Speeches

Mr President, honourable Member, I congratulate you on the question you have raised. It is timely and important. Dear Commissioner, I often, not to say almost always, criticise you for things that I believe are true, but in this case the question that has been raised and your reaction deserves both congratulations and respect. The community, the scientific community, in Ukraine must be helped, because after the treacherous Russian attack and missile strikes on higher education institutions, on high schools and on universities, it is quite obvious that this scientific thought and this scientific potential must be preserved for the good of both the Ukrainian nation, the Ukrainian people and our entire European civilization. So your position is worthy of respect, for which I congratulate you. There is one fact, historically, which you are obviously or rather unsurprisingly not aware of, but you all know that there is a very large Bulgarian community, a Bulgarian minority, in Ukraine. These people are loyal Ukrainian citizens. In Ukraine is the oldest Bulgarian high school, the oldest. There was a Bulgarian high school in Ukraine before there was a Bulgarian state. So we have to help these people, so work.

Madam President, Commissioner, violence against women and children is and must be a crime, and every crime must be prosecuted, accused, condemned and punished. And so it is right and so it should be, because this crime is abominable. However, the debate here is slightly different, because the Istanbul Convention is not this document to protect women and children from domestic violence or any gender-based violence. The Istanbul Convention has far larger, wider and different objectives, and you are well aware of this. In the Istanbul Convention, there is an ideology that for some of us is unacceptable and that is why we oppose this document, and at the same time we tell you not to take the just cause of defending women's rights as a hostage for ideological changes aimed at family tradition, family, etc. And I'll give you two examples. How do you claim to defend women's rights and encourage an athlete who is a born man to go compete in a women's league, in swimming, in boxing, in wrestling or whatever. And one more thing, how you claim to promote and protect women's rights, and you call tradition the practice in some communities, Muslim or in the neighborhoods in Bulgaria to marry forcibly 12-year-old children. This is not about protecting children's and women's rights, quite the contrary. I conclude with the call the Istanbul Convention has not been signed by us, it will not be signed .....

So, dear colleague, do you know where is the town of Bitola? The town of Bitola is one of the major cities in so—called North Macedonia. There are Bulgarians there – good guys. They created a cultural club. Well, this club was attacked and set on fire. What is your comment? By government—led arsonists. What is your comment? I want to know.

Madam President, what enlargement are we talking about at the moment when another fierce anti-Bulgarian campaign is raging in Skopje? Commissioner, a Bulgarian cultural club was set on fire in Bitola, a Bulgarian cultural club was destroyed in Ohrid, an old Bulgarian capital. The same day, the National Assembly, the Skupshtina of the Republic of Macedonia, North Macedonia, passed a law banning non-governmental organizations with Bulgarian names. Should I remind you who and in what years burned clubs culturally? Should I remind you who banned names in what years? May I remind you, Commissioner, the right to self-determination, the right of association, the right to organise? Have you forgotten all these things, Commissioner? I have asked you many times and you have not answered me at all. Because these are, so-called and defended by all of you, European values. If you're not protecting them, I don't know what you're protecting. And I hold on to the answer, because I've asked you many times, I want a real answer. Who set the club on fire in Bitola? Who destroyed the club in Ohrid? Who banned NGOs? Who swirled the anti-Bulgarian hysteria in Skopje? This is important and I expect a real answer from you, not the usual alabalicisms.

Member of the Commission. - Mr President, thank you also for your understanding in taking the floor. Dear Commissioner, many things have been said here and most of them are true. But the fight against the pandemic is a matter for the medical authorities, Commissioner. But the question for you is different. My question is how much did the organisation of the European Commission cost? Who carried out the public procurement? How much did the European Commission, the European Parliament pay for tests, for masks, for materials, for sanitary materials, for organising the tests, for placing the tests? How did you choose the companies, which companies cleaned, which companies did the tests outside, how did you choose them, what is the procedure, how much money did you spend and how much did it cost the European taxpayers? These are important things and should be known so that there are no doubts about the integrity of the European Commission's work, as a lot of money has been spent during the pandemic and you owe these answers and I expect them.

Member of the Commission. - Madam President, I hope you will really take action, as you have said. Dear colleagues, the non-accession of Bulgaria and Romania to Schengen is a real political disgrace for the leadership of the European Union. A real political disgrace, because all of you in this room, for which, by the way, I congratulate you, confirm the fact that both Bulgaria and Romania have met all the criteria and should be part of the Schengen area. But it doesn't work. Why doesn't it work, folks? Because one country is officially the Netherlands, the government of the Netherlands, not the whole of the Netherlands, and the other countries have stumbled and obstructed this for domestic political reasons so as not to cause themselves any harm inside the house. This is a double standard. You are showing us here that there are more Europeans and fewer Europeans. You show that there are first-hand Europeans and second-hand Europeans. This is hypocrisy, this is hypocrisy, and this is unacceptable to us. It is a shame and a disgrace to those who do. It is they who teach us how to deal with countries that are candidates for membership, how we should expand the European Union, how we should be one big, cheerful, happy family. What are they doing? They leave Bulgaria, Romania and Croatia on the sidelines and this is hypocrisy, and this is duplicity, and this is extremely, extremely dishonest. We all know why that is. The main reason is not even politics, but the economy. When we and the Romanians are outside Schengen, we cannot ride. We are one of the biggest carriers. Our trucks are waiting at the borders, our drivers are slow, our business is dying. Bread is taken from the hands of Bulgarian entrepreneurs and Romanian entrepreneurs. And that's a disgrace. Take action and get governments to do their job.

Mr President, there is Russian aggression against Ukraine, there is Russian propaganda. But this Russian propaganda is on American platforms. The biggest lies of this propaganda are spread by American platforms and they don't take them down. Why is that? Because they obviously do not want to, and because they help you in a lie, namely in the lie that the right were Putin's allies. No, it's not true. Putin’s true allies are in Brussels – those who destroyed European energy; those who destroyed the coal mines; those who destroyed our independence; those who made the European Union dependent on Russian hydrocarbons; and those who finance the Russian economy. These are Putin's friends. It's not us right-wingers, it's not us nationalists. Nationalism is the only resistance, a real spring resistance to Bolshevism, and communism belongs to the Kremlin. Just as we resisted with arms in hand after 45 years in Eastern Europe, and you abandoned us and betrayed us in Yalta, so today you continue to be Putin's true allies. Think about it.

Mr President, it is always an honour, a pleasure and a very interesting thing to listen to fellow Irish communists. Communism in Ireland is impressive, inspiring, it is clearly more outspoken, more real communism than that of Stalin, Lenin, Trotsky and all the other Soviet communists. But let's get back to the topic we're talking about, fraud. The frauds, of course, are reprehensible, but we voted against this report not because of fellow Irish communists who are true communists because they did not live in the Soviet Union and because they did not see the Soviet Union. And I wonder why they are in the European Parliament, and why they are not in the parliament on the island of Sakhalin, for example, or in some other such Soviet, nice communist parliament, but they are in the European Parliament. It would be interesting to go to the island of Colima, there would also be nice to see. But we voted against this report, finally, because the rule of law is being used as political pressure.

on behalf of the ALDE Group. - Mr President, we have voted firmly against this report because it once again confirms the serious political divisiveness of the individual in this House. On the one hand, colleagues say that they want to have sustainable fuels, that they want to have an environmental component, a recoverable component in fuels in the aviation industry. Then this component is added and it turns out that it is extracted from resources that lead to deforestation and forest loss in a number of countries. And then the greens, everyone in this room and others who came here on wheels a little while ago, say that this was already bad. What is true, my friends? Which of the two is true after all? Either these fuels are environmentally friendly and sustainable or they are not. They can't both be true. By the way, the many regulations, the attempts to impose administratively, people who have not earned 5 leva in their lives with some work, to impose on others how to do business, in the case of aviation, lead to what we see today at airports, severe problems.

Member of the Commission. - Mr President, I have a question for all the colleagues here who are defending this strategy. My question needs a very quick answer. Which one of you came from your birthplace to here on a bike? Can you raise your hand? Perhaps our fellow communists from Ireland came on a bicycle? Mrs. Kelly, did you come on a bike? From Ireland? This is news because there is an ocean, a sea between Ireland and Europe. You are heroes, bravo, you have managed to swim on a bicycle, maybe it is a water bike, I congratulate you. Why am I saying this? It is very nice to talk about these jokes and jokes, it is very nice to walk these stories, but this is another, Mrs Daly, nice debate about nothing, frankly, scratching the languages, it does not reflect the realities. There are places in Europe where you can ride a bike and you have to, there are places where it snows in winter and it is difficult, there are heights and you can not. But because colleagues here are racing anyone who is greener, but no one has come from their homeland by bike. What does that tell you? It tells you that once again the time of the European taxpayers is wasted and there are jokes and jokes and stories from the "Ship bush", I apologise to the translators.

Mr President, the rapporteur deserves congratulations on the report he has made and on the efforts he has made. I would like to draw attention to a fundamental mistake in the policy of the European Parliament and the Union. And this is not the rapporteur's effort, I say again, it deserves congratulations. The pursuit of more regulation is deeply flawed, honourable Members. Wanting more regulation, better regulation, goes against the idea of free initiative, free enterprise and citizens having their will, their desire to do what they see fit and what they have to do, and not to be constantly regulated by the European institutions. The desire for more regulation was Soviet-style socialism. And so that system was built, everything is regulated, everything is made in a mold, everything must be arranged in their boxes. And this disappoints citizens and drives them away from the European idea, from the European Union entirely. Let me give you an example of such regulation. Everyone here in this room is very green, you want everyone to eat green, breathe green, wear green pants or not to wear them if it is greener, but at the same time you voted for hundreds of thousands of empty trucks to walk around Europe empty, burn a lot of fuel and pollute the air. Is it good regulation or is it bad regulation? Is it environmentally friendly to walk the trucks empty or not environmentally friendly? And if it's not ecological, why vote it when you want good regulations? Separately, I leave the ideological settings and every single document that talks about administration, and there are discussed gender equality and other such topics that have nothing to do with it. In conclusion, not more, but less regulation, more sovereignty, more independence, free will and sovereign states.

Madam President, Commissioner, the Three Seas Initiative offers a unique chance for the rapid development of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Numerous infrastructure projects, the improvement of digital connectivity and, of course, energy projects are the three pillars of economic development on which the countries participating in this initiative should focus. It includes many important things, some of them important for both Bulgaria and Europe: infrastructure projects such as tunnels under the Petrohan Pass or tunnel number 8. Of course, this initiative is an occasion for the economic development of the countries on the periphery. Why do you have to do that? Not just because of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. It is a legitimate occasion, of course, and it must be condemned, and we all condemn it as we should. But in the European Union there is a visible double standard and a division between the centre and the periphery. Countries like Bulgaria, like Romania, like Croatia are not allowed into the Schengen area, and this prevents our economies from developing, it hinders our strength, our transport. For this reason, in order to overcome the hypocrisy of some of the elites of the Western European countries, who want them to be more equal among the equals, and who want them to be better and the rest to be few service personnel, we have to work together in the periphery or in Central and Eastern Europe, and there is nothing wrong with that. Connectivity between Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia, Hungary and Ukraine will be useful, will help all our countries to overcome the gaps in their infrastructures and make them competitive, and will hit a slight slap on the duplicity and hypocrisy of those who want to be more equal and tell us what to do.

Madam President, Madam Rapporteur, I congratulate you on your fruitful work. This report is quite different from the previous two we looked at a moment ago. What I will, of course, immediately stress is that, with the support of colleagues from different groups, our amendments were adopted, which call on the government in Pristina to consider the petition from more than 500 Bulgarians in the regions of Gora and Zupa and their rights to be guaranteed and regulated by law. I am sure that the pro-European government in Kosovo will pay attention to this issue and Bulgarians will be equal and well-received in a society that is friendly to them, and will have the opportunity to preserve their unique culture and identity. What worries me, however, is the lack of a clear indication of the real problem. The real problem is the proxy of Russia in the Balkans, Serbia. It is destabilizing and trying to destabilize Kosovo and continues with provocations, as it was at the beginning of this year. We have seen several Serbian provocations and tensions along the border, and the occasion was served by police raids of the Kosovo police, which acted against organised crime on the Serbian side, so attention should be paid there. For the rest, I can congratulate you.

Madam President, yes, I agree, this Serbia has no place in the European Union. This is the same Serbia that makes provocations in Kosovo. This is the same Serbia that makes provocations in Bosnia and Herzegovina. This is the same Serbia that supported Russian propaganda during Russia's war against Ukraine. This is the same Serbia that maintains Russia's largest logistical spy center in the Balkans, all over Europe, this is in the city of Nis, I guess you all know that. It is this Serbia that is crushing the national minorities. Here in this room very often many of you are defending various minority rights, where rightly, where not, but today they are not, they are silent because it is about real problems. Yes, this Serbia oppresses the Croats in its country, oppresses the Bulgarians, violates their rights, crushes them, looks to displace them, assimilates them, expels them and continues to behave in a way that is unacceptable and unacceptable. This is what Serbia is today. And I'm surprised there are people here who are literate. How do you think that if you keep sucking up to those in power in Belgrade who are proxies of the Kremlin, what will they suddenly become Europeans? No, they won't. This Serbia, which is a conduit for the Kremlin and Putin, has no place in the European Union, understand that.

Mr President, honourable Members, it is with great regret that it must be said and noted that this report is weak. This report is weak because it hides the facts on the ground, on the ground. He does not disclose the circumstances as they are, and they are as follows: The Croatian community in Bosnia and Herzegovina has no guaranteed rights of representation. Croatian interests in Bosnia and Herzegovina are not guaranteed and they are threatened, they are violated. The equilibrium between the three ethnic communities has been destroyed. And this report, instead of showing things as they are, uses, as usual, nice but empty talk, clichés, wishes and other alabalicisms, which aim to present a candied picture, which, however, is not true. For there to be stability in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Croatian community must be represented on an equal footing, protected on an equal footing. Everything else is in the service of Belgrade and the Kremlin.

Mr President, I voted absolutely against the idea of a treaty change convention, because this idea of treaty change is deeply anti-democratic and it aims at one thing only - a violent, artificial, false federalisation that will take sovereignty away from the Member States and put it in the hands of anonymous bureaucrats, unelected by anyone, irresponsible and unaccountable to anyone, who will impose on us the follies that change the lives of our societies. We affirm, believe and support the idea that every nation-state should solve the issues of culture, education and the family. The treaty change will mean that the sovereignty of the sensible states, represented by people who are chosen by their nation to make important decisions, will be taken away. I can give an example of this with the Republic of North Macedonia. If you had this tool, by now you would have let go of a state built on an anti-Bulgarian ideology, a man-hatred, hate speech directed against the Bulgarians in Macedonia. You'd have let her negotiate for Europe by now. That's not acceptable.

Mr President, I did not support this report, although it makes sense for the European Parliament to have some legislative initiative because of the nature of the political processes in the European Union and the European Parliament at the moment. Giving legislative initiative at this time, in this political configuration, will allow the far-left majority to impose its agenda, which, in my view, is not the agenda of European citizens. Institutional equilibrium is important and must be preserved in order to protect European countries from insanity such as the green deal, green hysterism, green climate hysterism. A legislative initiative in this parliament of these colleagues would mean a dictatorship of their very strong, very vocal, very strong speaking minority, which, however, they impose with the zeal of a new religion. For this reason, I think it is too early to talk about such an initiative. And this would be detrimental to the interests of the citizens of the Member States. The legislative initiative still needs to remain, in my view, in the national parliaments.

Mr President, Members, the political attack on Poland continues. Poland is a country that currently bears the burden of helping many people fleeing war. Poland has its own national government, elected by Polish citizens. Here in this room there are people who are trying to politically change the Polish government, to replace the vote of Polish citizens. For this reason, they are looking for all sorts of ways to replace the Poles' vote for years. This report is part of the disgraceful behaviour directed against the Polish state and the Polish nation, the sovereign Polish nation. This is totally unacceptable. For us, the European Union must be a union of countries that respect their sovereignty. A union of states that have their own opinion and stand up for it – an equal union. For this reason, the report and the attempt to stop Poland's recovery plan is completely unacceptable and disgraceful. Long live the Europe of the Fatherlands!

Mr President, Commissioner, honourable Members, forests are a national treasure. Green is patriotism. Forests are the lungs of the planet – there is no dispute about that. And my colleague's report is very timely. Illegal logging and illegal logging is a theft by future generations and must be severely sanctioned. At the same time, however, it is necessary to know and specify who is doing it. In Bulgaria, where we have one of the largest areas of forest in Europe and in general, the forests are managed by the Bulgarian Socialist Party, which stands on the left. He is a member of the Socialists and Democrats, of the Social Democrats. A is illegally obtained by the functionaries of the Movement for Rights and Freedoms, the people who belong to the Renew Europe group. So when we talk about the destruction of forests, point out those who do. And they are on the left and on the left – in these ranks. These are the people who cut down illegal forests. They sell them, destroy them, and thus endanger not only our lives, but everyone else's. What I want to tell you is that green patriotism and the forest must be protected.

Member of the Commission. - Mr President, colleagues, it was with a huge and pleasant surprise that I learned that you are interested in and very much defending democracy. That's very nice. But yesterday, when you received a lesson in democracy, when your green folly in the form of a green deal was rejected, all of a sudden you stopped being Democrats and asked to vote again. What kind of double standard? When something saves you, democracy is good. When I don’t get rid of you – it’s not good, you want to vote again, to change. For this reason of yours, this hypocrisy, this double standard, your proposed reform will actually be and is a complete failure. He was the person who was screaming here, screaming at the end of the Conference on the Future of Europe for a minute. You offer us a union of double standards, of bureaucracy, of the left-liberal dictatorship. We have lived under a Bolshevik dictatorship and do not want a new Soviet Union. What you are proposing to us is a new Soviet Union, in which you will make decisions by a majority, which you will then impose on the rest of us. No, it's not gonna work. What we want is a union of sovereign states. We want a union based on the idea of a European community, of equality, freedom, sovereignty. We want our union, our traditional families. We want the union of nation-states and nations. This is our union – a Europe of homelands.

Mr President, Commissioner Timmermans. Unfortunately, this zero-emissions work is not going to happen anytime soon, and for this reason we all have the feeling that we are living in some not-so-smart joke. Dear Commissioner Timmermans, the rise in energy prices started long before the war in Ukraine. Of course, it has its impact, but the main fault for raising this price lies in this room, in this building, and in the European institutions in general, which are imposing a new utopia and a political religion called ‘greenism’. With a Bolshevik rage, the people who serve this cult stop at nothing. Neither do they hear that nuclear energy is safe, nor do they notice the geopolitics that clearly shows that our competitors are not giving up their fossil fuels. The biggest polluters are reluctant to participate in this conversation, and you expect poor Europeans and poorer people to pay that price. Of course, this will also have a very serious impact on transport. This will deprive thousands of people of the opportunity to move into their own lives. And that's part of that cult, too. This can not help but come back against those who impose this green harmful pseudo-utopia.

Mr President, honourable Members, I voted for this report because there must definitely be a normal, new and genuine conversation in the European Parliament and the European Union about how to respond to such aggressions. I remind my fellow communists who live in their own utopia that the war was started by Putin and Ukraine was attacked by Russia, not the other way around. So justifying aggression is just shameful for this room. But what the European Parliament has to do is shake off the pink illusions, remove the pink glasses and start thinking about its own security and its own sources. It's obvious it won't happen with fins, it's obvious it won't happen with windmills. What we need to do is turn back to nuclear energy, which is clean, reasonable and safe. To turn to our own sources, such as minerals, to look for our resources, our gas, whether conventional, shale or some other. And to look for the options in which European countries will not be able to be blackmailed by any other aggressor, by any other attacker. This is why we need to work in this direction. And once again I will say that justifying the aggression and the attacker is shameful.

on behalf of the ALDE Group. - Mr President, I supported the report on Albania because the country has met the criteria, unlike the Republic of North Macedonia. And there is nothing to prevent this country from opening accession negotiations with the European Union. For example, Albania can and should be an example to look at the entire Western Balkans. The rights of all ethnic groups and all communities other than the Albanian population are respected and respected in this country. For this reason, and after the deep reforms that Albania has made, there is no reason to stop it. And it can and should start the negotiations for membership in the European Union. Literally at the first subsequent meeting, when the Foreign Affairs Ministers of the General Affairs Council meet, agreement can and must be given for Albania to start negotiations for membership of the European Union. She's an example and a model. We just talked about Macedonia. They can see how in Albania the government recognized and strengthened the rights of the Bulgarian minority. And they coexist beautifully, in mutual respect. And that's a good example.

Mr President, honourable Members, I strongly voted against this report because of the provocative amendment passed by the Greens with the following text: encourages North Macedonia and Bulgaria to resolve their cultural and historical dispute separately from the accession process and to immediately allow the organisation of the first intergovernmental conference, as North Macedonia has met all official criteria. This is categorically not true. It has not met all the official criteria, nor is the dispute bilateral. This is at least a matter of human rights, and anyone in this House who votes against human rights should be ashamed. You have dozens, hundreds of documented, proven cases of violation of the human rights of Macedonian citizens with Bulgarian national consciousness. And you all know that thing. There is no way to immediately start negotiations with a country that violates the Copenhagen criteria. This was the only meaningful criterion that could be called a ‘European value’. And he says that when a country wants to join, it has to respect human rights. This is not the case in North Macedonia. Yes, it is true that Macedonianism was invented in the Kremlin by the communist international and it was imposed by the totalitarian communist power with terror on the Macedonian Bulgarians. And what's happening here is a disgrace.

Mr President, honourable Members, Commissioner, I have asked for this debate because I want an answer to a very important question and it is as follows. It is addressed to the Commission and I would like to receive a clear answer: Yes or no. Are there any states, state and private companies in the European Union that buy and pay Russian gas under the scheme proposed by Gazprom? That's what I want to hear from you, nothing else. Yes or no? Is it or isn't it? Because if there is, it will turn out that in the European Commission, in the Union and in Parliament once again there is a great deal of hypocrisy and duplicity. While here we are talking about sanctions and how we should fight the bad guys and fight them, someone negotiates separately, because he is more dear to his economy and does not care about everyone else. Gazprom categorically violated the contract with Bulgaria, which was absolutely legal. He illegally violated it with Bulgaria and Poland, and stopped the delivery of a quantity already paid. Yes, this is dependence and this is aggression, but it is solved by common actions, and not when someone separately buys gas and pays in rubles. That's what I really want you to answer. And to you, my friends, a final conclusion. This crisis has shown us the following. It is high time to end the utopias, the ideologisation of the so-called ‘green deal’ that drives up prices. Because here you, in this room, are raising prices when you are constantly pushing for utopian insane ideas that reduce the production of electricity from normal sources. And what we have to do is turn to nuclear energy, to our own resources, to conventional gas, to shale gas, everything we have to have a normal economy, and not to depend on hostile third countries, on the one hand, or on green utopias.