What José spoke about.

Mr President, Commissioner, first, I would like to extend my congratulations on the European Union's internal security strategy. But there are two things that I am particularly concerned about that I wanted to share with you and Vice President Virkkunen. The first has to do with the digital ecosystem. You have said that we will even remove content from the platforms. That may be fine, but we should at least make it clear how to verify the identity of each of the platforms and how the DSA is actually implemented in Europe. I believe that in this you have to be much harder and much more forceful. Secondly, we are talking about the Rearm Europe Plan. We're really talking about how to define our border security strategy outwards. And one of the big deficits that, for example, the Niinistö Report raises is that of the intelligence services. To really make an internal security it is much more important that the internal intelligence is also perfectly coordinated. That, without a doubt, is one of the challenges they have to develop in this work programme.

Madam President, deregulate? Yes, I think we all agree on making our Europe more and more competitive. The Draghi Report says it in a special way. But I believe that, rather than deregulating and removing bureaucracy, the fundamental goal is to be world leaders at something. It has been shocking to me that some of the previous speakers have given the Chinese economy as an example, as if it were the beacon of the West. Anyway, it's kind of surprising to take steps backwards. I find it very problematic that the due diligence rules, which are undoubtedly a risk, are placed on the frontispiece of that great weapon that we must use to deregulate. I do share that you cannot cut bureaucracy without thinking about what the Draghi Report itself puts on the table, which is to lead. That is really our goal, Commissioner, to lead, and for that we have to be much more competitive, but not deregulating, no. What we have to do is remove bureaucracy to be competitive in the world. Of course I do.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, is Europe at war or not? I think we're at war. We are in a hybrid war and, for the first time in many decades, we are not sufficiently aware of the situation we are going through. We need to invest in our security and in our defence, in our critical telecommunications infrastructure. And to be truly sovereign we only have to do two things: invest in a significant way in technology, but not in any technology, in our technological development, and also invest in greater cooperation of our intelligence systems, to precisely protect in an efficient way all critical telecommunications infrastructures. In this case there are numerous works developed by research institutes, such as Max Planck; we have to strive for them to be visualized much more. And we have to generate our own resources if we really want to be sovereign and protect ourselves from what is directly invading us today.

Your Honor, I understand that you are a Democrat like me. I would give my life to listen to anyone who even thought differently. What we cannot do is subsidise – neither by the Commission nor by any EU body – only those NGOs that are going to be favourable to us. From what I gather from your words, you would be in favour of those NGOs that only finance your political opinion. Well, I am not, I am a Democrat and I want civil society, all civil society – even those who do not think like me – to have a voice, including in their opinions, to influence all of us who are represented in this Chamber. Of course I do. And that's what we're working on, and that's why we're going to keep fighting: for democracy, including in this House.

Madam President, the truth is that we are witnessing a debate at least surprising, because the reality is stubborn. Talk about lobbying is to speak of an instrument that anyone can exercise in our society. The Commissioner himself talked about wanting an active civil society - me too - and that's what NGOs are for. What happens is that the People's Group is trying to misuse, to go against a financial instrument such as the LIFE programme, which I believe has very good repercussions on society as a whole. Can you imagine, for example, the work carried out by NGOs to alert us, to make us aware of what, for example, has happened to us in Spain with the DANA? Of course I do. And we're going to keep working to make that a reality. Nothing happens, there are sufficient controls within the Union and that is where we need to be rigorous, so that all those systems of financial rules that the European Union and the Commission employ vis-à-vis any organisation – including NGOs – are implemented in a transparent manner. But it's okay. What happens is that you are trying to misuse and misrepresent all that because you have a very right-wing objective in this House, by the way, and that is quite worrying.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, 2019: cyberattack at Maastricht University, with a ransomware and then the requirement of more than EUR 200 000 to release your data; 2021, University of Oxford; 2022, University of Cambridge: an attack of phishing to extract data and credentials from our researchers. Undoubtedly, the issue of protecting our science, our universities, our knowledge is a priority issue that the latest Niinistö Report has put on the table. And this is an issue that, of course, the next Commission - which is already working on protecting our data, our knowledge, our researchers, our research centres - has to place at the centre as one of the top priorities. Our knowledge, that of our investigations, that of our investigators, is at stake; We played a lot. And that is why talking about cybersecurity and the protection of our research centres is also a priority for the Commission that is being launched today.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the Niinistö report is extremely interesting. It puts us squarely in the face of the threats we are already facing today, but I wanted to highlight two fundamental elements of this report: the first is the ability to coordinate the intelligence of our countries and, secondly, to try to develop a protective shield that, above all, values the defense of our citizens. This is not only done with investments. This is not only done by investing in defense. This is done by investing in a change of attitude which, unfortunately, even here this morning we see has nothing to do with it. There are some Members who are here today raising their voices and their words with a conceptualisation more specific to the Second World War and with an attitude of trying more to deconstruct Europe than anything else. This report is therefore extremely important. Let's safeguard our intelligence systems, let's have information shared and let's all protect ourselves from what is coming upon us that, without a doubt, is going to be extraordinarily important.

Mr President, Commissioner, it is a pleasure to share this debate with you. I would also like to thank the Court of Auditors, Mr Murphy and, in particular, Mr Gregor, who has made this report so excellent; of course, to a large extent, it seems to us that it is an essential task in the work of the accounts of the European Union. Undoubtedly, it also seems to us that the Digital Decade and, in particular, the European Green Deal are some of the most important strategies that we have precisely to seek the digital sovereignty of the Union, in the face of the international geopolitical context that we are experiencing. And, in that sense, we think it is essential, of course, to ensure that European funds are developed and implemented in an efficient, effective and transparent way. It seems to us, of course, that there has to be a certain balance between control and regulatory simplification – as we have seen this morning – but we want to make a strong commitment to digital transformation, trying to avoid gaps. And, above all, the most important thing is to provide security coverage to our citizens to avoid also the great cyber threats, which today are already becoming a reality.

Mr President, Commissioner, thank you for being here and, above all, thank you also to the rapporteurs, Mr Negrescu and Mr Herbst, who have done an excellent job of precisely translating Parliament's opinion into this draft budget. The CONT Committee would, of course, like to highlight the importance of ensuring that cost overruns, for example in Next Generation EU programmes, do not involve cuts to our public policies. The European Union, of course, needs to have its own resources and, in that sense, we have to work in a very important way to guarantee the Green Deal, the Digital Deal, and try to develop a new framework in a market model where knowledge is possibly going to be imposed on monetary systems. And, in that sense, and thinking about future generations, of course we also want to mention the importance of cybersecurity: We need to protect our digital policies with at least 10% investment in every cybersecurity development that is implemented.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, disinformation today is a reality that calls into question and blatantly puts our democracies at risk. Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights speaks of freedom of expression and freedom of information and clearly protects them. This is developed so that our citizens have the ability to make decisions and the ability to be able to choose freely in democratic processes. As our societies advance and digitalise, we see how, unfortunately, in the face of this ability to try to obtain more information and for our citizens to build a free and efficient opinion, disinformation, wrongdoing and lies are making their way and are increasingly putting our democracies at risk. It is an important job that all governments, like Spain's, must continue to do, because, if not, unfortunately, our European democratic societies will increasingly be at risk and, this, we cannot afford.