Speeches

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we are all part of a family, where life, natural ties and care are given. Whoever has grown up in a stable family with affection starts from a huge advantage. We wish this fate to every child. Those who have felt the selfless love of a family understand their dignity as a person and relate in this frequency to others and can return it to society. The family is the best tool for social inclusion against poverty and inequalities. The family needs to be valued, and it must be at the heart of social policies – especially in times of crisis. Instead, this House works to replace it, generating distrust, confronting relatives, distancing children from their parents. It is intended to end poverty by ending life, when life is the most important good to protect. The best guarantee for childhood is your family. Let's help parents do their job well.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the framework of the social economy must provide opportunities, it must be a framework in which projects that respond to different vocations can be shaped, which serves the common good with all the wealth that human beings – in society – are capable of contributing. Let us be inspired by the Member States and their developments in this regard. We know that the models are very varied, they depend on the evolution and traditions of each one. Sometimes – and we must remember this – they have a positive tint, but sometimes – in other states – they have a negative tint, because we must prevent captive systems from being created. In any case, corporate regulation is a national competence. This level must be protected in order to be able to attend to the casuistry of each place. Spain has a varied range where precious initiatives with a high impact on our society have found fit, as do so many commercial companies – so many SMEs – which must also be valued and never harmed by unfair competition. The vision and mission of each initiative should reflect the essence of its promoters. We are critical when it is intended to reduce with an alignment to certain precepts, such as the 2030 Agenda or the European Green Deal, or – even worse – when there is an ideological conditioning of the use of funds or public procurement. We see, even, when the social end is used rather as a disguise to get privileges. Let us then seek to give wings to creativity. It is about adding and offering solutions to those who need it – the world of care, education, the world of disability, art, culture, academia, innovation. We have so many ideas to develop. We support those who have a vocation, want to strive and have initiative, whether public or private.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, we all have a responsibility to create a good working environment, but unfortunately the dimension of the mental health problem cannot be reduced to this area. We face an environment of insecurity, fears, scarcity; an increasingly confrontational, individualistic and hypersexualised society where relationships are instrumentalised and not stable; loneliness, abuse of technologies, a culture without moral principles where emotions or perceptions are presented as reality. This causes wounds, confusion, disorder, sadness. It should come as no surprise that anxiety, depression and addictions are increasingly common conditions. Let's change course. Mental health can be related to our development as people. It depends on being able to respond to the purpose of serving and loving others. Let us not ignore our spiritual dimension, which allows us to give a transcendent meaning to life. Mother Teresa said it several times: The great hunger of the world today is the hunger for love.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, a war shakes the foundations of any society. Citizens who are exposed to cruelty whose limits, unfortunately, do not cease to amaze us; dramatic situations against the life and dignity of the person; women exposed to sexual violence, to having to flee with their children leaving their lives behind. Sure, they deserve all our support and consideration, but do you think we help them with this kind of proclamation? It is a tremendous irresponsibility to deal with emotional manipulation matters of such magnitude, because that is not how they are faced. The European Union's response must follow moral criteria that set insurmountable limits in our international relations. Failure to do so, that is, the naivety and infirmity of the Commission and of some Members of this House, exposes those people - indeed, exposes us all - to criminal regimes that take advantage of confusion to expand their evil. Let us recover the compass that guides us to the truth, which understands life as a good that must be guarded.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, our children, our children, are on the brink of the internet. The impact of age-inappropriate content affects their development, risking their psychological and emotional integrity. Controlling and prosecuting child pornography, online child abuse should be a priority for all. The average age of onset of consumption is eleven years. A content that minors find, persistently and repeatedly, also involuntary, when browsing games or platforms. When we know that pornography consumption can work like a drug: that hijacks the will and generates addiction. Especially in an immature brain, in an immature stage such as adolescence. The platforms that allow this type of content – pornographic pages – outperform the most used social networks in views, have more than 45 million users. On the other hand, the Digital Services Act does not impose any requirements on them. I ask the Commission: Why aren't they on the list? We need effective blocking and verification. They exist. There must be will. What is an offline crime has to be online as well.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the concern of the founding fathers of the European Union was to reconcile peace through agreements guaranteeing the supply of energy and raw materials. But today we see how our single market is not giving the necessary response by ideologized strategies or legislation that have compromised our competitiveness. We depend on basic goods such as active ingredients and drug components. We depend on third countries such as India and China. We depend on cancer treatments, antibiotics for children or for diagnosis, such as iodine. Patients' health and lives are put at risk if we are limited or short of supply. I don't know if they realize the damage they can do to us. It's a security issue. Today the Spanish Medicines Agency reports 954 medicines with supply problems. Many, no alternative. This serious problem will not be solved if the laws that harm our industry are not corrected. And, truth be told, we see no intention of doing so. The Commission has put forward a proposal for pharmaceutical legislation that completely discourages innovation in our space. Let us correct this course and fight for the safety and health we all deserve.

Madam President, Commissioner, Members of the European Parliament, the perspective of transport policies requires a broad vision in order to find affordable options and solutions for all citizens. But the reality is that there are more and more difficulties for mobility. Lack of safety on public roads, isolated and uninhabited rural areas in favor of large cities, public transport that does not efficiently reach everywhere. Entry into cities today is a luxury only accessible to those who can buy an electric car. A worker who, with his effort, bought a vehicle, cared for it, maintained it, is now banned from driving. Rising fuel prices have made our lives more expensive. Going to work or school – let alone travel – is already a privilege. There is no longer any profit margin for any professional activity or trade; It is not even left for leisure itself, so necessary to breathe in the face of day-to-day pressure. All these environmental policies are conditioning our way of life with difficulties, scarcity and loss of freedom in our decisions.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, respect for human dignity is an inalienable human right. Prostitution is inherently an evil because it understands people, and especially women, as objects of consumption, of mere pleasure, which is a serious attack on their physical, psychological, affective and spiritual integrity. Wherever it has been legalized, an increasingly degenerate sex industry has proliferated, which encourages and covers up the mafias of human trafficking, surrounding us with insecurity. It is our responsibility to support and give way to those who are in this situation. A society that banalizes sexuality and detachment from love, even if it claims to protect women, is encouraging practices that really denigrate them. Let's react to a cultural drift that damages our hearts. As human beings, we are called to the fullness of our relationships.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is worrying that this Parliament, which represents the citizens, is presenting a text to wash the Commission's hands by applauding its measures without demanding accountability or transparency from it. We must be critical. There have been clear shortcomings in our supply chain. We suffer from an unprecedented limitation of fundamental freedoms and rights that should not remain so. In Spain, the Government of Pedro Sánchez, with the complicity of other parties, took action without consulting experts, prevented parliamentary control and took advantage of all kinds of legal weaving. He censored social networks, there were illegal lockups... Only Vox faced two appeals to states of alarm, which were declared unconstitutional. The pandemic should have been avoided: That's the first failure. The first cases were not reported and not only have no responsibilities been demanded but it is intended to approve a treaty on pandemics giving more prominence to an institution that is not democratic or reliable like the WHO. The health pretext cannot be an excuse for attacking the sovereignty of Member States with competences that the European Union does not have. We continue with this continued intention to push forward a globalist agenda that has weakened us.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the European Commission is showing no scruples when it comes to wanting to impose itself and try to destroy our primary sector using an alleged environmental concern as an excuse. The so-called "nature restoration law" talks about restoring, but in reality it is threatening a large part of our arable area, which was already severely restricted by previous regulations. Those who have the experience of millennia – our farmers – whose activity is essential to our livelihood are despised for imposing an absurd green discourse. In Spain the forests burn because they cannot be cleaned. Dams are knocked down when water will be needed in drought. We will not allow our food to be risked. They take us to the precipice. We need strong governments that make sense of our policies and do not succumb to climate fanaticism.

Mr. President, comrades, what can you expect from a society that does not appreciate life, childhood, that ignores the family, that understands people only in an instrumental way? For what we can expect is what is happening, what has been happening for years of governments obedient to anti-natalist agendas: in the 1970s, Europe accounted for more than 10% of the world’s population; now 5% and by 2080 we are expected to be just 3%. In my country, young people cannot become independent, nor can they aspire to buy a house or build a home, fulfil their natural desire to start a family and have children. The reality is that there has been no political will to resolve this or the will has been just to get to this situation. Is Europe dying or is Europe being killed? In Spain we are clear: Where Vox is, support for motherhood and families has always been a priority. A Europe without children is a Europe without a future. We want neighborhoods full of children's joy. We want hope. Let us put an end to this existential pessimism.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, our constitutions, the Treaties of the European Union and the Western rule of law are based on the protection of the dignity of the person. The Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man is the ultimate expression in this regard. In the case of parenthood, legal tools have always been sought to defend the child's right to know and be cared for by his or her parents. Avoid the risk of a mother being able to snatch her baby. That's all at risk today. Technology has given rise to certain practices in reproduction, without timely reflection. Surrogacy is full of undeniable ethical and legal dilemmas. There are cases of children being abused or abandoned for being considered – sorry for the expression – defective. Women deprived of liberty, null contracts because the good of the person is unavailable. The person is a subject of rights, it can never be considered an object of transaction. This commodification of relationships, the reification of people, seeing them as an object of mere desire, is unaffordable because it transforms the treatment that every person deserves, pretending to end the inherent and infinite value that our existence confers. Gentlemen, consider the impact such a look has on our society. The human person acquires his status from its genesis, with a unique and unrepeatable genetic load, inheritance of his father and mother, from generation to generation. The expression of life cannot be dissociated from the affective and family dimension. Let's look for a robust legal system that avoids the risk of breaking the bonds that naturally unite parents and children. The Commission's regulatory proposal goes in this worrying direction.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, we all agree that care must be taken to ensure that harassment does not have room in our institutions. However, I do not trust that mandatory courses for adults and sanctions for those who do not or other measures with a gender perspective will be positive, rather, even the opposite. Gender ideology promotes a rarefied environment of mistrust and confusion. He only understands confrontation, which does not help, at all, a harmonious coexistence. This report advocates exemplary behaviour within the institutions. But I invite you to reflect on whether the exclusion that exists in this Parliament towards certain political groups deserves this consideration. I have experienced it in the first person for defending the voice of my voters and carrying out my activity as a deputy. We are all responsible for the atmosphere of respect that this House deserves.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, even today many of those who have a job do not make ends meet. The bills don't come out. No one's going to be held responsible? The Commission's measures, supported by the majority in this House, have not only not prevented us from being in this situation, but have largely provoked it. The energy crisis, the increase in the money supply, the shortage of supply, dependence on third parties, not being able to exploit our raw materials, suffocating taxation, legal uncertainty, the dismantling of the productive sectors, climate radicalism, excessive bureaucracy and regulation, a mastodontic political spending. Add it up and go on. Avoidable situations, caused by concrete policies, which our ECR Group has warned about on countless occasions, and which, despite the evidence of their failure, are not being corrected. European taxes were voted on today. And I wonder: Whose interests are they defending? Not only is the welfare of families and workers being played out, the very security of our nations is being threatened. Let's change course. Let us regain our autonomy and strategic sovereignty to ensure our prosperity.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Europeans are getting poorer, not less. It will have to do with the political line of this House. Once again, the pretext of the "social" is used as an instrument for the European Union to advance in competences. And I say pretext because the legislative initiatives - up to 15 - proposed here are not only an abuse, but they are also anti-social. They will not have an impact on the well-being of citizens because, if the ecosystem of prosperity and entrepreneurship is stifled, social benefits cannot be guaranteed. Especially when the root of the problem does not want to be tackled. Ladies and gentlemen, it does not matter whether infinite resources are put into an artificial care structure if policies do not recognise and support the family as the basic cell of society. Ladies and gentlemen, Europeans cannot satisfy their natural yearning to be parents, as evidenced by the demographic crisis, in the face of which they close their eyes. Our culture is a model of success, it is what makes us attractive, and uncontrolled immigration would put an end to this atmosphere of freedom that everyone – even the next one – wants to enjoy. Look at the countries that follow another course, check the good results. Not only in the economic dimension, but also in the atmosphere of hope. Where young people can start a life in front of an agenda that only wants to offer them crumbs like the co-livingHe will have nothing and you will be happy, the culture of subsidy or victimization... loneliness. The social model must be balanced. Support the vulnerable, but never end motivation. Effort must be a reward. This is what we should promote.

Mr Rangel, according to the Istanbul Convention, violence against women is the consequence of an alleged heteropatriarchy where the male is an alleged abuser by nature against women. I ask you, as a man, how you feel. I understand that you agree with this statement. Should I see you like this, as an abuser? Should I be afraid of you as a woman?

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the need to combat violence is too serious a challenge to be used to impose any ideology. The application of so-called gender perspective concepts does not help to prevent violence but rather hinders the implementation of truly effective measures. As recognized in its own preamble, the Istanbul Convention is based on gender theory, according to which violence against women must be eradicated by eliminating socially constructed roles, thus obviating that the problem of violence is not criminal behavior but cultural constructions. It moves so it's a social problem and not a criminal one. In my country, in fact, the penalties for rapists are reduced and, therefore, the aim is to address the problem by promoting a change in the way of understanding the relationships that confront us and generate inequality between men and women, which transforms the concept of the family, as a place of conflict instead of encounter. The data shows the reality: high level of violence in countries that have based their response to violence against women on the paradigm contained in the Istanbul Convention. Despite this, today the European Union imposes this system, which does not protect, by adhering to it, by circumventing the objections of those Member States that have not ratified the Convention because they find it contrary to their Constitutions. It is the Member States which, in the use of their sovereignty, must accede to international conventions.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we want investment in health – for example, to find solutions for cancer or treat rare diseases – to be a political priority. However, we see that this is not the case when analyzing what the interests are and where the European Union allocates the resources. There is a lack of health professionals and innovation is discouraged to the point that research is moving beyond our borders. On the other hand, it insists on a strategy that, under the pretext of health, seeks to undermine the sovereignty of the Member States and third countries with "a new world health order" in "a new global governance", whose concern is not only health, but also the promotion of new values that degrade the human being and the ethics of medical practice, as is the case with the dramatic practice of abortion in so-called sexual and reproductive health. Do the citizens of the European Union know that the European Union leaves us in the hands of world organisations which, moreover, have not been elected by their votes?

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, once again, under the pretext of alleged equality, inequality is created, even between women. Some of you call this intersectionality. I call it injustice. It is a "slogan" directive: It has nothing to do with the title with what we want to sneak into it. We do not seek to help women and we do seek to introduce a gender ideology into our laws, impose ourselves on the Member States, dominate companies, and also our lives, for an equalization where attitude and talent do not have recognition. Meanwhile, European companies, their workers and families are battered by the Green Deal, inflation and suffocating bureaucracy. Now they also have to go through bad regulation that will generate a bad work environment and a collapse of litigation. That is why, on behalf of my group, I have tabled a motion of rejection which I invite you to follow if you are for the true progress of the men and women of the Union, not for the demagogy of the left. Let us show the Council and society that there are still in this House those who, in different groups and in different countries, rebel against this grave error, in defense of our security, our prosperity and our future.

Commissioner, Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, debates such as this show the lack of loyalty towards the Member States of the European Union, which should show strict respect for national sovereignty in matters of exclusive competence, such as the regulation of the registration of children in the Civil Registry. The laws of our countries, our constitutions, provide us with a protection, an order. They are consistent with our culture, history, traditions and jurisprudence that have respected natural law and common sense. Today we want to coerce Italy to ensure compliance. In this house there are those who want to make a clean slate, throw us into the void without measuring the consequences that certain laws may have, in this case, in the most fragile: children, transforming them from subjects of law into objects of transaction, treating them as commodities. This does not protect them, it exposes them; It exposes them to be objects of desire. Being a father is not a right, it is a desire.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, a pregnant woman, in a difficult situation – for economic reasons, because of loneliness – is forced to have an abortion for lack of resources. There are people who, in solidarity, offer to help you. There are many cases in which women change their minds: They accept support and can happily receive their baby. Today, in Spain, offering this help can be considered harassment. Not only that: In this Parliament, it has been proposed to prevent the entry of civil society organizations that carry out this type of action, because it is against human rights. I denounce here this grave incoherence of defending abortion as a human right. It is reckless because it puts an end to the spirit in which human rights were declared.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, almost half of this Parliament is uncomfortable with the title of this debate, because it is natural to understand that life is a gift to celebrate. What can happen in someone's heart so that they don't shudder at the beginning of a life? Here it has been said that it is cruel and inhumane to offer to listen to the beat of your heart. That means that sound tells them something. It is an unrepeatable life, one that only expects to be loved. With their activism, with the screams, women are prevented from listening, from listening to themselves. The truth is hidden from them. They are transmitted doubts, fears and sold a false freedom that chains them to an existential vacuum. They know perfectly well the tear that abortion entails. It is a drama, a drama that no one can wish for. It is reckless for our society to speak of the defense of human rights when this is a practice contrary to them. I'm sure their hearts already tell them that it is so. I encourage you to embrace life, to dare to love.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the truth is that we can say that the political line chosen by the European Union in this last term of office has led us to be in a compromised situation, with foreseeable errors, warned by groups like mine. We see how jobs are destroyed, how our business fabric loses density and the industry does not find in our environment the conditions to be able to develop its activity. Environmental requirements have led to high and rising energy prices, inflation and legal uncertainty. It is this situation that is generating poverty and misery, which cannot be solved on the basis of social policies alone. Because there must be a balance between stability and growth; we must support generating prosperity at the same time, creating the environment that allows us to be competitive, promote entrepreneurship and reactivate our economy. Surprisingly, now that we have to rethink and order priorities, a flight forward is proposed, to the point of asking that the recommendations of the European Semester lose their economic focus and involve meddling in areas where the Union has no competences, with an ideological vision that has already had and continues to have devastating effects where it is applied.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, let us be honest. The European Union is late to the battle of data, today led by the United States and China, and the Commission has done so with a proposal that aims to monopolize more power and comply with an agenda, without measuring how it affects our business fabric or our life as citizens. On the other hand, the European Parliament, with good collaboration between the groups and with the rapporteur, has managed to greatly reduce this negative impact, putting the consumer and his safety – especially his protection against abuse – at the centre of the Regulation, demanding transparency and compensation, scheduling a phased implementation for the industry, technically improving the text and freeing small and medium-sized enterprises from requirements. But there are certainly controversial points, because conceptually we have different visions of the European Union. Sovereignty of nations, in this case over data, must be national and decisions belong to that level. For this reason, we have submitted requests for change in order to limit the powers that the European institutions confer on themselves. It is an opportunity to make this rule respect the principle of subsidiarity in all its content. Let's do it, let's work together, let's keep working together. We therefore call for support for the amendments tabled by our group.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to ask, on behalf of the ECR Group, for a roll-call vote on an amendment to the agenda of the sitting, which is certainly in the interest of my fellow citizens in Spain, the European institutions and the Member States. We propose to add the debate with the Commission, without resolution, on Wednesday afternoon before the urgency debates, under the title "The scandalous case of corruption in the misuse of European Union funds by members of the PSOE before the reduction of penalties for public embezzlement in Spain". In recent weeks a new great corruption plot has been uncovered in Spain that affects the ruling party, the Spanish Socialist Workers Party, and that has already involved several deputies and officials. The plot relates to the allocation and misappropriation of EU funds in a matter of great concern to the European Commission and this Parliament, as demonstrated by the recent fact-finding mission of the Committee on Budgetary Control to Madrid. Apparently, this corrupt plot is led by a Socialist Party deputy, Juan Bernardo Fuentes Curbelo (known in summary as ‘Tito Berni’), who resigned on 14 February 2023. As already stated, several deputies of the Socialist Party... (the Chair withdrew the floor from the speaker).