Speeches

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the objective of combating climate change is cross-cutting, involves everyone, and the path also involves rigour and, at the same time, gradualism and ambition. The European Union is doing its part in financial terms. The multiannual financial framework devotes 30 % of its amount to the objective ‘combating climate change’. In the Recovery and Resilience Facility, the amount shall be 37 % for that objective. But no one and nothing can be left out, and financial markets are also essential for private investments, corporate investments, too, to respect and lead to the goal of the climate transition. That is why I welcome this report, this approval, because supervision will also be important and the fight against fraud will also be important. green washing is essential.

Madam President, housing is a right that is primarily in the hands of the Member States. The European Union has to do its part and it does. The European Union is making available through Cohesion Policy, Recovery and Resilience Plans and InvestEU a multi-million storm that, unfortunately, Member States are not using. This housing problem is serious in my country, Portugal. Commissioner, how do you explain that Portugal did not want EUR 8.3 billion that was available until 31 August and could be used for this purpose? On loans, not only Portugal, EUR 93 billion has been wasted. How can we claim more financial resources if Member States do not even use what is available? In addition, there are also Member States that are against private initiative, that are against property, that promote, for example, coercive renting that takes away trust in investors. It is not in this way, it is not by pushing investors away, that we will solve the housing issue. In addition, wages and taxation are in the hands of the Member States, which should use it to lower house prices, while at the same time improving youth wages, among other things. And this is not being done either. In a number of Member States, Europe is guilty of what they do not do and try to Europeanise their incompetence. And that is unacceptable.

Mr President, I congratulate the Commissioner on his permanent readiness to be here. We have a trade deficit that has worsened. It is already over EUR 400 billion. The European Union reacts slowly when it should be proactive and the rulers have a lot of responsibility. The question is: do you not think that we should have investments in common structuring projects to strengthen the strategic autonomy of the European Union? Do you think the STEP will be approved and do you have the guarantee that those Member States that are so committed to the European Union's strategic autonomy will strengthen it? This also helps to reduce the trade deficit. Finally, wouldn't the Mercosur agreement be extremely important for us to reduce our dependencies on China? What about the agreements, for example, with Africa? Are we not forgetting these two continents, Africa and Latin America?

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner and Council representative, in the negotiations on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020, the European Parliament argued that the 2021-2027 budget was not up to the challenges, was not robust, did not have flexibility, would not respond to unforeseen events and that the payment of the debt arising from NextGenerationEU, the recovery and resilience plans, should not be within budgetary limits. Time has proved us right. The war in Ukraine, the pandemic and inflation have shown that we cannot have a budget of this small size and without flexibility. Inflation alone represents an additional cost of EUR 74 billion. That is why our proposal is not even a revision, it is another replacement to respond to the challenges we face and, in addition, to be able to support European citizens. The cost of debt was EUR 15 billion in interest alone, in 2021-2027 it will be around EUR 30 billion. This means that we must put the cost of this debt that gave rise to the RRPs within the multiannual financial framework, but above its limits. Finally, we need sufficient amounts for strategic projects that strengthen our autonomy. The Council – it is a question – agrees with Parliament and will be ready to support us this time, as we have shown that we were right? I expect an answer.

Madam President, thank you for your leadership, perseverance, competence that helps all the citizens of the European Union. Member States did not want €93 billion under the recovery and resilience plans and had it by 31 August this year. My question is whether the European Commission is available to reuse these amounts, for example for strengthening the strategic autonomy of the European Union, for example for the Platform for Strategic Investments in Projects and Technologies, the so-called STEP platform. We must not lose these resources. Furthermore, in terms of energy, it is essential that Portugal is not an energy island. We need interconnections. Energy and interconnections need to exist and exist, inter alia, in the Pyrenees. Finally, Portugal too cannot be a railway island and the railroad is essential. The discussion between the Iberian and European gauge is not finished and we need and the European Commission defends European gauge in 2030. It seems to me that it is not fair, it is not correct, nor efficient to bet on the Iberian gauge. And the dispute that exists, perhaps with Spain, I hope that the European Commission will help to resolve it.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, representative of the Council, every year we regret the fires, drought, deaths and floods. More than words, we must have action. And the Member States are not doing their part. You're not short of money. You have storms of millions. My country, Portugal, did not want €8.3 billion in the RRP loan window, which it could use for water storage, for the construction of irrigation and to help agriculture in times of drought, for planning and for the forest, to help the rural world. You do not lack financial resources and you need to plan and execute. On the other hand, in addition to prevention, which is the best solution, combat is also necessary. And here, the European Commission, often against the will of the Council, has done its work in strengthening the European Civil Protection Mechanism, in strengthening RescEU. With fewer resources, we can do more: sharing of resources and good coordination. That is why we are calling for action to be taken together in the fight, but then for everyone to do their homework and not even for European resources to be used to blame Europe for the resources that do not exist in each Member State. Everyone has to do their part. The European Union, the European Commission and the European Parliament have done so. More is required of Member States.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the European Union must move towards strategic autonomy, it must promote competitiveness and productivity, entrepreneurship through common projects. And you also have to value the merit, the rigor, the work. Member States that do not lack financial resources (have a storm of millions) have to move forward with projects that should also be common projects, which are unfortunately being forgotten. And besides, they should do their homework. In my country, Portugal, the income tax wedge is 41.9%. This takes resources away from wages. Wages are very low. The social elevator's broken. This social elevator, mobility, must be arranged, and this is in the hands of the Member States. Moreover, it is unacceptable to try to level out from below. Minimum wages are low and now many are complaining that average wages should approach the minimum wage, which is truly unacceptable, but it is the ideology that is being heard, including here in this House. In addition, we need to cut red tape, make good use of European funds, provide tax predictability and invest in small and medium-sized enterprises. This is how we will be able to have a future, a strong middle class and give hope to our young people and they deserve it.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, water is an essential asset and a limited resource and must therefore be managed competently at national and European level. First of all, we have to fight waste. In my country, in Portugal, 190 billion litres of water intended for human consumption are wasted every year. We need to tackle this waste and invest in the efficiency and maintenance of our systems. In addition, there is a need to interconnect public water supply systems and, if necessary, invest and invest in digitisation plants. Moreover, because we know that it is a national competence, but even if it is, the European Union cannot, however, give up its obligations and must encourage the Member States to meet targets in the fight against waste. I therefore suggest to the Commission a European plan for the efficient use of this water resource. There is also a need for efficient coordination and European coordination for water management. Water is essential for human consumption, but also for agriculture. And in my country, 35% of the territory in May was in a situation of severe and extreme drought. We need to invest in water storage to enable farmers to continue producing affordable food. And there is no shortage of resources for Member States: the recovery and resilience plans, the ERDF, the Cohesion Fund, the EAFRD. The European Commission needs to encourage the Member States to use the billions of euros, the storm of millions they have, to manage well this essential resource for human life, essential for agriculture and even essential in terms of diversity. It is the future of the citizens that is at stake. We must not miss this opportunity that European funds give us.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, in order to have a favourable environment in the European Union for attracting investment, we must not be afraid of the words entrepreneurship, merit, productivity and competitiveness. It is with these words that we attract investment, it is with the love of small and medium-sized enterprises and liking private initiative that we can move forward. Key competences are in the hands of the Member States. It is not enough to have many financial resources as they do with NextGenerationEU and the Multiannual Financial Framework. The bureaucracy is in the hands of each Member State. How long does it take to license an industry? If an administrative case in my country goes to court, you may be waiting for dozens of years for a decision. In addition, tax predictability is necessary and, in addition to this predictability, the reduction of the tax burden is essential. Educational skills are also in the hands of the Member States. The European Union must do its part by strengthening programmes such as research and innovation. And we need common projects to be more connected. We need the energy union, the digital union, the union of health, civil protection, security and, with fewer resources, if we are together, united and acting in a coordinated way, we can do more.

Madam President, Madam Vice-President of the Commission, ladies and gentlemen, major infrastructure projects, particularly railways, are essential for the competitiveness of the European Union, for territorial cohesion and also for sustainability. We know that competence is national, but it is necessary for the European Commission to be vigilant and to tell the Member States that they must quickly implement the funds in this area that are at their disposal. In the case of Portugal, Ferrovia 2020 has €2 billion that had to be implemented by 2023 – this year – and there are €450 million for projects that have not even started yet. Furthermore, Madam Vice-President, there needs to be coordination, there needs to be complementarity, and interconnections and interoperability are essential. In the case of my country, Portugal, the European gauge and the Iberian gauge are still being discussed. It is clear that the rail gauge in Europe should be unique. If Spain does not move forward with the European gauge and if Portugal, for example, does the European gauge, we will become an island in terms of rail transport. And the same goes for essential projects like energy. From that point of view, it is unacceptable, for example, that in France Mr Macron, who says he defends the European Union's strategic autonomy, seeks to prevent the electricity interconnections that are essential. We're all connected. We should all be truly connected and connected, and therefore these words and this appeal.

Mr President, Commissioner, Minister, colleagues and colleagues, in the European Union, farmers produce high-quality food at affordable prices, with high standards of food safety, animal welfare and environmental standards. Farmers are essential, as the pandemic has shown. Farmers, however, struggle with the context costs exacerbated by the war. And here I ask the Council and the Commission: We need to pay farmers what we owe them. It is necessary that Member States pay first pillar aid in a timely manner. In my country, in Portugal, 180 000 farmers are at risk of not receiving the subsidies to which they are entitled under the first pillar on time. They also open applications for rural development and do not burden farmers with more red tape. Don't overburden them, too, at a time like the present, with more demands. It is not possible, fair or acceptable to reduce the production area by 10%. This will have a consequence: more expensive food costs, more imports, products that do not meet the same standards in terms of environmental requirements. We support gradualism. Farmers are essential and have shown great responsibility and are the best friends of the environment. They value farmers and the rural world.

Madam President, Minister, Commissioner, in view of the debate, the report and the work we have done on the European Development Fund, I ask you to grant discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget for the eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Fund funds. With regard to future steps, I would like to reinforce the call for greater planning, greater visibility of this fund and the search for results that are even more positive. These funds require multiannual plans that can provide predictability and stability. In addition, they require another word: involvement. Involvement of beneficiaries, those who will also implement the funds of local and regional authorities. In this sense, it is also important, and I insist, that the private sector be involved, so that we can have not only grants, but also loans for the purpose of development. The European Union, which is the world's largest donor, which is the world's largest provider of development aid, must maintain this priority over the economies that need it most, with the aim also of reducing poverty. And I welcome the fact that the European Development Fund is increasingly being used for education and vocational training. This is how we can give hope to the youth, and in particular to the youth of the African continent. Right now, in Africa, we have 1250 million people. By 2050 it will be double, 2.5 billion. The average age will be around 21 years, a very young population. We have an obligation to give them hope and to enable them to live in their territory, in the land they love.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, congratulations to the Commissioner, congratulations to the Council. The European Union is the world's largest donor, and it is also the world's largest provider of development aid. However, there is no such perception. It is necessary to give visibility to what the European Union does in terms of humanitarian aid, in terms of development aid. It is a matter of justice, but it is also for us to have a geopolitical European Union, as we want. The European Development Fund was intergovernmental. The European Union had this fund outside the Union budget, but Parliament gave discharge. And that is one of the reasons why, in 2021, we only made payments with the European Development Fund and there was no commitment. Since 2021, with the new Multiannual Financial Framework, – fortunately and always we defend it – the European Development Fund has been integrated into the Multiannual Financial Framework. Africa is one of the most benefited from this fund. It is the largest recipient of EU budget support, followed by the European Neighbourhood, Asia and Latin America. The European Development Fund and the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument, which has around EUR 80 billion and where this fund is integrated, should be linked to a strategy for Africa. They must also be linked to a strategy for Latin America. And in this area, the Mercosur agreement is an agreement that would be very important. The European Development Fund and the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument should also seek to uphold values such as democracy, peace, the protection of life and human dignity, freedom, the rule of law. However, in the relationship with these countries, we should use the word cooperation as a keyword. We're not giving lessons to anyone. Let's try to cooperate. In order to achieve good cooperation, we should also, and should, require planning. I am one of those who believe, for the future, that we should ask countries for multiannual plans, investment plans corresponding to the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 to seek synergies, projects that should be cross-border, projects that could and should also be important for the European Union and aligned with the objectives of climate change and digital. Education is key, vocational training, upskilling. We have to give quality of life to the young people of that space and, therefore, the commitment to education is absolutely essential. By attracting small and medium-sized enterprises, with private investment, we will also achieve the goal of combating poverty. That is why it was essential and important that grants could also be linked to loans, that the European Fund for Sustainable Development could be working together with the European Development Fund to achieve the link between loans and grants, so that we can have projects where private people also come in, so that we can create wealth, to reduce the poverty that unfortunately exists on our planet. More than 1.2 billion people live in extreme poverty and our funds also aim to: reducing poverty on a global scale.

Mr President, I would like to thank all the Members who have taken part in this debate. There are points on which I do not agree. I don't agree with new taxes, more income taxes, more property taxes. We have Member States where property and income taxes are already almost in a situation of confiscation. But it's important to have revenue, new revenue. Otherwise, we will either call on Member States to put more money in order to pay off the debt resulting from the recovery and resilience plans, or we will have a cut in European programmes and funds worth EUR 15 billion per year, which we do not consider acceptable. And so we need smart revenues and one example is a fair border mechanism. Products coming from third countries and entering the European Union – and those countries, where they are manufactured, pay miserable wages of around $2 a day, below the poverty line – these products should be taxed, which will help our companies, which will help improve our competitiveness, which will give us more competition. And this recipe does not penalise European citizens and that is our main goal. And please stop saying that there are European taxes. Taxes are not European, which we are talking about. They are decided unanimously in the Council and then involve the ratification of all national parliaments, as it would have to be. We want a credible budget, a stable budget, with the necessary revenues to meet the objectives we set ourselves. We want smart development, sustainable, inclusive development, competitiveness, sustainability and cohesion.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. Commissioner, the budget of the European Union needs genuine own resources, genuine revenue. The distinction between net contributors and net beneficiaries is unacceptable, when all Member States benefit from the EU budget and all benefit even more from the internal market. In fact, the so-called frugals benefit the most from the European Union's internal market. We already have a small budget, around 1% of Gross National Income, a budget in difficulty in the face of reduced flexibility to respond to requests, to be in line with the global expectations and challenges that we want to solve. A budget that therefore needs revenues and there are basic principles for those revenues. We cannot overburden the citizens of the European Union with more taxes, we cannot overburden small and medium-sized enterprises. Those who do not pay should pay, and those who benefit the most from the internal market are those who should also contribute the most. That is why this report, which we are presenting with suggestions for new revenue for the European Commission to analyse, has these principles and also seeks to ensure that, at the same time, there is fairer taxation and, at the same time, greater competition, fairer and fairer competition. So, for example, the revenue for the Fair Border Mechanism, to give more competition to our companies. The tax on financial transactions and on cryptocurrencies, revenues based on European Union statistics, BEFIT, all examples of new revenue solutions with the principles I mentioned here. And don't be afraid, don't be afraid, because to have new recipes the process has to be fair and it has to involve. This is the most complex decision we have in the European Union, it involves unanimity in the Council and then ratification by all the Member States, read national parliaments, according to the constitutional requirements of each Member State. We have always defended the new revenues, we now have much stronger reasons to defend them. Because we cannot penalise the next generations, we now have NextGenerationEU that gave rise to the recovery and resilience plans. Well, as of 2027, the cost of debt in the EU budget will be more than €15 billion per year, around 10% of the budget. If we do not have new revenue, either we have a cut in the budget of the European Union or we will have an obligation for the Member States to contribute more revenue. It means more national transfers, this for those who do not want these new own resources. We want to protect citizens and their future. It would be unacceptable to penalise the next generations and therefore to defend this report. I would especially like to thank my co-rapporteur, Valérie Hayer, for all the work that has been done, and all my colleagues, especially the shadow rapporteurs, for this objective, which is to give us a future, to show solidarity with the next generations and to respond, with certainty and credibility, in budgetary terms, with new revenue, new own resources.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the rules and amounts of State aid must not distort competition or undermine cohesion. That is why I advocate a European solution for the capitalisation of companies and why I have insisted that InvestEU can provide such a European solution for the capitalisation of our companies. On the other hand, State rules and aid must take into account the specificities of our territory. And so the outermost regions, rural and less developed regions should be able to have flexibility in those same State aid rules. Competitiveness cannot be the enemy of cohesion. Moreover, it is essential that we have, at the same time, competitiveness that leads to convergence, without ever forgetting, on the one hand, cohesion and, on the other, sustainability. And it is in this sense that we call on the Commission to ensure that its proposals do not have a one-size-fits-all approach and that it treats what is different differently. It is not a question of exceptional aid, it is a question of justice and of us being able to treat those who need it most in a way that is fairer and more consistent with the objectives of the European Union.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, first of all I would like to address our rapporteur, Janusz Lewandowski, for the excellent work he has done and is also doing. Then we need to draw attention here to a negative point in the implementation of the partnership agreements, which allow cohesion policy to reach businesses, SMEs and farmers, also through the European Fund for Rural Development, one point or another, the second pillar of the common agricultural policy and all these funds, as well as the European Social Fund: they are taking time because the partnership agreements are slow, and in many countries there will not be financial implementation in 2023, nor do we have all the programmes approved. I hope that in 2024 everything will be at great speed, because the economy needs it. Regions, mayors and all beneficiaries are waiting for these funds. And it is unacceptable that the billion avalanche that Member States have is not being properly implemented. There is an urgent need for such implementation. In addition, common projects are needed, and so we need to strengthen common European programmes, review the Multiannual Financial Framework and finance this budget in line with the challenges and expectations of the population, requiring new own resources, new revenue.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we must achieve the climate objectives gradually, firmly and with sufficient financial resources to ensure the inclusion and territorial, economic and social cohesion of all territories. And here I place particular emphasis on the outermost regions – in the case of Portugal, the Azores and Madeira – which, given their natural handicaps, must be treated fairly so that they are not excluded, so that they are within the objective of territorial cohesion. Member States have to contribute and do their part with the national plans. And here, Commissioner, there is an urgent need for funds to be pooled. There is an urgent need to link the RRP and the RRPs with the partnership agreements, and also with the funds, such as the Social Climate Fund, not least because this objective is cross-cutting. Or European programmes such as Horizon Europe and the Connecting Europe Facility. They too must contribute to this goal. This is an objective in which industrial policy, research, knowledge, education and vocational training must be present, not least because at the moment we do not have the necessary and sufficient companies to achieve this objective. I will end with a request: the Social Climate Fund has to be part of, it has to be part of the next Multiannual Financial Framework. But it cannot be to reduce the Multiannual Financial Framework: it has to be, and should be, in order to be integrated and, consequently, with sufficient amounts for such integration, i.e. increasing the limits of the Multiannual Financial Framework.

Mr President, Commissioner, Council, Faces and Colleagues, competitiveness, productivity, entrepreneurship are very important key words and are not incompatible with the Green Deal, with the Green Deal. The European Union needs to have, on a global scale, a force that it cannot always have for internal divisions, which it cannot always have for lack of common projects, such as, for example, the energy union, or solutions that avoid the distortion of the internal market, as is happening with market aid or the non-use of instruments such as InvestEU, which are essential, for example, for the capitalisation of companies, and which are essential for critical investments that the Council has eliminated. I have seen criticism of the Commission, but much of the bureaucracy is in the Council. It is the Council that has blocked the energy union, it is the Council that has cut InvestEU, it is the Council that has avoided an instrument for the solvency of companies and that has removed the window for strategic investments. So let us not forget that the Commission, with some mistakes, has done a good job, and I have seen the Council blocking that work.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, European citizens, families and companies pay a very high price because of our excessive energy dependence. There is no shortage of resources for Member States to invest in energy efficiency and renewables. But then we have to have a real energy union, and for that, cross-border projects, interconnections, are key. And, in good time, we insisted that 35% of the amount of RePowerEU should go towards this goal. I hope that national selfishness will not triumph and that protectionism will not win, because there are people who talk a lot about energy autonomy, but then, in the Pyrenees, in France, they do not allow energy to pass on to the construction of a genuine energy union for the benefit of all European citizens. Congratulations to the rapporteurs. Once again, we strengthen the recovery and resilience plans, we give tools to Member States. I hope they are up to the challenges.

Madam President, Commissioner, Prime Minister, ladies and gentlemen, you can count on the European Parliament to achieve your objectives: a safer Europe, a more competitive, resilient European Union, and one that upholds European values. I hope that it also counts on the Council for these objectives, because it is not enough to discuss, analyse and state it, it is necessary to put it into practice. And we need this strategic autonomy, and for that, we need to have common projects. And, not having them, has a very high cost for citizens. It's seeing how much we pay for not having security and energy supply. Well, we need the Energy Union, the Digital Union, civil protection, secure connectivity, the Health Union, the Defence Union. And for that, we need means. It is not enough to set goals. We need financial resources. Tell us how much we need for each of these resources, and we are available to review the Multiannual Financial Framework for these common objectives. Is the Council also available? Is the Council available for the revision of the Multiannual Financial Framework? And another very important point: We need new recipes. We must show solidarity with future generations and be credible. The cost of NextGenerationEU, the debt of the recovery and resilience plans, after 2027, is 10% of the annual budget, and we need a robust budget for this strong European Union. And don't forget another point: our relationship with those who also stand up for European values. And in this sense, it is also necessary that our external relationship is based on these values. It helps our sovereignty and, from that point of view, Mercosur is also an important point that should come out of the drawer.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, the revision of the multiannual budget is urgent, it is obvious. Moreover, the European Commission, with its proposals for REPowerEU, for secure connectivity, for semiconductors, the proposal for a sovereign wealth fund to strengthen strategic autonomy, has shown that it is changing the multiannual financial framework, is cutting some programmes and is making redeployments. It is therefore clear to everyone that the multiannual financial framework needs to be changed, revised and strengthened. An evidence that is an urgency, as I mentioned. What needs to be done is to strengthen European programmes in the areas of health, digital, energy, security and defence. If we don't, we'll pay dearly. In fact, we see what the European Union pays for not having an energy union. For all this, we also need own resources, new revenues that do not harm and that help us to have new resources. (The Chair took the floor from the speaker).

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner and Minister, representative of the Council, the European Union needs real leaders or, in their absence, good leaders. Unfortunately, we have those who use unanimity for blackmail and for other cases, such as the veto on Romania's entry into the Schengen Area, for purely internal reasons, for populist reasons. The problem is not only unanimity. This is because unanimity sometimes works and, in some cases, is even justified, particularly on the question of own resources and on the question of taxes. It should be noted that in order to constitute NextGenerationEU, the decision on own resources had to be amended. This involved double unanimity, that is to say unanimity in the Council and also in the national parliaments. And that unanimity was achieved. In addition to talking about unanimity in some cases, and in those cases it is justified, we also need to speed up the procedures. Speed is essential. If we are now only discussing unanimity, which then passes to a qualified majority, we must not forget that if there is one or the other that vetoes today, in the future we may even have more than two or three or four that can form such a qualified majority. What the citizens of the European Union should demand is quality rulers who do not tamper with existing rules.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, it is not enough to announce solidarity or to preach it. Concrete actions are needed, which reflect the solidarity mentioned by Schuman, the solidarity of truth, the solidarity that we must realise. And so what I have to say here is that we have carried it out with these concrete actions and this rapid, urgent approval, to enable Ukraine to use EUR 18 billion in terms of loans provided by the European Union for the guarantee of the budget. But I would like to ask the Council not to have any doubts, not to accept that leaders in the Council use Ukraine, and sometimes even deceive it, when they accept its accession as a candidate country, and then start saying that there are not the best conditions or there are no conditions to be able to accept it. Leaders who do not have the name of leaders, and who should have the name of rulers, because, deep down, what they are afraid of is losing agricultural funds and cohesion funds. In addition, I hope that the blackmailing of unanimity towards Ukraine will not be used for gains in other files, such as the case of the dossier. Rule of law. It will be unacceptable in the Council to use the unanimity rule that is necessary to blackmail other files.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, with our proposals, with our opinion, which I am sure will be approved, we have achieved about EUR 15 billion in revenue without penalising the citizens, contributing to the objective of combating climate change, also helping to achieve tax justice and accelerating the objectives of the digital transition. New revenues that serve, it's true, to pay off the debt, but we can't stop there. It's not just to pay off the debt of: it is essential that revenues are also obtained for what are common projects, the strategic objectives of the European Union, its strategic autonomy. If we do not invest in security, in the energy union, in strengthening our military capacity, in health, in civil protection, in what are semiconductors, in secure connectivity, if we do not have these investments, we will pay a huge price. Investments that should be in common projects, because they bring effectiveness, efficiency. With fewer resources we can do much more, and this is a goal we have to have: Take on the commitments, pay the debt, don't overburden the next generations. On the other hand, having a budget that invests so that there is autonomy in the European Union, in order to give the citizens of the European Union a future. And in that sense, if we do not make the investments in these common projects, as the lack of the Energy Union shows, we will have and we will pay a very high price. Here is a compromise: the European Parliament, me and Mrs Hayer are already working on proposals for a new package and to make suggestions to the Commission. The Commission to come with the second phase and the second package, also in terms of what the roadmap for own resources should be. The Council is now in need of a unanimous decision. It is in the hands of the Council to move the European Union forward. And I hope that the Council, instead of rulers, and for once, will also have leaders. The European Union needs them very much.