Speeches

Madam President, the European economy is changing. If it is true that difficulties are more present, it is no less true that opportunities are also emerging. Europeans, especially young people, are now looking for alternatives to saving and investing. With the emergence of new technologies, financial markets have also found new solutions, solutions that are increasingly decentralised, more accessible and more present in our lives. Policymakers are not only asked to respond to immediate crises. It is asked, more than ever, that, in the complex, volatile and accelerated framework in which we live, they legislate intelligently and that they find solutions with their eyes set on the future. We have a duty to make European law more innovation-friendly so that national law is also a dynamo of progress. This belief is particularly important when we talk about taxation. Taxes are key instruments for a policy to promote innovation, competitiveness and growth. Unfortunately, they are often an obstacle when one wants to fill the coffers of the state at the expense of the sacrifice of families and businesses. As a Portuguese I know this phenomenon well, that of the suffocating tax burden that stifles our financial freedom and kidnaps our future. A pro-innovation, competitive and forward-looking fiscal policy cannot ignore the emergence of new technologies such as blockchain or the multiplication of crypto-assets. To enhance Europe's opportunities in this area, we have put forward these proposals on the impact of new technologies on taxation. What are those proposals? Firstly, the clear statement that tax policy is the responsibility of the Member States and that we should not tax assets at any cost to fatten up national budgets. It is up to each of the 27 states to decide on the taxes they collect. But in an internal market with fair and healthy competition, there must be a minimum of cooperation. When deciding to tax an asset, the tax should be fair, clear, transparent, predictable and proportionate. Secondly, national tax authorities also need to adapt to the challenges of digitalisation. We want a clear reinforcement of human and material resources, a training programme for staff at European level and the creation of a platform for sharing best practices between countries. Thirdly, we call for consistency between European law and national law and, by the way, between national laws. Definitions of ‘crypto-asset’, for example, or ‘taxable event’ or ‘permanent establishment’, must be common, otherwise we will treat similar situations differently. Fourthly, we want technology to blockchain be used to the full extent of the opportunities it represents. The features of this technology allow us to fight tax fraud and evasion faster and more effectively and can also make procedures more efficient, reducing red tape for citizens and context costs for businesses. Finally, we want the Union to lead the dialogue towards an international instrument on the taxation of crypto-assets. It makes no sense to limit ourselves to legislating from country to country, a reality that knows no borders. If competition is healthy, it also has to be fair and fair. The change we are experiencing in the economy and in the financial markets cannot be stopped. We will face complex difficulties, but we will also know challenging opportunities. It is up to us to live up to the time when we are called to decide and we will do so with our eyes set on the future.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, when we talk about droughts and fires, we also talk about the increasing impact that climate change has on our lives and that is manifested in the increase in global temperature, in the heat waves that repeatedly ravage Europe, or even in storms and floods, so often out of season. But let us have no illusions. Climate change and its consequences are also largely responsible for rising European food prices. And, therefore, seeking solutions for agriculture that do not imply coordinated action with the fight against climate change and a more sustainable way of life will always be doomed to failure, failure which has also been the expression that applies to the action of many national governments, such as that of Portugal, governments that for many years had the conditions and the necessary money to develop better solutions to prevent, monitor and combat forest fires, but also water management and saving systems, and very little or nothing has been done. Simply drought and firefighting were not a priority for the various governments, specifically in Portugal, and this summer is once again the result of that. The government has been negligent, I would even say incompetent, in keeping the forest and the people safe. It remains for me to leave a word of thanks and gratitude to the firefighters, who often sacrifice their own lives to compensate for the inaction of the rulers.

Mr President, the minimum effective tax rate of 15% on the income of multinationals seems increasingly to be a European requirement. The second pillar of the OECD agreement is becoming less and less global. On the other side of the Atlantic, in the United States, we already realize that the implementation of the agreement is a mirage. On this side, progress and setbacks are evident and we still have a long way to go in first pillar legislation. We agreed to tax 15%, but we still don't know how we're going to do it. The Commission's proposal on the levy is balanced and responsible, and Parliament's view, which has since been adopted, is realistic and appropriate. There is, of course, no say in who decides, the Council. Of the eight states that opposed it, we now have four. At the time, only Poland was blocking and now we have the Hungarian veto. It seems to me that this directive is more a bargaining chip than a priority for the Member States. The Portuguese Minister of Finance is wrong. It is not essential to eliminate tax competition, it is necessary to ensure that such competition is fair, fair and transparent. Some are doing their part and we can only hope that Hungary will be responsible once and for all and that the Council will be firm once and for all. That's what we asked for. This is what the Europeans demand.

Madam President, the recovery and resilience mechanism is one of the engines of the economic recovery we want for Europe. However, it is not the only one. The commitment of national governments to more and better public investment is also essential. I am therefore astonished to see so many reluctances on the part of some heads of government to revise the rules of economic governance. Maybe it's selfishness of some or opportunism of others. Maybe some people want to please the electorate. Perhaps others are more concerned about the presidency of the European Council. We can discuss the sufficiency and timelines of the mechanism, but we should not waste time, which could be invested in the implementation of national plans. Many of them are late. The whole debate has its time and we must therefore first explore all the opportunities of a mechanism that has not even been called upon to lend all the funds it has.

Madam President, sustainable development is not a soundbite or a fashion today, but a fundamental need to ensure the harmonious development of society and social cohesion between generations, geographies and communities. The European Union cannot only reaffirm a theoretical commitment to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, it must put them into practice and assess their performance. And it must evaluate its performance because the Sustainable Development Goals are not a political campaign or a media number, they are the visible face of an environmental, social and economic strategy that aims to raise the quality of life of all. The current situation in Europe is difficult. War, the food prices we already feel, and other extreme weather events require concrete action as a response. We therefore need more coordination and more responsiveness to problems, and that is also, with results, the best way to respond to the populism that continues to plague Europe.

Madam President, taxes are the most important source of public revenue and a manifestation of the sovereign power of states. It is taxes that finance our budgets and it is the tax burden that determines better or worse conditions for companies to create jobs, generate wealth and contribute to our economic growth. Fiscal competitiveness is therefore an indispensable dimension of any economic strategy. But that competitiveness must be fair, balanced and, of course, transparent. The international agreement for the taxation of multinationals, specifically this second pillar on the minimum effective rate, was an important step. The Union has led the negotiations and will lead the way in implementing the agreement. The time of discussion must become the time of action. The commitment of Member States is essential to ensure that this Directive is adopted, well transposed and implemented in a way that safeguards the competitiveness of our economies and our ability to attract investment. Unfortunately, the Union is not being accompanied, outside, by the commitment of other countries and, inside, we still have to decide on the First Pillar, the rules that guarantee it the taxation of the profits generated in our territory. So we have a lot of work ahead of us and we need more commitment. And this Parliament will not fail to demand this.

Mr President, competition policy is one of the pillars underpinning our internal market. Free, fair and fair competition is a necessary condition for the integrity of this market, but it is above all the precondition for an economy that grows, generates wealth and creates jobs. The last two years have been marked by a pandemic that has required significant flexibility in our competition policy. The recovery time advises a progressive and proportional return to normality. On the other hand, we cannot ignore what is happening in Europe, in the East, on the doorstep of our Union. Recovery time is therefore also the time of resilience, with ambition, rigour and flexibility. I want to highlight here the role of technological innovation. Digitalisation is an irreversible trend and the digital transition is an unquestionable priority. Competition within the Union must become Europe's competitiveness. Instead of regulating everything by the same criteria, we need a specific approach for digital companies, for start-ups technology and for small and medium-sized enterprises that are increasingly working online. Europe cannot risk losing the innovation train. It must be the Europe of the first chariot of the digital revolution that this generation of Europeans can and must lead.

Mr President, fellow Europeans, war is at our gates. Europeans are suffering, with fuel prices on the rise, with food prices, particularly bread and other essentials going through the roof. In fact, many Europeans are facing difficulties to which we cannot turn our faces in denial. But we need to face the social and economic consequences of this war, not only inside the EU but also in Ukraine. We must not just walk or talk the talk. We must do the walk, the walk. We must reinforce our capacity to walk the walk, not just for today, but also for tomorrow. We must not settle for a few good speeches and beautiful words and loads of indignity and social media. We must do what we can do as soon as we can to make sure that something like this does not happen again. We need a legal freeze-and-seize instrument. We need to make Russia pay for war reparations to Ukraine. And we need that money. We need to help creating an adequate recovery plan to rebuild Ukraine’s infrastructure and relaunch Ukraine’s economy. We can be divided into many things, and we frequently are. After all, debate and discussion are what a Parliament is about. But, dear friends, we cannot be divided about defending Europe from autocratic regimes. We shall not be divided about responding to other countries blackmailing us. And we will not be divided about putting European security, solidarity and friendship above anything else. Long live Europe and long live freedom.

Madam President, the Sixth Assessment Report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change shows the world how the average temperature of the planet has already risen by 1.1° and is affecting natural and human systems in Europe. Since the last assessment, the impacts of climate change have increased, resulting in losses in agricultural production, infrastructure or water scarcity. But what it brings again does not calm down, but rather provokes anxiety and worry. Europe is and will continue to warm faster than the rest of the planet and southern Europe will be the worst hit. The Fit for 55 package must come to fruition and look at the issue of adaptation as central from now on. I cannot, however, address this House and not talk about the Russian invasion and barbarism in Ukraine, which has, in addition to all the human suffering, also caused additional problems of two different orders: food shortages and economic losses, directing resources to the military effort and blocking diplomatic advances. Dear Colleagues, this is not the time to look back before we leave behind doubts or indecisions. What I ask of you is that we do not stay in history for lack of courage.

Mr President, the tax scandals, of which the Pandora Papers are the most pressing and recent example, rightly lead our citizens to demand more from policy-makers. At international level, the agreement reached at OECD level to reform the international tax system is exemplary. In the Union we now have a responsibility to lead in its implementation. At European level, we are committed to making the new framework for corporate income taxation, BEFIT, a tool for fairness and tax transparency, but also for the competitiveness of our companies. National withholding tax systems thus emerge as one of the areas where we can and should go further, improving cooperation between the 27 and safeguarding the integrity of our internal market. On the one hand, withholding taxes ensure recurring revenues for national budgets, help combat profit shifting and help prevent tax evasion and avoidance. On the other hand, we face risks of double taxation, deterrence of cross-border investment and bureaucratic burden for taxpayers. It is to maximise the benefits of these systems and to mitigate their risks that we want a clearer European framework. This European framework involves unblocking long-standing European legislation such as the Interest and Royalties Directive, approximating reduction and exemption rules and improving information exchange systems. Fighting fraud and evasion and committing to fairer, transparent and competitive tax systems have several fronts. This is one of them. And here we are ready to take over.

Mr President, taxation is at the heart of the political debate. We have, on the one hand, the positive impulses of the agreement for the reform of the international tax system and the recent initiatives of the Commission and, on the other hand, we have the negative impulses of the tax scandals and the economic crisis that results from the pandemic. The response to this crisis cannot ignore the scale of taxes. In addition, we are beginning to feel the effects of the war that has broken out in Europe and we all feel in our pockets the dimension of energy taxation. Here, it is clear that taxes will play a key role in the recovery of the European economy and in the green and digital transition. This report therefore comes at a good time and I would like to congratulate Mr Niedermayer on his proposals to this Parliament. These proposals go in the right direction and I give only a few examples. Simplify tax processes for citizens and businesses with less red tape and context costs, reflect on the role of positive tax incentives and the balance with free competition in the internal market, focus on digitalisation with e-invoices, harmonised models and a one-stop-shop scheme, improve information exchange systems and leverage European platforms, and mitigate the debt bias. As I said, taxation is on the agenda and European taxpayers want more than declarations, they want concrete actions. Here we will be and here we are to demand them.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the moment we are going through only reinforces the importance of ensuring increasing energy autonomy. This autonomy involves a greater use of electricity with the corresponding progressive abandonment of fossil fuels, fossil energies. But to do so, we must not only be more self-sufficient in the production of electricity, but also in the development, promotion, production and recovery of batteries and their components. Since planet Earth has finite resources, we need to be able to use and reuse these components. This can only be done with a strong focus on the circular economy and also on batteries. Therefore, it is important to recall here the overall objective of achieving a significant level of recovery of materials from batteries, which is not being achieved. I would like to reiterate my agreement with the general objectives of the proposal: strengthening the functioning of the internal market, including for products, processes and waste, ensuring a fair market and level playing field with common rules and standards, promoting the circular economy of the various components and reducing the environmental and social impacts of all stages of the life cycle of batteries. However, with our vote, we can go even further by facilitating the process of removing and exchanging batteries in light vehicles and a transparent labelling policy for the consumer. The big changes are made with small steps and the big victories with small advances. If we want energy autonomy, decarbonisation and moving forward in electrification, leaving fossil fuels behind, then move forward in these matters. For those who want to learn, ignorance is merely a step. That we continue to learn and live sustainably within the limits of our planet.

Madam President, the annual growth survey is a kick-off of the European Semester. This year, if it is indeed the last of the general escape clause of the Stability and Growth Pact, it is central to the debate and above all to decisions on the future of economic governance in the European Union. But let's be clear, we are not and will not grow to the level we expected. The economic forecasts for this final stretch of the pandemic are already more modest, but the outbreak of the war in Ukraine is significantly changing our expectations. Economic and fiscal policy cannot ignore it. If the revision of fiscal rules was necessary for the recovery from the pandemic, it became urgent in the response to the war. This must be done before the end of the year, otherwise we will lose the reformist momentum that has emerged from these challenges that the Union is now facing. Realistic paths for deficit reduction, responsibility for managing national public debts and ambition for joint debt issuance in the Union are three pillars of this debate. We must be bold in our solutions, but aware that we have a duty of solidarity with future generations. We want more Europe, more unity and more solidarity, precisely because we want a better future.

Madam President, today, as has already been mentioned, is the International Day of the Child with Cancer and we therefore have a great responsibility in our hands to strengthen the European strategy for the fight against cancer, because the Union that Europeans want is a Europe that they can count on, especially in the most difficult times. A Europe that finds solutions, a Europe that solves problems. In the fight against cancer we need to improve local responses, reduce inequalities and strengthen cooperation between Member States. A Europe that leaves no one behind must be a Europe where patients have the right to access the best care available, regardless of the Member State in which they reside. The recommendations made in this report are quite comprehensive and make it possible to correct some of the shortcomings in the strategy put forward by the European Commission. The initial approach to pediatric and juvenile cancer was deficient, and so we sought to improve the document with proposals targeting the rare types of cancer that typically affect these age groups. We want to strengthen research into targeted medicine, improve the provision of palliative cancer care and facilitate access to cross-border clinical trials for children and young people. Ladies and gentlemen, in a Europe where health is a fundamental right, we therefore have no time to waste.

Madam President, taxation is on the agenda. There are few dimensions of a country's sovereignty that say so much about the relationship between state and citizens. What taxes do we pay? How much do we pay? How do we pay? And these are the first questions that occur to us, looking at ourselves. And when we look at our countries, there are others: What tax burden is fair to citizens? What level of taxes is appropriate to promote economic growth and business competitiveness? How do we effectively combat tax fraud and tax evasion? If these questions are essential for citizens, the answers are fundamental for states. In an increasingly globalised, digitalised and integrated economy, tax policy challenges are increasingly demanding and complex. And the Union is a privileged platform for debate and cooperation between Member States. But our Union knows many different realities. While some states bet on freeing up resources for citizens and businesses, other countries share taxpayers with exaggerated tax burdens. Not infrequently, those countries that burden their taxpayers are the most averse to tax reforms and, indeed, to real economic reforms that are conducive to growth and employment. As far as taxes are concerned, everyone's idea of the role of the state is clear. And the choice is this: either a giant state that feeds on the tax burden it imposes on its taxpayers, or a sufficient state that relies on the initiative of its citizens and the innovation of its companies. This report, which is the result of remarkable work by our colleague Markus Ferber, comes at the right time as we prepare to discuss and decide on major changes in corporate taxation following the international agreement reached at OECD level. It is based on a clear assumption: Tax reforms have a significant impact on the economy of states. And what does that mean for us in our Union? Firstly, that when we talk about taxation, sovereign power resides in the Member States and the Union has limited legislative powers, focusing more on a coordinating role. But such a coordinating role is essential in the context of an open internal market. When tax policies are poorly coordinated, small and medium-sized enterprises are the first victims, because they are unable to have legal or regulatory departments. compliance as big as the complexity of 27 different systems requires. And poor coordination also opens the door to opportunities for fraud, evasion or aggressive tax planning. This context demonstrates the need for a Commission committed to leading this cooperation. And in which areas? harmonising tax bases, without fear of addressing the issue of debt bias in corporate finance, creating a clear context for tax incentives for research and development, and launching a scoreboard and comparison of national tax policies for the promotion of good practices. These are three clear examples of what we are asking the European Commission to do here. Let us therefore move forward with confidence and commitment to the reforms that our states need and our taxpayers demand.

Mr President, young people have been severely impacted by the pandemic and they continue to be so. We have heard this during this debate so far from many colleagues. More than ever, the uncertainty of this context makes young people worried about their future and we have the responsibility not to leave them behind. We must ensure that we address their concerns, such as mental health, unemployment and social inequality, and that we keep fighting climate change and care about the planet. This year, the European Year of Youth must represent our joint efforts to strengthen existing mechanisms and initiatives, but also to create additional programmes targeted at promoting well-paid and quality jobs. Young people are not only the present, they are the future of our Union, and it is our duty to make sure that they can live in a Europe of opportunities and economic growth. They are listening to us today and we cannot fail them.

Madam President, 60% of Europeans believe that national recovery and resilience plans will help their countries overcome the crisis. But we're late. The Commission is still assessing some of these plans and I hope that in this assessment, respect for the rule of law will not only be a detail, but a decisive factor in whether or not the proposals are approved. On the other hand, there are plans that have been approved for months and are not yet being fully implemented. The RRPs do not serve to fatten the state, but to feed the economy and its engines: households and businesses. So the funds have to reach Europeans, and every day that passes is a missed opportunity. The pandemic has paralysed our economies from one moment to the next. Our answer cannot wait. Even if there are elections in some Member States, this is certainly not propaganda time. Yes, it is the time of responsibility.

Mr President, we are here today to discuss the European Year of Youth, but 2022 will also be the year of important decisions, as we expect to reach crucial conclusions on the future of Europe. Making 2022 the European Year of Youth and completing the Conference on the Future of Europe cannot be a coincidence. As a young politician and President of the Youth of the European People’s Party, it is a privilege to live in a Union that leads the fight against climate change and shapes an economy not for today, but for future generations. A key cause of younger generations. The environmental and digital transitions are shifting the way our society works, but we cannot deny that we are still trying to recover from a crisis that is not yet over. In fact, we don’t know when it will be over. Yet, every uncertainty can be a tremendous possibility. Every adversity must be a new opportunity. The implementation of Next Generation EU needs to be a tool at the service of young Europeans, providing educational training, ensuring economic growth and delivering well-paid and quality jobs. Young Europeans want a Europe where each generation lives better than the generation before. We – politicians – must take this as a central rule and place the hopes and fears of next generations at the heart of what we do.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we often have a tendency to downplay what we have already achieved, the goals we are achieving. But without, for a moment, reducing ambition for the future, it seems to me of great importance that we know how to evaluate the path we have already taken. As co-author of this Parliament's resolution for the COP, I feel a particular responsibility not only for the establishment of the objectives that we took to Glasgow, but also for their fulfilment, and I do not think it is inappropriate to remind all the Groups here, but also the representatives of the Commission and the Council, who, having still much to do, are also the economic bloc that has already done more and that has worked more for climate neutrality. The fact that our goals are ambitious should not cloud us in relation to the effort and success achieved. We have led Glasgow to seven major goals: the ambition to increase the nationally determined targets to get closer to the 1.5 degree Celsius increase; mobilising resources for adaptation; the agreement on the global carbon market; fossil fuel subsidies; the methane agreement; the halt to deforestation; including all sectors in the decarbonisation effort in national targets, including aviation and maritime transport. Of these seven objectives, in six we have achieved important, I would even say very important, advances, and only the last one has not, at least partially, been achieved. Nothing would be so serious or so treacherous as to find that they were nothing but empty words. This is the time, the time to move from words to deeds, the time to implement the agreements signed, the time to ensure that we do our part.

Mr President, the fight against tax evasion and the use of tax havens is on the agenda and it is a good thing. The agreement that the OECD is preparing to conclude at the Rome summit is a strong political signal and the European Union must be a protagonist, but the political protagonism required must be matched by legislative commitment. If day zero is to celebrate the agreement, day one has to be to work and give effect to what will be agreed. And here, once again, we need the commitment of the States. If fiscal sovereignty is unavoidable, cooperation is inevitable. Profit shifting and aggressive tax planning severely damage the national budgets of countries where many large companies operate. The two pillars of the agreement want to ensure that profits are taxed where they are generated and that there is a minimum tax rate of 15%. These are structural changes that will require ambition, realism and competence, especially in European capitals. The biggest obstacles are sometimes in the details and the changes we want must protect, above all, the rights of our taxpayers, the competitiveness of our businesses and the integrity of our internal market. In order to live up to the ambition that has been announced, we must go beyond statements. It's time to move on to action.

Mr President, money laundering is a particularly serious and complex crime. Not fighting it is not only attacking concrete operations, but it is cutting off the financial flow that fuels terrorism, organised crime and human, drug or arms trafficking networks. The European ambition here is not only justified by the need to recover 1% of the lost European GDP. It is motivated above all by the urgency to stop crimes that violate our values, our fundamental values. The Commission's proposals go in the right direction, but we need to go further, and for that we need the commitment of national governments. We are discussing a reform when the current rules are not properly transposed or applied, as has happened in Portugal. A new regulation is a step forward if it strengthens financial market obligations, without harming the competitiveness of companies. A revision of the directive is welcome if the States comply with it, and a new anti-money laundering authority is a step forward if it actually improves communication between the competent authorities in the States. Fighting the crime of money laundering requires ambition and realism from all of us. This is not just a matter of law, it is an imperative of the rule of law.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, no one, absolutely no one, no other economic power has done as much as we have in the fight against climate change. And you have to say it and repeat it without fear: We are the global leaders in setting goals, but also in translating those goals into concrete changes to legislation. The next decade will be, with the legislative initiatives taking place in this Parliament, the decade of the shift towards a new paradigm of sustainability. Europeans, and new generations in particular, no longer tolerate the continued mistreatment of the planet and its biodiversity. But for this reason too, we must be able to represent them properly in their demands. It is no longer enough for us to do our work well and have a society that develops sustainably. We must also put pressure on other countries, and particularly those that pollute the most, to do so, to reduce their emissions quickly. We therefore need strong and effective leadership, leadership that has the courage to say that it is we, Europe, who lead, but also that requires others to do their part, that has the courage to say that we do our part and others do not, and that, for example, China continues to invest massively in new coal-fired power plants, damaging the work and effort done by others. But also that society and environmental organizations have the courage to say so and also to direct their action to other regions of the globe where little or very little is done. For our part, here in the European Parliament, we are going, I believe, with a solid, comprehensive and ambitious position for Glasgow. I want, and I hope, the Commission and the Council to pursue similar ambitions on key issues such as nationally determined targets and the mobilisation of funding not only for climate change mitigation but also for climate change adaptation. How, moreover, can we build a better world if we do not take care of the house that is all?

Madam President, the Banking Union in 2020 faced an unprecedented crisis, but proved stronger and more resilient than a decade ago. The supervisory and resolution pillars were prepared to ensure the financial stability of the banking sector. And that was essential for us to face the crisis with greater confidence. Unfortunately, there is a third pillar that remains incomplete: the European Deposit Insurance Scheme. If there is one thing we have learned from this crisis, it is that interdependence and solidarity are not just words to adorn speeches. Dragging this process leaves depositors more or less protected depending on the country in which they have their income and savings, and therefore is not justifiable. And if we talk about solidarity, we also have to talk about credit moratoria. This was important to protect citizens in the face of an unexpected crisis. Now, in some Member States, the level of claims they check is significant. In my country, for example, the value of moratoria exceeds EUR 36 billion. And while it is true that the priority is the protection of households and businesses, it is no less true that we have to look at the scale of non-performing loans, which remain structurally high in many countries. 2020 was a crisis year in which the Banking Union proved resilient. Hopefully, in a year's time, we will mark the advances that have been delayed for a long time. And we'll be here to defend them.

Mr President, today, when we discuss revelations about aggressive or harmful tax practices, we come to the inevitable conclusion that something has gone wrong. And if it's important to look back and make that assessment, it's even more essential to look forward and realize what we can do differently. The European Union is today a single market integrated into a globalised and increasingly digitalised economy. The borders that the internal market wants to break down have long been missing in the digital market. Opportunities for businesses must mean more growth, more jobs and more investment. And taxation must be an instrument at the service of these objectives. It cannot be a patchwork of holes for tax evasion and money laundering. Just as competition must be fair and fair, so must taxes be adequate and transparent. We must use the instruments that we have competently and effectively. The Code of Conduct needs to be better implemented and the blacklist of tax havens needs to have concrete consequences on the jurisdictions it identifies. It is up to each Member State to define its taxes, who pays them and how much it pays. The European Union must ensure that cooperation has tangible results in the lives of citizens and businesses. Outside, let's speak with one voice. Inside, let's be loyal to each other. With more commitment from the Member States and more leadership from the Union, I am sure we will be able to move forward. It's time to take the first step.

Madam President, these are not the first revelations about the use of tax havens for illegal or criminal purposes. And while it is true that not all revelations amount to crimes, it is equally true that there may be evidence of tax evasion and money laundering. This suspicion is sufficient to justify more ambitious and demanding measures. But unfortunately in the past it was not enough! Here, we have to answer three questions. First, what's failing? International negotiations in the G20 and OECD have been going on for too long. In the European Union we do not use the means we have to their full extent, and in each of our states (and in mine this is blatant), governments look the other way. They lack not only ambition, but also commitment to the implementation of European legislation. Second, what do we have to do? Achieve an international agreement on corporate taxation in the era of globalisation and digitalisation. Transform the European Union Code of Conduct and the Black List of Tax havens into more effective mechanisms. Where is the credibility of the list when it ignores jurisdictions like the Seychelles, which came off the list two days after the scandal Pandora Papers Have it blown up? Finally, commit countries to tax transparency rules and exchange of information that facilitate the fight against tax fraud and evasion. Third, when and how to do it? This is the time to decide. Today we are debating in the European Parliament and our positions are clear, but it is the Member States that have the power to decide. We have no time to waste and the first step is to sit governments at the same table. Ladies and gentlemen, the choice before us is clear, and it is between the courage to be more ambitious or to bury your head in the sand of some tax haven. We here do not want to wait for the next scandal. We want governments to follow us to avoid it.