What Ivars spoke about.

Dear Madam President, dear colleagues, I think that the history of the twentieth century shows us all what happens when we allow our democratic institutions to be used for destructive, anti-democratic, totalitarian purposes. And it seems to me that our Member States have learned something from this, but the European Union as a whole looks like very little. I think that this recent case with this Latvian elected Member Ždanoka is really shouting in this regard. Not only has this honourable forum, the European Parliament, been used. European resources have also been used to spread Kremlin narratives, for example, to defamate the Baltic States over a long period of time, to justify aggression, to glorify de facto terrorist organisations that are now and have been occupying Ukraine since 2014. Do you really not know what to do here? How do we imagine that we will deal with anti-European governments in Europe – like Orban – if we do not deal with Russian agents in this house? That is why, in my opinion, this is the moment when we must still, during this mandate, initiate a thorough investigation into what has happened and, in the future, think about much more thorough scrutiny of Members, so that our democratic institutions are really shielded from the influence of malicious third countries.

Mr President, I would like to thank the colleagues of the Council, Commission, and fellow Members of the Parliament, especially my shadow rapporteurs, who worked on this legislation. It is indeed a small but an important milestone in our journey towards seamless digital public services in Europe. I’m glad that we achieved some of the key priorities for those negotiations. We stressed the need to ensure adequate support for local and regional authorities in implementing the Act. We underlined the importance of interoperability training for public sector workers and digital skills more widely. We agreed on the role of open-source solutions as a critical element in promoting transparency and cost-effectiveness in the development of those interoperable systems. We recognised respect for multilingualism and machine readability as well. We agreed on the establishment of interoperability regulatory sandboxes, without creating unnecessary loopholes in general derogations from the existing EU legislation. Since we strengthened the role of the European Parliament in the monitoring of the implementation of this regulation, I look forward to the Commission’s regular report to the Parliament on interoperability, how it’s proceeding. Colleagues, although this might seem a rather technical piece of legislation, it has a lot of political and practical importance on our path to digital transformation. I thank you for your commitment to bring the work on this legislation to a successful conclusion in such a short time.

Dear Chair, The motto of the Interoperable Europe Act could be ‘think before you do’ – to reflect and assess how our new decisions can be implemented digitally; how the new rules we want to adopt here will affect the ability of citizens, entrepreneurs to receive public services smoothly, digitally and without unnecessary borders across Europe; whether any new information system that we are going to buy for millions of euros will be able to talk to similar systems in other European countries and help people without unnecessary bureaucracy. For example, the register of taxes, property, residents and vehicles must be designed from the outset in such a way that they are able to communicate with the relevant systems both in their own countries and in other European countries. Unfortunately, there are still many data exchanges between authorities, either on paper or actually manually transferring even digital information. This severely hampers the delivery of public services to people and businesses and hampers economic development. Moreover, it is not just a matter of communication between different Member States. Interoperability is very often lacking even between services provided by one country. This law is also important to make it binding on those digitisation projects that currently have many billions of European funds, such as the Recovery and Recovery Fund and others. In fact, these principles should have been in force for a long time, at least for some 15 years, but better late than much too late. In future, all public authorities in Europe will have to assess new projects from an interoperability point of view, make sure they are interoperable across borders. This will save a lot of taxpayers' money and also speed up business processes. Importantly, this Regulation defines trans-European digital public services provided by authorities interacting with each other and with natural and legal persons. Examples of such services include exchange of academic diplomas, exchange of vehicle data for road safety, access to social security and health data, accreditation for public procurement, digital driving rights, etc. In our negotiations with the Council on this regulation, we stressed the need to ensure adequate support for local and regional authorities in the implementation of the acts. Multilingualism is a fundamental principle of the European Union and must also be preserved in digital services. Training public sector employees for interoperability is important. We also managed to agree on the creation of interoperability regulatory sandboxes to experiment and create new, innovative ways of delivering public services in a controlled environment. Finally, during the negotiations, we also strengthened the role of the European Parliament in monitoring the implementation of the regulation. Joint Research Centre (JRC) JRC has calculated the monetary impact of interoperability in Europe. This would reduce the annual time spent by citizens in their relations with the public sector by 25% and increase the number of citizens using public services online by 15%. This is a billion-strong efficiency for citizens and businesses. Ladies and gentlemen! We agree that the European economy needs a rapid digital transformation, but sometimes there is a lack of understanding of something else. In particular, the public sector – Member States, regional and local authorities, which provide services to citizens, and also the European institutions themselves – must go ahead and lead by example, rather than take a step backwards. Promoting this leadership is then also a key objective of the Interoperable Europe Act.

Dear Madam President, Mr Breton, Our discussion today takes place in such a rather turbulent context, because the coming days will indeed be such an hour of truth for European security. If the European Council does not act, the security of Ukraine and of Europe as a whole will be seriously threatened and, I think, it is in this context that we should urgently move forward with this programme for common defence investment in Europe. As rapporteur for the law on common defence procurement (EDIRPA), I know quite well how difficult it is to change European thinking, far from the usual, purely civilian way of thinking, but common procurements were achieved. The law on ammunition production in support of Ukraine, Ukraine, was also a success. ASAP. However, we now need to allocate funding to support the defence industry beyond these two programmes in 2025, as well as in the next phase of the European Union budget from 2028, so that our industry can count on it. We also need to create all possible tax frameworks and relax budgetary rules for common defence production programmes. Because if we do not complement our speeches and strategies with clear financial support, we can only blame ourselves if the aggressor, without God, wants to check the conformity of our words with our works.

Mr President, Vice-President, Russia’s actions in Ukraine can clearly be described as ecocide. The environmental damage to Ukraine is enormous. The estimates of the cost vary, but it is clear this is at least EUR 60 billion. The full extent of the damage will only be known once the war is over. However, in the meantime, Europe must act. We must find legal ways to hold Russia accountable for this ecocide. Until now, European countries have mostly dragged their feet on confiscating Russian assets in Europe to compensate for the damage done to Ukraine. An important step is registered by the Council of Europe – already mentioned, it has been agreed by 44 countries in May – it aims to document the environmental damage and to prepare the ground for concrete reparations for Ukraine. But there is also a sound legal basis to hold Russia accountable for crimes against the environment, like the Kakhovka Dam, already mentioned, and to make it compensate for the damage. Here I am referring to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and other international acts. What we need here is a clear political will to proceed and to make Russia pay for the damage.

Dear Madam President, Dear Commissioner, I and the entire team working here in Parliament on our report on the competitiveness of start-ups naturally support the Commission's objective of reducing the reporting burden by 25%. And I really hope that the Commission will put this principle into practice – think small first – and put forward proposals for all these one in, one out initiatives. However, as soon as I complete the work on the Interoperable Europe Act, I would like to stress that the objective of submitting documents only once, where public authorities would cooperate with each other, is very far from being achieved, as inter-institutional interoperability in the digital environment remains a huge challenge, both within and between countries. We must not only reduce the regulatory and reporting burden by 25%, we must also ensure that the speed of communication with government authorities increases by the same 25%. Every policy, every decision at all levels of government must be taken digitally by default and interoperable between different databases. We see how fast artificial intelligence is entering our lives today. If we want to keep people in control of machines at all, our administration must be more flexible and much faster, otherwise it will still lose touch with Europe ... (the President prevents the speaker from continuing the speech).

Dear Madam President, dear Commissioner, Keeping wild animals in cages and slaughtering them for fur is, first of all, ethically unacceptable. This is a question of humanity and humanism. And this initiative and many surveys here show that European societies have changed and most of them no longer accept such cruelty here. But this is not just a matter of morality. It is also a matter of public health, natural diversity and fair competition. Fur farms pose a risk to animal and human health, as demonstrated during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the outbreak of the Corona virus in mink farms and the transmission of these new variants to humans. Fur farming also threatens Europe's natural diversity. Of the 18 worst invasive mammalian species in Europe, one third have been deliberately or accidentally introduced by the fur industry. And finally, the considerable differences between the laws of the Member States. For example, my home country Latvia has already banned it some time ago. This fur sector is simply distorting the single market. And that is why a total ban on the breeding and marketing of fur animals across Europe is the solution here, and I support it. Thank you for your attention!

Mr President, dear European Commission, I find it deeply symbolic that the discussion process about the generative AI initiated by G7 leaders a few weeks ago is named a Hiroshima process. This name invokes analogies with nuclear energy, which can be both immensely destructive and also a highly constructive force. Generative AI, with its immense power, necessitates efficient governance to ensure it empowers our society rather than causes harm. In the meantime, it is crucial that Europe does not fall far behind the US and China in deployment of those reactors of AI energy. This will entail also the public investment in the provision of high-quality data for researchers to train large language models. It is predicted that high quality text for training those models will run out in a few years’ time. This, and now I come to my main point, this could present a unique challenge for smaller languages. The quality data in smaller languages must receive a special attention from the European Union. This goes very much hand-in-hand with the need to adjust our copyright laws to provide appropriate compensation for content creators.

Dear Mr President, Dear Mr Gentiloni, It is clear that the recent years have certainly not been easy for the middle class of Europe, as the cost of living is increasing, job security and business security are decreasing. The gap between those who are and those who are not in economic security is also widening. I believe that the best we can do at European level to support this middle class is to complete a truly European single market. Such a market with fair rules that are the same for all countries, when it is not that some countries support their companies under the guise of the crisis, while others simply cannot afford it. This also means protecting the single market from unfair and unequal competition from third countries. This includes completing the capital market and the banking union. But there are, of course, also things that Member States themselves have to do, namely a reasonable level of income tax for employees. In many European countries, including my home country Latvia, this level of labour taxes is still too high and that is why shifting this tax burden to consumption from work will be an important task for all of us in Europe in the years to come.

Mr President, Dear Commissioner, Dear colleagues, One of the most important tasks of this Regulation is to eliminate the various stunts of manufacturers, which are aimed at buying increasingly new and new products. These tricks deliberately make products prematurely obsolete or non-functional, unrepairable or reparable only in a very limited number of authorised repair shops. Therefore, in addition to durability requirements, every product must also have repairability indicators so that people can make informed choices when they buy them. It is also necessary to prevent the increasing destruction of unsold products, such as textiles, footwear, electronics, which is increasing precisely through online trade. Manufacturers simply destroy returned purchases, which is a completely useless waste of resources. This practice simply needs to come to an end, and that is our task. And, of course, all these requirements must also take into account the interests of small and medium-sized enterprises – their ability to implement them, which often differs significantly from the capabilities of global companies.

Madam President, Commissioners, Colleagues ! I do not know whether Tihran and Mikita planned to defend their homeland against the occupiers by partisan methods. I do not know if they have succeeded, but I know that defending my people against genocide is an honor and pride. I know that the kidnapping, deportation and re-Russianisation of Ukrainian children is a war crime for which Putin and his armies will have to answer before the International Tribunal. I very much hope that Tihran and Mikita will soon be at liberty. I also hope that our resolution today will help this at least to some extent. But the best thing we can do at the moment is to support the Ukrainian counter-attack with weapons, with information, with our voice and with sanctions against the torturers and deporters of Tihrana, Mikita and all Ukrainian children. Unfortunately, we have to talk a second time about deportations on this day of 14 June. We mentioned it at the time of remembrance of the victims of Soviet crimes – Latvian, Lithuanian and Estonian – and now express our readiness to condemn the perpetrators of deportations also in this resolution.

Madam President, Dear Commissioner, Peace in Europe now depends on Ukraine's defence capabilities, and Ukraine is now defending all of us in Bahamas so that we can sit here and decide. It is regrettable that the European Defence Agency has not been able to reach common defence procurement in these 13 months. This is why we, the European Parliament, must act through the European Defence Industry Reinforcement Law with joint procurement, which must be adopted as soon as possible. We need to balance in that law, on the one hand, of course, this immediate task of restoring the stock of defence materials that have been sent to Ukraine from the Member States, on the other hand: it is a question of the medium-term task of developing our defence industry here in Europe, our production capacities. The 500 million proposed from the Commission is, of course, a small amount, given its Ukrainian defence needs. But we must start to act at last and not wait for some larger sums at some point in the distant, unknown future.

Mr President, Commissioner, The shortage of medicines in Europe has become chronic, and we have adopted not only a policy document, but it does not become sweeter from being labelled ‘halva, halva’ in the mouth. I would like to emphasise two things here. Firstly, there is a need for a simpler, more modern regulation of medicines, as the current compliance of medicines with the obligations and procedures of the European Pharmaceutical Law is very, very complex and the regulatory system is not digitalised enough. European legislation needs to be reviewed, simplifying and modernising its procedures. This will improve the life cycle management of medicines, and digital infrastructure and digital tools will contribute to security of supply. Cooperation between regulators will facilitate flexible supply chains. Secondly, we need to better understand the links between the prices of medicines, the profits of companies and the availability of medicines. The different pricing, payment and procurement policies of the 27 Member States in the jungle can be very, very rarely clarified. Therefore, national health services need to come together, inform each other and learn how to achieve better results, which would also lead to more affordable prices for people as well as security of supply chains. Thank you.

Dear President, Dear Commissioner, Our debate today comes at the same time as the Belgian court hearing, which rules on the accusation of our colleagues suspected of being involved in such unlawful influence from abroad. All this shows that democracies must have teeth. And I think that the sword of Themis remains the most important tool in protecting our democracy against hostile authoritarian regimes like Russia, like Iran. And this is not just a matter of detecting and punishing crimes, but also of preventing and deterring illegal influence. We will have to update the laws of the Member States of the European Union so that the perpetrators of unlawful interference can be effectively detected, prosecuted and punished. But we in the European Parliament and other European institutions must start with ourselves. We will have to review Parliament's staff procedures, especially before recruitment, in order to prevent such foreign infiltration into our legislature. Secondly, we must immediately extend the scope of the register of lobbyists to include contacts with foreign representatives. And thirdly, we need an independent ethics commission to find out how foreign influence could have had such a shameful effect on the work of our parliament, thus preventing a repetition of disgrace in the future.

Dear Madam President, Mr Gentiloni, Of all the solutions to the cost-of-living crisis, I would like to emphasise the key principle of targeted support for the vulnerable. But this calls for our support systems to be designed in such a way that they can be clearly seen and quickly reached without unnecessary bureaucracy and delays. These are the most vulnerable groups of the population, such as single elderly people, families with several children, people with special needs. I am convinced that targeted aid for the most deprived in terms of costs is a better solution than tax reductions or comprehensive subsidies in the price of energy, especially fossil energy. So the best support instruments for all Europeans are those that promote sustainability and reduce energy consumption, such as cheap tickets in public transport, support for families, the transition to greener energy, already today and with the support of European funds. And when it comes to the cost of living, it is worth remembering how expensive life is in Europe at the moment. I am talking, first of all, about families in Ukrainian cities and villages to whom the criminal Putin regime is deliberately taking away heat, electricity, water and basic needs with its missiles. Without victory over Putin, there will be no victory over this cost-of-living crisis!

Madam President, Mr Borrell, EU-China relations are as much about securing the rules-based international order as about realistic assessments of Europe’s strategic interests, not least in the areas of trade and investment. Much has been said already about screening inbound investment in strategically important sectors from chips to ports, but equally important is a hard-nosed attitude towards outbound strategic investment. Some European governments have already taken case-by-case decisions not to issue guarantees to companies that might benefit from slave labour or massive human rights violations in China. However, European rules are needed to tighten its investment regulations. We have export controls and a carbon border tax, so we have to make sure that foreign investment is not used to circumvent those export controls or to produce carbon leakage. In this context, I am looking very much forward to the European Commission coming up with a revision of the EU’s FDI screening and outbound investment control regulations. Naivety is not an option in relations with China and international relations in general.

Thank you, Madam President. The European Innovation Council is an instrument to bridge Europe's innovation gap, which is a particularly important task in this challenging geopolitical context, and it is our duty, as representatives of the European institutions, to treat it responsibly. This has not been fully achieved so far, and this delay in the cost of money due to inter-institutional struggles and disagreements is absolutely unacceptable and must be avoided. And that is what we are also calling on the Commission and the Council to do. And, of course, we need to think about the creation of a special European Investment Authority for the management of capital shares, as well as a one-stop-shop for future innovators and future applicants. Only in this way will we be able to achieve the excellence of these technologies and also their commercialisation, which will allow us all to experience a technological breakthrough in Europe. Thank you !

Madam President, Dear Commissioner, Belarus' increasing support for Russian aggression allows us to clearly see the axis of the new terrorist countries that are Russia, Belarus, Iran, North Korea. Yes, Belarus is involved in the Russian war! It has just renounced the status of a nuclear-free state in order to allow the use and deployment of nuclear weapons on its territory. In my opinion, this forces the European Union to act symmetrically towards Belarus, in exactly the same way as towards Russia. To impose economic and political sanctions as severe as those on Putin against Lukashenko. The Belarusian regime must also be weakened in order to reduce its ability to cause basic harm to Ukraine and other neighbouring countries in the region. In Latvia, as in Lithuania and Poland, we were already forced to defend our territory and the external border of the European Union against Lukashenka’s hybrid warfare since last summer. Then Lukashenko weaponised thousands of migrants, whom it actually criminally pushed across our borders. We repelled this attack and we will repel others if we act together and decisively, rather than allowing Putin’s Lukashenka Alliance to divide us all.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, for over a decade, the once-praised EU enlargement process stalls. And, unfortunately, an end to this stagnation is not coming any time soon. In practice, it means that we have willingly turned a blind eye to the creation of a more safe and stable EU regional neighbourhood and given our adversaries an advantage for their geopolitical aspirations. Now more than ever, we have to curb our decade-long diplomatic failures that have led to our partners questioning our credibility. It is time to show a real commitment by reopening the EU doors to anyone who shares our values and wants to become a member. However, this European openness must go hand in hand with alignment with EU foreign and security policy. There is a war in Europe and a common approach to the wartime geopolitical realities is a sine qua non for European enlargement. Russia uses this European weakness effectively and wants to reshape the European political landscape, which we cannot allow to happen. Putin is trying to divide the continent and cause uncertainty in our regional partners. Therefore, I welcome the Commission’s latest enlargement package with the hope that we can agree upon bold decisions and return to a decade-long process of negotiations more fruitfully.

Madam President, Commissioner, all 12 member states of the Three Seas Initiative have had one chapter in their history in common, and this is the Iron Curtain, which denied the development and natural growth of this region for a half a century. It caused a distinct polarity between European regions in economic development but, most notably, it showed how ineffective and uncompetitive the regional infrastructure and energy market integration is. The infrastructure is far outdated, and therefore requires urgent investment. We gladly acknowledge the significance of Union’s contribution, but unfortunately, the pace is still not rapid enough; it is limiting the country’s capabilities to compete fairly. Although the Three Seas Initiative is complementary to the European Union, I welcome very much the European Union’s, and especially the Commission’s, involvement in this forum, especially in the times of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, where we have to support Ukraine by all possible means. So, together we can facilitate not only the progress and resilience of Central European region, but also deliver more on Union’s common targets by unlocking the full potential of integration, cooperation and fruitful competition.

Mr President, Dear Mr Timmermans, The Green Deal is the path to Europe's energy independence and the independence we now need in the face of Russia's aggression. Therefore, climate and security policies must complement each other and not combat each other. The target of reducing these emissions by 55% by 2030 is very ambitious, and that is why we cannot leave any green local resource untapped. I am talking first of all about biomass. The LULUCF Regulation emphasises sustainable forestry, the use of wood to replace more climate-friendly materials such as concrete, steel and so on. And this should also be reflected in the CO2 removal targets that we are discussing here today. We also need to think about the competitiveness of the European economy and the economy of the Member States and the potential of logging. And, of course, we need to think about additional money for the Social Climate Fund to help vulnerable Europeans bear the costs of the green transition.

Mr President, spying on journalists, opposition politicians, judges and activists is, of course, totally unacceptable. The European Parliament should investigate and strongly condemn such activities, by whatever Member State they have been undertaken. Along with that, we should be aware of the new technological realities of today – that crime, terrorism and even war have moved to technological space, cyberspace. That’s why it’s important not to throw the baby out with the bathwater and to keep the balance between the security we owe to our citizens and consideration of our basic values. The main task is to be technologically ahead of criminals and authoritarian butchers like Vladimir Putin and, at the same time, to be consistent with our own values. First of all, the European standard of democratic oversight of how police and special agencies are using these technologies is a case in point. Second, the export and availability of such technologies should be linked with basic indicators of the rule of law and democracy in a particular Member State. This is the way our committee should proceed.

Mr President, when Vladimir Putin plans a so-called ‘special military operation’, he probably hoped for a quick and victorious war. However, Ukrainian resistance turned out to be fierce and Western support for them is helping Ukrainians to fight back so heroically. It is obvious now that Russia is going to use all possible non-conventional means to hurt Ukraine and its allies, and the increased intensity of cyber is clearly a case in point. They are affecting our critical infrastructure, water and electricity supply, transport, medicine and our supply chains. We shouldn’t be naive, as violent, cynical and inhumane as Putin’s regime is in a physical war, it is also going to be in the cyberspace. What we need in Europe is to proceed swiftly with a new cyber resilience act. Let me emphasise two elements here. First, strengthening the cooperation between computer security incident response teams in the Member States, in identifying the threats timely, not being ‘behind’ the hackers. Second, the development and coordination of offensive – not just defensive – capacities among Member States. It is very often crucial not just to block and prevent an attack. You have to be capable to seek out and to disrupt the malignant activities. This is what is needed to neutralise Putin’s army of cyber criminals.

Dear Madam President, Dear Mr Dombrovskis, A few weeks ago, the European economy was recovering from the shocks caused by the COVID pandemic, at a significantly faster pace than expected, also due to the targeted support provided by the European Union and Member States to the sectors most affected by the pandemic. This, in turn, already brought all Member States back to pre-pandemic levels of development. Until recently, we talked about the relaunch of the Stability and Growth Pact, about the need to return to restrictions on state aid, and so on. Unfortunately, at a moment when these shocks seemed to have been overcome, Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the sanctions imposed put the Union and the Member States in the face of completely new challenges, and we do not see the light at the end of the tunnel yet. But it is already clear today that the ongoing hostilities in the region will inevitably affect our economies and cause asymmetric shocks directly to those Member States closest to the region affected by the violence and aggression. I therefore call on the European Commission to draw up, in good time, an action plan to help mitigate the economic consequences in practice and to help Member States in difficulty in practice. The Commission should also make recommendations on how Europe can collectively reduce the impact of energy price hikes on the long-term development of our economy.

Madam President, Madam Commissioner, what we are seeing right now in Ukraine makes some things crystal clear. We in Europe have always protected freedom of speech, freedom of information as our fundamental values, and at the same time we have allowed aggressive, authoritarian dictatorships to use information as a weapon against us. It is now urgent to change this approach. Europe has to engage much more in the distribution of its positive message. We should not hesitate to emphasise our values, our position and our approach to reach the public in authoritarian countries like Russia. I’m talking here about supporting the quality journalism and analysis about access to objective expertise and independent channels of information. I mean, these first two weeks of the ongoing Russian aggression have been catastrophic for the informational sphere in Russia. Prominent media outlets like Echo Moskvy or Dozhd have been forcibly closed, journalists expelled and arrested. Without our help, the last remnants of a free public debate will be gone in a matter of days. This is not just about helping the Russian people, this is about also ourselves getting informed about what’s happening in those countries. Thank you very much for the report.