Debate contributions by Brigitte VAN DEN BERG

Madam President, having your own place, a spot in the sunshine and someone in the neighbourhood that can always love you. This is the start of a nostalgic hit song in the 1980s in the Netherlands, because it was such a given that everybody had their own home. But how different are things now? Europeans pay more than 60 % more for housing than in 2015, and in Hungary that's even 200 %. The cost of housing grew almost four times more than our wages and this means that many young Europeans only leave their house when they are in their mid 30s. They are forced to pass on opportunities or delay crucial decisions like starting a family because they cannot find a place to live. People are rightfully furious and rely on policymakers to come up with solutions, and the EU is now assuming its responsibility – besides local, regional and national governments, we are enabling these solutions. The plan is comprehensive and it focuses directly on the construction workers and the technicians who are going to build our houses, because bricks don't stack themselves. We are investing in people and we will prove it can be done.

Madam President, listening to this debate, I can conclude that we all agree that it's really not favourable that we are this dependent on China. So we do know what we need to do, but how do we do it? The Member States and the EU really have to get on their feet and, together with industry, build strong partnerships with trusted partners. We also need to set clear partners on when industry needs to be diversified. We need to both push and pull. The Vice-President of the Commission said in his introduction that he needs our support and asks for our support. We are ready for the next step. Tell us where and when, and we will be there to support you.

It's insane that you say that we have to keep our relationships with China while we are way too dependent on China. If we do this, the EU is dumber than a cat. A cat knows not to drink from one source, because if they drink from one source and that source is poisoned, they will get poisoned. They diversify their sources, and we also need to diversify our sources of raw materials and not become too dependent on China.

The claims you make are refuted by science time and time again. In addition, floods, heatwaves, droughts and wildfires cost €43 billion in economic damage last summer alone. What do you say to all the people who have lost their homes, who have seen their habitat destroyed? What do you say to those people when you deny that climate change is a problem that we must solve together?

Mr President, EUR 400 billion. This is how much Europe pays annually for fossil energy from countries outside our continent. EUR 400 billion flown to oil sheiks and often to undemocratic leaders. And who's gonna pay for that? The ordinary European, who pays a skyrocketing energy bill, and our industry, which suffers from these gigantic energy prices. We have long known that green energy is the cheapest energy. That is why it is now time to cut down on coal and opt for a future without fossil fuels. There's no way back. There is only the way forward. And that way forward leads to clean, European energy. Firstly, we are cheaper, secondly less dependent and thirdly, we are building our cleantech industry in which Europe can play a leading role in the world. And now it's time for the climate summit and it's time for the rest of the world to take a step forward. Four years ago, at the climate summit, we talked about phasing out fossil energy and phasing out coal. But in the meantime, it appears that China and many other countries are not only investing in cleantech, but are also still building ‘cheerful’ coal-fired power plants. That is why my question to the Commission and to Mr Hoekstra is: What is your plan for cutting coal?

Madam President, the European Union is not only a single market; it's also a social strength. And it is important to support the position of employees in these rapidly changing times. At the same time, we do not want to be standing in the way of competitiveness. This file shows that one does not have to counter the other, but that it actually can strengthen it when finding proportionate outcomes. By unifying and by 'eurofying', we create a system which is easier to navigate for businesses, while at the same time supporting employees all across the Union. The outcomes of these negotiations will make living, working and doing business in the EU more democratic. I would like to thank the rapporteur, Dennis Radtke, for his hard work. It was not easy and we still have aspects where we differ in position, but overall I am very happy with the good compromises that we found. I think we found the right balance both for workers and for businesses in the EU.

Mr. Gotink, you are the brake. You are very much in favour of the internal market here, but you are the brake. Because in your election program, I read: “We want tasks, powers and budgets that remain ours. This is how we preserve our sovereignty.” You are the brake. The government in which your party played the leading role prevented us from recognising vocational training diplomas across Europe. You are the brake. When are you really going to give gas to this internal market?

Mr President, this month thousands of trainees are starting in our European institutions. Of course it's a happy day for them, but I'm sick of it. I am disappointed that these traineeships are not accessible to VET students or vocational education students. May I remind you that two thirds of Europeans do not have a university education, but vocational training? Why are our internships not accessible to that group? I am, of course, very pleased that this is the last year that the European Commission will only hire trainees with a university degree, because it has announced that it will make 100 places available for vocational students for its Blue Book traineeship next year. But where are we? Where is the European Parliament and how do we ensure that we also involve professionals in our offices? I call on all my colleagues to hire a VET trainee and introduce everyone to Europe.

Mr President, ESF+: let's talk about the successes we've gained, but also about the rule of law. During trilogues, this was discussed thoroughly and we have made steps. But some members of our group still have concerns, and I hope that Madam Executive Vice-President can respond to them. First, on the fund itself. It is important to renew the European Social Fund Plus because it is a fund that invests in people, their opportunities and their skills. To invest in people means asking: 'What do Europeans need to thrive in times of change?' And that is why we have worked hard to make the ESF+ ready to respond to our crises. Whether it is helping someone to gain new skills for a greener economy or to gain new skills for defence for a safer Europe, for example, through vocational education and training. For Renew, this is of great importance and we are happy with the results – and also thank you to the rapporteur for providing those. But then, the rule of law. Let me be clear, we have made important steps, but my concern is that with this revision, we still leave open the possibility to reprogramme funds in a way that allows the circumvention of rule-of-law provisions. And I want to hear from the European Commission. Do we agree that money from this fund cannot go to Hungary through any route, for as long as they have not made real progress and change? The European Commission gave us this statement during the trilogues, but can you please confirm that we agree on this position here in plenary?

Mr President, in the region where I come from, very nice new companies have started. For example, a company that first made pipes for oil and gas. Or a company that first threw away normal waste and now makes new raw materials from it. And for example, a company that turns seaweed into green fertilizer and a company that turns pipes that used to be for oil and gas into pipes for hydrogen. All from the Just Transition Fund that Europe has invested in. I would like to congratulate Europe on this. However, I am also told by all these companies: It was a very complicated process and the rules often stand in our way. For example, what does a pragmatic definition of hydrogen stand in the way of mass production of green hydrogen? Or what are the rules for end-of-waste status preventing us from really building that circular future? Or how many rules prevent farmers from innovating and using greener fertilisers. So let us, Mr President, Commissioner, not be the Europe of vested interests, but the Europe of innovation, where ideas are given space, where innovation is given space. Not necessarily with fewer rules, but with forward-looking rules...

Mr President, a few weeks ago I stood in the square next to the European Parliament with a large group of steel workers from all over Europe, including from my region. From my region there was a group of boys and girls of less than twenty years who are in training to become professionals at the Hoogovens in IJmuiden. They stood there for their future and I stand here for their future. They must be able to work in a factory where no dirt comes out of the chimney, where green steel is made and where you can live next door without getting sick. We need to produce green steel for windmills, cars and batteries, so that our professionals can make it from our steel. They should be able to be proud of what they make, without having to fear for what the future brings. The same goes for recycled plastic and for clean ovens for glass and ceramics. The people who work in these sectors are eager to contribute to the energy transition. They want certainty about what the future will bring, for them and for the companies where they work. We must act now to make this future possible. Our companies can no longer compete with polluting imports and low energy prices. We have to do something about this. I am proud of the resolution we have drawn up on this subject. However, the people who work in the heavy industry have not yet been reassured. The Commission's proposal does not yet provide sufficient certainty. Therefore, let's make sure that there is a plan for every large factory that provides clarity about the future of the factory, its employees and the region in which it stands. Only when we have answered these questions can I go home satisfied. My region and our young people deserve clarity.

Mr President, I would like to thank the Commissioner for Climate Action, Net-Zero and Clean Growth for his plan. I understand he's working with the resources he has, but is that enough? Isn't it time to call for a real, integrated European energy market? Is it not time to ask all steel mills for a specific plan for the future of each steel region and to determine where we want to invest in green steel, the defence industry and clean technology? What does the Commissioner need to tempt the Member States to really take a European approach? We would like to hear this, because we want to help with this. We also want to know where the plans are going.

Madam President, change is Europe's biggest challenge, but we are not always very good at it. Sometimes Europe seems to wait until it's an absolute crisis for things to change. But to face climate change, the digital transition and the unstable world, Europe needs to anticipate the future and transform itself. This resolution helps in some ways to do that. We should support companies in adapting to a new economy. Reskilling and upskilling our workforce should be the primary way of helping citizens to get better jobs, and where companies cannot avoid major restructuring, regions and citizens should be able to rely on the EU and the Member States for help to find new economic opportunities. We should not resist change by imposing more rules on companies. We should embrace it, and we should turn it into an opportunity for a better Europe.

Mr President, Commissioner, during the hearing, I asked you the question: 'can you commit to making skills truly transferable and vocational training diplomas recognised across Europe by the end of this term?' And we are very happy to see in a Union of Skills, first of all, that there is a good amount of attention for vocationally educated professionals, and, second of all, that diploma recognition is one of the core ambitions. Thank you very much for listening. We are looking forward to working closely with you on this, also on the pilot that you propose. And seeing that the Benelux cooperation is often a frontrunner in unifying policy, I want to suggest that we start piloting diploma recognition in the Benelux. But I do want to ask for your attention regarding some other things. First of all, I want to ask for your attention in involving people with practical skills in policy-making. I want to ask for your attention for fair salaries for professionals with practical skills. And I want to ask for your attention in investing in VET teachers. And I want to echo my colleague Radtke on this: skilled people are at the core of every policy. Especially in these unfortunate times, it is where Europe has to find its strength. We need to invest in the people now more than ever.

Mr President, around 77 % of the companies in the EU have indicated that they are facing difficulties of finding employees with the required skills. To work on this challenge, we really have to recognise that there is a gap in our society between the practically educated and the theoretically educated. We have to be so much more conscious that our vocational professionals are carrying our society. What can we do to really do something about this? I'm inspired by Karim Amghar: he is a vocational educator in the Netherlands and, together with him, I want to plead to stop discrimination on the basis of educational level, to increase the salaries of vocational-trained professionals and to change our language: no longer 'higher education' and 'lower education', but let's talk about the professional specialists and the hi-tech craftsmen that they are. Let's stop talking about professionals as merely tools for our goals, because we are in this together: equal. The lack of appreciation and recognition of the practically educated professionals, and the lack of a human-centred approach, is the largest problem we have to win this battle.

Mr President, when your child becomes ill for the first time, you entrust it to the trustworthy hands of a doctor. If you can no longer take care of yourself as a parent, you trust the neighborhood nurse to help you. And if you get sick yourself, you blindly surrender to the healthcare professionals. It is a very good thing that we have a healthcare system that we can rely on. Everyone in this room trusts those healthcare workers with their own lives when it comes down to it. But why don't we trust the people in health care when we draw up the policy? We drown our employees in administration, we underpay our professionals and we ignore complaints about the high workload. In the Netherlands, caregivers spend forty percent of their time on administration, because we policy makers are afraid that otherwise the quality of care will not be good enough. By 2030, 4.1 million people are expected to fall short of health care. Member States, we must now take care of our concerns. We need to rely on professionals again. We need to reduce administration and we need to give the industry the modern tools we need. Make the job attractive again. Only then can we ensure that the next generation can count on reliable care.

During this debate, all the time we are talking about censorship. But it's not about censorship. It's about openness of debate. Let us see what happens right now on Instagram: if you use the hashtag #Democrat, you get no results, but if you use the hashtag #Republican, you get a lot of results. This is what happens if we don't regulate in a fair way and make sure that free speech is actually organised by rules. This is what we need.

Mr Arias, I'm very happy to hear you say that we should be strict on the DSA, but don't you think that this Commissioner should present more concrete, more direct and more immediate and binding measures to safeguard our democracy against foreign interference, and especially now? Can we agree on that?

Madam President, Miss Simpson, I'm very happy to be part of your last debate in this House. We are discussing a very well-discussed topic: high energy prices. I want to focus on those who always put this together with criticism on the Green Deal, because they are denying that green energy is the most cheap energy. It was only two years ago that across Europe, so many people faced unbearable insecurity and stress because of soaring energy prices. Now I worry that some Members in this House are leading us towards another energy crisis, cheering on Mr Trump, who only puts his own interests first. So it is time for Europe to stand on our own feet. We have to get a good collaboration with the leaders that not only prioritise their own progress, but collective progress. We have to understand that the Green Deal is about saving the planet, about getting cheaper energy and about our position in the world. Let's get it on.

Madam President, I'm sure I'm not the only one that has once written their password on a Post-it or clicked on a phishing email, because that's human and it's not nice to always live on your guard. But this is how we have treated our critical infrastructure up till now and it's time to lose our naivety. It's time to not only protect our cables, but also our elections and our media. We need to protect our citizens and it's not enough if every Member State just takes care of their own backyard. We have to work towards an integrated approach and we have to really put together our intelligence services, our police and our militaries. I think we have to put it ambitiously and make a NATO‑like command structure to counter hybrid threats. I urge the Commission and the Member States to take action before it's too late.

Mr President, dear colleagues – 'intensifying our efforts', 'decisive steps', 'business as usual is no longer an option' – I compliment the Member States for their beautiful words included in the Budapest declaration. However, I worry that when things become difficult, when Member States have to let go of red lines or bring home a tough message, these words will be much less impressive. Because when push comes to shove, it is this House that has to keep reminding Europe that inaction is not an option. And this means that we need a real European industrial strategy that contains stronger EU policies for energy, stronger EU policy for the capital markets and an ambitious EU budget. So I call upon my colleagues here. Let us agree to be ambitious. Let us agree to take the Draghi report seriously and implement its recommendations. And let us push the other institutions to follow through on their beautiful declarations.

Mr President, who do we need now that society is changing enormously due to the energy transition? Who will advise all our residents and all companies on all these sustainable measures? Who will install all those solar panels, maintain wind turbines, install heat networks and dig in the cables and pipes? The answer is: professionals. We must ensure that the new generation can dream of beautiful new professions. That you can become a mechanic of an electric car with pride and a good salary, or become a specialist of recycled plastic or hydrogen. So let's now seize the opportunity to fix a mistake we've been making for a little too long. Namely that we make policies and rules for people, while we do not talk to the people who know what is really needed in practice. Let's cut down on unnecessary papers and protocols that deprive people of the pleasure of the profession. Let's rely on craftsmanship. When the Commission gets to work, I would like to be the first to talk to the Commissioner about how we ensure that we get the people at the table who know what needs to be done in practice – before we start making policy. Because only together can we make plans that really work. Plans that work for the energy transition and for the people who will realize it.

Madam President, I am a child from a proud steel family and in my home town almost everybody is. Our steel plant is both our pride and our worry, and it is one of the main reasons that I'm here in Parliament today, because tough choices are needed for the regions that produce steel, or the rest of the world will eat us for lunch. Or as the Dutch say, 'They will eat the cheese from our sandwiches.' Budget choices are needed. Our European budget is designed for the past and not for a prosperous, clean future. Funds have to go from agricultural subsidies to industrial investments. This does not mean a blank cheque for the industry, because not all steel plants have a green future. To have a successful deal, we need to invest only in the plants that can exist in this future. And we have to increase our just transition fund for those that cannot, because no region can be left behind. We have to carry this change together. The time to act is short and there is so much to do. Let's go!

Mr President, I speak daily to people whose young lives are on break because they cannot live where they work or study, because they cannot move in with the partner they have found or because they cannot start a family. Not having a good home locks your life. Of course, the EU has limited competences when it comes to housing, but we can take some smart measures. That is why I think it is very good that Europe has said: “If it's important to Europeans, it's important to us and we'll get to work on it.” So let's make it easier for governments to grant grants or loans to enable housing construction. Let us ensure that we allocate money from European funds for this purpose. And let's invest in the professionals we need to build those homes. Every new generation deserves to stand on their own two feet. But we are depriving this generation of it. In the meantime, their youth is flying by. I therefore really want to ask the Commission to hurry up and stop making our young people wait for their own lives.