Madam President, in accordance with Rule 59 of the Rules of Procedure, I would like to request that the file be referred back to the TRAN Committee for interinstitutional negotiations.
Mr President! Ladies and gentlemen! Thank you very much for all the comments. As I have already mentioned, it is not possible to make everyone happy. Many of your comments have been a friendly reminder of this. So thank you, ladies and gentlemen. As I mentioned in my introduction, it has been my job to get many different interests to meet. Some would have "book and claim", others are vertically opposed. Some would have a broader definition of SAF, others would have a narrower one. Some would have higher blending requirements, others would have lower ones. However, I would like to remind you here that we now need to adopt a negotiating mandate. The Committee on Transport's proposal is the one that has received the most support in the Committee so far. That is why I think it is a very good starting point. I am very much looking forward to having this tried by Members of Parliament later today and I am very much looking forward to defending Parliament's position in the upcoming trilogue negotiations.
Mr President! Ladies and gentlemen! Today, Parliament is taking the first step towards decarbonising the sector which is probably the hardest to decarbonise. For many, the 2019 election was a climate change election. That is why I am proud that we are showing Europeans today that these were not empty words when we promised climate action. In 2017, aviation emissions accounted for around 3.8% of total EU emissions. Aviation's share of emissions is expected to rise sharply if we do not act. That is why we need to make ambitious demands on our airlines. But everyone has to contribute. This applies to fuel manufacturers, airports, aircraft manufacturers, Member States and passengers alike. If we don't act now, we only have two options: Either we have to stop flying, or we have to drop our climate targets, and luckily not many people want to go down those roads. We all agree that Europe's aviation must be sustainable and green. But we all know it will be challenging. I would therefore like to congratulate the Commission on its good proposal. The approach is smart, simple and will work. By requiring fuel suppliers to incorporate green fuels, we ensure that aircraft emit less. With the Commission's proposal, commonly known as ReFuelEUAviation, the EU will once again be at the forefront of the green transition, and with this bill we are showing the rest of the world how to make aviation green. Despite the good measures taken by the Commission, many of us do not think it is ambitious enough. That is why I am proud to have led the debate in Parliament and to have voted later today on a significantly more ambitious approach. Firstly, we propose that the admixture requirement should be raised significantly. In other words, we want more green fuel in aircraft than the Commission has proposed. We also propose a higher requirement for blending synthetic fuels from 100% sustainable sources. The so-called E-fuels are the future, and it is important that we stimulate the market so that roll-out and scale-up takes place as soon as possible. Green fuels are significantly more expensive than conventional ones, so in order to create an incentive to buy them while maintaining the competitiveness of European aviation, we propose that additional costs be compensated through the ETS. This will discourage airlines from intervening outside the EU to tank black. In addition, we will also have better control, transparency and we will be able to tackle the environmentally and climate harmful emissions that are not related to CO2. As rapporteur, I have seen it as my prime task to assemble the wings. It has not been an easy task. National, political, ideological and economic interests across the European Union have had to meet, and I am aware that it has not been possible to please everyone. However, I hope that both my colleagues and external stakeholders feel that I have listened and been available and clear about my priorities as rapporteur. I would like to thank everyone who has contributed, not least my own political group, Renew. Two committees have submitted reports. I would like to thank my colleagues on these committees. I have tried to include your positions as far as possible and I note with satisfaction that no amendments have been tabled on behalf of either ITRE or ENVI. Negotiations with the Council are ahead. I look forward to working with the Presidency and it is my sincere hope that together we can secure an ambitious outcome. I look forward to this morning's discussion.
Mr. President! Dear colleagues! Today, we are sending a strong signal to Iran that the European Parliament is strongly opposed to the use of the death penalty by the Iranian Government. The significant increase in the use of the death penalty since Raisi took power in Iran is both inhumane and unacceptable. I would like to thank my colleagues and, in particular, our rapporteur, David Lega, for ensuring that we are united today in calling on Iran to put an end to the use of the death penalty. We are united in this House in our call for sanctions against the Iranian Government responsible for these atrocities. We are united in our call for Iran, the Iranian regime, to release political prisoners and stop the persecution of journalists. I have no illusions that our decision today will stop the killings immediately. But this Parliament, the European Parliament, has the duty and the right to put the death penalty on the agenda and to keep the death penalty on the European agenda. Let us never stop the pressure on the Iranian regime. The brave Iranians who dare to speak out against their criminal leaders. They truly deserve our full support.
