Speeches

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, this is an important reform. It has been said and we will understand when we implement it, how important it has been. I would like to highlight three aspects here. The first: We have in some way designed the foundations around which a market for hydrogen and also a market for renewable gases can be born and prosper. We have guaranteed its injection into the network for biomethane, for others, defining a bit the conditions. This means that we have created the conditions for the development of markets that can support the change in the energy mix that we have designed in this Europe with Repower and other important acts. Secondly, and this is something that is very dear to my group and to me personally: With this reform we have also created a system of control and transparency of the market, its functioning and price formation mechanisms. We have paid too high a price for the inconsistencies and oddities, in quotation marks, that have often characterized price formation in recent years. With this regulation and with the reform of REMIT, which must be read in conjunction, we entrust to supervisory authorities, such as ACER, the tools and methods so that phenomena such as those that have occurred no longer happen and work in the name of transparency. The last thing: The last step forward is to take a further step towards the Energy Union. Not hoarding, war between countries, conflict to get the necessary resources, but a real Energy Union.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, lower energy consumption, lower cost of citizens' bills, upgrading of homes: Who could possibly be against these goals? Yet there has been a great controversy against the directive, great attacks in some countries - I think of mine - shouting wolf!, wolf!, as if it were a danger, and all for political exploitation against Europe, for an electoral advantage. In short, the usual easy and lying refrain of bad Europe and enemy Europe: But how did it end? It is over that we have today a reasonable agreement with clear measures, with the support of the Council, and in the Council also of the countries that have opposed it. We have worked to find resources and bring an effective and concrete approach; My group also wanted to improve the performance of the most vulnerable families in order to save money and improve the quality of their health. Three priorities, I want to underline: reduction of emissions from the construction sector, which is essential; greater autonomy with photovoltaic panels, especially from public buildings; finally, push for the best technologies such as heat pumps and hybrid boilers, in which we are leaders and we must maintain our competitiveness.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we approve a very important reform, linked to that of the electricity market, the regulation on gas, biomethane and hydrogen, a reform that concerns the protection of the Union - these are very demanding words - with respect to market manipulation. What happened in 2021 and 2022 in wholesale energy markets, with exorbitant and stratospheric price increases, was a shock. Of course, there are reasons that can be explained: the increase in demand from many areas of the world after COVID, the reduction of Russian gas. All concrete reasons. But there's been more and we can't deny it. There were certainly actions of market manipulation, if not real financial speculation, and the message that followed was very clear: We must intervene and intervene well so that this does not happen. The aim is therefore to create more stringent, more effective supervisory rules. And I have insisted, together with the rapporteur and the other Members, that a real leap forward be made, so that this reform is not so formal. We do not want – as liberals fear – to manipulate the market, lock it up, prevent it from functioning. We want it to work well to guarantee citizens and businesses, so that the market is not harmful but the place where everything can happen with clarity and transparency. We have also insisted on some transparency rules for non-European operators, because they too must comply with our logic and our criterion of good functioning.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Europe risks a competitiveness gap - perhaps already suffering - vis-à-vis the other major powers of the world and the economies we know. We cannot afford to back down, to lose ground in terms of technological research capacity and also in terms of positioning ourselves in the upstream of innovation, otherwise we will lose all the dimensions of life in Europe. We have always considered ourselves an economic giant and for this reason we said that we cannot remain a political dwarf. Today the dilemma returns, in my opinion in other words: If we also become a political dwarf, we will be an economic dwarf and an irrelevant political subject on the world stage, at a time when tumultuous geopolitics requires Europe to play a leading role. That is why I think that the decision on a strategy for competitiveness, a strategy for relaunching investment, the great choices that Draghi suggests to us, the Letta report, the things that you said, Commissioner, of the four pillars: I do not think this will happen unless we do political reform together. Only a united federal Europe that faces treaty reform will set the stage for this. Conflicting nation states will not lead us down the road of regaining competitiveness.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to briefly outline some of the objectives of the contribution we have made as a Committee on Industry, always working, so I have worked, in the belief that the environmental protection policies we are pursuing are not only compatible with competitiveness, but can also boost the competitiveness of our production system. The first objective was to encourage and support innovation in the many processes in which F-gases are already used today: for example, the pharmaceutical sector and the commercial and industrial cold technologies sector have already proven to be highly innovative and are now able to achieve higher performance levels than even those indicated by the Commission in its original proposal. Technological solutions with even less impact are available or will soon be available. The second point was to work to avoid market bottlenecks, which are already there or are looming, and restrictions on the single market and the free movement of goods. We think that the field of available alternatives and applications should be broadened to avoid monopolistic solutions, as is already the case in the field of electrical switchgear. I could also talk about spare parts, where we have called for greater caution and attention because there is a problem of the financial availability of families, but I close by saying that, although not all our observations have been accepted, we are convinced that this is a good measure and we support it.

– Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is an honour for me to represent here the ITRE Committee, which has done a great deal of work on this measure, and it is even more an honour to be the rapporteur of a committee which has obtained shared expertise on some very important articles. We welcome and unhesitatingly support the aim of this regulation – the reduction of packaging waste – and also most of the provisions contained therein. What we have tried to change, with the opinion voted by a very large majority in the ITRE, concerns an effort to reconcile the ambitious objectives proposed by the Commission, and partly shared, with reality, with opinions, observations of reality, of the state of the art and also of the great positive things that are there, so as not to penalize those who, in recent years, have done a great job to improve the quality of packaging, to put more and more sustainable packaging on the market and those who have invested in the recycling chains with research, investments, innovative capacity. Penalizing these worlds would be incomprehensible! This would lead to an inattentive Europe that does not listen. There would be other points that I cannot, for reasons of time, explain: I would just like to say that the ITRE Committee has decided, since our views have not been taken into account in the slightest by the committee responsible, to re-table our amendments here in plenary and I trust that..... (The President took the floor from the speaker)

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, European industry has high levels of competitiveness in many key sectors for our production system. But the challenge today – and it is a European challenge and only at this level can we play and win – is the challenge of maintaining this competitiveness through the long path of transition to the sustainability of our production apparatus, avoiding falling into new dependencies (batteries, raw materials, chips) and also avoiding falling into the trap of those who would like us, as a European system, in a condition of subordination to the global economic system. The choice to focus on technologies net zero and on strategic technologies it is right, it is the right path. And stand on theupstream technologies is the key to being competitive in innovation and not in production and outdated technologies, as we risk becoming today. Environment, technology, research and human capital, as my colleague Lina Gálvez said, i.e. the training and the idea of the academy, are a positive circuit and we hope that there will be a great commitment in the realization of this novelty. The last point I would like to make to the Commission and the Council, however, is: Where is the promised Sovereignty Fund? It is good to have an advanced technological framework, it is good to have an environmental policy but what is lacking are resources and the promised sovereign wealth fund should be the right path.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, innovation, by all accounts, is the engine, the lever on which to act for the improvement, for the advancement of society. For this reason, the Innovation Union must be our framework, our beacon. The agenda is important and we are confident that the new Commissioner will be able to give impetus and implementation. It is important because it connects and brings together, makes complementary, the different programmes and actions that we already carry out under the innovation chapter. I would like to make two suggestions to the Commissioner. The first is an attempt to overcome the fragmentation that still characterises our research and innovation programmes to this day. The second is to create more synergies, an effort that we are making, but more must be done between the different programmes, the funding funds, in order to focus on the main objectives of our Union and not to disperse resources and not to fragment our programmes. We believe that research also needs infrastructure – centres, innovation hubs – but here too we do not disperse and focus where there is quality and strength. Finally, one word: There is a lot of focus on the deep tech, in search disruptive: I also believe in incremental innovation and social innovation, which can really improve the quality and inclusiveness of our society.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Mr Vice-President, this extraordinary legislature is coming to an end and I think that these months that separate us from the end require an additional effort, a commitment to achieve those commitments that we made with the citizens at the beginning of the legislature and that have gone through all the difficult phases in terms of climate, environmental, digital and social policies, I want to add, as well as institutional, as has been said just now. I think it is important to implement that industrial policy that has now seen first drafts, first chapters in the European Commission and in Parliament, but it really needs a qualitative leap and a leap towards even the most advanced technologies to achieve the objectives of the Green Deal. What you said about SMEs is important. If we want SMEs to accompany us in all the environmental transformation, in all the commitments of the Green Deal, we need to have a special focus on cutting red tape, reducing many commitments and accompanying them. Finally, in the few seconds I have left, I want to make a reference to the social taxonomy. Unfortunately, it will not see the light of day in this legislative term of the Commission, but the social taxonomy must see progress now. We have made a green taxonomy, but how many more investments could we make in social infrastructure, if we also accompanied it with adequate financial instruments, such as those of the taxonomy?

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I think that this step, which we are voting on today in Parliament and which has been drawn up by the Commission, represents an important step forward in identifying a European industrial policy that really brings us to that strategic autonomy, that European sovereignty which is essential to maintaining the levels of productivity and competitiveness of our European industry, but at the same time essential to achieving the objectives we have set ourselves from an environmental point of view. We will not achieve decarbonisation if we do not make a real qualitative leap, very significant, towards new technologies, environmental and digital, and towards the whole world of biotechnology, which also has repercussions on people's health and the environment. So, Commissioner, this is a path that we need to pursue by coordinating the different funds, by putting in place the interventions that we have too much parcelled out today - the European Innovation Council, Horizon, the Innovation Fund and cohesion policies - really giving a boost. The structure of the European production model needs this step forward, it needs to abandon mature technologies, which must certainly be spread and taken into account, and to move towards new technologies. We hope, however, that the promised sovereign wealth fund will arrive to give real strength, including financial strength, to this industrial policy.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Madam Commissioner, this strategy is certainly a step forward along a road on which we have already done many things. I am thinking of the regulation of data and I am thinking of the regulation for artificial intelligence, which also has provisions with regard to minors, but I also think that we must do much, much more, not only talk about it, but put into practice all the measures necessary for this strategy. Technology has pervaded our lives, has pervaded them in all fields now, and has a power, especially with regard to young people, to be captivating, pervasive and therefore also useful, but also potentially harmful. And we, in this space of potential harm, must intervene to prevent, repress and control. I think that on the digital environment we must do more, especially in this perspective of young people who often become victims, as has been said, not only overexposed protagonists, but victims and recipients of bullying and other forms. I think that we need to devote some of that attention to the digital environment that we devote to the natural environment, where we are not afraid to put target, prohibitions, limits and even strict rules. So we must do in this field, without being afraid that this may be too restrictive an intervention, because it is about the mental and psychological health of many children. Last remark: We need to do more about training. We have a lot of technical skills but little awareness of all the implications that digital entails. So, not only repress and control, but also do a lot of training, even in schools.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, Minister, it is truly a disgraceful paradox that in Europe, the flag of social justice and human dignity, housing, a fundamental right, is still an unattainable mirage for many families, who may have housing but lose it for the cost of rent that they can no longer pay, or for young people who must find their autonomy. Europe can and should take action. Here we are not at a conference where everyone illustrates his beautiful theses. Here we have the responsibilities that the citizens have given us and for our credibility we have to decide what to do and do it. That is why the S&D Group's proposal for a social investment plan, the "Accommodation for All" plan, is right and urgent. The social economy can play a great role in this plan, and Commissioner Schmit is well aware of this, as he is relaunching this whole area of the social economy. Housing cooperatives, non-profit organizations, the world ofhousing social, even in partnerships with public authorities, with public entities, it can reach where the private sector arrives at prices that are inaccessible to most, to citizens. The World of Cooperationhousing It is the community approach, an approach that creates a context of mutual help among members, that creates common services and that, in a society of individualism and loneliness, creates networks of solidarity and mutuality.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, after so much rhetoric about SMEs and the backbone of our production system and so many profuse words and few acts, we finally have a package of concrete proposals. So, my first request is that the concreteness and urgency of putting these proposals on the ground be our first objective. Beyond the contents, it is necessary that all this immediately becomes something that is perceived in our realities and that perceives our production system and workers. Two points seem important to me among others. First: the regulation for late payments. It is right to correct the Directive: the regulation must enter into force as soon as possible, everywhere and under the same conditions, because it is disgraceful that there are small and medium-sized enterprises that, also because of the difficulties in accessing credit, have gone bankrupt, because of the delay, perhaps on the part of public administrations. So it's something that needs to be corrected immediately. The other concerns the staff, another delicate point. Small and medium-sized enterprises do not have the strength to do the proper preparation and we know that they need staff, even at simple levels, who have digital skills and in new technologies. The Academy of Skills must have a special focus on SMEs.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, we are in favour of a directive which has very demanding and ambitious targets and objectives, and we welcome that. But we know that they are also reachable: it is not only ambition, it is also a realism of a job that Europe is doing if, of course, we develop certain conditions; I only quote them by titles. The first concerns the procedures: the problem of accelerating permits is essential; We have national plans and target We are not progressing with the necessary speed and this is due to the procedures. So, excellent solution found. The second concerns the availability of technologies and raw materials and all that, fortunately, the new European industrial policy is tracing and trying to build: technologies, raw materials and tools. For example, we look very favorably on the successful alliance made for batteries and now, as far as wind and solar are concerned. These new forms and instruments of industrial policy bring together countries, research centres and entrepreneurs and can move us forward. The third concerns investments: REPowerEU and the new availability of our plans also give the tools to achieve these goals.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Europe has finally put in place an industrial policy and strategy worthy of the name, to accompany our production system with the green plan for industry in the challenge of transformation and in the ambition that we have to create a completely decarbonised system. But what is lacking, in my view, is an adaptation of this important strategy to the size of the prevailing enterprises in Europe, namely small and medium-sized enterprises. It is a deficiency that must be filled, because I think that only by inserting into the production chains the reality of this immense world of small and medium-sized enterprises, even very qualified, of our European production system, only by doing this will we be able to have a more solid system, without those interruptions in the supply of processed products, spare parts, components that we have verified during the COVID period. We found that distance is a cost and also a risk, because cost is bearable but risk maybe not, and proximity is a value. We therefore encourage value chains in our industrial policy, Commissioner, by encouraging large companies to transfer skills, innovation and preparation, and we also include in this context the world of credit, which, as has been said, is a very critical point for SMEs.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the practice of gestation for others is a practice that tramples on the rights of women and children, exploits and commodifies the body of women, markets gestation and also contradicts the entire path of feminism based on the dignity and freedom of women. This is why ours is a clear and clear no to this practice, which in Italy, as in many countries, most European countries, is already prohibited and is a crime. I want to say clearly to those who want, even on these sensitive and intimate issues, to make political instrumentalization, that the Democratic Party does not intend to modify this law. Point. Of course, when we legislate we think about principles and values, but we also think about the people in the flesh, the people who are there. And for this reason I reiterate that children, children's rights are in the foreground. All the rights of children who are born, who exist, regardless of the choices of adults, must be protected, and this is a fact, in my opinion, of humanity and civilization. It is for us, but I think it should be for everyone. I am thinking of adoption paths, of legislative solutions that exist and can be found and made faster and more appropriate to all situations. This is an essential point. Finally, on the so-called hypothetical and very labile, even legally, universal crime, I think that if we really want to extend the prohibition in good faith at international level, we start from international fora, from international bodies, and not provocatively from national parliaments with illusory proposals, flag, which also in this case have a provocative and instrumental intent.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Europe has not lost, as some with the usual anti-European skepticism claim, the battle to be a leader in the production and use of large-capacity batteries. No, indeed, Europe enters the global production scenario with a wide-ranging commitment, as the rapporteur, Mr Variati, has well explained. In ITRE our work was just that: enhance the innovative production capacity, also thanks to theAlliance for battery, and to save valuable raw materials for recycling and reuse. We have in some way anticipated Raw Materials and also Net Zero Industry. The leap in quality is just that: We do not limit ourselves as in the past to managing disposal, but we start from design, from a vision of an industrial ecosystem to contribute to Europe's strategic independence. We do not want to let batteries be produced only in countries outside Europe, perhaps unfair competitors, where there are no environmental standards or protection of the world of work. It is a very big challenge that Europe can and must win.

Mr President, we come to this approval after months of intense and very difficult negotiations. I want to thank my colleague Lara Wolters for the work she has done, which is truly profound and attentive. After awareness-raising campaigns for corporate responsibility in environmental and human rights matters – we must all remember the Rana Plaza tragedy, if we are not hypocrites, because of the tears we then shed – the compromise text adopted in the JURI Committee is the one that aligns very consistently with the international principles and recommendations of the UN and the OECD on responsible conduct and wants to involve at every stage the Member States in the process. stakeholder. I am from the Industry Committee, so I can listen, and I have listened, to the perplexities that arise from a part of the business world, but I recall here that with this text we have provided greater assistance to SMEs, through, for example, the regulation of procurement processes or the exemption of SMEs from the costs related to auditing activities, or even protection from contractual provisions, which can discharge on them the responsibilities that perhaps are instead in the hands of large companies. In short, I am sure that I have done my duty and that I have given, together with my colleague and the JURI Committee, the right answers to the most well-founded needs. Then I think that European industry can and must be ready for this change, which is not only necessary, but can lead, as many companies have guessed, to new business and development possibilities.

Madam President, Commissioner, the energy challenge for Europe continues, after last year's success with the first storage regulation to tackle winter, as President Buzek reminded us. Now we have to move on. We need to ensure safe supplies, distribution and optimal use. We need to diversify sources, switch to renewables, to hydrogen. So as a whole, we need to focus on greater integration of all sources and ensure optimal and effective use. For all this flexibility will be necessary and indispensable, but to ensure adequate flexibility, I believe that the point of storage is another central point. Therefore, it is good that the Commission has addressed this with a recommendation, but I - as Mr Casares said - expect something more from the Commission, that is, I think that a common regulatory framework is necessary and useful above all, and that therefore common measures, including through a legislative measure, must be put on the table, that aim at solidarity between States, as we did with the first regulation, that aim for example at purchases, as you are doing, in short, on a structure that goes in the direction of what we continue to dream of and hope to realize that it is the Energy Union.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, we can say with great pride that Europe is building – a unique case in the world and truly the first in the world – an architecture of rules that seek to give such impetuous, unstoppable and also very useful digital development, indications, obligations, opportunities and above all responsibility for operators and users, including for consumer citizens, responsibility because we must all work in the light of a principle that is fundamental for us: the freedom and rights of citizens, as well as those of consumers, must also be safeguarded and strengthened in the development of innovation and the digital market. With the Data Governance Act Before and now with the Data Act, we determine who may use the data and how they may do so, under what rules and under what conditions; who can give economic value in the future and already present data economy to the exploitation of data and who and how can share them, with what rules and for what purposes, always safeguarding the general interest and the well-being of citizens. One last thing I want to say to the Commissioner: all this plant is very important but it will stand if we develop the so-called data literacy that is, all digital literacy so that no citizen of any condition, age and education lags behind this development.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, we are very serious and very responsible legislators. I speak for myself, for my political group of Socialists and Democrats, and we have very clear ideas and we know that the interest of citizens, families and businesses today is to save energy, to consume less and to pay less in their bills; It is to prepare for the future, not to stand still as someone would like, without giving tools to face the great transformations we are experiencing. And so, I believe, with this measure, we are helping citizens, families in particular, and businesses, to cope with the changes and to spend less. This is the substance. Of course we need help – we are very responsible and serious – we know that we need tools. This will set in motion a major driver of work in the construction sector, which will need to be looked after in its supply chain, job opportunities – and it will be necessary to be careful that there is no exploitation and undeclared work – but as far as families are concerned, they will have an appreciation of their heritage. Sure, we have to help them. Time and resources are the two delicate points. On the times we have decided; on resources – I ask the Commission – more courage and more concreteness, because that is where the tipping point lies.

(IT) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, we expect the Raw Materials Act to set out concretely - with just a few words or promises - what choices and what steps to take in order to have sufficient availability of the strategic resources that precisely the development model we have chosen in Europe indicates as necessary. We have chosen a development that is based on green technologies, that wants an energy of the future, and therefore we need lithium, rare earths, nickel, copper and cobalt. If Europe does not choose quickly, we run the risk of being faced with two alternatives, both of which are dead ends: either to reduce and weaken our growth and development, or to depend on other unreliable countries. That is why, Commissioner, we need a Act very serious, very concrete, to counter those criticisms that we have heard here of those who, anti-European, say that we have great visions and great ambitions, but we do not have the tools that are just as consistent and ambitious. Some indications have already emerged. We need to diversify supplies, produce as much as possible and recover by recycling. And one thing: if we do supplier value chains, focus not only on environmental aspects, but also on human rights. Not child slaves, not workers enslaved to have these subjects.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, finally in Europe, alongside the word 'environment', there are other words: industry, technology, international competition, work and skills. Industry is finally back in the limelight, because it has been understood that the ambitious goals of decarbonisation cannot be achieved without a coherent and effective and sustained industrial policy. If we want to focus on sustainable mobility, we have to make batteries here in Europe, and making batteries means designing them here, it means building them, producing them, and it also means preparing the necessary staff training. If we want to put solar everywhere, we have to produce panels here in Europe, if we don't want to depend on other areas of the world or if we don't want to see new relocations of our businesses. This gigantic reconversion requires urgent private and public resources. Private, if we do not want to create also in Europe an industrial desert, risk that is very present. We must have private resources that must be favoured with necessary investments and aid. And then we must also focus on public resources, because state aid is not enough, Commissioner, otherwise we will have healthy and good companies that will die because they were born unluckily in the wrong country, the country that cannot help them because it has no budgetary resources. We need the courage we had in 2020. A new plan like Next Generation EU. Everything else is quite useless and is very little.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I think that at this time of great economic crisis and also of the production system, we really must put, beyond any rhetoric, any phrase that we repeat over and over again, as a priority the help, support, attention, calibration of our choices to suit SMEs. The great champions, who are also needed in Europe, the medium-sized companies, are not enough: It is this widespread framework that we must involve and support, and we must also do so with the help of large companies. Virtuous companies involve in their chain, made by suppliers, by those who contract the works, etc., all this world in their positive processes of innovation, search for new solutions, in short, of quality and manage to drag the whole chain in this leap of quality that makes. Here, we favor this process. And then for small and medium-sized enterprises we know very well what are the priority things: the cost of energy, let us find a way – the President made a few remarks yesterday: we need to be more timely, more relevant, not just words, but some really concrete acts on the issue of energy for small and medium-sized enterprises – the issue of staff training, which is missing, the late payment. Here, too, I think you find something drastic, something that helps the Member States not to be in default because the Member States are in default. The directive is not implemented and therefore I believe it is really time to be operational: A few words and a few facts for SMEs.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I think that from this report by Parliament, and I thank my fellow rapporteur and the shadow rapporteurs who have worked, there are many good indications that the Commission must collect promptly and with conviction. These are indications that link very well with all the content of industrial policy set out yesterday by President von der Leyen. What seems important to me, also for the experience of the past years, when the Commission was struggling to find a road to industrial policy, is that today we try to do something very integrated, very connected between the different parties, otherwise we will do many good sectoral policies - this is the Commission's risk today - but we will not grasp the synergy effects that there may be. I'll give just a few brief examples. If we are to have a very advanced sustainability and climate change policy, we must have a coherent industrial policy: panels, batteries and everything you need to implement that policy. If we make innovation, we must make it to the benefit of our industrial policy objectives: research funds, funds for the European Innovation Council. Finally, the issue of trade policy, as has been said, but also that of competition: If we are to attract significant investment from outside Europe, I am thinking of chip, etc., we must not have competition that still follows the old ideas of competition policy. So, synergy and timeliness!