What Terry spoke about.

Mr President, not one more, , and then there is another one, and another one, and another one. Like now in Italy, where a woman was brutally murdered – the suspect her ex-partner, again. She is the 53rd case, just in Italy, just this year. I don't know how you feel about this, but I’m fucking furious because men believe that their own, their girlfriends, their daughters, their sisters, that they are the ones who can take decisions over their lives, their freedom and their decisions. I believe that is so deeply rooted in patriarchal power systems. Every man who cannot accept that their wife wants a divorce and chooses violence, every father who cannot accept that their daughter wants to choose freely what their job is going to be and chooses violence, every ex-partner who cannot accept that their girlfriend has a new partner and chooses violence, all of these men are part of a bigger patriarchal problem. Our societies have to stand up to this violence. That is why the directive against gender-based violence is so urgently needed, including, of course, as the colleagues have said, a strong and comprehensive definition of rape. And let me tell you this: since I can remember, there have been a number of Member States who continuously told us all the things that we cannot do from the European level when it comes to gender-based violence, with legal arguments that have been proven wrong. The debate around the Istanbul Convention clearly shows that if we in this Parliament give up the first time a Member State raises legal concerns, we will not get anywhere. But if we fight, we can make it. The EU is going to accede to the Istanbul Convention, a success, colleagues, of this Parliament and the EU is also going to adopt a strong legislation against gender-based violence. And again, it will be because of the work done in this Parliament, because we know that we owe this to the many victims of gender-based violence in Europe and all the other women living in Europe. We are going to continue this fight. We are not going to give up.

Mr President, dear colleagues, yesterday, one month ago, atrocious acts of terror were committed in Israel. With a brutal killing of civilians, young people, children – many of them raped, tortured, mutilated – Hamas has shown its true face: a human-hating terror organisation that only wants death and darkness, that has nothing to offer but the hatred for Israel and ultimately wants only that – the destruction of Israel. Make no mistake, Hamas are brutal oppressors – most of all to the Palestinians themselves. They do not represent a struggle for freedom or the legitimate claim of Palestinians to their own state. Yes, Israel has the right to protect its citizens and to defend itself. And yes, Israel must do so in compliance with international law and international humanitarian law. Now, four weeks later, a brutal war is ongoing, and we see the humanitarian situation in Gaza badly deteriorating: civilians are dying, children are dying, people are in need of everything – food, water, medical supplies. The EU must do everything in its power to provide help to these civilians. The Israeli Government has a responsibility to avoid civilian deaths whenever possible. We must see restraint and precision in the Israeli Government’s response to terror, both to reach the hostages and to avoid the high numbers of civilian casualties we are seeing right now. Palestinian civilians must not be collectively punished for the crimes of Hamas. We must fight for humanitarian corridors, the immediate and unconditional release of hostages and the investigation of war crimes, and for the escalation of violence to be stopped. And for that, yes, we have to work for a ceasefire, for humanitarian aid to be increased and then to reach the people in Gaza. This conflict, colleagues, calls on all of us to rise to the occasion as Europe, as actors of peace. Let us continue to fight for peace, for humanity, for a lasting two-state solution, where Israelis and Palestinians both can live in peace and freedom and in security. Colleagues, let us not give in to hopelessness.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. Burned out arson attacks on Jewish institutions, attacks on Holocaust monuments and the Jewish part of Vienna's Central Cemetery, and then thousands of times anti-Semitic hatred on social media, on the street, during demonstrations, on buses, trains, in pubs and living rooms. None of this is an expression of opinion or commentary on the Middle East conflict, or even justified by current political events. We are at a historic point in Europe. Do we allow our open, diverse societies to be decomposed by hatred? Or, colleagues, do we oppose this? After the brutal human crime of the Shoah, more visible Jewish life has slowly developed again in Europe in recent decades. Exactly this Jewish life is being attacked many times. No matter who, no matter where and no matter when. Anti-Semitism must be condemned in the strongest possible terms. Hundreds of thousands of Jewish people in Europe live in fear. I celebrated Shabbat with Jewish friends in Berlin last week, and many of them wonder: Do I have a future in Europe in the face of the violent riots of recent weeks or the frighteningly high election results of fascist parties? I would therefore like all the democratic forces in this Parliament, on the streets, to say loudly and clearly in all the debates: Yes, Jews have a future in Europe! We stand by your side, we will protect Jewish life in Europe. We will defend open, pluralistic societies where there is not fear and hatred, but fundamental democratic rights, freedom and tolerance – not just on holidays, colleagues, but every day. Tomorrow is the anniversary of the November pogroms of 1938. In this context, the term ‘never again’ is very often used. Ladies and gentlemen, this 'never again' is not at some point, this 'never again' is now.

Madam President, dear colleagues, we have all been shocked by the attacks on Jewish institutions and synagogues in the past days. We have to be absolutely clear, and we are in this text, that we stand by the Jewish communities in Europe and that we are going to protect them and that we stand up against any form of anti-Semitism. Our oral amendment seeks to add an updated incident to the already existing text which says: ‘strongly condemns the attempted attacks on a Jewish synagogue in Berlin, hosting a community centre, a primary school and a kindergarten, on 18 October, as well as other similar incidents in other European countries’. I ask you to support this to strongly update the very strong position.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. I think, especially in times like these, it is always important to remind us that the European Union has made friends out of bitter enemies. The European Union has turned a continent separated by an iron curtain into a continent of free movement. The European Union has achieved a lot in recent decades. And yet: As we travel through the EU, we feel – even today – that this connectivity is not yet at the point where it should be. Ladies and gentlemen, we all know railway lines that simply break off at the border, pipeline connections that are only planned nationally and where European partners are not involved, national industrial strategies that run against each other and not into each other – that must end. We need to work more closely together, we need to finally build this continent – with a Europe-wide network for renewables, with hydrogen pipelines, with fibre networks. After all, France and Germany are also dwarfs on the global stage in the end. Only together as a European Union will we become giants. That is why we now need to take the next step together and build a European Infrastructure Union – and for that we need joint European investments. And it is precisely this signal to industry, to the economy and to citizens that I would like to receive from the European Council.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. Droughts, floods, forest fires: We have already had another summer of extreme weather in Europe. In Greece, 80 000 hectares of forest have been burned, in Slovenia heavy rain has caused more than half a billion euros in damage, affecting more than two thirds of the country. And in the Ahr Valley, there were even many billions more in damage that caused flooding. No one can say that doing nothing is cheaper or cheaper than acting now. Extreme weather events will cost hundreds of billions of euros in Europe in the coming years. Heat, heavy rain, hail will have a dramatic impact on citizens in the European Union. The heat is already killing tens of thousands of people every year. All these facts are sufficiently well known. And yet, despite this reality, there are politicians who say that we need a break now. A pause that means that weather events will become even more extreme in the future and that we will then have to take even more extreme measures to address the effects. No, we don't need a break when it comes to Green Deal The climate crisis, the effects of the climate crisis, does not take a break either. That is why we must act now. And this is not only rational, but also political responsibility. Anything else would be a denial of reality. When it becomes difficult to say: ‘We will somehow get away with doing nothing’, although reality clearly shows that it is exactly different. This is dangerous and irresponsible. That is why we must continue, as strenuous as it may be, because the Green Deal It's not a sprint, it's a marathon. As the European Union, we need to do more to help citizens cope with climate impacts. The European Union is built on solidarity, and for some people it may sound like a lot if we, as the European Union, put billions of euros into civil protection together. But if we look at the massive damage – including financial damage – that is causing disasters in the European Union, that is well-invested money.

Mr President! Mr Weber! I have to be honest, I am quite disappointed, because there has been a factual debate on this subject. There were meetings of shadow rapporteurs on the NRL, from which the EPP unfortunately withdrew. There was a long debate yesterday in which we discussed this draft law here in this plenary. You know who wasn't there? It's you! Although you have been addressed very often in this debate, also on the topic of fake news, also on the question of how the EPP positioned itself. That is why we are holding this debate. But let us then talk about it when it is on the agenda and when the colleagues are also there to discuss what you have said here. And I still believe what is happening in Ukraine and what was happening at the Council is of the utmost importance, because the destruction of Ukraine’s Kakhovka Dam represents a new level of aggression in Putin’s criminal war of aggression. This Financial Act of Terrorism Put Thousands of People at Risk The floods that were caused were an ecological catastrophe as tons of harmful substances polluted the surroundings area. And the destruction of this dam endangered also the nearby nuclear power plant of Zaporizhzhia. This is a new dimension in which we find ourselves. Russia is misusing a civilian dam located near a nuclear power plant as a weapon of war. And I think that the European Union and the heads of state of the European Union have to be clear and take a clear stance to stop Russia on this deadly path. But also efforts must now focus on Ukraine’s reconstruction. We welcome the new facility that has been created for this purpose to mobilise more funds. But we don’t need just any money, we need to rebuild Ukraine in a sustainable and renewable way. We need a green deal for Ukraine to bring more prosperity to the country after the horrors of war and a better environment for the people of Ukraine. And one last issue, and I think it has become obvious again at the EUCO meeting, we need a coherent and coordinated strategy on China from the heads of states and governments of the European Union. We welcome the clear sentences on the Taiwan Strait. But other than that, the agreement actually lacks clarity on this strategy, which is very urgently needed. So we appeal to the Member States: Do what is necessary, act united and act decisively.

Mr President, dear colleagues, our rivers are dying, our forests are sick, our nature is in deep crisis. We have to restore our nature, not in a distant future, not when the EPP has got its act together – we have to act now: to preserve nature, the basis of our agriculture, the basis of our economic prosperity; to keep the climate targets, because 10% out of the 55% that we agreed to reduce our emissions by before 2030 are nature-based climate action; to keep our competitiveness to the self-declared business groups in this Parliament. You heard the appeal by major companies like Unilever or Ikea to let the Nature Restoration Law pass. So dear EPP colleagues, many of your parties are actually based on Christian values, centred on the preservation of creation. Please follow your inner conviction and not what your group leader is telling you and vote tomorrow in favour of the Nature Restoration Law. Dear Renew colleagues, the Nature Restoration Law is about freedom. The destruction of biodiversity already today is limiting our options and it is going to get worse in the future. Preserve our freedom and vote in favour of the Nature Restoration Law tomorrow. But colleagues, we also all know that this law has become much more than just itself in the past month. It has become a symbol, a symbol of the Green Deal, a symbol of constructive decision-making in this Parliament. And it has unfortunately become a symbol of political games within the EPP on which strategy they want to go for for 2024. Mr Weber, who is unfortunately not here right now, we can clearly see what your strategy is: going against your own Commission President. All of this, to me, is a sign of a deep identity crisis within the EPP, a shift in decision—making here in this Parliament, and for me a very dangerous development, especially as far-right parties, groups and movements are gaining ground across Europe. Colleagues, let us vote tomorrow in favour of the Nature Restoration Law to show that constructive decision-making in this Parliament is still possible. To show that we stand behind the Green Deal and yes, also to restore and protect our nature.

Mr President, dear colleagues, Dorota was 33 years old. She died three weeks ago of a septic shock after being denied abortion care in a Polish hospital. She is not the first woman who has died since the introduction of the brutal anti-abortion legislation. Tragic stories, you could say, but what does this have to do with the debate on rule of law in Poland? Actually, it has to do a lot with the rule of law, because what we are experiencing right now is just another step to tighten the grip of authoritarian rule in Poland. After the politicisation of the judiciary, the takeover of public media, attacking minorities, restriction of fundamental rights, including access to life-saving abortion care. Now the next attacks on the rule of law and democratic standards are underway in Poland. By meddling with electoral law and trying to intimidate the democratic opposition with an investigative committee that can even prevent candidates from taking up office. Colleagues, when we look around the world right now, we witness a more and more autocratic backlash against democracy, against freedom, and against a rules-based world order. Let us make sure that the European Union, with united effort stands up to this. And with half a million people in the streets of Warsaw last Sunday, I am confident that Polish citizens are at our side in this struggle, not only in Poland but across the European Union, led us, as all democratic parties work together to prevent an authoritarian shift. This is not about left or right. This is about protecting our democracy together. So let us stand up for rule of law and democracy in Poland and all over the European Union together.

Mr President, yes, it is true, a lot of people are seeking asylum in the European Union right now. They have names, they have stories, and they have hope to find shelter in the European Union. And yes, the current the current asylum system in the European Union is dysfunctional and needs reform. I think almost everybody agrees on that. And yes, finding political agreement in the context of a mostly toxic debate that is driven by fears rather than facts is very difficult. But colleagues, right now, the whole story that still far too many politicians are selling to people in Europe about migration and asylum is simply not working. And that story is tougher rules, less refugees, more walls, less refugees, more fences, less refugees. I get that this is an easy sell and that a lot of politicians find it easier not to get into the difficult, complex reality of things. But these lines are simply wrong and there will be no breakthroughs, no improvements of the situation, but only frustration and more hardship at our external borders. Right now, there are a number of reasons why the number of refugees in the European Union is high. Reason number one: Vladimir Putin, and I’m not even talking about Ukraine because Ukraine was not the first country where Putin’s bombs led to millions of people having to flee. And if we don’t stand up to him, colleagues, it will not be the last. Reason number two: climate change. The number of climate refugees will increase the more extreme the impact of climate change will become. So instead of falling back into climate denial, let us take the necessary steps of mitigation and adaptation now, because now is the time we have to act. Reason number three: autocrats that are waging wars against their neighbours and their own citizens, torturing them, imprisoning them, executing them just because they want to live in freedom. Instead of making deals with these autocrats, we should actually support the people in the streets who are fighting for democracy. The fundamental right to asylum is not only a right but a lesson from our own history. Let us not gamble it away on fake simplistic promises that might work in the next election campaign, but not in the long run. But let us fight and also struggle with the position that the Council has found now for a real, sustainable solution that combines humanity and order. This Parliament, as a beacon of peace and human rights, owes the world at least that. But let us also talk about crucial decision making that is ongoing on the Green Deal, and especially let us talk about finding compromise with the EPP, who have recently walked out of the democratic negotiation of a crucial piece of legislation, the Nature Restoration Law. This piece of legislation is not only important to meet the Paris goals and to fight against biodiversity loss. Even if you don’t care about any of that, it is crucial to act now in order to keep up our economic competitiveness in the future. Because farmers need healthy soils, they need pollinators, they need clean water. Agriculture needs nature. That is why restoring nature is a precondition for a sustainable economic prosperity and for food security. And if you think it is a Green co-chair who is saying this, don’t listen to me, listen to big corporations that have recently intervened in the debate. They say with these actions, like the Nature Restoration Law, the European Union would create a level playing field for all businesses in Europe and ensure forward-thinking companies are rewarded for their actions to hold and reverse nature loss. The EU would become a more competitive, resilient and sustainable economy. This law is about nature ... (President interrupted speaker) ... in the future and the EU ... (President interrupted speaker) ... EPP should come back to the negotiation table.

Madam President, 2017: it has almost been six years since reports hit the European Parliament about sexual harassment. Colleagues, I don't know how you feel about it, but I think we have wasted enough time because the demands in this resolution are very similar to the ones that we already adopted six years ago. There are demands to reform and to fight against sexual harassment here in the European Parliament, like, for example, mandatory harassment training, where right now we have a situation where not even half of the members of this parliament have done these harassment trainings, external audits to improve the situation, with independent experts looking at what we can do for a zero-tolerance policy, and a reform of the obviously dysfunctional complaints structures that we have here in the European Parliament. If I'm being honest, I really start losing patience. We have to stop only talking and adopting resolutions and we have to start acting.

Madam President, colleagues, first things first. As you said, President, I think it is important that we make clear that this Parliament stands in full solidarity with all people who are affected by these horrible floods in different regions in Italy. We have again and again shown how important, especially in moments like this, European solidarity is. We can see – and this is not an isolated event – that climate change is nothing happening in the distant future anymore; it is something that is happening now –with extreme weather events, with droughts, with floods, with forest fires. We in this Parliament should debate what needs to be done now, what the necessary steps are to show solidarity with people in Italy, but also what the long term implications are, so that we avoid situations like this from happening again. So, colleagues, please support our request to debate this today in plenary.

Madam President, Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen! Mr Chancellor, you are coming to Strasbourg at a very good time, because after the last few months there is, frankly, a lot to kitten for the man with policy competence from Berlin. As is well known, the traffic light coalition has started with a claim of departure, renewal and progress. Your party has branded you in the election campaign as a climate chancellor, as one who tackles it, as one who delivers. Honestly, this promise of departure has also impressed many here in Europe: Finally a chancellor who wants to change something after years of stalemate, after years of finally someone with an agenda. But I must honestly say, Mr Chancellor, that the picture of you as Chancellor, who delivers, has unfortunately faded in recent months. And also that of the claim that some in this coalition make to Germany's role in Europe, and, as I must say so frankly, it sometimes seems to be yours. Because you're running instead of clearly positioning yourself. For example, if the FDP jeopardises the credibility of Germany and breaks the reputation of the German government as a reliable partner in Europe, in a central climate policy project of the European Union, the out of the internal combustion engine, which is at the heart of the ‘Fit for 55’ package, what is the German chancellor doing? At first he says nothing, and then he also stands behind the coalition partner, who is losing the trust of the European partners. Or another example: Rightly so, Chancellor, you started at the turn of the century when it came to Ukraine. But then, in many places here in Brussels and Strasbourg and in many capitals of the European Union, it often seems as if every concrete measure has to be painstakingly brought to you. This is in a situation where solidarity, where the ability to act was required, is not the way in which a German chancellor should position himself. I could continue this list, but we're not here for that. I am here, Chancellor, because I want to appeal to you. I would like to appeal to you because I want to see you fight for Europe, because we need a German chancellor who thinks European and leads the way. I would like a chancellor, for example, who has learned from his own party's mistakes against Russia and does not strike exactly the same tones against China. (Applause) ... to advance human rights in a wise common European strategy vis-à-vis China and also to draw the necessary consequences for the industrial and economic strength of the European Union. I would like a chancellor who knows that this continent will only be competitive if it sticks together and if it finally goes ahead with the green transformation and no longer lags behind. Also, Chancellor, if that costs money. And yes, I know who your finance minister is. And yet: I would like to see a chancellor who convinces the Germans that the Stability and Growth Pact, as it currently is, is slowing down precisely these important investments for the future. I would like a chancellor to say – and you mentioned it yourself: I come from a city that has become rich and powerful, not because it has closed itself off, but because it has opened up to the world. That is why I am clearly opposed to an asylum policy that wants to build a fortress Europe. I want a chancellor like that. In a landmark speech 73 years ago, Robert Schuman changed the history of this continent forever. At a time when the terror of Nazi Germany had brought death and misery and there were probably hardly any people in Europe who had not lost loved ones in recent years, he painted a picture of peace, commonality and a better future. I wish today for a chancellor who will go forward with such foresight. Yes, Chancellor, you want the right thing: enlargement, capacity to act, ending unanimity in the European Council. You are promoting a convention, but do not stay in the loop, but move forward together with this Parliament! We have proposed the launch of a European Convention. I'm sure: If you do your utmost to promote it in the Council, then we can get a majority and convene a European Convention before the European elections.

Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, my little nephew was born two years ago. Yesterday he had a pretty bad day because he had a cough but, in general, he’s a really happy and lively child. When he’s going to be my age, 35, and that is going to be in 2056, the risk is high that he will find himself in a world that has become hostile to humans: increasing floods, droughts, forest fires, conflicts over resources, devastated lands, infertile soils, millions and millions of people having to flee. In 2056, our planet may be on the path of no return for humanity or it may not. When you read the IPCC report, yes, there is much reason to panic. But there is also reason for hope – because it shows that we can make a difference, that we can still turn this around. The world that my nephew will live in will be shaped by the decisions that we take today. Everybody in this plenary is in a position of power, and I am convinced that everybody in this plenary loves someone who was born in the last 10 years. We have to use this power. We have to use the trust that was put in us and give a future not only for ourselves but also for the generations to come. And if I may, I think, when we speak about this this topic in a more abstract way, we have a lot of unity. The disunity comes when we speak about concrete actions, but at the end of the day, it is not abstract debates about climate change that are going to change the world, but concrete actions, so let us take concrete actions, colleagues.

Madam President, Madam Minister, Commissioner! If I may say so: I am a bit surprised that the Liberal Group has not raised a speaker in this debate, because I actually think that we are talking here about things that should be called for by this Parliament across political groups. It is indeed a matter of law enforcement. It's about everyone having to follow the rules. Truck drivers who do not receive a wage for weeks, go on strike, are supported by trade unions in claiming their rights and are then threatened in response by brutal thugs, sent by the forwarding company which deprives them of their wages. Ladies and gentlemen, we must face reality. There are freight forwarders in the European Union who have made the exploitation of their drivers their business model. Firstly, as colleagues have already said: These are not rare exceptions. Exploitation in the transport sector is the order of the day. And here in the European Parliament, we have repeatedly heard reports from drivers who have said that they could not go home for months, that they could not be home partly for the birth of their own children, that they were affected by inconceivable sanitary conditions, that wages were withheld and so on and so on. And for a long time, in fact, nothing or far too little has happened. And only through the support of trade unions – especially projects such as Fair mobility – these grievances come to light and the drivers are supported in defending themselves against such breaches of the law. Because what is happening here, ladies and gentlemen, is not some form of market economy. What is happening is just criminal. And secondly: These carriers do not operate for no name. In this case, Ikea, DHL and VW have placed orders with the corresponding company. And that too must change. But politics must also take action at last, and we do indeed need much tighter controls, including from the European Labour Authority. Because the European Union cannot close its eyes to these massive grievances. But yes, even the best laws do not do anything if they are not enforced. And obviously, many companies still feel fairly safe in what they are doing – even if they are breaking the law – because they are not controlled and sanctioned. And this is not only a problem for the affected drivers, but for the entire industry and, in the end, for all of us. That is why, ladies and gentlemen: Our fight against exploitation must continue. Full solidarity with the drivers. The European Parliament stands by your side.

Madam President, ‘if you are a parent in one Member State, you are a parent in every Member State’ – these are the words of our Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Yet in the last weeks, we witnessed yet another attack on rainbow families in Europe, this time in Italy. The practice to recognise certificates of same-sex parents has been restricted by the Interior Ministry and actually one person who is affected by this is sitting in the tribune, Giuseppe Sala, the Mayor of Milan. It’s great that you are here. We stand with you defending the LGBTI community. I want to be crystal clear: we are not surprised by these attacks but, still, we are outraged. And we will stand in solidarity with the community in Italy and everywhere in Europe. And this is why it is absolutely important that we have this debate right now, because for this Parliament, all EU citizens and all families are worth the same and deserve fundamental rights. And if I may say, Madam President, we have, together with other groups, come up with a compromise for the title. The title would now read ‘The rights of children in rainbow families and same-sex parents, in particular in Italy’, to be discussed tonight with an extended session by one hour and to be voted by RCV.

Madam President, dear colleagues, today we are celebrating the 25th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement. The Good Friday Agreement came after long conflict. 3 500 people have lost their lives in decades marked by violence, by insecurity and by hatred. This agreement is a symbol of committed peace-building, and 25 years later we acknowledge the hard work, the political will and the commitment that was put into making it happen by so many people. Colleagues, we all know that Brexit has shaken the political situation in Northern Ireland and made many of the questions that still need resolving more difficult, and this is not going to go away for a while. But, with the Windsor Framework, the European Union and the UK have recently shown that constructive negotiations based on trust and understanding have a good outcome even in difficult situations. We will continue to do everything in our power to secure peace in Northern Ireland and to support the Good Friday Agreement. Let’s also never forget, peace is not only the absence of armed conflict. Safeguarding fundamental rights of all citizens is a crucial part of a sustainable peace, and that is why the European Convention on Human Rights has played such an important role for peace—building in Northern Ireland and the Good Friday Agreement. That is why defending the European Convention on Human Rights is absolutely crucial, especially now that we see it being put under attack. Colleagues, the European Union was built on promoting peace. On the ruins of violent conflict, millions of people came together. So let us not only remember the great effort it took to achieve peace and the Good Friday Agreement, but let’s build on this spirit for the future – for a peaceful, a just and a democratic Ireland, United Kingdom and Europe built on understanding, on trust and on human rights.

Madam President, dear colleagues, today we are celebrating women. We are celebrating women in the fight for their rights. We are celebrating women in their fight against patriarchy. But let me say this: women are for long already not only carrying the fight for women’s rights. They are carrying across the globe the fight for democracy and freedom – values that the European Union is founded on. If we look at Iran, if we look at Afghanistan, if we look at Argentina, there are brave women who are fighting for what we hold dear and they are a source of inspiration to all of us. One of the women that we should be celebrating today, and for International Women’s Day, is Justyna Wydrzyńska, not only because she has shown bravery and commitment, but because she has helped others. She has helped people in need. She supported women who needed access to abortion in a country like Poland, where the right and the access to abortion has been heavily restricted over the past years. This form of compassion and solidarity is what makes our society strong. She has stood up for our values and very concretely provided support. But instead of celebrating her, she is being criminalised. She was convicted to eight months of community service yesterday for caring for others, for defending our rights. Colleagues, we cannot stay silent on this – full solidarity to Justyna and all the women in Poland and elsewhere in the world who are standing up for their rights, who are standing up for care and solidarity. I do not want to live in a Europe where women who are helping other women are being criminalised. So let us take this day and let us take action together. Let us put the right to abortion into the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights. Women in Europe deserve it. Let us be a beacon of hope and inspiration for all women across the globe.

Mr President, dear colleagues, this Windsor framework is good news. It is good news for the people in Northern Ireland. It is good news for the people in the whole of the UK and it is good news for the people in the European Union. And it shines a light on the value of trustful cooperation, something that was badly missing from the negotiations between the EU and the UK, at least from some people in the past. And in the aftermath of the announcement of the agreement, Rishi Sunak actually praised the unique position of Northern Ireland being part of the UK’s and the EU’s market. And I can only congratulate him for the clarity and insightfulness of his words, because yes, indeed, being part of the EU single market makes you strong. It means more prosperity, it means less red tape and it means more freedom. And, if you ask me, if we are being honest, the whole of the UK should actually benefit from these advantages and not only Northern Ireland. Colleagues, in a world where we see aggressive autocrats trying to take more power, it is important that democracies work together, and this agreement is a step into the right direction for that.

Madam President, first of all I wish to welcome the President to the European Parliament and, most importantly – even if we are a bit late – to say ‘Happy Independence Restoration Day’ to Lithuania, of course. More than anything, colleagues, the full—scale invasion of Ukraine has confirmed the need for European unity. And it is true that only together, as Europeans, can we stand up against the brutal imperialism of the Russian regime. We have shown here in the European Parliament that we stand for unwavering solidarity with Ukraine, be it financial, humanitarian, or military support, paving the way for Ukraine to become a member of the European Union. But of course, and you have mentioned it, Mr President, we need full energy independence of the brutal Russian regime. For too long politicians also, and especially from my home country, Germany, have ignored the alert for from our eastern neighbours, like, for example, Lithuania, and now we are paying a high price for this. But colleagues, one thing has to be understood. Simply switching from one energy dependency on one dictatorship to another will not solve any of our problems. Nor does the shift from one fossil fuel dependency to another non-renewable energy source. The only sustainable answer that will prevent us from having the exact same problem that we have been facing in the last year again, in two, five or ten years is to make our energy consumption 100% renewable. That is possible and we have no time to lose. No country in the European Union will manage this alone. Only a strong European Green Deal can make that possible. You are absolutely right. The Green Deal for long already has not only been a measure that we need to protect our climate or to stimulate our economy, it has become the most crucial measure also for strong security in the European continent. But, Mr President, the fight against authoritarianism does not only happen, unfortunately, outside of the European Union. We also have to stay vigilant inside because we can see attempts of undermining our democracy, of undermining separation of powers, rule of law and fundamental rights in the European Union, brutal attacks on press freedom and journalists. We cannot stay silent in the European Union on these developments because the EU is not only a community of trade – we share fundamental values. If we want the EU to be strong and true to its own values, we have to protect all our citizens from these attacks, no matter whether they are from Lithuania or Portugal, no matter their gender, their skin colour or their sexual orientation. Because safeguarding freedom and human dignity means safeguarding freedom and human dignity for all.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, One year after the brutal escalation of the war in Ukraine, it is absolutely clear: We stand firmly by the side of the challenged democratic state of Ukraine, and our support – be it financial, political or military – is absolutely certain, even if we now and especially hear voices from the Member State from which I come, trying to spread crude narratives in this debate in order to wear down the public debate. That's why I want to clarify a few things: Not arms deliveries to Ukraine prolong this war – Vladimir Putin does. Arms supplies protect Ukraine from extinction and millions of people in Ukraine from violence and occupation. And just as the High Representative has said, arms deliveries do not preclude negotiations at all. Supporting a country in its self-defense does not mean not wanting diplomacy anymore. It means protecting international law. And thirdly – and I think it is important to make this very clear in the debate: There will be no return to the status quo ante, not with this Russia. The whole security situation in Europe has changed, and a new world needs new answers, not the old lyre. And therefore: Instead of being applauded by fascists for collecting signatures, it would be time – especially for all those from Germany, who continue to sing this old lyre from before 24 February 2022 – to finally go to Riga, Warsaw or Helsinki and not to teach others, but to listen and finally see that we must continue to stand clearly at the side of Ukraine in a new world.

Madam President, Commissioner, Minister, colleagues, ahead of the EUCO meeting next week, we are facing a crucial moment for the future of our economy and our competitiveness. But let me be clear, it is not with senseless deregulation, dismantling workers’ rights or environmental standards, or this so-called moratorium on regulation that we can make the European Union strong and competitive for the 21st century. Our competitiveness will depend on how well we can lead the Green transformation globally, supporting green industries, being the first when it comes to climate—friendly and environmentally—friendly technologies. Yes, for that we will actually need green and sustainable regulation to give planning security to our companies and, yes, for setting the scene globally to move ahead with the green transformation. Indeed, we will need money for that. We will not need random investment, but we will need very targeted green investment in order to make this possible. I’ve read the letter that the Commission President sent to the Member States on migration and let me be honest, to me, it sounded – in a very technocratic and depoliticised language – like a plan to create a Fortress Europe. Not once was there was a mention of human rights, not once there was a mention of the suffering of those who are trying to find shelter in the European Union, and not once there was a mention of international law – international law that binds the European Union when it comes to asylum. But also, in the framing, we are talking about migration here – and migration is not only about asylum and returns. This whole initiative can only work if we look at migration in its entirety. I negotiated recently a coalition agreement between the Conservative Party and the Greens in North Rhine-Westphalia, and I can tell you what the number one concern of the SMEs, of the care homes and the citizens was: it was the question of how we can attract trained workers, trained labour in order to fit the shortages in our labour market. If we are not looking at this, if we are not looking at what our citizens need, then we are falling short of what we actually need to address. Don’t get me wrong. We all want orderly border management. We want legal provisions to be applied, but orderly border management, Mr Weber, also applies to border guards and we have seen in the past that there were illegal pushbacks. We have seen that this has been covered up. We have seen that there was no punishment for this. We have seen that there was no accountability. This, colleagues, is definitely unacceptable. The European Union received the Nobel Peace Prize not for building walls, not for encircling this continent in fences, not for pushing back boats of people who are looking for shelter. We received the Nobel Peace Prize because this Union stands for a promise, and, for me, the responsibility and the duty that we have learned from the horrors of the past – from nationalist devastations, but also from the suffering that this continent has brought to the world; a promise that we will be a beacon of human rights and of shared values. This, Commission President, does not end at how we behave at our external borders.

Madam President, in 2011 in Utøya and Oslo, 77 people were killed by a Nazi terrorist. In 2020 in Hanau, nine people were killed by a far—right terrorist. In 2022 in Bratislava, two queer people were shot coming out of a gay bar by a right—wing extremist. This list is far from exhaustive, and you all know it; hundreds of people have been killed by far—right extremists over the past years. In December last year, security forces conducted one of the biggest anti—terror investigations in German history against an alleged far—right terror network trying to overthrow the constitutional order in Germany. Among the suspects, and I want to say this clearly, there was a member of the far right party AfD, and not just any member, but a former Member of the German Parliament. These people planned to overthrow the democratic constitutional order in Germany. They are especially dangerous, because many of them have a lot of money, they have resources, and they have very good links to police and security forces, as well as to the justice system. Let me be clear, colleagues, in the twenties and thirties of the last century, many conservatives and liberals in Germany made a fatal mistake. They believed that they could keep the far—right, the violence and the hatred for democracy, in check. They failed. You all know the outcome of this. We cannot let the same mistake happen again. I must say that also here in this House, I see very dangerous tendencies to normalise the far—right, not least today, where a far—right candidate also received votes from democratic groups. Colleagues, we have to stand up to this far-right threat together, as democrats. These people are not playing. They are not making jokes. They mean it when they say that they want to overthrow our constitutional democratic order. We have to stop them.

Madam President, Madam Commissioner, dear colleagues, I think it is absolutely clear that we have to investigate until all facts of this scandal are on the surface, not only relating to Qatar, but also potentially other countries. But I think it’s also important that we already take the necessary steps that can be taken now, now. And I want to thank the President for coming forward with a proposal in this direction. I believe it is a good starting point, but some of the points will need to be added and maybe strengthened and sharpened a little bit. First of all, and I think that this is really important, we owe it to the citizens to bring our deliberations in this House to light. And that is why we will need a special committee with a very clear mandate to make recommendations of what is necessary to fight against corruption and for integrity and transparency in this House. Secondly, this institution needs better whistle—blower protection because people who bring misconduct and wrongdoing to light need to be protected and not punished. Thirdly, we need a stronger and mandatory transparency register. This is also part of the proposal, but I believe that we have to bring transparency by including also third-country representatives and by enforcing the rules that we already have on transparency, better. We need to make the register mandatory while at the same time ensuring that we do not put people at risk like, for example, human rights defenders, by not granting reasoned and limited exceptions. We have a big majority in this House supporting the establishment of an ethics body. But let us not wait until the Commission comes forward, let us already nominate our negotiators now so that the negotiations on the interinstitutional agreement can start as soon as possible. And fifth, we have to be better in enforcing rules, and clearer defined sanctions will play a very important role in order to make that possible. For all this, we will need clear deadlines and very understandable procedures. And colleagues, I think many of you know, I really love this House, and it is one of the greatest achievements that we have come forward with in the history of the European Union, that we come together here as directly elected representatives of EU citizens. And I think because of this, because we love this House and because we want to protect it, we need to do everything possible right now.