Speeches

This is ridiculous. You and the Sweden Democrats regret the climate crisis and high emissions in China when the Sweden Democrats voted against the EU emissions trading system that prices industry instead of ordinary people. You voted against the CBAM, which is pricing emissions in China, and you are voting against renewable energy to replace fossil fuels. In fact, the Sweden Democrats, you have worse climate policy than the Alternative for Deutschland. Do you think, Beatrice, that it is credible to stand here and complain about the climate crisis, while your party does not have a single concrete, sensible proposal for how we should lower emissions and meet the 1.5-degree target?

Mr President, colleagues, I've been listening and you say you don't want the Green Deal because you don't want a change, that it will be expensive, but wake up – open your eyes. With 3.1 °C of climate change – that's what will change society, that's what will be expensive. So what you are proposing is actually going into much more change and a much more costly scenario. Open your eyes – it's happening every day, like in Valencia in October, in Romania in September, and Mayotte just last week. It is everywhere. We are not done, and I don't want to spend another second in this House talking about how we're going to draw back on the Green Deal – I want to talk on how we can move forward. So we're still not pricing fossil raw materials. Can we please discuss how we can do that to really create competitiveness on the ones not using fossil fuels? We only just started working on negative emissions; that is policy we need to roll out in order to be successful in really implementing the negative emissions. We are far from a robust and fossil-free energy system. Let's talk about that, how we can create real competitiveness and not look back.

Mr President, so, how to summarise this COP29? It's a mixed bag of feelings: from disappointment to embarrassment to determination and a relief that there is a deal. But we have to ask ourselves, what will future generations remember from Baku? And just as many times before, we didn't do enough, we didn't do it in time, and we didn't do it in place. We have to face it. The USD 300 billion – well, looking at inflation until 2035, it's barely an increase of ambitions. We have to learn from this. The EU, in this Parliament, we can do more, we can do better, we can do it earlier and we can do it sooner. And this will have to be done if we are going to change and get away from the 3.1 °C hell scenario of climate change. Next year in Brazil, we have to do better! I'm not satisfied with the efforts of this Union. I am not satisfied by the efforts of this Parliament, nor with the global commitment. But I am determined that we can improve, simply because we have to.

Ondřej, the 3.1 °C scenario of climate change – that is what will destroy Europe's economy. Is that really your message to the small island states, the developing countries that have not emitted historically but are now suffering from climate change? Their islands are disappearing, and your message is 'we are destroying our economy'? We built our economy based on fossil fuels. They have none, and we are destroying their possibilities of living. That is what the USD 3 billion is all about, taking responsibility for what we have caused them.

Mr President, I would like to thank you. Every COP counts. This isn't a gimmick. For every COP, we are making progress on climate cooperation, which is needed now more than ever. But I am ashamed to go as a Swede to Baku and negotiate for the COP when we have a government that repeatedly fails the climate work. The most effective way to get the rest of the world to increase climate ambition is to increase climate finance and ensure that we live up to our climate goals. Then it is not good enough to do as the Swedish government and ignore the climate goals. Every country must meet its climate goals. We must stop financing fossil fuels. We need to increase climate finance tenfold, and it is time for countries such as China, Singapore and Saudi Arabia to contribute to climate action and climate finance. That is what we voted on today in this resolution. I'm going to Baku as a proud European and I hope that Sweden will keep up.

Madam President, I would like to thank you for your 600 ghost ships – floating environmental disasters right into Putin’s war chest. It goes without saying, this is completely unacceptable. Unregistered, uninsured and unreliable. We must act, and we must act now. So let me be specific. There has been a lot of talk and a little workshop here today. First of all, we need to shut down European waters for these vessels. Close English Channel, make it mandatory with pilots if you are going into the Baltic Sea. Secondly, the current monitoring is far too inadequate. Satellites are not good enough. We need to point-mark these ships with drones. Thirdly, we need to slim down the market: The supply of ghost ships. The EU can take it upon itself to buy and scrap these shadow ships, so that they do not end up in Russia's hands. Fourthly, we need to use the blacklist – make sure to top it up with much more vessels. And fifthly, we need to be prepared and start coordinating for when the environmental catastrophe is a fact. Stop Russia, stop the shadow fleet! Slava Ukraini!

Mr President, we are approaching the global climate conference and our focus right now should be on the global existential climate crisis. But at the same time, we cannot ignore what is happening all over Azerbaijan, in Baku and in the host country of the COP29. Azerbaijan has violating human rights for a really long time, but this year they have really been stepping it up. Opposition figures, journalists, fighters and civil rights defenders are thrown into jail, just like Gubad Ibadoghlu, one of the finalists for the Sakharov Prize this year, nominated for his work on anti-corruption in the oil and gas sector, kept in house arrest in a frightening medical condition. If that wasn't enough, Azerbaijan is also engaged in a war with ethnic cleansing of Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh, a clear violation of international law. And given these violations, it's a shame that the UN framework allows a country like Azerbaijan to host the COP29. Lets have now the world's attention on Azerbaijan to keep that on the government, to remind them of their international obligations and to make sure that regimes like Azerbaijan cannot host the COP in the future.

Mr President, I would like to thank you. First of all, I would like to deplore the sadness and the situation that the people affected by flooding in Eastern Europe are currently facing, and the extreme weather that is taking place throughout this Union. It is high time that this issue was raised in plenary. Extreme weather is becoming more frequent as climate change increases and we need to pull our heads out of the sand. This is why we must continue to work hard to reduce emissions and strengthen climate action. Too often it is farmers, people around our countryside, forest owners who are hit hardest by extreme weather. This is about our food supply and the opportunity to live and work throughout the country. We see it in Sweden as well. Droughts, forest fires, floods are increasing all the time and have done so for the last ten years. We must continue to talk about the climate issue, but we must also talk about climate adaptation, adapting both society and the individual farm. We need a new framework and regulations to strengthen climate adaptation, but also a climate adaptation fund so that there is money to deal with these extreme challenges we face.

Mr President, isn't it a little bit typical that when we're talking about competitiveness, this room is full. And now when we're talking about one of the most important pillars to get there, well, let's say it's not as full. But first of all, Commissioner Simpson, I want to say thank you, because this report really witnesses about results. Imagine where we were just a few years ago. We really see now that the Energy Union is benefiting us and creating results. However, there are five things that still worry me. And I have to mention them, or otherwise there wouldn't be a debate. First of all, we only have 10 national energy and climate plans submitted from the Member States. That is not good enough. Second of all, 18 % of the gas is still Russian. Thirdly, fossil fuel boilers dominate the heating systems. Fourth, the fossil fuel subsidies are still there. Even though we go to COP after COP promising we will do something about it, we still haven't managed to deliver getting rid of fossil fuel subsidies. And fifth, as the report states, the retail electricity prices are still two or three times higher than in the US. These are key elements of this report that we in this House need to learn from, and I hope to see that the next Energy Commissioner is also really focusing on them. Finally, I have two questions related to the last bullet on energy prices. Can you give us an update on the interconnectivity targets and where we are there? Because I missed that in this report. And also, what's the status of the review of the congestion zones and pricing zones that we so desperately need to have a functioning electricity market in the EU? Thank you, Commissioner, and thank you so much for your hard work these past five years.

Mr President, I would like to thank you. There are many interesting proposals here now that the dialogue for strengthening European agriculture is being presented, and I look forward to the Commission now also making a workshop of these proposals that our farmers have been involved in developing. It is particularly important that the signal is now clear that a new animal welfare law is needed. The industry and the dialogue, our farmers agree that we need to strengthen animal welfare in Europe for the benefit of animals, for reduced use of antibiotics but also for farmers' competitiveness. It is unreasonable for farmers to compete on the same market under totally different conditions. With different requirements for the best interests of the animals, the costs for eggs, for milk, for pork tenderloin will be totally different if you have produced it in Sweden, in Denmark, Ireland, Greece or Romania. We can't have that. The rules of the game need to be levelled out, which is why my question to the Commission is: When are you going to present the new Animal Welfare Act that we have been asking for so long, that you have been delaying and delaying? My husband and I are waiting impatiently.

Mr President, thank you very much. The beaks of chickens are cut off without stunning, pigtails are cut off or eaten by other pigs. Castration and slaughter are carried out without stunning. Forced feeding of ducks, and rooster and bullfighting. This sounds like medieval facts, but it's still legal in the EU. Not in Sweden, but in the EU. The law that should have been presented last year has not appeared, because the Conservative group has done everything in its power to keep this allowed. It's disgusting. We in the Centre Party will continue to nag and do everything we can to get the pigs to keep their knots and the chickens to keep their beaks. It's time. How can the European Commission allow itself to be kidnapped and slowed down by rural populists? It's unworthy. High animal welfare is good for the animals, the farmer and all of us who hope that antibiotics will continue to work when we get sick in the future.

Mr President, I was just wondering, there’s no blue-card activation for this one, is that correct? There should be no blue-card procedure for this debate.

Madam President, thank you very much. It is now cheaper to change than to let the planet warm up. I wonder, where are you on this side? Those of you who are dismantling climate policy and making us miss the 2030 targets. Where are your voices to rebuild the water networks and protect the infrastructure? If you do not want to increase the climate targets, where are your demands for action for our coasts? Those of you who are backing away from climate policy and climate goals, where are your funds and crisis packages? Where is your new agricultural policy and why are you so silent about the insurance industry? Because with today’s policies – without heightened ambitions – we are moving towards 2.4°C warming and a radically changed society. You who want to dismantle the policy we have, you are moving towards a society with 3.5 to 4 degrees of warming. There we are talking about radically raised sea levels, extreme weather, floods and droughts that are waiting and you are going towards enormous costs and you are rushing there with your eyes open. So why are you so quiet? Because you actually have to choose. Either you are investing in reaching the climate targets or you are paying the rampant costs of the consequences of the climate catastrophe. And that's what we see now.

Mr President, thank you very much. Environmentally friendly. Durable. 50% less emissions. It's green. Climate compensated. Reduced climate impact. low emission levels; Best in class. Circular. environmental benefits; Future-proofed. Fossil free. Climate hero and climate neutral! Yes, dear child has many names. Many promise, but few deliver. More than half of all claims made are made out of falsehood, misrepresentation or even lies. We can't have that. This law aims to combat greenwashing and create simple conditions for companies to contribute to the transition. It should ensure that you don't have to be a chemical expert to understand what you're buying. That's the party's message to everyone back home. You should be able to rely on environmental claims. When we say green, we mean green. And once again, hard work in the EU is bearing fruit when governments at home are failing the climate.

– Mr President, colleagues must see beyond Fit for 55. We must now go for the next stop – 95. Se bortom 55, nu måste vi nå mål om minst 95 procent. Det här är inte läget att sikta lågt och göra minsta möjliga, men kommissionens förslag är inget annat än mellanmjölk. Jag är besviken! Halvdan miljöpolitik kommer inte att leda oss framåt. Vi kan bättre. Hur gör vi det? Genom ledarskap. Tydlighet. Vi stoppar oljan. Vi stoppar kolen. Vi stoppar gasen. Vi måste förbjuda fossila bränslen för energisektorn senast 2035. Starta ett kvotsystem för fossil olja så att vi får bort fossilt från produkter. Förbjud fossil marknadsföring. Städa EU-budgeten från fossil energi. Förbjud fossila subventioner. Inga nya gaspannor i Europa. Dubblera EU:s energisamarbete och se till att utöka EU:s utsläppshandel. Så visar vi ledarskap och stoppar inte huvudet i sanden. Vi presenterar många fina ord i dag från kommissionen, men vi behöver gå från ord till handling. Vi kan inte svika klimatet och klimatmålen måste höjas.

Mr President, thank you very much. We have done too little to support Ukraine and I am ashamed that our colleagues in Kiev are waiting for Viktor Orbán's day form to be told whether to get support from EU leaders or not. We have done too little and we need to do more. Ukraine deserves long-term stable support from all over the EU, and we need to do this. As long as it takes. Every country should promise to deliver guaranteed support as long as the war continues.

Jessica Polfjärd, what do M and KD think when they betray the Swedish farmers? Swedish farmers have reduced the use of plant protection products and, thanks to the Centre Party, we have received a lower requirement than other EU countries, a requirement we already meet. This legislation would get the rest of the EU countries on track, to make the same journey, to take the same costs as the Swedish farmers have already taken. It would strengthen the competitiveness of Swedish farmers. Why do you engage in rural populism and vote against proposals that strengthen Swedish agriculture and the competitiveness of Swedish farmers?

Sara Skyttedal, on the contrary, we are now protecting the competitiveness of Swedish farmers. The exemption that the Centre Party has negotiated says that Sweden should reduce the use of plant protection products by 15 percent, unlike 50 or 30 percent that was the original proposal. Swedish farmers have already fallen by 17%. This just means that the rest of Europe's countries have to get on track and do the same homework that the Swedish farmers have already done. This is good for the competitiveness of Swedish farmers, who have already taken large costs to reduce their use of plant protection products. It is shameful that KD and M do not support proposals that actually strengthen Swedish farmers' competitiveness.

Madam President, thank you very much. Swedish farmers are among the best in the world when it comes to low use of plant protection products. It is done with care, precision and knowledge. Swedish farmers are the forerunners and for decades it has looked like this. We have been pioneers not only when it comes to plant protection but also animal welfare and antibiotics. And it's right to be a forerunner, but it costs. Competitiveness suffers as a result of higher costs and domestic production is knocked out by countries and imports with lower requirements. With the proposal we are debating today, we are beginning to change that. Thanks to the Centre Party, there is an exception for those countries that have been at the forefront and already have extremely low use of plant protection products. Instead, we are now demanding that all other EU countries do the same homework that Swedish farmers have already done. With these requirements, we will ensure that the competitiveness of those farmers who have already reduced the use of plant protection products is increased. It is right for nature, for food production and for the competitiveness of Swedish farmers. (The speaker agreed to answer a question ("blue card"))

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, to achieve our climate targets, we need three things: we need drastic cuts in emissions; we need drastic increase of carbon removals; and we need viable businesses and farmers that can remove and sequester carbon from the atmosphere. These two final points have so far been neglected a lot in the EU climate agenda, but that ends now. That’s why I’m really proud of what we are doing here. As far as I know, this is the world’s first law in certifying carbon removals – with this proposal, with clear business opportunities for the companies and farmers who are doing the right things. That’s why I am so proud standing here today as Renew shadow of this file. Because this text is very much influenced by the Renew proposals. We are increasing the climate integrity as well as creating competitiveness for our companies. But colleagues, this is only the first steps. We are not done. This is only certifying the carbon removals. The next steps is creating the market, boosting the market, stimulating the carbon removals that we much need in order to fulfil our climate agenda. That’s why I really look forward to starting the discussion with the Commission and Council already next week.

Mr President, thank you very much. The Energy Union is fantastic. But let's be honest. The Energy Union has failed. Since Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, the Energy Union would reduce the use of gas and reduce the use of Russian gas. Instead, the gas policy has done the opposite. We have increased the use of gas in the EU, we have increased imports of gas into the EU and we have increased imports of Russian gas into the EU. And it is the gas policy that has not worked, and it is the one that has led to the extreme energy prices that we have had for the last two years. Now we have to learn from this lesson. Full import ban on Russian gas and full import ban on Russian LNG in particular, which continues to flow into Europe. My Europe is fighting for peace and for the climate. For the climate we have to dump gas and for peace we have to dump Putin. So let us once and for all call ourselves “dumping the Putin Union”.

Mr President, thank you very much. I'm going to talk about something that a lot of people want, but few can, do. It's taking over the farm. We in Europe have a huge challenge when it comes to generational renewal in agriculture. In the EU, only 12% of farmers are under 40. In Sweden, a quarter of farmers are under 50 and only 5% are under 35. The European Parliament has therefore produced a report that focuses on this challenge of generational renewal of agriculture. It answers a lot, but not everything. Although I do not agree with all parts, it is a good start that takes a holistic approach. What I would like to see are three things to change and improve competitiveness: Reduced regulatory complexity for all levels of agriculture. Review costs and revenues; Farming needs to become more profitable and this is politically controlled. And thirdly, it must be possible to save money in agriculture, so that we get more capital so that it becomes attractive to invest in green industries and for the next generation of farmers. Let's continue this journey. I would also like to say a big thank you to ‘LRF Ungdomen’, who has written a great report in this particular area. More focus on the next generation of farmers.

Mr President, thank you very much. Thank you very much for the debate we have had today. I think it has been incredibly rewarding, educational and fun. We are all united here that we need to produce more protein, and more sustainable protein, in Europe, and we can do it with the right conditions; with more research and development, lower administrative burden for farmers, increased economic profitability and a competitive business sector. This strategy puts the farmer in focus, and in this report we highlight concrete measures to increase protein production in Europe. It is about improved plant material through new plant breeding techniques, such as the gene scissors, and more efficient and simpler authorisation for novel foods. the need for feed additives that reduce emissions and increase protein uptake; Better conditions for side streams, making it profitable for farmers to grow protein crops. Better conditions for biofuels and more pay for residual streams, and also to increase profitability in cultivation. Review the CAP and how we organise it. We also highlight the need for research and development for new technologies and new ways of producing protein. This work has been a journey, and I know there are plenty of good examples out there. In Sweden, for example, it may be the cultivation of sea squirt on the west coast, which is grown and absorbs and purifies water from environmental impact and also has a high protein content and tastes good. It may also involve more efficient approval processes for cultivated meat. It may be Lantmännen's investment in pea protein that is further processed, which ensures that we get a better crop rotation, crops that increase biodiversity and soil health at the same time as we get plant protein. Or it could be the further processing of ordinary grass, getting protein, protein meal from grassland and grass plants. This way, the farmer can feed his animals with protein meal from grass and grass around the corner, not imported soy from Brazil. Thank you very much for this work! I really see the future ahead of us, and I look forward to the Commission's continued work on this issue.

Madam President, dear all, first of all I would like to take this opportunity to say great thanks to the shadow rapporteurs and all of the technical teams working very hard to have a concrete and constructive debate on the future of protein. I am very happy that we have this debate today because I think it is timely, important and interesting. It is on how to enhance the production of sustainable protein in our Union. Because we, both humans and animals, need protein and sustainable protein. Today we have, in many ways, good and sustainable production of protein inside of Europe. Actually, over 77 % of the protein used for feed in the EU is produced within the Union, and this is a high number. But we also import a lot of protein: we import 70 % of the high-protein content feed that we need to balance the feed ratios for our animals, such as soy from South America, as many of you are aware of. There are several reports stating that this will lead to environmental and climate issues such as deforestation, water source shortages, land grabbing, and other issues related to this, and it is also making us dependent on a few single suppliers. Both our production and our consumption of protein and food must be more sustainable in the future. This means a shift towards animal protein with a lower sustainability impact, more plant-based, new and innovative protein sources such as insects, precision fermenting and other techniques. But regardless, colleagues, the farmer must be in the centre. That has always been the key for the Renew Europe Group: to keep the farmers in the centre of this strategy. In order for all of this to happen, we need a more competitive European agricultural sector with less administrative burdens on farmers and food producers, and smarter and more sustainable regulations. My ambition with this report has all the time been the same: to present concrete policy actions that increase the production of protein in the Union while at the same time taking us closer to our environmental goals. And in my humble opinion, I think we have succeeded: the strategy that we have on the table today is a good example of this, and let me mention a few key things that you find in this strategy. First of all, there is a strong call to the Commission to urgently present a comprehensive and ambitious protein strategy covering the sustainable production and consumption of all types of protein within the EU. Moreover, this report should support the environmental transition through the development of sustainable protein sources and contribute to both open protein autonomy and resilience and profitability for farmers in rural areas. This transition demands sustainable inputs and affordable inputs such as energy, feed, feed additives, good plant material, fertiliser and soils of good quality, and that is all included in this strategy. There are also interesting opportunities in the future – extracting high-value protein from grassland for biorefinery, for example. But we also need to develop more into plant-based food, and we therefore urge the Member States to follow Denmark to introduce a plant fund to invest in plant-based projects. In the future, our consumption of protein will also be more diverse. Therefore, we need to have a positive, open-minded, innovation-friendly approach towards food technologies, such as precision fermenting and cultivated food and I am therefore very happy that in this report we are not only looking at feed, we are also looking at protein for food. And I am very happy that we can suggest to the Commission to put forward technical guidelines in order to make application of novel foods much easier. As stated in my start, I wanted to present concrete policy actions and this report presents concrete policy actions such as new genomic techniques, CAP rules, a renewable energy directive, a feed additives regulation, novel food legislation, R&D strategies and much more. To conclude, colleagues, I think this report gives us a very good start towards more competitiveness, production and sustainability in the protein value chain. I look forward very much to the debate and thanks again to all of the political groups for a lot of good cooperation.