Speeches

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. I was really horrified when I learned that there is an intention in The Gambia to lift the ban on female genital mutilation here. I think we should do everything we can to the government there and, of course, also call on the Commission and our External Action Service to intervene here. We have existing conventions to eliminate all forms of discrimination against women, a convention on the rights of the child and a convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. This genital mutilation is indeed something that does not belong in the 21st century and cannot be pronounced by any government as something progressive or in the interests of women. Take that intention back. This is our call to the Government of The Gambia.

Mr President, colleagues, to end the debate, I have a suggestion to make. As I learned from Zhala, from his daughter, that apparently, President Aliyev is on Friday in Berlin meeting the Chancellor Scholz. Perhaps those who took the floor here, that we all send an email to the Chancellor’s office asking him, or asking his aides, to include in his speaking notes the reference to our case here, to Dr Ibadoghlu, and asking the Chancellor to raise the issue and allow him to travel home. So that is my suggestion, where perhaps it has an impact and might lead to an immediate result.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. The mullahs regime has launched a new level of escalation in the Middle East with the direct attack on Israel. This should be an occasion, but not the sole reason, to finally raise other strings against a regime that is repressive, internally against its own population, externally against Israel, but also a threat to other neighbours in the region. At the latest since the regime has been actively engaged in Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine – by supplying the Shahed drones and other weapons – it should have been clear that dialogue with this regime was no longer possible, not even a vague hope that the nuclear agreement could still be implemented. I had that hope for a while. Iran has become part of the Russian-North Korean terrorist alliance against Ukraine and, of course, against Israel. Therefore, the Pasdaran must now be on the EU terror list, economic sanctions must now be fully coordinated in consultation with the US, and we support politically and materially the democracy movement in Iran. Women, life and freedom – this must be the future for the people of Iran, which we should also wholeheartedly support.

Madam President, colleagues, Commissioner, if I had five minutes speaking time, we would indeed repeat one by one your speech because I fully subscribed to what you have said and you have said it all. Indeed, there are obligations that the Georgian Government has undertaken and which they are blatantly violating by introducing this law. Well, actually, my impression is if it is about foreign agents, the only foreign agents that are involved in this is those in the ruling party, who copy Russian laws and are promoting the way Russia rules at home, and perhaps even on behalf of that. And if I look at the Prime Minister, Kobakhidze, some time ago, they were still with the S&D group and were there complimented out for right reasons. But, in the meanwhile, he will be going to Budapest to a very right-wing conference and appear there as a speaker together with Mr Wilders and others. So I really wonder where this country is heading and where this ruling party is heading. We support the will of the people. We are in full solidarity with those protesters with Georgian and European flags, and apart from that, we once again also demand the release of Mr Saakashvili and also to see to it that we can get hold of Mr Ivanishvili and sanction him because he is the one in the background who is actually guiding the agenda there.

Mr De Graaff, you are the last person to speak of Christian values. Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich komme aus einem Land, das zwei Diktaturen erlebt hat. Mit der ersten haben wir fast ganz Europa und Nordafrika mit Krieg überzogen. Die zweite Diktatur beschränkte sich im Wesentlichen auf die Unterdrückung der eigenen Insassen. Und obwohl fast jedes Volk in Europa unter einer eigenen oder fremden Diktatur oder gar zwei Diktaturen gelitten hat, sieht das verbrecherische Putin-Regime es offenbar als erfolgsversprechend an, unsere freien Gesellschaften nicht nur vor den Wahlen zu manipulieren. Das schieht zum einen über soziale Medien. Ich cann seit einem Monat z. B. auf Facebook einen sehr deutlichen Anstieg von Aktivitäten feststellen, die offensichtlich einen russischen oder europäischen Rechtsaußenhintergrund haben. Zum Others propose wir fest – und das ist der politische Skandal –, dass es offenbar in diesem Haus und sicher auch in mehreren Mitgliedstaaten Politiker gibt, die trotz der Erfahrungen mit zwei Diktaturen bestimmte autocratische Neigungen haben und die Putin irgendwie als ihren geistigen Mentor ansehen. Es ist fast egal, ob jemand Geld, Reisen oder Sachleistungen für politisches Wohlverhalten im Sinne Russlands bekommt oder ob es schlicht Führer-Entzugserscheinungen sind – possibly in English ‘Führer-deprivation syndrome’ –, das Verhalten was motiviert. Unsere Aufgabe muss es signalin, innerhalb der Institutionen Spione aufzudecken, sich hier im Haus mit den entsprechenden Kollegen auseinanderzusetzen – aber am wichtigsten ist aus meiner Sicht, dass wir auf alle politischeen Ebenen, in alle Ländern und in der Öffentlichkeit die Resilienz unserer Gesellschaften stärken, damit sie auf diese Art der Manipulation nicht mehr reinfallen. That is the Aufgabe of the Democratic Party and of the Civil Society. Lasst uns da sister ammenarbeiten, damit Putin's Absichten niece von Erfolg krrönt sind.

Madam President, colleagues, this oral question relates to a budget support measure to Tunisia amounting to EUR 150 million. What is at the heart of the oral question, as I read it, is not Tunisia as such or relations with that country. This oral question addresses a far more principled issue: the relation between the Commission and this House in its role as budgetary authority. It therefore relates primarily to the procedural flaws in drafting and adopting the implementing decision by the Commission. During the drafting phase of the implementing act, not even informal contacts took place between the Commission and Parliament, as stipulated in paragraph 12 of the agreement between Parliament and Commission on comitology procedures. Furthermore, the Commission adopted the draft implementing decision in an urgent procedure after it learned that we were about to initiate an objection. That could even be interpreted as trying to bypass and thereby undermine this House’s authority. Additionally, the special measure seems legally questionable with regard to provisions in the NDICI-Global Europe Regulation, as well as the Financial Regulation on Conditionality. That should not be taken lightly by this House, as it ultimately is about the ability of Parliament to exercise its right of scrutiny that requires proper, timely and sound information by the Commission to Parliament. So we ask whether the Commission can explain why it was necessary to use an urgent written procedure for this special measure last December, given that the budget support of EUR 150 million was announced as early as 11 June 2023, and that an urgent procedure restricts the exercise of Parliament’s powers of scrutiny. Given that a significant deterioration in fundamental rights constitutes grounds for suspending, reducing or cancelling budget support to partner countries, and given the significant deterioration of such rights in Tunisia since July 2021, can the Commission clarify how it has deemed that Tunisia currently meets the requirements? Given that budget support is subject to the provisions of Article 27(4) of the NDICI-Global Europe Regulation, can the Commission clarify in a written form the definition of conditionality for the said budget support, provide further written details on the procedure and the criteria for assessing whether the conditions are met, as well as on the baseline applied for the assessment of the current state of fundamental rights in Tunisia? Can the Commission clarify why it chose to disburse the budget support in a single tranche, thus not permitting a gradual disbursement based on concrete milestones or steps achieved, as foreseen in Article 236(2) of the Financial Regulation, nor the suspension of further disbursement should a clear erosion of fundamental rights be observed? Lastly, what formal guarantees has the Commission received from the Tunisian authorities since September 2023 that ensure that Parliament will be allowed to visit EU-funded projects in Tunisia and thus exercise its right of oversight and scrutiny in accordance with Article 14 of the Treaty on European Union.

Madam President, colleagues, on Ukraine I said yesterday what needs to be said. I welcome that there is movement to enlarge the scope of the activities of the European Investment Bank to defence that will hopefully also end the hesitance of private banks to engage in defence-related activities. I welcome the announcement of the Commission President that she intends to install a Defence Union Commissioner in the new Commission, and I would like to see it as an ambitious approach. As a Commissioner, this ‘DUC’ should be assigned all defence-related EU actions within the remit of the European Commission, and in particular on defence research, the support for the industrial base, military mobility, the procurement and transfer directives, resilience, defence and training. All Commission actions should be encompassed in a single Multiannual Defence in Union Instrument, which the DUC oversees. The DUC should be assigned by the Council the role of the EU’s Special Representative for the Defence Union. In that role, he should in particular oversee the EDA and PESCO, military staff, military committee, military missions and operations and should be responsible for the relationship with NATO and should be assigned the responsibility to inform the European Council about the readiness of the EU to move to a common defence.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to remind you once again why we are also spending the €50 billion on Ukraine: because Ukraine is part of Europe, because Ukraine defends itself and us, because the Ukraine spirit will also strengthen the EU. He knows what values we are defending. It strengthens our resilience, fosters not only Ukrainian but also European creativity and dynamism, opens up access to new resources and, overall, creates new opportunities for European commonality. But let's not forget: Ukraine also pays the highest price – dead, injured and traumatised soldiers and civilians, destruction of infrastructure and private assets and the environment. We need to help – not ‘for as long as it takes“, but “:whatever it takes“. With the Facility – and this is a particular concern for many – we want to strengthen local self-government and SMEs with specific funding shares. Our European experience shows: They thrive particularly well in freedom. Freedom is guaranteed by democracy and the rule of law. A democracy needs representatives, representatives of the people at all levels and unlimited free media. Parliamentarians must be allowed to travel, exchange ideas, inform us, bring Ukrainian concerns to the people of Western Europe. I therefore criticise the undemocratic travel bans on members of the Rada. It reminds me of past times. But with the Facility, we are strengthening not only SMEs and local self-government, but also civil society and the mechanisms for reviewing the use of funds. The citizens of the EU expect this from us and the Ukrainians from their own government. That is why I am convinced: Our financial aid is well spent. They will strengthen Ukraine and we will also benefit from this in the EU. I hope we find ways and means to confiscate the frozen Russian funds in the end. Russia must pay for its crimes. Okkupanty, domo! Slava Ukrajini!

Mr President, dear colleagues, the European Union delivers on its promises on Ukraine. The EUR 50 billion Ukraine Facility is a clear marker for that. And when I was in Kyiv over the weekend, like many colleagues and other dignitaries from Europe and the world, amongst the tense discussions that we had on deliveries of arms, this was a positive highlight when you mention, yes, we are delivering, although with the two months delay because of the Hungarian veto in December. Now we have enabled the Commission also to pay out the first EUR 4.5 billion, probably at the beginning of March, and thank you for that. The objective thereof is, of course, during the war, to give the larger part for budget support for Ukraine in order to keep the state running and the functions going. But it is one process. It is budget support, but it is not only preparation, but also about reconstruction ongoing. It’s about future investments and to deliver the expertise that we need for the process that will automatically be part also of the pre-accession process because we cannot separate it artificially. And for that we have, as a Parliament particularly, insisted that in this process, where a European Ukraine is created for the time after the war, that the Verkhovna Rada – our colleagues – will have a bigger say in the process, how the means are used, that other levels of administration on the region and the local level, that they would have a say and an impact on the reconstruction of the country. That it is a principle that we would build back better for future Ukraine and that that all happens in a transparent process because we are aware that the bad guys that in the past were corrupt and, fortunately, because of the transparency that is already there, corruption cases come out in Ukraine, also during the war, which is a positive development. And insofar, I am confident that with the measures that we as a Parliament have particularly put focus on, this whole process, the Ukraine plan that will be implemented by the Ukrainian government, will contribute to this better Ukraine for the time thereafter. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir können uns die Diskussion über die 50 Milliarden Euro aber sparen, wenn wir nicht endlich auch erkennen, dass wir die Bremse lösen müssen und die Ukraine mit dem an Waffen beliefern, was sie jetzt am dringlichsten braucht. Und das geschieht nicht. In Kyjiw war von einem „slow yes“ die Rede bei den Lieferungen, die sie über die Jahre bekommen haben. Die Prioritäten, das ist Munition, das ist Luftabwehr, und das sind die weitreichenden Raketen, um die Versorgungswege des Aggressors zu unterbrechen. In diesem Zusammenhang ist jede Debatte, die in die richtige Richtung führt, richtig und wichtig. Wir müssen endlich dafür sorgen, dass in der Europäischen Union produzierte Waffen nicht an Drittstaaten geliefert werden, sondern umgeleitet werden in die Ukraine. Wir müssen dafür sorgen, dass die 5 Milliarden Euro, die für dieses Jahr für die Friedensfazilität vorgesehen sind – wo Herr Borrell sich darum bemüht –, dass diese 5 Milliarden Euro auch für Ankäufe auf dem globalen Markt genutzt werden, damit schnell geliefert werden kann. Der tschechische Präsident hatte sich in dieser Richtung auch in München schon geäußert. Das sind alles Voraussetzungen dafür, dass die anderen Dinge geschehen können. Wenn sich dann der deutsche Bundeskanzler hinstellt und behauptet, er würde deutsche Soldaten nicht in die Ukraine schicken, weil Taurus installiert werden müsste durch Soldaten, dann ist das objektiv falsch und eine Schande, wenn man sich das anschaut, denn kein Taurus ist bisher von deutschen Soldaten im Ausland installiert worden. Da kommt die Firma aus Schrobenhausen mit ihren zivilen Mitarbeitern und tut das. Deswegen sollten falsche deutsche Debatten nicht auf der europäischen Ebene für Irritationen sorgen. Slawa Ukrajini!

Mr President, colleagues, shanovni Ukraintsi. Ten years of war, two years of full—scale war waged by a war criminal in the Kremlin. The Ukrainian nation stands united and refuses to be subjugated back into the servitude of a Russian gulag. The EU also stands united behind Ukraine, and we are not alone, if we look at the Rammstein format of almost 50 states that help in multifaceted ways. I am proud, as standing rapporteur for Ukraine and as a co-rapporteur for the Ukraine Facility, that we concluded the Trilogue on the Ukraine Facility yesterday evening as part of the revised Multiannual Financial Framework. However, we can forget about all these good things that we have foreseen if Ukraine is unable to defend itself and push back the aggressor towards its own borders. We need to support Ukraine in this regard, not only as long as it takes, but with whatever it takes. That is why I support the suggestion of the Estonian Prime Minister that said that every EU Member State should provide 0.025 % of its GDP for weapons deliveries to the country. Le président Macron a parlé à plusieurs reprises du soutien de la France jusqu’à la victoire. Très bien. Mais il faut des livraisons d’armes françaises au niveau, par exemple, de ce que fournit l’Allemagne. Aber gegenüber dem zögerlichen und falsch beratenen deutschen Kanzler wiederhole ich in guter Gesellschaft mit führenden Vertretern der Ampelkoalition und der CDU/CSU-Opposition im Bundestag die Forderung: Liefern Sie Taurus jetzt! Es gibt dafür eine Mehrheit im Bundestag. Deutschland ist keine Ein-Mann-Demokratie. Haben Sie keine Angst vor Ihren Parteilinken, sondern vor einem Sieg Putins! Stehen wir gemeinsam und dauerhaft geschlossen gegen das Reich des Bösen, das auch unsere Art zu leben bedroht! Slawa Ukrajini!

– Madam President, dear colleagues. As China is a one—party dictatorship, it is not a surprise that in order to stay in power, such structures need to repress multifold groups in their respective societies. When it comes to China, we have on many occasions discussed the fate of the Uyghurs, of Tibet and of the citizens of Hong Kong. Today we once again focus on the fate of those who practice Falun Gong. It’s a practice that doesn’t harm anyone, that is not a danger to the state, but apparently the Party considers it – or has been considering it since 1999 – a threat to their ideology. The case we are focusing on is Mr Ding Yuande, who has been arrested and was in December sentenced to more than three years’ imprisonment. The only charge is that he practises Falun Gong. We are of the opinion that all those, not only Falun Gong practitioners, but the other groupings that I have named who are persecuted and repressed, need to be released unconditionally and allowed to practice their faith or to practice their culture, as it is also enshrined in the Chinese Constitution. We demand that the Member States publicly condemn these practices and that we should apply the EU global human rights sanctions regime and also national human rights sanctions regimes against all the perpetrators, as well as entities that have contributed to the persecution of Falun Gong practitioners in China. We stress that EU measures should include visa refusal, freezing of assets, expulsion from EU territories and criminal prosecution, including on the basis of extraterritorial jurisdiction or the initiation of international criminal charges. That is what we owe to the citizens who are innocent and who need to be released.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. We had a resolution here in October with a broad consensus. That was good, and I hope that once again we can decide something with a broad consensus here. Some things haven't changed since October. Hamas continues to shoot at Israel, and Israel continues to respond. And because Hamas is still shooting and the hostages have not yet been released, we are also in this terrible humanitarian situation of the people of Gaza. Yes, Israel, too, must abide by international humanitarian law, and we call on the government to be very precise there and to make sure that civilians are not affected in this way by the fighting. I think we have every reason to insist, given the supply situation, that we have regular humanitarian breaks. It is important that the United Nations, that all those who deliver the aid, can get there, including to the north of Gaza. That is why I also appeal to the Israeli government not only to open Kerem Shalom, but also to open the border crossings directly to supply in the north. And then Israel can also concretely control what goes in there, and be sure that no weapons are transported there. So, the hostages and the people there must be at the center of our concerns. But we must also think about the future, and that should perhaps determine the debate as soon as Hamas hopefully lays down its weapons soon.

Mr President! I am, among other things, the co-rapporteur for the 50 billion Ukraine Facility. Colleagues, we can save ourselves the debates on their implementation if we do not enable Ukraine to adequately defend itself in our interest. The fascist aggressor Russia must be traced back to its borders. It is scandalous that we have still not increased our armaments capacity to the extent that we oppose the Russian-North Korean-Iranian-Chinese Armaments Union. It is not enough to verbally support Ukraine, for as long as it takes, but we must finally adopt the Draghi wording on the rescue of the euro: Support Ukraine, whatever it takes. At that time, we could not afford to lose the euro. Today we cannot afford to lose Ukraine. We need to deliver more. In concrete terms, this means for the Member States, you finally place the long-term orders with the industry, then capacity is increased and employees are hired, and from now on you deliver what is possible. Talk to third countries that agreed deliveries to states that are not currently at war are somewhat waiting, so that, for example, the actual 155 millimeter shell production can now be completely delivered to Ukraine. I expect the German chancellor to stop personally blocking the delivery of Taurus missiles here. Germany is not a one-man democracy. From his coalition and with the opposition, there is a majority in the Bundestag for a delivery. Almost all experts are in favour. Don't be afraid of your party's leftists, but of Putin's victory. Those who support Putin by failing to do so are sinning against German and European history. Slava Ukrajini. Wse dlja peremohy.

Madam President, yes, not to speak against, but looking at our agenda that we have got this week and that we have added already, I’m afraid that we are overloaded. We would agree to have a debate, but if we could have it in February – unfortunately, probably, the attacks will be ongoing, so it will not be a done deal by February. So if the ECR could agree to have it in February, in order not to overload this week’s agenda, then we could agree.

Madam President, on the Green proposal, I thought that the continued support for the Yemeni peace process goes without saying. But if you insist to say it, I could go along with the Green addition, which is added to our proposal. But I cannot agree with the Left formulation. It is definitely not a US-led attack on Yemen. Probably the Yemeni Government is even in favour, because it goes against these Houthi rebels. But I can, as I said, agree to the formulation from the Green side.

Madam President, colleagues, we can follow the news of attacks on our merchant ships. That is a huge challenge to our trade relations and to the security in the region. It is – as we see the talk ongoing and the discussion in the Council and the Commission side to have an EU mission in this area – it is good to have an update from the Commission, and that is why we suggest to add this point to the agenda.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner! For almost two years, the war criminal in the Kremlin has been waging a full-scale war in the middle of Europe. If we do not support Ukraine extensively, he will march through it and then he will not stop. We have to react, and we should have reacted from the outset, both at the national level, where the defence budgets are, but also with our European programmes, which complement that. We did a part with ASAP and with EDIRPA, yes, but we still don't see the results of it. That's why it's so important that follow-up programs come. But in view of the dramatic situation of the European Council under the multiannual financial framework, it would have to decide now that money will actually be made available for such a programme EDIP and that we will use at least 5 billion more this weekend. Unfortunately, this will not happen. And why? Because the seriousness of the situation is not recognized from my point of view. For the rest, Commissioner: Originally, I believe, it was planned to set EDIS before EDIP, namely first to present the strategy and then to align the programme with it after the strategy. That could have been the case. I am not accusing the Commission of not having the money. The allegation goes more to the Member States, which are not in a position to make the funds available in an enlarged financial framework in such a way that a credible programme can actually come out of it. The war criminal runs three shifts, seven days a week full war economy, and we try with the smallest programs to promote the production something here. That doesn't go together. We need to understand the seriousness of the situation. We must not only implement this programme here, we must increase capacities in all national defence budgets so that we can counteract the aggressor.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. The Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, which is contrary to international law and inhumane, has various facets. We have repeatedly addressed and condemned them on previous occasions, from the debate on the kidnapping of children in Russia to the targeted destruction of vital infrastructure. All this is not directed against combatants, but against civilians or civilian institutions. A special aspect is the damage that destroys or impairs the environment as a result of the war. I do not mean the traces of an armored chain that can be seen on a harvested field and disappear again after a downpour. No, I am thinking of everything that gets unnecessarily into the soil, air and water of Ukraine – because of the war – and in some cases pollutes and contaminates these elements in the long term. There are calculations that the pollutant emissions from this war so far correspond to the annual emissions of Belgium. One of the biggest or biggest crimes in the area is certainly the destruction of the Kachowka Dam. I am against inflationary use of certain words, but I believe that in this context the word ecocide is actually appropriate in view of what has happened below the dam, but also above it by the disappearance of the lake there. We also have Russia's behavior in connection with the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. As such, it is already criminal to deliberately and deliberately carry out acts of war near nuclear power plants. But the treatment of the employees there is also extremely worthy of condemnation, and that is why this must also be recorded, as well as the other crimes that we record for the purpose of later war crimes trials. I think that it is precisely the crimes against the environment that show the character of the Russian regime, and the condemnation is certainly quite uniform and unanimous here in this House, as usual.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! Thirty years of the Copenhagen criteria – I think they were right criteria in the political and economic spheres at the time, and they have remained so to this day. At that time, they ensured that the candidate countries were given a precise framework in which they could orient themselves. This is perhaps also the difference with the countries that have been in the Eastern Partnership so far. They did not have this precise framework, and this prospect of accession was not yet there. And the result was, among other things, that just in countries like Ukraine, let me say, the Wild East – i.e. in allusion to the Wild West – was still accessible and in this way oligarchs built up structures, precisely because they thought they could continue to act as they had until recently also organized in Ukraine. Those who were able to acquire one or the other in the Central European area – yes, at the turn of the century – understood these criteria relatively early on: Aha, now we are going in the direction of the rule of law, now we have to stick to the framework that is given, and in this respect, in my view, we embraced the rule of law much earlier and in this way also contributed to the fact that a framework was set here economically, but also politically, in the candidate countries, which should then be compatible with the European Union. I am confident: If we consistently apply and implement these criteria in the political and economic field with the new candidate countries, including in the Western Balkans, this is the prerequisite for us to have members in the future, who in this way also represent a strengthening of the European Union, but on the other hand will also naturally be strengthened for themselves. Membership of the European Union is a win-win situation for all those who now belong to it, also thanks to the Copenhagen criteria.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. From the outset, we as Parliament have called for the unconditional release of all hostages. The Israeli government has now agreed to a deal where 50 hostages will be released on the condition that 150 Palestinian prisoners be released and there is a four-day ceasefire. I am happy with the releasers and their families. The regrettable thing is that, in the perception of many Palestinians and Arabs, it seems that the terrorist group Hamas is forcing the Israeli government to make concessions, and that there has been no progress on the issue of a lasting peace settlement since Oslo with the representatives of the Palestinians who are willing to talk to Israel and recognize its right to exist. After the end of Hamas’ rule in Gaza, we must work as Europeans, best coordinated with the US, to establish a robust mandate within the UN framework – for Gaza – where a strong international presence provides first humanitarian aid and then reconstruction in Gaza. And this must then lead to a peace process, where elections will take place and negotiations will ensure that the conflict is pacified. I am in favour of not allowing this Gaza to be repeated and that there must be no further intifada in the West Bank, because there is a genuine peace process.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! As the Ukraine rapporteur here, I think I can say that today we have a historic decision by the Commission in which it is proposing the opening of accession negotiations for Ukraine, and I am concentrating on this country. I think it is remarkable how, despite the Russian war of aggression, this country is still on the path of reform and thus expresses where it belongs. And this message, which comes from the Commission today and which this Parliament has also been clearly expressing for many years, is that this Ukraine is irrevocably on the European path and that there is no way back – even as long as and in whatever form, this Russia overwhelms the country with a war of aggression in violation of international law. I think – if I look at what the Commission has written down in detail in this regard, what Ukraine still has to achieve by March so that the negotiating framework can also be adopted – that is all possible, despite the war. And we should give the country all the support it needs. I am confident that this approach of concretely advancing enlargement with the many other countries also triggers the debate within the European Union, namely to improve reform and decision-making capacity in such a way that we can then work together with the new countries for a larger and more decision-making EU.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. Hamas' attack on peaceful Israeli citizens was the largest attack on Jewish civilians since the Holocaust. Israel has the right of self-defense within the framework of humanitarian and martial law. I hope that it will be possible to free the hostages and that the main Hamas financiers, such as Qatar, will also be helpful behind the scenes. I hope that it will be possible to destroy Hamas structures in Gaza. Hamas is a resolute, deadly adversary to Israel, but has also established a repressive, corrupt regime for the residents of the Gaza Strip. I hope that after the end of the military action, the Palestinian Authority will be able to take back control, and by then I expect the suffering of the civilian population to be limited. The civilians in Gaza are as innocent as those in Israel. The responsibility for what follows the attack on Israel lies with Hamas, which has no regard for the people of Gaza. It is good that we are stepping up humanitarian aid. I would like Hamas financiers to redirect their funds for this purpose. What do we need to do to stop the next Gaza? As a member of parliament, I have experienced the third or fourth Gaza since 1999. It gets worse every time. An attempt is needed to relaunch the peace process – an agreed EU-US agenda that brings Israel and the Palestinians together and includes relevant neighbours such as Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. The extremists on both sides must not achieve their goals. The Israelis are not driven into the sea and the Palestinians are not driven across the Jordan River to Jordan. Let's get it ready as soon as possible!

Madam President, thank you, colleagues, for the broad support as usual, and I ask the referral back to the Committee for Interinstitutional Negotiations according to Rule 59(4) of our Rules of Procedure.

Mr President, thank you very much, first of all, to the large majority of speakers here. Thank you for reconfirming our broad consensus. I need not go into any further details in this regard, but I would like to say to those who are closest to Putin in this House that they really have no right to claim that there is corruption in Ukraine. Who is the godfather of corruption, of kleptocratic structures? That is Putin, who wants with his allies to regain control of this country. And rest assured that this Facility, among other things, will see to it that there is a control of the finances. There is already anti-corruption control working in Ukraine: the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, the ProZorro system for public procurement. And there is the political will of the real reformers, and there is the vigilance of the civil society in Ukraine that we are also including in strengthening here. So far I think this will be one of the most controlled financial transactions that we have ever seen. And there was the other argument, which said that we want to colonise Ukraine with our entrepreneurs. Well, the only one who wants to colonise Ukraine is Putin. He is the slaveholder of his own country and wants to establish even a Stalinist or a fascist regime back in Ukraine. He will not succeed. But I can say something: our investment in this country makes this country also safer. That was the case for post-war West Germany, where some argued: ‘Well, there are so many Americans and Westerners coming and buying things’. First of all, nothing was taken away. The same will be the case in Ukraine: nobody takes anything away.But there will be a higher interest in this country staying safe and on the side of freedom and democracy. And so far, I welcome all bigger and smaller investors in Ukraine to contribute their share for the reconstruction of the country. I think that it will be a good investment because this country will at the end be an asset to the European Union. Once again, Slava Ukraini.

Mr President! I am pleased to present to you, ladies and gentlemen, and also to the Commission, the result of our joint work on the Ukraine Facility. I am proud to inform you that once again, at the joint meeting of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Budgets, we succeeded in achieving a vote that reflects the broad consensus of this House since the beginning of Russia's criminal full-scale war of aggression against Ukraine. With 86 votes in favour, only six rejections and two abstentions, we have given a clear political signal. This signal goes to the fighting Ukraine, to our Member States, but also to the aggressor. We support Ukraine during the war, we support Ukraine in its reconstruction, we support Ukraine on its way to the European Union. Listen to me, Putin! Ukraine will never return to the Gulag. I would like to thank my co-rapporteur, Ms Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, representing the Committee on Budgets and the S&D Group, for the good agreement and efficient cooperation that have made it possible to conduct the discussions well. I would also like to thank the shadow rapporteurs from the various political groups in our two committees for their many helpful contributions and special commitment. We are working under special time pressure to bring this regulation under wraps by the end of the year. Today's timely debate and tomorrow's vote would not have been possible without the great work of our teams of staff in committees, political groups and Members' offices. Ladies and Gentlemen! The Ukraine Facility aims to interlink the reconstruction, modernisation and pre-accession of Ukraine to the European Union. This is an ambitious project. Even during the war, Ukrainians and the EU are starting to work on a common European future. Ukraine is to present a so-called Ukraine Plan for reconstruction. It will be a master plan. It is prepared by the government, but also needs to be developed with municipalities and regions, as well as with civil society. But the last word – the last Ukrainian word – for such a plan must be the Verkhovna Rada, the Ukrainian parliament. The extensive reconstruction and modernization cannot be carried out from public funds alone. The Facility will therefore enable guarantees and grants to attract private sector investment to Ukraine earlier than would be expected in the current war situation. In doing so, we want to set an accent of support for Ukrainian small and medium-sized entrepreneurs. Ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen! 50 billion euros is a lot of money and a very large solidarity support from the EU. We therefore also address the precautionary measures against abuse and waste, but also against corruption. We demand transparency and controls and have put forward appropriate proposals. In this context, however, it is also encouraging and useful to take up the readiness of Ukraine's excellently qualified civil society organisations and assign them monitoring tasks where state and European structures are overwhelmed. Ukraine already has relevant experience, which we want to take on in accordance with the partnership principle. Ladies and gentlemen, it is very important that Ukraine not only wins the war, but also strengthens democracy at all levels and creates sustainable prosperity for citizens, with the help of the European Union. Slava Ukrajini! Za peremohu!