Committee on International Trade Extraordinary meeting
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
Offset
Transcript offset
Export
Replay
Versions of this video
Transcripts may differ slightly from one version to another.
INTA European Parliament
Follow its sittingsBernd Lange
Nobody knows what the next step in the United States will be. So we have to guarantee that on our side we expect that there will be not more than 15% as agreed in Scotland. And if not, then of course we have the chance to suspend this exercise. And some other conditions as well. And I guess now it's really a good and reasonable instrument to react if there is a really breach of the trade deal on the US side.
Third S. My favorite, the steel and aluminium so-called derivatives. So dear colleagues, I'm still not really convinced that a washing machine, a motorcycle is a so-called derivative and a car not. Both have steel and aluminium in. For me it's really an let's say US industrial driven exercise to bring some products over the 15% tariff.
And with a slight change on the 2nd of April, now these products are tariffed with 25% and even in some cases more than 25%. And it's evident that 25% is not 15%. And therefore we make clear that we want to have a clear commitment and a clear action by the United States that this products, roundabout 400 products, should be reduced to 15% as agreed in Scotland last year.
And we set also a deadline to the end of the year. If this will not happen, then we will put on this specific products like washing machine tariffs again to US products as well. Perhaps you read the news tonight. There is an I've no clue if President Trump made an reaction on this clear demand or what the reason was, but he changed indeed for some products the tariff line. He reduced for agriculture technique the tariffs from 25% back to 15%.
Of course, I would interpret this that this could be also seen as a move in our direction. Also the agriculture technique is really an important part of the game. And 70% of all machinery in the agriculture sector were tariffed with 25% and this was really a harm of a lot of small and medium-sized companies in Europe. So we are strict here. The so-called derivatives have to be reduced to 15% as well.
This was third S. Fourth S. We introduce also a safeguard mechanism that we really look what consequences this reduction on our side has to our economy. Specifically also this we introduced Jürgen to small and medium-sized enterprises. And of course, nobody knows exactly if this change in competition conditions will have for consequences for companies here.
And we need a proper assessment. Unfortunately, the Commission proposed this legislation without any impact assessment. And therefore we need also to have a proper assessment and also an clear information about the data. And dear colleagues, also here the Commission can start the investigation on its own or also on the initiative of a member state or the European Parliament, which we introduced as well. This is valid for the industrial goods, but also for the agriculture goods.
So remember, we are setting now 500,000 tons of nuts tariff zero. Nobody knows what this mean for nuts producers in Europe. So we have a safeguard mechanism introduced in the legislation. And fifth S, the strengthening of the monitoring and the involvement of the European Parliament. The Commission will report to the European Parliament quarterly on the change of the volumes and values of the exports.
Six months before the end of the regulation regarding the sunset, the Commission will come to us with a comprehensive assessment of all effects so that we have really a proper overview. And as I mentioned, also we have a clear commitment by the Commission that they will take on board our wishes on the several other S and we can also start the safeguard investigation.
So we really make clear that the European Parliament has a strong role in the whole exercise. And then we had in our mandate also the link of a breach of this deal and the possible use of the anti-coercion instrument. And we made here also the reference to the anti-coercion instrument in the text and also the reference to the enforcement regulation so that we have a clear vision of the other instruments in our toolbox. And we made also clear that we expect a continuous compliance with EU legislation in all areas. Also this is an important part of the game.
So I guess, dear colleagues, having described this compromise, I think it's for me really a positive outcome. We reached a lot of our impact we gave with our strong mandate, by the way, remember 417 votes in favor. So we could really discuss with the Council and the Commission that we reached this, as I call it, safety net. And I'm also quite convinced that this is giving a clear signal on the one hand that we are sticking to our deal, to the commitment the European Union has given, but on the other side we are also clear that if the other side is breaching this deal that we have a lot of possibilities to react. So therefore I can really give you the advice to vote in favor of the two files.
Before now I give the floor to the shadows rapporteurs, I would really thank the negotiation team. You can imagine that the whole discussion was under a tremendous political pressure from outside, sometimes also from inside. And I'm really thankful that Safet, Giacomo and my assistant Frank sitting in the back really worked sometimes really day and night and really also in the meetings on technical level stick to the mandate of the Parliament. And without them I guess we couldn't really reach such a good agreement. So thanks a lot to you three of us.
So and now, Sviliana, the floor is yours.
Željana Zovko
Thank you very much and I will be fast because I have to go to AFET on geopolitical dialogue. Thank you, dear Bernd Lange, and congratulate once again that we have defended Parliament's mandate and quite realistically after months of demanding negotiations and we have reached the point of adopting an agreement that marks an important step forward. I would like to thank all the colleagues and also Commissioner Šefčovič and Cypriot presidency for their cooperation and commitment throughout this process because we have reached quite realistic agreement. We achieved balanced text, meaningful safeguards and ensured parliamentary oversight and involvement.
The Commission now has a strong mandate and necessary tools to continue negotiating with greater ambitions. We must build on this agreement and pursue balanced solutions on the outstanding issues, particularly steel and aluminium, while protecting European industry from unnecessary costs and addressing the challenge of unfair global overcapacity. Our task today is to adopt this agreement and send a clear signal that Europe can deliver. The next step is to ensure that Commission uses this momentum to secure even stronger outcome for European businesses, workers and industry. And I would like to take into account all the goodwill that we had throughout all this process and also to bear in mind that millions of jobs in European Union are at stake.
And not only us, all these workers, their families and people, industry, they are waiting for us. So dear colleagues, you know, just forget about politicizing, let it done and please, I call and urge on all of you in plenary session to vote overwhelmingly and to give Commission tool to fight for even stronger and preferable position that we should have with this strongest transatlantic relations that we realistically have at this moment. Because you know, regardless of all the philosophy, we are not the ones who are executive power. We have to pressure our executive power to go more ambitious and to continue further in negotiating. And we cannot keep this stuck in this house.
I thank you very much.
Thanks a lot, Sunjana Anna.
Krzysztof Hetman
Dziękuję. Dziękuję, panie przewodniczącym. Nasza ocena umowy Turnberry pozostaje niezmiennie niezmiennie krytyczna. Mówimy o porozumieniu, które jest wyraźnie asymetryczne i wymaga zbyt daleko idących ustępstw po stronie europejskiej, zarówno w odniesieniu do przemysłu, jak i rolnictwa. Ale jednocześnie musimy jasno powiedzieć, powtarzanie tych samych argumentów w nieskończoność nie przybliża nas do rozwiązania.
Ten proces trwa już wystarczająco długo i osiągnął punkt, w którym dalsze dyskusje nie wnoszą nowej wartości. Po trzech rundach negocjacji międzyinstytucjonalnych doceniamy wkład prac parlamentu w poprawę tekstu umowy. Pomimo iż Komisja zarezerwowała dla siebie prawo inicjatywy w zakresie stosowania klauzul zabezpieczających i przeglądowych, w tekście uwzględniono postulaty kompromisowe parlamentu, czyli tymczasowy charakter stosowania umowy, możliwość zawieszenia umowy w przypadku znacznej szkody gospodarczej lub zagrożenia dla państw członkowskich, no i dla nas najważniejsze, gwarancję obniżenia ceł na produkty stalopochodne do 15%. Rozumiejąc konieczność ustanowienia ram dla współpracy handlowej między Stanami Zjednoczonymi a Unią Europejską, nadal dostrzegamy kapitulację Unii i asymetryczny charakter porozumienia. Dziękuję.
Geert Bourgeois
Thank you, Chair. Dear colleagues, first and foremost, a word of thanks to and appreciation to all my colleagues and all the staff involved for their hard work and the constructive cooperation during the negotiations. This trilogue, colleagues, agreement on implementing the Turnberry deal is a pragmatic compromise in the interest of our businesses, our workers and Europe's competitiveness.
In a time of economic uncertainty and rising geopolitical tensions, it is sensible for Europe to choose for stability, predictability and legal certainty. The European Union and the US remain each other's most important strategic and economic partners. And that is exactly why we need to approach this trade relationship in a calm and forward-looking way. Escalating tensions further is in nobody's interest, and avoiding unnecessary confrontation between allies is in all our interests. For the ECR, trade policy must serve Europe's economic strength, not be driven by ideological reflexes.
This agreement gives European companies the legal certainty they need to invest, to innovate and to protect jobs. At the same time, it is essential that the EU can defend its market if the US does not live up to the deal. That is why we welcome the clear conditions and the suspension mechanisms included in the text. We also see the sunset clause until 2029 as sensible, because it allows for a review once a new US administration takes office. That is not a sign of weakness, but of responsible government.
Colleagues, this agreement doesn't mark the end of the road. Let us make it our task to continuously engage with the US to deepen our trade cooperation. In short, Mr. Chair, this is not a perfect agreement, but it is a workable one. It puts stability, predictability and strategic realism at the center. And that is exactly the approach the EU needs today.
Thank you.
Karin Karlsbro
Thank you, Chair. Thank you, dear colleagues. Thank you to all of you involved in this long and quite tough process. I'm so proud of the European Parliament and what we have achieved together. Because we have shown two things.
We do not give in to blackmail and we contribute to predictability and stability in EU's trade relations when needed. We have shown that. Despite pressure and attempts to push the process forward, we paused when necessary and went forward when we should. Thanks to a strong European Parliament mandate, we entered into negotiations from a very solid position, and what we now have on the table is far better than where we started. But this is not the end, not at all.
And I have to remind us that we haven't forgotten Greenland, and we will not accept future threats or blackmail. Of course, we want to embrace the transatlantic relations in general and trade relations specifically. Of course we want to do that, but it must be built on mutual respect. Europe will always be constructive when it comes to deepening trade relations with the United States, and we should never hesitate to stand firm when faced with threats or coercion.
In addition to the trade bazooka and other instruments, we now have an additional tool to respond if we are addressed with new different kind of threats. And I also want to add that Lettsberry serves as a reminder that the only way for the European Union to be in a stronger position dealing with the United States in the future is through a stronger, united Union. We will not achieve that by isolation, but by trading more with each other and with the rest of the world. Unity makes us stronger and together we can achieve much more. So I hope for a broad support for this deal, for what we achieved, and that will have a huge impact for our relation and for our economy and for millions of European citizens.
Thank you so much.
Sergey Lagodinsky
Thank you very much. Greetings from our shadow Anna Cavazzini and I'm speaking on behalf of the Greens as vice-chair of the Green group. Let me start with a very clear statement: as Greens, we were always critical of the Turnberry deal. We were critical because of its asymmetry, we were critical because of its risks to our regulatory autonomy, and we were critical and remain critical because of its risks and constraints to the environmental and climate transition that it poses. These are clear risks and they did not disappear yet.
We should be watchful. At the same time, we understand what it is about and why the implementation of this deal is important. It is a necessary step even though it's not the perfect step. We do not want a spiral of trade escalation between European Union and United States. It is not in the interest of our small and medium-sized enterprises, it is not in the interest of our industry.
Avoiding unnecessary tensions is just as important. But let us be very clear: the atmosphere that the current US administration—and Anna Cavazzini and myself just visited Washington a couple of weeks ago—is a coercive environment, an environment that is not sustainable for our bilateral relationship. And the context that Trump is creating is not a genuine partnership. And this is why caving in every time they increase pressure is not the preferred option. And that is why the safeguards that we have been insisting here in this Parliament, both the sunset clause but also the automatic suspension, automatic suspension that we insisted on, were important.
And on this, I would like and we would like to criticize the Commission because the blackmail and the conduct of the Commission during the trilogue negotiations were hugely unusual. And this is something that we should not accept. We are here representing the interests of our constituencies, of the voters, and not the interests of the United States. And that's why it's important to highlight this once again. So our expectation: if there is no automatism, then the Commission must follow suit and it must suspend the agreement if, especially in the issue of derivatives and aluminium, the behavior of the other side will not be in accordance with the letter of this agreement.
Yes, Europe must avoid escalation. Yes, but we cannot accept and will not accept coercion. The combination is right, but we must remain watchful and we will be watching the Commission.
Thank you very much.
Martin Schirdewan
Vielen Dank Bernd, vielen Dank Herr Vorsitzender. Mit allem Respekt, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich habe den Eindruck, wir sind hier in einer autosuggestiven Therapiestunde nach der Unterwerfung unter Donald Trump. Wir haben es hier mit einem Deal zu tun, der in einer Zeit verhandelt wurde, als Donald Trump gedroht hat, Grönland auch militärisch zu annektieren, wo immer wieder die rechtliche Grundlage dieses Deals seitens der US-Regierung in Frage gestellt wurde, wo die spanische Regierung durch den US-amerikanischen Partner angegriffen wurde in krassester Art und Weise. Und trotzdem hat das Europäische Parlament nicht die Kraft gefunden, klare Position zu beziehen gegen diese Art und Weise, wie die amerikanische Regierung die Verhandlungen durchgeführt hat. Das mündet dann darin, dass das Mandat, was wir uns selbst gegeben haben, leider in den Trilogverhandlungen mit der Kommission - und ich schließe mich der Kritik des grünen Kollegen an der Kommission hier an - dass das Mandat, was das Parlament sich selbst gegeben hat in diesen Verhandlungen, nämlich zum Beispiel über die parlamentarische Weiterbehandlung dieses Deals über delegierte Rechtsakte involviert zu bleiben in diesem Prozess, über Bord gekippt wurde und das jetzt auf Grundlage des Drucks der Kommission an die Kommission ausgelagert wurde.
Die Kommission kann jetzt, wenn sie denn möchte, über implementierte Rechtsakte aktiv werden oder nicht. Das stellt das zweite wesentliche Bestandteil unseres Mandats komplett in Frage, nämlich die von dir Bernd eingangs auch erwähnten Schutzmechanismen, die Schutzklauseln. Die sind nur dann etwas wert, wenn sie wirklich verbindlich sind. Das ist mit dem Ergebnis des Trilogs nicht mehr der Fall. Sie sind optional geworden und hängen davon ab, ob die Kommission bereit ist, überhaupt Aktionen zu ergreifen oder nicht.
An dieser Stelle haben wir auch das Mandat des Europäischen Parlaments und damit unserer Wählerinnen und Wähler nicht erfüllt. Und drittens, die Politik, sich zu verstecken vor den Drohungen von Donald Trump, ist fortgesetzt worden, indem die Gegenmaßnahmen, die wir effektiverweise ergreifen könnten in den Handelsbeziehungen, die immer wieder durch die US-Regierung gebrochen werden, zum Beispiel indem das Antizwangsmaßnahmeninstrument aktiviert wird, das ist quasi in ein Recital verschoben worden. Wir haben uns auch noch unserer eigenen Gegenmaßnahmen beraubt in diesem Verhandlungsergebnis. Und das führt mich dazu, jetzt wirklich respektvoll noch mal in Bezug zu nehmen auf europäische Kultur, vielleicht nicht autosuggestive Therapiestunden, aber Märchenstunden. Die funktionieren ja immer über Zwang, über Drohung, über Strafe.
Die Gebrüder Grimm sind ja allen ein Begriff oder Charles Perrault oder auch Hans Christian Andersen. Offensichtlich hat diese schwarze Pädagogik gut funktioniert bei den Kolleginnen und Kollegen an dieser Stelle. Und ich glaube, dass viele von Ihnen, viele von euch, nachdem die Märchenstunde beendet ist, in einer Realität aufwachen werden, wo klar wird, dass europäische Jobs und europäische Industrie durch diesen Deal weiterhin gefährdet sind und wir uns die Mittel dagegen, uns gegen diese Erpressung zu wehren, selber aus der Hand geschlagen haben werden. Danke.
Brando Benifei
Grazie Presidente. Non c'è molto da aggiungere agli interventi che abbiamo ascoltato. Vorrei però ringraziare il relatore, il Presidente Bernd Lange per il grande lavoro svolto in un negoziato segnato da fortissime pressioni politiche. La vicenda di questo accordo ha dimostrato una cosa fondamentale: il Parlamento europeo ha rifiutato e deve continuare a rifiutare di essere relegato al ruolo di semplice notaio di un'intesa negoziata da altri, come molti purtroppo avrebbero voluto.
Mi associo ad alcune delle critiche sull'atteggiamento delle altre istituzioni che anche altri colleghi hanno fatto. Abbiamo difeso il nostro ruolo democratico istituzionale garantendo che il rispetto delle regole, della trasparenza e dell'equilibrio non venisse sacrificato in nome di una fretta frutto di pressioni e anche qualche eccesso che abbiamo sentito provenire dall'altra parte dell'Atlantico. Le salvaguardie ottenute dal rafforzamento del controllo parlamentare, i meccanismi di sospensione e monitoraggio sono il risultato di una battaglia politica che abbiamo portato avanti con determinazione. Il nostro giudizio sull'accordo resta critico, mi pare evidente anche dal dibattito, da quello che abbiamo sentito. Ma una lezione è chiara e noi la vogliamo portare avanti ancora anche nelle prossime scelte che dovremo portare avanti.
Il Parlamento europeo è un attore centrale delle relazioni economiche dell'Unione e non accetterà di essere messo ai margini da nessuno. Grazie.
Bernd Lange
Grazie. Now I have four requests for the floor for one minute and Manon is the first.
Manon Aubry
Merci Monsieur le Président. L'Union européenne est en train de dérouler le tapis rouge à Trump et j'avoue que je suis assez sidérée de l'accueil collectif fait par les députés ici qui disent formidable, soyons le paillasson de Donald Trump, acceptons les 15 % de droits de douane absolument inégaux et non réciproques, 15 % pour l'ensemble de nos produits européens qui entrent sur le marché américain sans qu'il n'y ait une réciproque. Et puis à cela, les quelques garde-fous que le Parlement avait réussi à ajouter, ça a été balayé par le Parlement, par le Conseil et la Commission avec aucune possibilité de suspendre l'accord si Trump renouvelle ses menaces et son chantage contre l'Union européenne, on pense notamment à son chantage et ses menaces contre le Groenland ou contre l'Espagne. Et il n'y a pas non plus de mécanisme automatique si les importations augmentent trop brutalement. L'accord il était déjà initialement inacceptable et puis on revient avec un accord encore pire et tout le monde dit formidable, acceptons-le.
Et puis c'est quoi la prochaine étape ? Donald Trump va faire les lois en Europe, va se débarrasser de nos lois sur le numérique, va se débarrasser de nos lois sur la santé, sur l'environnement ? Et je regrette que notre groupe de la gauche soit le seul ici dans ce que j'ai entendu à taper du poing sur la table et à dire que pour nous, nous n'accepterons ni hier, ni aujourd'hui, ni demain que Donald Trump fasse la loi à notre place.
Jessika van Leeuwen
Thank you very much Chair. Contrary to my colleague Aubry, I do not believe that we're handing over the keys to Europe to Trump. I think it's very good that we have averted a trade war with the US. It's our most important trading partner and the deal is not perfect, that I do agree. But a deal is better than no deal.
And EU businesses are very clear in their messages, they can work with this deal. So I would like to congratulate the negotiators who choose for pragmatism and European jobs in this particular negotiation. I'm also very interested to find that agricultural technology will now benefit from a lower tariff rate, but it will be interesting to see what it contains completely. But I'm sure that the innovative European agribusiness will profit from this. It's very important that we take this deal now to phase one.
So I hope we can find also more solutions for other sectors in phase two, especially the spirit sector and others where we would like to see further steps in reducing tariff rates. And we call on the Commission, this is very important because I always insist with every trade deal, to ensure there will be no concessions of phytosanitary rules and EU standards. We cannot consume what we cannot produce. Thank you.
Benoit Cassart
Merci Monsieur le Président. Tout d'abord, j'aimerais féliciter l'équipe de négociateurs car vous avez su améliorer un accord très mauvais, totalement déséquilibré, à commencer par l'introduction d'une clause suspensive. J'ai néanmoins une question très concrète. Donald Trump a mentionné le 4 juillet comme date limite pour relever les droits de douane si l'UE ne respecte pas ses engagements pris en juillet l'année dernière. Avez-vous une idée précise de ce qui va se passer s'il considère que l'accord a été modifié ?
Quelle est la marge de manœuvre réelle de l'Union européenne ? L'Union européenne va-t-elle utiliser concrètement sa boîte à outils et notamment l'instrument anti-coercition ? Va-t-elle introduire une plainte auprès de l'OMC ? Dans l'affirmative, avec quel résultat ? Et quel est le plan B pour ne pas pénaliser nos entreprises ?
Très concrètement. Merci.
Merci beaucoup, and Giulio.
Giulio TERZI DI SANT'AGATA
Chairman, thank you very much. Dear colleagues, I would also like to start by congratulating the negotiating teams and everybody who was involved because this compromise today on our table is better than the solution that was proposed by the Commission originally. So also congratulations for fulfilling the role of our European Parliament, which is from time to time also to put pressure on the Commission and strengthen those proposals which are too feeble for us to accept. Then I would also like to make it clear that this compromise today that we will vote, I'm not doubting it, this is an exception, it is not the new normal for our European Parliament and our trade environment. I think that we in the Parliament have to be in the forefront of defending the rules-based global trading environment, and I think that we do have to defend the rules for our SMEs, for their predictability, and we have to go on on our road of finding like-minded partners to have more trade deals and we achieve so through diversification, maintaining of the global rules-based order.
And I of course will support this compromise, I will support it also in the plenary. I ask also the colleagues to do the same. And I think that we are not at the end but only at the beginning of the long and winding road of the Turnberry deal. Thank you very much.
Jörgen Warborn
Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Chair, and congratulations to you and to the negotiating team. This has been said before, this is not the perfect deal, but this is the best deal on the table. And I'm quite surprised by some of the groups, listening to some of the groups, because the alternative, if you as groups or individuals choose to not support this deal, the alternative is a trade war. Is a trade war with all the implications that that will have on European workers and on European businesses in a time where we really need more growth, more businesses, more trade.
I think some might be more driven by being anti-Trump than being pro-European, and this will show in the vote. At the same time, chair, you said regarding the sunset clause that the alternative after the sunset clause is the MFN deal or an FTA. And that's the message I'd like to send to the Commission as well. It says in the Turnberry deal that we will continue to work on our trade and investment relationship with the US and increase that. So the Commission, of course, need to start that dialogue right away to make sure that we have a much better outcome the next time.
Thank you.
Bernd Lange
Thanks a lot to this, and this is concluding our exchange of views on the outcome of the negotiation between the European Parliament and the Council in the last weeks. And now we are coming to the vote. And first we make a test vote. So, my test question is, will be Belgium winning the World Football Club? In the US.
In the US. The vote is open. And the vote is closed. So, this mixed picture, I would say. Is it on the screen?
Yeah, yeah. Okay, there we are. Good. Then we start. Ah, okay.
Yes. Thank you. Good. Now we have two votes, and we start with the first one, and the vote is open. Yeah, yeah, that's the main file, not the lobster.
The lobster is coming the next. So, the main file with all the wonderful achievement of us. And the vote... one more coming. And we close it. And the vote is 31 in favor, 6 against, and 3 abstention.
Thanks a lot. Thanks a lot for that. Oh, wow. And now we have the famous lobster deal. The vote is open for the lobster.
Okay. And the vote is closed. And it is adopted with 32 in favor, 6 against, and 3 abstention. Thanks a lot also for the lobster. This concludes our session of today.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.