Speeches

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, this morning's debate confirms once again that when we talk about immigration we risk being misunderstood. And unfortunately there is a widespread distorted perception that sees on the one hand the good, those who integrate and welcome human lives, and on the other the bad, those who are only trying to govern migration processes. I believe that there cannot be such a simplistic and categorical vision, but there must be a common approach and a common response, but above all European. We all, including in this House, claim and are proud of European values, including solidarity, but apparently we interpret it outwards, but we do not apply it inwards. I cannot ignore how this issue particularly affects my country and a few others, and I cannot fail to underline the difficulties and the commitment we are putting in to better manage this difficulty. There is no migrant issue for Italy, nor for every single state, there is a migrant issue for Europe. The Italian coasts, as well as other borders, are a part of the borders of the European Union, but Italy cannot do it alone, just as no one else can do it alone. We need a European strategy that involves everyone and in which everyone plays their part. We need a proposal that prevents illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings, we need to activate humanitarian corridors, we need to provide for mandatory and non-voluntary relocation, but above all an extraordinary economic plan for Africa and for all those countries where the problem must be tackled at the root, to prevent the creation of the conditions to prevent these people from fleeing. The thousands of deaths in the Mediterranean are a defeat and a burden for all of us, without exception. And then we cannot go back, we just have to go forward to avoid further burdening this burden.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the vulnerability of our strategic infrastructure is visible to all. In fact, in recent years we have seen an increase in hybrid attacks due to both climate change and domestic threats and terrorism, not to mention the pandemic, and then to the war that has endangered the security of our continent. Today, more than ever, it is essential to defend the proper functioning of our critical infrastructure, to make it more resilient in order to ensure its proper functioning for our economies and the single market. The risks are clear, it was said. A disruption of one of these critical infrastructures can potentially generate knock-on effects not only in the state in which it is located, but also in all other states. I therefore welcome the strengthening of the rules that aim to increase the resilience of strategic structures and infrastructures for services and for the performance of essential economic activities and I am pleased to have obtained an extension of the areas of application of this directive also to the agri-food sector. In particular, I am referring to the large wholesale markets, which are obviously recognised in this measure in their role as strategic infrastructures. The functioning of the agri-food chain is an essential service for the well-being of our society and wholesale markets are fundamental, as structures of public interest, just think that, thanks to them, during the pandemic, the blockage of the agri-food system was avoided in many countries and the supply and distribution of food could be guaranteed.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, European agriculture and our farmers are in difficulty. For months, the People's Party has been denouncing how the increase in the costs of raw materials and the price of gas have generated a situation that risks blocking the entire agri-food chain. This debate, allow me, runs the risk of passing on European farmers or some of us as those who do not have an environmental sensitivity, when in reality it is all the opposite given the commitment and the results achieved by European farmers and their full willingness to share a pragmatic strategy where the environment can be protected together with productivity. Because we remember that no environmentally sustainable result can be achieved if we weaken our production system. The strategy provides for a ban on the use and non-production of fertilisers. Given that Europe is the world leader in their production, it means that it exports to the world what is prohibited in its interior. Make this reflection: if the strategy leads to a reduction in production, imports from third countries will increase and therefore Europe considers that what is exported is harmful and then finds it on the plate. We must ensure that there is the principle of reciprocity, otherwise it means that the richest European consumers will be able to afford to buy more expensive European products for their production costs, while the less wealthy will be redirected to purchases of cheaper but also less safe and less sustainable imported products.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, I would like to thank the rapporteur for the work she has done and for having found the synthesis of a balanced text. As part of the strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities, the creation of this centre was necessary to assist the Commission in monitoring and implementing the strategy, but also to support and coordinate the various Member States, where unfortunately there are still many differences and delays in the implementation of the European accessibility directives. The main aim of the Centre is to promote a real culture of equal opportunities and the full participation of people with disabilities in all aspects and areas of daily life. I am pleased that the importance of increasing the employment levels of disabled people has been underlined, both with the use of new technologies and with the necessary cooperation, not only with non-governmental organizations, but also and above all with the business world that must be sensitized to take note of the great potential deriving from the employment of disabled people, today often excluded also because of prejudices now denied by their many work and success stories. In this context, the role of local authorities is important, both in the analysis of the needs of the territories and in the implementation of social policies. I am convinced that the Centre will be the operational instrument with which the Commission and the individual States, with a coordinated and harmonised approach, can concretely promote all the conditions for real access to real life, with the removal of all physical and cultural obstacles.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, we all agree that the global economy is changing and that its progressive digitalisation is confronting us with new challenges that the European Union and its states must face in a cohesive and coordinated manner. The principles of the current tax framework are progressively outdated and do not guarantee fair, transparent and harmonised taxation on cryptocurrency and blockchain activities that, given their exponential growth, risk altering the internal market. I thank the rapporteur for a resolution that adequately addresses the various aspects, although, in my opinion, the environmental impact of the production of cryptocurrencies should also be taken into account in the definition of an updated tax framework, which requires an important amount of energy and therefore carbon emissions to carry out data control and encryption operations. Just think, for example, that the Bitcoin blockchain consumes more energy in a year than Italy. For this reason, it is good to create a clear and transparent regulatory framework, with fair taxation, which also takes into account the environmental impact of Blockchain activity and ensures the right competitiveness between companies, safeguarding especially the smallest ones.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, drought is not a problem for some, we do not make the mistake of two years ago when in the presence of the first COVID cases, someone thought it was the problem for some states. Drought is a problem across Europe and beyond. That is why we need a common European approach, structured and with concrete actions. It is necessary to modernise and implement new Italian and European infrastructure to understand how to make water reserves available also with a European solidarity system. Europe has invested heavily in both space research and innovation, but technologies and data can and must be better used to ensure the appropriate and responsible use of a water resource that is apparently not inexhaustible. The drought emergency coincides with the Commission's recent decision to reduce plant protection products. To compensate for these measures, European legislation is needed for the use of assisted evolution technologies, other than GMOs, to have crops that are more resistant and resilient to new pathogens and increasingly frequent droughts. European agriculture is going through a delicate phase, but if we want to ensure its green transition we must now worry about how to avoid a certain water emergency, otherwise we will have collapse and food dependence on third countries.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, allow me first of all to thank the two rapporteurs for these two important pieces of legislation, which represent a crucial turning point in the discipline of a market, the digital market, where more and more citizens and businesses, it has been said, meet and, over the years, there are many increased risks for users and many forms of unfair competition. For many years, the digital giants have controlled the market, asserting their economic power and creating a real monopoly, in which small businesses have not always played an adequate role and consumer users have not always been considered. I believe that the European Union has finally decided to put in place rules to ensure fair competition, innovation and consumer protection. There will be sanctions, because obviously the Digital Markets Act is a backbone, but it is important to monitor its implementation because the digital market, as it has evolved in recent years, will continue to react to this legislation and it is important to know how to adapt it to avoid that, once the law is made, there is, of course, a scam, and in this we will be careful enforcers of an important law for this European Union.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, how can we explain to our citizens that, although we are the only institutional body democratically and directly elected by them, we do not have the power of legislative initiative? Unfortunately, it is difficult to explain it and over the years this anomaly has also contributed to fuelling anti-European sentiment. With the Conference on the Future of Europe, citizens welcomed the opportunity to express their concerns and were clear about what they expected: more efficiency and democratic participation. The conclusions of the Conference highlighted the need to amend the Treaties and, given Parliament's democratic expression, it goes without saying that recognition of the legislative initiative is the first step towards giving the European Union greater democratic legitimacy and credibility among its citizens. It is true that the future of Europe is in the hands of the citizens, but it is to us MEPs who have delegated the task of representing them so that their demands and expectations are translated into concrete solutions and measures.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, it is unfortunately clear from today's debate that European cohesion policies have failed in recent years to deal effectively with the various socio-economic problems of the 20 million citizens living on the islands of the European Union. This observation deserves a deep reflection, considering that precisely from the small island of Ventotene, in the Mediterranean, about eighty years ago, the European project took its first steps with the manifesto of Altiero Spinelli, with which it imagined the realization of a cohesive Europe from a political, social and territorial point of view, a Europe in which all citizens could enjoy the same rights and the same services. To date, however, islands, especially smaller ones, as my colleagues have said, suffer from structural disadvantages: low population density, difficult energy and water supply, difficult access to health and cultural services, dependence on transport and an economy almost exclusively linked to tourism, fishing or agriculture, despite the islands having so much potential. This resolution is an important step in defining a strategy that can bridge the socio-economic gap between islands and continental areas, ensuring their development perspective in view of the challenges of the green and digital transition, but above all by implementing a concrete European cohesion policy, as provided for in Article 174 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, for a long time we have witnessed forms of unfair tax competition, especially from multinational groups and, finally, after the agreement between the majority of the OECD countries, Europe is starting with this step to transpose an important agreement to combat circumvention and evasion, providing for a minimum tax rate of 15%. Of course, the path is long and tortuous, given that at the last meeting of European ministers of the economy the agreement was not reached, highlighting also in this case the need to review some rules of operation, first of all those of unanimity. This reform aims to address the tax challenges born from the digitalization of the economy, holding back the race of some nations to create tax havens that allow multinational companies to move their headquarters on the basis of the most favorable tax convenience. With the minimum taxation of large groups, especially those outside the EU and those in the digital world, taxes will be paid in the country where the income-generating assets and activities are located. I welcome this proposal and hope that it will be a first step towards the establishment of a single system of taxation within the European Union and that, above all, it will become more ambitious in its revision after the first five years in order to find the necessary resources for funding programmes similar to that of the European Union. Next Generation, necessary to face the many challenges. The path taken is the right one, but there is still much to be done, especially within the Union for tax harmonisation and tax reductions in favour of small and medium-sized enterprises.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I too would like to thank the rapporteur, who has been able to combine the needs of the organic sector with those of farmers in a practical way. It has been said that our goal is to support organic production, by making our farmers contribute to the Green Deal, but let us not forget that we must ensure proper price formation, so that organic products can be known, appreciated and consumed. In this connection, I reiterate, as has also been mentioned in the report, the importance of wholesale markets, because they are large service platforms, which are also mentioned in the strategy. Farm to fork, which are important for price formation not only as guarantors of transparency, but also facilitators of a fairer agri-food system towards farmers and consumers. Finally, I also reiterate the need to protect our producers and consumers of organic products, especially from imports from outside Europe, and we must ensure a real principle of equivalence.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, this unjust and unjustifiable war is undermining our production chains and our food autonomy. War is an exceptional and extraordinary event, against which Europe must act and react with equally exceptional and extraordinary measures, both to promote its cessation and to defend our food production security. As we build a long-term strategy for our autonomy, we must have the courage to recognize that the various sustainability strategies prior to the war in Ukraine must be contextualized. It is therefore necessary to understand how to reshape any initiative that may affect European production capacity and adapt our strategies in the light of the critical issues that have emerged. No one wants to give up a more sustainable and environmentally friendly agriculture, but we must be pragmatic. Environmental sustainability cannot be separated from economic sustainability if we want to make our companies more competitive to achieve the result that we have set as ambitious and we want to achieve.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, it must be acknowledged that, unlike what has happened in the past, where we have supported environmental policies in favour of photovoltaics without having a European production, on this occasion the European Union is aligning its environmental policies with industrial ones and aims to have its own gradual autonomy of quality production to be opposed to that of third countries. Of course, the time factor is an essential variable, also in the light of the ongoing war conflict that, if unfortunately it should continue, obliges us to pursue, yes, our objectives, but at the same time to open a deep debate to evaluate in a practical way what corrective to adopt to the methods of implementation of our environmental strategies. Having made this clarification, I believe that the work of the regulation represents a model to be replicated for the holistic approach with which we proceeded to define a regulation referring to the entire life cycle of a product, so as to be able to make the most of its potential and create a virtuous circular system. It has been said that the demand for batteries will grow exponentially to promote both sustainable mobility and the accumulation of renewable energy, but we also know that unfortunately Europe is dependent on third countries for the necessary chemical components. The current blockade of Russia to export nickel highlights even more the need and urgency of our circular production system as autonomous as possible, as the regulation aims to achieve. I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mrs Bonafè, who was able to share and define an innovative and ambitious but also balanced text; I hope, however, that there is still room for improvement in the negotiations, especially on a few points: I am thinking, in particular, of the definition of battery or manufacturer or the wording of Article 11 on the replaceability and removability of batteries, for which I believe that easy and practical replacement should be allowed without compromising devices or, let alone, risks for the consumer. Finally, I hope that the new regulation will also be accompanied by a reduction in the bureaucratic burden on businesses, so that they do not lose competitiveness. Because let us remember that we will be able to achieve ambitious environmental goals if we do not weaken our economy.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, for too many years in Europe we have underestimated the problem of foreign interference in our democracies and we have not considered the disastrous consequences that would have had and unfortunately have had, the images of war these days are confirmation of this. Attempts at foreign interference are increasing all over the world and are increasingly sophisticated, also thanks to the use of artificial intelligence. It is not always easy to identify them because they take different forms and often find allies and accomplices within the systems to be conditioned. We must become aware of this risk and make our communities more resilient and more ready to repel any form of attack. Today, with the work of the INGE Committee, Parliament wants to give a strong signal to the citizens and institutions, but also to those countries that for years have taken advantage of our lowered guard to convey and amplify messages of hatred and disinformation to fuel fears and fragilities, to delegitimize a system and weaken a model like the European one. Indeed, ladies and gentlemen, the European Union is frightening: Our democracy, the standards of freedom and the defence of human rights, economic prosperity are all elements that frighten those countries that make coercion and fear the only means of controlling the population. Today we decide to raise our guard, to be more vigilant and to start a path that allows the European Union and its states to develop a coordinated strategy to combat foreign interference to defend themselves against those who manipulate information at will and spread lies. We must defend our model and be a reference point also for other democratic countries outside the European Union, so that they can be able to protect themselves from external attacks and threats.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, this very day this House has debated and approved the report on a European strategy against cancer, so that the European Union can strengthen its research, prevention and treatment activities to combat this insidious disease. We have all recognised that the fight against cancer must be a priority and we have shared the need to do more. Meanwhile, millions of Europeans continue to get sick or die of cancer. What I would like us to reflect on today is the data that has been set out by the rapporteur, the Commissioner and colleagues, impressive data, data that we cannot accept. A few hours after the adoption of the BECA report, Parliament is called upon to decide on another measure that, although apparently different, sees cancer as the connecting factor, making us understand how necessary it is to intervene on several fronts to eradicate this disease from our continent. Cancer is especially dangerous for the ways and times in which it develops. Prevention therefore becomes the most effective weapon to combat it, together with increased research and joint actions, which can be better addressed through joint Union action and legislation at European level that can adapt to the new dangers faced by workers. It is estimated that the rules we adopt today will reduce the exposure of our European workers to cancer-causing chemicals by around one million. In the measure, I appreciate the attention that has been given to workers in the hospital sector, who have been at the forefront of the pandemic for two years. Healthcare professionals, in fact, deal daily with HMPs, half of which are reprotoxic, for which it is necessary to have the right and adequate training to handle these products. Today, therefore, with the fourth amendment that we are making to this directive, we are not only updating the list of carcinogenic substances, which should be further revised with a shorter period of time, but we are also setting a European level of exposure limits to them. Today, ladies and gentlemen, let us take another step forward to protect European citizens who, even in the workplace, must feel safe thanks to a Europe that exists and protects their health.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, some time ago I was reading the news of an interactive plush teddy bear that made it possible to send messages between children and adults. This toy was hacked and allowed malicious people to acquire private video and audio images, but above all related to minors. This is just one of the unpleasant scenarios that we face if we do not ensure higher and adequate safety standards in the production of toys and electronic devices. We must not underestimate the insidious dangers arising from the increasingly networked toys that interact daily with our children. Toys smart They can collect an infinite amount of sensitive data and the problem is that often you do not know where they are stored and if the manufacturer of the smart toy sells them, sells them to third parties and for what use. I thank the rapporteur and I am glad that we have all shared the need to update the current safety legislation in order to adapt it to what are the significant and potential risks on the market. In particular, at the production stage and with regard to the presence of chemical or synthetic substances, it is necessary to establish clear requirements and values that are also up-to-date with new scientific findings, to ensure safety thresholds that exclude all forms of danger. Finally, it is necessary to provide for stricter rules for toys from non-European countries and especially for those sold on online platforms, both to ensure quality standards but also to avoid unfair competition with our European producers.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I too would like to begin by thanking the rapporteur for her work with the political groups. A demanding job, certainly not simple, a complex job where certainly not all aspects have found a widely shared definition. And unfortunately, I believe that in some passages of the text, especially in the light of some amendments, we have gone beyond the initial purpose of this text, which - I would like to remind you - is to ensure that everything that is illegal online is also illegal offline and to first ensure that our citizens are defended in the use of digital services. That is what we must keep in mind when we approach the vote. That is why we must be careful not to undermine freedom of expression and information, especially by the media and newspapers. We must also be cautious when evaluating this text and understand what its impact may be on the important regulation of the GDPR, which is also the result of excellent work, which has ensured that in recent years important doctrine and jurisprudence were formed and consolidated that cannot be ignored. The aim of the text must be to avoid a system that crushes small and medium-sized enterprises and imposes too stringent requirements that prevent their development on our continent. In this regard, I must point out that the text is not perfect, but I hope that it can be improved in this way in the trilogue. Our Union must be the first to set standards in areas that the whole world is looking at today, in particular the regulation of the new sectors of the economy, which are currently legislative jungles. We did it for the protection of personal data and now the world is following our example. We will and the time has come for digital markets to prevent web giants from legislating instead of citizens. These are not my words, but those of the late President Sassoli at the last European Council. Today we are disciplining our digital markets and services, creating a model for others and laying the foundations for a more democratic and secure Europe for future generations.

Mr President, Mr Vice-President, ladies and gentlemen, for me, COP26 means that 25 years have passed during which we have always questioned ourselves, whether we agree or not, how many and what results we have managed to achieve. In the meantime, however, nature has given us, unfortunately, many more signals and warnings than have come from activist squares and theoretical debates. I am one of those who believe that we have made progress and we still have to make progress, but I am convinced that the strong impetus made by Europe, with an ambitious and courageous strategy, must be characterized by a practical sense, which in many cases has been overwhelmed by demagogy and ideological clashes, favoring the mistaken belief that the theme of the environment belongs to some and not to all. The environment is not a religious faith. What nature has given us belongs to everyone and we must all work to safeguard it and allow those who come after us to enjoy it. Europe has done well to occupy the world stage for the fight against climate change, stimulating even the most reticent countries such as China. However, in my opinion it is necessary to do so by involving our production system, which should not be demonised, also because we Europeans are already the most virtuous in respect of the environment, as opposed to those who continue to produce under different conditions, generating unfair competition and weakening European production autonomy. One thing is certain: If Europe really wants to be a leader in the fight against climate change, it must have a strong and competitive economy to also help developing countries and to finance a green transition where sustainability is expressed in an environmental, social and economic version.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, today's debate confirms that asbestos, although its use is prohibited, remains a serious problem. Unfortunately, it has been said, many citizens still die and many others are affected by pathologies deriving from exposure to asbestos, many of which are not even recognized among the professional ones and therefore do not give the right to any type of compensation to the victims and their families. I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Villumsen, and all the colleagues who have worked on this report, which makes it possible to update European legislation, especially, as has been said, in the light of the measures with which Europe is promoting the renovation and regeneration of the building stock, so that it is necessary to introduce the obligation of a check to establish the presence of asbestos and a subsequent removal before the start of any work, as well as a certification attesting the absence or regularity of asbestos before a sale or lease for buildings built before 2005. Pending the new measures to be presented by the Commission, I would like to draw attention to some elements. First of all, it is necessary to recognize among occupational diseases all those that are objectively and scientifically linked to exposure to asbestos. If we really want to remove asbestos, we need to streamline bureaucratic procedures and help property owners economically, train technicians and workers properly. Finally, non-invasive techniques must be encouraged so that the risk factor is completely reduced even at the screening. Let's remember that investing in screening, but above all in the removal and remediation of asbestos means investing in the health of our citizens.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the proposal for an Agency to replace the current European Asylum Support Office is a step forward after years of stalemate on migration at European level. But we must not be too enthusiastic because to date, after numerous migration and humanitarian crises on all the continents close to us, the European Union has not yet adopted a real migration policy with which only those who are entitled to it can truly welcome and integrate. The facts of Afghanistan must make us even more aware that we do not have a strong and common foreign policy, within which we must also envisage a structured migration policy. It is clear that the new Agency aims to support national systems to facilitate and streamline asylum procedures and make them uniform, but we are faced with a measure that will serve to give a momentary breath especially to the States that have been taking the weight of all the arrivals of migrants on our continent for years. We really need a long-term sustainable solution. The Union must give a strong signal of credibility in the area of migration, because citizens are asking us for concrete measures that can only be achieved through a single package of Community policies. We hope, however, that this Agency will be a first step towards a more significant change in terms of the common migration and asylum policy, and above all we believe that this Agency can also serve to stimulate a different culture and approach from all the Member States, so that they understand that the weight of arrivals must be shared by all and it is necessary to be supportive and not solitary.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, today's debate sees us all agreeing that the European Union needs a single, coordinated, more ambitious and stronger cybersecurity strategy, with serious commitment from all Member States and a strengthening of cyber diplomacy. Cyberattacks are increasing, both in quantity and sophistication, and are set to grow in the future. This poses a serious risk to Europe, which is certainly fragile and lagging behind. Mr Paet's report, which I thank for the important work, is a step forward to share a defensive strategy that protects citizens and businesses and makes our critical infrastructure more resilient. International scenarios, also in the light of what has happened in Afghanistan, must make us even more aware that we need a common European defence system to react and resist present and future attacks, carried out above all by those who see European democracy as the greatest enemy. Just as we have reacted to the pandemic, it is necessary to show the same strength to contain the risk of cyber-attacks that can become more dangerous than the pandemic itself.

(IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, as long as there is a debate or a measure on the rights of persons with disabilities, it means that there is a problem and that there is still much to be done. This resolution ignites the responsibilities of everyone, so that we can intervene in defense of those people who face obstacles and discrimination every day and are deprived of the freedom and fundamental rights at the base of the European Union. Surely today Parliament is taking a step forward to make the European Union's action in defence of almost a quarter of its citizens suffering from a form of disability even stronger and more credible. With this resolution, the European Parliament does not limit itself to statements of principle, sometimes neglected or little considered, but commits the Commission and the Member States to take concrete action to improve the quality of many people with disabilities, but above all to remove the physical and cultural obstacles that prevent social and economic inclusion and generate hateful discrimination that undermine the fundamental right to equality. There are many elements of sharing this resolution, but I want to highlight the importance of the commitments made to prevent violence against women and the commitments made to overcome the employment and wage inequality of women with disabilities, which adds to and amplifies the equally deplorable one that affects the entire female gender. Finally, I would like to point out that this report is the result of many petitions submitted by many European citizens in the interests of millions of other citizens and confirms, in my view, the need for our Parliament, as a directly elected Parliament, to have the power of legislative initiative to express the interests of all the citizens who have elected us.