Speeches

Mr President, we see all these statistics coming from the European Commission, and from international organisations, and from the governments of the Member States, and they are worrying, as are the consequences. Romania, for example, ended 2022 with a 22 percent increase in food prices, and this translated into the gradual disappearance of some food products from shops and even the blocking in almost half of the country of the European scheme for the distribution of fruit, vegetables, milk and milk products in schools. Farmers simply couldn't keep up with prices and some stopped milk production. The problem is that over 40% of children in Romania are at risk of poverty and social exclusion, and the school meal has closed access to perhaps the only source of protein or even the daily food they had. And the forecast for 2023 shows us a 15% increase in the number of Romanians living in absolute poverty. And I ask you, Commissioner, if you see a real solution to this crisis that is depriving children of the food they need?

Mr President, the 30th anniversary of the single market is, for some, a moment of celebration and, for others, a reason for sad remembrance. For, three decades later, in this theoretically unique market, offering, we are told, equal opportunities and responsibilities, there are Member States that are still victims of the double standard. For example, my country. Although for 16 years Romania has been playing by all the rules, respecting also the single market, and the European companies present on its territory, our economy does not benefit from all the chances of development, because another Member State is allowed to play dirty political games and to oppose illegally our entry into Schengen. Or Romanian farmers, although hit today by the same crises as the rest of the Union, plus the border war that brought their bankruptcy to the farm gate, they must cope and be competitive, with subsidies that remain far below the European average. Also for political reasons. On this anniversary day, therefore, I remind the Council and the European Commission that the double standard creates two distinct markets as long as they all have responsibilities, but only some opportunities.

I think we can turn this topic into a topic of domestic politics, but the truth remains that Romania was rejected by a single voice, by the Austrian Chancellor, who, with the help of a lie, relying on false pretexts, opposed the other 26 states that stood firmly behind Romania.

Mr President, as a man who has longed for 40 years to be part of the European Union, as a citizen of a country that still loves this Union, although it has endured hardships and sacrifices, as a member of a nation that has survived a cruel history only by living in the hope that one day it will be respected and treated equally, I was and remain terrified and degraded by the moment on 8 December, when a single voice cancelled the rights of 20 million Romanians, trampling also on European legislation, and on the will of the other Member States. An even more offensive moment because it was based on a lie that the author didn't even bother to make more credible. I'm talking now with millions of Romanians behind my back who know you lied to them. Mr. Nehammer, who did you have behind your back and what were the real reasons why you forbade us to be equal to you? The Romanians were your friends, but you discriminated and humiliated them. For them I tell you now Herr Nehammer! Ab heute aus Rumänien kein ‘Grüß Gott’ mehr, nur Schande! I thank the Commission, the Czech Presidency and the states that have supported us. (The speaker agreed to respond to a blue card intervention)

Madam President, this debate is not about isolated villages, farmers' problems and a romantic view of country life. This debate is about 30% of the population of the European Union, over 80% of its territory and an urgent issue on which the future of the Member States depends. For example, in my country, 45% of the population lives in villages, the highest share in the European Union. But the situation, both in Romania and in the rest of the Union, is dramatic. Current funding programmes are good on paper but useless on the ground. That is why we have recent statistics showing that more than half of European citizens in rural areas consider themselves ignored by Brussels. That's why we have a continuous exodus from the village to the city. Therefore, those who are still there see only two solutions: either leaving our villages altogether or moving away from European values. In times of multiple crises, assault on Europe and geopolitical changes with an unpredictable end, we simply cannot afford to throw into oblivion almost a third of European citizens, and especially those people who provide us with food and preserve our traditions and our environment. My colleague Isabel Carvalhais' report, which I congratulate, comes with good and concrete measures: additional funds for road infrastructure, hospitals, schools and high-speed internet connection, elimination of red tape and greater involvement of local authorities, money to attract young people to rural areas. All this, put into practice and financed from the future multiannual budget of the European Union. This is what we have to do if we want to have a rural area after 2027.

Mr President, those who think that this debate is only about more compensation for farmers or about promoting hunting are bitterly mistaken. It is and must be about how we recover the lost balance between flora, fauna and man, because in my country the loss of this balance costs us, it costs us human lives. In a decade, Romania recorded the highest number of predator victims in the entire Union. More than 20 people killed and 200 wounded cost us decimated herds, closed farms, deserted villages and UNESCO-protected millennial traditions on the verge of extinction. It costs us the loss of biodiversity, pastures and mountain landscapes. It costs us the degradation of an animal, the Bear, who from the king of forests has become a seeker through garbage, with forest four times less than Sweden, Romania has five times more bears. Not finding food, they come out of the woods, cross roads, cause accidents and enter people's yards, shops, schools, blocks and hospitals. I therefore ask the European Commission, out of respect for the lives of hundreds of thousands of Romanians who live in danger every day, to find a solution.

Madam President, Commissioner, in the 1980s, which were the worst of communism, 23 million Romanians, including myself, lived in daily humility because of elementary shortages of food, heat and electricity. We were given little and rarely enough to see that they existed, but we had no right to have them. Four decades later, while living in the heart of democracy, millions of Europeans risk experiencing the same humiliations. These people have the fundamental right to a decent life, but they can no longer afford it. In the pandemic, the Commission mobilised quickly and billions of euros went to large companies to help them survive. Today, however, the Commission is somehow failing to convince large companies that even citizens have the right to survive, even though they have made giant (historical) profits on the backs of Europeans. We need direct support for consumers, now winter is here. The Commission is offering us an unrealistic mechanism, which comes late, has only long-term effects and is very unclear. Is it for people, for SMEs or for speculators? Maybe he's still studying the PSD Campaign "Down with the bills!" commission because it seems to have been inspired by it, but not enough.

Madam President, Commissioner, we thank you for this presentation, but I can tell you right now that it will severely disappoint many European producers, especially those from countries that cannot afford state aid, because they are already financially exhausted because they have to face a war that is very close to their border. So we do not have real, effective solutions for European factories that were providing 70% of ammonia and phosphorus production and that have closed down. We have few solutions for the autumn agricultural campaign and no food security strategy next year. The promises are good, the indications given to the Member States are good, but even better would have been concrete, saving measures for a vital sector that has been brought to its knees and is struggling to survive. I therefore call on the Council and the Commission to speed up the suspension of customs tariffs on urea and ammonia, on the Commission and the Member States to ensure the quantity of gas needed to produce fertilisers without affecting the continuity of agricultural activities, and, last but not least, on the European Commission to diversify the sources of substances needed to produce fertilisers, to raise tariff barriers for them and to identify in the European Union new mineral deposits needed to produce fertilisers.

Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, in an energy crisis whose end is hard to predict and around a cold season that could create new and big problems for us, Europe needs to learn how to save on heat, electricity and water. It is the price it pays, because for more than a year, despite warnings and repeated calls, the Union has hesitated to intervene firmly to combat anomalies in the energy market. And that's how we ended up in this situation that could plunge us into unprecedented chaos. Gas addicts, fertilizer producers, vital substances for agriculture, are collapsing. Factories in Romania, Spain, Lithuania, Hungary and Croatia have closed their doors, others have drastically reduced production, and due to the war in Ukraine, alternatives have diminished. In the last year, only in the case of ammonia, 70% of the European market has disappeared. Estimates for 2023 are dire. Without fertilisers, European agricultural production would fall by up to 45%, almost half. Affected will be both vegetable farms, but also livestock farms, which will no longer have food for animals. If urgent and effective solutions are not found, the disaster in the sector will no longer be averted. The first signs are already visible. In my country, farm animals began to be sold or sacrificed. In Europe, farmers are at risk of escalating bankruptcies and the consumer will face empty shelves. The consumer that the Commission promised to protect, the European that the Commission promised not to leave behind. I therefore call on the European Commission to resolve this crisis quickly through several simultaneous actions, such as finding new markets where the necessary fertilisers can be bought without import duties and urgently identifying sufficient financial support to enable European producers to keep their fertiliser plants open and, in the medium term, to speed up legislation on new plant breeding techniques. Food security is not an economy. If you don't intervene today, Europe won't eat tomorrow.

Mr President, for 11 years, Romania has been sitting in the Schengen anteroom, waiting for the door to open. For 11 years, my country is not only ready to enter, but has shown solidarity and exemplary action in crisis situations, has respected the legislation and is now preparing the implementation of the new European security systems. However, after 11 years, we are still opposed by some great trading partners, whom Romania welcomed with open arms, treating them with respect. And I ask them today why they keep us trapped in a loop of national interests and reinvented pretexts, affecting not only Romanians, but also their own citizens and their companies? The people of my country want to know why, after all the great, many, painful sacrifices, they do not have the right to be in Schengen, which even non-EU member states benefit from. These are not times to alienate friends. The Eurosceptic wave in the EU is also growing due to such mistakes. Stop discriminating against Russia! Don't keep us in the anteroom! It is our hard-won right, and Europe, I assure you, will only benefit.

Madam President, the people who sent us to the European Parliament are asking us why the Commission is failing to save them from the ordeal of huge energy prices. They ask us to tell them who is to blame because they will stay in the winter hungry and in the dark. And some, more knowledgeable, want to know why Brussels announces only measures with limited effect, as if we do not see, in our own home, the elephant that makes our daily life a nightmare. It is an allusion to that hub in the European Union which speculatively, non-transparently and uncontrollably sets the price of gas, which remains unnaturally linked to that of electricity. The same price is then shamelessly increased by middlemen lining the supply chain, enriching a handful of people, impoverishing hundreds of millions and bankrupting companies. We have a legal framework that would allow us to combat this speculation, if we really want to. If not, we can let Putin laugh in our faces with his videos about the winter cold, and let his extremist puppets wreak havoc across the Union.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, for almost a year now, my country has been waiting for the permission of the European Commission to reopen a damaging NRRP, with zero cents for agriculture, to finally allocate money for irrigation. I hope that following the recent statistics, the Commission will quickly take a decision, as the data shows us a catastrophic, alarming situation. At European level, we have experienced the worst drought in at least the last 500 years. In July, 64 % of the Union territory was on alert and in August maize, soybean and sunflower crops were 16 %, 15 % and 12 % below the five-year average respectively. In Romania alone, 500 thousand hectares are calamity, but the final balance will certainly be much worse. I welcome the initiative of the European Parliament to have this resolution and I insist on the urgency with which we must intervene. The Union's food security and the achievement of environmental objectives will not be achieved without rapid, effective aid to farmers in all Member States affected by climate change.

Mr President, the State of the Union speech, which will take place in two days' time in Parliament's plenary, is eagerly awaited by all of Europe. But if it does not contain the most important element, namely a strong social pillar, this presentation will arouse a wave of dissatisfaction in the European Union. Millions of people simply can no longer find ways to survive and the approaching winter is chilling employees and employers alike. It is therefore imperative that the Commission's vision of solutions to the energy crisis be complemented by a financial package to prevent and combat unemployment, an extension of the SURE programme so that financial aid reaches those who may lose their jobs, or an addition to the Social Climate Fund, which must be calibrated to the new reality. However, a rescue option is needed. The President of the Commission promised at the beginning of the mandate that no one would be left behind. Europeans are now waiting to keep their word. Inaction could have dramatic consequences, both socially and economically, but also politically.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to begin by thanking the rapporteur and the shadow rapporteurs for their exemplary collaboration in finalising this report on the forest strategy, in which we have managed to strike the balance between all three functions of forests: environmental, social and economic. This balance is extremely important today, in the context of multiple crises, historical drought and the approaching winter. We will need forests as a source of biodiversity and health, but also as a resource. Sustainablely exploited, the forest can help us achieve our renewable energy targets and energy independence. In addition, this report also calls for the protection of communities that depend on the forest. He calls for an impact assessment before the designation of protected areas, but also for financial compensation for forest owners who will contribute to achieving the targets. The achievement of these targets must not be settled by communities and industries. Commissioner, Romania has already taken important steps to better protect and manage forests, but as one of only four Member States with virgin forests, it must be helped to achieve this important goal for the whole of the Union.

Madam President, since the war began, there has been no European state, whether on the border with Ukraine or not, that has not made efforts to help this bloody country. Whether it was humanitarian, financial, military or agricultural support, the European Union has come to the rescue. Moreover, European leaders decided to raise administrative or fiscal barriers for Ukraine's agricultural sector to continue its work, for the food crisis not to deepen in some parts of the world and for others not to become a reality. Although affected by the energy crisis, the explosion of food prices and the prolonged drought, as a result of which the Danube, an important transport route, became impracticable, my country is doing everything in its power to help its neighbours. The European Commission needs to understand, however, that the states around the conflict need more support, logistical or otherwise, to continue this effort and so that the agricultural sector in the area does not suffer. Europeans and the world in general need all the food produced that can be exported during this period.

Madam President, Commissioner, the Commission's proposal on the sustainable use of plant protection products is not only not based on an impact assessment, but also puts farmers in Romania and elsewhere who already use chemicals well below the European average to the wall. My country, for example, would have to reduce by 35% the amount of pesticides, that is, it would be left with 4 times less substance than is necessary for an average yield per hectare. After the same proposal, however, other states will use much more pesticide than Romania. The Commission's proposal is unrealistic. Sustainable production could remain a dream, food, luxury commodity, and thousands of farmers risk bankruptcy. A realistic proposal should be based on the simple premise that we do not self-destruct and on a question: Do we really want to supplement the gaps left by our farmers with imports at questionable standards and with a greater impact on the environment? I therefore ask the European Commission to remedy this injustice, to come up with a balanced proposal and to give the agricultural sectors of the various Member States equal opportunities on the market.

Madam President, Putin's war is a war against our values. It is therefore time for the European Union to retaliate with a decisive leap towards a new paradigm, that of an active player, to move from patching broken relations to the role of creator of foreign policy, to become able to solve conflicts, but also to anticipate dangers. The new foreign policy of the Union must not start after the end of the war, but now, immediately, for example, with firm messages to bring closer our neighbours and partners, to whom we have promised but not delivered, an outstretched hand, a strong hand to those states that have shown their willingness to adhere to our values, who find it difficult to evolve towards democracy with a neighbour like Russia and whose only desire today is to escape this Siberian night that is dangerously approaching. And we must never forget the lesson that these times teach us, that partners should not be remembered only in times of conflict, but especially in times of peace, with fewer words and more promises, kept in time.

Mr. President, to violent attacks, response with appropriate strategies. REPowerEU is Europe's way of taking the decisive step towards energy independence, but also the immediate response to the blackmail of Putin's criminal regime, which closed the gas tap for two Member States. I therefore welcome the Commission's plan and the instrument that will refuel the Union. Allowing Member States to adapt their outdated NRRPs in the new world. We're all gonna win. My country, for example, now has a real chance to fill the gaps in the current recovery plan and kick-start the investments it badly needs: offshore, distribution infrastructure and green energy sources. With its resources, Romania will make a real contribution to European stability, becoming one of the Union's main energy suppliers. Energy independence will, however, have to be achieved as soon as possible with what we now have at our disposal and with new money, so that Europeans' fears disappear, energy poverty remains just a phrase of the past and no one ever tries to blackmail Europe again.

Madam President, the arrest of trade unionists in Belarus is not just a criminal attack on people uncomfortable with the Lukashenka regime. It is an attack on a democratic institution - the trade union - and on the fundamental rights guaranteed by the International Labour Organisation, of which Belarus is a member. It is no coincidence that three months after the barbaric invasion of Ukraine, the free world is once again defied by Putin's friend. These two characters insist on defying us, trampling on treaties and principles on which the democracies of the world work. It is clear that the numerous sanctions imposed on the Lukashenka regime are not working. The dictator will continue to do what he wants and, in the meantime, people who only want to live under the same values as any other European are putting their freedom and life at risk day by day and second by second. Demanding the release of these people is not enough. The Union urgently needs to find more courageous and effective solutions to support those who oppose the dictatorship. Without our support, change will never come to Belarus, and democratic Europe will never be whole.

We are going through several crises at once and preparing for another one: Indefinite recession. Between anti-Putin strategies and pro-Europe measures, however, we should not ignore a phenomenon that could give democracy a fatal blow: The resurgence of extremism in a conjuncture that creates the perfect premises. We were relieved by Emmanuel Macron's victory. But if we make an honest calculation, we see that the extremist camp and those likely to be seduced by it are not very far from the percentage of the winner. And Russia is working on continuous fire, has furiously thrown its trolls into battle with the mission to misinform and recruit sympathizers in the democratic world. The war did not disarm the extremists. It's just an intermezzo because their ideology is indistinguishable from Putin's. But it is not just about Putin, but also about the errors, the lack of vision and adaptation of some traditional parties to the needs of this new world. All this must be urgently repaired in order to bring back with us those who have derailed or are preparing to derail from democracy. The rise of extremism must be broken before it is too late.

Mr President, Commissioner Stella Kyriakides has recently announced that, while there is no question of abandoning the Green Deal targets, the 50% reduction in pesticides and fertilisers in agriculture will not apply at national level and the Commission will take into account the characteristics of each Member State. This is good news for food security. In the original version of the proposal, agriculture in my country, for example, was unfair, since it has always used fertiliser and pesticides well below the European average. But food security must not be done at the expense of food safety. I call on the Commission to carefully weigh the proposal for each Member State to decide on the maximum amount of pesticides accepted in imported feed. This derogation is likely to mislead the uninformed consumer who will judge the product by price and not by quality. In addition, it could further weaken the position of European farmers in the face of retailers, who will be tempted to bring to the European market even more cheap food products, but with a higher amount of active substance, which would endanger the common agricultural policy and the fate of farmers.

Madam President, I welcome Parliament's resolution and the Commission's plan to save the agricultural sector at this time of great crisis. But for food security, we need even more, well-calculated measures, such as: adapting to the new reality of national strategic plans, postponing provisions that may decrease production, increasing the percentage of advance on subsidies, viable solutions for the total independence of European production, aid for producers affected by the energy and fertiliser crises, and especially support for states that can fill the gap left by Ukraine on the agri-food market. Romania can do this through its sunflower crops, cereals and soybeans, but for four years, already at high risk of desertification, my country is facing extreme drought. With a fixed budget of zero euro for agriculture in the NRRP, Romania needs the reopening of the Plan, without changing the amount allocated, in order to invest in sustainable water management systems and storage facilities for agricultural products. It is not a fad, it is a vital necessity for ensuring our food security, for countries with a massive influx of refugees, for the Union and for vulnerable states.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the enormous energy crisis we are going through surprised us at the very moment we were taking off towards . At the same time, our farmers also faced Russia's attacks on grain prices and its expansion to other markets and the political instability triggered by it. After just a few months, the balance is already dramatic for the European consumer and Union producers. Here is the example of farmers in my country: at the price inputfive-fold increase compared to 2021, increases of up to 60% in natural gas prices and around 20% in electricity and diesel are added. In January 2022, electricity and gas prices increased 6-7 times in a single month. The effect is felt acutely in the price of food, which is up to 25% higher in basic foods. That being so, the fear of tomorrow has settled in the farms and, without solutions, some producers contemplate bankruptcy or the prospect of alienating their work to speculators, which will mean especially the destruction of small and medium-sized farms, exactly those placed by the CAP at the heart of the green revolution. In animal husbandry, it is even more serious: to the new invoices, the increased price of feed, which accounts for almost 70 % of the cost of production, is added. Animal welfare standards, therefore, are becoming increasingly difficult to maintain. But the most affected is the pigmeat sector, where the situation is catastrophic. Here they additionally hit African swine fever and reduced exports to China. In this area, we are living a paradox: although we have surplus pork on the market, the European consumer pays, at the peak, more per kilogram. Overall, industry profit margins in Europe have been at their lowest level in a decade. And yet the European Commission continues to leave the sector adrift, saying - many wonder why so easily - that it expects the market to regulate itself. The same inaction by the Commission in the rest of the agricultural sectors, where something could be repaired by, for example, removing protective tariffs and anti-dumping duties on some fertiliser imports. Without intervention, however, European agriculture continues to spin in a spiral of price increases that could bring it to its knees in just a few years. Commissioner, it is good that the Commission is aware of the situation. However, how does this lack of support for the European farmer reconcile with the Commission's demands on him: to make the green revolution a reality and on time; fighting land abandonment and rebuilding the countryside; to attract young people to agriculture and make the common agricultural policy a brand Top of the line?

Madam President, ‘You do not understand Russia’, Moscow’s officials accuse us and they are right. How can the European Union understand, with its values, a dictatorship with imperialist nostalgia, ruled even today by people who come from the darkness of the USSR and no longer want to leave? On the other hand, however, it is difficult to understand why when Putin's intentions are very clear to us, such as, for example, massing close to our borders the largest military device since the collapse of the USSR, the European Union fails to speak out and decide in unison on retaliation. To remain silent, to hesitate, to tolerate blackmail or to hope that Putin will one day become the apostle of peace, are mistakes that can seriously endanger our democratic construction, especially in Eastern Europe. Whatever the outcome of this crisis, if the Union wants to be a strong and credible global actor, it must give up gloves, because the Putin regime will not give up the boots with which it periodically enters our lives, unless it has in us a determined interlocutor, correct in his words. business, but also quickly in unison reactions when the game is dirty.

Madam President, animal welfare and farmers' welfare are not negotiable, nor are they antagonistic concepts, as some also insinuate, simply because the welfare of the animal depends 100% on the farmer's ability to grant it the highest breeding standards. These two concepts being interlinked, they must therefore be treated simultaneously and with identical degrees of attention and responsibility. Not just that, but to reach the targets. Green Deal and Farm-to-Fork, the two concepts must also be respected outside the Union when it comes to imports. Without a strong reciprocity clause in free trade agreements, the European livestock sector could get the fatal blow, while 450 million European consumers would risk eating cheaply and badly. Without such commitments and strong support for the livestock sector, animal welfare would remain a goal. That is why I urge you to support this report in the form negotiated with my colleagues, whom I thank, because this report contains a strong message: animal welfare legislation needs to be reviewed urgently, but without detracting from the care given to farmers.