Plenary session
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
PLENARY European Parliament
Bernd Lange
But keep on running, we're working on it, and we want to progress. So that's why we've got a whole list of demands. And the first one is to have the sunrise clause. We want to make sure that these uncertainties are addressed. Those products from 50% should go back down to 15%, and we want to make sure that there's a new legal basis because 01/2022 is going to run out in the next few days, and there shouldn't be any more increases higher than 15%.
And we have 301 as the legal basis, and we want to have the Sunset Clause as well, so that if there's a big change on the other side that's unacceptable, we can then come back to our tariffs. And we're also gonna say that as part of the WTO.
Of the assessment, we also need to set a date for the end of the legislation, and then look at what we can do after that in the future. So I think this means that we would have what is missing from the deal, something that would be in an agreement, and it would also cover.
safeguards and the surveillance, which is being discussed. And, of course, the European Parliament would be very much involved, we'd guarantee that. And then this brings me to my fourth point, let's stick together. Another nice song quote. This is a joint project in the European Parliament.
We are strong, and we need to make it clear that we want a fair partnership, and we don't want to be dependent on the decisions made by individuals. This is a democratic process, so this might take a bit longer. People might be critical of that, but we want to do it in a democratic way. We need to look at the needs of industry, of people, and we're going to decide that in a democratic manner, in the parliament, and do it together. We won't do it alone.
So stick together. Let's work together. Thank you.
Martin Hojsík
Thank you very much. Thank.
you. Next speaker is on behalf of the Commission, Mister Dombrowski. Please take the floor, commissioner.
Valdis Dombrovskis
Honorable members. Today's debate and the votes that will follow mark a very important milestone in our efforts to provide stability and predictability to European business, workers, and citizens in our trade relationships with the United States. I'm here today to replace commissioner Shekovich who could not be present as he is in Cameroon leading the EU delegation at the WTO ministerial conference MC14. The Turnberry agreement negotiated with the United States in July and the EU-US joint statement of 21st August steadied our trade relationship at a time of a profound upheaval. After the US overhaul of its trade policy, the deal provided predictability for European companies and consumers when they needed it most.
We recognize many of the concerns members of this House have raised, particularly with regards to tariffs on steel and aluminum and their derivative products. We also heard your calls for reassurances about the US commitment to uphold the deal and the need for safeguards should the terms be violated. Yet, despite these valid concerns, one truth remains valid. It's our economic interests demand that we move forward. We must act in the best interest of our firms, our workers, and our citizens, especially under the current circumstances.
Honoring our commitments under the joint statement does precisely that. A deal is a deal, and our credibility depends on keeping our word. And let's not forget the scale of what is at stake. The US remains our number one trading partner and our number one export destination by far. Our supply chains and business ties have been forged over decades, and underpin our industrial base today and sustain millions of European jobs.
In 2024, twenty-five alone, 1,700,000,000,000 of goods and services were traded across The Atlantic. We have invested in each other's economies €4,800,000,000,000. So all in all, our trade with the US accounts for around 25 percent of our global trade. Let me tell you why today's vote matters so much. The implementation of our commitments under the joint statement, which you will advance with your vote today, is not only important, it is an indispensable step.
First, it will allow you to exercise your legislative prerogatives by engaging in the trial of negotiations with the council to secure a common political agreement on the regulations implementing the deal. Second, it will strengthen our position in the engagement with the US to find solutions on outstanding issues, such as steel and aluminum derivatives, a concern I know many of you share, Arthur also mentioned it, and on securing additional tariff exemptions as agreed in the joint statement. Third, it paves the way for engaging in a wider positive agenda with the US, including on economic security, critical minerals, and trade facilitation measures. So we need to show good faith on our part if we want to get good faith in return. At this stage, we have received reassurances from the US that they intend to honor the deal.
Let me be clear on one thing. While we will continue our efforts to maintain constructive relationships and avoid volatility, we will not turn a blind eye to any risks to our interests. The commission will remain vigilant, ready to defend European interests whenever necessary. We are closely monitoring the US section c o one investigations, which may replace the legal basis for US tariffs. We need to ensure that there are no risks in this respect, and if there are changes, they are only positive.
Honorable members, today's vote is an important procedural step and a political signal that the EU stands by its word, that we act to protect our jobs, investments, and our economic prosperity. I look forward to hearing your views in the debate. Thank you.
Martin Hojsík
Thank you. On behalf of the budget committee, Miss Nerudova, please take the floor.
Danuše Nerudová
Dear commissioner, dear colleagues, I wanna have a strong relationship with the United States, but not at any cost. This deal, which cost us €4,000,000,000 per year. This is the size of the Erasmus program. Still, I believe it's worth it because we need access to the US market, but we need clear conditions. We all see that the current occupant of the White House changes his mind almost every day.
One day, he wants to impose 40% tariffs. The next day, he talks about occupying European territory. This is why we need a clear clause. We implement this deal only if the United States respect it. And if our territory is threatened again, the deal must be suspended immediately.
So, yes, I support the deal, but only if both sides respect it fully.
Martin Hojsík
Thank.
you. On behalf of the budget committee, again, Miss Gomez Lopez, please take the floor.
Sandra Gómez López
We
We need to be clear that the Turnbright agreement is signed by Trump and Van der Leyen, was extremely unbalanced, and it is even more unbalanced now given the context. The US has acted in an unfair manner with threats and pressure. They've also threatened Spain. This is not a cooperation between allies. It's coercion.
And that's why today, we're not going to give a blank check to this. What we're going to do is set limits. We say this quite clearly. Europe will only comply when the US complies with Europe. And if it doesn't, then we'll suspend the agreement because we're not going to accept a framework when our workers, businesses, and our sovereignty is subordinated to the chaos that is the Trump administration.
So we need to say extremely clearly, Europe will not negotiate under pressure. Europe will not accept threats, and Europe will not renounce the defense of its interests. We support this Monday because it strengthens the parliament's position, but let's be clear about one point. Without reciprocity, without respect, without guarantees, there will be no agreement. Thank you very much.
Martin Hojsík
Thank.
you. On behalf of the AGRI committee, Miss Brezionova, please take the floor.
Veronika Vrecionová
Chair, commissioner, Entering into trade deals is key for the EU, for our enterprises, for jobs, and for our competitiveness. The deal on tariff quotas with the US is far from ideal, but a customs war with the US is the last thing that we need in today's complicated times. We are exporting industrial goods and cars, and the US is providing us with technologies and energy. Our farmers also have much to offer. European farmers are among the best in the world, and they need fair conditions in the global market.
Our enterprises and farmers need security and predictability in mutual trade relations. This is why it must be our objective, to create a long-term trade deal with the US. Thank you.
Martin Hojsík
Thank you. Our next speaker on behalf of the EPP Group, Miss Zhovko, please take the floor.
Željana Zovko
Thank you. No man is an island, entire of itself. Every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main, said John Donne. 16,000,000 jobs depend on the transatlantic economy and on our decisions. Every delay costs us €5,000,000,000 annually.
Businesses on both sides of the Atlantic are calling for clarity and predictability, not uncertainty and delay. Beyond all arguments, the facts are clear. In 2025, our Transatlantic economy reached a record $29,800,000,000,000. Behind these numbers are real people, workers, entrepreneurs, and families. I stand here to defend the European economy, our interests, and our jobs.
One certainty remains. Even in a more challenging global trade environment, our economic ties have continued to grow. This resilience proves that Transatlantic trade works. And if it works, we should strengthen it, not hold it back. In this geopolitical context, the United States is not only our largest trading partner.
It is also a key security partner, and it must remain so. Even the democracy with which we seek to diversify our trade relation looks to the United States as a key security ally. That remains the foundation of our broader strategic objective. Our history has proven that with US on our side, we defeated the most horrible totalitarian regimes from Nazism and fascism after World War two to the fall of Berlin wall and defeating communism. For some people, hell is the other people, as Sartre said.
But only together, we can defeat the enemy regardless of what face it holds now. Thank you, colleagues, and I call upon you to do this historic job and to support this trade deal. Thank you.
Martin Hojsík
Thank.
you. Our next speaker on behalf of the S and D group, Miss Van Bremt. Please take the floor.
Kathleen Van Brempt
Thank you very much, president, commissioner, colleagues. Our group has made it crystal clear from the start. Turdenberry is a bad deal, and it will not be just rubber-stamped by us. It does not bring stability. It does not protect us from tariffs, threats, and coercion.
And do I have to remind ourselves, just only this year and more only March, The US threatened to invade Greenland, coerced Spain, breached once again the deal with new tariffs, and just this week threatened to raise energy prices for Europe in the wake of an illegal war that they started and which already spiked prices globally, in full affair, we say in French. Their strategy is crystal clear. They want to pressure all EU institutions, also the European Parliament, to roll over and just pass the deal. And let's not be naïve. More Trump coercion and chaos will come.
And that is exactly why we say today, no free pass, no blank check. We do not approve the deal today. We vote for a strong parliament position, which has been clearly outlined by our rapporteur, Berend Lange, with clear guarantees. We will only act once the US honors its commitments, including bringing the tariffs on steel down. That Europe can respond when these committee commitments are broken, and that our industry is protected against new chaos.
And that is why we today support this mandate because it draws clear conditions and gives Europe the tools to suspend, to react, and to protect itself. But let there be no misunderstanding, and I approach the commission. There will be no final approval by our group if these conditions are not fully met. Colleagues, to conclude, we will not be intimidated. We will not be bullied into a bad deal.
And today, we show our citizens that this European parliament stands up for their interest and for our Europe. And I urge the council and commission to finally show some courage and do the same. Thank you.
Martin Hojsík
Thank.
you. And now, on behalf of Patriots for Europe, our colleague, Terje.
Cristian Terheş
Good morning, commissioner. VOXXA will not be involved in the anti-US phobia in this house. We need a stable trade agreement with the United States. There is no real alternative to this transatlantic pack. We can just fall into the arms of China, as lots of people here want. That would just be suicide.
Unfortunately, what's underlying has set out as a deal with the US cannot be approved. 15% on tariffs, whereas it's zero for others, would just be another nail in the coffin for the primary sector. President Trump knows how to negotiate. He always has his country's interest in mind. This commission and President von der Leyen don't know how to negotiate, nor are they interested in the interest of European nations.
As we always see, there's ineptitude of our negotiators, and this is something which is paid for by the European societies. As always happens, this has been seen. Once again, we need to change the program we have. We need to get the bureaucrats out of their offices or we will upend our societies. Those who say they're against the US will vote in favor of this agreement so that they can say they can maintain their agreement with Yoselav under Lyon.
Yes. We want an agreement with the US. We want an agreement with Latin America as well, but the options set up by the European Commission are not sufficient. Agreeing to this agreement is applauding the ineptitude of the underlying, and we will not be involved in that.
Thank.
Daniele Polato
You, president. In this hemicycle, when it comes to the United States, we've got different opinions. We are aware of that. On the one hand, there is ideology, there are controversies, there's criticism, and there's anti-Americanism that's from the 1970s. On the other hand, you've got us who want to work on what unites us more than what divides us.
And we have to give out a message that's a sign of commitment that will give certainty to our companies and our workers. Yes. Have your ideology, your controversies, and criticisms. We've already seen that. We saw that with the Green Deal, and it doesn't get us anywhere.
It doesn't consolidate relationships, and it doesn't boost development. We want the vote on these agreements to be a sign that we're starting over. We want to have a new phase of our relationship with the United States, who are still a key partner for trade and security in Europe. Over the next few months, after this vote, there will be time to review things, including during the negotiations, and look at the most critical parts of the agreements. But anyone who wants to instrumentalize this vote or slow it down, well, they need to remember that companies don't have time to lose, especially at this very delicate phase that we're going through.
We need certainty and stability. That is the way we want to go. That is what companies and workers are asking of us. That is the right choice for Europe. Thank you.
President,
Karin Karlsbro
Commissioner Dombrowski's colleagues, transatlantic trade relations are important, but they must be built on mutual respect. We have not forgotten Greenland's threats and the blackmail. One could hardly say that the Turnberry agreement is balanced, but we are ready to move forward if it can provide stability and predictability. As The United States don't deliver, it's up to us, Europeans, to put our own safeguards in place to protect ourselves from COVID. This is exactly what the parliament is doing today through this vote, by Trump proving our position on the Turnberry tariff agreements.
Thank you.
Martin Hojsík
Thank.
you. The next speaker on behalf of the Greens is colleague Cavazzini. You have the floor.
Anna Cavazzini
Commissioner, Trump's tariffs are illegal, and we should not be focusing on this deal. And I would prefer that the commission had moved further in the negotiations last year and to reduce the anti-coercion instrument which is available to us. I find it very problematic that the EU in the joint statement supports LNG imports. But I can say very clearly that we will reject this deal. We should not become independent on the fossil fuels from The US.
This deal is bad, but given we need a plan for the economy at the times of uncertainty, we can improve this agreement. The people have already said this. We, as the European Union, have more cards in our hand with this mandate. I would like to see the German government support the EU parliament's position in the trilogue, and that's something we need to focus on, clearly. Thank you very much.
Martin Hojsík
And the next speaker is colleague Schirdewan, on behalf of the European Parliament. You have the floor.
Martin Schirdewan
Very much, President, and thank you to Mister Lange for giving us an idea of your taste in music. And now we have in the middle of this debate and the blackmail of Trump vis a vis Europe, and that prompts me to think about an entirely different album, a metal album, Master of Puppets. This is a case where European states are forced by a lot of liquid natural gas from the US and other substances. So new dependence on the US, I think it's a complete madness. And European companies are going to be obliged to invest massively in the US rather than in Europe.
It's like paying a ransom. And the high court in the US has itself said that there was no good legal basis for this agreement. And Trump made it clear yesterday that he has absolutely no intention to honor the tariff part of this. He doesn't care about data protection. He's attacking Mexico.
He's threatening Greenland. So even though Van der Leyen has agreed to this, I don't think we can take this agreement seriously, and we can't ever approve a deal of this type. Thank.
Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza
The transatlantic relations continue to thrive. Our ambition is to expand economic cooperation. Every day, four and a half billion dollars worth of goods and services are traded between the EU and the US. It is the basis for extensive cross-border investment and supports millions of jobs. 2025 was a turbulent year for transatlantic relations and the economy.
Despite this, we achieved a record trade turnover. The Turnberry deal averted a full-blown trade war. With today's vote, let's give it a chance. Europe and the US remain by far each other's most important source of overseas affiliate income. Transatlantic commerce works, and this dense web of deep connections remains a strength.
Poland is leading by example. Our security cooperation translates into economic partnerships, in particular in the defense and energy sectors. But Europe has to negotiate firmly, and a stronger Europe is a stronger US ally. Thank you very much.
Nicola Procaccini
These unjustified tariffs issued by Trump are not only putting our trade at risk, but our entire relationship across the Atlantic. We've got a choice here. We could just have the European companies and workers pay the price, or we can respond and we can improve the agreement during the negotiations, and we can defend our European interests. We need to have a practical response here, and we can do that from parliament. And there has been some ambiguous behavior by some of the parties and some of the governments, but thank you to the new agreement, the agreement could be interrupted or could just not start if there is a threat from The United States to the relationships that we've seen here when it comes to the derivatives and steel in Olimio.
For us, we have non-negotiable conditions here. And it's a simple point here. Either the EU makes itself respected here and gains credibility, or it just leaves others to decide for us. Thank you.
Nicolas Bay
President, the agreement signed by Miss Van der Leyen requires us to accept a number of concessions to the advantage of the US, taking tariffs off US goods. And then we have 15% tariffs on European products. That is going to lead to a disadvantage for the European market. And there's no serious guarantee of reciprocity and protection. All of this is happening in a perfectly well-known context.
The U. S. Has continued to use the tariff weapon. And what does the commission do, faced with that? Well, it comes up with commitments that weaken our situation, weaken our income from tariffs, and weaken a number of our sectors.
It's not so much the Trump administration that we should be pointing the finger at, but rather the lack of competence in the Federal Commission. We're being told that we have to accept the concession in order to maintain the transatlantic relationship, but accepting doesn't mean caving in. Thank you.
Martin Hojsík
Thank you very much. And the next speaker is our colleague Callaher. Please take the floor.
Billy Kelleher
In a very volatile world, and particularly in a volatile relation between The United States and the European Union, it is critically important that we play our part in trying to stabilize that relationship. While we do hear ideological debates inside this chamber from the left and from the right in the context of President Trump, I think we should be looking at it through the eyes of workers and businesses across the European Union. They need certainty in a very uncertain time. 4,600,000,000 is traded daily across the Atlantic in goods and services, and anything that gives confidence to this particular trade agreement, I very much welcome. I also believe that we have to be firm in saying to President Trump and the US administration that respect is critically important in this particular trade agreement.
We have to have confidence that they stand by their word as well. Time will tell, but in the meantime, we must play our part to ensure that we stand firm with regard to what was agreed in Turnberry, and that we insist from the United States' perspective that they also honor the commitments with regard to Turnberry. On the issue of steel and aluminum, yes, there is a need for us to continue to negotiate in those particular areas, but at the moment, certainty is what is required for businesses and workers.
Martin Hojsík
Thank you. Closing HDI because there are already too many people anyway, so we might not be able to take all of you. Let me give the floor to Mister Marci Manes.
Vicent Marzà Ibáñez
Six months ago, there was the first threat from Trump, and as we were humiliated with the signing of this agreement, we lost out on tariffs. So we got to Europe, Donald Shrieve, saying that there would be European investments to build fossil fuels and to buy fossil fuels and arms in The US. And this was all done on the premise of the basis of stability of this agreement. What this agreement brought us: more threats, more blackmail, more instability, price increases, more legal uncertainty, and a feeling of complete impunity that Trump can do exactly what he wants. We have, you know, kneeling down in front of an abuser, in front of a bully is not the way to go.
We need to stand up. We need to set out a clear limit. We need to use the anti-coercion instrument. We need to invest in reindustrialization in Europe. We need to stop our dependence on fossil fuels, and we need to have a mass investment in the green transition.
So, for coherence and dignity, we cannot agree with this agreement. Thank.
President.
Fabio De Masi
President, the European Union is suffering from Stockholm syndrome and not recognizing the reality. The reality is Donald Trump is backmailing us with punitive tariffs, we're accepting 15% on and we've got 0% on EU goods, and then he's got 50% on steel, and then you and we are just then also buying weapons from him and fracking gas. And he is also blackmailing us with the threat that we'll have less LNG. And I think that would be a basis for ending that agreement if we were to follow through in Parliament. He's going to war illegally in Iran, and we're seeing what's happened with the war in Putin.
And Trump is going to war against the country, and he is then actually suspending the sanctions against Russia. So we need to make sure that we're not further blackmailed by him. We need to have the instruments to deal with that. Anything else would just be giving up.
Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez
Thank you, commissioner. President, businesses and families in Europe are going through times of extreme volatility. The price of gas and oil has spiked. We're seeing shares and markets and volatility, and this has an impact on inflation as well. Faced with this uncertainty, we need to try to provide certainty and stability.
We need stability in our trade agreements, and that's what we need to have, nerves of steel and be pragmatic. We can't react with, end every change in The US to a change in our direction. We need to have an agreement, which does guarantee a position which is beneficial for the EU compared with other exporters from all over the world. Now, when it's approved, we will continue to ensure that all commitments are being adhered to. Now is the time to be responsible.
It's time to support this trade agreement. Thank you.
Very much.
Ladies.
Enikő Győri
And gentlemen, every day, €4,000,000,000 worth of goods change hands between the United States and the European Union. This clearly demonstrates how vital a balanced partnership based on mutual respect is. However, last summer, Ursula von der Leyen struck a humiliating bargain with the US. She provided proof that Europe is weak and susceptible to blackmail. A deeply unequal agreement was reached, which is far from bringing mutual benefits.
Where we previously paid 2% to 3% customs duties on our exports, we will now pay 15%, while the US brings in its industrial products duty free. Why exactly did the commission enter into this humiliating deal so that America would continue to support Ukraine? Donald Trump represented America's interest, America first, while Frontline represented Ukraine's, Ukraine first, rather than that of European citizens and businesses. Since then, of course, the US has pulled out of financing Ukraine. Now only Europe continues to pour money into a hopeless war.
At this point, only damage control remains. Because European companies need predictability and reduction intentions, the commission should finally pull itself together and learn from the American president how to effectively stand up. Thank you. The next.
Elisabetta Gualmini
Trump, we've been patient in front of your erratic and despotic behavior. We've been patient when you started the war without knowing how to finish it. We've been patient when you use trade policy as a weapon to take revenge and threaten countries and peoples who simply annoy you. We've been patient when you called us free riders and parasites, and we've been patient when your VP told us that in Europe, democracy is failing. What?
Come on. But now, of course, we cannot cut trade relationships with the United States, and we must provide certainty to our companies and citizens. So we have to move forward with the agreement on duties. But let me be really clear. We have suspended it twice.
We are not afraid to suspend it again. The closes and conditions are stronger. The suspension clause, the sunset clause, the safeguard on imports, and the sunrise clause. We are passionate Europeans. We are passionate pro-Europe politicians.
We will be vigilant. We will never be idiotic servants of an autocratic leader. Thank you.
Sebastian Kruis
Yeah. Thank you, President. Let me be clear from the outset. Did the European Commission negotiate badly? Yes.
Is this deal better for the U. S. And for Europe? Yes. Would we prefer the zero-tariff deal?
Yes, of course. But the European Union simply doesn't have the cards to force a better deal. We have empty hands, and we're tongue-tied. The real question is, how do we get here? Because we've made the wrong choices, smothering bureaucracy.
We've have energy policy run by weirdos and windmill nuts, an economy where companies don't build but pack their bags. We don't need political theater. We need predictability in order to invest. That's what our company needs. Voting against sounds very brave, but it leads to escalation and trade war with the U.
S. And major economic damage. And the PVV is not going to be involved. This is not a good deal, but it's at least a bad option. Therefore, we're in favor of realism for our companies and for the Dutch economy.
Thank you.
Martin Hojsík
Now we come to catch the eye, and I decided that I'll give it a try, and because many of you, but everybody gets the floor, but I'm gonna be extremely strict in time. So let me start with colleague Steer.
Thank.
Davor Ivo Stier
You, chair. Predictability is the key word here in this debate, and also for the votes that will follow. Even the biggest critic of this agreement think that with this agreement, we will have also more predictability. But what would happen if the agreement were rejected? From the left, we heard a lot of criticism, not only of the agreement, but of Trump's administration.
But even that part of the left, which should show responsibility because they are either in power or because they are part of the majority here, they will vote for the right. They praise Trump, but they will vote against him. And those in power will be abstained, but their governments in the council voted for. Why? Well, we need predictability in this time of turbulence, so this is why we need to support this agreement.
Maria Grapini
President, colleagues, commissioner, this deal with the US is obviously necessary, but I believe that an agreement means mutual respect between partners. Increasing taxes five times, from five to 50%, and imposing tariffs on steel and aluminum is unacceptable. So I'm thinking, what would have happened if this deal had been signed as the commission had first proposed it. Commissioner, it's unacceptable for you to disregard what happens on the European market. Thankfully, the European Parliament is here and can impose very clear requirements. This agreement can work on the long term only if there is reciprocity and respect between the two parties.
And, yes, I agree that these tariffs could highly impact the metal industry. The impact would be deleterious. So, commissioner, please respect the Parliament's position. Thank you.
Speaker 90
Don't know in how many ways the left is trying to prevent Europe from succeeding. I don't know. I lost count a long time ago. But they have always had one favorite subject, and that's blocking used trade. When we buy American fighter jets, the left shouts no.
When we make a trade deal with Trump, the left again shouts no. And when Finland recently agreed on a gigantic icebreaker deal in which we sell icebreakers to the United States, this didn't seem to sit well with the left either. The left was even calling for an exit from the deal. Apparently, we're not even allowed to sell our expertise when the counterpart is the USA. What do you think of the left?
Shall we soon ban watching American films, too? Like in Soviet times, whose doctrines you still seem to follow in your US policy. But remember, the USA won. The USSR lost. Don't you think that it's time for you to come too?
Sandro Gozi
President, the Arctic commissioner, you say the deal is a deal. Yes. But it takes two to tango. We can be a rival partner, but the trust is not there if the other partners does not practice what we preach and Trump does not. We can make an effort to clarify the legal framework, but the framework falls if the other partner is in a legal limbo and Trump is in a legal limbo.
We can, under certain conditions, accept a bad trade deal as the temporary deal is in exchange for stability and predictability. But Trump has been erratic and unpredictable with us on trade, on geopolitics, like on our digital legislation. We must always protect our sovereign choices, Europeans, and Trump pushed the big tech and has declared a war against our digital legislation. For all these reasons, and while commending the big effort made by Mister Lang and the shadow rapporteur, I think we should not move ahead with the Tambourine deal. Thank you very much.
Kai Tegethoff
Thank you, chair. We are strongly committed to a good and stable relationship with the US. That won't change. But as Volt, we cannot support this deal. It's enough.
Sometimes when your partner crosses a line, you have to tell them. And the US, or rather Trump and his cabinet, have been crossing lines with Europe for a while now on a daily basis. We have to stand up. A good trade deal should work for both sides, and this one simply doesn't. And it's rather a product of coercion and not of negotiation.
Europe should not concede under pressure, but negotiate from strength, and protect our own interests. Let's get back on the negotiation table and make a deal that works for both.
Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis
Thank you, Chair, dear Commissioner. We all know about what we are just speaking. Of course, recent Europe United States behavior and events have only added cowards and uncertainty. The threat to invade Greenland, coercion against Spain, the Supreme Court ruling declaring that reciprocal tariffs illegal, immediately followed by new tariffs, threats towards European legislation, and so on. Of course, we all know very well that we need to resolve it now.
We have such a predictable answer and European Parliament proposal now. Bent Bertrand Lange report is an excellent example to protect us and to improve those six c's. It means a very important tool kit which should be used by the commission also. And please keep in mind, commissioner, we are not all speaking about steel and aluminum, about biotech, about medicines, about pharma, about our research and possibility to invest. This is a very important time now to defend our sovereignty, not only keeping in mind still, but according to the research and investment also.
Lukas Sieper
Dear people of Europe, the thing that amuses me most here is the mental flexibility. Many of our colleagues show that. And you've got people, and they say that we should be open to Putin again, that those sanctions against Russia should be dropped, and then they want us just to have a hard line against Trump. Those are the same people who stand up there and who say that they defend the little man and get worked up about the petrol prices. Now they want us to drop this agreement so that we can have more price rises.
Is it a good deal? No. Is it a deal we want? No. Can we, in any way, depend on Trump?
No. Is he crazy? Yes. I think that the best thing that we could do is to sign the deal and then implement it in a way that's good for us, because anything else would be what Trump Thank.
Juan Fernando López Aguilar
Thank you, President. Commissario.
Commissioner, it's true that the relationship with the US, the Transatlantic Alliance, is important for our businesses. I mean, that's it. It's our leading trade partner. It's also true that the United States and Trump are not the same thing. The United States existed before and will exist after it.
But it was Trump at Turnberry, Trump on his golf course, who tried to impose on the EU via president von der Leyen a humiliating deal. If von der Leyen accepted this, then it means that she does not represent us. We need to look at the treaties, but this is not the final word on this. This is just a position that builds the commission and council into a position where we need to ensure legal certainty and reciprocity. Either respect is mutual, or it doesn't exist.
So either we guarantee legal certainty and reciprocity, or the European Parliament will vote against this and reject this deal. Thank you.
Ondřej Dostál
It is no coincidence. We should not approve this. Our tariffs are 0%. There's our 15%. That's no agreement.
That's capitulation. Let us not put a thumb up to the vassal promise by Osora that we will buy gas for 750,000,000,000 and weapons for 600,000,000,000 from Trump. No way. Trump is threatening Greenland, Spain. We should be adopting sanctions, not trade agreements.
It is Trump's illegal war against Iran, which deprived us of gas from the Gulf Area. It was the Americans who were after Germany due to Nord Stream, which then happened to explode. Who believes this is a coincidence? I will be very happy to sell off the Czech national treasures to those who can promise us fair deals. We do have better partners in the world than the 300,000,000 Americans there are.
Let us show Trump our strength, then we get better conditions. Thank you.
Valdis Dombrovskis
Mister Chair, honorable members, thank you for your interventions this morning. We take note and appreciate a wide spectrum of views in this house. This is not an easy debate, but I welcome that there is an overall recognition of the importance of the EU-US trading relationship and that moving ahead is the best step we can take for our citizens, workers, and firms. Now as we approach the vote shortly, I would once again underline that we recognize the validity of the points which have been taken up by the European Parliament and that we are ready to work constructively in the dialogues to see how to address them in the best manner possible. At the same time, we'll continue to engage with our US counterparts, raising our concerns where necessary, working together on issues of mutual concern where possible, and laying foundations for further and future engagement.
Martin Hojsík
You, mister commissioner. And to conclude the debate, the last speaker is the rapporteur, Mr. Langhe.
Bernd Lange
Yeah. Thanks a lot, dear colleagues. Thanks a lot, also for the support for my report. And, perhaps at the end of this debate, I will quote another song, a famous song, I'm a believer. And, yes, I'm a believer in the power of the European Parliament.
We have the power to secure a system which is predictable and stable in the future, and therefore, we need six s. We need a sunrise clause. We need a suspension clause, clear guarantees. We need a sunset clause to have an assessment after a period of time. We need really good safeguards, and we need also a clarity that steel is steel and not a motorcycle.
And, of course, we need a strong involvement of the European Parliament in this whole exercise. And, therefore, yeah, please support the vote at 11:00 the report from the intercommittee with a strong majority. And I'm really clear that with such support, we will have a strong mandate for the negotiations with the council, and this will lead to a meaningful outcome. So let's stick together. Thanks a lot.
Martin Hojsík
Thank you for this, musical, most rock team. The
Debate is concluded, and the vote will be held in one hour. The next item on the agenda is the report by Miss Riddle and Miss Bentall at Global Gateway, past impacts and future orientation.
Chloé Ridel
Vice president and commissioner Hildegard. I'm very pleased to be able to present this with my colleague this morning, this first report on the Global Gateway. Global Gateway is a unique strategy for investing in infrastructure around the world by Europe to try to compete with the new Silk Road project from China. It's an initiative which tries to use public funds, development banks, and also private funds. There are slogans which were highlighted, talking about huge and colossal amounts of funds.
Our report notes the fact that Global is still lacking transparency. The impacts aren't really known. It's a bit of a black box. We note honestly that the Global Gateway Project is becoming at the heart of our external diplomat diplomacy. We're seeing a world marked by geopolitical rivalry, and we need to try and find our way to exist.
But why and to whose benefit? There's a gap between the ambition set out by Global Gateway and real guarantees. We know that Global Gateway funds projects in a whole range of different areas, but we want Global Gateway to be a true alternative for the Russian, US, or Chinese investments. The Global Gateway government governance is opaque at times, so the duality criteria are not really well known, and the impacts for local populations are not highlighted. Our report highlights one key point.
We cannot be true alternative to Russia or Chinese investment if we are just investing in investments and partnerships. Although we need to have these partnerships which are on an equal footing, we need to have quality relationships with our partners, and we need to have credible projects. We want public data. We want serious impact assessments. We want real consultations with local authorities and civil society.
We also want instruments which stop environmental damage and human rights violations. There is no traceability. Without this traceability, there will be no trust. We need to be exemplary with our investments. You know?
No infrastructure project is new to us. They can create jobs, but they can also lead to a huge amount of negative impacts as well. That's why in our report, we are calling for a more demanding approach to look at added local value at an added local level, at an SME level. Are quality jobs really being created? Is training being delivered?
Global Gateway needs to not just be in support of the European value chain, it also needs to support local economies and local capacities in partner countries. Now finally, I'd like to say that for women and girls, Global Gateway also needs to support them. Feminist diplomacy is a guarantor of stability and prosperity. Global Gateway will, in the future, be at the heart of the economic reality and geopolitical reality for the EU. It will be part of our external policy.
If we want to meet our ambitions in this area, we need to prove that we're not just funding infrastructures, but we also need to focus on partnerships, rights, and other areas. Those are the key points from our report. I'd like to thank all those teams who have been involved, working with us, with my co-rapporteur, Hildegard as well. And thank you to the shadow teams as well, and also to the secretary from the different committees, and I'm very much looking forward to this debate.
Martin Hojsík
you. Our next speaker is the second rapporteur, Miss Ben Telle. Please take the floor.
Hildegard Bentele
Chloe, colleagues, what could Ramaphosa from South Africa say, and Zidsega from Congo, and the Colombian president say, and the prime minister of Armenia, and the prime minister of Grenada all have in common? Anyone know? They, along with some other heads of government, last October came here to talk to the commission president about the global gateway, and they met the commissioners to talk about the existing and new global gateway projects and to reach new agreements on partnerships and to strengthen existing ones. And I have learned all about this on my many trips. There is a huge amount of interest in working with the European Union and in particular to work with European companies, training bodies, experts, and investors in order to create jobs and value on the ground, to develop industry, to work on industrialization, and to be part of industrial international supply chains.
And the president of Namibia came to visit us in September, and that was the message he gave us. At the Global Gateway Forum last October, two other things happened, and they were important for the points that we think can be improved. The creation of an investment hub as a one-stop shop for companies, and another very disastrous meeting of the Global Gateway Board where the representatives of the member states and the financing institutions would come together. And that's the main problem here. That's what we need to solve.
Involving the private sector and mobilizing private capital is core to this initiative. So this means that we need to think more about the interests of the private sector. It means that we need to take decisions more quickly and in a more transparent way. We need to have planning opportunities, and we also need to have the right instruments. And we think that the Global Gateway Board needs to be more operative.
It needs to meet more often. And those who are taking the decisions need to be around a table. We need to have these clear flight ship projects. They need to be highlighted because they are seen as flagships by our partners and competitors. We need to get out of the silos and the top-down thinking approach.
We need to make sure our policies are coherent in the EU, and we need to express the interests more clearly. And there are high geopolitical tensions at the moment, and this means that we need to think about our external relations, and we need to make sure that there is resilience and that it's at the foreground, colleagues, citizens. In terms of industry, the EU is a valued partner when it comes to trade. And we are presenting a package here, and if we implement that, then we can respond. We would offer companies more opportunities across the world, and we would have a more stable network of partnerships.
The sky is the limit. Thank you.
Pina Picierno
Thank you very much, Miss Bentley, and good morning, colleagues. Today, we give the floor to the Commissioner Sickela.
Jozef Síkela
Honorable chair, honorable members, thank you to the AFET and DAVID committees, and to the co-rapporteurs, missus Bentel and missus Riedel, for this report. It demonstrates our strong Team Europe spirit around Global Gateway, our European offer to partner with countries around the globe. What distinguishes this offer is our commitment to building trusted links, not dependencies, and to strengthening strategic autonomy. For instance, when Europe invests in critical raw materials, we do so with a 360-degree approach. It means combining investments in infrastructure with education, training, and a strong emphasis on local value.
And, of course, with state-of-the-art environmental, social, and governance standards. I fully agree with your report's recommendation to scale up the Global Gateway together. We want to show that value-driven investments deliver, and we are on track. 306,000,000,000 have already been mobilized between 2021 and 2024 under the Team Europe approach, and we expect to surpass 400,000,000,000 by '27. I launched the global gateway investment hub on October 25 to further scale up our investment agenda.
European businesses can now submit project ideas through their team nationals. That is through their member states' global gateway contact points. We are also organizing global gateway business forums around the world to connect private and public sector representatives from Europe and our partner countries. Currently, we are preparing 10 forums from Ethiopia to Brazil and Papua New Guinea. And whenever possible, I participate in these forums myself to support this work.
Just last night, I returned from Hanoi where I opened a forum with around 1,000 participants. We announced a 560000000 investment package in sustainable transport, clean energy, and digital technologies. Honorable members, I could give many more examples of forums, concrete projects, and the benefits they bring. Let me give only one example. In March, we announced a new investment in Paraguay, where we support the production of fertilizers using locally produced renewable hydrogen.
This strengthens Paraguay's sustainable industry, helps diversify its economy, and contributes to decarbonization of Europe's energy-intensive industries. Global Gateway is how we turn our partnerships into concrete results for Europe and for our partners. And that is why we must scale it up together. Thank you very much.
Pina Picierno
Thank you very much. Thank you, commissioner. And now I'll give the floor to Mr. Mariani.
The global gateway.
Thierry Mariani
Gateway. 306,000,000,000, this enshrines the development policy of the commission. Everybody accepts that this is very opaque. There's no way of understanding why certain projects there's a management board, which meets twice in four years to manage €6,000,000,000. Europeans have to understand that. And then the $3.00, €6,000,000,000 is just the commission fooling you.
This is mixed up with European projects, which already exist, and the private and public loans from other partners. Furthermore, non-European companies have got public procurement contracts. In other words, we're being trampled under foot. We're not prepared to allow migrants in under normal conditions. So we're voting against this report.
Chair, colleagues, while Russia is conquering and occupying China, it carries out new neo-colonial policies. So Transamerica brings about the position of the stronger partner. Europe offers partnerships. This is so rare in today's world. And we also have a specific instrument for this, the Global Gateway.
Global Gateway is supposed to strengthen our geopolitical position worldwide and secure the necessary resources for security and prosperity in Europe. However, we need to secure these not to the detriment of our partners, but in a mutually beneficial partnership, through means which do not undermine the partner, which respect the partner and respect the rules. This is why Europe's approach in today's world is unique, and it is our competitive advantage. I brought about certain changes in the report. First of all, we must not allow a situation where we are paying Chinese partners for implementing our projects.
We must stop this. Also, let's strengthen knowledge, learning, and also student stays. Thirdly, let us use the global gateway to address the causes of migration by allowing for a decent life in the home country. As a shadow reporter, I would like to thank all my colleagues for their collaboration. I would also like to thank our commissioner, Josef Sickela, who is in charge of a key agenda for Europe today.
Thank you.
Flo, president.
Udo Bullmann
Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, almost half of our money for external policies goes to Global Gateway projects now. And, yes, the European Parliament wants us to be successful. We want it to be a core instrument that shapes our international partnerships, and we want to have a good future. So what does that mean in practice? The global gateway strategy needs to know what it stands for, why it's there.
The funds for development policies are there to tackle poverty. And so that means that in our actual practical terms, we need to think about targets for health. And when it comes to industry, we want to have sustainable value chains. These are the things that need to be at the heart of it. Europe wants to be a reliable partner, and we need reliable partnerships across the world.
And so that also means that we need to be honest here. Yes. We have interests, but others have interests as well, justified interests. Millions of young people in the global south want jobs. They want to work.
That needs to be our aim when it comes to our projects, and we need to be able to assess the outcomes. The partner, the parliament, is ready to be a partner. That is the message of the report. We want to achieve this together. So thank you very much to the rapporteur for the excellent report, Miss Bentalla and Miss Riedel, and we will further develop the instrument.
Pina Picierno
Thank you very much. Colleagues, remember the timing as well. Tânger Corrêa, please.
Security, Brazilian.
António Tânger Corrêa
Madam president, commissioner, dear colleagues, Global Gateway was set out as the EU's response to the geopolitical situation and the economic situation of our times. However, it's completely out of step with the current context because the context has changed. It's just a festival of ideology and dogma. We're talking about €300,000,000,000, ladies and gentlemen. 300000000000.
We're talking about amounts of money that are needed in the EU itself. We're talking about money being spent on ideological projects, undermining our interests, undermining our industry and our peoples. And we're seeing global powers playing off countries off each other. We're just giving money to those who are holding out their hands and promising to be loyal to the EU. Therefore, the patriots for Europe cannot support this report.
It's an ideological report, and it's not a strong report.
Lang Tagg for four men.
Kristoffer Storm
Thank you very much, commissioner, colleagues. The report is right in criticizing a lack of responsibility and transparency. I don't think we should pretend that it's still good enough, that we'll vote in favor, because it's not. There's no requirements, no conditions, and no consequences when it comes to migrations. We send billions of euros out of the EU without making the most elementary demand, namely that it should stop the flow of migrants to Europe.
And then we criticize the member states for putting their own citizens first. These are citizens who pay out, who stand up, who get up every morning, and go to work under this system. We owe them one thing, namely that we spend their money with a clear purpose and having thought things through. If we're going to send money for a development project, it should not be for the goodness of our heart. It should be to keep migrants out of Europe.
Thank you, Mr. Andrews.
Barry Andrews
Thank you, President, Commissioner, and colleagues. The Libido Railway Corridor is perhaps the best-known global gateway flagship project. However, a press release from one of the operators of the railway last month disclosed some of the shortcomings of the global gateway project that this opinion seeks to address. The press release announced the transport by railway of low carbon copper anodes to the EU from a mine in the Democratic Republic Of Congo. Firstly, the press release praised the involvement of the US and the African Development Bank, but there was no mention of the role of the European Union.
Secondly, it represents almost no added value, and is barely distinguishable from extractive practices of the past. And finally, the mine is 40% owned by a Chinese company, 40% owned by a Canadian company, and the press release came from a Swiss company. It underlines how we have to be careful about matching the rhetoric around the global gateway with the complexity of global supply chains. Equally, this is information that we have inadvertently come across and is not readily available from the commission. We can do better.
Let's hope this opinion marks a new departure in transparency around the global gateway. Thank you.
Thank.
You, Mister Marquette.
Erik Marquardt
Commissioner, president. Firstly, I'd like to say to the rapporteurs and the shadow rapporteurs, thank you for this constructive negotiation on this file. We want Global Glowway to be successful, but success for us means that we can have a key role in development and not just in the way that The US and China do, and we're having their own interests in mind. But we want to have partnerships, partnership based on values, which can also create good working conditions that can lead to benefits for both sides of the partnership. And that's really the heart of the point, the heart of the file.
We need to have development cooperation with development cooperation aims. I think the current global gateway strategy can be criticized. It can be improved. But, hopefully, we can, with this report, have a contribution to improving this. We want international partnerships.
We want these partnerships to be sustainable and to be based on values that really are at the heart of our opinion on this. And, hopefully, that's a compromise that we've been able to build in this. Thank you.
Özlem Demirel
Miss Demiral, please. Thank you, madam president. Global Gateway is being sold as a big project for the future by the EU. It's investment in sustainable development and partnerships. But if you take a closer look, you can see that those words don't reflect the reality, because global gateway is not really a development project.
It is, above all, a geopolitical instrument and model against the Chinese Silk Road Initiative, and they want to have influence. Development money is going to be used to implement the strategic capital interest of the EU. We want to say very clearly, real development policy would not be part of geopolitical power games. If you really want to do development support, you need to provide development support. And the people that will benefit are the European companies.
They benefit from the raw materials. It's not about equal partnerships with Africa. No. It's about the exploitation of their wealth. And these fossil projects are not sustainable or fair.
Many civil society organizations from the so-called global South criticize this and say it's neocolonialism, and that is the point. If development policies are developed on this and then they are going to be reduced, then that is a problem because this is not a step forward. It is a step backward. Public money should be put into real development work and not into the pockets of companies. Mister Jungen.
In the multipolar and belt.
Marc Jongen
In the multipolar world order, we fight for resources in the competition with China and developing countries in Ukraine, and this is why the Global Gateway program was created as a counterweight to the Silk Road. However, instead of really looking at policies, we're trying to impose climate goals worldwide, and we only cooperate with partners who think the same way as we do. So we're very close to the SDGs and our green goals. So a lot of money has been spent in an intransparent way. We've had some criticism of this from the CGU, quite correctly.
However, what we're really talking about here is wanting to export to other countries. This is not the right way to get world influence. The Chamber of Commerce in Germany said last year that it would not work.
Thank you, Mr. Mendel.
Lukas Mandl
Thank you, Madam President, Commissioner Sickell, and colleagues. We live in a world with an increasing amount of conflict. There are global actors who are no longer reliable. Europe is different. Europe has many challenges, and we need to look at hard power.
We need to ensure economic growth, but Europe can do a huge amount. Europe is reliable. Europe is a reliable partner for other countries around the world. Global gateway brings us together with these countries, and it strengthens these partnerships. It strengthens the world against conflict, and it helps to build cooperation.
Cooperation is something we have achieved, and it's something we can export to the world. We bring that with the global gateway, and it will bring us even closer to a partnership. Ronald Reagan says the best social program is a job. I would say the best development cooperation program is true development cooperation work. Thank you, Commissioner Sicola, for focusing on this direction.
We need humanitarian aid. We need development cooperation, but we also need to work together, economically it needs to be sustainable. Thank you.
Miss May.
Yeah. Don't go for it.
Marit Maij
Thank you, President, Commissioner. This report on the Global Gateway shares a clear message. We need more transparency from every stage of it, from the selection of the projects to the implementation, to the assessment. We need to ask, does it support our development project aims, or does it just support the EU interest? Does it help the people out there on the ground better?
Does it support women and men, women and girls who suffer most from poverty? Does it support regions hit by conflict? Global Gateway is a project that is going to boost EU taxpayer money with private financing, combining public and private financing for development. And that means it should focus on the most important parts of development policy, namely to reduce poverty. And I look forward to the dialogue between the parliament and the commission, and I hope that it will make sure that this development funding is still in line.
Assita Kanko
Dear colleagues, dear commissioner, madam president, I think it's pointless to waste time listing all the arguments that underscore the necessity of the global gateway initiative. Recent geopolitical developments are perhaps the strongest argument of all. If we in Europe wish to put ourselves back on the world map, strategically well considered investments in infrastructure, technology, and energy are the best means to that end. We must also dare to align our investments much more closely with our objectives. In the field of migration management, for example, with women's rights and with the strategic and economic interest of the member states.
Today, I note with great disappointment that the global gateway is still too heavily steered from Brussels, and is still too often based on a centralist, old-fashioned logic. In my view, this does not take sufficient account of the specific expertise and often deep-rooted historical, economic, and diplomatic ties that many member states have with certain partner countries. We cannot reduce those member states to mere implementers. They are co-architects. The global gateway is a unique opportunity.
Let us therefore say it with both hands, and with due consideration to innovate.
Thank.
You, Mister Kermans.
Charles Goerens
Thank you, madam President. And global gateway is a strategy, and at the same time, a reaction to Chinese expansionism, economic and trade expansionism, which is being seen across the world. This very recent strategy highlights the direction taken by the EU. This direction is transactional, and it's clearly not going to be changed. Now I don't want to question what has already been achieved with strategy, but I am one of those who would like to see some safeguards in this direction.
To be clear, the initiatives which are part of the global gateway must have a clear link with human development. Yes. To improve connectivity, but there are conditions. There needs to be a link to human development, and these links need to be clear. This is absolutely vital, and this is what will make the difference between us and other actors who are trying to replace the former colonial masters.
Thank you, Miss Neil.
Nela Riehl
Colleagues, we all agree for different reasons. Right now, Global Gateway does not work. Not for local populations who are not consulted on how to actually implement projects sustainably, not for companies or implementing partners who actually lack coherent benchmarks for success, and not for people whose water sources are polluted by extraction every day and infrastructure projects without environmental standards, and also not for young people who don't gain job prospects because skills transfer has not even been considered. And it does not work for us, the parliament, that has no oversight over the governance of these massive global investments. Many of these issues are addressed in the new Gate Global Gateway report, and that is good, but we need more.
Do no significant harm needs to be the global gateway principle. Local communities must be consulted. Development money must not be misused to protect EU corporate profits. Colleagues, we still have many massive tasks before us. This report will only be the start, and I'm very much looking forward to working together with you in the next one.
Thank you.
Colleague,
Anthony Smith
On the 28th July 1885, Gilles Ferry defended in the National Assembly the foundation of the polycolonial politics by saying that they need outlets for French industry. For 141 years later, nothing has changed. Global Gateway is a new colonial instrument, which serves your commercial and geo-strategic interest. It means that companies can access public procurement contracts and can steal the national resources of these states. The private sector breaks it in, public debt grows, populations get poorer and poorer, these are the ingredients that allow the West to maintain its dominance.
That's not the definition of multinational, nationalist, and development policy. The European Union must face its places such as respect to the sovereign states, access to food and energy, its sharing of wealth in respect to fundamental rights of peoples.
Milan Mazurek
Incredible €300,000,000,000. This is what you're wasting on this nonsense project in Africa and Asia, very often in countries that are completely corrupted, with no significant control. And you are trying to tell us what a successful project this is. And at the same time, our citizens have difficult lives. They have faced larger bills.
The prices are going up a rocket high in the meantime. And they should rejoice in the fact that the commission is advancing hundreds of billions into the so-called green transition in Africa and Asia, and trying to compare itself to China. China that is investing in mining, building heavy industry, building jobs, and gaining profits for itself. So instead of doing like China, all you do is walk around like Santa from an American movie and give her money from the taxpayers. If it was your own money, you would never be giving it up so generously.
You should instead focus on the lives of regular citizens and trying to improve them.
Thank.
Ingeborg Ter Laak
You, president. Colleagues, today, we're talking about the Global Gateway. And I want to be clear, it's not an abstract policy instrument. It's a chance to make sure that Europe is stronger, more honest, and more ready for the future. As a member of the EPP, I think that what we talk is honest gain.
We're creating added value, and it's for our society. And investment needs to contribute to sustainable jobs, innovation, and stronger economies, both in Europe and outside Europe. With the Global Gateway, we are making strategic investments in infrastructure, digitalization, and energy, but it's much more than money. It's about a partnership. It's about investing in economic resilience.
It's about offering an alternative that's based on transparency, reliability, and mutual benefits. President, let's choose a Europe that invests with a vision and which builds fair growth. Thank you. I don't see Mister Scheider here, so I'll give the floor to Mister Ericsson. And I will say that we have closed the catch-the-eye requests.
Thank.
Andreas Schieder
thank you very much. This all sounds very beautiful, this global gateway, and the whole strategy. This has been going on since 2021, and a lot of money has been spent. However, a number of auditors, including the European Court of Auditors, have criticized a lack of transparency, a lack of management, and a lack of evaluation. And a number of people have said that it's very difficult to get all of this working in an efficient fashion.
Competition with China is something we have to accept, of course, but we have to do that by developing our own competitiveness so that Europe can become the strongest partner in terms of growth. And we don't do that by giving billions to other parts of the world. So I would suggest that we take global gateway after out of the next MFF. This is not the way we should be working. We should create jobs, development, and growth in Europe.
Mr. Sell.
I don't understand. Sorry.
Alexander Sell
Over $200,000,000,000 is what the Chinese invested across the world. Last year, the European Union wanted to try to do something against that, and Global Gateway is its answer to China's new Silk Road. But whilst Peking builds infrastructure, what we're doing is spending money on gender projects in Tanzania, renewable energies in Trinidad And Tobago, and so on. 80,000,000,000 is what the European taxpayers are supposed to be paying for this nonsense. And we're seeing what this means.
We're seeing China get some richer, Europe gets poorer, and taxes are just going up here. German taxpayers are supposed to be paying for projects on gender and energy in Kinshasa, Timbuktu, and so on. But look at Germany, the roads are in a mess, the trains are late, in Hamburg it isn't working. We've got need of renovation in our German infrastructure, 400,000,000,000. But the CDU is just wasting.
We don't need a global gateway. We need German rebuilding.
Reinhold Lopatka
Dear colleagues, I want to underline that Global Gateway has already delivered tangible results, only to mention three of them. Across Africa, the EU is investing in renewable energy infrastructure, from large-scale solar projects to emerging green hydrogen corridors. Second, we are expanding digital connectivity. And thirdly, we are strengthening trade routes by upgrading ports and rail links. These initiatives are creating jobs and transferring knowledge to economically deprived regions.
And as the report rightly highlights, the global gateway will fulfill its potential if we have strengthened governance, transparency, and development orientation. If we are not continuing with our initiatives, China will use all of this for its interests. And above all, we must remain guiding the genuine development cooperation principles, poverty reduction, human development, and the widening of new debt traps.
Thank you, Miss Inche.
Evin Incir
Madam President, Europe is no longer operating in a stable world. We face growing geopolitical competition and instability. The European Union must act with clarity and resolve. We must take global leadership for peace and security. Global gateways is therefore not just another initiative.
It is an important strategic tool to build a strong mutually beneficial partnership with Asia, Africa, and Latin America. If we are serious about Europe's road, global gateway must become a cornerstone of our external action, positioning the EU as a credible value-driven partner while reducing some worrisome dependencies. This is about global leadership, and it is about responsibility. Commissioner, I also want to take the opportunity to address the planned budget cut to the EULAC Foundation at a time when we should strengthen ties with Latin America and the Caribbean. We are weakening them.
I would urge the commission to reconsider it. And finally, colleagues, I do not understand how the far right here in this European Parliament are keep being blind. We need more international cooperation for peace and security. Haven't you learned anything from the current global situation? Thank you.
Thank.
Nicolas Bay
You, Mister Baynai. The world is seeing an unprecedented geopolitical change, and we've got this global a great way, and the aim is to be part. We want to focus on that. We want to have strategic autonomy. We want to defend our interests with these mutually beneficial partnerships, and we want to rest in our own. We want to keep our own tradition.
We need to get out of this watering down. We need to be effective. The European Union and its members is going well, they've spent 80,000,000,000 in development aid in 2024, and what was the result? We need to have a new political philosophy here, and we need to make sure that we control the migration flows, and we need to make sure that there is the automatic reentry of the illegals. We need to look at developing the infrastructure.
We need to develop the infrastructure, and so on, and we need to use a local workforce. We need to make sure that things are bought at a fair price as opposed to being bought at a predatory rate by China. We need to make sure that every year invested abroad is used to serve our interest, security, and our prosperity.
Rosa Estaràs Ferragut
You, president, commissioner. It's been 4 years since we created the Global Gateway. Global Gateway was set up to bring together public and private investment, which would focus on the twin transitions, health, education, energy, sustainability, and promoting European values. There's been clear progress, we've seen in a range of flagship projects. There are challenges, nonetheless.
There's a lack of visibility or lack of coordination between institutions. Procedures can be slow, and there's a lack of clarity in relation to the real funding. The choice of flagship projects doesn't have transparent criteria, and that's why we need, four years later, a change towards a more participatory model, a model which is more open and provides more visibility and parliamentary oversight. Certain actors have taken a step away from international cooperation, and these have left a vacuum that the EU needs to fill. The global gateway is a way of strengthening our position in the world, of consolidating alliances and exporting democracy and sustainability and a human rights based approach around the world.
Shida, please.
Thank you, Shun.
Andreas Schieder
Thank you, colleagues. We have been living in this world now, a world where for decades we've had stable partnerships, but now that has changed. That's changed, so we need strong instruments for international cooperation now and for the future. This will help us support European interests in the future. Global Gateway and Global Europe in general are extremely important instruments.
These instruments allow us to convey our values and allow us to take strategic positions in strengthening our network for the future of Europe. Now there's a whole range of examples. There's a whole range of examples that have been extremely successful. We've seen, for example, better and more efficient transport systems in Europe. And that these are projects which are being funded with this instrument.
This is something that's good for Europe and the world.
Pina Picierno
Thank you. Now we're going to move.
on to catch the eye. We have got various speakers. So please, stick to the time. Steer, please.
Davor Ivo Stier
Thank you, Chair. Just a few words on the re operator for our strategies for Latin America, where global gateway plays a very important role. In the resolution that we adopted last year about Latin America, we underline certain things that were repeated in this resolution. First of all, the need for a greater parliamentary oversight, then partnerships with countries where we invest funds from the global gateway require also additional value and better coordination with the local communities. And this sets us apart from this exploitative model of China, which is enacted not only in Latin America, but I will speak about this part of the world.
I think this is an excellent report, and I would like to congratulate the reporters. And I think we need to focus on greater operability and focus on the implementation of the global gateway that needs to be stressed today. But, this will enable us to be better and to be more effective and efficient in using Global Gateway as one of the key geopolitical instruments that we have available today.
Juan Fernando López Aguilar
President and commissioner. I've seen we've seen the US take a step away from international aid, and the EU leads in this area globally now. Global Gateway has tried to relaunch this. We're trying to focus on as twin transitions, education, and European values, not just in Africa, but around the world. It's been said that we're trying to compete with the Chinese China's Silk Road.
And China can have opacity and a lack of criteria, but the EU can't do that. So the message from the European Parliament is it's absolutely vital to strengthen transparency in the Global Gateway. We need to make sure people are aware, businesses, private sectors, and when it comes to mobilizing their assets, people need to understand what is actually being done and what the EU represents in the world. And before we need to have parliamentary oversight of this so that we can be accountable to our constituents. There's huge amounts that we're investing, and we need to make sure that the European Union is weighing around the world.
Andrew Coitus.
Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis
Thank you, commissioner. Ladies and gentlemen, I think we can all say that the Global Gateway Initiative is a very important EU project, but I'd like to draw your attention to the fact that we should talk more about the Sustainable Development Goals. These SDGs should be implemented much more efficiently with health, education, and development for local populations. We should contribute to the consolidation of development in the global South. We should be involved in education programs.
We should create competence within the local populations because creating jobs, if people don't have the skills they need, is not going to work. So we need to emphasize that more.
Well,
Speaker 148
Ladies and gentlemen, in an ideological and left-wing union, sensible ideas are very few and far between. But when there is a project like this, then you burden it with some absurd quality tasks and other inclusive goals. We have Erasmus, a program that we all appreciate, now has to be a gate for immigration from Africa. Global Gateway, it was a good idea to strengthen the EU's competitiveness. However, it was infected with the green deal and other climate targets, and the balance, the balance mechanism, was weakened.
So it is now working just for the economy of Germany and France. Is this the principle of solidarity creating privileges for selected countries? Where are those mechanisms that should stop illegal immigration? We give money. We should get something in return.
Speaker 149
So there is now a project that is completely politicized, completely lacks transparency, and it just means total control over different countries.
Dear.
Speaker 147
President, Europe has been living in a dream world for too long. That dream world is called development aid. We've operated on a naive belief that if we were just kind enough, we would earn loyalty. That if we gave enough away, the world would adopt our values. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Speaker 92
This childish view has cost the European taxpayer hundreds of billions of euros in the last years alone. And what do we have to show it for? We gave away Europeans' hard-earned money as charity to cultures that often reject everything we stand for. We chose feeling good over doing business. It's time to wake up.
Speaker 147
Kindness doesn't buy loyalty in this world. Strength and partnership do. If we want influence, we have to stop being donors. Thank you.
Speaker 150
Please. The US and Europe have got a big competitor, Chinese companies, and production have moved to China. And today, the USA have seen the mistakes that they've made, and they're trying to get companies to come back to the United States. The tariffs, cutting bureaucracy, well, these are things that they're currently doing. And the US is opening up to companies.
It's signing agreements with India and other countries across the world. Are we going to be able to compete with India, where labor is five times cheaper than it is here? We're not able to compete with China. And the trade deficit is €100,000,000,000. We don't have the resources we need to make companies in Europe, and then we need to be a stronger economy.
Ondřej Dostál
Commissioner colleagues, the idea of the global gateway is a correct one, and I can say that representatives of countries from various continents give me positive feedback on this. However, there are three aspects which are negative. Global South countries have many unwanted memories of the colonial era. And today, their perception is very negative when Europe is dictating or being superior. They will opt for other partners, and our investments will be ruined.
Also, neoconservatives from the US are no longer a source of admiration in the world. On the contrary, if we join that block, we won't be trusted. Our strategic rival, China, three times the population, three times the money, popular exports. When our partners are faced with us or China, they will choose China, but we need not be rivals. If we connect our initiatives with the Chinese project, we will create more prosperity for our country, for our companies and citizens.
Jozef Síkela
Honorable members, thank you for this instructive exchange. I've heard your recommendations, your refusals, and partially contradictory statements. But I still believe that in today's contentious global landscape, strong partnership is more important than ever between the EU and partner countries, between the public and private sectors, and, of course, between the EU institutions and member states. My services and me, we are committed to continue to work hand in hand with everybody who wants to ensure that global gateway delivers. Together, we can boost competitiveness, resilience, sustainability, and diversification.
Together, we can reduce migration, and together, we can strengthen strategic autonomy, not just for Europe, but also for our partners. This is our value proposition. Thank you.
Chloé Ridel
Thank you very much, Vice President. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for this debate. Let me restate the essential points. Given the brutality of the way the world is managed at the moment, we have to find another way forward, the global gateway, which is based on mutual respect. In other words, European values, I'd like to answer the criticism that we've heard from the extreme right.
Yes. European investments in other countries at development aid are essential. We're not an island in the middle of the ocean. And Global Gateway is not a migration management tool. That's not the point.
The success of the Global Gateway will be seen in the international relationships it defines and in the way that we can decide on priorities among equals, the way the extent to which we can protect the public sector and create jobs. It cannot create domination. This should not be a window for European internationals. We want something that's more social, more ecological. We want an initiative which does not create dependence, but rather creates independence.
And we want to have something that is based on dignity, solidarity, and justice. And it is at this level that we will be judged. Thank you.
Thank.
Pina Picierno
you. Colleagues, could I ask for some respect for the rapporteurs who are speaking? So please take your seat, and please don't make noise. Ms. Bintella.
Hildegard Bentele
Colleagues, thank you very much for this exchange of views. Extremely productive. I also like to say I've been invited to the European Council to discuss this. It's very important that we work together with the member states as a team in Europe. Let me just say one thing to the right of this parliament.
You have not understood the global gateway. We said the European businesses, German businesses, receive support when they want to go export around the world. The single market is good, but German jobs are being secured with exporting business. I wanted to clarify that, but we need to work together on this when the ECR don't even come to the debate, and we are unfortunately, we can't take your contribution on board. Thank.
Pina Picierno
you. So that concludes the debate. As you know, the votes will take place today. The session is suspended for a few moments, and it will start again with a vote.
Speaker 152
Can I do the spine? Okay, dear colleagues. Can I ask you to take your seats? Let's resume. Okay.
Roberta Metsola
Let's start. Let's start. So, dear colleagues, the sitting is resumed. One announcement from my end, the competent authorities of Portugal have addressed a request to me for the parliamentary immunity of Francisco Assis to be waived. This request is referred to the committee on legal affairs.
We now come to the votes. The first one is by Roko, so all cards in. We have a report by Mister Malik Asmani on the common system for the return of third-country nationals staying illegally in the Union. This is the return regulation. We will vote on the decision to enter inter-institutional negotiations.
By roll call, the vote is open. Vote is closed. And it is adopted. So, okay. Okay.
Okay. Okay. Well, many votes to go through, guys. The committee can therefore start inter institutional negotiations immediately. We move to the objection unit framework for the national calculation of life cycle global warming potential.
We vote on the resolution as a whole. By roll call, the vote is open. And on this, we need 360. Vote is closed, and it is clearly rejected. Now we vote on the objection of the union list of projects of common interest and projects of mutual interest.
We vote on the resolution as a whole by a show of hands. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Rejected.
Let's check this. Okay? It's okay. It's okay. We can quickly check.
We got.
Roberta Metsola
Vote now on the objection to establish the certification methodologies for permanent carbon removal activities. We vote on the resolution as a whole. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains?
Rejected. We don't check this. We will move to the report by Mr. Mario Furore on the request for the waiver of the immunity of Gregor Brown. We vote on the proposal for a decision. Who is in favor?
Who is against? Who abstains? Approved. We move to the report by Mr. Danius Zalimas on the request for the waiver of the immunity of Gregor Brown. This is a vote for a proposal of a decision.
Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Report by Mister Christophe Smischek on the request for the waiver of the immunity of Nikos Papas.
We vote on the proposal for a decision. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Approved.
On the report of Miss Keira Marie Peter Hansen on the scope of deposit protection, use of deposit guarantee schemes funds, cross-border cooperation, transparency, I have received no amendments or motions to reject the council position. The European Parliament has therefore concluded its second reading, and the legislative act has been adopted. On the report by mister Ludac Nedermeyer on early intervention measures, conditions for resolution, and financing of resolution action, b r d three, I have received no amendments or motions to reject the council position. The European Parliament has therefore completed a second reading, and the legislative act has been adopted. The report by Miss Irene Tinalli on early intervention measures, conditions for resolution, and funding of resolution action SRMR 3.
I have received no amendments or motions to reject the council's position. The European Parliament has therefore concluded its second reading, and the legislative act has been adopted. Report by Mister Harvey Lopez on surface water and groundwater pollutants. Same here. I have received no amendments or motions to reject the council's position. The European Parliament has concluded the second reading, and the legislative act has been adopted.
Now we go to the report by Miss Raquel Garcia Hermina van der Valle on combating corruption. There is first a proposal to vote on the amendments to the draft legislative act. It is a procedural motion by roll call vote, is open. The vote is closed. Rejected.
Now we vote on the provisional agreement. Amendment 221 by roll call vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. First reading of the parliament is closed.
Now we go to the report by Miss Birgit Sipple on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council, amending regulation 2021 1232 as regards the extension of its period of application. I give the floor to the rapporteur for 2 minutes. 381,380. Does any microphone work? Miss Sippel, do you want to come to the restroom?
Yeah. A
Speaker 158
bag Oh, now they're all lighting up. Baggage. Baggage. Mister Shirdawan is up. He's always sorry.
Speaker 161
Doesn't work. I'll be doing it. Shouldn't have apologies for this. Mine. I think it works.
Speaker 160
Let's see. Okay. Here it works.
Colleagues, two weeks ago, this parliament adopted with an overwhelming majority, including EPP, S and D and Renu, a position based on facts and specific experience from five years of the interim regulation. We've taken responsibility to protect children and to maintain fundamental rights, and we decided to extend this based on evidence-based alignment adaptation. Now as co-legislator, we have to negotiate, and that is expecting compromise from the other side, but that is not what has happened. The council has simply moved away from the negotiating table and hasn't even come to negotiate. The past few years show us that this has worked and should continue to work, that is finding this material.
Speaker 163
When it comes to unknown material or grooming, a targeted restriction would be a step backward. This is why we need to remain consistent as a parliament and stick to the position we came to with an overwhelming majority, and to give legislators another opportunity for talks. I think it when it comes to all of the pressure, see how many fake claims, how much mud has been slung just because somebody has their own position on this file? Thank you.
Roberta Metsola
Thank you, Miss Sippel. We vote first on amendment 30 in two parts, both by roll call. First part, the vote is open. Okay. Okay.
Speaker 162
Hold on. Sorry. We will wait for Miss Sippel to take back her seat. Alright. Vote is closed.
Roberta Metsola
It is rejected. So the second part falls. We now vote on amendment 34 by roll call. Vote is open. Right?
Yes. Amendment 34. Vote is closed. Adopted. Amendment 35 by roll call.
Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 36 by roll call. Vote is open.
Vote is closed. Adopted. Amendment 33 by roll call. Vote is open. 33.
The vote is closed. This is rejected. Amendment 31 by roll call. Vote is open. Vote is closed.
Rejected. Amendment 29, by roll call. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted.
Amendment 32 by roll call. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. We vote on the commission proposal by roll call.
So? Yes. We can close it.
Roberta Metsola
Okay. Then the first reading of parliament is closed. Now I have received a motion. I have received, please, this is an important part. I have received a motion from the left group to adjourn the vote on the report adjustment of customs duties and opening of tariff quotas for the import of certain goods originating in the United States of America.
Could I please ask you to be silent? I give the floor first to Mister Martin Shildewan, who is the mover of the request for one minute.
Martin Schirdewan
Yeah. Thank you, madam president. I want to request the adjournment of the vote on the two Langenfelds and Bernd. This is nothing personal, but, colleagues, the US Supreme Court has ruled that this EU-US trade deal has no legal base. And just yesterday, Trump made it very clear that he doesn't intend to honor the terror section of the deal.
This is not a fair deal. This is blackmail. And as it stands now, the deal is harmful for our industry and endangers European jobs. We need more clarity from the Americans, and the Americans need more time to get their house in order. And even if the commission thinks that it is best to submit to Trump, I don't think so.
Why should we greenlight a deal now and reward a president who just wanted to annex Greenland, who threatened Spain, and who mocks the EU almost daily? It is time for this parliament to say no to this blackmail, and to protect European jobs. Thank you.
Bernd Lange
Yeah. Thanks a lot, President. Dear colleagues, I guess now it's really time to make a clear statement of the European Parliament in the direction of the United States that we are sticking to a deal, but with clear conditions, preconditions, suspension conditions, and also a time limit for the whole exercise. And I'm really a believer. I'm a believer in the power of parliament.
If we stick together, we can reach a lot. And regarding the vote in the intercommittee with 29 in favor, nine against, and one abstention, I guess the vote is quite clear, and we should stick together in our vote so that we have a strong position of the parliament towards The United States. Thanks a lot.
Roberta Metsola
Thank you, Mr. Lange. So I will put the motion of the left group to a vote, by roll call. Vote is open. Yes. Open.
Vote is closed. This is rejected, so we continue with the vote. On the report by Mister Bernd Lange on the adjustment of customs duties and the opening of tariff quotas for the import of certain goods originating in the United States of America, we first vote on a proposal to reject the commission proposal amendment 47 by roll call. Vote is open. Vote is closed.
Rejected. Now we vote on the draft legislative act. Amendment by the committee responsible block vote. Who is in favor? Who is against?
Who abstains? Adopted. Amendment 61 by roll call. Vote is open. Vote is closed.
Rejected 48 by Roelco, the vote is open. The vote is closed. Rejected 49 by Rokaw. Vote is open. The vote is closed.
Rejected 50 by Rokaw. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected 51 by Rokow. Vote is open.
Vote is closed. Rejected 52 by Rocco. Vote is open. The vote is closed. Rejected 53 by Rocco.
Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected 54 by Rocco. Vote is open. Vote is closed.
Rejected 55 by Rocco. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected 56 by Rocco. Vote is open.
Vote is closed. Rejected 57 by Rocco. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected 58 by Rocco.
Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected 59 by Rocco. Vote is open. Vote is closed.
Rejected 60 by a roll call. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. So we vote now on the commission proposal by roll call.
Vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. So now I give the floor to the rapporteur. Mister Lange, throw back to you.
Bernd Lange
For the strong vote and for the strong mandate, I ask now to go to inter institutional negotiation based on article 60.4.
Roberta Metsola
Thank you very much, Mr. Langhes. So now we will vote on the referral back. Who is in favor of the referral? Who is against? Who abstains?
So it is adopted, and therefore, the report is referred back to the committee responsible for interstitial negotiations in accordance with rule 60, paragraph four. Now I have received a motion from the left group to adjourn the vote on the report, nonapplication of customs duties on imports of certain goods. We go straight to the vote on this motion by the left group, by roll call. Vote is open. Wait.
Okay. Yes. Open. The vote is closed. It's rejected, so we continue with the vote on the report by mister Bernd Lange on the nonapplication of customs duties on imports of certain goods.
There is first a proposal to reject the commission proposal amendment 17 by Roelco. Vote is open. The vote is closed. That's rejected. We vote on the draft legislative act.
The amendments by the committee responsible, there's a block vote. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains? Adopted.
We vote on the commission proposal by Roko. Vote is open. The vote is closed. It's adopted. Now I give the floor to the rapporteur once again.
Mister Lange, you have the floor.
Bernd Lange
Thanks a lot, President. Dear colleagues, this famous lobster deal, we adopted it in 2018 the first time. We should go ahead and negotiate with the council. Therefore, I ask you to give the approval for going to the inter institutional negotiation based on article 60.4.
Roberta Metsola
Thank you very much, Mr. Lange. So now we vote on the referral back. Who is in favor? Who is against? Who abstains?
It is adopted, and therefore the report is referred back in accordance with rule 60, paragraph four. Now we move to the report by Miss Arba Kokalari and Mister Michael McNamara on the simplification of the implementation of harmonized rules on artificial intelligence. This is the digital omnibus on AI. I give the floor to the rapporteurs. First, Miss Kokalari, and afterwards, Mister McNamara for one minute each.
Arbhay, you have the floor.
Arba Kokalari
Thank you, President Metzola. Dear colleagues, for too long, Europe has been seen as the world's rulebook on tech, but nobody's innovation hub. Now we're changing this. We can't let our European startups drown in paperwork before they even get their first customers. Because Europe needs to get serious now on AI and innovation.
We have the talents, and we have our single market. I want a continent where start ups scale, where engineers stay, and where boys and girls in Stockholm, in Warsaw, in Madrid can build the next generation tech companies in Europe, and build the European success story. The vote today is a small step for AI in Europe, but is a big step to cut bureaucracy. And to our entrepreneurs out there, now we are pausing and simplifying the AI Act. And to our colleagues, vote yes to the AIA omnibus.
Michael McNamara
Thank you, President and colleagues. This resolution brings clarity and simplification to the law applicable to AI systems across Europe, for the benefit of all, but particularly our startups and mid caps. One very simple clarification is that AIs that create non-consensual intimate imagery will be prohibited. This has been a priority not only for my colleagues in the Renew group, but across this House. From ECR to the left, there have been amendments to that effect, and I'm glad that they are reflected in this resolution.
Having one's image taken and sexualized will no longer be a price to be paid for a woman seeking elected office in Europe, or for a person merely because they're in public life in Europe, or for those merely because they are growing up in this digital era of such limitless possibilities but new risk. Like the AI act passed only two years ago by this house, this law seeks to facilitate the possibilities of AI while mitigating its risks, and I commend it to the House.
Roberta Metsola
On the amendments by the committee responsible. It's a block vote. Who's in favor? Who's against? Who abstains?
Adopted. Amendment 11 by Rocco. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted amendment 81 by Rocco.
Vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted amendment 82 by Rocco. Vote is open. The vote is closed.
Adopted amendment 90 by Rokov. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected 91 by Rocco. Vote is open.
The vote is closed. Rejected 84 by Rocco. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected 92 by Rokow.
Vote is open. The vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 85. Who's in favor?
Roberta Metsola
Who's against? Who abstains? Rejected. One. Who's in favor?
Who's against? Who abstains? Rejected. 31 by roll call. Vote is open.
Roberta Metsola
Who abstains? Rejected. One 4 who's in favor? Who's against? Who abstains?
Rejected. 103 by Rocco. Vote is open. The vote is closed. Rejected.
Amendment 32 by Rocco. Vote is open. The vote is closed. Adopted. One five falls.
Amendment 86, who's in favor? Who's against? Who abstains? Rejected. Amendment 36 by Rocco.
Vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted. So 93 falls. Amendment 116, who's in favor?
Speaker 174
Who's against? Who abstains? Rejected. One seven, who's in favor? Who's against?
Roberta Metsola
Rejected. Amendment 47. Who's in favor? Who's against? Who abstains?
Speaker 174
Adopted. Amendment 104. Who's in favor? Who's against? Who abstains?
Rejected. Amendment 55. Who's in favor? Who's against? Who abstains?
Speaker 176
Adopted. 87 in two parts. Vote by roll call. First part. Vote is open.
Roberta Metsola
Vote is closed. Rejected. Second part. Vote is open. Vote is closed.
Rejected. Amendment 95 by Rocco, vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected amendment 56. Who's in favor?
Who's against? To abstain, adopted. Amendment 88 by Rocco. Vote is open. Vote is closed.
Rejected. So we vote on amendment 61 to 63. Who's in favor? Who's against? To abstain adopted.
Amendment 96 by Roelco. Vote is open. The vote is closed. Rejected. So we vote on amendment 60 in four parts.
Speaker 174
First part, who's in favor? Who's against? Who abstains? Adopted. Second part, who's in favor?
Who's against? Who adopted. Third part, who's in favor? Who's against? Who abstains?
Roberta Metsola
Adopted. Fourth part by Rocco. Vote is open. The vote is closed. Adopted amendment 97 by Rokov.
Vote is open. The vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 98 by Rocco. Vote is open.
Vote is closed. Rejected. Amendment 99 by Rocco. Vote is open. Vote is closed.
Rejected. Amendment 100 by Rocco. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected.
105 Barocco. Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 108 by Rocco.
Vote is open. The vote is closed. Rejected. 106 by Rocco. Vote is open.
Vote is closed. Rejected. 101 by Rocco. Vote is open. Vote is closed.
Rejected 76. Who's in favor? Who's against? Who abstains? Adopted 107 by Rocco.
Vote is open. Vote is closed. Rejected. 102 by Rocco. Vote is open.
The vote is closed. Rejected. 89 by Rokow. Vote is open. Vote is closed.
Rejected. We vote on amendment 77 to 80. Who's in favor? Who's against? Who abstains?
Speaker 174
Adopted. 109. Who's in favor? Who's against? Who abstains?
Rejected. Amendment six. Who's in favor? Who's against? Who abstains?
Roberta Metsola
Adopted. We vote on the commission proposal by Rocco. The vote is open. Vote is closed. Adopted.
So I give the floor to the rapporteur, Miss Kokalari. Hold on. Hold on. You need to press the button. Hopefully, it works.
Arba Kokalari
No. Okay. Thank you, colleagues, for the big support. Dear president, on behalf of both corrupters, I would like to refer the file back to IMCO and Liebe committees to start the inter institutional negotiations pursuant to rules of procedure 64. Thank you very much.
Roberta Metsola
Thank you very much, Miss Cocolari. So we vote on the referral back. Who's in favor? Who's against? Who abstains?
It's adopted, and therefore, the report is indeed referred back to the committee responsible in accordance with rule 60 paragraph form. We vote now on the report by Mr. Tom Diepervan on the United Nations Convention on the International Effects of Judicial Sales of Ships. This is a vote on the cons of our consent by Rocco. Vote is open. Vote is closed.
Adopted massively. We report on the report by Mister Boris Butka on the EU Lebanon agreement for scientific and technological cooperation setting. It's our consent vote. Barocco, the vote is open. Vote is closed.
Adopted report by Mister Jeremy Dusserl on the EU-China agreement modification of concessions on all the tariff rate quotas included in the EU schedule C L 175. Vote on the consent by Rocco. Vote is open. The vote is closed. Adopted.
We move to the report by Mister Helder Sousa Silva on the mobilization of the European Globalization Adjustment Fund for displaced workers' application for CASA Belgium. This is a single vote by Rocco. Vote is open. Vote is closed, and it is adopted. And the last report is by Miss. There is one more.
One more. One more. The penultimate report is by Mister Yanos Levandovsky on the mobilization of the European Globalization Adjustment Fund for displaced workers. The application for KTM Austria, it's a single vote by Roko. Vote is open.
The vote is closed. It's adopted. And then the report by Miss Chloe Riedel and Miss Hildegard Bentaller on the Global Gateway past impacts and future orientation. Amendment one, who's in favor? Who is against?
Roberta Metsola
Broadly adopted. We vote on the resolution as a whole by roll call. Vote is open. Vote is closed, and it's adopted. Have a good afternoon.
Speaker 182
Thank you very much, colleagues. Let's now move on to the explanation to vote. So we have a recommendation for a second reading. Peter Hansen on deposit and guarantee scheme schemes, including transport of cooperation and transparency. Mister Tejs for one minute.
Speaker 183
It comes to this report, deposit protection, well, this consolidates protection of deposits and the financial system. In this current economic context, where there's a lot of uncertainty, we do need to make sure there is trust in the banking system. The system to protect deposits is well, there is a certain guarantee up to €5,000. And this regulation goes further because it improves transparency, cross-border cooperation, and how funds are used. This protection, given it's paid for by the banking section, not the taxpayer, well, this shows that we can reduce possible scenarios of panic and the real economy and making sure that cash put into banks is protected.
Thank you.
Thank.
Speaker 181
thank you very much. That brings us to the report. Raquel Garcia, Hermida Bandovale, combating corruption. One minute, Mr. Tejas.
Thank you.
Speaker 183
Voted against the directive on combating corruption because it violates the standards and fundamental values of the European Union. That is what makes the difference between the European Union and the former USSR. It violates, in this case, the principle of sovereignty and subsidiarity. The definitions are vague to the point of absurdity, and that creates a risk of abuse. This is something that NGOs have also flagged.
The article on kickbacks talks about simply a promise to offer something to a public official, even if nothing physical changes hands. I think that this is criminalizing words and not facts, and that's absurd. And when it comes to the responsibility of public officials, I think that there is a lack of definition of what influence actually means in practice. There's a lack of obligatory transparency. So the EU is laying down the law for others, and it's paving the way to the discretionary use of power.
Speaker 181
Thank you very much, Missus Bentley and Missus Riddell, Global Gateway Past Impacts and Future Orientation. Mister Tejas for one minute.
Thank you.
Speaker 183
I voted in favor of this report on the Global Gateway because of geopolitical realism. The EU has abandoned its role as a key actor and is just lecturing others. The EU needs to invest in infrastructure, but stop being a moral arbiter. Talking about billions of euros in digital and energy infrastructure, the EU cannot afford to be naive and passive. If we don't have alternatives for these countries, they're not going to wait for us.
If others aren't there on the ground, others will come in our place. It's important to ensure access to raw materials and safe trade routes. We need to reduce dependence as well. For me, this corridor needs to become a reality, but the Global Gateway should not be used to promote the European Commission's agenda. We need to invest in infrastructure and not social engineering, and investing in partnerships.
Speaker 182
European taxpayers' money must serve the interests of the economy. Thank you.
Thank you very much. That brings us to the end of today's agenda. And the resolutions adopted will be put to the parliament at the beginning of the next session. And the resolutions adopted today will be sent to the final recipients. The next session will start in Strasbourg on April 27.
Session adjourned.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.