Speeches

Madam President, a quarter of households in Slovakia are at risk of energy poverty. Energy bills are for them to decide whether to have warmth at home or to eat normally. What does this have to do with clean industry? More than you think. Tackling energy poverty is also about clean industry. It is also about investing in home renovation. These bring not only lower energy bills, but also new jobs and state budget revenues. They deprive us of dependence on gas from imports – the root cause of high energy prices. It is about the availability of heat pumps or better use of geothermal energy. About social leasing of electric cars, which will make modern electric mobility accessible to ordinary people, not only the advantage of the rich. Not at the expense of public transport, but in addition to development. The Clean Industrial Deal is an opportunity to make better use of waste as a source of material for recycling and re-use instead of unnecessary landfilling and incineration. Not to send for scrap across half the world, but to recycle it in Europe. Clean industry is about new jobs, prosperity, competitiveness, security and, yes, protecting the planet because we have no other.

As a country, you are heavily reliant on imports of gas, coal, but also oil from Russia. With security at the core, I wonder, do you prefer then to be dependent on the US with the Trump regime, with the supply of gas and oil, or do you prefer to be dependent on the Gulf states, or which part of the world you think is going to provide Europe enough oil and keep our independence?

I was informed that the reason is a traffic jam, not a meeting with lobbyists. I'm sorry to disappoint you there. But I still believe that there are enough Commission officials listening to this broadcast anyway. And I think that this House should not be stuck because of this. So I would like to give the floor to Tomas Tobé to open the debate.

The next item is the debate on the Commission statement on cutting red tape and simplifying business in the EU: the first Omnibus proposals (2025/2602(RSP)). Dear participants, we will start the debate on the Commission statement without the Commission present. I have to say this is really appalling. This is not really a time for us to sit and relax, and I think it is going to be made quite clear to the Commission that it is currently not to have a Commissioner here for this really important debate. The next item is the Commission statement on cutting red tape and simplifying business in the EU: first omnibus proposals.

The debate was interrupted. So, I apologise, we have to suspend the sitting for a few minutes until someone on behalf of the Commission comes along. So please be patient.

The next item is the Commission statement on supporting the EU's most vulnerable regions in the face of the devastating effects of climate change, such as the recent cyclone at Réunion (2025/2587(RSP)). I inform Members that there will be only one round of political group speakers. Therefore, the catch-the-eye procedure will not apply and no blue cards will be accepted.

The next item is the statement by the Council of the Commission on the competitiveness compass. I would like to reopen the debate on behalf of the Council on behalf of Minister Szlapka (2025/2531(RSP)).

The next item is the thematic debate on cooperation between the Conservatives and the far right as a threat to competitiveness in the EU. I would also like to inform you that in this debate, as it is under Rule 169 of the Rules of Procedure, the catch-the-eye procedure does not apply and no blue cards will be accepted either. I would ask my colleague Repasi to open the debate.

Madam President, yes, the Commission Work Plan should be about security, competitiveness. But how can we be secure if we still are dependent on imports of fossil fuels, including from regimes which are waging war against us, which we consider as enemies? How can we gain independence when actually we are undermining our own innovators, our own scaleups? When we are forcing them to leave our countries? And no, it's not the European regulation; the sustainable finance framework has brought 440 billion taxonomy-compliant investments, not counting the 2024. Asset managers, which are covering EUR 6.6 trillion in assets, are saying: 'Please keep it. Don't undermine it because you lose credibility. You lose our money.' So that's the worry: that simplification might actually throw out the baby instead of the water. What we need to look at, and what I'm missing in the Commission Work Programme, is something else: the single market. That is something where even the IMF is very clearly showing: actually, forget about Trump's 25 %. On manufacturing, the internal tariffs because of the fragmentation are 40 %, and 120 % on services. We pretend that we have a single market. We don't, and we throwing our companies. It's not the effort to save our home, our planet. It's the Member States fragmenting and doing their own interest groups and protecting their own vested interests. Stronger Europe. That's what is important part of this. Two more issues from the Work Programme that I'm missing and I would like to see stronger. We are losing the disinformation war. There is incredible pressure on the civil society, and I think this is where the Commission needs to be bolder within Europe and outside Europe. The last thing: a bit of humanity. Millions of people called for the end of the cage age. Commission, it's time to deliver.

You were talking about the danger posed by illegal migration, the deaths, the horrors that it's causing. Then, I wonder, why did Orban's regime early release more than 2 000 people smugglers who are contributing to illegal migration just before the Slovak elections? Is this the contribution that your government's regime is trying to do to stop illegal migration?

on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. - (DE) Mr President, Commissioner, honourable colleagues, although, so to speak, the United Nations Conference on Desertification took place in Saudi Arabia in the middle of the desert, it is not a subject that concerns only the Arabian Peninsula and Africa. This is a very important issue for us in Europe as well. Desertification is a daily problem in Cyprus, Spain, Italy, but also in the middle of Europe. Every year in our home in Slovakia, we see a larger and larger share of land that farmers are no longer able to farm, which, so to speak, is being lost right in front of our eyes because it is drying out. That's what desertification is all about. Drought and water scarcity have become a phenomenon of our time, and when they come, they come like floods. The climate crisis is turning into a climate disaster. We are destroying biodiversity and turning landscapes into deserts. In some parts of Slovakia, farmers lost up to 40% of their income due to desertification. That's such a huge problem. Therefore, as the European Parliament's rapporteur on soil law, I really want to call on you to support it. I hope that we, together with the Commission and the Council, will be able to reach an agreement soon in the trilogue. The key is to have quality information. An international platform has been agreed in Riyadh. We do not have such a law in Europe, the law on soil can provide it.

Madam President, dear colleagues, yes, the Commission is funding environmental NGOs to lobby EU institutions. But it does not stop there. The Commission is funding farmers' NGOs to lobby EU institutions, including COPA-COGECA. The Commission is funding industry NGOs to lobby EU institutions. This very House is funding scientists, civil society, farmers and businesses to lobby EU institutions through pilot and preparatory actions, which include also advocacy of the outcomes and meeting with Commission officials. This is what all of us have been voting for. So why do we single out environmental NGOs? Let's treat them all the same way. Are we going to start also investigating if any of these subsidies from CAP were used to bring the farmers to Schuman Square when they were protesting? I hope not. But let me tell you, I'm really grateful for this funding. As the EU, we fund projects and we want to learn about their outcomes. We want to make better policies so we can make Europe stronger, more prosperous, more socially just and more environmentally friendly – and this is not going to happen without involvement of all the stakeholders, including those from far away from Brussels. If we want to limit the civil society – those who are the backbone of our democracy – will we start limiting farmers and businesses next in expressing their views? Will receiving EU financial support mean that you cannot advocate towards institutions or, in other terms, lobby? I believe that's not the case.

Madam President, sehr geehrter Herr KommissarDear colleagues, we are drowning in plastic waste. We breathe plastic, even in this room, we drink in the water. We have them in our blood. Plastic pollution is simply catastrophic and threatens the health of all of us. That is why it is important for us as a world to come together to solve this problem. Unfortunately, it turns out that some countries prefer their profits and the profits of their companies to the health of all of us. However, this must not discourage us, because most countries are on the side of the solution. We need to reduce global consumption and production of new plastics. There are more than enough of them on the planet and in Europe. Plastic waste must be the main raw material for the production of new plastics, not oil. Plastics are to be reused, recycled, not incinerated, landfilled or end up in nature. In this solution, there is an opportunity for Europe, an opportunity to reduce our dependence on imports of fossil raw materials, promote our security, create new, well-paid jobs and strengthen our economy. To help protect our health and the environment. I therefore expect the Commission to focus specifically on plastics in the circular economy and on making their circular economy happen in Europe. In a competitive, clean, European industry.

The next item is the Council and Commission statements on the need for action to address the ongoing repression and fake elections in Belarus (2024/3014(RSP)).

The next item is the Council and Commission statements on illegal espionage by the Hungarian Government targeting the institutions and investigative bodies of the European Union (2025/2505(RSP)).

As the Chair did not receive any request for a vote on the ECON request to consult the European Economic and Social Committee on the procedure related to facilitating the financing of investments and reforms to enhance European competitiveness and the creation of a Capital Markets Union, the Draghi report, which was announced yesterday, is deemed to have been approved under Rule 151(2) of the Rules of Procedure.

This debate has come to an end and the vote will take place shortly today. The sitting is suspended for a while, it will resume at twelve o'clock with a vote, and for my part I would like to wish you a pleasant and peaceful holiday and a happy New Year.

I'm sorry, you are now not even asking a question. The blue card is for asking questions. So please act according to the Rules of Procedure, Mr Mularczyk.

The next item is the Commission statement: Need to ensure swift action and transparency on allegations of corruption in the public sector in order to protect democratic integrity [2024/2997(RSP)].

I would also like to inform you that the Group of Socialists and Democrats has informed the President of a decision concerning changes to appointments in committees and delegations. This Decision shall be entered in the minutes of today's sitting and shall enter into force on the date of this notification.