Brussels Live · Plenary sitting 2026-10-21
Transcribed and translated automatically from the original sound. Mistakes are possible.
Machine translation. The original is authoritative.
Independent service, not affiliated with the European Parliament or the European Commission. Source: © European Union.
AI-generated: Transcripts, translations and summaries on this site are generated automatically by AI: speech recognition (Soniox), machine translation and summaries (Mistral AI). Not edited by humans before publication. EU AI Act, Article 50.

[09:03:56] Speaker 1 [FR]
The President.

[09:04:12] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Good morning, everybody. Can I ask you please to take your seats so that we can start? The next item on the agenda is European Council and the Commission statements conclusions of the European Council meeting of the 15th and 16th of October 2026. Please ask you to take your seats. Before I give the floor to the President of the European Council and the European Commission, I will give the f loor to Elisabeth Vossenberg for a point of order. Please, everybody, can I ask you to take your seats? I'm not going to start calling out by names, but soon I will. Okay. Thank you. Wait, let's have your microphone on. Press the button. Press the button. Elisabeth? Ms. Vossenberg?

[09:05:10] Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi (PPE) [EN]
No.

[09:05:10] Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi (PPE) [EN]
Okay, sorry.

[09:05:12] Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi (PPE) [EL]
Madam President, Mr President, yesterday the Libyan House of Representatives unanimously approved the ratification of the illegal Turkish-Libyan 2019 memorandum of understanding on maritime delimitation. We condemn in the most categorical manner the action that challenges the sovereign rights of Greece and Cyprus, violates the fundamental principles of the International Law of the Sea and undermines peace, stability and security in the Eastern Mediterranean. This decision does not alter the illegal, void and unfounded nature of the memorandum, which contravenes international maritime law and infringes upon the sovereign rights of the states in the region. Geography and the international law of the sea do not change with unilateral legally unfounded parliamentary decisions. The memorandum disregards the Greek islands and their rights to maritime zones under UNCLOS and customary international law. Having already concluded agreements on the delimitation of maritime zones with Egypt and Italy, in accordance with international law, Greece has demonstrated respect for international law and the sovereign rights of neighbouring states. We call on the European Union to take immediate action against this negative development, with a single voice and determination, utilising all available diplomatic and political means to defend sovereign rights.

[09:06:41] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Thank you very much.

[09:06:42] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EL]
of our Member States. Thank you, Madam President.

[09:06:44] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much, Ms. Vossenberg. We share your concerns. Thanks for that. Another quick announcement: Katerina Konečná is a member of the PFE group as of today, 21st of October 2026. Now I give the floor to the President of the European Council Antonio Costa.

[09:07:09] António Costa [FR]
Madam President, Roberta Metsola. Madam President von der Leyen, honourable Members, good morning. Madam President, Roberta Metsola. Madam President von der Leyen, honourable Members, good morning.

I am addressing you just days after an important and fruitful European Council. The message from the European leaders is clear: Europe is strengthening its competitiveness and is united in defending its interests and values. Our discussions focused on four key priorities. essential priorities: competitiveness, our upcoming multiannual financial framework, Ukraine and migration policy. First, competitiveness. Since our informal meeting last year in Allenbesen, we have made progress in implementing our 'A Europe in the Market' programme. We have notably reduced administrative formalities, removed burdens and taken measures to promote a true capital markets union. The agreement on the package relating to the integration and supervision of markets represents a very important step. We must now accelerate work on EU Inc. Our 28th regime for businesses, and to wait for the concrete objectives that we have set ourselves within the deadlines. While maintaining a high level of ambition. To maintain this momentum, I will convene a second Allenbesen meeting at the beginning of February in order to bring together leaders to take stock of progress made in terms of competitiveness and defence, and to renew our political commitment to delivering results. The cost of energy is at the heart of this effort. Households and businesses are paying the price for a war that is being waged well beyond our borders. Since the start of the war in the Middle East, the cost of imported fossil fuels has increased by 106 billion euros, without a single additional molecule of energy having been produced. continued. We need a coordinated European response combining immediate measures and structural solutions. In the short term, we need to ease the pressure that is

[09:09:48] António Costa [FR]
on households and businesses. The measures that you are well aware of, presented by President von der Leyen here in the European Parliament, concern the temporary framework for State aid, the report on the application of the regulation on methane, the strategic dialogue on the European refinery sector and strengthened coordination of energy purchases. In addition, there is the coordinated release at G7 level of 5 million barrels of oil and diesel. And the European Council has invited the Commission to examine and propose, if necessary, additional short-term measures. But emergency measures alone cannot resolve a structural problem. As long as we remain dependent on imported fossil fuels, our prosperity will remain exposed to events beyond our control. Our response must be affordable energy produced in Europe. Renewable energies or nuclear, or increased electrification and smart grids. modernised electricity grids. Last year, we installed 8.0 gigawatts of renewable capacity, whereas six times that capacity was expected. were still to be connected. We must finalise the package on European networks and accelerate investments. We must also urgently advance the modernisation of the ETS system. Competitiveness also requires fair trade. Our trade policy is based on a vast network of trade agreements that we continue to expand. But trade must be fair and based on rules. Our strategy is to engage in dialogue with our partners, but a dialogue focused on results that bears fruit, and our discussions have demonstrated the unity of the 27 Member States. And I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Commissioner Ševković on the recent result achieved in his dialogue with China. We must continue. Not only on cars, but also in other industrial sectors.

[09:12:39] António Costa [FR]
And we must also accelerate the diversification of our trade exchanges. Pursue a dialogue that leads to concrete results and strengthen our trade defence instruments. This is the mandate we have given to the Commission to develop our "toolbox" of defensive measures. Secondly, our next multiannual financial framework. The negotiations on the long-term budget of the European Union are entering a decisive phase. We remain determined to reach an agreement by the end of this year. I had a very useful exchange with the European Parliament's contact group on the budget last week, just before the European Council. I am fully aware of the role of the European Parliament in the negotiations. And I would like to commend the efforts made by the Harland Presidency to advance this process. Our discussions at the European Council have allowed us to make progress. The next multiannual financial framework is not just a question of figures. This is essentially a political choice concerning the Europe that we want to build together and our capacity to act. We have a budget that is ambitious enough to live up to our responsibilities while keeping national contributions at a reasonable level. . That is why we need to make progress on an ambitious package of new own resources. We will accelerate the work. Together with the Member States, on the proposals from the Commission, as well as on those put forward by the European Parliament. Thirdly, Ukraine. Our determination to support Ukraine and its people is stronger than ever. Nearly €16 billion has already been paid out this year under the defence component of loans to support Ukraine. Furthermore, an additional 17 billion euros in budgetary aid could also be released this year, subject to the implementation of the necessary reforms. We must honour these commitments and respond to Ukraine’s additional financing needs for 202

[09:15:24] António Costa [FR]
027. Europe and its Member States already account for 80% of the external aid provided to Ukraine, and our international partners must also step up their efforts. Our commitment to peace must therefore go hand in hand with sustained pressure on the aggressor. Every effort made in favour of peace counts. But Russia’s actions continue to demonstrate an escalation that is unacceptable. Russia must put an end to this dangerous headlong rush. Russia’s hybrid campaigns, including its acts of sabotage and repeated violations of airspace. into, and repeated violations of European airspace and territorial waters, remind us that Ukraine's security is Europe's security, inseparably linked. We will accelerate the implementation of our defence strategy and strengthen our ability to protect our citizens and critical infrastructure. Our objective remains a just and lasting peace. On conditions that respect Ukraine's sovereignty and security, as well as its path towards accession to the European Union. Finally, migration policy. Our common European approach is bearing fruit. Irregular border crossings have significantly decreased and the Pact on Migration and Asylum is now fully applicable. Its implementation must continue. We must continue to strengthen our external borders and improve the effectiveness of returns. And we must prepare for situations in which State and non-State actors deliberately instrumentalise migration. A European framework for responding to emergency situations could give Member States the means to react quickly to such crises. The Commission will work on this, with the Member States, in order to present a concrete proposal. Ladies and gentlemen, these four priorities are closely linked. Competitiveness gives Europe its economic strength. A flexible and sufficiently funded budget gives us the capacity to act.

[09:18:07] António Costa [FR]
Our support for Ukraine protects our security and our principles. It is a common European solution on migration that demonstrates the full value of collective action. The European Council has set the course. We must now continue our efforts and achieve results. With these parliaments and the Commission. Because Europe must not be content merely to react to events. Europe must have the strength, the resources and the unity needed to shape its future. Thank you.

[09:18:53] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much, President Koshta. Now, President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen.

[09:19:09] 37656 [EN]
Good morning, President Metsola di Roberta, President Costa di Antonio. Honorable members, indeed we had a long and dense European Council. And let me touch on two of the main topics, starting with European competitiveness. First, of course, first of all, of course, we have to do our homework in competitiveness. That is, completing our single market. And indeed, we have proposed EU Inc. to make it easier for business, not only to start, but also to grow in the European Union. We have made proposal for a new public procurement act, to make procurement procedures simp ler and faster. We've put forward 12 omnibus packages, three have reached the finish line, as well as other simplification measures. If all these measures are agreed, together they could save over 2 2 billion euros every year of administrative burden. We are building simplicity by design into every new Commission proposal. But this ambition must also be matched in every member state. And that was the discussion, and this is why we are proposing a pact against gold plating. It has to be very simple. A rule that is agreed at European level cannot become more comp lex and fragmented when transposed or implemented nationally. Finally, I think we should work much more radically in reducing reporting obligation. And of course, we have to use artificial intelligence for that. And this is why we will want to use a principle we call only once, that is, report data only once, and then with the help of artificial intelligence, the administration will and must ensure efficient use. Of course, the debate also centered on Europe's high energy costs. Not only are we too dependent on foreign fossil fuels, on gas setting the pr ice, but we are also squandering opportunities by not having a true European energy union. From grids to interconnectors to aggregated market power and purchasing, this is why the Commission will develop a plan for a true European energy union because we have to make much better use of the potential that we do have.

[09:21:43] 37656 [EN]
Finally, speaking of energy on our sanctions on Russia, we have placed energy sanctions on Russia due to its war of aggression against Ukraine. And because of the actual debate, I want to be crystal clear: these sanctions will sta y until Russia stops the war. And moreover, we should keep our lessons in mind. It was Russia that cut Europe's supply of gas. Russia is not a trusted supplier of energy because it would—this is our experience—at any time, weaponize ener gy dependencies to blackmail others. So that is a lesson that Europe certainly will not for get. Honorable members, as I said, competitiveness starts at home, of course. But it also depends on our companies being able to compete on fair terms globally. Let me take China as an example. You know the figure in 2025, our trade deficit with China was 1 billion euros a day. This is not sustainable. Industrial overcapacity, and unfair market practices, are distorting competition. Just keep in mind that Chinese companies receive up to eight times more subsidies than comparable firm s in the OECD countries. And European industries are paying the price. Factories are under pressure. We see jobs lost in our industrial heartlands. So last week at the European Council, we agreed a clear approach: first, dialogue where it delivers; second, action where needed; and third, stronger tools to defend our interests. Let me start with dialogue. And I also want to commend Commissioner Sevkovic for his success. We have really seen progress in dialogue. China has agreed to cut tariffs on EU products worth almost 4 billion euros. We secured greater predictability on export controls for rare earth and magnets. And we had the removal of certain EU companies from Chinese control lists. But I think the clearest example was in the automotive sector. So where did we come from? Chinese hybrid electric vehicle exports to the European Union had gone up from 2 .5 billion US dollars to 7. 5 billion US dollars. So a threefold increase in just 12 months.

[09:24:33] 37656 [EN]
This surge put, of course, a huge pressure on our industry for hybrids. Here, too, the dialogue now delivered. We agreed an annual quota of 350,000 hybrid vehicles from Ch ina. We're using exports by around 45%. This will be implemented through a safeguard. So we keep control. And thus, for the first time, China has agreed to export moderation in a major industri al sector. That is proof that dialogue can and does deliver. This is an important first step. But we also should keep in mind that one agreement in one sector cannot fix an overall structural im balance. That leads me to my second point. Europe must be ready to act when dialogue does not produce res ults. If necessary, we must be ready to use our trade defense instruments. And this includes safeguards. To respond quickly, when imports surges, threaten our industries. So to this concept, last week leaders gave a clear positive signal. And we are already working closely with our chemicals and machinery sectors which are seeing or facing growing concern s. Third element we must reduce our economic dependency. Last year, new trade restrictions affected almost 3 trillion dollars of global trade. More than three times as much as the year before. We see critical raw materials, for example, restricted. We see essential technologies used at geopolitical leverage. Europe must be able to withstand such a kind of pressure. So we will act on three fronts. First, reducing our vulnerabilities. In December, we will present a package that we call Diversify EU. It will be country-agnostic. And it will help European companies to diversify their sup ply chains. I think the principle for all of us and all the companies in the European Union is very simple: there should be no critical dependence on one single supplier. Second, deterrence. Here we will propose a new instrument. So that we can act faster and immediately can limit access to the single market when we see our interests threatened. Because deterrence works when others know we are ready to respond.

[09:27:23] 37656 [EN]
And my third point is very important. It is solidarity. Economic threats are designed to divide us. We know this. To target one industry or one member state. This is why we will propose a solidarity package so that no member state is left to face press ure alone, in a world where economic power is increasingly used as weapon, Europe m ust use its economic strength to defend our interests together. Honorable members, another central issue in the last week's discussion was migration. And here, too, Europe has made real progress. After years of hard work, our pact on migration is now fully applicable. We have mandatory screening at border procedures. That means the same rules fair and firm apply in all member states. We have our return regulation so that those who have no right to stay can be returned quickly. And we have deeper partnerships along key migration routes. And the results are speaking for themselves. Let me give you a few figures. Illegal border crossings are down by 56% over the last two years. Another 34% so far this year alone. Asylum applications are down by 19%. And our return rate has almost doubled in five years and is now over 30%. These are significant achievements. They show our common European approach does work. But this summer showed again how quickly new threats can emerge at our borders. So we must build on this progress. And let me focus on three priorities. First, we need, of course, a full implementation of the migration pact. We have agreed common rules. Now there must be applied consistently. That means responsibility and solidarity must go hand in hand. Every member state must take responsibility for the asylum seekers it is responsible for. And every member state must be able to count on European solidarity when under pressure. We must also reduce incentives for illegal migration and safeguard Schengen. Because freedom of movement is one of Europe's greatest achievements and we must protect it. Second, stronger external borders. We will propose to reinforce Frontex.

[09:30:17] 37656 [EN]
So it can support member states whenever and wherever needed. Including on returns. And that means giving it the mandate and the capabilities that this new real ity demands. And my third point is preparing Europe for new challenges. This summer we witnessed the tragic scenes in Ceuta. And we have seen how Russia and Belarus have weaponized migration. State and non-state actors are deliberately engineering mass movements of people. Of course, the goal is clear. They want to overwhelm authorities. They want to spread fears. They want finally to divide us. They will not succeed. We will not allow anyone to exploit our values to put pressure on our union. And this is why we will propose a so-called European emergency response framework. The aim is to give member states the tool to respond quickly to these kind of extraordinary threats at our external borders. And to protect, of course, also our internal security. We will present this proposal on the European Emergency Response Framework by the end of this year. So, honorable members, Europe has come a long way on migration. But there is more work ahead. We will always be a place that protects those fleeing war and pers ecution. And to do that, citizens need to trust that our system is fair, and functioning, that rules are enforced, that borders are secured. And above all, that it is Europeans who decide who comes to the European Union and under what circum stances, and not our adversaries. This is how we uphold our values and this is how we protect the freedom and the security of our citizens. Thank you very much and long live Europe.

[09:32:31] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Thank you very much, President von der Leyen. Before opening the floor, let me just quickly reply to the point of order of Ms. Elisabeth Rosenberg. We're very grateful to the clarity of the joint statement of Presidents Costa and von der Leyen on the so-called memorandum and share the concerns. Greece and Cyprus can count on our solidarity. Manfred Weber on behalf of the EPP Group, you have the floor.

[09:33:00] Manfred Weber (PPE) [EN]
President Metsola, President von der Leyen, President Costa, welcome into the European Parliament. First of all, I want to congratulate my colleagues for their re-election as group leaders. Valerie Iratxe and also Nico and Terry were already re-elected. The others will do it in the next upcoming weeks. So congratulations for this. The re-election means also stability for this House, that we can count on the support of our colleagues. And we need this stability to deliver 27,000 jobs each month. Are lost in the European Union in this moment of time. So we have a lot of huge challenges, especially on the economic front. And already the agreement inside of the platform on the car and automotive sector is a motivating signal that we can do deals together and we can find solutions. So congratulations. Let me start on a positive note when we reflect on the European Council meeting, China. One billion Ursula von der Leyen mentioned it, enough is enough. I want to remind ourselves that one and a half years ago Commissioner already initiated tariffs on the question of electric car s. That was not uncontroversial, I must say. Today, I think everybody sees that this was already brave leadership one and a half years ago. That things cannot continue as they are in this moment of time. That's why we have to stop naivety and have to work. I want to thank really Commissioner Sevkovic for his great work. We are in good hands in your hands in this file. So thank you very much for this. And we also, as EPP, welcome the new instruments now, also proposed on the Council side, to strengthen the role of the European Commission and prec ondition for everything is unity among our member states. And that was a good outcome, a good agreement on the Council side. The more difficult aspect is obviously MFF, which is the key issue in the next weeks in front of us. Looking to the figures, for example, on investments on artificial intelligence, China 290 billion, US 600 billion in this ye ar. And the EU budget should be now cut by 140 billion.

[09:34:55] Manfred Weber (PPE) [EN]
We cannot do more for Europe with less money. That will not work. So having this in mind, we have to be now very clear. For example, for farmers, for mayors, we do not speak about cold figures. We speak about the young farmers, whether they have a chance, a perspective, to do their business, to create independence on food sec urity for Europe. We speak about rural areas. We are fully supporting the ideas from the Commission on the modernization. So Horizon, now we see 10% cuts from the Irish. Defense cuts. We see for Frontex, the colleagues, a few days ago, Frontex in Warsaw published that they had to stop return missions joint return missions on European level because they have not any more the funding for doing it together. That's a reality on the ground. And we see further cuts now from the Irish presidency. So we have to defend the future. Let me say aspects of this modernized budget. I also want to be clear on the own resources because it was a promise when we discussed the next generation EU fund. To repay it, the borrowed money, and the interest rates, by own resources. The promise is on the table and we remind the Council to keep their promises to pay it back, not via our budget, but through own resour ces. And I would also ask, please stop the net payer perspective, because stopping migration in Ceuta is in Danish and is in Dutch interest. And also having a drone shield in the east is in German and French interest. So let's do this from a European perspective. And let me just appeal and ask President Costa now. You are a moderator, yes. But you are not only a moderator. And we know that you are a brave European leader. That's why in the next weeks and months we will support you to show this European leadership in this moment of time. And finally, dear colleagues, if you allow me, just on Ukraine, one final point. The winter ahead of us will be again a test for all of us. The war will not be decided on the front line. The war will be decided in our political will, whether we stand up for fre

[09:36:58] Manfred Weber (PPE) [EN]
edom and democracy and we support our Ukraine and France. That's why the message in front of this winter is the EPP is on the side of those who defend democracy and freedom. Thank you.

[09:37:09] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much, Mr. Weber. Now I give the floor to the Chair of the S&D Group, Iratxe Garcia-Per ez.

[09:37:22] Iratxe García Pérez (S&D) [EN]
Gracias, Presidenta.

[09:37:24] Iratxe García Pérez (S&D) [ES]
In Europe there are two ways of understanding the future. Those who want a smaller Europe, with less budget, less solidarity and fewer rights. And those of us who know that in a more dangerous and unjust world, we need more Europe. A Europe that protects, that invests and that leaves no one behind. And that difference is also evident in how we talk about immigration. Yes, migration is a European challenge. That is why it needs a European response, not a competition among Member States to see who can shut the most doors or who can point the finger most harshly at those who arrive. Because the data debunks the discourse of fear, and today the President herself, President von der Leyen, has laid them out. Irregular entries have fallen by almost a third in the first nine months of this year. And also asylum applications. However, the right and the far right continue to fuel the lie of a Europe that is overwhelmed. Ms von der Leyen, Mr Costa, I agree with you. Combating the mafias and human trafficking, managing our borders and ensuring effective processes is our responsibility. But so too is defending the right to asylum and combating disinformation. disinformation and ensure legal and safe pathways. Because those who care for our elderly, who tend to our sick, who build our homes and work in our fields are not a threat. They are part of our society and help to sustain it. The real enemies of Europe are not immigrants. The real enemies of Europe are the vulture funds that evict an 87-year-old disabled woman from her home. They are the ones who trigger wars and pass the bills on to our citizens. They are the same autocrats who force our families to pay more than two euros per litre of petrol and drive up the the shopping basket. Europe’s true enemies are the climate change deniers who put their own interests above the lives of those who lose their homes and their harvests to fires.

[09:39:47] Iratxe García Pérez (S&D) [ES]
And floods. And it is Putin’s allies within this Union that are weakening our unity while Russia wages a hybrid war against our democracies. And that is why we have the responsibility to build the Europe of the citizens. Not an Europe like that Argentina of the chainsaw cuts of Milei, we want that Europe of the left-wing and proud gaze. The Europe that combats speculation and guarantees decent housing. The one that accelerates renewable energies to lower energy costs. Let us build a Europe that invests in defence to protect us from Putin. Without abandoning our farmers. Because our security also depends on our food sovereignty. Let us build the Europe that invests in cohesion to guarantee schools, hospitals, and opportunities in every in our regions. And to make the Europe of the citizens a reality, we need a European budget up to the scale of our challenges. Not with cuts that force us to choose. Because the question is not whether we can afford to build this Europe. The question is how much it will cost us not to do so. Let us not allow fear to decide our future. In the face of those who are building walls, let us build rights. In the face of those who divide, let us build solidarity. And in the face of those who want a smaller Europe, let us defend a stronger, fairer and more humane Europe. That is the Europe our citizens need. That is and always will be the raison d’être of Europe. Thank you.

[09:41:29] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. Now for the PFE Group, its co-chair, Kinga Gal.

[09:41:37] Kinga Gál (PfE) [HU]
Madam President, Mr President. Seeing the shocking images coming from France, we can rightly ask ourselves how Europe has come to this. From Ceuta to the major cities of Western Europe, we are seeing increasingly severe signs of a deepening civilisational crisis. This is a direct consequence of this misguided migration policy. A radical patriotic turn is needed across Europe. To protect Europe’s external borders and guarantee the security of its citizens. Just as it has not provided any substantive response to the migration challenges, the most recent EU summit has also failed to address the economic challenges. The high energy prices, the declining standard of living, and the bleak prospects for businesses. Meanwhile, in the new multiannual financial framework, the Commission is asking for even more money for centralisation and would introduce new financial burdens, would send even more money to Ukraine and extend ideological pressure on the Member States. Instead, we patriots would like to preserve support for farmers and regions. Review the regulations that are strangling businesses and finally restore Europe’s competitiveness. On Friday, we Hungarians will mark the 70th anniversary of the 1956 revolution. are commemorating the 70th anniversary of the 1956 revolution. In 2007, it was then shamefully the 50th. on the 50th anniversary, the then left-wing government responded to peaceful commemorators with brutal police violence. This year, once again unworthy of the anniversary, there are political prisoners in Hungary. Most recently, a former undersecretary, a mother of three children, was imprisoned on absurd charges. The aim is intimidation. Opposition politicians have been stripped of their right to run in the elections retroactively. The servers of the largest opposition party have been seized. In Hungary, an autocracy reminiscent of the communist era is being built. Madam President, Mr President, it would be good if you were all aware of this when you visit Budapest on Friday.

[09:43:50] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you, Ms. Gal. Now for the ECR Group, Nikola Prokacini.

[09:43:59] Nicola Procaccini (ECR) [IT]
Thank you, Mr President. President von der Leyen, President Costa. It was a long and troubled European Council, we know that some governments are still trapped in the ideological spell of the Green Deal or in keeping the doors open to immigration. But we also know that more are waking up. Europe is beginning to put right its own mistakes, and it is doing so above all thanks to Giorgia Meloni’s determination, let me say that. For too long, we have undermined the competitiveness of our businesses, encouraged industrial delocalisation, and ended up importing the very products we stopped producing in Europe. We have exported jobs and imported CO2 emissions, a masterpiece of economic and environmental self-harm. Finally, the need to address the distortions in the ETS system is being acknowledged. It is a first step, but obviously it is not enough. There has also been an objective change on immigration: after years in which those who called for defending the borders were accused of violating European values, almost everyone today admits the need for new tools. Unfortunately, the violence in Milan, Paris and Brussels tells us that the mistakes of yesterday are being paid for today. Integration is not achieved by renouncing one's own cultural, religious and value-based heritage, but by sharing it. Alas, we cannot turn back time, but let us at least avoid repeating the same mistakes in the future. On the next European budget, the conservatives have clear ideas. In Parliament and in the Council. Defend agriculture, territories, the principle of subsidiarity that respects and promotes the role of nations. This is the change that conservatives want to bring to Europe. A Europe that does not confuse ideology with ecology, bureaucracy with solidarity, or legal immigration with free movement. A Europe that returns to producing instead of importing, to protecting instead of prohibiting, to competing instead of regulating.

[09:46:29] Nicola Procaccini (ECR) [IT]
Because the strength of Europe is not measured by the power of its institutions, but by the prosperity of its peoples.

[09:46:39] Speaker 1 [IT]
Thank you, Honourable Procacini.

[09:46:41] Speaker 1 [EN]
Now for the Renew Europe Group, its chair, Valérie Ayer. Three minutes.

[09:46:51] Valérie Hayer (Renew) [FR]
Thank you. Madam President, I would like in turn to congratulate Manfred Weber on your re-election. We are entering a new phase of this European Parliament, and I would like us to seize this momentum to consolidate the pro-European majority in the interests of Europe and in the interests of Europeans. Madam President, Mr President, this weekend, thousands of Europeans took to the streets across Europe. I condemn, with the utmost firmness, the acts of extreme violence committed on the margins of these gatherings. The latest demonstration of the different national realities, but one shared concern: the cost of living. Energy prices, purchasing power, the fear of downward mobility, the fear of losing one’s job. This is what concerns Europeans. And this is what must collectively mobilise us. That is why I want to commend the orientations taken by the European Council, dear Antonio, on competitiveness and, in particular, on energy. We need a single market that actually works. We need to mobilise European savings to finance our businesses. We need to simplify, invest and produce in Europe. And above all, we need to bring down energy prices. Because behind this word 'competitiveness' there are companies fighting to survive. There are jobs to preserve. There are families who can no longer make ends meet. Dear colleagues, there is a second emergency that has already been mentioned, and that is our security. For nearly five years now, Ukrainians have been fighting for their freedom. And for nearly five years, they have also been fighting for ours. Today, as American support wanes, we must face reality. No one will defend Europe in our place. What is at stake here is our sovereignty. And I do not want to allow Trump and Putin to organise a new Yalta, where Europe would be carved up. a Russian sphere of influence and an American one. We are the only ones today who can durably guarantee Ukraine’s security.

[09:48:48] Valérie Hayer (Renew) [FR]
yes, and we must do it. Not only out of solidarity, not only out of fidelity to our values, but because by protecting Ukraine, we are protecting ourselves. And I want to say this to those in this hemicycle who would like to abandon the Ukrainians to their fate. To the far right, which refuses aid, contests sanctions and prefers to cosy up to Putin rather than defend the sovereignty of European nations, you will have to answer to the Europeans. For I repeat, if Ukraine falls, it is our security that is directly threatened. And that means millions more refugees seeking protection in Europe. A migration crisis of a scale we have never seen before. These are the consequences of your irresponsibility. Dear colleagues, we know our priorities: protecting the purchasing power of Europeans, defending our jobs, guaranteeing our security. But there is a contradiction that we can no longer accept. And I am obviously coming to the budgetary question. We cannot ask Europe to do more with ever fewer resources. We cannot want a Europe that is more competitive, more independent, more secure, and yet deny it the means to achieve its ambitions. And dear colleagues, the next European budget will be a fundamental political choice. If we want a Europe that protects, then we must give it the means to protect. Thank you.

[09:50:08] Speaker 1 [FR]
Thank you, Ms Ayer.

[09:50:11] Speaker 1 [EN]
Now, on behalf of the Greens group, its co-chair, Niko Stefanutsa.

[09:50:21] Nicolae Ștefănuță (Verts/ALE) [FR]
Madam President, Madam President, Mr President, dear colleagues,

[09:50:27] Nicolae Ștefănuță (Verts/ALE) [EN]
you never know how strong you are until being strong is really your only choice. It's not some great philosopher, it's just Bob Marley who said that, but it applies to Europe. It applies to Europe. Because we really live through the hardest times that I've witnessed in my life. And I think we really need to step up to this challenge and defend these proud colors. Defend them. And defend the citizens, because we live through the worst of times in terms of a cost of living crisis. And a house divided against itself cannot stand. We cannot have citizens who have and citizens who have not. Because those citizens will not feel part of the project. And I ask you to all stand together to defend and fight for those citizens. Don't talk—let's not talk about priorities without looking at the budget. It's President Biden who said that. Don't tell me about priorities. Tell me about the budget. So the main point of this is how can we have gone through the last exercise where we saw that the moment we adopted the last budget, it was already short. 2019 found Bergamo and the COVID deaths and we had to show our empty pockets. Let's not do it again. With the energy crisis, with the cost of living crisis, with people having a housing crisis in Madrid, with forest fires raging through France, we cannot tell people that Europe cannot step up for them. So let's strengthen the budget right now. I'm looking at you, President Costa. You need to step it up. And we need to really defend this budget. And help Europe stay strong in the face of so many crises. Climate action belongs to the discussion, not just because I'm green. It belongs to the discussion because it makes the costs lower. Because renewables have become lower in price. Because people suffer under the price of heating. And we need to give them actionable results. And President von der Leyen, you came up with the Green Deal as an economic vision. It's an economic vision. Defend it. Let's all defend it. It's a proud achievement to have.

[09:52:38] Nicolae Ștefănuță (Verts/ALE) [EN]
It's nothing to be ashamed of. Let not be bullied by some people in this Parliament. It's something we want. It's something that makes sense. It's something we need to fight for. On the own resources, we fight for them. I think it's time that Europe has own resources. Let's make the digital giants pair their fair share. They are playing with our digital markets. They are making our voters go awry. Let them make—let's make them pay. And also the super polluters who make profits like never before. They should pair—pay their own share for Europe. And then that's Russia. War is looming. I come from Romania. People of Romania, of Bulgaria, they're desperate. There's drones hitting apartment blocks. Let's not be fools. This is a real and grave danger. Let's stand united. This might be a historic moment where Europe really needs to see us united. And I'm going to—

[09:53:33] Nicolae Ștefănuță (Verts/ALE) [EN]
Thank you.

[09:53:34] Nicolae Ștefănuță (Verts/ALE) [EN]
—finish saying that Europe is a matter of elected affinities, like Goethe said. We are here because we chose to. Let's be here because we want to. Because we need to.

[09:53:45] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much, Mr. Stefanutsa. Now for the left group, its co-chair, Martin Schilderwand. One and a half minutes.

[09:53:57] Martin Schirdewan (The Left) [DE]
Thank you, Madam President. Niko,

[09:54:00] Martin Schirdewan (The Left) [EN]
get up, stand up.

[09:54:01] Martin Schirdewan (The Left) [DE]
At the moment, Bob Marley’s probably got the better title to describe the situation in Europe. Hundreds of thousands are currently taking to the streets in a wave of social protest, and we hear not a word from Ms von der Leyen. We also hear no word from Mr Costa on the fact that in France, Belgium, Italy and Portugal people are angry because energy, fuel, rents and food are becoming ever more expensive. Pupils and students are taking to the streets across Europe because your policies are letting their schools fall apart and destroying their future. In Albania, people are demonstrating against their corrupt government. In Spain, there will be a general strike on 11 November for affordable rents. And on 20 November, Italy will enter a general strike for better wages and a good life for all. The cost-of-living crisis has Europe firmly in its grip, and we on the Left stand alongside those who are resolutely and peacefully taking their protest and their anger at the unjust conditions out onto the streets. are carrying. It is a conflict between the working population, the families and the youth of our countries and the profiteers of a failing system, the exploitation of people and nature. And we will not leave the people to their justified protest alone; their demands for an affordable life and a good future are also our demands, despite all attempts at distraction and the efforts of the far right to undermine these social issues. to politicise conflicts in a racist way. Federal Chancellor Merz continues to rely on cuts in social spending out of arrogance. This policy is the real danger to democracy. And in order to distract from his failure, he is now pointing the finger at the Left: this is just absurd. But it shows how much fear he has that we are actually making policy for and with the people. After the neoliberals have smashed social security, health care and pensions to smithereens and privatised them, now even

[09:56:01] Martin Schirdewan (The Left) [DE]
further cuts to social funds and universities in the EU budget. And when it comes to their gifts to the financial markets, Merz, Macron and Meloni are in agreement, as always: the banks, insurance companies and BlackRock, the former employer of Chancellor Merz, will be pleased, but they do not even want to solve the everyday concerns of the population. You are governing over the heads of the people. Mr President Costa, we urgently need a special summit to end the social emergency in Europe. Mobilise all your strength so that life becomes affordable again. Otherwise, European democracy will collapse.

[09:56:37] Speaker 1 [DE]
Thank you very much.

[09:56:39] Milan Uhrík (ESN) [EN]
Danke schön. Now for the ESN Group, Milan Ulrich, one minute. Go ahead.

[09:56:45] Milan Uhrík (ESN) [SK]
Ms Lenová, don't run away. Ms Lenová, you should be ashamed for wanting to rob Europeans of another 70 billion euros together with Mr Zelenskyy. You want to take tens of billions of euros from working citizens of the European Union, who are growing ever poorer, in order to finance a war that does not have a military solution anyway. And that is exactly what you are doing at a time when, across the entire continent, hundreds of thousands, millions of decent people are protesting against the fact that life in Europe is becoming increasingly expensive, that this inflation is simply endless. You are doing this at a time when, across European cities, these left-wing extremists, together with the immigrants that you brought into Europe, are destroying and setting fire to our European cities. Wake up to reality. Please start listening to the people. Stop funding nonsense. Why don’t you help young people with housing or families with rising costs? Businesses with energy? If you can’t or won’t do that, then say so and leave, and let us handle it. We will help them.

[09:57:52] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you. Now I give the floor to Andrzej Halicki. One and a half minutes, please.

[09:57:58] Andrzej Halicki (PPE) [PL]
Dear colleagues, yes, there can be no agreement to a second Yalta. It is Russia that is the aggressor; it must be punished, which is why sanctions are essential. And here, beyond divisions, full support for the decisions of governments, so unanimous and so strongly expressed last week. Donald Trump has responded. Ukraine will receive support, military and financial, because it is the victim of this aggression, and we will not allow it to lose this war. This is also a matter of our future security. But if we are talking about key issues for the future, negotiations on the budget are certainly one of them. And the budget must be offensive, because that is the task before us. A difficult future ahead, so more money is needed, not savings and cuts. This is obvious. So the appeal from Parliament – I think it is obvious – is that we must build consensus in favour of an offensive budget for the next seven years. And very important are the provisions and conclusions of the Council, points 8 and 11, which concern citizens and their greatest concern. We have a fuel crisis, energy prices are rising. And this concerns the revision of the ETS. Point 8 and point 11. Why am I mentioning this? Because there is a great expectation among citizens. A deeper revision of the ETS, the system as it currently functions, and not introducing additional costs that already affect individual households. Heating, home heating, fuel prices, energy. ETS-2 should either be rejected or postponed beyond 2030.

[09:59:40] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you, Mr. Halicki. Now I give the floor to Jean-Marc Gemma, one minute.

[09:59:47] Jean-Marc Germain (S&D) [FR]
Madam President, Mr President, I have only one word on the Irish Presidency's budget proposal, which was discussed at the last European Council, following two months of negotiations to reach this point. How, in the face of young people who are demonstrating, in the face of an industry that is collapsing, can we say: 'Oh yes, let's sacrifice the European social fund' and at the same time the Just Transition Fund? How can we watch the price of hydrocarbons soar and then say: 'Oh yes, let's reduce the funding for renewable energies'? How, faced with Trump’s umpteenth abandonment of Ukraine, can we say: ‘Oh yes, let’s give up on truly investing in our defence and in our sovereignty’? And how can they dare to appear before us empty-handed on their own resources, when the commitment was made in 2020 to do everything possible to achieve this by 2025 at the latest? And what are the key elements of any agreement? So I will say this clearly: less budget means less Europe, and less Europe for us means no. Do not count on our consent for such a compromise. And Mr President, take the draft back to square one, take up the Parliament’s proposals and come back to us with a meaningful project.

[10:01:02] Speaker 1 [FR]
Thank you.

[10:01:02] Speaker 3 [FR]
I thank you on behalf of Europeans.

[10:01:04] Jorge Buxadé Villalba (PfE) [EN]
Thank you. Now I give the floor to Jorge Buxa de Vilalba, one minute.

[10:01:10] Jorge Buxadé Villalba (PfE) [ES]
Europe is losing competitiveness because the Union has created a bureaucracy of tons of paperwork that criminalises work and production. In France, the islamo-left and anti-fascist terrorism have imposed violence, barbarism, and the frenzy of the Taliban. In just a few days, no less than 1.2 billion euros in losses. Faced with the invasion of Ceuta, the Council has limited itself to showing its solidarity with the sudden massive influx of immigrants. Sudden? Orchestrated, programmed, planned and known by Pedro Sánchez. And here the European People’s Party is aligning itself with the left to delay that special commission on Ceuta. Sánchez is alone, and that makes him more dangerous than ever. He goes to the Council knowing that neither the Italians, nor the Czechs, nor the Portuguese will vote for him. But yes, thousands of foreigners who have been naturalised through fraud and through the back door. He shows the immigrants the solidarity he has not had with those from Ceuta, Valencia, La Palma or Adamuz. But it is early; I hope that by now they no longer have you on the Council, and that Spain opens the way to freedom, national priority, deregulation and re-emigration. Without any consideration. Anyone who comes here to steal or to destroy can just go back home.

[10:02:21] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you. Thank you very much. Now I give the floor to Patrick Iaki, two minutes.

[10:02:35] Patryk Jaki (ECR) [EN]
Thank you so much, President. President, Commissioner, we must begin with the most important item of the agenda: sec urity. You can see the product of your policy in France. When I on the one side saw people crying on the street because they lost everything, te achers and police officers being humiliated, cities and historical land marks burning, crime rapes and helpless state. And on the other side, no one is responsible for this, but someone brought those migr ants here. Someone gave them generous benefits from our taxes and someone suppressed people who predict that exactly this would happen. You call them fascist, you accused of hate speech, but yet there were ordinary people defending traditional order who in fact were the victims of hate speech. It was the hate of elites, detached from reality, who while living in rich gay communities lec ture others how to integrate with migrants. Many people think that this is only a problem of migration, but this is not true. This is much bigger problem. For decades we have been seen destruction of western culture and Christian ity. And now you are surprised that people on the streets cannot tell right from wrong. Can you imagine young people who were taught to respect Europe western culture and heritage, and after that he will go and burn it? You were ashamed of western culture and now we can see result of this policy. You have replaced law and order with chaos and nihilism. And we want God, we want churches, we want to restore western culture and kicked out Mar xism. And it's up to you. Which will be the symbol of Europe? Magnificent cathedrals or masked migrants?

[10:04:47] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. I give the floor now to Billy Kelleher, one minute.

[10:04:53] Billy Kelleher (Renew) [EN]
Conclusions five and six outline the issues that were raised in the Council with regard to gold plating and the recordly challenges that are there. And there's one area that we really have to address, and that is the issue that is putting delays on infrastructural development, roads, wastewater, the energy systems, which are all compiling huge costs on housing itself, Commission er. And if we don't address this issue, we are really going to fracture society. So I would really urge that in the context of the environmental laws that there will be a deep dive done to see what areas are causing difficulties in terms of the rollout of infrastructure which, as I said, is delaying housing developments. On the issue of MFF, obviously the Irish presidency published its proposals but I would suggest that a lot of people in this house will go back to their capitalist themselves and request that member stat es would open the purse strings so that the European Union will have the capacity to do the many things that have been outlined in these Council proposals. So I would urge that the MFF would be expanded but most importantly that member stat es would propose that to their own government.

[10:06:05] Rasmus Nordqvist (Verts/ALE) [EN]
Thank you very much. Mr. Kelleher, now Rasmus Nordqvist, one minute.

[10:06:11] Rasmus Nordqvist (Verts/ALE) [EN]
Thank you, President. Another meeting and another negotiation box. Some want it smaller and some just want business as usual. At least that's what we hear coming out from your meeting. And so we're still left with the impression that this is not a talk about a European long-term budget but about 27 national priorities trying to fit in to one negotiation box. But the long-term budget is not just about juggling of billions. If we cut it actually have consequences. While democracy rule of law and civic space are under attack , the Council cut funding for the Agora and Global EU. While there's war and aggression we cut common investment in security and after the summer of heat wave we are cutting in the green transition. The negotiation box are not going to make problems disappear. It only going to make the necessarily investments more expensive in 27 member states. So dear Council, let's build a truly European budget one that serve our common priorities and not just 27 ones. Thank you.

[10:07:22] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you, Mr. Nordqvist. And now João Oliveira, one minute.

[10:07:29] João Oliveira (The Left) [PT]
Thank you, Mr President. Mr António Costa, 27 prime ministers and heads of State entered a room accompanied by you and by Ms Ursula von der Leyen for a meeting of the European Council. 14 hours after the meeting had begun, they announce the conclusions. There is no measure to halt the rise in the cost of living, to control prices, or to address the accumulation of profits by multinationals and economic groups. There is no proposal to promote increases in wages and pensions. There is not a single measure to guarantee the right to housing or access to healthcare. There is not a single political or diplomatic initiative to put an end to the war in Ukraine, to build the peace and collective security that all the peoples of Europe need. The only thing they are announcing about this is more money to continue the war and widen the battlefronts. There is not a single word about a budget that meets the needs of the peoples, and the prospect of a multiannual financial framework geared towards this is increasingly a mirage in the face of the harsh reality of the vertigo of militarism and war. Mr Costa, for the European Union to face up to the multinationals, it must turn its back on the peoples. Don’t be surprised afterwards if people fill the streets and squares fighting for their rights.

[10:08:43] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. Mr. Oliveira, would you accept a blue card from Mr. Madison? Go ahead, Jacques.

[10:08:51] Jaak Madison (ECR) [ET]
Yes, sure. Thank you. You criticised the fact that 40 hours of debate have not produced a result among the 27 Member States of the European Commission. Good. If you were a representative of a Member State at the European Council, do you think you could have come up with solutions to the problems you raised within 40 hours that all Member States would agree on? Because, as I just heard, you criticise war and the arms industry. As the representative of Portugal, could you propose a reasonable solution to defence concerns?

[10:09:24] Jaak Madison (ECR) [EN]
Thank you, Mr. Madison.

[10:09:24] Speaker 3 [ET]
Let's calm down Estonia, Finland, Sweden and others. Are you really capable of that or are you just going to whine?

[10:09:29] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you, Mr. Oliveira. You can respond.

[10:09:36] João Oliveira (The Left) [PT]
Thank you for your question, Mr Deputy. You know that the problem is not the time these meetings take, because the European Council could be meeting for two, two weekends, a month in a row, with the political guidance these meetings have, nothing that would resolve the problems of the peoples would come out of it. Because that is the issue. Naturally, governments represent the Member States and should have brought those meetings to a discussion on the real problems affecting people's lives. None of this was on the table. The issue of the cost of living and housing is truly scandalous. With the living conditions people are facing, not a word, not a minute was wasted in that meeting to find a solution to this. Mr Deputy, solutions exist and alternatives too. It is necessary.

[10:10:18] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much.

[10:10:18] Speaker 6 [PT]
May they be directed towards them and not towards those.

[10:10:21] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you. That's good. Close this. Roberto Vannozzi, one minute.

[10:10:26] Roberto Vannacci (ESN) [EN]
Thank you, President.

[10:10:30] Roberto Vannacci (ESN) [PT]
OMIDAT is another 70 billion.

[10:10:33] Roberto Vannacci (ESN) [IT]
I am being invaded by 20 million Ukrainian citizens. This is the new frontier of Zelensky: from fighting to defend your families to blackmail using his own citizens. He must have learned from Erdogan, the same Erdogan to whom the European Commission continues to pay a billion euros a year to keep the refugee taps closed. And who cares if his troops invaded Cyprus in 1974? And what is President von der Leyen doing while she has meanwhile left? It is calling for an increase in the European budget, threatening cuts to the Common Agricultural Policy, in order to continue funding a never-ending war. Meanwhile, European families cannot make ends meet, businesses are closing down, and the cost of energy has now surpassed that of gold. But money is always found to finance a war; however, to achieve that ugly peace which is certainly better than the ugly war we are financing, there is even a lack of will.

[10:11:36] Speaker 1 [IT]
Thank you.

[10:11:37] Speaker 1 [EN]
Now I give the floor to Monica Beniova, one minute. Go ahead.

[10:11:43] Monika Beňová (NI) [SK]
Thank you very much. Colleagues, the October conclusions of the European Council read like a list of problems we have known about for years: expensive energy, declining competitiveness, threatened jobs, and an unmanageable migration policy. So I ask, where is, for example, an effective price cap to protect European industry? Where is the extraordinary taxation of excessive profits of energy giants? Because these would be concrete solutions. I appreciate the initiative of Slovakia, the Visegrád Group and Italy on re-evaluating ETS2. After five years of discussions about expensive energy, we no longer need more promises or further impact assessments. We need concrete solutions that will reduce costs for our citizens and save the competitiveness of European industry. Since Ms von der Leyen did not find even an hour to discuss this issue with us, I ask you, Commissioner, can you tell us what the European solutions are? Where is the promised deregulation? Where is the concrete proposal for reducing energy prices, which we have been waiting for since February? Where has European diplomacy been at key moments? And where in the Commission's proposals do citizens remain, and their worsening economic and social situation? You cannot see this in France, Italy, Belgium or Spain, do you not see that Europe is burning because of the way you are running it? Thank you very much.

[10:13:00] Siegfried Mureşan (PPE) [EN]
Thank you very much. Now I give the floor to Sigfrid Muresan, one and a half minutes.

[10:13:05] Siegfried Mureşan (PPE) [EN]
Thank you very much, Madam President, President Costa. Welcome back to the Parliament, dear colleagues. Look, the European Council tells us that we shall invest more in our competitiveness, that security, defense are prior ities, and that we should accelerate the enlargement of the European Union. But while the European Council is telling us that security, defense, competitiveness, and enlargement are important, the Ir ish Presidency is proposing to reduce the budget in exactly these areas. Cutting the budget for our competitiveness by more than 10 percent is a mistake. Reducing funding to our immediate neighboring countries by almost 20 percent is a mistake. This will weaken Europe, it would not strengthen Europe. This is why, President Costa, there is a lot of work ahead of us, and we're looking forward, as a European Parliament, to working closely together with you to deliver for the next seven years a budget which is in line with the priorities that we are defining for ourselves. If we say that something is important, we need to allocate the resources. In that area, cutting the very priorities that the Council claims to support is not consistent. This would weaken Europe, it would create disappointment, it would increase populism. This is why, for us as a European Parliament, the Irish negotiating box is not a basis for negotiations, it is not a basis for, it is not a basis for consent. To have enough resources to invest, we will need to work together with you, President Costa, to generate own sources of revenues for the European Union. We as a Parliament, we have an idea that digital levy. We propose that the large global technological corporations contribu te a bit to the access, for the access to the single market which they have. We would not be able to explain to our citizens why we reduce funding to farmers, to security, to research, why Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg enjoy free access to the European single market. This is where the Parliament stands. We're looking forward to working with Council in the next months.

[10:14:52] Speaker 3 [EN]
Thank you very much.

[10:14:52] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. Mr. Muresan, will you take a blue card? For Mr. Grazulis, go ahead.

[10:14:58] Speaker 3 [EN]
With pleasure.

[10:14:58] Speaker 1 [EN]
Quickly.

[10:15:06] Petras Gražulis (ESN) [LT]
Honourable rapporteur, you are one of the representatives of one of the largest governing parliamentary parties. You are talking about reducing bureaucracy. But there is no result. Do you not think that if we were to fundamentally address this issue, we need to abolish the European Council? After all, the European Commission and Parliament represent the citizens of the European Union. We are directly elected, whereas the European Council members are merely appointed. I would suggest resolutely reducing this bureaucracy and abandoning this European Council institution.

[10:15:43] Siegfried Mureşan (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead, Mr. Muresan.

[10:15:47] Siegfried Mureşan (PPE) [EN]
Our solution is to cut red tape and reduce bureaucracy in a way in which it benefits the citizens of Europe, the farmers, the ent erprises, the small and medium-sized enterprises. We have, of course, the highest respect for the European Council. We're looking forward to working with the European Council, with the Commission, with Council, with all institutions, to deliver on what the citizens expect in the next month s. Thank you very much.

[10:16:07] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you, Mr. Muresan. Now, Carla Tavares, one minute.

[10:16:14] Carla Tavares (S&D) [PT]
Madam President, Mr President, dear colleagues, if we want a Europe that is a geopolitical power capable of defending its values and, as the strong and respected voice in an increasingly unstable world, the proposal presented to leaders at the European Council is not what Europe needs. We reject the cut to the financial framework proposed by the Irish Presidency, €16.1 billion less; that is, a 10% real terms reduction compared to the current budget. Europe is not alone in the world, and our partners expect the Union to lead, and the answer is more Europe, not less Europe. A Europe that is present, capable of building partnerships, supporting development, fulfilling commitments to humanitarian aid, defending peace and human rights, committed to enlargement and Ukraine’s accession. Strategic autonomy cannot be achieved with a short budget. A 17% cut in external action is simply unacceptable. There is no global leadership without investment, no credibility without commitment. Europe’s place in the world is measured not only by the words it utters, but by the choices it makes. We need stable and sufficient own resources to finance our ambition. For our part, the European Parliament is deeply committed to reaching an agreement by the end of the year.

[10:17:31] Carla Tavares (S&D) [EN]
Thank you, Mr. Tavares.

[10:17:32] Speaker 6 [PT]
Mr President, the European Council, we are counting on your commitment to have a credible proposal.

[10:17:36] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you.

[10:17:36] Speaker 6 [PT]
At the time of the defenders.

[10:17:37] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you. There is a blue card for you. Will you take it, Mr. Tavares, from Mr. Oliveira? Go ahead.

[10:17:45] João Oliveira (The Left) [PT]
Thank you. Thank you, Mr President. Ms Carla Tavares, I referred to the multiannual financial framework, and that is what I would like to ask you a few questions about. Thank you. Thank you, Mr President. Ms Carla Tavares, I have referred to the multiannual financial framework, and that is what I wanted to ask you a few questions about.

Is the problem merely that there is a shorter budget, or is it also the problem of resources being directed towards militarism, towards the arms industry, instead of being directed towards cohesion policy, to address socio-economic and territorial cohesion needs? Is the problem merely one of securing resources for the budget, or is it also a problem of inequality between Member States, of national asymmetries that, with the proposal for the multiannual financial framework under discussion, risk being exacerbated? Portugal fares poorly with this proposal for the multiannual financial framework. And the question I put to you, Ms Deputada, is how we can defend the national interest while supporting such a proposal.

[10:18:28] Carla Tavares (S&D) [EN]
Thank you. Please respond, Mr. Tavares.

[10:18:30] Carla Tavares (S&D) [PT]
Thank you very much, Mr Deputy João Oliveira. We do not have problems; we have challenges. And the biggest challenge we face at this moment is to have a multiannual financial framework that is up to the ambition of the European Union. And that is what Parliament is committed to, that is what the pro-European groups are committed to, and that is the work we will continue to do in a particularly difficult manner. We are aware of this, but particularly constructively in the coming months.

[10:18:53] Speaker 1 [PT]
Thank you very much.

[10:18:54] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you, Mr. Tavares. Now, Clara Dostálová, one and a half minutes.

[10:19:02] Klara Dostalova (PfE) [CS]
Dear colleagues, the European Council was, in places, very emotional, and it turns out that the European Commission has a problem. It talks about competitiveness, yet European companies face ever-increasing costs. It talks about affordable energy, yet people are terrified by further bills. It talks about simplification, yet entrepreneurs are drowning in bureaucracy. Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš has consistently pointed out these problems, warning of the impacts of emission permits, expensive energy, and the loss of competitiveness in European industry. For many years, Brussels refused to listen to him. Today, however, his warnings can no longer be ignored. It is precisely thanks to his persistent efforts that a significant shift was achieved at the last European summit. The European Council has called on the Commission to reassess the impacts of the ETS2 system. But I ask: what more does the Commission need to examine? When will its representatives, when will its representatives stand with their feet on the ground, will they see these problems at every turn? Energy is expensive, factories are losing competitiveness, entrepreneurs are struggling with rising costs, and families are calculating how much will remain in their wallets after paying the bills. We do not need another stack of analyses for this. All that is needed is to open our eyes. And today, we have finally managed to bring these warnings to the table, to the negotiating table of European leaders. And I will be glad if the European Commission finally realises that it is not here to make life more complicated for people, but is here to help solve their problems. People do not need more Brussels studies, promises and excuses. They need affordable energy, a functioning economy and money for the people.

[10:20:41] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you. I give the floor now to Charlie Weimers, one minute.

[10:20:47] Charlie Weimers (ECR) [SV]
Thank you, Madam President. Yes, the Chamber is here, the Commission wants to introduce a new EU tax, and you call them own resources. But it is, after all, the same thing: more of the Swedes' money going to Brussels. There are a bunch of so-called conservative members here cheering at the idea of EU taxes, and that makes me think of how Hayek dedicated his book "The Road to Serfdom" to socialists in all parties. To the Commission, I would like to say this: the Swedish people have not given you the right to decide over their taxes. That power belongs to the Swedish Riksdag. And now we are going to negotiate the next EU budget, and perhaps you think Sweden has to say yes in the end, but you know what? We don’t. If we do not reach an agreement, the EU can continue on the basis of today’s budget. Sweden therefore does not need to accept a bad deal. We are not afraid to say no. Sweden has a veto, and as long as the Sweden Democrats have anything to say about it, we will be prepared to use it. Our message is simple: not one krona in new EU taxes. Swedish taxes must be decided in Sweden.

[10:21:53] Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (Renew) [EN]
Thank you, Mr. Weimers. Now, Gerben Jan Gerbrandi, one minute.

[10:21:58] Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (Renew) [EN]
Thank you. Madam Chair, some politicians blame climate policy for high energy prices, but ren ewables saved us 29 billion euros in the first 16 weeks of this year. And it's Trump's diesel deal is what happens when you desperately need a political win on energy prices. You take the easy way out, ignore the root causes, and blame someone else. And here in Europe, Meloni and Babiš are playing the same game. Instead of tackling our dependence on fossil fuels, they're pointing the finger at the ETS. It's easier to blame climate policy than to take responsibility for failing to deliver change. Easier to blame Brussels for people's high energy bills than to deliver real solutions. And of course, Europe must help Italy and Czechia to protect their citizens from high energy prices. But at the next European Council, that support must come with a clear commitment: keep your hands off the ETS. Because when you touch the ETS, you're basically touching the savings of Europeans.

[10:23:12] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you. Thank you very much. Now, Marie Toussaint, one minute.

[10:23:17] Speaker 3 [FR]
Thank you.

[10:23:22] Marie Toussaint (Verts/ALE) [FR]
Mr Costa, prices are soaring. Those for food, rents, energy – don’t you hear the anger brewing across Europe? We had every right to expect strong, immediate action from the Member States. But nothing. There is no money left in the pockets of Europeans, nor in public services. The world is warming at a rapid pace, but you still have not decided to tax the super-profits of billionaires, of the tech sector, or of polluters. On the contrary, you are multiplying handouts, including free pollution permits to the companies that make the biggest profits. And you insist on the idea of making citizens pay a new carbon tax on transport and heating, which could cost households several thousand euros extra per year, on top of those already struggling to heat their homes, put a roof over their heads and put food on the table. Mr Costa, more and more Europeans have to juggle several jobs without always managing to feed their children. Making European households foot the bill for your climate inaction is unacceptable. The priority, the urgency, is to take the money where it is, to finance the energy transition.

[10:24:31] Speaker 3 [FR]
Thank you.

[10:24:32] Speaker 1 [FR]
And reduce bills. Do it.

[10:24:34] Speaker 3 [FR]
Thank you. Ms Toussaint.

[10:24:35] Speaker 3 [EN]
Now, Irene Montero, one minute.

[10:24:43] Irene Montero (The Left) [ES]
Mr Costa, honourable Members, a burning rubbish bin really gets your goat. But does a broken paving stone in Italy really seem unbearable to you? Is a camp-out in Madrid really too much to stomach? All your solidarity is with poor rubbish bins? Your most sincere support for broken paving stones? I mean, prices are through the roof. People who can’t pay their rent. Millions of young people who are being forced by your policies to study in prefabricated classrooms. Millions of evictions every day like the one suffered by Mari Carmen. They are spending the money meant for healthcare and pensions on rearmament and war. They want to send our children — not theirs — to war for profit. But what outrages them is a burning bin. Well, I think that if you call for a hard line against young people who are protesting and not against the speculators, the banks, the big companies, the energy firms, the billionaires who are destroying their lives, then you are part of the problem.

[10:25:49] Speaker 3 [ES]
Thank you.

[10:25:50] Speaker 1 [EN]
I give the floor next to Alexander Jungbluth, one minute.

[10:25:59] Alexander Jungbluth (ESN) [DE]
Dear Madam President, around 1.8 trillion euros for the new multiannual budget is not a compromise, it is a slap in the face for European taxpayers. In this respect, we welcome the Council's proposal, as enormous cuts are possible here. In view of the dramatic developments and the many pointless expenditure items in the EU budget, it is high time to subject this budget to a complete overhaul. Examples? Around 700 billion euros – more than a third of the entire budget – is earmarked for climate policy, while our industry is increasingly relocating. 8.6 billion euros for Agora EU, through which Brussels hand-picks people who are then financed in the media and so-called civil society. And this House even wants to increase that to 10.7 billion euros. The Commission itself had to admit that this tax money was used to finance impermissible lobbying work for NGOs. We are therefore demanding a drastic cut to this budget; this is necessary and urgent at this time.

[10:27:11] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you. I give the floor to Lefteris Nikolaou Alavanos. One minute.

[10:27:20] Lefteris Nikolaou-Alavanos (NI) [EL]
In France, Belgium, Spain, Portugal and Greece, workers and young people are demonstrating against high prices, high energy and housing costs, the attack on education, income and, overall, on people's rights. At the same time, groups such as those in the energy sector are recording record profits, literally stepping on the bodies of the people, as in Greece, fueling justified anger. Despite the rivalries within the European Council over the interests of each state’s monopolies, all governments agreed to squeeze the people dry, primarily to meet the needs of the war economy. The government of New Democracy in Greece and the other parties of the European Union, which for years have been presenting this wolf pack alliance as a shield of protection for the peoples, are now touting the goal of convergence, only to be resoundingly refuted. In the face of the European Union, its governments, the people respond by escalating their struggle with mass mobilisations, such as today in Greece, with the nationwide strike on 25 November, with the international workers' strike on 30 October, placing their own interests at the forefront. Affirming that for the people to win, capital must lose.

[10:28:25] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you.

[10:28:26] Speaker 3 [EN]
Now I give the floor to Dolores Montserrat, one and a half minutes.

[10:28:32] Dolors Montserrat (PPE) [ES]
Thank you, Madam President. The figures do not lie. Irregular entries into the Union are at their lowest level since 2021. With one exception: Spain. And that is no coincidence. The Migration and Asylum Pact is being applied in 26 Member States, while Mr Sánchez does not implement it and, on top of that, voted against it. Europe has never lacked a response to the invasion of Ceuta. What has been in abundance is the sectarian ideology that opens the borders to invaders and to the mafias that traffic in people, with total impunity. We congratulate the Commission on its new proposal for a regulation on responding to migration emergencies. Europe will be a shield against hybrid attacks and those who use migrants as weapons. And no kneeling President like Sánchez will be able to prevent it. Your failure will not be Europe’s failure. The second emergency is the cost of living. Climate sectarianism does not pay the electricity bill. Aid and tax relief, extensions, joint purchases and cutting red tape, yes. This is the policy that protects families, the middle classes, businesses and industry. Fewer dogmas and more solutions. But we must move faster and without complexes. Without nuclear, there will be no cheap energy. And those who will suffer will be the most vulnerable. Winter will also come to Ukraine, a people who have been resisting for almost five years an empire that seeks not peace but destruction. Yours and ours. And we will not stop. We will not allow it to fall. Europe was not born to surrender and we will always stand with Ukraine.

[10:30:10] Irene Tinagli (S&D) [EN]
Thank you very much. Next speaker will be Irene Tinagi, please.

[10:30:14] Irene Tinagli (S&D) [EN]
Thank you, president. So we talk a lot about competitiveness. We've heard a lot this word this morning. Let me give you just two data. Every year Europe imports more than 300 billion euros in digital services. We are overly dependent on U.S. big tech for our digital infrastructure. And at the same time, our industrial companies face energy prices that can be two or three times higher than those of our international peers. These are structural weaknesses. And cannot be addressed just with some simplification or omnibus thing. They require investments, common infrastructures, common investments. And this is precisely the purpose of the European competitiveness fund. Investing and supporting investment in common infrastructures and investments and energy transition, digital technologies, et cetera. Yet the council is moving in the opposite direction, relying more on national state aid while cutting common resources. And precisely the competitiveness fund. But a European strategy goes beyond the sum of national strategies. So we need to step up. Every day I hear leaders complaining about Europe's weaknesses, but then when it comes to action, they turn their back on Europe. I have a message for them. Start behaving like real leaders.

[10:31:32] Susanna Ceccardi (PfE) [EN]
Thank you. Thank you. Thank your next speaker, Suzanna Ceccardi, please.

[10:31:39] Susanna Ceccardi (PfE) [IT]
Thank you, Mr President. Not even cities reduced to ashes and flames understand that we need a more serious approach to immigration. Evidently, the lesson of Ceuta was not enough. Italy, Poland, Denmark have asked the European Council for new resources to... have asked the European Council for a tougher line on immigration. And yet once again, nothing has been done. And while member states are still being asked to make sacrifices, we are discussing new resources are being allocated for Ukraine, we are asking for one simple thing: when will Europe start to put at the centre also the security of its own citizens, the competitiveness of our businesses? Today we finally have news of the compromise reached by the majority groups... who understand that stopping the production of diesel and petrol cars by 2035 is madness. At last! But how long have we been saying this? How much time have we wasted on competitiveness? How many Chinese electric cars have flooded our market while we were talking instead of converting everything to electric? Meanwhile, however, we patriots have been saying this for many years. Now is the time to have a good dose of humility. Enough of treating as extremists the positions of those who have been calling for greater security, defence of our borders and competitiveness for our businesses while protecting jobs. The patriots have always been right. And sooner or later, you will be forced to admit it.

[10:33:12] Marion Maréchal (ECR) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Marion Maréchal.

[10:33:17] Marion Maréchal (ECR) [FR]
On this final day, France was devastated by an alliance between far-left militias and gangs of thugs who burned, looted and terrorised. e. Numerous European leaders from all political backgrounds have responded to this tragedy by recognising it as one of the consequences of massive and unassimilated immigration. The problem is that one of the few heads of State who is not lucid about this situation is precisely the French President. Once again, at the last meeting of the European Council, it was Emmanuel Macron who prevented the Union from toughening its stance on immigration. It was he, alongside the Socialist Pedro Sánchez, who refused to approve a historic declaration making the link between immigration and crime, and explaining that migratory subversion destroys national cohesion. The French must know the truth. It is their President who has betrayed them by blocking this text, which is nevertheless supported by the majority of European countries. So, fellow Europeans, take courage. There are less than six months to go, because soon, in May 2027, France will reclaim its rightful place and join the great coalition of proud countries that want Europe to remain Europe.

[10:34:18] Speaker 2 [EN]
I colleague Maréchal, would you accept a blue card from João Oliveira 125?

[10:34:29] João Oliveira (The Left) [PT]
Thank you. Thank you, Mr President. Madam Member, Madam Member, the far right pretends to be very concerned about people’s living conditions, about the cost-of-living problems, about housing problems, but in truth this is only a pretext. Because there is zero concern. Where was the government of Ms Meloni at the European Council meeting to raise these people's issues? ? The far-right government of Italy’s Ms. Meloni gave its agreement to these conclusions, agreed to the total disregard for the cost of living, disregard for housing, disregard for the difficulties that people are going through. You cannot come here pretending to be concerned about the people if, in your political actions, you contribute to the problems afflicting their lives.

[10:35:18] Marion Maréchal (ECR) [EN]
Please.

[10:35:23] Marion Maréchal (ECR) [FR]
Mr Deputy, it seems to me that you would have been better inspired to use the minute that was granted to you to condemn the absolutely scandalous attitude of some of your far-left friends who, through an anti-fascist international that engages in terrorism, calls for violence, calls for looting, calls for destruction. And I say this to you with the utmost gravity: I am today in a country that is on the brink of civil war because of the attitude of your far-left friends. And I will conclude simply by saying that there is no social condition or precariousness that can justify attacking police officers, beating up shopkeepers, or destroying town halls or public services.

[10:36:08] João Cotrim De Figueiredo (Renew) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, João Cotrim de Figueiredo.

[10:36:15] João Cotrim De Figueiredo (Renew) [EN]
Thank you, Mr. President, President Costa, Mr. Commissioner Savković. I'd like to say that last week's council was a disappointment. For more than two years we all have been calling for Europe to move forward quickly and decisively, and yet after the Council on Friday wh at we heard was not the sound of Europe marching forward. What we heard was sounds of joy in Moscow because Ukraine did not guarantee the 70 billion you'd asked for, sounds of joy in Beijing because faced with the 360 billion euro trade deficit the council asked for, yet another toolbox. Sounds of despair which I share from many of my European concitizens realizing that not one, not one really structural decision was taken. The council welcomes and invites and takes note. It spends countless hours redrafting issues that were closed before, but nothing on the MFF moved except the lik ely date of conclusion. I myself made sounds of laughter when I heard the council call for a regulatory soft restraint coming from 27 head of state which make gold plating a daily. Past time. The upcoming astronomy meeting of the 26th of November must produce very different sounds, Mr. President, the sounds of Europe moving to the future.

[10:37:29] Speaker 2 [EN]
Colleague de Figueiredo, would you accept that you have a two blue card so I will try to do it but I will definitely will not go to that I 'm colleague next time the second blue card so otherwise we will be much too late so first one is that Marta Temido 86 place so please.

[10:37:47] Marta Temido (S&D) [EN]
Thank you, President.

[10:37:49] Marta Temido (S&D) [PT]
Madam Deputy, the Council concluded that it is insufficient, but requested a coordinated European response to the increase in fuel costs, urgent, temporary, targeted measures. This was the request made by the Council, this was the request made by this Parliament, on several occasions, notably through the taxation of excess profits of energy companies. The gentleman seems to be against it. How can you call for decisions when you are then against them? How do you expect Europe to have the trust of its citizens and for its citizens to trust in Europe if we do not then provide responses for their day-to-day lives?

[10:38:24] João Cotrim De Figueiredo (Renew) [PT]
Thank you very much, Madam Deputy. You are asking me about something on which the Council has also not expressed an opinion, and my response regarding that taxing extraordinary profits is very simple. I do not want to tax extraordinary profits because I do not want to have to bear extraordinary losses one day, and the moral case is exactly the same. Therefore, I once again criticise the Council because it has not been decisive on Ukraine, it has not been decisive on the MFF, it has not been decisive on what are our major difficulties in trade relations with some of the blocs we have. This is where we need decisions, not invitations, comments or wishes to decide later, decisions.

[10:39:05] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you.

[10:39:05] Speaker 4 [PT]
Now, we need the Council to do so immediately.

[10:39:07] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you, colleague. You have a still blue or second blue card so if you will accept it so Bruno Gonçalves.

[10:39:11] Speaker 4 [EN]
Very popular.

[10:39:12] Speaker 2 [EN]
Bruno Gonçalves 304, you don't need that interpretation.

[10:39:20] Bruno Gonçalves (S&D) [PT]
Mr Deputy, thank you very much. Mr Deputy, thank you very much. I depend on your message being a Europeanist invitation, a Europeanist invitation that calls for more investment and more decisive action in your words. And they embody that very thing, more resources. And so the question I leave you with is: against windfall profits and the taxation of extraordinary profits, profits that, by the way, do not derive from merit but stem solely from the decisions of a single unstable person in the White House. My question is very simple: where will we find these resources? Do you advocate for greater own resources from the Member States or do you advocate for which and how new European taxes?

[10:39:56] João Cotrim De Figueiredo (Renew) [PT]
Mr/Ms Deputy, to your question, the answer is.

[10:39:58] João Cotrim De Figueiredo (Renew) [PT]
A budget that is commensurate with Europe’s ambitions, which will necessarily have to be higher than the previous one and which must not burden national contributions by resorting to own resources, on one condition. That these own resources do not divert revenue that currently belongs to the Member States. Therefore, they must truly be own resources generated, managed and collected by the Union. Thank you very much.

[10:40:20] Alice Kuhnke (Verts/ALE) [EN]
Thank you. So next speaker, Alice Kuhn-Kae, please.

[10:40:26] Alice Kuhnke (Verts/ALE) [SV]
Thank you, Mr President. This is how it is: the money is not enough for everything, and therefore we need to have the ability to prioritise. Freedom and defence are two fundamental prerequisites in the face of the challenges we are facing. The defence of our freedoms and rights, the defence of what builds the EU and Sweden’s strength. And that is about the work against disinformation, by investing in free, scrutinising and independent media, it is about meeting places – the local association, the youth club, the rehearsal space and the theatre stage – it is about the vital women’s shelters, about resources for the conditions to organise, about popular movements, about a strong civil society. It is precisely through these tools that democracy becomes strong. That is how we build trust in one another, that is how we build the society that Putin so eagerly wants to destroy. Thank you.

[10:41:27] Speaker 2 [EN]
Okay, would you accept the blue card from Charlie Weimers, 107?

[10:41:31] Charlie Weimers (ECR) [SV]
Yes.

[10:41:32] Charlie Weimers (ECR) [EN]
Yeah, please.

[10:41:35] Charlie Weimers (ECR) [SV]
Thank you.

[10:41:35] Charlie Weimers (ECR) [SV]
Mr President, Alice Bah Kuhnke, you did indeed speak in favour of defending freedoms and rights, and on that we are in agreement, but in the last session the Green Party voted against defending precisely those freedoms and rights with regard to Islamist infiltration and you were opposed to the terrorist designation of the Muslim Brotherhood. At first I saw that you had voted in favour of this, and I thought that was good. She also sees that this is a women-oppressing organisation, but then you announce that you voted incorrectly. Why is it wrong to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organisation?

[10:42:10] Alice Kuhnke (Verts/ALE) [SV]
For me, as a Green, it is self-evident that we are opposed to all forms of extremism and all forms of violent extremism and terrorism. What we, on the other hand, are opposed to, and will always stand up for, is populism that, with sweeping generalisations, seeks to stigmatise all Muslims. Unfortunately, we are living in a reality where many in this House, particularly on the side to which Mr Charlie Weimers belongs, are doing everything they can to undermine human rights, to drive a wedge between people. We Greens will never go along with that.

[10:42:40] Speaker 3 [SV]
Thank you.

[10:42:42] Speaker 2 [EN]
Sorry, we from the time constraints, we don't have a time. Sorry, colleague, Weimers. Thank you very much. So next speaker, Katarina Martins.

[10:42:59] Catarina Martins (The Left) [PT]
Thank you, Mr President. I would like to make a suggestion: open the windows of the office and listen, listen to what people are saying. Thank you, Mr President. I would like to make a suggestion: open the windows of your office and listen, listen to what people are saying.

They want homes, but there are no homes that people can afford. And while the far right blames workers in agriculture, construction, transport, distribution and care homes, the sale of luxury homes has doubled. Real estate funds have seen their assets quintuple. The Council meets, discusses the budget and there is not a single word about housing. They talk about competitiveness, so what about wages? Productivity in Europe has almost tripled compared to wages. People cannot make a living because everything goes to the richest 1% who do not even pay the taxes they owe. Yes, people are angry and they have every reason to be. And meanwhile, Ms von der Leyen, who has already left, came here to say that she wants to put more money into the billionaire arms industry, which will be taken away from schools and healthcare. Yes, the arsonists are actually here in this room.

[10:44:06] Speaker 2 [EN]
Colleague, Martins, you have a blue card from Piotr Müller, 591. Would you accept blue card from Piotr Müller 591?

[10:44:18] Piotr Müller (ECR) [EN]
Yeah.

[10:44:23] Piotr Müller (ECR) [PL]
I am glad that you are talking about the cost of living. I am glad that you are talking about the cost of living of European citizens. It is very good that you are drawing attention to this. However, I have a question for you then: what is your position regarding the abolition or deep reform of the ETS system, which in fact deepens the cost of living for those who are least well-off, when it comes to heating, when it comes to the buildings directive, which also increases costs precisely in housing? What will you say on this matter? Because the European Council has discussed this issue in order to abolish the ETS system or to fundamentally reform it. I hope that the left will finally also understand that this means higher living costs for citizens.

[10:45:05] Catarina Martins (The Left) [PT]
Mr Deputy, changing environmental rules now means making European industry more vulnerable. Everyone is talking about strategic autonomy, but then the rules could be changed every day. This destroys jobs in Europe, it destroys wealth in Europe. You are not going to get me to defend the carbon market, which I have never defended in my life, but I will tell you one thing: we can have a just transition, yes, and make energy companies pay for it. The problem is that they want to cut even further what little they already pay.

[10:45:34] Mary Khan (ESN) [EN]
So thank you. Next speaker, Mari Khan, please.

[10:45:40] Mary Khan (ESN) [DE]
You know, in just two days, 80,000 migrants crossed the Spanish border illegally. And what do the European heads of government, what does Friedrich Merz do? For this so-called invasion, they have only three meagre paragraphs to offer. And what are the people in Ceuta supposed to do with their solidarity? People who no longer recognise their own city. Three paragraphs without even mentioning the child, namely that this mass immigration is also being used as a weapon against our continent. And to this day, they have not been willing—have not been willing at all—to spend 1.2 trillion euros to defend this continent. France and Italy have been burning for weeks because they want it, because of their migration policy. But they don’t care. They let more criminals and terrorists into Europe day after day. And unfortunately, Ms von der Leyen is not here again. She left early. You owe it to Europeans at last to step down. Thank you.

[10:46:46] Tomas Tobé (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Tomas Dobre.

[10:46:52] Tomas Tobé (PPE) [EN]
President, colleagues, the European Council has recognized the hard truth: not only the awful war of aggression against Ukraine, but also the constant hybrid attacks against Europe are threatening our union. The EBP group strongly supports the message that Russia's hostile actions will not go unanswered. The same must go for any other hostile actor attacking Europe. We cannot be weak against our enemies. And we cannot be naive about their strategies. The weaponization of migration is a clear example. We must be prepared for crises like in Ceuta, where our external border was breached on a massive sc ale in a matter of days. And of course, Prime Minister Sanchez needs to leave office, but also the people who don't have the right to be in Europe. Russia and Belarus have since long used migration to pressure Europe, and we need to do more to tackle this. We also need to be very clear about cross-border crime, with a hybrid dimension. Europol has a crucial role to play, and must be able to support member states. Colleagues, we must do more, not less, to defend our borders, protect our democracies, and safeguard our freedom. We did not build the European Union to be intimidated. We built it together. And together we must defend our values and fight for Europe. Thank you.

[10:48:27] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Marit May, please.

[10:48:35] Marit Maij (S&D) [NL]
Thank you, Mr President. Did you know that in the latest proposal for the upcoming European budget, the European Council is allocating more than four times as much money to agriculture as to Europe’s social objectives? For 8.8 million agricultural businesses, 261 billion euros have been reserved. And for 92.7 million people living on or at the edge of poverty, not a single euro has been reserved, but rather a target of 61 billion euros. Children who go to school without breakfast do not have tractors to stage protests. People with disabilities do not block motorways. Homeless people cannot afford expensive lobbyists. The social dimension of the European Union is under pressure with the narrative that social policy is a burden. It is harmful that the new Multiannual Financial Framework does not have a separate budget for the European Social Fund. Europe is so much more than just competitiveness. It is also looking out for one another and investing in people. And let me repeat this one more time: a separate budget for the European Social Fund is a red line for the S&D. Thank you.

[10:49:40] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Marieke Eilers.

[10:49:50] Marieke Ehlers (PfE) [NL]
Thank you, Mr President. I could speak again today about Ukraine, the budget, enlargement and competitiveness, but then I would only be contributing to this endless echo chamber. So let me therefore address something more fundamental: Mr President, the Member States are the masters of the Treaties. The Commission is the guardian thereof. But neither seems to take that responsibility seriously anymore. And once again, it is citizens who are paying the price. Their purchasing power is evaporating, our competitive strength is declining, and energy costs are skyrocketing. Illegal migration continues unabated and our streets are more unsafe than ever. And Brussels just keeps on thundering away. The committee acts like a decree factory churning out destructive policies. The majority in this Parliament has long since lost touch with reality. And the Member States themselves? They just stand by and watch. At home, government leaders promise fewer rules and less bureaucracy. They send urgent letters to Ursula. They beg for a postponement of suffocating EU rules and demand an emergency brake on the Commission’s regulatory drive. Yet once they are in Brussels, they all capitulate one by one. How many more angry letters about the budget and deregulation will still follow? When are the heads of government finally going to block what they claim to fight against at home? It is high time that the Commission is reined in and its decrees end up in the bin.

[10:51:31] Speaker 4 [NL]
Thank you.

[10:51:32] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Francesco Torselli.

[10:51:41] Francesco Torselli (ECR) [IT]
There is one case that, more than any other, illustrates the absurd tendency of the European Union to harm itself. This is the case of the ETS, a mad system that has seen, since its inception to date, the cost multiply tenfold. quotas, increasing financial speculation and its cost being asymmetrically passed on to energy prices in various European countries. But above all, it has not led to a reduction in global emissions. Without Giorgia Meloni’s insistence, the Council would not have committed to reviewing the ETS system and to assessing the impact of the ETS2 folly on housing and transport. So perhaps those who say that here, locked in this bubble, Europe does not see that our industry is closing down and migrating are right. It does not see that China is dominating us with critical minerals, and I could go on. In this dramatic context, anyone who, for ideological or self-serving reasons, still wastes time is simply a tragically complicit.

[10:52:45] Laurence Farreng (Renew) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Laurence Farang.

[10:52:51] Laurence Farreng (Renew) [FR]
Mr President, Mr President of the Council, Commissioner, once again. Donald Trump is betraying Ukraine and Europe once again on the altar of foul deals with Vladimir Putin. He is once again choosing the aggressor over the victim. Again! We repeat: we are supporting Ukraine not only because we firmly believe in respect for international law. We are helping it for our own security. The far right, which denies this reality, is, as always, beneath contempt. So let us step up our support for Ukraine. Let us protect its skies. Let us use the frozen Russian assets. Let us rise to the occasion. Europe must stop waiting for anything from Donald Trump. It must absolutely build its independence to defend its values, to combat China's unfair competition, to protect its economy and jobs, and to increase Europeans' purchasing power. And to achieve this, we need an ambitious budget, equipped with new resources, capable of giving us more leeway. So let's stop dithering. Let's stop being defeatist. Let's be radically European. Thank you.

[10:53:59] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Damian Bozalaghed. Could be enough, yes.

[10:54:18] Damian Boeselager (Verts/ALE) [EN]
Dear President Costa, whenever Europe's 27 leaders meet to solve our problems, we get your document expressing deep concern. Underlining the urgency and reiterating the need for something to happen. Now, President Costa, while I understand the power of words, in these chaotic times we lack action, not words. When Trump cuts Starshield and Ukrainians die in their sleep, Europe needs to act. When young people take to the streets for their future, Europe needs to act. When Serbians are trying to get rid of their dictator, Europe needs to act. And when a mother is held at gunpoint every day when picking up her son at school in the West Bank, Europe needs to act. President Costa, I know that bringing 27 leaders together on the same will is not easy, especially when they're so weak at home. But governing Europe is not only about finding a common will, it's also about acting on that will. So allow me to say it in the language of the Council: we strongly encourage European leaders to move from words to action. We underline the urgent need to replace the 27 weak national leaders with a real European government, and we demand that the people of Europe are allowed to elect their future. Thank you.

[10:55:28] Estrella Galán (The Left) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Estrella Galán, please.

[10:55:36] Estrella Galán (The Left) [ES]
Thank you, Mr President. Mr Costas, there is enormous unrest in Europe, unrest that is being expressed in housing protests, in demonstrations for education, in mobilisations over the cost of living. But Ms von der Leyen has understood nothing, nor has she even stayed to listen to it. A large part of that unrest is affecting young people. And what they are telling us is something brutal: we have no future. They had the opportunity to tell the majority of society: 'We have heard you and we are going to change course.' However, that is not what they have done. They are once again displaying the same old short-sightedness. More deregulation and more borders is not the answer to a precarious life with no future. Completing the single market is not the answer to the cost of living, which is the nightmare of millions of families. More competitiveness is not what is needed to guarantee that housing is a right. You mind your own business, and then you are surprised that the weeds of the far right keep growing at your feet. The bad thing is that it is not growing only at your feet; it is also growing at ours.

[10:56:45] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Hans Neuhof. Please.

[10:56:58] Hans Neuhoff (ESN) [DE]
The EU’s Ukraine strategy has failed. 21 packages of sanctions have not brought Russia to its knees. Its arms industry is operating at full throttle, while Ukraine's financial needs have proven to be a bottomless pit. Ukraine remains exposed to Russian drones and missiles, while Moscow’s conditions for negotiations remain unchanged. remain the same. The conclusions of the European Council on this are nothing but a document of failure. The same appeals and declarations: 'Keep fighting, Ukraine,' which we have been hearing for years. Ukraine cannot continue this war of attrition indefinitely. Its population has shrunk from 52 to 22 million. Ladies and gentlemen, after the recapture of the Vietnamese city of Bến Tre, a US officer said: "We had to destroy this city in order to save it." Who among you would want to be responsible for a policy about which it will one day be said...

[10:58:06] Speaker 2 [EN]
We do conclude. Please.

[10:58:07] Speaker 3 [DE]
save them, and has done so.

[10:58:09] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, Niklas Herbst.

[10:58:19] Niclas Herbst (PPE) [DE]
Thank you, Mr President. My dear ladies and gentlemen, I live in Kiel on the Baltic Sea, and the Baltic Sea is the main operating area. Thank you, Mr President. My dear ladies and gentlemen, I live in Kiel on the Baltic Sea, and the Baltic Sea is the main operating area of the Russian shadow fleet. This is not only a threat to security policy and the economy, it is also an ecological threat to us in an ecosystem that is already very sensitive. And we do not have to wait for attacks. We have experienced them. There have been attacks on undersea cables, the lifelines in the Baltic Sea region. These are not just random incidents. We have seen espionage attempts, acts of sabotage, drone overflights, cyberattacks. So we do not have to wait. The attacks are happening, and we must also make it very clear to people: that is why it is important that the conclusions of the Council also include security policy demands. I do not read too much of them, but some. For example, regarding the Agile programme, which is praised but is still far too limited and is essentially still in a pilot phase. On military mobility, which is extremely important. And hopefully will also be seen in the countries that are a little further away from the NATO eastern flank. And the European Union must act here. And there is the saying, which I think fits well:

[10:59:22] Niclas Herbst (PPE) [EN]
"Put your money where your mouth is."

[10:59:24] Niclas Herbst (PPE) [DE]
Because if we look at what the proposal is in the current negotiating box, cuts are being made precisely in these areas. And that is why, ladies and gentlemen, we all need to move. And. That is also my message to the Council: here in Parliament you will find many well-meaning forces that are able to move forward as well. In order to actually create these opportunities within the next multiannual financial framework, however, this movement must also happen on the Council’s side. We are ready, and we hope that the Council is too, for the people in the Baltic Sea region and across Europe. Thank you.

[10:59:53] Speaker 2 [DE]
Colleague Herbst, Colleague Herbst,

[10:59:55] Speaker 2 [EN]
you have a two blue cards. First one is Luca Zipper, would you accept it?

[11:00:01] Lukas Sieper (Renew) [DE]
I have already been waiting.

[11:00:02] Lukas Sieper (Renew) [EN]
Yeah, please.

[11:00:06] Lukas Sieper (Renew) [DE]
Thank you very much, Mr President. Thank you very much, colleague, for accepting the blue card. I am also pleased about that. That I am allowed to ask you a question. I would like to play devil’s advocate a little here. Because you and I, I think we both know that when we go out to the public – and you have said we need to explain this to people – it keeps happening that people say we are to blame for having provoked Russia, that we are the aggressors, that we are standing in the way of peace. Now, you and I both agree that that is not the case. But what do you say to these people to change their minds? Thank you.

[11:00:45] Niclas Herbst (PPE) [DE]
Also, where I come from, the people are very peaceful. But they also know how maritime navigation works, for example. And that you don’t accidentally destroy undersea cables. Rather, that it is a targeted attack. And that it is a targeted attack on us. And the people understand that too, when you confront them with the truth. And that is why I believe that if we simply stick to the facts and say: We are not attacking anyone, we are not destroying any undersea cables, but they are being destroyed in our waters, then I think that is explanation enough. And the vast majority of people understand that very well.

[11:01:14] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Kollege Herbst, the second card is from Kollege Jungblut, 613, would you accept it?

[11:01:21] Alexander Jungbluth (ESN) [DE]
I am not quite as pleased about the colleague Mr Sipper, but progress is being made here too, of course.

[11:01:28] Alexander Jungbluth (ESN) [EN]
Please.

[11:01:28] Alexander Jungbluth (ESN) [DE]
Yes, thank you very much, colleague. I am all the more pleased to be able to put this question to you. Very briefly: you have indeed criticised some cuts quite clearly, and now the fact is that even Germany’s Federal Chancellor is proposing significant cuts. That means that even the proposals from the Irish Council Presidency do not go far enough for you. He says that we actually need to make even more significant cuts to the multiannual financial framework. How does this align with your demands that we should significantly increase spending in some areas?

[11:01:59] Niclas Herbst (PPE) [DE]
As I have already said, I believe that we should all leave our trenches and discuss how to spend money in the most sensible way. That is the only question. It is not just about the amount, but really about the question: where can things best be achieved? And I am quite certain that if we not only quote the Federal Chancellor in a shortened form, but also quote him on the fact that he is very committed to a modernised budget, to greater competitiveness and to greater defence capability, that this can also have positive effects on the federal budget. So we should all move away a little from this very simplistic debate: How much money are you spending? Instead: How can we best spend the taxpayers' money? The Herr Finanzamt can also make a good contribution here.

[11:02:35] Speaker 2 [EN]
Yeah, thank you. So, next speaker, no, blue card is over, yeah, so thank you, Kollege Herbst. Next speaker, Javier Moreno Sánchez.

[11:02:48] Javier Moreno Sánchez (S&D) [ES]
Thank you, Mr President. Mr President, Commissioner, honourable Members. Let us recall that the European Parliament is the budgetary authority and that the pro-European forces are prepared to reject the Council’s inadequate proposal for the next multiannual financial framework. This would lead to an unprecedented financial and institutional crisis that would leave a weak Union, adrift in a turbulent world order. We need a competitive and green Europe that guarantees its own security and defence. Honourable Members, the proposal from the Irish Presidency is clearly insufficient to keep the European Union united, cohesive both territorially and socially. As defended by my country's President, Pedro Sánchez, at the European Council, cuts cannot be made. Moreover, own resources are essential. The priority is the health, education, work and housing of our citizens. That is why an adequate European Social Fund is essential. Mr President, the agreement must be finalised in December so that this House can do its work and adopt the legislative acts that guarantee the continuity of the funds in 2028. Mr President Costa, we are counting on your skills.

[11:03:56] Speaker 2 [EN]
Yeah, thank you very much. Next speaker, Jean-Paul Garreau.

[11:04:06] Jean-Paul Garraud (PfE) [FR]
At the last European Council, the social-democrat Prime Minister of Denmark delivered a damning assessment that we have been making for years among patriots. Uncontrolled immigration threatens the cohesion of our societies, weighs on our public services and exacerbates insecurity. When a left-wing leader denounces mass immigration, she completely undermines the caricatures of political correctness that would label any clear-eyed view on migration as far-right. And we saw this, moreover, just last weekend in France, where hordes of rioters, many of them from immigrant backgrounds, laid waste to our to label all migration realism as far-right. And we saw this, moreover, last weekend in France, where hordes of rioters, many of them from immigration backgrounds, ransacked our cities alongside far-left militants. In Denmark, the left has understood that ignoring the will of the people is to betray the working classes and open the door to chaos. By contrast, the Spanish socialist Prime Minister persists in mass regularisation of several hundred thousand undocumented migrants, putting all of Europe at risk. Fortunately, the upcoming legislative elections will correct this policy and bring our allies from Vox to power. This European fracture proves that the divide is no longer between the right and the left, between reality and denial, but between patriots and globalists. Only the firmness of nations, thank you, masters of their borders, will save Europe.

[11:05:16] Andreas Schwab (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. You have a blue card, Kollege Garreau, from Schwab, Andreas Schwab, 199. Would you accept? Yes?

[11:05:23] Andreas Schwab (PPE) [EN]
Yes.

[11:05:23] Andreas Schwab (PPE) [EN]
Please.

[11:05:24] Andreas Schwab (PPE) [FR]
Thank you. Thank you, Mr President. Dear colleagues, I am here. So, I listened very carefully to your speech on immigration, and since we are talking about the budget, I wanted to ask you: what advantage do you see in the European budget in the interest of French citizens?

[11:05:42] Jean-Paul Garraud (PfE) [FR]
But is this question related to what I was talking about? The European budget, if you want me to talk about the European budget, it is indeed a major subject, an immense subject, with this key question being that of own resources. Of this budget. To which we are totally opposed, because we cannot, and we do not want, an increase in the European budget's own resources. So I think that answers your question.

[11:06:07] Speaker 3 [EN]
Thank you. Now, next speaker, Johan van Overtvelt.

[11:06:17] Johan Van Overtveldt (ECR) [NL]
Mr President, President Costa, Commissioner. In the current geopolitically turbulent circumstances, it is more important than ever that the European Union places competitiveness at the centre. Our delegation therefore welcomes the joint appeal by the German, Italian and Belgian heads of government. The European Union must enhance its competitiveness not only by stimulating new investments but also by actively removing legal and administrative obstacles and by a forward-looking reshaping of European budgetary expenditures. Moreover, of course, competitiveness cannot be considered in isolation from the phenomenon of China and the unfair practices applied by them. I repeat my call for a general import tariff of around 10% on everything coming from China. t. The revenue from this could be used to support Ukraine, and we would immediately send a double message to China: stop this unfair competition and stop facilitating Putin’s war. The EU will only be heard if it proves that it can act truly, effectively and decisively. Thank you.

[11:07:28] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [EN]
Kollega, van Overtvelt. Kollega van Overtvelt, you have a two blue cards, but I would like to say, since you have those who ask a blue c ard, you already have a KJI registration, so please do it. We cannot do both because of time constraint. And the same with the kollega Koelemans, Estelle, would you like to stay on KJI? Or blue card?

[11:07:53] Estelle Ceulemans (S&D) [FR]
I will have other opportunities to question Mr van Overtvelt, including on Mr Franken's remarks, so I will keep my speaking time for later to focus on KJI instead. Thank you.

[11:08:03] Speaker 2 [EN]
Yeah, thank you, Johan.

[11:08:04] Speaker 3 [EN]
Okay.

[11:08:08] Engin Eroglu (Renew) [EN]
Next speaker, Engin Eroglou, please.

[11:08:13] Engin Eroglu (Renew) [DE]
Honourable President of the Commission Costa, honourable Commissioner and Commissioner, now is the moment to listen and less to Mr Commissioner, you and the Commission are trying to give a naked man a shirt by reaching into the pockets of some Member States. it’s not even got pockets left because there’s no money left. And the reason there’s no money left in the Member States is that the European Commission, with its announcements and massive regulation of the economy in the European Union during the last mandate, has broken the legs and arms of the economy. And the only thing, Mr Commissioner, that will move us forward now is not trying to take money from a naked man, but to make the economy capable of action again. And this also applies to you, Mr Costa. We now finally have to start extracting the raw materials that are in the ground in the European Union. We must finally start processing the raw materials that we have then extracted within the European Union. Through extraction, through processing, through the economy, innovation will emerge, and through growth we will solve our problems, not through redistribution. Thank you very much.

[11:09:10] Benedetta Scuderi (Verts/ALE) [EN]
Thank you very much. Next speaker, Benedetta Scuderi.

[11:09:17] Benedetta Scuderi (Verts/ALE) [IT]
European families are being crushed by electricity and energy prices and the cost-of-living crisis. And the European Council is failing to propose anything substantial: no fuel price cap, no tax on excess profits. In return, you have accepted the postponement of the methane rules and a plan for refineries. In the face of the fossil fuel crisis, the response is more fossil fuel. You wrote it yourselves: transition is the most effective way to lower prices. But then the Irish Presidency proposes cuts of €141 billion compared to the Commission’s already insufficient proposal. We are reducing resources for businesses’ competitiveness and for the energy transition. By cutting Horizon, which is research, by almost a tenth and 30% of the funds for democracy. Less money for regions and cohesion. All this for what reason? Why on earth would we think of taxing the excess profits of companies, the fossil fuel giants filling their pockets because of this crisis? Or of reducing spending on rearmament? Leave these buildings and look at what is happening. And perhaps you will understand that this is the time to invest in energy, our people, and our territories.

[11:10:32] Daniel Buda (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Daniel Buda, please.

[11:10:37] Daniel Buda (PPE) [RO]
Mr President, thank you, Mr Costa. I welcome the conclusions of the European Council at point 17, which strongly condemn the attacks by the Russian Federation on commercial vessels in the Black Sea. This is one of the world's most important commercial routes for cereals and plays a crucial role in global food security. Romania has decisively contributed to the functioning of these solidarity corridors, with millions of tonnes of cereals being transported through the Port of Constanța and along the Danube. If the Black Sea becomes unsafe, Ukrainian exports will once again be redirected to overland routes. This means higher costs, logistical bottlenecks and additional pressure on the agricultural markets in Romania and in the other Member States bordering Ukraine. The gravity of the situation is already evident. According to data received this morning, over 5 million tonnes of grain are currently awaiting transport from the Black Sea region, but the insecurity of trade routes is blocking these exports. Romanian farmers and those in the EU Member States on the eastern border must receive guarantees that their activity will not be affected by the current situation in the Black Sea. Therefore, I call on the European Commission and the Council to come up with concrete measures and rapid funding to secure ports, protect commercial vessels, and strengthen defence capabilities against drones in Romania and Bulgaria. Dear colleagues, we cannot talk about global food security without security in the Black Sea and the Danube area. Thank you.

[11:12:12] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, René Lepazi, please.

[11:12:22] René Repasi (S&D) [DE]
Mr President, dear colleagues, let me immediately address the Irish Council Presidency. Mr President, dear colleagues, how can you put forward a budget proposal that at the same time so blatantly ignores reality and then also and colleagues, let me turn straight away to the Irish Council Presidency. How can you present a budget proposal that is so blind to reality and also sets such wrong priorities? Europe needs innovation, Europe needs investment in its competitiveness. And what do you come up with? You cut research, you cut education, you cut competitiveness. One euro invested in research corresponds to 11 euros in economic output. That’s what your own Research Minister said. Your cuts to research correspond, compared to the Commission's proposal, to a loss of 150 billion euros in economic output alone. And this at a time when top researchers are leaving the USA and Asia is competing for the best minds. are flocking. If you are so afraid of tractors, then do not cut back on the future of Europe and our young generation; instead, introduce a digital tax on Big Tech that pays what the Member States cannot or do not want to pay. Thank you.

[11:13:34] Harald Vilimsky (PfE) [EN]
Next speaker, Harald Vilimski.

[11:13:39] Harald Vilimsky (PfE) [DE]
Thank you very much, Mr President. Dear colleagues, we are having a rather lifeless debate on the conclusions of the Council meeting of 15 and 16 October, during which migration was also a topic. Rather, we should have a lively debate about how we are to address the current developments in Europe: Look to Paris, to Milan, to many cities across Europe, where tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of people young men who are obviously and clearly of Arab or African origin or affiliation are roaming and vandalising through these cities, where windows and shop fronts are already being smashed shops are being smashed, where these young men are jumping on cars, where street battles are being waged against police officers, where people are living in fear, where the state order has completely failed. This is a complete failure of migration policy, and it is also, in a sense, an invasion and an attack on European values, perpetrated by Islamist-influenced structures. What is being chanted there? Calls for Palestine are being chanted, Islamist slogans are being chanted. That cannot be. This Europe is built on the values of humanism and enlightenment. We are not the place for developments of this kind, of this nature. And we want to say this to the people who are attacking our values, our lives, our culture and our countries: You are not welcome here. Go home.

[11:15:16] Geadis Geadi (ECR) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, the ERDCRD. Please.

[11:15:25] Geadis Geadi (ECR) [EL]
Your partner, Turkey, is provoking again; just yesterday, it issued a new illegal NAVTEX, directly challenging the sovereign rights of European Union member states. At the same time, Libya’s Parliament has approved the illegal Turkish-Libyan memorandum, which you yourselves have characterised as null and void. And Europe stands by idly. You talk to us about European defence, about protecting every inch of European soil. What do we see? Occupation in Ukraine? Sanctions? Occupation in Cyprus? Words. Russian violations? Support? Turkish violations? Again, just words. Mr Kóstas, Europe is not confined to the offices in Brussels. Europe is Greece, it is the Aegean, it is Cyprus too. Enough with declarations of sympathy; we demand consequences for Turkey. You do not bow to terrorist states; you stand tall. You do not shake their hand; you squeeze them financially, with sanctions and strength.

[11:16:31] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Helmut Brandstetter.

[11:16:44] Helmut Brandstätter (Renew) [DE]
Thank you, Mr President. Commissioner, Mr President, on Russian television yesterday, a friend of Putin sent a message to Mr Trump saying: "Let’s divide up Europe like brothers." "That is what it is about. So it seems we do not only have friends, so we must defend ourselves, and we can only do that together. And the European Council has come up with some, but far too few, answers." Yes, we need to cut red tape, but please tell the national governments that they also need to do that. Trading with China is unfair, and we also need to get tougher on that. And we need to respond to the threats from the United States. Yes, we are in favour of Made in Europe because that secures jobs for us. We are not going to be intimidated. We finally need the single capital market and the EU, Inc. And yes, migration is a huge issue. We have the Migration Pact; right-wing extremists are pleased about every problem. We are the ones who say: "The Migration Pact solves problems. " We have to do this together. And we can only do this together. Yes, democracy is arduous, the rule of law is sometimes arduous and difficult, it takes time. And our freedom is abused by others, through disinformation. All the more reason we must stand together. Only a united Europe can secure everything that makes this wonderful Europe what it is and also our freedom. Thank you.

[11:17:58] Fulvio Martusciello (PPE) [EN]
Next, next speaker, before we. Martus Scheller. Sorry.

[11:18:07] Fulvio Martusciello (PPE) [IT]
Europe has an hourglass on its head. Its deindustrialisation is proceeding at an ever faster, unstoppable pace. Europe had set itself the target of reaching 14% of GDP by 2025. This target was then revised by the Irish Presidency, pushing its deadline back to 2035. But in reality we know full well that this target will become very difficult to achieve. Because we are shooting ourselves in the foot. For three reasons. First: the ETS. We cannot imagine paying while other countries countries far from Europe continue to pollute. We cannot imagine that Europe, which represent only 5% of global CO₂ emissions and European industry only 1.2%, in the end we still end up paying for everything. The over-regulation from Europe, every day we are there building new rules that bring our industries difficulty in adapting, difficulty in keeping up. this. And then we cannot imagine that we continue to reason with a free trade. We must reason with a fair trade. In other words, we cannot imagine that countries which do not act in a similar way to us can then benefit from our commercial capacity. That is why we must—

[11:19:45] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much.

[11:19:46] Speaker 3 [IT]
—give us one.

[11:19:47] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you, colleagues. So, I have to be fair to everybody: micro is switched off. Please. Next speaker, Vice President Victor Negresco.

[11:19:59] Victor Negrescu (S&D) [EN]
President, colleagues, the latest European Council has exposed deep divisions over the next EU budget. Some member states want to cut the budget, others want to protect traditional policies, and Europeans are struggling with high living costs. So we cannot do more with less. I fully support Presidents Costa's efforts to bring countries closer together. And I believe an extraordinary council dedicated to the next MFF is necessary. But we need more than another meeting. We need political leadership from EU leaders: clear priorities and a willingness to compromis e. Cohesion and agriculture must remain strong. Competitiveness, security, health, and education need adequate funding. And they require new resources. The European Parliament is central to this process. We are co-decision-makers, representing European citizens. We will not support a budget that weakens the capacity of the EU to deliver for citizens. Europe needs unity, but unity cannot mean lowering our ambitions. Thank you.

[11:21:01] Tom Vandendriessche (PfE) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Tom van den Driessche.

[11:21:09] Tom Vandendriessche (PfE) [NL]
Mr President, they claim that the money has run out. That they therefore have to cut back on our pensions and our families. That they therefore have to invent all kinds of extra taxes. As if the Flemish people aren’t already paying enough. What is not being cut, however, is the billions for the European Union, as von der Leyen gets her way, Belgium’s contribution will increase by no less than 4 billion euros. 4 billion euros, per year. What is not being cut is the billions for the expansion of the European Union. Albania, Moldova, Georgia and Gaza too. The poorer the country, the more the European Union is waving its money around. Nor is there any saving on the billions for an endless war in Ukraine with no prospect of lasting peace. If we claim that the money has run out, just know that they are lying. The money is not gone at all. It seems to be gone only for our people. They are being forgotten and abandoned. And that, colleagues, has to change.

[11:22:14] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much.

[11:22:15] Speaker 3 [NL]
Well, our people have had more than enough of it.

[11:22:17] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Sebastian Timkenen.

[11:22:27] Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR) [EN]
Dear President, EU leaders have betrayed us. How many cars have to be burned? How many policemen have to be hurt? How many businesses have to be looted? How many cultural sites have to be destroyed? How many neighborhoods have to be segregated? How many centers of radicalization have to be built? How many terrorists do we have to tolerate? How many girls have to be raped? How many areas have to be invaded? How many more before you do what our citizens dem and? Send them back. Thank you.

[11:23:10] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Charles Gordons.

[11:23:18] Charles Goerens (Renew) [FR]
Mr President, as usual, the last European Council was unable to agree on the next multiannual financial framework. Mr President, as usual, the last European Council was unable to agree on the next multiannual financial framework.

Two logics come into play at such meetings: arithmetic logic, which often overlooks the positive impact of European integration on Member States, and political logic. What is different this time compared to the past is a geopolitics that threatens the place of the European Union and its role on the international stage. Indeed, a gentleman in Moscow who, in a first step, wants to crush Ukraine, another gentleman in Washington who is doing everything to make the Kremlin feel at ease, and a gentleman in Beijing who, on the surface, lets things happen but who, in reality, is openly siding with the aggressor are behind the said threat. Soon, in China, a meeting between these three gentlemen—let us call it the ball of hypocrites—will take place, and will no doubt meet their shared aspiration to oust the European Union from world affairs. For now, it is hard, when it comes to this triumvirate, not to think of Yalta. They want to leave behind a world based on rules, hitherto applicable to trade, to respect for integrity.

[11:24:26] Charles Goerens (Renew) [EN]
Thank you, colleagues.

[11:24:27] Charles Goerens (Renew) [EN]
Thank you.

[11:24:28] Speaker 5 [FR]
Any sign of weakness on the part of the European Union could be fatal.

[11:24:31] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Élisabeth Rosenberg-Brionidi. Please.

[11:24:39] Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi (PPE) [EL]
Thank you very much, Mr President. Hundreds of thousands of European citizens, with explosive protests, are opposing austerity, energy costs and impoverishment. In France, Italy, Belgium, Portugal and Spain, the destructive consequences are already visible. The recent Summit, Mr President, Mr Kosta, which exposed the divisions within the European Union, fuelled the explosion and calls on all of us to rise to the occasion. What do we say to citizens who expect immediate action from the leaders of the Member States for their future, yet those leaders appear hesitant and indecisive? How can we explain the fact that only 16 countries support the policy of... Mr President, the energy crisis, a result of two wars, affects everyone without exception. There can be no longer be à la carte solidarity and a two-speed policy, north-south, and there is no time left. Bold decisions are needed here and now. The Greek government has taken the lead with an effective and comprehensive proposal that has already been positively evaluated, and a swift adjustment by the Council will follow. We expect an immediate fair decision. We are calling for additional fiscal flexibility in order to fund temporary and targeted measures to address the serious crisis. A harsh winter is coming, and we must support our societies that are deprived and unable to cope with the unprecedented crises. After all, it is certain that the credibility of our Union is judged each time by its decisions. Thank you very much.

[11:26:19] Elio Di Rupo (S&D) [EN]
Thank you very much. Next speaker, Elio Di Rupo. Please.

[11:26:24] Elio Di Rupo (S&D) [FR]
Mr President, we are dependent and subject to external blackmail in strategic areas Mr President, we are dependent and subject to external blackmail in strategically vital areas such as energy, medicines, artificial intelligence, food or defence. We are going to have to invest hundreds of billions, and free ourselves from the trap in which Europe is ensnaring itself. And above all, we must support our European populations. More than half of Europe's regions have a level of wealth below the European average. On the international stage, it is not enough to simply express concern, particularly about escalations in the Middle East. Europeans need to be protected in terms of their jobs, their incomes, their purchasing power and their security. In this dangerous world, for the lives and future of Europeans, heads of State or government must rise to the occasion. We are emerging from strategic complacency; the time for acceleration is now. So, Mr President, together, let us make Europe a global power.

[11:27:35] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, Eszter Lajos. Please.

[11:27:44] Eszter Lakos (PPE) [HU]
Mr President! Honourable Members! Without affordable energy, Europe has no competitiveness. Mr President! Honourable Members! Without affordable energy, Europe cannot remain competitive. This was also emphasised by Heads of State and Government at the October Council meeting. However, the Member States are not starting from an equal position. Mr President! Honourable Members! Without affordable energy, Europe cannot be competitive. The heads of state and government also emphasised this at the October Council meeting. However, the Member States do not start from an equal position. Moreover, the Visegrád countries are at a particular disadvantage here: many of them have no coastline, and diversifying energy imports also requires significant infrastructure investments. It is no coincidence that the electricity prices in the region are now among the highest in the European Union, and on Monday, the four energy ministers also drew attention to this in Bratislava. These Member States need more EU support and greater budgetary flexibility to achieve the green transition and diversify their energy supplies in the face of a global energy crisis. EU regulations must not increase, but rather reduce, inequalities—and this applies to energy as well.

[11:28:53] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, Vitenis Pavelos, Andrew Kaitis.

[11:29:04] Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis (S&D) [EN]
Dear colleagues, the issue of European defense and security is particularly urgent on the council agenda, Mr. President. Let us be clear: today in absence of European defense union prolongs the war in Ukraine. When member states doing defense separately it's cost around 18 or 57 bill ion euros per year is a waste of money and a waste of time. There are three clear demands. We need a true single market for defense with common testing, common certification, and simple transfers between member states. We need a European preference in the coming defense procurement regulation. And of course we need to make sure that we fund only defense designed and developed under European design authority and del ivers through joint projects for the whole European Union. Let's make solidarity against hybrid threats from Lisbon to Helsinki a reality, Mr. President.

[11:30:03] Karlo Ressler (PPE) [EN]
Thank you very much. Next speaker, Carlo Ressler.

[11:30:08] Karlo Ressler (PPE) [HR]
We live in dangerous times that are imposing ever greater and more numerous goals on Europe. And at the same time, a long-term budget is being proposed that is even 8% smaller than the Commission's proposal. This is not a serious response to what surrounds us. Second, Europe must be ready and have the courage to acknowledge its own mistakes. Too many delusions about migration, too little determination in protecting borders. Too much bureaucracy, too little competitiveness. It is time for more responsibility, for more self-confidence, and a little more European guard. For a decisive response to increasingly serious hybrid threats from the east, for a Europe that knows how to ensure security, including border security, and for a budget that reduces divides rather than deepening them. Because the price of our divisions and a weaker Europe would be enormous and would not be felt or paid only here in Strasbourg or Brussels.

[11:31:15] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Koštas Mavridis. Please.

[11:31:24] Costas Mavrides (S&D) [EN]
The European Union cannot become more autonomous with less budget. Our citizens demand a very clear: security, affordable housing, low energy prices, and decent liv ing standards for which we need adequate funding for strong cohesion policies, and we must also remember that is lands and remote regions face even greater challenges and need special attention. An autonomous Europe also in defense and the security is also a need to protect Europe as a whole and not selectively. Finally, in the Eastern Mediterranean, the appeasement policy of EU has fueled for years Turkey's neo-Ottoman aggression, disregarding international law against member stat es, Mr. President, such as Cyprus and Greece, with illegal occupation of EU territory, weaponization of migrants, with threats of war, and much more. We had enough of words and condemnation. We need concrete action against the aggressor and violator, and one question: did you ever suggest any sanction against the neo-Ottoman expansionist policies?

[11:32:35] Reinhold Lopatka (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Reinhold Lopatka.

[11:32:39] Reinhold Lopatka (PPE) [DE]
Dear colleagues, the European Council's recent decision to address the major challenges is the right approach, because those challenges have grown even greater. I see three areas that will crucially shape our future in Europe. First: the war in Ukraine following the Russian invasion. We are facing the fifth winter of war, and we must continue our support here. After the midterms, we must bring the USA back on board again. We need to increase the pressure on Russia. Secondly: on the multiannual financial framework. In light of the strained budget situation in many Member States, we do need to exercise caution here. We need clear priorities when it comes to competitiveness and security. Instead, we should not finance new areas that fall outside EU competences, such as housing. And we need effective trade defence measures in our fight — and this is a fight against China. Yes, to free trade, but under fair competitive conditions. That is the task of the European Union.

[11:33:45] Tonino Picula (S&D) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Tonino Pizzola.

[11:33:51] Tonino Picula (S&D) [EN]
Thank you, Chair. Colleagues, I believe our enlargement policy must remain credible, consistent, and firmly mer it-based. Commitments must be honored, obligations must be fulfilled, and progress must be earned. A candidate country that fails to meet its commitments cannot expect to be rewarded. Ukraine should one day become part of the European Union. We have a strategic interest in making that future possible. But we must also look beyond immediate geopolitical context and prepare seriously for the union of tomorrow. We have to ready, be ready for accession of not only one country, but potentially several new members, which are tod ay very different from one another. Our citizens must be ensured that enlargement will strengthen the union rather than weaken its capacity to act, while candidate countries deserve fair, transparent, and predictable process. That way, we won't have to speculate about dates for further enlargement, as they will emerge from the results. Thank you.

[11:34:56] Luděk Niedermayer (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Ludek Niedermayer. Please.

[11:35:02] Luděk Niedermayer (PPE) [EN]
Thank you, President. Let me start with the budget, turning to Mr. Kosta. It seems that we have two groups of the countries and two narratives. First groups want to send less national money into EU budget, and the second group wants to get more money from EU budget to their national budget. Surprisingly, I'm afraid the compromise is possible, but this would be a bad compromise. Because securing smaller budget means that Europe will not deliver on its priorities on expectation of citizens and the firms, and secondly, the second request will lead to lower efficiency of the budget that is obviously bad for the credibility and also for use of the money. On competitiveness, I can be more positive. One Europe, one market is important agenda where we are progressing. We should deliver on big things as well as small things. The small things, removal of the barriers on the member states level. Here, simplification played a role, but we should not forget that there is nothing that is more difficult than make simplification right. So that's why I guess big issues should have the priority and we must deliver on that. Thank you.

[11:36:05] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Sander Gomez-Lopez.

[11:36:13] Sandra Gómez López (S&D) [ES]
Thank you, Mr President. President Kosta, if anything demonstrates this Council, it is that agreeing that Europe needs [something] is easier said than done. Thank you, President. President Kosta, what this Council demonstrates is that agreeing that Europe needs to do something is easier than agreeing on how to pay for it. But security cannot be built at the expense of cohesion, nor can competitiveness be built at the expense of our farmers. That cannot be the solution. No, at least not the one that this Parliament will accept. That is why I ask you to count on our proposal on own resources; the digital tax, online gambling or cryptocurrencies could generate more than €30,000 million a year. And what are we afraid of? Of Trump? The pact with Putin, the supply of Russian diesel against European interests, and I do not see that it has asked us. Let us also defend our interests, European interests, and let us address our challenges by exercising our sovereignty, just as the rest of the world does, without any problem. President Kosta, we trust in you. Let the big tech companies also pay. They make millions thanks to our single market. This time, let them make the effort, not our families.

[11:37:25] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Sean Kelly, please.

[11:37:34] Seán Kelly (PPE) [EN]
Good morning. I welcome the European Council's call on the Commission to bring forward measures to address soaring energy prices. Few countries feel the more than Ireland. We have the highest household electricity prices in the union, around 480 euro a year, more than the average. Which is a direct result of our continued reliance on imported gas and the price impact the conflic ts in Ukraine and the Middle East have had on global markets. While temporary interventions to protect vulnerable cons umers are important, they are merely paper over the cracks. As long as we're exposed to fossil fuel markets over which we have no control, Europeans will pay through the nose ever y time there is a supply shock. The only viable long-term solution is to replace fossil fuels with renewable res ources we have here in Europe. So we need to accelerate work on the grids package and electrification action plan. And I welcome the Irish presidency's efforts to accelerate this important work, and we in Parliament must also work hard to deliver these important initiatives.

[11:38:43] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you.

[11:38:44] Wouter Beke (PPE) [EN]
Next speaker, Walter Becke, please.

[11:38:48] Wouter Beke (PPE) [NL]
Thank you very much. Mr President, Commissioner, Mr President of the European Council, colleagues. We often think here in this Parliament that citizens expect heaven and earth from Europe, but in reality, Mr President, that is not the case. They expect something very normal from Europe. Namely that Europe protects prosperity, protects jobs and protects security. And that is why I look back at the past summit with mixed feelings. Because on the one hand, we are finally speaking with one voice about Putin and about China, and that is very good, but on the other hand, let's be honest, let's also admit that we are divided. Divided. There is a lack of unity in Europe on affordable energy. For our families and businesses, about an ambitious European budget, about a genuine capital markets union without privileges for some large countries. And about reforms that are necessary if the European Union truly wants to grow. Colleagues, big words against China and Russia will not suffice on their own. We must also dare to show that same resolve internally. For Europe must do one thing, and that is to protect its citizens. Thank you.

[11:39:57] Speaker 3 [EN]
Thank you, colleagues. We have a KGI procedure. I will do my best. We have, I will keep a political balance and also give a priority for those colleagues who didn 't speak on blue cards issues. We will start with Michael Scherba,

[11:40:14] Michał Szczerba (PPE) [PL]
Mr President, Mr President, the European Council, and distinguished colleagues, these are the most important days these decisions are behind us, but we very clearly want to confirm what the Polish Prime Minister conveyed after the European Council. Above all, solidarity, unity and support for Ukraine, for Ukraine, will face the winter, but above all will face the solidarity of its allies. We see negative examples on the other side of the Atlantic. I want to make it very clear that we must condemn the Russian escalation. We will do this consistently. We will increase pressure on Russia through sanctions policy. We must also implement measures concerning former Russian soldiers. Combating the shadow fleet and tightening visa requirements for Russian citizens. But in all of this, we must think about our security. And defence readiness and also protecting the funds for security and defence will be a strategic goal. Thank you very much.

[11:41:19] Estelle Ceulemans (S&D) [EN]
Thank you, colleague. Next speaker, Estelle Coolemans.

[11:41:25] Estelle Ceulemans (S&D) [FR]
Mr President, as social movements are shaking Europe, as our young people are out on the streets to demand to claim what is our responsibility, to be able to study in good conditions and build ourselves a future, while employment and wages are under attack in favour of dividends and shareholders, not a single word in the Council's conclusions on the need for to maintain and create quality jobs. Not a word about fairer wages or improving working conditions in a world undergoing rapid change. Nothing about the need to guarantee budgets for the European Social Fund, which is not an investment in employment, training and combating poverty. The European Council's record is shocking. The competitiveness agenda of the Commission and its string of deregulations are taking us further away every day from a European project that truly responds to people's urgent needs and demands. So Mr President, but above all Commissioner von der Leyen, who has unfortunately already left us, there will be no sustainable European project if we do not replace the compass of competitiveness and profits with a true social compass.

[11:42:33] Elena Yoncheva (ECR) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Elena Yoncheva.

[11:42:38] Elena Yoncheva (ECR) [FR]
Dear colleagues, dear colleagues, I will speak in Bulgarian.

[11:42:41] Elena Yoncheva (ECR) [BG]
Dear Mr Kosta, the European Council recognises the attacks in the exclusive economic zones of Bulgaria and Romania as serious violations of international law. But where are the concrete measures, where are the concrete measures, Mr Costa? The economic consequences for Bulgaria and Romania can be devastating. Therefore, first of all, by the next Council at the latest, in December, specific measures must be proposed for the affected economies of the two Member States of the European Union in the Western Black Sea region. For the Black Sea region, specific measures for Bulgaria and Romania, Mr Kosta. Secondly, the European Council must set up a special commission, a special mission to monitor environmental risks and security in the Black Sea. The danger from floating mines and the environmental threat are growing every day. We cannot wait for a disaster to start acting, Mr Costa. Thank you.

[11:43:42] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Sandro Gozzi.

[11:43:50] Sandro Gozi (Renew) [EN]
Thank you, Chair. I think that the best part of this debate was the quote by Nico Stefanuta about Bob Marley. So I would like to contribute to the quality of this debate. Referring to a famous 80-band song, "Simple Minds," they used to sing, I quote, "Europe as a problem, talk, talk, talk, talking on," unquote. Forty years later, Mr. President, the European Council had the same problem. Too much talk, too little action. Worse still, it promised a stronger Europe with less money. It praises Draghi, who calls for 800 billion euro in annual investment, and it fights over a 7- year budget of just 1.6 trillion. It calls for more efficiency, but defends national vetoes. It wants to enlarge the Union, and this is even worse, Mr. President, without bold institutional reforms. You cannot promise European power and refuse to build it. Time to deliver. Thank you.

[11:44:54] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Gregor Braun.

[11:45:04] Grzegorz Braun (NI) [EN]
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm old enough to remember lengthy speeches of the Communist Soviet Party's secretaries, so it gives me the strong déjà vu feeling listening to Madame Reichsführerin von der Leyen. Here today, because she's saying peace, and at the same time she 's a warmongerer. She's saying prosperity, good future, competitiveness, and in fact, she brings Europe to the most horrific industrial— Economical disaster. In post-Second World War Europe, and so on and so on. But because comrades Stalin and Hitler are no longer around, this gives me hope that Madame von der Leyen's political activity will not last forever.

[11:46:12] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [EN]
Thank you very much. Please, yours next time, Ms. Comparisons, which is those persons who are gave a cri me in Nürnberg, and so that's why you cannot make this comparison. But thank you very much for your—

[11:46:28] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [EN]
Do you want to discuss—

[11:46:29] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [EN]
Thank you. It's close to your—

[11:46:32] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [EN]
Okay, point. Next speaker, Lukas Furlas.

[11:46:37] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [EN]
Please.

[11:46:39] Loucas Fourlas (PPE) [EN]
The blue card already. I announced the rules, how I can do it.

[11:46:42] Loucas Fourlas (PPE) [EN]
Lukas Furlas is speaking next.

[11:46:44] Loucas Fourlas (PPE) [EN]
Thank you.

[11:46:46] Loucas Fourlas (PPE) [EL]
Mr President, I wish to strongly condemn the ratification of the illegal Turkish-Libyan memorandum, which violates Greece's sovereign rights. Mr President, it is null and void. I welcome the immediate condemnation by all three institutions following the joint declaration of the Cypriot and Greek delegations to the European People’s Party, but I want to tell you with great affection that condemnations are no longer enough; we now need action. I also want to ask the following: I am trying to understand why the European Union allows Turkey to organise conferences in Natalya, while it does not recognise a Member State. Does the leadership of the European Union feel alright when it has to intervene with letters and démarches to call in the President of Cyprus, a Member State? Do European officials feel alright when they go to Natália and meet there the envoy of Ankara, whom Erdoğan is trying to bring in through the back door? These things are unacceptable and condemnable. Thank you very much.

[11:47:39] Maria Grapini (S&D) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Maria Grappini.

[11:47:44] Maria Grapini (S&D) [RO]
Mr Commissioner, Mr President Costa, I have listened to the conclusions and, frankly, I think there are two parallel things. One thing you have declared here and another is reality. And I will explain: the mere fact that the President has acknowledged the mistakes and is now trying to correct them with the methane regulation and electric vehicles, what does that mean? It means that we have borne certain costs. But who has borne these costs? Citizens and businesses. Speak up, Mr Costa, and also Madam President of Competitiveness, because we have strengthened competitiveness. How have we strengthened competitiveness? When we use the money from public procurement, if a control or verification were carried out, you will see that most European funds go to public procurement in third countries. Why? Because we are dependent on imports. And it is very good that the procurement directive is being changed into a regulation, but for over ten years we have been asking an entrepreneur, if they do not take immediate measures, they lose money from their own pocket. Who is paying these costs? We are talking about energy, you said we have, you declared that we have lower prices. How do we have lower prices?

[11:48:49] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much.

[11:48:49] Cristian Terheş (ECR) [EN]
Thank you very much. Next speaker, Christian Terhes. Is it working? Thank you. First question: where is Ursula von der Leyen? She came here this morning, had a monologue, pre ached to us how a great job her commission does, but now when we have to ask her directly, she ran away. She stated today, and praise herself, for deregulating and simplifying E U legislation. And among many things, she mentioned that she's proposing right now the EU public proc urement act. Do you know how many pages that draft is? 200 pages. On top of it, they are 74 more pages of annexes. On top of these pages, there are 432 pages, I just want to quote to make sure that I'm precise, of imp act assessment. This is just one draft legislation. Proposed by Ursula von der Leyen. I'm asking all of you: is this simplification?

[11:50:02] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [EN]
Thank you very much, colleague.

[11:50:04] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [EN]
All of you are repeating the word.

[11:50:05] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [EN]
Colleague, Terhes, you have to do it according to the rules, orally, not using any kind of items. So just remind you, next speaker, one lunch shot.

[11:50:19] Reinier Van Lanschot (Verts/ALE) [EN]
Thank you. Thank you very much, Chair. Dear President Costa, dear colleagues, hearing Trump praise Putin, and seeing the pictures of Ukra inian children who died from Russian bombs after Starshield was cut off, it made me think of D ante's Inferno, where the deepest circle of hell is reserved for traitors forever f rozen in a lake of ice. But just one level above that circle and that lake of ice is the cir cle reserved for liars and hypocrites. Is that where we will end up? Will we be the hypocrites condemning Trump for buying diesel while some far-right politicians want us to import more Russian gas? Or will we be liars for telling Ukraine we will support them as long as it takes? It depends on what we do now. And I say no, let's live up to our promise and increase our support for Ukraine. Ukraine has been going through hell.

[11:51:24] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much, colleague. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. And last speaker, last speaker, thank you very much on Kate Zai. We'll be Juan Fernando López Aguilar.

[11:51:34] Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D) [EN]
Thank you so much, Mr. President.

[11:51:36] Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D) [ES]
Dear and respected President Costa, we know it is not easy, but you have ample authority and leadership to move the Council in the direction of the European Parliament’s own resources, because without them there is no support for the values or the social and regional policy, nor to housing, nor to migratory solidarity with Spain and with any other country with an external border under pressure. Nor, either, will there be a European Union of Defence and Security. that is relevant in the world. Therefore, own resources, for crypto-assets, for online gambling, for large digital companies, and even for windfall profits, are the necessary response for the European Union to address the frustration and social anger shaking Europe. There is a huge amount at stake in the Council's decision to engage with the European Parliament, and we have full confidence in you.

[11:52:30] Speaker 2 [ES]
President Costa.

[11:52:32] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you, colleagues. We are closing. Kate Zai procedure, and now I would like to take floor for the commission. Commissioner Shevchevich, floor is yours. Sorry, commissioner, so I got, I had you principal why you didn't get a Kate Zai. You are not alone who didn't get a Kate Zai. Thank you very much.

[11:52:52] 99424 [EN]
Thank you very much, President. Mr. President of the European Council, Honorable Members, I have allocated time only for a few telegraphic messages, but I would like to start by underscoring that some expressions mentioned in this House just a few minutes ago are totally unacceptable and undignified for the democratic debate in this House. And I very much appreciate that you addressed them, Mr. President. Coming back to the debate, first and foremost, I would like to reassure this House that the commission is using every opportunity for highlighting the need for multi-annual financial framework that responds to the ch allenges of our time and responds to the expectations of our citizens. I mean, the whole debate today was about how much more it's important to do for Europe and Europe ans. And it's very clear that we cannot do more with less. And I think that this debate clearly pointed to the fact that the expectation is that we have to do much mor e. My second and last point is to reassure you that we are already working very hard on delivering and we do our utmost to deliver most of it before the next December European Counc il, to make sure that it would continue completing our single market, that we would diversify our supp ly chains, that we would build new trade partnership and reduce our dependencies. And of course, to implement what we jointly agreed upon including to reinforce our internal and external security and continue to support Ukraine. Thank you very much, Mr. President.

[11:54:42] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much, Commissioner. And now I would like to ask to take floor for President of the European Council, Antonio Costa. Floor is yours.

[11:54:54] António Costa [EN]
Thank you, President. Honorable Members, allow me to focus on two main issues. First of all, the cost of living is at the heart of the European concern s. To tackle these concerns, we need on the one hand to boost our competitiveness in order to sustain our social model create quality jobs with better salaries and reduce inequalities. At the same time, we need to address the costs of housing and energy. For the very first time, I brought housing to the European Council agenda October last year. Since then, the commission presented the European Affordable Housing Strategy, and now the European Parliament and the Council are discussing the Affordable Housing Act. And we need to act in order to ensure affordable housing for our citizens, especially for the yo ung generations. Regarding energy, the. European Council supported the commission proposals for the short time and call for further me asures. But we need to focus on the deep roots of energy costs. We need to ensure our strategic autonomy based on homegrown sources, like renewab les or nuclear. And we need to invest in our grids, extend interconnections, and discuss how to improve our electricity market. But we cannot ignore that the current crisis of. Energy comes beyond our borders, far beyond our borders. And to protect the European citizens, we need to have a Europe strong in the world , able to uphold international law against the blockage of the Strait of Hormuz or against the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine. Secondly, the European needs and European budget which reflects our polit ical priorities answer to our strategic challenges and to the citizens ' expectations. Our Union doesn't add bureaucracy but rather eff iciency. The average of administrative costs in our member states is 40. 1 percent, and the current budget proposal is is close to 6 per cent. A budget which respects the subsidiary principle needs to support our farmers, o ur regions, our cities, namely to help funding their housing policies.

[11:58:16] António Costa [EN]
And the budget that prioritizes investment where we have a clear added value act ing together in breakthrough technologies like artificial intelligence, quantum ener gy shortage, investing in supporting a just and effective transition in energy and digital, in protecting our common external borders, in sharing solidarity in the face of dramatic natural events, in strengthening our collective defense to ensure peace in Europe. And yes, this means to support Ukraine because Ukraine's security is the front line of our own security. We cannot— We cannot afford to save our priorities. But we need to balance our ambitions with our capacity to fund them. We must keep national contributions at a reasonable level. And for this, it is essential to have a balance, fair, and effective package of new own resources. Europe needs reliability, predictability, and stability. For this, we need to approve a new budget by the end of this year. It is the only way to have an to have conditions to implement a new budget since the 1 st of January 2028. That's why I will present a new detailed negotiation box to be negotiating negotiated in the extraordinary Council of the 26th and 27th of November. And to bring us closer to a landing zone probably only in December. And I will start to work immediately with the European Commission and the member states and keeping close contact with the European Parliament reporters. The next European budget will have to be the basis of an alliance for the future. Thank you very much.

[12:00:49] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [EN]
Thank you very much, Mr. President. Colleagues, we are closing this point in agenda. Debate is closed. And plenary, we will be started with voting in a minute.

[12:01:54] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Okay. Dear colleagues, we have a very long vote. Can I ask you to take your seats just after the vote? I will give the floor to three colleagues. Nicola Bay, Sebastian Kraus, and Daniele Polato. So stay in the room for that. Let's start. Final voting list of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2027. All sections— For adoption, I will go slowly until everybody puts in their voting card. The amendments require the votes of a majority of the component members of Parliament, which means we will need 360 votes for them to go through. Now we start. Revenue: Block 1. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Heading 1, Block 2. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Amendment 305. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 306. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 437. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Amendment 527. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Heading 2A, Block 3. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Amendment 223. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 310. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 529. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 224. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 311. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 312. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 313 by Roko. Vote is open. 313. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 530. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 316. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 227. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 317 by Roko. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 318. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 320 by Roko. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Heading 2B, Block 4. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 528. Amendment. Who is in favor?

[12:04:59] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 624. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 628. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 629. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 387. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 226. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 638. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 450. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 642. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 232. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 644. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 184. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 235. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 535. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 649. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 185. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 538. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 650. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 455. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Heading 3, Block 5. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 237. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 651. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 239. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 240. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 456. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 459. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 243. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 244. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 245. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 324 by Roko. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 657. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 248. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Heading 4, Block 6. Who is in favor? Who is against?

[12:07:42] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Who abstains? Adopted. 659. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 250. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 660. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 661. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 252. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 253. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 330 by Roko. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 662. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Heading 5, Block 7. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 663. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 254. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 255. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 333 by Roko. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 353 by Roko. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 334. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 69. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 336. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 337. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 338. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 339. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 340. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 341. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 342. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 343 by Roko. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 667. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 345 by Roko. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 346. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 668. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 348. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 349 by Roko. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 669. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 351. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 352 by Roko. Vote is open.

[12:10:46] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Vote is closed. Rejected. Heading 6, Block 8. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 670. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 541. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 542. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 543. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 355. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 256. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 673. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 357. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 360 by Roko. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 415. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 545. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 546. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 547. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 548. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 549. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 550. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Heading 7, European Commission, Block 9. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 553. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 554. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 561. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 259. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 562. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 563. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 565. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 567. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 570. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 571. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 572. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 574. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 575. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 577. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected.

[12:13:20] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
578. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 581. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 582. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 585. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 37. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 593. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Heading 7, Heading 7, European Parliament, Block 10. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Amendment 296 by Roko. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 606. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 299 by Roko. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 213. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 214. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 215. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 216. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 217. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 218. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 220. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Heading 7, Council and European Council, we go straight to Amendment 519. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 521. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 522. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 523. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 525. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Heading 7, Court of Justice of the European Union, Block 12. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Amendment 262. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Heading 7, European Court of Auditors, Block 13. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Heading 7, European Economic and Social Committee, Block 14. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Amendment 264. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 594. Who is in favor? Who is against?

[12:15:44] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Who abstains? Rejected. 265. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 286. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Ooh, 268. Who is in favor? Who is against? Paying attention. Who is abstaining? Rejected. 269. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Heading 7, European Committee of the Regions, Block 15. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 270. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 703. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 276. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 277. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 278. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Heading 7, European Ombudsman, Block 16. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Heading 7, European Data Protection Supervisor, Block 1 7. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Amendment 281. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 283. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Heading 7, European External Action Service, Block 18. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Amendment 284. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 286. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 288. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 291. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 292. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Pilot projects and preparatory actions, Block 19. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. I give the floor to the Council Presidency, Minister of State for Fisheries and Marine, Mr. Timmy Dooley.

[12:17:49] 275109 [EN]
Very much, Madam President. Honourable Members, Commissioner, Ladies and Gentlemen. The European Parliament has just adopted amendments to the Council's position on the draft budget. For the financial year 2027, and I take note of the differences in the positions of our two institutions concerning the draft bud get 27 presented by the Commission. Consequently, in my capacity as President of the Council, I agree that the President of the European Par liament convenes the conciliation committee as required in Point C of Paragraph 4 of Article 314 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union. Thank you.

[12:18:20] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Thank you very much, Minister Dooley. So I shall, in fact, convene the conciliation committee in accordance with Article 314(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Now we move to the report by Mr. Nils Ozarkovs and Mr. Mihalis Hadjipantela. On the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2027, all sections—lots of roll calls—amendment 2, vote is open, by roll call. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 3, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 4, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 5, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 22, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 23, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 24, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 25, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 68, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 26, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 112, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 69, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 70, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 113, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 71, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 72, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 73, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 114, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 74, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 115, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 75, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 27, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 76, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 28, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 77, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 29, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 78, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains?

[12:22:17] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Rejected. Amendment 30, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 6, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 7, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 8, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 9, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 10, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 11, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 12, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 13, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 14, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 15, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 31, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 32, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 33, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 34, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 108, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 35, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 79, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 116, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 36, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 80, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 37, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Paragraph 15.f, original text, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Paragraph 15.g, original text, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Amendment 81, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 82, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 83, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 109, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 117, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Paragraph 21.a, original text, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Amendment 84, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 85, by roll call, vote is open.

[12:27:03] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 86, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 87, by roll call, vote is open. Amendment 87. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 88, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 38, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 89, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 90, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Paragraph 22.a, original text, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Amendment 91, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 16, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 110, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 39, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 40, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 41, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 42, by roll call, vote is open. Rejected. Amendment 43, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 17, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 18, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 19, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 20, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 21, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 44, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 45, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 46, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 118, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Paragraph 27.a, original text, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. 92, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 93, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 94, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. So I give the floor to Mr. Nicolas B. to move an oral amendment to add a new paragraph after paragraph 27.

[12:30:58] Nicolas Bay (ECR) [FR]
Thank you, Madam President. Dear colleagues, on behalf of the ECR Group, I wish to present an oral amendment seeking to insert, after paragraph 27, a new paragraph 27a, worded as follows: "Recalls the position expressed by the European Parliament in its resolution of 8 October 2" 026 during the last plenary session on the need for the Union to adopt a strategy against Islamist entryism and the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood network, in which it called on the Commission to ensure that no Union funds could reach or benefit, directly or indirectly, entities that are partner contractors, subcontractors, beneficial owners, final beneficiaries or recipients linked to networks associated with the Muslim Brotherhood. » « I call on the Commission and the other Union bodies to proactively assess and strengthen control over compliance with Union values by applicants for and recipients of Union funds, whether through exempt checks or the requirement of a binding written commitment in order to detect any breaches. » Thank you.

[12:31:55] Speaker 1 [FR]
Thank you, Mr B.

[12:31:56] Speaker 1 [EN]
Is there any opposition to the oral amendment? Okay. There is enough opposition, so the oral amendment cannot be taken. We move to the next vote. Amendment 47, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 48, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 49, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 50, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 95, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 119, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 96, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 120, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 51, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 52, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 53, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 54, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 55, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 56, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 57, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 58, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 111, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 121, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 97, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 59, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 60, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 98, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 99, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 61, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 62, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 63, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 64, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 65, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 66, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 67, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 100, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 101, by roll call, vote is open.

[12:36:32] Speaker 1 [EN]
Vote is closed. Rejected. 102, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 103, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 122, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 104, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 105, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 106, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 123, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Paragraph 49.c original text, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. 107, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Citation to original text, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Citation 10, original text, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Amendment 124, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 1, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. We vote on the resolution as a whole, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Congratulations to the rapporteurs. We move to the report by Mr. Pasquale Tridico on the discharge 2024 EU General Budget, European Council, and Council. There is a decision to refuse the discharge. We vote on the decision. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. There is a motion for a resolution. Amendment 2, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Paragraph 21, Amendment 3, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 1, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. We vote on the original text, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. We vote on the resolution as a whole, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. We move to the report by Ms. Lucia Iar on the mobilization of the European Union Solidarity Fund to provide assistance to Malta and Italy regarding storm Harry in January 2026, and to Portugal and Spain following the storms in January and February 2026. We first start with Amendment 1, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed.

[12:40:19] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Sorry?

[12:40:23] Speaker 1 [EN]
Rejected. Amendment 3, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 4, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 2, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 5, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 6, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. We vote on the resolution as a whole, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. We move to the report by Ms. Aura Salla. On the mobilization of the European Globalization Adjustment Fund for displaced workers. Application for SLA Suomi, and Helsinki Uusimaa Paper, Finland. Amendment 1, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 2, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 3, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. We vote on the resolution as a whole, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. We now vote on the report by Mr. Michael McNamara on the Perikles 5 exchange assistance and training program for the protection of the eur o against counterfeiting 2028-2034. We first vote on the amendments by the committee responsible in a block. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Amendment 3, in two parts. First part, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Second part, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Amendment 7, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Amendment 14, in two parts. First part, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Second part, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. We vote on the commission proposal, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. I give the floor now to the Chair of the Committee, Mr. Javier Zazalejos.

[12:42:42] Javier Zarzalejos (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. Madam President, Parliament has now adopted its amendments to the commission proposal of the Perikles 5 program. So, on behalf of the committee on civil liberties, justice, and home affairs, and pursuant to Rule 60, paragraph 4, rules of procedure , I request the matter be referred back to the committee responsible so that we can open interinstitutional negotiations with the Council on the basis of the text adopted by the Parliament.

[12:43:08] Javier Zarzalejos (PPE) [EN]
Thank you.

[12:43:08] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Thank you very much. Mr. Zazalejos, so we will now vote on the referral back to committee. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? It is adopted and therefore it is referred back for interinstitutional negotiations and accords with Rule 60 , paragraph 4. Now we vote on the report by Ms. Lee Andersson on guidelines for the employment policies of the member states. We start with a block vote of the amendment by the committee responsible. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Amendment 5, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Amendment 16, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Amendment 17, in three parts, all by roll call. First part, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Second part, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Third part, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 18, in two parts, both by roll call. First part, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Second part, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Amendment 29, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Amendment 38, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected. 39, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 12, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Amendment 14, by roll call, vote is open. Amendment 34 as well?

[12:45:28] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Yes.

[12:45:29] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
We vote for an amendment 34 as well, by roll call, vote is open. Yes, I understand. Same here, huh?

[12:45:36] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Okay.

[12:45:38] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Yeah.

[12:45:38] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
I understand. Vote is closed. Sorry. Okay, hold on. We vote on amendment 34 again. Again on 34. Vote is closed. And it is rejected, so we now vote on amendment 14, by roll call, vote is open. 14. One-four. Vote is closed. Adopted. So 35 falls. Amendment 40, four-zero, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. And it is rejected, so we vote on amendment 22, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Amendment 36, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 26, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Therefore, 37 falls, so we vote now on amendment 41, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. And it is rejected. We vote on the commission proposal, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. Now we vote on the report by Mr. Nicola Zingaretti on a new co-ownership for the future of Euro-Mediterranean relation s. The pacts for the Mediterranean. First, I give the floor to Mr. Nacho Sanchez-Amor.

[12:47:37] Nacho Sánchez Amor (S&D) [EN]
Thank you, Chair. And we have of my group, Bourjois and the Rule, 206. I would like to request the postponement of the vote on this affair-owned initiative report, the pact of the Mediterranean. Thank you.

[12:47:49] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Sanchez-Amor. So, in accordance with Rule 206, there is a request for adjournment. I put this procedural motion on behalf of the S&D group to the vote. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Okay. There is a majority, so the vote is adjourned. So we go to the report by Ms. Brigitte Vandenberg on boosting skills in the Union. Opportunities for vocational education and training in times of transition. Amendment 1, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Paragraph 29, amendment 2, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. So we vote on the original text, in three parts. First part, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Second part, who is in favor? Who is against? Hold on, we check this. Second part?

[12:48:55] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Rejected.

[12:48:58] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Vote is closed. It is rejected, therefore the third part falls. We vote on the resolution as a whole, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. We move to the final vote. Objection? Genetically modified soybean. Amendment 2, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Check. Last one. Vote is closed. Okay, it's clear. Rejected. Amendment 1, who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Let's check again. Vote is closed. Rejected, so we vote on the resolution as a whole, by roll call, vote is open. Vote is closed. Okay, and it's adopted.

[12:50:04] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
I give the floor to Mr. Nicolas Bay for the point of order. Shh. We have a couple of points of orders, please.

[12:50:19] Nicolas Bay (ECR) [FR]
Thank you, Madam President. My point of order is based on Article 22 of our Rules of Procedure, which states, I quote: 'The Chair may only take the floor in a debate to present the state of the matter and to bring it back to order.' On Monday evening, during the debate on the violence in France, Belgium and Italy, the Chair, Ms Katharina Barley, interrupted me in the middle of my speech and then went on to make disparaging comments about other colleagues: Fabrice Leggeri and Petra Stuger. Presidents of the session must maintain strict political neutrality and must not interfere in the debates. Ms Barley completely departed from her role as Chair and subsequently undermined the function she holds and the prestige of our institution. Therefore, I ask you, Madam President, to call Ms Barley to order and no longer entrust her with chairing sessions if she is not capable of performing this function properly. Thank you.

[12:51:21] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Okay. Thank you very much. Vice President Barley, you want the floor?

[12:51:29] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Yes. Thank you very much, President. I have to say I didn't understand everything that was said, because it was very loud here. But I have to say, these colleagues can ask—

[12:51:41] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Colleagues, could you please be quiet?

[12:51:43] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Thanks. So I didn't get everything that was said, but apparently it was an attack on my— or are you. Still there?

[12:51:56] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Yes.

[12:51:56] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Yes. So it was attacking my President's— my Presidency, me presiding yesterday, I think it was, in the discussion on the riots in France, Belgium, and Ital y. I have to say, in the first place, that this was actually a very— an example for a very good debate, for a very he ated topic. It was— it was emotional, it was controversial, but it was by far. Most of the time very respectful. And I want to thank the colleagues. It was also with a lot of blue cards. It was a real discussion. So thank you for that.

[12:52:37] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Okay.

[12:52:37] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Yes?

[12:52:38] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Thank you.

[12:52:39] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
I think it's obvious, with a heated topic like that, that there were— I think it was three— Words, or notions, that I referred back to the President.

[12:52:53] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Yeah.

[12:52:53] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
To check it. And the one that Mr. Bay himself—

[12:52:57] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Okay.

[12:52:58] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
—who is leaving now—

[12:52:59] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Stop. Stop shouting. Stop shouting.

[12:53:01] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
—is in German. I was—

[12:53:03] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Okay.

[12:53:04] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Look, I couldn't. Half of the time because people were so— so, okay.

[12:53:10] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Stop shouting.

[12:53:10] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
So the word that Mr. Bay used—

[12:53:13] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Okay.

[12:53:13] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
—in German translation was the word "Abschaum". I can't— I don't know what it is in French, and I don't know—

[12:53:20] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Okay.

[12:53:21] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
—if it's okay in French.

[12:53:22] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Okay.

[12:53:22] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
But in German, this is a word—

[12:53:25] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Okay.

[12:53:25] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
—that dishumanizes people.

[12:53:27] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Okay.

[12:53:28] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
And this is against the rules of procedure.

[12:53:31] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Thank you. Thank you.

[12:53:31] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Paragraph 10.

[12:53:33] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Thank you.

[12:53:33] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
So this is what I did. The President will decide. And this is how we do it. I think it's a totally normal procedure.

[12:53:39] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Okay.

[12:53:40] Katarina Barley (S&D) [EN]
Thank you.

[12:53:40] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Okay, thank you. So— We will look into two things. One, what was said in the original language, and what was interpreted. But once again, I also ask all colleagues to really respect each other when we use what kind of language and how we debate in this chamber. Now, I give the floor next to Mr. Sebastian Krauß.

[12:54:05] Sebastian Kruis (PfE) [EN]
Yes, thank you very— thank you very much, Madam President. I rise to point under Article 6. 10. It's regarding safety and dignity in this Parliament. Yesterday we saw this House being chaired by a Vice President of this Parliament, which belongs to La France Insoumise, a party that had — that has incited a far-left gang combined violent crackdown on the French Republic. I'm sick and tired in this House of hearing repeated speeches about the dignity of this House, while someone who represents a party that undermines democratic institutions is— is permitted to preside over its proceedings. During the previous Strasbourg session, we also witnessed one of his colleagues, Rima Hassan, a convicted Hamas-loving Nazi sympathizer.

[12:54:48] Sebastian Kruis (PfE) [EN]
Okay.

[12:54:48] Sebastian Kruis (PfE) [EN]
—finally vandalizing an exhibition about Israel in this Parliament. Where is the red line? Where's the minimum standard we are supposed to abhort? How can this House maintain a cordon sanitaire against certain political groups while allowing representatives of the extre me left to proceed over Parliament? Despite the serious concerns surrounding their conduct. I will not—

[12:55:10] Sebastian Kruis (PfE) [EN]
All right.

[12:55:10] Sebastian Kruis (PfE) [EN]
—accept the normalization of the far-left in this House.

[12:55:13] Sebastian Kruis (PfE) [EN]
Okay.

[12:55:13] Sebastian Kruis (PfE) [EN]
—because many people feel unsafe about it, and I want direct and concrete measures against happening this again. That the far-left here is—

[12:55:22] Sebastian Kruis (PfE) [EN]
Okay.

[12:55:22] Sebastian Kruis (PfE) [EN]
—chairing this—

[12:55:23] Roberta Metsola (PPE) [EN]
Okay. Can I— can I— can I please recall to the colleague that the Vice Chair you referred to was elected by this plenary, and I can tell you that I have full support and respect for all the Vice Chairs of this— of this Ho use. Now, I give the floor finally to Mr. Daniele Polato.

[12:55:48] Daniele Polato (ECR) [IT]
Please.

[12:55:48] Daniele Polato (ECR) [IT]
Thank you. Thank you, Mr President. Colleagues, we still have before our eyes the damage caused in our cities by violent criminal acts under the guise of protests. The case of the French city of Limoges is emblematic, where the municipal bell tower collapsed due to a fire started by demonstrators. The collapse of the town hall is the collapse of Europe. Under the unsustainable weight of laxity, tolerance and complacency towards those who seek to damage our societies by sowing hatred and violence. Watching the town hall tower fall into the flames strikes at the heart of our European democracy. It strikes at our roots, at our local communities. The ECR has proposed donating a daily parliamentary allowance to the town of Limoges. We therefore invite all our parliamentary colleagues to donate a daily allowance to the town of Limoges. In the coming hours, all colleagues will receive an email asking them to join this cross-party initiative to send a strong signal against disorder and violence.

[12:57:11] Daniele Polato (ECR) [IT]
Thank you.

[12:57:12] Daniele Polato (ECR) [IT]
This is what is striking our Europe. Thank you.

[12:57:14] Speaker 1 [IT]
Ok, thank you. Honourable Member Polato.

[12:57:17] Speaker 1 [EN]
Okay. Now we go to the next item.

[12:59:11] Javi López (S&D) [EN]
Then we can start our debates. The minutes of yesterday's sitting and the texts adopted are available. If you don't have any comment, we can approve these minutes. And then we are moving to the topical debate. That is the next item on the agenda. Request by a political group, in this case the EPP, under the Rule 169: cutting costs on unne cessary reporting obligations. Now, concrete next steps to deliver swift relief for E U's entrepreneurs. I would like to inform members that for this debate there is no catch the eye. As you know, procedure and that no blue cards will be accepted. And the next— and first speaker of the debate is Mrs. Walsman, author of the topical debate, for 4 minutes.

[13:00:08] Marion Walsmann (PPE) [DE]
Dear Mr President, dear colleagues, at the Trade Day of the Austrian Economic Chamber, an entrepreneur handed me two sheets of paper. They listed the new EU requirements that he alone has to implement in 2026. Here’s what they show: for us, these may be individual regulations, but for him, it is the total of what his company has to achieve at great effort. And it is precisely this overall burden that does not create any added value. Anyone promising to reduce bureaucracy must deliver more than just the next announcement. And thanks to the EPP, some things are already moving. With the Sustainability Omnibus, we are easing the burden on SME suppliers, and with Omnibus 4, we are creating the category of small mid-caps with up to 1,000 employees so that growing companies do not suddenly lose all the relief intended for SMEs. With the environmental omnibus, we want to speed up approvals, create central contact points and abolish duplicate documentation obligations. Yesterday, we also voted to suspend unnecessary authorised representative obligations for packaging and batteries. But all that is not enough. The ongoing omnibus negotiations and legislative reviews must be used more ambitiously to provide relief. In the next work programme, we need clearer decisions. And simplifications. In particular in energy and water law. And we must finally bring together and align due diligence obligations from different legal acts. From the Supply Chain Act to conflict minerals and the Battery Regulation: it is time to put an end to companies having to provide the same evidence multiple times. With the EU Inc., we could enable digital company incorporations within 48 hours for under €100. It is good that the political centre is striving for a compromise. But in the end, we need a lean, practical instrument that start-ups and scale-ups can actually use and with which they can truly grow.

[13:02:36] Marion Walsmann (PPE) [DE]
Public procurement also needs to become more SME-friendly. The issue of lot sizes: fewer multiple certificates, so that small companies can also benefit from public contracts. And the national reflex to over-implement European regulations must be curbed. That is why I expressly welcome the announced pact against the pernicious practice of gold-plating. But let us also sweep our own doorstep. How can processes be improved? Why not set up a cross-factional and cross-committee working group to rigorously examine the key changes in the legislative procedure for their actual impact on companies? And it is very welcome that companies and authorities will soon be able to benefit from a concrete relief instrument. It is positive, and I can say this as the EPP shadow rapporteur, that the European Business Wallets will in future enable companies to digitally store identity data approvals and certificates. They can be reused across Europe, electronically signed and securely communicated with the authorities. And this is in the spirit of the planned Once-Only initiative: to suspend reporting obligations in principle and to submit information only once. And AI can and should also help to automate administrative processes. The trilogue negotiations on the European Business Wallet are underway, but I would also say: digitisation must not create new obligations. Five paper forms must not become five digital portals. These two sheets that I showed at the beginning, from the trade day, show in black and white where the problem lies. So let us not measure our work by the number of laws and reliefs we announce, but by whether these two sheets will be shorter next year or end up in the wastepaper basket. Thank you.

[13:04:51] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Dolly. And representing the European Council.

[13:05:02] 275109 [EN]
Uh, President, uh, Honorable Members, Commissioner, it's a pleasure to be with you today. Could I begin by congratulating the recently re-elected and elected Presidents and Vice Presidents to the three groups of RenewEPP and S&D, and wish you well in your term ahead. In 2025, the European Council decided to mark a step change in the EU action to boost competitiveness and agreed to give priority to simplification. And by reducing regulatory and administrative burdens to unlock necessary investment in the E U economy. In March of the same year, and at subsequent meetings, leaders have called for action at all levels: EU, national, and regional , to ensure a clear smart and innovative friendly regulatory framework and to drastically reduce, as a matter of urgency, administrat ive, regulatory, and reporting burdens for business and indeed public administrations. All of this, of course, while ensuring the integrity of the single market, something we hold dearly. In line with the leaders' call, the Council quickly began its work on the various simplification packages, coordinating the eff orts across policy areas with the General Affairs Council, playing an important role in monitoring progress. On six of these packages, together with European Parliament, we've given proof of our joint resolve and readiness to quickly achieve a smarter and more coherent regulatory framework. Many of these packages are already published and in force, and a few of them are in the last phase of finalization. So, as regards the remaining packages, we remain fully committed to the ambitious objectives and tim elines agreed by each of the institutions in one Europe, one market roadmap, with the view to providing European business, in particular SMEs, which were mentioned by the author and promoter of this topical issue, and cit izens with meaningful simplification benefits and tangible cost savings. Each institution has a role to play in ensuring we reach these targets and deliver on the promise of the One Europe One

[13:07:01] 275109 [EN]
Market roadmap. We must ensure that where agreement is possible on technical aspects, this should allow work to move forward without waiting for w ider policy discussions to be resolved. And in the spirit, the Irish Presidency is committed to advancing quickly and inter-institutional negotiations on the remaining omnibus packages as soon as the European Parliament position our positions have been set. And we're very conscious that at the end of the year, deadline of agreeing on the digital environmental and automotive and inde ed the food and feed safety packages is fast approaching. And I would call on the European Parliament to work together with the Council for a com mon endeavor to avoid unnecessary bureaucratic burdens in EU legal acts, as recalled by leaders last week. And at the same time, let me also recall that any new initiative has to be based on an in-depth regulatory review of the EU AKI to eliminate outdated provisions inconsistencies and indeed redundancies. The key concept here is simplicity by design. Let me finally recall that our ultimate goal is to strengthen the competitiveness of the European economy and to ensure that proper functioning of the single market while preserving the EU's high standards of social, consumer, and environmental protection. Thank you very much.

[13:08:17] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. On the next speaker is Commissioner Seraphine. Representing the European Commission.

[13:08:25] 263975 [EN]
The President, Honorable Members, the Minister. The debate today is about a very simple question: is Europe doing enough to make life easier for those who create jobs, inv est, innovate, and grow our economy? For many, too many companies the answer is that they expect more. They still spend too much time navigating complex rules, filling in forms, and meeting overlapping reporting requirements. They do little to help them grow. Hire or compete. And nowhere is this more important than for SMEs. For them, excessive reporting means lost time and money. This is true for all red tape that holds Europe back and undermines our competitiveness. The Commission has therefore implemented an approach covering all administrative costs. And changing the way we legislate. We implement right now the simplicity by design. That includes first, legislation that implements the once-only principle. Before asking companies to provide any additional information or documents, we first check whether we already have th em. Second, regulatory discipline. We introduce reporting requirements only when they are strictly necessary and we will act at EU level only where justified in line with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. Cutting administrative burdens and reporting requirements is a clear priority across the whole College. Each Commissioner has been asked to contribute to this exercise. Our aim is clear: to remove unnecessary complexity, from existing EU rules and ensure that new requirements are justified. Since the start of its mandate, the Commission has proposed measures that could save 22 .3 billion euro in administrative costs every year. Provided that co-legislators maintain the level of ambition present in Commission's proposal. That matters. Every euro saved in paperwork is also a euro that can be used towards more investment , innovation, wages, or growth. But we cannot achieve progress alone. The Commission is accelerating its efforts, but real change requires all institutions to pull in the same direction.

[13:10:59] 263975 [EN]
Furthermore, national and regional authorities must also play their part, because a rule agreed at European level sho uld not become more complex than transposed or implemented in the Member States. That is why the President of the Commission has proposed a pact against gold plating. The aim is to increase transparency and limit unnecessary national additions that create complexity and fragment the single market, while safeguarding rights and protections. This Commission will continue to simplify EU rules and deepen the single market, because both are essential to Europe's prosperity and compet itiveness. Thank you.

[13:11:43] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. Commissioner, on the next speaker is Mrs. Gasiuc Pihowicz for one minute and a half. Representing the EPP Group.

[13:11:54] Kamila Gasiuk-Pihowicz (PPE) [PL]
Thank you very much. Madam President, Mr Commissioner, it was 100 pages, exactly 100 pages, that much new law was coming to Poland every single day. In 2016, even on Sundays. And that was an absolute record in history. The genius behind this record was the PiS government, or rather the very same people who today in this Chamber are frightening us with Brussels bureaucracy. And then there was the tax revolution they called the Polish Deal. And who paid the price? Accountants who worked nights on end, 2.3 million micro-enterprises, because these companies did not have specialist departments. These people had to waste their evenings after work. And today, in Poland, we are doing exactly the opposite. 354 proposals from entrepreneurs regarding regulation and deregulation are now being implemented by our government. Inspections in micro-enterprises have been shortened from 12 days to 6. Exactly by half. And this rule is now enshrined in law. If you add a new obligation, you look for an old one to strike out. And today, Europe faces exactly the same choice. On the table are 150 billion euros a year, because that is precisely what bureaucracy costs us. And unfortunately, there are major EU regulations ahead of us. On industry, public procurement, on cloud computing. Let us not do to Europe what PiS did in Poland. Because how are entrepreneurs going to find their way in this? Let us ask businesses once. Let us strike things out before we add new ones. Poland has shown that it can be done. And now it is Europe’s turn.

[13:13:43] Speaker 1 [EN]
The next speaker is Mrs. Bischoff for one minute.

[13:13:48] Gabriele Bischoff (S&D) [DE]
The debate on the truth also includes the fact that there are two camps here. One camp uses the debate to push simplifications as a Trojan horse in order to dismantle rights. A good example is Omnibus 1, but also the current proposal on the EU Inc. directive, which comes at the expense of workers and social rights. We oppose this. But there are also good examples because there is a second camp in this House that wants to simplify without using it as an attack on consumer or workers' rights. Good examples are, for instance, the reform of Regulation 883, which we have just adopted—I was the rapporteur myself—or yesterday’s vote on the E-Declaration. You can simplify without attacking social rights. So stop putting forward discourses where you claim that simplification is all that is at stake, when in reality they are using it to dismantle consumer rights, workers' rights and to restrict social protections. And I am grateful to Ms von der Leyen that she clarified last week that gold-plating cannot exist in the social sphere, because these are minimum standards. What we need here is clarity and a genuine debate about alternatives. Thank you.

[13:15:04] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mrs. Latino-Polu for one minute and a half.

[13:15:12] Afroditi Latinopoulou (PfE) [EL]
SMEs account for 90% of businesses in the European Union and 99% of businesses in Greece. They are the ones that give oxygen and life to our countries. They are the people who, struggling every day, try against all odds to survive in this suffocating environment that you have shaped. They are the family businesses that you hate so much. These are the local baker, the greengrocer, the butcher, the fishmonger, the taverna, the café, the patisserie, the pharmacy and the hairdresser’s shop in our neighbourhood. It is as if you have been wronged in some way. You are trying every means to wipe them out, along with the hundreds of thousands of workers whose livelihoods depend on these small and medium-sized enterprises. Your socialist economic policies, the exorbitantly priced green energy, the suffocating taxation, the endless bureaucracy and the constant legislative changes that create insecurity and instability are precisely what are strangling small and medium-sized entrepreneurship. And all this you are doing to drive them into bankruptcy for the benefit of the big multinationals. So when did we start trusting the arsonist to put out the fire and rebuild the house he himself burned down? Are we going to go completely mad in here? Reduce bureaucracy. Reduce taxation. Now. Maybe we can manage to save something. Let’s finally understand this. Socialism is killing off small and medium-sized enterprises. It’s killing us.

[13:16:47] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Mantovani for one minute, representing ECR Group.

[13:16:53] Mario Mantovani (ECR) [IT]
Thank you, Mr President. Commissioner, Minister, colleagues. Omnibus. 1 has freed 9 out of 10 businesses from unnecessary reporting obligations. An important initiative. And yet, according to the Council, the proposals now under negotiation would cost businesses an additional €1.5 billion per year in new bureaucratic costs. Up to 26 billion for compliance. That is more than all the savings promised by the Omnibus package. And the burden of the ill-fated Green Deal is still there. For 64% of the proposals, no assessment of the impact on businesses has been carried out: the sums have not been done. Every law should first be measured in terms of costs for small and medium-sized enterprises; if they are useless, they need to be changed. We need an immediate moratorium on new burdens and preferential lanes for simplification. We need a year without new rules to change the existing ones, transforming them from obstacles into levers for growth. Thank you.

[13:18:02] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Lockegard for two minutes, representing Renew Group.

[13:18:10] Morten Løkkegaard (Renew) [EN]
Commissioner, Jessica Collier i Rådet.

[13:18:16] Morten Løkkegaard (Renew) [DA]
It is a little sad that every time we have this debate, we have to start by establishing that we are in our respective trenches. I listened with interest to my Social Democratic colleague, who says that this will become a game of removing social rights from him. That is not what this is about at all. Nor has it ever been at any point. So should we not try to move away from that and engage in a more constructive debate? which is about how we actually get rid of what is a nuisance. This could, for example, be unnecessary reporting requirements in the sustainability legislation. It could be overlapping requirements in the GDPR, the Data Act, and indeed all the digital legislation. Get rid of the unnecessary documentation in the AI Act. Get rid of the bureaucratic burdens in the taxonomy. Get rid of the 27 different interpretations of the same national rules. European rules, excuse me. Get rid of the paperwork, double-checking and forms whose clear purpose no one can see anymore. I think we should be able to agree on that. And I note with satisfaction that von der Leyen in her State of the Union speech spoke about gold-plating and raised it as a topic. We should at least be able to agree on that, even if it is not something that directly concerns us here in this House, but rather concerns the Member States. But this is a good place to start and I would like, on behalf of my group, to welcome with satisfaction that von der Leyen is proposing a page on this issue of gold-plating. I think we should tackle this much more vigorously. I have also proposed this several times. And I think we need to look at how we can push the Member States to live up to the obligations they say, at every given opportunity, that they are willing to live up to. There is a huge black box between the level of heads of government and the relevant ministers they send to Brussels when it comes to living up to this issue of addressing goldplating. So let us start there and let us agree, from both the left and the right, that this is the right place to start.

[13:20:07] Morten Løkkegaard (Renew) [DA]
Thank you for the floor.

[13:20:13] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Tegetov for one minute, representing Greens Group.

[13:20:23] Kai Tegethoff (Verts/ALE) [EN]
A potter in Estonia sells a few mucks a month to Italy and Germany. Because of the new packaging rules, the paperwork now costs more than the mucks itself. The businesses who build the single market, one parcel at a time, are now considering whether to stop selling abroad because they just can't afford it anymore. The principle is right. If you put packaging on the market, you pay to recycle it. But making the smallest businesses pay representatives in every single country they ship to makes a mockery of the system. The Commission wanted to lift this requirement for everyone, including Shein, Temu, Amazon, that's just a gift to companies that never needed it. We need relief for micro and small businesses. And keep the rules unchanged for the giants. One EU-wide registration point as the lasting fix. Christmas is just weeks away. Member states, stop stalling, fix this now.

[13:21:27] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Saedi for one minute, representing the Left.

[13:21:35] Arash Saeidi (The Left) [FR]
My dear colleagues, Ewing was supposed to enable us to catch up on the delay of European businesses in terms of innovation and technology. But then, if that is the case, why is Ewing intended for all European companies and not just start-ups? In the end, this technological lag is actually due to the fact that our European companies invest far less in research, pay their engineers far less well, and distribute far more dividends to their shareholders than US and Chinese companies. So what is Ewing actually going to be used for? Ewing will allow all European companies, I stress all of them, to be able to set up anywhere, to choose their tax regime, to choose where they do or do not pay social security contributions, and to choose the labour law that will apply, completely decoupled from their actual place of establishment, their actual place of activity, where they employ their workers and where they generate their turnover. Ewing is a frontal attack on the European social model. Thank you.

[13:22:38] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Drus for ECN Group.

[13:22:44] Siegbert Frank Droese (ESN) [DE]
Dear colleagues, for years, actually decades, we have been hearing the same promises from Brussels: less bureaucracy, fewer reporting obligations, less of everything. And today we are already discussing again here how we can reduce bureaucracy. The Commission, which is constantly expanding it. Companies need no new action plans, no omnibus packages and no further declarations of intent. What they need is tangible relief at long last and the room to breathe. That is why it must be crystal clear: first, scrapping unnecessary reporting and documentation obligations instead of just renaming them. Secondly, no new EU regulations. And thirdly, an end to ever new burdens in the name of climate change. Ms Weißmann from the CDU, it is good that you have spoken to the entrepreneurs. But your EPP has itself supported the vast majority of these regulations. That is simply part of what honesty entails. And so, dear EVP colleagues, if you are serious about competitiveness, you must be honest about it. Ladies and gentlemen, less Brussels, less European Commission today means more freedom for our domestic economy. The return to a prosperous Europe, as far as Germany is concerned, will only be possible with the Alternative for Germany in a position of responsibility. Thank you.

[13:23:51] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Warborn for one minute and a half.

[13:23:58] Jörgen Warborn (PPE) [EN]
Thank you very much, President, Minister, Commissioner, let me start off by actually thanking the Commission for your hard work when it comes to reducing the regulatory burden. I think the packages you have presented so far, the omnibuses packages, is a great step in the right direction. I'd like to ask you a question today. And that is, when will you start using the one-in-t wo-out principle? And I'm saying this because we, of course, now have the one -in-one-out principle, but we need the one-in-two-out principle. And colleagues know this, but maybe someone that is looking to this doesn't know about this principle. But it actually means that for each euro you add in cost for businesses with a piece of legislation, the Comm ission today commits to deduct that euro one-in-one-out. And that is perfect. That's a very good principle because it's keeps, it's like a break from Brussels now. There is no administrative burden added from Brussels since this principle started to be used. I think it was in 2022. But of course, one-in-one-out means the same. And we need to reduce the regulatory burden for businesses. And that's why this House, with a majority in February, I think it was, passed the one-in-two-out principle for each euro you add, you deduct two. And that's I'm saying, this Parliament, with a majority, passed it. Now it's up to the Commission to use it. So when will we have the one-in-two-out principle? Thank you.

[13:25:40] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Klerjo for one minute.

[13:25:45] Christophe Clergeau (S&D) [FR]
Mr President, Commissioner, let us stop the omnibus bills. Mr President, Commissioner, let us stop the omnibus bills. Omnibus bills have nothing to do with simplification; they are deregulation tools that attack workers' rights and undermine health and environmental protection. Some, such as the omnibus on chemical products or the omnibus on pesticides, are so absurd and dangerous that it is the Council itself that has contradicted and disavowed you and has re reduced their scope considerably. I believe that today the cost of this administrative mess in our collective life and the cost for the environment and health of these omnibus proposals is far higher than their benefit for businesses. So if you really want to simplify life for businesses, well yes, focus on simplifying procedures for SMEs, focus on combating the over-transposition of standards, and focus on completing the single market—this real European simplification that is the demand of all businesses in Europe. So stop the omnibus bills and start real simplification. Thank you.

[13:26:53] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you. The next speaker is Mrs. Nagyová for one minute and a half.

[13:27:04] Jana Nagyová (PfE) [CS]
Dear colleagues, Commissioner, imagine a small entrepreneur who comes home after work and is still sitting at midnight filling out forms. Or a doctor who closes their surgery at 12 and is still filling out piles of paperwork by five. During that time, they are not producing, innovating, creating jobs, or treating patients. And then we wonder why we are not competitive. When we waste human potential like this. Back in 2016, 16 % of small and medium-sized enterprises identified administration as their biggest problem, and by 2025 that figure was 64 %. But what is incredible is this: in practice, this burden is still increasing. And whatever we in the European Parliament are unable to manage, the European Commission will manage through its delegated and implementing acts. Or the Member States. Classic, and I’m not joking, I’m not joking. Because just take PPWR, the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation, that's a nightmare for businesses, especially small and medium-sized ones, since August of this year. Take what we have, or let’s take another example: the performance regulation, the performance framework. Originally, it was meant to simplify things, yes, a good idea, but in the end, it looks as though only the work for the European Commission is being simplified, while for the Member States and end recipients, the workload is increasing. So, classic case: we abolish one form, and two new ones are created. One to confirm the abolition of the previous one, and another to check the first. A bit of a Catch-22 situation. However, when I listen to my colleagues, I see a good will to change things, so I’ll keep my fingers crossed, hopefully it will work out, and I will do my utmost to ensure that everything improves. Thank you.

[13:28:59] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Zlatovský for one minute.

[13:29:07] Kosma Złotowski (ECR) [PL]
Ms Commissioner, Ladies and Gentlemen, when we said 'do not add burdens on entrepreneurs, give them freedom', the European Commission, supported by the majority, including in Parliament, did exactly the opposite. Ms Commissioner, Ladies and Gentlemen, when we said do not add burdens on entrepreneurs, give them freedom, the European Commission, supported by the majority, including in Parliament, did exactly the opposite. Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, when we said we should not impose additional burdens on entrepreneurs, we should give them freedom, the European Commission, supported by the majority, including in Parliament, did exactly the opposite. It created more and more regulations and imposed new obligations.

When we warned that the Green Deal meant higher costs, rising prices, and even the risk of bankruptcies, the Commission and the parliamentary majority consistently pushed through more regulations. And we were told that we were far-right extremists with whom one cannot cooperate. And today? Bureaucracy and the costs associated with the Green Deal have become unbearable for many entrepreneurs. The Commission is now trying to repair the damage it itself has caused, and Parliament is adopting further packages of simplification of regulations that it had previously adopted. No cosmetic changes, ladies and gentlemen. And certainly, debating them every month in Strasbourg will not improve the situation of European businesses. The Green Deal is killing [businesses].

[13:30:15] Kosma Złotowski (ECR) [EN]
the green deal kills.

[13:30:18] Kosma Złotowski (ECR) [PL]
Thank you.

[13:30:20] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Kelleher for one minute and a half.

[13:30:25] Billy Kelleher (Renew) [EN]
Very good, Kelleher. Commissioner, I guess, Era, followed a quick in Parliament. The simple fact is that the EU talks a lot about supporting SMEs and entrepreneurs. But it repeatedly fails to deliver the supports and regulatory environment needed for them to thrive and compete. Draghi and later reported on a two years ago: "But if we are to be honest, Commissioner, with ourselves, it has been like this for many years. " As an MEP, I must also hold my hands up and accept part of the blame. But will member states and the Commission also accept their role in making Europe a cold place for SMEs and entrepreneurs? Are member states' cold place at EU legislation and the Commission really doesn't carry out the right sorts of regulatory impact assessments on the vast majority of its proposals? And this needs to change. Otherwise, our existing SMEs will be forced to shutter their doors and our entrepreneurs will never get a chance to get their ideas off the ground. In August, 63 recommendations were made by the Irish Government's Cost of Business Advisory For um. It found that energy is the biggest driver of business cost, better price transparency, and easier switching is required. Regulators need to change or to engage more with business. A new culture of regulatory reform is needed. There is an urgent need for legal reform and limited business banking competition is driving high borrowing costs. Overall, I found that Ireland must shift from a public sector culture that measures activity and process to one that measures outcomes. The Renew Europe Group, through our Vice President Martin Løkkegaard, has been consistent in our campaign to reduce the bureaucratic burden on our SMEs and it's time for the institutions to listen and to implement our proposals.

[13:32:10] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mrs. Ojisalo for one minute.

[13:32:19] Maria Ohisalo (Verts/ALE) [FI]
Mr President, at the same time as big tech companies are cutting down forests without permission, data centres are guzzling electricity and water, and the world around us is burning, here we are being told that we need less regulation. Mr President, this is not helping entrepreneurs; it is people who are suffering, it is European nature that is suffering. But also the companies that have already invested in sustainable solutions and products, and in Finland we still have these. The reporting is not about unnecessary bureaucracy, but about the fact that ordinary consumers have the right to know that the products they buy are not linked to modern slavery, child labour or environmental destruction. When I meet companies myself, they are not asking for new omnibus packages, but for predictability. Constant deregulation and erratic legislation is the worst poison for businesses. Investments are not made when no one knows which rules will be in force next year. If responsibility does not bring a competitive advantage, the winners will be only and exclusively the biggest and most flagrant ones. Forward-looking companies that do things right must not be left to suffer.

[13:33:31] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Kennes. For one minute.

[13:33:40] Rudi Kennes (The Left) [EN]
Thank you. The European Volkspartij

[13:33:43] Rudi Kennes (The Left) [NL]
complains that entrepreneurs are struggling and that we need to make it even easier for them so that they can make even more profit. As if it were not bad enough that over the past decades millions of workers have been laid off. Do you want to give big business even more pampering? Just as the People's Party has made it easier for companies to buy raw materials that are dug out of the ground by Congolese children with their bare hands, and for example to dump toxic waste in Ivory Coast. All in the name of Europe’s competitiveness and Christian values. That is why I was in Geneva last week, at the UN negotiations for a binding treaty that holds transnational corporations accountable for the human rights violations they commit. By the way, these negotiations are being obstructed by the EU. So please stop concealing corporate crimes under the guise of economic growth. You care about nothing for workers, nothing for children, and even less for the environment. You are here only to do the dirty work for your rich friends in the business world. Thank you.

[13:34:51] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Bouhaid for one minute.

[13:34:55] Markus Buchheit (ESN) [DE]
Thank you, Mr Chair. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, it is the big week of the EPP, which is now boldly throwing itself into the fight against the combustion engine ban and now also wants to boldly tackle the bureaucratic measures. Yet, ladies and gentlemen, that is of course not the case. One could cry as winter has already set in, so much sand has been thrown in people’s eyes this week. Ladies and gentlemen, in the last legislative term, this House adopted 13,000 new legal acts between 2019 and 2024. The USA in the same period issued 3,500, just over a quarter of that. And now we are here saying: How can we reduce this bureaucracy? Dear EPP, you are responsible for this, responsible for what has happened here in recent years. Is it the citizens who are suffering under the Lieferkettenrichtlinie? That they are suffering under the Taxonomie, that they are suffering under the ETS system, that they are suffering under the sustainability reporting requirements – this is, to a very large extent, your doing. So, if you are thinking today about what you can do against bureaucracy, then first of all stop constantly chasing every new fad under ever new compulsions to adopt new laws, and focus instead on how you can avoid creating new bureaucracy, ladies and gentlemen. Turn away from the Green Deal and then tackle bureaucracy. Thank you very much.

[13:36:11] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Geisel for one minute.

[13:36:16] Thomas Geisel (NI) [DE]
Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, what characterises bureaucratic rule? The answer is quite simple: when faced with the choice of regulating a matter in a complicated or simple way, it usually opts for the complicated regulation. That secures jobs and control over knowledge. German Federal Chancellor Friedrich Merz is said to have calculated that, in the first term of office of Ms von der Leyen, we have had a total of 13. 000 new regulations with extensive reporting, documentation and verification obligations to thank. That we have thereby done a great disservice to the competitiveness of European industry now seems to have been understood even by the Commission. And that is why — keyword: Omnibus — rules are now suddenly to be simplified or suspended until further notice. Perhaps it would be better to take a more radical approach here. With every new regulation, we should ask ourselves: What does it actually achieve? Who benefits from it? And is the effort in a reasonable proportion to the benefits? Often, we would then come to the conclusion: the best solution is the zero solution. Thank you.

[13:37:22] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mrs. Pereda. For one minute and a half.

[13:37:30] Lídia Pereira (PPE) [PT]
Thank you very much, Mr President. Mr Commissioner, a company exists to produce, sell and innovate. However, six out of ten European companies say that complying with new rules is an obstacle to their activity. And worse still, the most innovative ones are the most penalised. The result, therefore, is perverse. Some prefer not to grow so as not to exceed the threshold that brings new obligations. Meanwhile, China and the United States invest and gain ground in the market and welcome their unicorns. This regulatory burden, this weight of rules, is also felt in access to credit. When a bank is required to report the same data time and time again, it is the entrepreneur who waits. That is why, with more proportionate rules and a single reporting system, credit reaches those who want to invest more quickly and more cheaply. European leaders once again acknowledged last week that simplification is urgent. The Council, the Commission and this Parliament are all aligned. The moment has come to move from words to action and to finalise the simplification packages that are still pending. Simple, clear rules help companies attract investment, grow and create quality jobs across the entire European space. There should be no doubt: simplifying means betting on Europe's competitiveness. Thank you.

[13:39:06] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mrs. Mendes for one minute.

[13:39:10] Ana Catarina Mendes (S&D) [PT]
Thank you very much, Mr President. Dear colleagues, Commissioner, I believe we are all in agreement on one thing: Europe needs greater competitiveness. And over the years, Europe has survived with the weight of bureaucracy and, precisely for that reason, I agree that it is need to simplify. But when it comes to simplification, we cannot talk about deregulation and, therefore, we need to combine the need to invest in innovation in artificial intelligence, which will change our lives and the world of work, with what is absolutely essential, which is the strength of the workforce and workers. And so, Ladies and Gentlemen Deputies, and my dear Commissioner, the importance of this debate is that we simplify the rules to have more competitive, more innovative companies. but that they should not be at the expense of workers' rights, so that we can continue to have a European social model that has shaped us and brought us this far over the past 80 years. Thank you.

[13:40:16] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Penella for one minute.

[13:40:23] Gilles Pennelle (PfE) [FR]
It is quite astonishing to see that the EPP is today holding a debate on reducing European bureaucracy when it supported the disastrous Green Deal and all the constraints that flow from it. If reducing 40 years of accumulated European bureaucratic and technocratic red tape is a good thing for businesses, we need to go even further with deregulation. That means removing standards that abusively hinder our economy. What is the point of removing a few forms if our farmers and industrialists remain crushed by ever more stringent regulations that increase their production costs and destroy their competitiveness? Carbon tax, bans on combustion engines, restrictions on plant protection products, reductions in fertiliser use, nature restoration regulations, IED directives on livestock farming: we must put an end to these obstacles. Our entrepreneurs and farmers need the freedom to produce and ensure the economic strength of our nations. When are you going to understand that?

[13:41:31] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mrs. Teodorescu for one minute.

[13:41:36] Speaker 6 [EN]
Thank you, Chair.

[13:41:37] Georgiana Teodorescu (ECR) [RO]
Today’s debate on reducing costs and bureaucratic burdens comes at a critical moment for European entrepreneurs. Regulations such as the Packaging Directive are clear evidence of how micro-enterprises and SMEs are suffocated by abusive fixed costs, authorised representatives in each country, and infernal bureaucracy. Up to 12,000 euros a year, a small artisan has to dig into their own pocket to meet all these absurd requirements. But has anyone asked themselves whether they even make 12 000 euros in profit in one year? However, beware, the legislative tsunami that has strangled the European business environment cannot be resolved by another legislative tsunami either. This time, with derogations, exceptions and improvisations on top of incoherent legislation, built on ideology rather than pragmatism. If we patch up bad laws with temporary exceptions, we only deepen the chaos and the lack of predictability, which is the basis of any business plan. We need a pragmatic, coherent approach and real political ownership. Stop the excessive regulation and restore the business environment’s freedom to produce. Thank you.

[13:42:46] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mrs. Balger for one minute.

[13:42:51] Jeannette Baljeu (Renew) [NL]
Force Stellifor. You are an entrepreneur and you have brought your customers abroad, and that is a very good step. But then you have to get to work in the evening to find out which registrations are all required. , which forms, which permits. What comes with that is: your business grows, but unfortunately so does the paperwork. And that means extra costs, and that is something we do not want. As far as I am concerned, entrepreneurs must be able to innovate, they must be able to make time for production, for investment. And also invest in their people and conquer new markets. That is how our prosperity grows.

[13:43:30] Jeannette Baljeu (Renew) [NL]
So my first call is therefore also to the Commission: sit down with entrepreneurs, keep talking to them, and let them point out which paperwork is duplicated and unnecessary. And then scrap that; it is time we really deliver on simplification. And make sure that small businesses can also comply with the rules without having to hire expensive advisers. And the second call is to the national Member States: that includes the Netherlands, avoid unnecessary, superfluous national additional regulatory burdens. Let us work together to ensure that we finally truly have an internal market.

[13:44:08] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Mazurek for 1 minute.

[13:44:12] Milan Mazurek (ESN) [SK]
You will come in one day with a mandatory e-invoice for small entrepreneurs and at the same time with some central you are coming one day with a mandatory e-invoice for small entrepreneurs and at the same time with some central register for all accommodation providers operating in the tourism sector, and the next day you will tell us that you want less bureaucracy and a better-functioning business environment. You are bringing in gender scoring as a mandatory requirement for accessing EU funds and gender quotas as a condition for companies, and then you are lying again by claiming that you want the business environment to have more freedom. You will come here without shame with the recycling directive, which will oblige all producers to draw up 1,000 new forms on the certification and origin of materials used in the production process, and then you will come and say: "We need less paperwork, less bureaucracy, we need better and more efficient functioning of the business environment." "After all, the biggest obstacle to the development of the business environment and the competitiveness of the economy in the European Union are you. Please, leave, give people some peace, stop with this bureaucracy, stop constantly making up nonsense, and allow people to create and do business freely, as they deserve to do.

[13:45:23] Speaker 2 [ES]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Ms Benjumea for one minute and a half.

[13:45:28] Isabel Benjumea Benjumea (PPE) [ES]
Thank you, Mr President. Commissioner, Minister, the European Union must be a space of freedom and equal opportunities, and one that promotes a culture of merit. It must be an attractive space in which to do business, to set up a company. What cannot be is that it is perceived as a hyper-regulated space drowning in bureaucracy. Under a protectionist mantra that claims to defend our rights, when what it really does is curtail our freedom and limit our opportunities. Europe has companies capable of competing with the best in the world, but its own regulatory, administrative and financial environment has become a burden. Excessive bureaucracy is compounded by the fragmentation of the single market, difficulties in accessing financing and high energy costs, with regulation and taxation that penalise our production capacity. That is why I welcome the Commission’s decision to make improving the competitiveness of our businesses a priority by firmly committing to simplification. But that strategy will not be enough if we do not accompany it with a fiscal policy that promotes competitiveness and helps to attract investment. Just as we have realised that in the Union we cannot respond to every problem with more regulation, neither can we do so with new taxes. And I am referring to the CORE, Mr Commissioner, a tax that we are firmly opposed to and which we are asking you to withdraw from your proposal for the next multiannual financial framework. Less tax and less regulation, that is the solution. Thank you.

[13:47:13] Speaker 2 [ES]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr Ruena for 1 minute.

[13:47:18] César Luena (S&D) [CA]
Thank you very much, Mr President. What we are discussing

[13:47:20] César Luena (S&D) [ES]
goes much further than eliminating unnecessary red tape, something we support. We are witnessing a progressive attack on European environmental and climate legislation, using small businesses to justify the removal of obligations that fundamentally affect large corporations. Corporate sustainability standards have been weakened, legislation against deforestation has been delayed, and emission standards for cars and vans are being weakened even today. The ETS, environmental assessments, and now there are increasing pressures to reopen the directives on birds and habitats, as well as the Water Framework Directive. What does protecting our rivers and waters have to do with eliminating bureaucracy? Because when we talk about water, I would remind you that we are talking about public health. Europe, it is true, needs competitive businesses, of course, but it also needs clean air, clean water and a protected environment. Competitiveness can never be an excuse for dismantling the guarantees that have taken decades to build.

[13:48:24] Speaker 2 [EN]
Muchísimas gracias. The next speaker is Mrs. Gyori for 1 minute.

[13:48:30] Enikő Győri (PfE) [FI]
There was a mistake here.

[13:48:32] Enikő Győri (PfE) [HU]
I cannot even count how many debates we have already held on simplifying EU regulation. It’s always the same old tune: we talk about it, we urge action, the Commission promises, and then nothing meaningful changes. Where is the promised 35% burden reduction for the smallest companies, promised since 2023, for example? We have only just started negotiations on half of the Commission's 12 simplification packages. Meanwhile, they boast that €17 billion, or even €22 billion, has been mentioned here – that much savings has already been achieved for the companies. Let’s do a quick calculation together: if we divide this by the 34 million SMEs in the Union, it quickly becomes clear that this amounts to an average monthly saving of €41 for a small business. Yet 86% of them need to employ a separate person to ensure compliance with the legislation. A concrete example: a small, low-revenue sole trader crafting handmade jewellery must have 20 to 30 pages of internal regulations drawn up by a lawyer. So how can we expect them to grow and invest? This, by the way, is your legacy, from the EPP to the left. We patriots demand real deregulation in order to fully unleash entrepreneurial freedom.

[13:49:49] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mrs. Van Leeuwen for 1 minute.

[13:49:55] Jessika van Leeuwen (ECR) [EN]
Thank you very much, Chair, Minister, Commissioner. In every member state, village shops, local tradespeople, and family businesses provide jobs and services close to home. They keep our towns, villages, and regions running. The Commission has promised to remove two rules for every new rule it introduces to alleviate small and medium-sized businesses, so when will you start? The farmer-citizen movement wants to eliminate overlapping reporting requirements and bring EU sustain ability reporting back to the bare minimum. So we only want to adopt new legislation if you remove two other rul es, and it does not result in overlapping reporting requirements on a national level. As a first proposal, let's have a careful look at how the new packaging and packaging waste regulation affects the international business of our SMEs. The announced gold plating act should, besides working with member states to remove national rules that jeopardize an equal playing field on the EU internal market, also tackle unnecessary national additional reporting obligations, so the EU becomes a true union of entrepreneurs again. Thank you.

[13:51:05] Speaker 2 [ES]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Ms Aguirregoitia for one minute.

[13:51:14] Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez (Renew) [ES]
We urgently need to improve our competitiveness and, therefore, we need entrepreneurs, we need innovation and we need companies that are capable of growing and competing globally. But we have a problem: we know that we generate talent, and yet we are not managing to retain them in Europe. As Mr Draghi said: almost 30% of the unicorns created in Europe between 2008 and 2021 have moved their headquarters abroad, and practically or mainly to the United States. And we cannot continue to lose innovative companies because of the difficulties of growing in Europe. We need to simplify regulations, eliminate bureaucracy and facilitate access to financing, and we must do this especially with startups and with SMEs that innovate. And simplifying does not mean deregulating, but rather facilitating innovation and growth for our companies. Our objective, therefore, should not only be that companies can be born in Europe, but that they can grow and become true global leaders without having to leave this continent. Thank you.

[13:52:15] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Veke for 1 minute.

[13:52:20] Wouter Beke (PPE) [EN]
Thank you, President.

[13:52:22] Wouter Beke (PPE) [NL]
Mr Commissioner, colleagues, entrepreneurs want to do business. Not having to fill an hour every day with administrative obligations and hundreds of forms, often in 27 different sets of rules. And this also applies to our SMEs, for example our start-ups. Every minute they spend on that is time they cannot invest, cannot innovate, cannot innovate, cannot grow and cannot create jobs. It’s that simple. And yes, of course, we have taken steps to reduce the red tape. But when I speak to entrepreneurs, they notice very little of it. Because we are mainly preventing new rules, but what about the mountain of existing rules? And what about our permits? For entrepreneurs and farmers, this remains a Herculean task. Through years of case law, a framework has emerged in which even strategic investments and greening measures grind to a halt. That is why, Commissioner, my call: come up with a horizontal permitting omnibus. Tackle the problems at the root, including in our European environmental legislation. Entrepreneurs want to move forward. Give them that chance.

[13:53:26] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much.

[13:53:26] Speaker 2 [ES]
The next speaker is Mr Girauta for one minute.

[13:53:31] Juan Carlos Girauta Vidal (PfE) [ES]
Thank you, Mr President. Two out of three small and medium-sized enterprises identify regulatory complexity as an obstacle to their growth. Mr President, two out of three small and medium-sized enterprises identify regulatory complexity as an obstacle to their growth. 22% of SMEs devote more than 10% of their workforce to assessing and managing regulatory requirements. 150 billion euros is the annual cost estimated by the European Commission in recurring expenses, in recurring costs, in the design of administrative processes. There is no way to be competitive without reviewing and deregulating this labyrinthine situation. Silence should be the norm in administrative procedures. Administrations should not request a document that they already have. It seems that the telecommunications revolution that changed the world of business organisations 20 years ago 25 years ago, the telecommunications revolution transformed the world of business organisations, but it has still not reached Europe’s public administrations. This Parliament has an obligation to stop producing paper, paper and more paper. Every new piece of legislation should mean the repeal of several previous ones. Thank you.

[13:54:50] Speaker 2 [EN]
Muchas gracias. The next speaker is Mrs. Malock for 1 minute.

[13:54:57] Marlena Maląg (ECR) [PL]
Ladies and Gentlemen, in Poland, it used to be joked that communism solved the problems it itself created. It seems the European Union has now taken that joke as an instruction manual. The Green Deal, more directives, reports – who voted for them? The people in this Chamber. €150 billion in annual administrative burdens for the Union. You promise great savings with omnibus bills, but does the fourth burden remain for the entrepreneur? Where is the success here? In Poland, the cost of the ETS accounts for half of the energy prices for industry. Where is the competitiveness here? Another absurdity. The Packaging Regulation. A small shop wants to send packages abroad. You add representatives, formalities, and then you propose relief. Where is the logic here? Behind this chaos stands a person. A small and medium-sized entrepreneur and their employees. You talk about competitiveness, about putting the human being at the centre, yet you place regulations above them. Start counting the costs before the votes. Remove unnecessary obligations. The European economy needs room to grow, not more debates on the consequences of your decisions. Thank you very much.

[13:56:17] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mrs. Vonte for 1 minute.

[13:56:25] Barbara Bonte (PfE) [NL]
Colleagues, yes, I do find it rather ironic that it is precisely the Christian Democrats who have requested this debate. Those who have been at the controls of the European regulatory machinery for years, those who have for years been the big advocates of climate and sustainability, ironic that it is precisely the Christian Democrats who have requested this debate. Those who have been at the controls of the European regulatory machine for years, who have for years supported the EU’s major climate and sustainability plans, the heavy reporting obligations for companies, the rules that hold companies responsible for an entire supply chain. And now they act as though they are, as it were, the deus ex machina, the great saviours of businesses. Well, that reminds me a little of the arsonist playing the fireman. And can that fire even be extinguished? Because every day we see the catastrophic economic consequences of this misguided policy. And the Commission itself now admits that it was all too much. But the administrative burden is one thing, but the high energy prices, the carbon taxes and the fierce international competition remain. And what we need is a policy that puts entrepreneurship and competitiveness at the centre. But that is not possible without political courage. And to achieve that, a great many green and left-wing dogmas will still have to be swept away.

[13:57:37] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. van Dijk for 1 minute.

[13:57:41] Kris Van Dijck (ECR) [NL]
Thank you, Mr President. For prosperity, economic growth is a priority. And for that growth, our businesses are crucial. And that is why, Commissioner, European rules should only be applied where they add value. Everything else is dead weight. It costs our businesses time, money and confidence, to the detriment of investment and innovation and thus of economic growth. And despite numerous initiatives, the Commission is not, or not yet, sufficiently succeeding in reducing regulatory burden and turning the tide. A more ambitious approach is needed. In fact. And it can be done. I believe in that. Clear language, no rules that contradict each other, solid impact assessments, less reporting, especially for SMEs, digital solutions and an end to gold plating. End gold plating. Make it clear to your colleagues, Commissioner, that regulation and simplification are two different things. But both are necessary to make European rules enforceable, affordable and therefore competitive. Thank you.

[13:58:57] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mrs. Deloge for 1 minute.

[13:59:03] Valérie Deloge (PfE) [FR]
Europe is counting its spending, but not what it costs our farmers. In 2026, the European budget plans more than 13 billion euros for the European public administration. At the same time, a European study estimates that farmers spend an average of 1,200 euros per year on administrative tasks related to the CAP. The problem with our administration is not that it lacks data, but that it keeps asking for it over and over again. In June 2025, the French Ministry of Agriculture indicated that the Commission had decided to roll out the single administrative control at European level. So where do we stand? Farmers should no longer have to submit the same information multiple times to administrations that do not communicate with each other. We are calling for a single farm file with pre-filled declarations and genuine data sharing. for administrations that do not communicate with each other. We are calling for a single operational file for pre-filled declarations and genuine data sharing between administrations, because information that has already been provided will never be requested from us again. It is time for Brussels to understand one thing: it is not the administrations that should be at the service of farmers; it is the administrations that should be at the service of farmers, not the other way around. Thank you.

[14:00:08] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Kutilek for 1 minute.

[14:00:17] Ondřej Krutílek (ECR) [CS]
Honourable Mr President, the European Council called on the European Commission a few days ago to propose cuts in reporting requirements, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises. And to us legislators, it sent a message to be restrained in the legislative process and not to add unnecessary bureaucracy. I recommend that we follow this recommendation and do so straight away in the debate on "Made in EU", which the European Council wants to be completed by the end of this year. The Commission proposal already includes requirements for complex documentation of origin and carbon footprint, and a significant part of this Parliament wants to tighten them even further. If we continue in this direction, we will have a perfect overview of every last screw, but we will be producing fewer and fewer of them. Our competitors in America and China will be happy, but European companies will lose out. So let's do what is expected of us: let our companies produce, not fill out forms. Thank you.

[14:01:16] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Pempe for 1 minute.

[14:01:24] Pierre Pimpie (PfE) [FR]
Dear colleagues, our entrepreneurs spend their time ticking boxes and providing justifications. The point is for them to feed your technostructure, which is hungry for data and thirsty for... of forms. This machine, you built it yourselves, with the zealous support of the EPP. You pretend to want to solve the problems you have created. You mention the next concrete steps; I suggest a simple one: stop adding to them. stop. Because the cup is full. Our SMEs do not need another fake support plan. What they need are low energy costs, thanks to nuclear power. These are reasonable and predictable taxes. These are low social charges, through controlled migratory flows. It is confidence and order that will get businesses back on their feet and bring them peace.

[14:02:28] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much. Now it's time for the European Commission to answer the debate. Commissioner Serafin, the turn is yours. You have two minutes.

[14:02:38] 263975 [EN]
Thank you, Mr. President. Honorable members, I will refer to some of the comments lines of today's debate. It's true that for the success of the of our simplification agenda, it 's not enough to have only strategies; they also need to be implemented. So that leads me to repeating the point I made at the beginning: how important it is that co-legislators work on the basis of the Commission's proposals, and how important it is to avoid also goldplating at the national level. That is the only way to make sure that our businesses, including in particular small and medium-sized businesses, can feel the difference. Then the second point I would like to make: that is the question of how we do the rules at the European level, how we make rules at the European level. I will repeat again: once only principle, this is the principle which is guiding now the European Commission, and we will stick to that principle. Which means that once the information has been provided, we cannot, we should not ask the business to provide it for the second time. We should also definitely use further AI, digital tools to reduce compliance cost s, and unnecessary administrative work. That is also true. And let me also tell you that for the next year, in the Commission working program, we will have some further simp lification proposals in areas such as banking, transport, and housing. Now let me refer to Honorable Member Varborn, who. Attracted our attention to the fact that the Commission is following the principle one in one out. It's true, this is the formal approach that we have. We are following this principle since 2022, formally speaking, because in practice the approach we are implementing right now goes much further. I got the data before this debate. Last year, Commission proposals we have propos ed additional 247 million of additional administrative costs, and at the same time 15 billion of reduction of administrative costs. So in practice the principle last year was one in 6 1 out.

[14:04:59] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. Thank you very much. Now it's time for the Councillor to answer the debate. Mr. Dully. For two minutes.

[14:05:10] 275109 [EN]
Thank you very much, and thank you for the contributions of so many. The Council took note of the call for from several member states for further simplification, including through legislative and regulatory self- restraint. This was touched upon during the meeting of the General Assembly Council in September, 22nd of September, and further re iterated in the latest conclusions of the Council. Council also notes the calls by the European Council last week for the Commission to put forward further initiatives to avoid goldplating and reduce administrative and regulatory burdens, especially for small and medium enterprises. And we stand ready to play our part in relation to that. A number of people raised the issue of packaging, and the impact that that has, and the burden it has, particularly on SMEs. Now, I just want to let you know that COREPER will today hold a discussion on the extended producer responsibility regulation, and will seek a mandate to enter into institution. Negotiations to alleviate the disproportionate burden on small operators, affected by the entry into application of key provisions of the packaging act, waste regulation of the 12th of August. And it is important that we alleviate any disproportionate burden for small businesses, and as the Presidency is committed to entering into that inter -institutional negotiations without delay. I know quite a number of people raised the issue about simplification, and it's connected ness to competitiveness, and of course the Council is very clear on that. However, simplification does not have to mean a retrenchment from an environmental standard, nor does it mean an under mining of workers' rights. And from a Presidency perspective, we're very clear on that. Just in reaching agreements between our institutions and on the outstanding omnibus packages without delay will provide I believe further necessary and tangible financial and administrative relief to economic operators, regulatory predictability, all the while boosting the union's competitiveness and deepening the single market, which I think most contributors felt was nec

[14:07:10] 275109 [EN]
essary. There's still work to be done on the outstanding omnibuses, and let me mention as I said that COREPER will today seek to agree a mand ate on the digital and environmental omnibuses, where we are eager to enter into the inter-institutional negotiations without del ay. And this debate has also shown that we broadly share the same objectives, however if we work hand in hand in a spirit of cooperation, and compromise, will turn our shared commitments into tangible results. And I certainly listened to a number who wanted action now rather than further talk or more papers. It's about action. Thank you very much.

[14:07:47] Javi López (S&D) [EN]
Thank you very much. With that, the debate is closed, and the sitting is suspended. Because it will be resumed in a few minutes. With the next point, that it has to start at 2:15. To the presentation of the Court of Auditors and a report 2025. With that, the sitting is resumed for this 10 minutes.

[14:15:51] Javi López (S&D) [EN]
The seating is resumed, and we are going to continue with the next item on the agenda, that is the presentation of the Court of Audit ors' annual report 2025. The first speaker is Mr. Murphy, coming from the Court of Auditors. For five minutes.

[14:16:14] 238669 [EN]
Thank you, President. Honorable members, Commissioner, Representative of the Council, Presidency, Minister Dooley. I'm very pleased to be here today to present the key findings and core messages from the European Court of Auditors' 2025 annual report. It identifies risks, shares lessons, and makes practical recommendations to support Parliament and other E U institutions in their decision-making and legislative roles. As negotiations on the next seven-year EU budget, the MFF continue, our annual report examines the current budget and draws lessons for the next. The key takeaways of our annual report: we provide a clean opinion on the reliability of the EU accounts; however, we emphasize some matters related to the introduction of the new accounting system SUMA. We also provide a clean opinion on the EU revenue, which was free from material error but, as we always say, this is based on the book ed revenue and not the unreported revenue. Regarding the regularity of expenditure, we offer two separate opinions, one for the traditional EU budget and one for the RR F. Reflecting the different nature of these types of spending, we start with the traditional EU budget spending. Our estimated level of error increased to 3.8% compared with 3. 6% the previous year. This is above our materiality threshold, and given the significant and widespread nature of the er rors identified, we have issued an adverse opinion on EU budget expenditure for the seventh consecutive year. Our audit covered expenditure totaling 130.8 billion euros under the general budget. The largest contributor to our error rate was natural resources and environment, which had an estimated level of error at 3. 9% compared to 2.6% the previous year. Cohesions, resilience, cohesion, resilience, and values had an estimated level of error of 6. 6% compared to 5.7% the previous year. Together, these two spending areas account for almost two-thirds of our audited expenditure. This has important implications for the next MFF. The proposals would place great responsibility on national aut

[14:18:34] 238669 [EN]
horities to manage EU funds and provide assurance. Even though we cannot yet fully rely on their work. We recognize that national authorities face capacity challenges. Bringing the common agricultural policy and cohesion policy into a single fund may offer opportunities to simplify the system. However, while this could make the administrative administration easier for the Commission, we are concerned that the burden may simply shift to the member states and beneficiaries. Who are already under pressure to manage the current funds. Ultimately, any reforms aimed at simplification must not come at the expense of accountability. In terms of the recovery and resilience facility, as we know, it has a different delivery model from the traditional EU budget spending. Whereby payments depend on the satisfactory fulfillment of milestones and targets, not on the actual costs or compliance with EU and national rules. We therefore apply a separate methodology and issue a separate opinion. In 2025, RRF expenditure amounted to 45. 4 billion euros. In payments to nine member states, we found milestones and targets that had not been satisfactorily fulfilled, as well as issues involving double funding and the eligibility period. We also identified weaknesses in the design of milestones and targets, gaps in the Commission's monitoring, and persistent shortcomings in the reliability of member states' control systems. We therefore issued a qualified opinion on RRF expenditure. In addition, we found that previously agreed milestones and targets were amended to reflect what member states had actually already achieved, lowering the initial level of ambition without affecting the related payment. This weakens the link between funding and delivery, and risks allowing payments when performance falls short. Member states had until the 30th of September this year to submit their final RRF grant payment requests. Twenty-one requests were submitted that month, including eight on the 29th of September and a further eight on the 30th of September

[14:20:46] 238669 [EN]
. The Commission must now process and pay around 90 billion euros by the end of 2026. Our past experience has shown that end-of-period spending pressure increases the risk of noncompliance, fraud, and substand ard projects. This is all the more concerning given that, at the end of 2025, 21% of the EPOs active expend iture fraud investigations were RRF-related. So in terms of the implications for the next MFF, as the proposed delivery model is likely to draw on the recovery and resilience fac ility, we must learn from this experience. If EU funding moves away from a cost-based model, that is based on milestones and targets, they must be credible, clearly defiant, objectively measurable, and directly linked to intended results. Performance information must also be reliable. Transparent and independently verifiable. Our assessment is that the proposed framework remains weak. In its current form, it does not make it possible to measure adequately wh at EU spending will have achieved. Our annual report also shows that EU borrowing could reach 1 trillion euros by the year 2027. And while debt increases, the Commission's proposals for the next budget also allow for potential substantial new borrowing, including 15 0 billion from member states' national and regional plans, the so-called catalyst statement, up to 100 billion in additional support for Ukraine, and the potential use of a severe crisis instrument of 395 billion euros. So overall, we can say that there has been a slight increase in the error rate, the typology of err ors remains the same, which is concerning, and we just would like to bring attention to the increasing level of debt and the related ob ligations this gives to the member states. Thank you very much.

[14:22:52] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much, Mr. Murphy. President of the Court of Auditors, and now the next speaker is the European Commission. Commissioner Seraphine. The floor is yours.

[14:23:06] 263975 [EN]
Mr. President, honorable members, let me begin by thanking the Court for the annual report and for the constructive cooperation throughout the audit process. The Commission welcomes the Court's unqualified audit opinion on the EU accounts. Confirming that they are complete, transparent, and reliable. This result is particularly significant because in 2025, we have implemented the our system SUMMA, which was the first year of SUMMA accounting system, SUMMA being in pla ce. At the same time, we also want to welcome the Court's assessment that, as in previous years, the level of error in revenue in 20 25 was not material. But we take very seriously the Court's conclusion on expenditure and its adverse opinion on the legal ity and regularity of the MFF expenditure, with 3. 5 on average error rate, and its qualified opinion on the recovery and resilience facility. We should always recall, when we talk about the error rate, that we we do not talk about the rate of fraud or waste. We talk about the error rate, which in most of the overwhelming majority of the cases is the rate of administrative mistakes. Nevertheless, the high level, higher slightly higher than last year, is the reason for concern, and in particular the higher levels reported for cohesion and natural resources require our particular attention. For the recovery and resilience facility, the Court's qualified opinion reflects its view that in 16 out of 42 0 milestones and targets examined, they were shortcomings. The Commission will continue to work closely with EU member states, which manage a large share of EU expenditu re. We'll do so to prevent errors before they occur, detect weaknesses, and correct them when necessar y. Specifically, as regards the cohesion policy, we are implementing right now action plans with member states audit aut horities to address weaknesses of detection capacity we have also increased the coverage of Commission's audits to check a larger number of audit authorities and programs where shortcomings have been identified.

[14:25:38] 263975 [EN]
As regards natural resources, we'll leverage new technologies to improve monitoring, such as the area monitoring system, Copern icus Sentinel data and artificial intelligence, where necessary we also apply financial corrections and recoveries to protect the EU budget. The Commission values recommendations made by the ECHA. In fact, more than 90% of the ECHA recommendations are accepted and are being and are or have been impl emented by the by the Commission. Let me conclude by reaffirming the Commission that the Commission will continue to act on the identified weaknesses, follow up on the Court's recommendations, and strengthen the system to protect the EU budget. Thank you.

[14:26:24] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much, Commissioner. Now it's the turn for the political groups. The first speaker is Mrs. Kolar for two minutes, representing the EPP group.

[14:26:35] Kinga Kollár (PPE) [EN]
Thank you, Chair.

[14:26:38] Kinga Kollár (PPE) [HU]
The European Court of Auditors' annual report sends a clear message. It is not enough for the Union's budget to finance Europe's priorities; we must also ensure that every euro is spent in accordance with the rules, transparently, and in a way that delivers real results. For the seventh year in a row, the European Court of Auditors has issued a disclaimer opinion on the legality and regularity of EU spending. The estimated error rate rose to 3.8% in 2025, while in cohesion policy, the figure reached 6.6%. As Members of the European Parliament, we cannot let this go unchallenged; we must find the reasons behind it. It is clear that the error rate does not equate to the number of fraud cases. Yet it still raises important questions. Are the persistent shortcomings in the use of EU funds so serious and widespread? Or are our rules too complex, impractical, and thus lead to overly formalistic controls? I ask the Court of Auditors to provide answers and guidance on these questions. The correct answers are particularly important now, as negotiations on the next multiannual financial framework are underway and we plan to significantly reform the way EU funds are spent. We also count on the European Court of Auditors to continue its independent, critical and constructive work in the future. Because every euro must count, and we must be able to account for every euro spent. Thank you.

[14:28:20] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mrs. Tavares for two minutes, representing the S&D group.

[14:28:26] Carla Tavares (S&D) [EN]
Thank you, President, Commissario Serafins.

[14:28:29] Carla Tavares (S&D) [PT]
Mr President of the European Court of Auditors, I naturally begin by thanking this report and all those that you have produced, in particular those that have direct relevance for the next multiannual financial framework. The European Court of Auditors' independent assessments help this Parliament to make good decisions, ensure that public money is well managed and that decisions are based on reliable data. We are at a decisive moment for the next multiannual budget. Parliament approved its mandate in April; the Council is still trying to build its own. And what is at stake is not just the size of the budget, but also how it will be financed, implemented and controlled. The report is clear: in traditional expenditure, error rates remain above the materiality threshold, and they are significant and widespread. And we still cannot fully trust the work of the national authorities, even though many of them are working under capacity constraints. Now, the Commission's proposal gives these same authorities even more responsibility for the management and guarantee of European funds. The Court also confirms what this Parliament has always defended: simplifying means reducing unnecessary bureaucracy, but it cannot shift it to the Member States and must never, at any moment, weaken accountability. The Court also urges us to learn from the Recovery and Resilience Facility. The milestones and targets must be credible, measurable and linked to results, with reliable, transparent and independently verifiable information. Finally, a warning: the proposed budget depends on new revenue amounting to around 20% of the total. If they do not materialise, we will naturally have less ambition and more indebtedness. That is why we are defending in this Parliament a European budget financed with sustainable and predictable revenue through new genuine own resources, without overburdening national budgets. Reinforcing this, the Council must consider Parliament’s proposals, alongside those of the Commission, in particular the

[14:30:30] Carla Tavares (S&D) [PT]
proposal for a digital contribution on the major platforms that could generate up to €25 billion per year. The aim is a stable flow of at least €60 billion annually and an agreement on revenue as swift as that on expenditure. Thank you very much.

[14:30:48] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Gnodek for one minute and a half, representing Patriots Group.

[14:30:55] Ondřej Knotek (PfE) [EN]
Thank you, Chair. Mr. Commissioner, Mr. President, I would like to congratulate EC HA for preparing a robust and overall relevant annual report 25. ECHA continually proves to be a reliable partner of this House. Now to the report. ECHA concludes again a negative assessment with confirmed trend of growing irregular ities in shared and direct management programs. Definitely something worse for a cost analysis and some appropriate improvement efforts. And I would have an invitation for two elements for ECHA to be considered in the report to com e. The first one is related to the omnibuses. We do many of them, and we would be interested to hear whether they really simplify the lives of EU businesses. Somehow to quantify it. And second element, really a real life effec tiveness check of EU climate policies and spending. Really focus on the results, not just the fact to which extent the money has been spent or not. For example, last week it turned out that the share of EU-based energy-int ensive production moves outside the EU, which at the end increases the global footprint and global emissions by 46%, which is not good for climate, neither for economy and our safety. So if you could elaborate also deeper in this we would be grateful. Thank you so much.

[14:32:39] Speaker 1 [EN]
Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Erickson for one minute, representing ECR Group.

[14:32:47] Dick Erixon (ECR) [SV]
An important message from the Court of Auditors is that the EU’s borrowing is increasing at a very rapid pace. This is an eightfold increase in just five years. And as we heard the President say, the debt burden is expected to reach 1 000 billion euros by the end of 2027. As a result of this, interest costs are also increasing. The Court of Auditors notes that they are set to become twice as high as the Commission has forecast. The realisation of this level of debt needs to increase. One way would be to report the debt burden distributed among each Member State and add it on top of their national debt as a percentage of GDP. Each member state's national debt would then be almost 4% higher than what is currently reported. This would mean that even fewer countries meet the Maastricht criteria and that the maximum public debt is 60%. This is serious, and we must break this trend of constant borrowing. Thank you.

[14:33:59] Speaker 1 [SK]
And now I give the floor to my colleague Mr Šestál from the Renew Europe group, please.

[14:34:05] Olivier Chastel (Renew) [FR]
Mr President of the Court of Auditors, Commissioner. I obviously want to start by thanking President Murphy for his presentation, but also more generally for the work of the Court of Auditors. In its annual report, it is stated that 94% of the recommendations made in 2025 have been fully or partially accepted by the Commission. And yet, the error rate has risen to 3.8%, the model of the Recovery and Resilience Facility continues to have flaws regarding milestones or the risk of double funding, and absorption rates remain insufficient. The discharge exercise is not trivial, nor is it a mere administrative formality, and it must not be instrumentalised for political score-settling either. Next May, at the end of our work, all our resolutions must set out clear, ambitious recommendations to the European institutions and to European taxpayers on how their money has been spent, for what purpose and to what end. Thank you.

[14:35:10] Speaker 1 [FR]
Thank you.

[14:35:11] Speaker 1 [SK]
And now I give the floor to my colleague Mr Frohn from the Greens/EFA Group, the European Free Alliance.

[14:35:16] Speaker 1 [DE]
Certainly.

[14:35:17] Daniel Freund (Verts/ALE) [DE]
Dear colleagues, thank you to the Court of Auditors, and Commissioner. When you read through the report of the Court of Auditors, you have to say that it makes your hair stand on end, particularly in the examples that you find there, where agricultural funds are being distributed, to shepherds, in Crete, who for example, 226 kilometres away, where they let their animals graze, and which they apparently had to travel to by ship every day. Even in Germany, further education centres receive far more computers and tablets than there are people. Unfortunately, we spend many billions every year without following the rules. And this applies to parts of the EU budget that have already been audited at national level. So, unfortunately, we can only conclude that our control systems are not working as they should. And we really need to urgently address this, both at national and European level, so that we don’t waste and misuse four to five billion euros every year. Thank you.

[14:36:26] Speaker 1 [SK]
Thank you. And now I would like to call on my colleague Fran Gan from the The Left group in the European Parliament.

[14:36:31] Speaker 1 [EN]
Please the floor is yours.

[14:36:34] Luke Ming Flanagan (The Left) [EN]
So the question is, can the RRF be properly audited? I'd say no, not in the traditional sense. The RRF operates on a financing not linked to cost mod el. There is a cost blind spot. The Commission does not systematically track actual project bills. So it is mathematically impossible to calculate if EU citizens got value for money. I don't know that the people in the crowd listen, but they're wasting your money and we don't know. We now face a cliff on accountability. The RRF expired this September because countries delayed much implementation, milestones were rushed through, and checked off at the end of the facility's lifespan. Introducing massive admin error and audit oversight risks. I don't envy the court's task in the years ahead. Your job is to monitor how EU funds are spent and you try your best. It is impossible to do that when the Commission has put a hand over your eyes. Simplification that comes at the cost of accountability is unacceptable. But that seems to be what we're doing. Thank you very much.

[14:37:44] Speaker 1 [SK]
Thank you. And now I would like to ask my colleague Ms Lajková from the European Sovereign Peoples’ Group. Please.

[14:37:53] Rada Laykova (ESN) [BG]
Thank you, Mr President. The European Court of Auditors is one of the few institutions in the European Union that still does its job honestly. Thank you, Mr President. The European Court of Auditors is one of the few institutions in the European Union that still does its job honestly.

And that is precisely why it is absolutely scandalous that this Parliament is blocking every attempt by the European Court of Auditors to audit the billions being sent to Ukraine. Cartel parties are blocking the audit without explanation. But let us be clear: the audit is not questioning whether aid should be provided, but is asking whether the money reached where it was supposed to. At the same time, Ukrainian anti-corruption bodies themselves uncovered a bribery scheme involving around USD 100 million within the highest circles of power. In this environment, the money of European taxpayers is being spent without any real oversight. Parliaments exist to decide how to spend people's money and to control the flow of funds. But this Parliament prefers to talk about the urgent need for urgent needs rather than fulfilling its core task: controlling how people's money is spent.

[14:39:11] Speaker 1 [SK]
Now I would like to ask Ms colleague Vincik to take the floor.

[14:39:15] Angelika Winzig (PPE) [DE]
Mr President, Commissioner, every year we are faced with the same question in this report. Mr President, Commissioner, every year we are faced with the same question in this report: what is the level of fraud and what is it due to in this complex system? Mr President, Commissioner, every year we are faced with the same question in this report. What is the level of fraud and what is due to the complex system? The Court of Auditors itself says that the error rate is not a measure of fraud, since it includes everything from forms to receipts. This year, however, there has been a slight increase. The error rate is increasing. And the problem does not necessarily lie with the beneficiary organisations, but also in the system. We know this from the business world. A large company has its own department for funding, whereas a municipality or a medium-sized enterprise does not. What concerns me most, however, is the Recovery and Resilience Facility. Nine out of 37 payments were not in conformity with the law. Targets were lowered retrospectively without sufficient justification. This year is the last year of the Recovery and Resilience Facility and at the end of the previous year, 38 percent of the grants were still outstanding. There is therefore still ample opportunity to monitor the flow of funds more closely. Simplification and control are not contradictory, I am convinced of that. Therefore, I expect more precise checks from the Commission before payments are made and from the Member States that they meet the targets they have set themselves, rather than lowering them afterwards.

[14:40:39] Speaker 1 [SK]
Thank you very much. And now I give the floor to Ms colleague Rajdel. Please, go ahead.

[14:40:46] Chloé Ridel (S&D) [FR]
Dear colleagues, Mr President Murphy, I for my part am concerned about the political instrumentalisation of your two reports from 20 25. The contribution report on the funding of NGOs, which did not identify any specific irregularities in the funding of O NGOs, is being instrumentalised nonetheless, this report, to justify a pseudo-inquiry committee which, for its part, has also revealed nothing on the question of NGOs, but which has contributed to casting opprobrium on civil society and to undermining it undermines our democracy. Furthermore, in another 2025 report on the European anti-fraud institutions, you recommend a new system for exchanging information on fraud suspicions and investigations. We share the goal of strengthening cooperation between the European Public Prosecutor's Office and OLAF, but some colleagues have taken up this recommendation without the safeguards. necessary guarantees for the confidentiality of criminal investigations, risking the weakening of the work of the European Public Prosecutor's Office. These two examples therefore raise a fundamental question, which is as follows: how can we prevent the public instrumentalisation of your work? Your reports must make clearer what they demonstrate, but also what they do not allow us to affirm. This is essential to prevent them from being used for political purposes that they do not justify. Thank you.

[14:41:57] Speaker 1 [SK]
And now I would like to give the floor to my colleague Mr Sánchez. Please.

[14:41:59] Julien Sanchez (PfE) [FR]
On the legality and regularity of the Union's budgetary expenditure. The estimated error rate for expenditure stands at 3.8 %, and for the cohesion, resilience and values heading, we are even at 6.6 % error rate. Ms von der Leyen will tell us that everything is fine, but the reality is that for the seventh consecutive year, the Court has issued an adverse opinion on the irregularities in expenditure. And the worst part is that these checks are only carried out by sampling. We can all imagine the scandals that slip through the net. If the European Union were a company, its leaders would have been fired a long time ago. Added to this is the opacity in spending. Today, in the age of artificial intelligence, there is no possible control over the spending done here; we do not even have the exhaustive list of final profits. A democratic scandal that shocks no one except the Patriots group. We are once again alerting you to several points. We are demanding public transparency on the spending. So, better control of spending. The controls are insufficient and irregularities persist. We also demand that the FRR model not be generalised. That would be dangerous. The Court itself is now documenting its weaknesses. Will you listen to it and to us? Thank you.

[14:43:04] Julien Sanchez (PfE) [EN]
Will you accept the blue card with—

[14:43:07] Julien Sanchez (PfE) [EN]
Will you accept the blue card from Mr. Freund? Please, Daniel.

[14:43:13] Daniel Freund (Verts/ALE) [FR]
Mr Sanchez, I am here. You have complained about all this corruption that only your party or your group is interested in. In fact, the offices of your Secretary-General have just been searched by the police. Because your political group continues to embezzle hundreds of thousands of euros, unfortunately. You have not spoken about it, but perhaps you can answer this question: why is there so much corruption among the Patriots and particularly in your party, where there are already so many convictions? You do not mention it.

[14:43:47] Julien Sanchez (PfE) [FR]
I know, Mr Freund, that you like communist regimes and that you have a nostalgia for them, and that in those regimes, in general, justice does not exist. We, once again, are attached to the rule of law. I think you often talk about it. The rule of law is precisely about ensuring that there are fair trials. In this case, there are cases that have not yet been definitively ruled on, and I believe that everyone will have the opportunity to say what they have to say regarding what is currently under way. This does not concern the Patriots group; it concerns the former ID group, of which I was not a member. Thank you. In any case, as regards NGOs, I think it would be interesting to look into that as well, and you may have things to tell us on the subject.

[14:44:30] Julien Sanchez (PfE) [SK]
Now I would ask my colleague Mr Brudžinský to take the floor.

[14:44:36] Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (ECR) [PL]
Thank you very much. Mr President, Mr Commissioner, European taxpayers' money requires greater accountability. The high error rate of 3.8 % contained in the ETO opinion for 2025, again exceeding the 2 % materiality threshold, shows that the European Commission should be held accountable for the actual results of budget management, not just for the declarations it submits. We need effective, reliable control, not a sham. In the area of cohesion, the ETO estimated the error rate at 6.6 %, while the Commission indicated only 2.3 %. Despite methodological differences, these discrepancies show the need for greater transparency in expenditure verification and the consistent elimination of irregularities. The Recovery Fund demonstrates the risks associated with the Commission's discretionary actions, particularly through the freedom to formulate and then meet generally defined milestones. In 13 audited changes, the requirements for milestones were already modified after the payment application was submitted. Therefore, the risk of the arbitrary application of funding conditions towards Member States must be eliminated. Thank you.

[14:45:50] Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (ECR) [SK]
Thank you. And now I give the floor to my colleague Mr Štreit. Please, go ahead.

[14:45:57] Joachim Streit (Renew) [DE]
Thank you. Dear colleagues, Mr President of the Court of Auditors Murphy, I am pleased to see you again here in Strasbourg after we also met in Luxembourg. Every year, the European Court of Auditors presents its report, and every year it’s the same thing. There is talk of mismanagement in the EU and in the Commission. And what does Ms von der Leyen do? She is demanding even more money. She wants two trillion euros for the next several multiannual financial frameworks. And at the same time, there are shortcomings with the Corona recovery fund, errors in EU spending and mounting debts. Ms von der Leyen, how do you explain this to citizens, that you always want more money but do not effectively control the measures? Ms von der Leyen, you always want more money. But what we need are clear priorities. We need effective controls and consequences for waste. The European Court of Auditors does its job very well. Ms von der Leyen, when will you finally do your job?

[14:46:56] Joachim Streit (Renew) [SK]
Now I would like to ask my colleague Ms Bossdorf to take the floor.

[14:47:03] Irmhild Boßdorf (ESN) [DE]
Almost four billion euros disappear every year from EU funds alone through opaque channels. 17.5 million euros for a wellness hotel in Croatia, over 100 million diverted from a 300 million euro project for water infrastructure in Romania, the Italian mafia apparently benefiting from the whole affair. 18 million for manipulated procurement procedures in Corsica, and so on. No single EU policy area is as susceptible to fraud as cohesion policy. Last year, the error rate even rose further, from 5.7 to 6.6 %, and is thus almost twice as high as in the rest of the EU budget. We need consistent recovery of funds that have been misused and greater responsibility in the allocation of funds in the Member States. We Germans, Europe’s paymasters, must urge the Council to use funds sparingly, because German taxpayers’ money must not be misused to compensate for inadequate EU controls. Thank you.

[14:48:05] Irmhild Boßdorf (ESN) [SK]
And now I would like to call on my colleague Rodneveď, please.

[14:48:10] Katarína Roth Neveďalová (NI) [SK]
Thank you, Mr President. We rarely appreciate our colleagues from the European Court of Auditors, who produce various reports. And in many of those reports, for example, they also mention that our policies are not as correct as they should be, that we are not meeting them in the way we should. And these reports, which they submit to us every year, also state that we are not managing our affairs as well as the European Union. For seven years in a row, we have received a negative opinion. It is certainly a coincidence that this seven-year period coincides with the presidency of the European Commission by Ms Ursula von der Leyen. The Annual Report now states that this error rate is 3.8 % in the expenditure of the European Union and the European budget. So I ask, if some European Member State were to manage its finances like this, what would be the reaction of the European Commission? This is really a very big problem. We would immediately hear about breaches of the rules, sanctions and the freezing of EU funds. So if we, as the European Union, manage badly in this way, then this is also the result of the work of the European Commission as such. It is all well and good that Mr Commissioner said that they will take some corrective action and that the European Commission will take some measures, but the question is what measures they can take to prevent this from happening. Likewise, the question is whether these rules apply equally to everyone, or whether we have some kind of double standard. Thank you.

[14:49:22] Katarína Roth Neveďalová (NI) [SK]
Now I would like to ask my colleague Ms Doreta to take the floor.

[14:49:27] Regina Doherty (PPE) [EN]
Thank you, President. For somebody opening their payslip in Dublin, my hometown, the tax deducted is real hard-e arned money that's earned. Money that could be used for other things like rent, childcare, or the weekly food bill. So there are absolutely entitled to know where their taxes go, and expect every euro to be spent wisely. And that includes the money that Ireland sends here to the European budget. And I think that's why the Court of Auditors is so important. The independent scrutiny helps people really trust that their money is being properly manag ed. So, President Murphy, as a fellow Dubliner, I want to welcome you here and thank your colleagues for all the crucial work that you do. Last year, the EU budget spending excluding recovery grants totaled 166. 3 billion euros. And the courts have estimated that a 3. 8% of error rate in the expenditure in their audits. That's just shy of 7 billion. And we absolutely, obviously, must always strive to bring that number down. But the error rate this year is an increase on last year. And whilst it is small, what's really worrying is that we're seeing the same mistakes being made by member states year in, year out. And that really isn't good enough. So the court sets out what needs to change. The commission and the member states are supposed to act on those recommendations. But we can't see those warnings fall on deaf ears or the trend will continue. Also, I think it's really alarming that we have a growth in EU rising debt without a sufficient clear plan of how we're going to repay it. The substantial interest bill alone for the next seven or eight years is going to be 93 billion euros. And if we have an incomplete payment plan, what will happen is that we'll end up rounding back to those taxpayers in Dublin, looking for more m oney. And that's absolutely unacceptable. All of our citizens work really hard to earn their wages. They deserve to know that every euro they contribute is properly accounted for. And that, when problems are absolutely identified, which is the court's job, they're acted upon and changed so that they don't happen again.

[14:51:25] Regina Doherty (PPE) [EN]
And that's how we protect the public trust in Europe, by taking responsibility and by showing their trust in the results. Taxpayers do their part to give us the money. We have to do our part to make sure we spend it wisely.

[14:51:37] Regina Doherty (PPE) [EN]
Thank you, Chair.

[14:51:38] Regina Doherty (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. And let me inform you, dear colleagues, that I'm closing HDI, the four requests for HDI, and we should be accommod ating all of them just so I will have to be very strict. And let me give the floor to Mr. Ruisen. Please.

[14:51:57] Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR) [NL]
Thank you, Mr President. Commissioner, dear colleagues, Thank you, Mr President. Dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, the picture that the Court of Auditors paints of the management of the 2025 budget is certainly not a rosy one. Another adverse opinion. Still far too high error rates. In the case of cohesion, even 6.6%. Inadequate accountability in the Recovery and Resilience Facility. And a mountain of debt that will grow to 1 trillion euro next year. The Court of Auditors is highlighting this: that is its role. And thank you for your excellent work. But the Court of Auditors cannot call the Commission to order. That is our task as elected representatives. And that is what we must do. If we do not intervene, who will? For me, Mr President, it is clear that with such error rates and deficiencies in the accounts, we cannot grant discharge. The time for settling for nice promises is now truly over. We, as Parliament, must stand our ground. And let us also heed the warning about the enormous debt burden. So, stop with those loans. Thank you.

[14:53:12] Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR) [SK]
Thank you. And now I would like to ask my colleague Mr Ronč, please.

[14:53:17] Bogdan Rzońca (ECR) [PL]
Mr President, on behalf of the ECR, I would like to say a few words. Mr President, anyone who wishes the European Union well should take into account every report presented by the European Court of Auditors. These documents are truly important and relevant for the future of the European Union. And these reports clearly and plainly show that the European Union does not check how it spends money, and unfortunately, it does not do so fully. And this is our problem. The Union does not see, and this is evident in the reports, the debts of the European Union and the consequences of the Union in this regard for the future. And after all, we want the project called the European Union to endure. So if we do not take into account these reliable pieces of information, the European Court of Auditors, we will be supporting extremist forces within the European Union that will simply exploit what is happening in the European Union. So my request to all of you here and those who are not present is this: read

[14:54:36] Speaker 5 [EN]
I really have to be strict and fair. Dziękuję bardzo. We have to be equal. It happens to all of us. And now we move to HDI. And let me give the floor to Madame Grappini.

[14:54:53] Maria Grapini (S&D) [RO]
Thank you, Mr President. Mr President of the Court, I would like to congratulate you and your entire team. I am in my third term. I continue to monitor what the Court of Auditors is doing. Unfortunately, the committee does not take this into account, even though it acknowledges the observations. Because, here we are, once again after seven years, at an error rate. And even though the Commissioner said so and may even be listening to me, I will interrupt until the Commissioner listens. That is correct. Yes? I return to it. I will wait for the Commissioner to listen. If the Court of Auditors does its job and every time in the report, I have heard this also in committee, why does our Budgetary Control Committee not correct these things? Because you cannot ask Member States to be honest? To sanction them? Instead, you have been persisting in error for seven years. What worries me is that I have heard today, I have also heard in the committee, the proposed framework is very weak for the future. So what chances do we have not to have these things again? Because, ultimately, this money belongs to the citizens and we must have efficiency in the way we spend this money. Thank you.

[14:56:04] Maria Grapini (S&D) [RO]
Thank you. Correctly, because—

[14:56:06] Maria Grapini (S&D) [SK]
Thank you. And now I will call on my colleague Mr Tinklainen to speak.

[14:56:18] Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR) [FI]
Mr President, the European Court of Auditors’ annual report makes for grim reading. Mr President, the auditors state bluntly that the error rate in EU spending remains too high. The audit found that the errors were significant and far-reaching. The general problem was that EU money was granted to projects that were not even entitled to support. And so, once again, the auditors issued an adverse opinion on EU spending. Isn’t this the seventh year in a row? And what about that massive recovery package that the Finns Party warned about years ago? During the year, nearly a quarter of the aid payments made to member states from the recovery package did not comply with the rules and conditions. Auditors have warned that the mere interest payments on the recovery package’s grants could balloon to €93 billion over the next seven years. The EU is an irresponsible spender of money. Thank you.

[14:57:22] Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR) [SK]
Thank you. And now I give the floor to my colleague Olivier.

[14:57:29] João Oliveira (The Left) [PT]
Thank you, Mr President. Commissioner Serafim, regarding this report from the European Court of Auditors, I would like to highlight two aspects that concern us are absolutely essential. First, the criticism levelled at the model of the Recovery and Resilience Facility, from which the national recovery and resilience plans (PRRs) emerged, concerns the concentration of power in the European Commission, which assumes an almost absolute power in management of the funds, with no form of control or obstructing the control over the use of the funds, and, naturally, with the ability it has to condition and subject the Member States based on this power to disburse the funds, which subjects the Member States to a situation of vulnerability in the imposition of the policies that the European Commission imposes. With these criticisms, this is yet another reason to reject the model that is being proposed for the multiannual financial framework, for 2028, 2034. Secondly, I would like to emphasise what the European Court of Auditors says: regarding the financial madness with the financing of the war in Ukraine, with loan after loan. €18 billion in 2028, €90 billion in 2025.

[14:58:36] João Oliveira (The Left) [EN]
Thank you.

[14:58:37] João Oliveira (The Left) [PT]
And the peoples are paying the price for this.

[14:58:39] João Oliveira (The Left) [SK]
And now I give the floor to my colleague Ms Soral, please.

[14:58:47] Malika Sorel (NI) [FR]
Mr President of the Court of Auditors, I would like to address the issue of the operating expenditure of the institutions, in particular those of the European Parliament and those of the European Commission. The Parliament [is at] 2.5 billion, the Commission 4.5 billion. In an era of tremendous advances in artificial intelligence, do you not think that some operating expenses may perhaps be superfluous? That serious reflection must be undertaken to rationalise the functioning of the institutions, to increase their efficiency and to reduce certain waste. Some might consider that this would bring little in the way of savings. I believe the opposite. Moreover, we have a duty of exemplary conduct. This is public money we are talking about. At a time when we regularly discuss the cost of living and the distress of some of our fellow citizens. So I put this question to you, Mr President: who, in your view, should oversee the institutions to make them more virtuous? I do not believe in self-analysis or self-psychoanalysis. Thank you.

[14:59:52] Malika Sorel (NI) [SK]
Thank you. And with that I close, as I always do, and I will now give the floor to Commissioner Serafin.

[15:00:09] 263975 [SK]
Mr President, I will now give my remarks following today's discussion. Let me stress that we value, as the European Commission, the reports, in particular the Court's annual reports. They are independent; it is an independent assessment of how the EU budget is managed and protected, and we have no doubt that such an independent assessment is needed and can improve how things work. We are, of course, aware that managing a budget of this scale, implemented through different instruments and involving many actors, inevitably entails risks. A zero-risk scenario is not realistic and is not even cost-effective. But what matters is that these risks are identified, addressed, and followed up effectively. And here I will refer to the comment made by the Honourable Member Grappini: I will repeat what I said at the beginning. The Commission not only values the recommendations made by ECHA, but also accepts and implements recommendations made by ECHA. So, in fact, more than 90 percent of the ECHA recommendations are accepted and are being or have already been implemented by the Commission. And we will do the same with the report which is in front of us. We will analyse the court's findings and recommendations, and we will take the necessary actions; sometimes, quite often, those actions would need to be taken together with the Member States and other implementing partners. I also want to stress that we have taken careful note of the questions and concerns raised today, and the Commission will ensure appropriate follow-up. This is one step in the process of the discharge procedure, so I am also looking forward to cooperation both with the Court and with this House in the context of the discharge procedure. Thank you.

[15:02:25] 263975 [PL]
Thank you very much. And now I would like to invite the Chair of the Board of Auditors, Mr Murphy.

[15:02:31] Speaker 1 [SK]
You're welcome.

[15:02:37] 238669 [EN]
Thank you, President. I'd like to thank all the Honorable Members who have intervened and shared their views on our annual report, which obviously we listened to and welcome any comments. I think the common issues which were raised most tod ay were basically the level of debt and own resources. And in a way, they're kind of linked, I would say. I mean, the own resources, I think it's very important to say. I think, as was mentioned by already by Honorable Members, it's 21 percent roughly of the next MFF budget pro posed by the Commission. I mean, it's 21 percent of this two trillion euros, so obviously if they do not materialize, I mean, y ou know, in addition to the already announced cuts, let's say, the EU may still face a significant shortfall, which would require either, I mean, there are— I mean, any sort of diminution in the level of own resources will mean that there will need to be funds from other sources, whether it's increased GNI contributions, which is probably not realistic, additional debt, which we already have some concerns about, rollover of the existing debt, or basically reducing the overall ambition of the EU budget and the policies which it covers. I think another area— the RRA has been mentioned a few times, and obviously we also would prefer to see a lower rate than 3. 8 percent, but I think it's very important that we clarify once again that this is not fraud per se. I mean, some projects which, you know, are perfect on paper and have no errors don't deliver much added value, and it 's vice versa. Some of the projects which actually have errors attached can be a positive— you know, contribu tion to the EU taxpayer. I think the issue raised by Honorable Member Doherty about the typology of errors being cons istent, that is an issue. Despite our recommendations, which the Commission says have been implemented, we see the same type of error year after year after year. So obviously there is a systemic structural issue there which needs to be add

[15:04:44] 238669 [EN]
ressed. In terms of the debt, we've already given the figures: one trillion euros by 2027. I mean, and I think linked to the own resource, we have to remember when the next generation EU was being devised, there was an own resource proposal on the table to basically repay the NGU debt. This never materialized, and now we see the actual consequence of that . We're in the Commission proposal: 8 percent of the next budget, or around 160 billion, is solely earmarked for serv icing this next generation EU debt, and as was mentioned by the Honorable Member above there, interest costs alone could reach around 93 billion over the 2028-2024 period. And where the latest proposal has reduced this figure somewhat, the amount involved are still quite substantial. Then we come to the perennial topic on the table before this new MFF, which was the RRF. And I think we have been quite clear about our concerns in relation to this delivery mechanism, let's say. And as has already been pointed out, it will be replicated to some degree in the European Fund, particularly in relation to the national program s. And we really hope that some of the advice we have given, that lessons are learned from this. It remains to be seen, because with the devil will be in the detail, the Commission is currently working on its assurance framework, which will give us an indication of how they see their role in controlling the funds, and obviously this will be instrumental in how we adopt their method ology to use their work, and also what additional work we will have to do to make sure basically that wherever the delivery mechanism, that EU taxpayers are getting value for money. I think one area where we still have significant concerns in relation to the RRF is the performance framework. I mean, the whole idea of a performance instrument is that you can measure its impact. And we consider the performance framework to be still very weak, which means that in the end it will be actually very difficult to measure the real

[15:06:44] 238669 [EN]
impact and what has been delivered for the money. A couple of quick replies to some of the issues raised. In terms of EU climate policy spending, we actually do a lot of work in this area, and will continue over the next couple of years. And we have actually reported that there has been an overstatement of climate-related expenditure by the Commission in terms of the 2 014-20 program, in terms of the one and five Europe being spent, and also in relation to the RRF program where we saw many billions of euros which were incorrectly reported as being green expenditure. Then I suppose also the administrative expenditure was mentioned. I mean, I think AI will have a— there's no doubt that that will have an impact on the administrative setup and related costs of all the institution s. You know, we actually do— not of the institutions in our annual report, chapter 10, and we see that there is consistently press ure on the administrative heading. We see in the new proposal that the administrative heading four has been cut by another 95 billion, which will require institutions de facto to rationalize and be more efficient because the resources available to them will be much less. Finally, I would like to thank many of the Honorable Members for their positive comments in relation to our annual report, and I think this is bas ically a consequence of the dedicated work of our staff and all the people involved in the production of this report in the EC CA, and I would like to thank them on behalf of the College of the European Court of Auditors. Thank you very much.

[15:08:17] 238669 [EN]
Thank you, President, and thank you for the great work of the Court of Auditors. And for being with us, this concludes the debate on this topic.

[15:08:26] Martin Hojsík (Renew) [SK]
The next item on the agenda is the declaration of the rule of law mission to Malta nine years after the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia. And I welcome Commissioner McGrath and would ask him to open this debate. Please, Commissioner.

[15:08:50] 263979 [EN]
Dear Chair, Honorable Members, thank you for holding this debate to commemorate the ninth anniversary of the assassination of Daphne Carolina Galicia. Daphne was a courageous Maltese investigative journalist known for her determined and fearless reporting. Her assassination shook all of us. Her murder, robbed her family, and friends of a loved one, including her three sons, Matthew, Paul, and Andrew. And a society of a courageous journalist who dedicated her life to exposing corruption, and holding power to account. It was an attack on journalism, and an attack on democracy itself. The Commission has consistently called for all those responsible for this assassination to be brought to justice. There needs to be accountability. There can be no impunity for this atrocious crime, and judicial procedures are still ongoing. Sadly, Daphne was not the only journalist in Europe to pay with her life for her work. Just four months later, in February 2018, Jan Kuczek was murdered in Slovakia, together with his fiancée, Martina Kušnírová. He too was investigating fraud and corruption. And this year marks 30 years since Veronica Gieren was shot dead in Dublin, in my own country, Ireland, because of her reporting on organized crime. And I can still remember the shock around the country when the news of her murder broke; it is a moment that Ireland has never forgotten. The protection of media and journalists remains a political priority across the European Union. For our part, in the years following Daphne's assassination, we have taken concrete action to uphold media freedom and to protect journalists. We have recommended a wide-ranging measures to ensure the protection, safety, and empowerment of journalists and other media professionals. New EU legislative rules are in place to protect journalists and civil society from abusive lawsuits. And we have enshrined a comprehensive regime to protect media freedom and media pluralism under the European Media Freedom Act. We are working with member states to ensure that this framework is implemented fully and delivers on the ground.

[15:11:16] 263979 [EN]
In addition, the European Democracy Shield published last November seeks to further support journalists and enhance their protection against the undue pressure and threats. As regards the situation of the rule of law in Malta, since 2020 the Commission has closely monitoring developments in the context of the annual rule of law reports. I would like to thank the Maltese authorities and stakeholders for the good cooperation throughout the annual rule of law cycle. The 2026 edition of the rule of law report, published in July, contains an in-depth analys is of the main developments regarding the rule of law in Malta. The report notes that Malta has taken certain steps to address some of the issues identified, but that further efforts are needed to address the recommendations made by the European Commission. Looking at the situation of media freedom and pluralism, the report noted limited progress on adopting safeguards to impro ve the working environment of journalists including access to official documents. The Commission is aware that the Maltese government has announced the tabling of a comprehensive media reform in the coming weeks. In that context, it will be important that Malta ensures adequate consultation of all relevant stakeholders. The Commission will analyze this legislation once adopted including in light of the provisions of the European Media Freedom Act. The Commission has also aware of the government's intention to expand the protection of journalists and other act ing as public watchdogs against abusive lawsuits. Our so-called SLAPPs. Malta was the first member state to transpose the anti-SLAPP directive. In 2024, covering cross-border cases. In its anti-SLAPP recommendation, the Commission called on all member states to extend the protection also to domestic cases, and I very much hope that Malta will take the opportunity now to en act such an extension to domestic SLAPP cases as well. Under justice system, the Commission recommended to Malta to take forward initiatives to increase resources to reform cour

[15:13:29] 263979 [EN]
t procedures and to advance digitalization with a view to improving the efficiency of the justice system, as no further progress had been reported in this year's report. Efficiency of justice is crucial for effective judicial protection of citizens and businesses, and for strengthening trust in the justice system. The report also recommended taking forward reforms with a view to invol ve the judiciary in the procedure for the appointment of the Chief Justice. This reform is still pending, and the political debate is ongoing. With regard to the fight against corruption, the report noted that progress remains to be achieved on establishing a robust tra ck record of final judgments in corruption cases, given the high backlog of pending court cases. Judges' workload and that a limited team of four magistrates are responsible for handling preliminary inquiries. The report also noted that limited progress was made to address challenges related to the length of investigations of high-level corruption cases and recommended stepping up efforts in this regard. Finally, in relation to other checks and balances, the rule of law report notes that Malta made limited progress in introducing a formal framework for public participation in the legislative process. Since legislative reforms remain pending, it is recommended to Malta to now introduce such a framework. Moreover, the report called on Malta to establish a national human rights institution as a legislative proposal to that end remains under preparation at the moment. To conclude, Chair, the European Commission continues to insist on the need to make further progress on the different pend ing issues highlighted in the recommendations in this year's rule of law report. The Commission remains committed to supporting Malta in these efforts. I look forward to the contribution of colleagues across the House to this important debate and to responding later on. Thank you very much.

[15:15:35] 263979 [SK]
Thank you, Mr Commissioner. And now I would like to call on my colleague Mr Kazú from the European People’s Party Group of Christian Democrats, please.

[15:15:43] David Casa (PPE) [IT]
Thank you, Mr President. Colleagues, two decades ago Galicia marked me definitively and I earned it in the Chamber. Let it be a joke to me. The institutions of the countries uphold those who seek integrity. The definitions of corruption, justice. And the... But is there in mind a group of people accused of obstructing justice, the failure of the Maltese state, failure and... The public inquiry that existed on the states’ climate of impunity.

[15:16:46] David Casa (PPE) [IT]
The Prime Minister is attacking Parliament, accusing Malta. Stagnant politics

[15:17:51] David Casa (PPE) [IT]
Thank you.

[15:17:53] David Casa (PPE) [SK]
Thank you. And now I would like to call on colleague Adius Saliba from the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats group, please.

[15:19:24] Speaker 1 [SK]
Now I would ask my colleague Mr Legeri to take the floor.

[15:19:33] Fabrice Leggeri (PfE) [FR]
Thank you, Mr President, Commissioner. Nine years after the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia, the perpetrators have been convicted. convicted, but no masterminds. To understand this case, we must look at what she was denouncing: a corruption so deeply entrenched that, according to the public inquiry, the State had created the climate of impunity that allowed her assassination. This scandal tarnishes a Labour government, yet another one for your political family, dear socialist colleagues.

[15:20:01] Fabrice Leggeri (PfE) [EN]
I'm sorry, just sorry to interrupt you. I'm missing the English interpretation, so you might need to start again.

[15:20:08] Fabrice Leggeri (PfE) [EN]
Oh, sorry.

[15:20:08] Fabrice Leggeri (PfE) [EN]
Because you're halfway through and we don't have English interpretation.

[15:20:12] Fabrice Leggeri (PfE) [EN]
But there is.

[15:20:13] Fabrice Leggeri (PfE) [EN]
I didn't have it for the first—

[15:20:15] Fabrice Leggeri (PfE) [EN]
I did not.

[15:20:16] Fabrice Leggeri (PfE) [EN]
No.

[15:20:16] Fabrice Leggeri (PfE) [EN]
Ah, okay.

[15:20:19] Fabrice Leggeri (PfE) [EN]
Can I get a confirmation that it will be okay again?

[15:20:22] Fabrice Leggeri (PfE) [EN]
Yes, thank you.

[15:20:23] Fabrice Leggeri (PfE) [EN]
Perfect. That happens to all of us. Please start again.

[15:20:27] Fabrice Leggeri (PfE) [EN]
Thank you. Thank you.

[15:20:29] Fabrice Leggeri (PfE) [FR]
Nine years after the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia, the executors have been convicted, but no masterminds. To understand this case, we need to look at what she was denouncing: a corruption so deeply entrenched that, according to the public inquiry, the State had created the climate of impunity that enabled her assassination. This scandal is tarnishing a Labour government, yet another one for your political family, dear Socialist colleagues. You who lecture the whole of Europe on the rule of law, start by demanding answers from your friends. Back in 2019, Jordan Bardella was warning you here: seven years later, we are still repeating the same speeches. Today, the Commission is publishing reports, Malta is promising reforms, but the Daphne Foundation is still denouncing recommendations that are largely unimplemented. Now, we are demanding a timeline and results. Daphne was investigating so that the powerful would be held to account. Honouring her memory means demanding accountability. Including from your political friends. Thank you, Mr President.

[15:21:32] Fabrice Leggeri (PfE) [SK]
Now I would like to ask my colleague Ms Goševská from the European Conservatives and Reformists Group to take the floor.

[15:21:38] Małgorzata Gosiewska (ECR) [PL]
We are debating the rule of law in Malta. Nine years after the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia. The rule of law means that power is subject to the law and state institutions are independent, and citizens can look to the authorities with trust. can look the authorities in the eye without fear. Let us look at Poland. The dispute over the legality of the Constitutional Tribunal's actions. Undermining the constitutional order: the police against protesting citizens. Where is the European Union today? Where is the European Commission? When Donald Tusk was fighting for power, Brussels was using the rule of law as a tool of political pressure on the government of the United Right. Today, when Tusk wields that power, the same Brussels remains silent in the face of actions that strike at the constitutional order. Back then, Brussels helped him gain power. Today, it does not want to challenge his government. The rule of law cannot be a tool for fighting political opponents and a shield for political allies. Because if it depends on who is in power, we are not dealing with the protection of European values, but with political hypocrisy.

[15:22:46] Małgorzata Gosiewska (ECR) [SK]
Now I call on Vice-President Wilmes on behalf of the Renew Europe group, please.

[15:22:52] Sophie Wilmès (Renew) [FR]
Thank you, Mr President. Nine years since the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia. Nine years that her family has been waiting, still, for responsibility to be established. Which makes it particularly difficult for them to grieve. This assassination also marked the Parliament, which led to the creation of the DRFMG in 2018, a group that I have the honour of chairing. 'Yes. Because many questions remain unanswered, and we cannot be satisfied with that, the DRFMG will once again travel to Malta in November. On site, we want to understand what is still not working, what is fuelling this lack of unity, but above all we want to see what has actually changed in the past nine years. We will of course share our conclusions with this Parliament and with you, Commissioner, but I want to be very clear: this mission cannot simply result in yet another report. It must, on the contrary, lead to real and concrete progress for the Maltese people. Because Daphné Caruana Galizia’s memory demands more than our tributes. Thank you.

[15:23:59] Sophie Wilmès (Renew) [SK]
Thank you. And now I would like to ask my colleague Freund from the Greens/European Free Alliance group to speak, please.

[15:24:06] Daniel Freund (Verts/ALE) [EN]
Dear colleagues, it's been nine years since the brutal assassination of Daphné. And for these nine years now, we have been waiting for justice, for closure on this case. The hitmen have been sentenced. They are in jail. But the person that ordered the brutal assassination by car bomb is still walking free today. And that shows us that something is not quite right in the justice system in Malta. Things have changed, but I think more change is necessary. All the recommendations by the public inquiry need to be fully implemented. It is, to me, really not understandable that abuse of office—for example—is still not criminalized in Mal ta. That an intervention by the Prime Minister's office into the ongoing procedures has seen no consequence whatsoever. So I'm glad we're going that a mission of the European Parliament is going to Malta in a couple of weeks. And we will look at what has changed and what more change we need to see in Malta. Thank you very much.

[15:25:18] Daniel Freund (Verts/ALE) [EN]
Ďakujem. And now there is no blue-collar possibility in the first round, if that's what you wanted.

[15:25:25] Speaker 1 [SK]
Now I would like to invite my colleague Arvani Tisa from the Left group in the European Parliament, please.

[15:25:35] Konstantinos Arvanitis (The Left) [EL]
Mr Pitropé, colleagues, Mr President, one year after the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia, things have taken their course, of course, in Malta. Mr President, ladies and gentlemen colleagues, Mr President, a year since the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia, things have taken their course, of course, in Malta. There was a promise that we would soon be there, the relevant committee. Eight years since the murder of Giannis Koutsou and his fiancée. Five years since the murder of the Dutchman Peter de Vries. Five years since the murder of Giorgos Karaivaz in Greece. And in most of these cases, the victims, those who were murdered, were investigative journalists. They were trying to expose the collusion between politics and major economic interests. Despite the guidelines on SLAPs, we still have not decisively secured press freedom issues. Mr Pittoors, Mr President, honourable colleagues, I wish to reiterate my proposal from this podium, as I did several years ago. To demonstrate in practice the importance of press freedom and the protection of journalists, let us at least adopt, as the European Parliament, the families—particularly the children—of murdered journalists who have fallen in the line of duty. In closing, it is not very safe to be a journalist in the Union, nor even an MEP. I remind you of the case of our colleague Mr Stelios Kouloglou, who was on the PEGA committee and was found to have been under surveillance by your PEGA.

[15:26:52] Konstantinos Arvanitis (The Left) [EN]
Thank you.

[15:26:53] Konstantinos Arvanitis (The Left) [EL]
Thank you.

[15:26:55] Konstantinos Arvanitis (The Left) [SK]
Now I will call on Mr Vargickevič, please.

[15:26:59] Michał Wawrykiewicz (PPE) [EN]
Dear Chair, Commissioner, colleagues, in her final years in 2016 and 2017, Daph né Caruana Galizia focused on the journalism targeting key figures in Maltese government , the ministers of Energy and Economy, the chief of staff and wife of the Prime Minister. This recalls situations in Orban's Hungary, before her assassination, she asked Maltese officials questions on behalf of all of us, actually, about possible corruption schemes, including secret companies in Panama or possible bribes kept in New Zealand. This is a normal work of journalists, free and independent journalism is the backbone of our union. Under the rule of law, under the democratic rules. The free press should remind elected representatives to ser ve to public rather than their own interests or political sponsors. Nine years after the murder, public perception among many Maltese people still points to a widespread culture of impunity and special treatment for public figures. It cannot be accepted. Honorable members, as a reporter to the Commission's 2026 r ule of law, report I promise you to do my best to bring the recent rule of law situation in Malta to the special attention of this. House and present you with the findings before the 10th anniversary of assassination. Thank you.

[15:28:39] Michał Wawrykiewicz (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. Will you accept the blue card from Mr. Gonzalez? Please.

[15:28:51] Bruno Gonçalves (S&D) [EN]
Dear Member, I think we all mourn the memory of Daphné. But you have been mentioning corruption and trying to correlate it. It's funny because when we vote for more transparency on the Panama Papers, your group votes against. When we vote, for example, on having a clear traffic of flows on the offshore accounts, your group votes against. And then you bring all the countries that you don't like. You brought Portugal. You have brought Spain because it's a socialist government. You have brought Sweden two weeks ago voting an amendment stating that there was interference in the elections by the Muslim Brotherhood. Is your problem with corruption or is it with democracy? Thank you.

[15:29:31] Michał Wawrykiewicz (PPE) [EN]
As EPP group, we do not have problems with the democracy. We do not have problems with the rule of law. We always support our common union values and we always vote after very serious consideration. So we are bringing today the situation in Malta. We are bringing the story of murdered Daphné Galizia to raise this problem in this Ho use. And as I promised, as a rule of law reporter, I will bring this situation to the attention of this House in my report. Thank you.

[15:30:09] Michał Wawrykiewicz (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. And I see that Mr. Mularczyk requested KGDI, but I'm sorry, you need to request it during the initial intervention of a member. So I would like to give the floor to Madam Minister.

[15:30:24] Evin Incir (S&D) [EN]
Colleagues, the brutal murder of Daphné Caruana Galizia demands justice. Justice for Daphné, justice for her family, and accountability for every criminal and master manipulator responsible. Because no one is above the law. But sometimes I'm wondering if this Parliament is turning into a Mickey Mouse Parliament where the EPP and the far right is exploiting tragedies for political gain. Because let's stay to the facts. Malta has abolished criminal defamation, strengthened journalist protections, introduced measures against abusive lawsuits, and secured five convictions connected to Daphné's murder. Is this enough? Of course it is not enough. But ignoring progress because it doesn't fit into the EPP and the far right narrative is not defending or serving justice. Justice is not a political weapon. And Daphné's memory, deserves better than political points scoring. So let's serve Daphné justice, but stop lying about the progress in Malta.

[15:31:27] Evin Incir (S&D) [EN]
Thank you. And you cannot have—sorry, you cannot have a blue card on a member from your own group. So that's why I cannot ask. But let me give the floor to a colleague. Cannot. Next apartheid.

[15:31:42] Speaker 5 [SK]
Thank you, Mr President.

[15:31:44] Jaroslav Knot (PfE) [EN]
Dear colleagues, nine years ago Daphné Caruana Galizia was brutally murdered for exposing corrup tion and challenging laws in power. Nine years later we must ask ourselves: has justice truly been served? The rule of law cannot exist where journalists are intimidated, corruption goes unpunished, and political connections stand above justice. But let us also be clear: the rule of law must never become a political weapon used selectively against certain member states while others escape scrutiny. Malta deserves justice, Daphné's family deserves justice, and the European citizens deserve equal standards not political double standard s. No government should be above the law, no journalists should have to die for telling the truth, and no European institution should confuse the defense of justice with political interference. Thank you very much.

[15:32:38] Jaroslav Knot (PfE) [SK]
Thank you. And now I give the floor to my colleague Ms García Harminda van der Valle.

[15:32:42] Jaroslav Knot (PfE) [SK]
You're welcome.

[15:32:44] Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle (Renew) [EN]
Thank you, Chair, Commissioner. Nine years have passed since the brutal murder of Daphné Caruana Galizia. Murdered for investigating corruption and the mastermind has still not been convicted. Nine years. And the Maltese authorities and courts have still not done enough to bring those responsible to justice. I think we can all agree on this. A disgrace not only for Malta but for the entire European Union. And time and time again the European Parliament and the Commission have called on Malta to speed up its justice. Especially for investigations on high-level corruption. Without much result until now, unfortunately. So dear Commissioner, please, you have been to Malta. Do your best to ensure that all due reforms are passed quickly and that we end this culture of impunity. And about ending this culture of impunity, I will say this about this Parliament. It is a disgrace that murders of journalists depending on which country they come from and which government is in power are being used by different political groups. I'm sorry. S&D, Malta. EPP, Greece. FICO, in Slovakia. We see this across the political spectrum. Stop doing this. This is a disgrace to the memory of the victims. Thank you.

[15:33:57] Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle (Renew) [EN]
Thank you. Will you accept the blue card? From colleague Mularczyk, from ECR.

[15:34:09] Arkadiusz Mularczyk (ECR) [PL]
Thank you very much for accepting the blue card. Madam, in your speech you quite rightly emphasise that journalists must enjoy the right to freedom of expression, must be protected, and citizens have the right to reliable information. You mentioned countries where violations of freedom of speech occur. Have you heard about the situation in Poland, where the liberal government of Donald Tusk is harassing journalists from the TVN television station? and in Poland, where the police enter journalists' homes, where journalists are detained, harassed, and where they are denied the right to information? Have you heard, Madam, about the harassment in Poland against—

[15:34:47] Arkadiusz Mularczyk (ECR) [EN]
Thank you. I have to applaud the time. I'm sorry. Do you have a minute? Please.

[15:34:54] Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle (Renew) [EN]
Thank you, colleague. This debate is meant to honor the memory of one murdered journalist, in this case Dap hné Caruana Galizia, and it has been mentioned also that she's not the only one. We have Jan Kusak, we have Giorgios Karavis, there are many. This is not about specific cases of violation of freedom of expression, which you bring into this debate when this debate is about high -level corruption and how journalists who are investigating high-level corruption are being murdered in a European Union. It's unacceptable. And I don't want to say that other infringements are not serious. The rule of law looks into this, but please don't bring other subjects to something—

[15:35:33] Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle (Renew) [EN]
Thank you. I have to be equally strict.

[15:35:36] Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle (Renew) [SK]
And now I would like to give the floor to my colleague from the Arsal Echosa group, please.

[15:35:43] Javier Zarzalejos (PPE) [EN]
Thank you, President and Commissioner. Well, nine years is a failure. Assassination, corruption at highest level, a wall of complicity. The role of media and investigative journalists at act, the protection of journalists ignored. And the perceived succumbing of the response of the judicial system. All these elements together make this case not only a tragic event but an unprecedented challenge to rule of la w and basic democratic principles. Justice system must deliver, I think we all agree on that, and must del iver on its responsibility. Justice has to be done and all, all those responsible for this des picable conspiracy that led to the killing of Daphné Caruana must be held accountable. The retrial of Jörgen Fennek following the appeal against his acquittal is an opportunity that shouldn't be missed. In order to have a fresh and thorough reconsideration of the whole case. Maltese people, Maltese institutions, Maltese democracy, Daphné's family, deserve to have their confidence restored. So Commissioner, I call on you to take all the necessary steps in your specific responsibility in rule of law in the European Union. Ensuring that Daphné's death was not in vain is a moral and political obligation for us all. Thank you.

[15:37:17] Javier Zarzalejos (PPE) [SK]
Thank you. And now I would like to ask my colleague Bajada to take the floor.

[15:37:27] Thomas Bajada (S&D) [ET]
Elis tells us and Daphne Caruana Galizia did not die for the democracy that we journalists defend here. The fight for freedom requires protection of justice. And also democracy is not just about the right to vote. It is also about the right to access and verify information. But I must also investigate the cases that are hidden behind computers. And also when we take a closer look at the critical issues, there is one thing that is very clear: that journalism and the work of the media are in great danger. The fabrication presented manipulates the information that it claims to provide and to inform. This is where trust in journalists and in the citizens who are supposed to be informed is lost. The fabrication presented as truth and the manipulation that is claimed to be information. And we also need a European sugar for independent journalism. Citizens deserve to be protected from misinformation and to benefit from effective access to the truth. We remember the life of Daphne. We defend democracy.

[15:38:36] Thomas Bajada (S&D) [SK]
Thank you. And now I would like to invite our colleague, Vice-President Kučiarová, to take the floor.

[15:38:42] Pina Picierno (Renew) [IT]
Yes, thank you, Mr President. Tell the truth, even if your voice trembles. And one of the phrases that Daphne Caruana Galizia loved to repeat, and it is one of the phrases that perhaps encaps counts best who Daphne was: having courage despite fear, having strength despite our weaknesses. This tells us who Daphne was, but it also tells us and remains a very powerful warning to to this Chamber, to all of us, because press freedom is never won forever; it remains a daily battleground. And so remembering Daphne means once again taking on, certainly here in this Chamber, a concrete commitment: we know that the assassins have been brought to justice, but much remains to be done with regard to the instigators, and I join the appeal of my colleagues who are asking the Commissioner to do everything possible to ensure that this happens. This means ensuring that no journalist is left alone when facing the powers they seek to investigate. This is our duty, this is the duty of the European Parliament.

[15:39:57] Pina Picierno (Renew) [EN]
Thank you. Thank you.

[15:39:59] Pina Picierno (Renew) [SK]
Now I will call on Ms Wieser and Ms Lima.

[15:40:08] Isabel Wiseler-Lima (PPE) [FR]
Mr President, Commissioner, Malta, a Member State of the European Union, and Mr President, Commissioner, Malta, a Member State of the European Union, and yet nine years after the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia, those who commissioned this crime have still not been convicted. The perpetrators are in prison, yes, but justice remains incomplete. The acquittal of 2 September has brought Maltese people onto the streets. They are protesting against a verdict they do not understand. Now, when a people loses confidence in its justice, when it is convinced that impunity reigns, it is democracy itself that is in danger. The Maltese people deserve better. We demand justice for Daphne. We also demand that the shortcomings identified by the Commission in its 2026 Rule of Law Report, Commissioner, which you yourself have highlighted, finally be corrected. The slowness of justice and the lack of convictions in high-level corruption cases. The Union has a duty to ensure compliance with the rule of law in each Member State. And the European Parliament will remain vigilant. Thank you.

[15:41:21] Isabel Wiseler-Lima (PPE) [EN]
Ďakujem. I'm closing KHDI and I have to warn you, I'm not going to be able to take all of you by far because yeah, we are go ing to be late of time already. Mr. Attard, the floor is yours.

[15:41:33] Daniel Attard (S&D) [IT]
Colleagues, this is a clear case of a conflict of interest and a clear case of an evident conflict of interest. In Malta, it is a matter of the Prime Minister’s discretion whether they are among the judges. The judges themselves have also underlined these conditions. They have told us that we must reform the current system to ensure that it is independent and that it is effective. More protection for journalists and responsibility for those who have to conclude. Mr President, I would like to ask Commissioner Reynders whether, in this political context and in this moment when the protection of journalists and those responsible for the press are not guaranteed, the Commission intends to take any steps to counter this worrying trend. They pay. Then the Chamber here must set standards, or else the one who is in charge for one year, for one year, will have Malta under attack, directly hit, as if there were a storm here, with all the others trembling in fear. I have already spoken about Malta, I have already spoken about Malta, but Europe must decide now what to do with this project. Thank you.

[15:42:38] Daniel Attard (S&D) [SK]
Thank you. And now I would like to ask our colleague Ms Joveva to take the floor.

[15:42:45] Irena Joveva (Renew) [SL]
Nine years ago, Daphne Caruana Galizia was killed. Because she asked too many questions. Knew too much. Would not be silenced. Today, we paid tribute to her once again. The only correct thing. We still talk too little about the fact that when journalists are silenced, democracy has no voice left. for far too long. But unfortunately, respect for the murdered journalist is not enough if we remain silent in the face of pressure on the living. I will continue in Croatian.

[15:43:16] Irena Joveva (Renew) [HR]
In a country whose government claims it wants to join the European Union, before the elections an attempt is being made once again to discipline those last remaining media outlets that have not yet learned to bow their heads. The message is roughly as follows: conform or leave. Who do free journalists bother? Those who would most gladly have microphones, but not questions. Daphne paid for this difference with her life. Let us not wait for another Daphne to finally understand this. After all, a democratic and self-confident government is not afraid of independent media. Nor of observation missions. Thank you.

[15:43:54] Irena Joveva (Renew) [SK]
Thank you. And now I would like to ask my colleague Mr Agius to take the floor.

[15:44:03] Peter Agius (PPE) [IT]
Colleagues, I would like to speak about the Labour Government. But I will speak about how the Labour Government is implementing the Daphne inquiry reforms. Every day Daphne is in the committee. Today Daphne is here as well. Let us recall that the European Commission expressed its displeasure at the European Commission's role in the corruption issue in Malta and that it is part of the problem. And these scoreboards and rule of law reports are not showing us that half of the institutions are down. Commissioner for Justice, the Attorney General is a puppet in the Government. The magistrates' investigations have now been going on for six months, and the citizens are still waiting for justice. The Commission has been able to count on Mr Joseph Muscat and now on Ms Roberta Metsola, and with more scoreboards, I am sorry, Mr President, the Commission has become a rubber stamp for corruption in Malta, and not just in Malta, but also in Europe, the funds and as you can see, Europe is also trampling on rights and it is doing so with more scoreboards and more actions. Thank you.

[15:45:19] Peter Agius (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. Will you accept the blue card from Mr. Agius Saliba? Please.

[15:45:26] Speaker 6 [EN]
You know, you know, Madam Eliadke, right. Now.

[15:45:32] Alex Agius Saliba (S&D) [EN]
You know, Madam Eliadke, if MP Malti il supposed eti rappresenta il paeso, ellum yi giune cui appella il commissionia europea sa bishtilbes linguante tal hadith u tattaccal il paeso metanda che il commissionia europea un ex tes u dim da nel parlamento li attai le kle perfette mahnish e ma le rihafna u hafna reformi tvet u sa besh il giustizia v paes natkun tista temshiel u dim. Peter Agius ma isto loksh tisseja rappresentant Malti aunek da nel parlamento europeo.

[15:46:08] Peter Agius (PPE) [EN]
Leonette, you know, mush supposed rappresentare il population. Malti. You know, the rappresentare il popolo Malti we attau netkellem ali yom anche al dauk lirdu yarav commissionie aktar ps aheta. U forse il commissionie ma tafsh li reato tal abuso d'ufficio uva applicable hafna f Malta shkenna chief of staff flufficio tal premier ministro e fishkel l'inchiesta ta Daphné Caruana Galizia for si alek uva importanti le nei duom da un lafariet u dim de nel plenaria sur Saliba.

[15:46:42] Peter Agius (PPE) [IT]
Thank you.

[15:46:43] Peter Agius (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. He has the right for follow-up questions, so and then you will have a right for follow-up answer. Please.

[15:46:52] Alex Agius Saliba (S&D) [IT]
The milk date you are giving us is a slap in the face to the country, but we also see this in the Parliament, especially in the Maltese delegation, where the European Commission is giving aid. there are many, many reforms that the Commission, the Venice Lists, the European Commission and various institutions have I would like to point out that we have already implemented and are continuing to implement in the Member States and the Council of Ministers a series of measures to address the situation in a comprehensive manner, and I would like to remind the country, the Member States, that this is precisely the added value that we represent.

[15:47:29] Alex Agius Saliba (S&D) [EN]
Thank you. Please. You should go for a question, not a comment.

[15:47:34] Peter Agius (PPE) [IT]
But the facts, the facts! But the facts, but the Toksh rajo ash edi nau ash disa sninwara mandate to the House, Mr Michel has the facts, but the Toksh rajoon ash alkem etnaraul scoreboards and rule of law reports etnaraul the Maltese Government in this case has violated rights and must respect the judicial inquiries set by the citizens themselves, justice and the country is in this situation and after that declaration etnaraam the European Commission, ladies and gentlemen, has noted the real situation that Malta faces regarding corruption and is taking good steps. Thank you.

[15:48:09] Peter Agius (PPE) [EN]
Yes.

[15:48:12] Peter Agius (PPE) [SK]
Thank you. And now we move on to KHDI and just to inform you,

[15:48:16] Speaker 1 [EN]
I'm going to be able to take only one speaker per group , so let me start with Mr. Lopatka. One moment, moment.

[15:48:32] Speaker 5 [DE]
Where it is murdering, sorry.

[15:48:36] Reinhold Lopatka (PPE) [EN]
No, no, okay. Thank you. Nine years ago, Daphné Galizia was murdered by a car bomb. That's a fact. But it's also a fact that no one has been convicted of ordering the bombing. Colleague Agius said it very clearly. We have to respect of course the independence of the Maltese courts. But the trial left questions about the police investigation and the handling. Very open. The wider picture is also worrying. The commission's role rule of law report finds no progress on free of seven recommendations. The government of Malta should listen very carefully to the majority of this speeches h ere in the European Parliament. I strongly call on Malta to complete its reforms.

[15:49:43] Reinhold Lopatka (PPE) [SK]
Thank you. And now I would like to call on my colleague Mr López Aguilar, please.

[15:49:49] Speaker 5 [EN]
Thank you so much, Mr. President. Commissioner Magra,

[15:49:52] Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D) [ES]
nine years since the assassination of Daphne Caruana and nine years that, on this date, we invariably hold a tribute to her memory. For which the press room of this Parliament bears her name. Full solidarity with your work, full solidarity with your family, and full commitment to ending impunity. But invariably this debate ends up being used by Malta’s government opponents to attack unjustly. There has been an investigation, a criminal trial, a verdict. And therefore, we must draw attention to the subject of this debate, which is the memory of Daphne Caruana Galizia. Not the Government of Malta, however much its opponents may dislike it. And so, if we truly want to honour the memory of Daphne Caruana, let us keep the debate within its proper scope. Which is to honour investigative journalism, to protect journalists against all threats. And naturally to guarantee information pluralism and investigative journalism in the European Union. Thank you, Mr President.

[15:50:55] Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D) [SK]
Thank you. And now I would like to ask our colleague Ms Višnevská to take the floor.

[15:51:02] Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR) [PL]
Mr President, honourable Members. Madam President, honourable Members, I was in Malta a few weeks ago and I saw Maltese people protesting against what happened. Mr President, honourable Members, I was in Malta a few weeks ago and I saw the Maltese protesting against what happened. Today Mr López is speaking here on behalf of Ms Aguilar, and says this is a debate dedicated to commemorating Daphne. But Daphne’s memory has still not been properly honoured. The perpetrators of this crime have not been punished. And when the left-wing government responsible for the rampant corruption in Malta and for Daphne’s death is pointed out in this Chamber, then the representatives of this supposedly so sensitive left they stand as one behind the corrupt government. Behind a government that has drawn no lessons whatsoever from this tragic death. And this shows, in a nutshell, their left-wing hypocrisy. Thank you.

[15:52:00] Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR) [SK]
And now, as the last colleague, I call on Mr Zaliņš to take the floor.

[15:52:06] Dainius Žalimas (Renew) [EN]
Thank you. Dear colleagues, nine years after assassination of Ms. Galizia Europe has still done and not done enough to protect media freedom. Last year investigative reporters were targeted by explosive attacks in Italy and Greece. Twenty Italian journalists required all day police protection. Elsewhere politicians used smear campaigns to discredit independent media. Public broadcasters also faced political interference undermining their ability to hold governments acco untable. In Lithuania, after attempts by the governing majority to bring public broadcaster under political contr ol, prosecutors have launched an inquiry into how LRT journalists gather covert information. The European Broadcasting Union has warned already that this could expose confidential sources and undermine the editorial independ ence. Together with cases revealed a disturbing pattern of growing political pressure on journalists. But we have instruments which must be enforced. The European Media Freedom Act. Thank you.

[15:53:15] Dainius Žalimas (Renew) [EN]
Thank you very much. And sadly I have to conclude with this, the KHDI. Thank you to all of you who expressed the interest, but since we are running late, we cannot take all of the requests. And let me give the floor back to the Commission, to the Commissioner Magra. Please, the floor is yours.

[15:53:34] 263979 [EN]
Thank you very much, Chair. And can I thank all of the honorable members who contributed to this debate? I highly charged debate, understandable given the circumstances and the issue that was under discuss ion. And as colleagues will know, neither I nor any member of the Commission can comment on cri minal proceedings that are ongoing before the National Courts. We have to fully respect the independence of the judiciary. And as we have done since the assassination we will closely monitor all developments so that justice is d one for Daphné. But what I can say is that the despicable assassination of Daphné in 20 17 was undoubtedly an attack on press freedom in Europe. Our thoughts remain with her family today and her friends, who have been fighting a long battle to secure justice for h er. The pursuit of justice for Daphné and her loved ones is not over. All those responsible must be held accountable. There can be no impunity. For what was a heinous attack and judicial procedures are still ongoing and we should resp ect that process. Free press lies at the heart of democracy. Journalists must be able to work safely, freely, and independently. There must be able to do their job. This is not a luxury. But I think we can all agree that it is a basic component of democracy and of the rule of law. Over the past decade the Commission, with your support, has taken concrete action to uphold media freedom and protect journalists and this is now also a key plank of our commitments under the European Democracy Shield. The European Freedom Act, passed by this House, provides a set of rules to protect media pluralism and independence in the EU and we are currently working to ensure its application on the ground. And in other tribute to all of the journalists who have tragically lost their lives in the European Union is to make sure that all of the provisions of the European Media Freedom Act are implemented right across the member states of the European Union. And since 2021 we have a Commission recommendation on the safety of journalists, aimed at ensuring that journalists ac

[15:55:54] 263979 [EN]
ross Europe are able to rely on a framework of laws and measures to ensure their safety without fear or constraints. The recommendation is currently undergoing review with the intention of updating it. We also have the framework against so-called slaps, we have the directive and a recommendation and again I would urge all of the member states to make sure we have full implementation. The media resilience program will reinforce financial support for independent and local journalism. We know that many parts of the media are under real pressure including financial sustainability issues that play a crucial role in our democracy and I believe are deserving of support. We are extremely vigilant on this matter and continue to monitor the state of media freedom in all member states. And please allow me to use the conclusion of this debate to express my sincere gratitude for the work of Maltese civil society. Which has undoubtedly played a crucial role following the assassination of Daphné nine years ago. In relation to the situation concerning the rule of law in Malta the Commission counsels the Maltese authorities to take forward the necessary reforms to adequately address the recommendations addressed to Malta in the rule of law report. And I would take this opportunity finally to urge all of the member states across the European Union to fully implement the recommendations that the Commission has made in respect of the rule of law. And we are there to support and assist member states in that regard and please be assured of my personal commitment and determination to working with all of you to improve the rule of law in the European Union and to ensure that justice is achieved in respect of all of these cases.

[15:57:40] 263979 [EN]
Thank you very much.

[15:57:43] 263979 [EN]
Thank you, Commissioner. And indeed I hope that not only justice will be served in all of the cases but that no journalists will be harmed ever again.

[15:57:52] Martin Hojsík (Renew) [SK]
The debate on this item is now closed. The next item on the agenda is the report presented by colleague Zdrojevský on Erasmus+, for the years 2028 to 2034. To open the debate, I would now like to give the floor to Mr colleague Zdrojevský as rapporteur. Please.

[15:58:14] Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE) [PL]
Mr President, Commissioner, it is hard to believe, but next year we will be celebrating the 40th anniversary of the Erasmus+ programme. It is even harder to believe the fact that nearly 17 million people have benefited from this programme. Mr President, Commissioner, it is hard to believe, but next year we will be celebrating the 40th anniversary of the Erasmus+ programme. And it is even harder to believe that nearly 17 million people have benefited from this programme. Today’s debate on this programme should therefore be something of a celebration. Because this is indeed a major effort and, as a result, a gigantic – I stress, gigantic – success. For me, as the rapporteur, today’s debate is also a positive finale and, at the same time, a presentation of the results of nearly a year’s work, of course not only mine. During this time, there was no shortage of interesting debates, interesting conferences or consultations. We had everything that was key: evaluations of the programme itself, postulates for the future, interesting questions, and expert answers. The whole process was crowned with a fantastic snapshot of where we are today and what we need in the future. Erasmus is a multidimensional programme. Student exchanges obviously dominate, of course. But today, what must not be forgotten is also the activities of youth organisations. Cooperation between universities, training, and professional development. And even support for sport and physical activity itself. Erasmus+ is a complementary programme. Returning to the origins and drawing on the experience gained, we must, however, emphasise the necessary conditions for its implementation. And there are three of them. First of all, there must be demand. Desire to participate. Good evaluation of implementation. And I will answer immediately: it is fantastic. We do not even have a chance of meeting all the quantitative expectations. On this occasion, I welcome the return of the United Kingdom. This enriches our offer and expands our implementation capabilities. Perhaps Switzerland will soon join, and in the longer term, Canada as well. I am pleased that Hungarians, students from Hungary. The second equally important condition is simplifications, flexibility, facilitation of access and, above all, maximum reduction of various forms of exclusion. This is the proposed simplicity and ease of application. And thirdly, an adequate budget. In our proposal, this amounts to €47.2 billion.

[16:00:55] Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE) [PL]
I would like to remind you that in the current, still ongoing multiannual financial framework, this was 26 billion. Thank you to colleague Jar for good cooperation with the Committee on Budgets. And here I must pause for a moment. We are not lacking in energy. There is no shortage of interest. There is no shortage of organisations ready for professional cooperation. But we still do not have enough financial resources. It is worth remembering that every additional euro invested in Erasmus+ is of enormous importance. Even a small increase in this programme increases the number and opportunities for thousands of people. Conversely, any cuts mean sending young people away and wasting their educational aspirations. We must give the youngest generation the tools for development. Spending on Erasmus+ is a guarantee of success. It is an investment with a 100% return. This is not inflation-linked bonds, but a capital investment with indicators unknown to banking institutions. The budget of EUR 47.2 billion is the minimum. And finally, of course, we know that the most important battle ahead of us is the trilogues. This is the cooperation between the Commission, the Council and Parliament. This will happen next year. We must ensure a guarantee for the budget at a level adequate to our needs. Today, I am keeping my fingers crossed for the young generation of Europeans. This debate and this report are for you.

[16:02:32] Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE) [SK]
Thank you, Mr rapporteur. And now I would like to invite the Commission's Executive Vice-President, Ms Minzátú. Please.

[16:02:43] Roxana Mînzatu [EN]
Thank you, Honorable Members. Erasmus+, the most loved, the most well-known, the most cherished of EU programs, the one that has a very direct impact in people's lives, especially young people, be them students, pupils, but also teachers, volunteers, all those engaged in youth organization s. For 40 years a program that has built a sense of belonging for all of us in Europe. And beyond the anniversary, our debate today is about the next generation of Erasmus+, what's happening in the next financial multi-annual financial framework 2028-2034. Of course, first of all, we want to protect what works, what works well with this program. A program that offered so many Europeans, millions of Europeans, the first to for the first time maybe travel in Europe, to study, to gather skills, to discover new people, new places, to understand Europe. We want to make this program even more accessible. I think it's important that no matter what region you come from or no matter what your social, economic background is , you should be able to access Erasmus. We also want Erasmus to contribute more to what we call excellence in Europe. Because we have so much talent and we want our Europeans to choose Europe. And we want to invest in European university alliances, in the scholarships. We want to make Erasmus simpler to access. It's important that it's easy, that it's not bureaucratic, that it's a demand that comes from of course national agencies, from students, from teachers, from you in this house. And this is a direction that we've also followed. And all these are reflected in the proposal of the Commission. But of course the money matters. A bigger budget indeed. Commission proposed an increase from the current 27 billion euros to a bigger amount. I wouldn't say the ideal amount because we need an Erasmus for all, but it's a big step forward. 41 billion euros. This house has supported a very strong budget and even better numbers. I need to thank all of you of course first of all rapporteurs Zdrojewski for the work that he has done, all the shad

[16:05:04] Roxana Mînzatu [EN]
ow rapporteurs, all the members of this house that have contributed and keep contributing to a strong relevant E rasmus. And of course we need to have a debate that would reflect not only the budget but also the soft power that Erasmus has in the lives of European citizens and in the lives of those that are outside of Europe and we mentioned here the countries that want to also to join. So looking forward to this debate and to your questions and to come back to them of course.

[16:05:38] Roxana Mînzatu [EN]
Thank you very much. So now I would like to give the floor for the Committee, Karolina Moracze, the floor is yours.

[16:05:45] Carolina Morace (The Left) [IT]
Thank you. Thank you, Mr President. Commissioner, and first of all I would like to start by thanking my colleague Zdrojewski for the excellent work carried out. Erasmus+ reminds us that education does not stop at the school desks. We learn by travelling, by meeting other cultures, by practising sport. Because growing up also means learning to know and respect others. But while we discuss these opportunities, we cannot forget the young Palestinians. In Gaza, war has destroyed schools and disrupted educational pathways. By depriving an entire generation of the normality of studying, playing and even dreaming. As rapporteur for the opinion of the Development Committee, I have stressed the need to protect students affected by conflicts. Erasmus+ cannot fund the physical reconstruction of schools, but it can provide scholarships and educational opportunities to those at risk of losing their future. Education, just like sport, must build bridges even where war erects walls. Thank you.

[16:06:52] Carolina Morace (The Left) [EN]
Thank you very much. Now for Budget Committee will speak Lucia Iar.

[16:06:58] Carolina Morace (The Left) [EN]
Commissioner, colleagues, I'll speak in Slovak.

[16:07:02] Lucia Yar (Renew) [SK]
This is the language, friends from all over Europe, an experience for a lifetime. This is precisely Erasmus. One of the best things the European Union has ever come up with. And an investment that absolutely pays off. That is why, in the new seven-year budget, we need a stronger Erasmus, but not only in the budget, but also in terms of the changes for the better that will come with it. Erasmus must not be a luxury. Try renting a room somewhere in Amsterdam or Milan on today’s scholarship, good luck. After all, it must not be the parents' wallet that decides who gets to go abroad. Erasmus must not be a luxury. But the skills of students. We want to strengthen competitiveness, we constantly talk about this here. Excellent. So let's link Erasmus with research and innovation. After all, the greatest competitive advantage of Europe is the potential of young people, who are turning it into results. In business, in technology, in science and in politics. I know what I'm talking about. Erasmus changed my life too. Without it, I wouldn't even be standing here today. So let's give all young people a stronger, more accessible and fairer Erasmus.

[16:08:16] Lucia Yar (Renew) [EN]
Thank you. For the Committee will speak Daniel Freund.

[16:08:22] Daniel Freund (Verts/ALE) [EN]
Dear colleagues, Erasmus is the best thing that the European Union is doing. There is no other program that changes lives of millions of Europeans so directly and so profoundly. I myself, 20 years ago, I was an Erasmus student.

[16:08:40] Daniel Freund (Verts/ALE) [FR]
And during that year I spent in Paris, I didn’t just fall in love with the French language, but also with a woman from Italy who today is my wife

[16:08:52] Daniel Freund (Verts/ALE) [DE]
and there is a study that says that over a million children have come from these Erasmus relationships, three of them are my children. So what could be a more beautiful symbol than the fact that, after centuries of war, we now have a programme where millions of Europeans spend time in another country.

[16:09:13] Daniel Freund (Verts/ALE) [EN]
That we have overcome war for this program of peace, of meeting each other. Actually every European should get the chance once in their life to spend some time in another member state. This is the best way that we can spend EU money. Thank you very much.

[16:09:32] Daniel Freund (Verts/ALE) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker for Ample Committee will be Nella Riel.

[16:09:41] Nela Riehl (Verts/ALE) [EN]
In France, a 16-year-old boy left his house to demand a classroom that lets him imagine a future. Instead he came home without an eye. A 15-year-old lost his hand. A 14-year-old has a broken jaw now. They are facing riot police because they ask for heating, for dry ceiling, and for enough shares to sit on at school. And politicians answer with even more budget cuts. Because young people's future is always the first budget to be cut because it's super easy to take away from someone who's not even sitt ing at the table. And it's easier to blame young people for disrupting society than to fix the system that actually caused the disruption in the first place. But colleagues, this is our job. In France, Italy, Belgium, students are protesting and asking, isn't anyone taking us seriously? And today we give them the answer by protecting the Erasmus budget. We show them we do. It is the education budget that you controls and we can show that with us they do have a future to imagine. Thank you, Mr. Zdrojewski. Thank you, Roxana, for the great work. Thank you all colleagues for the great work together.

[16:10:50] Nela Riehl (Verts/ALE) [LV]
Thank you. I now speak on behalf of the European People's Party Group, Eldar Sousa Silva.

[16:11:01] Hélder Sousa Silva (PPE) [PT]
Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, I would first like to congratulate my colleague Bogdan Zdrojewski Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, I would like to begin by congratulating my colleague Bogdan Zdrojewski and all the shadow rapporteurs for the rigorous and ambitious work on this report, which is as important as Erasmus+. Madam Commissioner, dear colleagues, I would like to start by congratulating my colleague Bogdan Zdrojewski and all the shadow rapporteurs for the rigorous and ambitious work on this report, which is as important as Erasmus+.

Faced with an extremely positive proposal from the Commission, but one that Parliament says is insufficient, and with the financial cuts proposed incomprehensibly by the Council, this is the moment for Parliament to halt this retreat and clearly demand more. After all, we are talking about one of the most emblematic and also most sought-after programmes of the Union, which prepares new generations for the challenges of the future and shapes true European citizens. But the future of Erasmus+ does not depend solely on how much we invest. It depends on the programme we want to build. And the report points exactly in this direction. We need an Erasmus+ that goes further. That does not waste talent and lack of opportunities. Let it empower young people and sport. And let it take Europe to the world and bring the world to Europe. In the end, Erasmus+ is not just another budget heading. It is one of the most concrete ways of living Europe. For many young people, it is where Europe becomes real because it shapes how they see the Union and choose to participate in it. That is why Erasmus+ is not just another expense in the European budget; it is one of the best investments in the next generations of Europeans. Thank you very much.

[16:12:41] Hélder Sousa Silva (PPE) [LV]
Thank you. I now speak on behalf of the Socialist and Democrats Group, Sabrina Repe.

[16:12:46] Hélder Sousa Silva (PPE) [EN]
Thank you very much.

[16:12:53] Sabrina Repp (S&D) [DE]
And where did you do your Erasmus+ at the time? This question is always being asked of me again and again, as if it were a matter of course. that a young woman who is sitting in the European Parliament today must have also spent time abroad with Erasmus+ at some point. And you know what? I would have loved to have had that experience. It wasn’t because I didn’t want to. But because I simply couldn't afford it. Who works alongside their studies to pay their rent cannot simply take that job abroad. If parents cannot financially step in, then this opportunity often remains unattainable. All too often, it is still the parents’ purse that decides who can take part in Erasmus+ and who cannot. And that is precisely what we must change in the upcoming Erasmus+ programme. We want to significantly increase the budget. Because what good is Erasmus+ if you still can’t afford to study abroad with it? We have enshrined a clear goal: at least one in five places should benefit people for whom studying abroad has not previously been a matter of course. Because talent does not depend on parents’ income. And European opportunities should not depend on that either. Furthermore, 15 percent of the budget is earmarked for youth and voluntary service programmes. Because Europe is experienced not only in the lecture hall, but also through youth exchanges, voluntary service or during vocational training. These opportunities must be open, in particular, to young people from rural areas. Erasmus+ is not an elite programme and must never become one. I want young people in future no longer to have to say: "I would have liked to do an Erasmus+, but I couldn’t afford it." I myself was unable to take advantage of this opportunity back then. Today, I am sitting here in the European Parliament and can help ensure that other young people can take this path. Because in the end, it should not be decided how much money their parents have, but rather what dreams and opportunities these young people bring with them.

[16:14:39] Sabrina Repp (S&D) [EN]
Thank you. Frau Weiß,

[16:14:40] Sabrina Repp (S&D) [DE]
the patriot of Europe's garden

[16:14:42] Sabrina Repp (S&D) [LV]
I am speaking, Katerina Grize.

[16:14:47] Catherine Griset (PfE) [FR]
Thank you, Mr President. Commissioner, for how long will you divert Erasmus from its original purpose, which is Thank you, Mr President. Commissioner, how long will you divert Erasmus from its original purpose, which is to bring young Europeans together? How long will you extend this programme to migration objectives, at the risk of betraying its spirit? And above all, how can we explain that, after having excluded Hungarian universities for years, Brussels is now opening the doors of Erasmus to them just months after its champion arrived in Budapest? The Commission is invoking reforms to the rule of law. But why have students had to pay the price for this political tug-of-war? Dear colleagues, the rule of law must never become an instrument of pressure applied with double standards. Education must not be a bargaining chip in politics nor an instrument of migration policy. Erasmus belongs to European students, not to the Commission’s political ambitions. Thank you.

[16:15:41] Catherine Griset (PfE) [LV]
Thank you. Now I will speak on behalf of the Renew Group, Lara Magoni.

[16:15:45] Catherine Griset (PfE) [EN]
Please.

[16:15:47] Lara Magoni (ECR) [IT]
Thank you to the rapporteur, Mr Zdrojewski. In an Europe where too many policies have disappointed citizens, Erasmus remains one of the greatest success stories of the European Union. In 1987, only 3,200 students took part; today, over 16 million people have. have lived this experience. But the real success is not the numbers, it is the young people who have learned to get to know other cultures, to break down prejudices and to broaden their horizons. At a time when we are witnessing too many acts of violence, even in our squares, investing in education, dialogue and knowledge also means preventing intolerance and building alternatives. Volunteering, youth projects and sport will be given greater prominence, making these pathways more accessible to all. Because young people must not only be Europe’s future, but conscious protagonists of its present. Europe is also defended in this way, by offering opportunities, building trust, and forming free, responsible citizens capable of living together, thanks to the Commissioner.

[16:16:55] Lara Magoni (ECR) [LV]
Thank you. On behalf of the Renew Europe group, I will speak Lorens Fareng.

[16:17:00] Laurence Farreng (Renew) [FR]
Thank you, Mr President. Madam Vice-President, dear colleagues. We have an Erasmus, and we can congratulate ourselves on the speed of our negotiations and the good collaboration in this Parliament. Finally, some good news. For 40 years, 17 million young people have gone abroad, and today more than ever, Erasmus — which has become Erasmus+ — fulfils three major and essential ambitions. To develop European citizenship and education, earlier and earlier, right from primary school. Promote the democratisation of education by integrating students in apprenticeships and vocational training into the programme, but also by increasing grants for pupils who need them, and individuals persons with disabilities. Finally, to develop our excellence and our capacity for innovation with European university alliances. So, Ladies and Gentlemen, Heads of Government, at the Council, why break this momentum? and momentum with drastic cuts to the budget? At a time when young people all over Europe are worried about their future, are demonstrating for better education, know that in this Parliament, we will fight for the budget and the ambition of Erasmus+. Thank you.

[16:18:14] Laurence Farreng (Renew) [LV]
Thank you. I now speak on behalf of the Greens group, Benedetta Scuderi.

[16:18:20] Benedetta Scuderi (Verts/ALE) [IT]
On 19 January, a very young me packed half my life into a suitcase and for the first time entered to live in another State. In Madrid I met incredible people, I spoke languages I didn’t know, I experienced situations I would never have imagined. Erasmus has taught me that people outside what I knew are much more similar to me than I thought, that young people have similar fears, and that sometimes my peers face far greater difficulties. And that is how we build Europe, with its people who know and understand one another. That is how we create the heart of citizenship and democracy. Erasmus has taught me that you can always change course, and that together, in diversity, we are better off. Today, unfortunately, that experience is for the few. But let us ensure that no young person has to give up on the European dream because they cannot afford it. Let origins, economic circumstances or vulnerability never be a barrier. So that every young person, even those who today feel furthest away from Europe, can discover that Europe belongs to them. Erasmus brought me here, and from here we must make it possible for everyone.

[16:19:33] Benedetta Scuderi (Verts/ALE) [LV]
Thank you. Now, speaking on behalf of the Left group, Mario Furori.

[16:19:43] Mario Furore (The Left) [IT]
Thank you, President. First of all, I would like to thank the rapporteur on behalf of the group of The Left, from my colleague Pappas, for their willingness to engage in dialogue and for having listened to our proposals. We worked in a spirit of collaboration, and I think it is right to acknowledge that. Erasmus, as we were saying, is one of the best things about this Europe. It has allowed millions of young people to travel, to study, to get to know each other and to feel truly European. But today we must also face reality: across Europe, young people are taking to the streets because they are tired of a future marked by ever-rising rents, wages that are too low, and precarious jobs. Now, I always condemn violence, but this cry of pain must be heard, and it must be heard also in light of the approval of Erasmus+. Why should Erasmus not only be a programme to train more competitive workers and meet the needs of the market, but one reserved only for the wealthiest groups? We must focus today above all on the most vulnerable young people. And it must first and foremost be a tool for social justice that gives everyone the same opportunities. And we have insisted on this in our amendments, and I welcome the European Parliament Culture Committee’s proposal to increase study grants by 20 %. We have achieved important results and improved the Commission’s proposal. But there is still a lot to do. We want an Erasmus programme open to everyone, as I was saying, not just those from wealthy families. And today’s young people are asking us to be able to study. To work. To live with dignity. And to build a future for themselves. And I believe that the very least we can do as Europe is to give them this opportunity. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you very much.

[16:21:30] Mario Furore (The Left) [LV]
Thank you. Speaking on behalf of the Sovereign Nations Group, Mark Jungen.

[16:21:41] Marc Jongen (ESN) [DE]
For countless young people from all over Europe, student mobility through Erasmus+ represents a formative experience, and that is very gratifying. However, a voluntary exchange programme has long since become an educational tool of the EU. Through conditionality, Member States and their universities are being blackmailed; the exclusion of Hungarian universities is just one particularly drastic example. At the same time, an ideological agenda is being pushed through horizontal priorities. Diversity and inclusion as binding requirements, climate policy as a cross-cutting objective, the systematic strengthening of a European identity at the expense of national ties, and the promotion of projects that democratically elected parties as G danger to democracy. Moreover, the bureaucratic instruments that enabled and enforced the harmful Bologna Process were largely financed through these programmes. Even in view of the necessary cuts to the EU budget, we cannot agree to the planned further expansion. However, we are not opposing the negotiations with the Council. Thank you.

[16:22:48] Marc Jongen (ESN) [LV]
Thank you. Next to speak is Giuseppina Princi.

[16:22:53] Giusi Princi (PPE) [IT]
Thank you, President. Vice-President Mizzotti. To understand what Erasmus is, we do not need to start from Strasbourg. We must start with Antonio, a 20-year-old boy born in San Luca in the province of Reggio Calabria. Antonio grew up there, where the world can seem distant and the future already mapped out. One day, Antonio arrives in Lisbon, studies, meets people, searches for words in another language. And he understands one crucial thing: the place you come from must not determine how far you can go. Over these 40 years, Erasmus has done precisely that: it has not only brought States closer together, it has shortened the distance between what a young person dares to imagine and what they can truly become. This is the whole political insight, the European vision. Even before millions of young people knew how to explain what the European Union was, Europe had already entered their lives. Not as a treaty, not as a distant institution, but as an open door. Because Europe is not built solely within our institutions. It is also built in the distance that separates San Luca from Lisbon. On paper it may remain the same, but what changes is its meaning in the life of a young European. Because talent does not choose where to be born, opportunities too often do, and our European ambition is measured by our ability to break this link. Thank you.

[16:24:28] Giusi Princi (PPE) [LV]
Thank you. Now Hannes Heide will speak, please.

[16:24:33] Hannes Heide (S&D) [DE]
Thank you, Mr Chair. Madam Vice-President of the Commission. Every European woman, every European man must have the opportunity to participate in Erasmus+ at least once in their life. to participate. No EU programme is more successful than Erasmus+, and that is how we should treat it. With a comparatively small budget, Erasmus+ is able to achieve extraordinary, indeed magnificent things. Since its inception, more than 18 million people have participated in it. And almost 100% say that they have benefited from this mobility experience. But more than any numbers, Erasmus+ speaks for itself in that there are now more than 1 million Erasmus+ babies. The Draghi report calls for a fourfold increase in the Erasmus+ budget. We are calling for at least €47.4 billion for the next multiannual financial framework in order to be able to achieve our objectives and thus reach more people as well. Students, just like apprentices, young people with fewer opportunities, athletes, volunteers, for example in our voluntary fire brigades through the European Solidarity Corps: every single exchange is an investment in the future of democracy and the European Union. My appeal to the Council: do not attack this budget proposal, this Parliament. Are we aware of the power Erasmus+ has and what we can achieve with it for Europe, for the European Union? Thank you.

[16:26:08] Hannes Heide (S&D) [EN]
Thank you, Kollege Heide. Kollege Heide, would you approve Blue Card, yeah, from Kollege Molarczyk, 5 90?

[16:26:20] Speaker 3 [DE]
Ah, colleague Molarczyk.

[16:26:22] Arkadiusz Mularczyk (ECR) [PL]
Thank you very much, Mr Ambassador, for accepting the blue card. You emphasise, just like your colleague, that over a million children, a million new Europeans, have been born thanks to the Erasmus programme. of them. This is, of course, an interesting and positive signal of this programme. But I also have a question. , whether these million new Europeans have two parents, as my colleague here mentioned, the Member who met his spouse during this programme. The point is that children should be born into families. Do you have, do you have that knowledge, whether these children have...

[16:27:04] Arkadiusz Mularczyk (ECR) [EN]
Thank you, thank you.

[16:27:04] Arkadiusz Mularczyk (ECR) [PL]
Stable families too. Thank you very much.

[16:27:08] Arkadiusz Mularczyk (ECR) [EN]
Please.

[16:27:12] Arkadiusz Mularczyk (ECR) [DE]
Also, I believe this question answers itself. But thank you very much for asking that question.

[16:27:20] Hannes Heide (S&D) [LV]
Next to speak is Anna Marija Viceka, for one minute, please.

[16:27:24] Hannes Heide (S&D) [EN]
Thank you, Chair. Honorable Commissioner, I will speak in Hungarian.

[16:27:29] Annamária Vicsek (PfE) [HU]
The original mission of Erasmus is mobility, skills development, language learning and cultural experience. This is what makes the programme one of the most successful and most popular EU initiatives. Its special value lies in its political neutrality. That is why we cannot allow it to become a tool for political or ideological interests. The European Union's task is to support national education systems, not to override them. Therefore, in the operation of Erasmus, a balance must be struck between the competences of the Member States and the European added value. There is one thing I would like to stress in particular: participants in the programme must not become hostages to political conflicts. The years-long exclusion of students and lecturers from the affected Hungarian universities has created a serious precedent. Therefore, we demand clear guarantees that this cannot happen again in the future. As shadow rapporteur, I will continue to work during the interinstitutional negotiations to ensure that these fundamental principles are given even greater prominence.

[16:28:39] Annamária Vicsek (PfE) [LV]
Thank you.

[16:28:39] Annamária Vicsek (PfE) [HU]
The final decision.

[16:28:40] Annamária Vicsek (PfE) [EN]
Kollega Viceka, thank you. Would you accept the Blue Card from Kollega Wiśniewska, 430? No? Can you— Okay, so we will continue. Next speaker, Marco Squarta.

[16:29:00] Marco Squarta (ECR) [EN]
President, young Europeans don't lack talent. Too often they simply lack the opportunity to prove it. And when a teenager sees their stronger public square or looting a shop as a formal political participation, we face a problem that go es far beyond public order. Investing in culture and education means giving young people the tools to think for themselves, to distinguish protest from violence, and the freedom from impunity. This is also what Erasmus should be about: giving young people the opportunity to study, develop their skills, and build a future, regardless of where they come from or what their families can afford. And this is where our political responsibility lies: giving them a reason to come back, a place to fulfill their ambition, and a real alternative to those who exploit their frustration and lack of opportunities. The success of the new Erasmus program will not only be measured by the experience young people have abroad, but by the opportunities waiting for them when they return.

[16:30:02] Marco Squarta (ECR) [LV]
Thank you. Next to speak is Vlada Vasile Vaicule. Please.

[16:30:09] Vlad Vasile-Voiculescu (Renew) [RO]
Mr President, Madam Vice-President of the Commission, dear colleagues, Erasmus is, definitively, one of the best things Europe has ever done for young people. It began in 1987, with just 3 000. 200 students. The year marks 40 years. It is 40 years since over 18 million Europeans have benefited from this programme. It created the framework and provided a few hundred euros in scholarships that can change lives. Meanwhile, Erasmus has grown; it is no longer just about students, it is also about pupils, apprentices and teachers. Volunteers. It has become one of the most well-known and appreciated European programmes. And now it needs to do more for even more young people. That requires money, obviously. The Commission is proposing €40.8 billion. We are proposing €47.4 billion. Let us not go below this amount, because for any young person, a young person from a village, especially for a young person from a village or a small town, Erasmus can be the only chance to discover Europe. These grants must take into account the cost of living. The money must cover transport, accommodation, everything, everything that is needed. Erasmus must be multiplied and replicated.

[16:31:21] Vlad Vasile-Voiculescu (Renew) [EN]
Thank you. Thank you, Kollega. Thank you.

[16:31:23] Vlad Vasile-Voiculescu (Renew) [LV]
Thank you. Now the floor goes to Mr Mārtiņš Staķis, please.

[16:31:30] Mārtiņš Staķis (Verts/ALE) [LV]
Thank you, Mr President. Millions of young Europeans have participated in Erasmus programmes. They have got to know other countries, languages and traditions, found friends for life, new career opportunities, well, and what else to hide, love as well. Returning home with a different view of the world and a united European idea. Erasmus is like a bridge where every day Europe itself comes to visit itself. We are different peoples with our languages and traditions, but we choose to work together and learn from one another. And that is precisely why Europe is the best place to live. But they are already sawing through this bridge. Across Europe, we are seeing populism and demagogues clawing their way to power. Even today in Strasbourg, the AfD presented its future plans. Divided, weak and easily manipulated. Well, in such an Europe, Erasmus would no longer exist. Colleagues, our generation opened the doors to Europe, and it is our duty to ensure that they are not slammed shut for the next generations, for future generations. Thank you.

[16:32:34] Mārtiņš Staķis (Verts/ALE) [LV]
Thank you. Now the floor is given to Mr Milan Mazurek. Please.

[16:32:40] Milan Mazurek (ESN) [EN]
You are misusing almost every single European policy to destroy national identities and to br ing more culturally incompatible immigrants into Europe. How many more you want them in Europe? One million more? Five millions more? Maybe ten millions more? When you will be finally happy about yourself? When will we achieve the so-called multicultural paradise in Europe? When all the cities in Europe will burn like Paris or Brussels? This program, Erasmus, should serve for European students, for European people, for European hardworking people who are paying ta xes here and not serve as a vehicle for young men from North Africa to come and stay in Europe because this is what you are doing right now. This is betrayal of European. This is the betrayal of hardworking people who are paying taxes also for y ou. We should openly say, finally, that this is the time when Europe is full. Europe should support its own citizens and not the whole world and the only real migration policy which we need is re-m igration.

[16:33:44] Milan Mazurek (ESN) [EN]
Kolēga Mazurek, you have two Blue Cards. Would you accept? So first one is João Oliveira, 125.

[16:33:59] João Oliveira (The Left) [PT]
Thank you, Mr President. Mr Mazurek, education is the foundation of any democracy, and sharing experiences and exchanges among young people only strengthens the democratic conception that our youth must have deeply rooted. I understand that the far right opposes these values, opposes the Erasmus programme, because it allows, through this sharing of experiences and values, to effectively reinforce the possibility of young people contributing to the building of democracy. What I ask is whether, in your opinion, the perspective that the far right has to offer young people is one of closure, of each person isolating themselves, disregarding the entire world around them?

[16:34:40] João Oliveira (The Left) [EN]
Thank you. Thanks a lot.

[16:34:43] Milan Mazurek (ESN) [EN]
I don't understand why you, Marxist politician, have always lied to us. We are not against the exchange of experiences in Europe. We are not against the traveling. We are against your misuse of this program to spread your propaganda into children. And this is what I said. And I am calling for stopping of this. Just stop to misuse this program. Stop to use it as so-called European identity, not as that exists. And please be calm. Don't talk to me when I am saying you can ask. This is very simple.

[16:35:18] Milan Mazurek (ESN) [EN]
Thank you. Thank you, Kollega Mazurek. Second question is from Kollega Wiśniewska, 430.

[16:35:27] Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR) [PL]
Thank you very much. I share these remarks regarding expanding opportunities for third-country youth to participate in Erasmus. I am not surprised by the speech of the Member from The Left, who sees this as an opportunity for the European Union, because after all it is the far-left in France that is accused of setting fires and inciting mass protests. Given that we have a very difficult budgetary situation, do you not think, then, that we should stick to the existing Erasmus framework rather than creating yet another new pathway enabling migration from countries outside the European Union?

[16:36:08] Milan Mazurek (ESN) [EN]
Thank you very much for your question. I absolutely agree with you. They are misusing those programs for their Marxist propaganda, which they are pushing into children, and they also want to mis use those programs and even increase the financing of those programs with bringing more immigrants into Europe. They are saying that openly, and they support that idea, but I think right now, in our European situation, we just don't have enough money for this kind of things. We should not support their ideas, and their proposals, and we should stay where we have been at the beginning. This should support European students, not the whole world.

[16:36:44] Milan Mazurek (ESN) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Nikolaos Anadiotis.

[16:36:54] Nikolaos Anadiotis (NI) [EL]
Ms Commissioner, today we are discussing the future of Erasmus+ with the Committee on Culture and Education proposing the budget. over €47 billion. At the same time, in Greece, children succeed in the national exams but are unable to their families cannot afford the unaffordable rents, energy costs and daily expenses. living. How can we talk about European educational mobility when young people cannot even study in their own country? The billions are worthless if the young people who need them most are left without opportunities. At the same time, we must examine whether the European city serves education or promotes ideological opposit ideologies such as those of the so-called 'woke' agenda. True education cultivates free individuals with knowledge, critical thinking, ethics, and respect for their traditions. Education cannot be a privilege of wealthy families, nor a tool for ideological imposition. And a child's future cannot depend on their parents' wallet.

[16:37:58] Nikolaos Anadiotis (NI) [EN]
Yes, thank you very much. Before I will give the floor to the next speaker, I would like to say that we are closing KJI procedure because we have a more than 1 0 already registered. So next speaker will be Viktor Weiss.

[16:38:13] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you. I'll speak in Hungarian.

[16:38:16] Viktor Weisz (PPE) [HU]
The peace of the future often begins in a dormitory room, when a Hungarian, a Romanian, a Slovak, an Irish or a French young person studies together, has dinner together, and talks until dawn, and in the process they realise that much more binds them together than divides them. That is the true power of Erasmus. It does not only provide language skills, experience and lifelong friendships, but also builds trust between the nations of Europe. But what is the value of this opportunity if someone misses out on it simply because their family cannot afford the cost of living abroad? That is why I advocate that the new Erasmus programme should receive more funding. Let the grants be adjusted to actual costs, and so that not only university students but also those in vocational training can participate with greater ease. Now that the restrictions affecting Hungarian universities have finally been lifted thanks to the Hungarian government and the European Union, our task now is to ensure that as many young Hungarians as possible can take advantage of this opportunity once again. Let us learn from the negative trends unfolding around the world. Let us learn from divisions and wars. Let us build together a strong Europe. And in this regard, Erasmus is an investment where the next generations will not build against each other, but together, a peaceful and thriving European future.

[16:39:38] Viktor Weisz (PPE) [EN]
Thank you very much.

[16:39:39] Viktor Weisz (PPE) [EN]
I thank you. I don't see next speaker, Kollega Rapabić in the hemicycle. That's why I will give the floor to Antonin Stanek.

[16:39:54] Antonín Staněk (PfE) [CS]
Thank you for the floor. Erasmus+ is one of those European programmes that people love regardless of whom they vote for. It has opened up the world to millions of young people without telling them what to think about it. The programme bears the name of a man who travelled across Europe to get to know it. , not re-educate. A century later, my fellow countryman Jan Amos Komenský had to leave his homeland. under religious intolerance. We Czechs have a clear lesson from history: as soon as schools become a tool of ide ideology, it ceases to serve the children. That is why we want the forty billion euros to serve primarily study stays, vocational education and languages, not the imposition of a uniform European identity, green ideology or migration policy. Member States are responsible for the content of education; the Union should support, not replace. Let Erasmus unite young Europeans, but let’s not prescribe how they should think.

[16:41:04] Antonín Staněk (PfE) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Jan-Peter Warnke.

[16:41:17] Jan-Peter Warnke (NI) [DE]
Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues. If we want to inspire young people for Europe today, we do so with Erasmus+. Young people thus experience best what it means to live, learn, work and love in the EU and to experience Europe’s diversity. I am pleased about the Culture Committee’s proposal, which provides €47 billion for the new Multiannual Financial Framework. This means the Parliament’s proposal is above the Commission’s proposal of €41 billion. However, this is cut by 4 percent in the Irish Council proposal, which is a shame. I urge us not to make any cuts to this programme. However, we urgently need to talk about administrative costs. In all budget proposals, the level of administrative costs is simply not specified at all. A shortcoming, I would say. In today's world, administrative processes can be drastically simplified with AI, thereby saving resources. The winners would be more young people in our EU if such freed-up funds could be allocated to the project. And regarding the report, colleague, chapeau and many thanks.

[16:42:21] Jan-Peter Warnke (NI) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Manuel Ripa.

[16:42:28] Manuela Ripa (PPE) [DE]
I myself took part in Erasmus and know from my own experience that Erasmus+ is far more than a mobility programme. How much it broadens one’s own horizons, strengthens competences and makes Europe tangible. That is precisely why it is an investment in our future, in people, their skills and their openness to cooperate across borders. And it is an investment in our democracy, because those who learn to understand other perspectives develop mutual understanding and appreciation for the values that unite us in Europe. That is why, alongside students, the programme must also include many more school pupils, teachers, trainees and reach further groups. To do this, Erasmus needs significantly more money than the Commission has proposed. In the Culture Committee, there was a very broad majority in favour of this, and we now need this unity here in the plenary session as well. And we must work together to convince the Member States to secure this budget. Because anyone who wants to strengthen Europe's competitiveness, democracy and resilience must not, of all things, cut spending on young people who will shape Europe's future.

[16:43:39] Manuela Ripa (PPE) [EN]
Thank you, Kollege. I don't see in the room Kollega Negrescu, and I will give the floor to Elisabeth Dieringer. Sorry, please, floor is yours, yeah.

[16:43:57] Elisabeth Dieringer (PfE) [DE]
I am speaking in German and as a former teacher who has been fortunate enough to witness the benefits of the programme for pupils and teachers, both actively and across many countries. That is why the money is also very well spent. We can still talk about bureaucratic hurdles. But this report gives a political mandate to an education programme. Applicants should be vetted in advance for compliance with EU values, with sanctions extending to the recovery of funds. But who then decides which school or which association has the right attitude? At the same time, Erasmus is to recruit talented individuals from all over the world, and the Member States are to reduce barriers to visas and residence permits. I am clear about this: Erasmus is an exchange programme for Europe’s youth. It does not have to be the whole world coming to us through an exchange programme. Who is allowed to enter and stay here should continue to be decided by the Member States. Mobility for our pupils, yes, but ideological screening and immigration via Erasmus, no.

[16:45:01] Elisabeth Dieringer (PfE) [EN]
Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, Milan Sverre.

[16:45:12] Milan Zver (PPE) [SL]
Thank you for the floor. Honourable Members, I have been the European Parliament’s rapporteur for the Erasmus+ programme for almost ten years. That was a golden period for this most effective and Thank you for the floor. Honourable Members, I was for almost ten years the permanent rapporteur of the European Parliament for the Erasmus+ programme. That was a golden age of this most effective and visible programme in the European Union. I am glad that at that time we doubled the budget; at the same time, we enabled much greater inclusion of people, not just young people, in Erasmus+. In short, we have largely eliminated some shortcomings, in short, a lot has been done, and today I am very pleased to see in this new Erasmus+ leadership so much energy and so much ambition that Erasmus will certainly remain at the top of European programmes. I wish Mr Bogdan Zdrojewski all the best, I thank him for his work to date, and given what he has just said, that Erasmus+ is a unique investment in knowledge, in people, in our common future, I believe it will continue to be successful.

[16:46:23] Milan Zver (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Marek Maj.

[16:46:30] Marit Maij (S&D) [EN]
Thank you, Chair. Dear Executive Vice President, imagine with me for a minute: you are a young person, you are born and raised in Willemstad, Curaçao, or in Accra, Ghana. Your hard work and dedication paid off, and you get an Erasmus scholarship to study in Denmark or in the Netherlands. And you are one of the few coming from outside of the EU. It's the first time in your life, and you need a winter coat. Because the rainy season here is not just wet, it's also cold. You can only spend your euro once. We call it equal opportunity, but we designed it as if everyone starts from the same place. The next Erasmus+ must change that. Bureaucracy should not determine who gets to learn. A geographical coefficient, a term that I introduced and I'm proud to see in this proposal, ensures that funding reflects the actual experience of students. And a minimum of 2% of the budget goes to participants from low and middle-income countries. Education to build bridges, not to reinforce borders. Thank you.

[16:47:35] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [EN]
Kollega Maj, so you have a blue card from João Oliveira, but João Oliveira, you are also on the KJI, so you alre ady asked one blue card. So we are not very far behind schedule, but you have to choose which one you want. One more blue card or KJI?

[16:47:54] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [EN]
That's a very difficult choice to make, Mr. President.

[16:47:57] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [EN]
We did this exercise also before the vote.

[16:47:59] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [EN]
Okay, I think the KJI. I'll take the KJI then.

[16:48:02] João Oliveira (The Left) [EN]
Okay, thank you. Thank you, Kollega Maj as well. So next speaker, Tiago Moreira de Sá, please.

[16:48:11] Tiago Moreira de Sá (PfE) [PT]
Thank you, Mr President, Commissioner. In 1514, the Upper Cloister of a convent in the Netherlands wrote an old monk demanding his return. The recipient was called Erasmus. But that young orphan, who had left the convent, no longer existed. Paris, Louvain, Geneva, Basel, Freiburg, London, Cambridge, Venice, Rome, the books, the scholars, the debates had transformed him. The convent was claiming the man it had known and who no longer existed. Education had made of the orphan a new man. Erasmus replied that he would not return. Erasmus of Rotterdam was no longer merely of Rotterdam. Five centuries later, millions of young people are following in his footsteps, thanks to the programme that bears his name, Erasmus+. Education is the most powerful promise of individual and collective emancipation. And if it is capable of turning a young man from Rotterdam into one of Europe’s greatest intellectuals, it is also capable of inspiring this example and making any young person in Europe an Erasmus from Rotterdam. Thank you very much.

[16:49:12] Tiago Moreira de Sá (PfE) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Magdalena Adamowicz.

[16:49:20] Magdalena Adamowicz (PPE) [PL]
Mr President, Commissioner, we think we have given young people the whole world because they have it in their phones. But with this phone, we have opened the doors of hell for them. Mr President, Commissioner, we thought we gave young people the whole world because they have it in their phones. But with that phone, we opened the gates of hell to them.

We have made children victims of algorithms; the algorithms will make them addicted and teach them to mock and hurl mud at their peers. Or that they are the enemy. At the same time, in so many places across Europe, the real world offers them no chance of a proper education, let alone their own home or starting a family. Erasmus is not a cure for all these problems, but it is a slice of the world where you talk to strangers. You live with strangers, you learn with strangers, until they stop being strangers. And then no propaganda can turn them into enemies. We must not stint on this scrap of the world. On the contrary, let us expand it as much as we can, because we owe this to young people, and in this way let us repair a piece of the world that we have ruined for the young. Congratulations to the rapporteur, Bogdan Zdrojewski.

[16:50:28] Magdalena Adamowicz (PPE) [EN]
Thank you, colleagues. Now we start the KJI procedure. I would be glad to give it the floor to everybody who is on the list, but please be collegial and good colleagues and not to overtake too much time on your one-minute speeches. Nina Carberry will be the first.

[16:50:45] Nina Carberry (PPE) [EN]
Thank you, President. 1.5 million people, that's how many people took part in Erasmus+ exchanges in 2024 alone. But Erasmus+ is much more than students studying abroad. It is the EU's main funding program for grassroots sports, and sport matters. It supports 1.8 million jobs across Europe, with young people particularly benefiting. And I see its impact in my own constituency, in County Mayo, Erasmus+ has helped share Ireland's successful act of school f lag model, with European schools. And in County Leesh, it funded six Port Leesh AFC coaches to travel to Belgium, bringing home new ideas to keep young players involved in football. These are huge opportunities for Irish sport. That is why, as Parliament prepares to vote in the next seven years, E rasmus+, I support a 47 billion budget, almost double the current amount. And with more funding being ring-fenced for sport than ever before, we must ensure that sport is not an optional extra in the next EU budget. Thank you.

[16:51:47] Nina Carberry (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Tomas Bajada.

[16:51:54] Thomas Bajada (S&D) [SL]
In the last two years of family donations, in the previous Erasmus experience, he limited it, the actor without luggage. They helped me, they gave me, they supported me, or they simply overlooked me. Mecca is where the cultural experience of Jeddah, its coffee, its spices and its confidence in the calculation and in the motor of the fight for these days is. But we must not forget that Erasmus+ is also a melting pot of languages. They do not grant the child the right to be. They do not grant the right to be heard. They do not grant the right to be seen. They do not grant the right to be respected. And colleagues, they did not grant the child the right to be with his parents, they did not grant him the right to be with his family, they did not grant him the right to be with his mother, they did not grant him the right to be with his family at all, and I say this with great regret, because they are taking him away from his mother from the very beginning. But we, European democracy, is being destroyed by these people who are not even capable of constructive criticism, who are trying to sabotage the decisions we make, and they want to kill the Erasmus+ project, and these people have no idea how much we have invested in this, how much we have fought for it, and how much we have achieved with it.

[16:52:59] Thomas Bajada (S&D) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Malgožata Gosievska.

[16:53:04] Małgorzata Gosiewska (ECR) [PL]
Thank you. We are in favour of Erasmus, a bigger budget and greater opportunities for our young people. But we oppose the idea of turning this excellent programme into a centralised political tool. Thank you. We are in favour of Erasmus, of a larger budget and greater opportunities for our young people. But we oppose turning this excellent programme into a centralised political tool.

As European students struggle with rising living costs, Brussels is shifting the focus of the programme towards attracting and retaining external talent from third countries. So I ask: whose interests should be the priority of this programme? We must support young Europeans, and education must remain within the competence of the Member States. We also oppose linking universities’ access to funding to political criteria that primarily harm the students themselves. Let us return to the roots of Erasmus. Equal opportunities, knowledge and talent instead of ideology. Respect for the sovereignty of States and priority for young Europeans.

[16:54:04] Małgorzata Gosiewska (ECR) [PL]
Thank you.

[16:54:06] Małgorzata Gosiewska (ECR) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Elena Kontur.

[16:54:16] Elena Kountoura (The Left) [EL]
Thank you very much, Mr President. Hundreds of thousands of pupils and students across Europe are demonstrating and demanding public, free , quality education, adequate funding and decent conditions for studying, working and living. These demands also concern Erasmus, which is one of Europe’s most tangible achievements. Millions of young people have the opportunity to acquire knowledge, to get to know new cultures and to forge lasting ties. beyond national borders. However, participation cannot depend on family income, place of residence or the ability to cover an exorbitantly high rent. How will a young person who is already struggling to pay their rent where they are studying participate? The new programme the Erasmus+ programme must be strengthened. With greater financial support, covering the actual cost of transport and living expenses for beneficiaries. Targeted support for rural, island and remote areas. And specific funding for young people and volunteering, so that participation—

[16:55:20] Elena Kountoura (The Left) [EN]
Thank you, thank you.

[16:55:21] Elena Kountoura (The Left) [EL]
—should be a right for all.

[16:55:22] Elena Kountoura (The Left) [EN]
Okay. Next speaker, Petras Gražulis.

[16:55:34] Petras Gražulis (ESN) [LT]
Honourable Chair, first of all, I would like to make a remark to you that you are very biased and undemocratic. You allow other MEPs to speak multiple times, ask questions and speak themselves. Unfortunately, you have applied censorship towards me not for the first time. Now, essentially, more than a million students from other countries are studying at universities in the European Union. A large proportion of them are funded under the European Union's Erasmus programme. And just recently, we saw those students in France, in other cities, taking to the streets, smashing up shops and cultural sites. I believe this programme should apply only to European Union citizens, and we won’t be able to educate the entire world. Secondly, how many European Union students themselves cannot afford to pay for their studies? So I believe this programme needs to be adjusted.

[16:56:40] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [EN]
Thank you. So, just a small remark: you said about my chairmanship, so I am not doing any c ensorship. You didn't get before the vote when I was chairing because of the announced principles. We were in time constraints, and it was nothing against you personally. Thank you very much. So, next speaker, Malika Sorell.

[16:57:07] Malika Sorel (NI) [FR]
Dear colleagues, you have all said it: Erasmus is the most popular programme of the European Union. Unfortunately, many young people's requests cannot be met because we are subject to significant budgetary constraints. Yet, you keep on increasing or expanding the number of eligible groups, professions, sectors and age ranges. So this is an insoluble problem, a basic arithmetic question. I do not understand your approach, your reasoning, especially as we know that the number of young people already eligible do not have the money to participate, because let us be frank, this programme unfortunately remains elitist. Most often, young people from poor backgrounds cannot complete this experience. Madam Vice-President, are you aware that the indefinite scrapping of the Erasmus programme will end will only exacerbate frustrations? And will tarnish Erasmus’ good name at a time when the rise of populism should prompt us to be more vigilant. Thank you.

[16:58:13] Malika Sorel (NI) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Luda Smažilis.

[16:58:18] Liudas Mažylis (PPE) [LT]
Thank you, Mr President. Commissioner, colleagues, Erasmus+ is one of the most successful European Union initiatives, uniting students across the continent and beyond for decades. Every euro invested in young people returns in the form of skills, jobs, resilience, and European competitiveness. u. However, it is important that the updated programme maintains a strong higher education foundation. Exchanges must not be limited to excursions and visits to cultural sites. They must provide an opportunity to acquire top-level future-oriented competences. It should be noted that quality education begins with the teacher, so Erasmus+ must invest in teachers, lecturers, as well as in students. In their improvement, mobility, and competences. By investing in one student, we change one life, but by investing in one teacher who is studying, we may change hundreds. Thank you.

[16:59:14] Liudas Mažylis (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Juan Fernández López Aguilar.

[16:59:18] Liudas Mažylis (PPE) [EN]
Thank you so much, Mr. President. Commissaria, Minsatu, el

[16:59:21] Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D) [ES]
the Erasmus+ programme is a story of success. It was conceived decades ago by the late and much-missed Spanish Commissioner, Manuel Marín. Not only is it linked to the European Solidarity Corps and volunteering, but above all to the training and educational opportunities it provides for young people. Of a closely-knit network, of coexistence, of shared experiences and of shared affection. That is precisely why, because Europe matters so much, we see the ferocity with which the far right attacks it, alleging that it is a diabolical bureaucratic and ideological plot serving a supposedly malignant Europeanist ideology. But also, precisely for that reason, the European Parliament has committed, in its negotiating position on the multiannual financial framework, to funding of €50 billion. Because it is absolutely essential to keep the European Union’s social contract alive with the younger generation. Thank you, Mr President.

[17:00:24] Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker is Madame Wiszniewska.

[17:00:31] Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR) [PL]
Thank you very much, Mr President. All speakers have expressed satisfaction with the Erasmus+ programme as it currently functions. So why change something that works well? You want to change a programme that has been effective and you are proposing its extension of students from third countries. While European students struggle with the enormous crisis of the cost of living, the new regulation proposes shifting the focus from the mobility of our youth to scholarships for citizens of third countries. European taxpayers' money must first and foremost go to young people from European cities and towns. Turning Erasmus into a recruitment vehicle leads to a drain on the European budget. The current programme’s practice shows how easily EU funds can also be hijacked by left-wing activism, and I warn against this.

[17:01:38] Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR) [EN]
Thank you.

[17:01:38] Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR) [PL]
Thank you.

[17:01:39] Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Joao Oliveira.

[17:01:43] Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR) [PT]
Thank you, Mr President.

[17:01:44] Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR) [EN]
It's your volunteer.

[17:01:45] João Oliveira (The Left) [PT]
The contribution that the Erasmus programme can make to the consolidation of democratic values is undeniable, placing education at the centre. of fundamental aspects to structure the democratic system and also allowing the broadening of young people’s experience to create the space for the consolidation of those democratic values. But it is also necessary that, under the conditions that the programme ensures, this democratic access is guaranteed. It is essential that the Erasmus programme can adapt to the real cost of living, notably by providing adequate coverage of housing costs. It is also absolutely essential that access to the Erasmus programme can allow, in terms of education conditions and access to the education system, the consolidation of this democratic access to higher education, but also in the sharing of experiences, namely in terms of support for the movement associative. That is why we proposed a budget increase of €80 billion in the European Union budget and it is absolutely essential that this increase is achieved.

[17:02:48] João Oliveira (The Left) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Sean Kelly.

[17:02:54] Seán Kelly (PPE) [EN]
It was striking the number of MEPs who spoke, saying they benefited themselves from Erasmus, and indeed MEP Act said she wouldn't be an MEP only for Erasmus. And the benefits of Erasmus would be replicated by the 16 million people who actually took part in it. And one could say that each of those becomes a lifelong human billboard promoting the E U as a result of their experiences. I'm glad to say that even though Brexit occurred, the Northern Ireland people were able to continue in Brexit because of the generosity of the Irish government, but Boris Johnson and his folly withdrew the United Kingdom from Erasmus, thinking he had set up a better scheme himself, now the United Kingdom sensibly admit it was a mistake, like everything else in Brexit, and they want to come back in to Erasmus+. And I welcome them with open arms. Also, I would like to say, like my colleague Nina Carbury, the broad benefits for sports people, universities, teachers, coaches, everybody else, must be embraced so we should expand —

[17:04:00] Seán Kelly (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. Thank you.

[17:04:01] Seán Kelly (PPE) [EN]
—not contract, Erasmus+.

[17:04:03] Seán Kelly (PPE) [EN]
Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, Maria Grappini.

[17:04:08] Maria Grapini (S&D) [RO]
Mr President, Commissioner, it is rare for a project to receive such support. I believe this is the most popular European project, Erasmus, and rightly so, because it is an investment in young people. And it is a long-term investment, because the cultural exchange, the educational exchange that takes place through this project is beneficial. However, I believe we need to extend it also to those who attend vocational schools, because we know that in the European Union there there is a very large skills shortage, and if we extend this to vocational schools, we will certainly gain. And do not worry, we support you in increasing the budget, because this is a long-term investment in human resources and I believe all Member States can benefit if you also extend this to vocational schools; thank you.

[17:04:57] Maria Grapini (S&D) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Arkadiusz Molarczyk.

[17:05:06] Arkadiusz Mularczyk (ECR) [PL]
Thank you very much. Erasmus+ is one of those European Union programmes that bring concrete, measurable benefits to citizens. concrete benefits. They bring together young Europeans through education, language learning and discovering new countries. That is why in the new multiannual financial framework we should strengthen it. But a larger budget must also mean greater accessibility and equal opportunities for all young Europeans. every young European, regardless of the country, place of residence or family income, should have the same opportunity opportunity to participate in Erasmus. Today, the barrier is often the high cost of housing and living in different countries of the European Union. Therefore, support should better reflect the actual cost of living and the financial situation of the participant and where they come from. We must particularly open up Erasmus to young people from smaller towns, rural areas and less affluent families. Because if Erasmus is truly to unite Europe, it must be accessible to all young Europeans, not just those whose parents can afford mobility or whose parents can afford their mobility. Thank you very much.

[17:06:07] Arkadiusz Mularczyk (ECR) [EN]
Thank you. Next speaker, Sebastian Timkinen.

[17:06:15] Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR) [FI]
Mr President, student mobility within Europe is a good thing. The fact that the EU is allocating €47 billion to the Erasmus+ programme for this purpose is not a good thing. But listen, the European Parliament is demanding €47 billion. At the same time, war is raging in Ukraine, and Europe is literally ablaze with internal security concerns. burning cars and falling bombs should wake this House up to the fact that now we must prioritise the use of funds. But no. Instead, this squandering of Erasmus funds is justified by the European Commission on the grounds that Europeans can be encouraged to adopt an active and knowledge-based citizenship. stance on sustainability. Tens of billions, because formal education, non-formal learning and everyday learning have a significant role in promoting climate change mitigation. Not Finnish taxpayers' money for this scheme, thank you.

[17:07:18] Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR) [EN]
Thank you. Now we are closing cage Z procedure, and I would like to take the floor for the commission, executive vice president Mzatu for security.

[17:07:34] Roxana Mînzatu [EN]
Well, what a debate. Thank you. So much. You know, Erasmus has be en, or let me put it another way, from its start in 1987, 18 million particip ants benefited from Erasmus. To me, this is very little. This is the small number. To me, a Romanian that has never had the chance to travel to Europe until she was 25, never the dream of being able to participate in Erasmus, this seems very little. And if we are now to divide, okay, we cannot exactly divide. The total number of participants to the member states, we see how small this number is. And we see that, I think, our main objective together is to make sure that through the struggle, the work, the budget that we will be able to obtain, we reach much, much more Europeans. Because it does change their lives. It empowers them. It empowers them in a very civic sense. It empowers them with skills. It connects them to Europe and to their own national identity. Going outside of your community, outside of your country, gives you a sense about Europe and a sense about your own country. A way to look at yourself, your street, your neighborhood, your nation, that is different. That enriches you. So we owe it to the many, many millions of young Europeans who have not been able, even to think, to participate in Erasmus, be them in vocational education and training. We need much more participants from that area. Be them from youth or sports organizations. Our students, to fight for a bigger budget. And I thank you. I thank Rapporteur Zdrojewski, for the vote that I hope you will give, a strong vote, a strong mandate to this House. For a bigger budget so that you will be able to negotiate with the Council as big as a budget as possible, because in the end, the limit is the budget. And the duty is towards all the tens of millions of Europeans that know about Erasmus but cannot dre am to access it. I agree we need synergies. There is a housing crisis. There is a cost of living crisis. It affects young people more than other generations.

[17:10:00] Roxana Mînzatu [EN]
And we need to think beyond Erasmus, how to connect it with European social fund plus, with other funds, so that it can be more inclusive. But this is, I think, the battle for the next generation of Europeans and for the future of our European Union. So thank you for this battle. And together, I hope that we will succeed. Thank you.

[17:10:20] Roxana Mînzatu [EN]
Thank you. Thank you very much, executive vice president. Now floors go back to Rapporteur Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski.

[17:10:29] Speaker 2 [EN]
Thank you very much.

[17:10:31] Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE) [PL]
First, I will respond to a few critics. Of those nearly 40 critics, there were only a few. But I have one simple request for you: read this report. Read that report. You won’t find Marx, Engels, or—even less so—Lenin in it. Secondly, a response to Ms Wiśniewska. You have confused Erasmus Mundus with Erasmus+. There is no funding in this programme. Not only that, we are blocking and restricting and better controlling the implementation of this programme than was the case before. We are not changing it in this respect. Erasmus Mundus is not funded under Erasmus Plus, but under Global Europe. The second point is very important and very significant. We do indeed have a million children born as a result of cooperation under the Erasmus+ programme. That is why the right must respond. We have one of the best pro-demographic programmes. You always wanted this. So here it is. There is a pro-demographic programme, and every child born always has, for one Member of Parliament, two parents – a mother and a father. And let’s be happy about it. And now a few remarks, as I didn’t get the chance to do so earlier. The budget amounts to 47.4 billion, that is our proposal. We are aware, the entire CULT Committee, but also the budget, that there are needs regarding Europe's security, energy security, and the fight for cheaper fuels. But this fight must also be conducted with an eye to the future of Europe, the future of the younger generation. These are our most important investments, let us not forget that. We are proposing 75% of the budget for education and training alone. A minimum of 15% for youth with volunteering. And 4.1% for sport. These are our proposals. And 20% of the funds is to be allocated to support people with fewer opportunities who are at risk. excluded. And finally, my thanks. I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to the committee, Commissioner Mzatu, and Commissioner Glen Mahler. It was an excellent, professional collaboration. There were some rough edges, but the outcome was always fantastic.

[17:12:56] Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE) [EN]
Thank you.

[17:12:57] Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE) [PL]
I also thank the secretariat of our committees. And finally, I thank all the organisations.

[17:13:04] Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE) [EN]
Thank you, colleagues.

[17:13:05] Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE) [PL]
To national institutions and agencies that have shared our position. They know, through experiences and opinions. We wish the youth all the best.

[17:13:15] Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE) [EN]
Thank you very much.

[17:13:16] Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE) [EN]
Thank you very much, sir.

[17:13:18] Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE) [SK]
Colleagues debate it

[17:13:20] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [LV]
are closed. And voting will take place tomorrow on this issue. Next agenda item: Council and Commission statements on the Circular Economy Act, which strengthens Europe's strategic autonomy, promotes competitiveness and reduces the cost of living for European citizens. And there will be a change of Commissioners. I would just like to take a moment

[17:13:52] Roberts Zīle (ECR) [EN]
before the commission vēl commission of you are welcome to. So now I would like to ask to take floors for the Council of Minister Dooley, floor is yours, please.

[17:14:15] 275109 [EN]
President, Members, Honorable Members, Commissioner, thank you for organizing this timely debate on the upcoming circular econom y act, which the Council very much looks forward to. Our economy in competitiveness, our facing challenges that require both immediate relief and structural long-term solutions for producers especially small and medium enterprises, but also for the recycling industry, and of course really importantly for our citizens. Who expect further efforts to make their lives more affordable. We need a truly functioning internal market with secondary raw materials, to achieve our circularity goals. But this is only possible if we have long-term predictable investments into recycling technologies and if we make sure that there 's enough demand for recycled materials on the side of the manufacturers of various goods. These objectives go hand in hand with the aim of boosting our strategic autonomy ensuring that production cap abilities remain in the EU and that EU products are attractive to EU customers. Our reliance on imported raw materials including critical raw materials should be well managed. At the same time we must pay due attention to our international commitments whether they concern trade relationships and level playing field c limate goals or for instance shipments of waste. And this brings me to the upcoming circular economy act. The Council expects the proposal to tackle as a matter of priority the extended producer responsibility for all waste stre ams. To ensure traceability so that the proper treatment can be provided. These are complex topics that need to be handled in a consistent and comprehensive way in order to provide clear guidance for economic operators and SMEs in particular. And bringing solutions for alleviating their administrative burden while preserving the very base of the whole collection system. The latter is essential to build a functioning market for secondary raw materials. In the meanwhile the Council also remains attentive to the areas in which urgent action is required in order to provide immediate relief for the most impacted sectors

[17:16:19] 275109 [EN]
of our economy. As part of the environmental omnibus the Council is looking at a targeted solution to alleviate the burden under the existing ext ended producer responsibility obligations for producers of limited amounts of packaging or packaged products under the packaging and packaging waste regulation. The omnibus file is a high priority for our presidency and we aim to deliver under the One Europe One Market Roadmap together with the Parliament and the Commission. As regards our long-term expectations for the circular economy act some very important aspects have been raised by delegations at the Environmental Council on the 12th of October and we can expect that boosting demand with regard to recycled plastic materials or EU preference or ensuring a stronger regime of controls for third country materials to make sure it complies with our EU requirements would be am ong the issues that will require most attention thank you very much.

[17:17:13] 275109 [EN]
Thank you very much Minister so now I would like to ask to take floor for the Commission Commissioner Hoekstra floor is yours.

[17:17:27] 232604 [EN]
Thank you very much dear President and Honorable Members on behalf of my friend and colleague Jessica Roosevelt I am taking part in this debate ladies and gentlemen our economy is and our security are under pressure the cost of materials for some sectors can be more than twice the cost of labor and energy such as iron and steel and in our view this shows just how essential circularity is and how essential material efficiency is to European competitiveness at the same time the r isk of supply disruptions is becoming ever more concrete Europe unfortunately is highly dep endent let me stress that highly dependent on imported materials particularly for key technologies of the green and dig ital transition we import roughly 60% of the critical raw materials and that per centage goes up to 90% when you would focus on rare materials just alone and I' m going to make it worse for some raw materials the Union is almost fully dependent on a single country for its supply now such dependencies create in our view a high risk of supply disruptions that are likely to distort competition internationally and fragment our internal market to make matters even worse we're effectively burying valuable resources in the European Union about 30% of our waste still goes to landfill and with it critical materials go to landfill so cir cle circular transition the circular transition is not a choice for our competitiveness and resilience it simply has become a necessity it is about creating the right legal framework and making the best use of the resources available in the Union including of course all the things that we call waste and that means ensuring that materials and products are reused remanufactured recycled and k ept within the economy and it means taking a more strategic approach to redu ce our exposure to unreliable suppliers and there are many of those out there if . We get this right if we manage to do this this will benefit citizens and businesses alike but it will also benef it the environment and help us reach our climate targets now a well-functioning

[17:20:10] 232604 [EN]
single market is essential essential for advancing these goals and unfortunately o urs still faces too many barriers and too much friction and we hear this directly from businesses operating all over the European Union as they still face and I'll give you the list non-uniform implementation of EU la w different national requirements in different member states fragment fragmented compliance system s uncertain legal status of waste and materials higher transaction cost for cross-border trade within Europe than for domestic trade and the list goes on and ladies and gentlemen this is not what a single market was designed for to deliver it is not what we promise and the consequences go well be yond the circular economy so. Chair the circular economy act will address at least some of these challenges right away first we will simplify the regulatory framework and remove barriers to our single market for example the national impl ementation of extended producer responsibility systems has the practical effect of stopping some companies from selling cross-border and we've made a proposal to mitigate some of these in in the environmental omnibus and we're currently assessing how the circular economy act can actually bring that even further we must also reform the system so companies can actually comply easily and do their utmost to boost circularity themselves we will harmon harmonize simplify digitalize and also ensure stronger enforcement bec ause that will be needed as well another example relates to so-called end of waste criteria harmonization will make it easier to move secondary raw materials within the European Union to where they have the highest value and the highest utility second we will strengthen the secondary raw materials market add ressing bottlenecks on the supply and demand side simultaneously and that includes ensuring that waste is recycled instead of being landfilled third specifically for raw materials this means diversif ying supply by making better use of waste streams like for electronic and elec

[17:22:44] 232604 [EN]
trical equipment we. Effectively need to turn more of Europe's waste into what I would like to call a strategic resource for Europe 's industry and the circular economy act will build on the legislation that we have already in place including the eco design for sustainable products regulation and of course the construction products regulation the circularity economy act will complement exactly these efforts by addressing broader single market barriers as we kn ow exist and then the act itself is only one part of our ambition what we're doing is working on an integrated package of legislative and non-legislative measures some to be adopted alongside the act and others to follow later and these accompanying measure measures will be just as important in our view as the act itself dear chair we also need research and innovation enabling market conditions incentives and practical tools including new ways to use public but also private funds because circularity requires investments but frankly speaking it pays back as a driver of competitiveness and it is the combination of all of these meas ures that I've described working together that in our view truly will make a difference it will help to deliver material efficiencies and supply chain supply chain certainty that we so clearly need and it will strengthen E U resilience and our strategic autonomy so. Delighted to have the opportunity to present and truly eager to hear the views of the esteemed members of par liament on the upcoming act and how we can turn all of these ambition into action as soon as possible alt ogether thank you very much thank you very much commissioner now for EPP group will speak Pablo Arias gracias presidente señor ministro señor comisario rediseñar reducir reutilizar re parar renovar recuperar y reciclar durante demasiado tiempo hemos basado nuestro modelo de producción y consumo en fabricar usar y tirar la economía circular no puede entenderse únicamente como un objetivo climático o medioambiental es también una cuestión de compet

[17:25:16] Pablo Arias Echeverría (PPE) [EN]
itividad de seguridad económica y de autonomía estratégica para Europa nuestros recursos son limitados y la dependencia ex terior especialmente en materias primas críticas nos hace vulnerables a las tensiones geopolíticas y pone en riesgo el sumin istro de nuestra industria reducir estas dependencias reutilizar y reciclar materiales e impulsar la innovación son nec esidades estratégicas pero también una oportunidad para rediseñar nuestro modelo productivo y generar nuevas oportun idades de negocio y empleo en nuestro mercado para ello necesitamos una ley de economía circular ambiciosa pero a la vez realista una ley que repare la competitividad de nuestras empresas en lugar de debilitarla y para ello la simplificación tiene que estar en el centro del debate no podemos añadir más burocracia cada trámite innecesario resta recursos a la innovación a la inversión y al crecimiento especialmente de nuestras pymes la transición debe hacerse de la mano de nuestras empresas facilitando su adopción a nuevos modelos de producción y renovando su competitividad necesit amos normas claras armonizadas y previsibles que faciliten la inversión y eliminen barreras en el mercado único y permitan compet ir en condiciones adecuadas a las materias primas secundarias desde el grupo PPE defendemos una economía circular más compet itiva resiliente y europea hagamos de las siete erres una ventaja estratégica para Europa una vía para recuperar nuestra industria y fortalecer nuestra capacidad de generar empleo apostemos por una ley de economía circular ambiciosa a la vez que senc illa y eficaz que impulse a nuestras empresas y sitúe a Europa a la cabeza de la economía del futuro muchas gracias th ank you very much for SMB group will speak Delara Burhart vielen dank liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen ob das große Aluminium Recycling Werk in Sachsen-Anhalt das Hamburger B iotech Unternehmen das aus Agrar Reststoffen neue Materialien entwickelt oder der Recyclinghof in meiner Heimat in Kiel sie alle zeigen he

[17:27:21] Delara Burkhardt (S&D) [EN]
ute schon Kreislaufwirtschaft funktioniert doch sie alle kämpfen mit den gleichen Hürden zu geringe Nachfrage nach recycelten R ohstoffen und einem Wirrwarr von Regeln auch innerhalb der Europäischen Union die gute Nachricht ist wir können das ändern der Circular Econom y Act muss die Kraft unseres Binnenmarktes neu entfesseln und mit gemeinsamen harmonisierten ambitionierten Regeln mehr Nach frage nach Recyclingmaterialien und einer starken Herstellerverantwortung die Wiederverwendung und Ressourcenschonung belohnt das ist eine riesige Chance für mehr Unabhängigkeit von Rohstoffimporten für geringere Materialkosten in der Produktion und für gute Ar beitsplätze in der Industrie von heute aber eben auch von morgen und vor allen Dingen für Bezahlbare Produkte die lang lebiger und günstiger werden Herr Kommissar Sie haben dieses strategische Potenzial erkannt jetzt wird's wichtig dass Sie endlich liefern wir warten schon eine Weile auf den Circular Economy Act für einen unabhängiges Wettbewerbsfähiges und nachhaltiges Europa vielen dank th ank you very much for the PFE group will speak Victoria Ference tisztelt biztos úr tisztelt képviselők Európa gazdasága egyre nehezebben viseli a magas költségeket és a ránehezed ő szabályozási terheket igaz ez a hulladékgazdálkodásra is a körforgásos gazdaságról szól ó szabályozásnak ezért Európa versenyképességét kell szolgálnia az újrahasznosítás és az újrafelhasználási arányok javítása garantálja a környezetvédelmét miközben Európa nyersanyagfüggőségét is csökkenti emellett szükség van a másodlagos nyersanyagok piacának fejlesztésére is de nem újabb jelentési kötelezettségekre és nem a nemzeti rendszerek egységesítésére minden áron az új uniós szabályozásnak lehetőséget kell adni ar ra hogy a tagállamok a saját tapasztalataikra és adottságukra építsenek közös célokat szem előtt tartva a szabályoknak a tisztességes versenyt is garantálniuk kell olyan nem fordulhat elő hogy miközben az európai váll alatok szigorú kötelezettségeket teljesítenek az unión kívülről érkező szereplők kibújhatnak ezek alól köszön

[17:29:33] Speaker 3 [EN]
öm thank you for ECR group will speak merci monsieur le président chers collègues nous débattons aujourd'hui d'un projet législatif dont l'analyse d'impact non concluante a repoussé le calendrier au mois de novembre prochain et bien profitons de ce délai pour introduire un peu de bon sens dans nos réflexions recycler n 'a de sens que si quelqu'un achète ce qu'on recycle et aujourd'hui des montagnes de matières premières s'entassent dans des hangars faute de clients on impose aux professionnels du recyclage des objectifs de recyclage toujours plus haut et on voudrait en plus les f aire entrer dans le marché du carbone ce qui serait une double peine certes oui il faut récupérer nos matériaux critiques plutôt que de dépendre de la Chine mais à plusieurs conditions d'abord pas de taxe déguisée alourdir les éco-contributions c 'est faire payer le consommateur l'inverse de la vie plus abordable ensuite protégeons nos recycleurs par des contrôles aux frontières une traçabilité et des obligations strictes pour les plateformes étrangères enfin pas de décroissance l'Eur ope doit produire mieux pas produire moins simplifier protéger faites confiance à nos entreprises le reste n'est que bureaucratie merci thank you for the new Europe will speak Anna Maya Henriksson arvoisa puhemies komisaari hyvät kollegat kierto talous hyödyttää sekä ilmastoa että ihm isten kukkaroita se vahvistaa samalla EU:n autonomiaa uskon että kiertotaloudella on paljon pot entiaalia vahvistaa Euroopan kilpailukykyä vähentää riippuvuuttamme EU:n ulkopuolelta tulevista ra aka-aineista ja parantaa Euroopan kansalaisten arkea samalla kun uudistumme ja u udistamme on myös tärkeä vaalia jo toimivia ratkaisuja esimerkiksi Suomen erinomaisesti toim iva pullojen ja tölkkien panttijärjestelmä on pystyttävä säilyttämään ja sähköautojen akkuja on vo itava korjata turvallisesti ja kohtuullisin kustannuksin kaikkialla EU:ssa odotan että kom ission tuleva esitys kiertotaloudesta kannustaa meitä korjaamaan ja käyttämään tuotteita uudelleen antamaan

[17:31:52] Anna-Maja Henriksson (Renew) [EN]
niille uuden elämän sekä kierrättämään materiaaleja jotta arvokkaat raaka-aineet saadaan talteen ja olen myös toiveikas siitä että riittävästi huomioidaan pienet ja keskisuuret y ritykset ja samojen sääntöjen on koskettava myös EU:n ulkopuolisia yrityksiä jotka haluavat toim ia meidän sisämarkkinoillamme kiitos

[17:32:27] David Cormand (Verts/ALE) [EN]
bonjour merci monsieur le président monsieur le commissaire cher conseil chers collègues d'abord une évidence il n'y a pas de bon déchet le bon déchet c'est celui qu'on ne produit pas et quand on parle d'économie cir culaire il me semble que ce qu'il on doit mettre au cœur de notre logique c'est trois éléments d'abord la prévention et ç a c'est l'éco-conception des produits pour qu'ils puissent être le plus réparable possible durer le plus longtemps possible et en fin de vie qu'on puisse récupérer le plus facilement possible l'ensemble des matières premières qui ont été utiles à sa production deux ièmement c'est le réemploi et donc là il faut s'appuyer notamment sur la commande publique pour favoriser la réutilisation et le réemploi la seconde vie mais pour cela il faut une offre et donc avoir des produits qu'on ait au préalable remis en é tat et puis la réparation c'est la même logique il y a deux autres textes dont on est en train de parler en ce moment c'est l'acc élérateur industriel et la commande publique la circularité doit être au cœur de notre stratégie europ éenne car notre continent ne sera pas compétitif dans une logique d'économie linéaire et extractiviste c'est ça l'ambition que nous devons nous fixer pour une Europe plus puissante plus industrielle et plus sociale merci mer ci mister gunta das Kreislaufwirtschaftsgesetz muss Menschen und den Planeten vor endlosen Produktion und Profit stellen eine Kreislaufwirtschaft muss mehr leisten als nur Abfall zu verwalten sie muss den Ressourcenverbrauch senken und die endlose Produktion und nutz losen Konsum in Frage stellen das Kreislaufwirtschaftsgesetz bietet die Chance einer Wende einzuleiten Binnenmärk te für Recycling und Abfall reichen nicht aus Abfallvermeidung muss an erster Stelle stehen Produkte müssen länger halten leicht zu reparieren und wieder zu verwenden sein wir brauchen Strukturen die effektive und damit kosteng ünstige Reparaturen erst ermöglichen wir brauchen ein Verbot der Vernichtung unverkaufter Waren wir brauchen die Auswe

[17:34:37] Martin Günther (The Left) [EN]
itung der Herstellerverantwortung auf mehr Produkte wir brauchen langliebiges und reparierbares Des ign mehr Mittel in die Abfallvermeidung Reparatur und Wiederverwendung nicht nur in die Abfallsammlung und das Rec ycling diese Wende muss klare Meilensteile und Rechenschaftspflichten setzen zugunsten der Beschäftigten sein g ute sichere Arbeitsplätze mit starken Arbeitnehmerrechten und Tarifverhandlungen schaffen vielen Dank vielen Dan k mister Commissioner

[17:35:18] 232604 [EN]
thank you very much dear chair and delighted to see you back specifically in that chair maybe three reflections if I may from my side at this point in time first to build on what quite a few speakers said I think the EPP in particular and that is the logic that we have here in front of us to make sure we bridge one everything we have in the domain of c limate and nature with the huge importance of competitiveness and everything related to the domain of autonomy and independence and recycling actually is a great idea on all these three fronts and it is an opportunity that we do need to reap so there are very much agree with those who have articulated that logic second ly and that was what Madam Burkart was saying das ist eine Chance and that is indeed really the opportunity here we have the opportunity to move from a world where we are burning 90% of the stuff towards a world where we re cycle 90% of the stuff and and that is simply an opportunity whether you look at this from an ecological perspective whether y ou look at this from the wallet or you look at the dramatic truly dramatic dependencies that Europe has third . And last dear chair and and there was something. That was brought up also by a few speakers some were focusing on the cost and. Of course there are as with everything in life there are smarter and dumber ways to do this there are more expensive and cheaper ways to do this but if I look at the member state that I know best and it has not nearly maximized its its its potential in the doma in of recycling but the reason why it went into this and why it is the world champion in in in recycling a circularity is because there is a business case and and that is something where we need much more of in Europe let me give you one last example I'm sure he will forgive me for bringing that up here once again I on ce had a chat with the previous CEO of IKEA and he explained to me how he c ame to start recycling mattresses in the Netherlands this was first imposed by the government and I

[17:37:36] 232604 [EN]
KEA embraced it and thought that this was a great opportunity from an ecological perspective but probably also a cost and and and something that would that would come with a certain financial. Burden to them in in doing that until they looked at it and they saw that actually this was che aper than the process that they had before and what they then started to do is lobby the other 26 govern ments in Europe to ask for the exact same regulation because again it works from an ecological perspective but actually it is better for the wallet of that specific company that is. Micro example but it tells you a story and that's the one I will keep repeating and Commissioner Roosevelt will keep re peating that we have an opportunity to bring our objectives in climate and environment in terms of competitiv eness and in terms of autonomy and independence truly hands in hand if we do this well thank you th ank you thank you very much dear Commissioner my next speaker is mister Joneski panie przewodniczący szanowny panie komisarzu ale nie zbudujemy europejskiej konkurenc yjnej gospodarki i synergia będzie u nas ponad dwa razy droższa niż w Stanach Zjednoczonych i trzy razy droższ a niż w Chinach no jeśli tylko popatrzymy na Unię Europejską to za prąd dla przemysłu tu w Europie nasze firmy płacą 20 eurocenta za kilowatogodzinę a w Chinach 7,5 eurocenta za kilowatogodzinę i to nie jest dobra drobna różnica to jest ta przewaga konkurencyjna którą oddajemy innym gospodarstwom i dlaczego o tym mówię tu w tej chwili dlatego że dyskusja o recyklingu o odzyskiwaniu surowców i uniezależnieniu się od Chin to dobry kierunek oczywiście i bardzo bardzo dobrze że o tym rozmawiam y ale jeśli przetwarzanie tych surowców w Europie będzie zbyt drogie nasze ambicje po prostu pozostaną na papierze bo jeśli europejska firma płaci za dużo za energię to inwestycja w Europie przestaje się opłacać jak przestaje się opłacać to produkcja pr zenosi się poza Unię a my stajemy się zależni od importu ten wyścig technologiczny wygrają ci którzy będ

[17:39:52] Speaker 3 [EN]
ą mieli tanią energię i ten wyścig trwa i my musimy zrobić wszystko w Europie żeby ten wyścig wygrać dlatego ceny energii muszą być jed nym z priorytetów tej polityki bez taniej i stabilnej energii nie będzie nowych inwestycji silnego przemysłu ani też real nej strategicznej autonomii dlatego po pierwsze przesunięcie i odejście od ETS2 a po drugie potrzebujem y prostych przepisów gospodarka o obiegu zamkniętym o których komisarz mówi ma tworzyć wartość i wzmacniać firmy a nie m nożyć obowiązki administracyjne nie wystarczy odzyskiwać surowce musimy jeszcze sprawić żeby opłacało się to po prostu robić tu w Europie dziękuję thank you very much dear colleague mister Tobak you have the floor thank you chair colleagues waste not want not if buying something is difficult or expensive then wasting what you already have is plain dumb yet that is what we do in Europe we complain about high energy costs about insecure supplies of crucial rare materials of metals or magnets and at the same time we th row away what we already have our citizens pay three times for this failure we pay to buy we pay to dispose burn our landfill and we pay again to buy again and while Chinese players are al ready eyeing our wind turbines to recover the precious materials inside we needlessly complicate the transport of used toaster for recycling in a neighboring member state colleagues reusing goods and materials has always made ec ological sense but in today's world it also has great strategic and economic value so commissioner more than ever there is no time to waste and no time to waste in connecting circular to economy and to act I'm looking forward thank you thank. You il signor Inselbini si continua giustamente a parlare di autonomia strategica competitività e riduzione dei costi per i cittadini ma come possiamo essere autonom i se da una parte dipendiamo dall'estero per l'approvvigionamento di materie prime strategiche e dall'altro soffochiamo i nostri imprenditori con la burocrazia il circular economy act rappresenta un'occasione unica è vero ma non deve diventare l'ennesimo

[17:42:17] Ana Vasconcelos (Renew) [EN]
capitolo del Green Deal fatto solo di costi e di burocrazia abbiamo bisogno di trasformare i rifiuti in risorse industriali e non le impr ese in uffici solamente amministrativi servono mercati europei efficienti procedure più rapide criteri armonizz ati e meno ostacoli alla circolazione dei materiali recuperati la vera economia circolare deve infatti ridurre la dipendenza strategica dalle importazioni abbassare i costi produttivi e rafforzare le nostre filiere oltre che proteggere tutti quei materiali strategici come il rottame che adesso vengono svenduti per esempio all'estero quindi non solo regole ma si devono dare alle imprese la libertà e gli strumenti per produrre innovare e competere grazie g razie onorevole la signora Vasconcelos thank you chair commissioner council colleagues a competitive economy and strategic autonomy two top priorities in for Europe in this uncertain world for both we need critical raw materials like lithium cobalt and copper ingredients we need for everything from our phones our car car bat teries wind turbines data centers and defense equipment our continent is not as naturally ri ch in these materials as others are but that does not mean that we don't have them in spades in our waste by 2040 recycling could could cut our demand for new cobalt by up to 70% and for nickel up to hal f Europe has the knowhow and the technology to reuse and recycle the challenge is regulation particularly in 27 different regimes across member states no business should have to register with every national producer responsibility scheme one by one give businesses a single digital one-stop shop and build a real single market where trade is unburdened and recycled materials circulate freely Europe al ready has an untapped mind of secondary raw materials let's stop wasting it ob rigado eh Madame Matti dear colleagues last week Elon Musk showed off a flying car uh while people worldwide fear that A I will replace them for us Europeans the answer to that is closer to the ground creating new jobs and making sure that the

[17:44:50] Speaker 3 [EN]
jobs we already have stay in Europe so I recently met the CEO of Gallo it's a Belgian recycler and he told me when he started his company that his family was asking him while why a well-educated man would actu ally want to deal in trash today the company employs over 800 people and it's highly successful in the beginning he thought that the EU rules on car recycling were completely impossible right now he says it allowed his company to flourish and he thanked me for them an innovative textile recycling companies are actually also telling me the same thing they want c lear rules they want market demand or they just move to China so in a couple of weeks commission you will present the circular economy act I will judge it on just one question does it infect give our innovative companies a reason to stay in Europe or not because that more than flying cars really gives people economical security thank you. Madame Matie you have a blue card from Madame Bisnieska do you accept it from ECR group um Mad ame Bisnieska sit four three zero you have the floor dziękuję bardzo za przyjęcie mojego pytania mam podobny Sorry. Yeah I have no translation Let's try now is correct dziękuję bardzo za przyjęcie mojego pytania mam podobny pogląd jeśli chodzi o pot encjał który tkwi w złomie zatem chciałam panią zapytać czy nie uważa pani że powinniśmy wprowadzić restrykcje jeśli chodzi o eksport złomu poza Unię Europejską dziękuję. Sorry the translation was not great but if I understand you correctly it's about um maybe limiting the export of scrap right that was your question yeah well um I think it's important uh to know all the numbers u h before we make uh this kind of uh decision and I think uh if you look at for instance what we're doing uh in the revamp of CBAM right now this is going to be a good way to actually make sure that we put on um the kind of legislation that is working and that is necessary I think for some uh it can be interesting uh to put on export restrictions but I wouldn't say right now we have all the data to make 100% sure that it's actually necessary

[17:47:39] Lynn Boylan (The Left) [EN]
thank you madame uh madame you have the floor maga. Sufficient safe structural this is what our circular economy act needs to be sufficient because focusing on resource efficiency while consumption skyrockets won't cut it we need to reduce our demand and make hard choices about what we pri oritize in our production and consumption do we prioritize the critical materials for the green transition or squander them on weapons systems safe because circular models that rely on toxic chemicals and contaminated materials work for no one we need harmonized end of waste criteria and import standards to ensure the safety of circular materials for workers and consumers and structural because today linear models are built into the way businesses produce and people consume we need circularity by design we need to challenge production models like fast fashion we need global action like a plastics treaty that tackles production and we need to ensure that circularity is pri oritized right across EU policies so it's time that we actually got serious about the circular economy th ank you madame la señora Crespo tiene la palabra eh gracias presidente eh comisario ministro la circularidad es la mejor forma de aprovechamiento la da competitividad y mejora el medio ambiente un residuo inmediatamente se convierte en una oportunidad en un recurso y en una fuente de ingreso evitamos sacar del medio natural más recursos y no se acumulan los residuos que ten emos en muchas ocasiones y podemos producir energía biogás fertilizantes renure y muchos otros productos los de dep uradora agua regenerada ejemplos concretos ya hay en toda Europa en estos momentos podemos hablar de oliv ar de economía circular en el agro o de comares con nuestros pescadores pero la investigación la innovación las nuevas tecnologías tenemos que invertir en ella es una inversión que se rentabiliza como decía el comisario Joescra y como la presidenta presentaba en el debate estaba hablando de agua reutilizamos solo 1000 millones de metros cúbicos en Europa

[17:49:58] Speaker 3 [EN]
de agua y se puede multiplicar por seis es necesario invertir en la circularidad del agua porque eso ad emás produce balance produce equilibrio en los sectores productivos en el agua y evita las dificult ades con la sequía terciarios cuaternarios un nuevo nicho de negocio a través de la infraestructura de agua y además permite equilibrar los sectores productivos el equilibrio que produce el agua para ello se necesitan herramientas y para ello tenemos el fondo de competitividad en estos momentos en el marco financiero que se ajusta como anillo el dedo y especialmente en estos momentos es una ley adecuada simplificada y posibilista todo son vent ajas muchas gracias señora Crespo tiene una tarjeta azul del señor Gunta de de Left la acepta míster Gunta ich würde in Deutsch sprechen haben Sie Übersetzung ja pas st das okay ja vielen vielen dank ich habe sie Ihnen und Ihren Kollegen von der EPP sehr genau z ugehört habe viel über Recycling und gehört was ich nicht gehört habe ist Abfallvermeidung und Sie haben ja jetzt hier auch ein Wasserbeispiel genannt wir wissen alle dass durch undichte Wassersysteme Milliarden Kubikmeter W asser in der EU verloren gehen während es hier auch eine auch ein praktisches Beispiel dafür dass wir eigentlich auf die Vermeidung erstmal Wert legen müssten und könnten Sie dafür zu was sagen efectivamente absolutamente de acuerdo acabo de decir que evitamos sacar recursos del medio natural est o es un tema muy importante que mejora el medio ambiente y además convierte los productos en pos ibilidades más económicas en el agua tenemos un déficit de infraestructura que lo dijo ya la la propia presidenta en el debate de la comunidad perdemos de cada 4 L 1 L de agua y por tanto tenemos oportunidad de equ ilibrar los sectores con una ley de circularidad o que sea objetiva y que dé oportunidad de la infraestructuras hidráulicas con terciario y cuaternario para nosotros es un son todo ventajas y hay posibilidad de hacer una buena ley en Europa que en ese sentido también crea las posibilidades que necesitamos en el agua y en otros materi

[17:52:27] Speaker 3 [EN]
ales que evitamos sacar de la naturaleza por tanto todo ventaja y la competitividad se mejora gracias muchas gracias señora Crispo my next speaker is madame Frison tack herr talman kommissionär Högstra vi pratar om bristen på viktiga mineral och metaller of ta fokuserar vi på debatten på handel geopolitik gruvor och leveranskedjor samtid igt som vi ägnar oss åt resurslöseri i stor skala och bara för att ge ett exempel vi återvinner bara ungefär 40 % av vårt elektroniska avfall och nästan h älften av strategiska och kritiska råmaterial i små apparater ja de går förlorade vid insamlingen och så här ser det ut på område efter område för olika avfall och olika material vi är helt enkelt för dåliga på sekulär ekonomi och det har vi inte råd med nu är det dags för EU att öka takten det är så mycket viktiga resurser som går förlorade vi behöver höja ambitionerna fixa fungerande lagstiftning och inv estera i ny teknik jag räknar dagarna tills kommissionen presenterar cirkulär ekonomi t ack thank you very much mister Tarsiu you have the floor mulțumesc domnule președinte stimați colegi comisia ne promite o viață mai ieftină și o restartare cumva a economiei europene prin reciclare dar oamenii nu și plătesc facturile cu materiale reciclate ci în eur o care provin din salarii câștigate tot mai greu cine garantează că această lege va scădea prețurile și nu va muta costurile în spinarea cumpărătorului cine garantează că firmele mici din România nu vor fi îngropate în hârtii burăoară comisia vrea să dubleze gradul de reciclare în următorii ani pe ch eltuiala producătorilor și a consumatorilor și propune noi reguli nu de asta avem nevoie ci de energie la prețuri rezonabile de investiții în colectare și reciclare și de materiale reciclate care se vând pentru că sunt mai ieftine nu pentru că o lege obligă pe cineva să le cumpere să dăm legi de ci pentru oameni nu împotriva lor mulțumesc thank you very much mister Tarsiu mad ame Balgi we for an onafhankelijk Europa is moet beginnen met wat we al hebben en daar zit voor mij de kracht van een circulaire economie produc

[17:55:20] Jeannette Baljeu (Renew) [EN]
ten langer gebruiken repareren of vernieuwen aan nieuwe standaarden en grondstoffen opnieuw benutten zo houden we de waar de de banen en de productie hier zo was ik vrijdag bij een haven event waar we spraken over het revitten naar nieuwe schone brandstoffen voor de shortse schepen of ik spreek met de sloot sloopsector die zit te wachten op een beschermde markt voor de aluminium scrap onze ondernemers willen vaak vooroplopen maar dan moet Europa wel de ruimte geven dus verwachten we in de eh circular economy act voor de ondernemer een echt verdienmodel en dat betekent dus ook een mar kt creëren voor circulaire grondstoffen en de vraag is waar hoe dat uiteindelijk ook in de circular economy act goed tot zijn recht komt want we hebben het nodig voor onze veiligheid en voor onze consumenten dat de producten langer meegaan een onafhankelijk Europa en een duurzame toekomst veel grondstoffen hebben we al laten we daar ons welvaart mee voortb ouwen thank you very much eh madame Cavazzini president dear commissioner dear colleagues die Zeit in der europäische Unternehmen Rohstoffe verlässlich auf dem Welt markt besorgen konnten die sind leider Geschichte kreislaufwirtschaft muss deshalb die Konsequenz und auch Kernb estandteil jeglicher EU-Industriepolitik sein und ich glaube da gibt's eine große Einigkeit hier im Plenum was gut ist wir müssen runter vom Rohst offverbrauch hin zum Nutzen von Rohstoffen und das heißt wiederverwenden aufarbeiten reparieren und auch recyceln aber leider leider treten wir immer noch auf der Stelle die Kreislaufquote und das wissen wir die stagniert seit Jahren auf einem se hr geringen Niveau das Kreislaufwirtschaftsgesetz muss daher das Geschäftsmodell der Zukunft schaffen w ir brauchen endlich EU-Ziele zur Verringerung des Materialfußabdrucks wir müssen zweitens Hersteller für das ges amte Leben ihrer Produkte mitverantworten mit einem Preisschild das sich in der Umweltwirkung ausrichtet und das einheitlich auf dem ganzen Binnenmarkt hier brauchen

[17:57:25] Dario Tamburrano (The Left) [EN]
wir endlich ein Ende der kleinen Staaterei hier gucke ich Richtung Rat und drittens wir müssen diese Gelder nutzen für Abfallvermeidung für Reparatur und Wiederverwertung und nicht nur für Recycling vielen herzlichen Dank danke il signore Tamburrano Salve colleghi eh ci sono cose da fare ci sono cose da un fa da non fare un pessimo esempio di economia cir colare l'abbiamo noi romani dove negli scavi di preparazione del nuovo inceneritore da 800. 000 tonnellate stanno uscendo sacchi di amianto che nessuno sa come sono arrivati là quindi eh e commissario io sono molto contento del della sua azione e sono certo che farà un bel lavoro con quest 'atto però forse qualcosa di più sull'ETS2 e l'emissione dell'incerimento credo fosse opportuno fare comunque una qualche parola sui pannelli fotovoltaici e sulla responsabilità estesa del produttore i pannelli durano 25 anni mentre qualche produttore dopo tre e già sparito il pannello resta la responsabilità resta il pannello evapora e gli accantonamenti non sono commisurati ai costi attuali perché sappiamo che le installazioni non hanno un andamento temporale lineare il circola economy act deve imporre garanzie finanziarie ai produttori fin dalla vendita ritiro davvero gratuito anche a residenziale recupero effettivo dei materi ali e controlli sulle esportazioni e filiere di recupero anche consumer to business nell'economia cir colare devono circolare le risorse non le responsabilità grazie grazie onorevole eh mister Coller sehr geehrter Kommissar Höchstra sehr geehrter Minister Duli geschätzte Kollegen und Kolleginnen ich blicke mit Spannung auf den angekündigten Circular Economy Act der Europäischen Kommission dieser stellt eine Chance für mehr Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und mehr strategische Un abhängigkeit da beides brauchen wir dringend unsere europäischen Unternehmen brauchen außerdem Planungssicherheit das ist der Grundstein für eine erfolgreiche Wirtschaft die in Innovationen und Umweltfreundliche Technologien investiert dah er möchte ich die Kommission nachträglich darum bitten den Vorschlag zur Kreislaufwirtschaft auch in diesem Sinne zu nutzen und mehr praktikabil

[17:59:53] Speaker 3 [EN]
ität zu schaffen dazu zählen für mich die eine Vereinfachung der erweiterten Herstellerverantwortung für Kleinstunternehmen und die Schaffung von Anreizen für Innovation wir benötigen einen sinnvollen Rechtsrahmen für Recycling und ein europaweit harmonisier tes Recyclingsystem ich freue mich auf den Austausch und die Diskussion vielen dank thank. You very much eh la signora Moretti. Presidente colleghi commissario il lavoro che da anni stiamo portando avanti sul tema della circolarità ha bisogno di uno scatto in avanti l'occasione del prossimo circular economy act per creare finalmente un sistema produttivo più s ostenibile e competitivo non può essere sprecata essenziale sarà creare un mercato unico delle materie prime secondar ie per trovare uno sbocco in Europa al materiale riciclato intervenire concretamente per ridurre la di pendenza sulle materie prime trattenendone l'economia europea i materiali di valore questo sforzo deve essere fat to con il dovuto supporto alle imprese in particolare alla piccola media impresa così da rilanciare l'industria e creare posti di lavoro i benefici di un sistema più sostenibile sono per tutti per l'ambiente la salute il lavoro e le imprese starà a noi come istituzioni nei prossimi mesi ed anni trovare un giusto compromesso che met te insieme ambiente e sviluppo grazie. Onorevole eh mister Smith. Voorzitter commissaris Hoekstra minister Duli collega's we moeten kringlopen sluiten met gezond verstand af val is een bron van secundaire grondstoffen en energie geen afvalbergen dus maar recycling en afvalenerg iecentrales sluitstuk van de kringloop zonder energetische benutting wordt verwerking duurder zonder dat er meer zou worden zal worden gerecycled de rekening komt bij huishoudens of het afval verdwijnt naar stortplaats en elders met methaanemissies tot gevolg wie grondstoffen en energie terugwinning niet samen ziet ondermijnt cir culariteit de wisselwerking met uw ETS is cruciaal geen haalbare business case voor recycling zonder

[18:02:17] Speaker 3 [EN]
betaalbare energetische verwerking van reststromen daarbij horen CCS en CCU koester de afvalsector maak van de Noordzeeregio één recyclinghub met havens die reststromen over water gemakkelijk uitwisselen behandel tenslotte commissaris mest als bruin goud als grondstof commissaris neem dit me e in de circular economy act zo versterken we strategische autonomie concurrentiekracht en de portemonnee van Europeanen dank u wel danke danke sen madame katijnen Arvoisa puhemies commission ja neuvoston edustajat euroopan on vahvistettava omaa kilpailukyky ään ja omavaraisuuttaan välittömästi energiariippuvuutemme ulkoma ulkomaisesta fossiilisesta on n ostanut tavallisten ihmisten elinkustannukset räjähdysmäisesti eri puolilla eurooppaa samaa virhettä ja uusien riippuv uuksien rakentamista esimerkiksi kiinaan ei enää pidä tehdä meidän on käytettävä omia resurssejamme paljon nykyistä tehokkaammin biotalous kestävä metsätalous sekä teollisuus ja maatalouden sivuvirrat ni itten hyödyntäminen tarjoaa merkittäviä mahdollisuuksia luoda uutta yrittäjyyttä ja työpaikkoja biopohjais ella materiaaleilla voimme korvata fossiiliset samalla kiertotalous luo elinvoimaa maaseudulle niitten uusiutuvien lu onnonvarojen äärelle kiertotalouden on toimittava myös käytännössä me tarvitsemme toimivia markkinoita kierrätysmateriaale ille sekä ennustettavaa säätelyä joka ei aiheuta lisää taakkaa pk-yrityksille tai maa- ja metsätalo usyrittäjille kiertotalouden markkinoiden täytyy toimia yli jäsenvaltioiden rajojen ennakoivasti ja u utta luoden kiitoksia thank you very much mister Norwich. I worked in fashion for years before joining politics the industry I loved was running on one model produce more sell more throw more away nobody was changing it so I left for politics and since then it 's only gotten worse and the solution for fashion and other industries is circularity circularity is not just a green obsession it is core industrial policy using fewer resources our companies biggest cost is also what makes europe more competitive and it means quality local jobs in repair in reuse

[18:04:54] Pascal Arimont (PPE) [EN]
and of course in recycling but circular must be obvious and the affordable choice recycled materials as we know it today are not too expensive virgin materials are too cheap so let's make imported pl astic and chemicals pay for the carbon at our borders and let materials move freely in our single mar ket this is not only about waste it's actually about ending line air business models which simply c annot last thank you thank you very much messi argument Vielen dank sehr geehrter Herr Präsident sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar sehr geehrter Herr Minister wir müssen Bedingungen schaffen damit sich Abfall zu Rohstoffm ärkte entwickeln können ich habe zuletzt Hersteller sehr erfolgreiche Hersteller von Schaumstoffen für Verpackungen und Kunststoff recy cle besucht ihre Botschaft war klar drei Dinge müssen wir im circular economy act machen erstens Unternehmen dürfen nicht läng er sich durch unterschiedliche Rücknahmeregistrierungs- und Meldesysteme kämpfen wir brauchen einen digitalen One Stop Shop zweitens Recycling darf nicht an Europas Grenzen scheitern wer Abfälle zur Verwertung in einen anderen Mitgliedstaat transportiert braucht je nach Material die Zustimmung mehrerer Behörden gleichzeitig wird das selbe Material nicht überall gleich eingestuft was hier als Rohstoff gilt kann hinter der Grenze wieder als Abfall gelten das kostet Zeit Geduld und verhindert einen echten Binnenmarkt drittens unsere alten Handys und Elektrogeräte sind die Minen die wir längst in Europa haben darin stecken wertvolle Rohstoffe die wir sonst teuer importieren ich appelliere da an die Kommission harmonisieren Sie die Regeln sorgen Sie dafür dass recycelt sich re chnet dann bleiben Rohstoffe und Wertschöpfung in Europa Kreislaufwirtschaft ist Industriepolitik europäische Unabhängig keit und ich wiederhole mich wir müssen Bedingungen schaffen und das schnell damit sich Abfall zu Rohstoffmärkten entwickeln können vielen dank danke sen madame Grossmann Ja meine Damen und Herren Kreislaufwirtschaft ist eine strategische Chance für Europa sie verringert unsere Rohstoffabhäng

[18:07:06] Speaker 3 [EN]
igkeit und Umweltbelastung stärkt die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und macht den Alltag der Menschen leistbar er dafür müssen wir die Kreislaufwirtschaft ganzheitlich denken Produkte müssen langlebig reparierbar und wiederverwendbar sein und auch sozusagen eine Chance auf ein zweites Leben haben und gleichzeitig müssen wir die Verbraucherinnen stärken und dazu gehört auch der Schutz vor nichtkonformen Waren wir brauchen EU-weite Qualitätsstandards und auch Online-Plattformen müssen als Wirtschafts akteure anerkannt und auch stärker in die Verantwortung genommen werden ja wir brauchen auch reduzierte Mehrwertsteuersätze für Reparatur Wiederaufbereitung und Gebra uchtwaren nach dem Vorbild einiger Mitgliedstaaten und damit das alles gelingt brauchen wir endlich einen koh ärenten Rechtsrahmen und ich stimme dem Satz vollkommen zu wir haben bei der Kreislaufwirtschaft keine Wahl es ist eine Pflicht thank. You very much mister Veriga thank you dear colleagues the circular economy act is an important initiative aiming to str engthen Europe's competitiveness reduce our dependence on imported raw materials and create a genuine single market for recycled materials however we must also recognize the potential risks mandatory recycled content targets additional reporting obligations and complex traceability requirements co uld increase production costs and place an unnecessary burden on European businesses and particularly SMS SMEs we must also ensure that European producers are not put at a competitive competitive disadvantage compared to imports from third countries our pri ority should be to remove barriers not create new ones we must ensure that new requirements are driven by real market needs are technologically feasible and do not undermine the competitiveness of European man ufacturers thank you thank you very much madame Grapini Domnule comisar domnule ministru stimați colegi propunerea de a avea un act legislativ privind economia circular ă este binevenită însă mi a plăcut ce ați spus și dumneavoastră domnule ministru și dumneavoastră domnule comisar trebuie să avem în

[18:09:55] Speaker 3 [EN]
calcul situația existentă trebuie să avem un cadru normativ corect trebuie să găsim soluții de exemplu pentru tras abilitatea deșeurilor trebuie să ne gândim cum facem investiții în tehnologie pentru a putea să facem reciclarea eu vin din mediul privat și vă spun că în țara mea dar și în alte state nu avem încă tehnologii pentru reciclare pentru toate produsele până la urmă reciclarea nu înseamnă doar mediu înseamnă eficiență și eficacitate și orice întreprinzător va vrea să facă economii dar dacă costul de reciclare este mai mare decât materia primă nouă n o va face nimeni de aceea trebuie să gândim foarte bine acest act legislativ și să încurajăm și să ținem cont că IMM urile au o presiune și acuma foarte mare ați spus domnule comisar că avem deja prea multe bariere în pia ța internă atunci să nu mai creăm prin acest act legislativ da îl avem nevoie de o economie circulară economia liniară este dep ășită dar trebuie s o facem un cadru normativ echitabil și corect vă mulțumesc thank you very much de ar colleague I have three requests for Cast first one is for madame Nikel sit 6 5 7 Panie przewodniczący panie komisarzu tytuł tej debaty obiecuję obniżenie kosztów życia i większą konkurenc yjność gospodarki europejskiej cudownie czy mamy komisję za słowo bo obieg zam knięty nie może oznaczać wyłącznie kolejnych restrykcji i kar dla naszych przedsiębiorców sur owce wtórne i recykling muszą realnie obniżać ceny produktów dla konsumentów a nie generować n owe certyfikaty i biurokrację z którymi być może małe i średnie firmy nie będą mogły sobie poradzić pol ski przemysł i Śląsk potrafią przetwarzać materiały i tworzyć nowoczesne produkty ale potrzebują uczciwych warunków konkurencji z rynkami azjatyckimi pani komisarzu czy to im zapewniamy ch rońmy europejski przemysł rynki pozwólmy przedsiębiorstwom się rozwijać bo tak naprawdę to one tworzą lepsze życie dla Europejczyków dziękuję sit 430 Bardzo panie przewodniczący i. Że być kolejnym batem na europejski przemysł ani źródłem ukrytych kosztów dla obywateli je

[18:12:38] Speaker 3 [EN]
śli chcemy realnie wzmacniać europejską konkurencyjność najwyższy czas by przesta ć dusić przedsiębiorców którzy już dzisiaj mają bardzo trudne warunki funkcjonowania rec ykling innowacje mają sens tylko wtedy gdy opłacają się ekonomicznie i wpływają na obniżkę cen kosztów życia a nie wtedy kiedy stają się kolejnym ciężarem zwracam na szczególnie trudną zwracam państwa uwagę na szczególnie trudną sytuację w branży AGD która już dziś ostr zega przed utratą konkurencyjności i apeluję o stworzenie planu wspierającego branżę czy państwo wie cie że w tej branży zatrudnionych jest ponad milion pracowników a regulacje o których dzisiaj mówimy b ędą niestety kolejnym bardzo wielkim obciążeniem dla firm produkujących sprzęt AGD i utrata konkurencyjności jeśli chodzi o Chiny jest oczywista także proszę mieć na uwadze sytuację tej branży dziękuję bardzo thank you very much dear colleague Mr. Tinkinen sit 210 Arvoisa puhemies komissaari Hökstra suomessa pulloja ja tölkkejä on kierrätetty panttijärjestelmän ansiosta vuosikymmeniä mutta nyt EU:n romuttamassa toimivan järjestelmämme EU vaatii että vuonna 2030 osa juomapakkauksista pitää olla uudelleen käytettäviä suomen panttisysteemi menisi uusiksi ja kustannusarviot liikkuvat sadoissa miljoonissa koittakaa nyt ymmärtää siellä komissiossa suomessa tölkit ja pullot eivät päädy kadulle tai roskiin kuten monissa muissa Euroopan mais sa suomessa on järjestelmä jossa pullot ja tölkit palautetaan ne litistetään ja materiaalit kierrätetään kok onaispalauteaste on Suomessa 99% olemme maailman huippua suomen järjestelmä on esimerkki miten materiaalien kierrätystä voidaan arjessa lisätä suomi ei ansaitse u utta huonompaa ja kalliimpaa järjestelmää suomi ansaitsee poikkeuksen jäädä näiden uusien EU-vaatimusten ulkopuolelle kiitos thank you very much el señor Oliveira sitio 125 Obrigado obrigado presidente eh quando discutimos a economia circular devíamos estar a discutir uma economia centrada e orient ada na satisfação das necessidades sociais numa economia orientada pelo pelo para o equilíbrio no apro

[18:15:24] João Oliveira (The Left) [EN]
veitamento dos recursos naturais e produtivos porque cadeias curtas de produção de distribuição e consumo pelo ap oio aos pequenos produtores e consumidores numa lógica de promoção de produzir consumir local o problema é que tudo isto é contraditório com as políticas da competitividade que põem no centro a l ógica da liberalização da sujeição às lógicas do mercados de praticamente todas as áreas da vida económica e social políticas orientadas para favorecer os grandes grupos económicos as grandes multinacionais em prejuí zo das pequenas e médias empresas dos pequenos produtores que verdadeiramente estão em condições de dar concretização a uma economia cir cular e portanto senhor comissário a questão central é perceber como é que tudo isto se compatibiliza parece-nos que não há compatibilização poss ível insistindo nestas políticas não é possível superar a contradição que elas colocam com a lógica que devia ter a economia circular Mu ito obrigado eh minister Mr. Tulli eh thank you very much to all who contributed I certainly think it was a very worthwhile debate and thank you for your contribution the debate underscores I believe the importance and the urgency of the forthcoming circular economy act it's clear that it needs to strike a balance between the immediate priorities and indeed the long-term sustainable solutions from the council's perspective tackling the ext ended producer responsibility for always streams should be one of the priorities of this file and we are working on a target ed and time-limited solution for the specific case of the packaging uh and packaging waste regulation the PPWR and I 'm pleased to confirm that just today Corper has completed its mandate for negotiations on the environmental omnibus including on extended producer responsibility so more broadly the council believes that we need a long-term solution in the up coming circular economy act which provides a real relief to producers without risk of circumvention and free riding as well

[18:17:33] Lídia Pereira (PPE) [EN]
as without undermining the ability of competent authorities to enforce the rules we stand ready to start the examination of the circular economy act once the proposals are formally uh transmitted to us thank you very much for your attention th ank you Mr. Minister the debate is closed the next item on the agenda is or al question to the council and the commission you a climate change conference 2026 in An talia Turkey COP 31 first place the author of the question madame Pereira. You have the floor obrigado Muito obrigada senhor presidente caros colegas senhor comissário durante demasiado tempo de ixámos que a conversa sobre a Europa fosse dominada por uma narrativa de conflitos Bruxelas de um lado as pessoas do outro as instituições de um lado a vida real do outro mas eu não acredito nessa Europa a Europa é um lugar não é um lugar distante a Europa somos nós e se qu eremos que as pessoas confiem nas instituições europeias temos de lhes mostrar que as decisões que tomamos têm um impacto concreto nas suas vidas é por isso que a transição climática não pode ser apenas uma discussão sobre metas e emissões tem de ser uma discussão sobre empregos salários energia mais acess ível empresas mais competitivas segurança e qualidade de vida tem de ser uma discussão sobre a capacidade da Europa para produzir inovar e criar prosperidade não queremos uma Europa obrigada a escolher entre clima e crescimento queremos uma Europa que cresce porque investe e inova enquanto se descarboniza é esta a visão que orienta a nossa posição para a COP 31 em Antalia e quero começar por recon hecer o trabalho de compromisso que permitiu construir esta resolução num parlamento com diferentes sensibilidades e prioridades encontrar uma posição comum exige diálogo capacidade de negociação e sent ido de responsabilidade esse compromisso é importante porque a ação climática global precisa de uma Europa unida coesa capaz de defender os seus objetivos e de influenciar os resultados mas o compromisso não pode ser um fim em si mesmo tem de nos permitir avançar da ambição para a execução

[18:20:35] Lídia Pereira (PPE) [EN]
a COP 31 não pode ser apenas mais uma conferência de promessas tem mesmo de ser a COP da implementação já assumimos vários compromissos agora temos de os cumprir e temos de garantir que essa transformação produz resultados concretos para as pessoas e para a economia em primeiro lugar precisamos de acelerar o investimento em tecnologias limpas e energias renováveis reconhecer em definitivo que as tecnologias limpas são muito mais do que uma política climática são políticas de segurança e de autonomia estratégicas quando reduzimos a dependência dos combustíveis fósseis reduzimos também a nossa vulnerabilidade geopolítica quando investimos em novas tecnologias criamos oportunidades para as nossas empresas e reforçamos a competitividade europeia mas há uma condição essencial a Europa tem de ser líder nas tecnologias limpas e também na produção dessas tecnologias a descarbonização não pode significar desindustrialização não podemos definir objetivos ambiciosos e depois deixar que o investimento a capacidade produtiva e os empregos associados à transição sejam criados noutros continentes pre cisamos de transformar o conhecimento em inovação inovação em investimento e investimento em indústria precisamos de criar con dições para que as empresas europeias possam competir crescer e liderar os mercados do futuro em segundo lugar temos de preservar instrumentos que dão previsibilidade ao investimento e contribuem para a transformação da economia inclu indo o mercado europeu de carbono ao mesmo tempo devemos assegurar que a transição é acompanhada por condições de concorrência just as e por soluções que protejam a competitividade da nossa indústria em terceiro lugar precisamos de reforç ar o financiamento climático e a adaptação os países mais vulneráveis não podem ser chamados a assumir compromissos sem dis porem de meios para os realizar e as nossas próprias sociedades têm de estar mais preparadas para os impactos climáticos que já en frentamos sem financiamento sem adaptação e sem confiança não haverá uma resposta global eficaz e

[18:22:48] Lídia Pereira (PPE) [EN]
finalmente temos de garantir uma transição justa porque uma transição que deixa trabalhadores famílias ou regiões para tr ás não será sustentável nem económica nem politicamente caros colegas ex iste uma falsa escolha que temos de rejeitar entre proteger o planeta e proteger a economia não temos de escolher tem os de fazer as duas coisas e o verdadeiro desafio é construir um modelo de desenvolvimento em que a inovação e a produtividade re forcem a competitividade em que as energias limpas reduzam dependências e em que o crescimento económico contribua para uma sociedade mais saudável resiliente e próspera os custos da transição são reais e devem ser levados a s ério a União Europeia deve continuar a defender o objetivo de limitar o aquecimento global a 1,5o reforçar a co operação internacional e exigir a implementação dos compromissos assumidos mas deve fazê-lo com a convicção de que a política clim ática pode ser também uma política de crescimento de segurança e de prosperidade sen hor presidente eu estou mesmo a terminar a nossa ambição deve ser construir uma Europa que protege o planeta sem abdicar da sua indústria que promove a inovação sem deixar ninguém para trás e que transforma a descarbonização num ativo estratégico menos promessas mais implementação menos dependência mais inovação mais competitividade e mais prosperidade é essa a Europa que vamos defender em Antalia obrigado senhora Pereira eh ministra Tuli hum president honorable members commissioner um COP 31 will take place this year against the backdrop of new clim ate records over the past summer global air and sea temperatures broke alarming records again this was also the third warmest summer ever recorded for our continent with record breaking temperatures across western Europe alt hough over the last decades the international community has made progress on climate change policies the worrying climate developments are a stark reminder that greenhouse gas emissions cuts have not been sufficient and have not happened fast enough there

[18:25:06] 275109 [EN]
fore COP 31 should put a further emphasis on the effective implementation of the Paris agreement and advance technical work in all core areas including mitigation adaption and just transition formal negotiations in Antalia will be complemented by the so-called global climate action agenda um the compromise uh this compromise is a wide range of initiatives proposed by COP presidencies relating to electrification zero waste and methane reduction resilien ce cities and building green industrializations and others the council outlined its overall position for COP 31 in a set of conclusions approved on 12th of October and allow me to underline our key priorities we would like this COP to demonstrate tangible progress on the implementation of the current commitments under the Paris agreement and establish a firm foundation for the further ambition aligned with best available science for the EU staying as close as possible to 1 .5 Celsius warming threshold and getting back below 1. 5 remains a key goal this requires continued rapid and deep emissions reduction as every additional fra ction of a degree brings greater risk to our health economy security and prosperity therefore this COP 31 must communicate the urgency of climate action and in line with the urgency of emissions reductions the EU will support a str ong outcome on a package of mitigation related initiatives and such outcomes must send a strong signal to the parties u h that have not yet submitted their national uh determined contributions and to do so as soon as possible and to all parties to ensure that these contributions and long-term strategies are aligned with 1. 5° the UAE consensus from COP 28 must be implemented this includes commitments related to a just orderly and equitable transition away from fossil fuels tripling renewables and doubling energy efficiency improvements and ac tion to reduce methane and other non-CO2 emissions and halt the reverse of deforestation by 20 30 and the groundwork for the second global stocktake must be firmly established moreover the

[18:27:21] 275109 [EN]
EU focus will also be on accelerated clean energy deployment through electrification clean energy trans ition does not only bring down emissions it also contributes to energy security and affordability and reduces strat egic dependencies and in the current unstability of political context in the period of high energy cost this is more important than ever and in this context uh the 35 by 35 global electrification pledge launched by the Turkish COP presidency as one of their flagship initiatives offers a welcome platform for discussions on energy transition at COP 31 the EU will engage in these discussions in line with its commitment to clean electrification with intensifying impacts on clim ate change climate resilience and strengthened preparedness and adaption policies have become a necessity for safe societies and econom ies therefore the EU supports further technical work towards reaching the global goal of adaption which should support progress on adaption at country level right across the globe as countries move to low emissions societies just equitable and inclusive climate action is a growing priority for many including us here in the EU in line with this the EU will support an agreement on lean and effective just transition mechanisms that helps countries integrate just transition considerations into their climate measures finally like in previous COPs we expect the climate fin ance will draw significant attention the EU remains firmly committed to delivering on our existing commitments under the new collective qualif ied goal as agreed back at COP 29 just two years ago our focus this year will be on improving ac cess to climate finance particularly foremost vulnerable countries such as small developing island states and least developed countries and allow me to highlight that despite the fiscal and geopolitical challenges the EU and its member states remain the largest contribut or to climate finance it's often last on some I think however in order to achieve the goals of the Paris agreement funding from all

[18:29:27] 232604 [EN]
sources will be needed we need to broaden the range of contributors increase private finance and remove barriers to finance flow so uh dear honorable members along with these priorities the EU and its member states will work hard to shape a positive outcome uh from from COP before concluding allow me to highlight that in Italia E U and member states pavilions will be co-located in the EU village I'm confident that this integrated presence will significantly amplify uh the union's impact at COP 31 providing a platform to showcase our collective progress in global climate action thank you very much for your attention and I look forward to seeing those of you who are intended on traveling to COP 3 1 very shortly thanks a lot thank you very much Mr. Minister uh dear Commissioner you have the floor merci thank you very much dear President and honorable members fantastic to have the opportunity to have this debate and let me start by thanking wholeheartedly the great work that Lidia Peria has done in leading the delegation in the past but also in all the current ongoing work which I think is truly instrumental in this whole en deavor and let me also wholeheartedly thank the collaboration I have experienced at the previous C OPs with um the various members of parliament when we were at the COP and of course there are significant differences as always in every political arena but making sure that we do team up when we are far and away is actually an asset to advancing the goals and the um and the um contributions Europe can be making um so I do want to salute that next thing I would want to share and that is wh at Lidia Perera said as well this is going to be an implementation COP and it should be an implementation COP beca use frankly speaking we have too often fallen into the trap of trying to do many new things r ather than just deliver on what we already have and I think it was Churchill who once famously said that no matter how beautiful the strategy you do need to occasionally look at the results um and the results are not nearly what they should be so hav

[18:31:57] 232604 [EN]
ing the conversation on delivery rather than on coming up with new things I think is is is is hugely important second thing to convey and and and there are very much agree with what the presidency has just said if you look at the context that is truly intimidating we've had the worst summer ever in Europe um our friends in um in particular the Pacific and it was recently in in Fijian Tuvalu are literally battling the water uh we are facing a hugely complicated geopolitical situation and let's also be hon est about the last thing that unfortunately shapes the context hesitation and in some cases out right denialism do make the whole endeavor ever more complicated having said that there is an opportunity for us all of us to deliver to continue to art iculate the hugely important endeavor we we are at in staying as close as possible to 1. 5 to deliver on the NDCs frankly speaking it is mindboggling that there still countries that have not delivered their NDC s and it is almost as mindboggling that many of the NDCs fall far short of what is needed but we can push the needle here and the main way we will be able to do that is through clean electrification which is a unifying theme uh which has I think a smart a degree of um of amb ivalence to it because some might focus specifically on solar others might focus on wind again others might focus on nuclear and again others would focus on batteries and for the commission all of it is a great idea so we do need to push that that that as a as a theme um next thing I would want to say uh is of course the conversation on adaptation and also adaptation finance and access to adaptation finance will contin ue and rightly so particularly with our friends from from the Global South and at the same time Europe is already by far the largest contributor to uh this whole endeavor by far so any conversation about making sure that the money actually reaches those most in need is one we should absolutely have con versations again on financing are not going to be productive because the finance COP was two years ago and we've had that

[18:34:31] 232604 [EN]
one uh at the same time we do invite everyone with similar higher almost similar levels lev els of affluence to chip in and to join what we are doing because that would actually help final . Um let me um once again articulate some of the other things that are hugely important we have no choice than to fully embrace the best available science and that is a thing that I will contin ue to articulate at every single endeavor at the COP content-wise ne xt to electrification we do have an opportunity to make progress in carbon markets uh and in methane in met hane and um I do very much look forward to trying to make a mark over there as well let me wrap up um and thank everyone once again for the opportunity to have this debate and I'm truly looking forward to working together with so many of you at the COP uh well knowing that the context will not be easy thank you th ank you very much dear Commissioner on behalf of the EPP group Madame Terlack.

[18:35:51] Ingeborg Ter Laak (PPE) [NL]
From parched farmlands last summer to flooded cities this week in Spain, the effects of climate change are evident, and no matter how you look at it, places where we live dry out, places where we feel safe are being damaged, and we are facing high recovery costs and a lot of work. At the UN Climate Summit in Turkey, I would therefore like to send a clear message: how do we ensure that our cities can withstand drought and extreme heat? how do we tackle these issues? How do we ensure that we have sufficient clean drinking water available even during prolonged periods of drought? And how do we ensure that ships can continue to sail even at low river levels? So, it is about concrete solutions. As the European Union, we will continue to do everything in our power to make our way of life more sustainable, and we will have to allocate funds to cover the consequences of climate change and the associated costs. on the other hand, we cannot and must not accept that those who pollute the least end up paying the highest price. As Europe, we cannot do this alone; we must work together with all countries. We need to invest in the green economy of the future, because that is the only perspective we have for a sustainable, healthy and safe future. Yes, yes, yes, uh, Ms Fritson, exactly. Important issue

[18:37:28] Heléne Fritzon (S&D) [SV]
Thank you, Mr President, Commissioner Högström, yes, and in fact we already know what we need to know about the gravity of the climate crisis; the facts are on the table. Yet the countries of the world—and, unfortunately, many of the Members in this Chamber—need a reality check. We have once again experienced a summer of heat records with drought and fires in our part of the world, and floods and flash floods in other parts of the world – equally alarming is the geopolitical situation. Wars and conflicts repeatedly lead to energy crises; we have seen this in Russia’s war against Ukraine and we are experiencing it through the situation in the Hormuz Strait. Our dependence on fossil fuels has made us vulnerable; we are exposed to both energy shortages and cost shocks. This is not just a climate issue, it is also a security issue. Investing in the climate is also investing in our security and our independence. If the research and facts about the severity of the climate crisis are not enough, then perhaps reality should make every politician pull themselves together. We have had several chances to learn the lesson, and time and again, the world’s countries have failed. So at COP31, we must go the whole way. We must deliver. We must invest heavily in renewable energy, for the climate and for our security. Thank you.

[18:39:07] Heléne Fritzon (S&D) [EN]
You very much and Madame on behalf of patriots for Europe

[18:39:20] Marie-Luce Brasier-Clain (PfE) [FR]
Thank you, Mr President, Commissioner. This COP will be like the previous ones a failure as long as you follow an ideological agenda that cannot be implemented within the deadlines set by the Paris Agreement without massive deindustrialisation and severe social upheaval: green finance, carbon market, green funds, phasing out fossil fuel subsidies. All of this does not even stem emissions that are still rising. even if Europe were to achieve climate neutrality, the rest of the world is not aligned with this green timetable and is increasing its consumption of fossil fuels. We may deplore this, but it is their freedom to choose their energy mix, especially in the midst of a geopolitical crisis. And this, even though the EU is funding the rest of the world’s climate transition at its own expense while weighing down its own industry, is steering us towards impoverishment and decline under the banner of climate guilt.

[18:40:26] Marie-Luce Brasier-Clain (PfE) [EN]
Thank you very much Madame Salewska on behalf of the ECR group

[18:40:31] Anna Zalewska (ECR) [PL]
Mr President, Mr Commissioner, in order to sit down honestly to negotiate with the whole world, we must honestly answer ourselves a few questions: first, why is the European Union alone? Why does the world not want to participate in the ambitions proposed by the European Union? Why are we losing jobs? Why have we lost competitiveness? competitiveness, and the whole world knows this because it is familiar with our documents, including the Draghi report. Why do we have high energy prices, and why is the whole world not interested in the ETS, which is destroying the European economy? We know that there are various types of solutions, but in reality, they are illusory and only serve to mislead. I mean SIBAM, which we proposed as a remedy for the fact that European investments are flowing out of our Member States. I think what we need to do, what we need to consider above all, is adaptation, because that is what Europeans expect from us. They will not withstand further taxes, which are being proposed, among others, by the European Commission as part of own resources in the next budgetary perspective. Thank you.

[18:41:52] Emma Ytterell (Renew) [EN]
Thank you very much Madame Mad ame Bizner in behalf of Renew this will be the fifth time I'm go ing to the Global Climate Conferences but somehow it feels like this is the first time the presidency has set a clear goal a global electrification target 35% by 20 35 so what are we waiting for now we have the focus we know what the presidency wants so where are the EU leaders where what are we waiting for this is like really a a no-brainer electrification tar get well that's what we need if we're going to lower energy prices in Europe if we're going to decarbonize electrification is what we need and for that we need a target so I would like every European leader in this ho use and in the European Council to be crystal clear in your support we need to help the presidency in mak ing this a success and we also need to do our homework because if we're going to have a global electrification target we need to do the same and support one also in Europe let's do this how hard can it be it's not that difficult let's make this COP a success and let's take historical steps forward thank you I'm done wait ing let's just do it Thank you dear colleague Madame Interel uh my next speaker is Mr. Holmgren On behalf of the group of the Greens Tack.

[18:43:30] Pär Holmgren (Verts/ALE) [SV]
Mr President, Commissioner, ministers, colleagues, the EU really must show true climate leadership now at the climate summit and this summer we have just experienced, with record heat in large parts of Europe, forest fires, drought and so on. That should be a sufficient wake-up call for all of us. At the same time, you have just today — or whether it was yesterday or possibly today, a new report from the UN has just been released showing how global warming is now accelerating and that the Paris Agreement will probably no longer be achievable. So this record-breaking summer we have just experienced will likely become one of the coolest summers for the rest of this century, and this is we need much, much more ambitious climate policy here and now, but I am very pleased that we in Parliament have now agreed on a fairly ambitious resolution text. It is clear that we believe that fossil fuels must be phased out, that climate resilience and adaptation are very closely linked to nature policy and, not least, nature restoration, and thirdly, that climate is also an issue of justice, that we really must focus globally on solidarity. on financing, because it is so important. The resolution is a good step, but we need to move from talk to action in the long run. What determines how good leadership we have is what we do, and to succeed with that, we must ensure that the pile is stopped in its dismantling of climate policy, speed up the transition for real, for example by ensuring that all of Europe's farmers are properly paid for important ecosystem services, and also implement the Nature Restoration Law in all Member States. that is what is required in all the Member States here and now if we are to live up to what we ourselves have written in the resolution and demonstrate real climate leadership at the Antalya summit in a month’s time, thank you very much

[18:45:24] Lynn Boylan (The Left) [EN]
Thank you very much dear colleague on behalf of the left Madame Boylan Guten Morgen uh as we prepare for COP 31 the world is still reeling from months of natural disasters we are processing the new s that we will overshoot our 1.5 degree goal and the illegal US-Israel war against Iran highlights the risks of o ur fossil fuel dependence these diarrhealities mean that world leaders must come to COP 31 ready for ch ange the European Parliament is calling for the EU to lead with a clear consistent position that brings real progr ess to the negotiations climate finance will be a big topic and we want the EU and member states to step up and to contribute more beyond the negotiations we are also calling for the EU to lead from home we want all EU policies to be aligned with the Paris Agreement and robust legislative proposals to achieve the 2040 target we will all do well to remember these calls and the urgent need for stronger climate action in the coming months we can have no roll ing back on what we have achieved to date Thank you very much dear colleague on behalf of the ESN group Madame Arndt

[18:46:40] Anja Arndt (ESN) [DE]
For 30 years, your climate conferences have failed, and yet in November there will be another one to extract billions more from our citizens for nothing. Since 1995, global CO2 emissions have risen by around 64% despite climate conferences and despite billions in spending. Just last year, Germans alone paid €21.4 billion in CO2 taxes and €11 billion for international climate climate financing, and nobody can answer the question of how our climate will develop. Our climate is a highly complex system. The sun, oceans, clouds, water vapour, the Earth's orbit and the tilt of its axis – none of these can be influenced here. Nevertheless, you are telling us that reducing a trace gas will make a difference. The control over global temperatures and the weather that this enables is scientific nonsense. End the climate conferences and the Green Deal. Europe needs the ESN, and Germany needs the AfD.

[18:47:52] 232604 [EN]
Thank you very much Mr. Hostra would you like to take the floor Thank you very much Chair also for your generosity because I'm aware I actually used all the speaking minutes in in the first attempt but then you granted me two hours let so so let me try not to not to waste them um I think actually there there are a couple of qu ick points to be made uh one is to thank and to embrace everyone who has um supported the commission and supported.

[18:48:32] 232604 [EN]
The whole endeavor, which I think is hugely important. Secondly, I do like—and I do very much appreciate—all the comments that have been made in the domain of electrification. And indeed, this is very relevant for Europe as well. I am positive that we're going to come up in the doma in of the 2030 package with an electrification target that actually bridges also the those mostly in favor of renewables and those mostly in favor of nuclear, and basically embrace. And further push the bar in Europe on electrification, which again is the best way out of the climate problem or crisis, the best way out of the competitiveness issue we're having, and the best way in terms of securing more autonomy and independ ence. So we're going to move the needle there, but it is hugely important that we also move the bar internationall y, and that is what we're going to do with this theme. There's one thing I cannot. Leave unaddressed. And that is: I very much disag ree with all those who are skeptical about climate action and who are saying that actually, well, let 's just postpone it because it is too expensive or whatever kind of arguments are coming. But what may be surprises me even more is that if that is your view, then at the very least you have a clear incentive to push the bar upwards internationally, right? Because whatever you do, that makes it easier in the European Union. So that is the one thing I would want to convey to people across the spectrum. There is a huge incentive given that the vast majority of emissions take place outside of the European Union. If you do the calculations, roughly 94%. To increase the bar internationally—by the way, as well as domestically. On that note, thank you very much, Chair.

[18:50:38] 232604 [EN]
Thank you very much, dear Commissioner. We jump now into the second part of the debate. My first speaker is Mr. Kelly.

[18:50:53] Seán Kelly (PPE) [EN]
Module 1 is a privileged fast alert cup took ahead as some group of the parliament August have. Entirety module. Each of the last 10 years ranks among the 10 hottest on record. Europe is the fastest warming continent, and current national pledges still point to well over 2 degrees of warming. Our greatest challenge for COP 31 is effectiveness. We've already established the ambition. Now, how do we turn this into deliverables? First, finance. Europe is the largest public climate financial provider. At 31.7 billion in 2024, we will press others to meet their fair share of the backward goal, and to be transparent about what counts. Second, the fossil fuel transition. This parliament wants a roadmap brought into the formal negotiations and a plan to phase out fossil fuel subsidies. Third, we back the global pledge to reach 1,500 gigawatts of storage by 2030, and we wel come the presidencies' electrification pledge. Fourth, no one gets left behind. That means a just transition mechanism that actually works and support for small islands and least developed countries.

[18:52:23] Seán Kelly (PPE) [EN]
Thank you very much, Mr. Kelly. My friend, Mr. Chaim.

[18:52:28] Mohammed Chahim (S&D) [EN]
Thank you, Chair. Recently, I've been in contact with families in the Netherlands who lost their loved ones in the devastating wildfires in Bidar. One of them wrote to me about losing his father. And he's in contact with families of other victims. They know that they cannot bring their loved ones back, but they are as king us, but they're asking for their stories to be heard publicly. Because they want us to understand that climate change and the growing threat of wildfires is not an abstract issue. For these families, this is deeply personal. They have lost family they love. And they want action to ensure that other families do not have to suffer the same loss. We owe it to these families to listen and to act. And at the same time, we carry responsibilities as parliament, along side Commissioner Hagstra, to send this message while we go to Türkiye. We must go there to deliver real progress on climate action. But Commissioner Hoekstra, at the same moment, this parliament is discussing delaying action to reduce methane emissions. One of the most powerful greenhouse gases. That's why I ask to you directly: will you stand by the promise we made in 2001 and to deliver on our commitment to reduce global methane emissions by 2030, by 30%?

[18:53:40] Mohammed Chahim (S&D) [EN]
Thank you very much, dear colleague. Mr. Haida,.

[18:53:48] Roman Haider (PfE) [DE]
It is, of course, well known how these climate conferences proceed. Various representatives, state organisations and representatives of state-funded organisations travel thousands of kilometres, by aeroplane. The representatives of the state-funded organisations, also known as non-governmental organisations, stage a few colourful demonstrations to justify the multi-billion euro funding, while at the same time a few working groups are set up and sanctimonious speeches are delivered. And of course, the outcome is already predetermined from the very beginning: the Europeans are supposed to pay up handsomely. That is, in fact, the only purpose of this entire event. And on top of that, Europeans are supposed to impose as many and as strict climate targets on themselves as possible. That is the most effective way to keep European companies at bay from global markets. The other states are getting more money, the NGOs more funding, and Ms von der Leyen is paying for everything with our tax money. At least the climate conference has paid off for everyone. Everyone except the citizens, of course, and the EU, because they’re the ones who have to foot the bill for this nonsense.

[18:54:52] Roman Haider (PfE) [IT]
Thank you very much. Mr Piccaro.

[18:54:59] Michele Picaro (ECR) [IT]
Mr President, honourable colleagues, COP31 in Antalya, which I will be attending, will be a decisive moment for turning international climate commitments into concrete actions. Mr President, honourable colleagues, Europe must arrive there with a credible strategy, based on technological neutrality, energy security and industrial competitiveness. In this process, nuclear energy is strategic; it guarantees stable, programmable energy with low emissions. The ECR Group has proposed recognising its role and assessing the economic and technological feasibility of the climate objectives. All of this has been ignored in the text of the resolution, which continues to set ambitious targets without adequately valuing the tools to achieve them. That is why we will vote against it. Meanwhile, at COP31 I will bring this conviction: without the contributions of nuclear power, the energy transition risks being more costly and less effective.

[18:56:08] Michele Picaro (ECR) [IT]
Thank you. Thank you, honourable Member.

[18:56:10] Michele Picaro (ECR) [FR]
And Ms Fries.

[18:56:18] Sigrid Friis (Renew) [EN]
The European leaders will arrive at COP 31 telling the rest of the world that we need to do more to fight climate change. But isn't it a bit ironic? How, here in Europe, we are weakening climate laws. We are going backwards on deals that we spent years fighting for. At the same time, Europe is warming twice as fast at the rest of the world. 30,000 people died in this summer's extreme heat, and extreme weather has already cost the European Union more than €20 0 billion. Euros, of course. And yet some politicians in this parliament seem to think that our climate policies are moving too fast. The right wing keeps telling us to slow down, that we should just wait a little longer. Well, how much longer? And how much more is this going to cost us? Because let me tell you something: climate change is not going to wait until its politically convenient. If we want the rest of the world to take climate action seriously, we need to take it seriously ourselves. Europe cannot lead the world on climate. By walking backwards.

[18:57:25] Sigrid Friis (Renew) [EN]
Thank you very much, dear colleague. Madame Mathieu.

[18:57:30] Sara Matthieu (Verts/ALE) [EN]
Colleagues, when a climate disaster hits, it's always the people that are close by that are risking their lives for each other. When the glacier collapsed in Nepal and killed over 1,400 people, rescuers pulled more than 1 3,000 people out of the mud. And last month in Antalya, where we are actually going for the COP, a farmer died after helping the firefighters. Just like our farmers in Belgium helped during the wildfires in Les Haute-Vignes. So a lot of people are actually trying to help or to combat climate change while big oil really cashes in on all of it . While the war in Iran has pushed prices up at every single pump, the five biggest oil companies made €6,000 every second, and they want to drill more. It's completely absurd. Dear colleagues, we can't go to the COP with empty promises. We cannot let those that did the least to cause climate change pay the highest price. So let's bring our own European plan to the COP, to get off oil, coal, and gas with real dates on it. Our lives are worth more than fossil fuel profits. Thank you.

[18:58:39] Sara Matthieu (Verts/ALE) [FR]
Thank you very much, Ms Mathieu. Jonas Søsted.

[18:58:45] Jonas Sjöstedt (The Left) [SV]
Thank you very much, Mr President. Colleagues, Commissioner Höglund. Ahead of the UN Climate Conference in Antalya, the EU's message must be clear. Emissions must come down. What has been promised must be kept. This also means that the European Union must keep its promises. Promises on financing, but also promises on reduced emissions. But here, the EU has a growing credibility problem. Because what is said in the ceremonial speeches does not quite hold up. At the same time as we talk about reduced emissions, we are negotiating to weaken the EU's Emissions Trading System. One of our most important tools. At the same time, in this House we are discussing whether to continue allowing cars that run on fossil fuels when we had said they would be phased out. That does not hold water. Our self-image is that we are leading the transition. The fact is that we are about to be overtaken. Both in terms of renewable electricity and in terms of electric vehicles. This is bad for the climate, and it is bad for Europe’s competitiveness. Thank you, Mr President.

[18:59:58] Jonas Sjöstedt (The Left) [FR]
Thank you very much, dear colleagues. Mr Kartezer.

[19:00:05] Fernand Kartheiser (NI) [FR]
Climate conferences aim to secure massive transfers of money from the European Union and its Member States to third countries, at a time when we can no longer afford it. Supposedly, to combat climate change. Climatology, moreover, is a divided, politicised and unreliable science. The colossal sums we are spending on projects, often nonsensical but supposedly aimed at protecting the climate, would be better used to tackle the real and urgent scourges of humanity, such as tuberculosis, malaria, or to improve healthcare in the poorest regions. In truth, the world will remain dependent on fossil fuels for a very long time to come. The only credible and reliable alternative currently remains nuclear energy. Should the European Union not prioritise its own economic interests instead of indulging in self-destructive ideological activism? Rather than overreaching, the European Union should align its energy transition with the pace and priorities of its competitors. Thank you very much.

[19:01:12] Fernand Kartheiser (NI) [FR]
Thank you very much. Dimitris Tsiodas.

[19:01:17] Dimitris Tsiodras (PPE) [EL]
Thank you, Mr President. The United Nations conference on climate change in Antalya is indeed an important event. However, this is overshadowed by the fact that the President of the Republic of Cyprus was invited under pressure from the Member States and European bodies, while at the same time Turkey was excluding Cyprus from preparatory meetings related to the conference. These are not isolated incidents. The international endorsement by the Libyan House of Representatives of the illegal Turkish-Libyan memorandum is yet another example of Turkey’s policy of violating international law and the law of the sea, especially when it is preparing to host a United Nations conference. This sham memorandum challenges the sovereign rights of European Union member states, specifically Greece and Cyprus. This policy must have consequences from Europe. These borders and rights of the Member States must be considered European, and illegal actions against one must be treated as actions against all. The European Union must act swiftly and decisively, utilising all available diplomatic, political and economic tools to defend the territorial integrity and sovereignty of its Member States. This means a truly united Europe. Thank you.

[19:02:39] Dimitris Tsiodras (PPE) [FR]
Thank you very much. Next speaker, Vice-President Ravi Lopez.

[19:02:46] Dimitris Tsiodras (PPE) [ES]
Thank you very much, Mr President.

[19:02:47] Javi López (S&D) [ES]
Thank you very much, Commissioner Högström. The climate crisis is no longer a future threat. It is a tragedy of the present. Thousands of dead Europeans in heatwaves. Hospitals overwhelmed. Devastating fires. Devastating megafires every summer. And now, in the Mediterranean, floods causing deaths, week after week. While the planet is burning and literally on the brink of hell, some here, in this Parliament, continue to demand dismantling climate action, the climate policy that is the only thing that can save us. The climate denialism no longer serves merely to deny the science, but knowing it, to deliberately reject action. When the United Nations has just told us that current policies will put the planet on track for a 2.8 degree increase, with catastrophic consequences. COP31 in Turkey must stop being a summit of small promises and grandiloquent speeches. And Europe must act with leadership. How? How? With a clear roadmap to phase out fossil fuels and real funding for adaptation for the most vulnerable countries. Because the climate emergency is not waiting, and history will not judge us for our empty promises. Only for the courage we have to act.

[19:04:13] Javi López (S&D) [FR]
Thank you very much, Mr Vice-President. Ms Boras Paboni.

[19:04:22] Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE) [ES]
Yes, thank you, Mr President. Commissioner. Yes, thank you, Mr President. Commissioner. Time and time again, the climate elite land in their private jets to tell the farmer that the big environmental problem is his tractor. This time, in the midst of an energy crisis and with diesel costing over two euros per litre, their priority is to eliminate fossil fuels, which in the real world translates to more expensive diesel, more expensive heating, industries leaving, and farmers finding they have to pay more for everything. Mr Commissioner, I have a question. Who do you think COP really serves? It is clear that it does not serve Europeans. So many billions of euros wasted on hypocrisy, and all these hypocrites. as for the climate hypocrites we have had to listen to today, I will tell you that Europe emits 6% of all global emissions. And China almost 30%. But your plan here is to punish European industry while increasing Chinese imports. In other words, the climate fight that you proclaim here will be paid for by Europeans, but the profits will go to the Chinese. This is about decarbonising or deindustrialising Europe. We are suffocating our farmers, yet we do not care. Encouraging deforestation through Mercosur imports. Nor do we care about uprooting more than 50,000 olive trees in Jaén to install photovoltaic panels. Ladies and gentlemen, water, grazing, firebreaks and affordable energy. That is true environmentalism.

[19:05:46] Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE) [FR]
Ms Paboni, yes, you have a speaking time, Mr Oliveira. Are you okay?

[19:05:52] Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE) [EN]
Yes.

[19:05:53] Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE) [FR]
Mr President,

[19:06:08] João Oliveira (The Left) [PT]
thank you, Mr President. Honourable Member Ms Borras Pabon, you are making a critical reference here to the costs of energy, particularly for families and small producers. I ask a very simple question. Is there a way to resolve this problem, namely through public control of the set or strategic control and with price control by the States so that prices are not set by the multinationals in the energy sector, as you well understand. The question I put to you is: do you agree with this public control of the energy sector, or is the concern of the far right about energy prices merely for show?

[19:06:52] Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE) [ES]
The problem with energy in Europe, of course, is not with private companies. The problem with energy in Europe lies in the ideologisation, in the ideology that you are imposing, in your energy policies. Poisoning absolutely everything with your climate ideology. If you impose a CO2 tax that increases the costs for industries, obviously energy is going to become much more expensive. That is not what private companies do; that is what you are doing here with your European Green Deal. They increase production costs, they increase the price of diesel, they increase the costs for our farmers and livestock farmers, and they make it impossible and difficult for them to carry out their activities.

[19:07:30] Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE) [FR]
Thank you for your response, Mr Oliveira.

[19:07:33] Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE) [FR]
Ms Boras Paboni, yes, you

[19:07:35] Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE) [EN]
can stay here.

[19:07:36] Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE) [FR]
Mr Oliveira.

[19:07:41] João Oliveira (The Left) [PT]
Here she is, Ms Boras Pabon. After all, the far right wants to speak out against energy prices, but it does not want to confront the interests of the multinational energy companies. Because, after all, they never want to bite the hand that feeds them. That is precisely the problem. It is that the far right is not an alternative to anything. Everything that is necessary to defend the interests of the people, you always shrink back whenever that implies confronting economic interests, because at the end of the day, the far right represents exactly the same economic interests that crush the lives of the people. And that is the contradiction that cannot be resolved. Ms Boras Pabon, it is not possible to defend the interests of the people and their right to access energy at fair prices while, at the same time, siding with the multinationals. And you are entangled in that contradiction.

[19:08:27] João Oliveira (The Left) [FR]
You may respond.

[19:08:30] Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE) [ES]
It is not at all surprising that the left always does the same thing, which is to blame others for its own responsibility. Here, the only ones responsible, the only ones to blame, are you. It is the left, the climate hypochondriacs, who are dedicated to intervening in the market, to implementing policies that increase costs, as I have said, energy costs, production costs, which hinder the work of those who truly take care of the countryside and the fields, like are our farmers and livestock farmers. I am not the one saying this; you go out into the street and everyone knows that with your European Green Deal, all you are doing is destroying biodiversity, attacking those who care for the countryside and driving up energy costs. Not the big companies.

[19:09:10] Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE) [FR]
Sir, your response, the exchange is closed, we are continuing the discussion. Mireille Bloss.

[19:09:25] Michael Bloss (Verts/ALE) [EN]
Thank you very much. Colleagues, President, Commissioner, today the United Nations tells us that the world is going to a temper ature rise of 2.8 degrees. What does it mean? It means that about one-third of the populated territory of this planet will face extensive heat bul bs. Temperatures above 35 degrees with humidity above 90 percent. And this is a situation where your body simply collapses. Because it cannot cool itself anymore. And if you stay outside, you will die. 2.8 degrees means 1.5 billion people will live in such territories. Either they have to move or they have to cool down, but many can't. Colleagues, you might think that climate change is not important anymore. You're wrong. The climate crisis will be the defining challenge of your life, of the life of your children, and the life of your grand children. But we know how to fix it. We have to stop burning oil, coal, and gas. And Mr. Commissioner, I know this is a lot of responsibility, but you have to deliver. Deliver at the climate conference and deliver for us Europeans a plan to free ourselves from fossil dependency. Thank you very much.

[19:10:46] Michael Bloss (Verts/ALE) [FR]
Thank you very much. Mr Georgiou.

[19:10:58] Giorgos Georgiou (The Left) [EL]
Mr Commissioner, the climate crisis is here. Mr Commissioner, the climate crisis is here. Wildfires, heatwaves, drought, devastating floods, a continuous state of emergency. Of course, the cost is being paid by the European peoples. Mr Commissioner, the climate crisis is here. Wildfires, heatwaves, drought, devastating floods, a continuous state of emergency. Of course, the cost is being paid by the European peoples. Whatever left to be done by the new COP31 climate conference is self-evident: actions, not new promises. That is what we have burned and drowned in. The fight against the climate crisis is, of course, not only an environmental one. It is a battle for social justice, equality, and not exclusions, but unfortunately Turkey attempted to obstruct the participation of the Republic of Cyprus and to instrumentalise the conference with the aim of politically promoting the illegal secessionist entity in the occupied territories. It also acknowledges, of course, the illegal Turkey-Libya memorandum. And I must say this—let me say it—Pontius Pilates with Turkey, perhaps even for the climate.

[19:12:07] Giorgos Georgiou (The Left) [FR]
Thank you very much, dear colleagues. Manuel Aripa.

[19:12:15] Manuela Ripa (PPE) [DE]
Today we are talking about climate protection, about COP31, but we should also be discussing COP17 on biodiversity with the same intensity. we are also speaking today about climate protection, about COP31, but we should also be discussing just as intensively the COP17 on biodiversity, which is currently taking place in Armenia and which I will be attending next week with a delegation from the European Parliament. Because climate protection and nature conservation are inextricably linked, and both conferences face the same challenges, such as phasing out environmentally harmful subsidies, securing financing, and finally implementing decisions consistently. Let us now turn to COP31. In this debate, the circular economy is being given too little attention. The reduction of primary raw material consumption and the increase in resource efficiency must be systematically taken into account in the national climate plans and made verifiable through measurable targets. To this end, we must in particular promote durable, repairable and reusable products and advance the market for high-quality secondary raw materials from recycling processes. This also needs to be given greater international attention. Because this way, we also reduce emissions, cut back on raw material dependencies and strengthen resilience. We need to think more closely together about climate protection, nature conservation and the circular economy.

[19:13:27] Manuela Ripa (PPE) [FR]
Thank you very much. Mr Maren.

[19:13:39] Pierfrancesco Maran (S&D) [EN]
Dear colleagues, we live in a world where multilateral cooperation is increasingly giving way to the rule of the strongest. But climate change knows no border. We can adopt ambitious legislation at European level, but without clear and coordinated international action, our efforts will have a limited global impact. COP31 is an opportunity to relaunch this global effort, and Europe must take responsibility and lead by examp le. We must turn commitments into concrete action. Push the major emitters to raise their ambition and ensure climate finance supports those most affected by the crisis. Our goal must remain clear: climate neutrality and a just transition away from fossil fuels. Colleagues, at a time when international cooperation is under pressure, we cannot afford to step back on climate action. Europe must show that multilateralism can still deliver for our planet. Thank you.

[19:14:41] Pierfrancesco Maran (S&D) [FR]
Thank you very much, dear colleagues. Annalisa Corrado.

[19:14:48] Annalisa Corrado (S&D) [IT]
Thank you, Mr President. Many people think that the UN's effort against the climate crisis is an exercise for environmentalists and for Thank you, President. Many people think that the UN’s efforts against the climate crisis are an exercise for environmentalists and for those involved. Far removed from real problems. And yet, even if I were not an environmentalist, I would work to abandon fossil fuels, because they cause unsustainable bills and skyrocketing costs for everything. Meanwhile, very few people are getting richer and richer. If I were not an environmentalist, I would fight to revolutionise mobility, transport, production and distribution, because the plight of those who live off their own work cannot be resolved with a few tweaks to a deeply unjust and unstable model. If I were not an ecologist, I would consider it unacceptable that this summer's heat has cost Europe €180 billion. If I were not an environmentalist, I would recognise that the path to salvation is precisely the one indicated by the UN for the next COP: to exit our dependence on gas and oil and accelerate the electrification of technologies and services. You do not need to be an environmentalist to understand this; you just need to be on the side of the many against the few. On the side of those who pay too much without having any fault, of the young people whose hope someone wants to take away, on the right side of history. Thank you.

[19:16:06] Annalisa Corrado (S&D) [FR]
Thank you very much, dear colleagues. Gunther Seeden.

[19:16:13] Günther Sidl (S&D) [DE]
Dear Mr President, esteemed Commissioner. Climate protection and the abandonment of fossil fuels are no longer options for Europe. They are the only way out. We live on the continent that is heating up the fastest. We are experiencing more heatwaves, more droughts and an increase in extreme weather events every year. At the same time, in this uncertain geopolitical situation, we are powerless against price fluctuations, for example in oil or gas. It is therefore high time that we draw the right lessons from these developments and finally once again set a clear example by leading the way. Only if we show the world that climate protection also brings economic advantages, such as boosting our own innovative strength, will things finally start to move in this direction. COP31 is the next opportunity to find allies on this path, and the European Union must also seize this opportunity. Thank you very much.

[19:17:08] Günther Sidl (S&D) [FR]
Thank you very much. We now move on to the expressions under the 4JI procedure. To begin, Costas Mavridis.

[19:17:30] Speaker 5 [EN]
Oh, now it is.

[19:17:32] Costas Mavrides (S&D) [EL]
I would like to congratulate my colleagues on this very important text. After all, climate change is a fact and not an ideology. And especially in Europe, and particularly in the Mediterranean, climate change is even more intense. However, such global problems require global approaches and interstate cooperation. Among the many important aspects of this report, I would like to highlight one: the proposal for specific, measurable targets to bridge the gap between objectives and their practical implementation. However, unfortunately, and I am addressing both the Council and the Commissioner, unfortunately once again the the Turkish regime in Ankara attempted to instrumentalise this international conference once again to the detriment of the Republic of Cyprus, attempting to exclude the participation of the President of Cyprus. I urge both of you to defend until the end the Member State of the European Union and the United Nations.

[19:18:43] Costas Mavrides (S&D) [FR]
Thank you very much, Viktoria Ferenc.

[19:18:50] Viktória Ferenc (PfE) [HU]
Mr President, Commissioner. Mr President, Commissioner, it is beyond doubt, especially after last summer, that climate change has severe consequences in Europe. We must state that adequate adaptation is inevitable. However, we must also face the fact that the Green Deal and the measures based on it have not led to success. Even though the continent is responsible for only 6% of global emissions, the major international polluters are not following the Union’s example. And there is nothing surprising in that, because what do they see here in Europe? declining competitiveness, artificially inflated energy prices, rising household heating and fuel prices, climate taxes such as the ETS2. No wonder that with such climate policy we find few international followers. Instead, we stand on the side of responsible, balanced climate policy based on adaptation. Thank you.

[19:19:48] Viktória Ferenc (PfE) [FR]
Thank you very much. Sébastien Thinkinen.

[19:19:58] Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR) [FI]
Mr President, the EU has gone to war against climate change with a bazooka. a. In the previous year, the EU and its Member States mobilised nearly €32 billion in public funds for international climate finance. But this is not enough for the European Parliament. Now we need new and greater climate funding, which should be provided in addition to official development assistance. It seems that European politicians never run out of money, but Europeans do. We are currently dealing with over 30 pages of demands and positions from the European Parliament regarding climate. Tell me, how is it possible that China has not been mentioned even once? You do not mention a country that is responsible for around a third of all the world’s carbon dioxide emissions. Let's put an end to this scattering of money around the world. Let's take real climate action and bring industry back from China to a cleaner Europe. Thank you.

[19:21:05] Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR) [FR]
Thank you. João Oliveira.

[19:21:10] João Oliveira (The Left) [PT]
Thank you, Mr President. Commissioner Oxtra, one of the objectives under discussion at COP31 is to increase the share of electricity in final energy consumption worldwide to 35% by 2035. This objective requires an energy policy that enables each State to make the most of its capacities and resources in energy production, distribution and supply, in the most balanced and tailored way to its social and economic needs. But this objective is not compatible with the policies of liberalisation and privatisation of the energy sector, including the resources necessary for energy production. Subjugating energy policy to the criteria of liberalisation means subordinating the satisfaction of energy needs to the logic of profit. Handing over resources and production capacities to multinational energy companies means leaving those rec these companies expose the territory and the populations to the circumstances in which those multinational corporations decide to exploit those resources to generate profit as quickly as possible. The installation of large-scale photovoltaic plants or the privatisation of dams or the handing over of lithium reserves are examples that contradict the objectives set out at COP31, and we hope that this contradiction will be overcome by rejecting neoliberal policies.

[19:22:29] João Oliveira (The Left) [FR]
Thank you very much, dear colleague. Maria Zakaria.

[19:22:34] Maria Zacharia (NI) [EL]
Ladies and gentlemen, colleagues, for years we were told that environmental protection hinders development. Now, wildfires, floods, and drought are the new reality. The climate did not go mad on its own. The draft resolution for COP31 recognises a role for nuclear energy, carbon capture and storage, and constantly speaks of competitiveness. However, COP31 demands real emission reductions, protection of societies, climate financing, and a just transition. There is no room for complacency. In Brno, residents are opposing offshore carbon dioxide storage. We brought this case to the Petitions Committee. We also support the fight against nuclear energy and combustion. For us, the critical questions are: who is responsible? Who pays? And who will be held to account? Will the big polluters bear the cost? They must, not the people. Before it is too late for the planet. Thank you.

[19:23:39] Maria Zacharia (NI) [FR]
Thank you very much. Juan Fernando López Aguilar.

[19:23:44] Maria Zacharia (NI) [FR]
Thank you, President Tomasi.

[19:23:46] Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D) [ES]
In this debate, we are adding all those that we have had throughout this plenary session, because the European budget and the financial framework the multiannual financial framework is crucial for ensuring both the resources and the political will for the European Union to have a respected voice at the Climate Conference in Turkey, COP31. Because it is not ideology that we are facing a global warming that borders on the unbearable. Particularly in the European continent, where there are deaths and lives lost to climate change and movements of people across the planet seeking climate refuge, lacking a seat at the table. Of protection in international law. Therefore, the response cannot simply be one omnibus after another lowering our standards, but rather maintaining exactly that response in the face of scorching summers that seem endless and, for the rest of the year, DANA storms and instability that are equally catastrophic. The European Union must rise to the occasion at the Conference with sufficient resources and political will. Thank you, President.

[19:24:49] Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D) [FR]
Thank you very much, Juan Fernando. We are coming to the end of this discussion and I will now give the floor to the Commissioner. Ah, to the Council first. Give the floor to the Council. Timi Giuli.

[19:25:09] 275109 [EN]
Thank you very much. I thought I was getting off the hook there, President, but Honorable Members, Commissioner and President, just to thank all those who contributed to this debate and I look forward to your continued engagement, particularly when we attend C OP. As you know, COP31 convenes at a really critical geopolitical juncture marked by mounting pressure on multilateral cooperation and renewed skepticism surrounding established climate science. Although global climate action has been insufficient it is important to stress that the Paris Agreement has made a very significant difference through the impl ementation of nationally determined mitigation pledges. The Paris Agreement has successfully altered the global emission trajectory. Lowering projected end-of-century warming from approximately three and a half degrees to a range between 2. 3 and 2.5. That's very significant. Decisive climate action to limit the 1. 5°C overshoot to the greatest extent possible is more urgent than ever. And it must be coupled with societal industrial and technological transition. We will continue our international engagement with allies and other partners towards the meaningful outcome of COP31. I just want to respond to one particular issue that was raised by a number of contributors, and that was in relation to Turkey. It is mandate of COP31, the Council conclusions. The Council has underlined the importance of participation of all member states at COP31. It is also reaffirmed the principle of solidarity among member states in this regard. Turkey has sent invitations to the leaders' summit at COP31 to all member states, including Cyprus. Thanks very much.

[19:26:46] Speaker 2 [FR]
Thank you very much, Mr Minister. I had not forgotten you, but I joined the debate midway and the Commissioner was able to intervene at the start of the discussion. The debate is closed. I have received a draft resolution to close this debate. And the vote will take place tomorrow. The agenda now calls for the Commission's statement on deepening the EU-Canada alliance, preparation for the EU-Canada summit. Let us give Commissioner Sykela time to take his seat and we will begin our discussion immediately.

[19:27:42] Younous Omarjee (The Left) [FR]
Mr Commissioner, it is your turn.

[19:27:47] Younous Omarjee (The Left) [FR]
Thank you very much.

[19:27:50] 234603 [EN]
Good evening, Honorable President, Honorable Members. I have the honor to address you today on our relationship with Canada. One of our most trusted and closest partners. With Canada, we share similar values: the same commitment to open, pl uralistic societies, and the similar vision for the global rules-based multilateral order. In these changing times, we also face similar challenges. The exchange today is timely. We are one week away from the 21 st EU-Canada Summit, which takes place in Montreal next Thursday and Friday. From 29th to 30th October, you all witnessed the state of the Union's speech and Prime Minister Carney's intervention at the September plenary. So you will know that the ambition for the summit is high. Negotiations ahead of the summit are still ongoing, I do not want to preempt those disc ussions and cannot at this stage prejudge the outcomes. When it comes to summits, nothing is done until it's done. And one week is still a long time. What I can share with you today is the general thinking behind the str engthening of the EU-Canada ties and to give you a sense of the direction of travel in the relationship. The ambition does not come out of the blue. We built on a solid foundation namely the strategic partnership agreement and CETA, Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement. Canada is a unique strategic partner and a close friend. It is a G7 member and NATO ally to many member states and a like-minded partner in defending and promoting multilateralism. Canada has always stood by us and it is an unwavering supporter of Ukraine rel iable provider reliably providing financial military and material support since 2 022 and taking the lead on issues such as the return of Ukrainian children. Over the past year we have further deepened our ties. It's not enough to be like-minded in a world of power politics and the weaponization of everything we both need to adapt and bol ster our resilience and we turn to each other as partners of choice. The June 25 summit adopted an ambitious agenda of commitments ac

[19:31:24] 234603 [EN]
ross a range of areas and marked the signature of the Security and Defense Part nership. And we have both worked actively on the implementation of these commitments and we are delivering for o ur citizens on both shores. One example has been the signing of Canada 's SAFE agreement earlier this year with one contract already signed under this framework. The 2026 summit will mark an even greater step change in our relationship. As President von der Leyen stated in her SOTEO speech, we want to bring the relationship with Canada to the highest level possible. She explained that our intention is to move from SETA to an alliance for the future to create a common prosperity and economic security space. This could include first further supply chain integration in strategic sectors through joint investments and deeper regulatory cooperation. Second, creating a trusted digital and technology space involving joint research and inv estments what President von der Leyen called a tech alliance and third co ordinating our respective economic security policies to ensure o ur shared supply chains are consistently protected. Beyond the alliance for the future, we should also consider whether we want to offer Canada a basic a basis for stronger political and institutional collaboration. This would build on the type of regular invitations that Canada has already received to particip ate in recent summits of the European political community and informal co uncil meetings. And it would allow us to identify shared priorities and jointly respond to common challenges. This is what President von der Leyen had in mind when she said that we are opening the door to Canada to becoming the first associate member of the EU. In the coming year, leading up to the next EU-Canada summit, we look forward to working with y ou as well as our member states and Canada. On defining the full scope of what such an associate membership could look like. I am sure I will find a positive echo in this chamber for closer ties with Canada.

[19:34:39] 234603 [EN]
As some in this chamber always remind us, very aptly, Canada is the most European of non-European countries. I expect the pass ahead to become clearer as a result of the summit. Of course, we won't fail to inform the European Parliament of the outcome. Thank you very much.

[19:35:05] 234603 [FR]
Thank you very much, Commissioner Sékela. As you know, the Bureau of the European Parliament has decided to open an office in Canada, Mr Warborn.

[19:35:21] Jörgen Warborn (PPE) [EN]
Thank you, President, for giving me the floor. And colleagues, you saw how this podium was elevated. I think that that is what we are going to try to do with the relationship with Canada. Let's elevate the relationship. EPP is committed to upgrade the EU-Canada relations and we will work to fill this al liance for the future with meaningful content that delivers concrete economic and geopolitical benefits for both parties. Associated membership was the label mentioned. But I think that much more important than any label is that this alliance can mark a starting point of an ambitious process of approximation across all economic dimensions including deeper integration in go ods and services regulatory harmonizations in strategic sectors and enhanced cooperation on critical capabilities. Building on SETA, our trade agreement, we should work towards a more even more integrated econom ic area by reducing barriers to trade in goods with mutual recognitions of standards con formity assessments and certifications. A transatlantic service market would be the natural step to upgrade SETA with frictionless cross-Atlantic provisions of services. And we should work towards a rapid conclusion of an ambitious digital trade agreement. We should also ensure open procurement markets. And we should leverage our complementarias notably in the critical raw materials using the EU demand to boost Canada Canadian supply. That will power our diversification efforts and enable the much needed de-risking from China. So to conclude, let's now be pragmatic, flexible, and open to try new ways forward with less focus on labels and more focus on content. Thank you.

[19:37:37] Jörgen Warborn (PPE) [FR]
Thank you very much. Ms von der Leyen.

[19:37:43] Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D) [EN]
Thank you very much, President, Commissioner, colleagues. In a world filled with trumps Europe needs sta ble and reliable partners. And partners that share our values and that share our ambition for the future. And Canada is such a partner. It makes sense to deepen that partnership. And that partnership recently has been giving a lot of fancy names. You mentioned it, an associated membership, an alliance for the future. It all sounds very promising. But it must be more than just a promise. The upcoming summit must deliver on real results. Building on the clear expectations set out by Prime Minister Carney here at this stage. With closer comparison on energy, security, defense, trade, critical minerals but also on students for instance. And not only working closing together because that might be the more easy part. What we need to do is responding together to the threats that we face. This alliance should help defend multilateralism. And the rules-based international order. And lay the groundwork for a broader alliance with other middle powers to use the name of Mark Carney and of the coercion by people like Trump and Xi. That also requires for Europe to be a reliable partner. Yet that member state still have to ratify SETA and that is unacceptable. Everybody needs to take their responsibility. Europe and Canada stronger together let's act on it .

[19:39:23] Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D) [FR]
Thank you very much, Ms Ferré.

[19:39:31] Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D) [FR]
Is that sufficient for you?

[19:39:33] Speaker 3 [FR]
Yes, exactly.

[19:39:34] Speaker 4 [FR]
Thank you.

[19:39:35] Angéline Furet (PfE) [FR]
Mr Commissioner. Mr Commissioner,

On the eve of the Montreal summit, the Commission wants to make Canada the first associate member of the European Union. Behind this fine-sounding phrase lurks the spectre of CETA, that infamous free trade agreement which is ruining our agriculture. The French Senate rejected it to protect our livestock farmers, and yet you are implementing it. With force. But this associate member status goes even further. You want to grant Canadian industry access to the SAFE Fund, a fund of 150 billion euros intended to reindustrialise Europe and ensure our military sovereignty. Buying North American armaments exposes us to the blackmail of kill switches. It is remote deactivation that makes us totally dependent. It is financing our own vassalisation. What hypocrisy. Finally, on raw materials. With your punitive environmental policy, you are shutting down our factories. Then you cross the Atlantic, begging for Canadian lithium and cobalt. Stop orchestrating our ruin. Protect our industry and respect our parliaments.

[19:40:44] Angéline Furet (PfE) [FR]
Thank you. Mr Kols.

[19:40:51] Rihards Kols (ECR) [EN]
Dear colleagues, Brussels has been busy debating what associated membership for Canada means. Europe does not need 28th quasi-member state. Europe needs hard industrial depth to break our dependencies on Beijing and Moscow. Canada holds 34 critical raw materials that European industry desperately lacks. Yet our mineral imports from Canada stand at just 3. 3 billion euros. The delivery gap is real. We gave Canada 80% content ceiling inside our SAFE instrument, six months later that has produced just one contract, tactical radios for Poland. On energy, the draft text for Montréal offers only another feasibility study on Canadian LNG. And nine member states still have not ratified SETA after nine years. Shame. Montréal summit must make Europe stronger, democracies are global minority. And deeper cooperation is simple math. We do not need new institutional labels for Canada we need to deliver on the agre ements that we already have signed. Thank you.

[19:41:59] Rihards Kols (ECR) [FR]
Thank you very much. I do not see Mr Barna. Mr Ninisto.

[19:42:09] Ville Niinistö (Verts/ALE) [EN]
Mr. President, Europe and Canada should build an ambitious alliance for the future. We can together defend democracy resist coercion and uphold international law consistently while also building bridges with the Global South. The Montréal summit must deliver a strong security cooperation s ustained support for Ukraine and protection of critical infrastructure. We can do more to support Ukraine together with Canada. We also need fair trade clean industry and resilient mineral supply chains with strong workers rights and recycling at their heart. Here we can also increase cooperation. Coming from Finland, I want also to emphasize Arctic cooperation in this day when the Arctic strategy has come out. We have to together support the indigenous-led conservation and respect indigenous rights also when it comes to biodiversity and the sensitive nature in Interarctic while also taking into account the increased geopolitical threats and address them. With Canada together we can build a wider coalition of democracies and also with countries both from the Global South that support the rules-based international order.

[19:43:17] Ville Niinistö (Verts/ALE) [FR]
Thank you very much, dear colleagues, next speaker. Marina Mesure.

[19:43:24] Marina Mesure (The Left) [FR]
Thank you very much, Mr President. Fifty years ago, the European Union and Canada sealed their first comprehensive cooperation agreement, inaugurating with it a rare and lasting relationship. Today, in the face of the imperialist threats from the Trump administration, this compass of our history takes on its full meaning. It can create a credible diplomatic and international alternative to bloc-based logic. To this end, our cooperation with Canada should not be reduced to unbridled free trade without respect for environmental and health standards. Nor should it lead us to take part in defence initiatives that increase our dependence on NATO and the United States. On the contrary, we could draw inspiration from models of cooperation such as France and Quebec, based on scientific and cultural influence. In this regard, I wish to recall that the provinces have a role to play in this partnership. In conclusion, these discussions provide an opportunity to give new impetus to our relations with Canada. Building an ambitious partnership that protects our farmers and our consumers. That deepens our university, scientific and diplomatic ties and that asserts, in the face of the imperialist ambitions of the United States, our commitment to non-alignment and the sovereignty of peoples. Thank you.

[19:44:34] Marina Mesure (The Left) [FR]
Thank you very much, Ms Mesure. Ms Anderson.

[19:44:41] Marina Mesure (The Left) [DE]
Thank you. Ursula von der Leyen

[19:44:43] Christine Anderson (ESN) [EN]
wants to lure Canada into an associate membership of EU. What does that even mean? Since SETA is already in place, it couldn't be about trade relations. What then? Apparently, Ursula von der Leyen is no longer content with merely terrorizing the people's in the EU with her insane regulations, bureaucracy, and cronyism. No, she is yet looking for yet another people whose industry she can wipe out, whose prosperity she can destroy, whose speech she can censor, and whose countries she can flood with even more illegal migrants. Thus, turning Canada into a living hell. The question is, is Mark Carney stupid enough to fall for it, or will he do right by the Canadian people and tell Ursula von der Leyen to bugger off? If he won't, then the Canadian people will have to fix it. And maybe a new freedom convoy would then be in order. Thank you.

[19:45:46] Christine Anderson (ESN) [FR]
Thank you. Mr Junkski.

[19:45:52] Dariusz Joński (PPE) [PL]
Thank you, Mr President. Commissioner, today the whole world is watching Europe. They are looking at us. Seeking stability, security, and the defence of European values. That is precisely why the European Union is a symbol of this free world. And that is good news. Especially today, when Donald Trump is holding talks with the criminal Putin, and the logic political deals are starting to prevail over the principles that for decades – precisely for decades – have built the world order and stability. Yet we cannot stop there. The world expects responsibility from us, from Europe. We must prove that we are able to rise to this challenge. That is why we need strong, reliable allies, and Canada is one of them. Together, we can build an international order based not on domination, not on blackmail, but on the rule of law, cooperation and mutual trust. And the speech delivered here, in this hall, by the Prime Minister of Canada in this chamber, has shown that both sides understand the significance of this moment. Our partnership is more than just trade relations. It is a shared responsibility for the future of democracy. Canada is a huge asset, with critical mineral resources, a space industry, highly developed artificial intelligence, and access to the Atlantic, Pacific and Arctic Oceans. 81% of Canadians support closer ties with the European Union. And I want to say it outright: by deepening the alliance between the European Union and Canada, we are strengthening not only ourselves, we are strengthening the entire free world. And it is precisely this kind of Europe that everyone needs today. Thank you.

[19:47:32] Younous Omarjee (The Left) [FR]
Thank you. Before giving the floor to Mr Moreno, I wish to say that the Prime Minister of Canada is a head of government whom we must respect here in our assembly. And while some statements can be criticised, some statements are not acceptable. Mr Moreno.

[19:47:55] Younous Omarjee (The Left) [FR]
Thank you, Mr President. Commissioner.

[19:47:57] Javier Moreno Sánchez (S&D) [ES]
Honourable Members, following President von der Leyen's announcement in the plenary on the Associate State Status of Canada, a legal debate has opened up. Three brief considerations on this matter. Yes, Commissioner, I have been saying for years that Canada is the most European country outside Europe. We share history, culture and languages, as well as values, principles and a worldview that respects international legality. Honourable Members, we are mentally associated. Two: it is true that the concept of an Associated State is not in the treaties, but neither was the euro, nor Schengen, nor health competences during COVID. But where there is political will, it is possible. More important than the legal debate is that Canada be a de facto Associate State. De facto. And we are not starting from scratch. We already have a strategic partnership agreement and the CETA. At the next summit we need to take concrete steps to continue strengthening this partnership. We hope that at the summit the digital agreement will be concluded that facilitates and protects relations between our citizens and companies. That progress be made on labour mobility by expanding the agreement for architects to other professions. That Canada's participation in Erasmus Plus be finalised. That cooperation on energy be strengthened, as well as cooperation on critical minerals. And finally, for this partnership to work, it is essential to involve citizens. That is why we must strengthen and institutionalise dialogue between civil societies on both sides of the Atlantic. Thank you.

[19:49:29] Javier Moreno Sánchez (S&D) [FR]
Mr Moreno. Yes, you have two blue cards, two requests. First, from the EPP, Ms Sofia Kircher. Ms Kircher,

[19:49:44] Sophia Kircher (PPE) [DE]
Thank you very much, Mr President, and thank you also for accepting the blue card. The translation is working. You have just said that it is important to involve the population in this process. And here is my very specific question: How can this best be achieved?

[19:50:09] Sophia Kircher (PPE) [FR]
You do not have the translation.

[19:50:15] Sophia Kircher (PPE) [EN]
Sorry.

[19:50:16] Sophia Kircher (PPE) [EN]
No worries. I mean, I can also do it in English.

[19:50:20] Sophia Kircher (PPE) [FR]
One moment.

[19:50:24] Sophia Kircher (PPE) [DE]
You have spoken about how important it is to bring the population along. When it comes to better cooperation with Canada. And here is my very concrete question: In your view, how can the population be involved on this path in order to also guarantee a good partnership for the future?

[19:50:45] Javier Moreno Sánchez (S&D) [ES]
Yes. Thank you for your question. Yes. There are already what they call the DACs, which are the Domestic Agreements, which allow and meet every year to hold a forum in which trade unions, NGOs, all levels of civil society participate. And then they present them; for example, they presented their conclusions at the International Trade Committee a few months ago. What I would like is for this to be reinforced, even institutionalised, and for it to happen much more often. That these forums should be the ones to bring the proposals to the decision-making bodies. Thank you very much for the question.

[19:51:24] Javier Moreno Sánchez (S&D) [FR]
Mr Moreno, you have a second request from Mr Steer, from the EPP Group. Mr Steer.

[19:51:31] Javier Moreno Sánchez (S&D) [ES]
Thank you, President. We will skip the translation and ask the question in Spanish. One. The key thing that you said in your speech is political will. Even if something is not in the treaties, there is political will. The way and the means are found. But do you not think that, even before this summit, it would be good to send a political signal by ratifying in those Member States that have not yet ratified CETA and by considering how to expedite that process? Yes, I thank you for the question. I should tell you that when I go to Canada as President of the delegation of this House, for relations with Canada, it is difficult for me to answer that question. Why are there nine Member States that have still not ratified it? Because it is an agreement that is benefiting both parties, but much more so the European side. I am a pragmatic person. What we can do at the level of this House is what I call parliamentary diplomacy. It is about trying to talk to our counterparts in the national parliaments, explaining that this treaty works, in the hope that it will be ratified. But it is true that this is an outstanding issue and I always say: just a moment, I always say that the relationship between two partners has to be based on trust and respect. And I believe we must demonstrate that respect and that trust. Thank you very much.

[19:52:51] Javier Moreno Sánchez (S&D) [FR]
Thank you very much. We will now continue the discussion. Ms Recio Noba.

[19:53:01] Veronika Vrecionová (ECR) [CS]
Thank you. Honourable Mr President, Commissioner, the world is becoming ever more dangerous. Authoritarian regimes are gaining strength and Europe cannot afford to lose any part of itself. Canada is our natural ally. And deepening cooperation with it is a strategic necessity. But Europe has one unpleasant weakness. We can talk about cooperation for a long time, but taking real steps is much more difficult for us. We do not need any more declarations. Summits full of lofty words or new bureaucratic structures. We need concrete actions. Remove trade barriers, strengthen security in the Arctic and open up new opportunities for our companies, students and workers. The upcoming EU-Canada summit must not just result in a joint photograph. And another list of promises. Let's stop just talking about Canada's associated membership. Let's give it concrete content. Thank you.

[19:54:03] Veronika Vrecionová (ECR) [FR]
Thank you very much. Ms Ion Courtin.

[19:54:08] Stéphanie Yon-Courtin (Renew) [FR]
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr President. Commissioner, dear colleagues, a cousin, a partner, an ally. For us, Canada is all of that at once. And so much more. Where I come from, in Normandy, no one has forgotten D-Day. And I say this as a former mayor of a town liberated by Canadian soldiers. Today, our shared history takes a new turn. Faced with the upheavals in the world, with the pressures from Donald Trump, the EU-Canada relationship must hold firm and be strengthened. The CETA agreement has shown the way. We must complete its ratification. And let us go further. On defence, AI, cybersecurity, critical raw materials, Erasmus. We have everything to gain from a strong, win-win partnership. Today, Canada is looking to Europe at the Montreal summit. We must seize this outstretched hand. Our partnership cannot be a fleeting liaison. It must be a long-term relationship, a cooperation, I repeat, a win-win cooperation, between the two shores of the Atlantic. Let us build a new Euro-Canadian alliance to shape our common future. Thank you and thank you to Mr President Moreno Sanchez, President of the European Union Delegation to Canada.

[19:55:18] Stéphanie Yon-Courtin (Renew) [FR]
Thank you very much. Ms Bricmont.

[19:55:28] Saskia Bricmont (Verts/ALE) [FR]
Europeans and Canadians must strengthen their ties, especially in a context where historical neighbours and partners are no longer reliable. Yes, Mr McCartney, we need to launch major policies. And among these, starting at COP31, in a few days' time, relaunching the fight against climate change and for biodiversity restoration, mobilising the international community again. Around concrete, coordinated measures. A major concrete policy for our fellow citizens, on both sides of the Atlantic. Indeed, 680,000 hectares of European forests and 4.7 million hectares of Canadian forests went up in smoke this summer. Let us therefore jointly provide funding intended for the transition in the poorest countries, industrial policies that will strengthen the resilience of our jobs and reduce energy bills. Therefore, I hope that, within the framework of an open alliance with other partners, the European Union and Canada, hand in hand, will cooperate closely on economic security issues, to finally free ourselves from the diktats imposed by Trump, Putin and Xi Jinping. The powers that are hostile to us are also dependent on us. Let us identify certain products and technologies and identify these vulnerabilities. The moment is historic. To put in place major policies together. Thank you.

[19:56:41] Saskia Bricmont (Verts/ALE) [FR]
Thank you very much, dear colleagues. Elena Contura.

[19:56:46] Elena Kountoura (The Left) [EL]
Thank you very much, Mr President. Honourable colleagues, at a time of increasing conflicts and international instability, the European Union needs strong partnerships that serve peace, diplomacy and the consistent respect for international law. Canada is an important partner in this effort, and closer cooperation in scientific research, technology, artificial intelligence, as well as in the green and energy transition can contribute to the creation of quality jobs and the improvement of the daily lives of European citizens. Ahead of the summit, I call on the Commission to seek full and effective protection of European geographical indications, such as Greek feta and Cypriot halloumi, in the Canadian market. The protection of these products concerns the income of livestock farmers, our production tradition and the sustainability of local communities. Deepening our relations with respect and trust must ensure fair trade terms and substantial support for our producers. Thank you very much.

[19:57:54] Elena Kountoura (The Left) [FR]
Thank you very much, Ms Contura. Stéphane Koller.

[19:58:01] Stefan Köhler (PPE) [DE]
Dear Commissioner, Ms Keller, dear colleagues. Canada is very close to my heart. In 1989, I did an internship there, and to this day, friendships connect me from east to west Canada. Commissioner, Ms Keller, dear colleagues. Canada is very close to my heart. In 1989, I did an internship there, and to this day, I maintain friendships from east to west Canada.

As a member of the delegation for relations with Canada, I know that this partner is reliable. Last week, I had the honour of speaking with Canada’s Minister of Agriculture, Heath MacDonald. Our conversation has once again shown how much we have in common, particularly in agriculture. In a world where old certainties are faltering, we need partners who share our values. Canada is such a partner, reliable, competent and democratic. We must now resolutely deepen this cooperation. But honesty is also required. Some are already talking about CETA 2.0. Yet almost ten years after its launch, CETA 1.0 has still not been ratified in several Member States. That is not a good signal to a friend. I appeal to the remaining Member States: finally bring the ratification process to a close. The summit in Montreal at the end of October is the opportunity for a clear commitment to this partnership. Thank you.

[19:59:09] Stefan Köhler (PPE) [FR]
Thank you very much, Tobias Krämer.

[19:59:14] Tobias Cremer (S&D) [EN]
Colleagues, Canada could become the first associate member of the European Union. But what does that actually mean? For us, the vision is clear: associate membership must mean the closest possible part nership that the EU can offer to a non-European country. In the case of Canada, that means unleashing CETA's full potential, integrating our defense industries, cooperating in the Arctic, and allowing young Canadians and Europeans to travel, study, and work more freely across the Atlantic. But it must also mean embedding all these great initiatives into something more enduring. Into a common institutional framework of coordination and cooperation. For instance, by inviting Canada to participate in relevant council meetings, or by establishing a formal parliamentary partnership assembly between the EP and the Canadian Parliament, as we have it with the UK. This Euro-Canadian alliance must be more than just a trade deal plus. And not just because we all love Canada, which we do, but because it could actually become the nucleus of something much big ger. Of a global network of like-minded partners that offers a world a different way, a different vision of doing politics in the 21 st century. A vision in which collective security, shared interests, and mutual respect prevail over m ight is right. Colleagues, over the last few months, Canada and Europe have been pretty good at writing each other love letters. And that's been wonderful. But now it's time to get serious. And to turn this Euro-Canadian love story into a more concrete commitment for Canada for Europe and the world. Thank you.

[20:00:50] Tobias Cremer (S&D) [FR]
Thank you very much, dear colleagues. Mr Beck.

[20:00:57] Wouter Beke (PPE) [EN]
Thank you, President. Dear colleagues, in Flanders' fields, the puppies blow. More than 100 years ago, Canadian soldiers came to the fields of Flanders. To defend our freedom. But that bound should be more than just a memory of the past. Because the reality is that Canada and Europe need each other once again, not to fight a war, but to defend our interests. Together. As global powers put increased pressure on us, we must stand stronger together. For our security. For a liable energy. For critical raw materials. And Europe also has a lot to offer Canada. A huge single market. Erasmus, small smart students' investments, you name it. But that truly unites us goes beyond economic interests. We share, yes indeed, the same values. Democracy, the rule of law, human rights, and the respect for international law. And these are precisely the values that are increasingly under pressure today. But colleagues, why should we stop here? Let Europe and Canada take the lead in bringing other partners together, such as the United Kingdom and Australia. Bring them on board to build a stronger coalition of democracies. Because when facing global powers, allies must stand together and strengthen each other. Thank you.

[20:02:30] Wouter Beke (PPE) [FR]
Thank you very much, Mr Becker. Brando Benifei.

[20:02:37] Brando Benifei (S&D) [IT]
Can we really deepen our alliance with Canada if we cannot even deepen our own European Union? For decades we have been paralysed in the debate between enlargement and deepening of the Union. Too many proposals from this Parliament have fallen on deaf ears. Today, strengthening relations with third countries such as Canada is necessary. And recognising it as the first associate member of the Union is a concrete proposal. But statements of principle are not enough. We need legal instruments and political decisions. To establish this new status, we need to amend Article 49 of the Treaty on the Union with a dedicated protocol. We are not starting from scratch. Let us take up the work of the Spinelli Group, which I led in 2022 and which has made clear proposals on this matter since the presidency of my former colleague Andrew Duff. We must seriously heed Mark Carney’s appeal. We cannot ask our partners to build a common future if we continue to postpone our choices. Let us therefore lead with conviction an alliance that is truly global to restore democratic order to a world that is in chaos today.

[20:03:44] Brando Benifei (S&D) [FR]
Thank you very much, Mr Pasquale De La Parte.

[20:03:55] Nicolás Pascual de la Parte (PPE) [ES]
Thank you very much, Mr President. Ahead of the summit in Ottawa at the end of January, we must say that the European Union must prepare to offer our Canadian friends, as other speakers have said, a legal framework to give effect to the association agreement we have agreed with them. This is the highest level of cooperation, the highest level of collaboration that we can have with a non-European State. Therefore, we must be innovative and have sufficient capacity to offer those legal frameworks for cooperation. We already have this in the area of security and defence, in which Canada is actively participating in the SAFE programme of joint defence procurement contracts. We will also surely have this in the Erasmus+ programme and the Horizon programme. We must also obviously collaborate with them on the Arctic. The Commission has just approved the new European strategy on the Arctic, which refers to cooperation with Canada. We also have to remind our Canadian friends that they must make their financial contribution to the effort to support Ukraine, to those 70 billion euros that our Ukrainian friends need by 2027, and that Canada has also committed to collaborating. And, above all, as I say, we must identify those areas in which we will all benefit: rare earths, critical minerals, cybersecurity, innovation, etc. Thank you very much.

[20:05:09] Nicolás Pascual de la Parte (PPE) [FR]
Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Ms Chloé Riedel.

[20:05:20] Chloé Ridel (S&D) [FR]
Thank you, dear colleagues. On 16 September, as we remember, we welcomed the Canadian Prime Minister, Mark Carney, to this hemicycle. Who said: 'As the non-European country that is the most European, Canada first turns to the European Union to build a better world.' And we must respond to him. In a world marked by chaos, by the brutality of Donald Trump, Europe must reach out to the leading democratic power of the North American continent. For scientific, technological and security cooperation, parliamentary cooperation, and for defending an international order based on the rule of law. Canada, for example, is joining the fight to protect the International Criminal Court. A Canadian judge is among the judges of the ICC — the International Criminal Court — whom we, for our part, wish to reward with the Sakharov Prize. That is what brings us together. We believe that the law applies to all, including and above all the powerful. We will respond to the disorder caused by autocrats with solidarity among democracies. Canada is not a partner of convenience; it is an ally that shares our values and, better than us, refuses to bow down today. So Trump saw the rapprochement between Europe and Canada as a hostile act. That is because we are on the right path. Thank you.

[20:06:30] Chloé Ridel (S&D) [FR]
Thank you very much. Juan Fernando López Aguilar.

[20:06:35] Chloé Ridel (S&D) [FR]
Thank you, Madam President. On a point of order.

[20:06:37] Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D) [ES]
It is undeniable that Canada enjoys enormous goodwill in this European Parliament because it has it. In the citizenry that this Parliament represents. For its constitutional, federal and integrative experience. Of its diversity. Of its social protection model, but also of the courage with which it is standing up to the onslaughts of its immediate neighbour, the Trump administration of the United States. But President von der Leyen announced in the State of the Union debate nothing less than a unique experiment, my distinguished colleague, a privileged strategic partnership without precedent. The legal basis needs to be clarified. And if necessary, the reform of the Treaties and institutional reform to accommodate this absolutely unique modality, which will undoubtedly receive support in this European Parliament. But what is needed is for this to begin precisely by strengthening inter-parliamentary dialogue, making the European Union-Canada delegation, of this European Parliament which my colleague Javier Moreno presides over, the embryo of an inter-parliamentary assembly that replicates the Africa-Caribbean-Pacific and Euro-Latin America model. This is a good way to begin that strengthening of mutual trust and mutual respect. Thank you, President.

[20:07:49] Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D) [FR]
Thank you very much, Juan Fernando. Lynne Boylan.

[20:07:54] Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D) [FR]
Thank you to the Presidency.

[20:07:56] Lynn Boylan (The Left) [EN]
Yes, Europe and Canada, must cooperate on the global challenges facing us. We absolutely should work together on climate action, multilateralism, and building a fair trading partnership. However, we must unequivocally reject investor courts, be they in CETA, the EU Chile, or EU Mexico agreements. Investor courts represented a wrecked corporate attack on the sovereignty of states and underm ine climate action and the delivery of strong public services. After a summer of lethal heatwaves, do the Commission not recognize the peril investor courts represent for European citizens ? The fossil fuel companies have already won more than 80 billion dollars in ISDS awards. Our planet is burning, and ISDS cells are sovereignty to those responsible. So, on the one hand, we have a Commission that sees Canada as such a close friend that they are literally prepared to make up a membership status for them. And yet, on the other hand, say that we cannot trust each other's independ ent legal systems.

[20:09:02] Lynn Boylan (The Left) [FR]
Thank you very much, Ms Boylan. We are coming to the end of this debate. And I now give the floor to Commissioner Sékela.

[20:09:17] 234603 [FR]
Thank you. Thank you, Mr President. Honourable colleagues,

[20:09:22] 234603 [EN]
let me thank you for your inter ventions and for the strong support for deeper EU-Canada relations that you have expressed. CETA has proven to be one of the most successful tr ade agreements the EU has signed. Since CETA's provisional entry into application, bil ateral trade in goods and services increased by 80 percent, reaching 130 bill ion euros in 2025, up from 72. 1 billion in 2016. Unfortunately, nine member stat es still need to ratify CETA. But there is a momentum: Slovenia rat ified recently. Congratulations. And hopefully, this will propel some others to follow suit. I take this opportunity to encourage MEPs from the nine member states that still need to rat ify CETA and the three member states that need to ratify the S PA to continue to advocate for ratification back home. Building on the success of CETA in boosting bilateral trade, it is only logical to explore deeper t ies with Canada. Support from for closer EU-Canada ties strong on both s ides of the Atlantic. For Canada, I can refer you to a pool in early September showing that 81 percent of Canadians support closer integr ation with the EU. Including making it easier to trade travel work and study and to cooperate on security. I believe a majority of EU cit izens feels the same way about Canada. We can be proud of what has been achieved in recent years, but today's challenge re quires an even greater critical mass of cooperation and advancement. I wish to commend the European Commission's Special Envoy for Relations with Canada, Mr. Just Cortez, for his work with the personal representative of Prime Minister Carney for relations with the EU , John Hannaford, in supporting the delivery of these commitments. They have injected a consistent focus on deliverables and been able to sustain political momentum. And they will continue to support our work under our new alliance for the future. So let us look ahead to next week's summit with big optimism. Thank you very much.

[20:12:31] 234603 [FR]
Thank you very much, Commissioner. The debate is closed. The agenda calls for explanations of vote. And I give the floor immediately to Christian Thérès. Thank you very much.

[20:12:46] Cristian Terheş (ECR) [RO]
Thank you. I voted against the report on the general budget of the European Union for 2027 because it it wants to continue directing European public money towards aberrant ideological priorities, instead of focusing on the concrete problems of the economy and of European citizens. The report continues to push money towards the green agenda and gender ideology, for example, when young Europeans protest in Western Europe over the lack of jobs, Europe’s concern seems to be more focused on the sexual perversions of some. If sex is so important, why isn’t the family with children supported? Furthermore, the same text calls for the expansion of the EU's own resources and new revenue, it says, of around 60 billion euros per year. Does this mean more taxes, more levies? The question is: from whom? Because all these European public policies that have been promoted have impoverished the population. Thank you.

[20:13:51] Speaker 1 [FR]
Thank you for your explanation of the vote on the general budget of the European Union for the 2027 financial year. Mr Papadakiskosas, on the new co-ownership for the future of Euro-Mediterranean relations, the Pact for the Mediterranean.

[20:14:08] Speaker 3 [FR]
Thank you for that.

[20:14:09] Speaker 1 [FR]
I do not see him in the Chamber. I will now give the floor to our colleague Nikolaou Alavanas Lefteris for an explanation of vote on strengthening skills in the Union, the possibility of teaching and vocational training during the transition period. You have the floor.

[20:14:28] Lefteris Nikolaou-Alavanos (NI) [EL]
A report commissioned from the Draghi report which elevates skills as a condition for the competitiveness and profitability of capital. The aim is to bind vocational education and training more closely to business groups within the framework of a European Union skills union. It promotes dual education, meaning the exploitation of students by groups as apprenticeships, while giving businesses a role in determining the content of studies. Thus, it aims to produce cheap, flexible, easily mobile labour without secured employment and professional rights. These are measures intensifying class divisions, state underfunding, infrastructure shortages and educational deficiencies which in France also sparked the massive student mobilisations. Young people of working-class and popular origin, through their struggle, are demanding unified public and free education, without class barriers, with strong general education, guaranteed professional specialisation and the possibility of continuing their studies. In the streets, they are challenging the strategic commodification of education by the European Union, the bourgeois governments and parties, posing the dilemma: either their profits or our lives.

[20:15:36] Speaker 1 [FR]
Thank you very much. Dear colleagues, the next sitting will take place tomorrow, Thursday 22 October 2026, at 9 a.m. The agenda has been published. It is available on the European Parliament’s website. Colleagues, the next sitting will take place tomorrow, Thursday 22 October 2026, at 9 a.m. The agenda has been published. It is available on the European Parliament’s website.

The minutes of today’s sitting will be submitted for Parliament’s approval tomorrow early in the afternoon; the sitting is adjourned.

[20:16:01] Younous Omarjee (The Left) [FR]
Thank you very much.