Speeches

Mr President! Europe sleeps the industrial sleep, and whoever claims that the Green Deal and competitiveness did not fit together, dear CDU/CSU, tells fact-free fairy tales and has not read the EU Chips Act and the EU Critical Raw Materials Act. But of course we are happy to help again, dear colleagues. We now have it Net-Zero Industry Act, but far from what is needed for competitive green industrial policy. Our future lies in wind and solar energy, in green hydrogen, in storage technologies. And yes, we need a climate-neutral economy by 2050 at the latest and the massive creation of green jobs. That's good, but that's far from enough, because China and the US, unlike Europe, are not sleeping. Accelerated admissions procedures, the net-zero academies, sustainability and resilience criteria in public procurement, which are excellent but with no focus on Net-Zero Industry Act This is not good enough for the key industries for decarbonisation and competitiveness. What we don't need is dinosaur technology, nuclear technology, or unengineered technology, or greenwashed strategic projects. This works better with a focus on emission reduction, on renewable energy and very much with Net-Zero Industry ValleysThey don't necessarily have to be built in nature reserves. Reconciling economy and ecology in a competitive and socially responsible way remains a key task for the European Union, even after the 2024 European elections.

Mr President! We can stand and watch European companies churn out with their arms crossed – see EU solar industry. We can make industrial policy in small steps, such as STEP, the platform for the promotion of strategic technologies – in the right direction, but in small triple steps. We can do anything. We can also create websites, coordinate, identify preferred projects, reallocate and redeploy financing. That successful industrial policy is ultimately also part of cohesion policy is, of course, correct. But let's be honest. This is far from enough to create green economic growth in Europe with secure, good jobs. We demand a sovereign wealth fund that is fully funded with new own resources. Of course, it is also clear: Bureaucracy has to go down, skilled workers have to go up and high ecological and social standards have to be set, as a quality label for Made in Europe. That's the way to go. European funding and support must also be maintained in Europe so that locomotive and cohesion regions in Europe benefit as much as small businesses and global players. We don't need it small, we need it big, big.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Solar energy is central to our energy transition in Europe. And yet the European photovoltaic industry is in crisis, and of course we cannot accept that. Europe must become the heart of the climate industry. We already have a solar value chain in Europe from the solar cell to the module to the finished solar system, with companies such as Wacker Chemie in Bavaria, Meyer Burger and Solarwatt in Saxony, Energetica in Austria. And these are all companies that are currently facing major challenges. It is now necessary to maintain and further expand the solar industry. And to be clear: It is at the heart of Europe's interest to produce a decisive share of transformation technologies in Europe itself, regardless of China and location-attractive. In concrete terms, this means: We need it now within the framework of the Net-Zero Industry Act Resilience calls in the photovoltaic sector, and we need to support European added value where possible, with the highest possible environmental and social criteria as a location factor. And this must also be made clear again, without at the same time releasing companies from responsibility for their competitiveness. This means that the Council, especially a German finance minister, must stand by the side of European companies. We need to create an EU Sovereignty Fund that can be integrated into a European solar industry. (The President withdrew the floor from the speaker.)

Mr President! In Bavaria, many years ago, there was already a loud outcry about whether this could be the sale of key technologies to a Chinese group when the manufacturer of industrial robots KUKA was acquired. Geopolitical tensions and technological advances are now making such operations even more sensitive than ever before. Protecting chips, quantum technologies, artificial intelligence and biotechnology in Europe in a targeted manner with an EU strategy on economic security is right. And the EU law on semiconductors and critical raw materials is now strengthening European independence from geopolitically questionable partners. If competition between the US and China in the field of technology increases, then it is important in Europe to decide wisely and calmly – and precisely: without resorting to protectionism. And it is also clear: De-risking – promoting research and development and partnering with like-minded partners – will be central to economic, strategic decisions for a strong Europe in the future.

Mr President! It needs critical raw materials and Europe has delivered – at the speed of sound, for diversified supply chains and security of supply, for industry and small businesses in Europe. Lithium and rare earths for green technologies are used in wind turbines, solar systems, electric cars and computer chips. With the EU Critical Raw Materials Act, we have now set a green industrial policy milestone for more mining in Europe in record time in 2023. Circular economy and recycling are now at the heart of the Raw Materials Act, and at the same time we are working on reducing the need for critical raw materials and substitution. With the Raw Materials Act now gets green technology Made in Europe the possibility of producing more strategically autonomously and reliably, without sourcing raw material supplies from geopolitically questionable countries such as Russia and China. We are building a European raw materials sector, turning waste into a resource and strengthening global partnerships and thus green, competitive industry without disappearing into the bureaucratic jungle. The recycling benchmark is now raised in the Raw Materials Act to 25 percent of the EU's annual consumption of strategic raw materials. A growing amount of strategic raw materials in EU waste streams will be recycled. This is, of course, a good dynamo for the recycling industry. This is also very important for us Greens: Civil society needs to be best involved in mining in Europe. The explicit mention of free consent after prior education for indigenous peoples has been slowed down due to the Council's refusals. And yet: The final text refers to the OECD guidelines, which include free informed consent, and that is important and that is correct. The final text also includes a recital against deep-sea mining, which is also important to us. Mining in EU areas must remain a taboo. Ultimately, the safeguards provided for in the European Parliament's mandate have not been maintained, and this is clearly painful for us Greens. As a result, however, it must also be said: The Raw Materials Act explicitly does not change any provisions of the environmental legal framework. It is clear: Green transition to achieve our climate goals needs critical raw materials, and that's why we need demand-driven mining in Europe under the highest possible environmental and social criteria. Let's go!

Madam President, Products are in demand worldwide – from medium-sized automotive suppliers to global players such as Airbus in Donauwörth or Toulouse. There are good reasons for this. It is clear: To be successful in global competition, companies in Europe need to be flexible and innovative, and we need to take the reports of too much bureaucracy seriously. Entrepreneurs have to tackle instead of sinking into paper floods at their desks. And there is really no event that I experience with entrepreneurs that does not talk about bureaucracy – and that has to be done in Brussels. With its SME relief package, the Commission has made a first mark-up, from simplified tax rules to an improved methodology for reporting on ESG issues, because this is always an issue, and national governments can also do a lot. The German Federal Ministry of Economics has just presented a concept paper against bureaucracy, with correct solutions ranging from practical and digital checks to the networking of national transparency registers. The problem is recognized, that is, the solutions are needed now. But I still warn against artificial oversubscription, because some conservative colleagues – especially here in the European Parliament – use this important task of ‘de-bureaucratisation’ as a political code for 100% deregulation and at the same time as an attack against the Green Deal. And to go about sensible EU legislation with the lawnmower instead of really looking responsibly at exactly what needs to be changed is of course not a responsible policy, but simply populism. What we need instead are fewer, clear, simple and transparent rules that support business innovation and competitiveness while also benefiting consumers and the environment – and that is how sustainable business works. Made in Europe.

Mr President, from an industrial policy perspective, the most relevant piece of news from the EU-US summit in October is what was not agreed about. So the agreement on critical minerals doesn’t include recycled materials, as we in the European Parliament call for. What a waste of opportunity. In the EU, we currently work on having circular and resilient supply chains for critical raw materials, and, of course, we should vote for covering recycled minerals in line with the objectives of the Critical Raw Materials Act. And we should not miss the chance to promote recycling capacities. Additionally, we have this trade dispute on trade in steel and aluminium not solved yet and the EU and the US have agreed to find a solution for that. They didn’t. A future global steel and aluminium agreement should cover overcapacity and climate-related goals. This means emissions intensity thresholds for steel and aluminium production and consumption, or a common understanding on what can be permissible: green industrial subsidies that do not contribute to overcapacity. My vision is to have a transatlantic climate alliance as a base for quick transatlantic, rational decisions pushing green economy and the fight against climate change, what is desperately needed. Let’s make that better next time.

Madam President, European companies and industry need a strong European response as soon as possible in times of high energy prices. Only a competitive industrial policy that co-letters climate protection can create and sustain prosperity in Europe. With STEP, the platform for strategic technologies for Europe, we are now making available existing pots such as the InvestEU Innovation Fund or Horizon for the promotion of green and digital future technologies. SMEs and large companies in Europe will benefit from this. Together with a progressive majority, we have put together a financing package that supports both Europe's locomotive regions and Member States that have less room for investment than others. But that's still not enough for the Greens. We are calling for new counter-financed funding pots for STEP, without budgetary shifting stations and computational tricks. We are calling for a STEP label that excludes nuclear projects with 100% clarity, and we should not disproportionately loot cohesion funds. Plucking the Just Transition Fund as an important EU project that brings together competitiveness, decarbonisation and social justice is simply wrong. For competitive green industrial policy, we don't just need small stepsSmall steps, but big steps, but above all a strong sovereign wealth fund, preferably today and not tomorrow.

Mr President! Small and medium-sized enterprises are at the heart of Europe's strong economy. And that is why we in the EU must also do our utmost to support competitive green economies. Strengthening EU late payment rules is a good thing. It cannot be that SMEs go bankrupt if large megacompanies do not pay their medium-sized suppliers on time. The Commission's initiative envisages a more systematic examination of new legislative proposals and a moderate review of reporting obligations. This allows us to bring together important reliefs for companies with social and environmental goals at the same time. In the future, a European Bureaucracy Cost Index could make the regulatory burden felt by local companies on a daily basis even more transparent. However, it is also clear that EU support to SMEs must not be a pretext for blind deregulation. The truth lies in the middle, in clever control with at the same time strong support and relief. Small and medium-sized enterprises are doing great things for a green, competitive economy in Europe – every day.

Mr President, we Greens appreciate a lot what the Inflation Reduction Act will do for the worldwide climate in the future. It’s an astonishing piece of legislation with strong social conditionalities as well we can also learn from in the European Union. It would be my personal wish to have a transatlantic climate alliance to adjust US-EU legislation in a way that the climate and a green, competitive transatlantic economy works the best on both sides of the Atlantic. Nevertheless, there are numerous provisions within the US Inflation Reduction Act that appear to discriminate against European companies. For Europe it’s important to have sustainable, circular and resilient supply chains of critical raw materials, and to achieve this we have to broaden the scope of the agreement to include recycled minerals. This expansion aligns perfectly with the objectives set forth in in the EU Critical Raw Materials Act and will play an important role in promoting recycling capacity within the European Union. Recycling is where the European Union can truly bring substantial added value to the table. And I ask the Commission to maintain a transparent and open line of communication with the European Parliament to have the best base of informed, powerful, democratic, better decision-making.

Mr President! Europe needs a stable supply of critical raw materials for a competitive green industry. Raw materials such as lithium and rare earths are indispensable for solar panels, wind turbines, electric cars and computer chips. The EU Critical Raw Materials Act will now properly contribute to ensuring and diversifying the supply of critical raw materials for industry, small and medium-sized enterprises. For raw materials that we urgently need for green technologies and in the space and defence sectors in Europe. Our focus must also be in the future: Resource efficiency, circular economy. But EU support for competitive economies is also clear: Made in Europe must always conjugate the highest possible social and environmental criteria equally. I think that in the present CRMA compromise, the potential to support companies in the best possible way has not yet been sufficiently exploited. The trilogue can be improved. Accelerating approval procedures is a good thing per se. However, it must not lead to undermining environmental and social standards. Here standards with a sense of proportion are very important. There is no truly sustainable mining. This has not yet been invented, so honestly you have to be – even if there are large and committed differences in the consideration of sustainability, as I could see at various mines in the USA and Europe themselves on the ground. But it is also important: Mining in Natura 2000 sites must remain a taboo and affected and local communities must always be involved in the best possible way. And yet it is clear: The EU Raw Materials Act is an important part of the Green Deals and an important answer to the Inflation Reduction Act and our strategic autonomy.

Madam President, In the middle of Europe, in Bavaria, something monstrous has just happened. A Bavarian Prime Minister Söder of the CSU keeps his deputy and coalition partner of the Free Voters, Aiwanger, in office despite the accusations of anti-Semitism and although many questions remain open, although remorse is difficult to see. Preservation of power and tactics preceded values and attitudes. We don't want that in Europe, and it's dangerous. We have a responsibility to protect people from harm instead of dividing society. Instead, we are increasingly seeing populism and fake news being used instead of value-based, good politics. Zero tolerance for anti-Semitism. We're not going to look away from what's happening in the European Parliament. We will see if some are blind in the right eye – also with a view to the upcoming European elections. We will resist with all our might. Our homeland is a civilized Europe. Never again!

Madam President, I say this in all clarity: We need to put in place measures in the EU to enable small and medium-sized enterprises to operate competitively and sustainably. In the Chips Act, we have just spelled this out very clearly, very successfully. We want to support not only mega-projects to promote the European semiconductor industry, but also small and medium-sized innovation drivers. If we build future industries in Europe with the Green Deal, then we create green jobs and the opportunity to export products worldwide. When we make political decisions, we must always think about the consequences of these decisions for companies and SMEs. The Commission's SME strategy is now welcome, but real action must now be taken. With a simplified EU-wide approach, we can reduce compliance costs for SMEs and remove important barriers to the single market. We need a revision of the Late Payment Directive and the lowest possible bureaucratic hurdles for SMEs. An entrepreneur must not suffocate with paper waste instead of being able to operate properly. The solution lies, of course, in the exact examination of how, on the one hand, we can profitably steer politics for all in Europe and, at the same time, how we can also make a Level playing field can create for companies with fair rules for large companies as well as for smaller companies. Better support for SMEs in implementing new requirements is also important. It cannot be possible to create new regulations and thus leave those affected completely alone. Providing a network of consultants is already a start, and of course we also have to tackle the shortage of skilled workers very importantly. We need to focus massively on development and further education, on lifelong learning. Of course, we also need to bring in specialists from non-European countries. We Greens therefore also call for a European migration code. Easier recognition of qualifications acquired abroad supports all of us for a competitive Europe, for good work, for secure jobs, for climate neutrality and a circular economy. Let's get it ready!

Madam President, Semiconductors are everywhere in our smartphones, cars and medical devices. We need a stable supply of computer chips for the green and digital transitions. With the European Chips Act, we now have a decent boost for the European microchip industry, and that is our clear green success. The Chips Act now places particular emphasis on the environmentally and climate-friendly production of semiconductors. The focus is on energy efficiency, resource efficiency and the circular economy. And so, to make it clear again: Competitiveness goes well together with climate protection and environmental protection and the Chips Act. And this must be said again in the European Parliament to the perpetual brakers of the Green Deal. We are now calling on the EU semiconductor sector to move forward with around 3.3 billion euros. Not with fresh money. In the future, we need a clear commitment in the Council via own resources to better support European companies. After all, we are now not only supporting a few mega-projects, but also innovative small and medium-sized companies and start-ups. The Chips Act makes Europe fit for the future.

Madam President, green industrial policy is now finally on the European agenda. And this shift to an active industrial policy, including corresponding investments, is a real chance to meet the economy needs, to be sustainable and competitive. We need strong European answers on production and energy costs, on supply chains, security issues and the Inflation Reduction Act. And the old ways of industrial policy-making are finally over driving nature and climate destruction and attacking the foundations on which Europe’s economy relies on. And dear EPP, dear Manfred Weber, we have no time for industrial dinosaur politics attacking the Green Deal, attacking and delaying important industry initiatives in the European Parliament and the EU Nature Restoration Law because of private election power games to please the far right. We need fact-based oriented policy and very precise industrial initiatives and corresponding Green Deal investments. We need fresh funding for a strong EU sovereignty fund, and own resources have to be key on that. Let us fight for a competitive and green industry and for Europe as an investment location for the future.

Mr President, Cyprus is an important Member State of the European Union, and Europe is interested in a stable, peaceful situation in the Eastern Mediterranean and Southern Europe. Turkish military sabre-rattling will not change that. Cyprus has an important role in achieving the EU climate and environmental goals, and we need the best possible European cooperation on that, especially on renewable energies and not necessarily on fossil fuels, of course. And we welcome the current progress on structural reforms of the justice system in Cyprus, pointing to the Commission’s 2022 Rule of Law report, including the necessity of better investigating high-level corruption cases. And for us in the European Union, it is also very important that sanctions against Russia are properly enforced. We are looking forward to the cooperation, that’s for sure: Europe needs Cyprus as much as Cyprus needs Europe.

Mr President! The EU budget is a powerful multi-billion dollar instrument to deliver on our common goals in Europe. Goals such as the green, competitive transformation of the economy and social justice need investments and incentives in the right places. And also – this must be made quite clear – a solid counter-financing. That's why we need to think boldly, new and innovatively about the EU budget, but also sound and stable at the same time. The Council needs to adopt the EU's own resources from the Emissions Trading Scheme and the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism as soon as possible. Future EU own resources should stand for innovation, social justice and climate justice. Own resources can now have new waste taxes, an aviation tax based on kerosene consumption, Gender pay gap-Own resources, but also a financial transaction tax. It is clear: We need new own resources in the EU so that we grow wings in Europe to make Europe greener, more competitive, safer and more social.

Mr President! We do not need anti-China hysteria or naivety in Europe. Both are not appropriate. China is an important trading partner for Europe. We need cooperation on climate protection and green industries of the future. China ranks first in the world in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, which we cannot ignore. However, Europe and China are also – clearly – not like-minded partners – see the forced labour of Uyghurs in Xinjiang. This makes transatlantic cooperation all the more important, and decoupling relations with China is not an option. But Europe needs to reduce economic and political risks and become more independent. Above all, we need to strengthen Europe's economy from within. We are now implementing this in the EU with the Chips Act, the Net-Zero Industry Act and the Critical Raw Materials Act. This does not mean, however, that in view of the economic interdependence of Europe and China, we now have to overthrow European values under supposed pressure. Competitiveness with the highest environmental and social criteria must be clearly the approach in Europe. In the EU, we need a common European strategy for a China that declares itself a world power in 2049. And the current status of Taiwan must not be changed unilaterally, let alone militarily. And we will take a close look at critical sectors, sharpen our trade instruments and check whether investments and exports are in line with Europe's security and climate interests. And we will not forget today's dialogue with China.

Mr President! The package leads directly to the heart of European climate policy and competitive industrial policy. Europe is taking a historic and important step with the package, even if we Greens would have liked to see even more ambitious results. And the Social Climate Fund is now set to tackle energy and mobility poverty in Europe. It aims to promote measures for more efficient buildings, support low-emission mobility and low-income households and small businesses. From 2026, we will now receive a Social Climate Fund totalling around EUR 86.7 billion, and the bitter truth is: The European Commission has demanded EUR 144.4 billion, and we in the Economic Committee have demanded 25 percent more. To be clear: These are not enough resources for a truly fair balance in Europe. It's a drop on the hot stone in the face of what's needed. But with the Social Climate Fund, the EU is now clearly saying: The Green Deal must be a social deal to be. Women are disproportionately affected by energy and transport poverty, especially single mothers, single women, women with disabilities or single older women. And that's where we have to start. We must resolutely combat energy and mobility poverty in Europe. And this is just the beginning.

Madam President, Raw materials are essential for the transition to a climate-neutral society. We need raw materials for the green transformation, for future technologies. And it is clear: We need to reduce Europe’s overall dependence on raw materials, including China, for strategic autonomy. We know that raw material supply chains are fragile, and security of supply is important. And the development of EU capacities for raw materials is central to the European green competitive industry. And yet it must also be clearly stated: There is a big question mark about classifying mining as sustainable per se, and we have to face it. Mining in EU protected areas such as Natura 2000 cannot be the right European solution. We need a green raw materials strategy with high environmental, social and human rights standards. Commodity partnerships such as the Commodity Club can diversify procurement and work towards a global regulatory balance. And we need long-term solutions. We need to advance recycling and recycling rates with a circular economy in focus. Substitution and efficiency are important along the way. This is precisely why we need to focus on research and development, for new European technologies. We now expect an active European raw materials policy from the EU Raw Materials Act, which calls for a green European competitive industrial policy. Let's go!

Madam President, With the 2022 annual report on the European Central Bank, the European Parliament sets out clear expectations. We know that interest rate hikes are an important tool for monetary policy, but they cannot lower energy prices or have a decisive impact on inflation in the short term. And this is precisely why the ECB must place more emphasis on its secondary mandate in the future, for a socially just and green European economic policy. It is irresponsible that the EPP Group diluted the section of the ECB’s 2022 annual report on the ECB’s climate policy in this way. And one wonders what problem the EPP has with climate protection in particular for the preservation of prosperity in the first place and how it actually wants to justify this in front of the people and industry in Europe. The ECB also knows that monetary stability and the fight against climate change go hand in hand, and that is why we need the introduction of differentiated interest rates on green investments from the ECB to drive the competitive transformation of the economy.

Madam President, High energy prices, high food prices, record inflation – this is difficult for people and businesses in Europe. EU Member States are doing a lot to mitigate these effects of inflation. Also, the REPowerEU programme, the adaptation to the Renewable Energy Directive and the Energy Efficiency Act, is now accelerating the green transformation, bringing down energy prices and thus working against inflation. We also need to do something about market manipulation in energy markets and strengthen the supervision of national authorities and the European supervisory authority ESMA. Energy suppliers are not subject to the same financial supervision as traditional banks, and it is a good thing that the ECB has now decided to examine whether the largely unregulated financial trading of energy companies can pose a risk to the financial system. We must now fight with all our strength against high energy prices and against inflation, which is now making the lives of so many people in Europe difficult.

Madam President, on both sides of the Atlantic we need green transition and a green, decarbonised economy. And we neither want a trade war over the Inflation Reduction Act nor a subsidy race. And yes, the WTO can check the Inflation Reduction Act, but what we need especially is a transatlantic climate alliance and quick decisions to strengthen the green European industry. Therefore, let’s talk about carbon contracts for difference. The first German CCfD will be granted in 2023, and we need those instruments at EU level as well. For that, we have to increase the ETS Innovation Fund and shift its focus from technology innovation to technology diffusion. And let’s talk about state aid. We need simpler rules and faster procedures for companies, but not at ecological costs or risking the integrity of the internal market. So Europe’s industry needs can, of course, profit from the first-of-a-kind add-on to existing state rules, and we are currently working on the EU Chips Act. And let’s talk about the Sovereignty Fund. We need a European coordinated approach to support private and public investment in green industries. But if we want an EU Sovereignty Fund, we also need to speed up the introduction of EU own resources because we need sufficient revenue sources.

The European Commission has initiated the long-awaited reform of the debt rules, and this was more than overdue. We suspended the Stability and Growth Pact in solidarity at the beginning of the pandemic, and the debt level in the eurozone has increased. And that's why: One One-size-fits-all-An approach is unrealistic given the different budgetary and structural conditions of the Member States. Therefore, the Commission's plan to introduce medium-term and Member State-specific debt plans is a good proposal. This will also not mean that everyone can budget as they want; the rules remain uniform and apply uniformly. But we now need massive investments in climate protection, and new debt rules must create room for manoeuvre in state budgets. Integrating budgets into national energy and climate plans is therefore a step forward. Nevertheless: When it comes to climate investment, we need more speed and more ambition. The ambition that was lacking at COP27 is now all the more a commitment for the EU. And here is my question: How can we create financial space for Member States to be able to successfully fight climate change?

Thank you very much for the question. Actually I didn’t understand it because I wasn’t able to hear the interpretation, so would you be so kind as to summarise it in two phrases, maybe in English. I would be grateful for that.