18/05/2017 European Parliament

any request. Therefore the any request. Therefore the

committees may start negotiations. Let us start the meeting and I would

also like to inform you that the first point on our agenda is as

follows. The joint debate concerning EU cohesion policy. A report. The

right funding makes for balancing financial instruments and grants in

EU cohesion policy. The second report. Future perspectives for

technical assistant in cohesion policy. We will proceed as follows.

I will give the floor to the rapporteurs. Four minutes, the floor

is yours. I would like to make my contribution

in Bulgarian. TRANSLATION: At the outset I would like to thank for the

cooperation. I want to thank for the contributions of all colleagues, who

helped me a lot. Successes and good results cannot be achieved without

the good cooperation with the Commissioner. I am talking about

cohesion policy. We need to realise this is not just one of the policies

of the European Union. This is not about projects and funds. Cohesion

policy and the funded projects are part of our values and beliefs. I

want to give you an example. This is the expression of the European

solidarity. We express the interests and opinions of the people, and this

is why we have to be able to produce this balancing act. I mean that

mixture between grants and financial instruments. We have to meets the

needs of the people, and together with that, we have to take into

consideration the crises and challenges. This is why we need to

talk about the percentage of the financial instance, the grants. It

is right and proper to talk about that. We should not forget the

interests of the municipalities and regions. What is more, to see what

will be the result of our intervention. What is the most

important priority for the beneficiaries? I have a few

proposals. I have thought about the respective resources. The reports

are not important. The accountancy is not important. The most important

result of our work is the results. We have to facilitate the life of

the citizens. Our task is to make the countries of the European Union

richer. We have good initiatives in the European Union. Some of them

success. -- successful. They meet the challenges. We should not forget

that cohesion policy and the grants for the developing regions are not

just small. These regions should not have the feeling they are living

from the alms basket. We need to reach all regions.

Otherwise, it could be detrimental. This is why I think with this report

we shall think about preserving grants for regions. And to present

financial instruments for the better off regions. All that we present

should be equally accessible across the European Union. Everywhere up

and down the European Union. Thank you very much. TRANSLATION: Thank

you very much, indeed. Thank you you very much, indeed. Thank you

very much for your speech. Five minutes. Take the floor, please.

TRANSLATION: Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, cohesion

policy is perhaps one of the best examples we have of how being a

member of the European Union can be a positive experience for number

states, particularly the weaker ones. The single market and

freedoms, these are things that are wondrous but when there is a

discrepancy in development levels between states, there is the feeling

somebody is exploiting someone else. The less developed countries are the

ones where workers tend to leave to head off to more developed

countries, which lowers the cost of labour and leads to discontent in

both cases. This tends to provoke a demographic crisis and economic

crisis. Stemming the flow of migrants from the less developed

countries to the more developed countries is important for the

future of the EU. Cohesion policy plays an important role in that and

talking about today, is a talking about today, is a

high-quality instrument to bring that about. After all, it is

important to finance good quality projects in less developed countries

through the right means. The lack of administrative capacity in less

developed countries of the European Union is a major issue.

Post-communist countries have rather a large administration compared to

the number of inhabitants but that administration is insufficiently

efficient to be able to draw on European funds and it lacks

transparency. Changes in cohesion policy post 2020 will in the less

developed countries potentially catch them out, but will it

ultimately allow them to get onto the same train as the more developed

countries? Training is what it comes down to for the upcoming programming

period. The new projects must be provided with good information. What

is important particularly is good analysis or evaluation of foregoing

projects and this would help to create the right conditions for the

next programming period. In writing my report, I had discussions with

representatives from the less countries and the same problem was

alluded to time and again. Cohesion policies, it was said, were rather

formal at the level of the state and what was required was a possibility

to include local and regional actors at a lower level. In my report I

have said member states need to provide better information about the

kind of activity that might be financed by technical assistance and

also of the outcomes achieved. Time passes, money is spent and yet there

is no result and probably because there is a lack of a proper

evaluation system. That is why it is important to take into account

regular updating databases on the activities the member states are

intending to, or have already, accomplish. Hopefully we will learn

from the mistakes of the past and be able to set the framework and

conditions. The objective is not to use the money but to use the money

properly to assist the targeted groups. You could only do that if

you are in possession of the right information and that cohesion policy

and technical assistance can then really help those that need it.

Thank you for respecting the time limit. On behalf of the committee, I

give the floor, one minute. Thank you, President. Cohesion

policy is one of the big success stories of the EU. Many regions have

emerged from poverty, many peripheral regions, but I think we

can do more. The time goes by and it can do more. The time goes by and it

means we do not get the best out of this extraordinary policy. For

example, it can also help to administer to the needs of the

regions. As we have seen in the budget committee, with the financial

recommendation, it is possible to make targeted modifications to the

rules on the funding side which are very beneficial and stand us in good

stead for the future of the policy and it greatly helps us in our

legislative work. And now on behalf of the European Commission, our

former colleague, welcome. TRANSLATION: Ladies and gentlemen,

members of the European Parliament, colleagues, good morning. I would

like to start today by thanking the regional development committee in

the European Parliament. I would also like to thank the two

rapporteurs for the reports. I would like to start by talking about the

report on balancing financial instruments and grants in the EU

cohesion policy. The European Commission welcomes this report. It

deals with a very important topic. Pertaining to current discussions.

The proposals that you have adopted in the framework of the review is

also going to have an important impact on cohesion policy post 2020.

The European Commission believes that a proper balance between

financial instruments and grants will allow for a proper regional

development. I think we all recognise the fact that we have to

work together to ensure it is a success. First of all, we have to

look at the type of financing, but also the characteristics of each

region and each sector. We think a large part of cohesion policy will

have to be financed by grants and that cannot be otherwise. There are

some areas such as schools, health care, which do not generate any

revenue. There are other types of financing which will generate

profits. As you know, we encourage all member states to look for

technical assistance because all the regions, including the poorest,

should have the opportunity to use the financial instruments. The

commission therefore supports the use of the financial instruments.

The principle of responsibility, I think that this is something that

will allow cohesion policy to work on the ground. And to ensure that we

are working with the most appropriate partners, without whom

we could not carry out our programmes. Local strategic partners

have a strategic role in identifying the financial instruments and grants

that will be best suited to each region. National and regional banks

also have an important role and should help us to consolidate our

ability to act and to invest better. But on the bus proposal provides for

direct grants and of course we in the commission welcomes the fact

that these have been adopted by the Parliament and we hope that council

will adopt them as soon as possible as well -- the omnibus proposal. We

want to have safe projects that are sustainable and long injuries. On

the report on future respective is for future cohesion policy, the

commission also welcomes this report of course. There are several

initiatives in the commission including the peer to peer

initiatives. I carry out visits every week to member states but I

get the impression sometimes even ministers do not know all of the

tools made available to them through the commission. We created these

tools precisely to help member states. We have 250,000 workers on

the ground dealing with European firms, to a lesser or higher degree.

We have been working in this area for 40 years, since the regional

development fund was created. There are some countries which have only

been working on it for about ten years. Romania and Bulgaria, four

years. These policies are fundamental. They allow us to have

contact with local experts and technical experts to have classical

Lee McCulloch -- to have close contact. In some member states,

there is a low level of demand for these instruments. If a member state

tells us they need technical assistance on public procurement,

for example, the commission will act within five days, we will go on the

ground and employ experts who know the region in greater detail. I

would like to encourage greater use of these instruments because the

commission makes them available to member states for free. I very much

welcome this report because you make clear precise proposals for better

take up of technical assistance. This is of course going to be very

important in the post 2020 discussions. I would also like to

emphasise the fact that the commission would urge member states

to have a more targeted approach to how they use financial instruments.

For example, using technical assistance in order to finalise

implementation of X anti-conditionality is. Also in

fighting fraud and corruption. Sometimes member states use

technical assistance to cover wage technical assistance to cover wage

costs., for instance. -- wage costs for staff. I appreciate the reports

and they recognise challenging is such as brain drain, demographic

problems for less developed regions. -- they recognise challenges. We are

here to provide help. You are right to say that sometimes training and

education is more important than the money. I am happy to see that both

rapporteurs have emphasised the responsibility of member states.

When it comes to implementation, the responsibility lies wholly with

member states. Member states have to be able to ensure local authorities

can play the full role. I would agree with you in saying we can

improve the use of technical assistance. We have to support its

development. We are very much at the beginning of the debate on the

future of the cohesion policy. We want to work on increasing the use

of technical assistance at the very beginning of each period and that it

is looked at before projects are selected or launched. That is one of

the ideas on the table. It would increase the use of technical

assistance but also provide support for local and regional authorities

in planning their projects. It is very important for us to learn

lessons from the past. And not to repeat the delays that we are seeing

at the moment and that we saw seven years ago. We want to also better

target technical assistance on beneficiaries and ensure exchange of

experience between regions. Thank you very much. It was also

emphasised the importance of the funds and how they can be used on

the ground and I am happy to answer any questions you have. Thank you.

Very interesting speech. Now, on behalf, the committee deputy.

TRANSLATION: Thank you very much. The European Union has set off on a

rather diverging paths after 2000 between the moor and less developed

regions. There has been an ever greater divergence from the average.

The financial framework is the reflection of that reality because

there has been a reduction in the budget for cohesion and cooperation

compared with previous periods. Financial instruments are simply

another phase of the choices made in favour of liberalism and against the

policies that would favour redistribution. We had hearings and

we have proven that the financial instruments cannot under any

circumstances replace existing support measures under the second

pillar of the CHP and cohesion cannot be a model. It does mean you

get appropriations, but there is austerity and there is the

imposition via the single currency of limits on the possibility for

countries to fully benefit from the structural funds. Now, speeches on

behalf of Portugal groups, first, two minutes, please.

TRANSLATION: Thank you, president. Commissioner. The targeted provision

of technical assistance is a real catalyst and a good thing for the

future of cohesion policy. It is very good to see how much money is

going into cohesion policy. At the same time, this must be augmented by

means of properly delivered technical assistance. It is

important to get right down to the question of the project and the

beneficiaries. In each ministry, in the universities, and so on, you

have very different situations. I believe that technical assistance

can be a real contribution in order to provide back up and support for

the local authorities. Let us begin by enhancing transparency of the

provision of technical assistance. Let us see how technical assistance

can be a real driver for cohesion policy so we can get networks and

also proper evaluation systems for the next programming period. We have

had experience of the task force in Greece, with the assistance from the

auditors, the necessary reforms have been put in place. That is very

good. It technical assistance can help on the implementation front and

it can also help on evaluation. All of these things are so important for

sustainable development in the regions. Thank you. Thank you. Now

on behalf of another group, two minutes, please.

TRANSLATION: Thank you, president. Financial instruments are there to

meet our objectives in terms of cohesion policy and they are not an

end in themselves. They are an additional tool which can be used

when they are more fitting than grants. France should be maintained

as the main instrument in cohesion policy -- grants. Particular you for

smaller beneficiaries. For us socialists, we need to focus on the

needs of European citizens. Investment should be focused on

sectors which can have multiplier effects on employment and growth,

such as investment in education and sustainable energy.

These other drivers love of innovation -- the drivers of

innovation. That is why financial instruments should help to

strengthen the social pillar of the cohesion policy. We also have to

develop financial instruments in the develop financial instruments in the

least developed regions. These are the regions with the highest

unemployment rates. And who can see the asymmetry reduced through

positive discrimination. The cohesion policy should continue to

distribute funds but should also be demanding its requirement for

responsibility. We have to have clear rules and provide guidelines

through technical assistance to administration is responsible for

solving these problems. This is something the European Parliament

has always defended. I would like to thank everyone who is defending

cohesion policy, because it is the best expression of solidarity

between different regions of the EU. Thank you. Now the deputy. I do not

see him. He is absent, probably. OK, the next Speaker. One and a half

minutes, please. TRANSLATION: Thank you, president. I

want to thank rapporteurs for the good work. These are good reports.

We should have such of announcing system that makes it possible to

make use of the budget and its possibility and also attract private

investors in such a manner that as a result we don't have this lack of

financing any more. I emphasise that loans must not fully replace grants.

We need a mix that is useful for regions, local governments and

enterprises. When we look at developed and less-developed member

states, we can see that they need for financing changes. One thing is

clear. In addition to grants, we need other financing channels. The

bank was set up with the Rome Treaty but now it needs a better role in

the cohesion role. Giving guarantees and loan support. It is functional

for public and private sectors. Problems with financing results from

a lack of information. We need training so we can find suitable

financing sources for different matters. We have to enhance the role

of the investment bank for this reason. This is important when we

want to have a new cohesion policy. Thank you. And now on -- one and a

half minutes, please. TRANSLATION: Thank you very much. In

the White Paper in the future, the EU, there is a scenario in which EU

cohesion policy would be chucked overboard. We are dealing with no

less than solidarity, social levelling, and, if you like, freed

in the regions and it should be invested in in a meaningful way. If

these are fundamental values which are part of cohesion policy and they

would be underlined. This new paper does not want them in the approach

to globalisation. If you, madam Commissioner, were to keep saying

that cohesion policy is not a financial instrument, but policy

with long-term objectives and in particular the creation of equal

living conditions throughout the EU, we would support that, and I think

it is a nonsense if this mix of instruments in the cohesion policy

we were to produce. Cohesion must not just be the poor relation. We

need to ensure we should not reduce this to nothing. We need to make it

more efficient. We need to encourage local authorities and project

supporters to join in with co-financing and to try to bring

about long-term benefits and, obviously, cross-border research,

training, education, and all of it must be included. And now, on behalf

of the Greens. To do half minutes, please.

-- to do half minutes. TRANSLATION: Thank you, Mr Chairman. The present

Commissioner seems to be relying increasingly on financial

instruments in cohesion policy, which concerns us. The aim of

cohesion policy is to help regions lagging behind. It is evident that

under market conditions the lion's share of funding is recouped by more

competitive players, and in the case of regional policy, richer regions

get most financing. Therefore more prolific use of financial

instruments will not only harm poorer regions, but will reward the

richer. I do not want this. Therefore, as a shadow rapporteur

for the Greens, I implore you to look in favour of this report. I

would like to thank the rapporteur because he has managed to provide a

thorough analysis of the threat of financial interests and among them I

would like to mention the growing disparity between regions, as well

as the lack of transparency, the weakening of the principle of

partnership and many other issues. The report has struck the right

balance between cohesion policy and philosophy. The rapporteur says the

potential of financial instruments should be tapped into when this is

appropriate. Colleagues, the report deals with an important subject,

which is sometimes overlooked. The EU allocates billions of euros of

taxpayers' money for cohesion policy. The EU develops rules on the

use of this support. The EU should also make sure member states have

adequate capacity to tap into this. Up until now, technical assistance

has been financed from the cohesion budget. But this assistance would

often stop at the national level and would hardly ever reach regions or

local governments. I am not speaking about the lowest administrative

level, which is local communities, and we should remember that local

communities, there are initiatives are becoming an ever important

instrument of cohesion policy. Thank you. Thank you very much, indeed.

And now, two minutes, please. TRANSLATION: Thank you, president.

Today we are voting on two reports and in the first we talk about

balancing financial instruments in grants in EU cohesion policy but the

response we are trying to give is a dangerous one. It is a time bomb,

because we have lower and lower funding for less and less

transparent instruments. We are not sure the results will yield. The

banks and intermediaries are using financial tools to promote more

investment, but less for European citizens. The market is being filled

with products that would lead to a speculative bubble which will have

toxic effects on SMEs. We are building a colossus with feet of

clay. This will have an impact on the lives of millions of European

citizens. In the second report on technical assistance and cohesion

policy and we have to avoid repeating the mistakes of waste we

have seen in many member states. We do have to emphasise involvement of

regional and local authorities, in design and implementation of

technical assistance measures, and at the same time we have to ensure

we have more transparency in expenditure, which amounts to

billions of euros. Technical assistance should allow institutions

to strengthen capacity in terms of human resources and when it comes to

improving transparency. We will vote in favour. TRANSLATION: Thank you.

And now the deputy. Not attached. One and a half minutes.

TRANSLATION: Thank you, Mr Chair. The aim of cohesion policy is to

increase cohesion and to help poor regions catch up with the rest of

Europe. In 2004, ten central and Eastern European countries join the

European Union. If you asked people in these countries, do they think

they have managed to catch up with Western Europe? They would probably

also no. Of course, you can measure indicators in terms of GDP and

infrastructure and there might be improvement but the real question

for the people is, in the last 13 years, has their quality of life

improved? Prices have caught up with those of Western Europe, but not

salaries. This is a huge problem we have to deal with at a European

level. If you do not do that the population only has one choice left,

the European citizens initiative. That is why our party has launched

such an initiative will stop we have partners from six other countries.

This European citizens' initiative concerns salaries. I think it is our

common interests because as long as the difference between salaries and

wages are huge, people will continue to migrate to the west, which leads

to internal tensions. The European Commission has given green light to

this initiative, anchor knowledge we have a lot to do at European level.

Once we have the 1 million signatures, on this petition, I hope

the European commission will do something about this. Thank you very

much indeed. And now, the deputy, one and a half minutes.

TRANSLATION: President Commissioner, colleagues. I think with these two

reports, we are striking the right balance. The balance between what we

can do, instruments, and so on, and what doing in cohesion, social and

social and economic and territorial cohesion, seen across all the

regions, everywhere across the EU. It is not sufficient to work on the

basis of money that is Lent and has to be repaid. We are looking at

projects at local level will stop there is no market mechanism which

is going to provide funding. I think we have now cast a spotlight on

that. There is a feeling that banking, business soul is

everything. That is not the case. This is what this demonstrates. When

you have instruments, subsidies, public - private, you are now

working with revolving funds. There you need technical assistance and

the commission has got to make qualitative demands as well. We are

talking about a seven year period. Some things are working well. We

should let the stars shine. It is easy to be despondent and to say

things are terrible. To say the whole thing is being bungled, and so

one. We need an action plan on communication, which can reach out,

get the message out to member states and regions, so we can be proud of

our achievements. TRANSLATION: Thank you. I think we

have done good work with these two reports and I think they provide an

important contribution to the new chapter we are opening on the new

regional policy. I think we've flagged up the risks involved in

excessive use of financial instruments but also make a choice

and provide guidance as parliament. We want to maintain the use of

grants as a strategic part of cohesion policy.

This is the choice on which we have to focus our efforts in dialogue

with the commission and council. The second report on technical

assistance is even more important. We have made a substantive choice,

not just in that the main tool to help states and local authorities

and make better use of community funds is set out, it is true they

need better information, but we have to make sure our choice moves in the

right direction. Technical assistance is not just in terms of

how to better absorb result is, but to boost quality. -- better absorb

resources. To see how community funds could be better used depending

on the nature of each region. We are also looking at how structural

reforms can be introduced in each country to make them more

competitive and to better use public investment. Finally, one point where

I think we have to work a bit more and here I would ask for help from

the commission as well, we cannot provide technical assistance...

Technical assistance cannot be something that is not handled by the

state. We have to create leaders who can make better use of European

instruments and ensure development through them. That is the main

challenge facing the future of cohesion policy. There are many

regions where we need to have leaders who can make better use of

these instruments. TRANSLATION: And now I give the

floor to... One and a half minutes. Thank you very much, dear President,

dear colleagues. Today we will be voting on the report concerning the

cohesion fund. We are talking about 75 billion euros for the period

2014-2020. Quite a large amount. In point six, we underlined the fact we

should not cut the funds for the cohesion fund. I work on this

approach because it is in line with the solidarity principle which is

officially hailed in the EU as the overriding principle. However, we

also say financial instruments have some deficits. Point 11. Under point

one, we all ready say financial instruments were developed prior to

the financial crisis. They were not adequate. We go on to say there are

many examples of situations where those funds were not used correctly.

However, those funds are directed largely to those member states which

are new member states. And even if there are problems, often enough,

those funds are the only reason why the public opinion remains in favour

of the EU. The example of my region, Poland, people keep expecting that

the EU will try to mitigate the differences in the level of

development between individual regions. I hope that a potential

surplus in the budget will go to poorer regions, such as my region in

Poland. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for your speech. And

now I give the floor... TRANSLATION: Thank you, president.

Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. We have two reports and we will be

voting on them today and they aim to improve the cohesion policy. Also in

this programming period after 2020, this is very good. We need indeed an

effective use of the cohesion policy also post 2020. We want that the

disparities between regions in the EU are alleviated. We have

flexibility, addition a la is our main goals. We want the right mix

between financial instruments and grants. We address a major

programme, namely the good balance. The good balance between our

experience from the lessons learned from the cohesion policy and the

balance also between this experience and the future perspective. The

financial instruments give us the opportunity to attract additional

investments outside the scope of the investments of the European Union.

In this way, we can disseminate our experience and we can deepen the

technical assistance. We can further develop the financial instruments.

And this is the precondition to improving the cohesion policy. Thank

you very much. Take the floor, please. Half a

minute. TRANSLATION: Thank you very much, Mr

President. We are debating technical assistance. And who should technical

assistance focus on? Usually governments. Regional and local

governments should also benefit from technical assistance. I asked this

because to implement the concept, we need local and regional governments

to benefit from this. Thank you. Thank you very much for your

question. Of course, I agree with the fact that technical assistance

should be targeting not only the central level but also all

beneficiaries of the operational levels. Of course, this means

regional authorities. They need to build capacity within the local

authorities and it is a precondition for the preparation and

implementation of projects that are really aimed at local communities.

But technical assistance should also improve the visibility of the

cohesion policy so that citizens know what it is all about. Mr

President, thank you. The European Parliament, with the two reports

today, is asking for something, it wants a stronger cohesion policy.

Now I know that is something you wish and will as well. You want

that. But I think around the commission and elsewhere, there are

others of your colleagues who are not doing too much to help you and I

believe the commission can do more. In terms of social cohesion and

regional cohesion. There are imbalances, economic and social,

over recent times. That gap has not been narrowing. If anything, it has

been widening. It is not something that is the preserve of the South

and East of Europe. There are also poor regions within the strongest

regions, even in Germany, France, Italy. With millions of poor people

living in poverty. And high levels of unemployment as well. There is

need for more technical assistance and also for funding and a reduction

in the bureaucracy and also more money as an investment in social

cohesion. Over recent years, the word cohesion itself has been

disappearing, slowly but surely, from the commission's text and

documents and in particular also in the councils' publications. I know

from Greece that we put this money to very productive use, thanks in

large part to your contribution. When the European parliament is

there, we are strong ally to get your colleagues going as well. Thank

you very much. Mr President... OK. Take the floor, please. 30 seconds

only, please. TRANSLATION: I wonder if you would

take my question. I wonder if you think that technical assistance is

important for cohesion policy? Having said that, the discrepancies

between regions have become greater, despite cohesion policy, and you

were talking about the discrepancies and they have become even greater

within regions within individual countries. That is exactly the point

I was trying to make. Over recent years, these discrepancies have been

worsening, rather than getting any better. As I was saying, it is not

just between countries, it is also between regions in individual

countries. If we want a united, prosperous Europe where the benefits

are available for everyone, we have got to put an even bigger investment

into cohesion, not just for 2020, but more money and more technical

assistance, so that the money really gets through to where it is needed

most. Thank you. Thank you, Mr Chairman. The European

Union's cohesion policy is a crucial tool to bridge the inequalities

between the EU's various regions. We have to make sure the entire union

is able to benefit from the economic element and the transition to a

sustainable society and social equality. The cohesion policy helps

promote this. However, a key aspect we believe is lacking is the

synergies between the cohesion fund and the non-cohesion funds. Such as

the framework programme for research and innovation. It is a programme

that helps promote excellent research projects all over Europe.

Even though there has been some challenges for some parts of the

union to fully participate in this programme. One goal of the cohesion

policy is to work as a tool to foster excellence so that the

regional fund can become the stairway to excellence and better

participation in the research programme. It would benefit the

whole of Europe. This is something the commission is trying to promote

with a tool for smart strategies. This is a good start and I call on

all stakeholders involved to improve the synergies in the next programme

period so all the nice talk can become a reality. Thank you. Thank

you and now, two and a half minutes, please. This report calls for the

commission to raise the profile of the funds investments, I quote, and

to make it clearer that EU funding is involved. Let me make this

crystal clear from the start of this speech. There is no such thing as EU

funding. This money comes from the pockets of citizens of your

constituent nations, and for you to even consider throwing more of it

away on self-promotion is simply a sign you understand nothing of the

issues confronting your voters. We have already seen decades of audits

proving the EU is utterly unable to prevent misappropriation, Ms

spending and fraud. Giving you tens of billions of euros. Aggrandisement

between 2014 and 2020 seems tantamount to financial suicide.

This budget is no more than a very expensive carnival parade replete

with all of the clowns and sideshows paraded throughout Europe to the

music of the dance macabre and the smell of burning money. The

profusion of EU spending across Europe following the deluge of

taxpayers' money on projects which could have been done, if indeed they

should be done, by the nation states, much more cheaply and more

effectively. It may indeed prove to be no more than gravestones for your

expansionist empire. The concern this report states regarding the

backlog of unpaid invoices is extremely valid. Who is going to

bail out your vanity schemes when the UK leaves? Many of the nations

in the south and east of Europe are already groaning under the weight of

supporting the euro and your backing of the banking establishments. This

empire building will come to a shuddering halt sooner or later and

for the good of your peoples I urge you to make it sooner. Thank you

very much. I have a question. Do you accept a

blue card? I am sorry. Mr Finch rejects your proposal. OK. The next

Speaker. TRANSLATION: It has been

demonstrated the combination of technical assistance and financial

instruments has not brought the expected results. At a time when

there has been mismanagement of funds. The union and member states

must apply the rules. Audits for the proper use of money is done on a

sampling basis by the commission. It is supposed to be underpinning all

of that is the principle of mutual trust and common trust. However,

that means the job is being done by the member state governments. We

have seen institutional weaknesses and administrative weaknesses,

and deficits. The governments have and deficits. The governments have

systematically succumbed to cronyism and vested interests at local level

which has been good for construction companies, but has failed to bring

the expected results. We want to see proper use made of community funds

and to maximise the benefit, rather than simply seeing a constant drain

on the European budget will stop we need tailor-made responses, which

are in line with macro regional projects, which had to do with local

requirements on the ground. We need access ability, transparency,

meritocracy, and nations scented pro-people governments. Ladies and

gentlemen, good morning. I will now give the floor for one minute and a

half. TRANSLATION: Thank you, President. Commissioner. Today, once

again, the European Parliament is having a debate where we are looking

to create solutions to improve cohesion policy which is important,

and to provide responses that citizens' requests. We cohesion

policy is the biggest expression of Europeans are -- European

solidarity. Malaga, for example, the city centre, is one example from our

country. Cohesion policy is also the main policy to ensure no one is left

behind. It is created over 1 million jobs in times of crisis and help

people in vulnerable regions. That is why the policy can... Is

absolutely vital and cannot be substituted. Not a single euro

should be lost to -- in this policy. We have to defend Europe and

negotiating Brexit is important but more important is to ensure public

hospitals stay open, water runs and children have access to good

schools. That is how we will overcome inequality and ensure

opportunities for all citizens and we can only do that with more

cohesion. Thank you. Thank you. Next, one minute.

TRANSLATION: Thank you very much, president. Ladies and gentlemen,

there are discrepancies, a lot of discrepancies. Ten years into our

membership now and I want to tell you that there are towns in Bulgaria

without sanitary conditions, without access to palatable water. The use

of these instruments is limited and this means that we should pull

together and step up efforts. The cohesion policy helps the regions

flourish. There are close to cycles of production. Systems that require

capital which cannot be provided by the municipalities. Here is where

cohesion policy comes into play stop this is why I think regions must

have a guaranteed access to cohesion policy. Thank you. One minute.

TRANSLATION: At a time when Mr when we have seen privatisation in

the electricity area and we are looking around at other member

states and we have got regional airports and a German consortium is

going there and that means the regional airports in places like

Crete, and that is in breach of the community laws. I think that this is

so typical. One minute. TRANSLATION: These two

reports I think speak of the importance of cohesion policy being

the expression of solidarity within the European Union, but, more than

that, this provides an opportunity for development of those regions

that really need funds. I would like to emphasise in particular the

importance of the local and regional element. I have been familiar with

hundreds of European projects and seen how important the local and

regional level is. It can be decisive in the programmes. The mix

we are talking about for financing projects is important but who

ultimately will be the person to decide whether grants, technical

assistance, the FC fund, European investment bank, even the private

sector, would be included in the carrying out of the project. It is

complicated but we need to carry on down that road.

One minute. TRANSLATION: Thank you, president. I think debating on

financial instruments and grants and what percentages we should have is

not what we should focus on. Same with technical assistance. These

debates are necessary but we need to focus on other priorities. We have a

Europe very divided between the first and second level regions. Some

are capable of managing funds and investment and no these instruments

are the best instruments but secondary regions do not know or

have technical and financial capacity to ask for funds, let alone

manage them properly. These regions cannot have access to a large number

of funds because the EU imposes austerity on them which limits

public and local administrations, which are the closest to citizens.

Therefore, we have to focus attention more on reducing

differences between different regions and in order to encourage

regions that have been left behind, which is what cohesion funds for.

One minute and a half. TRANSLATION: Thank you very much, president.

Commissioner, ladies and financial instruments, the current ones, the

former ones, have proved they can achieve good results. However, we

still have to improve further implementation. The potential is not

fully realised yet. I think financial instruments supplement

well the grant system because they can attract additional financial

support. There is an added value, especially in research and small and

medium enterprises. In the new financial perspective, the absolute

basis of the cohesion policy should be the grants, because they have

proved its usefulness in infrastructure, environment, social

investment. For us, in the future, to find a better way to combine both

financial instruments and grants, we financial instruments and grants, we

have to avoid the top-down approach and we have to keep flexibility

principles and make the local governments so they choose the Best

support depending on the local circumstances, because local

circumstances, should be the decisive element. The decisive

factor when we take a decision whether to support or not a project

within the policy. The region needs more trusts. We have to remember

those who implement projects on the ground, they build up the capacity

of the towns, regions and EU in general.

Thank you. One minute. TRANSLATION: Mr President, Commissioner. A key

challenge before the EU today is the deepening discrepancy in the EU and

therefore the cohesion policy, which is a key instrument to fight

inequality, is assuming ever greater importance. In the report, it is

rightly stressed grants should be predominant in funding key public

policies while financial instruments can be used as a top up. Efforts

have to be made to attract and combine private and public

investment but they should be distinction between areas which will

be better served by grants and others by financial instruments.

When structural and investment funds are used, what matters most is to

achieve the objectives of cohesion, unless there is determined policy in

favour of cohesion, it be clear a highly imbalanced union will have no

future. Thank you.

One minute. EU Commission funding has been vital

for Northern Ireland and communities recovering from conflict and

neglect. This could work is under threat because of a Brexit most

people in the North do not want and did not vote for. By supporting

Brexit, the DUP has let the people of the North Down again. As we stand

to lose 982 million of much-needed and essential structural funding,

North of Ireland and people depend North of Ireland and people depend

on for businesses, community projects and for infrastructure.

Some projects are already delayed because of fears and uncertainty

around Brexit. It is hurting communities now. We spoke about

this. It will get worse in the future if we don't have access to

such cohesion funding and structural funding for the North because we

will see projects collapse. The EU needs to ensure the benefits of

decades of cohesion funding for a community that has emerged from

conflict is not lost by ensuring that the North is guaranteed ongoing

access to cohesion funding in the future, after Brexit, as part of us

being afforded designated specialist status within the EU or whatever it

is called. Thank you. One minute and a half.

TRANSLATION: Thank you. Solidarity is a key value of the European Union

implement solidarity in practice. In implement solidarity in practice. In

the 1980s and 90s, regions in Ireland, Wales and Spain and

Portugal and Greece were able to develop, and also other member

states. In this century, we the new member states had an opportunity to

implement cohesion funds. I was mayor of a community with 25,000

inhabitants and we got more than 40 million European funds. Waterworks.

Waste water management plants. All of these are a result of cohesion

policy and if cohesion policy requires more money and requires

different forms of funding, it also requires good high quality technical

assistance, which will be used to train administrations, bring the

whole thing closer to local communities and economy and science

and research. In the previous financial perspective we had to

assume the knowledge and gain the knowledge of how to perhaps build

large facilities and now we have to gain the knowledge of bringing new

technology through smart specialisation to our member states

and that is what we are talking about today and that is why everyone

supports both reports and I am convinced cohesion policy has to

remain the foundation of a new financial perspective to keep the

European Union. One leg, please.

TRANSLATION: Thank you. Can I thank the two rapporteurs for the approach

they brought the bird? Adhesion policy has demonstrated it can be

efficient. -- brought to the? They EU can bring about and finance

growth and recovery. In the financial framework, as the

commissioner said, it is important for the to be more flexibility built

into the system because that is important for the beneficiaries.

They need a broad range of different instruments, with co-investment, and

know how being applied as well. The investment landscape, it is a very

positive thing from the point of view of regional authorities because

it means the projects, the quality is being improved and it means that

the benefits spread to the weaker regions as well. We are a little bit

behind schedule. I have a higher number of persons that would like to

speak. I will not be able to give the floor to everyone. I seek your

understanding. But I will distribute six speaking times. The first will

be for one minute. TRANSLATION: I believe that in

cohesion policy, it cannot be driven by profit orientated perspectives.

In education or health care, success cannot be measured by financial

return. Therefore, beyond increasing financial resources, we should know

that they cannot replace grants, they can complement grants, but

cannot replace them. Experience so far has shown that in regions with

long-term high unemployment and low density of population, they are not

attractive to investments. Therefore, grants are needed because

they are meant to help these regions to catch up. Therefore, in the

post-2020 cohesion policy, we should take into account the increase of

resources not coinciding with a decrease in the amount of grants

because it would be detrimental to the purpose of cohesion policy, that

is to help abolish discrepancies between regions in Europe. One

minute. TRANSLATION: Thank you, president.

Subsidies and financial instruments all have the specificity is, they

are all different and they have benefits for research, the

environment, small businesses. We have to optimise the money that is

the across the different regions. Anything which is a disincentive

must be avoided. For example, excessive bureaucratic cumbersome

procedures. That is one area where we can make an agreement.

Transparency is essential as well. These are blended funds. We have to

be able to see the wood for the trees and understand and allow

different instruments to be deployed at the same time. We also must make

sure that there is the necessary know-how provided by means of

technical assistance. So far, that has not been adequate, it is not

getting through insufficient amounts. To the local and regional

authorities. They have to be transparent, the pathways. So that

the money is can be put to good use. And also increase people's

confidence that they EU money is being well used. One minute.

TRANSLATION: Thank you. I would also like to welcome the commissioner.

Technical aid and financial instruments have to be at the

assistance of entrepreneurs and citizens, the population. We are

hearing financial instance are too complex. Even the court of auditors

has said that this is the case. So we should not be producing hundreds

of pages on this, we need to be listening more. The same for

technical assistance. This should ensure people can better manage the

funds and should also help users. One minute.

TRANSLATION: Firstly, we must not underestimate the negative impact of

Brexit on deprived areas of the UK. They benefit from regional

development funding. Particularly, my region, the north-west of

England, and the rural area of Cumbria, specifically. But also,

Liverpool, which was regenerated with European money after Margaret

Thatcher's government decided to let it rocked. It is crucial, with

regard to future cohesion policy, that it is in line with sustainable

development goals, encompassing a Broadway job objectives. -- Margaret

Thatcher's government decided to let it rocked. We need to have

sustainable element of societies and well-being of communities.

Structural investment funds must be used for creative, innovative and

smart initiatives benefiting a large part of the population, including

the most honourable people. Although I welcome the important work done on

urban agendas, I'd believe the specific needs of rural areas must

receive proper attention. One minute.

TRANSLATION: Thank you very much. Generally speaking, I think cohesion

policy is the back bowl of that EU because it is based on solidarity --

the backbone. It is about trying to reduce differences and that is the

key here. It should not be weakened therefore by other instruments or

theories, which, for example, purport that cohesion policy is

superfluous. I think it has been quite rightly said that when it

comes to the disbursement of monies, member states are having issues with

the technical side of things and I think that is something we need to

ensure member states can get on top of because they are responsible for

the drawdown of the money. What about the administration? There are

certainly bureaucratic burdens falling on their heads. One minute.

TRANSLATION: Thank you very much, president. Cohesion policy should be

central to the EU's policy objectives. If we are being honest,

we would recognise that from the very start this cohesion policy was

intended to reduce the gaps, the imbalances and discrepancies between

different regions. It seems to me that we have got to also extend our

assistance to the agriculture as well and farmers. Thank you very

much, commissioner. What we need is something along these lines in the

agricultural area which would be along the lines of the ERDF. We have

big differences in infrastructure, transport, health provision, and

that is another facet we have to address. The last speaker.

TRANSLATION: Thank you, president. I am pleased we have this topic on the

agenda. The rapporteurs have assessed the importance of cohesion

policy to bridge gaps in Europe. I would also like to thank her for her

efforts and also on concentrating resources on the areas for European

Union development. That work should continue to be supported. Some

colleagues would like to see cohesion policy disappear. However,

we do not want to privatise cohesion policy. Or put it in the hands of

financial or banking institutions. When it comes to defining the

future, we have to ensure... Your closing remarks. Thank you very much

for this fruitful and very interesting debate. Thank you for

your contribution. I share all of your views that this policy is more

important than ever in that I am sad we have so many divisions and of

course I think it is very important to show solidarity between member

states. This debate shows that we can do together this policy to be

stronger. I would like to make some clarifications because there were

some misunderstandings, I think. I would like to underline the

financial instruments do not do reallocation of funds between member

states or regions. When financial instruments are used, we do not

support... We transfer resources with strict rules. Synergies, of

course, are very important. I would like to thank them for these

communications, very elaborate document. I am very grateful that

they also put in the Luxembourg meeting, the communication issue on

our debate between the ministries for cohesion policy because it is

very important. I am very sorry that Mr finch is not here any more

because this is the irony of our policy, this policy was created

under the pressure of the UK in 75 when the UK said it will not go to

the council in Paris if the ERDF solidarity fund will not be created

because it was this situation of European funds, ERDF, solidarity

fund, they retrain the people, make new activities, I am sorry that I do

not know if the people who voted for axel knew that they had jobs because

of the EU -- voted for Brexit. He was right, it is the taxpayers'

money, but the money was also going to the UK. As you said, in

Liverpool, in Cardiff, a lot of big projects. We made the University in

Manchester. You mentioned this programme which is very important. I

am very worried as well as you about this because it was not London, not

Belfast, it was not Dublin, it was Brussels who put the money together

for the reconciliation policy and I have full trust in Michel Barnier,

our chief negotiator, that he will deal with that because this is a

very important programme and it shows this policy has also this role

is to heal the wounds that we have on the map of Europe. Thank you very

much and now I will say a few words in my native tongue.

TRANSLATION: I think that the two rapporteurs have played a very

important role here. Because they have stressed how important it is to

have the grants and financial instruments. The grants are

certainly when it comes to infrastructure, hospitals, schools,

roads, they are very useful. They do not generate an immediate profit.

And the financial instruments, I agree that they are just as

essential. We have to ensure there is this conversation of the two

which is set up and balanced in I would encourage everyone

interested at a regional, local level, banks, to press ahead,

because they need to have the necessary competence to work out

where that balance between the grants and financial instruments

needs to live. Technical assistance, which was the focus of the report,

is equally important. You will be well aware that in the current

period the commission has worked closely with member states. In order

to try to ensure that the member states can reap the benefits of the

current period, but also looking ahead, all member states have

strengthened their administrative capacity and have put in place

requisite legislation and, as I said at the start, we are now trying to

define priorities for technical assistance. We believe that

technical assistance needs to be able to run from the start of a

programming period throughout the period, so that we don't get the

build-up of delays we have experienced in member states. Then

we can get an exchange of experience between regions and we can make sure

that we are there to help with structural funds reform. In debates

on the budget after 2020 that we are going to be having, 500 million

Europeans will benefit from this. This will contribute to an

improvement to their lives and it is incumbent on all of us, that we and

the commissioners do everything to make that come true.

You have your final two minutes, please.

TRANSLATION: I will continue my intervention in Bulgaria. I would

like to thank all who participated in the debate and I'm happy that

some criticism was levelled as well but I have to say that until the end

of this programming period, the European regions will get investment

of almost half E1 trillion. Every day, hundreds of millions are

invested in municipalities to resolve issues people face and we

cannot neglect that fact. There are issues to be resolved and room for

improvement. Whether procedures can be faster, more understandable, of

course. Whether the policy can be more visible, I hope we can. I

support the commissioner who says that cohesion policy which is

people, regions and municipalities more than any other policy of the

union, and we have to support this approach. Any project implemented

through the European Union, through the European structural and

investment funds, weakens the position of populists. This is the

difference between the constructive politicians and politicians that

first furnish results and second only taught. I'm sure people will

realise we have done a good job and will be judged on the of what we

have done. I would ask for the final minute...

TRANSLATION: Thank you very much. Can I also thank everyone who has

contributed to this debate. In particular, my co-reporter. This

demonstrates we have a shared objective because, so far, technical

assistance has been a little bit like when you buy a washing machine

and two years later they send you the instructions for use. Now we

have the machine, the leaflet, and we can all work together.

Colleagues, I hereby close the joint debate. The vote is scheduled for

today. We are behind schedule. This House does not have the best of

discipline always shortly before the votes. I would like to keep the

will be able to hear the closing will be able to hear the closing

remarks at the end of the debate on the urgency and I will ask now the

Speaker for one minute. One of the two countries in Africa

that has seen peaceful transfers of power. The close elections that saw

the incumbent president narrowly beat the opposition party leader has

the potential to jeopardise that success. Concerns were raised after

the Constitutional Court dismissed his electoral petition, with events

coming to a head after the bizarre arrest of him on charges of treason.

In response the influential Zambia conference of Catholic Bishops

issued a strongly worded letter claiming the country had become a

dictatorship in all but name. Despite Zambia's success, it is not

the first time the president sought to consolidate his power, as was

seen by the former President's unsuccessful attempt to secure an

unconstitutional third term. We must support the EU's efforts to see

tensions relieved and insure Zambia and its democratic constitution is

supported by the European Union. Thank you.

One minute. TRANSLATION: Thank you. The president, the opposition

leader, was arrested for reasons of treason. It seems incredible but it

is true. The political opposition in Zambia has been placed under

restrictions. It is not just the question of detention but what

happens to people when they are put behind bars, because they are liable

to be mistreated, if not tortured. That is very unfortunate if when it

is the opposition which brings with it prospects for and improvement in

a country's faked. There are other charges levelled such as defamation.

In the light of recent -- country's faked. -- fate. Until such time

there is full respect for opposition and human rights. Thank you.

One minute, please. Zambia has been one of the more promising countries

on the African continent. The country has two peaceful transfers

of powers. In the last month there has been a backslide. Zambia is now

as the conference of Catholic Bishops noted in an unusual strongly

worded criticism of the government, all but a dictatorship. The Leader

of the Opposition has been arrested on trumped up charges. The

government accuses him of treason but has not presented a shred of

evidence against him. The arrest is just the tip of the iceberg. Civic

Society is attacked. The judiciary and police are politicised.

Political pressure needs to be increased and we need to consider

Zambia as a country heading for dictatorship will stop the president

needs to know we are watching him. Thank you. At and the next, one

minute. TRANSLATION: Considering the

situation in the country, we would call upon the government and

opposition to start a peaceful dialogue in order to soothe current

political tensions and to focus on solving the social and economic

problems the population are suffering from. Real poverty in 2015

in Zambia was 76.6%. It is triple that of urban areas. There has been

no drop between 2010 and 2015. Malnutrition is thought to be a

factor in 54% of infant deaths. There is a large number of people

who do not have access to drinking water or adequate health care

services. HIV and Aids pandemic. That is why we ask the government to

respect, protect and promote civil and social rights for citizens and

guarantee fair access to justice in line with the African Charter and

other international charters on human rights. Also to put an end to

discriminatory and repressive practices against LGBTQ people. We

are behind schedule. Two minutes.

TRANSLATION: Thank you very much. To start I would like to thank the

other political groups for our fruitful cooperation. I'm glad we

have joined the draft resolution. During the election campaign in 2016

there was political tension between the party in power and the

opposition. For the last 25 years Zambia has achieved a lot. There are

many transformations that took place in peace. Now, the main Leader of

the Opposition, did not recognise the victory of the incumbent

president as a result of which he has been arrested, and detained and

is accused of treason, which means the death punishment is a real

danger. For 20 years there have been no executions in Zambia. However,

theoretically, capital punishment exists. It is possible, where we are

talking about treason. There have been many pieces of information

about politically motivated charges levelled at against him. The trial

will start this week and it is urgent to start a political dialogue

between the parties with international support of the EU and

regional organisations. The government must provide for a trial

which is fair. My apology, you were well in time, I

am sorry for that. Extra minutes? After 4pm today.

A minute and a half now. TRANSLATION: Thank you. The fight

against the infringement of people'sfundamental rights of the

kind we are seeing in Zambia requires two kinds of measures and

responses. We must see an increase in the powers and competence of

International Criminal Court. And the scope must be extended to

countries that have not signed up to their own treaty, so no one can

enjoy impunity and that is the best protection we can provide for

potential victims. This then would be a serious deterrent. The other

measures that require to be taken are of a political and economic

nature. They require a battle against poverty because where you

have poverty you will always have violations of human rights. Poverty

in itself is a breach of humanitarian law.

One minute. TRANSLATION: Thank you. The European people'sparty group

initiated the debate on Zambia. The political climate in the country has

been marked by tension since the presidential elections last summer.

The arrest of the opposition leader has caused the situation to grow

more tense. It is a rather unusual arrest because he has been accused

of treason. He has been incarcerated for a minor road offence. And for

getting in the way of the presidential motorcade. The

president finds this helpful because his opponent in the last elections

contested the result. Act of vengeance of this kind did not help

to sort things out and the only thing that will is reasonable

dialogue between the authorities. One minute.

I was able to lead the election observation mission for the EU in

Zambia. Let me take this opportunity to thank the representative for

foreign policy for the confidence which he placed in me. I accept we

had certain difficulties during the election process. Because of the

limitations of freedom of expression is an press freedoms, the relatively

low participation of women, for example, on voting day, but we felt

this was subjective. The President got a small majority. With this

resolution, the Parliament acknowledges the efforts made by the

people and Parliament of Zambia. It was an unfair trial against Hakainde

Hichilema and it will be an opportunity for them to confirm the

progress the country has made in terms of governance and it will

consolidate democracy and be an example to other countries across

Africa. One minute and a half. TRANSLATION: Thank you, colleagues.

Of course we have to take an interest in the human rights

situation and I think that this is a useful opinion, but I have

questions. Treason, attacks on the city of the state, they are things

we have seen here as well. We have seen it in the US or even in France.

We use this idea of the well-being of the state to undermine

politicians. Also, we have to ask questions about our values. We have

a double standard. It is very easy to cast blame on others, but what

are we doing here? Other countries, China, India, they do not intervene

in these areas. When it comes to Zambia and other African countries,

there are huge contradictions. They have to deal with the modernisation,

the rural exodus, other problems. However, there are international

agreements which prevent them from developing the country properly.

Zambia is a country which also has to deal with Western countries in

its markets. We have to leave it up to the conference of Bishops to

allow them to have the own solutions. I will have to ask people

to stick to one minute. TRANSLATION: Five weeks ago,

Hakainde Hichilema and the Leader of the Opposition was arrested at home

in a brutal way and accused of treason. It is a very serious case.

Added to that of the impositions of restrictions on freedom of

expression and we have seen this since the presidential campaign.

Police brutality, conditions of arrest and the risk of either the

death penalty or lifetime imprisonment, they are undermining

human rights in Zambia and I think any form of intimidation of

opposition politicians must be condemned and the united party for

the national development patriotic front need to work out how to save

democracy in Zambia. One minute. TRANSLATION: Thank you very much,

president. The general situation in Zambia requires to be kept under

careful attention and we must work with our international partners. I

visited Zambia and I have seen for myself the people living in poverty.

If we are serious about solidarity, we must work with the institutions

at the international level to combat poverty. There is still the death

penalty which is unacceptable. There are many restrictions placed on

fundamental rights and free speech and we must apply this resolution,

not just adopt it. Thank you very much, president. Zambia is a poor

African country, huge problems which are compounded by the spread of HIV

Aids. The relationship between the government and the opposition has

been clearly affected by disagreements about what exactly

happened, but with the result of the elections in 2016, Hakainde

Hichilema, Leader of the Opposition, he has been arrested and his life is

in danger. It seems it is difficult to get a consensus between the

government and the opposition and I think the EU and the commission has

an important role to play to restore peace and tranquillity in the

region, so that the two opposing forces can find a solution. The main

problem in Zambia is poverty and I think that if that is the benchmark,

it may help them to resolve their differences.

TRANSLATION: Thank you, president. Can you be accused of treason for

having blocked a presidential convoy? Well, it seems unfortunate

that in Gambia the answer is yes. Hakainde Hichilema, Leader of the

Opposition and the main challenger to the president in the most recent

elections has been arrested together with many of his colleagues. He was

refused visits by many of his supporters. Many people have pointed

out the huge irregularities in the elections and this shows the

opposition were correct to point out a certain number of irregularities

and we have not been able to monitor the final results. When the election

observation mission was sent to regional centres. I would urge for

Hakainde Hichilema and his supporters to be freed and also to

put an end to the death penalty. Torture and mistreatment for

political acts are never acceptable. We have to remember also the

European aid being sent to the country. One minute.

TRANSLATION: Mr Chairman, I would like to thank the authors of this

resolution motion because I think they have made clear that the

progress that we had thought had come about in the country is not

pear. If the presidential election is any guide, it would appear that

things have not gone according to the way they should have gone. The

torture of opposition leaders is unacceptable and Zambia now faces a

test whether there will be justice and whether there is an independent

judicial. It is important that we should follow the process and make

sure that the trial is conducted in a proper, legal manner. And we must

make sure that the progress we have previously seen in Zambia is not

removed. I am glad to speak on behalf of the representative of the

Vice President. Thank you for the time the debate. The European Union

highly values its partnership with Zambia and we are proud of our

significant contribution to the country's development and we are

firmly committed to remain a key partner. The European Union is also

aware of the various challenges the country is facing and supports its

ambitious economic and governance reform agenda. You may recall EU

involvement was a deployment of a new election observation mission led

by an honourable member who just took the floor. We are very grateful

for her job. We are advocating for the implementation of its

recommendation, in particular in response to concerns related to the

freedoms of expression and assembly. Zambia has to additionally been a

peaceful and democratic nation in a neighbourhood so often marked by

political instability and human rights violations. It is therefore

all the more of concern that Zambia's democracy is being

questioned particular since the highly contested August, 2016,

elections which reveal eyes -- which revealed the polarised nature of the

country. There was increased political tensions. The EU quickly

responded by calling all parties to refrain from any action is likely to

aggravate the situation. The EU, in close quarter nation with the EU

member states, will further convey tee convey a strong message to the

government and the opposition to engage in dialogue to restore trust

in support of inclusive political environments -- will further convey.

The ongoing legal proceedings against Hakainde Hichilema, the EU

calls on the government of Zambia to ensure transparency, judiciary

independence and the right to a fair trial and due process according to

international human rights law. Making Zambia's institutions

accountable and inclusive, it is vital for upholding democratic

credentials and stability. The EU will continue to engage with Zambian

partners through let go and diplomatic means and calling on the

wisdom and sends of responsibility of all parties to avoid further

reputational damage to Zambia's strong democratic traditions --

sense of responsibility. Thank you. I have by close the debate on Zambia

and the case of Hakainde Hichilema. We will vote on the draft today. We

will now proceed to the next item on the agenda, Ethiopia, notably the

case of Dr Gudina. One minute. I case of Dr Gudina. One minute. I

hope that African Union and 80 regional contributor to be peace

missions, Ethiopia's rollers strategic. With conflicts in Sudan

and other countries, Ethiopia has the largest refugee population in

Africa. For one of the poorest countries in the world, such

responsibilities placed great strains on the country's resources.

I hope today's resolution can be seen in a constructive manner,

reminding Ethiopia's government that the EU is here to support its

actions but the fundamental human rights to free speech and a right to

peaceful process must still be upheld. I welcome the calls on the

resolution for a UN led inquiry into the heavy-handed actions taken by

the government in response to the protests. This along with the

release of political prisoners including Dr Gudina will be vital to

improving Ethiopia's record on democracy. A key part also of

honouring its obligations under the EU's agreement. Thank you. One

minute. TRANSLATION: Thank you, president.

When we talk about Ethiopia, this is a key country in balance, integral

Libyan, in sub Sahara Africa. It is under certain obligations. Can I

welcome Dr Gudina, an opposition figure, he was arrested for simply

standing and they have been subject to threats, intimidation and

violence against the opposition and they do not have the right to

defence and there are four breaches of the penal code, violations of

human rights, excessive use of force against ethnic forces and abuse made

of the anti-terrorism law. Journalists, bloggers and

demonstrators are under pressure. We are calling for the release of all

political prisoners, including Dr Gudina, and others. Because we have

to have an investigation which is international and independent and we

must put an end to the human rights abuses. One minute. Thank you,

chair. Ethiopia is a key partner and I hope for economic improvement and

stability in the troubled region. The truth is also the country's

regime is authoritarian, cracking down on those who voice dissent.

Economic growth and enforced political stability are prioritised

at the expense of human rights and civil liberties. Especially the

fundamental rights of the country's underrepresented groups are being

violated on a daily basis. Most of the groups are systematically

penalised by the central government. Those living in need regions are

most vulnerable to the persecution, as the case of Dr Gudina shows.

There is a grateful greater ethnically diverse political

groups. Being aware of the groups. Being aware of the

importance of Ethiopia for the economic and political stability of

the region should not relieve us from the moral obligation of

addressing and denouncing the severe human rights violations still taking

place. Thank you. Thank you. One minute. Thank you. A

decade of strong development in Ethiopia lifted many out of poverty,

for which they can be proud. Now this is all that risk. Ethiopia is

in its eighth month of emergency rule and the government is

systematically repressing freedom. In November the Leader of the

Opposition, Professor Merera Gudina was detained after arriving in the

capital from Brussels, where he held a speech in this House. Independent

media, civil society, are also under attack. If the Ethiopian government

values its long-standing cooperation with the EU and great achievements

of Ethiopia, it has to start respecting its constitution. The

government needs to immediately end emergency rule and let the United

Nations in to visit political prisoners. Crucially, it needs to

release Professor Merera Gudina from prison.

Thank you. Next. For one minute. TRANSLATION: Thank

you. Ethiopia is a great country with a rich history and diverse

population and is a key country in the region and includes a lot of

friends here in Europe stopped respecting a friend been speaking

the truth to him or her and the arrest of Merera Gudina is most

serious. He has come here and talked about the human rights situation so

we cannot remain silent. Apparently EU- Ethiopia relations could have an

impact on migration. This is blackmail. For months the situation

has deteriorated, deaths, arrests, torture ring in prison. We must

demand the Ethiopian authorities look into these allegations. To

accept an international enquiry and to release the prisoners who have

been arrested, allegedly for terrorism.

The co-author. Two minutes. Thank you. There is no doubt about EU

sympathy towards Ethiopia. 11 months ago, the EU Ethiopia agreement was

signed recognising the role of Ethiopia, especially for providing

stability in the Horn of Africa. Ethiopia has generously received 1

million refugees from neighbouring countries but we are worried the

Leader of the Opposition party, Doctor Merera Gudina has been

arrested for half a year. Ironically, following his visit to

the European Parliament. He is accused of creating pressure against

the government. That is the opposition's constitutional role and

disrupting the constitutional order. Sadly Dr Gudina is not alone. We

have journalists, activists, who are kept in detention. Today, therefore,

we urge strongly the Ethiopian government release immediately Dr

Gudina and all other political prisoners to allow international

investigation of the killings of protesters on government-sponsored

land grabs. To start genuine dialogue with the opposition, which

is the only way towards a more democratic society and to stop using

anti-terrorist laws and states of emergency to repress dissent and to

provide unrestricted access for human rights organisations and NGOs.

These are criteria for meaningful implementation of the strategic

engagement agreement. Thank you very much. The last

co-author. A minute and a half. Thank you.

Ethiopia is one of the poorest countries in the world and the

people suffer from drought and other challenges that leave millions

hungry and age-dependent. It is important the EU cooperates to help

people and save lives but it would be a grave mistake to only look at

the challenges of people in Ethiopia through the lens of quote, managing

migration, and not to address the dire human rights violations, and

they risk being overshadowed. Counterterrorism laws are being

abused and critics silenced and farmland has been expropriated.

Hundreds of people have been killed last month according to Ethiopia's

human rights commission. Human rights organisations and NGOs

claymore were killed in demonstrations. Today we call on the

government of Ethiopia to respect the right to freedom of expression,

including press freedom, of critics and lift the remaining elements of

the emergency and to give access to aid organisations for all areas and

people in need of assistance. It is important political prisoners,

journalists and human rights defenders are free from detention

and for its government to honour commitments made under the Africa

Charter and in the context of the agreement, towards democracy and

respecting human rights. Thank you. Now we will have speakers

on behalf of groups. One minute. TRANSLATION: Thank you.

Ethiopia plays a key role in the corner of Africa that it affected by

drought, refugees and other burdens. It is important that these

challenges be solved according to the law. Also as part of the

agreement with the EU. The regime has pacified peaceful

demonstrations, arbitrary arrests, etc. We appeal to the government to

release Dr Gudina as well as other political prisoners, and, we would

also like to appeal to European countries to intervene.

For one minute and a half. In Ethiopia two days ago, a

spokesperson for the opposition party was sentenced as a terrorist

for comments about human rights who made Facebook and in November Merera

Gudina, the opposition leader, was arrested for the crime of

participating in a public hearing at the European Parliament with another

opposition leader, who was democratically elected and then sent

to jail, now in exile and also deemed a terrorist. Thousands of

political prisoners languish in jail. By government not elected, the

last election, putting the ruling party to win by 100% votes.

Excessive force. Against demonstrators. Massacres.

Brutalising victims last March. Brutal repression in rural

communities and other ethnic groups. Torture, killing, terrorist charges

against those who dare to dissent. We call on the high representative

to mobilise representatives. They must stop the pretence they deal

with the legitimate government in Ethiopia, wasting taxpayers' money.

They are in fact assisting a corrupt dictatorship that rules by terror,

fast fuelling insecurity. Ethiopia is strategic. When Ethiopians

revolt, all of Africa will tremble. And cued. Now, on behalf of the

Greens. -- thank you. TRANSLATION: Thank you very much. Yesterday I

voted in favour of the commission proposal to put Ethiopia on the list

for corruption and money laundering. We see the way this situation is

worsening in this country. In 2010 there were complaints against

corruption in the government, but these were simply brushed aside. A

lot of people have been imprisoned because they have different

political beliefs. We are talking about a totalitarian system here. A

lot of those who have been imprisoned have been given long

sentences. They are not always tried with a proper trial. It is a chaotic

situation on the ground there. Even in the highest courts, these cases

are raised, but these affecting members of the opposition still in

TRANSLATION: The situation in TRANSLATION: The situation in

Ethiopia is fragile. It is the country in Africa with the highest

economic growth but it remains poor. The security position is

deteriorating, particularly with regard to interethnic relations

between the majority ethnic group and the others. Against that

we have guarantees for human rights. we have guarantees for human rights.

We have a role to play in ensuring vigilance on human rights but let's

try to put our own house in order. Africa has its own multinational

institutions and does not lead lessons from us regarding the rights

of the opposition. African countries have their own path towards

democracy. Let's strengthen the powers of the Africa union, which I

hope will be up to this complex task. The United Nations will not

ask us to act as human rights police. Thank you.

Now, one minute. TRANSLATION: The human rights situation in Ethiopia

is something we have been concerned about in this House for a long time.

The high representative for human rights expressed concern. The

Ethiopian government, despite statements, does not do anything to

stop its restrictive politics and particularly we have the arrest of

Merera Gudina after he had been to the European Parliament. The

Ethiopian government is engaging in self-harm. It is endangering the not

inconsiderable sums available for developments cooperation and in

doing this it is endangering the economic growth of the country. It

seems it is growing. We cannot emphasise strongly enough that

limiting human rights and putting aside Democratic structures never

ever brings about stability, quite the contrary. It endangers

stability. That is something we need to take account of, given the

dramatic situation in the Horn of Africa where there are millions of

refugees. We will now proceed.

I give the floor for one minute. The case of Dr Gudina offers insight

into the state of freedom of expression, association and assembly

in Ethiopia. I support calls for the Ethiopian authorities to stop

discrimination and encourage act in favour of a peaceful dialogue

between all communities. I wish to remind the Ethiopian government

their obligations to guarantee fundamental rights including access

to justice and the right to a fair trial is provided. There can be no

denying the political, economic and democratic stability of Ethiopia is

crucial to development of the countries in the Horn of Africa. We

must be dedicated to a working relationship between the EU and

Ethiopian government in order to advance. We have to keep working and

that we intend to do. Thank you.

One minute, please. Colleagues, I am glad to see the issue of human

rights in Ethiopia brought to this agenda. However, I am concerned that

the resolution bears no mention of the systematic and widespread sexual

violence against women as part of the persecution of ethnic minorities

in Ethiopia. We have had testimony in this Parliament from victims,

survivors and civil society activists. We heard of mass rape and

torture in prisons in camps and of systematic abuse to break up

communities. These are horrifying crimes taking place far away from

the cameras and gaze of the world media. All of us must give voice to

the voiceless and issue a strong call to the Ethiopian government to

stop these atrocities immediately. Investigate reports and bring the

One. Minute. TRANSLATION: Excuse for imprisoning political opponents.

Violence and terror will not solve problems. The European Union cannot

tolerate a situation where democratic institutions are failing.

To be a witness to the situation in this country is doing his duty. In

no circumstances can he be held to that. A democratic country must be

characterised by respect for democratically established law and

respect the rights of the opposition and ensure there is an independent

judiciary. With our partners dates we must and that democracy and

freedom of expression are as well of the whole range of human rights. One

minutes. TRANSLATION: Ethiopia is an

important country for the Horn of Africa. It can play an even more

important role. They have signed strategic agreements with the EU. It

seems that things have got out of hand because what we have now is a

situation of a state of emergency and arbitrary arrests and especially

of the opposition, land grabs, the situation is unacceptable. Do not

respect the freedom of the press, freedom of expression and arrest

journalists and bloggers so we have to send a decisive message to the

government that this will no longer be tolerated and they will have to

stick to what they have agreed. Can you speak on the half of the

President? The European Union watches with great concern is the

difficult domestic situation in Ethiopia and follows closely on

reports of human rights violations. Ethiopia faces multiple challenges

including several votes than cholera outbreaks but also persistent

pockets of violence throughout the country. The European Union is aware

of the difficult situation and as a key opposition parties face and has

repeatedly highlighted these concerns to the government. The

delegation in Ethiopia are closely follows the case of a doctor and

have regular contact with his lawyers. The delegation monitors

trials of other opposition leaders and has regular contact with the

remaining leadership. The situation has further deteriorated under the

state of -- and the stability of the country. Ethiopia is an important

partner and the situation warrants the EU's close attention. Strategic

engagement is the right framework to address and follow issues of

concern. In March was an opportunity to discuss political developments

with the Prime Minister and the imperative to respect human rights

and fundamental freedoms under the state of emergency as well for a

credible political dialogue with the opposition. She reiterated that

Somalia conference in London and was grateful for the continuous

engagement. It is important to note that the father strategic engagement

with the six to -- sector for human rights jury his visit in April.

Topics discussed included no process of law, happy days and conditions

and children's rights including Female Genital Mutilation and

migrants' writes. Working on concrete follow-up. The

establishment of a strong political dialogue and the improvement of

conditions in detention centres. This visit has imported to the

parliament on its findings on the violence that led to the current

state of emergency. We all welcomed the recommendations that security

personnel responsible should be held accountable. We have encouraged the

Ethiopian human rights commission to work with the independent civil

society organisations to publicly sheer all of their reports. The

Commissioner for human rights, to the country to encourage Ethiopia to

cooperate with UN special procedures. The EU continues to

stress a need to encourage tangible changes to laws and practices to

ensure more outlets for citizens to express their views and concerns

freely and peacefully through political parties and civil society.

It is detrimental through a process of dialogue. The leaders of the

opposition as well as supported calls for an independent