Schriftliche Erklärungen zur Abstimmung Thomas BAJADA

I voted in favour to reject extending the temporary exemption to the ePrivacy Directive because I believe it could delay agreement on a permanent EU law to better protect children from online sexual abuse.
Earlier this year, the European Parliament had already rejected extending these temporary rules because it wants stronger safeguards for citizens’ fundamental rights. The temporary system allows online service providers to voluntarily scan private communications for child sexual abuse material. Parliament had argued that any detection should be more targeted and subject to judicial authorisation.
Today’s approval of the temporary extension now risks weakening Parliament’s position in the ongoing negotiations and makes it harder to secure a stronger, permanent legal framework.
That permanent framework is important because it would create long-term tools to tackle child sexual abuse online, including an EU Centre to help detect known abuse material, coordinate action and support its removal across online platforms.
Protecting children and protecting fundamental rights must go hand in hand. We should not rely indefinitely on temporary measures or voluntary scanning by private companies, especially when these measures have shown clear limitations. Europe needs a durable, effective and rights-based legal framework that better protects children while respecting the privacy and freedoms of all citizens.

I supported the joint motion for a resolution, because it protects medicine affordability without weakening the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive or suspending extended producer responsibility (EPR). The right approach is balanced and evidence-based implementation, not weakening rules that ensure clean water, safe seas and the protection of citizens.
Proper wastewater treatment is essential for citizens. At the same time, concerns about the availability, affordability and accessibility of medicines, particularly generic and critical medicines, must be taken seriously.
The joint motion calls for an independent study by the end of 2026 that should verify which substances are present in urban wastewater, assess the real costs of quaternary treatment, identify which sectors should contribute under the polluter-pays principle, and examine any possible impact on medicine supply and affordability. If evidence shows that critical or generic medicines could be affected, the Commission is called on to act quickly and introduce safeguards.
However, I could not support a temporary suspension of EPR. Suspending EPR would not make pollution disappear. It would delay cleaner wastewater treatment, allow micropollutants to affect water bodies and aquatic life for longer, and risk leaving citizens with the bill.
My vote is clear: protect affordable medicines, protect clean water and do not pass pollution costs onto ordinary people.

I voted in favour of the Parliament’s report on the 28th regime, a new legal framework for innovative companies, because I believe that a discussion on a 28th EU regime for companies can help new and innovative businesses remain, scale up, and grow in Europe’s single market.
I am particularly in favour the Parliament’s approach, because participation in the regime is voluntary. Equally important is that employment law should not fall within the scope of this regime. Both principles must be kept.
At the same time, I wish to clearly express my opposition to the inclusion of tax matters within this proposed legal framework. Any new proposals concerning the taxation of company profits fall within an area that requires unanimity among Member States. As such, a differentiated approach would be necessary, and tax issues should not be addressed through this initiative.

Bħal m'għamilt b'mod konsistenti dwar is-suġġett tal-abort, mill-jum li fih ġejt elett, qed nirreġistra astensjoni fuq ir-riżoluzzjonijiet kollha ppreżentati llum.
Nibqa' impenjat u nsostni b'ċertezza l-prinċipju li nemmen fih: li diskussjonijiet dwar l-abort f'Malta għandhom isiru bla aġendi politiċi, bla polarizazzjoni u b'rispett profond lejn ir-realtajiet soċjali u etiċi tagħna. Din dejjem kienet il-pożizzjoni tiegħi, u nibqa' konvint li huwa essenzjali li nħarsu djalogu nazzjonali li hu onest, inklussiv u liberu minn pressjonijiet jew sfruttament politiku.
Fl-istess waqt, irrid inkun ċar: jien kompletament kontra li nisa f'Malta jiġu meqjusa kriminali u jintbagħtu l-ħabs għax ikunu għaddew minn abort.
L-ebda mara m'għandha taffaċċja konsegwenzi kriminali għal deċiżjoni daqshekk personali – u li ħafna drabi, tkun waħda trawmatika. Il-kompassjoni, id-dinjità u l-appoġġ f'każijiet ta' kumplikazzjonijiet ta' saħħa għandhom imexxu l-ħidma tagħna ma' dawn il-persuni.
Astensjoni m'għandhiex tiġi interpretata bħala reżistenza għall-progress, u lanqas bħala indifferenza.
Hija riflessjoni ta' pożizzjoni bilanċjata u prinċipju konsistenti lejn:
- ix-xewqa ta' dibattitu nazzjonali, sensittiv u sovran f'Malta;
- ir-rispett li dan is-suġġett ma jintużax bħala ballun politiku u;
- il-ħarsien tal-mara mill-kriminalizzazzjoni u l-assigurazzjoni tal-benesseri tagħhom.
Nibqa' impenjat lejn djalogu nazzjonali kostruttiv u sovran, imsejjes fuq l-empatija u r-responsabbiltà, fejn dejjem inpoġġu l-benesseri tal-bniedem fiċ-ċentru ta' ħidmietna.

I voted in favour of the first omnibus simplification package in line with the objective of simplification where it strengthens the EU’s competitiveness, safeguards jobs, and supports growth. A clearer regulatory framework is essential for a resilient European economy, and legal certainty is particularly important for SMEs.
The disorderly process and political bickering that preceded the trilogue agreement risked undermining that certainty. Businesses need clarity and stability to plan and invest with confidence. My vote also reflects a clear conviction that EU legislation must avoid a one-size-fits-all approach. Our laws must be tailored, proportionate, and accompanied by adequate public support to ensure that our economies remain dynamic and competitive.
However, I regret the sidelining of climate transition plans. Environmental and climate considerations are too often treated as secondary to short-term calculations that ignore the real, current and growing economic costs of environmental degradation. This package must therefore not be treated as a template for future simplification efforts. Each legislative file requires a case-specific, balanced approach that places all aspects of citizens’ wellbeing at its core.

I unequivocally endorse and actively support this report’s forward-looking and comprehensive vision for equality, fairness and empowerment of women and girls across Europe. It rightly underlines the urgent need to eliminate discrimination, secure equal pay, and strengthen women’s participation in leadership, education and employment.
Yet, certain elements of the text address matters of profound ethical sensitivity, particularly the topic of safe and legal abortion.
Malta is currently facing a deeply sensitive and divisive debate. I respect constituents that hold strong views on this issue – whether shaped by faith or by belief in bodily autonomy. We must acknowledge the sincerity and conviction on both sides.
Such matters deserve an open discussion at a national level – free from fear, slogans, and partisanship, but rooted in mutual respect and through an objective and scientific consultation process. Every voice must be heard – not silenced – away from divisive beliefs and political manoeuvring.
While I fully support the overarching goals of the report, I abstained on sections specifically related to abortion, and consequently, on the final vote. My abstention represents a principled stance for balance: safeguarding women’s rights across Europe, while upholding the need for inclusive, informed and nationally grounded dialogue on sensitive ethical matters.

I voted against the 2023 and 2024 reports on Ukraine because of two major issues.
Firstly, the report calls for the removal of unanimity in Council and the introduction of qualified majority voting in the foreign affairs area. I cannot accept the dwindling of power of individual Member States in the EU decision-making process on such important matters. This would be particularly detrimental for smaller Member States like mine.
Secondly, I cannot support the report’s recommendations for EU military aid to Ukraine. Such a stance conflicts with the constitutional principles of neutral Member States. This fundamental consideration must be considered when shaping institutional positions on the matter.

Malta is currently facing a deeply sensitive and divisive debate on whether to permit the legal termination of a pregnancy. This is not an abstract issue, as it touches our most deeply held values, beliefs, and personal experiences. I acknowledge the June 2024 amendments to national law, which allowed for termination when a woman’s life or health is at risk.
I have deep respect for those who, in my constituency, hold strong views on this issue, whether shaped by faith, or by belief in bodily autonomy. We must acknowledge the sincerity and conviction on both sides.
However, I believe Malta needs a space for open discussion – free from fear, slogans, and partisanship, but rooted in mutual respect, through an objective and scientific consultation process, where every voice is heard – not silenced – and away from divisive beliefs and political manoeuvring.
The report voted on today included crucial elements on access to care, prevention, and health rights. Whilst supporting the whole package, I abstained on the paragraph relating to abortion. I believe that, as a politician, taking a definitive position at this moment risks deepening division within Maltese society. My vote reflects a call to moving beyond politics and ensuring that voices are heard through dialogue, not polarisation.

Today we have voted in favour of the Commission's 'stop-the-clock' proposal as regards the dates from which Member States are to apply certain requirements related to corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence. This will ensure stability and predictability for citizens and businesses.
Furthermore, it is encouraging that the pro-European majority in Parliament will be working jointly on the Omnibus package. The commitment to deliver results for the common good of our citizens, businesses and planet is crucial.
We will now be working as the Maltese Labour Delegation towards a balanced EP approach aimed at simplification that protects our citizens and our SMEs, and one that takes into consideration the specificities of the countries, while simultaneously maintaining the high-level EU standards that we are all accustomed to.

I voted in favour of the resolution on the further deterioration of the political situation in Georgia because I share the Parliament’s concerns about the fairness of the parliamentary elections held on 26 October 2024.
Yet, I also wish to emphasise the necessity that any decision related to the political direction of the country reflects the will of Georgian citizens.
This should include any decision on the country’s direction towards European integration, as well as any military alliance the country might wish to opt for.
Such decision should be free from external pressure or interference in respect to Georgian sovereignty. All major powers, including the European Union, should allow for a free debate in the country and for Georgian citizens to reach their own verdict.
In conclusion, I share the resolution’s concerns regarding the destabilisation of Georgia’s democratic institutions, while hoping that future debates and exchanges will focus on the stabilisation of the country and on how the Union can assist the country, and its people, in realising its aspirations.