Speeches

Mr President, thank you very much. The absence of borders in Europe has united our continent. It is a symbol of European values and the European way of life. Bulgaria and Romania, which joined the EU in 2007, 15 years ago, are still outside Schengen. Croatia has been waiting for six years, and yet it is only the entry into Schengen that completes the integration process understood as rights, but also serious obligations. Every year, Brussels examines in detail the adaptation of Romania and Bulgaria to the requirements of the zone and announces recommendations. Therefore, if the Commission considers that aspiring countries fulfil all the key conditions, there is nothing to wait for. It's a decision to make. The Union must prove that, even in the difficult conditions caused by Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, it is able to protect its greatest achievements, namely the free movement of persons, one of the four fundamental freedoms on which it was built.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Friends and colleagues! Approximately 100 million European Union citizens have a disability. Despite the existence of laws that seek to ensure equal rights for these people in all areas of life, they often face barriers to their full participation in society. Our priority is to create an environment that enables people with disabilities to have full access to every aspect of life and the economy. That is why it is so important that the European Commission allocates adequate financial and human resources to the creation and operation of the AccesibleEU Centre. It will also support Member States by providing material and training on the implementation, monitoring and enforcement of accessibility policies. An evaluation of the Centre's activities should be carried out in five years' time with a view to streamlining and updating it and deciding on the possible establishment of an agency. I hope that this important project will significantly improve the quality of life of people with disabilities in the European Union.

Mr President, thank you very much. The conclusions of the Conference on the Future of Europe, concluded in May, send a clear signal that the people of our Union expect change. Of course, one may feel unsatisfied that the debate was not as broad as we assumed, but this does not cancel out the meaning of the voice of thousands of citizens. This is why our Parliament, guided by the opinions expressed, calls on the European Council to convene a Convention to consider amendments to the Treaties. The aim of these changes is to enable the European Union to act faster and more effectively, especially in cases of crises such as COVID 19 or Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. For this to happen, the EU institutions must move from unanimity voting to qualified majority voting. It is also necessary to move towards deeper European integration and the Community method towards federalisation. These factors should be included in the revision of the Treaties if we want to achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness in the decision-making mechanisms of our Union. The convocation of the Convention is necessary.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Friends and colleagues! Crimes against Ukrainian girls and women must be prosecuted and punished. Many persecuted women fled to Poland. These are women who not only face war trauma, but because of tragic events have become the only breadwinners of families. One of the biggest challenges, in addition to providing them with security, is to build a system of professional activation, enabling them to enter the labour market, allowing them to gain means of subsistence. The condition for achieving this goal is, on the one hand, the provision of places in nursery, pre-school and school education institutions for children from Ukraine, and, on the other hand, the European Commission's ring-fencing of funds for co-financing programmes for entrepreneurs creating jobs and employing women from Ukraine. Spontaneous, admirable actions by Polish citizens – and as you know, three million Ukrainians have crossed our border – must be supported by the means at the Union’s disposal, not once, but here and now.

Mr President, thank you very much. The pandemic has shown shortcomings in European legislation on health and safety at work. We need to learn from this difficult situation and prepare for potential future health crises. Particular attention should be paid to the rules for frontline workers who have been at the forefront of the fight against the pandemic. The possibility to work from home, forced by the situation, has increased the flexibility of the working day, however, it has created new risks for the mental and physical health of workers, such as long hours of employment, isolation and poor equipment of the workplace. It is also necessary to pay attention to the difficult situation of women. In the current situation, it is crucial to update the rules and develop strategies that will allow for a faster response to subsequent changes. We should strive to ensure that all workers are guaranteed adequate working conditions regardless of where and what kind of work they do.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Friends and colleagues! Yesterday in Moscow, Chancellor Scholz said that the war in Europe was unthinkable for his generation. It is also unthinkable for my generation, and therefore everything must be done to prevent scenarios that end in war. The Presidents of the European Council and the Commission said today that diplomatic efforts to date have led to a certain de-escalation of the conflict, which is true. However, Russia does not get rid of the military argument and still maintains forces that could pose a serious threat to Ukraine, which it will be ready to use for military intervention. Surrounding Ukraine with troops is an aggressive behaviour, not a peaceful signal. The current crisis should be another lesson for Europe. Diplomatic talks are conducted mainly by the leaders of the Member States and not by the heads of EU institutions and diplomats. Unfortunately, this is part of Russia's strategy to ignore the European Union. What we can do for Ukraine today is significant financial assistance and a roadmap for Ukraine's membership of the European Union.

Mr President, thank you very much. Friends and colleagues! The Digital Services Act under discussion today is undoubtedly one of the most important regulations adopted by the European Parliament. This regulation shapes the fast-growing digital economy and is an important step in building the security of the online environment. The new rules have not only a European but also a global dimension, as they expand and clarify the catalogue of obligations for online companies that offer services in the European Union's single market from anywhere in the world. In this context, the establishment of stronger obligations for very large online platforms and a system of independent oversight and dispute resolution of published content deserves particular attention. I share the comments made by many creative circles and press publishers in Poland that the new rules should limit the ability of large online platforms to interfere with legal editorial content, as well as the right to decide which of them are permissible and which are not. Freedom of expression and media pluralism are crucial for democracy. I would like to thank the rapporteur, Christel Schaldemose, for the excellent work and preparation of the text, which is supported by most of the political groups. However, the compromise nature of this submission necessarily means that not all the amendments tabled to it could be taken into account. However, I am convinced that by voting in favour of certain additional amendments to the report, Parliament will be able to improve the text, which will constitute a strong mandate for further negotiations with the Council.

Mr President, thank you very much. Friends and colleagues! While a total or partial ban on the use of animals in circuses has already been introduced in 23 Member States, we should aim for a full ban across the Union. Wild animals in circuses are forced to behave in ways we don't see in their environment. Their well-being is also seriously threatened. The exploitation of endangered species also undermines international efforts to combat illegal trafficking and poaching. In 2019, public opinion in Poland was appalled by information about the transport of Bengal tigers transported in scandalous conditions from Italy to the circus in Russia. As a result of insufficient veterinary documentation, the transport was not allowed on the territory of Belarus and stood at the border. The tigers were transported in cramped cages and fed inappropriately. Of the 10 animals, one was in agony. The others' condition was dramatic. The tigers were saved only thanks to the rapid and professional action of the employees of the Poznań zoo. No animal can be treated this way. Resolutely counteracting such practices is our duty. All previous questions to the European Commission concerning the ban on the use of wild animals in circuses have been divested of the fact that the ban does not fall within the competence of the Commission, but belongs to the Member States. If this is the case, the Commission should consider including circus activities in the so-called Zoo Directive, which precisely defines the rules for keeping wild animals in zoos, licenses such activities and sets strict rules on the conditions for the transport and storage of wild animals. I believe that this is the minimum we should ensure before the use of wild animals in circuses is completely banned in the European Union. Let it happen as soon as possible.

(beginning of speech outside the microphone)... in the European Parliament for several years now. Today's debate should be really alarming, because the Polish government uses state institutions to limit human rights, including such important rights as depriving women of the opportunity to decide whether, when and how much they want to give birth to children. This is what the everyday life of European women looks like. Everyday life is also a violation of judicial independence and subordination of the Constitutional Tribunal to the will of the authorities. It is the political Court that delivers judgments that limit the human rights deriving from European conventions and EU values. It is clear that the inaction and compromises used by the European Commission should be exhausted. It's time for action and principled politics. If this is not possible, the question will be asked more and more often: Why Poland's Union?

Mr President, thank you very much. Listening to today's debate, we can certainly conclude that for both the left and the right, represented here in the European Parliament, human work is not only a special good, but also plays an important social role. The European Union should strongly support Member States' efforts to ensure that workers are informed about and can participate in decision-making processes in the workplace. It is therefore necessary to strengthen the Union’s toolbox, notably by adopting an ambitious framework directive that will streamline existing rules and empower workers with regard to their right to information, consultation and participation in companies. I believe that the resolution we are adopting today clearly and exhaustively identifies the key needs and draws conclusions regarding the democratisation of the employment relationship. That is why I would like to thank my colleague, the project rapporteur, Gabi Bischoff, for preparing this important document. We expect the European Commission to act now and submit appropriate legislative proposals to Parliament.

Madam President, I'm sorry. The European Union stands by its common position (and it is unquestionable) that national sovereignty, the inviolability of borders and the lack of consent to change borders by force is the foundation of security in Europe and in the world. Therefore, a clear position on the sovereignty of Ukraine and its territory. We note with real concern the increase in tensions in relations between Ukraine and Russia and the build-up of war potential at the border. We support the assumption that political dialogue is the only sustainable solution to the current crisis. Any ideas from Russia on how to solve the current crisis by force should be met with our strong opposition. In the event of an attack, however, Russia must face an unprecedented response in the form of economic and political sanctions. A possible aggression cannot bring any benefit to the aggressor.

Mr President, thank you very much. The implementation of this Directive aims to harmonise national rules on the civil liability of drivers and the rules for its enforcement. It will allow citizens to travel across the EU without having to buy additional insurance based on a single premium. The Directive facilitates the functioning of the single market, but will also make an important contribution to strengthening the protection of victims of road accidents, as Member States will be required to set up guarantee funds to compensate victims in the event of the insolvency of an insurer, accidents caused by uninsured or unidentified vehicles. Today's debate concludes a long, more than two-year period of negotiations with the Council. I believe that Parliament has managed to find a good compromise that takes into account most of our amendments to the Commission's proposal. Particular attention should be paid to the exemption of light-duty electric vehicles from the Directive, the introduction of derogations for temporary end-of-life vehicles and the addition of criteria to be met by online comparison websites for motor insurance prices to be certified by Member States. I believe that the directive as it stands will properly pursue its objectives, ensure a high level of protection for victims of road traffic accidents and facilitate the free movement of persons and vehicles within the Union. With this in mind, Parliament should support the adoption of the negotiated text of the Directive. Thank you to everyone who has been successful in the negotiations.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Prime Minister, I'm sorry. We are hosting the Polish Prime Minister today, but several former Polish Prime Ministers are members of our Parliament. There is Jerzy Buzek, who started negotiations with the European Union. I am the one who concluded these negotiations. My government held an accession referendum in which 77% of Poles said yes to the European community. I am very pleased that today, after 18 years, despite anti-EU propaganda, the acceptance of the community is even greater and reaches 90%. Of course, to a large extent it is opposition to anti-EU power, not acceptance of it. Today, once again, we have heard that the authorities are not striving for polexit. If there are spells that there is no question of leaving the Union, the problem is that the government thinks about a European Union that does not exist and will not exist. The rulers think of a Union of money, but not of a Union of values and not of a Union of law. They are thinking of a Union to fight against, not to cooperate with. "Poland fought the German occupier, it fought the Soviet occupier. We will fight against the Brussels occupiers", the Prime Minister’s adviser recently said without opposition from the head of government. The prime minister himself sounds like Nigel Farage, who already in 2000 predicted that the European super state would take away the identity and sovereignty of the peoples, give it to Brussels officials and the Brussels dictatorship. 21 years have passed and there is no super state, but there is Brexit. There are also followers and followers of Farage. I am sure that European Poland will not follow in this footsteps, it will remain loyal... (The President took the floor)

Mr President, thank you very much. Although the production and placing on the market of asbestos has been banned in the Union since 2005, the existing surveillance tools do not ensure that products containing asbestos do not enter the European market. It is also still present in many of the buildings around us, putting the health of millions of European citizens at serious risk. Nearly 50,000 people die each year in the EU because of this. In the interests of the safety and life of citizens, we call on the Commission to take decisive legislative action, as currently only a few Member States have adequate plans to remove existing asbestos resources. The European Union should be more active in encouraging Member States to act by offering them real support and assistance in detecting and removing asbestos. It should also lay down measures to protect workers and consumers from the harmful effects of that substance. The Commission's initiative in this regard is possible and desirable, especially since the issue of safe asbestos removal can now be co-financed by the European funds provided for in the Green Deal and the Recovery Fund.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Like most of my compatriots, I believe that Poland should receive money from the National Recovery Plan as soon as possible. Although the head of the National Bank of Poland announced that EU funds are not needed for Poland, because it is experiencing an economic miracle, these words cannot be taken seriously. Like most MEPs, I believe that the funds transferred to the Member States should be under the strict control of the European institutions. This also applies to my country, whose government, which is significant, has not joined the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. Nevertheless, the Commission cannot continue to maintain the Polish recovery plan at the assessment stage. Since there are reservations about compliance with the rule of law, the budgetary conditionality mechanism has been in place since 1 January. The European Parliament has on several occasions mobilised the Commission to use this mechanism and has even announced legal action against the Commission for its past inaction. The Commission therefore has an appropriate instrument which it can use at any time.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Once again, we have heard many words from the EU authorities about the observance of the rule of law in Poland. I would like to confront them with a concrete example. On 13 July this year in Brussels, the Polish Prime Minister met with Mrs von der Leyen. After the meeting at the press conference, the Prime Minister informed the public that the issue of compliance with the rule of law was not raised by the head of the European Commission, but by himself, and only marginally. The Prime Minister compared the ongoing procedure with Article 7 of the Treaty to, I quote, "a buzzing wasp in a room that has unnecessarily flown through a window and must be allowed to fly out so that important matters can be dealt with calmly with the European Commission". Together with two colleagues, Mr Belka and Mr Cimoszewicz, we asked the Commission in writing whether it was possible for the President of the European Commission, in an interview with the Polish Prime Minister, not to take up such a fundamental issue as the rule of law, having such a great opportunity to do so. We also asked whether, in the Commission’s view, the conditions for triggering the rule of law mechanism under Article 7 had ceased to exist in order to be able to downplay them by comparing them to a buzzing wasp. After two months, we received a letter from the Commission which unfortunately does not meet the requirements of the reply. We will therefore reiterate our question once again, giving the Commission the chance to try again to answer a simple question.

Madam President, I'm sorry. We are dealing with a report which, as Mrs Szydło rightly said, raises the fundamental problem of Europe's ageing population. The report adopted by the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs correctly identified the problems and pointed out that ensuring fair social security systems, enabling women and men to reconcile work and family life, effective healthcare and non-discrimination are key to addressing them. In the context of increasing fertility, rightly points out the important role of promoting women's rights, adequate education and access to sexual and reproductive health services and goods. Despite these advantages, the rapporteur of the committee, Mrs Szydło, questions the content of the report by proposing an alternative motion for a resolution. A project that ignores such important issues as combating discrimination, inequalities in employment and pay, or supporting women living in rural areas. This is incomprehensible. I hope that Parliament will support the committee's report, together with the amendments proposed by our group.