What Radan spoke about.

Madam President, honourable Members, a week ago in this House, we rallied around a resolution on maximum severe sanctions, including the suspension of imports of oil and natural gas, to appease the aggressor, to help with whatever we can stop the war and the suffering of the Ukrainian people. This is not a utopia, this is a possible solution, but if we carefully rethink the philosophy of the green deal and even the meaning we have given to the concept of sustainability. In this situation, any solution that leads to our energy independence and our ability to economically isolate Putin and the Kremlin is sustainable. The most sustainable, of course, are renewable energy sources, because they are inexhaustible and independent of imports. But they are not the only solution. Also, all technological alternatives to Russian imports – coal, gas and nuclear, independent from foreign influence – must be considered sustainable.

Mr President, Commissioner, millions of European Union citizens are constantly travelling, changing jobs and conditions to support themselves and feed their families. Very often they work simultaneously in different countries, with different employers, for different working hours. Very often they combine work as self-employed or as owners of micro-companies with work as employees in commercial companies - employers. Very often, in tens of thousands of cases a year, because of the chaos of different laws and regulations in the different countries of our Union, these people lose their pension and social rights, or at least the rights related to part of their working life. The draft European Common Social Security Number largely answered these questions. I am afraid that the project presented to us now is perhaps a good start, but a very, very small step in the right direction, far from the good start that was set with the draft general social security number years ago.

Mr President, what we see today is the true face of the Putin dictatorship and the true face of his friendship with Mr Erdoğan, whose puppet in this situation – only a puppet – is Mr Lukashenko. And I hope that the self-proclaimed European patriots and the guardians of Christian values see the true face of their idol Mr Putin today, because I see the name of Lukashenko mentioned, I hear the name of Erdoğan, but I hear a big silence from the far right when Mr Putin has to be mentioned too. Of course we see a human tragedy today, but we see a human tragedy deliberately and cold-bloodedly provoked by two tyrants: a tragedy we need to face together with compassion to the Baltic States and Poland, and with compassion to the victims on the frontier, of course.

Madam President, Commissioner, the poorest country in Europe, my country, Bulgaria, which has also suffered the most from COVID-19, has not yet submitted its recovery and resilience plan. Three successive governments and three parliaments, blocked by election panic, even refuse to clearly inform citizens what is the reason for this delay, to explain where the problem with decarbonisation measures is, to explain what measures they do not dare to communicate to citizens that they should take in the field of justice reform and the rule of law. But the recovery and resilience plan is not for governments and it is not for parliament, it is for citizens, for businesses, for the victims of the pandemic, for industries that need support in the process of modernisation towards a green economy and green energy. The lack of this frankness on the part of the government, including after the deposit of the plan and in the course of the negotiations on it, can only be compensated by you, Commissioner, by the Commission. It must address citizens and explain what governments are hiding from them. It should inform people who really expect support and need support from this plan, what is the reason why it can not even be submitted six months late.

Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, open borders, free movement and free trade are our strength and the foundation of our well-being, but they also pose serious health risks, which we have all seen in the current pandemic. But these risks were present before. It is enough to track the movement of hepatitis cases, the awakening of tuberculosis, new unknown viruses and bacteria, or the ever-increasing infections with antibiotic-resistant bacteria, which, apropo, we discussed in our previous session. Last but not least, the link between these infections and cancer and cardiovascular diseases. Separately, health risks related to pollution, accidents and natural disasters also do not recognise state borders. All these risks are common to the Union and cannot be addressed by individual national health systems, regardless of national competence in the field of health. The new Health Emergency Response Authority HERA must work in close coordination with the Civil Protection Mechanism and ECDC, as well as, of course, with national health authorities. Above all, we must also bear in mind its ability to aggregate a unique database based on the problems of half a billion European citizens and thus contribute to the prevention of cross-border threats, but also to scientific and technological breakthroughs worldwide in the fight not only against communicable diseases, but also against cancer and cardiovascular diseases.

Mr President, as rapporteur of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs opinion on this very important report, I will use the opportunity to very briefly present the most important among our long list of suggestions. If I am to put it in one sentence, it would be: make lifelong education accessible and affordable, open the labour market, and provide for independent living. Most people with disabilities are full members of our societies, not only by virtue of their equal rights, but also by virtue of their same abilities to learn, to work, to develop and to provide for themselves, their families and their communities. The only thing they need is an equal chance for development through independent living, and I’m afraid here is where we fail as Member States, societies and the Union, or at least that’s what their petitions show us.

Mr President, we should welcome and support this long—awaited legislation, and I thank all the teams that made it possible. It is paramount for the EU to become, once again, the most attractive labour market in the world. We want to sustain and develop our social model. We want to build the first carbon—neutral economy in the world and to become leaders in new technology and green innovation. Human capital is the only key to achieve it. The economy of the 21st century is all about people and knowledge. The Blue Card is essential, but not enough for us to be the best labour market and the most competitive economy. We also need to adapt our labour market to the realities of the 21st century in order to become the innovation hub of the next decade, which, by the way, is the only way to fulfil our climate and social objectives.

Mr President, I do generally support the idea of this report, and yet I see risks that I would like to share with you, especially vis-à-vis the legislative work that we will have at the end of this year and the beginning of the next. Of course, we are all committed to improving working conditions. We are all looking forward to quality employment and fair incomes on our continent. We share the same concerns that more and more of our younger citizens are sometimes working in insecurity and often even falling out of the social security and health systems, which is a great risk both for them and for the solidarity model as a whole. And yet we could not and we should not fight the achievements of digital technology through outmoded regulations. We have to see the risk that this Parliament might try to impose 19th-century metrics over 21st-century social relations. What is really most important for us is that we must accept the realities of the 21st-century labour market and then adjust our regulations to life rather than doing it the other way around.

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, in this general debate on European health policy, the main political topic is how far the competences of the nation state extend and where those of the Union begin. Does the subsidiarity principle allow the European institutions to engage in health issues in individual Member States? The general procurement of vaccines, despite the initial delay, was an undeniable success. Today, the European Union has the highest vaccination rates, best prices and maximum safety guarantees worldwide, but is this exhausting the Union’s ability to influence health policy? My answer is categorically no. Much more is needed because the principle of subsidiarity allows but also requires intervention when an individual country is not coping with the crisis and endangers the health and lives of its citizens, but across our open borders and of all Europeans. And I will give a concrete example that deeply worries me, which affects my relatives, colleagues and neighbors. A second government and a third parliament in Bulgaria have failed to organize a vaccination campaign, to stop the anti-scientific propaganda that has led us to the disgraceful result of about 20% vaccinated against 70% on average in the Union, to implement policies that promote vaccination and protect citizens. They fail because the political crisis and constant election campaign make them hostages of cowardly populism. Days ago, all other parties rejected Democratic Bulgaria's proposal to budget funds for a public vaccination campaign. But the victims of this failure are not politicians, victims are the elderly, the sick, the weak, victims are small and family businesses, self-employed people, those who have been vaccinated to protect others, but today their businesses are closed, victims are children, again threatened by distance learning. So the answer is that Europe's powers go as far as necessary if national governments fail to protect our citizens.