Please fill this field
Alfred SANT Alfred SANT
Alfred SANT

skupina Progresivní aliance socialistů a demokratů v Evropském parlamentu

Člen

Malta - Partit Laburista (Malta)

Datum narození : , Sliema

Písemná vysvětlení hlasování Alfred SANT

Poslanci mohou podat písemné vysvětlení svého hlasování v plénu. Článek 194 jednacího řádu

Komplexní politika Unie v oblasti předcházení praní peněz a financování terorismu – akční plán Komise a další nedávný vývoj (B9-0207/2020) EN

10-07-2020

. – I fully support many of the measures proposed in this resolution and believe they would serve to give renewed impetus to ongoing efforts to eliminate money laundering and terrorism financing, much of which happens across borders.
At a time when governments are struggling to mount full-scale recovery programmes in the wake of the corona virus pandemic, the war must be sharpened against the criminals who siphon off funds that rightly belong to the community as a whole.
However I have had to abstain on this resolution on two counts.
First, it contains proposals that directly or by implication, fail to fully satisfy the balance that should be maintained between what devolves on central EU institutions and on national – in parts sovereign – competences. When such balance is not maintained, EU programmes are likely to fail.
Secondly, it seems to endorse a perspective on my country Malta that to a large extent reflects a one-sided partisan and distorted assessment of the political, economic and professional situation there. The time has come to ensure that our resolutions in this House are no longer guided by not-so-hidden agendas that end up obscuring the aims which we seek to achieve.

Zvláštní pravidla o vysílání řidičů v odvětví silniční dopravy a požadavky na prosazování (A9-0114/2020 - Kateřina Konečná) EN

08-07-2020

. – I voted against the Mobility Package and in favour of some amendments that could at least have improved the package.
The Mobility Package has been divisive for the past years. Its biggest problem is the obligation for a truck to return to base every 8 weeks, even if empty. This blatantly discriminates against Europe’s periphery. Countries at the core of Europe have smaller distances and obstacles to face to return home for the same period. Also, the likely increase in the number of empty runs contradicts the purposes of the Green deal.
Malta supported the main objectives of the proposal: better social conditions for drivers, sustainability of road transport and proper functioning of the EU Single Market. However, one cannot support a package that restricts the mobility of drivers. Such inflexibility will be administratively and financially burdensome for trucking companies that are mainly SMEs, especially again, if working from the periphery.
Indeed, the European Commission launched a detailed impact assessment to be concluded in autumn 2020, which demonstrates how there still are doubts about the whole process.
In such conditions, adoption of the package sends an extremely negative signal and unnecessarily divides Member States in a crucial sector for the European economy.

Denní a týdenní doby řízení, minimální přestávky a doby odpočinku a určování polohy pomocí tachografů (A9-0115/2020 - Henna Virkkunen) EN

08-07-2020

. – I voted against the mobility package and in favour of some amendments that could at least have improved the package.
The mobility package has been divisive for the past years. Its biggest problem is the obligation for a truck to return to base every eight weeks, even if empty. This blatantly discriminates against Europe’s periphery. Countries at the core of Europe have smaller distances and obstacles to face to return home for the same period. Also, the likely increase in the number of empty runs contradicts the purposes of the Green Deal.
Malta supported the main objectives of the proposal: better social conditions for drivers, sustainability of road transport and proper functioning of the EU single market. However, one cannot support a package that restricts the mobility of drivers. Such inflexibility will be administratively and financially burdensome for trucking companies, that are mainly SMEs, especially again, if working from the periphery.
Indeed, the Commission launched a detailed impact assessment to be concluded in autumn 2020, which demonstrates how there are still doubts about the whole process.
In such conditions, adoption of the package sends an extremely negative signal and unnecessarily divides Member States in a crucial sector for the European economy.

Přizpůsobení vývoji v odvětví silniční dopravy (A9-0116/2020 - Ismail Ertug) EN

08-07-2020

. – I voted against the mobility package and in favour of some amendments that could at least have improved the package.
The mobility package has been divisive for the past years. Its biggest problem is the obligation for a truck to return to base every eight weeks, even if empty. This blatantly discriminates against Europe’s periphery. Countries at the core of Europe have smaller distances and obstacles to face to return home for the same period. Also, the likely increase in the number of empty runs contradicts the purposes of the Green Deal.
Malta supported the main objectives of the proposal: better social conditions for drivers, sustainability of road transport and proper functioning of the EU single market. However, one cannot support a package that restricts the mobility of drivers. Such inflexibility will be administratively and financially burdensome for trucking companies, that are mainly SMEs, especially again, if working from the periphery.
Indeed, the Commission launched a detailed impact assessment to be concluded in autumn 2020, which demonstrates how there still are doubts about the whole process.
In such conditions, adoption of the package sends an extremely negative signal and unnecessarily divides Member States in a crucial sector for the European economy.

Bankovní unie – výroční zpráva za rok 2019 (A9-0026/2020 - Pedro Marques) EN

19-06-2020

I have voted in favour of this report.
As is frequently acknowledged, an increasingly convergent and stable Economic and Monetary Union requires a solid Banking Union. Despite progress towards a single banking policy in the euro area, the Banking Union project has stagnated for years. It is still early to say, but the current pandemic crisis might highlight the risks posed by its incompletion. The differences in regimes across the EU could create significant vulnerabilities.
The report also addresses issues deep running consumer issues. EU citizens are confronted by obscure and unfair commercial practices. The interests of vulnerable groups are frequently ignored. The pandemic could exacerbate such aspects with the reduction of banking services to small clients.
Finally, the report tackles the issue of the fight against money laundering. Giving powers for anti-money laundering supervision to an independent Union agency with a single rule book, could be a truly effective way to tackle cross-border illegal activities. However, its prerogatives would need to be implemented in the same way everywhere, with equivalent approaches for all credit institutions across Member States.
Only a truly impartial EU body could preserve the integrity of the EU financial system.

Cestovní ruch a doprava v roce 2020 a v dalších letech (RC-B9-0166/2020, B9-0166/2020, B9-0175/2020, B9-0177/2020, B9-0178/2020, B9-0180/2020, B9-0182/2020, B9-0184/2020) EN

19-06-2020

I voted in favour of this resolution, which tackles the issue of tourism after the COVID-19 crisis.
Tourism cross cuts across various economic sectors, and has a wide-ranging impact on economic growth, employment, and social and sustainable development.
Although it is one of the economic activities worst affected by the pandemic, it is not yet being given its true importance in proposals for the upcoming recovery phase.
Moreover, special care should be given when/if support programmes for the sector are going to be subject to conditionality by way of implementing structural reforms and respecting ecological standards. This could be a problem for vulnerable stakeholders.
In a survival scenario, swift access to funding should be secured, without prematurely burdening small tourism companies with reforms. Similarly, one should strive to limit administrative burdens when accessing funding programmes.
As stressed in the report, I would welcome additional support to the sector based on the share that tourism contributes to a Member State’s economy.
Finally, it should be recognised that reliance on national tourism is feasible as a stop-gap measure for large countries with a sizeable population. The option is not available to small countries and recovery programmes should take good note of this.

Správní spolupráce v oblasti daní: prodloužení některých časových lhůt v důsledku pandemie COVID-19 (C9-0134/2020) EN

19-06-2020

I voted in favour of this measure, which, owing to the COVID-19 pandemic, would defer certain time limits for the filing and exchange of information in the field of taxation.
In 2018, the EU introduced a new reporting regime to increase the level of transparency surrounding harmful tax practices. With more stringent disclosure, this new filing and exchange of information system represented a major change for tax advisors and taxpayers.
The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted operating conditions across a wide range of reporting and administrative activities.
It became reasonable to defer the introduction of the new system to allow stakeholders to adapt to it smoothly and effectively.
This in no way means that the EU is less committed to the fight against tax evasion and avoidance. Indeed, tax transparency will be more essential than ever in the upcoming recovery period. Tax abuses cannot be allowed to siphon off public revenues needed for investment in citizens’ welfare and economic renewal.
The new administrative requirements for Member States and stakeholders are to be deferred for three months. Once that period is over, all the reportable tax arrangements made during the postponement period will still have to be reported.

Zákon o národní bezpečnosti ČLR pro Hongkong a potřeba toho, aby EU hájila vysoký stupeň autonomie Hongkongu (RC-B9-0169/2020, B9-0169/2020, B9-0171/2020, B9-0173/2020, B9-0174/2020, B9-0176/2020, B9-0181/2020, B9-0193/2020) EN

19-06-2020

I have abstained on this resolution, but not because I support the erosion of civil and political liberties in Hong Kong or wherever it may happen.
I did so because it seems to me that when deciding on this and similar issues, this Parliament takes decisions according to criteria that, while being politically loaded, are if not warped, then certainly non-transparent.
From a legal and diplomatic point of view, I do not see much difference in the way in which the central Chinese Government considers its relationship with Hong Kong and that, for instance, of the central Spanish Government in dealing with Catalonia. Yet, the considerations brought forward in the two cases by this Parliament are totally different.
Nor in my view, does it hold water to make for Spain the claim that it is democratic while China, by European standards, is not. Certainly if that argument is legitimate, then the whole historic background relating to the actions of European powers in China must also be brought into the picture.
The euro-centrism that guides the versions we approve of diplomatic realities makes me fear that we do not take the full panoply of facts into account; therefore, I abstained.

Doporučení pro jednání o novém partnerství se Spojeným královstvím Velké Británie a Severního Irska (A9-0117/2020 - Kati Piri, Christophe Hansen) EN

18-06-2020

Though I voted for this resolution, I have to register my reservations regarding how negotiations are proceeding. It seems to me that both sides have spent too much negotiating time digging into their initial positions and maintaining them. In any negotiations, if agreement is to be reached, the lookout should be for acceptable compromises reached on a mutually satisfactory give and take basis. It does not look as if we are close to reaching this approach in the current negotiations. There is no point in blaming just one side for this; both are responsible. Yet meanwhile a huge economic recession is creeping in. Pessimism about the outcome of the Brexit negotiations or indeed their breakdown, will only serve to fuel further negative trends right across the board. This should be considered as unacceptable by all concerned. Both sides at the negotiating table need to drop their rigid and dogmatic approaches. They should stop considering the talks as also serving to give messages and signals to third parties about the implications of the Brexit development, which is now a fait accompli. The priority should be that of arriving at a reasonable deal as quickly as possible.

Konference o budoucnosti Evropy (B9-0170/2020, B9-0179/2020) EN

18-06-2020

I voted in favour of the Resolution on the Conference on the Future of Europe because I believe that a debate on where Europe is heading could be useful.
Nevertheless, I have serious doubts on the approach adopted by some Brussels based entities.
Rather than listening to what European citizens from the different parts of the continent would wish for their future, some political actors seem to wish to impose their agendas on this conference.
Yet, if Europe wants to succeed, it is essential that a bottom-up approach for this debate is adopted.
The actual needs of citizens need to be at the forefront of this conference. The debate should focus on realistic and doable achievements rather than on endless discussions that lead to no conclusion.
Finally, many should come to a realisation that despite the increasing power of the Union, citizens continue to feel closer to their national governments and parliaments. It is therefore essential that national representatives are given a leading role in this debate for the rest of us to listen and understand what is needed for a better future.

Kontakt

Bruxelles

Strasbourg