Speeches

Madam President, I voted firmly against this report because, as usual, it has nothing to do with reason and common sense and is aimed at utopias, greenisms, climatisms and other topics that doom Europeans to more energy poverty, more spending and a non-competitive economy. What we have just talked about, namely critical infrastructure and so on, is related to the damage done by the policy made by the European Union and the European Parliament, which is aimed solely at sponsoring things that have nothing to do with common sense. But that is the motive. Now in conclusion, allow me, I see that time does not move, but I attribute it to the computer. Now allow me to thank you for your patience, personally, Madam President, to apologise for the slight violation of the rules (I believe that a snowball will not so much shake your healthy psyche) and to wish you personal, family happiness, cheerful Christian, Christmas, Christmas and New Year holidays, and personal and family happiness!

Madam President, starvation is a crime against humanity. In fact, there are several gladomors, against the Ukrainian state and people, there are at least two, and they are accompanied by more crimes of the Stalinist regime, such as forced deportations, the relocation of many peoples, of many nations. The Taurian, Zaporizhzhian, Crimean Bulgarians were repatriated, as were many other peoples within the Soviet-occupied territories. For many years this truth hushed up, hushed up and covered up this monstrous crime of the Soviet genocidal, anti-human, anti-human regime against humanity. It was their, I would say, perverse criminal idea of crushing nations, imposing a multicultural Soviet society, a Soviet man, and doing so at the cost of crimes against humanity. So I am glad that at last this room, which is quite sluggish on these issues, has finally moved on and acknowledged this real crime against humanity. Henceforth, an apology and, of course, compensation must be sought.

Madam President, I voted for this resolution because exposing this corruption ring, this coalition, Cathar corruption in the socialist, democrat and other left-wing circles is a real scandal in the European Parliament. For years, we've been hearing accusations about how some very right-wing, far-right people were taking money somewhere outside the EU to work against it. What did it turn out to be? It turned out that among the most vocal anti-corruption fighters, ‘the thief shouted, hold the thief’. It turned out that the real corruption is in this party, in this group, which supposedly has to protect the rights of workers and workers. This is a huge hypocrisy, a huge scandal and a huge damage to the European Parliament and to those who claimed to be very uncorrupted, very clean, very white, many untouched by harmful influences. But we don't have to stop there. This group and the like should be checked for how and why it voted suspiciously regarding, for example, the Mobility Package or the influence of other, third parties, such as, say, the Republic of North Macedonia. This is also very important and should be checked, because I think that very dangerous things will come out there too.

It is snow. Well, it’s because of global warming. And my question here was: where is your global warming, ladies and gentlemen? Outside is like Siberia and snow is falling down. And that’s why we need to know who is behind the sabotage of this critical infrastructure. So your question is absolutely right and full on time, because we are not stupid people. We need to ask two questions. The first question is: who benefits from this sabotage? And the second question is: who is capable of this sabotage? When we have these answers, we’ll understand why all this is happening. And now, about global warming: please let us know with data, and why are we forcing and forced to accept all this propaganda, all this idea that we are capable and we have to build our energy only by all these sources like wind, like sun, etc.? No, we need to explore our own resources. We need to export our own natural gas. We need to explore our own nuclear energy and to have our sovereign European energy. Because we need not to be dependent on outside suppliers. Thank you. Where is my ball?

Member of the Commission. - Madam President, my fellow Member, Güner, this is a very timely question. We can answer this question in this way. What you see is a snowball. I gathered this snowball outside, in front of Parliament. I didn't bring it to throw the Chairman, this snowball is here to show that... (President interrupts speaker)

Mr President, thank you for giving me the floor so quickly. The Russian aggression against Ukraine has entered a new phase. Something familiar from the history of Russian and Soviet occupation and autocratic regimes. Attacks on civilian infrastructure aimed at forcing the Ukrainian government to end its resistance. But the purpose of this attack and the destruction of infrastructure will be the destruction and suffering of millions of people and the forcing of an additional migration wave. This is of course unacceptable, unacceptable and must be answered with an increasingly serious and clear response from the EU. Sanctions and non-purchase of useful and any other fossils from Russia must also be extended so as not to finance this latest Russian aggression against the Ukrainian people and civilians.

Mr President, the revelations and suspicions of corruption in the ranks of the Socialists and Democrats are a huge disgrace and stain on the European Parliament. It turned out, as always, that the saying of the wise Bulgarian people, "The thief cries, hold the thief", is true. Of course, this corruption must be investigated to the end. These trade unions, non-governmental organisations that probably influenced the European Parliament, need to be investigated in order for the Mobility lobby package, which was stealing business from eastern countries, to be adopted. You all know well that the Kremlin and Belgrade influence the Balkans through their own NGOs and from there follow in Skopje, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Albania and Kosovo anti-European, anti-Bulgarian propaganda. It should be investigated whether these NGOs have invited European representatives, i.e. MEPs, as some colleagues like to call themselves, who are these MEPs, have their participations been paid as institutes, such as IFIMES, for example? These are important issues, because if Qatar can give money here, both the Kremlin and Belgrade are destroying European unity through Belgrade, in Skopje, and therefore it should be very nice to see if there are colleagues who have been tempted to reach into the medic there as well. And they should be shown, followed and investigated, because corruption is a bad thing, do not forget on the left side of the hall, on the left.

– OK, he’s from Belgium. If you want to discuss geography, we can of course. But still, Mr Verhofstadt is very patient to defend Brussels, not the national states. That’s why we are political opponents. But geography is geography, yes.

Thank you, but there was no question here. This is some kind of violation of rules here in this room. But still, there is no question. Can I answer something or just think something? I don’t know. But yes, Mr Verhofstadt, the national states need their rights to defend the interests of their citizens against the bureaucratic system in Brussels.

Mr President, I am glad that you have started to follow the rules, that is good. When we talk about the veto of nation states, to see (by the way, Mr Verhofstadt, and here he is) citizens of the Netherlands talking against a veto is hypocrisy. Why hypocrisy? For 11 years, without any reason, the Netherlands and Austria have stopped Bulgaria and Romania from joining the Schengen area because of their economic interests, and now they have sat down to talk to me about the right of veto. We know what you want, my friends. To talk about the rule of law is like representatives of socialists and democrats speaking out against corruption, bad things and untrue, because, dear ones, for you, the rule of law is a dictate to your majority, which you now have here in this House. And yes, Mr President, the Conference on the Future of Europe is nothing different from a gathering of like-minded friends. And yes, they are indeed 0.000001% of the population of the European Union. The rule of law means compliance with national laws, it means protecting the interests of nation states so that no one, unelected by anyone, can dictate to others how to govern their states and how to govern their families and societies.

So you said ‘bad guys’ use the veto. Well recently two countries – Austria and Netherlands – stopped, vetoed Bulgaria and Romania, for 11 years now, for their own reasons: because of the economy, because of transportation, because of their economical reasons. So please tell me, are these countries bad guys, Netherlands and Austria? Please, I want to hear you.

Mr President, I voted in favour of this report because the growing wolf populations in the European Union and the problem that these populations allegedly pose in terms of biodiversity and traditional livestock farming in Europe, as well as the need for a joint assessment of the conservation status and transboundary measures for the conservation and management of the population of large carnivores in a scientifically sound manner, comply with the ecological requirements for wolf species that inhabit large areas and carry out large migrations. Hunting should therefore be permitted, within the framework of good practice, to the rules and the way in which these hunting groups operate, so that they can carry out the useful activity of protecting the farm and protecting human lives and the farm of people. Bulgaria gives a positive example of how, in a country with the least investment in Europe in terms of wolf hunting, the range and numbers of this predator are increasing, despite the measures. On the other hand, the bear as a strictly protected species in Bulgaria over the last 10 years has decreased by more than 30% according to official data.

Mr President, I voted against this report categorically because measures under the Conditionality Regulation must be implemented by the Commission, which violates the principles of the rule of law and directly affects or seriously risks affecting the sound financial management of the Union. In no way does this policy, pursued by the European Union and the European Parliament with regard to Hungary, of suspending 65% of commitment appropriations under cohesion policy correspond to the reality and to any logic of the European Union, to the idea of the rule of law. The topic of the rule of law is used to impose policies in a number of Member States, including Hungary. This is absolutely unacceptable and unacceptable, contrary to the nature of the Treaties and contrary to the idea of a European Union. For this reason, such an approach of blackmail, of arm-wringing cannot be supported in any way, because it is precisely in these approaches that the growing role of skepticism of many citizens of Member States of the European Union lies.

Mr President, I voted in favour of this report. The recent escalation of Russia's brutal military aggression against Ukraine is a confirmation of its decision to violate Ukraine's fundamental rights to independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognised borders and to destroy its viability as a state. The courage, courage and determination of the Ukrainian people to defend the country deserves deep respect and gratitude. Through a Team Europe approach, the European Union, its Member States and European financial institutions mobilised EUR 19 billion at the start of the Russian military aggression for Ukraine’s economic, social and financial resilience. This, combined with support from the Union budget of EUR 12.4 billion, including macro-financial assistance in support of the European Investment Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, is fully and partially guaranteed by the budget of the European Union, as well as additional financial support from Member States of EUR 7.3 billion. This should be part of our duty to support the attacked state so that it can withstand aggression.

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, when I look at the facts surrounding the revision of the Medical Devices Regulation, I am once again disappointed to see that something is profoundly wrong with the way decisions are taken and implemented in the functioning of this European Union. There is no explanation why, once this regulation has been adopted, due to the excessive bureaucratic and financial effort required to re-certify a range of medical devices, even those that are of excellent quality and have been in use for a long time may unexpectedly disappear from the market because companies decide to withdraw them without any explanation. The result is visible – a reduction in the availability of medical devices across Europe, which worsens patient care. Until recently, in this room, everyone had become a medical specialist, understood about pandemics, discussed the Chinese virus, what it was, what it was not, how medical care was exhausted, lack of medicines, lack of ventilators and so on, and so on. However, it seems that this is past as an explanation, everyone has forgotten it, and now the same mistakes are repeated again. This behaviour is inexplicable and it is inexplicable that citizens of the Member States of the European Union are deprived of adequate, timely and necessary medical care. Commissioner, it is time for the European Commission to start acting adequately, to mind its own business. It's in your interest, not ours. We often criticise you for these things, but it is not a bad thing to take the decision to end this vicious practice of legislation that affects the interests of the citizens of the Member States.

Mr President, I read the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria, Article 46, first paragraph: "Marriage is a voluntary union between a man and a woman. Civil marriage shall be lawful.’ A few lines below in the following paragraph: “Children born out of wedlock have equal rights to those born out of wedlock.” This, colleagues, proves everything you are discussing here, you are fooling each other and trying to make political propaganda. Yes, we may surprise you, but we Bulgarians in Bulgaria through our Constitution have accepted marriage as a union between a man and a woman. If the child was born out of such a marriage, he has equal rights and there is no problem to be issued a document in the name of the mother. A single civil number can immediately be issued in the name of the mother. So there's no problem with that thing. What you are doing here, however, is propaganda, with which you are trying to change our society and our way of life. And we disagree with him. We do not say to allow or prohibit or adopt a form of marriage in your countries. We don't tell you how to sustain your societies. We tell you that we will not allow you to change ours, because unlike you, we think that marriage is between a man and a woman biological parents. And I think you have to comply with this will of ours, because this is democracy.

Of course, honourable Member, anyone who supports and encourages the illegal crossing of a state border is a political accomplice to those who make human trafficking. There are organizations that promote human trafficking that organize human trafficking that receive money for human trafficking, and here in this room, there are people who advocate human trafficking. And I'm surprised, but I'm not really surprised, because when the hall-occupied and hall-dominated left supports illegal migration, it does so for its own political reasons. But any of you who supports the illegal crossing of a state border should be ashamed of this, because in essence you become an accomplice to criminal acts. It's just as simple as that.

Mr President, colleagues, crossing a state border is a crime. This crime must be investigated, prosecuted, charged, tried and convicted. Instead of this happening, however, this House supports such crimes. It often talks about the rule of law. What rule of law when you support breaking the law and crimes? The hall of this European Parliament occupied by the extreme left, the extremist left, is complicit in human trafficking, is complicit in a number of crimes related to human trafficking. You work together with traffickers' organizations, you support traffickers' organizations that sell people as commodities, and you support them, and you should be ashamed of that. Supporters of illegal migration are directly responsible and guilty of the deaths of Bulgarian border and police officers who have died and continue to suffer and suffer damage, shootings with illegal immigrants and Turkish smugglers. You are talking about solidarity – have any of you called the families of these people to express solidarity to them? No, of course you're not, and you shouldn't be, because you should be ashamed. The solution is one and it must be a European one: a united firm stance, the protection of external borders, the extradition of illegal migrants, a court and prison for smugglers and a disgrace for those who support them. (The speaker agreed to respond to the "blue card" statement)

Mr President, Commissioner, I welcome the proposal for a directive on the resilience of critical sites, and I am pleased that the opinion of the Committee on Transport and Tourism is also being taken into account. Transport is an essential sector, connectivity is an important thing and, of course, critical infrastructure needs to be arranged, assessed and safeguarded. But when we talk about these things, there is inevitably a contradiction and a very strong discrepancy. There will be a lot of talk here about this connectivity report, about how infrastructure should be assessed, etc. At the same time, there are Member States that continue to block the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the Schengen area. What connectivity are we talking about, given that 12 hours are travelled from Ruse to Bucharest, between which there are 70 kilometres of distance, Commissioner, how can this work be done? Again we see the difference between words and deeds. For 11 years now, the two countries have met all the technical criteria, meet the requirements, but are not part of the Schengen area, and this is absolutely unfair to our citizens, to our transport, to our infrastructure and to our business. So, when you talk about these things, first you need to see the issues related to the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to Schengen, so that this space can be completed and so that it can be fully assessed and worked out.

on behalf of the ECR Group. - Madam President, unlike my fellow Member, I voted absolutely against this report because this report is nothing more than a hypocritical, two-faced escape and pinning of a badge. When this hall understands and sees that in Bitola, in Ohrid, real racism develops, real xenophobia, real hatred based on the national origin of the local Bulgarians there, this hall is silent and pretends that it has not heard, seen and neither onions have eaten nor onions have smelled. This is wrong. That's two-faced. This is absolutely hypocritical. When the Serbian authorities stop commemorating the Day of the Western Outskirts and continue their illegal occupation, we write and say: ‘People, this is real racism, this is real xenophobia’, and someone there is making some imaginary declarations in order to have a clear conscience and to make himself more, more and more humane than the others. My colleague said earlier that there can be no choice which racism is worse, which is better. Either you condemn the manifestation of such actions or you do not condemn. You can't pretend to be blind in one eye, you can't help but see things happening right under your nose in a country that wants to be an EU candidate. It's just a disgrace.

Madam President, I supported this report not only because Croatia has fulfilled all the conditions and deserves to be part of the Schengen area, but also because I want to remind those Member States that continue to break the rules. It is absolutely hypocritical, two-faced and irregular for them to suspend Romania and Bulgaria from Schengen membership for their own economic reasons, because they violate the treaties. For 11 years, Bulgaria and Romania have clearly fulfilled all the requirements of the Schengen area. A few days ago, a Bulgarian border policeman died in a shootout at the Turkish border with Turkish smugglers, defending this hall here. Two months ago, two other policemen died again in pursuit of smugglers and people and traffickers of migrants, but Bulgaria and Romania are not yet part of the Schengen area. Why? Because countries like the Netherlands are pursuing their own self-interest. There are lobbyists of the big transport companies who are pushing Bulgaria and Romania not to be accepted so that their companies can work and their companies can earn more money. That's hypocritical. And that's two-faced.

Member of the Commission. - Madam President, I have abstained from supporting this report because of its content. We have heard many times here that there are increased prices, that energy is expensive. Why is energy expensive? Because of the votes in this House. Because for years, systematically, the people who voted in this House did only one thing: made electricity more expensive, fuels more expensive and citizens' lives more expensive. Why did they do it? They were led by a greenist, climateist, alarmist utopia and hysteria. They claimed that there could be no production of their own gas. They claimed that there could be no production of electricity from nuclear energy and made sure that the prices of energy carriers were deliberately high. No one else is to blame here, not Russia, not China, not other countries. It is the fault of the vote in this House. Prices have risen in this room and now the same people are telling us that we have to fight external dependencies - those that have made the European Union totally dependent on external energy sources. That's stupid.

Mr President, I am very pleased with these meetings of ours on Thursday evening, in the afternoon. I voted firmly against this resolution for the following reason: I do not believe in this ideology - climateism, hysterism, greenism, an ideology that is not based on any real scientific data and no real scientific facts. The result of this ideology is the deindustrialization of the European continent. We are killing our own production and putting forces in the hands of China, in the hands of Turkey, in the hands of Russia. We are consciously destroying our economy so that some other people who are not interested in this ideology can profit at our expense. This is unreasonable, it is not economically and scientifically justified. For this reason, we always vote firmly against all such resolutions that make us poorer, more unemployed, more deindustrialised for the benefit of other societies and other countries that have their economic and political ambitions in this direction.

on behalf of the ALDE Group. - Mr President, I have strongly voted against this resolution for several reasons. First of all, crimes, murders must be prosecuted, punished, regardless of the person of either the criminal or the victim. This is the work of criminal justice, this is the work of criminal law, because otherwise ideological explanations, ideological reasons and ideological justifications for one or another act are created in this room. Dear Mr President, in Europe and in Bulgaria there are many crimes, unfortunately, which are committed, say, because of the religious motives of the perpetrator. In both France and Germany, of which you are a member, there are jihadist and Muslim Islamist groups who commit crimes because of their motives. In Bulgaria, many crimes are committed by the inhabitants of the neighborhoods. Should these people be punished more severely for their origin? And let me raise the question of self-determination one more time. Should the offender be punished if he or she identifies himself or herself in one way or another? I think no, there should be justice.

on behalf of the ECR Group. - Mr President, I supported the resolution on the rule of law in Malta, five years after the murder of journalist Daphne Galizia, because I believe that through her work she managed to raise the issue of corruption in her society, particularly large-scale money laundering and, unfortunately, pay for it with her life. The resolution is balanced, welcomes the additional capacity available for investigating and prosecuting such crimes. This means that the European Parliament is concerned about the persistence of obstacles to freedom of expression and divergent opinions in the media. When I talk about different opinions, I'm not just talking about those who are pleasing to these media and who are in the so-called mainstream society. I believe that the resolution as it stands covers these aspects and the fact that it is supported by all groups shows its good content.