Speeches

Thank you, Ms Bentele, for accepting my question. I have been following your position on this situation quite closely, and I also saw that you visited the German‑Israeli summer festival in Berlin just a few days ago. I take that your support for Israel stems from the right of Israel to exist, which is enshrined in our German national ideals, and I'm just wondering, in your opinion, does this also include the necessity to protect Israel from its internal enemies, and not only its external enemies?

I agree with everything you said. However, I would have liked you to have answered my specific question a little more clearly. Nevertheless, I think we can continue to fight together for Ukraine's support.

Madam President, in accordance with our Rules of Procedure, I would also like to be able to respond to Mrs Strack-Zimmermann's reply. Mrs Strack-Zimmermann, you talked about the fact that we are no longer allowed to do national solo trips, and you talked about the fact that we have to go home and kick our governments' asses. There is a concept that so far only drives a European government, namely that its citizens are allowed to fight in the Ukrainian army. Only Poland can do that. Would you agree with me when I say that we should allow this throughout Europe in order to enable those citizens of our nations who want to fight for freedom to do so?

Mr President, dear people of Europe, every time this Parliament takes a step toward progress, we hear the same tired chorus: 'Brussels bureaucracy'. This time it is about circularity and vehicle designs, a reform that makes total sense if you are serious about sustainability, consumer rights or even basic industrial logic. Because yes, setting common standards across 27 countries isn't simple. But you know what's worse? Having 27 different standards. We do not need 27 answers to the question on how to recycle a car. What we need is European solutions for European industry, one that makes it easier to reuse parts, recover critical materials and reduce waste, no matter where your vehicle is made or where it breaks down. So to those shouting 'bureaucracy' I say: show me one good law – just one – that brought instant results, zero effort and universal applause. I will wait.

Mr President, dear people of Europe! At the age of 20, a friend and I opened a steakhouse. The business went well until a change of ownership of our supplier for T-bone steaks and whisky. Suddenly this supplier demanded renegotiations of current contracts, threatened us with delivery stops and price increases, and at the same time we learned that the new owner had cheated business partners several times, previous companies had regularly gone bankrupt, he discriminated against employees and regularly became insulting. I was shocked, but my partner insisted on negotiating in good faith. The conversations dragged on, the tone became rougher and at some point we were also threatened and insulted. And what was the result of these conversations? This story is, of course, fictional. But I feel the same way about the current EU-US trade talks. I welcome Commissioner Šefčovič's will to negotiate in good faith. But I would like us to talk more about what we are doing with regard to our trade with the US if we do not get another extension on 1.8. Commissioner, the people of Europe need your confidence, but also your foresight.

Mr President, dear people of Europe! At the age of 20, a friend and I opened a steakhouse. The business went well until a change of ownership of our supplier for T-bone steaks and whisky. Suddenly this supplier demanded renegotiations of current contracts, threatened us with delivery stops and price increases, and at the same time we learned that the new owner had cheated business partners several times, previous companies had regularly gone bankrupt, he discriminated against employees and regularly became insulting. I was shocked, but my partner insisted on negotiating in good faith. The conversations dragged on, the tone became rougher and at some point we were also threatened and insulted. And what was the result of these conversations? This story is, of course, fictional. But I feel the same way about the current EU-US trade talks. I welcome Commissioner Šefčovič's will to negotiate in good faith. But I would like us to talk more about what we are doing with regard to our trade with the US if we do not get another extension on 1.8. Commissioner, the people of Europe need your confidence, but also your foresight.

I think you have raised a good point with the table. In fact, we are not alone in this. Of course, we still have to ask ourselves the question, to what extent does this hit us hard and to what extent does it hit the other states and blocs hard? The absolute numbers may be different or the same. The effect can be different. I think the solution is that we in the EU really put ourselves at the forefront of a new international trade law, that we try to take the place that the US previously had in the international trade structure and thus become the number one in world trade.

I think you have raised a good point with the table. In fact, we are not alone in this. Of course, we still have to ask ourselves the question, to what extent does this hit us hard and to what extent does it hit the other states and blocs hard? The absolute numbers may be different or the same. The effect can be different. I think the solution is that we in the EU really put ourselves at the forefront of a new international trade law, that we try to take the place that the US previously had in the international trade structure and thus become the number one in world trade.

Thank you, Mr. President. In accordance with the last sentence of Rule 178(10), I would also like to be able to react to the reply that the colleague gives me. Thank you, Mr. Colleague, for accepting the blue card. I can only agree with you in the need for stability. You have raised one point – I have also raised one point: It was also supported that we are now strengthening our trade agreements with the rest of the world. I'm wondering, and that's my question to you: How can we ensure that the other countries, the other trading blocs in the world, do not take advantage of this situation, that we urgently need new partners now, because the US is unreliable for us, and use it in the negotiations against us? What can we do?

Thank you, Mr. President. In accordance with the last sentence of Rule 178(10), I would also like to be able to react to the reply that the colleague gives me. Thank you, Mr. Colleague, for accepting the blue card. I can only agree with you in the need for stability. You have raised one point – I have also raised one point: It was also supported that we are now strengthening our trade agreements with the rest of the world. I'm wondering, and that's my question to you: How can we ensure that the other countries, the other trading blocs in the world, do not take advantage of this situation, that we urgently need new partners now, because the US is unreliable for us, and use it in the negotiations against us? What can we do?

Madam President, once again, in this debate about LGBTQ+ rights, it's because of Rule 10(4) of Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament prohibiting hate speech. Saying that a man who wears lip gloss on his face is a perversion is hate speech, dear colleagues. It's not allowed. You can, of course, have another opinion about if you think it's pretty or not, but it's not perverse. Let people be who they are. This is what is enshrined in our Rules of Procedure. Madam President, as so often before, I ask the Bureau to take care of this. We have seen this in all debates since I entered this Parliament – in all debates when it came to LGBTQ+ issues, we have seen hate speech like this. I'm sick of this. I know a big part of the plenary is sick of this and it needs to stop now.

Madam President, once again, in this debate about LGBTQ+ rights, it's because of Rule 10(4) of Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament prohibiting hate speech. Saying that a man who wears lip gloss on his face is a perversion is hate speech, dear colleagues. It's not allowed. You can, of course, have another opinion about if you think it's pretty or not, but it's not perverse. Let people be who they are. This is what is enshrined in our Rules of Procedure. Madam President, as so often before, I ask the Bureau to take care of this. We have seen this in all debates since I entered this Parliament – in all debates when it came to LGBTQ+ issues, we have seen hate speech like this. I'm sick of this. I know a big part of the plenary is sick of this and it needs to stop now.

It's not a point of order; it's a reaction. Thank you, dear colleague. I can just tell you two things when you talk about the fact that the only corrective that is needed is the reader – I advise you to research a little bit about the effect that the state-controlled media of the communist German Democratic Republic had or, on the other hand, the state-controlled media of the Nazi regime in Germany. I can tell you from my national experience, the idea that the only corrective is the reader is very, very naïve and you should think about this again.

In accordance with Rule 178(10), the last sentence of the Rules of Procedure, I would also ask for your permission to react to the answer that I will get from my colleague. Thank you, colleague, for accepting the blue card – you talked a lot about the dangers of one unified administrative body that regulates the media and the press. My question would be, do you think that media and press should be fully free without any oversight, being able to also spread lies and disinformation? And if not, what body can control this? Where can we put a safeguard in place?

Thank you very much, Mr Colleague, for this statement. I can only agree with you. I think the most important thing about this is: Of all the things you just mentioned – I personally knew about half of them, I think the average citizen, the average citizen of the European Union, knows almost none of them. I think it is all the more important here that we explain these instruments, that we explain the possibilities that we have, in this competition, in this rivalry, to the population sufficiently, so that they do not feel that the Chinese are just dancing on our noses all day long.

Madam President, in accordance with Rule 178 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament, I would also like to ask you for the possibility to react to the reply that Mr Lange gives to me right now. Thank you, Mr. Colleague, for accepting the blue card. My question would be, in your opinion, what can be done if China does not agree to let these practices, which we criticise here with a large majority, actually be re-established? What are we going to do in the future if we don't come to an agreement?

Madam President, dear people of Europe! What I particularly love about my job are the many first times. Last week I was for the first time at the splash! festival and at the same time the first member of parliament backstage at Germany's largest hip-hop festival. Just for a moment, dear house: Think back to your last festival, this concert you will never forget. These places are not a luxury. They are the heart of our culture. They connect people, create identity and give hope. And yet: If you want to promote European culture today, you need a master's degree in bureaucracy. I know this: As a lawyer, I have advised companies on funding applications, and I can tell you that these applications are a single disaster. Maybe it needs more MPs backstage at festivals like the splash! – but there is a particular need for support programmes that arrive where people live, where culture lives. Because culture is what unites us all here in Europe.

Madam President, dear people of Europe! What I particularly love about my job are the many first times. Last week I was for the first time at the splash! festival and at the same time the first member of parliament backstage at Germany's largest hip-hop festival. Just for a moment, dear house: Think back to your last festival, this concert you will never forget. These places are not a luxury. They are the heart of our culture. They connect people, create identity and give hope. And yet: If you want to promote European culture today, you need a master's degree in bureaucracy. I know this: As a lawyer, I have advised companies on funding applications, and I can tell you that these applications are a single disaster. Maybe it needs more MPs backstage at festivals like the splash! – but there is a particular need for support programmes that arrive where people live, where culture lives. Because culture is what unites us all here in Europe.

So my law studies were good for something after all, thank you Mr Vice-President. Dear colleague, I can just tell you that the people, the will of the people, the will of the Italian people, that was what led to this European Union. They decided democratically to give power, to give trust to the European Union. Therefore, I think you should not in general be against that. You should respect the democratic will of your people to follow the European path.

So my law studies were good for something after all, thank you Mr Vice-President. Dear colleague, I can just tell you that the people, the will of the people, the will of the Italian people, that was what led to this European Union. They decided democratically to give power, to give trust to the European Union. Therefore, I think you should not in general be against that. You should respect the democratic will of your people to follow the European path.

Mr President, in accordance with Rule 178(10), the last sentence, I would ask for your approval to be able to react to the answer that I will get from the speaker. Dear colleague, thank you very much for taking this blue card. You said in your speech that we do not need more centralised rules from Brussels. That's something that we hear over and over again. And every time I hear that, I'm wondering, because this is the European Parliament, so we are not even in Brussels. That's a separate story. But my question is: is this not here Italian politics? Are there not Italians here and Spanish and Germans? Are we not also all the people?

Mr President, in accordance with Rule 178(10), the last sentence, I would ask for your approval to be able to react to the answer that I will get from the speaker. Dear colleague, thank you very much for taking this blue card. You said in your speech that we do not need more centralised rules from Brussels. That's something that we hear over and over again. And every time I hear that, I'm wondering, because this is the European Parliament, so we are not even in Brussels. That's a separate story. But my question is: is this not here Italian politics? Are there not Italians here and Spanish and Germans? Are we not also all the people?

Mr President, dear people of Europe, I am happy to see that there is so much unity in this House when it comes to the necessity of e-commerce consumer protection. What troubles me a little bit is the idea that we can just apply the laws that we have and that this will solve the situation, because we are talking, in fact, about the internet. I know that for some of us this is maybe hard to grasp still, but the internet is developing very, very, very fast. One colleague from Renew said we can just enact the DSA. The DSA was drafted in 2020. It was accepted by this Parliament in 2022, then the Council said yes also in 2022, and since 2024, it's actually in action. In internet terms, that's a pretty, pretty, pretty long time ago. Even while I'm speaking right now, there is development in the internet that our legislation is not up to. So if we take one thing from this situation, it is that we have to update constantly.

Mr President, dear people of Europe, I am happy to see that there is so much unity in this House when it comes to the necessity of e-commerce consumer protection. What troubles me a little bit is the idea that we can just apply the laws that we have and that this will solve the situation, because we are talking, in fact, about the internet. I know that for some of us this is maybe hard to grasp still, but the internet is developing very, very, very fast. One colleague from Renew said we can just enact the DSA. The DSA was drafted in 2020. It was accepted by this Parliament in 2022, then the Council said yes also in 2022, and since 2024, it's actually in action. In internet terms, that's a pretty, pretty, pretty long time ago. Even while I'm speaking right now, there is development in the internet that our legislation is not up to. So if we take one thing from this situation, it is that we have to update constantly.