Speeches

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.

Madam President, Commissioner, thank you for your presence. First of all, I would just like to recall, with due regard for the Rules of Procedure, that my colleague Javier Moreno would have liked to participate in this debate, but that, because of an air transport problem, it has not been possible. I would also like to join in the condolences and solidarity expressed by this House to the families of all the victims. Ladies and gentlemen, this tragedy is not the first and, unfortunately, I am afraid it will not be the last either, although it should be. If we do not change our policy, it will happen again, and not just at the southernmost border of the Union. The pandemic temporarily slowed migratory flows, but now secular changes, global warming and Putin's war are accelerating them, and so are famines, which are causing this unsustainable situation. Obviously, we rely on the investigations undertaken by the Spanish and Moroccan prosecutors' offices, and by the Spanish Ombudsman, to find out what exactly has happened. The loss of human life has neither color nor religion. Immigrants should always be treated with dignity. But some right-wing political forces, especially those in my country, are trying to make a profit from this tragedy in the face of an increasingly pressing challenge in which we should all be united to carry out a holistic, orderly and effective European immigration policy.

Mrs Pereira, I have decided to address this question to you because you are a left-wing woman, we come from the same tradition. The left has always been internationalist, it has never been a defender of the nation state; I have never seen it in the writings of Marx or Engels. However, you have here made a closed defense of the veto, of national sovereignty as the paradigm of political action. I find it truly incomprehensible.

Mr President, thank you, above all, to the colleagues who have drafted this important resolution, which has my full support, supported by five groups in this House. In 1950, on May 9, the Schuman Declaration was known. Six European countries pooled coal and steel. And that Declaration said twice, not just once, that this European Coal and Steel Community was the first step in establishing a European federation. And indeed, that promise has not been fully realized, although we have made much progress in the federalization of the European Union. And now we have to go a step further. Why? Because this is no longer, ladies and gentlemen, the world of the Treaty of Lisbon. The Treaty of Lisbon was a phenomenal step forward. But let's compare today's circumstances with those of 2007. They are radically different: climate change, digitalisation, China’s role in the world, but also, more recently, Putin’s pandemic and aggression against Ukraine. We therefore need to update our constitutional framework, improving decision-making, overcoming unanimity, making Parliament the centre of European political construction, but also adding new policies and new capacities to the Treaty.

Mr President, I would like to thank Vice-President Maroš Šefčovič and his team and, of course, the rapporteur for this report, Paulo Rangel, and the other members of the negotiating team for this excellent report, which is also very timely, as has been said. Tomorrow we will also vote on the resolution that we have all negotiated to activate Article 48, which should lead us, we hope, with the support of at least a majority of 14 Member States in the European Council, to the convention and the reform of the Treaties. And indeed, as the Vice-President said, it is being put in place, there is already a certain right of legislative initiative from the indirect Parliament, to the extent that the Commission has indeed made this commitment to present legislative proposals on the basis of our own-initiative reports. But we certainly have to go further and that will require the reform of our Treaty. Why? Because if we want - as I think the vast majority here want - full European democracy, it is necessary to strengthen the European Parliament, which is precisely the House that we citizens directly elect in elections to the European Parliament. In that sense, if we look at the historical trajectory of the European Parliament – let us not forget that it began as a consultative assembly, that it did not approve the bills and that it initially only approved the budget – then the next step in this historical evolution is precisely what Paulo Rangel has proposed: it has its own right of legislative initiative. This, moreover, is particularly important when we consider the recovery plan, which also raises the democratic dilemma of who approves the European Union's debt issuances and who approves the European Union's own resources.

–Mr President, thanks in particular to Maria Arena, the author of this resolution, who I fully support, particularly the initiative to set up this special court to try the crime of aggression, not because we want to weaken the International Criminal Court; We have also requested financial support for it. We have recently learned that the Service for Foreign Policy Instruments will provide such funding to enable the International Criminal Court to investigate war crimes and crimes against humanity. But right now it is not within your competence to judge and investigate the crime of aggression, which, on the other hand, as has already been said, is absolutely obvious. And in that regard, I take these seconds to address Commissioner Reynders directly, who is here and whom I thank for his presence, so that it is the European Union that will lead a proposal for the establishment of this special court, as well as a legislative proposal so that we can use the assets of the Central Bank of Russia for the reconstruction of Ukraine.

I know, you ask me, that Mr Sandro Gozi is a dear companion and a dear friend and I know that it is absolutely possible. He did it: working for Europe when he was in Italy and working for Europe when he is in France.

Madam President, thank you, Vice-President, for your presence in the debate and also for what you have done by co-chairing this conference with these very good outcomes. They are clearly pointing to the need to improve the competencies, the capabilities of the European Union to act in very important fields, but also to improve the degree of democratic legitimacy, and the participation of citizens in the European project. Many things have been said. I made them my own. Also, what Prime Minister Draghi said this morning about pragmatic and ideal federalism. Now, I would like to address you directly, because you have been saying, and I understand that as a positive thing, that you believe that the Commission should play an honest broker role in this process. But I believe that maybe the Commission can also join Parliament. Parliament has made clear the position in this resolution about the next step, the convention and the reform of the treaties. And also, by the way, as you very well know, we approved today with a large majority the electoral law, including the union-wide constituency. Why doesn’t the Commission and the Parliament join together? Because we know the Council, they are good guys, but not particularly the vanguard of the European Union. So, the Commission and Parliament working together, what do you think? (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card intervention)

Yes, Mr Dzhambazki, you have said that there is no European identity and I would like to ask you about that. I think it does exist. Don't you think that characters like Beethoven, like Molière, like Cervantes, elements like Greco-Roman culture, like the contribution of the intellectuals of the Renaissance, of the Enlightenment, make up the European identity?

Mr President, thank you to all the colleagues who have spoken in this lively debate. The report, at least, has the courage to have generated such an intense and dynamic debate. I would like to take this opportunity to remind you – as the Vice-President said in her last speech on whether Members elected on a European list would be responsible to those who elected them, leaving the question open – that it is worth recalling that, according to the Treaty, Madam Vice-President, Members of the European Parliament already represent all citizens, we do not represent only the country where we have been elected. But I think it has also become clear that, although there has been a lot of negativity on the part of some colleagues with regard, in particular, to the pan-European constituency, not a single alternative proposal has been put forward to solve the problem of the 27 parallel national elections that we have at the moment in the elections to the European Parliament, nor to visualise the candidate for President of the Commission. I also think that we must remember, as some colleagues have also said, that actually voting against this bill, whether in part or in all, also means voting against improving the electoral rights of people with disabilities, voting against the possibility of voting by post and also voting against gender equality, either through zip lists or through quotas. Let us keep this in mind tomorrow in the vote. In addition, this project comes at an important moment for Europe, following the pandemic, Putin’s aggression against Ukraine and the conclusion of the Conference on the Future of Europe. Europe is already strengthening its health dimension, its financial dimension, its energy dimension and its defensive dimension. Our internal political cohesion is also important at this time. The top-ranking system, if properly implemented, is a reinforcement of Europe's political leadership and democratic legitimacy. This draft electoral law strengthens our political union, builds the demos European. This Parliament, precisely now, cannot be absent from this rendezvous with history.