Speeches

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, 'demography is destiny', Auguste Comte said to us, and that of Europe, as such, seems sealed. The comparison with the vitality of the South marks the twilight of our civilization: in 2026, the EU’s population will start to decline to 3.5% of the world’s population by 2070. So this decline cannot be stopped by mass immigration, unless one thinks that all individuals are interchangeable – an illusion that denies the peoples of Europe their uniqueness and their own destiny. European nations, like the Commission, should consider birth-related expenditure as investment rather than mere social costs when drawing up their budgets. In France, this issue is even more important, with a social model that is based precisely on solidarity between generations. It is therefore by giving back to Europeans the pride of being who they are that the future will be built more securely. The family, constantly attacked by progressivism, must be revalued. Motherhood and fatherhood are the pillars on which the future of our continent is built.

Mr President, Commissioner, a calm debate on the status of women in the world would require several conditions, which, unfortunately, are not met. It would first be necessary to be able to define precisely what a woman is. But the lubies woke whose text is full do not allow it. It would then be necessary to get rid of a caricatured ideological vision. But this report makes the choice to carry an already outdated feminism, which I cannot claim. Because I defend women for what they are, not for what you think they should be, I am not a feminist. Because I fight surrogacy, forced abortion, the degradation of the image of women through pornography, I am not a feminist. Because I want to celebrate motherhood as the privilege of women, with the support of men and as the future of humanity, I am not a feminist. So women have nothing to do with these wishful thinking and your ideological agenda. Europe should have better things to offer the world than these cartoons, and I will keep reminding you of that.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, ‘The European Union and support for people with disabilities: Few concrete effects”: This is the title of the latest report of the European Court of Auditors, which has been established without appeal. So, more than the concrete solutions, which belong to the Member States, it is a vision of civilisation that Europe must set itself the task of recalling. Recall and support the efforts of caregivers and these families, who sacrifice a large part of their lives, with very little support from the public authorities. Recall that it is illusory to be obsessed with accessibility if we forget the specific issues related to mental disability, a blind spot in EU policies. Recall that, if the only solution proposed to deal with disability is abortion, this adds unhappiness to the drama and promotes eugenics. Finally, remembering that the family, which some people strive to destroy, is the first material and moral support to cope with disability.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the quality of a civilisation is measured by its respect for the weakest of its members, said Professor Jérôme Lejeune, a great French researcher who discovered Down syndrome. Our children, the future of our continent, today face new threats, sometimes imported, sometimes denied, but present. Threats of physical violence first, with an immigration that, in France, has already killed Lola, Thomas, Mathis, Philippine and so many others. Threats of sexual violence, then, with the worrying development of online sexual exploitation of minors. The journey of sexual predators begins very often with the consumption of pornography and it is a subject that we must dare to face. Threats also to education, with school programs on emotional and sexual life that replace parents, families and sexualize children. Threats finally of militant transgenderism supported by the European Commission in its LGBT program. The practices of sex reassignment operations for minors, which are real mutilations, must be banned from the European Union. And for the future of our nations, we will be intractable...

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, as is often the case in this Parliament, good intentions can lead to bad consequences. No one today questions the dangers of tobacco on the health of Europeans, but the legitimate desire for prevention must be able to be done without harming several economic sectors that must be taken into account. Let's take care of our tobacconists, especially provincial ones, whose shops, where they work hard every day, are sometimes the last place of social life in some villages. Let us also think of our restaurant owners and coffee shop owners, who would suffer directly from a ban on all smoke on their terraces, which this resolution calls for. Furthermore, an impact study on the health effects of e-cigarettes and their contribution or not to smoking cessation would be essential before putting them on an equal footing with tobacco. Finally, I regret that the increasingly important subject of cannabis consumption, which has exploded in France with a 72% increase between 2010 and 2017, is not mentioned in this text. Its health consequences are obviously much more harmful than those of tobacco.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the election of Donald Trump, far from being the cataclysm portrayed by the Western media, must sign an end to naivety for the European nations and for the Union. The end of commercial naivety first, and the dream of sweet commerce as the regulator of the world's march. American protectionism will have to respond to European and national measures to finally liberate our economy and protect our businesses. End of military naivety then, America finally turning away from its role as gendarme of the world and thus the opportunity for the European nations, and especially the French nuclear power, to take back in hand their destiny, their autonomy and their sovereignty in terms of defense. End of ideological naivety, finally, with a rout of the candidate of wokism, mass immigration, LGBT ideology and transgenderism. The European Union should learn this lesson rather than go further and further in the direction of false and destructive progress. The left can cry, it is used to it, it will then have to, like all of us, finally face the real.

You have not understood the meaning of my intervention, Mrs Aubry. My intervention was aimed at recalling that Poland is a sovereign state and that, as such, it is up to the Polish people to decide which laws they consider good for them. We do not have to interfere with the decisions of the Member States. You claim, with your good feelings, to know better than everyone else what is allowed, what is good, what is bad, but we should remember here that a democratic functioning requires, in these times troubled by your interventions, that sovereign peoples always have the last word.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, once again this Parliament is debating a matter that does not concern it. The Polish law on abortion is legitimate as it was passed by a national representation that holds its mandate to the Polish people and is accountable only to itself. Yes, Poland has the right to choose its own laws. Yes, Poles have the right to consider that the life of the unborn child should be protected, especially that of a disabled child. Yes, Poland has the right to protect its demography by limiting the use of abortion. Yes, Poland has the right to believe that abortions are suffering for women and should be preserved. And no, the European Union cannot impose its ideology without respecting the rules of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal, nor can a UN report based on the work of militant associations dictate its law to a sovereign nation of sovereign choice. Ladies and gentlemen, if democracy is a value of the European Union, let us start by respecting the laws of the Member States.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the current housing crisis affecting our nations is an opportunity for the Commission to shine in what it knows how to do best: above ground technocracy and stifling overregulation. Far from the labyrinth of absurd norms gradually imposed, the priority to guarantee dignified housing is first of all to put an end to the dehumanizing urban ghettos that populate our cities. Our priority is above all to protect our fellow citizens from growing dispossession. While some promise us that "you will own nothing and you will be happy", it is necessary above all to protect the right of ownership and the constitution of a patrimony to be transmitted. You're amazed at this housing crisis, but can you remind us: Who caused energy prices to rise? This is the European Commission. Who excluded so-called "thermal hoses" from the rental stock? It's the Commission again. Who imposed costly renovations, which undermined our public finances and our heritage? It's the Commission. Who, in reality, opposes all the natural aspirations of men to possess and dwell with dignity? Again and again the Commission. Let's change course to guarantee housing, property rights, heritage and family inheritance. Count on us to defend the French against the absurdity of the Brussels bureaucracy.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, teaches us wisely Saint Bernard de Clairvaux, a figure of monasticism, to whom Europe owes so much. Indeed, it is in response to legitimate concerns that the strengthening of the Digital Services Act, the DSA, is desired: fight against crime, spread of terrorism or disinformation. However, under the guise of a largely misguided common good, the DSA mostly promotes political censorship. This summer, in France, the Meta group arbitrarily closed the accounts of officials of Nemesis or those of French media such as Occidentis, Une Bonne Droite or Frontières, temporarily suspended for no objective reason. It is by sheltering behind the DSA that these private companies transform the rule of law into the Orwellian Ministry of Truth. And as often, the defense of democracy serves as a pretext for an ever more arrogant, ever more present, ever more arbitrary censorship. So, in the face of these excesses, be sure to find us on your way to defend the treasure of freedom of expression.