Speeches

Madam President, dear colleagues, I think we all agree that the fight against anti—Semitism must remain a top priority in the EU, but also in our external policy. And I think it’s important to underline today the crucial role of education in this respect. Therefore, I would like to propose as an oral amendment to add the following text to paragraph 54: ‘Calls on the Commission to ensure that the resources for the Southern Neighbourhood are not being used for schoolbooks that do not adhere to the UNESCO standards of peace, co—existence, tolerance and mutual respect’.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is crazy to say that next year the European Union will again be willing to pay many millions for problematic Palestinian textbooks – books that glorify terrorism, incite hatred and rampant violence and anti-Semitism. The Commission is making it all happen. She has recently completely reopened the money tap towards the Palestinian Authority and does not impose any conditions on the textbooks. I find that incomprehensible. Combating antisemitism should be a top priority, including in our external policies. Now that the Commission is failing, we as a Parliament must take our responsibility. As ECR Group, we therefore propose to put EUR 30 million in the reserve and not release the money until the problems with the textbooks have been solved. I therefore call on you to reject Amendment No 823 by the Committee on Budgets and to support our Amendment No 415. Let's promote peace and stop hate speech.

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, fertilisers are crucial for our food supply. Without nutrients there is no growth and therefore no harvest. Now that the prices for fertilizer are escalating, action must be taken. Not only is the future of many companies at stake, but global food production is also at stake. However, an important solution is available. I am referring to the reuse of nutrients through animal manure and processed manure. The RENURE products based on processed manure meet strict criteria and should therefore be immediately recognised as fertilizer substitutes. The European Parliament made a very clear call on this in its March resolution. Does the Commission know how strategic our food production is, as well as the raw materials needed for it? We are now seeing the problems of being dependent on third countries for our energy supply. We must ensure that we do not also become dependent on imports from third countries for our fertilisers and food supplies. I therefore urge the Commission to allow these fertilizer substitutes immediately. This also fits very well in the pursuit of a circular economy. In addition, everything should be aimed at keeping the production of fertilizer in Europe affordable.

Mr President, it is good that we in the European Parliament are also paying attention to the supplement affair, because what has happened is, of course, scandalous. The government must be a shield of the weak, but the government – the Dutch government – did exactly the opposite. Citizens were put in serious financial trouble, discriminated against. Children were taken out of the house. And the misery continues. As far as I am concerned, the purpose of this debate is above all to show other countries how not to do it, and above all to contribute to raising awareness. Awareness of how it can also go very easily, very wrongly, fundamentally wrong with government bodies. The government must be reliable, and that requires a lasting investment from all of us.

The bullet has finally come through the church! There will be clear legislation for a universal charger. We have indeed had to wait a very long time for that. It really took the Commission a very long time to fulfil the European Parliament's wish. For example, I am thinking very specifically of Mr Manders' amendment of 2009. Certainly a part of the business community was not initially in favour because of self-interest. However, it should be noted that the voluntary initiatives did not lead to the desired result. By standardising the charger, we ensure ease of use for consumers, reduce electronic waste and tackle market fragmentation in the European Union. That is why it is so important that we, as the European Parliament, say yes today to the outcome of the trilogue. Equal standards are essential for the proper functioning of the internal market. This is an important added value for European cooperation, and the directive on a universal charger for electronic devices is a very good example of this!

Mr President, Commissioner, Minister, I have only one request this evening, to the Commissioner: Keep your promise. I have it here in black and white: a letter from Ms von der Leyen. A year ago she wrote to me – I will leave a copy with you –: “Dear Representative Ruissen, the reappointment of the EU Envoy for Religious Freedom has my full attention.” But a third year followed, in fact without an EU envoy. The absence of this reappointment is the reason for this debate, you understand. You are not only disappointing me and many colleagues here in this house, you are leaving millions of oppressed believers out in the cold! Persecution of faith is very much alive and even increasing: Blasphemy laws in Pakistan, anti-conversion laws in India, re-education camps in China, massacres in Nigeria. Today, 360 million Christians in 50 countries face very severe to extreme forms of persecution. All this should not be left untouched. I ask you: Is the EU a community of values or just words? My call is therefore: Name that envoy, who appeals to governments around the world for freedom of belief. Provide sufficient manpower and budget. Do what you promise!

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, human rights are based on key themes such as ‘human dignity’ and ‘equal opportunities’. However, the conversation about it is increasingly defined and narrowed down to ‘me, me and me’. For example, they say: ‘I decide for myself whether or not to terminate a pregnancy, and no one, but no one, should restrict me in that freedom.’ In the meantime, we risk forgetting that we are people with a mission. Created to take care of the other. Because I'm asking you: What is worthy of ending unborn life? And where do you see the equal opportunities of fighting for the life of a premature baby in one hospital and aborting a child in the clinic a few blocks away? Mr President, we are on our way to elevating the right to self-determination above all else at the expense of the most vulnerable, and that is a narrow, slippery path.

Mr President, for those who love to travel, it is of course most pleasant to spend another week in Strasbourg. Strasbourg, the city that symbolizes the peace between France and Germany. Strasbourg, the city that recalls important church reformers such as Bucer and Calvin. That's great, isn't it? The opposite is the case! Our monthly move is a total idiocy. No other parliament in the world does this. Pure waste of money. In addition, we have just talked about energy savings. This is a great opportunity to lead by example. Mr President, I propose that we let the Council know that we are going to close one of our branches, that we ask the Council to amend the Treaty if necessary, and that we also ask one of the Heads of State to come out at our next meeting. Or, of course, we can also appeal to the Commissioner, because closing one of our branches will also contribute enormously to reducing our CO2 emissions.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, every sane person who looks at his energy bill understands the importance of, for example, home insulation. We don't need any set goals from behind an agency. In the debate on energy saving, however, I miss something very essential, namely the call for austerity. Because with our Western lifestyle, we have become huge energy suckers. The hunger for an even bigger house, an even bigger car and an even more luxurious holiday can hardly be satisfied. By Thomas a Kempis, an important medieval theologian, I read: ‘A proud and greedy person will never find peace, but he who is simple and humble will find peace within.’ Mr President, we must therefore look more broadly, not only at technical measures, but also at our way of life. Not only to save energy, but also for inner peace and peace with God. You understand: This is especially a call to the wealthy and certainly not to those queuing up at the food bank.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the arrest of the 90-year-old cardinal is a new low. What is left of freedom of religion and democracy in Hong Kong? Almost nothing. Worse still, the appointment of new leader John Lee promises little improvement. You will be a resident of this city. The inhabitants are, as it were, on a sinking ship. The European Union and its Member States must cast a lifebuoy. This means that we can also be expected to contribute to the reception of political refugees from Hong Kong. And let us certainly also work on imposing sanctions against John Lee and other responsible parties in China and Hong Kong. This is the fifth resolution in two years on the deteriorating situation in Hong Kong. I hope that there is no need for a sixth, but I am afraid that we will still have to talk about it very often.

Mr President, Commissioner, the Russian invasion of Ukraine shows how fragile our food supply really is. Despite the solidarity corridors, there are still major obstacles in the transport of grain from Ukraine. With all this, not least for Africa and for countries such as Lebanon, where food scarcity is beginning to take on worrying proportions. What are we supposed to do? First of all, all hands on deck to get the grain out of Ukraine anyway. If it is not via the ports, then also by road, where the flow capacity really needs to increase further. Secondly, we need to conserve our agricultural land. In my country alone, 25 000 hectares of agricultural land have been lost in recent years to industry, housing and nature. And thirdly, let us also become less dependent on the import of raw materials, including through the reuse of nutrients. Our farmers are indispensable for our food security, our countryside and the management of our landscape. Food production deserves the highest priority.

Mr President, the way in which the High Representative speaks about Israel's settlements is incorrect and careless. He is constantly talking about illegal occupation activities. From an international judicial point of view, however, this is only the case if the occupied territory belongs to another recognised State. In Crimea, this is clear: That's from Ukraine. But to which country did the West Bank belong before 1967? Not to Jordan, not to the Ottoman Empire, nor to the British Empire. As long as there is no solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, there is no recognized Palestinian state that would be occupied. The curious thing is that even for situations where the legal status is crystal clear, such as Northern Cyprus, the High Representative does not use the term ‘illegal occupation activities’. My call is: do not do so in the case of settlements, for which such characterisation should not be used at all under international law. No one was helped with that.

Mr President, the abolition of the national right to abortion in the United States has also caused a great deal of movement in Europe. Prolife organizations can count on increasing interest. Young people are more critical of abortion than their parents. I find all this hopeful. The trick now is to conduct the necessary debate with each other in a dignified manner here in Europe as well. We are not doing this by excluding organisations from Parliament, as some of us here are advocating. These are tactics they use in dictatorships like China and North Korea. We have to stay away from that. Let's focus on providing the necessary help. Help for mother and child. Abortion is not a solution and certainly not a human right. What would it be nice if, in ten years' time, we could say: The Supreme Court's ruling has brought a turning point in Europe's thinking about abortion. We have come to see again that every life is worthy of protection, including the unborn life.

Mr President, the brutal attack on a church in South-West Nigeria has shocked the world. Unfortunately, this attack is not on its own. Christians in Nigeria have been subjected to attacks, kidnappings and terror by radical Islamist groups for decades. And in the meantime, the Nigerian government is just letting it happen. There is little or no criminal prosecution. Meanwhile, the international community is watching patiently. And meanwhile, the European Commission is also coming up with vague, covert statements on an evening like this. The Commission has been working for two and a half years on the question of whether a special envoy for religious freedom should actually be appointed. Mrs von der Leyen promised me in writing at the end of last year that this special envoy would be appointed, but that has still not happened. My question to the Commissioner is: Will you be silent again tonight? You have heard the calls from many colleagues, and where is the EU Envoy for Freedom of Religion? I want an answer from you tonight. Thank you very much.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, let us say: You don't drink alcohol or you study religious writings, or you turn off your phone regularly. As a Uyghur in Xinjiang, you quickly get the label unreliably affixed, with all the consequences that entails. You will be taken to a "reliable place" - read: concentration camp - sent to be re-educated under the surveillance of heavily armed police. The leaked police documents showcase the chilling reality of systematic repression that millions of Uyghurs live in. And they also show that this is happening under the watchful and consenting eye of the highest political leadership in Beijing. President Xi called for the issue not to be politicized, in his conversation with UN Commissioner Bachelet during her recent disappointing visit to the region. However, the mounting evidence of China's misdeeds in Xinjiang requires a strong response from the European side, including individual and economic sanctions against all individuals and institutions complicit in these gross crimes. Thank you very much.

I think it's our expensive duty to protect all children. Especially children we are worried about. I think we should also invest a lot more in actually offering help to women and girls who are unwanted pregnant. Because I realize very well that women and girls end up in difficult situations, but we do not help them by offering them an abortion. We help them by standing shoulder to shoulder and helping them. Even in the most difficult phase of their lives. Thank you very much.

Mr President, your predecessor in the chair called this a lively debate. I must honestly say that I experience this as a sad debate. I hear a lot about women's rights, but I hear almost nothing about the vulnerable unborn life. Even a spokesperson for the EPP called abortion a human right. The Commission also called abortion a human right. The Council did that too. How can we say that? Because no matter how you turn it around, abortion is about ending life. A little man with a beating heart. That life is ending. Isn't it upside down to call it a human right? Mr President, I have one specific question for the Commission. We all know that in countries where there is prenatal screening, hardly any children are born with Down syndrome. My question is: How do you look at that? Thank you very much. (The speaker accepted a "blue card" response)

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the proposal on a right of initiative for the European Parliament is yet another attempt to make the EU a superstate, arguing that this Parliament is the only directly elected EU institution. And the latter may be the case, but the ministers in the Council are all subject to democratic control, namely that of their own national parliament. So the question is not: “Are you for or against strengthening democracy?” The question is: “How do we divide power in Europe?” If you are in favour of a superstate, you are centralising as much power as possible and therefore also the right of initiative here in the European Parliament. However, if you are in favour of a Europe of cooperating Member States, you are investing in democratic governance through the Council and national parliaments. And I choose the latter with conviction. It's not about power, it's about the question: “How can we best serve society?”

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, in order for the CO2 reduction plans to succeed, three points are needed: - fair distribution among Member States; - flexibility in the implementation so that countries can opt for the most cost-effective approach; and - realistic objectives. Unfortunately, the plans for the ESR and LULUCF do not meet any of these preconditions: - The Netherlands has to reduce 48%, while a country like Latvia only has to do 17%. Such differences, Commissioner, cannot be explained to the public. The flexibility mechanisms proposed were not unkind, but are now being severely curtailed by the Committee on the Environment. And the goals are and remain overambitious. That Parliament is going so far in this regard for the carbon farming I think it would be very unwise to introduce an additional 50 megaton reduction obligation. To carbon farming To give a good chance, you have to stay away from additional obligations, but you have to bet on a good reward. Agriculture deserves better, especially in these times of global concerns about food shortages.

Mr President, Commissioner, the fact that we have agreed within the OECD on a global minimum rate of taxation for multinationals is a good thing. After all, this is an important point for us to make in order to combat tax avoidance. What concerns me, however, is the generous conferral of delegated powers on the Commission in the report as it stands. In this way, we give the Commission a lot of leeway in the field of taxation and a very broad mandate, and we undermine the position of the Member States, while taxation is and must remain a real competence of the Member States. I also regret that no impact assessment has been carried out. In this way, it is not clear how the proposal will work out in practice. It is important that we stay as close as possible to the global agreements in order to truly create a level playing field. Only then can we really combat tax avoidance.

Mr President, Commissioner, at the time of the death of journalist Shireen Abu Akleh, first of all our thoughts go to the relatives. What a shock. What a sadness to lose such a loved one. The biggest mistake we can make today is to draw premature conclusions. Yes, we saw images and explanations, but the actual facts must be clear from further investigation. The same goes for the funeral confrontations. The obvious outcome would be a joint investigation by Israeli and Palestinian authorities, possibly involving foreign experts. How strange that Palestinian authorities reject such an investigation and have already drawn their conclusions. Israel has recently been hit by a wave of attacks. The fact that Israel is looking for suspects is understandable. Images of the confrontation show a switch of shots between the Israeli army and armed Palestinians in an unclear urban area. The risks for innocent bystanders are high in this area. This is without prejudice to the fact that the killing of journalists in the course of their work should be strongly condemned by anyone. But leave the answer to the question of guilt to an independent investigation and not to emotions or bias.

Mr President, the obscure Chinese trade in organs is of serious concern to us. There are reports of systematic organ harvesting, which mainly affects Falun Gong supporters and prisoners. The lack of openness in organ transplants does not improve the situation. However, this issue is not an isolated one: Concerns about the human rights situation in the People’s Republic of China are accumulating. How many times have we spoken out about the Uyghurs and Hong Kong, and about the increasing pressure on Christians and other religious minorities? What is the EU going to do about this in concrete terms? Do we only mention this to the Chinese government in the margins at summits or do we dare to expand the European sanctions package against China? As far as I'm concerned, we'll do the latter. This is not only in the interest of our credibility, but above all in that of our oppressed Chinese fellow man.

Mr President, I would like to draw attention to the Palestinian textbooks in the European Commission's discharge report. Once again, European taxpayers' money has been spent on textbooks full of anti-Semitism, full of calls for hatred and violence. This problem has been going on for years. Parliament has been criticising this expenditure for years. However, the problem is not getting any less. A recent study shows that the content even worsens. The EU can and should no longer tolerate this. My call is therefore: Freeze funds until Palestinian textbooks meet international standards of peace and tolerance. I would ask you to support the paragraph on this in the discharge report. We cannot fight antisemitism within the EU and at the same time subsidise antisemitism outside the European Union. That is unacceptable.

Mr President, this report on religious minorities and the persecution they face is a good thing. However, I agree with the concerns raised by Peter van Dalen about the fact that Christians are not or hardly mentioned in the report and that a lot of information has been amended. I think this is a very bad thing. What I find particularly inexplicable and indigestible, however, is that the report criticises believers for their stance on abortion. This subject is not only outside the scope of the report, but also outside the competences of the European Union. Every life is worthy of protection, especially the unborn life. We should not criticize believers, but praise them for caring for life.

Mr President, Simone Schmiedtbauer's report has become an excellent and very balanced report. What particularly appeals to me in this report is the question-orientation. I am strongly convinced that percentages and targets imposed from above are counterproductive and lead to market distortions and price falls, which do not serve anyone, and certainly not the organic farmer. That is why we do well not to embrace the 25% rate proposed by the Commission. In addition, let us not forget that conventional agriculture can also be particularly sustainable if we provide good tools, a good regulatory framework and good new varieties and make sufficient plant protection products available to farmers so that they can intervene. A top-down approach to organic farming does not work. Our approach must be demand-oriented.