Speeches

Madam President, the crisis we are experiencing requires us all to return to reality, especially in terms of energy, to get out of our dependencies, to protect the environment, we are no longer entitled to illusions. You want to develop wind power massively and you have cited Denmark as a model. But with nearly 10,000 wind turbines, Denmark remains dependent on its coal-fired power plants and has to import electricity. The one that neighbouring Sweden produces and exports is 50% less carbon-intensive thanks to nuclear power. How can we break the deadlock if we do not open our eyes, if we send gas to Germany to help it through the winter while letting it shut down its operating nuclear power plants? If to stop paying for Russian gas, we pay for Azeri gas, thus becoming dependent on another criminal dictatorship. And I dare to hope, Madam President, that we will jointly sanction the aggression launched yesterday by Aliyev against Armenia. This is not just about energy. To return to reality is to refuse these new rules, which will bring down agricultural production in Europe at a time when food prices are rising everywhere in our countries. It is to start producing again rather than relying on the multiplication of dated trade agreements. It is breaking the spiral of a common debt that will make us vulnerable tomorrow. It is defending Frontex and controlling our borders rather than weakening its mandate. It’s not just about recruiting talent from abroad, it’s about training our young people better first. Madam President, you want to include solidarity between generations in our treaties, and we share that spirit. But it probably starts there.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, this night, shortly after midnight, Azerbaijan launched a full-scale military attack on Armenia. Intense shelling targeted several towns and villages on Armenian territory. Military sites, of course, but also places inhabited by civilian populations. At this point, the toll is at least 49 soldiers and three civilians killed. Nothing, nothing can justify this aggression. Two years ago, in violation of all the rules of international law, Azerbaijan, supported by Turkey, attacked Nagorno-Karabakh. This time it is attacking the very territory of the Republic of Armenia. Ladies and gentlemen, we supported the Ukrainian people without hesitation when they were attacked by Russia. We must denounce with such a clear voice the criminal aggression launched last night by Mr Aliyev’s regime. Madam President, we ask you to bring the voice of our Parliament to this emergency situation. Our determined position can prevent this war and can stop Azerbaijan in the project it is preparing. Finally, let's stop treating this criminal state as a legitimate partner and fund its threats by buying gas from it. Let us quickly take steps to prepare sanctions that are effective. Let us immediately demand a meeting of the United Nations Security Council. We owe it to the security of our continent, which will be directly endangered by this new conflict. But above all, we owe it to the Armenian people with whom we live these hours of mourning and anguish wholeheartedly.

Mr President, to conclude this debate, as we have said, it is a moment of truth that is emerging. Tonight, we heard from colleagues who call themselves environmentalists and who are willing to sacrifice the energy sector without which, says the IPCC, we will not be able to save the climate. We have heard from Socialist colleagues who are ready to sacrifice the energy sector that will make it possible tomorrow to control the costs of energy, which are soaring today for households, for families, for our businesses, for our industries. We have heard from colleagues who claim to be defending democracy, yet who are ready, by abolishing the nuclear industry, to make us even more dependent on these authoritarian states that now own gas, oil and rare earths. Colleagues, tomorrow we will all face our responsibility. This is a historic vote. This will be an opportunity to show not only our commitment to the future of our continent, which started with the Energy Union, the European Coal and Steel Community, but it will also be a time to show the sincerity of our convictions, our ability to face reality, to take facts into account, to listen to reason. It is also a certain idea of democracy that is emerging in our vote tomorrow.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, you are part of the Group of the Greens and I believe that we have in common a desire to combat the climate crisis. How do you respond to the fact that nuclear emits half as much CO2 as wind and ten times less than solar energy, and what do you respond to the IPCC saying that we will not be able to solve the climate challenge before us if we do not do with nuclear energy, which is now the most decarbonised energy that European countries can have to face this challenge and preserve our energy model?

Mr President, Mr Vice-President, this Council will be marked by growing concerns, of course, on the economic front: inflation is reaching unprecedented levels and is now hitting millions of citizens in our countries who, by working or having worked all their lives, are no longer able to cope. Will we have the means to sustain the war effort that will have to be made to deal with the conflict in Ukraine after COVID? For this, there is an urgent need to rebuild the capacity of our states to act by finally returning to fiscal seriousness. Russia has a long way to go in its war. And do you know why? It is only indebted to 17% of its GDP. A country like mine, with 113% of its GDP in debt, is infinitely more vulnerable, especially when half of its debt is held by foreign actors. And that is, I believe, one of the keys to the fight that lies ahead. As we all know, we are facing very strong tensions for families, for workers, for businesses in our countries. It is urgent that the European states that still live in untenable budgetary illusions finally have the courage to return to the economic balances that are essential to act over time and face future crises and guarantee our sovereignty.

Madam President, last Sunday in Owo, Mass was coming to an end when the first shots were fired. More than 50 people were killed and dozens injured, including many children. What was their crime? For having been to Mass. Less than a month ago, still in Nigeria, young Deborah Samuel was lynched, stoned, her body burned by her classmates in the name of Islam. What was his crime? She was a Christian. In the aftermath of that murder, a majority of this Parliament had refused to include this topic on its agenda. We talk a lot here, but persecuted Christians have only the right to silence. A silence that should shame us. Who said anything about Owo’s deaths? Who? Where did you see their images? Where did you hear the witnesses? In fact, we are talking about it tonight, but this Parliament is almost empty when, on the contrary, this subject should concern us all. Because Europe is concerned; Our continent owes so much to the Christian faith! When will we finally understand that Europe has a duty to protect persecuted Christians around the world? Those from Nigeria, of course, but also those from Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, those from India, those from China, of course – I am thinking of Cardinal Zen, who was arrested just recently. What is Europe doing? What does she say? She lets things go, and in a way everything is summed up by the fact that she has not found anyone for months to take on the role of Special Envoy for Freedom of Religion. Ladies and gentlemen, if we do not react now, this silence will remain a symptom of the greatest denial of European leaders.

Mr President, Commissioner, Minister, there are moments that count in a mandate and this one, I believe, is part of it because, for years, Europe has allowed all the imbalances of globalisation to settle. And when it was concerned about the environment, it set increasingly demanding standards for all those who produced in our countries. And these constraints eventually installed a form of unfair competition. We have not promoted ecology, we have especially weakened our economy. For the first time, we will make the single market that we have been able to build a lever to protect our environment. Tomorrow, those who import into Europe will also have to pay for their carbon emissions. And by imposing this mechanism on our borders, we are pushing the world towards cleaner production and we are also giving oxygen back to our own industries. This is the awareness that was long awaited. Simply imposing constraints on those who work in Europe is not a progress for ecology, it is a problem for ecology. It is not to stop polluting, it is to export pollution and to become dependent on the model that we refuse. Now, ladies and gentlemen, this awareness must come to an end. We will not build a cleaner industry without European industrialists. And when they need to invest the most, we don't have the right to take the money away from them.

Mr President, the situation created by Russia’s war against Ukraine risks putting us in a situation of shortage in the medium term in the European area and will continue to raise energy prices for consumers and businesses in our countries. That is when the coalition currently in power in Germany decides to backtrack and vote against the delegated act of the taxonomy, including nuclear energy sources that can serve the decarbonisation of our continent. There is something like a purely ideological madness that cannot be explained otherwise. The Commission itself, in the REPowerEU plan, would like to get us out of our dependence on Russian gas without investing a single penny. However, funding is provided for nuclear energy, which now accounts for a quarter of Europe's electricity production. It is fundamental that we are able to get out of magical thinking. We will not avoid these shortages and rising prices if we are not able to take advantage of all the energy sources currently available. And to begin with, let’s say it again here, Germany and Belgium must keep in operation the plants that still exist in their countries today. It will be, just that, a billion cubic meters per month of Russian gas that we will import less. It is also our honour that is at stake in this choice.

Madam President, a word to go back to the discharge of Frontex, because we see that this procedure risks being instrumentalised by all those who would like to prevent the agency from carrying out its mission. Its task is not to control the Member States, but to help them, in particular to deal with illegal immigration, which we can clearly see could jeopardise the very balance of our countries. Today, we are being proposed to postpone the discharge of Frontex on the basis of an OLAF investigation, which we do not have, which we have not been able to read, and we see that this postponement of the discharge will only serve this political trial, which is being conducted against the agency, against its teams, against its management. At Frontex, we are re-emphasising our trust here. We reiterate that nothing should undermine the mandate entrusted to it, including attacks that sometimes come from within the European Commission itself. We believe in this mandate, we believe in its mission, and that is why we believe it is fundamental to refuse to allow this discharge process to be politically instrumentalised today.

Madam President, Commissioner, it seems to me that our debate is marked by an ambivalence that some are seeking to exploit. Of course, the principle of non-refoulement prohibits a state from pushing someone out of its borders who would be in danger in the country to which it is being returned. But the principle of non-refoulement does not say that it is forbidden to control its borders. The principle of non-refoulement does not say that it is forbidden to push back, for example in Turkey, when that state seeks to use our fragility in terms of migration, people who will obviously not be in danger if they are returned to that country. Today, this confusion is causing the humanitarian drama that some say they want to avoid. I went to the island of Evros, I met those who are now trapped by what some say is an eldorado and which is proving to be a dead end. Behind the beautiful statements here is the obvious complicity with the trade of smugglers who, on our naivety, build the dreams on which they thrive by creating so much misfortune. And we need to be clear today: if we continue on the path of this absurd criminalisation, if we continue to explain that a border guard does not have the right to guard a border, if we continue to make people believe that we do not have the right to refuse entry to people who obviously do not have the right to come and settle illegally in Europe, we will only provoke the humanitarian disasters that we will come to deplore next, and that we will cause the deaths that are mourning, around Europe, the Mediterranean Sea and the borders of our continent.

Madam President, Commissioner, the report we are about to vote on finally puts the spotlight on the disastrous consequences that Brexit will have had for European fishermen: the consequences of the application of the agreement, since our fishermen will lose 25% of their activity in value in British waters – no economic sector will have been affected to this extent – but also the consequences of the non-implementation of the agreement by our British partners, who have used all possible bad faith in the past months, for example not to issue fishing licences to vessels that were nevertheless entitled to do so under the agreement that had been signed. This should allow us to open our eyes to the tug of war that is before us today, to ensure that we will be able to enforce this agreement at the end of the transition period that will end in 2026. We want to have loyal cooperation with the British, but this cooperation must be in good faith and must be done in accordance with the commitments that each of the parties has signed. I would like to say that the work that we have done here to defend European fishermen, the fishermen of our countries, who are now hit hard not only by the consequences of Brexit, but also by the crisis triggered by the exponential increase in energy prices, finds its full meaning in the moment we are living, because fishermen are one of the essential supports for our food. At a time when we are experiencing the reality of food insecurity in Europe and around the world, we must reiterate our trust and appreciation for the work they are doing. Far from all those who would like to attack them, sometimes even criminalise them, we know that it is to European fisheries that we owe part of our capacity to resist the turbulence of this world. We will need them to avoid this global food insecurity that threatens to affect Europe and the countries around it.

Madam President, Minister, Commissioner, the current situation is obviously a terrible crisis for European households, which are seeing their fuel bills explode, and reveals our continent’s dependence on Russia, which we are paying at the price of our honour in the current crisis situation in Ukraine. Of course, urgent action is needed, and many of the measures you have announced, Commissioner, are obviously necessary. However, in order to move forward, we will have to start producing again, and it will take time. You spoke of this view, Commissioner, of the massive deployment of renewable energy. I am afraid that we have not yet realised the need to base our energy mix of tomorrow on all controllable energy sources. Every time we install a wind turbine or solar panel in Europe, we need to import gas to compensate for its intermittentity. How is it that this very simple equation has not yet been understood? It sheds a stark light on the funding from Russia of many so-called environmental organisations that have contributed in recent years to destroying our energy mix. We must urgently step out of naivety. It also means being able to rely on nuclear energy. Let's say it again: it is part of what allows us today to produce decarbonised energy, which guarantees our independence and sovereignty.

Madam President, Russia’s attack on Ukraine not only endangers the lives of Ukrainians, it also endangers living conditions for many others and for a long time by threatening planting and harvesting in Ukraine, but also by cutting off from the world a region that today produces 30% of the world’s wheat. Meanwhile, in our countries, farmers and fishermen are in extreme difficulty because of the rising prices of fuel and all raw materials, which directly endangers the continuation of their activity. However, it is the condition of life that we are talking about, and today we must reiterate our support for farmers in the face of the suspicions that they still face and that we still hear here. To this end, Commissioner, it is also necessary to revise our policies in this area. I am thinking in particular of the Farm to Fork Strategy. How can we pursue this strategy, which the European Commission study group itself says will bring down European food production, raise prices for consumers, lower incomes for farmers and increase our dependence on global imports? It would be foolish to persevere on this path. Mrs Noichl, how can you accuse those who dare to put on the table this debate, which is necessary in the moment we are going through? Those who endanger our sovereignty, those who make us fragile in the face of Russia’s attack, are those who want to bring down European production when we need to strengthen it.

Madam President, Commissioner, one war must not make us forget another. Even today, families in Armenia, Nagorno-Karabakh, are waiting for the return of ill-treated prisoners of war illegally held by Azerbaijan, used as bargaining chips. Military personnel and civilians are regularly targeted by Azeri soldiers, in defiance of ceasefire commitments. Just yesterday, the village of Khnushinak was targeted by mortar fire, and this morning, that of Khramort. But it is not only the living who die. President Aliyev also wants to kill history, like the Taliban in Bamiyan, like Daesh in the Levant. Since the end of the war, dozens of monuments, churches, khatchkars, have been deliberately destroyed in a senseless denialist drive to erase the millennial traces of the Armenian presence on these lands, which the Azeri government very officially declares to be a fiction. The ultimate violence which, by depriving a people of their right to decide their destiny, also wants to rob them of their presence. Violence that concerns us all, because this priceless heritage is also ours. It is a treasure of humanity. Our resolution today affirms the urgency of a UNESCO mission to verify the protection of Armenian heritage now. If this resolution is not followed up, the EU must suspend its funds to Azerbaijan, as no support is due to a state that violates international law and its own commitments. Europe has become aware of this today, it must finally be present concretely alongside Armenia.

Madam President, needless to recall the very correct findings that we have just heard, I would simply like to recall one point that concerns us all, far beyond these walls. With the invasion of Ukraine, it is not only the freedom and sovereignty of the Ukrainian people that is under threat – a people to whom we owe our solidarity. These are also the principles necessary for world peace. Never, never should a great nation resolve any disagreement by violence. Nor does an army have the right to attack civilians, to bomb, as we have seen in recent hours, targets that have no military necessity and to evacuation corridors through which families flee the war. To recall this is not naive idealism, it is to recall international law. Even war has its rules. A thousand years ago, Europe knew that weapons did not have all the rights and it paid dearly every time it forgot. To all the Russian forces involved in this conflict, by the destructive will that would make us believe that violence again prevails over law, we must recall this simple principle: We all have a conscience, we are all responsible, definitely. One day justice will pass. And now it's time to show what it means to be a man. For us Europeans, who have believed for too long that war is behind us, it is time to finally recall that it is a betrayal of the principles we have inherited to be too disarmed to be able to defend them at a time of danger.

Mr President, we are facing an existential crisis and it is time to take the measure. 400% increase in the price of gas in just one year, it is obviously a major crisis, a crisis vital for, of course, European households and countries, but also for tens of thousands of companies that could be condemned to bankruptcy as well as for our entire financial system, which is threatened with collapse in the face of exploding financing needs. Urgent action is needed. We must do everything possible, use all the tools at our disposal to cushion the shock and overcome this crisis. And for that, the proposals made today by the Commission will not be enough. The Commission proposes to oblige Europeans to increase their reserves. But how can we store more of what we cannot produce or buy? This will only further soften the market. The urgency is to contain prices and, for that, to revert to the market logic that the Commission has been trying to impose on the energy sector for years. It is thanks to this logic that we are now paying €600 million per day to Russia. Prices must no longer depend on market variations, but on production costs – and we owe it to all consumers. The urgency is, and the urgency will remain, production: It is necessary to produce, to produce, to produce. And from this point of view, it is tragic that the Commission has not taken up the proposal by the International Energy Agency to extend the existing nuclear power plant. If only Germany and Belgium decided to maintain the four reactors that these two countries decided to close, Europe would save 1 billion cubic meters of gas per month on its imports from Russia. Do those who have shut down power plants in our countries now realize that they are making us more fragile in the current crisis and in some way condemning us to powerlessness in the face of the aggression that Ukraine is undergoing today?

Madam President, I hope we all agree here that the rule of law must be defended scrupulously and that Europe is a civilisation that carries with it the principle of freedom, which we do not have the right to negotiate, even in times of crisis. However, this respect for the rule of law must never become the occasion for a double standard trial, which ends up discrediting the case he claims to be defending. Here, as we have seen again tonight, it is always the same ones that are targeted. However, I also know a country – I know it well – that lives in a state of emergency, which has been planned to last 12 days, for two years now – and it is not Hungary – a country where two close members of the government were appointed yesterday to the Constitutional Council – and it is not Poland – a country whose Court of Auditors warned this morning about public finances being adrift because of the uncontrolled spending of a President of the Republic – without relaunching, two months before a presidential election – a country where 80% of orders have still not been ratified by Parliament, even though they are taken unilaterally by the government. This country, Minister, is ours. This is your government. So yes, let us be concerned about the rule of law. We have to worry about this, because a true democracy is a country that inquires about its own health from the point of view of freedom. But let us not make this cause of the rule of law the occasion of a political trial, because we will make all the fractures that would weaken the Europe of tomorrow.

Madam President, Mr President of the Republic, you have just opened this presidency with great promises, but we must tell you the truth: No one here really believes it. Not only because the calendar you have endorsed will serve your presidential campaign more than European action, but above all because you have contradicted yourself so much. You've played so much by deflecting to the meaning of the most important words. You have, sorry to say, often lied. How can I believe you? You say you want to control Europe's borders, but yesterday you denounced as a nationalist leprosy the countries that called for help to protect their borders in the face of the migration crisis. You talk about the environment and strategic autonomy, but today France imports gas and coal because you closed Fessenheim and undermined our industry. You speak today of European belonging while declaring that the roots of Europe do not matter. But where then to draw the sap to irrigate our future? You promised the end of the divisions and you will leave France, like Europe, fractured as never before. Here too, we know that your "at the same time" is just a rhetorical trick to cover up calculated inconsistencies. As Pierre Manent writes, the contradiction between Europe's ambitions or pretensions and its reality has become a major political fact. You embody this contradiction today, and we must resolve it. Of course, together with our group, our delegation, we will do everything to make these six months as useful as possible for our countries. But in truth, Mr. Speaker, the essential is no longer there. The main thing is to say to all of you, French and Europeans who look at us: another policy is possible. A policy that takes you seriously, that prefers the sobriety of action to the obsession with communication. A policy that does not claim to strengthen Europe by weakening the states that make it up. Who does not believe that European solidarity is about over-indebtedness. Who does not pretend to defend the rule of law by marching in your freedom and sovereignty, who does not despise you at the first coming disagreement. Who respects you and gives himself the means to make you respected by the great powers of the world. You do not ask too much if you hope for all this, and we have a duty to prepare together for the recovery of our countries, of Europe, to prepare for the succession to which you are entitled.

Madam President, Bernanos wrote, ‘you may wonder if there will still be Christmas nights with their angels and shepherds for this world so foreign to the spirit of childhood’. Amazing, but true, the day has arrived: We must now try to save Christmas, which the European Commission seemed to have planned to condemn. Commissioner Dalli considers that the term is not inclusive enough. Crazy! Reaching the hatred of the roots that have made Europe. Ms Dalli may have forgotten: Christmas is not just the pretext of winter holidays, as she says, it is the day on which the world we inherit was born, the beginning of our era, the reference from which we count our years. Mrs Dalli, do you intend to withdraw us to this common landmark? Crazy! Because to deny what connects us is to destroy any possibility of belonging to a common culture, any hope of assimilation and thus open the way to the break-up of our societies, to the communitarian demands that are preparing for the coming confrontations. In the same month, the European Commission condemned Christmas, because it needed to be inclusive and funded a campaign proclaiming that joy was in the hijab, because it needed to be inclusive. You think we don't understand? When you call us to avoid Christian first names, to favor, I quote, "Malika" rather than "Maria". You are not attacking superfluous symbols and I say this here to all our colleagues who would be tempted not to take this problem seriously: you are attacking what unites Europe and you are paving the way for all the fractures of tomorrow. Jean-Paul Sartre, wrote - Jean-Paul Sartre! -: "you have the right to be shown the crèche" and you wanted to withdraw this right from us. And you are not the first, Ms Dalli. But you have to take responsibility, even if you did not have the courage to come and answer here, I know you hear us. You did everything you could to deny Europe and your mission was to serve it. But it is in vain. Madness, indeed, to believe that you can destroy that. All Ms Dalli in Brussels will never prevent Christmas Day from emptying the Commission’s offices because of the infinite hope that Hannah Arendt spoke of, proof that Christmas is inclusive, through what she described as the greatest of the good news, the good news of the Gospels: A child is born to us. Mrs Dalli, we are talking here, but the truth is that we do not need to save Christmas. Once again this year, Christmas will save us as much as Europe lasts. Merry Christmas!

Mr President, in Eastern Europe, the Belarusian dictatorship is organising a migration crisis and right now, as we speak, Poland is facing thousands of people massed at its borders. This is not Poland's problem, this is our problem. These people want to enter Europe illegally and Poland is defending the whole of Europe. If we do not help him, we have no future, because the one who does not control his borders is necessarily the toy of the first migratory blackmail that came and he abandons the essential. Those who attacked Frontex here a few months ago said they were defending fundamental rights, but it is only our weakness that allows Lukashenko, like Erdoğan yesterday, to put the thousands of people he is pushing towards Europe in danger of death in order to destabilise us. Today, when Poland is on the front line in the face of this clear attack, the same attacks Poland as if it were the one to be targeted. Is Europe able to unite to meet the challenges that affect us all and preserve its principles? In the face of such a serious crisis, solidarity is non-negotiable, starting with financing the infrastructure needed to protect our borders. Now.

Madam President, at this very moment, thousands of people used as a weapon of a new kind by the Belarusian dictatorship are being thrown against the borders of Poland, Lithuania, in an attempt to fracture entry into the European space. And this is another indication of this major migration challenge that our countries will have to face together in the coming years. It was at this very moment that some political groups, some colleagues here in the European Parliament and even part of the Commission decided to indict Frontex, the border guard agency, on the grounds that it guards the borders, as if this was an attack on human dignity. While, ladies and gentlemen, we see this clearly, it is against human dignity that our current powerlessness on the migration front will take place. Now that the accusations against Frontex have been gradually lifted, it is fundamental that we can secure the budget of this agency, but that will not be enough. We must also be able to guarantee the necessary legal framework to combat smuggling networks, to take those who have entered illegally out of our borders and, finally, to ensure that real pressure is put on third countries to ensure their cooperation in this area. This is before us, as 12 EU home affairs ministers recently recalled. Unfortunately, for the time being, for any answer, they have only obtained the fact that Europe would not finance the construction of borders, walls and barriers. However, we know that there is a need to finally provide an effective response to this issue. The Council will work on this by talking about the need to cooperate with third countries, but let us remember that no cooperation will be enough if we are not able to do this work effectively in the fight against illegal immigration.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, this morning's debate is triggered by rising gas prices, but the truth is that the energy crisis has not yet started: It is very much in front of us. We can already be sure of this for a very simple reason: it is being prepared now by the decisions that are being taken here, in this Chamber and in the European institutions. As we know very well, these decisions lead us to become more and more dependent on this gas whose volatility we see is great and which will increase even more with the weight of renewables, the intermittency of which will make our dependence even more important. We want to electrify all uses, we need more and more electricity, but we are reducing controllable electricity generation capacity in all European countries. The result is absolutely inevitable. Some, like the French economy minister, want to change the rules of the energy market, but the truth is that you will not change the first principles of the economy. Introductory course on economics, first chapter: Economics is the science of scarcity and anything rare is expensive. If we prepare today the scarcity of the economy for tomorrow, if we prepare today a system in which shortages will be structural from 2030, then we will destroy the competitiveness of our industry, we will increase the insecurity of the European continent and its dependence on the powers that sell us gas, then we will aggravate the growing social malaise. We have known the yellow vests in France, we will see the same phenomenon at the European level and in the end, for having wanted to sell renewable energies that, in reality, make us dependent on gas, we will have increased our contribution to climate change. I believe that if we do not change now, then this moment will be remembered as a particularly milestone in Europe’s self-destruction.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the decision taken by the United States is obviously a wake-up call, but it must not make us forget three things that seem essential. The first concerns the persons who are implicated in this decision: there are already judicial procedures, and I think it is essential to reiterate that the necessary means of combating corruption is justice, and that nothing can replace the procedural work of a court which, by the means of information available to it, will be able to take the necessary decisions. The second point to be made is precisely this: The EU needs to strengthen its fight against corruption. This is a certainty. It cannot do so outside these procedural constructs. And of course, we welcome the reinforcements that the European Union has decided on in this area through the European Public Prosecutor’s Office or the strengthening of Europol. But it is fundamental, and this will be my last point, to recall that never can the necessary fight against corruption, the indispensable fight for the rule of law, become the instrument of a purely political trial. It is clear to us how instrumental these issues can be today, how exploitable they can be. And here I am talking about the European Union as a whole. There is no substitute for this fundamental conquest, which has been for the history of democracy the construction of procedures which lead to results after a fair debate, at the end of a full investigation, with the means of effective information. And it seems to me that today, the danger before us is to see this necessary requirement of transparency instrumentalised to serve political biases that are necessarily capable of casting suspicion, not only on those directly concerned, but also, and most importantly, on democratic procedures themselves. We have a major responsibility here and the European Union, on this fundamental debate on the rule of law, must be at the forefront of reason and responsibility.

Mr President, Madam President, you have drawn up a lucid diagnosis and an ambitious roadmap, but one that will require urgent breaks. You mentioned the dependence of our countries on Asia, highlighted by the health crisis, and you want to ensure better health protection. But the danger would be to prepare for the past crisis. Tomorrow's will come where we don't expect it. As you describe this vulnerability, the proliferation of European climate standards will increase our imports from China; taxonomy could make us permanently dependent on Russian and American gas; and a Commission study reveals that its own agricultural strategy will lead to a massive decline in food production. Sadness for European agriculture, which, I still regret today, will not have had a word, increased food insecurity for our countries and new dependencies. It is through the coherence of actions that public speech takes on its meaning. You want to prevent any product of forced labour from being marketed in Europe. But why then sign at the same time an economic agreement with China, which has still not ratified its ban? You refuse helplessness in the face of uncontrolled migratory flows and so do we. People who do not have the right to stay in Europe should be sent back, you say. But then, why is Commissioner Johansson indicting Frontex because it is carrying out this mission? You assure countries subject to migration blackmail of your support. But Mr Erdoğan, who keeps playing with it, receives billions of euros. And when Lithuania asked for help in the face of a near-invasion, Ms Johansson replied that the Commission was not funding walls or barriers. You say, and so do we, that European countries must commit to their security, and we look forward to your proposal to exempt the defence industry from VAT. But at the same time, European financial regulations are creating severe difficulties for the financing of this crucial sector. And the European Working Time Directive creates major legal uncertainty for the operations of all European armed forces. Finally, a final word for the young people who have been so tried, as you have said, in recent months. It is a bit sad to dedicate 2022 as the year of youth, after leaving EUR 750 billion of unfunded debt in 2021. Rather than the artifices of communication, let us offer the coming generation a Europe finally awakened that can guarantee our countries the means to control their destiny.

Mr President, we have achieved this. Negotiation has been difficult, but I believe that we have been able to significantly improve the European Commission's initial proposal, in particular by improving the distribution of funds between our Member States, but also and above all, I believe this is the most important, to ensure that the sectors most affected – and I am thinking in particular of fishermen – will be offered the support they need to be able to retrain. We are giving the fishing industry the legibility and visibility it needed. We guarantee the simplicity of administrative procedures. We are ensuring that the fishermen who will be affected, even in Jersey, Guernsey and the Falklands, will be taken into account in the distribution of funds. This is fundamental because, let us remember, they are now losing 25% of the fishing capacity in value that they could operate in UK waters. And I believe that we must remember that it is also a key to the strategic autonomy of our countries: Today, we import half of the fishery products we consume in Europe. If we want to guarantee our food sovereignty, our countries do not have the right to abandon those who fish and that is, I believe, the message we are sending through this improvement of the Brexit Adjustment Reserve.