What Delara spoke about.

Mr President! The civilian population in Lebanon is suffering, and – for the enemies of humanity on the right-hand side of the house – not just the Christian ones! We are talking about two and a half thousand dead since March. One and a half million people who had to leave their homes. From people living in shelters, with families or on the streets of Beirut without knowing if they can ever return. They live with the daily fear of attacks, with drones over their heads and a ceasefire that is repeatedly broken by both Israel and Hezbollah. For this reason, there must be a clear sign from this House: The protection of civilians is a duty under international law for all sides. The EU must therefore take action, step up diplomatic initiatives, examine sanctions for breaches of international law and clearly condemn the establishment of a so-called security zone in southern Lebanon. Above all, however, one thing is urgently needed now: a ceasefire that deserves this name – comprehensively and reliably.

Madam President, Dear colleagues! A compass should provide orientation. And you may have noticed in the debate: The competition compass hasn't quite done that yet. Climate neutrality remains the goal, but without guarantees as to how this can be achieved in a socially just manner. Meanwhile, the Commission President's own group Green Deal. This reminds me a bit of the election campaign of the CDU in Germany. There are big words about the economy and competitiveness. The programme: A billion-dollar grave. 100 billion extra costs, tax gifts for the rich without a plan for counter-financing. Even the German Institute for Economic Research calls this utopian. And who pays ́s in the end? The vast majority of society. Competitiveness is not created by division, not by populism, not by deregulation. It is created through innovation, planning security and investments in the future. Competitiveness is not a goal in itself, but must be measured by how it organizes prosperity not only for a few, but for all people. With this in mind, Mr. Séjourné, we as S&D are very happy to work with you on this.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Due to some contributions in this debate, I feel compelled to recall something again: The plastic crisis doesn't happen anywhere else. While we may not like to produce the raw materials, the EU is one of the largest plastic producers in the world, producing 60 million tonnes of plastic annually. Most of it then goes into disposable products that end up in the trash relatively quickly – trash that we in turn export to other countries like world champions. According to the motto: Out of sight, out of mind. Yes, creating a binding UN plastics agreement that regulates the entire life cycle of plastics is urgently needed, because the market has not yet regulated this. On the contrary, the plastic lobby often blocks ambitious laws that stand in the way of its business model. She can count on support, both conservative and right-wing, in this House. Here's a little reminder: A binding UN plastics agreement is an important step, but it does not absolve this Parliament from offering concrete solutions.

Mr President! Dear colleagues! If the right side, but unfortunately also increasingly conservatives, speak of competitiveness, then the entire Green Deal is pretty quickly under fire – except for the holy cow of the CDU/CSU: the CO2price. But what happens to our competitiveness when prices rise and there are no affordable alternatives? It means that housing, mobility, heating become priceless for many people. It means that nothing is really booming in our economy anymore, because fewer and fewer people are making ends meet. While blocking future investments, risking planning certainty and distributing tax gifts to the rich; Then what do people who depend on their car do when fuel prices rise and we have lost the switch to electromobility? What do families do that cannot renovate their homes energetically because the costs are exploding? Your answer is clear: They leave people to the market, they save the economy – that's not competitiveness, that's social explosives. We stand for a different policy. We ensure that the climate-neutral transformation is just: with affordable housing, investment in infrastructure and affordable energy. And we are proud that we have a competent Commissioner like Mrs Ribera for this.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen! A fossil autocracy presides over the climate conference, climate denier Donald Trump re-enters the White House, and the 1.5-degree goal has failed for the time being. As disappointing as the image of multilateralism may seem, international cooperation is more important than ever. The European Union must take bold steps – you are absolutely right, Mr Hoekstra – to rebuild trust. On the one hand with an ambitious climate policy at home, and on the other hand by living up to our responsibility for international climate finance. Rich people are no longer allowed to produce more emissions in a day with private jets than most people in their entire lives – while the vast majority do not even have enough means to protect themselves from floods, droughts and other climate disasters. It's time for the polluters to pay. But the truth is that the EU is weakened from within – not only by the far right, but also increasingly by centre-right parties, who pretend to support climate policy but want to jointly dismantle democratically adopted laws. We hope we have you on our side for the Green Deal continue to fight. That's what it's going to be about.

Madam President, We have a very important task ahead of us tomorrow, and we will vote on the Commission's proposal to postpone the deforestation regulation as a matter of urgency, which has already been unanimously approved in the Council. This was necessary because the Commission did not implement the transposition aid in time. However, an urgency procedure does not allow for a proper debate on the amendments tabled by the EPP, which are not technically mature and create new uncertainties for companies that have already invested in the implementation of the Regulation. They risk prolonging the process so that trilogues cannot be finalised in time for a timely postponement, as a majority is already emerging in the Council against these requests. And even when you open your mailboxes, you see that industry, NGOs and global partners ask us: Do not put the postponement at risk, give us planning certainty! I appeal once again to the rationale of the EPP: Stop this wooden path, ensure clear conditions and planning security with us! This is how we live up to our responsibilities. In order to avoid chaos, we, as the S&D Group, call on the Commission to withdraw this proposal should any amendments come through.

Madam President, We know that for countless products on our shelves people work hard under unworthy conditions, the environment and livelihoods are destroyed. With the EU Supply Chain Act, we would finally have an effective tool to ban modern slavery from our shopping carts. But the FDP is convinced that the market is already regulating this. Yes, the market already regulates this for the companies that make fat profits at the expense of people and nature. Voluntarily, we will not see an end to child labour, exploitation and pollution. This has been promised for a long time – nothing has happened. Entrepreneurship and responsibility must go hand in hand; A liberal party should know this. My appeal to the FDP: Listen to two-thirds of Germans, listen to 67% of your own voters! Clear the way for the EU Supply Chain Act!

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Imagine that from tomorrow you can only take a shower once a week; Watering or bathing flowers has not been allowed for a long time. In the supermarket, canned food is rationed because nothing grows on the dried-up fields. You're wondering: How could it get so far? I'm not describing a plot for a dramatic Hollywood movie here. I'm telling you how climate change will change Europe if we keep pretending we can continue like this. It is no longer enough to just talk about reducing greenhouse gases. The consequences of the climate crisis are already felt and have the potential to tear Europe apart if we do not better protect ourselves from heat waves, drought and extreme weather. We all need to realise how much climate change threatens peace in the European Union and our lives as we know them. The EU is insufficiently prepared for the climate crisis, not least because of the conservative and right-wing blockers. People will be swamped, so it's time to turn back and make sure that they don't determine the next mandate.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. Heating costs, energy prices, food – everything is becoming more expensive, while wages are barely adjusting. Everyday life is no longer easy for many people, as is the case for Lina; She is 22, has a weekend job in the restaurant in addition to her training and can hardly pay her rent. But what does not help with the rising cost of living is the policy of the right over there, because their answers are always very simple: You cannot find affordable housing – the refugees are to blame; you cannot pay your bills – citizens’ money recipients get everything for free. Stepping down – this is the right-wing policy style. Labern instead of solution. But fear-mongering and hate speech do not pay rents, but distract from the problems. That's why I would say: Instead of blue hearts, prefer crosses at the right place for real problems instead of fake questions.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. If you go through the supermarket at the moment, you can get the feeling that we have already achieved our sustainability goals: There are few products that do not advertise any sustainability promises. They all want to be environmentally friendly. But are they really? From cruises to rainforest wood: According to some companies, coal power is now also eco-friendly. Behind the green glow there is usually only one thing: false promises. A product is not sustainable just because a ton of CO2 has been offset here and there or a tree has been planted. This greenwashing It doesn't just lie to consumers, it prevents truly sustainable products from having a chance on our market. I am glad that we are now adopting rules that ensure that the promises made must also be kept. This creates clarity and transparency.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. The Commission's proposal for our 2040 climate target is the absolute minimum of what is necessary and feasible. The Conservatives are now criticizing that we should first achieve our 2030 climate targets, but at the same time they are the ones who do not miss an opportunity to sabotage the Commission's climate policy with the far-right, instead of looking for real solutions. They play their part in the protection of rural areas, but they offer no alternative for these people. Example of mobility: My homeland Schleswig-Holstein is rural, the paths are often far. What do I have more of as a commuter in the country? If we continue to rely on combustion engines, while gasoline and diesel prices rise because the CDU wanted to do so in emissions trading, or if we invest massively in e-mobility, in public transport, in sustainable infrastructure, and thus create sustainable alternatives that people can really use? No one needs fake debates. Here on the right side of the house, you will discover your social side whenever it comes to defending corporate interests here in these negotiations. And you still have the audacity to pretend that this is for the people. We oppose this, we will expose these lies, for social climate protection!

Madam President, Yes, it has just been said: Again and again, one sow is chased through the village after the next, but for the future viability of our agriculture, we do not have an honest debate here. It is just decades of conservative agricultural policy in the state, the federal government and Europe that have given the future viability, which have not given the prospects for the farmers in my region, which do not give fair prices for their hard work. Today in the program: the claim that one would be against new genetic engineering per se if one did not simply take part in waving through its deregulation. According to the Commission and also a majority here in the European Parliament, most genetically modified plants will soon be allowed to land on consumers' plates without risk assessment and without labelling. A labelling obligation for products that are produced by new genetic engineering should no longer exist for a large part of the genetically modified plants in the future. In the supermarket, people will no longer be able to decide for themselves what products they want to buy. This also puts organic farming at risk – without binding measures for coexistence such as puff strips, without liability in cases of contamination of organic fields, the regulation becomes a factor of uncertainty. We Socialists and Democrats are not opposed to new genetic engineering, but we want a minimum level of risk control, labelling and traceability of genetically modified plants to be guaranteed. This creates safety for consumers and agriculture.

Mr President! Hello to the AfD and other rights. My name is Delara. My father is German, my mother is from Iran. I am a Social Democrat and celebrate Christmas in addition to Nouruz. Am I German enough or would you deport me along with 12 million other people in Germany? You call it 'remigration'. The corrective research showed us: The right is extremely well-connected, not only rising in the polls, but also taking over governments, becoming mayor and forming majorities in parliaments across Europe. In the social networks, in the neighborhood barbecue or in parliamentary speeches: They are inciting against minorities, against free press, dragging down the welfare state and praising fascists. That's how it started, said Holocaust survivor Margot Friedmann a few days ago. And she's right: Never again is now. And there is hope. In just a few hours, more than 10,000 people gathered in my hometown of Kiel, cross-party, trade unions, civil society. And that's how it has to go on. Whether on the streets, in the comment columns or in parliaments: No footsteps for the fascists!

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Rapper Toomaj Salehi, who has been imprisoned for months, is released on bail. The news that reached us this weekend shows: Public pressure is working. Being loud makes a difference. Behind the often anonymous figures and reports of imprisoned political prisoners are people. People and their stories of courage and resistance. Courage and resistance that the Iranian regime wants to break. In solitary confinement with torture. The imprisoned rapper Saman Yasin even writes in letters of mock executions. The psychological and physical violence of this regime is horrific. They are methods of a regime that has nothing more than this violence. It breaks my heart to see how, in the diaspora, the fronts are hardening, people are increasingly seeking what divides them, instead of focusing on solidarity and cohesion right now – for Saman, for Jamshid, for Arash, for Nahid, for all political hostages, for a free Iran. For women, life, freedom.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Last week I received a post or had a conversation with the 12-year-old students Anna and Sabine from Düsseldorf. They were annoyed that there was so much packaging waste in the fruit and vegetable section of the supermarket alone, and asked me as a politician what we were actually doing about it. The reality is that Sabine and Anna are right. We consume far too much packaging waste, whether individually packaged cucumbers, to-go coffee mugs or the oversized packages from online retailers. Since 2010, our consumption of packaging waste in the EU has grown by 20%. Each and every German collects 225 kilograms of packaging waste each year, which is about as much as three washing machines weigh - you have to imagine that. Like Sabine and Anna, many people in Europe are annoyed by this. An overwhelming majority of the population requires us to reduce the mountains of packaging. I would like the voices of consumers here in this House to be heard as much as some fast food chains. I've never been overwhelmed by so many lobbying requests; Some have crossed the boundaries of legitimacy. With pseudo-serious, unscientific fake studies, they sow doubts about the regulation, and they must not succeed tomorrow. Tomorrow we can sharpen the waste hierarchy, reduce our material consumption in the first place, because we cannot recycle ourselves out of our garbage mountains. For this we need more reusable packaging, bans on really unnecessary packaging and rules against oversized packaging. We can make unavoidable packaging more sustainable – also a recovery plan for the recycling sector, by the way, because all packaging must be recyclable by 2030 and more recycled material must be found in plastic bags, bottles and boxes. We can protect consumers by banning harmful eternal chemicals and bisphenol from packaging that comes into contact with our food. Sabine and Anna gave me their hope, that several Members would take their votes seriously. Tomorrow it will be decided who will vote for whom in this House.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Luxury villas, mega yachts, private jets – the richest percent of the world’s population causes as many climate-damaging greenhouse gases as the five billion people who make up the poorer two-thirds, according to Oxfam. One place where the super-rich romp is Dubai – a city built on the foundations of oil wealth and the constant exploitation of resources. It feels a bit bizarre that this year's World Climate Conference is taking place right there, hosted by the United Arab Emirates, which are already trying to push their agenda to prolong the age of oil and gas massively – and here we have to fight back. We need to talk not only about global climate policy, but about the justice issue behind it: What does the vast majority of people who cannot buy out of the crisis, who are already feeling the effects of climate change, need to lose their livelihoods due to earthquakes, floods and storms? We have to fight for this 99% at COP – for an end to fossil subsidies, for solidarity-based financing of climate damage.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. Whoever is born as a woman in the Islamic Republic of Iran will never be free. For my family, it was the reason to leave the country after the murder of my grandfather. Many have stayed. And resistance to the regime has existed since the very beginning. Courageous people like Narges Mohammadi who risk their lives for a free Iran. The murder of Jina Mahsa Amini has revolutionized decades of resistance. From individual movements became a great movement. Her voice has not only been heard around the world, but also reinforced – also here in the European Parliament. A year later, the regime is blind to fear. He has nothing but his power. The number of victims, tortured and imprisoned is increasing every day. "All these crimes are in the blind spot," says rapper Tomaz Salehi. If we as the EU are serious about human rights, then there must never again be blind spots for this regime. Despite all the danger, thousands of people in Iran will be on the streets again in the next few days. You risk everything. For women, life, freedom. What are you risking, Mr. Borrell?

Madam President, It is a strong piece to say, especially as an EPP, that our climate policy strengthens the right margin if it was the voice of the AfD that ensured that the law could be blocked in the Environment Committee. Fortunately, that didn't happen. When the global agreement on the protection of species was adopted in Montreal, this was also referred to as historic by many Members of this Parliament. And rightly so. What some seem to be unaware of: Global means that an agreement also applies to us in the EU. Nature is also in a bad state in the EU, and that is what threatens our food security and sustainable agriculture. I have now read the EPP press release today, and yes, you want the Montreal Agreement to be implemented worldwide, but when it becomes concrete, it is blocked – with bogus statements that even Frans Timmermans personally accused of wanting to ban Santa from the Finnish forest. That's how far it went on this point, and we have to ask ourselves now: Is there Nature Destruction or Santa Claus? There is destruction of nature. That's why we have to do our homework. And that's what we're going to do now!

Madam President, I think many of us would have liked to talk about the worries and the law of nature restoration. But instead of the "how" we need to talk about the "whether" here today: whether the European Parliament is the only European institution to block the law. Refusal to work instead of solution. It would be a great vote if it were only about nature restoration. But it is also a question of whether a majority of this House is behind Manfred Weber's legal course. To maintain your power, you are ready to leave the democratic negotiating table in parliament and call for a blockade of political action in a fake news campaign that would make Trump envious. This is a strategy that we are already seeing in Italy, Sweden and Spain. They form alliances with the right, not to solve problems, but for posts and power. We have heard here that colleagues in the EPP are also critical of this. Come back to the negotiating table and let's make this law a reality.

Madam President, Two and a half metres long and one and a half metres wide – this is the size of an isolation cell in Evin prison in Iran. Discrimination, isolation and torture are part of the everyday life of the detainees and also the uncertainty of whether and when you will ever be free again. Especially in unofficial detention facilities of the Revolutionary Guards, which are euphemistically called ‘safe houses’, isolation is frequent, and for the relatives of the detainees it is not even clear where they actually are. Since the murder of Jina Mahsa Amini, more than 20,000 people have been imprisoned. But even before that, it was true: Whom the regime wants to silence, they let disappear behind thick walls. Rapper Tumaj Salehi was sentenced to six years and three months after 252 days of solitary confinement. Even though attention is dwindling, we in this House must not stop naming human rights violations committed by the Iranian regime.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. Above all, I find this conservative narrative that agriculture and the Green Deal are on different sides – pseudo-solidarity. Drought and water shortages are already threatening not only the livelihoods of our farmers, but also the supply of sustainable food. However, the political answer must not be: Everything remains as it was, we favor agro-industry and let small and medium-sized farms die. We show real solidarity by not leaving our domestic agriculture alone with the ever-greater pressure on the world market. We show real solidarity in our agriculture by creating the framework conditions for a just transformation towards sustainable and resilient agriculture, especially for small farms. So if the EPP were really about the farmers and not just about their legitimate fears for the future for their own campaign against the Green Deal I would advise you to take a third of the EU budget into account - the common agricultural policy. Here, large landowners are pampered with billions, while these are missing for the investment in a sustainable agriculture.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. UN Secretary-General António Guterres has called the IPCC report a survival guide. I have listened to the whole debate now and I believe that some of my colleagues really need guidance and we must act accordingly. Because the first realization of the report must never become routine, namely that our current climate measures are not enough and the climate damage is already noticeable. But the IPCC report also gives us a guide to survival, because it is clear that we already have the necessary technologies and knowledge: Solar and wind energy, energy efficiency, another food system – all of which can make large contributions at a low cost. This is also a message to all those who prefer to light fog candles in this debate – from E-fuels, which are not available, or nuclear revivals which are far too expensive – instead of working in the here and now to ensure that we can also avert the climate crisis with available innovations. Speaking of nuclear energy: This is not mentioned as a solution in the IPCC report. On the contrary, the IPCC report highlights the high cost of nuclear energy and its low contribution to tackling the climate crisis.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Does my rain jacket actually belong in the hazardous waste? And is the baking paper carcinogenic? These are legitimate questions that cannot be answered clearly today and which have occupied many since this news at the latest. At 1500 locations in Germany, PFAS, so-called perpetual chemicals, could be detected. Water, dirt and grease repellent – these properties ensure that we can find them everywhere: clothing, disposable packaging, even in the blood of infants and in breast milk. Forever chemicals Sounds like a good name for a band. However, it is a group of substances suspected of limiting liver and thyroid function and causing cancer. Just as eponymous as problematic: They cannot be naturally degraded. The precautionary principle should guide our chemicals policy. If there are concerns that a substance is endangering health, the problem cannot be solved – a fortiori if neither humans nor the environment can degrade these substances. The problem is actually only exacerbated by sitting out. The European Chemicals Agency needs to clarify this quickly. We need clear statements from the Commission.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. Whether it's the coffee at the train station this morning or the piece of chocolate I ate on the train, consumers in the EU cannot be sure whether or not their consumption contributed to deforestation. Whether we want it or not: When we go shopping, we almost always put a piece of forest destruction in our shopping cart. Soya, palm oil, rubber, coffee, cocoa, wood and beef – these products still come far too often from deforestation and there is no law to prohibit this practice – or better: gave. Because now it's over. As an EU, we are tackling our forest footprint. With the EU law against imported deforestation, companies will have to prove in the future that there were no forests that were destroyed and no people were displaced for the cultivation and production of their goods. Otherwise, the following applies: No access to the European market. In doing so, we are putting a stop to the business model of deforestation. And this is not only good for forests, but also for consumers in Europe. So far, if you wanted to know something about deforestation, you didn't find any clarity, but a jungle of sustainability labels and many promises that didn't actually give any clarity. Without pressure from civil society and the European Parliament, we would not be voting on the European Supply Chain Act against Deforestation this week. And it also shows something about the political will in this House and also within the European institutions that we have come from the parliamentary initiative to the regulation in three and a half years. This is where we put pressure and this is where we delivered. And in the negotiations we were also able to improve the Commission proposal – Mrs Kyriakides enumerated this better than I could have done. We also cover forest damage. We are including the deforestation driver rubber in the regulation despite the massive headwind we had. We are strengthening the role of indigenous communities living on, with and in forests by also banning land-grabbing products from the EU market. But the fight against deforestation has not yet been won. Now it is time for implementation. Over the next two years, the Commission will decide whether to extend the regulation to other important ecosystems, such as the Cerrado savanna in Brazil. In addition, it could make banks that co-finance forest destruction more accountable. And here in the European Parliament, just as we have called for, we will keep up the pressure for this expansion to come. But first of all, we would like to thank the many people who have asked the EU to act, the Commission for this courageous initiative and all the colleagues who have worked so well together across political groups and committees. Thank you very much!