Speeches

Mr President, the 2025 Rule of Law Report published by the European Commission does not create a new tool; He's doing something deeper: it organises a system – a structured system of surveillance, monitoring and pressure on Member States. Because, yes, the mechanisms already exist: procedure before the CJEU, financial sanctions, budgetary conditionality. But this report marks a change of scale. It proposes to systematize their use, to centralize them, to make them permanent and, above all, to articulate them among themselves. The recent case law of the CJEU, which for the first time finds a violation of the values of Article 2 of the Treaty, illustrates this extension of European control over ever wider areas. From now on, everything is nested: a public scoreboard to rank states, a dedicated unit to monitor the execution of CJEU and ECHR decisions, cross-analysis with international bodies, and, in the background, the threat of financial sanctions and suspension of funds. As if that were not enough, the report carried by Konstantinos Arvanitis goes even further. It calls for tightening up coercive instruments, making funding more directly conditional on compliance with court decisions, extending control to more and more areas, including public policies, the media, the facilities made available to NGOs and even our sovereign societal choices. In other words, an acceleration, a logic of continuous extension, a vision in which the rule of law becomes no longer a legal principle, but a tool for political normalization. Yes, judicial decisions must be respected, this is the basis of any serious democracy, but this cannot justify the establishment of a permanent political steering of nations by an unelected technostructure. Because behind the words there is a reality: a gradual alignment of states, a silent centralization, a system in which criteria defined elsewhere end up imposing themselves on everyone under financial threat. And, basically, a simple question: Who decides, the peoples or the institutions? There is no rule of law without sovereignty. There is no democracy under conditions. We want a Europe that cooperates, protects, respects nations, not a Europe that monitors, judges and punishes.

Mr President, Commissioner, the European Commission says it wants to take back control of migration. However, the results observed on the ground contradict this ambition. Every year, almost 500 000 return decisions are issued in the European Union, and every year only 20% are actually enforced. This means a very simple thing: in four out of five cases, the EU renounces to enforce its own decisions. This failure is not abstract: in my country, France, tens of thousands of obligations to leave the territory are imposed every year. Yet barely one in ten is actually executed. This discrepancy between decision and action undermines the authority of the State and fuels public impotence. This is not a technical problem, it is not a lack of resources: it is a political renunciation. The Commission explained that cooperation with third countries should be improved. But how can we talk about cooperation when states that refuse to take back their nationals continue to benefit from visas, financial aid and preferential agreements? How can we speak of firmness when the visa tool, although provided for by European law, is used only in a timid, temporary and reversible way? Where the Commission is talking about regaining control, we are talking about regaining political power. The Commission wants to set up a system that fails, the National Rally wants to overthrow it. The Commission manages failure, we take the break. Without strict visa conditionality, without automatic sanctions against non-cooperative countries, without clear primacy of states over migration ideology, there will be no effective return, credibility or protection of the peoples of Europe. This debate is not administrative, it is sovereign, political and vital for the future of Europe.

Madam President, Commissioner, sexual deepfakes and the exploitation of minors on social media are among the most serious abuses of digital technology. These are crimes that destroy lives, often in silence, while platforms are slow to act. Faced with this, the European Union multiplies the rules, but the accumulation of texts such as the Digital Services Act It is not enough when criminal content stays online, perpetrators remain anonymous, and sanctions come too late or never. The truth is simple: Victim protection cannot be based on technocratic mechanisms or self-regulation by platforms. It comes under the authority of States, criminal law, identified magistrates, law enforcement agencies with immediate and dissuasive means and sanctions. We believe in a Europe that truly protects, not by censoring opinions, but by fighting crimes. A Europe that respects national sovereignty and empowers states. Because in the face of these excesses, only public authority can guarantee protection, justice and dignity.

Mr President, for years Brussels has been piling up standards in the name of combating discrimination without ever questioning whether this leap forward really protects Europeans: texts, agencies and observatories are growing, accumulating, without improving substance or content. It merely camouflages and delays pragmatic and necessary action. Yet when the new Commission finally withdrew a directive that had been blocked for years, the left and Renew shouted scandal. According to them, ideology is not discussed, it is necessary. This system has a cost. It is first and foremost a matter for taxpayers and our businesses, who are left with permanent legal uncertainty. But also, and above all, this cost is democratic: the subsidised activist ecosystem is completely disconnected from the field. More serious: This policy sorts out discrimination. Some are amplified, others are ignored. Those that affect Christians, the dignity of women, European identities are harmed, put in the background, often rendered invisible and non-existent. Once again, the left and the Brussels wokists dictate what to defend. But it does not repair, it fractures! It does not appease, it opposes! The fight against discrimination must not be an ideological flag. This is a requirement of justice.

Madam President, legislation on safe third countries and safe countries of origin is very important to protect European borders and reduce the unbearable pressure of unfounded asylum applications on our Member States. We adopted them in the European Parliament's Civil Liberties Committee. This is a major political victory for the control of European borders, made possible by the advance of patriotic forces in the last European elections. The central idea of the text concerning the application of the concept of ‘safe third country’ is to return, even before an asylum application is lodged in the European Union, asylum seekers to countries from which they do not originate, but which the EU considers to be safe. The aim of the text on the establishment of a list of safe countries of origin, on which my colleague Susanna Ceccardi is working, is to enable asylum applications from safe third countries to be processed more quickly and sent back to them. My group, the Patriots for Europe, will confirm in a few seconds the immediate entry into trilogue of these texts to speed up their adoption at European level, because our priority is the safety of Europeans.

Mr President, we will not let France become a narco-state and we will not let the European Union become a sanctuary for narcos, with European ports transformed into cocaine hubs. Drug trafficking is billions of euros, a daily violence, entire territories where the state has retreated. It is not a social problem, it is a political abandonment. When the left speaks of legalising, it shows that it understands nothing about the secession that is taking place in our neighbourhoods. The first victims are honest families, residents taken hostage by drug dealers. In Marseille, Emmanuel Macron promised to make a clean place. However, traffickers move 200 meters, wait for the cameras to leave, and then resume their activity. Here is macronism: communication, no authority. The murder of Mehdi Kessaci is not an accident. There is a European anti-trafficking plan led by Commissioner Brunner. All right, but nothing will be gained if we refuse to see the link with illegal immigration, the exploitation of unaccompanied minors and the disempowerment of consumers. Last hypocrisy, and it is immense: alcohol and tobacco advertising is banned, but rappers followed by millions of young people are allowed to promote drugs and drug trafficking. It is not culture, it is criminal propaganda. This complacency kills. Firmness is not an option, it is an emergency.

Madam President, the New Pact on Migration and Asylum, which we are discussing today, is a real pact of shame. With this pact, the Commission does not propose to manage migration: it obliges European states to capitulate to the phenomenon of migration. With this pact, any European state refusing the distribution of migrants in our cities and villages is now under the threat of heavy financial sanctions. Any country that wants to protect its citizens and its national identity is now treated as a delinquent country, which should be submitted. By forcing states to welcome migrants, you are trampling on an elementary principle, of which our continent is the cradle: democracy. But, worse still: potentially, you let the Islamist wolf into the European sheepfold. Let me refresh your memory: Abdelhamid Abaaoud, the operational commander of the Paris attacks of 13 November 2015, entered Europe by infiltrating the flows of migrants from Syria. As stated in an article of World, which cannot be suspected of being sympathetic to the Rassemblement national, most of the suicide bombers involved in the Paris and Brussels attacks entered Europe along the same migratory route. You will not be able to tell European citizens that you did not know. In a violent world, nurtured by hatred of the West, this naivety is no longer allowed. The only migration policy that is worthwhile is a policy of firmness. The only migration policy that is worthwhile is the systematic expulsion of illegal migrants and the systematic protection of our borders. European citizens have a legitimate right to live in peace in their country.

Mr President, the enlargement talks with Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, the Western Balkan countries and Turkey reflect a leak from the European Commission. Not all are at the same stage, some are at a standstill, others are suspended from meeting criteria that many do not meet. But all these enlargements, if they were to succeed, would profoundly upset the political balance, particularly in the Council, but also the institutional and budgetary balance of the European Union. Welcoming countries that are economically or institutionally fragile means redistributing seats, reviewing voting rules and significantly increasing the burden on contributing states, second only to France, which injects 23 billion euros into the European budget in 2025. Behind this enlargement, presented as a moral necessity, the Commission pursues a political objective: Centralize power, weaken the voice of nations and dilute their sovereignty in a whole without popular legitimacy. Now, as Stefan Zweig wrote, when people stop believing in their own destiny, others decide in their place. That is what we refuse. Enlargement must not come at the cost of sovereignty.

Mr President, Brussels announces a fine against Google for defending press freedom. All right, all right. But let's be honest, it's a late chin shot from people who let it go for 20 years. While our media was being smothered, while our data was going to the United States, the European Commission was rolling out the red carpet at GAFAM. It was these same technocrats who entrusted the Union's digital infrastructure to Google, Amazon or Microsoft. And today they want to play the white knights? No, they are complicit in this strategic dependence. We have been saying this from the beginning: Digital sovereignty doesn't just happen in Silicon Valley, it's built here in Europe. This means a European preference in public procurement, support for our players and rules that really apply to foreign multinationals. Sanctioning Google is a signal, but a signal without concrete action is theater. What is needed now is to break contracts, stop fattening these foreign giants and regain control of our data, our media and our digital future. Yes, the awakening will be brutal, because we will cut off the rents of these giants, because we will question years of dependence and because we will finally return power to the Europeans.

Mr President, as today marks with sadness the two-year anniversary of the 7 October 2023 attack perpetrated by Hamas terrorists and other armed factions, and acclaimed by some civilians in Gaza, it is essential to recall the facts. In Gaza, the truth is blurred by words. We talk about genocide, but what we see is a people held hostage by Hamas, a terrorist organization that refuses every truce and turns suffering into a political weapon. In this chaos, the European Union hides behind empty statements and symbolic gestures. It remains unable to say clearly who threatens peace. For the truth is simple: There will be no peace as long as Hamas chooses war over life. Europe must stop masking its inaction and assert a clear truth: The security of peoples and the protection of civilians will never be guaranteed as long as terrorism dictates its law in the Middle East.

Madam President, Commissioner, the revision of the visa suspension mechanism is not a step forward, it is a catch-up. The European Union is late in trying to repair the consequences of its own naivety. For years, some states have abused our complacency to allow their nationals to settle illegally in Europe. This situation has become unbearable. While we live up to our commitments, others deliberately refuse to assume theirs. Admittedly, the European Visa Regulation already provides for a mechanism to temporarily suspend the exemption when a third country causes a sharp increase in irregular migration or presents security risks related to its nationals. But this mechanism, introduced in 2013 and revised in 2017, was activated only once, in 2022, against Vanuatu for a golden passport program. Meanwhile, states with far greater levels of illegal immigration continue to enjoy total impunity. When trust is betrayed, reciprocity must cease. We cannot hope for the return of illegal immigrants without strong sanctions, and the most obvious of these sanctions is the suspension of visas. It is therefore legitimate and now essential to re-establish the visa requirement and to go even further. There is a need for a collective mechanism allowing all Schengen States to suspend the issuance of visas to nationalities whose governments refuse to cooperate in the return of their irregular nationals. This requirement must be clearly stated in the next European visa strategy. The example of Algeria, which systematically hinders the expulsion of its nationals while taking advantage of European generosity, illustrates how urgent it is to act. A simple rule must now be imposed: We do not take advantage of Europe's advantages while flouting its laws. Visa exemption is not a right, it is a responsibility and it must be earned.

Mr President, there are attacks on innocent civilians in Bogotá. These crimes are the work of armed groups that thrive on drug trafficking money. In some areas, the state has retreated and clan law is required, that of fear and violence. But make no mistake, this scourge is not confined to Latin America. In Marseille, in 2023, 47 people were killed by drug-related account settlements: a macabre record that illustrates the deep establishment of these criminal networks in our neighborhoods. In Antwerp, the main gateway to cocaine in Europe, hundreds of tons pass through each year. They fuel crime that plagues our societies, weakens our institutions and threatens the security of our fellow citizens. These examples belong to the same criminal chain that connects the cocaine growing areas in Colombia to the streets of our major European metropolises. It is a parallel economy of a colossal power that feeds violence, terrorism and corruption. Faced with this, two duties are required. Colombia must be able to restore its sovereignty and restore order to its territory. The European Union, for its part, cannot be satisfied with verbal condemnations. It must act: strengthening police and judicial cooperation, drying up financial channels and securing its external borders. To close our eyes to the direct link between terrorism and drug trafficking is to accept that this violence takes hold in our country. There is no other responsible path than that of firmness. Any renunciation would be a fault and any delay a danger to our peoples.

Madam President, for more than 700 days, 48 hostages have been held by Hamas. 48 lives suspended, half presumed dead, the other still held. Faces that we forget too quickly. Screams that no one should ignore. And what is Europe doing? She's talking. She talks a lot, but in a vacuum. Like King Lear, Shakespeare, she handles great speeches, but never acts to save those in need. Europe wants to be powerful, but it is actually ghostly. Meanwhile, famine is on the rise in Gaza. Yes, we must help civilians, but we must never strengthen a terrorist organization. However, the European Union distributes millions of euros and votes resolutions, without control, without result. While others are taking concrete initiatives, Europe is ridiculed by its impotence. We are still being told about a two-state solution. This is a long-term horizon that we do not reject. But today, the reality is that such a project would lead to a Hamas state, that is, a terrorist state. As long as this continues, peace will remain an illusion. Politics is not words, it is deeds: acts to free the hostages, acts to protect the innocent, acts to guarantee Israel's security.

Madam President, Commissioner, it has been six hundred and forty-one days since Israeli hostages were held by Hamas – six hundred and forty-one days of waiting, suffering and silence for families abandoned by the international community. While negotiations are stalling in Doha, Israel continues to defend its people, alone in the face of an Islamist coalition – Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, all of whom are funded and armed by Iran. What we see is a strategic, methodical undertaking from Tehran to encircle, weaken and ultimately destroy the only stable democracy in the region. It is not a local conflict, it is a hybrid, regional, ideological war: a war against the West. Meanwhile, the European Union is playing the game of balance. It distributes humanitarian aid that too often falls into the wrong hands. It condemns the violence without ever naming the aggressors. She calls on Israel, which was the victim of a pogrom on 7 October, to exercise restraint. But Israel is doing what we have never had the courage to do: fighting Islamism without naivety, without dual language. He's our bulwark. He is our natural ally in this war of civilization that many still refuse to see. It is time to take our side: that of democracies, that of firmness, that of freedom.

Madam President, last Monday, a French journalist, Christophe Gleizes, was sentenced to seven years in prison in Algeria. On Tuesday, Boualem Sansal, an 80-year-old French-Algerian writer with cancer, was detained for five years. His crime? To have thought freely. Meanwhile, France is silent. The European Union continues to finance this scheme – EUR 172 million between 2021 and 2024. Two Frenchmen imprisoned and not a single sanction. Not a suspension of cooperation. It is no longer naivety, it is submission. Boualem Sansal wrote in his book 2084: “Lie is sacred, truth is ungodly, freedom is blasphemy, submission is virtue.” This sentence not only describes an authoritarian regime, it describes the attitude of our leaders towards it. Because, finally, what are we talking about? A regime that gags its intellectuals, imprisons journalists, brutalises its people, denies religious freedom and expels migrants to our shores while insulting us. And we pay. We are subsidizing this repression. Where is France’s honour? Where is Europe's sovereignty? Why continue to pay millions to those who lock up our fellow citizens and trample on our core values? It is time for France to raise its head. It is time for Europe to stop paying those who persecute our compatriots and humiliate our flag.

Madam President, Madam President von der Leyen, ladies and gentlemen, Europe deserves better than silence, better than opacity, better than bureaucratic authoritarianism. For six years now, you have been leading this Commission with a Jupitian verticality, cut off from realities, cut off from peoples, cut off even too often from the values that founded our continent. Pfizergate is not an administrative error: This is an abuse of power. €35 billion of public money negotiated via SMS, without a call for tenders, without a mandate, without transparency. This has been confirmed by the Court of Justice of the European Union: you have acted alone, outside any democratic framework. This is not just your fault. It symbolizes an even more serious drift, that of a Europe governed in the shadow of the peoples. Under your authority, the Commission has become the armed arm of private interests, militant NGOs, diminishing ideologies, sometimes even alien to the foundations of our civilisation. What you call ‘transition’, thousands of Europeans live it as punishment; what you call "green compact", our farmers, our craftsmen, our industrialists suffer it as a strangulation; and what you call "European values" all too often seems like censorship of people who dare to think otherwise. So is this the Europe you are defending, madam? A Europe where decisions are taken without debate, a Europe that would sign, behind the backs of citizens, trade agreements such as that of Mercosur, which will expose our sectors even more to unfair competition, a Europe that weakens nations while dreaming of getting worse? So, no, Mrs von der Leyen, this Europe is not ours. Ours is freedom, respect for identities, sovereignty, democratic choices, the one that protects, builds, listens; Not the one that imposes. Today, in conscience, we will vote on this motion of censure. This vote is not just an act of opposition, it is an act of responsibility, because it is no longer just a matter of disavowal, it is a matter of saying that another path is possible. A path where Europe becomes again a project and a promise, not a system, a superimposition of norms and threats. The peoples of Europe do not need an all-powerful Commission, they need a Europe in their own image, and if this mandate is to end with a strong signal, then this is: the return of politics, the return of the people, the return of reality.

Mr President, while Qatargate splattered the European left, it is now the turn of Spain's socialist power to be at the centre of a major corruption scandal. A recent investigation report of nearly 500 pages has highlighted a widespread system of bribes between relatives of Socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez and entrepreneurs. However, the case does not end there: his wife is herself under investigation for trading in influence, his brother is sent to court in another case related to the Socialist Party, and filled with cynicism, the public prosecutor's office, led by a personality now herself indicted, has systematically defended them. If the European Commission claims to defend the rule of law, let it first sweep the door of its socialist allies, instead of turning it into a weapon against right-wing governments. As for Olivier Faure, who is always quick to lecture my party, let him at least have the decency to condemn the actions of his Spanish ally in the European Parliament.

Madam President, Commissioner, the European Commission, supported by the left, is using its annual report on the rule of law situation in the Member States to impose its Wokist ideology and put pressure on right-wing governments. While there is no clear and precise definition of this concept of the rule of law, Brussels is using its non-compliance as a pretext to deprive Hungary and, in the past, Poland of EU funds. This pseudo-report is based on activist NGOs such as theOpen Society George Soros or actors with blatant conflicts of interest. In France, for example, Reporters Without Borders defames to the Commission the director of the Journal du Dimanche, Geoffroy Lejeune, calling him, I quote, an extreme right-winger. The same association received EUR 71.4 million from the Commission between 2014 and 2023. On the other hand, in Brussels, nothing is said about the abusive closure of a television channel and the political condemnation of the main presidential candidate, Marine Le Pen. Let the European Commission stop its hypocrisy. If she really cares about the rule of law she starts by sweeping outside her door.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the European Union is celebrating 40 years of the Schengen Agreement, but what exactly are we celebrating? The programmed failure of a system incapable of protecting peoples. This system, originally based on international cooperation, was however based on a simple idea: free movement could only exist if the external borders were strictly protected. This promise has never been fulfilled. The Commission has arrogated its powers to the detriment of States and has never carried out its mission. Since 2022, more than one million illegal crossings of the external borders have been detected, not counting previous waves. Meanwhile, the number of returns of illegal migrants to their countries of origin is ridiculous. Today, only smugglers and complicit NGOs have something to rejoice about. In the face, and in the face of this migratory submergence fed by M's pro-migrant ideologyme von der Leyen, states have no choice but to re-establish their national borders. The Commission dares to write – I quote – that ‘Schengen has become a resilient system [...], based on effective management of the external borders’. Brussels lives above ground. My group, the Patriots for Europe, demands a return to reality. We want the external borders of the European Union to finally be strictly protected so that free movement is truly possible, asylum seekers to be returned to centres outside the continent, illegal migrants to be returned to their countries of origin, NGOs complicit in smugglers to be sanctioned, police cooperation through Europol to be strengthened and, finally, the asylum and migration pact to be abandoned. If Brussels refuses to do the job, voters can count on my group to do it.