Speeches

Mr President! spying on the opposition by the secret service. Exclusion of opposition from mayoral elections. Exclusion of opposition members from the civil service. Exclusion of opposition members from legal professions. Attacks on disapproved media. Denial of adequate premises to allow the opposition to hold group meetings. Funding of associations and organizations with the aim of carrying out protests against the opposition. Recently: denial of the possibility for the opposition to set up committees of inquiry. All of this is Germany. This is the worst functioning democracy in the EU.

Mr President! The double standards of the Greens are intolerable. If the Federal Spokeswoman of the German Green Youth calls for a possible AfD government to be combated by force of arms in case of doubt, this is considered freedom of expression. If anything happens in Hungary that our moralists do not like, Mr Freund calls for the alleged rule of law to be examined in the discharge of the budget. The report states that full suspensions of funds in the absence of reforms should be enforced as an alleged solution. Why don't you follow your Green youth and demand gun violence against unpopular states? Let's get back to the report. It is still the case that the error rate in the audit report is 3.8%, well above tolerance. So it is not remotely so that we can somehow speak of a success here. But the main thing is to use a report to continue its Hungarian paranoia. We are talking here about the discharge of the budget and we should talk much more often about how the EU is buttoning its money away from citizens.

Mr President! This interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2028-2034 is a very similar one. Instead of focusing on your actual tasks, this Parliament is earnestly calling for an even larger, even more centralised and even more expensive financial framework. From 2021 to 2027, this figure was around EUR 1 074 billion, and if we take this as a reference, we now have a doubling of around EUR 2 000 billion. Financial expectations are exploding in almost every area. What is sold as a necessity is hardly justified. There should be more money, according to the ‘want something’ principle. And while these supposed justifications are described here with values, challenges, sustainability and other words, there is one word far too little, and that is ‘savings’. It is therefore not surprising that Parliament is calling for 1.27 per cent of the gross national income of all Member States and from total own resources as a reference for financing. This is, in the end, an increase in an implicit government quota. The EU's revenues are expected to grow faster than the revenues of its citizens – that is socialism in pure culture. The assumption that average EU growth should be stronger than citizens’ income growth contradicts any market economy principle – and, above all, contradicts citizens’ interests. I would like to remind you: Citizens in Germany and across Europe are forced to save, to reduce their spending massively – due to crises and wars, mismanagement, billions in borrowing from states created solely by their irresponsible policies. I ask you: What legitimacy does the EU have to increase its spending in times of crisis when citizens have to save at the same time? That doesn't fit together, that's not achievable. What this EU needs now is discipline, austerity and a fall in spending. If the EU wants to be close to people – as it always claims – then please also refrain from doing so. We are particularly critical of the fact that national freedoms in the budget are to be further restricted in this draft. Now the EU also wants to prohibit farmers and agricultural companies from deciding independently on subsidy allocations. Fishermen are pitted against farmers, employers against workers – this is the crisis concept of the EU and Friedrich Merz to distract from their own misconduct. We think the opposite is true: National responsibility is not a risk, but a basic democratic principle. Member States know best where financial resources are needed and where they have to decide for themselves. The new MFF is also an attack on the tax sovereignty of the nation states and the private property of the people. They call it public goods, flexibility, increase in own resources. In practice, however, it says: implicit tax and burden on citizens and businesses – and, above all, more bureaucracy. If even the own resources are to be increased again by EUR 60 billion per year, then this is not a will to reform, then in the end this is an additional burden, an even higher burden for citizens and businesses. The planned expansion of EU institutions, agencies and administrative structures is also heading in the wrong direction. Instead of purging the administration, it continues to inflate. Instead of decentralising responsibilities, Brussels is increasingly becoming a waterhead. We need exactly the opposite. We need lean, transparent and truly subsidiary financial planning that relieves the burden on citizens. Less money for centralisation, less money for EU administration and more responsibility for the sovereign states of Europe.

Madam President, What we are currently experiencing in Rhineland-Palatinate is a shocking signal for the state of democracy and the rule of law in Germany and throughout Europe. Following a strong election result by the AfD in the last state election in March, the rules are suddenly changed – exactly where the opposition is supposed to exercise control: in Parliament. The hurdles for the establishment of a committee of inquiry should be raised in such a way that, in fact, only the government can use it. Only the governing parties should control the government. What a farce! However, those who change fundamental opposition rights after the election weaken trust in democratic institutions and undermine the principle of parliament. Because when the government begins to restrict the opposition, the rulers are no longer concerned with democracy, but with the suppression of political change that so many people in Germany want.

Madam President, The Commission's core task is to coordinate economic policy. However, this report seeks to extend Brussels' powers to include financial surveillance and structural reforms. The European Semester will be linked to climate action and social policy. However, this interference with the national areas goes far beyond the mandate of the EU ‑ Commission under its own treaties. Anyone who describes himself as the guardian of the treaties should know exactly his own contractual limits and observe them. The planned reform of the budget already aims to impose new controls on Member States within the framework of their fiscal independence. This is further evidence of creeping centralisation by the EU. That is why we say clearly: cooperation yes, but no economic and fiscal patronage by Brussels.

Thank you very much, Mr. Colleague. You have pointed out very well that remigration is an important pillar of the solution to the problem. But I would like to return to the supply side, to another aspect: It is true that many new buildings are so expensive because the construction costs are so high, and one of the major drivers is energy prices and thus a homemade problem for the European Union. Perhaps you could also present a solution here.

Dear Madam President, I refer to Rule 22 – Duties of the President – paragraph 5: security. It has been a few weeks since I have addressed the security risk posed by the Left Group. At that time it was about serious bodily injury. Now we know: Anyone who goes to an event of the left-wing extremist parliamentarian Rima Hassan and has a dissent from her will be beaten to death by her environment. How many attacks by parliamentarians of the left and their environment still have to happen before action is finally taken? Worse still: In the Presidium there is a representative of the LFI, Younous Omarjee. We must therefore assume that information on Parliament's security will be sent directly to the dishonorable cowards and murderers of the Jeune guard to be transmitted? The Bureau must finally take action against this left-wing violence, and Mr Omarjee must resign!

Madam President, Where are the EU's peace efforts? The European Union, which sees itself as a peace project, is failing miserably. Instead of promoting diplomacy and negotiations, it pumps billions into weapons that only prolong the war or simply disappear in a corrupt administration of Ukraine. In addition, Ukraine is sabotaging the EU's energy supply. Hungary's position is particularly commendable in this context. It is true that Hungary is blocking EU aid to Ukraine and sanctions against Russia as long as fundamental problems such as stopped oil supplies are not solved. Hungary shows that you don't have to participate if the course is wrong, and that deserves our respect. Against the background – in Ukraine – of the lack of rule of law and, above all, of corruption in the country, EU accession must be strictly rejected.

Madam President, The EU and its elites have been telling people for years that foreign policy is about so-called values. People have long since understood that these buzzwords are only camouflage words to obscure the obvious national interests of states. Donald Trump uses a different language. The difference to our elites: He is honest with his constituents and the world. Let me say very briefly, Mr Gerbrandy of RENEW has just said: We have long laughed at Donald Trump's incompetence. Let me tell you one thing: Anyone who treats the President of the United States with such disrespect should not be surprised if the United States no longer wants to communicate with this EU. So the real question is: How does Europe feel about the transatlantic alliance when interests are honestly communicated and not hidden behind moral lies? The answer: The days of a soft left-liberal foreign policy are over. It is time for a right-wing Europe that finally becomes capable of action in foreign policy and recognizes the American doctrine. The future Europe must create a new principle of order – honest, courageous and reality-oriented.

Mr President! Freedom of the press in Germany is under attack. David Bendels, editor-in-chief of the German courier, was dragged to court just for posting a critical meme against the government. The local court sentenced him to seven months in prison on probation. Only the court acquitted him. This shows that the established want to prevent criticism of themselves and criminalize every free word. The totalitarian dreams of CDU politician Daniel Günther make it quite clear: He defamed news as an enemy of democracy and demanded regulation and, if necessary, bans from independent media. In Leipzig, the car of the streamer ‘Weichreite TV’ was destroyed by left-wing extremists, discs smashed, tyres punctured. Politicians on the left celebrated it. CDU politicians, left-wing extremists and public service broadcasters – all united by hatred of new media opposing their hegemony. However, freedom of the press is at the heart of our democracy and it is our duty to defend it.

Yes, thank you very much for this question. In fact, I believe that we are enforcing ever more totalitarian mechanisms across the EU in many countries. We note this in particular by reversing elections, by not admitting candidates to elections in France, by not admitting candidates to elections in Germany. And you are actually noticing that these totalitarian structures, which are taking up more and more space in Europe, originate from Western European countries. And that's the real problem. Totalitarian structures can be found mainly in Germany and France and not in Hungary.

Thank you for this request. I think we can emphasize at this point that we have a whole series of large German companies that produce very well in Hungary. And because the circumstances in Germany are so bad, and your party is responsible for that, among other things, there are more and more German companies thinking about going to Hungary. This is something that speaks for Hungary and against Germany. If you look at economic development in Germany, I think we have no right at all to judge how other countries are building their economies.

Thank you for the question. I always think it's good to quote something that you call a source. You didn't do that here. But I would like to state at this point: If you look at the Hungarian economy, you will notice that there are quite a number of German companies located there, especially from the automotive industry, especially from the automotive supply industry. And I can tell you, these companies are very satisfied there. And it goes one step further. There are quite a few companies from Germany who are thinking about going to Hungary because the criteria are better there, because they have better economic criteria there, because they have better rule of law criteria there than in Germany.

Madam President, The conditionality mechanism is not a neutral instrument, but a tool of political blackmail in the hands of a dislodged Brussels elite, reminiscent of authoritarian powers shortly before their natural demise. It is used selectively against progressive conservative governments such as Hungary, which oppose the left-green ideology. And we should all be glad that this strong Hungary does not allow itself to be intimidated by such totalitarian instruments. And as long as a dubious TISZA is not put to power, it will remain so. This left-green minority here in Parliament and other woke institutes claim that the mechanism protects the EU budget from abuse, ensures compliance with the rule of law in all Member States and somehow promotes democracy and transparency. Instead of protecting the rule of law, however, it violates the sovereignty of the nation and serves to centralize power in unelected EU institutions. The alleged violations are often just pretexts for ideological attacks. A clear abuse that divides rather than unites the EU. The conditionality mechanism must therefore be abolished because it itself violates fundamental values of the rule of law and democracy.

(Start of speech when microphone is switched off) ... 10 of the Rules of Conduct, as the EPP colleague has just said: If a company wants to do business in Hungary, it must have letters full of money. This is a slanderous statement and I ask that it be investigated.

Mr President! Defence projects like ReArm Europe have nothing to do with the EU budget. Direct or indirect military financing is a breach of taboo and a misuse of taxpayers' money. Defence is and remains the core task of the sovereign states, not the EU. The new plan includes costly investments of €800 billion by 2030. They run a war economy here. The European Commission says on its website that it wants to secure peace. What is certain, however, is that you are using defence spending and alleged peacekeeping to build a debt union. They talk about peacekeeping, but they finance the continuation of the war. They speak of defense capability, but organize a subsidy rain for the defense industry. They speak of European strength, but squander the money of sovereign states for the construction of an EU war structure. Use the billions of euros for the well-being of the citizens! Or better yet: Give the billions back to the nation-states!