Speeches

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, it is essential that we have this collective moment today to recall our strongest commitment against antisemitism. Europe has a special history and responsibility in this area, because it was on our continent that antisemitism led to the worst, with the Holocaust. It is in our countries that millions of Jews have been targeted, hunted down and murdered. And today I would like it not to be forgotten. Antisemitism is the foundation of the European far right, which still has deniers in its ranks. I do not want anyone to believe that it protects Jews today. It is an insult to the past and a lie to the present. So yes, we will participate here, in the European Parliament, and externally in all initiatives against antisemitism if they do not include those who have theorised, nurtured and disseminated it: the far right. Antisemitism is a profound evil that is part of a millennial history. It is a poison that always infects our societies and against which we must fight relentlessly and never let our guard down. More than a thousand anti-Semitic acts recorded in France in just one month, two thousand in Germany, a similar trend throughout Europe. The legitimate and necessary criticism of the policy of the Israeli far-right government must never be confused with the essentialisation of people of Jewish faith or culture. As the condemnation of the atrocities committed by Hamas must never be confused with the essentialisation of people of Muslim faith or culture. Anti-Semitism, racism and hatred of others have no place in our democracies. Any intimidation, any insult, any violence against a person because of his religion is unacceptable. Nothing can justify them. Never. I would like to address here, on behalf of my left-wing group in the European Parliament, my solidarity and support to all victims of anti-Semitic acts. I also want to express a clear commitment to all people of Jewish faith and culture who, I know for many, are worried today. I want to tell them, I want to tell you that you will always be under the protection of the European Union and I want to tell you that I will be, that we will always be by your side.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the whole world is watching us and waiting for the European Union to take a strong position, commensurate with the ongoing humanitarian disaster in Gaza. Already 10,000 Palestinians have died under Israeli bombs, including 4,000 children. We must do everything we can to stop this massacre. But talking about a humanitarian pause, in the singular as well as in the plural, means absolutely nothing in practice. The war, ladies and gentlemen, is not child’s play, or even a perched cat game where it looks like ‘inch’, in the space of a few hours, before the bombs rain again on Palestinian civilians. The key word today, which can save thousands of innocent lives in Gaza, is the immediate ceasefire. It is the constant call of NGOs, it is the constant call of the UN Secretary-General that Cate Blanchett echoed again. That is why we call for this debate with a resolution on the humanitarian disaster in Gaza and the need for an immediate ceasefire. And allow me, Madam President, to insist that there be a vote. I believe that our Parliament must be able to position itself and that we have a vote on each of the proposals that have been made by our political groups.

Madam President, this is the original text: ‘urges the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the Commission and the Council to join UN Secretary-General António Guterres in enforcing’ – this is the amendment – ‘an immediate humanitarian ceasefire and unrestricted access to humanitarian aid’. The rest remains unchanged, Madam President.

Madam President, this amendment is intended to put into words what is necessary. Of course, we need a humanitarian break, as I understand the Renew Group is going to ask for. But this must be done expressly through a cease-fire, which is codified in international law by the Geneva Conventions. The conflict is raging, thousands of civilians are being targeted, and our European Parliament must have a serious word and use the exact words of António Guterres, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who proposed an ‘immediate humanitarian ceasefire’. Therefore, like the United Nations, like the NGOs Doctors Without Borders, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, we call for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire. This means stopping all military operations to help the civilian population. Millions of people, ladies and gentlemen, are waiting for the end of military operations and the end of the conflict. Let us rise to the occasion and vote in favour of this immediate humanitarian ceasefire.

Mr President, just a few days ago, Dominique Bernard, a letter teacher, was coldly killed with a knife while trying to protect his students in Arras. Two other people were injured. Just a few days later, two Swedish fans were shot dead in the street in Brussels. Islamist terrorism has hit us again in our flesh, just three years after Samuel Paty was assassinated. We are all in awe, and my first thoughts go out to the victims of this unspeakable atrocity. I also want to express my solidarity with the educational community. I think of all the teachers who found themselves, Monday morning, tetanized in front of their students. Because, through Dominique Bernard, it was at school, a symbol of emancipation, that the terrorist attacked. This is what the jihadists wanted to target: school as a bulwark against obscurantism and a place to learn about freedom. So I want to tell all the teachers in our country that they do the best job in the world and that they are our best weapon against fanaticism. Didn’t Victor Hugo say that every time you open a school you close a prison? In this moment of emotion and recollection, we must not give in to the temptation of withdrawal and hatred, because that is exactly what terrorists are looking for, with these attacks. They want to divide us, they want to oppose us, they want to distance us. We are put to the test, but it is precisely in these moments that we must stand firm and stand together. So, in the face of barbarism and cruelty, let us oppose them with our most unwavering humanity.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, last night Gaza saw the unspeakable: A hospital was struck and destroyed. Behind its walls, children, wounded and carers. A hospital... Where life is supposed to be saved, hundreds of people have lost it. It is a carnage. As we speak, more than 3,000 Palestinians have already died, a third of whom are children. It is necessary to name things: These are war crimes. As we speak, 2.5 million Palestinians find themselves trapped under Israeli bombs and siege, 2.5 million people with a committed life-threatening prognosis. In the face of this humanitarian catastrophe, every minute counts. There has been an endless spiral of violence since the barbaric acts of Hamas. In this context, Mrs von der Leyen – I regret, moreover, that you did not have the decency to wait until the end of the first round of group presidents – you have one responsibility, only one: carry the torch of peace and proclaim, loud and clear, that every life counts. But you did not. Worse: During your visit to Israel, you usurped the voice of the European Union by giving unconditional support to Israel’s murderous Replica. Again, Mrs von der Leyen, the legitimate right to defence is not the right to revenge. We do not respond to abject war crimes with other war crimes. People are not collectively punished for crimes they did not commit. Civilians are not cannon fodder. Mrs von der Leyen, how dared you give Netanyahu a full blank, without a single word for Palestinian civilians, without a single word in favour of a ceasefire? We are of course on the side of the Israeli people, struck by Hamas' unjustifiable acts of terror. On 7 October, Hamas sowed terror by cold-bloodedly murdering more than a thousand innocent people and taking 200 civilians hostage. I reiterate here, on behalf of our Left Group, our most total and firm condemnation of these atrocities. Every Israeli victim deserves our compassion and support in the face of barbarism. And indeed, Mrs von der Leyen, the fight against barbarism can only be fought in justice, humanity and peace. Where is justice when the Israeli government indiscriminately bombs 2.5 million civilians in Gaza? Where is humanity when it deprives them of water, electricity, food and healthcare? Where is peace when he treats them as human animals and forces a million of them to flee without even knowing where to go? For decades, the oppression of the Palestinian people, their humiliation and colonisation have been covered by the complicit silence of Western countries. Gaza was already an open-air prison. Today it is a hell on earth and, if nothing is done, Gaza will soon be a cemetery. Mrs von der Leyen, while a regional flare-up is threatening, you must affirm today – as the UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, reiterated again this morning – the only objective that is worthwhile: a ceasefire. We call for the immediate release of the hostages and the opening of humanitarian corridors, and above all not for the cessation of humanitarian aid to the Palestinians, as proposed by your Commissioner. We call for everything to be done to find the way back to lasting peace, through the two-state solution advocated by our Parliament. Peace, Mrs von der Leyen, requires recognition and coexistence. History is watching us. If we persist in the "eye for an eye", everyone will end up blind.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to say to the Commissioner that he lacks a clear priority in his work programme for 2024, a reality which, no doubt, he does not know with his EUR 27 000 monthly salary: poverty. Commissioner, the fight against poverty and the explosion of prices must be the priority objective that should occupy you, rather than competitiveness in every way. Because, in the latest news, competitiveness is not eaten. What are you going to do for a third of Europeans who do not eat enough, those Europeans who cannot cope with the price explosion? Competitiveness also does not allow heating in winter. What are you going to do for this half of Europeans who do not want to increase heating when they are cold? Competitiveness also does not put a roof over the heads. What are you going to do for the homeless in Europe, whose number is equivalent to the population of Marseille? Nothing in your work plan about it. Your inaction is all the more culpable because you are well aware of the origin of the price rise, because even the ECB and the IMF say so: These are the profits of big companies. So, knowing this, where is the EU’s action to block margins and tax superprofits? Nowhere... Nowhere! You are too busy deregulating and easing the supposed constraints on companies. Where is the European Union's action to ensure that our citizens can eat for themselves, find shelter, heat and care? Nowhere! You are too busy planning for the return of austerity, which will further weaken our schools, our universities, our hospitals. Where is the EU's action to build a European industry that protects our jobs and is at the service of the ecological bifurcation? Nowhere! You're too busy signing free trade agreements to bring beef from Brazil or milk from New Zealand. You are too busy scheduling your environmental break, putting a critically important regulation on hazardous chemicals in the closet and re-authorising glyphosate. So to be clear, Commissioner, you are very busy, but much less concerned about our lives than about the lobbies and their profits. We will continue to offer another world, one in which we share the fruits of the incredible riches of our continent.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I take my hat off to you. It takes quite a bit of nerve to place the words free trade, autonomy and sustainability side by side in the title of the debate. Words have meaning anyway. How dare you call these agreements sustainable, when we talk about increasing imports of milk, butter, cheese, meat since, for example, New Zealand, literally on the other side of the world, more than 20,000 kilometers from here? And that's the difference between you and us. You want to make your butter on European farmers. We want to make our butter by European farmers and for that, no need for globetrotter food that has been around the world three times before arriving on our plate. I want to formally raise the alarm here. You are obviously preparing without much emotion, to sign more than ten free trade agreements, New Zealand, but also behind Australia, Chile, Mexico, Mercosur, India. It would be a great trip around the world if we excluded the dramatic impact on our farmers and the planet. In the end, the choice is simple, it is the Earth or the container ships. And when it comes to us, the choice is already made.

I listened to you and you said very clearly that the path we are taking is the renewal of glyphosate. But I remember a President of the Republic from a political camp to which you belong, Emmanuel Macron, who himself said in 2017: It is necessary to organize in the years following the release of glyphosate. So I know that you are one of the strongest representatives of pesticide lobbyists here and that you have even been named by Monsanto as one of their best allies. But, knowing that Parkinson's is a very prevalent disease among farmers, are you here defending the interests of farmers who suffer first from glyphosate, or are you defending the interests of the multinational company Monsanto?

Mr President, Commissioner, I have a fairly simple question for you. Did Bayer Monsanto hold the pen to re-authorise glyphosate for another 10 years? Because obviously, their €6 million of annual lobbying has been effective enough to convince you to continue with their poison. Money that has been well invested, since it has obviously also led to the flipping of Emmanuel Macron’s jacket, which also refuses to leave despite his promises. You would rather serve the interests of a multinational than those of the 99.8% of Europeans who already have glyphosate in their urine. You are talking about science, but what are you doing in this case about the World Health Organisation which has classified glyphosate as a probable carcinogen? Glyphosate impacts pregnant women and fetuses, damages our bodies, contaminates our waterways, pollutes the soil and destroys biodiversity. What more do you need to ban it? By ignoring the irrefutable scientific evidence concealed by Monsanto, you are endangering the health of all Europeans. Finally, I offer you a fairly simple experience. If glyphosate is so harmless, go for a walk in a field after spraying and we'll see if you continue to put their profits ahead of our lives.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I have listened carefully to your speeches and, above all, on this side of the Chamber, I must say, one thing struck me. As soon as you talk about migration, reason gives way to hallucination, even hysterization. Behind the nightmares of the extreme right on the "migratory invasion" or "passory Europe", there is a completely different reality. In mid-September, it was not a horde of invaders who landed in Lampedusa, but twelve thousand men, women, children who fled wars, climate chaos, misery and are now crammed into unworthy conditions. I want to make it clear here, you don't get on a makeshift raft at the risk of your life like you get on a cruise ship to cross the Mediterranean Sea. Twelve thousand people make up 0.003% of the European population. So the migratory invasion is a fable that the extreme right tells itself to scare itself, as we frightened children with the big bad wolf. Colleagues of the extreme right, Mr Zanni, Mr Bardella, it is time to grow up. The big bad wolf doesn't exist. Explain to me how we can, we have been able to welcome without problem more than 4 million Ukrainians forced to flee the Russian aggressor, but today we would be unable to accommodate an additional 12,000 exiles. Unless it's their skin color or religion that bothers you. Commissioner, the European Union is responsible for the chaos in Lampedusa, desired by the far right and set up by the right and the liberals. You have closed shelters, criminalized rescue NGOs at sea, violated the most basic rights of all exiles. You have outsourced border and asylum management by signing shameful agreements with states like Tunisia that abandon migrants in the desert and let them die of thirst. The inhumane and illegal migration policies confirmed in the New Pact on Migration and Asylum create the conditions for the humanitarian tragedy that has been repeated for years in southern Europe. The crisis settlement, which is supposed to be both firm and humane, actually endorses the systematic violation of the fundamental rights of exiles. Always the same recipes, always the same mistakes, always more broken lives. And let me tell you that, even if your goal is to limit migratory flows, your policy is absolutely not effective. How many more deaths in the Mediterranean Sea will it take for you to understand that your policy and the security approach are not working? We will not stop repeating it, we need a reception policy that guarantees dignity and rights. We must protect humanitarian NGOs, create a civilian rescue corps at sea. In short, it is time to make the only choice that is worthwhile, that of solidarity rather than that of barbed wire.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, nine months after the worst corruption scandal in its history, our Parliament is finally voting to change its ethical rules. It is time to take stock and frankly, there is really nothing to brag about. I remember when the scandal broke a few months ago, all the Members came here to the Chamber to say, with their hands on their hearts, that nothing would ever be the same again. And since the "Qatargate", a large part of the commitments that have been made, especially thanks to our group, voted in resolutions, have been largely buried. Out of almost 40 promises, more or less, in the end, less than ten were kept, because the right, the extreme right, but also the macronists, buried all the others. So the least we can do when we want to save democracy is to start by respecting it. I will take just one example: the prohibition of ancillary remuneration for elected officials. It must be obvious, but how many Members here in this Chamber are heavily paid by companies or lobbies, in addition to their mandate. Who are they accountable to? To the deputies, these deputies? To the elected officials? Or the citizens who elected them or the companies that pay them? The rejection of my amendment this noon to put an end to these practices of MPs-lobbies shows how money still too often takes precedence over ethics in this European Parliament. But you can count on us to lead the battle.

Madam President, Madam President of the Commission, I listened well to you, and I must say that I was quite astonished by your level of total disconnection from reality. Get off your golden tower! You say that you are responding to the call of history, but you are not responding to the call of millions of people, a third of Europeans, who are not eating enough because of inflation and for whom you have achieved the feat of not having a single word today. So, since you refuse to hear our call for a social emergency plan funded by the richest and super-profits, I will do something that is quite uncommon in the European Parliament, which is to give my microphone to a European citizen you have not listened to – it is very short: [Ms. Aubry launches an audio recording on her phoneEvery night you start to get a little hungry.inaudibleand close to the lunchtime meal. His name is Yassine. There are millions of people like him in the European Union and it is for them that you should act, Mrs von der Leyen. Victor Hugo wrote: Do you want help from the poor? I want misery removed. I have the impression today, Mrs von der Leyen, that you do not want either of them. So count on our group to keep fighting to make it a priority.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, do you know how much Total or Amazon pay taxes in Europe? No, no. Well, neither am I. Like vampires, multinationals hate light. We understand them. When we learn that Starbucks pays less tax in Europe than local coffee, the Frappuccino will suddenly have a slightly bitter aftertaste. To fight tax evasion, we need transparency. I have been fighting for ten years for the public country-by-country reporting directive, which was finally adopted in 2021, but in a minimalist version. Because of the lobbying of multinationals by Macron’s government, transparency is only effective in one in five countries. For example, it is impossible to know the profits of multinationals in the Cayman Islands, Jersey, Guernsey or Switzerland. And now, lobbies have found a new ally to continue tax arrangements in the shadows. Ms McGuinness, you are telling us that you are in favour of transparency, but in the utmost secrecy, the Commission has sent a note to the Member States, urging them to adopt only minimal transparency. But who gave you this warrant? This is the ultimate! Unelected technocrats who act behind the scenes without even informing the elected representatives of the people, in a file on transparency. Commissioner McGuinness, yesterday we sent you a cross-party letter calling you to account for this scandal. Well, transpartisan... not quite. I regret that the rapporteur and president of the Renew Group, Stéphane Séjourné, refused to sign it. But I ask you here clearly, for whom do you work? European citizens or lobbies?

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten. That's it! During these ten seconds, Bernard Arnault, the richest man in the world, has just earned EUR 17 123. I repeat: EUR 17 123 within 10 seconds. In 10 seconds, more than a full year of work for a minimum wage garbage collector or housekeeper. But the CEO of LVMH is not alone in seeing his fortune duplicate without lifting a finger. This year, for example, France’s 500 largest fortunes alone add up to €1.170 billion, almost four times the total amount of the European COVID-19 recovery plan and seven times the EU budget. 1 170 billion is more than last year and I give you a scoop: probably less than next year. Look at this curve, colleagues. This curve, if it continues, will pierce the bottom, because there is no glass ceiling for some. The ultrarich are always richer and more and more numerous. A curve that will continue to explode in the following years. More than a curve, it is the image representation of the infamy and bankruptcy of our economic and democratic system. Meanwhile, in real life, we are dealing with a completely different reality. We calculate our purchases to the nearest cent, we accumulate coupons, we reduce the quality of food and we tighten our belts. So I know, I really like numbers, but I will show you another curve. This curve is the fall in food consumption. At the end, minus 12% for a year and a half. One in six people who don't eat enough in the world's richest continent. This is the direct consequence of inflation hitting European households hard: +15% on food products in one year. This same inflation is, according to the European Central Bank itself, caused mainly by corporate superprofits. And these superprofits, they don't eat themselves. On the other hand, they feed dividends from wealthy shareholders and bonuses from bosses. The loop of indecency is closed. Never, never will we resolve to live in a society where we prefer to put anti-thefts on meat and fish rather than guarantee everyone to lie down with their stomachs full. Nor will I ever resolve that the working classes should deprive themselves of leisure and holidays to be sure that they will be able to finish the month. They already triage throughout the year and can no longer even escape to change their minds, rest and please their children. This is the case for Zenaba, a carer. Here are his words: “Holidays are a way to congratulate my daughters and motivate them for school. It is very hard for them not to leave. My daughter’s girlfriend told her she was a tramp.’ Shame, shame on the backs of the poor. But he, Bernard Arnault, rest assured, will have no difficulty in escaping tax or physically aboard his ironically called yacht. Symphony, obviously recorded, I give it to you in a thousand, to the Cayman Islands. However, these repeated journeys are not harmonious. By engaging in tax evasion, billionaires have long since seceded. That is why our group wanted to put this simple but necessary goal of taxing the rich on the agenda of this plenary session! Our group has been fighting for years for very simple measures. And yet: European FSI, rejected; tax on superprofits in all sectors, refused; regulation of jets and yachts and other billionaire toys, buried – and there is not even talk of a ban yet. So, ladies and gentlemen, let us resume our account to finish. One, two, three. Three seconds. This is hardly the time it would take to vote in this Chamber and approve tax justice measures and change people’s lives. 3% is the tiny wealth tax rate of the rich that would already raise hundreds of billions of euros. Three words, this is what you should remember from my speech: taxing the rich. Tax the rich.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, last week was the hottest in 120,000 years. 80% of Europe's land and waters are devastated by the insane exploitation of the planet. A quarter of the birds have disappeared since the 1980s. Adopted tomorrow, the Nature Restoration Law should be unanimously adopted, as humanity cannot live on a dead planet. But the right and the extreme right make this law a totem to shoot down. For this political purpose, Mr Weber, you who do not even have the courage to be here with us today have lied. You have denied science, forcibly replaced your recalcitrant deputies, rolled out the red carpet to lobbies, and pacted with climate sceptics. Mr Weber, you are blowing a bad wind in Europe, a Trumpist wind that is stirring up the embers of the far right and threatening to uproot any environmental policy. As for the colleagues in the Renaissance group who want to pass for the saviors of the planet, I wanted to recall the facts. Mr Séjourné, it is Emmanuel Macron’s call for an environmental break that has opened the gap where this bad wind is engulfing. And it was the votes of some of your Members that led to the rejection of this text in the Committee on the Environment. History will remember, ladies and gentlemen, every vote against this text bringing us closer to the abyss. You can deny science, ignore youth, gag activists. You can cradle the fables of infinite growth. Reality will catch up with you when you leave this Chamber. It's only July 10 and it's 37 degrees in Strasbourg. Vote for the Nature Restoration Act.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, last Tuesday, a 17-year-old man, Nahel, was coldly shot dead by the police during a roadside check. Without a damning video, this murder would have gone unpunished. To the horror of this terrible tragedy was added a surge of racist hatred. In which European country can we imagine that a prize pool to the glory of a murderer raises €1.6 million? France is now an anomaly in Europe. Twelve people were killed for refusing to comply last year, compared to one in ten years in Germany. Black and Arab youth are 20 times more likely to be controlled by the police. Justice Commissioner Didier Reynders and the UN have called on France to address this issue. But the French government denies the reality of police violence and racism in the police. Worse, he has just banned a demonstration on Saturday that simply calls for truth and justice for the victims and where journalists have been abused by law enforcement. What then remains when democratic expression frameworks are removed? France has entered an illiberal and authoritarian drift. And here, from the European Parliament, I want to raise the alarm solemnly. The European Union must react.

Mr President, France has incredible talents and I will present one to you. He is our master of SLAPPs. It is a bit like the Kylian Mbappé of judicial dribbles. I have appointed: Vincent Bolloré. For years, Bolloré has sent battalions of lawyers to harass all journalists and activists who denounce corruption, labour exploitation and the environmental disasters of his industrial empire. Mediapart, France Inter, Bastamag, Libération, Sherpa, React, they all paid the price. Bolloré loses most of his trials, but he does not care, because he does not seek justice, but to divert it to protect his impunity. Unfortunately, he is not the only judicial harasser in Europe. For all these reasons, I am happy to participate, as rapporteur for the left, in the negotiation of this ambitious directive against SLAPPs. The Council now has the same ambition. Justice at the service of the powerful is necessarily an injustice. So let us adopt this directive and prevent the courts from being diverted from their mission by judicial harassers. Thank you.

Madam President, the Pandora Papers were almost two years ago. For an eternity, you will tell me, at the pace of tax evasion scandals. But still, $11,300 billion hidden. And then we will be told by the way that the crates are empty and that we will make the pockets of the citizens? And it’s not just anyone involved: 35 former and current Heads of State and 300 public officials, some of whom are still in office, such as Sylvain Maillard, the Vice-President of the Macronist Group in the French National Assembly, or the Dutch Deputy Prime Minister. In a normal world, they should have seen the police disembark at home, their assets seized and convictions rained down. But no, nothing. Under the influence of the right, they are not even mentioned in the report we are debating today. No wonder that tax evasion is so slow to be repressed and tax havens punished. Under these conditions, fraudsters, after all, will not bite the hand that feeds them. In short, two years later, colleagues, we still have a little feeling that the song I have not changedJulio Iglesias – also involved in the Pandora Papers – has become the chorus of the European Union. So, I propose another piece, another music to replace it: taxing the rich. And we could start with a tax on the fortunes of billionaires.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I had a small suggestion for you: Try to close your eyes for a few seconds and imagine two images: on the one hand, thousands of trucks on the roads and their procession of noise and pollution; on the other, freight trains, each carrying as many as 50 heavy goods vehicles. No doubt: I imagine that you prefer the second image, but what is obvious, unfortunately, is clearly not so for the Commission. In the name of competition, it is preparing the ground for the liquidation of the public operator Fret SNCF, with the complicity of the French Government. The outcome would be catastrophic: job losses, shareholder profits and the undermining of an essential tool in the face of the climate emergency. Rail freight transport emits 14 times less greenhouse gases than road transport. This is called simply shooting yourself in the foot. One more example of why liberal dogmas are incompatible with the public interest. If we continue along this path, it is not only freight, but all of humanity that will derail, which is why we voted against this report.

Commissioner Jourová, frankly, your proposal for a European ethical authority, the one you are proposing, which is meaningless, is an insult against democracy and a masquerade. Six months after the Qatargate corruption scandal and its suitcases of tickets to buy European democracy, how dare you present such an empty shell with a ridiculous budget, without investigative powers or sanctions? Ultimately, your independent ethical authority has authority, ethics and independence only by name. At best, it is a writing club to draft a charter of good conduct. Mrs Jourová, I'm sorry to tell you, but you're making fun of us. It is a bit like you want to act for road safety by setting the speed limit at 300 km/hour and removing the radars. Together with my group, we have been fighting for four years to establish a proper European ethics review, an authority made up of independent experts capable of investigating and punishing breaches of transparency and ethics rules. This is the path you should have followed. Unless you are afraid to open the Pandora's box of conflicts of interest of your friends at the European Commission? Then review your copy and make the right choice: protecting the integrity of our institutions rather than the impunity of the corrupt.

Madam President, I obviously wanted to join the initiative of all my colleagues in favour of paternity and maternity leave. And since it is a question of democracy, ladies and gentlemen, I wanted here, from the European Parliament, to issue a solemn warning about the state of democracy in France. Last week, the government simply prevented the National Assembly from voting on the repeal of the pension reform, which is rejected by three quarters of the French. After demonstrating unprecedented police brutality against the social movement, Emmanuel Macron has just planted a real and serious stab against Parliament. In what democracy, ladies and gentlemen, is it conceivable that Members cannot vote, and what is more, on a text as important as that extending the retirement age? In what democracy is it conceivable that deputies are prohibited from proposing and even amending the law? However, this is what is happening in France today. The separation of powers is the very foundation of the rule of law. Emmanuel Macron has just buried him. So here, from the European Parliament, looking at Poland or Hungary, we know all too well where this kind of authoritarian and illiberal drift can lead. That is why, ladies and gentlemen, the European Union must react.

Mr Štefanec, I listened to you carefully, and you say that companies cannot have a responsibility throughout their supply chain. But I have a fairly simple question: Do you agree that companies know their supply chain, and when it comes to raising profits, they have no problem finding the factory where the labour is the cheapest? So why can they turn profits upside down, but never accountability when it comes to human rights violations? And so, as a result, why are you going to oppose this text?

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, it is with great emotion that I speak to you today of a huge victory against the impunity of multinationals. A victory for human rights and the environment, which very large companies can no longer undermine without being held accountable before the courts. A victory for the 100,000 peasants expropriated by Total in Uganda, the families of the 6,500 workers who died on the construction sites of the World Cup in Qatar, or the thousands of Uighurs forcibly exploited by major clothing brands such as Shein or Zara. A victory for all these victims, who will finally be able to access justice without multinationals hiding behind their subcontractors or subsidiaries. A victory, it must be said, ladies and gentlemen, snatched from the lobbies, ready for all lies to protect their delusional profits on the altar of human rights and the environment. The result of four years of fierce fighting here in Brussels, where we have fought hard to ensure that these crimes never go unpunished again. So today, for once, here in the European Parliament, it has been demonstrated that people’s power can outweigh money’s.

Mr President, 1 135. There were 1,135 women and men, some almost children, who died crushed under the rubble of the Rana Plaza plant in Bangladesh. 1,135 bodies in the middle of Carrefour, Auchan, Primark, H&M and Benetton labels. 1,135 workers died because they were forced to work while the factory walls cracked. Dead because they were forced to keep up the pace to ensure the unlimited profits of our clothing brands. 1,135 lives crushed by the greed of multinationals who exploit workers and nature around the world with impunity. These 1,135 lives were as precious as mine and yours. Behind each of them were stories, dreams of the future, laughter and tears. Behind each of them, there is now a bereaved family seeking justice. For ten years, the European Union has ignored this call. As if those lives were worth nothing, or no more than a few cents on the price of a T-shirt. For ten years, we have let these multinationals continue to spend the lives of workers, human rights and the environment in their profit mill. We have allowed Total to expropriate more than 100,000 people in Uganda and Tanzania. We let Nike and Zara exploit the forced labor of the Uighurs in China. We let 6,500 workers die on the World Cup sites in Qatar. In memory of the 1 135 dead in the Rana Plaza, the right and far right of this Chamber swear, with their hands on their hearts, that this will never happen again. But, ladies and gentlemen, such a promise cannot be paid for in words. It will be verified by deeds tomorrow, when we vote on the duty of vigilance of multinationals. So pause with words in the air, because yes, EPP colleagues, how dare you shed crocodile tears today when your group is scuppering behind the scenes the text precisely aimed at punishing multinationals that exploit people and nature to death? The choice is ultimately simple for Mr Weber, whose absence I regret today, and his right-wing group: give in to lobbies and protect exploiters, or defend the rights of millions of workers.