Advancing towards a care society: addressing the gender care gap (A10-0083/2026 - Eleonora Meleti, Rosa Estaràs Ferragut)
Madam President, dear people of Europe, we cannot continue to ignore the gender care gap. Millions of women across Europe still carry most unpaid care responsibilities every single day. Women spent on average 13 hours more per week on unpaid care work than men. Many are forced to reduce working hours, pause their careers or leave the labour market entirely because care responsibilities are still not shared equally and support systems remain insufficient. This is not only a gender issue. It is also about fairness and social justice. I voted in favour because this report pushes for better child care and stronger long-term care systems, because the people carrying these responsibilities every day deserve recognition and support. Because a society that depends on care work must also value the people providing it.
Rights, support and protection of victims of crime (A9-0157/2024 - Javier Zarzalejos, Lucia Yar)
Madam President, dear people of Europe, behind every crime statistic, there is a person and, more and more, this person is a child. This is something that we cannot accept – we can never accept if people are left behind by society, if they are left alone by society. This can be anything, from a woman fleeing domestic violence, a man attacked because of his identity, or a child that is used by criminal gangs online. A victim should never feel abandoned by the justice system. But for many people across Europe, this is still the reality. That is why I supported this report. This is why we must strengthen victims' rights across Europe, why we must increase support, legal protection and dignified treatment during judicial procedures, because justice is not only about punishing offenders, it is also about protecting victims of crime.
Decision of the Azerbaijani Parliament on suspending cooperation with the European Parliament (debate)
It's wonderful. (I have technical problems.) We have a little more time in the end, so that's possible. Thank you very much! I am completely with you in the role of mediator. Now, in the past, and perhaps in countries such as the one we are talking about today, I have noticed that there are sometimes some problems with understanding the functioning of parliamentary democracy outside Europe: It is assumed that when a particular voice says something uncomfortable, it is representative of the whole institution or the whole Union. How, then, could we, in a stronger role for Parliament, be assimilated to thinking that perhaps we do not think that the crooks of this Parliament are the ones who really represent Parliament as such?
Decision of the Azerbaijani Parliament on suspending cooperation with the European Parliament (debate)
Thank you, Mr Colleague, for accepting the blue card here at a late hour in the European Parliament. I think we will agree that it is not just about creating a new self-image about the foreign policy role. It is also a question of perhaps reshaping essential functions – something like a single foreign policy of the Union. Let us assume that we have a foreign policy of the Union. Let's say we have a true foreign minister. You also mentioned the role of Parliament. What role would you attribute to Parliament if the European Union had the primary responsibility for foreign policy?
Decision of the Azerbaijani Parliament on suspending cooperation with the European Parliament (debate)
Madam President, the European Parliament brought its best and brightest to speak for two, three, four minutes on this debate, I think this shows everything. Dear people of Europe, the suspension of parliamentary relations between Europe and Azerbaijan is not a diplomatic footnote. It is a warning for the Union and, if we are honest with ourselves today, then this crisis is not only about Azerbaijan. It is about us. Because for years now, the European Union has tried to conduct two foreign policies at the same time: one from the Commission and the Council – pragmatic, geopolitical, energy-focused; the other from this Parliament – moral, value-based, confrontational in tone. Sometimes both are justified, even though I am, of course, on the side of Parliament. But together, too often, they create strategic incoherence, because we cannot simultaneously tell a country 'you are an indispensable strategic partner to Europe,' while politically communicating 'you are fundamentally outside the community of acceptable States'. And then we act shocked when the world stops taking European diplomacy seriously. We cannot claim to be a geopolitical power while speaking to the world with two different European voices. And honestly, from the outside, Europe sometimes looks less like a union and more like 27 nations sharing a press conference. The world does not hate Europe, the world simply no longer knows which Europe it's talking to. This is the uncomfortable truth – geopolitics is not therapy, the world will not validate Europe's identity crisis forever. States must be predictable actors, not confused ones, and the more fragmented Europe appears, the more influence Europe loses economically, diplomatically, geopolitically. Let me be absolutely clear about one thing: a stronger Europe must never become a silent Europe. We can never back down on human rights, we can never back down on democracy, we can never back down on the rule of law. But values without strategic coherence eventually become performative, and strategy without values becomes cynical. Europe cannot afford either. Europe was never built on blood – Europe was built on a decision, a decision that cooperation is stronger than hatred, that dialogue is stronger than violence, that dignity matters more than power. People do not come together in Europe because we share the same ethnicity, the same religion, the same path. People come together in Europe because they believe in the idea of Europe. And if Europe can unite its values with strategic clarity, then Europe will not only be respected again, Europe will be believed again.
Need for an adaptation of the EU legal framework on sustainable biofuels (debate)
Thank you for accepting the blue card. I was wondering, you talked at length about the great Italian biofuels and the necessity to not go with an ideological approach on that. So if those great Italian biofuels are not ecological, if they are not green, where does this innovation within the Italian biofuels come from then? And how is it not basically the same thing that you are condemning so heavily?
The Union’s preparedness for and response to health emergencies: the case of the MV Hondius and the hantavirus warning (debate)
Thank you, Mr Schenk, for accepting the blue card. You said at the beginning and also at the end that viruses and diseases do not respect borders. Now Mrs Anderson has almost prepared the next coronavirus denial, but at the same time she also claims that health care is a matter for the Member States, that it is a matter of subsidiarity, etc. pp. Could you – simply so that I can sleep quietly tonight – perhaps explain to Mrs Anderson in more detail why viruses know no borders and why it might make sense to regulate this at European level – from a scientific point of view?
European Citizens’ Initiative ‘Stop destroying videogames’ (debate)
Madam President, dear people of Europe, this is for Von Gressien, for Beatz, for SilverBolt, for Ipoa. Because I was not only Lukas Sieper, I was Wilhelm von Bergen. Wilhelm von Bergen led men and women into battle on the fields of Mount & Blade: Napoleonic Wars. He commanded up to 50 players. He trained twice every week and fought clan matches on the weekend. He edited a community newspaper and he organised a world cup with hundreds of players from dozens of nations. And Wilhelm von Bergen existed only because TaleWorlds and Flying Squirrel did not sunset the game. They turned a community mod into an official DLC. They allowed community-hosted service. They delegated admin rights to players. They supported the modding ecosystem instead of shutting it down. Wilhelm von Bergen was lucky – I was lucky. So today I asked the Commission and my colleagues to support the ECI 'Stop killing video games'. Not only to stop killing video games, but to protect the lives that we live.
Recruitment of children by organised crime (debate)
Madam President, dear people of Europe, I am very thankful for colleagues like Ms Mertens, who took a constructive approach on that, because it allows me to challenge my anger and make some points clear. If you really think that the criminalisation of children has anything to do with the fact of where these children or the perpetrators come from, then you are mentally incapable of thinking above the borders of this Union, because we see the same phenomenon all around the world. In Mexico, it is Mexican gangs that do the same to Mexican children. In Thailand, it is Thai gangs that do the same to Thailand's children. It has nothing to do with nationality. What is even more shameful is then when some people here claim that we just need to deport the children for them not to commit the crimes. One colleague said they commit prostitution here and we should deport them. So, is a child prostitute in Africa better than a child prostitute here? And if the answer for you is yes, then you are nothing more than a racist. This is about protecting the children and nothing more. And anyone else who says anything else is a shame to this Parliament, a shame to this Union, and we need to fight that every day.
Recruitment of children by organised crime (debate)
That's a pity. But, OK, I have to phrase it differently. So if I get you right, the main problem is unaccompanied young people. So would you then agree with me that maybe one solution is to allow for them to be together with their family, so they have their parents to watch them, so they don't commit crimes here in Europe?
Rights, support and protection of victims of crime (debate)
Madam President, Mr Commissioner, imagine you are a victim of a crime, or a relative is a victim of a crime. And then you see your face, your name on posters and social media posts and demonstrations here in Parliament, in speeches, used as a pawn for political gains over and over again. And you have to first live through all of that, what you suffered, over and over again because you're reminded about it through the media. Also, maybe you don't even agree with the political actors that use your face, your name, your story. I believe, if we think about the protection of victims of crime, we should also think about the development of the concept of the right to identity, and if we want to stop people being used as pawns in political communication against their will.
Rights, support and protection of victims of crime (debate)
Madam President, it's a little bit late, it's not on the speech of the previous colleague. I had to check it first. It's in accordance with Rule 10(1), the first half-sentence. It relates to the speech by Mr Mazurek claiming that we have blood on our hands, that we are to blame for rapes and murders directly. This is not within the Rules of Procedure. I cannot, unfortunately, stop Mr Mazurek from sharing his political ideas about the fact that migrants are to blame for all of that. That's his right to say. But accusing us of being co‑perpetrators of capital crimes is a form of respectless conduct that we see more and more in this House, and I think we have to stop it. It was not stopped, it was all in the heat of the moment. As I said myself, I had to check it first. But I'm of the strong opinion this has to be revised by the Bureau. Thank you for giving me the floor for this.
Advancing towards a care society: addressing the gender care gap (debate)
Thank you, Madame, for accepting the blue card. You have rightly mentioned that care work in particular is usually or often carried out by women. The whole thing is also problematic if it goes in the direction of a property compensation in divorces, so if one spouse, in the case usually the husband, has earned for years much more than the wife or another spouse who has done this care work. Do you think that this should be harmonised across Europe in family law?
Recent proposals to fight poverty in the EU (debate)
Yes, thank you very much for your reply, Madam. I believe what is important to understand, what many people in the populist or extremist camp in particular do not seem to be able to understand, is that we as politicians are capable of multitasking. It always seems as if we can't deal with one issue just because we deal with another, or as if we have to constantly weigh up. Of course, sometimes we have to weigh things up against each other, but ultimately we serve people in everything we do. And as Mrs Bischoff – who now sits over there and is no longer standing in front – has rightly said, climate policy also serves to protect the lower-income sections of the population, and also serves social protection. And accordingly, the Commission, even if it is not always, is on the right track in this matter.
Recent proposals to fight poverty in the EU (debate)
Ms. Bischof, thank you very much for accepting the blue card. We have just discussed whether it is a problem to ask colleagues who are spreading lies here a question about the ‘blue card’ procedure – whether they will then no longer be given speaking time for these lies. That's why I'd just ask you: It is precisely here that we had the colleague who claimed that our climate policy or other objectives pursued by the EU in this regard are ultimately harmful to social policy. What do you think about it – does climate policy harm social policy?
Recent proposals to fight poverty in the EU (debate)
Dear colleague, I would love to have a very long discussion with you about the question of whether your political party or political group follows an ideology or not, and whether all politics does not rely on ideologies in some way or another. But I will ask another question. So you're not talking about identity rights, you're talking about the Green Deal – so I rephrase my question. Are you aware that all scientific research and all data regarding the economy show that doing climate protection now, doing green policies now will save us big, big costs in the future that would stem from climate catastrophe? Are you aware that we are actually protecting the economy by protecting the climate?
Recent proposals to fight poverty in the EU (debate)
Thank you, colleague, for accepting the blue card. I guess when you talk about the EU supporting ideologies, you mean stuff like identity rights, protection of LGBTQI+ persons, etc. Are you aware of the fact that all scientific research and all studies regarding the economy show that people who are discriminated against are a weaker factor in the economy, so that all of what you call 'ideological policies' that the European Union is pursuing – to protect individual rights, to protect human rights – actually benefits the economy massively?
High time to deliver on the Single Market, providing certainty and predictability for EU businesses and quality jobs (continuation of debate)
Thank you, Mr Colleague, for giving me the honour of speaking with you in my own language. I am also pleased that you are very concerned about the economic situation, the economic miracle in Germany. The economic miracle in Germany took place above all because there were no links between politics and business. So, I'll ask you again: Do you not think that the Hungarian economy, and thus also the German economy – which, as you rightly said, benefits from or collaborates with the Hungarian economy – would be better off if there had not been significant links between Viktor Orbán's best friends and the business bosses over the years and decades?
High time to deliver on the Single Market, providing certainty and predictability for EU businesses and quality jobs (continuation of debate)
Colleague, I really admire your care for the small and medium enterprises that you expressed in your speech. And I was wondering, would you agree with me that it is bad for the small and medium enterprises if all the big enterprises are accumulated over years and years in the hands of people who are directly linked to government officials, like we have seen in Hungary in the past 15 years?
High time to deliver on the Single Market, providing certainty and predictability for EU businesses and quality jobs (continuation of debate)
Thank you Damian for accepting the blue card. I also see that it is short-sighted and wrong to block the convergence of the internal market because of possible losses of one's own. I would like to say this to our Chancellor, whom you also mentioned, Friedrich Merz. Now, however, I can only ask one question here and cannot do so. That's why I wanted to ask you what you could say to Friedrich Merz on the subject if you had the opportunity to talk to him.
Presentation of the Fertilisers Action Plan (debate)
So really, you never disappoint me, Mr. Bausemer. I have never been disappointed with the creativity you have shown. I wonder how you want to know how many farmers I know, but just on the sidelines. I think you're misunderstanding this. And I don't think you've listened to these people properly. I believe you are using these people only for your own political opportunism and your own maintenance of power. But I ask again: Don’t you think that every farmer has an original interest in preserving the natural livelihood – yes or no?
Presentation of the Fertilisers Action Plan (debate)
Thank you very much, Mr Bausemer. I am always impressed by the depth and creativity of your thoughts. I would like to put this on record here. Mr Bausemer, you said that farmers would rather have cheap fertilisers than green fertilisers, and I wonder: Have you ever talked to them? Do you not think that the farmers want above all that nature is doing well, and that they are therefore in the broadest sense for everything that is beneficial to nature, and that perhaps they are only afraid of all these directives and regulations because there are certain political forces in Europe – without now naming names – that constantly scare them?
Presentation of the Fertilisers Action Plan (debate)
The first thing is: what is the difference between sustainable and green when it comes to the production of fertilisers? And secondly, I think you misunderstood my question. I said: should we not do anything in our power to make them cheaper? Because this, at least through subsidiaries, through certain legislation, we can influence the market. We do it every day. This is our main job here apart from other things in the European Parliament. So, should we not enact policies that lead to the fact that green fertilisers are cheaper than non‑green fertilisers?
Presentation of the Fertilisers Action Plan (debate)
Thank you, colleague, for accepting the blue card. You said that they need cheap European fertilisers, not necessarily green fertilisers. Would you agree with me that, in the best case scenario, they would get cheap European green fertilisers? And if so, should we not do everything in our power to make this possible?
