Speeches

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, it is clear for me that the future is clean. It couldn’t be green, but clean for sure. That’s clear for me. And I believe that is not the responsibility only of the younger generation, but their parents’ generation as well. We should all contribute to that, and I know that it’s meaningful action if only the rest of the world is following, otherwise is just something that we are going to do – a hard exercise which going to pay a high price with suspicious results at the end. But I am sure that our diplomacy will do its best to make the rest of the world to follow. Now, the only thing that I would like to see more is to treat our industry as a partner, not as a criminal which is poisoning our environment. Because let’s be honest, the input from millions of European families are provided by European industry, not by European institutions. So we have to treat them equally and pay attention of what price they are supposed to pay for our policies that we are making.

Mr President, Madam Commissioner, I do support and warmly welcome the efforts of the European Commission to find a way to stop our dependence on Russian gas and oil. I do support the efforts of the Commission to find different ways to supply those crucial energy resources to our continent. However, welcoming the REPowerEU initiative, I would like to express my concerns and saying that requiring additional EUR 30 billion coming from the cohesion policy and about 8 billion coming from agriculture policy, it puts to a danger the development of those policies who already funded a lot of initiatives. Let me just briefly go through all of them: CARE, CARE+, CRII 1, CRII 2, REACT-EU and now REPowerEU. In the cohesion policy, we already have 100 billion who are at disposal for decarbonisation, transition and different ways to find resources to our own continent. Let’s use them and not create another one. And as a conclusion I would like to say yes, we have to find a way to import energy resources to our continent, but we should develop our own and use the existing one as well.

Madam President, Commissioners, President of the European Court of Auditors, dear colleagues, our nature as Members of European Parliament is to be critical and reactive, to be very tough against all attacks towards the European budget and towards the interests of European taxpayers. We could not go against the moral compass of this House or against the rules of our Union. So this week we are deciding whether to grant discharge to the European Court of Auditors or not. We have been witnessing an attack against an institution – an attack against the President of this institution – and we should not enlarge this attack to the whole interest in the good relationship that this Parliament has with the European Court of Auditors. We’ve been provided with information on all the questions we’ve been asking, and never in the history of the European Court of Auditors have we seen a problem with its nature or work. We’ve been provided with reports on a regular basis. Two thirds of the workflow of Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT) comes from the European Court of Auditors. We don’t see a problem with the quality of the work provided to us, with the quality of the report, or with the moral compass and capabilities of the professionals who are working there. I believe we should grant discharge to this institution.

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, I think something needs to change. If we want more people to get involved in watching debates from the European Parliament at home, and if we want more people to believe in and in the European Union, we must forget in times of crisis that – I quote – ‘we will express concern, we will follow with alarm and we will strongly condemn’. What we need to do in times of crisis is to be close to people more than any other moment. Let me give you an example. For 70 days now, ports in Ukraine have been blocked, dozens of ships cannot leave these ports. Among them is the Bulgarian Rozhen, which is blocked at the port of Chernomorsk. Some of the sailors were evacuated, the other part were on board the ships and survived with what was left in the holds. The more time passes, the more mines are poured into the waters around the harbour, making it almost impossible to get the ships out. And if you ask me what we should do, I will answer you. Immediately, but immediately, a delegation from the European institutions with an action plan at hand goes to Ukraine and returns with the last ship flying a European flag there. And then, dear colleagues, from TVs, the European Union will move into people's hearts.

Mr President, my speaking time this morning is three minutes. These are three minutes in which, somewhere in Ukraine, a rocket will be launched and turn somebody’s home into ashes. These are three minutes in which some government in Europe will still be thinking about either sending support or a device for defence to Ukraine. Three minutes in which some broken Ukrainian family will be trying to cross the European border in order to seek security and peace. These are three minutes in which a life will be lost and we cannot recover it. I believe that our actions with CARE and CARE+ will help those running for their lives and will go down in history. It will go down in history that Europe showed solidarity and saved millions of lives, because we already have about 4 million on the territory of the European Union. But I think we should look further to make a step forward. What we need is a European Marshall Plan, a long—term mechanism which will recover and rebuild Ukraine after this horrible war that is going on there. I think this is the chance for Europe to not only show solidarity, but for European companies to rebuild Ukraine. And we will bring it back to a path of prosperity, peace and cooperation with the European Union – something that we should have been doing over the last 15 years at least. But I think we are on the right track now. I don’t know what the outcome of the votes later on today will be, but I am sure that neither I, nor any of us, would like to leave our home, our country and our life, just like most Ukrainians don’t want to. With this in mind, I am sure that the votes are going to show that we have learned the lessons of history and we are not going to repeat the mistakes that we’ve made. I think that, with this vote, we are going to show that we remain on the right side of history.

Madam President, my last name is Novakov. I am an ethnic Bulgarian, from a Bulgarian family, with a Bulgarian mother and father. Dear Commissioner, Your surname is Ferreira, a Portuguese family of Portuguese origin, with Portuguese roots. What both of us Europeans are doing is not just the flag, it's just the anthem. What both of us Europeans are doing is European solidarity. Because this Union was built from the debris of the Second World War. And yet in his DNA are neither bombs, nor shells, nor tanks. In his DNA are peace, prosperity and trade. I think that this aggression, this war that we see in Ukraine, is a chance to show the human face of the European Union. To educate a whole generation of Europeans who will defend the European Union. And this will be the strongest part of our army. Because this is the strongest feature of the European Union: to help those in need, those fleeing for their lives. And I am proud that this Parliament has accepted by an absolute majority, with no votes against and no abstentions, that we use those sleeping money from European funds to help people and countries that accept Ukrainians fleeing the war, 90% mothers with children. Here I think of the thought of the genius Bulgarian politician and European Atanas Burov, who says that great peoples will not fall victim to petty psychology, because they are great peoples and their measure is great. I am proud that with this vote we made the difference and stood on the right side of history, we did not fall victim to petty psychology, but went to the side of those who will win.

I have in me the book that is at the heart of European cohesion policy, as I have already said. The trouble is that this policy is currently not working and we need clear and concrete action. We have to do this... I can send my speech in writing. I can use the services of Parliament to send it in 24 different languages, if that is going to help. But, Madam President, I would like to ask you to indicate to me when I can continue with my speech. I will continue in English, then and we will see how the interpretation goes, but that goes so far, anyway. It's good. I hope that in Bulgarian you also understand me and hear well what I am going to say, and that is that we can not afford more delays like this at the moment. No matter if there's a translation or not, no matter if you understand what I'm saying well, I know you understand what we need to do. We Bulgarians like to say that the neighbor is part of the family, and the family is always helped. Over a million refugees from Ukraine are currently on the territory of Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, Romania and Bulgaria. We have enough sleeping money on cohesion policy, which we do not currently use. I call for urgent action – for the European Commission to create, without delay, an instrument to support any country hosting Ukrainian refugees. Only then will we show that behind the fairy tales are actions, that we believe in what we do and that we can be united in this difficult moment. When the whole world is looking at us. As you can see, there are no refugees who choose other countries overseas. Every time, in every crisis, Europe is the first to help. We have no right to apologize for not being ready for crises. When have we been? During the Greek debt crisis, the refugee crisis before that, were we ready for the Corona crisis? But these are moments after which we stand stronger and stronger, and I believe that no matter how many times the translation stops, we have all been together and agreed that we cannot stay away from watching some countries take the burden on the whole Union. Europe must act immediately. The European Commission should set up an immediate initiative to support any country currently hosting refugees. We have money. We need the will to use them.

I knew that at some point in my career I would end up in front of the plenary without knowing what to say. And I have to say that even knowing that for so long, it didn’t prepare me well for this. But I can assure you that the situation is such that even such moments could not break our will to support our neighbours ... (Interruption by President)

I can continue in English until interpretation is available. So, I’ll start from the very beginning. You already saw the book that I showed you. I said, this is the alphabet of European cohesion policy. And I know this very well because with a large group of colleagues, along with Constanze Krehl, we dedicated three years of our lives to participating in adoption of those ... (interrupted by the President)

Madam President, Commissioner, honourable Members, I have in my hands the letter of European cohesion policy – 706 pages of rules on how the European Structural and Investment Funds work. They set out very well what is being done in a time of crisis, when the European Union is flooded with a wave of refugees. I know this well because in these 705 pages, together with Constanze Krehl and another large team of people, we dedicated two years of our lives to getting them accepted. The trouble is that cohesion policy is currently not working because of the inaction of the Member States, but also because we are passively watching their inaction. It turns out, however, that the measure of leadership is concrete and quick action. The lack of such actions gives leadership to others. (Presidency interrupts speaker)

Mr. President, we are talking about a green certificate, about free travel in Europe. Which way are we having this conversation? That means the problem is still there. I've been vaccinated three times and it doesn't help me move around Europe freely. Don't get me wrong, the green certificate was a good idea that at first did a lot of work to bring order to the chaos of the pandemic. Of course, the discovery of the vaccine also helped a lot, and I, as a European politician, agree to wear a green certificate, but not pink glasses. And let's be serious. Europe has not found a unified solution. She found a vaccine, she found a certificate, she found a data exchange system, but not a uniform solution. And you know why? Because every country changed its rules whenever it wanted, as many times as it wanted and as it wanted. That's why we promised people that the green certificate will return them to a normal way of life. And now before each flight, besides a green certificate, you need a QR-code, a PCR-test, an affidavit or all of them combined. Dear colleagues, in order for us not to be laughed at but to be trusted, we need a rule that applies throughout Europe, in every Member State, today and tomorrow, without changing without warning. Let us do so, dear colleagues, that it does not matter whether you are flying from Berlin, from Brussels or from Burgas.

Mr President, if we make the price of gasoline two euros, we will not save the environment. If we tax plane tickets with carbon tax, we're not going to raise air quality, we're going to get people off planes. It is very easy to talk about the energy of the sun, about the energy of the wind, but in summer. Now in winter we all glow on coal and gas, including this hall at the moment. I see the birth of a new type of politician in general – I call them helicopters because they hover in the clouds, occasionally land on Earth to make a little noise and dust in people’s eyes, and then fly away again. They need to know that they will meet the sensible resistance of all of us who still walk the earth and talk to people. I believe in the market. And when electric cars become good enough, and better than ordinary cars, people will start buying them themselves and without obliging them to vote in this room. When, thanks to technology, we can use the energy from the sun and wind almost for free, I assure you, no one will go underground to dig anything. That's it, everything else is illusions. And high bills. Often in combination.

Madam President, at the beginning, the RRF was presented as an equal partner of the cohesion policy. We were told that they would both live alongside each other in harmony and a balanced relationship. What is the current status quo, though? We have 26 national plans submitted, 22 approved. We have three partnership agreements submitted, one approved. We have EUR 56 billion disbursed out of the RRF, we have zero from the cohesion policy. So something went wrong. I don’t like this to be the last programming period of the cohesion policy. I don’t like to participate in a Parliament that killed our policy. So what we need now from the Commission is a flight plan for each Member State of where to land in order not to lose precious European funding. Not a single euro should be lost. I think it is possible because these are the same governments that have to conclude the last programming period, the same governments that have to start the new one and to deal with the RRF, so they need some help. Please help them not to lose our European funding.

Madam President, only three Member States submitted their partnership agreements to the European Commission. It means one thing and one thing only. There is a very high probability that this year it will be a zero when it comes to the budget. A zero 2021 means additional stress on the budgets of 2022, 2023 and 2024. It means that we have a really high risk of losing EU money for our Member States, our regions and constituencies. This is much more important than the arguments over a million here or over a million there, and I think a lot of work has been done to reach that agreement. I believe that we should support the compromise that has been reached and not create any additional delays on the budget procedure because we have already lost one year for the new programming period and this is a great paradox. This economy, the European economy, needs European funds to be invested immediately in order to recover, so we cannot play games with this important issue. Please vote in favour of the report that has already been proposed.

Mr President, on my way to work this morning, I crossed the River Rhine on the Europabrücke. It’s a project that is co—financed by Interreg, using our European funds. If our Cross—Border Mechanism had been in place, it would have been open much earlier because, according to the expectations of local authorities and the European institutions, the Cross—Border Mechanism would cut 50% of the administrative burden that the authorities are facing at the moment. I have had no explanation, neither for myself nor for my voters, as to why this crucial regulation is taking the Council so long. So I call on the Slovenian Presidency to reopen the negotiations because, exactly two years ago, we voted to start negotiations, and nothing has happened. Two years. Two years in which many projects could have been started, finished and already in place to be used by our citizens. The reason for all regulations and funds are to serve people. When we achieve that, we do not need many arguments to convince our voters that Europe is the future. So let’s reopen the negotiations and close them as soon as possible.

Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, perhaps 90% of the debate so far has focused on the fact that several countries that have submitted their recovery and resilience plans are likely not to be approved. In this regard, I would like to say a few things. First, these are means not for given governments, but for given peoples to deal with the consequences that the coronary crisis has inflicted on them. Secondly, this is the smaller problem, because there are still countries that have not submitted their plans at all. As we have already seen, one of these countries is the Netherlands and the second is Bulgaria. In this regard, because I love my country, especially when it is managed in a way that is alarming, let me ask the Commissioner: firstly, is there a way for countries that have not submitted recovery and resilience plans to be at risk of losing European funds? Secondly, is there a way for the countries currently governed by governments that are unable to submit a recovery and resilience plan to receive any help from the European Commission so that the peoples of these two countries do not lose access to European funding, which is so important in this case? Finally, is there a mechanism for the European Commission, in such situations, to make countries comply with deadlines even when they are managed by caretaker governments that cannot be held responsible for meeting these deadlines? Finally, is the submission of the recovery and resilience plans conditional on the approval of operational programmes, do the two relate, put at risk the lack of plan approval and of operational programmes?

Madam President, we have to be clear on two things, when it comes to Turkey and the refugee crisis. The first one is that we are disbursing EU funds to Turkey not only because Turkey is in need, but because the Union is in need as well. We have to be clear about the following thing: there are more than four million refugees in Turkey, who, if the authorities stop taking care of them, probably will not try to go back to their homes in Syria and in Afghanistan, but will probably try to reach the European Union and – why not – Strasbourg, where we are at the moment. That is one of the things. The second one, for sure, is that we need bulletproof control of the EU funds that are going to be invested in Turkey. We have to be clear that – in front of our taxpayers, our voters – everything that is in our power to implement budgetary control over those funds has to be on grounds. Not a single cent from the European budget has to be invested to chase somebody’s short—term political goals. Finally, now it is time for calm and wise decisions, not for firework speeches here.

Mr President, colleagues, I was 11 years old when my family managed to raise money for a car for the first time. Of course, it was second-hand. Of course, it was from Germany, and this was the only option for personal transportation. The situation was similar in the families of my peers, it is similar now and in more countries in the European Union than you might think. We have often said that human life has no price. Cars do, however, and it is often unbearable for many people. Often, the only option to have personal transportation is to have a second-hand car, and that's why I want to talk about a scam that has a colossal scale. According to independent reports, 50% of second-hand cars have manipulated mileage, one in two. Take a look the next time you go out on the street. Some time ago, I proposed to the European Commission a pilot project that tackles precisely this fraud – it has been approved and funded. And yet there are still countries that do not share the real mileage of their cars: the one that gathers during the annual technical inspections and I do not understand why. There's no reason for that. When you sell a car a million miles away and claim it's 100,000 miles away, you're not just stealing money from the most vulnerable, you're stealing safety from all of us. Let's put an end to this, let's get all countries involved in this pilot project, let's put an end to this fraud, and finally let's eliminate at least one of the factors for many of the catastrophes in the European Union.

Mr President, Commissioner, first of all, I would like to begin my speech by paying tribute to all the men and women who are fighting the elements and risking their lives to save other people's lives. Unfortunately, in the last 20 years almost every European Union country has been in a situation to seek help from the European Union, whether after an earthquake, whether after a fire, whether after a landslide or after a flood, and unfortunately, things do not seem to improve over time. €5 billion from the Solidarity Fund went to such disasters. However, there is much more hope than money in the Solidarity Fund. And we have to say that before we take care of the protection of the environment, we have to take care of the protection of people. There are a few things we should be honest with ourselves and with the people who look at us from the outside. The Solidarity Fund needs more money and faster disbursement. People expect us to react immediately and then, when the disaster happens, the European Union will be there for them. Otherwise, they will tend to believe all kinds of fake news and misinformation that someone thousands of miles away is helping them more than their own country thanks to the Union. More money in the Solidarity Fund, faster disbursement and better communication to be there for people when they need us.