Speeches

Madam President, there is this saying about the so‑called elephant in the room. It might be that in the past it was meant for various different things. Today, my impression is that it is meant for China, because after each and every discussion we have, in whatever capital of Member States or on the European level, in the end somebody would state that it was a very interesting discussion, but there is the elephant in the room: we have not talked enough about China. But still, we talk about China and it is becoming more and more, but I would advocate for talking with China more. China is called by the Strategic Compass of the European Union an economic competitor, a strategic partner and also a systemic rival. I know from encounters with Chinese officials that the systemic rival dimension is not very well received. It is obvious that we have different values: human dignity, individual freedom – the death penalty would be something that is absolutely not compatible with European values – but we have to talk with China to de‑risk without to decouple, and to diversify our risk in many different fields of economy and other fields.

Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, the pact for the Mediterranean is of the utmost importance for Europe and for Europe's global outreach, for Europe's strength to the outside, for obvious reasons: we are close neighbours. All the countries close to the sea, no matter whether it's Europe or North Africa or even the Middle East, are in the end, on a global scale, compared to the rest of the world, close neighbours. Why would we let other powers on this planet – who might seek confrontation against us instead of cooperation with us – why would we allow them to influence Africa in general, North Africa in particular, and also other parts surrounding Europe, even Europe itself, more than we ourselves do? We involve ourselves in our own destiny. We get involved in our own pathway forward if we cooperate in the Mediterranean. This is why it's of utmost importance that this will be a success – a success in terms of the economy, a success in terms of security, and also a success in terms of fighting illegal migration. We need the partners to fight illegal migration. We need security also in terms of confronting hybrid threats. We need economic success, and as Ronald Reagan once stated, 'The best social program is a job,' I think the best development aid is economic cooperation – and this is what we have to seek with our partner countries in the respective regions.

Madam President, Ronald Reagan has quoted in his time that one can go to Germany or to France, but he won't be a German or a Frenchman, but he could go to America and become an American. This is not true at the time of the current US administration, but it can be a pattern of what it means to come to Europe and become a European. On the other hand, there is the tolerance paradox of Sir Karl Popper, who says: "Tolerance against intolerance does not work." And there have been many who are intolerant of our European civilization, and Europe has not been able to face it together for ten years. That's why it's so nice and a special day, a good day, to be able to say today: After ten years, Europe has unified access. Europe treats together what Europe must tackle together as a challenge. And that this succeeds under a commissioner from Austria, Magnus Brunner, is particularly beautiful, but Magnus Brunner did it for the whole of Europe. And so we can look to the future and cope with integration with those who are there. Because that is what burdens citizens the most.

Mr President, Commissioner, thank you very much for this deep dive into the important matter of the EU-Africa Partnership. And, in the long term, there is not much on the planet that matters more to Europe, to Europe's future, than the EU-Africa Partnership, since this is nothing other than an important, a close, a deep and meaningful neighbourhood –it's neighbourhood. Some might think, when they think about Africa, in all its diversity, it would be about development, and development is important. Some might think it would be about migration, and migration is important. Some might also see it's about youth – strong youth – in Africa, striving for prospects. Some might think it is about business partnerships, and I want to clearly emphasise and underline that these things are connected. Actually, when it comes to development, time and again I quote Ronald Reagan, who said, 'The best social programme is a job'. And the same is true for development – the best development aid is economic partnership. This is why Global Gateway is of the utmost importance in our EU-Africa partnership, but also when it comes to other parts of the world, to try to influence the rest of the world under the umbrella of other values than the values we strive for. Then, time and again, I underline – also to our African partners – that it's the EU that is trustworthy, it's the EU that's rule-of-law based, and it's the EU that's reliable in the longer term. And this is why partners in the EU and partners in Africa belong together for the better of the population of both.

Mr President, what a pity the Commission President left our plenary debate about the Commission work programme. But I'm more than happy that the most experienced commissioner, Vice-President Maroš Šefčovič, is with us this afternoon, because it is an important matter we have to discuss. I kindly ask the Vice-President to convey the messages of this plenary debate to the Commission President. I have to say, I voted for her in her first election six years ago, in her second election one year ago – even while the Member States didn't even provide us with more than one candidate for this position, but this is all a future perspective – and I have defended, as has the majority of this House, the Commission President against the confidence vote we had here. Having said that, I really want to ask the Commission President to not allow herself to get distracted by these confidence votes from the extremists of this House. Because when I was thinking in the beginning of this mandate that now the right policies will be taken from the side of the European Commission in terms of deregulation for our economy and, of course, also in terms of security and to tackle the crises of our times, then I think it was a positive, optimistic approach of the beginning of a mandate. We must not allow ourselves to be distracted because one extreme wants to destroy our economy, the other extreme wants to destroy our security. We have to take care of both in Europe – our economy and our security – because both are existential. We need a Europe with more freedom to the inside and more strength to the outside. Therefore, I kindly ask the Commission President to remain a friend of freedom in that sense, and a leader in terms of security for Europe.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. When it comes to our Europeans' access to the digital age, to social media, to artificial intelligence, it's not just about a company, even if it's a big one, it's not just about a platform, it's about how we deal with the risks and how we deal with the opportunities. Fear is a bad adviser. This principle is very, very important, but the fear is very different from the fear, the fear of the risks, which are evident, which are there, which often already occur. Only today, a teacher from Tyrol in my home country Austria wrote me how much addiction potential for children and adolescents – and actually everyone – is already in social media, where, due to artificial intelligence in algorithms, much is designed for addiction, which people then develop in one way or another. That's dangerous. At the same time, as a friend of freedom, I also want innovation in Europe. I don't want us to be consumers of what is invented and produced and distributed in other parts. I want European companies to have the freedom to innovate in the field of artificial intelligence, based on European values. And ultimately, I want freedom, freedom of expression, freedom of the press to be not only the freedom of the loudest and the most extreme, and perhaps the most nude, but really the freedom of the voices reflected, the quiet voices, the marginalized. All this can only be achieved with a corresponding human contribution to the digital age.

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, while here in the European Parliament we have to discuss and vote on confidence votes against our Commission's President from the extreme right and from the extreme left, which is already kind of a shame, the Commission's President has just visited India and reached out for prosperous future cooperation. There are not many things sustainably so important as this. The reason is India is not only the biggest country on Earth, it is also the country where Europe can prove its strength to the outside in the very fields we Europeans care about. I have already fought my election campaigns with the clear message. I want Europe to thrive, with more strength to the outside and more freedom to the inside, of course. India, in terms of labour, in terms of people, in terms of education, in terms of skills, and in all the many other fields colleagues have already mentioned, from technology to security, is and will remain and become an even more important partner for us Europeans. So let's go for it.

Mr President, Commissioner, Minister, today marks 7 October. After 11 September 2001, the world took care of Afghanistan, but it didn't work out well. After 7 October 2023, we will see whether the world takes care of the Palestinian territories and where it will lead, because the ideology of different rights for men and women, the ideology of treating not only men and women differently, but also boys and girls, different communities differently, leads always from bad to worse. This happens in many kinds of ideological regimes, and this happens in Islamist regimes especially, and these days in particular. This is why the earthquake of 31 August is a big tragedy. It caused more than 2 000 losses in terms of lives and many other victims, and the European Union must take care of it. Humanitarian aid is provided by the European Union, and the EU remains the largest donor of humanitarian aid on Earth, also in this case. But women are affected more and girls are affected more, and communities which are not supported by the regime are affected more. This is what we must not allow to happen anywhere on Earth. And this is why humanitarian aid also must come along with a clear political message for human dignity.

Madam President, first, I want to make the remark that also during this war and after this war, we in this Chamber have to talk to each other also on different matters. This is why I advocate for a bit of a de‑escalation in the language. I hear 'shame, shame, shame' all the time and things like that – I do not think this is the way to deal with it. Secondly, the whole mess has been started by the Iranian regime. I am very happy, Ms Kallas, that we have you here and not your predecessor during these times and generally, but I also want to remind you that the Iranian regime is very much aligned with the Russian regime at the moment. These are those who fight the political West, which we are supposed to defend, I think. The Iranian regime might already regret this attack, but it is still there and Hamas is also still there. Usually, we are against political Islam, we are against Islamic terrorism. Usually, we are for democracy. Israel is a vibrant democracy. Of course, I am very much in favour of supplying help to Gaza. I very much recognise that Israel itself is also supplying help to Gaza. I am not against the two‑state solution. I am for a two‑state solution, but after a long process of deweaponisation of the Palestinian territories.

Mr President, I should like to thank the Commissioner for his courageous speech. I'm happy to have for the development policies and efforts of this Parliament such a champion in the European Commission when it comes to sustainable development. I am also happy that the European Parliament today managed to decide, in our voting, on a very particular specific message. Namely, we welcome the outcome of the fourth international conference on financing for development in Seville as a significant effort to reform the international financial architecture, readdress the cost of borrowing and scale up investment to close the financing gap for sustainable development. The very clear message that we have taken today, and since there is a lot at stake when it comes to development, is that it's often about life and death, and it's about opportunities for generations because there's a lot at stake. I want to speak very parliamentarily as a parliamentarian today. We have decided on that today because we were not able to decide before Seville here in the European Parliament. And the reason was not Charles Goerens, who was the rapporteur for this file, whom I commend for his efforts and for his excellent work in the negotiations – very compromise-oriented, and this is what it should be about. But after these negotiations, this compromise was targeted by amendments. We didn't have a chance for majorities – nearly all of them, except one. And this hit. And this is why last time we couldn't decide on Seville. This can be a lesson for all of us to stick together, because it's a lot at stake, as I have mentioned, to find positive compromises and to contribute to sustainable development in the best sense we can as the European Parliament.

Mr President, I should like to thank the Commissioner for his courageous speech. I'm happy to have for the development policies and efforts of this Parliament such a champion in the European Commission when it comes to sustainable development. I am also happy that the European Parliament today managed to decide, in our voting, on a very particular specific message. Namely, we welcome the outcome of the fourth international conference on financing for development in Seville as a significant effort to reform the international financial architecture, readdress the cost of borrowing and scale up investment to close the financing gap for sustainable development. The very clear message that we have taken today, and since there is a lot at stake when it comes to development, is that it's often about life and death, and it's about opportunities for generations because there's a lot at stake. I want to speak very parliamentarily as a parliamentarian today. We have decided on that today because we were not able to decide before Seville here in the European Parliament. And the reason was not Charles Goerens, who was the rapporteur for this file, whom I commend for his efforts and for his excellent work in the negotiations – very compromise-oriented, and this is what it should be about. But after these negotiations, this compromise was targeted by amendments. We didn't have a chance for majorities – nearly all of them, except one. And this hit. And this is why last time we couldn't decide on Seville. This can be a lesson for all of us to stick together, because it's a lot at stake, as I have mentioned, to find positive compromises and to contribute to sustainable development in the best sense we can as the European Parliament.

Very interesting that you said you have asked the question several times and not received an answer; then it might be the case that the question is the problem, not the answer. That's the one side. The other side is, I mean, we have still a war ongoing. Putin and Russia's aggression against Ukraine. We have on the table several ideas of new Member States, which are not yet official candidate countries. Ukraine is officially a candidate country. But we need also here the holistic approach. We have six Western Balkan countries. We have the Eastern Partnership countries. We will have a future Europe for future generations, which will be entirely one integrated Europe in unity with freedom and peace and prosperity. This is what we have to thrive for. And polemics or extremism will not work on this path ahead.

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, we need a Europe with more strength to the outside and more freedom to the inside. And at the moment, we are experiencing an era when the European Commission contributes a lot to a Europe with more freedom to the inside: deregulation, simplification, competitiveness – that's what we were thriving for for a long time and what's happening now. But we also need a Europe with more strength to the outside for the sake of European values, for the sake of the interests of the Europeans of this generation and of generations to come, and that means fostering the enlargement process. We have to be aware of the fact that the so-called 'methodologies' of accession to the European Union just haven't worked. They haven't worked for many years. I remember at the beginning of the last mandate, here, we were more or less obliged to define a new methodology for the enlargement process. Did it help? No, not at all. While many European countries, nearly all of them, want to be part of the integrated Europe, of the European Union, the best shape our continent ever had in history, while this is the case on one side, on the other side, we are reluctant and stuck in bureaucracy, in so-called 'methodologies', when it comes to enlargement. We need a more holistic and a more visionary approach here.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Today we are discussing the return of those Ukrainian children who were abducted from Ukraine in the course of the Putin-Russia war of aggression. You have to keep that in mind, and you have to tell that to the whole world – and you have to tell that to those who keep trying to relativise. They're the smallest, they're the most vulnerable. It is those who would be most reliant on the help of other people on whom Putin-Russia commits its war crimes. I have no doubt that Russian parents love their children as much as all parents love their children. But I can't imagine anyone approving what's going on with these kids. The children must be brought back. This must be part of any future peace agreement for a free Ukraine, and without retraumatization and without new traumatization, these children must be brought back. They deserve a future in freedom and a future in the knowledge of their Ukrainian identity.

Madam President, dear colleagues, dear honourable High Representative/Vice-President Kallas, first, I want to again emphasise, as I do time and again, the difference between Islam and Islamism, between the religion of Islam and the harmful ideology of political Islam, between the religion that deserves and enjoys all the rights of religious freedom, on the one side, and Islamism – a violent, harmful ideology causing bloodshed all over the world. It's important to emphasise that because we Europeans, we the European Union, defend religious freedom and we also defend ourselves against attacks of Islamism, and we defend those who would be attacked by jihadists, by Islamists all over the world. This is exactly what we do with today's resolution, because Christians were killed and tortured because they were Christians, because they are Christians. That's the reason why I want to praise and appreciate, High Representative, your clear stance when it comes to our adversary in Moscow and everything related to that. I want to draw attention to the fact that Moscow is aligned with Tehran, Pyongyang and Islamism, and our adversaries to the east are more or less on the same table against Europe. We have to see the connection. This is also what we address to the outside and to the inside to fight this kind of attacks against our civilisation.

Madam President, My Italian is just enough to agree with what you have just said, Madam President, and I thank you very much for that. Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! It is important that we invest in civil protection in Europe in these times. It is important that the new European Commission sets clear priorities for security and for the economy, for the economy and for security and for the interconnections between them. Of course, civil protection is also part of security. Responsibility is always the responsibility of others. We do not only provide civil protection for ourselves – to a certain extent selfishly – but also for all people in our society and also for future generations. That's why it's so important to invest now. We have prepared – in my penultimate period here in the European Parliament, I was allowed to negotiate this, the Civil Protection Mechanism. It has also had a positive impact on forest fires, when European Member States worked together to combat these natural disasters. What was important back then, and what is important now, and what I would like to recommend to you, Commissioner, is that we think in a subsidiary way. In Austria, it is the Civil Protection Association and the fire brigades, of course always together with the Federal Army and professionals in all areas and volunteers in all areas, who cooperate on a subsidiary basis so that civil protection can really succeed and civil protection can succeed, and to develop this European civil protection not centrally, but also with those affected on the ground, that seems to me to be so important. Then we are on the right track.

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, humanitarian organisations call Sudan and the situation there literally one of the worst humanitarian nightmares of recent history. So, rightly, late at night now in the European Parliament, we use the time to reflect on this worst humanitarian nightmare of recent history. We all know the Russian attack against Ukraine is close geographically and is also close to our way of life. But there are also other crises on earth. In terms of quantity, Sudan is one of the major crises, and also in terms of cruelty – even sexual violence is used as a weapon of war in this crisis. Many among the most evil powers on our planet are present in Sudan, among others: Islamist terror, Islamist ideology and violence, as well as Putin's Russian forces who try to exploit the soil and to torture the population there as well. I thank Hilde Vautmans and the other co-negotiators on this file and I'm happy that we explicitly mention the World Food Programme in this file, which has rightly received the Nobel Peace Prize a few years ago. Three World Food Programme workers were killed some time ago in Sudan. And we can see that the funding of the World Food Programme today is the same as ten years ago, while the number of starving people is four times as much as that time. And my proposal today is that maybe it can be, even in these times, a cooperation project between EU and US to provide more funding to the World Food Programme, because fighting starvation must be something that's common ground for the EU and US.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! I did not make it easy for me to give Ursula von der Leyen a boost of confidence for a second term of office as President of the Commission. I have also received many critical e-mails from citizens for this voting behaviour, which I have made transparent. However, after 100 days of this new European Commission, I can say that I would do it again because there is no ‘continue as before’ with regard to the old period. We discussed intensively with Ursula von der Leyen before her election here in the European Parliament that there must be a way out of this over-regulation, that Europe must take the path that Montesquieu described with the truly liberal principle: If there is no need to make a law, then there is no need to make a law. And now with the excellent proposal on migration, with the excellent proposal on the so-called Omnibus package on deregulation, with the Global Gateway that will increase our competitiveness, and with security policy, there are many good reasons to see Europe's stability secured in a high-wave world.

Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, I visited Syria three years ago. In the main place, I met with international organisations present there. Already then their recommendation was to make exceptions in humanitarian cases from the sanctions, which would have been important and which remain important, while sanctions also remain important, as long as we don't know whether jihadists have turned. Have we learned our lessons from the other so-called 'Arab Spring', which was nothing but the change from winter to winter in many Arab countries? We don't yet know. The outrage and violence last weekend show a different picture. We should align with international organisations, Commissioner. We should align with organisations important for us in Europe, especially in the field of border management, such as the UNODC. We should also align with our strong partner in the region, Israel, which has taken care to ensure that the military threat from whatever regime will not increase but decrease, and which takes care of stability in the region, in the buffer zone there.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Very often, like many colleagues who criticise over-regulation, I have criticised the inability of the European Union to cope with illegal migration from this lectern. And now the new European Commission is coming into action at a considerable pace. Yesterday we discussed the fight against overregulation here because the European Commission made a good proposal, and now, so early in the mandate, there is the proposal for deportations – if only one in five who are not allowed to stay is deported – so far this is bad. This proposal from the European Commission, if it is implemented, if it survives the parliamentary process well here in the House or perhaps even gets better, will lead to those who deserve and need asylum because they have a right to it, which is also obtained in the EU. But the vast majority of those who come illegally and have no right to asylum can be deported faster and more effectively. Full support for the Commission and for Commissioner Magnus Brunner on this path!

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! An open word: My heart is bleeding that every day I get complaints from citizens of my home country Austria, from entrepreneurs about how overregulation makes business more difficult, how overregulation destroys jobs, how overregulation prevents growth because orders cannot come at all or can not be perceived, how overregulation leads to the fact that we cannot survive on the world market with our companies that provide the highest quality services, because overregulation drives prices. My heart is bleeding because the European Union, we need it for our security, we need it for our economy when we think of the single market and everything that this single market has made possible for decades. However, if the reputation of the European Union among its own citizens is damaged by this over-regulation, then it is the highest railway that acts. The European Commission must understand that the path of the past period was the wooden path. It was wrong what was done. The supply chain law was wrong, it did not get my approval here in the European Parliament. Now, with the word omnibus, it should come to the fact that it is deregulated, that companies can work freely, that the European economic market can recover and that there is a future for Austria and Europe's companies and Europe's workers.

Mr President! Mr Executive Vice-President! Dear colleagues! Cooperation between conservatives and right-wing extremists as a threat to competitiveness in the EU – in other words, this is already a title that seems to be on the agenda and is to be made with the election campaign in Germany. The speeches of colleagues Repasi, López, Freund and Schirdewan from the far left made it quite clear that this is not a European political debate at all, but an election campaign in Germany. This is an abuse of this Parliament; But we can discuss everything. Secondly, we are the Christian Democratic Group here – the European People's Party; The Conservatives are another group. This is something that needs to be kept in check, because every now and then we try to throw everything in one pot. My distance from extremes to both sides is rock-solid, whether it's left-wing extremists or right-wing extremists. I keep this distance, the European People's Party keeps this distance, and that is self-evident. In the second largest city of my home country Austria – Graz – a communist governs. In Austria, the Social Democrats pulled out of the affair when it came to forming a government. Therefore, the Federal President had to instruct the head of the Freedom Party to form a government. And who does not withdraw from the affair, but tries to do the best for the state? Once again, the People's Party. What makes the extremes great? Those who keep putting them at the centre, as well as those from the left who have requested this debate today. Let's strengthen the middle! I like to work with Conservatives and Liberals, with Social Democrats and Greens, and if Extremes approve good motions, the motions will not be bad. This is real parliamentarism. This is the way we should deal with each other – by strengthening the political centre.

Mr President! Commissioner! Dear colleagues! It is a tragedy of unimaginable proportions that is taking place in the Congo, and I will say right at the beginning: If one or the other in Europe asks ‘What is our concern?’, then I say, for many reasons, it is our concern! Firstly, one of the values that Europe represents is human dignity and freedoms. That is, it affects us when people experience such suffering as in the Congo right now. Secondly, we also need the partnership with the states in the region to push back negative influences, such as Putin's Russia, that are being attempted there. Thirdly, of course, we are also concerned by any movement of illegal migration through organised smuggling, through the machinations that are attempted in this way. Therefore, it is not a gift if we want to help, but it is in our own interest. Fourthly, We need to look closely at who is doing what. If the negative developments emanate from Rwanda, ultimately the terror to which the civilian population in the Congo is exposed, then this cannot leave us to sleep quietly, because Rwanda is considered a partner state, has long been embedded in a project of the European Union's Global Gateway initiative and much more. If we see that even the World Food Programme - which always helps when it is somehow possible - had to withdraw because infrastructure and communication are destroyed, then that must alarm us; then we must look and contribute to the solution and urge Rwanda to end the negative, violent activities.

Mr President, when a person goes missing and remains missing, not only is this person affected in one way or another, but many people around; friends and family, parents and children would be affected by that. It is a pity that we have to say today the absolute rule to avoid persons going missing also in armed conflict is not respected anymore. There are more and more missing persons. Particularly Ukraine is suffering; Ukrainian children, men and women are suffering. Especially, as we all know, children from Ukraine in a large number would be brought to Russia and maybe other places. We don't know about their whereabouts. They go missing. The International Red Cross documents that more and more persons go missing. This is why, in the European Parliament, we time and again have to underline and emphasise the importance of human rights, of humanitarian law, and among humanitarian law rules, avoiding persons going missing is a major rule. Of course, also the migration routes which are caused by human trafficking, by smugglers, by organised crime, are places where persons go missing: 60 000 and more in Ukraine, 40 000 were documented by the Red Cross, nearly 30 000 only in the last years in the Mediterranean when it's about illegal migration routes. There are also regimes on this planet who purposely use persons going missing against their own population. This is something that happens in North Korea. This is something that happens in the Iranian mullah regime. And this is something that's also used against Europe when it comes to illegal migration, many times purposely. This is why it is so important to emphasise this issue and to bring it to the table of this very European Parliament.