Speeches

Madam President, Commissioner, Madam President Lagarde, the digital euro project was already decisive before the election of Donald Trump; It is now vital. It is now vital to provide Europeans and all Europeans in all Member States with a European payment solution. And it is now also vital for public money to find its place in a growing digital world. So, the Central Bank has obviously made a proposal that we can discuss at will, let us not deprive ourselves of it. The Commission relayed it, the Council has now provided its general approach; It is now up to us, ladies and gentlemen, to play. We must be at the rendezvous of this story. The discussions have begun, they last. This is a complicated, multidimensional subject that we need to address. I would like to say that tomorrow, on the occasion of the vote on the excellent report by Mr Van Overtveldt, we have a first opportunity with two amendments that have been tabled, to take a strong position on this subject and to start negotiations on the basis of a positive vote by our Parliament for an ambitious digital euro. And I call on all of us to vote for these two amendments.

Mr President, Mr President of the European Court of Auditors, Commissioner, the Court of Auditors' report illustrates the need to bring more simplification and flexibility to the next multiannual financial framework, without, of course, abandoning the requirement of transparency and traceability of every public euro spent. This is emphasised by the Court of Auditors in performance-based instruments, such as the Recovery and Resilience Facility. Controls are mainly based on Member States, whose assessments are sometimes unreliable. We are therefore often confronted with the impossibility of measuring the concrete results of the use and therefore the effectiveness of European funds. It is on this that we will be judged collectively, here in Parliament, ladies and gentlemen, but also in the Commission. Commissioner, I believe that this is the only objective we must set ourselves for the future, with the help of the Court of Auditors.

Mr President, Commissioner, this lucid report confirms the diagnosis made in the reports by Mr Draghi and Mr Letta: the complexity and fragmentation of our tax rules is a major obstacle to the competitiveness of European businesses. We need to address this. The proposal for a Directive on the taxation of business income in Europe, BEFIT, is a first step towards simpler, fairer, more integrated taxation, without calling into question the tax sovereignty of the Member States. But we need to go further. We must, on the one hand, empower our businesses to compete on a level playing field in global competition and, on the other hand, avoid tax competition between Member States that only benefits our adversaries. Tax simplification and harmonisation can and must become the levers for a genuine Savings and Investment Union.

Madam President, Commissioner, I would like to thank our rapporteur for this report, which presents an analysis of the situation, but above all of ways of improving the real savings and investment union. The famous Draghi, Letta and Noyer reports go further and detail precisely the measures they consider urgent. These three reports are broadly approved in theory, but we are, as often, slow to take action. There are many believers in this matter and finally quite few practitioners. I am pleased, Commissioner, that the Commission has published its proposal to revise and relax the rules on securitisation. I call on our rapporteur and my colleagues to be ambitious in our work to create additional financing leverage to serve our priorities, to foster the financing conditions of the economy, especially for SMEs and for European households.

Mr President, Commissioner, Mr President of the European Court of Auditors, the discharge report confirms that the European Public Prosecutor's Office has become a key player in our anti-fraud architecture, with more than 2 000 investigations under way, EUR 19 billion of damage identified and EUR 1.5 billion already recovered. But this success also highlights the structural challenges facing the EPPO: imperfect cooperation with some Member States, saturation of justice in several countries and unequal access to national databases. That is why we call for strengthening the human, technical and budgetary resources of the European Public Prosecutor's Office. We will therefore pay particular attention to the upcoming revision of the EPPO Regulation and the PIF Directive. We believe in a strong, independent and effective European Public Prosecutor's Office. This report proves it, the tool is there. It is now up to us, the institutions and the Member States, to enable it to deploy its full strength.

Mr President, Commissioner, the reports we have - those of Mr Draghi, Mr Letta and Mr Noyer - all propose concrete measures to build a genuine Savings and Investment Union, a genuine Capital Markets Union, to finance our green and digital transitions and our European defence, but also to strengthen our strategic autonomy. However, as soon as it comes to finalising the banking union or strengthening European supervision, national resistance resurfaces and slows down progress. Many of us are therefore waiting for strong proposals from the Commission on the Savings and Investment Union, starting with the revision of the securitisation rules, with a view to creating additional funding leverage to serve our political priorities. Many of us here, Commissioner, will support these strong proposals.

Mr President, Commissioner, rapporteur, President Lagarde – thank you for your presence and for your comments – we believe that the European Central Bank must be able to react with the necessary flexibility, obviously respecting the mandate established by the Treaties, to ensure monetary stability within our Union. The principle of market neutrality therefore has its place in the monetary policy of the European Central Bank, but we must apply it intelligently and flexibly, like everything we do. The European Central Bank must be allowed to react to economic and societal changes, especially when they are systemic, as is often the case at the moment. Reality imposes itself on us. I take the example of the international agreements we have been able to conclude, such as the Basel agreement on the regulation of the banking system. When our partners in other jurisdictions decide not to apply jointly agreed global rules and create a situation of unfair competition, we need to be able to reassess our positions to ensure that our banks are still able to finance our SMEs, European households and the green and digital transitions that are so essential. All this, of course, within the framework of a secure financial system. This will be one of the challenges of this European mandate here. Our European Union has turned a lot towards itself, and rightly so, in the past. It must now look more outwards.

Madam President, Commissioner, cryptocurrencies are clearly gaining popularity. They operate outside any financial legislation and in complete anonymity. Like any instrument of speculation, they will make the fortunes of some and the misfortunes of others, without ever contributing to the real economy. But let us not forget, and this is our role, that it is above all for the public authorities to organise the circulation of currencies by adapting to new uses and to guarantee the stability and use of the euro. This is the meaning of the digital euro project, an equivalent to cash in a digital wallet, issued and guaranteed by the European Central Bank, unlike cryptocurrencies. It will be a free, secure payment method, accepted everywhere in Europe, even in areas without Internet connection and with, in some cases, a level of anonymity similar to cash. The digital euro will enable the European Union to preserve and strengthen its monetary sovereignty in an increasingly digitalised payments sector. The co-legislators must tackle this without delay, first and foremost our Parliament.

Madam President, Commissioner, this is always an important moment and it is always a step forward when an independent institution decides to entrust the supervision of its ethical rules to an external authority. This is always a step forward for democracy and we must recognise that our self-monitoring has shown its limits and that we are, in essence, always the worst judges of ourselves. That is why, despite its imperfections, I would like to welcome the interinstitutional agreement that has been reached between eight European institutions for the creation of a European ethics body. We would have liked it to be more ambitious, like the position that Parliament adopted in 2021, but it is a first step that will allow us to have a harmonised assessment of what is prohibited, what is allowed and what needs to be declared. Above all, I believe, it will allow us to spread a common culture of integrity, control and transparency. I have to tell you that in the future we will not give up on improving the situation. This will undoubtedly be one of the challenges for the next term, but our vote today is a first step: it is a question of creating this external body. In France, we campaigned on this in 2019. I am delighted to be able to deliver on one of these campaign commitments today, but in our minds, this is only a first step.

Mr President, Commissioner, the banking union we are calling for remains unfinished, but we are making progress on this banking package, which I hope we will vote on this evening. We made sure to reconcile some major concerns: first, to ensure the security of our financial system; secondly, to safeguard the competitiveness of European banks on the world stage; finally, ensuring the financing of the economy, preserving access to credit for SMEs and households. In addition, the CMDI package, which we adopted today, strengthens our European capacity to anticipate and manage banking crises, as well as to safeguard guarantees for European savers in these tragic situations. These are great achievements of the mandate that is coming to an end, but we will still have work to do, step by step, to complete the Banking Union. This will be one of several projects for the next term of office.

Mr President, Commissioner, we have, as has been said, begun to respond to the various scandals that affected our institution last year by increasing the transparency of our relations with interest representatives: private interest representatives, but also, as we have seen, public interest representatives, whether they act within the European Union or outside. We also tried to better define cases of conflicts of interest of Members, to better identify them and above all to better resolve them, which was not always the case in the past. Finally, with the report of the INGE Committee, we have also tried to limit external interference in our work by foreign powers. Finally, we tried to regulate relations with our former colleagues, in particular with regard to access to premises and attempts to influence our work. As you said, Commissioner, we are missing an important step, a step we have taken: it is the creation of a European ethics authority, independent and external to our European institutions. You know that our Parliament voted on an ambitious proposal two years ago, even before these scandals occurred and damaged our image. As you know, we consider the Commission's proposal to be very inadequate at this stage. I know that inter-institutional discussions have started and that Parliament’s team will have the opportunity to try to increase this ambition. We want to go further and for the benefit of all.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we must constantly question ourselves and I must say that we will all be judged on our collective capacity to take quick, concrete and effective decisions. In this sense, the work done here is particularly valuable. Our decision-making processes are limited to 27. We experience these limitations every day in our operation. And if the European Union were to expand, it would also have to reform itself, in order to invent a new, adapted way of working. And the end of unanimity, ladies and gentlemen, will be the symbol of an integrated Union capable of bringing out the collective interest for the benefit of the continent and European citizens. It will be a Union that, after devoting a lot of energy to taking care of itself, will be able to stand together and face the challenges of the world together.

Madam President, Commissioner, we have placed this mandate under the sign of the Green Deal and the green transition, and this transition we must finance. And with this new instrument, European Green Bonds, we are creating an additional tool for this financing. An ambitious standard with strict criteria, which allows those who respect them to proclaim themselves objectively green or sustainable in compliance with our European taxonomy. It is a tool that will win for the debt issuer and win for the investor. The institution or company that issues debt to invest will be able to choose this new standard, its debt will be more attractive and the conditions for placing on the market will be better because the demand for green products is constantly increasing. For its part, the investor will be assured that these funds will be used to finance equipment or projects compatible with the Green Deal and the European taxonomy. Attractiveness for issuers, transparency for investors, that's the balance we defended. We have defended an ambitious, voluntary standard that will be able to go to school globally and be used, including by non-European bond issuers. And we want to limit as much as possible the greenwashing which too often repaints projects that are not green. And we want to make a decisive contribution to the financing of green investments.

–Mrs President, following the 2022 scandals, it was our duty to improve our internal rules. That is the meaning of the proposal by President Metsola and the political groups, and that is the meaning of this report, to which my group is proud to have contributed. Thank you to our rapporteur, Gabrielle Bischoff, for her work. This report will allow for stricter checks on declarations and conflicts of interest, on relations with private interest representatives, but also for greater transparency on Members’ assets. Europe is watching us and we must demonstrate on Wednesday, when we vote in this Chamber, our ability to draw the consequences of these disastrous events for the image of our Parliament and for the image of the European Union. Beyond that, my group calls more than ever for the creation of an independent European High Ethics Authority, common to all EU institutions, which will help us to establish and implement harmonised standards for all matters of ethics and deontology. This is more necessary than ever and my group will take care of it.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, in the face of the challenge of tax fraud and tax evasion, Europe must show its capacity to act and lead the world. For that, of course, she must first be blameless at home and give herself the means to do so. The use of shell companies for tax avoidance is a real challenge for Europe that has been revealed to us in recent years by the Pandora Papers. These companies cause the European Union to lose billions of euros in tax revenue every year and undermine citizens’ trust. It is therefore urgent that the European Union adopts common rules in this area. At the end of 2021, as recalled, the Commission presented a relevant and ambitious directive. Our Parliament voted overwhelmingly in favour of this directive in January and, over the past year and a half, significant technical work has been carried out in the Council. All the conditions are in place to move forward. We now call on the Council to discuss this text at political level and to find an agreement to adopt it unanimously. We cannot continue to expose ourselves collectively to tax scandals like those we have experienced, which have undermined the trust of European citizens. Our commitment to this will be constant. It is a question of fairness and justice.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, in September 2021, our Parliament adopted its position in favour of the creation of an independent ethics body for the EU institutions. Since 2019, since the Commission's programme, we have been waiting for a proposal to that effect. We have received it and it is far from our ambitions. We want independent members, and you offer us representatives from each institution. We want powers of investigation, verification, public recommendation and sanction: You refuse them. It is not necessarily a question of harmonising the rules between the different institutions. Our operations are different and we are dealing with different people. It is a question of entrusting their application to an external authority, which would be competent for elected officials, of course, but also for senior officials. We have seen in the news that some situations may also concern senior officials in our institutions. As you rightly said, EU citizens will judge us collectively. They will not judge Parliament, the Commission and the Council separately, but the European Union as a whole, and we must respond to that expectation. Our Parliament has taken the step of agreeing to outsource control of its own procedures. This is a difficult course for any legislator. We have done it in France, we have done it here, and we need to go further to restore citizens’ trust in the European institutions.

Madam President, Commissioner, President of the European Court of Auditors, every year, the granting of discharges is not, contrary to what one might think, a purely technical matter. On the contrary, it is an eminently political subject. European citizens have the right to expect us to verify and certify whether or not the EU budget is being properly managed. And this assessment is not just an accounting study. You know that our Committee on Budgetary Control, with the help of the Court of Auditors, is working with the utmost rigour and vigilance. So every year I have two regrets, always the same. The first is that our debate takes place 18 months after the closure of the financial year concerned, in this case the financial year 2021. I think we could all collectively try to move faster to stick more to the news. And I also regret, and this is my second regret, that most of our energy in this plenary is devoted to examining amendments that have nothing to do with the 2021 exercise, but which are amendments that aim to try to change our operating rules in a procedure that is not suitable for it. Nevertheless, with regard to our Parliament’s discharge, for the financial year 2021, we have put a sad focus on ethical and transparency issues in the light of Qatargate and the abuses that may have occurred within our Parliament itself, which, of course, we regret and condemn in the strongest possible terms. We welcome the fact that we have been able to react decisively, forcefully and swiftly, while being aware that no new procedure or form will prevent a corrupt person from being able to do so. The proposals of our President Metsola, adopted in the Conference of Presidents and in our Bureau, are currently on the agenda of the various committees and committees responsible for their implementation. Some measures have already been introduced, such as the six-month cooling-off period for former Members and the revision of the conditions for access to the European Parliament for former Members and interest representatives. We need to go further. Interest representatives must, as we recall, be subject to the same rules and the same requirements of transparency, whatever they may be, all those who, in a certain way, wish to exert an influence on our debates, an influence which is legitimate, provided that we know collectively who we are dealing with. And non-governmental organizations are concerned in the same way as other entities, including private companies. Finally, ladies and gentlemen, we call once again on the Commission to submit to us as soon as possible an ambitious proposal commensurate with the challenges for the creation of an independent European institutional ethics body. You know that Parliament adopted this position 18 months ago. Current events make it even more urgent and we very much hope that this body can be established and operational by the end of our term of office.

Mr President, Commissioner, the European Union must be at the forefront of the profound transformations in the payments sector and remain there. The world is not waiting for us. Our sovereignty is at stake, as is the preservation of an essential prerogative of the public authorities: the issue of money. We therefore welcome the upcoming Commission proposal for the creation of a digital euro, complementing the work of the European Central Bank. This is of course a major technical challenge, but it is above all a political challenge, with many issues still to be resolved. The digital euro must be a success, a new tool of trust that European citizens can take ownership of: complementary to cash, to which they remain deeply attached, easy to use, secure, preserving personal data while contributing to the fight against money laundering. We will also need to consider the potential impact on the banking system. These are all imperatives, sometimes contradictory, that we will have to reconcile. We therefore look forward to the Commission's proposal to start our work and address these challenges, in order to make everyday life easier for European citizens.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the image of our institutions is damaged by a succession of irregularities and malfunctions. This is not about politicising or personalising these cases. We have not done so here in the European Parliament and I do not intend to do so for the European Commission. My concern is that we learn the lessons and the consequences for the future, to restore the trust of EU citizens in our institutions. We have made a proposal here in Parliament, a bold proposal for any legislative body, that is to say, to delegate control over ourselves to an external authority. This is not easy for any Parliament. Yet we took that step by voting on an ambitious resolution and reaffirming it in a resolution last month. We call on the Commission to take the initiative to do the same to set up a high European ethics authority, which would be common to several European institutions and would allow us not to control ourselves, in a way, which is sometimes the source of many problems.

Mr President, Commissioner, the trust placed in us by European citizens has been seriously undermined by the recent revelations of corruption in our Parliament. So, of course, no procedure can prevent the corrupt few from doing so. But we must recognize that our system has shown its limitations: it is based only on a self-regulatory approach that is not sufficient. Our institutions need an independent, more effective and fairer assessment of conflicts of interest and ethical rules. We brought this idea to France during the 2019 European campaign, the European Commission took it up in its political guidelines at the beginning of its mandate, and our Parliament voted in favour of this idea as early as September 2021. All the conditions are therefore in place to move forward. So outsourcing the control of our institution is not a matter to be taken lightly. All the parliaments of the world are asking for it. We did this in France: this is an example from which we can draw inspiration, with the good practices and possible improvements revealed by a few years of operation. It is not a question of banning lobbying, or of exhibiting, or questioning, or impeding Members’ freedom of mandate, or of trying to separate powers, but of having a clear assessment of what is prohibited, what is authorised and what must be declared. It is also about spreading a culture of integrity, control and transparency. The stakes for us are high: Restore our European institutions as the most advanced institutions for the prevention of conflicts of interest and restore citizens’ trust. The ball is now in the Commission's court, and the proposal voted on by our Parliament 18 months ago could provide a useful basis for discussion.

Madam President, the risks to the financial interests of the European Union today are immense, commensurate with the colossal sums involved in national recovery plans. Our Union has been strongly committed in recent years to consolidating its anti-fraud architecture with the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO). The report we will be voting on tomorrow clearly illustrates this positive dynamic. We must continue our efforts by empowering this anti-fraud architecture to function fully with increased human, financial and technological resources for OLAF and the EPPO, but also by tackling organised crime and corruption at all levels from all possible angles. This is being done through the development of effective rules and tools to combat money laundering and tax evasion. This is how we will build trust in the Europe we want, because the financial interests of the Union are first and foremost, let us not forget, the interests of European taxpayers and citizens.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the rapporteur – Lídia Pereira – in 2021, it was said, shed light on tax avoidance practices within our European Union itself, thanks to shell companies that have been created, which are being created, with the sole aim of avoiding taxation. A strong European response was expected, and before we invite the whole world to exemplarity we obviously have to approach it ourselves. We therefore welcome, in our report and in general, the Commission's proposal for the Unshell Directive, which will allow for coordinated and ambitious action. In the report that will be voted on tomorrow, our Parliament insists that this tool be legally and technically operational, and we then call on the Council to swiftly adopt the directive. We are in an area where the inventiveness and speed of fraudsters is endless. In the face of this inventiveness and speed, we must act diligently and creatively. That is what we are trying to do. It is true that sometimes our administrative action does not move at the same pace as the creativity of those who seek to circumvent the rules. We are expected to: European citizens expect us on the fight against tax evasion, on fair competition, first between European companies, and secondly between European and global companies. This will be the subject of your SAFE initiative, which you mentioned and which will be very important. And it will be very important that, of course, all together, the Council, the Commission and Parliament all play their part in ensuring that we are there.

Mr President, in the founding pact of the European Union, the Member States freely decided in which areas competences were transferred, which competences they shared and which competences they retained. As the applicable texts stand, the use of the veto in certain areas is therefore legitimate, for the preservation of vital interests, but not as a currency of exchange or pretext. As a last example, Hungary had first signed the OECD agreement on the taxation of multinationals, before going back on its word and blocking the process for several months, in a very important file, to obtain a currency of exchange. Unanimity or qualified majority voting is not a technical measure. This was recalled before me. It is a decision that is eminently political and basically reveals our idea of the European Union. The world is changing, and we need to change to be in tune. Faced with the challenges of the world, our Union must speak with one voice and act or react quickly. We have to give up unanimity, which pits the Member States against each other, while we have to stand together.