What Jaroslava spoke about.

Madam President, Madam High Representative, the withdrawal of American troops from Europe is a cold shower. But let's be completely honest about why we got into this situation. This is a direct result of Brussels' profound diplomatic incapacity. For many years, the European bureaucracy has not treated our most important security partner with respect, but with ideological arrogance and petty moralization. Instead of building cooperation, Brussels has obsessively focused on political differences, successfully alienating our main ally. Let us tell an undeniable truth: European security, NATO and the United States are inseparable. True security does not lie in the fantasy of a European army promoted by an elite that is not even able to protect our external borders, but requires harsh and cold pragmatism. Let's stop arrogant finger-pointing, let's abandon federalist illusions and unite with Washington. It's time for common sense.

Madam President, dear colleagues, cyberattacks, disinformation and the misuse of artificial intelligence are no longer a threat to the future, but a reality of today. That is why we need to move from regulation itself to the real preparedness and resilience of our states and regions. Real security will only be revealed when the attack actually comes. As a former governor of the largest region in the Czech Republic, I saw how devastating a cyberattack can be. The attack on the regional hospital knocked out the medical system for almost a year. It wasn't just about computers. This affected patient care, the functioning of the rescue system and the daily lives of citizens. Similarly vulnerable are not only hospitals, but also energy networks, transport or, for example, water infrastructure across Europe. A single attack can cripple the entire state in a matter of hours. For example, we tested blackout scenarios. It was costly, but it is precisely such exercises that show whether and how the state, regions and the business community are actually able to function in a crisis situation. Europe needs to focus on preparedness and resilience. European funds should focus on critical infrastructure protection, cybersecurity testing and practical crisis exercises. They must focus mainly on the regions that are most vulnerable and lag behind in these areas. Security today is not just a matter of defense in war. It is the company's ability to function even during cyberattacks, blackouts and infrastructure outages. Unfortunately, Europe is still not sufficiently prepared for this reality.

Mr President, the multiannual budget cannot only be about higher expenditure. Above all, it must be about the fairness and effectiveness of the European Union. The weakening of geographical balance jeopardises Europe's cohesion. Therefore, cohesion policy must not pay for new priorities. The principle of excellence puts countries with less experience in drawing at a disadvantage. The EU's intransigence in this respect shows a trend towards a two-speed Europe, and this is not acceptable. The EU will be as strong as its weakest parts. It is not possible to concentrate money in the hands of the European Commission. It will not increase competitiveness, only its impact. A strict control of European Union spending is necessary. The EU must first demonstrate that it can effectively manage the resources it already has. Another budget swelling is suicidal without it. We don't want new resources, whether it's emission allowances or new excise duties. We reject both in order to make companies more competitive. If Europe is to succeed, it also needs technological neutrality. Nuclear power must therefore be placed on an equal footing.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I must respond to the scandalous and activist intervention of the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, and other EU representatives in the sovereign decision-making of the authorities of one of the EU Member States – Hungary. Hungarian authorities ban celebrations Budapest Pride. It was a sovereign decision of the institutions authorised to do so, which did so on the basis of the laws in force adopted by the national parliament. The fact that Mrs Ursula von der Leyen and others do not like the composition of this democratically elected parliament and have problems with the prime minister resulting from free elections is clear to us. But this does not give anyone in Brussels the right to call for violations of the laws in force in a sovereign member country. Once again, it is confirmed that the President does not understand, or rather does not want to understand, her position and her boundaries. And that's unacceptable. EU leaders must respect national specificities and the views of member countries. These states should have the right to decide freely without being scolded by EU leaders.

Madam President, Europe is at fault in a difficult situation that will test our ability to respond properly to fateful challenges. We must act pragmatically, be united, but at the same time respect the sovereignty and interests of individual states. Security policy cannot be developed in Brussels, but must be based on the needs of the Member States. Europe's chances lie in transatlantic cooperation. NATO has defense mechanisms that have evolved for decades. Creating a parallel European structure is a path in the wrong direction. Let's focus on strengthening the NATO alliance. Let's invest diplomatic efforts and financial resources in this project. We need to stop and think about defence policy with a cool head. We are now limiting our relations with the United States of America to the question of Ukraine and letting them be defined by this conflict. However, there are many other problems on which we need to work together. We should make every effort to ensure peace and create functioning security guarantees. A smart and responsible solution is to ensure the competitiveness of our economy, to maintain favourable transatlantic relations for Europe and to pursue a pragmatic diplomatic policy.

Madam President, Europe is now facing a major challenge and should demonstrate its capacity for cooperation. We need a strong, self-sufficient and competitive technological base, more robust industrial capacities and reliable information sharing mechanisms between the public and private sectors. Instead, industrial production is moving outside Europe, where bureaucratic and green rules do not apply, where energy is cheaper and taxes are lower. In times of crisis, a rapid and coordinated response in contemporary Europe is virtually unnegotiable. We have to change that. We need to pass on information faster, evaluate it and make competent decisions based on it. Therefore, responsibility must be clearly defined in advance. The European Council decides, the European Commission acts and the European Parliament scrutinises. It's that simple. We must finally take care of the future of the continent ourselves. This will not happen without a fundamental change in the European institutions. But you chose the wrong European leader for this task, and in a few days you will approve the Commission, which may not be able to do so.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the Czech Republic, including the ANO movement of which I am a member, is on the side of Ukraine and has always supported aid to the attacked country. But we cannot agree that someone from Brussels should order help. The European Union is still composed of sovereign states, which have the right to help other countries decide according to their capabilities. Each of the member countries has its own problems, specifics and can help in different ways. The Czech Republic is one of the most active, but in principle no one can dictate the volume of aid to us in the way that the resolution adopted by this Parliament in July seeks to do. Similarly, I cannot agree with the European Parliament calling for countries to allow the use of weapons originally acquired for the defence of Ukraine to attack Russia. Such a decision may be taken by NATO or individual countries. And we respect that! I also want to stress that I absolutely reject any labeling and labeling of the Patriot Group for Europe as a pro-Russian faction. Labelling for a different opinion of anyone is unacceptable. On the contrary, the discussion should take into account different perspectives and none of them should... (The Chair interrupted the speaker)