Speeches

The next item is the report by Hannah Neumann, on behalf of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, on EU Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders [2021/2204(INI)] (A9-0034/2023).

I have a blue card from Karen Melchior, but with your kind cooperation I think we are running very late, so thank you very much for your understanding. It is of course an important debate, there’s no doubt about that, and the need for debate is there.

– The next item is the Council and Commission statements on women activism - defenders of human rights to sexual and reproductive health and rights [2023/2574(RSP)].

Thank you for your question. Firstly, the Code of Conduct of Members, which is now over 10 years old, it does not allow the committee on its own to sanction anyone. It’s the President who refers cases to the committee and then it is up to the President to decide if or if not she or he acts on the recommendations by the committee. So you see that there’s a structural failure in this whole construction, and now it’s time that we can correct this so that the committee could be independent vis-à-vis the President, because it’s not healthy that there’s no accountability.

– Mr President, the current ethics framework, the Code of Conduct for Members and its advisory committee were created in the aftermath of the cash—for— amendments scandal of 2011. Now, these rules are being revised because of the biggest corruption scandal in the European Parliament’s history. The EU needs an independent EU ethics body, but we should not just sit and wait for the Commission’s proposal and its further destiny in the institutions. We can already start the work in the European Parliament. The Parliament needs to redefine conflict of interest beyond financial interests. It needs sanctions with teeth and it needs strong scrutiny. All this is now lacking. As a member of the Advisory Committee on the Code of Conduct, I believe that with new strengthened powers, the advisory committee can be the starting point for the future European Parliament’s ethics body. What it needs is first, it should not anymore be dependent on the decisions by the President. Transparency should apply both to internal reforms in progress as well as transparency to the future work of the advisory committee. Second, the advisory committee should be given powers to monitor, investigate and ensure compliance with ethics rules, also on its own initiative. This is also recommended by Ms Emily O’Reilly, the European Ombudsman, who is constantly watching how this Parliament manages its work and its ethics. So colleagues, we can start today. We don’t have to wait. We are, of course, eager for the promise that the Commissioner, Vice-President Jourová, has now given to us. But let’s see if it really happens. We need to act now. (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card speech)

Mr President, I just wanted to say that there was no Finnish interpretation in both Mr Séjourné's and Mr Aubry's speeches. It is probably worthwhile to make sure that every speech is interpreted in Finnish.

The next item is the report by Jan Huitema, on behalf of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, on the proposal for CO2 emission performance standards for cars and vans (COM(2021)0556 - C9-0322/2021 - 2021/0197(COD)) (A9-0150/2022).

In accordance with Rule 158(2) of the Rules of Procedure, on a proposal from the President and with the approval of all the political groups, tomorrow's sitting will be extended to 11 p.m. If there are no objections, the amendment shall be accepted. It's been approved.

The next item is the report by Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Siegfried Mureşan and Dragoş Pîslaru, on behalf of the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, on the proposal for REPowerEU chapters in recovery and resilience plans (COM(2022)0231 - C9-0183/2022 - 2022/0164(COD)) (A9-0260/2022).

Thank you very much, Commissioner. This debate shows that the European Parliament is deeply shocked and in solidarity with all those affected by this tragic disaster in Turkey and Syria. We have to do everything we can. The debate is over. Written statements (Rule 171)

The next item is the Commission statement on the EU response to the humanitarian situation in Turkey and Syria following the earthquake (2023/2561(RSP)).

I note that the representatives of both the Council and the Commission have already referred to the following very important debate on responsibility for the crimes committed. We'll move on to the debate.

The next item is the statements by the Council and the Commission on the EU's response to the tragic attack on civilians in Dnipro: Strengthening sanctions against the Putin regime and military support to Ukraine (2023/2511(RSP)).

The next item is the report by Loránt Vincze, on behalf of the Committee on Petitions, on the deliberations of the Committee on Petitions in 2021 2022/2024(INI) (A9-0271/2022).

It is true, then, that we have an article in the statutes which states that we must not present here ... we are not allowed, nor, as you remember, are we allowed flags and banners. This has to do with the same thing.