What Céline spoke about.

Madam President, Commissioner, I welcome your willingness to build a useful fertiliser plan for farmers. Flexibility of the Nitrates Directive, reduction of import restrictions: two examples of measures that go in the right direction. But this plan unfortunately bears the scars of blockages and divisions within the Commission, where some prioritize a climate obsession disconnected from the ground, where others explain that suspending the CBAM would harm European fertiliser producers, as if an industry could be protected by making its first customers disappear. Without solvent farmers, no market; without viable farms, no sovereignty; Without immediate measures, large strategies become beautiful texts placed on farms that close. Yes, we must produce more in Europe and reduce our dependencies. But it is not future green fertilizer trade corridors, however virtuous they may be on paper, that will allow farmers to pass the next season. The suspension of the CBAM "Fertilizer" was essential to give our farmers a breath of oxygen now and, despite your goodwill, this plan will not bring it to them.

Mr President, Commissioner, I would like to pay tribute to the work of Carlo Fidanza. This report calls for the urgent need to preserve a sector that sustains our territories and lays the foundations for a positive strategic vision for livestock farming. Faced with the permanent lawsuit brought against our breeders by the prophets of the green plate, or the artificial plate, who exchanged the taste of pleasure for the pleasure of prohibition, this report puts the church in the center of the village. Animal products are not climatic sins or moral faults. They have recognized nutritional value and cannot be replaced by plant or laboratory substitutes. Another essential step forward, the transparency required by this report on European funds paid to NGOs, including some activists, calls into question our farming practices, which are nevertheless the most virtuous in the world in terms of the environment and animal welfare. It's time to act. The Commission's next strategy will have to be an electroshock. Either we assume to defend our breeding, or we accompany its decline with compassionate statements. I know I can count on your support, Commissioner, in choosing the first path.

Madam President, Commissioner, the rule of law is not a moral incantation that is brandished, with variable geometry. We have built a regulation on conditionality based on a simple idea: access to EU funds is inseparable from our values. But one question remains: Does cross-compliance stop where grants start? The European Court of Auditors mentions a real headache to trace the use of several billion euros paid to environmental NGOs on the basis of simple self-declarations, particularly in the context of the LIFE programme, which cheerfully finances the promoters of destructive agribashing. Even more worrying: some grants awarded by the Commission may have been used to finance political lobbying, judicialisation strategies or targeted pressure campaigns against democratic decisions adopted by our Parliament, as documented by the Court of Auditors. Public money then fabricates a false consensus and blurs the separation of powers provided for in the Treaties. The Commission is also turning a blind eye to some funding channels from outside the EU. Because when NGOs benefiting from European funds are also financed by foreign entities or foundations whose agenda is hostile to our values, it is no longer an accounting detail, but a matter of democratic coherence. This inconsistency is also reflected in our most emblematic programmes, such as Erasmus, which cannot become a blind spot in our rule of law. Clearly, Europe's enemies have sometimes been able to find shoes on their feet and funding on their stock exchanges. The EU cannot be intractable on the rule of law and naive on the allocation of its funding.

Madam President, Commissioner, last week the French government, without sending any minister or state representative on the ground, gave the order to attack farmers with Centaure tanks, helicopters, tear gas. These appalling scenes are a symptom of a state that, instead of accompanying, strikes deafly without hearing the anger and dismay of the ranchers, out of breath. Throughout the weekend, farmers in France demonstrated to shout their distress at the management of nodular dermatosis. Farmers know how to be responsible, but they want certainties. Commissioner, the current protocol requires the total slaughter of a herd as soon as a single case of lumpy skin disease is detected. Can you tell us if this is justified under any circumstances? Is the European Food Safety Authority also categorical? Is it possible that less radical solutions are being studied and that we can have a quick response? Vaccination is not currently widespread so as not to lose the disease-free status. However, it is a long-term solution to protect our farms. I ask you to react in a coordinated way at European level to support but also to anticipate repeated health crises, which are destroying decades of work by several generations of farmers, through: – firstly, the creation of a European database that can scan variants emerging in our country and thus anticipate the onset of these diseases; – secondly, the anticipation of large-scale production of European vaccines and, failing that, a massive contractualisation of stocks; – thirdly, the strengthening of an adequate crisis reserve and the presence of European bodies on the ground in these difficult times. Commissioner, anger is not extinguished with armour or tear gas, as France has tried to do. It is with a real political - and humane - strategy that we will succeed.

Mr President, Commissioner, on 13 November 2025 in Marseilles, the brother of an activist committed against narcobanditism was shot dead – a cold-blooded murder against a backdrop of reprisals. This murder is not a miscellaneous fact: this is a symptom of a collective European failure to tackle drug trafficking. France has alerted: Last April, then Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau carried out a courageous reform to get the country out of this trap: creation of a national organised anti-crime prosecutor’s office, tightening of the prison regime for the most dangerous criminals and recasting the statute of repentance on the Italian model. Adopted despite a fragmented Parliament, this reform shows clear political will and action. But let's be lucid: this war will not be won only at Member State level. The European level has just presented an action plan against drug trafficking: European Union Agency for Drugs, strengthened partnerships with third countries, investment in research. This is a step in the right direction, even if it comes a bit late. And then there is the level of our cities: from large metropolises to small villages, no territory, even rural, is spared in France. Mayors have a key role in the security continuum – without this level of proximity, nothing is possible. In Marseille, these phenomena have been known for years, and municipal inaction has a cost: that of broken lives. Commissioner, in the face of these transnational criminal networks, is the Commission prepared to take a decisive step forward by setting up a European Public Prosecutor's Office dedicated to organised crime and drug trafficking, along the lines of the European Financial Prosecutor's Office? Drug trafficking is already European; the answer must be too.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, thank you all. I propose that this report be referred back to committee, in accordance with Rule 60 of the Rules of Procedure, in order to start interinstitutional negotiations.

Mr President, Commissioners, on this anniversary of the massacres of 7 October and, in this year – should this be recalled? – which marks 80 years since the liberation of Auschwitz, history should remind us how far the weight of our compromises can go. How many Jewish students ask for waivers not to go to university because they are threatened, taken in by their comrades, in the deafening silence of their leadership? How many fathers are assaulted in the squares and beaten in the evening because they come out of the synagogue with a kippah on Shabbat night, while the Jew becomes again a public enemy in Europe? Is this the time to make a gift to Hamas, such as early recognition of the State of Palestine or questioning by the Israel Trade Partnership Commission? The import of the Middle East conflict into Europe only fuels anti-Semitism. Let us stop showing signs of weakness in the face of this scourge and meditate on this warning of Hannah Arendt, who thought so well about our disasters of the 20th century: If they stop thinking, every human can act barbaric.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to thank you for your contributions to this debate on the CMO, which I naturally take into account, whether it is on compulsory contractualisation, interbranch derogations or relations with cooperatives. In my reply, I will focus on the Greens/EFA Group's constant interpellations, perhaps giving them two small reminders about the normal functioning of a democracy. Firstly, I would like to explain to the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance that, in a democracy, it is normal and even healthy to have disagreements between the different groups. On the other hand, this does not in any way allow us to lie in the debate. I fundamentally believe that honesty and elegance are important values in life, but also in politics. So when I hear the bad faith with which Mr. Waitz and Mr.me Strolenberg – who unfortunately left the Chamber – is talking about my supposed desire to boycott or ban plant proteins, I would like to say that this is a lie. Under no circumstances do I wish to ban meat ersatz made from laboratory products or plants. I simply do not want them to be able to benefit from meat designations, which, in my opinion, are intended to promote the quality of our farmers' know-how and to be extremely transparent with the consumer. Second, a little lesson in democracy for Mr Everding: It is not the judges who make the law. Members of the Court of Justice of the European Union deliver judgments on the basis of the law, and the law is written by parliamentarians. This is called the separation of powers. Parliament and the Council are the co-legislators who write the law, and the Court of Justice judges on the basis of these texts. Finally, on meat-related names, I highlight a form of hypocrisy on the part of those who spend their time denouncing a so-called "meat industry" and who are often the first defenders of the agri-food giants that produce ultra-processed plant substitutes and who, tomorrow, will also be at the forefront of marketing laboratory substitutes. This battle is not just a semantic quarrel; It is a fight for transparency, for respect for breeders and for our food sovereignty.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, this report is the result of long months of work with a single objective: strengthening the place of our farmers in the value chain and guaranteeing their income, one of their main demands during the 2024 protests. Commissioner, you defended this first legislative proposal of the mandate with great courage. We do not agree on everything, but if there is one fight that we share deeply, it is more revenue and less standards. The core of this reform is simple: secure the farmer with a contract with his first buyer. We must put an end to the precariousness of trade relations that are too often unbalanced and guarantee fair remuneration for those who feed us, by taking production costs into account. However, this objective is approached with pragmatism: a contract can be a simple email or a commitment on a mobile application, and sectoral derogations at the national level are provided for the sectors that will request it. The first outcry against this balanced text came from the cooperatives. Many of them have sued me for intent, accusing me of being their declared enemy, which is false. They are important, but they cannot escape any rule on the sole basis that they are composed of co-operating farmers. They owe farmers clear information, especially on prices. It is not a question of demolishing a model, nor of asking all-va for writings, but simply of having more transparency. Imagine that you arrive at a shoe store and when you go to the checkout, you can redefine all the prices displayed on the grounds that the black of a shoe is not black enough for you or that the model is not rigorously the same as the one described in the catalog. We'd think you were crazy. Yet this is the reality that farmers sometimes face. So I say: Copa-Cogeca, for some, no longer defends farmers, and I am sorry. Conversely, other agricultural unions in several European countries, including France, Italy and Spain, have made a dissonant voice heard in calling for support for the compromises in the text, and I welcome that. As the vote approaches, I also want to highlight two other key points in my report. The first concerns the protection of meat-related names. I assume it: a steak, a scalp or a sausage are products from our farms. Paragraph. No laboratory ersatz, no plant product. It is about transparency and clarity for the consumer and recognition for the work of our breeders. Because livestock farming, beyond being an economic activity, has an essential social and environmental impact in sometimes isolated territories, where it also preserves landscapes and biodiversity. There is no question of banning plant alternatives, but I am committed to the valorization of terms, their true meaning, their reach. The second outcry over this provision came from mass distribution, particularly in Germany, but its criticism does not reflect the reality of the text. Under the guise of claiming to defend the lowest price for the consumer, we cannot trample on a text that strengthens the position of farmers and the valorization of their production. The second point concerns European preference. The Made in Europe is on everyone's lips, because today we import 20% of the food we consume, and this figure is alarming. In an unstable world, a strong Europe must above all maintain and conquer its food sovereignty. I therefore call on you, in conclusion, to vote tomorrow in favour of this text, which is essential for our farmers. Behind every farm there are faces, lives, families who work tirelessly, sometimes seven days a week, to feed us. Farm income is not just a statistic or an abstract figure; It is a question of justice, dignity and sometimes even survival. I will fight to the end for this text to be adopted and I thank all the Members from all the groups who supported it. When I think of those who produce our food, who are the sentinels of our landscapes and our identity, when I think of their difficult struggle and their daily commitment, I tell you: This text is the minimum we owe them.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, at a time when anti-Semitism is rampant throughout Europe, our universities must be sanctuaries where everyone must be able to study freely without ever being threatened. This is also the case for MEPs, who should be able to speak without ever being threatened, as was unfortunately the case of François-Xavier Bellamy. That is why, together with many colleagues in our group, we would like to propose this amendment to you: ‘Deplores the decision of the Free University of Brussels, a member of the European Universities Alliance Network, to confirm Rima Hassan’s name for the 2025 promotion of her law school, despite her statements aimed at legitimising the terrorist attack of 7 October 2023 and the abuses by Hamas; Condemns the violence suffered by Jewish students during demonstrations on the university campus in 2024 and 2025; Calls on the Commission to suspend without delay the funds allocated to this university until the safety of Jewish students is guaranteed and EU values are fully respected again".

Mr President, everything is good in the pig and especially in the European pig. Unfortunately, this is not the opinion of the Chinese, who take revenge on his feet, his ears, his offal, in retaliation for European measures on electric vehicles. Again, the Chinese are typing where it hurts. With high tariffs, it is all trade with China that is at risk for the sector. However, it is these parts of pork that we do not consume in Europe and that find their outlets there. This is vital for the balance of the sector and this Chinese blockage will have concrete consequences for consumers, soaring prices. After the agreement with the United States, the Chinese rights on cognac, it is no longer time for laissez-faire. Europe must show the muscles. We have effective anti-coercion instruments that also make it possible to retaliate forcefully when our producers are attacked. These are tools that we can mobilize to make the Chinese authorities bend. Their measures are completely illegal. Beijing takes out the bazooka, let's take out the tank, otherwise we will lose all credibility in the eyes of our producers, our citizens. This is the new reality of international trade. The rules of the game have changed and Europe must be strong to defend our interests without trembling.

Mr President, Commissioner, on 27 July last, the President of the European Commission, at the bend of a golf course, endorsed a completely unbalanced agreement: free and duty-free access for US imports compared to 15% for our European exports. I measure the complexity of the subject. I know the unpredictable nature of the American partner. I am aware that our companies and our sectors need clarity and stability, but Europe has been trampled on, the European Parliament ruled out, the agreement reached in opacity. It's not a compromise, it's a capitulation. Add to this the promise of 1,200 billion euros of European investments on American soil: energy, strategic sector, more artificial intelligence, not to mention promises of military purchases. We are financing with our taxpayers' money the reindustrialization of the United States, and in doing so, we are sacrificing our sovereignty. Commissioner, continue these negotiations, defend the dignity of our States and the interests of our sectors and, if renegotiation proves impossible, use trade defence tools such as the anti-coercion tool that this Parliament has given you. Because if Europe is an economic giant, this disastrous negotiation reminds us that we remain a political dwarf.

Madam President, High Representative, 703 days. 703 days since Hamas snatched civilians from their lives in an attack of unprecedented brutality. 703 days of unbearable anguish for families and 703 days that we and my colleagues in the EPP Group are hammering out the same demand: the immediate release of the hostages, which is essential for any negotiation. However, during this time, some countries such as mine have chosen to recognize the State of Palestine, but the conditions are not yet met, because it is, by recognizing the State of Palestine, the massacres of October 7 that are valid. Recognition of the State of Palestine should be considered after the release of the Israeli hostages, with the effective provision of humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza and the establishment of a ceasefire on both sides. Europe cannot negotiate under the threat of weapons. Mutual recognition between the two states is indispensable, but to want to build this in the midst of chaos is a madness that would compromise the credibility and unity of Europe. It is no longer time for the diplomacy of good feelings. We need to mobilise our energy for a single priority: the release of hostages and an end to the suffering of all civilians.

Madam President, Commissioner, the CAP is the roots and wings of Europe. Sixty years after its debut, it remains more strategic than ever, at a time when the food weapon is being used as a rattle by the powers of this world. Agriculture is a pillar, not an adjustment line of an Excel table, and the budget devoted to it would not survive a decrease of 15 points. A merger into the single fund would put support for agriculture in competition with support for the construction of roundabouts. Commissioner, you are a sincere ally of the agricultural world. You proved that by breaking with the old demons of the Green Deal and the announcements of simplification in the spring. Your intelligence on the ground contrasts with the vertical and disconnected management of President von der Leyen, to whom you will pass on a saving track from me on the €5.4 billion LIFE programme. This funding serves a nebula of NGOs that undermine the foundations of our agriculture by claiming to defend the environment. An example in my region, where one of them, who receives €9 million, engages in banned protests to confront law enforcement by proudly displaying Palestinian and LGBT flags. This money would be better used in the yards of our farms.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, America First It is more than a slogan, it is a weapon that threatens, taxes and works. While Trump is arming himself with an axe to make us bend, the Commission is sharpening his butter knife. Too nice, too weak. Too late. When you negotiate in front of a bulldozer, you have to be a wall, not a gruyère. Today, our European products taxed at least 10%, it is not just an accounting line. They are farmers who worry about their future, families who fear losing everything, territories that hold their breath. I prefer Europe to be at the negotiating table rather than on the retaliatory menu. But what is being prepared is a deal at a discount, necessary, but not sufficient. Our companies no longer wait for Brussels and negotiate directly in Washington, and they are unfortunately right. For the American president, a builder who employs thousands of people weighs much more than a poorly elected president and solitary governance. The reality is that we must prepare the next step, implement the recommendations of the Draghi report, protect our strategic sectors and genuine economic sovereignty. If Europe plays chess against a player who eats the coins, let's try to always have a spare game.

Mr President, Madam High Representative, I am delighted that the European Parliament is organising a debate on the situation in the Middle East, because this subject deserves better than the gestures of a few influencers who are struggling with 'likes' playing to scare themselves on a sailboat. On October 7, 2023, the world turned into horror. Hamas terrorists, backed by Iran and some UNRWA operatives, carried out a barbaric attack, exterminating civilians, women and children. This massacre is not a detail of history. It is the starting point of all human suffering in the Middle East, which is a real heartbreak. Meanwhile, Iran is arming, financing, fuelling chaos, from Gaza to Lebanon, from Yemen to Syria. This theocratic regime, obsessed with Israel's destruction, is the regional arsonist who threatens global balance by making proxy war a state doctrine, with Hamas as its armed arm. So yes, it must be remembered, Israel is our ally and our economic partner, and one of our bulwarks in the face of Islamism. And he has to stay that way. Between terrorism and democracy, my choice is made. France and Europe would be well inspired to do...

Mr President, Commissioner, the European External Action Service is a centrepiece of our policy of influence. He can't just do all-out diplomacy with the European checkbook in hand. If it continues to support, by funding UNRWA, structures infiltrated by hatred such as Hamas, it commits much more than budget lines: It commits our credibility. Humanitarian aid is a reflection of our own values. Yes, milestones have been set. Yes, audits and strengthening of internal control systems are planned and we will be extremely vigilant to ensure that they are effective. No offense to the left and the Greens, one cannot save the honor of a policy by turning a blind eye to what it finances. In Gaza, guarantees are melting down faster than hostages are released. European taxpayers' money cannot be used as a blank money to finance Hamas ideology, hatred, violence and indoctrination, especially of children. I welcome in this text significant progress in terms of budgetary rigour and ethical vigilance, including the clear message that reconstruction in Gaza will not begin until the hostages are released, the explicit recognition of the problem of the contents of textbooks, the strengthening of audits and controls of funds by the European Union, and the need for compliance with UNESCO standards. This text therefore marks a welcome step forward. We will ensure the implementation of our long-standing requirements. Every euro paid must be traceable, conditioned and controlled so that European money stops circulating anyhow and anywhere, perhaps even in tunnels.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, one hundred and thirty-eight days is how long Boualem Sansal, a Franco-Algerian writer, has been imprisoned in Algerian jails. For more than four months, Algeria has been dishonoring itself by locking up a man because he has exercised his most basic right: say and write what he thinks. Boualem Sansal is a free, deeply European voice, a major author, winner of prestigious literary prizes, and who has offered Europe very enlightening works on the dangers of totalitarianism and religious extremism. Its commitment to freedom of expression and freedom of conscience embodies what Europe stands for, what it is, what we are. I quote: "History is not history when criminals make its ink and pass the pen. It is the chronicle of their alibis. And those who read it without burning their hearts are false witnesses. Boualem Sansal is now an elderly European citizen, sick, a political prisoner, who defends himself against a regime that has rejected his lawyer simply because that lawyer was Jewish. After the almost unanimous adoption of a resolution by our Parliament last January, I still call on the European institutions to act for his release. Almost unanimous, because the political groups of the Left and the Greens have selective indignation. They prefer to support a tyrannical regime rather than defend a European citizen. Abject and anecdotal betrayal, so insignificant are their political combinations and calculations in the face of Sansal's strength and struggle. Boualem Sansal could have been a bridge between two shores, and is instead treated as the enemy of a system that has decided to break it for example. To close one's eyes to one's fate would be to send a chilling signal to all those who still dare to think and write freely. That would be betraying an exemplary man, an exemplary work, and an exemplary fight. It is his freedom that is at stake, but it is also ours. Let's act!

May Hamas stop using civilians in Gaza as human shields, and Israel can stop bombing hospitals and schools! A negotiated two-state solution cannot be found as long as Hamas continues to deny Gazans any possibility of being democratically represented. I have no lessons to learn from you, Madam, nor from groups like yours, which, under the pretext of anti-Zionism, are openly anti-Semitic!