Debate contributions by Pasquale TRIDICO

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Ukraine, Venezuela, Iran, Greenland and perhaps tomorrow Mexico, Norway, Canada and who knows, France, Spain. All these Trump threats, direct and indirect, are a humiliation for Europe and are upsetting the geopolitical balance, our old certainties. NATO, the UN and even the European Union are in an identity crisis and risk being swept away by oligarchies more powerful than a head of government. Orwell's prophecy is coming true in which the elite of powerful rule over all. The European Union is at a crossroads: It must choose whether to fight this modern form of authoritarianism or whether, once again, eighty years after the end of the Second World War, it must fight for democracy, its freedom and its sovereignty. We have tools to respond to Trump: the anti-coercion instrument, tariffs, digital tax, but we can't shut up. At the next Council, European leaders show that they are up to this challenge, say: We are not vassals. And also the majority of this European Parliament. Take a clear stand against Trump and his arrogance.

Thank you very much, colleague, for your question. Actually, I think that the European Union as such, as a Union, should invest in European defence. We are not actually investing in European defence. We are allowing Member States to invest each other in their own defence. For instance, a big state like Germany, which has huge fiscal room to invest even more, one thousand billion dollars, actually it is increasing security within Europe. I say that Europe needs to look for its own strategic autonomy economically, technologically and even from a defence point of view. But now, what we are doing is even investing more in arms, buying more arms from Americans, rather than building a European mechanism of defence.

Are you happier now that Mr Trump is actually speaking with Mr Putin instead of us? Are you happy with that? So, I am actually not happier that Trump is speaking alone now with Putin. That is why I wanted a different strategy from Europe from the very beginning. Following the only way of war is not reaching the peace, my dear.

As I said, I condemn in all the means the aggression of Russia against Ukraine. I think that the way to reach peace is not the one that Europe is following, because actually we are allowing Member States to increase defence expenditure asymmetrically. We are even, in derogation of the stability pact, allowing big Member States to increase defence. And this is even dangerous for Member States which have a bigger fiscal space against the others. It's basically a counter-position of each Member State against the others.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, politics is not the art of preparing for war, it is the art of preventing it. And Europe exists because it has learned on its own skin that strength, without dialogue, only leads to ruin. Today someone tells us that we must get used to the idea of conflict, that our children will have to suffer as our grandparents did. I oppose this logic: If Europe accepts this narrative, it has already lost. This race for rearmament does not strengthen the European Union, it divides it. In 2025, the "Security and Defence" chapter of the budget increased by more than 10% and, adding to this the asymmetric increases in national plans, we arrive at disproportionate, even opposing, interests between the various member countries. This is not European defence, we are rewriting the European budget items – for the EIB, for the Cohesion Fund and for InvestEU – that were created to reduce inequalities and are being converted, or at least used, as financial instruments for militarisation, also guaranteeing private profits and passing the risk of this profit on to taxpayers. This, again, is not common security: This is an escalation that weakens the Union as a whole. We say no to a Europe that turns war into a bargain for the few and we also say it in solidarity with Ukraine. We were elected to leave a better future for our children, not to prepare them for war.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, today we are debating InvestEU at a time when Europe is called upon to look at its position in the world. As we follow progress towards a peace agreement between Ukraine and Russia, a dissonance emerges: We can find unity in the face of conflict, but we disperse it when it comes to building our industrial future and strategic autonomy. We are approaching a geopolitical turning point, but the indicators tell us more: Europe is losing ground. The gap with the US and China widens; They invest in data center, artificial intelligence and infrastructure, while we move with fragmentation and delays. We postpone a real industrial strategy; the 'automotive declines; We are delaying the launch of the digital euro. We do not oppose an autonomous strategy to American tariffs, nor do we succeed in taxing multinational digital services to have adequate resources and strengthen our production capacity, and we only think of competitiveness as a product of the market while the stagnation of GDP is a reality. If the world runs, Europe cannot limit itself to administering the existing, we need a real industrial policy that reduces the technological gap and mobilizes capital, bringing critical infrastructure back to Europe.

Mr President, Commissioner Šefčovič, ladies and gentlemen, while we are debating here and while Europe continues to negotiate as if we were still in the world of free trade, the United States has already collected over $100 billion in tariffs, applying selective protectionism that rewards its interests and punishes our economy. Why are our companies, Commissioner, being hit by unilateral measures, while American multinationals still continue to sell in Europe, taking advantage of our great single market and not paying taxes fairly? This is not just a commercial issue, it is a question of social justice, economic sovereignty and dignity. Enough with asymmetry, enough with economic dependence. Our welfare is at risk, if we allow those who make profits here not to return anything to the community. We call for symmetrical countermeasures and targeted and selective tariffs. If we do not do so, we risk undermining the single market. We demand the introduction of a digital tax, Mr Šefčovič, we demand the digital services tax. This is the time: Either we defend Europe now or we condemn our economy to economic and political irrelevance.

(IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Parliament's control of the executive of the European Union through the so-called discharge is fundamental to the smooth functioning of democracy. An exercise that for us should once again be inspired by the values of the founding fathers: peace, solidarity, human rights, the prosperity of our citizens. Instead, questioning the legitimacy of NGOs receiving funds from the European Union weakens the European Union's own action in the most fragile areas of the world. Attacking NGOs but also the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees at a time when Palestinians are being starved in Gaza is inhumane. We also strongly oppose the approval of the European rearmament plan through an extraordinary procedure, without real involvement of Parliament. This represents a serious precedent, a theft of our democracy, which should be condemned by this House, as indeed was done by the Committee on Legal Affairs two weeks ago. I conclude with an appeal: Let us return to the spirit of the Ventotene Manifesto: a united but not closed Europe, strong but not aggressive, attentive to accounts but also to rights. Discharge is not just a management judgement: It is a reflection of our idea of union. Let's defend her uncompromisingly.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Trump's trade policy reflects the mercantilist logic that a trade deficit is a threat. In 2023, the US imported around €157 billion worth of goods from the European Union. But we have to look at services and here we notice that it is the United States that has a surplus of 109 billion. This reminds us of how complex economic relations are and must be read as a whole. Today the tariffs are suspended but tensions remain and meanwhile many large US companies, especially in the digital sector, continue to make exorbitant profits. It is a matter of justice: We need to take care of this situation. This is why we need a tax on digital services. In addition, the European Union should expand its trade ties with other emerging countries, the BRICS, and not depend on Trump's unilateral choices. Let us not forget the economic fallout of tariffs, the recession. That is why we must also focus on wage growth, domestic demand and consumption. Europe must overcome the challenges with greater force against the powerful in Washington.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Europe was not born of fear, but of hope. From men and women who, in the rubble of war, had the courage to imagine a different future, a Union based on cooperation, democracy and peace. Today, this vision is under severe strain: We are witnessing an unjustified, useless, fragmented rearmament race, lacking even a common strategy that strengthens us and, instead, exposes us to weaknesses, to greater geopolitical tensions. Without European coordination, with uncoordinated investment and a disparity in the spending capacity of individual states, countries like Italy will face new debt and our debt will reach 150% of GDP. But security is not built only with weapons, but with technological and economic independence and social stability. This rearmament, with 800 billion euros, will lead Italy to have to cut welfare and health, but not only Italy, all the member countries. That is why on 5 April we will be in Rome to demonstrate against this rearmament, for a Europe of justice and peace.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Europe must choose between protecting work and dignity or succumbing to precariousness and inequality. Deindustrialisation, the ecological transition, in particular in the sector automotive, and global trade tensions cannot be a pretext to reduce wages; We need a minimum wage where there is not yet, as in Italy, to guarantee decent incomes and stop wage dumping. But it's not enough. Commissioner, work alone is very often not enough to lift people out of poverty. We need a European minimum income, a European citizenship income, financed with fair taxation on large multinationals, calibrated to the poverty line of each Member State. The technological transition must strengthen our social model, not widen inequalities. For this reason, as Five Star Movement we call for a fund to accompany workers in the change, the introduction of the short week and the reduction of working hours, together with a universal minimum income. We want to stand by work against poverty, against inequalities.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Commission's work programme for 2025 raises a number of concerns, with so many shadows and very few lights. On the investment front, the programme focuses too much on defence, while there are no concrete measures for the protection of citizens, workers and support for industrial sectors in difficulty, such as the industrial sector.automotive. The revision of the EDIP, the defence industrial programme, provides new funds for the development of armaments and paves the way for a escalation that we don't accept. In addition, amending the REACH Regulation on the authorisation of chemicals risks reducing environmental protections in a dangerous way. As regards the labour market, there is a lack of structured support to address industrial transitions. Furthermore, we have called for the establishment of a new instrument for industry, as was SURE during COVID, to boost competitiveness, a programme in particular that serves theautomotive in the conversion to the electric, but there are no answers in this sense. This proposal could be addressed under the Skills Union initiative. Finally, the housing plan is a good thing, it is an important theme for the 5 Star Movement, a step in the right direction, but its non-legislative nature and very limited resources risk severely limiting its effectiveness on high rents and the housing crisis in Italy as well as in all European countries. More concrete responses are needed to protect workers and support businesses, starting with industry, which is a asset strategic for the whole of Europe.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, while in the United States, with Trump's inauguration, Bitcoin reaches historic values and even a single currency. meme Trump gains billions in capitalization, in Europe the debate on digital currencies remains stagnant, especially with regard to the digital euro. The digital euro issued by the European Central Bank would represent a public, secure and independent response, supporting our strategic and economic autonomy vis-à-vis cryptocurrencies, which, due to their volatility and lack of regulation, cannot offer a stable payment method. This project, however, remains blocked for some countries that veto it and political groups. We, on the other hand, strongly support the introduction of this instrument, because it would guarantee Europe's strategic independence from foreign, mainly American, giants that monopolize electronic payments, allow the construction of a European infrastructure for digital payments, reduce transaction costs for consumers and sellers and, moreover, increase financial stability. The digital euro would also be a crucial response in the fight against tax evasion, which deprives the European welfare state of €824 billion in tax revenue every year. Commissioner, we are asking you to go one step further than the digital euro.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, demographic decline is a danger to the labour market and the sustainability of welfare. Among its most worrying implications is the sustainability of the pension system: if today there are 2.7 people of working age for every European pensioner, by 2100 this ratio will fall to 1.5, with a reduction of 54 million workers. In Italy, the situation is dramatic: For every pensioner, we have 1.4 employees. In order to cope with this change and increase the supply of labour, migration flows must be used in the short term and, in the long term, policies must stimulate the birth rate. This requires an increase in public childcare services and an increase in female employment rates. We know that where female employment rates are higher, fertility rates are higher. In Italy we have the lowest female employment rate in the EU, 53%, and the lowest fertility rate, around 1.2 children per woman. In addition, job insecurity and the absence of reconciliation policies worsen the situation. Compulsory paternity leave and adequate wages must be introduced in order to have greater incentives towards the birth rate.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, since there is no one on the right, the right to strike is a fundamental instrument of freedom and justice and is guaranteed by all our constitutions in Europe. Today, however, this right is under attack. In Italy, Salvini allows himself to prescribe the right to strike every time; It happened this year and it happened last year. This is unacceptable. Di Vittorio, a symbol of the workers' struggle, said that "when you strike, you are not fighting against a boss, but against a system that deprives workers of their rights and dignity", as Amazon workers in the United States do these days. The strike is not only an instrument of struggle, but also a crucial element in strengthening collective bargaining. In the last legislature, an important step was taken with the Minimum Wage Directive, with the introduction of the minimum wage, either by negotiation or by legal means. The Italian government has not yet transposed the Minimum Wage Directive, saying that workers are covered by collective bargaining. This is false: Collective bargaining does not effectively cover all workers in many services. We ask that bargaining be extended with specific criteria of representation, otherwise bargaining will be ineffective. We need to protect...

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, technology has radically transformed the global economy, redefining the way companies operate and interact in markets. However, it has also contributed to widening economic inequalities, concentrating unprecedented wealth and power in the hands of a few. This shift has highlighted the structural gaps in our tax systems, with regulatory asymmetries that are unsuitable to meet the challenges of an increasingly digital and globalised economy. The declaration of the G20 leaders meeting in Rio represents a significant step towards a fairer tax system, committed to ensuring that large assets are properly taxed. Today, more than ever, the world needs a strong and effective multilateral system, capable of adopting fiscal policies that respond to new technological paradigms. We must lead this change, like Europe, by promoting fairness, reducing inequalities and ensuring essential resources for key priorities such as education, health and climate action. The new Commission and the new G20 Presidency of South Africa must act with ambition and courage. For Europe to give up this opportunity would mean abdicating the global leadership role that Europe is called upon to claim.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, today there is an inexplicable contradiction in Europe in the eyes of the citizens. On the one hand, the Member States are asked to repay, through cuts, EUR 100 billion per year in view of the new Stability Pact; Italy is asking for 13 billion euros, for example. On the other hand, it turns a blind eye to the tax avoidance practiced by multinationals on the immense wealth accumulated by the super-rich. Today, 1% of the population holds 46% of global wealth and the middle class is disappearing, squeezed between new poverty and the super-rich who move their residence to a tax haven that allows them to pay less tax. In Europe, billionaires increased their wealth by 33% between 2020 and 2023, while poverty and inequality increased. There is a proposal accepted by the Lula presidency at the G20 in Brazil. It was put forward by the economist Zucman and provides for a tax on the super-rich of 2% for over a billion. You don't want to hit people's homes or consumer goods. It is simply a contribution for those who have accumulated billions in wealth. According to an Oxfam report, progressive taxation of up to 5% in Europe in 2023 would provide around €300 billion more to the European coffers of each individual Member State, overall. These revenues could help struggling citizens with a minimum income, support small and medium-sized enterprises in the challenges of the energy transition, finance school health systems and put money trapped in financial markets back into the real economy. A fairer tax system would also strengthen the fight against climate change, because the richest 10% are responsible for 50% of CO2 emissions.2 globally, and would also increase demand. Economic growth would be stronger without inequality. The new European Commission is presenting a legislative proposal on this and we are ready to discuss it.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Mr Vice-President, half of the factories producing cars in Italy are in crisis, at risk of closure. In Turin, Melfi, Pomigliano, Termoli, the workers of Stellantis, formerly GKN, we have thousands of workers in redundancy, an induced of about 100 000 workers in crisis. Looking to the past is useless. Of course, he won't come back. So let's focus on the future, on what we can do so that demand for consumption and production meet. This is the main problem today. The future of European mobility can only start from building electric cars for all citizens and not only for the rich. We need a chain of public investment made not only of cars, but also of buses and public and electric vehicles for transport, which provide supplies and, in the short term, can close that sector. gap Today there is a gap between supply and demand for electrical consumer goods. We therefore need a European sustainable and public mobility plan that encourages the use of electric cars for private mobility, including by saving factories, jobs and the climate. We need a European industrial policy, Mr Dombrovskis, we need a European fund to support electric cars. Europe has set the right goals. Now also put the resources to reach them.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the ruling obliging Apple to return EUR 13 billion to Ireland is a victory for tax justice and invites us to reflect on the kind of Europe we want to live in: not in a Europe of privileges for multinationals, but in a Europe where everyone contributes equally to paying taxes. The current economic model is deeply unfair and needs to be rethought through new fiscal and tax policies. We must put an end to the impunity of the giants, we must have the courage to face the multinationals of technology and finance and build a tax system that does not bend to their interests, following three priorities: tax harmonization among member countries, with a common tax on capital, the fight against tax avoidance and evasion, with a real list of tax havens, and the reduction of bureaucracy for companies. And let me add that we have many doubts that these proposals can be considered by the new Commissioner for Taxation, whose name appeared in the Pandora Papers because he owned investments through shell companies in a tax haven of the Virgin Islands. We call for this delegation to be withdrawn. The burden of taxation cannot fall on the shoulders of workers and small and medium-sized enterprises. The time for exemptions for multinationals and multimillionaires must end.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the Draghi report - it would also have been very courteous for President Draghi to be here among the representatives of the European people to discuss - has the merit of opening a reflection on the future of Europe, but it offers inadequate answers, which do not change the framework of macroeconomic policies and the quality of development. The proposal of 800 billion euros of investment, if financed by common debt, revives the excellent experience of the Next Generation EU, but how can it be achieved in a context of fiscal policies dominated by austerity? The Stability Pact worked well only when it was suspended, but already this year the Pact imposes about EUR 100 billion of expenditure reduction on Member States and EUR 13 billion less expenditure on Italy, my country. The report is not complete. There is a lack of analysis of today's work, the function of trade unions, the problems of poverty and inequality arising from financial capitalism, and the great tax disparity that guarantees multinationals tax advantages and avoidance. There is no reference to the consequences of the impact of artificial intelligence on work: Without a minimum income, we will have millions more poor people. Finally, how can we relaunch the European economy with war Eurobonds? We believe in a more integrated, social and solidarity-based Europe...

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, we have discovered in Italy in recent days that politicians must also respect humanitarian law and respect the laws. What Mr Salvini did when he was in the position of Deputy Prime Minister in Italy, Minister of Transport, was beyond the law, especially beyond humanitarian law. He kidnapped men, women and children, leaving them in despair, in sickness, in total despair in the middle of the sea. This is not correct behaviour and humanitarian law must be respected: to save men, women and children in the sea, first of all.