What Franc spoke about.

Mr. President! Dear Vice-President, Honourable Commissioner, Honourable colleague Ehler. Thank you for the excellent report. The report is more than necessary, and it makes it very clear that Europe is aware of the importance of fighting the causes of climate change, but also of the importance of maintaining the competitiveness of the economy in the European Union, so that we can withstand the big rivals, which on the one hand have protectionism in the United States, state aid, and dumping in China. Europe has made great strides in recent years. It is a continent that has reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 30%, while at the same time the world has grown by 35%. Unfortunately, so far, we have all too often bet only on ideology and omitted certain technologies. I am pleased that with my report on nuclear energy, too, we have brought this back to the European area, obtained a two-thirds majority in this house, and that we have realised that this is one of those sources of energy that will also guarantee us the competitiveness of the economy and, on the other hand, prevent energy poverty among people. I am a great supporter of technological neutrality and honourable fellow politicians leave the economy, let those professions work together and, based on knowledge, innovation, make Europe the continent that will continue to lead the fight against climate change, while at the same time enabling quality of life in Europe. This document goes in that direction.

Mr President. I come from Slovenia, a country that joined the European Union twenty years ago. Six years before that, I became mayor in the city of Krško, I was mayor for thirteen years and I know very well first-hand what cohesion policy means, how we developed the city with cohesion policy funds, and how people also felt what the European Union is. That is why I always say that cohesion policy is the heart, the glue of the European Union. Both the principle of solidarity and the principle of subsidiarity are implemented here, and therefore this is not an old-fashioned policy. We need to continue with this policy and give it new content. The challenges we face are huge. Let me mention three. The first is expansion. There are countries that are in great need of development. And the European Union, and through cohesion policy, can and must ensure that. The second challenge is demographics. We have major relocations within the European Union. Let us make sure that the regions are not left without people, because this will be a major problem and there too the cohesion of society will collapse. And the third challenge. What I have been saying for two terms in the European Parliament, rural development. The countryside has 80 percent of the area, 30 percent of the population, and therefore requires special attention.

Dear President! Good evening, Honourable Commissioner, Honourable Rapporteurs. Tomorrow marks the 20th anniversary of the great enlargement of the European Union, of which my Slovenia was a part. A colleague of the rapporteurs comes from Croatia, which celebrated its 10th anniversary of accession to the EU last year. And in both countries, very significant progress has been made over the years, which mainly benefits the citizens of our countries. We have seized the historic opportunity and, finally, there is also greater readiness in the European Union for the enlargement process, because history is being rewritten again and some events have also led the European Union to really open the door wider than before. Certainly, this measure, which provides 6 billion additional funds for the Western Balkan countries, is more than welcome. We have to get to the people with him. In these countries, there is often a feeling that only the political summit decides too much on fate. We don't touch people very much. Therefore, the measures that we will take for further reforms, on the other hand, are also for the construction of infrastructure facilities, the transformation of energy and the like, what people in this part of Europe need and what they understand - that their situation will improve as they enter the EU. Many young people have already emigrated from this part of Europe, so we must stop this too, because the cohesion of each country and of the Union as a whole will also be greater if young people create the future in their home environments. I will be happy to support this report, and I hope that this historic window opens up to the Western Balkan countries as soon as possible and that those who are prepared also come to the European Union with respect for European law.

Dear President! We are talking about a very important report. That is, we are discussing plant and forest reproductive material. We all know that seeds, seedlings are crucial for, on the one hand, ensuring food security, for innovation, for development, for raising crops, and, on the other hand, also very important for adaptation to climate change. Today we see that the weather is changing, so it is necessary to find, even with the help of new planting material, resistant varieties both to climate change, frosts, and, on the other hand, to pesticide resistance. As far as this report is concerned, I support it. I think it strikes the right balance between, on the one hand, supporting innovation, competitiveness in this area, so that we can really respond to these great challenges. On the other hand, to also take care of biodiversity, there are special rules for organic seed production, which is regulated specifically outside this. That, in fact, traceability of all material is also necessary, so that also those materials where these new genomic techniques are used are clearly marked. On the other hand, it is also very important to allow these seeds to be exchanged, sold in small quantities, because these small producers should not be affected by this regulation in any way. And I think Herbert Dorfmann – and others – took this very well into account when drafting this report. I will therefore support it, and I would also suggest to my colleagues that they support the report.

Madam President. In 1998, Slovenia started pre-accession negotiations with the European Union. That year I became mayor of the municipality of Krško, where I was mayor for thirteen years, so I know very well what it means, how you can use cohesion funds to build basic infrastructure, build environmental infrastructure, flood protection. In our municipality, we also built broadband connections in villages 15 years ago. Cohesion policy is the binder of the European Union. The principle of solidarity is implemented through cohesion policy. That is to say, the less developed can count on those who are more developed and, therefore, it is very important to build a European mindset precisely through cohesion policy and, of course, agricultural policy. We have new challenges ahead of us. I'm finishing up here. This now addresses the end of the 14-20 period. We are now well into the next period. Climate change, digitalisation, demographic change, rural depopulation and a whole range of other crisis situations. Like urban centres, I very much support the preparation of a special fund and a special allocation of money for rural areas, because I wrote this in the amendments. After all, we have a long-term vision of rural development, which is also based on the concept of smart villages, which we set up in this European Parliament and which I actively participated in. It must be flexible and as simplified as possible and respect the principle of subsidiarity, so that it is close to municipalities, regions and people. Let me just say thank you, Commissioner, for the excellent cooperation, thank you Andrey, for the excellently prepared report and thank President Omarjea for the excellent cooperation in the Committee on Regional Development.

Mr President. I, too, miss Commissioner Wojciechowski in the debate on agriculture, on a much-needed topic that, in a way, also upsets the entire European market. We all know that Putin has used all possible means to weaken the European Union in some way in this war. By shutting down Ukrainian grain exports across the Black Sea, he first took literally Ukraine's markets in Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. The pressure of Ukrainian grain also justifiably creates a bad mood among European farmers. On the other hand, Russian, Belarusian grain, food is now coming to the European market. I think we really have nothing to think about, but we ourselves have to respond to this war with the means we have in our hands and simply impose sanctions also on these imports of food from Russia and Belarus. On the other hand, we must also be very sensitive to what is happening in Europe. How European farmers, who are struggling because of the market situation of their income position, also because of the stupidity and additional burdens that we have accepted and confirmed in this House, are today loudly and rightly pointing out in European streets, cities, that they are in a very difficult situation. So I think we really need to have enough wisdom. Not to argue, but to find a solution by which, on the one hand, we express our irrevocable support for Ukraine in this war against Russia, and, on the other hand, we also help to maintain a stable position for European farmers, women farmers, because otherwise we ourselves can weaken and threaten our food security in the long term. That is to say, support to stop these imports of this food from Russia and Belarus into Europe. It is also interesting that, for example, fertilizer regulation today comes to a large extent to the European market from Tajikistan. I would like to see what this arrangement was made of in Tajikistan, basically where it comes from. So this war has broad dimensions and we also need to respond sharply.

Mr President. I come from Slovenia, which was mentioned by the Commissioner and which suffered last year's flooding in August, a year earlier in July, heavy fires. I am a fruit grower and the vegetation in the plantation is now 14 days to 3 weeks ahead of the average, so I have no problem recognizing and realizing that these changes are present in our country. In Slovenia, we have an active measure or activities of civil protection firefighters, which solve problems especially in natural disasters. On the other hand, I am also aware that Europe emits about 7% of its greenhouse gas emissions. Over the past 30 years, we have reduced our emissions by 30 percent. At the same time, global emissions increased by 35 percent. While colleagues in Germany are shutting down nuclear power plants, they are also supporting the extraction of coal, despite the fact that the German energy industry has ten times more emissions than the French, for example. That is why I support realistic measures such as nuclear energy, small modular reactors, and we are aware that only through active measures, with figures, will we eliminate these consequences, not through an ideological approach. In 22, China built thermal power plants for about 100 new nuclear power plants, so let's be realistic, let's take into account the realities of the figure, the facts, not some imaginary ideology that sounds nice, but does not give real results.

Honourable Commissioner, Mr President, as we know, buildings consume 40 percent of energy and eliminate as much as 35 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, so it is expected that in this package, where we want to reduce greenhouse gases, we also deal very intensively with buildings. The climatic conditions in Europe are very different. I myself come from Slovenia, where we have severe winters, hot summers, so this energy efficiency is very important. I also have a personal experience. I moved into my house in the 1990s. In 2020, deep energy renovations were needed, with around €100,000 worth of renovations. To this must be added a solar power plant on the roof, which has also been added, that is, well over 100,000 euros. And often the problem is that we simply do not have enough money or that there are too few materials or too few people who would do such renovations. In Slovenia, as much as 87 percent of the housing stock is privately owned, so there is no expectation that this renovation will come from elsewhere, but the owners themselves will have to take care of it. And I am pleased that this correction, which was in the process of this directive, went in this direction, moving away from some compulsory renewals, which was at the beginning also from some targets, where as much as 3% of renewals annually were voted in the European Parliament to be compulsory, in the end. Today, it is 0.8%. I therefore strongly advocate the principle of subsidiarity in this directive. Let the countries, regions determine and also give their incentives. I would avoid any obligations, such as compulsory renovations, as is the case in the Flemish Länder. In any case, it will be necessary to ensure that people with the lowest incomes receive significantly higher support than those with higher incomes, otherwise we will work new energy poor.

Mr. President! Dear colleague Paolo de Castro, thank you for your report. For many years you have been fighting for geographical origins, which are very important for agriculture. I am pleased that Mairead McGuinness is with us today, who, also as a member of the Committee on Agriculture, has spoken a lot about this and knows very well what we are talking about. We are talking about using geographical indications to raise the value of crops, to put a better position of these crops on the market, and on the other hand, to enable the local connection of tourism, rural areas and the creation of new jobs in rural areas. I therefore think that it is essential to simplify these procedures, and 27 protected agricultural products are also of great importance in Slovenia. But when I follow these protests in the streets of Europe, I also think that we should do more on other labels related to local production. And to somehow incorporate these indications into the food chain and thus raise the total value of the agricultural product. In any case, I welcome the fact that this happens first for products with geographical indications.

Mr. President! As we know, the increase in food prices is very high, 29%, and in addition to the increase in energy prices, this puts great pressure on people's condition. On the other hand, it is also a fact that the share that farmers get for agricultural produce is smaller and smaller. Nowadays, a farmer gets only one quarter of what consumers pay for. That is why farmers are rightly protesting, first of all, against the income situation in the food chain, there are unjustified relationships in that chain, the second, for which farmers are protesting, is also additional environmental and administrative burdens and, last but not least, food imports from other parts of the world. However, additional burdens are also imposed by countries, as in Slovenia, taxation on limited factors, as well as on those who have complementary activities. Farmers' income is falling, so I think it is right not to reduce the agricultural policy, the resources for the common agricultural policy, as some predict, and to increase it and do everything to improve the position of farmers in the food chain. After all, we also have a directive on unfair trading practices. It is only right that he should live.

Madam President! Last spring, last spring, I joined Slovenian farmers who started protests and were directed against such stupid measures from the European Union. At that time, we saw what the Sustainable Use of Pesticides Regulation means, what the Nature Restoration Regulation means, and we protested together against these measures. For the first time, I protested against the measures of the European Union, because at that time we really went too far. Slovenian farmers also protested against the measures of the Government of the Republic of Slovenia, which only tightened up many European measures, even using them as a legal basis for regulations that had not yet been adopted in the European Parliament. This year, the same government is trying to limit the use of wood for heating as one of the sustainable sources in rural areas. Farmers are also protesting against the situation in retail chains, and we all need to really listen to farmers and start looking for solutions, not just talking and imposing new burdens.

Madam President! Agriculture is a major challenge because more and more people need to be fed. Climate change is the cause of new diseases, new pests. There are more and more dry periods. Agriculture has been searching for an answer for centuries in breeding, and with new genomic techniques we want to give scientists the opportunity to speed up processes that otherwise take place in nature. What we can do in the 1930s and 40s with the help of new genomic techniques, we can achieve this progress in five years. Therefore, it is necessary to support such genomic techniques and give agriculture this opportunity. After all, 37 Nobel laureates, 1500 experts who support and are advocates for these techniques to be legalised and give European agriculture opportunities similar to those of the world, agree with these techniques, otherwise we will be condemned to import food from other places where these techniques are used. However, I also support the exclusion of organic farming from this regulation.

Madam President! The world around the European Union is at war – Ukraine, Gaza, Israel, the Middle East. Evropska komisija, pa tudi velik del politične levice v Evropskem parlamentu zagovarja ideološke predloge Green Deala, ki so velikokrat brez posledic, učinkov na prehransko varnost, kot je bila uredba o trajnostni rabi pesticidov v okviru strategije „od vil do vilic“. I very much welcome what the President of the European Commission announced today that she is withdrawing this controversial, unprofessional, harmful proposal for a regulation on pesticides, and that she and the farmers are starting to talk about how we are going to transform European agriculture. Without the Sustainable Use Regulation, European farmers reduced their pesticide consumption by 30%. That is why I myself joined Slovenian farmers in March last year in protest and at that time said that we should not destroy food security, as we destroyed energy security. I therefore welcome this measure and good morning to those of you who have now seen that we have gone too far and taken a large part of the European public to the streets alongside farmers.

Madam President! Dear Commissioner, Colleagues, Colleagues! First of all, I would like to express my sincere thanks to Dr Krasnodębski for his report, which I think is very much in the right place, because geothermal energy certainly has a great future. I come from Slovenia, which is also known for its rich hot water springs and there are quite a few good examples of geothermal exploitation in Slovenia. About one third of Slovenian tourism is spa tourism, where geothermia is used to heat thermal water facilities. We have successful examples of growing tomatoes, fruits, vegetables. Prekmurje also has the largest orchid producer in Europe, which produces orchids based on energy obtained from geothermal energy. We should definitely invest more effort, including more financial measures, also from the European Union, because if we make a comparison with the sun and wind, we can safely say that geothermal energy is neglected and is a great, untapped opportunity. It is also necessary to do everything possible to make the procedures for obtaining documentation faster than they are today.

Madam President! Honourable Commissioner, Honourable Vice-President! I come from Slovenia and I can safely say that I know Serbia quite well. And I firmly believe that it is very important for the well-being of the people living in Serbia, as well as for lasting peace in this part of Europe, that Serbia joins the European Union. Accession to the European Union is, in any case, conditional on respect for the basic rules of democracy in every country. Pluralism in society, free media and certainly one of the key items are also free and fair parliamentary elections, as well as local elections. In the last elections, there are quite a few remarks about how people from other parts of Serbia came to Belgrade, how voters from the Republika Srpska came. I therefore want and believe that it will be best for everyone to come to a final report on the fairness of these elections as soon as possible. On the basis of this report, the Commission should also draw up a strategy, evaluate these elections and draw up a strategy for Serbia's further rapprochement with the European Union. I wish the Serbs a successful and good rapprochement with the European Union, as well as a lot of wisdom on this path.

Thank you for this question, and I can safely tell you that, as a Member of the European Parliament, I also talked a lot about farmers, about the common agricultural policy, which was proposed by Commissioner Wojciechowski and Commissioner Hogan earlier. However, when Commissioner Timmermans put the ‘Farm to Fork’ proposals on the agenda and defended them here, we all came to the conclusion that this is a huge nonsense that will destroy agriculture. However, farmers are aware of and supportive of agricultural policy and are part of the changes that the Farm to Fork strategy also requires. In any case, they do not want to accept unrealistic, unrealistic proposals that would jeopardise both their income and, above all, sovereignty, European food sovereignty and also the consumer.

Madam President! Dear Commissioner, Honourable Members! Last spring, as a fruit farmer, I joined Slovenian farmers in protest. Do you know who they were protesting against? Against the nonsense of Slovenian agricultural policy and against the nonsense coming from Brussels. Farmers are frustrated, feel guilty, and are accused of being guilty of destroying nature, poisoning people. They will soon be charged with the extinction of dinosaurs. Here too, in the European Parliament, agriculture is very often spoken of by those who, I am sure, have never been in a stable and worked in a field. I am pleased that some of us have succeeded in putting an end to the regulation on pesticides, which would have been very harmful. The number of farms is decreasing. Young farmers are not taking up professions and we are at risk of jeopardising food sovereignty. The lack of food, and no, not sovereignty in this area, can, however, turn out to be critical, as energy has shown. The Slovenian President organised a forum on agriculture and there was a conclusion: Nothing about a farmer without a farmer. Let this be the conclusion in the European Parliament. (The speaker will answer the question asked by raising a blue card..)

Mr President, honourable Commissioner, honourable President-in-Office, colleagues! We in the Committee on Regional Development were also pleased to support the basic report and also added our opinion, in which we support the basic objectives of increased extraction of these raw materials in Europe, as well as processing, recycling, collection of these raw materials, as well as strategic diversification in the area of different countries. The speed of spatialisation is important, the speed of these administrative procedures, and cooperation with local communities, regional communities, is particularly important here. Without a timely approach to local communities, all these objectives will also be difficult to achieve. Therefore, we really want all those who want to place such facilities in the space to advertise in local communities, to provide additional infrastructure as well as new jobs in this environment, because this will be the best guarantee that strategic projects will be successful in the future. Dear Commissioner, I wish you to carry out as many strategic projects as possible and ensure strategic sovereignty in the field of critical materials in Europe.

Madam President, honourable colleagues, honourable Commissioner, thank you very much for today's debate, for your support and also for the critical comments made during the debate. Let me also thank my colleague Edita from my office, Florian, Alex and all the others who helped me prepare the report. Thank you also to the shadow rapporteurs for the cooperative cooperation and also for the support of the EPP, S&D, Renew, ECR and ID Groups for the joint text of this resolution. I always swear by the principle. in-and, that is to say, all sources of electricity that are complementary. We know, however, that today electricity must be affordable, that it must be low-carbon and also competitive, and that we must have an energy mix that meets all needs, regardless of weather conditions. In Europe, nuclear power has been on a back-track in recent years, mostly for ideological reasons, which has also led to a stalemate in technology development in many countries. That is why I think it is right that today, in the European Union, we jointly support the development of these technologies, which are also being developed around the world, regardless of what we do in Europe, even with the great support of Inflation Reduction Act America, China, India, Japan, Korea. I also expect nuclear power, including small government reactors, to have similar or equal conditions as renewables. It would be rather strange if we had to close down nuclear power plants in France because we would not have reached a certain percentage of renewables here in the European Union. In order to achieve this, I also expect support, financial support in the development of technology. I believe that the European Investment Bank will also rank nuclear energy and finance it in a similar way to other low-carbon sources. Thank you once again for this debate and once again I call on you to support the report in the vote tomorrow.

Madam President, honourable Commissioner Kadri Simson, honourable colleagues! The current composition of the European Parliament has been confronted with events and crises of unprecedented proportions. From the COVID-pandemic to the Russian aggression in Ukraine, the severe natural disasters and now the appalling situation in the Middle East, Israel and Gaza. All these events require an appropriate response from the European Union. We Europeans need to become more self-sufficient in all areas, especially energy. As regards energy in particular, we need all technologies that can ensure the resilience, reliability and continuity of supply of competitive, low-carbon electricity, which we acknowledged in the vote on the Net-Zero Industry Actu. The fact is that the ambition of all Member States for all modes of technology needs to be scaled up in order to achieve carbon neutrality in the EU by the end of 2050. It is precisely small modular reactors, the so-called SMRs, that can play a key role in the global policy of decarbonising our economies by offering highly flexible steam and electricity generation regardless of weather conditions. Given the large investments in technology development in many countries, SMRs are projected to become a commercially viable nuclear product by 2030. In particular, they will be used to replace fossil fuels, for district heating of buildings, process heat for energy-intensive industries, for seawater desalination and for hydrogen production. They can also make a significant contribution to decarbonisation in the production of synthetic fuels for heavy goods transport and aviation. Nuclear power now accounts for 25% of electricity produced in the EU and 50% of low-carbon electricity. In light of the transition to a low-carbon society, energy experts predict a doubling of electricity consumption by 2060. SMRs are highly compatible with renewable electricity sources. The increase in electricity production is expected to come from solar, wind and SMRs, as well as from new large-scale nuclear power plants and the extension of existing ones. Pan-European cooperation in the development, creation of supplier supply chains and spatialisation processes will be crucial if we want to compete in this field with those already active in the USA, China, Russia, the UK and others in the development of important innovative technology. We must promote partnership and alliance within the EU and create a reliable environment for the new nuclear Airbus. This is what we can do with tomorrow's support for small modular reactors. Public surveys show that support for low-carbon nuclear energy, especially among young people, is increasing and is noticeably increasing. Not so much because of the price of electricity, but because of environmental goals. Moreover, an increasing number of Member States see nuclear energy in their energy mix. In November this year, the European Commission accelerated and launched the Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) partnership, which was another major step forward. It is therefore clear that SMRs are a reality and will be deployed in the near future. We must start making our decisions rationally on the basis of indisputable facts and figures. At 3 p.m. today, looking at the Electricity Map platform, I saw that France had only 41 grams of CO2 emissions per kilowatt of electricity produced, while Germany had 408 grams of CO2 emissions with 59 percent of renewable energy and 62 percent of low-carbon sources. It is up to us to finally recognise who is actually green in the EU. Tomorrow we will have an excellent opportunity, as the European Parliament, to send a clear and strong signal to the whole of Europe and to European industry. We want a safe, green and competitive Europe. The latter will only be achieved if all low-carbon sources are properly and equally treated. I sincerely ask for your support in voting and thank you in advance.

Madam President. Dear Sir/Madam, In the European People's Party, and myself, I am very much in favour of reducing pesticide consumption, and I am pleased that European farmers have reduced their pesticide consumption by one third over the last five years. I therefore support the proposals of the Committee on Agriculture to achieve the target of a 50% reduction by 2035, thus enabling a normal transition for European farmers. However, in those countries where consumption is already very low, such as Romania, it is right to set lower targets and also to allow them to produce vegetables and fruit. I also support the fact that the Member States determine sensitive areas themselves, not that in Brussels we determine that I do not know, in Slovenia and the Karst they will no longer grow Teran, that there will be no more apples in the Posavje region. Let's leave it to the farmers. As farmers have already reduced their use of pesticides through the transition to integrated production, organic farming, and precision farming, they will continue to do so. We must be careful to ensure that farmers can continue to maintain food security for Europeans, that we do not import food from abroad, and at the same time that farmers can survive on their farms with their activity.

Madam President. Thanks for the word. Thank you also for the Net Zero Act, both to the Commission and to the rapporteur, Mr Ehler. The act is urgently needed. Unfortunately, we only woke up when the Americans issued their IRA act to respond to the key challenges of this time. In Europe, too, we have realised that we need industry and that we need decarbonisation. And that we need the industry to be present in Europe. In what follows, I think it is imperative that we also recognise what the Americans are, that technological neutrality is urgently needed. That we cannot choose which technology is green and which is low-carbon, but what we use the term low-carbon, and in this way we also give our place to nuclear energy, which fortunately found a place in this act. I am pleased to be rapporteur for SMRs and that they too will have a future in the decarbonisation of the European Union. More pragmatism, consideration of technological neutrality, and we will certainly continue to be a beacon in Europe in the area of decarbonising the world.

Mr. President! Dear Vice-President, Commissioner. I agree with the Communication's findings that short-term measures to mitigate the energy crisis have been successful. We have reduced dependence on Russia, diversification of supplies is greater, stocks are increased, and the production of renewable energy sources is also increasing. On the other hand, we have a reduction in energy consumption, which is partly due to energy efficiency measures, but unfortunately also to the fact that it is difficult for people to pay the price of expensive gas for heating. On the other hand, it is also due to the fact that the competitiveness of the European economy, the largest in Germany, has been reduced and consumption has been reduced. Also in my country Slovenia, where I come from, there is no more aluminium production and now we import significantly dirtier steel, aluminium from China. I welcome your address yesterday at the Nuclear Energy Forum - support for nuclear energy as well as small modular reactors - I am preparing a report on this point. But I see a long-term solution only in the fact that we will really respect the rule of technological neutrality and implement measures for 10, 20 years ahead, because energy is not planned 2.3 years, but planning is measured in decades.

Mr. President! Greetings and thanks, Mrs Eva, for the excellent report on protein, a strategy that we urgently need in the European Union, because we are all aware of how essential protein is in both human and animal nutrition. In any case, I advocate this approach that both plant and animal proteins are needed. And we will probably eat less animal protein in the future. In any case, we have a duty to ensure that we produce as much protein from plants as possible, that we have as many leguminous crops as possible in the fields, legumes, that European permanent grasslands are well cultivated, because these are key sources of protein, and even with a wide crop rotation, we improve the cultivation of the soil itself, so we need to support this in agricultural policy, and not talk about set-aside on agricultural land. In any case, I do not see the future in synthetic meat, in artificial meat, where multinationals will again have their licences, but in farmers and in agriculture.

Mr. President! Today we are talking about water scarcity in remote French regions. We could talk about the lack of access to drinking water in the water supply network in Romania or also about Roma settlements in my Slovenia that do not yet have access to drinking water. That is why I think we really need to do everything we can to continue with cohesion funds and supply where there is not yet access to quality drinking water for every European. Measures in wastewater treatment plants are also extremely important. Again I can speak from my Slovenia, where the rivers are much cleaner today than they were decades ago and life is returning to the rivers as well. There is also a lot to be done for the efficient use of water in agriculture. We know drip irrigation systems that use small amounts of water to save permanent plantations and the like, so we have solutions. Continuous investment is required. We also have more and more on one side of droughts or floods. Last year we had the biggest drought in Slovenia. This year we had floods in August. In Greece, this happened within a week, so we should not forget that investment in the protection of water resources is needed as a permanent process, not just when there is drought or flooding. That is why I support the Commission's Water Resilience Initiative and I believe that in the future we will invest even more in water supply and in clean waters.