Debate contributions by Elisabetta GUALMINI

Mr President, dear Commissioner, today it's really an historical moment because we have been talking for many years about the need to increase the strategic autonomy of the European Union, and the European Union has never been a fully-fledged political entity because it has suffered from two dependencies: in the east, on the gas from Russia, and in the west, on the United States for defence. A democracy that depends on an autocracy to heat its homes and companies is not a fully-fledged democracy. This is the point. What kind of Europe do we want? Only a huge commercial space or an autonomous political entity? So, today we are really on the right track. The full ban on gas in 2028 will give us a freedom and autonomy, and above all, will free us from the deception of financing ourselves the war against the Ukrainians. Freeing ourselves from Putin's gas means freeing ourselves from his hate for our values, democracy, peace and pluralism.

No, no, we do not believe that you are crazy people, absolutely. But these are two questions. So first of all, it is absolutely true that Putin does not want peace, and we are in the middle of a hybrid war all over Europe. We can see it every day in Denmark, Sweden, Germany and so on and so forth. Second, of course Putin is not winning, because there is an incredible resistance by heroes, people fighting for their liberty and freedom thanks to the help of the European Union, thank God.

Mr President, we all know very well what is really at stake in the Russia-Ukraine war: the defence of democracy against tyranny; the defence of pluralism against dictatorship; the defence of freedom against despotic leaders who really do not care about international law. So Putin's real target is not just the Ukraine or its critical materials, but Europe and the West: our values, our freedom, our unity. So we need the two very clear conditions for the European Council of tomorrow. First, military support by the EU and, at the same time, a solid peace proposal, including ceasefire, restitution of deported Ukrainian children to their families, and so on and so forth. The second condition is that Ukraine must be put in a position of strength in order to negotiate a peace. You cannot surrender to the strongest one. You cannot surrender to tackle Trump's crazy diktats. So, President Zelenskyy, your fight is our fight.

Mr President, dear Commissioner, we know the numbers of the crisis of the automotive industry, we know the numbers of the production fall and the sales decrease. It is a perfect storm with multiple explaining factors: the transition to electric vehicles is costly and difficult given the shortage of raw materials and delays in the infrastructure; changing lifestyles; competition from China; tariffs from the US. However, these challenges cannot justify abandoning the climate targets already fixed and carried out so far; we need to give certainty to producers and investors who have planned their activities precisely because of those targets. It would be stupid to cancel the 2035 ban on combustion engines because we need to safeguard competitiveness. But, at the same time, it is crystal clear that we need more flexibility, we need pragmatic action. We cannot resign to ideology, for instance, by rethinking the principle of technological neutrality. We are the policy makers, we have to find the conditions in which our core industry and its employees can innovate without perishing, can embrace sustainability without losing salaries and rights. It is not easy, but what is sure is that the answer cannot be always and forever the status quo.

Mr President, dear Commissioner, China's decision to impose anti-dumping duties of up to 62 % on the importation of European pork products is an act of profound economic injustice that damages our farmers a lot, with estimated costs of around USD 2 billion. It just happens when China itself is facing a significant domestic overcapacity of pork products, so there are no real and legitimate reasons for such tariffs. Beijing's decision is nothing more than a retaliation to the principle of multilateralism and to a system of shared rules which is now more than ever under attack. So if we also consider Trump's duties by 15 % on European food products, it is crystal clear that Europe is more and more squeezed between two powerful autocrats using trade as a weapon. But the problem is bigger today. The problem is that the strategic autonomy of the European Union is not enough. We must work for a stronger, united, powerful political union, not only a market, which makes a difference in the world, and not be a hostage of lunatic superpowers.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, investing in nuclear fusion research is a priority. Well the ITER project, to which the European Union contributes significantly, with almost half of the funds. None of us are against research – how can we be against research? – It is important to have a diversified portfolio of energy-generating technologies. We will need a lot of energy in the future, think, for example, of the development of artificial intelligence. Hence the importance of nuclear fusion that produces clean, renewable energy, the energy of the future. There's a problem, though: Time is not an independent variable, time is not infinite. It's a constraint. We need to decarbonize, and we need to do it quickly, step by step. We cannot wait until 2050. It must be realistic, not punitive, decarbonisation of businesses and households. But I would ask you, Commissioner, for very precise information on any delays that may occur and for a precise estimate of the costs that we have to bear. I very much appreciated your reference to Draghi, to public-private partnerships to bear the costs, but we need accurate data. It's up to politics, all in all, to choose and point out a way. In Italy, perhaps we have delegated too much, perhaps we have made a mistake, making decisions with a referendum on the basis of fear over nuclear power. Now we have to move forward, but with realistic and unimaginative promises.

Mr President, dear Commissioner, protecting biodiversity must continue to be our top priority. We have addressed it in the Green Deal, in the Nature Restoration Law, so we cannot step back or be afraid to move forward, because biodiversity is not just about the beauty of our landscapes and the fundamental fight against the extinction of animal and plant species – but it is also at the basis of our food security, the quality of our agricultural sector, especially facing climate change. So let's say it loud and clear: biodiversity is what helps agri‑food ecosystems to react to external shocks. In fact, it is a survival factor. So two points are important to me. First of all, farmers who are the true custodians of our territory are among the first victims of biodiversity loss. We must therefore help them not only economically, but also with training and innovative tools such as sustainable biotechnologies that put them in a position to adopt more adequate production methods. Never put agriculture and biodiversity one against the other. The two factors are intrinsically linked and there is not one without the other. Second point: the protection of biodiversity cannot stop at the borders of Europe. We need a global change in which the European Union promotes sustainable food systems at an international level, respecting human rights, workers' rights, the environment, health and animal welfare. Reciprocity is needed inside and outside the Union. We cannot allow the competitiveness of our farmers to be compromised due to less sustainable practices in other parts of the world. It is essential that international agreements reflect these principles, ensuring at least an equivalence of production standards. Therefore, dear Commissioner, I really ask you to also address the global dimension of the protection of biodiversity.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, subcontracting and the use of intermediaries are increasingly common in the world of work. Often, in construction they are also linked to accidents and deaths at work. Let's remember the five deaths in Florence in February 2024 due to the collapse of a construction site. The Platform Work Directive, for which I was rapporteur, includes in Article 3 very clear rules, saying that workers who have a contract with an intermediary must have the same level of protection as those who have a direct contract with digital platforms. Now governments must act quickly to transpose European standards. But we also call for the revision of the Public Procurement Directive to be forthcoming: I call for the inclusion of social conditionality clauses; limiting subcontracting chains; more controls; identification of legal responsibilities; the prohibition of the maximum discount. To die of work, to go to work without returning home, or to die without knowing whose responsibilities they are, are tragedies that have no consolation.

Mr President, Commissioner, the spread of digital technologies is having a huge impact on the labour market, and innovations such as AI, robotics, quantum technology and 6G are triggering a wave of new demands for a new generation of advanced digital skills. The Draghi report strongly highlights how digitalisation and AI are essential, for example for the public sector due to its ability to provide quality public goods in the fields of health, education, justice and welfare. We need to work hard on the European digital decade programme and its ambitious goals, pushing professional training and life-long learning. We are still lagging behind: in Italy, only 22 % of the population have advanced digital skills. Only 30 % of SMEs have implemented a solid digital strategy, which is not a luxury, it's a strategic asset. So we shouldn't be afraid of change and Europe's strength has always relied upon its people. By empowering them, we ensure that our communities grow and that the EU remains a global leader in innovation.

Mr President, dear colleagues, dear Commissioner, words are important, and they want to remind all of us that we cannot talk of a Union of energy until we do not have a real single energy market. And this is linked to several factors, from energy security to the fight against energy poverty, to the competences of the EU in terms of institutional governance. For instance, after the war in Ukraine, in order to have high quantities of energy storage, we pushed a little bit further the competences of the EU. We have a humongous problem of prices: on the one side, the energy companies can benefit from extra profits; on the other, families and small companies are overwhelmed by extra costs. And no words have we heard on the ETS. If the free allowances disappear, many industrial sectors will decline, not to say close down. But there is one primary precondition for a real integrated energy market, that is, providing adequate energy infrastructure. I really hope that the next European Commission engages as soon as possible in ensuring nodal interconnections between countries. It is the only way to ensure we can really talk of a Union of energy.