Speeches

Madam President, first of all, I would like to congratulate Simona Bonafè on the work that has been done in this report on batteries. As we know, moving away from fossil fuels will inevitably require more batteries, which is why regulation, as proposed today, is necessary. Indeed, more batteries will mean more recycling and more circular economy. As we know, today only 12% of aluminium, 22% of cobalt, 16% of nickel are recycled, or 52% of waste is actually collected. More batteries will also mean more resource extraction, and this cannot be done at the expense of the countries and populations that own them. That is why the inclusion of mandatory due diligence is so important to ensure that the batteries we will use do not cause environmental or social damage. But more batteries are also more potentially hazardous chemicals that will need to be replaced by more sustainable alternatives, as currently provided for in the REACH legislation. Only then will the transition be sustainable.

Mr President, in the face of the horror of Putin’s war in Ukraine and the millions of Ukrainian refugees, we can only welcome the decision to activate temporary protection. But I cannot help thinking of these Syrian, Afghan and Libyan families, who are also fleeing the horror of the war and for whom temporary protection has not been activated. Why? I cannot help thinking of those countries of entry which, since 2015, have been asking for solidarity from the European Union and which have been denied that solidarity. Why? I cannot help thinking of all those who lost their lives in the Mediterranean in the face of this lack of solidarity. Why? I hope here that this momentum of solidarity in the face of the Ukrainian crisis will change our reception and migration policy, that it will be dictated by dignity, solidarity, but above all by the right to protection, without discrimination.

Madam President, Commissioner, the coup d’état of 24 January in Burkina Faso is part of a tense regional context characterised by the continued deterioration of security in the Sahel. Burkina Faso is indeed the country that has suffered the most from the exceptional increase in the number of terrorist attacks. In recent years, the data has been overwhelming. Just think of the 7,000 victims, including 3,000 civilians, the displacement of more than 1.5 million people, but also the closure of more than 3,000 schools in the region. One cannot be surprised if tensions have only increased in the country. The people of Burkina Faso are tired of the long-term lack of security and stability. Like other countries in the Sahel region, she was very disillusioned with the electoral system, governance and the presence of foreign forces, which she considered to be ineffective in solving the security problems in that region. We must therefore insist, through this resolution, on priority political development, without which it will not be possible to return to a situation of stability, but also of trust in the institutions. To begin with, we call for the immediate release of President Roch Marc Kaboré, before any discussion with the authorities in place. Secondly, the entire international community, including the External Action Service and the European Commission, will have to commit to dialogue with the Burkinabe authorities to ensure a swift peaceful transition between the military and civilian government, ensuring a return to constitutional order, stressing the importance of prioritising the establishment of a new electoral process based on the principles of inclusion and transparency. Burkina Faso will have to embark on an inclusive dialogue involving civil society based on a shared vision for the democratic development of the country. Respect for human rights must be a priority in any discussion, and we must encourage the National Coordination for a Successful Transition, composed of seven civil society organizations, to oversee the authorities in place for the country's development. It is clear that the state of democracy in several West African countries is worrying. We are called upon to contribute, through our political commitment, to a deep reflection on how to encourage democratic processes in the region, ensuring that human rights organisations can play a very active role.

Mr President, Commissioner, I would first like to recall that our institutions are committed to promoting the abolition of the death penalty worldwide. There is therefore no justification for the use of the death penalty, let alone in Iran, which remains the country with the highest death penalty execution rate in the world: More than 250 people were executed in Iran last year. Iran’s judicial system is a real trap for human rights defenders, who are arrested, detained in inhumane conditions, tortured and accused in false trials for acts against national security, propaganda against the regime, or simply for demanding respect for rights and an end to human rights violations. Nor do we forget the situation in which the families of these defenders live, who are themselves too often threatened and placed under surveillance. Iran is also the country in which a high number of minors are sentenced to the death penalty, which is also in total violation of the obligations imposed by the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Again, in this Chamber, we therefore continue to call for the release of a number of prisoners now detained or facing the death penalty: Narges Mohammadi, president of the NGO Defenders of Human Rights Center, which is fighting for the abolition of the death penalty, but also for all journalists, activists and opponents who continue to suffer the injustices of the Iranian regime today. I will of course mention Djalali, this professor of the Swedish-Iranian VUB, but also Nasrin Sotoudeh, our Sakharov Prize, whom we have hosted several times by videoconference and whose conviction we call for to be quashed.

Mr President, Commissioner, it has been said that President Duterte, by justifying himself with anti-terrorist, anti-drug or anti-communist laws, has created an environment conducive to attacks on human rights defenders and a climate of total impunity. The approaching elections in the Philippines raise fears of increased efforts to silence the voices of dissent. However, the EU continues to grant the Philippines enhanced trade preferences under the GSP+. This status, as is well known, depends on the implementation of international human rights conventions, which the Philippines should respect and has committed itself to respect. In its evaluation report on GSP+ covering the period 2018-2019, the Commission expressed serious concern about the human rights situation in the Philippines. So how many emergency resolutions and how many evaluation reports will have to be published, and, most importantly, how many defenders will still have to lose their lives for us to move? I therefore urge the Commission to immediately initiate the procedure for the withdrawal of the trade preferences granted to the Philippines. We must stop being complicit in the massive human rights violations in this country.

Mr President, as has been said, corruption is an endemic problem. It can be found on all continents. It is not continent- or culture-specific; It is unique to power and non-transparency. Corruption is a devastating phenomenon for the availability, quality and accessibility of human rights goods and services, and there is a close correlation between corruption and serious human rights violations. Yet the global sanctions regime has not included corruption as such in the phenomena of serious human rights violations. I believe that there is a need to correct the situation and include corruption in this mechanism. I give an example: In 2020, the United States sanctioned a Mr. Dan Gertler, an Israeli tycoon operating in the Democratic Republic of Congo who stole more than $4 billion from the Congolese people through opaque mining operations. When the United States sanctioned Mr Gertler, the European Union, not sanctioning him, gave him access to operations that were no longer possible in the United States. Thus, thanks to this paradise that the European Union represents for corrupters, it has been able to continue to steal the money of the Congolese people. Examples such as this, there are hundreds of them today in the world, which we accept on European territory. We must put an end to this.

Madam President, Mr High Representative, thank you for your willingness to discuss these essential human rights. It should be remembered: the Treaty of the European Union sets out the obligation to respect fundamental rights within the European Union, but also to promote and consolidate human rights in the European Union’s external action. To remain credible, we must be consistent, i.e. we must not accept any transgression of human rights within the EU, but we must also avoid double standards and double languages outside the EU. As we know, the model that puts human rights at the heart of our values is far from being shared by everyone today. We must therefore defend it with strength and conviction. Otherwise, other models, liberticides and authoritarians, will impose themselves on us and on others. The annual report we are discussing today highlights the actions that have been taken, but also those that need to be taken in the area of human rights, in a complex context. The human rights dialogue with third countries is now considered too weak, failing to deliver satisfactory results. The fight against impunity through all the instruments at our disposal sometimes suffers from inconsistency. Unfortunately, the overall sanctions mechanism that you defended before the Council did not bother to deal with the unanimity of the decision or corruption. Finally, the issue of human rights and business is also something we need to address, but I know you are in favour of it.

Madam President, Mr High Representative, this week's summit between the EU and Africa is, as you said, a new opportunity to build a new partnership together. But we need to understand the wounds of the past to build a common future, and our goal as the European Union, but also as European leaders, will be above all to convince the African people, people whose wounds are still alive. I will talk about slavery, the slave trade, brutal colonisation, repressed or sometimes manipulated independence, domination or even condescension, exploitation of resources without return for the populations, or a persistent racism, today in Europe, towards diasporas, but also towards newcomers. Understanding also means avoiding repeating the same mistakes for the future, in order to face common challenges. You quoted them: the post-COVID-19 economic recovery, tackling inequalities through education, health and employment, promoting sustainable investment, tackling climate change, democracy, social and environmental rights, but also peace and security. For all this, there are ways: €150 billion in investments. But what are we talking about? What is the leverage effect in relation to these investments? What sectors are we talking about? Are there any processing sectors that will actually allow for development in the countries? Will companies respect due diligence, i.e. respect people’s social and environmental rights? For all these questions, we do not have clear answers from the Council and the Commission at the level of the European Parliament today. A new partnership, agreed; But, thankfully, let us not rebuild against the mistakes of the past, but let us do better than what we have done in the past.

Madam President, dear Véronique, first of all I would like to commend the work you have done and the content of the report we have produced together. I hope that this week's vote is not an end point, but rather that the priorities and actions we call for feed into the various policies that play a role in the fight against cancer. Among these policies, I will focus on prevention: 40% of cancers are preventable, and beyond changes in individual behaviour, it is up to governments to take systemic measures to reduce environmental risk factors. It is therefore up to us as legislators to make the fight against cancer our priority and to keep in mind the commitments we make today when we deal with legislation such as, for example, those on tobacco, chemicals, pesticides, air pollution or the farm to fork policy objectives. A final point on alcohol consumption, which has been the source of much debate and intense lobbying. I think it is our duty here to remind that we, as Members of the European Parliament, must take the necessary steps to inform by following science. I am surprised here that some Members are turning into promoters of the wine sector, while we are here talking about the issue of cancer prevention. This is what we have to deal with, not agricultural producers.

Madam President, congratulations on your election. In Sudan, in 2022, 30% of the population will need humanitarian assistance. That's 14 million women, men and children. 3 million men, women and children are internally displaced populations, mainly from Darfur, but also from external conflicts in neighbouring countries. Yet Sudan has been a hope for democracy in the region. A young, educated, engaged, peaceful civil society in 2018 overcame a bloody al-Bashir dictatorship that had lasted for more than thirty years. But the generals, supported by anti-democratic foreign forces such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates or Russia, put an end to this transition, to this hope. Despite the brutal repression, young people continue to demonstrate for their rights and for their dreams. The response of the generals is not only unacceptable, but dangerous, as it risks turning this peaceful opposition into violent movements. It would be a tragedy, first of all for the Sudanese, it would be a tragedy for the region, it would be a tragedy for democracy. On the one hand, we must demand humanitarian aid for these populations, who are now at risk. We must demand in all multilateral forums that the foreign forces with whom we have relations cease to intervene and to support this military regime. And we need to conduct independent investigations into today's human rights violations in Sudan.

Mr President, two weeks ago, the protest in Kazakhstan started with the anger of the people following the increase in the price of gas, which more than doubled amid great inequalities. According to several NGOs, the official death toll of 225 is largely underestimated. The government, however, continues to invoke the fight against terrorism to justify the bloody responses to this revolution. But this crisis also highlights an autocratic regime that was set up by Nazarbayev, who himself organised a transfer of power to Tokayev by maintaining his political and economic influence and reinforced injustices, and discontent was expressed in the streets. It also appears that this popular discontent has been compounded by a clan war. This country, long regarded as the stability of the region by a number of actors, has become the instability of the region. There is no doubt that we need to evaluate our European support for a Kazakh elite that saw only its personal enrichment and the impoverishment of its peoples. I think we need an assessment and a change in our foreign policy.

Mr President, Commissioner, it is true, as has been said, that the Chinese crackdown in Hong Kong has been going on for months, I would say for almost more than years. Most of the voices of dissidents are now in prison, so there is terrible oppression. In 2002, Hong Kong ranked 12th in the world in terms of freedom of expression. Today, Hong Kong ranks 80th in the world ranking. We can see how strong this repression is in Hong Kong. There are indeed a number of pro-democracy movements whose members are now in prison. We have a lot of journalists muzzled, we have most of the free media now closed – we talked about Apple Daily, Stand News, Citizen News. Today, all these media are closed and the only media still present in Hong Kong are international media. Until when will we still have the opportunity to have a free voice in Hong Kong? It is true that the European Union must stand side by side with democracy. The European Union cannot be next to dictators and oppressors. That is why we are calling for diplomacy to no longer be blind to human rights violations, for there to be no diplomatic political representation at the Beijing Olympics, that is a clear message, but also that we do not have this investment agreement. It is also important to be able to type where it hurts. Finally, it is also important to have a message with our companies in China. And this is what we call corporate responsibility, and therefore corporate responsibility. due diligence, on which, Commissioner, I know you are working, will be an extremely powerful instrument to fight and to have this democracy in China.

Mr President, Mr High Representative, I can only share your words on the desperate situation we are seeing today in Nicaragua. This Ortega regime, like all dictatorships, is obviously attacking the opposition, incarcerating the seven potential opposition figures, freedom of the press, and also human rights defenders in general. Of course, we support your approach to sanctions, or even the tightening of sanctions that have been taken. But we see that the Ortega regime does not respond to these sanctions. And the question I ask with perhaps a touch of disappointment is why we cannot use the tools in our possession to also put pressure on a regime, such as the Association Agreement we have with Central America today? My country, Belgium, has not ratified this Association Agreement. Simply because at the time, already in 2013, we felt that it did not give enough capacity to support the issue of human rights. It has been implemented for the commercial part only, despite the fact that it is not ratified. And now the question is how this trade agreement was able to support democracy in Central America, but more specifically in Nicaragua. And how can this trade agreement be suspended in the case of a regime such as this, which does not respect the values we signed? I would point out that the Association Agreement is there to develop a privileged political partnership based on values and principles, particularly democracy. I think we're a long way from that.

Madam President, in Cameroon, after the 1972 constitutional referendum, the system of the federalist government guaranteeing the representation of 20% of Anglophones was abandoned in favour of a centralised system that gives the advantage to Francophones. Since then, Anglophones in Cameroon have suffered from increased marginalisation, which has only worsened. In 2016, teachers and lawyers in the English-speaking south-west and north-west region went on strike because they felt that the government, which is predominantly French-speaking, was trying to reduce the Common law and teaching in English in these regions. The reaction of the Biya government is clear: a harsh military response, which stirs up separatist movements and provokes violent demonstrations. This triggered a spiral of violence between the government, deaf to legitimate demands and committed to destroying all those who wanted to divide the nation, and Anglophone separatist movements that were radicalising and arming themselves against Yaoundé’s French-speaking power and repressing all those who did not adhere to their cause. The victim, as always, is the civilian population, which is being massacred – 3,000 dead –, deprived of school and forced to flee – more than a million displaced today in Cameroon. Currently, the Biya government still refuses to heed requests from moderate elements for a return to federalism that would grant regions greater autonomy. And the separatists, who are otherwise divided, are encamping on their demands for independence. Today we have a number of demands. We are asking for humanitarian aid. We also call for dialogue and for the External Action Service to work towards this.

Madam President, it is true that Somalia is facing a major political crisis, aggravated by the coronavirus pandemic and repeated climate shocks, which are worsening the humanitarian situation and contributing to the country’s economic stagnation. In addition, as my colleague, Mr Maurel, has said, there is the security situation in the country, particularly as a result of fundamentalist groups, such as those listed, such as Al-Shabaab, but also of many others who are currently active there and are causing a certain amount of crime in the region. I will refer in particular to the 800 000 children in Somalia who are now at risk of malnutrition. What we are indeed asking is to work on security issues, which are essential in this region, but also on humanitarian issues, which, in my view, are also our responsibility and our duty to help these malnourished children. On the other hand, there is also the issue of journalists, who are particularly targeted in relation to the issue of human rights. There is no democracy without journalism and defence of journalists in the region and therefore, here too, a protection mechanism, in particular for human rights defenders and journalists, must be advocated.

Madam President, Belarus has orchestrated the arrival of refugee candidates at the borders of the European Union. This is true, it is unacceptable and it justifies stronger sanctions against all those who cooperate with this regime. But these men and women, these children now trapped at the border, do not have to pay the price for this shameful blackmail. Yes, the Belarusian authorities are responsible, but the Polish authorities are also responsible for the ill-treatment of these men, women and children. Without a common asylum and migration policy, this dark picture will recur in Europe. Yesterday, Turkey, Morocco, Libya. Today, Belarus. Tomorrow, what is the regime that will impose this reality on Europe again? So yes, today we are calling for an end to refoulement, access to asylum procedures, immediate relocation, access for journalists to lawless areas, but also for the suspension of the Polish law on refoulement. But in the longer term, we call on the Council to take up this issue on migration. Parliament is ready. The Commission has made a proposal. So what are you waiting for to stop being at the mercy of these authoritarian regimes?

Mr President, Commissioner, it is true that Frontex is one of the most important agencies in the European Union. This is reflected in her budget, and Ms Bricmont has said it, in an increase from 6 million in 2006 to 343 million in 2021, which does indeed show the importance that the European Union places on an agency such as this, but also reflects an extension of its tasks, today, in the area of migration policy. So, quite simply, here we are exercising our parliamentary role of budgetary control, in connection with the legal obligations of such an important agency. Why would we be lenient towards this Agency? Any agency would be affected by such bad governance and all of us here in this House would vote against the discharge. No... because this is Frontex and because this is about politicising the budget debate we have. And it is not the left that politicises this debate, it is the right and the far right that politicises this debate. Frontex is an agency today, as has been said, that is out of control and, as parliamentarians, we cannot accept it. These shortcomings were demonstrated by the LIBE Committee in its report published in July. These shortcomings have been confirmed by the Court of Auditors. These malfunctions are the subject of an OLAF investigation. What more is needed on the right to question what is happening today at Frontex? Developing a catalogue of good intentions, Commissioner, is not enough. Today, we want real human rights guarantees and effective and transparent monitoring mechanisms in this Agency. We are not there yet. These safeguards do not exist and we will therefore vote against this discharge.

Madam President, in Haiti, one disaster drives away another. From earthquakes to tropical storms, this country has been ravaged. In this country, where the few existing infrastructures have been ravaged by natural disasters, international NGOs remain the only alternative to a care system and a non-existent social net. The political crisis has been added to the humanitarian crisis. For months, Port-au-Prince has been subjected to fire and terror. Insecurity has become the rule. Armed gangs continued to strike. Kidnappings, assassinations, targeted attacks have multiplied. Neighborhoods were set on fire. Women, young people, children, journalists, activists, personalities were massacred. The humanitarian crisis is showing worrying figures. Today, more than four million Haitians, mostly women and girls, are in need of emergency assistance. Our priority must be to respond to humanitarian needs, of course, but also to engage with local partners, civil society, people on the ground in order to deliver effective aid that does not take political considerations into account and that is targeted at people. But this country will not be able to cope without a return to the rule of law and the fight against impunity, which remains the major scourge for the Haitian people.

Madam President, Commissioner, Minister, it has been said: the right to life, the right to health, the right to safety, these rights already guaranteed at European level are of course partly dependent on the quality of the environment in which we live. How can we guarantee these rights without first guaranteeing the right to a healthy environment? I obviously welcome, as has been done here in this house, the UN resolution proposing to introduce the right to a healthy environment in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. My questions are how can this UN declaration be interpreted at EU level? How can it be enshrined in the fundamental rights of the European Union in order to take ownership of this political act, which has been adopted at the level of the United Nations, on European territory? And how can this be done in a transgenerational way, i.e. defend today to protect a certain number of populations tomorrow as well? But I cannot help talking about the international and global issue, because when we talk about the right to the environment, it is also the responsibility of our companies to respect and guarantee it. So we have two things to do. The first, Mr. Minister, concerns the UN Binding Treaty, which today is blocked in relation to the European Union because there is no Council mandate at UN level. And the second question: there is an initiative on the due diligence It must come from the Commission, which is lagging behind and which would allow us to work on the right to a healthy environment.

Madam President, Mr High Representative, I fully agree with you when you say that Tunisia is an important country for the European Union – geographically, historically, culturally, politically and securely important. In 2011, the peaceful revolution led by thousands of Tunisian citizens put an end to a regime, a dictatorship, that of Mr. Ben Ali. At that time, Europe stood by Tunisia. Maybe not enough: we may not have sufficiently understood the scope of this pro-democracy movement in Tunisia. Today, Tunisia is facing an economic crisis driven by the insecurity of its Libyan neighbour. A health crisis also, with COVID having particularly hit Tunisia, with a dramatic effect on tourism, a key economic sector in Tunisia. But also to a political-institutional crisis in a young democracy. As such, the European Union must double its efforts towards Tunisia and stand with Tunisian citizens first and foremost. In a democracy worthy of the name, a man alone cannot claim to represent the executive, the legislature or the judiciary. In a democracy worthy of the name, a decree cannot change the Constitution. In a democracy worthy of the name, we cannot arbitrarily ban travel, we cannot try civilians before military courts. All this is happening today in Tunisia and we are therefore asking for the state of emergency to end, for the democratic process to resume, but also for us to evaluate our action towards Tunisia, in order to be more effective.

Madam President, so it was said: my body, my choice, my rights. Any evidence? Obviously, not really, when you hear what is happening inside this Chamber. And yet, when I was 20, I never imagined that I would have to be here to defend the obvious. Because, quite simply, I am part of this generation of women who benefited – I mean, benefited – from the struggles that led to being able to freely dispose of our bodies, to have access to contraception and to have access to abortion when we did not want to, or when we were not ready to carry this child. Yet it is clearly not to advance these rights – because there is still work on abortion rights here in Europe – that we are here, but to fight restrictions on these rights in Texas and here. I say it: All women must stand in solidarity with all women regarding these rights, because they are fundamental rights, here as elsewhere.

Mr President, Commissioner, the conditions of arrest which relate to kidnapping, non-access to a lawyer of his choice, confiscated legal confidential documents, presumption of innocence swept away by President Kagame: We can all agree that Paul Rusesabagina, a European citizen, was not entitled to a fair trial, which resulted in a sentence of 25 years in prison, contrary to what the Rwandan authorities claim. We therefore call for his immediate release and repatriation on humanitarian grounds. This is also proof that there is now a drift in Rwanda that tends to silence any criticism of the regime. We therefore remind the Rwandan authorities of their international commitments to respect for fundamental rights. Access to justice, democracy, freedom of expression and multi-party politics are part of these commitments. We call on the External Action Service to remind Rwanda of these commitments.

Mr President, Commissioner, the crimes committed by the Burmese army since the coup have been described as crimes against humanity by Human Rights Watch, which states that, by their widespread nature, these crimes and repression are not individual actions, but rather actions targeted by the junta. The renewed fighting and subsequent insecurity in ethnic minority areas have also displaced more than 210,000 people inside the country since the coup. As you have understood, the situation in the country is critical and it is high time to act against the violations that are being committed. Thus, we call on the army to immediately release all detainees unjustly arrested since this coup. We also call on the Council and its Member States to continue to impose and enforce targeted sanctions. We call on Member States to also enforce the sanctions imposed on all Burmese state-linked companies, including in the timber or gemstone industry. But the issue of the responsibility of our companies that are linked to the Burmese economy is also on the agenda, and it is important that these companies can ensure that they are not complicit in what is happening today in Burma. It would also be necessary to impose bans on international financial transfers to the two Burmese public banks. Finally, we call on the Commission to swiftly investigate Burma’s trade preferences for access to European markets.

Madam President, Commissioner, since the beginning of the conflict in the Tigray region of northern Ethiopia, since November 2020, therefore, almost a year ago, Amnesty International has documented violations of international human rights and humanitarian law, some of which may amount to war crimes or crimes against humanity. These include massacres in Aksoum, Mai-Kadra, indiscriminate shelling of civilian populations, and arbitrary detentions of Tigreans, activists and journalists. The organisation also documented how troops from the federal government and other armed forces supporting them in the conflict also carried out widespread rapes of ethnic Tiger women and girls during the conflict. This sexual violence is accompanied by a shocking level of brutality. Some of the victims were held captive by the perpetrators for days or even weeks in circumstances constituting sexual slavery. Others were raped in front of their children, in front of their families. But let us not forget that the Tigray conflict is not limited to this region. Since July, it has extended in particular to the neighbouring regions of Amhara and Afar. Tiger fighters in turn engaged in armed clashes with the Ethiopian National Defence Forces and the regional special forces and militias of Amhara and Afar, now causing tens of thousands of civilians to flee to the region as well. So it is important, as you said, that we call for an immediate ceasefire, that we give humanitarian access to those most in need and that all these human rights crimes can be tried as such.

Madam President, first of all, I would still like to say that I am in a rather uncomfortable situation, because it was Mr Várhelyi who started the debate, but it will end with Commissioner Urpilainen, when I had things to say to Mr Várhelyi. But hey, I'll send them to Mr. Várhelyi and you'll get the message to him. What is a problem is not the trust funds, which are an element of flexibility, but the political direction that has been given to the trust funds since 2014. The Trust Fund for Africa mobilised €5 billion, normally to address the global challenges that are the root causes of migration, but priority was given to border control and the readmission of refugees. Only 1.5% was dedicated to regular migration routes. 1.5%! If I take the facility for refugees in Turkey, of course we have to help refugees in Turkey, but not in the shame market, saying that Turkey had to close the borders compared to arriving in Europe. The same goes for the Libyan border guards. We cannot finance border guards who push back those people who are now, at best, being pushed back, at worst, dying in the Mediterranean. The Madad Fund: of course we need to help Lebanon and others in relation to the people who are refugees there, but finally, are we funding barbed wire barriers to ensure that these people do not take the Balkan route? So, Mr. Várhelyi, I ask you a question: The effectiveness of a migration policy is not measured by the amount of people being pushed back, but by the quality we have of protecting them with legislation.