Speeches

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.

Madam President, colleagues, I could now defend our proposal because we think it’s the best, but I’m not going to do that. I think if it’s very important for the other groups to have this aspect of new developments added, that can be fine. But for us, it will be very important also to focus on integrity and transparency measures, so to have that definitely in the title. And if you would like to add the specific country names, I think that’s also fine for us. But we really want to focus on what do we do now and what kind of measures do we need to put in place to prevent things like this from happening in the future.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. I think we're all still horrified by what came to light this weekend. Let me quote my father who said: "What a fucking shit they took off." I think that's a quote that shows how much trust has broken. Trust can only be rebuilt if we act now as the European Parliament. That is why we will have to be very clear, including in the resolution we are adopting, in terms of condemnation of the acts, in terms of education and better prevention, and an absolutely crystal clear response to corruption and misconduct is absolutely central. We took the first step today by deposing Eva Kaili as Vice-President of Parliament. Corruption must have far-reaching consequences. Point. No discussion. Secondly: We need full clarification, a committee of inquiry and, of course, full cooperation with the Belgian authorities. Because if one thing has turned out to be true, it is that there is a capable and independent public prosecutor's office in Belgium. Thirdly, and I believe this is a very important part of this reappraisal, further measures for better prevention. Yes, there are things that will not be completely preventable even with better transparency rules. Nevertheless, it is important that we now focus on full transparency, for example the inclusion of third countries in the lobby register or an independent ethics authority. Some colleagues will now say: Nothing rushing, no actionism. But let me be clear: There are many rules that we as the European Parliament have already adopted by a majority here in plenary, such as the ethics authority. We must now insist that these rules be finally implemented. The debate isn't new, it's just topical. It is important to me that we always have the image of the citizens in mind when making these decisions. This Parliament must rebuild the lost trust, and for that we must work together.

Madam President, I can only echo what the colleagues have been saying. These are dark days for European democracy. I can tell you personally, colleagues, that I have always been a very proud member of this Parliament. To me, it’s the honour of my life to be elected to this Parliament. In the last days, honestly, this pride has seriously been shaken. I myself know that most of us here are working hard, that we are honest and sincere in representing the EU citizens, but now I’m actually thinking about the millions of EU citizens who are struggling right now – the people who are lying awake at night who do not know how to pay their bills, who do not know how to get through the next month and what they had to see over the past days. This puts shame on all of us here in this Parliament. We have to be absolutely clear: this Parliament, after what has happened, cannot do business as usual. We cannot stop at just thoughts and prayers. We have to be absolutely clear. We have to act. I want us to act, as the colleagues have said, unitedly, as pro—European Democrats. But we have to act, and we also have to put something in writing to be clear about what we want, because we want a full inquiry into this matter. Everything has to come to the surface right now because, as people have said, trust has been broken. We have to have a dedicated position in the EP Bureau that is working on these reforms, that is working on anti—corruption, and we need to have more far—reaching measures, like, for example, the reform of the lobby register, as well as an ethics body that can make sure that we do everything in our power to prevent something like this in the future. Indeed, colleagues, the trust of citizens has been broken, and to my understanding, rightfully so. So let us do everything we can to bring everything to light and to prevent something like this from happening again in the future. This is about more than just us. This is about protecting this House. This is about protecting democracy. This is about protecting the European project. So let us do all we can – we owe it to ourselves and we owe it to our citizens.

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.