Speeches

Madam President, you know, even though I am not Romani, I have been the biggest supporter of the Romani community here since the beginning. I stood here ten years ago at the beginning Roma Week, which shows that many Romani people are able to assert themselves in the world. Yes, we can talk for hours here, Commissioner, about discrimination. We can keep talking about how it doesn't work. We can continue to talk about how 80% of Romani people in Slovakia, for example, in some villages do not even have drinking water and do not have electricity. When you come to their house, they have clay floors in their houses. In the 21st century! But this is not about the European Union not spending money on it. This is about the fact that many Romani projects are completely stolen. We give a billion to Slovakia and what is paid for it? This applies to the planting of trees around Romani settlements. It pays for the bench where these people are supposed to sit. If these people don't go to school, they don't have a legal job, they don't have water, they don't have electricity, they don't even have shoes, so how can we want them to sit down and rest on benches? That's the kind of crap we pay for. To be Romani is to be proud. They are people who have a great culture and pride. And I am proud to say today that Romani inclusion is not ideal. But step by step, we are moving towards making Romani people more proud and able to change the world. I hope that will happen in the coming years.

I have for you some questions. You said that the solution is the electrification of Europe. But do you think that in the short term we can solve it in any other way? Give some advice to Mr Šefčovič, what he has to do with this situation and how he can really manage it, the European Commission, to unblock this situation. Also, do you have any view of the situation from your perspective, what we can do together?

Mr President, Commissioner, granting discharge is not just a technical step. In fact, it is also proof that we take the protection of public money seriously and that we know how to deal with it very responsibly. Every year, the discharge agreement is not born lightly. This year was no different, but I think Daniel and I did very well. In the case of granting discharge to the Commission, we had difficult negotiations, dealt with hundreds of amendments and sought a balance between control and political pressure. The result? The result is a sensitive compromise covering both the MFF and the RRF, including an emphasis on greater transparency for final recipients. The original proposal contained a number of controversial and politicizing elements for me. However, thanks to the work of the committees and the constructive approach, the text has been balanced and returned to facts, accountability and realistic assessments of the 2024 budgets of the European Union, for which I would like to thank my colleagues very much. Today we have a very good compromise ahead of us, and I would like to call on you to vote in favour of that compromise. This is the only possible compromise that will guarantee that we have a clear report on the budget of the European Union.

Mr President, Europe is at a crossroads. We have war on our borders, instability in the Middle East, and we have global competition, or we can say global economic war with Donald Trump. This is not a time for hesitation. We need a strong Europe and we need a strong budget. That is why we need a targeted increase in the multiannual financial framework. Let's be honest, for less money, there will never be more music. Every euro must be controlled. We can no longer pay for projects that don't bring anything. We cannot give money to thieves for various haciendas, for example in Slovakia. We can't give money to projects that don't bring anything. That is why we say clearly: no flexibility without scrutiny, no transfers without Parliament’s consent. We also need stable and predictable funding. Finally, we cannot afford national projects without added European value. No more euros for bike paths, no more euros for observation towers, no more euros for nonsense. We must fight geopolitical threats, we must expand infrastructure, we must give money to security, and we must seriously say that Europe must be stronger.

Mr President, Commissioner, we all agree on one thing. European money must be protected from thieves and fraudsters. You cannot recognize a true patriot by the fact that he is called a patriot. You can tell a true patriot by the fact that if he loses the election, he won't resign, he won't give up his mandate, he won't run away from the country where he stole taxpayers' money, and he won't go hiding in the US. They do not name anyone, but there are examples in European countries where this actually happened after the lost European elections. You know, I never want to argue these things, because these things have nothing to do with whether I have a blue, yellow or green T-shirt. Either someone is a thief or a thief isn't. Either someone is a fraud or someone is not. And it does not matter if he is from a group of Patriots, Idiots or from another group of the European Parliament. I think Mr Sanchez has done a good job on this report, and that is from a group of Patriots. He's a real patriot to me. No, really, Daniel, I had the opportunity to work with him for nine months, and he tried to speak very correctly and discuss my arguments with me. He even went to meetings with the EPPO, OLAF, the Commission and other institutions, and I really think he took a lot of things into account in that report, too. So let me be a little more personal than usual at the end and tell you, dear colleagues, that I really like you. You're doing a lot of great work. But let's look at PIF., from your party t-shirts and let's vote for some decent compromise that will lay the groundwork for the new Anti Fraud Infrastructure.

Madam President, I would like to say that I fully agree with my predecessor, also. He said absolutely clearly that my colleagues from the ESN have a one-minute speech. Also, in a one-minute speech, they can declare all the things that they needed to declare. And this is absolutely, absolutely off European topics.

Madam President, Commissioner, I had quite an interesting speech prepared on how things need to be unified, but my colleague Uhrík inspired me on one thing: ‘College, if someone is stealing, if someone is cheating, like Slovakia, it is necessary to intervene, and that is why we are setting standards between European countries so that someone does not bend legislation for their friends, as the current government is doing in Slovakia, and so that they do not set rules for those who are corrupt and steal European funds, and that those European funds actually serve citizens. You probably agree that it is necessary for money to go to the construction of motorways, for it to go to infrastructure and for Slovakia not to be at the tail end of the European Union, but to go up so that the money serves European citizens. What did you do in Slovakia? You stole it. It steals every day, overpriced contracts behind overpriced contracts’. And that's the answer. David Casa did a great thing and I congratulate him for it. This is the best thing that has been done in this European Parliament to prevent corruption.

Madam President, at the end of November, the presidential elections were held in Honduras in an extremely tense and polarised atmosphere. I was personally on the scene as a member of an international observation mission, and I can make one thing very clear. The election day was peaceful, organized and the results seem to correspond to the will of the voters. Despite this, today we face attempts to challenge the outcome of the elections by political decrees, by circumventing the Constitution and by pressuring the electoral institutions. I find that totally unacceptable. International observation missions, including the European Union mission, have made it clear that there is no evidence of any electoral fraud. The European Parliament must send a clear signal. Respect for election results is not optional. Democracy is not recalculated according to the political mood of the losers. We must stand by the rule of law, protect the electoral authorities and condemn any violence and political pressure, and insist on the orderly and peaceful transfer of power under the Constitution of Honduras. As is always the case in all democracies. Ladies and gentlemen, this is exactly what we want to achieve with this resolution.

Mr President, Commissioner, yes, we also want a better return policy, but that is why, as EPP, we are doing something for this. We are not the ones who let Russian agents in, like our Hungarian colleagues here. We are not the ones who open the gates here for people who come here unchecked through Istanbul through Hungary to the whole of the European Union and commit crimes here. It brings information from our companies, looks at our technologies and puts people's health and lives at risk. This is not the return policy. That is why the EPP makes it clear: ‘Asylum makes sense when returns work.’ That is why we say that those who are not entitled to any kind of asylum really have to leave right away. That is why we need clear rules and a clear definition of returns without populisms, patriots, but with the solution offered by the European People's Party.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, today we are not just addressing the technical delay in the approval of the Hungarian national plan under the SAFE instrument, we are addressing the fundamental issue of trust, responsibility and the proper management of European money. Hungary is awaiting approval of its plan. At the same time, however, I must recall one fundamental fact. In the Council, Hungary rejected this instrument. The Hungarian Parliament voted against the common debt, yet Budapest claims the second-largest volume of SAFE loans and the highest share in terms of GDP. This is not a political contradiction, this is a serious warning sign. The more serious question is, who should the money serve? Just days after the adoption of SAFE, there have been fundamental changes in the ownership structure of companies operating in the defence sector, to the benefit of private entities closely linked to the country’s political leadership. And it must also be absolutely clear that SAFE is not a tool for strengthening political-business ties. It is not a tool for rewarding loyal structures, nor is it a tool for circumventing the rules that apply to all other Member States. If SAFE funds are to be used to strengthen European defence, they must be distributed in a transparent manner, based on open and fair procedures and with clear responsibility for the final beneficiary. Europe's security must not be built on doubts about where the money is actually flowing. Control, transparency and accountability are not an obstacle to security, they are a prerequisite without exceptions, without double standards and without closing the eyes.

Madam President, I usually do not use this point of order. It is the first time in my life. But I have to use Rule 202 because, in Slovakia, the most important whistleblower regarding corruption and misusing European funds in the agriculture sector, Ms Šubová, has been put in prison. Police took her to the prison this morning and she is still in detention. I am totally shocked because she will speak next week in the Budgetary Control Committee here in the European Parliament and we do not have more information on why they took her to the police. She stayed longer than 12 hours. I think they wanted to give her only the signal to shut up and not say what we are doing in Slovakia. This is the same scenario that was in Hungary, Iran, Russia or Venezuela.

Madam President, honourable Members of the Council, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the European Parliament, and we all agree on this, is a symbol of free democratic debate. But let's be honest. Freedom and democracy are vulnerable. In recent months, it has become increasingly apparent that the Russian regime is not only waging war in Ukraine, but against our states and against our democratic institutions. Not tanks, but influence, not weapons, but money that someone carries in an envelope, misinformation, loyalty hidden behind mandates, assistant positions, or consulting contracts. Investigation published by the server EU Observer shows that there is a network of MEPs and their entourage in the European Parliament who have been voting and acting in line with the Kremlin's interests for a long time. And unfortunately, there are many representatives of the Czech Republic, Slovakia or Germany among them. This is not an ideological dispute, this is a security risk. It's not about criminalizing different opinions. It is a conscious cooperation with an authoritarian regime that murders and rapes people in Ukraine. As early as 1 June 2023, in its resolution on foreign interference in democratic processes, the European Parliament itself made it clear that ‘foreign interference poses a serious threat to the functioning of democracy and must be systematically detected and countered.’ That is why we need to fill this with content. We need the courage to name the problem. We need a transparent screening of ties. We need to protect institutions from abuse and we need clear accountability where failures have occurred. Because democracy, ladies and gentlemen, will not survive alone. Democracy will only survive if we are able to defend it. And this is where the defense begins, here in this hall.

Madam President, Commissioner, consumer protection is not just a marginal policy. In fact, this is why the European Union exists so that the single market protects people and gives them safe and high-quality products in fair competition. And this is not just a principle, these are hard numbers. The single market is 450 million consumers and household expenditure accounts for more than 51% of the EU's GDP. If consumers do not trust the market, they will lose all of Europe. The 2030 Agenda rightly combines consumer protection with competitiveness and shows concrete benefits. By removing some artificial barriers on the market, consumers can save up to €14.1 billion per year for selected products. But today we are facing a new reality, a huge pressure from cheap imports and e-commerce outside the European Union. The number of dangerous products has increased by 52% since 2019, and by 61% in 2024. Up to 75% of products come from outside the EU, and about half of alerts are related to goods from China. This is a direct threat to consumer safety and fair competition. Therefore, Commissioner, I stress the enforceability of the rules and the need to do something about them.

I have one question. I think you will understand – or I can speak German, if you want. My question is easy. Do you think that we are a totalitarian regime? That someone in Brussels is a dictator? And the Commissioner, especially this Commissioner, that you can see here, is part of a dictatorship of Brussels against Hungary? Do you trust these things? Please for your clear response.

Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear ladies and gentlemen, 'rule of law' is not an abstract slogan. It's a fundamental thing in the European Union. It's the foundation of the fair and proper application of European law, for the protection of the EU budget and the protection of citizens' money. This report is clear: where the rule of law is weakened, European funds are at risk, corruption grows, public procurement is destroyed, justice stops being independent, and citizens lose trust not only in their governments, but in the European Union itself. This is why the rule of law conditionality mechanism exists – not to push citizens, but protect them, protect the people and their money. We are not speaking about a concrete country. We are speaking generally about the principle of democracy, about how the taxpayers have to trust democratic values and the democratic mechanism without ideology. This is why the EPP strongly supports this report.

Mr Valet, so I understand your words that you agree and Patriots are supporting. Do you agree with this proposal? With what our rapporteur here is proposing? Will the Patriots support this report? You agree with me that you will do it? Because from your speech, it was not clear.

Madam President, I have full respect for all of you, my dear colleagues, that are here. But points of order start with the paragraph I am referring to. Please read it and be careful. This is not a one-minute speech. If you want to say some political speeches, let us go to the evening and stay here. But if you want to have a point of order, please respect our rules.

Thank you for the question, I don't think we can really fund anyone who has worked with smugglers. Smugglers are society's biggest waste. These are people who are abusing migration and are abusing people on the run who are actually trying to get to Europe. And I think there were a lot of fundamental mistakes made between 2014 and 2017. Now I think that the Commission already sees this situation differently and there really needs to be an open dialogue with the Commission so that this situation does not happen again. If you don't love us, leave us. If you do not love us, you have nothing to do in the territory of the European Union.

Madam President, first of all, let me commend your pronunciation of my name. Commissioner, thank you for letting us discuss this very topic here today, because I have been warning for 12 years that unaddressed migration is the biggest problem, an internal problem in Europe, and it divides us too much. That is why we need to work systematically with it. Yes, someone will say that the migration pact does not work. But some things in the migration pact are very good. We have unified the methodologies, now it is necessary to shorten the screening of people and it is necessary to get people who are illegally present on the territory of the European Union outside the territory of the European Union. And I firmly believe, and here I am counting on Renew, on the ECR, and on other democratic parties, that they will help us have another debate on how we should just tighten up some of the things that concern the issue of migration.

You said what you don't want, but tell me any solution. You are every time criticising everything. I never heard something constructive from you. So, you have 30 seconds now, tell me, what is your solution for immigration? And tell me one thing: why do you use immigrants in your hospitals? Why do you use nurses from central and eastern Europe? When you use doctors in your hospitals, they are also migrants. Could you respond me this simple question?

Mr President, you know, I do not want to repeat what has been said here, because I think that everything you have said here is important. The protection of nature and the prevention of illegal trade in animals is the main theme of the CITES COP20 conference in Uzbekistan. For me personally, Uzbekistan, as the former head of the Central Asia delegation, is a very good example of a state that has understood the importance of working together in the European Union, not only in the area of the economy, but mainly in the area of the environment. Yes, it is not a developing country, it is a country that dynamically demonstrates what we could see in the states of Central and Eastern Europe before they joined the European Union. Uzbekistan shows that it is willing to hold international discussions that lead to the protection of nature and a paradigm shift in climate perception. CITES is not just about animal and plant protection, ladies and gentlemen, it's about trust, it's about cooperation and it's about responsible development. And I only ask you, when we discuss with our partners from all over the world, let us be humble and try to find a consensus with them.

I have just a question about why you are speaking about the EPP today. We saw your reliability – you promised us to vote on one issue with us and half of your group resign for this opinion. Also, why are you saying that the European People's Party is not against climate change? We are a predictable partner. The problem is the Socialists. If you are not in, we will vote it with someone who has, with us, the majority.