Speeches

Madam President, Mr von der Leyen, ladies and gentlemen, this debate comes at the end of the parliamentary term and with great delay. In the last five years in this House we have talked much more about electric scooters and butterflies than about geopolitics and military defence. The idea of the red and green left to make Europe a herbivorous superpower has entirely occupied the agenda of the European Commission and consequently the parliamentary one. We have been overwhelmed by great speeches about the need to ride a bike in order not to emit CO2. We fell asleep in a dream but in the meantime the world has continued to live in reality and reality is a beautiful but dangerous place. We European conservatives have always had clear ideas in this regard: we have always thought that the European Union should not take care of everything, but of a few things, even if important: "Doing less, doing betterIt has always been our message. The common defence of Europe's borders and interests is one of the few things the European Union serves, if you will! Because it is obvious that security lies in numbers and interests do not always coincide on this side and on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean. Making the European pillar of NATO stronger and more efficient also serves to strengthen the Atlantic Alliance. Please don't be shocked when Trump comes to wake us up from our "green dream": It can't always be the others who pay or die for us. However, today it is not necessary to divide on the prospect of a European army that – allow me personal digression – the Italian right has been supporting for 50 years, when today's pro-European supers supported the Red Army. What we can agree on, for now, is a better integration of national armies and a common production of armaments, which costs but is necessary, which if done together, can allow us to spend less and better. We need courage, realism and common sense. Despite delays and some hypocrisy in its aims, the European ASPIDES mission in the Mediterranean is the right path to follow. These are difficult times, it's true. But in reality they have always been. Publilius Syrus, a Roman slave who became free many years ago, wrote "It is not easy to defend alone what many desire: our freedom.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, I am sorry that Timmermans, who has run away, is not in his place. For years we have asked you to listen to us, we have fought you, even though we do not have the numbers to stop the red-green majority that gave birth to this crazy programme called . Every four months you slammed into our faces a law against farmers, ranchers and fishermen. You told us that it was necessary to protect nature from them, they who live and work in nature for generations and generations. With the Farm to fork You crushed them and promoted the consumption of insects and larvae. With Nutri-Score you wanted to hit the Mediterranean diet. With the packaging regulation you have banned packaging that guarantees freshness to fruit and vegetables. With the green claims you have established that vegetables cannot be defined as green if they then travel by truck. With the cancer strategy you have declared war on meat and wine. With a directive you have equated stables with industrial installations. With another, you want pharmaceutical companies to produce meat in the lab. In some countries the left-wing government has also removed subsidies for the purchase of diesel. With the Nature Restoration Act you have decided that human beings are harming the planet, so you have to abandon the cultivated fields, remove the embankments from the rivers and exhume the swamps. And thank goodness that half the crap of the CAP has passed, because, if it had gone as Greta Thunberg and the living room environmentalists wanted, it would have been even worse than it is. Now, what did you expect from farmers? That they'd thank you? Revolt is the language of those who are not listened to. Now back off, but it's late: The minority has become a majority across Europe and in a few months it will put people back in the place of ideologies.

Madam President, Madam President von der Leyen, ladies and gentlemen, the outcome of the last European Council is, in our view, in the dark. We are pleased with the work that has been done on enlargement to the Western Balkans and on the start of negotiations for the entry of Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova. Among other things, the proposal to use frozen funds to Russia to finance the reconstruction of Ukraine is right. However, some questions remain on several issues and the revision of the 2021-2027 financial framework, on which the necessary unanimity has not yet been found, is still pending. The enlargement of the European Union to new nations is certainly important, not least because, as President Meloni has often said, it would be more correct to speak of the reunification of Europe. There is a cultural identity, in fact, that comes even before the political identity and there is the need to face together the difficult geopolitical challenges of these years. That is why we must not make the tragic mistake of removing nations that are already part of the European Union, as happened with Britain and as it risks happening again. To be even clearer, I find short-sighted the constant attack on Hungary that even today, in here, is pouring against it. A political bombing that spares nothing and no one, not even Hungarian students who, if an amendment had not been approved yesterday, would have been excluded from the Erasmus programme. This is despite the progress made by the Hungarian institutions in their relations with the Commission, for example with regard to the reform of the justice system. I believe that the Budapest institutions should be asked for more solidarity and sharing, but I believe that in return they should be offered more willingness to listen to their reasons and the right serenity of judgment. The European Union must be cohesive within it and must regain that centrality on the international stage that it has lost or perhaps never really had. To the old issues related to birthlessness, loss of competitiveness, management of migration flows, many others have been added: Chinese and Russian expansionism, the Middle East crisis, the supply of raw materials and energy, artificial intelligence. President, ladies and gentlemen, we are already in the electoral campaign and it would be hypocritical to deny it, but Europe is either something bigger than our small political skirmishes, or it is nothing.

(IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, this empty Chamber, deserted by the same Members who wanted this debate, explains how much more important it is for anti-fascists in the living room to find a place in the restaurant than in their stalls here in Parliament. On the other hand, their goal was to defame Italy and the goal was achieved; It is regrettable that the Italian left, which is still unable to understand the reasons for its political and electoral failure, also lends itself to this. Let's start with the title of this debate: The fight against the rebirth of neo-fascism in Europe, also in reference to the parade that took place in Rome on January 7. First of all it was not a parade but a funeral commemoration, the same that has been taking place for 40 years, every year. The same in which, in addition to the homage composed of citizens and institutions, unfortunately some militants of the extreme right are used to give the Roman greeting, but that over the years have become less and less. Yes, because in these more than 40 years of government of Italy there have been parties of all political colors: Prime Ministers such as Draghi and Conte, Craxi and Andreotti, Prodi and D'Alema. The commemoration of Acca Larentia has always remained the same. Only the number of people making the Roman greeting has changed: Today there are a few tens, while in the past there were a few thousand. And that greeting, so anachronistic, in some ways even grotesque, has never even had the political meaning of the apology of fascism, so much so that almost never the judiciary has recognized it as a crime, considering it for what it really is: a funeral gesture, a small gesture within a tragedy too great to be forgotten, that of innocent young boys massacred by communist terrorism. We would have liked to have talked about the victims of political terrorism in this House, all the victims, of whatever party they are. It was not possible because the Italian Democratic Party and the groups of the European left also prevented it yesterday; Obviously they can desert this debate because they are hungry, but they are not yet full of political hatred. Have a good appetite! We will continue to have respect for other people's ideas and love for our people.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, among those who are speaking today to commemorate Jacques Delors, I am probably one of the most politically distant from him, but this does not prevent me from giving him the right human respect, nor does it prevent me from positively evaluating certain features of his political experience at European and national level. First of all I like to emphasize the anchoring of his public commitment to a spiritual, religious and Christian dimension. One aspect, this aspect of faith, which was well present across the board among all the founding fathers of the European Union, but which today is banned from public discourse, especially among socialists, allow me to do so. As if being sincerely Christian can be an obstacle to the secularity of institutions or to respect for any other religious confession. There are valuable results of his political work that I like to highlight such as the creation of the single market, the free movement of goods and people within our continent, the launch of the Erasmus student programme, or the particular focus on the common agricultural and energy policy. On the other hand, there is one element in his vision that is a watershed with respect to our vision: The European Union as a Federation of National States. In our opinion, this is an obvious oxymoron, implicitly admitted by Delors himself when he defined this Parliament as "the first and only multinational Parliament in the world". That said, the possibility remains intact for our political group to converge on the need, repeatedly reiterated by Delors himself, to fill this Europe with a soul, otherwise it will be only a set of offices and rules, far from the people and history.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the geopolitical context requires us to look at reality as it is and not as we would like it to be. The world is much bigger than the European Union and it is not going in the direction we are pointing. It did not do so with sanctions against Russia or even in the fight against Islamic terrorism; It is not doing this on energy sources and climate warming. This is why Europe needs unity and pragmatism more than ever before. It is not the time, and it is not right, to change the founding treaties to strip nations of their prerogatives; this is not the time to re-propose old budgetary parameters and austerity, rather it is the time to cut red tape and invest in economic growth; This is not the time for green ideological radicalism, but for a technologically neutral approach. This is not the time for a Europe undergoing globalisation, but for a continent capable of taking the lead on the international stage and defending its interests, firmly if necessary. That is why it is right to proceed with enlargement, without hesitation but also without discrimination. There are not, nor must there be, first-class nations, other second-class nations, and still others destined to travel standing or in the freight car. For us conservatives, Europe exists only in its complexity, not in the leadership of a few governments that claim the right to decide for everyone else. Of course, it is not easy to seek a broad consensus every time on the decisions to be taken, but how can we make other nations join the European Union, depriving them of their political sovereignty? Never before has Europe made sense if it is able to confront, unitedly, those who aspire to a world of violence and abuse. In a few days it is Christmas and, no matter how much someone may ignore it here, Europe is a fruit of Christian civilization. I hope that the next Council can be a moment of light and not a mere political showcase; Never before has there been a need for an alliance of nations to pave the way for itself before the rest of the world. Merry Christmas to all, even to those who do not believe.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, we are living in a strange time, when it is up to us European Conservatives and Reformists to preserve the Treaties establishing the Union and to defend them from the attempts at reform that are often proposed here. Nothing new, in reality, at least for us conservatives of the Italian right, who since 1957 have been supporters of the European Union, while those who today pose as "turbo-Europeanists" supported and coveted the Soviet Union and voted against the ratification of the Treaty of Rome. It is therefore probably no coincidence that the left tries to replicate here and today the dirigist, absolutist and anti-democratic model that was typical of that political system. It is the Council of European Governments, not Parliament, which according to the Treaty of Lisbon designates the President of the Commission; Parliament can only accept it or not, but it cannot arrogate to itself the tasks it does not have. It is quite clear that the attempt to revive Parliament's indication of the Commission's leadership is the result of the awareness that the majority of the 27 Member States of the Union are now governed by the centre-right. We would have defended what is written in the treaties even if it had been the opposite, because we believe in a Europe of nations, that of the founding fathers and not that of the degenerate sons; We believe in a confederal alliance of the peoples of Europe, united to do together what they alone would not be able to do. The exact opposite of the federalist project on which we are working in recent years and today: a project designed to dissolve the most expensive thing for European citizens, that is, a land to be called homeland. On this we will measure ourselves in the 2024 elections, and see who wins.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, in this Parliament we have heard countless times about the rule of law, usually when there was an attack on governments that were displeased with the sinister efforts to implement the programme with which they had won the elections. Our group has always denounced this political exploitation. The rule of law is a serious matter: It is the separation of judicial, executive and legislative powers, not a permanent campaign topic. The atrocious paradox is that today, for the first time in a great European nation, like Spain, the rule of law is being brutally violated by those who have filled their mouths for years: Socialists and Communists, in order to remain in power despite the electoral defeat, decide to vote for the cancellation of crimes such as sedition, embezzlement, insurrection, even terrorism, in exchange for seven votes. It is the most blatant prevarication of political power over judicial power ever seen in Europe. And it is also the most sensational democratic scam ever seen in Europe, because, as Vox's friends recalled, during the election campaign, Pedro Sanchez had always declared himself against amnesty for secessionists. Speaking of democracy, Commissioner Gentiloni at the Socialist Congress in Malaga said: "What is happening in Spain is consistent with our democratic model", on the same day that you, Commissioner Reynders, expressed serious concerns about what is happening in Spain. Now, to the men and women of Spain I just want to say this: Frankly, I don't know if you can count on the European institutions. I hope so. But for sure you can count on the friendship and solidarity and support of all the patriots of Europe.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the last European Council took place in the aftermath of the Hamas attack on the people of Israel. A vicious, cowardly, inhuman violence. Since that day the world has entered a new spiral of fear and disorder. And for some, that's good news. For China, for Islamic regimes, for Putin who trusts in the distraction of democratic nations, for his senseless war against the Ukrainian people. To be politically strong, the European Union must be economically strong, as well as energy independent. That is why it is a mistake to burden its economic production with too many ideological burdens. Rather, it should be lightened by all those dirigiste impositions typical of that socialism painted green. In this regard, I appreciated the passage on mitigating the consequences of global warming. It is on securing territories in the face of extreme weather events that we must focus our efforts, instead of dealing solely with our CO2 emissions, now residual compared to the rest of the planet. Finally, I do not think it is a coincidence that it is only today, when there is a majority of centre-right governments in the European Council, that we are approaching the issue of immigration with common sense. A year ago it would have been unthinkable to read in the Council conclusions the need to protect the external borders, to combat smugglers, to conclude cooperation agreements with third States, as in the case of Tunisia. Unfortunately, there is a part of the policy that continues to boycott any possibility of countering illegal immigration. They are the ones in here shaking their hands for a Hollywood actress who comes to give us lessons in humanity before returning to Highwell House, her 5-million-euro Victorian mansion in East Sussex, they are the ones too snobbish to get their hands dirty with reality. Fortunately, democracy is not a film and is coming to do justice to your hypocrisy.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the next European Council is taking place in a dramatic context. Never before has the ability to see the geopolitical picture in its entirety been needed. There is a thread that binds all the bloodiest crises of our time and it is the will, on the part of some, to subvert the international order. I am referring to that set of rules, rights and geographical boundaries which is certainly not perfect, which certainly can be improved, but which is probably the most just and peaceful that there has ever been in the world. The most recent of these crises, the one generated by the Hamas attack on Israel, fits right into this phase of history. The resulting war serves to destabilize a relationship between Israel and the Arab world that was slowly, painfully moving towards normalization and today, unfortunately, has returned to its starting point. It is the same paradigm as the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The order in Eastern Europe was set on fire by Vladimir Putin because he believes he must change it, even at the cost of thousands of innocent victims and, not surprisingly, both Russia and China chose Hamas over Israel. Within the same scheme is Islamic terrorism, which cyclically re-emerges with all its ferocity. For the most radical Islam, democracy and freedom are the foundations of a civilization to be overthrown, to replace it with another that they consider better. What should Europe do, not just Europe? Defend the values that define it, wherever they are in danger in the world. Defend itself from mass illegal immigration, but also regain the neighborhoods and cities it has already lost. Era sbarcato a Lampedusa l'ultimo terrorista che poche ore fa ha ucciso a sangue freddo due cittadini svedesi mentre andavano a vedere una partita di calcio – come altri terroristi prima e dopo di lui – e, nonostante il decreto di espulsione, ha potuto muoversi liberamente tra le strade di Bruxelles, dove ha sede il Parlamento europeo, ma dove ci sono quartieri in cui vige la sharia, dove alle donne non è consentito prendere un autobus, dove alla polizia non è consentito entrare. You see, we call ourselves European conservatives not because we are against someone, but because we would like to preserve what is good, right and free has flourished in the world and which, without those roots that many of you here deny, would never have flourished.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, reforming the European rules on immigration and asylum is right, it is necessary, it is urgent. The problem is how to do it. On the one hand, there is the duty to welcome those fleeing war or persecution, on the other hand, there is the duty to counter illegal immigration, red gold, dirty with blood, whose trafficking in human beings is greedy, and labour exploitation, sexual, criminal, and sometimes even terrorist, by organizations operating in the territories, including European ones. Without hypocrisy, illegal immigration is also an instrument of political war by so-called ideology.no borders" sailing on board NGO vessels. It is no coincidence that the political protection of their action claimed by the German Government is one of the reasons for friction between the Member States for the definition of the New Pact on Migration. It is not responsible behavior to finance with the taxes paid by German citizens those who are complicit in the migratory chaos and sometimes the smugglers. It is not fair to the nations of first entry, such as Italy, but it is also an illogical choice if you want to stop secondary movements towards the most attractive nations such as France or Germany. But do you realize that in order to support the most radical immigration theories we are renouncing the most precious political conquest in European history? I am referring to the free movement of persons and goods between European States. In Frankfurt, two days ago, on the ladder of the plane coming from Italy, passports were checked for all passengers, including our colleagues who were headed here to Parliament. Thus, internal borders are restored, as when the Schengen Treaty did not exist, and at the same time external borders are sought to be opened indiscriminately, even to those who have no right to enter Europe. The truth is that until we choose the path of fighting illegal immigration, we will never be able to govern legal immigration wisely. This road passes through the internal rules that we will give ourselves and the agreements and external ones that we will make, it passes through a terrestrial and military garrison of the European borders and it passes through the victory of common sense and the defeat of the maximalist utopias, just as it happened in the last century.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Pietro, you will not have missed the fact that this debate is taking place thanks to us who voted in favour of your request, otherwise it would not have taken place. We did not do so to highlight that on 3 October 2013 there were men from the Democratic and Socialist Party at the helm of the Italian government and the European Commission. Unlike what happened a few weeks ago on the occasion of the sinking of Cutro, we do not speculate on the death of people. But I want to reiterate today that the only way to prevent the constant repetition of tragedies like those we are remembering is to contain the departures of migrants, often at the mercy of human traffickers. Also because most of those who travel do not have the right to international protection and must be returned. They risk their lives in vain. We honor the memory of those who disappeared in the waters of Lampedusa with the right emotion, but also with honesty, otherwise it will have been another missed opportunity.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we welcome the conclusions of the European Council. Not all of them, but a number of appropriate answers have been given at the level that the European Union, that is to say, foreign policy, has been most lacking. I am also referring to immigration, the most divisive issue and therefore relegated to the communications of the President-in-Office of the Council. On the other hand, if governed with firmness and intelligence, the phenomenon of immigration can have positive developments in our cities. Conversely, if passively suffered it can be disastrous. Entire civilizations have collapsed in the face of large migratory flows; Faced with the lack of integration, the daughter of multiculturalism disguised by the left as progress, the peripheries of large European cities, such as Paris or Brussels, are on fire, but the flames are now reaching the heart of the cities themselves. Faced with the inability to govern migration flows, the Dutch government fell a few days ago, one of the few left-wing governments left in Europe. History is a succession of facts, not opinions. There is no point in calling conservative governments xenophobic with the help of the international media. Poland and Hungary, to be clear, defend their right to exist, already threatened from outside their borders, without giving up welcoming millions of war refugees into their homes. And it is good for Giorgia Meloni to explain that the solution is not the relocation among the European States of those few migrants who are entitled to asylum and who land in Italy or Greece. The right solution is to stop the departures from Africa of the vast majority of migrants who should be returned without the right to asylum. This saves lives at sea, not the political activity of immigrant NGOs. This disrupts the business of human traffickers: Smugglers are the new great criminals of our time, not drug dealers or arms dealers. The New Pact on Migration is only a first step in the long journey that must lead the European Union to tackle this phenomenon as never before. Taken the first step, today, we must also take the others. If not in this legislature, let's do it in the next one.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner Reynders, there are issues that should not have a political colour, because they go far beyond belonging to a party or an ideological party, because they concern natural principles that go beyond space and time, beyond each of us. The fight against surrogacy is one of them. We are talking about a contract by which one or more clients agree with a woman to bring a child to birth and deliver it to them after childbirth. Unfortunately, in some nations of the world and Europe this abominable practice is legalized or knowingly concealed. Sometimes hidden behind the hypocrisy of an alleged altruism, of a mere reimbursement of expenses to be paid to the mother. Sometimes explicitly defined through a lavish payment for the rent of the maternal uterus and the purchase of the newborn. We are talking about a commodification of bodies and life incompatible with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which in Article 3 prohibits making the human body and its parts as such a source of profit. In the same sense have gone various pronouncements of the United Nations, many feminist associations, jurists, philosophers and doctors from all over the world, such as those recently gathered in Casablanca to call for the universal abolition of surrogacy, as happened with landmines or slavery. And religion doesn't matter, colleagues. Just as the sexual orientation of those who, thanks to their economic superiority, feel legitimized to buy a child from a woman by taking advantage of her economic or psychological distress does not matter. We should all agree to condemn and ban this abyss of humanity, but that is not the case. There is a part of politics and society that considers freedom the choice to give birth to a child for a fee and then give it to those who can afford to buy it. Unfortunately, there are those who believe that at the right price any desire can turn into a right. For this reason it is necessary to address here and today the theme of surrogacy, or of the rented uterus, or of gestation for others, as it is subtly called this practice in some cultural circles. In Europe and the world there are still too many countries where this is allowed, in different ways: United States, Canada, South Africa, Russia, Ukraine, United Kingdom, but also Belgium, Greece, Netherlands, Denmark, Cyprus. Just last March the German government presented a commission that will examine the possibility of legalizing surrogacy in Germany. To be honest, this House has repeatedly reiterated its opposition to this activity, rightly considering it a violation of human dignity and human rights. But the facts are walking with their own legs, supported by obvious economic interests, indifferent to the political judgments of condemnation. That is why I hope that today's debate, strongly supported by the ECR Group, which I have the honour of co-chairing, will be followed by a final resolution, able to affirm surrogacy as a universal crime, taking responsibility for doing the right thing. If we do not succeed in this legislature, I am confident that it will happen in the next one. In conclusion, let me quote a great conservative of the last century, Robert Maynard Hawkins: “Human rights are based on human dignity. Human dignity is an ideal worth fighting for and dying for.”

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the next European Council will be held one year after the elections. It is not yet time for budgets, it will come. Now let us think about the time that remains, the definition of a political line that addresses and does not escape the serious common challenges of our time. I am thinking of immigration, an issue on which the European Union has wasted too many years pursuing an ideology called No Borders, imbued with ambiguity and old-fashioned internationalism. Certainly the last ministerial meeting in Luxembourg is a first step on the right path, but it is only the first step and the road is still long. For us European conservatives it is essential to reiterate the concept that Europe is only entered in a safe and legal way, recognizing the right to asylum only to those who really flee from wars and persecution. Working on the external dimension, i.e. on the countries of origin and transit of migrants, is crucial to govern and not suffer the migration phenomenon, delegating it to human traffickers and immigration NGOs, as has happened so far. Of course there is not only this theme. As ECR, we call on the European Council to seek open strategic autonomy, especially on defence and energy independence. That is why we welcome the anti-coercion tool that should allow us to better defend European companies against violent and unfair business practices that are sometimes put into practice by unscrupulous regimes such as the Chinese one. Finally, we must be aware of the ongoing demographic crisis, helping European states to promote birth policies accompanied by adequate social and health policies. Resources are scarce, it is true, but how many are we wasting in pursuit of a radical environmentalism that does not help the environment, let alone the human beings who inhabit it.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the past and future of the European Union meet in Cyprus. The history of this island is also the history of the Mediterranean and its geographical position has always made it a place of great strategic value. Since 2020, the United Nations has stepped up its efforts to establish a new round of negotiations for the reunification of the country. I am convinced that the European Union must strengthen its role in the resumption of talks. This inevitably leads us to the definition, once and for all, of the relationship that must exist between the European Union and Turkey. While we cannot accept any threat to the sovereignty of Cyprus, we all have an interest in a strategic partnership with Ankara, with particular reference to economic and defence issues. Personally, I believe that the simultaneous closure of Turkey's accession process to the European Union, which obviously cannot be pursued, must be accompanied by the recognition of an honest and productive relationship. I hope that Europe will not allow itself to be overcome by events, but will finally be able to determine them. If there is one virtuous effect that must be recognised of European integration, it is undoubtedly the demolition of walls and the reunification of the peoples of Europe. We did it in Berlin and Belfast. We must also succeed in Nicosia, the last European capital divided by a wall. But Cyprus is not only the area where some geopolitical faults collide and where the West meets the East, in its waters two other central themes develop in our political agenda. It is enough to go to Pournara to see the failure of European policies on asylum and immigration. Fortunately, something is changing and a new approach, less ideological and more realistic, is making room for itself in the European Union. In addition, important gas discoveries have made Cyprus the crossroads of new scenarios in the Eastern Mediterranean, both from an energy and geopolitical point of view. President Christodoulides, most of your problems are similar to those of other European countries, particularly those of countries such as Italy, Spain, Malta or Greece. Immigration, border security, energy, the centrality of the Mediterranean, sustainable fisheries and tourism: common challenges that as European Conservatives we want to tackle with a different approach than the one adopted to date. We do this in a context where we are in the minority and oppose various proposals that we do not agree with, but with the approach of the European elections and after several recent national elections we feel less and less alone. The consensus around our proposals grows at every latitude. The course is established and the wind blows strongly on our sails. Very soon we will return to Ithaca!

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, what we are about to approve has been awaited for a long time. The protection of geographical indications is an economic issue, but it is above all a matter of respect for the history, traditions and agri-food culture of our nations. For years we have witnessed powerless unfair competition from products such as Parmesan or Prosec, which narrowly recalled our excellence. Today we can finally put an end to this alternative market that lives on the shoulders of producers. Increased transparency on online sales and the ban on evocation of protected names will lead to a fair protection of the sector. We unanimously approve this text, as we have already done in the Commission. We protect what identifies us in time and space. We owe it to those who have gone before us and to those who will come after us.

Mr President, the tragedy at Rana Plaza in Bangladesh forced us to open our eyes to a disturbing aspect of globalisation. I am referring to the logic that only profit and profit margin count and that in order to arrive at the lowest possible price it is necessary to relocate production where the rules and protections for workers are minimal or non-existent. A perverse logic, the result of a greedy and internationalist culture. I will not list the major Western clothing brands involved in that tragedy, which has become a symbol of the most cynical exploitation, despite the temptation being objectively strong. Today, ten years later, I cannot deny some progress in the working conditions and security of our supply chains, but there is still a lot to be done. The European Union is the world's largest integrated market, buying and exporting everything. Thanks to the strength of our economy, we have the right to demand reciprocity in the environmental and social standards of production, with the dual objective of discouraging the relocation of European companies and encouraging the improvement of workers' conditions when they still choose to produce outside our continent. As president of the South Asian delegation, of which Bangladesh is part, let me pay tribute to its great culture, its great spirituality, quoting its most famous poet, Tagore: "Power said to the world: "You are mine," and the world made him a prisoner on his throne. Love said to the world: "I am yours," and the world offered itself to him as a home.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, what is happening in different parts of Europe reminds us that farmers are continually called upon to face the challenges of climate change: droughts, floods, land degradation, just to name a few. These challenges not only threaten their household incomes but also jeopardise the food security of the entire continent. While it is therefore right to encourage the sustainable development of agriculture, we must avoid crushing production with bureaucratic obligations and unsustainable economic burdens for our farmers, especially if they are not protected from unfair competition from those outside the European Union who are not required to comply with the same environmental, health and social standards. With the rules and regulations that are adopted here, but above all with the economic funds that are allocated here, we must enhance the profession of farmer and breeder, because they are the ones who guarantee us high quality local products, deeply rooted in the culture and nutrition of us Europeans. It is therefore important not to jeopardise its vitality and resilience in the name of false environmentalist ideologies, such as the replacement of animal meat that has fed humanity for millennia with artificial meat produced in a laboratory, or the marketing of wormmeal, which was also contracted by the Commission to a monopoly multinational company in Vietnam. Conservative governments, like the Italian one, do well to contain its spread, also in the name of transparency and public health, acting in a sort of subsidiarity on the contrary that shows who is on the right side of history. You know what one of the fathers of conservative thought said, Sir Roger Scruton? Our farmers, not our politicians, are the real stewards of the land.

Madam President, Mr Prime Minister, welcome. The beautiful castles of Luxembourg remind us of the history of our continent. An ultra-millennial history that has produced a civilization of which we are proud, to be loved and preserved. I know I am not telling you anything new by reminding you that Luxembourg is also famous for some overly aggressive tax practices. This allows many companies to reduce or avoid paying taxes in their home states, generating unfair competition within the European Union. I am convinced that you will agree with me that, if we want to ensure proper economic development, it is necessary to defend the real economy against the economy based only on finance. In Luxembourg, there is also Schengen, where the agreement establishing a common area of free movement came into being, breaking down the internal borders of the Union. Undoubtedly one of the most important achievements in cooperation between European states. The atrocious paradox of today is that internal circulation is no longer as free as it should be, unlike external circulation. On the one hand, borders are created to counter the secondary movements of illegal migrants between one European state and another, between France and Italy for example. On the other hand, the opening of external borders to illegal immigration is being demanded, transforming the States of first entry into huge refugee camps or open-air reception centres. Very often this approach is accompanied by public statements of severe criticism of the nations at the external border of the European Union, because they are not sufficiently welcoming. But if an illegal migrant manages to cross the internal border, he is captured like an animal by the police and deported to the state where he first landed. It is this hypocrisy that we have long denounced and that we fight with firmness, realism and humanity. The Europe in which we conservatives believe has the breath of the great national stories that compose it. This is why we adopt Luxembourg's motto: We want to remain who we are.

Mr President, this debate was put on the agenda a few days before the world listened to the words of some mercenaries of the Wagner company, whom I quote verbatim: I executed the order with this hand, I killed the children, including the five-year-olds. It was probably not necessary to add these words to the horror unleashed by Vladimir Putin, but they can help us understand the abyss of what is happening in Ukraine. There is no more vile violence than that perpetrated against children. For this reason, it is necessary to shed full light on the accusations of deportation of minors from the occupied areas of Ukraine by the Russian Federation. We all know that the international arrest warrants issued against Vladimir Putin and Belova are mere instruments of political pressure, nothing more. And unfortunately we know that in the history of humanity all this has already happened other times and probably will happen again. What he has done and will always make the difference is between being indifferent or not. Let me quote Edmund Burke, the father of conservative thought: For evil to triumph, it is enough that the good do nothing.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Mr President Michel, Madam President von der Leyen, the ECR Group has welcomed the so-called Windsor Framework between the European Commission and the UK Government, as it strengthens our alliance with London, allowing us to turn the page on Brexit and focus on the difficult challenges we have in common. This agreement then takes on even greater significance in the light of the 25th anniversary of the one signed in Belfast, on Good Friday, which we have just celebrated. Immigration was discussed at the European Council. We hope that we will soon arrive at a joint, concrete, urgent but long-term initiative. We need a new and different approach to EU immigration policies. Of course we must save people at sea, but at the same time we must prevent them from entering the sea. Human trafficking must be stopped and at the same time the causes that push people to leave their land to emigrate to Europe must be removed. There is nothing racist or sovereign in this, Mr Picierno, but common sense, foresight and true generosity. The European Council was right to focus on competitiveness and industrial policies. In order to be more competitive, the Union must not lower a single production model from above. The Union must set targets, including environmental targets, while leaving the Member States free to choose how to achieve them. It's called technological neutrality. It means not being slaves to opaque interests, it means being aware of the reality that surrounds us and its evolution over time. Dear colleagues, the term Easter comes from Hebrew and means "passage". I hope that there will also be a shift at the level of the European Union towards a renewed political, less ideological, less abstract, less centralist approach. Happy Easter to all.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, without wanting to go into the substance of the matter, there is a substantial error in the request of the groups of the Red and Green Lefts that I would like to make clear to everyone. The current Italian government is accused of something it has not done and for which, evidently, it cannot be responsible. In Italy today there is no law that authorizes the transcription of minors had abroad by homosexual or homogenitorial couples. The prefect of Milan, like all the prefects of Italy, is not a politician, but a public official who applies the laws in force. I know, and the Italian Left knows, that in the ten years in which they ruled Italy, they could have made all the laws they wanted. They did not do so and today they are using the correct behaviour of an Italian public official to try in the European Parliament the government of their own nation, which has been in office for not even five months. This is a shame, no matter where you look at it.

Madam President, President von der Leyen, President Michel, ladies and gentlemen, at the next European Council you will have to deal with major issues. On behalf of the ECR Group, I would like to reiterate, first of all, our support for the people of Ukraine, who are called upon to resist the Russian invasion amid atrocious daily suffering. And while it's good news that Russian oil and gas have achieved independence in a short time, we don't think it's good news to shift our energy dependency to China for years to come. We must not repeat the mistakes of the past, nor can we hope, in such a delicate moment, to run into an industrial conflict between Europe and the United States. But let us take a step back to the last European Council when, at the behest of the Italian government, the migration situation was discussed again. European leaders have identified initiatives that go in the right direction: increase the European Union's external action, promote cooperation on returns, strengthen external border control to tackle trafficking in human beings in the Mediterranean. Unfortunately, the reality did not wait for the Byzantines in Brussels and in the same days when the Italian military authorities rescued thousands of migrants in the middle of the sea, unfortunately the tragedy of Cutro occurred. Not the first of its kind, maybe not even the last. There is a bitter observation from which we cannot escape: The more people who entrust their lives to the smugglers, paying them lavishly, the more dead at sea we will have to cry together. Looking back, we can only see the failure of European immigration policy, from whatever point of view it is observed. For my socialist and left-wing colleagues, recent events were yet another pretext for attacking a government of opposite political color. Now I will not stand up to you for the many migrants who have died in Italy as well as in Spain, Greece, France, every time the left has found itself at the head of these nations. Nor am I going to list the consequences of unrestrained immigration to European cities, at the mercy of that crazy ideology called ""no borders". Dear colleagues, I will merely observe objectively that your hypocrisy on these matters is comparable only to your inability to find solutions. When can we finally share the principle that, beyond our political colors, immigration must be governed and not suffered? That we cannot leave it to smugglers or mercenary militias to determine who has the right and who does not have the right to enter Europe? No one ever thought that the Italian government could solve everything in four months. Immigration is a complex problem: Fortunately, the government has clear ideas. We certainly know that immigration is a European problem and as such needs a European response. This is why we will carefully assess the Communication on integrated European border management, launched yesterday by the Commission. Urgent, concrete and effective action is needed. We need the courage to make the right choices: There is no need for the political exploitation of blood, which is typical of those who do not value life.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, it has been a reasonable time since the last European Council to consider the decision to finally put a cap on the price of gas, on which, as we know, the price of all electricity depends. Well, speculation on the Amsterdam market has stopped and the price of gas collapsed yesterday to 51 euros and 40 cents per megawatt hour. One of the most irreducible opponents of the price cap It was the German socialist government, whose green economy minister Robert Habeck said yesterday: It's true, in August we destroyed the gas market and raised prices up to 350 euros per megawatt hour, but we had to fill up the storage and I think we did the right thing. No, it was not the right thing, it was a suicidal choice that enriched Putin, that cost 200 billion euros to German citizens, tens of billions of euros to Italian citizens and that caused atrocious suffering to businesses and families all over Europe.