Speeches

Madam President, colleagues, in patriarchal societies, violence against women has always been widespread. It is not only based on the belief that women matter less, it is actually based on the assumption that women are not fully equal and self—determined human beings, that they somehow need to be disciplined to be controlled. We are battered. We are raped. We are abused. Our choices are being restricted because we do not matter enough. But also because patriarchy tells us that we had to, that we have to be kept in check. That includes also the denial of our right to choose over our own bodies. Forcing a woman to go through with a pregnancy against her own will is a form of violence against women. That is true for the ten—year—old rape victim who had to travel from Ohio to Indiana to get an abortion. That is true for the 31—year—old Savita, who died in Ireland in 2012 after being denied abortion care when she was miscarrying. And that is also true for already six women who died in Poland after not receiving very much needed abortion care because of the inhumane de facto abortion ban. Whenever a woman dies because she did not receive the abortion care she needed to be saved, society sends a message to all of us that even in moments of absolute vulnerability, they will not help us because our lives do not matter enough. They will actually let us die. They will let us die because a fundamentalist ideology matters more than our lives. Honestly, I do not want to live in a society like this, and definitely I do not want to get pregnant in a society like this. So, colleagues, let us end all forms of violence against women. Let us end these inhumane abortion bans.

Madam President, In fact, yesterday, November 9, this memorable day of German and European history, our former colleague Werner Schulz was surprisingly torn out of life at a commemorative event in Bellevue Palace. We remember Werner as a fighter for civil rights, beginning in the former GDR, but then also on his way to life. He was a fighter for defensive democracy, for a critical civil society and for human rights. Werner was a freedom fighter, a convinced European, a sharp critic of Putin and a vehement defender of Ukraine. I think that should make us all think. We will miss Werner very, very painfully, especially in these times. But his work will remain unforgotten for all of us, including here in the European Parliament.

Madam President, dear colleagues, what we have seen in the last weeks is that Putin is obviously realising that he cannot win the war in Ukraine on the battlefield and this is why he’s resorting to other means. First and foremost, in Ukraine, where millions of people have been without electricity and water after Russia bombed civilian infrastructure. But the energy war has also reached the rest of Europe. And there is only one way that we can win this war, and that is to act united. This energy crisis is, in fact, a gas dependency crisis. It is a crisis of wrong political choices: wrong political choices denying the reality of the dangers of climate change; wrong political choices, denying the reality of the dangers of being completely dependent for fossil fuels on a dictator –a dictator who wants to destroy our freedom and our democracy. But the answer to this cannot be that we put band-aids on a broken system and simply try to import gas and fossil fuels from elsewhere – especially when this means from other dictators. The only answer can be to build a system that is reliable with energy that is cheap and sustainable: wind and solar. And, yes, for that we will need more money for renewables. But we will also need to invest in better insulation of buildings. Because despite this crisis, we are still wasting valuable energy every day in badly insulated housing and this costs households money and keeping warm in winter should not be just for those who can afford it. Massive investment in insulating homes is a win-win for everyone because it protects people’s health and wallets. And it is a key pillar of our climate action and our responsibility to lead with when it comes to COP27. And, lastly, and I know that many of you don’t want to be confronted with this, but this is real: (The speaker held up image on an A4 sheet of paper) A deputy minister of the new far-right government in Italy with a swastika armband, from a picture not too long ago. He said afterwards, apparently, that it was a joke, a prank. A joke about 6 million Jews who were killed in the Holocaust. A joke about the countless victims of Nazi ideology of fascism in Europe, the Roma, the trade unionists, the queer men and women, the resistance fighters, the allied soldiers who died on the battlefield for freedom, the women who were raped, the many people who were killed and tortured, the people who lost loved ones and their homes. A joke about a continent that was in complete ruins with 55 million people dead across the world. Especially today colleagues, this is not a joke. This is serious and we have to stand up to it together. And the conservatives especially have to learn from history. Let us work together and stand up to the far-right across Europe.

Madam President, colleagues, as you all know, the Conditionality Regulation has been activated by the European Commission for the first time in the case of Hungary. And also we have seen, in the recent weeks and days, movement on the negotiations on the RRP regarding Hungary. We believe that the European Parliament has to make its voice heard in these discussions and we are aware that there is a counter-proposal to move this to November II. I just want to give you the argument why we believe it’s important to have a first round of speakers already tomorrow, because if we want to influence the ongoing negotiations before decisions are going to be taken, we should have a debate – at least a short debate – already tomorrow. And this obviously can then also be rounded up by a debate and a resolution in November II. So please vote in favour also of having a short discussion about this tomorrow.

Madam President, Madam Commission President, Mr Minister, dear colleagues, I was born in 1987, two years before the fall of the Berlin Wall. My childhood and my youth were marked by an expansion of freedoms. Walls and borders fell, in 2004 we celebrated the eastern enlargement of the European Union. And over the last three decades, we strengthened the rights and freedoms of hundreds of millions of citizens through EU law. I grew up with a sense of self-evidence that everybody can clearly see that democracy obviously is the best form of government, that through education, public discourse and finding compromise, we will build stronger, more resilient and more equal democratic societies, and that this would work almost automatically. And I must admit, this sense of self-evidence is gone. Latest, on 24 February this year: everyone could clearly see there is a brutal, a violent and a powerful authoritarian backlash ongoing, a backlash against democracy, against freedom and against equality. Now you could argue we have to stand with Ukraine in this brutal aggression for the sake of the brave Ukrainian people, and we certainly do. But it goes far beyond this. We have to stand with Ukraine also for our own sake, for our own freedom and our own democracy, because we have seen in the past weeks and months, light as day, that our democracies are not untouchable. And Vladimir Putin very well knows this, this is why he’s funding the far-right. This is why he is using energy as a weapon against us. And this is why he’s using every single opportunity to try to divide us. And it is true that his initial strategy of dividing Europe, the West and all democratic countries who believe in a rules-based world order did not succeed. We reacted unitedly. We provided military aid to Ukraine. We adopted sanctions. We, finally, took very much needed measures to end our toxic dependence on Russian energy imports. But, colleagues, politics is not a sprint; politics is a marathon. And we all know Putin’s game plan right now: doing whatever it takes to spread fear to destabilise our democracies in Ukraine with state terrorism, drone and missile strikes on cities and in the rest of Europe by trying to fuel the fear of energy shortages and an explosion of prices. And as it looks also for this, he is using whatever means necessary, whatever means necessary to create social hardships and divisions in our societies. And, Madam Commission President, a dynamic price cap on gas will not be enough to counter these injustices. We will need a bold and determined Commission also on tax and social issues, not to let the most vulnerable in our societies pay the price for this. But he will also use whatever means necessary, threatening a global famine which will have to be prevented. But if you believe that food sovereignty can be achieved by agro-industries dependent on energy-intensive fertilisers or a global food system where massive amounts of crops are simply wasted in intensive livestock farming, you are wrong. We have to build a truly ecological, sustainable agricultural system that is also part of our commitment to the Paris goals. And for all of this, and I’m very happy that we seem to have large unity, we will need a new common effort as Europeans. Just as with Next Generation EU, we will need to invest together a European solidarity fund with common balance to invest in through the renovation wave and the expansion of renewables, to counter Putin’s escalation strategy, to become less dependent on autocratic regimes for our energy supply. And I’m not only talking about Russia here, because also Azerbaijan is not a democracy, to fund the necessary measures to tackle climate change and to protect our citizens from economic and social hits because social equality is essential for democracy. Colleagues, my nephew was born in 2021, I want us to fight for a Europe in which his childhood and his youth will again be marked by an expansion of freedom, by more rights and a strengthening of democracy. I’m standing in front of you today as the newly elected Co-Chair of the Greens/EFA Group here in the Parliament but I want to appeal to all democrats in this House. The next months are not going to be easy, we will all have to make difficult choices. But let us work together as pro-European democrats and not be taken hostage or collaborate with the far-right. And especially to you, Mr Weber, because at the end of the day, what this is going to mean is that Vladimir Putin will win. He will win the division and weakness of a far-right in Europe instead of the stability and the strength of pro-European democracy. So let us work together, stand up to Vladimir Putin and draw a strong European Union for strong democracy.

Mr President, dear colleagues, so many moments have passed now where we had to express our condolences and our solidarity with victims of hate crime and terror. Of course, first and foremost, also today our love and solidarity goes to the victims, their loved ones and the whole LGBTI community in Slovakia. But I want to take this opportunity and say something else as well. Words have consequences. This attack did not start when the shooter picked up the gun. This attack started long before. It started with words, with words of hatred, uttered on social media, on the Internet, but also unfortunately uttered in places in this Parliament. Words that deny us fundamental rights. Words that deny us equality. Words that go as far as denying our very existence. Words that frame us as a threat to society and that dehumanise us, just because we love someone or because we were assigned the wrong gender at birth. I want to say this to the far right: stop these hate campaigns. Your words have consequences. And I want to say to all of us: we cannot start at launching investigations after terror attacks like this have happened. We have to start when these words of hatred are being uttered. We have to stand up to this hatred in our societies and not just as queers, but everyone who believes in democracy, freedom, fundamental rights and peaceful societies.

Madam President, as you rightly said, we would have a counter—proposal and the title of the counter—proposal that we would like to put forward is ‘fighting sexualised violence and violence against women: the importance of the Istanbul Convention and the need for a comprehensive directive against gender—based violence’. And we would like to propose this for Wednesday, as the fourth point of the agenda. Let me give you the reasons why. First of all, because we believe that the timing is crucial. We do not want such an important topic to be moved to be the last item of the agenda, so we would like to have it moved up, for Wednesday. The second point, and I really want to make sure that you understand this, we in this Parliament, we are not only a House for talking, we are a House for delivering. The Istanbul Convention and the directive against gender—based violence are two very important proposals that can really change the situation on the ground and make more tangible our fight against sexualised violence and violence against women. This is why we ask you to support our proposal.

Mr President, dear colleagues, human dignity, freedom, democracy – values that we claim to hold very dear in the European Union, values that are the basis of the functioning of our societies. Now we see a protest movement in Iran that is fighting for exactly these values, led by brave women. A protest movement that has come together, and that can change not only Iran, but the whole region, and eventually the whole world. With a force and determination that is unprecedented, people are going to the streets, and they go to the streets knowing full well that they could sacrifice their own lives doing this. And they rightfully ask us, ‘What are your words, your declarations, your banners worth if now, in this moment, you are not standing with us?’. So the EU response has to be clear: more sanctions and more determined and louder condemnation of this brutal regime, and amplifying the voices of the people who are protesting and who have sacrificed so much in this revolution.

Madam President, democracies can die. Democracies can die on battlefields in war, in occupation, in oppression. But democracies can also die silently. First, independent media is restricted, pushed out, journalists intimidated. Then critical civil society is defunded, swamped with lawsuits, maims foreign agents, universities are maimed in their academic freedom, political opponents are attacked, electoral reform is introduced to minimise their political success. Then you single out minorities. And we have seen this – LGBTI people, the Roma community and yes, also refugees. And every time you want to pass yet another anti-democratic law or reform, you basically create some fuss about one of these minorities in order to distract from what you are actually doing. What is the gain? The gain is authoritarian rule with disabled checks and balances, limited civil society and free press. And yes, in addition, a much easier way to direct public money into the pockets of people who are powerful government ministers and other politicians. We cannot let a democracy die in Europe. So I really urge the Commission, but also the Council to do more in order to defend democracy and rule of law inside of the European Union. I know this is a historic task, but I think we have to be up to this historic task because otherwise in 50 years, colleagues, we are going to say, why didn’t we do more when we needed to defend democracy and the rule of law in the European Union? (The speaker refused to respond to a blue-card speech from Andor Deli)

Madam President, dear colleagues, a lot of you might know a very important European event is set to take place this Saturday in Belgrade. It’s EuroPride. It’s a demonstration for freedom, for democracy, for fundamental rights and diversity, a pan-European demonstration. Unfortunately, it has been cancelled yesterday by Serbian authorities. We are in very close contact both with the Serbian Government as well as with the Pride organisers, but I wanted to use this opportunity for this Parliament to show that we are a Parliament that stands for the fundamental right of freedom of assembly and with the LGBTI community all across the European Union and in Serbia and in Europe.

Mr President, dear colleagues, what the UK Government is doing right now looks, unfortunately, more like a group of reckless, privileged people trying to distract from their own mistakes by breaking international law, rather than serious governing. What we actually urgently need is calm and constructive discussions on the implementation of the Northern Ireland Protocol; to find practical solutions for the people on the ground, and not to play political games or to blackmail the other side. To the people in the UK, I would like to say, rest assured that, despite all the difficulty and tension, this Parliament and the citizens in the European Union can still make a very clear difference between the UK Government and the people in the UK. We know that a majority of members of the Northern Ireland Assembly actually stand behind the protocol and want to find solutions. And we know that there are millions of people in the UK who want to have a close and strong relationship with the European Union, and we will continue to put all our efforts into making that possible.

Madam President, colleagues, in the state of Ohio, a 10-year-old girl has just been denied an abortion. Yes, you heard me right: a 10-year-old girl. The child-abuse doctor who was taking care of her had to arrange a referral to Indiana, a state where soon abortion could also be criminalised. Denying abortion care to a 10-year-old victim of rape is not a policy based on another person’s political opinion. It is a form of state-supported, gender-based violence. Forcing a 10-year-old victim of rape to go through with a pregnancy is simply brutal. But cases like this will be the outcome if we do not stand up to the aggressive authoritarian backlash that we are facing right now. We cannot simply wait and see. We have to act, and we have to act now to stabilise and strengthen our fundamental rights to bodily autonomy, to protect us, to protect our children and future generations before it is too late.

Well, I would definitely say that if you can wear a cross, I think you should also be able to wear a scarf like this, especially when you have a sore throat.

I’m sorry, I’m not going to take off the cloth right now, and I hope it’s okay for colleagues. So again ... (In response to clapping from the floor) Are you seriously going to keep clapping until I take this off? Colleague? (In response to continued clapping from the floor) Okay, then I’m going to speak against this noise. First of all, abortion is a fact. Millions of people end their pregnancy each year. Criminalising abortion does not lower the number of abortions, it just makes them illegal and very often unsafe. Thirdly, and this is important for me, unsafe abortions are a leading, yet preventable, reason for maternal death. So, if this was about life and health, the answer to the problem would actually be obvious: providing safe and legal access to abortion care, providing safe and legal access to contraception, providing safe and legal access to sexual education and to universal healthcare. But it is not! Because it is about exercising power: power over other people’s bodies, power over other people’s life choices, power over reproduction. I am not a vessel to supply infants. I and only I have the right to decide over my uterus, my ovaries and my body. Until this is the case in Europe, in the US, and all over the world – and colleague, also to you specifically – we are going to continue to fight here in this Chamber and everywhere around the world. I salute the brave people in the US fighting for this, in Europe and all over the world. (Cheers from the floor) (The speaker agreed to respond to a blue—card speech)

Madam President, sorry, I have a very sore throat today, so I had to wear the cloth. Colleagues, I wanted to share with you three important points about abortion. First of all, abortion is a fact. Millions of people enter pregnancy each year. Criminalising abortion does not lower the number of abortions, it actually just makes ...

Madam President, I think it has to be said here very clearly that what the Commission did last week was a big political and strategic mistake, and I think there is no dancing around it because even large parts of the Commission seem to agree with that. And now it is actually on the Council to show some spine and not to adopt the RRP for Poland until the pre-given conditions are going to be met. And may I remind this House that actually these conditions are not specific political requirements. They should actually not be conditions at all because they should just be self-evident facts that everybody in the European Union can take for granted – to comply with rulings of the European Court of Justice. Now, the Commission does not seem to think that it is bound by the Treaties but I have to break it to you, Madam President, you are. And unless you find back that clarity this Parliament is going to be ready to do what it takes to make sure that Article 2 of the Treaties is going to be safeguarded.

Madam President, dear colleagues, you have probably all followed the news that the Commission has given a positive assessment for the RRP of Poland last week. And this despite the fact that not even the conditions that the Commission set itself were met by the Polish Government. Now we think that this Parliament has been a very strong defender of the rule of law in the past, and we would like to continue on this path, and this is why we want to have a resolution where we clearly state our assessment of the situation. If it can be in June one, I think we would also be fine with that. Otherwise, for June two. And on a side note, colleagues, I really think that for the debate tomorrow, it is necessary that the Commission President is here herself to listen to what Parliament has to say.

Mr President, I would like to thank a lot all the colleagues who have contributed constructively. I think it was a very good debate. Maybe we had some exceptions, but in general, I’m very happy about all the input and the very engaged debate that we have had. And I think that we can clearly see, and a lot of you have given examples for this, that the situation is challenging and that in certain parts it has actually deteriorated. And that is something that we need to strongly keep an eye on, not only in the rule of law report, but also with all the other instruments that we have. Because I believe that, despite this backlash, we can still make it happen to defend the rule of law in the European Union. But for that, we actually need a European Commission that does not only do the paper work well, but that also has the political will and determination to stand up for the rule of law when wind is blowing in their faces. I hope that with the commitment that the Commissioner has just given, we can we can see that happen in the future. Let me take the last of my time to really thank the constructive work that has been put into writing this report, not only the shadow rapporteurs, not only the MEPs, but also the staff, the people from the Secretariat, the APAs. I think we have really pulled this off in a very future—oriented and constructive way, and you have made this report clearer and broader and better. I really believe that this approach that we form overwhelming big majorities from the left to the EPP to stand up for the rule of law in this House is something that has proven to be very successful. We have actually shown that this is not a matter of whether you are a liberal, a Christian democrat or a green, or whether you are from Finland, Spain or from Poland, that this is really something about the fundament of our societies and of the European Union. I believe that this is important because at the end of the day, it is in all of our interests to defend the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights. Having said that, I hope that we can get a very large and broad majority for this report tomorrow, so I ask you for your support tomorrow.

Mr President, dear colleagues, some of us, including me, have grown up believing that the global trend towards democracy and freedom only knew one direction – emancipating citizens from authoritarian regimes, strengthening the rights of all people in our societies, making Europe and the whole world a fairer, a more equal and a more democratic place. I must admit, colleagues, that I do not believe that any more, and we do not have to look as far as Moscow to see attempts to undermine rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights, because the rule of law crisis is also happening within our Union – a Union built on values, not just economic cooperation, a Union built on a promise to all its citizens to safeguard their rights and freedoms. But we are not helpless to these attacks on our values – quite the opposite. In the last years, with the clear leadership of this Parliament and many colleagues before me from different political groups and Member States, we have managed to expand the instruments for monitoring, for preventing and sanctioning attacks on the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights. One of those instruments is indeed the rule of law report of the European Commission, and the European Parliament welcomed the introduction of the rule of law report as a tool to firstly create a common basis, an overview of the situation of rule of law in the Member States. We are happy about the commitment and the energy that a lot of people in the Commission have actually put into making it a reality, and before I come to the very much needed criticism, I would like to give some credit to those people in the Commission who have actually put effort into writing and preparing the reports. But it is also clear that a lot still needs to be done to improve the impact of the rule of law report of the European Commission. First of all, so far the report has mostly been an exercise of description – no doubt an important part, but regarding the urgency of the situation also in the European Union, we need to go beyond that. We want the next report not only to include recommendations, but to suggest very concrete follow—up in cases of non—compliance including, for example, infringement procedures, the rule of law conditionality and Article 7 proceedings. This would not only strengthen the report itself, but would also make the reasoning of the Commission behind how they are planning to defend the rule of law more transparent and comprehensible, not only to this Parliament, but also to the citizens in the European Union. Secondly, regarding the scope, Parliament has always called for a more holistic approach in the assessment. The fact that an illegitimate constitutional tribunal is restricting the reproductive rights of women shows how closely the independence of the judiciary and fundamental rights are interlinked, and this should also be reflected in this report. Thirdly, we want this report to be prepared in an inclusive and transparent way, because civil society organisations, academics and activists, are not ‘nice to have’ input givers, but an absolutely vital part to get full insight into what is happening on the ground. That is why we want NGOs to be able to give input, to make the process of writing and preparing this report more foreseeable – and yes, to create a panel of independent experts to give a much—needed outside view into the preparing of this report. Lastly, let me say this, colleagues. I have learned that rights we have taken for granted can be taken away from us again. I went into politics not only to leave a habitable planet to future generations, but also to make sure that our daughters and granddaughters do not have less rights than we have, but actually more – to enjoy more freedom, equality and more diversity in their lives. The same is true for all of society. I want this report to become a tool to make sure that our democracies thrive, that everyone can feel safe in their rights, and that we build a Union that shows crystal clear not only to the people in Europe, but the whole world, that even – and especially – in times of transformation, conflict and disruption, strong, viable democracies are the future, not authoritarian leaders invoking an imagined ‘better, cleaner’ past, to show clearly that commitment to the rule of law and not the law of the ruler wins the battle, not only in Ukraine, but all over Europe.

Mr President, dear colleagues, dear Commissioner, dear Minister, the President is right – European history will be written in Ukraine. That is why our support for a free European democracy against brutal Russian aggression is paramount right now. It is our historic responsibility to do everything possible to show this solidarity, including hard and far—reaching sanctions, and I’m happy to hear that a deal has been reached on a ban on Russian oil. It is an important next step, but it is certainly not the last one that we will need. While this parliament strongly supports the sanctions, we also already see the negative consequences this war has for Europe. After years of pandemic, we see the economic struggle of many households in the European Union. And our reaction to the pandemic, despite some challenges in the beginning, was based on one of our strongest assets – solidarity. With the Next Generation EU fund we managed to show that we can stand together in times of crisis, and the same – and probably more – is needed now because we all know what Putin is trying to do. He’s trying to divide us, to play Member State against Member States and to count that the social hardship that we will face will dry out our firm support for Ukraine. Putin is trying to divide Europe, to divide our societies. He is counting on our inability to manage this great challenge together. We cannot colleagues, and we will not, let him succeed in this. Let us show that we will face this challenge together, the east and the west of Europe, the north and the south. Let us show that all that he is succeeding in will be to revive the European social model, the promise of a European Union where nobody will be left behind. For that, we will need joint efforts, investments, a solidarity fund to balance out the social inequality. And we will have to proceed in creating a real social safety net on the European level by finally introducing a European minimum wage, closing the gender pay gap and, yes, also a European minimum income. This continent is weakest when it is divided and strongest when it is united. Let us be united against Putin!

Madam President, brave people in Ukraine are fighting right now in a brutal war, also to defend freedom and democracy. Ukrainian citizens are fighting for their right to live in a democratic system where the separation of powers means something, where fundamental rights and the independence of the judiciary will be safeguarded. Women are fighting for their own self-determination. LGBTI people are fighting for their fundamental right to be who they are. A record 91% of Ukrainians are supporting the accession to the European Union. Why is that? Because they believe in the values outlined in Article 2 of our Treaties. Because despite the setbacks and the shortcomings that we clearly see in the European Union, apparently we still stand for a promise of democracy, rule of law and fundamental rights. I urge you, colleagues, let us live up to this promise also by being tough about democracy and rule of law inside our own Union. And this does not only need a vocal European Parliament, this most of all also needs Member States to open their mouths and to stand up for the rule of law and democracy. So I can only call on the French Presidency to move on with the Article 7 procedure, not only by hearings, because the next step is very clear. We need binding recommendations with clear timelines to protect the rule of law and fundamental rights inside of our common Union.

Mr President, yesterday I arrived at the main station in Berlin and, when I walked up the stairs, just like in so many other places in Europe right now, I could already see the stalls, the info desks and the many, many volunteers in their neon vests who were welcoming refugees there. And I could see the people, many of them loaded with bags, a lot of children indeed, who had arrived with tired faces, exhausted from a long journey, anxious and worried. And I thought to myself, is it not that in these tired and exhausted faces, we can actually see the meaning of this Union? In these faces – and I want to say it very clearly – no matter whether their skin is white, brown or black, no matter whether their gender actually matches the markers in their documents, in these faces, the promises of this Union are reflected because this Union was built to create peace. This Union was built to defend humanity, freedom and democracy, and this Union was built to defend the rule of law against the law of the ruler. Let us live up to these promises. We have failed so many people before. Let us not fail again. Not now and not in the future.

Madam President, the Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. No secret agenda, no additional obligation, just plain and simple, what all Member States agreed on; in fact, what makes the European Union. Yes, the European Union is not just a single market, but a Union of values, and this applies to all aspects of this Union, including the budget. For me, it is hard to understand that people don’t get that. This fundament is not only a clear commitment and promise between the Member States, but it is first and foremost a commitment and promise to our citizens. And whether you live in Finland, in Spain, in Poland or in Ireland, you have to be able to fully rely on that and you have to know that the EU institutions will defend this. The Commission shall promote the general interest of the Union and take appropriate initiatives to that end. It shall ensure the application of the Treaties and of measures adopted by the institutions pursuant to them. You are the guardians of the Treaties. But right now you look more like the masterminds of delaying tactics and avoiding responsibility, Mr Commissioner. Now you come back with guidelines. Now, after these many months. Power comes with responsibility and you are neglecting this responsibility. You are failing, not only in the duties that stem from the Treaties, but you are failing millions of EU citizens that have put trust in you, that count on you. The European Parliament cannot and will not let that stand. We have to do something. And that will also mean considering the postponement of the discharge of the Commission until you no longer fail the responsibility to protect this Union and its citizens.

Madam President, Secretary of State, ! Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! For years, we have been witnessing massive attacks on the right to sexual self-determination in Europe – an authoritarian , trying to challenge our right to our own bodies. But besides all these attacks, there is also light in the darkness, not only in Ireland, but finally in Germany. I want to make it very clear again here, because I very often encounter surprise and incomprehension when I explain this – especially French colleagues: In Germany, abortions are still regulated in the Criminal Code. Abortion is only punishable under certain preconditions, but still not decriminalized. So far, doctors can even be prosecuted if they publish information about abortions on their websites. This information ban, Section 219a, was reintroduced by the Nazis in 1933. What was behind it, many can probably think. Now – this week – finally, finally, finally, after many years of hard struggle – the replacement of paragraph 219a has finally been initiated. Of course, this is not the last step on a long road, but I think it is still an important signal, because the debate on sexual and reproductive rights in Germany is lagging far behind many other EU Member States. We finally need progress on sexual self-determination in Europe again, because for years, if we are honest, we have often fought a defensive fight. The aim of feminist movements must be to move forward. Therefore: Thank you to the many activists, to the doctors, especially Kristina Hänel, the lawyers and the many, many other people who have worked tirelessly for the deletion of this paragraph. Be sure, this Parliament is clearly by your side! Now it must continue until the old demo slogans finally become a reality everywhere in Europe: ‘My stomach is mine’, ‘My body – my choice’.

Mr President, ‘Me Too, yes, also I have been sexually harassed’. These were the words I started my speech with four years ago. When reports of sexual harassment also from inside of this house came to the surface, when millions broke the silence of what had been considered something you just have to be able to deal with beforehand. And yes, Me Too did change a lot. We now have a completely different conversation from what we had four years ago, but it did not change enough. Still, cases of sexual harassment and sexual assault and not taken seriously. Still, conviction rates, even of rape, are ridiculously low. And we have a backlash against women’s rights in full swing. And also here in this Parliament, our common House of European Democracy, issues have been talked down and urgently needed measures have still not been implemented. Like, for example, mandatory trainings or a fully independent audit of the situation. The European Parliament indeed stands for more than just itself. The fact that the Presidents of this House have still not managed to implement all of these reforms is simply a shame. I was told back then that I would damage the reputation of the European Parliament if I spoke up too loud and too clear about the problems with sexual harassment and the necessary reforms in this Parliament. Well, here’s the thing: neither I nor the many women who raised their voices about sexual harassment or were damaging this House; quite the opposite. It is the people who have covered this up. The people who slowed down the process of changing things who are damaging this Parliament. But here’s to you. Time’s up.