Speeches

Mr President, the European Parliament, entangled in the so-called ‘Qatargate’ scandal – revealed through an investigation into criminal association, corruption and money laundering targeting former or current members of the European Parliament, mainly socialists – is now trying to divert attention. It calls for the creation of an independent ethics body that would deal with all EU institutions, agencies and bodies, with investigative or advisory powers. Contrary to what is stated, its implementation is, first of all, complex. Indeed, how could the European Union create a structure independent of itself? It is also a denial of already existing structures within, inter alia, the Commission and the Parliament. For example, in addition to its Code of Conduct on Financial Interests and Conflicts of Interest, it has set up a Committee on External Interference. Ironically, the chairman of this committee, a French socialist, spent his time accusing the Rassemblement National of all evils, while his own socialist friends took part in the biggest scandal the European Parliament has ever known. All these structures did not see or want to see ‘Qatargate’ and the other suspicions it raises. There is no need for any more generalist structure, which would certainly lead to the same lack of result. This request for a new ethics body is above all a pretext for opposing the creation of an immediate parliamentary committee of inquiry, which I have been insistently calling for since the beginning of this case. By wanting to drown the fish and make it appear that the "Qatargate" concerns only a few corrupt people, the European Parliament wants to avoid questioning itself. The major problem, however, is structural. It is the system set up by the Europeanists that is at stake, and this is the one that needs to be transformed. But a majority of MEPs will do everything to avoid this much-needed change, which is why they voted against our request for a committee of inquiry and tried to ignite counter-fires. This ethics body is the latest. We denounce this new scheme and resolutely oppose its creation.

Madam President, last week the European Council was held, where many Member States called for Brussels to finance the construction of walls at the external borders in order to protect their territory from mass immigration, which was refused by the President of the Commission. At the same time, German Socialist Chancellor Scholz is preparing to pass a so-called "liberal" law to facilitate the arrival of 400,000 immigrants a year to address, according to him, Germany's demographic problems. More than 5 million people are expected to come by 2035. Once they arrive across the Rhine, these immigrants will be free to move around Europe. This choice that Germany wants to make concerns us all and will have an impact on all the policies of our territories. It is therefore essential that we discuss it, hence our request to add it to the agenda. It is inconceivable that at a time when there is an urgent need to strengthen our external borders, an EU Member State unilaterally decides to open the immigration floodgates wide. A debate is needed here. I therefore urge you to vote in favour of our request.

Mr President, the years are passing, and migratory pressure continues to suffocate Europe. In 2022, Frontex counted 330,000 irregular crossings of the EU’s external borders. These alarming figures should wake up the European Union and make it aware of the seriousness of the current situation. While we are experiencing a real migratory flood, which would require strong measures, Commissioner Johansson still refuses to finance walls and barriers at Europe's borders, on the pretext that the European Union would not have funds to spend on this. However, the Commission is much less concerned about the financial means when it comes to subsidising certain associations and promotional campaigns on the future of Europe with the Islamic veil. What credibility should be given to the measures announced by Ms von der Leyen to address the migration crisis, while at the same time maintaining a pro-immigration stance? By wanting to step up the so-called ‘humanitarian’ corridors to encourage mass immigration and by wanting to attract more allegedly skilled workers, Brussels continues to create air calls, aspiring pumps, which many migration candidates will follow. However, the European Union must control its borders, stop funding NGOs for migrant water taxis, stop legalising illegal immigration, send back to their countries of origin all those who must leave and no longer give a euro to states that do not take back their nationals. This is a vital issue for the future of Europe. It is high time to show common sense and firmness because, if Europe cannot be inward-looking, it must protect its nationals, its businesses, its identity. Europe will only be strong if its Member States are strong. The exact opposite is happening. We resolutely oppose it.

Madam President, Commissioner, last Wednesday, a Libyan illegally present on French soil was committing extremely violent knife attacks at Gare du Nord, injuring several people. During this attack, the assailant shouted ‘Allah Akbar’, giving his infamous gesture an Islamist connotation. For years, this terrorism has proliferated in Europe, often financed directly or indirectly by foreign states linked to Islamism. By ideological blindness, some MEPs, and generally the European Union, are obsessed with far-right terrorism, which is in fact a minority compared to far-left and Islamist terrorism. The reality of the situation is that there is an undeniable link between Islamist terrorism and the mass immigration that we are experiencing. It is this terrorist scourge that has shaken European democracies, as recalled in July 2022 by Europol’s report on the situation and trends in terrorism. Who in this Chamber can seriously suggest that the democratic constitutional order in Europe would be endangered by the far right? It is also a vague term, encompassing everything and anything. Perhaps our Parliament was wrong in the title of this debate: He wanted to point out the threats posed by Islamism and the far left in Europe. The latter, the extreme left, regularly commits violence in demonstrations, particularly in France. Anti-fa activists and black blocs are wreaking havoc there with impunity, attacking the security forces abandoned by their minister. This is the reality that is denied here. Democracy falters in our countries because its representatives are disconnected from citizens’ expectations. And indeed, the reality experienced by Europeans differs from the priorities you have set for yourself. While Islamist terrorism is hitting our continent, we are discussing a threat that exists mostly in your imagination. Colleagues, it is time to remove your blinders and open up to the world. The safety of our compatriots depends on it.

Madam President, on 15 December last 436 MEPs voted against our amendment calling for the immediate establishment of a parliamentary committee of inquiry into the Qatar Gate affair that has shaken our Parliament for a few weeks. However, the Committee of Inquiry is the only effective measure to combat the excesses of all these networks of influence that are plentiful in our European bodies. In order to avoid this immediate commission of inquiry, it is objected that this would not be possible until the judicial case is completed. This is not true, as in 2016 our Assembly set up a committee of inquiry into the so-called Panama Papers case, while legal proceedings were ongoing. The same applies to the so-called Pegasus case, where our Assembly set up a committee of inquiry in March 2022, while here too the judicial case was ongoing. My group therefore calls for the immediate establishment of such a parliamentary committee of inquiry into the political responsibilities of the Qatar Gate. It will not interfere in any way in the judicial case that follows its course. By refusing our proposal, you become complicit in a system that ultimately works for you. This is not a question for us. The committee responsible for monitoring external interference, chaired by Mr Glucksmann, saw nothing coming. It is therefore essential to create this commission to remedy the shortcomings of the commission responsible for monitoring external interference, without waiting several years for the end of the judicial file.

Madam President, Prime Minister, Sweden is taking over the presidency of the Council of the European Union for six months, at a time when there are many challenges. Firstly, in terms of migration, because our continent has become a kind of giant sieve because of the European Commission’s ideological policy, which favours mass immigration at all levels to the detriment of the nationals of each of our countries. As recently as 13 January, Frontex announced that 300 000 illegal entries into the European Union in 2022 had been recorded, representing an increase of 64% compared to 2021. This is the highest level of arrivals since 2016. We are counting on Sweden, and in particular on the Democratic Party within your majority, to stop this crazy migration policy. It is about preserving our civilization and our national identities. Economically, a smart protectionist policy is an emergency in the face of unfair competition from the United States and its $500 billion mega-plan. The EUR 200 billion German plan to support its economy, adopted without any consultation with the other Member States, must be called into question because it also creates unfair competition. Sweden also has the priority of strengthening the common foreign policy and continuing to build European defence. However, we consider that these areas must remain within the competence of the Member States themselves. This is a question of sovereignty, especially in view of the results of the European Union’s belligerent policy in the conflict in Ukraine. If your presidency, Prime Minister, could bring about the return of diplomacy, it would be a considerable step forward. We can only encourage you to commit yourselves forcefully to this indispensable path to peace in the world. Especially since at the current risk of a war that can spread at any time, the conflict increases a major energy crisis and aggravates inflation that stifles households and businesses. Over the next six months, your country will prolong the European debate on what is called safeguarding the fundamental values of the European Union, especially in Hungary and Poland. We hope that your presidency will not play into the hands of the Commission, which is using these values to punish States that resist its policies. Banning the European Union, punishing and stigmatising these two great democracies that have always fought for freedom is outrageous. We hope that you will bring reason and balance back into this one-sided and very ideological debate.

Madam President, of course we support a general debate on the ‘Qatargate’ case. On the other hand, as far as our proposal is concerned, it is particular and it differs from the others because we are calling for the creation of an immediate special committee of inquiry. Then it is objected that this immediate commission of inquiry is not possible as long as the judicial case is ongoing. I can demonstrate the opposite since this assembly appointed special committees while there were ongoing court cases. For example, in the case of Panama Papers and in the Pegasus case, in 2016 and 2022, there were special commissions set up while the judicial cases were ongoing. We consider that it is absolutely necessary to have an immediate special committee of inquiry, and that not creating one would be totally incomprehensible, while this case is shaking Parliament properly, since it is a major scandal. So we also want this issue of the creation of an immediate committee of inquiry to be included in the debate.

Madam President, the rise in prices that we are experiencing is particularly cruel, because it primarily affects basic necessities: energy and food. Energy prices are skyrocketing because of the absurd rules of the European electricity market and the deliberate sabotage of the nuclear industry, which guaranteed us cheap energy. The flight ahead in globalisation, which has led us to give up producing our food at home, makes our food supply dependent on foreigners and puts us at the mercy of an external conflict, such as the one that broke out in Ukraine. In the face of this dramatic situation, the European Union is stretching its powerlessness. For more than a year, the reform of the European electricity market has been an Arlesian that will never see the light of day. The Commission's proposal to cap gas at a stratospheric price is an affront to our citizens, who will suffer from the cold this winter. This exceptional situation does not call for interminable Brussels compromises, but for emergency measures at the level of each State. Countries that have chosen to act on their own are able to protect their people. Spain and Portugal pay three times less for their electricity than other EU countries. Italians, Dutch, Germans and Poles can breathe a little, thanks to lower VAT on energy. Immediate and effective solutions exist. They only require a little political courage. Taxes on energy and basic foodstuffs need to be lowered. We must put an end to the stagnation of wages by proposing a win-win pact to companies, which must be exempt from charges when they increase their employees. All of these measures can be financed through the taxation of super-profits that arise directly from the price explosion. It is not acceptable for a few to get rich through widespread speculation on life-saving products, while eating properly and heating up become a luxury for many.

Madam President, in January 2021, France closed many of its border crossing points with Spain, including the Banyuls pass, on the grounds of a terrorist threat, uncontrolled immigration and health risks due to the COVID-19 outbreak. Three large rocks were arranged across the road from the pass. Of course, this does not prevent the epidemic, illegal immigration or terrorism. The situation is absurd and surreal. It defies simple common sense. Many local actors have mobilised, as this closure only annoys one category of people: honest people. In addition, this closure prevents any assistance from crossing over, for example to fight fires, and it also prevents many seasonal workers, especially for vines, from coming and going to these areas. Controlling a country’s borders does not mean having three pebbles in the middle of a road. I therefore ask that France restore real control at this level of the border, without this negatively affecting a whole local life already in great difficulty. The President of the French Republic, travelling to Perthus, had ensured that police reinforcements were provided to guard our borders. There were no police officers, but instead rocks. We want real controls that do not prevent local life. This is entirely possible. It is enough that in Paris, this little piece of the Catalan Pyrenees is finally considered.

Mr President, according to Frontex, the number of illegal entries into the European Union increased by 73% between January and November 2022 compared to the previous year, reaching the highest level since 2016. NGOs, in association with smugglers, organize this traffic by arming taxi boats with illegal immigrants directly from the North African coast. NGOs that are sometimes subsidised by Europe, some states and local authorities such as the City of Paris. However, the European Commission announced last Monday that there is a need to step up cooperation with these NGOs and improve the distribution of migrants in the Member States. This plan is perfectly relayed in France, where Mr Macron is preparing to welcome these migrants throughout the territory. By doing this, you encourage the migratory phenomenon and you send to death thousands of unfortunate people who perish in the Mediterranean. On the contrary, these boats must be taken back to their port of departure, confiscated if they arrive on our coasts and any subsidies for them must be abolished. You want to welcome and distribute migrants all over Europe. We want to rescue them and take them home.

Madam President, while the existence of an area of free movement must have been counterbalanced by the creation of impassable European external borders – which has not been the case –, whereas Europe was invaded by 2 million people in 2015, whereas the European Commission refuses to finance physical barriers – despite being requested by 12 Member States –, whereas Greece has blocked the entry of at least 150 000 migrants at its borders – land and sea – since the beginning of the year, whereas Brussels has just forced the Executive Director of Frontex to resign because he wanted to do his job of protecting the EU’s external borders, whereas the same Union does not intend to interrupt the payment of European funds to countries that refuse to take back their illegal or disenfranchised nationals, whereas the perpetrators of the attacks that took place within the European Union in 2021 are all of extra-European origin – thus confirming the existence of a link between immigration and terrorism – while the daily news in Europe shows the major link between immigration and insecurity, while the Pact for Asylum and Migration, negotiated at the moment in Brussels, could lead to the arrival of 50 to 60 million people in a few years, the debate taking place here today is aimed at enlarging the Schengen area, so that an ever-increasing number of people can move around Europe unchecked. What a discrepancy between what is happening in this Chamber and the aspirations of our peoples! The dazzling victory of the sovereignist forces in Hungary, Sweden or Italy marks the refusal of these peoples to continue on this path. Any enlargement of the Schengen area, while Europe’s external borders are non-existent, is for us excluded. Any enlargement of the Schengen area, while Frontex does not have the task of refoulement of illegal migrants, is for us excluded. Protecting Europeans is a top priority. Expanding Schengen would expose them even more. There can therefore be no question of that.

Mr President, Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old woman who died because she was beaten by the morality police in Iran for not wearing her Islamic veil properly. Hadis Najafi, 20, shot six times by police for the same reasons. Like them, thousands of brave women are fighting in Iran to free themselves from this veil, a symbol of the enslavement of women. But for years, the European Union has been involved in promoting the wearing of the same veil in Europe. And recently, in November 2021, the European Commission co-funded this campaign claiming that freedom is in the hijab. Last February, at the Conference on the Future of Europe, the following visual was published: The future is in your hands and features a woman wearing a hijab. This future of Europe, our peoples do not want it. On 21 September, as part of an Erasmus+ campaign, the Commission distributed this poster featuring a veiled girl. Also on 21 September, a delegation of the Femyso movement, a false nose of Islamism according to a former French minister, carried out on the premises of the European Parliament, on the occasion of an invitation from the Socialist Group, a genuine proselytizing exercise in favour of wearing the veil for women. But the European Union's support for this cause is also financial: 23 million euros paid by the Commission to ENAR, which brings together many associations refusing integration with our European values and some of which are received here to accuse France of Islamophobia. All this is no longer tolerable. Europeans do not expect the European Union to convert them to Islam. Let Brussels hear the Iranians instead of obeying the ayatollahs.

Madam President, as part of its crusade for its own conception of the rule of law and even more so for what it sees as its European values, the European Parliament is supporting a damning new report against Hungary. His government was accused of all the evils and the conclusion pointed out in no uncertain terms the emergence in that country of a kind of monster called the hybrid electoral autocracy regime, in order to push the European Commission to perpetuate the blocking of the payment of European funds to Hungary. Without any foundation, based on vague and highly questionable notions, this text again wants to impose this imperialist conception of an omnipotent supra-European Union. It is a kind of political settlement of accounts against a country that refuses this drift by remaining faithful to the fundamentals of European integration. You forget that the Hungarian people have decided and confirmed their government’s policy vis-à-vis a coalition of all the oppositions. The outgoing Prime Minister and his ruling Fidesz party won the parliamentary elections for the fourth time in a row, even improving these results by almost four points compared to previous elections. Democracy is about respecting the decision of voters. Hungary is a democracy. You forget this Hungarian people. The European Parliament, in fact, has nothing to do with this report drawn up by a very ideologically strong Member. It should be recalled that the President of the Commission decided, two days after these elections, to trigger the conditionality mechanism for the first time. In the words of Monsieur de Talleyrand, Napoleon I's minister, anything excessive is insignificant. With this report, the maxim remains perfectly topical.

Madam President, I am speaking – inevitably quickly – on a very important subject: Femyso, a close association to the Muslim Brotherhood, which advocates sharia supremacy over all the laws of all our democracies, has received hundreds of thousands of euros in grants from the European Commission since 2007. Together with the Council of Europe, she designed communication campaigns with veiled women, as everyone remembers, which led to the withdrawal of this communication campaign. It intervenes, this association, right here and will give conferences very soon. There is one that is planned very soon. It supports Islamist movements that have been dissolved in France. Even Macron’s ministers see this association as a false nose of radical Islam. So it would be high time, I think, to open a real debate on the subject, because it is not only a scandal to encourage such a movement, but also and above all, we reject this future for Europe. At the very least, we want to discuss it here.

Madam President, last Thursday the European Court of Auditors published a report revealing that the European Commission uses consultancy firms. After the McKinsey scandal in France, the Commission therefore spent almost EUR 1 billion per year on external consultants between 2017 and 2020. The massive use of these private firms is eminently reprehensible, while the Commission has 33,000 officials. This also raises questions of interference, sovereignty and collusion. We must have a debate on this highly sensitive subject. Our Parliament must not, of course, turn into a chamber for registering proposals that are expensively paid by the taxpayer with private firms that are sometimes outside Europe and do not pay any tax in France.

Madam President, as the amendment rejecting this regulation prolonging the use of the EU Digital COVID Certificate until June 2023 has just been rejected, which we deeply regret, I now call for the ID Group amendments to be put to the vote in order to limit the ensuing infringements of fundamental rights. These amendments propose, for example, that the use of the EU Digital COVID Certificate be required by Member States only where strictly necessary and proportionate, that the EU Digital COVID Certificate be phased out before the scheduled date of 30 June 2023, that antibody tests or any other scientifically validated method to prove natural immunity be able to benefit from the EU Digital COVID Certificate, and that by 31 December 2022, the Commission submit a report to Parliament. I remind my dear colleagues that this is a democratic debate, and to reject these amendments would be profoundly undemocratic.

Madam President, this report is another attack on EU countries that want to remain sovereign and master of their destiny. For example, Poland and Hungary, which not only do not receive any assistance from the European Union, while these countries host millions of Ukrainian refugees, but also do not receive the European Recovery Plan funds to which they are entitled. The Commission has managed to circumvent the Treaty that requires unanimity to suspend the payment of these funds through the so-called ‘conditionality mechanism’, validated by the Court of Justice of the European Union and intended to sanction states that do not respect the rule of law, a vague and debatable concept that is in reality only a reflection of the federal and globalist ideology of the European Union. The Court of Justice of the European Union has thus, in fact, carried out a genuine judicial coup d’état and this is to be compared with the conclusions of the Conference on the Future of Europe, where the French President called for decisions to be taken no longer by unanimity of the Member States but by qualified majority, which would make it possible to impose on the recalcitrant States the same ideology that we are fighting against. In the face of health and international crises, globalists see a new opportunity to advance their ideas. They do not want to understand that only a Europe of nations with strong countries that retain their identity and sovereignty can strengthen Europe. By wanting to dilute peoples and nations in an informed and soulless whole, it is ultimately the erasure of Europe that will result. And we do not want that.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, on 12 May in Nigeria, a young Christian student, Deborah Samuel Yakubu, was stoned to death and then burned, because she had simply complained about the influx of religious messages on the WhatsApp group in her class, which was considered blasphemous by Islamists. Christian communities in some Muslim countries suffer numerous murders and assaults, desecration of churches and cemeteries, attacks on processions. But this is also happening in Europe and France. However, the European Commission still refuses to appoint a coordinator for the fight against Christianophobia or to establish a European strategy to combat this scourge, despite the fact that such a coordinator has been created to combat antisemitism and Islamophobia. The European Parliament must debate this important subject of the persecution of Christians around the world and, more specifically, the case of the young Deborah Samuel Yakubu. Doing everything to avoid such tragedies is an absolute necessity; To do nothing would, a contrario, be guilty.

Mr President, the conflict in Ukraine is causing horrors that are upsetting the whole world. Scenes of devastation and desolation are multiplying and the number of victims is constantly increasing. The population is severely affected, mainly women and children fleeing the war, abandoning their devastated homes and separating from a husband, a father who remains defending their country with arms in hand. It is unbearable to see such scenes. Such tragedies on the European continent are intolerable! In the face of these atrocities, European solidarity has manifested itself, often spontaneously, with great humanity. Our peoples have truly mobilized. We must welcome and encourage all the initiatives, at all levels, that make it possible to come to the rescue of all these unfortunates. Notable countries include Poland, which hosts 2.5 million refugees, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Romania. These are examples of the best that a true Europe of nations can give. These countries must be helped, but they are not. It is even the opposite. It is already surprising that, in the face of this surge of solidarity, no European aid has reached them. But even worse: in another area, the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Commission have imposed sanctions on Hungary and Poland, which are accused of breaches of the rule of law, a concept that is in my view highly questionable. Admittedly, this is not the same subject, but it is shocking to note that, in the face of this surge of solidarity, Poland and Hungary are not supported by the European Commission. The Commission now withholds EU funds for these countries: €7 billion for Hungary and €39.4 billion for Poland. How can it be that, at the same time, countries that are also exemplary in their solidarity with millions of refugees are sanctioned by our European institutions? Not only should these countries not be sanctioned, but they should be helped and praised. The Commission has been able to find ways, more or less quickly, to get through the health crisis, to finance weapons for Ukraine and to sanction Russia. It could, and should, also take measures to help Poland and Hungary, starting with lifting sanctions and allowing them access to EU funds. Unless these political regimes are not suitable for the Commission? And we are – I must say – particularly outraged that the left and the liberals in this European Parliament are putting pressure on the Commission not to release this €39.4 billion for Poland. The Socialists and Democrats, Renew, the Greens and the Left in this House dared to send a letter to this effect to the Commission on 24 March. I find this truly unworthy. Quick: that the European Commission release these funds from the recovery plan and grant additional aid. Protect these millions of refugees. Protect this highly vulnerable population that is plagued by all dangers.