Speeches

Mr President, Madam Vice-President, let me warn you that it is very dangerous and irresponsible to impose an ideology as if it were a kind of sacred doctrine that no one can question or debate or disagree with. When someone questions the excesses of the requirements imposed by the Green Deal, the immediacy of the deadlines, the effects it will have and has on the economy, they are not committing blasphemy or questioning the need to take care of the environment. In the last European elections the message of the citizens was resounding: We cannot close down key economic sectors of our economy, lose hundreds of thousands of jobs and reduce our competitive capacity to meet climate objectives that, moreover, no one else wants to meet on the planet. There is an urgent need to review these objectives imposed on strategic sectors, as well as to put farmers, livestock farmers, transporters, SMEs and families at the centre of our policies. Solutions cannot go exclusively through more and more public spending, through transition plans that continue to be subsidies and aid in charge of further increasing our public debt and our tax burden: It is time to review these policies and adapt them to reality. And what I deeply regret is that given your very poor service record in Spain, Madam Vice-President, you are not part of the solution: You're part of the problem.

Mr President, this debate coincides with the second anniversary of the horrific murder of Jina Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old Iranian Kurdish girl, arrested in Tehran on 13 September 2022 for – according to the regime – violating laws on veiling in Iran. Plain and simple, for not wanting to wear the veil. Three days later, he died in hospital due to physical abuse in police custody. Her death sparked mass protests, led by women, across the country, united under the slogan "Woman, life, freedom." Women who are asking for something that we enjoy here and maybe don't value: Simply and simply, to be able to live in freedom and decide the life they want to lead. A murderous regime, which last year killed 853 people with the death penalty, a regime that must receive more sanctions and which we cannot allow to roam freely through Europe with diplomatic representation.

Madam President, Commissioner, I wish you all the best in the new phase that is beginning. I am going to read you some data from a report comparing the venture capital market in the United States and in Europe. And, truly, it's devastating. On the one hand, it tells us that the European Union represents less than 50% of the size of the American venture capital market. He then tells us that the capital rounds in the United States are larger at all stages, in the initial stages and in the growth stages. It also shows us that investments in Europe are mainly earmarked for European Green Deal expenditure, while in the US they are earmarked for investments in artificial intelligence, in health or in defence. It shows us that we do not believe start-ups highly valued by the markets and that the ones we create simply go away. And the number of "unicorns" in the United States is three times that of "unicorns" in Europe. And finally, it highlights the serious damage of regulatory fragmentation in Europe, which prevents an agile market for venture capital markets. The big question is whether we want a Europe of entrepreneurs, of companies that generate jobs, that generate wealth, or we want a Europe of public investment or civil servants. We simply have to react and react now.

Mr President, Mr Commissioner, Mr Minister, facing a budget is a huge responsibility because we have to decide what expenses and what investments we are going to allocate the money from the taxes of the citizens. So three things have to be done when we face a new budget. Firstly, to evaluate the programmes that do work, those that are having the desired impact, that are generating the opportunities we want for Europeans and that, in addition, are covering those basic needs that we want to cover from the European Union. We also have to identify those needs for which more resources have to be allocated because that situation has arisen, as can be seen, in this case in the budget, in the case of Frontex. And finally, new demands must be identified, such as – and it is important to talk about this – the payment of interest on the Next Generation EU debt. This is what this budget does. On the one hand, it maintains and reinforces what works: Erasmus+, the common agricultural policy, cohesion policy, investments in innovation. And he keeps it because it works. On the other hand, it reinforces something that we are demanding, which is to strengthen our borders, namely Frontex. And, on the other hand, it gives a solution, which is not ideal, on how to deal with the interest we have to pay on the debt of Next Generation EU funds. And I say that it is not ideal because it has to make us reflect in the face of new debates that are taking place about creating new funds also out of debt.

Madam President, Mr Vice-President, in the face of the very alarming increase in anti-Semitism in Europe, I would also like to raise my voice in relation to the increase in hate crimes against Christianity in Europe. The latest data we have speak of 748 recorded hate crimes against Christians in Europe. These data are very, very far from the tremendous data that speak of 365 million persecuted Christians in the world, but it shows that it is not a phenomenon alien to European borders. It should be noted that when Christianity is attacked, it is not only attacking people's individual religious freedom, but it is a direct attack on the waterline of Western culture. The attacks on this religion what they do is attack the religion that inspires the values of dignity and equality of the human being. Therefore, we must warn that denying the Judeo-Christian roots of Europe and the influence of Christian-humanist principles in the construction of the European project has always been one of the most perverse strategies of the radical left, and we must remain vigilant and defend Christian culture and the European way of life.

Mr President, it is clear that the left does not want to learn: insists on the need to intervene in the economy through new taxes, without caring in the least about the low revenue achieved by these policies wherever they have been applied, their zero redistributive effect and the great damage caused to economic growth. The left persists in its demagogic discourses through which it points out and blames evil enemies who cause all evils, regardless of the fact that it is precisely its policies that end up harming and impoverishing those it says it wants to defend. The European Union does not need more taxes or more interventionism. If we want to discuss taxation, let us do so on a tax policy that incentivises – not penalises – hiring and saving, creates opportunities, helps us to be more competitive and facilitates investment and the attraction of talent, as well as lower tax burdens, efficiency in spending and management, economic growth and job creation. This is the recipe that works.

Madam President, I would like to react to the intervention of Mr Borrell, whom I thank, of course, for condemning the terrible attacks of 7 October on behalf of the European Union and, of course, for calling for the immediate release of the hundreds of hostages still held by Hamas. However, I wanted to make it clear that I am concerned about some attempt to create an equidistance between what is Israel and what is Hamas. We must remember once again in this Parliament that Israel is a democratic state fighting terrorist organisations, such as Hamas and Hezbollah, and I have missed the fact that there was no reference to these terrorist organisations using the civilian population as human shields. I do not know whether international law allows command centres to be set up in hospitals or schools. Israel is a democratic state fighting against two terrorist organizations, and under the protection of Iran, to which you have not referred and it is important to remember that its ambassadors are at ease in the States of the European Union.

Madam President, Venezuela is a great country that has been suffering a long totalitarian and dictatorial nightmare. It is macabre that it presents itself as the government of the people and defender of human rights to a regime that has expelled eight million people into exile, that has imprisoned and tortured thousands of Venezuelans and that systematically violates the rule of law, the separation of powers, individual rights and private property. Let's call things by their name. Venezuela suffers a dictatorship that violates human rights and, before that, there are three positions. The first is to support the criminal dictatorship, as some radical left-wing formations do in this Parliament and which, fortunately, are a minority, but which, unfortunately, are part of the Government of my country, in Spain. The second is to be cowardly silent in the face of the excesses of the criminal dictatorship, pretending that it is done and pretending that it is pacified, when the dictator and the retaliated, the criminal and the victim are really put on the same level. This is what the former president of my country, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, represents, one of the main responsible for the permanence of the dictator Maduro in power. But there is another option: to fight the dictatorship from the unity of the democrats. Democracy and freedom are being destroyed in Venezuela. That is why we must recognize the new legitimate government of Venezuela and recognize Edmundo González as the winner of the elections. And we must denounce the persecution of the opposition and, especially, the persecution of María Corina Machado, who is in danger. Therefore, let's unite the Democrats for a free Venezuela.

The best proof that the State of Israel is a free democracy is that its citizens can take to the streets to protest against their rulers whenever they consider it, they can go out and criticize their governments, they have elections and they change their governments: that is the best example that democracy in Israel needs to be defended so that they can continue to protest whenever they want; Unfortunately, this is not the case in Gaza.

Madam President, Commissioner, on 7 October 2023, the terrorist organisation Hamas murdered more than 1200 Israelis and abducted more than 250 innocent people, including children, in a bloody and inhumane attack on the democratic State of Israel. It is key to remember this date and this terrible attack so as not to lose focus and fall into biased stories that seem to pretend to forget this massacre, because it was that terrorist massacre that triggered Israel's legitimate reaction and the legitimate defense of its borders, its citizens, its freedoms and its existence as a State. I want to be very clear: Israel is a democratic state fighting a terrorist organization that has turned Gaza's civilian population into human shields and hostages to its barbarism: a civilian population that is suffering the terrible consequences of the war and a civilian population that causes us profound pain and to which we give the most sincere support from the European Union; a civilian population that is demanding an end to this war, of course, but the end of the war cannot happen without the release of the hostages, without the assurance that the State of Israel can exist in peace and freedom and without the disappearance of terrorist organizations that sow terror in the region. The European Union and all Western democracies must have a firm commitment to defending democracy, freedom and human rights in the Middle East against terrorist organisations such as Hamas and Hezbollah: Our cause must always be with democracy and freedom.

As I said in my speech, this Parliament is trying to impose on the Member States its will, which is the will of a minority. And I reaffirm myself. Mr Macron, when he came here to announce his priorities to the Presidency, already announced that he intended to do this. Mr Macron is using abortion as a political tool in his own interest. Let's not fall into the trap. Let us respect subsidiarity and respect the right to life.

Mr President, Commissioner, everyone has the right to life. This is Article 2 of the Charter that some in this Parliament want to amend. It's a surprising contradiction. Celso defines that Law is the art of the good and the just. For this reason rights are neither created, nor erected, nor conquered. Rights are recognized. Respect for human life in all its dimensions is the first act of justice to be applied. To defend human life is to preserve it everywhere, at all times. How can we not share the beauty of human life? Abortion represents a failure for us as a society. It is truly a moral and existential drama. And it attacks by attacking the existence of another human being. As much as they call it right, what we are talking about here is an ideological imposition. The imposition of Mr Macron on the rest of Europe, showing political opportunism to introduce by force the culture of death in all the states of the Union. The will of a minority that arbitrarily, without scientific reason, must decide when and how human life is conceived for the majority. Will this Parliament admit to being the instrument in the service of this stubborn attack by this minority against the life we claim to defend? This so-called right is protected neither by the Declaration of Human Rights, nor by the Treaty on European Union, nor by the Convention. It's time to call things by their name. And the Law was established not to promote death, but to defend life. (She agreed to answer a question under the "blue card" procedure)

Madam President, Commissioner, I would like to begin by thanking the rapporteur for this report, Mr Andrey Novakov, for his interest in obtaining direct views from regional and local authorities, his negotiating spirit and the brilliant work he has done. Something, by the way, usual in the Committee on Regional Development, which is one of the pillars of this Parliament. As a Spanish Member, I can only thank you for the contribution that cohesion policy has made and continues to make in my country. Many transformative projects financed by the Structural Funds have promoted growth and the creation of opportunities in Spanish regions. Today, unfortunately, there is a clear threat of making cohesion policy the common repository to draw on when the Commission urgently needs to finance new programmes. And while these items are emptied, the funds are multiplied and a blockage is generated both in the execution and in the administrative management at all levels, thus causing a delay in the execution of the funds and a less transformative impact of them. It is not a question of dispensing with cohesion. The solution is to reduce the bureaucratic swarm, remove obstacles, simplify procedures, strengthen public-private cooperation, give a leading role to the private sector, centralize information or facilitate access to beneficiaries, promoting greater participation at local and regional level. Regions are crying out for this simplification. Creating new funds makes management difficult and reduces the impact of cohesion policy, one of the best valued by European citizens. Let us focus, therefore, on improving it, on boosting it, not on drowning it.

Mr. President, gentlemen of the PSOE, you feel absolutely desperate. And I understand that because the case we are debating today is a disgusting case, because it occurred in the middle of the pandemic when citizens were most vulnerable. It is unworthy and immoral for some to take advantage of those difficult times to collect those illegal commissions for the sale of useless masks. There were leaders responsible for the government of Mr. Sanchez who looked the other way, covered up and, therefore, collaborated with that disgusting corruption. Socialist leaders who even lied in public documents validating this material knowing that it was defective, in order to be able to impute the expenditure to European funds. Europe must send a loud and clear message that goes to the heart of the matter. In the same way that we have to know, in the light of the new information, whether the Sánchez government helped to circumvent sanctions on leaders of the Venezuelan regime, specifically Mrs Delcy Rodríguez. The corruption within the Sanchez government will be paid by all Spaniards because we will have to return these funds. To tolerate this and allow those responsible to go unpunished would be a betrayal not only of the citizens but of the solidarity of the European Union.

Mr President, Mrs Calviño, welcome to the European Parliament and congratulations on your appointment. First of all, let me congratulate you on your miraculous conversion in relation to nuclear energy. Until very recently, during five years in the Spanish Government, you have fought them and excluded them from any type of investment. Therefore, welcome this miraculous conversion and I hope that you will work so that the Spanish Government also begins to bet on this energy. Secondly, you referred to the very important role that the EIB will play in relation to recovery funds. As you know, the EIB will manage 20 billion of the loans that will go to the autonomous communities in Spain. Today, the autonomous communities demand information, they know absolutely nothing about how this fund will be managed. And this reminds us of the poor management of the recovery funds in Spain, under his leadership, where we have zero impact on GDP and where, to this day, we still do not have real data on the execution of them. We're generating frustration, the same as... (the Chair took the floor from the speaker).

Mr President, Commissioner, I would like to acknowledge the enormous leadership that you have had in promoting the capital markets union since you came to the Commission and to thank you for the impetus that you have had in an uneasy context. So I thank you very much for that leadership, that ambition and those milestones that we are going to finish the mandate having achieved. If we look at the capital markets union project, obviously, we have a long list of objectives to meet: objectives within that action plan and objectives, perhaps, that are above. But I would like to use this last minute to say that, if we really want to move forward, what is key is the retail investment strategy. I deeply believe that it is absolutely essential to get European savers to become real investors. And I believe that only in this way will we be able to bridge the gap between the financial markets and European citizens. Bringing financial markets closer and more accessible to retail investors I think is the big unfinished business. The strategy that is being negotiated, the retail investment strategy, is the main piece to achieve that change and, therefore, I encourage that progress is made and can also be closed in this mandate. I believe that we must develop a strategy that is focused on understanding the needs of investors – of course also on costs, but on the needs of investors – and that aims to offer the best quality, advice and adaptability to the products to be able to decide when that investment is made. So, if we look back today, I think we can look with satisfaction at the work that, under the leadership of the Commission and the leadership of Parliament - because it has to be acknowledged that there has been very important leadership in Parliament - has come a long way in the capital markets union. I hope that the retail strategy will be closed and I hope that in the next Commission we will be able to talk about a Europe of empowered retail investors who will take control of their savings and be able to think about their future.

Mr President, Commissioner, we are only a few months away from the end of the parliamentary term and this is a key opportunity to reflect on the way forward in the capital markets union. Since the beginning of the legislature we have been engaged in significant progress, but we have also had to face major challenges and challenges that have limited the potential of European capital markets. When in 2019 the European Commission launched its second action plan for the completion of this union, optimism and energy for the implementation of the measures were the main protagonists. What no one expected was a COVID-19 pandemic that triggered high volatility in financial markets, with sharp declines in stock indices and unbridled levels of uncertainty among investors. What no one expected was a Russian invasion of Ukraine that would escalate geopolitical tensions, weakening the European competitiveness of key economic sectors such as energy. What no one expected was for the biggest banking crisis to break out in the United States since 2008 with the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank. What no one expected was an increase in risk aversion and fear of a contagion effect on European markets. Undoubtedly, what no one expected was that we would have to fight against the highest inflation at the global level in recent decades and with its consequent rise in interest rates. This scenario that we have experienced in recent years has little to do with the one imagined by any of us for this legislature. However, each of these developments has served to make clearer the absolute necessity of the Capital Markets Union in the European Union. A stronger, completed and consolidated union. The obstacles we have faced have demonstrated the important role that financial markets can play in the European economy, both in households and businesses. The agreement reached tomorrow on the amendment of the Directives on Alternative Investment Fund Managers and Undertakings for Collective Investment in Real Estate Securities (AIFMD and UCITSD) is extraordinary news. These directives are a key part of the latest legislative package launched by the Commission in 2022 to boost the Capital Markets Union. With the agreement reached - and I would like to thank all the shadow rapporteurs involved and the Council and the Commission - we can say the following: whereas the delegation of functions in asset management contributes to the efficiency of investment portfolio management, whereas the proposed amendments will encourage a more focused approach to increasing the quality of service for investors, preserving a smooth channel of information with the supervisor, whereas today investment funds providing loans can be an alternative source of financing for the real economy, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises. The private credit sector should continue to grow by easing the participation of institutional investors. And, with the agreement reached, liquidity risk management will present a more robust structure to mitigate market tensions and protect investors. The proposed system recognises that the primary responsibility for liquidity management lies with managers and that it is up to them to make decisions based on their investment strategies. In short, the alternative investment fund sector involves an investment of more than €1.5 trillion in Europe. It provides more than €250 billion to European companies in forms of private credit and European investors are responsible for 30% of the overall capital allocated to the entire sector. Undoubtedly, it makes a valuable contribution to the European economy and financial markets. That is why today I welcome the fact that we are holding this debate and I ask you to vote in favour tomorrow.

Mr President, Commissioner, if we want jobs we need employers. Quality employment is the most reliable indicator of a good economic ecosystem that starts with those who generate jobs because they invest and risk their assets: entrepreneurs and the self-employed. Bureaucratic and administrative obstacles, high tax levels and regulatory excesses do not benefit, but act as counterproductive obstacles to achieving the quality employment to which we aspire. Even more so when we have in many Member States measures that penalise own recruitment. Spain, my country, is unfortunately a good example of this situation. And I give you an example: when a self-employed person wants to risk his assets and offer a job by paying the minimum wage to an employee, it costs him 2,000 euros, so that the employer can pay 1,300 euros, it costs him 2,000 euros. Quality jobs are well-paid jobs, quality jobs are jobs in which, when an entrepreneur risks and puts his assets, that money reaches the person he has employed. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Unfortunately, this needs to be reviewed.

Madam President, we are voting on this report on the reform of the rules on business taxation in the European Union, which is based on five axes: firstly, respect for the fiscal sovereignty of states and their free competition; secondly, the importance of coordination within the European Union in tax decision-making; thirdly, the reduction of red tape and the tax burden, especially for SMEs; fourthly, respect for the single market; and, fifthly, the recognition of business as a driver of the free market economy through job creation. It is crucial that the European Parliament takes a clear position on corporate tax reforms in the context of the OECD Framework Agreement and the various legislative proposals made by the European Commission. This reform cannot go in the direction of creating more difficulties for our companies and entrepreneurs, thus hindering investments and growth. That is why I would like to thank all the political groups for their enormous work, as well as the immense work also done by the technical team of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the Subcommittee on Fiscal Affairs, and ask them to vote in favour, as happened in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs.

Madam President, Commissioner, this is and must be a platform for coordination between the various programmes and funds of the European Union. A coordination that manages to simplify processes, eliminate administrative and bureaucratic obstacles, and speed up the implementation of the different programs so that funding reaches those who really need it: families, businesses and sectors most affected. I have always argued that the institutions of the European Union have lived up to the successive crises and disasters we have suffered in recent years. The approval of Next Generation funds, the joint purchase of vaccines or the injection of resources prove this. But more important than the approval of new programmes and large numbers is the speed with which they reach their final recipients. This speed can only be achieved through coordination between the various programmes and funds, through evaluations and the need for transparency in the management of the Member States, and through the involvement of all the competent authorities in the management of the programmes. Therefore, STEP will be an opportunity and not an obstacle as long as it complies with the objectives detailed in this Regulation and the Union institutions, with the Commission at the forefront, demand its scrupulous compliance from the Member States. The Sovereignty Seal will be an opportunity for business projects if we create a truly accessible and transparent platform that is a common space for all information and programs. Without this, STEP will not be a success. Let us not fall into the error of promoting the blockade of public administrations with the creation of endless new funds and programs. We need coordination and that the funds reach their recipients.

Mr President, Commissioner, Mr representative of the Spanish Presidency of the Council, let me wish you the best of success for these months. Over the last 15 years we have suffered economic crises that have particularly hit families, SMEs and the self-employed, who are undoubtedly the real engine of the European economy; those who promote consumption, investment and savings; Those who create jobs and energize our market. This middle class bears the high cost of living and the increase in the price of basic products derived from inflation, to which must be added a high and constant fiscal pressure that especially punishes their pockets and makes it very difficult for them to reach the end of the month. And I know very well what I'm talking about, considering the Spanish case. If we really want to help them, the solution is to lower taxes. Faced with the culture of subsidies and a myriad of European funds that have not yet reached the pockets of families or the real economy, lowering taxes is the most useful and effective way to ease their burdens and clean up their economies. In addition, the inclusion of tax incentives and benefits would help in a swift and efficient implementation of the European Recovery Funds, Commissioner, which, as we have spoken about many times, are suffering from enormous delays in their implementation. Corporate tax, personal income tax, VAT on basic products, hiring taxes, rates that increase the receipt of electricity... The reduction of these taxes would be noticed by families, the self-employed and SMEs, thus allowing a recovery and an economic reactivation that would benefit society as a whole. Only in this way will we be able to put the economy at the service of the middle class and only in this way will we be able to achieve the ambitious objectives of the recovery funds.

Mr President, Commissioner, as has already been discussed in this report, regulatory coherence between EU Member States, bureaucratic simplification, the removal of barriers to free markets and cross-border investments are pillars on which a more competitive Europe must continue to be built. In this regard, I believe that the NextGenerationEU programme deserves particular mention. These funds were not only a swift and successful response to the economic crisis resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, but also a unique and never-before-used tool in the Union, put at the service of states to make them more competitive in a global market economy, more resilient to periods of crisis and economic contraction, and capable of generating opportunities for jobs and growth. It should be noted that the founding principles of recovery funds are consistent with the broad outlines of this competition report. Let us not forget that the reforms included in the national recovery plans must seek regulatory and administrative simplification and the reduction of red tape for the proper functioning of the internal market. Therefore, we must ask ourselves: Are the reforms agreed and implemented in the States, under the umbrella of these funds, making it possible to achieve these objectives? Are the investments that are being made achieving the intended economic transformation or, on the contrary, are they increasing public and structural spending in the medium and long term that will hinder the competitiveness of our economy and involve future problems in the national economies of the Union? This is not the time for complacency; It's time for the demand.

Madam President, Commissioner, the success of recovery funds cannot be measured in payment claims or transfers made by the Commission. Nor can it be done for the aesthetic quality of PowerPoint presentations where individual Member States are presenting their national plans. An art, that of propaganda, in which, by the way, Mr Sánchez's government is absolutely a genius. However, the success of the RRF, the success of the recovery funds will be measured in the success of the impact of the reforms that create more opportunities for SMEs, for entrepreneurs, for those who are looking for work, and also in the fact that the funds reach the final recipients, in which the funds reach those projects for which they are intended. And in order to measure this success, we need transparency, absolute transparency. And it is the Commission's responsibility to ensure that there is such transparency. A transparency that allows us to know, as in the case of Spain, exactly how many payments have been made from Next Generation funds and that we can finally know an official data - an official data that we have not had since August 2021 - on the execution of the recovery funds. And for Next Generation funds to be a success, these funds, these measures, these reforms, these investments have to be agreed reforms: agreed with the regions, agreed with local authorities, agreed with businessmen, agreed with civil society. And to this day it has not been done so. And I appeal to the Commission to have maximum demand with Spain in the preparation of the addendum that is being prepared by the Spanish Government for the application of the loans. Only if it is a true national plan will it be a success. And, of course, if it is again a Sanchez plan, what will be doomed is to failure, like the current national plan.

Madam President, Commissioner, I am very glad that this debate is taking place today, because it is a very important debate. There is no doubt that the digital euro proposal would improve the efficiency of payments by reducing costs and transaction times. It would also strengthen the international role of the euro by allowing the EU to diversify its international foreign exchange reserves and reduce its dependence on the US dollar. In short, it would position us one step closer to our goals of digitization and strengthening the position of the European Union in the global economy. However, at this final stage of the design of this proposal, we must bear in mind that the digital euro must not be presented, in any scenario, as an instrument for creating deposits of value in the European Central Bank and that it must be a means of payment that competes on equal terms with those already existing. Otherwise, the creation of the digital euro would have a negative impact on the financing of the economy and the stability of the European banking system. In this regard, it is important to recall that commercial banks are the fundamental link in the Union’s monetary policy and that their essential role in financial intermediation should not be undermined by the introduction of the digital euro. In this way, the European financial system will be able to continue to function efficiently to support the real economy. In conclusion, I urge the Commission to put in place the necessary safeguards for the future digital euro to fulfil its purpose of improving the lives of European citizens, while preserving the financial stability and integrity of the European banking system.