Speeches

The minutes of yesterday's meeting and the texts adopted are now available. Are there any objections? That is not the case. The minutes are thus approved.

The next item on the agenda is the debate on the statements by the Council and the Commission on the dissemination of draft laws ‘against LGBTIQ propaganda’ by populist parties and governments in Europe (2023/2892(RSP)).

The next item on the agenda is the debate on the Council and Commission statements on the need to conclude new trade agreements for sustainable growth, competitiveness and EU strategic autonomy (2023/2876(RSP)).

The next item on the agenda is the debate on the oral question to the Commission on improving the working conditions of Dragoş Pîslaru firefighters, on behalf of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (O-000036/2023 – B9-0028/23) (2023/2701(RSP)).

Excuse me, you know the rules in the House. This is against the rules of the House, as you know. I will have to ask you to refrain from showing – even if I like it! – these kinds of symbols.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Unfortunately, I have to say it: Your speech didn't convince me this time. And I suspect that it also leaves the citizens relatively perplexed. A whole handful of new commissions, commissioners, reports just before the election. How will this be implemented? But very little concrete for the citizens in these difficult times. You say you've implemented 90%. But there are, I think, a few foreign feathers. So: Women in leadership positions. Why didn't that come? Because the federal government – because of the CDU/CSU – has blocked it forever. Why is it unblocked now? Because of the new federal government. Because the CDU is no longer on board. Not a word about right-wing extremism. I think that's really bad. On anti-Semitism, the entry into more and more governments in Europe, because your party family makes common cause with them. And the effects? We see them in these countries: Social assistance is deleted via SMS, the right to abortion is limited. The rule of law is just a hollow phrase. The EPP also fundamentally sabotages the European Green DealYour flagship, your prestige project. Who will prevail in the end? Our position is clear: We need an economically strong, climate-neutral and social Europe. That's what we're committed to. It is time for a clear compass for Europe.

Madam President, Today we are talking about transparency, integrity, responsibility and anti-corruption. We are talking about this Parliament's reaction to the terrible Qatar scandal. What do we have to do? We need good rules, and we have often found good rules in response to such scandals. Now, unfortunately, the Front National deputies leave the house, because it was then about Marine Le Pen, who has cut 670 000 euros for bogus self-employment, which had nothing to do with her assistant, but what went into the coffers of her party friends. We have changed the rules and we, the decent Members of Parliament, are still suffering from them today. Now we have to change them, e.g. whistleblowing, because there are rules that would have prevented this scandal. Good whistleblowing – at least we have to comply with our own whistleblowing directive. So far we need to improve these proposals. These rules must be more than just a friendly recommendation. This is especially true with the ethics committee, we need a lot more teeth there. The transparency register we negotiated is good, but it needs control, it needs enforcement. Something else has to happen. Finally, and finally, the most important thing: We need character. We need good people in this House. Johannes Rau, a great German politician, has already said: It is not politics that corrupts character, but bad characters that corrupt politics.

Mr President, Commissioner! Democracies thrive on a free and independent press. They live on people who investigate, who uncover, who are critical of their governments. This is precisely what governments in undemocratic countries do not want. And some companies are also trying to silence critical journalists. How do they do that? Through such actions – SLAPPs. This is actually an abbreviation: strategic lawsuit against public participation. But to slap It also means hitting someone, knocking someone down. It is to threaten violence, to commit violence, and that is what these complaints do. Because they cost time, they cost money, they cost nerves, they put pressure. That's exactly what they're supposed to do. We have to take action against this. Because we see it especially in countries where democracy is under pressure: This is where we need this free press. We must protect journalists, but also people who engage in NGOs, in associations, in order to uncover grievances. Our democracy lives on these people. Let us protect these people, and please do so in the Council.

The next item on the agenda is the joint debate - Fit for 55 and industrial emissions - on – the report by Mr Kanev, on behalf of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) and Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste (COM(2022)0156 – C9-0144/2022 – 2022/0104(COD)) (A9-0216/2023), – the report by Radan Kanev, on behalf of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on reporting on environmental data from industrial installations and establishing an industrial emissions portal (COM(2022)0157 – C9-0145/2022 – 2022/0105(COD)) (A9-0211/2023), – the report by Petar Vitanov, on behalf of the Committee on Transport and Tourism, on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the deployment of alternative fuels infrastructure and repealing Directive 2014/94/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (COM(2021)0559 – C9-0331/2021 – 2021/0223(COD)) (A9-0234/2022), – the report by Jörgen Warborn, on behalf of the Committee on Transport and Tourism, on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the use of renewable and low-carbon fuels in maritime transport and amending Directive 2009/16/EC (COM(2021)0562 – C9-0333/2021 – 2021/0210(COD)) (A9-0233/2022) and – the report by Niels Fuglsang, on behalf of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on energy efficiency (recast) (COM(2021)0558 – C9-0330/2021 – 2021/0203(COD)) (A9-0221/2022).

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! "Thank you very much for your request. However, for reasons of national security, we are unfortunately unable to provide you with any information." This was almost the standard response of the governments of your Member States to our questions on the use of spyware. Of course, we dug anyway, and we got information from others, especially journalists and NGOs. And what we found out was frightening. Several governments have used this software to spy on different people: Journalists, opposition activists, members of the judiciary, civil society. I myself was on a fact-finding trip to Poland. We were faced with a prosecutor investigating a corruption affair, a trade unionist, an employer president, a lawyer, a lawyer, a politician. In Greece, we have had to deal with the leader of the largest opposition party and journalists who also did investigative research. These people are said to have all threatened national security. What they actually did was to do critical research. This report shows all our findings and makes recommendations. What we need above all is a legal framework. It can't be that we have a rule for everything, even for which plug, which cable comes into this device, but no rules for how to spy on this device comprehensively. It's not just the person themselves, it's their family, it's their colleagues, it's the whole environment that is also being spied on – everyone they have contact with through this device. We don't have rules for this, we don't have a definition of national security, and we urgently need to change that.

The next item on the agenda is the joint debate on – the report by Sophia in 't Veld, on behalf of the Committee of Inquiry into the use of Pegasus and similar surveillance spyware, on the examination of alleged breaches and maladministration in the application of Union law in relation to the use of Pegasus and similar surveillance spyware (2022/2077(INI)) (A9-0189/2023); and – the draft recommendation from the European Parliament to the Council and the Commission, submitted pursuant to Rule 208(12) of the CRP, following the examination of alleged breaches and maladministration in the application of Union law in relation to the use of Pegasus and similar surveillance spyware (2023/2500(RSP)) (B9-0260/2023)

The next item on the agenda was the debate on a topical issue (Rule 162) on surrogacy in the EU – risks of exploitation and commercialisation. Before we enter the discussion, I would like to say briefly that there have been complaints from colleagues about the culture of debate in our House that personal attacks are also becoming more and more frequent. As this is a particularly sensitive issue, I would ask everyone to have a respectful debate on this important issue.

The minutes of yesterday's meeting and the texts adopted are available. Are there any objections to the minutes? That is not the case. The minutes are thus approved.

The next item on the agenda is the debate on the Council and Commission statements on the negotiations on European electoral law (2023/2746(RSP)).