Speeches

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, without a solid industry, you said yourself, Commissioner, we cannot have economic security and we cannot have social security. And yes, the metals industry, the cement industry, the chemical industry are energy intensive, they consume a lot of energy, but we need to have a combined plan, Commissioner. You presented the plan for steel and metals. Of course, other industries also need a plan. The key issue is energy. If we don't solve the cost of energy here, clearly, inputIt is he who gives the final price. And yes, we also need to resolve the protection of the internal market linked to entries from third countries that do not have as many restrictions as products from the European Union. Commissioner, you were with us in Parliament, I believe that the Commission needs to change two things: to make impact studies before establishing anything and the speed of decision. Because I was born in an area in Romania, where the steel industry had tens of thousands of jobs, almost all of them were destroyed. What do we do not to continue the demolition of the metal industry, steel industry and other industries? Concrete measures.

Mr President, Commissioner, cohesion, cohesion policy, keeps Europe united. If we do not understand this - and yes, you have now proposed to modernise, but, Commissioner, I think there should be a Commission exercise, to look at the impact, because we have always had money earmarked for cohesion policy, and yet regional disparities exist: the difference between rural and urban areas, the difference between areas far from the centres of the Member States. I ask you: Do you know if you also apply the geographical criterion when giving cohesion funds? Because we had the experience of a strategic investment fund to which we asked for geographical criteria, we put first come, first served and all the money was concentrated in four five states and created a difference between the member states. Therefore, I believe that modernization must take into account a few criteria. On the one hand, the geographical criterion that we really reduce these regional disparities, but also the efficiency of spending money, because it is important to see what happens with 100 euros spent. Therefore, the criteria I see that you should put are those related to efficiency, and geographical criteria.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we have not succeeded in setting up the capital market and we are rebaptising it now. You've come up with a new name, very poorly explained. You know, Commissioner, and you have heard here in my country, too, that people are already afraid, they want to take their money out of the bank, because they understand that yes, the European Commission is taking their investment money, their private money. Commissioner, first of all, you need to build trust. A citizen, an entrepreneur – and they come from their world, from there, from the business world – invests if they trust. We need to build this trust, to invest in the European Union, not to take the money to other states, not to leave well-trained citizens elsewhere. Therefore, this project can only be built if you communicate well, explain well the project and both the citizen and the entrepreneurs will come up with private money in strategic projects. Otherwise, it will be a failure again and we do not achieve what we really want: to have a common policy in the capital market, to be able to have common laws for everything that happens in the tax area, to have comparable taxation in the Member States, because we have an internal market, but it all starts with trust, Commissioner. This project was poorly communicated. Everyone is afraid and does not know how to protect their private money now, be it to the citizen or to entrepreneurs.

Mr President, Commissioner, setting the priority directions for the 2026 budget is extremely important. Why? We cannot have more money in the next period if we do not invest it where more money can bring us, namely in research, in innovation, in SMEs, in order to be able to develop well-paid jobs. We cannot have a competitive economy if we do not have well-trained people – that is why we must have a budget for education – if we do not have healthy people – that is why we must have money for health – and if we do not have well-paid people. So, Commissioner, you were saying that we need to find additional resources. Where do we find them? I think we can find them if we invest well, if we invest in cohesion, if we invest in all geographical areas, not to have areas left behind. Yes, if we have a good economy. But there is another problem, if we know how to defend our internal market, because today we have unfair competition and we are destroying jobs. The budget's priorities for 2026 are extremely important and it is up to us to do them well.

Mr President, Commissioner, we are talking about affordable prices, but I wish you had given a definition: What do you mean by affordable energy prices? Because another price is affordable for citizens of Luxembourg, another price is affordable for those of Romania or Eastern countries. You were very sure of yourself, as if you had the ace in your pocket. You can work it out by making an energy union, lowering prices, clean energy – all this means investment and especially time. The citizen needs it today, because for three years Europe has always been in crisis. Where is the crisis going? In the pocket of the citizen. I'd like you to tell us in the answers you give now, when? One term, one time. As a businessman, I understood: Let me tell you the measure and the time. When do we have affordable prices for all citizens, depending on their income? Besides, I believe one more thing, Commissioner. It is a speculation in the price of energy, unresearched, unsearched and left like this, to live well the uncontrolled energy producers and energy suppliers, and the costs again go to the pocket of the citizen.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, today's debate must be immediately followed by action, Commissioner. That's what farmers expect. We need to have more economic and social fairness in the internal market if we want to have sustainable agriculture, because that's what we're talking about. We need to have regulations that combat inflation and stabilize prices. Inflation eats from the budget. We cannot let farmers sell their produce below cost. We need action here. We need to step up efforts to combat unfair trading practices. We are well aware that we have unfair practices in every Member State. Why? Because uncontrolled products enter the internal market. Farmers and agricultural workers need a decent life, they deserve better living conditions. We must encourage – if we do not resolve this, the younger generation will not work, the generation you were talking about having to replace. The common agricultural policy? The common agricultural policy must be reformed, but direct subsidies must remain. Commissioner, you spoke of polarisation. How are you going to stop being polarized? How will you make subsidies ethical and fair for all farmers? And yes, farmers support simplification without affecting competence and fair competition in the internal market.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, what we do is very important, not just what we say. The European Semester was a concept, a concept that, of course, brought a lot of expectations in the Member States, brought a lot of expectations to the citizens, because, after all, we have to work for the citizens. The results of our work here, of the regulations, must lead to an increase in living standards, an increase in jobs, an increase in competitiveness in the European Union. That is why, Commissioner, I hope you are telling the European Commission that in the European Semester, and what we will do in this 2025 programme, until our mandate is over, we need to bring about measures that will increase social cohesion and, as I was saying, people's well-being. We can't with energy that costs three times as much as in the United States, we can't with very large inputs, we can't only with restrictions. In agriculture, this is again a problem. Of course we also need a clean environment, but we also need a European industry that can withstand global competition.

Dear colleague, we are discussing the European Semester. You didn't say much in your speech. I want to ask you specifically: why do you think that the European Semester that we have had for a long time has not worked in terms of social cohesion, increasing employee incomes, increasing the number of SMEs, sustainability? Because this is the debate, what should the European Union do, what should the European Commission do for the European Semester to bring results? The governance that the Minister was talking about, economic governance, which would bring social cohesion. What, in your view, would be the measures to be taken?

Madam President, Commissioner, first of all I would like to stress something positive, namely that for the first time we have four European institutions led by women. I am proud that Romania, my country, has had a female commissioner for three mandates. These are things that have developed in our democratic society. There's one more thing I'd like: the word ‘protect’ has been widely used – let’s replace it with ‘assume’, not ‘protect’. Why? Women are strong. I want to address our male partners now. Assume to emphasize the criterion of value, that she is a woman, that she is a man, on the criterion of value. Then we'll be competitive and efficient. I want to tell you something else: in my country, on 8 March we celebrate – and all over the world, of course – International Women’s Day, but on 9 March it is Men’s Day and we respect each other and I believe in this partnership so that we can do projects together. I have been running a women's association in Romania for 28 years and believe me we work very well with male partners. In the roadmap, Commissioner, and I am proud that you are here, you also need to talk to the other Commissioners, to have concrete measures. As I have said in other debates, it is not enough to debate, but we must have concrete measures to make progress.

Madam President, President of the European Council, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, today we were supposed to debate the Council meeting on 20 March. Unfortunately, almost all speeches were related to rearmament, defence; are very important, but I want to stop at the three points raised by the Polish Presidency and I want you to discuss them, Mr President, on 20 March. This is about the economic problem. We cannot be strong – you said, Minister, and rightly so, three very important pillars: simplification, energy and investment. If we don't do these three things, we can't defend ourselves. I must say with regret that over the last 20 years, the European Union's diplomacy has declined. If you want to be strong in the global world, you need to know how to negotiate with those who are stronger than you and those who are weaker than you, and clearly have a solid economy, which then allows you to sit at the negotiating table. Therefore, President Costa, especially for you, please discuss on March 20 what solutions we have for energy. SMEs are on the ground, people cannot pay for their energy, at least in my country and other countries in the east.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Europe's problem now is not only that of conflict, it is also the economic problem. And, Commissioner, gold-plating can lead to job losses. We have to understand, we have worked much more in the economy, in industry than in politics, we have to understand that we have to treat workers' rights as a package, with conditions for SMEs, especially, and for companies, because only companies create jobs and if we regulate, overregulate, these jobs can be eroded. But even if we deregulate, we can end up eroding jobs in the long run. This is why a very good analysis is needed, and perhaps the biggest fault of the European Union, the European Commission, is that regulations are being put in place, and a farmer, a farmer, an SME no longer knows what to do when these laws come into conflict. That is why we must be very careful to analyse what we are deregulating and, above all, to stop adding bureaucracy that brings nothing, neither competitiveness, nor job security, nor sustainability, nor the possibility for companies to raise wages.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I would first of all like to congratulate the Polish Council, the Polish Presidency, which is sitting here in the debate, unlike the President, who has not even presented her programme. Commissioner, are you in charge of the internal market? Of course it is good that we aim for competitiveness, but I tell you from experience, as an entrepreneur, we cannot have competitiveness without taking into account some policies to be integrated. For example: energy policy, also research and innovation, modern technologies, education and training. We can't do anything without qualified human resources, but we can't have qualified human resources if we don't think about people's lives. We cannot, in an unbalanced Europe where we have people in poverty, increase competitiveness. That is why, Commissioner, I propose to you that this Competitiveness Compass should be based on these pillars and that you link them together so that we do indeed get it! And look back at what we've legislated for. Do we have results or not? It's not enough to write on paper.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I think I can start by saying that the President of the Commission is being defiant, disrespectful and disinterested. If, when he has to present the Commission's five-year programme, he does not find time to come to Parliament, I believe that we must give him a vote of blame. Now, Commissioner, 11 pages has this five-year project. Know that a student I mentored made a better and more concrete program, because any program must answer three questions: How? With what? and when? Don't answer here. There are three and a half rows for agriculture, nothing for SMEs, you are resuming the social pact, but we have a social pillar, the same president led the last committee. Don't say anything about how to get the money back. It's a huge fraud. We feed budgets to the European Public Prosecutor's Office, to a lot of institutions, but we fail to collect the money that is defrauded. And one more problem: energy policy. It all starts here, Commissioner, and you know it. I appreciate you, but I do not appreciate the Commission's programme.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we are, of course, discussing a very important issue: export restrictions on chips from the United States, but I think we are not aware of these restrictions now. They started five years ago, we know well, and I think that the European Union should have been active, developing its chip production in the European Union, because we know well that advanced technologies, Commissioner, are based on chips. We don't have any. We depend on imports and I think that's the weak point. I am interested, Commissioner, if in the programme that you will be presenting tomorrow, the Commission's programme, you have included concrete measures to develop capacities and boost production capacities, because we cannot have advanced technologies, we cannot have competitiveness, we cannot have resistance in the global market and in vain we are angry at any administration coming from the United States or Asia, if we do not take our fate into our own hands to produce here. That's why that's my question. I hope that tomorrow we will learn more about how chip production will develop in Europe.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, of course we are discussing a subject that I, at least, have known for three terms. We also know that health is a national competence. It is not only the European Union that can work here. But, Commissioner, we must say that policies at European Union level, from the point of view of allocating budgets for infrastructure, for the working conditions of health workers, must come from the European Union. You know very well, the country I know best, and you know it, is now in a great deficit of skilled personnel and infrastructure. But there's another problem: palliative treatment. If we add the lack of social assistance for palliative treatment and the lack of infrastructure for palliative treatment of patients, it is a big problem and I think they are all related here. Economically, the eastern states and central Europe must also develop, in order to have the possibility to increase wages, for doctors and nurses to stay in our villages, in the countryside, also to have infrastructure. So you have work to do, Commissioner for European health policies, of course, along with the national policy of each Member State.

Mr President, from 9 to 10 I am taking part in the debate and I signed up first for catch-the-eye. I do not understand not being notified that we are not being given ‘catch-the-eye’ because we have placed a card. This has to be said at the beginning of the meeting, in order to decide whether I am carding or keeping my catch-the-eye. It's absolutely rude and irregular.

Dear colleague, you have said on several occasions "we must", "we must have relations with the United States", but you have not said anything concrete. What would you concretely propose that the European Union do in relation to the United States? Do you think that the European Union's trade agreement policy is sufficient? Does it sufficiently protect industry in the European Union? What should be concrete? A proposal from you to the European Commission.

Mr President, Commissioner, the energy policy that the European Commission has made - not you, which was - is disastrous. The effects on competitiveness, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises, are now being seen. Commissioner, I propose that you discuss this in the College of Commissioners, that you make a real energy policy. We can't shut down energy production before we have an alternative. And it's clear that there's been a crisis. As long as companies in the European Union pay three to four times the price of energy than those in the United States or Asia, obviously they are no longer competitive, obviously they are in unequal competition, obviously they are being taken out of the market. The European Union's energy policy must therefore be geared towards supporting industrial production. We have a programme to reindustrialise the European Union. How to do it with these costs? The producer knows that inputs are important for the final price. I hope, from this Commission, that indeed - unfortunately, we have the same conductor, the same President of the Commission - but I hope that you will indeed put in place an energy strategy to increase the competitiveness of the European Union.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we are discussing a sad thing and this is not the first time. I want to express my condolences to those who have lost their children, not only in Sweden. Let's remember what Christmas was like in Germany, what was recently in Brussels. Commissioner, I think we have to assume that we are telling the truth: Democracy has not been managed well. Democracy is not about giving up security. On the contrary, I think security needs to increase. Then let's see what we do, because there are states that have legislated, for example, drug use. They all have to do with: The drugs, the guns. We've regulated the weapons regime here. And what? What happened? Everyone has a gun at home, everyone pulls out their gun and shoots at children, at school or on the street. So if we don't commit to changing the rules - democracy doesn't mean chaos, democracy means order, democracy also means responsibilities, not just rights. We do not have the courage to say this, for fear that the citizens will somehow tell us that, Lord, we are not democratic. This is how I understand democracy: to increase security, the right of man to be alone in his home, on the street, in his city.

Mr President, Commissioner, Mrs Lagarde, I saw that you were congratulated by your colleagues and I was very attentive to what you said. Among other things, you criticized households for not spending more. Mrs. Lagarde, do you know how many people are in poverty? How can they spend more when they don't know what's going on, when they don't have enough money, than to pay for their light, their electricity? From my point of view, the ECB did not do what it should do, from the point of view of monetary policy, from the point of view of the pressure borne by the poorest, in fact, inflation, interest rates. Do you know what the interest rate is in my country, in Romania? How? SMEs are being swept away. So, as far as I'm concerned, you're responsible. You said you were coming to meet us. Very well, but you have some specialists on very high salaries there. They have to do monetary policy. They must ensure our existence and resilience in the internal market of the economy, after all, in order to be able to compete globally.

Madam President, Commissioner, for fear of evasion, we must not oppose innovation. Cryptocurrencies are the result of innovation. You said very well, we have regulation, we have directive, we think about international standards, because yes, we are not alone in the world, we have a global market. The problem is that, from my point of view, we must not prevent citizens from using their income, we must not prevent companies from investing as they wish, but we must have rules that they follow. You have said, Commissioner, among other things, that you want to remove harmful actors. You also have to see how, you have to say what measures, you need a lot of transparency. I do not know if you have any statistics in the European Union, in the Member States: How many cases do we have of evasion, of cryptocurrency scams? But these things have to be done, and I think we have to stick with this innovation - cryptocurrencies - also in the European Union, but with proper regulation and supervision.

Dear colleague, you said only one theory. What would be your and your group's proposal for land restoration? Because, of all the debates, you oppose agriculture, you oppose industry, you oppose everything! We want food security. How do you see this?

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, of course, we are debating a very important issue, it is a pity that there are so few Members of the European Parliament in the Chamber. As stated here, as in the declaration of the Convention, the land is degraded annually. 70% of the land has been converted from its natural state. Droughts cause damage and costs and damage, more than 300 billion a year. Where does this damage and damage go? Obviously, to farmers and, ultimately, to citizens. In 2015-2019 alone, some 100 million hectares of healthy and productive land were degraded annually, clearly threatening the world's food security as well as water availability. What needs to be done, Commissioner? You told us what was at the Convention and that no important compromises were reached. I believe that the European Union must be especially concerned about what is happening in the European Union, certainly, and globally. I believe that we need to improve national and European policy instruments for a productive approach to drought management. We have a lot of work to do here. Budgets need to be allocated to finance land restoration, increasing drought resilience through research and innovation. The European Commission must have an action plan at European Union level to combat land degradation in collaboration with the Member States. And there is one more thing that needs to be done, Commissioner: The policies of the European Union, of the Commission, must not be canceled as in algebra - plus and minus - are thousands of hectares now, with photovoltaic parks, land that is not recovered for decades. We need to see how we relate energy policy to this land protection policy, and I very much believe that you need to think mainly about how not to put pressure on farmers in the European Union, on citizens in the European Union, as long as the rest of the world, the United States, Japan and the other states, have not voted in this Convention.

Madam President, I see that many of you have forgotten the title of the debate. I am a member of the Committee on Budgetary Control and I think that we should now be debating how to finance the LIFE programme transparently, and we have seen all sorts of debates here, forgetting the subject. No one is saying from here and I don't think that any MEP doesn't want there to be NGOs. Yes, I have set up NGOs in my country, but I want transparency. It cannot be that the Commission, which is an executive, is not subject to the scrutiny of the European Parliament. We want NGOs to exist, but we want them to be controlled exactly as an SME is controlled when it receives European funds. That's what you really want. I do not understand, as if you were biting on the hat some of you at the time when you spoke. We do not want to dismantle NGOs, but we want a transparent functioning and we are ultimately responsible for the management of European funds, and the executive must submit to parliamentary control.

Madam President, we have been debating migration for over 10 years. Unfortunately, we are looking at the effects and not the causes, and we are not looking at why every measure we have tried has not paid off. In the end, people die, either drowned or people who are attacked in the Member States. I think, Commissioner, that it turns out very well that it is harder to fix a wrong thing done than to do it right all over again, and then I think we need to find appropriate measures. On the one hand, to delineate illegal and legal migration and to catch the smugglers, the traffickers – who are doing what? I'm taking the money. Those people sell all the stuff they have there and pay for these smuggling rings. That's what we have to do. What Happens to Trafficking Networks? Why can't they be dismantled? Why can't the guides get caught? Because migrants are still dying, European citizens are also dying.