What Clara spoke about.

Madam President, Commissioner Valean, replacing Commissioner Sinkevicius, ladies and gentlemen: firstly, I would like to thank the shadow rapporteurs from all the political groups for their good cooperation, because sometimes it has not been easy, but with this report we have reached a good agreement, which I think is balanced. Ladies and gentlemen, despite advances in the aquaculture sector and funding from the European Union, our aquaculture sector is far from reaching its full growth potential and meeting the growing demand for marine food products. The Union imports more than 70% of the seafood it consumes and I have to tell you something, ladies and gentlemen: I would like these foods to come from Member States of the European Union, where we apply the highest food safety and quality standards in the world. To achieve this, we call on the Member States and the Commission to resolutely address the main problems facing the sector, which are often discussed but not sufficiently addressed. We propose solutions both in the short and medium term, including measures on organic aquaculture, but also on other aquaculture models that are equally sustainable and that should play a key role in the sector's expected growth in line with the transition towards a more sustainable food system in Europe. First of all, I would like to highlight the need for a predictable, streamlined and business-friendly legal framework in Europe, taking into account the three pillars of sustainability: economic, social and environmental. This is the only way to develop the growth potential of the sector and is essential to be able to offer sustainable and quality food, reduce our dependence on aquatic food imports and create more jobs in the European Union, especially in coastal regions. In addition, I would like to draw attention to the fact that the aquaculture sector can contribute to providing ecosystem services to society, and that the farming of algae, for example, or other aquatic products, can contribute to the decarbonisation of the European Union economy and to mitigating the fight against climate change. Freshwater aquaculture is very important in many rural regions of Europe. I would therefore also like to stress that, in relation to this aspect, we should be working more on traceability, ecological business models and fish welfare, which are also important factors. Multiannual national strategic plans should take into account the main obstacles to the development of the sector's potential and recognise the need to allocate more space to aquaculture. Coordination with national, regional and local public administrations with competences in the development of aquaculture is very necessary to streamline national legislation and develop guidelines in the legal framework that are useful to the sector. Another problem that I would like to draw attention to is the availability of sustainable food ingredients for EU aquaculture. This is one of the key elements where the sector can fully contribute to the objectives of the Green Deal. I conclude, Honourable Members: There are many elements. One of them is the situation that cormorants are generating. The only thing I say to you here, in relation to this paragraph - and it is well reflected in the report - is that it is a problem and we must be courageous. We must engage it in the debate and seek solutions. I hope there will be broad support for the report.

Mr. President, I want to join the public recognition of firefighters, public forces and people who have helped us throughout this summer to alleviate the effects of the fires, to end these fires. Ladies and gentlemen, since February, in the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, I have been calling for a genuine debate on drought. We are now in it, unfortunately, when it is affecting the whole of Europe; Not to the south of Europe, not to Spain alone, to the Mediterranean countries, but, unfortunately, to the whole of Europe. In a report prepared by the Commission, it says that 47% of the territory is on drought alert and 17% on alert. Therefore, we have almost two thirds in a regrettable situation in the face of drought, which is also the cause of fires, but, Commissioner, we have regulatory action in the European Green Deal, but direct action is needed now, immediately, to start the fires as early as next summer. I would like to call on all groups to join forces in a joint, far-sighted, non-partisan resolution and to resolve the situation together. And, ladies and gentlemen, farmers are not the enemy, they have to work with us to solve these situations.

Mr President, with this proposal we Europeans are no longer complicit in the destruction of forests: accomplices unknowingly, with our consumption. This proposal for a regulation seeks to curb the effect of consumption of certain products in the EU on global deforestation; To this end, the imposition of requirements on these products for their introduction and sale on the European market is an important and necessary measure. Extending protection to other ecosystems must be a priority, as well as obtaining an adequate definition of "forest degradation" that serves to better protect our planet's forests. The Commission's proposal contains six important raw materials, but we need to extend this proposal to other ecosystems and new raw materials as soon as possible. Transparency in supply chains, the obligation of due diligence, is also very important for this, although we must avoid duplication of obligations and reduce administrative burdens.

Madam President, Commissioner, thank you to the rapporteurs, Mrs Katainen and especially Carmen Avram, from my political group, for the work done. We have to welcome the proposal for a European Union Forest Strategy for 2030: I consider it a very important strategic instrument to achieve our commitments related to climate change mitigation and adaptation, biodiversity conservation and restoration, and the promotion of the circular bioeconomy and support for rural development. The importance given to the multifunctionality of forests in this strategy is important, although they will only be achieved if economic and social aspects are integrated into them. I would also like to stress that there is no mention of environmental issues of major relevance to Europe, such as desertification or abandonment of forest land, in addition to issues such as forest fires or pests. They should have had more attention and concreteness. This is an ambitious forestry strategy in many respects and action is now needed to ensure that these objectives are actually achieved. Finally, it is necessary to strike a balance between the environmental, social and economic aspects of forest management, maintaining and respecting the diversity of forests and forest management practices of the Member States of the European Union, while ensuring a coordinated and harmonised approximation of the European Union.

Madam President, as everyone has repeated, most of us have a moral and ethical obligation to ensure food security worldwide, not just in Europe. But we are seeing that this war in Ukraine is bringing a lot of problems, especially for those productions to arrive. The change in transport routes, especially the blockade of ports, is bringing with it that this great production obviously does not arrive. Therefore, welcome are the solidarity runners. Let's see if these solidarity corridors work well. We have already seen a good result in June, when there has been a 25% increase in Ukrainian production, but they are not enough, because they cannot stay in Europe, they cannot stay in Poland, in Romania, they have to leave. We need these products to reach Africa and those countries so that they do not suffer the great famine that everyone announces to us. But we have to improve too. Customs in Poland and Romania are bringing a delay in transport of eight days of logistics. Therefore, let us fix that situation and, above all, let us also protect and help European farmers.

Madam President, I wanted to congratulate Mrs Roose, Pietro Bartolo and the other rapporteurs on this Article 17 report, because I think they have done a great job. What is said in that report is reality. In other words, it is not known what criteria the Member States have for determining the allocation of quotas. And a very clear example is the bluefin tuna recovery plan in my country: the distribution of quotas during that recovery plan meant that, in the end, smaller fishing, small-scale fishing, was adversely affected, especially small-scale gear. It is therefore necessary to add transparency to the system. It cannot be that every year in December a TAC is made, that it is distributed to the States and that we do not know what the criteria are. Therefore, we need a much more transparent system that benefits artisanal fishing clearly, not just speeches.

Madam President, Commissioner, in order for there to be responsibility and for the reduction in the percentage you want to reach 50% to be real, viable and feasible alternatives must be made available to farmers from the moment the reduction occurs. Why not advance the new regulations on new cultivation techniques, which would be a good way out, along with pesticides or other alternatives? Take that initiative forward or take other initiatives, but, while carrying out the reduction, they have to make other products available.

Madam President, Commissioner Kyriakides, welcome to Question Time. The Commission has announced that we will soon have a regulation ─ I thought it would be a directive, but apparently it is a regulation ─ on a more sustainable use of pesticides, that is, on their reduction, as promised in the European Green Deal. This is a demand from society, no doubt, but, from the outset, I do have to tell you that we are concerned, because the problem for farmers is not the reduction of pesticides, but the lack of alternatives to be able to carry it out. I would therefore like it to be clear here today, in this speech or in my colleagues' next speech, what the percentage reduction of pesticides is going to be and what alternatives the Commission is going to make available to farmers so that plant health is not harmed.

Madam President, Commissioner, I believe that this is a very interesting report, with 93 points, all of which are of great interest. I would like to stress that the most important thing in today's debate is to put the islands at the centre. We need a European pact for islands because, if not, there are no specific policies. The only one there was the POSEI, and we saw in the reform how it wanted to cut its budget. Coming soon, in 2027, I don't know what's going to happen: whether it will be a policy within the CAP or a state policy. The islands have characteristics and a situation that require specific support, whether the outermost islands or not. I am from Spain, with the Balearic Islands and the Canary Islands, outermost, and require specific measures. Let us also be sensitive to tomorrow's Objective 55 package, which is not at all sensitive, by the way, to these islands.

Mr President, the blue economy represents a large segment of our economy, it affects industries and sectors. I think that this view made by my colleague Isabel Carvalhais is very timely, and I would like to congratulate her on it, because it completes the part of the Commission communication where little was said about fisheries and aquaculture. I think it's important, and over the last decade we've seen significant steps taken to modernize and diversify these sectors, including the more traditional ones. But, without a doubt, it is important to understand that, within this broad segment of the blue economy, some sectors can sometimes cause conflicts with others, and it must be corrected. I therefore believe that there are many opportunities in this own-initiative report to analyse a more sustainable blue economy. I regret that on social media the media has only talked about trawling. This report is much broader, much more comprehensive, and I do not want it to be clouded by a fight against trawling. I think it's a big mistake.

Mr President, entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship are very important elements for a society to move forward. In order for a society to achieve its competitiveness index, as in the European Union, it is essential that this momentum be given. Also for job creation. But here we see again how there is no gender equality: There is a big gap and a big difference between men's and women's entrepreneurship. Precisely because, among other things, it costs a lot for women to get adequate funding and women-led companies still account for a small share of investments. There is also very little representation in business associations. In short, I think Mrs Weiss's is a great report to echo, to spread the word that we have a serious problem here: that there is no gender equality and that there is a gap that we have to solve for the sake of European society and for the creation of jobs.

Madam President, Commissioner, I would like to congratulate Mrs Schmiedtbauer and all the rapporteurs, especially Eric Andrieu, from my political group, who have done a great job with this report, which concludes here with tomorrow's vote on the new EU action plan for organic farming, which is a continuation of the previous one, which lasted from 2014 to 2020, and which sets out 23 new proposals. I believe that the development of organic farming has been evident in the last decade: It has grown by 66% (still perhaps a low percentage for what we would like) and 8.5% of the area is dedicated to it. I am very proud of my region, Andalusia, where we dedicate 23% of the agricultural area to it, that is, we will soon be on the horizon of that 25% without even a Green Deal. There is a lot of inequality between regions and between countries. There is no doubt that consumption must be strengthened and knowledge increased. But I believe, as the report rightly states, that development and growth must be linked to the market-based approach.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to say that we are all appalled by the latest massacre we have seen, that of Bucha, and by so many others. A few months ago we were commemorating in the European institutions that the success of the European Union – the great success – was that there had been no war for 70 years. We were commemorating it and saying: If the European Union has succeeded, it has been by avoiding war and changing it for dialogue and peace. Well, we have on our continent – not in the European Union, but on the European continent – a bloody war, a tremendous, unequal, unbalanced invasion. And from day one we are aware of it. And diplomacy, ladies and gentlemen, does not serve here, does not serve. We must act as the Commission is doing, with all possible measures. And we will probably have to continue to articulate this. I want to strongly support the European Commission, I want us to congratulate ourselves on this European Union and I also want to stress the importance of the unity of all, of all European countries. It is very important that no one leaves the agreement. That is what will give us strength in the face of a dictator like Putin, in the face of a universal massacre, for which he will have to sit before the Hague Tribunal at last. I would therefore like to thank Mr Borrell for his words and speech. Tall and clear, as always, loud and clear, saying the things to be heard and to be heard in this House, because we all have to internalise it. The European Union is our great strength and, as you rightly said, if we were not here, if it did not exist, it would have to be invented. Of course, Mr. Borrell. That's the key to everything: actions against Putin, against Russia, but above all our unity and our strength in joint measures and the strengthening of European institutions.

Madam President, Commissioner, this is a debate in which we wanted to call for the urgency of an action plan in the face of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The first thing, obviously, is to meet the humanitarian demand, of course, of Ukrainians; But secondly, we have to ensure food supplies in Europe, of course, and also in the rest of the world. That is why we welcome the Commission's action plan, which is along the right lines. I congratulate the Commission on having put forward some interesting measures, such as putting ICES areas into production, such as activating the crisis reserve. More measures will probably have to be activated, Commissioner, for all sectors: farmers, fishermen, livestock farmers and aquaculture farmers. All four sectors are equally affected and we must therefore ensure that supply. Here the problem is the prices and costs that farmers are suffering, which make farms unsustainable. If we do not help farmers, if we do not help fishermen, if we do not help farmers or aquaculture farmers, they will probably leave their farms and abandon their boats, because the current production costs cannot be continued. Therefore, I think they are a good range of measures, but more will have to be taken. And now I put to you a question on the motion for a resolution: It is necessary that we unanimously adopt the motion for a resolution tomorrow, that we join the groups that have not joined the signature and that we leave other things behind. This is not about questioning the European Green Deal, but about increasing flexibility to meet food supply requirements; The rest are political strategies that we must not fall into.

Madam President, Commissioner, we are talking about a report, I am saying this because, listening to some of the honourable Members... This is a report on the welfare of farm animals. Nothing to do with transport or slaughter; those are other reports that we have already discussed. I think it is a good report, Mr Decerle, and I would like to congratulate you on your work, as well as my colleague Carmen Avram and all the rapporteurs who have worked on it. The report essentially concludes on a number of issues that I would like to highlight: the current regulations must be updated, without a doubt: the Commission has already said this on several occasions. We have had the regulations for fifteen years and these regulations must be adapted to the new demands of society, as well as to scientific and technological advances and good livestock practices. I therefore believe that this is a good report and we hope that the Commission will take it into account. I reiterate that the modifications must be built on solid scientific bases that, of course, must be accompanied beforehand by an impact study that includes the changes that are introduced in the regulations. In conclusion, I would like to point out that it is probably necessary to set adaptation deadlines and take into account the competitiveness of the entire food chain, but especially of farmers.

Madam President, Commissioner, I would like to thank the two rapporteurs, Mr Buda and my colleague Isabel Carvalhais: I think they have done an impressive, very difficult job during these 18 months, and I want to support the agreement of the rapporteurs, and to support the agreement of the rapporteurs we have to vote on the two amendments that have been tabled by both; I say this to complete that agreement, which is a balanced agreement. Livestock farming is essential for the economic development of many rural areas and districts in the European Union, and the transport of live animals is a necessary activity for the livestock sector. The animals must be moved to the slaughterhouse, and these movements are largely due to the organisation of this sector itself, which is adapted to the preferences and habits of meat consumption in the different Member States; It is also very important to highlight the importance of relocation for what is genetic improvement. It is therefore important that we apply the current rules, which are not being applied - and that is a big mistake and a failure of the system - and it needs to be improved. The European Commission has made an interesting announcement: improving maritime transport; it needs to be improved, but not banned, at all: I think it is necessary and essential. I do not question animal welfare, I am in favour of improvements in animal welfare, but I also want the farmer to be able to have optimal conditions so that his exploitation is competitive. And that is why I ask that the new rules, Commissioner, be scientifically based, not ideologically based, and appropriately adapted to what each species needs. For this reason, prior scientific information for the adaptation of regulations or their change is essential, and that is what I would like to ask the Commission to do. And let us not forget to vote on the two amendments to complete the great political agreement of this House.

Mr President, Vice-President, Commissioner, this is a very important debate - all of you have highlighted it - the basis of which is an agreement, a very important agreement, with the Digital Services Act. When there is a great agreement, even if there are nuances, that is the result of a great work. I think the work done by the rapporteurs is unbeatable, but let me highlight the very great work done by my colleague Christel Schaldemose, because it was not easy and, in record time, he has achieved a great deal of agreement. That I think is a success and a success for everyone. We start from there. Regulating the digital universe is something very complex, without a doubt, ladies and gentlemen, because of the collision of interests and because it is a market that offers opportunities and challenges that we must correct. We are under our obligation. Companies want regulation and clear rules. Users or consumers need protection. Digital platforms have become – some of them – an essential use element of our lives; this is undeniable. But the dimension does not have to be the problem to have digital security and put citizens at the centre of the debate, which is what we have done. This is a very important success for all, even if there are deficits that will have to be corrected. And we have a great opportunity, also, with the amendments, to improve some aspects. I'm done. I think we're really dealing with the regulation of digital services by putting people at the center.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we ended the debate on a lengthy process with one of the most profound reforms, in my opinion, of agricultural policy, which manages a third of the Community budget, and possibly – we will see what happens – one of the shortest, 2023-2027. This reform has added to income support, which is very important in agriculture, increased social, environmental and climate ambition, and this Parliament must be proud to have increased social ambition with social conditionality. There is the recognition of the role of rural women – by the way, very few have mentioned it, perhaps no one – that the CAP does for the first time, greater support for young farmers and an extension of the redistributive payment, as well as greater climate ambition with reinforced conditionality, the support rate of the new schemes and 35% of the second pillar measures. Subsidiarity has been strengthened, and this Parliament has helped to ensure that it does not lose its Community status. The European level is the area of the CAP; agricultural policy is not just another policy: guarantees food and cohesion to the territory. That is why it needs greater social support and all the support of this House, and that is why I call on all groups, all honourable Members, to vote in favour of this reform. Let us not think that, if these regulations are not supported, the current CAP will follow; It's not true, it's a lie: will end on 31 December 2022. Therefore, let us not deceive farmers and bet on a European agriculture, let us give security to our farmers by voting 'yes' now to both of them.

Madam President, today we conclude, with this debate, the European Parliament's opinion on the Farm to Fork Strategy, and legislative documents will arrive in the coming months. First of all, I would like to thank all the speakers and our technical teams for their excellent willingness to work together. I would like to point out that the potential problems and difficulties that these changes will generate have been identified. That is why we believe it is important for the Commission, Commissioner, to draw up impact assessments of all measures taken on the basis of this strategy and to incorporate those already drawn up. The end result is not what we socialists would have wanted, but it is where we have found the equilibrium agreement, and we have added important elements. It is essential that the impact of the Strategy does not prevent agricultural markets from remaining stable, with fair prices throughout the food chain, starting with farmers, and hoping that the consumer, that all of us, will not get prices impossible to assume. We are also concerned that, as an unintended effect, the Strategy is dragging down the competitiveness of European production vis-à-vis imports from third countries, whose producers are not subject to these requirements, as we know well in this House. In short, we must make important commitments in agriculture to achieve good results in our fight against climate change, undoubtedly, as is the case with other sectors. Hence the importance of the European Green Deal. This process must be accompanied by alternatives and public support to achieve a just green transition for European agriculture. Otherwise, it won't be possible.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the European Union's relationship with the United States is, without a doubt, very important to us. But, ladies and gentlemen, we are already of legal age and we have to bet on ourselves and have a foreign policy of our own. The main objectives of the European Union must be our international priorities. We need a clear strategy. President Biden, for some of us - I think for most of us - was an initial euphoria, but after a few months we are seeing that it is a great disappointment. The "America First» continues. Therefore, the European Union cannot be expectant, but we must seize the opportunity and set our own course in foreign policy, and also in trade and defence policy. Also, ladies and gentlemen, the departure of the United Kingdom is having an impact on these relations. In short, we must have in Europe our own interests and a clear strategy for international policy and also for transatlantic policy.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to mention at the opening of this plenary session what is happening in my region, in Andalusia: a really exceptional and large fire in Sierra Bermeja, in Malaga. Already, unfortunately, a firefighter has died; There are two also very serious. There are more than 1,600 people evicted from their homes and almost 8,000 hectares burned. I want - and I finish briefly, Mr President - to acknowledge, greet and convey the affection of this House to the family of the firefighter, to all the families who are suffering this serious fire in Malaga, in Sierra Bermeja, to all the technical means that are fighting for it and, of course, to the municipalities, the Junta de Andalucía and the Government of Spain.

Madam President, Commissioner, Minister, Antarctica is certainly an area to be protected for the environmental reasons put forward by all previous speakers. There are the many reasons. Therefore, what we want is for this resolution to give the support and political support that I hope will provide a definitive impetus for the declaration of these marine protected areas. The Antarctic Ocean is rich in marine life, including species of interest to the fishing industry such as krill or southern hake. But there are other species that have been and continue to be fished commercially in Antarctic waters without being properly documented, such as mackerel icefish and Antarctic rock cod. There is still significant illegal fishing in the area. Fishing should only be carried out on the basis of sound scientific advice if it is to be sustainable in the long term. Black hake plays a key predatory role in Antarctic ecosystems. Endangering any of these species can have unexpected consequences for these organisms. Illegal fishing is a global problem that has proved difficult to eliminate and the Antarctic Ocean is difficult to monitor. Therefore, given the geographical isolation of the Antarctic Ocean and the harsh weather conditions, control operations in the area are complex and difficult. Illegal fishing activities in Antarctica pose a serious threat to sustainable fisheries and the resilience of marine ecosystems. That is why it is so necessary to declare these maritime protected areas and thus ensure the conservation and recovery of the natural heritage and marine biodiversity in the area.

Madam President, Commissioner, I would first like to congratulate the negotiating team, the rapporteur, Mr Mato, and most especially, among all the shadow rapporteurs, Manuel Pizarro, our shadow rapporteur, who has done a great job with the entire negotiating team. We are finally voting on the approval of this Fund, the smallest of the European Structural and Investment Funds, which we hope will, of course, be more useful in this period and better meet the demands of the fisheries sector, aquaculture and the blue economy. I say better because the Fund that has just been concluded has been downright nefarious. And I have to say it as I'm sorry, because I think I had an excess of bureaucratization that hasn't helped at all. Simplifying this I think will help. I also welcome the compensation for the ORs, for the Canary Islands, in my country – in Spain. And I understand that this new EMFAF will contribute to improving the working and living conditions of all fishermen. And that – if only for that – is worth it.