What Charlie spoke about.

Madam President, thank you very much. Prime Minister Kristersson! Welcome to the European Parliament! One thing we have in common is a respect for Gösta Bohman's political deed, his fight for freedom against the great state. Now the big government is making a comeback at EU level. You know that Brexit did not lead to the necessary self-examination in Brussels and that the centralists saw their chance. You know that power transferred to Brussels will never come back. You know that the EU acquis is becoming increasingly burdensome and that the EU regulates more and more of the lives of its citizens. Dear Prime Minister, The principle of subsidiarity would limit the transfer of power. That was not the case. Crisis after crisis is used to transfer power to Brussels. The EU would promote free trade and fight protectionism. That was not the case. Instead, protectionist green investment support financed by loans is proposed, as is the case with the Coronavirus Fund. We need to maintain our labour market model. That was not the case either. To this can be added the EU's decisions on forests, hunting, energy, fuel, quotas, migration and asylum. Dear Prime Minister, In Sweden, the Moderates have finally adopted a realistic migration policy, but your party has essentially accepted Migration Commissioner Ylva Johansson's proposal to give Brussels power over migration volumes. Because even if your line means that you can pay yourself free from receiving Brussels' migrant quotas, it is about fines in the billions class in order to be able to pursue an independent migration policy. The reduction obligation, i.e. that the government may have to pay up to SEK 20 billion in fines for fulfilling its election promises, should be appalling. In addition, we know that migratory pressure will increase. Just look at the UN population projections for Africa and the Middle East. Frontex has reported the largest illegal migration since 2016. The Pact on Migration is not designed to address future migratory pressures. We must not give up power over migration volumes. Dear Prime Minister, Down here, the big state is growing. The Corona Fund's financing with joint debt is now a precedent. Those sitting here today – from the left to your own EPP group – are demanding more debt, new EU taxes and more transfers of power. And my question is: When will the Conservatives draw conclusions from this? Prime Minister Kristersson: Gösta Bohman fought for what he believed in and you can do that too! I am convinced that many of your voters, not just mine, would appreciate Swedish threats of veto against the indebtedness of future generations and a referendum lock that gives the Swedish people an opportunity to have their say on the major transfers of power that are planned. More than you think would welcome a change of course away from the United States of Europe, to safeguard individual freedom, corporate competitiveness and Sweden's sovereignty. I wish you the best of luck!

Madam President, discontent is spreading in red China, where lockdowns remain an essential part of the zero-COVID policy. Lockdowns are enforced so harshly that 10 people, including a 3-year-old child, died when a fire broke out in a residential building in Xinjiang. Some suspect they could not get out and that firefighters were prevented from arriving at the scene by CCP pandemic laws. The tragedy triggered protests across China and the world. Some, mainly in Chinese, bravely called for an end to CCP rule and for Xi Jinping to step down. Blank pieces of paper were used to mourn those who died and to protest against the censorship, cover-up and victim-blaming of the regime in Beijing. We know that authoritarian regimes do not value human life. We know the CCP is on the wrong side of history. But why is High Representative Borrell silent? Where is the condemnation by the EU? Fellow colleagues, I’ve summarised High Representative Borrell’s statements in support of the brave protesters in China. This is the summary. (The speaker held up a sheet of paper)

Mr President, every Treaty transferred more and more powers to Brussels. Every Treaty increased the number of decisions taken by QMV (qualified majority voting). National vetoes have been abolished in area after area. Today, Member States can be steamrolled by the majority in most policy areas. Sweden recently had minimum wage, pay transparency and gender quota directives imposed on us against our will. EU centralists now have their sights set on the final areas Member States retain veto over: taxes, spending, foreign policy and enlargement, and changes to the Treaties – the rules of this club. Here in Strasbourg, most want to abolish these last vestiges of national sovereignty, but you lack the consent of the people. Swedes don’t want to transfer more power to the EU – it’s one of the most unpopular policy ideas around. Swedes want to retain the right to say no to your new taxes and your new spending sprees.

Mr President, Commissioner Vestager, Mr Bek, the energy crisis is bad now, and it will get worse next winter. There isn’t enough production, supply nor import capacity. You progressives fought for the shutdown of nuclear power, resisted the restart of reactors, refused extraction, and restricted the use of branches, tops and twigs from logging in bioenergy. You push for new, expensive climate legislation. You claimed renewables offered salvation. You refused to classify nuclear as sustainable in the EU taxonomy. How do you think it’s working out? Madam President, a price cap won’t make up for zealotry. It won’t resolve the underlying problem, which is lack of supply. Europe needs a moratorium on new climate legislation. It needs gas drilling, the restart to nuclear, and that we stop the mindless attack on Nordic bioenergy. It’s time to take a stand for people who are losing their jobs and for the pensioners in Sweden calling helplines in desperation as they cannot afford to heat their homes.

Mr President, thank you very much. In November, Heléne Fritzon, the European Parliament's majority wanted a parliamentary resolution critical of Qatar. There, you and your party colleagues Erik Bergkvist and Ilan De Basso voted against that idea. I would like to ask why? I would like to ask why the Social Democrats in Sweden took a stand for visa-free travel for Qatar when, for example, the Center Party, which is not directly known for closed borders, voted against?

Madam President, thank you very much. Recently, we could read that 52 percent of French teachers engage in self-censorship so as not to offend religious students. As self-censorship spreads, Islamists have achieved an important milestone on the path to statutory censorship. In Sweden, we have an Islamist party represented in several municipalities that run blasphemy laws. It should scare the punches of every freedom-loving European. But for a number of years, the EU has been supporting Islamists, actively undermining our European way of life. Youth organizations with links to the Muslim Brotherhood have received millions. The association against Islamophobia in France, which was dissolved by the government after the murder of teacher Samuel Paty, has received grants. The Islamic University of Gaza, an important symbol of Hamas, received over SEK 5 million from the EU in 2019. After my prophecies, the contributions to the Islamic University have been stopped. Member States are exchanging experience in the Council to tackle Islamism and the Commission has been mandated to tighten the requirements to stop subsidies. It's about time. If freedom is to have a place in Europe, Islamism must be pushed back.

Mr President, today the European Parliament decided to designate the Russian Federation as a state sponsor of terrorism. Now, some Members of this House were trying to water down this resolution and delete this designation. And I’m glad those efforts did not succeed, because right after this vote, two things happened. The Russian Federation started to terror-bomb Ukraine and Russians hacked the European Parliament’s IT system, which means that this vote actually made a difference, something that was confirmed by the message by President Zelenskyy. Now, my message here today to the Member States, to the Council is: take this seriously. Establish a European legal framework to designate Russia a sponsor of terrorism. Do it quickly. It’s needed.

Mr President, thank you very much. When the Riksdag approved the EU coronavirus fund, it would be a temporary one-off event. The Sweden Democrats, the Court of Auditors in Germany and many others warned that a precedent for shifting the cost of future crises to the EU level was established. Now the next crisis is here, and you centralists, of course, refuse to cut support funds, waste or bureaucracy. Even the Islamist contributions are sacred. calls instead for joint borrowing, as a normal way of financing EU spending – a massive increase in power at the expense of the Member States; The aim of the debt is to increase pressure on Member States and approve the introduction of several new EU taxes to repay the loans. SD votes no to debts and taxes. Jag hoppas att statsministern i Sverige hörsammar sin föregångares varning – den som är satt i skuld är icke fri – och håller sitt löfte om nej till EU-skatter.

Mr President, thank you very much. I come from one of the most wolves-dense areas in northern Europe. For those of you on the left who think that the EU should under no circumstances change its protection status, I will tell you something from Värmland: “We could see the sheep from the kitchen window. Some were only 20 yards from the house. Most of them were dead. Two I had to shoot in the pasture", says farmer Mats Eriksson, Brandbol's farm, outside Gräsmark, at home in my Värmland. We have dog owners who don't dare to go out with their dogs anymore and parents who don't dare to let their children out. We have seen an increase from the tens of wolves – 17 wolves in Sweden, when this protection status was established – to over 400 wolves today. And you don't want to touch the protection status. It doesn't hold. You undermine confidence in the EU through this. It's time to change the wolf's protection status.

Mr President, Commissioner, Mr Bek, Commissioner Schinas, I agree that the EU right now operates as firefighters. As illegal migration decreases in the western Med, it soars in the central Med: almost 300 000 illegal entries into the EU this year alone. As the Commissioner pointed out, right now we see economic migrants from Bangladesh, Egypt and Tunisia. But Commissioner, do you honestly believe that the migration pact will solve the problem? The UN predicts Africa’s population will triple from 1.4 billion to 4 billion within this century. From 2000 to 2050 the Middle East population is estimated to increase by 329 million. The current migratory pressure fades in comparison to what will come. The migration pact is not designed for migration of that magnitude. Why? Because the EU will be overwhelmed by economic migrants using asylum as a means to enter our territory. And relocation won’t solve that. Commissioner, strict measures are a necessity. Illegal entry must mean forfeiture of the right to asylum. The EU must start financing border barriers. The Danish asylum plan must be recognised as a serious attempt to safeguard social cohesion – our European way of life.

Madam President, Commissioner Várhelyi, the regime in Tehran has murdered at least 402 protesters, including 58 children for protesting or merely being on the streets, as the families of the victims have told us. In Zahedan, they shot 17-year old Mohammad Iqbal in the back. They killed nine year old Kian Pirfalak, together with a 13-year old child in Izeh. Commissioner, I welcome the European Union’s growing recognition of the threatening geopolitical environment, but the EU has been asleep for decades. Sanctions were a step in the right direction, but we need to do more. We should reflect on the way forward you said. Well, yes, and in doing so, we should listen to the protesters. They want divorce, not counselling. And so should we. Add the IRGC to the terror list and implore the Member States to recall their ambassadors and expel Iran’s diplomats here in the European Union, close the embassies, period. The Islamic Republic is not a legitimate representative of the Iranian people.

Madam President, the Recovery Fund, aka ‘Death Generation EU’, almost doubled the EU’s expenses. That fund cures economic hangovers like vodka helps an alcoholic start his day. It sets a dangerous precedent – just impose the costs of the next crisis to the EU level. You claim recovery, but all you did was pile more debt on already over—indebted economies and misallocated funds to Brussels pet projects. The Italian and French Commissioners are having a field day. They’re already clamouring for the next round of handouts, or, to quote Ursula von der Leyen herself, ‘more European funding’. You love to hear those words, don’t you? And who will pay for those new EU taxes to fund this debt—addicted party? Sven Svensson. Before you come back for another handout, you should cut inefficient subsidy programmes and redistributed funds, because if you don’t, Sven Svensson won’t only refuse to pay the next tab, he’ll walk out the bar. And don’t be shocked if Mette Nielsen and Juha Mäkinen walk out with him too.

Madam President, thank you very much. The theft leagues are back, alerts the organization Entrepreneurs. Machine parks are being drained, boat owners are getting rid of their engines, older ones are being robbed. So what are the Commission and the European Parliament doing? Yes, they require the accession of Romania and Bulgaria to Schengen. So far, liberals in the Netherlands, Finnish Christian Democrats and even Merkel have blocked. The fact that Swedish Social Democrats want to open the highway to the theft gangs does not surprise anyone. But the fact that the Moderates, who went to elections on the slogan ‘Hello, theft leagues’, today voted to call for the abolition of border controls for Bulgarian and Romanian citizens, is surprising and worrying to say the least. Instead, the interests of ordinary Swedes should be put first. It is only to follow the call of the liberal Göteborgsposten: ‘Do not open the last door for the Romanian theft gangs.’ That is why we Sweden Democrats voted against.

Madam President, Commissioner Johansson, colleagues, in the past decades, the Russian Federation has attempted to re-establish regional hegemony. Russia inspires terror by murdering countless civilian victims, by indiscriminate targeting in Chechnya, Georgia, Syria and Ukraine. Russia relishes instability by supporting and financing terrorist regimes and organisations in the Middle East and Latin America. Russia’s closest allies Syria, Cuba, North Korea and Iran, are also sponsors of terrorism. Colleagues, we cannot, on the one hand, condemn and sanction Russia, while on the other continuing to entertain any delusion that the regime in Moscow can be a reliable partner, whether on climate, trade or regional stability. That world is dead and gone. Will it ever come back during our lifetime? I don’t think so. Colleagues, the Ukrainian parliament has appealed to countries to declare the Russian regime a terrorist state. Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia have shown leadership by heeding this call, and the EU Parliament should call for other EU Member States to follow their example. It is time to recognise the Russian Federation for what it is: a pariah, a menace, a rogue state and a state sponsor of terrorism. And that recognition must come with consequences.

Mr President, thank you very much. I would like to take this opportunity to draw attention to all the brave men and women from our countries who rushed to the defense of Ukraine, and especially those who paid the highest price to defend the small country's right to fend off the clutches of imperialism. One of those who sacrificed their lives for Ukraine is my compatriot, Lieutenant Edward Selander. He died on July 18. One of those who served under him in the Swedish army has this to say, and I quote: "Lieutenant Edvard Selander was the best officer I ever worked with. He embodied all the values we as the armed forces stand for. No one was more eager to create capable warriors than him, and he lived by an infallible moral compass.’ Dear colleagues, I would like to ask you to give a thought to all those of our citizens who have sacrificed their lives for the security of Ukraine and Europe.

Madam President, in retaliation for Ukraine attacking a legitimate military target, the Crimean Bridge, the Russian Federation unleashed a brutal bombardment against civilian targets across Ukraine. Terror is an integral part of the Russian war strategy. But despite recent actions, as well as previous atrocities against the Ukrainian civilian population by the Russian Federation, the leaders of this Parliament last week voted against adding to this session’s agenda a debate and a resolution calling for the Russian Federation to be designated a state sponsor of terrorism. Now, we Conservatives would like to give all Members present a chance to correct the record by supporting the ECR Group proposal to debate and adopt a resolution during this part-session calling for Member States to take action. I ask for your support for this proposal.

Mr President, thank you very much. Propaganda is best met with facts. The West can and must never underestimate the Kremlin's propaganda. It's everywhere, and it's effective. It intends to undermine European resilience with false claims that Kiev falls within three days, that Russian military power is the second strongest in the world, and to this day we hear from various quarters that Ukraine cannot win. Lies are best met with facts. Ukrainian heroes in this now show that Ukraine can actually win, with Swedish and European support. The Russian propaganda machine has also been very effective in energy policy. We know that Gazprom has funded environmental organisations with the aim of shutting down European energy production and increasing dependence on Russian gas. We know that Belgium's environmentalist energy minister, who was previously paid as a lawyer by Gazprom, now wants to shut down the country's nuclear power. Environmental organizations in Germany received tens of millions of dollars from Russia to counteract energy extraction. For Europe to resist Russian pressure, self-examination is necessary. My party has made a clean house with Putin apologists. But what about the political centre that said Nord Stream was a strictly commercial project and that the energy weapon would not be used by Putin – is there a self-examination there? And when will the self-criticism and the desire for improvement come from a climate movement that has received Russian money? When will the environmental left acknowledge that their fight against nuclear power has weakened Europe and enabled Putin's aggression?

Surrounded by Azeri soldiers, you surrender. You drop your weapons to the ground. Place your hands in the air. Suddenly you’re thrown to the ground. Your brothers in arms are herded together, lambs to the slaughter. Without provocation, an Azeri soldier fires a hail of bullets at one of your fellow servicemen. These are your final moments. Do you say a prayer? Do you hang on to the memory of your loved ones? This war crime recorded is one among many committed by the Azeri armed forces over the past two years. High Representative Borrell, you condemn the atrocities committed by Russia against Ukrainians and rightly so. Will you condemn war crimes committed by Azerbaijan against Armenia?

Mr President, ‘evil empire’ – that’s what President Reagan dared to call the Soviet Union. Remember that? Soviet dissident Natan Sharansky does. He fondly remarked, ‘I remember what a burst of enthusiasm this gave us: when the West finally saw the Soviet Union for what it was, there would be hope for victory.’ Words matter. The Iranian people beg us to be their voice. And we should. But words must be matched by action. And this requires soul—searching here in Europe. Political prisoners and young girls don’t get a burst of enthusiasm when European politicians don hijabs in front of the regime in Tehran. Iranian—supplied suicide drones to Russia are used to kill Ukrainians. While Brussels clings on to a dead nuclear deal, where are the Magnitsky sanctions against the ruling elite? Will protesters chanting (the speaker used a slogan in a non-official language) – ‘Women, Life, Freedom’ – be given a hope for victory as Liberals and Socialists normalise relations with the murdering mullahs? Mr High Representative, join me in declaring what the brave Iranian people already know all too well: the Islamic Republic is an evil republic.

Madam President, Commissioner Várhelyi, colleagues, this report calls on the EU to facilitate safe routes for asylum seekers and refugees into the EU. Now it’s a fact that the left stands for an ultra—liberal migration policy. So I want to address colleagues on the right side of the aisle. You know as well as I do that we must stop signalling that Europe will accommodate everyone. And you pretty well know that many of those are allowed into the EU and then denied asylum remain here illegally. Less than a third are returned. Even the Danish Social Democrat government gets this. They aim for a sustainable asylum policy. They’ve struck a deal with Rwanda, enabling transfers of asylum seekers to safety in Africa. In Rwanda, asylum applications will be processed, and if asylum is granted then protection provided. If the EU followed suit, it would crush the business model of human traffickers and end deaths at sea. It would enable assimilation as well as the return of those who have no right to be here. We must deter illegal migration, finance physical border barriers, return migrant boats to their ports of origin, and never, ever send a cent in aid to countries not accepting returns of its citizens. The left has no moral high ground on migration. Their open borders policy has failed, and the centre—right must stop enabling it. Support the amendments of the conservatives!

Madam President, High Representative, colleagues, to counter Chinese belligerence towards Taiwan or others in the Indo-Pacific, we must learn the lessons from Ukraine: don’t become dependent on cheap energy or exports; arm your allies before the enemy attacks; work with partners in the region as well as outside (the United States) to decouple from China and secure stability in the Indo-Pacific; strengthen our and Taiwan’s economies by enacting new, mutually—beneficial trade and investment agreements; communicate clearly that any kinetic action against Taiwan will have serious consequences; announce in advance that EU—China relations can never return to ‘business as usual’ if military action is taken by the CCP. Let’s speak clearly and carry a big stick!

Madam President, thank you very much. Let me tell you about the Swedish Centre Party. This party has long poisoned the debate at home in Sweden with accusations of Putin-friendliness. A month ago, their leader, Annie Lööf, questioned the blue-yellow Conservative bloc's security credibility and demanded guarantees that it would not sit on Putinists in high government positions. VoteWatch then released its review of Russia's votes here in the European Parliament, which shows, among other things, that the Sweden Democrats' party group ECR has consistently been the most Putin-critical. VoteWatch also shows that the Sweden Democrats are one of the most Putin-critical parties in all of Europe and the most critical of all Swedish parties, followed by the Christian Democrats and the Moderates. The Left Party stands out as one of the least critical of Russia in all of Europe, closely followed by the Social Democrats. The center has nothing to complain about either. How crazy it can be when fictional narratives meet reality. Unfortunately, there are parties both on the right and on the left that do not want to criticize Russia. They deserve criticism. But wrongly painting out political opponents such as Putinists, spreading disinformation at the same time as it may pave the way for a government containing the country’s least Russia-critical party, the Left Party – that is what Swedish Centre Party leader Annie Lööf does. Don't be like Annie.

Madam President, thank you very much. Forests are not mentioned in the Treaties. Sweden has never given power over forest policy to the EU. Nevertheless, the Commission wants to transform our forest – our national treasure – into a carbon reserve. They base their proposal on the Treaty provisions on the prudent and rational use of natural resources, as well as a ruling by the European Court of Justice in 1999, which stated that the Commission can regulate environmental measures in forests. It may be legal, but not legitimate. We have never democratically given up power over the forest. Sweden is the world's second largest exporter of industrial products from the forest. Forestry provides hundreds of thousands of jobs. The proposals to force Sweden to recreate at least 2.5 million hectares of natural forest will cost SEK 350 billion. Instead of forestry, a dead hand is laid over large forest areas. How many people lose their jobs, no one knows. Be assured, many Swedes will feel ‘hit, but not anymore’. The Commission cuts off the branch on which they are sitting.

Mr President, the left liberal majority in this House, led by centraliser-in-chief Guy Verhofstadt, seeks to abolish national vetoes, expand powers for the Union in the areas of health, energy, defence and social and economic policy. And ensure the European Pillar of Social Rights, which spawned the Minimum Wage Directive, a direct attack on the Swedish labour model, is fully implemented. This House and its well—funded lobby of centralists, funded by the taxpayers themselves in many cases, seek to enshrine these and other proposals to transfer more power to Brussels and away from democratic, legitimate national parliaments. Thankfully, there seems to be some recognition in the Council that there is no public longing for more power transfers. I hope these attempts to render my country, Sweden, to the status of a subservient, net-paying province of the United States of Europe will be strongly rejected by the Council. And if they’re not, they should be subject to approval by referenda in all Member States. Would you dare that?