Speeches

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.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! Historically, right-wing extremism has shown its bad face throughout Europe and caused a lot of suffering, in parts of Europe also left-wing extremism. Next week, in the European Parliament, we are going to do what is usual and right, and what is particularly important, year after year: International Holocaust Remembrance DayThe Day of Remembrance of the Shoah. This shows historical right-wing extremism, which also shows that right-wing extremism must alert us, shake us to the core when such tendencies appear somewhere in our societies. But it also shows, with a view to the present, that we must examine: Is anti-Semitism always right-wing extremism? Is this also sometimes left-wing extremism? Yeah, that's it. Is it the abuse of religion, of Islam in the form of Islamism, of political Islam? Yeah, that's it. And it is a field, an important field, perhaps the most important field that shows for all fields: It's always extremism, no matter what adjective we put in front of it, that destroys. This can also give us to think: If something does not build, but wants to destroy, if something does not want to develop, but wants to destroy, then this is obviously an extremist tendency. We live in times when this is also promoted from the outside by disinformation, by trying to divide our societies. The most recent examples were the migration crisis since 2015, the pandemic, now the Putin-Russia war against all of us, not only by military means against Ukraine, but by means of hybrid warfare against all. We face this threat together. As the European Union, we obviously have a better grip on the pandemic than other parts of the world. But we have to deal with the migration crisis and many other crises.

Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, the Iranian regime is a threat to the inside and to the outside, and it has been a threat to its own people, to the region, especially to Israel and to the world, actually, for many, many years. And the free world has done a lot in order to seek the one or the other opportunity to calm down the tensions within Iran and to calm down Iran as a player on the global scene. But it didn’t happen. It became even worse. It is no surprise that those regimes who harm their own people, those regimes who harm others, those regimes who follow ideologies of hatred, align more and more on this planet, and when it comes to Iran and Russia, the Iranian regime and the Russian regime, we see this very clear picture. This is why it’s important to support the freedom movement within Iran. This is why it’s important to strengthen the sanctions we have already in place towards the Iranian regime, because this regime is rotten, morally rotten. No matter what they present to the world or what they try to present the world, it’s a morally rotten regime of criminals.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, What we will discuss and decide today in a resolution is the plan to set up a special court against those responsible for the war of aggression against Ukraine. It is less than a year after the start of this war that we are addressing this special court, and it must be the European Union in a global comparison that is launching this initiative with the willing, the forces of good will in the Council of Europe, possibly, so that it is really certain that those responsible in Putin-Russia can actually be held accountable. And how? The rule of law, because it is the rule of law that we are defending here. It is the freedom we defend. And it is important for the future that there is an ex-judiciation of what has been committed here of crimes and is being committed of crimes. We owe it to the victims. We owe it to future generations, and we owe it to those who suffer from this war and those who suffer from regimes that act as the Putin regime does today to rule out such things in the future.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen! I would like to thank Commissioner Johannes Hahn for the clear words with which he initiated this debate. No year before this year has shown more clearly how dangerous disinformation can be and how vulnerable a developed civilization like ours is when disinformation is carried into our society from the outside. We must also confess: No week has shown as much as this week that the political system in particular is a target for foreign interference, for disinformation, for the destabilisation of our societies, even for the questioning of democracy and the rule of law, for the questioning of our values. That is why I can only agree with our President Roberta Metsola, our first Vice-President Othmar Karas, that the lack of character that has been expressed here must be rejected, that it needs legal consequences, that it needs political consequences, yes, and that, of course, it needs what is actually the standard in a democracy, namely also consequences in the decision of citizens about their representation in elections. This needs to be transported: MEPs must be incorruptible and MEPs must always be able to give transparent and immediate motives for what they stand for. The word 'response' is also in the word 'response' and we all need to be able to respond to it.

Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, I had the privilege to visit Georgia with the Subcommittee on Security and Defence of this very parliament earlier this year, in April. Mr Olekas, our colleague, who is also present in this debate, was always a part of our parliamentary endeavour there. We were standing at the border to the occupied territories, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. And when we read the title of this very discussion today, ‘Annual implementing report on the EU association agreement with Georgia’, we have to state that this is not any annual report. It’s a report in a very specific year, in a year of the so-called shift of paradigms, as all the experts say and as all of us in political life experience and Georgia is more or less at the frontline of the free world, of the Western world. Georgia has a clear tendency towards the European Union, European values. A lot has to be done in terms of reforms when it comes to the rule of law, when it comes to fighting corruption, when it comes to also proper political competition, not political fight on a sometimes basis of hatred in the country, when it comes to media freedom. But one could feel and can feel in Georgia that there is a clear European attitude in the population, and as the other parts of the Eastern Partnership, meaning here Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova, Georgia can become an EU Member State in the future undergoing these reforms. And we have to run for that even more than in the past due to this shift of paradigms.

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, I called the resolution we are discussing today the ‘as if’ resolution. We are doing it as if Israel were not the strongest rule—of—law state and the only democracy in the Middle East. We are doing it as if Israel were our strong partner in terms of security, our own security, but also in other fields like innovation, economy and many other fields. We are doing it as if there were not more urgent problems on this planet, especially for Europe, like the war of aggression from Putin’s Russia, inflation, the energy crisis, or on a geopolitical level, what’s happening in the Pacific and elsewhere. We are doing it as if it were a recent development that would justify such a resolution. That’s not the case, actually, but I negotiated on it since it’s on the table. This is a parliamentary process, and I’m happy that we could at least include the main precondition for the language providing the title for this very resolution. This precondition is a security guarantee for Israel from those who are threatening Israel, who are attacking civilians in Israel, and who have been attacking them for decades and are still doing so. Frankly, colleagues, it’s not very smart to align with the enemies of our friends, and in this case it’s also immoral to do so. So let us seek such a security guarantee. Let us seek to fight terrorism. Let us support those who fight terrorism in the first place, Israel, in securing its own people. Then we can achieve a true peace – a sustainable peace. This might also be the purpose of this very resolution.

Thank you for the question. It’s a very important point because a major part of the issue at the moment has a route which goes through the respective countries we are talking about today, and the major part is also going through the Balkans, the Western Balkans. And frankly I am concerned that it was not the European level, it was even not the European Commission in that case, which negotiated with the Balkan countries, especially the Western Balkan countries, in order to control this situation, to control this migration. It was, again, the Austrian Government who took responsibility for that. I would be happy if the European level would be it that solves European problems and I hope we can achieve such a situation, such a process, as soon as possible.

Thank you very much colleague. If I have the floor – this was not really a question, but I anyway will answer. First of all, I have worked very hard on registration via Eurodac at the borders, and I guess that’s a small step forward in this whole endeavour of managing the migration crisis. And dear colleague, you have purposely misunderstood the point. There is no legal procedure to change the decision because it’s a decision that’s up to elected officials at a government level and at a legislative level and this is a decision that has to be taken. And it’s not yet responsibly and reliably possible to take the decision. I hope it will be possible soon when we withdraw this blockade from whomever in the Council – it’s not transparent; from the Parliament it is transparent who is blocking here, to proceed with solving this migration crisis. (The speaker agreed to respond to a blue-card speech.)

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, I look forward to the moment when Bulgaria and Romania will join Schengen. We will have to decide reliably and responsibly as soon as we can, but we can’t yet. And this is the reason why we have to accept political developments – there is no legal stance against it, and the drama is not the few months of postponement of the Schengen access, which I really look forward to; the drama is the migration crisis that is increasing. And this is not due to the Commission that much, because the Commission has proposed a very good concept two years ago, even more than two years ago already, but the process has not been ongoing in the Council of the Member States’ governments as well as in our very European Parliament. And this is why we have to push forward the agenda, we have to protect our borders better, we have to fight organised crime in the area of human trafficking. We have to do our best for solidarity between the Member States when it comes to asylum procedures, when it comes to return procedures and all the other fields. There is not Bulgaria or Romania to blame. There is a lot of work to do for this institution, the European Parliament, and also for the Council of the Member States’ governments. And then I look forward to go forward with the Schengen accession of the two countries. (The speaker agreed to respond to a blue-card speech.)

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. Today we are discussing the European guarantee that children can grow up without poverty and in a carefree childhood. Having children is one of the greatest happy things that can happen. At the same time, the old saying is true that children increase the attack surface of fate. Therefore, families with children are particularly affected by the current crises – inflation, rising rents, rising credit rates, rising prices overall. This is why the so-called European Child Guarantee is particularly important. Therefore, I can only wholeheartedly advocate that this would be the wrong place to save. Children should be supported in their talents. Next year is the European Year of Skills – giving children the chance to learn and then practice as a profession, to be able to do something and then to be happy to do it – this is also so important according to the old important motto that the best social programme is a job. My home country is called Kinderösterreich, because we have been doing this for a long time, that children are in the foreground. In Austria there is the childcare allowance, the family bonus – yes, and I would also like to see the child guarantee implemented at European level. Children's noise is the music of the future.

Madam President, Commissioner Várhelyi, ladies and gentlemen, colleagues, security in the Middle East is of utmost importance for the security of Europe and the entire world actually. I don’t agree with everything we state in the resolution we will vote on tomorrow, but let’s see the positive sides and let’s follow up. With whom? with our strongest ally, the only democracy and rule of law-based state in the Middle East – Israel. Israel has opened historic opportunities with the Abraham Accords and with its partners there. That’s the one side. The other side is the Iranian threat, which is not only contributing to the terrorism of Hezbollah and of Hamas, and supporting the malicious powers in Syria and misusing the Syrian soil for proliferation, but is also supporting Putin’s Russia in its war of aggression, its brutal war crime-oriented aggression, and in its hybrid warfare against the free world, against the political west. So let’s see who are our allies. Let’s follow up with our ally in the Middle East. Let’s contribute from our side for security in the Middle East, because this will pay back for our security as well and also for our values.

Mr President, Commissioner! Critical infrastructure is vital infrastructure and it is important that the European Union as a whole takes care of maintaining this infrastructure in the event of a crisis. I thank the rapporteur, I thank the shadow rapporteurs for the good negotiations. Three things were important to me to anchor in these negotiations. Firstly: Those responsible for a critical infrastructure unit deserve public appreciation. We need to make it possible in Europe to communicate clearly that this means something – for security, for quality of life, for preparedness, for possible crises. Secondly: What is done for the general public must also be financed by the general public. This means that we don't want to impose additional burdens where someone takes responsibility for critical infrastructure units, but that we want to make it work. And thirdly: The local food supply was important to me. The hybrid attacks, the Putin-Russia war have shown: Food chains to Europe and other parts of the world are also important. And with all this, with the protection of critical infrastructure, we are confronting this world of confrontation with our access to cooperation, but also with the preparation for future crises.

Madam President, Commissioner Várhelyi! I admire your perseverance here in the European Parliament tonight. Ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen! It is good that we are discussing here in Parliament what the governments in the Member States are doing. You have the European political community, the European Political Community. And I see, to put it in a saying, the glass half full. It is good that the whole of Europe comes together, that the EU takes care of the whole of European territory, because that is also its mission, its mission: To give everyone on this continent what Europe can mean, even if that is a long way off. But it would be bad if this European Political Community led to existing processes of EU integration being, to a certain extent, thrown into a box, and then processes that are very advanced towards the European Union, possibly stalled even further than has already happened, especially with the Western Balkans. In the past, the European Union has made many, many mistakes. That can't happen anymore. Montenegro is ready for accession and accession negotiations are needed with Albania and North Macedonia. Kosovo and Serbia have been resolved. Both belong to the European Union, Serbia if Serbia will also support European values. Bosnia and Herzegovina now has candidate status. The Eastern Partnership countries – Republic of Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine – belong differently integrated. And we need a much better relationship with Switzerland and with Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Azerbaijan and Armenia were also represented in the European political community. Belarus was represented by the liberation movement. So every state that is involved has a different status. You have to keep looking, and then you can have the future. And even if there is a parliamentary dimension, there may be a future.

Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen. In Belarus, there is something in place that’s growing in Russia today, but it has been in place in Belarus for more than two years already. Since the stolen election, there has been a vibrant and active liberation movement, and we should not stop supporting this liberation movement. We should not take away our sight, our view on this liberation movement, which is active all over the world. Belarus is the only country in Europe that was not represented at the so-called European Political Community (EPoC) event. I like the idea of the EPoC event, even while there are many questions that are open, but it is good that the countries of Europe come together in this broad format. Why was Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, the head of the liberation movement, not invited to this event? Why was only Belarus not present? I would really ask, from this side of the European Parliament, to invite the liberation movement of Belarus. Even the Council of Europe has established a contact group with the liberation movement of Belarus. As the title of today’s parliamentary debate is about the war of Russia against Ukraine and the support for Belarus, I want again to emphasise that this is not only a war against Ukraine; this is a war against all of us. Belarus is also taking part not only militarily, conventionally in the action of war and in this aggression, but also via hybrid warfare. Just remember, not that long ago when Lukashenko tried to misuse refugees against our borders, against the European Union, and more and more. Let’s stick together here and include the liberation movement in our action.

Madam President, Vice-President Regner, Commissioner Várhelyi, colleagues, it’s good that there is an enlargement package from the European Commission, and there are some positive aspects about it. We don’t call it enlargement but we should also better deal with the UK, Norway and Switzerland. We made some progress with the Eastern Partnership and other parts. When it comes to UK, I want to appreciate today also in the Plenary that it was decided that the UK will participate in the PESCO project on military mobility, which is positive. When it comes to the Western Balkans, it’s very positive that Bosnia and Herzegovina will most probably be granted the candidate status. That’s a progress in that case. But overall, I would wish for more clarity, especially regarding Serbia. I’m happy, Commissioner that after our exchange in the Foreign Affairs Committee of this very Parliament, where you stated that only one side would have to contribute more to the dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia which would have been Kosovo, today you have said both sides should contribute. I call it progress from the side of the Commissioner. I would say Kosovo has already contributed a lot during history and also the recent months and years, and it is on Serbia not only to contribute to that, but even more to join the sanctions, to join the first unbloody defence against a bloody war attack in history – that’s the state of our civilisation. If this will not happen, we have to consider sanctioning Serbian companies and entities who do business with Russian companies and entities because it’s still Putin’s Russia. And if we have heard the President announcing Sakharov Prize for Ukraine just a few moments ago, it’s clear that we are still in this moment of attack and we defend ourselves via these sanctions.