Speeches

Madam President, a serious political debate on the very serious institutional crisis in Spain makes perfect sense. But it must take place in its own place: the Parliament of Spain, not here in the European Parliament. It is clear that the scheduling of this debate by the European People's Party is only an attempt to use this European stage to continue the partisan confrontation against the Spanish Government. Undoubtedly, the rule of law is a European value and systemic threats to the rule of law are a European matter, as has been understood for several Member States. But that is not the case in Spain. Even today, the European Commission has come here to acknowledge the progress made in the functioning of democracy and the rule of law. If, in Spain, there are concerns about the functioning of the rule of law and the principle of the separation of powers, it is precisely on those two points that the right and the proponents of this debate refuse to acknowledge. First, the long blockage of many years in the renewal of the General Council of the Judiciary, and now also of the Constitutional Court, keeping several judges in office far beyond their mandate, to perpetuate a political imbalance favorable to the right. Second, and more serious, the unprecedented case of interference by the judiciary in the functioning of the legislature: When the Constitutional Court, at the request of the right, used the expedient of the interim measure to prevent the vote in the Senate, in a legislative process still ongoing. This is unprecedented, neither in Spain nor in any rule of law. The Spanish Government has done well in complying with this Court ruling and thus contributing to respect for the rule of law. But it is also good not to conform to this blockage. This is, moreover, the number one priority of the Commission's recommendations. If the People's Party takes its concerns about the rule of law seriously, the way forward is simple: stop this blockage of many years to the renewal of the organs of the judiciary in Spain.

Madam President, Commissioner, since the European Multiannual Financial Framework was adopted in December 2020, the world has changed and changed a lot. He just doesn't see who doesn't want to. We are now faced with a terrible war in Europe, an energy and supply chain crisis, a spiral of inflation, a shift in monetary policy and probably a recession. The scenario underpinning the Multiannual Financial Framework has changed radically. Therefore, the December 2020 financial framework is not in a position to respond to the new challenges of December 2022. We therefore call on the Commission to urgently review the current Multiannual Financial Framework to make it more ambitious, more flexible and better suited to the challenges of the moment. Only then can we live up to citizens' expectations.

– The next item is the debate on the Council and Commission statements on the Commission’s reporting on the situation of journalists and the implications for the rule of law (2022/3002(RSP)).

The next item on the agenda is the Council and Commission statements on the need for a dedicated budget to make the Child Guarantee a reality - an urgency in times of energy and food crisis (2022/2996(RSP)). I welcome Commissioner Nicolas Schmit.

The next item on the agenda is the report by Salima Yenbou, on behalf of the Committee on Culture and Education, on the implementation of the New European Agenda for Culture and the EU strategy for international cultural relations (2022/2047(INI)) (A9-0279/2022).

Before we continue I have two announcements. The first is to say that the speakers’ list is now closed. The second is to ask you to put only one question now, so that I can give the floor to everyone that has requested it in this debate.

We now move to the next item on the agenda: the Commission Declaration on the results of the modernisation of the Energy Charter Treaty (2022/2934(RSP)). In this debate, a round of political group speakers is foreseen, so there will be no blue card questions and no catch-the-eye interventions.

Due to other commitments, President Michel has to leave now, so I would like to give him the floor so that he can comment on the interventions made so far.

The ID Group informed the Chair of a decision to amend the appointments in a delegation. This decision will be recorded in the minutes of today's sitting and will take effect from the date of this announcement.

Mr President, the far right, which is present in many European countries today, is illiberal and therefore contrary to European democratic values, the separation of powers and the rule of law. It is nationalistic and xenophobic, and therefore opposed to human rights, the rights of migrants and minorities. It is also populist and Eurosceptic, and therefore opposed to the European project. And this is not insults, this is the exact description of the political reality that is today the extreme right in Europe. And that is why it must be said that the governmental and parliamentary alliances, which the centre-right and liberals are now making with the far-right in several European countries, are not only a dangerous game that normalizes and gives more strength to the far-right, they are also a betrayal of our European values. And so this debate is not just about the far right, this debate is about its whitewashing, it is about Mr Berlusconi, Mr Tajani, the EPP, the Renew liberals. The cordon sanitaire is not discrimination, the cordon sanitaire is a response in self-defence of democracy and a respect we owe to the mandate we receive from our own voters. It's time for centre-right and liberals to think twice before continuing this dangerous game and before it's too late.

Mr President, as Vice—President in charge of Parliament’s budget, I would like to reaffirm our political will to negotiate constructively with other European institutions to reach a budget that can respond to our political priorities in these challenging times. But as Commissioner Hahn rightly said, the budgetary cuts proposed by the Council don’t even respect its own political priorities and this is not acceptable. From the point of view of Parliament’s budget, this context of war and high inflation implies the need to respond to the increase of expenses due to inflation, in particular the rise of energy costs; the need to strengthen our capacity to respond to the increasing cybersecurity challenges, including additional specialised human resources, and the need to be prudent in our building policy. That’s why I hope the amendment to this effect can be adopted. Finally, I hope that the budget, in its final version, can respond to these needs, meeting citizens’ expectations.

I regret to inform you that we cannot have ‘catch the eye’ in this debate. We are just starting this debate and, afterwards, we still have another topic on our agenda with 27 one-minute speeches.

The next item is the debate on the report by Alicia Homs Ginel, on behalf of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, on the proposal for a Council decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (COM(2022)0241 - C9-0199/2022 - 2022/0165(NLE)) (A9-0243/2022).