What Pedro spoke about.

Dear colleagues, a few weeks ago, Europe witnessed floods that brought Emilia-Romagna to its knees in Italy. At least 15 people lost their lives and more than 30 000 were forced to leave their homes. The same amount of rain that usually falls in seven months fell in two weeks, causing twenty-three rivers to overflow across the region. 400 landslides occurred in the area and 43 municipalities were flooded. There is very serious damage to housing, agriculture, industry and infrastructure. But the worst moment brought out the best in people. We saw first responders risk everything for someone they never knew, neighbors helping each other. The European Union has activated its Civil Protection Mechanism. Italy will request the activation of the European Union Solidarity Fund. Our response will continue and will be stronger and stronger. And to the people of Emilia-Romagna I want to say once again: We are with you, we will be with you and help you rebuild. Because you are Europe. Dear colleagues, I invite you to join me in observing a minute of silence to remember the victims of this tragedy. (Parliament stood and observed a minute's silence)

I have received one motion for a resolution* on the basis of Rule 136(5) of the Rules of Procedure to wind up the debate. The debate is closed. The vote will take place today. _______________ * See Minutes.

The next item is the debate on the question for oral answer to the Commission on Towards a strong and sustainable EU algae sector, tabled by Pierre Karleskind on behalf of the Committee on Fisheries (O-000015/2023 - B9-0018/23) (2023/2547(RSP)).

Madam President, I am also participating in this debate on the implementation of the 2021 budget in my capacity as Vice-President of Parliament, responsible for the European Parliament’s budget. And I want to start by recalling that 2021 was still a year marked by the constraints of the pandemic, when Parliament had to continue mobilising extraordinary resources to address an extraordinary situation. And so we continued to invest in information and communication technology tools and equipment, so that Parliament could fulfil its tasks, while at the same time boosting investment in cybersecurity. But most importantly, I wanted to underline that Parliament’s 2021 budget was also an investment in European democracy, where we supported the Conference on the Future of Europe – a conference where citizens asked us for a closer and more engaged Europe, with more information about Europe and European values. This is why it is so important that Parliament’s 2021 budget has allowed for the deepening of the Europa Experience project, a European Parliament programme that aims to install an innovative, interactive and pedagogical information centre in every European capital, so that citizens have a better understanding of the European Parliament. Nine of these centres have already opened, they have had more than 2 million visitors and so we can say that the Europa Experience project is already a successful formula for a more participatory and stronger democracy.

The next item on the agenda is the report by Ms Peter-Hansen and Ms Rafaela on ‘Strengthening the application of the principle of equal pay for equal work or work of equal value between men and women’ (A9-0056/2022). I would also like to greet the Commissioner and welcome her to this session of the European Parliament.

Madam President, for the last 25 years, the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement has delivered on its promise of peace and stability for Northern Ireland. Peace is not a minor issue, as we all know, and we should recall this today more than ever. 25 years of peace in Northern Ireland is a remarkable political achievement that indeed deserves proper celebration, so that we all can praise the progress made and the parties involved can renew their commitment to working together for a peaceful future in Northern Ireland. Carefully negotiated and successfully concluded in 1988 under a Labour government led by Tony Blair, with the full engagement of remarkable Irish political leaders, the Good Friday Agreement made all the difference for the people in Northern Ireland. Instead of violence, peace; instead of confrontation, dialogue, compromise and co-operation; instead of struggles for domination and power, cross-community power sharing. Challenging resentment and disbelief, the Good Friday Agreement has worked for the last 25 years and still sets the framework for new ambitions for the future of the island of Ireland. The European Union is not just a mere spectator of the Good Friday Agreement; it is an engaged party in this international agreement, fully committed to delivering its promises in all its parts. That is why it was always clear for the European Union that, despite Brexit, and while safeguarding the integrity of the European Union’s single market, we had to keep the promise of not having a hard border again between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. This has been, since the beginning, the goal of the commonly agreed Northern Ireland Protocol, just as it is now the goal of the recently agreed Windsor framework. For us it is clear that the time has come to turn the page of this absurd confrontation against the EU. More than that, we need immediately to see power-sharing coming back to Northern Ireland so that after 25 years of peace, we can build 25 years of prosperity for the people in Northern Ireland.

The next item on the agenda is the oral question to the Commission on the lack of action by the Commission in the context of the duty of sincere and sincere cooperation (O-000013/2023 - B9-0015/2023) (2023/2583(RSP)).

Madam President, I thank you and our colleagues for your support and the shadow rapporteurs for their cooperation. Despite the continuous resentment of some Eurosceptics here and radical Brexiteers on the other side of the channel, the positive tone of this debate shows that for this Parliament, time is come for cooperation, not confrontation. Building on our common history and on our common values, we must be able to build with the UK a strong partnership to meet the common challenges we face from the war in Ukraine, the related challenges on defence, security and geopolitical issues, the energy crisis, the supply chain disruptions, climate change, migration, you name it. The confrontation against the EU is not only dangerous for the stability in Northern Ireland, it is also simply absurd from the point of view of our common economic interests. So I hope that in the near future we can talk a little bit more about the Trade and Cooperation agreement and a bit less about the withdrawal agreement. For that to happen, of course, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has to secure sufficient political support in the UK and probably also in Northern Ireland. But one thing is certain: this is a great opportunity, it cannot be wasted.

Mr President, Vice-President Maroš Šefčovič, dear colleagues, time flies. Believe it or not, almost seven years have passed since the Brexit referendum and more than three years have gone since the entry into force of the withdrawal agreement. As rapporteur for the implementation of the Brexit agreement, I am glad to say that, fortunately, we are here not only to assess what happened in the last three years, where the story to tell is not always pleasant, but also to look into the future of the EU-UK relations in light of the recently announced Windsor framework, a new joint understanding about the terms for a more flexible but also more effective implementation of the Northern Ireland Protocol. This development is of utmost importance. The UK’s continuous breach of its agreed legal commitments under the protocol was by far the most serious issue in the implementation of the withdrawal agreement. The lack of customs checks in the Irish Sea and the insufficient sharing of customs data with the EU obviously endangered the integrity of the EU single market. It’s worth recalling that the Northern Ireland Protocol was the agreed solution to prevent a physical border on the island of Ireland so that the Good Friday Agreement is fully safeguarded while protecting the integrity of the EU single market. A dialogue on a flexible but effective implementation of the protocol, as many times suggested by the European Commission, was always the right thing to do, not unilateral actions. Besides the new customs data sharing arrangements, the key element of the Windsor framework is a distinction between a green lane in the Irish Sea with no border controls for goods entering Northern Ireland for final consumption there in Northern Ireland and the red lane with EU customs and sanitary and phytosanitary procedures for those goods entering Northern Ireland but at risk of entering the EU single market. Together with the so-called ‘Stormont break’, allowing for Members of the Northern Ireland Assembly to stop in exceptional circumstances future regulatory divergences introduced by the EU. This joint understanding gives us reasons to believe that an important turn of a page can happen in the EU-UK relations. Moreover, we hope to see power-sharing returning to Northern Ireland so that we can all properly celebrate the 25 years of the Good Friday Agreement. Therefore, as rapporteur for the implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement, I propose to the European Parliament that we warmly welcome the announced Windsor framework and, to that effect, I table a few amendments updating the report in respect of this important development. Furthermore, I would like to warmly congratulate Vice President Maroš Šefčovič and all his team for this remarkable political achievement. One last word on citizens’ rights, a top priority for this Parliament. We welcome the UK establishment of the EU settlement scheme, under which 7 million European citizens have asked for the recognition of their residence rights. 55% of those got the permanent settled status. But however, we note that 39% of the applicants – about 2.7 million – only got the so-called ‘pre-settled status’. So we will monitor the situation to ensure that they get the permanent status as soon as they fulfil the legal requirements. And, finally, we still ask the British Government to provide a document serving as physical proof of residence rights so people don’t have to face practical difficulties in their daily life. So improvements are still needed for sure, but I believe that hope should be the right tone for today’s debate.

Mr President, this debate on the creation of an independent body for ethics in the European institutions should not be necessary. The President of the European Commission made this proposal at the very beginning of her term of office and the European Parliament made a concrete proposal more than a year and a half ago. It should not be necessary to remind the Commission and the Council of all this today, following a corruption scandal that makes everything more urgent. But, in the meantime, little or nothing has happened and statements of sympathy for the idea, such as those made by the Commission, are always accompanied by a long list of conceptual objections, legal difficulties, model divergences, discussion of competences and doubts, even, about the resources to be allocated to the new entity. Some of these issues will no doubt deserve serious consideration and need reasonable compromise, but they cannot become insurmountable barriers, because that would give a sign of a lack of political will to move forward and do what needs to be done. The truth is that today, even more urgently, we need an interinstitutional agreement, which will lead to the creation of this unique and independent entity for ethics, with the means to assess conflicts of interest, to verify compliance with the rules of transparency and codes of conduct, and with the power to issue reasoned recommendations. This is part of the response needed to regain citizens' trust and to address the problems of lack of transparency in the European institutions. You can't keep a postponed promise.

The next item is Question Time to the Commission under Rule 137 of the Rules of Procedure on the enhanced enlargement policy of the European Union for the Western Balkans. I therefore welcome Commissioner Várhelyi to this Question Time. As you know, this question time will last about 90 minutes. There will be one minute to ask the question, two minutes for the answer, 30 seconds for a supplementary question and two minutes for the answer. I would like to remind colleagues that any supplementary question will only be allocated if it is strictly related to the main question and does not consist of a new question. If you wish to ask a question, we invite you to register your request now by using the catch-the-eye function on your voting machine after you have inserted your voting card. During Question Time, speeches will be made from your seat and I invite all speakers to respect the allocated speaking time. Colleagues may need a few moments to register the question request via the voting mechanism. I would therefore ask you to submit your request now so that we can start our debate.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, freedom of movement for people is one of the most important concrete advantages of European citizenship, and citizens know and recognise it well. But mobility must not jeopardise the exercise of voting rights and political participation by European citizens who make use of their freedom to reside in countries other than their country of origin. That is why the European Parliament is today calling on the Commission and the Council to take measures to remove barriers and facilitate the right of immigrants to vote in European elections. Automatic census mechanisms, early voting mechanisms, postal voting can make all the difference for many immigrants and other mobile citizens. Information measures on political participation rights at the time of registration, where possible in an accessible language, and awareness-raising campaigns are also very necessary and urgent. We are still in time to have more immigrant citizens voting in the next European elections, but for that we need to do, and do now what has not yet been done.

The debate is closed. I am sorry to say to those young people in the gallery who have just arrived that the sitting is now suspended. We will come back at noon for the votes. (The sitting was suspended at 11.36)

Madam President, today the European Parliament once again fulfils its role of carrying out democratic scrutiny of the activity of the European Investment Bank, with the report under discussion covering the year 2021. A very difficult year, still marked by the impact of the pandemic on our societies and economies. But 2021 also reconfirmed the decisive role of the European Investment Bank in supporting the European economy and European public policies, in particular through emergency financing, supporting economic recovery and helping small and medium-sized enterprises. It is now necessary for the EIB to continue its efforts to ensure a geographical balance of financing and a special focus on regions that are less attractive for investment. At the same time, it must continue to assume itself as the Climate Bank in Europe. Already in my previous report, for which I was rapporteur, I advocated strengthening the capital of the European Investment Bank. I believe that after the invasion of Ukraine, this challenge is even more urgent than ever to be able to leverage investments in Europe.