Speeches

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, I am pleased to be able to present our report on the implementation of the Eel Regulation to you. First of all, I would like to thank all the shadow rapporteurs, all the staff involved and the secretariat of the Committee on Fisheries for their excellent cooperation. There is now a report that has broad support and absolutely deserves follow-up. Our main conclusion is that the current approach, both by the Council and the Commission, is far too one-sidedly aimed at limiting fishing. It has to be different. The Eel Regulation requires an integrated approach, which explicitly also looks at factors outside fisheries. Unfortunately, that happens too little. Fishing is already severely restricted, while other factors have a much greater impact on eel stocks. Unfortunately, the implementation of the Eel Regulation by the Member States leaves a lot to be desired. The fact that several Member States do not even bother to submit a report to the Commission on the implementation of the management plans is a sign in this respect. What are we specifically asking the Member States to do? Firstly, we call for much greater efforts by Member States to remove migratory barriers. After all, the eel is a migratory fish that comes to Europe from the Sargasso Sea and then swims back to reproduce. And on that trek he encounters all kinds of barriers. I understand very well that dams and dikes and locks are indispensable in many places, but there are plenty of innovative possibilities on the market to make them passable, such as fish stairs and fish-friendly pumps in mills. These opportunities are not yet being sufficiently exploited. Secondly, we ask the Member States to continue to expand glass eels. This gives young eel the opportunity to spread across Europe and preserves sustainable fishing. Thirdly, we call for better control and a tougher approach to the illegal trade in glass eels. Criminals still smuggle suitcases full of glass eel to China, where millions of euros are paid for this poaching. We really need to stop this. More attention should also be paid to other factors that influence the eel, such as water pollution, parasites and cormorants. Certification and traceability can play an important role in all this. In this respect, we see great initiatives from the sector. Let's cherish and support them. In our report, we also make concrete recommendations to improve the governance of eel management. For example, we call for the establishment of an expert group that can monitor Member States’ management plans and also serve as a platform to exchange good practices. We also recommend investing more in scientific research and making greater use of the knowledge and skills of fishermen. Mr President, the eel is a beautiful fish, a miracle of creation. With the broad approach that we in Parliament are advocating, it must be possible to improve eel stocks, to give both eel fishermen and eel farms a future and to enable consumers to continue to enjoy a delicious eel sandwich.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, waves of antisemitism are currently sweeping Europe and the rest of the world. An entire population is removed. That we have allowed this to happen in Europe, with our so-called high-quality European values. There's only one thing that fits here: Great collective shame. Since 7 October, the number of anti-Semitic incidents in the Netherlands alone has increased by 818 %. Even many of our universities are no longer able to provide Jewish students with a safe environment. In Brussels, protesters carried a flag with a swastika. The police stood by and looked at it. Let us not forget that Jew-hatred goes hand in hand with hatred of the State of Israel. We therefore need to tackle both. Otherwise, our fight against anti-Semitism is by definition a lost battle. What matters now is leadership and decisiveness. A zero-tolerance policy against anti-Semitism, but really. I really do not understand that some countries still allow demonstrations with very bad slogans that actually call for Jews to be expelled from their own countries. This should not be tolerated by the police. Furthermore, the detection and prosecution of those guilty of anti-Semitism should be a top priority. And let the EU finally ban organizations in Europe that openly sympathize with Hamas. I asked written questions to put organization Samidoun on the list of terrorist organizations. Here, too, more decisiveness is needed. I also call attention to a recent study by UN Watch, which shows that several teachers employed by UNRWA have openly supported Hamas's horrific actions. I would ask you, President of the Commission, to take this into account in your review of the aid. If the European Union is to be a credible community, it must act now.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, if we want to be assured of food in the future, we must now ensure that a new generation of young farmers can start. Unfortunately, there are quite a few obstacles: availability of land; access to capital, loans rejected; the economic perspective of the sector, ever-changing rules and new requirements. Just to name a few examples. What we need is a stable policy. Not always different rules, but a clear framework that creates certainty for the future. And a better economic revenue model. How do we ensure that the competitive position of farmers in the EU is maintained? More attention needs to be paid to this. I am therefore pleased that we have included in this report that new policies must always be tested for their effects on young farmers. Finally, let's give our farmers, young and old, the appreciation they deserve. They are the ones who take care of our food and contribute to a liveable countryside on a daily basis. I would also like to thank the rapporteur and colleagues for their good cooperation on this excellent report.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, protein is an essential part of our food system. I am pleased that both vegetable and animal proteins have been given an important place in this report, because they go hand in hand. I would like to underline three specific points: Firstly, in order to promote the cultivation of protein crops: the importance of new breeding techniques. Second, circularity. In this report, too, we call for more scope for not being allowed to reuse nutrients from animal manure. Commission, when will you finally come forward with the recognition of Renure as a substitute for fertiliser? Finally, I would like to stress the importance of fisheries. Fresh seafood is a high-quality protein source that replenishes itself over and over again. I call on the Commission and the Member States to take forward the concrete recommendations in this report, putting farmers and fishermen at the heart of it.

Mr President, Commissioner, Minister, ladies and gentlemen, the horrific acts of Hamas have deeply shocked us all. They have once again confronted us with the harsh reality. Israel is facing a nothing-and-nobody-forgiving terrorist organization. What we have to do is therefore crystal clear: Support Israel unconditionally in its fight against Hamas. But the hand must also be in its own bosom. Has the EU done enough to stop terrorism? The answer is: No! We have transferred millions to the Palestinian Authority, while the same Authority facilitates terrorism by, for example, paying generous salaries to relatives of deceased terrorists. What about the water pipes? Paid with European money that Hamas uses to make missiles. That is why I call on you: Support our amendments to the budget resolution which make the subsidy in Palestinian territories subject to very clear conditions. Of course, emergency aid is needed, but Hamas's aggression must not remain without consequences.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I regret to say that I cannot agree with the agreement on fisheries control that is now before us. For me, the pain point is mainly with the mandatory camera surveillance. A measure with which we place an entire sector in advance in the suspects' bank. In addition, with this camera surveillance you try to improve compliance with a measure that is simply very unworkable in practice. I am referring to the landing obligation which obliges fishermen to land unsaleable fish. A measure that completely overstepped its purpose. That is why I say: no cameras, stop stacking checks and stop this landing obligation. To be honest, I am also very critical of the new traceability obligations. I foresee a lot of administrative burden and little added value. Thank you to the rapporteur for all her efforts, but unfortunately I do not see enough of our wishes in the final package.

Mr President, Commissioner, the Armenian people of Nagorno-Karabakh suffered historically from Azerbaijan last week. 120 000 Armenians who had to leave everything behind. A crime right outside the door of the European Union. And what did the Member States do, what did the Council do, what did the European Commission do? They let it all happen. The European External Action Service continues to speak of Azerbaijan as a reliable partner. It's incomprehensible. In fact, the European Union even facilitates Azerbaijan by buying a lot of gas. This has to stop. Those who do not take action now give Azerbaijan a license to continue with enemy actions, including on Armenian territory. I'm very worried about that. I therefore urge you to: 1) suspending the gas deal with Azerbaijan; 2) the imposition of sanctions against those responsible for the blockade and the attacks; 3) a UNESCO mission to safeguard cultural and Christian heritage; 4) extension of the European mission in Armenia with access to the Azerbaijani side of the border. Mr Borrell promised a strong response last week in the event of a forced departure of the Armenians. The region is empty. But where is the European Union? This is worrying, especially since the raid does not come as a surprise. Last summer I was at the border between Armenia and Azerbaijan. I spoke to people from Nagorno-Karabakh who, due to the blockade of the Laçın corridor, were unable to return to their families and work. Their emotional stories about the humanitarian situation touched me deeply. I've seen the despair in their eyes. Armenia now desperately needs European support and decisiveness. I'm counting on your cooperation.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, 30 years ago, the wolf was undoubtedly an endangered species and there was every reason to give it the highest European protection status. However, the situation is now completely different. There are now more than 21,000 wolves in Europe. The wolf is no longer threatened. The wolf itself has become a threat to sheep, ponies, calves and grazers that are used in nature management, such as mouflons in our area on the Veluwe. I am pleased that the European Commission is taking our resolution seriously, is now clearly calling on Member States to take measures under Article 16 of the Directive and is seriously considering amending and reducing the protection status. There's every reason for that. Let us bring legislation into line with a new reality. I call on the Commission to speed up this process. And let us give regional authorities more room to take management measures where necessary.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, antisemitism has many faces. We see it on the far right. We see it on the left. We see it in the BDS movement. We see it among those who present the State of Israel as a neocolonial product. Yes, anti-Semitism, we see it everywhere. And against all these different manifestations of anti-Semitism, we will have to continue to vigorously resist. Among other things, it is important that all Member States implement the working definition of the IHRA and also use it as a starting point for enforcement. The IHRA is, as you know, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. Within Europe, the Commission's action plan against antisemitism, as well as the special coordinator, is doing a very good job, which I appreciate. But outside Europe, in its foreign policy, the Commission is making big strides so that Palestinian leader Abbas simply shows impunity for understanding the Holocaust. It is true that the External Action Service is renouncing it in cautious terms, but that remains the case. And we see the same attitude around the Palestinian schoolbooks. Nice words from the Commission, but no deeds: no discontinuation of the subsidy, while we know very well that these textbooks are still full of Jew-hatred. Commissioner, why don't you tell Abbas: “As long as you do not take back your words about the Holocaust, we as the EU will stop our donations. And we do the same with the textbooks, as long as they have not been cleaned up.” You can, moreover, look forward to my amendments to these textbooks again during the budgetary discussions. I count on the support of all of you, because anyone who wants to be credible in the fight against anti-Semitism does not just leave it to words.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the rapporteur's conclusion is clear: “As long as Turkey does not change course, the accession process cannot be resumed.” I understand that position, but after 20 years of waiting in vain for improvement, we really need to take a step forward. It is high time for the Council to deprive Turkey of its status as a candidate country, because Turkey continues to discriminate and intimidate Christians. Turkey still refuses to recognise the Armenian Genocide and Turkey still refuses to recognise Cyprus. Moreover, Turkey simply does not belong to Europe. Not geographically, but not culturally or religiously. "Yes, but as a neighbour and NATO ally, Turkey is of great strategic importance?" Surely, and that also calls for continued cooperation, for example in the form of a renewed partnership agreement. But there is no point in continuing to regard Turkey as a candidate country.

Mr President, Commissioner, ten years ago the Council adopted the guidelines on freedom of religion. The existence of these guidelines is, of course, a good thing. But what about its implementation? I have serious doubts about this and that is why I have requested this debate today. For example, Article 70 requires a three-yearly evaluation, but no implementation or evaluation report has ever been published in ten years. There would also be regular consultations with Parliament on the persecution of the faith, but in ten years' time this has never taken off. The post of EU Envoy remained vacant for three years and now he has finally been appointed, but in ten years' time the human resources to which he can fall back have always been very minimal. Mr President, more needs to be done, because persecution of faith is only increasing worldwide. Look at a country like Nigeria, where 50,000 Christians have been killed for their faith in the last 20 years. Or look at the situation in Manipur, which we talked about yesterday. I therefore have three specific requests to the Commission: 1) present a thorough implementation report of the guidelines in the short term; 2) give the EU Envoy a permanent mandate and provide additional staff so that he can do his job well; 3) come forward with proposals to designate 24 June, the date on which the guidelines were adopted, as European Day for the Fight against Persecution of Faith. I would like a response from the Commission. We must not leave the oppressed church with millions of believers in the cold. I hope and pray it doesn't take another 10 years.

Mr President, Commissioner, a debate on India is often about opportunities for trade. Today, unfortunately, we have to talk about human rights, about the situation in Manipur, where the ethnic conflict is becoming increasingly religious. The sad balance of the last ten weeks: 120 people killed, 50 000 displaced and 250 churches destroyed. Unfortunately, the issue is not an isolated one. Throughout India, non-Hindus such as Christians face increasing intolerance, violence, destruction, discrimination. We also see it in the anti-conversion laws in various states. Our joint resolution is crystal clear. We call on India to do everything in its power to stop ethnic and religious violence, punish perpetrators and eradicate Hindu extremism. Without firm guarantees in these areas, I do not think there can be a new trade agreement with India.

Mr President, Commissioner, the Israeli army's invasion of Jenin has once again hit us hard: In the Palestinian Territories there are not only benevolent people. Unfortunately, there are also terrorists who speak only one language: the language of terror and violence. As long as that is the case, Israel has no choice. Then it'll have to act. In the meantime, the situation is getting more and more complicated. With a Palestinian Authority that has long lost its democratic legitimacy. A PA that does nothing to stop terror, but instead fuels it. Look at what children get in the Palestinian textbooks and in the media: To die when a martyr is portrayed as something great. It's scary, but it happens. Is it still possible to break all this? The EU holds an important key. As the largest donor to the Palestinians, it can appeal to the Palestinians. First of all, the PA must assume its responsibilities. The Palestinian Authority can be expected to provide Israel with the necessary security guarantees. And that includes stopping hate speech in textbooks. And secondly, I advocate a much stronger commitment to peaceful coexistence. Jews and Palestinians working together in the West Bank in one and the same company, for example. Why is this no longer possible in 2023? Providing security guarantees and learning to live together: I think these are the things we need to invest in. Then, of course, the willingness to come to a solution politically also arises. This does not necessarily have to be a two-state solution.

Mr President, Commissioner, in Mariënheem, a village in the east of our country, they have a major problem: a busy, dangerous road through the village. The bypass that the village has to relieve, is not yet there. A major cause – in addition to lack of money – is tight Natura 2000 legislation that even subordinates road safety to nature. Mr President, if we agree to the Nature Restoration Act tomorrow, we will create similar situations on a large scale across Europe. Our rural area is closed. After all, the priority rule ‘nature always precedes’ applies in many places outside Natura 2000. And population density is not taken into account by the proposal at all. That makes it all even more complicated. Nature is important, but the Commission's approach is wrong. Let's support valuable bottom-up initiatives while giving regions enough flexibility to make their own responsible choices. More Brussels involvement is not going to help. The rejection amendment therefore deserves all the support.

Mr President, we can agree that children are not commodities. However, a global surrogacy industry has emerged, accompanied by modern slavery and exploitation of vulnerable women. Childlessness can be very difficult. However, the use of surrogacy as a solution raises important ethical questions, such as agreements on aborting children, for example in the event of multiple pregnancies or because of a disability. This is also the case with altruistic surrogacy. Last March, a group of 100 experts called for a universal ban on surrogacy: The Casablanca Declaration. I wholeheartedly support this call; Not to polarize, but for the sake of mother and child. Children are not products.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is a good thing that we are talking about food security and the resilience of agriculture. Especially this week, which seems to be all about nature restoration. In any case, it ensures the much-needed balance in the discussion. It is only thanks to sufficient agriculture that we always have sufficient food. What is needed for this is space. Space to do business in Europe. Physical space, by being economical on fertile agricultural land. But also space in the business operations, by limiting regulatory pressure as much as possible. Ensuring sufficient good nutrition can be achieved by supporting agricultural entrepreneurs and giving them access to the latest insights and possibilities, to new alternative plant protection products, for example, to new varieties. That's what we need. Not to a new legislative European straitjacket that the rural area ... (The President interrupted the speaker) ... largely shut down, like the nature restoration law that will hopefully be rejected in the Environment Committee the day after tomorrow.

Mr President, we are so grateful that we have left the COVID pandemic behind us and that we no longer have to show our QR codes all the time. Anyone who thinks that this marks the end of the era of digital health certificates is mistaken. Because if it is up to the European Commission, the COVID certificate simply merges into a broader digital health certificate from the WHO. I think that is very unwise, all the more so because this step is taken silently, without a proper reflection on the possible consequences. Have we really learned nothing from the COVID crisis? Have we really not seen how the corona certificate led to a division in society? That the conscientious objectors caused serious problems and that it mainly created false certainty? Because even with certificates and vaccinations, the infections continued. Let us learn from the mistakes of the past and at least have a good debate about it. That's the least we could and should do.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I am increasingly wondering – despite all the fine words: Is the EU really there for our fishermen? Of course, measures are needed to protect marine ecosystems and our fish stocks: investment in more selective fishing gear, for example, continuation of TAC and quota systems. But what the Commission is putting on the table is really going too far. The distress signals from fishermen everywhere on 9 May were very clear. They feel abandoned. Many no longer see a way out. Their fishing grounds make way for wind farms and nature reserves. And on top of that, the Commission's call to stop allowing any bottom-contacting fishing in Natura 2000 sites is now a disproportionate measure that will hit fishing very hard and does not do justice to the fact that in many places bottom-contacting fishing is not nearly as harmful as is currently proposed. Meanwhile, the EU has banned pulse fishing, one of the most sustainable fishing methods. None of that can be explained. Commissioner, I call on you to: Listen to the fishermen. We need them badly. They provide our food supply. Let's give them the space they need to continue their important profession. Fish is healthy and most fish stocks are currently good. It is up to us to show that the EU is indeed there for our fishermen.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, once again we managed to include a clear recommendation on the Palestinian textbooks in the discharge report on the Commission. We ask you to take a critical look at the European spending on these textbooks, because they are full of anti-Semitism. Once again, however, we are also dealing with the S&D, the Greens and The Left, who are trying to cover up the anti-Semitic facts with an amendment. Once again, we are faced with a Commission that has not yet shown any willingness to move on this issue, even though the EU has the pretense to contribute to the peace process. A commendable endeavor, but then let's start here, make sure that education is good, that children learn to respect the other instead of hating, that children no longer have to learn math by counting victims that you can make with a terrorist suicide action. That is why today I call on the European Commission: Make sure that the European money flow to the Palestinian territories is no longer used to pay for incorrect textbooks. And as far as the general budget, the 2021 annual accounts are concerned, the error rate is still clearly too high for us. 3 %, i.e. more than 1 % above the border. As far as we are concerned, giving discharge is therefore not justified.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, there is a lot at stake in Nigeria in the Sharif Aminu case. I sincerely hope with you that the Supreme Court will declare the blasphemy laws unconstitutional and contrary to international treaties. The ruling can have far-reaching consequences, also for the many Christians who are threatened by Sharia law in Nigeria. In 2022, an estimated 13 Christians per day were killed. The very existence of blasphemy laws encourages mass violence against people accused of blasphemy, often even before the police and the judiciary can intervene. A shocking example of this is the murder of Deborah Yakubu last year. I call on the Commission to convey our concerns about the blasphemy laws to the Nigerian authorities. Perhaps the EU Special Envoy for Religious Freedom can also play a significant role in this.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, criticism of the digital euro is growing from all sides. That is also very understandable. For what problem does this new concept actually offer a solution? Is there a problem? In any case, it is clear that the ECB will have a huge dominant position with this digital euro. For example, it could set negative interest rates. It could even make the euro programmable, in other words set up in such a way that you can only spend your money on things that the government finds acceptable. My question to the Commission is: How do you actually look at that? Do you see these risks too? And what about the safeguarding of privacy? It should be borne in mind that the recent analysis carried out by the ECON commission shows that there is no market for the digital euro at all. I would say: Let's take the objections seriously and stop this project. The risks and uncertainties are simply too great.

Mr President, Mr High Representative, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it has of course been known for some time that China is a dictatorship where human rights are being violated en masse. In the meantime, the situation in China is certainly not improving, and we are also noticing this in Europe. China intimidates and threatens journalists and engages in large-scale espionage activities. And what about China's aggressive attitude towards Taiwan? The stupidest thing we can do now is to let ourselves play against each other as a Western world. Unfortunately, President Macron fell into this trap by stepping away from the US on Taiwan. Very unwise. Transatlantic cooperation is much needed, but also investments to reduce our dependence on China, as well as clear agreements on protecting our vital infrastructure. Finally, a specific question to the Commissioner: When will the new EU Envoy for Freedom of Religion travel to Beijing? He will have enough to discuss.

Mr President, Fit for 55 has good and bad sides. I still have a lot of hesitation about the level of ambition. I foresee that we will soon come to the conclusion in 2030 that we have set an unachievable binding goal in the legislation. So from a legal point of view, we are totally stuck. We are already seeing that our energy network is approaching its limits. As far as ETS is concerned, it is positive that there will be an ever lower emission ceiling for industry. This is simply necessary for the proper functioning of the system. The advantage of the ETS system is also that companies have the opportunity to shape the transition as cost-efficiently as possible. Aviation and maritime transport will now also be covered by the ETS, which is also a good thing. That you can fly from Amsterdam to Paris or London for a while, is actually no longer of this time. I am pleased that the built environment is now largely outside the ETS. This is not the time to further increase household energy bills. I would have preferred to keep the built environment completely out of ETS. By adding the commercial buildings, a door is opened that we should have left closed. Making buildings more sustainable is something that we can leave to the Member States themselves. Climate policy is needed, but with an eye for the citizen and feasibility.

Mr President, Commissioner Sinkevičius recently sent a letter to the Netherlands which caused a great stir. In this letter on nitrogen policy, the Commissioner seeks to impose on Dutch farmers and our entire economy targets and dates that are not enshrined in European legislation. This is, of course, highly questionable from an institutional point of view. The Commission has to monitor compliance with legislation adopted here by co-legislators, Parliament and Council, for example with the Habitats Directive. But it cannot add its own agenda. In this case, she does. As the ECR Group, we therefore believe that the Commission should come forward with a text and explanation on this, and we therefore propose that our oral question, the oral question, be put on the agenda.