What Balázs spoke about.

Madam President, dear colleagues, thank you very much for the floor. The Article 7 procedure has been going on against Hungary for almost four years without any tangible results. There’s a clear reason for this: the accusations are not factual; they are not of a legal nature but clearly and only political. Hungary has come under heavy criticism for years because we stand up for our sovereignty and right to decide on issues that do not concern the European Union. It all started with the migration crisis back in 2015, when we maintained that only Hungarians can decide who to let into their own country. Hungary, in fact, was the first country to differentiate between a refugee and an economic migrant. The left—wing liberal forces propagating the new religion, multiculturalism and open society, à la George Soros, did not like this policy, so they launched a political offensive against my country. Then they criticised us because for us, marriage is between a man and a woman. What is more, the father is a man and the mother is a woman. Now, even if you don’t like this, you have to accept that it’s only Hungarians who can decide about these issues in Hungary and for Hungarians. More recently, we have come under attack because we have chosen to protect our children. We made it clear that it is the parents’ right to determine what kind of sexual education they want their children to receive. You know, our children will always be more important for us than to conform to the latest gender madness spreading in the West. Now these significant political and ideological differences have also motivated many other unfounded accusations. These include the ridiculous claim that there is no press freedom in Hungary. Well, in reality, Hungary today has a more balanced press and media landscape than in many other places in Europe. What hurts you so much is that, unlike in Western Europe, in Hungary right—wing, conservative, Christian democratic media exists and flourishes. As for the accusations of an all encompassing corruption. Well, if this was true, the significant and constant economic growth, exceeding the EU average for over nine years now, would have been impossible. This spectacular economic success has benefited the whole country, the entire society, and not only a few businessmen. Otherwise, the government would not be re—elected over and over again with such a large majority. So it is high time to stop these absurd attacks and respect the right of Hungarians to their own country. We do not want you to dictate to us our values and convictions, thank you very much, we can define them for ourselves. 18 years ago, when we joined the European Union, it was clear to us where we wanted to belong after four decades of Soviet domination – to a community of freedom that respected classical European values, traditions and was based on mutual respect. Since then, Brussels – and especially this Parliament – has increasingly become a self—righteous postmodern witch—hunt club, that wants to impose a radical and narrow ideology on everyone else. If somebody resists, like we do, then you start the blackmailing, the sanctions and the aggressive attacks. We still believe in a Europe which will respect each other’s similarities and differences. I therefore demand: stop once and for all the poisonous and shameful attacks against Hungary and Poland!

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, for years we have been listening to the lies of the European left that Hungary does not help refugees. The current war shows the absurdity of these allegations. We help people in need, but we reject illegal economic migration and the violation of our borders. This atrocity shows very clearly the difference between people fleeing the war and economic migrants who are aggressive and attack border guards very often. As we have already said on several occasions, they should not be confused to the detriment of genuine aid. Of course, Hungary and other Central European countries are now helping people in need. Hungary has already welcomed and assisted more than 600,000 refugees. In times of peace, we can have all kinds of political debates, but in a time like this, when Central Europe is experiencing the biggest migration crisis in its history, petty ideological debates must be put aside.

Madam President, on Sunday, Hungarian voters gave Viktor Orbán and the Fidesz government a landslide victory. No political force has had a victory greater than this in the past 30 years in Central Europe. That’s a fact. This election result does not only mean the spectacular failure of the Hungarian opposition, but it was also a resolute and clear rejection of all the political intervention attempts by the Brussels elite and many of you here. At this point, you have a clear choice: either you respect the will of the people and open a new chapter of cooperation with us – we stand ready as we have always stood ready – or you continue your ill-conceived ideological jihad against us. Unfortunately, it seems that you are choosing the latter. This demonstrates a lack of respect of one of the most important principles of democracy, the vox populi. Please understand, Hungarians reject your arrogant ideological lectures. Europe is facing a terrible war. We are receiving millions of refugees. There is an economic crisis looming. We need sobriety and unity. Please help that. It’s high time to take your hands off Poland and Hungary.

Madam President, every effort that we make in this situation has to be directed towards creating peace, reaching a ceasefire first and then a peace agreement as soon as possible. We should avoid any escalation of this terrible situation, which is terrible already. The bloodshed must end, and so we must make our decision based on that overarching goal. Sanctions are undoubtedly necessary. We have come out with sanctions, come up with sanctions, but we cannot harm ourselves more in this effort than the country we want to pressure with the sanctions. So although it’s an emotional time, understandably, rationality must be maintained. Now, let me come to the question of refugees. We are seeing the large influx of refugees into central Europe, into the European Union, and this is an extraordinary time. I salute the efforts of Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, the countries that are helping and taking most of the burden in this situation. But this is also a situation of a test of maturity for the EU and the EU institutions in particular. It is high-time to leave behind the unimportant, petty ideological debates that have divided us so much over the past. Stop withholding funds to Hungary and Poland, as they are doing the most to help millions of Ukrainian refugees. These attempts were unacceptable already before the war, but since the war they are outright scandalous. Help the people who are helping the Ukrainians!

Mr President, for years, we have been listening in this House to the false accusations that Hungary was not helping those in need. The tragic consequences of the current war in Ukraine clearly prove those accusations wrong. They were nothing but malicious lies. Hungary does help refugees who are now fleeing our neighbouring Ukraine from this terrible war. The whole country has moved as one to provide care, accommodation, all kinds of assistance. And I salute all those who take part in this effort. We can witness exemplary unity and helpfulness, just like Commissioner Schinas also saluted and thanked the people when he visited the border just a few days ago and I thank the Commissioner for that. However, instead of focusing on how best to support the frontline states, the left in this House and the EPP want to pass a resolution just tomorrow that would demand the freezing of European funds to Poland and to Hungary. Even at a time of a crisis of this magnitude, they cannot stop their usual ideological witch—hunt. Well, how petty and short—sighted, I must say. If you keep attacking those countries who are now helping the Ukrainians, you can only prove your own incompetence and cynicism.

Mr. President, please. The free and undisturbed operation of civil society organisations is an important European tradition. However, there is no reason why these organisations should receive special treatment or privileges. In any case, it is not acceptable for some civil society organisations to deliberately break the law, possibly ignoring instructions from the authorities. In recent years, NGOs have been collaborating with smugglers and carrying hundreds of illegal immigrants across the Mediterranean to Europe. Has it also recently come to light that a network of left-wing organisations is manipulating European political debates in a pseudo-industrial way, and that the European Parliament is trying to exempt them from the rules? We reject any attempt to eliminate the accountability of civil society organisations and the safeguards for their legitimate and transparent functioning. They should be subject to the same rules as any other organisation. It is neither justified nor permissible to lift them above the law and to exclude them from compliance with the rules of the Member States.

Madam President, many of us are celebrating today’s verdict as if it were a bright success for European cooperation. The reality is that today’s decision leads to a dead end. It is an historical mistake to use the European Union as a facade to enforce a single ideology. It is unacceptable to undermine the sovereignty of Member States, to disregard the division of competences and to force everyone into a leftist ideological straitjacket. This is a political and ideological battle about values. The European Left first wanted to force migration upon us, and now they want us to accept LGBTQ propaganda in our kindergartens and schools. It is regrettable that the European Court of Justice, a supposedly independent institution, is now a partner in assisting this federalist onslaught to create a centralised Europe. But Hungary and Poland, and I hope many others, will continue to adhere to the politics of common sense. Whether you like it or not, we will continue to protect our borders, our children and our way of life.

Madam President, it is ridiculous that almost no plenary session has passed here lately without a debate on Poland. Well, perhaps it is frustrating to some of you how our central and eastern European Member States, like Poland, are confident, successful and stable, and they know what they want, and they are not afraid to make decisions based upon their own competences. They do not need tutoring from the West anymore. Maybe that is what you take so badly. You constantly abuse the concept of the rule of law, of democracy, of respect for each other when you attack these governments solely because you have an ideological difference, but that is not the same as a rule of law problem. You have to understand that Member States created and maintained a European Union and not the other way around. Even if some of you dream of a federal Europe, well, that is not going to happen if Member States do not want it. Member States retain the right to organise their educational system, to defend their borders, to organise their judiciary, to decide about family matters, health care issues, etc. These are national competences. So I demand more respect for Poland and the Polish people.

Madam President, political correctness and gender madness have hit Europe once again, hard. The Commission apparently wants a Europe where women cannot be called women anymore and men shouldn’t be called men, where we are advised not to use names like Mary and John, and where we are supposed to say winter holidays instead of Christmas holidays. Well, we in Central Europe have a strange feeling that we’ve been here before – this feeling of déjà vu, when we were supposed to say Pine Holiday instead of Christmas; when we were supposed to say Uncle Winter instead of Santa Claus. But that was during totalitarian Communism – and in 2021, here we are in the European Union back there. Well, George Orwell must be turning in his grave, I’m sure. Let me say a word to my former political family, the EPP Group, and especially the EPP leadership. Well, this is exactly where your ill-conceived policy or politics of appeasement has led. This is what happens when you give in to every single crazy idea of the Left. It’s a shame that this could have happened under an EPP-led European Commission, don’t you think? And finally, just a word to our Commissioner Dalli, who didn’t have the courage to come here today. The belated withdrawal of these absurd guidelines is not enough. She should resign immediately.

Mr President, the Left in this house is cooking from the same recipe all over again, isn’t it? The recipe is the following: take a successful, conservative right-wing government, come up with unfounded political attacks, disguise them as legal issues, and then put it up on the agenda here as a rule-of-law debate. We’ve seen this before: mostly it’s been about Hungary and Poland, now it is Slovenia. But let’s be clear: your real problem is that in these countries the liberal mainstream does not have hegemony. People are able to speak their minds without taboos, and they can have real debates without political correctness. It is ridiculous how you criticise media freedom in these countries, but you forget to mention how media looks like in most of your countries now – like in Germany, for instance, where all the liberal views are tolerated and everything else is censored. Luckily it does not matter how many fake fact-finding missions you organise to these countries, how many debates, resolutions or sanctions you push for here. It will always be and remain the free people of these countries to decide about their governments, and not you.

Dear Mr President, My fellow Members! Today's report by the European Parliament is another example of the immorality that has been going on in this House for a long time. You are hypocritically portraying yourselves as human rights defenders, while pushing for the draining of poor countries in these reports. They claim that immigration is good for everyone, that it is economically beneficial, and that we should help poor countries in particular. All this is a blatant lie. The opposite is true. With mass immigration, which means emigration from the issuing countries, everyone loses. It represents a significant financial cost for Europe and a threat to European culture, which, unlike many in this House, the European people do not want to give up. For the underdeveloped and poorer countries and continents, it is nothing more than a waste. If Europe really wants to help these regions, it is not the most skilled workers that need to be sucked out. That's not what you have to force. We need to get help where the problem is. There, economic investment, infrastructural development or humanitarian assistance should help create hope for a better life.

Madam President, today’s debate is yet another example of the European Parliament’s leftist and liberal forces interfering in the matters of a sovereign Member State. Yesterday, you were attacking the decision of the Constitutional Court of Poland in a more than four-hour-long debate, but you failed to realise that the Polish court decision was a direct consequence of your own harmful policies. You’ve been transgressing your competences over and over again, with the intention to breach the Treaties. You are calling for procedures and sanctions against democratically-elected governments solely because they do things that you may disagree with or you don’t like. You should finally accept that not every idea that you may have or come up with becomes automatically a human right. This House has to understand once and for all that there are areas where it is exclusively for Member States, for governments and their citizens to make a decision, and not you. And this is going to remain like this, whether you like it or not. Let’s make one thing clear today: you, the leftists in this House, are the greatest danger to European cooperation, exactly because you refuse to accept that there can be other views and opinions than your own.

Madam President, dear colleagues, the credibility of the fight against corruption can only be preserved if it’s not misused for political purposes. Yes, corruption is an existing problem in our Member States, and yes, all Member States should step up action against it with all available means. But this should never become the tool of political power games. It is hard not to see how the US all of a sudden felt the need, just before the Bulgarian elections, to intensify its fight against corruption there. How interesting. Let me underline that this House should never use the fight against corruption as a weapon in politically motivated rule of law debates. To the Members who like to pose in this House as rule-of-law warriors let me say: if in a democratic election, your opponent wins that’s not corruption – it’s democracy. This House in particular should refrain from using actions against corruption to interfere in democratic elections, because the moment this happens, it will no longer be about the upholding of the law. On the contrary, it will diminish public trust in the democratic process, and it will diminish the credibility of the fight as a whole against corruption.

Dear Madam President, Today's debate is yet another example of the European Parliament misinterpreting its role, playing a political tribunal and constantly demanding all sorts of sanctions. They always find an excuse to attack those who think of something other than you in the spirit of diversity and acceptance. Now it is Poland's turn. This debate was originally supposed to be about an amendment to the media law, but in fact Poland is being attacked again on all existing topics. It should be clearly stated that Poland, like all other Member States, has the right to adopt rules on its media market and that if there are concerns, whether legal or economic, there are competition authorities or even courts where this can ultimately be decided. But it is not for the European Parliament to decide on this here in advance, and it is certainly not for anyone here to interfere in the constitutional competences of the Member States. Poland has the right to decide on its justice system, it has the right to decide on immigration, it has the right to decide on the education of children in Poland, it has the right to decide on family law issues, and you have no say in these matters.

Dear Mr President, If there is a political lesson to be learned from the migration debates of the last six years, it is that there is no united European position on this issue. Immigration has a significant impact on a country’s culture and identity and can bring about a radical transformation of European societies, so it is not a matter of common European rules and stronger Brussels powers, but of giving the right to decide back to the Member States – each Member State has the right to decide on its own future. It must be clearly stated that mass immigration is not the only possible response if the population is declining or if there are problems in the labour market. There are other options, such as special support for families and childbearing, as we do in Hungary. Finally, a moral aspect: If the most highly educated from poorer third countries are sucked away by Europe, it will cause further economic backwardness and poverty will generate new waves of migration towards Europe. This is not only immoral on the part of the European Union, but also grossly irresponsible.

Mr. President, please. It is also difficult to find words for the madness that is happening in the European Parliament today. How can it be, my fellow Members, that you here refer to European values and law, while ignoring the treaties and the division of powers they contain? They cry out for violations of EU law, while they themselves abuse them in the service of their own political interests. The Hungarian law that you have disgraced is only for the protection of children and is in their best interests. It states that the decision to raise children remains the right of parents and that the youngest should not be subjected to gratuitous sexual propaganda, sexual propaganda of any kind. Everything else that is said in this regard: it's a lie. The law does not apply to adults. In Hungary, everyone lives as they wish. LGBT organisations are free to operate, but have no place in kindergartens and schools. We do not accept any interference in matters in which we have never conferred competence on the European Union. We reject the superior tone and colonial arrogance of old times.

Madam President, I'm sorry. A new information flow space has been created on the internet, where content harmful to children is spreading rapidly. Pedophile crimes and networks, online sexual abuse, have taken on a new dimension. Criminals have faster and easier access to victims, but it is harder to track them down. In such a radically new situation, it is necessary to act quickly and effectively, to take all measures, both at national and EU level, to ensure the protection of our children. Every step we take and every decision we make must be based on a single principle, which is in the best interests of the child. This is the principle enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of 20 November 1989 and reflected in Article 24 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The present agreement is to be welcomed, but it should be underlined that it is only a temporary solution. In the long term, there is a need to establish a permanent regulation obliging the filtering of such content. We don't have time to act, we have to protect our children.