Speeches

Madam President, the European Union claims to want to improve water management, but it does so from above, by multiplying standards, rigid objectives and bureaucratic constraints. It is not a reform, it is a recentralisation. However, optimism may be in order. The European election has reshuffled the cards and the decreasing religion of the left has lost followers in our midst. The deletion of any mention of the disastrous Green Deal in this text is a sign of political victory. Let us not forget, however, a truth that must be recalled and hammered: water management cannot be uniform. Each basin, each river, each region has its specificities. It is not up to Brussels to decide how much water a farmer from Occitanie or an industrialist from the Valley of Chemistry in Feyzin can use. Water must be managed locally with the actors on the ground. It is a question, in law, of subsidiarity and, in practice, of intelligence. To add administrative layers is to standardize the law and penalize those who produce, innovate and guarantee our sovereignty. Yes to water protection, but no to technocratic centralization. Let us trust territories, science and those who live the reality of a land where they were born, where they live and through which they sustain themselves. In other words, on the issue of water management, leave us our oxygen!

Madam President, on 19 March, Ekrem İmamoğlu, the mayor of Istanbul and the main opponent of President Erdoğan in the 2028 presidential election, was arrested on the delusional grounds that he would run a criminal organisation. Despite this, Mr Erdoğan will continue to be Mr Erdoğan’s partner.me von der Leyen, who will continue to send him European money. But why would anyone be outraged here? On the basis of suspicion, without condemnation, the Romanian presidential election is cancelled, and you applaud it. In Germany, we are thinking about activating the courts to ban the AfD, and you will applaud if it succeeds. Yesterday, in France, Marine Le Pen, the favourite of all polls, was deprived by a small committee of politicised judges of competing in the presidential election – and with her millions of French people were silenced – and you applauded. You are not democrats, but aristocrats whose power falters, and that is what drives you crazy. Democracy frightens you as much as the people disgust you. We, the people, love him and we will always defend him against your miserable manoeuvres! Marine Le Pen will not be silent, and all democrats and peoples must stop being silent and defend their freedoms today against your manoeuvres!

Your question is so outrageous that it makes you laugh more than anything else. In this case, I have no problem; I think that indeed we are very privileged in this European Parliament. This trial is very unwelcome, given that I have been a woman named Marine Le Pen for years, who may become the first woman President of the Republic in France. This is therefore quite unwelcome on your part. I think we are women on an equal footing with men, so I am against the ideology of gender, which is to make us sorts of sub-men or derivative men. Women are unique and singular, and I campaign for their singularity.

Mr President, as we celebrate women's rights in Europe and around the world, this figure fell yesterday in France: the number of victims of sexual violence in transport has increased by 86% in ten years in Île-de-France. To speak only of populations of interest to the left, 90% of migrant women crossing the Mediterranean are victims of rape, according to a UN report last November. In a world where 1 in 8 women in the world have already been raped or sexually assaulted as children, the fact that men do not take a deconstruction traineeship, financed by public money, the same money that is missing to install maternity or gynaecological services in all our territories, is more a matter of left-wing elucubration than of sensible feminism. Defending women’s rights is not about imposing dogmas; it means ensuring their safety and dignity in the face of real threats, and also having the lucidity to recognise that some cultures are openly misogynistic. When I say that, I am obviously not talking about a fantasized European patriarchy. So my question, widely shared by millions of women who are waiting for change in their daily lives, is: What do we have to do with your smoky proposals on gender theory, gender transition support or inclusive writing, when millions of women are afraid to go out even on their own streets?

I am somewhat confused by your political response, which is therefore to invest in schools, which is an educational reality, but which will in no way stop imported violence. Because I think we are talking about one of the countries where the level of investment and care for the growth of children is important – this is the case, I think, in Sweden. In this case, all the figures speak for themselves and show – not only in Sweden, for that matter, but all over Europe – that, yes, this violence is largely imported, do not mind. I know.

Madam President, Sweden, once one of the safest countries in Europe, is now ravaged by the violence of immigrant gangs. In 2023, Sweden recorded 363 count-related shootings, resulting in 53 deaths. The rate of homicides by firearms is four per million inhabitants, compared to an average of 1.6 in Europe. No other country on the European continent has seen such a dizzying rise. Criminal violence, shootings, bombings, corruption, social fraud and pimping, the whole range of crime is ensured with perpetrators recruited sometimes from the age of twelve. The Swedish authorities themselves admit this: This criminal explosion is the result of decades of migratory blindness and predominantly Islamist communitarianism. In 20 years, the foreign population has increased from 2% to 15%. An upheaval that favored the rise of ethnic gangs like Foxtrot, Asir or the Syrian network, gangrenous to the courts and extending their threat to Denmark, Norway or Finland. A situation comparable to many other European countries, including France with its DZ mafia, where the law of crime replaces the law of law and justice. Faced with this threat, Sweden is finally beginning a turning point with the expulsion of foreign criminals, the deprivation of nationality for binational offenders or the tightening of asylum. Europe must take the example of this post-traumatic political awakening. Let us apply strict control of national and European borders, let us have a double border, and let us begin the end of generalized laxity, zero tolerance in the face of delinquency. Let's not let the mafias take over institutions, human lives. Let's act before it's too late.

Madam President, the rise of cryptocurrencies is a major challenge for our States and for the European Union. These alternative systems, often outside the control of central banks, must not compromise a fundamental principle: the monetary sovereignty of nations. Money is an indispensable sovereign attribute to ensure economic stability and protect our citizens. Yet, while Europe is questioning itself, other countries are making great strides. The United States, for example, does not merely regulate these new technologies; they support, develop and use them as a strategic lever of influence on a global scale. For their part, China and other powers are investing massively to establish their digital dominance. In the face of this, Europe cannot remain stuck in a culture of gold-plating. Of course, it is essential to ensure a safe, transparent and respectful framework for our values. But to regulate without acting is to accept to suffer. We need to change the paradigm. Let's invest in digital technologies such as blockchain, support innovative companies and encourage the emergence of competitive European solutions. Our economic and monetary sovereignty is at stake. We cannot let outside actors impose their rules, dictate their standards and enslave us to technologies they control alone. Let us be ambitious, let us build a Europe that dares, innovates and asserts itself as a world leader. Yes, the future of our sovereignty will not be written in wait-and-see; Europe must be strong, visionary and bold.

Mr President, at the end of the COP16 on desertification held in Riyadh, 12 billion have been secured by 2030 to improve land, ten of which come from the Islamic Development Bank. In an international gathering, petromonarchies came to the rescue of sand deserts, deserts where sometimes ski slopes are built, despite all environmental and economic concerns. Here, once again, is the demonstration that to environmental problems, which are localized problems, one cannot have a globalized answer. COPs are gatherings for the release or creation of financial funds, in no way places for reflection and the provision of environmental solutions. So, on the major problem of desertification and soil drying, let's have a local vision and solutions. Water management is a sensitive issue that differs from country to country and sometimes from region to region in the same country. Last year, in the north of France, crops suffered from too much rain, the exact opposite of the Eastern Pyrenees, which lacked permanent water. If you refuse local treatment to operate only on a European scale, let's take common problems. In Bulgaria as in Guadeloupe, 60% of the water is lost as the infrastructure is dilapidated and leaky. Similarly, encourage reforestation, the replanting of hedges to promote the capture of water by the soil. In short, rely on those who know their environment best, namely the peasants, rather than on the financiers of the petromonarchies to solve our problems of water and desertification in Europe. Local problem, national solution.

Mr President, to date, the so-called ‘environmental solutions’, mainly supported by the left, which is more prophetic than scientific, have had as their only options only degrowth or greenwashing, disastrous solutions to bring down temperatures. Their failure on the issue of energy, with their ill-advised anti-nuclear stance, which requires the use of wind – and therefore gas and coal – should have served as a lesson for us. Their praise for photovoltaics, which requires, for example, the removal of more than 50 hectares of forest on the Balerne plateau in the Jura, is also madness – which was fortunately stopped by the prefect. You want to lower the temperatures? Stop clearing, stop concreteing. Concreteisation of our daily environments is one of the major causes of the city’s thermometer panic in Europe. Montreuil and Bagnolet, cities held by the far left and environmentalists, have cleared an entire forest island, arguing ‘A tree torn out, a tree replanted’, and forgetting that the power to capture carbon is much greater when the tree is in full maturity. Let's get environmental issues out of the clutches of ideologues. In-depth technique and knowledge are the only keys to success for this collective challenge, both in our urban and rural environments.

I don't know the Hungarian figures, so I could hardly comment on them. The reality is that violence has been imported. In fact, mass immigration penalises migrant women as much as European women. And so it is this phenomenon that undermines the security of women, regardless of the profile of migrants. I don't speak with a wet finger. That is the reality. And besides, I gave you the figures: 90% of migrant women are raped. Therefore, migration itself is a destructive and destabilizing phenomenon that threatens the security of women, regardless of women, both migrant and European women.

Mr President, when it comes to women’s rights, you refuse to see elephants in the European room. First, mass immigration has given rise to hitherto unknown threats, such as excision or wearing the burqa. The International Organization for Migration notes that almost 90% of migrant women are raped by smugglers or other migrants. Secondly, within Western countries, the claim of many men to call themselves women without even having genetics develops unopposed or almost unopposed. Women who seek to denounce this are insulted and dragged into the mud. Even in the field of sport, women can no longer compete with each other. Third, Islamist movements, once in power, deprive women of their sometimes most fundamental rights; it has been seen in Iran and Afghanistan and may soon be seen in Syria. Finally, let's talk about surrogacy or surrogacy. The abuses are numerous and are helped by our institutions, sometimes even when it comes to the exploitation of women. In short, between the unachieved goals of the Beijing Conference, although widely shared, and the means implemented, there is an abyssal chasm, which is called ‘left-wing ideology’.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, there is no need to cross Europe's borders to see the harassment of women politicians. My party has one of the most harassed and threatened women politicians in Europe as a candidate for President of France. Marine Le Pen is constantly harassed: about her family, about her ideas, about the media, about enraged people on social media who hate her or threaten her with death, about banks, who refuse to finance democratic life, and even about the European administration and justice about how she manages her cabinet and assistants. She has endured this violence every day since childhood, to the point that, for many years, she can no longer take a step without bodyguards or police officers. Your denunciation of violence and threats against women politicians would only be valid if it applied to all women. Our colleague Marie Dauchy, who is also your colleague, was attacked while she was in the election campaign. Her attacker insulted her, jostled her, knocked her down and threatened her with death. Yet last week, in the courtroom itself, under the rant of a militant lawyer and the booing of far-left demonstrators, Marie Dauchy almost went from being a victim to an accused. Who, on these benches, gave her support to Marie Dauchy? Nobody. Not a word, not an indignation. Worse: You were with the demonstrators who claimed his assault. So, please, stop your moral lessons. The fight against violence must be universal, without exception or political calculation. For, in a democracy, no woman, whether patriotic or not, should be subjected to such attacks without a clear, unanimous and unambiguous condemnation.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, we no longer have time. No, we no longer have time to wait to protect children in the European Union. Every year in Europe, around 250,000 children disappear. Disappearances often facilitated by the migration crisis. In 2020, Europol reported the disappearance of nearly 10,000 unaccompanied migrant children, vulnerable to criminal networks specialising in human trafficking. Colleagues, immigration is also that aspect, which you pretend not to see. In France, 45,000 reports of missing children were recorded in 2021, fuelling trafficking where Europe is both a place of passage, but above all a market for victims. Another scourge, child pornography, is worsening, with more than 85 million files reported in 2021. International networks use digital platforms and the darknet to disseminate this content. Silence around these crimes must be at the heart of our discussions, calling for stricter laws and enhanced international cooperation. As mayor and member of parliament, I call for collective mobilization, which is essential to protect children, break the cycle of violence and guarantee their fundamental rights. Parents or not, we are all responsible for children in Europe.

Mr. Speaker, after days of rumours, on November 22, Algeria Press Service confirmed the incarceration of Boualem Sansal, Franco-Algerian writer several times rewarded by the French Academy, for attacking the security of the State. As such, Boualem Sansal could be sentenced to life imprisonment. To date, the conditions of his imprisonment and his rights are completely unclear, in total breach of the international conventions signed by Algeria. The moral left is strangely soft in the face of the detention of a man whose only crime is to denounce the Algerian regime and Islamization on both sides of the Mediterranean. Worse, on French public television was justified, or at least understood, this incarceration, a sign of the wounding of Algerian national sentiment by a France that the regime shamelessly describes as macronisto-Zionist. This capitulation of the left, which no longer defends intellectuals by suburban electoralism, would be almost the second volume of the Oath of the Barbarians Sansal. Because yes, these are barbaric practices: You don't throw a man in a dungeon because of his ideas, the most unpleasant ones seem to you. France must demand from Algeria the release of Boualem Sansal, imprisoned out of hatred for freedom of expression. But it is also the duty of the European Union to support French diplomatic initiatives, including by proposing to suspend the payment of the millions of euros provided for under the EU-Algeria association programme. The blackmail and victimization of a country that continues to trample on French dignity has lasted long enough. The time of the colonies is over, let us each regain our independence. As this front page says so well Charlie Hebdo: Algerians! Take back your imams, give us back your writers!

Mr President, when you refuse to admit the obvious improvement in women's lives that the systematic expulsion of any foreign sex offender would bring, I will instead work today to dismantle what you want to impose on us as obvious: The existence of a culture of rape in the West and a generalized patriarchy making all men predators by nature. Feminists have found in the Pelicot trial a new symbol, even though the shock of this case is the demonstration that rape, moreover under sedation in the marital context, is totally contrary to our morals. In a world of real rape culture, such a story would have been classified as a miscellaneous fact. Can we imagine such media coverage, such popular support for the victim in Iran or Pakistan? Not for a second. Does this exempt our society? No! Because this case is still the mirror of two generalized failures: that of a society governed by the will to enjoy, and only to enjoy, without limits, without consideration of the other; a society of immediate enjoyment, excited by ubiquitous pornography that outbids, at the limit, bodily torture, flooding the screens of younger and younger men who have only this as their only tutorial. And also that of a society that has never fully succeeded in curbing this phenomenon of the reproduction of violence by adults who, as children, had themselves suffered violence. Here are two major challenges to ending some of the violence against women. No need to invent a war of the sexes: Our societies are already sufficiently violent. It is not misandry that they need, but empathy and sanctuarization of the other's body. And this humanism is, you don't mind, a profoundly Western value.

Mr President, after the COP in the oil empire, here is the COP in the gas empire. And yet another missed opportunity to put back at the center of the game a more decarbonized and less expensive energy as nuclear can be. Unfortunately, the European Union persists in the nonsense of the German model, more expensive and less ecological, favoring gas whether imported from Russia, the United States or Azerbaijan. We are thus drawn into a country which, like the other precedent, does not frankly share our vision of the world and of men. After all, why bother with big principles, worry about the plight of persecuted Armenians, or stop shaking hands with Ilham Aliyev, for whom fossil fuels are a gift from God when you can buy energy in Baku. Another proof that all this is finally only a circus: the desertion of major international players and the concomitance of the US elections depriving the world's leading polluter of room for negotiation, stuck as he is in a change of administration. We will, therefore, once again assume the unjust role of the wrongful West and open the European checkbook in the name of a declinist ideology that does not hesitate to betray its own ideals when it comes to making a profit, but always in the name of ecology.

Madam Speaker, young people between the ages of 13 and 19 spend on average more than five hours a day in front of a screen. For some, this is the only way to socialise, and it can lead to violence – against oneself or against others. But instead of fighting against the abandonment of our young people to the virtual, the European Commission prefers to tackle the tools that are Telegram or X to hinder freedom of expression. So yes, Daesh recruited terrorists and soldiers on social networks. Yes, young people are adopting archaic customs to integrate a so-called new family. But attacking the tools, rather than trying to meet this legitimate need to belong to a strong and uplifting group, is silly. It is as silly as banning cars or the use of kitchen knives on the pretext that some are using them to kill. However, this is what the Commission is doing by censoring – first and foremost – those who are trying to fight against wokism or Islamism and letting antifas and preachers of hatred swarm. We must not change the tool, but the model. A real model of society must be offered to Europe's young people, who magnify the riches of the past with the aim of exalting the future. The problem is not the internet, it is a Western society that, refusing any life impulse, pushes its youth towards sects where the death impulse has become their life.

Madam President, foreign interference in Europe comes in part from actors already established on our soil, supported by our institutions and acting most often at our request. Yes, the wolf is in the sheepfold. One example is the Islamist entrism of the Muslim Brotherhood and its satellite, the Femyso, which is regularly hosted by the European Commission. Another example is the United States, which, through the extraterritoriality of its law, its digital domination and its political omnipresence, keeps Europe under its control. Although they have listened to our European leaders, they still have service contracts in our strategic areas. Never sanctions or precautions. The revolving door of former senior European officials in their structures is a threat. As a recent example, former Director of the French DGSI Patrick Calvar is now selling his services to a US company specialising in the application of US economic sanctions. This man has had the life of French spies in his hands and is going to work for the United States against us. Two years after the ‘Qatargate’ in this Parliament, no lessons have been learned. I propose you to bring up to date a value that you find obsolete if not hateful: patriotism. When you love your country, you don't betray it for a dish of lentils.

Mr President, their names are Lola, Philippine, Claire, Marion and Mégane. All have been victims of sexual violence, but above all, all have been victims of our lack of firmness towards immigration and have brought with them other victims. Delphine, Blandine and Catherine had to bury their child, unlike the natural cycle of life. Today, in the name of defending women, the trial of immigration policies and the Schengen sieve must begin. We must stop welcoming everyone and especially anyone. Yes, a significant part of sexual violence, and especially street violence, is committed by foreigners, many of them clandestine. Why encourage mass immigration when we see the over-representation of foreigners in sexual delinquency? Just to lower the wages of our workers? What civilization have we become to abandon women to such material considerations? Mass immigration is a scourge for all, indigenous as well as immigrant. On the road to exile, 90% of women are victims of sexual violence. Immigration is not an opportunity for anyone, and especially not for women. Obviously, a firm migration policy will not erase Michel Fourniret or Dominique Pelicot, but it will avoid predators from elsewhere, whose number continues to grow in our country. Immigrationists, you are guilty before our history and before all European women. On behalf of Lola, Philippine, Claire, Marion, Mégane and their mothers, let's save lives, let's have borders.

Mr President, the adoption of the law on the promotion of virtue and the prevention of vice by the Taliban is causing fear as the situation of Afghan women continues to decline. Deprived of their fundamental freedoms, women are locked into a system of total control over their daily lives: prohibition to travel without a male guardian, impossibility to access education, prohibition to work in most sectors. Alas, let us be honest, our unanimous condemnation here will not change their fate. Moral support is good, active support is better. Therefore, if our legislative work cannot improve the lives of these unfortunate women, let us examine that of exiled Afghan women who consider that Europe is not up to the fight for women's rights. Thus, on August 26, the Afghan Olympic taekwondo athlete, Marzieh Hamidi, a refugee for two years in Paris, is outraged on social networks by this new Afghan legislation. The only response she receives is torrents of insults, death threats and rape. She now lives under police protection, hidden, and had to move twice in a fortnight. Here is his testimony: I've been living in Paris for more than two years and I didn't think my life would be in danger here. Many calls came from Afghanistan, but also from France, Belgium, Germany. They want to silence me in my home country, but now also here in France, in the heart of Europe. Denouncing the Afghan Sharia from Strasbourg is simple, but will you do the same against the one developing in Europe? A cultural war is being waged against us Europeans, and women's freedom is their priority battleground. Let us not deceive ourselves: the increase in migratory flows in Europe, coupled with the cowardice of our political institutions, are the cause of this Talibanisation of the lives of some women. Our vigilance must be unfailing. Let's throw away the political correctness and the fable of systemic racism that only abandons girls and women. The agitations of the left, so-called anti-racist but in reality cowardly and electoralist, must not deviate us from the only course of cultural preservation that we must all share here: the freedom of women, our mothers, our sisters, our friends and our daughters.

Mr. Speaker, on August 14, the World Health Organization declared the monkeypox epidemic in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and neighbouring regions to be a public health emergency of international concern. Once again, the WHO announcement triggered a series of disturbing reactions from the European Commission. Let me begin by recalling a fundamental principle before this House, which is fed by European federalism: Public health falls primarily within the competence of the Member States. This European centralisation is problematic. It is often ineffective, costly and grossly lacking in transparency, as demonstrated by the contracting of COVID vaccines. Member States are better placed to assess and manage health risks directly affecting them, taking into account their local realities. In the case of monkeypox, many experts have pointed out that this disease, although of concern, has nothing to do with the COVID-19 pandemic. The transmission and mortality rate is relatively low and therefore it does not seem justified to take measures as extreme as those applied during COVID. On the other hand, re-establishing control at Europe's borders on people coming from the affected areas could prove effective in preventing a spread on our continent that has so far been preserved. The border is not a bad word, know it, quite the contrary. What worries us here is that the Commission's current approach risks leading to an escalation of disproportionate measures, threatening our individual freedoms. Health crises are becoming a pretext for the Commission, which is only seeking to strengthen its grip. Challenging the Commission does not, of course, call into question solidarity, particularly in sending vaccines to other Member States. However, if a country decides to build up a stockpile of strategic reserves for its population, this choice is automatic and should not be the subject of any wrath on the part of the Commission, as has been seen with regard to the Netherlands. Gentlemen elected and Commissioners not elected, do you know the principle of national priority? The Dutch government is sovereign and it is not up to Mrs von der Leyen to say what is good or bad in politics, or what is good or bad for the Member States.

Mr President, yet another text against violence against women, and yet the same figures for the last five years. One in three women has experienced sexual and psychological violence in Europe. One in twenty women has suffered rape. Every year, 180,000 European women undergo excision. For progressives, you have made little progress, preferring to agglomer all your causes to that of the end of violence against women, which explains your failure. The objective of intersectionality, here explicit in the text, mixes the defence of women and, for example, the defence of immigrants, who nevertheless bear a share of sexual violence. Recent figures support that, in Paris, 77% of the rapes solved are committed by foreigners. We also find the defense of trans women, who are by nature biological men with inherently non-feminine problems. We are talking about excision, not to mention the awful origins of this monstrous practice. In addition to the ideological fatras, the legislative overbidding. You are imposing new definitions of criminal offences by directive, overstepping your rights and creating legal instability. Let the European Commission therefore not forget that it is treading a continent where women have been able to be scientists, queens, saints, warlords, astronauts, empresses or writers, and that, as such, this heritage obliges it. Forcing him to what? At the very least, avoid importing or lying down in front of ideologies where the woman is only a belly to be filled, a body to be veiled or subdued, or a spirit to be silenced. Europe has set the principle that women are the greatest treasure of men. Make this your dogma, protect it, but really protect it.

Madam President, while energy prices have packed into an inadequate European market, while our economies are suffering from the indebtedness of the COVID-19 crisis, more than one in five Europeans is at risk of poverty or social exclusion, according to Eurostat. And France is a bad student. Unsurprisingly, the survey shows that inflation is the first concern of the French. This is followed by insecurity and immigration, which is out of step with the European average, which puts immigration at the top of the agenda. Despite the data provided by the Commission, the Commission calls on the Member States to become more economically insecure and to redistribute its funds and wealth to its citizens and their public services, to buy from the US or China, to finance Ukraine or the mass arrival of immigrant populations, which generates many social, economic, cultural and security imbalances. It is therefore not surprising that 65% of French people say they do not trust the European Union. When will you apply this principle of democracy? Make the policies you are asked to: protect us and make us prosper!

Mr President, last Saturday, a trans couple was hunted down by a violent mob in Thessaloniki. Whether or not you are a transgender person, it is urgent to remember that no one in Europe should have their integrity threatened because of their opinions, religion or way of life. Logically aligned with this principle of respect for human beings, the initiators of this debate will condemn, I am sure, with the same firmness all violence, including that against feminists such as Riley Gaines, who defends women in sport, and who on 7 April had to be exfiltrated from the room where she had barricaded herself for three hours to escape the beatings and threats of a rabid crowd of activists of the trans cause – the same scenario as the couple in Greece. It is strange, I have never heard you ask for a debate to defend these feminists threatened with death. Would there be prey and victims as a matter of principle for the left? Would the camp of good have a selective defense of values? If I know how to be a target for you beautiful souls, know that I, unlike you, speak out against all violence, and I have said all of them well.

Mr President, strengthen the economic prosperity of the European Union and regain the advantage of international competition. This is a great ambition, which is none other than the Coué method, Mr Breton! How can you talk about prosperity in a continent that you have already deindustrialised for decades, which sees a level of business failures at the highest level since 2008, which increases free trade treaties that favour our competitors rather than us, which sees its scientific and technological nuggets being downgraded by emerging powers? Let's face the realities: European attractiveness is fading while other continents, especially Asia and North America, are making their mark. For example, the European Union has been unable to anticipate the consequences of theInflation Reduction Act, which distorts free competition with European industry through the massive subsidisation of US companies. The result? Countless strategic sectors escape the Europeans under the weight of US subsidies and the total lack of support from the Brussels authorities. Whether in the automotive, energy or digital sectors, European companies end up preferring to invest abroad rather than on our continent, for lack of competitiveness on our own soil. A pinnacle! The economic war is ruthless. It would be naive to believe that we can win it if we do not fight on equal terms with our opponents and reject crucial levers out of dogmatism. Yes, we must reindustrialize, yes, we must relocate, yes, we must set economic sovereignty as a framework. Without it, we will continue to become poorer. With this, with these weapons, we will once again become a true world power.