Speeches

Mr President, Mr Executive Vice-President Timmermans, I thank you for being here today in this debate. I would also like to thank the rapporteur for the report, Mr Paet, who was unable to be present. I would like to address a more particular issue, because many things have already been said: Article 31 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). Article 31 TEU is very important. Why? Because in its paragraph 2 it allows many decisions to be adopted by qualified majority and, until now, unfortunately, it has not been used. In order to implement those decisions by qualified majority, a decision on the strategic interests and objectives of the Union, in accordance with Article 22 TEU, needs to have been taken. It is apparent that the European Council adopted that document, entitled ‘The New Strategic Agenda’, and its last section is entitled ‘Promoting Europe’s interests and values in the world’. Therefore, as it was also adopted by the European Council through the consensus procedure, they have been satisfied. de facto the requirements of Article 22 of the Treaty. Therefore, a European Council decision on the Union's strategic interests and values is already available. This allows Article 31(2) TEU to be applied to take decisions and actions implementing those strategic interests and values by qualified majority.

Madam President, first of all, I would like to convey all the solidarity of myself, of my political group of socialists and, I would also say, I am sure, of all the Spanish people and the European people, to Navalny for this very inhuman and unjust situation. Certainly, we have to do everything we can from the European Union to get them released, and not just for a humanitarian reason. Because I am convinced that sooner rather than later Ukraine will prevail in this war and, also sooner rather than later, Putin's regime will collapse in Russia. Then we will be able to find – meet again – a free and democratic Russia that will return to the European nations. And Navalny, among others, will be instrumental in building that new order: a Europe, let us remember, from the Atlantic to the Urals, free and united.

Madam President, first of all, I would like to extend my heartfelt condolences to the relatives of Julio Obama Mefuman, who died on 15 January 2023 in a prison in Equatorial Guinea. What this Parliament is asking for today with the resolution that all the political groups have negotiated is simple. First, the repatriation of Julio Obama's body to Spain. Julio Obama had dual Equatoguinean and Spanish nationality. He was therefore also a citizen of the European Union. He was imprisoned for his status as an opponent of Theodore Obiang's regime, which has lasted for forty-four years, all my life. Secondly, we call for the immediate release of his fellow opponents: Feliciano Efa Mangue, Martín Obiang Ondo and Bienvenido Ndong Ondo, three political prisoners who were also kidnapped in South Sudan and transferred to Equatorial Guinea in a sort of new Operation Condor on the African continent. There they were imprisoned and subjected to inhuman torture, under a total lack of respect for international law and with very limited consular access that, fortunately - and I thank you - the Embassy of Spain was able to offer. No one should die or suffer for their ideas. These activists deserve all our protection and protection. We therefore call on the Equatoguinean authorities to stop this harassment and arbitrary detention, both inside and outside the country.

Mr President Othmar Karas, High Representative Josep Borrell, thank you for your intervention this morning. I agree exactly with that idea that diplomacy is also a tool at our disposal, together with all the military support that should go further in Ukraine, always bearing in mind that the objective has to be a just peace, that is, for Ukraine to regain its sovereignty and territorial integrity. In that sense, we saw today in the Financial Times a new holder: ‘Russians amassing aircraft within striking range of Ukraine target». Indeed, we have been too slow. A year ago, it was said that the help of tanks and fighter jets will come too late, but no one knows how long the war will last. That strategy could therefore have been even more effective. In a year of war, Ukraine has regained half of the territory initially occupied by Russia. Let's go faster and faster.

Madam President Picierno, Commissioner, one of the most important innovations of the Maastricht Treaty was the introduction of European citizenship, including the right to vote and stand as a candidate in elections to the European Parliament and also in municipal elections. We currently have more than 13 million citizens living in another Member State of the European Union. It is therefore essential that these citizens can fully exercise their right to vote and stand as candidates in electoral processes, both in the European Parliament and in local elections. Unfortunately, these citizens face too many administrative and information barriers, especially for people with disabilities. It is therefore time to remove these barriers. We call for this report to be taken into account in order to include at least three objectives in particular: make it easier to register as residents and voters, provide more and better information on elections in an official language understandable to them, and thirdly, ensure the needs of the most vulnerable groups, making voting accessible to people with disabilities, the elderly and the homeless. I also believe that it would be very important to ensure postal voting in all the Member States of the European Union.

Madam President, thank you very much for your flexibility and generosity also in this round of catch-the-eye. I'm going to be really very brief. The Allies have spent six, seven, eight months debating whether to send the tanks or not to send the tanks to Ukraine. And it was very clear from the outset that it is absolutely necessary to make available to the Government and people of Ukraine all available means so that they can face that aggression and regain their sovereignty and territorial integrity. And now the issue of delivering long-range missiles and fighter jets is on the table. I say from here, from this House, to the allies, to the West, to NATO: please do not waste another six, seven, eight months debating this issue. Go directly to make this delivery as soon as possible, because the people of Ukraine need it.

Mr President, 24 aid workers on the island of Lesbos accused of facilitating illegal immigration into Europe, a case which a study by this Parliament described as the largest criminalisation case in Europe and for which the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights called for the charges to be dropped. And this is not the only case, unfortunately. Now we see how the Italian hard-right government tries to hinder with this decree the activities of NGOs that help at sea. It is not a matter of regulating anything but of making their work more difficult and of complicating it. And we also see that other governments, in addition, what they do is practice hot returns, forced returns. We have seen it in Greece, we have seen it in Croatia, we see it in Poland. Therefore, Commissioner, the Commission has to act. European Union law is being violated by these authorities and by these governments, both in the criminalisation of NGOs – which is a rule of law problem – and in the issue of systematic forced returns. Please act by opening the infringement procedure of EU law.

Madam President, first, if I may, a point of order: closed the debate with a list of not less than eight MEPs from the European People's Party and opened the catch-the-eye procedure by also giving the floor three times in a row to three MEPs from the Group of the European People's Party. Maybe it would have been more reasonable to alternate with the other groups that we had asked to participate in the catch-the-eye procedure, but well, in any case, it is very clear what this House demands. Commissioner Reynders, I have to tell you that I have seen you a little generic in your opening statement. You've put a lot of punches: that you are working on a working document, that you have worked with the Commissioners, with the services, that this needs to be studied very well. Well, of course, that is what the technicians are for, but he has not given us any compelling reason why, after the first initiative of this Parliament, with the letter we presented in April and the May resolution, at this stage you still do not say clearly that you are in favour of establishing the special court. I don't know what you guys are waiting for. The technicalities will come later. Please give the political signal that five political groups in this House have asked you to give. Only two MEPs – one from the far right and one from the far left – have been against it.

Madam President, indeed, we have to move forward in the area of sanctions and move forward in the area of military aid to Ukraine. In the first of the camps, of course, the Navalny list in its entirety, as several colleagues have said. We could even go further: Let's think of all the members of the political parties that make up Putin's regime, who could at least be denied a visa to travel to Europe. And, of course, the question of armaments. I remember that, almost a year ago when the war started, a few weeks after the aggression, several of us began to say in this House that we had to give tanks and fighter planes to Ukraine, and we were told that it was not possible because that was going to require several months of training of the Ukrainian army in order for it to be able to use this weaponry. Well, here we are almost a year later. How long could we have won if we had made those decisions then? Please, let's not demote them anymore now.

Mr President Karas, thank you also to the High Representative and Vice-President of the European Commission for his presence and patience. In this debate there has been a consensus - a very clear majority, I would say - in favour of overcoming unanimity in foreign policy decision-making. There are three ways to move in that direction, from the most difficult to the easiest – none of which is easy at all, but let us admit this order: the first, to reform the treaty; the second, to activate passerelle clauses; and the third, to apply more strictly Article 31 of the Treaty on European Union. Why do I say this? This article indeed says that decisions will be taken unanimously on a general basis, but it also says that they will be taken by qualified majority when a decision of the European Council concerning the strategic interests and objectives of the Union is implemented, as well as to implement any decision resulting from an action or position of the Union already adopted.

Mr President, we are celebrating the 30th anniversary of the single market, which entered into force on 1 January 1993, following the signing of the Maastricht Treaty on 7 February 1992. It was therefore not only the internal market, which is very important, but also European citizenship (proposed by Felipe González), the euro, European political parties, the codecision power of this Parliament and its participation in the appointment of the President of the Commission and also cohesion policy. Let us remember, therefore, that the internal market is undoubtedly the deepening of that first market established by the Treaty on the European Coal and Steel Community and whose mission - let us not forget, it is written in the Schuman Declaration - was to make that first Community the first step towards forming a federation in Europe.

Madam President, only to draw the attention of the House, in accordance with Rule 195 of the Rules of Procedure, to the fact that Julio Obama, an activist opposed to the regime of Equatorial Guinea, died yesterday in a prison in that country, surely murdered. His death occurred days after the accusation, by the Spanish Justice, of Carmelo Ovono Obiang, son of the dictator and head of the secret services, for crimes against humanity; something that can only be seen, therefore, as a retaliation. I therefore call on our Parliament, the Council and the Commission to take all appropriate measures to ensure that fellow abductees like him, Feliciano Efa, Martín Obiang and Bienvenido Ndong, do not suffer the same fate.

Vice-President Charanzová, Minister Bek, Commissioner Hahn, there is no doubt that without free journalism there is no functioning democracy. It is very worrying that in the 2022 Rule of Law Report we see the deterioration of the indicator on the journalistic profession and its protection. This trend comes from afar. Since 2015, 15 journalists have been killed in the European Union: in France, Malta, Greece, the Netherlands, Denmark, Poland, formerly the United Kingdom and Slovakia. And we see how some countries, unfortunately, are getting worse. As regards threats to the physical safety of journalists, the Commission has had to make specific recommendations for Slovakia and Greece. But in addition, Reporters Without Borders designated Greece, in 2022, as the worst country in the European Union in press freedom. Worse than Hungary, even. Journalists in this country who want to report on immigration policy and violations of the human rights of migrants are real heroes who are playing the guy. They are victims of hostile statements by political leaders. They suffer harassment and assaults, including by the police, and even arrests. This situation must cease and the Commission must continue to act. I would say with even greater emphasis on the case I have described.

Mr President Karas, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner Gentiloni, I have of course taken note of what you have said. You can talk a lot about the catwalks, but we know that to activate the catwalks you need unanimity. I therefore believe that we cannot ignore the fact that a reform of the Treaties is absolutely necessary at the moment in order to be able to resolve this issue. But I think that even before raising that it is very important that, especially from the Commission, Mr Gentiloni, they take it more seriously to find ways to overcome the abusive use - as the debate says - of the national veto. Because the Council will not be able to do so. We have just seen what has happened with Hungary, it is not the first time. Mr Orbán’s government – the umpteenth time it has used the veto as an instrument of political blackmail – says: I am paralysing the 18 billion support to Ukraine and I am paralysing the OECD minimum corporate tax agreement until I am given, in this case, a reduction. It is true that it has not been very large, but, in any case, it has obtained a reduction on the funds that had been frozen for lack of respect for the rule of law. How can that be possible? That there is a political agreement that relativizes a sanction for not respecting the rule of law. But in addition, there was a way out, which you had pointed out - and also the Council, by the way. Then, I don't know why, they changed it. It consisted of finding a way to solve the package of aid to Ukraine to 26. In addition, you also had – and that concerns you, Commissioner Gentiloni – a solution for the OECD tax, which was Article 116. How long will the Commission not have the courage to activate this article once and for all, which would make it possible to resolve the question of taxation by qualified majority and put an end to Orbán's political blackmail?

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, on this issue I am obviously joining in the denunciation and condemnation of the Turkish Government's offensive on Iraq following the bombing in Istanbul, which caused six deaths and dozens of injuries. But it is also necessary, in the case of this new – not the first time – violation of Iraq’s national sovereignty by Turkey, to investigate the possible use of chemical weapons by the Turkish armed forces, which, as we all know, are prohibited by international law. Ladies and gentlemen, Iraq is an incipient democracy, of course, with many problems, with many difficulties, exit from an electoral process that has taken more than a year to form a government. The road is not the one Turkey has taken.

Madam President, the intellectual George Steiner, a European Jew and philosopher, argued that "the true being of Europe" is the confluence of various traditions, including Athens and Jerusalem. It is not necessary to extend the great legacy that the Jewish community has contributed to European civilization and to the whole of humanity. Names like Maimonides, Freud, Einstein, among many others, speak for themselves. We live in difficult times in which hatred of the different, whether Jewish or Muslim, Christian or atheist, grows everywhere. Anti-Semitism, in particular, is on the rise, precisely on the continent that bore the barbarism of the Holocaust. That is why it is important to remember that Spain offers since 2015 the possibility of obtaining Spanish nationality to the descendants of Sephardic Jews, that is, those who lived in Iberia, "Sefarad" in Hebrew. The initiative seeks to redress the historical injustice committed in 1492, when the Jews were expelled from Aragon and Castile. So far, more than 90 000 applications have been welcomed.

Madam President, first of all, I would like to express my support and that of the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party for this motion for a resolution on cultural solidarity with Ukraine and a joint emergency response mechanism for cultural recovery in Europe. This debate takes place at a symbolic and – I would say – unfortunately important moment. We have observed how it is not enough for Putin's criminal regime to bomb the civilian population, the infrastructure, the electricity centers, the bridges of Ukraine, but it has also killed a conductor, Yuri Kerpatenko, for refusing to conduct a concert before his occupying forces. What can we say in the face of this brutality? How can we respond? Precisely, with more determination, with more solidarity, both in terms of financial, humanitarian, military and cultural assistance to Ukraine: by helping to recover the sites that have been destroyed by the bombings, by supporting the threatened artists, some of whom are refugees among us, by activating the Trust Fund for Ukraine in the cultural dimension and in support of the cultural community of Ukraine, which should be considered an integral part of the reconstruction process. Putin wants to destroy the identity and soul of Ukraine. Every euro spent on the reconstruction of their culture and heritage is also a euro spent towards the defeat of this imperialist project.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, we are indeed dealing with the project of the European Political Community which, in the light of what was once the Prague Summit – indeed, very well organised by the Czech Presidency – is a forum for meetings between European States, that is to say, not only between those who are members of the European Union ... As I say, in view of the result and the expectations it has generated, it is a good thing that there is a forum that would fill some kind of vacuum, inasmuch as it performs a function that is not that of NATO, where the Americans are, or that of the OSCE, where the Americans are also, or that of the Council of Europe, which is essentially devoted to the question of human rights. To the extent that there is a meeting place, to launch joint projects, to deal together with the Russian aggression in Ukraine, I find it positive. However, it must be clear, as the High Representative, Josep Borrell, has pointed out in his blog, that it cannot be an alternative to enlargement. It has to add value to the existing formats, to which I have already referred, it has to be a community of shared principles and it has to have a very light structure. We cannot create more secretariats, new structures, because the institutional structure that really exists, and that we have to keep expanding and deepening at the same time, is the European Union.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I would of course like to take this opportunity to reiterate my support for the process of enlarging the European Union to the Western Balkans without reservation. I really welcome the candidate status that has been granted to Bosnia and Herzegovina. But I did want to make a precision that has not been made - I would say - in the framework of this debate so far, and it is important: we cannot decouple the process of enlargement from the process of deepening the European Union. We cannot go to a Union of thirty, thirty-two, thirty-five states and continue to decide sanctions, foreign policy, unanimously. Therefore, keep in mind that there are two processes that have to go hand in hand: Enlargement – enlarging the area of European democracy – but also, at the same time, deepening European democracy in terms of its functioning, legitimacy and effectiveness.

Madam President, Minister Bek, I am happy to see you again in the House. Also Vice President Schinas. The first thing I want to express on this subject is my thanks, especially to Victor Negrescu, for his work, already in his time as minister, aimed at achieving accession to the Schengen area, and also for having proposed the debate that we are having today within the Socialist Group, since it was he who carried it forward. The Schengen area without internal borders has been strained, we know, by the issue of the pandemic and Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. The Commission has reiterated that since 2011 Bulgaria and Romania have fulfilled the necessary requirements to be part of the Schengen area with full rights. Vice President Schinas knows that well. Therefore, Minister Bek, it is time for the Council to take a positive decision and step forward, and acknowledge that Romania and Bulgaria have complied. And, furthermore, to recognise the enormous work being done by the EU as Ukraine’s neighbours in the face of the crisis caused by the war. Croatia, by the way, must also be complied with. We cannot speak of a united Europe when there are citizens of Member States who, having fulfilled their obligations, are excluded from their rights to mobility.

Madam President, I would like to thank the Commissioner, who is here, and the colleagues who have worked on these two rules, which seem to me to be fundamental, because they are the two main pillars of the health union, a project that began, obviously, in the wake of the pandemic. The Commissioner has pointed out that she made the proposal in November 2020 and there I do allow myself a little criticism: I think it should have been done even earlier. "Well is what ends well", but already in April of that year Spanish socialists such as Javi López, César Luena and myself raised the question of health union with the Commission. The Socialists and Democrats Group also made the same proposal in May 2020. In any case, we are now in a situation where we can make the most of this health union. Why? Because, as has been said, the coronavirus virus pandemic is not completely overcome and the most likely scenario will surely be to have to carry out annual vaccination campaigns aimed at the whole of European society.

Madam President, thank you to Minister Bek and Vice-President Jourová, with whom we always have excellent cooperation on all matters; I would also like to congratulate the rapporteurs of the report and the members of the negotiating team. I will not gloss over the main elements, it has already been done, I will only emphasize that we need to have this instrument of European political parties and European political foundations ready for the 2024 elections, but we also need to have ready for those same elections the European electoral law that this Parliament has proposed, which includes the novelty of the common electoral constituency. They are two elements that come together, because this project presented today wants to strengthen European political parties, their transparency, the participation of women, and also their visibility, their logos, and that is also what we are proposing in the European electoral law, that there be a ballot from a European list with the logo of European political parties, among other novelties.

Mr President, I would like to express a very special thanks to my group colleague, Tiemo Wölken, for this magnificent report on such an important issue as improving the legislative and regulatory production procedure. Thank you also, of course, to the Vice-President of the Commission for his presence. The report highlights, in fact, the new positive elements launched by the Commission, such as the strengthening of accessibility for persons with disabilities to the public consultation platform or the commitment to incorporate the Sustainable Development Goals as a cross-cutting element. It is also essential to insist on the commitments formally made by all EU institutions, such as the creation of a joint legislative register listing all publicly disclosed documents and improving the transparency of the decision-making process, particularly in the Council, and of access to documents on all its activities.

Madam President, dear Roberta, Prime Minister of the Czech Republic, thank you very much for your presentation to us. I would like to add to what other Members have said: how important it is for Parliament that we move forward on the institutional chapter which, indeed, has not been mentioned, perhaps so much, in the presentation, but it is never too late if the bliss is good. I have full confidence in the Czech Presidency's ability to open the debate in the Council, as Parliament has already called for - the activation of Article 48 - in its resolution last month, so that the Council can begin to assess these proposals that we have made. It is a matter of opening the debate, of course, of taking note of our resolution without any further doubt or confusion and also of helping us to carry forward the important work of the new European electoral law, including the introduction of a European-wide constituency.