Speeches

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. The need to care for forests and biodiversity is a fact and even a duty of civilization. But in order to do that, you have to make good laws. Unfortunately, the document we are discussing has escaped legislative scrutiny despite the very good intentions of each rapporteur and shadow rapporteur. There's a lot to improve here. Please note, there everyone added their goods, the amount of goods increased, which is in the regulation, without any analysis, primarily financial, and social responsibility. Later, the material scope changed, definitions changed. In addition, bureaucratic ideas actually mean that it will not be possible to apply this provision in such a way as not to bother Europeans, who want absolutely well. The vague inclusion of banks, which will assess whether a given product can be financed, is only a complement to these irregularities.

Mr President, thank you very much. Article 2 of the Climate Law clearly states: zero-emissions by 2050 with removals. Not only natural, but also technological. That is why LULUCF is so important, where we have to be fair, share this investigation fairly to absorb emissions, because a hectare of forest in Sweden is completely different from a hectare of forest in Spain. We have to be flexible, we have to avoid penalties. Fortunately, the legal service supported me in this endeavour and the EUR 375 per tonne amendment simply fell. We need to support those who want to serve the climate through absorption. It is absolutely unacceptable, without research, to include agricultural removals from 2031. However, when we talk about absorption, remember that absorption can save 30 million jobs that are associated with internal combustion engines. 35 million company cars... (The President took the floor)

Thank you very much, MEP, although I am obviously not a member of the Government, but I will be happy to reply. First of all, I would like to say to you that we have delivered on all the commitments that took place in 2020. Among other things, with regard to renewable energy – 16.1 renewables in the entire energy mix – the planned target has been met, firstly. Secondly, we systematically introduce all mechanisms that are to serve the environment, but also to take care of the human being. The war showed that, among other things, the idea of closing Turów overnight was a political absurdity. Thanks to the fact that the mine has not been closed, Polish citizens can feel safe. At the same time, the money, which is related, among others, to the ETS, is regularly allocated to support those who are in energy poverty, to thermomodernization and renewable energy.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Friends and colleagues! Yes, Mr President, tomorrow is a historic day. We will decide whether Europe will be strong, competitive and whether our children will have a future, or whether it will be weak, harassed and tormented by social protests, where children will not see a chance for their dreams to live in Europe, to be proud of it. Please note, as we show in the amendments, that the Fit for 55 package is outdated. It is outdated because it does not see the events of the last two years, it does not see the pandemic, it does not see the war, it does not see that we have agreed that Nord Stream 2 will not be built. He also does not see that in the climate law in the Impact Assessment we talked about ETS prices at 60 euros in 2030. At the moment it is about seventy, eighty euros, and it was almost 100 euros. Therefore, if we cannot plan and count, we cannot guarantee the safety of our citizens. Note that the ETS, on which we build our entire climate policy, is speculative – 70% of financial institutions are registered in tax havens – and at the same time it is managed by the Commission in an absolutely socialist way. And we are talking about the ETS, which is to cover the whole of society, all elements of European life. Justice funds don't work. An example is the Energy Justice Fund. Well, Frans Timmermans tells Poland and Wielkopolska, where ZE PAK decided to close the mine because there is no money for them, even though she accepted it earlier. (The speaker agreed to respond to the speech signalled by the blue card)

Madam President, I'm sorry. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Poles have been taking care of their wilderness for hundreds of years, which is why today you can say that it is so unique. It is no different now that a wall is being built to protect against illegal immigration, war and human trafficking. The whole procedure is under the absolute supervision of the environmental services, which monitor this construction on a daily basis, perform analyses on a daily basis. The whole wall is designed to protect nature and allow watercourses to flow. Tree felling is restricted and migration routes for small and large animals are established under the supervision of individual forest districts. Where were you when Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 were built? I didn't hear the alarm about how it destroys the environment and how it makes wars financially possible.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Today is the 70th day of the war in Europe. Every day we see murder, rape, torture, unimaginable suffering, sometimes, unfortunately, drinking coffee or talking to friends. Before Ukrainian women, as well as women all over Europe who have supported them, and above all Polish women, I bow down and thank them every day, especially women in the Podkarpacie and Lublin regions, because they have been on the border every day since the beginning of the war. Ukrainian women need three things: an end to the war, tight sanctions and money. Today, tomorrow at the latest. Commissioner, don't tell the Polish people to do this out of their own pockets. We welcomed more than two million Ukrainians. They are in the health care system, education, social care, they have their PESELE. We need the money. Please do not say that on the occasion of the war you want to starve Poland. Because we are in Poland for Ukraine, for the whole European Union. We want to help, but we want money. Today, tomorrow.

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Today is the 70th day of the war in Europe. The Russian services also work here, they will analyze your every word, your actions, they will observe what is happening in the special committee. Therefore, I ask for restraint, for content and responsibility for my actions and for my words. Moreover, the Russian services and their influence before the war were active in the European Parliament and the European Commission. I hope that a special committee will soon be set up to resolve this issue as well. The author of the motion for a commission said that there are such media reports. Yes, the media reports. There are few prosecutions, court proceedings, where citizens have the right to defend themselves and ask for it to be decided in accordance with the rules in force in each Member State. I am adhering to a committee, a special committee with very limited powers, because the law actually says that it can or should. It is difficult to expect that the special services in every country in the face of war will stand up and talk about how they work.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Commissioner, thank you very much. It is indeed a great courage for the French Presidency to discuss Poland in the context of Article 7, because it is today that we should talk about France. This is the country that has been selling arms to Russia since 2014 despite the embargo. And this is a country whose companies see no reason to withdraw from the Russian market. A few days ago, the representative of the parliamentary majority Janina Ochojska said that they are doing everything in the European Parliament so that Poland does not receive money. This is why the Reconstruction Fund is blocked, this is why there is conditionality, this is why there is debate about the Republic of Poland in the context of fakes, half-truths, untruths or newspaper titles, and this in the context of the war. Poland is not just two and a half million refugees. It's 200,000 children and young people in the education system, it's an open health system, it's an open labour market, it's trains that transport Ukrainians to Poland for free. This is 7 billion zlotys from the budget to co-finance citizens who gave their homes, their property, their money, in a sense of great responsibility for the fate of the entire European Union, not only the Republic of Poland, not only Ukraine. And at the same time, all this in the context of the lack of money from the European Union for refugees in the European Union. It is simply irresponsible to say that we have to find money in untapped funds. Shame on you!

Madam President, I'm sorry. Commissioner, thank you very much. I want to tell you that economists, entrepreneurs and, above all, Europeans say quite different things than you do. They're straightforward: ETS is opaque, manipulative, subject to various kinds of fluctuations – meaningless, with the intervention of opaque companies. Energy prices are high, we do not see any energy security, which is absolutely crucial in the context of the war, and it is not really related to decarbonisation. I propose to focus on capture, absorption, because it is a serious global challenge. Therefore, the stabilization market should serve something completely different. I propose that the Commissioner look at the ECR amendments 27, 28, 29 and consider that this is why we have this market, that when prices are high, especially when there is such a threat of war in the world - we have a war in Europe, Commissioner - it should serve not to take allowances from the market and increase ETS prices, but to release those allowances. I think the Commissioner feels the burden of responsibility for what will happen in a week, in a month, in a year and in ten years. This is not the way, first of all, to transparency, energy security and certainly not the way to climate protection.

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Mr. Secretary of State! I think we're aware that the war has changed everything. It must also change the European Union and its energy policy in order to ensure the energy sovereignty of the European Union. Change it in such a way as to respect every source that is available in the European Union, including fossil ones. We need to be open to new technologies, global technologies that capture carbon dioxide, absorb carbon dioxide. All documents need to focus on new models of diversification, storage, capture, saving, as well as ensuring low energy prices. Therefore, the ETS needs to be reconsidered. It is primarily a source of speculation. The Commissioner may have some way of overseeing the ETS. The documents show that no one has oversight of the ETS. And we want there to be ETS 2. That is, to touch the tax on fuel for cars and fuel for heating or cooling apartments. We really have to draw conclusions.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. The 8th Environmental Framework Plan 2030 is a policy objective. These are very often right ideas, right indicators, but very often utopian. The rapporteur, who worked hard on this document, said in a fiery speech: Let's move beyond the GDP paradigm. Honourable Member, we must think of every European. You will be fine, the Commissioner will be fine, or the President. Because we have other means of subsistence secured. On the other hand, the average European counts money every day. These changing energy prices, changing fuel prices – he will bear the costs. Without him, there will be no plan. Without him, without a man, without a European, there will be no action. The Commissioner is talking about prosperity. Everyone thinks so, everyone wants so. But Commissioner, the Fit for 55 package goes deep into the pockets of Europeans. He tells Europeans: We'll go into your house, we'll go into your car, we'll go to your fields, we'll go to your places, we'll go to your planes, we'll go to your vacations, and we'll say pay, pay a lot. Because that's the idea. I won't agree with that. Euractiv reports today that Germany has said it is now activating all of its carbon safeguards. In times of dramatic economic crisis, energy crisis, war with Ukraine absolutely and in no way can we withdraw from subsidies for everything that is fossil. This will ensure that Europe and Europeans survive. We will not replace this with wind farms and photovoltaic panels. I don't have time and space to argue about what kind of greenwashing is the production of wind power plants or photovoltaic panels.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Batteries are so common in human life and cause so many troubles and worries that it actually seems necessary not only to analyze, but to try to regulate. I am very happy that we are talking about producer responsibility here, because it cannot be that the consumer is always doomed to wonder how to dispose of the equipment he uses. Unfortunately, I have a lot of concerns about the implementation of this document. Firstly, for several weeks, months, we have a changed world – not only a war that brings death and aggravates the economic crisis, but we have an energy crisis. In this regard, I hope that this will be the case in trilogues, we should apply all these changing realities to the document in order to recognise that we really want to achieve the goal and not just say that we have ambitions. I would like to remind you that lithium has increased five times in one year, that lithium mining is destroying – not only deforestation, but air pollution. We can't pretend we don't see it. Yes, we do, but we don't really have any mechanisms. Tell manufacturers who want to produce batteries that they won't turn a blind eye to how lithium and cobalt are extracted. We do not have any guarantees that simply a European producer will not buy from such a mine, for example, but there are dozens of other producers who will still buy it for double the price. Let's be realistic, because that's the only way we can achieve our goals.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Commissioner, I'm sorry. There has been a war in Europe for 13 days. Putin is killing innocent people. Putin is destroying cities and villages, energetically destabilizing the entire European Union. But there has been another war going on for many years, a war on disinformation. We have observed it many times, because today it rains from everyday attacks not only Ukraine, but also Russia. The Russians are being fed Putin's propaganda. Russia says directly that it will create its own communication channels and will talk to its citizens in this way. But for us MEPs, the Commission is also a warning that we should not succumb to this disinformation. Remember how recently Poland had to explain itself that it is not racist, that it does not divide Ukrainians and that it welcomes everyone with an open heart and open apartments to Poland. Until recently, the President of Ukraine was a Nazi, and we repeated these fake news, We did not verify. This is an important message for us. Let's tell the truth. Let's look for the truth. Let's confirm in many sources.

Mr President, thank you very much. The Commissioner is absent! Friends and colleagues! Today, words are often said: war, war – that is indeed the case. Rightly indicated are the fields where this fight takes place: pandemic, situation at the Polish-Belarusian border. There are even announcements of sanctions. It is a pity that they fall out of the mouths of those who do not want to block the construction of Nord Stream 2, such as the President of the EPP, among others. But we forget one more fight, one more war. The war that the European Commission is waging against Europeans. This is, ladies and gentlemen, allowing the ETS, the European carbon pricing system, to drain the pockets of citizens. Yes, there are provisions in the directive that allow not only to appoint appropriate services, but also to conduct an investigation. We cannot be held hostage by speculation and theft. The Fit for 55 package is just a variation on this ETS, and I call on the European Commission to end the war against Europeans.

Madam President, I'm sorry. The following weeks and months are a great test for two great world projects: for what the European Union is and what NATO is. Is it a force, a player in the global market, in international politics, or is it a collection – I don't want to say clusters – of various interests that are being played out by the blackmailer? The aggression against Ukraine is also an aggression on the Polish-Belarusian border, it is Putin's joint projects to complete the construction of Nord Stream 2 and to be powered by billions of euros to conduct his imperialist policy, as well as Putin's policy, which is to lead to the destabilisation of the European Union and NATO. Unity, strength, consequences, not individual interests. This gives us a chance to say no.

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. I think that today we have a tangible effect of what happened in Glasgow, of our political declarations – the ETS, the European carbon purchase system, has increased by a few euros. This, of course, is very pleasing to the Commissioner, because the Commissioner believes that the ETS should grow, regardless of energy prices and citizens' costs. But what is also related to this is that we have not convinced the world to function in the same system. Therefore, when it comes to the Fit for 55 package, it needs to be seriously reviewed, these taxes, orders and penalties need to be seriously analysed and, above all, the CBAM document needs to be reviewed, because we did not see any country's willingness to participate in the discussion, and at the same time we did not hear the answers to the questions of how many European Union companies have exported their production to China and India. At the same time, an important thing happened – it was calculated who was responsible for carbon emissions and carbon accumulation since 1850. And of course it is China, it is the United States, the attention – Germany is in the top ten – which does not want to discuss the fact that they have the greatest responsibility now, also financially, and they say to the whole world ‘you answer the same, you have to pay the same’. This does not bode well for these statements. It bodes badly for what we have ambitions to do ourselves. One good thing happened, namely, there was a discussion about capturers, canisters. If we want to remove carbon dioxide, we will not succeed otherwise than through modern technologies. It just can't be a parallel, expensive system, a system built alongside the ETS.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Friends and colleagues! There are a lot of valuable ideas and solutions in the report, but unfortunately there are a few that raise serious doubts and that would have to be said. Firstly, there is a lack of accurate analyses and solutions, and above all, information on how much companies in the European Union have already done to achieve various types of results. This is worth noting, because such work has been carried out for many years. Secondly, however, the proposal for a legal act with binding objectives raises doubts. Why is that? Because such solutions already exist. After all, we are working together on the Fit for 55 package. Actually, we started this work, and in several documents, methane solutions are already in place. There is really no need for bureaucracy. Thirdly, there are no sources of funding. We cannot introduce further acts that are just an idea without sources of funding. And finally, without global solutions, we really will not be able to achieve this. I do not know if you know, but the construction of Nord Stream 2, which is mainly supported by two groups - S&D and EPP, has been checked by, among others, the Copernicus satellite and we systematically have huge methane leaks there. We are responsible for this, because we, the European Union, participate in the construction of Nord Stream 2.

Mr President, thank you very much. At the climate summit, the European Union, Europe must be not only and not so much a leader, but above all it must be credible, because only then can it convince to its reasons, to its ambitions. It can be credible for two reasons. Firstly, when she says that she has Europeans behind her, that she has citizens behind her, that she has told her citizens that they will pay many times more for energy, for heat, for gas, for water, for the price of a plane ticket, for a car, for housing. If we get that consent, then we will be credible, and the Fit for 55 package tells the citizen, the European, only that you pay, we will not help you at all, and there is little evidence of how much this will translate into emissions, how much it will translate into environmental protection. Secondly, we will be credible if we look for all possible methods: Those who are, and those who are yet to come. Therefore, I do not understand why the position of the Commission, the European Union and the European Parliament does not include provisions on sinks and artificial capturers. These are new technologies that really capture the carbon dioxide emitted, which is in line with the IPCC report. If we can support this with arguments at the climate summit, if we can prove it, then we will be credible, then we will really be the leader.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Friends and colleagues! Today, Europeans expect two things from the European Commission, the European Union: border security and energy security. I therefore hope that the European Council will send the following messages: Firstly, it will show that Poland properly protects the European border and will support it every day and at every step. And secondly, that it will decide to revise the ETS so that energy prices do not soar (it is the fault of the carbon price, which has almost quadrupled in the last two years), to revise the Fit for 55 package (because it is badly written, badly calculated, it will cause prices, which today are so high, to increase many times), as well as to block Nord Stream 2. This is blocked by two groups: S&D and EPP. They work with Putin.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Friends and colleagues! This is a disaster: before our eyes, the energy policy of the European Union, the climate policy of the European Union is falling! What do we have to say to Europeans who are worried about the fact that the price of energy, gas, water, garbage has increased many times, the price of living has increased many times? All we have to say to them is that it is good that there is an ETS, good that there is a speculative market, and not only that it affects the cost of living of citizens, but we also want to add the aviation market, the maritime market, cars, buildings. Yes, let the Commission really emphasise how important this is, and let it rejoice to lose all credibility. At the same time, he is happy and does nothing with Gazprom and Nord Stream 2. On several occasions, two political groups, S&D and EPP, rejected the possibility of adopting a resolution that would force the Commission to stop Nord Stream 2.

Mr President, thank you very much. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Friends and colleagues! There are legal immigrants on the Belarusian border who have been brought in, who have arrived and paid the money for it. They don't have the documents, they don't want to accept asylum. Humanitarian aid is on the Polish-Belarusian border. The Lukashenka regime does not allow humanitarian aid. Poland – with the help of 1,800 soldiers and the Border Guard, with the help of 180 kilometers of the wall – defends Poland and the European Union against another route of illegal immigration, illegal trafficking in human beings. We have to be together, we have to speak with one voice, we have to act harder, faster, to be effective and to speak the same way. One of the Polish MEPs used the wrong wording to use disinformation, Fake news. Let's see it as dangerous, but still a leap.

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Friends and colleagues! I think that December 2020 is a historic December, when the entire European Union agreed to zero-emissions by 2050 at the level of the European Union, including sinks, in a solidarity-based, responsible manner, showing the different ways to reach the target in individual countries of the European Union. Unfortunately, and I regret to say this – I hope that we will work on it and change it – the package forgets about these arrangements. Governments are counting, citizens are starting to take an interest in it, and they are also asking. They ask, first of all, about the increase in prices, the increase in the prices of everything. They will bear the greatest cost and they will bear the burden of the European Union's ambitions. Therefore, we must ensure that they are not the ones in energy poverty. The 50 million citizens of the European Union are already people living in energy poverty. The first estimates indicate that there will be at least twice as many. Therefore, we need to limit new taxes, injunctions, prohibitions, we just need to count money. Without people, we will not do it, they will turn their backs on us and no ambitions, no incentives will help. At the same time, I hope that we will work on the ETS and the one that we will revise, and the new one for buildings and cars. Because the ECJ, ladies and gentlemen, is, firstly, unfair, secondly, it has degenerated, it operates in a speculative market. Frans Timmermans, answering my question, expressed his joy that ETS prices are rising in this way, and they are directly reflected in energy prices. I would like to remind you that during the pandemic they tripled. At the same time, when we agreed and stipulated in the climate law that we would absorb, we almost eliminated artificial sinks, they are only mentioned in the recital in the climate law. Let us make sure, according to the IPCC report, where paragraphs D.1.4 and D.1.5 clearly mention the importance of artificial sinks, that they are included in the individual entries in order for companies to want to absorb. This seems to be the fastest, fairest way to achieve zero emissions.

Mr President, thank you very much. Let me start by thanking the rapporteur. Her high personal culture meant that we talked about very difficult matters very substantively. I want to point out these elements, where we have stayed in our positions, to what we cannot absolutely agree to. First, in many places the 8th overall plan is too detailed. It does not set directions, but deals with very specific solutions, such as the introduction of taxonomy provisions into this general plan. This is a separate document, let's leave it to function separately. In addition, it interferes with the Treaties, allows or orders the Commission to interfere with the budgets of the Member States, which we cannot agree to. At the same time, it is aggressive in many places. We talked about the fact that when citizens are with us, we will be able to achieve the right goals that your rapporteur spoke about here, but we cannot tell European citizens, Poles and Poles that by 2025 we are to close all energy-intensive plants and enterprises, because that is what we are saying, banning subsidies by 2025. In the end, what we care about: amendment to make everything clear and transparent. Hence the idea to see how much money we spent, how much more we need and whether this money was spent effectively.

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. I think that the Commissioner's optimism is extinguished with every speech we make. We have a year and a half since the outbreak of the pandemic. We are poorly vaccinated, we are at risk of another wave of epidemics. We don't have the cure to cure our citizens. At the same time, I recall the chaos in the introduction of vaccines into individual Member States. The covid passport was supposed to be an added value, and further divides, further is unfair and further excludes, because we have a free vaccine, we do not have a free test, a free visit to the doctor and a test that will confirm that we are recovered. At the same time, how do citizens and guesthouse owners in Italy, Greece, Poland, Hungary verify these applications? How is this monitored? How to prevent a large black market that is already applying for this green certificate?