What Sira spoke about.

Madam President, second consecutive year in which it is proposed to delay the approval of Frontex accounts. In this case, pending the final report of the European Anti-Fraud Office, a report in several phases, which, for the moment, has already claimed the head of Fabrice Leggeri. Although it is excellent news that he has finally resigned, it is essential to point out that Frontex has a fundamental problem and that, beyond the resignations, it is necessary to clarify for what, how and who has made an allegedly irregular use of public resources. Under Leggeri, the Agency has increased its funding sixfold. And all this, for what? Well, to violate human rights. Although thanks to the pact of silence proposed by the Commission, we will never know the details and the real scope. In order to ensure that respect for human rights is not an accounting problem and to prevent European money from being used to beat and kill human beings, a change in the EU migration model is a priority.

The EU is an example, a melting pot full of cases of people who have not received sufficient legal guarantees to prove the need to enter reception, asylum and refugee systems. So, I'm not mixing anything. Equal legal aid must be guaranteed. The application of the Geneva Convention, the application of international law, must be ensured. Human rights must be guaranteed. And there are many examples at the EU's external borders that prove that this is not the case.

Madam President, I don't know about you, but I am perplexed by this. In just four weeks we have shown that we can receive more than four million people fleeing war and barbarism by guaranteeing the right to asylum. We have done so in conditions that have ensured a dignified reception. We have done so with pride and determination. Popular solidarity has been activated; Even at the price of petrol, taxi drivers from my country have travelled 3,000 kilometres to pick up Ukrainian refugees at the Polish border. So how is it explained that at the same time we continue to see migrants drowned in the sea? Scenes of people beaten up on the southern border fences? Bodies shattered by concertinas? The criminalization of those who save lives? How do you explain the 40 000 hot returns in 2020? It's unbearable. And, in addition, it is a sample of racist politics that feeds hatred, from which only the extreme right benefits, instead of basing itself on what makes human beings bigger: empathy and justice. It is unbearable, above all, after seeing that it is possible to make another policy of reception and refuge. That a migration model based on legal and safe pathways, based on the freedom of movement of refugees between Member States, is possible. It has been shown that those in need can be given the opportunity to live with dignity. (She agreed to answer a question under the "blue card" procedure.)

Mr President, yesterday, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change made it clear in its report: we are in time to stop climate change, but for this we must decarbonize life and the economy, that is, we must stop burning gas, oil and coal, and we must also hurry because we run out of time. However, here we are, talking about how to invest European public money, that of all, in making new infrastructures to continue burning gas, infrastructures that will inevitably make our energy model of the coming decades continue to pollute and, of course, give millionaire benefits to the electric oligopoly: an error and a contradiction with the emission reduction targets. Frankly, after the IPCC report, which points to the abyss, and the war in Ukraine having shown how vulnerable we are depending on gas, it does not seem sensible that we are still talking here about strengthening infrastructure that will weaken us over the years; on the contrary, our discussions and proposals should focus on promoting a strong, distributed and public renewable energy grid.

Madam President, in recent months the profits of electricity in my country have increased fourfold and those of some oil companies have doubled. Meanwhile, the industry stops, boats do not go out to fish and prices in the "super" skyrocket. In a few weeks, their economic model has led to unbearable impoverishment. And, of course, there is a common denominator that allows energy multinationals to get rich and Putin to blackmail us: its pricing model. However, you, who do agree quickly to distribute European funds among the lobbies From war, energy multinationals or the financial sector, these days they are not able to give solutions to working people. Ladies and gentlemen of the Commission and the Council, leave the traps and take decisions. Do something. For example, start by allocating the profits of these multinationals to cover the needs of the most affected people and end the marginalist market at once.

Mr President, Commissioner for Energy, I endorse the Commission's words: We have to become independent of Russian gas. However, you and I know that reducing dependency is not enough to respond to this emergency; In addition, it is essential to change their rules of the game for pricing, their failed marginalist market model, which, by the way, they do not dare to touch. Let me give you an example: In my country, right now, around eight o'clock in the afternoon, we are going to pay 700 euros per megawatt hour, even if only 1% of electricity generation depends directly on Russian gas. A possible blackmail because the energy market in Europe is designed to inflate the profits of large electric. That is why it is not enough to diversify the origin of the gas. We urgently need a model change that strengthens our energy sovereignty so that it is renewable, fair and under public control. We need a model that prevents us from being hostages and makes it impossible for the price of energy in Europe to be determined by Putin from his office.

Madam President, Commissioner, this change in the direction of EU asylum policy is certainly good news. For the first time since it was adopted 20 years ago, the Temporary Protection Directive is activated, which today allows us to welcome people fleeing the war in Ukraine. This shows that, when there is political will, Europe can open up legal and safe avenues and articulate decent reception mechanisms for those in need. And that in just two weeks we have received more than two million refugees, more than twice as many as in 2015. It also shows that there is another possible and necessary approach to the European Pact on Migration and Asylum: one based on respect for human rights. However, we deeply regret that the Council has decided not to include long-term residents and other residents, such as African and Middle Eastern students, in direct protection. Let us remember that it is essential that protection and the right to asylum are not limited by skin colour or origin.

Madam President, today we are debating good news. European justice guarantees that racist, LGBT, sexist policies that cut press freedom are not financed with public money... And if something should make sense of the European institutions, it is the possibility that this will serve as a space for guaranteeing rights for working people. That from here the possibility of a dignified existence is assured. That is why the judgment of the CJEU is a brake on a runaway extreme right, which is determined to turn this House into a field of operations to roll back our rights. In their project, if you're poor, or gay, or woman, or worker, or migrant, or environmentalist or unionist, you're out. For them, the vast social majority are out. Let's not forget it! Security, future and certainty will only be possible by broadening and defending the rule of law. This ruling places us on that horizon of progress. Now it's time for the political battle to rise to the occasion.

Mr President, I would like to begin by acknowledging the figure of David Sassoli and what he has meant to this Parliament. Comrades, comrades, it is an honor for me to represent in this process the Left, a humble group, but one that has been essential to build a more democratic, more just and more fraternal Europe. Our vocation always: improve the lives of working people, of the social majority. We live in a world with limited resources. The answer cannot be that only a few have rights and access to those resources. We need firm decisions that address the consequences of a climate emergency that is already here. That is why we believe that, now that we are debating the future of Europe, we must bet on more democracy. And that means that this Parliament must push for decisions that respond to the great challenges we face in the context of the eco-social crisis. In addition, we must champion a fair way out of the crisis generated by the pandemic, defending jobs and public services. And, of course, this Parliament must defend women's rights. Not a step back in our right to decide about our own bodies, not a step back in our right to abortion. In addition, we need to be able to debate in a public space that is not intoxicated with lies, a diverse and plural space such as European society. We need to move away from an extreme right that only brings fear, hatred and violence so that the rights of all become the privilege of the few. Its attacks on LGBTI people, women and migrants are no coincidence. In fact, the far right has declared war on human rights because, in its narrow model of society, most of us are left over. Their project is that of a minority that needs to confront those at the bottom so that those at the top continue to get rich at the cost of our precariousness. They have declared war on human rights. We fight to abolish injustice and inequality. That is why we must point out that the old formulas for dealing with this threat are showing their limits. The seams of this pretended cordon sanitaire of the great coalitions jump and the right is too porous to extremist approaches. Democracy and progress can only be defended by expanding social rights and with a solid material basis that leaves no one behind. Therefore, I would like to recall that European democracies have as their essential feature the axis of anti-fascism. Moreover, European cohesion is rooted in a continent shattered by Nazi and fascist barbarism. Constitutions such as the Italian or the German ones reflect that post-World War II spirit. But they're not just stories from the past. I come from Spain, the country where this global phenomenon has been created. The Paper House. His screenwriter, one of the architects of that Bella Ciao is chanted again all over the planet, tells us that the day has not yet dawned when it is not a good idea to sing an anti-fascist anthem. The anthem we sing today is that of a more social, more ecological, more feminist Europe. It is enough for us to build a broad democratic alliance between those of us who stand in the face of reactionary barbarism. Therefore, comrades who identify with these ideas, allow me this appeal: Let us build together a new consensus that puts the common good and social rights at the centre. Let us learn the lessons of history and seize the opportunity to emerge from this crisis without leaving anyone behind. Let us not give in to speeches that claim authoritarian involution. We do not ally ourselves with those who share their agenda or part of their agenda. That would be an implicit recognition that democracy is losing. Let us not give in to the reactionaries and their allies. That is why I ask you to support all those, all those who, like us, recognise each other, in the dignity of those who save lives in the Mediterranean, of the working class that mobilizes for their rights, of women who challenge reactionary governments – their governments! – demanding freedom to decide on their bodies, of the youth who occupy the squares demanding effective measures to face the climate crisis, of those who fight for public services. I ask for your support for a new feminist horizon, because feminism has come to change everything to say with pride that the history of Europe has also been written by women and we will continue to write it from the point of view of sorority, from the struggle for equity. I ask for your support for a proposal that is inspired by democratic and revolutionary Europe, one that added fraternity to freedom and equality. I ask for your support so that together we can build a more democratic, more just and more fraternal Europe, in short, anti-fascist. Up those who fight!

Madam President, Commissioner, these things usually happen gradually. They start with a raging man pointing to gays, lesbians, women, migrants and the poor as enemies, obviously imaginary. It continues with the normalization of that narrative in the institutions (I think it sounds to them). And it ends with discussions like this, in which we are debating the Polish government's plan to turn its country into the Handmaid's Tale. Precisely that is the centralized registration of pregnancies to avoid possible abortions, clandestine or outside the country. A further leap in the use of violence against women, a measure that, in addition to eliminating the right to say about their bodies, makes women guardians. Their wombs will be owned by the government. A pregnant woman will cease to be a human being and become an object. Mr Schinas, we need firmness and concrete measures to defend human rights in Poland. The Commission must commit and put in place a plan to ensure that the sexual and reproductive rights of Polish women are respected by enabling European resources to do so.

Madam President, Commissioner, let me start with some evidence: it will seem incredible to them, but people who believe that inclusive language is important because what is not named does not exist, or because diversity is also built through what is made visible, we do not intend to put an end to the ideas of others; Rather, on the contrary. That the European institutions have a Guide suggesting an inclusive language, is simply an exercise to democratize spaces of coexistence, not a dogma. In fact, you can rest assured: their lordly privileges remain intact and Christmas is not at risk. In fact, this Guide didn't cancel anyone, it just matched a few things. In these battles, which are often called "frivolous" by those who speak from the privilege of being named exclusively or of having occupied our spaces, we also risk the meaning of equality and the visibility of those who are always invisible. Unfortunately, the Commission, playing into the hands of white, conservative men with certain religious values, leaves out all the others. In the meantime, we'll keep naming each other.

Mr President, Commissioner, thanks to this report we confirm that the European Union's energy model is a failure: failure for people, failure for the planet. The data show that energy consumption has not been reduced, which is essential to address climate change. We continue to dope fossil fuels with public money. Look green, but don't be green. Of course, it maintains its great fetish, the marginalist market, raining millions for the lobby energy at the expense of the pockets of working people. Between you and me, Commissioner, they sometimes look like commercials of the big electricity companies rather than public servants looking out for the general interest. With how simple it would be to change this to reduce the electricity bill. The devastating fact: There are 31 million people – equivalent to half the population of France – who do not have access to the minimum vital energy and who today, with this temperature, are going cold. And it is that, Mrs Simson, as long as they continue to make policies tailored to energy, neither climate change, nor energy poverty, nor justice will reach European households. It's in your hands.

Mr President, Commissioner, surely, behind the unattractive title of this debate, we have one of the most important issues of the moment. At bottom, to discuss the extraction of critical raw materials is to talk about the limits of the planet, about the effort we are willing to make for a just transition, about the audacity to change the forms of production. We are debating what resources we leave to future generations. And, for the construction of a wind turbine, a tablet or a robot of a production chain, a huge amount of raw materials is needed. Many of them are critical because they are scarce, because of their difficult extraction or because their deposits are concentrated in certain regions of the world. Only in this device we have tungsten, coltan, tin, lithium or rare earths. Many are known as blood minerals because their obtaining, in addition to destroying ecosystems and people, is done at the expense of armed conflicts such as that of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, for the control of coltan, coups d'état such as that of Bolivia, for the control of lithium, or the illegal occupation of Morocco over Western Sahara, to exploit the reserves of phosphates or tantalum. That is why, in our view, this report is unambitious. Given the opportunity to abandon extractivism and think about where we are going and how to guide our production model fairly in the face of the challenges of climate change, we continue to bet on models that will deepen the ecosocial crisis. Perhaps starting with a strategy that reduces the use of materials and recovers those that are in circulation is the most sensible thing to do today.

Mr President, Mr Borrell, in my opinion, the real debate here is what the responsibility is and what the EU can do in the face of this humanitarian emergency. The fact is that we have thousands of people on the Polish border fleeing armed conflicts, minors, families... At temperatures below zero, enduring extreme violence, with several dead. And the fact is that we have a Member State, Poland, which has decided to decree the suspension of human rights and the Geneva Convention. It has created an exception zone where all these refugees are trapped. An area that cannot be accessed by the media, NGOs or UN agencies. An area where it is obvious that the right to asylum is not being respected. In short, an area in which they do not want there to be witnesses. So when we talk about the far-right agenda penetrating the EU, we're talking about things like this. And that is why the Commission cannot come to a plenary session to ask that fundamental rights be respected in Poland and to the next plenary session to come to defend that fundamental rights are violated in Poland because they are people who come from outside. That's racist politics.

Mr President, Commissioner, in 2021 alone, 55 complaints and 7 cases opened with the Ombudsman. And yesterday we learned from the media that Frontex is once again being denounced. In this case, before the Court of Justice of the EU. This is a family of Syrian refugees who were illegally expelled courtesy of Mr. Leggeri. The problem with this news, which is very serious, is that it no longer surprises anyone, because Frontex is accumulating human rights violations. Then there's the matter of their million-dollar parties, cases of harassment, whatsapps with the Libyan coastguards, which first did not exist, but then it seems that yes, the hot returns, the "we have no money to hire human rights monitors", which is mandatory, but yes to increase the personal cabinet of the Leggeri, which is accessory, and, of course, there is the investigation that is still open in the Anti-Fraud Office. In all this time we have been able to conclude that Frontex is out of control, that Frontex is not transparent, that Frontex violates human rights, that Mr Leggeri has lied in Parliament and that the European Commission has not done its homework. A complete history that indicates that things are not going well. What is more, all this is a real scandal and perhaps the debate is not about approving the accounts but about what we need to do to dismantle this Agency.

Madam President, I'm sure it rings a bell: defending the European way of life; protect our borders from the invasion of immigrants; gender-based violence does not exist and climate change does not; eradicating the LGTBI ideology; Progressive dictatorship; This narrative is a daily part of our day, it is the necessary framework for far-right policies to progress, but it is also the previous step for the violent escalation of the new fascisms: assaults on LGBTI people, shootings of migrants, justification for Nazi and fascist crimes, terrorist massacres and – the latest episode – the assault on the headquarters of the Italian majority trade union. It is no coincidence that it is against the organization of workers: the war that has opened the far right against rights is directed in a certain way against the places that represent the interests of working people; They are never on the wrong side, always with the elites, always against the peoples. Extract its narrative, deploy social state, guarantee rights for all: That is the best vaccine against the advance of the far right, and remember every day that to be a Democrat you have to be antifascist.

Mr President, Polish justice is rebelling: they will not take over the European legal order, but they do not do so to protect their workers, who by the way have one of the lowest wages in the whole EU, or to challenge rules that have left years of austerity thinning social states – pensions, health, education ...; They do so because they want to deepen their authoritarian plan. Within a few weeks it is one year since they outlawed abortion; To this is added the harassment of LGTBI people, the limitation of freedom of the press, the racist anti-immigration discourse, the control of Justice ... The Polish Government wants to have its hands free to violate human rights, but does not renounce that we pay for the party among all. So, basically, this is not about legal boundaries and sovereignty, this is about a war open to rights, and in that there is no doubt: The defense of human rights challenges all democrats, without borders. That they are fulfilled in Poland is a duty and an engine for those of us who remain committed and committed to building a fraternal Europe and a Europe of equals. (Applause)

Mr President, it is surprising that in such a debate you cannot go out in an anti-racist t-shirt in a House like this. The momentum of an asylum agency would be great news if there were a common EU asylum policy that respected human rights. Indeed, the creation of instruments that do not have a clear policy behind them or that are even contrary to the common sense of protection of vulnerable people fleeing persecution, war or climate change augurs rather that what is going to be done may end up becoming another agency out of control. During this time I had the opportunity to visit the Greek-Turkish border, Sicily, Algeciras, Canary Islands, Melilla... In all cases, with something in common: camps for persons held without legal guarantees for access to the right of asylum. There is certainly a common asylum protocol in the EU: is that of suspension of rights and return and systematized deportations. We insist, this agency will make sense when the EU does its asylum duties and equips itself with a mechanism that guarantees rights and respect for international law. If not, we would be replicating the Frontex model: an agency that, as you well know, violates human rights.

Madam President, Commissioner, I believe that, at this stage, with this obscene escalation in the price of electricity, we cannot continue to cheat ourselves. Here are two reasons: the energy crisis due to the depletion of fossil fuels and legislation tailored to the oligopolies and energy lobbies that facilitates the monthly looting of the pockets of working people. It is obvious that, to solve it, there are also two options: do nothing and have the electricity party bill paid by families, or promote drastic measures so that for once the energy multinationals earn a little less. That is why, Mrs Simson, I believe that you and I know where the Commission can begin to work, which is by changing European legislation to put an end to the marginal market. A model that – I will allow the simile – charges us the kilo of sugar at the price of kilo of caviar. I assure you that in my country it is very complicated for families to assume these prices. Today we have another light record. Mrs. Simson, winter is coming and we're running out of time. I am very much afraid that your responsibility to stop this escalation is to amend the directive.

Madam President, today we are debating the use that has been made of the more than EUR 10 billion earmarked, in theory, for development aid projects with third countries: agreement of shame with Turkey, Libya, etc. I also clarify that the debate is purely conceptual, because in this House we have no control over this money. And while EU rules do indicate that their use is only to help development, what have we found? Well, they are used to apply migration control mechanisms that in many cases violate human rights and, therefore, do not comply with this standard. In that regard, I would like to highlight two of the conclusions we have reached in this opinion. First, the immediate suspension of funding to the Libyan Coast Guard for serious human rights violations, as noted in the United Nations report published today. And the review and, where appropriate, suspension of agreements with third countries. I conclude with a question of substance: it is imperative to rethink the EU solidarity model and that resources are invested in projects that rescue people and respect rights. And it is imperative that there are control mechanisms that guarantee that public money is not used to generate human suffering.

Mr President, certainly, although we should congratulate ourselves on the rate of vaccination in Europe, it is inevitable to compare it with the rate of vaccination in impoverished countries, which is clearly insufficient to curb the pandemic. The question that I think we must ask ourselves is whether we are doing everything we can from the countries with the most resources to solve a situation that affects all of the world's population. I think the answer is no. Just yesterday, Ursula von der Leyen came to this lectern to tell us that the most serious epidemic in recent history is resolved with charity: a few million doses to silence our conscience and think that Europe delivers. However, we believe that this should be a matter not of charity, but of justice; not a business for the pharmaceutical industry, but a fair sharing of knowledge. That is why we continue to demand that, in order to address this situation, to spread vaccines around the world in the fastest and most efficient way, we push for the abolition of patents, as approved by this Parliament in June. But, for this, we should know what situation we are in. Yesterday the President of the Commission insisted that everything is phenomenal, but she forgot to comment on how the sainete ended with AstraZeneca and, above all, how much it cost us. And we have gone through all the moods with pharmaceutical companies, yes, without being able to credit a single role. We have gone from euphoria, because they were going to save us, to disenchantment, because they were extorting us. But months later there is something that has not changed. We still do not have transparency guarantees to verify how, how much and what public resources are being spent. Transparency is a principle of democratic guarantee that unfortunately has not been complied with in this case, and this has allowed a resource that should be available to guarantee everyone's rights to have ended up being the business. (the Chair took the floor from the speaker).

Mr President, Mrs von der Leyen, I understand that you have to tell us that everything is phenomenal, but, as in almost everything, the focus of this debate depends a lot on the volume of your bank account. For example, it has been a good year for AstraZeneca, which has made its August at the expense of public money, between opaque processes and scandals; It has served to bolster a far-right migration project, which leaves many benefits to a few. It has also served to lobbies energy and oligopolies are shielded: They will take a good portion of the Recovery Fund, although there is no guarantee that they will meet the Paris targets. However, the soul of Europe is not these gains. The soul of Europe is Alcoa's laid-off workers, they are the kellys, it is the young people without work, it is the families that cannot pay the electricity bill; are the Open Arms and rescue NGOs in the Mediterranean Sea; They are the ones fighting to curb climate change. I am very afraid that the advance of the extreme right does not allow us to fall into complacent speeches. We must not forget, Mrs von der Leyen, that the breeding ground that allows the far right to grow is the inequality, poverty and fear that the EU's neoliberal policies have provoked.