18.01.2011 - Eiropas Parlaments - Europa

ПЪЛЕН ПРОТОКОЛ НА РАЗИСКВАНИЯТА
ACTA LITERAL DE LOS DEBATES
DOSLOVNÝ ZÁZNAM ZE ZASEDÁNÍ
FULDSTÆNDIGT FORHANDLINGSREFERAT
AUSFÜHRLICHE SITZUNGSBERICHTE
ISTUNGI STENOGRAMM
ΠΛΗΡΗ ΠΡΑΚΤΙΚΑ ΤΩΝ ΣΥΖΗΤΗΣΕΩΝ
VERBATIM REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS
COMPTE RENDU IN EXTENSO DES DÉBATS
TUARASCÁIL FOCAL AR FHOCAL NA N-IMEACHTAÍ
RESOCONTO INTEGRALE DELLE DISCUSSIONI
DEBAŠU STENOGRAMMA
2009 - 2014
18.01.2011
POSĖDŽIO STENOGRAMA
AZ ÜLÉSEK SZÓ SZERINTI JEGYZŐKÖNYVE
RAPPORTI VERBATIM TAD-DIBATTITI
VOLLEDIG VERSLAG VAN DE VERGADERINGEN
PEŁNE SPRAWOZDANIE Z OBRAD
RELATO INTEGRAL DOS DEBATES
STENOGRAMA DEZBATERILOR
DOSLOVNÝ ZÁPIS Z ROZPRÁV
DOBESEDNI ZAPISI RAZPRAV
SANATARKAT ISTUNTOSELOSTUKSET
FULLSTÄNDIGT FÖRHANDLINGSREFERAT
Вторник - Martes - Úterý - Tirsdag - Dienstag - Teisipäev - Τρίτη
Tuesday - Mardi - Dé Máirt - Martedì - Otrdiena - Antradienis - Kedd
It-Tlieta - Dinsdag - Wtorek - Terça-feira - Marţi - Utorok - Torek - Tiistai - Tisdag
Единство в многообразието - Unida en la diversidad - Jednotná v rozmanitosti - Forenet i mangfoldighed - In Vielfalt geeint - Ühinenud mitmekesisuses
Eνωμένη στην πολυμορφία - United in diversity - Unie dans la diversité - Aontaithe san éagsúlacht - Unita nella diversità - Vienoti daudzveidībā
Susivieniję įvairovėje - Egyesülve a sokféleségben - Magħquda fid-diversità - In verscheidenheid verenigd - Zjednoczona w różnorodności - Unida na diversidade
Unită în diversitate - Zjednotení v rozmanitosti - Združena v raznolikosti - Moninaisuudessaan yhtenäinen - Förenade i mångfalden
Неокончателно издание - Edición provisional - Prozatímní vydání - Foreløbig udgave - Vorläufige Ausgabe
Esialgne versioon - Προσωρινή έκδοση - Provisional edition - Edition provisoire - Eagrán Sealadach - Edizione provvisoria
Pagaidu versija - Negalutinė redakcija - Ideiglenes kiadás - Edizzjoni proviżorja - Voorlopige uitgave - Wydanie tymczasowe
Edição provisória - Ediţie provizorie - Predbežné vydanie - Začasna razlicica č
- Väliaikainen versio - Preliminär utgåva

BG СЪДЪРЖАНИЕ
1 - Откриване на заседанието....................................15
2 - Разисквания относно случаи на нарушаване на
правата на човека, на демокрацията и принципа
на правовата държава (обявяване на внесените
предложения за резолюция): вж. протоколи......15
3 - Споразумение между ЕО и Република Сърбия за
стабилизиране и асоцииране - Споразумение
между ЕО и Република Сърбия за стабилизиране
и асоцииране (разискване)...................................15
4 - Приветствие с добре дошли................................18
5 - Споразумение между ЕО и Република Сърбия за
стабилизиране и асоцииране - Споразумение
между ЕО и Република Сърбия за стабилизиране
и асоцииране (продължение на разискването).18
6 - Преглед на белгийското председателство на
Съвета (разискване).............................................28
7 - Време за гласуване ..............................................45
7.1 - Сливания на акционерни дружества
(Кодифицирана версия) (A7-0363/2010, Jiří
Maštálka) (гласуване)...........................................45
7.2 - Протокол към Евро-средиземноморското
споразумение между ЕО и Йордания с оглед на
присъединяването на България и Румъния към ЕС
(A7-0373/2010, Gabriele Albertini) (гласуване)..45
7.3 - Споразумение между ЕО и Западноафриканския
икономически и валутен съюз относно някои
аспекти на въздухоплавателните услуги (A7-
0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch) (гласуване) ...45
7.4 - Хармонизирани условия за пускането на пазара
на строителните продукти (A7-0343/2010,
Catherine Stihler) (гласуване) ..............................45
7.5 - Европейски консенсус относно хуманитарната
помощ (A7-0375/2010, Michèle Striffler)
(гласуване) ...........................................................46
7.6 - Селското стопанство като сектор от
стратегическо значение за продоволствената
сигурност (A7-0376/2010, Daciana Octavia Sârbu)
(гласуване) ...........................................................46
8 - Обяснение на вот .................................................46
9 - Поправки и намерения за гласуване: вж.
протоколи.............................................................64
10 - Одобряване на протокола от предишното
заседание: вж. протокола....................................65
11 - Внасяне на документи: вж. протоколи ............65
12 - Време за въпроси към председателя на
Комисията ............................................................65
13 - Правата на пациентите в областта на
трансграничните здравни грижи (разискване)..74
14 - Европейска инициатива за болестта на
Алцхаймер и други деменции - Инхалатори за
астма (разискване)...............................................92
15 - Време за въпроси (въпроси към Комисията).103
16 - Положението в Хаити една година след
земетресението: хуманитарна помощ и
възстановяване (разискване) ............................ 115
17 - Криза в Кампания, свързана с отпадъците
(разискване) ....................................................... 124
18 - Нарушаване на свободата на изразяване и
дискриминация въз основа на сексуалната
ориентация в Литва (разискване)..................... 133
19 - Дневен ред на следващото заседание: вж.
протокола ........................................................... 140
20 - Закриване на заседанието ............................... 140
ES ÍNDICE
1 - Apertura de la sesión ..............................................15
2 - Debates sobre casos de violaciones de los derechos
humanos, de la democracia y del Estado de Derecho
(anuncio de las propuestas de resolución
presentadas): véase el Acta ....................................15
3 - Acuerdo de Estabilización y Asociación CE-Serbia -
Acuerdo de Estabilización y Asociación entre la CE
y Serbia (debate) ....................................................15
4 - Bienvenida............................................................. 18
5 - Acuerdo de Estabilización y Asociación CE-Serbia -
Acuerdo de Estabilización y Asociación entre la CE
y Serbia (continuación del debate) ........................ 18
6 - Balance de la Presidencia belga del Consejo (debate)
............................................................................... 28
7 - Turno de votaciones............................................... 45
7.1 - Fusiones de las sociedades anónimas (versión
codificada) (A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka) (votación)
............................................................................... 45
7.2 - Protocolo del Acuerdo Euromediterráneo entre las
CE y Jordania para tener en cuenta la adhesión de
Bulgaria y Rumanía a la UE (A7-0373/2010,
Gabriele Albertini) (votación)............................... 45
7.3 - Acuerdo CE-Unión Económica y Monetaria del
África Occidental sobre determinados aspectos de
los servicios aéreos (A7-0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht
Koch) (votación) ................................................... 45
7.4 - Condiciones armonizadas para la comercialización
de productos de construcción (A7-0343/2010,
Catherine Stihler) (votación)................................. 45
7.5 - Consenso europeo sobre la ayuda humanitaria (A7-
0375/2010, Michèle Striffler) (votación) .............. 46
7.6 - La agricultura como sector estratégico en el
contexto de la seguridad alimentaria (A7-0376/2010,
Daciana Octavia Sârbu) (votación) ....................... 46
8 - Explicaciones de voto............................................ 46
9 - Correcciones e intenciones de voto: véase el Acta 64
10 - Aprobación del Acta de la sesión anterior: véase el
Acta ....................................................................... 65
11 - Presentación de documentos: véase el Acta ........ 65
12 - Turno de preguntas al Presidente de la Comisión 65
13 - Derechos de los pacientes en la asistencia sanitaria
transfronteriza (debate) ......................................... 74
14 - Iniciativa europea acerca de la enfermedad de
Alzheimer y otras demencias - Inhaladores para el
asma (debate) ........................................................ 92
15 - Turno de preguntas (preguntas a la Comisión).. 103
16 - Situación en Haití un año después del terremoto:
ayuda humanitaria y reconstrucción (debate)...... 115
17 - Crisis de los residuos en Campania (debate) ..... 124
18 - Violación de la libertad de expresión y
discriminación basada en la orientación sexual en
Lituania (debate) ................................................. 133
19 - Orden del día de la próxima sesión : véase el Acta
............................................................................. 140
20 - Cierre de la sesión ............................................. 140

4 18-01-2011
CS OBSAH
1 - Zahájení zasedání ...................................................15
2 - Rozpravy o případech porušování lidských práv,
demokracie a právního státu (oznámení předložených
návrhů usnesení): viz zápis.....................................15
3 - Dohoda o stabilizaci a přidružení ES-Srbsko -
Dohoda o stabilizaci a přidružení mezi ES a Srbskem
(rozprava) ...............................................................15
4 - Přivítání .................................................................18
5 - Dohoda o stabilizaci a přidružení ES-Srbsko -
Dohoda o stabilizaci a přidružení mezi ES a Srbskem
(pokračování rozpravy) .........................................18
6 - Hodnocení belgického předsednictví Rady (rozprava)
...............................................................................28
7 - Hlasování...............................................................45
7.1 - Fúze akciových společností (kodifikované znění)
(A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka) (hlasování) ...........45
7.2 - Protokol k Evropsko-středomořské dohodě mezi
ES a Jordánskem s ohledem na přistoupení Bulharska
a Rumunska k EU (A7-0373/2010, Gabriele
Albertini) (hlasování) ............................................45
7.3 - Dohoda mezi ES a Západoafrickou hospodářskou a
měnovou unií o některých aspektech leteckých
služeb (A7-0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch)
(hlasování).............................................................45
7.4 - Harmonizované podmínky pro uvádění stavebních
produktů na trh (A7-0343/2010, Catherine Stihler)
(hlasování).............................................................45
7.5 - Provádění Evropského konsensu o humanitární
pomoci (A7-0375/2010, Michèle Striffler)
(hlasování).............................................................46
7.6 - Zemědělství jako strategické odvětví v souvislosti
se zajišťováním potravin (A7-0376/2010, Daciana
Octavia Sârbu) (hlasování)....................................46
8 - Vysvětlení hlasování..............................................46
9 - Opravy hlasování a sdělení o úmyslu hlasovat: viz
zápis.......................................................................64
10 - Schválení zápisu z předchozího zasedání: viz zápis
...............................................................................65
11 - Předložení dokumentů: viz zápis ......................... 65
12 - Doba vyhrazená pro otázky předsedovi Komise..65
13 - Práva pacientů v přeshraniční zdravotní péči
(rozprava) ..............................................................74
14 - Evropská iniciativa pro Alzheimerovu chorobu a
jiné formy demence - Astmatické inhalátory
(rozprava) ..............................................................92
15 - Doby vyhrazená pro otázky (otázky Komisi) .... 103
16 - Situace na Haiti rok po zemětřesení: humanitární
pomoc a obnova (rozprava)................................. 115
17 - Kritická situace v souvislosti s odpadem v
Kampánii (rozprava) ........................................... 124
18 - Porušování svobody projevu a diskriminace na
základě sexuální orientace v Litvě (rozprava).....133
19 - Pořad jednání příštího zasedání: viz zápis ......... 140
20 - Ukončení zasedání............................................. 140
DA INDHOLD
1 - Åbning af mødet.....................................................15
2 - Debat om tilfælde af krænkelse af
menneskerettighederne, demokratiet og
retsstatsprincippet (meddelelse om indgivne
beslutningsforslag): se protokollen ........................15
3 - Stabiliserings- og associeringsaftale EF/Serbien -
Stabiliserings- og associeringsaftale mellem EF og
Serbien (forhandling) .............................................15
4 - Velkomstord .......................................................... 18
5 - Stabiliserings- og associeringsaftale EF/Serbien -
Stabiliserings- og associeringsaftale mellem EF og
Serbien (fortsat forhandling) ................................. 18
6 - Gennemgang af det belgiske rådsformandskab
(forhandling) ......................................................... 28
7 - Afstemningstid ...................................................... 45
7.1 - Fusioner af aktieselskaber (Kodificeret udgave)
(A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka) (afstemning)......... 45
7.2 - Protokol til Euro-Middelhavsaftalen mellem EF og
Jordan for at tage hensyn til Bulgariens og
Rumæniens tiltrædelse af Den Europæiske Union
(A7-0373/2010, Gabriele Albertini) (afstemning). 45
7.3 - Aftale EF/Den Vestafrikanske Økonomiske og
Monetære Union om lufttrafik (A7-0361/2010,
Dieter-Lebrecht Koch) (afstemning) ..................... 45
7.4 - Harmoniserede betingelser for markedsføring af
byggevarer (A7-0343/2010, Catherine Stihler)
(afstemning) .......................................................... 45
7.5 - Europæisk konsensus om humanitær bistand (A7-
0375/2010, Michèle Striffler) (afstemning) .......... 46
7.6 - Landbruget som en strategisk sektor i forbindelse
med fødevaresikkerhed (A7-0376/2010, Daciana
Octavia Sârbu) (afstemning) ................................. 46
8 - Stemmeforklaringer............................................... 46
9 - Stemmerettelser og -intentioner: se protokollen.... 64
10 - Godkendelse af protokollen fra foregående møde: se
protokollen ............................................................ 65
11 - Modtagne dokumenter: se protokollen ................ 65
12 - Spørgetid til Kommissionens formand ................ 65
13 - Patientrettigheder i forbindelse med
grænseoverskridende sundhedsydelser (forhandling)
............................................................................... 74
14 - Europæisk initiativ vedrørende Alzheimers sygdom
og andre demenssygdomme - Astmainhalatorer
(forhandling) ......................................................... 92
15 - Spørgetid (spørgsmål til Kommissionen) .......... 103
16 - Situationen i Haiti et år efter jordskælvet:
humanitær bistand og genopbygning (forhandling)
............................................................................. 115
17 - Affaldskrise i Campania (forhandling).............. 124
18 - Krænkelse af ytringsfriheden og forskelsbehandling
på grund af seksuel orientering i Litauen
(forhandling) ....................................................... 133
19 - Dagsorden for næste møde: se protokollen........ 140
20 - Hævelse af mødet .............................................. 140

18-01-2011 5
DE INHALT
1 - Eröffnung der Sitzung ............................................15
2 - Aussprache über Fälle von Verletzungen der
Menschenrechte, der Demokratie und der
Rechtsstaatlichkeit (Bekanntgabe der eingereichten
Entschließungsanträge): siehe Protokoll ................15
3 - Stabilisierungs- und Assoziierungsabkommen
EG/Serbien - Stabilisierungs- und
Assoziierungsabkommen zwischen der EG und
Serbien (Aussprache) .............................................15
4 - Begrüßung .............................................................18
5 - Stabilisierungs- und Assoziierungsabkommen
EG/Serbien - Stabilisierungs- und
Assoziierungsabkommen zwischen der EG und
Serbien (Fortsetzung der Aussprache)...................18
6 - Bilanz des belgischen Ratsvorsitzes (Aussprache) 28
7 - Abstimmungsstunde ..............................................45
7.1 - Verschmelzung von Aktiengesellschaften
(kodifizierte Fassung) (A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka)
(Abstimmung) .......................................................45
7.2 - Protokoll zum Europa-Mittelmeer-Abkommen
EG/Jordanien anlässlich des Beitritts Bulgariens und
Rumäniens zur EU (A7-0373/2010, Gabriele
Albertini) (Abstimmung).......................................45
7.3 - Abkommen EG/Westafrikanische Wirtschafts- und
Währungsunion über bestimmte Aspekte von
Luftverkehrsdiensten (A7-0361/2010, Dieter-
Lebrecht Koch) (Abstimmung) .............................45
7.4 - Harmonisierte Bedingungen für die Vermarktung
von Bauprodukten (A7-0343/2010, Catherine Stihler)
(Abstimmung) .......................................................45
7.5 - Europäischer Konsens zur humanitären Hilfe (A7-
0375/2010, Michèle Striffler) (Abstimmung) .......46
7.6 - Landwirtschaft als Sektor von strategischer
Bedeutung für die Ernährungssicherheit (A7-
0376/2010, Daciana Octavia Sârbu) (Abstimmung)46
8 - Stimmerklärungen .................................................46
9 - Berichtigungen des Stimmverhaltens und
beabsichtigtes Stimmverhalten: siehe Protokoll....64
10 - Genehmigung des Protokolls der vorangegangenen
Sitzung: siehe Protokoll.........................................65
11 - Vorlage von Dokumenten: siehe Protokoll..........65
12 - Fragestunde mit Anfragen an den Präsidenten der
Kommission ..........................................................65
13 - Patientenrechte in der grenzüberschreitenden
Gesundheitsversorgung (Aussprache) ................... 74
14 - Europäische Initiative zur Alzheimer-Krankheit und
zu anderen Demenzerkrankungen - Inhaliergeräte für
Asthmatiker (Aussprache).....................................92
15 - Fragestunde (Anfragen an die Kommission) ..... 103
16 - Lage in Haiti ein Jahr nach dem Erdbeben:
Humanitäre Hilfe und Wiederaufbau (Aussprache)
............................................................................. 115
17 - Müllnotstand in Kampanien (Aussprache) ........124
18 - Verletzung des Rechts auf freie Meinungsäußerung
und Diskriminierung aufgrund der sexuellen
Ausrichtung in Litauen (Aussprache).................. 133
19 - Tagesordnung der nächsten Sitzung: siehe Protokoll
............................................................................. 140
20 - Schluss der Sitzung............................................ 140
ET SISUKORD
1 - Osaistungjärgu avamine .........................................15
2 - Inimõiguste, demokraatia ja õigusriigi põhimõtete
rikkumise juhtumite arutamine (esitatud
resolutsiooni ettepanekute tutvustamine) (vt
protokoll)................................................................15
3 - EÜ ja Serbia vaheline stabiliseerimis- ja
assotsieerimisleping - EÜ ja Serbia vaheline
stabiliseerimis- ja assotsieerimisleping (arutelu)....15
4 - Tervitus.................................................................. 18
5 - EÜ ja Serbia vaheline stabiliseerimis- ja
assotsieerimisleping - EÜ ja Serbia vaheline
stabiliseerimis- ja assotsieerimisleping (arutelu
jätkamine).............................................................. 18
6 - Belgia eesistumise ülevaade (arutelu).................... 28
7 - Hääletused ............................................................. 45
7.1 - Aktsiaseltside ühinemine (kodifitseeritud versioon)
(A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka) (hääletus).............. 45
7.2 - EÜ ja Jordaania vahelise Euroopa–Vahemere
piirkonna lepingu protokolli sõlmimine, et võtta
arvesse Bulgaaria ja Rumeenia ühinemist ELiga (A7-
0373/2010, Gabriele Albertini) (hääletus)............. 45
7.3 - EÜ ning Lääne-Aafrika majandus- ja rahaliidu
vaheline teatavaid lennundusküsimusi käsitlev leping
(A7-0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch) (hääletus)45
7.4 - Ehitustoodete ühtlustatud turustustingimused (A7-
0343/2010, Catherine Stihler) (hääletus)............... 45
7.5 - Humanitaarabi valdkonna Euroopa konsensus (A7-
0375/2010, Michèle Striffler) (hääletus) ............... 46
7.6 - Põllumajanduse tunnistamine strateegiliselt
tähtsaks sektoriks toiduga kindlustatuse tagamisel
(A7-0376/2010, Daciana Octavia Sârbu) (hääletus)46
8 - Selgitused hääletuse kohta..................................... 46
9 - Hääletuse parandused ja hääletuskavatsused (vt
protokoll)............................................................... 64
10 - Eelmise istungi protokolli kinnitamine (vt
protokoll)............................................................... 65
11 - Esitatud dokumendid (vt protokoll)..................... 65
12 - Infotund komisjoni presidendi osavõtul .............. 65
13 - Patsiendiõiguste kohaldamine piiriüleses tervishoius
(arutelu)................................................................. 74
14 - Alzheimeri tõbe ja muid dementsuse vorme käsitlev
Euroopa algatus - Astmainhalaatorid (arutelu)...... 92
15 - Infotund (küsimused komisjonile)..................... 103
16 - Olukord Haitis aasta pärast maavärinat:
humanitaarabi ja ülesehitustöö (arutelu) ............. 115
17 - Campania jäätmekriis (arutelu).......................... 124
18 - Sõnavabaduse rikkumine ja diskrimineerimine
seksuaalse sättumuse alusel Leedus (arutelu)...... 133
19 - Järgmise istungi päevakord (vt protokoll) ......... 140
20 - Istungi lõpp........................................................ 140

6 18-01-2011
EL ΠΕΡΙΕΧΟΜΕΝΑ
1 - Έναρξη της συνεδρίασης........................................15
2 - Συζήτηση για περιπτώσεις παραβίασης των
ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων, της δημοκρατίας και του
κράτους δικαίου (ανακοίνωση των προτάσεων
ψηφίσματος που έχουν κατατεθεί): βλ. Συνοπτικά
Πρακτικά................................................................15
3 - Συμφωνία σταθεροποίησης και σύνδεσης ΕΚ-
Σερβίας - Συμφωνία σταθεροποίησης και σύνδεσης
μεταξύ των ΕΚ και της Σερβίας (συζήτηση)..........15
4 - Υποδοχή ................................................................18
5 - Συμφωνία σταθεροποίησης και σύνδεσης ΕΚ-
Σερβίας - Συμφωνία σταθεροποίησης και σύνδεσης
μεταξύ των ΕΚ και της Σερβίας (συνέχεια της
συζήτησης) ............................................................18
6 - Επισκόπηση της Βελγικής Προεδρίας του
Συμβουλίου (συζήτηση)........................................28
7 - Ώρα των ψηφοφοριών ...........................................45
7.1 - Συγχωνεύσεις των ανωνύμων εταιρειών
(κωδικοποιημένο κείμενο) (A7-0363/2010, Jiří
Maštálka) (ψηφοφορία).........................................45
7.2 - Πρωτόκολλο της ευρωμεσογειακής συμφωνίας
σύνδεσης μεταξύ των ΕΚ και της Ιορδανίας, για να
ληφθεί υπόψη η προσχώρηση στην Ευρωπαϊκή
Ένωση της Βουλγαρίας και της Ρουμανίας (A7-
0373/2010, Gabriele Albertini) (ψηφοφορία)........45
7.3 - Συμφωνία ΕΚ-Δυτικοαφρικανικής Οικονομικής
και Νομισματικής Ένωσης σχετικά με ορισμένες
πτυχές των αεροπορικών μεταφορών (A7-
0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch) (ψηφοφορία)..45
7.4 - Εναρμονισμένοι όροι εμπορίας προϊόντων του
τομέα των δομικών κατασκευών (A7-0343/2010,
Catherine Stihler) (ψηφοφορία) ............................45
7.5 - Ευρωπαϊκή κοινή αντίληψη για την ανθρωπιστική
βοήθεια (A7-0375/2010, Michèle Striffler)
(ψηφοφορία)..........................................................46
7.6 - Η γεωργία ως στρατηγικός τομέας στο πλαίσιο της
επισιτιστικής ασφάλειας (A7-0376/2010, Daciana
Octavia Sârbu) (ψηφοφορία).................................46
8 - Αιτιολογήσεις ψήφου ............................................46
9 - Διορθώσεις και προθέσεις ψήφου: βλ. Συνοπτικά
Πρακτικά...............................................................64
10 - Έγκριση των Συνοπτικών Πρακτικών της
προηγούμενης συνεδρίασης: βλ. Συνοπτικά
Πρακτικά...............................................................65
11 - Κατάθεση εγγράφων: βλ. Συνοπτικά Πρακτικά ..65
12 - Ώρα των ερωτήσεων με τον Πρόεδρο της Επιτροπής
...............................................................................65
13 - Δικαιώματα των ασθενών στο πλαίσιο της
διασυνοριακής υγειονομικής περίθαλψης (συζήτηση)
...............................................................................74
14 - Ευρωπαϊκή πρωτοβουλία για τη νόσο του
Αλτσχάιμερ και άλλες μορφές άνοιας -
Εισπνευστήρες για ασθματικούς (συζήτηση)........92
15 - Ώρα των ερωτήσεων (ερωτήσεις προς την
Επιτροπή) ............................................................ 103
16 - Η κατάσταση στην Αϊτή ένα χρόνο μετά το σεισμό:
ανθρωπιστική βοήθεια και ανασυγκρότηση
(συζήτηση) .......................................................... 115
17 - Κρίση στην Καμπανία στον τομέα των αποβλήτων
(συζήτηση) .......................................................... 124
18 - Παραβίαση της ελευθερίας έκφρασης και
διακρίσεις λόγω σεξουαλικού προσανατολισμού στη
Λιθουανία (συζήτηση) ........................................ 133
19 - Ημερήσια διάταξη της επόμενης συνεδρίασης: βλ.
Συνοπτικά Πρακτικά ........................................... 140
20 - Λήξη της συνεδρίασης....................................... 140
EN CONTENTS
1 - Opening of the sitting .............................................15
2 - Debates on cases of breaches of human rights,
democracy and the rule of law (announcement of
motions for resolutions tabled): see Minutes..........15
3 - EC-Serbia Stabilisation and Association Agreement -
Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the
EC and Serbia (debate)...........................................15
4 - Welcome................................................................ 18
5 - EC-Serbia Stabilisation and Association Agreement -
Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the
EC and Serbia (continuation of debate)................. 18
6 - Review of the Belgian presidency of the Council
(debate).................................................................. 28
7 - Voting time............................................................ 45
7.1 - Mergers of public limited liability companies
(codified version) (A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka)
(vote) ..................................................................... 45
7.2 - Protocol to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement
between the EC and Jordan, to take account of the
accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the EU (A7-
0373/2010, Gabriele Albertini) (vote)................... 45
7.3 - EC-West African Economic and Monetary Union
air services agreement (A7-0361/2010, Dieter-
Lebrecht Koch) (vote) ........................................... 45
7.4 - Harmonised conditions for the marketing of
construction products (A7-0343/2010, Catherine
Stihler) (vote) ........................................................ 45
7.5 - European Consensus on humanitarian aid (A7-
0375/2010, Michèle Striffler) (vote) ..................... 46
7.6 - Agriculture as a strategic sector in the context of
food security (A7-0376/2010, Daciana Octavia
Sârbu) (vote).......................................................... 46
8 - Explanations of vote .............................................. 46
9 - Corrections to votes and voting intentions: see
Minutes.................................................................. 64
10 - Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting : see
Minutes.................................................................. 65
11 - Documents received: see Minutes ....................... 65
12 - Question Hour with the President of the
Commission .......................................................... 65
13 - Patients' rights in cross-border healthcare (debate)
............................................................................... 74
14 - European initiative on Alzheimer’s disease and
other dementias - Asthma inhalers (debate) .......... 92
15 - Question Time (Commission)............................ 103
16 - Situation in Haiti one year after the earthquake:
humanitarian aid and reconstruction (debate) ..... 115
17 - Waste crisis in Campania (debate) .................... 124
18 - Violation of freedom of expression and
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in
Lithuania (debate) ............................................... 133
19 - Agenda of the next sitting : see Minutes............ 140
20 - Closure of the sitting.......................................... 140

18-01-2011 7
FR SOMMAIRE
1 - Ouverture de la séance............................................15
2 - Débats sur des cas de violation des droits de
l'Homme, de la démocratie et de l'Etat de droit
(annonce des propositions de résolution déposées):
voir procès-verbal...................................................15
3 - Accord CE/Serbie de stabilisation et d'association -
Accord CE/Serbie de stabilisation et d'association
(débat) ....................................................................15
4 - Souhaits de bienvenue ...........................................18
5 - Accord CE/Serbie de stabilisation et d'association -
Accord CE/Serbie de stabilisation et d'association
(suite du débat)......................................................18
6 - Bilan de la Présidence belge du Conseil (débat)....28
7 - Heure des votes......................................................45
7.1 - Fusions des sociétés anonymes (version codifiée)
(A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka) (vote)....................45
7.2 - Protocole à l'accord euro-méditerranéen
CE/Jordanie, afin de tenir compte de l'adhésion de la
Bulgarie et de la Roumanie à l'UE (A7-0373/2010,
Gabriele Albertini) (vote)......................................45
7.3 - Accord CE/Union Économique et Monétaire Ouest
Africaine: services aériens (A7-0361/2010, Dieter-
Lebrecht Koch) (vote) ...........................................45
7.4 - Conditions harmonisées de commercialisation pour
les produits de construction (A7-0343/2010,
Catherine Stihler) (vote)........................................45
7.5 - Consensus européen sur l’aide humanitaire (A7-
0375/2010, Michèle Striffler) (vote) .....................46
7.6 - L'agriculture comme secteur stratégique dans le
cadre de la sécurité alimentaire (A7-0376/2010,
Daciana Octavia Sârbu) (vote) ..............................46
8 - Explications de vote...............................................46
9 - Corrections et intentions de vote: voir procès-verbal
...............................................................................64
10 - Approbation du procès-verbal de la séance
précédente : voir procès-verbal .............................65
11 - Dépôt de documents: voir procès-verbal .............65
12 - Heure des questions au président de la Commission
...............................................................................65
13 - Droits des patients en matière de soins de santé
transfrontaliers (débat) ..........................................74
14 - Initiative européenne sur la maladie d’Alzheimer et
les autres démences - Inhalateurs pour les
asthmatiques (débat)..............................................92
15 - Heure des questions (questions à la Commission)
............................................................................. 103
16 - Situation en Haïti un an après le séisme: aide
humanitaire et reconstruction (débat)..................115
17 - Crise des déchets en Campanie (débat) .............124
18 - Atteinte à la liberté d'expression et discrimination
fondée sur l'orientation sexuelle en Lituanie (débat)
............................................................................. 133
19 - Ordre du jour de la prochaine séance : voir procèsverbal...................................................................
140
20 - Levée de la séance .............................................140
IT INDICE
1 - Apertura della seduta..............................................15
2 - Discussioni su casi di violazione dei diritti umani,
della democrazia e dello Stato di diritto
(comunicazione delle proposte di risoluzione
presentate): vedasi processo verbale ......................15
3 - Accordo di stabilizzazione e associazione CE-Serbia
- Accordo di stabilizzazione e di associazione tra la
CE e la Serbia (discussione)...................................15
4 - Benvenuto.............................................................. 18
5 - Accordo di stabilizzazione e associazione CE-Serbia
- Accordo di stabilizzazione e di associazione tra la
CE e la Serbia (seguito della discussione)............. 18
6 - Bilancio della Presidenza belga del Consiglio
(discussione).......................................................... 28
7 - Turno di votazioni ................................................. 45
7.1 - Fusione di società per azioni (Versione codificata)
(A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka) (votazione) ........... 45
7.2 - Protocollo dell'accordo euromediterraneo
CE/Giordania, per tener conto dell'adesione della
Bulgaria e della Romania all'UE (A7-0373/2010,
Gabriele Albertini) (votazione) ............................. 45
7.3 - Accordo CE-Unione economica e monetaria
dell'Africa occidentale relativo ai servizi aerei (A7-
0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch) (votazione) .... 45
7.4 - Condizioni armonizzate per la
commercializzazione dei prodotti da costruzione
(A7-0343/2010, Catherine Stihler) (votazione)..... 45
7.5 - Consenso europeo in materia di aiuto umanitario
(A7-0375/2010, Michèle Striffler) (votazione) ..... 46
7.6 - Agricoltura come settore strategico per la sicurezza
dell'approvvigionamento alimentare (A7-0376/2010,
Daciana Octavia Sârbu) (votazione)...................... 46
8 - Dichiarazioni di voto ............................................. 46
9 - Correzioni e intenzioni di voto: vedasi processo
verbale................................................................... 64
10 - Approvazione del processo verbale della seduta
precedente: vedasi processo verbale...................... 65
11 - Presentazione di documenti: vedasi processo
verbale................................................................... 65
12 - Ora delle interrogazioni al Presidente della
Commissione......................................................... 65
13 - Diritti dei pazienti relativi all'assistenza sanitaria
transfrontaliera (discussione) ................................ 74
14 - Iniziativa europea sulla malattia di Alzheimer e le
altre forme di demenza - Inalatori per l'asma
(discussione).......................................................... 92
15 - Tempo delle interrogazioni (interrogazioni alla
Commissione) ..................................................... 103
16 - Situazione a Haiti un anno dopo il terremoto: aiuto
umanitario e ricostruzione (discussione)............. 115
17 - Crisi dei rifiuti in Campania (discussione) ........ 124
18 - Violazione della libertà di espressione e
discriminazione sulla base dell'orientamento sessuale
in Lituania (discussione) ..................................... 133
19 - Ordine del giorno della prossima seduta: vedasi
processo verbale.................................................. 140
20 - Chiusura della seduta......................................... 140

8 18-01-2011
LV SATURS
1 - Sēdes atklāšana.......................................................15
2 - Debates par cilvēktiesību, demokrātijas un tiesiskuma
principu pārkāpumiem (paziņošana par iesniegtajiem
rezolūcijas priekšlikumiem) (sk. protokolu)...........15
3 - EK un Serbijas Stabilizācijas un asociācijas nolīgums
- Stabilizācijas un asociācijas nolīgums starp Eiropas
Kopienām un Serbiju (debates) ..............................15
4 - Oficiāla sveikšana..................................................18
5 - EK un Serbijas Stabilizācijas un asociācijas nolīgums
- Stabilizācijas un asociācijas nolīgums starp Eiropas
Kopienām un Serbiju (debašu turpināšana)...........18
6 - ES Padomes Beļģijas prezidentūras pārskats
(debates) ................................................................28
7 - Balsošanas laiks.....................................................45
7.1 - Akciju sabiedrību apvienošanās (kodificēta versija)
(A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka) (balsošana) ...........45
7.2 - Protokols Eiropas un Vidusjūras reģiona valstu
nolīgumam starp Eiropas Kopienām un Jordāniju, lai
ņemtu vērā Bulgārijas un Rumānijas pievienošanos
ES (A7-0373/2010, Gabriele Albertini) (balsošana)
...............................................................................45
7.3 - EK un Rietumāfrikas Ekonomikas un monetārās
savienības nolīgums par gaisa pārvadājumu
pakalpojumiem (A7-0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht
Koch) (balsošana)..................................................45
7.4 - Saskaņoti būvizstrādājumu tirdzniecības nosacījumi
(A7-0343/2010, Catherine Stihler) (balsošana).....45
7.5 - Eiropas konsenss par humāno palīdzību (A7-
0375/2010, Michèle Striffler) (balsošana).............46
7.6 - Lauksaimniecības atzīšana par stratēģiski svarīgu
nozari pārtikas nodrošinātībā (A7-0376/2010,
Daciana Octavia Sârbu) (balsošana)......................46
8 - Balsojumu skaidrojumi..........................................46
9 - Balsojumu labojumi un nodomi balsot (sk. protokolu)
...............................................................................64
10 - Iepriekšējās sēdes protokola apstiprināšana (sk.
protokolu)..............................................................65
11 - Dokumentu iesniegšana (sk. protokolu) ..............65
12 - Jautājumu laiks (jautājumi Komisijas
priekšsēdētājam)....................................................65
13 - Pacienta tiesības pārrobežu veselības aprūpē
(debates) ................................................................74
14 - Eiropas iniciatīva attiecībā uz Alcheimera slimību
un citām demencēm - Astmas slimniekiem paredzētie
inhalatori (debates)................................................92
15 - Jautājumu laiks (jautājumi Komisijai)............... 103
16 - Stāvoklis Haiti vienu gadu pēc zemestrīces —
humānā palīdzība un rekonstrukcija (debates) ....115
17 - Atkritumu krīze Kampānijā (debates)................ 124
18 - Vārda brīvības pārkāpumi un diskriminācija
seksuālās orientācijas dēļ Lietuvā (debates)........ 133
19 - Nākamās sēdes darba kārtība (sk. protokolu) ....140
20 - Sēdes slēgšana ...................................................140
LT TURINYS
1 - Posėdžio pradžia.....................................................15
2 - Diskusijos dėl žmogaus teisių, demokratijos ir
teisinės valstybės pažeidimo atvejų (paskelbiami
pateikti pasiūlymai dėl rezoliucijų) (žr. protokolą)15
3 - Europos Bendrijų ir Serbijos Respublikos
stabilizacijos ir asociacijos susitarimas - Europos
Bendrijų ir Serbijos stabilizacijos ir asociacijos
susitarimas (diskusijos) ..........................................15
4 - Oficialus pasveikinimas......................................... 18
5 - Europos Bendrijų ir Serbijos Respublikos
stabilizacijos ir asociacijos susitarimas - Europos
Bendrijų ir Serbijos stabilizacijos ir asociacijos
susitarimas (diskusijų tęsinys)............................... 18
6 - Belgijos pirmininkavimo Taryboje apžvalga
(diskusijos) ............................................................ 28
7 - Balsuoti skirtas laikas ............................................ 45
7.1 - Akcinių bendrovių jungimas (kodifikuota
redakcija) (A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka)
(balsavimas) .......................................................... 45
7.2 - Europos ir Viduržemio jūros regiono šalių
susitarimo tarp Europos Bendrijų ir Jordanijos
protokolas siekiant atsižvelgti į Bulgarijos ir
Rumunijos įstojimą į Europos Sąjungą (A7-
0373/2010, Gabriele Albertini) (balsavimas) ........ 45
7.3 - EB ir Vakarų Afrikos ekonominės ir pinigų
sąjungos susitarimas dėl oro susisiekimo paslaugų
(A7-0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch) (balsavimas)
............................................................................... 45
7.4 - Suderintos statybos produktų rinkodaros sąlygos
(A7-0343/2010, Catherine Stihler) (balsavimas)... 45
7.5 - Europos konsensuso dėl humanitarinės pagalbos
(A7-0375/2010, Michèle Striffler) (balsavimas)... 46
7.6 - Žemės ūkio pripažinimas strateginiu sektoriumi
atsižvelgiant į aprūpinimo maistu saugumą (A7-
0376/2010, Daciana Octavia Sârbu) (balsavimas) 46
8 - Paaiškinimai dėl balsavimo ................................... 46
9 - Balsavimo ketinimai ir pataisymai (žr. protokolą) 64
10 - Ankstesnio posėdžio protokolo tvirtinimas (žr.
protokola) .............................................................. 65
11 - Pateikti dokumentai (žr.protokolą) ...................... 65
12 - Klausimų Komisijos pirmininkui valanda ........... 65
13 - Pacientų teisės į sveikatos priežiūros paslaugas
kitose valstybėse narėse (diskusijos)..................... 74
14 - Europos iniciatyva dėl Alzheimerio ligos ir kitų
demencijos atmainų - Astmos inhaliatoriai
(diskusijos) ............................................................ 92
15 - Klausimų valanda (klausimai Komisijai) .......... 103
16 - Haičio atstatymas praėjus vieniems metams po
žemės drebėjimo: humanitarinė pagalba ir atstatymas
(diskusijos) .......................................................... 115
17 - Atliekų krizė Kampanijoje (diskusijos) ............. 124
18 - Laisvės reikšti savo mintis ir įsitikinimus
pažeidimas ir diskriminacija dėl seksualinės
orientacijos Lietuvoje (diskusijos) ...................... 133
19 - Kito posėdžio darbotvarkė (žr. protokola)......... 140
20 - Posėdžio pabaiga ............................................... 140

18-01-2011 9
HU TARTALOM
1 - Az ülés megnyitása.................................................15
2 - Viták az emberi jogok, a demokrácia és a
jogállamiság megsértésének eseteiről (benyújtott
állásfoglalásra irányuló indítványok bejelentése):
lásd a jegyzőkönyvet ..............................................15
3 - Az EK és Szerbia közötti stabilizációs és társulási
megállapodás - Az EK és Szerbia közötti
stabilizációs és társulási megállapodás (vita) .........15
4 - Köszöntés ..............................................................18
5 - Az EK és Szerbia közötti stabilizációs és társulási
megállapodás - Az EK és Szerbia közötti
stabilizációs és társulási megállapodás (a vita
folytatása)..............................................................18
6 - A Tanács belga elnökségének áttekintése (vita) ....28
7 - Szavazások órája....................................................45
7.1 - Részvénytársaságok egyesülése (kodifikált
változat) (A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka) (szavazás)45
7.2 - Az EK és Jordánia közötti euro-mediterrán
megállapodáshoz Bulgária és Románia Európai
Unióhoz való csatlakozásának figyelembevétele
céljából csatolt jegyzőkönyv (A7-0373/2010,
Gabriele Albertini) (szavazás)...............................45
7.3 - Az EK és a Nyugat-afrikai Gazdasági és Monetáris
Unió közötti légiközlekedési megállapodás (A7-
0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch) (szavazás)......45
7.4 - Az építési termékek forgalmazására vonatkozó
harmonizált feltételek (A7-0343/2010, Catherine
Stihler) (szavazás) .................................................45
7.5 - A humanitárius segítségnyújtással kapcsolatos
európai konszenzus (A7-0375/2010, Michèle
Striffler) (szavazás) ...............................................46
7.6 - A mezőgazdaság elismerése startégiai ágazatként
az élelmezésbiztonság terén (A7-0376/2010, Daciana
Octavia Sârbu) (szavazás) .....................................46
8 - A szavazáshoz fűzött indokolások.........................46
9 - Szavazathelyesbítések és szavazási szándékok: lásd a
jegyzőkönyvet .......................................................64
10 - Az előző ülés jegyzőkönyvének elfogadása: lásd a
jegyzokönyvet .......................................................65
11 - Dokumentumok benyújtása: lásd a jegyzőkönyvet65
12 - Kérdések órája a Bizottság elnöke jelenlétében...65
13 - A határokon átnyúló egészségügyi ellátásra
vonatkozó betegjogok (vita)..................................74
14 - Az Alzheimer-kórra és más demenciákra irányuló
európai kezdeményezés - Asztmainhalátorok (vita)92
15 - Kérdések órája (a Bizottsághoz intézett kérdések)
............................................................................. 103
16 - A haiti helyzet egy évvel a földrengést követően:
humanitárius segély és újjáépítés (vita)...............115
17 - Hulladékválság Campaniában (vita)..................124
18 - A szólásszabadság megsértése és szexuális
orientáción alapuló megkülönböztetés Litvániában
(vita) ....................................................................133
19 - A következő ülésnap napirendje: lásd a
jegyzokönyvet ..................................................... 140
20 - Az ülés berekesztése..........................................140
MT WERREJ
1 - Ftuħ tas-seduta........................................................15
2 - Dibattiti dwar każijiet ta' vjolazzjoni tad-drittijiet talbniedem,
tad-demokrazija u l-istat tad-dritt (tħabbir
ta' mozzjonijiet għal riżoluzzjonijiet imressqa): ara lminuti
.....................................................................15
3 - Ftehim ta' Stabbilizzazzjoni u Assoċjazzjoni KE-
Serbja - Ftehim ta' Stabbilizzazzjoni u Assoċjazzjoni
bejn il-KE u s-Serbja (dibattitu) .............................15
4 - Merħba................................................................... 18
5 - Ftehim ta' Stabbilizzazzjoni u Assoċjazzjoni KE-
Serbja - Ftehim ta' Stabbilizzazzjoni u Assoċjazzjoni
bejn il-KE u s-Serbja (tkomplija tad-dibattitu)...... 18
6 - Analiżi tal-Presidenza Belġjana tal-Kunsill (dibattitu)
............................................................................... 28
7 - Ħin tal-votazzjonijiet ............................................. 45
7.1 - Mergers ta’ kumpaniji pubbliċi b’responsabbiltà
limitata(verżjoni kodifikata) (A7-0363/2010, Jiří
Maštálka) (votazzjoni)........................................... 45
7.2 - Protokoll għall-Ftehima Ewro-Mediterranja bejn il-
KE u l-Ġordan, fid-dawl tal-adeżjoni mal-UE tal-
Bulgarija u r-Rumanija (A7-0373/2010, Gabriele
Albertini) (votazzjoni)........................................... 45
7.3 - Ftehim KE-Unjoni Ekonomika u Monetarja tal-
Afrika tal-Punent dwar is-servizzi tal-ajru (A7-
0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch) (votazzjoni) ... 45
7.4 - Kundizzjonijiet armonizzati għallkummerċjalizzazzjoni
tal-prodotti għall-kostruzzjoni
(A7-0343/2010, Catherine Stihler) (votazzjoni).... 45
7.5 - L-implimentazzjoni tal-Konsensus Ewropew dwar
l-għajnuna umanitarja: l-analiżi ta' nofs it-term tal-
Pjan ta' Azzjoni tagħha u t-triq 'il quddiem (A7-
0375/2010, Michèle Striffler) (votazzjoni)............ 46
7.6 - L-agrikoltura bħala settur strateġiku fil-kuntest tassigurtà
tal-ikel (A7-0376/2010, Daciana Octavia
Sârbu) (votazzjoni)................................................ 46
8 - Spegazzjonijiet tal-vot ........................................... 46
9 - Korrezzjonijiet u intenzjonijiet għall-vot: ara l-
Minuti.................................................................... 64
10 - Approvazzjoni tal-Minuti tas-seduta ta’ qabel: ara l-
Minuti.................................................................... 65
11 - Dokumenti mressqa: ara l-Minuti........................ 65
12 - Ħin għall-Mistoqsijiet mal-President tal-
Kummissjoni ......................................................... 65
13 - Id-drittijiet tal-pazjenti fil-kura tas-saħħa
transkonfinali (dibattitu)........................................ 74
14 - Inizjattiva Ewropea dwar il-marda ta' Alzheimer u
dimenzji oħrajn - Inalaturi għall-ażma (dibattitu) . 92
15 - Ħin tal-mistoqsijiet (mistoqsijiet lill-Kummissjoni)
............................................................................. 103
16 - Ir-rikostruzzjoni ta' Ħaiti sena wara t-terremot:
għajnuna umanitarja u rikostruzzjoni (dibattitu) . 115
17 - Il-kriżi tal-iskart fil-Kampanja (dibattitu).......... 124
18 - Ksur tal-libertà tal-espressjoni u diskriminazzjoni
abbażi tal-orjentament sesswali fil-Litwanja
(dibattitu)............................................................. 133
19 - L-aġenda tas-seduta li jmiss: ara l-Minuti ......... 140
20 - Għeluq tas-seduta .............................................. 140

10 18-01-2011
NL INHOUD
1 - Opening van de vergadering...................................15
2 - Debatten over gevallen van schending van de
mensenrechten, de democratie en de rechtsstaat
(bekendmaking van de ingediende
ontwerpresoluties): zie notulen...............................15
3 - Stabilisatie- en associatieovereenkomst EG-Servië -
Stabilisatie- en associatieovereenkomst EG-Servië
(debat) ....................................................................15
4 - Welkomstwoord.....................................................18
5 - Stabilisatie- en associatieovereenkomst EG-Servië -
Stabilisatie- en associatieovereenkomst EG-Servië
(voortzetting van het debat)...................................18
6 - Balans van het Belgisch voorzitterschap van de Raad
(debat) ...................................................................28
7 - Stemmingen...........................................................45
7.1 - Fusies van naamloze vennootschappen
(gecodificeerde versie) (A7-0363/2010, Jiří
Maštálka) (stemming) ...........................................45
7.2 - Protocol bij de Europees-mediterrane
overeenkomst tussen de EG en Jordanië, teneinde
rekening te houden met de toetreding van de
Republiek Bulgarije en Roemenië tot de EU (A7-
0373/2010, Gabriele Albertini) (stemming) ..........45
7.3 - Overeenkomst tussen de Europese Gemeenschap en
de West-Afrikaanse economische en monetaire
Unie? ..................................................................... 45
inzake bepaalde aspecten van luchtdiensten (A7-
0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch) (stemming) ....45
7.4 - Geharmoniseerde voorwaarden voor het in de
handel brengen van bouwproducten (A7-0343/2010,
Catherine Stihler) (stemming) ...............................45
7.5 - Europese consensus betreffende humanitaire hulp
(A7-0375/2010, Michèle Striffler) (stemming) .....46
7.6 - De landbouw als strategische sector voor de
voedselzekerheid (A7-0376/2010, Daciana Octavia
Sârbu) (stemming).................................................46
8 - Stemverklaringen...................................................46
9 - Rectificaties stemgedrag/voorgenomen stemgedrag:
zie notulen .............................................................64
10 - Goedkeuring van de notulen van de vorige
vergadering: zie notulen ........................................65
11 - Ingekomen stukken: zie notulen ..........................65
12 - Vragenuur met de voorzitter van de Commissie..65
13 - Rechten van patiënten bij grensoverschrijdende
gezondheidszorg (debat)........................................74
14 - Europees initiatief op het gebied van de ziekte van
Alzheimer en andere vormen van dementie - Astmainhalatoren
(debat).................................................92
15 - Vragenuur (vragen aan de Commissie)..............103
16 - De situatie in Haïti een jaar na de aardbeving:
humanitaire hulp en wederopbouw (debat) .........115
17 - Afvalcrisis in Campanië (debat) ........................124
18 - Schending van de vrijheid van meningsuiting en
discriminatie op grond van seksuele geaardheid in
Litouwen (debat) .................................................133
19 - Agenda van de volgende vergadering: zie notulen
.............................................................................140
20 - Sluiting van de vergadering ............................... 140
PL SPIS TREŚCI
1 - Otwarcie posiedzenia..............................................15
2 - Debata nad przypadkami łamania praw człowieka,
zasad demokracji i państwa prawa (ogłoszenie o
złożonych projektach rezolucji): patrz protokół.....15
3 - Układ WE/Serbia o stabilizacji i stowarzyszeniu -
Układ o stabilizacji i stowarzyszeniu między WE i
Serbią (debata) .......................................................15
4 - Powitanie............................................................... 18
5 - Układ WE/Serbia o stabilizacji i stowarzyszeniu -
Układ o stabilizacji i stowarzyszeniu między WE i
Serbią (ciąg dalszy debat) ..................................... 18
6 - Podsumowanie belgijskiej prezydencji w Radzie
(debata).................................................................. 28
7 - Głosowanie............................................................ 45
7.1 - Łączenie się spółek akcyjnych (wersja
ujednolicona) (A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka)
(głosowanie).......................................................... 45
7.2 - Protokół do Układu eurośródziemnomorskiego
WE/Jordania uwzględniający przystąpienie
Republiki Bułgarii i Rumunii do UE (A7-0373/2010,
Gabriele Albertini) (głosowanie)........................... 45
7.3 - Umowa między WE a Unią Gospodarczą i
Walutową Afryki Zachodniej dotycząca przewozów
lotniczych (A7-0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch)
(głosowanie).......................................................... 45
7.4 - Zharmonizowane warunki wprowadzania do obrotu
wyrobów budowlanych (A7-0343/2010, Catherine
Stihler) (głosowanie)............................................. 45
7.5 - Konsensus europejski w sprawie pomocy
humanitarnej (A7-0375/2010, Michèle Striffler)
(głosowanie).......................................................... 46
7.6 - Rolnictwo jako sektor strategiczny w kontekście
bezpieczeństwa żywnościowego (A7-0376/2010,
Daciana Octavia Sârbu) (głosowanie)................... 46
8 - Wyjaśnienia dotyczące sposobu głosowania ......... 46
9 - Korekty do głosowania i zamiar głosowania: patrz
protokół ................................................................. 64
10 - Przyjęcie protokołu poprzedniego posiedzenia:
Patrz protokól........................................................ 65
11 - Składanie dokumentów: patrz protokół ............... 65
12 - Tura pytań z udziałem przewodniczącego Komisji
............................................................................... 65
13 - Prawa pacjenta w transgranicznej opiece
zdrowotnej (debata)............................................... 74
14 - Europejska inicjatywa dotycząca choroby
Alzheimera i pozostałych demencji - Inhalatory dla
osób chorych na astmę (debata) ............................ 92
15 - Tura pytań (pytania do Komisji)........................ 103
16 - Sytucja na Haiti w rok po trzęsieniu ziemi: pomoc
humanitarna i odbudowa (debata) ....................... 115
17 - Kryzys śmieciowy w Kampanii (debata)........... 124
18 - Naruszenie wolności słowa i dyskryminacja ze
względu na orientację seksualną na Litwie (debata)
............................................................................. 133
19 - Porządek obrad następnego posiedzenia: Patrz
protokól ............................................................... 140
20 - Zamknięcie posiedzenia .................................... 140

18-01-2011 11
PT INDICE
1 - Abertura do período de sessões ..............................15
2 - Debates sobre casos de violação dos direitos
humanos, da democracia e do Estado de direito
(comunicação das propostas de resolução
apresentadas): ver Acta ..........................................15
3 - Acordo CE-Sérvia de Estabilização e de Associação -
Acordo de estabilização e de associação entre a CE e
a Sérvia (debate).....................................................15
4 - Boas-vindas ...........................................................18
5 - Acordo CE-Sérvia de Estabilização e de Associação -
Acordo de estabilização e de associação entre a CE e
a Sérvia (continuação do debate)...........................18
6 - Balanço da Presidência belga do Conselho (debate)28
7 - Período de votação.................................................45
7.1 - Fusão das sociedades anónimas (versão codificada)
(A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka) (votação) ..............45
7.2 - Protocolo ao Acordo Euro-Mediterrânico CE-
Jordânia, a fim de ter em conta a adesão da Bulgária
e da Roménia à UE (A7-0373/2010, Gabriele
Albertini) (votação) ...............................................45
7.3 - Acordo CE-União Económica e Monetária da
África Ocidental sobre serviços aéreos (A7-
0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch) (votação) .......45
7.4 - Condições harmonizadas para a comercialização
dos produtos de construção (A7-0343/2010,
Catherine Stihler) (votação) ..................................45
7.5 - Consenso Europeu em matéria de Ajuda
Humanitária (A7-0375/2010, Michèle Striffler)
(votação)................................................................46
7.6 - A agricultura como um sector estratégico no
contexto da segurança alimentar (A7-0376/2010,
Daciana Octavia Sârbu) (votação).........................46
8 - Declarações de voto...............................................46
9 - Correcções e intenções de voto: ver Acta..............64
10 - Aprovação da acta da sessão anterior: Ver Acta..65
11 - Entrega de documentos: ver Acta ........................65
12 - Período de perguntas ao Presidente da Comissão 65
13 - Direitos dos doentes em matéria de cuidados de
saúde transfronteiriços (debate).............................74
14 - Iniciativa europeia em matéria de doença de
Alzheimer e outras formas de demência - Inaladores
para a asma (debate)..............................................92
15 - Período de perguntas (perguntas à Comissão)...103
16 - Situação no Haiti um ano após o terramoto: ajuda
humanitária e reconstrução (debate).................... 115
17 - Crise dos resíduos na Campânia (debate) .......... 124
18 - Violação da liberdade de expressão e discriminação
com base na orientação sexual na Lituânia (debate)
............................................................................. 133
19 - Ordem do dia da próxima sessão: Ver Acta.......140
20 - Encerramento da sessão..................................... 140
RO CUPRINS
1 - Deschiderea şedinţei...............................................15
2 - Dezbateri asupra cazurilor de încălcare a drepturilor
omului, a democraţiei şi a statului de drept
(anunţarea propunerilor de rezoluţie depuse): a se
vedea procesul-verbal.............................................15
3 - Acordul de stabilizare şi de asociere între CE şi
Serbia - Acordul de stabilizare şi de asociere între
CE şi Serbia (dezbatere).........................................15
4 - Urări de bun venit.................................................. 18
5 - Acordul de stabilizare şi de asociere între CE şi
Serbia - Acordul de stabilizare şi de asociere între
CE şi Serbia (continuarea dezbaterii).................... 18
6 - Bilanţul Preşedinţiei belgiene a Consiliului
(dezbatere)............................................................. 28
7 - Votare .................................................................... 45
7.1 - Fuziunile societăţilor comerciale pe acţiuni
(versiune codificată) (A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka)
(vot)....................................................................... 45
7.2 - Protocolul la Acordul euromediteraneean între CE
şi Iordania pentru a ţine seama de aderarea Bulgariei
şi a României la UE (A7-0373/2010, Gabriele
Albertini) (vot) ...................................................... 45
7.3 - Acordul CE-Uniunea Economică și Monetară a
Africii de Vest privind serviciile aeriene (A7-
0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch) (vot)............... 45
7.4 - Condiţii armonizate pentru comercializarea
produselor de construcţie (A7-0343/2010, Catherine
Stihler) (vot).......................................................... 45
7.5 - Consensul european privind ajutorul umanitar (A7-
0375/2010, Michèle Striffler) (vot)....................... 46
7.6 - Agricultura ca sector strategic în contextul
securităţii alimentare (A7-0376/2010, Daciana
Octavia Sârbu) (vot).............................................. 46
8 - Explicaţii privind votul.......................................... 46
9 - Corectările voturilor şi intenţiile de vot: a se vedea
procesul-verbal...................................................... 64
10 - Aprobarea procesului-verbal al şedinţei anterioare:
consultaţi procesul-verbal ..................................... 65
11 - Depunerea documentelor: a se vedea procesulverbal.....................................................................
65
12 - Timp afectat întrebărilor adresate Preşedintelui
Comisiei ................................................................ 65
13 - Drepturile pacienților în cadrul asistenței medicale
transfrontaliere (dezbatere) ................................... 74
14 - O inițiativă europeană privind boala Alzheimer şi
alte demențe - Inhalatoarele pentru astmatici
(dezbatere)............................................................. 92
15 - Timpul afectat întrebărilor (întrebări adresate
Comisiei)............................................................. 103
16 - Situaţia în Haiti la un an după cutremur: ajutoarele
umanitare şi reconstrucţia (dezbatere)................. 115
17 - Criza deşeurilor din Campania (dezbatere)........ 124
18 - Încălcarea libertăţii de exprimare şi discriminarea
pe bază de orientare sexuală în Lituania (dezbatere)
............................................................................. 133
19 - Ordinea de zi a următoarei şedinţe: consultaţi
procesul-verbal.................................................... 140
20 - Ridicarea şedinţei .............................................. 140

12 18-01-2011
SK OBSAH
1 - Otvorenie rokovania ...............................................15
2 - Rozpravy o prípadoch porušovania ľudských práv,
demokracie a princípov právneho štátu (oznámenie o
podaných návrhoch uznesenia): pozri zápisnicu ....15
3 - Dohoda o stabilizácii a pridružení medzi ES a
Srbskom - Dohoda o stabilizácii a pridružení medzi
ES a Srbskom (rozprava)........................................15
4 - Oficiálne privítanie................................................18
5 - Dohoda o stabilizácii a pridružení medzi ES a
Srbskom - Dohoda o stabilizácii a pridružení medzi
ES a Srbskom (pokračovanie rozpravy) ................18
6 - Zhodnotenie belgického predsedníctva Rady
(rozprava) ..............................................................28
7 - Hlasovanie .............................................................45
7.1 - Zlúčenie a splynutie akciových spoločností
(kodifikované znenie) (A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka)
(hlasovanie) ...........................................................45
7.2 - Protokol k Euro-stredomorskej dohode medzi ES a
Jordánskom s cieľom zohľadniť pristúpenie
Bulharska a Rumunska k EÚ (A7-0373/2010,
Gabriele Albertini) (hlasovanie)............................45
7.3 - Dohoda medzi ES a Západoafrickou hospodárskou
a menovou úniou o leteckých službách (A7-
0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch) (hlasovanie)...45
7.4 - Harmonizované podmienky uvádzania stavebných
výrobkov na trh (A7-0343/2010, Catherine Stihler)
(hlasovanie) ...........................................................45
7.5 - Európsky konsenzus o humanitárnej pomoci (A7-
0375/2010, Michèle Striffler) (hlasovanie) ...........46
7.6 - Poľnohospodárstvo ako strategické odvetvie v
súvislosti s potravinovou bezpečnosťou (A7-
0376/2010, Daciana Octavia Sârbu) (hlasovanie) .46
8 - Vysvetlenia hlasovania ..........................................46
9 - Opravy hlasovania a zámery pri hlasovaní: pozri
zápisnicu................................................................64
10 - Schválenie zápisnice z predchádzajúceho rokovania:
pozri zápisnicu.......................................................65
11 - Predložené dokumenty: pozri zápisnicu ..............65
12 - Hodina otázok pre predsedu Komisie..................65
13 - Práva pacientov pri cezhraničnej zdravotnej
starostlivosti (rozprava).........................................74
14 - Európska iniciatíva o Alzheimerovej chorobe a
iných typoch demencií - Inhalátory pre astmatikov
(rozprava) ..............................................................92
15 - Hodina otázok (otázky pre Komisiu)................. 103
16 - Situácia na Haiti rok po zemetrasení: humanitárna
pomoc a obnova (rozprava)................................. 115
17 - Kríza týkajúca sa odpadu v Kampánii (rozprava)124
18 - Porušovanie slobody prejavu a diskriminácia na
základe sexuálnej orientácie v Litve (rozprava) ..133
19 - Program rokovania na nasledujúci deň: pozri
zápisnicu.............................................................. 140
20 - Skončenie rokovania.......................................... 140
SL VSEBINA
1 - Otvoritev seje..........................................................15
2 - Razprave o primerih kršitev človekovih pravic,
demokracije in načela pravne države (razglasitev
vloženih predlogov resolucij): glej zapisnik...........15
3 - Stabilizacijsko-pridružitveni sporazum ES/Srbija -
Stabilizacijsko-pridružitveni sporazum ES/Srbija
(razprava) ...............................................................15
4 - Dobrodošlica.......................................................... 18
5 - Stabilizacijsko-pridružitveni sporazum ES/Srbija -
Stabilizacijsko-pridružitveni sporazum ES/Srbija
(nadaljevanje razprave) ......................................... 18
6 - Pregled belgijskega predsedovanja Svetu (razprava)
............................................................................... 28
7 - Čas glasovanja....................................................... 45
7.1 - Združitev delniških družb (kodificirana različica)
(A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka) (glasovanje).......... 45
7.2 - Protokol k Evro-mediteranskemu sporazumu med
ES in Jordanijo, da se upošteva pristop Bolgarije in
Romunije k Evropski uniji (A7-0373/2010, Gabriele
Albertini) (glasovanje) .......................................... 45
7.3 - Sporazum med Evropsko skupnostjo ter
Ekonomsko in monetarno unijo Zahodne Afrike o
nekaterih vidikih zračnega prometa (A7-0361/2010,
Dieter-Lebrecht Koch) (glasovanje)...................... 45
7.4 - Določitev usklajenih pogojev za trženje gradbenih
proizvodov (A7-0343/2010, Catherine Stihler)
(glasovanje)........................................................... 45
7.5 - Evropsko soglasje o humanitarni pomoči (A7-
0375/2010, Michèle Striffler) (glasovanje) ........... 46
7.6 - Kmetijstvo kot strateški sektor v okviru prehranske
varnosti (A7-0376/2010, Daciana Octavia Sârbu)
(glasovanje)........................................................... 46
8 - Obrazložitev glasovanja ........................................ 46
9 - Popravki in namere glasovanja: glej zapisnik........ 64
10 - Sprejetje zapisnika predhodne seje: gl. zapisnik.. 65
11 - Predložitev dokumentov: glej zapisnik................ 65
12 - Ura za vprašanja predsedniku Komisije .............. 65
13 - Pravice pacientov pri čezmejnem zdravstvenem
varstvu (razprava).................................................. 74
14 - Evropska pobuda o Alzheimerjevi bolezni in drugih
demencah - Inhalatorji za astmatike (razprava)..... 92
15 - Čas za vprašanja (vprašanja Komisiji)............... 103
16 - Razmere na Haitiju leto po potresu: humanitarna
pomoč in obnova (razprava)................................ 115
17 - Kriza z odpadki v Kampanji (razprava)............. 124
18 - Kršitve svobode govora in diskriminacija zaradi
spolne usmerjenosti v Litvi (razprava)................ 133
19 - Dnevni red naslednje seje: gl. zapisnik.............. 140
20 - Zaključek seje.................................................... 140

18-01-2011 13
FI SISÄLTÖ
1 - Istunnon avaaminen................................................15
2 - Keskustelu ihmisoikeuksien sekä demokratian ja
oikeusvaltion periaatteiden loukkauksia koskevista
tapauksista (käsiteltäväksi jätetyt
päätöslauselmaesitykset): ks. pöytäkirja.................15
3 - EY:n ja Serbian välinen vakautus- ja
assosiaatiosopimus - EY:n ja Serbian välinen
vakautus- ja assosiaatiosopimus (keskustelu).........15
4 - Tervetulotoivotukset..............................................18
5 - EY:n ja Serbian välinen vakautus- ja
assosiaatiosopimus - EY:n ja Serbian välinen
vakautus- ja assosiaatiosopimus (jatkoa
keskustelulle).........................................................18
6 - Katsaus Belgian puheenjohtajakauteen (keskustelu)
...............................................................................28
7 - Äänestykset............................................................45
7.1 - Osakeyhtiöiden sulautumiset (kodifioitu toisinto)
(A7-0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka) (äänestys) .............45
7.2 - EY:n ja Jordanian Euro–Välimeri-sopimukseen
Bulgarian tasavallan ja Romanian EU:hun liittymisen
huomioon ottamiseksi liitettävän pöytäkirjan
tekeminen (A7-0373/2010, Gabriele Albertini)
(äänestys)...............................................................45
7.3 - EY:n ja Länsi-Afrikan talous- ja rahaliiton välinen
tiettyjä lentoliikenteen näkökohtia koskeva sopimus
(A7-0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch) (äänestys)45
7.4 - Rakennustuotteiden kaupan pitämistä koskevien
ehtojen yhdenmukaistaminen (A7-0343/2010,
Catherine Stihler) (äänestys) .................................45
7.5 - Yhteisön humanitaarista apua koskeva konsensus
(A7-0375/2010, Michèle Striffler) (äänestys) .......46
7.6 - Maatalouden tunnustaminen strategiseksi alaksi
elintarviketurvan yhteydessä (A7-0376/2010,
Daciana Octavia Sârbu) (äänestys)........................46
8 - Äänestysselitykset .................................................46
9 - Äänestymiskäyttäytymistä ja äänestysaikeita
koskevat ilmoitukset: ks. pöytäkirja......................64
10 - Edellisen istunnon pöytäkirjan hyväksyminen: ks.
pöytäkirja...............................................................65
11 - Vastaanotetut asiakirjat: ks. pöytäkirja................65
12 - Kyselytunti (komission puheenjohtaja) ...............65
13 - Rajatylittävässä terveydenhuollossa sovellettavat
potilaiden oikeudet (keskustelu)............................74
14 - Alzheimerin tautia ja muita dementioita koskeva
eurooppalainen aloite - Astmasumutteet (keskustelu)
...............................................................................92
15 - Kyselytunti (kysymykset komissiolle)............... 103
16 - Haitin tilanne vuosi maanjäristyksen jälkeen:
humanitaarinen apu ja jälleenrakentaminen
(keskustelu) ......................................................... 115
17 - Campanian jätekriisi (keskustelu)......................124
18 - Ilmaisunvapauden rikkominen ja seksuaalisen
suuntautumisen perusteella tapahtuva syrjintä
Liettuassa (keskustelu) ........................................133
19 - Seuraavan istunnon esityslista: ks. pöytäkirja ...140
20 - Istunnon päättäminen......................................... 140
SV INNEHÅLL
1 - Öppnande av sammanträdet....................................15
2 - Debatter om fall av kränkningar av de mänskliga
rättigheterna samt av demokratiska och rättsstatliga
principer (tillkännagivande av ingivna
resolutionsförslag): se protokollet..........................15
3 - Stabiliserings- och associeringsavtal EG/Serbien -
Stabiliserings- och associeringsavtal mellan EG och
Serbien (debatt) ......................................................15
4 - Välkomsthälsning.................................................. 18
5 - Stabiliserings- och associeringsavtal EG/Serbien -
Stabiliserings- och associeringsavtal mellan EG och
Serbien (fortsättning på debatten) ......................... 18
6 - Resultat av det belgiska ordförandeskapet (debatt)28
7 - Omröstning............................................................ 45
7.1 - Fusioner av aktiebolag (kodifierad version) (A7-
0363/2010, Jiří Maštálka) (omröstning)................ 45
7.2 - Protokoll till Europa–Medelhavsavtalet mellan EG
och Jordanien, med anledning av Bulgariens och
Rumäniens anslutning till EU (A7-0373/2010,
Gabriele Albertini) (omröstning)........................... 45
7.3 - Avtal EG/Västafrikanska ekonomiska och
monetära unionen om luftfart (A7-0361/2010,
Dieter-Lebrecht Koch) (omröstning)..................... 45
7.4 - Harmoniserade villkor för utsläppande av
byggprodukter på marknaden (A7-0343/2010,
Catherine Stihler) (omröstning)............................. 45
7.5 - Europeiska samförståndet om humanitärt bistånd
(A7-0375/2010, Michèle Striffler) (omröstning)... 46
7.6 - Jordbruket som en strategisk sektor inom ramen för
livsmedelsförsörjning (A7-0376/2010, Daciana
Octavia Sârbu) (omröstning)................................. 46
8 - Röstförklaringar..................................................... 46
9 - Rättelser/avsiktsförklaringar till avgivna röster: se
protokollet ............................................................. 64
10 - Justering av protokollet från föregående
sammanträde: se protokollet.................................. 65
11 - Inkomna dokument: se protokollet ...................... 65
12 - Frågetimme med kommissionens ordförande...... 65
13 - Patienternas rättigheter vid gränsöverskridande
hälso- och sjukvård (debatt) .................................. 74
14 - Europeiskt initiativ rörande Alzheimers sjukdom
och andra demenssjukdomar - Astmainhalatorer
(debatt) .................................................................. 92
15 - Frågestund (frågor till kommissionen) .............. 103
16 - Situationen i Haiti ett år efter jordbävningen -
humanitärt bistånd och återuppbyggnad (debatt) 115
17 - Avfallskrisen i Kampanien (debatt)................... 124
18 - Brott mot yttrandefriheten och diskriminering
utifrån sexuell läggning i Litauen (debatt) .......... 133
19 - Föredragningslista för nästa sammanträde: se
protokollet ........................................................... 140
20 - Avslutande av sammanträdet............................. 140

14 18-01-2011

2-001
2-002
ВТОРНИК 18 ЯНУАРИ 2011 Г.
MARTES 18 DE ENERO DE 2011
ÚTERÝ 18. LEDNA 2011
TIRSDAG DEN 18. JANUAR 2011
DIENSTAG, 18. JANUAR 2011
TEISIPÄEV, 18. JAANUAR 2011
ΤΡΙΤΗ 18 ΙΑΝΟΥΑΡΙΟΥ 2011
TUESDAY, 18 JANUARY 2011
MARDI 18 JANVIER 2011
MARTEDI' 18 GENNAIO 2011
OTRDIENA, 2011. GADA 18. JANVĀRIS
VORSITZ: SILVANA KOCH-MEHRIN
Vizepräsidentin
2-003
1 - Eröffnung der Sitzung
2-004
(Die Sitzung wird um 9.00 Uhr eröffnet.)
2-005
2 - Aussprache über Fälle von Verletzungen
der Menschenrechte, der Demokratie und
der Rechtsstaatlichkeit (Bekanntgabe der
eingereichten Entschließungsanträge): siehe
Protokoll
2-006
3 - Stabilisierungs- und
Assoziierungsabkommen EG/Serbien -
Stabilisierungs- und
Assoziierungsabkommen zwischen der EG
und Serbien (Aussprache)
2-007
Die Präsidentin. − Als erster Punkt folgt die
Gemeinsame Aussprache – Abkommen EG-Serbien
– Stabilisierungs- und Assoziierungsabkommen
EG/Serbien. Empfehlung von Jelko Kacin im Namen
des Ausschusses für auswärtige Angelegenheiten (A7-
0362/2010). Empfehlung zu dem Entwurf eines
Beschlusses des Rates und der Kommission über den
Abschluss des Stabilisierungs- und
Assoziierungsabkommens zwischen den Europäischen
Gemeinschaften und ihren Mitgliedstaaten einerseits und
der Republik Serbien andererseits [15619/1/2007 - C7-
0341/2010 - 2007/0255(NLE)]
2011 M. SAUSIO 18 D., ANTRADIENIS
2011. JANUÁR 18., KEDD
IT-TLIETA, 18 TA' JANNAR 2011
DINSDAG 18 JANUARI 2011
WTOREK, 18 STYCZNIA 2011
TERÇA-FEIRA, 18 DE JANEIRO DE 2011
MARŢI 18 IANUARIE 2011
UTOROK 18. JANUÁRA 2011
TOREK, 18. JANUAR 2011
TIISTAI 18. TAMMIKUUTA 2011
TISDAGEN DEN 18 JANUARI 2011
– Stabilisierungs- und Assoziierungsabkommen
zwischen der EG und Serbien. Erklärungen des Rates
und der Kommission [2010/2980(RSP)]
2-008
Jelko Kacin, Poročevalec. − Sporazum o stabilizaciji in
pridruževanju med Evropsko unijo in Srbijo je bil
podpisan aprila 2008, prehodni trgovinski začasni
sporazum pa se uspešno izvaja od februarja 2010.
Proces ratifikacije se je začel septembra 2008, ko je
parlament Srbije prvi ratificiral ta sporazum.
Sporazum prinaša politični, pravni in gospodarski okvir
sodelovanja Evropske unije in Srbije, in brez začetka
procesa ratifikacije ni bilo mogoče nadaljevati evropskih
integracij Srbije.
Leta 2009 poročila o Srbiji ni bilo na dnevnem redu
Evropskega parlamenta, ker je bil proces ratifikacije v
državah članicah blokiran zaradi nezadostnega
sodelovanja s haaškim sodiščem. Do danes je enajst
držav članic ratificiralo ta sporazum, in zato danes
pozivam preostale države, da to storijo čim prej.
Z današnjo ratifikacijo v tem najvišjem zboru bomo
poslali močno in vidno sporočilo podpore evropskim
naporom Srbije. A to še ne zagotavlja samo po sebi
zaključka procesa ratifikacije.
Resolucija o Srbiji, o kateri bomo glasovali jutri, nosi
prav to sporočilo podpore. Srbijo je potrebno podpreti na
njeni dolgi in težki poti k članstvu v Evropski uniji.
Kot država, ki je bila dolgo izolirana in izven modernih
tokov evropske politike in gospodarstva, se Srbija sooča
s številnimi izzivi.
V zadnjih dveh letih smo priča evropeizaciji politične
scene v Srbiji. Srbski voditelji bodo ponudili najboljši
dokaz o iskreni predanosti evropskim vrednotam in

16 18-01-2011
načinu življenja, če bodo uspešno reševali probleme in
izvedli vse reforme, ki so nujne.
Pozitivnih dogodkov je že nekaj. Pripravljenost Srbije na
kompromis in sprejetje skupne resolucije o Kosovu v
generalni skupščini OZN septembra 2010 so jasno
pozdravljeni z naše strani.
S prvim dnem tega leta je ukinjeno obvezno služenje
vojaškega roka, in generacije mladih državljanov Srbije
so dobile dodatno možnost, da se učijo, študirajo in se
razvijajo. Civilni nadzor nad oboroženimi silami pa je
okrepljen.
Po drugi strani je napredek Srbije k Uniji zelo
obremenjen z dejstvom, da sta dva obtoženca za vojne
zločine pred haaškim sodiščem še vedno na svobodi.
Več kot 15 let od genocida v Srebrenici, tega največjega
zločina na evropskih tleh po drugi svetovni vojni, je
Ratko Mladić še naprej na begu.
Pozdravljamo izjave voditeljev v Beogradu, da je
zaključek sodelovanja s Haagom prioriteta vlade. Prav
tako pa pozivamo oblasti, da, kot pravi glavni haaški
tožilec, prepričljivo zmanjšajo razkorak med izkazano
politično voljo in konkretnimi rezultati.
Prišel je čas, da Srbija zapre to mučno poglavje in naredi
nov korak k spravi v regiji.
Srbija ne more dobiti status kandidatke dokler ne
dokaže, da polno sodeluje s Haagom, kot piše v
zaključkih Sveta z dne 25. oktobra leta 2010.
Najbolj prepričljiv dokaz za to bi bili aretaciji in
izročitev obtoženih. Nivo dosedanjega truda pri
sodelovanju ne prinaša rezultatov in še ni zadosten.
Doseženi so pomembni premiki v regionalnih odnosih
na zahodnem Balkanu, ki se najbolj čutijo v odnosih
med Srbijo in Hrvaško. Pozdravljamo državniško držo
predsednika Srbije, ki je z novim pristopom dal močan
zagon trajni spravi v regiji.
Kljub temu pa obstajajo drugi izzivi. Beograd mora
pokazati konstruktiven odnos v bližnjem dialogu s
Prištino in, ne glede na vprašanja statusa Kosova,
morajo odnosi med Beogradom in Prištino postati
partnerski, da bi cela regija lažje napredovala k Evropi.
To velja tudi za odnos Srbije do Bosne in Hercegovine.
Beograd mora podpirati reforme, ki bodo Bosno in
Hercegovino kot državo z institucijami usposobile za
pogajanja o članstvu v Evropski uniji. V tem trenutku to
namreč še ni tako.
2-009
Enikő Győri, President-in-Office of the Council. −
Madam President, it is a great privilege and honour for
me to return to the European Parliament in my new
capacity as the representative of the Hungarian rotating
presidency of the Council of the European Union. I
hope, honourable Members, that you will consider me a
former Member of this House, and as a guarantee that
the Hungarian Presidency will be a Parliament-friendly
presidency.
I look forward to working with you all during the
forthcoming five-and-a-half months of this presidency,
with great expectations. I shall now use my mother
tongue.
2-010
Enikő Győri, a Tanács soros elnöke. − Elnök asszony!
Képviselő hölgyek és urak! Nagy öröm és
megtiszteltetés számomra, hogy részt vehetek ezen a
vitán, amelyet követően a Parlament szavazni fog a
Szerb Köztársasággal kötött stabilizációs és társulási
megállapodás jóváhagyásáról. Egyúttal szeretném
megragadni az alkalmat, hogy köszönetem fejezzem ki
az Európai Parlament raportőrének, Jelko Kacin úrnak,
aki egy kiváló jelentést készített a témában, és hogy
melegen üdvözöljem a Szerbia európai integrációs
folyamatáról szóló állásfoglalást. A régió többi
országához hasonlóan Szerbiának is javára szolgált az
európai tagságnak a perspektívája, és az elmúlt években
jelentős haladást ért el a cél irányában. Ebben az
összefüggésben a stabilizációs és társulási megállapodás
fontos előrelépést jelent Szerbia számára az Unióba
vezető úton.
A megállapodás megerősíti az EU és Szerbia között már
fennálló szoros köteléket és szerződéses kapcsolatot
teremt a két fél között. A megállapodás új keretbe
helyezi a politikai párbeszédet. Szabadkereskedelmi
övezetet hoz létre és megerősíti a kétoldalú gazdasági
kapcsolatokat és ezáltal arra hivatott, hogy komoly
gazdasági előnyöket hozzon Szerbia számára. A
megállapodás ösztönzi azokat a reformfolyamatokat,
amelyek hozzájárulnak majd a szerb gazdaság
növekedéséhez és elősegítik, hogy Szerbia teljes körűen
működő piacgazdaságot alakítson ki. A megállapodás
lefekteti továbbá az alapokat ahhoz, hogy az Unió és
Szerbia a jövőben számos területen fokozott
együttműködést alakítson ki. Nem utolsó sorban a
szervezett bűnözés és a határokon átívelő tiltott
kereskedelem leküzdése terén, valamint a meglévő
környezetvédelmi előírások javítása tekintetében.
A Tanács 2010. június 14-én elindította a megállapodás
ratifikálási folyamatát. Eddig tizenegy tagállam, köztük
természetesen Magyarország erősítette meg a
megállapodást parlamentje által. Nagyon bízunk benne,
hogy rövid időn belül az összes tagállam ratifikálni
fogja. A Tanács üdvözölné, ha a stabilizációs és társulási
megállapodás 2011 végéig, de legkésőbb 2012 elejéig
hatályba lépne. Ez azt jelentené, hogy Szerbia éppen
akkor lépne ambiciózus szerződéses kapcsolatba az
Unióval, amikor intenzívebbé kezdi tenni a csatlakozási
előkészületeket. Az Önök szavazata még inkább előtérbe
helyezi és előmozdítja majd ezt a folyamatot,
köszönhetően annak az egyhangú támogatásnak, amelyet
a Külügyi Bizottság december 1-jei ülésén valamennyi
politika erő kifejezésre juttatott. Szerbia a 2009

18-01-2011 17
decemberében benyújtott csatlakozási kérelmével
kinyilvánította az Európai Unió iránti elkötelezettségét.
A Tanács tavaly októberben felkérte a Bizottságot, hogy
nyújtsa be a véleményét. Erre várhatóan 2011 második
felében kerül sor.
Mindannyian tudjuk, Szerbia számára az európai
integrációs folyamat számos előnnyel jár. Az országnak
ugyanakkor még fontos reformokat kell végrehajtania.
Ide tartoznak a közigazgatás és a jogállamiság terén tett
további erőfeszítések, beleértve az igazságügyi reformot
is, a korrupció és a szervezett bűnözés elleni küzdelem,
valamint a volt Jugoszláviával foglakozó nemzetközi
törvényszékkel való együttműködés.
Ahogy az a Jelko Kacin úr által benyújtott jelentésben is
szerepel, az integrációs folyamat az e téren elért
előrehaladás függvényében zajlik. Üdvözlöm azt a tényt,
hogy már számos eredmény született. Szeretném egyben
megragadni az alkalmat, hogy felhívjam a figyelmet, az
elmúlt évben Szerbia történelmi lépéseket tett a régióbeli
szomszédaival való megbékélés felé. Üdvözlöm továbbá
azt a szoros együttműködést, amelyet Szerbia 2010
nyarán az Unióval folytatott, és amelynek
eredményeképpen megszületett az az ENSZ határozat,
amely megnyitotta a Belgrád és Pristina közötti
párbeszéd útját. A Tanács teljes mértékben támogatja
Catherin Ashton főképviselő asszony e téren végzett
munkáját. Komoly kihívásról van szó, de a párbeszéd
kialakítása lehetőséget kínál mind Koszovó, mind
Szerbia számára ahhoz, hogy közelebb kerüljenek az
Európai Unióhoz.
És még egy zárógondolatot engedjenek meg nekem.
Meggyőződésem, hogy az Európai Uniónak fenn kell
tartani a bővítési folyamat hitelességét. Ehhez az
eszközök a kezünkben vannak. Azt gondolom, hogy
amennyiben a magyar elnökség alatt sikerül lezárni a
csatlakozási tárgyalásokat Horvátországgal, az Szerbia
felé is egy nagyon komoly jel, hogy a folyamat él, és a
Balkán országainak az uniós népek közös családjában
van a helyük.
Elnök asszony! Képviselő urak! 2011 jelentős év lesz
Szerbia számára, amely egyaránt hoz kihívásokat és
lehetőségeket. Üdvözlöm azt a lehetőséget, amelyet ez
az új megállapodás hoz Szerbia számára ahhoz, hogy
egy békés Európában közösen építsünk vele közös jövőt.
2-011
Štefan Füle, Member of the Commission. − Madam
President, it is a great pleasure and honour for me to
address the European Parliament today for the vote of
consent to the Stabilisation and Association Agreement
with the Republic of Serbia. I would also like to express
my warm gratitude to the rapporteur for Serbia, Jelko
Kacin, for his report on the European integration process
of Serbia.
The Stabilisation and Association Agreement is a major
step forward for Serbia on its path towards the European
Union. The fundamental objective of this agreement is to
pave the way for further European integration and
reforms and to prepare Serbia for European Union
membership. This important milestone will serve as an
encouragement for Serbia, as it has renewed its efforts to
promote reconciliation in the region.
The Stabilisation and Association Agreement sets up a
comprehensive institutional framework through the SAA
Council and SAA Committee, a renewed framework for
political dialogue and a network of subcommittees
extensively covering most European Union policy areas.
Naturally, it also establishes a specific body between this
House and the Serbian Parliament, the Joint
Parliamentary Committee.
From an economic standpoint, the SAA foresees the
gradual establishment of a free trade zone and the
gradual integration of Serbia into the European Union’s
internal market, thus bringing economic benefits for
both the European Union and Serbia. As was the case in
central Europe in the 1990s, the agreement will boost
investment, in particular for indirect investments. It will
make a key contribution to the growth of the Serbian
economy and help Serbia move towards a functioning
market economy.
The benefits of this agreement for the European Union
are equally significant. Serbia’s market has now been
opened up to European Union exporters. Previously
relatively high tariffs will be totally dismantled within a
couple of years, with the exception of a few very
sensitive agricultural products.
Furthermore, by gradually integrating Serbia into the
internal market, conditions for investors will become
more stable and predictable. Rules on competition and
state aid are aligned to those of the European Union.
Protection of intellectual property rights is also gradually
being brought up to European Union standards. The
sizeable Serbian public procurement market is also being
progressively opened up to European bidders.
Forging closer ties with Serbia entails a number of other
advantages for the European Union in particular, as it
will facilitate cooperation in the areas of justice, freedom
and security, the environment, transport and customs, to
mention just a few. It therefore helps make the European
Union’s policy in south-east Europe more credible and
effective.
Finally, it is particularly noteworthy that Serbia brought
forward the implementation of the interim agreement. It
officially entered into force in February 2010, but Serbia
decided to apply it shortly after it was signed in April
2008. Serbia has thereby demonstrated a commitment to
its economic integration with the European Union and
has so far established a positive track record.
Since 14 June 2010, when the Council decided to launch
the ratification process for the agreement, nine Member
States have notified ratification and two more have
secured the approval of their parliaments. Today’s vote
by the European Parliament should therefore provide
additional impetus for this process thanks to the

18 18-01-2011
unanimous support from across the political groups. I
hope that ratification by the other Member States will
follow soon.
Let me conclude by focusing on the motion for a
resolution on the European integration process of Serbia
as a well-prepared contribution to today’s political
debate. I am therefore grateful to the rapporteur, Jelko
Kacin. The resolution sends Serbia both a message of
support for enhancing EU-Serbia relations, and a
message of expectation in relation to the key challenges
on Serbia’s path to European Union membership. This is
particularly timely in the context of the preparations of
the opinion on Serbia’s membership application.
I was in Belgrade last November to hand over a detailed
questionnaire to the Prime Minister and the Deputy
Prime Minister for European integration. The Serbian
authorities are currently working hard on their replies,
which we expect by the end of the month. I am
encouraged by the Serbian Government’s adoption on 30
December of an action plan as a follow-up to the
Commission’s progress report. The Commission will
thoroughly analyse the replies to the questionnaires and
the steps taken by the Serbian authorities in the coming
months to complete its assessment with a view to issuing
the opinion in the second half of 2011.
As my Hungarian colleague said, 2011 is an important
year for Serbia: a year of demanding challenges as well
as a year of opportunities. The path has been set and the
objectives are well known, yet it is up to Serbia to walk
down that path, fulfil the required criteria, and, once
ready, engage in the negotiation process with the
European Union. I am convinced that, with our joint
support, Serbia will continue to make the right European
choices and move ahead in its integration efforts. This
will deliver a positive message for the whole region at a
time when we need to reaffirm its European perspective
in order to consolidate peace and foster economic
prosperity in the Western Balkans.
2-012
György Schöpflin, on behalf of the PPE Group. –
Madam President, in my view the report on Serbia is
excellent. I congratulate the rapporteur, Jelko Kacin.
It seems to me that Serbia has finally made up its mind
that it genuinely wants a European future for itself. The
majority of the political elite believes that this is the
most favourable option. This determination has to be
seen in the light of the turbulence of the last two
decades. Serbia experienced the end of communism, the
collapse of Yugoslavia, the wars that ensued, the rule of
Slobodan Milošević, the bombing of 1999, burgeoning
mafias and criminality, violence, refugees – a depressing
and traumatic history. The decision to opt for Europe,
therefore, is a considerable achievement and signals that
Serbia has become a factor of stability in the region.
Two major political problems remain: the arrest and
transfer of Ratko Mladić to The Hague, and coming to
terms with the independence of Kosovo. Both these
point towards psychological barriers. Mladić has his
protectors, and the loss of Kosovo is painful for a
sizeable section of Serbian society; any loss of territory
is painful. To these may be added several other areas
that need attention, notably the upgrading of public
administration and of the administration of justice, the
establishment of market conditions and full openness
towards Serbia’s past, including opening up the archives.
The auguries for Serbia’s road towards Europe are
reasonably good. There is a clear commitment in this
direction. The tasks faced by the elite and by society are
recognised and the technical preparations are going
ahead. If all goes well, Serbia should receive the opinion
this autumn and candidate status after that. The road to
Europe will not be easy, but Europe as a whole benefits
from a stable, democratic Serbia.
2-013
4 - Begrüßung
2-014
Die Präsidentin. − Bevor wir in der Rednerliste
fortfahren, möchte ich einen Gast begrüßen, der unsere
Debatte hier verfolgt, und zwar den stellvertretenden
Regierungschef von Serbien, Herrn Božidar Đelić.
Herzlich willkommen und schön, dass Sie da sind.
2-015
5 - Stabilisierungs- und
Assoziierungsabkommen EG/Serbien -
Stabilisierungs- und
Assoziierungsabkommen zwischen der EG
und Serbien (Fortsetzung der Aussprache)
2-016
Die Präsidentin. − Als nächster Punkt folgt die
Fortsetzung der Gemeinsamen Aussprache – Abkommen
EG-Serbien.
2-017
Μαρία-Ελένη Κοππά, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας S&D. –
Κυρία Πρόεδρε, θα ήθελα και εγώ να συγχαρώ τον
συνάδελφο Kacin για το ισορροπημένο και
εμπεριστατωμένο κείμενο που παρουσίασε. Η Ομάδα
των Σοσιαλιστών και Δημοκρατών στηρίζει ένθερμα την
ενταξιακή προοπτική της Σερβίας, μίας χώρας που έκανε
τεράστια βήματα προόδου τα τελευταία χρόνια και που
αποτελεί ακρογωνιαίο λίθο για την εδραίωση της
ειρήνης και σταθερότητας στα Δυτικά Βαλκάνια. Η
σημερινή έγκριση της Συμφωνίας Σταθεροποίησης και
Σύνδεσης εκ μέρους του Κοινοβουλίου αποτελεί λοιπόν
ιστορική στιγμή και την καλωσορίζουμε. Με το
ψήφισμα του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου
καλωσορίζουμε επίσης την αίτηση ένταξης που υπέβαλε
η χώρα υπογραμμίζοντας ότι υπολείπονται ακόμη
βήματα που πρέπει να γίνουν.
Πρέπει να είναι σαφές ότι η ανάπτυξη της
περιφερειακής συνεργασίας παραμένει κεντρική
προτεραιότητα της Ένωσης στα Δυτικά Βαλκάνια. Στο
πλαίσιο αυτό, η συνεργασία της χώρας με το Διεθνές
Ποινικό Δικαστήριο είναι απόλυτη διεθνής υποχρέωση

18-01-2011 19
και πρέπει να προχωρήσει με γοργούς ρυθμούς, όχι γιατί
το θέλει η Ευρώπη, αλλά γιατί η απόδοση δικαιοσύνης
συμβάλλει στη συμφιλίωση με το παρελθόν και
επιτρέπει τη βελτίωση των σχέσεων μεταξύ όλων των
λαών της πρώην Γιουγκοσλαβίας.
Δεν πρέπει ωστόσο να ξεχνάμε ότι ο σερβικός λαός
υπήρξε θύμα αυτού του πολέμου. Η Σερβία είναι
σήμερα η χώρα με τον υψηλότερο αριθμό προσφύγων
και εσωτερικά μετατοπισμένων στην Ευρώπη.
Άνθρωποι που χρειάζονται περίθαλψη, στέγη και ένταξη
στην αγορά εργασίας. Ιδιαίτερα στο πλαίσιο της
χρηματοπιστωτικής κρίσης η Ένωση πρέπει να
υποστηρίξει έμπρακτα κάθε προσπάθεια προς αυτήν την
κατεύθυνση. Καλωσορίζουμε, λοιπόν, την πρόσφατη
δέσμευση των Προέδρων της Σερβίας και της Κροατίας
να επιζητήσουν από κοινού λύσεις για το πρόβλημα των
προσφύγων.
Η απόφαση για έναρξη διαλόγου με τις αρχές του
Κοσόβου έχει ιδιαίτερη σημασία για τη σταθερότητα
στην περιοχή. Υποστηρίζουμε το διάλογο που πρέπει να
ξεκινήσει το συντομότερο δυνατό προς όφελος όλων
των κατοίκων του Κοσόβου και που ελπίζουμε να
συμβάλει στο κοινό ευρωπαϊκό μέλλον των λαών της
περιοχής. Κλείνοντας, θα ήθελα να συγχαρώ τον
Αντιπρόεδρο της Σερβικής Κυβέρνησης, κύριο Đelić,
για τη χθεσινή του δήλωση στην Επιτροπή Εξωτερικών
Υποθέσεων του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου ότι η Σερβία
επιζητεί ένα ιστορικό συμβιβασμό σε σχέση με το
Κόσοβο. Αυτός ο συμβιβασμός πράγματι είναι
αναγκαίος και πρέπει όλοι μας να βοηθήσουμε για την
επίτευξή του.
2-018
Norica Nicolai, în numele grupului ALDE. – Ca liberală,
trebuie să subliniez că Grupul ALDE este un grup care a
susţinut întotdeauna procesul de extindere, pentru că noi
credem într-o Europă a tuturor membrilor ei, o Europă
puternică şi unită. Ca româncă, nu pot decât să salut
acest parcurs european al Serbiei, subliniind totodată că
Serbia este o ţară europeană, iar parcursul ei european se
va realiza, sigur cu dificultăţi, cu dificultăţi care ţin de
un trecut tulbure, dar Serbia trebuie să privească înainte
şi să încerce să uite trecutul, pentru că reconcilierea cu
trecutul nu trebuie să fie un impediment pentru o vocaţie
europeană viitoare.
Vreau să subliniez că este esenţial pentru întreaga zonă
şi, implicit, pentru Serbia, ca criteriile de la Copenhaga
să fie corect, solid şi temeinic implementate, pentru că
numai ele sunt garanţia respectului unor valori europene,
a statului de drept şi a unor democraţii viabile. Cred că
aceşti doi ani de la decizia istorică de a îşi începe
parcursul european dovedesc faptul că, atât guvernul de
la Belgrad, cât şi poporul sârb sunt motivaţi, determinaţi
şi cred cu tărie în acest proiect european, pentru că ce
altceva poate fi mai important decât deciziile europene
luate de un guvern, fără a fi forţat să ia aceste decizii de
rigori juridice sau de rigori ce ţin de regulile în care
acest joc politic se joacă.
Pentru Serbia este, de asemenea, vital să-şi stabilizeze
economia, iar semnele pe care le vedem astăzi în
economia sârbă sunt foarte bune. Este vital să-şi
stabilizeze democraţia, dar, în acelaşi timp, trebuie să fie
foarte atentă la elementul de sensibilitate care a fost
multiculturalismul Balcanilor. Problema minorităţilor în
această zonă nu trebuie să fie o problemă care să
genereze conflict şi cred că un model de susţinere şi de
suport al minorităţilor, de conciliere culturală, este unul
esenţial.
2-019
Marije Cornelissen, namens de Verts/ALE-Fractie. –
Voorzitter, de Groenen zijn groot voorstander van de
toetreding van Servië tot de EU. Daarom zijn we blij met
de ondubbelzinnig pro-Europese koers van de huidige
regering. Maar ik vind de manier waarop wordt
omgegaan met het toetredingsproces van beide kanten
geen schoonheidsprijs waard. De EU laat simpelweg met
zich sollen.
Om pro-Europese politiek te steunen, kreeg Servië visavrij
reizen vóór het volledig voldeed aan de criteria. In
ruil voor een gematigde koers voor Kosovo, kreeg
Servië de avis-vraag in oktober. De EU stuurt de
boodschap dat niet zozeer de criteria, maar het politieke
spel bepalend zijn voor het toetredingsproces. Wij
zouden Servië niet moeten hoeven belonen om zich te
gedragen als een volwassen Europese democratie. We
mogen best verwachten dat Servië een
verantwoordelijke rol als regionaal leider op zich neemt
ten opzichte van Kosovo, ten opzichte van Bosnië,
zonder dat het daar als een klein kind een snoepje voor
terug moet krijgen.
Op één vlak moeten we in ieder geval stoppen met
telkens toegeven: de jacht op Mladić en Hadžić. We
hebben het hier over de daders van afschuwelijke
oorlogsmisdaden, van genocide. Daar mogen ze niet mee
wegkomen. Servië kan en moet veel meer doen om hen
aan te houden. Volledige medewerking met het
Joegoslavië-tribunaal mag geen speelbal zijn van
diplomatie. Het oordeel daarover moet liggen bij de
enige die kan beoordelen of er sprake is van volledige
medewerking en dat is aanklager Brammertz. Daarom
vraag ik jullie om vóór ons amendement te stemmen dat
hiervoor pleit.
2-020
Charles Tannock, on behalf of the ECR Group. –
Madam President, Serbia’s progress towards EU
membership is gathering pace, and rightly so, as
evidenced by the excellent Kacin report.
When I was in Serbia last October, I was impressed with
the commitment and effort of Serbia’s dynamic,
western-orientated democratic government. Serbia
certainly has much work still to be done, relating to
judicial reform and the fight against organised crime.
We in the ECR also hope that Ratko Mladić will be
caught and sent to The Hague, though it is by no means
certain that he is on Serbian territory. However, it is vital
that Serbia’s progress is reciprocated and rewarded by
the EU and its Member States, for example now by

20 18-01-2011
ratifying the SSA, not least because some of Serbia’s
neighbours, such as Croatia, are far more advanced on
the road to EU accession.
Serbia’s relationship with Kosovo is problematic but not
insoluble. I personally believe that an equitable full and
final settlement based on partition and the ‘land for
peace’ principles we see in the Middle East would be the
best way forward. In my view, the EU should properly
evaluate this option during the forthcoming dialogue
brokered by the High Representative. To dismiss it out
of hand would be dangerously short-sighted, and would
only perpetuate Kosovo’s state of limbo in terms of
international recognition at EU, NATO and UN level.
2-021
Miloslav Ransdorf, za skupinu GUE/NGL. – Největší
osobnost srbských dějin svatý Sáva řekl, že Srbové jsou
jak lidé Východu, tak lidé Západu. A z toho plyne
problém, že jim nevěří lidé Západu, protože si myslí, že
jsou to lidé Východu, a lidé Východu proto, že si myslí,
že jsou to lidé Západu. Ve skutečnosti je Srbsko most
mezi východem a západem Evropy, je klíčovou zemí pro
jednotu Evropy a koneckonců i román velkého srbského
spisovatele Dobrici Ćosiće „Vreme smrti“ (Čas smrti)
ukazuje, že tam, kde vlastně jde o Srbsko, tak je klíčová
hra o jednotu nebo rozlomení Evropy.
Já si myslím, že časy by se měly změnit v tom smyslu,
abychom si uvědomili zásadní význam Srbska pro
jednotu Evropy. Je to klíčová ekonomika Balkánu a bez
Balkánu prostě Evropa jednotná nebude. Chtěl bych
zdůraznit, že máme společné úkoly, které se dají
poměrně rychle řešit, jako jsou problémy uprchlíků v
Srbsku – Srbsko má na svém území zhruba 750 tisíc
uprchlíků –, jako jsou ekologické problémy, některé
zděděné vlastně ještě z let devadesátých minulého
století, jako je zprovoznění dunajské plavební cesty,
máme např. v Evropském parlamentu pracovní
meziskupinu, která je věnovaná Dunaji, a také bychom
se mohli zaměřit i na to, abychom Srbsku pomohli s
odvážnou soudní reformou a bojem proti
organizovanému zločinu.
2-022
Νικόλαος Σαλαβράκος, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας EFD. –
Κυρία Πρόεδρε, θεωρώ ότι η έκθεση του κυρίου Kacin
είναι απόλυτα ισορροπημένη και τον συγχαίρω για
αυτήν. Η πρόοδος της Σερβίας σχετικά με τις αναγκαίες
μεταρρυθμίσεις απεικονίζεται στην έκθεση αυτή με
ρεαλιστικό τρόπο. Μάλιστα δε εχθές στην Επιτροπή
Εξωτερικών Υποθέσεων είχαμε μία ικανοποιητική
παρουσίαση των εξελίξεων από τον Αναπληρωτή
Πρωθυπουργό της Σερβίας.
Παρόλα αυτά, σημαντική παραμένει η εκκρεμότητα για
τη συνεργασία με το Διεθνές Ποινικό Δικαστήριο,
συμπεριλαμβανομένης της παράδοσης των τελευταίων
φυγάδων στη Χάγη, που αποτελεί θεμελιώδη
προϋπόθεση για την ενταξιακή πορεία της Σερβίας.
Η ελευθερία του Τύπου είναι ένα από τα σημαντικότερα
προβλήματα που πρέπει να λύσει η Σερβική Κυβέρνηση,
αφού δεν πρέπει να υπάρχουν πολιτικές πιέσεις ή άλλες
επιρροές που να εμποδίζουν την ανεξαρτησία των
Σέρβων δημοσιογράφων.
Ένα ακόμη πρόβλημα που ταλανίζει τη Σερβία είναι ο
μεγάλος αριθμός προσφύγων και εσωτερικά
εκτοπισμένων ανθρώπων που αντιμετωπίζουν
προβλήματα στέγασης και φτώχειας, ενώ η ανεργία
φθάνει στο 19%. Θεωρώ ότι θα πρέπει να βοηθήσουμε
τη Σερβία και δεν πρέπει να ξεχνάμε ότι η χώρα αυτή
πέρασε ένα πόλεμο μόλις πρόσφατα.
2-023
Barry Madlener (NI). – Voorzitter, we moeten ons niet
alleen maar richten op het oppakken en berechten van de
oorlogsmisdadiger Mladić. Servië heeft enorme
problemen met de georganiseerde criminaliteit. Dat is al
door een aantal sprekers gezegd en die problemen
moeten we niet onderschatten. Natuurlijk zijn er
vorderingen gemaakt, maar nog lang niet voldoende om
op een normale standaard te komen.
Servië is natuurlijk weer een arm land, zoals al die
toetredende landen. Het zijn arme landen en dat gaat de
Europese burger heel veel geld kosten. Servië is nog
corrupter dan Roemenië en Bulgarije. Ook Roemenië en
Bulgarije hadden nooit toegelaten moeten worden tot de
Unie. Een en ander leidt tot heel veel problemen gezien
de corruptie en Servië is nog corrupter. Ik zie dat ook als
een heel hardnekkig probleem dat niet zomaar valt op te
lossen. Onderschat dat dus niet, is mijn oproep.
Verder zal een eventuele toetreding van Servië leiden,
net als de visumvrijstelling, tot nog meer emigratie naar
West-Europa, emigratie die we niet kunnen gebruiken.
2-024
Adrian Severin (S&D). – Madam President, the
Stabilisation and Association Agreement and the
European integration of Serbia are important for both
Serbia and the European Union.
I should like to make two remarks. In order to negotiate
the Agreement properly and to properly manage the
integration process, the European Union should start by
identifying and recognising its own interests. Europe has
an unsolved Albanian problem, a lack of geopolitical
coherence on its southern flank, and a black hole of
organised crime and corruption in its Balkan area. This
means that at the centre of the Union there is a need for
an enlarged functional and cohesive market and for
better transportation corridors in that area. None of these
problems can be solved without the contribution of
Serbia.
Secondly, we have to avoid treating Serbia as a secondclass
European country and lecturing it on every
occasion. Serbia has indeed committed many sins, but
the Euro-Atlantic contribution to the sins committed was
also significant. 2011 is indeed a year of challenging
opportunities for both Serbia and the European Union.
We will not be able to rise to those opportunities unless
we leave aside all narcissism and treat Serbia as a peer.

18-01-2011 21
Only a dignified Serbia can be a reliable partner for a
historic reconciliation in the Balkans and a historic
reunification within the European Union. Mr Kacin’s
report makes a remarkable contribution in that direction.
2-025
Sarah Ludford (ALDE). – Madam President, I join
those who have praised and welcomed the report by my
colleague Jelko Kacin, and I thoroughly agree with his
remarks that Serbia’s future lies in the European Union
and that Serbia will become an important player in
guaranteeing security and stability in the Western
Balkans region.
I have supported the aim of EU membership for the
Western Balkan countries for the last decade, including
when I was the Vice-Chair of the Balkans Delegation. I
worked closely with our rapporteur in championing visafree
travel and I was delighted when that was secured for
Serbia, among others, a year ago. I think this is a really
vital contribution to person-to-person contacts and to
raising horizons and, ultimately, to guaranteeing security
in its wider sense.
Some of the challenges that are faced by Serbia have
already been mentioned. I would like to add something
on the challenge of judicial reform. The Commission’s
progress report last autumn sounded a note of concern
about reappointment procedures being carried out in a
non-transparent way, jeopardising the principle of
independence of the judiciary and creating a high risk of
political influence. That is clearly a key issue in terms of
the Rule of Law.
In relation to cooperation with the International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, in The Hague,
Mr Kacin told the Foreign Affairs Committee last night
that Serbia is doing absolutely everything in its power to
locate and apprehend the remaining two indicted
individuals and transfer them to The Hague, but Serge
Brammertz, the Chief Prosecutor, in his speech to the
UN Security Council in September, said that Serbia
needed to bridge the gap between its stated commitment
to the arrests and the effectiveness of its operations on
the ground. We are not seeing results. Serbia needs to
adopt a more proactive approach to arresting the
fugitives, so I am afraid that there is a gap between
rhetoric and reality, and that gap absolutely must be
bridged.
2-026
Franziska Katharina Brantner (Verts/ALE). – Frau
Präsidentin! Auch wir stehen für den Beitritt des
Westbalkans zur Europäischen Union und natürlich auch
für den von Serbien. Dabei ist natürlich jedes Land
eigenständig, aber die Region hängt zusammen, und
auch das Agieren jedes Landes in der Region trägt
maßgeblich dazu bei, wie der Prozess an sich gelingt.
In diesem Zusammenhang möchte ich noch einmal
darauf hinweisen, dass es für uns im Beitrittsprozess für
Serbien keine weitere Schritte gibt ohne das absolute O.
K. vonseiten des Internationalen Strafgerichtshofs und,
wie die Kollegin gerade gesagt hat, eine pro-aktivere
und vor allen Dingen effektivere Zusammenarbeit vor
Ort mit dem Strafgerichtshof.
Es gab auch positive Entwicklungen. Eine davon war die
Annahme des gender equality act, das hat uns sehr
gefreut. Wir möchten jetzt, dass dessen Umsetzung
wirklich schnell vonstatten geht, und fordern die
Kommission auf, Gelder dafür zur Verfügung zu stellen
und diesen Prozess zu unterstützen. Wenn die Region
zusammenwachsen will, brauchen wir auch wieder mehr
öffentliche Transportmöglichkeiten in der Region und
durch die Region. Und auch hier ein Aufruf an die
Kommission, über die IPA-Gelder dies stärker zu
unterstützen und zu finanzieren, weil wir davon
überzeugt sind, dass der Kontakt zwischen Menschen
und nicht nur zwischen Leadern notwendig ist. Dies
wird durchaus gefördert, wenn es für die Leute einfacher
wird, in der Region mobil zu sein.
Mobilität ist auch eine Frage, die ich noch ganz kurz
erwähnen möchte, und zwar geht es da um
Autokennzeichen, die Belgrad immer noch für die
sieben Regionen im Norden von Kosovo ausstellt. Wir
rufen Belgrad dringend auf, dieses Kennzeichen endlich
nicht mehr für Kosovo auszustellen.
2-027
Ryszard Czarnecki (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca!
Serbia to europejski kraj. Serbia to część europejskiej
historii. Serbia to część europejskiej kultury. Serbia to
nie tylko część geografii Europy. Serbia więc musi być
częścią politycznej Europy i naprawdę nie szukajmy
pretekstów, aby wydłużyć drogę Serbii do Unii
Europejskiej. Mam wrażenie, że Unia traktowała nieraz
po macoszemu ten kraj i była swoista asymetria między
traktowaniem niektórych krajów tego regionu Bałkanów
a właśnie Serbii. Z tą asymetrią musimy raz na zawsze
skończyć. Nie szukajmy pretekstów, aby – podkreślam
to jeszcze raz – wydłużyć drogę Serbii do Unii
Europejskiej. Naród serbski zasłużył na to, żeby być
wśród narodów europejskich jak najszybciej.
2-028
Bastiaan Belder (EFD). – Mevrouw de Voorzitter, op
dit ogenblik spitst zich de economische crisis in Servië
en op de westelijke Balkan toe. Deze hachelijke situatie
bergt het gevaar in zich van een vernieuwde versterking
van populistische en nationalistische krachten.
Commissaris Füle, wordt het niet tijd om een
ontwikkelingsfonds voor de westelijke Balkan op te
richten naar het voorbeeld van het na-oorlogse Marshallplan.
Mijnheer de commissaris, ik heb nog een tweede vraag
voor u. Een insider informeerde mij gisteren over de
potentiële nieuwe brandhaard in Servië. Het betreft hier
de activiteiten van radicaal islamitische krachten in de
Sandzak. In dit verband circuleert vooral de naam van de
mufti van de regio Zukorlić. Over welke precieze
informatie beschikt de Europese Commissie in deze
kwestie en welke tegenmaatregelen overweegt de
Commissie?
2-029

22 18-01-2011
Димитър Стоянов (NI). – В източната част на
Сърбия, в района на градовете Босилеград и
Цариброд живеят няколко десетки хиляди българи -
национално малцинство, останало в пределите на
Сърбия след края на Първата световна война.
Няма да бъда много далеч от истината, ако кажа, че
тези хора там са едни от най-бедните хора в Европа.
Сръбското правителство не само че не прави нищо
по този въпрос - да направи инвестиции, да развие
малко икономически района, а през ноември
миналата година, без никакво обяснение и в
нарушение на своите международни споразумения,
спря група български граждани, които носеха помощ
за децата на този район, които идват да учат в
България.
Уважаеми представители на сръбското
правителство, свободното движение и отворените
граници са основна ценност на Европейския съюз. И
докато не я научите и не я прилагате, нямате място в
него.
2-030
Elmar Brok (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau
Ratspräsidentin, Herr Kommissar, Kolleginnen und
Kollegen! Ich möchte dem Kollegen Kacin sehr danken
für seine Vorlage, die ein klares Ja spricht.
Ich glaube, dass bei allen Fragen, in denen wir nach wie
vor Kritik an Serbien üben, allen Notwendigkeiten
interner Reformprozesse, aller Notwendigkeit, mit dem
ICTY zusammenzuarbeiten, den Fragen im Kampf
gegen Korruption, die insbesondere in Serbien besonders
tiefgreifend ist, mit mafiösen Bandenwirkungen, die dort
sind und auf das Wirtschaftsleben Einfluss nehmen, dies
alles im Lauf der Jahre bekämpft werden muss und das
Bedingung ist für den weiteren positiven proeuropäischen
Kurs Serbiens hin zur Mitgliedschaft in der
Europäischen Union, wie ihnen in Thessaloniki fest
versprochen worden ist, und an dieses Versprechen
wollen wir uns halten.
Aber ich möchte auch zum Ausdruck bringen, dass es
notwendig ist, mit Serbien zu kooperieren. Wer in die
Geschichte der Region hineinschaut, weiß, dass es eine
dauerhafte friedliche Entwicklung nur mit Serbien geben
kann und dass wir aus diesem Grunde Serbien – nicht
nur als Antragsteller zur späteren Mitgliedschaft in der
Europäischen Union sehen müssen, sondern als einen
wesentlichen strategischen Partner bei einer
vernünftigen Entwicklung dieser gesamten Region und
dass wir aus diesem Grunde auch von uns aus ermutigen
und dass wir Serbien nicht schlechter behandeln sollten
als Länder, die Mitglied der Europäischen Union sind
oder unmittelbar auf dem Weg in die Europäischen
Union sind, aus welchen Gründen der kürzeren oder
längeren Geschichte auch immer. Wenn ich sehe, mit
welchem Mut Präsident Tadić für einen europäischen
Kurs gekämpft hat und in Serbien umkämpft ist, ist es
eine Notwendigkeit, dass wir diese politischen Kräfte
stützen, sie ermutigen, damit sie ihrer Bevölkerung
zeigen können, dass der Weg nach Europa auch für die
Bevölkerung der richtige Weg ist und nicht ein
nationalistischer Weg.
Aus diesem Grunde möchte ich uns und insbesondere
die Mitgliedstaaten einladen, dass sie im Ratifikationsprozess
schnell vorangehen und auf diese Art und Weise
ein Signal senden, dass diese Schritte Serbiens nach
Europa gestützt werden müssen, damit wir die Sicherheit
in der Region auf Dauer bekommen.
2-031
Hannes Swoboda (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin! ich war in
den letzten Tagen in Kroatien und noch nie wurde dort
nie so viel über Serbien gesprochen wie in diesen Tagen,
und zwar in einem sehr positiven Sinn, weil genau das,
was Herr Brok jetzt erwähnt hat: die mutigen Schritte,
die Herr Tadić zusammen mit Präsident Josipović
gesetzt hat, – ich weiß auch, dass der stellvertretende
Ministerpräsident Đelić sich hier besonders bemüht –
wesentliche Schritte nach Europa sind. Es sind Elemente
einer regionalen Zusammenarbeit, aber einer regionalen
Zusammenarbeit, die eine große politische und auch
humanitäre Bedeutung hat. Von daher ist es – da
schließe ich mich da dem Kollegen Brok und den
anderen Kollegen völlig an – ganz wichtig, dass wir
Serbien ermutigen, diese Schritte weiterzugehen.
Dies betrifft natürlich auch das Verhältnis zu Bosnien
und Herzegowina. Wir alle wissen, wie wichtig es ist,
dass Serbien sich in einem positiven Sinn engagiert –
Serbien und Kroatien –, damit dieses Land
zusammenhält und auch die entsprechenden Reformen
vollzieht. Insofern ist Serbien wirklich hier sehr mutig
und sehr entscheidend für die regionale Zusammenarbeit.
Ein kritisches Element, das ich dennoch erwähnen
möchte, ist die Zusammenarbeit mit dem ICTY. Ich
hatte ja Herrn Brammertz eingeladen in die
Arbeitsgruppe des außenpolitischen Ausschusses, die ich
leite. Da sind wir nicht ganz zufrieden, da könnte mehr
geschehen. Da sind die Anregungen noch nicht wirklich
vollfüllt worden. Daher würde ich alle darum bitten,
darauf zu drängen, dass das getan wird.
Wie Frau Koppa schon gesagt hat: Es ist nicht nur eine
Frage für Europa. Serbien muss diese Dinge aufarbeiten
für Serbien selbst. Wie es diese Entschuldigung in
Vukovar gegeben hat, die fraglos in die Geschichte des
Landes eingehen wird, so muss auch der Kampf gegen
diejenigen weitergehen, die große Verbrechen begangen
haben.
2-032
Anna Ibrisagic (PPE). – Fru talman! Det går inte att
undgå att märka att Serbien under den senaste tiden har
gjort stora framsteg. Låt mig nämna några: en
framgångsrikt avslutad visumliberaliseringsprocess, det
regionala samarbetet på både trafik- och energiområdet,
en politisk vilja att bidra till försoningsprocessen i
regionen, och ett nytt politiskt ledarskap, ytterst synligt i
president Boris Tadić besök i både Srebrenica och
Vukovar.

18-01-2011 23
Alla dessa saker visar inte bara enskilda personers goda
ledarskap och Serbiens stora vilja att ta ett steg närmare
EU-medlemskap, utan också serbernas beslut att välja
just ett sådant ledarskap.
Därför gläds vi åt att även stabiliserings- och
associeringsavtalet mellan EU och Serbien nu är klart
och att vi skickar tydliga signaler till Serbien om att vi
ser resultaten av landets ansträngningar och att Serbien
har en plats i EU-familjen.
Det är klart att många utmaningar kvarstår: kampen mot
den organiserade brottsligheten, fortsatta juridiska
reformer och en lösning på minoritetsfrågorna. De flesta
av dessa problem är dock inte unika för Serbien, utan
delas även av övriga Balkanländer.
En fråga som dock är ganska unik och som måste
nämnas i sammanhanget är samarbetet med
Haagtribunalen. Den politiska viljan hos Serbiens
regering finns. Medvetenheten om att det är nödvändigt
att fullfölja samarbetet med tribunalen finns också. Låt
oss nu hoppas att Ratko Mladić snart återfinns i Haag.
2-033
María Muñiz De Urquiza (S&D). – Señora Presidenta,
un minuto para subrayar la importancia de que
completemos la configuración de la Unión Europea con
la candidatura de Serbia, que espero pueda confirmarse
este año sobre la base de los importantes avances
logrados por Serbia, reconocidos por el Consejo al
decidir impulsar el proceso de adhesión y reconocidos
por este Parlamento en el informe del Sr. Kacin, a quien
felicito.
Y un minuto para recordar que las diferentes posiciones
sobre Kosovo en el seno de la Unión Europea han
favorecido el claro compromiso europeo de Serbia,
esencial para la consolidación de la paz y la democracia
en los Balcanes y para alcanzar un enfoque constructivo
en la integración regional, como se puso de manifiesto el
pasado 2 de junio con la celebración, bajo Presidencia
española, de la cumbre de alto nivel de Sarajevo.
Espero que Serbia cuente con la plena colaboración de la
Unión Europea para acometer las reformas que necesite
en materia de justicia, en materia de lucha contra la
corrupción y también en materia de diálogo
intrarregional.
2-034
Eduard Kukan (PPE). – Madam President, I am glad to
see that Serbia has shown strong determination and
made substantial progress in the integration process.
Concluding the Stabilisation and Association Agreement
(SAA) and implementing it are the next important steps
on this road.
The Serbian Government should be commended for the
actions which have been taken to get to this stage. I am
sure that the SAA will bring concrete economic and
trade benefits for the country in areas such as
environment, energy, transport and many others.
Thirteen countries have so far ratified this agreement. I
hope that its ratification by the European Parliament will
encourage the rest to conclude the process soon.
However, there are still challenges ahead for both Serbia
and the EU. Serbia needs to commit to full cooperation
with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia in bringing the remaining war criminals to
justice. There is also an urgent need for progress in the
fight against corruption and organised crime, and for
further reforms in the sectors of justice and public
administration. Equally, the Serbian Parliament needs to
abandon the practices of blank mandates and the
arbitrary allocation of parliamentary seats.
Finally, the dialogue between Serbia and Kosovo will, I
hope, be put on the right track and will guarantee
ordinary people better prospects for the future. The
European Parliament has always been a strong supporter
of the integration of the Western Balkans. Serbia is a
crucial part of that with this commitment ...
(The President cut off the speaker)
2-035
Emine Bozkurt (S&D). – Voorzitter, dit is een
belangrijk moment voor de stabiliteit op de Balkan.
Servië heeft duidelijk laten zien dat het de keuze heeft
gemaakt om te werken aan een Europese toekomst, doch
zal daar hard aan moeten werken. Er zijn zo een aantal
struikelblokken op weg naar het eventueel EUlidmaatschap.
Zo zijn de laatste twee hoofdverdachten
van het Joegoslavië-tribunaal, Goran Hadžić en Ratko
Mladić, nog niet opgepakt. Helaas - zo blijkt uit het
rapport van hoofdaanklager Brammertz - slaagt Servië er
niet in de internationale gemeenschap ervan te
overtuigen dat er met man en macht naar deze
misdadigers gezocht wordt.
Volgens Brammertz doet de Servische regering niet het
meest mogelijke om de verdachten op te pakken, maar
juist het minst noodzakelijke. Een duidelijke en
eendrachtige boodschap vanuit de Servische overheid is
nodig. Zo ook is het van belang dat de Europese
Commissie veel grotere druk hierop blijft uitoefenen.
Ook is het belangrijk dat de rechten van vrouwen en
homo's hoog op de agenda van Servië blijven staan. Ik
verwacht dat Servië alles op alles zal zetten om een open
proces mogelijk te maken.
2-036
Kinga Gál (PPE). – Tisztelt biztos úr, államtitkár
asszony! Először is gratuláció illeti a jelentéstevőt és az
árnyék-jelentéstevőt egyaránt, hogy megfelelő
kompromisszumok születtek ebben a szövegben és egy
jó jelentésről beszélünk. Az elmúlt évben Szerbia sok
tekintetben komoly lépésekkel haladt az integráció
irányába, és ezeket a jelentés számba is veszi, úgyhogy
én csak néhány pontot emelnék ki.
Az egyik a vízummentesség kérdése, amit a szerb
hatóságoknak nagyon komolyan kellene vennie és a
továbbiakban mindent megtenniük, hogy az
állampolgárokat felvilágosítsák, hogy ne éljenek vissza
ezzel a lehetőséggel, hiszen egyébként sérülne a jövő

24 18-01-2011
fiatalságának az európai perspektívához való
hozzáférése, hiszen ez a vízummentesség, ami mellett
mindig is kiálltunk, pont a fiatal generációk európai
csatlakozásához, felzárkózásáról szól, és ezt pedig nem
lehet eljátszani. Ugyanakkor Szerbiának haladéktalanul
előrelépéseket kell tennie a nemzetközi törvényszékkel
való együttműködés tekintetében és felmutatni a
tárgyalási eredményeket Koszovóval.
De amit én kiemelnék, az a koppenhágai kritériumokban
felsorolt kisebbségi jogok kérdése. Örülök, hogy a
jelentés már idejében figyelmet szentel ezeknek a
kérdéseknek, hiszen Szerbiának folytatnia kell
tevékenységét e területen: a Vajdaság statútumáról, a
nemzeti tanácsokról szóló törvényeket úgy kell
gyakorlatba ültetni, hogy azok valóban hatásukat ki
tudják fejteni. Az Uniónak pedig tanulnia kell a 2004,
2007-es csatlakozásból, hogy ezek ...(az elnök megvonja
a szót)
2-037
Elena Băsescu (PPE). – Decizia Consiliului de a începe
procedura de ratificare a Acordului de stabilizare şi
asociere va încuraja Serbia să continue reformele pentru
respectarea criteriilor de la Copenhaga. Intrarea lui în
vigoare va deschide comerţul dintre UE şi Serbia şi va
oferi perspective de aderare tangibile.
Până în prezent, au fost înregistrate progrese importante,
mai ales în cooperarea cu EULEX, reforma sistemului
judiciar şi lupta împotriva corupţiei. Totodată, consider
că nerecunoaşterea independenţei Kosovo nu trebuie să
stea în calea aspiraţiilor euroatlantice ale Serbiei. Mai
ales, guvernul sârb şi-a arătat disponibilitatea de a se
angaja într-un dialog reînnoit cu Kosovo sub egida UE.
Aş dori să menţionez şi rolul cheie al Serbiei pentru
asigurarea păcii în Balcani. În acest sens, consider foarte
important ca politica uşilor deschise să fie continuată
către toate ţările din Balcanii de Vest. România a
susţinut fără rezerve extinderea acestei regiuni către UE
şi NATO, cu o menţiune specială pentru Serbia.
În final, subliniez că eforturile şi aspiraţiile acestei ţări
trebuie recunoscute de statele europene şi încurajate în
acelaşi timp. Avem datoria să ne susţinem partenerii din
Balcani în continuarea parcursului euroatlantic pe care lau
ales deja.
2-038
Андрей Ковачев (PPE). – г-жо Министър, г-н
Комисар, искам първо да благодаря на докладчика гн
Kacin за добрата работа по доклада. Бъдещето на
Сърбия и на Западните балкани е в Европейския
съюз. Убеден съм, че историческите грешки и
несправедливости, случили се през изминалия век на
Балканите, не могат да бъдат преодолени по друг
начин, освен по пътя на европейската интеграция.
Нашата обща цел е съществуващите граници да се
превърнат от разделителни в обединителни линии.
За гражданите, независимо от техния произход, не
бива да има значение от коя страна на граничната
линия живеят: дали в Ниш, в Калотина, в Цариброд
или в София, дали в Прищина или в Лесковец.
Европейската интеграция е единственият път към
стабилност, сигурност и просперитет, както за
сръбските граждани, така и за техните съседи.
В доклада на г-н Kacin се съдържат аспектите от
постигнатото в Сърбия и това, което предстои да се
направи. Сърбия има и ще има нашата подкрепа по
пътя на нейната европейска интеграция. Ние, обаче,
от Източна Европа, можем да дадем полезни съвети
на сръбските ни приятели, за да не повтарят
грешките, които ние сме правили.
Такъв един съвет е да отворят архивите на
комунистическия репресивен апарат на Югославия.
В България имаме много горчив опит от късното
отваряне на архивите. Бившите служби са свързани
много с корупцията и организираната престъпност в
региона. Приветствам усилията на Сърбия за
ограничаване влиянието на комунистическите
структури в управлението. Бъдещето на една
демократична страна не бива да се контролира от
тоталитарното й минало.
На нас от Източна Европа са ни ясни манипулациите
на бившите комунисти, които по всякакъв начин
представят дейността си като защита на
националните интереси. Не се подвеждайте.
Единственото, което ги води, е тяхното собствено
благополучие.
Уважаеми колеги, който контролира миналото,
контролира и бъдещето. Отварянето на архивите на
комунистическите тайни служби ще е ясен знак за
Европа, че Сърбия иска да скъса с един режим,
който я откъсна за десетилетия от Европа.
Гражданите на бивша Югославия имат правото да
познават най-новата си история.
Пожелавам успех на Сърбия по пътя на нейната
европейска интеграция, по който път тя има нашата
подкрепа, и я очакваме в европейското
демократично семейство.
2-039
Γεώργιος Κουμουτσάκος (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε,
θέλω να ξεκινήσω ευχαριστώντας τον εισηγητή για την
εξαιρετική δουλειά που έκανε και για το κείμενο το
οποίο έχει παρουσιάσει για τη Σερβία. Η υπογραφή της
Συμφωνίας Σταθεροποίησης και Σύνδεσης ΕΕ-Σερβίας
αποτελεί μια κομβικής σημασίας εξέλιξη και για τη
Σερβία και για την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση. Τώρα, το
επόμενο στάδιο, το επόμενο σημαντικό βήμα είναι η
απόκτηση του καθεστώτος υποψήφιας προς ένταξη
χώρας. Και πιστεύω ότι αυτό θα πρέπει να το
αποφασίσουμε τον ερχόμενο Δεκέμβριο. Ας μη ξεχνάμε
ότι το 2011 είναι χρόνος προεκλογικός για τη Σερβία,
καθώς τον Μάρτιο του 2012 θα έχουν βουλευτικές και
δημοτικές εκλογές.
Όσοι εχθές είχαμε την ευκαιρία να ακούσουμε στην
Επιτροπή Εξωτερικών Υποθέσεων τον Αναπληρωτή
Πρωθυπουργό κύριο Đelić διαπιστώσαμε την αφοσίωση

18-01-2011 25
και την αποφασιστικότητα της Σερβίας να κάνει κάθε
προσπάθεια για να ανταποκριθεί επιτυχώς στα
ευρωπαϊκά κριτήρια και προαπαιτούμενα.
Διαπιστώσαμε επίσης την θετική και εποικοδομητική
στάση της Σερβίας και της Σερβικής Κυβέρνησης για
ένα ουσιαστικό διάλογο με την Πρίστινα. Πρέπει να
ενθαρρύνουμε τη Σερβία.
2-040
Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė (PPE). –
Atsižvelgiant į Tarybos išvadas dėl Serbijos pažangos
reformų srityje reiktų šią valstybę pasveikinti, tačiau,
deja, kai kurie dalykai kelia nerimą. Serbijai žengiant
žingsnius link Europos Sąjungos didelės pastangos turi
būti dedamos į tam tikras sritis, ypač verslo aplinkos
Serbijoje gerinimą. Lietuvos investuotojų patirtis kelia
pagrįstų klausimų dėl verslo aplinkos ir užsienio
investicijų apsaugos Serbijoje. Kadangi Serbijos
vyriausybė apkaltino Lietuvos įmones, investavusias 34
milijonus eurų, įsipareigojimų nevykdymu ir,
pažeisdama Serbijos ir Lietuvos susitarimą, numatantį
investicijų skatinimą ir abipusę apsaugą, nutraukė
privatizavimo sutartį. Serbija turi ieškoti būdų, kaip
užtikrinti skaidrią ir prognozuojamą verslo aplinką,
susidoroti su biurokratiniais suvaržymais, teisiniu
netikrumu ir panašiais dalykais. Remiame Serbijos
siekius, savaime suprantama, dėl integracijos į Europos
Sąjungą ir linkime susidoroti su probleminiais dalykais.
2-041
Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D). – Kedves államtitkár
asszony, Füle biztos úr! Nemcsak egy folyamatot zárunk
le, hanem remélem, hogy már ebben az évben elkezdjük
a csatlakozási tárgyalásokat, hiszen Szerbia rengeteg
eredményt ért el az elmúlt időszakban. Kiemelném azt,
hogy maga Brammertz főügyész a hágai törvényszékkel
való együttműködést kifogástalannak tekinti. Ez sokáig
egy kényes kérdés volt. Ugyanez vonatkozik a NATOpartnerségre,
és amit én különösen fontosnak tartok a
Nyugat-Balkán esetében, Szerbiának olyan példamutató
kisebbségpolitikája van, amely számos uniós tagállam
számára is példaértékű lehet, hiszen az a széleskörű
kulturális autonómia, amely a különböző nemzeti
kisebbségek tanácsainak valós működésében
megmutatkozik, az garantálja a kisebbségek
fennmaradását, és Koszovó ügyében is rendkívül
jelentős az előrelépés, amely érzelmileg egy nagyon
bonyolult, összetett kérdés, de Szerbia nagyon jó úton
halad...(az elnök megvonja a szót)
2-042
Ivo Vajgl (ALDE). – Poročilo kolege Jelka Kacina je
enako stvarno in vzpodbudno.
Polna integracija Srbije v Evropsko unijo je v interesu
stabilnosti in varnosti Evrope, je tudi, zaradi tega
pomeni tudi eliminiranje in pomemben korak pri
eliminiranju sive cone na jugo-vzhodu Evrope.
Podpiram Srbijo in njene strateške cilje, o katerih nas je
obvestil gospod podpredsednik Đelić.
Ključi so v rokah Srbije, ki mora izpolniti pogoje.
Mogoče je tudi to priložnost, da sporočimo srbski
javnosti, da Mladić ni ponos, ampak sramota srbskega
naroda.
Rad bi tudi poudaril, da pozdravljam vse korake v
graditvi dobrega sosedstva, ki jih dela srbska vlada in
srbska javnost, obenem pa poudarjam, da je vprašanje
meje eno izmed ključnih vprašanj, ko gre za sosedske
odnose.
2-043
Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin! Auch
von meiner Seite gibt es ein klares Ja zur Heranführung
Serbiens an die Europäische Union und dafür, dass die
serbische Bevölkerung eine Zukunft im gemeinsamen
Europa hat, wie das für den gesamten Westbalkan gilt.
Von meiner Seite wird es auch grünes Licht für das
Stabilisierungs- und Assoziierungsabkommen geben,
wenn ich auch gleichzeitig sagen muss, dass die
Zusammenarbeit mit dem ICTY noch nicht so ist, wie
sie sein müsste. Und auch ich erhoffe mir, dass es in
diesem Plenum eine Mehrheit für unseren
Änderungsantrag gibt, dass die Worte von Herrn
Brammertz hier in Zukunft gelten.
Ich möchte Herrn Kacin für den Bericht danken, für
diese zum Teil sehr positive Berichterstattung über die
Fortschritte, die es in Serbien gegeben hat, und
gleichzeitig über die Punkte, wo es noch problematisch
ist.
Was nun die Beziehungen zu der Republik Kosovo
betrifft: Ich als Berichterstatterin dieses Parlaments für
Kosovo appelliere an die serbische Führung. Ich habe
die Worte von Vizepremierminister Đelić gestern sehr
genau mitverfolgt, dass es hier die Bereitschaft zu dieser
historischen Vereinbarung gibt, dass aber auch
klargestellt werden muss, dass der Dialog zwischen der
Republik Serbien und der Republik Kosovo ...
(Die Präsidentin entzieht der Rednerin das Wort.)
2-044
Jaroslav Paška (EFD). – Úvodom chcem vysloviť
podporu podpisu asociačnej dohody so Srbskou
republikou.
Srbsko bolo a stále je vplyvnou balkánskou krajinou.
Občania tejto krajiny však už dlhé roky doplácajú na
chyby svojich politických lídrov, ktorí svojimi
avanturistickými rozhodnutiami dostali krajinu do
zložitej politickej situácie. Ak však chceme dlhodobo
stabilizovať politické pomery na Balkáne, musíme mať
otvorené a korektné vzťahy so všetkými krajinami tohto
regiónu.
Srbsko pre nás preto musí byť rovnako váženým
partnerom ako ďalšie stabilné krajiny tohto regiónu, aby
sme v otvorenom dialógu a dobrej spolupráci pomohli
obyvateľom tejto krajiny čo najskôr a čo najlepšie sa
integrovať do spoločenstva slobodných, demokratických
európskych krajín.
2-045

26 18-01-2011
Krisztina Morvai (NI). – Magyar emberként nagy öröm
számomra a magyar elnökség és sok sikert kívánok a
Tanácsnak, ugyanakkor ez a felszólalás Szerbia EUcsatlakozásával
kapcsolatban némi szomorúságot és
hiányérzetet okozott nekem. Nem volt szó ugyanis
délvidéki magyar testvéreink sérelmére elkövetett
rendkívül durva emberjogi jogsértésekről, és szeretném
megkérdezni azt, hogy a magyar elnökségnek, illetőleg a
Bizottságnak van-e tudomása azokról az emberi jogi
szervezetek jelentéseiről, illetőleg megfigyelők
jelentéseiről, egyfelől a temerini fiúk ügyével
kapcsolatban. A temerini fiúk az a kirívó jogsértés, amit
öt fiatalember sérelmére követtek el oly módon, hogy
egy kocsmai verekedésért eltúlzottan súlyos, összesen 61
évi börtönbüntetést szabtak ki rájuk, amely
börtönbüntetést harmadik világbeli körülmények között
megkínozva, embertelen, kegyetlen bánásmód mellett
kell letölteniük. Ezt egészíti ki az, hogy ugyanakkor a
magyarok sérelemére elkövetett legdurvább
bűncselekményeket nem vizsgálják ki. Tudnak-e... (az
elnök megvonja a szót)
2-046
Andreas Mölzer (NI). – Frau Präsidentin! Entgegen der
Ansicht von EU-Euphorikern reicht der Beitritt zur
Union allein nicht aus, um alle Konflikte in Luft
aufzulösen. Speziell im Vergleich mit dem
Beitrittsbewerber Türkei sieht man, dass die EU mit
zweierlei Maß misst. Serbien ist ja zu Gesprächen mit
dem Kosovo bereit, obgleich die EU-Haltung sicher
inkonsequent ist, sollen doch in Bosnien mehrere
ethnische Gruppen in einen Multikulti-Staat gedrängt
werden, während es im Fall des Kosovo legitim sein
soll, dass sich eine ethnische Gruppe von einem Staat
ablöst.
Nicht nur die Gesprächsbereitschaft Serbiens ist ja
gegeben, sondern es gab ja auch eine Entschuldigung für
den Völkermord in Srebrenica. Dennoch wird Belgrad
nach wie vor mangelnde Zusammenarbeit mit dem
Haager Tribunal vorgeworfen. Die Menschenrechtsverletzungen
in der Türkei, wo allein schon Gespräche
über den Armenier-Genozid reichen, um bestraft zu
werden, scheinen hingegen vernachlässigbar zu sein.
Auch der Vorwurf des Organhandels gegen den
Kosovopremier Thaçi veranschaulicht, dass Kriegsverbrechen
nicht nur einseitig gesehen werden können.
Diese Vorwürfe müssen restlos geklärt werden. Für
einen EU-Beitritt ist es sehr wichtig, dass Serbien und
Kosovo zuerst ihre Konflikte lösen.
2-047
Victor Boştinaru (S&D). – Madam President, the
Stabilisation and Association Agreement with Serbia
represents another important step in the process of
integration towards the EU undertaken by Serbia. We
are talking about a country whose progress in recent
years has already been impressive, and I think that
further political and economic integration on the basis of
the SAA will give the final boost that Serbia needs on its
path towards the EU.
In view of the important role that Serbia plays in the
Western Balkans, the SAA will have a positive influence
not only on the EU and on Serbia, but also on the region
as a whole by enhancing its security, stability and
development, as well as setting solid foundations for the
enlargement process in the Western Balkans.
I hope that, after it has received the green light from the
European Parliament, the SAA process can be concluded
as soon as possible. I would therefore ask the Member
States to ensure that the ratification process takes place
as smoothly and rapidly as possible.
2-048
Jarosław Kalinowski (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca!
Współpraca z naszymi europejskimi sąsiadami to istotny
element polityki Wspólnoty. Serbia, podobnie jak
wszystkie kraje na Półwyspie Bałkańskim, to przypadek
bardzo szczególny. W związku z rozpadem Jugosławii w
latach dziewięćdziesiątych oraz prowadzonymi tam
działaniami wojennymi, kraje te do tej pory borykają się
z problemami gospodarczymi i politycznymi. Rolą Unii
Europejskiej jest wspierać te kraje i pomagać im.
Historia nauczyła nas, że sytuacja polityczna w tym
regionie ma wpływ na cały kontynent i jego
konsekwencje długo wszyscy odczuwamy. Europa
ponosi w jakimś sensie częściową winę za wydarzenia,
które wówczas miały miejsce, dlatego mamy podwójny
obowiązek moralny wobec tych krajów i takie umowy, o
których dziś mówimy – współpraca na wszystkich
płaszczyznach, ułatwienia dla obywateli tych państw –
to konieczność. Także, aby nigdy więcej taka historia się
nie powtórzyła.
2-049
Zoran Thaler (S&D). – Danes se je ponovno pokazalo,
da ima Srbija, demokratična in evropska, veliko
zaveznikov v Evropski uniji.
Dejstvo je, da je šele demokratična in proevropska Srbija
prišla do možnosti, da nadomesti dvajsetletno zamudo v
razvoju demokracije, gospodarstva in kvalitete življenja
državljanov.
Demokratična vlada Srbije in predsednik Tadić si
zaslužijo našo podporo. Srbije je ključ za stabilnost
Balkana. Tu ima sodobna evropska Srbija svojo veliko
odgovornost.
Prvič, pri zagotovitvi stabilne, evropske, mirne in boljše
prihodnosti sosede Bosne in Hercegovine, in drugič, pri
sklenitvi zgodovinskega kompromisa s sosednim
albanskim narodom.
Oba dva ta cilja sta cilja sedanje vlade v Srbiji,
sodelujmo z njo in podpirajmo jo v teh ciljih.
2-050
Andrzej Grzyb (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pan
komisarz Füle powiedział, że wszystko w rękach Serbii
czy będzie dokonywać właściwych wyborów.
Niewątpliwie tak jest, ale jednocześnie musimy sobie
zdawać sprawę, i my to wiemy jako nowe kraje
członkowskie, że trzeba wzmacniać ten proces. Serbia

18-01-2011 27
dokonała właściwego wyboru przez podpisanie układu o
stabilizacji i stowarzyszeniu. Zobowiązała się do
podjęcia szeregu niewątpliwie trudnych reform. Jako
Parlament Europejski musimy te reformy wzmocnić, bo
to nie tylko rząd, ale przede wszystkim społeczeństwo
musi dokonać tego właściwego wyboru europejskiego.
Kiedy byłem na obserwacji referendum
konstytucyjnego, to powiedziałem do Serbów,
powiedziałem do moich kolegów europejskich
„popatrzcie, ten Belgrad i ci ludzie, Serbowie, to są
Europejczycy, im trzeba pomóc w tej drodze”. Sądzę, że
wszystko to, co się dzieje w procesie ratyfikacji układu o
stowarzyszeniu, a także ta rezolucja Parlamentu
Europejskiego mogą bardzo mocno Serbii w tej drodze
pomóc.
2-051
Štefan Füle, Member of the Commission. − Madam
President, I wish to thank the honourable Members for
this rich debate, which has shown the House’s
constructive support of the process of the European
Union integration of Serbia. The support provided by
Parliament to the ratification process of the SAA is an
important signal for Serbia, and will contribute to
intensifying its efforts on the path towards the European
Union.
Let me address briefly some questions which were
raised during the debate. To Mr Belder firstly, on the
Sandžak, I would rather talk about a politicisation of the
issue of Muslim representation than a surge of radical
Islamism. In that context we look forward to the next
elections to the Bosniak National Council in April this
year, which should be peaceful and inclusive and will
help foster dialogue and avoid radicalisation.
On the question of the Development Fund, we are in
close dialogue with Serbia and other countries in the
Western Balkan region concerning how to make the best
use of the IPA and how to make it even more effective.
Reflection is ongoing regarding the support for
technological development.
Concerning the question by Mrs Morvai, let me say that
we pay particular attention to human rights and also to
the protection of minority rights. I will write to her
addressing one concrete case she referred to in her
intervention.
I am personally very encouraged by Serbia’s serious and
constructive approach to the current stage of the
enlargement process. Where we talked yesterday about
concerns, we are talking today about Serbia being on the
right track in addressing, for example, the important
issue of judicial reform. This is a good basis for Serbia
to fully use the integration potential that the year 2011
offers.
2-052
Enikő Győri, a Tanács soros elnöke. − Elnök asszony,
biztos úr, miniszterelnök-helyettes úr, tisztelt képviselő
hölgyek és urak! Köszönöm szépen ezt a kiváló vitát.
Egy kiváló jelentéshez kiváló észrevételek érkeztek, és
azt, hogy milyen kiváló a jelentés, számomra az is
bizonyítja, hogy az itt felemlegetett kérdések nagy része
magában a jelentésben is megtalálható, tehát azt hiszem,
hogy ez egy kiváló vitaalap volt.
Mindannyian megerősítették, hogy nem egy lezárt
folyamatról van szó, sokkal inkább egy kezdetről.
Ezután a kezdet után azt hiszem, hogy mindazok a
kérdések terítékre kerülnek, amelyeket önök is
felemlítettek a vitában. Komoly előrelépések történtek,
ezért tartunk a folyamatban ott, ahol tartunk, és sok még
a teendő. Igen sok kérdést önök is megemlítettek itt,
úgymint a demokrácia elmélyítése, menekültek, üzleti
környezet kialakítása, vízummentességgel kapcsolatos
problémák, vagy a kisebbségek helyzete.
Hallottuk, hogy kisebbségi politikában Szerbia terén van
komoly előrelépés, Tabajdi képviselő úr is hivatkozott
rá, ugyanakkor a koppenhágai kritériumok érvényesek –
a Bizottság is utalt rá. Ez egy fontos iránytű számunkra,
és minden mozdulatunkban, minden értékelésünkben
oda fogunk erre figyelni.
Az is elhangzott, hogy a helyzet törékeny. Ezzel
maximálisan egyetértek, és emiatt különösen fontos,
hogy bátorítsuk Szerbiát, hogy haladjon tovább ezen az
úton. Brok úr és Swoboda úr is utaltak erre. Amit a
legfontosabbnak érzek, az az – és erre Nicolai asszony is
utalt, hogy Szerbia saját akaratából hozott döntésről van
szó, hogy az Európai Unió iránt elkötelezett, a tagság
iránt elkötelezett, és mi minden lehetséges módon
segíteni fogjuk ezt a folyamatot. Azt, hogy saját
akaratukból választották ezt az utat, ezt tekintem
garanciának arra, hogy minden szükséges lépést Szerbia
meg fog tenni. Én nagyon bízom abban, elnök asszony,
ezután a kiérlelt vita után a Parlament meg fogja adni a
hozzájárulást a stabilitási és társulási megállapodáshoz.
2-053
Jelko Kacin, Poročevalec. − Današnja bogata razprava
je najboljša ilustracija živega zanimanja in podpore, ki jo
uživa Srbija tukaj v Evropskem parlamentu in drugih
evropskih inštitucijah.
Ob vseh izzivih, ki so dediščina vojn iz devetdesetih let,
je Srbija predvsem v procesu postavljanja temeljev
vladavini prava.
Reforma pravosodja, ki se je začela leta 2009, je v
marsičem nepopolna, to pa zahteva sistematske
popravke.
Ključni københavenski kriterij je vladavina prava, Srbija
mora zagotoviti neodvisnost, kompetentnost in
učinkovitost pravosodnih organov, da bi zagotovili
pravno varnost in razvoj gospodarstva.
Pozdravljamo zadnje odzive Beograda, da razume vse te
izzive. Tudi restitucija, tudi vračanje odvzetega
premoženja, zaščita zasebne lastnine, je eden od teh
elementov.
Veselim se prihoda predsednice narodne skupščine
Srbije, ki nas bo v Evropskem parlamentu obiskala še ta

28 18-01-2011
mesec. Okrepiti moramo vlogo in odgovornost srbskega
parlamenta in vseh parlamentark in parlamentarcev.
Bolj kvalitetno je potrebno pritegniti tudi srbsko
opozicijo, ki mora prevzeti več odgovornosti za uspeh
procesa integracije Srbije.
Izročitev odgovorov na vprašalnik Evropske komisije, ki
jih bo predsednik vlade Cvetković izročil komisarju
Füleju ta mesec, pa bo zgodovinski korak za državo
Srbijo in tudi za vse njene državljane.
Verjamem, da bo ta korak prepričljiv in uspešen. Zato
želim tudi obilo uspehov madžarskemu predsedstvu pri
vzpodbujanju proevropskih sil v Srbiji.
Vem, da službe vlade za evropske zadeve, pod vodstvom
Milice Delević, delajo odlično, in zato sodelovanje ne bo
težko.
Tudi navzočnost podpredsednika vlade in ministra za
znanost, Bože Đelića, danes tukaj, je dokaz živega
interesa vlade za naše delo in za srbsko prihodnost v
Evropski uniji.
In za konec še tale misel.
Pred manj kot tremi leti je bila Srbija na robu
samoizolacije. Danes je ta nevarnost mimo in Srbija je
odločno na poti v Evropsko unijo. S kakšnim tempom pa
bo napredovala, je odvisno le od nje same.
S to resolucijo opogumljamo Srbijo na njeni zgodovinski
poti, ko ji jasno sporočamo, da cenimo njene uspehe in
opozarjamo na vse izzive pred katerimi je.
2-054
Die Präsidentin. − Die gemeinsame Aussprache ist
geschlossen.
Zum Abschluss der Aussprache wurde eine
Entschließung vom Ausschuss für auswärtige
Angelegenheiten eingereicht. Dazu erfolgt die
Abstimmung morgen um 12.30 Uhr.
Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 149)
2-055
Jiří Maštálka (GUE/NGL), písemně. – Vítám a
podporuji všechny kroky, které směřují k rychlé
integraci Srbska do EU, neboť většina Srbů si tuto
integraci přeje. Zároveň však připomínám, že valná část
z těch nedostatků, jež jsou Srbsku vytýkány v návrhu
usnesení EP, lze označit za důsledky předchozí
dlouholeté destruktivní angažovanosti některých
členských států EU na Balkáně a přímé agrese NATO
proti Srbsku. Srbsko by mělo mít usnadněnou cestu do
EU, neboť jeho členství není pro tuto zemi odměnou,
nýbrž šancí pro EU přispět k vyřešení mnoha problémů,
které přímo či nepřímo sama způsobila. Dále chci
naléhavě upozornit na nutnost velmi obezřetného a
vyváženého postupu ohledně národnostních menšin v
Srbsku. Návrh usnesení EP přiznává „další aspirace
albánské menšiny“ v Srbsku a hovoří o respektování
jejího „práva na provinční autonomii“. Budou-li
problémy menšin „řešeny“ vytvářením kolektivního
zákonodárství poskytujícího jim zvláštní práva, bude to
„řešení“ v konečném důsledku katastrofální pro daný
stát, to platí nejen pro Srbsko. Jedinou cestou k zajištění
práv příslušníků menšin je důsledné prosazování a
ochrana individuálních lidských práv.
2-056
Csanád Szegedi (NI), írásban. – Tisztelt Elnök
Asszony! Tisztelt Képviselőtársaim! Az EU és Szerbia
közötti társulási megállapodást Magyarország 2010.
november 16-án ratifikálta. Az EU soros elnökségére
akkor még készülő Magyarország nem tanult a
történelmi hibájából, amikor Románia csatlakozását az
őshonos erdélyi magyar kisebbségek területi
önrendelkezéséhez köthette volna. A mai napig
tapasztalhatjuk ennek az elszalasztott lehetőségnek az
eredményeit: magyar temetők meggyalázása, csendes
magyar népirtás zajlik Erdélyben. Az EU és Szerbia
közötti társulási megállapodás folyamán az EU-nak és a
magyar külügynek érvényesíteni kell a kisebbségek
védelmét. Az Unión nagy a nyomás, hogy a társulási
megállapodások megkötésével és felgyorsításával az
uniós csatlakozást elérhető célnak tüntessék fel a jelölt
országoknak. Amíg a Jobbik támogatja például
Horvátország, mint a feltételeket teljesítő ország
csatlakozását, addig élesen ellenzi a Szerbia irányába tett
további, elhamarkodott lépéseket. A további csatlakozási
folyamat feltételeként a Szerbiában élő őshonos magyar
kisebbség sokkal nagyobb fokú önrendelkezését, teljes
területi és kulturális autonómiáját kell megszabni. Nem
szabad elvetnünk annak a gondolatát sem, hogy a
Délvidéken élő emberek népszavazás útján
nyilváníthassák ki akaratukat területi hovatartozásuk
ügyében, ezzel is vallamelyest enyhítve a magyarság
Trianonban elszenvedett felejthetetlen sérelmeit.
2-057
(Die Sitzung wird von 10.25 Uhr bis 10.30 Uhr
unterbrochen.)
2-058
IN THE CHAIR: Jerzy BUZEK
President
2-059
6 - Podsumowanie belgijskiej prezydencji w
Radzie (debata)
2-060
President. − Colleagues, allow me to welcome Prime
Minister Yves Leterme. Half a year ago we had the
presentation of the Belgian Presidency. Now we have
the presentation of the achievements of the Belgian
Presidency: legislation, the European External Action
Service, financial supervision, the Citizens’ Initiative,
the budget – we will discuss all these points.
Welcome, too, to President Barroso, who is present with
us, and to all of you.
2-061

18-01-2011 29
Przewodniczący. − Kolejnym punktem porządku
dziennego są oświadczenia Rady i Komisji dotyczące
podsumowania belgijskiej prezydencji w Radzie.
2-062
Yves Leterme, président en exercice du Conseil. −
Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président de la
Commission, Excellences, Mesdames et Messieurs les
députés européens, même si cela peut paraître un peu
incongru dans cette salle plénière du Parlement
européen, je voudrais néanmoins débuter mon
intervention par une citation d'un grand penseur
américain, Ralph Waldo Emerson, qui disait, et je le
cite:
2-063
‘Do not go where the path may lead. Go instead where
there is no path and leave a trail’.
2-064
C'est-à-dire: n'allez pas là où le chemin peut mener,
allez là où il n'y a pas de chemin et laissez une piste.
Mesdames, Messieurs, chers collègues, c'est en effet ce
que nous avons fait, avec vous tous, ces derniers six
mois. La Belgique, mon pays, était appelée à assumer la
présidence tournante de l'Union européenne après
l'entrée en vigueur, finalement, du traité de Lisbonne.
Il est vrai que nous ne nous engagions pas sur un terrain
totalement inconnu, mais il a quand même fallu poser les
balises pour le nouveau fonctionnement de l'Union sous
le nouveau traité, avec les nouvelles institutions dont
s'était dotée l'Union européenne. Alors, fidèle à la
tradition belge, à la tradition de mon pays, nous avons
tout fait pour permettre aux institutions de fonctionner
de manière optimale pour créer les bons précédents.
Mesdames, Messieurs, je crois pouvoir vous dire que
l'Union européenne, telle qu'elle s'est structurée avec le
traité de Lisbonne, fonctionne aujourd'hui et fonctionne
bien. Ainsi, notre Union s'est-elle dotée d'un nouvel
instrument de supervision du secteur financier qui
devrait lui éviter, espérons-le, la réédition de crises
comme celle dont nous peinons encore à sortir. La
gouvernance économique a progressé. Un accord a pu
être trouvé sur le budget 2011 et, surtout, au total, durant
ces six mois, près de quarante accords de nature
législative ont été conclus entre le Parlement et le
Conseil.
Mesdames, Messieurs, notre détermination à respecter
tant la lettre que l'esprit du traité de Lisbonne a été un
choix pour l'avenir de l'Union, un investissement dans
une coopération européenne toujours plus étroite. Pour
ce faire, durant cette présidence, nous avons suivi deux
grandes lignes directrices.
Premièrement, nous ne souhaitions pas nous mettre en
avant. Nous avons plutôt inscrit notre programme, le
programme belge avec ses cinq priorités, dans l'agenda
européen, dans le programme de la Commission, dans
les impulsions données par les chefs d'État et de
gouvernement au niveau du Conseil européen, dans le
programme du trio avec les collègues espagnols et
hongrois.
2-065
Ten tweede, dames en heren, naast het feit dat wij geen
Belgische agenda hebben willen opleggen, hebben we
ook gekozen voor wat ik zou noemen, een inclusief
voorzitterschap. We hebben effectief geprobeerd zo
goed mogelijk samen te werken naar de letter en de
geest van het Verdrag van Lissabon met álle Europese
instellingen, eigenlijk in een rol die niet meer was dan
die van facilitator.
Samenwerking met alle partijen, uiteraard met uw
Parlement, met de Commissie, maar ook met de nieuwe
permanente voorzitter van de Raad, met de hoge
vertegenwoordiger en uiteraard ook met de lidstaten,
maar ik meen te mogen zeggen dat wij in dat geheel
vooral bijzondere aandacht hebben besteed aan een
goede samenwerking en een open geest met het
Parlement dat zijn bevoegdheden in belangrijke mate
versterkt heeft gezien onder de nieuwe regels.
Vandaag past uiteraard ook enige bescheidenheid, maar
mag ik toch zeggen dat we er samen met u voor hebben
gezorgd dat deze methode heeft gewerkt. Trouwens
meer dan ooit, collega's, is de Unie vandaag een
samenspel van instellingen en lidstaten. Ik denk dat deze
methode heeft gewerkt en ook kan werken, omdat ze
gericht was en is op resultaat en niet op profilering. Dat
geldt voor ons voorzitterschap, maar dat geldt eigenlijk
ook voor het Europees Parlement, ook al bent u zelf
meester om dat te beoordelen.
Ik wil toch, mijnheer de Voorzitter, dames en heren
parlementsleden, hier namens de Belgische regering,
namens de collega's die raden hebben voorgezeten, mijn
waardering en mijn dank uitspreken voor uw
medewerking. Ik meen te mogen zeggen dat de meeste
akkoorden die wij bereikt hebben uiteindelijk met een
zeer brede meerderheid zijn goedgekeurd. Hieruit blijkt
de kwaliteit van uw debatten alsook - en dat moet de
Europese burgers geruststellen - de voorrang die u ver
boven de nationale belangen geeft aan wat goed is voor
Europa.
Maar, dames en heren, die zes maanden zijn voorbij. We
kunnen uiteraard niet stilstaan bij het verleden. Er valt
effectief de komende maanden en jaren bijzonder veel te
doen, want onze Unie, onze samenleving, staat voor
bijzonder grote uitdagingen. Ik wil er in dit kort bestek
vier vermelden.
De eerste ligt uiteraard in de continuïteit van wat de
afgelopen zes maanden is aangevat, namelijk het
economisch bestuur. We hebben ondertussen samen de
nodige maatregelen genomen om een crisis in de
eurozone af te wenden. Maar die symptoombestrijding,
waarvan tot nu toe sprake is geweest, volstaat niet. De
dreigingen die op een aantal eurolanden rusten, hebben
aangetoond dat een monetaire unie in feite niet kan
zonder meer economische unie, zonder meer
economische convergentie. We moeten dus vastberaden

30 18-01-2011
de weg opgaan van meer economische samenhang, meer
samenhang in het fiscaal, economisch en sociaal beleid
van de lidstaten.
Economische governance vereist ook een streng toezicht
op het begrotings- en structureel beleid van de landen
van de Unie. We moeten het Europees semester dat met
dat oogmerk is ingevoerd, ten volle gebruiken. Een
terugkeer naar begrotingsdiscipline mag geen
vrijblijvend streefdoel zijn, maar moet controleerbaar
zijn, en zo nodig op Europees niveau afdwingbaar zijn.
Het gaat hierbij uiteraard niet om de discipline op zich,
maar gezonde overheidsfinanciën zijn een absolute
noodzaak om weer aan te knopen met een duurzame
groei, een geloofwaardige groei, die banen schept voor
onze burgers. Die banen zijn uiteraard noodzakelijk voor
het behoud van ons heel specifiek Europees sociaal
model dat gepaard gaat met politieke en economische
vrijheid, sociale solidariteit en ecologische verantwoordelijkheid.
2-066
Die Union muss die neue Instrumenteneffizienz nützen,
die sie zur Kontrolle der Finanzmärkte einführt. Diese
Instrumente sollen noch Ende dieses Jahres einsatzbereit
sein. Das ist ein absolutes Muss, um neuen Entgleisungen
der Märkte vorzubeugen.
Wirtschaftliche Konvergenz, Kontrolle der nationalen
Haushalts- und Strukturpolitikoptionen, neue Instrumente
zur Finanzmarktkontrolle – sie können den
Eindruck entstehen lassen, dass der Apparat der Union
dabei ist, ziemlich schwer und kompliziert zu werden.
Es ist natürlich auch zu erwarten, dass die genauere
Überwachung der nationalen politischen Entscheidungen
der Mitgliedstaaten nicht ohne Diskussionen und
Reibereien vor sich geht. Aber das sollte uns nicht
abschrecken, denn das gehört zum Wesen der europäischen
Integration.
2-067
The second field in which we must do this – in which we
must keep up the momentum – is that of the Union’s role
in the world. We have made progress in that field.
Thanks to our concerted preparation and unified
representation, we have indeed increased our weight in
the G20. In the last months, the Union has started to
build its own diplomatic representation all over the
world. These moves are good but they have to be
consolidated.
The European Union, it is true, speaks with one voice on
most problems in the world, but words are not enough.
The Union must indeed develop more clout, it must be
able to act in a decisive manner and to become a real
pole of influence and power in this multipolar world.
Thirdly, we have to address the financial perspective of
the Union. It is true that this is not a time when
governments can contemplate hefty increases in their
contributions to the Union budget, but neither can we
avoid a debate on the long-term financial perspective.
Promises have been made to this Parliament that there
will be consultation on the philosophy of the Union’s
future financing and on ways and means. The Union
cannot live hand-to-mouth: it has to have this long-term
perspective.
Last but not least, I want to say that we will be able to
deliver on these challenges only if, more than ever, we
believe in ourselves. I would like to quote the French
thinker and writer André Frossard on this challenge for
the coming years. I will first quote in French, and then
translate:
2-068
"L'Europe cherche, avec raison, à se donner une
politique et une monnaie communes mais elle a surtout
besoin d'une âme."
2-069
Europe quite rightly wants to equip herself with a
common policy and currency but, most of all, she needs
a soul.’
We do indeed need a soul, colleagues. We need to have
faith in ourselves and in what we have accomplished,
and not to excuse ourselves for who and what we are.
We need to remember that, before being a market,
before being a currency, before being a set of
institutions, the Union – our Union – was a vision, a
belief, a dream. It was a dream of peace on this
continent, which has been torn by so many wars.
I have heard that it has become a little bit passé to speak
of peace to generations in Europe who have never
known war. I can only say: ‘Look around you.’ Watch
all the refugees, for instance, who come to us fleeing
war, fleeing armed conflicts, fleeing tyranny. Those
refugees certainly do not look down on the achievement
that it is to have spread peace and security across almost
the entire continent. And those refugees – those people –
aspire, like so many people elsewhere in the world, to
the rights and freedoms which too many of our citizens
take so easily for granted.
As much as the Union is about peace, it is also about
liberty, about democracy, about fundamental civil rights
and about the rule of law, for our citizens as well as for
our immigrants. We believe in the right of each person
to human dignity, which means people’s right to live on
their feet and not on their knees, and the right to think
and speak and worship freely.
In a much quoted statement, Jean Monnet said that
nothing gets done without people, but that nothing lasts
without institutions. This is just as true today as when he
said it but, on the other hand, it is also true that
institutions will wither if they are not carried by people
with strong convictions. We must remember that we will
carry our citizens with us only if we give them a vision:
if we give them a dream.
To conclude, I wish Hungary all possible success now
that it has taken over the baton of the Presidency. I am
sure it will hold high the torch of the European dream of

18-01-2011 31
peace, the European dream of freedom, and the aim of
an ever stronger Union.
(Applause)
2-070
José Manuel Barroso, président de la Commission. −
Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Premier ministre,
Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, avec efficacité et
concentration, avec pragmatisme et esprit
communautaire, l'Union a fait d'importants progrès
pendant la Présidence belge, qui méritent à la fois notre
admiration et notre reconnaissance.
Au nom de la Commission européenne, je tiens à
féliciter très sincèrement le premier ministre,
M. Leterme, toute son équipe du gouvernement,
l'administration, tous les Belges qui ont donné le
meilleur d'eux mêmes pour le succès de cette
Présidence.
Ce fut une belle et grande Présidence, à un moment
délicat et exigeant pour l'avenir de l'Union européenne.
Rarement, les défis ont été aussi importants et les
difficultés si cruciales à surmonter. Au cours de ces
longs mois de bruit et de fureur – permettez-moi
l'expression –, la Présidence belge n'a eu de cesse de
garder le cap européen. Son action s'est toujours inscrite
dans le sens fondamental de l'existence de l'Union
européenne, la solidarité de chacun au profit de l'intérêt
général européen. Son action nous a aussi permis de
parfaitement baliser la voie à suivre pour atteindre nos
principaux objectifs: stabilité et relance d'une croissance
génératrice d'emplois.
Ce furent des mois où l'Europe a encore vécu au rythme
frénétique des développements de la crise et de la dette
souveraine. Tous les regards étaient rivés sur l'avenir de
la zone euro et sur notre détermination à la défendre.
Lorsque nous disons que nous ferons tout pour défendre
la stabilité de la zone euro, dans son ensemble, cela ne
doit pas être de vaines paroles. Ce n'est ni plus ni moins
que l'expression de notre ferme volonté politique de
défendre notre destinée commune. L'avenir de la zone
euro et l'avenir de l'Union européenne sont les deux
faces d'une même pièce. Cet avenir, nous le voulons
stable et prospère pour nous-mêmes et pour les
générations futures. Cela a toujours été et cela reste le
sens de la construction européenne et de l'esprit
communautaire.
Les réformes de fond auxquelles nous nous sommes
engagés montrent que nous avons pris pleinement
conscience de l'enjeu auquel l'avenir de l'Union
européenne est confronté. Nous devons réussir à nous
adapter aux nouvelles donnes politiques économiques,
stratégiques d'un monde globalisé et en pleine mutation.
Nous devons réussir cette adaptation en affirmant nos
valeurs, en défendant nos intérêts et en renforçant notre
crédibilité et notre influence sur la scène internationale.
Les décisions de base que nous avons prises sur le
renforcement de la gouvernance économique européenne
et la lutte contre nos déséquilibres macro-économiques
sont au cœur de ces progrès. Elles ne sont pas une option
mais un impératif. J'espère que, pendant ce semestre, le
Parlement européen et le Conseil adopteront les
propositions de gouvernance économique.
Fondamentalement, la question n'est pas de savoir qui,
parmi les différents acteurs politiques européens, y
gagne ou y perd, mais de savoir si chacun d'entre nous
est prêt à coopérer dans le plein respect de nos
prérogatives mutuelles. Car, fondamentalement, la
question est de savoir si l'Union européenne, dans son
ensemble, y gagne ou y perd. La réponse est claire: sans
renforcement de notre gouvernance économique, nous
serons tous perdants, tous! Dans la zone euro et dans
l'ensemble de l'Union européenne.
Sans renforcement de notre gouvernance économique,
nous ne gagnerons pas la bataille pour la stabilité, la
croissance et l'emploi en Europe. Sans renforcement de
notre gouvernance économique, les maillons forts
d'aujourd'hui pourraient devenir les maillons faibles de
demain. Et sans renforcement de notre gouvernance
économique, nous perdrions notre crédibilité sur la scène
internationale.
Alors que les questions de gouvernance et de
déséquilibre macro-économique sont également des
questions mondiales et qu'on les discute notamment au
G20, comment pourrions-nous rester crédibles et
influents auprès de nos partenaires internationaux si
nous n'étions même pas capables de les résoudre au
niveau européen? Je le dis en pesant bien tous mes mots:
fondamentalement, il s'agit d'une question existentielle
pour l'Union européenne. Nous agissons et nous nous
affirmons en tant qu'Union, ou nous subissons et nous
nous laissons marginaliser. C'est vraiment une question
de destin collectif qui est en cause.
Nous sommes, fort heureusement, sur la voie de
l'affirmation. C'est pourquoi je félicite sincèrement la
Présidence belge. L'accord obtenu au Conseil ECOFIN
du 17 septembre dernier a permis la création de
nouveaux cycles de gouvernance économique, ce qu'on
appelle le semestre européen. La toute première étape a
été lancée la semaine dernière avec la présentation de
l'examen annuel de croissance préparé par la
Commission européenne. Nous y indiquons très
clairement les trois axes prioritaires sur lesquels nous
devons porter nos efforts pour l'année à venir:
renforcement de la stabilité macro-économique –
notamment par l'assainissement budgétaire rigoureux –
réforme structurelle et croissance créatrice d'emplois.
Nous avons aussi obtenu des succès majeurs dans le
domaine de la surveillance financière, notamment avec
l'adoption d'une nouvelle architecture européenne de
supervision financière qui a vu le jour le 1 er janvier 2011
avec la mise en place du comité européen du risque
systémique et de trois nouvelles autorités de supervision
financière couvrant respectivement les marchés, les
banques et les assurances.

32 18-01-2011
Pendant ces six mois, nous avons aussi réussi à obtenir
des accords sur la gestion des fonds spéculatifs et autres
fonds d'investissement alternatifs ainsi que sur les
agences de notation. Pour nos concitoyens, les mesures
d'austérité ne sont pas un vague concept mais une dure
réalité qu'ils vivent au jour le jour. Il y a, à travers
l'Europe, beaucoup d'inquiétudes et de préoccupations
mais il y a aussi, à travers l'Europe, une forte attente
pour que les réformes, trop longtemps remises à demain,
soient enfin menées à terme et pour que la dimension
européenne soit une partie intégrante de la solution, pour
que l'Europe défende ses projets, ses valeurs et ses
intérêts dans le monde.
Il est donc important de largement communiquer sur ce
que l'Union fait pour relancer une croissance durable,
génératrice d'emplois, et bâtir une société européenne
plus équitable et plus respectueuse de l'environnement.
Je souhaiterais également évoquer quelques autres
succès, notamment en matière de politique étrangère et
de relations extérieures, par exemple l'accord de libreéchange
signé avec la Corée du Sud le 6 octobre dernier.
C'est tout simplement l'accord commercial le plus
ambitieux jamais conclu par l'Union européenne. Il doit
rester une référence pour nos futurs accords
commerciaux bilatéraux.
Cancùn, contrairement à ce qu'ont prévu les pessimistes,
a aussi réussi à faire apparaître quelques progrès sur la
voie multilatérale dans la lutte contre le changement
climatique. Cancùn a également montré l'importance de
la coopération entre la Présidence et la Commission pour
que l'Europe parle d'une voix cohérente et audible sur la
scène internationale.
Je voudrais également, en termes de résultats concrets,
saluer l'accord enfin obtenu pendant la Présidence belge,
dans le domaine des transports sur le dossier
Eurovignette. C'est très important pour nos citoyens.
Je voudrais surtout rendre hommage à la façon
exemplaire dont la Présidence belge a permis que les
principales innovations du traité de Lisbonne soient
respectées et exécutées. Elle a déployé avec brio tous ses
talents de négociation lors de la difficile discussion sur
le budget 2011 de l'Union européenne selon les
nouvelles règles budgétaires du traité. Ce fut une
illustration de l'esprit européen et de sa culture du
compromis dans ce qu'il a de meilleur. La Commission
est fière de la contribution qu'elle a apportée à ce
résultat.
Demain même, en application des engagements pris visà-vis
de ce Parlement, j'aurai une première réunion avec
le Président du Parlement européen, M. Buzek, et M. le
premier ministre Orban, qui assure la présidence
tournante du Conseil, pour discuter des prochaines
étapes en matière budgétaire.
L'année 2010 a été une année souvent difficile, parfois
extrêmement exigeante, mais finalement très productive.
Et c'est sous la présidence de deux pays, la Belgique
mais aussi l'Espagne, que l'intégration européenne a pu
avancer de façon déterminée. J'y vois la marque de la
force de notre Union et du bon fonctionnement de nos
institutions. Il appartient maintenant au troisième pays
du trio – la Hongrie – de poursuivre sur cette lancée.
Les grandes décisions que nous avons prises au cours de
cette dernière année sont la preuve que nous savons tous,
Parlement, Conseil, Commission, États membres, ce que
nous devons faire pour assurer un avenir européen stable
et prospère. Si nous savons ce que nous devons faire, il
nous reste à le faire maintenant. Nous avons dit que nous
avions la volonté de le faire, nous devons maintenant
montrer que nous sommes effectivement capables de
tenir nos engagements politiques, sans les diluer, sans
faiblir et sans nous laisser leurrer par de timides signes
de reprise.
Il s'agit de consolider nos actions, de montrer qu'elles ne
sont pas qu'une réaction à la pression de la crise et des
marchés, mais bien la réaffirmation forte de notre
volonté de vivre ensemble dans cette Union pour la paix,
la démocratie, la solidarité et la liberté.
2-071
Jean-Luc Dehaene, namens de PPE-Fractie. –
Voorzitter, het Belgisch voorzitterschap kreeg terecht
alom lof toegezwaaid. U en uw collega's, mijnheer de
Eerste Minister, kunnen een opmerkelijke palmares
voorleggen. Eerder dan op de concrete realisaties in te
gaan, wil ik vooral de nadruk leggen op het rolmodel dat
u hebt neergezet voor het Raadsvoorzitterschap. Het
Belgisch voorzitterschap van de Raad was immers het
eerste dat zich volledig afspeelde binnen het nieuwe
institutioneel kader van het Verdrag van Lissabon. Dat
was op zich een hele uitdaging.
Het Verdrag wijzigt immers het institutioneel raamwerk
grondig zoals ik al heb aangegeven in mijn verslag in de
vorige legislatuur. Zo zijn de Europese Raad en de Raad
nu duidelijk twee onderscheiden instellingen geworden
met elk een eigen voorzitterschap. Nieuw is ook dat het
Verdrag de opdracht van de Raad en het Parlement in
exact dezelfde bewoordingen omschrijft. Men kan zich
niet aan de indruk onttrekken dat sommige leden van de
Raad enige moeite hebben om zich aan de nieuwe
verhouding tussen Parlement en Raad aan te passen. Dat
bleek duidelijk tijdens het begrotingsdebat.
Dat kan echter niet gezegd worden van het Belgisch
voorzitterschap. In overleg met Commissie en Parlement
werd vooral geïnvesteerd in het realiseren van de
Europese wetgevende agenda. De Europese prioriteiten
stonden hierbij altijd voorop. Dat verklaart ook mede het
succes van het Belgisch Raadsvoorzitterschap. In het
verleden hebben de voorzitterschappen te vaak
geprobeerd voor de Europese agentschappen hun
nationale prioriteiten te laten gelden. Dit is hier niet het
geval en daardoor heeft Europa tijdens dit
voorzitterschap écht vooruitgang geboekt. Het moeilijke
begrotingsdebat heeft tijdens het Belgisch Raadsvoorzitterschap
ook mede de bakens gezet voor een van de
moeilijkste uitdagingen van de Unie in de komende

18-01-2011 33
jaren, namelijk het vastleggen van het nieuwe
financieringskader. België bekwam van de vorige
voorzitterschappen de toezegging dat het Parlement zal
worden betrokken bij de bespreking van dit meerjarig
financieel kader. De Commissie van haar kant verbond
zich ertoe in het kader van haar voorstel voor het
meerjarenplan ook voorstellen te formuleren voor de
eigen inkomsten van de Unie en dit is essentieel. Het
Parlement zal er derhalve voor waken dat zowel de
Commissie als de komende voorzitterschappen zich aan
deze engagementen houden.
2-072
Hannes Swoboda, im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Herr
Präsident, Herr Ministerpräsident, liebe Kollegen vom
Ratsvorsitz, Herr Barroso! Wir haben in dieser Woche
die Gelegenheit, zwei Präsidentschaften miteinander zu
vergleichen, die abgelaufene und die schon begonnene
Präsidentschaft. Von der belgischen Präsidentschaft
muss ich sagen, dass sie eine ausgezeichnete Arbeit
geliefert hat – dafür herzlichen Dank! Trotz schwieriger
Bedingungen – die politische Lage zu Hause ist ja nicht
ganz leicht, Lissabon ist neu, auch das Verhältnis zum
Europäischen Rat ist nicht ganz leicht zu finden. Aber es
gab eine klare Orientierung zu Europa hin. Sie wollten
Europa voranbringen.
Auf der anderen Seite haben wir – bisher jedenfalls –
eine ungarische Präsidentschaft gesehen, die sich mehr
um das kümmert, was zu Hause passiert, nämlich im
Sinne der Machterhaltung zu Hause, und zwar mit einem
sehr umstrittenen Mediengesetz, über das wir noch
diskutieren werden. Ich hoffe, Herr Orbán schaut sich
noch genau an, wie die belgische Präsidentschaft
gelaufen ist, und nimmt sich vielleicht ein bisschen ein
Beispiel an dieser Präsidentschaft.
Sie haben, Herr Ministerpräsident, Herr Ratspräsident,
von der Wirtschaftsregierung gesprochen. Hier kann ich
nur dem voll zustimmen, was Herr Präsident Barroso
gesagt hat. Es gibt nur ein Entweder-Oder. Es gibt
entweder eine weitere krisenhafte Entwicklung in
Europa – nicht nur in der Eurozone –, oder es gibt den
Versuch einer effizienten Wirtschaftsregierung auf der
Basis der Zusammenarbeit aller Mitgliedstaaten, aber
auch auf der Basis einer starken europäischen
Kommissionsaktivität. Sie wissen, Herr Präsident
Barroso, da unterstützen wir sie voll. Sie haben auf
diesem Gebiet Großes geleistet, Her Leterme, aber wir
müssen jetzt weitergehen, und wir müssen die weiteren
Schritte verfolgen.
Sie haben gesagt, es geht vor allem um eine steuerliche,
fiskalische und soziale Zusammenarbeit. Damit bin ich
beim zweiten Punkt, den diese belgische Präsidentschaft
sehr ausgezeichnet hat, nämlich der sozialen Dimension.
Ich glaube, wir alle sind daran interessiert – vielleicht
mit unterschiedlichen Schwerpunkten –, dass diese
soziale Dimension noch entsprechend ausgebaut wird.
Soziales Europa heißt nicht, dass alles und jedes auf dem
sozialpolitischen Gebiet von Europa gemacht wird, aber
zum Beispiel was Sie gesagt und getan haben zur
Bekämpfung der Armut. Es ist eine Schande, wenn ich
sehe, dass die die Armut in Europa zum Teil steigt.
Auch was Sie gesagt haben zur ungleich werdenden
Einkommensverteilung. Sie haben in Ihrer Präsidentschaft
deutlich gemacht: Das ist nicht nur eine soziale
Frage, das ist auch eine wirtschaftliche Frage. Mehr
Armut, mehr soziale Ungleichheit bedeutet auch Verlust
an Wettbewerbsfähigkeit. Das ist wirtschaftlich, ökonomisch
und empirisch nachgewiesen. Es ist ganz wichtig,
was Sie gesagt haben.
Ebenso wichtig ist, was Sie zum Europa der Bürger
gesagt haben. Sie haben einen konkreten Beitrag
geliefert, gemeinsam mit Vizepräsident Šefčovič und
unseren Kolleginnen und Kollegen bei der europäischen
Bürgerinitiative. Das ist ein großer Schritt nach vorne,
wenn dieser Schritt auch von den proeuropäischen
Kräften entsprechend genützt wird, um Europa den
Bürgern näher zu bringen.
Wir wünschen Belgien natürlich auch weiterhin alles
Gute. Es ist nicht unwichtig, wie sich die politische Lage
verhält. Ich hoffe, dass alle politischen Kräfte in Belgien
versuchen, einen wirklichen Konsens zu finden. Es ist
schwer, in Krisenregionen den Leuten zu sagen: „Findet
doch einen Konsens, arbeitet doch in wichtigen Fragen
zusammen!“, wenn das in Belgien – einem Herzland der
Europäischen Union – nicht möglich ist.
In diesem Sinne wünsche ich Ihnen alles Gute, Sie
waren in vielen Fällen eine vorbildliche Präsidentschaft.
Ich hoffe, andere Präsidentschaften, die folgen, nehmen
sich ein Beispiel daran!
(Beifall)
(Der Redner ist damit einverstanden, eine Frage nach
dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ zu beantworten
(Artikel 149 Absatz 8 GO).)
2-073
Krisztina Morvai (NI). – Mr President, I would like to
ask Mr Swoboda how he dares to criticise the Hungarian
Presidency when it is just starting. He does not even
know anything about it. Why does he not instead
criticise his comrades in the Socialist Group who were
shooting at their own people on the 50th anniversary of
the 1956 revolution and who arbitrarily imprisoned
hundreds of people? He should ask them and criticise
them.
2-074
Hannes Swoboda (S&D). – Mr President, I am familiar
with this kind of argument, which states that if you
criticise a government, you criticise its people. It was
like this in former times in my own country too.
Let us be clear. We did not start the debate. It was the
Hungarian Government with this – as I said here –
contested law. It is a law greatly disputed by many
Hungarian citizens who suffered under Communism and
during the Nazi regime. They are afraid that their liberty
of expression is in danger. That is the thing that should
be addressed.

34 18-01-2011
2-075
Guy Verhofstadt, namens de ALDE-Fractie. –
Voorzitter, ik stel voor dat we het morgen over het
Hongaars voorzitterschap hebben. We moeten niet alles
vermengen, anders moet Eerste Minister Leterme nog
ingaan op de nieuwe mediawet in Hongarije en ik geloof
niet dat dat zijn verantwoordelijkheid is.
De rol van het Parlement, collega's, is om wetgeving te
maken en te controleren, dus om kritiek te leveren
wanneer het verkeerd gaat, wanneer het niet goed is,
maar ook om te zeggen dat het goed is geweest wanneer
dat effectief zo is. We mogen zeggen dat het Belgisch
voorzitterschap goed was, zeer goed was en dat het een
succes is geworden dankzij de inspanning van velen: de
Belgische regering, maar ook vele diplomaten, de
permanente vertegenwoordiger, de adjunct-permanente
vertegenwoordiger en al degenen die zich er dagelijks
voor hebben ingezet.
Het is een onverhoopt succes, want, mijnheer de Eerste
Minister, iedereen van ons werd in het thuisland
voortdurend geconfronteerd met de vraag: hoe kan uit
een regering van lopende zaken een goed
voorzitterschap voortvloeien? Ik zou zeggen, we hebben
voor de eerste keer een echte Europese regering gehad,
want het was een regering die zich alleen bezighield met
Europese zaken, met Europese dossiers en niet werd
afgeleid door nationale besognes.
Het is bijna een uitnodiging aan de andere
voorzitterschappen om ook in lopende zaken te gaan,
wanneer zij het voorzitterschap van de Europese Unie
waarnemen, zo dat ze zich zes maanden lang kunnen
concentreren op Europa in plaats van Europa er zo af en
toe maar eens bij te nemen tussen twee andere dossiers
door.
Ik denk dat het voornamelijk een geslaagd
voorzitterschap was om één reden - kijk naar de
financiële supervisie, naar de hedgefondsen, naar de
rating agentschappen - en wel omdat dit voorzitterschap
begrepen heeft dat er met het nieuwe Verdrag gewerkt
moet worden aan méér Europa en in de Raad de stem
voor méér Europa heeft verkondigd. Dat kan niet van
alle voorzitterschappen worden gezegd. Jean-Luc
Dehaene heeft gelijk wanneer hij zegt dat er
inderdaadnog een aantal lidstaten zijn die nog altijd niet
begrepen hebben dat de spelregels zijn veranderd.
De spelregels zijn veranderd en het Belgisch
voorzitterschap is het eerste voorzitterschap dat
begrepen heeft dát de spelregels zijn veranderd. Als er
een regeling is gekomen voor een Europese supervisie
waarbij de stellingen van het Europees Parlement het
uiteindelijk hebben gehaald is het omdat het Belgisch
voorzitterschap aan de collega's in de Raad heeft gezegd,
zo kan het niet, het moet een Europese oplossing
worden, in tegenstelling tot de oplossing die de ministers
van financiën in december 2009 hadden uitgewerkt.
Hetzelfde wil ik zeggen over het Europees patent. Een
belangrijke doorbraak, Voorzitter. Ik zou een oproep
willen doen aan u en alle collega's in het Parlement om
zeer snel met het Europees Parlement het groene licht te
geven voor dat patent, zodat het Europees patent
eindelijk na meer dan 20 jaar discussie snel een realiteit
zal zijn.
2-076
Isabelle Durant, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. –
Monsieur le Président, c'est vrai – d'autres l'ont dit avant
moi – manifestement, à ce jour, les mécaniciens
politiques belges sont meilleurs hors de leurs enceintes
qu'à domicile. En tout cas, je m'en félicite, je vous en
félicite, l'équipe belge a bien travaillé et c'est une très
bonne chose.
Je pense d'ailleurs que les résistances que vous avez
rencontrées dans les différents Conseils ressemblent au
fond aux résistances que nous rencontrons dans le débat
belge: solidarité, transferts, toutes ces questions sur le
repli ou la contribution sont des éléments que nous
connaissons bien en Belgique et que vous avez
rencontrés au Conseil.
D'ailleurs, M. Barroso, puisque vous avez marqué votre
admiration et votre reconnaissance, peut-être qu'à un
moment donné l'Union européenne pourrait donner un
petit coup de pouce ou un petit coup de main. Puisque la
Belgique a aidé l'Union européenne, peut-être que
l'Union européenne pourrait l'aider à débloquer son
impasse fédérale.
Pour le reste et pour revenir sur quelques dossiers précis,
Monsieur le Premier ministre, notamment sur la question
du budget, on a une responsabilité quand on sort de
présidence plus grande encore que ceux qui y entrent. Et
donc, sur la question du budget, mon avis est qu'on a
sans doute manqué un peu d'audace en n'embrassant pas
la proposition de convention qu'on aurait pu faire sur les
ressources financières, mais le dossier des ressources
propres est un dossier central dans les mois à venir et je
compte beaucoup sur la Belgique – qui va récupérer, si
je peux dire, une liberté de parole, puisqu'elle ne
représente plus l'ensemble des pays membres mais parle
pour elle – pour faire avancer ce dossier.
Deuxième dossier important, c'est la circonscription
européenne. C'est quelque chose qui viendra aussi à un
moment donné sur la table du Conseil. Je sais qu'en
Belgique, certains ne veulent pas d'une circonscription
fédérale, mais je pense qu'elle est nécessaire, et peut-être
que justement, parce qu'on n'en veut pas en Belgique, la
Belgique en voudra au niveau européen. Une
circonscription européenne serait extrêmement utile pour
garantir ce que vous appelez "l'âme" de l'Union
européenne, c'est-à-dire le fait que les citoyens
européens s'y retrouvent en tant, tout simplement, que
citoyens qui peuvent voter pour plus que des
représentants nationaux. Je pense que c'est un dossier
très important.
Et le troisième, on l'a cité déjà, c'est l'initiative citoyenne
européenne. Là aussi, je compte beaucoup sur la
Belgique pour accélérer le processus de mise en œuvre.

18-01-2011 35
C'est un instrument important à côté de toutes les
réformes de gouvernance économique et j'espère que la
Belgique pourra, elle aussi, contribuer à le faire avancer
plus vite et plus fort.
2-077
Derk Jan Eppink, namens de ECR-Fractie. –
Voorzitter, België is de afgelopen zes maanden een
goede voorzitter geweest. Men zou niet zeggen dat de
zittende regering uittredend is. Als ik kijk naar de
dossiers die ik kan beoordelen, is de balans positief. Een
akkoord over de regelgeving voor risicokapitaal,
regelgeving over toezicht op financiële markten én een
begroting voor 2011. Ik ken zowel België als Europa vrij
goed. Europese politiek is als het ware de voortzetting
van Belgische politiek met grotere doeleinden. Het is het
zoeken naar compromissen via converseren, dineren,
arrangeren en zo nodig een beetje supporteren in de
naam van het resultaat.
Sommigen zeggen daarom: België is Europa in het klein.
Daarin schuilt nu precies het gevaar voor Europa, want
het Belgisch systeem kan geen compromissen meer
maken voor zichzelf. Er is zelfs nog geen zicht op een
opvolger voor de heer Leterme. Als België het voorland
is van Europa, dan moeten we ons de vraag stellen:
waarom loopt dat Belgisch systeem dan ten einde?
Waarom is het in staat van ontbinding?
De oorzaak is volgens mij dat België een
transfereconomie heeft gecreëerd die niet meer
betaalbaar is. In naam van solidariteit is er een
geldstroom van Vlaanderen naar Wallonië en Brussel
ontstaan, maar, mijnheer Barroso, als solidariteit
eenrichtingsverkeer wordt, dan scheiden de geesten en
dat zien wij nu in België.
Op dit moment zijn we in Europa bezig de mechanismen
van een transfereconomie te planten. U bent daarmee
bezig. De euro is daarvoor al misbruikt. Nu is er de roep
om eurobonds. De heer Verhofstadt doet dat op
dagelijkse basis. Kijk ook naar het euronoodfonds, dat
op een Ponzi Scheme begint te lijken. Eerst was het
tijdelijk, nu is het permanent en nu moet er ook steeds
meer geld in. Een slachtoffer hiervan is de
concurrentiekracht, want de buitenlandse investeringen
in Europa gaan achteruit. Wie het Europa van morgen
wil zien, moet kijken naar het België van nu! Dan zien
we wellicht Duitsland in de rol van Vlaanderen dat zegt:
"wij willen niet altijd voor iedereen betalen". Sommigen
zullen hier lachen, maar dat gevaar komt dichterbij dan u
denkt. Laat het een wake-up call zijn voor ons allemaal.
Mijnheer Leterme, ik heb altijd veel respect voor u
gehad. Het ga u goed in datgene wat u doet, maar België
zal u nog een tijdje op uw huidige post houden, vrees ik.
2-078
Patrick Le Hyaric, au nom du groupe GUE/NGL. –
Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président, Monsieur
le Premier ministre, reconnaissant d'emblée que vous
aviez pris la présidence de l'Union européenne dans le
contexte très difficile de la crise, vous aviez laissé,
malgré cela, entendre que vous auriez fait des questions
sociales l'une de vos priorités et annoncé un statut pour
protéger les services publics.
Vous n'avez rien fait de cela. Non seulement, il n'y a eu
aucune initiative pour protéger les services d'intérêt
général mais aujourd'hui, dans le cadre du pacte de
stabilité renforcé, nous entrons dans une inquiétante
spirale où, pour réduire la dette des États, les vautours
des marchés financiers et de leurs agences de notation
poussent les États à brader leurs biens publics qui sont
pourtant un atout pour la justice et l'égalité.
Quant aux questions sociales, il a fallu toute la vigilance
du Parlement pour repousser l'augmentation du temps de
travail pour les chauffeurs routiers ou le projet dit de
"permis unique", version élargie, de la directive
Bolkestein.
Nous étions dans l'année européenne de lutte contre la
pauvreté. Il n'y a pas un seul pauvre en moins dans
l'Union européenne, il y en a toujours plus! Et force est
de constater que les moyens de lutte contre la crise sont
inefficaces parce qu'ils bradent les droits sociaux.
La stratégie adoptée consiste en permanence à rassurer
les créanciers des États surendettés en raison de la baisse
de la fiscalité du capital et du recul de la croissance dû à
la baisse du pouvoir d'achat et à l'austérité – un mot que
j'ai entendu prononcer pour la première fois par
M. Barroso. Et pour cela, vous voulez maintenant
vérifier les budgets des États a priori à la place des
parlements nationaux.
Vous avez engagé en catimini une révision des traités
européens, dont vous nous avez dit hier qu'ils étaient
intangibles. Par contre, vous avez en permanence refusé
un débat sur la mise en place d'un fonds de
développement social et environnemental, alimenté par
une taxation des mouvements de capitaux, par une
harmonisation vers le haut de la fiscalité du capital, sur
une création monétaire de la Banque centrale
européenne pour le rachat des dettes des États et sur le
développement des services publics indispensables à la
justice et au progrès social.
Au début de votre présidence, vous aviez dit, Monsieur
le Premier ministre, que vous vouliez une présidence
sobre, et c'était tout à votre honneur. Mais durant celleci,
force est de constater que les marchés financiers et les
grands actionnaires se sont rassasiés. Les peuples, eux,
sont de plus en plus à la disette.
2-079
Νίκη Τζαβέλα, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας EFD. – Κύριε
Πρόεδρε, θα ήθελα κατ' αρχήν να ευχηθώ σε όλους,
ιδιαίτερα στην Επιτροπή, στο Προεδρείο, σε όλους τους
πολιτικούς, καλή χρονιά, μια χρονιά που διαγράφεται
πολύ δύσκολη. Θα ήθελα, ως μία παρένθεση, να κάνω
μια επισήμανση ανταποκρινόμενη στην πρόσκληση που
απηύθυνε ο Πρόεδρος της Επιτροπής, ο κύριος Barroso,
λέγοντας ότι θα πρέπει να τον βοηθήσουμε μέσα σε μία
παγκόσμια οικονομική διακυβέρνηση για να
αποδείξουμε τι είναι η Ευρώπη. Είναι μία ενιαία

36 18-01-2011
οικονομική, πολιτιστική και ίσως και πολιτική δύναμη.
Για αυτό θα πρέπει όλοι να στηρίξουμε την Επιτροπή
για να παραμείνει η Ευρώπη η μεγάλη δύναμη που είναι.
Ως προς τη Βελγική Προεδρία, κατά γενική ομολογία
ήταν μία πολύ επιτυχημένη προεδρία. Και σε αυτά τα
οποία ελέχθησαν θα ήθελα να προσθέσω δύο σημεία τα
οποία δεν αναφέρθηκαν εδώ και τα οποία εντείνουν την
επιτυχία της Βελγικής Προεδρίας. Πρώτα από όλα, το
Βέλγιο λειτούργησε τελείως ευρωπαϊκά· δηλαδή,
ακολούθησε την ατζέντα της Επιτροπής και του
Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου. Συνήθως οι προεδρίες
προσθέτουν εθνικά θέματα. Το Βέλγιο μας έδωσε το
καλό παράδειγμα ότι είμαστε Ευρώπη, ασχολούμαστε
με τα θέματα τα οποία θέτει η Επιτροπή. Δεν
φιλοδόξησε να βάλει και δικά του θέματα. Το δεύτερο
αξιέπαινο στοιχείο της Βελγικής Προεδρίας είναι το
μοντέλο το οποίο ακολούθησε, το μοντέλο της
τριλογίας, της τριμερούς συνεργασίας: Συμβούλιο,
Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο και Επιτροπή. Συγχαρητήρια
κύριοι συνάδελφοι!
2-080
Philip Claeys (NI). – Voorzitter, mijnheer de Eerste
Minister, u hebt nogal wat complimenten gekregen over
het Belgisch voorzitterschap en dat is wel te begrijpen.
Men is opgelucht in de Europese Commissie en in het
Parlement dat het Belgisch voorzitterschap voorbij is en
dat er geen grote ongelukken zijn gebeurd. Het is
inderdaad niet evident dat een kunstmatig land zonder
regering, een land dat niet eens in staat is om zichzelf te
besturen, het voorzitterschap van de hele EU moet
waarnemen.
Men zou natuurlijk kunnen zeggen dat u en de ministers
veel tijd hebben gehad om zich met het voorzitterschap
bezig te houden, aangezien u toch maar een regering van
lopende zaken vormt. Men zou kunnen zeggen dat u
beschikt over ervaren diplomaten die hun werk goed
hebben gedaan en dat het belang van het roterend
voorzitterschap sinds het Verdrag van Lissabon is
afgenomen.
Dat klopt allemaal wel, maar ik denk dat het uw beste
beslissing was om de raad van het Vlaams Belang op te
volgen en vooral een laag profiel aan te nemen. U had de
fouten kunnen maken van het vorige Belgisch
voorzitterschap in 2001. Denk maar aan de mislukte
Pralinentop in Brussel, aan de opeenstapeling van
diplomatieke blunders en aan de zogenaamde Verklaring
van Laeken die uiteindelijk heeft geleid heeft tot het
debacle van de Europese grondwet.
Het is natuurlijk niet zo dat het Belgisch voorzitterschap
een foutloos parcours heeft afgelegd, allereerst was er
het incident waarbij de socialistische minister van
pensioenen Daerden de Ministerraad leidde in toestand
van dronkenschap - het gezicht van commissaris Andor
spreekt boekdelen; de Vlaamse belastingbetalers én
netto-betalers kunnen er niet meer om lachen, in de
wetenschap dat deze figuur verantwoordelijk is voor hun
pensioenen.
Voorts waren er de verwoede pogingen van minister van
Buitenlandse Zaken Vanackere tegen de wil van de
bevolking in om koste wat kost een nieuw hoofdstuk te
openen in de onderhandelingen over de toetreding van
Turkije, terwijl Turkije niet eens in aanmerking zou
mogen komen voor onderhandelingen.
2-081
José Manuel García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE). –
Señor Presidente, no voy a insistir sobre lo que se ha
dicho ya. La Presidencia belga ha sido una Presidencia
magnífica. Quiero aquí subrayar dos perlas: la
supervisión financiera y el semestre europeo. Y quiero
subrayarlas para decir lo que se ha hecho y, sobre todo,
lo que hay que hacer.
En materia de supervisión financiera, el Ministro
Reynders, en 48 horas, logró desatascar un dosier que
estaba atascado y fuimos capaces de dar al Consejo y a
la Comisión lo que la Comisión nos había pedido: unas
autoridades europeas que pudiesen empezar a funcionar
el 1 de enero de 2011, autoridades fuertes, autoridades
auténticamente europeas, autoridades con dientes.
Lo que ha ocurrido después es poco tranquilizador.
Todavía no tenemos presidentes de las autoridades;
tenemos un presupuesto extraordinariamente escaso y
me dicen que las retribuciones para las personas que van
a ocupar los cargos en esas autoridades no son brillantes.
Desde luego, mucho menos brillantes que los bonus que
cobran los banqueros en Londres.
Dos asignaturas pendientes: la regulación de los entes
sistémicos y las contribuciones e impuestos a la
actividad bancaria.
En regulación de entes sistémicos, nosotros queremos
que la supervisión corresponda a la Autoridad Europea,
a través de las autoridades nacionales, que actuarían, en
este caso, como agentes y estarían sujetas a las
instrucciones de la autoridad continental. Lo otro no
tendría sentido.
En materia de fiscalidad, la última aportación del
Comisario Šemeta pone encima de la mesa todos los
impuestos posibles en materia de bancos. Este
Parlamento ha votado ya dos contribuciones: la
contribución a los fondos de garantía coordinados y la
contribución a los fondos de estabilidad bancaria. Eso es
un dato, podemos luego discutir el impuesto sobre la
actividad bancaria o los impuestos sobre transacciones
bancarias, pero lo otro, insisto, es un dato.
Y en materia de semestre europeo, lo único que
queremos es coordinar con todo: con eurobonos, con
bonos de proyectos, con mecanismo, etc.
(El Presidente retira la palabra al orador.)
2-082
Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D). – Voorzitter, ik ga in
herhaling vallen. Een beetje een saai debat, moet ik
eerlijk toegeven, maar wel een waar we trots op kunnen
zijn, dus ik sluit mij heel graag aan bij mijn collega's met

18-01-2011 37
lof voor het Belgisch voorzitterschap. Yves, uw team,
uw ministers, maar ook uw politieke en diplomatieke
corps hebben fantastisch werk geleverd. Ik heb het aan
den lijve kunnen ondervinden. Ik heb het genot en het
genoegen gehad om in twee trilogen over milieu te zitten
en - nee, ze moeten geen dikke nek krijgen, maar ze
krijgen deze keer wel een beetje lof - bij dezen mijn
complimenten voor het knappe voorzitterschap.
Toch wil ik een grote en een kleine "maar" aan die lof
toevoegen. Mijn eerste "maar" heeft te maken met het
sociale beleid, ik denk dat er vooruitgang geboekt is in
een aantal sociale dossiers. Toch moeten we eerlijk
toegeven - en ik schrijf dat niet op het conto van het
Belgisch voorzitterschap, maar wel op het einde van het
Europese Jaar van de strijd tegen de armoede - dat het
Europees belang niet zo erg groot is. Echte vooruitgang
op wetgevend vlak, als het bijvoorbeeld gaat over het
Europees minimuminkomen, is er niet geboekt, dus er is
nog veel werk aan de winkel.
Mijn tweede "maar" heeft te maken met de rol die het
Belgisch voorzitterschap heeft gespeeld in het post-
Lissabon-tijdperk. Ik krijg daarvoor felicitaties van
Verhofstadt en van Dehaene, twee ex-premiers die het
institutionele bijzonder goed kennen. Toch heeft die rol
ook een keerzijde, met name het gebrek aan politiek
leiderschap van het Belgisch voorzitterschap op heel
cruciale dossiers. Er is een beetje naar achter geleund en
gezegd, de heer Van Rompuy moet de zaak maar
trekken.
Ik denk aan het debat rond het economic governance
verhaal, ik denk ook aan het debat over de schuldencrisis
in de Europese Unie. Andere regeringsleiders - om
Merkel en Sarkozy niet te vernoemen - hebben die rol
dan wél op zich genomen. Dat heeft geleid, vind ik, tot
beperkte resultaten bij de laatste Raad, onder meer naar
aanleiding van de schuldencrisis. In het verleden heeft
het Belgisch voorzitterschap wel politieke leiding
genomen en ik zou wensen dat de volgende regering dat
leiderschap in de Europese Unie toch op zich neemt.
2-083
Chris Davies (ALDE). – Mr President, we make laws
together but, too often, we do not know how those laws
get applied by Member States. You have taken the lead
in making clear that this Parliament supports the
Commission in wanting to see correlation tables
included in all future legislation.
The Belgian Presidency has been very helpful in tabling
a paper to the Council, in which it promotes the use of
correlation tables, emphasising that they help clarity and
transparency and will make the application of EU law
quicker and more effective. I think that a period of
reflection on the matter has been initiated.
Prime Minister, I wonder if, in your concluding remarks,
you could tell us what sort of response you have had to
that paper and whether the Belgian Government, in its
role as part of the troika and within the Council, will
continue to press for the inclusion of correlation tables.
2-084
Bart Staes (Verts/ALE). – Voorzitter, collega's, één
minuut heb ik om het Belgisch voorzitterschap te
bejubelen. De balans mag dan wel globaal gezien
positief zijn, toch kan ik iedereen, denk ik, evenveel
pluimen op zijn of haar hoed steken. Ik denk dat er
gelukkig de inhoudelijk sterke aanwezigheid was van de
commissarissen Potočnik en Hedegaard op de grote
conferenties van Nagoya over biodiversiteit en Cancun
over klimaatverandering.
Er is gezegd - en dat is soms grappig bedoeld - dat het
Belgisch voorzitterschap het goed heeft gedaan, want ze
hadden een zee van tijd, ze konden al hun energie steken
in dat voorzitterschap. Mijnheer Verhofstadt heeft
bijvoorbeeld gezegd dat er voor de eerste keer een
voltijdse Europese regering was. Ik denk dat dat juist is.
Maar we kunnen ook niet voorbij aan het feit dat er
achter die ploegen een heleboel mensen stonden, dat er
een diplomatie stond die met een goede voorbereiding,
met een goede kennis, met een ongelooflijk
onderhandelingstalent ervoor heeft gezorgd dat dit
inderdaad een goed voorzitterschap is geworden.
Morgen, mijnheer Leterme, wordt de gouden schoen in
België uitgereikt. Als ik de gouden schoen mag uitreiken
voor het Belgisch voorzitterschap, voor de beste actor in
het Belgisch voorzitterschap, dan gaat deze zonder enige
twijfel naar de Belgische diplomatie, naar de mensen die
achter u zitten en ervoor gezorgd hebben dat u en uw
ploeg en de deelregeringen inderdaad puik werk hebben
verricht.
2-085
Paweł Robert Kowal (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący!
Przyłączam się oczywiście do słów gratulacji i
pozdrowień związanych z tym, co się stało w trakcie
prezydencji belgijskiej. Jednak słuchając tej debaty
pojawiają się dwa dość istotne pytania. Czy to jest na
prawdę tak, że w trakcie prezydencji belgijskiej wszyscy
w Europie zapomnieli o narodowych interesach i skupili
się jedynie na tych wyznaczonych przez, jak rozumiem,
instytucje w Brukseli i podtrzymanych przez rząd
belgijski? Tak przecież nie było. Obserwowaliśmy życie
Europy w ostatnim półroczu i było widać wyraźnie, że
nie wystarczy prezydencja, która nie odwołuje się do
interesów narodowych, by ich nie było.
I wreszcie druga rzecz, może najbardziej fundamentalna
i największa wątpliwość do całej tej debaty. Otóż nie
byłoby dobrze, gdybyśmy przeciwstawiali cele tutaj
nazywane europejskimi celom, które nazywamy tutaj
narodowymi. Przecież te narodowe cele to są pomysły
dla Europy pochodzące z konkretnych krajów. To jest
konkretny wkład, bez którego Europa byłaby dużo
bardziej uboga. Nie możemy dzisiaj narzucić takiego
standardu, w którym te cele, które formułowane są w
stolicach dla Europy, nie są traktowane jako bogactwo
tylko jako problem.
2-086
Rui Tavares (GUE/NGL). – Mr President, may I ask
the Prime Minister for his attention, please. I am here, on
your left, Mr Prime Minister. I need to have a frank

38 18-01-2011
conversation with you. I have a text in Portuguese but I
am going to improvise in English because that was the
language you used in what, for me, was the most
important part of your speech, when you said: ‘look at
refugees. Look at the refugees if you think that war and
peace is not important for Europe’. You were addressing
the new generations.
I have to admit that my heart jumped when you said that,
because I am the European Parliament rapporteur for
refugees. During your presidency you could have done
more than look at refugees. You could have done
something to help; it was not difficult. The Council
could have finished the co-decision procedure which
Parliament started on resettlement of refugees. In our
part of the co-decision we increased the money that we
give to Member States to resettle refugees; we
established categories of priorities for people who have
been raped, who have been tortured and who have
diseases, and are waiting in camps to be resettled. The
Council has not completed the co-decision. It seems that
it was because of Article 290 and delegated acts –
something which is in the Treaty of Lisbon.
You say: ‘look at refugees’. But I challenge you to do
what we did, go to the al-Hol camp in Syria. Then tell
refugees to look at Article 290, look at delegated acts.
They will say: ‘what are you talking about? My kids are
not going to school; I do not have a passport; we are
stuck in a refugee camp; why are you talking about a
minor institutional problem when you could have done
something to help our problem?’ This will tarnish the
Belgian presidency. I am sorry to say this; I say it in
sadness.
2-087
Corien Wortmann-Kool (PPE). – Voorzitter, ik wil mij
graag aansluiten bij de hulde die hier door collega's is
geuit aan het adres van het Belgisch voorzitterschap en
aan uw adres, want in een periode waarin de
kabinetsformatie in uw land zich voltrok als een drama
in veel bedrijven, hebt u echt vanuit een Europese spirit
invulling gegeven aan dat voorzitterschap.
Wat mij betreft doet u zichzelf tekort als u zich een
facilitator noemt, want u bent de motor geweest en hebt
op creatieve en geëngageerde wijze in heel moeilijke
dossiers verschillen weten te overbruggen, ook met dit
Parlement. Daarom staat er nu een stevig Europees
toezicht, hebben we een richtlijn voor de alternatieve
investeringsfondsen en is ook een moeilijk onderwerp
als het eurovignet nu geëindigd in een duidelijke
Raadsconclusie.
Maar vanuit die Europese spirit hier in uw toespraak in
dit Parlement kijkt u ook vooruit. Ik zou één punt uit uw
toespraak met name willen onderstrepen. U zegt terecht
dat het economisch bestuur niet mag eindigen in een
symptoombestrijding en dat risico dreigt nog steeds,
want een stevig stabiliteits- en groeipact gaat er
misschien wel komen, maar dat is slechts één steunpilaar
van dat economisch bestuur.
Wat wij willen voor onze burgers, is dat wij werkelijk
uit die economische crisis komen, dat er weer banen
komen voor onze burgers en ook voor de jonge mensen
en dan hebben we ook een stevig Europees macroeconomisch
toezicht nodig en een heel stevige Europese
2020-strategie. Gaat dat Europees semester dat ook echt
brengen? Gaan de lidstaten zich committeren om ook op
dat vlak het economisch bestuur invulling te geven? Wij
zullen als Parlement in het governance-pakket, het
wetgevende pakket, voluit onze medewetgevende rol
spelen om dat voor elkaar te krijgen.
2-088
Marc Tarabella (S&D). – Monsieur le Président,
Monsieur le Premier ministre, lorsque vous avez
présenté le programme de la Présidence belge en juillet
dernier, je vous avais dit, en vous saluant et en boutade,
que vous seriez peut-être encore là en janvier pour nous
présenter le bilan. J'avoue que j'espérais me tromper et
sans vouloir vous offenser, Monsieur le Premier
ministre, j'aurais aimé – comme tous les Belges – avoir
devant moi aujourd'hui le chef du gouvernement issu du
scrutin du 13 juin dernier. Mais c'est vous qui avez dû
assumer cette Présidence, et je vous en félicite ainsi que
tous les ministres du gouvernement présent.
Laissons maintenant de côté notre situation politique
intérieure pour nous concentrer sur le bilan de la
Présidence belge.
Moi aussi, je voudrais citer un américain célèbre mais ce
n'est pas un philosophe, c'est un tennisman. Arthur Ashe
disait: "Une des clefs du succès est la confiance en soi,
et une des clés de la confiance en soi est la préparation".
Et force est de constater, à n'en pas douter, que la
Présidence belge s'en est inspirée.
Rien que dans les matières dont je m'occupe ici, j'ai vu
beaucoup d'avancées: la coopération renforcée en
matière de divorce, l'ordre européen de protection pour
les victimes de violences, la future coopération renforcée
pour les brevets, l'accord sur la directive "retard de
paiement", sur l'étiquetage des denrées alimentaires, sont
autant de réussites dont on peut se targuer au niveau de
la Présidence belge.
De même pour la PAC après 2013, même s'il n'y a pas
encore d'accord, le principe d'une PAC forte avec deux
piliers et le principe de la simplification sont d'ores et
déjà acquis. Mais ce dont l'agriculture a le plus grand
besoin dans le futur, c'est d'une régulation qui arrive à
contenir la volatilité des marchés dans certaines limites.
Or, à cet égard, il n'y a pas encore d'accord et j'émets des
craintes par rapport aux Présidences qui vont suivre –
notamment la Hongrie et la Pologne –, la régulation ne
semblant pas être une de leurs priorités.
Outre la bonne préparation, la totale implication des
ministres, l'efficacité des diplomates et des
fonctionnaires belges, le secret de la Présidence – et
vous l'avez souligné –, a été de ne pas imposer son
propre agenda mais de s'inscrire dans les dossiers
prioritaires en cours, au niveau européen, et de tout

18-01-2011 39
mettre en œuvre pour les faire avancer, grâce au
pragmatisme et à la culture du compromis qui nous
caractérisent.
J'espère que les Présidences à venir sauront s'inspirer de
cet exemple.
2-089
Anne E. Jensen (ALDE). – Hr. formand! Jeg vil også
gerne takke det belgiske formandskab for dets indsats,
især på de to områder, som jeg kender bedst: budget og
transport. Det var ikke på grund af formandskabet, at
budgetforhandlingerne i første omgang brød sammen, og
vi fandt jo en løsning for 2011-budgettet. Lad os så
håbe, at spørgsmålet om fleksibilitet og finansiering af
fusionsenergiprojektet ITER også snart falder på plads.
På transportområdet fandt det belgiske formandskab en
løsning på det vanskelige spørgsmål om EUROvignetten.
Især vil jeg takke det belgiske formandskab
for opbakningen til en sag, jeg har arbejdet for gennem
mange år, nemlig at vi skaber et netværk af sikre
rastepladser i Europa, så de lastbilchauffører, der
bogstaveligt talt holder Europa sammen og skaber det
indre marked, kan arbejde under gode og sikre forhold.
Jeg ville ønske, at alle andre landes regeringer ville lade
sig inspirere af den belgiske regerings positive syn på
denne sag, så vi endelig kan få noget til at ske i
virkeligheden.
2-090
Mirosław Piotrowski (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący!
Belgia jako jedno z sześciu państw założycielskich Unii
Europejskiej niedawno zakończyła sześciomiesięczną
prezydencję. Pomimo wewnętrznych trudności
politycznych związanych z niemożnością wyłonienia
własnego rządu, oficjalnie chwalona jest za skuteczność
i sukces osiągnięcia niemal wszystkich wcześniej
założonych priorytetów. Dlatego i ja pragnę przyłączyć
się do gratulacji, że w tak krótkim czasie, w ramach
wytyczonych priorytetów, stawiła czoła kryzysowi
ekonomicznemu w Europie, ochroniła środowisko
naturalne Europy, zbudowała otwartą i bezpieczną Unię
Europejską, zbudowała spójny model społeczny w Unii
Europejskiej oraz dała podwaliny wspólnej polityce
zagranicznej Unii. Rzadko w historii tak mały kraj w tak
krótkim czasie zrobił tak wiele dla szczęścia Europy.
2-091
Mathieu Grosch (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Herr
Premierminister! Als vor sechs Monaten die Fragen der
Kollegen so zahlreich warern, wie es nun um die
belgische Präsidentschaft stehe, und man das Programm
gelesen hatte, da waren viele hier im Hause noch voller
Zweifel.
Heute ist für uns die Freude umso größer, Ihnen, aber
auch der Ständigen Vertretung für die hervorragende
Arbeit und Vorbereitung zu danken. Ihr Erfolg war
natürlich kein leichter. Innenpolitische Probleme sind
schon angesprochen worden und Kollege Verhofstadt
musste auch feststellen, dass man nicht
notwendigerweise in Belgien und auf europäischer
Ebene Effizienz hat. Vielleicht ist das auch der Schlüssel
des Erfolgs für morgen, dass die Politiker, die hier gut
sind, vielleicht auch in Belgien die nötige Anerkennung
finden.
Ihr Erfolg war nicht leicht, denn die Außenbedingungen
waren auch nicht die besten. Und nicht zuletzt – und das
kann ich im Auftrag der EVP für den Bereich Transport
sagen – haben Sie sich auch nicht die leichtesten
Themen ausgesucht. Es wurde angesprochen und es war
für uns mehr als eine Genugtuung, dass u.a. das Thema
der Eurovignette gelöst wurde. Hier geht es nicht nur um
ein Prinzip, hier geht es in meinen Augen um neue
Finanzquellen, um eine sichere, saubere, aber auch
effiziente Mobilität auf europäischer Ebene. Hier geht es
darum zu sehen, ob wir morgen auf europäischer Ebene
dieses Thema der Mobilität verstärkt anpassen können.
Als Grenzbewohner freue ich mich natürlich auch über
die Durchsetzung der Verkehrssicherheitsvorschriften.
Es ist für uns und in jedem Grenzgebiet nicht
hinnehmbar, dass bei schweren Vergehen je nachdem
welches Nummernschild man hat, das Vergehen
geahndet wird oder nicht. Sie haben dieses heikle Thema
angepackt und einen ersten Schritt gemacht.
Und nicht zuletzt mit den Passagierrechten im
Busverkehr hat Europa jetzt allen Bürgern in den
verschiedenen Verkehrsarten Passagierrechte
zugeschrieben. Bei der Vulkankrise haben wir gemerkt,
wie wichtig es für die Betriebe, aber auch für die
Passagiere ist, so ein europäisches Fundament zu
schaffen. Ich hoffe, dass wir auf diesem Weg
weiterarbeiten können.
Abschließend wünsche ich Ihnen und auch Belgien nur
eines, nämlich dass wir das Geschick, das Sie auf
europäischer Ebene gezeigt haben, endlich auch auf
belgischer Ebene finden, nach dem guten Motiv: Wer
Forderungen stellen muss, wie Sie es gemacht haben,
der muss auch Lösungen zeigen.
2-092
Alejandro Cercas (S&D). – Señor Presidente, señor
Primer Ministro Leterme, yo también, desde las
responsabilidades del Grupo Socialista en las materias
de empleo y asuntos sociales, quiero unirme a las voces
de mis colegas que felicitan a la Presidencia belga por
estos seis meses.
Y, ¿cómo es posible que, pese a que usted se ha referido
escasamente a la dimensión social y pese a que,
efectivamente, no hay un enorme balance social en la
Presidencia belga, yo pueda unirme a estas
felicitaciones?
Sencillamente, señor Leterme, porque he tenido el
privilegio de trabajar con sus ministras, las Sras.
Onkelinx y Milquet, y conozco el esfuerzo de ellas y de
sus equipos para sacar adelante una agenda social en
unas circunstancias tan difíciles y en un Consejo tan
poco sensible a la Europa social como el que
desgraciadamente hoy tenemos. Y, pese a ello, han
trabajado con denuedo, con responsabilidad, con un alto

40 18-01-2011
espíritu europeísta y tratando de que el Parlamento
Europeo sea escuchado, de que los ciudadanos europeos
sean escuchados en esta hora, grave hora, en la que
Europa se juega su futuro.
Por tanto, señor Leterme, yo también me uno a esa
felicitación y espero que, en el futuro, en lo que a los
desafíos se refiere, sea verdad lo que usted ha dicho, sea
verdad que Europa encuentre su alma. Y ese alma, señor
Leterme, tiene que ser un alma política y un alma social,
no solamente económica.
Y quiero referirme simplemente a un par de dosieres que
han quedado pendientes de su Presidencia y sobre los
que espero que ustedes transmitan ese espíritu europeísta
y ese espíritu humanista a la próxima Presidencia
húngara, porque con ello nos jugamos mucho en el
futuro de Europa. Me estoy refiriendo a los dosieres que
tienen que ver con la dimensión de la política de
migración de Europa, el permiso único, las dos
Directivas relativas a los trabajadores de temporada y al
traslado dentro de una misma empresa.
Señor Leterme, diga usted a sus colegas que miren a
largo plazo. No puede haber trato desigual a los
trabajadores que llegan a Europa. Tiene que haber un
trato igual o abriremos un foso de unas consecuencias
incalculables para el futuro de la Unión. No puede ser
que esos trabajadores lleguen a Europa en desigualdad
de condiciones con respecto a los que trabajan aquí,
porque estaremos destruyendo Europa.
Señor Leterme, ojalá los próximos seis meses los
húngaros le escuchen y usted pueda recobrar la libertad
de palabra en el Consejo y ese Consejo se oriente hacia
el alma de Europa, que no puede ser otra que un alma
humanista y un alma de progreso.
2-093
Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE). – Signor Presidente,
onorevoli colleghi, Signor Primo ministro, non posso
che dirmi soddisfatto per una Presidenza che ha
dimostrato di saper gestire l'agenda europea in maniera
pragmatica ed efficiente, pur in un momento difficile.
Dall'approvazione in prima lettura della revisione della
direttiva contro i ritardi di pagamento della pubblica
amministrazione, fondamentale per il futuro del sistema
delle imprese, sino a quella sul pacchetto di supervisione
finanziaria, la Presidenza belga ha dato prova di
concretezza e dinamismo.
Potrei continuare con gli esempi, ma preferisco trarre
conclusioni su ciò che si può imparare da una Presidenza
che ha concluso il suo bilancio in maniera positiva. In
primo luogo, un programma di lavoro realistico, una
capacità negoziale dinamica e orientata al compromesso
e, infine, il pieno coinvolgimento delle Istituzioni
europee, a cominciare dal Parlamento, ed un approccio
alle questioni da affrontare svincolato dai confini e dagli
interessi nazionali.
Spero che questa Presidenza sia di esempio per le altre
che seguiranno. Per il momento, ad essa le mie più
sincere congratulazioni.
2-094
Pervenche Berès (S&D). – Monsieur le Président,
Monsieur le Premier ministre, avec vos ministres, Joëlle
Milquet et Laurette Onkelinx, nous avons très bien
travaillé à la fois pour que la voix du Parlement
européen soit entendue lorsque les lignes directrices
emploi ont été adoptées par le Conseil, où nos positions
ont été prises en compte, mais aussi sur la question des
services publics, puisque le rôle que jouent ces services
au cœur du modèle social européen a été réaffirmé au
cours de votre Présidence. J'espère que la dynamique qui
a ainsi été insufflée dans le dialogue interinstitutionnel
pourra se poursuivre à la fois dans les travaux de la
Commission et dans les travaux de la Présidence qui
nous arrive.
Il y a aussi un autre volet que nous avons beaucoup
élaboré ensemble, qui est la question de savoir comment
la gouvernance économique que vous avez évoquée doit
reposer sur ses deux pieds, car si elle traite la question
de l'emploi comme un solde, alors elle nous mène dans
le mur. Et je vois avec inquiétude la façon dont la
Commission, dans le paquet du semestre européen, traite
de cette affaire en proposant aux États membres de
réduire ici ou là les salaires ou d'augmenter, de façon
aveugle ou presque, l'âge de la retraite et de diminuer le
niveau des pensions. Ce n'est pas l'esprit dans lequel la
gouvernance économique peut apporter un succès à la
question européenne, celle qu'attendent nos salariés et
nos citoyens.
2-095
Morten Messerschmidt (EFD). – Hr. formand! Jeg vil
sige, at det belgiske formandskab uden sammenligning
har været et forunderligt eksempel på, hvordan EU
fungerer. På trods af at landet ikke har haft en regering,
høster formandskabet alligevel ros fra alle sider her i
salen. Det er måske et billede på, hvordan EU i
virkeligheden fungerer bedst – uden folkevalgte og i
virkeligheden helt uden folk. I hvert fald er det under det
belgiske formandskab, at det hidtil største bedrag, det
hidtil største svigt af de europæiske folk siden
Lissabontraktatens ikrafttrædelse er blevet en realitet –
nemlig indførelsen af den nu permanente krisemekanisme.
Da man skulle overbevise europæerne om at få
Lissabontraktaten på plads, hvor man skulle overføre
hidtil uset meget magt til fremmede folk i Bruxelles, så
lovede man, at én ting i hvert fald ikke kunne komme til
at ske: Man ville aldrig komme til at hæfte for hinandens
gæld. Det er under det belgiske formandskab, at dette
ene løfte er blevet svigtet. Nu har vi med virkning fra
2013 en fast akt gående ud på, at vi skal komme til at
hæfte for hinanden permanent i al fremtid. Det er det,
der står tilbage efter det belgiske formandskab, og det er
trist.
2-096

18-01-2011 41
Ivo Belet (PPE). – Voorzitter, mijnheer de Eerste
Minister, staatssecretaris, zowel jullie als de diplomaten
hebben bewezen dat we ook in zeer moeilijke
economische omstandigheden succes kunnen boeken en
dat we die omstandigheden kunnen aangrijpen om
Europa sterker te maken. Dat is heel belangrijk. Zoiets
vereist natuurlijk dat je compromissen sluit, moeilijke
compromissen. Daar komt altijd kritiek op, maar ik denk
dat in deze de ijzeren wet meer dan ooit geldt dat het
perfecte de vijand is van het goede. Zo'n compromis is
altijd verdedigbaar als je vooruitgang boekt en als het
ten goede komt aan de welvaart en het welzijn van onze
burgers.
Mijnheer de Eerste Minister, ik heb ook maar één
minuut. Ik verwijs even naar het volgend Belgisch
voorzitterschap. Dat komt er wellicht aan in het jaar
2025 of daaromtrent. Dan bent u waarschijnlijk 65 jaar
en ben ik nog een jaar ouder, dus ik ga ervan uit dat
Europa dan op het wereldtoneel een sterke speler zal
zijn, maar dan moeten we inderdaad wel voortgaan met
hetzelfde elan als in het afgelopen halfjaar. Ik wens u in
elk geval heel veel succes, hier en in Brussel.
2-097
Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D). – Monsieur le
Président, chers amis, chers amis belges, je voudrais
vous féliciter, chapeau bas! En tant que Hongrois, je
serais très heureux de connaître un aussi grand succès
pendant la présidence hongroise.
2-098
És most magyarul folytatnám. A belga elnökség idején
sikerült megelőzni az euróövezet válságának
elmélyülését. Rekordgyorsasággal összeállították az ír
mentőcsomagot. Előkészítették az új gazdaságpolitikai
koordináció rendszerét, és a magyar elnökségre vár a
gazdasági kormányzás hat jogszabályának az elfogadása.
Fölállították a pénzügyi felügyeletet, elindították a
külügyi szolgálatot, valamint az állampolgári
kezdeményezést. Csak a teljes elismerés hangján tudok
szólni arról is, hogy előrehaladt a Lisszaboni Szerződés
gyakorlati átültetése, bár rengeteg nyitott kérdés maradt.
2-099
Encore une fois félicitations mes amis belges, j'espère
que nous aurons autant de succès pendant la Présidence
hongroise.
2-100
Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE). – Deşi au existat
temeri legate de faptul că evoluţiile din planul politicii
interne belgiene ar putea afecta prestaţia preşedinţiei
rotative, mă bucur că Belgia a infirmat prognozele,
gestionând de o manieră pragmatică şi eficientă dosarele
europene. Astfel, o serie de problematici europene prin
excelenţă au reprezentat dosarele fanion ale preşedinţiei
belgiene: lansarea Serviciului European de Acţiune
Externă, creşterea economică şi consolidarea fiscală,
adoptarea regulamentului privind iniţiativa cetăţenească
europeană, lansarea punerii în aplicare a strategiei
Europa 2020.
În ceea ce priveşte interesele României, abordarea
preşedinţiei belgiene a fost una corectă şi echilibrată. În
două dosare de sensibilitate pentru România, preşedinţia
belgiană a ales opţiunile care au corespuns cel mai bine
poziţiei argumentate a părţii române: discutarea
problemei romilor din perspectiva incluziunii sociale şi
gestionarea procedurală a trimiterii în parlamentul
European a proiectului deciziei de aderare a României şi
Bulgariei la Schengen.
2-101
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D). – V prvom rade by
som chcela zdôrazniť, že Belgicko sa rotujúceho
predsedníctva ujalo v situácii, ktorá bola ťažká nielen na
vnútornej politickej scéne, ale samozrejme aj globálne
vo svete.
A preto mu nemožno prisudzovať všetky prípadné
neúspechy Únie. Naopak, dovolím si tvrdiť, že úlohu
mediátora v trialógu medzi Komisiou, Radou a
Parlamentom sa darilo Belgicku excelentne zvládnuť.
Podarilo sa pod belgickým kormidlom dosiahnuť pokrok
vo významnej oblasti dohľadu nad bankovým sektorom
a jeho reguláciu – aspoň čiastočnú. V októbri sa podarilo
uzavrieť rokovania o regulácii hedžových fondov,
podielových firiem a ratingových agentúr.
Vedela by som si predstaviť aj ambicióznejšie opatrenia
práve v tejto oblasti, ale myslím si, že Belgicku sa
podarilo skoordinovať aspoň tie veci, ktoré sa dali,
a dosiahnuť aspoň istý pokrok.
Mimoriadne dôležitá bola tiež oblasť medzinárodných
vzťahov. Únii sa podarilo sformulovať svoju
diplomatickú službu a aj tu sa Belgicko ukázalo ako
šikovný mediátor.
Takže záverom mi dovoľte zablahoželať Belgicku a
poďakovať sa za jeho predsedníctvo a vyjadriť aj istú
nádej, že príklad z vášho predsedníctva si vezme aj
Maďarsko.
2-102
Mairead McGuinness (PPE). – Mr President, could I
raise a wider issue here? At Christmas, John Bruton, a
former leader of Ireland and one-time President of the
Council, said that the part-time nature of the European
Council is really not fit for purpose, given the extent of
the crisis that Europe faces. He suggested that the time
given to these big issues is little more than the times
when leaders are on a flight to Brussels.
He says that we are facing a financial crisis – a crisis of
the welfare state in an ageing society, a crisis of
globalisation of nation states and, potentially, even a
crisis of the efficacy of European democracy. He says
that leaders need to sit together until they have reached a
full mutual understanding of all that needs to be done:
the whole job and not just bits of it. Only something on
that scale will give markets durable confidence. I would
ask people to discuss this, because perhaps he is right.
2-103
Oreste Rossi (EFD). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli
colleghi, nel suo intervento ha fatto importanti citazioni,

42 18-01-2011
peccato che poi nella realtà la sua persona rimarrà nota
principalmente per essere il Primo ministro di uno Stato
che a 219 giorni dalle elezioni non è riuscito a darsi un
governo.
Vede, io ho avuto una cattiva opinione, poi sicuramente
nel tempo l'ho modificata, nei suoi confronti, perché nel
giorno del suo insediamento io le avevo chiesto, proprio
come Presidente del semestre, come si sarebbe posto su
quei fatti, che ritenevo gravissimi, accaduti contro la
chiesa cattolica nel suo paese, fatti poi condannati dalla
stessa magistratura, perquisizioni dichiarate nulle.
Lei non mi aveva risposto. Questo mi era dispiaciuto,
perché credo che un presidente debba essere il
presidente di tutti. Se gli viene posta una domanda, deve
cercare in qualche modo di rispondere e, con coraggio,
fare una scelta: dire se si è favorevoli, se si è contro,
cosa si pensa. Lei non lo aveva fatto.
Oggi posso dire che lei con la sua Presidenza ha fatto un
buon lavoro. Forse, se da subito si fosse posto in un
modo un po' più "alla pari" con tutti noi, avremmo avuto
un rapporto migliore.
2-104
Franz Obermayr (NI). – Herr Präsident! Mit Sicherheit
hat Belgien die EU-Ratspräsidentschaft in einer sehr
schwierigen Übergangsphase übernommen, da einerseits
die Wirtschaftskrise noch nicht überwunden ist und
andererseits natürlich auch der Vertrag von Lissabon
noch nicht vollständig umgesetzt ist bzw. auch dessen
bedingte Tauglichkeit sichtbar wurde.
In der gesamten Debatte um den Eurorettungsschirm
allerdings darf ein wesentlicher Aspekt nicht vergessen
werden, nämlich dass sowohl der Rettungsschirm für die
Eurostaaten als auch die Kredite für Griechenland gegen
den Vertrag von Lissabon verstoßen. Beiden
Maßnahmen fehlt somit die zulässige Rechtsgrundlage.
Damit handelt es sich eindeutig um eine
Kompetenzüberschreitung, die letztlich ein ordentliches
Vertragsänderungsverfahren unumgänglich macht.
Nach weiteren Rettungsschirmkandidaten – wie Irland
und Portugal – ist auch Spanien ein Sorgenkind der
Eurozone. Auf der anderen Seite werden Nettozahler
wie Deutschland und Österreich sukzessive zu den
Melkkühen der EU. So kann es natürlich nicht
weitergehen. Belgien hat beide – zugegeben schwierigen
– Herausforderungen, nämlich die Bewältigung der
Krise einerseits und andererseits die Umsetzung des
Lissabon-Vertrags, nicht wirklich bewältigen können.
2-105
Andrzej Grzyb (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Wiele
dobrych opinii wyrażono pod adresem belgijskiej
prezydencji, w szczególności za sprawność negocjacyjną
i spokój w trudnym okresie zarówno kryzysu, jak i
szczytu G20, konferencji w Cancún czy też debaty
budżetowej. Dominowały sprawy powrotu do stabilności
rynków finansowych, jak również stabilności
gospodarczej, ale też trzeba powiedzieć, że rozszalały
się egoizmy narodowe, w szczególności przy budżecie.
Należy pogratulować sprawności negocjacyjnej, ale to
przecież już dwunasta prezydencja w wykonaniu Belgii.
Premier Leterme stwierdził, że program prezydencji był
programem Rady i Komisji, bez ambicji, aby nadawać
jej jakiś narodowy priorytet. Musimy jednak dopuścić,
że kolejne prezydencje będą chciały zaznaczyć swoje
priorytety. Wydaje mi się, że to istota integracji i jej
ducha, o którym mówił właśnie pan premier Leterme.
To co mnie martwi, to kryzys w uchwaleniu budżetu na
rok 2011, ale w szczególności jego tło i zapowiedź, że w
przyszłości ta nowa perspektywa finansowa nie będzie w
sposób łatwy negocjowana.
2-106
Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE). – Señor
Presidente, hay, al menos, un ámbito importante para
Europa y para la región a la que pertenezco ―Euskadi,
el País Vasco― en el que ustedes no han hecho
absolutamente nada.
En el Tratado de Lisboa a este Parlamento se le
reconocen competencias en materia de pesca. El Consejo
bloqueó varios planes de pesquerías de la anchoa. Al
inicio de su Presidencia, yo misma me mostré dispuesta
a continuar con las negociaciones para poder
desbloquear planes importantes y ustedes no han hecho
ningún esfuerzo para desbloquear estos aspectos. Por
tanto, no les puedo felicitar porque, en el fondo, el
Consejo no reconoce las competencias que el Tratado de
Lisboa reconoce a esta Cámara.
Creo que han perdido una oportunidad para solventar un
problema que se arrastra desde la Presidencia española.
No han movido ninguna ficha; por tanto, espero que la
próxima Presidencia sea capaz de hacerlo.
Y les hubiera agradecido, también, un poco de atención
en mi intervención.
2-107
Edite Estrela (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, também eu
gostaria de felicitar o Governo belga pelo sucesso da sua
Presidência, não obstante as condições difíceis que já
aqui também foram referidas em que se desenvolveu. E,
na área que eu acompanhei mais de perto, gostaria de
felicitar e agradecer à Ministra Milquet o seu
empenhamento e a sua determinação na condução do
dossiê sobre a directiva sobre licença de maternidade,
não obstante o Conselho não a ter acompanhado.
Esperamos que a Presidência húngara dê a devida
importância a esta matéria. O Sr. Primeiro-Ministro
Leterme recordou o sonho que norteou os fundadores do
projecto europeu em contraponto ao mercado único e o
Sr. Presidente Barroso salientou a importância do
espírito comunitário. Acho que são bons avisos no
contexto actual, em que nós precisamos de mais unidade
e de mais solidariedade para enfrentarmos os desafios
que temos pela frente.
2-108
Czesław Adam Siekierski (PPE). – Panie
Przewodniczący! Prezydencja belgijska, właściwie dwie
ostatnie prezydencje, przypadły na okres wdrażania
traktatu lizbońskiego i kształtowania nowego ładu

18-01-2011 43
ustrojowego w Unii. Obie te prezydencje ograniczyły
podejście krajowe na rzecz pogłębienia współpracy i
koordynacji we Wspólnocie. To dobry kierunek służący
wzmocnieniu podejścia wspólnotowego, a nie
rządowego. Z drugiej strony należy być ostrożnym w
ograniczaniu roli prezydencji krajowych w zakresie
kreowania swoich priorytetów. Tu musi funkcjonować
specyficzna równowaga. Niewątpliwym osiągnięciem
prezydencji belgijskiej jest wzmocnienie zarządzania
gospodarczego. Rozpoczęły pracę agencje nadzoru nad
instytucjami finansowymi. Wiele uczyniono dla bardziej
rygorystycznego przestrzegania dyscypliny budżetowej.
Działania na rzecz reform strukturalnych uczyniono
głównym instrumentem rozwojowym. Wreszcie
przełamano powstały impas w zakresie zatwierdzenia
budżetu Unii na 2011 rok. Po prostu dziękujemy.
2-109
Seán Kelly (PPE). – Mr President, I must say that it is
very encouraging to hear so many Members from all
sides of the House praising the Belgian Presidency, and
rightly so. I feared the opposite. I think one of the
reasons the Belgian Presidency is a success is because
they took the realities of the Lisbon Treaty into account.
Nowadays there must be a seamless transfer from one
presidency to another. It is like a relay race: the more
effective the transfer is – and the more low-profile it is –
the better, probably. The Belgians did that exceptionally
well and have given an example to other countries of
how to do so in future.
I would particularly like to thank them for their work in
relation to the budget and the banking authorities and
other authorities established. If they are as successful as
we hope they will be, then the Belgian Presidency will
actually grow in stature in the years ahead as we look
back on these very important decisions.
2-110
Frédéric Daerden (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, je
souhaite me joindre aux messages quasi unanimes de ce
matin Monsieur le Premier ministre, la Présidence belge
a été une bonne Présidence car elle a fait avancer le
projet européen, et ce dans un contexte national difficile
qui ne l'a pas empêchée de relever des défis auxquels
l'Europe est confrontée. Je pense à l'adoption du budget
2011 qui, sous certains aspects, nous laisse amers, mais
vous avez évité une confrontation institutionnelle
préjudiciable.
En matière sociale, la Présidence belge a été confrontée,
dès le début, à la frilosité de certains au Conseil – je
pense notamment à l'idée d'une directive-cadre sur le
revenu minimum. Malgré ce contexte, des avancées
réelles peuvent être portées au crédit de la Belgique
grâce à la combativité de vos ministres, de nos ministres:
le rapport du Conseil EPSCO avant chaque Conseil
européen afin d'apporter le contrepoids nécessaire au
Conseil ECOFIN; les conclusions sur les services
sociaux d'intérêt général; les pensions, avec notamment
la conférence sur les pensions qui s'est tenue à Liège, qui
a mis en évidence le nécessaire traitement conjoint des
questions d'adéquation et de soutenabilité des pensions –
j'avais pour mission de le souligner –; la déclaration
EPSCO sur l'année de lutte contre la pauvreté.
Encore félicitations et espérons que ces avancées seront
poursuivies avec les Présidences suivantes.
2-111
Gay Mitchell (PPE). – Mr President, on a point of
order, I would ask you to carry out a survey of who is
being allowed in on Catch-the-Eye and who is not. It
seems to me that there is not a fair distribution from one
part-session to another. I would ask you to do this
because some of us, who have other duties, cannot sit in
the House day in and day out, whereas other people have
the opportunity to do so.
I think there has to be a fair opportunity for Members to
intervene in debate. I do apologise for delaying the
House, but I would ask that you carry out that survey.
2-112
President. − Mr Mitchell, I do not want to say any more
other than that I have a list and you can check the list.
Almost 20 people on the list have the possibility to
speak. If you wish you can come to my office, I can
show you the list and we can explain it.
2-113
Maroš Šefčovič, Vice-President of the Commission. −
Mr President, a great deal of positive evaluation and
praise has been expressed in the House this morning. On
behalf of the Commission I would like to say that it is
very well deserved. With its European spirit, the Belgian
Presidency clearly demonstrated impressive efficiency
and a very cooperative approach. When the Belgian
Presidency took up an issue, we all knew that it would
pursue the European goal – and only the European goal
– and that it would do so in a spirit of loyal cooperation
among the institutions. The Belgian Presidency’s very
good cooperation with the European Parliament and very
close contacts with the Commission resulted in what is
clearly a very impressive list of achievements.
Today we can say that the Lisbon Treaty is now fully
operational. We have managed to give our citizens a
new voice through the European Citizens’ Initiative, and
we managed to reach an agreement on more transparent
and effective rules for comitology. I worked on both of
those issues with the Secretary of State, Olivier Chastel,
and I must say that I was always impressed by his
cooperative spirit and high level of professionalism.
A calm and constructive approach was needed for the
conclusion of the debate on the 2011 Budget, and for the
beginning of the new economic governance in Europe.
Even in complex, protracted discussions on issues such
as divorce, financial supervision and even patents, the
Belgian Presidency managed to achieve clear progress.
It is very clear now that we need to carry forward the
positive spirit and efficiency of the Belgian Presidency.
Clearly the economy, recovering from the crisis and
fiscal consolidation remain top priorities for us all. We
received good news last week with the successful sale of

44 18-01-2011
Portuguese, Spanish and Italian bonds, and we saw
reductions in the spreads for Belgium and other
countries. But it is also very clear that we need to press
ahead with structural reforms and that we have to work
even harder. If we do not want to have a jobless
recovery, we need to look at how we can reform our
labour market rules and how we can remove the
obstacles to higher employment in Europe. At the same
time we need to protect the vulnerable in our society and
reduce poverty. This is the only way we can develop our
social market economy in Europe.
A lot will depend on how we start the European
Semester and to what extent we will collectively be able
to be ambitious in our national reform programmes, in
our consolidation efforts and in implementing the EU
2020 Strategy. The Belgian Presidency made a major
contribution to the launch of this new process of
economic governance and we now have to continue the
excellent work it started.
Prime Minister, Secretary of State, I should like to thank
you very much for your excellent work. I would also like
to thank all your diplomats very much for creating a
positive atmosphere in which the next presidency can
continue the work you started so successfully six months
ago.
2-114
Yves Leterme, président en exercice du Conseil. −
Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Vice-président de la
Commission, chers collègues, mes derniers mots au nom
de la Présidence belge seront brefs. Je me réjouis de
l'affluence, mais je sais que cela a à voir avec d'autres
éléments de votre ordre du jour.
2-115
Dames en heren, ik dank uiteraard alle collega's die zijn
tussengekomen voor de heel constructieve kritiek die
nuttig zal zijn voor de voortzetting van uw en onze
werkzaamheden. Laat me eerst en vooral zeggen dat ten
aanzien van de zeer positieve evaluatie van het Europees
Parlement met betrekking tot ons voorzitterschap, ik een
stelregel probeer te hanteren die erin bestaat om bij
negatieve kritiek sereen te zijn en bij positieve kritiek,
wanneer dat zelfs een hype wordt, zeer bescheiden te
blijven.
Een viertal elementen wil ik toevoegen tot conclusie van
het debat. Ten eerste, ik denk dat het inderdaad
belangrijk is - en dit overstijgt uiteraard het belang van
ons Belgisch voorzitterschap - dat wij goede praktijken
installeren met betrekking tot de tenuitvoerlegging van
het Verdrag van Lissabon. Het roterend voorzitterschap
van een nationale lidstaat van de Europese Unie
gedurende zes maanden moet vooral de Europese agenda
hoog houden.
Ten tweede is het bij het hanteren van het roterend
voorzitterschap wel de bedoeling, misschien niet alleen
als facilitator, maar ook als motor, zoals een collega
heeft gezegd, dat de instellingen hun werk kunnen doen.
We hebben allemaal geknokt voor ratificatie van het
Verdrag van Lissabon. Het zou natuurlijk onzinnig zijn
een roterend voorzitterschap te hanteren als een middel
dat niet voldoende recht doet aan de letter en de geest
van dit Verdrag van Lissabon. Ik denk trouwens dat
alleen op die manier een roterend voorzitterschap in de
toekomst nog zin heeft en toekomstige
verdragswijzigingen of nieuwe verdragen kan overleven.
Tweede element: niet alles is perfect en er is door een
aantal collega's terecht gewezen op een aantal lacunes.
Ik zou met name willen onderstrepen dat met betrekking
tot het sociale beleid Europa ambitieuzer zou mogen
zijn.
2-116
En effet, ce qui a été dit est exact. Au niveau de la
politique sociale, les ambitions de l'Union, à l'avenir,
doivent être plus grandes mais je crois néanmoins que la
Belgique a joué son rôle. On a renforcé le rôle des
politiques d'emploi dans la stratégie de l'Union
européenne 2020, on a assuré la place de ces politiques
dans la nouvelle gouvernance économique européenne et
je crois qu'on a aussi posé les bases de la dimension
sociale de la stratégie Europe 2020, pas uniquement la
lutte contre la pauvreté mais aussi la cohésion sociale. Il
me semble, en réponse à certaines interventions, que
nous avons quand même mis la question des services
d'intérêt général à l'agenda européen, mais il est vrai
qu'il faut faire plus et aller de l'avant, surtout au niveau
législatif.
Comme je l'ai déjà dit, notre Présidence n'est pas
parfaite, et je pense, comme le collègue Tavares l'a, à
juste titre, souligné, qu'il y a moyen de faire davantage
qu'aujourd'hui au niveau de la politique des réfugiés.
2-117
Ten slotte, twee slotopmerkingen, want er zijn andere
dingen aan de orde nu. Ik zou me heel nadrukkelijk
willen wenden tot de Belgische vertegenwoordigers in
het Europees Parlement en een aantal collega's in het
bijzonder, met name twee van mijn voorgangers.
Namens de Belgische regering zou ik willen zeggen dat
wij de inzet die wij tijdens het Belgisch voorzitterschap
aan de dag hebben gelegd ook beschouwen als een soort
eresaluut voor uw werk hier. Wij hebben alles gedaan,
collega's, om het Verdrag van Lissabon op een juiste
manier toe te passen, ook als een soort eresaluut voor de
initiatieven die sinds het elfde voorzitterschap met het
Verdrag van Laeken en nadien in het kader van
belangrijke verslaggeverschappen zijn ontplooid voor de
implementatie van de geest van Laeken in het Verdrag
van Lissabon.
Ten slotte is terecht opgemerkt dat een roterend
voorzitterschap vooral de inzet en verdienste is van heel
wat mensen rond de politici die de verantwoordelijkheid
moeten nemen en op de eerste rij staan. Het gaat dan om
de adviseurs, om de diplomaten, om heel wat mensen die
daar uiteindelijk het belangrijkste werk leveren.
Aan de heer Staes zou ik willen zeggen dat voor wat
betreft de uitreiking van de gouden schoen morgen in
België eerder mensen als Lukaku en Boussoufa favoriet
zijn, maar dat de gouden schoen voor het Belgisch

18-01-2011 45
voorzitterschap inderdaad gerust mag worden toebedeeld
aan de diplomaten, van wie een deel hier achter mij zit.
Tot slot zou ik aan de heer Tabajdi willen zeggen - en ik
probeer mijn beste Hongaars te gebruiken:
2-118
President. − Prime Minister, thanks to you over the last
half year we have developed new ways of cooperating at
different levels between the two chambers of legislation
of the European Union: between Council and the
European Parliament. Your presidency was a great
success. All the best to your country and all the best to
you personally.
(Applause)
Written statements (Rule 149)
2-119
Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. – In den vergangenen
sechs Monaten hatte Belgien den EU-Vorsitz inne und
kaum jemand habe davon Notiz genommen. Belgien war
vor allem – und das noch dazu erfolglos – mit der
Bildung einer neuen Regierung beschäftigt, und der
Streit zwischen Flamen und Wallonen hat das Land
politisch handlungsunfähig gemacht. Daher ist es kein
Wunder gewesen, dass das EU-Polit-Establishment ein
leichtes Spiel gehabt hat, um den Zentralismus innerhalb
der Europäischen Union weiter voranzutreiben. Die
Krise des Euro wurde zum Anlass genommen, um Pläne
für eine europäische Wirtschaftsregierung zu schmieden.
Und der sogenannte ständige Rettungsschirm für den
Euro ist nichts anderes als ein Anschlag auf die
Nettozahler, die künftig noch tiefer in die Tasche werden
greifen müssen. Dabei müsste Belgien eigentlich ein
warnendes Beispiel sein, was passieren kann, wenn
Völker mit einer unterschiedlichen wirtschaftlichen
Leistungskraft in ein Korsett gesteckt werden. Belgien,
wo die Differenzen zwischen Flamen und Wallonen
offenkundig unüberbrückbar sind und wo der
Gesamtstaat eine Umverteilungsmaschine von den
Flamen hin zu den Wallonen ist, zeigt, was auf
Europäische Union und Eurozone zuzukommen droht,
wenn die bestehenden Irrwege weiter beschritten
werden.
2-120
Sławomir Witold Nitras (PPE), na piśmie. –
Podsumowując belgijską prezydencję, należy w
pierwszej kolejności docenić jej bardzo aktywną rolę w
kwestii projektowania europejskiego systemu stabilności
finansowej. Wszyscy, którzy obserwowali ten proces
wiedzą, że była to operacja trudna i realizowana pod
presją czasu. Składam z tego powodu serdeczne
gratulacje wszystkim, którzy się przyczynili do realizacji
tego projektu. Na tym polu belgijska prezydencja
pozostawia węgierskiej prezydencji dobrze zrealizowane
zadanie. Należy też podkreślić, że Belgowie wytyczyli
kierunek działania przyszłym prezydencjom w
kontekście wejścia w życie traktatu lizbońskiego.
Chciałbym wyrazić nadzieję, że kolejne prezydencje, w
tym polska, w większym stopniu będą próbowały nadać
wyraźne, własne priorytety, wpisujące się jednak w
nasze wspólne, europejskie cele. Taki tryb pracy w
większym stopniu pozwala planować i realizować
politykę instytucji europejskich.
2-121
PRESIDE: ALEJO VIDAL-QUADRAS
Vicepresidente
2-122
7 - Turno de votaciones
2-123
El Presidente. − Pasamos ahora al turno de votaciones.
(Para los resultados y otros detalles de la votación:
véase el Acta)
2-124
7.1 - Fusiones de las sociedades anónimas
(versión codificada) (A7-0363/2010, Jiří
Maštálka) (votación)
2-125
7.2 - Protocolo del Acuerdo
Euromediterráneo entre las CE y Jordania
para tener en cuenta la adhesión de
Bulgaria y Rumanía a la UE (A7-0373/2010,
Gabriele Albertini) (votación)
2-126
7.3 - Acuerdo CE-Unión Económica y
Monetaria del África Occidental sobre
determinados aspectos de los servicios
aéreos (A7-0361/2010, Dieter-Lebrecht
Koch) (votación)
2-127
– Antes de la votación:
2-128
Dieter-Lebrecht Koch (PPE). – Herr Präsident, liebe
Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Durch die Annahme meines
Berichts stimmen wir einem Abkommen zu, mit dem die
rechtliche Angleichung von 47 bestehenden bilateralen
Luftverkehrsabkommen zwischen den einzelnen EU-
Mitgliedstaaten und den einzelnen Ländern der
westafrikanischen Wirtschafts- und Währungsunion
gelingt. Wir sorgen dadurch für die Anwendung
geltenden EU-Rechts, verhindern
Marktzugangsbarrieren und Diskriminierungen, und wir
bauen Bürokratie ab. Bitte stimmen Sie zu!
2-129
7.4 - Condiciones armonizadas para la
comercialización de productos de
construcción (A7-0343/2010, Catherine
Stihler) (votación)
2-130

46 18-01-2011
7.5 - Consenso europeo sobre la ayuda
humanitaria (A7-0375/2010, Michèle
Striffler) (votación)
2-131
7.6 - La agricultura como sector estratégico
en el contexto de la seguridad alimentaria
(A7-0376/2010, Daciana Octavia Sârbu)
(votación)
2-132
El Presidente. − Con esto concluimos el turno de
votaciones.
2-133
8 - Explicaciones de voto
2-134
El Presidente. − Pasamos ahora a las explicaciones de
voto
2-135
Explicaciones de voto orales
2-136
Recomendacíon para la segunda lectura: Catherine
Stihler (A7-0343/2010)
2-137
Jarosław Kalinowski (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący!
Sektor budowlany stanowi bardzo ważną gałąź
gospodarki każdego kraju. Dążąc do wzrostu
ekonomicznego i poprawy standardu życia obywateli,
nie można pominąć tak istotnej części rynku. Każdy
człowiek zdaje sobie sprawę ze znaczenia, jakie dla
bezpieczeństwa i komfortu ma poprawnie zbudowany
czy zmodernizowany obiekt. Jednocześnie wszyscy
dążymy do obniżenia kosztów budowy domów,
budynków przemysłowych czy obiektów użyteczności
publicznej. Sprawozdanie dąży do zniesienia barier
rynkowych, umożliwienia sprawnego obrotu towarami
budowlanymi i do zapewnienia konkurencyjnych cen w
sektorze. Korzyści z tej inicjatywy odniesie cała Europa.
Całkowicie popieram też postulaty autorki dotyczące
zwiększenia bezpieczeństwa pracowników w tej branży.
2-138
Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE). – Signor Presidente,
onorevoli colleghi, sulla relazione Stihler, l'importanza
che il settore edile riveste in Europa è evidente. Non
potevamo non affrontare i problemi che coinvolgono 12
milioni di cittadini direttamente impiegati in questo
settore.
La relazione della collega Stihler rappresenta un utile
strumento per abbattere le barriere nazionali di natura
amministrativa e tecnica che impediscono la
commercializzazione dei prodotti da costruzione
all'interno dell'Unione europea e proseguire nella
costruzione di un mercato unico in questo settore.
Concordo con il riconoscimento riferito alle piccole e
medie imprese nel settore edilizio, così come alla
particolare attenzione riservata al problema della
necessità di riciclare i prodotti da costruzione, un tema
di cruciale importanza nella lotta al cambiamento
climatico. Tuttavia, voglio cogliere questa occasione per
richiamare l'attenzione sulla questione della salute e
della sicurezza dei lavoratori impiegati nel settore
dell'edilizia. Gli orientamenti inseriti dalla relatrice in
proposito sono utili, ma non sufficienti.
È un nostro dovere affrontare e sviluppare
maggiormente queste proposte nel futuro immediato,
assicurando ai lavoratori impiegati nel settore edile un
elevato livello di protezione. La tragedia delle morti
bianche sul lavoro è un tema che coinvolge l'intera
Europa, mi auguro che con il nostro lavoro riusciremo a
porvi rimedio.
2-139
Hannu Takkula (ALDE). – Arvoisa puhemies,
ensinnäkin haluaisin kiittää Catherine Stihleriä tästä
erittäin hyvästä mietinnöstä. On erittäin tärkeätä
kiinnittää huomiota rakennustuotteiden kaupan
yhdenmukaistamiseen, koska tarvitsemme
tulevaisuudessa entistä parempaa ja laadukkaampaa
rakentamista.
Täytyy muistaa, että vaikka on kyse hyvin kilpailutetusta
alasta, tärkeintä ei ole vain kilpailu itsessään vaan
lopputulos. On tärkeää, että ne rakennukset, joita
Euroopassa rakennetaan, voisivat olla turvallisia niiden
käyttäjille ja että ne olisivat turvallisia myös
rakentamisprosessin aikana rakentajille ja muille
työntekijöille.
On erittäin tärkeää, että yhdenmukaistamista tapahtuu
myös rakennustuotteiden kaupan alalla ja tätä kautta
voidaan vaihtaa parhaita käytäntöjä. On totta, että tällä
hetkellä monessa Euroopan maassa käytetään vielä
sellaisia materiaaleja, jotka eivät ole terveellisiä
asukkaille. Meillä on esimerkiksi laaja homeongelma
monessa Euroopan unionin jäsenvaltiossa ja siksi on
tärkeätä parhaita käytäntöjä ja innovaatioita käyttäen
pyrkiä siihen, että voimme saada rakennustuotteiden
kaupan sellaiseksi, että tuotteet ovat terveellisiä ja hyviä
niiden käyttäjille.
Arvoisa puhemies, haluan siis kiittää esittelijä Stihleriä
tästä hyvästä mietinnöstä. Euroopassa tarvitaan hyviä
rakennustuotteita ja sellaista kauppaa, jossa otetaan
huomioon nimenomaan turvallisuusmääräykset.
2-140
Daniel Hannan (ECR). – Mr President, last week the
French Prime Minister came to London and said that we
needed to join in the project of assisting the euro. Let us
leave aside for a moment the question of whether we
should again be dragged into somebody else’s problem;
let us focus instead on the main logical flaw here. He
says ‘European integration is not working, so let us have
more European integration!’ I am sure that you can spot
the problem in his reasoning here. ‘My dinghy keeps
capsizing, so I would like to be put in charge of an ocean
liner’. ‘My go-kart has crashed, so please put me at the
wheel of an articulated lorry’. It seems that whatever the

18-01-2011 47
problem is, the answer is always closer European
integration.
The EU is a solution in search of a problem, but surely
the day is coming when we can no longer impose
ourselves both on the markets and on public opinion.
The spell is breaking and the shamanistic incantations
are losing their force.
2-141
Informe: Michèle Striffler (A7-0375/2010)
2-142
Clemente Mastella (PPE). – Signor Presidente,
onorevoli colleghi, l'Unione europea è il primo donatore
di aiuti umanitari al mondo. Basti pensare che il suo
contributo rappresenta oltre il 40% dell'assistenza
umanitaria internazionale. Attraverso la sua politica
umanitaria, l'Unione europea dimostra concretamente
tutto l'impegno a favore delle popolazioni dei paesi terzi
che hanno bisogno di aiuto e si trovano in situazioni di
estrema vulnerabilità.
Il consenso umanitario, firmato il 18 dicembre dai
Presidenti del Consiglio dell'Unione europea, del
Parlamento e della Commissione europea, rappresenta
un notevole passo avanti in questa direzione. Mi preme
qui ricordare che gli impegni derivanti dal consenso
devono valere sia per gli Stati membri sia per la
Commissione europea.
In questi ultimi anni abbiamo registrato un crescente
coinvolgimento di attori non umanitari nella risposta alle
crisi umanitarie. È fondamentale che gli attori politici,
militari e umanitari che condividono lo stesso ambiente
operativo apprendano a conoscersi meglio e a dialogare,
rispettando e non compromettendo i ruoli ed i mandati
rispettivi. È chiaro che il ricorso ai mezzi della
protezione civile dovrà essere conforme alle direttive
internazionali quali enunciate nel consenso europeo.
2-143
Antonello Antinoro (PPE). – Signor Presidente,
onorevoli colleghi, credo che la relazione approvata oggi
della collega Striffler, alla quale va il mio
ringraziamento e i miei complimenti, sia una
comunicazione destinata ad accrescere l'efficacia e la
coerenza degli aiuti umanitari.
Il Parlamento europeo invita oggi l'Unione a collaborare
più intensamente per raggiungere un consenso volto a
potenziare la risposta collettiva alle crisi umanitarie e in
particolare a difendere con vigore il pieno rispetto del
diritto umanitario internazionale.
Dobbiamo fare in modo, quindi, che gli aiuti e gli
operatori umanitari possano raggiungere ancor meglio le
popolazioni bisognose, ed essendo queste aumentate
nell'ultimo periodo dobbiamo, attraverso la
Commissione o attraverso programmi bilaterali, riuscire
a fare ancor più di quanto non si sia fatto finora. Se le
necessità sono enormi, la distribuzione di aiuti diventa
sempre più difficile e anche rischiosa e pericolosa per il
quadro internazionale sempre più complesso.
Secondo queste esigenze, quindi, questo accordo
promuove un consenso europeo in cui si afferma che gli
aiuti dell'Unione sono basati inequivocabilmente sui
principi umanitari di neutralità, indipendenza e
imparzialità e devono essere forniti rapidamente ed
efficacemente alle vittime delle crisi sulla base delle
necessità individuate.
2-144
Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE). – Signor Presidente,
onorevoli colleghi, l'aumento esponenziale delle
catastrofi naturali, sia nel loro numero sia nella loro
intensità, insieme alla moltiplicazione delle crisi
complesse ci pongono di fronte ad un aggravamento
delle violazioni del diritto umanitario internazionale e ad
un restringimento dello spazio umanitario.
Le recenti tragedie accadute ad Haiti e in Pakistan
dimostrano nuovamente la necessità di rafforzare gli
strumenti a disposizione dell'Unione europea necessari
ad affrontare le catastrofi naturali. Sono d'accordo con
l'impostazione generale della relazione e, nello specifico,
con l'affermazione secondo cui l'Unione europea deve
farsi promotrice dei principi umanitari in modo
instancabile. L'azione esterna dell'Unione europea è
sancita dal trattato di Lisbona; è necessario che essa
rispecchi il peso politico dell'Unione e la sua influenza
come principale donatore internazionale.
Ho votato a favore della relazione della collega Striffler
perché ritengo giusto porci come imperativo il
rafforzamento dell'attuazione del consenso e del suo
piano d'azione, insieme alla garanzia di un
coordinamento e di una perequazione degli oneri a
livello mondiale, tenendo conto allo stesso tempo delle
responsabilità regionali dei paesi che hanno la capacità
di contribuire in maniera sostanziale agli aiuti umanitari.
2-145
Informe: Daciana Octavia Sârbu (A7-0376/2010)
2-146
Jim Higgins (PPE). – Mr President, I had great pleasure
in voting for this particular report, because the report
confirms that food security is a basic human right. The
agricultural sector must meet a growing population’s
need for safe and sufficient food despite the obstacles of
limited natural resources, high energy prices and climate
change. According to the United Nations Food and
Agricultural Organisation, food production must
increase by at least 70% to meet the growing demands of
a world population which is expected to exceed 9 billion
by the year 2050.
Furthermore, around 900 million people worldwide are
chronically hungry due to extreme poverty, while up to 2
billion people lack genuine long-term food security due
to varying degrees of poverty. In Europe, 16% of
citizens still live below the poverty line. Basically what I
am saying is this: we need to tackle this issue head-on. It
is essential that the financing of the new Common
Agricultural Policy after 2013 recognises this, and the
very least we need is that the budget should be
maintained at least at its current level.

48 18-01-2011
2-147
Jens Rohde (ALDE). – Hr. formand! Parlamentet har i
dag valgt formelt at anerkende landbruget som en
strategisk sektor for fødevaresikkerhed. Det har vi
liberale anerkendt i mange år. Ligesom vi også
anerkender, at landbruget er en strategisk sektor for
fødevarekvalitet, folkesundhed, bæredygtig og
økonomisk vækst. Men det berettiger altså ikke til
skoleprogrammer for frugt og mælk. Ej heller til flere
markedsstøttede mælkestøtteprogrammer. Vi skal gøre
opmærksom på, at vi stemte imod disse forslag og
beklager, at de gik igennem.
Det skal dog ikke ødelægge helhedsbilledet af, at vi skal
give landbruget gode vilkår. Smørbjerge og vinsøer og
skoleprogrammer er imidlertid ikke vejen frem.
Landmandens indkomst skal ikke sikres ved hjælp af
intervention og markedsforvridning. I stedet skal vi
investere i forskning, vi skal give landmændene
mulighed for at udnytte nye teknologier til alternative
indtægtsformer. Overordnet set synes vi, at
betænkningen er god, og derfor stemte vi for det
samlede resultat.
2-148
Clemente Mastella (PPE). – Signor Presidente,
onorevoli colleghi, la sicurezza alimentare rappresenta
ogni giorno un diritto fondamentale dell'umanità e si
realizza in modo concreto solo quando tutti dispongono,
in qualsiasi momento, di un accesso fisico, sociale ed
economico ad una nutrizione sufficiente.
La nuova politica agricola comune dell'Unione europea
non potrà non tener conto di queste nuove esigenze: essa
dovrà pertanto essere in grado di rispondere in modo
chiaro ed inequivocabile alle sfide poste dalla sicurezza
alimentare e da altri fattori, in particolare i cambiamenti
climatici, la crisi economica, il mantenimento
dell'equilibrio territoriale all'interno dell'Unione.
Abbiamo bisogno di promuovere non soltanto la
competitività dei nostri prodotti, ma anche l'agricoltura
tradizionale, i piccoli allevamenti, l'agricoltura biologica
e la distribuzione locale. Questi modelli di agricoltura
hanno dato da sempre, e continuano a dare, un valido
contributo alla sicurezza alimentare perché spesso
rappresentano il modo più efficace di utilizzare terreni in
diverse regioni geografiche dell'Unione europea
attraverso l'uso di metodi che sono stati specificamente
sviluppati in diverse regioni e per lunghi periodi di
tempo.
2-149
Jarosław Kalinowski (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący!
Naszą rolą, jako posłów do Parlamentu Europejskiego,
jest działanie na rzecz polepszenia bytu obywateli Unii.
Zapewnienie im dostępu do bezpiecznej żywności
najwyższej jakości powinno być najwyższym
priorytetem. Niedobory żywności i jej wysokie ceny
zazwyczaj wiążą się z niepokojami społecznymi i nie
możemy dopuścić do takiej sytuacji na naszym
kontynencie. Biorąc pod uwagę wzrastającą liczbę
ludności, zmiany klimatyczne oraz klęski żywiołowe,
bezpieczeństwo żywnościowe na świecie jest bardzo
zagrożone. Już teraz tak wielu ludzi głoduje. Aby temu
zaradzić, konieczna jest rozsądna, sprawiedliwa wspólna
polityka rolna oraz wsparcie finansowe dla tego sektora.
Należy nadać rolnictwu wyjątkowy status, który pozwoli
na podejmowanie specjalnych działań i stosowanie
odpowiednich instrumentów w przypadku możliwości
wystąpienia kryzysów żywnościowych.
2-150
Mario Pirillo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli
colleghi, certezza nell'approvvigionamento alimentare
delle popolazioni e sicurezza alimentare rimangono le
sfide centrali dell'agricoltura, non solo europea, ma a
livello globale.
Sono molto soddisfatto del contenuto di questa
relazione, soprattutto perché si riconosce la sicurezza
alimentare come diritto fondamentale dell'umanità.
L'obiettivo della sicurezza alimentare si può raggiungere
solo se si affronteranno seriamente due questioni
importanti: la volatilità del mercato e dei prezzi e il
depauperamento delle risorse alimentari. L'Europa deve
essere in grado di intervenire con misure comuni ed
efficaci per la sicurezza dell'approvvigionamento
alimentare, per evitare le forti asimmetrie ancora
esistenti relative agli standard di sicurezza tra i prodotti
UE ed extra UE.
2-151
Peter Jahr (PPE). – Herr Präsident! Ich möchte
feststellen, dass ich mich über den Bericht
„Anerkennung der Landwirtschaft als strategischer
Sektor für die Nahrungsmittelsicherheit“ sehr gefreut
habe, weil damit die Bedeutung der Landwirtschaft
wieder in den Mittelpunkt gerückt wurde, und die erste
Schlussfolgerung ist für mich, dass wir auch weiterhin
eine starke gemeinsame europäische Agrarpolitik
brauchen. Vielen Dank auch an die Berichterstatterin!
In einem Punkt habe ich allerdings abweichend
gestimmt, und zwar geht es hier um die Schaffung eines
europäischen Nahrungsmittelhilfsprogramms innerhalb
der Europäischen Union. Ich denke, die Vor-Ort-Hilfe,
d.h. die Hilfe, dass niemand in der Europäischen Union
Hunger leiden darf, muss eine Aufgabe der
Mitgliedstaaten bleiben, ganz einfach weil man die
Probleme dort lösen sollte, wo sie entstehen, nämlich in
den Mitgliedstaaten.
2-152
Diane Dodds (NI). – Mr President, this report highlights
the need for food security for the citizens whom we
represent. It also emphasises the important public goods
which farmers produce, often with little or no
recognition. However, I feel that there is going to be a
problem.
I have recently heard major speeches which indicate that
the Common Agricultural Policy should actually shift to
being an environmental policy. This I think will
ultimately lead us to mistakenly believe that we can do
without European farmers, and maybe just import food
from outside of the EU.

18-01-2011 49
This should not be the case. Our farmers should be
supported to produce food in a way which is not harmful
to the environment, and as for importing food, world
markets are simply too volatile – both in terms of price
and in terms of consistency of supply.
There are a number of things that we must do. We must
have a strong budget for the Common Agricultural
Policy. We must encourage young farmers into the
industry to secure a future for it. We must have more
research and innovation to make production methods
more efficient, and we must have less red tape – and
certainly no green tape to tie up our farmers.
2-153
Giommaria Uggias (ALDE). – Signor Presidente,
onorevoli colleghi, in queste settimane le diverse
commissioni parlamentari che stanno affrontando il tema
della politica agricola comunitaria stanno trattando
questo tema, il tema della riforma che avremo dopo il
2013.
Negli elementi fondamentali dell'agricoltura è sempre
chiaro che la sicurezza degli alimenti ne costituisce un
elemento integrante. Ecco che questa considerazione
deve essere quindi valutata tenendo conto del
provvedimento che oggi abbiamo in votazione, laddove
la sicurezza è definita un diritto fondamentale e, quindi,
in quanto tale deve essere tutelato in tutti i modi
possibili.
Questa attenzione, Presidente, deve essere fatta valere
sia nei momenti di emergenza, come quella legata allo
scandalo della diossina che stiamo vivendo in questi
giorni, diossina scoperta nei mangimi utilizzati negli
allevamenti animali, ma anche, e soprattutto, nella
garanzia di un processo produttivo ordinario che sia
rispettoso dell'intera filiera produttiva, della qualità del
lavoro degli agricoltori, della qualità dell'ambiente e
anche della commercializzazione e, pertanto, dei
consumatori.
Questo è un provvedimento che questo Parlamento ha
varato nell'ambito di una serie di provvedimenti atti a
valorizzare l'agricoltura e in questo senso mi dichiaro
soddisfatto.
2-154
Alajos Mészáros (PPE). – Elnök úr! A világ élelmiszertermelése
manapság egyre inkább ki van téve különböző
kihívásoknak. Egyik ilyen az éghajlatváltozás, ami
sajnos megjósolhatatlan élelmiszerhiányt okozhat és
ezáltal veszélybe kerülhet a 2050-ig 9 milliárd főt is
meghaladó világnépesség növekvő szükségletének
kielégítése. A KAP-nak az élelmiszerbiztonság, az
éghajlatváltozás és gazdasági válság okozta kihívásokra
egyértelműen kell reagálnia. Nem csak a
versenyképességet, hanem a hagyományos
mezőgazdaságot, a kisüzemi és biogazdálkodást, a helyi
értékeket is ösztönözni kell. Az éghajlati változások
eredményeképpen egyre több a természeti katasztrófa,
melyek hatására csökken a nagyobb területű termőföldek
kihasználásának lehetősége, veszélyeztetve ezáltal az
élelmiszer-biztonságot. A fenti célok elérésére, valamint
az ésszerű élelmiszerárak és a mezőgazdasági termelők
tisztességes jövedelme érdekében a KAP költségvetését
legalább a jelenlegi szinten kell tartani. Ezért fontos,
hogy a mezőgazdaságot az élelmiszerbiztonság
szempontjából stratégiai ágazatként kezeljük. Ezért
támogattam én is ezt a jelentést.
2-155
Hannu Takkula (ALDE). – Arvoisa puhemies,
ensinnäkin haluan sanoa, että on erittäin hyvä asia, että
Euroopan parlamentti tunnustaa maatalouden
strategiseksi alaksi elintarviketurvallisuuden yhteydessä.
Meidän on erittäin tärkeä huolehtia siitä, että Euroopan
unionin alueella tuottamamme elintarvikkeet ovat ennen
muuta terveellisiä ja puhtaita. Olen hieman huolissani
siitä, että meillä on kiinnitetty enemmän huomiota
määrään kuin laatuun. Tehokkuusvaatimus on tavallaan
sivuuttanut nämä terveellisyysvaatimukset. Puhuttaessa
elintarviketurvallisuudesta on erittäin tärkeää huolehtia,
että eurooppalaisille kuluttajille tarjottavat elintarvikkeet
ovat turvallisia, hyviä ja ravitsevia.
On erittäin tärkeää huolehtia myös siitä, että Euroopan
unionin eri jäsenvaltioissa säilyy kansallinen maatalous.
Kohdatessamme luonnonkatastrofeja on tärkeää, että
meillä on omavaraista maataloutta. Tällöin voimme
vastata lähiruokaperiaatteella niihin kysymyksiin, jotka
saattavat nousta esiin erilaisten katastrofien yhteydessä.
Arvoisa puhemies, haluan korostaa ennen muuta näitä
terveydestä nousevia periaatteita, jotka ovat tärkeitä.
Toivon, että tällaiseen lähiruokakehitykseen voidaan
päästä. Euroopan laajuisesti on tärkeää huolehtia siitä,
että maataloudella on hyvät toimintaedellytykset ja että
jokaisessa Euroopan unionin jäsenvaltiossa voidaan
harjoittaa maataloutta. Se on elinehto ja vahva
tulevaisuuden pohja ja perusta, minkä me tarvitsemme
nimenomaan elintarvikesektorilla.
2-156
Salvatore Tatarella (PPE). – Signor Presidente,
onorevoli colleghi, dopo aver espresso con convinzione
il mio voto favorevole a questa importante relazione, mi
piace sottolineare in modo particolare il punto 35
dell'articolato parere della commissione ambiente dove,
nel considerare l'importanza dell'Agenzia europea per la
sicurezza alimentare nel valutare tutti i rischi associati
alla filiera alimentare nell'ambito delle azioni a difesa
del cittadino e della salute, si auspica che tutti gli Stati
membri provvedano all'istituzione di omologhi
organismi nazionali con lo scopo di collaborare con
l'Agenzia europea.
Come i recenti e gravi episodi accaduti in Germania
dimostrano, è necessario che ogni Stato oggi istituisca
un organismo nazionale per la sicurezza alimentare.
Sorprende il fatto che il governo italiano, dopo aver
istituito l'Agenzia, abbia cambiato opinione per ragioni
di bilancio. Credo che la sicurezza alimentare non debba
fermarsi davanti a un limite di bilancio.
2-157
Explicaciones de voto por escrito

50 18-01-2011
2-158
Informe: Jiři Maštálka (A7-0363/2010)
2-159
Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Uma vez que,
de acordo com o Grupo de Trabalho Consultivo dos
serviços legais do PE, Conselho e Comissão, a proposta
em questão contém a codificação dos textos existentes
sem qualquer alteração à sua substância, aprovo a sua
adopção em primeira leitura.
2-160
George Becali (NI), în scris. − Am votat acest raport
deoarece Comisia, în propunerea de codificare a celei
de-a treia Directive 78/855/CEE din 9 octombrie 1978
privind fuziunile societăţilor comerciale pe acţiuni, a
ţinut cont de adaptările redacţionale sau formale sugerate
de Grupul consultativ al serviciilor juridice şi care s-au
dovedit fondate. De exemplu, Grupul consultativ
sugerează că este deosebit de important ca acţionarii
societăţilor care fuzionează să fie informaţi în mod
corespunzător şi cât mai obiectiv posibil şi ca drepturile
acestora să fie protejate în mod adecvat. Cu toate
acestea, nu este nevoie să se impună o examinare a
proiectului de fuziune de către un expert independent.
De asemenea, organele de administrare sau de conducere
ale fiecărei societăţi comerciale implicate informează
adunarea generală a societăţii lor, precum şi organele de
administrare sau de conducere ale celorlalte societăţi
implicate, referitor la orice modificare substanţială
intervenită între data întocmirii proiectului de fuziune şi
data adunărilor generale care urmează să decidă asupra
proiectului de fuziune.
2-161
David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I voted for this
report because, according to the Consultative Working
Party of the Legal Services of the European Parliament,
the Council and the Commission, the proposal in
question contains a straightforward codification of the
existing texts without any change in their substance.
2-162
Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. − Es ist sicherlich
eine Erleichterung, wenn nach einer gewissen Anzahl an
Änderungen eine Kodifizierung durchgeführt wird,
damit die Übersichtlichkeit gewahrt bleibt. Generell gilt
es jedoch zu überlegen, ob die Vielzahl an Regelungen
überhaupt nötig ist. In einigen Bereichen wird
übertrieben und etwa dem Konsumenten kaum mehr
Hausverstand zugetraut, in anderen Bereichen werden
etwa Namensänderungen für Lebensmittel vorgeschrieben.
Im Sinne des Schutzes der Interessen von
Gesellschaftern und Dritten ist eine Koordination der
Rechtsvorschriften der Mitgliedstaaten über die
Verschmelzung von Aktiengesellschaften dazu geeignet,
für die Wahrung der Informationsrechte Sorge zu tragen.
Einigen Änderungen kann ich nicht zustimmen, deshalb
habe ich den Bericht als ganzes abgelehnt.
2-163
Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. −
Having sought legal advice, the services stated that,
having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of
20 December 1994 on an accelerated working method
for official codification of legislative texts, and in
particular to point 4 thereof, the Consultative Working
Party consisting of the respective legal services of the
European Parliament, the Council and the Commission
met on 21 September 2010 for the purpose of
examining, among others, the proposal submitted by the
Commission.
At that meeting, an examination of the amended
proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and
of the Council codifying the Third Council Directive
78/855/EEC of 9 October 1978 based on Article
54(3)(g) of the Treaty concerning mergers of public
limited liability companies resulted in the Consultative
Working Party’s concluding, without dissent, that the
proposal is a straightforward codification of existing
texts, without any change in their substance. With this in
mind, we decided to support the proposal.
2-164
Recomendacíon: Gabriele Albertini (A7-0373/010)
2-165
Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Aprovo a
celebração do acordo Euro-Mediterrânico que cria uma
Associação entre a Comunidade Europeia e os seus
Estados-Membros, por um lado, e o Reino Hachemita da
Jordânia, por outro, a fim de ter em conta a adesão da
República da Bulgária e da Roménia à União Europeia e
que foi aplicado a título provisório desde 1 de Janeiro de
2007.
2-166
George Becali (NI), în scris. − Am votat raportul, ca şi
colegii mei. Dincolo de aspectul formal, e important sub
aspectul rolului global al Europei unite în diverse zone,
rol economic, dar şi politic. Printre acestea, zona
mediteraneeană a fost şi rămâne zonă de interes
strategic.
2-167
Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − O texto da resolução
legislativa que votámos foi objecto do processo
simplificado previsto no artigo 46.º do Regimento. Creio
que tal se justifica tendo em conta o carácter não
contraditório da matéria a que a mesma respeita. O
Acordo Euro-Mediterrânico entre as Comunidades
Europeias e a Jordânia deve incluir a Bulgária e a
Roménia, pelo que o protocolo proposto tem razão de
ser válido e merecedor do apoio unânime do Parlamento
Europeu.
2-168
David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I voted for this
report, which is a simple piece of housekeeping updating
the existing agreement to take into account the accession
of Bulgaria and Romania. The proposal has no impact
on the EU budget and is uncontroversial.
2-169
Jean-Luc Mélenchon (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – Ce
protocole n'est qu'une mise en conformité de l'accord
euro-méditerranéen d'association UE/Jordanie avec ce
qui est en réalité appliqué depuis le 1er Janvier 2007.
Duperie. La précipitation à mettre en place la zone de
libre échange euro-méditerranéenne à l'horizon 2015
justifie tous les manquements aux principes

18-01-2011 51
démocratiques. Ces méthodes aveugles viennent de
prouver leurs limites en Tunisie. Je vote contre ce texte.
2-170
Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. − Ich habe der
Entschliessung zum Entwurf eines Beschlusses des
Rates über den Abschluss eines Protokolls zum Europa-
Mittelmeer-Abkommen zur Gründung einer Assoziation
zwischen den Europäischen Gemeinschaften und ihren
Mitgliedstaaten einerseits und dem Haschemitischen
Königreich Jordanien andererseits zur Berücksichtigung
des Beitritts der Republik Bulgarien und Rumäniens zur
Europäischen Union zugestimmt, da alle
Voraussetzungen gegeben waren und es sich hier in
erster Linie um einen formalen Akt handelte.
2-171
Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. −
Having regard to the draft Council decision
(06903/2010), having regard to the draft protocol to the
Euro-Mediterranean agreement establishing an
association between the European Communities and
their Member States, of the one part, and the Hashemite
Kingdom of Jordan, of the other part, to take account of
the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and of
Romania to the European Union (09373/2008), having
regard to the request for consent submitted by the
Council in accordance with Article 217 and Article
218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on
the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0384/2010),
having regard to Rules 81, 90(8) and 46(1) of its Rules
of Procedure, having regard to the recommendation of
the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A7-0373/2010), the
Verts/ALE Group agreed that Parliament should give its
consent to the conclusion of the protocol.
2-172
Informe: Dieter-Lebrecht Koch (A7-0361/2010)
2-173
Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − A transferência de
competências dos Estados-Membros para as
comunidades justificou a substituição de acordos
bilaterais no tocante à aviação externa por novos acordos
em que é parte a Comunidade Europeia.
A resolução votada versa, precisamente, sobre questões
deste teor e visa harmonizar os instrumentos jurídicointernacionais
em vigor com a presente realidade da
integração europeia, bem como adaptá-los às exigências
adicionais decorrentes do Direito Comunitário. A
matéria em questão é eminentemente técnica,
implicando a substituição de acordos anteriormente em
vigor por outros, não implicando qualquer contencioso
nem discrepâncias ideológicas de monta. A unanimidade
de votos favoráveis que recebeu em sede de comissão
confirma esta interpretação. Ao plenário coube, portanto,
ratificar uma decisão consensual. Votei-a
favoravelmente.
2-174
João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − No quadro
concreto actual em que se desenvolve a actividade da
aviação civil, esta proposta de acordo suscita-nos sérias
dúvidas quanto ao seu alcance e possíveis
consequências. Se até agora os Estados-Membros
decidiam de forma soberana sobre a organização e
alcance dos acordos a estabelecer neste domínio, com
impactos evidentes nas companhias de transporte aéreo,
num sector que é, por diversas razões, estratégico para a
salvaguarda dos interesses nacionais, a partir de agora
pretende-se que seja o mercado, também aqui, a imperar.
Em especial, não podemos subestimar o facto da alegada
criação de condições iguais às diversas companhias
europeias poder concorrer para a facilitação da
concentração monopolista no sector (processo já em
curso) e para a redução da capacidade dos Estados-
Membros defenderem as suas companhias de transporte
aéreo de bandeira.
A sempre referida e sacrossanta livre concorrência,
defendida a todo o custo, volta a ser o pilar sobre o qual
assenta esta iniciativa. As consequências, neste como
noutros sectores, não diferem substancialmente: é a
concentração monopolista que sempre se acaba por
impor nestes cenários. Por estas razões, não votámos
favoravelmente este relatório.
2-175
Jarosław Kalinowski (PPE), na piśmie. − Kraje
afrykańskie położne w szczególnie trudnych warunkach
geograficznych i klimatycznych wymagają specjalnego
traktowania. Ale tym ludziom nie potrzeba tylko
jedzenia i wody, oni również potrzebują edukacji, chcą
godnie pracować i przemieszczać się. Umowa Unii
Europejskiej z Unią Gospodarczą i Walutową Afryki
Zachodniej, zastępując niektóre postanowienia
wcześniejszych umów, znacznie ułatwia i czyni bardziej
sprawiedliwymi rynkowo procedury transportu
lotniczego między stronami umowy. Zapobiegnie to
nieuczciwym praktykom monopolistów i ułatwi
przemieszczanie się zwykłym obywatelom. Są to także
nowe możliwości dla turystów z całego świata i wiążący
się z nimi rozwój tej gałęzi gospodarki w Afryce.
2-176
David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I voted to give
consent to this Agreement. The Agreement is one of the
horizontal air service agreements whose aim is to bring
existing bilateral air service agreements in line with EU
law. This is as a result of the 2003 ECJ decision that
gave the Community exclusive competence in regard to
various aspects of external aviation which had
traditionally been governed by bilateral air service
agreements. Just as with other horizontal air agreements,
this Agreement provides for an EU designation clause
permitting all EU carriers to benefit from the right of
establishment, deals with safety issues and the taxation
of aviation fuel and resolves potential conflicts with EU
competition rules.
2-177
Jean-Luc Mélenchon (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – Non
contente de diligenter en sous-main la division des
intégrations régionales africaines comme ailleurs dans le
monde, l'Union européenne impose désormais son diktat
néolibéral jusque dans le ciel d'Afrique. Les leurres de la
Commission ne le cachent que trop mal.

52 18-01-2011
Cet accord n'a "pas pour objectif d'augmenter le volume
total du trafic aérien"? Mais l'absence totale de freins à
une telle augmentation du trafic est certaine!
Cet accord "n'empêche pas un État d'imposer des impôts,
droits, taxes ou redevances sur le carburant"? Mais
l'efficacité écologique est réduite à néant par les
restrictions qui lui sont imposées!
De fait, là où les États décidaient souverainement de
l'organisation de leurs accords d'accès avec les
compagnies, seul le marché décidera désormais.
2-178
Louis Michel (ALDE), par écrit. – Cet accord vise à
remplacer certaines dispositions des 47 accords
bilatéraux existants en matière de services aériens
conclus entre les États membres et l'Union économique
et monétaire ouest-africaine. Il est en effet judicieux
d'harmoniser les différentes dispositions des accords
existants par un accord communautaire de type
horizontal. Il rétablira une sécurité juridique pour les
accords bilatéraux sur les services aériens conclus entre
les États membres de l'UEMOA et de l'Union
européenne et permettra aussi de ne pas léser des États
membres qui n'auraient pas signé d'accord bilatéral avec
un des États de l'UEMOA. Il évitera toute discrimination
entre transporteurs en ce qui concerne la désignation ou
la taxation du carburant d'aviation.
Les dispositions des accords bilatéraux qui sont
anticoncurrentielles sont mises en conformité avec le
droit européen de la concurrence. L'accord consolidera
les relations euro-africaines en matière de transport
aérien et favorisera la coopération entre l'Union
européenne et l'UEMOA dans le domaine de l'aviation,
notamment en matière de sécurité et de sûreté.
2-179
Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. − As
the Court of Justice of the European Communities has
ruled, the Community has exclusive competence with
respect to various aspects of external aviation which
were traditionally governed by bilateral air services
agreements between Member States and third countries.
Consequently, the Council authorised the Commission in
June 2003 to open negotiations with third countries in
order to replace certain provisions in existing bilateral
agreements with Community agreements. Thus, the
Commission has negotiated an Agreement with the West
African Economic and Monetary Union that replaces
certain provisions in the existing 47 bilateral air services
agreements concluded between EU Member States and
Member States of the West African Economic and
Monetary Union.
Parliament is entitled to give its consent to the
conclusion of this Agreement in accordance with Rule
81 of the Rules of Procedure. Parliament shall take a
decision by means of a single vote, and no amendments
to the agreement itself may be tabled. On the basis of the
above, the rapporteur suggested that the Committee on
Transport and Tourism, first, and then Parliament as a
whole, should give a favourable opinion on the
conclusion of this Agreement. The Verts/ALE Group did
so.
2-180
Nuno Teixeira (PPE), por escrito. − A competência
exclusiva em certos domínios da aviação externa,
estabelecida em 2003 no acórdão Céu Aberto, permite à
Comissão Europeia negociar acordos com países
terceiros, de forma a adequar o mercado da aviação
europeia às regras comunitárias e, simultaneamente,
torná-lo competitivo e transparente. Congratulo a
aprovação deste acordo com os Estados membros da
União Económica e Monetária da África Ocidental,
considerando essencial que a União Europeia apresente
uma política de coerência neste sector da aviação
externa, reduzindo de forma gradual as diversas
disposições dos actuais acordos bilaterais de serviços
aéreos entre ambas as partes.
Saliento no acordo a cláusula de não discriminação entre
transportadoras aéreas europeias, a tributação do
combustível aéreo de acordo com a directiva sobre a
tributação dos produtos energéticos e da electricidade, a
conformidade das disposições dos acordos bilaterais
com o direito comunitário da concorrência e o controlo
regulamentar, medidas que irão permitir a abertura dos
mercados e, consequentemente, a criação de
oportunidades de investimento para ambas as partes.
Estes acordos deverão ser compreendidos como uma
forma de estreitar a cooperação estratégica entre ambas
as organizações.
2-181
Recomendacíon para la segunda lectura: Catherine
Stihler (A7-0343/010)
2-182
Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Concordo com
a necessidade de tomar medidas relativamente ao sector
da construção, sendo este sector bastante importante
para a economia europeia (10 % do PIB) e representando
cerca de 65 000 PME com menos de 250 empregados.
Esta proposta pretende, por um lado, garantir um
elevado nível de segurança para os produtos de
construção e, por outro, melhorar as condições de saúde
e segurança dos trabalhadores no sector. Actualmente, as
trocas comerciais no mercado interno são prejudicadas
por regras técnicas nacionais que condicionam a livre
circulação de bens e serviços no sector da construção,
sendo por esta razão necessária a revisão da Directiva
89/106/CEE sobre Produtos de Construção.
A proposta de regulamento sobre condições
harmonizadas para a comercialização dos produtos de
construção pode ser um importante marco no sentido de
actualizar, simplificar e substituir a directiva respectiva à
luz das novas circunstâncias no que respeita à vigilância
do mercado, incluindo o novo quadro legislativo.
2-183
George Becali (NI), în scris. − Aşa cum subliniam şi în
intervenţia de ieri, am votat în favoarea acestui raport.
Avem nevoie să progresăm în demersul de armonizare
pe piaţa globală a construcţiilor. Mă refer la ceea ce ţine
de siguranţa lucrătorilor, de migraţia lor, dar şi la

18-01-2011 53
siguranţa materialelor de construcţie pentru sănătatea
noastră. Cu privire la viitoarele puncte de informare
despre materialele de construcţii, îmi doresc foarte mult
ca ele să ofere informaţie obiectivă, să fie funcţionale cât
mai curând în statele membre şi să aibă sprijin financiar,
pentru a fi utile cetăţenilor şi firmelor interesate. Sper ca
noua reglementare să producă efecte cât mai rapide şi să
constatăm noi, ca oameni, că am făcut progrese şi că
domeniul construcţiilor în ansamblu nu mai e unul din
cele mai periculoase domenii de activitate.
2-184
Sebastian Valentin Bodu (PPE), în scris. − Nevoia de a
acționa în ceea ce privește comercializarea produselor
pentru construcții în UE este de o importanță crucială
având în vedere dimensiunile acestui sector. Sectorul
construcțiilor constituie una dintre cele mai importante
industrii din Europa, reprezentând 10% din PIB și 50,5%
din capitalul fix brut. Acest sector asigură, în mod direct,
încadrarea în muncă a 12 milioane de cetățeni ai UE, alți
26 de milioane de lucrători depinzând de acest sector.
Recesiunea economică a afectat grav industria
construcţiilor din UE, o serie de întreprinderi din UE
ajungând în faliment și numeroşi lucrători pierzându-şi
mijloacele de existenţă. Este şi cazul României unde,
după un boom al pieţei construcţiilor, construcţiile se
confruntă cu o acută lipsă de comenzi. Specialiştii
apreciază că 2011 nu va aduce revenirea pieţei
construcţiilor, ba chiar apreciază că ar putea înregistra
valori minime, raportat la ultimul deceniu.
În aceste condiţii, orice măsură care poate fi luată pentru
a sprijini sectorul construcțiilor reprezintă o contribuție
bine-venită. În acest context, revizuirea Directivei
privind produsele pentru construcții ar trebui să sprijine
sectorul prin înlăturarea barierelor comerciale cu care se
confruntă fabricanții și, astfel, ar ajuta întreprinderile să
își desfășoare în continuare activitatea și lucrătorii să își
păstreze locurile de muncă.
2-185
Zuzana Brzobohatá (S&D), písemně. − Stavebnictví
představuje z hlediska tvorby HDP 10 % ekonomického
výkonu Evropské unie. Trh se stavebnictvím stále ještě
vykazuje celou řadu překážek, které brání plnému
rozvoji jednotného trhu. Cílem předloženého nařízení je
novelizovat stávající směrnici a dosáhnout tak
zjednodušení v podmínkách uvádění stavebních výrobků
na trh. Jde především o oblast dozoru nad trhem a o
společný rámec pro uvádění stavebních výrobků na trh.
Cílem novelizace směrnice je v době hospodářského
poklesu pomoci odvětví stavebnictví při odstraňování
obchodních překážek, čímž dojde k zachování
pracovních míst a udržení celé řady stavebních podniků,
které by jinak ekonomicky hospodářský pokles
nevydržely. Rada ve svém postoji v prvním čtení
vypustila pozměňovací návrhy Parlamentu, které
směřovaly k povinnosti uvádět nebezpečné látky
obsažené ve stavebních výrobcích (např. azbest). Toto
považuji za velmi nebezpečné, a proto také podporuji
předloženou zprávu, neboť znovu předkládá povinnost
stavebních firem uvádět nebezpečné látky obsažené ve
stavebních výrobcích. Je třeba chránit zdraví občanů. V
neposlední řadě oceňuji snahu, aby členské státy zajistily
nezávislost zástupců ve Stálém výboru pro stavebnictví,
který posuzuje a ověřuje stálost vlastností stavebních
výrobků. Zpráva dále mimo jiné obsahuje pozměňovací
návrhy zvyšující bezpečnost a ochranu zdraví nejen
zaměstnanců ve stavebnictví, ale i uživatelů staveb
samotných. Nejen z výše uvedených důvodů jsem se
rozhodla zprávu podpořit.
2-186
Robert Dušek (S&D), písemně. − Návrh doporučení o
stanovení harmonizovaných podmínek pro uvádění
stavebních výrobků na trh požaduje nejvyšší možnou
míru ochrany pracovníků i osob, které stavby využívají.
Souhlasím s postojem navrhovatelky, že je
bezpodmínečně nutné moci vysledovat možné
nebezpečné látky ve stavebních výrobcích, a podporuji
pozměňovací návrhy o nutnosti uvádět na stavebních
výrobcích údaje o nebezpečných látkách. Nechápu
postoj Rady, která toto z původního návrhu zcela
vypustila. Pro lepší informovanost o nových i stávajících
stavebních výrobcích by měla být zřízena tzv. kontaktní
místa, která musí být nestranná, tzn. personálně i
finančně nezávislá na orgánech zapojených do procesu
získávání označení CE. Výjimek z nutnosti nést
označení CE předložila Rada příliš mnoho, tyto výjimky
je nezbytné revidovat a maximálně omezit, jinak by celý
systém označování CE ztrácel na významu. Návrh
nařízení v upravené podobě podporuji a budu pro jeho
přijetí hlasovat.
2-187
Edite Estrela (S&D), por escrito. − Votei
favoravelmente este relatório por defender que é
necessário reduzir os entraves que afectam o comércio
no sector da construção. A actual recessão económica
prejudicou gravemente este sector. O Regulamento
proposto, que substituirá a Directiva actualmente em
vigor, irá ajudar a inverter a situação. Por um lado, a
eliminação dos obstáculos ao comércio para os
fabricantes ajudará as empresas a prosseguirem com a
sua actividade e, por outro, contribuirá para que os
trabalhadores mantenham os seus postos de trabalho.
2-188
Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − De acordo com os
dados do Relatório, que cito: o sector da construção é
um dos maiores sectores industriais da Europa,
representando 10% do PIB e 50,5% do capital bruto
fixo. Este sector não só emprega directamente 12
milhões de cidadãos comunitários como 26 milhões de
trabalhadores dependem do mesmo. Alem disso, cerca
de 92% dos fabricantes de materiais de construção, isto
e, 65 mil empresas, são PME com menos de 250
empregados. Estes números dão a real dimensão da
importância do sector da construção para a economia
europeia. Por isso mesmo são necessárias regras comuns
que regulem o sector e permitam o correcto
funcionamento do mercado interno.
2-189
Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Apesar de
alguns aspectos positivos incluídos na segunda leitura
deste relatório e no acordo final com o Conselho, é
preciso não esquecer que este se centra no princípio da
consolidação do mercado único.

54 18-01-2011
Neste contexto, trata-se da adopção de um regulamento
com vista a estabelecer condições harmonizadas para a
comercialização de produtos para a construção. Isto é,
estabelece as regras que as empresas e os Estados-
Membros devem cumprir para os seus produtos poderem
entrar no mercado da União Europeia.
Em certos aspectos, creio que todos podemos concordar,
designadamente quando se trata de defender a saúde e a
segurança, incluindo dos trabalhadores, mas também dos
relacionados com a utilização do produto durante o seu
ciclo de vida, sobretudo quando se trata de substâncias
perigosas.
Mas não podemos estar de acordo com decisões que
venham a pôr em causa a produção destes produtos em
países de economias mais frágeis ou PME que tenham
dificuldade de adaptação, sem quaisquer apoios prévios,
apenas para defender os interesses de grupos
económicos europeus que, de facto, pretendem dominar
o mercado.
2-190
Małgorzata Handzlik (PPE), na piśmie. −
Funkcjonowanie rynku wewnętrznego nadal
ograniczone jest licznymi barierami. Dlatego też z
zadowoleniem przyjmuję przyjęcie rozporządzenia
dotyczącego wprowadzania do obrotu towarów
budowlanych. Rozporządzenie to powinno przyczynić
się do łatwiejszego przepływu towarów budowlanych
pomiędzy państwami członkowskimi.
Rozporządzenie wprowadza ponadto ważne zapisy z
punktu widzenia ułatwień dla przedsiębiorstw. Po
pierwsze, zobowiązuje ono państwa członkowskie do
utworzenia punktów kontaktowych ds. produktów, w
których przedsiębiorcy będą mogli uzyskać informacje
na temat produktów budowlanych. Zawiera ono także
przepisy, które powinny pomóc najmniejszym
przedsiębiorstwom sprostać nowym wymogom
związanym ze sporządzaniem deklaracji właściwości
użytkowych i z oznakowaniem CE. Niemniej jednak nie
powinniśmy zapominać, iż przepisy rozporządzenia to
szereg nowych obowiązków związanych z wymogiem
umieszczania oznakowania CE oraz ze sporządzaniem
deklaracji właściwości użytkowych, która będzie
musiała zawierać także informacje na temat substancji
niebezpiecznych zawartych w wyrobach budowlanych.
Mam nadzieję, że zarówno Komisja Europejska, jak i
państwa członkowskie dołożą wszelkich starań, aby
informacja o nowych przepisach jak najszybciej trafiła
do wiadomości producentów, aby mogli oni jak
najszybciej zacząć przygotowania i dostosowania do
przepisów nowego rozporządzenia.
2-191
Edvard Kožušník (ECR), písemně. − Podporuji tento
nový přístup, kdy není cílem právní úpravy vymezování
bezpečnosti výrobků, ale vytvoření transparentního
prostředí, v němž budou podávány spolehlivé informace
o vlastnostech výrobků. Oceňuji také skutečnost, že
Evropský parlament se rozhodl preferovat elektronickou
podobu dokumentů, konkrétně se jedná o prohlášení o
vlastnostech připojovaná k výrobkům uváděným na trh.
Ve věci pozměňovacího návrhu č. 45 týkajícího se
článku 17 mám však určité pochybnosti o legislativní
systematičnosti. Sice podporuji navržený princip
spravedlivého a vyváženého zastoupení různých druhů
zúčastněných stran v procesu vytváření
harmonizovaných norem, avšak jsem toho názoru, že
tato problematika by měla být řešena komplexně v rámci
revize systému evropské standardizace, a nikoliv
nesystémově v jednotlivých právních aktech. Takto
zvolený postup dle mého povede k nepřehlednosti
právního řádu.
2-192
David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I wish to
congratulate my Scottish colleague Catherine Stihler on
her good work on this very technical subject. I voted for
the report, which should ensure more transparency for
bodies that create standards in the construction industry,
places an emphasis on recycling and gives SMEs an
easier route to the single market with simplified
procedures.
2-193
Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), per iscritto. − Il settore
edile rappresenta uno dei settori europei fondamentali
sia a livello di occupazione sia di sviluppo delle nostre
piccole medie imprese.
È quindi fondamentale sostenere un regolamento che
fissa condizioni di armonizzazione per la
commercializzazione dei prodotti da costruzione a
garanzia della sicurezza dei materiali utilizzati e della
salute dei lavoratori. Si continuano a registrare casi di
danni fisici e di salute anche per i cittadini che vivono a
contatto giornaliero con sostanze pericolose, come
l'amianto, utilizzate nella costruzione di edifici urbani.
Sono quindi favorevole al regolamento dell'on. Sthiler,
votato oggi in seconda lettura, poiché sottolinea
l'importanza, in un mondo globalizzato, della necessità
di introdurre regole comuni per la marcatura delle
sostanze e dei prodotti utilizzati, in grado così di
garantire sicurezza e affidabilità e al tempo stesso
ridurre i costi per i produttori, con particolare riguardo
alle PMI.
2-194
Rovana Plumb (S&D), în scris. − Nevoia de a acţiona
în ceea ce priveşte comercializarea produselor pentru
construcţii în UE este de o importanţă crucială, având în
vedere dimensiunile acestui sector. Potrivit Comitetului
European de Standardizare, sectorul construcţiilor
constituie una dintre cele mai importante industrii din
Europa, reprezentând 10% din PIB şi 50,5% din
capitalul fix brut. Acest sector asigură, în mod direct,
încadrarea în muncă a 12 milioane de cetăţeni ai UE, alţi
26 de milioane de lucrători depinzând de acest sector. În
plus, aproximativ 92% dintre fabricanţii de materiale de
construcţii – adică 65 000 de întreprinderi – sunt IMMuri
cu mai puţin de 250 de angajaţi. Întrucât IMM-urile
reprezintă un pilon esenţial al economiei noastre,
prezenta propunere solicită recunoaşterea rolului şi
necesităţilor acestora, precum şi un nivel ridicat de

18-01-2011 55
sănătate şi siguranţă pentru persoanele care lucrează în
acest sector. Am votat acest raport deoarece propunerea
contribuie la creşterea competitivităţii industriei de
profil prin simplificarea legislaţiei existente,
îmbunătăţirea transparenţei şi diminuarea sarcinilor
administrative pe care trebuie să le suporte
întreprinderile, cât şi pentru a susţine interesul României
de a introduce obligativitatea evaluării performanţei
produselor acoperite de standarde armonizate, emiterea
declaraţiei de performanţă şi aplicarea marcajului CE.
2-195
Crescenzio Rivellini (PPE), per iscritto. − Si è votato,
oggi, in Plenaria sulla raccomandazione "Condizioni
armonizzate per la commercializzazione dei prodotti da
costruzione".
Alla luce della rilevanza del settore, è fondamentale
dotarsi di provvedimenti in materia di
commercializzazione dei prodotti da costruzione
all'interno dell'UE. Secondo il Comitato europeo di
normalizzazione (CEN), il settore edile, responsabile del
10% del PIL e del 50,5% degli investimenti fissi lordi, è
uno dei più importanti a livello europeo.
Tale proposta di regolamento fissa le condizioni di
armonizzazione per la commercializzazione dei prodotti
da costruzione. Tramite l'introduzione di regole comuni
per la marcatura, mira ad aumentare le garanzie relative
alla sicurezza e all'affidabilità dei prodotti e al tempo
stesso a ridurre i costi per i produttori, con particolare
riguardo alle PMI.
2-196
Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. − This
regulation comes before the Parliament for second
reading in view of its final adoption. Parliament’s first
reading took place during the previous parliamentary
term. The Council adopted its position in 2010 and
subsequently there were intense informal trialogue
negotiations under the Belgian Presidency in order to
reach a compromise solution. This regulation is very
technical but is politically highly relevant for the Greens
because its main purpose is to harmonise requirements
regarding the marketing of construction products.
The Verts/ALE Group’s major concerns have been to
make sure, inter alia, that (i) procedures should be
transparent (in particular the standardisation bodies
should not be monopolised by representatives of the
major industries, and the concerns of SMEs or other
stakeholders should be taken into account); (ii)
construction requirements and procedures should be able
to boost innovative and more ecological patterns; (iii)
special procedures for ‘micro-enterprises’ should not
allow the industry to circumvent the requirements or
procedures.
2-197
Licia Ronzulli (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho votato a favore
di questa risoluzione perché ritengo che in Europa
esistano ancora troppe "restrizioni" al commercio nel
settore edile. La revisione di questa direttiva dovrebbe
favorire l'eliminazione delle barriere commerciali,
tutelando i posti di lavoro delle società del settore che
rimangono esposte alla crisi economica globale. Sono
contemplate nuove misure specifiche per la verifica del
riciclaggio di questi prodotti, che ne promuovano
l'utilizzo in vista del conseguimento degli obiettivi
dell'UE in materia di cambiamento climatico.
Si chiedono inoltre nuove tutele per la salute e la
sicurezza degli operatori di questo settore, dove
purtroppo ancora oggi si registrano numerosi "morti
bianche". Infine, la richiesta della progressiva
digitalizzazione della documentazione al posto delle
copie cartacee vuole rendere ancora più "unico" il
mercato dei prodotti da costruzione.
2-198
Oreste Rossi (EFD), per iscritto. − Nonostante
nell'introduzione al regolamento vi siano delle
dichiarazioni generali non condivisibili, in particolare
sulla totale e libera circolazione di servizi nel settore
dell'edilizia, perché fino a che non sarà armonizzato il
costo del lavoro tra i vari paesi membri ci saranno rischi
di concorrenza sleale, il nostro voto sarà favorevole.
La motivazione è che nel merito, il provvedimento si
occupa esclusivamente della normativa sulla
commercializzazione dei prodotti destinati al settore
delle costruzioni, che in questo periodo di recessione
economica ha avuto ripercussioni molto gravi con il
fallimento di molte società e perdita di posti di lavoro.
La proposta prevede l'armonizzazione e l'etichettatura
dei beni che contengono sostanze pericolose, semplifica,
aggiorna e sostituisce regole attuali al fine di eliminare
alcuni ostacoli normativi a vantaggio sia degli operatori
sia delle piccole e medie imprese.
2-199
Viktor Uspaskich (ALDE), raštu. − Gerbiami kolegos,
manau, jog statybos sektorius gana plačiai atspindi
ekonominę padėtį. 2010 m. antrą ketvirtį Lietuvos
statybos sektorius sumažėjo iki 42,9 proc. – tarp
didžiausių sumažėjimų Europoje. Nuo to laiko padėtis
nežymiai pagerėjo, tačiau neapgaudinėkime savęs –
Lietuvos statybos sektorius labai lėtai atsigauna. Todėl
kalbėti apie pastovų atsigavimą gana ankstoka. Dar yra
vietos, kur tobulėti. Pvz., mano šalies statybos sektorius
atsigautų greičiau, jei ES parama būtų geriau
įsisavinama. Statybos sektorius yra viena didžiausių
Lietuvos ir Europos pramonės šakų. Sektoriuje įdarbinta
12 milijonų ES piliečių ir nuo jo priklauso 26 milijonai
darbuotojų. Statybos sektorius yra labai svarbus
Lietuvai, kadangi sukuria daug darbo vietų, didina
vidaus paklausą bei atneša pinigų į biudžetą. Šis
sektorius taip pat svarbus mažosioms ir vidutinėms
įmonėms – kertiniam mūsų ekonomikos akmeniui.
Apytikriai 92 proc. statybines medžiagas gaminančių
įmonių yra MVĮ, kuriose dirba mažiau nei 250
darbuotojų. Aš taip pat pritariu pranešėjo pasiūlymui
naudoti e. įrankius ir IT metodus siekiant pagerinti
bendrąją statybos produktų rinką. Tai yra svarbu
žvelgiant į ateitį.
2-200
Informe: Michèle Striffler (A7-0375/2010)

56 18-01-2011
2-201
Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Votei
favoravelmente o presente relatório, que procura
melhorar a eficácia da ajuda humanitária da UE. O
Consenso Humanitário da UE é um grande progresso.
Contudo, a avaliação do seu Plano de Acção deve ser
mais coerente, através de objectivos mais mensuráveis e
indicadores mais fiáveis. Só assim se conseguirá ajudar
de uma forma mais eficaz. Tendo em conta o aumento
do número e da intensidade das catástrofes naturais
decorrentes das alterações climáticas, concordo com a
posição apresentada de ser importante não só a prestação
pontual de ajuda, mas também o apoio às capacidades
próprias das comunidades para melhor se prepararem
face aos desastres, sendo necessário reforçar o Plano de
Acção de Hyogo.
É necessário igualmente concentrar esforços na matéria
dos direitos humanos decorrentes dos conflitos internos
e crises complexas, melhorando a capacidade dos
intervenientes de aceder às populações, o que só poderá
ser possível através de uma clara distinção de papéis
entre decisores políticos, militares e humanitários.
Concordo igualmente com a aplicação efectiva de uma
Capacidade Europeia de Intervenção Rápida.
2-202
Elena Oana Antonescu (PPE), în scris. − Acest raport
angajează Uniunea Europeană la o strânsă cooperare în
jurul unei viziuni comune asupra ajutorului umanitar.
Consider că intensitatea catastrofelor naturale se
datorează și acțiunilor umane care stau la baza
schimbărilor climatice. De asemenea, încurajez Statele
Membre să se implice în punerea în aplicare a acestui
Consens european privind ajutorul umanitar. Susțin
promovarea acțiunilor în acest domeniu: promovarea
principiilor umanitare și a dreptului internațional
umanitar, îmbunătățirea calității coordonării și coerenței
în cadrul furnizării ajutorului umanitar al Uniunii
Europene, clarificarea utilizării mijloacelor și
capacitaților militare și de protecție civilă în
conformitate cu consensul umanitar și cu directivele
Națiunilor Unite, reducerea riscurilor de catastrofe și
întărirea legăturii între ajutorul de urgență, reabilitare și
dezvoltare. Prin urmare, am votat în favoarea acestui
raport.
2-203
Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau už
Parlamento pranešimą dėl Europos konsensuso dėl
humanitarinės pagalbos įgyvendinimo: veiklos plano
laikotarpio vidurio peržiūros ir ateities perspektyvų.
Susitarimas dėl humanitarinės pagalbos įpareigoja
Europos Sąjungą glaudžiai bendradarbiauti šioje srityje
kuriant bendrą humanitarinės pagalbos viziją. Šiuo
susitarimu siekiama gerinti Europos Sąjungos
veiksmingumą, ginti ir skleisti pagrindinius
humaniškumo, neutralumo, nešališkumo ir
nepriklausomybės principus bei skatinti laikytis
tarptautinės humanitarinės teisės. Įvykdžius vidurio
laikotarpio peržiūrą buvo pastebėta, kad trūksta
informacijos apie konkrečius įvykdytus ar atliktinus
veiksmus bei kad apie šį susitarimą dar nežino net
humanitarinių organizacijų atstovai. Būtina dėti dideles
pastangas siekiant pagerinti konsensuso matomumą ir
geriau apie jį informuoti valstybes nares, kitas
institucijas ir karinės veiklos dalyvius. Humanitarinės
pagalbos aplinkybės per pastaruosius metus labai pakito,
todėl būtina dar griežčiau ir aktyviau taikyti susitarimą
dėl humanitarinės pagalbos.
Norėčiau pabrėžti, kad reikia sustiprinti pastangas,
susijusias su nelaimių rizikos mažinimu, ir numatyti ne
tik atsitiktinės pagalbos teikimą, bet ir paramą
bendruomenių nuosaviems pasirengimo nelaimėms
pajėgumams. Be to, daugiau pastangų reikėtų dėti
siekiant integruoti lyčių aspektą ir humanitarinės
pagalbos priemonėmis apsaugoti aukas nuo seksualinio
smurto, kuris vis dažniau naudojamas kaip karo ginklas.
2-204
Sebastian Valentin Bodu (PPE), în scris. − Uniunea
Europeană este cel mai mare donator la nivel mondial,
cu o contribuţie ce reprezintă 40% din asistenţa acordată
global. Peste 100.000.000 de persoane din peste 70 de
ţări au primit ajutoare de aproape un miliard de euro din
partea Uniunii în 2009. Păcat însă că suntem, de multe
ori, campioni la donaţii în state care aleg ulterior să
primească investiţii străine directe ale Chinei. Poate ar
trebui ca donaţiile şi investiţiile europene să fie, cât de
cât, coordonate, în loc să ne lamentăm că China a ajuns a
doua economie mondială. Contextul umanitar s-a
schimbat în mod semnificativ în ultimii ani, ceea ce face
ca aplicarea riguroasă şi consolidată a consensului
umanitar să fie cu atât mai pertinentă.
În ceea ce priveşte evoluţia contextului, trebuie mai întâi
menţionată creşterea semnificativă a numărului şi a
intensităţii dezastrelor naturale, cauzată în principal de
schimbările climatice. În consecinţă, este necesară, pe
lângă furnizarea de ajutor punctual şi sprijinirea
capacităţilor proprii ale comunităţilor, astfel încât
acestea să fie pregătite să reacţioneze în cazul unor
dezastre. Angajamentele politice există - strategia UE în
acest sens şi planul de acţiune de la Hyogo - însă persistă
încă probleme în punerea în aplicare a acestora.
2-205
David Campbell Bannerman (EFD), in writing. −
UKIP believes that the best reaction to a humanitarian
disaster is for independent nation states to coordinate
their aid efforts voluntarily, and not to have them set
centrally by the undemocratic EU. We note the debacle
of the EU’s slow and small efforts in Haiti, and thus we
feel that the EU cannot be trusted in future humanitarian
crises.
2-206
Νικόλαος Χουντής (GUE/NGL), γραπτώς. – Ψήφισα
αρνητικά στην έκθεση για την ανθρωπιστική βοήθεια
για δύο λόγους. Αρχικά, γιατί επιμένει στη σύνδεση της
πολιτικής προστασίας και της ανθρωπιστικής βοήθειας
με την Υπηρεσία εξωτερικής δράσης της ΕΕ καθώς και
με την εξωτερική πολιτική της, ενώ προφανώς τα
κριτήρια παρέμβασης θα έπρεπε να είναι σαφώς και
μόνο ανθρωπιστικά. Επίσης, γιατί δεν πιστεύω πως δίνει
τη σωστή κατεύθυνση σε ό,τι αφορά τη σύνδεση
πολιτικών και στρατιωτικών μέσων για την

18-01-2011 57
αντιμετώπιση καταστάσεων ανθρωπιστικής κρίσης.
Είναι προφανές ότι σε ορισμένες περιπτώσεις
απαιτούνται ιδιαίτερες γνώσεις και η χρήση ειδικού
εξοπλισμού που μέχρι στιγμής κατέχει και χρησιμοποιεί
ο στρατός. Θα μπορούσε, λοιπόν, προκειμένου να
προφυλαχθεί και να εξασφαλιστεί ο αμιγώς πολιτικός
χαρακτήρας των ανθρωπιστικών αποστολών, να
χρηματοδοτείται η πολιτική προστασία ώστε να έχει τον
συγκεκριμένο εξοπλισμό και φυσικά, να εκπαιδεύονται
αντίστοιχα οι εργαζόμενοι σε αυτήν αντί να συνεχίζουμε
όλες αυτές τις στρατιωτικές δαπάνες. Είναι ο μοναδικός
τρόπος για πραγματική και αποτελεσματική βοήθεια σε
περιπτώσεις ανθρωπιστικών κρίσεων χωρίς να
αντιμετωπίζονται οι κίνδυνοι της παρουσίας
στρατευμάτων.
2-207
Carlos Coelho (PPE), por escrito. − Ao proceder à
avaliação intercalar do Consenso Europeu em matéria de
Ajuda Humanitária não posso deixar de considerar
lamentável que o seu conhecimento público não tenha
sido o desejável e que o papel dos Estados-Membros na
sua implementação tenha sido escasso. Mais do que
apontar falhas, porém, é necessário promover e definir o
caminho que devemos prosseguir em matéria de ajuda
humanitária. O contexto humanitário alterou-se bastante
nestes últimos anos (catástrofes naturais, mais
deslocados, multiplicação de diversos conflitos internos,
crises alimentares, etc.). Mais do que nunca é premente
uma reacção global equilibrada e eficaz que se baseie em
necessidades concretas, orientada para os resultados e
norteada pelo princípio de que salvar meios de
subsistência é salvar vidas tendo em conta o
autodesenvolvimento e a auto-suficiência das áreas
envolvidas. A promoção destes valores humanitários
pelo Consenso e a optimização dos recursos pelos
diversos actores é neste sentido crucial.
Mais uma vez, defendo a criação urgente de uma Força
Europeia de Protecção Civil, no seguimento do relatório
Barnier de Maio de 2006. Felicito a colega Michèle
Striffler pelo conteúdo positivo das propostas
apresentadas e reitero a minha posição de que o
Consenso é um instrumento fundamental, com toda a
pertinência na realidade actual.
2-208
Edite Estrela (S&D), por escrito. − Votei
favoravelmente este relatório por considerar necessária a
revisão do plano de acção do consenso humanitário. O
contexto humanitário modificou-se profundamente
durante os últimos anos, nomeadamente, com o aumento
significativo do número e da intensidade das catástrofes
naturais, originadas também pelo impacte das alterações
climáticas. É fundamental integrar totalmente a redução
dos riscos de catástrofes nas políticas de ajuda ao
desenvolvimento e de ajuda humanitária, o que torna
ainda mais pertinente uma aplicação rigorosa e reforçada
do consenso humanitário.
2-209
Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − É hoje evidente a
multiplicação por todo o mundo de situações de
catástrofe e de emergência humanitária. A União
Europeia vem assumindo um importante papel no
combate a estes flagelos e espero que o mantenha e
mesmo que o reforce na medida das suas possibilidades.
Não basta, no entanto, dar o peixe a quem tem fome, há
que ensinar a pescar.
Creio que quase tão importante como fazer face às
emergências que ocorrem é ajudar a capacitar os países
menos providos de recursos com meios humanos e
materiais susceptíveis de fazerem face a crises futuras. O
Consenso Europeu em torno das questões relativas à
ajuda humanitária merece o meu apoio e os votos de que
o compromisso entre as instituições europeias se traduza
numa sempre melhor operacionalização dos meios ao
dispor da União, tendo sempre presente a prioridade a
dar aos que menos têm e àqueles que mais sofrem e a
total isenção face a agendas políticas ou ideológicas.
2-210
João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − A chamada
ajuda humanitária da UE tem um papel não desprezável
no que se tem vindo a definir como a sua política
externa. Frequentemente instrumentalizando genuínas
necessidades de apoio e de cooperação a que importa
responder, particularmente em situações de emergência,
na prática visam-se objectivos de ordem bem diversa. As
acções desenvolvidas e os métodos utilizados, que
incluem a ingerência e a ocupação militar, procuram
reproduzir e aprofundar formas de dominação política e
económica, disputar mercados e recursos naturais dos
países do Terceiro Mundo. No actual contexto de
aprofundamento da crise do capitalismo, estas
orientações não deixam de visar também a contenção
das lutas dos povos por mais justiça e progresso social,
assumindo expressões e formas diversas um pouco por
todo o mundo.
Camufladas por um suposto interesse humanitário,
várias ONG, empresas de logística e outras, são
beneficiárias e cúmplices destas políticas, promovendo
interesses próprios ou dos seus financiadores, sejam eles
interesses públicos ou privados, de natureza política, de
lucro, de natureza religiosa ou outros. Somos por
princípio favoráveis a expressões de solidariedade
concreta para com os povos vítimas de qualquer tipo de
catástrofe ou conflito. Mas elas têm que basear-se no
interesse desses povos, no respeito pelo direito
internacional, pela independência e soberania desses
países.
2-211
Jarosław Kalinowski (PPE), na piśmie. − Rok po
trzęsieniu ziemi na Haiti możemy zaobserwować, że
działania, które podejmujemy, czy też sposób, w jaki
pomagamy, nie jest doskonały. Dlatego konsensus
europejski, który powstał, aby usprawnić udzielanie
pomocy humanitarnej nie może zostać zaprzepaszczony.
Unia, jako jeden z najbogatszych i najbardziej
rozwiniętych regionów na świecie ma obowiązek
moralny pomagać słabszym i potrzebującym.
Szczególnie musimy solidaryzować się z ofiarami
kataklizmów i klęsk żywiołowych, które nie są
przygotowane na to, co ich spotyka.

58 18-01-2011
Należy zatem podjąć wszelkie działania, aby wzmocnić
współpracę państw członkowskich w tym zakresie,
ułatwić dzielenie się tzw. dobrymi praktykami. Trzeba
uczynić wszystko, aby system pomocy był sprawny i
efektywny, i nie marnował się żaden cent. Konieczna
jest zatem współpraca z innymi podmiotami,
organizacjami pozarządowymi czy międzynarodowymi,
które zajmują się również udzielaniem takiej pomocy,
by uczynić ją jak najskuteczniejszą.
2-212
Giovanni La Via (PPE), per iscritto. − Il mio voto a
favore di tale relazione è dettato dal fatto che c'è ancora
tanto bisogno di rimarcare l'importanza, quindi la
delicatezza, di tale argomento.
Con tale voto il Parlamento ha voluto che l'obiettivo
dell'Unione europea diventi quello di difendere i diritti
umani di neutralità, imparzialità ed indipendenza.
Nell'ambito della solidarietà non si è mai del tutto pronti
o con un piano eccellente, occorre spingere sempre più
tutti gli attori, ovvero la Commissione e gli Stati
membri, affinché l'Unione europea continui ad essere
pronta ad andare incontro ai più bisognosi.
2-213
Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE), în scris. − Ultima
perioadă este caracterizată de o creştere semnificativă a
numărului şi a intensităţii catastrofelor naturale, cauzate
sau nu de către om, precum şi de o creştere a efectelor
negative generate de încălcările dreptului internaţional
umanitar şi proasta guvernanţă. După cum se ştie,
Uniunea Europeană este primul donator de ajutor
umanitar la nivel mondial, cu o contribuţie de
aproximativ 40% din asistenţa umanitară internaţională
oficială şi drept dovadă stau cele 115 milioane de
persoane ajutate, din aproximativ 70 de ţări, care au
beneficiat de o contribuţie totală de aproape un miliard
de euro. Am votat în favoarea acestui consens, deoarece
consider că, prin politica sa umanitară, UE demonstrează
în mod concret angajamentul său faţă de persoanele care
au cu adevărat nevoie de ajutor. În acest sens, avem
nevoie de resurse umane şi materiale suficiente şi trebuie
să susţinem îmbunătăţirea coordonării dintre instituţiile
şi organizaţiile implicate în acest proces.
2-214
David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I strongly welcome
this report, which makes suggestions on how the
Consensus on Humanitarian Aid can be strengthened. It
highlights a number of areas that require more attention,
including the promotion of humanitarian principles and
international humanitarian law; issues of quality,
coordination and consistency in the delivery of EU
humanitarian aid; clarification on the use of military and
civil protection resources and capabilities in accordance
with the Consensus and the UN guidelines, and
reinforcement of the link between emergency aid,
rehabilitation and development.
2-215
Jiří Maštálka (GUE/NGL), písemně. − Předložená
zpráva je velmi aktuální reakcí na mnoho přírodních
katastrof, které jsme prožili v uplynulých letech.
Zkušenosti z možnosti poskytnutí účinné pomoci po
předchozích katastrofách např. v Austrálii, na Haiti, v
Rusku ukazují, že je nezbytné, aby ES mělo zcela jasné
postupy a prostředky pro poskytnutí účinné humanitární
pomoci. Zatím se tyto katastrofy vyhýbaly – co do
rozsahu – evropskému kontinentu, což ale neznamená,
že účinný komplex struktur a prostředků by neměl být
připraven. Zkušenosti z posledních let ukazují, že
zajištění dopravy do postižených oblastí není možné bez
technické a organizační podpory vojenských složek.
Nevládní humanitární organizace nemají tyto možnosti.
Je evidentní, že velmi často zůstávají obyvatelé
postižených oblastí odříznuti od možnosti dopravy po
zemi a kapacita civilních leteckých prostředků je
omezená. Je-li využití vojenských sil v nějakém případě
odůvodnitelné a přijatelné, pak je to právě případ
humanitárních, resp. přírodních katastrof.
2-216
Louis Michel (ALDE), par écrit. – L'environnement
humanitaire est de plus en plus complexe et malaisé: le
droit humanitaire est souvent violé, la confusion des
rôles fait que les travailleurs humanitaires sont de plus
en plus souvent pris pour cibles et les catastrophes
naturelles augmentent en nombre et en intensité. En
2010 nous avons été les témoins des trois plus grandes
catastrophes humanitaires de ces dernières années: le
séisme d'Haïti, la sécheresse au Sahel et les inondations
au Pakistan. Or comme le dit la commissaire Kristalina
Georgieva: "la qualité de notre aide humanitaire est de la
plus haute importance." Elle permet "de sauver quelque
140 millions de personnes chaque année".
Au vu de ces considération, je me range à l'avis de la
rapporteure lorsqu'elle plaide pour une augmentation
substantielle du financement de l'aide humanitaire tout
comme lorsqu'elle fait le constat que le consensus
humanitaire est trop méconnu. Il faut continuer à
sensibiliser et à promouvoir les principes humanitaires et
du droit international. Il faut, comme j'ai déjà eu
l'occasion de le faire, plaider en faveur de la création
d'une capacité européenne de réaction rapide. Il faut
mettre d'avantage l'accent sur la prévention des risques
des catastrophes.
2-217
Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. − Der Bericht über
die Umsetzung des europäischen Konsenses zur
humanitären Hilfe enthält einige wichtige Vorschläge,
die in der Zukunft in Angriff genommen werden
müssen. So zum Beispiel der Ausbau von Kapazitäten
und Ressourcen für den Katastrophenschutz, Stichwort
Aufbau einer europäischen Katastrophenschutztruppe.
Bedeutend ist auch die verbesserte Koordination nicht
nur zwischen den Mitgliedsstaaten, sondern auch auf
internationaler Ebene mit den Vereinten Nationen. Auch
der Ansatz, im Falle von Katastrophen Nahrungsmittel
und Ähnliches in der Umgebung zu erwerben und so die
lokale Wirtschaft zu unterstützen ist vernünftig. Leider
ist der Bericht aber in einigen Punkten zu ungenau und
zu wenig ambitioniert, weshalb ich mich der Stimme
enthalten habe.
2-218

18-01-2011 59
Rolandas Paksas (EFD), raštu. − Balsavau už šį
pranešimą, kadangi Europos Sąjunga būdama didžiausia
humanitarinės pagalbos tiekėja, turi didesnį dėmesį skirti
humanitarinei pagalbai tose vietovėse, kuriose ji
reikalinga neatidėliotinai, atsižvelgiant į tai, jog stipriai
išaugo gamtos nelaimių ir vidinių konfliktų skaičius.
Valstybės narės turėtų efektyviau dalyvauti šio
konsensuso įgyvendinimo procese, įtraukiant jį į
nacionalines humanitarines strategijas. Atsižvelgiant į
humanitarinės pagalbos poreikį būtina skirti jai didesnį
finansavimą užtikrinant greitą ir efektyvų operacijų
finansavimą.
Pritariu pasiūlymui, kad būtina aiškiai atskirti karinės ir
humanitarinės veikos dalyvių įgaliojimus, tam, kad
kariniai ištekliai ir pajėgumai, ypatingai tuose
regionuose, kuriuose vyksta kariniai konfliktai, būtų
naudojami tik griežtai ribojamais ir kraštutiniais atvejais.
Be to siekiant užtikrinti tinkamą ir efektyvų
humanitarinės pagalbos koordinavimą ir nuoseklumą,
turi būti sukurtos Europos civilinės saugos pajėgos ir
greito reagavimo pajėgos.
2-219
Crescenzio Rivellini (PPE), per iscritto. − Si è votato,
oggi, in plenaria sulla relazione "Consenso europeo in
materia di aiuto umanitario".
L'Unione europea, comprendente la Commissione
europea e gli Stati membri, è il primo donatore di aiuti
umanitari al mondo. Il suo contributo rappresenta oltre il
40% dell'assistenza umanitaria internazionale ufficiale.
Attraverso la sua politica umanitaria, l'Unione europea
dimostra concretamente il suo impegno a favore delle
popolazioni di paesi terzi che hanno bisogno di aiuto in
situazioni di estrema vulnerabilità.
È importante sottolineare che l'erogazione dell'aiuto
deve fondarsi unicamente sui bisogni accertati e il grado
di vulnerabilità e che la qualità e la quantità dell'aiuto
sono determinate innanzitutto dalla valutazione iniziale,
che deve ancora essere migliorata, in particolare per
quanto riguarda il livello dell'applicazione dei criteri di
vulnerabilità, specialmente per quanto riguarda donne,
minori e portatori di disabilità.
Premessa essenziale inoltre il coinvolgimento effettivo e
continuo – e ove possibile la partecipazione – dei
beneficiari alla gestione dell'aiuto, che garantisce la
qualità della risposta umanitaria, segnatamente in caso di
crisi di lunga durata.
2-220
Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. −
Since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty on 1
December 2009, the Union’s humanitarian activities
have been governed by Article 214 TFEU, establishing a
specific EU policy for humanitarian aid as a competence
shared between the Member States and the Union. Thus,
when Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/96 of 20 June
1996 concerning humanitarian aid is revised under the
codecision procedure it will have its own legal basis.
The Lisbon Treaty also provided for the creation of the
European External Action Service (EEAS). The DEVE
Committee expressed its concern that humanitarian aid
should not be instrumentalised under EEAS and
advocates preserving the independence of DG ECHO. It
also asks for the roles of Commissioners Ashton and
Georgieva to be clarified.
As the mid-term review offers an opportunity to step up
EU's efforts in a number of areas, the report draw
attention on the following issues among others: the
promotion of humanitarian principles and international
humanitarian law; the issues of quality, coordination and
consistency in the delivery of EU humanitarian aid;
clarification on the use of military and civil protection
resources and capabilities in accordance with the
consensus and the UN guidelines; disaster risk reduction
and reinforcement of the link between emergency aid,
Rehabilitation and development.
2-221
Licia Ronzulli (PPE), per iscritto. − L'Unione europea,
insieme alla Commissione e agli Stati membri, è il primo
donatore di aiuti umanitari al mondo, con un contributo
pari ad oltre il 40% dell'assistenza internazionale
ufficiale.
Solo nel 2009 la Commissione europea ha fornito aiuti a
circa 115 milioni di persone in oltre 70 paesi, per un
importo totale di 950 milioni di euro. Attraverso le sue
politiche l'UE dimostra concretamente il suo impegno
tangibile a favore delle popolazioni che vivono in
situazioni di estrema vulnerabilità. Il nostro obiettivo è
di riuscire a pianificare un coordinamento rafforzato, sia
civile sia militare, in grado di intervenire in modo
sempre più efficace soprattutto nei confronti delle
catastrofi naturali. Questi tragici eventi si verificano
sempre con maggior frequenza e negli ultimi anni hanno
causato centinaia di migliaia di morti in tutto il mondo.
Particolare attenzione deve essere rivolta a donne e
bambini, specialmente rifugiati e profughi, poiché le
violazioni del diritto umanitario internazionale nei loro
confronti sono sempre più numerose. Oltre ad essere più
efficaci nell'intervento, molto deve essere fatto nella
prevenzione attiva e passiva e le comunità a maggior
rischio devono essere più preparate a questo genere di
fenomeni, favorendo tutte le politiche di sviluppo
sostenibile volte a minimizzare i danni.
2-222
Informe: Daciana Octavia Sârbu (A7-0376/2010)
2-223
John Stuart Agnew and David Campbell Bannerman
(EFD), in writing. − 14/1: I voted in favour of this as I
perceive it to be a weakening of EU legislation and will
result in it becoming easier to import non-GM soya
beans into the UK. This is a critical issue for our poultry
sector.
14/2: I voted in favour of this as it will reduce the
negative impact of EU legislation on cargoes of non-GM
soya beans destined for the UK.

60 18-01-2011
14/3: I abstained on this because although it may be a
desirable aspiration (for a UK government free of EU
control), it is not yet a critical issue in my view and I do
not wish to extend EU power.
2-224
Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − A UE deve
recorrer a iniciativas inovadoras que, por um lado, dêem
uso aos excedentes alimentares e, por outro, permitam
alimentar pessoas carenciadas, devendo a PAC prever
isso aquando da sua revisão. O comportamento
especulativo tem sido responsável por cerca de 50 % dos
recentes aumentos de preços, devendo fomentar-se a
criação de instrumentos de estabilização dos preços no
seio dos fóruns internacionais através de uma estratégia
concertada no seio do G20. A UE deve liderar um
movimento internacional com vista à criação de um
acordo no seio das Nações Unidas que vise o
fornecimento alimentar de países com estas carências de
forma efectiva e permanente.
Saliento ainda a importância de apostar na credibilidade
do sector da agricultura, nomeadamente ao potenciar
esta actividade junto dos jovens formados e
empreendedores, como uma actividade que pode ser
aliada à inovação e investigação.
2-225
Elena Oana Antonescu (PPE), în scris. − Recenta
volatilitate a preţurilor alimentelor şi ale produselor
alimentare de bază a generat îngrijorări serioase cu
privire la funcţionarea lanţului de aprovizionare cu
alimente la nivel european şi mondial. Creşterea
preţurilor la alimente a afectat cel mai mult categoriile
cele mai vulnerabile de populaţie. Acest raport
încurajează aprovizionarea consumatorilor cu alimente
sănătoase şi de bună calitate, la preţuri rezonabile şi
menţinerea veniturilor agricole, acestea reprezentând
două dintre obiectivele-cheie ale Uniunii Europene. Am
votat în favoarea acestui raport. Devenind mai
competitivă, Europa poate contribui la securitatea
alimentară globală.
2-226
Liam Aylward (ALDE), i scríbhinn. − Faoi láthair tá
900 milliún duine ar fud an domhain ag fulaingt de bharr
ocras na fíorbhochtaineachta, agus suas le 2 bhilliún
nach féidir leo brath ar chinnteacht a soláthair bia, toisc
go bhfuil siad ag maireachtáil faoi scáil na
bochtaineachta.
Ós rud é go bhfuil méadú de 70%, ar a laghad, ag
teastáil chun freastal ar riachtanais an daonra
dhomhanda atá ag fás, ní mór an earnáil talmhaíochta a
neartú. Chuige seo, tacaím leis an tuarascáil
thábhachtach seo maidir le cúrsaí talmhaíochta agus an
soláthar bia. Ní foláir Comhbheartas Talmhaíochta láidir
maoinithe a fhorbairt chun bia ar ardchaighdeán agus ar
chostas réasúnta a chur ar fáil agus sinn ag tabhairt
aghaidhe ar an éileamh ar bhia san AE agus sa domhan.
Ní mór na Scéimeanna um Thorthaí agus Bainne i
Scoileanna agus an Clár do Dhaoine Díothacha a láidriú.
Ní mór go mbeadh teacht ag muintir an AE ar a ndóthain
de bhia folláin, in ainneoin deacrachtaí eacnamaíochta.
Is cúis imní é nach bhfuil an stoc bia domhanda chomh
lán is a bhíodh agus, ag smaoineamh ar an mbaol atá ann
ó athrú aeráide agus taismí nádúrtha, tacaím lena bhfuil
sa Tuarascáil maidir le córas domhanda a bhunú a
bheidh dírithe ar an stoc bia a fhorbairt.
2-227
George Becali (NI), în scris. − Am votat acest raport
întrucât există în continuare sărăcie şi foamete în
Uniunea Europeană. 79 de milioane de oameni din UE
trăiesc în continuare sub limita sărăciei. Amendamentele
mele subliniază faptul că dreptul la hrană este un drept
de bază al omului şi că acesta există atunci când toţi
oamenii au permanent acces fizic, social şi economic la
alimente suficiente, sigure şi nutritive, în vederea
satisfacerii nevoilor lor nutriţionale pentru a duce o viaţă
activă şi sănătoasă. Doresc să subliniez în special
importanţa diversităţii în agricultura europeană şi a
asigurării coexistenţei unor modele agricole diferite,
precum şi cea a diversităţii şi calităţii alimentelor şi a
nutriţiei peste tot în Europa.
2-228
Bastiaan Belder (EFD), schriftelijk. − Ik heb vóór de
resolutie gestemd; in haar programma legt mijn partij
(de SGP) ook duidelijk de vinger op het strategisch
belang van de sector en wordt landbouw zelfs de basis
genoemd voor voedselzekerheid. Enkele kanttekeningen
moet ik toch plaatsen, hoe nobel de ideeën op zichzelf
ook kunnen zijn. Met programma’s voor schoolmelk en
schoolfruit moet de EU zich niet bezighouden. Laat dat
desgewenst aan de lidstaten over. Ik heb daarnaast ook
tegen de paragraaf over versoepeling en stimulering van
GGO-importen gestemd. Mijn partij is van mening dat
GGO’s niet de oplossing zijn voor het
wereldvoedselvraagstuk. Een verband tussen hogere
opbrengsten en genetische modificatie is nog steeds niet
aangetoond. Bovendien zijn er naar onze mening in
ethisch opzicht principiële vragen te stellen bij
genetische modificatie.
Echter, in de algehele toonzetting van de resolutie kan ik
mij goed vinden. De resolutie laat nog weer eens zien
hoe belangrijk een krachtig en goed gefinancierd GLB
na 2013 is. Daarnaast vind ik de oproep om
ontwikkelingslanden hun landbouwgrond te laten
gebruiken voor het veiligstellen van de
voedselvoorziening, in de eerste plaats voor hun eigen
bevolking, van groot belang en hoge urgentie.
2-229
Sebastian Valentin Bodu (PPE), în scris. − Uniunea
Europeană are datoria de a răspunde provocărilor privind
securitatea alimentară, furnizarea de alimente superioare
calitativ, protejarea mediului, diversitatea spaţiului rural,
menţinerea echilibrului teritorial prin ameliorarea
condiţiilor de trai din spaţiul rural. Politica Agricolă
Comună oferă răspunsuri şi soluţii pentru aceste
provocări ale viitorului şi este important faptul că
obiectivele şi instrumentele pe care aceasta le identifică
încearcă să răspundă cât mai bine nevoii de integrare a

18-01-2011 61
specificului naţional în arhitectura politicii agricole
comune. Este clar că fermierii au nevoie de un sprijin
direct consistent şi în viitor, dar nu mai pot fi menţinute
diferenţele existente la nivelul plăţilor directe între
statele membre pentru că acest lucru afectează direct
nivelul de competitivitate al produselor agricole pe piaţa
unică.
PAC trebuie să responsabilizeze în ce priveşte cheltuirea
banilor europeni prin concentrarea plăţilor pe suprafaţă,
doar în cazul terenurilor cultivate şi, pentru sectorul
zootehnic, doar asupra animalelor existente în fermă în
anul aferent plăţilor. Pilonul I al PAC ar trebui să
acopere plăţile compensatorii pentru zonele defavorizate
agricol şi plăţile de agro-mediu, contribuind astfel, la
prevenirea abandonării terenurilor agricole şi la
recompensarea avantajelor aduse mediului înconjurător
prin practicile agricole extensive.
2-230
Νικόλαος Χουντής (GUE/NGL), γραπτώς. – Ψήφισα
αρνητικά την Έκθεση, παρά το ότι εμπεριέχει σοβαρά
θετικά σημεία και αναγνωρίζει τον ρόλο της γεωργίας
στην εξασφάλιση της διατροφικής ασφάλειας και
επάρκειας. Υπάρχει όμως ένα πολύ σοβαρό μειονέκτημα
στην Έκθεση, το οποίο δεν μπορεί να παραβλεφθεί.
Υπερψηφίστηκε ένα συγκεκριμένο σημείο, σύμφωνα με
το οποίο το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο "καλεί την
Επιτροπή να προτείνει μια ταχύτερη διαδικασία
έγκρισης σε πλαίσιο ΕΕ για την εισαγωγή νέας
παραλλαγής ζωοτροφών γενετικώς τροποποιημένων
μόλις αποδειχθεί ασφαλής". Η θέση μας ενάντια στην
εισαγωγή και χρήση οποιουδήποτε μεταλλαγμένου
υλικού, τροφίμου ή ζωοτροφής παραμένει σταθερή και
σε καμία περίπτωση δεν θα μπορούσα να ψηφίσω μια
Έκθεση η οποία, για πρώτη φορά, διαμορφώνει θετική
στάση του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου προς τα
μεταλλαγμένα που με τόσο ζήλο προσπαθεί να
εισαγάγει στην Ευρώπη ο κύριος Μπαρόζο.
2-231
Edite Estrela (S&D), por escrito. − Votei
favoravelmente o relatório sobre a agricultura como um
sector estratégico no contexto da segurança alimentar,
porque apresenta propostas importantes sobre como a
PAC, que deverá entrar em vigor após 2013, deverá
responder aos desafios em matéria de segurança
alimentar, alterações climáticas, crise económica,
manutenção do equilíbrio territorial na UE, entre outros.
2-232
Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − A Organização para a
Agricultura e Alimentação (FAO) alertou recentemente
para um possível aumento do preço dos bens alimentares
em 2011, após em 2010 estes terem atingido novos
máximos históricos, depois da subida durante a crise
alimentar de 2008. O índice de 55 matérias-primas
alimentares da FAO subiu, pelo sexto mês consecutivo,
para 214,7 pontos acima do anterior máximo histórico de
213,5 pontos, atingido em Junho de 2008.
O preço do açúcar e da carne atinge novos recordes
históricos e a menos que se verifique um aumento de
pelo menos 2% na produção de cereais, o preço destes
continuará a subir. É, por isso, de saudar esta iniciativa
e, tal como salientei numa pergunta colocada a semana
passada à Comissão Europeia, atendendo a que a
volatilidade dos preços afecta todos os intervenientes no
mercado, acredito que devem ser tomadas medidas
concretas, no âmbito da PAC, para aumentar a produção,
abastecer melhor os mercados e garantir uma maior
estabilidade dos preços, para além de garantir uma
produção que responda às necessidades de consumo
europeias. Como venho defendendo, a agricultura deve
ser encarada, sobretudo em momentos de crise, como
um sector estratégico.
2-233
João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − O relatório
aborda uma questão candente, apontando problemas
pertinentes que ameaçam a segurança alimentar, como
sejam a volatilidade dos preços em resultado da
especulação financeira, a usurpação de terras nos países
em desenvolvimento ou a insuficiência de stocks
estratégicos. A abordagem feita a cada um destes
problemas, como de resto a toda a problemática da
segurança alimentar, é todavia muito incompleta,
contraditória por vezes e, nalguns casos, errada. São
omitidas as consequências das políticas agrícolas
vigentes, concretamente da PAC e das suas sucessivas
reformas, com a liberalização dos mercados e o
desmantelamento dos instrumentos reguladores e a
consequente ruína de milhares de pequenos e médios
produtores, confrontados com preços à produção que
não cobrem muitas vezes os custos de produção.
Acresce a defesa da tese de que para alimentar a
Europa e os países terceiros, será necessário recorrer a
todas as formas de cultivo – defesa implícita de modelos
de produção insustentáveis, da produção intensiva de
cariz exportador e dos OGM, cujo processo de
aprovação de importações se apela para que seja
facilitado e mais rápido. Finalmente, a relatora regozijase
com a proposta de regulamento relativa aos
derivados OTC – proposta que não travará a
especulação, como denuncia o relator especial da ONU
para o direito à alimentação.
2-234
Bruno Gollnisch (NI), par écrit. – Oui, le secteur
agricole est un secteur stratégique, et la sécurité
alimentaire un impératif. Il aura fallu des décennies à
l'Europe pour s'en apercevoir. Mais le titre de ce rapport
est trompeur. À aucun moment les conséquences
dévastatrices du libre-échangisme mondial et de la
logique de marché n'y sont dénoncées.
Nous continuerons à manger des fraises en hiver,
qu'elles viennent de l'hémisphère sud ou de serres surconsommatrices
d'énergie et d'eau. Nous continuerons à
promouvoir l'importation de haricots verts africains, au
détriment des cultures vivrières locales et en
concurrence de nos propres productions.
Nous continuerons à demander la régulation des marchés
des produits agricoles et de leurs produits dérivés, alors
même que cette seconde notion est aberrante et que nous
devrions promouvoir des agricultures de qualité et des

62 18-01-2011
circuits courts, en poursuivant impitoyablement les abus
des intermédiaires et de la grande distribution.
Nous assisterons impuissants à la mainmise de pays
étrangers ayant gaspillé leur propre potentiel, sur les
terres arables des pays les plus vulnérables, nous
inquiétant sans agir de ce qui est potentiellement une
situation explosive.
Vous avez fait des progrès mais il vous reste encore du
chemin à faire. En refusant de vous attaquer au système
même qui est à l'origine de nos problèmes, vous vous
condamnez à l'échec.
2-235
Bogusław Liberadzki (S&D), na piśmie. − Głosowałem
za sprawozdaniem Sârbu w sprawie uznania rolnictwa za
sektor strategicznie ważny w kontekście bezpieczeństwa
żywnościowego. Bezpieczeństwo żywnościowe należy
historycznie od wieków do najważniejszych powinności
każdej władzy. Kryterium finansowe czy ekonomiczne
nie może być zatem decydujące.
Produkować żywność tanio, ale dobrą, to bardzo ważne
z punktu widzenia rynku i zdolności nabywczej
ludności, zwłaszcza o niskich dochodach. Jeszcze
ważniejsza jest jednak zdolność do produkcji żywności.
Nie możemy pozwolić na zdanie się na import żywności,
tylko dlatego, że ktoś może nam na bieżąco sprzedawać
ją taniej. Możemy importować, ale musimy też
utrzymywać własną zdolność do wyprodukowania
potrzebnej ilości żywności.
2-236
Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE), în scris. − În
momentul actual, în care preţurile la alimente sunt tot
mai ridicate şi se vorbește tot mai des despre o viitoare
criză alimentară, o mare parte din populația Uniunii
Europene trăiește sub limita sărăciei și este primordial să
ne asigurăm că alimentele sunt accesibile pentru toate
categoriile sociale. Am votat în favoarea acestui raport
deoarece consider că Uniunea Europeană are nevoie de o
politică agricolă puternică, competitivă, care să se
bazeze pe inovare şi să urmărească în primul rând
stabilizarea piețelor, încurajarea şi sprijinirea
agricultorilor. În același timp, consumatorii europeni au
dreptul să beneficieze de alimente sănătoase, de înaltă
calitate şi la prețuri rezonabile, acestea fiind obiective
principale ale politicii agricole comune (PAC) și
obiective cheie ale UE.
2-237
David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I voted for this
report, but abstained on the three parts of amendment 14
which dealt with GMOs. I am not intrinsically against
GM foodstuffs but was nervous at this attempt to speed
up the importation of GM material and the use of
production methods from third countries. The scientific
evidence that GM is safe must be robust, and the public
must have full confidence that the appropriate authorities
have taken all necessary safety precautions and carried
out rigorous testing. This cannot be rushed.
2-238
Jean-Luc Mélenchon (GUE/NGL), par écrit. –
Rappeler que la sécurité alimentaire est un droit
fondamental de l'humanité qui doit être garanti,
demander la rétribution des agriculteurs pour les efforts
biens publics qu'ils fournissent, proposer un système de
stocks alimentaires gérés par l'ONU sont autant de
concessions à nos thèses. Je m'en félicite. La prise en
compte de la différence, parmi les produits financiers,
des produits dérivés sur les matières premières ou la
limitation de l'accès aux marchés financiers agricoles
aux opérateurs en lien avec la production agricole sont
elles aussi le signe d'une évolution des mentalités.
Mais la relocalisation et la fin du productivisme,
nécessaires à l'autosuffisance alimentaire et à la
préservation de la biodiversité, sont encore loin. La
financiarisation des marchés agricoles n'est pas
fondamentalement remise en cause. Pire, des
autorisations de variétés d'OGM se profilent. Pour
encourager les bonnes intentions, je m'abstiens donc.
2-239
Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. − Gerade hinsichtlich
der Ernährungssicherheit besteht das Problem, dass die
Mitgliedsstaaten der EU ihre Selbstversorgungsfähigkeit
immer mehr verlieren. Dem besorgniserregenden Trend
weg vom hauptberuflichen Bauern hin zum
Nebenerwerbslandwirt und des Bauernsterbens konnte
noch nicht Einhalt geboten werden. Wenn also über
Ernährungssicherheit gesprochen wird, dann gilt es,
Konzepte zu finden, mit denen zum einen dieser
besorgniserregende Trend gestoppt werden kann und
zum anderen das Bewusstsein beim Konsumenten für
regionale Produkte gestärkt wird. Insbesondere gilt es in
diesem Zusammenhang, auch die EU-Förderungen
dahingehend zu untersuchen, dass die
Lebensmitteltransporte kreuz und quer durch die EU
reduziert werden. Dies ist nicht nur im Sinne der
Umwelt und hilft damit, die Kyoto-Ziele zur
Emissionsreduktion umzusetzen, sondern reduziert auch
die Lärmbelastung für die Menschen, vor allem entlang
der Transitrouten.
Und nicht zuletzt ist zu überlegen, in welchem Ausmaß
alternative Antriebssysteme vermehrt gefördert werden
können, da die Produktion von Biotreibstoffen
konventionellen Anbau zu verdrängen beginnt und sich
dies in Nahrungsmittelknappheit und -verteuerung
niederschlägt. Diese Aspekte gehen im Bericht unter,
weshalb ich mich der Stimme enthalten habe.
2-240
Claudio Morganti (EFD), per iscritto. − La relatrice
sottolinea l’importanza dell’agricoltura in relazione alle
nuove sfide alimentari.
La FAO ha dichiarato che la produzione alimentare
dovrà crescere di almeno il 70%, in quanto nel 2050 la
popolazione mondiale supererà i 9 miliardi. Così la
sicurezza alimentare continua a richiedere una forte
PAC.
I principali obiettivi della PAC sono stati: aumentare la
produttività dell'agricoltura, aiutare gli agricoltori a

18-01-2011 63
raggiungere uno standard di vita equo, stabilizzare i
mercati e garantire un approvvigionamento sicuro di
prodotti alimentari a prezzi accessibili. Tuttavia il suo
successo ha portato ad una sovrapproduzione non
intenzionale e ad eccedenze che hanno distorto il
mercato e hanno sollevato preoccupazioni ambientali.
Per questo la nuova PAC dovrà migliorare il sistema
alimentare con l’aumento della produttività e nel
contempo incoraggiare una produzione alimentare
ecologicamente sostenibile. La relazione sottolinea che è
essenziale che il finanziamento della PAC rifletta la sua
visione ambiziosa e i suoi obiettivi politici.
La PAC deve essere mantenuta ai livelli attuali
garantendo prezzi supportabili dei prodotti alimentari e
soprattutto un reddito dignitoso per gli agricoltori con
l'obiettivo di assicurare la sicurezza alimentare.
Migliorare e rafforzare i controlli di sicurezza alimentare
nell'Unione e nei paesi terzi è indispensabile e per
questo esprimo il mio parere positivo sulla risoluzione.
2-241
Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), per iscritto. − La
sicurezza alimentare è un diritto dell'uomo e la politica
agricola comune deve avere come obiettivo una facile
accessibilità per tutti di derrate alimentari tenendo conto
dell'aumento della popolazione, dei cambiamenti
climatici, dei costi alti dell'energia e degli ostacoli posti
dalle limitate risorse naturali.
Condivido e sostengo la relatrice Sârbu nel progetto di
rendere la nuova PAC, dopo il 2013, capace di
rispondere alle esigenze e alle sfide poste dalla sicurezza
alimentare. È importante quindi favorire la
diversificazione della produzione agricola, che va dalle
grandi catene commerciali all'agricoltura tradizionale e
ai piccoli allevamenti; garantire credito ai giovani
agricoltori e favorire lo sviluppo di programmi di
gestione delle scorte di prodotti alimentari, utili al
commercio mondiale e alla riduzione dei prezzi sui
mercati internazionali.
Sono però contraria allo sviluppo di OGM e del loro
utilizzo come varianti dei mangimi fin quando non sia
accertata la loro sicurezza per gli animali d'allevamento
e per i consumatori europei.
2-242
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE), în scris. − Am votat in
favoarea acestui raport. Regret totuşi că la vot au fost
eliminate câteva prevederi importante, cum ar fi, de
exemplu, cea privind o analiză referitoare la posibilitatea
de a autoriza aplicarea unor metode de producţie
utilizate în ţări terţe, în privinţa Organismelor
Modificate Genetic. Unele state au progresat enorm în
acest domeniu, în timp ce Uniunea Europeană a rămas în
urmă şi nu îşi valorifică întregul potenţial. De asemenea,
regret faptul că a fost eliminată referirea la problema pe
care o reprezintă, în unele state membre, suprafeţele
agricole enorme care nu sunt cultivate.
2-243
Rovana Plumb (S&D), în scris. − Conform FAO,
producţia de alimente trebuie să crească cu cel puţin
70% pentru a satisface cererile din ce în ce mai ridicate
ale populaţiei la nivel mondial, care se estimează că,
până în 2050, va număra peste 9 miliarde de persoane.
De asemenea, aproximativ 900 de milioane de persoane
suferă grav de foame din cauza sărăciei extreme, în timp
ce aproape 2 miliarde de persoane nu beneficiază de o
securitate alimentară reală şi pe termen lung din cauza
unor diverse grade de sărăcie. Având în vedere că
cererea de alimente este în creștere, iar 16% dintre
cetățenii europeni trăiesc sub limita sărăciei, dreptul la
hrană şi accesul la alimente devin o prioritate. De aceea,
pentru a crea o securitate alimentară, este în continuare
nevoie de o politică agricolă comună (PAC) puternică,
orientată către piaţă, distinctă şi responsabilă faţă de
mediu, care să aibă şi o componentă semnificativă de
dezvoltare rurală şi care să facă faţă şi altor provocări, în
special schimbărilor climatice, crizei economice şi
păstrării echilibrului teritorial în cadrul UE. Securitatea
alimentară ca obiectiv nu poate exista fără să fie
abordate două dintre cele mai importante probleme
actuale: volatilitatea pieţelor şi a preţurilor şi rezervele
de alimente în scădere.
2-244
Crescenzio Rivellini (PPE), per iscritto. − Mi
congratulo con la collega Sârbu. Per assicurare un
approvvigionamento sicuro di prodotti alimentari a
prezzi accessibili, l'UE deve dotarsi di una forte Politica
agricola comune (PAC) che scoraggi la speculazione su
materie prime alimentari e aiuti i giovani a intraprendere
l'attività di agricoltore.
Infatti, la PAC di domani dovrà assolutamente fare di
più per i giovani agricoltori. Solo il 7% degli agricoltori
europei ha meno di 35 anni, mentre l'UE avrà bisogno di
4.5 milioni di agricoltori nei prossimi 10 anni. Chiedo
pertanto di rafforzare le misure esistenti per attrarre i
giovani verso l'agricoltura, come i premi d'installazione
e i tassi d'interesse agevolati sui prestiti.
Inoltre, al fine di garantire che gli strumenti finanziari
esistenti aiutino gli agricoltori a far fronte alle crisi,
piuttosto che aiutare gli speculatori a provocare una
volatilità estrema dei prezzi, chiedo una revisione della
legislazione europea in materia di prodotti finanziari per
rendere le negoziazioni più trasparenti ed esorto la
Commissione europea a introdurre urgentemente misure
forti e permanenti per mettere chiari paletti alla
speculazione e contrastare l'instabilità dei mercati dei
generi alimentari.
2-245
Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. − The
report was adopted without the support of the Verts/ALE
Group, which voted against. The reason for that negative
vote was that paragraph 14 remained in the text. It ‘calls
on the Commission to propose a technical solution to the
problem of low-level presence of GM material in non-
GM imports, and to propose a faster approval process
within the EU for the importation of a new GM feed
variant once it has been proved safe’.
2-246

64 18-01-2011
Licia Ronzulli (PPE), per iscritto. − La sicurezza
alimentare è un diritto fondamentale dell'umanità e può
dirsi realizzata solo quando è possibile soddisfare il
fabbisogno energetico di una persona per permetterle di
svolgere una vita sana e attiva.
Soprattutto in previsione della revisione del Piano
agricolo comune prevista per il 2013, il sostegno che
verrà accordato agli agricoltori europei dovrà sempre e
comunque permettere loro il pieno rispetto degli
standard in materia di sicurezza alimentare ed
ambientale. Nonostante l'efficienza delle produzioni
europee, ancora oggi circa 80 milioni di persone vivono
al di sotto della soglia di povertà e molte di loro sono
aiutate attraverso programmi di aiuti alimentari. Una
PAC forte è in grado di preservare non solo il ruolo
economico degli agricoltori in quanto produttori di
alimenti, ma anche di garantire il sostentamento e
l'occupazione ad oltre 28 milioni di cittadini impiegati
nelle zone rurali europee.
Anche alla luce della crisi economica, sarà doveroso
mantenere i pagamenti diretti agli agricoltori dopo il
2013, per stabilizzarne il reddito e aiutarli a resistere alla
volatilità del mercato. Infine saranno previste iniziative
specifiche per incoraggiare i giovani ad entrare nel
settore agricolo, rendendo più agevole l'accesso ai
prestiti, promuovendone la formazione professionale e
l'istruzione tecnica specifica, oltre alla divulgazione
delle "buone prassi" nel settore dell'agricoltura su scala
europea.
2-247
Oreste Rossi (EFD), per iscritto. − A parte la dubbia
citazione di dati relativi all'aumento della popolazione
mondiale, che non tiene conto della recente riduzione
della natalità di diversi paesi extraeuropei, la sicurezza
alimentare è sicuramente legata al buon uso
dell'agricoltura.
È quindi chiaro che una PAC che punta ad aumentare
l'attività dell'agricoltura nel rispetto della qualità e
dell'ambiente e ad aiutare gli agricoltori a raggiungere
un adeguato livello di vita è auspicabile. Anche in
riferimento alle politiche energetiche, che entrano nel
settore agricolo per l'uso dei biocombustibili, è un
argomento che va ulteriormente approfondito in quanto è
una produzione in competizione con quella alimentare.
Anche la conclusione della relazione è condivisibile, non
possiamo pensare di ridurre il bilancio destinato alla
PAC.
2-248
Csanád Szegedi (NI), írásban. − Nem tudok támogatni
egy olyan kezdeményezést, amely megkönnyíti, vagy
meggyorsítja bármilyen géntechnológiával módosított
növény behozatalát. Az Európai Unión belül a kiváló
termőföldi adottságok lehetővé teszik számos országban
- köztük Magyarországon, Lengyelországban,
Olaszországban, vagy Franciaországban -, hogy jó
minőségű takarmányt állítson elő. Nincs szükségünk
génkezelt takarmányvariánsokra! A génmódosított
termékek behozatalát az Európai Unióba hosszú távú
káros egészségügyi hatásuk miatt sem támogatom.
2-249
Nuno Teixeira (PPE), por escrito. − O termo segurança
alimentar põe em relevo a necessidade de tomar medidas
concretas para o aumento do stock alimentar mundial.
Um direito humano que compreende o acesso físico e
económico das pessoas a uma alimentação saudável,
adequada e nutritiva. Considero de extrema importância
a aprovação deste relatório que põe o acento tónico no
sector agrícola. O crescimento populacional que se prevê
e a pobreza que subsiste implicam um crescimento de
pelo menos 70 % da produção alimentar para satisfazer
as necessidades da população. Os fenómenos climáticos,
a especulação e volatilidade dos preços têm causado um
impacto negativo na capacidade dos agricultores.
Uma Política Agrícola Comum pós-2013 capaz de
garantir o direito à segurança alimentar através de uma
forte aposta na competitividade e inovação, no reforço
da presença de jovens agricultores, capazes de vitalizar o
sector e dar resposta aos novos desafios globais. Deve
haver um ajustamento da política agrícola através da
promoção da agricultura tradicional e local,
nomeadamente a agricultura biológica e de proximidade.
2-250
Marie-Christine Vergiat (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – Le
Parlement européen a adopté un texte sur la
reconnaissance de l'agriculture sur lequel j'ai du
m'abstenir. Ce rapport tient compte de nombre de
préoccupations essentielles des agriculteurs, telles que
l'aide à la petite production, aux jeunes agriculteurs et à
la lutte contre la spéculation des prix. Ce texte rappelle
également le besoin de financements substantiels pour la
future PAC.
Si ce rapport est dans l'ensemble positif, il intègre une
mesure intolérable: l'accélération des procédures
d'autorisation des OGM par la Commission.
Cette mesure refuse de prendre en compte une réelle
évaluation des produits avant leur mise sur le marché et
ne tient aucun compte des dangers maintes fois dénoncés
de la commercialisation des OGM.
Cette mesure va à l'encontre de toute prise en compte
minimale de la sécurité alimentaire et du principe de
précaution. C'est une mesure dangereuse qu'il est
scandaleux d'intégrer à l'intérieur d'un rapport visant à
prendre en compte l'importance stratégique de
l'agriculture.
La question des OGM mérite un débat à elle seule que
les instances européennes se refusent à mener.
2-251
9 - Correcciones e intenciones de voto: véase
el Acta
2-252
(La sesión, suspendida a las 12.55 horas, se reanuda a
las 15.05 horas)
2-253
PRZEWODNICZY: JERZY BUZEK
Przewodniczący

18-01-2011 65
2-254
10 - Przyjęcie protokołu poprzedniego
posiedzenia: Patrz protokól
2-255
11 - Składanie dokumentów: patrz protokół
2-256
12 - Tura pytań z udziałem
przewodniczącego Komisji
2-257
Przewodniczący. − Kolejnym punktem porządku
dziennego jest tura pytań z udziałem przewodniczącego
Komisji. Jest to zwykła procedura, tzn. pytania trwają
jedną minutę, odpowiedź także trwa jedną minutę.
Gdyby było dodatkowe pytanie – trzydzieści sekund,
odpowiedź także trzydzieści sekund. Pierwsi pytania
przewodniczącemu Komisji Europejskiej będą zadawać
szefowie lub przedstawiciele grup politycznych.
2-258
Corien Wortmann-Kool, namens de PPE-Fractie. –
Voorzitter, voorzitter Barroso, ik wil u in dit Huis een
vraag stellen over het Europese Noodfonds, ook om het
belang te onderstrepen van het feit dat u zich in het debat
over dat noodfonds heeft gemengd, omdat het om een
Europees noodfonds gaat. Mijn vraag is: hoe kijkt u aan
tegen de uitbreiding van het fonds? U hebt zich
weliswaar daarover uitgelaten, maar vooral over de
vraag hoe dat zijn beslag zou moeten krijgen en op
welke termijn. Het is nu op dit moment redelijk rustig op
de staatsobligatiemarkt, maar dat kan ineens veranderen.
Vandaar mijn vraag: wat is uw visie op die uitbreiding
van het noodfonds?
2-259
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
Mr President, I would like, first of all, to thank
Ms Wortmann-Kool.
In fact, this is not just my position but the unanimous
position of the Commission. It says in this document,
about the annual growth survey, that the Commission
considers that the effective financing capacity of the
European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) must be
reinforced and the scope of its activity widened. We
consider this as part of a comprehensive response and
not, of course, as the entire response. There is only one
sentence in this document about the EFSF. It is also
about structural reform, fiscal consolidation and growthenhancing
measures.
But, in fact, it is important for the stability of the euro
area to increase lending capacity because, as you know,
the EFSF is currently endowed with EUR 440 billion. I
am not asking now for this ceiling to be increased, but
we know that the EFSF cannot, de facto, lend this
EUR 440 billion if need be, due to the need to secure a
triple-A rating for the EFSF. So the minimum we can
and should do is to increase the capacity of the fund. I
think this is a very constructive proposal that should be
adopted sooner rather than later.
2-260
Corien Wortmann-Kool, namens de PPE-Fractie. –
Voorzitter, een aanvullende vraag, u zegt "liever eerder
dan later". Wat bedoelt u precies met "liever eerder dan
later", want er is volgens mij toch een zekere urgentie
om de stabiliteit op de financiële markten voor de
komende maanden te verzekeren en dan helpt
daadkracht. Op dit moment zien we vooral debatten
tussen regeringsleiders en tussen ministers van
Financiën, dus op welke termijn "sooner or later"? Kunt
u daar nog wat specifieker in zijn?
2-261
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
Mr President, ‘sooner rather than later’ means precisely
that: that we should not procrastinate. We have seen in
the past that many analysts in the market consider the
European Union and the euro area to be reacting rather
than acting. We need to be ahead of the curve, not
behind the curve, so as soon as possible it shall be!
In fact, it seems that the euro area meeting yesterday and
today’s ECOFIN meeting made some progress. We are
contacting our Member States. I believe that is
important. And I think it will be wise, since we have the
European Council on 4 February, to address these issues
there. We are ready to do so. The Commission is ready
to address these issues on 4 February.
2-262
Stephen Hughes, on behalf of the S&D Group. –
President Barroso, I know that the European Trade
Union Confederation has already raised very strong
objections about the detailed interference by the
Commission in the Greek and Irish labour markets,
riding roughshod over collective bargaining and social
dialogue. Your new annual growth survey promises
more of the same. Your officials are calling for a
revision of indexation clauses and pay deals, the
promotion of flexible work, a review of unemployment
benefits and a reduction of over-protection of workers.
Do you not agree that the Commission should be looking
to promote social dialogue and collective bargaining
rather than undermining it? And, as the issue of pay is
specifically excluded from the social chapter of the
Treaty, what legal basis is the Commission using to
interfere in national collective bargaining systems? Also,
the doubling of the fiscal consolidation effort called for
in the survey is going to choke off any possibility of
achieving the 2020 process goals. What is your answer
to that?
2-263
José Manuel Barroso, Pt Commission. − Let me tell
you, without any ambiguity, that we fully support social
dialogue. We do it at European level but afterwards we
have to do it also at national level; that is a Member
State responsibility. I have been actively promoting all
this social dialogue with ETUC, with BusinessEurope
and with other relevant partners. But in fact we are of
the opinion that we should now create more incentives to
work; we have to address the situation of our labour
markets. I think this is part of the structural reforms
which are needed to increase Europe’s competitiveness.

66 18-01-2011
2-264
Stephen Hughes, on behalf of the S&D Group. –
President Barroso, why is it that all the focus seems to
be upon labour markets? What about the other markets
that we need to deal with here – the financial market, the
internal market, the commodity markets? All the focus
seems to be on labour markets. Why should the least
well off, the workers, be carrying the cost of this
recession and the need to repair it?
2-265
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
The focus is not only on the labour market. We are
reforming the financial markets with the active support
and participation of this Parliament. We also discussed
at length the need to deepen internal market reform in
the annual growth survey. We are now specifically
discussing energy markets, but the labour market is also
part of the structural reforms needed to increase
Europe’s competitiveness, especially in those countries
that are now most vulnerable. As you know, some of
them are already undertaking important labour market
reforms.
2-266
Guy Verhofstadt, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr
President, I know that you conveyed your concerns over
the Khodorkovsky case in a private conversation with
President Medvedev. If the Khodorkovsky case was a
test case for the rule of law in Russia, then we naturally
have to say that the case failed. On top of this, Boris
Nemtsov was arrested on 31 December. Article 31 of the
Russian Constitution, however, guarantees the freedom
of assembly.
As you know, the Opposition organises a protest
meeting every 31st of the month. As far as I can see,
there are seven months in 2011 which have 31 days in
them. That means there is a chance, if this continues,
that events similar to the arrest of Mr Nemtsov could
happen in 2011. So what joint action can the EU
institutions take on this matter? Russia is a member of
the Council of Europe, the OECD, the G8 and
potentially a member of the WTO. I think urgent action
from the European institutions is needed.
2-267
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
As you said, Mr Verhofstadt, we have been raising the
issue with our Russian partners and in fact the European
Union has already publicly reacted to the proceedings
against Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Platon Lebedev
through the declaration by High Representative
Catherine Ashton.
We believe that judicial independence and the right of
each and every citizen to a fair trial – as enshrined in the
European Convention on Human Rights, to which
Russia is a party – are of crucial importance to the
strategic partnership between the European Union and
the Russian Federation. The Rule of Law is also a
cornerstone of the ‘Partnership for Modernisation’ that
we are now developing with Russia.
We will continue to closely follow this and raise the
issue in different formats and meetings with Russia, as
emphasised in the last European Union-Russia summit
on 7 December in Brussels. The European Union
expects Russia to respect its international commitments
in the field of human rights and also to respect the Rule
of Law.
2-268
Guy Verhofstadt, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – This
is not a question but simply a comment. I think that this
House also has to deal with this problem as urgently as
possible. The situation cannot continue as it is now in
the Russian Federation. I do not think that, just because
we have many important commercial links, we have to
stay silent on this issue – on the contrary.
2-269
Rebecca Harms, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. –
In Russland ist Presse- und Medienfreiheit ein ganz
großes Problem. Wenn Sie in dieser Auseinandersetzung
gut dastehen wollen, Herr Kommissionspräsident, dann
dürfen Sie das, was im Moment in Ungarn passiert, nicht
zulassen. Ich frage Sie, warum die Kommission so lax
mit dem ungarischen Mediengesetz umgeht. Es verstößt
in allen seinen Bereichen gegen Grundsätze, die in
Europa und darüber hinaus gelten.
Wir haben uns eine Rechtsexpertise erstellen lassen. Ein
Überblick: Das Gesetz verstößt gegen die Kopenhagener
Kriterien, die Helsinki Schlussakte, die Richtlinie über
audiovisuelle Medien, die Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention,
die Unesco-Konvention, die die Medien
betrifft, den Vertrag von Lissabon, die EU-
Grundrechtecharta. Ich könnte fortfahren, ich tue es
nicht. Ich frage Sie: Wann intervenieren Sie angemessen
in Ungarn? Wie sieht der Zeitplan aus? Warum gibt es
noch kein Vertragsverletzungsverfahren? Meine Kritik
ist auch gedeckt durch existierende Rechtsprechung in
diesem Bereich.
2-270
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
With Hungary, as with any other Member State, we have
to implement European law in an objective, impartial
manner. We have to look at it very cautiously from a
legal point of view, so we need to follow a clear
methodology.
That is what we – in the shape of Vice-President Kroes –
have been doing. Yesterday she gave extensive reports
to the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home
Affairs and the Committee on Culture and Education.
We have some concerns about Hungary’s media law. By
the end of this week we intend to send a first letter to the
Government of Hungary to which the Hungarian
authorities should respond.
I repeat: we have to follow clear, objective, impartial,
legally-based procedures, because Hungary, just like any
other EU Member State, has the right to impartiality on
the part of the Commission. I can reassure you, however,
that we are following this matter very attentively.
2-271

18-01-2011 67
Rebecca Harms, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. –
Ich möchte darum bitten, dass uns alle Unterlagen, die
Ungarn der Kommission zur Verfügung gestellt hat, zur
Einsicht vorgelegt werden. Wir möchten das gerne selbst
beurteilen können. Wir halten es für beurteilungsreif.
Wir haben allerdings den Verdacht, dass Ungarn
möglicherweise gar nicht den vollständigen Gesetzestext
vorgelegt hat, dass da auf Zeit gespielt wird usw. Bitte
geben Sie uns diese Dokumente!
Darüber hinaus halte ich es für ausgesprochen schwierig,
Politik z.B. in den Beitrittsverhandlungen mit der Türkei
zu machen und immer wieder auf den Kopenhagener
Kriterien herumzureiten und diese dann zu vergessen,
wenn ein Land Mitglied der Europäischen Union ist.
2-272
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
Of course we are keeping this Parliament fully informed.
As I said earlier, Commission Vice-President Kroes met
the relevant committees of this Parliament yesterday.
At the same time, you will understand that these issues
have a legal dimension and that we have to follow the
methodology in a very clear, objective way. The
Commission has a very good reputation and a level of
credibility in all these matters that we certainly we do
not want to put at risk. I can reassure you that we are
following the issue with great attention and we have
already expressed these concerns. I have personally
taken up this issue with Prime Minister Orbán.
Tomorrow he is coming to this Parliament. We can
discuss this politically, but we also have to follow the
clear procedures in this matter.
2-273
Michał Tomasz Kamiński, w imieniu grupy ECR. –
Panie Przewodniczący! Kilka dni temu
Międzypaństwowy Komitet Lotniczy działający w
Moskwie opublikował swój raport dotyczący przyczyn
katastrofy, do której doszło 10 kwietnia ubiegłego roku
w Smoleńsku. Polska opinia publiczna przyjęła ten
raport z dużym zdumieniem i traktuje go jako dokument,
który nie ma charakteru obiektywnego. Zostało już
udowodnione w ciągu ostatnich kilku dni, że w tym
raporcie zostały ukryte niewygodne dla Rosji fakty, a
cały raport nakierowany jest na to, by winę za to
tragiczne wydarzenie, do którego doszło w Smoleńsku,
obarczyć stronę polską. W Polsce nikt rozsądny nie
kwestionuje błędów, do których doszło po stronie
naszego kraju w całym procesie przygotowywania i
realizacji wizyty świętej pamięci prezydenta. Tym
niemniej jednak rosyjski raport nosi wszelkie cechy
politycznej rozgrywki, która ma na celu oddalenie od
strony rosyjskiej jakichkolwiek zarzutów.
Mam w związku z tym pytanie: jaka jest ocena tego
raportu ze strony Komisji i czy Komisja Europejska
zamierza coś zrobić w sprawie wyjaśnienia przyczyn
tragedii w Smoleńsku, w której zginęła głowa państwa
Unii Europejskiej, a także bardzo wielu przedstawicieli
elity politycznej mojego kraju?
2-274
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
Mr President, I would like to say to Mr Kamiński that
nobody will ever forget this terrible tragedy, either in
Poland or elsewhere. We felt deeply the death of
President Kaczynski and all those who were with him on
that tragic day. I am, of course, aware of the Russian
report published last week and I am also aware of the
Polish reactions to it, for which I have a great deal of
understanding, given the scale of this tragedy.
That said, the Commission can act in these situations
only when we have the right legal basis on which to do
so. By the way, we have never been approached by the
Polish authorities to intervene in this matter although, of
course, we remain ready to do whatever lies within our
legal competence, should we receive such a request.
2-275
Michał Tomasz Kamiński, w imieniu grupy ECR. –
Panie Przewodniczący! Chciałbym dobrze Pana
zrozumieć. Do tej pory rząd polski nie zwrócił się do
Komisji w sprawie wyjaśnienia przyczyn katastrofy
smoleńskiej. Jeśliby jednak rząd polski zwrócił się o
pomoc do Komisji Europejskiej, czy Komisja podejmie
się w tej sprawie działania?
2-276
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
As I said, we have to see the legal basis for it. According
to my information it was a military flight and a state
visit, and the regulation entered into force after the
terrible accident. So, from a legal point of view, it seems
that there are not many arguments on the basis of which
the Commission might intervene. But we can of course
always discuss this matter informally with the Polish
authorities or with other authorities that may ask us to do
so.
2-277
Lothar Bisky, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. –
Herr Barroso, wir alle wissen um die Wichtigkeit der
Stabilität des Euro. In dem Zusammenhang habe ich
einen Vorgang nicht ganz verstanden. Es ging um die
Debatte der Aufstockung des Rettungsschirms, und da
haben Sie „Los“ gerufen und Frau Merkel hat „Stopp“
gerufen. Nun ist meine Frage, ob Sie sich untereinander
gar nicht abstimmen. Das kann ja immer mal passieren.
Aber das ist nicht das erste Mal, dass ich so etwas erlebe
oder erahne. Und die Medien werden inzwischen sehr
aufmerksam. Das ist doch kein einfacher Ehestreit
zwischen Ihnen und Frau Merkel, sondern eine wichtige
politische Frage! Ich kann das verstehen – Sie können
mir glauben, dass auch ich nicht immer mit Frau Merkel
einer Meinung bin –, aber hier geht es ja darum, ob man
damit den Finanzspekulanten nicht eher hilft, wenn
unterschiedliche Meinungen öffentlich werden.
2-278
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
In the European Union each institution and each
government has its own responsibilities. The
Commission has some responsibility to present what it
believes to be the right way forward for the euro area
and for the Union and so, in a very comprehensive
document regarding the annual growth survey, we

68 18-01-2011
expressed our opinion. I think we had not only the right
but also the duty to do that.
So that is what we did, and I think it was extremely well
received by the markets, as we have seen in recent days,
because they understood that now there was a real
willingness to move in a decisive way on all aspects of a
comprehensive response, including on the EFSF.
The market analysis is unanimous on the need to do
more on that matter. This is not just the Commission’s
opinion, it is also the opinion of the European Central
Bank, and it was expressed in extremely clear terms. I
hope that the Member States will come to an agreement
on the basis of the Commission’s position.
2-279
Lothar Bisky, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. –
Herr Barroso, ich akzeptiere voll und ganz, dass Sie Ihre
Meinung zum Ausdruck gebracht haben und den
Bericht. Dennoch bleibt meine Frage: Wie kann es bei
einer so wichtigen Frage, wo mit dem Euro spekuliert
wird, zu einem so wichtigen Zeitpunkt wie jetzt sein,
dass Ihre Meinung mit Frau Merkel oder Herrn Sarkozy
oder mit anderen Regierungschef unabgestimmt
erscheint? Jedenfalls ist das die Wahrnehmung in der
Öffentlichkeit.
2-280
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
The Commission does not need the Member States’
permission before we express an opinion. Our proposal
was made very much in line with the conclusions of the
last European Council, when the Member States stated
that they were ready to do whatever was necessary to
protect the financial stability of the euro area. They
specifically mentioned the EFSF and said that they were
ready to reinforce it. So in fact there was no
contradiction.
I cannot comment on the comments of others, but I can
tell you what the position of the Commission is: it is a
unanimous position that is shared by the President of the
European Central Bank; it is the position of the other
relevant institutions that are keeping a very close eye on
the financial stability of the euro area. I think that we
should highlight what unites us rather than some specific
issues about the way we communicate.
2-281
Marta Andreasen, on behalf of the EFD Group. – Last
week a member of the European Court of Auditors, who
retired recently after 15 years of service, made serious
allegations in the media. The allegations, which come as
no surprise to me, pointed essentially to the lack of
independence of the EU auditors, which affects the level
of transparency in the reporting of irregularities.
The clarification letter published yesterday by
Mr Engwirda does nothing more than confirm the
Commission’s power over the auditors, and it calls into
question the basis on which this Parliament has been
granting discharge for the past 15 years.
It is now time for this Parliament to demand that the EU
budget and accounts are audited by a truly independent
body external to the EU institutions. Without such an
independent audit, the Council and Parliament are in no
position to continue discharging the Commission of its
financial responsibility.
Will you, Mr Barroso, allow an external auditor to
review the accounts and tell us the truth about how
European taxpayers’ money is being spent?
2-282
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
Mr President, I should point out that the European Court
of Auditors is a fully independent body. The
Commission has absolutely no influence over its
methods or audit priorities, nor would we seek to have
that kind of influence. It is in the Commission’s own
interest, and in the European interest, to respect the
independence of its external auditor.
I have never made negative comments about decisions
of courts, be it the constitutional courts, the European
Court of Justice or the Court of Auditors. That is a basic
principle of democracy, respect for the Rule of Law and
respect for independent institutions.
A regular dialogue exists, of course, between the
Commission as auditee and the Court as auditor, as part
of the audit process. This is normal and necessary to
ensure the audit process works well and that all findings
in the audit process are on a solid basis. Such a dialogue
is fully in accordance with all international standards. I
should probably also point out that in previous years the
Commission was subject to extremely critical reports
from the Court of Auditors. I think we should respect
our institutions, namely the independent institutions.
2-283
Marta Andreasen, on behalf of the EFD Group. – Mr
Barroso, I disagree with your response. In response to
the criticism made by the European Court of Auditors in
the last ten years, the Commission has turned to the
auditors – and this is recorded by the media – and asked
them to change their methodology of work so that the
report on EU expenditure would show a better figure.
In my 30 years of professional experience in the area of
accounting and audit, I have never seen the auditee
instruct the auditor on how to do its own work. How can
we now know if a reduction in the error rate is due to the
change in methodology requested by the Commission or
to an improvement in the controls?
2-284
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
The Commission, like the European Parliament, has the
right to express its opinions on the audit process. You
are now expressing an opinion on it, and you are fully
entitled to do so. The Commission is also a political
body. We have been elected by this Parliament, so we
have the right to express our opinion. In no way can this
be regarded as a form of pressure, unless we are also to
regard your comments as intolerable pressure.

18-01-2011 69
This is in fact an exercise in transparency. So, once and
for all, we fully respect the Court of Auditors, we do not
put pressure on the Court of Auditors and we try to do
our best to implement the recommendations of the
independent audit institution that is the Court of
Auditors.
2-285
Daniël van der Stoep (NI). – Voorzitter, Jeruzalem is
de enige eeuwige en ondeelbare hoofdstad van de joodse
staat Israël. Jeruzalem is en zal altijd van oost tot west
Israëlisch grondgebied zijn en blijven.
Voorzitter, de Europese Unie mag met recht trots zijn op
Israël. In het Midden-Oosten is het de enige democratie
in een zee van dictatoriale regimes.
Voorzitter, in haar strijd tegen de islamitische jihad
verdedigt Israël dan ook niet alleen zichzelf, maar ook
alles waar Europa met zijn joods-christelijke waarden
voor staat. Dat zal de Commissie met me eens zijn.
Voorzitter, de steun van de Europese Unie aan de joodse
staat Israël zou dan ook vanzelfsprekend moeten zijn. De
Europese Unie moet aan de internationale gemeenschap
een duidelijk signaal afgeven, namelijk de diplomatieke
vertegenwoordiging van de EU hoort enkel en alleen in
Jeruzalem thuis. Daarom zou ik graag aan de heer
Barroso willen vragen of hij het met mij eens is dat de
diplomatieke vertegenwoordiging Israël onmiddellijk
verplaatst zou moeten worden van Ramat Gan naar de
Israëlische hoofdstad Jeruzalem? Zo nee, waarom niet?
Voorzitter, hetzelfde zou natuurlijk moeten gebeuren
voor de toekomstige EU-ambassade in Jeruzalem. Wij
zijn tegen die ambassades, maar àls ze er komen, dan in
Jeruzalem.
2-286
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
First of all you know the position of the European
Commission regarding Israel. We fully support the
existence of Israel. As you said, it is a democratic state
in a very difficult environment and we fully recognise
the right of Israel to exist. At the same time, we would
like Israel to respect the right of self-determination of
the Palestinian people, and we believe the best solution
is for two states – Israel and the Palestinian State – to
exist in full respect of each other and of international
law.
Regarding the issue of a change of capital or our
representation in Israel, we see no reason to change it.
2-287
Daniël van der Stoep (NI). – Voorzitter, ik ben
natuurlijk wel teleurgesteld met het antwoord, maar u
heeft het inderdaad over Oost-Jeruzalem en van de week
heeft de Commissie ook veroordeeld dat Israël in Gilo
1.400 huizen gaat bouwen. Nou vraag ik mij af hoe de
gemeente Jeruzalem daar nu precies mee om moet gaan,
want zij krijgen aanvragen voor bouwvergunningen in
Oost- en West-Jeruzalem.
In beide gebieden delen ze die inderdaad uit aan
Arabieren en aan Israëliërs en wat de Commissie
eigenlijk zegt en de afgelopen week heeft gezegd is:
jullie moeten discrimineren in Oost-Jeruzalem, want de
stad is sowieso één geheel, daar kunnen we niets aan
veranderen, de stad wordt door één gemeente bestuurd.
Wat zegt u dan tegen het bestuur van de gemeente
Jeruzalem, wat moeten zij doen met Israëliërs die
volkomen in hun recht een bouwvergunning aanvragen
in een gebied waar zij mogen wonen?
2-288
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − I
think the European Union’s position regarding the
settlements has been fully in line with that of the
international community, including Israel’s closest
allies. We believe the way the settlements issue has been
dealt with by the current government has not always
been helpful in terms of the current efforts for peace in
that region.
The comments you made show precisely why we should
not have a representation in Jerusalem as a result of the
difficult situation in that extremely important city for
Israel and for all of us.
So let us keep our commitment to peace. Let us support
Israel. At the same time, let us not forget the rights of
the Palestinian people. I think they also deserve our
attention and support.
2-289
President. − We now come to the second part of
Question Hour, a specific and concrete topic on
innovation and energy.
2-290
Alejo Vidal-Quadras (PPE). – Señor Presidente, señor
Presidente de la Comisión, la Comisión está impulsando
la innovación en diversos ámbitos de nuestro sistema
energético. Puedo citar biocarburantes de segunda
generación, fusión, fisión de cuarta generación, redes
inteligentes, energías renovables en general, eficiencia
energética en general, uso de hidrógeno en pilas de
combustible, captura, transporte y almacenamiento de
CO2, vehículos eléctricos, y la lista podría seguir.
Los recursos son escasos, señor Presidente, y todo no se
puede hacer. Muchos ciudadanos se preguntan —yo le
traslado esa inquietud a usted hoy— en cuáles de todas
estas cosas la Comisión, en el presente contexto difícil,
va a poner su acento. ¿Cuál de estas prioridades es o
cuáles son prioritarias para la Comisión?
2-291
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
That is a very difficult question, because all priorities are
linked, so we need to complete the energy market – we
need an integrated energy market. This is also a way to
have renewables and energy efficiency. Energy
efficiency is certainly a priority, but we also need to
invest in low-carbon technologies, because there is also
an external dimension and we need to pursue our
external ambitions – to speak, as far as is possible, in
unison with our partners in the energy field.

70 18-01-2011
There are four priorities which I would like the
European Council to address on 4 February: completion
of the energy market and implementation of all the rules
of the internal market; energy efficiency; low carbon
technologies; and accepting joint efforts where the
external dimension is concerned.
2-292
Romana Jordan Cizelj (PPE). – Sedaj velja, da mora
Evropska unija znižati svoje izpuste toplogrednih plinov
do leta 2020 za 20 %. Na politični ravni pa se
pogovarjamo tudi o bolj ambicioznem cilju in znano je,
da v tem primeru bi največje breme nosili sektorji
znotraj ETS, še posebej energetika.
Zato me zanima vaše mnenje, vaše osebno mnenje o
tem, kdaj bodo primerni pogoji, da bo ta cilj še bolj
ambiciozen.
Kakšne dodatne ukrepe bi Evropska unija morala uvesti
prav na področju energetike, in ali sodi med te ukrepe
tudi pogoji, ki ste jih omenili, ko ste odgovarjali na
vprašanje mojega kolega.
2-293
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
This is also a global process, not only a European
process. Cancún was a significant step in the climate
negotiations, at least it was able to keep alive the
multilateral process and this was good, but in fact it was
not enough from our point of view.
For us to go forward and commit to binding targets, I
think we should ask others, namely the biggest polluters,
the developing and emerging economies to make a
comparable effort. So far they have not committed to it.
So that is why we have to find the right way to make
them move. At the same time, those countries that are
ready to go forward and make more commitments can
and should do so, and the concrete way that I am going
to propose to the European Council on 1 February is to
achieve more in terms of energy efficiency, an area in
which we are falling short of where we should be.
On renewables I think we are on target to reach our goal
for 2020 but not on energy efficiency so that is a
concrete area where we can make more progress.
2-294
Derek Vaughan (S&D). – To ensure energy security
and low costs to consumers in the future, Europe must
use all types of low carbon energy. That includes clean
coal technology – an area in which, until now,
development has been very slow. Can the President of
the Commission therefore give an assurance that support
for research into carbon capture and storage will
continue into the future?
2-295
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − I
can give an assurance that we will try to achieve it. But
in the end, you know, the Member States decide on the
funding for research. That is a matter that we are going
to discuss when we present the multi-annual financial
perspectives.
But I certainly hope that Member States will give
priority to investment in renewables and low-carbon
technologies, and focus on the technology priorities
established in the European Strategic Energy
Technology plan.
We are indeed proposing this for the next European
Council.
2-296
Fiona Hall (ALDE). – President Barroso, you said just
now that Member States are achieving less than half
what they set out to achieve on the 20% target for energy
saving by 2020, so why is the Commission not pushing
hard to make that target binding on Member States?
2-297
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
We are pushing for that. We are trying to put the issue
forward for the next European Council. Energy
efficiency is still lagging behind, as you said. I am not
happy with the situation and the Commission intends to
reverse it.
Energy efficiency is now an integral part of the headline
target of the EU 2020 Strategy. We are currently in talks
with the Member States to establish national targets to
underpin this objective. We have already estimated that,
with existing policies and measures, the saving by 2020
would be no more than 10%.
However, the combined national indicative targets
emerging in the Europe 2020 discussions give a result
that is clearly more ambitious than that, but still likely to
be well below the 20%. That is why we intend to follow
a two-step approach, by closely monitoring the progress
made with the implementation of national targets
defined in Europe 2020, and reviewing this progress in
2013. If these reviews show that our target of 20% is
unlikely to be achieved, the Commission will consider
proposing legally binding national targets for 2020.
2-298
Reinhard Bütikofer (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident!
Herr Präsident Barroso, ich möchte Ihnen eine Frage zur
Harmonisierung von Einspeisevergütungen innerhalb
der Union stellen. Energiekommissar Oettinger verfolgt
hier eine Strategie, die nach unserer Auffassung und
auch nach der des deutschen Umweltministers dazu
führen würde, dass das erfolgreichste Innovationsprogramm
bei den erneuerbaren Energien, das wir in
Deutschland haben, zerstört wird.
Was werden Sie tun, um zu verhindern, dass unter der
Überschrift der Harmonisierung die deutsche Einspeisevergütung
zerstört und damit die Innovation bei den
erneuerbaren Energien verhindert wird? Und was
werden Sie tun, um dafür zu sorgen, dass Herr Oettinger
bei der Frage der Energieeffizienz nicht so auf Zeit
spielt? Er will erst 2012 etwas tun, obwohl Sie selbst
gerade eben gesagt haben, dass man jetzt schon sehen

18-01-2011 71
kann, dass die unverbindlichen Ziele nicht reichen. Wie
wollen Sie das beschleunigen?
2-299
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
Mr President, first of all let me say that the
Commissioner is the one who is proposing this
additional approach to energy efficiency and I fully trust
that he is doing his best to achieve that goal. We are also
trying to link this energy issue to other policy objectives
like the fight against climate change.
That said, we believe this is not just a matter of setting
targets, it is also about work in the Member States, and
so we believe that it is better for the Member States to
establish their own national targets and then we shall
see. If they are on track, great. If not, we will at least
propose binding legislation.
But to achieve success it is sometimes better to start with
a kind of voluntary target. At least, that is what we have
done in the past and it has proved to be the right
approach. We do not exclude – quite the contrary – a
possible need for binding targets for each country, but
let us also give the Member States ownership of this
policy and see how they develop their strategy.
2-300
Paul Rübig (PPE). – Herr Präsident! Wir haben am 4.
Februar den Energiegipfel. Derzeit sind zwei Richtlinien
in der Debatte, einerseits die Wasserrahmenrichtlinie,
andererseits die UVP – die
Umweltverträglichkeitsprüfung. Bei beiden müssten wir
uns überlegen, wie wir diese beiden Varianten nachhaltig
miteinander vereinbaren. Hier geht es um Umwelt
und um Energiegewinnung. Ich glaube, dass
Genehmigungsverfahren in diesem Bereich nicht länger
als ein Jahr dauern sollten. Die Kommission hat derzeit
fünf Jahre vorgeschlagen. Ich glaube, fünf Jahre – das ist
eine ganze Legislaturperiode – können wir uns in dieser
Dynamik nicht mehr leisten.
Ist die Kommission hier bereit, die Zeit dementsprechend
zu reduzieren? Ist es möglich, die Wasserrahmenrichtlinie
so zu adaptieren, dass auch
Speicherkraftwerke in Zukunft eine Chance haben, den
Ausgleich zwischen Solarenergie und auf der anderen
Seite Windenergie zu gewährleisten?
2-301
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
In general, the Commission wants to reduce as much as
possible the time for adoption and implementation. The
issue is that Member States usually ask us for a realistic
lapse of time, so that implementation can proceed, as far
as possible, in a coherent manner, avoiding distortions in
the internal market, or at least in what we believe should
be the internal market. One of the concerns in the energy
sector is precisely the fact that we still have very
different regulations.
Some progress has been achieved, and we are not
starting from scratch now. On 4 February there will be
the communications that we presented recently, and
there is also of course the historic (I think we can now
call it historic) climate and energy package that we
presented some years ago under my previous
Commission.
We are open to reducing the time gap but it is important
to have an agreement with Member States so that they
act more or less at the same time in order to avoid these
problems of distortion of competition in the internal
market.
2-302
Vicky Ford (ECR). – Research and innovation are vital
to drive the competitiveness of our economies. Last
year, for the first time, a European university topped the
world league tables for scientific research. It was
Cambridge University, based in the region I represent.
At that university, but also at many less well-known
institutions and businesses large and small, I have seen
cutting-edge research funded by the EU through the
EUR 50 billion framework programme. Sadly though,
this framework programme also has a reputation for
being the most complex and bureaucratic in the world.
Last autumn this Parliament voted unanimously on a
series of recommendations to simplify that bureaucracy.
What is the Commission doing to implement those
reforms?
2-303
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
First of all, I should like to congratulate Cambridge
University and your region.
Secondly, I hope to have the support of your Group in
the discussion on the multi-annual framework for
appropriate budgetary commitments to support research,
technology and innovation at European level. Cambridge
is one of the most developed universities in the world,
but there are other universities in Europe in the poorest
regions that unfortunately do not have the same kind of
access.
Thirdly, simplification is indeed one of our priorities for
energy and innovation, and in this case for research. We
are also going to discuss innovation in the other part of
the European Council. It is certainly one of our priorities
and we are very happy to have the support of the
European Parliament for that. We hope also to have the
support of the Court of Auditors and others. It is
important to understand how important it is for scientists
that they do not lose so much time on paperwork and
that they have more time to concentrate on what they do
best, namely research.
2-304
Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL). – Senhor Presidente, em
nome da consolidação financeira, os programas ditos de
austeridade estão a agravar as divergências na União
Europeia, a promover políticas anti-sociais, a pôr em
causa direitos laborais e a cortar investimentos públicos,
designadamente na área da inovação e energia.

72 18-01-2011
Isto significa que, se continuarem as mesmas
orientações, as mesmas políticas e as mesmas pressões
sobre Portugal e outros países de economias mais
frágeis, teremos agravamento das divergências e uma
situação cada vez mais grave por falta de solidariedade
da União Europeia.
E, assim, a questão que se coloca é saber que medidas
vão ser tomadas para alterar a situação, para garantir
efectivamente apoios à inovação em países como
Portugal e outros que não têm investimentos públicos
previstos suficientes para estas áreas e também para
garantir o acesso das pessoas e das indústrias à energia,
dados os preços elevados que estão a ser praticados e as
dificuldades que em muitos lados se estão a sentir.
2-305
José Manuel Barroso, Presidente da Comissão. − A
Senhora Deputada Ilda Figueiredo conhece a nossa
posição em relação à consolidação orçamental. É
indispensável fazer, nomeadamente num país como
Portugal, que está a enfrentar alguns problemas com a
sua dívida soberana, mas é necessário fazer em geral na
União Europeia. Mas, precisamente nas recomendações
que fizemos num documento que acabámos de publicar,
pedimos aos Estados que, se possível, não reduzam os
investimentos nem na educação nem na investigação
nem especificamente no sector da energia. E, de facto,
há Estados que estão a fazer isso com um grande
sucesso, Estados que estão a fazer programas de
consolidação orçamental, mas que estão até a aumentar
os fundos para a investigação e para a educação.
Em relação aos países com maior dificuldade financeira
é necessário, também, jogar com a solidariedade, com a
coesão. É por isso que não me cansarei de defender
também, no plano europeu, a coesão económica e social
e territorial. A solidariedade é importante. A
solidariedade não pode ser uma palavra vã. É necessário,
se me permitem a expressão, operacionalizar a
solidariedade.
2-306
Judith A. Merkies (S&D). – Voorzitter, innovatie gaat
onze economie, onze samenleving veranderen en moet
ook nog banen opleveren; daarmee is innovatie een van
de belangrijkste initiatieven van de Europese Unie. Ik
vraag u dan ook graag om een meer integrale aanpak in
uw Commissie met alle DG's tezamen. Er zijn
bijvoorbeeld innovation partnerships op dit moment
onderweg die eigenlijk vooral in één directoraatgeneraal
spelen; het moet toch echt een meer holistische
aanpak worden. Zo vind ik ook dat de fondsen meer
moeten worden samengevoegd en fragmentatie moet
worden voorkomen, het liefst in één fonds, inclusief de
structuurfondsen. Ik verzoek u om daar echt naar te
kijken en één grote zuigstroom richting innovatie te
creëren in samenwerking met de lidstaten.
Even nog iets anders over energie. We hebben vooral
altijd veel oog voor het grote. Ook bij de innovatie, moet
het altijd groot zijn, maar soms zit de waarheid in het
kleine. Ik vind dat er erg weinig aandacht is voor lokaal
opgewekte energie. Ik denk dat daar de empowerment
ligt voor de burgers. Mag ik u hier dan samen met alle
andere collega's toch echt vragen om binding targets?
2-307
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
You are rightly concerned with this problem of the lack
of synergies at European level. That is precisely why I
expect the European Council to address this matter in a
comprehensive way.
In fact, European Innovation Partnerships are an
instrument for creating synergies between already
existing programmes at European, national and regional
levels. By bringing them together under a single
umbrella, I believe we can tap into their inherent
innovation potential in order to deploy Europe-wide
solutions that address societal challenges.
So one of the goals is precisely that of speeding up the
step from research to market, from market-oriented
innovations to market-oriented products and services.
This will create the necessary pull for participation.
Hence we are seeking – in the Commission and now
with the Member States – this comprehensive approach
to innovation, looking beyond DGs’ portfolios and even
national origins.
2-308
Νικόλαος Σαλαβράκος (EFD). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε,
επιστημονικές έρευνες που δημοσιεύθηκαν στον διεθνή
Τύπο και, πρόσφατα, εντονότερα στον ελληνικό,
ισραηλινό και κυπριακό Τύπο αναφέρουν ότι υπάρχουν
μεγάλες ποσότητες φυσικού αερίου και πετρελαίου στην
περιοχή του Αιγαίου και νότια της νήσου Κρήτης.
Επομένως, υπάρχει ενεργειακός πλούτος στον εδαφικό
χώρο, στα εδαφικά όρια της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης.
Με τα δεδομένα αυτά, πώς προτίθεται η Ευρωπαϊκή
Επιτροπή να ενθαρρύνει και να υποβοηθήσει τις έρευνες
για την ανίχνευση και εκμετάλλευση αυτών των πηγών
ενέργειας, οι οποίες εν πάση περιπτώσει είναι
ευχερέστερο να μεταφερθούν στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση
καλύτερα από κάθε άλλο σχεδιασμένο αγωγό;
Και με αυτή την ευκαιρία, κύριε Πρόεδρε του
Κοινοβουλίου και κύριε Πρόεδρε της Επιτροπής,
επιτρέψτε μου να σας δηλώσω ότι σας θεωρώ πολύ
τυχερούς ανθρώπους, διότι η μοίρα σας επεφύλαξε στον
μεν πρώτο να προεδρεύει ενός διευρυμένου
Κοινοβουλίου από πλευράς αρμοδιοτήτων μετά την
εφαρμογή της Συνθήκης της Λισαβόνας, στον δε
δεύτερο να χειρίζεται μια μεγάλη οικονομική κρίση της
Ευρώπης. Συμμερίζομαι όλες τις κινήσεις του κυρίου
Barroso ως προς την κατεύθυνση αυτή, αλλά θα ήθελα
να προτείνω κάτι: υπάρχει και η μέθοδος της Αμερικής,
η έκδοση νέου χρήματος. Παρακαλώ, ερευνήστε την….
(O Πρόεδρος αφαιρεί το λόγο από τον ομιλητή)
2-309
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
Mr President, you cut the Honourable Member off just

18-01-2011 73
when he was saying something nice about me, for which
I thank him.
Regarding the first part of his intervention, we do not
have the means – and it is not our priority now – to
explore, or support the exploration of, other sources of
energy in Europe. Our priority in terms of infrastructure
is to establish interconnections, because that has a
critical European dimension.
We are going to make proposals on that matter to the
European Council. Something has been achieved already
– for instance BEMIP, the Baltic Energy Market
Interconnection Plan, for the Baltic countries. Now we
are working also with Central and Eastern European
countries to establish, if possible, North-South
interconnections, and things are going well. I have just
been to Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan in connection with
work on the Southern Gas Corridor, a new potential
means of bringing energy – in this case gas – to Europe.
This is where I believe the European Union can make
some investments in energy infrastructures.
2-310
Arturs Krišjānis Kariņš (PPE). – Priekšsēdētāj,
Barroso kungs! Komisija nākusi klajā ar, manuprāt, ļoti
apsveicamu iniciatīvu pilnveidot energoinfrastruktūru
visā Eiropas Savienībā — gan elektrotīklos, gan gāzes
tīklu starpsavienojumos. Jūsu ziņojumā tiek lēsts, ka
izmaksas būs apmēram 200 miljardi eiro. Šos tīklus
pilnveidos līdz 2020. gadam. Ziņojumā arī teikts, ka
apmēram puse, tātad 100 miljardi, nāks no privātā
sektora. Mans jautājums jums ir šāds: atlikušie
100 miljardi eiro, kas būs vajadzīgi energotīklu
pilnveidošanai līdz 20. gadam, — no kurienes nāks šie
līdzekļi? Vai tie būs Kopienas līdzekļi, vai tie būs
vērtspapīri, kas ir uz projektu orientēti, vai ir cits
finansējumu avots? Paldies jums!
2-311
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
As you said, it is correct that EUR 200 billion of
investment is needed for gas infrastructures and power
grids up to 2020. It is estimated that EUR 100 billion of
this total investment need will be delivered on time by
the market alone, whereas the other EUR 100 billion
will require public action on permitting and leveraging
the necessary private capital.
That is why we are now proposing, for instance,
unbundling. We are proposing many measures that will
make this private investment more rational and more
useful. We will also take a closer look at tariff regulation
practices in order to liberate adequate cost allocation
principles.
To fill the remainder of the gap, the Commission
proposes a new financial instrument to support projects
of European interest for the new financial perspective
after 2013. Beyond grants, innovative market-based
solutions may be proposed such as equity participations,
guarantees and public-private partnership loans. As you
know, I already spoke about European funds through
project bonds specifically designed for this kind of
project.
2-312
Sonia Alfano (ALDE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli
colleghi, Presidente Barroso, la direttiva 77/2001/CE
fissa la definizione di fonti rinnovabili per individuare
quelle per le quali sono ammissibili degli incentivi
pubblici.
Dalle fonti rinnovabili è escluso l'incenerimento della
parte non biodegradabile dei rifiuti. L'Italia, sin dal
1992, ha incentivato attraverso un aumento della bolletta
energetica dei cittadini la costruzione di inceneritori,
scientificamente dannosi per la salute e per l'ambiente e
per questo posti dall'Unione europea come opzione
residuale per la gestione integrata di rifiuti. Con
riferimento a questi incentivi, ci sono state ben due
procedure di infrazione e, nonostante formali interventi
legislativi, in Italia l'incenerimento di rifiuti viene ancora
oggi incentivato come assimilato alle rinnovabili, uno su
tutti il caso di Acerra.
Mi rendo conto che potrà risultarle difficile ricordare i
dettagli della situazione dei Cip 6, è per questo che ho
presentato un'interrogazione scritta. Le domando però di
confermarmi che non è possibile incentivare come
rinnovabile l'incenerimento di rifiuti non biodegradabili
e che non è prevista alcuna deroga in tal senso.
Inoltre, vorrei sapere se non risulta incoerente che la
direttiva rifiuti ponga l'incenerimento come opzione
residuale per lo smaltimento dei rifiuti, mentre la
direttiva 77/2001 incentiva come fonte rinnovabile
l'incenerimento. La Commissione prevede un intervento
di revisione a questo proposito?
2-313
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
As Mrs Alfano rightly said, this is a detailed question. I
cannot know the detail of all the infringement
procedures. Let me tell you – I think it is an important
point – just on energy and the internal market for energy,
we have now 77 infringement procedures with Member
States in general, and 55 on the internal market. So if
you provide me with that question in writing, I will be
more than happy to send a reply in writing.
2-314
Franz Obermayr (NI). – Innovation, Klimaschutz,
erneuerbare Energien – liest man die Strategie Europa
2020, dann könnte man ja wirklich glauben, dass es der
EU ernst ist mit umwelt- und energiepolitischen
Maßnahmen. Blickt man allerdings hinter die Fassade
des Umweltschutzes, dann zeigt sich sehr rasch eine
andere Energiestrategie: Atomstrom als sogenannte
schonende Energie. Kommissar Oettinger hat bei einer
Anfrage von mir klar positioniert, als er mir mitteilte,
Kernenergie leiste zurzeit einen wichtigen Beitrag zur
kohlenstoffarmen Elektrizitätserzeugung in der EU und
werde dies in nächster Zukunft auch weiterhin tun. Die
Europäische Kommission plant keine Richtlinie für eine
maximale Laufzeit von Kernkraftwerken. Und das 25

74 18-01-2011
Jahre nach Tschernobyl! Am 26. April haben wir ja ein
trauriges Jubiläum.
Nun, Herr Präsident Barroso, meine Frage: Sind Sie
auch der Meinung, dass man unseren europäischen
Bürgern Atomstrom tatsächlich und reinen Herzens als
saubere und klimaschonende Energie verkaufen kann?
2-315
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
You know the position of the Commission regarding
nuclear energy. With full respect for subsidiarity in that
matter, some Member States have it and some do not.
No one is forced to have nuclear energy, but in fact it is
true that nuclear energy is, in terms of climate change,
less polluting than other sources of energy.
Having said that, the Commission has certain obligations
under the Euratom Treaty. At the beginning of the
European Union we had the Euratom Community, and
the Commission has not only the right but also the duty
to provide assistance to Member States that require it in
the fields of nuclear safety or research into nuclear
matters. That is certainly what we intend to do.
2-316
Jacek Saryusz-Wolski (PPE). – You are bringing an
optimistic message from Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan.
The only shortage is figures. I understand that at this
stage you cannot set the figures with Azerbaijan and
Turkmenistan in terms of millions of cubic metres of
gas, but does the Commission have any estimates or
expectations of its own, obviously non-binding, which
point to whether it would be able to fill the Southern
Corridor as a whole or Nabucco in particular, which is
supposed to provide 31 million cubic metres?
2-317
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
From this visit to Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan, I have
brought the clear commitment of both countries to give
their full support to the European Union in terms of the
Southern Corridor. In fact I signed a joint declaration
with the President of Azerbaijan, Mr Aliyev, and the
President of Turkmenistan, Mr Berdimuhamedov, said
publicly that he was ready to supply enough gas for
Europe – even more than we need at the present time.
Having said that, there are still problems to address.
Some of those problems have to be commercial
decisions taken by the companies involved. They also
concern the way in which the different pipelines can be
built and developed. However, there is enough gas in
that area to come to the European Union if the Member
States of the European Union are ready to cooperate
with those countries and others to make that project
available – either Nabucco or other projects in the
Southern Corridor.
2-318
Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (S&D). – Având în vedere că tot
mai multe familii europene, mai ales pe fondul crizei
economice şi a creşterii ratei şomajului, cheltuiesc mai
mult de 10% din veniturile lunare pentru plata facturii de
energie, aş dori să vă întreb care sunt măsurile concrete
pe care Comisia Europeană le are în vedere pentru
reducerea sărăciei energetice.
De asemenea, aş dori să vă întreb dacă aveţi în vedere
creşterea semnificativă a procentului din Fondul
european de dezvoltare regională care poate fi folosit de
statele membre pentru creşterea eficienţei energetice a
locuinţelor, începând cu viitoarea perspectivă financiară.
2-319
José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. −
The internal energy market legislation sets high
standards of consumer protection with regard to the
provision of a minimum service, transparency of billing,
effective complaint handling and so on, and it provides
choices to consumers. I could quote many other areas in
which we are proposing measures that directly address
consumers’ concerns.
Regarding lower energy bills, we think that, in the
medium term at least, in a real integrated energy market,
true competition can achieve more than the current
situation, in which there are many dysfunctions and
examples of dominant market positions.
Regarding funding for energy security projects, as I said
earlier, we certainly intend to propose it in the next
financial perspectives. So part of it has to come from
market solutions, but part of it has to come from public
investment. The European Commission is preparing
some proposals that will move in this direction for the
next financial perspectives.
2-320
President. − Colleagues, thank you for the discussion on
innovation and energy which is a very important topic as
we know very well. Our thanks to you, Mr President of
the Commission. It is the second time today that you
have been here in a hard discussion in the European
Parliament.
2-321
IN THE CHAIR: Edward McMILLAN-SCOTT
Vice-President
2-322
13 - Patients' rights in cross-border
healthcare (debate)
2-323
President. − The next item is the recommendation for
second reading from the Committee on the Environment,
Public Health and Food Safety on the Council position at
first reading with a view to the adoption of a directive of
the European Parliament and of the Council on the
application of patients’ rights in cross-border healthcare
(11038/2/2010 - C7-0266/2010 - 2008/0142(COD))
(Rapporteur: Françoise Grossetête) (A7-0307/2010).
2-324
Françoise Grossetête, rapporteure. − Monsieur le
Président, je me permettrai d'intervenir pour quatre
minutes et de garder les deux minutes supplémentaires
pour la fin du débat.

18-01-2011 75
Monsieur le Président, Madame la représentante du
Conseil, Monsieur le Commissaire, "enfin !", je dirais,
nous voyons le bout du tunnel sur ce sujet majeur pour
les patients.
Nous ne pouvions plus continuer dans une situation
confuse où le droit était édicté par la Cour de justice de
l'Union européenne. La directive fixe, à présent, des
règles claires pour la mobilité des patients sur le
territoire européen. De quel type de soins peut-on
bénéficier à l'étranger? Comment et sur quels critères
peut-on être remboursé? Comment sont réparties les
responsabilités entre l'État membre d'affiliation et l'État
membre de traitement? Toutes les réponses à ces
questions figurent désormais dans le projet de directive.
Permettez-moi, avant toute chose, de remercier la
Présidence belge pour son excellent travail tout au long
de la négociation. Sa capacité de conviction a été
décisive car – il faut le souligner –, de nombreux États
membres ne souhaitaient pas cette directive. Je pense
qu'il s'agissait là d'irresponsabilité.
Je veux aussi rendre hommage à mon ami et ancien
député John Bowis qui est d'ailleurs dans les tribunes.
En tant que rapporteur de première lecture, il a, lui aussi,
été l'artisan de cette directive et a toujours milité pour les
droits des patients. Bien sûr, je remercie également le
Commissaire Dalli et mes collègues rapporteurs fictifs,
qui ont contribué très activement à l'aboutissement des
négociations, et sans lesquels rien n'aurait été possible.
Quel est ici l'enjeu pour les patients? Le progrès médical
fait que l'offre ne peut plus être pour toutes les
pathologies une offre strictement nationale et qu'il faut
parfois traverser les frontières pour se faire soigner. Cela
peut être le cas de patients qui vivent en région
frontalière, où les soins fournis à l'étranger sont parfois
plus proches du domicile. Cela peut être dû au fait, aussi,
qu'il y a plus de moyens et d'expertises disponibles dans
un autre État membre, comme pour certains traitements
hautement spécialisés.
Enfin, pour certains Européens, il peut être simplement
plus pratique de recevoir des soins en dehors de son pays
d'affiliation parce que, tout simplement, on a de la
famille qui vit dans un autre État membre. Les
consommateurs, les salariés, les étudiants et désormais
les patients pourront donc bénéficier de droits à la
mobilité au sein de l'Union grâce à des dispositions
législatives claires.
Bien évidemment, il ne s'agit pas d'encourager un
quelconque tourisme médical car les régimes de sécurité
sociale, leur organisation et leur gestion restent, quant à
eux, une compétence pleine et entière des États
membres. Les patients pourront donc à présent
généralement recevoir dans un autre État membre tous
les soins auxquels ils ont droit chez eux et être
remboursés jusqu'à concurrence du montant du
remboursement prévu par leur propre système.
Pour les soins hospitaliers comprenant un séjour d'une
nuit, ou recourant à des technologies spécialisées ou
coûteuses, l'État membre pourra mettre en place un
système d'autorisation préalable. Cela permettra de
prendre en considération les nécessités de planification
et d'investissement des États membres dans leur
structure de soins. Le Parlement a obtenu que les
conditions de refus de l'autorisation préalable soient
limitées et énoncées dans une liste close, au bénéfice de
la sécurité juridique de la situation des patients.
Le Parlement a obtenu aussi d'autres avancées: ainsi
chaque État membre devra mettre en place des points de
contact nationaux afin d'informer et d'orienter au mieux
le patient en fonction de ses besoins. Chaque point de
contact national fonctionnera comme un guichet unique
et devra travailler en réseau avec les autres points de
contact nationaux. Ainsi, le patient disposera
d'informations claires et précises.
La question du remboursement, qui constitue de fait un
obstacle essentiel, a été largement améliorée et, soit on
pourra recourir à un mécanisme de compensation
comme actuellement avec le règlement 883/2004 sur la
sécurité sociale, soit le patient devra avancer le paiement
et se faire rembourser dans les délais les plus brefs.
Nous avons fini par obtenir aussi que les patients atteints
de maladies rares soient moins livrés à eux-mêmes et
puissent recourir à une expertise extérieure qui
diagnostiquera la maladie et permettra une autorisation
préalable pour des soins.
Je termine en vous disant que, grâce à la coopération
européenne dans des domaines tels que les réseaux
européens de référence, les patients auront ainsi accès à
des soins hautement spécialisés, l'objectif étant
d'encourager le partage d'expériences, afin d'améliorer
les performances, les diagnostics et les thérapeutiques
dans l'intérêt des patients.
C'est ainsi qu'aujourd'hui nous pouvons nous dire que
nous avons atteint le but et j'en remercie encore tous mes
collègues. Je pourrais dire que c'est l'Europe de la santé
qui est en construction à travers cette directive.
2-325
Enikő Győri, President-in-Office of the Council. −
Mr President, Ms Grossetête, distinguished Members, let
me continue in my mother tongue, Hungarian.
2-326
Nagyon örülök, hogy részt vehetek a határokon átnyúló
egészségügyi ellátásra vonatkozó betegjogok
érvényesítéséről szóló direktívának a vitájában. E
pillanat rendkívül fontos, hiszen két és fél év után az e
jogalkotási aktusról folytatott megbeszéléseink most
érnek véget. Először is engedjék meg, hogy köszönetet
mondjak mindenkinek, aki lehetővé tette, hogy eljussunk
ehhez a nagyon fontos megállapodáshoz. Először is az
elnökségi trió előző tagjainak, Belgiumnak, illetve még
korábban Spanyolországnak azért a kitűnő munkáért,
amellyel hozzájárultak, hogy a Tanácsban létrejöhetett
ez a kompromisszum. Szeretnék továbbá köszönetet

76 18-01-2011
mondani a Tanács nevében az Európai Parlamentnek a
kiváló együttműködésért és kompromisszumkészségért,
amelynek köszönhetően megszületett a megállapodás,
amely -meggyőződésem - sok előnnyel jár majd az
unióbeli betegek számára, és újabb fontos lépést jelent
az uniós betegjogok biztosításában.
A három intézmény közötti megbeszélések,
mindannyian emlékszünk rá, nem voltak könnyűek, ám
mindvégig konstruktívak és eredményorientáltak
maradtak és végig a kompromisszumkeresés jegyében
folytak. Elismerem, hogy az Európai Parlamenten belüli
viták sem voltak egyszerűek, és hogy az a jelentés,
amelyről Önök holnap szavaznak, a képviselőcsoportok
közötti kompromisszumot is tükrözi. Ezért elismerésem
fejezem ki mindazoknak, akik munkájukkal
hozzájárultak ahhoz, hogy itt a Parlamenten belül is
egységes lett az álláspont, elsősorban Françoise
Grossetête asszonynak, majdnem egymás mellett ültünk
egy évig ebben a Házban, és minden társelőadónak,
hiszen az ő közreműködésük nélkül nem sikerült volna
ez a jogalkotási folyamat.
Meggyőződésem, hogy az elfogadott szöveg megteremti
a megfelelő egyensúlyt a betegeknek a határokon
átnyúló egészségügyi ellátáshoz fűződő jogai, valamint a
tagállamok azon kötelessége között, hogy
megszervezzék és biztosítsák az egészségügyi
szolgáltatásokat és az orvosi ellátást. A három
intézmény közötti egyeztetések során több politikai
jellegű kérdésben sikerült mindenki számára elfogadható
megoldásokat találni. Megállapodtunk mindenekelőtt az
egészségügyi szolgáltatások minőségévével és
biztonságával kapcsolatos kérdésekről. Lefektettük az
előzetes engedélyezés kritériumait és meghatároztuk,
hogy milyen általános feltételek vonatkozzanak a
határokon átnyúló egészségügyi ellátások költségeinek
visszatérítésére.
Megegyeztünk továbbá az olyan betegek kezelésével
kapcsolatos kérdésekről, akiknél ritka betegséget
diagnosztizálnak, valamint az e-egészségügyi
rendszerekkel kapcsolatos további tagállami
együttműködésről. A Tanács úgy látja, hogy elértük a
legfontosabb célt, azaz megvalósult az egészségügy
területébe tartozó áruk és szolgáltatások szabad
mozgásával kapcsolatos európai bírósági ítélkezési
gyakorlat egységes szerkezetbe foglalása. Vannak
azonban olyan további fontos tényezők, amelyek
segíthetnének abban, hogy a betegek a jövőben
könnyebben igénybe vehessék a határokon átnyúló
egészségügyi szolgáltatásokat. Ezek között kell
megemlíteni a tagállamok által létrehozandó nemzeti
kapcsolattartó pontokat, amelyek tájékoztatással
szolgálnak a betegeknek.
Fontos továbbá a rendelvények tagállamok közötti
kölcsönös elfogadása, valamint a tagállamok közötti
kölcsönös segítségnyújtás és együttműködés. Végül, de
nem utolsó sorban pedig az az irányelv tisztázza a
viszonyt, a szociális biztonsági rendszerek
koordinálásáról szóló 883/2004-es EK rendelettel és
ezáltal nagyobb jogbiztonságot garantál a betegek
számára. Az irányelv végrehajtása során a tagállamokat
olyan elvek vezérlik majd, amelyeket az Európai
Parlament, a Tanács és a Bizottság többször is elismert
már. Ezek az egyetemesség, a jó minőségű ellátáshoz
való jog, a méltányosság és a szolidaritás elve. És
hozzátenném, hogy ezúttal hatékony és
versenyképességet is fokozó intézkedésről is tudtunk
dönteni.
Tisztelt elnök úr! Képviselőtársak! A magyar elnökség
elkötelezett amellett, hogy a Tanács e jogszabályt a
lehető leghamarabb elfogadja. A jogi eljárás szerint a
szöveget a Tanács a szokásos jogi, nyelvi véglegesítést
követően fogadja el, ami után az irányelv a lehető
legrövidebb időn belül megjelenhet az Unió hivatalos
lapjában. Köszönöm szépen, és még egyszer gratulálok
mindenkinek, aki munkájával hozzájárult az irányelv
megszületéséhez.
2-327
John Dalli, Member of the Commission. − Mr President,
let me congratulate Parliament on the major achievement
of reaching an agreement on this directive. I am
particularly grateful to the rapporteur, Ms Grossetête,
and the shadow rapporteurs for their hard work and their
commitment to patients’ rights. I would also like to
thank the previous two presidencies – Spain and
Belgium – for the hard work they did to conclude this
dossier.
I believe that the new directive will provide a coherent
and uniform set of rules for patients all over Europe. It
will also generate a new phase of cooperation between
27 national health systems.
The path towards today’s successful conclusion was far
from easy. I remember last year, when I took up office,
people told me that negotiations on the directive were at
a dead end. The directive is a good example of the need
for political leadership: it shows that, with courage and
determination, decisions which are important for our
citizens can be taken. I believe that legislators must not
leave the European Court of Justice to decide in their
place, nor leave citizens with no other means of having
their rights recognised than by going to court.
The Court recognised the right of patient mobility under
the Treaty. It is the legislator’s role to decide how to
deliver such rights.
Allow me now to share with you some views on the
directive. Firstly, the directive makes clear that all
Member States have a duty to invest at home, to provide
their citizens with the healthcare they need without
undue delay.
The directive will thus contribute towards reducing
inequalities in access to care by helping to minimise
delays across the EU. Patients will be able to seek
primary care with the provider of their choice across
Europe. As regards hospital care, the directive provides
that, when the delay – I mean the waiting time for
receiving treatment – is too long, the patient will be able

18-01-2011 77
to choose a provider in another Member State and will
be reimbursed. However, what precisely constitutes an
acceptable waiting time will need to be carefully
considered and defined.
The main progress achieved by this directive, as
compared with existing legislation, is that patients will
be able to choose their healthcare provider and will have
access to information on the quality and safety of the
care they will receive. I can assure you that the
Commission will carefully monitor how Member States
implement the directive in that respect.
Secondly, the directive will give patients access to
information on their rights and on cross-border
healthcare – information validated by national contact
points and not left to private initiatives on the internet or
other media.
Thirdly, on quality of care, the directive offers
transparency and accountability in relation to national
standards. This should gradually lead to some
convergence across Europe on the quality and safety of
care.
Lastly, the directive lays the foundation for European
collaboration on health. While the cooperation networks
set up by the directive are voluntary, I am convinced that
all Member States will see that they have much to gain
by working together. This is a matter of solidarity in
Europe. I am therefore counting on the Member States to
launch cooperation initiatives in key areas such as ehealth
and health technology assessments.
The directive also provides for European reference
centres, which will facilitate the pooling of expertise and
its dissemination across Europe. I believe such centres
can lead to better healthcare for our citizens.
Mr President, Minister, honourable Members, the final
compromise which is on the table today reflects the
essential spirit and fundamental purpose of this
directive: to enhance patients’ rights to cross-border
healthcare, while taking into account the sustainability
of health systems. This is a good day for the building of
a ‘Europe for health’.
I should like to conclude by making the following
statement on an institutional aspect of the text:
‘The Commission has certain doubts that some of the
future acts which the Commission has been given the
power to adopt by the legislative act would be
implementing acts. When exercising its implementing
powers, the Commission will not adopt, on the basis of
the powers granted, acts that it considers as being
delegated acts within the meaning of Article 290 of the
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.’
2-328
Peter Liese, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr
Präsident, Herr Kommissar, Frau Ratspräsidentin, liebe
Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In der Tat, das ist ein
wichtiger Tag für die Patientinnen und Patienten in
Europa. Es war ein unerträglicher Zustand, dass wir
zwar das vom EuGH zugestandene Recht hatten, in
einen anderen Mitgliedstaat zu gehen, aber viele
Mitgliedstaaten es nicht umgesetzt haben.
Wir haben jeden einzelnen Patienten auf den Klageweg
verwiesen, erneut bis hin zum EuGH, in jedem
Einzelfall. Ich finde, das ist ein zynisches Verhalten,
denn es handelt sich um schwache Menschen. Sie sind
krank, sonst bräuchten sie keine Behandlung, und im
schlimmsten Fall könnten sie tot sein, bevor der EuGH
den Fall entschieden hat. Deswegen ist es allerhöchste
Zeit, dass wir hier im rechtlichen Sinne Klarheit
schaffen.
Auch für die Patienten, bei denen die
Grundsatzrechtsprechung mehr oder weniger umgesetzt
war, haben Françoise Grossetête und alle, die
mitgearbeitet haben, viele Erfolge erzielt, z.B. die
nationalen Kontaktpunkte und die europäischen
Referenznetzwerke. Hier gibt es auch eine Verbesserung
in den Ländern, in denen die EuGH-Rechtsprechung im
Prinzip schon umgesetzt war, hin zu einem Europa der
Patienten und zu einem Europa der Gesundheit, ganz
wie der Kommissar es gesagt hat.
Ich habe nicht viel Zeit, deswegen jetzt die letzten 15
Sekunden für den Dank an die Berichterstatterin, an die
Schattenberichterstatter, an John Dalli als Kommissar,
der sich wirklich sehr eingesetzt hat, aber vor allem an
John Bowis, der hier auf der Tribüne sitzt und der Vater
dieser Richtlinie ist. Allen herzlichen Dank und
herzlichen Glückwunsch!
2-329
Dagmar Roth-Behrendt, im Namen der S&D-Fraktion.
– Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Das ist
eigentlich eine überflüssige Gesetzgebung. Ich hoffe,
dass das auch eine überflüssige Gesetzgebung bleiben
wird, weil Patientinnen und Patienten sie nicht in
Anspruch nehmen müssen. Im Idealfall bekommen
Patientinnen und Patienten die beste, schnellste
Gesundheitsversorgung in dem Land, in dem sie geboren
sind, oder in dem Land, in dem sie leben.
Dass wir heute darüber reden müssen und diese
Gesetzgebung morgen beschließen werden – da hat Herr
Liese völlig Recht – ist eigentlich zynisch. Das heißt,
dass die Mitgliedstaaten nicht erkannt haben, was sie
ihren Bürgerinnen und Bürgern schuldig sind, nämlich
schnelle, gute und qualitativ hochwertige Gesundheitsversorgung.
Es zeigt auch, dass sie lieber in andere
Dinge investieren als in genau in diese Bereiche für ihre
Bürgerinnen und Bürger, und das ist eine Schande! Die
Verhandlungen im Rat dazu sind auch kein Ruhmesblatt.
Wenn diese Gesetzgebung trotzdem irgendwann
Anwendung finden sollte, weil Patientinnen und
Patienten sie doch nötig haben – schlimm genug! – dann
bin ich froh über das, was wir erreicht haben. Ich bin der
Berichterstatterin Françoise Grossetête und den
Kolleginnen und Kollegen dankbar für die Zusammenarbeit.

78 18-01-2011
Wir haben eine Menge erreicht. Wir haben erreicht, dass
seltene Krankheiten endlich im Fokus der
Aufmerksamkeit sind. Menschen, die seltene
Krankheiten haben, sind immer in einer Ecke gewesen,
in der sie es schwer hatten, überhaupt eine Behandlung
zu bekommen. Wir haben es endlich erreicht, dass
Menschen in den Mitgliedstaaten auch Informationspunkte
haben, die sie über ihre Rechte informieren. Das
gab es doch bisher nicht! Wenn in Zukunft
Referenznetzwerke existieren werden, dann wird es
endlich einen Austausch zwischen den Mitgliedstaaten
über best practice, über Gold- oder Platinstandards, über
den wissenschaftlichen Fortschritt geben. Auch das gibt
es doch nicht koordiniert! Das gibt es in einzelnen
Leuchttürmen, aber nicht koordiniert.
All das sind schon riesige Erfolge, ohne dass ich jetzt
über die ambulanten Behandlungen und über die anderen
Punkte sprechen möchte. Klar, es gibt auch Punkte, die
mich traurig machen! Dieses Theater und Gezanke um
die Vorabgenehmigung – auch das hätte ich mir anders
gewünscht, auch das zeigt, dass die Mitgliedstaaten nicht
erkannt haben, was wirklich wichtig ist. Aber zum
Glück gibt es da noch einige, mit denen wir gut
zusammenarbeiten können, das haben wir heute gezeigt.
Das Ziel ist doch – und das muss unser Ziel sein, dass
das Gesundheitssystem in allen Ländern so gut sein
wird, dass kein einziger Mensch in ein anderes Land
gehen möchte, dessen Sprache er oder sie nicht spricht.
Und wenn das heute und morgen ein kleiner Schritt dazu
ist – weil es transparenter wird, wer gut ist und wer
schlecht ist, wer etwas tut für seine Bürgerinnen und
Bürger und wer nicht –, auch dann haben wir schon viel
erreicht.
Ich hoffe, dass das genau ein kleiner Nebeneffekt sein
wird, nämlich die Transparenz. Wo ist ein Mitgliedstaat
auf hohem Standard, auf hohem Niveau, und wo ist ein
Mitgliedstaat auf niedrigem Niveau. Ich komme aus
einem Mitgliedstaat, in dem ich relativ entspannt sein
kann. Aber ich weiß um die Nöte der Menschen in
vielen anderen Mitgliedstaaten, und darüber schäme ich
mich, denn das ist einer Europäischen Union wie unserer
nicht würdig.
Ich danke der Berichterstatterin für ihre Arbeit, aber ich
danke besonders der Kommission, Herrn Dalli und
seinem Team, die in dieser Gesetzgebung so dicht beim
Europäischen Parlament und dem Vater – zuerst Herrn
Bowis in der vergangenen Legislaturperiode – waren,
wie wir es uns nur wünschen können. Ich möchte
besonders der belgischen Ratspräsidentschaft danken,
die heute nicht hier ist, aber alles getan hat, um das zu
einem Erfolg zu bringen. Das, was in ihrer Macht stand,
war nicht immer viel, wenn wir uns die anderen
Mitgliedstaaten angucken, die manchmal störrisch sind
wie Fossile aus früheren Jahrtausenden. Aber es war
immerhin eine Menge, und ich glaube, dass wir morgen
mit gutem Gewissen Ja sagen können.
(Beifall)
2-330
Antonyia Parvanova, on behalf of the ALDE Group. –
Mr President, looking back four years to the launching
of the ALDE campaign ‘Europe for patients’, I have
good reasons to welcome the agreement reached with
the Council in December. I would firstly like to
congratulate our rapporteur, Mrs Grossetête, as well as
the other shadows for their good cooperation and the
great work accomplished, and also the father of this
initiative, our colleague Mr John Bowis.
The Parliament remained united and stayed firm during
the negotiations with the Council. We stood for patients
and for the first time, there will be a clear legislative
framework in the EU for patients seeking treatment in
another Member State. We have to consider the
agreement reached as a small step, but it is a real
achievement for patients in Europe, which will
strengthen their rights while focusing on their needs, the
information available to them, and the quality and safety
of care.
I am sure, however, that Parliament would have
supported a more ambitious result. Though I recognise
the need for Member States to be able to set up prior
authorisation to maintain the sustainability of their
health systems, I regret that they – including the Belgian
Presidency – have sometimes put organisational
considerations above patients’ interests and needs. But
we represent our citizens and are responsible for
representing them here in this House.
Let me just mention one example: quality and safety.
While Member States were keen on establishing quality
and safety risks as a criterion for the refusal of prior
authorisation, they have been reluctant to accept – and
have opposed – any system for the sharing of
information and upgrading of requirements in this field
at EU level.
The ALDE Group welcomes the future directive, but we
will be strict about its implementation and make sure
proper reporting and monitoring is in place to ensure that
the directive is correctly implemented, and that the prior
authorisation and reimbursement provisions do not
become an unjustified obstacle to patients.
Finally, let me highlight one of my regrets: the lack of
ambition of the provisions agreed for cooperation in the
field of e-health, again due to strong opposition from the
most advanced Member States in this area. The initial
proposal from the Commission has been significantly
watered down. I would therefore like to ask Mr Dalli the
following question. Would the Commission consider the
development of a stand-alone proposal on e-health,
fostering cooperation and enabling interoperability of
data and safety for patients, thus making it a reality in
Europe?
2-331
Jean Lambert, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. –
Mr President, many in this House will remember that at
first reading this was an extremely hot topic, and I think
we are hearing only some of the differences between us.

18-01-2011 79
There were concerns about whether market forces would
win out over services of general interest; and that people
who were concerned about patients’ rights to choose,
and to travel, were being pitted against those who were
asking which patients would actually exercise that
choice.
I think what we have, at the end of the day, is a
reasonable compromise. As people have pointed out, in
cases where things are medically necessary, with a need
for urgent treatment, we already have a system in place
under social security coordination. This directive is more
concerned with the market system, with choice, and with
people’s ability to choose where to go, and to have
money follow them. So we have clarity now, in that
Member States can put in place systems to enable them
to ensure that needs can be met.
This directive should also be welcomed because it deals
with issues around the legal dimension and legal
certainty: with where responsibility for follow-up
treatment lies; with the question of redress if there are
problems; and with issues around ensuring that
procedures are carried out by qualified medical
professionals.
On the issue of rare diseases, we have also achieved a
compromise that is better than what we were pursuing
first time round.
As people have said, for many patients this will work
well, but we also need to take care of our patients in our
own Member States.
2-332
Milan Cabrnoch, za skupinu ECR. – Já bych úvodem
chtěl poděkovat oběma zpravodajům, paní
Grossetêteové i panu Bowisovi. Dnes jsou tomu přesně 2
roky 6 měsíců a 16 dnů, co Evropská komise předložila
dlouho očekávaný návrh směrnice o právech pacientů v
přeshraniční péči, ale její historie se píše už dávno
předtím, kdy byla tato problematika původně součástí
návrhu směrnice o službách. I dnes se potvrzuje, jak
velkou chybou bylo zdravotní služby ze směrnice o
službách vyčlenit. Nesmíme zapomínat, že projednávaná
směrnice řeší pouze práva pacientů a otázka volného
pohybu zdravotních služeb v Evropské unii zatím
zůstává neřešena. Zdravotní systémy v členských státech
jsou sice založeny na stejných obecných hodnotách, ale
ve skutečnosti je organizace poskytování zdravotní péče
v jednotlivých členských státech velice rozdílná.
Text, o kterém budeme zítra hlasovat a který podpořím,
je velkým kompromisem mezi právy občanů, pacientů a
obavami vlád členských zemí. I přes mnoho ústupků a
protivenství je předložený návrh malým, ale důležitým
krokem vpřed. Navrhovaná směrnice vyjasňuje, byť ne
dokonale, práva pacientů, zajišťuje jim přístup k
informacím, v souladu s principem subsidiarity plně
potvrzuje výhradní odpovědnost vlád členských zemí za
organizaci a financování zdravotnictví, za kvalitu,
bezpečnost a dostupnost péče na jejich území a dává jim
možnost určit pravidla, podle kterých musí občan
případně žádat ještě před čerpáním péče v zahraničí o
souhlas.
Doufám, dámy a pánové, že v práci na směrnici budeme
v tomto parlamentu pokračovat i v dalších letech a
zlepšíme práva pacientů v Evropské unii.
2-333
Kartika Tamara Liotard, namens de GUE/NGL-
Fractie. – Voorzitter, mórgen is het zo ver, dan wordt
zorg een internemarktproduct. De nieuwe richtlijn maakt
van zorg een verhandelbaar commercieel goed. Wie het
meeste geld heeft, wordt het eerst geholpen op de plek
waar het zorgaanbod het grootst en het goedkoopst is.
Het voorstel handhaaft tweedeling in de zorg. Ik vraag
mij af hoeveel van mijn collega's zich hierin kunnen
vinden. Zorg is een basisbehoefte die voor iedereen
gelijk toegankelijk moet zijn. De leden die morgen vóór
stemmen, denken wellicht dat ze de patiënten een dienst
bewijzen, maar dat is absoluut niet het geval. Ik ben
voor alles wat de rechten van de patiënt ten goede komt,
maar bij goedkeuring van deze richtlijn kunnen we in dit
kader heel veel narigheid verwachten; ik zal u een paar
voorbeelden noemen.
Verzekeraars zullen patiënten maar al te graag de grens
over sturen, als daar een goedkopere
behandelingsmogelijkheid bestaat. Het zorgaanbod in
eigen land zal daardoor verschralen. Zorg die niet meer
rendabel is, zal uit duurdere regio's verdwijnen.
Patiënten hebben dan geen keuze meer, het is geen recht,
maar ze móeten de grens over. Patiënten uit regio's waar
zorg goedkoper is, zullen overigens niet de mogelijkheid
hebben om uit te wijken naar een andere regio. De
meerkosten daarvoor worden namelijk niet automatisch
vergoed. Het zorgtoerisme dat deze richtlijn beoogt, is
daarmee alleen voor rijkeren weggelegd.
Dan de goedkope regio's en de regio's met korte
wachttijden. Zij zullen op termijn zó veel zorgtoeristen
ontvangen dat hun eigen lokale zorg daardoor wordt
verdrongen. Een voorbeeld konden we maandag al lezen
in de Belgische krant De Standaard en ik kan u
verzekeren, méér voorbeelden zullen volgen. Elke
patiënt heeft naar mijn mening recht op goede zorg en
wel dicht bij huis, in eigen taal en met eigen familie. In
plaats daarvan stimuleert Europa zorg naar het
buitenland en laat het de markt zijn werk doen. Wie het
hiermee eens is, stemt morgen vóór; wie het met mij
eens is, dient zeker tegen te stemmen.
2-334
Oreste Rossi, a nome del gruppo EFD. – Signor
Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, inizialmente la direttiva
presentava punti critici. In sede di discussione in
commissione e nel trilogo si è raggiunto un accordo su
un testo nel complesso equilibrato, che tiene conto delle
esigenze di qualità e di sicurezza dell'assistenza
sanitaria, dei principi generali dei rimborsi,
dell'autorizzazione preventiva, della cooperazione
transfrontaliera per la cura delle malattie rare e dei
servizi di sanità elettronica.

80 18-01-2011
L'obiettivo che si è cercato di raggiungere è di
riconoscere a tutti i pazienti il diritto all'assistenza
sanitaria transfrontaliera, scongiurando il turismo
sanitario. Le spese che vengono sostenute dal servizio
sanitario per curare un cittadino di un altro Stato
membro devono, giustamente, essere a carico dello Stato
di origine del paziente.
Avremmo voluto altresì inserire l'obbligo per gli Stati
membri di garantire dei livelli essenziali di assistenza
sanitaria, ma non è stato possibile. Il nostro voto, visto il
lavoro di mediazione migliorativo del testo, sarà a
favore, come lo sarà anche sull'altro testo in discussione
riguardante l'iniziativa europea sulla malattia di
Alzheimer e le altre forme di demenza, testo
propedeutico alla presentazione di una proposta
legislativa volta a creare un'integrazione tra le diverse
politiche esistenti.
L'obiettivo comune di tutti e due i provvedimenti è di
sottolineare l'esigenza di un miglior coordinamento fra
gli Stati membri nell'interesse esclusivo dei cittadini.
2-335
Csanád Szegedi (NI). – Tisztelt elnök úr, tisztelt
képviselőtársaim, tisztelt államtitkár asszony! Személy
szerint támogatom a határokon átnyúló egészségügyi
ellátására vonatkozó betegjogok érvényesítéséről szóló
jelentést. Számos példa bizonyítja, hogy nagyon sokan
más tagállamhoz fordulnak megfelelő egészségügyi
ellátásért. Mindannyiunk előtt ismert a luxemburgi
Kohl-ügy, amely erre bizonyíték. Sajnos az EU külső és
belső különbsége, és ezalatt értem a nyugat-európai és
kelet-európai részek különbségeit, nem merülnek ki
abban, hogy gazdasági különbségek vannak, szociális
ellátásban különbségek vannak, hanem az egészségügyi
ellátások tekintetében is mély szakadék tátong, és az
Európai Parlamentnek feladat az, hogy ezeket a
különbségeket csökkentsük, tehát a nyugat- és a keleteurópai
különbségeket csökkentsük, ugyanis az
egységesen jó egészségügyi ellátással lehet csökkenteni
azoknak a számát, hogy az emberek egyik tagállamból
egy másik tagállam egészségügyi ellátását vegyék
igénybe. Mindezeken felül elengedhetetlen egységesíteni
a betegbiztosítók szerepét, ezzel lehetne szabályozni,
hogy ne csorbuljon a szabad mozgás egyetemes uniós
elve.
Ezeken túlmenően szükségesnek tartom a szakmai
kollégium ajánlásainak összehangolását, hogy azonos
betegségcsoportokra azonos kezeléseket alkalmazzanak
az egyes tagállamokban. Az egészség az nem lehet
kiváltság, és az azonos betegséget nem lehet másként
kezelni Magyarországon csak azért, mert Kelet-Európa
és rosszabb az anyagi körülmény, és Svédországban
csak azért mert Nyugat-Európa és jobb anyagi
körülmények között élnek az emberek.
2-336
Christofer Fjellner (PPE). – Herr talman!
Morgondagens omröstning tror jag är en de viktigaste
omröstningarna som jag har varit med om under mina
sex år i Europaparlamentet. Inte för att den berör så
många, de allra flesta vill ju och har rätt till att få bra
vård i tid där de bor. Men för att dem som det berör, för
just dem kan det vara så otroligt viktigt. Det kan rent av
vara en fråga om liv eller död. Det här handlar dessutom
om grundtanken med Europasamarbetet - fri rörlighet.
Egentligen är det en skam att vi först nu utsträcker den
fria rörligheten till dem som behöver den allra mest, den
som är sjuk, den som är patient.
Det här är en kompromiss och jag vet att såväl jag som
mina kollegor i EPP gärna hade gått längre i många
delar, men vi måste just nu komma ihåg hur det lät för
inte så lång tid sedan. Med allt tal om sjukvårdsturism,
om hotande kollaps av nationella sjukvårdssystem, krav
på förhandsbesked, eller som vi säger på vanlig svenska:
att man som patient ska vara tvungen att be om lov innan
man utnyttjar de rättigheter som EG-domstolen har gett
oss. Så lät det då och med tanke på det är det en enorm
framgång att vi överhuvudtaget får ett beslut.
Jag uppfattar inte det här vara ett beslut som vi tar tack
vare den svenska eller europeiska vänstern, utan snarare
trots den. Jag minns hur det har låtit och hur till exempel
de svenska socialdemokraterna lade ned sina röster när
vi röstade om det här i förstabehandlingen. Igår hördes
krav på att man skulle införa förhandsbesked i Sverige.
Jag hoppas att Sverige inte gör det. Vi har klarat oss utan
förhandsbesked i många år och då hoppas jag vi slipper
det även i framtiden.
Men i morgon är vårt beslut färdigt här i
Europaparlamentet, och då är det upp till
medlemsstaterna och kommissionen. Genomför det här
så att vi stärker patienternas rättigheter istället för att
minska dem. Det är min uppmaning till
medlemsstaterna. Till kommissionen vill jag säga:
Granska medlemsländerna hårt, för vi vet att de kommer
att vilja smita undan.
2-337
Gilles Pargneaux (S&D). – Monsieur le Président,
Monsieur le Commissaire, Madame la Présidente, tout
d'abord, permettez-moi d'affirmer notre satisfaction face
aux progrès mis en œuvre par cette directive que nous
allons voter demain. En effet, depuis des années, seule la
Cour de justice des Communautés européennes arbitrait
les litiges concernant les soins de santé transfrontaliers
et les droits des patients.
Aujourd'hui, la mobilité des patients n'est plus un
phénomène marginal en Europe mais est devenue un
acte de vie courant. Les traitements transfrontaliers
représentent aujourd'hui 1 % des dépenses totales de
santé en Europe.
Il ne faut cependant pas confondre la mobilité des
patients avec le tourisme médical qui s'est développé au
cours des dernières années. Ce dernier s'organise et se
révèle, hélas!, de plus en plus lucratif. La santé devient
progressivement un marché concurrentiel.
Un Allemand va en Hongrie pour ses soins dentaires, un
Anglais – s'il en a les moyens – se rend en France pour
se faire opérer plus vite. Les exemples sont nombreux.

18-01-2011 81
Mais nous devons faire en sorte que la santé ne soit pas
traitée comme une marchandise, pour que nous soyons
tous égaux. Et c'est pourquoi, au cours de ces trois
dernières années, nous avons défendu le principe
d'autorisation préalable de l'État membre d'affiliation
pour les soins hospitaliers et non hospitaliers.
Je voudrais ici saluer le travail des rapporteurs –
Mme Grossetête, et notre rapporteure socialiste,
Dagmar Roth-Behrendt, que je tiens à saluer
particulièrement – qui a permis d'importantes avancées
avec, par exemple, le remboursement des soins,
l'instauration de points de contact nationaux et de
réseaux européens de référence, le traitement des
maladies rares et la coopération renforcée entre les États
membres.
Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, notre
travail n'est pas terminé. Il nous faut aller plus loin, audelà
de cette avancée, pour permettre de gommer les
disparités que nous connaissons encore en Europe et je
sais que nous pouvons tous ensemble faire en sorte que
le patient et les citoyens européens bénéficient d'un
traitement égal.
2-338
Corinne Lepage (ALDE). – Monsieur le Président,
Monsieur le Commissaire, Madame le Ministre, cet
accord a d'abord le mérite d'apporter une certaine
clarification juridique, comme mes collègues l'ont
rappelé. Jusqu'à présent c'était la Cour de justice qui était
chargée de ces questions, d'où une insécurité juridique,
dont nous sortons aujourd'hui, et je crois qu'il faut être
très reconnaissant à la rapporteure, Mme Grossetête, aux
rapporteurs fictifs et également à M. Dalli pour leur
travail. Ces dispositions améliorent l'information des
patients, la qualité des soins, les coûts et les procédures
de remboursement.
Je suis également satisfaite de ce système d'autorisation
préalable pour les soins les plus lourds, notamment les
soins hospitaliers, les soins spécialisés ou ceux qui
présentent un risque particulier pour les patients. Il ne
s'agit évidemment pas d'empêcher les patients de se
soigner à l'étranger, mais d'éviter, d'une part, le tourisme
médical et, d'autre part, d'éviter de mettre en danger les
régimes de sécurité sociale.
Cependant, j'ai un sentiment partagé sur les conditions
de mise en œuvre de cette procédure qui peuvent
présenter des risques d'inégalité de traitement entre les
patients des États membres.
D'abord, que signifie un délai raisonnable? Il faut être
attentif à ce que ce terme de "raisonnable" ne mette pas
en péril les besoins des patients.
Nous devons également être attentifs à ce que les États
membres mettent en place des procédures financières de
manière à éviter que les patients, et notamment les plus
modestes d'entre eux, avancent des frais trop importants.
Il ne serait pas acceptable que des difficultés
administratives amoindrissent les droits des patients.
Enfin, les décisions différentes des États membres sur le
remboursement des coûts engendrés par les soins
peuvent aussi conduire à des inégalités entre les patients
s'il y a d'un côté un remboursement minimum et,
ailleurs, autre chose.
Voilà, Monsieur le Président, les éléments que je
souhaitais défendre.
2-339
Claude Turmes (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident, meine
Damen und Herren, lieber John! Diese Richtlinie schafft
klare und transparente Rechte. Dadurch wird die
Situation, wenn ich ins Ausland gehe, klar und nicht
mehr willkürlich, wie das in einzelnen Ländern der Fall
war. Diese Richtlinie wird auch dazu führen, dass die
Information, wenn ich ins Ausland gehe, verbessert
wird. Allerdings muss diese Richtlinie von den
Regierungen auch umgesetzt werden. Was diese
Richtlinie allerdings verhindert hat, ist das, wovon
einige in der Kommission – und vielleicht auch hier –
geträumt haben, und zwar dass man die Grenzen öffnen
muss, um die nationalen Gesundheitssysteme zu
verbessern. Ich bin stolz darauf, dass wir es mit den zwei
Berichterstattern – auch mit Frau Grossetête – geschafft
haben, dieses Gleichgewicht zu halten: ein klares Nein
zum Gesundheitstourismus und ein klares Ja dazu, dass
die nationalen Systeme nicht unterwandert werden.
Qualitative Unterschiede in der medizinischen
Versorgung können nicht über diese Richtlinie gelöst
werden, sondern nur durch genug Investitionen in den
jeweiligen Staaten.
Mich würde freuen, Herr Dalli und Kommission, wenn
Sie sich jetzt, nachdem wir diese Richtlinie haben,
vielleicht mehr auf die Verordnung über soziale
Sicherheit – die ja das Basissystem ist, wo klar ist, wer
bezahlt wird, wo alles gut geregelt wird – konzentrieren
würden. Machen Sie mehr Druck auf die Länder, dass
das noch besser umgesetzt wird, anstatt neue
Liberalisierungs- oder Konkurrenzideen zu entwickeln.
2-340
Kay Swinburne (ECR). – Mr President, this directive
has taken concrete steps to consolidate patients’ rights in
accessing health care services across the EU. I have
taken an interest in this directive as the implementation
will have a particular impact in my constituency of
Wales where, despite the UK government negotiating
with the EU on health matters, the subsequent
management and delivery of healthcare is a devolved
competence delivered through the Welsh Assembly
Government.
My initial concerns are at the potential impact on the
Welsh healthcare system, regarding reimbursement and
prior authorisation, have been resolved as a degree of
flexibility has been built into these proposals. The ability
for Member States and regional pairs to have the
capacity to decide on eligible treatments with prior
authorisation and a setting of a cap on reimbursements
will go some way in alleviating concerns about the
already overstretched and burdened healthcare systems.

82 18-01-2011
As a result of the work of my colleagues in this
Parliament, past and present, especially Mr Bowis, we
can be content in having taken a step forward in
ensuring clarification for patients, improved healthcare
choice and greater cooperation between the different EU
healthcare systems. This should lead to a rise in
standards throughout the EU, through patient choice.
2-341
João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). – Senhor Presidente, a
intenção desta directiva é clara desde a primeira hora:
incluir os serviços de saúde no objectivo de liberalização
dos serviços e, dessa forma, satisfazer os interesses dos
grupos económicos e financeiros, expandindo as suas
áreas de negócio no domínio da saúde em todos os
países da União Europeia, encarando a saúde como se de
um qualquer bem de mercado se tratasse e os utentes dos
serviços de saúde como meros consumidores.
Esta proposta acentuará as desigualdades entre os
cidadãos, prejudicando aqueles que não têm meios para
recorrer aos serviços de saúde privados ou a cuidados de
saúde noutro Estado-Membro da União Europeia. A sua
aprovação, mesmo com as alterações que lhe foram
introduzidas, acarretaria consequências graves para
alguns países, nomeadamente para Portugal e para o seu
Serviço Nacional de Saúde, atendendo aos custos muito
elevados que pode implicar.
Na prática, a mesma União Europeia que impõe pesados
constrangimentos aos orçamentos nacionais quando se
trata de financiar serviços públicos, como a saúde, não
se importa de sobrecarregar esses orçamentos quando se
trata de canalizar dinheiros públicos para grupos
económicos e financeiros privados que se dediquem ao
negócio da saúde e para alimentar o turismo da saúde.
Por outro lado, esta proposta, na ânsia de promover o
negócio, não salvaguardou devidamente a segurança dos
utentes nem a qualidade dos cuidados de saúde,
particularmente no que se refere aos cuidados não
hospitalares. Ao contrário do que alguns disseram, o
sistema de autorização prévia não contempla
devidamente estes casos. Impõe-se, por isso, que, à
semelhança do que aconteceu em 2007 com a exclusão
dos serviços de saúde da famigerada directiva
Bolkestein, também desta vez estas intenções sejam
derrotadas.
2-342
Jaroslav Paška (EFD). – Úvodom chcem vyjadriť isté
sklamanie z pozície Rady k smernici o uplatňovaní práv
pacientov pri cezhraničnej zdravotnej starostlivosti, keď
Rada v prvom čítaní neprevzala mnohé z dobrých
pozmeňujúcich návrhov Európskeho parlamentu.
Európsky parlament totiž už v prvom čítaní postavil
dobrý základ pre korektné upravenie pravidiel
cezhraničného poskytovania zdravotnej starostlivosti v
členských štátoch tak, aby sa pacienti mohli v
odôvodnených prípadoch, pri dodržaní stanovených
pravidiel a bez zaťažovania súdov dostať k potrebnej
ambulantnej či nemocničnej starostlivosti v inom
členskom štáte.
Preto je dobré, že sa pri príprave správy vo výboroch do
druhého čítania podarilo udržať kontinuitu pôvodnej
filozofie vyjadrujúcej pozíciu Parlamentu z prvého
čítania a posunúť v súčasnosti neprehľadný stav v
poskytovaní cezhraničnej zdravotnej starostlivosti k
dôstojnému vyriešeniu tohto problému.
Kompromisný text opierajúci sa o judikatúru Súdneho
dvora, predložený na dnešné rokovanie, prináša našim
občanom nové možnosti a novú kvalitu pri starostlivosti
o ich zdravie, a preto je – podľa môjho názoru –
potrebné usilovať sa o čo najrýchlejšiu implementáciu
tejto smernice do každodenného života.
2-343
Licia Ronzulli (PPE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli
colleghi, dopo un percorso giuridico durato anni, domani
finalmente verrà votata la relazione che darà una base
legislativa certa ai cittadini europei che ogni anno
devono rivolgersi all'estero per ottenere cure mediche
appropriate.
Questo permetterà a tutti i pazienti, e non solo ai più
informati o ai più fortunati, di beneficiare di diritti che
già sono riconosciuti negli anni nelle sentenze della
Corte di giustizia dell'Unione europea. Attraverso
l'apertura dei punti di contatto nazionali, accedere alla
sanità transfrontaliera non sarà più un salto nel buio in
cui, fino ad oggi, il paziente, già debilitato dalla malattia,
ha dovuto purtroppo spesso affrontare problemi
burocratici, linguistici ed economici.
Per quanto riguarda le cure ospedaliere, lo Stato di
affiliazione potrà richiedere al paziente che decide di
farsi curare all'estero un'autorizzazione preventiva e
questo è necessario ovviamente per tutelare la stabilità
del proprio sistema sanitario. Su alcuni punti si sarebbe
forse potuto fare di più per tutelare i pazienti, come ad
esempio per quanto riguarda il sistema di notifica
preventiva che permetterà agli Stati membri di anticipare
le spese mediche, ma solo su base volontaria.
Infine, permettetemi di sottolineare quanto sia entusiasta
di partecipare a un dibattito che, assolutamente in modo
trasversale, ha soltanto un comune denominatore, ossia
la priorità di porre fine al calvario di migliaia di pazienti
in tutta Europa e finalmente questo momento sembra
essere arrivato.
2-344
Karin Kadenbach (S&D). – Herr Präsident, Frau
Ratsvorsitzende, Herr Kommissar! Nach meinem
Verständnis liegt die Aufgabe der Politik darin, dazu
beizutragen, dass Lebensqualität gesichert und
ausgebaut wird. Das ist gerade im Bereich der
Gesundheit im Moment keine leichte Aufgabe. Es ist in
erster Linie eine Aufgabe der nationalen Staaten, diese
Gesundheitsversorgung, den Zugang zur besten Medizin
unabhängig vom Einkommen der Patientinnen und
Patienten und unabhängig von der Region, in der sie
leben, zu garantieren.
Es wird aber trotz bester nationaler Gesundheitssysteme
immer wieder Fälle geben, bei denen Patientinnen und

18-01-2011 83
Patienten Hilfe, Unterstützung und medizinische
Leistungen im Ausland in Anspruch nehmen müssen
bzw. wollen. Hier bietet diese Richtlinie endlich die
rechtlichen Voraussetzungen und die Sicherstellung,
dass diese Leistungen ohne zusätzliche bürokratische
Hürden, ohne Rechtsunsicherheit und auch ohne allzu
große finanzielle Vorbelastung in Angriff genommen
werden können.
Ich sehe diese Richtlinie nach den langen
Verhandlungen wirklich als Erfolg, auch wenn sie in
ihrer Umsetzung jetzt noch große Leistungen der
einzelnen Staaten der Gesundheitsversorgung und auch
der Versicherungsträger nach sich ziehen wird. Ich hoffe
sehr, dass Sie in diese Richtung auch weiter Druck
machen werden, denn die beste Richtlinie nützt uns nur
dann etwas, wenn sie implementiert und umgesetzt wird.
Ich ersuche sie auch, standhaft zu bleiben in Ihren
Bestrebungen, die Prävention und die Gesundheitsvorsorge
auszubauen. Denn ich glaube, wir wollen, dass
die Europäerinnen und Europäer so lange wie möglich in
einem guten Gesundheitszustand leben, mit dem
bestmöglichen Zugang zu einer Medizin mit hohen
Standards, und das zu den geringstmöglichen Kosten.
2-345
Frédérique Ries (ALDE). – Monsieur le Président,
Monsieur le Commissaire, Madame la Ministre,
j'aimerais à mon tour remercier et féliciter notre
rapporteure, M me Grossetête, qui a donc brillamment
repris le témoin transmis par notre ancien collègue John
Bowis. D'ailleurs, avec toutes ces félicitations, c'est un
peu la fête de John Bowis aujourd'hui!
Je voudrais – et c'est important – souligner le rôle
important qui fut celui de la Présidence belge, qui a fait
les efforts qu'il fallait pour arriver à ce difficile
compromis avec le Parlement mais surtout avec certains
États membres dont la position était – comment dire –
réfractaire dans certains cas.
Cette directive sur les soins de santé transfrontaliers est
essentielle, même si elle ne concerne qu'un pour cent des
budgets nationaux de santé car, au-delà des chiffres, c'est
toute la force du symbole qui est à souligner, à savoir le
droit légitime pour chaque citoyen européen de se faire
soigner à l'étranger et de se faire rembourser les soins
reçus en toute bonne information.
Il était important également de fixer clairement les
garde-fous afin d'éviter toute forme de tourisme médical
mais aussi d'introduire suffisamment de flexibilité dans
ce texte pour favoriser le diagnostic et le traitement des
deux côtés d'une frontière. Je pense, notamment, à
certaines maladies comme les maladies rares.
Je conclus, Monsieur le Président, en disant qu'il s'agit
d'un premier pas essentiel mais qu'il faudra aller plus
loin et batailler encore pour faire avancer cette Europe
de la santé qui nous est chère à tous.
2-346
Tadeusz Cymański (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący!
Nie ma idealnych praw. Wszędzie są wady i zalety, ale
ta dyrektywa zdecydowanie niesie więcej nadziei niż
obaw. Europa, pomimo szybkich zmian, pozostaje
kontynentem dużych różnic, a nawet kontrastów.
Dotyczy to również poziomu i skali opieki zdrowotnej i
jest widoczne, że więcej obaw wyrażają kraje
biedniejsze, kraje w transformacji i na dorobku. Poziom
finansowania i zaspokojenia potrzeb medycznych w
krajach, gdzie jest transformacja, jest jednak daleko,
daleko niższy.
Ta dyrektywa stanowi więc ogromną szansę i nadzieję
dla tych wszystkich pacjentów w krajach, o których
mówię. Rządy stają przed wielkim wyzwaniem, ale
paradoksalnie właśnie ta dyrektywa wymusi wiele
reform oraz zwróci uwagę na skalę niedofinansowania
służby zdrowia, ponieważ niedofinansowanie jest nie
tylko skutkiem braku możliwości finansowych tych
państw, ale także skutkiem błędów w prowadzonej
polityce i niedocenienia ogromnego znaczenia, jakie dla
obywateli europejskich ma zdrowie.
Dziękując, apeluję o poparcie tej dyrektywy i to
niezależnie od końcowego kształtu tak zwanej klauzuli
ochronnej, która jest wyrazem kompromisu. I to słowo
nas cieszy.
2-347
Sabine Wils (GUE/NGL). – Herr Präsident! Der
Richtlinienentwurf zur Patientenmobilität kann sehr
schnell dazu führen, dass die Gesundheitsversorgung in
der EU anhand eines Dienstleistungsansatzes auf den
kleinsten gemeinsamen Nenner gebracht wird. Meine
Fraktion lehnt es strikt ab, dass der Geldbeutel der
Menschen ein Kriterium für die Gesundheitsversorgung
wird und Patienten zu Kunden werden.
Die nun vorgeschlagene Richtlinie gibt den
Krankenversicherungen ein Instrument in die Hand, mit
dem sie die Patienten zu einer kostengünstigeren
Versorgung ins Ausland schicken können. Diese Praxis
würde zu großem Konkurrenz- und Preisdruck im
Gesundheitssektor führen. Wenn eine bestimmte
Behandlung ein paar hundert Kilometer weiter günstiger
ist und die Patienten von ihren Versicherungen dorthin
geschickt werden, wird diese Behandlung nicht mehr vor
Ort angeboten. Damit würde auch der Gesundheitssektor
nur noch der neoliberalen Logik des Marktes folgen,
anstatt dem Patientenwohl Vorrang zu geben.
Ich frage Sie, verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen:
Wollen Sie in diesem sensiblen Sektor einen
Patiententourismus? Ich bin dafür, die Gesundheitsversorgung
nah bei ihren Patienten zu lassen. Das ist
eine öffentliche Aufgabe der Daseinsvorsorge, die für
alle gleichermaßen lokal zur Verfügung stehen muss.
2-348
Anna Rosbach (EFD). – Hr. formand! Ingen syge
mennesker ønsker at drage til et fremmed land, hvis
behandlingen er lige så god i hjemlandet. Men når det er
sagt, så er dette forslag det bedst opnåelige. Vi ser, at
finansieringsmodellen er ændret, og at de nationale
sundhedssystemer ikke undergraves samtidig med, at

84 18-01-2011
patienter får bedre mulighed for at blive behandlet i
andre EU-lande.
Patienter kan lettere søge behandling i et andet land, hvis
f.eks. ekspertisen og behandlingstilbuddet ikke findes i
deres hjemland. Dette er vigtigt, når vi taler om yderst
sjældne sygdomme, der kræver meget speciel faglig
viden. Hvis vi kan koncentrere behandlingen af sådanne
sjældne sygdomme nogle få steder i EU, vil patienternes
chance for at blive helbredt være langt større, da læger,
der bruger deres faglige kompetence tit, er bedre til at
opnå gode resultater. Det må dog ikke betyde, at
medlemsstaterne udvander deres sundhedssystemer,
hvilket teksten da også fastslår. Tak, hr. formand, og tak
til kommissær Dalli og til ordføreren. Tak for en god
indsats.
2-349
Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska (PPE). – Panie
Przewodniczący! Na samym początku chciałabym
pogratulować pani sprawozdawczyni Grossetête, która
wykonała bardzo trudną pracę. Ta praca nie była łatwa
ze względu na różne stanowiska państw Unii
Europejskiej oraz odmienne systemy zdrowotne w
poszczególnych krajach. Osiągnięcie kompromisu
pomiędzy oczekiwaniami a możliwościami wymagało
nie tylko sprawności negocjacyjnej, ale przede
wszystkim znajomości tematu. Wszyscy mamy
świadomość, że na rozwiązania zawarte w dyrektywie
dotyczącej praw pacjentów w transgranicznej opiece
zdrowotnej, o których szczegółowo mówiła pani
sprawozdawczyni, oczekują mieszkańcy Unii
Europejskiej, zwłaszcza w tych krajach, gdzie dostęp do
lekarzy specjalistów i nowoczesnych procedur jest
ograniczony.
Ważne jest, że w trakcie prac nad treścią dyrektywy i
dzięki osiągniętym kompromisom, udało się zmienić
podejście państw, które pierwotnie blokowały jej zapisy.
Istotą tej dyrektywy jest dostępność, łatwość i pewność
opieki zdrowotnej, a także prawo pacjenta do
korzystania z usług opieki zdrowotnej innego państwa
oraz zwrotu określonych kosztów. Dyrektywa opiera się
na potrzebach pacjenta, a nie na środkach finansowych.
Chciałabym zauważyć, że dzięki zapisom dyrektywy
poprawi się nie tylko sytuacja zdrowotna pacjentów, ale
wierzę, że będzie ona podstawą do poprawy systemów
zdrowotnych w niektórych krajach Unii Europejskiej.
Należy podkreślić, że dyrektywa jest pierwszym i
podstawowym krokiem na rzecz mobilności pacjentów,
na rzecz wzmocnienia ich praw, a także wyrównywania
poziomu usług w poszczególnych krajach
członkowskich.
2-350
Andrés Perelló Rodríguez (S&D). – Señor Presidente,
creo que es de justicia agradecer a los ponentes,
especialmente a la señora Grossetête y a la señora
Roth-Behrendt, de mi propio Grupo, el trabajo que han
hecho para sacar una norma del estancamiento y
convertirla en útil, porque este trabajo ha permitido
incluir el derecho a la salud pública como base jurídica y
tener una nueva orientación que nos permite sentar las
bases que han de garantizar a los ciudadanos la
seguridad y la calidad que eligen en cada momento y,
sobre todo, porque también permite regular con claridad
el papel de los Estados, tanto de los de origen, que tienen
que hacer el pago, como de aquellos en los que se recibe
tratamiento.
Pero creo que no hemos de sentirnos satisfechos solo por
eso, sino que esto tiene que ser el principio de un avance
mucho mayor, que haga de esta Directiva —como decía
la señora Roth-Behrendt— un mero trámite porque el
nivel de igualdad alcanzado en todos los Estados haga
innecesarios los desplazamientos de cada ciudadano a
cada país.
En esa lucha, hemos de obtener una norma que garantice
más el derecho de los ciudadanos en relación con la
atención que tienen que percibir —prestaciones y
seguridad— que el mero derecho, que ya lo tienen, a la
movilidad entre Estados. Igualdad es lo que hará unión
y, si no, estaremos dando pasos muy pequeños.
2-351
Miroslav Ouzký (ECR). – Kdo z vás je déle v
Evropském parlamentu, tak si jistě vzpomene, jak tato
norma vznikala. Je to až úsměvný příběh. Na začátku
byla zpráva paní Gebhardt, která měla umožnit volný
pohyb služeb po Evropské unii. Z ní jsme vyčlenili část
a usnesli jsme se, že zdravotnické služby zaslouží
speciální normu. Když ta nakonec byla Komisí
předložena, tak se z ní postupně volný pohyb
zdravotnických služeb dostal ven a zůstala nám část,
která popisuje právo pacientů na volný pohyb po
Evropské unii při hledání zdravotních služeb a
poskytování zdravotní péče.
Já tím chci zdůraznit, že někdy je naše evropanství více
o těch symbolech a vlajkách a velmi málo je o
naplňování faktických svobod, na kterých by Unie měla
být založena. Normu provázely četné obavy jednotlivých
členských států z přečerpávání a likvidací národních
rozpočtů.
Na závěr mi dovolte říci, že to není přesně to, co jsme
chtěli, ale je to správný krok a jistě vykročení správným
směrem. Chci popřát i zpravodajkám a poděkovat jim za
jejich práci.
2-352
Horst Schnellhardt (PPE). – Herr Präsident! Ich
begrüße es sehr, dass diese Richtlinie nun endlich zum
Tragen kommt. Ich möchte daran erinnern: Es schien ja
einmal so, dass der ganze Gesetzgebungsprozess
scheitert. Ich glaube, es ist dem Geschick der
Berichterstatterin und dem Vermittlungsteam zu
verdanken – und natürlich auch der belgischen
Präsidentschaft –, dass nun ein Ergebnis vorliegt, mit
dem wir sicher sehr zufrieden sein können. Ich begrüße
besonders, dass das Recht der Mitgliedstaaten, die
Behandlung in einem anderen Land einzuschränken, hier
klarer definiert wurde. Nach dem Vorschlag der
Mitgliedstaaten war dies ja nicht der Fall. Ich glaube,
dass jetzt eine Entscheidung vorliegt, bei der die
Nachvollziehbarkeit und die Überprüfbarkeit der

18-01-2011 85
Ablehnung einer Behandlung klar nachvollzogen werden
können. Das ist ein richtiger und wichtiger Schritt.
Wem helfen wir denn besonders? Ich glaube, wir helfen
zunächst den 60 000 Menschen, die auf den Wartelisten
für Organtransplantationen stehen. Wir haben natürlich
schon die Richtlinie zur Organtransplantation
verabschiedet, aber hier ist ein weiterer Schritt erfolgt,
um auch die Wartezeiten zu verkürzen. Wir helfen
andererseits den Millionen Menschen, die an einer der
30 000 bekannten seltenen Krankheiten erkrankt sind.
Diese können jetzt viel gezielter und qualitativ besser
behandelt werden, wenn sie eine Behandlung in einem
anderen Land suchen.
Ich denke aber nicht, dass durch diese Richtlinie ein
Patiententourismus in Europa entstehen wird. Deswegen
ist die Befürchtung, die von der linken Seite dieses
Hauses kommt, völlig überflüssig. Mit dieser Sache
sollten wir uns nicht beschäftigen.
2-353
Edite Estrela (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, este texto é o
resultado de muito trabalho e negociação e, por isso,
quero agradecer aos colegas Bowis, Grossetête e Roth-
Behrendt. É justo reconhecer os avanços alcançados
porque esta nova versão dá mais garantias no que diz
respeito à segurança e à qualidade dos serviços. Embora
tenha sido melhorada a redacção dos artigos 7.° e 8.°,
acho que se poderia ter ido mais longe no sentido de se
garantir maior equidade.
A maior parte dos doentes, sobretudo os pertencentes a
grupos socioeconómicos mais débeis, não quer ser
tratada no estrangeiro por causa das barreiras linguísticas
e da falta de apoio familiar. Os cidadãos de maiores
rendimentos não têm esses obstáculos. Por isso, receio
que, em países com sistemas de saúde universais e
tendencialmente gratuitos, a nova legislação possa
funcionar como um incentivo ao desinvestimento nos
sistemas nacionais e contribuir para a criação de um
mercado de saúde para ricos. Espero, todavia, que a
aplicação da directiva contribua para reduzir as
desigualdades na saúde.
2-354
Mairead McGuinness (PPE). – Mr President, like
others I welcome this debate and this directive and I
thank our rapporteur.
I am perhaps a little more cautious about it than some
Members are. I think it would be wrong for the news to
go out from this House that, from now on, all is well
with cross-border healthcare. We still have much to
debate and to put in place to make this work. Can I just
quote – and I hope I do it accurately – the
Commissioner’s own words? He said it was ‘clear that
all Member States have a duty to invest at home, to
provide their citizens with the healthcare they need’. I
see him nodding in agreement, so I have got the quote
correct.
It is good that we have that message to take back to
Member States which are not doing this and to those
which have long waiting lists. My own country, Ireland,
is included here. The truth is that people would prefer to
be treated close to home. That is why we have endless
protests – and very valid protests – in Ireland about the
closure of local hospitals and local services. That said,
this directive may work if it forces Member States and
their health providers to look at their services at home
and to improve the provision of services to those who
need them. They are going to have to pay for them
anyway if our citizens take up the rights that this
directive will give them.
In conclusion, people already have a right to travel for
cross-border healthcare under Regulation No 883/2004
but they do not know about it. If they did, we would see
many more cross-border patients moving to get their
services. So let us inform our citizens of what they are
entitled to, and let us hope that we do not have to travel
across borders but that, if we do, we are able to do so
freely and will have the services we need.
2-355
Edit Herczog (S&D). – Elnök úr! Üdvözlöm a magyar
elnökség első vitáját. Első megjegyzésem, hogy érdemes
volt a szolgáltatási irányelven kívül tárgyalni, hiszen
nagyon sok sajátossággal rendelkezik a határon átnyúló
egészségügynek a kérdése. Szeretnék gratulálni a
jelentéstévőknek, árnyék-jelentéstévőknek, Johnnak a
karzaton. Nagyon nagyon fontos ugyanakkor, hogy ne
kérdőjelezzük meg a tagállamok alapellátási
kötelezettségét. A tagállamok felelősek a saját
országukban élőket ellátni. Nagyon fontos, hogy az
irányelv nem a gazdagok kiváltsága, hanem a ritka
betegségek jobb ellátásának az eszköze. Ez a cél vezérelt
bennünket. S egy nagyon fontos szempont, hogy
lehetővé teszi a természeti adottságok jobb
kihasználását. Gondolok például a magyarországi
termálfürdőkre, amelyek bizonyos betegségeket sokkal
jobban gyógyíthatnak és nem mozdíthatók. Nyilván a
betegeknek kell ide érkezni. Nagyon fontos, hogy ezen
az úton továbblépjünk, hogy az egészségesek, a betegek,
az európai lakók úgy érezzék, hogy az Európai Unió
róluk szól, értük van.
2-356
David Casa (PPE). – Ħafna minnha ftit nagħtu kas issaħħa
tagħna sakemm inkunu b'saħħitna u ma jkollna
bżonn ta' ebda tip ta' kura. Madankollu, meta nsibu
ruħna f'kundizzjoni medika prekarja, awtomatikament
nibdew nifhmu kemm hija importanti s-saħħa, u kemm
hu importanti li jkollna sistema ta' saħħa li jkunu ta'
livell għoli - sistemi li mhux biss ikunu tajbin imma
effiċjenti u effettivi.
Iċ-ċittadini tal-Unjoni Ewropea għandhom il-vantaġġ li
jistgħu jieħdu kura f'pajjiżi differenti tal-Unjoni
Ewropea, meta l-kundizzjoni tagħhom ma tkunx tista'
tiġi kkurata f'pajjiżhom stess. Irridu niftakru li din lgħażla
għandha tkun l-aħħar waħda u m'għandhiex tkun
inkoraġġuta: hija għażla li tiswa ħafna flus u, barra minn
hekk, mhijiex prattika. Għandha tkun l-aħħar pożizzjoni
tagħna. U meta ma jkunx hemm għażla, però, irridu
nassiguraw li kemm jista' jkun titnaqqas il-burokrazija u
tiżdied il-kwalità tal-aċċess u s-sigurtà.

86 18-01-2011
Il-Pajjiżi Membri għandhom ukoll jingħataw il-mezzi
neċessarji biex jipproteġu s-sistemi tas-saħħa tagħhom u
jilqgħu għall-influss żejjed li jista' jkollhom minn pajjiżi
oħrajn. Għalhekk hu ideali li l-Pajjiż Membri jkollhom
awtorizzazzjoni minn qabel. F'dan il-kuntest joħroġ ċar
li r-regoli li hemm bħalissa mhumiex adegwati -
mhumiex ċari u konsistenti biżżejjed. Però, kif rajna filkaż
tad-donazzjonijiet tal-organi, aħna nistgħu nsibu
wkoll soluzzjonijiet biex l-Ewropa timxi 'l quddiem u
toffri l-aħjar servizzi mediċi liċ-ċittadini Ewropej.
2-357
Zuzana Roithová (PPE). – S velkým ulehčením kvituji,
že Parlament dospěl konečně k politické dohodě o právu
pacientů na přeshraniční zdravotní služby za podmínek,
která střežil po léta jen Evropský soudní dvůr na základě
žalob. Jsem ráda, že dnešní kompromis formuluje
podmínky úhrady tak, jak jsme je někteří prosazovali už
ve směrnici o službách před sedmi lety. Chci ze srdce
poděkovat kolegyni Grossetêteové a kolegovi Bowisovi,
kterého zdravím, za to, že vybojovali tuto přijatelnou
shodu a vypracovali navíc i důležité pojistky pro
vymahatelnost tohoto práva. Věřím, že právo na
mobilitu zpřístupní léčbu vzácných nemocí všem
Evropanům a povede nakonec ke zkrácení čekacích dob
na operace v celé Unii. Splnil se tak i jeden z mých
celoživotních osobních cílů v oblasti zdravotnictví.
Dovolte mi připomenout, že je ještě před námi řada věcí,
např. dořešit on-line služby ve zdravotnictví, mobilitu
zdravotnických pracovníků a další cíle.
2-358
Theodor Dumitru Stolojan (PPE). – Doresc în primul
rând să o felicit pe doamna ministru Gyori pentru
mandatul pe care îl are în faţă, să îi doresc mult succes,
ca şi Preşedinţiei maghiare. Aş vrea să îi felicit pe toţi
cei care au contribuit la acest proiect de raport care se
află astăzi în dezbaterea noastră.
După cum poate aţi aflat, România face parte din grupul
de ţări care a avut rezerve la o serie de compromisuri la
care s-a ajuns în cadrul Consiliului. Aceste rezerve nu
reprezintă împotrivirea României la asistenţa medicală
transfrontalieră, ele exprimau îngrijorarea guvernului
român faţă de sustenabilitatea financiară, faţă de
dimensiunea asistenţei transfrontaliere, pe care poate să
o capete, deoarece, după cum ştiţi foarte bine, există
state membre cu un venit naţional foarte mic.
Dar, investiţiile reprezintă un mijloc pentru a reduce
acest risc, dar, în acelaşi timp, consider că reformele
sistemelor medicale în statele membre au o mare
importanţă şi cred că aici Comisia Europeană ar trebui să
se implice mai mult în ceea ce priveşte aceste reforme
ale sistemelor medicale.
2-359
Christa Klaß (PPE). – Herr Präsident! Mit der
Patientenmobilität machen wir einen riesengroßen
Schritt hin zu einem Europa der Bürger. Diese Richtlinie
ist gut angelegt. Sie hat nicht nur einen bekennenden
Vater – John Bowis –, sie hat auch eine Mutter –
Francoise Grossetête. Herzlichen Dank für diesen
großartigen Einsatz!
Wir haben lange über den richtigen Weg diskutiert, und
wir wissen heute, dass wir noch nicht auf der
Schnelltrasse der Autobahn sind. Aber das Fundament,
auf dem wir aufbauen können, ist solide und gut
angelegt. Die Situation ist kompliziert. Wir haben
27 Mitgliedstaaten mit unterschiedlichen Ausgangspositionen
sowohl bei den Gesundheitsdienstleistungsstrukturen
als auch bei den Versicherungen. Die
Vorabgenehmigung des Krankenhausaufenthaltes in
einem anderen Mitgliedstaat und die Anerkennung der
ethisch-moralischen Grundsätze der eigenen
Gesundheitsgesetzgebung sind der richtige Weg, um
einerseits die eigene Versicherung und die Eigenverantwortlichkeit
zu stützen, andererseits aber trotzdem
allen Bürgern den Zugang zu den Leistungen zu geben,
die andere Mitgliedstaaten anbieten.
Das ist ein großer Fortschritt, gerade auch im Bereich
der seltenen Krankheiten. Nicht jeder Mitgliedstaat ist
hier gleichermaßen intensiv ausgerüstet. Alle können
jetzt von den Erkenntnissen und Strukturen profitieren,
und Spezialisten können sich besser entwickeln, da mehr
Bedarf besteht, weil mehr Menschen Zugang haben. Für
die Menschen meiner Region im grenznahen Bereich zu
Luxemburg, Belgien und Frankreich ist der
grenzübergreifende Zugang zu Gesundheitsdienstleistungen
ein großer Gewinn und eine Bereicherung im
alltäglichen Europa.
2-360
José Manuel Fernandes (PPE). – Senhor Presidente,
caros Colegas, a presente directiva permite que todos os
doentes da União Europeia possam beneficiar de
cuidados de saúde dados os direitos que passam a ter
nesta área e que, aliás, já eram reconhecidos pelo
Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia.
Esta proposta clarifica e facilita o acesso a cuidados de
saúde transfronteiriços e o exercício do direito ao
reembolso pelo Estado-Membro de afiliação. É um
avanço no processo de integração e construção europeia,
no reforço da solidariedade e na Europa dos cidadãos.
Teremos a diminuição das listas de espera, o reforço da
qualidade dos cuidados de saúde, a concorrência e o
incentivo à investigação científica. As doenças raras são
uma prioridade, podendo-se fazer o diagnóstico e o
tratamento no Estado-Membro mais adequado para o
efeito. Esta directiva é para todos os cidadãos europeus
que necessitem de cuidados de saúde.
É, por isso, um disparate que a Sra. Ministra da Saúde de
Portugal diga que esta opção é para as pessoas mais
esclarecidas e as que têm maior poder económico. Isso é
o que acontece agora sem esta directiva. Portugal tem
excelentes cuidados de saúde, excelentes profissionais e
não pode ficar à margem deste importante projecto,
devendo aproveitar esta directiva para se modernizar
ainda mais e competir no sentido de poder prestar
serviços nesta área a todos os cidadãos europeus que
deles necessitem.

18-01-2011 87
Os parabéns à grande relatora, que fez um excelente
trabalho, à Deputada Françoise Grossetête.
2-361
President. − We are now going to start the Catch-the-
Eye procedure. I have 17 people who have asked for the
floor. Given the importance and the significance of this
measure I intend to take everybody, but you must keep
to one minute and the microphone will be switched off
at that point.
Can I just say to the parents of this measure, to John
Bowis in the strangers’ gallery and to Mrs Grossetête the
current rapporteur, and to all the shadow rapporteurs:
patient power has spoken; the European Parliament has
listened. Thank you all very much.
2-362
Csaba Sógor (PPE). – A világosabban meghatározott
betegjogokat, a végeérhetetlen várakozási listák végét, a
saját országában nem létező szakemberek problémáját
áthidaló javaslatot üdvözlöm ebben az irányelvben.
Gondolom, mindannyian értjük és átérezzük az új és
szerény anyagi körülményekkel számoló tagállamok
egészségügyi rendszerének helyzetét is, hiszen nekünk
ráadásul a szakképzett munkaerő elvándorlásának
veszélyével is számolni kell.
Ha igennel szavazunk, újabb óriási erőfeszítést kérünk a
szerényebb lehetőségekkel rendelkező tagállamok
egészségügyétől, ha nemmel, közvetve éppen az érintett
tagállamokban a betegek jogainak érvényesítése
továbbra is korlátozott marad. Meggyőződésem, hogy
sikerül megtalálni azokat a lehetőségeket, amelyek révén
a tagállamok különböző adottságú egészségügyi
rendszereinek működése kiegyenlítődhet. Országomban
például a balneológia, a fizioterápia vagy éppen a
fogászat révén sikerülhet versenyképes szolgáltatásokat
nyújtani.
2-363
Richard Howitt (S&D). – Mr President, I am deeply
disturbed that our amendment to require medical
regulators in one country to tell their EU counterparts
when a health professional is facing disciplinary or
criminal proceedings failed at the committee stage and
will not be put to the final vote on this new EU crossborder
health law.
Let me tell you about the case of German doctor Daniel
Ubani, who unlawfully killed my Cambridgeshire
constituent David Gray by administering 10 times the
recommended dose for a painkiller. He was struck off in
Britain yet he continues to practise in Germany today.
Then there is the case of Dr Marcos Ariel Hourmann,
convicted for manslaughter for deliberately
administering a lethal injection in Spain, yet working at
the accident and emergency department of West Suffolk
Hospital, also in my constituency, despite a clear request
to Spain about his fitness to practise.
These examples show that there is a huge loophole in
European law, which allows health professionals
recognised as unfit to practise in one of our countries the
opportunity to work and to put patients at risk in another.
I would ask the Commissioner to explain why.
2-364
Krisztina Morvai (NI). – Szeretettel kérem a magyar
elnökség képviselőit, a Tanácsot, hogy ezt a fél évet, a
magyar elnökség fél évét használják ki arra is, hogy az
új tagállamok, a posztkommunista országok, így
Magyarország sajátos problémáit hozzák be ezekbe a
vitákba. Amikor például most arról van szó, hogy
határokon átnyúló, európai méretű, kvázi egységesített
egészségügyi szolgáltatási rendszert vezetünk be, nem
szabad elfeledkezni arról, hogy kezeljük azt a problémát
is, hogy például Magyarországon havi 250 euró körüli
fizetésért dolgoznak szakképzett és jól képzett ápolónők,
500 eurós, 600 eurós fizetésért dolgoznak orvosok. Nem
gondolja az Európai Unió, hogy rendkívül etikátlan,
erkölcstelen és elfogadhatatlan dolog ünnepelni
valamiféle egységesített európai egészségügyet anélkül,
hogy a fizetésekre is odafigyelnének ... (az elnök
megvonja a szót)
2-365
la toruSiiri Oviir (ALDE). – Me astume edasi olulise
sammu patsientide huvides. Sellest rääkisid täna siin
paljud esinejad. Kuid mis minu kõrva riivas, oli see, et
taas toonitati ka kartust meditsiiniturismi soodustamise
pärast. Nendes sõnavõttudes kumas läbi hirm, et
madalama elatustasemega ning väiksema
tervishoiueelarvega liikmesriikide patsiendid
ummistavad rikkamate riikide arstide kabinetid, tõrjudes
kõrvale nende oma koduriigi patsiendid.
Mõelgem nüüd – see hirm ei ole ju eluline. Makstakse
välja koduriigi hindades, vahe tuleb tasuda patsiendil ise.
Haigel inimesel pole liigset raha, et kahe- või
kolmekordseid hinnavahesid kinni maksta. Mul on
piinlik kuulda, et me nüüd ja ikka veel kardame niiöelda
Poola torumehe müüti.
2-366
Marina Yannakoudakis (ECR). – Mr President, the
importance of health care and this directive cannot be
overemphasised. It can have fundamental consequences
for Member States’ health systems.
The areas that are controversial and worrying have been
dealt with, I am pleased to say, and the result is a strong,
defining directive that will strengthen Member State
positions in health care.
The challenge was to protect the integrity of healthcare
systems while offering patients greater choice. The need
for Member States to retain control over the policy
direction and budgetary requirements of their health
services was met by the pre-authorisation clause and the
fact that Member States would choose which services
were carried out.
E-health was also dealt with in a very sensible fashion in
that it is offered in order to provide flexibility, and
Member States can pick it up if they wish and when they
wish.

88 18-01-2011
Overall we have before us a piece of work that secures
Member States’ autonomy in their health systems while
offering patients best service. I congratulate the
rapporteur and John Bowis for a job well done.
2-367
Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, tá tú an-fhial chun
seans a thabhairt do gach duine labhairt. Dá bhrí sin,
coimeádfaidh mise an margadh agus labhairt ar feadh
nóiméid amháin.
Bhí an díospóireacht seo an-shuimiúil agus bhí sé anoideachasúil
domsa. Go háirithe, chuir sé áthas orm go
bhfuil an tAontas Eorpach ag tabhairt tús áite dár nothair,
is cuma an bhfuil siad saibhir nó bocht. Agus
freisin, ós rud é go mbeidh eolas ar fáil in aon áit amháin
i ngach uile tír, cabhróidh sé sin go mór lenár n-othair.
Freisin cuirfidh an Treoir seo brú ar gach uile stát
ardchaighdeán seirbhíse a bheith acu mar, mura mbeidh
sé sin ann, beidh fonn ar ár saoránaigh taisteal go tír eile
ina mbeidh sé seo ar fáil. Mar fhocal scoir, ní dúradh
mórán faoi e-sláinte ach tá an áis sin an-thábhachtach
chomh maith agus cloisfimid níos mó faoin ábhar seo
amach anseo.
2-368
Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D). – Dalli biztos úr, Győri
államtitkár asszony! Gratulálok Grossetête asszonynak
ehhez a jelentéséhez. Én négy elemet emelnék ki.
Először is rendkívül fontos a nemzeti kapcsolattartó
pontok felállítása a tájékozódás, a betegek tájékozódása
érdekében. Nagyon fontos, hogy pontosan tudjuk, a
feltételeket mikor kell előzetesen engedélyezni. Nagyon
fontos a ritka betegségek esetében. Nagyon fontos, hogy
főszabályként a beteg nem kötelezhető előleg fizetésére
és végül – amely Magyarország és Közép-Európa
számára rendkívül fontos – a határon átnyúló
egészségügyi térségek, hiszen a német-osztrák határ
mentén vagy Magyarország-Szlovákia, Magyarország-
Románia határ mentén, ahol a nyelvi és államhatárok
nem esnek egybe, nagyon sok kiépítetlen és fölösleges,
nem kihasznált egészségügyi kapacitás van, és a nyelvi
akadályok sincsenek ebben. Gratulálok még egyszer.
2-369
Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE). – Accesul la serviciile
medicale transfrontaliere este o condiţie de bază pentru
ca pacienţii să poată beneficia de cel mai bun tratament
disponibil, iar stabilirea unor reguli cât mai clare şi
funcţionale poate face posibil acest lucru. Îmbunătăţirea
drepturilor pacienţilor, în special prin asigurarea
furnizării de informaţii şi prin cooperarea dintre statele
membre, este posibilă prin dezvoltarea sistemului de esănătate
şi asigurarea diseminării informaţiei referitoare
la asistenţa medicală transfrontalieră.
Acţiunile de promovare susţinute de programele de
cooperare transfrontalieră pot crea pacienţilor un grad de
informare care să facă posibilă utilizarea sistemului, cu
cât mai puţine abuzuri, în conformitate cu normele
agreate. De aceea, considerăm că e-sănătate şi asigurarea
promovării eficiente a sistemelor de asistenţă medicală
transfrontalieră trebuie să fie elemente de bază pentru
îndeplinirea prerogativelor Directivei.
2-370
PRESIDE: MIGUEL ANGEL MARTÍNEZ
MARTÍNEZ
Vicepresidente
2-371
Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D). – Sveikinu visus pranešėjus
šio svarbaus dokumento sukūrimo proga. Šiuo metu
žmonėms kyla daug neaiškumų dėl galimybės gauti
sveikatos priežiūros paslaugas kitose Europos Sąjungos
valstybėse narėse, kompensacijų už suteiktas paslaugas,
atsakomybės už klinikinę priežiūrą, po gydymo. Vienoje
valstybėje narėje išrašyti vaistų receptai ne visada
pripažįstami kitose šalyse. Ši direktyva yra labai
reikalinga mūsų žmonėms, nes šiuo metu taikoma
sistema yra paini, o gauti tinkamą informaciją yra
sudėtinga. Be to, mokslo pažanga yra labai nevienoda,
todėl ši direktyva suteiktų galimybę pacientams gauti
tinkamą gydymą kitoje valstybėje narėje, jei jis
neteikiamas pacientui. Tai leistų pacientams realiai
pasinaudoti bendros rinkos teikiamais privalumais ir
turėtų teigiamą poveikį kiekvienos valstybės narės
sveikatos priežiūros sistemos teisingesnei reformai
ateityje.
2-372
Salvatore Iacolino (PPE). – Signor Presidente,
onorevoli colleghi, questo provvedimento è sicuramente
un provvedimento organico, per cui bisogna dare alla
relatrice e a coloro i quali hanno contribuito alla sua
definizione un plauso sincero.
Cure transfrontaliere significano per l'appunto abbattere
le frontiere e dare libertà di scelta al paziente, in stretta
correlazione con quella libertà di movimento che
caratterizza l'Unione europea; una mobilità sanitaria che
viene adesso riconosciuta, sia per le malattie rare sia per
le malattie altamente specialistiche che richiedono per
l'appunto una pronta risposta.
La tempestività e l'appropriatezza della prestazione
consentono di affermare un diritto che è quello alla
salute; una sanità che diventa elettronica, che riduce la
disparità di trattamento dei cittadini nell'Unione europea.
E, perché no, questo provvedimento in prospettiva può
essere una premessa per un accreditamento di tipo
europeo, con garanzie elevate di standard tecnologici e
personali.
2-373
Olga Sehnalová (S&D). – Cílem kompromisního
návrhu směrnice po dvouletém vyjednávání je zajistit
zejména právní jistotu pacientů v souvislosti s
poskytováním přeshraniční zdravotní péče. To je jistě
pozitivní výsledek. Složitost jednání však poukázala
nejen na rozdílnost zdravotních systémů v jednotlivých
členských zemích, ale i na různé ekonomické podmínky,
v nichž je zdravotní péče evropským občanům
poskytována. O tom, že jde o velmi citlivý problém,
svědčí i současné masivní výpovědi nespokojených
lékařů v českých nemocnicích. Na pozadí tohoto
kontextu vyvstávají jistá rizika či nejistoty ohledně
dopadu směrnice, např. ve smyslu zdravotní turistiky za
kvalitní, nicméně levnější zdravotní péčí. Jen čas ukáže,
zda se bude jednat jen o okrajový problém a rozhodně

18-01-2011 89
nezpochybnitelná pozitiva dopadů směrnice budou
převažovat.
2-374
Miroslav Mikolášik (PPE). – Dovoľte mi poblahoželať
kolegyni Mme Grossetête, spravodajkyni, a otcovi tejto
direktívy Johnovi Bowisovi za ohromnú prácu na tejto
norme, ktorej cieľom je bezpečná a kvalitná cezhraničná
zdravotná starostlivosť.
Chcem nepochybne zdôrazniť potrebu takejto regulácie
vzhľadom na doteraz nejednoznačnú úpravu liečby
pacientov v zahraničí, čo im spôsobovalo neistotu, a to
najmä v prípade vzácnych chorôb. Som veľmi rád, že
nariadenie obsahuje špeciálne ustanovenia práve pre
týchto pacientov.
Podporujem líniu spravodajkyne, ktorá zdôrazňuje, že
táto právna úprava je pre pacientov, ktorí to potrebujú, a
nie výlučne pre tých, ktorí na to majú aj finančné
prostriedky. Nariadenie tak predstavuje významný krok
smerom k mobilite pacientov v rámci EÚ. Dohoda s
Radou je rovnováhou medzi pozíciami členských štátov
a Európskeho parlamentu...
(Rečník bol prerušený predsedajúcim)
2-375
Mario Pirillo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli
colleghi, l'accesso alle cure transfrontaliere in Europa ha
presentato finora diversi limiti legati ai lunghi tempi di
attesa, ad un complesso sistema di rimborsi, nonché ad
una difficile individuazione delle responsabilità
dell'assistenza clinica successiva alle cure
transfrontaliere.
La direttiva che il Parlamento europeo si accinge a
votare è un importante passo avanti perché chiarisce
questi aspetti amministrativi e migliora la cooperazione
tra gli Stati, rafforzando anche gli standard di qualità e di
sicurezza delle cure stesse.
Con l'istituzione dei centri informativi nazionali il
paziente potrà avere conoscenza delle cure mediche
disponibili in un altro Stato dell'Unione, degli
adempimenti da assolvere e delle procedure di reclamo e
di ricorso. È questa un'opportunità che si basa non più
sulle possibilità economiche, ma su un vero e proprio
diritto di scelta più consapevole.
2-376
Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė (PPE). –
Sveikinimai pranešėjui ir visiems, kas prisidėjo prie šito
svarbaus dokumento. Tai buvo labai ilgas kelias iki
galutinio sutarimo. Atrodytų, tai visiems priimtinas
dokumentas, tačiau randasi šioje vietoje tam tikrų
skeptikų dėl galbūt nevienodų paslaugų įkainių ar per
didelių biurokratinių reikalavimų baiminimosi, galimo
medicininio turizmo, tačiau, mano nuomone, direktyvoje
tikrai yra subalansuoti mechanizmai kaip išvengti
galimo neigiamo poveikio šito dokumento. Bet visgi
svarbiausia yra sudaryti sąlygas pacientų judumui,
sudaryti galimybę būti Europos Sąjungos piliečiu, t. y.
laisvai judant Europos Sąjungoje taip pat patogiai gauti
ir paslaugas, tai yra svarbiausias dalykas. Kas atgrasytų
nuo naudojimosi šia galimybe – kalbos barjeras ir
informacijos stygius, todėl planuojami kurti kontaktiniai
centrai suteiks pacientams visą reikiamą informaciją,
daugiau aiškumo, pasitikėjimo ir rūpinimosi savimi.
Sveikata svarbi kiekvienam iš mūsų ir bendros sutelktos
pajėgos tik užtikrina ėjimą į priekį šia linkme.
2-377
Κρίτων Αρσένης (S&D). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριε
Επίτροπε, συζητάμε μία οδηγία που πραγματικά λύνει
το πρόβλημα της χρήσης υπηρεσιών υγείας σε άλλα
κράτη μέλη. Η χρήση των υπηρεσιών αυτών γίνεται ήδη.
Η οδηγία, όμως, εναρμονίζει και ρυθμίζει τους όρους
χρήσης των υπηρεσιών αυτών. Συμφωνώ με αυτά που
είπαν οι συνάδελφοι ότι οι υπηρεσίες υγείας πρέπει να
είναι υψηλής ποιότητας και να τις βρίσκει ο πολίτης
στον τόπο διαμονής του. Όμως υπάρχει ανάγκη πολλές
φορές να προσφύγουμε και στις υπηρεσίες υγείας άλλων
κρατών, ιδίως για σπάνιες ασθένειες και νέες θεραπείες.
Χαιρετίζω επίσης το γεγονός ότι γίνεται ειδική αναφορά
στις υπηρεσίες υγείας θερμών πηγών και ιαματικών
πηγών. Η χρήση τους επιτρέπει να βελτιώσουμε με
λίγους πόρους την πρόληψη και θεραπεία πολλών
ασθενειών και μπορεί να είναι πολύ σημαντική για την
«υγεία» και των ασφαλιστικών μας ταμείων.
Κύριε Επίτροπε, σας καλώ πραγματικά να στηρίξετε
αυτήν την πρωτοβουλία για την προώθηση των
υπηρεσιών αυτών.
2-378
Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE). – Senhor Presidente,
Senhor Comissário, Senhora Ministra, a presente
directiva estabelece regras para facilitar o acesso a
cuidados de saúde transfronteiriços, seguros e de
qualidade e promove a cooperação entre os
Estados-Membros no pleno respeito das competências
nacionais.
Nela estão contidos valores fundamentais da
universalidade do acesso a cuidados de saúde de elevada
qualidade, de equidade e da solidariedade. São claras as
vantagens para os pacientes, sobretudo para aqueles que
padecem de doenças raras e complexas, pois poderão ter
acesso aos centros de excelência da área da doença de
que sofrem.
Esta directiva é mais um exemplo da Europa colocada ao
serviço dos cidadãos. Estamos todos de parabéns,
principalmente a Comissão, o Conselho e a nossa
colega, Françoise Grossetête pelo excelente trabalho e
por ter ajudado a tornar esta directiva numa realidade...
(O Presidente retira a palavra à oradora.)
2-379
Αντιγόνη Παπαδοπούλου (S&D). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η
διασυνοριακή υγειονομική περίθαλψη είναι μία
αναγκαιότητα στις μέρες μας. Η παρούσα οδηγία
δημιουργεί τις προϋποθέσεις για μια Ευρώπη χωρίς
σύνορα στον ιατρικό τομέα. Οι πάσχοντες από χρόνιες
σοβαρές παθήσεις μπορούν πια να απολαμβάνουν

90 18-01-2011
εξειδικευμένες θεραπείες, να έχουν μεγαλύτερη
κινητικότητα και πληρέστερη πληροφόρηση από τα
σημεία επαφής, καθώς επίσης μηχανισμούς κάλυψης
των εξόδων χωρίς ταλαιπωρία. Η νέα κοινοτική οδηγία
δημιουργεί νέες προκλήσεις, πιέσεις για εκσυγχρονισμό
των εθνικών συστημάτων υγείας στις 27 χώρες μέλη της
Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και, αναντίλεκτα, την ανάγκη για
διαρκή δικτύωση και συνεργασία όλων των ιατρικών
συστημάτων των 27 χωρών μελών της Ευρωπαϊκής
Ένωσης με στόχο πάντα την ανταλλαγή καλών
πρακτικών, την προώθηση της ηλεκτρονικής υγείας και
οπωσδήποτε τη διαρκή βελτίωση της ποιότητας της
συνοριακής υγειονομικής περίθαλψης. Αυτή είναι μία
πρόκληση που πρέπει να την αντιμετωπίσουμε...
(Ο Πρόεδρος αφαιρεί το λόγο από την ομιλήτρια)
2-380
John Dalli, Member of the Commission. − Mr President,
once again let me congratulate Parliament on the major
achievement of reaching a conclusion on this directive. I
am very pleased to see this directive being adopted.
I must say that I cannot agree with the inference that this
initiative promotes health tourism or enables health
insurance companies to reduce costs. Rather, it is an
assurance that citizens in need of health care can be in a
better position to get it, freeing them from bureaucratic
shackles that sometimes preclude them from doing so.
I believe the directive is a real breakthrough for patients
and for reinforcing a Europe of health. I must agree with
Mrs Roth-Behrendt, Mrs McGuinness and others that
this should be an incentive for Member States to invest
in their own healthcare systems because, as I have said
in public many times referring to this directive, we do
not want to make nomads out of our citizens. We want
our citizens to get the best treatment they can get at
home.
With this directive, patients’ rights in cross-border
healthcare are now enshrined in EU legislation, but our
work does not stop here. I refer here to Mrs Parvanova’s
question about possible stand-alone proposals on
interoperability. I must say that interoperability is also
key to making this initiative, this directive, operational
and implementable, because I cannot see us
implementing this directive in a really good way without
a proper interoperable e-health system. On the other
hand, interoperability is also very important for
increasing equality in health care and improving the
sustainability of health care.
I now look forward to working together with the
Member States to see this directive properly
implemented and enforced throughout the EU. Much
remains to be done, both at European and national level,
to ensure that cooperation between health systems in
Europe becomes a reality. You can count on me to
pursue this challenge with all my determination and
energy.
2-381
Enikő Győri, a Tanács soros elnöke. − Tisztelt
képviselő hölgyek és urak, biztos úr, korábbi
jelentéstevő úr! Nagyon szépen köszönöm ezt a
termékeny vitát. Azt hiszem, kiválóan bemutatta azokat
a pontokat, amelyekkel a legnehezebben küzdöttek meg
mind a Tanácsban, mind ebben a Házban a vita
résztvevői az elmúlt évek során, és annak is nagyon
örülök, hogy a képviselők túlnyomó többsége
egyetértését fejezte ki.
Igen, világosabb helyzetet teremt ez az irányelv, egy
átláthatóbb rendszer jön létre az európai polgárok
szolgálatában. A magyar elnökség, ez a holnapi
programbemutatón is egyértelművé fog válni, az
embereket kívánja programja középpontjába állítani.
Kiderült az is, hogy amit alkottunk, az nem tökéletes.
Van helye annak, hogy majd további munka legyen.
Dalli úr is utalt az előbb erre.
Nagyon érdekesnek találtam azt a vitát, amely arról
szólt, hogy most akkor az egységes piac és a szolgáltatás
irányelv, és hogy jön össze ez a történet a betegjogokkal.
Én azt gondolom, hogy nagyon okos megoldás volt az,
hogy nem a szolgáltatások oldala felől közelítettünk,
hiszen mindenki emlékszik, hogy mekkora vihart kavart
a szolgáltatás irányelv annak idején. Helyes volt, hogy a
betegjogokon keresztül születik most meg ez az
irányelv, a betegek szabad mozgását teszi lehetővé és
azt, hogy mégis a betegek jobb minőségű és megfelelő
időben juthatnak szolgáltatáshoz. Tehát más
megközelítéssel, de a célunkat azt hiszem, hogy elértük.
Ami nagyon fontos, hogy a választás szabadságát erősíti
meg ez az irányelv, a már általam korábban felsorol
egyenlő esélyek, jobb minőségű ellátáshoz való jog,
méltányosság és szolidaritás elvein túl.
Elnök úr, tisztelt képviselő hölgyek és urak! Nagyon
örülök, hogy ez a direktíva magyar elnökség alatt
születhet meg. A dicsőség nem a mienk, hanem az
elődöké, Belgiumé és Spanyolországé és ezen Ház
tagjaié. Nagyon köszönöm, hogy az európai polgárokat
ilyen mértékben szolgálta a Tanács és a Parlament
kiváló együttműködése.
2-382
El Presidente. − Quiero aprovechar la ocasión para
felicitar, desde luego, a la señora Grossetête por el
magnífico trabajo que han realizado ella y los ponentes
alternativos de los distintos Grupos en una materia muy
delicada y muy complicada, a la que creo que
deberíamos dar una publicidad muy grande, porque es
uno de los temas que, de verdad, va a llegar a todos los
ciudadanos de los veintisiete Estados miembros.
¡Felicidades!, señora Grossetête.
2-383
Françoise Grossetête, rapporteur. − Monsieur le
Président, je partage complètement votre point de vue et
je voudrais tout d'abord remercier les nombreux députés
qui sont intervenus tout au long de ce débat pour
soutenir cette directive. Je remercie encore les
rapporteurs fictifs de chaque groupe politique – je vois
Dagmar Roth-Behrendt, mais je pense à tous mes
collègues, je ne peux pas tous les citer –, je les remercie

18-01-2011 91
parce qu'ils ont participé activement et contribué
largement à ce que l'on obtienne cet accord politique le
21 décembre avec le Conseil, qui aboutira demain.
Alors, à mes collègues qui ont exprimé un certain
nombre de réserves sur le tourisme médical, entre autres,
je dis "Eh bien, non! Nous veillons à cela." La directive
a prévu la clause de sauvegarde pour les États membres,
la directive a prévu que les États membres puissent
assurer la maîtrise de la planification de leurs soins de
santé et de leurs infrastructures et tout cela sera fait
justement pour éviter le tourisme médical.
À ceux qui estiment que cette directive n'est pas assez
ambitieuse, je dis "Vous avez raison, moi aussi, j'aurais
souhaité que l'on aille plus loin!" Mais aujourd'hui, il
faut considérer que nous sommes à une première étape
de cette directive et je vois que le commissaire Dalli, qui
nous a beaucoup aidés en la matière, est d'accord avec
moi.
Nous allons veiller tous ensemble à ce que, d'abord, la
transposition de cette directive se fasse dans les
meilleures conditions. D'ici trente mois, cette directive
sera appliquée et il faudra que nous soyons vigilants,
tous, dans nos États membres pour que cette directive
soit vraiment en faveur du droit des patients.
Je terminerai en vous disant que le vote de demain est
essentiel. J'attends de vous que vous permettiez que cette
directive remporte un beau succès car ce succès-là, vous
l'offrirez aux patients puisqu'enfin nous allons
reconnaître le droit des patients à une santé de qualité.
2-384
El Presidente. − Se cierra el debate.
La votación tendrá lugar mañana al mediodía.
Declaraciones por escrito (artículo 149 del
Reglamento)
2-385
János Áder (PPE), írásban. – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! A
határon átnyúló betegjogokra vonatkozó irányelv
tervezet szakbizottsági vitája során még kevesen voltak
azok, akik Peter Liese kollégámhoz hasonlóan nem a
veszélyt, hanem a lehetőséget látták a jogszabályban.
Mi, magyarok osztjuk ezt a véleményt. A most
megkötött kompromisszum, amely a betegjogok és a
tagállami félelmek közötti jó kompromisszumnak
tekinthető, nagyban eltér ugyan a korábbi
jelentéstervezettől, a lehetőség azonban továbbra is
megmaradt. Úgy is mondhatnánk, hogy egy kis lépés a
jó irányba. Mi ez a lehetőség? Míg többek korábban a
külföldi betegek irreálisan nagy tömegeinek hirtelen
beáramlását és a nemzeti egészségügyi rendszerek
összeomlását vizionálták, addig véleményem szerint
inkább lehetőség nyílik arra, hogy a jövőben jobban
kihasználhassuk országunk természetes adottságait. Itt
nemcsak a gyógyvizeinkre gondolok, hanem a földrajzi
fekvésre és a szakképzett munkaerő árára is. Végre
lehetősége lesz az egészségügyben dolgozóknak arra,
hogy szaktudásukat és esetleges felesleges kapacitásukat
jobban kiaknázzák. Jól jár az a beteg is, aki a saját
országában bizonyos természeti adottságok miatt ki nem
épült egészségügyi szolgáltatásokat akadályok nélkül
vehet majd igénybe egy másik tagállamban. Jól jártak
tehát az egészségügyben dolgozók és a betegek is, de a
tagállamok is nyugodtak lehetnek az irányelvbe beépített
számtalan féknek köszönhetően. Gratulálok a
jelentéstevőnek és valamennyi kollégának, aki
hozzájárult a sikerhez!
2-386
Giovanni Collino (PPE), per iscritto. – La
standardizzazione dell'assistenza sanitaria in Europa
terrà conto della qualità dei servizi offerti, che dovrà
essere omogenea per i cittadini dei 27 Stati membri
indipendentemente dal censo, e della fattibilità
economica, per il completamento del mercato interno
anche a livello sanitario.
Invito il Presidente e i miei colleghi parlamentari a fare
in modo che l'intervento dell'Europa non si fermi
all'approvazione di questa iniziativa, ma solleciti anche
azioni a livello locale, prima di tutto per l'accoglimento
del provvedimento nei singoli Stati.
Non meno importante, poi, è l'adozione di tutte quelle
misure transfrontaliere che servono al funzionamento
dell'intero sistema. Penso ad un meccanismo adeguato di
raccolta dei dati, di cui una regione di frontiera come il
Friuli Venezia Giulia ha bisogno per ottimizzare la
collaborazione sia all'interno del territorio nazionale,
soprattutto adesso che il federalismo fiscale per il nostro
paese è sempre più vicino, sia con quei territori
confinanti, come alcune regioni limitrofe della Slovenia,
con le quali è cominciato da tempo un importante
dialogo costruttivo sulla gestione dei servizi sanitari.
Penso anche ad una formazione adeguata del personale i
cui pazienti e le cui competenze dovranno essere sempre
più globali in una realtà che non è più soltanto europea.
2-387
Alajos Mészáros (PPE), írásban. – A munkaerő szabad
áramlása és az idegenforgalom fejlesztése szükségessé
teszi a határon átnyúló egészségügyi ellátás
problémáinak megoldását. Az ellátáshoz való hozzáférés
és a visszatérítések szabályainak egyértelműnek és
közismertnek kell lenni a tagállamok polgárainak. A cél
az, hogy a polgárok előzetes engedély nélkül bármelyik
tagállamban igénybe vehessenek olyan nem kórházi és
kórházi ellátást, amelyre saját tagállamukban is
jogosultak, és ennek költségeit a saját rendszerükben
meghatározott mértékig vissza is térítik számukra. Az
esetleges visszaélések veszélye, utalva az „egészségügyi
turizmusra”, nem lehet akadály ebben az esetben, de
természetesen meg kell tenni mindent ennek a
minimalizálása érdekében.
Hangsúlyoznom kell, hogy a javaslat a betegek unión
belüli mobilitását érinti, nem pedig a „szolgáltatások
szabad mozgását”. El kell mondani, hogy egy jól
felállított rendszer hozzáadott értéket is szolgáltathat a
szabad kapacitások kiaknázása területén és a logisztikai
veszteségek elkerülésének érdekében. Egyes esetekben a
határ menti gyors beavatkozás életeket is menthet. És

92 18-01-2011
még egy fontos aspektus: a határon átnyúló
egészségügyi ellátás abban az esetben is nagy
jelentőséggel bír, amikor egy tagállamban hiányzik
valamely betegség megfelelő színvonalú kezelése, más
országban pedig megtalálható. A javaslatot
kiegyensúlyozottnak tartom, ahol egy kompromisszum
született a tagállamok fenntartásai és az Európai
Parlament ambíciói között.
2-388
Rovana Plumb (S&D), în scris. – La ora actuală există
prea multe incertitudini în ceea ce priveşte accesul la
asistenţă medicală, rambursările şi responsabilitatea
pentru supravegherea clinică în contextul asistenţei
medicale transfrontaliere. Prezenta directivă permite
tuturor pacienților – nu numai celor mai bine informaţi
sau celor mai bogaţi dintre aceştia – să beneficieze de o
serie de drepturi deja recunoscute de către Curtea de
Justiţie a Uniunii Europene în ceea ce priveşte asistenţa
medicală. Organizarea şi gestionarea sistemelor de
securitate socială intră în responsabilitatea exclusivă a
statelor membre. Propunerea se referă la pacienți şi la
mobilitatea acestora în cadrul UE, şi nu la libera
circulație a furnizorilor de servicii. Directiva prevede
cooperarea între statele membre în special în ceea ce
privește recunoașterea recomandărilor medicale
(tratamente, rețete etc.) emise în alt stat membru, esănătate
şi HTA (evaluarea tehnologiilor de vârf).
Accesul cetățenilor la aceste informații va fi facilitat prin
rețeaua de referință, creată din punctele naționale de
contact. Astfel, Autoritățile române trebuie să se asigure
că cetățenii săi au acces la informații. Adoptarea acestui
raport contribuie la asigurarea unui bun echilibru între
drepturile pacienților din UE de acces la cel mai bun
tratament medical şi protecția durabilității financiare a
sistemului național de asigurări sociale.
2-389
Bernadette Vergnaud (S&D), par écrit. – Par rapport à
la proposition initiale de la Commission, qui facilitait la
mobilité de patients-clients dans une vision marchande
de la santé, je me félicite des avancées contenues dans
cet accord. Il était en effet indispensable pour
sauvegarder nos systèmes de protection sociale de
rétablir un système d'autorisation préalable pour les
soins hospitaliers ou coûteux. De même, la référence à
l'article 168 du traité était nécessaire pour garantir le
respect des prérogatives des États membres sur
l'organisation de leur système de santé publique. Enfin,
il y a des avancées louables en matière de coopération et
d'information aux patients.
En revanche, des lacunes majeures subsistent: l'absence
de réflexion sur la mobilité des professionnels, la
démographie médicale, ou le vieillissement de la
population. D'autres propositions législatives devraient y
remédier –notamment celle sur les qualifications
professionnelles – où il sera important de réaffirmer que
la santé est un secteur avec ses spécificités et qu'elle
n'est pas une marchandise régie par les seules lois du
marché, mais le bien le plus précieux des citoyens.
2-390
14 - Iniciativa europea acerca de la
enfermedad de Alzheimer y otras demencias
- Inhaladores para el asma (debate)
2-391
El Presidente. − El punto siguiente es el, debo decir,
extraño debate conjunto sobre
- el informe de Marisa Matias, en nombre de la
Comisión de Medio Ambiente, Salud Pública y
Seguridad Alimentaria, sobre una iniciativa europea
acerca de la enfermedad de Alzheimer y otras demencias
(2010/2084(INI)) (A7-0366/2010), y,
- la pregunta oral a la Comisión sobre los inhaladores
para el asma, de Erminia Mazzoni, en nombre de la
Comisión de Peticiones (O-0182/2010 – B7-0666/2010).
2-392
Marisa Matias, relatora. − Senhor Presidente, eu
gostaria de começar por dar um exemplo que me parece
claro da urgência desta iniciativa. Começámos o
trabalho no Parlamento há seis meses, exactamente há
seis meses, entre o período de início da elaboração do
relatório e o período de voto. Durante estes seis meses,
mais de 700 000 pessoas na Europa desenvolveram
Alzheimer ou qualquer outro tipo de demência. Este
número por si só mostra o quão relevante e urgente é
intervir neste domínio. E é por isso que, em boa hora,
vem a Comunicação da Comissão.
As pessoas que sofrem de Alzheimer e de outras
demências na Europa têm que ser tratadas todas por
igual. São mais de 7 milhões de pessoas com Alzheimer,
são quase 10 milhões de pessoas que sofrem no total de
doenças demenciais.
Se falássemos de números, falaríamos da dimensão de
um país médio. Nós não podemos discriminar uma
doença como não podemos discriminar um país. Temos
que tratá-los a todos por igual. E é por isso mesmo que é
preciso e urgente intervir em várias áreas. Na área da
investigação, nós sabemos que esta doença duplica a
cada vinte anos em termos de números.
Nós sabemos que se a faixa etária for com mais de 65
anos, o número de duplicação é a cada quatro anos, e é
por isso mesmo que nós temos que investir nas causas e
descobrir as causas porque não temos outra forma de
intervir sobre um problema se não o conhecermos bem.
E para isso mais investigação, mais cooperação e mais
dados epidemiológicos.
Precisamos também de conhecer melhor como intervir
em matéria de prevenção e em matéria de controlar os
factores de risco. Precisamos de um diagnóstico precoce,
precisamos de cuidados especializados, de treinar os
cuidadores. Precisamos de dar apoio às famílias, de não
estigmatizar os doentes, de lhes dar direitos, de lhes dar
dignidade. Precisamos que todos os países tenham
planos de acção nacionais para depois termos uma
cooperação à escala europeia. Precisamos de combater
as desigualdades entre Estados-Membros e dentro dos

18-01-2011 93
Estados-Membros. Não podemos admitir que haja
doentes de primeira e de segunda. Têm de ser todos
iguais, independentemente do sexo, da idade, do local de
residência ou outro qualquer critério.
É por isso, Senhor Presidente, que é muito, muito
importante que possamos ter a maior cobertura possível
dos serviços de saúde. E não podemos evitar falar destas
urgências apenas porque estamos em crise e falamos
sempre dos custos da doença. Os custos sociais e
económicos resultantes de não tratar deste problema são
muito maiores, são muito mais elevados do que se o
enfrentarmos. E é por isso que temos que enfrentar este
problema e investir, investir nas pessoas, investir, como
disse, na prevenção e dar apoio às famílias e aos
cuidadores que tantas vezes são esquecidos.
Nós sabemos que para cada pessoa que sofra de
Alzheimer são precisas três pessoas para cuidar dela.
Uma pessoa que sofra de Alzheimer não pode passar
uma hora sem acompanhamento. Isto tem que nos servir
de lição. Não podemos continuar sem articulação, sem
cooperação e sem uma cooperação que seja solidária
entre os Estados-Membros para responder a este
problema.
E é por isso que eu gostaria de dizer o seguinte: falando
em cooperação, todos sabemos e todas sabemos que
nenhum deste trabalho pode ser feito isoladamente e
também aqui dentro do Parlamento o trabalho foi feito
em cooperação com todas as relatoras-sombra de todos
os grupos parlamentares, com o apoio das três mulheres
que me ajudaram na Comissão do Ambiente, no meu
grupo parlamentar, na minha delegação.
E é por isso que quero agradecer muito a todas essas
mulheres, e se calhar não é por acaso que foram só
mulheres que trabalharam neste relatório, é porque as
mulheres são as mais afectadas, são elas que tratam dos
relatórios Alzheimer e são elas que também tratam dos
doentes de Alzheimer, incluindo os homens. E por isso
quero que se preste também atenção às formas de
discriminação que estão escondidas sob a forma de não
haver tratamento nem resposta para estas matérias.
E termino dizendo que gostaria de questionar
directamente o Sr. Comissário para lhe perguntar que
propostas incluídas neste relatório está a Comissão
disposta a aceitar e quando estará disposta a aceitar e dar
seguimento a tamanha urgência como é esta que
vivemos actualmente.
2-393
Erminia Mazzoni, Autore. − Signor Presidente,
onorevoli colleghi, devo dire che condivido anch'io le
perplessità sulla logica dell'abbinamento di questa
interrogazione con la precedente relazione, ma
l'importante per me è che oggi quest'Aula si occupi
dell'argomento che è contenuto nell'interrogazione da me
presentata a nome della commissione per le petizioni.
Questa interrogazione solleva un caso di denegata
giustizia nei confronti di una piccola impresa europea
per l'inerzia purtroppo consumata dalla Commissione dal
1997 ad oggi, così come ha sostenuto anche la
commissione giuridica che è stata interpellata per un
parere dalla commissione che io presiedo.
La vicenda riguarda un apparecchio medico, nello
specifico un inalatore per asmatici, brevettato nel 1990 e
immesso regolarmente sul mercato. Questo prodotto
rientra nella disciplina dettata dalla direttiva 93/42/CEE,
la quale prevede che la conformità alle prescrizioni sia
oggetto di autocertificazione da parte del produttore e
affida poi alle autorità nazionali un potere di controllo
sulla regolarità, attraverso attività di monitoraggio e di
controllo a campione.
Il prodotto, diffuso con successo sul mercato per sei
anni, quindi fino al 1996, in assenza di specifiche
contestazioni e di rilievi che non sono mai stati
documentati nel corso di oltre quindici anni, viene
sottoposto a controllo da parte dell'Autorità governativa
dell'Alta Baviera che chiede alla commissione del
Magdeburgo di rivedere l'autorizzazione rilasciata a
questa società.
Nel dicembre dello stesso anno, la commissione, il
ministro della Salute della Sassonia-Anhalt procede a
questa attività di controllo e conclude la procedura
dichiarando la perfetta conformità del prodotto alle
prescrizioni normative, sollevando tra l'altro, al termine
di questa procedura, un dubbio sulla fondatezza della
richiesta formulata dall'Autorità governativa dell'Alta
Baviera e invitando la stessa, nel caso dovessero
permanere dubbi, ad avviare la procedura di
salvaguardia prevista dalla direttiva citata.
Nel corso dell'anno successivo si susseguono una serie
di attività non documentate, delle quali abbiamo notizia
solo de relato, e si arriva poi nel 1997,
improvvisamente, senza nessuna comunicazione fatta al
produttore, a un provvedimento da parte del ministro
della Salute federale di ritiro del prodotto dal mercato.
La procedura viene avviata alla fine del 1997 dal
ministero – la procedura ai sensi dell'articolo 8 della
direttiva citata – ma va a finire su un binario morto,
perché non si hanno notizie, non viene avviata la fase
delle consultazioni con il produttore. Nel silenzio
generale il produttore, nel 2003, ritenendo di poter
attribuire a questo silenzio un significato di evidente
negazione di quei rilievi non chiariti formulati dalle
autorità tedesche, reimmette sul mercato il prodotto a
metà del 2003.
Purtroppo nel 2005, sempre senza una comunicazione, le
autorità tedesche emettono un nuovo provvedimento di
ritiro dal mercato di questo prodotto. Da precisare che
non risulta ancora oggi, nonostante le reiterate richieste,
alcun elemento che porti a chiarire il perché di questo
ritiro del prodotto.
Quindi: mancata comunicazione, mancato accertamento,
negazione di qualunque possibilità di legittimo
contraddittorio per il produttore e conseguenze gravi di

94 18-01-2011
carattere economico per lo stesso, perché da oltre
quindici anni è in attesa di una risposta e il suo prodotto
non può circolare sul mercato.
Aggiungo anche che, nel corso dei sei anni di diffusione
del prodotto – e su questo ci sono documenti che sono
stati forniti anche alla Commissione – nei sei anni di
distribuzione del prodotto si sono annotati notevoli
risparmi nella spesa pubblica della sanità per il ridotto
costo del prodotto e positivi effetti per i malati sofferenti
di asma.
Nel 2008, visti vani tutti i tentativi formulati con le altre
autorità, il sig. Klein, il produttore, si rivolge alla
commissione per le petizioni. La commissione avvia la
procedura nel corso di questa legislatura e, considerato il
lungo tempo della vicenda contenuta nella petizione,
avvia anche una consultazione informale con il
Commissario, chiedendo di accelerare i tempi di una
risposta, perché la richiesta dell'autore della petizione è
una richiesta che va nell'ordine di riconfermare la
conformità del prodotto alla normativa europea o, in
subordine, quanto meno di avere un provvedimento
impugnabile davanti alla Corte che quindi gli consenta
di avere giustizia.
Tutto questo non è avvenuto e nel corso della
discussione in commissione petizioni la Commissione
europea, purtroppo, ha eluso le domande ancora una
volta. Ecco perché la commissione ha deciso
all'unanimità di arrivare in Aula e di chiedere in Aula
alla Commissione risposte chiare, perché questa vicenda,
è innegabile, solleva gravi dubbi su una violazione della
Carta dei diritti fondamentali e non solo per l'inerzia
della Commissione, ma anche, e soprattutto, per
l'impossibilità nella quale è posto l'autore della
petizione, il sig. Klein, di adire un'autorità giudiziaria.
La vicenda pone evidenti dubbi sulla violazione delle
regole del mercato e sulla tutela della piccola impresa,
ecco perché insistiamo per avere, qui, delle risposte alle
domande formulate nell'interrogazione.
2-394
El Presidente. − Señora Mazzoni, le agradezco, sobre
todo, el haber compartido mi perplejidad por el
solapamiento de los dos temas, que, naturalmente, no
supone, por mi parte, ningún demérito de una pregunta
importante y que, además, usted plantea en su condición
de presidenta de la Comisión de Peticiones, de la que
formo parte y, por lo tanto, tengo el máximo interés en
lo que allí se hace.
Será muy difícil, tanto para el Comisario como para los
intervinientes, mezclar dos temas de naturaleza tan
distinta y, por lo tanto, cabe preguntarse si es razonable
plantear el debate tal y como se ha planteado en el orden
del día.
2-395
John Dalli, Member of the Commission. − Mr President,
honourable Members, first allow me to pay tribute to
Parliament, in particular to the rapporteur, Mrs Matias,
for your commitment to addressing Alzheimer’s and
other dementias.
The Commission fully shares your concern. Dementia
means great suffering for millions of Europeans and
their families. With a population ageing fast, now is the
time for Europe to act.
This is why the Commission put forward a
Communication on Alzheimer’s and other dementias in
2009 with action to improve prevention and diagnosis,
research and best practice exchange.
I am delighted that Parliament is supporting ongoing
work in this context and presenting a comprehensive set
of recommendations. This report and its
recommendations are very timely at a moment when the
Commission is about to launch a joint action with the
Member States on Alzheimer’s in April, the so-called
ALCOVE (ALzheimer COoperative Valuation in
Europe).
I am persuaded that this joint action will deliver on
many of the recommendations that you are adopting here
today.
The joint action will focus on prevention – an area
which Parliament underlines in this report – and also on
improving knowledge and data and sharing good
practices. It will also address another area where
Parliament is calling for action: the rights of people
living with dementia. I agree with you that we need fully
coordinated research to understand better how to prevent
or delay the onset of dementia. This is why the
Commission has launched a joint programming initiative
on combating neurodegenerative diseases, in particular
Alzheimer’s.
For the first time, 23 countries are working together to
tackle Alzheimer’s. There are good practices across
Europe on diagnosis and treatment for Alzheimer’s and
the Commission is fostering exchange of knowledge and
good practice.
As recommended by Parliament, I can also confirm that
the Innovation Union initiative under the Europe 2020
strategy will take as its first pilot area for the new
European innovation partnership the topic of active and
healthy ageing.
Action to support people suffering from dementia could
be developed in this context. A good example could be
the ongoing Parliament initiative on carers. We hope to
be able to support further innovative actions in this area
which may also address the issues of Alzheimer’s and
other dementias.
Finally the Commission looks favourably at a number of
other recommendations, including declaring 2014 as
European Year of the Brain. Let me assure you that the
Commission is committed to doing its share to address
dementia.

18-01-2011 95
Let me now address the second topic in this debate: the
petition filed by Mr Klein, the inventor and producer of
the inhaler ‘Effecto’.
The placing on the market of the device in question was
originally refused in Germany in 1997. This decision
was not pursued further, either by the Commission, the
German authorities, or the manufacturer. The then
distributor indicated at the time that it would conduct
further studies before placing the product on the market
again.
The device was placed back on the market in 2002 under
a new name. When the product was again prohibited by
the German authorities in 2005, the Commission
carefully analysed the case and concluded the procedure
by formal letter to the German authorities and the
manufacturer in July 2007.
The Commission analysis was that the prohibition by the
German authorities was justified because the clinical
data provided by the manufacturer was insufficient to
demonstrate the safety of the device.
According to the Medical Device Directive, safety has to
be demonstrated by the manufacturer in order for him to
be allowed to use the CE marking. This meant that the
applicable legal provision was Article 18 of the directive
which addresses cases where a product is placed on the
market with improperly affixed CE marking. In this
case, there is no formal Commission decision.
Since, in the Commission’s view, the case is not one to
which the safeguard clause procedure applies, it has no
reason to request notification of the 2005 prohibition
adopted by the German authorities.
The obstacle which the petitioner faces in placing the
product on the market is the decision of the German
authorities (the 2005 prohibition) and not a decision of
the Commission. The petitioner had clear legal avenues
which he could pursue at national level, and indeed he
has made use of these opportunities. His claims,
however, were rejected by the German courts.
I would like to stress that the Commission has, since
2007, invited the petitioner to bring the device into
compliance by providing the missing clinical data and
has facilitated contacts between him and the German
authorities to that end. To the Commission’s knowledge,
no action has been taken by the petitioner so far.
2-396
Elena Oana Antonescu, în numele grupului PPE. – Mă
voi referi la boala Alzheimer şi alte demenţe. Doresc să
o felicit pe doamna raportor Matias pentru munca
depusă şi, în calitate de raportor din umbră din partea
Grupului PPE pe acest dosar, vreau, de asemenea, să
mulţumesc tuturor colegilor care şi-au adus contribuţia.
Atenţia de care s-a bucurat acest dosar arată importanţa
temei şi, în acelaşi timp, gravitatea fenomenului.
Numărul persoanelor care suferă de demenţă se ridică la
9,9 milioane, bolnavii de Alzheimer reprezentând cea
mai mare parte, iar până în anul 2020 ne aşteptăm la o
creştere dramatică a numărului, în condiţiile în care
boala este încă subdiagnosticată în Uniunea Europeană.
Există inegalităţi între statele membre în ceea ce priveşte
prevenţia, accesul la tratamente şi îngrijire. Acţiunile
sunt fragmentate, reacţiile sunt inegale în ceea ce
priveşte cercetarea şi lupta împotriva acestei boli.
Raportul este un pas important în direcţia luptei
împotriva acestei boli în Uniunea Europeană şi un pas
esenţial pentru introducerea unui nou mod de colaborare
între statele membre, prin care să se ia măsuri
coordonate pentru combaterea unor probleme care
afectează întreaga Europă. Raportul sprijină solidaritatea
între state, schimbul de bune practici, pentru a se evita
duplicarea efortului şi risipa de resurse. Doresc să
subliniez importanţa diagnosticării preventive şi a
intervenţiilor timpurii în cazurile incipiente ale bolii şi
cred că aceasta este cheia către progresul în lupta
împotriva acestei maladii.
De asemenea, doresc să amintesc şi importanţa unei
abordări multidisciplinare a cercetărilor în acest
domeniu. Compartimentarea între discipline şi slaba
conectare între cercetarea primară, clinică, domeniul
sănătăţii publice şi cercetarea socială influenţează
transferarea descoperirilor ştiinţifice în practica medicală
şi în asigurarea îngrijirii. Faptul că toate acestea se fac la
nivel naţional accentuează fragmentarea. De aceea,
trebuie să punem accentul pe abordarea multidisciplinară
şi pe transferul descoperirilor şi cunoştinţelor la nivel
comunitar.
2-397
Nessa Childers, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr
President, nearly 10 million Europeans suffer today from
dementia, with Alzheimer’s the most common form.
One of those statistics was my own mother who passed
away last year. I therefore strongly welcome this
European initiative on dementia.
We should be very concerned that only half of cases are
estimated to have been diagnosed. We should be very
concerned that twice as many women as men suffer from
dementia, and we should be very concerned that with an
ageing European population the number of sufferers will
double in the next 20 years.
Given that a five-year delay in the onset of Alzheimer’s
means 50% less prevalence rates, I welcome the focus
on prevention and early detection by the Commission. I
welcome the focus on better research in Europe,
especially as we know that 85% of research today is
without EU coordination. I also welcome the focus on
the sharing of best practices and the rights of sufferers
and their families.
I, and my fellow Social Democrat MEPs, focused on the
social aspects of dementia in our amendments and we
urge the following:

96 18-01-2011
We call for a strong focus on the specific needs of
women, who account for twice the number of sufferers
and a disproportionate number of carers, in the areas of
medical and social research, health, employment and
social policies.
We renew our call on the Commission to legislate for
mental-health-at-work policies, as part of their health
and safety at work responsibility to incorporate persons
with mental disorders into the labour market in the best
way possible.
We recommend an examination of the use of living wills
across European borders, which are so badly needed.
Finally we also highlight the importance, in all
awareness and education campaigns, of the ability to
recognise the symptoms of dementia.
To conclude, I should like to congratulate the rapporteur
Maria Matias, and thank her and my fellow shadow
rapporteurs for their work on this report.
2-398
Frédérique Ries, au nom du groupe ALDE. – Monsieur
le Président, la lutte contre la maladie d'Alzheimer est
devenue une priorité européenne ces dernières années et
il était temps. J'ajoute que je me réjouis de toutes les
initiatives qui viennent d'être annoncées par le
commissaire Dalli.
Cette forme de vieillissement cérébral est en pleine
explosion en Europe et dans le monde: plus de sept
millions de personnes touchées et dix millions si l'on
veut bien considérer les autres types de maladies
neurodégénératives. On peut certes – et on doit – se
féliciter du financement européen actuel de trente-quatre
projets de recherche mais il faudra faire mieux,
beaucoup mieux même, et notamment en termes de
coordination des recherches sur Alzheimer dans le
huitième programme-cadre de recherche et cela dès
2014. C'est clairement spécifié au point 21 de notre
résolution.
Il est également essentiel de privilégier une approche
multidisciplinaire qui englobe le diagnostic, la
prévention, le traitement et l'accompagnement des
patients et de leur famille; cela fait l'objet des points 2 et
20, qui sont très importants. À ce sujet d'ailleurs, une
étude récente, qui vient d'être publiée en France, révèle
les coûts socio-économiques considérables induits par
cette maladie: plus de mille euros par mois pour la prise
en charge médicale et la surveillance des malades
seulement, et cela sans calculer l'immense dévouement
des proches, des familles qui consacrent, au quotidien,
plus de six heures à l'éveil et à l'encadrement du patient.
Aider ces patients, c'est aussi ne pas se tromper de
diagnostic. Le monde scientifique nous l'indique: il s'agit
aujourd'hui de modifier les critères internationaux car,
en appliquant à la lettre des critères souvent obsolètes,
on inclut trop de patients qui ont d'autres formes de
démence.
Au niveau européen – et j'en viens ici au point 64 de
notre résolution –, il est essentiel que notre Parlement
réponde enfin à l'appel des chercheurs. Il faut plus de
volontaires lors des études cliniques si l'on espère
trouver un jour – et c'est une obligation – un traitement
curatif. La révision toute prochaine de cette directive
"essais cliniques" est donc l'occasion rêvée d'y répondre
concrètement et d'apporter de l'espoir aux familles.
2-399
Gerald Häfner, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. –
Herr Präsident! Wer immer das veranlasst hat, diese
Debatten zu mischen, hat dem Parlament keinen guten
Dienst erwiesen und noch weniger unseren Themen!
Überall in Europa steigen die Arzneimittel- und die
Krankenversicherungskosten und überall denken wir
darüber nach, wie wir sie senken können. Es heißt, durch
den medizinischen Fortschritt würden die Heilmittel
immer teurer. In diesem Fall, den wir jetzt verhandeln,
ist es anders. Wir haben 30 Millionen Asthmatiker in
Europa, und wir haben einen kleinen Hersteller, der ein
Instrument entwickelt hat, durch das die Inhalation, die
für Asthmatiker manchmal lebensnotwendig und
therapeutisch extrem wichtig ist, besser, schneller,
effizienter und vor allem kostengünstiger erfolgen kann.
Seit 14 Jahren wird diesem Hersteller der Marktzutritt
verwehrt. Seit 1996 hat er sich an die Kommission
gewandt, seit 2006 beschäftigt sich der
Petitionsausschuss damit. Es ist die Aufgabe der
Kommission, lieber Herr Kommissar Dalli, dem Recht
zur Durchsetzung zu verhelfen und aufseiten der Bürger
zu stehen. In diesem Fall ist es nicht so, sondern die
Kommission verweigert eine klare Entscheidung, eine
Entscheidung, die dem Petenten weiterhilft.
Ich möchte Sie ganz persönlich ansprechen, Herr Dalli,
denn Sie erinnern sich: Wir haben Sie in den
Petitionsausschuss eingeladen, um mit Ihnen zu
diskutieren. Sie haben uns mitgeteilt, Sie hätten dafür
keine Zeit, Sie hätten aber Zeit für ein persönliches
Gespräch. Wir sind zu Ihnen gekommen und haben
persönlich mit Ihnen gesprochen. Sie haben mir
persönlich versprochen, Sie würden sich um den Fall
kümmern und sehr schnell für eine Lösung sorgen. Ich
habe bis heute nichts gehört. Ich habe Ihnen nochmals
einen Brief geschrieben, aber keine Antwort erhalten.
Sie haben versucht, auch die nächste Debatte zu
verhindern. Das ist nicht, wie die Kommission agieren
sollte!
Ich möchte sehr deutlich sagen: Das Europäische
Parlament erwartet – und wir werden über diese
Entschließung morgen gemeinsam abstimmen –, dass
die Kommission aufseiten des Rechts und der Bürger
steht. Wir erwarten, dass Sie einen Schutz für solche
kleinen Hersteller garantieren gegenüber denen, die den
Marktzugang verwehren wollen. Es geht um viel Geld,
es geht aber insbesondere auch um die Gesundheit der
Menschen. Wir kennen die Problematik. Wir verstehen
Ihr Handeln nicht, Herr Dalli. Wir kennen alle Ihre
Argumente. Ich habe bergeweise Akten durchgesehen,
aber kein klares Argument gefunden, das Ihre Position

18-01-2011 97
stärkt. Es geht um ein Medizinprodukt. Es ist 30 000
Mal angewendet worden, millionenfach haben
Menschen inhaliert, mit besten Ergebnissen. Wir haben
Briefe von Krankenkassen, die darum bitten, dass wir
den Marktzugang ermöglichen, damit dort Kosten
gespart werden. Ich erwarte, dass die Kommission
endlich ihre Aufgabe erfüllt und hier zu einer positiven
Entscheidung kommt.
(Der Redner ist damit einverstanden, eine Frage nach
dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ zu beantworten
(Artikel 149 Absatz 8 GO).)
2-400
William (The Earl of) Dartmouth (EFD). – Mr
President, I would like to ask Mr Häfner if he would
agree that the Commissioner’s comments on the matter
of Broncho-Air that we heard earlier have been
thoroughly evasive and unhelpful to the company in
particular and to asthma suffers in general?
2-401
Gerald Häfner (Verts/ALE). – Wenn Sie mir eine
knappe, aber persönliche Antwort erlauben, so ist mein
Eindruck, dass der Kommissar noch nicht die
Gelegenheit wahrgenommen hat, sich persönlich einen
eigenen und neuen Eindruck von der Sache zu
verschaffen. Das aber wäre genau die Chance nach den
langen Jahren, in denen es verschleppt worden ist, dass
Sie, Herr Kommissar Dalli – und ich würde vorschlagen,
durch andere Beamte Ihres Hauses als diejenigen, die
bisher für die Verschleppung verantwortlich waren –
einen neuen Blick auf die Sache werfen und zu einem
neuen Urteil kommen. Ich würde das gerne mit Ihnen
diskutieren, noch lieber wäre mir, Sie würden sich mit
dem Petenten zusammensetzen und für eine Lösung
sorgen.
Ich bin völlig Ihrer Meinung, geschätzter Herr Kollege!
2-402
Marina Yannakoudakis, on behalf of the ECR Group.
– Mr President, 750 000 people in the UK suffer from
dementia; over 50% of these will have Alzheimer’s. The
effects are common but everyone’s experience is
different. There is no cure for this condition which often
holds hostage both patient and carer regardless of age.
But what can be done in the EU? Legislation is clearly
secondary in what primarily needs local support.
However, firstly by bringing this topic to this Chamber,
we can bring it to the forefront, open discussion and
increase public awareness. Leading from this, Member
States can decide on its prioritisation and sharing of best
practice. Secondly, awareness can lead to a greater
understanding of the symptoms and, consequently, early
diagnosis. There are drugs on the market that can assist
here and, if taken at the correct time, can slow down the
process. The important point is this: sufferers are helped,
families have information and support and, ultimately,
the patients are helped to retain their dignity through this
difficult illness.
2-403
William (The Earl of) Dartmouth, on behalf of the
EFD Group. – Mr President, apparently a small German
company, BronchoAir of Munich, has produced an
inhaler which can actually improve the life of asthma
sufferers who rely on such devices to breathe. This
product has been shut out of the market for over 14
years, and the Commissioner’s account of why this has
been was very different from the that of the Chair of the
Committee on Petitions who opened the debate. The
Committee on Legal Affairs has stated, and I quote: ‘the
company has been the victim of a flagrant denial of
justice’ on the part of the Commission.
Why does the Commission favour the big
pharmaceutical companies and their lobbyists? In this
case the UK Independence Party, which I have the
honour to represent, strongly supports the immediate
setting up of an inquiry into the Commission’s handling
of this matter.
2-404
Diane Dodds (NI). – Mr President, as has already been
stated in this Chamber today, in the United Kingdom
almost three-quarters of a million people currently suffer
from some form of dementia. Sixteen thousand of those
live in my constituency in Northern Ireland.
Alzheimer’s is a cruel disease. It strips sufferers of their
personality, it takes away their independence and robs
them eventually of their relationship with family and
friends. It is a devastating disease which places huge
burdens on families and carers, who are often isolated
and in poor health because of the burdens they face. As
has already been mentioned in this House, many of those
who care are women.
In the United Kingdom by 2050 the number of those
with dementia is estimated to soar to approximately 1.7
million. The estimated cost of health and social care by
2018 will be GBP 27 billion. These are staggering
figures, which make research absolutely vital and the
careful targeting of resources in medical and social care
an absolute imperative. I also believe that we should
recognise the contribution of the voluntary and
community sector in this.
Commissioner, you have made much of healthy and
active ageing and I am proud to highlight the work of the
Mullen Mews scheme in Belfast, which has driven off
international competition to win awards for its social
inclusion and improvement of the lives of those who live
with dementia and their families and carers.
2-405
Peter Jahr (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar
Dalli! Ich finde es auch sehr ärgerlich, dass wir jetzt
ständig zwischen zwei Themen wechseln müssen. Ich
hätte mir gewünscht, dass wir zumindest die Themen
nacheinander behandeln.
Also ich spreche wieder zu der Petition von Herrn Klein.
Ich freue mich, dass wir Gelegenheit haben, darüber zu
sprechen, denn der Petitionsausschuss beschäftigt sich
schon seit geraumer Zeit mit dieser Petition. Was ist

98 18-01-2011
passiert? Da gab es einen innovativen Unternehmer, der
eine Inhalierhilfe für Asthmatiker entwickelte. Das war
gut für die Patienten, weil verträglicher. Das war gut für
die Krankenkassen, weil preiswerter. Richtigerweise
wurde der Unternehmer auch ausgezeichnet. Doch dann
der Schock: Das Inhalierhilfsmittel wurde von deutschen
Behörden verboten, und deshalb wurde bei der
Europäischen Kommission ein Schutzklauselverfahren
eröffnet.
Ohne noch einmal auf alle Details einzugehen, bin ich
davon überzeugt, dass bei dem ersten Verbot der
Inhalierhilfe aus dem Jahr 1996 nicht alles rechtmäßig
abgelaufen ist. Die Kommission wäre dazu verpflichtet
gewesen, das Schutzklauselverfahren mit einem
Ergebnis zu beenden, um den Betroffenen den Klageweg
zu eröffnen. Im Ergebnis ist Herr Klein – und an dieser
Stelle zitiere ich die Stellungnahme unseres eigenen
Rechtsausschusses – ein Opfer einer eklatanten
Rechtsverweigerung geworden. Herr Kommissar, hier
geht es mir nicht um Schuldzuweisungen. Wichtig ist
mir, dass eine zeitnahe Lösung gefunden wird, um
dieses Problem nun endlich zu beheben. Ich bitte Sie
einfach: Respektieren Sie auch das einstimmige Votum
unseres Petitionsausschusses. Ich hoffe und setze im
Interesse der Petenten, aber auch im Interesse der
Patienten in der Europäischen Union auf Ihre
Zusammenarbeit und Mithilfe.
2-406
Daciana Octavia Sârbu (S&D). – În zilele noastre
există încă multe incertitudini şi necunoscute despre
boala Alzheimer şi, din păcate, situaţia continuă să se
înrăutăţească, odată cu îmbătrânirea populaţiei în
Europa. Avem nevoie, în mod evident, de cercetare şi
mai multe studii în ce priveşte cauzele şi tratamentul
demenţei, dar, la fel ca şi în cazul bolilor
netransmisibile, există dovezi că nişte măsuri simple în
alegerea modului de viaţă pot preveni multe afecţiuni.
De aceea, în amendamentele depuse, am cerut să fie
acordată mai multă importanţă cercetării efectelor pe
care le are nutriţia în apariţia bolii Alzheimer.
Mulţi dintre noi cunoaştem, cu siguranţă, măcar o
persoană afectată de această boală sau altă formă de
demenţă şi ştim că, de fapt, costurile personale sunt mult
mai mari decât cele sociale sau financiare. Mult
răspânditele şi devastatoarele efecte ale demenţei, la un
număr atât de mare de persoane, ne îngrijorează pe toţi.
Ca rezultat, avem un raport foarte cuprinzător, care
conţine toate problemele cheie şi ne dorim o reacţie
pozitivă din partea Comisiei, dar şi a statelor membre.
2-407
Antonyia Parvanova (ALDE). – Mr President, I too
regret that we are joining one debate to another one: it is
like having a joint debate on shipping and fishing
because both of them happen in the marine environment.
However, I would like to congratulate the rapporteur,
Marisa Matias, and it is indeed of the utmost importance
that the European Union should address, in a concrete
manner, the challenge of Alzheimer’s disease as one of
its health priorities.
The current medical and social burden of this disease
represents a serious threat to the sustainability of our
healthcare and social systems. Several other chronic
diseases will significantly increase in the coming years
and it is crucial that we should also address them in a
comprehensive way with an appropriate preparedness
plan. I sincerely hope that the Commission will take the
lead in building on the European initiative on
Alzheimer’s disease, and will support Member States in
addressing the public health challenges of our ageing
population. I particularly welcome the focus on a
multidisciplinary approach.
Finally, I would like to stress the need to focus on
research, and on targeted investment in this field, with
one priority in mind: not to serve business interests but
to deliver concrete public health outcomes for patients
and citizens.
With regard to the oral questions, I think we are
witnessing here a method of lobbying aimed at
increasing pressure on the German authorities and
contesting EU safety requirements and regulations. It
does not matter whether the companies concerned are
big or small: the only question of importance for us is
the safety of patients.
2-408
Satu Hassi (Verts/ALE). – Arvoisa puhemies, hyvät
kollegat, suuret kiitokset esittelijä Marisa Matiassille
erinomaisesta työstä Alzheimer-mietinnön yhteydessä.
Alzheimerin tauti ja dementiat ovat yhteiskunnalle
valtavan iso asia. Inhimillisen hinnan lisäksi rahallinen
hinta on valtava. Arvioidaan, että Alzheimerin taudin
hoito maksaa vuodessa yli sata miljardia euroa. Se on
enemmän kuin komission arvioima hinta sille, mitä
maksaisi, jos tiukentaisimme kasvihuonekaasupäästövähennystavoitettamme
30 prosenttiin. Alzheimerpotilaiden
määrän arvioidaan kaksinkertaistuvan 20
vuoden välein.
Haluankin korostaa ennaltaehkäisyn ensisijaisuutta ja
varhaista diagnoosia. Erityisesti toivon lisää tutkimusta
siitä, mikä on hermoston kehitystä haittaavien
kemikaalien vaikutus Alzheimeriin ja muiden
hermostorappeutumatautien riskiin. Varovaisuusperiaatteen
nojalla näiden kemikaalien käyttöä torjuntaaineina
puutarhoissamme ja pelloilla tulee joka
tapauksessa vähentää.
2-409
Miroslav Ouzký (ECR). – Budu hovořit také k
Alzheimerově chorobě. Víme, že je to zpráva, která
nemá vlastní legislativní dopad a ani není příliš
konfliktní. Doufám, že nerozdělí toto plénum. Víme ale,
že se jedná o velmi závažné zdravotní postižení s velmi
závažnými ekonomickými dopady a tím pádem i velmi
závažný sociální problém. Ten velmi souvisí se
stárnutím evropské populace a jeho nárůst začíná v
Evropě připomínat jakousi neurologickou epidemii. Co
můžeme udělat v této věci? Můžeme zdůraznit prevenci,
která šetří prostředky a zlepšuje zdravotní stav, můžeme
zlepšit dietní návyky evropské populace, můžeme
sjednotit naši vědeckou základnu v Evropě a

18-01-2011 99
koordinovat práci jednotlivých členských států, můžeme
podporovat občanská sdružení a sdružení rodinných
příslušníků a můžeme napomoci vytváření
specializovaných center v Evropě.
2-410
Philippe Juvin (PPE). – Monsieur le Président, chers
collègues, il y a tant à dire sur la maladie d'Alzheimer.
Permettez-moi de centrer mon propos sur deux aspects:
le premier est la question du maintien à domicile des
patients gravement atteints. Pour des raisons médicales,
nous savons qu'il convient de ne pas bouleverser les
patients dans leur environnement. Un bouleversement de
l'environnement peut aggraver la maladie et ses
symptômes et rendre les choses beaucoup plus difficiles.
Une de nos priorités doit être absolument de permettre
aux patients de rester le plus longtemps possible dans
leur environnement habituel. Pour ce faire, il faut aider
les familles et aider ceux dans les familles qui aident les
patients. Bref, il ne faut pas laisser les familles seules.
C'est un premier point.
Le deuxième point concerne la recherche. Pourquoi?
Parce que, au fond, l'espoir en matière de maladie
d'Alzheimer est de trouver un médicament et, pour
trouver ce médicament, il faut une recherche efficace.
J'entends ici et là dire qu'il faut plus de moyens pour la
recherche. Sans doute! Mais avant tout, avant de parler
de moyens, il faut parler de l'utilisation de ces moyens.
Jusqu'ici, la recherche a été trop fragmentée, saupoudrée.
Aucune priorité n'a été définie. Les gens ne travaillent
pas ensemble et ne parlent pas entre eux. Il faut que
demain le biologiste cellulaire parle avec le
physiologiste, avec le radiologue, avec le neurologue. Il
faut mieux faire travailler les gens ensemble. J'appelle
donc la Commission à donner tout son poids au
programme commun de recherche qui avait été lancé
pendant la Présidence française.
Enfin, je veux conclure en disant aux patients et à leur
famille que les choses avancent. Qu'ils aient confiance,
ils ne sont pas seuls, ils ne sont plus seuls!
2-411
IN THE CHAIR: Edward McMILLAN-SCOTT
Vice-President
2-412
Glenis Willmott (S&D). – Mr President, I would like to
thank the rapporteur and the shadow rapporteurs for
their good work on this report.
Whilst this report on Alzheimer’s is very important, we
know that the power for implementing policy lies mainly
with the Member States. But the ageing population is
one of the most pressing challenges for the future and
we know that dementia is one of the main causes of
disability and dependence among the elderly.
Currently the main responsibility of care tends to lie
with the spouse or child of the dementia patient, which
can be extremely hard work and emotionally gruelling.
This is why our amendments that call on the
Commission to consider the opportunities for creating
jobs from a better care sector in the EU 2020 Strategy
are so important. It is also important that we focus not
only on providing research funding into new drugs to
treat diseases, but also to look at simple preventative
measures that everybody can take such as a change in
diet and lifestyle. Nutrition is increasingly being shown
to be an important factor in the development of
Alzheimer’s and other dementias and we need to
dedicate some of our resources into investigating this
further.
The cost of dementias in the EU was EUR 130 billion in
2005 and it affected 19 million people – that is sufferers
and carers. So it makes sense, both morally and
economically, to ensure that we put more funds into
work into this terrible disease.
2-413
Jorgo Chatzimarkakis (ALDE). – Herr Präsident! Die
Mitteilung und der Bericht sind sehr gut. Deswegen
mein Dank an Kommissar Dalli und Kollegin Matias.
Alzheimer ist eine Plage unserer Zeit, und unser großes
Problem ist: Wir wissen einfach zu wenig über
Alzheimer. Deswegen geht es hier um Forschung,
Forschung, Forschung! Wir müssen unsere Kräfte
bündeln. Ich begrüße daher die Initiative der
Kommission, eine Innovationspartnerschaft zum Thema
gesundes Altern, zu schaffen und Alzheimer passt genau
da hinein.
Die US-Regierung hat vor vielen Jahren einmal den
Kampf gegen Krebs zu einem Leuchtturmprojekt
ausgerufen. Sie haben den Krebs nicht bekämpft, aber
sehr viele Medikamente, sehr viele Therapien sind
daraus entstanden. So etwas brauchen wir heute, und
deswegen begrüße ich es, dass wir uns auf Alzheimer
konzentrieren. Wir müssen wissen: Wie können wir
präventiv vorgehen? Was können wir in Zukunft gegen
Alzheimer tun? Deswegen geht es bei dem
Gießkannenprinzip der europäischen Forschungspolitik
so nicht weiter. Wir brauchen eine Konzentration!
Alzheimer könnte eines unserer großen Themen werden,
um das wir uns kümmern!
2-414
Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE). – Voorzitter, als
vicevoorzitter van de Alzheimer Alliantie in het
Europees Parlement verwelkom ik van harte het verslag
van mevrouw Matias. Het bevat de belangrijkste zaken
die prioritair moeten worden aangepakt. Ik wil in dit kort
tijdsbestek twee punten aanstippen.
Ten eerste het belang van preventie en vroegtijdige
diagnose. Bewustwordingscampagnes over de eerste
symptomen zijn essentieel, opdat patiënten en hun
verzorgers zo snel mogelijk gebruik kunnen maken van
de behandeling en steun die momenteel al beschikbaar
zijn. Maar daarnaast kan het belang van een
gemeenschappelijke programmering van onderzoeksmiddelen
niet genoeg worden benadrukt. Veel collega's

100 18-01-2011
hebben het al gezegd: 85% van de publieke
investeringen in onderzoek gebeurt vandaag de dag
zonder enige Europese coördinatie en dit leidt
onvermijdelijk tot versnippering en dubbel werk. Dus
een gezamenlijke strategische onderzoeksagenda kan
zorgen voor een meer efficiënte besteding van de
middelen en kan een beter inzicht verschaffen in de
oorzaken, behandelingsmogelijkheden en de sociale
impact van ziekten als Alzheimer.
2-415
Miroslav Mikolášik (PPE). – Oznámenie Komisie o
európskej iniciatíve o Azheimerovej chorobe a iných
druhoch demencií zlepšuje doterajšie rozdrobené
opatrenia a jestvujúce rozdiely, pokiaľ ide o prístup k
liečbe, a vedie nás k zlepšeniu zdravotných a sociálnych
podmienok stále väčšieho počtu takých pacientov aj
vzhľadom na ich zvyšujúci sa podiel v starnúcej Európe.
Smernica sa venuje aj zdravotníckym pracovníkom v
tejto oblasti a zabezpečuje odborné vzdelávanie, čo som
veľmi rád, a podporu rodinných príslušníkov. Problémy
máme už teraz, veď každý rok pribudne až 1,4 milióna
prípadov nejakého typu demencie a včasná diagnostika,
prevencia a ďalšie súvisiace otázky, ako je dôstojnosť
takého pacienta, by nás mali teda viesť k energickej
činnosti.
Sú tu aj ovplyvnené osoby, obzvlášť rodinní príslušníci,
ktorí sú vystavení veľkej spoločenskej stigmatizácii. Ide
o to, aby spoločnosť dokázala pomôcť aj finančne oceniť
tých, ktorí sa v domácich podmienkach o dementného
pacienta starajú.
2-416
Justas Vincas Paleckis (S&D). – Sveikinu pranešėjus,
kurie gerai padirbėjo. Tenka pripažinti, kad Europos
Sąjungai senstant Alzheimeris ir kitos demencijos
formos plinta pavojingu greičiu. Neretai šių ligų
simptomai nėra teisingai nustatomi arba susigriebiama
per vėlai ir ligoniai nesulaukia tinkamo gydymo.
Teisingas kvietimas demencijas paskelbti viena iš
prioritetinių sveikatos apsaugos sričių. Tik kuo plačiau
skleisdami informaciją, didindami visuomenės supratimą
apie ligą, jos simptomus, ankstyvius diagnozės būdus,
galėtume susidoroti su kylančia demencijos banga. Deja,
daugumoje naujųjų Europos Sąjungos šalių, jų tarpe ir
Lietuvoje, demencijos ligonių priežiūra paprastai ypač
nepatenkinama. Didžiausias krūvis dažniausiai tenka
ligonių artimiesiems, šeimos nariams. Valstybės turėtų
įvertinti jų darbą: ligonį slaugantiems artimiesiems pagal
galimybes fiksuoti darbo stažą, suteikti socialines
garantijas.
2-417
Gay Mitchell (PPE). – Mr President, I just want to
make the point that we are talking about Alzheimer’s
disease and old people, yet I have experience in my
constituency with the case of a 48-year-old man who had
to be looked after by his elderly widowed father because
the young man had Alzheimer’s. I will not abuse the
opportunity to speak but I thank you for it, and I want to
say that I support innovation in relation to ageing. This
is mainly an ageing-related issue, but not simply an
ageing-related issue.
2-418
Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (S&D). – Herr Präsident,
Herr Kommissar, verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen!
Ich werde zu der Petition sprechen. Seit Frühjahr 2007
bin ich mit dem Fall beschäftigt. Im Herbst 2007 habe
ich eine Anfrage an die Kommission gestellt. Die
Antwort war mehr als unbefriedigend.
Ich habe viele Gespräche mit dem Bundesgesundheitsministerium
und mit anderen Behörden geführt. Alles
war immer sehr vage und weich. Und Ihrer Antwort,
Herr Dalli, dem, was Sie vorgelesen haben, entnehme
ich, dass Sie gar keine Lust haben, sich näher mit diesem
Fall zu beschäftigen. Es geschah nicht in Ihrer Amtszeit,
aber Sie gehören einem Kollektivgremium an, und ich
fordere Sie auch im Namen des Rechtsausschusses und
des Petitionsausschusses auf, uns alle Unterlagen zur
Verfügung zu stellen, auf deren Grundlagen Sie
entschieden haben. Und ich möchte wissen, wenn man
sich das Gerät ansieht, warum denn – man kann es
wissen! – bestimmte Firmen kein Interesse haben, dass
ein anderes Produkt auf den Markt kommt. Denn mit
diesem Plastikteil den Inhalator zu installieren ist relativ
preiswert, aber im Verkauf insgesamt liegen die Margen
drin.
Wenn man sich einmal ansieht, wie Pharmalobbyismus
funktioniert, wenn man sich einmal genau betrachtet,
wer welche Interessen im finanziellen Bereich hat,
kleine Firmen herauszuhalten, dann wird vieles unter
Umständen sehr deutlich.
Ich fordere Sie auf, heute hier einmal klar Stellung zu
beziehen, ob Sie uns die Unterlagen zur Verfügung
stellen und ob Sie bereit sind, sich mit uns im
Petitionsausschuss und im Rechtsausschuss einmal
ordentlich auseinanderzusetzen und das nicht einfach
wegzuschieben. Denn die Bürgerinnen und Bürger, auch
die, die vielleicht nicht so reich und so groß sind, haben
auch ein Recht darauf, dass sie ordentlich behandelt
werden.
2-419
Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska (PPE). – Panie
Przewodniczący! Wraz ze starzeniem się populacji Unii
Europejskiej rośnie odsetek osób cierpiących na choroby
wieku podeszłego. Dane statystyczne pokazują, że co
piąta osoba powyżej 80 roku życia cierpi na chorobę
Alzheimera. Nie wszyscy wiedzą, że jest to choroba
nieuleczalna, ale dzięki odpowiedniej profilaktyce i
wczesnej diagnozie można opóźnić jej skutki. Według
światowego raportu na temat Alzheimera z 2009 roku
28% osób cierpiących na demencję zamieszkuje Europę,
która pod tym względem zajmuje drugie miejsce na
świecie po Azji. W Polsce, kraju który reprezentuję, na
chorobę Alzheimera cierpi około 250 tys. osób, a
specjaliści szacują, że do 2040 roku liczba ta się potroi.
Jak widać dane te są niepokojące.
Demencja niesie za sobą zarówno skutki społeczne, jak i
gospodarcze oraz dotyka nie tylko samego chorego, ale

18-01-2011 101
także jego najbliższych. Dlatego cieszę się, że dzisiaj
poruszamy ten ważny problem. Tylko współpraca,
prowadzenie wysoko specjalistycznych badań oraz
prowadzenie szerokiej kampanii informacyjnej pozwolą
na szybszą diagnozę i lepszą profilaktykę.
2-420
Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D). – Pritariu iniciatyvoje dėl
Alzheimerio ligos siūlomiems konkretiems veiksmams,
jog būtina užtikrinti ankstyvą diagnozę ir gyvenimo
kokybę, skatinti valstybių narių bendradarbiavimą
keičiantis geriausia patirtimi bei klinikiniais tyrimais ir
gerbti šia sunkia liga sergančių žmonių teises. Kadangi
Europos Sąjunga šiuo metu neturi pakankamai tikslių
statistinių duomenų apie Alzheimerio ligos paplitimą,
būtina atlikti tyrimus, kurie būtų grindžiami griežtais
bendrais rodikliais. Be to, reikia investuoti į mokslinius
tyrimus ir veiksmingas priežiūros sistemų programas.
Ypač daug dėmesio reikia skirti sveikatos priežiūros
specialistams, paslaugų teikėjams bei mokymui ir
paramai šeimoms, kurie kasdien susiduria su
Alzheimerio ligos atvejais. Noriu pabrėžti, kad kovojant
su šia sunkia liga labai svarbu daug dėmesio skirti
prevencijai ir stengtis kuo anksčiau nustatyti diagnozę.
Todėl reikia parengti prevencinę strategiją dėl
Alzheimerio ligos, kuri būtų susijusi su sveikesnės
gyvensenos skatinimu, žmonių informavimu apie šią ligą
bei medicinos praktikos keitimusi.
2-421
Pat the Cope Gallagher (ALDE). – A Uachtaráin, ba
mhaith liom mo bhuíochas a ghabháil leat as ucht an
deis labhairt mar gheall ar ghalar Alzheimer.
2-422
Alzheimer’s is a disease that is the most common cause
of dementia, affecting 44 000 people in Ireland and
nearly ten million people across Europe. It is a
progressive disease, which means that over time more
parts of the brain will become damaged and as this
occurs the symptoms become worse.
Unfortunately, due to the ageing population in Europe,
more and more people are likely to be affected by this
disease in the future. Therefore better coordination
between EU Member States, in terms of research into
the causes of dementia and best practice in terms of a
care system, is essential. The burden of care is often
placed on the shoulders of close family members and in
Ireland 50 000 people care for people with dementia on
a daily basis.
In conclusion, I would like to pay special tribute to those
carers and to the Alzheimer’s society of Ireland who
provide incredible support to people affected by
dementia.
2-423
Margrete Auken (Verts/ALE). – Hr. formand! Jeg
henvender mig til kommissær Dalli. Her ser De den
plastikdims, det drejer sig om. Det er den store
multinationale medicinalindustri, der i den tyske sag har
sagt, at plastikdimsen og medicinen hører sammen. Her
ser De medicinen. Den skal have den store test!
Plastikdimsen svarer til, at man bruger en kanyle. Men
det er klart, at medicinalindustrien tjener styrtende med
penge på, at de to produkter altid skal sælges sammen.
Samfundet, derimod, sparer en masse penge ved at man
kan genbruge og genbruge og genbruge. Jeg mener, at
det er en ren skandale, at Kommissionen bliver ved med
at henholde sig til, at dette simple produkt skal
underkastes samme store testprocedure – som om det
nødvendigvis hørte med i det samme testsystem – som
medicinen. Ikke fuldstændig det samme som medicinen
selv, det ved jeg godt, men stadigvæk som en anordning,
der hører til der. Det er simpelthen så forfærdeligt, at vi
ikke har fået et klart svar på denne sag! Der er så mange
mennesker, inklusive mange samfund og
sygeforsikringer, der lider under, at denne simple
plastikting ikke er blevet godkendt for længst. Den har
aldrig skabt andre problemer end økon… (Formanden
tog ordet fra taleren)
2-424
Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli
colleghi, le malattie neurodegenerative, e tra queste
appunto l'Alzheimer, rappresentano una priorità sanitaria
per l'Unione europea.
La malattia in questione ha pesanti risvolti, non solo
sanitari, per chi la subisce. Elevati sono infatti i costi che
devono essere sostenuti per le cure dirette e per quelle
informali. Il morbo di Alzheimer, infatti, non riguarda
solo le persone che ne sono colpite, ma coinvolge anche
tutti coloro che si occupano dei malati stessi.
Si rende perciò necessaria una risposta europea al
problema, una coordinazione globale tra gli Stati
membri, una sinergia di azioni concertate che riguardano
soprattutto l'ambito scientifico e di ricerca e che si faccia
carico del potenziamento della prevenzione e la diagnosi
per il perfezionamento delle cure disponibili, anche
innovative, nonché della diffusione delle informazioni
fra gli Stati sui risultati raggiunti all'interno degli stessi,
incrementando nei cittadini il livello di conoscenza della
malattia.
2-425
John Dalli, Member of the Commission. − Mr President,
honourable Members, I again thank Parliament and the
Members who have taken the floor for their engagement
with the important cause of Alzheimer’s and other forms
of dementia.
The Commission welcomes Parliament’s report and its
recommendations. Let me take this opportunity to stress
that the Commission is fully committed to doing its
share to address Alzheimer’s and other forms of
dementia. These conditions are unfortunately part of the
ageing process for many European citizens.
I believe it is our collective responsibility to work
together to minimise their burden and to invest in
innovation to prevent, diagnose, treat and manage these
conditions.
I look forward to supporting Member States in their
efforts to work closely with Parliament in addressing
Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia.

102 18-01-2011
On the ‘Effecto’ Klein petition, I must state first of all –
referring to Mrs Manzoni’s statement that the
Commission’s job is to stand by the citizens – that I can
assure you my job is to stand by the patient. It is very
important for me, as Commissioner responsible for
health, not to compromise on patient safety, not to take
any shortcuts and short-circuit the processes and
procedures that we have in place to ensure that any
device to be used in any medical way is properly tested
and its safety assured.
The issue here is not how to deliver a medicine with a
piece of plastic, as has been said. The issue is that we
need clinical evidence that the product is safe and to do
this the petitioner, in this case Mr Klein, was requested
to conduct clinical studies on 24 patients. That is the
extent of the clinical tests that were requested.
Why is there a resistance to providing these clinical
tests? What is causing this resistance? This is something
that I am asking myself. We need to know, for example,
is this product universal in application, is it to be used
with one specific medicine, is it to be used with different
types of medicines? If it is, do these medicines require
different dosages? Is there an adjustment system in the
device to adjust the dosage? As a layman, if I had to use
a device like this, these are the questions that I would
ask myself. This is the kind of thing the authorities have
been asking themselves. They have been asking for
proof that this device would be safe in the hands of
patients at large.
There is, as I said, a proper safety assurance procedure,
and I will be not short-circuiting that. It has been said
that I promised to look into the case. I promised to look
into the case, and I did look into the case. I have had a
lot of details about the case. Naturally, these are details
that I had to learn from others who have been here in the
Commission since 1987. When Mr Klein asked for a
meeting with me or my cabinet, I immediately agreed.
My ‘chef de cabinet’ informed him that we were
prepared to have a meeting to explain it. He sent an email
back setting a lot of conditions, amongst which he
stated that as a basis for this meeting, the EU
Commission should completely take over the expenses.
This included the flights and overnight stays in Brussels
for him and his staff, and I could not accommodate this.
2-426
Marisa Matias, relatora. − Senhor Presidente, Senhor
Comissário, caros Colegas, eu quero começar por
agradecer todas as palavras que aqui foram deixadas em
relação ao relatório que o Parlamento apresenta em
matéria de Alzheimer e de outras doenças demenciais.
Sabemos todos que a situação que vivemos é
substancialmente dramática e que está ainda muito subdiagnosticada
e isso foi aqui referido.
E quero apenas referir uma questão que foi transversal a
todas as intervenções, mas provavelmente não tão
sublinhada, que é a questão da dignidade dos pacientes,
dos seus direitos e não apenas dos pacientes, mas
também dos seus familiares e daqueles que cuidam
deles, sejam cuidadores formais ou informais e dos
profissionais que estão associados a este tipo de doenças.
Eu fico contente, francamente contente, com as palavras
do Sr. Comissário quando diz que partilha das mesmas
preocupações que o Parlamento Europeu. E que a
Comissão Europeia vê de forma muito positiva todas as
recomendações do relatório que o Parlamento apresenta
e que vai fazer tudo o que estiver ao seu alcance para pôlas
em prática.
Nós sabemos que cada dia que passa é mais tarde que o
anterior nesta matéria dada a urgência daquilo que temos
em mãos. E portanto nós sabemos também que amanhã
o Parlamento se vai pronunciar sobre esta matéria.
Aguardaremos o resultado da votação, mas sabemos,
Senhor Comissário, que os cidadãos europeus esperam
de nós muito mais do que solidariedade e conforto
moral. Esperam de nós acções concretas e adequadas e
espero bem, Senhor Comissário, que então ponha em
prática e que a Comissão, que tem a iniciativa que
infelizmente este Parlamento não tem, ponha em prática
toda essa prioridade que diz dar a este domínio e que a
transforme em iniciativa legislativa para que os cidadãos
e os seus familiares vejam respeitados os seus direitos e
sejam tratados com igualdade e com a dignidade que
merecem.
2-427
President. − The debate is closed.
The vote will take place tomorrow (Wednesday, 19
January 2011).
Written statements (Rule 149)
2-428
Liam Aylward (ALDE), i scríbhinn. – Meastar go
bhfuil 9.9 milliún duine san Eoraip atá ag fulaingt de
bharr galar méarmheathlúcháin, cosúil le galar
Alzheimer. Le daonra na hEorpa ag dul in aois, measann
Eurostat go mbeidh dhá oiread an méid daoine le galar
méarmheathlúcháin orthu sa bhliain 2050 agus mar a bhí
i 1995. Thairis sin, ós rud é gur ar bhaill clainne a
thiteann ualach an chúraim, meastar go mbíonn tionchar
ag an ngalar ar thriúr ball clainne an othair. Chuige seo,
ní mór a chinntiú go nglacfar beart ar leibhéal an AE
chun cabhrú leis na Ballstáit cúnamh cuí a thabhairt
d’othair agus dá muintir.
Aontaím go hiomlán go mba chóir tús áite i mbeartas
sláinte an AE a thabhairt don néaltrú. Ní foláir aitheantas
mar is cóir a thabhairt d’eagraíochtaí othar agus
cúramóirí agus ní mór go mbeadh na heagraíochtaí
céanna bainteach le feachtais eolais agus le hullmhúchán
clár taighde. Tugann an AE méid suntasach airgid –
EUR 159 milliún – do 34 clár taighde ar ghalair
mhéarmheathlúcháin ach, ós rud é go bhfuil méadú
ollmhór ag teacht ar na galair sin, ní mór go leathnófar
ar thionscadail taighde faoin 8ú Chreatchlár chun
taighde ar theiripí iompraíochta, cognaíocha agus teiripí
gan drugaí a ghlacadh san áireamh.
2-429

18-01-2011 103
Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă (S&D), în scris. – Datele cu
privire la prevalenţa bolii Alzheimer şi alte demenţe sunt
disponibile în ţările Uniunii Europene şi au fost colectate
de Alzheimer Europe. Boala Alzheimer a fost şi este
cauza principală a demenţei în toate ţările. Ea reprezintă
74,5% din cazurile de demenţă din America de Nord,
61,4% din Europa şi 46,5 din Asia. Cu toate acestea, în
Uniunea Europeană există cazuri de boală Alzheimer
nediagnosticată, conform ultimelor date epidemiologice
disponibile, numai jumătate din persoanele care suferă
de această boală sunt identificate în prezent. În acest
context, consider că Statele Membre trebuie să dezvolte
politici şi planuri de acțiune pe termen lung pentru a
eficientiza accesarea fondurilor de cercetare în domeniul
demenței și a bolii Alzheimer, incluzând și cercetări în
domeniul prevenției, la un nivel proporțional cu
impactul economic al acestora asupra societății şi care să
anticipeze și să prevină tendințele sociale și demografice
și să-și concentreze atenția pe sprijinul oferit familiilor
pacienților care îi îngrijesc, oferind astfel protecție
socială persoanelor vulnerabile suferinde de demență.
2-430
Anneli Jäätteenmäki (ALDE), kirjallinen. – Herra
Puheenjohtaja! Muistisairaudet ovat yleinen ongelma
Euroopassa. Arviolta noin 10 miljoonaa eurooppalaista
kärsii tälläkin hetkellä muistisairauksista. Valtaosalla
heistä on Alzheimerin tauti. Monet tekijät vaikuttavat
ihmisten kykyyn muistaa asioita ja oppia uutta. Muun
muassa stressi, masennus, suru, runsas alkoholin käyttö,
huono ravitsemustila ja lääkkeet ovat esimerkkejä näistä
tekijöistä. Muistisairauksien ehkäisyyn on kiinnitettävä
enemmän huomiota jo nuoruudesta alkaen. Liikunta,
henkinen aktiivisuus, terveelliset ravintovalinnat ja
päihteiden välttäminen suojaavat muistisairauksilta.
Hoitamalla muistisairauksien vaaratekijöitä hoidamme
samalla sydän- ja aivoverisuonitautien vaaratekijöitä.
Herra Puheenjohtaja! Muistisairauksien vastaisessa
työssä on jatkossa korostettava enemmän tiedottamisen
ja kansalaisjärjestöjen merkitystä. Järjestöt tekevät
erittäin arvokasta työtä. Niitä on tuettava enemmän, jotta
muistisairauksista kärsivät saisivat paremmin apua.
Lisäksi hoitopaikkoihin ja niiden laatuun on jatkossa
kiinnitettävä enemmän huomiota. Tarjolla olevat
hoitopaikat eivät valitettavasti vastaa tällä hetkellä
kysyntää. Esimerkiksi Suomessa pulaa on etenkin
vertaistuesta ja sopivista päivä- ja
pitkäaikaishoitopaikoista. Lopuksi haluaisin kiinnittää
huomion muistisairauksien hoitoon erikoistuneen
ammattihenkilöstön tukemiseen, oikeanlaiseen
koulutukseen ja osaamisen kehittämiseen. Kiitos!
2-431
Richard Seeber (PPE), schriftlich. – 10 Millionen
Menschen in Europa leiden an Demenz, die Hälfte
davon sind Alzheimerpatienten. Durch die zunehmende
Lebenserwartung steigen diese Zahlen weiter an. Der
Initiativbericht geht mit seiner Forderung nach einem
wirkungsvolleren Ansatz für die Behandlung von
Demenz und insbesondere Alzheimer in eine richtige
Richtung. Ein besonderes Augenmerk sollte dabei auf
die Prävention gerichtet werden. Frühdiagnose,
kostenlose Untersuchungen für Risikogruppen und
insbesondere bessere Information der Bevölkerung sind
dafür von zentraler Bedeutung, da Alzheimer in der EU
meistens zu spät erkannt wird. Die weitere Verbreitung
von Demenz erfordert eine europäische Strategie, die
möglichst flächendeckende Strukturen anbietet, durch
die den Patienten gleicher Zugang zu Informationen und
Behandlungsmöglichkeiten gegeben wird. Dabei darf
auch die Unterstützung für Angehörige und
Betreuungspersonen nicht vergessen werden. Breit
angelegte epidemiologische und klinische Studien sowie
eine verbesserte Demenz- und Alzheimerforschung sind
des Weiteren ein wichtiger Faktor bei der Bekämpfung
von Demenzerkrankungen.
2-432
Olga Sehnalová (S&D), písemně. – Demence a zejména
Alzheimerova choroba jsou nejen závažným
medicínským, ale i eticky a společensky nesmírně
citlivým problémem, jehož význam bude v souvislosti se
stárnutím evropské populace dále stoupat. V
předloženém dokumentu je velmi správně věnována
pozornost různým aspektům tohoto onemocnění,
zejména podpoře časné diagnostiky, výzkumu i zlepšení
samotné péče o pacienty. Za neméně důležitou však
považuji i oblast podpory rodin osob postižených
demencí, za zásadní pak důraz na nediskriminační
dostupnost kvalitních zdravotních a sociálních služeb. V
této souvislosti spatřuji rozhodující úlohu samospráv, ať
již místních či regionálních i neziskových organizací,
které mohou operativně reagovat na nárůst potřeby
těchto služeb. Evropská iniciativa pro Alzheimerovu
chorobu a jiné formy demence je velmi důležitá i pro
nastartování seriózní a otevřené společenské diskuze o
tomto onemocnění v nejširším slova smyslu. Proto tuto
iniciativu rozhodně vítám a podporuji.
2-433
15 - Question Time (Commission)
2-434
President. − The next item is Question Time (B7-
0001/2011).
The following questions are addressed to the
Commission.
Part one
2-435
Question 14 by Rares-Lucian Niculescu (H-0629/10)
Subject: Utilisation of European funds
According to a recent article in the Financial Times, the
European Union has only spent 10% of the 347 billion euros
allocated for the period up to 2013 to promote the
development of poor regions.
That article also states that funding earmarked for SMEs has
come to be used by multinational companies (Coca-Cola,
IBM, Nokia Siemens) while other large companies (Twining,
Valeo) are using EU funds to transfer their operations to
countries where labour is cheaper, thereby violating rules
explicitly prohibiting that practice.
What is the Commission’s view of the information contained
in that article, and what steps is it considering taking to
prevent such situations arising in the future?

104 18-01-2011
2-436
Johannes Hahn, Member of the Commission. − Mr
President, the Commission welcomes the Financial
Times’s scrutiny as it represents an important
contribution to opening and broadening public debate
about the efficiency and effectiveness of cohesion
policy.
The Commission is aware of the habitually slower takeup
at the beginning of a programming period. However,
the most recent data show that the Commission made
more cohesion policy payments in the fourth quarter of
2010 than ever before. The vast majority of the
payments made were interim payments, i.e.
reimbursements of expenditure already made and
certified in the Member States. Thus it is certain that, as
has been seen in previous programming periods,
cohesion policy spending is accelerating. Absorption
rates, in terms of EU payments to Member States, are
now at 21% for the Cohesion Fund, 22% for the
European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and
23% for the European Social Fund (ESF).
As regards support provided to multinational and large
companies, the Commission would emphasise that a
primary objective of cohesion policy is growth and the
creation of new jobs for particular regions and Member
States. Any support for productive investment has to be
seen in that context.
Promoting job creation and economic growth can be
achieved in many ways, from setting-up small
enterprises to supporting larger companies. Cohesion
policy intervention supports productive investment that
is primarily targeted at small and medium-sized
enterprises, as specified by the ERDF and ESF
regulations. The Commission also stressed the role of
small and medium-sized enterprises during negotiation
of the current programming documents. The vast
majority of productive investment and investment in the
development of endogenous potential is targeted at
SMEs. However, there may be cases where, in line with
the regulations, co-financing is granted to larger
companies subject to compliance with the objectives of
the funds and programmes concerned.
In total, cohesion policy has allocated some
EUR 55 billion to business support between 2007 and
2013, a large share of which supports innovation in
SMEs. The Commission would like to point out that
multinationals are not beneficiaries of the support
extended by the ESF. Workers receive the co-financed
training. The ESF supports people. It is about providing
training and retraining and improving skills to prepare
people and help them find a job. A worker who has been
employed in a given enterprise may well then find
himself or herself engaged in another company.
Therefore, what matters is the skill capital that workers
manage to build to sustain their inclusion in the labour
market, not the name or type of enterprises providing the
training.
The Commission considers that, from a policy
perspective, firms should not receive European funding
for investments which would lead to the loss of
employment by the same company in another region of
the European Union, because the net effect of the ESF
investment might be zero or even negative. In cases
where a company which has received cohesion policy
support closes down, or ceases to support a project,
within five years – or three years in the case of SMEs –
this funding needs to be paid back.
My final point – but it is a crucial one – is that while
there are clearly areas for improvement this cannot and
should not overshadow the major positive impact that
cohesion policy is having. I would like to assure you that
the Commission is not shying away from the problems.
Indeed, in the past we have proposed changes, some of
which were taken up, and we will continue to drive
improvement of cohesion policy. Cohesion policy brings
clear benefits to the poorer regions of the European
Union, but it also clearly benefits the rest of Europe.
2-437
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE). – Îi mulţumesc şi
domnului comisar pentru calitatea informaţiilor oferite,
însă aş dori să adaug o remarcă: într-o astfel de
dezbatere, când abordăm o astfel de temă, cred că ar
trebui să ne concentrăm mai degrabă pe viitoarele
măsuri destinate să evităm situaţii similare şi, dacă îmi
este îngăduit, poate chiar mai important, să ne punem
întrebarea dacă astfel de bilanţuri, odată ajunse în atenţia
publicului, nu sunt cumva de natură să reducă încrederea
cetăţenilor în munca instituţiilor europene.
2-438
Paul Rübig (PPE). – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrter Herr
Kommissar! Ich möchte mich vor allem für die
Aufklärung bedanken, weil das die Grundlage für eine
vernünftige Diskussion ist und auch ein klares
Bekenntnis zu unseren kleinen und mittleren Betrieben,
weil letztlich dort zwei Drittel der Beschäftigung
Europas stattfinden und 80 % der Steuern bezahlt
werden. Deshalb ist meine Frage: Glauben Sie, dass wir
in Zukunft die Forschungsrahmenbedingungen und die
Forschungsinfrastruktur im Bereich dieser Programme
etwas mehr verstärken können?
2-439
Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D). – Mano klausimas būtų
toks. Iš tikrųjų struktūrinių fondų lėšos ir ypač socialinio
fondo lėšos, kurios yra skirtos darbuotojų kvalifikacijai
kelti, darbo vietų išsaugojimui, ta prasme, kad jas užimtų
kvalifikuoti žmonės, yra labai svarbu. Tačiau ar jūs
manote, kad turi lygias sąlygas tarptautinės turtingos
korporacijos, kadangi reikia prisidėti sava dalimi norint
gauti lėšas iš struktūrinių fondų ar socialinio fondo, ir
vidutinės bei mažos įmonės, kurios lygiai taip pat nori
apmokyti savo žmones, nori turėti kvalifikuotus
darbuotojus. Ar čia jūs nematote kokių nors tam tikrų
pasiūlymų, kad didžiosios korporacijos ir mažosios ir
vidutinės įmonės turi nelygiavertes sąlygas?
2-440

18-01-2011 105
Johannes Hahn, Mitglied der Kommission. − Herr
Präsident! Danke für die Fragen!
Zur Forschungsinfrastruktur: Insbesondere, wenn es um
den Bereich der Innovation geht, erhalten die Klein- und
Mittelbetriebe heute schon aus den EFRE-Fonds
erhebliche Mittel in einem hohen zweistelligen
Milliarden-Euro-Betrag im Bereich der Innovationsförderung.
In der Periode 2000-2006 haben sich
insgesamt über 30 000 Unternehmen sich ganz
fokussiert auf diesen Bereich konzentriert. Wir denken
darüber nach, dass die Forschungsinfrastruktur auch eine
erhebliche Bedeutung haben sollte, gerade in der
Zukunft, durchaus auch über den Bereich der Wirtschaft
hinausgehend im Bereich der Grundlagenforschung.
Möglicherweise werden wir noch in der laufenden
Periode ein Forschungsinfrastrukturprojekt, das auch in
der ESFRI-Roadmap aufgezeichnet ist, erstmalig mit
entsprechenden Mitteln fördern, weil die Untersuchung
dieses Projektes ergeben hat, dass es sich hier um eine
sehr nachhaltige Wirkung in einer Region über das reine
Projekt hinaus handelt, indem eben Arbeitsplätze
geschaffen werden, nicht nur Forscherarbeitsplätze,
sondern auch Arbeitsplätze in Zulieferbetrieben, denn
auch Basisforschungsinfrastruktur braucht Zulieferung
und Service. Das kann also ein echter Hub in einem
bestimmten Bereich in einer Region – in dem Fall einer
ungarischen Region – sein. Das soll auch ein Signal für
die nächste Programmperiode sein, etwa in Richtung
von Universitäten, die dann letztlich auch wieder
konkrete Auswirkungen haben. Denn heute schon
befinden sich die Forschungsaktivitäten im universitären
Bereich fast zu einem Drittel im Bereich der
angewandten Forschung, was letztlich der Wirtschaft
zugute kommt und nachhaltig Arbeitsplätze schafft.
Zur Frage der Frau Kollegin: Im Rahmen des
Europäischen Sozialfonds werden in aller Regel die
beschäftigten oder momentan nicht beschäftigten
Personen durch Schulungen gefördert und in die Lage
versetzt, ihre Möglichkeiten am Arbeitsmarkt zu
verbessern. Sei es innerhalb des Unternehmens, in dem
sie beschäftigt sind, oder sei es – wenn sie nicht
beschäftigt sind – um ihre Qualifikationen zu verbessern
oder einfach um ihre Qualifikationen für andere
Jobmöglichkeiten insgesamt zu verbessern. Ich kann
Ihnen aber ein Beispiel geben, weil Sie vielleicht darauf
angespielt haben und das auch immer kritisiert worden
ist, dass beispielsweise für Mitarbeiter von McDonald’s
Fortbildungsmaßnahmen angeboten wurden. Hier muss
man klar unterscheiden: Das waren Fortbildungsmaßnahmen
für McDonald’s-Mitarbeiter, um sie am
Arbeitsplatz und in der Arbeitswelt besser zu
qualifizieren. Sie wissen, es wird ja manchmal kritisiert,
dass die Arbeitsplätze bei McDonald’s – sie haben ja
auch den Spitznamen „McJobs“ – durchaus Jobs sind,
die Teilzeitjobs sind, die zum Teil keine hohe Qualifizierung
erfordern, die Jobs sind, die von Studenten und
Studentinnen ausgeübt werden und wo es darum geht,
diese Personen weiter zu qualifizieren. Wo es um die
innerbetriebliche Weiterqualifikation gegangen ist,
gerade in diesem Projekt, hat McDonald’s etwa die
Kosten vollständig getragen. Wir versuchen also und wir
trachten danach, dass die Fortbildung der Mitarbeiter auf
ihre persönliche Qualifikation hin ausgerichtet ist. Vor
diesem Hintergrund denke ich, dass wir keinen
Unterschied dahingehend machen sollen, wo die
Menschen beschäftigt sind, sondern die Zielsetzung
muss sein, die jeweilige persönliche Qualität der
Qualifikation weiter zu verbessern, um die Menschen
vor dem Hintergrund einer immer mobileren Arbeitswelt
fitter zu machen, um hier nach Möglichkeit
Arbeitslosigkeit zu vermeiden.
2-441
President. − Question 16 by Kinga Göncz (H-0639/10)
Subject: European Progress Microfinance Facility
Implementation of the European Progress Microfinance
Facility (EPMF) seems to be slower than expected, a situation
which could endanger its purpose and which is manifestly at
odds with the speed of its adoption in March 2010.
How does the Commission intend to speed up the process and
make sure that the EPMF reaches the most vulnerable people
while also reflecting the right geographical balance?
What does the Commission plan to do in order to get the
Member States to finance mentoring and training
programmes, and also to ensure that interest payments are
subsidised from European Social Fund resources, as agreed?
How will the Commission ensure that information about the
EPMF reaches the target audiences?
2-442
Johannes Hahn, Member of the Commission. − Dear
colleagues, I am pleased to report that both parts of the
European Progress Microfinance Facility – the
guarantees part and the cash products part – are now
entirely operational. Only three months after the entry
into force of the decision, the Commission finalised the
mandate for the European Investment Fund to launch the
guarantee operations for microfinance providers.
Last November the Commission established a
specialised investment vehicle. As a result, the first
micro-loans will be provided starting from this month. I
am also pleased to report that the Commission has been
successful in securing additional funding for microentrepreneurs
in Europe. The European Investment Bank
will match the European Union’s contribution of EUR
100 million, and further contributors are expected. As a
result, the overall volume of loans under the Progress
Microfinance Facility will amount, as planned, to around
EUR 500 million. This money will benefit unemployed
people, people facing social exclusion or vulnerable
persons who face difficulties in accessing the
conventional credit market. Ensuring outreach to these
target groups and promoting geographical balance are
key elements of the mandate given by the Commission
to the European Investment Fund.
Operations approved so far, or under preparation,
suggest that both objectives will be met. As from early
2011, micro-loans will be provided through a start-up
microfinancing institution in Belgium which focuses on
disadvantaged urban communities, and through a

106 18-01-2011
foundation in the Netherlands which targets individuals
with no access to conventional finance. The EIF has
announced that the operations being prepared will also
be balanced in terms of geographical coverage. About
40% are expected to involve intermediaries investing in
Europe and about 60% in Central and Eastern Europe. It
is well known that microfinance is most effective if
business starters and micro-enterprises are accompanied
through business support services.
As such, the Commission will undertake measures to
support European Social Fund managing authorities and
intermediate bodies to step up the promotion of selfemployment
and micro-enterprises.
For the current ESF programming period, the Member
States have earmarked more than EUR 2.7 billion to
promote entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurs can also be
supported through interest rebates. However, whether or
not interest rebates are subsidised through the ESF is a
decision to be taken by the individual Member States. At
present only one Member State, namely Lithuania, has
indicated that it makes use of this possibility.
Lastly, the Commission will promote information about
the Progress Microfinance Facility. The microfinance
providers who are closest to the target beneficiaries will
provide information on the availability of micro-loans.
The Commission will make use of existing networks of
public employment services, ESF managing authorities
and NGOs to provide information on the progress of the
Microfinance Facility.
Last but not least, the Youth on the Move campaign will
pay special attention to opportunities for young people
from different backgrounds to start up their own
businesses and receive micro-loans.
2-443
Kinga Göncz (S&D). – Elnök úr! Örömmel hallottam
biztos úr beszámolóját, és egy részére szeretnék
rákérdezni. Amikor beszámolót kaptunk néhány héttel
ezelőtt a Bizottságtól, illetve az Európai Beruházási
Alaptól, akkor még csak kétszázvalahány millió euróról
volt összesen szó, és az egyik kérdésem pont ez volt,
hogy az eredeti ígéret vagy terv szerint 500 millió volt
tervbe véve. Érdekelne, hogy honnan lettek ezek a
pótlólagos források. Azt gondolom, hogy nagyon fontos
ez, hiszen a krízis hatásainak a csökkentésében ez egy
kiemelten fontos program, ezért is siettünk ennek az
elfogadásával. A másik fontos kérdés az volt, hogy a
Szociális Alapból kamattámogatást, illetőleg tréning és
mentoring elemeket támogatnak-e a tagországok.
Szintén szerepelt az eredeti tervben, és aztán úgy tűnt,
hogy a Bizottság mintha elhanyagolta volna ezt a
kérdést. Nagyon fontos az információnyújtás, az, hogy
elérjen az emberekhez az információ.
2-444
Janusz Władysław Zemke (S&D). – Panie
Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Chciałem Panu
podziękować za informacje. W pełni się z Panem
zgadzam, że instrument, o którym tutaj dzisiaj mówimy,
to bardzo ważny instrument. Ale warto zwrócić uwagę
na to, że musimy sobie także odpowiedzieć na pytanie,
jakie państwa korzystają z instrumentu
mikrofinansowania. Mnie w Pana wypowiedzi
zaniepokoiło to, że mówił Pan, iż trzeba dbać o to, żeby
to rozłożenie, jeśli chodzi o państwa i geografię, było
różne. Czyli jakie państwa skorzystały już z tego
instrumentu?
2-445
Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (S&D). – Este adevărat că tinerii
sunt cei mai afectaţi de criza economică şi financiară,
dar nu trebuie să uităm şi persoanele cu vârsta de peste
45 ani care se află în şomaj. Aş dori să vă întreb, pentru
că aţi menţionat faptul că 60% din Instrumentul
european de microfinanţare Progress va merge către
centrul şi estul Europei: aţi identificat care sunt barierele
pentru care ţările din această regiune a Europei nu au
utilizat suficient până acum acest instrument?
2-446
Johannes Hahn, Mitglied der Kommission. − Vielen
Dank für Ihr Interesse und Ihre Stellungnahmen. Das
Thema Mikrofinanzierung ist in der Tat eines, das ja in
mehreren Generaldirektionen angesiedelt ist, wobei ein
gewisses lead hier inhaltlich beim Kollegen Andor
gegeben ist. Aber auch im Bereich der Regionalpolitik
beschäftigen wir uns mit der Frage. Was etwa die Frage
der Zinssätze anbelangt, ist es so, dass es einige
Mitgliedstaaten gibt, die hier sozusagen als Bedingung
eine Obergrenze gezogen haben, die sich ungefähr bei 8
bis 9,5 % bewegt. Man muss hier allerdings auch in
Rechnung stellen, dass natürlich – und das war immer
ein Thema, auch in der Vorbereitung dieser ganzen
Thematik – die Overhead-Kosten im Vergleich zu den
tatsächlichen loans relativ hoch sind und daher auch
entsprechende Kosten anfallen, die es zu decken gilt.
Hier muss ein vernünftiger Mittelweg gefunden werden.
Ich denke, das ist gelungen.
Zur zweiten Frage: Ich kann berichten, dass es gerade
mit dem Instrument Jasmine, das dazu dienen soll, die
Mikrofinanzierung entsprechend vorzubereiten und hier
auch auf eine Einstellung der intermediates vorzubereiten
und zu trainieren, gegenwärtig 15 Institutionen
in 15 verschiedenen Ländern, 11 sind in Zentral- und
Osteuropa und 4 in Westeuropa, vorbereitet werden. Ich
habe jetzt nicht alle Länder im Kopf, aber es sind im
Wesentlichen die meisten neuen Beitrittsländer davon
schon erfasst, und wir rechnen damit, dass in den
kommenden Jahren 20 weitere intermediates durch das
Jasmine-Programm entsprechend vorbereitet werden.
Zur letzten Frage bitte ich um Verständnis, dass ich aus
dem Kopf keine Antworten geben kann. Wir werden das
schriftlich nachreichen, wo im Detail die Gründe für
Zugangsbeschränkungen liegen. Ich würde aber in
hohem Ausmaß annehmen, dass es hier oft
kommunikative Probleme gibt, dass es auch oftmals
Hemmnisse gibt, weil viele der potenziellen Kreditnehmer
Personen sind, die bei einer „normalen Bank“
keinen Kredit mehr bekommen und daher da oft auch
eine gewisse Schwellenangst oder Zurückhaltung
gegeben ist, derartige Einrichtungen aufzusuchen. Wenn
das der Fall ist und sich erhärtet und bestätigt, dann ist

18-01-2011 107
es aber auch notwendig, in diesem Bereich entsprechend
aufklärerisch tätig zu werden.
2-447
President. − Question 15 by Zigmantas Balcytis (H-
0636/10)
Subject: Additional support measures for SMEs under
tourism policy
Tourism, like any other sector of the economy, is increasingly
feeling the effects of world competition. In order for the
European Union to remain competitive in this sector, the EU
has set itself the objective in the Lisbon Treaty of promoting
the competitiveness of tourism and creating an environment
favourable to business development. For this purpose the
following objectives have been adopted: promoting
innovation in tourism, improving the overall quality of
tourism services and perfecting the professional skills of
personnel. However, businesses in the tourism sector – many
of which are SMEs – are not always able to attain these
objectives through their own unaided efforts. This is due to
several factors, such as limited financial resources, the lack of
qualified workers and inability to respond quickly to change:
hence the need for additional funding.
Does not the Commission consider that it would be desirable
to devise a coherent strategy and a detailed action plan
comprising specific support measures for SMEs and financing
arrangements which could help to overcome the difficulties
encountered by the sector?
2-448
Antonio Tajani, Vicepresidente della Commissione. −
Signor Presidente, onorevoli deputati, l'industria europea
del turismo, come molti altri settori economici, deve
fronteggiare la sfida sempre più forte della
globalizzazione.
Si tratta di una sfida che la Commissione ha già
sottolineato e affrontato a più riprese, in modo
particolare con la comunicazione "Una politica
industriale nell'era della globalizzazione". Inoltre, il 30
giugno dello scorso anno la Commissione ha adottato
una comunicazione specifica sul turismo, che propone,
in linea con il trattato di Lisbona e la nuova strategia
Europa 2020, un quadro politico consolidato per
rafforzare la competitività del settore, con l'aspirazione
di fare del turismo europeo una vera industria
competitiva moderna, stabile e responsabile.
La creazione di un contesto favorevole allo sviluppo
delle medie, piccole e piccolissime imprese del settore
turistico rappresenta il principio fondamentale di questo
quadro consolidato. Per raggiungere l'obiettivo abbiamo
proposto tre azioni concrete che puntano in primo luogo
a stimolare la competitività del settore turistico
all'interno della nostra Unione, in secondo luogo a
promuovere lo sviluppo di un turismo di lunga durata,
responsabile e di qualità, e in terzo luogo a consolidare
l'immagine e la visibilità dell'Europa come un insieme di
destinazioni turistiche di lunga durata e di qualità e,
naturalmente, massimizzare il potenziale delle politiche
e degli strumenti finanziari dell'Unione per sviluppare il
turismo.
Le iniziative promosse dovrebbero conferire al settore
gli strumenti per adattarsi alle sfide al cospetto delle
quali si trovano i suoi attori, nonché per intraprendere
uno sviluppo durevole in termini di competitività.
Saranno certamente portate in fase di attuazione misure
concrete per promuovere l'innovazione nel settore del
turismo, migliorare la qualità dei servizi turistici e
perfezionare le competenze professionali del personale,
perché non possiamo più pensare al turismo come ad un
settore a conduzione esclusivamente familiare, ma
dobbiamo pensare anche ad un'organizzazione turistica
più moderna e più competitiva.
Farò qualche esempio a proposito della formazione delle
competenze professionali: una "piattaforma TIC &
turismo" per facilitare l'adattamento del settore turistico
e delle imprese all'evoluzione del mercato delle nuove
tecnologie dell'informazione e accrescere la loro
competitività. Sono tutte proposte, idee, inserite nel testo
della comunicazione della Commissione, approvata dal
Consiglio e che stiamo dibattendo in Parlamento, il
relatore è presente in Aula.
La mobilitazione degli attori dell'industria per un
migliore utilizzo dei diversi programmi dell'Unione,
come Leonardo, o ancora il programma quadro per
l'innovazione e la competitività, l'Erasmus per i giovani
imprenditori, il Fondo sociale europeo ed altri
programmi. Inoltre, una strategia per la promozione di
un'offerta turistica diversificata e la creazione di un
osservatorio virtuale con supporto elettronico per il
turismo europeo permetteranno di contribuire in eguale
maniera alla creazione di un contesto favorevole per gli
attori del settore.
Peraltro, bisogna ricordare che le piccole e medie
imprese possono beneficiare di altre iniziative trasversali
per accedere ai finanziamenti. Cito il caso di JEREMIE,
iniziativa congiunta della Commissione, del Fondo
europeo per gli investimenti e della Banca europea per
gli investimenti, che punta a migliorare l'accesso delle
piccolissime, piccole e medie imprese ai finanziamenti,
in particolare attraverso il canale del capitale di rischio,
dei prestiti, delle garanzie, del microcredito e di altre
forme di aiuti rimborsabili.
Vorrei infine ricordare che le piccole e medie imprese
nel settore del turismo beneficiano a pieno titolo delle
misure proposte nel quadro dello Small business act che
mira a facilitare il contesto operativo proprio delle
piccole e medie imprese e che il Parlamento riceverà il
testo di aggiornamento nel giro di poche settimane.
Lo Small business act diventa quindi anche uno
strumento per tutelare le piccole e medie imprese nel
settore del turismo, che rappresentano una straordinaria
potenzialità per sviluppare un settore che conto di poter
potenziare nel prossimo anno, perché sono
assolutamente convinto che una politica europea, così
come prevista dal trattato, possa rappresentare un valore
aggiunto al lavoro che già egregiamente svolgono le
regioni dell'Unione europea e gli Stati membri.

108 18-01-2011
Credo quindi di poter rassicurare l'on. parlamentare che
ha sottoposto l'interrogazione con l'impegno della
Commissione e mio personale affinché tutte le piccole e
medie imprese del settore possano essere sostenute e
possano essere agevolate nell'accedere agli strumenti
economici comunitari, nel contesto di una strategia
politica che punta a fare del turismo uno dei settori
cardine di politica economica e industriale.
2-449
Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D). – Turbūt mes visi šiandien
čia salėje susirinkę tikimės, kad jūsų išsakytos
prognozės dėl turizmo plėtros ateityje taps iš tikrųjų
įgyvendintos ir ši sritis bus ne tik vystoma, bet ir bus
palanki investuoti. Kaip jūs žinote, iki šiol vis dėlto
turizmas yra išvystytas nevienodai Europos Sąjungoje ir
tam yra objektyvios ir subjektyvios priežastys. Norėčiau
paklausti. Baltijos jūros strategijoje Baltijos regiono
patrauklumas ir prieinamumas yra įvardijamas kaip
vienas iš pagrindinių tikslų. Kas konkrečiai per metus
yra pasiekta šitoje srityje ?
2-450
Carlo Fidanza (PPE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli
colleghi, Signor Commissario, voglio ringraziare il
collega Balčytis per questa interrogazione che pone al
centro del nostro dibattito argomenti che il Parlamento
avrà modo di affrontare anche nei prossimi mesi con la
relazione parlamentare di cui sono responsabile.
Dobbiamo innanzitutto dare atto al Vicepresidente
Tajani di aver dato un impulso molto forte alla nuova
politica europea del turismo prevista dalle competenze
del trattato di Lisbona, con la comunicazione del giugno
scorso e con il relativo piano di implementazione
presentato poche settimane fa. Questi due atti hanno al
centro proprio l'attenzione per le piccole e medie
imprese, per la competitività del settore, in particolar
modo le tematiche relative all'innovazione e alla
formazione.
Sui finanziamenti dobbiamo agire su due linee:
innanzitutto rendere conoscibili e maggiormente
utilizzati i fondi già esistenti e in secondo luogo il
Parlamento dovrà fare una grande battaglia per avere
nelle prospettive – e concludo Presidente – 2014-2020
delle linee di finanziamento specifiche per le politiche
del turismo.
2-451
Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (S&D). – Sunt unele ţări care
utilizează, de exemplu, pentru dezvoltarea turismului,
Programul regional pentru competitivitate şi inovare,
programul operaţional, cazul Marii Britanii sau cazul
Greciei, Programul operaţional pentru dezvoltare
regională. Aş dori să vă întreb dacă aveţi în vedere
crearea unui cadru european pentru a mări participarea
IMM-urilor în ceea ce priveşte accesarea fondurilor
europene pentru turism.
2-452
Antonio Tajani, Vicepresidente della Commissione. −
Signor Presidente, onorevoli deputati, voglio ringraziare
l'on. Balčytis perché mi dà la possibilità di intervenire su
un tema che mi sta particolarmente a cuore fra quelli di
cui sono responsabile come Commissario europeo ed
essendo il primo Commissario europeo al turismo, lo
considero, insieme alla politica industriale e alla politica
dello spazio, una priorità.
Il tema chiave, però, per rispondere poi concretamente,
al di là delle iniziative politiche che ho cercato di attuare
da quando sono diventato Commissario, è quello che ha
posto l'on. Fidanza nel corso del suo intervento, perché
non essendoci una competenza comunitaria di politica
del turismo prima del trattato di Lisbona, nelle attuali
prospettive finanziarie non ci sono i fondi necessari per
contribuire con un aiuto comunitario ad una forte azione
turistica.
Abbiamo programmi interessanti come Calipso, che in
Spagna sono stati valorizzati con iniziative regionali che
mi sembrano molto positive, ma se ho ben capito il
messaggio che ha lanciato l'on. Fidanza, nella relazione
che verrà presentata dal Parlamento ci sarà un sostegno
perché nelle prossime prospettive finanziarie ci sia un
incremento dei fondi destinati alla politica del turismo.
Questo può essere inserito all'interno dell'ottavo
programma quadro oppure con linee di bilancio ad hoc.
È però importante che il Parlamento ponga il problema,
perché è difficile dare delle risposte concrete se non ci
sono gli strumenti economici.
Detto questo, non significa che noi non ci muoveremo in
maniera molto determinata. Come lei sa, le iniziative
adottate sono state tantissime, la Presidenza belga ha
organizzato un grande evento a Malta, la Presidenza
ungherese ha già annunciato che organizzerà un grande
evento – è stato tema di colloquio in occasione del primo
incontro che abbiamo avuto a Budapest qualche giorno
fa – un grande evento dedicato proprio al turismo.
Sono contento anche che l'on. Balčytis abbia posto il
problema del turismo nel Baltico: il turismo non è un
problema che riguarda le economie soltanto dei paesi
dell'area mediterranea – Spagna, Francia, Italia, Grecia e
Malta – è una risorsa importantissima per tutta l'Unione
europea, compresi i paesi dell'Europa centrale,
dell'Europa dell'Est, che hanno delle bellezze e delle
potenzialità da poter sviluppare.
A proposito dei paesi del Baltico, io credo che uno dei
temi, che peraltro è affrontato nel testo che è stato
approvato il 30 giugno dello scorso anno, sia il rapporto
con le nuove classi emergenti, con la nuova borghesia
della Federazione russa, dove ci sono milioni e milioni
di cittadini che intendono svolgere attività turistica e
quindi vogliono uscire dai confini del loro paese.
Abbiamo un problema per quanto riguarda i visti. Lo
stesso problema esiste con la Cina, credo, ed è volontà
della Commissione europea e dei ministri del Turismo
cercare di risolvere questo problema, sia per quanto
riguarda questo potenziale del turismo russo sia questo
potenziale del turismo cinese, per accelerare e fare in
modo che sia più facile ricevere nei nostri paesi, e i paesi
baltici, essendo più vicini alla Federazione russa,
possono beneficiare di una presenza turistica anche di

18-01-2011 109
classe media emergente che può portare benefici alla
loro economia.
Questo è pienamente al centro della nostra attività a
favore delle politiche turistiche e mi rallegro anche del
fatto che molti ministri dei differenti paesi – ho
incontrato qualche settimana fa a Londra il nuovo
ministro del Turismo britannico – tra cui la Gran
Bretagna, sono fortemente impegnati per sostenere la
politica turistica dell'Unione europea, lo stesso la
Francia.
Sarebbe importante individuare alcune porte di ingresso,
perché l'Europa deve rappresentare un valore aggiunto.
Sono ben lieto che il Commissario Vassiliou abbia
voluto inserire nel testo approvato oggi che riguarda lo
sport i grandi eventi sportivi – penso alle Olimpiadi di
Londra prossime venture – come una grande opportunità
per tutta l'Unione europea.
Dobbiamo insomma fare in modo che ogni paese
dell'Unione possa rappresentare una porta da dove
entrano turisti che non si fermano in quel paese ma,
dopo aver visitato quel paese, possano andare a visitare
altri paesi europei.
Questa è l'azione aggiuntiva che può fare la
Commissione europea e il sostegno del Parlamento è per
me determinante. Vi ringrazio per ciò che potrete fare,
anche in occasione del dibattito sulla politica del
turismo, ma anche in ogni dibattito che riguarderà le
prossime attività di bilancio.
2-453
Part two
President. − Question 17 by Vilija Blinkeviciute (H-
0625/10)
2-454
Subject: Programmes and initiatives to modernise higher
education
Studies have been carried out in some Member States in order
to determine how higher education institutions have adapted
to the new labour market requirements and what prospects
graduates have of finding work once they have completed
their degree course. The research has shown – regrettably –
that many universities are preparing specialists for a market
that is already saturated. College syllabuses do not always
allow for the needs of the labour market, and those who suffer
most as a result are, therefore, new graduates. The
Commission’s work programme for 2011 refers to the
modernisation of higher education and states that proposals
might be put forward on the systems to be applied in order to
assess, and bring transparency to, the activities of higher
education institutions.
That being the case, what specific programmes and model
initiatives will the Commission adopt with a view to
modernising higher education in Europe? Will it draw up a
special strategy to modernise higher education so as to ensure
that young graduates will be able to find a job as quickly as
possible? How much is it willing to invest in the future in
programmes and initiatives of this kind for young people?
Androulla Vassiliou, Member of the Commission. − Mr
President, education is one of the major factors that
determines employability. The risk of being unemployed
is 40% lower for higher education graduates than for
people with only secondary education. However, youth
unemployment and under-employment are unacceptably
high today. Too many graduates struggle to make the
transition to the labour market and secure quality
employment that corresponds to their educational
background.
Of course, the efforts to improve employability begin
well before higher education. The Commission works
with Member States to identify the skills or key
competences that young people need to learn at school.
Today, young people need a wider range of skills than
ever before in order to flourish in a globalised economy.
Many will work in jobs that do not yet exist. Many will
need advanced linguistic, intercultural and
entrepreneurial skills. Technology will continue to
change the world in ways we cannot imagine, so the
ability to continue to learn and to innovate will become
crucial factors for employability.
Guidance is also critical. Young people are confronted
with an increased number of educational choices. They
need to be able to take informed decisions. This requires
better information about education and training paths,
including a clear picture of job opportunities. We need
to develop quality career guidance services and
vocational orientation with the strong involvement of
labour market institutions.
Turning to higher education, the Commission recently
launched, as you know, Youth on the Move – a Europe
2020 flagship initiative which sets out to make education
and training more relevant to young people’s needs. We
are now starting to implement the various parts of this
strategy. Later this year, the Commission plans to
present a new Communication on the modernisation of
higher education. We will take stock of progress in
making higher education more relevant to the needs of
the knowledge-based society, including the question of
employability. We will identify the key challenges for
the future and set out our response.
As part of these efforts, the Commission will reinforce
the European platform for dialogue between universities
and business, with a view to increasing the
employability of students and to developing the role of
education in the knowledge triangle. In a more global
and mobile world, transparency regarding the
performance of higher education institutions can
stimulate both competition and cooperation, and be an
incentive for further improvements and modernisation.
However, existing international rankings can give an
incomplete picture of the performance of universities.
This year, the Commission will present the results of a
feasibility study to develop an alternative multidimensional
ranking system which reflects the diversity
of higher education institutions.

110 18-01-2011
Europe needs to be better at anticipating the skill needs
of tomorrow. This is why the Commission has launched
the Agenda for New Skills and Jobs, which goes hand in
hand with our Youth on the Move initiative. The Agenda
for New Skills and Jobs looks at how to help our young
people to become more employable. Above all, we need
to give people the right mix of skills so that they can
adapt to our fast-changing society. Our new EU Skills
Panorama, which will be operational in 2012, will help
to forecast not only the skills that employers need today,
but also those required in the future.
In the spring of this year, the Commission intends to
propose new European benchmarks on learning mobility
and on the role of education in preparing people to be
employable in the knowledge-based labour market.
Finally, EU programmes to support education, training
and youth, including mobility programmes such as
Erasmus, can help young people to improve their
chances in the labour market by gaining valuable
international experience and by developing their
intellectual understanding.
2-455
Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D). – Ačiū, Komisare, už jūsų
išties išsamų atsakymą, tačiau noriu dar užduoti
papildomą klausimą. Europos Sąjunga turi garantuoti
visiems piliečiams teisę į kokybišką aukštąjį mokslą.
Tačiau valstybėse narėse yra nemaži skirtumai tarp
aukštojo mokslo sistemų, jo kainų bei tarp paskolų
teikimo studijoms apmokėti. Didelės paskolų palūkanos
siekiant apmokėti už studijas ir nepalankios paskolų
grąžinimo sąlygos neretai sulaiko jauną žmogų nuo
aukšto mokslo siekimo savo šalyje bei skatina proto
nutekėjimą į kitas šalis. Ar Europos Komisija planuoja
išleisti rekomendacines gaires dėl priimtiniausių sąlygų
studijų paskolų teikimui?
2-456
Janusz Władysław Zemke (S&D). – Panie
Przewodniczący! Chciałbym poruszyć tylko jedną
kwestię, chociaż można by tu mówić o wielu różnych
sprawach. Chciałem się pani komisarz spytać, czy trwają
prace nad tym, żeby zwiększyć środki na programy
wymiany młodych ludzi w Europie? Mam takie
wrażenie, że od co najmniej kilku lat pula środków, jakie
mamy na Erasmusa czy na inne programy, jest taka
sama. Te stypendia są dzisiaj rzeczywiście bardzo
niskie.
2-457
Γεώργιος Παπανικολάου (PPE). – Κυρία Επίτροπε,
είναι αλήθεια πως το συγκεκριμένο ζήτημα εμπίπτει σε
θέματα επικουρικότητας. Ωστόσο, τα κράτη μέλη
χρηματοδοτούνται από την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση με
πόρους για τον εκσυγχρονισμό των προγραμμάτων
σπουδών των κρατών μελών. Για παράδειγμα, θυμίζω
ότι στο προηγούμενο, στο 3ο Κοινοτικό Πλαίσιο
Στήριξης πολλά κράτη μέλη απορρόφησαν κοινοτικούς
πόρους για αυτό το σκοπό. Και το ερώτημα είναι
συγκεκριμένο: διαθέτει η Επιτροπή στοιχεία για την
αποτελεσματικότητα αυτών των πόρων που δόθηκαν
αλλά και θα δοθούν στα κράτη μέλη;
2-458
Androulla Vassiliou, Member of the Commission. −
First of all, on the question of the disparities between
higher education institutes: exactly! That is why we
want to have transparency in the records of universities.
That is why we are now completing the feasibility study
on the basis of which we shall dare to look into the
ranking of universities, the mapping of universities and
the standards of universities in order to give students
more informed choices. The aim is for them to know
exactly where to study, what to study and what is the
standard of the university that they want to enter.
Regarding fees, I think I agree with you that high fees
need fair loans, but as I am sure you know this is the
responsibility of the Member States. We know that one
thing that economists agree on is that investment in
education is something which will produce long-term
results, growth and jobs, so I always urge governments
not to cut university investment or education investment
in general.
Moreover, I agree with the honourable Member who
raised the question of the insufficiency of mobility
grants like Erasmus. That is why we are again
completing a feasibility study – a study by the London
School of Economics, which I hope will be ready in a
couple of months – on the basis of which we shall
explore, with the European Investment Bank, the
possibility of creating a European student loan for
mobility. This, I am sure, will give all students, whether
they are poor or rich, the possibility of taking advantage
of these excellent mobility grants.
With regard to Mr Papanikolaou’s question, he is talking
about the structural development funds on the basis of
which governments can build their education
infrastructure. Unfortunately the Structural Funds are not
my responsibility, but I will find out from Commissioner
Hahn whether there are any reports by Member States as
to the outcome of these grants and if so, I will certainly
let you know.
2-459
President. − Question 18 by Radvile Morkunaite-
Mikuleniene (H-000009/11)
Subject: Performance of pupils in EU Member States
On the whole, the recently published results of the
international survey of the performance of 15-year-old school
pupils (PISA Survey 2009) show that the EU’s
competitiveness is seriously threatened, because in the field of
reading competence (Levels 5-6) only two EU countries are
ranked in the top 10. In the field of mathematics, only three
EU countries figure in the top 10, and none are in the top five.
In 2020 both these young people and their younger fellow
pupils will either be active on the labour market or be in the
process of entering it, and it is therefore necessary to take
immediate effective measures in the Member States if we
wish to significantly improve the quality of pupils' education.
Will the Commission make a thorough assessment of the
above survey and submit specific recommendations to the
Member States for procedures of proven effectiveness? Are
there plans for compiling a programme to disseminate such
tried and tested procedures or to establish a forum to debate

18-01-2011 111
the challenges which need to be faced? Should discussions be
held with the Member States to determine what measures
need to be taken in order to improve their results?
2-460
Androulla Vassiliou, Member of the Commission. − As
you are aware, it is for each Member State to decide how
to organise its educational system. This is in accordance
with Article 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union. Nevertheless, the Commission works
with Member States to foster mutual learning and
exchanges of good practice.
As we stated in the Europe 2020 strategy, it is vital for
Europe’s future as a knowledge-based and inclusive
society that education systems are reformed and
modernised to match the best in the world. The OECD’s
PISA survey is an important resource for these
exchanges. The latest PISA survey, published in
December 2010, shows a mixed picture for EU Member
States. There are signs of considerable improvement in
some systems but, overall, there is much progress still to
be made. These results will provide an important input
to future exchanges between the Commission and the
Member States.
The European benchmark, adopted by the Council in
May 2009, aims at an adequate level of basic skills in
reading, mathematics and science by calling for the
share of low-achievers aged 15 to be reduced to below
15% by the year 2020.
Now I would like to read something from the PISA
report, which is very relevant. The share of lowachieving
pupils in reading, which had increased from
21% in 2000 to 24% in 2006, improved to 20% in 2009.
Nevertheless, the OECD 2010 benchmark of reducing
the 2000 share by 20% to reach 17% was not reached.
The share of low-achieving pupils in maths and science
has been declining since 2006. There was more progress
in science than in maths and the share of low-achievers
is today lower in science than in maths.
If 2006 is used as a strong starting point, the EU is well
on track as regards progress towards the 2020 lowachiever
benchmark. On average, over the three
disciplines in the 25 EU countries for which data is
available, 22.5% were low-achievers in 2006 and by
2009 their share had declined to 19.6%. So we see that,
on average, in the European Union we have made
progress.
The Commission will, of course, analyse the PISA
results and publish its conclusions in its next annual
progress report on benchmarks in 2011. In November
2010 the Council invited the Commission and Member
States to focus their joint work on the following areas:
curriculum design, motivation for reading, literacy,
maths, science and technology, the impact of new
technologies on basic skills and their use in helping
learners to acquire autonomy and maintain motivation,
gender differences in performance and attitudes, the link
between pupils’ background and their mastery of basic
skills and, finally, issues around teachers and teacher
trainers as well as around schools’ ethos and
characteristics.
In its conclusion the Council also invited the
Commission to establish a high-level group on literacy
and a thematic working group on maths, science and
technology.
I intend to launch the high-level group on literacy on 1
February. It will suggest policy measures based on best
practices and research, which will help Member States to
improve the consistency and effectiveness of the
provision of basic skills within their lifelong learning
strategies and the group will conclude its work and
publish its report in mid-2012.
Moreover, the thematic working group on maths, science
and technology has already been established. It
comprises national policymakers and experts on the
basis of mutual learning and the exchange of good
practices. The thematic working group will identify and
disseminate policy measures to improve the situation of
low-achievers in basic skills at national level.
I should also underline that the Comenius actions of the
lifelong learning programme focuses among other
priorities on increasing motivation in science and
mathematics and on improving literacy skills.
2-461
Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė (PPE). – Aš
norėčiau paklausti, galbūt yra padarytas tyrimas kai
kuriose šalyse, kurios galbūt nerodo gerų rezultatų
būtent moksleivių tarpe, jų pasiekimuose, nuo ko tai
priklauso? Ar tai yra finansiniai dalykai, ar tai yra
struktūriniai dalykai? Ką jūs galvojate apie pradinį
mokymą? Tyrimas buvo darytas su vyresnių klasių
moksleiviais, o kalbant apie dar jaunesnius žmones,
kurie ketina tęsti toliau mokslus?
2-462
Androulla Vassiliou, Member of the Commission. − I
can provide you with all the detailed data that we have
on various Member States. We have not analysed it, it is
not our job to see why certain Member States did worse
than others, but during our work we exchanged good
practices. I am very pleased to say that some countries
that have followed good practices have shown very good
progress since 2006 in most of these indicators.
Regarding elementary school, unfortunately we do not
have studies similar to the PISA one. No such study
exists.
2-463
President. − Question 19 by Georgios Papanikolaou (H-
0623/10)
Subject: Fragmented digital markets and consequences
for the educational system and investments in geographically
isolated regions

112 18-01-2011
According to the Commission Communication on a Digital
Agenda for Europe, Europe is still a patchwork of national
online markets, and Europeans are prevented from enjoying
the benefits of a digital single market by solvable problems
such as the lack of investment in networks. As a result, the
education provided in many remote – in particular
mountainous and island – regions lags behind technologically
and investments in specific geographical locations are also
affected. Will the Commission say:
Since ICT accounts for 5% of European GDP, having a
market value of € 660 billion annually, while making a much
greater contribution to increasing total productivity (20%
directly from the ICT sector and 30% from ICT investments),
how does it intend to address the fragmentation of digital
markets?
Are any targeted Community actions being developed to
address the problem of low national investments in networks,
especially for geographically isolated regions?
2-464
Neelie Kroes, Vice-President of the Commission. − The
Commission’s communication on Europe 2020 and its
communication on the digital agenda for Europe set the
objective of bringing basic broadband to all Europeans
by 2013 and seek to ensure that by 2020 all Europeans
have access to much higher internet speeds of above 30
megabytes per second and that 50% or more of
European households have subscribed to internet
connection above 100 megabytes per second.
Mr President, the Commission is aware that without
strong public intervention there is a risk of sub-optimal
roll-out with fast proven networks concentrated in highdensity
zones and with remote and rural areas lagging
behind. That would also have negative consequences on
educational systems and integration of information and
communication technology in education. The latest EUwide
data shows that only 67% of schools have
broadband access and that there were large disparities
between Member States and between densely and thinly
populated areas, 73.7% and 60.6% respectively.
To avoid the risk of a sub-optimal roll-out, the
Commission has adopted a broadband package outlining
a common framework within both national and regional
policies, which should be developed to meet the targets.
Those policies should, in particular, lower the cost of
broadband deployment in the entire EU territory by
ensuring proper planning and coordination and reducing
administrative burdens.
The Commission has already acted to increase
investment in remote areas and regions within the
framework of the EU Cohesion Policy with the
programming of about EUR 2.3 billion in the period
2007-2013. The Commission’s communication on a
European economic recovery plan also enabled the
programming of EUR 360 million in broadband
measures for rural areas through the European
Agricultural Fund for Rural Development. In its
programme package the Commission announced that it
will reinforce and rationalise the funding of high-speed
broadband through EU instruments by 2014 and explore
how to attract capital for broadband investment through
credit enhancement backed by the European Investment
Bank and the EU funds. An EC-EIB proposal on the
issue is expected in 2011.
Another pillar from the digital agenda is dedicated to
digital skills. Here we propose for instance to consider
digital literacy and competences as a priority for the
European Social Fund regulation in the next
programming period and to identify digital competences
as a supplement to Europass to ensure their
transparency. Education, as you are aware, is crucial to
the development of digital competences in our society
and we agree that without appropriate investment some
regions may lag behind.
The latest EU-wide data – I am talking about 2006 –
shows that only 67% of schools had broadband access
and that there were large disparities between EU
Member States and between densely and thinly
populated areas. We are about to launch a new survey on
schools and the results will be available at the end of this
year.
2-465
Γεώργιος Παπανικολάου (PPE). – Κυρία Επίτροπε,
σας ευχαριστώ για την πολύ διεξοδική απάντησή σας.
Θα ήθελα συμπληρώνοντας να προσθέσω το εξής:
αναφέρεται στη στρατηγική «Ευρώπη 2020» ότι στόχος
μας είναι μία ψηφιακή ενιαία αγορά για τα νοικοκυριά
και τις επιχειρήσεις, πράγμα το οποίο σημαίνει ίσες
ευκαιρίες για πρόσβαση, ίσες ευκαιρίες όμως και για
ανάπτυξη.
Εσείς η ίδια, κατά καιρούς, σε ακροάσεις στις αρμόδιες
επιτροπές, όπως στην Επιτροπή Πολιτισμού και
Παιδείας, έχετε αναφέρει ότι για τα επόμενα πέντε
χρόνια περίπου 500.000 νέες θέσεις εργασίας θα
χρειασθούν στους τομείς αυτούς. Και ερωτώ
συγκεκριμένα: λαμβάνουμε όλα εκείνα τα μέτρα που
απαιτούνται ώστε η δημιουργία αυτών των θέσεων
εργασίας να κατανεμηθεί δίκαια χωρίς να αποκλείει τις
γεωγραφικά απομονωμένες περιοχές;
2-466
Neelie Kroes, Member of the Commission. − Mr
President, the answer is yes.
2-467
President. − That was very good. Thank you very much
indeed!
2-468
Question 20 by Liam Aylward (H-0648/10)
Subject: 116 000 Missing children hotline
The Commission has recently made a final call to EU
Member States to activate the European missing children
hotline 116 000 as soon as possible. This telephone number
would provide the necessary aid, assistance and support for
children in their time of need.
At the moment, the 116 000 hotline is fully operational only
in 12 Member States. Does the Commission consider that the
fact that the service is not operating in a full and proper
manner throughout the EU could put children at risk? Will

18-01-2011 113
people be informed if this service is not available in their
country or in the country they are visiting? Must every
Member State implement this service correctly and in its
entirety? Is it not true that the failure to provide an adequate
service throughout all Member States as regards this number
may put children at risk?
2-469
Neelie Kroes, Vice-President of the Commission. − Mr
President, the Commission shares the Honourable
Member’s view that the implementation of the 116 000
hotline for missing children requires further efforts in
many Member States. In that respect, the revised
telecom rules – and, in particular, I refer to Article 27a
of the Universal Service Directive – require Member
States to make every effort to ensure that citizens have
access to the service operating a hotline to report cases
of missing children. In that respect the Commission is
carefully monitoring and assisting Member States in the
transposition of that new provision into national law,
which has to be completed by 25 May 2011.
On 17 November last year the Commission adopted the
Communication entitled ‘Dial 116 000: The European
hotline for missing children’. The objectives of the
Communication are to renew the Commission’s call on
the Member States to implement the missing children
hotline as a matter of priority and to ensure that the same
high quality of service is offered throughout the Union
to provide practical support to the Member States.
The Communication highlights existing best practice
developed by the Member States to address the main
problems linked to the operating cost and telecom cost
of the 116 000 hotline. The Commission proposes using
this best practice to work out a set of common minimum
standards that would guarantee a high-quality service
throughout the EU so that parents and children can count
on the same assistance no matter where they are. This
extensive work goes beyond electronic communications
issues for which I am responsible and is coordinated by
my colleague, Mrs Reding.
2-470
Liam Aylward (ALDE). – Commissioner, in the past
you have identified cost and lack of information as
barriers to the implementation of this hotline in some
Member States. What measures do you intend to put in
place to address these barriers and, furthermore, do you
foresee this service being fully implemented across all
Member States? Finally, what options are available to
Member States that have problems financing this hotline
to ensure it becomes operational throughout the
European Union?
2-471
Neelie Kroes, Vice-President of the Commission. − Of
course we are trying to do our utmost. The line taken by
the honourable Member makes sense. I was indeed,
earlier on, taking the line that cost is one of the issues.
The hotline itself is the least part of the problem. The
problem is to follow up. The issue that we should focus
on is not just the hotline itself, but the follow-up.
We are carefully monitoring and assisting the Member
States as regards implementation, and we are aware that
it is up to them to take the initiative as regards national
law. We are also aware that, in the current financial
crisis, it is even more difficult for Member States to find
possibilities of financing the follow-up.
Some of those organisations have been the beneficiaries
of EU funding for certain projects. The EU funding
available is not intended to cover the full running costs
of the services’ operations, but aims just to help develop
the 116 000 services by means of concrete projects.
Of course we need to be creative. Those who are
involved in such projects, and national governments,
should also be creative in drawing on budgetary
resources, corporate social responsibility and private
donations to find the means, at the end of day, of doing
what we should all like to be done.
2-472
Question 22 by Bernd Posselt (H-0619/10)
Subject: Mainline railway through the Alps
How does the Commission view the current situation with
regard to the construction of the Brenner base tunnel and the
necessary approaches on either side, as well as the extension
of the Munich-Mühldorf-Freilassing-Salzburg railway?
2-473
Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission. −
Mr President, the question of traffic across the Alps is an
extremely serious one, but the situation does not look
too bad at this stage. Despite a difficult financial context,
advances are being made on the Brenner Base Tunnel
and its northern and southern access routes. This project
is of the highest priority, and the Commission decided to
allocate to it a budget of almost EUR 1 billion.
First, on the Brenner Base Tunnel itself, the meeting of
the Austrian-Italian Intergovernmental Commission on
19 November 2010, in the presence of EU coordinator
Pat Cox, led to decisive progress. Austria and Italy
confirmed an agreement on the total cost of the Brenner
Base Tunnel project at EUR 8 billion. Austria approved
an optimised working plan which will allow preparatory
works on the main tunnel to start by 2011. The Italian
Government authorised the launch of the works with a
commitment that guarantees coverage of the costs over
the entire construction period.
Secondly, good progress can be reported on access route
approaches on either side. Italy has authorised the launch
of works on the southern access route, starting with the
first section, Fortezza-Ponte Gardena. Good progress has
also been made by Austria on the northern access route.
Austria has a section in the Lower Inn Valley which will
be completed by 2013 or even sooner.
Finally, regarding the cross-border connections between
Austria and Germany, the initial goal for completing the
works by 2012 at the latest will not be achieved. On the

114 18-01-2011
German side, works will not start before 2012 and will
take an estimated three years. However, in November
2010 Germany published its national investment
assessment, which includes provision for positive
development on the northern access route between
Munich and the Austrian border. The one-track section
will be upgraded and the whole section will be
electrified. The next step will be a memorandum of
understanding between Germany and Austria on this
section and the infrastructure management planning
process will have to start.
2-474
Bernd Posselt (PPE). – Danke für die gute Antwort,
Herr Kommissar! Aber der zweite Teil der Frage ist
noch nicht beantwortet, in dem ich auf München–
Mühldorf–Freilassing eingegangen bin, was Teil der
Magistrale von Paris nach Budapest und besonders
wegen des bayerischen Chemiedreieicks und auch
wegen der Entlastung der Zulaufstrecke zum Brenner
wichtig ist.
Denn wenn der Brennerbasistunnel kommt, wird die
Rosenheimer Strecke überlastet sein, und dann wird es
wichtig sein, München–Mühldorf–Freilassing–Salzburg
auszubauen, was ja ein absolut prioritäres Projekt auch
der Kommission ist. Ich frage Sie, ob Sie es für möglich
halten, dass in der nächsten Finanziellen Vorausschau
zusätzliche Mittel hierfür zur Verfügung gestellt werden
können, weil es ja grenzüberschreitend ist.
2-475
Νικόλαος Χουντής (GUE/NGL). – Κύριε Επίτροπε,
ωραία αυτά που γίνονται στις Άλπεις. Αλλά στην
Ελλάδα, λόγω του Μνημονίου, η Ελληνική Κυβέρνηση
προχωράει σε περικοπές και διακοπές δρομολογίων, που
απομονώνουν την Ελλάδα από το ευρωπαϊκό και το
βαλκανικό σιδηροδρομικό δίκτυο, επικαλούμενη, μαζί
με την Επιτροπή, ότι ο Οργανισμός Σιδηροδρόμων της
Ελλάδας έχει μεγάλο χρέος.
Σας ερωτώ λοιπόν: πώς κρίνετε αυτές τις εξελίξεις,
δηλαδή τις περικοπές των σιδηροδρομικών
δρομολογίων; Και δεύτερον, στο χρέος του Οργανισμού
Σιδηροδρόμων της Ελλάδας υπολογίζονται και τα
χρήματα για τη συγχρηματοδότηση των έργων
υποδομής μαζί με την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση;
2-476
Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission. − About
Greece, I am not able to answer because I do not know
the details. I have not received any information about
these troubles.
About the Munich-Mühldorf-Freilassing-Salzburg
priority project number 17, it is ongoing. The initial
work started in 2007. Some of the work is finished. On
19 April 2010 the work on the new double-track bridge
crossing of the river in Mühldorf started and will be
finished. It is fully funded by the German recovery plan.
It costs EUR 11.7 million, so it is developing and we do
not consider this as a major trouble at this moment.
2-477
President. − Question 23 by Jim Higgins (H-0621/10)
Subject: Texting while driving - road safety
A driver is 23 times more likely to be in an accident if texting.
Texting while driving is deemed to be responsible for
thousands of road deaths annually, while the number of
personal injuries rise at an alarming rate year on year.
While the Commission recognises the need to increase road
safety and ensure proper enforcement of road safety rules, no
EU-wide legislation exists which bans the practice of texting,
emailing and web browsing while driving a motorised vehicle
above a pre-agreed speed limit.
Given that the technology already exists to prevent the
practice of texting, emailing and web browsing while driving,
does the Commission intend to introduce EU-wide legislation
in order to eliminate the extremely dangerous practice of
texting, emailing and web browsing while driving?
2-478
Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission. − The
Commission shares the view of the honourable Member
that texting while driving, like all extraneous activities,
is extremely dangerous. In 2009 the Commission issued
a report on the use of mobile phones when driving. This
report is published on the Europa road safety website.
However, we have no statistics on the number of
accidents caused by this practice.
All Member States have legislation which, at least
implicitly, prohibits texting, e-mailing and web
browsing while driving. While not specifically referring
to the use of mobile phones, legal provisions in domestic
legislation state that drivers must be fully concentrated
on driving. Against this background the Commission
does not intend to introduce an additional layer of EUwide
legislation in order to ban the practices of texting,
e-mailing and web browsing while driving a motorised
vehicle. We hope that Member States will deal with this
issue adequately.
2-479
Jim Higgins (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, tá díomá orm faoin
bhfreagra a fuair mé ón gCoimisinéir Kallas. Tá sé thar a
bheith tábhachtach go mbeadh comhoibriú idir na
Ballstáit éagsúla. Caithfimid chuile rud a dhéanamh
chun na báis ar na bóithre agus díobháil thromchúiseach
a laghdú. Ceann de na rudaí nua-aimseartha atá ag tarlú
ar bhóithre Eorpacha is ea daoine a bheith ag seoladh
téacsanna agus iad ag tiomáint. Tá rialacha difriúla idir
na Ballstáit go léir. Caithfimid níos mó comhoibrithe a
bheith againn; tá díomá orm nach bhfuil an Coimisinéir
in ann níos mó geallúintí a thabhairt dúinn faoi sin.
2-480
Seán Kelly (PPE). – I would like to compliment my
colleague, Mr Higgins, on raising this very important
issue. I, too, share his concern at the lack of enthusiasm
shown by the Commissioner to ensure that best practice
is observed throughout the European Union. I would ask
him why the Commission would not at least try and
encourage Member States to have the same rules and
regulations right across the European Union, and ensure
that they are enforced in the interests of safety and the
preservation of life?
2-481

18-01-2011 115
Inés Ayala Sender (S&D). – Señor Presidente, mi
intervención es solamente para informar a sus Señorías
de que soy ponente del dosier sobre las sanciones
transfronterizas, donde se ha dado facilidad al Consejo
para poder abrir la lista de infracciones –lo que era,
incluso, una propuesta inicial de la Comisión– y donde
ha aparecido precisamente el problema del uso de los
teléfonos móviles. Pero, por desgracia, en el cambio de
la base legal que nos ha facilitado el acuerdo del
Consejo, no participan ni el Reino Unido ni Irlanda, que
tienen un opting out. Ese es uno de los problemas que
tenemos y, que tal vez, desde el Parlamento, podríamos
mejorar. Espero que, en el debate con el Consejo, estos
países –el Reino Unido parece ser que está intentando ya
un opting in– expresen su interés, aunque no sabemos
nada.
2-482
Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission. − A
broad safety action plan and implementation of that
action plan have been extremely high priorities for the
Commission, and there really has been tremendous
progress: we have substantially reduced the number of
accidents in Europe. I can tell you that, in my own
country, the annual death toll at the beginning of the
1990s was 400, whereas last year it was 78 – and that is,
of course, with a tenfold increase in the number of
vehicles on the roads. It is a substantial change.
This is important, and thank you very much Ms Ayala
Sender for reminding us about the cross-border
enforcement of traffic violations, which is an extremely
important step towards improving road safety. That
decision was adopted by the Council in December and
we will now implement it.
I do not believe that increasing the number of legislative
acts at European level is a panacea: that whatever
problem we have, we must have European legislation.
However, while everybody criticises the fact that we
have too much EU legislation, in my view this is an
issue about which Member States are as worried as the
European public in general, and if cross-border
enforcement of traffic violations can create a European
space for road safety, that is very important.
2-483
President. − Questions which have not been answered
for lack of time will receive written answers (see
Annex).
That concludes Question Time.
(The sitting was suspended at 20.15 and resumed at
21.00)
2-484
PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. ROBERTA ANGELILLI
Vicepresidente
2-485
16 - Situazione a Haiti un anno dopo il
terremoto: aiuto umanitario e ricostruzione
(discussione)
2-486
Presidente. − Prima di iniziare i lavori dell'ordine del
giorno, devo comunicare che, purtroppo, un militare
italiano è stato ucciso e un altro è rimasto gravemente
ferito in uno scontro a fuoco avvenuto oggi in
Afghanistan. Alla famiglia della vittima, Luca Sanna,
vanno le nostre condoglianze.
L'ordine del giorno reca la dichiarazione della
Commissione sulla situazione a Haiti un anno dopo il
terremoto: aiuto umanitario e ricostruzione.
2-487
Kristalina Georgieva, Member of the Commission. −
Madam President, may I also join you in expressing
sympathy to those affected and their families.
A year ago, we witnessed in Haiti one of the worst
natural catastrophes in recent history but this also
triggered one of the best displays of solidarity, with
people whose resilience in the face of disaster and
disorder is a lesson of courage to us all. One year after
the disaster, we would like to pay tribute to those who
died, but also to those who have survived. We promised
them our help, and we stand by our promises.
The EU is a critical part of the global solidarity effort for
Haiti. We have mobilised all the means available to
provide both humanitarian assistance and, as
Commissioner Piebalgs will outline later, development
aid to rebuild the country.
After the earthquake, the EU pledged more than
EUR 320 million in pure humanitarian aid, of which the
Commission provided EUR 130 million for last year,
2010.
These funds allowed us to touch the lives of more than
four million Haitians through food assistance, sanitation
and shelter. Close to 1.5 million people have been
provided with a place to stay: a basis from which to restart
their life. Our assistance targeted not only Port-au-
Prince but also other affected cities – Léogâne and
Jacmel – and we followed, with aid, the 500 000
Haitians who left Port-au-Prince to live with relatives in
rural areas, bringing food, water and medical care,
clearing the roads and supporting cash-for-work
programmes.
Our current humanitarian assistance is focusing on
cholera, using EUR 22 million to cover the most
essential needs in terms of healthcare, access to proper
water supplies and sanitation, information campaigns,
epidemiological surveillance and logistics. We have
funded treatment for 158 000 people so far but, more
significantly, we have provided clean water for half a
million and access to safer sanitation for 900 000 people,
we have raised awareness among one million Haitians
about what cholera is, how to avoid getting sick and how

116 18-01-2011
to treat cholera, and we have distributed 1.3 million
soaps and chlorine tablets to affected communities.
We had hoped that one year after the earthquake the
situation would be better, but it is not. For this reason we
are budgeting for this year, 2011, EUR 33 million. We
stand ready to provide more if more help is necessary.
For 2011, our priorities will be housing, sanitation and
healthcare. We will continue to tackle poor sanitation
because it is obviously a risk in terms of cholera
spreading and affecting communities. We will also
continue to assist with healthcare, but the healthcare
system of Haiti is a shambles. It is not there to help
people.
In this process we have relied on humanitarian aid
workers and I want to express my gratitude to those who
have been risking their lives to help the Haitian people.
We are also supporting Commissioner Piebalgs in
linking relief to rehabilitation and development. For
instance, some of the 9 th EDF ‘B’ envelope funds will be
allocated for housing programmes in close coordination
with our humanitarian support. I want to stress here that
we have been looking at the situation in Haiti
comprehensively with a view not only to helping people
in immediate need but also to building the foundation for
longer-term recovery.
2-488
Andris Piebalgs, Member of the Commission. − Madam
President, we are also delivering on the reconstruction
front. The EU as a whole – that is the Union and the
Member States – has already committed
EUR 600 million out of its EUR 1.2 billion pledge in
New York, and has already disbursed EUR 330 million.
As part of the overall EU commitment, the Union’s
pledge was initially announced at EUR 460 million, and
we consider it necessary to increase that to
EUR 522 million. Out of this pledge we have already
committed EUR 327 million. Ongoing programmes were
adjusted, by extending their duration and/or by
increasing the financial envelopes, to respond better to
revised priorities. New programmes were put in place to
address additional needs.
Disbursements strictly linked to the pledge amounted to
EUR 74 million in 2010. I believe that, given the
situation in Haiti, this is quite a good result. One has to
realise that the situation there, which was already very
difficult before the earthquake, became immensely
challenging in its aftermath and even more complicated
later – due to Hurricane Tomas, the cholera epidemic
and political instability. Aid workers and technical
experts were often working in quite difficult conditions.
Other factors which we need to bear in mind include,
firstly, the fact that medium-term to long-term
reconstruction assistance is implemented over three to
five years and disbursements are spread over the
programme’s duration: 2010 was mainly dedicated to
committing funds and launching project preparations,
including all necessary technical studies and tenders.
More concrete activities will be starting in 2011 and we
believe that disbursements against the pledge will double
to EUR 150 million during this year.
EU development aid so far has focused, first of all, on
providing necessary functions for the Government to
help deliver the basic services of the state, such as the
running of the education system, the healthcare system
and the police, and the ability to provide staff in the
public sector. The second priority has been immediate
reinforcement and reconstruction of strategic
infrastructure and roads; and the third priority has been
strengthening Haitian disaster preparedness and civil
protection mechanisms and structures.
We have set ourselves the goal of rebuilding a stronger
Haiti, following the earthquake, on more solid
foundations. It is very clear that we need a strong
Haitian Government and we need to focus on priorities.
So we very much follow the priorities identified for us
by the Haitian Government. They would really like to
strengthen governance – with a particular focus that
includes budget support, and taking into account the
limited level of government revenue – and to invest
substantially in infrastructure, particularly in roads.
Where can we learn lessons in order to improve the
situation? Well, we could coordinate the aid better and
strengthen cooperation between the Commission and the
Member States. We are now finalising the joint
programme in a process that involves the EU Member
States.
We also have good experience of working with all our
partners in the Interim Haiti Reconstruction Commission
and this definitely helps to speed up the process. I
believe, however, that we must pursue our strong wish to
achieve stability in terms of both aid and the democratic
functioning of Haiti, because that is clearly a
precondition if the efforts of the EU and the entire
international community are to be successful.
Honourable Members, we are trying to do our best, but it
is clear that we can work better. We have learned from
our experiences: the EU is definitely living up to its
pledge and to our commitment. So I believe that, while
the situation as sometimes portrayed in the media is
quite accurate from one perspective, we are advancing. I
believe that in 2011 we will see significant changes on
the ground – provided that political stability is
established in Haiti, because instability is definitely
hampering our efforts – and we will focus those efforts
on rebuilding Haiti.
2-489
Michèle Striffler, au nom du groupe PPE. – Monsieur
le Président, Madame la Commissaire, Monsieur le
Commissaire, un an après le tremblement de terre, Haïti
est toujours en situation d'urgence et la reconstruction
peine à démarrer, ce qui est imputable aux carences
structurelles de l'État haïtien, à l'absence de volonté

18-01-2011 117
politique et de décision des autorités haïtiennes et au
manque d'accompagnement de la communauté
internationale. Sans décision majeure provenant des
autorités haïtiennes, notamment d'expropriation, les
millions de gravats qui bloquent les efforts de
reconstruction ne seront pas déblayés.
Je tiens à saluer les efforts déployés et le travail réalisé
par les organisations humanitaires. Des progrès sont
accomplis et des millions de vie sont sauvées.
Cependant, les acteurs humanitaires ne peuvent pas
continuer à pallier les faiblesses de l'État haïtien. Ainsi,
l'Union européenne doit faire tout ce qui est en son
pouvoir pour soutenir fortement un processus électoral
légitime et transparent afin de garantir la stabilité et la
volonté politique que réclame la reconstruction. Elle doit
impérativement accompagner les futures autorités
haïtiennes dans l'organisation de leurs institutions vers
un nouvel équilibre à tous les niveaux, vers une
démocratie pleinement opérationnelle tout au long du
processus de reconstruction.
De plus, il est essentiel que la Commission européenne,
en tant que membre de la commission intérimaire pour la
reconstruction d'Haïti, et au regard de sa contribution
financière, intervienne pour accélérer la mise en œuvre
du mandat de cette dernière et pour pourvoir à son
fonctionnement.
Suite au séisme, la communauté internationale avait
décidé de reconstruire Haïti autrement, sans commettre
les erreurs du passé. Il est temps de s'attaquer, une fois
pour toutes, aux causes profondes de la pauvreté en
Haïti.
2-490
Corina Creţu, în numele grupului S&D – La un an de la
tragedia care a devastat Haiti, aşa cum aţi spus, bilanţul
procesului de reconstrucţie este departe de aşteptările
populaţiei, dar şi de angajamentele asumate de
comunitatea internaţională. Mai mult, eforturile de
reclădire a statului par, prin prisma involuţiilor din
ultimele luni, să fi ajuns într-un punct mort. Devastată de
cutremur şi lovită de o epidemie de holeră ale cărei
origini au fost atribuite Căştilor Albastre din
contingentul ONU, această ţară s-a afundat şi într-o
gravă criză politică.
Cred că sunt trei planuri ale crizei haitiene pe care
trebuie să acţionăm în perioada următoare, altfel
eforturile de până acum riscă să fie compromise. Este
necesară anunţarea cât mai rapidă a rezultatelor anchetei
privind cauzele epidemiei de holeră, pentru a calma furia
populaţiei împotriva prezenţei ONU. În al doilea rând,
trebuie evitată prelungirea provizoratului ce va fi
declanşat de finalul mandatului preşedintelui Préval, la 7
februarie, iar noi alegeri, sub atenta supraveghere
internaţională, sunt singura soluţie viabilă şi
democratică. Nu în cele din urmă, cred că acest moment
de bilanţ trebuie să marcheze o cotitură în eforturile de
reconstrucţie, subminate de ineficienţă, întârzieri şi
interese contradictorii ale unor ţări din zonă.
Să nu uităm că, din cele 10 miliarde de dolari promise la
Conferinţa donatorilor de la New York, din martie 2010,
doar 1,2 miliarde au fost virate până acum, efortul
Uniunii Europene deţinând o pondere semnificativă.
Grijii pentru rezolvarea problemelor milionului de
haitieni ce supravieţuieşte în taberele de urgenţă, unde
sărăcia, mizeria şi violenţele sexuale ating proporţii
îngrijorătoare, suntem datori să îi adăugăm perspectiva
pe termen lung a unor investiţii durabile în Haiti şi un
sprijin concret pentru construirea unei structuri statale
viabile.
2-491
Charles Goerens, au nom du groupe ALDE. – Madame
la Présidente, la qualité des interventions de nos deux
commissaires me permet de me limiter à deux
remarques.
Premièrement, un an après le tremblement de terre, Haïti
reste, pour l'essentiel, un champ de ruines. On savait
que, devant l'ampleur de la catastrophe, le pays allait
rencontrer des difficultés considérables. On savait aussi
que, outre les nombreuses victimes civiles, le séisme
avait atteint le cœur même de l'État, tant étaient
importants les dégâts causés par cette catastrophe
naturelle. Ajoutons les difficultés structurelles et
notamment les carences en matière de gouvernance pour
mettre en évidence les défis posés aux acteurs sur le
terrain.
Qui est responsable en premier lieu de cette situation?
Même s'il y a des circonstances atténuantes, le premier
acteur, sans lequel rien ne va, est l'État haïtien lui-même.
L'alternative consisterait à remettre le pays sous tutelle,
ce que personne ne veut.
Deuxième remarque: on peut être complémentaire de
l'action de l'État haïtien et on doit même l'être. D'ailleurs
l'Union européenne n'a pas ménagé ses efforts dans ce
domaine. Non seulement l'Union européenne a fait des
annonces, mais encore elle les a réalisées. Ce que nous
attendons de l'Union européenne pour l'avenir est certes
qu'elle poursuive son engagement sans faille, mais il
importe avant tout de contribuer à sortir l'État haïtien de
son incapacité notoire à se libérer de cette situation de
dépendance. Je concède que cela ne peut pas se faire en
quelques mois.
2-492
Judith Sargentini, namens de Verts/ALE-Fractie. –
Voorzitter, de vraag is eigenlijk, hoe bouwen we een
staat op die gefaald heeft? Haïti is een falende staat. Is er
eigenlijk wel sprake van wederopbouw, als er al geen
democratie was? Dat is de taak die wij voor ons zien.
Met alle moeite die de Europese Commissie zich heeft
getroost, hebben wij daar nog niet zomaar een antwoord
op. Dat er cholera uitbreekt, dat er fraude was bij de
verkiezingen in november en mensen geïntimideerd
werden, helpt ons natuurlijk niet bij het zogenaamd
wederopbouwen van deze staat. Dat de positie van
vrouwen en meisjes vóór de aardbeving al
verschrikkelijk was, leidt ertoe dat seksueel geweld
tegen vrouwen en meisjes in de opvangkampen nog
steeds ongelooflijk is.

118 18-01-2011
Dan komt er nu nog bij dat Baby Doc terug is in Haïti en
dat die misschien denkt een graantje te kunnen
meepikken van de ellende waarin de burgers zich nu
bevinden, omdat - zo gaat het gerucht - zijn geld
eindelijk op is. Dat gunnen wij de Haïtianen niet.
Wat is ons antwoord na de ramp, nu ze al een jaar lang
proberen iets op te bouwen, maar het ze eigenlijk
ontbreekt aan de organisatiecapaciteit, ze zitten nu dus
nog steeds met noodhulp en we moeten naar
ontwikkelingssamenwerking. Daartussen ontbreekt iets.
Ik denk niet dat dat ook zo maar uitgevonden kan
worden, maar het is wel iets waar wij moeite voor
moeten gaan doen omdat dit land geen gebouwen kan
neerzetten, als het land geen democratie of op z'n minst
goed bestuur kent. Ik wens de commissarissen
Georgieva en Piebalgs daarin sterkte. Succes!
2-493
Nirj Deva, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam
President, it is good to have this debate again, we had
one recently. It shows our concern for the people of
Haiti – we are obviously more concerned about the
people of Haiti than the government of Haiti is
concerned about the people of Haiti.
We talk about the responsibility to protect. We talk
about responsibility to protect against mass murderers
and genocidal dictators – but what about the
responsibility to protect against inefficient and corrupt
governments who do not care about their own people?
There are a million people homeless in Haiti; 230 000
have died; 300 000 are injured. But only 5% of the
rubble has been cleared, only 15% of houses have been
reconstructed in some fashion or other.
If the Government of Haiti does not care about its own
people, then we have to use the concept of responsibility
to protect. Until and unless we do that, it is quite absurd
for us to ask our two excellent Commissioners to go on
popping up and down in Parliament trying to tell us what
they can and cannot do, when the local capacity to do
anything is so fraught and fragile.
When an earthquake happens, the first thing you need to
do is to clear the rubble. In order to clear the rubble, you
need heavy lifting machinery, cranes, helicopters,
bulldozers and the capacity to drive them. If there is
nobody capable of driving this machinery, then you have
to bring people in from somewhere else who know how
to drive them and get them to be driven. But the left
wing would oppose any Member State army or air force
or navy coming and helping to do that. You cannot
expect people from Oxfam and Save the Children and
other such organisations to be driving tractors and lifting
heavy rubble. We have to depoliticise our argument and
be practical about helping these people.
2-494
Jacky Hénin, au nom du groupe GUE/NGL. – Madame
la Présidente, il y a un an à peine, Haïti et son peuple
étaient victimes d'une terrible catastrophe. Partout, la
désolation et la mort.
Qu'il nous soit permis de saluer le courage du peuple
haïtien et l'élan mondial de solidarité populaire en faveur
des sinistrés. Solidarité populaire car, en Europe comme
ailleurs, ce sont bien souvent ceux qui n'ont pas grandchose
qui ont donné le plus.
Je veux ici également remercier solennellement l'État et
le peuple cubains pour leur aide: un engagement efficace
et sans arrière-pensée, des résultats éloquents. À ce jour,
la brigade médicale cubaine a soigné plus de 50 000 cas
de choléra, permis de reconstruire 76 centres de santé et
hôpitaux et opéré de nombreux Haïtiens. Cuba, dont
l'aide est jugée particulièrement efficace par de
nombreux experts. C'est tellement vrai qu'un pays
comme la Norvège a souhaité demander à Cuba
d'intervenir en ses lieu et place.
L'Union européenne et les États-Unis feraient bien de
s'inspirer de l'exemple cubain plutôt que de se complaire
derrière des mises en scène médiatiques qui cachent mal
une conception caritative de l'aide qui, en définitive, sert
avant tout leurs intérêts économiques et politiques au
détriment d'une reconstruction durable de l'État haïtien
et de son économie.
Au regard de leur responsabilité historique dans les
malheurs d'Haïti, il est indécent de voir la France et les
États-Unis se poser en donneurs de leçons. Rappelons
quand même qu'il a fallu que la pire des catastrophes ait
lieu pour qu'enfin la Banque mondiale et le FMI se
décident à annuler la dette d'Haïti.
Pour l'heure, ce qui se passe en Haïti montre les limites
du fonctionnement actuel de l'ONU. En Haïti,
l'ingérence humanitaire montre son incapacité à mettre
en œuvre des solutions durables pour les populations.
Pire, elle constitue à moyen et long terme une entrave à
la reconstruction d'un État démocratique et d'une
économie répondant enfin aux besoins humains de
développement du peuple haïtien.
11,5 milliards de dollars ont été promis par la
communauté internationale pour la reconstruction du
pays. Reste à savoir de quelle reconstruction on parle.
Quelle part de cette aide est effectivement arrivée sur le
terrain? Qui décidera des projets? Va-t-on voir, comme
au Kosovo, un peuple mis au chômage regarder de
grandes entreprises multinationales reconstruire leur
pays car elles auront été les seules à pouvoir remporter
les appels d'offres internationaux?
L'Union européenne ne doit pas s'inscrire dans une
vision paternaliste ou néocolonialiste, mais doit, au
contraire, concourir à l'émergence d'une renaissance
démocratique de la République haïtienne qui soit l'œuvre
du peuple lui-même. Le peuple haïtien a été le premier
au monde à s'émanciper du colonialisme français. Outre
les ravages de la guerre, cela lui a coûté plus de
20 milliards d'euros actuels pour "dédommager" les
colons européens esclavagistes.
Aujourd'hui, en raison des crimes contre l'humanité que
constituent l'esclavagisme et le colonialisme, l'Union

18-01-2011 119
européenne et, en particulier, la France, ont une dette
morale, politique et économique vis-à-vis d'Haïti. Il nous
faut honorer cette dette d'honneur.
2-495
Bastiaan Belder, namens de EFD-Fractie. – Mevrouw
de Voorzitter, een jaar na de verschrikkelijke aardbeving
in Haïti verloopt de wederopbouw van het land pijnlijk
traag. Toch wordt stapsgewijs vooruitgang geboekt. De
bevolking van Haïti heeft onze hulp hard nodig, zeker nu
ook de cholera-epidemie haar tol eist. Nadruk moet
gelegd worden op voedselzekerheid. De landbouwsector
ter plekke heeft zware klappen gehad, waardoor het land
te veel afhankelijk is van voedselimporten. Het is van
belang om veel energie en geld te steken in het
herontwikkelen van de landbouw en lokale
infrastructuur. Microkredieten zijn daarbij van eminent
belang, daar zij de economische ontwikkeling van
onderop stimuleren. Deelt de Commissie deze
opvatting?
Intussen blijft de politieke situatie in Haïti zorgelijk na
de eerste ronde van de presidentsverkiezingen. Het
vorige week verschenen evaluatierapport van de
Organization of American States is daar duidelijk over.
Hoe beoordeelt de Commissie de huidige politieke
situatie in Haïti en de invloed die zij heeft op de
wederopbouw van het land?
Ten slotte, mevrouw de Voorzitter, er is vorige week een
indrukwekkend boek over Haïti verschenen van een
Nederlandse journalist en er is mij één beeld
bijgebleven: puinruimers in Haïti hadden een t-shirt aan
met het opschrift "Haïti komt niet om". Dat moet ons
inspireren om er inderdaad voor te zorgen dat de
Haïtiaanse bevolking in leven blijft en een goed
toekomstperspectief krijgt dankzij onze steun.
2-496
Filip Kaczmarek (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Unia
Europejska nie zapomniała o Haiti. Do tej pory jesteśmy
największym źródłem pomocy humanitarnej. Natomiast
przygnębiające jest to, że kraj pogrążony jest nadal w
chaosie gospodarczym i politycznym.
Działania pomocy humanitarnej na Haiti były
prowadzone w dwóch klasycznych etapach. Pierwszy
etap udzielanej pomocy kryzysowej miał ulżyć ludziom
w najpilniejszych potrzebach. Na drugim etapie
mieliśmy się skoncentrować na odbudowie kraju,
zarówno gospodarczej, jak i społeczno-politycznej. Ale
ze względu na wybuch epidemii cholery, huragan,
niestabilną sytuację polityczną i społeczną, a nawet
napięcia międzyreligijne i walki międzyreligijne okres
udzielania pomocy humanitarnej trwa dłużej, aniżeli się
początkowo spodziewaliśmy. Też nie można było w
związku z tym przystąpić do tego drugiego etapu w
takim zakresie i w takim tempie, jak byśmy chcieli.
Kryzys na Haiti trwa nadal. Cały czas jest potrzebne
nasze zaangażowanie. Nie możemy zapominać o
naszych zobowiązaniach. Zresztą pan komisarz Piebalgs
przypomniał, że Komisja Europejska przekazała połowę
środków, które były obiecane w Nowym Jorku na
konferencji donatorów. W tej kwestii realizacja naszych
planów przebiega pomyślnie.
Celem rezolucji, którą jutro przyjmiemy w naszej Izbie,
jest zmobilizowanie państw członkowskich i Komisji do
kontynuowania wypełniania tych deklaracji, które
składaliśmy. Pamiętajmy o tym, że nadal setki tysięcy
ludzi mieszka w obozach tymczasowych, a na cholerę
zmarło ponad 3,5 tysiąca osób. Od samego początku
uważaliśmy też, że gospodarzem procesu odbudowy
powinni być sami Haitańczycy. Haitański plan
odbudowy kraju opiera się na decentralizacji i na silnym
nacisku na lokalną produkcję rolną i bezpieczeństwo
żywnościowe. My te priorytety haitańskie respektujemy.
Jest jeszcze jeden wniosek. Musimy wzmocnić nasze
możliwości oddziaływania humanitarnego i wiem, że
Pani Komisarz już nad tym pracuje.
2-497
Κρίτων Αρσένης (S&D). – Κύριοι Επίτροποι,
πραγματικά η Αϊτή είναι μια μοναδική περίπτωση. Θα
πρέπει να το καταλάβουμε αυτό όλοι μας. Δεν είναι μια
περίπτωση ανθρωπιστικής κρίσης όπου καταθέτουμε
κάποια χρηματικά ποσά και αναλαμβάνει η κυβέρνηση
μετά πώς θα υλοποιήσει τα έργα. Η Αϊτή είναι μια χώρα
σε πλήρη κατάρρευση. Και το μόνο αναμενόμενο είναι
ότι η χώρα αυτή, δεδομένης της κατάστασης στην οποία
βρίσκεται, θα έχει περισσότερη διαφθορά και όλο και
μεγαλύτερες δυσκολίες για να αντιμετωπίσει την κρίση
και να λάβει τα απαραίτητα μέτρα. Είναι μια χώρα στην
οποία η παρέμβασή μας θα πρέπει να είναι πιο δυνατή,
πιο σταθερή· θα πρέπει πολλές φορές να έχουμε πιο
ενεργό ρόλο απ’ ό,τι σε κάθε άλλη περίπτωση.
Αναφέρθηκε ο κύριος Deva στα ερείπια που δεν έχουν
ακόμα καθαριστεί, ώστε να αποκατασταθούν οι ζημιές.
Πρέπει να μαζευτούν τα ερείπια από τους δρόμους.
Αυτή θα πρέπει να είναι η προτεραιότητά μας. Με τους
ρυθμούς που ακολουθούμε θα χρειασθούμε άλλα πέντε
χρόνια! Αυτό το έργο θα πρέπει να τελειώσει άμεσα.
Είναι τόσα τα έργα που χρειάζεται να γίνουν σε αυτήν
την χώρα που κανονικά δεν θα έπρεπε να υπάρχει
ανεργία, αν γίνουν όλα αυτά σωστά.
Πρέπει πραγματικά να παρέμβουμε δυναμικά στο θέμα
των ερειπίων, στο θέμα της παροχής νερού, στο θέμα
της παροχής τροφίμων, ώστε να μπορέσει αυτή η χώρα
να σταθεί στα πόδια της, ώστε οι πολίτες αυτής της
χώρας, που είναι υποχρεωμένοι να σκέφτονται κάθε
μέρα πώς θα επιβιώσουν, να μπορέσουν να σκεφθούν
και το αύριο.
2-498
Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE). – Signora Presidente,
onorevoli colleghi, Signori Commissari, è proprio vero,
Haiti è un caso a parte, diverso, perché quando si ricorda
l'anniversario di una calamità lo si fa sempre per
ricordare le vittime, per imparare meglio la lezione, ma
ad Haiti è diverso, perché non c'è niente da ricordare,
niente è ancora passato.
Anziché dire un anno dal terremoto dobbiamo dire un
anno di terremoto, terremoto sismico, poi terremoto del
disordine degli aiuti, terremoto sanitario con il colera,

120 18-01-2011
terremoto della politica con elezioni poco trasparenti e
probabilmente nel momento meno opportuno e
terremoto per certi aspetti anche storico, adesso, con il
ritorno da equivoco turista miliardario dell'ex dittatore.
La Commissione lavora bene, molto bene, sono stato ad
Haiti lo scorso giugno con la commissione sviluppo e ho
visto l'ottimo lavoro e la ringraziamo, ma occorre anche
una maggiore tutela politica con un ruolo accresciuto
della comunità internazionale che indichi obiettivi,
scadenze e che gestisca direttamente parte della
ricostruzione.
Questo deve essere bilanciato con un maggior
coinvolgimento della popolazione e delle ONG locali,
spesso invece tagliate fuori. Meno ruolo per la politica
nazionale e le istituzioni nazionali governative di Haiti,
dunque, e più per un partenariato finora debole tra
cittadini e comunità internazionale.
2-499
Michèle Rivasi (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente,
suite à la mission d'observation que j'avais effectuée, en
septembre dernier, en Haïti, j'ai pu me rendre compte
des urgences à traiter. Aujourd'hui, il faut dépasser ces
urgences pour enfin parvenir au stade du
développement. Il ne faut pas reconstruire mais bien
construire un pays dont les fondations et la gouvernance
n'ont jamais été solides.
Premier constat – et cela a été dit par mes collègues – il
y a vingt millions de tonnes de gravats à déblayer et
seule une infime partie – 5 % – a été déblayée en un an.
À ce rythme, il faudra plus de six ans pour dégager Portau-Prince
de ses décombres. C'est donc un projet
politique en soi et la Commission doit y apporter sa
contribution.
Une autre priorité est la gouvernance et je suis heureuse
que l'Union européenne contribue en grande partie à
l'appui budgétaire du pays. Nous devons renforcer cet
effort financier car c'est le seul moyen de redonner au
pays et au peuple haïtien ses compétences. Sa
dépendance actuelle à l'égard des ONG est révélatrice au
niveau des services publics de base tels que la santé et
l'éducation. Mais il ne faut pas sous-traiter tous les
services publics au niveau des ONG.
Il faut surtout renforcer notre soutien pour organiser
rapidement des élections et achever ces élections qui, je
le souhaite, doivent permettre de remplacer une élite
politique corrompue. L'oligarchie actuelle – on parle de
vingt familles – empêche tout développement
économique puisqu'elle contrôle le commerce, sans pour
autant développer les capacités de production du pays.
Enfin, il faut donner à Haïti les moyens de son
engagement afin que le pays sorte de la dépendance qui
le minait déjà avant même le séisme. J'appelle donc les
institutions européennes à se fixer des priorités
cohérentes et à soutenir massivement la mise en place
des services publics avec un engagement déterminé du
futur gouvernement haïtien.
2-500
James Nicholson (ECR). – Madam President, I had I
suppose the honour, along with Ms Rivasi, to lead a
delegation from the ACP to Haiti in September. I said at
the time that nothing prepared me for what I found when
we were there.
I want to say a number of things tonight. One is that we
have got to move immediately from humanitarian aid to
reconstruction. This is where the problem has not moved
forward. I have heard some very fine things said here
tonight, but these are not going to be possible on the
ground unless there is more help.
We must put more pressure on those who promised their
support to deliver that support, and we must put pressure
on the Clinton-led reconstruction, and the United
Nations, to move faster. That has got to come very
clearly.
I listened to the Commissioner and he is quite right. We
do need political stability. I hope and I pray that we get
that political stability, but I am not so sure that we will.
I found when we were there – and I want to say this and
put it on the record – that the Haitian people are a very
proud people. They are a wonderful people. We watched
them, Michèle Rivasi and I, coming out of their tents at
6 o’clock in the morning shining like a shilling and with
their children washed. Wonderful people smiling and
you wondered why they were able to smile.
I would also like to put on record a tribute to the many
people there from our NGOs who are risking their lives,
and to our Commission staff to whom I paid tribute
when we were there. We found them to be excellent, and
we should not forget that these people risk their lives on
a daily basis to help the people of Haiti. We must not
forget the people of Haiti. We must work for the people
of Haiti and we must help the people of Haiti. If we
return to this Chamber ten more times to achieve that,
then we should do that and keep doing it.
2-501
Cristian Dan Preda (PPE) – Pe 12 ianuarie 2010 statul
haitian a fost literalmente spulberat, aşa cum au spus-o şi
mai mulţi dintre colegi; acum, la un an după acest teribil
cutremur, reconstrucţia se lasă încă aşteptată. S-au
adăugat, între timp, epidemia de holeră, alegerile; toate
acestea au complicat situaţia.
Port-au-Prince este, de fapt, azi, o imensă tabără de
refugiaţi. Populaţia haitiană nu supravieţuieşte decât
graţie eforturilor organizaţiilor umanitare. Trebuie, de
altfel, să fim recunoscători acestor organizaţii. Aşa cum
spunea reprezentantul special al Naţiunilor Unite pentru
această ţară, Haiti a devenit o republică de ONG-uri. Dar
cât poate să dureze această situaţie? Vedem că situaţia
sanitară este catastrofală, reconstruirea sistemului de
educaţie e absolut necesară, procesul de ridicare a
urmelor dezastrului, toate acestea evocă nevoia unei
reconstrucţii a statului haitian. Dincolo de seism, absenţa
instituţiilor şi a bunei guvernări este azi foarte
problematică.

18-01-2011 121
Eforturile trebuie, deci, să se concentreze asupra
restabilirii capacităţilor statului şi asupra construcţiei
democratice în Haiti. Necesitatea unui proces electoral
credibil şi transparent, în perspectiva celui de-al doilea
tur al alegerilor din luna februarie, trebuie subliniată
foarte apăsat.
În fine, aş vrea să spun că reconstruirea Haiti trebuie să
fie făcută, dacă îmi îngăduiţi, altfel. „Altfel” înseamnă
că reconstrucţia trebuie făcută mai bine decât înainte,
pentru a preveni noi catastrofe similare. „Altfel”
înseamnă că eforturile noastre de reconstrucţie trebuie să
implice, aş spune eu, comunităţile locale. Cred că
principalii interesaţi, haitienii, trebuie consultaţi în acest
proces de reconstrucţie.
2-502
Ricardo Cortés Lastra (S&D). – Señora Presidenta,
señor Comisario, señora Comisaria, Señorías, no quería
empezar mi intervención sin saludar a las ONG que
están sobre el terreno; creo que ellas representan una
labor encomiable, representan lo mejor de los valores
que tenemos, lo mejor de los valores de la humanidad.
Ha transcurrido un año desde el terremoto de Haití y ha
llegado el momento, probablemente, de aumentar la
efectividad. Tenemos muchos problemas encima de la
mesa que hay que afrontar con urgencia y sin dilación.
No cabe la menor duda.
El primer problema es, probablemente, construir un
saneamiento aceptable. Creo que es la prioridad número
uno que amenaza la vida hoy en día en Haití. Y una vez
solucionado, tendremos que afrontar el problema de la
vivienda, resolviendo la cuestión de los títulos de
propiedad de forma urgente.
Además, necesitamos un gobierno legítimo, elegido
democráticamente, capaz de negociar. Sé que la
situación no es fácil, pero necesitamos esa interlocución,
legítima, para acelerar la mejora de la situación de Haití.
Y, además, tenemos un problema importante que ya han
citado muchos colegas: los escombros, que es un gran
problema político en sí mismo. Y no debemos dejar de
mirar también hacia el futuro para empezar a establecer
una estrategia de educación a largo plazo. Lo que ha
pasado en Haití probablemente no hubiera pasado si
hubiera existido una educación pública y una atención a
los menores como tenía que ser.
Necesitamos acabar, no solo con la pobreza, sino
también con la dependencia.
2-503
Zbigniew Ziobro (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Przed
rokiem na Haiti doszło do strasznego kataklizmu,
ogromnego trzęsienia ziemi, w wyniku którego zginęło
200 000 mieszkańców, ponad 1 300 000 zostało
pozbawionych domów. Od roku trwa akcja pomocy i
odbudowy. Jest to bez wątpienia wielka i bardzo
skomplikowana akcja humanitarna. Wyspa jednak
potrzebuje nie tylko pomocy materialnej i finansowej,
lecz również odbudowy administracji i stabilizacji
politycznej, bez której nie może się rozwijać. Co więcej,
ostatnio epidemia cholery, która zabiła już ponad 3500
osób wciąż zagraża tysiącom ludzi. Doświadczenie Haiti
pokazuje, że nawet spore środki pieniężne nie pomogą,
jeśli nie będą właściwie wydawane. Kazus Haiti
powinien ponadto dać nam do myślenia i wyraźnie
wskazuje na potrzebę stworzenia sprawnie działającego
systemu pomocy międzynarodowej w przypadku
wielkich katastrof naturalnych, które również mogą się
zdarzyć.
2-504
Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE). – Mevrouw de Voorzitter,
mevrouw en mijnheer de commissaris, geachte collega's,
als ik aan Haïti denk, denk ik aan burgers in Haïti, maar
denk ik ook aan Europese burgers die ongelooflijk veel
steun verleend hebben voor de mensen in Haïti. Ik denk
ook aan de hulpverleners die ongelooflijk veel gedaan
hebben. Voorzitter, dat is het positieve van het verhaal.
We moeten lessen trekken. De lessen die we moeten
trekken, zijn er wat mij betreft drie.
Ten eerste, coördinatie. In de fase van humanitaire hulp
is de coördinatie niet goed gelukt - we hebben vandaag
een verslag daarover aangekomen. Bij wederopbouw
moet het beter. Dan denk ik aan effectiviteit van
hulpverlening, want dat heeft ook met coördinatie te
maken. Wat kunt u daar meer en effectiever doen?
Voorzitter, het tweede punt is de corruptie. Als we
willen dat onze Europese burgers steun geven, dan
willen ze niet dat die steun niet goed wordt gebruikt. Dat
willen we niet als overheden, dat willen we ook niet als
burgers. Wat kunnen we doen om ervoor te zorgen dat
door een betere coördinatie die corruptie geen vat krijgt
op die systemen?
Dan het derde punt, Voorzitter, dat is het politieke
aspect. Zonder politieke stabiliteit en ook een heel
daadkrachtig openbaar bestuur kan die duurzame
opbouw überhaupt niet lukken. We hebben een betwiste
eerste ronde van de verkiezingen gehad. Ik zou u willen
vragen: hoe verloopt de coördinatie met de organisatie
van Amerikaanse staten en andere spelers om ervoor te
zorgen dat die komende verkiezingen wel goed gaan?
We hebben als Europeanen op korte termijn een
committment voor Haïti uitgesproken en ik vind dat we
solidair moeten blijven.
2-505
Edite Estrela (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhores
Comissários, Colegas, o sismo mergulhou o Haiti numa
das mais graves crises humanitárias – milhares de
mortos e feridos, milhões de desalojados e prejuízos
elevadíssimos. A comunidade internacional prometeu
muito, mas ainda deu pouco, e não se compreende a
lentidão do processo de reconstrução, não obstante a boa
vontade da União Europeia e o trabalho das ONG.
A situação agravou-se devido ao surto de cólera e à
instabilidade política na sequência das eleições, que
geraram enorme violência, de que as mulheres e as
crianças são as principais vítimas. A União Europeia
deve continuar a ajudar na reconstrução e a melhorar a

122 18-01-2011
situação humanitária dos grupos vulneráveis da
população, mas também contribuir para reforçar as
capacidades de prevenção de catástrofes a longo prazo.
E, nesse sentido, gostaria de saudar as recentes propostas
apresentadas pela Comissão no sentido de criação da
capacidade de resposta europeia que inclui um
agrupamento voluntário das estruturas de emergência
dos Estados-Membros, previamente autorizadas, e o
desenvolvimento de planos de contingência, bem como a
criação de um centro europeu de resposta a emergências
através da fusão dos centros de crise de ajuda
humanitária e da protecção civil, responsável por
acompanhar situações de perigo, emitir alertas rápidos e
coordenar a resposta da UE a catástrofes.
2-506
Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE). – Pani
Przewodnicząca! Niedługo minie rok czasu od naszej
poprzedniej dyskusji na temat koordynacji pomocy
humanitarnej i odbudowy Haiti. Dzisiaj więc
dokonujemy pewnego podsumowania i wniosek nasuwa
się jeden: minął rok od tej tragedii, a ofiar ciągle
przybywa. Należy tu podkreślić dwie kwestie, które są
równie ważne, a może i ważniejsze od budowy nowych
domów, nowych dróg. Po pierwsze, musimy tu na tej
sali głośno i dobitnie powiedzieć „stop” epidemii
przemocy seksualnej. Jak wykazują źródła, już kilka dni
po trzęsieniu ziemi odnotowano 250 gwałtów na
kobietach i dziewczętach, a sytuacja ciągle się pogarsza.
Ta przemoc ciągle wzrasta. Najwyższy czas zacząć
głośno mówić na ten wstydliwy temat i zająć się tym
nieludzkim zjawiskiem oraz zacząć skuteczną walkę z
przemocą seksualną na Haiti.
Drugą kwestią, która już była tutaj wspominana, to
kwestia epidemii cholery. Liczba zachorowań spada, ale
to się wiąże oczywiście z porą roku. Z tym się wiąże też
ciekawe, ale niepokojące zjawisko dotyczące pacjentów,
którzy symulują objawy cholery. Nam trudno w to
uwierzyć, dzisiaj spędzimy noc w wygodnych łóżkach,
ale dla tych osób noc w szpitalu jest dużo lepsza niż w
ich własnych domach, a w zasadzie szałasach. I tutaj
również powinniśmy zwracać na to uwagę, a zwłaszcza,
że epidemia cholery na pewno się nasili wraz ze zmianą
pory roku. Dlatego też musimy zwracać na to uwagę i
powinniśmy tutaj szczególnie poprawić tę sytuację.
2-507
Seán Kelly (PPE). – Madam President, they say that
God helps those who help themselves but the European
Union actually goes further, because the European
Union helps those who do not help themselves,
particularly in relation to Haiti where the Government –
as Mr Deva and others have pointed out – is corrupt and
does not seem to be concerned about its own people.
Nevertheless, it is important that we continue the good
work in cooperation with the UN and the NGOs etc. I
know that one of our most successful Irish businessmen,
Denis O’Brien, is playing a leading role in that regard.
However, all that will be a drop in the ocean compared
to what could be achieved if we had a properly
functioning government. So the message has to go out
loud and clear to the Haitian Government that it either
needs to ‘catch itself on’ or – hopefully – to be removed
by a more competent government, and then we would
see real progress.
2-508
Monika Flašíková Beňová, (S&D). − Hoci sa následky
ničivého zemetrasenia dali postupne zmierňovať a
odstraňovať, obyvatelia stále trpia závažnými
problémami. Či je to nedostatok pitnej vody, potravín a
iných základných materiálov. Sú to proste ich
každodenné problémy a trápenia. K tomu sa pridáva
situácia s nestabilnou vládou s absenciou
demokratických hodnôt a takisto epidémia cholery,
rozšírená kriminalita, rabovanie, únosy a znásilňovanie
žien a detí.
Je preto nutné podniknúť kroky, ktoré by viedli k
zamedzeniu takýmto odsúdeniahodným činom.
Európske inštitúcie musia naďalej pokračovať v snahe
zmierniť následky katastrofy. Pomoc sa aj v roku 2011
musí sústrediť na komplexné výzvy, najmä na obnovu
bývania, pokrytie základných potrieb v rámci komunít,
či stabilizáciu situácie v dočasných táboroch.
Zároveň je potrebné usilovať sa o napĺňanie
dlhodobejších cieľov, akými sú dobudovanie verejných
inštitúcií, miestnych samospráv, škôl, nemocníc a pod.
2-509
Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL). – Senhora Presidente,
reiteramos a nossa solidariedade com os habitantes do
Haiti, vítimas do sismo de há um ano e, recentemente, da
cólera. É urgente mais auxílio, mais apoio às populações
atingidas pela tragédia de há um ano e pelas doenças
recentes. Não é admissível que algumas ajudas ainda não
tenham chegado. É preciso acompanhar o que se passa
com as ajudas já aprovadas, designadamente da União
Europeia, e olhar com toda a atenção para as acções de
solidariedade exemplares de alguns países da região.
Destaco o caso de Cuba, cujo governo enviou médicos e
pessoal especializado que já trataram mais de 50 mil
pessoas contra a cólera, mas destaco também o apoio
financeiro da ALBA e outros apoios nas áreas da
energia, da agricultura e alimentares.
É bom que a União Europeia também tenha isto em
conta e actue de uma forma mais activa. É urgente tomar
todas as medidas necessárias para acelerar a
reconstrução rápida do Haiti e melhorar as condições de
vida da sua população, mas insistimos no respeito do
princípio da soberania e da integridade territorial que a
valentia e a nobreza do povo do Haiti merecem.
2-510
Elena Băsescu (PPE). – La un an după cutremurul
devastator din Haiti, rezultatele concrete ale procesului
de reconstituire nu sunt încă vizibile. Blocajul se
datorează în special faptului că statul haitian nu are
capacitatea să asigure, prin mijloace proprii, servicii
publice de bază. Lipseşte voinţa politică, iar autorităţile
haitiene nu reuşesc să implementeze deciziile care
vizează reconstrucţia.

18-01-2011 123
Astfel, se îngreunează considerabil funcţionarea
Comisiei interimare pentru reconstrucţie, principalul
organism însărcinat cu gestionarea eficientă a resurselor
deblocate de comunitatea internaţională. Această situaţie
va continua, dacă nu se reuşeşte stabilizarea politică a
ţării, refacerea capacităţilor statale şi desemnarea unui
guvern funcţional. De aceea, consider că UE trebuie să
depună toate eforturile posibile pentru a susţine un
proces electoral legitim şi transparent. Desfăşurarea
corectă a celui de-al doilea tur de scrutin, programat în
luna februarie, reprezintă singura cale de a pune capăt
crizei politice.
2-511
Janusz Władysław Zemke (S&D). – Pani
Przewodnicząca! Chciałbym, aby mnie dobrze
zrozumiano. Nie mam poważniejszych uwag, jeśli
chodzi o obecną pomoc Unii Europejskiej dla Haiti.
Unia rzeczywiście niesie Haiti dużą pomoc materialną i
należy się dziwić, że wiele innych państw nie czyni tego
w takiej skali jak Unia.
Chciałem przypomnieć, że nasze zastrzeżenia budziły
działania Unii bezpośrednio po katastrofie. Unia działała
zbyt wolno, a pomoc humanitarna była ewidentnie źle
skoordynowana. Chciałbym się więc zapytać, jakie
konkretne wnioski wyciągnęła Komisja Europejska z tej
bardzo wolno toczącej się wówczas pomocy? Myślę, że
jest to rzecz niebywale ważna, dlatego że czas
otrzymania pomocy to dla niektórych kwestia przeżycia
albo śmierci.
2-512
Peter Jahr (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau
Kommissarin! Haiti zeigt sehr deutlich, dass die
eigentlichen Katastrophen von Menschen gemacht sind.
Die Hilfsbereitschaft der Staatengemeinschaft und vor
allen Dingen der Europäischen Union ist riesig. Aber
nicht das Geld ist das Problem, sondern die instabilen
politischen Verhältnisse. Zurzeit traut sich ja keine
Nation wirklich, Geld in ein korruptes politisches
System zu stecken. Deshalb meine Bitte an die
Kommission: Selbstverständlich müssen wir Haiti
weiterhin helfen, aber wir müssen vor allem auch in die
politische Infrastruktur investieren. Solange kein
funktionierendes Regierungssystem und kein
funktionierender Verwaltungsapparat vorhanden sind,
müssen wir die vorhandenen Hilfsorganisationen nutzen,
ganz einfach deshalb, weil es dazu keine wirkliche
Alternative gibt.
2-513
Kristalina Georgieva, Member of the Commission. −
Madam President, I sincerely thank Members of
Parliament for all their comments this evening. In
closing, I would like to make five points.
Firstly, I agree very much with all speakers who
emphasised the governance failure as the most
significant factor underlying the problems Haiti faces
today. That was my first impression after the earthquake
and it still stands today: that bad as the earthquake was,
it is not Haiti’s biggest problem. Its biggest problem is
the many decades of bad governance that have
practically left no social structures and government
structures in place to help the Haitian people, and that
creates a big deficit of trust of the Haitian people in their
government.
I remember very vividly how, when I was there,
universally all the Haitians I talked to had one message
for me consistently, which was ‘Do not give money to
the government’. Now, on the humanitarian side we do
not give money; we provide direct assistance. But it does
give us pause for thought on the question of how long it
will take to rebuild Haiti: it will take a very long time
because it will not happen without this institutional
infrastructure in place.
This being said, my second point is that there is actually
a positive side to Haitian society which has helped the
Haitian people survive: their own resilience and the
resilience of their communities. I met people who lived
together: they lost their houses together, they moved to
camps together and they have organised in the camps a
support system for each other, with some taking
responsibility to oversee the kids and to improvise some
schooling for them; others taking responsibility to find
work; others, actually the women, taking on
responsibility for cooking for everybody. That resilience
is what gives us some hope today for the future of Haiti.
This leads on to my third point, which is that our support
programmes for Haiti have to take into account what the
country has and does not have. For that reason, we have
on the humanitarian side emphasised cash for work,
vouchers programmes, innovations like getting seeds
and tools at the Community level so that people can
actually increase their reliance on themselves.
Fourthly, I am grateful for the points that were made on
what lessons we have learnt from Haiti. I would not
agree that we were slow to respond: help from the
European Union was flowing within 24 hours. But I
would agree that coordination left room for
improvement and that our ability to organise ourselves
before a disaster strikes is absolutely essential. In this
sense, I am grateful for the point that was made that,
based on lessons from Haiti, we have indeed moved in
the direction of creating a European Response Capacity
and stronger coordination through the European Disaster
Response Centre.
Let me then move to a last point, looking forward on the
humanitarian side. What is it that we are very worried
about? It is actually the question of protection, especially
for women, and of increasing our support for dealing
with the tragedy of primarily women-led households
stuck in the camps. I can assure you that this year as well
as with the funding next year, we will put the emphasis
on making sure that this question of protection is
addressed and that the EU is there for people.
Let me in closing just thank everyone once again for
their comments and especially those of you who have
recognised the sacrifice of the humanitarian workers for
the benefit of the people of Haiti.

124 18-01-2011
2-514
Andris Piebalgs, Member of the Commission. − Madam
President, first I would like to thank Members of this
House for their solidarity and support. I will start with
the political dimension. The situation is certainly not
easy in Haiti, but the High Representative is following it
very closely and giving all the necessary diplomatic
support to ensure that there is stability. The second
round of presidential elections will help rebuild
credibility if there is no violence around it, so we are
also making all the necessary diplomatic efforts; but
diplomatic efforts sometimes give immediate results and
sometimes need time to produce results.
Some of you mentioned Baby Doc’s visit. We can say
that whilst anybody can move freely, this was definitely
not the best sign of the whole political process. But we
should not be somehow misled by this. I think there is a
healthy political core in Haiti and we should believe in
it. Our hope is that the people who are elected in the
legislative elections and the president will have the
necessary capacities to lead the reconstruction of the
country.
The second point I would like to emphasise is that
development cooperation is about hard choices. One
choice is do something with high visibility that does not
entail a structural change. It would be no problem to
finance thousands of doctors from the EU or to build a
new university in the name of the EU; it would be
visible and everybody would say fine. But what about
the insecurity in the streets? We finance security in quite
difficult conditions through the government. So if
security is provided partially, it is financed by the
European Union. Is it visible? Not very much so,
because there is no EU label, but I believe it is definite
that we have provided for the stability of the country.
Another point is where to invest money. Again,
rebuilding the houses would be the easiest political
choice, but what help is that if the country is not
reconnected, if there is no infrastructure? And
infrastructure requires massive investment. Roughly
speaking, one kilometre of road costs USD 1 million and
in Haiti even more, because there must be maintenance
and also we need to help the local communities through
which the road passes. So the costs are very substantial.
Haiti will not have such funds to invest. Strangely
enough, in Haiti we are the only ones involved in the
road infrastructure. Normally many other countries
participate in road infrastructure, but in Haiti we are
alone in giving grants for this. It is a difficult choice, but
I believe it will help the country to have structural
change.
A last point which was not raised very much today is the
speed of commitment and disbursement of funds. The
funds should not be misused and it takes time for budget
support. It is not just that the government gives us an
account and we just transfer the money. No. We check
the account, we know where the disbursements go, so it
is quite a procedure. You cannot just immediately send
EUR 1.2 billion to an account and expect that everything
will be sorted out. We also have a responsibility to our
taxpayers. The same considerations apply with the
roads: we need to launch a tender, we need to be
transparent about this and that takes a bit of time. But I
believe this time is rightly taken, because it needs only
one case of a misuse of funds for the support for Haiti’s
reconstruction to be damaged in the eyes of European
citizens. I can assure you that we will take all the
necessary steps in this regard, too.
Again, I thank you for your support. It was a very
helpful and encouraging debate and I believe that we
will try to deliver on the issues that you have mentioned
today.
2-515
Presidente. − Comunico di aver ricevuto sei proposte di
risoluzione 1 conformemente all'articolo 110, paragrafo 2,
del regolamento.
La discussione è chiusa.
La votazione si svolgerà mercoledì 19 gennaio 2011.
1 Vedasi processo verbale.
2-516
17 - Crisi dei rifiuti in Campania
(discussione)
2-517
Presidente. − L'ordine del giorno reca la discussione su:
− l'interrogazione orale alla Commissione sulla crisi dei
rifiuti in Campania, di Margrete Auken ed Eva
Lichtenberger, a nome del gruppo Verts/ALE (O-
0188/2010 - B7-0667/2010),
− l'interrogazione orale alla Commissione sulla crisi dei
rifiuti in Campania, di Bairbre de Brún e Willy Meyer, a
nome del gruppo GUE/NGL (O-0197/2010 - B7-
0801/2010),
− l'interrogazione orale alla Commissione sulla crisi dei
rifiuti in Campania (Italia), di Judith A. Merkies e Victor
Boştinaru, a nome del gruppo S&D (O-0208/2010 - B7-
0805/2010),
− l'interrogazione orale alla Commissione
sull'emergenza rifiuti a Napoli e nella Regione
Campania e utilizzo dei fondi europei, di Mara Bizzotto
e Lorenzo Fontana, a nome del gruppo EFD (O-
0209/2010 - B7-0806/2010).
2-518
Margrete Auken, stiller. − Fru formand! Mange tak til
kommissær Potočnik for, at der omsider ser ud til at
komme lidt konsekvens fra Kommissionens side. Jeg vil
meget opfordre til, at det også bliver synligt. Jeg har
store forventninger til det svar, vi skal have i dag, fordi
hvis ikke der sker noget klart nu, og der eventuelt
gennemføres hårde bødeprocedurer over for Italien, så
vil vi møde dette problem mange flere steder. Det er
ikke kun i Italien, man har store affaldsproblemer. Hvis
man rundt omkring får fornemmelsen af, at der ikke sker
noget ved, at man udelukkende bruger lossepladser, så
har vi en meget stor katastrofe. Så det svar ser jeg frem
til.
Resten af min taletid vil jeg gerne bruge til at henvende
mig til Italien. Jeg ved godt, at Italiens regering ikke er

18-01-2011 125
direkte repræsenteret her, men det er dog vigtigt, at
Italien nu selv begynder at sige, at dette problem skal
løses nu. Man har det vidunderlige land, og det er ved at
drukne i affald, og mange konflikter opstår, og
situationen er nærmest kun blevet værre. Italien skal
ikke nu opleve en situation, hvor befolkningen pålægges
yderligere byrder i form af bøder. Tværtimod skal man
sørge for at sætte en plan i værk, der er troværdig, og så
bruge de mange aktive borgere som en del af løsningen i
stedet for hele tiden at gøre dem til skydeskive for
kriminaliseringer osv. Vi kan ikke løse affaldsproblemet,
hvis ikke vi har borgerne med os, og der er mange
borgere, der vil kunne gøre et rigtigt godt stykke arbejde
i Italien.
Brug så militær og politi – ikke til at knægte borgerne,
ikke til at holde lokale myndigheder udenfor - men til at
få fat på de rigtige forbrydere. Det er jo dels den store
industri i Norditalien, som profiterer fedt på, at den bare
kan komme af med affaldet på en billig måde i stedet for
at betale, hvad det koster. Og det er dels gangsterne i
mafiaen, der også har store fortjenester. Det må altså
holde op nu, og jeg håber, at Italien vil begynde at tage
det her rigtigt alvorligt!
2-519
Søren Bo Søndergaard, stiller. − Fru formand! Da en
delegation fra Budgetkontroludvalget i efteråret besøgte
Italien, mødtes vi med præsidenten for Campaniaregionen.
Da vi så spurgte ham, hvorfor den katastrofale
affaldssituation i Campania endnu ikke var løst, svarede
han, at det var et politisk problem!
Det svar forklarer en del. For han kunne jo have sagt alt
muligt andet - at det var et teknisk problem, at det var et
logistisk problem, at det var et økonomisk problem. Men
nej, problemet var politisk. Problemet er, at der mangler
politisk vilje! Det er på grund af den manglende
politiske vilje, at Italien har undladt at opfylde sine
forpligtigelser i affaldsdirektivet. Det er på grund af
manglende politisk vilje, at det i oktober kunne
konstateres, at ingen af de forbedringer, som EU-
Domstolen har krævet, er blevet gennemført. Og det er
på grund af manglende politisk vilje, at EU ved
årsskiftet stadig ikke havde modtaget en
affaldssorteringsplan.
Til gengæld har vi set, at myndighederne har haft
politisk vilje nok til at mørklægge skandalerne ved hjælp
af sikkerhedsstemplinger. Det er derfor, vi fra vores
gruppe har en klar holdning. Vi støtter alle de - og der er
mange - gode italienske mænd og kvinder, som kæmper
for åbenhed i denne sag og for at dem, der er ansvarlige
for, at situationen kunne komme så langt ud, bliver stillet
til ansvar. Men vores holdning er også, at før det er sket,
må vi totalt afvise, at europæiske skatteborgere skal give
så meget som en euro mere til affaldseventyret i Italien!
Gode penge skal ikke kastes efter dårlige.
2-520
Judith A. Merkies, Auteur. − Voorzitter, geachte
commissaris, wij waren vorig jaar met de Commissie
verzoekschriften in Campanië en in Napels om de
situatie van de vuilniscrisis, de situatie die vele indieners
van de verzoekschriften ons hadden beschreven als zeer
ernstig, daar zelf met eigen ogen te zien. Ook wij
vonden de situatie ter plekke zeer ernstig. Wij zagen een
vuilstortplaats in een nationaal park boven op de
Vesuvius. Wij zagen vele illegale dumpingsites, we
zagen brandende puinhopen. Ik haalde zelfs industrieel
afval uit een berg die was bestempeld als huishoudafval
en we zagen ook een niet functionerende - althans zo
leek het - verbrandingsoven.
Een ding is duidelijk: het werkt daar op dit moment niet
en ik ben het met voorgaande sprekers eens dat er erg
veel politiek gesteggel lijkt te zijn over wie het nu
precies heeft gedaan. Inderdaad, wij hebben daar
opgeroepen om uiteindelijk alle politieke verschillen
achter zich te laten, de handen ineen te slaan, politici en
burgers, om de situatie op te lossen.
Ik merk ondertussen nog niets van een oplossing. Ik heb
ook hier - althans in de openbaarheid - nog geen plan
zien langskomen en ik hoop dat u duidelijkheid kunt
geven over de vraag of er daadwerkelijk een plan is. De
burgers van Campanië hebben ons heel duidelijk vorig
jaar gezegd: "wij hebben bij iedereen aangeklopt, wij
hebben bij allerlei deuren aangeklopt, bij ons in de
provincie, bij ons in de regio, bij ons in Italië, bij de
Italiaanse regering en we hebben overal nul op het rekest
gekregen. Onze laatste hoop is de Europese Unie en
terwijl niemand naar ons luisterde is de Europese Unie
naar ons toegekomen om te luisteren."
Ze hebben de hoop op u en ons gevestigd in de hoop dat
wij uiteindelijk toch op de een of andere manier kunnen
bijdragen aan een oplossing in hun regio. Natuurlijk
moeten zij zelf de situatie ter plaatse oplossen. Wij
kunnen daar jammer genoeg niet met eigen handen het
vuil gaan opruimen; u bekleedt daarentegen een
sleutelpositie in dezen. Kunt u duidelijk aangeven of er
een plan is, of het een kwaliteitsplan is en zo neen, wat u
van plan bent daaraan te doen. Wat zijn de deadlines?
Wanneer moet het geïmplementeerd worden en hoe lang
bent u bereid te wachten? Wanneer gaat u uiteindelijk
voor sancties naar het Europese Hof en wat gebeurt er
met de structuurfondsen die op dit moment nog bevroren
zijn?
Het gaat hier niet alleen om een vuilniscrisis; een en
ander kan ook leiden tot gevaarlijke gezondheidssituaties.
Hoe gaat de Europese Commissie daarmee
om? Dit is weliswaar niet uw terrein, maar misschien
kunt u toch antwoorden op de vraag of u zich hierover
buigt.
De maffia speelt uiteraard ook een duidelijke rol. Het is
inderdaad niet direct aan de Europese Commissie, noch
aan ons om daaraan iets te doen; uiteindelijk kunnen wij
alleen maar toezien op de implementatie van onze
richtlijnen in de Europese Unie. Op welke manier
kunnen wij daar verder nog steun geven, misschien door
best practices uit te delen? Op welke manier kunnen de
lidstaten onderling elkaar hier helpen? Denkt u niet dat
in dit geval vuilnis geen probleem is, maar juist een
kans. Campanië kan in een keer een enorme sprong

126 18-01-2011
voorwaarts maken richting recycle-maatschappij. Ik ben
van mening dat we op Europees niveau eigenlijk zouden
moeten gaan voor een compleet verbod op storten en een
verbod op stortplaatsen.
2-521
Mara Bizzotto, Autore. − Signora Presidente, onorevoli
colleghi, la situazione che la Campania e in particolare
la città di Napoli vivono da anni è ormai purtroppo nota
a tutto il mondo e l'Unione europea ha dovuto occuparsi
più volte della questione.
Di fronte a tale situazione ormai paradossale da terzo
mondo, chiedo pertanto alla Commissione a quali
conseguenze andrà incontro l'Italia dal punto di vista del
diritto comunitario e quali sanzioni economiche saranno
eventualmente comminate all'Italia, nel caso la crisi dei
rifiuti in Campania non dovesse trovare una soluzione
definitiva in breve tempo.
Chiedo inoltre se la Commissione può fornire nel
dettaglio i dati relativi ai fondi europei che sono stati
finora gestiti dalla regione Campania per la creazione
del sistema integrato di raccolta e smaltimento di rifiuti.
Vede Signor Commissario, solitamente quando si parla
di emergenza si parla di situazioni drammatiche,
estreme, che tuttavia trovano una soluzione in tempi
ragionevoli. Quando una cosiddetta "emergenza" dura da
più di 15 anni, evidentemente c'è qualcosa che non
funziona.
Il governo italiano in questi anni ha cercato di fare il
possibile per risolvere l'annosa questione del ciclo di
raccolta e smaltimento dei rifiuti ma, evidentemente, se
oggi le strade di Napoli sono invase da tonnellate e
tonnellate di immondizia la colpa è principalmente da
addebitare alle autorità locali campane e alla loro totale
incapacità o mancanza di volontà di adoperarsi per
trovare una soluzione.
È chiaro, assolutamente fuori da ogni dubbio, che le
condizioni in cui versano Napoli e la Campania sono
dovute alla latitanza che ha caratterizzato per tanti anni il
comune, la provincia e la regione nella gestione del ciclo
dei rifiuti. Se non viene fatta a dovere la raccolta
differenziata, primo elemento indispensabile di un piano
di gestione di rifiuti che funzioni, non può essere colpa
del governo centrale. Se il governo italiano ha dovuto
mandare l'esercito – è successo qualche settimana fa ma
anche altre volte in precedenza – per sostituire centinaia
di netturbini improvvisamente e contemporaneamente
ammalati, evidentemente non può essere colpa del
governo centrale.
Se l'emergenza ha colpito Napoli mentre nel resto
dell'Italia le cose vanno assai diversamente, per esempio
nella mia regione, il Veneto, dove la raccolta
differenziata si fa da anni senza problemi e con un tasso
di riciclo altissimo, significa che le responsabilità
dell'emergenza ricadono sulla politica campana e sugli
amministratori locali e, soprattutto, sulle pesanti
connivenze con la malavita che da sempre cerca e
ottiene profitti grandissimi dal business dei rifiuti grazie
all'infiltrazione della camorra nella politica e nelle
amministrazioni locali.
2-522
Janez Potočnik, Member of the Commission. − Madam
President, first of all I would like to thank all Members
of Parliament who drew my attention and the attention
of my services to this important question. I am pleased
that the European Parliament has taken an active role in
monitoring the waste management situation in
Campania, as shown, for example, by the report adopted
by the Committee on Petitions following the visit to
Campania which it carried out in April last year.
Parliament has truly an important role here and has
assumed it fully.
Immediately after the European Court ruling, on 4
March 2010, the Commission wrote to the Italian
authorities asking what measures they had planned or
taken in order to comply with it. After that, the
Commission has had several contacts and meetings with
the Italian authorities, most recently during the mission
to Naples carried out on 22 and 23 November 2010 by a
delegation from the Environment Directorate-General.
Our view is that the Italian authorities still have a long
way to go in order to execute the ruling. In particular
they need, firstly, to expand and upgrade waste
management facilities throughout the whole of
Campania and, secondly, to develop an effective
management plan for urban waste in Campania, taking
into account, amongst other things, the EU waste
management hierarchy.
The Commission is not satisfied with the measures that
the Italian authorities have communicated since the
Court’s ruling because they do not include a detailed
calendar indicating milestones for the construction
works of the foreseen installations.
We think that the waste management plan for Campania
must be fully compliant with EU environmental law and
must give priority to waste reduction, re-use and
recycling; ensure implementation of separate collection
in the whole region; provide Campania with the
necessary composting capacity; and establish measures
for the safe disposal in a reasonable timeframe of more
than seven million tonnes of baled waste stored in
several cities in Campania, which also means that the
Italian authorities will have to carry out an analysis of
the baled waste, the so-called ‘ecoballe’, before deciding
which is the safest way to dispose of them.
If there is no adequate and effective waste management
plan, the Commission will return to the Court and
propose the imposition of fines. Therefore we must
closely assess the draft waste management plan that the
Campania authorities have just submitted to the
Commission – and ‘just’ really means ‘just’ – and
monitor carefully that they actually adopt and implement
the plan. The decision on whether and when to open
Article 260 proceedings against Italy will depend mainly
on the content of the waste management plan and the

18-01-2011 127
timing of the measures used to immediately address the
problem in a convincing way.
With regard to the existing landfills, the Commission has
started an investigation and asked the Italian authorities
to report on the functioning of the Terziano and Cicciano
landfills. The Italian reply is still pending and once it is
received, the Commission will assess it.
At this stage, the Commission does not have evidence of
a breach of European Union environmental law. The fact
that the landfill is situated in a nature protected area is
not in itself a breach of EU legislation, provided of
course that other rules are applied and that the competent
national authorities carry out an appropriate environment
assessment and implement the necessary mitigation and
also compensation measures.
As concerns the co-financing of waste management
measures in Campania, in the 1994-1999 programming
period EUR 88.1 million were devoted to waste
management projects, almost 49% co-financed by the
ERDF. However, only 90% of the total allocation was
used because of difficulties also linked to the waste
management crisis and the institution by the Italian
authorities of the extraordinary management in 1994.
In the 2002-2006 programming period, a total financing
allocation of EUR 140 million, 50% co-financed again
by the ERDF, was concentrated on waste management
projects. However, following the waste management
crisis, the Commission decided to take specific measures
in order to ensure that ERDF funds allocated to
Campania were used properly.
Firstly, as from 1 January 2005, expenditure
management was considered ineligible for co-financing.
Secondly, after the official notification to Italy of the
opening of the infringement procedure for waste
management on 29 June 2007, the Commission
informed the Italian authorities that no further cofinancing
would be acceptable for waste management.
The 2007-2013 regional operational programme in
Campania foresees a total investment of EUR 270
million, again 50% co-financed by the ERDF, for the
management of waste. However, the disbursement of EC
financing for projects in the waste sector is subject, in
particular, to the condition that the Italian authorities
adopt a regional waste management plan, to be validated
of course by the Commission.
Tomorrow we will publish in the Commission the report
on the implementation of a thematic strategy on
prevention and recycling of waste. This report shows
significant differences between Member States in terms
of waste management performance. It clearly
demonstrates that with an appropriate waste
management strategy, landfilling can be reduced close to
zero and that incineration could be dramatically reduced
by increasing waste composting and recycling. In
addition to transforming waste into resources, this
creates jobs and economic activity while reducing the
environmental impact of waste management. So I really
hope that this crisis will eventually be transformed into
an opportunity by the competent authorities through the
launch of serious separate collection and recycling
schemes in Campania.
In brief, the Commission is hoping that the waste
management plan for Campania is convincing. Until we
are certain of an effective plan setting up a system with
the necessary infrastructure and have robust guarantees
that projects will be implemented effectively,
Commission funding of relevant waste management
projects in Campania is interrupted.
I will address some of your questions which you have
already raised in my closing remarks.
2-523
Erminia Mazzoni, a nome del gruppo PPE. – Signora
Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ringrazio il Commissario
per aver voluto ricordare che la commissione petizioni
ha dato un ruolo attivo a questo Parlamento, questo a
dimostrazione che chi vi parla, e la parte politica che
rappresenta, hanno il pieno interesse a farsi carico
responsabilmente di questa situazione, a rendere tutte le
procedure trasparenti e a coinvolgere i cittadini in un
dialogo che responsabilizzi tutti quanti.
Come è stato già detto, l'esecutivo regionale che,
ricordo, si è insediato solo a maggio di quest'anno, ha
sviluppato nei mesi scorsi un serrato dialogo con la
Commissione europea, dando avvio ad un percorso che
possiamo sicuramente definire diverso rispetto agli anni
precedenti. Niente, però, di miracolistico, solo la presa
in carico di una situazione drammatica che si è
consolidata nell'arco di quindici anni di azioni
inconcludenti o di non azioni. L'Italia è stata condannata
– lo ricordo – dalla Corte di giustizia nel marzo 2010,
ma per fatti accertati e congelati al 2007.
Da allora la situazione è cambiata, l'assessore regionale è
venuto già tre volte qui a Bruxelles e ha già realizzato
buona parte del "crono-programma" che è stato illustrato
nel corso di un'audizione a luglio davanti alla
commissione petizioni. Rapidamente faccio un elenco:
ha approvato il piano dei rifiuti speciali, definito il piano
dei rifiuti solidi urbani, il 31 dicembre è stato presentato
l'ennesimo piano con le correzioni richieste dalla
Commissione, che verrà approvato entro il 30 aprile
come già comunicato.
Il piano è già stato parzialmente avviato: è stato messo
in funzione il termovalorizzatore di Acerra, sono state
espletate le procedure di gara per quello di Salerno,
pubblicati i bandi per quello di Napoli Est, sono stati
messi a regime 182 isole ecologiche, 7 impianti di
recupero, 9 di compostaggio, 4 di selezione
multimateriale, 1 per il trattamento dei RAEE, 2 di
gestione aerobica, 34 piattaforme convenzionate e 5
discariche che mi fa piacere che possano essere
controllate dalla Commissione.

128 18-01-2011
È stata conclusa l'intesa con le cinque province per lo
smaltimento dei rifiuti accumulati e, ancora, stipulati
accordi con cinque regioni per il temporaneo
trasferimento dei rifiuti, in attesa dell'entrata a regime
definitiva del piano. È stata chiusa la gestione
straordinaria e sono state reperite parziali risorse
all'interno del bilancio regionale.
Come ha detto la Sig.ra Buccella nel corso della sua
recente audizione in commissione ambiente, i tempi di
adeguamento alla sentenza normalmente variano,
oscillano tra i 12 e i 24 mesi e quindi siamo
perfettamente nei termini, ma la Commissione può
discrezionalmente valutare un ampliamento dei tempi
compatibili realisticamente con lo stato di avanzamento
dei lavori.
Credo che in questa tempistica ci siano già tutte le
risposte che gli interroganti hanno chiesto, non ci sono i
presupposti, come ha detto il Commissario, per
l'irrogazione di nuove sanzioni pecuniarie. La
Commissione è giustamente attenta e spero che questo
dibattito non sia un dibattito strumentale che metta
ancora contro le istituzioni e le parti politiche.
Se questo è un dibattito serio per aiutare la regione
Campania, per cercare di trovare una soluzione a un
problema antico, allora sicuramente anche la risoluzione
che si immagina di votare a febbraio potrà essere una
risoluzione comune, altrimenti sarà l'ennesima perdita di
tempo che creerà ulteriori danni.
2-524
Mario Pirillo, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signora
Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la profonda crisi che da
anni vive la gestione del ciclo dei rifiuti campano non fa
che preoccupare soprattutto per le pesanti ricadute sulla
qualità della vita delle popolazioni locali.
Come istituzione europea abbiamo il dovere di
intervenire affinché questa situazione non si protragga
oltremodo, tenendo alta l'attenzione e la soglia di
guardia nei confronti delle autorità locali, spronandole
senza esitazione affinché adottino provvedimenti
credibili, che permettano alla Campania di uscire da
questa gravosa emergenza.
La verità è che si è parlato tanto dell'emergenza rifiuti,
senza sapere come stanno le cose. La regione Campania
si era impegnata a presentare un piano regionale entro il
2010, ora rinviato a marzo 2011. La situazione diventerà
ingestibile di fronte ad ulteriori rinvii: aumentano i rischi
per la salute dei cittadini e la criminalità organizzata
continua a lucrare sulle emergenze.
Con il Decreto legge 195/2009 il governo italiano
dichiara chiusa l'emergenza, delegando alle province la
gestione del ciclo dei rifiuti. È una decisione che non
condividiamo, di difficile attuazione in una provincia
come Napoli, dove risiede il 52 per cento della
popolazione campana.
Occorre rimettere al centro i comuni, solo essi sono
capaci di dare risposte mirate ed efficaci. Diversi sindaci
campani hanno avviato con notevole sforzo ed
apprezzabili risultati la raccolta differenziata. Ad essi
vanno assegnate quelle risorse già trasferite alla regione.
Ascoltare le amministrazioni locali è quanto mai
necessario: stanno in prima linea e hanno una visione
reale e complessiva del proprio territorio. Sono loro che
lanciano l'allarme "discariche piene". Servono nei
prossimi mesi nuove discariche e nuovi inceneritori,
vanno individuati i relativi siti, anche a seguito
dell'esclusione di Cava Vitiello a Terzigno su richiesta
del territorio e del nostro Parlamento, per scongiurare il
rischio di una paralisi dell'intero sistema di raccolta dei
rifiuti urbani.
Aspettiamo la risposta della Commissione rispetto al
piano presentato dalla regione Campania.
2-525
Sonia Alfano, a nome del gruppo ALDE. – Signora
Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Signor Commissario,
nonostante la propaganda del governo italiano, presto
smentito dalla Commissione, l'emergenza dei rifiuti in
Campania è un problema strutturale tutt'altro che risolto.
Al di là di elenchi discutibili, bisogna rendersi conto di
un unico dato di fatto: i cittadini campani continuano a
vivere, e a morire, in mezzo ai rifiuti. La classe politica
locale, regionale e nazionale, a destra come a sinistra, ha
pesantissime responsabilità. Adesso la soluzione del
problema non può essere scaricata sui cittadini, già
vittime di condizioni di vita assolutamente insalubri.
L'Unione europea deve imporre che la soluzione sia
virtuosa, altrimenti il suo intervento risulterebbe vano.
Non è costruendo gli inceneritori, peraltro finanziati
come fonti rinnovabili in contrasto con la normativa
europea vigente, che si risolve la questione. I rifiuti
verrebbero trasformati in ceneri, emissioni nocive e
mortali. Gli inceneritori, lo dice la direttiva Rifiuti, sono
l'ultima opzione gerarchica di un ciclo integrato di rifiuti
che presenta alternative virtuose senza impatto sulla
salute dei cittadini e sull'ambiente e che, anzi, creano
occupazione.
Rispetto alle infiltrazioni mafiose, ritengo sia opportuno
prendere atto che le infiltrazioni mafiose, soprattutto nel
campo dei rifiuti, sono al Sud ma soprattutto al Nord,
specialmente negli ultimi anni.
Pongo pertanto alla Commissione tre domande: come
intende agire per evitare che la soluzione del problema
ricada sulla salute dei cittadini e che cosa intende fare
per evitare che ai cittadini vengano imposte decisioni e
che vengano addirittura militarizzati i territori?
Ritiene opportuno porre tra le condizioni per la chiusura
della procedura di infrazione l'immediata attivazione del
registro tumori per l'intera regione?

18-01-2011 129
In che maniera la Commissione valuta la Legge 210 del
2008 e, in particolare, l'articolo 9 relativo agli incentivi
per la realizzazione degli inceneritori, nel quale viene
violata palesemente la normativa comunitaria relativa
agli aiuti di Stato?
2-526
Eva Lichtenberger, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion.
– Frau Präsidentin! Nach der Märchenstunde unserer
Kollegin aus Italien von der EVP möchte ich, dass wir
wieder auf die Erde zurückkehren. Es ist ein Faktum:
Italien wurde angeklagt, zu Recht angeklagt. Italien
wurde verurteilt, zu Recht verurteilt. Italien hat die Frist
nicht eingehalten. Offensichtlich wurde der Plan zwar
von der Regierung geliefert, aber dann nicht rechtzeitig
weitergeschickt. So bleibt die Situation immer wieder
die gleiche. Man kann sich des Eindrucks nicht
erwehren, dass es vonseiten der Verantwortlichen immer
wieder so lange getrieben wird, bis eine Notfallsituation
entsteht, man dann mit den Notfallgesetzen in Italien
regieren kann, entscheiden kann und damit alle anderen
Normen außer Kraft setzt. Wenn viel Müll auf der
Straße liegt, und sei er auch vermischt mit Industriemüll
aus dem Norden, aus dem Süden, dann wird man ihn
schnell irgendwo ungesichert in eine Deponie werfen
können, ohne genug Vorsorge zu treffen oder treffen zu
können. Das ist hier keine italienische Debatte, meine
Damen und Herren Kolleginnen und Kollegen aus
Italien! Das ist eine Debatte, wo europäisches Recht
nicht eingehalten und nicht umgesetzt wurde.
Wenn diese Art und Weise, wie hier vorgegangen wird,
sich auch in anderen Ländern verbreitet, hat das für ganz
Europa Konsequenzen. Das ist kein Sonntagsspaziergang,
was dort unten passiert. Es ist skandalös. Es
geht nicht darum, 536 neue Standorte immer wieder
auszuweisen und die Bürgerinnen und Bürgern dann mit
Polizeigewalt von ihren Protesten abzuhalten, weil sie
nicht wollen, dass mit giftigem Industriemüll
vermischter Hausmüll hinter ihrer Haustür deponiert
wird. Das kann es nicht sein! Es muss Konsequenzen
geben, und zwar fühlbare Konsequenzen. Es ist gut, dass
die Fördermittel nicht mehr in dem Ausmaß eingesetzt
werden können, wie das früher der Fall war. Da ist
schon genug versickert. Es muss jetzt endlich fühlbare
Konsequenzen geben, denn hier geht es um die
Umsetzung von sinnvollem, notwendigem und gutem
europäischem Recht.
2-527
Oreste Rossi, a nome del gruppo EFD. – Signora
Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il piano di smaltimento
rifiuti predisposto deve essere attuato prevedendo la
raccolta differenziata, il riciclo e, solo per la parte finale,
l'incenerimento.
Pensare di infliggere nuove sanzioni non sarebbe
corretto e le ricordo che la colpa non è né del Nord, né di
altre forze politiche, il gruppo dei verdi a cui lei
appartiene aveva persino un ministro prima, quindi
attenzione. Sono decenni che si parla dell'emergenza
rifiuti a Napoli e nella Regione Campania e, nonostante
siano stati stanziati copiosi fondi, è vero, ad oggi si è
ancora in situazione di emergenza, ma non ci sono scuse.
Dire che la responsabilità è del Nord dell'Italia, o
addirittura che adesso vi sarebbero – diceva la collega –
i rifiuti del Nord per le strade di Napoli sono
semplicemente falsità.
La responsabilità palese è delle precedenti
amministrazioni locali che, mentre da una parte hanno
consentito alla malavita organizzata di fare liberamente
traffici illeciti di rifiuti, dall'altra non hanno saputo
predisporre idonee e adeguate aree di raccolta e
smaltimento.
Quello che è necessario è che i cittadini campani e
napoletani abbiano il coraggio, con il loro voto, come è
già successo a livello regionale, di sostituire gli
amministratori incapaci.
2-528
Angelika Werthmann (NI). – Frau Präsidentin, sehr
geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Müllkrise im
Großraum Neapel hält mittlerweile geschlagene 14 Jahre
an.
Die bestehenden Müllkippen sind überfüllt, der Bau
neuer Anlagen wird von den betroffenen Gemeinden
blockiert. Das Misstrauen der Bürgerinnen und Bürger
gegen jedes Müllprojekt ist aber auch damit zu erklären,
dass auf politischer Ebene in dieser Zeit viel
versprochen, aber so gut wie gar nichts eingehalten
wurde.
Der bisherige Umgang mit diesem Problem bestand in
der Praxis in kurzsichtigen Übergangslösungen.
Sonderkommissäre wurden eingerichtet, diese jedoch
nicht einmal verpflichtet, lokale Behörden und
Anwohner zu informieren. Auf der anderen Seite
gehören Einwegartikel in Italien zum Alltag. Dies
bedingt eine tägliche Abfallproduktion, die weit über
dem europäischen Durchschnitt liegt, wobei gleichzeitig
auf Mülltrennung und Recycling kaum Wert gelegt wird.
Das traurige Ergebnis dieses mangelnden Umweltbewusstseins
auf beiden Seiten: Kampanien ist heute eine
großflächig verseuchte Region, die Krebsrate bei den
Anwohnern und die Atemwegserkrankungen bei den
Kindern im Großraum Neapel liegen weit über dem
Durchschnitt Italiens.
Lösungen müssen daher dringendst gefunden und
durchgeführt werden!
2-529
Crescenzio Rivellini (PPE). – Signora Presidente,
onorevoli colleghi, ringrazio l'on. Seeber e tutti i miei
colleghi per il compito assegnatomi, ma permettetemi di
sottolineare che già sono in corso in Campania azioni
estremamente positive.
Ritengo pertanto che il ricorso all'articolo ex 260 del
regolamento da parte di alcuni per ottenere sanzioni
pecuniarie sia strumentale. La giunta regionale,
insediatasi solo da pochi mesi, ha già pronto il piano
relativo ai rifiuti speciali e il piano sul ciclo integrato dei
rifiuti. Inoltre, è iniziata una politica relativa alla

130 18-01-2011
raccolta differenziata e sono state avviate iniziative per
ridurre complessivamente i rifiuti prodotti. È in corso a
Salerno la gara per la realizzazione di un inceneritore e
sono in fase avanzata le procedure per la pubblicazione
del bando per l'inceneritore a Napoli Est.
Finalmente, le politiche attuate hanno lo scopo non solo
di pulire la città, ma di organizzare un ciclo integrato di
rifiuti con la raccolta differenziata, la diminuzione dei
rifiuti prodotti, la realizzazione di impianti moderni
anche per eliminare le ecoballe e la bonifica delle
vecchie discariche.
Per ciò che è accaduto in passato si puniscano i veri
responsabili, che sono certo tra gli ex amministratori
campani di sinistra e, in particolare, dei verdi, ma anche
alcuni che dal Nord Italia hanno sfruttato la malavita
locale per scaricare i rifiuti tossici che hanno prodotto.
La Comunità europea deve aiutare la Campania, senza
pregiudizi, e mi appello a tutti affinché si lavori per, e
non contro, solo per soddisfare mediaticamente il
proprio partito o la propria ideologia. Pensate veramente
che penalizzando pecuniariamente la Campania si
risolva l'emergenza?
2-530
Luigi de Magistris (ALDE). – Signora Presidente,
onorevoli colleghi, dopo le bugie del governo Berlusconi
che si è insediato nel 2008 dicendo agli italiani che il
problema dei rifiuti era superato, fa bene l'Unione
europea a bloccare i fondi all'Italia fino a quando non
verrà presentato un ciclo dei rifiuti ecocompatibile, che
si fondi sul riciclaggio dei rifiuti e sul compostaggio.
Non è certo il piano che ha presentato il presidente
Caldoro, che si fonda ancora una volta su discariche
incontrollate come quelle di Chiaiano, di Taverna del
Re, di Terzigno, addirittura nel Parco nazionale del
Vesuvio, né degli inceneritori che producono morte,
tumori e una vera e propria emergenza sanitaria. I soldi
pubblici in Campania nell'emergenza ambientale di
questi tredici anni hanno consolidato i rapporti criminali
tra la politica, tanto di sinistra quanto di destra, gli
imprenditori e la camorra.
E le questioni ambientali non si risolvono con la
criminalizzazione del dissenso, con la criminalizzazione
delle comunità locali, delle famiglie e del territorio,
come ha fatto il governo italiano utilizzando il
manganello per reprimere chi difende la natura e il
territorio.
2-531
Francesco Enrico Speroni (EFD). – Signor Presidente,
onorevoli colleghi, l'Europa, centralista e burocratica,
non distingue le differenze territoriali e le articolazioni
amministrative all'interno degli Stati membri.
La responsabilità della disastrosa situazione in
Campania è principalmente dei cittadini campani e io, da
padano, respingo queste accuse e le ribalto contro quelli
che in Campania hanno votato amministratori locali
incapaci di risolvere il problema e hanno persistito
nell'errore confermandoli in successive tornate elettorali.
La Padania è disponibile ad aiutare i campani, ma non
accetta le accuse.
2-532
Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE). – Signora Presidente,
onorevoli colleghi, Signor Commissario, non voglio
certo con il mio intervento negare la gravità di una
situazione che è la conseguenza inevitabile di una palese
insufficienza amministrativa e politica che ha rischiato, e
rischia ancora, di soffocare un'intera città e il suo
circondario di rifiuti.
On. Søndergaard e on. Lichtenberger, l'emergenza in
Campania è nata e si è così drammaticamente sviluppata
per l'incapacità di una giunta regionale e di
un'amministrazione comunale di Napoli di sinistra, e con
assessori verdi, di compiere scelte, anche impopolari e
coraggiose, per realizzare il ciclo virtuoso della raccolta
e lo smaltimento dell'immondizia. Irresponsabilità,
indecisione, convenienze politiche, connivenze oscure,
sprechi hanno caratterizzato una fase politica e
amministrativa che oggi si è definitivamente chiusa.
Voglio rassicurare i firmatari delle interrogazioni e i
gruppi politici che le hanno appoggiate che la situazione
politica e operativa è completamente cambiata. Il
governo nazionale e la nuova giunta regionale, in modo
responsabile, hanno la determinazione politica di
risolvere l'emergenza, superando con il confronto con le
popolazioni interessate e con la doverosa risolutezza
ostacoli e resistenze che spesso nascono dalla sindrome
di Nimby: "non voglio la tua spazzatura nel mio
giardino".
A tale fine, hanno predisposto un piano integrato di
raccolta e smaltimento rifiuti che prevede in tempi brevi
l'incentivazione alla raccolta differenziata e la
realizzazione degli impianti necessari.
Sarebbe pertanto estremamente ingiusto,
controproducente e strumentale, così come chiede l'on.
De Magistris, imporre oggi sanzioni e provvedimenti
inibitori che colpirebbero istituzioni che, attraverso
l'efficiente utilizzo delle risorse comunitarie e nazionali
stanno cercando, in piena collaborazione con l'Unione
europea, di chiudere definitivamente questa brutta
pagina della millenaria storia di Napoli e della
Campania.
2-533
Horst Schnellhardt (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, meine
Damen und Herren! Ich hoffe und wünsche, dass die
heutige Diskussion ein Startschuss für eine
durchgreifende Änderung bei der Müllentsorgung in
Kampanien ist. Der Beschluss oder die Forderung des
Europäischen Gerichtshofes müssen endlich umgesetzt
werden, und die europäischen Regeln für Müllsammlung
und Entsorgung müssen dort eingesetzt werden.
Zweitens müssen die Schäden, die durch die illegalen
Deponien erzeugt wurden, auch mit in Angriff
genommen werden. Ich weiß wovon ich rede. Wir haben
heute, zwanzig Jahre nach der Wiedervereinigung, in

18-01-2011 131
Ostdeutschland immer noch mit den Lasten illegaler
Müllentsorgung oder schlechter Müllentsorgung zu tun.
Aber ich glaube nicht, dass das alles einen Erfolg hat,
wenn wir nicht die Wurzeln des Übels anpacken. Da
können wir von Verwaltung reden, so viel wir wollen, es
sind mafiöse Strukturen, die dort bestehen. Die müssen
zerschlagen werden, sonst werden wir hier nicht
erfolgreich sein.
Ich sage Ihnen ganz ehrlich, ich würde vier Bedingungen
stellen: Erstens die Erstellung eines Abfallentsorgungsplanes.
Der liegt wohl nun vor. Aber auch die
Kommission sollte dort hilfreich sein. Zweitens die
Bereitstellung von finanziellen Ressourcen, um neue
Recyclinganlagen und Abfallanlagen zu schaffen.
Drittens müssen härtere Strafen für die illegale
Entsorgung geschaffen werden, und ich denke auch –
mit Blick auf die Kommission –, dass Europol und
Eurojust die Polizei und die Staatsanwaltschaft in Italien
bei der Bekämpfung der organisierten Kriminalität
unterstützen sollten.
Die zur Verfügung stehenden Mittel sollte man so lange
sperren, bis diese Bedingungen erfüllt sind. Dann bin ich
gerne bereit, mein Ja dazu zu geben, dass die Mittel
wieder freigegeben werden.
2-534
Lara Comi (PPE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli
colleghi, Signor Commissario, con il mio intervento
voglio affermare in modo chiaro che la situazione dei
rifiuti in Campania è migliorata rispetto al passato ed è
in corso di definizione.
La problematica è molto complessa, presenta difficoltà
di vario genere e necessita di tempo per essere risolta in
modo adeguato e definitivo. Le interrogazioni orali sulle
quali discutiamo invocano l'applicazione della procedura
ai sensi dell'articolo 260 del trattato, ma non è
l'applicazione di una sanzione pecuniaria che risolverà la
situazione in Campania. Così procedendo, rischieremmo
di avallare un criterio di attribuzione della responsabilità
per infrazione a uno Stato membro sul piano meramente
oggettivo, semplicemente per non aver ancora
adempiuto oggettivamente a un obbligo derivante
dall'ordinamento comunitario.
Ciò che deve essere preso in considerazione è anche il
comportamento soggettivo dello Stato. Non si può certo
dire che l'Italia non abbia rispettato l'obbligo di leale
cooperazione, ma come il Signor Commissario ha
confermato, i servizi della Commissione sono in
continuo contatto con le autorità italiane nazionali e
territoriali e seguono scrupolosamente l'evolversi della
situazione.
La volontà e l'impegno profusi dall'Italia sono
assolutamente innegabili. È importante sottolineare che
il ruolo operativo è passato dalle regioni alle province, in
modo tale da sviluppare un piano idoneo alle diverse
esigenze del territorio. L'Europa deve essere vicina
all'Italia, cooperando in perfetta sinergia.
Vorrei concludere ricordando che nella giunta regionale
campana era presente anche l'Italia dei Valori, che forse
ora ha la memoria corta e troppo corta per ricordare
quello che ha fatto o che, meglio, non ha fatto.
2-535
Barbara Matera (PPE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli
colleghi, non intervengo per mero campanilismo, ma per
condividere con voi la risposta italiana alla violazione
comunitaria, ricordando che è nostro interesse difendere
gli interessi dei cittadini e del nostro popolo.
La regione Campania e, in generale, lo Stato italiano
stanno provvedendo alla creazione di una rete di
impianti di smaltimento dei rifiuti secondo quanto
stabilito dal diritto comunitario. Voglio ricordare che i
fondi comunitari stanziati per lo smaltimento di rifiuti in
Campania sono stati impiegati nei POR 2000-2006 nella
misura 1.7 e nei POR 2007-2013, obiettivo operativo
1.1.
Sul POR 2000-2006 la regione Campania ha
rendicontato la dotazione finanziaria disponibile pari a
140 milioni di euro, soldi impegnati nella realizzazione
di impianti di stoccaggio, trattamento e recupero,
impianti di valorizzazione, frazione umida e secca e la
messa in sicurezza di discariche per costruzione, o
ampliamento, di impianti destinati al recupero di materia
da rifiuti, per interventi a sostegno della raccolta
differenziata. Per quanto attiene al POR 2007-2013,
sono stati stanziati 110 milioni di euro per la
realizzazione di impianti per il trattamento di rifiuti, 50
milioni di euro per il finanziamento di impianti comunali
per la raccolta differenziata.
Le attività, quindi, dell'obiettivo 1.1. del POR FESR
2007-2013, insieme alla misura 1.7. del POR 2000-2006
sono state fortemente limitate da regimi di
condizionabilità della spesa per effetto della procedura
di infrazione sulla gestione dei rifiuti in Campania,
quindi, ad oggi si è accantonata una quota dei FAS per
consentire il prosieguo delle attività in vigenza del veto
comunitario al riconoscimento dei fondi POR.
Concludo dicendo che si ritiene importante poter
presentare alla Commissione e al Parlamento le
oggettive difficoltà a ottemperare in tempi brevi alla
sentenza della Corte di giustizia.
2-536
Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė (PPE). – Tiesiog
norėčiau pasinaudoti proga ir atkreipti dėmesį į kitas
atliekų tvarkymo problemas Europos Sąjungoje. Šios
problemos pasireiškia, visų pirma, aplaidžiu valstybės ir
vietos valdžios institucijų požiūriu į atliekų tvarkymo
prioritetus. Štai, pavyzdžiui, viename Lietuvos miestų
verslininkai, siekiantys pastatyti atliekų deginimo
gamyklą, visuomenę klaidina atliekų deginimą statydami
į vieną gretą ar net iškeldami prieš kitus atliekų
tvarkymo būdus - vengimą, rūšiavimą. Deja, vietos
valdžios institucijos ir valdininkai, atsakingi už atliekų
tvarkymą, į tokį klaidinimą nekreipia daug dėmesio.
Todėl raginu Komisiją sprendžiant atliekų tvarkymo
problemas Europos Sąjungoje atkreipti dėmesį ir į tokius

132 18-01-2011
pažeidimus, kuomet nesilaikoma ir raginama nesilaikyti
Europos Sąjungos atliekų direktyvoje įtvirtintų atliekų
tvarkymo prioritetų.
2-537
Peter Jahr (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin! Im Rahmen einer
Delegationsreise des Petitionsausschusses konnte ich
mich über die Situation der Müllentsorgung in
Kampanien informieren. Man muss feststellen, dass die
dort handelnden Institutionen vor einer extrem
schwierigen Aufgabe stehen. Denn es müssen die
Müllentsorgungsprobleme der Vergangenheit –
Stichwort Öko-Pellets –, der Gegenwart und der Zukunft
gelöst werden. Mein Eindruck von dieser Reise: Die
Müllentsorgung der Gegenwart war zum Zeitpunkt des
Besuchs leidlich gelöst, teilweise mit Militäreinsatz.
Gelöst hieß damals, der Müll wurde von der Stadt
herausgebracht und deponiert, leider, müssen wir
feststellen, teilweise auch illegal deponiert. Was fehlt,
sind strategische Lösungen für die Vergangenheit, aber
vor allen Dingen für die Zukunft.
Das Angebot der EU ist gut, nachvollziehbar und fair.
Wenn die Region ein schlüssiges
Müllentsorgungskonzept vorlegt, dann wird die
Europäische Union die Finanzmittel freigeben. Man
sollte den lokalen Behörden auch Mut machen, dies zu
tun. Ich sage es noch einmal aus meiner Sicht: Die
Kommission und auch wir, das Europäische Parlament,
sind nicht an Strafzahlungen interessiert. Wir sind daran
interessiert, dass die Müllprobleme vor Ort in
Kampanien geklärt werden. Diesen Deal sollten wir
gemeinsam machen und vorangehen.
2-538
Crescenzio Rivellini (PPE). – Signora Presidente,
onorevoli colleghi, i fondi eventualmente bloccati dalla
Comunità europea sono in particolare quelli destinati
alla bonifica dei territori.
Mi chiedo come si possa pensare di bloccare tali fondi e
chiedo in particolare ai parlamentari italiani, tra l'altro
eletti dalla comunità campana, di non rispondere alla
loro furia ideologica e di non penalizzare i loro
concittadini.
Mi appello a loro affinché siano rappresentativi della
loro comunità e non autoreferenti di loro stessi.
2-539
Janez Potočnik, Member of the Commission. − Madam
President, I should like to thank the Members very much
for all their views.
There are three or four issues which I would like to
address. First is the issue which has been quite
passionately addressed by many of you. The situation is
critical; there is no quick fix. There have been some
positive developments but it is obvious that we still need
a systemic answer to the question. It is not easy but it is
more than needed. In that respect our partner in finding a
solution is, of course, Italy, but cooperation with
regional authorities in this respect is undoubtedly
necessary.
So I am very much looking forward to the evaluation of
the new draft waste management plan which we
sincerely hope is what we all believe it should be. It will
be evaluated by my services, by the experts, and I can
assure you that it will be done in such a way that there
will be the same treatment for Italy as for any other
Member State, because it is of fundamental importance
that we keep that trust between Member States on the
table.
So when we talk about dealing with these problems, my
approach could actually be put into four words. I want to
be helpfully strict and strictly helpful. The idea is
certainly not to impose fines. As was mentioned by
some of you, the idea is to solve problems, but by
imposing fines if there is no other way to solve the
problems, because that is my duty.
So I am truly doing everything in cooperation with the
Italian authorities so that we find proper solutions. That
is my sincere hope. At the end of the day we are talking
about the health of Italian citizens and the Italian
environment.
The second thing I want to mention is connected with
the Waste Framework Directive. It is a new directive
which was recently adopted. In that directive it is pretty
clear that each of the countries, as a matter of law, has to
introduce a waste hierarchy. That means the best waste
is no waste; there is re-use, recycling, energy
regeneration and, if there is no other possibility,
landfilling.
That is the picture which is taken from the report that
will be published tomorrow on how efficient the
Member States in the European Union are. It is about the
trends in landfilling municipal waste because our best
available data are on municipal waste.
Believe it or not, there are five Member States where
landfilling is below 5% of municipal waste, but there are
also seven Member States where landfilling is over 80%,
so we have really very different situations in Europe
when we deal with these programmes, and this is an
issue which we certainly want to address. This picture is
of the situation between 1995 and 2007 and, if it shows
anything, it shows that if countries want they can
change. If they organise themselves in a proper way,
they can really change.
Fundamentally, you can today divide Europe into two
parts: one part which sees waste as a problem and one
part which sees waste as a major opportunity for
resources and also for the new financial profits because
that is the reality. I have heard many stories of the need
for the question of who will take the waste to be decided
by public procurement, because there are more than the
necessary number of users who would like to have it in
order to use it. However, for this purpose the waste has
to be selected at the very beginning. That is the
fundamental and most important need.

18-01-2011 133
The last thing which I would like to mention is the
honourable Member who said that we should be more
careful about waste management problems elsewhere in
the European Union. In the infringement cases by sector
in 2009, waste accounts for 19%, water 20%, nature
19%, air 16%, and the rest less. We are looking
horizontally at all implementation problems and we are
bound to do that. I can assure you that we will do it also
in the future.
To conclude, we should truly do our best, you as
Members of Parliament and I as Commissioner for the
Environment, to spread across Europe the message of
waste as an opportunity for the future. We desperately
need that message in the context of the limited resources
which we are increasingly facing from day to day.
Resource efficiency is the name of the problem and
resource efficiency is at the core of our future
competitiveness in Europe. If you do not believe me, ask
me in 10 years’ time. I can guarantee that this will be the
case.
2-540
Presidente. − La discussione è chiusa.
La votazione si svolgerà durante la prossima tornata.
2-541
18 - Violazione della libertà di espressione e
discriminazione sulla base dell'orientamento
sessuale in Lituania (discussione)
2-542
Presidente. − L'ordine del giorno reca la discussione su:
– l'interrogazione orale alla Commissione sulla
violazione della libertà di espressione e discriminazioni
sulla base dell'orientamento sessuale in Lituania, di
Renate Weber, Sophia in 't Veld, Leonidas Donskis,
Cecilia Wikström, Alexander Alvaro, Sonia Alfano,
Gianni Vattimo, Sarah Ludford, Ramon Tremosa i
Balcells, a nome del gruppo ALDE (O-0190/2010 - B7-
0669/2010),
– l'interrogazione orale alla Commissione sulla
violazione della libertà di espressione e discriminazione
fondata sull'orientamento sessuale in Lituania, di Ulrike
Lunacek, a nome del gruppo Verts/ALE (O-0204/2010 -
B7-0803/2010),
– l'interrogazione orale alla Commissione sulla
violazione della libertà di espressione e discriminazioni
sulla base dell'orientamento sessuale in Lituania, di
Cornelis de Jong, a nome del gruppo GUE/NGL (O-
0207/2010 - B7-0804/2010),
– l'interrogazione orale alla Commissione sulla
violazione della libertà di espressione e discriminazione
sulla base dell'orientamento sessuale in Lituania, di
Michael Cashman, Monika Flašíková Beňová, Claude
Moraes, a nome del gruppo S&D (O-0216/2010 - B7-
0005/2011).
2-543
Sophia in ’t Veld, author. − Madam President, we are
discussing today, and not for the first time, legislation
that may be passed by the Lithuanian Parliament with a
potentially very negative effect on the position of
lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people in
Lithuania. I think it is unfortunate that we are discussing
the subject again, as Parliament has already passed a
resolution on it.
I think the resolution we have proposed for vote
tomorrow is very clear. We would appeal to our
Lithuanian colleagues to reflect further on this matter
and to make sure that whatever legislation they pass will
not discriminate against LGBT people.
I do not have much to say about the resolution, but I
think it is becoming increasingly clear that the European
Union needs to equip itself with stronger legal
instruments for the enforcement of fundamental rights.
We recently debated the controversial media law in
Hungary and now we are facing very similar issues.
We have laid down the principles – the shared values of
500 million citizens – in the European treaties but, when
it comes to putting them into practice, we run into
trouble. Therefore, Commissioner, I would like to hear
your views on our proposal for a European roadmap for
LGBT rights. The European Union has done a lot for
gender equality in the past and, indeed, we have regular
roadmaps for gender equality. We have all sorts of
strategies to combat racism and xenophobia, to combat
social exclusion and to strengthen fundamental rights,
but not for LGBT people. I think it is very urgent and
very necessary that we have such a strategy: a strategy to
fight prejudice, ignorance, discrimination and hatred and
to strengthen the rights of LGBT people.
There are many examples of the problem. Today we are
discussing the amendments which have been put to the
Lithuanian Parliament, but that should not distract us
from the fact that homophobia exists in all Member
States.
I would like to bring another fact to your attention,
Commissioner, and to hear your views on it. This
concerns the European asylum policy, and the fact is that
people seeking asylum because they are prosecuted on
grounds of their sexual orientation in a Member State
which I will not name have to undergo something known
as a phallometric test. This is particularly degrading. It
has no place in the European Union and I would like to
hear what the Commission intends to do about it.
2-544
Ulrike Lunacek, author. − Madam President, my
colleague Mrs in 't Veld has already explained what the
resolution is about and referred to it and I strongly agree
with the question she put to you, Commissioner: what
about a road map for LGBT rights in this common
European Union?
But I would like to take a different angle to hopefully
convince those who in this Parliament have not yet
decided on voting in favour of this resolution. You know
what? Last summer, four Members of the European
Parliament, Mrs in 't Veld, myself, Mr Cashman and Mr
Fjellner, representing four groups, the majority of this
Parliament, were in Vilnius, in Lithuania, together with

134 18-01-2011
the first Baltic Pride to be held in Vilnius, empowering
and supporting lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender
people in this city and we were there under the European
flag telling everybody, ‘this flag protects us, lesbian,
gay, bisexual and transgender people, and that is true
also for Lithuania.’
Now, what would happen to us and to Lithuanians who
next year might go marching in favour of our equal
rights in Vilnius if this law is adopted in the Seimas?
Each one of us could be fined up to EUR 2 900 for
publicly promoting sexual orientation – meaning
homosexuality in this case, because I guess for
heterosexuality that does not apply. Is that really what
this Parliament would want? Is that what the Parliament
of Lithuania would want, the parliament of a country
which 20 years ago struggled for its own freedom, with
lesbians and gays among the people struggling for that
freedom?
So I am very happy that the President of Lithuania, Mrs
Grybauskaitė, former Commissioner, and the
Government of Lithuania have already said that this
proposed law contravenes Lithuania’s obligations under
its own constitution. I hope it will be clear that different
forms of sexuality, of sexual orientation, of forms of
living, have been part of all cultures and of all societies
and are so in Lithuania, as well, and that hiding facts like
that from the public, from young people, is simply a
basis for inciting hatred, hate speech and hate crimes.
That is something that I think nobody in this Parliament
or in the Lithuanian parliament would want.
Therefore I hope that we will have the support of this
Parliament and of the Commissioner for the resolution.
We do not need your support, but I hope we have it.
2-545
Cornelis de Jong, Auteur. − Mevrouw de Voorzitter, ik
sluit me graag aan bij wat de vorige sprekers hebben
gezegd, maar ik wil ook nog een ander aspect van de
problematiek benadrukken: de bepaling van de
voorgestelde wetswijziging kan niet alleen zeer ernstige
gevolgen hebben voor de LGBT- gemeenschap in
Litouwen, maar is wederom een voorbeeld van
wetgeving die gebruikt kan worden tegen de erkenning
van partnerschappen en huwelijken van paren van gelijk
geslacht uit andere lidstaten. In dit huis hebben we daar
ook al eerder over gesproken in september vorig jaar, en
omdat er toen nog vragen bleven, hebben we samen met
andere europarlementariërs een brief gestuurd om
verduidelijking. Uw Eurocommissaris heeft een
antwoord gestuurd, waarin u onder meer schrijft dat het
verblijfsrecht van dergelijke paren door het Europees
recht wordt erkend. Mijn vraag aan u is dan ook: Gaat u
Litouwen daar nu aan houden, ook als een van de
partners niet de nationaliteit heeft van de lidstaten?
Graag een heel duidelijk antwoord hierop.
In het werkprogramma van de Commissie lees ik dat de
Commissie in 2013 een wetgevingsvoorstel over de
wederzijdse erkenning van de effecten van bepaalde
akten van de burgerlijke stand gaat opstellen. Mijn vraag
is: Is dat nu ook een voorstel voor wederzijdse erkenning
van partnerschappen en huwelijken en, als dat zo is, dan
ben ik daar op zich blij mee, maar waarom pas in 2013?
De Commissie heeft aangekondigd noodzakelijke actie
te ondernemen, als de diensten de Litouwse wetgeving
hebben geanalyseerd en mijn vraag is: Is die analyse
inmiddels uitgevoerd en hebben de diensten in de
analyse ook meegenomen wat de gevolgen zijn voor de
erkenning van paren van gelijk geslacht uit andere
lidstaten?
Welke stappen gaat de Commissie vervolgens
ondernemen tegen Litouwen, maar bijvoorbeeld ook
tegen Roemenië dat bij wetgeving erkenning expliciet
uitsluit?
Tenslotte, beloofde u, mevrouw de commissaris, tijdens
de debatten in september om snel met een reactie te
zullen komen op het rapport van het
mensenrechtenagentschap over homofobie. In uw brief
verwijst u echter simpelweg naar het jaarverslag van de
Commissie. Vindt u niet dat, in het licht van de
gebeurtenissen in Litouwen, die zaak veel meer aandacht
moet krijgen, en kunt u ons toezeggen dat u zo spoedig
mogelijk met een apart verslag over homofobie in de
Europese Unie zult komen?
2-546
Monika Flašíková Beňová, autorka. − Musím úprimne
povedať, že nerozumieme tomu, čo sa deje v Litve,
alebo možno ešte lepšie, že sme z toho rozčarovaní a
rozhorčení.
Keď sa už zdá, že sme v Európskej únii dosiahli pokrok
aspoň v tom, že vieme, čo sú to základné ľudské práva,
príde z jedného z členských štátov signál, že to vlastne
vôbec nie je pravda.
Úvahy o tom, že treba zákonom zakázať napríklad
propagáciu iných než heterosexuálnych vzťahov, nám
prídu neuveriteľne spiatočnícke a totálne ignorujúce to,
čo sme za posledné roky v oblasti ľudských práv tu
spoločne v Európskom parlamente aj v spolupráci s
vami, s Komisiou, dosiahli.
Ochrana duševného zdravia detí je iba nedôstojnou
zámienkou agendy zakomplexovaných politikov. Deti
musíme a chceme chrániť. Chceme ich chrániť najmä
proti násiliu, proti chudobe, chceme im zabezpečiť
podmienky pre vzdelanie, bezpečnosť a osobný rozvoj.
Všetci však alebo väčšina z nás z vlastných skúseností
vie, že deťom nevadia prejavy náklonnosti a lásky a ani
propagácia iných ako heterosexuálnych vzťahov.
Preto som presvedčená, že dnes už nie je namieste, aby
sme s podporovateľmi takýchto názorov diskutovali,
pani komisárka, a snažili sa im stále niečo vysvetľovať.
Snažili sa im vysvetľovať, v čom sú ich postoje žalostne
mylné.
Podľa môjho názoru treba razantným spôsobom
zakročiť. Treba jednoznačne povedať, že homofóbne

18-01-2011 135
legislatívne snahy sú v jednoznačnom rozpore so
základnými princípmi Európskej únie, sú úplne jasne v
rozpore so zmluvami, s Chartou základných ľudských
práv a s Európskym dohovorom o ľudských právach.
Nerešpektujú slobodu prejavu a informácií a slobodu
zhromažďovania, ako aj zákaz diskriminácie na základe
sexuálnej orientácie.
Chcela by som sa tiež opýtať, pani komisárka, či v
prípade schválenia takého zákona začne Komisia voči
Litve konanie o porušení?
2-547
Viviane Reding, Vice-President of the Commission. −
Madam President, I would like to start by stressing that
the Commission unambiguously rejects homophobia
because it is a blatant violation of human dignity.
That is also why, on 22 November 2010, I visited
Lithuania and discussed with President Dalia
Grybauskaitė and the Minister of Justice the proposal to
amend the Administrative Code, which establishes a
new offence punishable by a fine for ‘the promotion of
homosexual relations or financing of such promotion in
public places’, as well as the related proposal to amend
the Penal Code.
According to the latest information in my possession, the
adoption by the Lithuanian Parliament of this draft
amendment to the Administrative Code was postponed
and is now expected to take place in spring this year.
This means that it is still under discussion.
The Commission is examining the proposals to amend
the Lithuanian Administrative and Penal Codes, as well
as other Lithuanian legislation, from the perspective of
compliance with relevant EU law.
In 2009, the Commission expressed serious concerns to
the Lithuanian authorities in relation to the compatibility
with Union law and fundamental rights of the Lithuanian
Law on the Protection of Minors against the Detrimental
Effect of Public Information. Following the
Commission’s intervention, this law was amended in
December 2009.
The law qualifies as detrimental to minors information
that ‘expresses contempt for family values, encourages
the concept of entry into a marriage and creation of a
family other than stipulated in the Constitution of the
Republic of Lithuania and the Civil Code of the
Republic of Lithuania’. The practical application of this
law may raise questions in terms of compliance with the
e-Commerce and Audiovisual Media Services Directives
and with the principle of non-discrimination. The
Commission is continuing to look into this matter.
According to the information in my possession, an
amendment to the Law on Provision of Information took
effect on 18 October 2010. This amendment prescribes
that ‘advertising and audiovisual commercial
communication […] must not contain manifestation or
promotion of sexual orientation’. If these provisions
were to remain in the law, we would see the same
problems in terms of compliance with the Audiovisual
and Media Services Directive and possible violation of
Article 21 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.
In May 2010, the Commission wrote to the Lithuanian
Government expressing worries about the last-minute
suspension of the Baltic Gay Pride event. You will
remember this. We recalled in that letter that freedom of
peaceful assembly, as provided for in the European
Convention on Human Rights and Article 12 of the
Charter, is one of the principles on which the Union is
founded. On that basis, Baltic Gay Pride was held on
8 May 2010: that was the event to which a previous
speaker referred.
As regards the question of a possible European strategy
on the fight against homophobia, the Commission’s
priority is to ensure that EU legislation complies fully
with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, including
Article 21 prohibiting discrimination on the ground of
sexual orientation. How this is to be achieved was
explained very clearly in the Commission’s
communication on the strategy for effective
implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights,
adopted on 19 October 2010. We will come back to this
matter in the annual report on application of the Charter,
which also covers progress on the application of
Article 21. That will happen in spring of this year.
According to this logic, the phallometric test as a
procedure under asylum policy is, of course, subject to
EU law and relates directly to Article 21 of the Charter,
which prohibits discrimination on the grounds of sexual
orientation. This clearly means that if, in EU law or in its
application at national level, there is discrimination, then
the Union is empowered to intervene. It is very clear that
the Union can intervene here.
To conclude, I would like to reiterate the Commission’s
strong commitment to combating homophobia and
discrimination based on sexual orientation, to the full
extent of the powers conferred by the Treaties.
Regarding the recognition of civil status, we have no
intention of proposing any legislation that would
interfere with Member States’ substantive family law or
modify national definitions of marriage. This is
subsidiarity. Our green paper on recognition of civil
status is designed for cross-border situations, such as the
recognition of birth certificates, and is not concerned
with the recognition of same-sex marriage. We must not
mix things up. It is for the Member States to define what
marriage is. It is for the European Union to permit free
movement and non-discrimination. These are two
completely different things. Such is the position in
European law and that is what we apply in real terms.
2-548
Simon Busuttil, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam
President, the EPP is committed to upholding the values
and principles upon which the Union is founded, in
particular the respect for human rights. Europe should

136 18-01-2011
fight against all forms of discrimination and that
includes discrimination on the basis of sexual
orientation. At the same time, we have to respect the
right of any democracy, as long as it respects human
rights and the non-discrimination principle, to discuss,
modify and adopt national laws, without interfering in
the debates of national parliaments, without infringing
the principle of subsidiarity and without acting or
condemning a Member State prematurely.
We do not like the idea of condemning a Member State,
especially since in this particular case the proposed
modifications have not even been voted on by the
plenary of the Lithuanian Parliament and are still under
review by the Lithuanian authorities. Not only that, but
the proposed modifications have already been deemed to
be in conflict with European law by the Lithuanian
authorities themselves, who have declared that they will
be taking action to remedy the situation and to respect
the principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of
sexual orientation. So this proposed legislation will
probably not even make it onto the statute book of
Lithuania and therefore there is no need to condemn this
Member State.
To conclude, I do hope nonetheless that tomorrow the
EPP will be able to support the joint resolution as long
as it does not condemn any individual Member State and
as long as it is modified to make it more balanced.
2-549
Sarah Ludford, on behalf of the ALDE Group. –
Madam President, I hope very much that Lithuania will
learn from the experience in the UK, which went
through its own agonies of having a law which banned
the promotion of homosexuality in schools. David
Cameron, then Conservative leader and now Prime
Minister, said 18 months ago that his party was wrong in
its support for that 1988 law, which was subsequently
repealed. Indeed David Cameron predicted that the first
openly gay Prime Minister in the UK would be a Tory.
We will see, but that is what he predicted.
So you could see a huge change in attitudes in the space
of two decades. This development in attitudes, which my
colleague Charles Tannock knows a lot more about, and
this move by the centre right are reflected in a quite
modest and moderate EPP resolution and indeed in
Simon Busuttil’s opening remarks. I am hopeful that the
EPP might be able to rally to the main resolution if most
of their amendments are accepted in the vote tomorrow.
The situation in the UK has been transformed to the
extent that the proprietors of a small guest house were
today forced to pay compensation to a gay couple whom
they refused to allow to stay, in breach of the law. As the
judge remarked, these proprietors were perfectly at
liberty to hold or discuss their personal views on
homosexuality, but what they could not do was
discriminate on the basis of those views. It is talk,
discussion, debate, right of assembly that would be
affected by the proposed Lithuanian laws.
Banning the promotion or propagation of homosexuality
is likely to have a chilling effect on free speech and
discussions, as the Fundamental Rights Agency has
pointed out. I join Sophie in ’t Veld in calling for an EU
roadmap to combat homophobia and discrimination and
I call on everyone across the political spectrum in this
House to unite in support of the whole range of human
rights.
2-550
Marije Cornelissen, namens de Verts/ALE-Fractie. –
Voorzitter, dit is niet de eerste keer dat Litouwen de
basiswaarden en het Verdrag van de EU schendt. Het
Parlement daar lijkt steeds schaamtelozer te worden in
het inperken van de rechten van homo's.
We moeten daar actie tegen ondernemen. De waarden en
wetten van de EU zijn niet à la carte – deze wel, en deze
liever niet. Wie EU-lid wil worden en wil zijn, moet zich
aan alles houden. Dat geldt voor Litouwen, maar net zo
goed voor Frankrijk en ook voor Nederland. Stel dat
Nederland bijvoorbeeld in de toekomst zou willen gaan
morrelen aan de rechten van migranten. We moeten actie
ondernemen, want als dit zomaar kan, dan betekent dat
dat eigenlijk niemand zich echt goed beschermd mag
voelen in de Unie.
Ik ben blij dat de commissaris meteen is gestart met een
juridische analyse en ik hoop op heel snelle
vervolgstappen. Want het kan toch niet zo zijn dat
mensen eerst slachtoffer moeten worden van deze wetten
en dan bij de buren hun rechten als EU-burgers moeten
gaan opeisen bij het Mensenrechtenhof.
2-551
Charles Tannock, on behalf of the ECR Group. –
Madam President, the EU is founded on the principle
that all its citizens enjoy equal rights and freedoms.
Every country that wants to become a Member State of
the EU must commit to that principle and be signatory to
the ECHR, not least with regard to sexual orientation.
When Lithuania joined the EU seven years ago, it
pledged to uphold our common values of tolerance and
equality. Since then, the EU’s Charter of Fundamental
Rights – and I believe its Articles 12 and 21 – have
come into force, further guaranteeing in law citizens’
freedom from discrimination on the grounds of sexual
orientation at EU institutional level.
As a spokesman for my party and group on human rights
issues outside the Union, I can say categorically that the
ECR upholds and endorses principles of equality,
tolerance and diversity everywhere.
However, many Europeans do hold traditional views
with regard to homosexuality, often based on religious
conviction. Just as we seek to uphold the law to protect
LGBT rights, so too should we seek to ensure that those
who wish to express contrary, non-inflammatory, views
within the bounds of the law regarding free speech
should be free to do so as well.

18-01-2011 137
Undoubtedly, Lithuanian society remains by and large
conservative and we should understand that. People are
entitled to their own private views, but at an institutional
and legal level, we cannot compromise on the principle
that we are all equal. Equality is a hallmark of our
progressive society in Europe, and I believe in fact that
the legal safeguards and individual rights guaranteed by
the EU acted as a kind of magnet to countries such as
Lithuania as they emerged from communist totalitarian
domination.
I would therefore urge the Lithuanian authorities to
reflect on the fact that the EU is committed to preventing
the marginalisation, vilification and persecution of
minorities that was so commonplace throughout Europe
for the first half of the 20th century. The Commission
should indeed look at this proposed draft Lithuanian
piece of legislation and pronounce whether or not, in its
opinion, this piece of legislation is compatible with EU
law – although, as Simon Busuttil put it, it is entirely
possible that this bill will not become law, as Lithuania
is a democracy and is only too well aware of all the
issues we are going to raise in this debate tonight.
2-552
Joe Higgins, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. –
Madam President, the proposed law to ban what is called
the public promotion of gay relations in Lithuania is
another excuse to crush the rights of gay, lesbian,
transgender and bisexual people in that state.
How cruelly ironic that a country which threw off the
shackles of Stalinist dictatorship only 20 years ago
should now revert to aping one of the many crimes of
that system: the suppression of the right of people to live
freely and in peace according to their own sexual
identity.
I salute the courage of the hundreds of gay people and
their supporters who braved the hate campaign against
them to march in the Baltic Pride parade in Lithuania’s
capital Vilnius in May of last year. It is revolting to see
right-wing politicians scapegoating gay people in
Lithuania. The political establishment in that country has
dismally failed its people, particularly the youth. Just as
in Ireland, market capitalism and financial speculation
have devastated the economies of the Baltic States,
including Lithuania where unemployment has rocketed
to 18% and youth unemployment to a staggering 35%.
In these circumstances, using minorities, including gay
people, as scapegoats is a standard, cynical way to divert
attention from the failures of the establishment.
Just as in the hate campaign against gays in Uganda, the
homophobic campaign in Lithuania tries to insinuate that
gay people pose a threat to children, implying sexual
abuse of children. This is a poisonous slander, designed
to confuse and mislead. It is a slander that would have
parents look in the wrong direction to protect their
children. Coming from Ireland, I can confirm tragically
that threats to children come traditionally from within
institutions where they are supposed to be safe, within
certain families and within certain areas of the Catholic
Church.
It is reprehensible that young people in Lithuania coping
with their emerging sexuality – which is a difficult
enough time – must now do so in a climate of
intolerance and fear. So, we should stand in solidarity
with the right of all people in Lithuania, in Russia,
throughout the European Union and elsewhere to live in
peace and in accordance with their own identities.
2-553
Димитър Стоянов (NI). – Първото нещо, което
разбрах от изказванията на вносителите е, че те в
същност предполагат, че предложените изменения
ще дискриминират хомосексуалните. Не са сигурни
в това. Те само го предполагат. Затова тази ситуация
ми напомня малко на филма „Специален доклад”, в
който използвайки ясновидци, местната полиция
осъждаше хора преди те още да са извършили
дадено престъпление.
В момента Литва се намира точно в тази позиция -
да бъде осъдена за нещо, което тя в същност още не
е извършила. Тук има и един друг много голям
фундаментален проблем, който, колеги, ще ни мъчи
много дълги години занапред и това е конфликтът
между различните права на различните групи.
Например, вие знаете, че правото на събиране, за
което говорим сега в тази зала, не е неограничено и
абсолютно. То трябва да е мирно събиране, да бъде
проведено при определени обстоятелства, които не
нарушават обществения ред.
Това е извън контекста на конкретния случай, но не
забравяйте, че занапред тези конфликти на права ще
бъдат огромен проблем за Европейския съюз и
много често, в един момент даже ще се озовем в
ситуация, в която ще трябва да отсъждаме чии права
имат предимство пред правата на другите, ако
продължаваме така безконтролно да разширяваме
полезрението на така наречените граждански права и
свободи.
2-554
Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE). – Pani
Przewodnicząca! Obecnie na Litwie mamy do czynienia
z sytuacją, w której z jednej strony mówimy o prawie
każdego demokratycznie wybranego rządu do
swobodnego stanowienia prawa w swoim kraju, a z
drugiej strony z obowiązkiem przestrzegania praw
człowieka chronionych przez prawo unijne i
międzynarodowe konwencje. Niewątpliwie rolą
Parlamentu Europejskiego jest, między innymi,
zwracanie uwagi na wszystkie przypadki, w których
może dochodzić do łamania praw człowieka, również ze
względu na przynależność do różnych grup społecznych.
Parlament wielokrotnie podejmował w tych sprawach
rezolucje. Zawsze przeciwstawiał się w nich łamaniu
tych praw.
Dzisiejsza debata także jest wynikiem obawy, że projekt
zmiany w litewskim prawie może prowadzić do

138 18-01-2011
ograniczenia na przykład wolności wypowiedzi na
Litwie ze względu na orientację seksualną. Obawa ta
uzasadniona jest w tym sensie, że na forum Parlamentu
Europejskiego wielokrotnie podnoszono kwestię
wybiórczego traktowania praw człowieka na Litwie
przez władze tego kraju. Mam tu na myśli przede
wszystkim mniejszości narodowe, które nie są niestety
jednakowo traktowane przez litewskie prawo w zakresie
uprawnień, jakie im przyznano. Dlatego warto
podkreślać, że projekty ustawodawstwa krajowego
muszą spełniać określone standardy i być zgodne z
prawem unijnym, które gwarantuje równe traktowanie
zdefiniowanym mniejszościom, również narodowym.
2-555
Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D). – Šiandien svarstant šį
jautrų klausimą mano šaliai, Lietuvai, pirmiausiai
norėčiau pabrėžti, kad Lietuva būdama Europos
Sąjungos nare gerbia žmogaus teises ir laisves bei
Europos Sąjungos vertybes. Gaila, jog pasitaiko atvejų,
kai atskiri Lietuvos parlamento nariai inicijuoja žmogaus
teises pažeidžiančius ir piliečius diskriminuojančius
įstatymus. Tačiau noriu pranešti, kad Lietuvos
vyriausybė praėjusį trečiadienį pateikė neigiamą išvadą
dėl parlamente svarstomo pasiūlymo numatyti bausmes
už homoseksualių santykių propagavimą, nes jis
prieštarauja tiek tarptautiniams, tiek Europos Sąjungos
teisės aktams, tiek Lietuvos Respublikos konstitucinėms
nuostatoms ir laikytinas diskriminaciniu asmenų
seksualinės orientacijos pagrindu. Be to, ratifikavus
Lisabonos sutartį Lietuva privalo laikytis Europos
Sąjungos pagrindinių teisių chartijos, kuri draudžia bet
kokią diskriminaciją, įskaitant ir dėl seksualinės
orientacijos. Šį įstatymo projektą pasmerkė Lietuvos
Respublikos Prezidentė Dalia Grybauskaitė. Norėčiau
pažymėti, kad įstatymo projekte siūlomi pakeitimai dar
nėra priimti Lietuvos Respublikos Parlamente. Be to, dar
nėra pateikta ir Lietuvos Parlamento žmogaus teisių
komiteto išvada dėl šių siūlomų pakeitimų. Tikiuosi, kad
Lietuva atsižvelgs į Europos Sąjungos ir tarptautinę
kritiką, į neigiamą Lietuvos Respublikos vyriausybės
išvadą, į Europos Parlamento rezoliuciją ir Lietuvos
Parlamentas turės politinės valios atmesti siūlomą
įstatymą, kuris pažeistų žmogaus teises ir laisves, ir kad
bus užkirstas kelias bet kokiai diskriminacijai, įskaitant
ir dėl seksualinės orientacijos.
2-556
Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE). – Madam
President, I think it is pretty clear that the message we
want to send to the Lithuanian Parliament – and not only
to them but also to all those who still presume to debate
what are basic facts – is more necessary than ever. I
think there are two facts of which we need to remind
some colleagues who may have forgotten them. The first
is that homosexuality has been declassified as a mental
illness; and the second, which is particularly relevant
here, is that there is no credible research to show that
educating children about homosexuality can affect their
sexual orientation.
These are facts, and no legal text or proposed legislation
can contradict them. So the message we want to send
tomorrow is simply to remind our colleagues that these
matters should not be up for discussion. That is why we
need to pass this resolution and that is why we also need
to support the attempts by the President of Lithuania to
stop what is happening. But I insist: the message is
directed not only at the Lithuanians but also at all those
who still presume, on occasion, to put such matters up
for discussion.
2-557
Konrad Szymański (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca!
Wydaje się, że nie ma bardziej przewrażliwionego
parlamentu na świecie na tle ochrony praw mniejszości
seksualnych niż Parlament Europejski. Litewskie prawo,
zresztą źle przetłumaczone w rezolucji, nad którą
proponuje się nam głosować, jeszcze nie zostało
przyjęte. Parlament Europejski już zabiera się do
krytykowania jednego z państw członkowskich. Myślę,
że nie powinniśmy ingerować w suwerenny proces
legislacyjny, który ma miejsce na Litwie, w suwerennym
państwie.
Powinniśmy z całą pewnością wykazywać więcej
zaufania do procesu legislacyjnego na Litwie, więcej
zrozumienia dla tych posłów na Litwie, którzy akurat
zwracają uwagę na to, że w szczególności dzieci i
młodzież powinni być często lepiej chronieni przed
często agresywnym eksponowaniem treści seksualnych.
To jest zupełnie naturalna dyskusja. Wydaje się, że
prawa dzieci w tej dyskusji są zupełnie pomijane. W tej
rezolucji nie znajdziemy ani tego zaufania, nie
znajdziemy poszanowania dla suwerenności, nie
znajdziemy umiaru, nie znajdziemy w końcu
zastanowienia się nad prawami dzieci. Dlatego nie
bardzo możemy poprzeć ten tekst.
2-558
Joanna Senyszyn (S&D). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Dla
większości mieszkańców Unii wspólne jest przekonanie,
że wszyscy ludzie są równi i mają te same prawa.
Niestety w niektórych krajach europejskich poziom
tolerancji dla mniejszości seksualnych jest wciąż zbyt
niski. Zdarzają się przypadki podżegania do nienawiści
wobec osób homoseksualnych, zakazywania marszów
równości, a nawet prawnych regulacji sprzecznych z
prawem unijnym, jak właśnie dyskryminacyjny projekt
litewski. Kres takim praktykom może położyć ustalenie
jednolitego minimalnego unijnego poziomu ochrony
osób dotkniętych dyskryminacją ze względu na wiek,
orientację seksualną, niepełnosprawność, wyznanie lub
światopogląd. Kiedy to nastąpi? Ważny jest całkowity
rozdział kościoła i państwa, gdyż homofobia szerzy się
zwłaszcza tam, gdzie zbyt dużą rolę odgrywa religia.
Wciąż w 76 krajach świata homoseksualizm jest
nielegalny, a w 8 państwach islamskich za stosunki
homoseksualne grozi kara śmierci. W Europie pojawiają
się najwyżej przepisy lub projekty kompromitujące
wolny świat. Dlatego ważna jest nasza rezolucja i unijna
dyrektywa antydyskryminacyjna.
2-559
Catherine Trautmann (S&D). – Madame la
Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues,
l'amendement actuellement en cours d'examen au
Parlement lituanien, et qui rendrait passible d'amendes la

18-01-2011 139
promotion publique de l'homosexualité, a été rédigé dans
le cadre de la loi de protection des mineurs contre les
effets néfastes des informations publiques.
Comment peut-on, à des fins soi-disant de défense des
mineurs, porter atteinte à la fois à la liberté d'expression
et d'information, et surtout cautionner des
discriminations fondées sur l'orientation sexuelle? Nous
le savons bien ici, un tel texte entraîne la dissimulation
de l'orientation sexuelle, revient sur les droits que nous
avons défendus et que ce Parlement a défendus en faveur
des LGBT. En outre, alors que nous assistons au même
moment à des actions violentes, à des agressions contre
des personnes homosexuelles, c'est une incitation à la
criminalisation de l'homosexualité ou un appel à la
violence. Nous ne pouvons donner cette image de
l'Europe à la jeunesse, celle d'une société fermée,
intolérante, repliée sur elle-même et qui ne tiendrait pas
compte du respect dû à autrui.
Ainsi, cette loi entre, pour nous, en complète
contradiction avec les valeurs européennes, notamment
véhiculées par la charte des droits fondamentaux de
l'Union européenne et la convention européenne de
sauvegarde des droits de l'homme et des libertés
fondamentales. Elle s'oppose également – cela a été dit –
à tout le corpus antidiscriminatoire du droit de l'Union,
lequel d'ailleurs a largement contribué à faire évoluer
nos législations nationales vers plus d'égalité sur de
nombreux aspects de la vie courante, allant de l'emploi à
l'information ou à l'éducation.
Je vous remercie, Madame la Commissaire, d'avoir tenu
ici des propos très clairs et je voudrais que tous les
groupes entendent votre argumentation ainsi que celle de
mes collègues. Je voudrais appeler tous les collègues de
l'ensemble des groupes à rejoindre les groupes de
l'Alliance progressiste des Socialistes et Démocrates,
ALDE, Verts et GUE/NGL, qui ont pris l'initiative de
rédiger cette résolution.
2-560
Anna Záborská (PPE). – Prečo sa tento parlament
zaoberá návrhom zákona, ktorý predložil jeden poslanec
národného parlamentu? Pýtam sa, kedy sa stalo, že sme
začali diktovať zákonodarcom členských štátov, o čom
môžu diskutovať a o čom už nie?
Táto debata ani návrhy uznesení, o ktorých budeme
hlasovať zajtra, sa netýkajú platnej zákonnej normy.
Týkajú sa nezáväzného textu, ktorý je predmetom
diskusie v parlamente členského štátu Európskej únie.
Zákon, ktorý potenciálne ohrozuje slobodu médií v
Maďarsku, je platný zákon.
Väčšina z nás sa však nakoniec priklonila k názoru, že
skôr než sa ním budeme zaoberať, je treba dať čas
maďarskej vláde, aby mohla, ak to bude potrebné, zákon
zmeniť. Keď už nič iné, buďme dôslední.
Vážení kolegovia, počkajme aj s touto rezolúciou aspoň
na koniec diskusie v litovskom parlamente.
2-561
Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė (PPE). – Esu iš
Lietuvos ir šiandien svarstoma rezoliucija grįsta viena
Administracinių teisių pažeidimų kodekso pataisa. Tai
yra, pabrėžiu, nepabaigtas teisėkūrinis procesas
nacionaliniame parlamente, į kurį bando įsikišti Europos
Parlamentas. Tai yra svarstymo stadija, ne galutinis
sprendimas, net komitete nesvarstyta ir diskusijų
nebuvo. Teisingumo dėlei turiu pasakyti, kad
institucijos, turėjusios įvertinti mūsų aptariamą
parlamentarų grupės pataisą pateikė išvadas, kurios
projektui nėra palankios, tad šiandien aptariamas
projektuojamas rezultatas greičiausiai nebus toks, apie
kokį čia yra kalbama. Todėl negaliu palaikyti
rezoliucijos, nes tai perteklinė reakcija. Ir dar norėčiau
kreiptis į draugą Higgins: nedarykite referencijų į tai, ko
neišgyvenote. Palyginimas Sovietų Sąjungos su
dabartine Lietuva yra tiesiog nesuvokiamas.
2-562
Alexandra Thein (ALDE). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau
Kommissarin! Die europäische Menschenrechtskonvention
und die europäische Grundrechtecharta
verbieten Diskriminierung aufgrund sexueller
Ausrichtung. Die Organe der EU und alle
Mitgliedstaaten sind gemäß Artikel 6 und 7 des Vertrags
über die Europäische Union bzw. Artikel 19 des
Vertrags über die Arbeitsweise der EU verpflichtet,
Diskriminierung aufgrund der sexuellen Orientierung zu
bekämpfen.
Litauen ist ein Mitgliedstaat der EU und hat sich somit
verpflichtet, diese gemeinsamen Werte von 500
Millionen Unionsbürgern zu teilen. Ich begrüße
zunächst, dass in Litauen nach unserer ersten
Entschließung aus dem Jahr 2009 das geplante Gesetz in
abgeschwächter Form in Kraft getreten ist und bisher
kein einziger Fall der Anwendung dieses Gesetzes
bekannt geworden ist bzw. die Anwendung in Bezug auf
das Verbot der Christopher Street Day Parade
gescheitert ist und diese stattfand. Umso erstaunter bin
ich, dass nun neue legislative Maßnahmen anstehen,
wonach im Endeffekt das öffentliche Sprechen bzw. die
Information über homosexuelle Beziehungen zu
Geldstrafen bis zu 2 900 Euro führen kann und es keine
Chancengleichheit mehr für Homosexuelle – aber
immerhin für Frauen – geben soll.
Ich begrüße daher die Strategie der Kommission gegen
Homophobie und möchte der Kommissarin, Frau
Reding, ausdrücklich dafür danken, dass sie durch ihre
Anwesenheit hier im Plenum kurz vor 24 Uhr die
Wichtigkeit dieses Grundrechteschutzes unterstreicht.
2-563
Viviane Reding, Vice-President of the Commission. −
Madam President, I have noted very broad agreement in
this House by all the major political parties on the
principle of non-discrimination. I believe that if there
were a resolution that really underlined this principle
and its application in national law – an obligation that
the national states have signed up to vis-à-vis the rules
of Europe – then this would be a very important
moment.

140 18-01-2011
Those parliamentarians who have clearly stated that we
are speaking here about a law which is not a law but a
proposal by some parliamentarians are right to highlight
this fact, but I would also like to point out that both the
President of Lithuania and the Government of Lithuania
have spoken out clearly against those proposals made by
some parliamentarians.
I hope that a nearly unanimous decision in tomorrow’s
vote will underline these principles which have been
freely agreed upon by 27 Member States, which are the
principles behind our European directives, and which
have been reinforced by the Charter of Fundamental
Rights. I can only subscribe to the strong position of this
Parliament.
2-564
Presidente. − Comunico di aver ricevuto due proposte
di risoluzione 1 conformemente all'articolo 115,
paragrafo 5, del regolamento.
La discussione è chiusa.
La votazione si svolgerà mercoledì 19 gennaio 2011.
1 Vedasi processo verbale.
2-565
19 - Ordine del giorno della prossima
seduta: vedasi processo verbale
2-566
20 - Chiusura della seduta
2-567
(La seduta è tolta alle 23.55)

НЕОКОНЧАТЕЛНО ИЗДАНИЕ
В настоящото издание (достъпно и в интернет - вж.
страница последна) всяко изказване фигурира на
езика, използван от оратора. Окончателно издание
е достъпно едва впоследствие. Ораторите, които
желаят в текста на изказванията им да бъдат
нанесени корекции, следва да ги представят на
Отдел "Протоколи и пълни стенографски протоколи
на пленарни заседания" в едноседмичен срок
на адреса, посочен на страница последна (по
електронна поща поставете в полето "Относно"
"CRE / дата").
EDICIÓN PROVISIONAL
La presente edición (disponible también en Internet -
véase última página) contiene todas las intervenciones
en la lengua usada por el orador. La edición
definitiva estará disponible posteriormente. Las
correcciones que los oradores deseen efectuar en el
texto de su intervención deben enviarse a la Unidad de
Actas y Actas Literales de la Sesión Plenaria en el plazo
de una semana a la dirección que figura en la última
página (para el e-mail: asunto «CRE / fecha»).
PROZATÍMNÍ VYDÁNÍ
V tomto vydání (které je rovněž k dispozici na
internetu – viz poslední strana) je každé vystoupení
zaznamenáno v jazyce, ve kterém je řečník přednesl.
Řečníci, kteří si přejí provést opravy ve znění svých
vystoupení, mohou do jednoho týdne předat opravy
oddělení pro doslovný záznam a zápis z plenárního
zasedání na adresu uvedenou na poslední straně (v
příslušném e-mailu uvést v předmětu zprávy (subject):
„CRE / datum“).
FORELØBIG UDGAVE
Denne udgave (findes også på internettet - se sidste
side) indeholder samtlige taler på det af taleren
anvendte sprog. En endelig udgave offentliggøres
senere. Enheden for Plenarmødeprotokoller og -
referater bør inden en uge, på den adresse der er
angivet på sidste side, underrettes om de ændringer,
som talerne måtte ønske at foretage i deres indlæg
(ved henvendelse pr. e-mail, skriv venligst "CRE / dato"
under "subject").
VORLÄUFIGE AUSGABE
Diese Ausgabe (auch im Internet abrufbar — siehe
hintere Umschlagseite) enthält alle Reden in der vom
Redner verwendeten Sprache. Eine endgültige Ausgabe
wird später veröffentlicht. Etwaige Korrekturen,
die die Redner am Text ihrer Reden vorzunehmen
wünschen, sollten innerhalb einer Woche dem Referat
Plenarprotokolle an die auf der Rückseite angegebene
Adresse zugesandt werden (für E-Mail: im Betreff
erwähnen: CRE / Datum).
ESIALGNE VERSIOON
Käesolevas versioonis (mis on kättesaadav ka internetis
– vt viimast lehekülge) on toodud kõikide sõnavõttude
originaaltekstid. Lõplik versioon avaldatakse hiljem.
Sõnavõtjatel, kes soovivad oma sõnavõtus teha
muudatusi, palutakse edastada muudatused ühe
nädala jooksul täiskogu istungite protokollide üksusele
viimasel leheküljel toodud aadressil (e-posti puhul
märkida teemaks „CRE / kuupäev”).
Списък на съкращенията на политическите групи
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Група на Европейската народна партия (Християндемократи)
Група на прогресивния алианс на социалистите и демократите в
Европейския парламент
Група на Алианса на либералите и демократите за Европа
Група на Зелените/Европейски свободен алианс
Европейски консерватори и реформисти
Конфедеративна група на Европейската обединена левица -
Северна зелена левица
Група „Европа на свободата и демокрацията”
Независими членове
Lista de las siglas de los grupos políticos
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Grupo del Partido Popular Europeo (Demócrata-cristianos)
Grupo de la Alianza Progresista de los Socialistas y Demócratas en
el Parlamento Europeo
Grupo de la Alianza de los Demócratas y Liberales por Europa
Grupo de los Verdes/Alianza Libre Europea
Grupo de los Conservadores y Reformistas Europeos
Grupo Confederal de la Izquierda Unitaria Europea/Izquierda Verde
Nórdica
Grupo Europa de la Libertad y de la Democracia
No inscritos
Seznam zkratek politických skupin
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Skupina Evropské lidové strany (Křesťanští demokraté)
Skupina Pokrokové aliance socialistů a demokratů v Evropském
parlamentu
Skupina Aliance liberálů a demokratů pro Evropu
Skupina Zelených/Evropské svobodné aliance
Skupina Evropských konzervativců a reformistů
Skupina konfederace Evropské sjednocené levice a Severské zelené
levice
Skupina Evropa svobody a demokracie
Nezařazení poslanci
Liste over forkortelserne for de politiske grupper
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Det Europæiske Folkepartis gruppe (Kristelige Demokrater)
Gruppen for Det Progressive Forbund af Socialdemokrater i Europa-
Parlamentet
Gruppen Alliancen af Liberale og Demokrater for Europa
Gruppen De Grønne/Den Europæiske Fri Alliance
Gruppen De Europæiske Konservative og Reformister
Den Europæiske Venstrefløjs Fællesgruppe/Nordisk Grønne Venstre
Gruppen for Europæisk Frihed og Demokrati
Løsgængere
Liste der Abkürzungen der Fraktionen
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Fraktion der Europäischen Volkspartei (Christdemokraten)
Fraktion der Progressiven Allianz der Sozialisten & Demokraten
im Europäischen Parlament
Fraktion der Allianz der Liberalen und Demokraten für Europa
Fraktion der Grünen / Freie Europäische Allianz
Fraktion Europäische Konservative und Reformisten
Konföderale Fraktion der Vereinigten Europäischen
Linken/Nordische Grüne Linke
Fraktion Europa der Freiheit und der Demokratie
Fraktionslos
Fraktsioonide lühendite nimekiri
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Euroopa Rahvapartei (kristlike demokraatide) fraktsioon
Euroopa Parlamendi Sotsialistide ja Demokraatide Progressiivse
Liidu fraktsioon
Euroopa Demokraatide ja Liberaalide Liidu fraktsioon
Roheliste / Euroopa Vabaliidu fraktsioon
Euroopa Konservatiivide ja Reformistide fraktsioon
Euroopa Ühendatud Vasakpoolsete / Põhjamaade Roheliste
Vasakpoolsete liitfraktsioon
Vaba ja Demokraatliku Euroopa fraktsioon
fraktsioonilise kuuluvuseta parlamendiliikmed
BG
ES
CS
DA
DE
ET

ΠΡΟΣΩΡΙΝΗ ΕΚΔΟΣΗ
Η παρούσα έκδοση (διαθέσιμη και στο Διαδίκτυο - βλ.
οπισθόφυλλο) περιέχει τα πρωτότυπα όλων των
αγορεύσεων. Η τελική έκδοση θα είναι διαθέσιμη
αργότερα. Οι αγορητές που επιθυμούν να επιφέρουν
διορθώσεις στις αγορεύσεις τους καλούνται να τις
διαβιβάσουν στη μονάδα Πρακτικών της Ολομέλειας
στο αργότερο μέσα σε μία εβδομάδα στη διεύθυνση
που αναγράφεται στο οπισθόφυλλο (για το e-mail: να
αναγράφεται στο θέμα "CRE / ημερομηνία").
PROVISIONAL EDITION
This edition (also available on the Internet – see back
cover) contains the texts of all speeches in the original
language used by the speaker. The final edition will be
available later. Speakers wishing to correct their
speeches are requested to send any corrections
within a week to the Plenary Records Unit at the
address shown on the last page (if using e-mail,
please enter ‘CRE / date’ in the subject line).
EDITION PROVISOIRE
Dans la présente édition (disponible également sur
Internet - v. dernière page) chaque intervention figure
dans la langue utilisée par l'orateur. Une édition
définitive sera disponible ultérieurement. Les orateurs
qui désirent voir apporter des corrections au texte de
leur intervention sont priés de transmettre celles-ci à
l'unité des Procès-verbaux et des Comptes rendus de
la plénière dans un délai d'une semaine à l'adresse
figurant en dernière page (pour l'e-mail: mentionner
dans le sujet "CRE / date").
EAGRÁN SEALADACH
Is é atá san eagrán seo (atá ar fáil ar an Idirlíon chomh
maith - feic clúdach cúil) ná téacsanna bunaidh de
gach aitheasc. Beidh eagrán deiridh ar fáil níos déanaí.
Ba cheart do chainteoirí aon cheartúcháin a chur in
iúl don Aonad do Thaifead na gCruinnithe Iomlánacha
trí ríomhphost a sheoladh laistigh de sheachtain
chuig an seoladh ar an leathanach deiridh (cuir
'CRE/dáta' mar ábhar an ríomhphoist le do thoil).
EDIZIONE PROVVISORIA
La presente edizione (disponibile anche su Internet
all'indirizzo indicato all'ultima pagina) contiene tutti i
discorsi nella lingua usata dall'oratore. L'edizione
definitiva sarà pubblicata successivamente. Gli oratori
che desiderino rivedere il testo dei loro interventi
sono pregati di far pervenire le correzioni entro una
settimana all'unità Processi verbali e resoconti
integrali della seduta plenaria all'indirizzo indicato
all'ultima pagina (per l'e-mail indicare nell'oggetto
"CRE / data").
PAGAIDU VERSIJA
Šajā izdevumā (pieejams arī internetā — sk. pēdējo
lappusi) visas runas ir oriģinālajā valodā. Galīgā versija
būs pieejama vēlāk. Runātāji, kas vēlas labot savas
runas, tiek lūgti izlaboto tekstu vienas nedēļas laikā
nosūtīt Plenārsēžu protokolu un stenogrammu
nodaļai uz adresi, kura norādīta pēdējā lappusē (epastā
kā tematu rakstīt: CRE / datums).
Συντομογραφίες των πολιτικών ομάδων
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Ομάδα τoυ Ευρωπαϊκoύ Λαϊκoύ Κόμματoς (Χριστιαvoδημoκράτες)
Ομάδα της Προοδευτικής Συμμαχίας των Σοσιαλιστών και
Δημοκρατών στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο
Ομάδα της Συμμαχίας Φιλελευθέρων και Δημοκρατών για την
Ευρώπη
Ομάδα τωv Πρασίvωv / Ευρωπαϊκή Ελεύθερη Συμμαχία
Ευρωπαίοι Συντηρητικοί και Μεταρρυθμιστές
Συνομοσπονδιακή Ομάδα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ενωτικής
Αριστεράς/Αριστερά των Πρασίνων των Βορείων Χωρών
Ευρώπη ελευθερίας και δημοκρατίας
Μη Εγγεγραμμένοι
List of abbreviations denoting political groups
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats)
Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the
European Parliament
Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe
Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
European Conservatives and Reformists Group
Confederal Group of the European United Left - Nordic Green Left
Europe of Freedom and Democracy Group
Non-attached Members
Liste des sigles des groupes politiques
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Groupe du Parti populaire européen (Démocrates-Chrétiens)
Groupe de l'Alliance progressiste des Socialistes et Démocrates au
Parlement européen
Groupe Alliance des démocrates et des libéraux pour l'Europe
Groupe des Verts/Alliance libre européenne
Groupe des Conservateurs et Réformistes européens
Groupe confédéral de la Gauche unitaire européenne/Gauche verte
nordique
Groupe Europe Liberté Démocratie
Non-inscrits
Liosta de ghiorrúcháin na ngrúpaí polaitiúla
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Grúpa Pháirtí an Phobail Eorpaigh (Na Daonlathaithe Críostaí)
An Grúpa d’Aontas Forchéimnitheach na Sóisialaithe agus na
nDaonlathaithe i bParlaimint na hEorpa
Grúpa Chomhghuaillíocht na Liobrálaithe agus na nDaonlathaithe
An Grúpa Glas/Grúpa na Saor-Chomhghuaillíochta Eorpaí
An Grúpa do Choimeádaigh agus Leasaitheoirí na hEorpa
Grúpa Cónasctha den Chlé Aontaithe Eorpach - den Chlé Ghlas
Nordach
An Grúpa d’Eoraip na Saoirse agus an Daonlathais
Feisirí Neamhcheangailte
Elenco delle sigle dei gruppi politici
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Gruppo del Partito popolare europeo (Democratico Cristiano)
Gruppo dell'Alleanza Progressista di Socialisti e Democratici al
Parlamento europeo
Gruppo dell'Alleanza dei Democratici e dei Liberali per l'Europa
Gruppo Verde/Alleanza libera europea
Gruppo dei Conservatori e Riformisti europei
Gruppo confederale della Sinistra unitaria europea/Sinistra verde
nordica
Gruppo Europa della libertà e della democrazia
Non iscritti
Saraksts ar politisko grupu saīsinājumiem
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Eiropas Tautas partijas grupa (Kristīgie demokrāti)
Eiropas Parlamenta sociālistu un demokrātu progresīvās alianses
grupa
Eiropas Liberāļu un demokrātu apvienības grupa
Zaļo un Eiropas Brīvās apvienības grupa
Eiropas Konservatīvo un reformistu grupa
Eiropas Apvienotā kreiso un Ziemeļvalstu Zaļo kreiso spēku
konfederālā grupa
grupa „Brīvības un demokrātijas Eiropa”
Pie politiskajām grupām nepiederošie deputāti
EL
EN
FR
GA
IT
LV

NEGALUTINĖ REDAKCIJA
Šioje redakcijoje (ją taip pat galima rasti internete – žr.
paskutinį puslapį) pateikiami visų pranešimų tekstai
originalo kalba. Galutinė redakcija bus paruošta
vėliau. Kalbėjusiųjų, norinčių pataisyti savo
pranešimus, prašome pateikti savo pataisymus
Plenarinių posėdžių protokolų ir stenogramų skyriui
paskutiniame puslapyje nurodytu adresu ne vėliau
kaip per vieną savaitę (siunčiant el. paštu, dalyko
skiltyje nurodykite CRE / data).
IDEIGLENES KIADÁS
A jelen kiadásban (amely az Interneten is
hozzáférhető, ld. az utolsó oldalt) minden felszólalás a
felszólaló által használt nyelven szerepel. A végleges
kiadás elkészítésére később kerül sor. Azok a
felszólalók, akik javításokat kívánnak tenni
felszólalásuk szövegében, szíveskedjenek a kívánt
javításokat egyhetes határidőn belül eljuttatni
a plenáris ülések jegyzőkönyvéért és szó szerinti
jegyzőkönyvéért felelős osztályhoz, az utolsó oldalon
szereplő címre (az e-mailek tárgyában tüntesse fel a
következőt: „CRE / dátum”).
EDIZZJONI PROVIŻORJA
Din l-edizzjoni (li tinstab ukoll fuq l-Internet - ara lqoxra
ta' wara) fiha t-testi oriġinali tad-diskorsi kollha.
L-edizzjoni finali tkun disponibbli aktar 'il quddiem.
Dawk li jixtiequ jikkoreġu d-diskors tagħhom huma
mitluba li jgħaddu, fi żmien ġimgħa, l-verżjonijiet
riveduti lill-Unità tal-Minuti u ta' l-Atti tal-Plenarja, flindirizz
indikat fuq il-qoxra ta' wara (jekk tuża l-email,
jekk jogħġbok ikteb CRE / id-data fil-linja indikata).
VOORLOPIGE UITGAVE
Deze uitgave (ook te vinden op Internet - zie
achterkant) omvat alle redevoeringen in de taal
waarin zij zijn uitgesproken. Een definitieve versie in
elk van de officiële talen zal op een later tijdstip
verschijnen. Sprekers die verbeteringen in de tekst
van hun redevoeringen wensen aan te brengen,
kunnen deze binnen een week aan de Afdeling
notulen en volledig verslag plenaire vergaderingen
op het op de achterkant aangegeven adres doen
toekomen (Voor e-mail: onder onderwerp vermelden:
CRE / datum).
WYDANIE TYMCZASOWE
Niniejsze wydanie (dostępne również na stronach
internetowych - zob. ostatnia strona) zawiera teksty
wszystkich przemówień w językach mówców.
Wydanie ostateczne będzie dostępne później. Mówcy,
którzy chcieliby wnieść poprawki do tekstu swojego
przemówienia, proszeni są o przesłanie poprawek do
Wydziału protokołów i stenogramów z posiedzenia
plenarnego w terminie jednego tygodnia na adres
podany na ostatniej stronie (zaznaczając w temacie
wiadomości e-mail: CRE / data).
EDIÇÃO PROVISÓRIA
A presente edição (também disponível na Internet - cf.
última página) contém todas as intervenções na
língua utilizada pelo respectivo orador. A edição
definitiva será publicada ulteriormente. As correcções
que os oradores desejem efectuar no texto das
respectivas intervenções devem ser transmitidas, no
prazo de uma semana, à Unidade da Acta e do Relato
Integral das Sessões, para o endereço que figura na
última página deste caderno (para a transmissão via
e-mail, é necessário inscrever a menção "CRE / data"
no campo assunto).
Frakcijų pavadinimų sutrumpinimų sąrašas
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Europos liaudies partijos (krikščionių demokratų) frakcija
Europos Parlamento socialistų ir demokratų pažangiojo aljanso
frakcija
Liberalų ir demokratų aljanso už Europą frakcija
Žaliųjų frakcija / Europos laisvasis aljansas
Europos konservatorių ir reformuotojų frakcija
Europos vieningųjų kairiųjų jungtinė frakcija / Šiaurės šalių žalieji
kairieji
Laisvos ir demokratiškos Europos frakcija
Nepriklausomi nariai
A képviselőcsoportok betűszó szerinti listája
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
az Európai Néppárt (Kereszténydemokraták) képviselőcsoportja
az Európai Szocialisták és Demokraták Progresszív Szövetsége
képviselőcsoport
Liberálisok és Demokraták Szövetsége Európáért képviselőcsoport
a Zöldek/Európai Szabad Szövetség képviselőcsoport
Európai Konzervatívok és Reformisták képviselőcsoport
az Egységes Európai Baloldal/Északi Zöld Baloldal képviselőcsoport
a Szabadság és Demokrácia Európája képviselőcsoport
független képviselők
Lista ta' abbrevjazzonijiet ta' gruppi politiċi
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Grupp tal-Partit Popolari Ewropew (Demokristjani)
Grupp tal-Alleanza Progressiva tas-Soċjalisti u d-Demokratiċi fil-
Parlament Ewropew
Grupp ta' l-Alleanza tal-Liberali u d-Demokratiċi għall-Ewropa
Grupp tal-Ħodor/Alleanza Ħielsa Ewropea
Konservattivi u Riformisti Ewropej
Grupp Konfederali tax-Xellug Magħqud Ewropew - Xellug Aħdar
Nordiku
Grupp għall-Ewropa ħielsa u demokratika
Membri mhux affiljati
Lijst van afkortingen van de fracties
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Fractie van de Europese Volkspartij (Christen-democraten)
Fractie van de Progressieve Alliantie van Socialisten en Democraten
in het Europees Parlement
Fractie Alliantie van Liberalen en Democraten voor Europa
Fractie De Groenen/Vrije Europese Alliantie
Fractie Europese Conservatieven en Hervormers
Confederale Fractie Europees Unitair Links/Noords Groen Links
Europa van Vrijheid en Democratie
Niet-ingeschrevenen
Lista skrótów grup politycznych
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Grupa Europejskiej Partii Ludowej (Chrześcijańscy Demokraci)
Grupa Postępowego Sojuszu Socjalistów i Demokratów w
Parlamencie Europejskim
Grupa Porozumienia Liberałów i Demokratów na rzecz Europy
Grupa Zielonych / Wolne Przymierze Europejskie
Grupa Europejskich Konserwatystów i Reformistów
Konfederacyjna Grupa Zjednoczonej Lewicy Europejskiej / Nordycka
Zielona Lewica
Grupa Europy Wolności i Demokracji
Niezrzeszeni
Lista das siglas dos grupos políticos
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Grupo do Partido Popular Europeu (Democratas-Cristãos)
Grupo da Aliança Progressista dos Socialistas e Democratas no
Parlamento Europeu
Grupo da Aliança dos Democratas e Liberais pela Europa
Grupo dos Verdes/Aliança Livre Europeia
Grupo dos Conservadores e Reformistas Europeus
Grupo Confederal da Esquerda Unitária Europeia/Esquerda Nórdica
Verde
Grupo Europa da Liberdade e da Democracia
Não-inscritos
LT
HU
MT
NL
PL
PT

EDIŢIE PROVIZORIE
În prezenta ediție (disponibilă și pe internet –
consultați ultima pagină), fiecare intervenție figurează
în limba utilizată de către vorbitor. Ediția definitivă va
fi disponibilă la o dată ulterioară. Vorbitorii care
doresc să aducă modificări textului intervenției lor
sunt rugați să le transmită în termen de o
săptămână Unității Procese-verbale și Stenograme
Ședințe Plenare, la adresa indicată pe ultima pagină
(în cazul trimiterilor pe e-mail: menționați la rubrica
subiect „CRE/data”).
EDBEŽNÉ VYDANIE
Toto vydanie, ktoré sa nachádza aj na internete (pozri
poslednú stranu), obsahuje znenie všetkých prejavov
uvedené v pôvodnom jazyku rečníka. Konečná verzia
bude k dispozícii neskôr. Rečníci, ktorí chcú vložiť
opravy do svojich prejavov, môžu zaslať všetky opravy
na adresu Oddelenia pre zápisnice a doslovné zápisy z
plenárnej schôdze uvedenú na poslednej strane, a to
do jedného týždňa (ak ide o e-mailovú korešpondenciu,
treba uviesť ako predmet = CRE / dátum).
ZAČASNA VERZIJA
V začasni različici (na razpolago tudi na svetovnem
spletu - glej hrbtno stran) so govori v jeziku, v katerem
je govorec nastopil. Naknadno bo na razpolago tudi
končna različica. Govorci, ki želijo vnesti popravke v
besedilo svojega govora, naj jih v roku enega tedna
posredujejo službi za zapisnike in dobesedne zapise
plenarnega zasedanja na naslov, naveden na hrbtni
strani (prek elektronske pošte: omenjeno v zadevi
"CRE / datum").
VÄLIAIKAINEN VERSIO
Julkaisu (joka on saatavilla myös Internetissä – katso
takakansi) sisältää kaikkien puheiden alkuperäiset
versiot. Lopullinen julkaisu ilmestyy myöhemmin.
Puhujia, jotka haluavat tehdä korjauksia puheisiinsa,
pyydetään toimittamaan korjatut versiot täysistuntopöytäkirjoista
ja sanatarkoista istuntoselostuksista
vastaavalle yksikölle viikon kuluessa takakannessa
mainittuun osoitteeseen (sähköpostia varten:
asiakenttään maininta "CRE / päivämäärä").
PRELIMINÄR UTGÅVA
Denna utgåva (som också finns tillgänglig på Internet
– se nedan) innehåller samtliga anföranden på
originalspråket. En slutlig version kommer att
offentliggöras senare. Talare som önskar justera sina
anföranden ombeds skicka den justerade versionen
till enheten för plenarsammanträdesprotokoll inom
en vecka, se adress nedan (för e-post: ange som
ärende ”CRE / datum”).
Lista siglelor grupurilor politice
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Grupul Partidului Popular European (Creștin Democrat)
Grupul Alianței Progresiste a Socialiștilor și Democraților din
Parlamentul European
Grupul Alianței Liberalilor și Democraților pentru Europa
Grupul Verzilor/Alianța Liberă Europeană
Grupul Conservatorilor și Reformiștilor Europeni
Grupul Confederal al Stângii Unite Europene/Stânga Verde Nordică
Grupul Europa Libertății și Democrației
Deputați neafiliați
Zoznam skratiek politických skupín
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Poslanecký klub Európskej ľudovej strany (kresťanských
demokratov)
Skupina Pokrokovej aliancie socialistov a demokratov v Európskom
parlamente
Skupina Aliancie liberálov a demokratov za Európu
Skupina zelených/Európska slobodná aliancia
Európski konzervatívci a reformisti
Konfederatívna skupina Európskej zjednotenej ľavice - Severskej
zelenej ľavice
Skupina Európa slobody a demokracie
Nezaradení poslanci
Seznam kratic političnih skupin
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
skupina Evropske ljudske stranke (krščanskih demokratov)
skupina Napredne zveze socialistov in demokratov v Evropskem
parlamentu
skupina Zavezništva liberalcev in demokratov za Evropo
skupina Zelenih/Evropske svobodne zveze
skupina Evropskih konservativcev in reformistov
konfederalna skupina Evropske združene levice - Zelene nordijske
levice
skupina Evropa svobode in demokracije
samostojni poslanci
Poliittisten ryhmien lyhenteet
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
Euroopan kansanpuolueen (kristillisdemokraatit) ryhmä
Euroopan parlamentin sosialistien ja demokraattien progressiivisen
liiton ryhmä
Euroopan liberaalidemokraattien liiton ryhmä
Vihreät / Euroopan vapaa allianssi -ryhmä
Euroopan konservatiivit ja reformistit
Euroopan yhtyneen vasemmiston konfederaatioryhmä /
Pohjoismaiden vihreä vasemmisto
Vapaa ja demokraattinen Eurooppa
Sitoutumattomat
Förteckning över förkortningarna för de politiska grupperna
PPE
S&D
ALDE
Verts/ALE
ECR
GUE/NGL
EFD
NI
PARLEMENT EUROPÉEN
Secrétariat général - Procès-verbaux et Comptes rendus de la Plénière
L-2929 LUXEMBOURG
e-mail : pv-cre@europarl.europa.eu
Internet : http://www.europarl.europa.eu
(aller vers: "Activités", "Plénière", "Débats")
Europeiska folkpartiets grupp (kristdemokrater)
Gruppen Progressiva alliansen av socialister och demokrater i
Europaparlamentet
Gruppen Alliansen liberaler och demokrater för Europa
Gruppen De gröna/Europeiska fria alliansen
Gruppen Europeiska konservativa och reformister
Gruppen Europeiska enade vänstern/Nordisk grön vänster
Gruppen Frihet och demokrati i Europa
Grupplösa
RO
SK
SL
FI
SV