Speeches

The session is suspended for a few minutes and will resume with the address of Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau. (The sitting adjourned at 5.36 p.m.)

I would say that we can go further because the honourable Member does not stick to our agenda. As you know, the regulation applies to everyone and so, unfortunately, I have to take the floor. I'm sorry, but it is. We have given ourselves a regulation that applies to everyone and that we respect all and everyone.

Ladies and gentlemen, I would ask you to stick to the agenda, otherwise I will have to interrupt it. As you know, we have a regulation that applies to everyone, no one excluded.

The next item is the debate on six motions for resolutions on the situation of journalists and human rights defenders in Mexico (2022/2580(RSP))*. _______________ * See Minutes.

The debate is closed. The vote on the amendments will take place on Wednesday 9 March 2022 and the final vote will take place on Thursday 10 March 2022. Written declarations (Rule 171)

The next item is the report by Simona Bonafè, on behalf of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on batteries and waste batteries, repealing Directive 2006/66/EC and amending Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 (COM(2020)0798 – C9‐0400/2020 – (2020/0353(COD)) (A9‐0031/2022).

The next item is the debate on the statements by the Council and the Commission on the European Union's priorities for the 66th session of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (2022/2536(RSP)).

I would like to thank Undersecretary Beaune and, of course, all the colleagues who have taken part in this important debate. As I said, we will look at the footage to make sure that there has not been a fascist salute in this House, because I want to reiterate once again that fascist symbols are incompatible and unacceptable in this House, because this is the home of European citizens, but also a living monument that represents the victory of European citizens against the barbarism of Nazi-fascism. The debate is closed. The vote will take place during the next part-session. Written declarations (Rule 171)

We now continue with the discussion on the Council and Commission statements on the rule of law and the consequences of the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (2022/2535(RSP)).

Before continuing with the discussions, I will proceed to the communication of the results of today’s first voting session, 16 February 2022. (The President announced the results of the votes.)1 _______________ 1 For further details: see Minutes.

Before I give the floor to Mr Kuhnke for a minute, I must say that we have been told that Mr Dzhambazki would give the Roman salute to the House. If this is true, of course, we will check what has happened, raise the issue and will of course be subject to any sanctions. We'll check with the administration to see if this really happened. It has been pointed out to us and I believe that it is absolutely necessary to check because, and I want to reiterate this very firmly, fascist symbols and gestures are not allowed in any way in this House. So if this very serious event has taken place, sanctions will be decided, as this very, very serious behaviour deserves.

(IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I have read with great interest the reports on our foreign and security policy and it seems to me that they frame the central point of the matter well: The EU is an economic power, but it is not yet in a position to assert its geopolitical voice. The effects are clear these days: We are witnessing the risk of a war on our eastern flank without having the appropriate diplomatic and security tools and means to act or react. What we need to do, however, is clear: to achieve European sovereignty also in foreign policy, and not only in trade matters, to introduce majority voting in the Council and in foreign policy matters, and to establish a common army, benefiting from the capabilities, resources and experience of all member countries. But above all, it is necessary to bring the field of foreign policy back into the so-called "Community method", valuing the role of the European Parliament.

I thank Undersecretary Beaune and also Commissioner Reynders and all the colleagues who have contributed their thoughts to this debate. The debate is closed. The sitting is currently suspended. There will be a very small suspension, because then we will resume at 12.00 with the address of the President of Colombia Iván Duque Márquez. Thanks to all of you. Written declarations (Rule 171)

However, ladies and gentlemen, I would ask you to remain on the subject of the debate, without mentioning anything else, and to be respectful of the Members who have spoken and who listen to you. Ladies and gentlemen, if you do not speak on the substance of the matter, I am obliged to take your floor. I repeat that we must remain on the substance of the subject that is being discussed and this attitude is not respectful either of this House or of the Members who are intervening, so I hope that this will not be repeated.

I ask you to pay a little attention to the times. I did not interrupt you, because I think it is a very important discussion and I want to leave space and time to express myself, but it is also important to respect the times.

The next item is the debate on the Council and Commission statements on the surveillance of politicians, prosecutors, lawyers and journalists, as well as other natural persons and entities in EU Member States using cyber-surveillance software (2022/2546(RSP)). I would like to inform the honourable Members that this debate will be attended by speakers from the political groups. I would also point out that there is no catch-the-eye procedure for all the debates at this part-session and no blue card applications will be accepted. In addition, as was the case during recent part-sessions, remote interventions are planned from Parliament’s Liaison Offices in the Member States. I would also like to remind you that speeches in the Chamber will continue to be made from the central podium and therefore I call on Members to check the list of speakers and to approach the central podium as their speaking time approaches. I now give the floor, on behalf of the Council, to Mr Clément Beaune, Under-Secretary for European Affairs.

I thank the rapporteur and all the colleagues who have spoken. The debate is closed. The votes on the amendments will take place today, Tuesday 15 February 2022, and the final vote will take place tomorrow, Wednesday 16 February 2022. Written declarations (Rule 171)

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, four years ago now, the MeToo movement spread all over the world thanks to force, thanks to the determination of some women who decided to denounce harassment and abuse received from men of power. So, I want to say it clearly, once again, in this House, once again to the colleagues who deny it: True, not all men are harassers, of course, but all the harassment women receive is caused by men. This is the truth and from this truth we must start. Then came the time when it was tried to diminish the value of this collective complaint to the cry of "if I looked for it", "do not exaggerate with the complaints, do not exaggerate with the MeToo", "if they received harassment some women is because they gave the idea of being available". We still had to listen to discussions about why, even, we had found the courage to denounce, perhaps after a few years, and this too, dear colleagues, highlights, for the umpteenth time, how tragically women are still twice victims. Victims the first time, when they are abused, when they are harassed, when they are annihilated, when they are raped and victims even a second time, when they are judged for how they dress, for what they say, for how they have fun and even if they have not found the strength to report a trauma immediately. But here, in the house of democracy, we wanted to add our voice to that of the thousands of women who have reported cases of violence and abuse. It is important, ladies and gentlemen, to make the strong and clear voice of the European institutions heard in support of all those who, with their complaints, have opened a debate that is absolutely necessary. So let's say it together, loud and clear, MeToo!

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, violence has ancient roots, but it has new forms in which it manifests itself and these new forms require all of us and our strategies to renew themselves, to find new ways. The forms through which violence manifests itself change over time and today they can make use of the help of new technologies and virtual space, but all this has very concrete, very serious consequences on the lives of women and, in general, on the lives of people. The many cases of revenge porn and in general of intimidation and harassment that are exercised through Facebook, through Twitter, through messaging apps, through virtual space have shown that the amplifier effect is devastating. We know of women who took their own lives for all this, others have been forced to change their names. Not taking care of all this means dramatically leaving women even more lonely. And that is why this Parliament is called upon to respond now.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, one victim every six hours in Europe, every six hours. These are numbers, stories, talking about each of us, talking about each of us, because each of us, directly or indirectly, has experienced that violence. Regardless of our social condition and our religious affiliation, our condition of life because, whether it is physical or psychological, whether it is implicit or brazen, as it often is, violence runs through all our lives and remains an unbearable, unbearable limit to our dignity, our freedom and, ultimately, our life. So, Commissioner, President, we must ask ourselves today: Is this emergency at the top of the priorities of the European institutions and this House? The answer is no, because it is not. Just consider that we have not yet been able, for example, to ratify the Istanbul Convention, which is a minimal instrument. We should go far beyond, far beyond, and we haven't been able to do that either. We are hostage to illiberal and anti-democratic governments, which continue to block even the minimum measures that would be needed to protect women and not to turn this day into just another day of remembrance for the victims. It can't be just that. We need to go further, we need to give answers to those women. There is no more time, we have no more time. Women die killed at the hands of men, who are comrades, former comrades and husbands. It is not a natural tragedy, colleagues, it is not a flood, it is not an earthquake! They are crimes that are committed by men in the name of a precise culture called patriarchy, and that we, from here, starting from here, must reverse and defeat.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, today we are leaving behind a long job, as has been said, a complex job, a difficult job, but also a long-awaited job, which has led us to compare in these three long years of work very different positions, even very distant ones, until we reach what I consider to be a satisfactory balance, which today we deliver to European citizens. Mind you, colleagues, I want to be very honest with you: Everything can always be improved, everything can always be improved, you can always do better. But I believe that intellectual honesty must make us recognize here this morning that the text we are about to approve will deliver important innovations to European agriculture. Intellectual honesty must make us recognize that the point of arrival of this work is very far from the point of departure, because much has been improved thanks to the work, let me say this with pride, especially of Parliament, which has always worked to maintain the bar of the highest ambition, which has fought, we have fought, sometimes we have even clashed - the Commissioner knows - with the Council and with the Commission so that the expectations of farmers, of our farmers, were not betrayed. So today we approve a good text, a text that I believe should make us proudly recognize the results we have achieved. We avoided renationalization, it was a real risk. While allowing flexibility to the Member States, we have maintained a compliance check by the Commission. Above all, we will give citizens a CAP, let me say, fairer, more attentive to young people, greener, and above all fairer thanks to social conditionality, which is a result that really - and I want to acknowledge and proudly reiterate this - is due to the work that has been done above all by our political family, my political family, the Socialists and Democrats. So I believe that we will vote today on all these results that we must proudly claim. We are voting to give our farmers the answers they have been waiting for too long, after a difficult time that was that of the pandemic. And I am sure that Parliament will live up to these expectations.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, reactionary and subversive governments, as we know, always attack the rights of everyone. But they always start, and history teaches us, from women's rights. Reactionaries don't like women being free, reactionaries don't like women being able to choose, whether it's their careers, their loves, their bodies, and yes, their lives. This liberticidal law, rightly suspended pending the constitutional review, is an example of what can happen and finally a warning, which tells us how we can not, even here, even in our European Union, never let our guard down. We, colleagues, you know, we know, we fight every day here too to defend women and their fundamental rights and we are still ready to offer our help to women and also to Texan men, who want to live in a rule of law, where their freedoms are guaranteed and where there is no return to the Middle Ages and the witch hunt.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Madam Commissioner, weeping, screaming, pleading, the sound of broken doors. These, Mr President, are the noises that accompany the study of the cases of the so-called "parental alienation syndrome", as noted by Daniela Poggio who is a feminist and a PAS scholar. And the desperation of those children remains stuck on them and prevents them from sleeping, from thinking about anything else, it requires us to ask ourselves how it is possible that in Europe, in the homeland of the rule of law, in the name of an alleged syndrome rejected by the scientific community, mothers and children are removed. They also call it "malevolent mother syndrome" or "symbiotic mother syndrome", so as not to leave doubts to the fact that this alleged syndrome feeds on very serious gender prejudices. In Italy the lawyers Teresa Manente and Ilaria Boiano of Difference between women From 2018 to 2020, there were 100 cases of children being removed from a parent for this reason. In 8 out of 10 cases the refusal to the other parent was charged to the mother; in 9 out of 10 cases the child was never heard by the judge; in 100 cases out of 100, in all cases, mothers have been intimidated, have been restricted in their freedom, must remain silent and must suffer the most cruel of the violence: the so-called "ablation of motherhood", so it is called. They must remain silent in the face of the compulsory treatment to which children are subjected who are removed by public force and conducted in neutral structures, where they must be re-educated and realigned, in this case evidently, yes, manipulated. Mothers must remain silent even when they are treated as dangerous criminals and instead are uncensored citizens and, in most cases, victims of partner violence. But if it were possible, colleagues, to draw up a ranking of the victims of the pain and damage that this established custom in the courts inflicts, children would have the first place. Because they are denied childhood, because they are deprived by the force of their mother. Is it acceptable? We do not think so, and we have reiterated this in this text. Now the floor to Parliament, which will have to choose whether to stand on the side of civilization, the rule of law, science, or barbarism.