Speeches

Mr President, on 20 November, Türkiye launched a major air offensive attack in Rojava, Syria, and in the Kurdistan region of Iraq, which continues uninterrupted against targets, including civilians and infrastructure. This was portrayed by Türkiye as a response to the bombing attack a few days earlier that was attributed to the Kurds. Since then, though, the Turkish narrative has change a few times and, despite inconsistencies and contradictions, the request by the HDP for a full investigation has been rejected by the government coalition in the Turkish Parliament. The Turkish Government has been using the bombing attack as a pretext to attack the Kurds, despite the strong suspicion, which is more than probable, of Turkish intelligence involvement. The ongoing attack in Syria and Iraq is another blatant violation of international law, just like in the Aegean against Greece and against Cyprus, despite the ongoing military occupation of northern Cyprus. Enough is enough. This long-standing appeasement policy has failed and the EU has to act strongly to stop the Turkish aggression now.

Madam President, first of all, congratulations to the rapporteur on the report and to colleagues. The way out of the conflict in Libya is one: free and fair elections. Unfortunately, however, the interim government in Tripoli, whose mandate has ended, refuses to cooperate and for this reason we will continue to see crimes, impunity and foreign interference, especially from Russia and Turkey. In fact, as evidenced by relevant European Union agencies involved in Operation IRINI for the implementation of the arms embargo on Libya, as decided by the UN, Turkey despises the arms embargo to this day. In relation to the Turkish-Libyan Memorandum on the so-called delimitation of maritime areas in the Mediterranean Sea, this report is very specific: This agreement violates the sovereign rights of third states, especially the European states of Cyprus and Greece, is not in line with international law, does not have any legal consequences and therefore we call on the interim government in Libya to cancel this memorandum, because it has no legal value.

Mr President, the current energy crisis and the high inflation require urgent decisions. Tomorrow, the European Parliament is called upon to vote on this regulation, which allows Member States to amend their national recovery and resilience plans by including new reforms and investments in energy related projects financed by additional requests for grants and loans. The urgency of the situation leaves no option but to proceed quickly to the negotiations with other EU institutions and deliver to our citizens. As the European Parliament, our proposal is to ensure that projects aim at tackling energy poverty for households and SMEs can benefit from this funding. This has been one of our group’s priorities. We have also included a provision requiring mandatory consultations with social partners and other civil society stakeholders, as we have noticed the lack of proper consultation during the drafting of the national recovery and resilience plans. It is also important that we ensure that members are allowed to amend their plans due to the consequences of war inflation by including various measures such as social housing. We also support cross—border projects and include a reference for the EU to give particular consideration to remote, peripheral and isolated regions and islands which already experience additional constraints. The RRF, with the REPowerEU chapter, is an important instrument for Member States to cope with the short-term effects of energy crises, safeguarding security of supply and accelerating the long-term transition towards a decarbonised energy system. However, this is not the end, and for certain this is not enough. We need more courageous decisions immediately by the Council and the Commission, such as a reform of EU economic and fiscal governance, EU fiscal capacity and common tools to respond to economic shocks on a European level, learning from experience. Because, after all, our job is to deliver to the EU citizens.

Madam President, since the beginning of the Russian invasion and with the successive packages of sanctions, we have insisted that there is a great need for a parallel European response to the coming consequences, with solidarity at the centre. The European Commission then – unfortunately – looked elsewhere. Unfortunately, we did not have the same common understanding as we did with the pandemic. But now I also come to the European Council, where I see that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine itself is on the agenda. That's good. This also includes a discussion on our relationship with China. I turn to the Council and ask myself: When will we discuss Erdogan's Trojan horse in Europe? And, of course, I am referring to Turkey and Erdogan, and especially after the Commission's report, which objectively records Erdogan's wrongdoing and how ruthless he is. I wonder: It is not yet time to impose sanctions. (The Chair removed the floor from the speaker)

Mr President, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has highlighted the urgent need for the European Union to have a geopolitical role in its neighbourhood and in the world. We live in a time when authoritarian regimes are attacking our democratic societies. Warlike violators of international law are not treated with soft power; Putin and Erdogan are not met with statements of concern. We will not ensure our energy security, our economic, environmental, technological goals, without our own geopolitical role, with common defence and security. The Russian invasion of Ukraine, however, revealed a huge hypocrisy. There is a regime that instrumentalized migrants, that imprisons dissidents and Kurds, that occupies territory of the European Union in the Republic of Cyprus, that intervenes in Libya, in the Eastern Mediterranean, in the Aegean. We cannot caress it with statements of concern, but we must finally proceed with sanctions.

Mr Borrell, being balanced is like the title I see here: tensions between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Being impartial means that we should be straight on the facts. Around midnight on 12 September this year, the Azerbaijani armed forces launched a large-scale military attack against the Republic of Armenia in several directions from the eastern part of Armenia-Azerbaijan border. In this pre—planned attack, they used heavy artillery against numerous cities and nearby villages. Also, this has been an unprovoked and unjustified aggression against the sovereignty of Armenia. I can go on and on, but I’m going to ask you a few questions. Are you ready to consider proposing sanctions against Azerbaijan? Second, to ask for Turkey to exert its influence on Azerbaijan is unfortunate, to say the least, for one good reason: Turkey is part of ... (The President cut off the speaker)

Madam President, continuing with the Commissioner's reasoning for cooperation with reliable partners in our neighbourhood, the Mediterranean, I would add the following: we need, as the European Union, reliable partners who respect international law and in particular the law of the sea of the United Nations. We need partners who respect the sovereign rights of other states in the region, and in particular Member States of the European Union, such as Cyprus and Greece. We need partners who respect migrants and do not instrumentalise migration flows. Unfortunately, a regime in the region, the Erdogan regime, not only remains for many years the violator of international law, not only is it the oppressor of the peoples within Turkey, not only is it the troublemaker of the region, but it criminalizes and instrumentalizes the migration flows. That is why we want common rules, in order to have reliable partners. But we also expect the European Union, which is our home, to defend the Member States of the European Union themselves.

Mr President, I am glad that the Chamber is full now and that everyone will listen. In June’s conclusion of the European Council, there was another call on Turkey to respect international law and terminate its unilateral and aggressive actions in the Eastern Mediterranean. However, I would like everyone to remember that in March 2021, the statement of the European Council – I am reading straight from it – stated, ‘we call on Turkey to abstain from renewed provocations or unilateral actions in breach of international law.’ Would you affirm the determination of the European Union, in case of such actions, to use the instruments and options at its disposal to defend its interests and those of its Member States? My final word: we stand with international law against Putin’s aggressive actions in Ukraine. We stand with the values of the European Union and we expect everyone to respect the values that are being violated in the Eastern Mediterranean against Cyprus and against Greece by a Turkish aggressive regime.

Madam President, the Commissioner will need his headphones. Κύριε Πρόεδρε, ο μηχανισμός ανάκαμψης δημιουργήθηκε για αντιμετώπιση των επιπτώσεων της πανδημίας. Είχε πρωτόγνωρα χαρακτηριστικά και αντικατοπτρίζει ουσιαστικά την αλληλεγγύη και τη δυνατότητα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Και στο σημερινό ψήφισμα επισημαίνουμε τη σημαντική θετική επιρροή του, αλλά παραθέτουμε και στοιχεία για σωστή βελτίωση της επιτυχίας του, όπως είναι ο κοινωνικός πυλώνας με ποσοτικά κριτήρια, η αναθεώρηση των κριτηρίων για τα δάνεια και η συμμετοχή των κοινωνικών εταίρων με αποτελεσματικό τρόπο. Τέλος, τα κράτη μέλη μπορούν να διασφαλίσουν ότι η χρηματοδότηση θα φτάνει με ισότιμο τρόπο σε όλους, και ιδιαίτερα τους μικρούς και αδυνάτους. Ακούγοντάς σας προηγουμένως διαπίστωσα ότι σωστά έχετε επισημάνει τις επιπτώσεις από τις κυρώσεις και την εισβολή της Ρωσίας στην Ουκρανία. Ο μηχανισμός αυτός μπορεί να βοηθήσει μερικώς, για παράδειγμα με επενδύσεις στις εγχώριες πηγές ενέργειας, αλλά δεν αρκεί αυτό. Ο μηχανισμός σχεδιάστηκε για τις επιπτώσεις της πανδημίας και οι Ευρωπαίοι πολίτες αναμένουν παρόμοια αποφασιστική παρέμβαση βασισμένη στην αλληλεγγύη. Διαφορετικά, και τελειώνω, το οικονομικό και κοινωνικό κόστος θα διογκώνεται και η οργή των πολιτών θα διογκώνεται εναντίον μας για την απάθεια μας.

Madam President, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is an act of aggression to forcefully revise the European security order. Our response should continue to be united and firm against the specific aggressor, but also a time to move faster with the common foreign security and defence policy based on common rules and a common defence mechanism, as stated in the Strategic Compass – common rules, including international law, such as respect for UNCLOS and the powers of the International Criminal Court charter. With common rules whether the criminal and the aggressors are Russian troops in Ukraine or Turkish occupying troops in Cyprus, it is a gross violation of international law and a crime against humanity requiring the same treatment and the same punishment.

Mr President, congratulations to the rapporteur on his report. Neo-Ottoman expansionism brought us here, with security issues for the Eastern Mediterranean states, especially Greece and Cyprus, but also for other states such as Syria, Libya, up to the Caucasus, for one reason: We followed the policy of appeasement, which unfortunately feeds the beast. Human rights and international law, both, are being brutally violated by the Turkish regime. We are counting days since Russia's brutal invasion of Ukraine, but in the case of Cyprus, which is a territory of the European Union, we are counting years. Forty-eight, since 1974, since the invasion and continued occupation of the territory of the European Union. But with a contradiction. In Russia we rightly imposed six packages of sanctions - on Turkey not a single one. And I'll finish with three sentences. Prohibition of arms sales to Turkey, withdrawal of the occupying troops from Cyprus and finally, Commissioner, Customs Union, complaint now to the World Trade Organisation, as you have done for Lithuania against China. (Applause)

Mr President, Turkey is a member of the Council of Europe, which binds Turkey to the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights. The European Court, however, in a final decision asked for the release of Kavala. But Turkey not only refuses his release, but also sentences him to life imprisonment. Similar rulings regarding the imprisonment of Demirtaş, a political leader and also a human rights defender, is also treated by Turkey with contempt. Similarly, hundreds of rulings by the same European Court regarding the citizens of Cyprus of Greek descent, whose fundamental rights are violated by the Turkish state – Turkey refuses to implement. The heavy arm of Erdoğan’s repressive regime extends particularly on the Turkish Cypriot community as well. Recently, just a few days ago, the Ankara Penal Court condemned in absentia to a one—year imprisonment the editor Şener Levent, following the publication of a cartoon in his Turkish Cypriot newspaper ‘Avrupa’. Similar persecution against Şener Elcil, another human rights defender in Turkey in the Turkish Cypriot community. Finally, I’m going to ask a question: can we have a democracy in a country where the judiciary is an instrument of the government? The answer should be ‘yes’ or ‘no’.

LNG, by the way, is part of the transition period towards 2050. So LNG can be part of the energy mix tomorrow. But my question is this: talking about energy autonomy, would the Commission consider to extend the sanctions, Madam Commissioner? Would the Commission consider to extend the sanctions by including companies controlled by the Kremlin, such as Rosatom, which built up nuclear stations throughout countries in Europe and outside as well?

Madam President, my question is very specific. We are talking about strategic autonomy, which starts with energy. Commissioner, I would like you to explain this to me, which is also the question of many European citizens, particularly in the eastern Mediterranean. Strategic autonomy by increasing energy imports is not strategic autonomy in energy. We have our own findings, especially in the eastern Mediterranean. Why don't we move on? And the question is this: The suspicion of all of us is that the reason is that the European Union, or some specific officials, do not dare to clash with the Erdogan regime. It's just that simple. That is, they put Europe's strategic autonomy under the priority of clashing with Erdogan.

Madam President, culture must be a means of bringing people together, not a means of hatred. The destruction and desecration of cultural monuments of religious or national heritage violates international law and the principles of the European Union, to which we all commit ourselves and serve them. When destruction or desecration is carried out with a systematic plan following the prevalence of weapons, this violation constitutes cultural genocide and a crime, wherever it occurs; either in Palmyra in Syria by the Islamic State, or in occupied Cyprus by Turkey, or in Nagorno-Karabakh by Azerbaijan, which we are considering today. The events reveal cultural genocide against the centuries-old Armenian culture in Nagorno-Karabakh, which is a systematic state policy of Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan's refusal to grant UNESCO access must come at a cost. In the case before us there are criminal responsibilities. Will the International Criminal Court in The Hague act against authoritarian regime leaders who commit these crimes, crimes against culture and humanity? Culture is a means of rapprochement, not a means of hatred.

Madam President, (to Mrs Lagarde and Mr Gentiloni in English) on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the euro, I would like to stress the important role of the European Central Bank in the recovery and strengthening of the euro, especially in difficult times, especially when it is being challenged. At that time, Mrs Lagarde, the collapse of the euro was likely to lead to the collapse of the European project. But there are important steps that remain and some of them, the most important ones, are in this report. I'll just mention a few. The impact of the pandemic and rising inflation, mainly on rising energy prices, is a matter of concern to all. We welcomed the rapid response of the European Central Bank and we support today the gradual, deliberate withdrawal of the measures, taking into account economic and social consequences, with a view, above all, to avoiding a new recession. Moreover, this flexibility must be channelled into the real economy. Thirdly, for fairer competition, Mrs Lagarde and Commissioner, we finally need a pan-European deposit guarantee. There are also issues of climate change and equal representation of women. We call on the European Central Bank to take further steps. Finally, another issue is unfair terms: there are Member States – one of which is Cyprus – where banks unfortunately still use unfair terms in their contracts with consumers; These costs are unbearable for a consumer. Finally, I would like to stress the excellent work of Mr Papadimoulis, who came up with a balanced report. I think it is the duty of all of us, or at least of the majority, as we have come to this text, to support it in plenary.

Madam President, there were many who questioned the need for a European response to the pandemic or sought to limit such European intervention. Today, the importance of the mechanism by financing it with common debt is accepted by almost everyone and few question it. I repeat a few remarks for improvement. Firstly, funding should be channelled in a timely manner for the implementation of reforms and investments, but in such a way as to ensure equal access to all and not only to large organisations or powerful ones that have an advantage. Secondly, as there are quantitative economic indicators and national plans, there should also be social quantitative indicators. And thirdly, the new wave of the pandemic with its economic and social impact is creating new data in our economies. The Commission and the Council should take the situation into account both in the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility and in the discussions on the revision of the financial framework of the European Union. Finally, we need rules for fiscal sustainability that are realistic but citizen-centred.

Mr President, as European representatives and officials in European politics, we are primarily judged by our insightfulness and results, not by intentions. When Erdoğan was instrumentalising unfortunate people in migration in a hybrid attack against the EU and certain Member States, we all knew about it, just as we know now about Lukashenko. Same methods, same brutal exploitation of human suffering. But at the time, did we impose sanctions? No. Human suffering deserves human solidarity. Criminal dictators deserve criminal prosecution and firm action, not lip service. Words are enough that we have so far sanctions. Finally, those comparing the Berlin Wall with the protection of the EU external border is not right. I know all about internal borders, and one of them is in Nicosia, preserved by Erdoğan’s Turkish troops.

Madam President, firstly, I would like to thank the rapporteur, my colleague Danuta Hübner, for our excellent cooperation in drafting this report. The Banking Union has been one of our key achievements since the financial crisis in 2008. The aim, though, of this annual report is to assess the state of play and functioning of its three pillars: the Single Supervisory Mechanism, the Single Resolution Mechanism and the third one, the European Deposit Insurance Scheme (EDIS), regrettably not yet implemented. As a result of these positive reforms, we have a better capitalised, less leveraged banking sector. Regarding the current crisis, we praise the immediate response and the temporary relief measures to contain economic damage, and we call for a gradual shift from pandemic relief to recovery support tools. As the S&D Group, we ask for a well—regulated banking sector that can provide financing to the real economy during the post—COVID recovery, secure financial stability, and guarantee high levels of protection for retail depositors. Unfortunately, though, the lack of political will regarding the establishment of the indispensable third pillar is a real deficiency of the Banking Union, but also a moral mistrust to the fair functioning of the EU as a whole. In this report, we stress the importance of depositors across the Banking Union enjoying the same level of protection regardless of their bank location. And we call on the Commission to take further steps to relaunch the negotiations on the EDIS through a roadmap-based work plan. At the same time, we call on the Council to a firm commitment towards an agreement, despite the disappointment of the June Council meeting. Lastly, this report underlines the importance of protecting consumer rights against abusive contract terms and practices employed by banks, and cautions the Commission to scrutinise consumer contracts to ensure the effective implementation by all Member States of the Unfair Contract Terms Directive, using all means available.

Mr President, warm congratulations to my colleague, Tonino Picula, on his report on the future of European Union-US relations, such an important and topical issue. Importantly, because close cooperation from trade to security was based on shared values, shared priorities and shared interests and so needs to continue and broaden on issues listed in the report, such as climate change, human rights, the digital transition, terrorism and others. However, as the US adapts to its own priorities, our priority is to address the threats that exist from the Caucasus to the Eastern Mediterranean. Strategic autonomy and the European defence union, which some people here have been proactively talking about, are now a necessity, because the events in Afghanistan and the Pacific have overtaken us. Finally, a few days ago we had the France-Greece defence agreement, which can be a step on this great path for a Europe with a common defence and common security and a geopolitical role in the world.

Mr President, this mechanism is an important tool for the accession countries to carry out the necessary reforms to fully comply with the European acquis. Congratulations to the contributors to this document. But before we reach full compliance, some fundamental conditions are laid down concerning the principle of democracy, human rights, the rule of law, respect for agreements with the European Union and much more. All this is already being violated by the Turkish Erdoğan regime. As regards the Turkish regime's external relations with the European Union, this continues the illegal occupation of European Union territory in Cyprus. It does not even respect the rulings of the European Court of Justice. It violates the principles of good neighborliness. It does not even recognise the Republic of Cyprus, while there is already an agreement with the European Union to this effect. It expands the crime of colonization in Varosha, Afrin and elsewhere. It invades the internationally recognized EEZ of the region. Commissioner, I am addressing you. It would be good to admit all this publicly if we want this regulation to be properly implemented.