, maybe not so uncomfortable, but just as harmful to the planet. Because the real alternative is to speed up the deployment of renewables, setting more ambitious targets, establishing new legal obligations, and offering more European funding for deployment. That’s why we welcome REPowerEU, but without forgetting that the goal is to remove fossil fuels from our energy mix as quickly as possible and at the same time create 100% clean generation model that is local and distributed.

  Markus Buchheit (ID). – Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Wenn der letzte Neubau mit Solarmodulen chinesischer Fertigung vollgepflastert ist und auch in Bayern und andernorts die 10H-Regelung endlich gefallen ist, dann werden auch wir hier vielleicht bemerken, dass uns das alles nichts nutzt.

Meine Damen und Herren in der Kommission, vielleicht steigen Sie endlich mal von Ihrem Elfenbeinturm herunter. Wir brauchen keine ständigen Kompetenzerweiterungen zu Ihren Gunsten unter dem Deckmantel immer neuer Krisenbewältigungen. Die Frau Kommissionspräsidentin gibt es ja ganz offen zu: Auch die jetzige Situation, der Gasboykott in Polen und Bulgarien, ist nichts weiter als eine Initialzündung für den Green Deal – und der Zündfunke übrigens für 300 Milliarden Euro Steuergeld.

Wir brauchen keine Mann-auf-dem-Mond-Projekte und Initialzündungen für Projekte, die schon beim Start zum Scheitern verurteilt sind und bestenfalls Geld in die Taschen unserer chinesischen Konkurrenten spülen. Wir brauchen bezahlbare, sichere Energie, und das geht letztlich nur mit weniger Ideologie und einem diversifizierten, technologieoffenen Energiemix europaweit zugunsten aller Länder und Bürger.

Wir müssen nicht eine Abhängigkeit durch eine weitere ersetzen, wie es gerade der Fall ist. Echte Solidarität, meine Damen und Herren, bedeutet eben auch die Forderung nach einer umfassenden und sofortigen Energiesicherheitswende.

  Nicola Procaccini (ECR). – Signor Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, sono bastate poche settimane per distruggere la vita di troppe persone in Ucraina, ma anche per distruggere la vostra utopia green, che in questi anni ha considerato prioritaria la riduzione delle emissioni di CO2 piuttosto che l’indipendenza energetica dell’Unione europea, con le sue conseguenze per la pace in Europa.

Farò solo un esempio, avendo solo un minuto. La Presidente von der Leyen, per giustificare l’inevitabile ricorso al gas, al nucleare, al carbone, ha annunciato con grande enfasi di voler ricoprire le nostre città con pannelli fotovoltaici. Ma chi è che produce la quasi totalità dei pannelli fotovoltaici e che possiede il monopolio dei minerali necessari per realizzarli? La Cina, ovvero il campione mondiale delle emissioni di CO2, della distruzione dell’ambiente, della repressione delle libertà, della violenza etnica e politica, un maestro irraggiungibile anche per la Russia di Vladimir Putin.

  Marisa Matias (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, o que estamos a viver é o reflexo do problema mais estrutural da dependência energética, para o qual alertamos já há muito tempo. É, por isso, preciso combater os mitos da política energética europeia. O primeiro é o de que o mercado é capaz de se autorregular. O segundo é o de que este problema é temporário e que resulta da invasão da Ucrânia. Agravou, mas não é a causa.

Sem alterar as regras do mercado, fixando preços e fortalecendo o controlo público da energia, tudo continuará no mesmo caminho, com os cartéis energéticos que acumulam lucros e distribuem dividendos, ao mesmo tempo que as famílias continuam a pagar.

Temos de investir mais nas energias renováveis e garantir uma verdadeira transição energética. A proposta da Comissão não abandona estes mitos. Admite, pela primeira vez, que a mão invisível do mercado não regula tudo magicamente, mas não retira consequências. Temos, por isso, de ir às causas. Não basta e, sobretudo, não resulta substituir a dependência da Rússia pela dependência da Arábia Saudita ou dos Estados Unidos.

Só um modelo justo, controlado publicamente e compatível com as metas climáticas, pode ajudar à nossa soberania energética.

  Milan Uhrík (NI). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, hovoríte tu mnohí, že Európa sa musí okamžite odpojiť od ruského plynu lebo kupovaním ruského plynu vraj financujeme ruskú vojnu.

Ja sa vás prosím pýtam, čo je to za nezmysel. Čo je to za nezmysel, veď kupovaním plynu predsa zabezpečujeme v prvom rade náš európsky, u mňa slovenský, priemysel, ktorý by bez plynu nevydržal ani jeden deň. To je proste fakt. Máme teraz prestať kupovať výrobky z Číny, lebo financujeme komunistický režim, či arabskú ropu, lebo financujeme Arabov?

Slovensko je na sto percent, na sto percent závislé od ruského plynu a všetkých chytrákov ktorí hovoria, že sa musíme okamžite odpojiť, sa pýtam, prečo nám Ukrajina nejde príkladom. Prečo sa Ukrajina, tiež na sto percent, závislá neodpojí ako prvá, prečo Ukrajina platí stále za ruský plyn. Máme ich snáď obviniť, že financujú ruskú inváziu? Nie, nerobíme to.

Ja som za, keď sa nájde lacnejší a výhodnejší dodávateľ energií, kľudne nakupujeme ropu a plyn od hocikoho. Ale pokiaľ taký dodávateľ nie je, čo teda nie je, tak vyzývam na rozvahu a chladnú hlavu.

  Peter Liese (PPE). – Herr Präsident! Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, zunächst einmal volle Solidarität für Polen und für Bulgarien. Es war richtig, nicht in Rubel zu bezahlen, und wir müssen diese Länder jetzt unterstützen. Wir dürfen uns von Russland nicht erpressen lassen.

Frau Kommissarin, volle Unterstützung für die Erhöhung des Ziels bei erneuerbaren Energien auf 45 %. Das war ja ein Vorschlag unseres EVP-Berichterstatters. Gut, dass die Kommission jetzt mitgeht, und ich freue mich zu sagen, dass wir auch bereit sind, bei der Energieeffizienz diesen höheren Wert zu unterstützen, wenn bestimmte Bedingungen erreicht sind. Ich glaube, das ist auch wichtig.

Sehr kritisch wird die Versteigerung von zusätzlichen Zertifikaten aus dem Emissionshandel diskutiert. Als Berichterstatter und Koordinator der EVP sage ich: Die Idee kann ich grundsätzlich mitgehen. Kosten gehen runter, Preise gehen runter, Investitionen gehen rauf. Aber es ist nicht gut, das Geld in die Aufbau- und Resilienzfazilität zu stecken. Hier ist das Parlament raus. Die Mitgliedstaaten machen, was sie wollen. Es gibt keine grenzüberschreitenden Projekte. Also da müssen wir noch mal nachbessern. Wie wäre es mit dem Innovationsfonds für wirklich europäische Projekte? Dann können wir mitgehen.

  Patrizia Toia (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, cambiare radicalmente il nostro modello di forniture energetiche, mantenendo al contempo la capacità produttiva e la crescita in Europa è un compito gigantesco, ma ce la possiamo fare se siamo uniti, cioè se nessun paese, come purtroppo oggi accade, fa un gioco ambiguo o frena.

I punti sono chiari e condivisi, signora Commissaria: accelerazione delle rinnovabili e dell’idrogeno, creazione di sistemi locali per sfruttare al massimo le potenzialità, anche energetiche, dell’economia circolare, efficienza e risparmio. Io penso che dobbiamo avere il coraggio di parlare chiaro ai cittadini europei, chiamandoli alla responsabilità e dicendo che devono cambiare i comportamenti che generano sprechi.

Poi il tema dei prezzi: non possiamo aspettare la massima emergenza per affrontarlo. Price cap, acquisti comuni, interventi sulla piattaforma di Amsterdam, il TTF, dove non c’è chiarezza per capire come si formano i prezzi: qualcosa va fatto subito.

La dipendenza ci rende sempre fragili, ma la dipendenza dalla Russia, colpevole di una guerra, ci rende molto più esposti, anche eticamente. Per questo dobbiamo fare tutto il possibile e il più presto possibile.

  Morten Petersen (Renew). – Hr. formand! Putins angreb på Ukraine udfordrer os alle, kræver fælles svar og kræver solidaritet mellem medlemslandene. Og det groteske er, at vi europæere dybest set har sponseret opbygningen af Putins krigsmaskine gennem årtier ved at købe hans gas. Det skal slutte, og det skal slutte nu. Derfor var i går en god dag. Og jeg vil gerne kvittere for de fine forslag, der blev lagt på bordet i går, der alle sammen entydigt peger i den rigtige retning, nemlig at vi gør os fri af Putins gas. Det kan kun gå for langsomt.

Det kræver højere tempo, det kræver mere grøn strøm til havs, og det kræver mere grøn strøm på land og på sol. Og så er vi tilbage ved udgangspunktet, nemlig spørgsmålet om tilladelser. Derfor var det utrolig glædeligt og er glædeligt, at vi nu for alvor kan arbejde på at bringe de tidsfrister ned, der gør, at vi kan producere al den grønne strøm, der gør, at vi kan blive reelt uafhængige. Nu skal der leveres. Det stiller store krav til os alle, også her i huset.

  Marie Toussaint (Verts/ALE). – Monsieur le Président, c’est très simple: des vies sont sacrifiées, perdues, en Ukraine, évidemment, avec une guerre financée par nos achats d’énergie fossile. Il était donc essentiel de rehausser nos objectifs énergétiques et de lancer enfin des actions concrètes. Cela ne fait pas moins de 22 ans que nous dépendons à 40 % du gaz russe et que nous disons que nous allons agir. Il était temps.

Mais évidemment, il y a un mais, et ce mais n’est pas anodin. Car des vies sont aussi sacrifiées en Éthiopie, par exemple, à cause de la sécheresse, en Inde ou au Pakistan, où il fait 51 degrés. À partir de 55 °C, ce n’est plus vivable pour l’être humain.

L’ONU et l’Agence internationale de l’énergie nous disent une chose: il ne faut plus une seule – plus une seule – infrastructure d’énergie fossile. Il ne faut plus en construire. Mais nous savons aussi qu’il ne faut pas se contenter de ne pas développer les énergies fossiles: nous devons aussi laisser 40 % des réserves aujourd’hui exploitées sous les sols.

Alors pour le climat, pour la paix, osons nous affronter aux multinationales du pétrole et du gaz et à leurs superprofits. Osons aller plus vite.

  Harald Vilimsky (ID). – Herr Präsident, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Da heißt es immer, die Europäische Union ist wenig effektiv, die Europäische Union bringt nichts zustande, die Europäische Union scheitert an den großen Dingen. Aber das stimmt gar nicht, denn wenn man sich die Sanktionspolitik der Europäischen Union in diesem aktuellen Konflikt Ukraine-Russland ansieht, dann ist die Europäische Union Meister darin, sich ins eigene Knie zu schießen.

Da wird nicht primär der Aggressor – nämlich Putin – geschädigt, da wird die eigene Bevölkerung in eine entsprechend nachteilige Situation gebracht. Wir reden bereits davon, dass der Liter Treibstoff auf drei Euro, vielleicht vier Euro hinaufklettern kann. Die Gaspreise explodieren entsprechend. Mit der Teuerung für die Energie explodiert die Preissituation für die komplette Warenkette. Sie produzieren Armut, Sie produzieren eine Teuerungswelle. Und das ist mit Sicherheit der falsche Weg, der hier beschritten wird.

Der richtige Weg wäre es, aufzuhören mit diesem Sanktionenwahnsinn und alles zu unternehmen, um die Situation zu deeskalieren, endlich Frieden herbeizuführen und nicht noch mehr Öl ins Feuer zu gießen und die europäische Bevölkerung über Gebühr derart zu belasten.

  Silvia Modig (The Left). – Arvoisa puhemies, komission julkaisemat askelmerkit venäläisestä energiasta irtautumiselle sisältävät monia erittäin kannatettavia keinoja, kuten energiatehokkuuden, energiansäästön ja uusiutuvien lähteiden lisäämisen mutta myös hyvin kyseenalaisia valintoja, kuten päästökaupan heikentämisen ja fossiiliset investoinnit.

Samaan aikaan kun irtaudumme venäläisestä energiasta, meidän on muistettava, että ilmastokriisi ei ole hävinnyt mihinkään. Se on edelleen suurin eksistentiaalinen uhka meille. Siksi meidän on päästävä irti ei pelkästään venäläisestä fossiilisesta energiasta vaan fossiilisesta energiasta riippumatta siitä, missä se on tuotettu.

On äärimmäisen tärkeää, että nyt sodan takia tehtävät ratkaisut eivät ole ristiriidassa ilmastotavoitteidemme kanssa, ja näiden välillä on löydettävissä synergia, jos niin halutaan. Ja kyllä, pakotteet ja muut välttämättömät ratkaisut tulevat tuntumaan ja vaikuttamaan kaikkien meidän eurooppalaisten arkeen, mutta se on se hinta, joka meidän on oltava valmiita maksamaan tukeaksemme ukrainalaisia ja puolustaaksemme vapautta.

Lopulta on kaikkien eurooppalaisten etu, että viemme energiajärjestelmäämme kohti omavaraista uusiutuviin energioihin perustuvaa järjestelmää.

  Jerzy Buzek (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Dziękuję Pani Komisarz za propozycję RepowerEU. Ale mówimy także dzisiaj o Polsce i Bułgarii. Obydwa kraje, powiedzmy sobie szczerze, mogą się dzisiaj czuć bezpiecznie, zupełnie inaczej niż w 2006 i 2009 r. Dlaczego tak jest? Bo mamy wspólny rynek energii, mamy rozporządzenie o bezpieczeństwie dostaw gazu i solidarność energetyczna została podniesiona do rangi mocy prawnej. To jest niezwykle nowa sytuacja.

Również dzisiaj zostało podpisane porozumienie pomiędzy instytucjami dotyczące magazynowania gazu, w ciągu mniej niż dwóch tygodni od chwili, kiedy pokazało się na stole w Parlamencie Europejskim. To jest rekord i jest nowa historyczna okazja, żebyśmy teraz w Unii Europejskiej działali szybko i sprawnie w odpowiedzi na kryzysy. To dotyczyło także COVID-19. Pamiętajmy. A więc uczmy się tego, co jest ważne.

Ważne jest również, żebyśmy w czasie magazynowania gazu – co jest tak istotne dla Unii i dla naszego bezpieczeństwa – nie używali źródeł gazu od dostawców z krajów trzecich, którzy nie są solidni i stosują gaz jako broń energetyczną.

  Иво Христов (S&D). – Уважаеми г-н Председател, войната не трябва да е повод за енергийно самоубийство на Европа. Обявихме отказ от руския газ, а сега търсим механизми как да заобиколим собствените си декларации, за да се впишем в новите схеми за разплащане.

България е сред най-зависимите от руския газ страни, която се отказа от руските доставки, за своя сметка. Към момента ние търпим загуби от това, че се придържаме към европейската стратегия, а може би и от собствената си наивност. Идеологизирането на зелената сделка трябва да отстъпи място на реализма. Безотговорно е да повтаряме мантрата за атома и газа като преходни енергоизточници, докато намаляваме градуса на топлата вода и ограничаваме времето за душа на гражданите.

Енергийната независимост е илюзия. Ние заменяме една зависимост с друга, обричаме икономиките си на скъпи суровини. Нужен ни е мир, трябват усилия за постигане на мир, конкурентни цени, надеждни доставчици и съюзна политика за купуването на газ. Нужна ни е солидарност на дело, а не на думи.

  Claudia Gamon (Renew). – Mr President, Europe’s energy crisis is not the lack of natural gas that we have, but it is our dependence on natural gas. Fossil fuels are not only the drivers of climate change, they are now also instruments of war. And I want to thank the Commission for the REPowerEU plan, because our future, the basis of our liberty and our democracy, depend on its success.

We have to become the continent where the energy future of tomorrow actually happens today and where we leap into that development. We need to have a decentralised, renewables-based system with a strong European grid supported by sustainable storage solutions. We need to have affordable, clean heat in insulated homes all across the European Union. We need a solar carpet covering all unused spaces and a green economy powering the growth of the future.

It is the only future that we have, and I know that we have been working on these developments for many years, but we will need to speed it up. We will have to leap into the energy future of tomorrow today, otherwise our freedom also depends on that.

  Jutta Paulus (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, liebe Kadri! Vielen Dank! Im März hat die Kommission noch überlegt, welchen Autokraten sie denn als nächstes anbettelt, um an fossile Energie zu kommen. Jetzt hat sie umgeschwenkt und es heißt: save, switch, search – Energie einsparen, Umstieg auf Erneuerbare und dann erst schauen, wo wir nach weiteren Fossilen suchen müssen.

Einsparung ist das Wichtigste: Sie mildert unsere Abhängigkeit, sie entlastet unsere Bürgerinnen und Bürger und die Unternehmen, und sie bringt nachhaltigen Klimaschutz. Es ist auch gut, dass das REPower-Paket Zusammenarbeit und Solidarität in den Mittelpunkt stellt.

Es fehlt aber noch immer etwas. Wir warten immer noch auf die Umsetzung der Bürgerenergie-Rechte aus dem Clean-Energy-Paket der letzten Legislaturperiode. Die Kommission muss die Mitgliedstaaten hier endlich fordern und fördern: Tretet ihnen auf die Füße, aber gebt ihnen auch eine Blaupause, wie sie dieses Paket am besten umsetzen, damit jede und jeder in Erneuerbare investieren kann, seine Energie mit den Nachbarn teilen kann und gemeinsam Putin die Stirn bieten kann.

  Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-н Председател, уважаеми колеги, г-жо Комисар, поисках този дебат, защото държа да получа отговор на един много важен въпрос и той е следният. Той е към Комисията и държа да получа еднозначен отговор: да или не. Има ли държави, държавни и частни компании в Европейския съюз, които купуват и плащат руски газ по схемата, която е предложена от Газпром? Това искам да чуя от вас, нищо друго. Да или не? Има или няма? Защото ако има, ще се окаже, че в Европейската комисия, в Съюза и в Парламента за пореден път се вихри огромно лицемерие и двуличие.

Докато тук се говори за санкции и как трябва да се бием с лошите и да се борим с тях, някой се споразумява сепаративно, защото му е по-скъпа неговата икономика и не се интересува от всички останали. Категорично Газпром наруши договора с България, който беше абсолютно законен. Наруши го незаконно с България и с Полша, и спря доставките на вече платено количество. Да, това е зависимост и това е агресия, но тя се решава с общи действия, а не се решава, когато някой сепаративно си купува газ и си плаща в рубли. Това искам да ми отговорите наистина.

А към вас, колеги, последно заключение. Тази криза ни показа следното нещо. Крайно време е да се приключи с утопиите, с идеологизирането на така наречената „зелена сделка“, която вдига цените. Защото тук вие, в тази зала, вдигате цените, когато непрекъснато се натяга за утопични безумни идеи, които да намаляват производството на електроенергия от нормалните източници. И това, което трябва да направим, е да се обърнем към ядрената енергия, към собствените си ресурси, към конвенционалния газ, към шистовия газ, всичко, което имаме, за да има нормална икономика, а не да зависим от враждебни трети страни, от една страна, или от зелени утопии.

  Marc Botenga (The Left). – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, un grand plan européen pour l’énergie, et qui est oublié? Les travailleurs. Encore une fois, pas une mesure forte pour faire baisser les prix – pas une mesure forte! Pas de grand blocage des prix, pas de levée des minimas sur les accises ou la TVA… non, rien. Au contraire, vous dites même que votre politique va faire augmenter encore les prix de l’énergie. Mais ce n’est pas possible, les travailleurs n’en peuvent plus.

Et pourquoi? Parce que vous dites ne plus vouloir financer la guerre russe en Ukraine. OK, mais ça ne vous dérange pas de financer l’occupation israélienne de la Palestine en achetant du gaz israélien ou de financer la guerre saoudienne au Yémen en achetant du pétrole saoudien? Ce n’est pas une politique. Vous sacrifiez les travailleurs pour des objectifs géopolitiques.

En plus, vous sacrifiez le climat. Vous avez décidé de relâcher des millions de tonnes de CO2 dans le cadre du marché de carbone. Cela revient à sacrifier et le social et le climat. Au nom de quoi? Pour quel résultat? Le moment est venu de changer le cours des choses. Il faut vraiment que nous investissions massivement et publiquement dans les renouvelables, sinon nous n’y arriverons pas. Il faut en outre bloquer les prix à leur niveau d’avant la crise.

  Antonio Tajani (PPE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ovviamente ribadiamo la nostra solidarietà al popolo ucraino, vittima di violenze che credevamo appartenessero a un passato buio.

La guerra, la crisi alimentare, l’aumento delle materie prime e l’inflazione stanno mettendo in ginocchio le nostre imprese e le nostre famiglie. Il piano REPowerEU, presentato ieri dalla Commissione, è un primo positivo passo in avanti, ma serve più coraggio. La transizione energetica è una priorità da sostenere anche attraverso il nucleare, come giustamente affermato dalla Commissione. Ma dobbiamo essere realisti: per fare tutto ciò servono centinaia di miliardi. Utilizzare i fondi non spesi dal Next Generation EU potrebbe non essere sufficiente a rispondere alle tante sfide di questi anni. Infatti, il piano non stanzia nessuna nuova risorsa finanziaria.

Crediamo serva anche una nuova emissione comune di titoli di debito per finanziare una politica energetica comune. Bene la piattaforma per gli acquisti comuni, a patto che non resti una cosa vaga e che, come fatto per i vaccini, si arrivi ad avere un vero prezzo unico europeo dell’energia. Per questo è indispensabile un tetto europeo al prezzo del gas.

Insomma, possiamo fare di più, ma stiamo andando nella giusta direzione.

  Jens Geier (S&D). – Herr Präsident! Frau Kommissarin Simson, herzlichen Dank für den Vorschlag, der gemacht worden ist. Ich begrüße das sehr. Es ist hohe Zeit, dass wir anfangen, die nicht erledigten Hausaufgaben in der Europäischen Union zu erledigen.

Die eine nicht gemachte Aufgabe ist eine mangelnde Diversifizierung der Energieversorgung. Glauben Sie mir, als Deutscher weiß ich, wovon ich rede. Das Zweite ist, Maßnahmen gegen die Preisentwicklung einzuleiten. Hier müssen wir dringend tätig werden, um die Unterstützung der Bevölkerung für den politischen Kurs der EU sowohl beim Green Deal als auch in der Politik der Sanktionen gegen Russland nicht zu verlieren.

Eine andere Hausaufgabe, die gemacht werden muss, ist, dringend auf die fehlende kritische Infrastruktur hinzuweisen und hier auch – und das wäre eine zusätzliche Bitte an die Kommission – zu einer Prioritätenliste zu kommen, welche kritische Infrastruktur jetzt dringend angefasst werden muss, damit wir uns gegenseitig unterstützen können.

Das beste Beispiel dafür bleibt nach wie vor der Interkonnektor zwischen Frankreich und Spanien. Aber sie müssen dann auch wasserstofftransportfähig sein, also H2-ready. Sonst sind das falsche Investitionen.

Ich glaube, das ist die Nagelprobe auf die europäische Solidarität. Wir dürfen uns nicht spalten lassen, denn dann gewinnt Russland. Wir müssen in der Lage sein, uns gegenseitig zu helfen, und das effektiv.

  Nils Torvalds (Renew). – Mr President, a quick glance at a map of central Europe 150 years ago shows that the area was totally dominated by four empires: the Habsburg, the German, the Ottoman and the Russian. On the map, you don’t see the Polish, the Czechs, the Estonians, the Slovaks, the Hungarians, the Latvians, the Romanians, the Bulgarians, the Lithuanians, the Croatians, the Serbs, the Bosniaks, the Austrians, you don’t see the Jews, you don’t see the Roma, and you don’t even see the Finns. Then change started to happen, and we thought that the era of suppressing empires with their spheres of interest would be over.

But when we look at the new map from 1848, for instance, you see something very peculiar. The three empires have vanished, but one is bigger and more influential than ever before. The Russian Empire was still there, although another name, and it’s still there trying to enlarge their spheres of influence by energy resources and by the army.

But we earlier oppressed peoples of Europe have one message: the era of empires is over. In the same manner, the era of fossil empires is over, and the politically fossilised empires are over. And we are going to do our part by decarbonising our enemy and economy, and by joining NATO.

  Grzegorz Tobiszowski (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Pani Komisarz! Szanowni Państwo! Najważniejsza w każdym działaniu jest właściwa ocena sytuacji i diagnoza. To stanowi fundament każdego działania, każdego wynalazku. Dzisiaj rozmawiamy o kryzysie energetycznym w kontekście agresji Rosji na Ukrainę. Ale, proszę Państwa, kryzys rozpoczął się przed agresją i musimy zdiagnozować, co było powodem, że pandemia spowodowała, iż obecna polityka, ta wygłaszana nawet dzisiaj z tej mównicy, ma być intensyfikowana. W pandemii doznaliśmy kryzysu, a agresja rosyjska go spotęgowała. I jeśli mamy wziąć odpowiedzialność za przyszłe pokolenia, za tych ludzi, którzy dzisiaj są młodzi, to musimy mocniej zdiagnozować, jaki jest powód. Bo jeśli tylko mówimy, żeby zwiększyć odnawialne źródła, to dlaczego tego nie rozumiemy, jeśli jest to takie proste? Bowiem problem jest głębszy, problem jest istotniejszy.

Chcemy mieć samochody elektryczne – i to jest słuszny postulat – ale przecież w dziewięćdziesięciu kilku procentach sprowadzamy surowce do tych samochodów, do ich akumulatorów. Myślę, że powinniśmy zadać sobie pytanie: jaki pakiet klimatyczny ze wszystkimi aktami prawnymi jest tak dobry dla Europy i buduje naszą przyszłość energetyczną, lecz dlaczego nie buduje on dzisiaj bezpieczeństwa energetycznego nam oraz młodym i obecnym pokoleniom? Należy lepiej to zdiagnozować i podjąć decyzję, aby to kraje mogły zaproponować, jaki mają potencjał i na czym chcą budować najpierw bezpieczeństwo energetyczne, by dokonać w czasie bypassu, by opracowywać nowe technologie i siłę w odnawialne źródła energii.

  Sandra Pereira (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, a política de sanções da União Europeia sacrifica os interesses dos países e povos da Europa e contribui para a escalada de confrontação, dificultando o caminho para a paz.

O caso do gás é paradigmático. Aos pacotes de sanções adotados sucede o ainda mais acentuado aumento especulativo do preço do gás, que já vinha subindo em meses anteriores, e o povo a pagar.

Estabelecem-se metas de armazenamento de gás para os Estados-Membros cumprirem, mas, como os grupos económicos não querem fazer esses investimentos, serão os Estados e o povo a pagar. Substituem-se umas dependências por outras, mais longínquas e ambientalmente mais nocivas, mais caras, e o povo a pagar.

Está mais que visto que é necessária a intervenção dos Estados e o estabelecimento de tetos máximos, mas é insuficiente. É necessário ir mais longe. A prospeção, o aprovisionamento, a produção, o transporte e a comercialização das diferentes formas de energia devem estar na esfera pública, sob escrutínio público e democrático. É a única maneira de não ser o povo a pagar a guerra, as sanções e os lucros e os aproveitamentos das multinacionais do setor.

  Łukasz Kohut (S&D). – Panie Przewodniczący! Pokonaliśmy w Unii Europejskiej już wiele nacjonalizmów. Nie wszystkie, ale wiele. Jednym z tych, z którymi wciąż mamy do czynienia i które musimy pokonać, jest nacjonalizm energetyczny. Wspólna odpowiedzialność za unijnych obywateli i za ich bezpieczeństwo energetyczne jest równie ważna jak wspólny rynek.

Unia energetyczna musi w końcu stać się faktem. I dzieje się na naszych oczach – wspólne zakupy gazu i paliw, wspieranie się państw i koniec z projektami typu Nord Stream 2. To jest najlepszy moment. Moment, w którym słowo solidarność przestaje być tylko słowem.

Ogromna większość państw członkowskich patrzyła na kwestie bezpieczeństwa energetycznego przez pryzmat swoich granic, swoich interesów gospodarczych i finansowych. Ale ta wojna wywróciła ten stolik. Kierunek, w którym zmierzamy – zielona transformacja – to jedyny słuszny kierunek. Potrzebujemy więcej fotowoltaiki, pomp ciepła i rozwijania technologii wodorowej. Unia energetyczna, dywersyfikacja i solidarność energetyczna to kamienie milowe silniejszej, bezpieczniejszej i bardziej zintegrowanej Europy.

Mam nadzieję, że zrozumie to także Jarosław Kaczyński i jego najlepszy przyjaciel Viktor Orban.

  Klemen Grošelj (Renew). – Gospod predsednik, odvisnost od ruskih energentov nas je naučila predvsem, da potrebujemo enoten in dobro delujoč evropski trg energentov, ki ni odvisen od enega samega ponudnika.

Zato kot je predvideno v REPowerEU, potrebujemo ukrepe, s katerimi bomo diverzificirali naše energetske vire. Nikakor ne smemo ene odvisnosti nadomestiti z novimi odvisnostmi, tudi če to pomeni, da se moramo vsaj začasno bolj opreti na lastne evropske vire in v nekaterih primerih, predvsem v interkonekcijah, vlagati v obstoječo infrastrukturo.

Drug ukrep pa je pospešitev prehoda na obnovljive vire, ki so edini dolgoročni ukrep energetske samozadostnosti Evropske unije. To pomeni pospešitev vlaganj v nove obnovljive vire, vlaganje v energetsko učinkovitost, predvsem pa oblikovanje, in to je tudi naša naloga, kolegice in kolegi, zakonodajno-normativnega okvira, ki bo EU omogočil, da postane ogljično nevtralna in energetsko neodvisna.

Tretji nabor ukrepov pa je nujnost sistemskih rešitev za soočenje z energetsko revščino, kjer moramo zaščititi naše ljudi pred cenovnimi šoki.

  Carmen Avram (S&D). – Domnule președinte, la atacuri violente, răspuns cu strategii pe măsură. REPowerEU este modalitatea prin care Europa face pasul decisiv spre independența energetică, dar și riposta imediată la șantajul regimului criminal al lui Putin, care a închis robinetul de gaz pentru două state membre.

Salut, deci, planul Comisiei și instrumentul care va realimenta Uniunea. Permisiunea acordată statelor membre de a-și adapta în noua lume PNRR-ul depășit de realitate. Cu toții vom câștiga. Țara mea, de exemplu, are acum șansa reală de a umple lipsurile din actualul plan de redresare și de a porni investițiile de care are mare nevoie: în offshore, în infrastructura de distribuție și în sursele de energie verde.

Cu resursele ei, România va contribui în mod real la stabilitatea europeană, devenind unul dintre principalii furnizori de energie ai Uniunii. Independența energetică va trebui, însă, atinsă cât mai repede cu ce avem acum la dispoziție și cu bani noi, pentru ca temerile europenilor să dispară, sărăcia energetică să rămână doar o sintagmă a trecutului și nimeni să nu mai încerce vreodată să șantajeze Europa.

  Herbert Dorfmann (PPE). – (Beginn des Redebeitrags bei ausgeschaltetem Mikrofon.) … Weniger Energie aus Russland, mehr Produktion in der Europäischen Union. Über das Ziel sind wir uns wahrscheinlich fast alle einig. Wenn ich mir aber den Vorschlag REPowerEU anschaue, dann bleiben bei mir doch Fragen offen: 7,5 Milliarden Euro sollen aus der zweiten Säule der Gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik abgezweigt werden, um neue Biogasanlagen zu bauen. Ich frage mich: Wo kommen die Rohstoffe dafür her? Ist es angebracht, in einer Zeit, wo wir schmerzhaft Engpässe am Lebensmittelmarkt erleben, Anreize zu schaffen, damit Lebensmittel in Biogasanlagen vergast werden? Wenn, dann braucht es ein klares Kaskadenprinzip, Lebensmittel für den Tisch und für den Trog und Abfälle und Gülle für die Biogasanlage.

Warum aber will man das Geld der Gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik entziehen? Wir können diese Investitionen genau gleich im Rahmen der zweiten Säule der Gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik finanzieren. Dann profitieren nämlich bäuerliche Betriebe davon, und diese bäuerlichen Betriebe haben dann ein Zusatzeinkommen.

Wenn wir dieses Geld in REPowerEU stecken, dann ist klar, dass nicht unsere Bauernhöfe davon profitieren werden, sondern die großen Energieversorger. Dann nehmen wir den Bäuerinnen und Bauern das Geld weg, und für große Betriebe wie ENGIE, E.ON, Enel werden dann Anreize geschaffen, damit die in Geschäftszweige investieren, welche bisher in bäuerlicher Hand waren. Das möchte ich nicht unbedingt unterstützen.

  Nicolás González Casares (S&D). – Señor presidente, comisaria Simson, gracias por los esfuerzos que están realizando ante la situación energética y por el paquete presentado: esto va de solidaridad, y debemos ser solidarios, por ejemplo con Bulgaria y Polonia, y creo que ahí debemos avanzar.

Nuestra dependencia energética está siendo utilizada como arma de guerra, y Rusia no puede volver a ser un proveedor fiable de la Unión Europea. La transición energética debe ser acelerada, y REPowerEU es una solución para ello: promoviendo la energía descarbonizada, aumentando las renovables, aumentando la eficiencia energética… Y, además, han escuchado a los Estados miembros, viendo como hay varias propuestas, como la utilización de los beneficios imprevistos, los mecanismos de compra conjunta de gas, las propuestas de hidrógeno o el acuerdo de esta misma madrugada para aumentar las reservas de gas para el próximo invierno.

Por tanto, REPowerEU va en la buena dirección, representa un impulso, pero estas medidas, recordemos, no deben aumentar las emisiones, deben ser compatibles con el Pacto Verde Europeo, y también estaremos vigilantes en estos aspectos. Nuestro objetivo es la neutralidad climática y reducir emisiones: el cambio climático está ahí y hoy mismo hay una ola de calor en todo el sur de Europa, y debemos ser conscientes de ello.

  Andrey Novakov (PPE). – Mr President, Madam Commissioner, I do support and warmly welcome the efforts of the European Commission to find a way to stop our dependence on Russian gas and oil. I do support the efforts of the Commission to find different ways to supply those crucial energy resources to our continent.

However, welcoming the REPowerEU initiative, I would like to express my concerns and saying that requiring additional EUR 30 billion coming from the cohesion policy and about 8 billion coming from agriculture policy, it puts to a danger the development of those policies who already funded a lot of initiatives. Let me just briefly go through all of them: CARE, CARE+, CRII 1, CRII 2, REACT-EU and now REPowerEU. In the cohesion policy, we already have 100 billion who are at disposal for decarbonisation, transition and different ways to find resources to our own continent. Let’s use them and not create another one.

And as a conclusion I would like to say yes, we have to find a way to import energy resources to our continent, but we should develop our own and use the existing one as well.

  Robert Hajšel (S&D). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, mnohé navrhované opatrenia, pani komisárka, možno len privítať, pretože umožňujú naozaj úsporu energií hlavne cez výraznejšie zvyšovanie energetickej účinnosti, ale aj výraznejšie zavádzanie obnoviteľných zdrojov.

Mám ale niekoľko poznámok. Po prvé, musíme byť naozaj úprimní k našim občanom, ak chceme urýchlene znižovať energetickú závislosť od Ruska, bude to stáť veľa peňazí, ktoré z veľkej časti zaplatia občania, a to už napríklad vyššími účtami za energie alebo aj pri stojanoch na čerpacích staniciach. A takisto my musíme dokonca investovať aj do infraštruktúry na dovoz alternatívnych fosílnych palív. To je to, čo normálne by sme nechceli robiť, máme Green Deal. Obnoviteľné zdroje nám totiž neumožnia hneď nájsť alternatívy k rope a k plynu z Ruska. Musíme mať na pamäti tiež, že tie krajiny, ktoré by mohli byť alternatívnymi dopravcami pre naše potreby, tak nie sú zďaleka ani demokracie, ale sú to skôr režimy a tak isto majú skôr záujem o dlhodobé kontrakty a nie krátkodobé kontrakty. Nehovorme tiež o 300 miliardách, pretože to navádza ľudí, že sú to nejaké nové peniaze, ale ide iba o presuny už existujúcich peňazí z existujúcich fondov. A pre vnútrozemské krajiny, ako je napríklad Slovensko alebo Maďarsko, ktoré sú na konci všetkých alternatívnych plynových ciest, je veľmi dôležité zabezpečiť investície do LNG terminálov, ako aj do prepájačov, interkonektorov, a zdá sa mi, že navrhovaných 10 miliárd nebude stačiť.

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Caro Comissário, a independência energética é um objetivo essencial da União Europeia. É inaceitável estarmos a comprar a energia à Rússia por mil milhões de euros por dia. Na prática, estamos a financiar a compra de armas para o Sr. Putin. Mas este objetivo não é novo. Há muito tempo que falamos de interconexões e, por exemplo, das interconexões para a energia entre Portugal, Espanha e França.

A Comissão deveria ter incluído no Quadro Financeiro Plurianual este REPowerEU. Não o tendo feito, deve incluí-lo agora numa revisão que é urgente, assim como é urgente, para estarmos à altura dos anseios dos cidadãos, termos novas receitas para o orçamento da União, novos recursos próprios.

Não podemos estar a financiar o REPowerEU, cortando montantes de regiões mais pobres, cortando montantes do desenvolvimento rural.

Esta iniciativa é bem-vinda, mas o financiamento não pode ser à custa dos mais pobres.

  Angelika Niebler (PPE). – Herr Präsident! Frau Kommissarin! Verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Verminderung unserer Exportabhängigkeit von Russland ist das Gebot der Stunde. Insofern begrüße ich auch den Vorschlag, den die Kommission jetzt im Rahmen von REPowerEU vorgelegt hat.

Erfreulich ist in diesem Vorschlag, dass es gute Ideen zur Finanzierung der ambitionierten Pläne gibt. So sollen Synergien und Flexibilität zwischen den bereits existierenden EU-Fördertöpfen und dem EU-Aufbaufonds genutzt werden. Ich denke, das ist richtig, dass wir hier vorhandene Mittel ausnutzen, die nicht abgerufen sind, und nicht neue Schulden für die Projekte aufnehmen.

Priorität für uns muss sein, Bezahlbarkeit und Versorgungssicherheit zu gewährleisten. Unsere Bürgerinnen und Bürger müssen ihre Energierechnungen weiterhin bezahlen können. Nur dann hat der beschleunigte Wandel die Chance, auch breit akzeptiert zu werden. Kleinen und mittelständischen Betrieben dürfen wir durch bürokratische Auflagen nicht die Luft zum Atmen nehmen.

Ich sage auch deutlich: Wir müssen hinschauen, warum der beschleunigte Wandel zu langsam vonstattengeht, zum Beispiel bei Fotovoltaikanlagen. Da ist nicht das Problem, dass es kein Geld gibt, sondern es fehlt an Material, und es fehlt an Fachkräften, die die Fotovoltaikanlagen aufbauen. Also bei den weiteren Beratungen zu „Fit für 55“ und zu REPowerEU bitte auch die gegebenen Realitäten berücksichtigen!

Catch-the-eye procedure

  Радан Кънев (PPE). – Г-н Председател, г-жо Комисар, колеги, боя се, че трябва да започна с това, че беше грешно решение да свържем дебата за „Repower EU“ с дебата за спирането на газа за България и Полша.

„Repower EU“ е смела и добра инициатива, но тя е средносрочна, тя не дава непосредствени решения. Обратно, спирането на газа за България и Полша е агресивна, груба мярка от страна на режима в Кремъл, която изисква незабавна и то политическа реакция, защото става дума за политическа мярка. Правителствата на България и на Полша се справиха с непосредствената криза отлично. Справиха се в голяма степен с подкрепата на съседни държави в рамките на европейската солидарност.

Политическа реакция на ниво Европейска комисия, отвъд думи, обаче нямаше. И днес трябваше да проведем дебат основно по тази тема, тъй като заплашена вече е Финландия, заплашени са Чехия, Словакия и други европейски държави.

  Margarida Marques (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, reconheço o esforço da Comissão Europeia em apresentar este REPowerEU. É necessário e é o momento. Mas o REPowerEU vem revolucionar, é a expressão apropriada, vários instrumentos europeus chave, em particular o Quadro Financeiro Plurianual 2021-2027 e o Mecanismo de Recuperação e Resiliência.

É por isso que exigimos da Comissão Europeia as propostas necessárias, claras e transparentes, que salvaguardem as políticas europeias, as prioridades e os objetivos definidos. Desde logo, a revisão do QFP 2021-2027. E queremos um debate aprofundado do REPowerEU neste Parlamento.

Podemos ajustar prioridades europeias. Não podemos secundarizar objetivos políticos bem definidos. E uma coisa é certa, em circunstâncias nenhumas aceitaremos a desvalorização do papel do Parlamento Europeu, designadamente como autoridade orçamental.

  Γεώργιος Κύρτσος (Renew). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κατά την άποψή μου η Επιτροπή προσπαθεί —και συγχαρητήρια στην Επίτροπο. Και στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο νομίζω ότι προσπαθούμε σχεδόν όλοι μαζί. Όμως, το κλειδί είναι η ενεργειακή πολιτική των κυβερνήσεων. Πάρτε το παράδειγμα της ελληνικής κυβέρνησης: τον Μάρτιο μετά τη ρωσική εισβολή στην Ουκρανία, αύξησε την αξία των εισαγωγών από τη Ρωσία κατά 69% σε 532 εκατομμύρια ευρώ. Πρόκειται κυρίως για εισαγωγές φυσικού αερίου. Το κωμικοτραγικό είναι ότι στην Ελλάδα δεν έχουμε σοβαρές εξαγωγές στη Ρωσία. Ήταν μόλις 15,9 εκατομμύρια ευρώ τον Μάρτιο του 2021 και έπεσαν στα 5,4 εκατομμύρια ευρώ τον Μάρτιο του 2022. Δεν υπάρχει, δηλαδή, διμερές εμπόριο, απλά ενεργειακή εξάρτηση της Ελλάδας από τη Ρωσία, για την οποία η ελληνική κυβέρνηση δεν κάνει αυτά που πρέπει. Έτσι δεν μπορούμε να προχωρήσουμε. Οι θεσμοί δείχνουν μεν το δρόμο μπροστά, αλλά πολλές κυβερνήσεις, δυστυχώς, δεν ακολουθούν.

  Bronis Ropė (Verts/ALE). – Gerbiamas pirmininke, komisare, kolegos. Kada V. Putinas nutrauks tiekimą kitoms Europos Sąjungos šalims? Manau, kad tai tik laiko klausimas. Ir jis tai padarys tada, kai jam bus sunkiausia. Todėl turime solidarizuotis ir veikti kartu, pavyzdžiui, peržiūrint programas, keičiant finansavimą – tiek sanglaudos, tiek bendros žemės ūkio politikos. Turime atsižvelgti į valstybių išsivystymo lygį. Turime atsižvelgti į tiesioginių išmokų dydį, kad nebūtų taip, kad vienos šalys mažai nukentės, o kitos labai daug nukentės. Ir ar mes galime gyventi be energijos? Žinoma, ne. Bet ar galime jos naudoti mažiau? Taip. Ar galime ją pasigaminti patys, nepriklausomai? Žinoma, taip. Ir tos šalys, kurios jau turėjo problemų su Rusija, jos padarė didelį įdirbį. Kviečiame visus greičiau veikti.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)

  Kadri Simson, Member of the Commission. – Mr President. Dear Members of Parliament, thank you for all your questions and remarks. Based on your remarks, it is clear that we all agree on the same goal: eliminating our dependence on Russian energy. There are just certain differences in the vision of how we should get there. Some of you point to the need to strengthen energy infrastructure. Others argue that we need even higher targets for renewables and energy savings. And I heard also calls to increase the share of prosumers.

I think we need to work on all these elements. This is what the RePowerEU is about: a comprehensive document addressing practically all of the points mentioned today.

Some of you mentioned that renewables are not the solution for the near future. And I want to, however, underline that this is not necessarily true for solar energy. The technology can be rolled out rapidly and it’s affordable. The costs have decreased by 82% over the last decade, and solar energy is now one of the cheapest energy sources in the EU. With our solar strategy, we are giving a new boost to the industry and sending the right signal to investors. We are triggering quick and massive PV deployment by the European solar rooftop initiative, making solar panels mandatory on roofs, at first in public and commercial buildings, and then in newly built residential homes.

In terms of our preparedness for this winter, the Commission is working on the risk preparedness plans. Of course, in this context, unity and strong partnerships will go a long way. Therefore, the Commission is working very closely with Member States to ensure that concluding bilateral solidarity agreements will be a priority.

Importantly, RePowerEU also proposes to develop a voluntary operational joint purchasing mechanism responsible for negotiating and contracting on behalf of participating Member States. So I heard that many of you are concerned about the impact on our consumers, and these joint purchase activities can deliver more predictable prices for our consumers and industry.

Coming back to Poland and Bulgaria, the recent cut-off of Russian gas supplies to those countries exemplifies the importance of the work done over the years to strengthen the resilience of our infrastructure and properly interconnect the European market. Thanks to EU solidarity and the work we have done over the years on the gas infrastructure, both countries are not impacted by Russia’s reckless behaviour.

So now we will focus on our preparedness for this heating season, but also in the longer run. And the key words are renewables, energy saving and diversification of our supply routes.

(The sitting was suspended at 11.55)

VORSITZ: OTHMAR KARAS
Vizepräsident

  Der Präsident. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Abstimmung.

(Abstimmungsergebnisse und sonstige Einzelheiten der Abstimmung: siehe Protokoll.)

– Vor der Abstimmung:

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Chair of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. – Mr President, just shortly, as I had the honour to state yesterday, the LIBE Committee supports both the substance and the urgent procedure as to this amending regulation of Eurojust. So the LIBE coordinators have mandated me to present shortly the LIBE position as follows:

First, we have to stick to the minimum amendments possible to improve the draft proposal. Second, we have included the considerations that were delivered by the European Data Protection Supervisor’s opinion. We have been in informal talks both with the Council and the Commission. So we have learned that just yesterday Coreper agreed to the position that was handed by the LIBE Committee, which means that if we vote positively on this amending regulation of Eurojust, that will be the first reading – end of it, because the Council has agreed to this position.

That will be the final track to make it enter into force. It will be an answer, a swift answer of our determination both to help Ukraine and fight against the impunity of all war crimes.

  Der Präsident. – Damit ist die Abstimmungsstunde geschlossen.

  Der Präsident. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgen die Erklärungen zur Abstimmung.

Mündliche Stimmerklärungen

  Vlad Gheorghe (Renew). – Domnule președinte, dacă nici după o pandemie și un război la granițele noastre nu înțelegem că trebuie să fim pregătiți pentru o reacție rapidă și unitară, ce credibilitate mai putem avea în fața cetățenilor europeni?

Voluntarii, societatea civilă au dus greul în ambele crize și s-au mobilizat exemplar. În România, în timpul pandemiei, au donat echipamente medicale, au dus cafea și mâncare cadrelor medicale epuizate, au dus cumpărături esențiale la ușa celor vulnerabili. La fel s-a întâmplat peste tot în Europa.

Acum românii și toți europenii și-au deschis inimile și casele pentru ucrainenii fugiți de bombele lui Putin. Am votat pentru. Este datoria noastră să pregătim instituțiile, finanțările, procedurile europene să fie măcar la fel de eficiente ca eforturile cetățenilor noștri.

Am votat pentru ca vinovații din acest război să plătească pentru reconstrucția Ucrainei din bunurile înghețate ale oligarhilor ruși. Regimul lui Putin trebuie să suporte povara socială și economică a războiului declanșat de Rusia, nu cetățenii europeni.

Mündliche Stimmerklärungen

  Александър Александров Йорданов (PPE). – Г-н Председател, гласувах против доклада за Македония, защото е пълен с противоречащи си тези и твърдения. Твърди се, например, че Северна Македония е постигнала последователен напредък, а същевременно се припомня необходимостта от отваряне на архивите на югославските тайни служби и да се разгледат комунистическите престъпления.

Но нима 30 години бяха малко за тази държава, за да може това да се случи? Защо още не са променени в Македония учебниците по история? Най-голямото престъпление е самата доктрина на македонизма, която е доктрина на антибългаризъм в постоянно действие. Това е война срещу българската идентичност, история, култура и ярки исторически личности. В доклада тази доктрина не бе осъдена и тя обижда 8-милионния български народ, обижда и македонските българи. Северна Македония трябва да изпълнява договора с България, но тя не го прави. Затова гласувах против.

  Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-н Председател, уважаеми колеги, категорично гласувах против този доклад заради провокативното изменение, което мина, предложено от Зелените със следния текст: насърчава Северна Македония и България да разрешат своя културно-исторически спор, отделно от процеса на присъединяване, и незабавно да позволят организирането на първата междуправителствена конференция, тъй като Северна Македония е изпълнила всички официални критерии.

Това категорично не е вярно. Нито е изпълнила всички официални критерии, нито спорът е двустранен. Тук става дума най-малкото и за човешки права и всеки в тази зала, който гласува против човешките права, би трябвало да се засрами. Имате десетки, стотици документирани, доказани случаи на нарушаване на човешките права на македонски граждани с българско национално самосъзнание. И вие всички го знаете това нещо. Няма как да започне незабавно преговори държава, която нарушава копенхагенските критерии. Това беше единственият смислен критерий, който може да бъде наречен „европейска ценност“. И той казва, че когато една държава иска да се присъедини, трябва да спазва човешките права. А това в Северна Македония не става.

Да, вярно е, македонизмът е измислен в Кремъл от комунистическия интернационал и той беше налаган от тоталитарната комунистическа власт с терор върху македонските българи. И това, което се случва тук, е позор.

  Андрей Слабаков  (ECR). – Г-н Председател, извинявайте, че закъснях около една минута и половина. Аз гласувах категорично против. Тук колегите казаха много неща. А едно от най-странните неща обаче в Македония, която не е изпълнила абсолютно никакви критерии, не знам кой го разказва това нещо, е, че там има 150 хиляди души с български паспорти, които са доказани етнически българи. При последното преброяване според македонските фалшификации там има 3 хиляди. Вие вярвате ли, че от 150 000 само 3000 души са казали, че са българи?

Там проблемите са изключително големи. Аз съм в комисията по петиции и мога да ви кажа, че влезе наново една петиция преди две-три седмици от българи, които са дискриминирани. Това върви към геноцид, според мен. Там никой вече не смее да признае, че е българин, защото няма да има работа и ще бъде тормозен от властта.

Тази държава не може да влезе в Европейския съюз, преди наистина да изпълни договора за приятелство с България, който сме подписали много отдавна. Аз нямам намерение да си подаря историята на друга държава.

Mündliche Stimmerklärungen

  Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-н Председател, подкрепих доклада за Албания, тъй като държавата е изпълнила критериите, за разлика от Република Северна Македония. И няма никаква пречка тази държава да започне преговори за присъединяване към Европейския съюз.

Примерно, Албания може и трябва да бъде пример, който да се гледа на целите Западни Балкани. В тази държава се спазват и се зачитат правата на всички етнически групи и на всички общности, различни от албанското население. По тази причина и след дълбоките реформи, които Албания направи, няма никаква причина тя да бъде спирана. И тя може и би трябвало да започне преговорите за членство в Европейския съюз. Буквално на първата следваща среща, когато се съберат министрите на външните работи на Съвета по общи въпроси, може да бъде дадено и трябва да бъде дадено съгласие за това Албания да започне преговори за членство в Европейския съюз. Тя е пример и модел.

Преди малко говорихме за Македония. Могат да видят как в Албания правителството призна и закрепи правата на българското малцинство. И те съжителстват прекрасно, във взаимно уважение. И това е добрият пример.

  Андрей Слабаков  (ECR). – Г-н Председател, аз съм в делегацията за преговорите с Албания и мога да ви кажа, че Албания е изпълнила абсолютно всичко. За разлика от Македония, за която стана дума. Колегата Джамбазки вече каза, че признаха и българското малцинство. Там няма абсолютно никакви проблеми.

Едно не разбирам. Защо двете държави трябва да бъдат обвързани? Защо държава, която още преди две години на практика беше изпълнила всичко, сега ще чака Македония в следващите 20 години да се разправяме с нея, докато тя изпълни нещо? Мога да ви кажа, че Македония няма да изпълни нищо.

От Комисията се появи един господин, който каза, че в процеса на преговорите тези проблеми щели да се решат. Мога да ви кажа, че няма да се решат. Ако ние не вземем наистина твърдо решение и не направим нещо нормално, за да може нещо да се случи в Македония, за да може тя да стане част от Европейския съюз. Извинявайте, ама вместо пълноправен член, ще получим един тумор. Ето това ще получим ние, вкарвайки Македония.

Mündliche Stimmerklärungen

  Clare Daly (The Left). – Mr President, I was a shop steward and a trade unionist all my working life. I stand against the repression of trade unionists everywhere. And this resolution could have done that in relation to Belarus, where the scale and nature of the arrests of trade union leaders is clearly a violation of the right to organise, and something which I utterly condemn.

But yet again, what we have is an urgent social issue being contorted beyond recognition for geopolitical point scoring. We’ve a motion welcoming further sanctions on Belarus, which, contrary to the statements of solidarity, is going to inflict further economic hardship on Belarusian citizens. It talks about Belarus having to maintain its neutrality, while at the same time ordering direct support to the Belarussian opposition, not to mind forcing other countries who are neutral to abandon that and join NATO.

Could we ever have a day in here – just one, maybe – when this Parliament didn’t instrumentalise human rights? It’s an absolute joke, which is why I abstained.

  Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Domnule președinte, Belarusul, din păcate, este un alt stat capturat astăzi și condus de către un tiran care răspunde doar la ordinele lui Putin. Vedem cum s-a aliniat în situația aceasta legată de război și susține atrocitățile Rusiei în Ucraina.

Și mai grav este că continuă represaliile împotriva propriilor cetățeni, încălcând flagrant drepturile omului, iar instituționalizarea terorii în Belarus reprezintă un semnal de alarmă pentru că pedeapsa cu moartea împotriva oricui, oricărui opozant politic este o chestiune extrem de gravă și aici trebuie să acționăm cu mult mai multă fermitate pentru a opri această încercare de a pune în paranteze complet acest stat și a-i tortura pe oameni doar pentru că au o altă opinie decât acest tiran numit Lukașenko.

Mündliche Stimmerklärungen

  Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Domnule președinte, de prea mult timp, sute de companii multinaționale care își desfășoară activitatea în lume și în Uniunea Europeană au continuat să își evite obligațiile fiscale, prin diverse artificii legale și prin mutarea profiturilor realizate pe seama cetățenilor europeni în paradisuri fiscale.

Toate acestea, în timp ce IMM-urile, motorul economiei europene, sunt sufocate de taxe, de pandemie, de inflație și se luptă pentru supraviețuire. Avem totuși, pentru prima dată în istorie, un acord global care să nu mai permită evitarea impozitării și care să introducă pentru marile companii o cotă minimă de impozitare de 15 %.

Peste 130 de țări, reprezentând mai bine de 90 % din economia globală, sunt parte a acestui acord, iar Uniunea Europeană trebuie să asigure o implementare corectă și cât mai rapidă a acestuia.

Tocmai de aceea am votat „pentru” și cred că Parlamentul European trebuie să susțină această propunere a Comisiei cu privire la acest acord. Europa trebuie să rămână o piață atractivă pentru multinaționale, însă doar cu condiția ca acestea să respecte regulile care sunt făcute pentru toți.

Mündliche Stimmerklärungen

  Mick Wallace (The Left). – Mr President, war is a crime and wars create war crimes. The Parliament rightly condemns war crimes in Ukraine, but does very little to stop the war. The Parliament condemns the illegal invasion and occupation of Ukraine by Russia, but says nothing about the illegal occupation of Palestine by the Israelis or the illegal occupation of Syria by Israel, the US and Turkey. The Parliament condemns the indiscriminate shelling of Ukrainian towns and cities, and rightly so, but does not want to talk about the 400 000 that have been killed in Yemen by the targeted destruction of food, water and health infrastructure by US and EU—made bombs – bombs that are dropping as we speak.

While we are investigating Russian war crimes in Ukraine, can we also investigate French war crimes in Mali, Saudi, the UAE and French, US, UK war crimes in Yemen, Israeli war crimes in Palestine, US war crimes in Iraq and Syria and NATO war crimes in Afghanistan and Libya. International law selectively applied makes a mockery of international law.

  Vlad Gheorghe (Renew). – Domnule președinte, am fost la Bucea și la Irpin, am văzut iadul făcut de trupele lui Putin. Am simțit mirosul morții, am văzut cu ochii mei gropile comune, am mers prin orașe cu adevărat rase de pe fața pământului. Am fost în vămile cu România și cu Republica Moldova. Am văzut mame cu copii care au fugit pe jos din calea bombelor. Am văzut orfani, vârstnici, persoane cu dizabilități, care nu mai au la cine sau la ce să se întoarcă. Familiile lor au fost ucise, casele au fost distruse.

De aproape trei luni pe grupul pe care l-am creat în România, „Uniți pentru Ucraina”, voluntarii ajută neobosiți oameni care nu doar au văzut iadul, ci l-au și trăit.

Am votat „pentru” fără să clipesc. Nu doar istoria, ci chiar copiii noștri ne vor judeca dacă permitem ca aceste crime împotriva umanității și cei care le-au comis să scape nepedepsiți. Criminalii trebuie să plătească sub toate formele existente pe acest pământ.

Mündliche Stimmerklärungen

  Clare Daly (The Left). – Mr President, for me, the aim of this resolution really is to put in place measures to offset the costs of continuing the war when in actual fact what we should be doing is working to end it. This lunacy is anchored in the knowledge that sanctions are hurting the people of the European Union and not, I would say, enhancing European security, but rather actually undermining it.

I see now in every meeting and every committee, people in here slobbering over vast sums of money being ring—fenced for increased militarisation and securitisation, when these were the policies that contributed to the start of the war in the first place. These are resources, which could be dealt with to help the problems of ordinary people: health, housing, good public services and so on. But they’re not, and it’s ordinary people who are continuing to pay the price of this war.

The measures that we’ve put in place today – while there’s some nice sounding words about environmental conditionality, rule of law conditionality, helping the ordinary people – are pretty weak in terms of those calls, and to me it smacks of a corporate handout.

  Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-н Председател, уважаеми колеги, гласувах за този доклад, защото категорично трябва да има нормален, нов и истински разговор в Европейския парламент и Европейския съюз за това как трябва да се отговаря на подобни агресии.

Напомням на колегите комунисти, които живеят в собствената си утопия, че войната бе започната от Путин и Украйна беше нападната от Русия, а не обратното. Така че оправдаването на агресията е просто срамно за тази зала. Но това, което трябва да направи Европейският парламент, е да се отърси от розовите илюзии, да махне розовите очила и да започне да мисли за собствената си сигурност и за собствените си източници. Очевидно е, че няма да стане с перки, очевидно е, че няма да стане с вятърни мелници. Това, което трябва да направим, е да се обърнем обратно към ядрената енергия, която е чиста, разумна и безопасна. Да се обърнем към собствените си източници, като например полезни изкопаеми, да потърсим своите ресурси, свой газ, бил той конвенционален, шистов или някакъв друг. И да търсим вариантите, в които европейските държави няма да можем да бъдем изнудвани от никой друг агресор, от нито един друг нападател.

По тази причина трябва да се работи в тази посока. И още веднъж ще кажа, че оправдаването на агресията и на нападателя е срамно.

  Der Präsident. – Damit ist dieser Tagesordnungspunkt geschlossen.

  Der Präsident. – Die Protokolle der Sitzung von heute und der Sitzung von gestern werden dem Parlament zu Beginn der nächsten Sitzung zur Genehmigung vorgelegt. Wenn es keine Einwände gibt, werde ich die in der heutigen Sitzung angenommenen Entschließungen den in diesen Entschließungen genannten Personen und Gremien übermitteln.

(Die Sitzung wird um 13.06 Uhr geschlossen)

  Der Präsident. – Ich erkläre die Sitzungsperiode des Europäischen Parlaments für unterbrochen.