Speeches

Mr President, rapporteur, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for this report and for your consultation work in this context. The safety objective pursued by the traffic management system must remain a priority for the Member States when implementing ERTMS. At the same time, improving passenger comfort and interoperability must drive the rest of its application, in order to make the train ever more attractive. Finally, improving the pace and delivery times of rail freight will also support the credibility of the sector, vis-à-vis road or air transport. To support a deployment worthy of the 21st century, I believe that the functionalities offered by satellites and especially the Galileo system must, in the future, be privileged. Less expensive than a physical beacon, the development of satellite positioning for rail mobility would further strengthen its international credibility. Research resources must be devoted to rapid implementation, on the main lines and throughout Europe. Indeed, new technologies can serve both to meet the requirements of fluidity and security, but also to inform the public. What to meet, colleagues, all our objectives.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, this Council is extremely important for those who feed us and for European consumers. This Council must be something other than intentions, good intentions towards farmers. It must take decisions: both, of course, drastic administrative simplification – to relieve our farmers – but also the allocation of additional budgetary resources – costs have skyrocketed for farms. The common agricultural policy must be indexed: This is an urgent decision. Imports from Ukraine also need to be much more contained. Of course, we support Ukraine. I was the first MEP there two years ago, just after the outbreak of the war. But we cannot accept so many imports on terms that are very different from those of European production, all for the benefit of a Ukrainian billionaire. It is not sustainable, it is not sustainable. Here too, action will have to be taken at this Council to contain these imports and, finally, ladies and gentlemen, to ensure that we protect our borders with standards that are equivalent across European borders, so that consumers and farmers are not harmed.

Mr President, Commissioner, once again, dare I say, a free trade treaty considers agriculture and even the environment as adjustment variables. In this treaty, we do not put in place what has been defended and voted on, and indeed here on my initiative, namely the mirror clauses. These aim to ensure that what enters the European territory respects our environmental, health and social standards. This is not the case in this Treaty. And so, we will again dump in Europe, in the midst of the agricultural crisis, 40 million kilos per year of chicken, 2 million kilos of beef, etc. that it makes sense? This makes no sense, even if it is true that lithium is indeed needed for electric vehicle batteries. Some voted in its time for 100% electric vehicles. In my opinion, this is pure madness in terms of the environment and, above all, in terms of economics and employment. More than 200 000 jobs will be lost in Europe. In short, all those who voted for this must bite their fingers today, because this will require the extraction of lithium and harmful agreements such as these. It is a slap in the face for farmers, it is a slap in the face for consumers and it is a beating for the environment.

Madam President, Prime Minister, Commissioner, first of all, in four months you will have to deploy – there is no doubt about the efficiency and speed of the Belgians. In a speech, there is obviously what is expressed and what is not expressed. I deeply regret that there has not been a word for agriculture, not a word for all those who live in rural areas, in the most remote areas at European level, and who expect signals from the Belgian Presidency, again. Look at what's happening in Germany, the anger of farmers. I think it is important, when you hold the presidency of the European Union, to be able to reassure the entire European population and give a direction – the protection directorate. Protecting all European citizens wherever they are, whatever their reality, and also having the power – in what is more important in terms of protection: the European Union’s strategy of autonomy, particularly in sectors as important as food – give strong signals. I did not hear them, Prime Minister, and I did not even hear the word ‘agriculture’ once in your presentation. The same is true in other sectors such as health: here too, Europe must do more to protect its people and regain autonomy, or in key sectors such as digital – you mentioned this, but never with the vision of being much stronger in the face of Chinese interference. The same is true in other sectors such as the defence sector, so much stronger coordination needs to be ensured. Your predecessor, Mr Macron, had at least laid the foundations for this European defence construction. So you're going to say criticism is easy. That being said, there is great anger because a few months before the elections, I think it is more than necessary to protect Europeans, to actually give them this guarantee that Europe will be by their side to prevent them from leaving, at the level of democracy, for votes that would perhaps be extreme. To stand by rurality and farmers is to defend our food, it is also to defend the European Union.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, recognition does not prevent vigilance. Friendship does not prevent criticism, nor does a transatlantic project. In my region of the Ardennes, more than 80,000 young Americans have been killed, missing or injured, and the 79th anniversary of this battle will be commemorated in a few days’ time. This has created a foundation of common values – freedom and democracy – between us. To face the world and the challenges of today, and the obscurantism that is gaining ground every day, are there better partners than the Americans? Does this prevent us from being critical of them? Certainly not. Do we sometimes have divergent interests? Probably. But in the face, too, of the Russian danger and the "yellow peril", are there better partners than the Americans at our side? I don't think so. This does not prevent a multilateral world. This does not prevent, again, certain criticisms, sometimes linked, and sometimes more forcefully said to our friends. Are there better partners than the United States to tackle the climate challenge?

Madam President, Commissioner, there is indeed progress that can be welcomed in this free trade treaty, particularly in relation to sustainability and better consideration of environmental impacts. But the fact remains that it is also necessary to judge and gauge in the light of all the European Commission’s actions. When I see how the Commission keeps increasing administrative and financial burdens, with ever higher environmental objectives for our agriculture, and at the same time opens its doors and sees agriculture as an adjustment variable in free trade treaties, I cannot accept it. It makes no sense to bring beef that we produce in quality and in abundance to our territories. It makes no sense to bring milk from New Zealand to our territory for more than 20 000 kilometres. This makes no economic, environmental or social sense.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, we are going to say that it is not easy to provide measures or a moderate and measured response in a debate where extremes, in the end, are agitated and referred back to back. I think we should all be able to say that the terrorist massacre of 7 October calls for a strong response: to eradicate Hamas, which is a terrorist group. Some are struggling to pronounce 'Hamas, terrorist group' in this House, and I deeply regret that. The release of the hostages is a top priority, but, ladies and gentlemen, and I say this to others in this House, let us not confuse Hamas with the Palestinian people. Yes, the Israeli government has the right to defend itself, but it must also respect international law. It must respect humanitarian law. It must ensure that tomorrow we can provide the necessary assistance to civilians. And it is not by killing children, civilians and women that peace will be achieved in Gaza or Israel. It is, and I think most important today, to ensure that this right is respected by everyone, at the risk, if not, of creating even greater conflicts tomorrow.

Madam President, Mr Vice-President, ladies and gentlemen, the Vice-President spoke about the COVID-19 crisis, the response that the European Union was able to provide at the time, and certainly the Ukrainian crisis as well. But, unfortunately, I have not heard the strength of Europe speak out to say how, in areas as important as health, defence, energy or food – to take just these four examples – to further strengthen, in the six months that remain, the strategic autonomy of the European Union, which makes it possible to protect Europeans, to give us much greater strength, to be less dependent on third countries such as China – or Russia, yesterday – which do not have quite the same democratic values as ours. This strategic autonomy is essential, just as it is essential to protect our borders with mirror clauses, to ensure that what enters the European Union as a product has the same environmental, social and health values. I hope – or dare to hope – that, in the framework of the agreement concluded with Mercosur in particular, there will finally be this desire to apply the reality of these mirror clauses at our borders, and in other areas as well. Protecting Europeans also means supporting 150 million Europeans living in rural areas, providing them with jobs, public services, hospitals and mobility close to home. This is an economic issue, but it is certainly also a democratic one, so that the anger of some Europeans – who feel forgotten – is not expressed in the June elections. I count on you and the Commission to have this reaction to the European shipyards, and for Europe to be an opportunity for everyone.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the climate, environmental, social and health objectives that we impose on our businesses and our farmers must also be imposed on our borders. It is a democratic question, it is also a question of acceptance by our fellow citizens of what we ask of them as challenges. Climate challenge, of course, but also all the others I mentioned. In trade agreements, these mirror clauses are essential, essential for understanding and acceptance by our people. Different groups have defended these mirror clauses, in particular in relation to an amendment that I have defended in the context of nature restoration. We cannot ask to have goals at home without also being able to impose them at our borders. Yes, we also need trade agreements in sectors that allow us to strengthen our strategy and our autonomy, sectors as important as digital and health, as we saw during the COVID crisis, or sectors as essential as defence, defence in a very broad way. With regard to these sectors and these strategies of autonomy, in particular the energy sector – and this has been seen through the dependence that Europe has created over time on Russian gas, in particular – we must also – and this is perhaps the most important sector, the energy sector – have, thanks in particular to raw materials, trade agreements that allow us to reindustrialise and ensure that in Europe we can at the same time develop employment, achieve our climate objectives, but also, and this is very important in these trade agreements, ensure that Europe’s voice, which must be a leader in terms of climate objectives in particular, is respected, with the understanding of all European citizens and of our businesses, our self-employed and our farmers.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, let us protect our farmers, our borders, but also biodiversity. That is why I propose recital 12a. The Commission’s Trade Policy Review, an open, sustainable and assertive trade policy, indicates that the European Green Deal is the EU’s new growth strategy, which will drive our competitiveness and lead to a gradual but profound transformation of our economies, which in turn will have a strong impact on the structure of trade, while the EU’s extensive network of bilateral trade agreements is an essential platform for dialogue with our partners on climate change and biodiversity, and therefore requires the introduction of mirror measures in line with WTO rules.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, that is enough. No, agriculture is not industrial in Europe. She's family, she's local. It develops with criteria constantly raised on the environmental, health or animal welfare levels. Agriculture has nothing to do with this Industrial Emissions Directive. Agriculture has nothing to do with a text concerning incinerators or cement plants. Agriculture deserves our full support and this text goes against animal welfare. It runs counter to the protection of the environment by concentrating even larger farms in the future. Why? Because the costs that are asked of farmers for a purification that is limited will again be unbearable for the agricultural world. And some will resell their farms. These are the consequences of this text for agriculture. I ask you to fully support all the amendments that have been defended by the Committee on Agriculture, in particular to prevent the beef sector from being covered by this directive in the future.

Madam President, Commissioner, let me quote a country in the world that depends on third countries to feed its people and that is stable and secure. There is no such thing. The main challenge is also to support the agricultural world so that tomorrow there are still buyers, young people who want to get involved. However, stress and all-round regulations effectively lead to a defection in the profession, jeopardise agriculture and, moreover, concentrate agriculture even more in the hands of a few. Yes, we must be able to evolve, but we must also recognise that European agriculture is the most sustainable in the world, and we must be very proud of the quality produced by our farmers. Of course, we must not forget that the issue of food security is an issue of today, tomorrow and the day after tomorrow. Of course, agriculture needs to evolve, but not at any pace. There have also been laboratories in this area. Check out what happened in Sri Lanka, with a frantic pace to completely change agriculture. This has been an economic, ecological and environmental disaster. Development requires time and consultation with the agricultural community.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, first of all, thank you and congratulations to the rapporteur for the quality of the work. You now have a comprehensive enough action plan at Commission level to effectively protect our democracy. In any case, I would like the Commission to come forward quickly with proposals to implement the proposals made by Parliament. More broadly, if there are forms of interference in Europe, it is also because there are Europeans who welcome with open arms a whole range of countries such as China, Russia yesterday or Qatar today, and perhaps even tomorrow, in a whole range of areas. Let us also protect our ports, our airports, so that they do not pass into Chinese hands, with all the consequences that this can have for our democracies, the reality of our agricultural and forestry land. Let us also protect sport – when I see that, in some countries, there is indeed a very favourable reception for investments from third countries that do not have quite the same democratic values as ours and that actually use these means in strategic sectors as important as energy, as digital, as food. In these strategic sectors, Europe’s autonomy will be the closed door, as closed as possible to any form of interference.

Madam President, Prime Minister – gudde moien, dear Xavier –, first of all congratulations, of course, on following the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg’s tradition of defending European values and the European spirit, and defending minorities in particular. However, Prime Minister, I think it is really essential that you also sign up to a strategic autonomy that is not open but firm, solid, in different sectors for Europe: food, energy, defence – three sectors that are essential for the development of the whole of Europe. I have not heard you, Prime Minister – and I am disappointed with that – I have not heard you talk about the essential agricultural policy. How can we succeed in climate change policy, not to mention the farmers, men and women who fight every day to feed us? I think it is really important that, beyond the values we defend, we defend every European, that, wherever they are geographically, every European sees Europe as an opportunity, and that we give them our full support wherever they are. This is how we will defend the European Union.

Madam President, Commissioner, as we know from our history, the far right represents millions of deaths in our European territory, but so does communism. Let’s face it, both the far left and the far right have wreaked havoc. It is the bankruptcy of our societies and the ruin of individual liberties. There is a distinction between the extreme right and the extreme left, to help the debate a little bit: it’s racism – and it’s not nothing. Both are supported, and largely supported, by interference from China or Russia, for example. The Committee against Interference will make a whole series of proposals to protect us, protect our democracy, fight against fake news, cybercrime and of course other European coordination actions in particular on education for the youngest. In a recent report on state security in Belgium, we see that the rise in extremes among young people aged 14-15 is extremely worrying. Every time, it is the same thing, it is the attack on our democracy, the values that we have been defending for more than 70 years now, all together at European level. So yes, we have to ask ourselves questions, beyond of course the police aspect, justice, the absolute fight against all forms of extremes – and I have distinguished the extreme right from the extreme left. Beyond that, we need to find the sources that allow some to grow their electoral space. We see this through various votes: the less a citizen feels considered by Europe, by his country, the farther he is from a hospital, far from the reality of a parliamentarian, far from an administration, the less opportunities he has to flourish, and the more he will actually tend to vote for extreme parties. Social distress is the breeding ground for extremes, ladies and gentlemen. It is up to us at European level to provide economic and social energy solutions for every European citizen and to ensure that Europe is an opportunity for everyone in all our territories, everywhere in Europe.

Madam President, Prime Minister, you have made supporting Ukraine economically, militarily and politically a top priority for your presidency. Of course, I can only be happy about that. Ladies and gentlemen, you have seen in recent days the cacophony of procrastination that can still exist between the various European countries in terms of military support, particularly. I hope, Prime Minister, that you will use your presidency to strengthen what I think is essential: European defence. This construction of European defence is essential for our sovereignty and independence and will also show the strength of Europe. This sovereignty must obviously be found in sectors as strategic as energy, digital, food or health, beyond the defence I have mentioned. These different sovereignties and independences are the guarantee for us of a form of independence, of strength vis-à-vis European citizens, of course, but also vis-à-vis the rest of the world. I dare to hope, Prime Minister, that you will use your presidency to move in the direction of this stronger autonomy, which is also a guarantee of defending our democratic values, which are essential for the rest of the world and for Europeans.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, first of all a correction to what I have heard: To say that the European forest is in decline and that hectares are being lost every year is totally wrong. You can see big. The European forest has grown by the equivalent of Portugal in 25 years, which is not nothing. This does not mean that there is no biodiversity problem, of course. So we have to hear the call of men, women, shepherds, shepherds, herders, who are indeed perhaps even closer to nature than anyone in this assembly and who actually need our support. That this growth in the number of wolves can be effectively addressed at European level by taking appropriate measures in different areas. These adapted measures are also compensation. In some Member States, including my own, compensation takes an incredible amount of time. Farmers must fight for recognition of these wolf attacks. The compensation must be total, at the level of the total cost coverage, for all farmers and the measures must be adapted at the level of each Member State so that this regulation can be found as quickly as possible.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, in view of the atrocities committed – such as rapes, displacements of populations, massacres of different families – all foreign forces present in the Congo in various forms that illegally occupy the territory, in particular the M23 and the ADF, must leave the Congo immediately and unconditionally. All these acts – and this has been said by some perpetrators with great force and I agree with them – which clearly amount to human rights violations, serious international crimes, must be severely prosecuted. The European Union, it is true, has a major role to play in the face of these crucial demands to enable Congo to regain its calm – at the dawn of elections scheduled for the coming months. There can be no democracy without ending this cyclical conflict and without judgment. I express with all my heart that all democratic forces quickly gather around the table and agree to determine the electoral process. Various works have already been carried out. We must now go further, there is urgency in this matter. A dialogue must take place on a lasting basis. This will only be possible by finding a solution to the current conflict. I hope, of course, that the United Nations will hear our message and take over by adopting a resolution to bring appeasement and peace to Congo.

Mr President, Commissioner, congratulations. Your text is a step in the right direction: more protection compared to all critical infrastructure for Europe, especially in the health and food sectors. The pandemic has shown us how urgent it is to protect these important sectors, which are so vital for Europe – health, food, energy – and to protect them, in particular, from cyber-attacks. I call on the Commission to go further. I think that when it comes to our independence – a form of sovereignty that can be found at European level in sectors as important as energy, digital, food, health and I would even add defence – we need to go further to avoid dependence in the future. It is sometimes created, especially if we take the example of the decision taken here and elsewhere to have 100% electric vehicles by 2035, which creates a form of dependence on China. This can also be seen when the same China takes over ports and airports in Europe. Compared to all these strategic sectors, all these strategic places, the Commission must go further to protect Europeans, to protect as much as possible our independence, our autonomy.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, this regulation provides answers, guidelines and objectives for the aviation sector, for the maritime sector and for the road sector, in particular for the transport of heavy goods vehicles and light vehicles. But let us recognise that for motorists and in relation to their concerns – in particular that of not having sufficient limits – this text does not go far enough: it concerns only the trans-European network. There will be an urgent need for a rapid response for all areas, for all networks, so that obligations can also alleviate people’s fears. There are many fears. Can I afford an electric vehicle? Will I be able to pay for its operation? Will I be able to have enough charging stations near my home? This is, of course, an issue for citizens, for their jobs and for their work. It is an economic and tourist issue. And so quickly, I think we will have to add a whole series of obligations, in particular to ensure that the network is sufficient everywhere on all European roads. In conclusion, I would like to say that everything to electric as decided – I did not vote for everything to electric – is a folly for me, in particular dependence on China. The European strategy and innovation in particular have had a lot to lose with this target set at 2035 of 100%. A target of 90% would have allowed this flexibility for the market, also for new technologies.

So indeed, I would like to see more important details on this decoupling. It is good to decouple and ensure that electricity that is not produced from gas is no longer impacted and does not impact our businesses and families as strongly. It seems to me that this is a good decision for the future. What we are trying to avoid, to correct through this taxation of overprofits, is simply because companies, in the field of renewable energy or nuclear energy, have made colossal profits without any justification linked to cost. We must therefore consider this decoupling. You are indeed right to expect the Commission and the Council tomorrow to go further into the details of the proposals. The principles and objectives that have been set by the President of the Commission go in the right direction, in the simple sense of supporting our businesses, households and all associations.

Madam President of Parliament, Madam President of the Commission, thank you for your inspiring speech, which must inspire us all. Thank you for recalling that the strength of the EU is to be able to act together, by being united. Thank you also for once again expressing your solidarity with the people of Ukraine. What is at stake in Ukraine is also our future and the future of our children. Thank you for saying so forcefully. You have also proposed very concrete and short-term measures in the field of energy. You know how, in our countries, many families are in a form of despair, companies also have great difficulties. Yes, you have dared to propose, and it was quite normal, to involve large energy companies that have benefited from colossal elements and budgets spontaneously, without there being the real costs associated with these companies. Yes, this contribution, this taxation will make it possible to free up resources, and you are right to ask that these resources be allocated to the most vulnerable households and to our businesses, which are in difficulty. It is also essential to try in the future to be able to decouple the gas and electricity markets to avoid these additional costs, tomorrow, for our businesses and for our households. Last but not least, it is essential to have laid the foundations for a European strategy to achieve greater sovereignty and energy autonomy. Madam President, I obviously want the European Council and all those who have spoken recently to show the same diligence, the same speed of implementation, because urgency is on our doorstep. The urgency to support Ukraine, but also the urgency, of course, to support all our citizens to believe in a stronger, more cohesive Europe. (The speaker agreed to reply to a blue card intervention)

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would first like to thank and salute the commitment and courage of firefighters across Europe and the European solidarity that has intervened. We can only rejoice in these particularly dramatic moments. So yes, it has been more than 500 years, according to the figures, since we have experienced such an episode of drought. I fear that the same thing will be repeated in the coming years. All the evidence leads us to believe that, unfortunately, this episode is only one that will perhaps be repeated with even more seriousness in the future. We must mobilize with a strategy, especially to support the agricultural world. Food sovereignty in Europe is a key issue for all Europeans. Support farmers by compensating them, of course, but above all by accompanying them to have a global strategy in terms of food, in terms of agriculture, with a positive focus on the environment and agriculture. Finally, of course, the EU can also take action to prevent 40% or 50% of water losses in some countries along the entire water supply chain in Europe, plus all the water routes that need to be created in a spirit of European solidarity. This is how we will succeed, especially with a stronger strategy, in achieving this victory in the face of this change.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, climate change is also a social and democratic issue. Democratic because, if we leave behind a whole range of people, be they the weakest in our society, those who cannot afford somewhere to commit to climate action through a range of measures and investments, we will miss this goal, both in climate and in democracy. The Social Climate Fund must therefore be greatly increased to meet these needs, and for every European citizen to be able to play their part in this climate issue. No one can be left by the side of the road. The same applies to the LULUCF sector in particular, and, in relation to this sector – which is obviously essential to ensure that CO2 absorption, soils, forestry and agriculture as a whole can participate – private owners must also be supported and encouraged to return to this dynamic in order to achieve the objectives set, which are extremely ambitious. I would add that public authorities – particularly in the forestry sector, where public European forest accounts for about 41%, or 20 million hectares, at European level – must lead by example. Lead by example in terms of investment, planting, the fight against global warming and also support the various private owners.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, two weeks ago I was in Ukraine. Do I have to admit that I am sometimes embarrassed to hear certain positions here, embarrassed by the procrastination of some when it should be time to mobilise to produce? We know that Ukraine’s production, storage and export capacity is either damaged or destroyed today. We also know that the risks of war and its continuity may bring even greater disasters tomorrow. Meanwhile, some are procrastinating. Yes, we need to produce and use every square inch this year to ensure that production is sufficient. We owe it to Ukrainians, our farmers and our consumers, so that they can still feed themselves tomorrow at a decent price. We also owe it to the Somalis, the Egyptians and all those who will indeed need our food tomorrow in order to simply feed themselves and meet their needs. So yes, it is not time for procrastination, it is time for production and general mobilisation. I think we would do well to draw inspiration from this strength and will that exists in Ukraine.