Speeches

Ms Sander, the legitimate protests of farmers in France have become worrying and illegitimate altercations against trucks transporting Spanish agricultural products; acts which, in addition to jeopardising the safety of carriers, run counter to the free movement of goods and fair competition which must prevail in the European single market. Do you think that the solution for agriculture in France is agricultural nationalism and that it involves throwing away the products of Spanish farmers? Where will the European Union go if these actions are allowed? Shouldn't France bear the consequences of its own agricultural policy?

Mr President, Commissioner, in order to achieve the objective of 'vision zero', i.e. zero casualties and serious injuries on European roads by 2050, decisive action is needed. Since 2010, the creation of a European road safety area has been one of the objectives of the European Union towards this "vision zero". And one of the main elements of this European road safety area is the one dealt with in the proposal we are debating today: reciprocal recognition of driving disqualifications. This proposal aims to put an end to the situation of impunity of those drivers who commit serious misconduct outside their countries and who are difficult to sanction properly. Therefore, it is of great importance not only for tourist countries, such as Spain, Portugal, Italy, but also for those countries in central Europe with greater traffic flows in transit. We are moving in the right direction by setting up a system of cooperation and exchange of information on infringement procedures. But we should not only cooperate when the most serious infringements occur: Penalties. Member States should also be encouraged to cooperate on administrative matters. It is not understood that a driver commits repeated infractions in another country and that, because they do not become criminal, they do not entail any type of sanction for the lack of collaboration between countries. And finally, it would be very positive if a point-based driving licence system were introduced at European level, such as the one we have in Spain, which has produced such good results, and in which all infringements were included, regardless of the country in which they are committed. Thank you, Petar, for your report. Without decisive action we will never reach 'vision zero' and this report will help.

Mr President, Commissioner Reynders, this is the first time that, instead of congratulating the rapporteur on the report, the shadow rapporteurs should be congratulated, because they are the ones who have managed to turn the report around and that this is not a mere attack and an attempt to demonise NGOs. NGOs play a crucial role in the lives of countless people. They perform an essential task for society. Many of them are working tirelessly to deliver humanitarian aid on the frontlines of humanitarian crises, assisting the most vulnerable, as is happening right now in Gaza. In fact, the European Union has tripled funding for humanitarian organisations working in the midst of conflict, because it knows that they are essential. Of course, as with all funding to organisations, all European funding must be subject to the principles of scrutiny, transparency and accountability, as is already the case. But, as a society, we must support and value the work that NGOs do, reaching where administrations often do not reach and giving a voice to those who often do not have a voice.

Madam President, the new measures proposed in this review aim to make drivers safer in tourist and occasional transport and to improve their working conditions. It is a very specific sector characterized by working days in which driving is combined with other types of work linked to tourism activities, so fewer hours are driven than in the regular one. The new rules give workers some flexibility to address unforeseen events and avoid situations such as the one in Germany, where a driver abandoned 42 people on a motorway for having completed their driving hours and, when he refused to continue, was fired. In addition, it is given the possibility that in a tour National drivers can accumulate weekly breaks at the end of the trip and return home with their families, something that already happens on international trips. Finally, controls are strengthened to protect workers and prevent possible abuses. Supporting these measures is to support the legal certainty that occasional transport drivers need and to improve their working conditions, their safety and that of passengers.

Mr President, Commissioner Hahn, Mr President Murphy and team, I appreciate the hard work done by the Court of Auditors and its presentation here in Parliament today. We cannot deny that the increase in the error rate estimated by the Court of Auditors is worrying, especially if we focus only on the number and compare it with that of previous years. But we must look at the whole picture, understanding the timing of the European Union, the challenges it faced and the decisions we co-legislators took. Beyond a number, the important thing is to locate where and why errors have occurred. Mistakes, not fraud. Analyze if what fails is a program, if the problem is in a specific country. We cannot question a policy by generalizing error. We see that in 2022 cohesion policy has increased its error rate, but it has been the policy that has provided the most tools to deal with crises. Of course we must strengthen controls and simplify rules to improve the error rate as has happened in innovation, but we must put it in value. As we must also highlight the recovery and resilience mechanism that is helping the recovery of the Union so much, although, due to its design, it is sometimes difficult to objectively verify the fulfilment of some milestone.

Madam President, we welcome all internal measures that serve to strengthen integrity, transparency and accountability in this European Parliament, as they are a great step towards consolidating the ethical culture of the European institutions. Standards should deter, hinder and punish unethical individual behaviour. But we say it again and again in the Committee on Budgetary Control: only effective controls will prevent the illegitimate use of public resources and the cost of corruption to the European budget. That is why we continue to call, in addition to effective protection for whistleblowers, for means to monitor strict compliance with the rules, including allowing OLAF to investigate Parliament in the event of well-founded suspicions. Socialists are ready to continue leading the necessary reforms and we call on the right to join us, to vote with us for greater transparency and accountability. We cannot miss any opportunity to restore citizens' trust in the European institutions.

Madam President, mobility must be a universal right and we must therefore ensure that all citizens can move freely across all territories and in the most sustainable and fair way. This plenary session, with the vote on the regulation on the deployment of alternative fuels infrastructure and the FuelEU Maritime initiative, will make this possible. With the Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation, we are driving more environmentally responsible road transport by setting mandatory targets for the distribution of hydrogen electric recharging points to ensure that all citizens, wherever they live, can access them easily. We hope this will help stimulate the use of more sustainable vehicles and make them more affordable. With the FuelEU Maritime initiative, we will reduce emissions in the maritime sector, boosting the use of renewable and low-carbon fuels. And we do so with territories such as the Canary Islands, the Balearic Islands and other coastal regions, whose connectivity and socio-economic development depend largely on maritime traffic, including measures to prevent carbon leakage to ports in third countries and thus protect European ports such as Algeciras or Valencia. We continue to work for a Green Deal with a red heart.

Madam President, the European Public Prosecutor's Office has been a before and after in prosecuting the crimes of fraud, corruption and money laundering that affect the European budget. The figures for 2022 are strong: 1 117 investigations and 359 million euros seized, seven times the budget of the EPPO itself. Its success is based on the fact that its competences do not stop at national borders, but act in a European area where all these crimes are effectively and independently investigated and prosecuted. But criminal organisations are looking for any opportunity to divert European funds or to introduce illegal goods that do not comply with consumer or environmental regulations and that affect the competitiveness of our European companies. It is therefore important that both the violation of restrictive measures imposed by the Union and environmental fraud should also fall within the competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. And finally, I call on the Council, because it cannot be that there are still five countries that do not participate in the European Public Prosecutor's Office: it must take steps to incorporate them so that taxpayers' money can be protected more effectively.

Madam President, we finally have the long-awaited proposal from the Commission to set up an independent ethics body and I regret to say that, for this trip, there was no need for saddlebags. Parliament called for an ethics watchdog and the Commission proposes a body that simply lays down minimum standards for each institution to apply as it pleases. The rules exist and can be harmonised between all the European institutions, but what matters is that strict compliance with them is ensured, and this is not possible without the capacity to carry out investigations and impose sanctions. Vice-President Jourová mentioned that we already had OLAF, which can carry out investigations, but it turns out that Parliament is not allowed access to our offices in case of substantiated suspicions, so we did not solve the problem. We need a body with resources and real powers to make recommendations, conduct investigations and impose sanctions. Mrs Jourová also mentioned that with this we achieve a common ethical culture. It may be, but I have my doubts that we will achieve a better ethical culture. Any proposal below all this is a mere symbolic gesture.

Madam President, Commissioner, sound financial management must ensure that resources are used effectively and the return on money is maximised for the benefit of citizens. In large transport infrastructure projects, sound financial management should result in improving the competitiveness of businesses, improving the mobility of citizens, strengthening the European supply chain and even improving sustainability. As this report makes clear, in order to achieve these objectives and therefore maximise the return on European money, the first thing to do is to finalise the Trans-European Transport Network on time and as soon as possible. And this means completing the cross-border sections, which are the ones that give that surname, that characteristic of "European" to the transport network and, therefore, should be considered a priority in the national transport policies of all the Member States, as they already are at European level. But this is not happening in all EU countries. Despite the Europeanism displayed by Mr Macron, that Europeanism is not reflected in French transport policy. And I am referring to the fact that, in a report by the French Government last February, cross-border projects with Spain on both the Atlantic and Mediterranean corridors were delayed to 2042. A delay of 12 years that goes against the European Regulation on the Trans-European Transport Network, which is mandatory. Delaying the completion of major infrastructure projects is, in addition to hindering the single market and mobility, questioning the European project. We must ensure that all EU countries are committed to major infrastructure projects. France has announced the publication of its infrastructure investment roadmap for before the summer. I would like to ask you, Commissioner, if you know whether your colleague, Commissioner Vălean, has initiated contacts with France to include European transport priorities in this proposal. This debate serves to vindicate the Europeanism so necessary also in transport policy.

Madam President, Madam Minister, after listening above all to the latest speeches, I would like to point out a couple of things. Mrs. Montserrat, from the appreciation and respect I have for you, mix churras with merinos. The only thing that fails in the management of Spain is the opposition that the Government of Spain has. Look, the 2021 discharge is the first in which we are examining the Recovery and Resilience Facility and it is vitally important that our report lays a solid, objective and truthful foundation for its analysis and that it does not provide incorrect or biased information for citizens. In 2021 only Spain received a payment, and you should be proud of your country for this, comrades of the Popular Party. And being the first is the one that has the most scrutiny. The European Commission has reiterated on countless occasions that Spain had fully fulfilled each and every milestone and target, as has been the case in subsequent payment claims. Mrs Montserrat, you were not lucky enough to come to Madrid with the Committee on Budgetary Control, but as can be seen from the conclusions of the mission and as we saw in person, the Spanish Government is doing a great job of managing the funds, and after a great deal of effort it has developed pioneering control systems to avoid both conflicts of interest and misuse of funds, which is what concerns and concerns our Committee on Budgetary Control. All information on the use of funds, calls, approved projects is accessible to the public in a transparent manner. Mrs. Benjumea, you only want one piece of information. I believe that with one piece of data you do not see the effect of the reforms. If you look for that data on the web pages you will surely find it, but you have to look for it. So please do not try to politicize this report and let us all offer truthful information, as is our institutional responsibility.

Madam President, Mr Hahn, Mr Murphy, as rapporteur for the adoption of the 2021 accounts of the European Parliament, I have to acknowledge that examining how we have used our budget and what we need to do to improve it is not an easy task. We are talking about EUR 2 billion, about 9 000 employees, 705 Members and a large building stock. Important public resources intended to enable Members to carry out our mandate and which must be managed as efficiently, ethically and transparently as possible. Parliament is the only directly elected European institution and represents the voice of citizens across the Union. That is why accountability, transparency and integrity are essential in all EU institutions, but in particular in the house of European democracy. I would like to thank the other rapporteurs for their work and support so that the report we adopted in the Committee on Budgetary Control reflected the need to go into all these aspects in greater depth and I hope that after tomorrow's vote they will continue to be retained in the final text. 2021 continued to be marked by the COVID-19 pandemic. For much of the year, Parliament had to continue to implement many of the extraordinary measures that had been adopted the previous year in order to continue the activity of the institution: teleworking, remote voting, hybrid meetings. And, therefore, the budget was also adopted with savings on some budget items that were transferred to others, such as debt reduction by the expansive building policy. We can welcome the fact that Parliament has been resilient in the face of an unpredictable situation of enormous magnitude and has been able to provide a rapid and flexible response, based largely on human effort and also on the digitalisation of the administration, in which, without a doubt, we must continue to invest, as well as in cybersecurity, in order to combat the increasingly present and dangerous foreign interference in the European institutions. Once again I wanted to be objective in my report, taking into account the difficult context of urgency, but also the responsibility of the administration when it comes to managing the budget and human resources. Therefore, within the management of the pandemic I highlight very positive aspects such as the successful vaccination campaign that allowed to protect the health of all. But I also mention decisions that do not justify certain expenses, such as the renovation of a garden adjacent to Parliament in Brussels, or decisions that have not helped to maintain good working conditions for the staff of the institution. I also value the measures to save energy and reduce the institution's environmental footprint and also the intense and diverse communication activity carried out by Parliament to inform citizens. But we continue to demand necessary changes in the working conditions of our assistants. All this and many other aspects are included in the report. But in addition to the pandemic, a second factor has had an impact on the 2021 discharge: the Qatargate scandal, which, although it did not happen in 2021, we could not fail to address in this report. This scandal has served as a shock for Parliament to review its rules on ethics and transparency, but it must be remembered that some of them have already been claimed in our committee. They had even been approved in plenary years ago, although without success in their implementation. As rapporteur, I have tried to agree with the other groups on a series of measures that Parliament should implement in order to avoid any similar situation in the future and, above all, to repair the damage caused to its credibility, to the trust that citizens must place in this institution. The proposals include strengthening transparency around the activity of lobbying, improve controls to avoid conflicts of interest, such as in public procurement as well, and revise the code of conduct to prevent and sanction unethical individual behaviour. It must not be forgotten that these are individual behaviours, but they harm everyone as a whole, and it is fair to recognise the responsiveness of Parliament, which in a few months has taken important steps towards transparency and accountability. And I welcome, of course, all those improvements. But we must not forget that rules are of little use if there is no proper system of implementation, control and sanction. Thanks to the discharge, this Parliament looks closely at what the Commission is doing, what other institutions and even the Member States are doing. But what we ask of others we do not always demand for ourselves. We are risking the trust of the citizens and, therefore, the future of the Union. Let's not miss this opportunity.

Madam President, Mrs O’Reilly, we congratulate you one more year on your work as European Ombudsman, working to make the European institutions closer, more accessible and more transparent for citizens. From the Committee on Budgetary Control we insist that transparency, good administration and accountability are fundamental principles to protect the European budget and to maintain credibility in the Union. It is necessary for Parliament to be exemplary in this regard and we must therefore take very seriously the recommendations that the Ombudsman addresses to us, such as the need to strengthen the ethical and transparency framework, to publish the meetings with lobbies, strengthen the internal ethics committee or submit more detailed declarations of interest and more effective controls. As rapporteur for Parliament’s discharge report for 2021, I receive those recommendations positively, and I have reflected this in my report, but we cannot forget that the Ombudsman has pointed out as maladministration the Bureau’s lack of transparency regarding the overhead review. And I add, in addition to more transparency, there should have been more ambition. We question and control the other institutions, the Member States, but when we talk about our budget, there, the attitude changes. Ladies and gentlemen, we must lead by example.

Mr President, Commissioner, the creation of an independent European ethics body was one of President von der Leyen’s commitments as early as 2019, and this Parliament reminded her and asked for it in September 2021. It's 2023. After having detected one of the largest cases of corruption within the European institutions and understanding that it is undoubtedly a complex issue, it is undeniable that the time to do so is now. The European institutions already have strict rules and we are working to strengthen them, but they are of little use if we do not ensure strict compliance by all members and staff of the institutions. We must not forget that corruption, fraud and other unethical behaviour not only seriously damage the credibility of the whole Union, but also have significant financial consequences for the European budget. This Parliament has demonstrated a great capacity to react to cases of corruption, but now we must demonstrate the political will to go further and create that European ethical body that ensures full implementation of the highest ethical standards in all European institutions and that ensures that decisions are taken in the common interest of citizens. We must create a body that has a preventive role through awareness-raising and guidance, that can issue recommendations on ethical issues, including conflicts of interest, that monitors compliance with existing rules, that has the capacity to investigate on its own initiative and independently, all in collaboration and complementing its action with that of the Anti-Fraud Office, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, the Court of Auditors, the Ombudsman and Europol, and, above all, that helps to restore citizens’ trust in the European Union. Only in this way will we strengthen the democratic legitimacy of the Union.

Madam President, Commissioner, as rapporteur of the Committee on Transport and Tourism for this report, I would like to stress that the two main milestones that condition this review further highlight the value of investing in mobility and infrastructure in the European Union. COVID-19 and the war in Ukraine have had an incalculable impact on Europe’s transport and tourism systems, sectors that contribute greatly to the economy and job creation in Europe. The already insufficient budget of the Connecting Europe Facility 2021-2027 cannot cover the new transport needs. The new geopolitical context and the urgency of accelerating energy independence and the decarbonisation of transport require more European funds. The Council failed to understand the added value of investing in dual mobility. We have seen that adapting transport networks to a defence use benefits civilian use and that, in addition, it would facilitate the transport of humanitarian material and grain from Ukraine through solidarity corridors. I do not forget the tourism sector, which has also been badly affected in recent years and for which we are once again insisting on having a specific European budget.

Madam President, Commissioner, the aviation sector is facing numerous challenges affecting passengers, workers, companies and, of course, Europe's environment and connectivity. COVID-19 virtually paralysed the sector, minimizing air traffic, with restrictions on mobility, effects on connectivity and also on competitiveness. Thousands of people were dismissed from their jobs (airport staff, self-employed cabin staff, who are often bogus self-employed), running out of contract, without social coverage. When the situation for the sector started to improve, it turned out that it was not prepared to meet all the demand and the dismissed staff were not willing to return under the same conditions. The result? The chaos we experienced this summer: delays, cancellations, loss of luggage and many complaints and social discontent; passengers who began to wonder whether to take a plane again if the situation did not improve. Currently, we are facing an accelerated recovery of the sector that should not be at odds with being, above all, a responsible recovery. It is essential to regain the connection with all territories, especially the islands and the outermost regions. It must be done in an environmentally sustainable way, reducing emissions as much as possible, increasing the use of alternative fuels and betting on research. But, in addition, it must be done with social responsibility. We must seize this crucial moment for aviation to ensure optimal working conditions which will undoubtedly also benefit aviation safety; We must not forget that passengers' rights must also be guaranteed. Commissioner, as you can see, there are many challenges facing aviation. I liked hearing him talk about social dialogue, working conditions, passenger rights, even safety. But we have been waiting for the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 for a long time and asking about it. When's that review?

Madam President, congratulations to the rapporteur on her work. This long-term vision for rural areas was both long-awaited and necessary and represents a unique opportunity to put rural areas at the centre of the European agenda. The Green Deal and the pandemic have revealed the potential that rural Europe has to achieve a new, more sustainable economic model, with renewable energy production, making use of the circular economy and innovation, and thus playing an active role in the green and digital transitions to which the European Union aspires. But, in order to exploit all this potential, the challenges they present must be addressed, so that they serve to retain and attract people who want to enjoy the quality of life in rural areas. We are talking about infrastructure, connectivity, quality services and, of course, employment opportunities. Opportunities that go beyond agriculture. New forms of work, new technologies, which must also involve women and young people and thus curb depopulation. This requires a rural pact with the commitment of all and instruments such as the rural verification mechanism, to assess the impact of European policies on rural areas.

Mr President, Commissioner, thank you, President Murphy, for presenting the 2021 annual report. We are certainly concerned that the level of error estimated by the Court of Auditors is 3 %, even if the Commission puts it at 1,9 %. But, beyond the percentage, what I do think is important and necessary is to identify concrete errors in order to solve the problems that cause them. On the other hand, this is the first time that the audit of the Recovery and Resilience Facility, a novel instrument with an implementation model based on meeting targets and milestones, has been included. Spain was the first and only country to receive a payment in 2021 following the Commission’s positive assessment, because all milestones had been satisfactorily fulfilled, and this has been confirmed by the Commission. Being first in class sometimes means taking on greater scrutiny and control, but it also helps us get ahead of challenges that may arise in the future. Although Spain has fulfilled, it may happen that other countries do not meet all the milestones committed and it will be necessary to see how it acts in those cases. The good cooperation of all will undoubtedly improve the management of the European budget.

Madam President, upholding the founding values of the European Union and strict respect for the rule of law must be above all else. We are glad that the Commission has activated, after so long and thanks to Parliament's commitment, the conditionality mechanism against the Orbán government. €7.5 billion is the only thing that has managed to get the Hungarian government to take the warnings seriously. Continuous breaches of the rule of law in the fight against corruption and fraud in public procurement, shortcomings in the treatment of conflicts of interest and attacks on the independence of the judicial system pose a risk to the European budget and it is therefore imperative to take measures to protect it. Hungary is one of the biggest beneficiaries of European regional funds, so if you want to be in our club you will have to comply with the established rules. Not only are you going to receive aid, there are also conditions to meet. For now we only have a commitment to reforms, so we will have to keep pushing until they become a reality. In the Council, for their part, they only have to decide whether they defend democracy and the rule of law or whether they prefer to look the other way.

Commissioner, we have already spoken about this on other occasions; the demographic challenge of depopulation is a democratic challenge that deserves the cooperation of all institutions at all levels and, of course, at European level. You referred to strategies at national and regional level. Well, my region, Aragon, has been a pioneer in adopting a law on the revitalization of the rural environment that includes active policies similar to those proposed by the Commission in the Communication for a long-term vision for the EU’s rural areas; dynamizing measures aimed at combating the fading of the rural environment; initiatives to increase the number of businesses and services in demographically diminished territories; and also other instruments, such as administrative decentralisation or the development of an economic dynamisation territorial management programme that promotes the entrepreneurial culture, as well as one of the main novelties, which we had also asked for here, from Parliament; the application of the principle of rural verification to assess the impact of the main regulations on rural areas. In addition to those actions to which you referred, at regional or national level, separately, my question is as follows: Does it envisage a common European strategy to combat depopulation with binding measures and, in that strategy, incorporate the application of the principle of rural proofing into the Structural Funds?

Mr. President, this summer has been, much to our regret, the summer of fire. At the end of August, in Spain, there had been more than 63 large fires that exceeded 300 000 hectares burned. Some of the most worrying have happened in my land, in Aragon. The fires of Ateca and Añón de Moncayo have caused incalculable losses, citizens displaced from their homes, irreparable damage to agriculture, livestock, infrastructure, loss of biodiversity ..., without forgetting the professionals who have worked tirelessly to quell the flames risking their lives. One of the major causes of these natural disasters has a name and surname: climate emergency. The funding and coordination instruments we have in Europe to address these disasters are not adapted to the severity and intensity of natural disasters in recent years. The EU Civil Protection Mechanism and the Solidarity Fund, created 20 years ago, were a European success story, but fall short of the reality of the global climate emergency. The Commission must rethink its efforts to strengthen them and revise its budget upwards for the benefit of the planet and its citizens.

Madam President, the invasion of Ukraine has highlighted the importance of having developed a resilient logistics chain prepared to deal with potential disruptions. To this end, it is essential to strengthen Europe's rail corridors and to strengthen ports, airports and other infrastructure. Putin knew perfectly well what he was doing by attacking Ukrainian ports from the outset, blocking them, breaking the European and global supply chain and provoking an international food crisis that is destabilizing the world order. We need short-term solutions that improve connectivity between Ukraine and the European continent, such as solidarity corridors, and that allow agricultural products to be taken out, but also humanitarian aid and basic products. The Government of Spain has taken the lead in one of these solidarity projects to take cereal stored in Ukraine by rail and take it to Spanish ports, from where it can be exported to other countries. Solidarity and responsibility is what is expected of the European Union and is what the Government of Pedro Sánchez is already doing.

Madam President, Commissioner, in 2020 the European Union was up to par and faced with an unprecedented health, economic and social crisis, conceived the Next Generation EU funds and the Recovery and Resilience Facility as a unique opportunity to boost Europe’s recovery; this time leaving no one behind. It is now up to the Member States to prove that they are up to the task by delivering on their national reform plans approved by the Commission. And as countries reach the targets set in those plans, the Commission must ensure that aid continues to arrive. It is essential that it is carried out quickly, but this does not mean that there has to be less control. The implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility should be transparent, effective and rigorous, for which it needs monitoring and control mechanisms to ensure that money is used according to established rules and that not a single euro is lost due to fraud or corruption. Only in this way will we make the most of the recovery funds, achieve Europe's green and digital transition and maintain citizens' trust. With these objectives in mind, we in Parliament will continue to carry out democratic oversight of the mechanism for which we are responsible.

Madam President, the letter sent yesterday by the Court of Auditors, with the latest changes to its Code of Conduct, told us that these reforms are proof of its commitment to a rigorous discharge process. I am glad to know that we agree in the search for that rigor that I have maintained from the beginning. I am also pleased that the Court has gradually adjusted its position on the draft initial report and the resolution adopted in the Committee on Budgetary Control, accepted the need for changes and has taken action on the revision of the Code of Conduct so as to ensure the highest ethical standards. The Court of Auditors decided not to answer some specific questions from some shadow rapporteurs, and that is what I transferred to it, but this is not the reason for not giving the discharge. The reason is in the information they have given us. And the key is ethics. You said it, Mr. Lehne: We must apply the same standard. Well, that's what we're doing: our control work for the sake of maintaining the credibility of the institutions. Finally, Mr Kuhs, what I would be ashamed to do is to do otherwise. The difficult thing has been my position. The easy thing would have been to profile myself.

Madam President, Madam Minister, Commissioner Hahn, President Lehne, 2020 was a difficult year for everyone, with a strong impact on the functioning of all European institutions. It was a year in which the EU had to demonstrate its capacity to react and adapt, as well as putting on the table a historic policy response, the Next Generation EU stimulus package. Institutions had to find ways to continue to fulfil their mandate, adapt to a changing work environment and, at the same time, protect their staff. I am pleased to be able to say, as rapporteur for the 2020 discharge for the other institutions, that the European institutions more than passed this test, in addition to having a crucial role during the pandemic, as is the case with the EEAS with the repatriation of European citizens or the Data Protection Supervisor with the evaluation of tracking applications, to give two simple examples. The reports we are voting on today highlight the measures taken to deal with the pandemic that have allowed the institutions to continue their activities, proposing innovative solutions without sacrificing sound budgetary and administrative management and internal controls. They also identify a number of challenges and opportunities for the future of the Union, such as the need to ensure the resilience of our institutions, by reviewing continuity plans; continue and improve the internal digitalisation process, which is essential for a modern, efficient and capable European public administration in all circumstances; without forgetting the duty of care towards staff, which includes both physical and mental health and safety. We regret, however, that different reasons have led the Committee on Budgetary Control to vote to postpone the discharge of three institutions: the Council, one more year – and now 12 years in a row – due to the lack of cooperation and the lack of consideration for this Parliament; the Economic and Social Committee, because some of Parliament's recommendations requested in previous years are still pending - although I am aware that important progress is being made - we need to verify that they are a reality, especially the agreements with the victims of the serious case of harassment of the former Group 1 president and the revision of the ethical framework that is underway - and, finally, the European Court of Auditors, the institution responsible for auditing and controlling the accounts of the European Union, the institution responsible for ensuring the financial interests of European citizens, which, however, we have been able to verify that it has allowed certain behaviors of some of its members, but above all of the president, which do not correspond to the highest ethical standards and sound financial management required of it. Who is watching, in this case, the watchman? Trust, credibility and transparency are central to the interinstitutional relationship between Parliament and the Court of Auditors. The work carried out by the institution as auditor of the European budget is not called into question. That I want to be very clear. But as ambassadors of the institution, the behavior of its members and the management they make of their own budget must be exemplary and blameless. Is it an ethical example that the President of the European Court of Auditors receives a subsistence allowance to settle in Luxembourg and monthly residence allowances, while sharing and subletting a house to members of his own cabinet? Is it an ethical example that members of the European Court of Auditors use official cars for personal use in exchange for €100 per month or that missions are used to attend party events, when impartiality and independence are presumed? Is it an example of transparency that the official missions of the members of the Tribunal are not kept publicly available on the web and that there is no attendance register showing the extent to which they fulfil their mandate? Perhaps for some they may seem appropriate behaviour, but what I am sure of is that they are not for European citizens. These behaviours have greatly damaged the image of the guardian of the European Union's financial interests and we must, together, help restore it. But we can't look the other way as if nothing had happened. We cannot allow the slightest questioning of the Tribunal. That is why we have called for clear rules that combine sound financial management and the exemplary ethical behaviour of its members. Something that goes beyond regularity or legality. By the way, I would like to sincerely thank all the work and support of the shadow rapporteurs and their teams, including the Secretariat, in reaching compromises that reinforce our defence of rigorous and impartial budgetary control. I am glad that, following the first draft report, a diligent and express process of amending the Court's internal rules was initiated, which lasted until yesterday, when we were aware of the latest reform. I welcome these new rules, which will solve many of the problems encountered in 2020 and contribute to improving the reputation of the institution. But this shows that those patterns of behaviors allowed in 2020 were not adequate and needed to be modified. That is why I recommended postponing the discharge in the Committee on Budgetary Control and why I recommend postponing it now to plenary. I would remind you that we assessed the 2020 management and, if we are consistent and fair, the Court of Auditors does not pass the assessment. I know that there has been intense pressure for us to approve the discharge, both to groups and to Members. But at this point, everyone who votes in conscience. But keep in mind that Parliament's image is going to be marked by the outcome of this vote.