Speeches

Ms. President! Tax avoidance and evasion are real problems to be addressed. We support this goal, but not without objections. Firstly: We have not only a tax avoidance problem, but a tax avoidance problem. Multinationals zSome of them pay less than one percent tax on their EU profits, and international banks are all too happy to shift their billion-dollar profits. offshore. We have a tax fairness and a tax waste problem and therefore far too high taxes. Hundreds of billions of taxes are being wasted on world rescue projects such as unqualified mass immigration past the labour market directly into the social network and a climate policy that must fail because the EU's contribution to global CO2 emissions of less than 8% is virtually meaningless. Secondly: Tax-exempt and exempt from money laundering regulation NGOs, although MONEYVAL, the European Court of Auditors and the Financial Action Task Force All warn, billion-dollar pro-migration and climate rescueNGOsTrusts and foundations also acted as vehicles for money laundering, terrorist financing and tax evasion. End the EU exemption for politically compliant NGOs! And thirdly: Please bury your plans for an all-encompassing EU asset register as soon as possible. Tax policy is not a competence of the EU, but of the Member States. So if you want to fight tax evasion, please do so in accordance with the law and not illegally. In the rule of law, I think, the end does not sanctify every means.

Mr President! This report accuses Russia of expanding its sphere of influence, discrediting Western liberal democracy, disregarding international law and LGBT rights, and, listening, pursuing its own national interests. Perhaps it is part of EU climate policy to launch politically new ice ages. The report is hardly a recipe for better relations with Russia. Please consider: Who has been assisting NATO in its post-liberal crusades from the Atlantic to the Hindu Kush for 20 years? Who is funding the Western NGOs in Russia? And who intervened in violation of international law in Iraq and Libya? Who is different from the EU and its members? Compared to Russia, however, quite unsuccessful. Afghanistan teaches: Russia learns from mistakes – the EU never learns.

Mr President! The COVID certificate digitally proves whether its holder has been vaccinated, tested negative or recovered from COVID-19. The Commission claims that the certificate ensures the free movement of persons in the EU. Compatibility with systems of non-EU countries also facilitates travel abroad. Under EU law, the certificate is not a precondition for entry into other Member States. The Commission also considers that it does not discriminate against non-vaccinated persons. So far, so good. However, Member States are free to allow entry only to certificate holders. For example, vaccinated people could enter unhindered, while non-vaccinated people would have to be tested again and again every time they cross the border. As a result, this means discrimination against non-vaccinated people: Vaccinated travel freely, non-vaccinated travel only with test. Anyone who wants to exercise their basic rights without restrictions or has to travel a lot in the future will hardly get around vaccination. Vaccination was once intended to protect against disease. Today, it is used in the EU to protect against disenfranchisement.

Madam President, The Geneva Convention on Refugees is a document of humanity and charity. After the Second World War and the Cold War, it protected persecuted and displaced people, but it also respects national sovereignty, the right to national character and the distinction between citizens and foreigners. The Convention does not contain a general right to asylum, nor does it grant the right to naturalisation or illegal border crossing. Article 31 requests safe third countries, namely only the nearest safe third countries, persecuted persons, and only those whose lives and freedoms are threatened at home, to provide temporary refuge until they return home. Refugees should be placed close to culture and home so that they are not uprooted. Merkel's opening of the border since 2015 does not authorize the Refugee Convention, nor does she authorize transcontinental settlement projects such as the EU Migration Pact or the de-Europeanisation of Europe. That's why you want to reconsider the convention and expand its grounds of asylum to include climate and abortion law. Because according to the literal interpretation of the Convention, hundreds or a few thousand would have a real reason for asylum every year, but you want tens of millions of migrants.