What Borys spoke about.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. I am not surprised that after these statements, ECR colleagues simply fled, because they know perfectly well that the ETS cannot be spoken. It needs to be reformed, the errors contained in it need to be corrected. But this system is essentially supposed to make Europe energy independent, including from Russia. Do you know who said the ETS could not be terminated? Mateusz Morawiecki. Yes, the head of the ECR, a former Polish prime minister who, while he was prime minister, drew handfuls and spent money from the ETS. Unfortunately, not on the energy transition, but on everything else. And today, the most important task for us is to spend money well on the energy transition. We need changes in this system, but done with our heads. Finally, as Europe, we would be energy independent of crises such as the crisis or the war in Iran or the war waged by Russia. If we want to talk about this today, this is the place. And I regret that once again Patryk Jaki turned out to be a coward, told a few dirty words, a few untrue things, and then escaped from this room precisely because he knows perfectly well that he was in the Polish government, which agreed to the proposals of the Green Deal. Yes, Mateusz Morawiecki agreed to this. And today the same Mateusz Morawiecki is the head of the European Conservatives and Reformists and strikes at the system of which he was a co-author.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Indeed, the SAFE program is a unique success. It's ours together. We have succeeded in creating a programme that strengthens European security and at the same time allows for extraordinary investments in the European defence industry. And above all from this place I would like to appeal to my colleagues on the right side of the political scene, to right-wing populists. If you can't understand, don't bother. It is a shame that at a time when the enemy is in Moscow, you still cannot understand that we must be together and the European Union is a great common security project. And do not look for enemies in Brussels or Strasbourg, because the enemy is completely different. You can't understand it, so stop bothering me.

Mr President, thank you very much. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Ladies and Gentlemen, As rapporteur for this fund, which is unique in its essence, I would like to stress how important and dedicated this financial instrument is for two sectors. Ladies and Gentlemen, Parliament is of the opinion that the instrument dedicated to the coal and steel industry is something unique and therefore must remain in this budgetary structure as long as we are undergoing the energy transition. This fund is unique in that it delivers on the promise that the European Union has given to regions in transition, including the energy transition. I am talking about this fund not only because I come from Silesia, which is a unique place showing how to undergo a just transition. But this fund is also proof that we also need to invest in industries that are undergoing transformation and that cannot be closed overnight. The Council of the European Union has proposed to increase the budget to EUR 120 million with the fund fully disbursed by about 2038. Parliament supports this approach, but I want to stress in my report that this should be done under certain conditions. First, this money must go to regions that are affected by the transition. This is not money that should be spent in large academic centers just to conduct research for the sake of research. These measures should be dedicated precisely where the effects of the transition are felt most. Geographic balance – this is not a slogan, this is the key to how we should look at European funds not only in this fund, but also globally, in other funds that we will be able to debate in this room in the future. Second important element: this fund should be an industry-led fund. This is not a fund for theorists. This is the fund from which these industries are to draw, who know perfectly well what transformation they need and where the funds should be spent: engineers, technicians in Jastrzębie, Knurów, Dąbrowa Górnicza. I give these places from my homeland, because that's where the energy transition is taking place today. And finally, it is also concrete for the metallurgy. Yes, it is an industry that is suffering a lot at the moment as a result of wrong decisions that were made in the past. But also this industry has a chance to be rebuilt, but precisely thanks to the funds that will go for specific research. But here we need more European support, not just penalties that are imposed on those who do not meet certain requirements. Finally, the last very important thing that was included by the Parliament in this report. Before this fund expires, we expect the European Commission to present a follow-up plan on what will happen after this fund, because the transition will continue. We know very well that some dates imposed or selected earlier will not be kept. That is why it is so important to continue this type of funds, which I appeal for and I believe that this will be fulfilled by us in the future.

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. It is time for a serious discussion about the future of our citizens, so it is time to open and revise the ETS and take into account the withdrawal from the ETS 2. Today, citizens are trembling at high energy prices and some mechanisms need to be changed. I thank the Commission for addressing this issue, but if mistakes have been made here in the past, this should be corrected. Today we need a solid discussion about the future of Europe, a competitive Europe and a Europe that is independent from other parts of the world. But this is also a matter of our industry. Today we need strengthening, competitiveness and lowering prices. Today our steel, our metallurgy. There is nothing to look for in global markets, precisely because of high energy prices. Let us not limit the discussion by talking only about citizens, only about consumers, because it is not only about an individual person, but also about our companies, it is also about entrepreneurs, it is also about employees. That is why it is so important to speak openly about what has failed and look for solutions that can remind us in the future that we are and will continue to be competitive. Commissioner, we are open to the Commission's proposals, but I would like us to make it clear that we have made mistakes and that these mistakes need to be corrected.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Ladies and Gentlemen, First of all, I would like to thank you for this substantive debate, which has shown that in the European Parliament, when it comes to security, solidarity, we are able to speak with one voice, we are able to adopt good solutions, we are able to work well with the European Commission and the Council. This is a very important piece of legislation from the point of view of citizens' security, which, as I said at the outset, has already proved its worth in the most difficult times. Therefore, I thank the European Commission for this prolongation of this act, but I also thank the countries involved in the work of the committees, who, with their proposals and amendments, have made it possible for us to work out solutions that will not only make European citizens feel safe in the most difficult times of the year for the gas season, winter and spring, but also that we will work together to ensure that, thanks to the simplification of this act, we will, thanks to a kind of deregulation, make gas prices in Europe lower. The European Union has used this time very well. Member states have strengthened their infrastructure, but they have also shown that they can bear the necessary costs when it comes to the security of their neighbours, the security of countries that may have had problems with gas at that time. I would therefore like once again to thank you for your efforts in the ITRE Committee and tomorrow I will ask for a mandate to be able to start trilogues as soon as possible and to complete what the Committee has started.

Mr President, thank you very much. Ladies and Gentlemen, I was appointed as the head of the ITRE committee for this important role, as the Commission proposed to extend the regulation, which guaranteed gas security and solidarity between all the countries of the European Union at the most difficult time for Europe. It is very important that Europe at a crucial moment managed to secure citizens in a situation where Russia used gas as an element of blackmail, as a tool to conduct its dirty, warlike policy. Today, Europe must face the challenges of the next winter at this difficult time. The regulation, which was successfully adopted, expires at the end of this year and the Commission has therefore proposed to extend it for another two years, while ensuring a revision of all rules covering the security of raw materials next year. The ITRE Committee has reached a very broad political agreement which, on the one hand, guarantees the security of citizens of the European Union when it comes to access to gas in key situations, while, on the other hand, we propose that you give us a negotiating mandate to be more flexible, less bureaucratic, but above all to have gas prices in Europe fall. During this time, the European Union countries have managed to strengthen infrastructure, build new ports that accept LNG gas, make us more united and more in solidarity than when we introduced these rules. In its political compromise, the ITRE Committee proposes more flexibility as regards the end date by which storages must be filled. Well, we propose that it should not be a specific date, but rather a timeframe, so that from a market point of view there is more flexibility, and thus it did not turn out that gas prices can be higher in summer than in winter on key trajectory dates. The second very important thing: ensure that the minimum level, from which there are no derogations anymore, is 75%. But watch out! We have set this target at 83%, of course with the possibility of negotiations in trilogues. As announced by the European Commission, Parliament will also significantly reduce bureaucratic burdens. Therefore, we limit the issue of reporting to key elements. We will want the trust between the Member States and the European Commission to be the basis for this reporting, of course taking into account the fact that the Commission needs to know at what level these gas storage facilities are. We also maintain tools for the Commission to enforce in case of non-compliance. And, of course, like the European Commission, we want the European Union to become completely independent of Russian gas.

Madam President, thank you very much. Ladies and Gentlemen, Commissioner, I'm sorry. On behalf of the ITRE Committee, I have the honour to put to you a question concerning the situation in the AI industry, namely the recent decision of the United States to impose export restrictions on advanced AI chips and the weight of AI models. This poses a serious challenge to the functioning of the European Union’s single market, its economic resilience and its technological sovereignty. Classifying the Member States of the European Union into different categories undermines the principles of the European Union's common commercial policy and threatens the European Union's common approach to the development of artificial intelligence and industrial capacity building. In this connection, I would like to ask the following questions: first, how do these measures affect the implementation of the Chips Act, in particular as regards the third pillar (monitoring and crisis response) and the AI factories initiative? What adjustment measures is the Commission considering? The second question is how does the Commission plan to mitigate the potentially negative effects on Member States with export limits and on overall technological development in Europe? Third, what concrete steps is the Commission taking to further accelerate the development of intra-EU production capacities for AI chips in order to reduce dependence on external suppliers and strengthen the economic resilience of the European Union? The competitiveness compass contains only limited references to semiconductors. Therefore, is the Commission considering updating the Chips Acts to further support and accelerate investments in the European semiconductor ecosystem? Finally, does the Commission plan to speed up the establishment of the recently announced Centre for Artificial Intelligence Improvement and Research? If so, how and when is it to be established?