Speeches

Mr President! Dear fellow human beings, do you know what I admire so much about our conservative friends from the EPP or the CDU in Germany? No other political current has such a constructive relationship with the economy. No one is more closely linked to the industry in terms of personnel and no one can count on the financial support of the companies anymore. That's why I was pleased when, in the middle of last year, the presidents of the major German industry associations addressed the public with a letter and warned against the mental-creative hobby fascists of the AfD. Finally, a nationalist policy is detrimental to the European single market – our biggest advantage on the world market. It deters the much-needed international professionals. It leads to stand-alone approaches to global crises such as climate change, which pose a lasting threat to our economic growth. It was 1932 Franz von Pappen, a conservative who thought he could control Hitler, could collaborate with him from a position of strength. Dear Conservatives, for the good of our economy and our society, don't make the same mistake!

Madam President, dear people of Europe, the EU Commission's Work Programme, on paper, shares key priorities with the Party of Progress: reducing bureaucracy for businesses, fostering digital and green innovation, strengthening social protection and internal security. Let us see, friends, because we also have 123 open proposals from the previous Work Programmes. However, this Work Programme falls short in one crucial area and this is democratic participation. The Party of Progress believes that Europe must not only work for its people, but with them. Because you and me, we both know that populists, extremists and opportunists work to turn the people against our democracy every day, and also in here, in this temple of freedom. That is why we need stronger engagement with the citizens to reflect their voices – democracy itself must always keep pace with economic and social progress. A bolder, simpler and faster Union can only be a Union of the people.

Madam President, dear people of Europe, it was the horrors of the Second World War that led to the implementation of the system of international justice as we know it today. The face of tyranny and the killing of people in a scope that was never seen before was needed to bring the international society together. Today, I think we stand at a turning point where tyranny once again shows its ugly face, and where we still have a chance, where we still can defend the international order and we should do everything. Because, once again, the title of this debate is quite wrong. It is not the international system of justice, it is our system of justice that we need to defend, that we need to fight for, and that we need to follow through in every ruling, in every aspect. Because when the rest of the world is looking the other way, we as Europe have to take charge on protecting this system.

Madam President, dear people of Europe, the United States AI export restrictions aren't just a trade issue – they are a direct threat to Europe's technological sovereignty. We cannot afford to be dependent on decisions made in Washington. Our AI future must be built here in Europe, on European terms. And right now, our development is scattered, fragmented, slowed down by a lack of coordination. We need a European AI hub, a central framework for cooperation, funding and research. The AI Action Summit in Paris was a great start. But a start is not enough. We need alternative suppliers, stronger industrial policies and, above all, independence. The US cannot dictate our strategy. Even when their ideas are good, they must be sold as European ideas. Europe must lead, not follow. And it is time to act now, to build the future. Dear colleagues, this speech was written by AI just seconds before my speaking time. I hope you take this as an example of the importance of the matter.

Madam President, Dear people of Europe, also in Serbia. Before I was elected to this House, I was a student. A student with a heart for politics. And I can tell you, it's not always easy. We live in a world where the powerful are usually our parents, where we are rarely heard, where the problems that plague our society arose significantly before we were born. But we, the students, have shown time and again that we too can be at the forefront of change, that we can carry the flag of freedom forward. But that, ladies and gentlemen, we have never been able to do it alone. And I would therefore like to ask you all: Get up now! Join the democratic movement in Serbia! Just like the people of Serbia of all ages and social backgrounds, stand by the side of Serbian students! Let's show Serbia together that it has a place in our midst, so that soon some Serbian students will also be sitting here in this hall!

Madam President, Dear people! High house! I am pleased that the word Erasmus+ has been used more often in this debate on vocational training. You already know this from me, I am a huge fan of Erasmus+. I was an Erasmus+ student myself. In the same way, we have to integrate this programme more and more into vocational training, because it has now been almost ten years since Erasmus+ became an inclusive programme for all types of formal and non-formal education and no longer only addressed students. Nevertheless, the majority of young people still consider it to be just such a program. I myself only learned last year, when we wrote our European elections programme, that it is more than that, that it is aimed at more than the students. That is why I would like to stress once again that we need to increase funding here. Never limit, always expand, because the Erasmus+ programme is our flagship project in education. It offers young people across the continent the opportunity to learn the skills they need in this globalized and increasingly modern world.

Mr President, dear people of Europe, I think Donald Trump would be happy about the frequency of the name Trump being mentioned here today, but let me be clear: he is not our friend. Someone who tries to dismantle the rule of law cannot be our friend. Someone whose friends perform a Nazi salute at a public event cannot be our friend. And I know this is hard for us because the US, historically speaking, is our friend. But Trump? Trump is nothing more than a spineless schoolyard bully and that's how we need to treat him. But to beat the bully, you have to be able to pack a punch yourself. And that, Germany cannot do. Estonia cannot do. Spain cannot do. But Europe, a strong Europe can do. Give this Parliament the right to initiative. Abolish the unanimity principle and the exceptions to the four freedoms of the internal market due to national interests. Together we stand.

Illegal migration leads to crime. You don't have to be brave to say that. No one denies that either. But don't you think that if people with a migrant background had been pushed into poverty if they hadn't been ghettoised, they would have been pushed into bad neighbourhoods, if they had been given a work permit, if they had been treated as equal members of our society, don't you think there would be less crime from that part of the population?

Madam President, the people of Europe, the title of this debate is, in my humble opinion, all wrong. As many colleagues have pointed out, the problem that we are facing is not a Swedish one – it is European, with a strong worldwide aspect to it. Just last week, the Ambassador of Ecuador told us that it's the Albanian mafia being in control of the cocaine shipping out of the port of Guayaquil in Ecuador. Albanian mafia in Ecuador. Let that sink in for a moment. It is always drug-trafficking gangs that enact the worst violence, and these gangs do not fight about the market of Sweden, of Italy or of Luxembourg – they fight about Europe. And so there can only be a European solution. We need to strengthen Europol and let it take over some responsibilities from the national police forces. We need to expand funding for the European Union Drugs Agency, and we need to legalise or criminalise the same drugs in the same countries all over Europe. Only if we start tackling this European issue as such, we will stand a chance.

Thank you, colleague, for taking the blue card. I was listening closely to your speech and at some point you said that we need to treat the drug traffickers in the same way as terrorists. And while I understand the deep emotions that these problems bring with them, I think that's a very, very difficult statement, because we treat terrorists in the most extreme way that our state of law can give: we have full surveillance; we send out heavily armed police. So my question would be, when we look at those gangs, at which stage of the gang level do you have to be to be treated like that? Is it only for the bosses or is it also for the runners? Where would you draw the line in the sand?

Mr President! Dear people of Europe, today we talked about the European Central Bank. And yes, even on behalf of the Progressive Party, I must say: Criticism is justified. The ECB influences the lives of millions of people and has to face such a debate. But while I have heard constructive proposals from the moderates here from the political centre of this House, I hear from the extremes that the ECB is biased, politically motivated. This claim is not only false, it is dangerous. But this rhetoric suits you: Yes, everyone is conspiring with each other, wanting to make it difficult for the little man and also allowing themselves to want to save the climate. I'll tell you: Whoever bases his entire policy on undermining trust in democratic institutions is not a Democrat. Ms Lagarde, I have lived with the ECB for 26 of my 27 years. You know, there's still room for improvement. But keep it up!

Mr President! Dear fellow human beings! What should be our priority in promoting women's rights? Respect them by believing them. Just yesterday I learned another lesson: My friend showed me a video of the Love Island VIP candidate Sophie, in which she reports about attacks by her TV colleague Yasin. In the video, however, she does not explain details, give names, describe her personal suffering, dressed in the indisputable principle of ‘no means no’. What about me? I had trouble judging these events. I had trouble judging this Yasin. But that was wrong! If we do not respect women by believing them, if we men always need evidence of their oppression, then women's rights will always be restricted. Dear men, let's be better than that.

Mr President! Ladies and Gentlemen! I have to say, I think it is a pity that at the end of this debate this fairy tale was repeated again, that climate protection and agricultural policy would somehow be opposites. To the man who just said this: How can agriculture be carried out on dry land, on droughts, on floods? If the planet goes before the dogs, then it is no longer with agriculture – nowhere. Then it's over – for everyone. But at the same time, of course, it also hurts me – and I address this to my friends from the Green Camp – to hear that, obviously, in recent years and decades, we have not been able to make an agricultural policy that does not suffocate our farmers in bureaucracy, especially with regard to climate protection, after all that others have said here. Personally, I am very new to it. They're all much more experienced than I am. But I think we can do something better. And I would like to ask you not only to demand this balance, which everyone here obviously wants, not only to talk about it, but actually to do something about it by talking to those affected.

So you talked a lot about double standards and how, because of the climate policies, people in the farming sector have to suffer. You ask if we are really about the well-being of these people, and if we do not only do it for political causes. But then I'm wondering, you're coming from the group and also from a party who is famous for its anti-migrant rhetoric. Given the fact that most of the businesses in the farming industry need people from outside, how do you put this together? And how can you accuse other people of double standards when you clearly have double standards yourself?

Madam President, dear colleagues, the Western Balkans is not just a distant region. It is the new frontier of our Union's growth. And the people there have shown unwavering support for our European values. And it is time to honour this commitment. We must deepen our engagement with a growth plan that builds a sustainable, prosperous economy for the region. We must strengthen our cooperation in foreign and security policy to safeguard stability and mitigate the impacts of Russia's aggression. Only when the entire European continent has the opportunity to join our Union, we can truly call ourselves a European Union. And this is not ‑ like this colleague said ‑ just for social media. This is because I truly believe in that.

Madam President, Dear fellow human beings, Linn! One of the issues on the Council's agenda is the situation in the Middle East. I am really happy that Europe is now turning to this region, because we have the chance to learn from our mistakes of recent years and decades. Especially with regard to Syria, we now have the chance to prove that we can do better. Because in Syria, civil society is reawakening – the same civil society that we abandoned more than a decade ago, which led to unbelievable suffering and a large migration movement to Europe. Especially in this situation, vulnerable groups need our support and especially those NGOs that are committed to the rights of women. Because the new Syrian government follows at its core a male-dominated interpretation of Islam. For many, this is just another session of the Council; for me, as always, it is an opportunity for a strong Europe that stands by its values and learns from its mistakes.

Hello, Mr. Colleague - up here. Moin! You talked a lot about peace. And that's why I wanted to ask you if you are aware of the conditions that Putin himself puts in place for the start of peace negotiations. He last described it in great detail three months ago in a press conference and repeated it a few weeks ago. I'll tell you briefly, then you can just tell me if you know that. He said: There will be peace negotiations with Ukraine only after the Ukrainian military has abandoned all weapons and withdrawn from all areas claimed by Russia. Are you aware of this? And would you conduct peace negotiations under these conditions?

Dear colleague, I think you raised one important point, and this is the cynicism that derives from the fact that especially those who are defending the Kremlin are also defending this regime. So I think this is very important for the people outside this House. Maybe you could elaborate a little more about this. I would be interested to hear your take on that.

I also have a question for Mr Bystron: Can you change me $200? I still have to refuel. But only on the sidelines. Dear people of Europe, honourable Members! Russia is not just waging war in Ukraine with human waves and missiles. It's a war on truth, a war on disinformation. Putin claims that Ukraine is not a people, not a country, not a nation. But the facts speak a different language; Facts Putin wants to suppress. For example, Ukraine, which emerged from Kievan Rus, is older than modern Russia, or the fact that Russia has already spent $200 billion in Ukraine and lost 300,000 soldiers without breaking Ukraine's will. These are facts that Putin does not want to hear, that Putin wants to suppress and that can be a weapon for us to oppose this aggressor. Accordingly, I ask all of you, dear Members, to raise your voice, let us fight together against disinformation. Slawa Ukrajini.

Madam President, dear colleagues, dear people of Europe, whenever I think about the stories that I read about the weaponization of rape in Sudan and Congo quite some months ago, I don't know what I can say anymore and it sends a shiver down my spine. But I would like to touch on one thing that our dear colleague, Mr Oetjen, said. He said we need to enable the international court – I think he meant the International Criminal Court – to actually do something against this, and I want to agree with all my heart. I think it is time. It is because of crimes like this, as well as because of other crimes, that we actually enable international criminal law institutions to enact international law. You can call it 'blue helmets', you can call it a 'world police' – I don't care. But in a situation where people weaponize rape as a weapon of war, there need to be other people with guns who can stop those people.

Mr President, dear colleagues, I am sorry that I have to bother you with a personal matter. It is, of course, something that happened in this debate that we just had. I had asked Mr Milan Mazurek, a colleague of ours, for a blue card, and I asked him about his views on how social media platforms should be restricted. His answer to that was that I am, in fact, not able to divide between dream and reality, and that I am brainwashed. Thereby, he was denying me my stable and lucid state of mind. And why is this wrong? Not only because I, as a person, was insulted, because I've been insulted a lot in my life. And it is not only wrong because Rule 10(4) of the Rules of Procedure clearly prohibits insulting behaviour. It is wrong because freedom of speech, my freedom of speech, and also your freedom of speech, is about the freedom of all opinions, and it is about the freedom of having different opinions. And thereby freedom of speech also includes the freedom not to be insulted when you question your opponent. I just hope that everyone here takes this as an example of how we should not speak to each other in this house – that we should not insult each other just because we do not like what happens. Just for the record, I think most of you all know that I can, in fact, divide between dream and reality. Because even though I live my dream here in this House, if it would be a dream, people who are deemed as political extremists would not be here. Therefore, I hope I don't get insulted in the future. I hope no one here gets insulted in the future. And with all due respect, I would like to ask the Vice-President and all Vice-Presidents and the President of this House to immediately stop any insulting behaviour in any debate in the future.

Colleague, do you think that you yourself are promoting democracy given the political background that you come from? And would you be accepting restrictions on TikTok when, just to give you an example, someone would go on TikTok and ask everyone to kill all the blue-eyed, blonde-haired Slovak boys?

I think this line of questioning shows really well why the non-attached should not be put into one box together. Not all of us are neo-Nazis or populists. But you said something about the poisoning of our children. And this children rhetoric is used a lot by special people, so not for me so much, but maybe for them, you can elaborate a little bit more about the poisoning of children's minds with unregulated social media.

Mr President! Dear fellow human beings! As a representative of the Progressive Party, I would like to take this opportunity to talk about the situation of the new parties in Europe. What unites us all is the barriers to voting – now they are very different across Europe. In the Czech Republic, you will collect 1,000 signatures and from then on you will be allowed to vote in all elections for all days. In Germany, you have to collect thousands to tens of thousands of signatures for every election, all on paper. Democracy thrives on change. Democracy thrives on the absence of dynasties of power. You will agree with me, whether you are a representative of a big party or a small party. And we can only really call ourselves a European Parliament if everyone has a fair chance of standing in these elections. We need a fair, digital and uniform voting system across Europe. Thank you very much. Mr President, if you will allow the idea of the Rules of Procedure for a moment: I think these speeches should be made from the bottom up, because this is about things that are important to us as Members – and this really cannot be marketed. The room is so empty, you can't upload it anywhere.

Mr President, dear people of Europe, as a shadow rapporteur on this file, I would like to thank Anna Cavazzini and to state my support, as well as to describe to you the importance of this file. The EU has always been committed to transparency and facilitating public engagement with our institution and its procedures. It is important to hold all our Treaties to this standard, even those from a decade ago. It is even more important that we consider how investor-state dispute settlements play out in Brexit. I give you the statistical most frequent example. Globally, states pay billions of euros to fossil fuel investors after climate policies negatively impact their businesses. These settlements need to always be made public. Why? Because the European Union is, at its core, a project about the rule of law, and therefore this kind of transparency is paramount to us.