Speeches

Mr President, dear colleagues, this evening I want to direct my words to the members of the ousted civilian government of Myanmar, the so-called Union Parliament. Two and a half years after the military coup attempt, the atrocities by the junta are growing and the suffering of the people, including of the refugees – some of those, the Rohingyas, have been expelled from the country – are growing day by day. So now the international community must take very seriously its responsibility to protect the people, and it is in no way acceptable that the junta is planning sham elections this year, and for that purpose it has closed and finished 40 political parties. Now it’s very important that we coordinate internationally the sanctions and that we try to find ways to address the illicit criminal economy of the junta, which is also undermining the sanctions of the democratic countries. So we need to work together with the democratic forces, the national unity government, the Union Parliament and the armed regional organisations that work all together. This is the moment that we have to take our responsibility.

The rules do not allow any kind of presentation material, and this is about plastic and lettuce, which does not have anything to do with this debate. I think we have had enough blue—cards. We are a bit delayed already. So, with your permission, I would also recommend to my successor that no more blue—cards be accepted.

I would just request that you respect the 30—second rule on the blue—cards please – both the one who poses the blue-card and the one who gives the answer.

I would like to clarify to you now the question of the blue card, with your permission. ‘The President may give the floor to Members who indicate, by raising a blue card, their wish to put to another Member, during that Member’s speech, a question of no longer than half a minute’s duration related to what that Member has said’. And now: ‘the President shall only do so if the Speaker agrees to the question’. So many of you were right and I was wrong. I was ill—informed. It seems that the focus group proposed that, nevertheless, the Member should be able to present the 30—second blue card, but the AFCO Committee has not followed the focus group. So we follow, of course, what the committee has proposed to the rules and the plenary adopted. So you were right and I was wrong. I’m sorry for that. So we will follow that practice from now on, of course.

So the way it works is that, yes, you can refuse, but the colleague can still present the blue—card, as far as we understand. We can check this with the President, and we will of course do so if we have doubts. So there is no need to answer.

Ms Riba i Giner, could you wait as you have a blue-card. I just want to clarify the rule. You can refuse, but the colleague can still present his blue—card.

The next item is the joint debate on the EU accession to the Istanbul Convention on violence against women. – Recommendation: Kohut and Kokalari - EU accession to the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence: Union institutions and public administration (A9-0169/2023) – Recommendation: Kohut and Kokalari - EU accession to the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence: Judicial cooperation in criminal matters, asylum and non-refoulement (A9-0170/2023)

Notice to the Plenary Assembly. The S&D Group has informed the President of the decision on changes to the nominations of committee members. This Decision shall be recorded in the minutes of today's sitting and shall enter into force on the date of this notification.

Then the last catch-the-eye speech, Alessandro Panza, although you did not really follow this debate, but you will still have the floor because we have a moment.

The next item is the debate on the question for oral answer to the Commission by Younous Omarjee, on behalf of the Committee on Regional Development, on the cohesion dimension of EU State aid rules and de minimis rules (O‐000016/2023 – B9-0016/23) (2023/2634(RSP)).

The debate is over. Now we're going to take a little technical break before we get on with the next thing, but don't leave if you're going to get involved. Written statements (Rule 171)

The next item is the report by Javi López, on behalf of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, on the EU Rapid Deployment Capacity, EU Battlegroups and Article 44 TEU: the way forward (2022/2145(INI)) (A9-0077/2023).

The next item is the statement by the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on EU relations with Iraq (2023/2639(RSP)).

Mr President, Commissioner, the EU has already partially suspended the trade benefits of the ‘everything but arms’ scheme. And now what we see is that the opposition leader Kem Sokha has been convicted on politically fabricated accusations to a prison sentence of 27 years by a ruler that has ruled the country for 38 years. And I think the European Union should indeed insist that, if these violations will continue, then we will indeed use all the possible means to see that the situation would be improved. We also could improve indeed, and could include the possibility to altogether continue to suspend the ‘everything but arms’ benefits.