Speeches

On October 7, the terrorist group Hamas committed the worst crime in Israel's history. More than 1,400 civilians, most of them women, children and the elderly, were killed in the most brutal ways possible. The mass murders, unfortunately, are not something the Israelis have not already experienced. Since the beginning of its history, Israel has had to fight for bare survival, and it is fortunate that we have not had the opportunity to see what would have likely happened if Israel had lost at least one of the wars imposed on it. Today, we see that what is happening in the Middle East is not just an Israeli problem. Islamist terrorists have been killing people on the streets of European cities for years. Illegal migrants, who some want to let into European territory, are celebrating Hamas' crimes in camps. We see that some here on the left can hardly wait for the opportunity to relativize what happened and try to equate guilt. That is why it should be made clear once again: ‘No, but the sole culprit for this is Hamas’, which has killed and masqueraded a huge number of civilians, and is still using civilians as a living shield today, which is disgusting. Ladies and gentlemen, it is normal and humane to support Israel in eradicating terrorism, of course with respect to all norms of international humanitarian law. We must also stop illegal immigration that threatens the security of our citizens, without a fig in our pockets.

Dear Vice-President, Commissioner, Rapporteur, colleague and colleague, the political crisis in Montenegro caused by anti-European forces trying to form a pro-Serbian and pro-Russian government is in fact just a sequence of political chaos that lasts from the 2020 elections until today. Since then, Western powers, including the European Union, have largely supported those who are committed to European values only in words, but not in reality. In reality, however, we are witnessing faster and faster srbization of Montenegrin institutions with the consequence of the gradual suppression of the identity of Montenegrins as a separate nation. A certain formation of a government into which radical pro-Serbian and openly pro-Russian political forces would directly enter would constitute cementing this process. With the crown in the next census as the last step in deconstructing independent Montenegro. I'm afraid Mr. Spajic doesn't have the strength to resist it himself and that's why we need to help him. If this development were indeed to occur, the main cause would be in a series of failed moves by the European Union and other Western powers from 2020 to the present day. That should be clear to everyone. Let us be open, we are on a step towards the creation of a mini Belarus in the heart of Europe under the control of Vučić and Russia. Please, wake up and stop it until it's too late.

. Dear Vice-President of the European Parliament, Dear Vice-President of the European Commission, colleague and colleague, the European Union needs a uniform approach when it comes to lodging applications and introducing a digital visa. This will increase the security of the Schengen area by reducing the risk of visa fraud and forgery and by facilitating the process of checking them at the borders. Given the security challenges facing Europe, I strongly support the modernisation and further digitalisation of the visa procedure in order to better control who enters the territory of the European Union. How important it is to know who we are letting into the EU, unfortunately, we see every day. The number of recorded irregular attempts to enter is at a record level, migrants in a camp in Greece are shouting at Hamas, and migration is increasingly proving to be a potential source of terrorism. In the last few days alone, we have witnessed two terrorist attacks in Belgium and France linked to Islamism. That is why we need a comprehensive European response to migration through a final agreement on the Pact on Migration and Asylum, which will contain instruments to prevent uncontrolled and mass entry into the European Union, as well as a mechanism for the accelerated deportation of those illegally staying on the territory of the Union. Only in this way will we be able to protect our European way of life.

Dear Chairman, the four dead, this is the epilogue of the visit of a Serbian terrorist group that attacked members of the police force in Kosovo. Serbian methods of attacks involving blockades and armed attacks on police are irresistibly reminiscent of the bloody raids carried out by Chetnik groups at the beginning of the Serbian aggression against Croatia. Unfortunately, a lot of evidence indicates that this terrorist attack was carried out under the auspices of Belgrade, and that Serbian attackers on the territory of Serbia were targeted and systematically trained to carry out the terrorist act. Speaking recently about the Kosovo report, I said that I hope that the European Union has learned something from the failed policies of the past and will stop Serbian hegemony before it is completely out of control, which unfortunately is not the case. Unfortunately, the Union has been lenient towards Serbia too many times and now we are again witnessing that the policy of Serbian hegemony destabilizes not only Kosovo but also neighbouring countries such as Montenegro. Therefore, if it is established that the Serbian government was behind this attack, the European Union must sanction Serbia most severely and thus prevent the destabilization of Southeast Europe. Aleksandar Vucic is responsible for this.

Dear Chair, Commissioners, colleagues, shortages of medicines pose a growing threat to public health in the EU, especially in less developed and smaller Member States. The consequences of such shortages include reduced quality of treatment and create inequalities between patients, depending on the country in which they live. Between 2017 and 2019, notifications of shortages of medicinal products in the Union increased by as much as 60%, with medicinal products for the treatment of cancer, infections and nervous system disorders accounting for more than half of the medicines that are insufficient, which is absolutely inadmissible. I hope and believe that the revision of the EU pharmaceutical legislation will help to solve the problem of genuine shortages at all times. With the new legislation, we need to improve the monitoring and mitigation of shortages of medicines, especially critical ones. Provisions requiring pharmaceutical companies to report shortages of medicines more quickly and to put in place plans to prevent shortages are generally a step in the right direction, although there is certainly room for improvement, especially in terms of deadlines. In doing so, it is essential that all citizens of the Union have equal access to medicines and not that we have first- and second-class citizens as is the case now, which is in any case unacceptable. On the other hand, everything that has happened in the last three years has shown that the EU must seriously work on its own strategic autonomy in the field of health if we do not want someone else to decide our lives and our health in the future. A few decades ago, Europe had a very strong position in health research and innovation, but to a large extent lost this advantage. Today, despite some exceptions, most innovations and innovative companies are located elsewhere. The EU is increasingly lagging behind in the development and production of innovative medicines compared to the US. If we take into account China's explosive growth, we see that the situation is extremely worrying and dangerous in the long run. We need to create an environment that attracts and does not create barriers for manufacturers of new innovative medicines, especially in challenging areas such as rare childhood diseases where we are weakest. This includes incentives, protection of intellectual property, but also industrial policy measures that go far beyond the pharmaceutical package that we have been discussing so much recently. The bureaucratization and regulatory burdens that are unfortunately increasing must not become so great as to undermine the foundations of our health care, reduce the availability of medicines, thus endangering people's lives. Overall, I think the pharmaceutical reform proposed by the European Commission is a step in the right direction. I think it addresses those key issues that we have to face, but, of course, there is room for improvement. However, what is particularly important is that this is not the only solution, that there are other areas of European legislation that need to be considered, such as the transparency directives, such as the revision of the rules on cross-border healthcare, in order to create what we want, namely the single market, a truly single market for medicines in the European Union and to enable all citizens of the European Union to have access to medicines in the same way at the same time. We still have a lot to do. The European Union can indeed provide added value compared to the situation we have now, when much is still fragmented, but we all need to work together to truly enable our patients to get the medicines they need, to get the best quality medicines as soon as possible and to have the right to equal healthcare for all.

Dear Chair, we will all agree that we want European citizens to breathe clean air in the future. For example, the introduction of a mechanism of regular review of air quality standards in line with the latest scientific evidence should be welcomed. On the other hand, when setting targets, we must be ambitious and realistic, not guided by populism and propose drastic changes that will do more harm than good. The binding targets we set at Union level must be achievable in reality, not just on paper. European industry is currently facing a difficult economic situation and increasingly stringent rules on CO2 emissions. Imposing new rules that will lead to the shutdown of individual industrial plants or their transfer to, for example, China will lead to the collapse of the living standards of our citizens, and will not result in the desired reduction of emissions. Also, I am against the ban on cars in entire city districts and city centers. Instead of bans, we need incentives for our citizens and investment in public transport. We also have to reward those who pollute less. In the current situation, we need to give European companies a wind in their backs, not put a knife in their backs, which some here obviously want.

–The Honourable Chair, the COVID-19 pandemic has revealed structural shortcomings that make it difficult for the European Union to respond to the crisis in a swift, efficient and coordinated manner. Let us recall the scenes of empty shelves in shops from the beginning of the pandemic, shortages and closed borders of Member States. The unprecedented crisis led to a chaotic initial response from Member States that lacked coordination and solidarity, without taking into account the devastating impact of the restriction on the proper functioning of the internal market. We want to avoid such a scenario in the future and that is why I am pleased that today we are discussing an instrument that will guarantee the normal functioning of the Single Market also in the conditions of crisis. The activation of this mechanism will prohibit Member States from imposing restrictions on exports of products to other Member States, but also from imposing restrictions on the movement of workers. In order to make the Single Market resilient also in times of crisis, it is important to preserve the freedoms of movement guaranteed by the founding Treaties. On the other hand, I particularly welcome the creation of strategic reserves aimed at addressing the challenges of commodity shortages. In addition, through joint procurement with priority delivery of goods and services also in the event of a crisis, the European Union will improve its mechanism of action and prevent the recurrence of empty shelves in shops. This means that in crises, companies operating in Europe will have to deliver the necessary goods to Member States as a matter of priority, which is normal and of course in the interest of all. Ultimately, this act guarantees solidarity between Member States, which was challenged as never before at the beginning of the pandemic. I therefore welcome the adoption of this report and call for further building a resilient, single market for citizens and businesses.

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 crisis, as many as 6 out of 10 consumers have encountered financial difficulties. In such circumstances, we need strong mechanisms to protect citizens from over-indebtedness, and the current rules do not provide sufficient certainty to consumers in this regard. That is why I am proud that tomorrow we will finally vote on the Consumer Credit Directive. The new rules will no longer allow banks to send unsolicited credit cards to home addresses or unilaterally increase the limits of permissible and tacit overdraft. The novelty is that banks will not be able to request a refund of tacit overdrafts from citizens without notice and without giving the possibility of instalment repayment. In particular, banks will have to inform citizens in advance of any planned reduction or elimination of tacit overdrafts and leave them the possibility to repay in instalments in 12 equal instalments, and Member States may also introduce stricter consumer protection rules. This is certainly an improvement, since a study carried out by the European Parliament on my proposal has shown that over 340 million bank accounts of citizens in the European Union are burdened with the problems of the so-called minuses and that overdrafts are one of the most expensive forms of debt for citizens. In addition, it is important that consumers continue to have a period of fourteen days within which to withdraw from the credit agreement without giving any reason. Finally, it is important to note that this is the first piece of legislation to codify at European level the right to be forgotten and to be protected from discrimination for cancer survivors. Overall, this directive is indeed a step in the right direction for consumers and I therefore call on you to support it.

Dear Chair, Commissioners, colleagues, the full potential of AI applications, especially generative ones, has not yet been realised. While we are aware of the obvious benefits that the use of artificial intelligence brings, such as better traffic regulation, a more precise diagnosis of malignant diseases or a more rational use of energy resources, we must not forget about the dangers and its abuses. In order to prevent the possibility of manipulation of artificial intelligence, we need to regulate it well. That is why I welcome the fact that we are finalising the work on the first European AI law that will regulate the actions of generative AI such as chatGPT by preventing the generation of illegal content through IP infringement and by informing users that content has been generated through AI. It is justifiable to expect that in the future generative AI will increasingly be used in medicine, the creative industries or even public administration, and we should not be afraid of this. However, we must insist that, in such circumstances, the citizens of the European Union are protected from all the risks that the use of AI entails. We also need to ensure that our entrepreneurs can reap the benefits of AI to create innovation and safely test it under controlled conditions. Research has shown that generative AI can raise global GDP by as much as 7 percent in the next 10 years, and we need to make the most of that. We don't need to be afraid of artificial intelligence, but we need to regulate it properly. In doing so, we must do our utmost to make the European standards we are now establishing global standards and I support all the Commission’s efforts in this regard.

Colleague Glavak, you spoke, and I agree, about the impact of artificial intelligence on the economy and various segments of life, but also the fact that there are great fears that artificial intelligence could lead to both, and in general automation and the development of technologies can lead to the loss of many jobs because many jobs will become unnecessary. Are you afraid of such a scenario? What do you think we can do, that public authorities can do to prevent or facilitate this transition to new technologies and prevent many people from losing their jobs and their livelihoods from being threatened?

The Honourable Chair, the aspiration to make Europe the first climate-neutral continent must not be transformed into an extremist green agenda that is economically reversing the European Union. Unfortunately, the data clearly show that Europe is in the process of deindustrialisation. In dramatic geopolitical circumstances, the EU is losing its competitiveness race at global level, mainly due to strong regulatory constraints that are increasingly burdening European farmers, fishers and industry and diverting investments to other parts of the world. If we continue this way, we will destroy a European civilization that has been built for centuries. In addition, if, due to the implementation of such a European Green Deal, production is moved to countries with lower environmental standards than those in the European Union, we will not only not reduce emissions, but will eventually increase them. It is an illusion to expect that producers in third countries will in due course comply with the high environmental standards that apply in the European Union. Therefore, it is in the interest of environmental protection itself to keep production within the EU. Colleagues, in circumstances where the European Union is responsible for less than 9% of the world's CO2 emissions, cannot be the main solution to reduce emissions globally in deindustrialising and destroying the European way of life.

Dear Chairman, the recent decisions of High Representative Schmidt imposing changes to the electoral legislation and the Constitution of the Federation of BiH saved Croats in BiH from the political liquidations prepared for them by the SDA and the DF. In this way, as well as by removing the blockade of the formation of executive power in the Federation, the influence of anti-European fundamentalist forces in Sarajevo was reduced and it was possible for BiH to really move towards European integration. Croats are the constitutive people who most certainly, without a fig in their pocket, want to join the European Union. We hope that now they finally have a partner from the Bosniak side for a rational conversation without attempting to overstate and disenfranchise. The best test of the sincerity of their intentions will be the final reform of the electoral legislation, which should prevent persons without electoral legitimacy, such as Željko Komšić, from ever being elected as false representatives of the Croatian people in the presidency of the state. Ladies and gentlemen, stability and long-term survival, as well as the European path of Bosnia and Herzegovina, can only be achieved by completing the reform of the electoral law that will enable full equality of all three constituent peoples.

After the COVID-19 pandemic, there is a need to draw a line and draw lessons from it, as well as from the Chair, Commissioner, colleagues. That's why it's good to discuss this report today. At the very beginning of the crisis, there is no coordinated response at European level, which has led, among other things, to the closure of the border and the restriction of exports of medical equipment to other Member States. Such a situation was a clear indication of the need for a common European response to health crises. Joint procurement of vaccines is precisely an example of such a response With all the grievances we will hear today, it has enabled smaller, economically less developed Member States, which do not have their own production, to have access to vaccines at the same time as larger and more developed ones. In doing so, we have shown that there are no, and must not be, first- and second-class citizens in the European Union. The pandemic has also shown us the importance of innovation and I think it is very good for our continent that we had a European company that developed a successful vaccine. This shows how important it is for the EU’s global competitiveness and resilience to global crises, as well as its strategic autonomy, to have an enabling framework for research and innovation, with strong intellectual property protection as a necessary precondition. In addition to the above, I would highlight two problems that represent the legacy of the pandemic that we will fight in the years to come. Mental health of young people and long COVID. We need a joint action to invest in healthcare at European level to help the hundreds of thousands of people facing these problems. They should not feel isolated and left behind. It is the responsibility of all Member States to prevent this with maximum assistance from the European level. Finally, I would like to thank the rapporteur for her hard work on this report, which contains all the essential elements and lessons related to COVID-19, and I invite you all to support it.

Dear Chair, Commissioners, colleagues, market uncertainty due to the war in Ukraine, limited availability of raw materials, inflation and rising energy costs have made the European Union less attractive for investment than its global competitors. The wholesale price of gas in the EU increased by more than 1000% between 2019 and 2022, while the increase was 200% in the US and 100% in Japan. Of particular concern is the fact that foreign direct investment inflows to the EU fell by 68% in 2021 compared to 2019, as opposed to an increase of 63% in the US during the same period. Between 2021 and 2022 number Greenfield investment in the EU fell by 15%, compared with an increase of 18% in the US. In such circumstances, the threat of deindustrialisation of Europe has become a reality. The EU has contributed very much to this. This year alone, the European Commission plans to propose 43 new initiatives that create an additional administrative burden for entrepreneurs. In addition, the implementation of such a European Green Deal will make Europe even less competitive and will primarily contribute to job creation in China, not in the European Union. Europe needs to be made attractive for investment again by finally completing the creation of the single market and depriving our entrepreneurs of a number of unnecessary bureaucratic requirements that very often overlap. Next, we need to strengthen the system of incentives in strategic sectors such as the production of medicines and create a better framework for investment in research and development of new technologies. In the end, it is necessary to invest more in the education system in order to make our universities competitive compared to the American ones, which is absolutely not the case today.

Dear Chair, Commissioners, colleagues, antibiotic-resistant bacteria cause more than 670 thousand infections every year, of which approximately 35 thousand people in the European Union die. Antimicrobial resistance is a problem that no Member State can solve on its own and a common European response is necessary, as we have already heard today. Particular emphasis should be placed here on the importance of data sharing in order to have real-time information on AMR and antimicrobial consumption at all levels. This is why it is crucial that we finalise the negotiations as soon as possible and establish a European Health Data Space. Next: It is particularly important to create a European legal framework that will boost research and innovation, as failure to develop and produce effective new antibiotics exacerbates the consequences of antimicrobial resistance. In this regard, I believe that the Commission's proposal to reform pharmaceutical legislation is going in the right direction, but of course improvements are always possible. In addition, it is essential to ensure adequate infrastructure and human resources at Member State level for infection prevention and control and for programmes to improve water, sanitation and hygiene services. Finally, we need to invest further in the prudent use of antimicrobials, the implementation of EU guidelines and the design of measures for healthcare professionals, to ensure that they follow the guidelines on the treatment of common infections.

Dear Vice-President, Commissioner, colleague and colleague, this report is extremely problematic and I cannot support it as it was adopted by the committee responsible. It clearly aims to prevent the protection of Croatian Prošek. Prošek is a traditional sweet dessert wine that is completely different from the Italian prosecco sparkling wine with its color, smell, price and way of consumption. For this reason, it is unacceptable that, through the rules on homonymity, this report seeks to deprive Croatia of its legitimate right to protection of the traditional name prošek. I recall that the European Commission has previously taken the view that homonymity, that is to say, similarity in a name, is not in itself a sufficient factor to reject an application for protection of a traditional term and that two similar names may coexist. This is the diametrical opposite of what is contained in this report. In addition, this report seeks to create a basis for retroactively annulling the European Commission's decision to grant Croatia the protection of the traditional name in a procedure already under way. Prosecco. I would point out here that it would be completely illogical if prosecco enjoyed protection under European law, only because Italy had become a member of the European Union earlier than Croatia, and had thus previously achieved protection of the name of this sparkling wine, and that Croatian Prosecco was denied such protection. That's why I urge everyone to vote tomorrow against the harmful homonymous amendments and reports of such content. Colleagues, Prošek has an invaluable meaning in the centuries-old, historical and oenological tradition of Croatia and it has every right to protect it as its traditional product.

Dear Chairman, different political interests have always intertwined in the area of Southeast Europe. In such circumstances, a clear perspective of Kosovo as an internationally recognised and integrated state is crucial for maintaining the stability of this area. That is why I welcome this report as it calls on those Member States that have not done so to recognise Kosovo without delay. Unfortunately, on the Serbian side, we still do not see a real readiness for a lasting solution to the problem, but only plays, stalling and obstruction at all levels. Therefore, any attempt by Belgrade to create a Serbian state in the country must be prevented. In the end, I have to point out the following. The idea that some geopolitical compensations to Vučić, for example related to Montenegro, can achieve the cooperativeness of the Serbian side, is doomed to failure. I hope that the European Union has learned something from the failed policies of the past and will stop Serbian hegemony in time before it is completely out of control.

Dear Chairman, the fate of missing and forcibly removed persons is still the most difficult issue today regarding the Serbian aggression against the Republic of Croatia. Unfortunately, the fate of 1418 people and the place of burial of the remains of 394 people killed in the Homeland War is still unknown. So far, the Serbian authorities have not shown a sufficiently sincere commitment to resolving the issue of the missing from the Homeland War, and the issue of finding the missing, the issue of respecting the fundamental European values that we often talk about here. That is why it is of the utmost importance that this report encourages Serbia to address the issue of missing persons and achieve concrete results in the identification of mass graves. On the other hand, while the appointment of minority representatives to the Serbian government is a step in the right direction, Serbia still does not guarantee the Croatian minority the same rights as the Serbian minority enjoys in Croatia, which is unacceptable. Finally, it is good that this report sends a strong message to Serbia that their attempts to grant Serbian courts universal jurisdiction over alleged war crimes are absolutely unacceptable. In conclusion, I would like to point out that without resolving all outstanding issues, especially the issue of missing persons, Serbia has no place in the European Union.

Dear Chairman, the recent research by the Joint Research Centre on honey has shown alarming results. As many as 46 percent of the examined samples of honey imported into the European Union are marked as suspicious and do not meet the criteria of the Honey Directive. The study found that non-allowed ingredients such as rice syrups or sugar beet were added to honey. Ever since I started working on the Farm to Fork strategy, I have been continuously warning about the dangers of importing adulterated honey from third countries. Unfortunately, so far, the situation has been such that consumers have encountered unclear indications about the honey mixture when buying honey. At the end of April, the European Commission proposed new rules on honey labelling, correctly establishing that there is a close link between the characteristics and quality of the honey and its origin. However, the Commission's proposal needs to be improved. The buyer has the right to know exactly from which country the honey comes, but also, if it is a mixture of honey, he must know what proportion of honey from which country it comes. I call, therefore, for the Commission’s proposal to be improved and for consumers to be fully informed, which will also protect domestic honey producers from unfair competition from third countries.

Dear Chair, after the world faced a large-scale pandemic three years ago, global health has become an even greater priority for the European Union's action. Today, the EU has a huge opportunity to play an important role in closing existing gaps in global health governance. For this reason, I welcome the adoption of the EU Global Health Strategy and its three priorities: ensuring better health and well-being of people throughout life, strengthening health systems while promoting universal health coverage and strengthening primary health care, preventing and countering health threats through a One Health approach. First and foremost, we need to address the underlying economic, social and environmental causes of ill health. Next, we must ensure equitable access to all essential health services, from health promotion and disease prevention to affordable, quality treatment, rehabilitation and the fight against communicable and non-communicable diseases, which remain a huge public health problem in many countries. In addition, we must work, and this is particularly important, to address health workforce shortages, which are also a problem in many countries of the European Union, and skills shortages in many parts of the world. Finally, it is up to us to strengthen prevention, preparedness and response capacities and early detection of health threats globally. To achieve this, it is essential to expand the Union’s strategic partnerships in the field of health and to reshape cooperation with different stakeholders in line with mutual interest and strategic priorities, while further strengthening the role of the World Health Organization. Digitalisation is mentioned as one of the key prerequisites for better global health in the strategy. Building on its ground-breaking work in the context of regulating health data, the EU can harness the potential of health data worldwide in line with the principles of the planned European Health Data Space. It is crucial to address the lack of investment in digital health in low- and middle-income countries, where Europe can make a huge financial contribution. To conclude, this strategy focuses on key priorities, strengthening health systems, universal health coverage, primary health care, public health, health determinants, and addressing imbalances in the workforce. And for these very reasons, I think we should support her.

Dear Chairman, thank you very much. Since 2015, over 629 000 lives have been saved thanks to the European Union's engagement in the Mediterranean. Unfortunately, the number of illegal migrants has been growing strongly lately, with an estimated 90% of them paying smugglers to try to reach Europe. Criminals generate an annual turnover of billions of euros. European policy must therefore aim to combat irregular migration by punishing human smugglers as severely as possible. In addition, we need to do even more to protect the Union’s external borders from illegal crossings and to work with third countries to reduce the number of migrants trying to reach Europe. The European Union is not obliged to admit to its territory all those who want to reach Europe simply because the quality of life here is better than in their own countries. Embracing mass uncontrolled migration would mean the end of the European way of life and we must fight it by all means.

Dear Vice-President, Commissioner, colleague and colleague, the digital transition we are witnessing, which is further accelerating due to the Covid 19 pandemic, fundamentally changes citizens' behavioural patterns, their communication with the administration and the way they buy. In such circumstances, we must ensure that no one is left behind. While we are aware that digitalisation has many positive sides, we must not forget that the protection of citizens’ data must remain a priority, especially in challenging geopolitical circumstances and especially for sensitive data, such as health data. With the Digital Compass, the European Commission has set ambitious targets, so by 2030, key public services must be fully accessible online, and 80% of citizens should use digital identification by then, which will greatly facilitate the use of digital services. However, research has shown that as many as 42 percent of EU citizens do not have basic digital skills, which is why achieving digital goals would not be possible without systematic education of citizens. Moreover, the European Digital Single Market cannot be built without improving digital skills and broadband availability. Therefore, in the report, we called on the Commission to implement decisively the Digital Education Action Plan and further called for the necessary infrastructure to be built. Especially on the islands and in mountainous areas. Digital provision of public services can significantly reduce the administrative burden, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises. In this regard, we need a more ambitious approach at all stages of building permits. It is also necessary to continue the further digitalisation of land registers, as this is the only way for the European Union to remain competitive when it comes to attracting investment. Unfortunately, when establishing ownership, citizens often have problems accessing land registers, their historical extracts, which can lead to legal uncertainty. Simplification of administrative procedures for citizens is at the core of this report. That is why it is important to emphasize that a large part of citizens do not have printers, so we believe that citizens must be able to fill out, sign and submit forms digitally, without the need to print. Furthermore, as citizens increasingly use mobile phones, we also believe that all public service websites must be adapted to access from mobile devices. It is also important that Member States implement the ‘once-only’ principle, which means that they do not require citizens to provide repetitively those documents that are already in the possession of public authorities. Digitalisation still needs to reach its full potential also in the areas of health and justice. This is why we strongly welcome the creation of the European Health Data Space as a necessary part of the digital transition. Furthermore, we noted that digitalisation can also have a positive impact on enforcement proceedings, which is why we invited the Commission to assess how digitalisation can reduce the costs of enforcement proceedings for the consumer, and these high costs are a very significant problem for many of them today. Also, in the report, I focused in particular on public procurement. Indeed, the abuse of appeals for the sole purpose of prolonging a public procurement procedure very often hinders investment and delays the procedure. This is why the report calls on the Commission to assess the extent to which abusive remedies are taking place and to consider ways to prevent them. Finally, the report highlights the importance of adopting a new e-services strategy that will respond to the needs of European citizens and prepare the Single Market for the digital age. And, here, only in the end, in addition to all the above, I would also like to thank all the colleagues who worked on this report and I believe that tomorrow it will be fully adopted by a large majority in plenary.

Dear Vice-Presidents, Commissioners, rapporteurs, colleagues, in achieving the climate targets, it is essential that the energy transition does not lead to a collapse in the competitiveness of European industry and is fair to citizens, who fear that they will have to bear the additional cost of the green transition in addition to general inflation. It is therefore important that the Social Climate Fund supports poor households and small businesses most in need. It will finance concrete measures to address energy and mobile poverty. Furthermore, the Green Deal must mirror the principle of solidarity. There must be no first- and second-class citizens in Europe. That is why I particularly welcome the increase in the Modernisation Fund, which supports ten Member States, including Croatia, in modernising their energy systems and improving energy efficiency. The most important thing is that the implementation of European green policy does not lead to the deindustrialisation of Europe and the collapse of the standard of living of our citizens. While the agreement reached is not ideal, it contains many mechanisms to protect the European way of life from ideological green extremism and we need to support it in these circumstances.

Dear Chairman, the path of introducing a common charger has not been easy or simple. Mobile phone manufacturers have long assured that the problem with the accumulation of chargers will be solved voluntarily by different non-binding mechanisms, which of course did not result in concrete benefits for the consumer. When I became a Member of the European Parliament, not everyone believed that we would be able to introduce a common charger because lobbying by tech giants was truly unprecedented until then. However, with the adoption of the Resolution on a common charger in 2020, we achieved a major victory for all consumers in the European Union. Ultimately, the new law was adopted last year and will make the USB-C slot the standard slot for all smartphones, laptops and other electronic equipment. However, information has emerged that those tech giants who have opposed the introduction of a common charger for years intend to produce USB-C chargers certified only for their users. This would not only deprive them of the meaning of the new law, but would also mock the European Parliament. Therefore, I call on the European Commission to ensure the correct implementation of the law introducing the common charger, as without the correct implementation the law remains only a dead letter on paper.

Dear Chair, colleague Flego, I have listened carefully to your presentation and I fully share your opinion on European agriculture as being based on organic farming. And of course, it is also important to give support because of this to citizens who want to ensure a healthy diet through this initiative. However, in the circumstances of economic uncertainty, high inflation rates, high food prices, can you tell me if you think that achieving such ambitious goals on the complete abolition of pesticides over the next 12 years can lead to an even greater increase in food prices and cause food shortages in the European Union, or do we need perhaps a slightly more nuanced and gradual approach than what is proposed here?