Speeches

Mr President, dear Commissioner, today it's really an historical moment because we have been talking for many years about the need to increase the strategic autonomy of the European Union, and the European Union has never been a fully-fledged political entity because it has suffered from two dependencies: in the east, on the gas from Russia, and in the west, on the United States for defence. A democracy that depends on an autocracy to heat its homes and companies is not a fully-fledged democracy. This is the point. What kind of Europe do we want? Only a huge commercial space or an autonomous political entity? So, today we are really on the right track. The full ban on gas in 2028 will give us a freedom and autonomy, and above all, will free us from the deception of financing ourselves the war against the Ukrainians. Freeing ourselves from Putin's gas means freeing ourselves from his hate for our values, democracy, peace and pluralism.

No, no, we do not believe that you are crazy people, absolutely. But these are two questions. So first of all, it is absolutely true that Putin does not want peace, and we are in the middle of a hybrid war all over Europe. We can see it every day in Denmark, Sweden, Germany and so on and so forth. Second, of course Putin is not winning, because there is an incredible resistance by heroes, people fighting for their liberty and freedom thanks to the help of the European Union, thank God.

Mr President, we all know very well what is really at stake in the Russia-Ukraine war: the defence of democracy against tyranny; the defence of pluralism against dictatorship; the defence of freedom against despotic leaders who really do not care about international law. So Putin's real target is not just the Ukraine or its critical materials, but Europe and the West: our values, our freedom, our unity. So we need the two very clear conditions for the European Council of tomorrow. First, military support by the EU and, at the same time, a solid peace proposal, including ceasefire, restitution of deported Ukrainian children to their families, and so on and so forth. The second condition is that Ukraine must be put in a position of strength in order to negotiate a peace. You cannot surrender to the strongest one. You cannot surrender to tackle Trump's crazy diktats. So, President Zelenskyy, your fight is our fight.

Mr President, dear Commissioner, we know the numbers of the crisis of the automotive industry, we know the numbers of the production fall and the sales decrease. It is a perfect storm with multiple explaining factors: the transition to electric vehicles is costly and difficult given the shortage of raw materials and delays in the infrastructure; changing lifestyles; competition from China; tariffs from the US. However, these challenges cannot justify abandoning the climate targets already fixed and carried out so far; we need to give certainty to producers and investors who have planned their activities precisely because of those targets. It would be stupid to cancel the 2035 ban on combustion engines because we need to safeguard competitiveness. But, at the same time, it is crystal clear that we need more flexibility, we need pragmatic action. We cannot resign to ideology, for instance, by rethinking the principle of technological neutrality. We are the policy makers, we have to find the conditions in which our core industry and its employees can innovate without perishing, can embrace sustainability without losing salaries and rights. It is not easy, but what is sure is that the answer cannot be always and forever the status quo.

Mr President, dear Commissioner, China's decision to impose anti-dumping duties of up to 62 % on the importation of European pork products is an act of profound economic injustice that damages our farmers a lot, with estimated costs of around USD 2 billion. It just happens when China itself is facing a significant domestic overcapacity of pork products, so there are no real and legitimate reasons for such tariffs. Beijing's decision is nothing more than a retaliation to the principle of multilateralism and to a system of shared rules which is now more than ever under attack. So if we also consider Trump's duties by 15 % on European food products, it is crystal clear that Europe is more and more squeezed between two powerful autocrats using trade as a weapon. But the problem is bigger today. The problem is that the strategic autonomy of the European Union is not enough. We must work for a stronger, united, powerful political union, not only a market, which makes a difference in the world, and not be a hostage of lunatic superpowers.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, investing in nuclear fusion research is a priority. Well the ITER project, to which the European Union contributes significantly, with almost half of the funds. None of us are against research – how can we be against research? – It is important to have a diversified portfolio of energy-generating technologies. We will need a lot of energy in the future, think, for example, of the development of artificial intelligence. Hence the importance of nuclear fusion that produces clean, renewable energy, the energy of the future. There's a problem, though: Time is not an independent variable, time is not infinite. It's a constraint. We need to decarbonize, and we need to do it quickly, step by step. We cannot wait until 2050. It must be realistic, not punitive, decarbonisation of businesses and households. But I would ask you, Commissioner, for very precise information on any delays that may occur and for a precise estimate of the costs that we have to bear. I very much appreciated your reference to Draghi, to public-private partnerships to bear the costs, but we need accurate data. It's up to politics, all in all, to choose and point out a way. In Italy, perhaps we have delegated too much, perhaps we have made a mistake, making decisions with a referendum on the basis of fear over nuclear power. Now we have to move forward, but with realistic and unimaginative promises.

Mr President, dear Commissioner, protecting biodiversity must continue to be our top priority. We have addressed it in the Green Deal, in the Nature Restoration Law, so we cannot step back or be afraid to move forward, because biodiversity is not just about the beauty of our landscapes and the fundamental fight against the extinction of animal and plant species – but it is also at the basis of our food security, the quality of our agricultural sector, especially facing climate change. So let's say it loud and clear: biodiversity is what helps agri‑food ecosystems to react to external shocks. In fact, it is a survival factor. So two points are important to me. First of all, farmers who are the true custodians of our territory are among the first victims of biodiversity loss. We must therefore help them not only economically, but also with training and innovative tools such as sustainable biotechnologies that put them in a position to adopt more adequate production methods. Never put agriculture and biodiversity one against the other. The two factors are intrinsically linked and there is not one without the other. Second point: the protection of biodiversity cannot stop at the borders of Europe. We need a global change in which the European Union promotes sustainable food systems at an international level, respecting human rights, workers' rights, the environment, health and animal welfare. Reciprocity is needed inside and outside the Union. We cannot allow the competitiveness of our farmers to be compromised due to less sustainable practices in other parts of the world. It is essential that international agreements reflect these principles, ensuring at least an equivalence of production standards. Therefore, dear Commissioner, I really ask you to also address the global dimension of the protection of biodiversity.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, subcontracting and the use of intermediaries are increasingly common in the world of work. Often, in construction they are also linked to accidents and deaths at work. Let's remember the five deaths in Florence in February 2024 due to the collapse of a construction site. The Platform Work Directive, for which I was rapporteur, includes in Article 3 very clear rules, saying that workers who have a contract with an intermediary must have the same level of protection as those who have a direct contract with digital platforms. Now governments must act quickly to transpose European standards. But we also call for the revision of the Public Procurement Directive to be forthcoming: I call for the inclusion of social conditionality clauses; limiting subcontracting chains; more controls; identification of legal responsibilities; the prohibition of the maximum discount. To die of work, to go to work without returning home, or to die without knowing whose responsibilities they are, are tragedies that have no consolation.

Mr President, Commissioner, the spread of digital technologies is having a huge impact on the labour market, and innovations such as AI, robotics, quantum technology and 6G are triggering a wave of new demands for a new generation of advanced digital skills. The Draghi report strongly highlights how digitalisation and AI are essential, for example for the public sector due to its ability to provide quality public goods in the fields of health, education, justice and welfare. We need to work hard on the European digital decade programme and its ambitious goals, pushing professional training and life-long learning. We are still lagging behind: in Italy, only 22 % of the population have advanced digital skills. Only 30 % of SMEs have implemented a solid digital strategy, which is not a luxury, it's a strategic asset. So we shouldn't be afraid of change and Europe's strength has always relied upon its people. By empowering them, we ensure that our communities grow and that the EU remains a global leader in innovation.

Mr President, dear colleagues, dear Commissioner, words are important, and they want to remind all of us that we cannot talk of a Union of energy until we do not have a real single energy market. And this is linked to several factors, from energy security to the fight against energy poverty, to the competences of the EU in terms of institutional governance. For instance, after the war in Ukraine, in order to have high quantities of energy storage, we pushed a little bit further the competences of the EU. We have a humongous problem of prices: on the one side, the energy companies can benefit from extra profits; on the other, families and small companies are overwhelmed by extra costs. And no words have we heard on the ETS. If the free allowances disappear, many industrial sectors will decline, not to say close down. But there is one primary precondition for a real integrated energy market, that is, providing adequate energy infrastructure. I really hope that the next European Commission engages as soon as possible in ensuring nodal interconnections between countries. It is the only way to ensure we can really talk of a Union of energy.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I very much thank the shadow rapporteurs, the colleagues who have supported me in this very difficult negotiation and I use a euphemism. We have shown that when the European Parliament acts with determination, unity and unity, the European Union manages to touch the living flesh of people, to change the lives of its citizens for the better, in this case to protect over thirty million workers. I am proud that today, at the last plenary session of the legislature, we are putting this beautiful stamp, a beautiful sign that will remain there, in the history of this Parliament. And, thanks to Commissioner Schmit, who wanted this directive on platform workers, a mechanism is introduced to combat bogus self-employment, almost six million workers who are fully employed and yet treated by independent entrepreneurs. And in this way we reiterate that subordination, when the objective conditions of work are those, is neither obsolete nor a scandal, without obviously preventing true self-employment. But above all, let's talk about algorithms in the labor market for the first time in the world. We demand transparency and say that automated systems must not act outside of human oversight. It can no longer happen in Europe that a delivery boy dies in an accident and is fired by an automatic message after he dies. This is dehumanization of the labor market. They dismiss your account because you didn't deliver the pizza and we say "no!" to that. We don't oppose technological change, it would be stupid. We want to ride digital development, but in a good society and good society it is the one that meets the minimum expectations of each of us, including having a decent job. Well the market, but also well society, and today we have shown that the European Union is not only a giant regulator, but can also change people's lives.

Madam President, yeah, I know, because it was my fault. I mean, we were wrong in indicating the vote for Amendment 2 because we confused it with Amendment 8. Is it possible to... (The President cut off the speaker)

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, unfortunately this morning we saw an unacceptable example of pro-Russian and Putinian propaganda by Mr De Graaff, precisely during the debate on Ukrainian children forcibly deported to Russia, some 20 000. It is crucial to condemn this kind of completely false propaganda. We have heard that it is actually Zelensky who has to go before the International Criminal Court; whereas the West, together with Ukraine, facilitates the trafficking of children, even organs; whereas the West, together with Ukraine, is spreading transgender indoctrination and even genital mutilation. Unacceptable words in the house of democracy and freedom. This Parliament has always defended Ukraine and the boys and girls of Ukraine against the invasion of what can be considered a ferocious tyranny, a ferocious authoritarian regime. We do not allow pro-Putin and pro-Russian propaganda to infiltrate the skin of boys and girls! And we condemn that.

Madam President, I have to say that what happened some seconds ago with MEP Marcel de Graaff is a very, very serious issue. We cannot tolerate Russian propaganda in this House. We cannot tolerate pro-Putin fake propaganda in the House of democracy. We cannot tolerate the violation of the truth! We are fighting and all Parliament is united to defend democracy against tyranny, against authoritarian regimes. So please don’t come in this House to tell lies in front of these girls, please. We have to condemn this. So, care ragazze, I’m sorry for what has happened. I shift to Italian. La ferocia di un tiranno si misura col comportamento verso le persone più fragili – i bambini prima di tutto – rubati ai genitori dall'Ucraina, strappati con la forza nei convitti, deportati in campi di rieducazione, costretti a diventare cittadini russi. Siamo arrivati alla cancellazione dell'identità ucraina, all'annientamento della cultura delle origini, della propria storia e delle proprie radici. E questa è la forma più odiosa di totalitarismo: 20 000 deportati da Mosca in Russia e in Bielorussia. È imperativo che condanniamo chi commette questi crimini di guerra! Ripetiamolo: è Vladimir Putin il responsabile! Ripetiamolo: è Vladimir Putin! Deve andare di fronte alla Corte penale internazionale. L'indottrinamento, il lavaggio del cervello, la propaganda finta sono le armi delle dittature e delle mire imperialiste di Putin. L'Europa alzi la propria voce, ma la dittatura non vincerà contro la democrazia, l'autoritarismo brutale non vincerà contro la libertà e noi siamo qua con voi. Slava Ukraini!

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, frankly, I am shocked to reply to Mr Ceccardi: The President of the Republic, Sergio Mattarella, had to intervene, saying that the authority of law enforcement is not measured with batons on minors: 13 minors injured, who had every right to demonstrate. We are in favor of law enforcement but unarmed 15-year-old boys don't bat, neither here, nor ever.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, on 12 February last, four out of 27 countries (France, Germany, Estonia and Greece) blocked the agreement providing a minimum of social protection for 30 million platform workers. It was a shame! We want to understand why, because there is no rational explanation. The text makes it possible to correct the false self-employed, to recognize, only in the face of objective working conditions, the status of employee and, unlike what multinationals say, there is no automatic reclassification of workers: The self-employed remain self-employed. We have even left the legal presumption of subordination to the States, albeit in the safeguard of certain principles, including the reversal of the burden of proof from the worker to the employer in the event of disputes. And the part on algorithms is an extraordinary opportunity to set a global standard for the first time on transparency, information obligations, human oversight. But why did you block it? The explanation is only one: because you have bowed to the pressures of the multinationals, because you have chosen the strongest instead of the weakest, the bullies instead of the vulnerable. And it is not acceptable that two "super-European" countries, such as France and Germany, have said no. Alors Monsieur Macron, le projet pour lequel vous avez échoué est un projet libéral qui décourage la concurrence incontrôlée et favorise une concurrence loyale pour les entreprises. Une Europe soumise aux intérêts exclusifs des multinationales, qui exploite le travail sans un minimum de réglementation, n’est pas l’Europe libérale que nous pensions. Lieber Herr Scholz, aus welchem Grund tragen Sie zur Zerstörung des europäischen Sozialmodells bei? Wie ist es möglich, so vielen Millionen Arbeitern keinen Schutz zu gewähren? Sie sind ein sozialdemokratischer Kanzler, der das größte Land der Europäischen Union führt. Sagen Sie uns doch, auf welcher Seite Sie stehen! So there is the time to unblock the agreement. Please do it. Not for us, not for you, but for the workers.

Mr President, Council, the revision of the EU budget that the European Council is negotiating is absolutely good news. Europe is finally increasing the budget allocation to address energy costs, the war in Ukraine and the environmental disasters. But the bad news is that, as far as we know, today’s negotiations on the budget are still blocked and the culprit is the usual suspect, Viktor Orbán, and, it is worth repeating, the friend of the far right, the friend of Vladimir Putin, the despotic leader who holds Europe hostage at every historic juncture. So he is now obsessed with funds for post-war reconstruction in Ukraine. But with his veto, he is also blocking European investments in strategic sectors, blocking resources allocated to manage migration and, above all, blocking the increase of the European Solidarity Fund, for instance, which would have been crucial for the floods hitting Italy, Emilia-Romagna. Today, Giorgia Meloni will be in Forlì, I think, with Ursula von der Leyen. I hope that she is going to Italy and I hope that Giorgia Meloni strongly emphasises that her friend Orbán is withholding additional funds for the citizens of Emilia-Romagna. So, this Chamber is really wondering why, for years, we allow Orbán to put the brakes on a strong and solidary Europe. Europe is not an ATM. One cannot request European funds and then ignore the values of democracy, pluralism and the rule of law. Please stop this veto.

Mr President, Commissioner, representative of the Presidency, ladies and gentlemen, today girls and boys are asking us for protection, for security and for future prospects; Paradoxically, they do not ask for utopias, dreams and innovation, but for protection. We're like this. Then these questions are answered with appropriate public policies, for example with correct housing policies, not with overcrowding and skyrocketing rents; attractive training and professionalisation offers, not free traineeships on the verge of exploitation, and above all decent and decent working conditions. I think the time has come to propose an extraordinary plan for the home at European level. We have dealt with vaccines, pandemic, minimum wage, child guarantee and equal pay, we have done a lot here from Brussels, we have not wasted time; so it is also necessary to deal with housing discomfort, which does not mean a roof over your head but means a condition for which you develop a life perspective and for which you feel an active citizen. I cannot but stress that tonight we reached an extraordinary agreement with you, Commissioner, and with the Presidency: we have said enough about precariousness and enough about exploitation for a category of workers who are very underpaid and very discontinuous in their work, platform workers – riders, for example – and we have created a simple legal infrastructure, which, however, gives social rights to workers who have so far been poorly protected, often young people. Let's say that if you are completely dependent on an algorithm it is difficult to call you or consider yourself an entrepreneur in the midst of your entrepreneurial creativity, you are an employee. We have said this and we have said that we do not want to be governed by algorithms. Let's go on like this and we'll protect our... (The President took the floor from the speaker)

Madam President, dear colleagues, given the statements made yesterday by Commissioner Hahn in the BUDG and CONT committees, on behalf of the S&D Group I would like to withdraw our request for a debate on ‘the continuing threat to the rule of law, the independence of justice and the non-fulfilment of conditionality for EU funding in Hungary’, but, however, given the recent media reports, we would like to stress the need to remain vigilant and keep up the pressure on the European Commission not to release any funds for Hungary, and we will therefore ask for this debate again for the November II plenary session.

Madam President, dear colleagues, the various proposals that have been made by the different political groups mirror the gravity of the situation in the Middle East and this Parliament’s strong engagement to contribute to putting an end to violence and to the suffering of innocent civilians in the region. And in light of our responsibility as the European Union’s Parliament, it is of crucial importance that our House stands united in this commitment. So, in this spirit, I move a joint proposal on behalf of the EPP, S&D and Renew Groups to add a debate under the title ‘The humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the need for a humanitarian pause’ on the plenary agenda, which could take place this afternoon jointly with our debate on the outcome of the European Council meeting without a resolution. So I hope that a large majority of this Parliament of this House will support this compromise.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, housing is a fundamental right, a right of citizenship, it is not a concession. If you have a roof over your head, you can live safely, you can think about plans for the future, create a family, realize your desires. If, on the other hand, you are strangled by a mortgage that you have the anguish of not being able to pay, you live in a condition of insecurity. If you are forced to sleep in tents, not only to protest against rents but because you do not find a rag of room at sustainable prices to be able to study, it means that the European social model no longer holds, that it no longer holds. Then there are the financial speculations, so the house becomes an object to be exchanged on the market with rises that are dumped on the skin of citizens. In Italy we are wonderful: We managed to erase the only things that worked. The Meloni government has razed the default fund and the rent fund to the ground. Thirty-three cities are calling for a plan.Next Housing EU". We need to work on investments and serious commitments. Enough with a central bank raising rates and choking millions of households, enough with the poorest.

Madam President, we absolutely believe that water management is a crucial topic, but we really would like to address this subject also with a debate with a larger, all-encompassing title, including on the impact on agriculture and nature. And so we would propose a broader title: the Council and Commission statements on responsible water management, nature restoration and agriculture. However, we know that there are some other political groups that would like to have more time to discuss and to have a debate. And so in the spirit of compromise, we suggest that the debate be moved to the October II plenary session.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, many things have changed in Europe in this mandate. We are pleased that even points on our agenda as Socialists and Democrats have become points on its agenda, especially after the pandemic. We supported the social turnaround of the Union, instead of austerity, solidarity; Europe has found its soul for a moment, we forgot about the market. But there are things that don't come back. His party, the People's Party, is objectively blocking more important measures than the Green Deal: It's the truth. You reassured us at the end of your speech, and we want to believe you: We want to believe you, but we are a little bit sceptical about that. Not to mention migrants: She went hand in hand in Tunisia with Giorgia Meloni, the leader of a Eurosceptic and sovereignist party, hoping to pay an autocratic leader to keep all migrants in Tunisia. I don't think this is a good strategy: hand in hand with a leader who said that we must get out of the euro, that Europe is the Europe of usurers, that the European Commission is like the Soviet Union and that it wants a minimal Europe at the service of the nation states. So, you don't invent pro-Europeans overnight. We need a strong Europe on migrants, with strong skills and mandatory solidarity, and you really have to tell us which side you are on: whether on the side of Europe as freedom, as democracy, as pluralism, as responsible reception, or of the Europe of walls, of nativism; Europe of the extreme right, nationalisms; Europe is closing its doors. Because either you're on one side or you're on the other. And we want to be true pro-Europeans, not reluctant pro-Europeans. We want Europe as a project for the liberation of man, the one that David Sassoli wanted, with that anxiety for justice and freedom to which everyone aspires: the Europe of women, rights, the Europe of growth and development, the Europe of fraternity and hope. Really tell us which side you're on.