Debate contributions by Delara BURKHARDT

Madam President, Dear colleagues! A compass should provide orientation. And you may have noticed in the debate: The competition compass hasn't quite done that yet. Climate neutrality remains the goal, but without guarantees as to how this can be achieved in a socially just manner. Meanwhile, the Commission President's own group Green Deal. This reminds me a bit of the election campaign of the CDU in Germany. There are big words about the economy and competitiveness. The programme: A billion-dollar grave. 100 billion extra costs, tax gifts for the rich without a plan for counter-financing. Even the German Institute for Economic Research calls this utopian. And who pays ́s in the end? The vast majority of society. Competitiveness is not created by division, not by populism, not by deregulation. It is created through innovation, planning security and investments in the future. Competitiveness is not a goal in itself, but must be measured by how it organizes prosperity not only for a few, but for all people. With this in mind, Mr. Séjourné, we as S&D are very happy to work with you on this.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Due to some contributions in this debate, I feel compelled to recall something again: The plastic crisis doesn't happen anywhere else. While we may not like to produce the raw materials, the EU is one of the largest plastic producers in the world, producing 60 million tonnes of plastic annually. Most of it then goes into disposable products that end up in the trash relatively quickly – trash that we in turn export to other countries like world champions. According to the motto: Out of sight, out of mind. Yes, creating a binding UN plastics agreement that regulates the entire life cycle of plastics is urgently needed, because the market has not yet regulated this. On the contrary, the plastic lobby often blocks ambitious laws that stand in the way of its business model. She can count on support, both conservative and right-wing, in this House. Here's a little reminder: A binding UN plastics agreement is an important step, but it does not absolve this Parliament from offering concrete solutions.

Mr President! Dear colleagues! If the right side, but unfortunately also increasingly conservatives, speak of competitiveness, then the entire Green Deal is pretty quickly under fire – except for the holy cow of the CDU/CSU: the CO2price. But what happens to our competitiveness when prices rise and there are no affordable alternatives? It means that housing, mobility, heating become priceless for many people. It means that nothing is really booming in our economy anymore, because fewer and fewer people are making ends meet. While blocking future investments, risking planning certainty and distributing tax gifts to the rich; Then what do people who depend on their car do when fuel prices rise and we have lost the switch to electromobility? What do families do that cannot renovate their homes energetically because the costs are exploding? Your answer is clear: They leave people to the market, they save the economy – that's not competitiveness, that's social explosives. We stand for a different policy. We ensure that the climate-neutral transformation is just: with affordable housing, investment in infrastructure and affordable energy. And we are proud that we have a competent Commissioner like Mrs Ribera for this.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen! A fossil autocracy presides over the climate conference, climate denier Donald Trump re-enters the White House, and the 1.5-degree goal has failed for the time being. As disappointing as the image of multilateralism may seem, international cooperation is more important than ever. The European Union must take bold steps – you are absolutely right, Mr Hoekstra – to rebuild trust. On the one hand with an ambitious climate policy at home, and on the other hand by living up to our responsibility for international climate finance. Rich people are no longer allowed to produce more emissions in a day with private jets than most people in their entire lives – while the vast majority do not even have enough means to protect themselves from floods, droughts and other climate disasters. It's time for the polluters to pay. But the truth is that the EU is weakened from within – not only by the far right, but also increasingly by centre-right parties, who pretend to support climate policy but want to jointly dismantle democratically adopted laws. We hope we have you on our side for the Green Deal continue to fight. That's what it's going to be about.

Madam President, We have a very important task ahead of us tomorrow, and we will vote on the Commission's proposal to postpone the deforestation regulation as a matter of urgency, which has already been unanimously approved in the Council. This was necessary because the Commission did not implement the transposition aid in time. However, an urgency procedure does not allow for a proper debate on the amendments tabled by the EPP, which are not technically mature and create new uncertainties for companies that have already invested in the implementation of the Regulation. They risk prolonging the process so that trilogues cannot be finalised in time for a timely postponement, as a majority is already emerging in the Council against these requests. And even when you open your mailboxes, you see that industry, NGOs and global partners ask us: Do not put the postponement at risk, give us planning certainty! I appeal once again to the rationale of the EPP: Stop this wooden path, ensure clear conditions and planning security with us! This is how we live up to our responsibilities. In order to avoid chaos, we, as the S&D Group, call on the Commission to withdraw this proposal should any amendments come through.