Speeches

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. Mr Vice-President, thank you for responding to almost every intervention in this parliamentary debate, in this reflection. This shows how factually we are debating the Switzerland report here in the European Parliament and how helpful – hopefully not only for the European Commission, but also for the Swiss Federal Council – this report from the European Parliament can be. I applied to adopt this report after Jean-Claude Juncker, the former President of the Commission, said on the change of periods: Among the few things he regretted was that no framework agreement had been concluded with Switzerland. As an Australian, I thought: Perhaps I can make a parliamentary contribution to this, but not alone, but, like everything that happens in a parliament, together with my colleagues. That is why I would like to say thank you at the end of these two and a half years and these months of intensive negotiations – especially to the co-negotiators here in the European Parliament, especially for the second largest group here in the House, the Social Democrats, my Austrian compatriot Andreas Schieder. But I would also like to thank the European Commission and the Vice-President and his team for the good cooperation and also the Swiss side, especially the cantons, which have made a very, very constructive contribution, and the colleagues in the Swiss Parliament. This is not a conclusion, but a decision that indicates what is possible in cooperation between Switzerland and the European Union. I would also like to thank my advisory team Caroline Parsché now, Kevin Kaiser in recent years and also Blagoy Klimov on the part of the parliamentary group, who have supported this process accordingly. The ball is now in the hands of the European Commission and the Bundesrat. We will accompany this, as we always do, with parliamentary attention, critically, but constructively critically. Let me give you one more thought: We have to say goodbye to the idea that if one wins in negotiations, the other must absolutely lose. This will not be the case between the EU Commission and the Federal Council, between the EU and Switzerland. Both will win if we do it right, and there is a lot to win - for Switzerland, we know this very well here, but there is also a lot to win for the EU.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Switzerland is an important state in the European family of states, and Switzerland does a lot geopolitically in peace work, in mediation and thus represents what Europe is, what Europe wants for the world and what European civilization should be now and in the future. This is a dimension of Switzerland that may not have been sufficiently taken into account in the negotiations in the European Commission in the past. Overall, transparency in the negotiations seems to me to have been too low in the past – in both directions. If, as an Austrian, I can say that we have had concerns in the past – on price dumping, on wage dumping, on social dumping – within the European Union, with the opening up of the East, with enlargement, with the strengthening of the European Union through enlargement, but even within the European Union, we have been able to resolve these open questions and no longer have to have these concerns. It is therefore possible to participate in the internal market, also as a high-wage and high-price country, just as Switzerland, and especially Switzerland, is one. It is possible to benefit from the single market, as Switzerland does on a very large scale, without having these concerns. This message is also conveyed in the report of the European Parliament. A common market needs a common place of jurisdiction. Everyone who attends a trade school knows this already in the first grade. A common place of jurisdiction is important to enable fairness, clear rules and compliance with those rules. This is for Europe, for the European single market, the European Court of Justice. They are not foreign judges. I think this is a deliberately wrong term. It is fair judges who decide there, and in order for the internal market to work - for Switzerland and for everyone else - the European Court of Justice is needed. The report also speaks clearly about this. However, the report also covers two other important areas. In addition to geopolitics, which I have already mentioned, these are science and security. We want Switzerland back to Horizon Europe. Switzerland is an important research country, an important innovation country, a science hotspot not only for Europe, but worldwide. We therefore need Switzerland back to Horizon Europe. All sides will benefit from it. The same is true in the area of security. I am pleased, and this is also reflected in the European Parliament's report, that Switzerland is seriously considering participating in PESCO, the Permanent Structured Cooperation of the Armed Forces not only of the EU Member States, but of many other countries. The United Kingdom, Canada, the United States and Norway, for example, are already present as non-EU Member States. This closer cooperation on security is warranted, especially in the light of current geopolitical developments. The report also clearly states that Switzerland is involved in the bloodless defense against the bloody war of aggression by Putin-Russia in the form of sanctions. Honestly, For me, this was a crucial moment for this report. I would have done the reporting, the role as chief negotiator here, if Switzerland had not made this decision, immediately at the beginning of the war, by the way. This is expressed in a positive way, and now there are many levels of cooperation, including Sky Shield on air defence, where, in addition to my home country of Austria, Switzerland and others are also included. These are lines that can be taken up in future negotiations, Commissioner, Vice-President, with the Swiss Federal Council. We must resolve these open institutional issues in the above sense. But we can think more broadly, including geopolitics, science and security. This is reflected in the European Parliament's report on EU-Switzerland relations.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner Lenarčič sits here and has to represent the European Commission, in which quite different members are responsible for the fact that the European Commission's Western Balkans policy has completely failed in this mandate. Josep Borrell is absent, Mr Várhelyi is absent, or Mr Lajčák as Special Representative for the Kosovo-Serbia Dialogue is absent, does not take part in this debate. I wonder: Where is it more important for these representatives of the European Commission to be now than here? I would like to ask these three gentlemen if they have ever visited the Kosovar valley Krusha e Madhe. This is a valley in which all boys and men were murdered or abducted in times of war, in which women founded an agricultural cooperative to make ends meet. I visited Krusha e Madhe and have an impression of why what is. Kosovars are afraid these days when such things happen as they have in recent weeks. The European Commission must not go back to the agenda, not make appeasement again, but must show a clear edge towards the Vučić regime. And I can only ask the Kosovar side not to be provoked – however bad it gets – not to be provoked and to contribute to de-escalation.

Mr President, Mr Vice-President, ladies and gentlemen! The people of Poland are right when they warned of the danger of Putin-Russia for years, if not decades. The people of Poland have participated a lot in history and have a very, very clear positioning. The colleagues here in the European Parliament are often very, very helpful, and the rest of Europe now sees how the people of Poland also defend Europe in the first place when it comes to the Putin-Russia attack. But the government of Poland plays with these feelings on the one hand. The government of Poland pretends to know better than anyone else. The Government of Poland is not ready for Europe-wide cooperation. Here we are again talking about what needs to be done in the area of migration. But it is the Polish government that often stands in the way when it comes to curbing irregular migration. And now there is a huge scandal: It is precisely the government of Poland that is allowing a visa scandal, whereby people for whom this is not foreseen come to the European Union, to the Schengen zone, through corruption - and this is a government that I do not want any EU citizen, any EU citizen, including those of Poland, for which we are all here in the European Parliament.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, When one speaks of the great innovations, inventions of mankind, then one speaks about printing, for example, or about the electric current, perhaps about penicillin. But freedom of the press is also a great innovation of humanity, by the way, as is parliamentarism. We in Europe defend freedom of the press in particularly difficult times, because the Internet age, because social media has produced not only positives, but also negatives: Fake news, hate speech, disinformation in an organized way, the incitement of people, the division of our societies threatens. That is why freedom of the press is so important, because freedom of the press enables information that is tested, that is researched, that can be trusted, because journalists are behind it, who can and like to do their job and do it according to ethical standards. That's the big difference. Same with food. We would not eat toxic foods, but we are all constantly confronted with toxic information. So that there is also good, useful information, truthful, researched, there is freedom of the press, and we hold it high in Europe.

Madam President, Commissioner! Anti-Semitism, as its victims, has primarily Jewish fellow human beings. But anti-Semitism is endangering our societies as a whole, endangering trust in our society, endangering freedom, defending the values of human dignity, freedoms, what Europe should be, what the free world as a whole should be. In my home country of Austria, the President of the Parliament commissioned studies on anti-Semitism every two years. The results are clear and they speak a clear language, including in relation to the title of today’s debate. Anti-Semitism comes from the far left in the political spectrum, comes from the far right in the political spectrum. Anti-Semitism today also often comes from people with a migrant background. And then there is the old, evil face of European anti-Semitism. And there is anti-Semitism directed against the State of Israel, which calls into question the existence of the State of Israel, which approaches the State of Israel with double standards or does not respect Israeli democracy. All of this has to be taken into account, leaving nothing out of it. It is not enough to fight anti-Semitism. It is about making Jewish life possible without fear in Europe, especially in Europe, worldwide, but especially in Europe. That it can develop, because that enriches Europe, that belongs to Europe, that is part of our identity.

Dear Mr President, Commissioner! Turkey now wants to be called Türkiye and I respect that. Each entity should decide for itself what it wants to be called, and Türkiye will certainly not become a Member State of the European Union. It is important to keep this in mind, it is important to communicate this to the representatives of Türkiye and also to inform EU citizens that we must live together in the immediate vicinity of Türkiye and make the most of it. There will be no membership. There are very different signals from Türkiye. On the one hand, yes, the re-election of Erdoğan, and that must be respected. On the other hand, the report we are debating here also says that the conditions were not the same for candidates. This is not in line with European standards. On the other hand, we have the pressure on Greece and Cyprus, our Member States, which was also discussed today. But the pressure that was constructed by migration at our external borders was taken back by Türkiye. Let's look for ways of working together, but with clarity about the impossibility of membership.

Madam President Evelyn Regner, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! We are adopting new rules for the European Parliament, for parliamentary work, for parliamentarians, and that is important. There were already rules, and the rules were partly broken, which was the reason for thinking about new rules. It is important to have rules, because to protect parliamentarism is to protect democracy. This is where the laws for Europe are made, where the people of Europe are represented vis-à-vis the world. It is important that this is done on behalf of the citizens who are represented there. It is not in one's own name that a parliamentarian acts and not in the name of any particular interest, but the common good is at the centre. To be able to represent those who are allowed to be represented on the basis of our right to vote, on the basis of democracy and on the basis of our parliamentary system, that is actually the privilege and the temporary task, as Sir Karl Popper, the philosopher, defines democracy as being limited to time, and then everything is back to zero, and then it is decided who will continue to do so. In this context, it must also be said that even the best rules are only the second best protection for our parliamentarism. Because integrity is important, personal incorruptibility is important, character and an understanding of what the job description, is the job description of a Member of Parliament. In a democracy, this is the responsibility of the nominating parties first and then above all of the voters, and all over Europe.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! We are dealing here with a tragedy of enormous proportions. This one shipwreck has a huge scale in itself. There are deaths in the Mediterranean almost every day, and we need to see what the causes are. And the causes start at the beginning of a chain of tragedies, and this chain starts with disinformation, with people in countries of origin getting false information about how to get off the ground and what to expect in the European Union. Who is spreading this disinformation? It is organised smuggling. It is human trafficking that is taking place here in an organized manner, and it is one of the worst forms of organized crime of our time. We also know that state actors around the world are also using this organised crime to put pressure on the European Union. The main sufferers are those who set out, who invest their wealth in this organized smuggling crime and who set out on a dangerous path, some going to their deaths. This is the tragedy. Those who survive come to the external borders of the European Union and have an asylum procedure, and you all know, ladies and gentlemen, that more than 80% of those who enter an asylum procedure are not entitled to asylum. But what do they lose after they have lost their fortune, after they have just saved their lives? They continue to lose life, some many years of life. That is why it was so important to implement this concept that we fight disinformation, that we want to speed up asylum procedures, that we strengthen external border protection and that we clearly communicate to people in the countries of origin in the languages of the countries of origin, as Deutsche Welle is already doing, what the real prospects are in Europe and how dangerous the crossing is. That is why it is so important that this broad access to fight organised crime, which endangers lives at the gates of the European Union, is also taken into account in this resolution.

Madam President, dear colleagues, first I want to emphasise that we must never forget that the worst crimes in mankind’s history were committed by Austrians and Germans. And given that, I want to remember that we have commemorated today in this very European Parliament, the massacre of Srebrenica is a part of many war crimes in the wars of the former Yugoslavia. That’s why many of us are wearing these signs today. And this must lead us to the clear analysis that in parts of Europe, like the so-called Republika Srpska, the leadership does not exist of people who share with their children that things like that must never happen again. They don’t think that there is some responsibility, if not for the past, if they are later generations, then at least for the future. In order to take care of the future, we have to take care of reconciliation, of freedom, of human dignity, of rule of law, of democracy in present times. And this is what’s not done in Republika Srpska. This harms Bosnia and Herzegovina, this harms the Western Balkans in its entirety, because the same is true for the leadership in Belgrade. And this is why we have to stick to these very values I have just mentioned in our outreach to Bosnia and Herzegovina on behalf of the citizens, not on behalf of Brussels, on behalf of the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Madam President, dear colleagues, this is called a report on the relations with the so—called Palestinian Authority. So first and foremost we could question whether this is really a priority given the geopolitical situation, but OK, let’s talk about it. I had the privilege to be co—negotiator on a report on a so-called two—state solution half a year ago, and I managed to put into there the language of a security guarantee for Israel, which would be needed, in my view, at least, that a so-called two—state solution could even be considered. There is no democratically legitimised representation of the so-called Palestinian Authority, but OK, let’s discuss it. But when we look deeper into the outcome of this document, it’s actually a blaming and shaming document against the only democracy, the only rule—of—law—based state in the Middle East, our strong partner state, Israel, which is fighting terrorism, fighting a kind of terrorism that also seeks to reach out to our European soil, which is present on EU soil –Hamas, Hezbollah and others, and they are supported by whom as proxies of this regime? By the Iranian regime. And who else is the Iranian regime supporting? The Putin Russian regime that’s attacking us and has been attacking us in hybrid means before February 22 and with military means in Ukraine since February 22. So let’s connect the dots. For me, I felt sorry for the Foreign Affairs Committee that it decided on this report and I would feel sorry for this very plenary if it would decide in favour of this report.

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, the situation in Belarus has disappeared a bit from public attention due to this brutal and unjustified war of Putin’s Russia. But the situation in Belarus is still bad. It became even worse. There are political prisoners we are talking about today, there are people accused of something even if they only conduct their right to fight for freedom, and then they are imprisoned and they are persecuted by the bodies of Lukashenko’s regime – and this regime is also supporting this Putin/Russia war. I want to recommend from the side of this very European Parliament to include the Belarusian freedom movement into the European political community, EPC. I request the decision—takers on the administrative level, in the executive branches in Europe, to decide to include also this only remaining state, which is not yet represented in the European political community, via its freedom movement into this community, meeting on 1 June in the Republic of Moldova. This will be a clear signal of the unity of the free world.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, On European soil, we have become alarmingly aware of what is the difference between the aggressor and the attacked, between the perpetrator and the victim, in a war. It is important in the history of Europe, even if we are talking about the Republic of Kosovo, to see that this is a country that had to free itself, that had to pay a high blood duty for its very existence. And the more surprising and beautiful it is that it is the Kosovars who, according to all the studies that exist in the Western Balkans, have the greatest confidence, the greatest optimism, the brightest view of the future in a way. These are the Kosovars. They applied for EU membership in December last year and will finally be allowed to travel visa-free on 1 January 2024, as other Europeans in the European Union have been allowed to do for a long time. But that's not a reason to celebrate, it's a lesson. And we have to learn that it obviously takes far too long on the bureaucratic path to make such self-evident decisions. It took too long to get visa-free. It shouldn't take so long to become a member of the EU. Kosovo has the euro, Kosovo has the youngest population in Europe, Kosovo has the best rule of law and democratic standard in the Western Balkans. Kosovo has a lot of future, confidence, religious freedom, one of the most modern constitutions in the world. So, Commissioner, I ask you to stop talking about both sides when it comes to dialogue. No longer to talk about both sides, I also ask Foreign Commissioner Borrell, I also ask Foreign Representative Lajčák when it comes to Kosovo, Serbia, but to see clearly that Kosovo is on the way to European integration.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner! About ten days ago I was allowed to visit Serbia, I was allowed to visit Belgrade, and I experienced a lot of hospitality, good conversations. I was allowed to visit the largest Orthodox church in the world, which is the largest because unfortunately the Hagia Sophia cannot currently be used as a church. But we are not provoked by the Erdoğan regime. I've seen what I always say: Serbia can be the Germany of the Western Balkans in terms of the economic driving force, the economic engine, the economic engine of the region. This is the perspective that needs to be created for Serbia. It is good that domestic problems are now being addressed, such as the possession of weapons. It was good that we were thinking of the victims of the recent attacks here in the European Parliament. I cry with the families of these victims. These are real domestic problems. We help Serbia on the way, not to take care of the southern neighbor and conduct mock battles, but to tackle the real problems, to live good neighborhood. That would be a European perspective.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Nigeria is the largest country in Africa. Nigeria is the seventh most populous country in the world. Nigeria is an important economic partner for us and a major goal of our development cooperation. But those in Nigeria who operate such a system of injustice as the one that puts this young man on death row should know that in the future the European Union will no longer be shrugging its shoulders at the fact that such conditions exist. This is the lesson of the geopolitical developments of our time. That's why it's so important that we address Nigeria clearly: It is not at all a crime to have a religious faith and to express this religious faith. This is part of religious freedom. Then without trial, without a public trial, without a lawyer and the like, not only to punish someone, but even to punish him with death, to want to take his life, to impose a death penalty, that is completely beyond the realm and unacceptable. This European Parliament stands up against this.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I keep reminding you of what Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in this Parliament on 1 March. On 1 March last year, shortly after the start of Putin’s Russia’s war of aggression – militarily against Ukraine, hybrid against all of us – she said in this special session of the European Parliament on this occasion: We must extend our hand and let it be extended to the other Russia. We see now – and again and again in the past –: There is the other Russia, like the two men we are discussing today who have been innocently imprisoned. And behind them are many others, thousands, perhaps tens of thousands – they are there. Those who commit these atrocities, who put innocent people in prison, should be told: As always, the good will win. And we work to make sure that the time is short until the good wins and until the criminals are also brought to their just punishment. For those who are fighting for freedom, let's say: We're really stretching out our hand. The free world, especially the European Union, stands behind you.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! Money means trust, trust in a product or a service or a work performance, of course trust in the fact that something good can be done with the money and that there is then creditworthiness in the return of this money. That is why it is so important to me that the title of this debate is not called cryptocurrencies, i.e. cryptocurrencies, but crypto assets. Because crypto is not money, but assets, and that is not a currency, because currencies – money – cannot be privatised. In the background, money needs democratically legitimate states that strengthen this trust. That is why it is so important that we, as representatives of the citizens of Europe, nevertheless closely monitor the independent European Central Bank and also form our opinion on what the European Central Bank is doing with our money, especially in these times of inflation and the challenges in so many areas. It is therefore important that we use this regulation to ensure that everything that comes with crypto assets is made on the entire chain, in which crypto assets and that we are questioning very, very critically what will happen if the eurozone enters this crypto assetBusiness should be aimed at at all and whether that would make sense. I am very critical of what is called the digital euro. I believe that receiving cash as a form of exercising freedom is a matter of course. As in all other areas, money laundering belongs, any kind of abuse must be combated, but therefore to question cash in total is certainly the wrong way. The circle closes because we have to strengthen this trust, which means money, every day. And we, as parliamentarians, are also called upon to do so.

Mr President, Commissioner, High Representative, ladies and gentlemen! It is important that the European Union, as the title of this item on the agenda says, develops a coherent strategy towards China. The strategic compass that we adopted not so long ago speaks a clear language, sees China as a strategic partner, as an economic competitor and as a systemic rival. All three dimensions must be considered. Unfortunately, the systemic rival seems to come more and more to the fore. Since I was allowed to visit China several times more than half a decade ago, the situation seems to have deteriorated significantly – in terms of human rights, in terms of freedom of conscience. Hong Kong, for example, was a thriving trading city, has become a police state, in a sense. The systemic rivalry is great, and even on the global stage it must be said: Show me who your friends are, and I'll tell you who you are. So please don't be friendly with Putin, Russia and the atrocities from there. Economic competition requires reciprocity. It cannot be that European companies do not have legal certainty in China, while Chinese companies on the European market get that legal certainty like everyone else. And, of course, the strategic partnership needs to be re-examined.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! Being a citizen of the European Union means something that has weight. Being a citizen of the Union means living in a democratic system governed by the rule of law. And that is anything but self-evident. This is something that the European Union upholds. And that is something that is consolidated and further developed in the annual Rule of Law Report that we are negotiating here and now in the European Parliament. And it is something in which the EU level is there for all citizens. Be it the citizens of Hungary or Poland or any other Member State, where, to say the least, there can be critical questions about the rule of law everywhere from one day to the next. Rule of law structures based on values that are upheld in the European Union, such as human dignity and freedoms. And that is what the European Union enforces for its citizens. So if the EU level demands something from Member States, it is not a centralist wish from Brussels, but to stand on the side of those who deserve and get the rule of law systems because they are EU citizens. The rule of law is the European Union's great promise to its own citizens, but also to the world. Investing in Europe means being sure that law applies and that law is spoken. That is why we are an attractive location. And that is why it is so important that we uphold the rule of law. I thank the European Commission for the annual report and, above all, the colleagues from almost all political groups here in the House for the good negotiations on the Rule of Law Report and look forward to a strong vote from the representation of citizens for citizens in the spirit of the rule of law with colleagues from all Member States.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! In a democratic parliamentary system, it is normal that there is a constructive rivalry between the representatives of the citizens here in the parliamentary framework and the representation of the State sector, the executive branch of the European Commission in the European Union. But it is important that we live that, because that also keeps things in balance, and that is also what we defend and represent on a global level, what we wish for all people: to live in a democratic parliamentary system. If I have to make some critical comments on the European Commission from a parliamentary perspective, I must admit that Commissioner McGuinness, who is among us today, is not the addressee of such criticism. She is an experienced parliamentarian, she was a member of this House, she was elected by citizens and she appreciates parliamentarism. But it is not long ago that a Commissioner here in the House said to his neighbours in a speech by Members, in a series of speeches by Members: How many idiots are left to talk about? He then admitted that this was meant differently. In the same plenary week, a member of the European Commission showed a member of parliament the famous windscreen wiper. This cannot be done, and it cannot be done in the same way that the representation of citizens is planted, as we say in Austria, simply by not answering legitimate questions for citizens on the part of parliamentarians on the part of the Member States and then the European Commission does nothing.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. What the free world has so far failed to achieve with many attempts – with the nuclear deal, without the nuclear deal, with sanctions, perhaps sometimes with half-heartedness or a bit of naivety – and, I respect that, is now creating a civic movement, actually a civic movement in Iran, namely to bring this diabolical regime to the brink of its existence. This is very, very valuable for the citizens of Iran, for the future of Iran, but also for the entire Middle East, for the whole world, because Iran is a threat to its own citizens. The Iranian regime is this threat, and the Iranian regime is also it for its neighbours, especially for our partner state Israel and also for us, also through Islamist terror, which is supported by Iran, which does not even shy away from poisoning schoolgirls on the part of this regime, so that they cannot go to school. This regime is brought to the brink of its existence and overcome.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, It is important that we debate the fight against organised crime here in plenary, in the European Parliament, because organised crime is even worse than simple crime. It's not just a crime here, it's a crime there. Organized crime means networking, and organized crime means that more is still being destroyed than by the immediate individual crime, but trust in our society is being destroyed, and life chances of people are being destroyed by organized crime. Organised crime is not alone. It's not just local, regional, national, it's not even European, it's global, it's related to corruption in our societies, and it's related from outside to what experts call hybrid warfare. Forces of the world that want to weaken Europe, that want to weaken free societies, make use of organized crime. That is why the global fight against organised crime, with a strong contribution from the European Union, is so important.

Mr President, I feel that I want to ask the question today how many Members of the European Commission are left? There are two of them today, so twice as much as it is usual in this Chamber. Well, the issue is maybe not the most important issue for the EU. The State of Israel will celebrate in a few weeks 75 years of its existence and to be honest, I feel strong sympathy with Israel, for many good reasons. They are our partner; the only rule of law based democratic state in the Middle East, the only Jewish state on earth. We have an Association Agreement with Israel which is outdated and I can only ask the High Representative to negotiate a new one. But you don’t have to feel strong sympathy with Israel just to treat Israel with fairness like each and every other rule of law based democratic state on earth. And this is not happening if we from outside try to insinuate this or that about Israel. So, since I only have one minute of speaking time, I strongly ask to treat Israel as every other democratic rule of law based state on earth.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I apologise for the delay in the foreign policy debates I have just come from. However, it is important for me to comment on this democratic debate, because the right to vote is a civic right – one of the most important civic rights in our democratic systems, which are so under pressure from inside and outside. And it is also a right of EU citizenship, because EU citizens can not only choose their European representation – the European Parliament – but also vote at the local level if they live in a European municipality in the European Union. That's worth a lot. And it is particularly worth it that you can choose your own representation in the European Parliament from your own country, no matter where you live in the world, or also where you live in the European Union, if you are not from this country and are a citizen of the Union. It is important to: It affects not only the right to vote, but also the passive. We should motivate young people, motivate all generations to participate in the vote, but also in the candidacy, in order to strengthen democracy.

Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, it has been nearly a year that Putin’s Russia has waged war militarily against Ukraine, but hybrid warfare against all of us – the free world, especially Europe – was already ongoing for many years – also in February last year – and has been ongoing now for many years. But Europe defends its citizens, its freedom and wants to achieve peace with unprecedented means and measures. This was unexpected by Putin’s Russia and this is why we have to underline that Europe is using the European Peace Facility exactly for what it was meant to be used for. And Europe is also fighting back in a bloodless way against the bloody war attack in terms of sanctions. Yes, within Europe the leadership of Serbia is of concern, the leadership of Hungary is of concern, but the alignment and unity are unprecedented and will remain. So it’s good to have the EU-Ukraine summit this week. It’s good to talk about even more help in terms of military, in terms of sanctions, in terms of reconstruction in the future. And I have no doubt that freedom and peace will be restored.