Speeches

The trial of Dominique Pelicot – and 50 other men – for drugging his wife to rape her for almost ten years, in the middle of the 21st century in the heart of Europe, shows how widespread the rape culture is. Socialists lead the support for effective European action to end gender-based violence, as we did in Spain with that Law against gender-based violence that turns 20 this 2024. 25 November is the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, but, as every day, we call for more efforts to eradicate gender-based violence. We must overcome the lack of political will to include the absence of consent in the crime of rape, since the legal basis is already in the norm on the sexual exploitation of women and girls. And, on the other hand, we urge the effective implementation of the Directive adopted this year and the creation of the specific Eurocrime.

Madam President, this report addresses a fundamental issue for the credibility of the Union: it is not enough to adopt legislation, but we have to ensure that the law is applied effectively, transparently and uniformly in the Member States. And from the PETI Committee, we wanted to provide precisely that practical perspective based on the direct experience of citizens, since petitions are not a secondary instrument of the European institutions, they are a tool of true democratic oversight and a source of early warning that allows to detect gaps, non-compliances and systemic problems where EU law is not correctly applied. It is they, the citizens, who first identify where the problems are, and it was therefore essential to strengthen the role of petitions in this report. We also have to note that the absence of the Commission’s 2024 annual report is a very worrying setback in transparency, and more so in a growing context of challenges to the rule of law, judicial independence and the proper enforcement of our rules. But, in addition, this House has the responsibility to correct certain amendments that have been left out and that, for us, do not lengthen the report artificially, but make it more precise and connected. I am talking, in particular, about a priority that cannot be left out, such as the protection of minors in the digital environment. Just come to our Committee on Petitions and see the growing number of families absolutely concerned about child sexual abuse, exploitation and persistent shortcomings in the implementation of European legislation aimed at protecting children and adolescents. That is why these amendments are of fundamental value and we ask that they can be applied in this report to strengthen our quality of oversight and ensure that Parliament responds more precisely to the real problems of citizens.

Mr President, there is something in this House that most of us share: ambition; the ambition to invest more, to respond to crises, to protect citizens and to make the European Union a stronger Union. But the reality is that there's an uncomfortable question that we keep avoiding, and it's how we pay for it, and that's where the inconsistency starts. The Commission and governments like to demand more funds, more programmes, more European investment, but very few like to talk about revenue, own resources and real financing. And yet the reality is very clear: without own resources there is no autonomy and without autonomy there is no strong European Union. Since 2020, the governments of the Member States, through the Council, have blocked any progress on this issue and we cannot continue to do so. That is why we are taking a very important step today. For the first time, this Parliament clearly links the adoption of the multiannual financial framework to the existence of new resources. It ended up approving budgets without deciding how they are financed. We want an ambitious basket that guarantees at least €60 billion not only to repay the NextGenerationEU debt, but to be able to finance the new priorities without cutting cohesion and agriculture. And if some elements fall, they are replaced: digital taxation, online gambling, crypto-assets... there are options; What we must have is courage and political will to implement them. In conclusion, the message we send to the Commission and the Council is clear: There is not going to be a long-term budget with no income up to par, because Europe cannot aspire to be more if it is not willing to finance itself as such.

Mr. President, let's be clear: the Turnberry deal, as signed by Trump and von der Leyen, was deeply unbalanced. And it is even more so in a context in which the United States has acted with disloyalty, threats, pressure ... even against Member States such as mine, Spain. And that's not cooperation between allies, that's coercion. That is why today we are not going to give a blank check; what we are doing today is setting limits. We say clearly: Europe will only comply when the United States complies with Europe. And if it does not, we will suspend the agreement, because we cannot accept a framework in which our workers, our companies and our sovereignty are subordinated to the political chaos of the Trump Administration. We have to tell him, clearly, that Europe is not going to negotiate under pressure, that it is not going to accept threats and that it is not going to give up defending its interests. We support this mandate because it strengthens Parliament's position, but let no one have any doubts: without respect, without reciprocity and without guarantees there will be no agreement.

Madam President, 'homosexuality: we help people explore their identity and correct the causes of their confusion'. This is an advertisement that has been found in various places that should be a place of peace. Homosexuality occurs because men have been seduced by their mother, and by not having sex with her because of the taboo of incest, they focus sexual energy on men. This text has been found in one of the pamphlets they give in conversion therapies. Thanks to the petitioners for this initiative, since it is clear that it was very necessary, because in Europe these therapies are still practiced and the psychological torture to which they subject children for months or even years is unacceptable; torture that includes imprisonment, humiliation, forced labor and medication to annul the desire, but, above all, constant psychological violence that makes them believe that what they are is wrong, that they are wrong. And we don't tell it, its victims tell it: a Valencian like Xavi Martínez, who underwent a therapy for four years and is still recovering psychologically from it. But not everyone has had the same luck, as there are documented cases of suicide after these therapies. And let us not deceive ourselves: this is not just a case of marginal fanaticism. Sometimes they have institutional and political coverage. In Valencia, my land, a law that prohibited conversion therapies of the Popular Party Government and VOX has been eliminated. Steps are being taken in my country, but there are governments that push back, and that is why it is unacceptable that love, even in Europe, should be considered a disease or an action of the devil. Whoever considers it, the sick, the disoriented and the misfit is he and, therefore, must be punished.

Madam President, this report should have been an exercise in institutional responsibility to strengthen transparency, ethics and good governance in the European institutions. And we did our part of the work, kept our word and voted on the compromises in the Committee on Petitions. But, as usual in that committee, the EPP Group, instead of sticking to the work done, opened the door to the far right to put its political and ideological slogans that, by the way, they replicate in all committees in the same way and that have nothing to do with the work that has been done in the institution. The result, because we have a report whose real author - who is there - had to give it up. Now what do we do? Our group has kept its word, Madam Ombudsman, Mrs Anjinho, this group, as you know, is serious, responsible and committed to institutionality. The answer has to be given by the Popular Group, which is the one who has to solve the problem because it was the one who created it. That despite adulterating the report, now the far right tells them that they will not vote in favor of the report. Why? Because they don't believe in institutionality. Go back to consensus, go back to common sense and go back to Europeanism.

Mr President, uncertainty is increasing throughout the Union, not only because of wars, but also because of new emerging challenges, such as the increasing frequency and intensity of natural disasters that we are experiencing, for example, in my homeland, in Valencia. While it is clear that these problems cannot be solved by the annual budget alone, we can ensure that the Union has sufficient resources to act where it is most needed. In this context of so much uncertainty and challenges, both internal and external, our Group wants a budget that creates prosperity for our citizens, creates and improves employment opportunities and strengthens our security without leaving anyone behind. That is why our priorities are social investments, affordable housing, upholding European values, implementing the European Green Deal, security and defence cooperation, but above all a stronger role for Europe on the global stage. These guidelines are very important because they will form the basis of the next multiannual financial framework.

Mr President, I would like to begin by stressing that the European Union's election observation in Honduras undoubtedly contributed to building trust and pacifying a very delicate electoral process. It should be remembered that Honduras has experienced, for almost two decades, episodes of political violence. He even suffered a coup d'état in 2009 and that is not a minor detail. We have to contextualize the institutional fragility and democratic weakness experienced by countries such as Honduras. That is why we in the European Parliament have a very important responsibility. The Honduran population offered us a real lesson in civility, pacifism, democratic commitment, even in a context of strong polarization on the part of all political parties. That is why in this Parliament, which has helped to appease the situation, we now have a special responsibility. We have to live up to the responsibility that citizens have given us and we do not have to feed any logic of confrontation or opposing sides. Quite the opposite: Our duty is to call for calm, peace and cooperation between the political forces and thus to accompany Honduras to the democratic responsibility that the European Union wants in Latin America.

Madam President, Gaza, Sudan, Congo, Afghanistan, Iran, Ukraine, Yemen, Myanmar, Nicaragua, to name the most relevant. It has been a black year for human rights, not forgetting the violence and criminalization that migrants and human rights activists are suffering in the United States. It is black, not only because of gravity, but also because of its normalization. The attack is global, cross-cutting and systematic. And what is the European Union doing? What is more, can we guarantee from the European Union that the year 2026 will be better? That is why the report is right when it says that defending human rights means putting more resources, not just words and speeches. We need permanent lines of humanitarian aid in the financial framework. We need an instrument for rebuilding Gaza and suspending our trade agreements when human rights are not respected, to tell those who want to rule with force that the European Union will always be a refuge and hope for the oppressed.

Madam President, first of all I would like to thank the shadow rapporteurs for the work we have done in committee. With the approval of this report we will approve a historic aid for the municipalities devastated by the Dana in Valencia and by the cyclones in France. But historical doesn't mean enough. It barely reaches 10%, in the case of Spain, and 2.5, in the case of France, of the total money invested. That is why I would like to appeal to the Commission. A Europe of solidarity means a Europe that protects and helps the territories most vulnerable to increasingly violent climate change. And that is why the proposal they have made for a financial framework is absolutely insufficient for this Europe of solidarity. And I want to make another appeal as well. Just because it's historical doesn't mean it's good. Valencians don't want to receive any more aid. We don't want to have such a deep wound again. Therefore, I want to tell the Popular Party and Vox that, before reaching an agreement in Valencia that abolishes and eliminates the Green Deal, remember that they do so in a land where climate change has left 229 dead and tens of thousands of families destroyed. Let them remember. And, finally: we are more than 700 people – 720 – very different. But I think there is one thing that unites us and that is the will to help those who are worse off, those who need it most. That is why I ask you to vote in favour so that Valencia knows - if you do not respect me, at least respect my city and the memory of the victims when we are talking about this - and so that the victims know that the dignity and memory of what has happened will remain forever in this House.

Mr President, Commissioner, we do not agree with the structure of the plan, but what we do agree on is that it must be an ambitious financial framework. And, to be really ambitious, the current framework does not meet the objectives we have set ourselves. It is not possible to cover new priorities, such as the European Competitiveness and Defence Fund, to maintain traditional priorities, such as agriculture or cohesion, and to pay for NextGenerationEU. That's a reality. Therefore, we have to go much further and we have to make a proposal for own resources that is more ambitious and therefore includes the digital levy, and my group will not stop insisting on that. And I want to address the Popular Party: it is absolutely incoherent to defend defence and competitiveness, to sign manifestos in favour of maintaining the CAP and not to support the Commission's own resources proposal. We have to get wet, we have to decide and we have to support the proposal made by the Commission.

Mr. President, learning from dana is not just investing more in prevention, emergencies or resilience. It is also to do so in humanity and empathy. Because when the institutions mistreat or ignore the victims, as the Generalitat Valenciana has done, that is also damage. The vice president went so far as to blame them for not knowing how to protect themselves and, therefore, for their deaths. Mazón has not met with them, has ignored them, has defamed them and has also accused them of being politicized, as if a mother could pretend or exaggerate the pain of having lost her daughter. Insinuating that is institutional maltreatment and neglect. And it's also part of the disaster. And we have to learn from the political failure of the People's Party in my land. Europe not only needs more and better infrastructure, it needs human institutions that listen, accompany and repair. That is why we should create the European status of victims of natural disasters, so that empathy does not depend on who governs, but is a guaranteed right for all. And we should also talk about how we treat those who suffer these catastrophes.

Mr President, Commissioner, Minister, Europe and its families are facing a very complex and complicated moment: climate crisis, housing crisis, growing inequality, loss of competitiveness and war. And from us they expect a firm response, with a strong, fair and people-centered budget. However, the proposal made by the Council is for cuts in programmes with unquestionable European value. And why? Because there's no money. We don't have enough resources. And this has to be a clear sign that, if we do not arrive in 2026, we cannot defend maintaining the same size of the financial framework until 2034. It's just absurd. That is why we need to be more ambitious and take advantage of this to support the increase in the size of the financial framework. And I would ask you to please also vote on the amendment that we have tabled as a political group so that women on maternity leave can vote electronically. Because it is shameful that in this House we see women who have to bring their newborn baby to be able to exercise their right to vote. An embarrassing image that we must eradicate from this House.

Mr President, yesterday Trump once again threatened Europe with reopening the trade war, because we sanctioned Google, a large American technology company that blocks legitimate competition from our European search engines. And all that, in addition, in the framework of a dinner, where the owners of the big platforms dined with Trump while boasting that they squeeze, subjugate and subject Europe to their own interests. That is why, Commissioner, the digital tax is not only tax justice, it is also European sovereignty. It is democratic dignity and it is telling Trump that he can put the tablecloth on and serve dinner to a table of millionaires, but that the only thing that matters to us Europeans is that, when they get up from the table, they pay the bill first.

Madam President, today we are talking about a European citizens' initiative. This means that it does not come from any government or any elite, but from the direct voice of citizens: citizens who have said that they value our cohesion policies, but who also want them to respond to the diversity and richness of our territories. I, as a Valencian, know what it is like to have a cultural identity and linguistic richness of my own within a Member State. I can therefore tell you that, if citizens ask for more decentralisation, how can the Commission envisage for the next financial framework a single centralised national plan? It doesn't make any sense. Europe must listen and defend cohesion. That doesn't mean imposing uniformity, but protecting the diversity that unites us and... (spoke in an unofficial language).

Madam President, I listened carefully to the previous speakers. Everyone has their own priorities: defence, competitiveness, agriculture... Even the far right dares to raise its hand for its exclusionary and migratory purposes. But my question is: How do you plan to pay for it? Because a competitive Europe needs more investment, a Europe that defends itself needs more budget, and a Europe that guarantees housing and our climate needs more funding. That is why this financial framework must be accompanied by an ambitious proposal for own resources, and not only to pay the debt, but to respond to these challenges. Enough, Commission: We have to break the hypocrisy of asking for more and contributing the same. The Council must understand that it has to unlock and that we need to exceed the self-imposed 1%, move forward on common debt and design new revenues aligned with the values of the European Union.

Mr President, we call for the vote to be postponed on the basis of paragraphs 1, 4 and 12 of the motion for a resolution, because it was adopted in the Committee on Petitions in breach of the rules, because it was rejected by four political groups, because it is not a citizens' petition – MEP Romana Tomc had the nerve to write on her social networks that she herself had written the petition and the resolution, which is further proof of the politicisation that the right wing of the Committee on Petitions is doing – but, above all, because it criminalises the people who fought against fascism and presents as possible victims possible Nazis and collaborators, which is an insult to the values of the European Union, but, above all, to the memory of the people who built this Europe. I want to address the popular: His partner Ursula von der Leyen said not to let the far right rewrite history. You only point them out, except when you lend them your vows. Don't take us for stupid. Do not insult our intelligence and stop feeding the monster, because he does not want pacts, he wants to devour them, and this Thursday he will make it very clear.