Speeches

Madam President, dear citizens of Europe, in addition to more than a hundred dead, countless people have been injured. Tens of thousands of people lost their property and businesses in the region suffered damage worth several hundred million euros. You'll be surprised, but I'm not talking about the flood in Spain. I am referring to the flooding of the Ahr valley in Germany three years ago. It has been three years in which the fight against climate change has been relegated by other important issues such as the economic crisis, the challenges of migration or Putin's war of aggression. Today, in this debate, the majority can think of nothing better than insulting each other. The price of this inaction is paid by the citizens of Spain. Let's stick together.

Madam President, this House! At the end of this plenary week, I would like to reiterate the principles that must be followed in this House. I know that I myself am sometimes disruptive when it comes to Parliament's practices, but there are some things we should definitely follow here. One of them is to speak the truth, the whole truth, not just part of it. That is why I would like to comment on a truth that Mr Droese mentioned earlier. Mr Droese from the far-right party AfD said that there have always been climatic changes in the world, there have always been changes in biodiversity. Yes, that's true, no one doubts that either. The fact is, however, that these changes have taken place in recent years and decades on a scale never seen before in the world. Even if the colleague obviously does not listen to me – which is a pity at this point – I would still like to make him aware: They must always look at the whole truth, especially when it comes to climate change issues, such as protecting the oceans.

Mr President, honourable House, Rule 202 deals with the point of order. Last plenary week, I had the honour to shed some light on the blatant misuse of this rule inside this House. We were talking about Rule 202(1) that states that you shall use a point of order to address a failure to comply with the parliamentary Rules of Procedure. Today, I want to talk about Rule 202(4) that states that in all regular cases like this, the President shall take an immediate decision about the point of order raised. That is not what happened to my point of order. Instead, right after I finished, we kept on seeing the same thing. For example, since then we heard about the suffering of the Palestinian people or the necessity to honour a Polish priest. Understandable topics, but nothing to state inside a point of order. In my legal opinion, immediate means on the spot. So, Mr President, with all due respect and being thankful to also having the possibility to forewarn President Metsola on this directly yesterday, I request an immediate decision about stopping the point of order being misused.

Madam President, dear colleagues, honourable House, as we talk of young people here with my, in other cases, little life experience of 27 years, I am happy to take the floor today. I may present you with three truths. Number one: TikTok is owned and controlled by the Chinese Communist Party, responsible for atrocities like putting Uyghurs in concentration camps. Number two: because of that, the algorithm is, of course, also controlled and manipulated by the Chinese Communist Party. Number three: if you, my dear colleagues, do not join TikTok, and if you are not active there, you will leave this platform and the young people on this platform to the enemies of democracy inside this House and outside this House. So please be active there no matter what. I am not much, but I am young, so I hope you trust me on that.

Madam President, dear colleagues, whenever a journalist is murdered it's a big problem for democracy, as many of our colleagues have said. I just want to add something to what Mr Saliba said, also what you said here, my dear colleague. Here in Europe, we are a family. So when there is a problem and we call out the problems of the other family members, it's nothing personal. You shouldn't take it personally. You shouldn't take it as something against your country or your people. We should be able to openly discuss when there is a problem without our feelings getting hurt. So whenever there is a nation mentioned in this title, we see the same thing. We see the people coming from this nation being hurt emotionally. They are angry. They feel like their country's being made fun of or something like that. But that's not how it is. So I understand that sometimes the debates here are heated and sometimes people do not use the words that they should use, but keep an open mind to criticism from your colleagues, to criticism from your fellow Europeans, from your family.

Madam President, this House! First of all, I would like to raise the question of whether we would even have to have a debate about abortion if the majority of the positions of power had been occupied by women in the last few centuries. There are religious people who appeal to God. But if they are religious, who are they to interpret God's will? I don't know when the unborn life outweighs the woman's right to self-determination over her own body, but I do know that the balancing of rights in any case does not work in such a way that one right can exclude the other. If I were a woman, I would really want to be able to have an abortion whenever I think it's right.

Mr President, I am referring to Rule 178, which states that in every debate also the non-attached Members shall have speaking time. So I'm wondering why there was no non-attached Member in this debate who got allocated speaking time.

Madam President, Dear people of Europe, we can do it! A sentence that has obviously traumatised some of the Members here more than – I don’t know – a crossing of the Mediterranean Sea on a rubber dinghy. Let me tell you an inconvenient truth: Experts tell us that hundreds of millions of people are expected to migrate to Europe as a result of climate change. These people will come. One colleague said: We are now philosophizing about reform. There is no philosophizing about reform; a reform was adopted in the spring of this year – the EU Migration and Asylum Pact. Of course, illegal migration does not help anyone and creates problems. Of course, legal migration also comes with challenges. But migration is also our opportunity to tackle problems – skills shortages, the collapsing pension system or, for example, rural exodus. This topic is not easy, but we can do it!

Mr President, dear colleagues, I would like to take the time to do a little sensibility training with all of you on the 'caviar diplomacy' that a colleague of ours mentioned. I am not speaking from personal experience, because as yet I am not important enough for Azerbaijan to spend any caviar on me. But I have some information on how it works when the state of Azerbaijan wants to bribe you as a Member of the Parliament. So I want to tell you so you can recognise it when it happens. Once you are in Azerbaijan and you are in a hotel room – that is, of course, filled up with cameras and microphones – the first thing that they do is they will lay a golden pen on your table. And when you leave the hotel and you have taken the pen, then they know, okay, he took the pen of gold and he's about to be bought. The second stage, after you take the pen, is that they send a sex worker to your hotel room at night. And of course, it goes the same way: if you let this person in, then they know you can be bought. And then, of course, the third stage is the briefcase of money that some people here are, unfortunately, familiar with. So watch out, don't get bribed!

Mr President, dear fellow human beings! Labour policy is, from a very crucial point, an essential part of any policy decision we make here in the EU; After all, our own work is closest to the people we represent. If we really want them to stand with Europe, to stand with this idea of a common continent, a common space of peace, freedom and justice, then they need a reasonable basis for this, and they want to create this basis for themselves. That is why, as some colleagues have rightly said here, the guidelines are an important contribution to the implementation of the European idea. We should always remember that these people we represent are above all people who have a normal job; No people sitting in a large, semicircular hall debating important things.

Madam President, dear fellow human beings! In this general debate on the EU budget for 2025, the last thing I would like to draw your attention to is one aspect that, fortunately, has been mentioned many times here: the Erasmus+ programme. This EU flagship project enables young people in education and training, teaching staff and general administration to take the step towards Europe. It is the cornerstone of preserving and developing the European idea. And that is why, not only because I loved my Erasmus in Amsterdam myself, or because my friend loves her Erasmus in Paris right now, I cannot understand why the Council and the Commission want to cut this budget for Erasmus+ next year. In these times of economic crisis, war, threats to democracy and climate change, what do we have but to invest in a better future? Education is the best investment in this better future. Don't let us save on it, don't let us save on the Erasmus+ programme!

Mr President, dear fellow human beings! In this debate on financial support to Ukraine using frozen Russian assets, many MPs talk about peace. Peace as Putin's regime mercilessly bombards schools, hospitals and civilian infrastructure. Peace, while the Russian army executes more and more Ukrainian soldiers who surrender on the spot. Peace, while the Ukrainian people are unbroken in their will to defend their entire homeland. Peace, while the majority of our population – and some will not like to hear this – but the majority wants support for Ukraine until victory. Do you know, ladies and gentlemen, Putin's conditions for starting peace negotiations? He recently announced it at a press conference: The total surrender of the Ukrainian military. You can imagine what these peace negotiations would look like. Slava Ukrajini!

Mr Parliament, Rule 178, paragraphs one and three, sentence two, states that you may only speak when given speaking time. And also, when you are at your place in this debate here today, which is a troublesome debate. And I also feel that some things that are being said here are despicable. We have Members screaming stuff from their seats into the plenary multiple times. So I request that we stop this, because this is not the way that we should debate here. We should be civilised. We should listen to each other. Of course, we can applaud and we can boo, because this is what people do. But if we don't have speaking time, we should keep ours mouth shut.

Mr President, dear people of Europe, High House! A few days ago I got a comment under my video about the weekly review of my work. A citizen there expressed in very flowery words his displeasure at the discrepancy between my and his workload and my and his salary. This man works over 180 hours a month on a construction site. The core of our work – even though the number of people here in this room is a direct lie to me – is the sittings here in the Chamber, and yet we start on Mondays in the early evening and end on Thursdays at noon; So we don't work a full four days here in this room. And now some of you will say: I have to come and go; Now imagine that the man from the construction site would say that to his boss. My influence here is even more than limited, but I would still like to make a suggestion to you: Let's start at noon on Mondays and end at noon on Fridays! Then we all still have enough time to travel, and maybe we don't even sit here in this room every night until 11 or 12 o'clock.

Mr President, Ladies and Gentlemen of Europe, House! We have already talked today about the importance of the European single market. I am therefore all the happier about this debate, because we must also protect our internal market. We cannot accept products flooding the market that are produced in violation of human rights, sometimes even by Uyghur forced laborers in concentration camps. We cannot accept products flooding the market that do not meet our safety standards. We cannot let it happen idly if these products are deliberately subsidized by authoritarian states. We cannot afford to have these products distributed within the EU by large international corporations, consciously exploiting various tax systems. Finally: We cannot afford it if the internal market is destroyed by being played off by foreign competition. People want a strong single market, not one ordered on Wish; As many of my colleagues have rightly pointed out, this starts with the customs system.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen! The famous German poet Reinhard Mey once sang ‘Above the clouds, freedom must be boundless’, and there is endless truth in these words from a European political point of view. Because above the clouds there are no borders, you're just somewhere over Europe. That is why I support the update of the Single European Sky, even though it has taken half as long as I am in this world. At the same time, however, we should not stop where we started now and think about other things. I would like to suggest two things to you. On the one hand, there is a need for a fee adjustment for climate-friendly flights. We have noticed in the past that above all we can control the development in society through something like this, and climate change knows no borders. On the other hand, we need a single European air data space. We must therefore optimise the exchange of data between Member States in the air transport sector and thus make it more efficient, because data also knows no borders. The work on Single European Sky is valuable – it is not over yet.

Madam President, dear honourable House, dear people of Europe, Mr Letta, before I came here to this Parliament, I finished my law studies at the University of Cologne. During this time, I put a lot of effort into learning the four European freedoms: the freedom to move people, services, goods and capital. And I can tell you, learning all the law-related details – especially the court rulings – that was a pain in the ass, indeed. Names like Dassonville or Cassis de Dijon, who will tell you here nothing, send a shiver down the spine of every law student. But at the same time, whenever I opened my books, I felt love for Europe. Because what is Europe if not the idea of freedom? And that's why, Mr Letta, I would like to take the time to give you my deepest support for one of the main ideas of your report: the implementation of a fifth freedom – the freedom of research, innovation, knowledge and education. Because as Europe is an idea, ideas should roam free on this continent.

(Start of speech with microphone switched off) ... Climate change is the biggest threat to our civilisation as such, which concerns us all – even if the intellectual horizon of some people on the German border stops. If we don’t win this fight, we are all lost – and we lose this fight. But we haven't lost this fight yet because we have a great ally: nature. We need the oceans, we need the moors, we need the forests. And that's why I'm telling you: In this inferno, in which the most famous of all forests is currently located, we must act. I would like to call on all Member States of the European Union and all countries worldwide to do everything. Send your other firefighters, send financial aid. Stop buying products created by the deforestation of the important forests and use the diplomatic power you have to get President Lula to rethink. We can win this battle together as people of our beautiful green and blue earth.

(Start of speech off mic) … Rule 202 deals with the point of order. This rule gives us, the Members, the opportunity to uphold the rules of these plenary sessions, and we break it every plenary session. Every plenary session, it is misused to make political statements instead of calling out the rules. Now, I talked to our dear President about this because I wanted to hear her take, and she told me that this is the only chance that we can use to give the Members an opportunity to speak about things that they like. So it's the only situation where we have a debate where there is a speech, and then there is an actual reply to that speech in a plenary full of Members. It's the only situation where this 'heart chamber' of the European idea is really making a sound, and that's not how it should be. So if the rules have led us to this situation, then we should change the rules to make this a real plenary, a real Parliament.

Mr President, honourable Members of the House, our body is just a shell of flesh and bone, but our mind is what we need to really exist. And if we talk about an important topic like this, we need to compare ourselves with the individual situation of the people that we represent. We – all of us here – can have a spot in therapy instantly in this House, here and in Brussels. Why do I know this? Because I have one. So we can just go there and get help. But the people outside this building, the people that we are representing, they cannot do this. And this is something that needs to change. We need to focus on those who have the urgent need first, and then we need to give the opportunity to get help in a state of mental illness for everyone. Because if we do not secure our mind, our life is lost.

Mr President, dear people of the world, sometimes there are topics where it's better to quote than to give your own account. So let me quote: 'There comes a time when we heed a certain call; when the world must come together as one; There are people dying, and it's time to lend a hand to life – the greatest gift of all; We can't go on pretending day by day; that someone, somewhere will make a change; We are all a part of the world's great big family; and the truth you know – love is all we need; We are the world, we are the children; We are the ones who make a brighter day, so let's start giving; There's a choice we're making, we're saving our own lives; It's true we'll make a better day; just you and me.' Let's go forward on global governance for building peace, human rights and sustainable development goals.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen. Mr Braun – by the way, a very fitting name in terms of the choice of colours – asked us – Mr Braun, I am talking about you – whether we are tired of the EU interfering in the affairs of states. We are not fed up with it because what you call interference is based on the democratic will of these states, because these states have democratically opted for a common Europe and for the surrender of competences. If you now remember the demonstrations in Georgia, you can remember the countless hundreds of thousands of European flags flying over the crowd, more European flags than I personally have ever seen at a demonstration in a European country. Now neo-Nazis want to tell us something about democracy. I'll tell you: The people of Georgia want democracy, the people of Georgia want the road to Europe, and we must support them in this.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, this House! As you can read here, the European automotive industry is in crisis. In times of crisis, one should stand together, reflect on one's common strengths. That's why I was particularly surprised when I recently heard about plant closures of the European automotive industry in Germany. I personally – but only marginally – would rather recommend that the European automotive industry close its factories in China, where Uyghur forced labourers from concentration camps – and I would like to emphasise this once again at this point: Concentration camps – work. Like I said, just on the sidelines. Dear Ladies and Gentlemen! We here in Europe, we build the best cars in the world. The most beautiful cars, the fastest cars and that is the reason why our cars also appear in all internationally known movies etc. That is why I would like to call on the European automotive industry to stand with us. We have world leaders without end, the strongest middle class in the world, hard-working people – and states that can subsidise all of this. Let's stand together and save the automotive industry!

(Start of speech off mic) … House, praised leaders of Europe: war and foreign policy, economy, migration, climate and biodiversity. Important topics, big-boy topics that give a chance for empowering political speeches, juicy press shots and lovely dinner receptions. You might think differently now, but I actually support those line of topics. But those are all topics related to recent political crises in Europe. What about a vision for the average people that we represent? What about education? What about internal security? What about the development of the welfare state or the upholding of the rule of law? Honourable House, praised leaders of Europe, widen your scope. Try to look at this upcoming European Council from the eyes of the average people that you represent. Ask yourself: what line of topics would they put forward?

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen. War is the scourge of humanity. A year ago, Hamas carried out the largest mass murder of people of Jewish faith since the Holocaust. On that day, she again plunged the people of Israel into darkness. It has not only plunged the people of Israel into darkness, but it has also plunged the people of Palestine into darkness. It has provoked Israel to a military response, which has since been carried out in blatant violation of international law. All this leads only to hatred, suffering and a spiral of mutual vengeance and violence. In the face of these incidents, in the face of this war, there is only one place where this conflict can be resolved, and that is the headquarters of the United Nations. There is only one place for the leaders of these warring parties to belong, and that is the courtroom of the International Criminal Court.