Speeches

Mr President, Commissioner Schmit, 22% unemployment in 2030: This is the objective proposed by the European Commission in these guidelines. It's embarrassing. One in four unemployed workers. Is this all the European Union can offer us? One in four of us on the street? But at the same time, the 2030 Agenda speaks of zero poverty. Zero poverty? How? The intentions are clear: subsidy culture. Poverty is caused and then the aid is marketed. Let's change course, employment is the best social policy. Let's talk about creating wealth, competitiveness, a market of prosperity where we can earn decently, with our effort, the livelihood of our families and be free (and not, as proposed here, dependent on any government).

Madam President, Commissioner Dalli and Commissioner Kyriakides, ladies and gentlemen, the COVID-19 crisis has been fraught with errors and poor transparency, both in the Member States and in the coordination work carried out by the Commission. These proposals should serve to improve access to information and coordination to gain agility in crisis management. The improvement of the available health instruments cannot, under any circumstances, be an excuse for imposing policies orchestrated by the European Commission to gradually empty the Member States of their competences. Coordinating on health does not imply unilaterally imposing disproportionate measures or discarding effective mechanisms at national level. The impending reform of the European pharmaceutical legislation will demonstrate whether we have been able to work together to find respect for the balance of competences that benefits the health of Europeans, innovation and, at the same time, industrial development and the autonomy of supplies.

Madam President, we call for the inclusion in the agenda of a debate without a resolution following the infamous statements by Spain's Minister for Equality, Irene Montero, on the sexual relations of children of legal age based on consent. Consenting? A child? What are we talking about? We need a serious debate in this Parliament on respect for the innocence of children, which today, unfortunately, is being stalked by ideological policies with concepts that a child is not yet able to assume; that damage him, injuring the normal development of his personality. His right to know sexuality at the right age must come hand in hand with those who truly know him, who are his parents and not those who want to corrupt him.

Madam President, it is clear that Europe needs to be reindustrialised. The pandemic made this clear, even more so in the context of the war in Ukraine. Our dependence makes us vulnerable. We need industry to generate prosperity and jobs. But the reality is that in Spain – including Germany, Italy and France – the industrial fabric is disappearing. They are forced to close or go to third countries because here they are drowned with more and more legislation, such as climate legislation, which leaves them completely out of the game. Because, ahead of this much-needed industrial strategy, there are other incompatible ones, such as the Green Deal, to which they continue to give priority, without mercy, without flexibility. Why don't you listen? There are solutions. It is necessary to match the plans to the situations, to the maturity of the technologies. The determination to move forward with environmental objectives shows that the happiness of European people and citizens is not their concern.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we are talking about fundamental rights, but this report attacks them: denies the most elementary right, the right to life, with an obsessive promotion of the drama of abortion; lack of respect for the dignity of individuals; creates inequalities and division through collectivization, victimization and the promotion of ideologies such as gender. In 2020 and 2021, some governments have taken measures that we would never have imagined, and they deserve a deep reflection on what the situation of fundamental rights has been during the pandemic. It seems that it does not matter the violation of freedoms with incoherent confinements: The Spanish Constitutional Court has declared two states of alarm unconstitutional, but it prefers to attack Poland and Hungary skewedly. Neither do the elderly in residential care, nor the health personnel exposed in their work without the necessary protection, nor the imposition of de facto vaccination, no difference in treatment on the basis of possession of a certificate, no censorship of free expression... This occasion has been used to engage in political activism and thus collaborate with the increasing violation of fundamental rights in the European Union.

Mr President, Commissioner, the social economy is a new scheme compared to the traditional one that can cover an intermediate reality between the public and private sectors, generating new opportunities that respond to a social good. The typology and development of entities recognized within this model in the European space have been very heterogeneous. Therefore, the uniqueness and regulation of each nation must be respected. We do not agree that the wealth that the social economy can bring, the creativity to be developed or the potential are affected by an imposition, by a requirement to align or condition these projects to the objectives of other agendas, such as the environmental one, or to the Sustainable Development Goals, which limit entrepreneurship in one direction. The social economy must contribute to generating activity and services – needs that are not being met – but at the same time it must coexist with a market economy, never phagocyte it. It must do so respecting free competition and offering the same quality standards, without requiring exclusive privileges that detract from the presence or competitiveness of other business projects in the same sector.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, rapporteurs, getting care that guarantees the dignity of every person is an essential responsibility of our society. We have all received them and we will all offer them. Getting there is still a challenge. This strategy was an opportunity to design a serious and ambitious framework for those in need of care, committed to those providing care and respectful of national competences, but it does not provide all the clarity we needed. It lacks structure, mixes concepts related to the regular, irregular and informal world of work, which are the relatives, but avoids naming them. In fact, it is proposed as an objective to externalize care through an artificial infrastructure that replaces the family, values care exclusively from an economic and unhuman perspective, and smears these occupations abounding in the alleged victimization of women for having a greater presence, ignoring our natural vocation. Through an alternative text, we propose to give priority to supporting the family, which is the irreplaceable natural environment where life and affections take place; give options to choose solutions adapted to each moment and each situation; propose creative ideas, offer economic resources and promote tax advantages that allow the dedication of a family member or professional services that are of quality and qualified on the basis of a specialty, whether domestic, educational or therapeutic; recognize the incalculable and indispensable value of those who offer their dedication. There is no more honorable work, caring for another transcends the mere material act. Returning prestige and seeking good conditions is a priority, whether you are a family member or a professional.

Madam President, the end of 'Roe contra Wade' in the United States is a return to sanity, after fifty years of confusion and helplessness over a misinterpretation of the concept of freedom. The defense of life has had a major place in your nation's culture and history. There is therefore no constitutional recognition of the right to abortion. This sentence invites a reflection, to look face to face at the reality of abortion, without beautiful words that cloud consciences or ideological premises that denaturalize women and push us to despise love and life. During pregnancy there is a tiny reality: obvious. It is illogical to think that, if desired, it is a baby, and if not, then it is discarded, as if it were an object. Open yourself to a new way of understanding life. Don't be afraid. If the spiritual and transcendent dimension is missing, if we only value the material dimension, human existence is instrumentalized and relationships are commodified. The protection of life cannot be questioned, it does not depend on circumstances. Not doing so unprotects us all, especially the most fragile. The guarantee of the security of human rights lies in affirming life.

Madam President, more than 360 million Christians suffer, because of their faith, high levels of persecution and discrimination. They are threatened, rejected, imprisoned, displaced, beaten. They are forced to marry, their churches raided, closed, some destroyed, but they do not abandon their faith in Jesus. One in five Christians is persecuted in Africa, two in five in Asia, one in fifteen in Latin America. Christians suffer persecution for hatred of Islamic extremism, for communist oppression, for non-Islamic religious nationalism, and the rest, for other reasons. Last week we saw the terrible images of a young student beaten, stoned and burned alive in Nigeria. This week we have seen, also in Nigeria, the church of San Francisco Javier, in the State of Ondo, attacked during the mass on Pentecost Sunday, its parishioners dying on the ground and part of the kidnapped community. Also this week the Christian village of Nandoli, in Mozambique, has been burned by the Islamic State. Europe is looking the other way and this must end. That's enough. There can be no collaboration with any of these governments and any assistance from the European Union and its Member States must be made conditional on the real protection of these communities. Only in Nigeria is a Christian killed every two hours, thirteen a day. Our actions and words today can save these lives, before they kill tomorrow, the day after tomorrow or next week. Therefore, I implore your help. Life goes in it for our brothers.

All abortions are unsafe, there is always an end to a developing life; In fact, none of us would be here if our mother had aborted. What do you think of this reflection, Mrs. Walsh?

– Mrs Rodríguez Palop, in our country we know that there are many women who are pressured to give up their babies because they cannot take on a childhood. They do receive funding to abort, but not to support them with their financial situation. Don't you think it shouldn't be a privilege for women who have financial solvency to be able to have children?

Madam President, what is happening here is a huge irregularity: They are based on a leaked draft of the U.S. Supreme Court regarding abortion. What are you pretending? Coerce the jurisdiction of the United States? Are they trying to illegally influence democratic legislation? It is a disgrace and a discredit to this institution. As a woman, I am not able to understand the ways in which they claim something as painful as ending a pregnancy. They should listen to the experience of women who have chosen to have an abortion: They are tricked into believing that they are involved in an unimportant intervention, but the reality is that they are approached by a rather delicate process and with absolute coldness. It is normal for a woman to feel restless when she learns of a pregnancy: It is difficult to assimilate it, but this does not mean that you do not want it. Those of us who have lost babies know the sadness when you receive the news that it does not prosper, you experience a great absence. Opposing abortion is not only a matter of conscience, but of knowing how to choose good, where we will find love and happiness. Christianity invites us all to respect human dignity. The true protection of women lies in supporting them in their motherhood, today it is a heroism and a privilege to be a mother. The lack of resources cannot be the cause of the child limit. Women's decisions are not being free, they are being pushed by a poisoned society, by a feminism that denies its femininity. Human rights cannot be subordinated to ideological issues that seek to normalize the practice of an "anti-human right" such as abortion. The United States shows us that social consciousness values life, and you make us see through this debate that it values death.

Madam President, peaceful international coexistence is based on respecting the political course that each country decides democratically and respecting the decisions of its courts; It is not sensible to question them here, in the European Parliament, with biased debates, let alone on matters in which the Union has no competence. We therefore call for this debate on abortion not to take place next Wednesday: It is an unacceptable interference in the jurisdiction of a country like the United States just because it does not satisfy the line that millions of people are legitimately following, millions of people who appreciate life, who defend true human rights and who, with common sense, will not accept the imposition of new and inconsistent ideologies that lead us to lose our natural identity. Abortion is a drama that no one can desire, not a right. I would like to see this Parliament raise its voice for the defence of our dignity as women by supporting motherhood. Reflect: What is the fate of a society that does not appreciate life?

Mr President, the European Union was formed with the concern of avoiding further clashes over raw materials and energy. However, the obsession with renewables has led us to the inconsistency of generating a dependence on third countries with totalitarian regimes, such as Russia, that have taken peace from us. But no, they cannot recognize that it has been a wrong strategy, that the objectives have been too demanding, that the plan has not been well designed, and they continue to insist on accelerating the green transition. We have not stopped crying out the need for an energy mix that would allow us to have autonomy. Do you not see that environmental policies are fuelling instability, insecurity and poverty in the Union and our countries?

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, after an interesting proposal of micro-credentials, which can offer useful and flexible training adapted to the current moment and to the situation of each person throughout their professional life, there is also another idea, diffuse: the concept of the European Education Area with targets by 2025. Concerns that this idea could imply an interference that undermines the sovereignty of the Member States in terms of educational competences at the service of promoting ideologies such as gender and climate in an effort to homogenize the interests of people in Europe that limits the subjects, as mentioned here today, to the consecration of ecological sustainability: It seems that there is only a need for training along these lines. It is also disturbing that the aim is to promote education for European and global citizenship and the activist appeal of young advocates for a more inclusive and sustainable society; That is, indoctrination. Be clear.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is sad that, in the face of a drama of such dimensions, in the face of an unjustifiable war invasion, there are those who take the opportunity to put tares. It is heartbreaking to see families separated, mothers with their children who do not know if they will meet their husbands again. Ukrainians are giving their lives for their own, for their homeland. The human being has again shown a cruelty that we thought overcome. The evil is evident these days with degrading violence, violations such as weapons of war, mafias that profit from human trafficking, crimes against humanity that must be persecuted. No action should go unpunished. But, at the same time, we must unanimously applaud the welcoming spirit of neighbouring countries, such as Poland and Hungary, whose Christian values have led them to open their homes without hesitation. They deserve international recognition for their humanitarian work and not the unwarranted criticism that is being voiced these days. They're mean. They only have the concern to implement a culture that does not value life, but materializes it, commodifies it, as is the case with the promotion of abortion or surrogacy. Who is not dismayed with the situation of helplessness and danger of these pregnant women and babies in a legal and ethical limbo? Life is not an object of whim or desire.

Madam President, the defence of human rights must be present in any country where freedom and human dignity are respected. The European Union cannot have a double standard when it comes to defending these rights. For example, we see how strategic relations are maintained, which have compromised our autonomy, with totalitarian regimes that do not respect the smallest democratic standards. In Afghanistan, violent groups have seized power by striking the lives of many innocents, especially women and children, without a strong response from the European Union or even normalizing relations with these illegitimate powers. The European Union, faced with this reality, shows great moral weakness and lack of international leadership. What can be achieved by limiting action to debates like this? The European Union must be consistent with its essence in the values of its faith, culture and traditions if it is to inspire the defence and promotion of human rights, instead of confusing consciences with ideological interpretations of them and silence those who are truly responsible for the dramatic situation of Afghan women.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the European Semester is the framework within which the economic and budgetary policies of the countries of the European Union are coordinated. Now it is intended the interference of changing its nature including other matters that change its objectives and, in addition, with an ideological language such as gender equality, the green, fluid and inclusive transition, climate neutrality, sustainability. A way to put our economy at the service of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals to force social change. Where to? Behind these euphemisms lies out-of-control spending at a time of crisis and pressing need. An increase in EU taxes is even encouraged. We value positively the references to the protection of the family and the large family and to conciliation. But we cannot tolerate training on sexual orientation and gender identity being an integral part of education systems. We will not support any political initiative with ideological intent.

Mr President, the European Union's external action in the fight against inequality cannot be based on ideological theories that undermine human identity: Gender ideology is perverse, degrades women, confronts us with men, and disrupts the family and society. Third countries that need our support have the right to be respected in their identity and not to be contaminated with atrocities such as the promotion of abortion. It's a manipulation, a blackmail: Exporting these theories corrupts their culture and traditions, as is happening here in Europe. We are in favour of promoting economic and social rights, equality, guaranteeing the autonomy of women and girls, but always respecting their essence and their greatness, never in opposition to men or in a permanent conflict of struggle between the sexes: We achieve progress together, man and woman, complementing each other. We denounce practices that denigrate the dignity of women, which affect their freedom. This action plan does not show this concern. Let us transmit all the good that our European cultural heritage has left us, let us not deprive them of enriching themselves with the wisdom of our roots in Christian humanism.

Mr President, it is not serious that a text is proposed at the last minute that lacks legal rigor and internal logic, without time to make amendments. It mixes women with gender ideology and climate change with a logic impossible to decipher. What does effective gender-transformative climate action mean, for example? Can anyone understand what you're talking about? It's crazy. Go back to reality and come down from the climatic clouds where you are installed. Stop obeying globalist interests with international summits that only seek to use the European Union as a transmitter belt of globalist movements promoted by the United Nations. Take care of the real problems. We gambled a lot. Recover common sense if you really want to support women or the environment. And forget about these ideologies that corrupt human reason and hope.

Mr. President, you young people deserve to be told the truth, that a full life is only achieved on a path of effort and development of virtues, where love and the search for the common good are present. But here, in Parliament, you are told of imposed agendas, of ideologies that encourage victimization, guilt, hopelessness, fear, rather than learning to trust yourself. Follow the natural dictates of reason, of your heart and unfold your talent. Wake up, you are the present. Seek a prosperous environment of hope and opportunities for a decent livelihood, to be able to start a life and start a family. You are the light of the world.

Madam President, rapporteur, shadow rapporteurs, it has been a pleasure to work as a team to present this European Beating Cancer Plan, which materialises the collaboration between sovereign Member States, their health policies, and allows us to share and drive forward progress. The fragility of the human being in the face of disease also shows us his dignity. We promote responsible, virtuous habits, not only for personal benefit, but also to contribute to a balanced society that values health and life. Our culture, especially the Mediterranean diet, is associated with greater longevity. Investing resources in research benefits us all. Knowing the causes of cancer in depth will provide us with new opportunities for treatment or early detection that increase survival. Life does not belong to us, but we can decide how to accompany it. All patients should be provided with palliative care to help them cope with suffering or pain in each of the phases of the disease, taking into account all the dimensions of the person: physical, psychological, spiritual, but also affective. We know that the love and presence of loved ones is vital. Also the most practical and material issues: the nutritional status of the patient, physical or cognitive rehabilitation or aesthetics are fundamental aspects of the treatment that should be available until recovery is achieved. The ability to overcome patients and family members, the vocation of professionals, the concern of scientists to find solutions well deserves the support of the European Union with an action plan to fight cancer that should be at the service of people and not an ideological or political instrumentation.

Madam President, Commissioner, I wonder: Do they really care about unity? So why attack a Member State? Poland is protecting human rights as enshrined in 1948; We appreciate you doing it. Abortion is not a human right: This perverse interpretation does away with the protection they should provide us. Poland is sovereign to regulate according to its laws, and does so by being faithful to its faith, culture, and traditions, and also to its own jurisprudence; it is an interference by the Union to question compliance with the rule of law. Poland has already suffered the oppression of ideologies. It not only protects itself, it protects us all from the degeneration that comes with the culture of death that from here, from the European Parliament, is being promoted. Life has absolute value. Dear Poland, do not give in; Gentlemen, reconsider: The imposition of ideologies leads us to European disunity. I end by wishing you all a Merry Christmas with your families.

Madam President, it is disconcerting that an institution that should set an example, such as the European Parliament, which presumes to fight for women's rights and which, in turn, is supposed to have an influence in the world of politics, forces us, days after giving birth, to have a physical presence to intervene and vote, something impossible given that we must travel. I complain that a situation as natural as motherhood is not resolved in this house and we are prevented from exercising the political responsibility of representing those who have placed their trust in us. There are votes where a single vote is decisive. During the pandemic, the solution of online participation has been found. Both talk about digitization and it turns out that it is not contemplated to continue with the use of this technology in situations as justified as the birth of a baby. Really, it cries out to heaven that we have to ask that this inconsistency be remedied.