President. – The next item is the debate on the report by Johan Van Overtveldt, on behalf of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, on competition policy – annual report 2020 (2020/2223(INI)) (A9-0168/2021).

  Margrethe Vestager, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, I would very much like to begin by thanking the rapporteur, Johan Van Overtveldt, and all the shadow rapporteurs for their comprehensive report. I think it provides an excellent basis for today’s debate. I think this engagement deserves our warm thanks.

The time and effort put into this report show the Parliament’s interest in competition policy and how this is seen as an important policy area. That’s because it goes to the very heart of the choices we need to make for Europe to recover from the pandemic. We need to recover in a way that is strong and sustainable, and of course to continue to offer Europeans what they deserve: societies that include them and provide for them. This is also a Europe that seizes the opportunity that comes with the green and digital transitions that give companies of all sizes a fair chance to compete on their merits on a level playing field, to the benefit of the businesses themselves and obviously for us as consumers.

The past 15 months have put a strain on every individual, every human that lives on this planet. Our societies and our economies have been under great strain and, as it happens, it has shown the importance of well—functioning markets for things to continue, for value chains to deliver, for goods to be brought to supermarkets, for hospital equipment to be available, and for protective gear to be there. Competition policy is essential to reach that goal.

The passing months have also shown that our rules remain relevant, that they serve us well and that they can be swiftly adapted if need be. When the crisis hit, our state aid rules enabled quick and effective support to address the economic consequences of COVID—19, while at the same time maintaining the integrity of the single market. The State Aid Temporary Framework enabled Member States to make use of the full flexibility of rules to support their businesses. Since March 2020 the Commission has adopted more than 500 decisions and approved over EUR 3 trillion in aid.

The temporary framework is currently set to apply until the end of this year. We continue to monitor its ability to offer the necessary support, especially for those sectors that are hardest hit, and we know that has everything to do with humans travelling, sleeping, eating – in short, hospitality, culture, tourism. We will continue to look at it because obviously it is important that we can still give support where the crisis has hit, while progressively phasing out the crisis rule once the situation allows for it.

But this year we have not only dealt with the crisis. Along with keeping up the pace of our enforcement, we have worked to ensure that our competition rule book remains fit for the challenges, including those from the green and digital transition. We have launched a reflection process on how competition rules can contribute to the objective of the European Green Deal, and indeed we did it in the Parliament. We are now in the process of reviewing key state aid rules to ensure that they are fully fit for purpose. Just today, we have launched a public consultation on the new climate, energy and environmental state aid guidelines. They will play a key role in enabling the green transition, while maintaining a level playing field in the single market.

We also looked at the jurisdictional and procedural aspects of our merger rules, and we have issued new guidance on the application of the referral mechanism by Member States to the EU level, to work very closely with national competition authorities to enable us to review what we sometimes call killer acquisitions, including in digital markets, things that would otherwise go unnoticed. We are revising our market definition notice to take stock of developments, and also, of course, revising our vertical and horizontal block exemption regulation.

So it is indeed a busy year. Looking forward, not only do we look at competition rules as such, and not only do we enforce them vigorously, but we also seek regulatory solutions to address systemic behaviours arising on large digital platforms with a gatekeeping role. In December last year, we adopted the Digital Markets Act proposal. It aims to ensure that digital markets within our Union remain open and contestable so that companies, both large and small, have fair opportunities to compete online, as they do offline.

The Digital Markets Act will tell the very large gatekeepers what to do and indeed what not to do. It will enable us, in close cooperation with national competition authorities, to act and to sanction gatekeepers who do not respect the rules. The proposal has progressed very well in Council, and I am very happy to see how the pace is picking up in Parliament. I really appreciate that engagement and that interest because we need the regulation and we need it fast. I very much look forward to continuing the discussion with Parliament’s committees and Members over the coming months.

Last, but not least, in addition we’ve just tabled a proposal to deal with foreign subsidies because they can be very distortive. As you will know by heart, for 60 years our state aid rules have been ensuring that aid granted by Member States is targeted, proportional and does not undermine fair competition in the single market. But similar rules for subsidies do not exist for subsidies granted by foreign states, so our proposal aims to make this imbalance a thing of the past. Companies that receive subsidies from non—EU countries will need our approval before they implement big mergers in Europe, in addition to clearance under the EU merger regulation. Companies will have to tell us what subsidies they have received when they bid in large public tenders and, again, won’t be able to win and to close those tenders without our OK. We’ll have the power on our own initiative to investigate any company to see if it has received foreign subsidies that harm fair competition in Europe.

We have a lot on our plate. I appreciate your interest and engagement, and I think it is really well reflected in the report that is the basis for today’s discussion. Thank you very much. I am committed to continuing to work closely with you and I look forward to today’s debate.

  Stéphanie Yon-Courtin, rapporteure pour avis, commission du marché intérieur et de la protection des consommateurs. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Vice-présidente exécutive, Monsieur le rapporteur, chers collègues, je me réjouis de pouvoir m’exprimer sur le rapport annuel sur la politique de concurrence depuis cet hémicycle à Strasbourg. Avant toute chose, je veux remercier le rapporteur pour son excellent travail et sa coopération tout au long des négociations.

La pandémie que nous avons traversée et dont nous commençons à entrevoir la fin, au moins sur le plan sanitaire, a illustré le rôle fondamental de notre politique de concurrence. La mobilisation rapide et efficace de la Commission européenne, avec la mise en place du cadre temporaire en matière d’aides d’État, a notamment permis aux États membres de pouvoir aider, comme il le fallait, les entreprises touchées brutalement par les conséquences économiques de la COVID.

Cette situation exceptionnelle n’a pas vocation à rester définitive. Nous devons rapidement reconstruire notre économie sur des bases solides en préservant la concurrence au sein de notre marché unique. Toutefois, un retour à la normale ne signifie pas revenir au monde d’hier. Nous avons tiré les enseignements de cette crise en matière d’autonomie stratégique et d’harmonisation de notre marché unique. Notre politique de concurrence est un des outils pour y parvenir et pour combattre toute distorsion de concurrence qui fragiliserait notre économie, nos économies et notre marché intérieur.

Je me réjouis que la Commission européenne, en dépit de la crise, ait continué à avancer sur des sujets cruciaux tels que la concurrence déloyale sur le plan international, avec l’instrument sur les subventions étrangères, ainsi que sur les déséquilibres en matière de concurrence en ligne, avec l’acte sur les marchés numériques.

Il y a bien un pilote dans l’avion et nous savons où nous allons. Le Parlement européen doit aussi prendre toute sa place dans le cockpit pour être informé et pour être associé à la feuille de route ambitieuse en matière de politique de concurrence et de relance pour les années à venir.

Relance et concurrence sont deux problématiques intimement liées aux objectifs que nous nous sommes fixés en matière de politique commerciale, industrielle, environnementale, numérique, de protection des consommateurs et de compétitivité.

  Fulvio Martusciello, a nome del gruppo PPE. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, noi abbiamo lavorato con grande energia a questo dossier. Ancora una volta, anche quest'anno, abbiamo individuato una serie di punti che sono distorsivi, a nostro parere, della concorrenza.

Ogni anno facciamo sempre lo stesso lavoro. Mi chiedo quanti punti che abbiamo individuato nelle relazioni degli scorsi anni sono stati poi attuati, sono stati poi valutati dalla Commissione. Non sarebbe il caso che la Commissione, prima di farci avventurare in questo lavoro, ci desse conto di come ha utilizzato il lavoro dell'anno precedente?

Io ho fatto uno studio e ho visto che, ad esempio su quello del 2017,la Commissione ne ha analizzati pochi, 2 o 3 su 181 che ne avevamo individuati. E ritengo che il primo punto distorsivo della concorrenza, Commissario, sia la differenza di tassazione fra gli Stati membri, l'utilizzo che fanno alcuni Stati membri delle politiche fiscali per potersene avvantaggiare.

Io sono partito da Napoli, dalla mia città nel sud Italia, e mi sono fermato a fare il diesel e l'ho pagato 1,7 EUR. Poi mi sono fermato in Lussemburgo e il diesel l'ho pagato 1,1 EUR, perché il Lussemburgo usa la leva fiscale per attrarre investimenti, per attrarre consumatori, e naturalmente le stesse cose accadono in altri paesi dell'Unione.

Questa è la vera anomalia, il vero elemento distorsivo della concorrenza, insieme all'accettazione placida che avviene del boicottaggio. Abbiamo cercato di inserire, a più riprese, in questa relazione la condanna assoluta del boicottaggio dei prodotti provenienti da un'area geografica soltanto perché provenienti da quell'area geografica. Ebbene non ci siamo riusciti per l'ostruzionismo messo in campo dalle forze di sinistra presenti tra i relatori d'ombra. Eppure questo è un altro elemento che, ad esempio in Italia, ha distorto la concorrenza, producendo danni irreversibili nei confronti di aziende che sono state discriminate soltanto perché provenivano da un'area geografica.

Allora noi lavoreremo anche l'anno prossimo sulla stessa relazione INI e ci aspettiamo però una forte inversione da parte sua, Commissario, perché attui e analizzi e valuti quello che noi, il Parlamento sovrano, le indichiamo come priorità.

  Marc Angel, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, let me start by thanking the rapporteur, Johan Van Overtveldt, and the shadow rapporteurs, for the excellent cooperation we have had.

Competition policies are one of the main competencies of the European Union, and as a socialist I am very glad that today we are debating a report that takes into account that competition rules are not only about regulating to ensure fair conditions, but also about the role they play in the achievement of the digital and the environmental transitions.

Competition is not only about low prices, it’s about quality and innovation of products and of production chains. These are crucial elements if we want to reach the goals of the Green Deal. And we have to reach these goals, because they are not just a ‘nice to have’, they are a must!

Therefore, I want to underline once more how important it is not only to foster innovation through competition but also for Member States not to distort this phenomenon. Even each justified State aid must be in line with the Green Deal, with the Sustainable Development Goals and our pillar of social rights.

This report also takes into account that loopholes in the existing legislation exist when it comes to the digital markets.

While we are all aware that data is a source of considerable economic power and leverage, often procedures – especially in the antitrust field – are way too slow to keep up with fast—developing business models in the digital markets and also because ex ante interventions are so far forbidden.

Meanwhile, the European Union is watching gatekeepers become ever more powerful – the recent data scandals show us the necessity to act: for example, the Facebook—WhatsApp merger, where Facebook lied about its technical abilities on using data from WhatsApp for personalised adds on Facebook. In fact, one could also call the unwillingness of the CEOs of the GAFAs (Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple) to appear in front of this Parliament as the next scandal.

The upcoming DMA (Digital Market Act) is thus a very good opportunity, which must be used to complement competition policies. Nevertheless, there is also room for improvement when it comes to antitrust and merger procedures, and lastly also to the sanction mechanisms – a conclusion that has already been drawn many times before in this annual report, and where the Commission finally must act.

Allow me at the end to underline that the European Commission needs to continue actively monitoring and removing unjustified geo—blocking, and as an MEP from Luxembourg, a small Member State, I also call on the Commission in view of a fully functioning Single Market to address the anti—competitive effects of the so—called Territorial Supply Constraints.

  Claude Gruffat, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Madame la Présidente, chère commissaire Vestager, chers collègues, 2020 n’aura pas été une année de crise pour tout le monde. Pour certaines entreprises, c’est même une année mémorable et terrible: 2020, c’est l’année des records en termes d’aides d’État.

En France, 100 % des grandes entreprises ont touché des aides publiques exceptionnelles, sans aucune conditionnalité écologique ou sociale. Quand nos TPE et PME luttent pour leur survie, 26 de nos 40 champions nationaux reversent 51 milliards d’euros de dividendes à leurs actionnaires, soit 22 % de plus que l’an passé: l’équivalent budgétaire français de l’Éducation nationale ou des dépenses de personnel des hôpitaux publics. Pour Bruno Le Maire, le ministre français des finances, c’est dans les moments de crise qu’il faut profiter de l’argent de l’État. En disant cela, il ne s’adressait pas aux demandeurs d’aide alimentaire dont le nombre explose, ni aux étudiants désespérés, ni aux soignants en burn-out, ni aux neuf millions de pauvres en France. Il s’adressait aux grands patrons, qui ont bien saisi le message.

Crise ou pas, l’économie, pour eux, se résume à faire passer la richesse de la poche des contribuables à celle de l’actionnaire. Et ceci sans contrepartie, sans ruissellement, mais avec concentration des richesses, avec licenciements, avec évasion et opacité fiscales, avec négation de l’urgence climatique.

Chers collègues, sans conditionnalité associée aux aides d’État, le monde d’après ressemblera furieusement au monde d’avant en pire, et nous ne l’acceptons pas. Trop de conséquences néfastes en découleront. C’est grave.

  Maximilian Krah, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist bemerkenswert, dass wir über einen Bericht diskutieren, und der Berichterstatter hat ihn selbst nicht vorstellen können. Vielleicht zeigt das auch, dass dieser Bericht in eine falsche Richtung geht.

Wettbewerbsrecht dient dazu, durch faire Bedingungen für jedermann Wohlstand zu schaffen. Und der Glaube, durch Aufweichung der starren Regeln des Wettbewerbsrechts und durch mehr staatliche Intervention könne man Wohlstand schaffen, ist ein Trugschluss. Sozialismus klingt immer gut, aber er wirkt meistens schlecht, und wir können daher auch dem vorliegenden Bericht nichts Gutes abgewinnen. Vielleicht ganz gut, dass der Berichterstatter ihn nicht vorstellen konnte.

Der erste Punkt ist, dass dieser Bericht fordert, dass die Übergangsfristen, die wir wegen der Pandemie eingeführt haben und die zu Lockerungen des Wettbewerbsregimes führen, verlängert werden. Dies führt dazu, dass wir später – und so ist die Intention des Berichterstatters eigentlich gar nicht – zum Wettbewerbsrecht, wie wir es vor der Pandemie hatten, zurückkehren. Das halten wir für falsch. Ausnahmen sind deshalb Ausnahmen, weil sie auf bestimmte Situationen antworten, aber eben nicht dauerhaft bestehen. Wir brauchen ein strenges, korrektes Wettbewerbsrecht, und wir brauchen keine Ausnahmen, um mehr Beihilfen auszuzahlen und damit weitere Haushaltsdefizite anzuhäufen.

Das Zweite, was wir kritisieren, ist, dass eine Anpassung der EU-Wettbewerbspolitik an die Pariser Klimaziele gefordert wird. Dies führt dazu, dass ein zunehmend sehr großer Bereich der Wirtschaft von den Wettbewerbsregeln ausgenommen wird. Da wir mittlerweile ja alles zu einer Klimafrage erheben, heißt das, dass wir weitere Einschränkungen unseres Wettbewerbsrechts vornehmen müssen und Wildwuchs Tür und Tor geöffnet wird.

Und schließlich fordert der Bericht wiederum, dass die Patente für medizinische Forschungen aufgehoben werden. Bereits der Rat hat sich dagegen ausgesprochen, und wir haben bei der Diskussion über die kleinen und mittelständischen Unternehmen soeben das Beispiel BioNTech gehört. Es gäbe kein BioNTech, wenn diese Empfehlung umgesetzt würde. Wir brauchen Patentschutz, damit es Entwicklungen gibt.

Und deshalb lehnen wir den Bericht ab, denn er geht in jederlei Hinsicht in die falsche Richtung. Das Gegenteil von gut ist gut gemeint. Wir brauchen Wettbewerb. Wettbewerb schafft Innovation und Arbeitsplätze. Und wir brauchen keine Ausnahmen vom fairen Wettbewerb.

  José Gusmão, em nome do Grupo The Left. – Senhora Presidente, esta crise mostrou que não há conjunto de regras europeias que aguente uma crise. Orçamentais, regras de sistema financeiro, regras de competição, sempre que a União Europeia e a zona euro enfrentam uma crise, têm que suspender todas as suas regras fundamentais. O que deveria motivar uma reflexão, mas, aparentemente, ela não consta deste relatório.

As regras de concorrência foram suspensas para que a Alemanha pudesse, graças à também suspensão das regras orçamentais, injetar dezenas de milhares de milhões de euros nas suas empresas públicas ou privadas. A Comissão Europeia, que sempre aplicou, aliás, as regras de forma altamente discricionária e desigual entre Estados-Membros, aplica agora também a suspensão das regras de forma igualmente discricionária e desigual entre Estados-Membros. E, curiosamente, continua a não ver problemas de concorrência no dumping fiscal, no dumping social, no dumping laboral e no dumping ambiental, que continuam a ser o modelo de negócio de grande parte dos Estados-Membros da União Europeia. Discricionariedade em tudo, incluindo nos critérios.

  Clara Ponsatí Obiols (NI). – Madam President, three Spanish Prime Ministers and more than 20 Ministers sit on the boards of the big utility corporations, cashing millionaire rewards from the very same companies their governments had privatised and set the market rules for. It is hardly a surprise or a coincidence that a recent Commission report warns that Spain is the European champion of market barriers in electricity and that consumers there pay the top rates across the EU.

The upcoming allocation of recovery funds with SMEs’ limited capabilities to submit large projects will only increase market distortions. These funds must not be a free lunch for oligopolies to wipe out smaller competitors. But in Spain, the large IBEX 35 corporations stand ready to swallow the lion’s portion of the recovery funds. Endesa wants 23 billion, Naturgy wants 14 billion, Enagás more than six billion. Unless you, the Commission, are much more vigilant than you have been up to now, European taxpayers will soon be directly filling crony capitalism and revolving doors in Spain. And let me just mention that we are very happy to be back in Strasbourg and walking free in the French Republic.

  Johan Van Overtveldt, rapporteur. – Madam President, let me flag you clearly that I was available here from the beginning of the session, even before Commissioner Vestager spoke, and we continuously got the signal that we were connected. So I don’t know what’s happening, but I find this really outrageous and I would like to ask you to check on your side how this is possible.

Madam President, Vice-President, Commissioner Vestager, colleagues, we’ve reached the point where the biggest crisis in decades is gradually coming under control – although ‘control’ has to be treated with care in this context. The vaccination campaign is key to recovery. I remain convinced that the EU has missed opportunities and has lost time. We will continue to carry this backlog in the recovery phase, and I hope that lessons will be learned from this.

In that recovery phase lies another challenge for the European institutions. The resources from the Recovery Fund must achieve their purpose. There is no place for inefficiencies, for irregularities, for illegal use.

But the recovery does not only depend on additional resources. The way the EU organises itself and prepares itself for the future will be equally decisive. Innovation and competitiveness will be important drivers. That was already the case pre-Corona, and it is of course now also the case.

The present report highlights some important elements related to our competitive environment, our growth potential and our relationship with major international players. We are also confronted with digital powers that know no territory or borders. Free and fair competition is crucial to drive innovation and growth and give consumers more choices, lower prices and better quality. We call for strict and impartial enforcement of EU competition rules. But these rules must also be updated concerning, of course, the digital age.

Recently, the debate has focused very much on the digitax, and yes, everybody agrees that the internet giants also have to make a fair contribution to tax receipts. That is important. But the big challenge in our relationship with these players lies elsewhere. The big tech companies are well organised enough to absorb and/or pass on those digital taxes to users and consumers.

The real challenge we face is the monopoly of these companies. After all, a digitax does not change that situation. It smothers smaller, innovative companies – they do not even get the chance to grow, with all the associated consequences in terms of innovation, growth and even employment.

This report examines the role of these digital players in more detail, and the relationship with governments and consumers. It welcomes the Commission’s determination to address unfair terms and practices of platforms acting as gatekeepers and eliminate illegitimate obstacles to online competition in the European digital single market. However, the slowness of anti-trust investigations mismatches fast-moving digital markets.

The report is particularly critical of the Commission’s handling of the Google search bias case, as well as the takeover of the WhatsApp messenger service by Facebook.

Structural unbundling of big tech monopolies may be desirable for restoring competition in digital markets, given the limits of fines and the failure of past behavioural remedies in certain anti-trust cases. The report calls on the Commission to review its merger and acquisition rules when it comes to asserting personal data.

In summary, we ask the Commission to monitor the evolutions in the digital market with persistence, efficiency and the appropriate speed. The report is, of course, not limited to the digital market. At the tail-end of the COVID crisis are important challenges on the road to efficient recovery. In that regard, we welcome the adoption of the temporary framework for state aid measures established in response to the unprecedented COVID—19 crisis.

We call on the Commission to be sure and monitor the proper use and distribution of the different EU funding measures in response to the COVID-19 crisis, which should be in accordance with EU competition and state aid rules. We are in need of a post COVID-19 roadmap for better-targeted state aid in order to promote competitiveness and safeguard jobs.

We also urge the Commission to pay attention to the role of the foreign-based state-owned enterprises that are supported and subsidised by their governments in ways that the EU single market rules prohibit for EU entities. There has to be some serious concern about distortive state-funded competition from foreign undertakings acquiring European undertakings.

Last but not least, the report calls for reflection on possible distortions of competition arising from the European Central Bank’s corporate bonds purchases.

We’re at an absolutely historical point for our economies, for the welfare of our citizens. Do we succeed in bringing about a sustained and healthy recovery? Appropriate monetary and budgetary policies are much needed, but so is also a robust competition policy.

Let us avoid the historic mistake made by the American President, Franklin Roosevelt, in his New Deal. Roosevelt’s National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) of 1933 contained many solid, constructive and much-needed measures, but this NIRA also limited competition, allowed cartels, allowed collusion and even stimulated price fixing. A lot of research has gone into NIRA and the results are unequivocal. The results of these anti-competitive measures were a substantial rise in inflation, a reduction of growth by at least 25%, and substantially less job creation.

Let us avoid these kinds of mistakes. Let us take robust competition policy and its implementation very seriously.

  President. – Thank you very much Mr Van Overtveldt, and my apologies. I was not aware of any problems in connection and I will definitely report the case. Thank you very much. We continue with the debate.

  Lídia Pereira (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, o mercado interno da União Europeia é uma das maiores conquistas da integração. Para a minha geração, que não conhece as fronteiras fechadas de outros tempos, há três pilares desse mercado único que, progressivamente, terá de ser mais verde e mais digital.

Em primeiro lugar, a liberdade de circulação de pessoas, bens, serviços e capitais. Em segundo lugar, o modelo social europeu em que assenta a nossa economia social de mercado. Em terceiro lugar, a política de concorrência que, quando é justa, leal e equilibrada, protege os consumidores e ajuda a nossa economia a crescer e a inovar.

Alguns políticos nacionais atacam a política de concorrência europeia quando as decisões não lhes agradam. O caso do governo português com a TAP, a companhia aérea nacional, é exemplo disso mesmo. O que estes políticos não percebem (ou fingem não perceber) é que são as regras da concorrência europeias que protegem a competitividade das empresas de países como Portugal.

A pandemia mostrou que temos um quadro de regras suficientemente flexível para enfrentar emergências. O que precisamos agora é de olhar para os desafios do futuro, que é cada vez mais digital e online. Garantir que as mesmas regras se aplicam a quem vende o mesmo produto ou presta o mesmo serviço, seja na nossa rua ou no nosso ecrã.

Está na hora de irmos mais longe.

  Paul Tang (S&D). – Madam President, last Friday the Commissioner announced she has opened a formal antitrust investigation into Facebook in cooperation with the UK Competition and Markets Authority, and the claim is that Facebook has constructed an unfair advantage on the online advertising sector. This goes under the heading: better late than never.

Today we will discuss the annual competition policy report looking back at 2020, and over a year ago we adopted a report with similar parts, in which a vast majority of Parliament called on the Commissioner to propose legislation restricting Facebook’s main revenue stream: digital advertising. For years, the market share of Facebook and Google have increased at an exponential rate, and today we are facing a duopoly. So Parliament cannot but repeat itself that there is a significant problem insufficiently tackled.

I am glad that the Commission has put forward legislation that will address part of the market dominance of some giants, but as shadow rapporteur on the digital market tax I have to express my great concern. Market definition is still the same; neither the Digital Markets Act nor the Digital Services Act will change the digital advertising market fundamentally, and interoperability measures for core services are missing. So in short, the motto – if you choose to accept it, Commissioner – is: let’s move fast and break monopoly power.

  Jean-Lin Lacapelle (ID). – Madame la Présidente, madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, dans l'idéologie libérale qui a inspiré les traités européens, la concurrence a toujours été le seul objectif. Esclaves de la théorie selon laquelle la concurrence optimiserait sans cesse la créativité et le rendement, vous avez édifié un monde où tous les acteurs économiques sont censés en permanence se montrer vigilants et performants.

Cette course à la rentabilité, qui a sacrifié des millions d'emplois, a constitué un système inhumain et stupide qui a permis aux grandes entreprises, par la mondialisation, par la délocalisation, d'échapper au contrôle de leurs États et d'abuser de leurs règles dans les pays où il n'y en a aucune. Vous commencez à prendre la mesure de cette catastrophe et vous nous proposez une réforme des aides publiques d'État qui va enfin favoriser la recherche et les projets européens, notamment dans le numérique, alors qu'hier, vous refusiez ce volontarisme au motif que ce n'était pas équitable vis-à-vis des pays extra-européens.

Notre groupe a toujours dénoncé la concurrence déloyale et ses ravages. Les correctifs qu'apporte l'Union européenne, en revanche, ne sont pas suffisants. C'est une véritable rupture idéologique qu'il faut mettre en place, en renouant avec le protectionnisme intelligent, en instaurant la préférence nationale dans certaines commandes publiques, en relançant la croissance par l'investissement. Ce projet doit être celui de la raison comme de la paix sociale, en opposition avec le conflit permanent de la concurrence.

Nous avons eu raison depuis trente ans. Il est temps de tourner la page et de nous faire confiance.

  Manon Aubry (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, ma très grande entreprise ne connaît pas la crise. En 2021, les géants du CAC 40 vont verser 51 milliards d’euros à leurs actionnaires. C’est 22 % de plus que l’an dernier. Un véritable miracle, n’est-ce pas? En fait, pas vraiment, car toutes ces entreprises, comme Total ou Sanofi, ont touché des aides de l’État. Et le scandale ne s’arrête pas là, car le CAC 40 prévoit de supprimer en même temps 30 000 emplois rien qu’en France.

Pendant qu’on laisse les PME mourir, on subventionne l’enrichissement des actionnaires, et l’Union européenne, si prompte à bloquer toute aide aux entreprises publiques, applaudit des deux mains. Cette politique au service d’une poignée de privilégiés a trop duré. L’État et l’Union européenne doivent reprendre la main et conditionner les aides. Pas un euro d’argent public ne doit servir à supprimer des emplois, faire de l’évasion fiscale ou détruire la planète. C’est un levier stratégique essentiel pour la bifurcation écologique et l’emploi. Mais c’est aussi et surtout un impératif de justice face aux inégalités qui explosent.

  Enikő Győri (NI). – Tisztelt Elnök úr, Képviselőtársaim! Örülök, és a jelentéstevő munkáját dicséri, hogy az állami támogatások mellett a jelentésben hangsúlyt kap a versenyképesség, még ha az – mint azt sok vitában magam is megtapasztaltam – szitokszó a baloldal szótárában. A versenyképesség a jövő záloga, ha nem akarunk lemaradni az USA és Ázsia mögött. Ezért értek egyet azzal is, hogy az állami támogatások átmeneti szabályozása az európai gazdaság talpra állásáig legyen érvényben.

Amit sajnálok, hogy az adózás tekintetében megjelenik a jelentésben a baloldali narratíva. Bár a szöveg elismeri, hogy az adópolitika tagállami hatáskör, az adócsökkentést támogató országokat célkeresztbe állítja. Tegyünk meg mindent azért, hogy a multik, de senki ne kerülhesse el az adófizetést, de akkor ismerjük el: a tisztességes adóverseny hozzájárul a versenyképesség növeléséhez, hiszen arra ösztönzi a vállalatokat, hogy az Unió területén maradjanak. Büszkén mondhatom, hogy Magyarország az egyik legjobb példája annak, hogyan lehet adócsökkentés révén növelni az állami bevételeket, az uniós átlag feletti gazdasági növekedést és csökkenő munkanélküliséget elérni. Meg kellene érteni végre, a belső versenyképességtől az EU versenyképessége is nő.

  Alfred Sant (S&D). – Madam President, (inaudible) triggered by the COVID—19 pandemic has been especially severe for enterprises, mostly SMEs, in tourism, hospitality and culture, not least those based in EU island regions. Determination of major transport connections and interruption of ongoing business relations cannot be brought back to their original base overnight. State aid is crucial, but needs time to work effectively.

Some would like a so—called return to normal on economic regulation, and for this to happen as soon as possible. But this has no real—life logic to back it, only dogma. The idea that the re—application of state aid rules must follow the same tempo as the epidemiological situation is absurd. The two follow different time clocks.

Rather, the exceptional measures adopted under the temporary framework for the hospitality and culture sectors as affected by the COVID—19 crisis must be maintained, no matter what the received wisdom about competition and what the rules say. Yes, the lessons of the 2008 financial crisis must be kept in mind, but they cannot be taken as the be—all—and—end all compass by which to navigate today’s storm. Otherwise, we risk the collapse of major sectors of activity, like tourism and culture.

ΠΡΟΕΔΡΙΑ: ΔΗΜΗΤΡΙΟΣ ΠΑΠΑΔΗΜΟΥΛΗΣ
Αντιπρόεδρος

  Carmen Avram (S&D). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, stimați colegi, felicit echipa care a lucrat la acest dosar, pentru reiterarea mesajului ferm al Parlamentului European: în piața internă nu există loc pentru practici neloiale, iar drepturile celor 450 de milioane de cetățeni nu se negociază.

Anul trecut pandemia a lovit necruțător producătorii europeni de hrană. Deși au făcut eforturi supraomenești pentru a garanta securitatea alimentară, producătorii au fost nevoiți să se lupte cu practicile neloiale întețite ale retailerilor. Un studiu european recent arată că aproape 20 % dintre producătorii chestionați, inclusiv corporații, se plâng de avalanșa de abuzuri din 2020 și știu ce s-a întâmplat și în țara mea, România.

Asta în timp ce importatorii au beneficiat de măsuri mult mai avantajoase pentru produsele lor care au standarde și prețuri mai joase.

În concluzie, așa cum arată și acest raport, Comisia trebuie să se asigure că regulile de competiție vor fi respectate prin măsuri mai ferme care să garanteze un preț corect pentru munca fermierilor și un acces facil nediscriminatoriu pe rafturile hipermarketurilor și aplicarea principiului reciprocității în toate acordurile comerciale cu țări terțe.

Anul 2020 nu trebuie să devină un precedent periculos.

  Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Domnule președinte, doamnă comisar, dragi colegi, proiectul european este profund legat de existența unei competiții corecte și reale. Fără reguli și standarde comune, încrederea în instituțiile europene riscă să scadă tot mai mult. De aceea, în contextul pandemiei, este extrem de important ca toate statele europene și, în mod special, IMM-urile, să aibă acces la aceleași oportunități.

În același timp, facilitățile oferite trebuie să permită inițiativelor private, cu un grad scăzut de digitalizare, să facă față noilor provocări. Din păcate, statisticile arată că doar anumite state europene au putut să sprijine companiile, generând o destabilizare importantă a pieței interne. Majoritatea ajutoarelor de stat, facilitate de către noile reguli europene, au fost oferite de câteva state membre, conducând la o competiție inegală. Comisia Europeană trebuie să se asigure că acest lucru nu va perturba piața și să identifice noi mecanisme prin care și companiile din țările mai puțin dezvoltate să aibă acces la finanțări.

  Margrethe Vestager, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, thank you, and first and foremost I would like to thank the rapporteur for his words. I think it was really important that Johan came on board to give us this overview, because I think it shows the debates that the rapporteurs and the shadows had engaged in during this work. I was especially struck by the last sentences: not to repeat historical mistakes, to make sure that when we recover we use the drivers of fair competition to help us recover, that we do not shy away and basically let the bigger ones get most of the recovery.

The words on the temporary framework: I do understand why that creates a lot of debate, but looking forward – also reflecting on some of the last remarks – I think it’s really important that we are cautious not to create a cliff—edge. The temporary framework is set to stop by the end of this year, but we already now are sharing with Member States the different things that can be done for the sectors which are really, really challenged – tourism, culture, mobility, hospitality – for instance, to create a fund where a state guarantee crowds in private investment in order to enable capital for the businesses where capital has been completely depleted. That is the thing to do. And just this week, we sent a number of questions to Member States to get their insight as to what is needed in order to make sure that we make the most of the support that was already given.

One feature that I will mention here is the feature that you can actually transfer what was given as a loan into a grant in order not to nullify all the efforts done to make businesses survive this crisis when the states asked them to close the door – because this is so different from any other normal crisis; this is a situation where the states, because of the health situation, asked businesses to close their doors. Here I think it is fully legitimate for the states, for us as taxpayers, to step in, to make sure that they have a fair chance of coming back, doing the best they can and serve us and be available for the green and the digital transition.

On exactly that question, what a state does must be in accordance with the legislation, but taking direct commitments on social affairs or green, that has to be really considered. And this is why, as of today, we have launched a consultation on the climate, energy and environmental aid guidelines. Where and how do we in the best possible way enable the transition while still maintaining the drivers of fair competition? And one of the questions asked initially sheds light on one of the things I’m aware of on a very daily basis: competition law enforcement is a strong instrument, but we are not alone in the world. On the contrary, we need a lot of other things to happen at the same time for businesses, for customers, for consumers, to meet a fair and level playing field. There may be a number of single market issues, and here now we have the single market enforcement task force, where Member States and the Commission come together to make sure that the barriers that have been rising here, there, left, centre, that they have been taken down, because this is basically what we need.

We need to do this together to make sure that we make the best of the competitive drivers while at the same time transitioning our economy. And as several of you have mentioned, this work sometimes seems slower than how the market is driving us. But it is still, I think, really important to accept that we cannot compromise on the quality of our work. We cannot compromise on due process because we live in a Union based on the rule of law. And this is why vigorous competition law enforcement, the regulation that you’re now looking at: that combination will be of the essence.

I want to thank you very much, and looking at the different recommendations of this year’s report, I hope that, if nothing else, then last year you will say that I have lived up to the recommendation that we are encouraged to continue the structured dialogue, the really close working relationship between us and the European Parliament, because that support is crucial, and it is for your voters, for the European citizens, to feel that they deserve affordable goods, innovative products, choice and quality delivered from the marketplace.

  Πρόεδρος. – Η συζήτηση έληξε.

Η ψηφοφορία θα διεξαχθεί αύριο.

Γραπτές δηλώσεις (άρθρο 171 του Κανονισμού)

  Andrus Ansip (Renew), kirjalikult. – Konkurentsipoliitika on oluline vahend ühtse turu tugevdamiseks. Aus konkurents tagab ka tugeva tarbijakaitse. Viimastel aastatel on nii ettevõtted kui ka tarbijad kogenud aga majanduse digitaalset muutust. See areng on tekitanud lünki traditsioonilises konkurentsipoliitikas ja monopolidevastane mudel on nendele muutustele reageerimisel osutunud liiga aeglaseks. Seetõttu tervitan Euroopa Komisjoni keskendumist meie konkurentsipoliitika ajakohastamisele, et tulla toime digitaalsektori väljakutsetega. Olin siseturukomisjonis konkurentsipoliitika arvamusraporti autor, milles keskendusin nn väravavahi rollis olevatele platvormidele. Eriti, kui tegemist on näiteks e-kaubandusega, on mõnede platvormide domineerimisel tõsised tagajärjed tarbijate valikuvabadusele ja paljude Euroopa ettevõtete turulepääsule. Euroopa Liit peab kohandama konkurentsivahendeid vastavalt turu hiljutistele ja tulevastele arengutele ning selleks on alanud ka parlamendis läbirääkimised digiturgude õigusakti üle, millega kehtestatakse sisule juurdepääsu kontrollijatele kohustused ja keelud, mida nad peavad oma igapäevategevuses järgima.

  Roberts Zīle (ECR), rakstiski. – Pagājušais gads ir bijis izaicinājums visas mūsu dzīves jomās. Ekonomika ir ļoti cietusi, un mūsu uzdevums ir nodrošināt, lai atveseļošanās noritētu ar iespējami mazākiem zaudējumiem. Šis ziņojums akcentē mūsu konkurences un attīstības potenciāla izaugsmes iespējas. Digitālajai videi nav teritoriālā ierobežojuma, kas nozīmē, ka mūsu izpratne par šo nozari ir patstāvīgi jāaktualizē, it īpaši attiecībā uz lielajiem tehnoloģiju uzņēmumiem. Ja mēs vēlamies saglabāt neatkarību un godīgus konkurences noteikumus, mums jāņem vērā šajā ziņojumā minētais.