Speeches

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! The health of our people should be one of the main tasks and priorities of our Member States. Getting old is a privilege that not everyone enjoys. This is precisely why it would be important to make elderly care affordable and accessible again. A healthy lifestyle – which can of course look different for everyone – can contribute preventively to a healthy life and to tolerable and dignified aging. But what good is the best and healthiest way of life if we as the EU counteract this with our laws and regulations? Because numerous studies show that stress is catastrophic for health, and our fellow citizens have had an uncanny amount of stress in recent years. Firstly: Stress caused by inflation and high housing and energy costs, especially for pensioners. In Germany, therefore, many pensioners now have to collect deposit bottles – this is certainly not healthy. Secondly: Stress due to a more fragile health as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, the deprivation of liberty lockdowns and the rigid vaccination regime, which in some cases continues to this day. And thirdly: Unfortunately, I have to say it: Stress because we are threatening to be dragged into a war with Russia, which evokes the fear of a Third World War, especially among the older generation. And this stress is currently caused by our own governments and also by the EU institutions. Once again: This stress is real, and it can't be healthy. Therefore, I ask the question: Why do we even talk about a healthy lifestyle and healthy aging when we destroy the basic prerequisites for it? This is basically as contradictory as if we were trying to heal a wound we have struck ourselves. Let's put an end to the stressors as soon as possible, and then let the people in our countries make their age the way they like it best, healthy and with dignity! We in the EU do not need to regulate this or think we have to take care of it. Our old people are already doing it themselves – and I count myself among them, at 68.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. When I attended a meeting of the Committee on Budgets for the first time almost five years ago, we have already discussed a fundamental revision of the Financial Regulation. Frightened at the time by the sheer scope and complexity of this set of rules, this project seemed more than plausible and necessary to me. Today, almost at the end of the legislature, we are only voting on a few amendments. The fundamental revision is still a long way off, and I dare to doubt whether it will be possible to complete this revision and adjustments with the adoption of the next MFF. In any case, I wish the Commission good luck in this regard. Thank you, Commissioner, and the rapporteurs for the report. Some really good changes have been incorporated, such as an NGO definition, new lower limits, a central information data system and much more. However, I find it strange that such a purely technical document does not refrain from ideologically and politically charged terms and regulations, so that budgetary authorisations are linked without necessity to, for example, respect for European values, thereby opening the door to arbitrary treatment of financial allocations. The rules of the Financial Regulation should contain only objectively and objectively verifiable criteria. In my opinion, this is unfortunately not the case; I will therefore abstain from voting. But I'm sure you can miss that, Commissioner.

Mr President, Commissioner Hahn, ladies and gentlemen, Mr Secretary of State! This painstakingly negotiated and scaled-down revision of the seven-year financial framework will also fail. How do I fix this? Well, if you have to send Mr. Orbán to drink coffee so that all negotiators agree, then everyone recognizes: There's something wrong. Is that a bad compromise? Secondly, if about two thirds of the €50 billion of the Ukraine Facility is debt-financed and you think that would not burden the EU budget, then, colleagues, you are lying in your pocket. Do you really think Ukraine will be able to pay interest, let alone repay debt, after this terrible war? Thirdly, if one scrapes together 21 billion euros from everywhere and tears open new holes everywhere and then exceeds the previously permissible ceilings in budgetary terms, then every Swabian housewife knows: This can only cause discord and annoyance. But what concerns me the most personally, and I have already said this in committee: Have you, ladies and gentlemen, asked the people of Ukraine what they really want? Do they really want more money? I don't think so. These people want peace for their country. If we continue to promote war with arms deliveries here in plenary - just before, Mr Gahler, you said it - and do not work towards peace, then we are guilty of the people of Ukraine and also of all the soldiers who die or are crippled by hundreds every day. Ladies and gentlemen, let's stop this war!

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. Since I'm not a smoker, I didn't know at all what Dentsu is and didn't know this track-and-trace system where apparently every pack of cigarettes in the EU is given a code that registers where the cigarettes are made and how they have moved through the supply chain. When I think about it, I am stunned: Now Big Brother is watching what cigarettes you smoke, who made them, and who sold them to you? The conflicts of interest discussed here and of course to be condemned in any case and also to be eliminated or clarified seem to me to be negligible. Ladies and gentlemen, I wonder if this is our task at all to deal with these questions. We should make better use of our resources, our time, our responsibilities, than continue this bureaucratic nonsense. One could almost think that we have no inflation, no shrinking economies, no wars and no mass immigration problems. Let's really turn to the right and difficult and real topics!

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. I don't know about you, but I don't really want to eat horse meat. Whether from Argentina or Uruguay. I want to eat meat from animals coming from German farms. And when I'm here in Strasbourg, I want to eat meat from French agriculture. Instead of discussing here whether or not we should ban the import of horse meat from Uruguay and Argentina, we should focus on supporting our local farmers to ensure that we can provide ourselves with domestic vegetables and fruit, dairy products from domestic cows and goats, and domestic meat. We should look for ways to make domestic agriculture more attractive and foreign imports less attractive. But I would like to ban one thing, namely the massive import of live animals for slaughter from all over the world, if these animals suffer serious injuries during long animal transports. It's just cruel. Dear colleagues, almost all EU countries are agricultural countries. We have been farming for centuries, and all of a sudden agriculture is said to be bad. And we're starting to import massive amounts of meat. It's just crazy, and we need to stop this madness that, under the guise of climate change, discourages meat consumption and destroys our agriculture. This is like telling the Italians that they are no longer allowed to make their own Parmesan, but have to import Gouda, or telling the French that they are no longer allowed to produce their own wines, but have to import German wines. Dear colleagues, you would rightly not like this. Of course, everyone should be able to import meat from all over the world, as long as it complies with health regulations and all these rules are complied with. But the Commission should not take care of these matters. Mr. Milei is in charge in Argentina. Prohibitions are certainly not effective. Like many of you, I was born and raised on a farm. We must not leave our farmers in the rain. And it is precisely in these days of open protest by farmers against the attacks of their governments that farmers need our solidarity. I stand with my farmers. I stand for Germany, but I also stand with the farmers in Uruguay and Argentina. They just have to do their homework. And if someone wants to eat Argentine horse meat here, please, then he should eat it and like to do it. But it is not up to the EU to ban it.

Mr President, Commissioner! Dear Mr Pieper, I welcome your report on transparency and accountability of NGOs. It is an important step towards reviewing these organisations, a sector that has been operating without sufficient oversight for too long. In its current form, however, the report has crucial gaps. We are trying to close this at least in part with our amendment. But we must not stop there. Of course, it is necessary and important to make NGOs more accountable, to increase transparency and to control the use of funds more effectively. But we must not ignore other problems that exist. The colleague has already mentioned one thing: It needs to be made clear what is an NGO funded by us at all. In 2022, NGOs received at least 2.6 billion euros from the EU. But, according to the definition, experts say that could also be 3.6 billion. I don't think it can stay that way. Secondly, I think it is a mistake for Member States to be forced to give control powers to the EU when NGOs receive money from the Member State. The budgetary and audit powers of national parliaments and courts of auditors may not be restricted. And thirdly, I am concerned that certain NGOs are increasingly interfering in government action. They bite the hand that feeds them, even though they are not democratically legitimized. This is definitely not a strengthening of democracy.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. To want to improve something is honorable, but I have the impression that here again the wrong priorities are set. Instead of subsidiarity, i.e. less EU, there is once again more EU. Or you could say very roughly: The little ones you hang, and the big ones you let go. My colleague Joron has already pointed out that: These are the violations of the law that need to be investigated. Why don't you do that? Ladies and gentlemen, we no longer need instruments that undermine the sovereignty of the Member States. We need more MEPs, such as our late colleague Michèle Rivasi, who unfortunately passed away too early, who want to protect the EU's financial interests. And we need more Member States that want to stand up for their own people and protect them from an ever more aggressive EU.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. Yes, wouldn't it be great if Europe attracted many highly intelligent young people who were looking for a career in research here? But instead of these intelligent people, we are attracting immigrants from North Africa and Islamic countries who, firstly, do not have the qualifications for young researchers and, secondly, do not intend to work here, but mostly only want to benefit from our social system. For example, these people – mostly young men – come to us via Lampedusa. I went there a few weeks ago and looked at it closely. I can tell you the development, especially in the target cities of these men, which is really dramatic: Closed shops, street robberies, gang rapes, men doing their duty on the street. More and more cities are turning into ghettos. So if we want to answer the question of what we can do to make our countries, our cities, our universities attractive to smart young researchers, then I would suggest that we first effectively close our borders to illegal immigration because no one – really no one – wants to live or work in a Europe flooded with poverty, violence and dirt and where most of the money is spent on redistribution and not invested. But then spending millions on meaningless projects is like putting on a bandage on an amputated leg. It looks nice, but it doesn't help. And ladies and gentlemen, when I look at the questions you ask, that you pay particular attention to gender equality and women's quotas, I fear that this project is not about young researchers at all, but about compliance with quotas. It is quite simple: In addition to the economic conditions, we only need to attract the person with the right qualifications for the right job. But I say it again: All the support will go to waste if we don't close the borders for illegal immigration. And, ladies and gentlemen, if you take these signals against illegal immigration sent out by the Dutch in yesterday's election, if you don't take them seriously, you will be swept away in next year's elections. That's right for me, because I won't be here anymore. But I am already sorry for the young researchers who have fallen for our empty promises.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. This topic of the new own resources also drives the blush in my face. Because with this new financing plan, you are accelerating on the wrong path to servitude a few years ago. Since you introduced the system of new own resources into the overall package three years ago, NextGenerationEU, seven-year plan and rule of law mechanism and miraculously overturned the vetoes of Poland and Hungary – since then it is clear what you want: They want a new EU, an EU that, unlike the Treaties, is largely independent of the Member States, where there is no longer a veto and where the Commission can make and manage debt as it wants. But, ladies and gentlemen, have you also asked the citizens what they want? And here I can tell you: They don't want an EU superstate, not even the good Germans. And if the citizens knew what you are planning to do with new own resources and other atrocities and what burdens are coming on them, then you would be swept away in the next elections, then you would not get a foot on the ground. But since the citizens will not know about it thanks to the control of the mainstream media, I predict that at the latest when the Germans run out of money and when you take bankrupt Ukraine into the EU, many Member States will leave the ship. Let us stop the way into bondage so that your worthy compatriot, Mr. Hayek, can continue to sleep quietly.

Mr President, Commissioner, dear President of the European Court of Auditors Tony Murphy! Thank you for ringing the alarm bells again this year – and it is more urgent than ever. Because, ladies and gentlemen, the recent report by the Court of Auditors should actually trigger shockwaves in the Commission. Because the auditors have found that the errors in expenditure have now increased significantly in the audit year from already too high a 3 percent in the previous year to 4.2 percent. Commissioner, this is not a small mistake, this is not a marginality, this is a really worrying trend. In addition, two thirds of the expenditure audited pose a high risk due to the complex rules and eligibility criteria. These errors implicitly point to mismanagement and inefficiency. This is also confirmed by the renewed non-conformity of the audit opinion on expenditure in 2022. And your report, dear Tony Murphy, also describes systemic problems with the Recovery and Resilience Facility. For example, they found that 11 out of 13 grant payments were affected by regularity issues and 6 payments were materially erroneous. Commissioner Hahn, this is unacceptable. As someone who always advocates responsible spending and the efficient use of taxpayers' money, I naturally support the Court of Auditors in its concern. The European Commission, yes, the whole Union – it would have to do better if it wanted to have a future. It is therefore time to fully implement all of the Court's recommendations and take all necessary steps, firstly, to correct these errors, secondly, to avoid future ones and, thirdly, to ensure that every euro from the EU budget is spent in a meaningful and effective way. Our voters deserve nothing less, and I look forward to their response on 9 June 2024.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. This household puts shame in my face. Not just because he's bloated unbelievably. In the meantime, we are reaching the 200 billion euro mark. And, ladies and gentlemen, let's be honest: That's only half of the total money we plan to spend in the next financial year. All the money from the beautiful sounding facilities, such as the Reconstruction Facility or the Ukraine Facility, which we have adopted today, will be added to this. In the meantime, we are talking about a whole galaxy of funds and – in Germany we would say – special assets, which, however, are only debts with which we burden our children for decades to come. But I am also ashamed that this budget includes programs and payments for UNRWA and the Palestinian Authority, where it is not entirely transparent whether this money is also going to terrorist organizations like Hamas. Dear colleagues, it must be clear to us: Before we stop all these funds, the images that reach us these days from Israel, Arras, Brussels or even Sudan or Nagorno-Karabakh will not stop robbing us of our sleep. That is why I conclude now with the last stanza of the war song by Matthias Claudius, a German poet: “’s is war! ’s is war! O God's angel, ward off, and speak thou therein. "Unfortunately, it's war - and I don't want to be to blame!" Kyrie eleison.

Mr President, dear Commissioner! We have seen each other many times today – in a different capacity – but from time to time on Thursday afternoon we always have nice topics that we deal with, on which we also usually agree, so there is little dissent. Truck drivers are in short supply. If I only think of Germany, there is a study from 2022 that assumes a driver shortage that 60,000 truck drivers are missing in Germany alone. And when it comes to parking, we also agree: It's just too little. We can still put together so many mobility packages, it will simply not be enough, because the transport requires so much. A study by the German Road Freight Transport, Logistics and Disposal Association (Bundesverband Güterkraftverkehr, Logistik und Entsorgung) found that 40,000 parking spaces are currently missing only in Germany. How many there are then EU-wide, I do not have the number. So we see we have a huge problem. Then there is the fact that everyone is pushing for these parking spaces and that we then have these big problems with the sanitary facilities, that then everything is simply not enough. It's not enough back and front, and there's so much we can try to do. Of course, companies, companies in the logistics industry need to make the profession of truck driver more attractive by improving working conditions and raising wages. But you are also required to do so, because you simply make a lot of things more difficult through the regulations, and that is ultimately my petitum to you: We can't go on like this. I often have the impression that we care less about the truck drivers than about the dear animals, the chickens, the pigs, the cows, etc., because we have an incredible number of rules for this and take care of it. But the truck drivers, where are they? I know, Commissioner, that you cannot save the whole world here, that is impossible, none of us can. But please make sure that the work of these people is more bearable, that it becomes more livable and, above all, that there are no more regulations. There are already too many regulations, and we can't put on top of them now and make even more regulations, which will only make the lives of truck drivers even harder.

Madam President, dear Commissioner Hahn, dear Minister, dear colleagues! Every year, the ambition of the Commission increases and the sovereignty of the Member States decreases. Each year, the Commission spends more money than in the previous year and demands more money for the following years. Of course, this money does not grow on a money tree, but this money is contributed by the taxpayers in our Member States. Also in the revision of the multiannual financial framework, the Commission wants to add an additional 65 billion for the next few years and the Committee on Budgets wants to add another 10 billion. Dear colleagues, I say no to more money! That you reject my 300 requests for reductions every year - as a gift. But that you, Commissioner, are demanding more and more money with this mid-term review for mass immigration, for climate madness and 50 billion for Ukraine, we have to explain to our voters next year, and I am curious to see what they have to say about it. Let's just do it like the Americans did last week: They simply completely cancelled the tens of billions earmarked for the war in Ukraine, and there was already an agreement on the budget at the last second. Dear Commissioner, you too are pulling the rope. Eliminate support for the further prolongation of the war in Ukraine. They would subsequently earn the Nobel Peace Prize for the EU - and earn it honestly - and give the multiannual financial framework the necessary air to breathe.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. We need to fight segregation and discrimination – of course. But I'd like to put my finger on another wound that's opening up here. When it comes to Roma, especially their children, my heart opens. I have been involved with children in Romania for over 30 years. ‘Hope for a new generation’ is the name of this association. And hope is what I want to convey on this topic. But I know from my own point of view how difficult, indeed almost impossible, it is to provide children with a good education and to integrate them into society: They remain too much in their own community. They don't go to school regularly. They are therefore hardly impartable on the labour market. In addition, many Roma children are forced to take to the streets and beg. This is also perfectly organized. Because I have personally seen in Freiburg, in Karlsruhe, in Mannheim, in Cologne – in my home country – the same Roma children begging with the same papers in their hands. And in Romania I was shown some villa belonging to a so-called Roma prince. That is why I am not now appealing to the Commission or to the Member States, I am appealing to all Roma: You love your children, don't you? Send them to school regularly. Break this terrible cycle and create a better future for yourself and your children. We are happy to help you with this. But: You have to want it too.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. Ten years ago today, the Guidelines for Freedom of Belief and Confession were adopted. That's a reason to celebrate. But if I see that correctly, there has not been a public assessment of these guidelines yet. How were they actually implemented? This does not seem to interest anyone, even if I look at the list of speakers today. Or is it just a paper tiger? Because we had numerous reports and reviews on transgenderism or the alleged right to abortion and on a thousand other topics. But we hardly had time for this central issue of freedom of religion and confession. Doesn't it matter to us that more than 20 Christians have been murdered every day since the beginning of this year in Nigeria alone? Or do we not care that hundreds of millions of people worldwide, especially Christians, are being persecuted? It is more important than ever today to protect our Christian culture, our faith and our heritage. Let's bring these guidelines to life!

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. It is, of course, terrifying that there have been multiple incidents in countries like Iran where citizens of Member States have been held hostage and imprisoned or even killed. I think everyone here, as usual on Thursday afternoon, can agree with this assessment. However, I do not believe that it is the task of the EU to take action against these crimes. Because, ladies and gentlemen, we are not a state and, thank God, there is no United States of Europe, especially since there is no European people. This problem discussed today must therefore be resolved by the countries concerned. Each Member State must take care of its citizens. He must take action against these unjust states, no question - and in the case of the Belgian citizen Olivier Vandecasteele, Belgium, in the case of Cécile Kohler and Jacques Paris France, etc. That is why I call on these countries to take care of their citizens and to take swift action. And sorry, ladies and gentlemen, unfortunately it makes no sense for us to look to Brussels and look to the Commission and ask for solutions to this problem. Only the Member States can solve this.

Mr President! Ladies and Gentlemen! Let's be honest: When we talk about the rule of law in this House, most of you automatically think of Hungary and Poland – and it still comes to mind today – and how we can sanction them even more effectively. When it comes to the rule of law, this is primarily about the fact that it is we who have exposed our citizens, for example, to experimental vaccines, which Mrs von der Leyen is said to have obtained in dubious shops. We are the ones who, because of the Green Deal madness, are making energy and food unaffordable. We are the ones who, under the pretext of combating disinformation, endanger our freedom of expression and the press and jeopardise our traditional way of life with the gender agenda. The only man in the EU who says no to all this and who tries to increase the well-being of his own people and defend the true European and Christian values will be attacked by you. This is just hypocritical.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. Today, on Thursday afternoon, we will once again discuss with the familiar faces a topic on which we are pretty much in agreement, because none of us find the killing of day-old chicks beautiful or meaningful. But in all harmony on Thursday afternoon, Madam President, please allow me to make a brief comment on these debates on Thursday afternoon: I would be more honest if we also dealt with the even more important issues on this day, such as the million-fold killing of unborn human life in the womb. The fact that we will not be able to hold a serious debate on this subject on Thursday afternoon is, in my view, a testament to poverty in this House, which I think is a disgrace. But back to today's topic. Yes, killing day-old chicks is a cruel practice. And when my grandchildren play with chicken or ducklings, machine death seems even more cruel, downright inhumane to these fluffy little creatures. We all want and demand a quick end to this practice. However, if this issue is misused by interested groups with flimsy reasons for climate protection to demand a ban on the entire poultry sector, then this is simply hypocritical and completely wrong. Did you know that the CO2 emissions of the poultry sector pale compared to the negative emissions of massive deforestation for the production of protein from soya? And are you aware that a ban on the poultry sector in Europe would only worsen the suffering of these animals, since poultry products would then be imported from countries such as Thailand, Vietnam, China or India, i.e. from countries where there are no animal welfare standards at all compared to Germany or Belgium or France, or do you name any country? We need to look closely at the facts, and we need to make decisions based on reason and logic. Yes, the industrial killing of day-old chicks must be stopped, we all agree. But a ban on the poultry sector would certainly not be a solution.

Madam President, Commissioner Hahn, dear President Murphy, ladies and gentlemen! Today, as every year, we perform one of our noblest tasks: We are debating the budgetary discharge of the now over 50 EU bodies for the financial year 2021. Incidentally, have you ever noticed that every year we have more institutions for which we have to carry out this discharge process? I find this development very worrying; But that is not the issue today. Today it is a matter of granting discharge to these bodies and the Committee on Budgetary Control has the task of verifying the soundness and economy of financial management and the proper performance of the tasks of these bodies and, depending on the outcome, recommending or refusing discharge. Thank you to the Court of Auditors for supporting us in this. However, we do not discuss whether or not these institutions have implemented our respective political agendas. At the very least, we in the Committee on Budgetary Control believe that in this procedure we are not having politically charged discussions about the EU's objectives, but are limiting ourselves to retrospective budgetary control. Two years ago, in the discharge procedure at the time, I sorely missed this insight in the debate on the discharge of the Frontex border guard agency. Obviously you have learned, ladies and gentlemen, because today you are proposing the discharge of Frontex. And I can agree. Because those of Frontex are just trying to do their job. Then we should not criticize and sanction them for it. This also applies to other institutions such as the Court of Auditors and the Ombudsman. It is only because they have uncovered the inconsistencies in the procurement of vaccines in connection with the President of the Commission, as my colleague has just said, which has led to a procedure before the European Public Prosecutor's Office, that these institutions must not be examined more closely than others, which may be more in the political line. I have already said it in this House, and I would like to repeat it: If we did not have the Court of Auditors and the Ombudsman, we would have to invent them, because we need these institutions.

Mr President! Thank you very much, especially for your generous conduct of the negotiations this afternoon. I'm not going to strain her, don't worry. Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. As usual on Thursday afternoon, when we exchange views today on the Commission's plan to better regulate trade in cultural goods and combat excesses, we are broadly in agreement. We agree on the importance of detecting and prosecuting criminal offences and, where appropriate, strengthening law enforcement and judicial capacity. Theft and trafficking in human beings should in any case be prevented, but if it does occur, those responsible should be tracked down and brought to justice consistently and without respect for the person. We all agree on that. But many of us do not realize that the biggest illicit trade in cultural property is currently taking place right in front of our eyes, by those who claim to protect cultural property. Just two examples: In Bristol, England, the statue of a slave trader was pulled from the pedestal and thrown into the harbor. Here in Belgium, a statue of King Leopold II was damaged and then removed. Dear colleagues, the Western world is experiencing a crusade against its own cultural heritage. Statues, paintings and books are taken to dusty archives, while others are even destroyed. Books are rewritten because they do not conform to current woken ideologies and do not meet today's standards of political correctness. The biggest problem is that the destruction of our cultural heritage is carried out or ordered by the very governments and institutions that should protect and preserve our cultural heritage. The destruction of cultural heritage is not just about the loss of material objects, it is about the loss of our history, our identity and our culture. We try to erase our past and thereby effectively erase the essence of who we are and what has shaped us and our culture – both good and evil. Colleagues, we usually learn from mistakes. But if we hide, deny, or make our mistakes disappear, then we, or especially our children, have no chance to learn from those mistakes. We should stand by our cultural heritage and be proud of the good and preserve it. Not just for us, but for the benefit of future generations.

Mr President, Mr Borrell, ladies and gentlemen. While we focus on finding a common strategy on how to deal and work with China, one of the EU’s strongest representatives – at least according to most of us here in the House – is throwing sand by calling the EU the US vassal. Macron also criticises the EU for interfering too much in China’s foreign policy and in the conflict over Taiwan. And, Mr Weber, not only the AfD, but also President-in-Office Michel and many others have agreed to the French President. Your bashing of the wrong side is too short. As Solomon said: Condemnation is easy, but understanding is far better. Colleagues, what do we learn from last week's events? If we think we can publicly criticize China and dictate what it has to do, then China shows us the red card or the door to the exit. The result is zero. On the other hand, Macron is greeted on a red carpet and with a military parade and comes back with a lot of signed contracts. Mrs von der Leyen: No red carpet, no military parade, no press conference with Xi. This is the political reality of EU-China relations. Ladies and gentlemen, let's be honest. China sees us as an extended arm of the US, and as long as EU member states do not emancipate themselves, this assessment will not change. Any discussion of EU-China relations or strategies will fail. That, my friends, is what none of us want.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. The wise King Solomon said in the Bible: ‘The just man takes care of his livestock.’ At that time, 3,000 years ago, it was also easy. There everyone had his cow, his sheep and his goat in the stable, and it was every farmer's own interest to take care of the welfare of his animals. What Mr Rzońca said is very important. Otherwise, he would have had nothing to eat and nothing to sell. I also grew up on a farm, and from time to time as a small child I was injected with fresh milk directly from the cow's udder into my mouth. Those were still times! Today, all this is no longer conceivable, because the farms are now run like factories. The individual animal is only a unit of account, and the bureaucracy of the EU makes it impossible to take care of the livestock. Dear colleagues, if we do not succeed in regaining man's natural relationship with the fellow creatures entrusted to him, then all certainly well-intentioned proposals and obligations to animal welfare are of no use.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. I believe that today, once again, we are quite in agreement – which is very often the case on Thursday afternoons – that things are presented very well and that the initiatives that are in place are also in principle in order. However, some colleagues have already mentioned this: We can never maintain a voluntary nature by pushing it into the encrusted bed of working time arrangements – this will not work. And we completely destroy this voluntaryness when we start to slay the real thing – the initiative and the commitment – here with rules. I just want to give a few examples to show that it can't be done at all, that doesn't fit. The fire brigade is naturally active, so to speak, in areas where it constantly violates rules: She drives over the traffic lights in red, she goes to – what is her workplace – areas where the fine dust pollution is so immense that the professional association would go up the walls, etc. So the fire brigade deliberately violates and must violate rules so that she can do her job. Therefore: Rules can also hurt. We've seen this in the nursing services. Now in lockdown, so many regulations were made, and the nursing services were unable to do their job properly. And in the end, the people died alone in the nursing homes, and we go to disaster relief in Syria, as an example. We talked about Turkey, and it worked quite well. There are sanctions in Syria. And what happens? The sanctions inhibit voluntary work, which inhibits the employment of many people. You can't work, and that shouldn't be. We must not use rules to destroy and destroy this fundamentally good initiative, which is voluntary. And especially young people, they need this enthusiasm, they need the fire with which we reach people. That is why I would like to conclude by quoting very briefly what Saint-Exupéry said: If you want to build a ship, do not start by gathering wood, cutting boards and distributing the work, but awaken in the hearts of people the longing for the great and beautiful sea. That's what it's about. And I ask you, Commissioner, to ensure that this voluntary nature is not lost.

. – Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! Today, they want to talk about the practice of sustainable investment funds. I would like to take a more fundamental approach and move forward and talk about sustainable investments in general, because the most sustainable investment is in our families and in our Christian values. However, this Union no longer invests in its people and in its values. Once upon a time, nations worked together on an equal footing to strengthen their economies. Today they have developed into a political union in which the richer countries are to pay for the poorer, indeed the poor of the whole world. We see this in the war, for example in Ukraine, which is now being abused to establish a monthly billion-dollar donation to the government of Ukraine. We see it in the so-called coronavirus pandemic, which has led to a kind of health union in which Member States are no longer allowed to decide what is best for them in a self-defined emergency. And we see it in the Green Deal, which is also about gigantic sums of money through the so-called Reconstruction Fund, which no one can imagine and also afford. Because of all these misdevelopments, we are now threatened by, among other things, high inflation and poverty, as well as rising depressions and even suicides. In these difficult times, investing in our people and economies would be an appropriate, necessary and sustainable investment. But no, not with us! The EU prefers to invest in the Green Deal and woke programmes that damage our economies and drive our hard-working people into despair because they can no longer afford normal life. Our economies and cultures are being thrown overboard for green ideologies, and the inhabitants of Europe are suffering from terrorism, violence and discrimination based on anti-Semitism and anti-Christianism. Even expressions of our Christian heritage, such as Christmas and Saint Martin, are now seen as discriminatory. It is time for us to wake up, recognize the truth and make the necessary changes for a better future. Stop the Green Deal madness, the woken ideologies, the gender nonsense and mass immigration! Colleagues, let's start investing in our lives, our future, our families and our culture – that would be a really good and sustainable investment.

. – Madam President, Vice-President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! The only good thing I can get from this very demanding and detailed report, Mrs Tinzig, is the inclusion of our Committee on Budgetary Control's repeated request that the EIB grant the Court of Auditors more extensive audit and information rights. Thanks for that. Otherwise, the report shows that the EIB has less and less to do with financially and economically sound investments within the EU. The EIB's money should actually be used to invest in our future and that of our children in the EU. Instead, calls are being made for strengthening and implementing gender mainstreaming, diversity, social inclusion – whatever that may be – and climate action that only serves to weaken our economy, our national identity and the well-being of our families. Reading between the lines – as you have confirmed, Mr Vice-President, and also my previous speaker – the report even calls for the EIB to be transformed into a European climate bank to protect not only the EU, but the whole world from climate change. Unfortunately, I'm sure: It will not be long before German and other European taxpayers will have to pay for the climate transition in Brazil or for alleged climate damage in Pakistan. This report should therefore not be dealt with further, so that we can spend our time and money more on investments that are good for the people we represent in this House.