Speeches

The European Semester should focus on economic and budgetary issues. Unfortunately, the report deals almost exclusively with social and employment policy issues, which is not surprising, as this has become a common practice in recent years. It is not that social and employment issues are not relevant and are the competence of the Member States. It is important that the Semester is intended to coordinate economic and budgetary policies. Extending it to a social issue is an excuse and justification for blurring the criteria: creating new, easily justified shortcomings in the original framework. The report suggests that the RRPs in the area of the Green Deal should continue also after the end of the RRF. This is another step in the Commission's acceptance of excessive budgetary spending and rising debt - if they serve this purpose. So we are dealing with a loose fiscal policy, justifying it with the need to implement the Green Deal - regardless of the cost! While we rightly stress the need to make Europe independent of imported fossil fuels, we do not mention nuclear energy, which should at least be mentioned in this context. So we are dealing with another example of wishful thinking on the issues of the green transition, not counting the costs and achieving excessive ambitions at the expense of future generations. And it will be us, Europeans, who will pay these debts!

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Nearly €8 trillion, or 8% of the world's gross domestic product, is the value of financial wealth located in tax havens. In short, this is a loss of around €155 billion a year in global tax revenues. We often experience how wealthy people in high positions, and often even criminals, using modern techniques, systems and capabilities, creatively using banking and legal-tax-fiscal optimization, create complex structures to protect their income and assets from taxation, sanctions and legal obligations, enabling money laundering or terrorist financing. Today it is a small step, but an important step in the fight for transparency and clear rules of functioning. However, I cannot agree with the proposal for greater centralisation, including moving away from the principle of unanimous decision-making. The key to success is effective coordination, not just harmonisation and unification. The tax system is an important element in shaping the entire economic policy system. Respect for the tax sovereignty of the Member States should be a particularly important priority for us. Poland has been effectively fighting tax fraud and tax evasion for years. However, this success, as well as the success of each Member State, should be an impulse for solidarity between all the others. Today, first of all, we need a strong and tough policy towards each of the tax havens. Tax competition is healthy as long as the rules are transparent. Similarly, rules on the absence of conflicts of interest, employment and lobbying activities in all European institutions should be transparent.

Madam President, Commissioner, Ladies and Gentlemen, We have been through the crisis and the collapse of the crypto-asset market and we see clearly what practices to prevent and what we had to pay particular attention to. The industry’s most notorious scandal – the collapse of the FTX exchange – was caused by investors’ long-standing misrepresentation of the actual value of their assets. Our MiCa regulation is the answer to this problem. It provides internal control mechanisms, mandatory management reporting and effective segregation of the client's assets from the supplier's assets. I believe that the main values to be absolutely protected are free market, fair competition and providing investors with reliable information to make an informed decision. Equal opportunities on the market are also technological neutrality, which we have ensured in this regulation. I am strongly against discriminating against certain crypto-assets on the pretext of concern for the environment. In these efforts, there is too much hypocrisy and particular interest to believe in the sincere intentions and selflessness of the circles pushing for such restrictions. As a representative of Poland, a non-euro area country, I am particularly pleased that the interests of such Member States have also been safeguarded. Taking the views of central banks into account in the licensing process or maintaining national supervision of digital money, functioning only in a given country, is, for me as a shadow rapporteur, a significant achievement and an important element of monetary independence. In conclusion, while I have considerable doubts, in the case of many acts in this Parliament, whether they really serve citizens and are necessary, today I am convinced that the work done under the MiCa Regulation will be of good benefit to Europeans.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Mr. President, I'm sorry. More than €65 billion in 2021 was allocated by the European Investment Bank to investments in cities and regions, innovation and small business development, climate and environmental protection and infrastructure. In Poland, small and medium-sized companies received funding of nearly EUR 2 billion, and EUR 6.5 billion and support for 670,000 jobs is a record achievement in the bank's more than thirty-year history in Poland. The EIB has played a particularly leading role in the fight against the COVID-19 crisis across the European Union by offering these additional funds as part of its assistance packages, which confirms that the EIB Group is ready to respond very quickly to the crisis and is effective in delivering funding to key sectors of the economy in a short period of time. However, the fact that successive economic and economic crises, high energy prices or rising raw material prices have a serious impact on the competitiveness of European SMEs obliges the EIB to monitor and continue its efforts to increase its support with additional growth capital to enable companies to scale up and grow in the European and global markets.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. The fourth industrial revolution, artificial intelligence, the COVID-19 pandemic have shown that the transformation of our economy and society towards a more digital one is our urgent goal. We urgently need to speed up the process of education and development of digital infrastructure in all countries of the European Union. That is why this joint programme ‘Path to the Digital Decade’ is so important. I am very pleased that young people are listening to this important debate today, because this is the future of the whole of Europe for them. Because you are the most in this digital economy. The European Union must be ambitious, modern and digital, because it will guarantee a profit for Europe of almost EUR 3 trillion. For example, for my country, Poland, it is almost PLN 500 billion. Today, unfortunately, most Europeans have only basic digital competences, and huge differences remain between countries. The share of Europeans with basic digital skills varies between 29% and 79%. Today, this compromise reached by our Parliament and the European Council requires an ambitious approach and cooperation. We have set specific objectives for digital policy, digital skills, infrastructure and digitalisation of businesses, and most importantly, a transparent framework for the implementation of multinational projects. However, we should highlight a number of sensitive issues in this ambitious project: on the timing of the publication of national digital roadmaps and the achievement of 70% targets for EU businesses using digitalisation to do business and 100% digital transformation in access to public services and access to citizens, e.g. medical records. However, let us remember that in this rush to the global digital civilization, it is important that we do not forget about the other person, about our security and that we pay attention to the threats posed by technological progress and the digital world.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Dear Commissioner, Ladies and Gentlemen, Recent years of experience have shown that cohesion policy is a dynamic development of regions. To ensure this, it must be flexible and tailored to the specific needs of the regions of the Member States. In light of the current energy crisis, the war in Ukraine, the post-COVID situation and the huge economic recession, it is difficult to judge today what cohesion policy will look like in six years' time. It will be an effective tool for the dynamic development of the European Union only if it responds flexibly to changing conditions and new global challenges. If the Europe of the future is to be innovative and competitive, and if the energy transition, digitalisation and demography are to become a driver of economic growth, we need to guarantee the necessary and tailor-made budget for cohesion policy post-2027. REPowerEU, such an important new instrument on the way to the energy security of Europeans, requires huge investments, but it cannot stand in the way of investment in the development of regions. And I have a lot of doubts about that today.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Ladies and Gentlemen, In short, the activities of the European Investment Bank in 2021 deserve great recognition. Once again, the EIB has shown that it is an indispensable financial arm of the European Union, which is able to effectively support our economies also during the crisis. My country, Poland, greatly appreciates the relationship with the European Investment Bank. In 2019, we increased our share of subscribed capital to 11.4, becoming the seventh country in terms of shares. In 2021, the bank committed a record €6.3 billion in Poland and is forecasting similar amounts for the current year, which will include loans to the public sector, as well as to private and local governments. It is worth highlighting two things. Firstly, engagement in the fight against the consequences of the COVID-19 crisis, where 50% of payments in these projects were paid out already in the first half of the year, which strongly supported the liquidity of small and medium-sized entrepreneurs. Secondly, the EIB's involvement in assisting Ukraine primarily by supporting Member States hosting war refugees. It is also important to underline the EIB's financial commitment to the InvestEU programme, which overcomes the investment gap in the European Union. By June 2020, the bank had approved operations amounting to €500 billion. In fulfilling its statutory role of cohesion policy, it is important that the EIB applies a case-by-case approach that will also allow these countries to level the playing field.

Mr President, thank you very much. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Free competition is the basis of the market. Without it, the European market will neither function nor develop. Participants in the European single market come from countries with very different potentials and a level playing field must therefore be ensured in particular. Now, after the pandemic, we need to ensure that public aid is phased out gradually and proportionately, so as not to favour actors from richer countries with stronger aid programmes. I believe that an important threat to competition in Europe may be the uncritical favouring of those sectors of the economy that have been considered top-down (and often arbitrarily) as ‘green’, regardless of their actual economic efficiency. I consider this ideology of the economy to be very dangerous for the free market. I thank the rapporteur for the great work he has done. The emphasis on ensuring a level playing field, stimulating innovation, safeguarding the competitiveness of EU businesses and giving consumers more choice are exactly the directions that I strongly support. At the same time, I cannot agree with the elements of the report on the green transition – paragraphs 47 and 49, in particular the references to the European Parliament resolution of 20 October 2021 on State aid for climate-related purposes. As ECR, we did not support this resolution. I cannot accept discrimination against entire branches of the traditional economy related to fossil fuels. I can't imagine killing competition in the name of eco-ideology.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Commissioner, I'm sorry. The CARE programme is extremely important, urgent and necessary. We support CARE, but today's proposal is insufficient. Today, we need a package of changes that will have a real impact on the ability to quickly help people fleeing the war. Russia is waging a cruel war against a free Ukraine, against humanity. Defeating Russia's economy and helping citizens fleeing this barbarism, the people of Ukraine, is one of the biggest migratory challenges we face as a European community after World War II. My country – the Polish government and citizens – has been at the forefront of aid and support for four weeks, since the first day of the war, financing from its own resources and providing security, social and welfare services to over 2 million war refugees. As of today, almost 100% of the 2014-2020 allocation has already been contracted in Poland. Funds for the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived and the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund in Poland have also been practically allocated and used. Cohesion policy, as in the case of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, should be an effective and urgent tool to respond to this extraordinary social and economic crisis. In view of the enormity of the social and economic challenges we have faced in less than a month, I consider it necessary to mobilise new and additional resources to enable the countries that have accepted refugees to meet the new challenges. We also request to extend the eligibility period for the 2014-2020 perspective by one year and to increase the possibility of using the flexibility mechanism in the programmes from 10 to 20 percent, as well as to allow the implementation of the European Social Fund specific support for FEAD, food and material assistance, and for the AMIF in the field of refugee assistance, applying 100 percent of the funding to the total budget of the operational programme food aid for the years 2022-2023.

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. I am pleased that we have finally addressed the issue of withholding tax in the European Parliament. Let me remind you that already in 1989 the Commission proposed the first proposals to regulate the movement of capital between countries – the payment of dividends by public limited companies or royalties for the use of trademarks and copyrights. Unfortunately, only the discovery of the huge Cum-EX scandal intensified our work, after 23 three years! Currently, most Member States have signed a double taxation treaty. Unfortunately, the rules on tax refunds and collection vary from one country to another, not to mention third countries, which has been exploited by criminal groups and fraudulent financial institutions. It is estimated that the European Union has lost around EUR 140 billion in this way. As shadow rapporteur, I thank you for the excellent substantive work of the rapporteur, all shadow rapporteurs for working together and finding compromises, identifying the main problems. As a result of this in-depth analysis and the volume of work carried out, our report calls on the Commission to urgently harmonise the WHT refund procedure across the Union, to assist tax administrations in the flow of information. These measures will bring up to €20 billion a year to Member States' budgets, which is a significant amount in these times of crisis. Of course, our work does not end with this document. We should work without delay to harmonise the definition of the real recipient – and this is also very carefully emphasised. This is because this issue has a significant impact on the collection of withholding tax and the application of preferential rates. Currently, each member state interprets this very differently, which significantly hinders the movement of capital in the common market. The ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union has not solved this problem. I hope that we will act much faster in this matter.

Mr President, thank you very much. Ladies and Gentlemen, The COVID-19 crisis, the consequences of which will be felt for a long time to come, but also the war in Ukraine, which has been going on for 14 days, foreshadows very serious economic difficulties for Europe. The imperfection of the current tax systems, the lack of solidarity between Member States or the need for a new "tax architecture" are the main challenges of the new reality that we urgently need to tackle. My goal is to improve and modify tax systems to make them fair, efficient and business-friendly. The priority is to restore fiscal sustainability and maintain the competitiveness of the international economy. The report contains proposals to improve the functioning of the European tax system by improving the flow of information or simplifying the treatment of taxpayers. Fair settlement of tax disputes, extension of automatic exchange of information or e-invoicing, extension of the scope of the VAT platform - One Stop Shop and unification of CIT income tax returns will help both entrepreneurs and tax authorities. Key in this regard are: solidarity between the tax authorities of the Member States and the abandonment today of very harmful tax practices involving the application of vague criteria of reliefs and exemptions to multinational corporations. In fact, it is the robbery of one Member State by another, which we can never agree to. I am a strong supporter of the sovereignty of the Member States and I am opposed to moving away from the principle of unanimity in tax matters. I focus on cooperation and exchange of information, not on top-down harmonisation, the creation of new regulations and the multiplication of regulations. Any changes to existing rules should be preceded by a thorough analysis of the effects they will have. I consider it harmful and unnecessary to harmonise the criteria for tax residence as an action interfering with the sovereignty of the Member States and putting pressure on the Council to return to projects that have not been supported. That is why I would like to reiterate and remind you that it is the voice of the European countries that should be the most important for the European Parliament. We are not here to "know better" how to make European citizens happy. Let us remember that we are here to serve the people who have chosen us.

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Friends and colleagues! The Code of Conduct was created to curb unfair tax practices in the Member States. The assumptions of this code remain valid, because unfortunately they are not effective enough. The group has been operating for over 20 years. During this time, economic and political realities have changed. New economic challenges have emerged, but progress has also been made in the fight against tax fraud. Today, it is appropriate to review the criteria of the Code and to improve the decision-making process within the Group. Despite the guidance provided by the group, a non-transparent tax system is in place in many Member States, leading to surprising situations. Member States lose more CIT revenue to other members of the Community than to traditional tax havens such as the Cayman Islands. This is what European solidarity looks like in practice. As the ECR Polish delegation, we support the pursuit of a fair tax system with healthy competition, but without the possibility of abuse. The key to success, however, is not to limit the influence of Member States on the European solution. We only disagree with the change from unanimous to majority decision-making within the group. When seeking an optimal solution, the interests of all members of the Union should be taken into account and consensus should be sought. Healthy competition, even in a difficult area such as taxation, should never be prohibited. It is only necessary to create the right framework for it, to ensure the principles of fair play.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Every year in the European Union, we lose around €140 billion in corporate income tax losses, which can be spent on health, disaster relief and education. The exchange of tax information, while respecting the competences of the Member States, has an invaluable impact on the fight against tax fraud. When we successfully defeat them, we see how huge sums of money are being stolen from our budgets and our societies. However, we cannot apply further regulations without dialogue with entrepreneurs, for whom an even more detailed reporting system will be a costly and time-consuming burden. Entrepreneurs should do business, because it is a guarantee of our common prosperity and European success. We have six implemented directives on the exchange of tax information. The next two are ahead of us, and we are not able to effectively deal with European tax havens or golden passports. Did you know that only 4% of the 50 items of DAC3 data were used? We do not have data on the effectiveness of the implemented directives. Therefore, is further planning of changes in the issues of reporting by entrepreneurs of a detailed list of income and assets necessary? Will the provision of information relating to previous price agreements, where the protection of a company’s financial indicators is paramount, not undermine the principle of competitiveness in the single market? Let's make proper use of the tools we already have, improve and monitor cooperation. Let us not allow some Member States to apply the requirements so minimally.

Mr President, thank you very much. Commissioner, I'm sorry. The World Bank estimates the global cost of natural disasters at €440 billion per year . But it's hundreds of thousands of human dramas, because from floods and avalanches to heatwaves, natural disasters can destroy our entire communities. We must speak out about the shared responsibility of the European Union, but also of each country, region and city, to have plans at national and local levels and strategies for disaster risk reduction and disaster loss reduction. In this respect, the European Union plays a very important role in coordinating and securing the necessary financial resources for improving infrastructure. In the European Union, loud slogans about combating climate change and reducing the risk of natural hazards are not enough. EU cohesion policy funds, funds for regions, as well as additional resources in the recovery fund, national recovery plans are needed to secure a genuine resilience policy, to make the transition to a low-carbon economy, to be able to transform its infrastructure into a more disaster-resilient one and to recover quickly from a natural disaster. Today, we are also fighting the huge social consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic and the economic recession. We are fighting for food security, ASE in agriculture. What does the European Commission do? It politically assesses the national recovery programmes and blocks the funds due to the Member State and slows down its response to requests for interventions and states. Do actions or just slogans unite the European Union? So not politics, but responsibility is the credibility of the European community. A safe and strong Europe is only the strength and security of each Member State.

Mr President, thank you very much. Taking care of the environment for the benefit of future generations is our duty and our great responsibility, and we all agree with that. However, this 8th Environment Programme to 2030, which sets very ambitious targets on the right track, needs to be improved, clarified and complemented in many respects. Because in this form he will not fulfill his role. Biodiversity, which is our heritage, is important. Only its protection will ensure that future generations will be able to enjoy the richness of nature. The lack of consistency in the document as regards forests and the forestry sector needs to be addressed. It is important to promote multifunctional and sustainable forest management, to maintain a balance between natural, social and economic functions, and to use this potential to achieve both environmental and climate objectives and ambitions. I would also like to draw attention to the fact that the priority objectives should be supplemented directly by issues relating to waste management, and the definitions should be clear and very precise. And that's just missing. High doubts are also raised by vague indicators, which are not sufficient to develop a comprehensive monitoring framework for the programme. When creating regulations, we must remember about their effectiveness and proper application, because regulations with gaps give great opportunities for overinterpretation and application of excessive sanctions by institutions monitoring their implementation.