Speeches

Madam President! Colleagues, Commissioner! What do you see when you hear the term artificial intelligence? Robots taking over the world? A dystopia of Orwellian dimensions? Or maybe an app that can diagnose skin cancer just as accurately as experts? Or the Bluedot machine that predicted the COVID-19 pandemic before the WHO did it? Artificial intelligence, like everything else, has at least two sides. If used responsibly, it can benefit all of us. But if it is abused, it can have disastrous consequences. That is why it is important that we in the EU become leaders when it comes to the development of artificial intelligence, because we have a unique approach to technological development. We have people at the centre and insist that technology must be reliable. It goes hand in hand with high innovation, economic growth and greater competitiveness. But right now it is the United States and China that have taken the lead, and if we do not catch up with them, they will be the ones who will set the standard for how artificial intelligence should be and should be used. It's not supposed to be like that! The EU really needs to do this. The challenges of artificial intelligence today must not be turned into machine stormers. They must not become an excuse to be against progress and against technological development. What matters is that we make some demands on artificial intelligence. It must be developed and used in a transparent, ethical and responsible manner. That is the European way. Here we have the opportunity to take the lead back. I think the AIDA report is very good because it strikes precisely this balance. We are increasing investment in AI, we are making sure that European legislation is harmonised and we are addressing the risks inherent in the use of AI. I hope that in the future we can use artificial intelligence more in Europe. But this presupposes that it is human-centric and that we have legislation that ensures reliability in the way we use AI. With this, I warmly welcome the report.

Madam President! One planet is not enough if the whole world lived as we do here in Europe. If the whole world built houses, bought cars, clothes and electronics, as we do in Europe, then we would need 2.8 planets. It goes without saying that the way we live, produce and buy in Europe is not sustainable. We need to get away from this use-and-throw-away mentality. An important step towards more sustainable production and consumption is, among other things, the right to repair. I am, of course, pleased that the European Commission is considering various options under pressure from us in the European Parliament. There are many things that prevent us from repairing and consuming more sustainably. It is time consuming, it is difficult to get spare parts, and the price of spare parts is actually also high. But we need to change things. We need our products to live longer and also can be repaired. So I would like to call on the Commission, in its work towards a legislative proposal, not only to give us a right to information on repair, but to ensure that we as consumers have a real legal right to have our products repaired. I really believe that consumers can be used to push this green transition forward. If we have an opportunity as consumers to demand that the product be repaired, then there are also more who will do it, and if there are more who will do it, then we will really get the circular economy going. There is good business in it, and it may be that there are a few who lose his job, but then there are some other jobs that come in instead. This is a very good thing, and we also know that this is what consumers are looking for. In fact, 77% of consumers in the EU prefer to have their products repaired rather than buy new ones. So everything indicates that there will also be a lot of support for it. In addition, of course, we must also do everything else that we have proposed and that I support. We need to design the products so that they last longer. We need to make sure that the public sector buys much more green, we need a product passport and all these things. But frankly, fundamentally, it is important for us to get a right to have our products repaired.

Madam President! Commissioners, colleagues. The pictures from Butja are horrific. The killing of innocent civilians. A man on his way home with a bag of potatoes. Another who comes cycling, piles with female next to the road, naked and burned. The pictures are so gruesome that they are hard to describe. We lack words, but right now we need words, we need political words and we need action behind the words. What we see in Bucha looks like war crimes committed by Putin, and it must have consequences. Those behind these brutal attacks and killings must be held accountable. This applies to both those with military power and those with political power. That is why, dear friends, we need to step up the sanctions against Russia and Belarus once again. In close coordination here in the European Union, but also with our allies in general. We need to put thumbscrews on Putin. It must be felt when you violate international rules. Colleagues here today have talked a lot about energy sanctions. I totally support it. We need to step up sanctions, but we can also do more. In fact, we also need to look at digital sanctions. Every day, Russian tech companies reap sensitive data from millions of smartphones, including smartphones here in Europe. It is data that could potentially be used against Ukrainians fleeing or Russians working against Putin's regime. For the road from the Russian data harvest to Putin's desk in the Kremlin is quite short, even if the mobile phone is located in Europe. In this way, every single app containing components from a Russian tech company poses a potential danger to anyone working for a peaceful Ukraine and a democratic Russia. Therefore, we also need to look in the toolbox for digital sanctions now. We need to introduce a data embargo in the EU and in the West so that the data flow from Russian tech companies can end as soon as possible. We need to take all weapons out of Putin's hands, including the digital weapons he uses against his own citizens and against the Ukrainians. I hope we can stop it now.

Madam President! Every year, Earth Overshoot Day moves forward. The day marks when we have used the amount of resources that the Earth can regenerate in an entire year. In 2021, the day was already 29 July. We must dare to have high ambitions if we want a green planet with resources that our children and our grandchildren can live good lives on - also in the future. And that is precisely what is contained in the 8th Environment Action Programme on which we are voting. Pressure from the European Parliament has ensured that the ambitions for the environment and sustainability are higher than in the Commission's original proposal. At the same time, we have ensured that there is a holistic approach where climate and the environment are not seen as decoupled from the economy or from the way we should organise our society. The objective is clear: By 2050, we must all be able to live good lives without draining the planet of resources. The EU must be climate neutral and circular, and biodiversity must be enhanced. The gaps in our society need to be narrowed. These are important but crucial goals for our future. But we also need to make sure we get there. That is why we also have clear targets for what we need to achieve already by 2030, and we demand that the Commission come up with proposals by 2024 on how to concretise the milestones. With the 8th EAP, we are taking further important steps towards a more sustainable world. A world where we become free from pollution and dangerous chemistry and leave a greener planet than the one we have taken over.

Madam President! In 1991, batteries were something we put in the remote control, in the alarm clock and in the walkman. Today we have batteries in everything from mobile phones to electric scooters and electric cars, not to mention batteries in industry. And the consumption of batteries will not be less preliminary. It is important for our green transition that more things are powered by electricity in the future - and thus also by batteries. In fact, everything suggests that by 2030 world demand for batteries will be 14 times higher than today and that as much as 17% of this demand will come from the EU. Batteries don't grow on trees. Many of the batteries' ingredients are produced by mining, and very often the resources available to us are limited. Therefore, it goes without saying that we need to ensure a significantly better use of our batteries. We must recycle them, which is why it is also good that the European Parliament's report manages to include more types of batteries, both from the household and from industry. Many more than the Commission had proposed. It is important that the vast majority of batteries are covered. At the same time, we also ensure that the requirements for hazardous chemistry remain in the battery legislation. We will have standards for chargers and we will have CO2 labelling and so on. We do a lot, a lot of things. If it comes to the European Parliament, we will have a European battery law that covers the entire life of the battery. It is a circular economy at its best.

Oh, ma'am. The President! The fight against disinformation and fake news has never been more important. We are seeing right now how Putin's propaganda machine is an active part of the war in Ukraine. Disinformation is a direct threat to our free and democratic world and has become the tool of choice for authoritarian regimes to undermine election results, citizens' decisions and trust in society. We must not turn a blind eye to this. That is why I welcome the very good proposals in the INGE report. As rapporteur on the DSA, I particularly welcome the report's focus on the role of social media in spreading disinformation. For too long, the algorithms of social media have spread hatred, division and fake news. Instead of removing or downplaying problematic content and the accounts that spread it, social media has created an algorithmic megaphone that gets the content out to even more people. And at the same time, they have made money from this business model of spreading the harmful algorithms. It has to stop now. Many of the good proposals in the report I am struggling to get into the final DSA legislation: algorithms must be made transparent, platforms must be accountable, dark patterns must be removed, and deep fakes and online advertising must be clearly labelled. We need to ban targeted advertising to minors, and then we need to look at the business models of the platforms, because it is they who are responsible for part of the problem we have. Better today than tomorrow.

Mr. President! The EU's single market provides jobs and growth. It also ensures good consumer protection, it ensures a green transition and it ensures fair and social progress. I believe that this is one of the greatest achievements of the European Union with the single market. This is the engine of our collaboration. In many ways, the internal market is absolutely crucial for us. We also need the internal market to continue to develop. We need to protect it and do it better. That is why we must not accept protectionism or unjustified obstacles that hinder the completion of the internal market, and that is why this report is good to have. We will look at: What works and what doesn't? In my opinion, we need to look at whether there are any obstacles that we need to remove. For example, if there are unreasonable language barriers in the procurement or if there is otherwise insufficient enforcement of our common rules. And if there are unjustified rules and obstacles that are problematic, then of course they must be removed. Because we need a well-functioning internal market. But we also need to recognize that just because it's a rule, it doesn't have to be a barrier. We have many rules that are also important, which serve to protect workers, the environment and so on. So while addressing the barriers, we must also respect the right of Member States to ensure proper environmental protection, consumer protection or labour rights. But in many ways, I think this report strikes the right balance. Our good internal market needs to be made even better.

Mr. President! I would like to start by congratulating Mr Benifei on an extremely important and good report. In fact, it can be said quite simply. All toys purchased in and for the EU must be safe. Unfortunately, today we see that this is not the case. Toys from third countries, in particular, are being sold on online marketplaces that do not comply with our internal market rules at all. Parents can too easily click dangerous toys into the basket. Toys with carcinogens, with loose parts or with strong magnets that destroy the stomach of children. Just to mention some of the problems. It's not supposed to be like that. We must not accept that. Parents, grandparents and others must be able to shop safely online, and dangerous chemistry simply does not belong in our toys. Online marketplaces are increasing the availability of dangerous toys, making it probably one of the biggest challenges for safer toys in the EU. We need to close the legal loopholes. Platforms should become responsible, and I welcome the fact that the report also addresses this, among other things. We need to solve the problem so that people and children can play with safe toys.

Mr President, I would like to thank my colleagues so much for a very good and very interesting debate. I really appreciated to listen to all your comments, and what I see and hear is that we are rather united. Of course, we have small differences, but there is big and broad support behind the proposal from the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO) with all the associated committees. I think that is really important, and I’m so happy to hear that. Of course, we have the vote. I have already just voted, and I hope that this debate also will be reflected in the vote, and hopefully we will see that people will vote to support the IMCO report with a couple of extra things. But I am really happy, and I do believe that what we have here is, as Ms Vestager just told us, an example of a good, well—functioning democracy. Now we need to start negotiating with the Council. That’s not going to be easy. I’m sure that we will have differences, but there is no doubt that, by the end of the day, we will adopt a very good and very important and very needed legislation. We need it, and we need to do it speedily, because we have kind of a sense of urgency here – we have so many problems we need to tackle. But today is the first major step in taking back control from the platforms and creating a democratic rulebook for the platforms. I’m really happy to participate in that, and I’m looking so much forward to the discussion and negotiations with the Council. Thanks colleagues, I’m sure that we are standing rather united behind this.

Mr President! Now we are taking back control from the tech giants and bringing our digital EU legislation into the 21st century. We are building on the e-commerce directive that we adopted in 2000. At that time, the world looked very different. Facebook didn't exist, Mark Zuckerberg hadn't even got the idea, and Steve Jobs and Apple hadn't yet launched the iPod, let alone thought about the iPhone. Amazon was still a deficit business, and EU trade with China was significantly less than it is today. So it is time for us to fundamentally update our digital legislation. The DSA could become the new gold standard for the tech industry, not just in Europe, but around the world. Big tech nations like the U.S. and China are closely following what we are now agreeing on. Just like they did when we created GDPR. With the DSA, we take a fundamental stand against the Wild West that the digital has evolved into. For far too long, illegal products and content have spread online. Algorithms have fostered division, and recommender systems have destroyed young people's self-esteem. The digital has at the same time made the distance between us shorter, but dug the ditches deeper. You can write to people from all over the world, but judging by the debate on social media, it's all too easy to forget that it's just a person you're writing with. You can buy products from all corners of the world, but you can no longer be sure that the product you buy actually lives up to the rules we have in Europe. And just as easy it is to click the item into the virtual basket, just as difficult it can be to reach the seller if you experience problems. That is why we need strong new legislation. Legislation to ensure that what is illegal offline will also be illegal online in the future. We are now voting on that legislation in the European Parliament. The DSA contains an incredible number of important much-needed positive measures. I would like to emphasise here that we are improving consumer safety, that we are putting a stop to the endless harvest of data and that we are opening the black box of algorithms. Concretely, we are improving consumer safety in three areas: Firstly, we propose that consumers and citizens should be able to access the intermediary service through a single point of contact. It will give social media users better opportunities to get in touch with the services if, for example, their content is removed illegally or their account is blocked. At the same time, it will also allow consumers who have unknowingly bought an illegal or dangerous product online to get in touch directly with the online marketplace and not just with some chat feature. Secondly, we require online marketplaces to do more to protect consumers from illegal products. They must quickly and effectively remove the illegal products and contact the users who have managed to purchase these illegal products before they were taken down. And thirdly, we introduce a right to seek compensation directly from the platforms for both consumers and businesses if it is that the platforms do not live up to the provisions we set in the DSA. This is a significant improvement for both the consumers and the companies that live off the platforms and use the platforms. We are also slowing down the platforms' use of our data with a number of new rules. Targeted advertising for minors must be stopped. Minors' data shall not be harvestable and used for commercial purposes. We in this House are putting an end to this. At the same time, it should be easier to withdraw your consent if you have given it to targeted advertising. It shouldn't be harder to say no than it is to say yes. And finally, we want to ban "dark patterns". No more designing a dialogue box so that citizens' choices are determined and influenced in a certain direction. All of this gives us more control over our own data. Then we will also open the algorithms' black box and have both the Commission and the Digital Services Coordinator look at the reports on the consequences of algorithms. In the future, social media should make an assessment of what it means with the changes in their algorithms that they make. Does an algorithm, for example, promote eating disorders and self-harm? If it does, the platform must familiarise itself with it and correct the problem. The biggest platforms can no longer hide behind a veil of ignorance. Now they are forced to face the consequences of their algorithms. That's really important. We're taking back control of the tech giants. With the European Parliament's proposal for a new gold standard for tech, we are sending a very, very strong signal to the Council. We insist on legislation with two main objectives: We must protect users and consumers, and we must ensure that the digital economy can grow within a democratic, transparent and reliable framework. I am incredibly proud of what we have achieved with this agreement in the European Parliament. A lot of people deserve a big thank you. First of all, I would like to say a big thank you to the shadow rapporteurs for the cooperation we have had in IMCO, also to the associated committees and to the coordinators' colleagues. I would also like to thank all the colleagues in my own group and other colleagues in this House who have contributed to proposals and to discussions, because this is such an important area. I'm glad you've been there. I would also like to extend my sincere thanks to the staff of the IMCO secretariat and of the S&D Group. Without their work, we would not have come here. I would also like to thank the two Commissioners, Mrs Vestager and Mr Breton, very much for their excellent cooperation. Finally, I would also like to thank the Presidency, both Portuguese, Slovenian and, for the time being, French. We have had a good cooperation so far, and I am sure that it will be very good when we start the trilogue negotiations shortly. I hope we can do it relatively quickly. European citizens deserve us to swiftly finalise this legislation so that we can have a safer and more secure internet. We all need that. Thank you!

Mr President! It is deeply worrying that we continue to see new Corona variants creating problems for our health around the world. No one is safe until everyone is safe. That is why we in the European Union also need to do much more than we do today. As far as the EU is concerned, we need to make a huge effort. Here we do not lack vaccines, but we must make a great effort to overcome misinformation and scepticism against the vaccines, because that is what is the problem in terms of getting up and ensuring proper, good and broad coverage. It's about making an effort on social media. It is about creating more information. In terms of the global perspective, there is a lack of both vaccines and help in overcoming misinformation, and here I believe that the European Union must play an even greater role than we do today. We need to get more vaccines to the world, and we need to help them get rolled out. We must also work with them to combat misinformation and vaccine hesitancy, which is global. No one is safe until everyone is safe.

Madam President! Commissioners, colleagues! Then we are taking back the fight and control from the big tech giants. When we vote later today on the Digital Markets Act, the DMA, we are putting our foot down against the very biggest tech gatekeepers, who have been able to dictate the rules of our Digital Single Market for too long. We in the European Parliament want it to stop now. The rules must be democratic. Together with the Digital Services Act (DSA), the DMA sets the framework for a fairer digital sphere for the benefit of users, consumers and businesses alike. Now we ensure that the biggest tech giants' business model will benefit the users to a greater extent, and we will create the framework for a more free and fair competition, so that also new ones can come. We introduce requirements for interoperability. I think this is an important tool in the fight against the monopoly of platforms. And then we send a clear signal that the largest platforms need to rethink their business model based on harvesting and selling our personal data. With the DMA, targeted advertising against minors now becomes illegal for the largest gatekeepers. It is an important step in the fight to ensure that we stop the big platforms' extreme harvesting of our data. Finally, I am also very pleased that we managed to include a ban on the so-called dark patterns, in the DMA. Now it is forbidden for the largest companies to influence our decisions by designing their interfaces It's an unconscious way to get us to act. We need to stop that. So all in all, I think that the DMA is an important step for us consumers to regain control over our personal data and for us to ensure a much better and better functioning internal market. Let me conclude by expressing my sincere thanks to my colleague Evelyne Gebhardt for her hard work on this issue, but also for her 28 years in the service of Europe. I think that deserves a big thank you. Thank you for that and thank you for a great deal of work with the DMA, also to Mr Schwab.

Madam President! Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. This is an incredibly important debate we are having tonight and I would like to thank the INGE Committee for raising this issue again in this House. Because we are in a situation where we need to do something to regulate social platforms. But let me start somewhere else, because do you remember when we called the social platforms “our virtual assembly house”? We hoped that they would help strengthen democratic dialogue and bring citizens closer to decision-makers. You could say that digital has made us more connected. More information is available. We can also discuss more with each other. That's good enough. But it is also as if the digital creates a kind of distance, where you very quickly forget that it is a real person you write to. It creates a harsh tone among many people, and it prevents many from wanting to participate in the democratic debate. At the same time, both misinformation and disinformation spread almost like dandelion seeds in the summer wind. Algorithms help spread this because conflict creates clicks, and algorithms interpret clicks as interest. Then they send the story out to even more people. Why do they do that? Because this is big business. There is so much money in this for the platforms that they are not interested in doing enough. We heard this the other day from Facebook's whistle-blower, and we also saw the consequences of this kind of misinformation and disinformation on January 6 in Washington. We need to do more. Fortunately, there is some legislation we are working on. I have the Digital Services Act. Here we can do something, but that is not enough, and I am not sure that what we have in it is actually good enough. We must also use this law to tighten up the rules considerably. We need to hold the platforms accountable. We cannot accept that they are completely running their own race. Thank you for the debate. I hope that together we will make an effort to resolve this, because we must - for the sake of democracy.

Madam President! Preparing the EU for the next health crisis is a serious matter. That's why I'm glad we're having a discussion about HERA here today. The way we have dealt with the coronavirus pandemic was indeed reactive. We were naturally acting backwards. Therefore, we need to be better at seeing the health crises before they hit. And we must ensure that we have the necessary production of medicines and protective equipment, etc. All of this is something we all agree on, and that is why it is also good that we are discussing it here today, because we need to be better prepared when the next pandemic strikes. But – it is therefore also a great pity that the Commission chooses to treat HERA as a matter of urgency and chooses to keep the European Parliament out of the discussion on how to organise it. We have been affected by this for over a year and a half. It takes time to find out what we can learn from it, and then it also requires better solutions. And for better solutions, the European Parliament should be involved. We're not. We owe it to each other to do this properly.

Mr President! The world needs all democratic forces to stand together, and the EU must therefore keep close to everyone who shares our values. This is not the time to push anyone away. The European Union and the United States share history and values, and there is no doubt that we also share the future. That is why the US is and must be the EU's closest trading partner, cooperation partner and security ally. But the United States is not the only ally of the European Union, nor should it be. As chairman of the Japan delegation, I must stress how important it is that the European Union also strengthens ties with all our democratic allies throughout the world, including in the Pacific region. We must maintain close contact with all those who share our struggle for democracy, fundamental human rights and multilateral cooperation. With increased European strategic autonomy, we can ensure that the EU becomes a strong and equal partner with everyone, including the United States. The two things go hand in hand, they are not each other's opposites.

Mr President! We have learned from the coronavirus crisis. The pandemic exposed and underlined both the strengths and weaknesses of the European Community. When the coronavirus hit Europe, we were too slow to react. We were too poorly prepared and had too few protective equipment, and a large part of our health production was distributed to countries outside the EU. This aggravated the situation. Never before in the history of the European Union has our cooperation faced such a great challenge. But over the last year and a half, we have gained new insights into what we can do in the collaboration. Both what we can do in the community and what responsibility the member states have for the community. We cannot politically decide how or whether the next pandemic will affect us, but we can politically ensure that we are better equipped. That's what we need. The initiatives we are voting on this week improve our European health cooperation, and that is necessary and good. We are strengthening the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control ECDC. This means that we can detect health crises faster and better respond to them in time together. We are improving coordination between EU Member States. We are connected, and it makes sense that we coordinate the procurement of protective equipment, vaccines and such things together. Together we can ensure a better supply all the way through the production chain, and I think that is quite crucial, necessary and a good lesson. This week, therefore, we are voting to better equip the European Union against new health crises, and I am voting in favour of that.