Speeches

Madam President, dear people of Europe, I know what it feels when your phone becomes a weapon. I've been in politics for two years now, and in these two years I have received messages that I will not repeat in this Chamber. I have seen what coordinated online hate does to a person, to their sleep, to their confidence, to their sense of reality. And I think you, Madam President, have too. I am someone with power. I have a microphone. I can fight back. But now I ask, what does it feel like when you cannot? When someone is bullied off every platform they ever tried to call home. When intimate images are taken without consent and sent not to one person, but to hundreds; to employers, to family, as a public execution of dignity. They cannot fight back. And when they go to the authorities, too often they hear, 'we understand, but there is nothing we can do'. The internet did not invent cruelty. We just gave it scale and then looked away. Ireland said 'enough'. Coco's Law works. Now it's Europe's turn.

Madam President, dear people of Europe, today I voted in favour of this resolution on the enforcement of the Digital Markets Act because the real question is not technical – it is political. Who decides the rules for the new European digital market? Europe or someone else? A handful of foreign platforms today control the gateways to our digital lives – the app stores we use, the search results we see, the messengers we rely on. The DMA exists precisely to keep those gateways open and to ensure that no company, regardless of size or origin, stands above European law. It is striking that the United States tries to ban TikTok out of fear that a foreign power could shape the digital lives of its citizens, while at the same time pressuring the European Union to weaken the very rules that protect ours. The logic is clear when it serves Washington, and it's inconvenient when it applies to Europe. So I ask: what are we waiting for? For the last social interaction, the last search result, the last app to be governed by decision made outside this continent, outside of Europe? It is time for us to act.

Madam President, dear people of Europe, if you scroll through your feed today, you don't see a bank adviser in a stiff suit, you see content creators who have done more to get my generation interested in investing than any government brochure ever could. This is a massive win for democratisation of financial knowledge. But as we build this savings and investment union, we have to ensure the rules of the game are fair for everyone. I supported the Pereira report because financial literacy should not be a secret tip you stumble upon in a comment section. It should be a fundamental skill for every European. We are not here to fight the digital world, we are here to master it. We need a framework that provides clarity and transparency without crushing the innovation of the creators who make finance accessible. Let us empower our citizens with the tools they need to be smart, protected and free investors.

Madam President, dear people of Europe, Mr Commissioner, sometimes I wonder if it's because I'm young or, as Ms Furet explained to me in great length right now, poorly educated, but sometimes I have the feeling that we lost the ability to be brave in this House and on the world stage. Of course this is not a perfect instrument. It is voluntary or the nations have to put it into action, and this is somewhere where it can fail. It might be that we will not have enough money. On the other hand, of course it will scare people. It will scare businesses. It will scare industries that their costs will rise even more. But is this a reason not to try any new idea to protect biodiversity? I was not at the COP16, but I am pretty certain the hundreds and hundreds of very brilliant and experienced people who sat together there and who developed this tool were not completely stupid. So I think it's a good idea. Mr Commissioner, the EU should do everything in its power to realise it.

I think, on your last point, taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor can be communism – it can also be taxes. I just want to remind you about the simple scientific fact that even if the rest of the world is failing biologically and the environment is failing in the rest of the world, that does not mean that the European biosystem will also be destroyed. So, at least, we have an interest in being this green island in a burning world, because then at least we can survive. If we say, 'Oh, the rest of the world is failing, so who cares?', then we will go down with the rest of the world. So we have an interest. And I ask you once again: what's your alternative?

Thank you, sir, for accepting my blue card. You spoke at great length about why this is a bad idea and why the people supporting it in this House are not right. So my question would be: what's your alternative? Because since I came to this Parliament, I have never seen the ESN support anything that was about protecting the climate, that was about protecting biodiversity. On every single issue, you always are against it. So my question is how to protect biodiversity and what to do.

Thank you, Madame, for accepting the blue card. You just said in your speech that it's a problem that it's all built on volunteering. And now we have here the colleague from the AfD and also the one from the patriots who make the false claim that this would already be a tax. My question is: Is what you think of as a mandatory payment a tax? And if so, how would you explain that to the companies?

Thank you, Madame, for accepting the blue card. In your speech, you spoke at length about the fact that the problem is not gender inequality. Therefore, as a man, I would now allow myself the freedom to ask you as a woman: Do you think women are equal in our society? Are you equal in this society as a woman? Not as a member, as a woman. And are the other women in this society equal? Effective, not just from the idea. In any case, women do not lack the willpower.

I find one thing about this whole topic very difficult. It's the perspective of the farmers. Because for the farmers, they look at us and we are here for 30 years in the European Parliament. They have been there for thousands of years. They have worked the land. They have had their place for many, many generations. So if we want them to stop what they are doing, we need to give them something in advance. So what is the alternative that we could offer to farmers when we say, 'You should not have these big herds anymore'?

Thank you, colleague, for accepting the blue card. You know that I'm all the way in for saving the climate. At the same time, I love the provision in the Rules of Procedure that says that the MEPs shall talk about the topic of the debate. So my question to you is how to secure a sustainable future for the EU livestock sector?

Thank you, Mr. Colleague, for accepting the blue card. I think we all agree that the interests of agriculture and the interests of climate protection must not be played off against each other. However, what you just said sounds a bit shady to me, a bit strange – that is, that the electricity from wind turbines goes into the ground. Then not only cows would be affected, but also people and many others. How many cases have there been in the Netherlands as a whole?

Mr President, be more transparent and it's not so easy for them. Dear people of Europe, another debate with just one goal: to dismantle trust in Europe under the false pretext of protecting it. It starts like this, with doubt, with distortion. But let me be very clear – it will not work. You can poison the debate with lies, with fear, with hate – but we will never give up Europe. You can call this Union a failure, call it corrupt, call it a lie, call it the enemy – but we will never give up Europe. You can divide our people, nation against nation, neighbour against neighbour – but we will never give up Europe. And to those who sometimes think 'there's just too many of them', listen – there are more of us, more who believe in freedom, more who believe in democracy, more who believe in Europe. So no matter how loud you shout, we are more, we are stronger and we are not going anywhere. Long live Europe!

Mr President, I am afraid this will be a little bit going in your direction, in your mind. But, Mr President, to connect LGBTQ+ with perversion is, as yesterday, hate speech. It is a breach of Article 10(4) of the Rules of Procedure. (Addressing Mr Volgin) Dear colleague, this is the borders of the freedom of speech and the freedom of opinion that exists in this House to protect the dignity of people, and only because you are different, you have no right to hate these people in this House, on this floor. You can go outside, you can think what you want. You can say what you want. But here we have a certain level of decency that is required. (Addressing other Members in the Chamber) And you can talk when you have the floor.

Madam President, dear people of Europe, a few weeks ago, I sat in a strategy meeting and a brilliant assistant, Schiller, told me there is a difference between strategies, projects and instruments. An instrument, that is our immediate response: relief for consumers and businesses facing high energy and fertiliser prices. That is right, that is necessary, but this is just a band aid. A project, that would be more structured: a European crisis fund for fertilisers or faster permits for wind turbines while Putin holds us hostage. But the strategy must be long term. We need a European renewable energy industry, independent from geopolitics, independent from dictators. And the same applies to fertilisers. Why import when we can produce circular ones from waste here in Europe? And that is the strategy: independence, sovereignty, security. So I ask you: do we want band aids or do we finally want to heal the wound? Because Europe deserves tomorrow.

Colleague, I'm wondering if you ever read about renewable energies? About how solar energy, wind energy, water energy works? Because if you did, you would realise that all of this we can produce here. We have the sun, we have the wind, we have water. In Europe! So the only thing that we would be dependable on, if we would go for renewable energies in Europe, would be European nature. And I personally think that's a pretty damn good thing to depend on. Don't you think?

Mr President, Mr László, Ms Steger, Mr Uhrík and Mr Terheş are right, and I cannot take the pressure anymore, so here's my confession. While I spend my time in kindergartens turning the gender of young children, I am constantly preparing my speeches full of lies, in total disregard for the principle of sovereignty. And while chanting hateful songs about the traditions of European Member States, I then proceed to prepare secret meetings with the Commission, where – in typical fashion of the cartel of the centre parties – we discuss how to blackmail national governments into forcing their citizens to accept the Green Deal, while sipping champagne financed by woke NGOs. Oh, damn, did I read that out loud? I mean, Orbán is bad. Grow up!

Thank you for accepting the blue card. As I'm waiting: it's beautiful here from the first row, I have to say. Can you maybe remind me, dear colleague: ¿Esto es el Parlamento español?

Mr President, dear people of Europe! I think we all agree that people deserve justice, Mr Mularczyk. But I don't think it makes sense to keep tearing up old wounds. The idea of the European Union is an idea of the future – an investment in the future, in joint progress. And that is what we can do with this budget. Surely there is one or the other adjustment screw here, on which you can turn, with which you do not agree. But a commitment to this budget is a commitment to the future of Europe at a time when what is happening in the rest of the world shows us all the more how much we need each other.