Order of business
President
The final version of the draft agenda for this part-session, as drawn up by the Conference of Presidents at its meeting of Thursday, 17 January 2008, pursuant to Rules 130 and 131 of the Rules of Procedure, has been distributed. The following amendments have been proposed:
Brussels part-session:
At the request of the GUE/NGL Group and with the consent of all groups, I propose that statements on the situation in Gaza by Mr Javier Solana, High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, who is already with us and to whom I bid a very warm welcome, and by the Commission be added to today's agenda as item 2, following the statements on the situation in Iran.
(Parliament approved the request.)
There is also a request that we conclude the debate with the tabling of motions for resolutions and vote on these during the February part-session.
Francis Wurtz
on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. - (FR) Mr President, my group has proposed a debate on this for the same reasons as we have proposed that there should be a resolution in February. It is in order to have an opportunity to listen to Mr Solana and for Parliament then to explain its own position, for three reasons.
The first is, of course, the issue of the Gaza blockade, which seems to us a collective punishment that is totally unacceptable from the humanitarian point of view, counter-productive politically and ineffective as far as the security of Israel is concerned. The second reason is the new situation since the people of Gaza have opened up the border. Thirdly, and above all, the European response to the question of what we can do to ensure that this opening up continues in a controlled and stable way and to make this step forward part of the peace process as a whole.
I think it would be useful now to hear what Mr Solana has to say and to debate the issue and wind up the debate with a resolution in February.
(Parliament adopted the motion.)
(The amended order of business was adopted.)

Daniel Hannan
Mr President, on a point of order, under Rules 173, 19(1), 161 and 171, the decision by the Committee on Constitutional Affairs which you cited a moment ago represents, I am sorry to say, the moment at which this Parliament departs from any pretence of legality or the rule of law.
Last week, you asked for, and were granted by the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, discretionary powers arbitrarily to disapply the Rules of Procedure of this House according to your own view. The Rules allow no such latitude. You cited Rule 19(1). Let me read what it says: 'The President shall direct all the activities of Parliament and its bodies under the conditions laid down in these rules.' They do not allow you discretionary power to set them aside simply because you do not like the opinions of the people making amendments or requests that, in your letter, you accepted 'were formally based on and fulfilled the requirements of ... the Rules of Procedure'.
What has driven you to this, Mr President? What action has driven you to this extremity of tearing up your own rule book rather than following the letter of the law? Was it some filibuster that was preventing any business getting through? Hardly! Those of us who are asking for a referendum perhaps represent 40 or 50 out of 785. We are a small minority. The worst we could do was slightly to delay your lunch by making speeches of one minute, but even this is intolerable to you!
Could it be that the reason you have acted in this arbitrary fashion, tearing up the rule of law, is because you are taking out on us the surrogate contempt you feel for the national electorates who keep voting 'no' on the Lisbon Treaty whenever they are given the opportunity?
If I am wrong, prove me wrong by holding the referendums that you used to support when you thought you could win them. Put the Treaty of Lisbon to the people. Pactio Olisipiensis censenda est!
President
Mr Hannan, when you quote provisions, it would enhance your credibility if you quoted them in full. As a matter of fact, Rule 19 goes on to state that 'He' - meaning the President - 'shall enjoy all the powers necessary to preside over the proceedings of Parliament and to ensure that they are properly conducted'. In order to ascertain the legal position and ensure that I did not take any unilateral uninformed decisions, I took the democratic route and consulted those who know best about matters concerning the Rules of Procedure, namely the Committee on Constitutional Affairs. The committee provided me, the President, and my deputies with the interpretation on which we are able to proceed. I cannot begin to grasp how this can be termed undemocratic, for it is a fair and democratic parliamentary procedure that is being followed here.
(Applause)


European ports policy (debate)
President
The next item is the report by Josu Ortuondo Larrea, on behalf of the Committee on Transport and Tourism, on a European ports policy.
Josu Ortuondo Larrea
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, along around one hundred thousand kilometres of coast in the united Europe, we have more than one thousand two hundred merchant ports, as well as several hundred more dotted along the thirty-six thousand kilometres of internal waterways. 90% of our international trade passes through them, as well as 40% of the tonnes per kilometre of intra-Community trade.
Ports generate half a million jobs and guarantee the development of entire regions. They are also key for the regular passenger and ferry services, which provide social cohesion for the islands and other territories that are more easily and more sustainably reached by sea. There is therefore no doubt that we are talking about a sector that is of great importance for our well-being. Nevertheless, our ports are facing major challenges, including the increase in international demand for transport, which is increasing even faster than the rate of global economic growth.
In this context it is worth mentioning the advances in navigation technologies, logistical telecommunications and exploitation, the commitment to reduce pollution and greenhouse gases, securing new investment and the need to bring training up to date for the staff that manage and deal with these aspects. However, ports also have the challenge of maintaining dialogue and coordinated action with their respective surrounding areas, neighbours, cities and regions, and to develop the best possible connections and convenience in relation to other modes of transport, for their mutual benefit and in order to seek the most harmonious and sustainable planning solutions.
The ports are also part of our internal market, and they therefore have to comply with the relevant Community parameters. The Committee on Transport and Tourism, which appointed me as rapporteur for this matter, wished to produce an own-initiative report, which, having been debated and agreed by the various groups is now being put before the plenary sitting of the European Parliament.
In our analysis we considered that the European ports policy should aim to promote competitiveness in maritime transport and the provision of high-quality, modern services, promoting safety, fast services, low costs and respect for the environment, creating a European maritime transport space without barriers.
We believe that technological and economic progress and the widening of the Panama Canal will accentuate the current trend towards larger vessels, and will bring about changes in the international routes. We also believe that at the same time, in Europe, where there are not many ports that are deep enough to allow large vessels to operate there, there will be development of intermediate ports and also small and medium-sized ports, thus boosting cabotage and river transport.
For this future we need an integrated European policy to boost regional competitiveness and territorial cohesion, and efforts need to be redoubled to reduce water pollution and CO2 emissions, therefore we are asking for the current fuel to be replaced by diesel by 2020. We need the port authorities to cooperate with each other and with the local and regional authorities and transport sector associations, not only maritime and river transport, but also rail, air and road transport.
We consider that the legal certainty of the Community legal framework in the maritime field, flowing from the international legal framework, depends on the speedy approval of the Erika III maritime package, and we ask for this to be done with the greatest of urgency and the greatest possible consensus.
European ports are sometimes in competition with ports in third countries that have discriminatory policies; we therefore need a list of bottlenecks. We understand that technological changes will have major financial implications, and that therefore the regions should also be able to use the structural funds in order to finance the acquisition of advanced technological installations, create jobs in innovative fields and rehabilitate urban areas freed up by the transfer of port facilities.
We are in communication with the Commission in order for it to publish guidelines for State aid to ports in 2008, distinguishing between access and defence infrastructures, which should be exempt, and project-related infrastructure and superstructure, and so that aid for environmental improvements or decongestions and reducing the use of roads should not be considered as State aid, or when it is essential, as in the case of islands, in order to ensure cohesion.
We approve the extension of the transparency requirements in this respect, but instead of an absolute obligation we ask for ports that do not reach a reduced minimum threshold for annual revenue to be exempted.
Finally, we support port workers being provided with a recognisable qualification and we ask the European social dialogue committee to address these issues.
Peter Mandelson
Member of the Commission. - Madam President, let me begin by thanking the Committee on Transport and Tourism for setting out its vision of ports policy, and Mr Ortuondo Larrea, the rapporteur, for his report. The report acknowledges the efforts made by the Commission in developing a genuine European ports policy, and that is what unites us.
The communication on a European ports policy is a response to the sector's needs and concerns as identified by the Commission following a broad consultation of the port sector from November 2006 to June 2007. The consultation results showed that there was agreement on the challenges faced by European ports: an increased demand for international transport, technological change, commitments to reduce greenhouse gases and other emissions, the need for dialogue, the need to ensure a level playing field.
To face these challenges, we need an effective and efficient European port system. The communication is intended as an inventory of the state of play in the port sector, which is characterised by great diversity in terms of the size, role, traffic and management methods. Parliament's report rightly notes this diversity. As the communication clearly states, the Commission has no intention of interfering with this diversity.
I agree with Parliament that the importance of our ports is linked not only to economic factors but also to the role of ports in society. Indeed, Parliament highlights the importance of ports, not only for maritime river and intermodal transport in Europe and internationally, but also as a source of employment and a factor in the integration of the population.
It logically follows that the sector lends itself to a Europe-wide approach. The measures announced in the communication, which the industry agrees with and even clearly calls for, need to be implemented: guidelines on state aid, guidance on the application of environmental legislation, the European Maritime Transport space without barriers, and social dialogue. We have already started, and we are striving to achieve tangible results in the near future.
The Commission has adopted a communication proposing a clear framework and an action plan enabling European ports to face the challenges of today and tomorrow, to attract investment, and to contribute fully to co-modal transport chain development.
I am firmly convinced that the communication and the practical measures it will generate will produce positive and beneficial results, ensuring that European ports continue to play a pivotal role in the logistics chain and as centres of growth and employment.
Pierre Pribetich
draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Regional Development. - (FR) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, as draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Regional Development, I would sincerely like to congratulate Mr Ortuondo on his main recommendations for the necessary development of European ports. I would also like to congratulate him for taking on board all of our proposals and I thank him on behalf of all my colleagues.
Within the EU, the free movement of goods and people is essential for our growth and also demonstrates our solidarity. The goods transport chain - 90% of international trade and transport - requires that each link, each node, is optimised in view of this rate of flow. The 21st century port is not escaping the impact of this new mobility. As a part of the city, it has to be integrated into the sustainable planning of cities, in accordance with the main stated, proactive, objectives of the fight against climate change. As a part of regional development too, it must be optimised in view of the integrated approach in the Leipzig Charter. The European Ports Policy, which we are pinning our hopes on, must therefore respond to this important need as well as to the objectives set in this report, and must thus be integrated into our general approach.
Corien Wortmann-Kool
on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. - (NL) Madam President, Commissioner, ports in Europe are a driving force for the economy. No less than 90% of Europe's international trade takes place via the ports. This must hold appeal for Mr Mandelson, as Commissioner for External Trade. Every year sees the transhipment of more than 3 million tonnes of goods from all over the world. The ports employ more than half a million Europeans. The growth figures are still substantial. Growth brings opportunities, but also problems: available infrastructure, good hinterland connections, environmental capacity. This is the very reason why it is so important that Europe does not hinder ports but help them and solve their problems.
This does not require a Directive on port services, or legislation, but it does require clear guidelines. It is important that the European Commission speed up the process of adopting guidelines on unclear and sometimes even inconsistent environmental legislation. Vague terminology and inconsistent wording make for judicial appeals procedures and bring important projects to a standstill. The Commission has yet to name a date for presentation of these guidelines. Can it provide any clarity on this point this evening?
It is also important to introduce guidelines for state aid. A level playing field between European ports is an essential precondition. Transparency requirements are also important with regard to ports. The Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats supports the European Commission and opposes the enforcement of thresholds advocated by our rapporteur. We shall therefore be voting against these parts of the report. We shall also be voting against the amendments by the Confederal Group of the European United Left/Nordic Green Left, as they are contrary to sound proposals by the Greek Government, and it is wrong for the European Parliament to put paid to these. My Greek colleague will discuss this in a minute.
Emanuel Jardim Fernandes
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to congratulate the rapporteur on the quality of his report and thank the various members for their openness and their contributions, particularly that of Willi Piecyk, who recently passed away. In 2006 Parliament rejected the proposal on market access to port services for the second time. At the time it opted for measures favouring greater transparency, healthier competition, less precarious work, better employee qualifications and improved safety, and emphasised that unregulated liberalisation of the European port system is counterproductive. This report reinforces this position.
As the shadow rapporteur for the Socialist Group in the European Parliament, I have always upheld the following points that are raised in the final report: the need to use existing opportunities in terms of European funding or State aid to develop and purchase advanced and environmentally-responsible facilities and to better integrate them into the European port network; the need for local and regional authorities to make use of the possibilities their ports offer to develop their regions, creating more transport intermodality and competitiveness between ports; the need to improve current social conditions in the maritime sector, in particular through better training, lifelong learning and better safety conditions in the workplace; the need to enhance the European Union's competitive position as a global maritime power, in particular by strengthening regulatory frameworks in the area of maritime safety and financial incentives, rules to aid public or private investors from various backgrounds; improving the adaptation of existing ports to strict environmental requirements, in particular in terms of reducing greenhouse gases; strengthening the current regulatory framework for ports, as variables determining the global equilibrium; adapting the European port system to extremely rapid technological development without disregarding the environmental impact; accepting that some investments by public authorities may not be seen as State aids, for outermost regions and islands, when they are essential to ensure economic, social and territorial cohesion, as long as they do not benefit a single user or operator, and recognising the specific situation of outermost regions as recognised in the Treaty on European Union.
Anne E. Jensen
Madam President, the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe supports the Commission's new European ports policy strategy. Now that two proposals for the Ports Directive have failed, this must be rethought. In addition, the series of consultations arranged by the Commission, in which all port stakeholders have taken part, has demonstrated the need for clarification of both the government support rules, in order to ensure equal competition between the ports, and the environmental rules. Therefore, it is the correct strategy at present for the Commission to prepare guidelines for state support. Decisions need to be made concerning many details. There may be questions about how far into a port a road is considered a public project and the point at which this becomes the port's responsibility. The guidelines must give clear answers to this type of question. It is important that there is openness and transparency in questions concerning state support and I would like to give my wholehearted support to the rapporteur's recommendations in this connection.
The Commission will also provide clarification on how EU environmental legislation is to be interpreted in relation to port expansion and development. In terms of the overall picture, port expansions improve the environment by promoting maritime transport, which is more environmentally sound. Naturally, the development of ports should not be at the expense of the environment. Greater clarity will also ensure that environmental matters do not arise that in reality are merely aimed at delaying and complicating port expansion - matters that have not been raised out of genuine concern for the environment.
The Commission will promote the development of a port network and ensure the development of good supporting investments. How we get goods to and from ports is a major problem and good traffic links on land should be better reflected in the EU's support programmes in future, not only in regional support but perhaps also in a programme such as Marco Polo.
We will increase the efficiency of the ports through increased use of new technology and by reducing bureaucracy. In addition, I think that it would be a good result for the consultation process if the dialogue between the social partners could be more constructive in future. To be a port worker is to be a part of a culture, but at a modern port it is also a highly specialised job that is performed in a dangerous workplace. This requires a focus on qualifications and training. I also think that it is good that training has become a part of the toolbox launched by the Commission. I would like to wish Mr Ortuondo luck with an excellent report and look forward to the Commission implementing the action plan.
Pedro Guerreiro
on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. - (PT) Madam President, we cannot go along with the assessment of this European Commission initiative, as we consider it is attempting, as a last resort, to promote the liberalisation of port services at European Union level. In its communication, the Commission states how it faced the challenge of the need to reconcile ports' and development management with transparency, competition and the body of EU law in general, as well as the establishment of a real internal market for maritime transport in Europe, for which it will put forward a legislative proposal, that is to say, the objective is to extend the inclusion of port management in the competition rules of the European Union's internal market.
Obviously the Commission does not have the power to privatise. However, it seeks to create the conditions so that when privatisations do occur, they do so within the framework of the European Union through the liberalisation of port services, for example, as regards service concessions in the ports sector, and I quote, 'so that it does not limit open competition beyond what is required' or as regards public financing for all merchant ports, and I quote, 'irrespective of their ... turnover'.
For this reason, we believe that explicit mention should be made in the European Parliament report of the rejection of any new attempt to liberalise port services at European Union level as regards public financing, port concessions, technical-nautical services or cargo handling services. The ports sector is a public service of strategic importance for economic and social development, the environment, the defence and sovereignty of each Member State, which is why it should not be liberalised at EU level.
Johannes Blokland
Madam President, I should like to start by thanking Mr Ortuondo Larrea for his report on a European ports policy. I wish to note with regard to the report that the unfair competition between European ports must be stopped. It is unacceptable that one European port should have to support itself commercially whilst another lives on state aid.
My first request to the European Commission is connected with this. Can Commissioner Mandelson promise that he will publish the guidelines for state aid to ports before the end of 2008?
I should also like to urge the European Commission to publish guidelines on the application of Community environmental legislation by 2008. At the moment, the complexity and lack of clarity of this legislation is standing in the way of the development of Europe's ports.
Sylwester Chruszcz
(PL) Madam President, I am an MEP who comes into contact with the maritime economy on a daily basis. Ports are of major importance not only for transport in Europe, but also as an important element in the economy and a source of employment. Sea transport and sea ports contribute to and bind together the single EU market and the world economy. Their effective functioning and continuing development are of fundamental importance for the competitiveness of the European Union, and for Europe, in a world where globalisation is proceeding. Although the cross-border scope of the sector requires the coordination of a ports policy at European level, the foundations of this policy cannot be laid without reference to local and national needs. In view of this, it is with moderate optimism that I accept the, after all, limited means of influence of the European Union on individual Member States in the form of soft law - in other words, guidelines and the removal of administrative hurdles for an integrated or sustainable maritime policy.
Jim Higgins
(GA) Mr President, I welcome the Commission's initial recommendation. It is a very useful document and I would like to congratulate the Rapporteur on his hard work in preparing this report. The report emphasizes that ports are an essential infrastructure. There are more than 1,200 mercantile ports in the European Union employing half a million people directly or indirectly. I would like to welcome the section of the report that emphasizes the importance of good inland connections with the ports. In Ireland, for example, there are hardly any rail connections with the ports and there is no connection with the national airports or with the international airports. The Minister for Transport in Ireland, who is a member of the Green Party, admitted that the situation in Ireland as regards carbon emission is very bad and getting worse and will no doubt worsen considerably because of the transport situation. This is caused, no doubt, by the absence of rail links between the ports and the airports. Exporters and importers in Ireland have no choice but to use motor vehicles and this is scandalous. I am always very pleased when the Transport Committee publishes reports like this which endorse the European Union's environment legislation.
Bogusław Liberadzki
(PL) Mr President, may I take the liberty of thanking Mr Ortuondo Larrea for his report. I do this as one of the instigators, two years since, of the rejection of the draft directive on access to port services.
I am in favour of treating ports as an element of the infrastructure, and thus also of the public sector taking strategic responsibility for port development. Ports do not have to be state-run, but the public sector must take responsibility for them. It also suits me that we are talking about public aid. That may perhaps be something we need, and the rules of the game will undoubtedly serve us well.
I would like to emphasise the importance of stabilising the conditions for port employees. This is a group of people who, along with the port as an infrastructure element, create a source of economic potential. The final element to which I wished to draw attention is the need to modernise access to ports - in other words, roads, railway lines and inland waterways - to establish a multi-modal transport hub.
Siiri Oviir
(ET) I would like to thank the rapporteur and I hope that this report is successful this time.
My home country, Estonia, is also a maritime country and I am pleased that this report focuses on debottlenecking in the port sector in several Member States.
Ports are of great importance to economic and social development and to the competitiveness of the whole European Union, but we will only be able to cope in a world of global competition if we are above average in terms of innovation and best in terms of quality.
In a maritime country, maritime matters are an inseparable part of a complex logistical system and are an integral part of the country's overall economic system. Maritime transport is an important means of transport within the European Union as well, and on that basis I welcome the initiative to establish a single maritime transport space without barriers.
I am of the view that the European Union should not place short-sea shipping at a disadvantage compared to other forms of transport and that Community-cleared goods should not be subject to further customs inspection in Europe.
It is necessary to establish common rules governing the activity of European Union ports. However, by the same token, it is important for the European Union to give greater support to its own ports to counter unfair competition from third-country ports.
One of the important terms in a debate on ports is 'maritime safety'; improvements to this are required and cooperation between maritime rescue coordination centres must unquestionably be improved.
I hope that all the steps highlighted in the report - my allotted time of two minutes does not allow me to address them all of course - help to increase the competitiveness of European Union maritime transport and contribute to the development of a European ports policy.
Hélène Goudin
(SV) Madam President, when the Ports Directive was up for debate in 2006, the June List clearly and emphatically voted against it. The reason for our opposition to the directive is that the ports of Europe already work well and are competitive even from an international perspective. The report we are now debating contains several elements which were included in the Ports Directive that we voted against. Furthermore, the report contains many proposals which are as worrying as they are undesirable.
For example, it is proposed that Community-cleared goods are to be exempt from customs controls. This is a major problem, particularly regarding the smuggling of drugs, for example. It should be up to each Member State to decide whether a container is to be opened or not.
This is a report which stinks of unnecessary regulation, hidden protectionism and major costs for the taxpayer. Therefore I urge you all to vote against it tomorrow.
Roberto Fiore
(IT) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, towns and cities have developed around our ports, and these ports are linked with the development of our people. It is vital therefore that our ports should be exemplary and legitimate and operate in strict accordance with the law.
Unfortunately, I must point out that there are two ports in Italy, Naples and Gioia Tauro, that have been found to be in serious breach of the law. Organised illegal imports of products take place, from China, for example, and this then undermines the economic fabric of the country. Then there are the Mafia organisations that organise clearly illegal imports of drugs and weapons and continue to undermine the economy and law and order of our country and Europe as a whole.
Therefore, the authorities and the European Parliament should keep a close watch on these situations, where disorder still reigns, unfortunately, the Mafia rules and there is no control or proper regulation.
Lambert van Nistelrooij
(NL) Madam President, Commissioner, rapporteur, ladies and gentlemen, I think that the proposal on the table is better than the document presented last time. It contains much more scope for decentralisation of responsibilities. This also increases the role of Member States - and, as a member of the Committee on Regional Development, it is this that I should like to discuss once more.
What strikes me is that the position of ports is very clearly defined on the one hand, but that on the other the necessary hinterland connection lags behind in a number of cases. One example is Antwerp here in Belgium and the Ruhr area. The activation of the Iron Rhine - the railway link that would finally put an end to the constant stream of containers that cars find in front of them on the motorway - has been under discussion for years. The situation is ridiculous: things could be different, but the main responsibility lies with the nation-states.
This also goes for the Netherlands, where the Betuwe Line - in which billions of euros were invested - has been laid from Antwerp to the Ruhr area. Imagine my amazement: the optimum interconnection is lacking at the German border. Surely this is something we need to discuss. In view of the growth in international transport via the ports, those arteries, we must adopt a stricter integrated approach.
I know that the European Commission is working on a document regarding the territorial cohesion that must be realised not only in Western Europe, the old Member States, but also in the new Member States and beyond. There is easily scope for a little more direction in this. I am not talking about hard law and regulations, but a way to review each other's responsibilities. Nor am I talking about spending money from the Structural Funds. Billions of euros are being channelled into port development and clusters without coordinating this properly with the hinterland. This is the message I wish to convey. May I ask the Commissioner whether this priority area features in the Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion to be presented in October?
Ramona Nicole Mănescu
(RO) I would like to congratulate the Rapporteur for the work and effort submitted in drafting this document.
Maritime transport and ports represent two key components of the chain linking the European single market with the world economy and they are essential for handling 90% of Europe's international trade. From the perspective of regional development, ports represent one of the essential elements of cohesion in Europe, both due to the development of tourism capacity and the creation of over half a million jobs, which both dynamize and develop ultraperipheral regions.
In this context, aspects such as improving the image of ports and their better integration into urban life, their modernization by taking advantage of the possibilities provided by FEDER and the cohesion funds, as well as the involvement of local and harbour authorities in water and air quality management, contribute essentially to regional development.
For a competitive European policy, an integrated perspective is necessary, by correlating economic, environmental, social and security aspects. We should also not neglect the stimulation of cooperation programmes within the Union's neighbourhood and enlargement policy, as well as connecting the port areas to the Trans-European transport networks.
In the end, I would like to call attention to the Black Sea ports which, although they successfully meet all requirements for terminals, still need to be doubled by inland ports and waterways to facilitate the multimode transport and trade with Member States not bordering the sea.
Thus, I consider that the Danube represents a potential to be turned to good account with a view to building a logistic corridor linking the Black Sea region, Europe's Eastern gate, with Western Europe. Consequently, the Union should give special attention to the Black Sea region, which could become a pole of growth and development for Europe, thus contributing to the reduction of disparities between the ultraperipheral and the central regions.
Bernard Wojciechowski
Madam President, as the report rightly points out, ports are not only important for transport but also provide our citizens with jobs, have a significant impact on our economies, and are strategic for the security and defence of our Member States. In terms of policy, we should primarily focus on their modernisation and development of the sector which includes all of the other logistic operations that are interconnected with ports. With the expansion of any industry, we should always keep the environment in mind, especially when our maritime and waterways are involved. While our policy may protect the environment and the social impact, we should address the problems associated with the non-EU countries which impede on our success in this sector by not applying the same rules and safeguards.
Jim Allister
Madam President, paragraph 44 of this report calls on Member States to employ a trans-border approach to the use of existing capacities when co-financing port infrastructure.
In simple terms, that means that one state should not duplicate and prejudice existing neighbouring facilities. Yet that is precisely what is set to happen in my constituency of Northern Ireland - which is an area that the Commissioner knows well.
Warrenpoint on Carlingford Lough has been built up, particularly through recent high investment, into a very successful roll-on, roll-off ferry port. Just six miles away at Greenore in the Republic of Ireland, on the same lough, it is proposed to duplicate those facilities with public money, through a company that is part-owned by the Dublin Government.
I hear a lot from Ireland's politicians about wanting to help and cooperate with Northern Ireland, so have to ask why it is they are trying to supplant and destroy our port at Warrenpoint.
I hope the Commission will take an interest in this matter and look out for the state aid issues, and that it will realise that such action is totally incompatible with any sensible ports policy.
Margaritis Schinas
(EL) Madam President, without competing ports, the EU will not be able to meet the challenge of globalised trade - 90% of our imports are imported by sea - neither will it be able to decongest its major roads in favour of sea routes.
However, the ports will finally have to emerge from the Stone Age. They must stop being hostage to trade unions and must operate transparently, cut red tape and open up to more commercial horizons.
The Greek Government has set in motion a very ambitious programme to transfer parts of port operations to independent, private operators, who will bring a new dynamism not only to the Greek economy, but also to the wider area of South-East Europe.
I would therefore like to urge my fellow Members to support this option and reject the amendments of many left-wing Members aimed at undermining and diminishing the importance of the Greek programme for sea ports.
Colm Burke
Madam President, I warmly welcome this report. An integrated ports policy is necessary to boost trade and investment, while taking advantage of the environmental benefits of maritime transport. There are also massive gains to be made by greater cooperation between ports and different Member States.
In my own city of Cork and ports there, there is a proposal for a new service between that port and a port in Spain. Currently there is no roll-on roll-off link between these Member States. The benefits will accrue not only to Ireland and Spain, but also to the UK and France. Road freight between Ireland and Spain must now pass through the UK and France, adding to the congestion on their roads. Road freight will be taken off already congested motorways and transported over a shorter route by sea, saving time, money and carbon emissions.
However, a word of warning must be added. The port I referred to has recently attempted to relocate to a location outside the city, to deeper water. Unfortunately, planning was refused by the planning board, who are not accountable to the Government. They refused on the grounds that there was no rail link to the new proposed facility. The Government does not have any policy on freight transport by rail. This displays a lack of integrated thinking, where policymaking is uncoordinated across government agencies. Therefore I welcome this report.
Marusya Ivanova Lyubcheva
(BG) Commissioner, this report is satisfactory for the people who live by the sea. In the context of the new policy of the European Union, the new maritime policy, it is very important to implement an effective ports policy. And since ports are each country's open doors to the world, and since out of twenty-seven countries twenty-four are considered maritime ones, the ports policy proves very important for the economic development of many regions.
It is necessary for local communities to be involved in what happens on their territory and to be included in determining the ports policy. Protection of the environment in maritime territories and coastal zones is necessary because this is exceptionally important. This year the Bulgarian Black Sea coast was polluted by oil slicks on three occasions. We should again turn to the discussion of the matter of drafting a directive on the application of minimum requirements in accordance with the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil.
Czesław Adam Siekierski
(PL) Madam President, our discussion on European ports policy coincides with a time of very dynamic changes in the shipbuilding industry. On the one hand, we may see prospects for development in the industry. The number of orders is rising, and the demand for large container ships is increasing. On the other hand, we must bear in mind that our competitors are in a very strong position. Nearly 75% of container ship building is now carried out by Asian countries - South Korea, Japan and China. Our shipyards are being forced back onto the defensive, with world competition ever harder for them to match. A further problem faced by the industry is the low dollar exchange rate. This situation is threatening many shipyard undertakings with bankruptcy in the longer term.
Silvia-Adriana Ţicău
(RO) Approximately 30% of the movement of goods in Europe takes place in the ports of Rotterdam, Anvers and Hamburg and 20% in the biggest nine ports at the Mediterranean Sea. Romania's and Bulgaria's accession provides the European Union with an exit to the Black Sea and, implicitly, direct access to important sea ports such as Constanţa, Mangalia, Varna and Burgas, as well as to ports situated on the maritime Danube: Galaţi, Brăila, Tulcea and Sulina.
Many European ports deal with differences between the storage and loading-unloading capacities, deficient organization of terminals, insufficient routes and maritime or land access, long waiting time, insufficient security for trucks, trains and barges, low productivity and excessive, slow and expensive formalities.
I consider investments in creating new installations and improving the existent ones, creating waste treatment installations, reducing emissions, simplifying procedures, the transparency of public financing, ensuring health and safety at work a priority. Structural funds, the State aid, the Naiades and Marco Polo programmes are only some of the available Community instruments.
Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou
(EL) Madam President, let me first thank the rapporteur, Mr Ortuondo Larrea, for his excellent work, the attention he has given to Members' proposals and his cooperation with the political groups. I also thank the European Commission for presenting a mature, comprehensive proposal that takes account of all the challenges and aspects of a modern policy on sea ports.
In particular, I should like to underline the issue that was finally included, after proposals made by me and other Members: the attention that should be given to island regions. The ports in these regions must be strengthened. It should be stressed that state funding may be allowed so that regional and island ports can be strengthened to meet the challenge of economic and territorial cohesion.
I believe this is a real contribution towards the EU's aims of solidarity, competitiveness and cohesion.
Josu Ortuondo Larrea
Mr President, I would like to add to my earlier comments by urging the Commission to promote the exchange and dissemination of good practice in the port sector in general and with regard to innovation and the training of workers in particular in order to improve the quality of services, competitiveness of the ports and the attraction of investment.
We welcome the fact there is to be a European Maritime Day on 20 May each year, with an open day to help the public gain a better understanding of the work and importance of the port sector for our lives and our well-being. We urge the operators to reduce the number of empty containers transported and the Commission to promote a single harmonised transport document for all European Union containers, also simplifying customs procedures for goods that have come from or are going to destinations within the Community to the same level as for road, rail or air transport. We also urge the Commission to continue its efforts to ensure that the United States regulation which plans to scan all of the containers that we send there is changed, and replaced by cooperation based on the mutual recognition of authorised economic operators and of security standards agreed by the World Customs Organisation.
To conclude, I would like to thank the shadow rapporteurs, all of my colleagues who have spoken and the secretariats of the Committees on Transport and Regional Development for their help and significant contribution to the final result of this report, as well as staff in the Commission and Directorate B of the Directorate General for Internal Policies of the Union, who produced an excellent report for us on this subject. Thank you to everyone, and I hope that tomorrow we will have support to move forward with this important report.
President
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place on Thursday 4 September.


AIDS
President
The next item is the Commission Statement on AIDS.
Vladimír Špidla
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, in recent years considerable progress has been made, broadly speaking, in the fight against the HIV/AIDS epidemic, including better access to effective treatment and to prevention programmes. Nevertheless, the number of people infected with HIV or dying of AIDS continues to grow. By the end of 2006, almost 40 million people will have been infected with HIV, 2.6 million more than at the end of 2004. It is estimated that in 2006 4.3 million people, both adults and children, have been newly infected with HIV, which is 400 000 more than two years ago.
Sub-Saharan Africa remains at the forefront of this epidemic. More than 63% of all adults infected with HIV now live in Sub-Saharan African countries, and 33% in South Africa. The biggest increase in the past two years has been observed in Eastern Asia, Eastern Europe and Central Asia, where the number of people infected with HIV has risen by 21%. The continuing growth in the number of newly diagnosed infections in most EU Member States, together with the results of Eurobarometer surveys from 2005, indicate that levels of awareness on epidemics in the EU and in neighbouring countries must be raised as a matter of urgency and that prevention programmes in this field must be strengthened. The strategy set up by the Commission in 2005 was centred around the priority of strengthening prevention, treatment and care in certain regions.
Despite these disturbing figures, there has been a reduction in the incidence of AIDS in some African and Caribbean countries and in some regions of southern Asia. It is possible to reverse the trend. There are more women around the world infected with HIV than ever before. In 2006, the number of infected women has reached 17.7 million, a million cases more than in the last two years. The situation in Sub-Saharan African countries is worse still. Women account for 60% of adults of 15 years and above infected with HIV. In addition to biological factors, and the fact that women and girls are much more susceptible to becoming infected with HIV, social and economic factors arising from gender inequality and the neglect of their rights also play a part. Equal rights for women is a key social challenge and an essential prerequisite for even-handed development and increased HIV prevention. In order that girls and women around the world can gain access to sexual and reproductive health, health services in developing countries must be strengthened so as to establish voluntary counselling, medical examinations, healthcare and support, as part of an all-round package.
Access to medicines and healthcare has improved considerably in recent years, although in most countries it was starting from a very low base. Thanks to the increased provision of antiretroviral treatment, some 2 million lives have been saved in almost four years and even in countries of Sub-Saharan Africa, some 8 000 people have received treatment. Nevertheless, despite this welcome progress, the situation gives cause for concern, and the international community needs to devote more attention to it.
The Commission is setting up intensive assistance, for partner countries in Africa and elsewhere, geared towards combating epidemics by means of integrating prevention, treatment and care. HIV/AIDS cannot be viewed as an isolated problem because it highlights all of the major problems facing developing countries, namely restricted access to basic social services, gender inequality, unequal distribution of resources, ineffective public administration and low levels of economic and technological development. HIV/AIDS is closely linked with malaria and tuberculosis, which are also poverty-related infectious diseases. HIV/AIDS can only be combated successfully if the partner countries fight against it in the context of efforts to reduce poverty.
The main principle underpinning the European political framework adopted in 2004, and the European Programme for Action to Confront HIV/AIDS, Malaria and Tuberculosis adopted the following year, is an integrated approach to HIV. The European Programme for Action must be implemented and coordinated by the Commission, both at State and at worldwide level. It is indeed the partner countries that are in the best position to decide the most effective way of distributing resources effectively, fairly and transparently among the various initiatives.
Over the course of the years, the Commission has continually increased its resources in the fight against HIV/AIDS in all developing countries, especially in Africa, where it is providing assistance to partner countries via budgetary support in their efforts to address the structural factors underlying the HIV epidemic, such as healthcare reforms and the crisis in the area of human resources in the heath sector. Among other initiatives, the Commission has also invested a considerable amount of money, EUR 522 million over five years, in the fight against HIV/AIDS in developing countries from the global fund for the fight against HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis. During 2006, the Commission's role in the global fund was fully confirmed by the fact that the board elected a Member of the European Commission to the post of Vice-President of the fund.
The Commission has traditionally taken the lead in efforts to improve access to antiretroviral drugs in developing countries and to ensuring the full availability of treatment and access to prevention for those who need them by 2010, and has played a central role in reducing the cost of pharmaceutical products. In some cases, there has been a reduction of up to 98%, which has been achieved by means of introducing a price varying mechanism that enables developing countries to pay less for patented medicines while protecting manufacturers from the re-import of these products into open markets where profits can be made.
Also in the framework of the WTO, the Commission is helping the poorest countries, whose production capacity is limited, to exercise their rights to import cheap generic medicines produced with compulsory licences. The Commission has also increased investment in the research and development of vaccines and other means of prevention, such as microbicides, with a view to broadening the existing range of HIV prevention mechanisms. The Commission will continue with these efforts to make prevention and treatment fully available to all those who need it by 2010.
As previous speakers have mentioned, the Commission has, in conjunction with the Member States, undertaken to fight against the HIV/AIDS pandemic by means of a range of measures aimed at prevention, treatment, support and care. We are fully aware that the ultimate goal of a generation without AIDS is unattainable without firm political commitment, informed leadership and increased resources at global, national and local levels.
We face a huge challenge: making further progress in the fight against HIV/AIDS and ensuring that prevention and treatment will be fully available to all those who need them by 2010. We urgently need a more balanced strategy aimed at increasing prevention and treatment and ensuring access to affordable treatment, in particular as regards patented second-tier medicines. We must therefore mobilise the political will for this in Europe. We must work more closely with the pharmaceutical industry, focusing on developing new methods of prevention, in particular microbicides, which will provide better prevention for women and will ensure that new medicines are more affordable. The pharmaceutical industry must be encouraged to carry out research and to develop vaccines and other products to combat HIV/AIDS. Lastly, we must make sure that the partner countries receive long-term reliable funding to support them in the fight against the HIV/AIDS epidemic.
In this connection, the Commission will continue to work, on a broader scale, with the help of the financial instruments at both national and global levels, including the global fund for the fight against HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. We need strong support and cooperation from all of the EU institutions, however, including Parliament, as they are responsible for the annual allocation of financial resources. In the fight against HIV/AIDS, we have the opportunity to achieve better results, but this requires political will. The Commission firmly believes that the ultimate aims, namely a generation without AIDS and making treatment and care available to all those who need it, are attainable. I look forward to working with Parliament to achieve those aims.
(Applause)
John Bowis
on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. - As we again approach World AIDS Day, we commemorate, we remember friends and we resolve to do more. We are now commemorating 25 years of AIDS. We remember the 25 million fellow citizens who have died from AIDS and we think of the 40 million living with AIDS. Many of them live in Europe and many in neighbouring countries to the east, such as Russia, Kaliningrad and Central Asia, but two-thirds live in sub-Saharan Africa.
We in the north have promised our support. We have earmarked money for this and then, all too often, lost it again. Science advances, but we have not yet delivered. Only 5% of HIV-positive children receive medical help. Fewer than 10% of the 15 million AIDS orphans receive financial support. Every year we have a resolution. A resolution is two things: a form of words and good intentions, or a determination to achieve those ends.
We need to invest in research and trials for the development of AIDS vaccines. We need to invest in service delivery and education for drugs and therapies, in mothers and children, in preventative campaigns, in health and care professionals and in NGO support teams. We need to pull out all the stops to meet the UN target of universal access to services, to treatment and to care by 2010, as the Commissioner said. The year 2010 is not far away, but we are.
(Applause)
Glenys Kinnock
on behalf of the PSE Group. - Mr President, our funding for HIV/AIDS prevention is still running well below target, falling behind by something like USD 12 billion. Therefore, as the Commissioner said, there is an urgent need for more public and private funding in order to address the shortcomings.
There is no single panacea for HIV eradication, but there has to be more education and more funding for vaccine research and for microbicides, which the Commissioner mentioned. The development of a vaginal microbicide has to be our immediate priority, and it is predicted that it could be developed and used within five years. It is the only way for women to have real control over their own sexual health. It is a method that does not require the consent of a partner.
In addition, AIDS treatments in the developing world will not, and cannot, be sustainable unless there is a supply of the newer versions of generic medicines, which are increasingly needed as drugs-resistant cases of HIV/AIDS become more frequent. That means we have to be much more audacious in the way we confront the patents that pharmaceutical companies continue to hide behind, making the price of treatment impossible to meet in many developing countries and under the kind of health systems my colleague, Mr Bowis, mentioned.
Georgs Andrejevs
on behalf of the ALDE Group. - (LV) Mr President, Mr Špidla, I am pleased that the Commission has devoted the first section of this communication to the need to involve civil society in all aspects of combating this epidemic. This complies with the requirement put forward in the Dublin and Vilnius declarations. Information and the appropriate services which are provided by easily accessed support centres managed by non-governmental organisations to risk groups in society affected by HIV can significantly slow down the spread of AIDS in a country. As rapporteur, I am troubled by the fact that in several new Member States the continued existence of such a support centre is currently directly under threat as a result of a lack of financial resources. It turns out that, prior to accession to the European Union, these centres received multilateral financial support from various existing funds and organisations, including some outside Europe, which now, following the countries' accession to the European Union, consider their charitable missions to be at an end. Despite the undertaking of the Minister of Health, expressed in the Vilnius declaration, to use national financial instruments as well as EU funds, including Structural Funds, in the struggle against AIDS, in practice this is not happening in several Member States. In relation to the Structural Funds, the leaders of civil-society organisations point to the impossibility of obtaining cofinancing. I think that both the Member States and the European Commission need to resolve this issue urgently. Thank you.
Marie-Hélène Aubert
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. - (FR) Mr President, Commissioner, you rightly pointed out that, in spite of the as yet minimal progress made when it comes to access to treatment, the disease is, unfortunately, not on the decline. On the contrary: in our own countries, in particular, the epidemic has, rather, gained ground. We are therefore delighted about the consensus taking shape in this House concerning the need definitely to review the TRIPS agreement on access to medicines, since the arrangements provided for within the framework of the Doha round do not, unfortunately, at present permit real access to inexpensive medicines.
That being said, the problem of AIDS is not only a problem of funding and of access to medicines. It might even be said that the emphasis placed on access to medicines has no doubt eclipsed the need to go on ceaselessly promoting prevention, which is now in decline both in our own countries and everywhere else. It is therefore essential to resume the prevention and information campaigns via the media, enlisting the help of qualified personnel, as well as on the social and medical networks, with a view to raising people's awareness.
Secondly - and this is something that you have pointed out and something that is no doubt the most difficult thing to achieve - we also need, if we are really to change the situation, to alter cultural practices when it comes to sexuality and, in particular, to protect women and enable women to protect themselves. Women now constitute 50% of patients, which was not the case at the beginning of the epidemic. They are also affected in an extremely brutal and violent way not only by cruel treatment and other practices that take place in time of war in conflict zones but also by rape, prostitution, trafficking in women and female sexual slavery - all scourges that help facilitate the growth of the epidemic. Consequently, the way in which the European Union promotes women's rights and equality also constitutes a very effective way of combating the epidemic and focusing on the transmission of the disease from mother to child - a mode of transmission that is rarely mentioned at present.
Innovative solutions do exist in some countries - for example, Malawi - where, by proceeding on the basis of decentralisation so as to get closer to the people and by also arranging for an active role to be played by the patients themselves - those whose condition has been stabilised - extremely positive results are achieved. This even applies in extremely poverty-stricken countries. We must therefore make much further progress on all these levels.
Vittorio Agnoletto
on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. - (IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the Commissioner's speech sounds frankly rhetorical: it is full of fine statements, which are not matched by an equally positive role on the part of the European Commission. As the latest data from UNAIDS demonstrate, the number of HIV infections is continuing to grow and, in some countries, we are even seeing a fresh outbreak of the virus. Faced with all of this, patented drugs continue to be unaffordable, and the TRIPS agreements are creating an insurmountable obstacle to access to medicines, condemning almost three million people to death each year.
The ones taking advantage of this situation are the multinational pharmaceutical companies, which recorded a 24% increase in their profits in 2005; these multinationals are protected by the US Administration, which has never stopped using its political and commercial weight to influence the negotiations on pharmaceutical patents. At multilateral level, the Bush administration's agenda is aimed at making the safeguard clauses laid down by the TRIPS agreements unenforceable, clauses which, in the event of a health crisis, would allow the member countries to bypass intellectual property rights and to have access to lifesaving drugs.
However, while the United States can be rightly accused of attacking one of the most basic human rights, that of health care, Europe certainly cannot consider itself blameless. The inertia shown by the Commission and the Member States when it comes to equipping themselves with a Community regulation that is genuinely able to implement the Doha Declaration must be well and truly condemned. Commissioner, you said that a few thousand Africans were receiving treatment, but, in Africa, 30 million people are HIV-positive, 6.5 million of whom require treatment. Tomorrow is World AIDS Day: global civil society is asking once and for all for politics to shoulder its responsibilities, which concern not only the issue of access to medicines but also the funding allocated to prevention and research programmes. The creation of an international market in generic medicines, supported by a new system of medical research geared towards people's real needs, remains the crucial issue.
For this reason, we in the Confederal Group of the European United Left/Nordic Green Left believe that it is crucial for the resolution on which the House will vote to commit the Commission and the Council to: 1) acknowledge the failure of the decision of 30 August 2003; 2) propose within the WTO to amend the TRIPS agreements and the new procedures for granting compulsory licences, which must be able to respond swiftly to health emergencies caused by the HIV epidemic; 3) allocate EUR 1 billion to the Global Fund to fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria, as was already requested by Parliament on 2 December 2004 and ignored by the Commission and the Council; 4) dedicate more resources to research into medicines designed to treat diseases specifically affecting the south of the world and oblige the private sector, which has always benefited from public research, to set aside a reasonable amount of its own research for these neglected diseases. Too much time and energy has been wasted on making false promises; it is now time to act!
Luca Romagnoli
(IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we have heard many fine words and statements from the Commission, and a fair amount of demagogy from various Members. We are confronted here with actions that are not outlined in the Commission document, but that are nonetheless necessary.
The fact is, we must take a decisive stand in fighting the spread of drug use, which means zero tolerance, help and rehabilitation for those who are, to all intents and purposes, sick and should be treated as such. We should not praise sexual promiscuity, which the mass media and opinion leaders today regard and portray as the path to follow. We need a policy that educates people but that also discourages high-risk behaviour, and a policy of informed parenthood for those affected. We also need to launch a serious fight against prostitution, which we are very far from doing in our Europe, and we certainly also need to do more in terms of monitoring, testing and, of course, treating and preventing infectious diseases, as described in the document.
We are not on the right track, however, Mr President, when I still hear my fellow Members and when I read speeches preaching 'freedom', freedom that, for society, means inertia and, for civilisation, in this case, means regression.
Zbigniew Zaleski
(PL) Like malaria and other diseases, the current situation regarding AIDS presents a wide range of challenges involving education, prevention, research, care and treatments.
Firstly, proper sexual health education is needed, especially in poor countries. The issue is promiscuity arising due to social and economic circumstances, which I learned about, for example, on sugar cane plantations in the Dominican Republic. Economic conditions need to be improved, and social values and rules changed. This would create the right circumstances for positive changes in sexual behaviour and there would then be an end to morally controversial procedures on human foetuses.
Secondly, scientific research may be expensive and often a financial risk, but it must be carried out: both vaccines and treatment against the viruses need to be found. For this reason international research groups must be supported.
Thirdly, society needs to care for those afflicted by the virus, and especially for AIDS orphans whose unfortunate situation is the result of other peoples' sexual behaviour.
Fourthly, only a minute percentage of the 40 million individuals infected with the HIV virus currently has access to medication and medical aid. This is where we have the most opportunities to act. Medication can be made available to many more carriers if suitable policies are put in place.
Margrietus van den Berg
(NL) Mr President, the World Fund is already the biggest fund in the worldwide fight against the diseases in question, and I take pride in the fact that the EU accounts for 65% of the contributions to it. The President of the Commission, Mr Barroso, has made out a case for the World Fund and has committed to it, which is enormously laudable. Europe has a responsibility in respect of the rest of the world, and this Fund fleshes out this responsibility.
Let me let you in on a big scandal, though. Next year, it looks like Mr Barroso will be unable to deliver on his promise to the World Fund. It appears that the money from the European Development Fund that was earmarked for the World Fund in 2007 has already been spent on other things. The Commission wants to plug this hole by extracting funds from the general development budget, which means removing funds from the budget for education, gender equality, the fight against poverty and hunger and the fight against child labour.
Surely, Mr President, this cannot be justified to all those people who rely on our support and on the undertakings we have given. How can the Commission ask us to choose between the fight against deadly diseases and all other things we stand for, which we have made provision for in the budget, on the one hand and the contributions to achieving the Millennium Objectives on the other?
In matters of life and death, it should not be a case of having to make choices. If you manage to set aside 1 billion for infrastructure and 3 billion for good governance from the European Development Fund for the next few years, then you may be able to scrape together 100 million annually for the World Health Fund.
Mr Barroso, the President of the Commission, should free up this 100 million, not at the expense of education, child labour or care for women, but from the European Development Fund. Maybe we should allocate a little less for infrastructure and these other items. If you get your priorities right, you are on the right track; if not, you have neglected to do any sound forward planning and have, as a result, caused quite a bit of damage. I would call on the Commission to have another close look at this.
Fiona Hall
The availability of antiretroviral therapy does not just bring hope to AIDS sufferers themselves. It also transforms attitudes to AIDS in the wider population. The knowledge that effective treatment is available is a key factor in encouraging people to be tested for HIV. The more people are aware of their HIV status, the easier it is to control the spread of the disease.
That is why it is particularly worrying that the price of new, improved and second-line AIDS medicines remains prohibitively high. It is good news that the price of some established first-line AIDS drugs has come right down, but figures from South Africa and Malawi indicate that up to one in six patients will need to switch to newer drug combinations within three to five years.
What can the Commission do to persuade pharmaceutical companies to register their newer drugs in developing countries and make those newer drugs available at affordable prices? Failing that, we will soon be back to square one. The drugs that still work will be unaffordable and donors, including the EU, will effectively be donating to the pharmaceutical industry.
Raül Romeva i Rueda
(ES) Mr President, we are still a long way from winning the fight against HIV-AIDS; all we need is political will, however.
The numbers are clear: the vast majority of new infections occur in the developing countries, which means that HIV is one of the main factors slowing down the progress of thousands of settlements and communities.
We are therefore talking about a global emergency, from both health and from social and economic points of view. We know what the problem is and we know how to prevent it and treat it. In order to do so, however, we need resources, political responsibility, responsibility on the part of economic sectors and social and cultural responsibility.
For example, amongst other measures, we must guarantee universal access to vital medicines, something which is still not possible due to the greed of certain economic sectors, especially the pharmaceuticals sector, which has no scruples in this regard, and it therefore clearly shares responsibility for mass murder on a global scale.
Furthermore, certain arguments from ultra-conservative sectors against sexual and reproductive health share responsibility for this situation. For example, given the information we have, to oppose appropriate sex education for everybody, particularly the youngest people, in this day and age, is, however you look at it, an affront against life and dignity, and is quite frankly immoral.
This year once again, therefore, we must call for actions, for commitment, and above all we must demand that promises be kept.
Zita Gurmai
(HU) Mr President, we all know of the importance of the struggle against AIDS, and should be aware of our responsibility in this regard as well. It is to this that I attribute the fact that my opinion, submitted last week, has received so many proposed amendments.
Last year there were nearly 40 million people on record living with AIDS, and the illness has truly reached every corner of the world. There are several reasons for its spread. Lack of information is first among these, but other important factors have been drug use and the lack of preparation on the part of some countries' health care systems. In my own country, testing was introduced 20 years ago, and it is to this that we owe the fact that the situation is not bad, yet problems are nonetheless present. The virus is spread 90% through sexual contact and 10% through drug use.
Two further experiences: untreated sexually transmitted infections increase exponentially the risk of AIDS. People with HIV and AIDS find it much more difficult to obtain suitable medical care, if they are able to get any at all. The importance of prevention cannot be emphasised enough, and this includes information. This is especially important among highly vulnerable social groups and for secondary school students. We must take action. We have to help countries outside the Union as well, especially in neighbouring areas. The number of those diagnosed with the infection is constantly growing in some neighbouring countries. Reciprocal action is in the interests of us all. An integrated approach is needed, as the Commissioner has also stated, and we must take action. We all need to be partners in this effort.
Pierre Schapira
(FR) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, this resolution is a step in the right direction. I should like to add that the fight against AIDS is also an issue of governance, which must be dealt with at local level.
I would remind you that in 2007, that is to say at present, 50% of the world's population live in cities. In many African cities, prevention and health care require local authorities to be involved in making those same cities more responsive to local needs and in removing social taboos, which are often very powerful. We must cooperate directly with the cities in order to help them manage their health services and in order to provide them with increased funding.
I should have liked our resolution to have put forward a larger number of practical solutions to be employed on the ground. We could have asked the Commission to make it easier to offer combined treatments in the form of medicines combining three types of remedy in one and the same capsule - an arrangement that would have greatly simplified the treatment of patients living in areas in which hospitals, medicines and laboratories are few in number. We must promote the use of such treatments, ladies and gentlemen, as we have a pressing duty: to achieve the Millennium Development Goals.
Vladimír Špidla
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to thank you for a debate which has shed light on this serious, worldwide problem from a number of perspectives. I think I can say that no objections have emerged in the debate that would undermine the broad strategic value of this document, in terms of either the ideas in the statement or the definition of the areas for action and the goals we need to achieve.
I should like to emphasise the fundamental idea that the only way to address the HIV/AIDS pandemic is with the kind of coordinated, holistic approach that is currently deployed in the fight against poverty, in other words, preventative mechanisms that incorporate cultural norms, education, common sense, screening and care for the sick, including appropriate treatment. I think it is safe to say that the current results cannot be regarded as a success. Neither can we view them as empty words, since the progress that has been made is not inconsiderable. As for the fund, there has been a significant amount of financing. The EU is also providing significant resources to finance a range of projects in all countries and there have been some successes. The TRIPS agreement has been mentioned. As of this year, medicines can be produced more cheaply. I mentioned the fact that there have been times when prices have fallen by 98%. This is indeed noteworthy progress, but in no way could it be called a success. There is no doubt that we need to redouble our efforts.
I should now like to turn to two specific issues, which I feel require a particular response. It was mentioned - though I am not sure I have understood correctly - that in the new Member States there are no suitable centres monitoring this epidemic. This observation is untrue; these centres are everywhere. If we compared their quality of course, we might find that some are better than others. Under the European Treaty there are not many possibilities for direct control, but the idea that these centres do not exist has no basis in reality.
A further problem that was mentioned is the financing of the Fund against AIDS. The Commission has responded to the fact that the Member States are not contributing anything in 2007 by restructuring the resources. I think that one could debate whether this restructuring process has been carried out in the best possible manner, and whether different approaches might be considered, but I also think that the idea of restructuring was in essence a good one, because AIDS is a problem of massive proportions.
In spite of this I believe that if Member States have undertaken to make certain contributions, which would not be significant amounts in relation to their GDP, they should fulfil that commitment. The overall amount of money is very significant, but in relation to GDP it is an amount that can be released in the context of national budgets. It is up to us to channel our efforts into reversing this unacceptable situation, because failure to do so would be unjustifiable and indefensible. I should also like to emphasise the importance of equal opportunities, which will undoubtedly make a significant contribution to overcoming this phenomenon and improving the situation.
Ladies and gentlemen, it is a strange quirk of human nature that we push some things into the background and bring others to the foreground. Take avian flu, for example, and the attention devoted to it. I do not wish, in any way, to underplay that tragedy, but HIV/AIDS is obviously a vastly more significant problem and yet we are unfortunately not devoting the same level of attention to it.
Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to thank you for this debate, which I feel has enabled us to advance further down this path. We must of course be aware that however much we channel all our efforts into resolving the problem, it is a worldwide problem and the chances of our making progress are thus limited. However, as the debate has clearly demonstrated, we must do all that we can to make use of those chances.
President
To conclude the debate, I have received six motions for resolutions.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place tomorrow at 11.00 a.m.