What Ana Catarina spoke about.

Dear Mr Oliveira, I am happy to reply. Yes, the Socialists and Democrats here in the European Parliament have approved the Pact for Migration. The Portuguese Socialist Government contributed to making this Migration Pact the best possible compromise. What cannot happen at the moment is, in exchange for perceptions and fear and hate speech, to want to revoke a pact that has not yet been implemented. But, I must say, I will always be against the externalisation of borders, because I consider it a mistake. Commitments are commitments. And in this pact, the externalization of borders has always been a mistake.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I believe that we really need to be very clear about the Commission's and the Council's proposal on migration, because this measure is actually against the values of the European project. It's a mistake, it's inhumane, it's the externalization of borders. Ladies and gentlemen, this is an affront to human rights. It's not just me saying it. The Italian judicial system and the Court of Justice of the European Union itself also say so. The fact that the President of the European Commission suggests that the European Union follow innovative solutions, such as those in the Albania-Italy Protocol, should not only concern us, but also not silence us. I recall here the Italian court decision ordering the return to Italy of the migrants transferred to the detention centre on the outskirts of Tirana, for not considering the countries of origin, Egypt and Bangladesh, safe countries. I recall, ladies and gentlemen, the Geneva Convention, the European Charter of Fundamental Rights and, more recently, the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the case concerning the Czech Republic, which states: ‘a country outside the bloc cannot be declared safe unless its entire territory is considered safe’. And, my dear colleagues, we are not talking about money, we are talking about human lives. The policy of externalising borders is truly a mistake, because it destroys people's lives. We are following the European project.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we have long known that the Iranian regime has a clear agenda of internal oppression of its own population, which is reflected in the intensification of attacks against human rights, having launched a war against women and girls through increasingly violent repression, reinforcing the use of the death penalty to silence dissent. The Iranian regime has also been committed to a clear agenda of destabilisation of the region and Europe by directly and indirectly supporting and sponsoring terrorist non-state groups and facilitating their involvement in illicit activities. It should also be borne in mind that the Iranian regime continues to supply unmanned aircraft and has started to transfer missiles to Russia, thereby reinforcing its clear support for Putin’s autocratic regime in its war of invasion against Ukraine. Recent reports from the European security services – that Iran may have been involved in the explosions and shooting at the Israeli embassies in Stockholm and Copenhagen, using local criminal groups – are a good mirror of this assumed attempt to destabilise the European space, sowing a climate of terror and fear. That is why, in the face of these threats, Europe must act now, without complacency, by taking measures to strengthen the resources of the security services and cooperation on intelligence and information at European level. It is also important to give Europol and Eurojust more means to prevent further attacks and to act in advance in the event of a threat, always ensuring respect for the rights, freedoms and guarantees of all citizens. The European Union has a responsibility to extend restrictive measures against the Iranian regime by including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps on the European Union terrorist list, as has already been requested by this Parliament. And in the face of these serious threats to all of us, the European Union must even strengthen the tools at its disposal to ensure respect for human rights – living in a free, democratic Iran that respects fundamental rights – every day.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, Article 10 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union recognises the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. And that is why this is also the place to condemn what is religious extremism on the one hand, but also what is the anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim discourse that is raging in our society. This is the speech, moreover, that leads to the instrumentalization, as has already been said, of many of the political agendas that we have today, which lead, moreover, to the anti-immigration speech. That is why, Commissioner, I think it is very important, in addition to welcoming your campaigns, that it is absolutely essential that religious freedom is a point to be defended here in Europe, but that interreligious dialogue can also serve to integrate those who seek a place of refuge in Europe, a port of refuge. And for that very reason, religious freedom, tolerance and respect are all about complying with the values of the European Union.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, respect for the rule of law can never be taken for granted. That is why this annual report is of particular importance, not only because of the improvements it has already shown in some Member States, but also because of the concerns it leaves us with. And one of the concerns is the press freedom index 2024, which shows what we already knew: freedom of the press is threatened by those who should guarantee it, the political authorities. More and more governments and political authorities are failing to fulfil their role as guarantors of reliable, independent and pluralistic journalism. And that is why I must leave here my perplexity with the Portuguese Prime Minister's statements yesterday about the impartiality of journalism, in which he accuses journalists of receiving questions blown by their earphones and calls for calmer and less breathless journalism. This worries us as democrats and should worry us because this populist rhetoric, supported by a certain traditional right, feeds backsliding on respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights. I therefore urge the European Commission to strengthen this report not only with what it says, but above all with its recommendations, and to monitor its recommendations.

Madam President, Prime Minister, ladies and gentlemen, I have fortunately grown up in a Europe of values, in a Europe of solidarity, peace, justice and freedoms. And today, what I expected was that those who hold the presidency of the European Council could tell us here that their view on immigration has changed, that migrants are not, are not poison, and that hate speech only inflames what we have been seeing this morning. This is not the Europe I want, Mr Orban. This was not the Europe that the great Schuman or Monnet thinkers dreamed of for all of us. And for this reason, its migration policy deserves a vehement repudiation. We cannot continue to witness lies and hate speech against immigrants, those seeking shelter in Europe. And what the Prime Minister has contributed in Europe is to a speech that is, every day, divisive and that is, every day, against what this Parliament, which is the House of democracy, should be. No, we do not want your vision of Europe, Mr Orban.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I believe that the Pact for the Future, contrary to what has been said here a moment ago, is really a starting point and not an end point. And it is absolutely important at a time when we are experiencing a number of conflicts on a global scale. It is therefore important to reinforce that, in this pact, the United Nations puts on the table the vision of multilateralism and the strengthening of multilateralism for the resolution of conflicts. We can't solve the issues on our own. Secondly, strengthening developing countries to meet the Sustainable Development Goals. And let me finally highlight the Digital Agenda and also the Climate Change Agenda, which can only be done if there is a just transition and if there is equal opportunities for all. Climate change is not a myth – it is there and it needs to be addressed and it needs to have answers. That is why the Pact for the Future is so relevant and why the European Union must be involved in this debate.

Madam President, 'there is only one radical way to preserve the human being: without concrete reinforcements, tanks, planes or fortifications. The radical solution, ladies and gentlemen, is called 'peace'. No more blood and tears. Thirty-nine years ago, following these words, Yitzhak Rabin was murdered, and I think it is worth remembering him today to remind him that a path of peace is possible and that a path of peace must be built. António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, has been declared persona non grata It is urgent to silence arms and build the path that leads us to peace. Ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, Mr Borrell said yesterday that we must build hope for peace, strengthen humanitarian aid, recognise Palestine as a state. I couldn't agree more, but I have to add: more than words, we must act, and that is why we must also suspend the trade agreement between the European Union and Israel so that the words of Itzhak Rabin 39 years ago make sense and so that the thousands of dead and the millions of displaced can be honoured in what must be strong action by the European Union to condemn, to call for a ceasefire now.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Anne Applebaum explained this week, in an international interview, the danger of fake news, disinformation and the control of social information networks by several world leaders who do not have an ideology in common, but rather the will to remain in power at almost any cost. That is why we know that, in recent years, authors opposing the European project and liberal democracy have used the manipulation of algorithms to spread chaos on the Internet and thus contaminate our democratic societies. That is why the European Union, with the European Media Freedom Regulation, which entered into force in May, is to be congratulated, but we need to work harder. We need to implement the regulations on service and the digital market and strengthen the annual rule of law report, but we also need to be aware that artificial intelligence must be at the service of democracies and not as an enemy of democracies. Democratic societies, strong and capable of guaranteeing the rights, freedoms and guarantees of all of us, are made with a strong media, but we must monitor those who damage the European area every day and the area of rights, freedoms and guarantees.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I do not think any of us have any doubts and I, like the Commissioner, am proud to live in the Schengen area and in a Europe, in an area without internal borders, in which the free movement of persons is ensured. Since the Treaty of Lisbon that is, and since the Treaty of Lisbon that we also know that this Schengen acquis introduces its exceptions. But the great concern we have today, these days, is that the Schengen exception has become the norm in many Member States, which is why we need to cut through two myths. The first is of those who think that reintroducing borders means that immigration is the greatest crime. All the data we have points to the completely reverse path. And the second myth is that, by closing borders, we will have flows of legal migration – another myth that is false. Closing and restricting borders means opening up space for mafias, organised crime and irregular immigration. That is why, dear colleagues, I understand that a speech that is based on fear erodes our democracy. And that is why, Commissioner, the European Commission must be the guardian of our Treaties, and that is why it must enforce Schengen. And enforcing Schengen means...

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, three years ago the Taliban again attacked Afghanistan and therefore imposed rules that are inhumane rules, where women no longer have a voice. At this minute, I would like us to remember Simone Weil as the first woman President of this Parliament and remind her that we can be the silenced voice of so many women in Afghanistan. For the respect of human rights, for the work that we have to do and, above all, calling for this Parliament to be able to put pressure so that these women can be saved by giving them asylum and welcoming them, in an urgent need for everyone, everyone, everyone to be able to be free.

Madam President, Commissioner, representative of the Council, I think the time is particularly difficult. And it is particularly difficult because we are still experiencing Russia's invasion of Ukraine's territory. Therefore, in this context, the recent decision of the Hungarian authorities to facilitate the access of Russia and Belarus to the Schengen area, immediately after Prime Minister Orbán’s visit to Moscow, is dangerous, worrying and runs counter to the principles of cooperation to which all Member States of the European Union are bound. For more than ten years, we have witnessed, with some perplexity, Hungary's abuses of the rule of law and respect for human rights. The visa facilitation decision that is presented, when in parallel the Hungarian authorities decided to withdraw the right to housing of Ukrainian refugees, is nevertheless extraordinary and difficult to understand. It is truly a clear example of a profound lack of humanism and solidarity. But as far as Hungary's 'national card' is concerned, as well as the simplification of visa procedures for 'guest workers' from Russia and Belarus, we should look at Commissioner Johansson's words, but also at what has just been said here: Russia is a security threat. We need more, not less vigilance. Allowing potential Russian spies or saboteurs [free] access to European Union space undermines the security of all of us.” This is what we are talking about and this is the explanation that the Hungarian government must give. Their ‘national card’ could undermine the collective framework in place since the invasion of Ukraine, with the suspension of the visa facilitation agreement with Russia in summer 2022 and the intensification of the scrutiny of future applications. I would therefore like, ladies and gentlemen, Madam President, Madam Representative of the Commission, to urge the next College of Commissioners to continue the efforts of Commissioner Johansson, who just last week assured - and we have heard this assurance even today - that the Commission will continue to assess very closely Hungary's behaviour in this area and to implement measures to ensure the security of the European Union and all its citizens. This debate is not easy because we should not take a Member State as a whole. But the attitudes and decisions of a government, which can jeopardise the security of the European Union, deserve the attention of this House.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I do not think that any of us is unaware that there is a before and after of new technologies. There is a before and after of digital platforms and we know how distorting the use of digital platforms undermines our democracies. For this reason, over time, the rules that define the limits of this communication have been changed to accommodate these same differences. The only thing that must remain equal and unwavering is the radical defence of our freedom, privacy and democracy. Digital giants and users are not, and never have been, on an equal footing. The Digital Services Act, but also the Artificial Intelligence Act, first made and adopted in December 2023, was therefore very important. The latter aims to ensure the protection of citizens but also to hold platforms accountable for the fake content they often help disseminate. Fake news, image and video manipulation and fallacious propaganda do irretrievable damage to our democracies. This is clearly visible in the exacerbation of tensions, in the visibility that algorithms give to hate speech and xenophobia, and in the questioning of the very democratic legitimacy of our institutions. We know well that to defend democracy we cannot pinch our rights, freedoms and guarantees. Freedom, yes, but responsibility as well. In the online space, as in the offline space, the European Union will even have to continue to seek a path that guarantees respect for the privacy that strengthens us all and for the freedom that defines us. The European Union must therefore be at the forefront of this balance, between modern artificial intelligence and technological platforms and respect for rights, freedoms and guarantees. Because it's not just about defending platforms, it's about defending our democracy and our freedom.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the previous colleague rightly said, let us not forget history. And it is history that gave rise to the European project, the European Union: a space of respect for human rights, for difference, for freedom, for equality. Therefore, even in this space of defence of the rights, freedoms and guarantees of all, hate speech cannot pass and cannot take place. Hannah Arendt said that discrimination is the weapon that kills without blood, and hate speech is a weapon that kills without blood. For this reason, we must increasingly focus on educating and strengthening our youth, go through history and explain that hate speech, whatever it may be – in this case, anti-Semitism – is a return to a space whose memory we do not want to forget, but which we do not want to live again. I therefore leave today the call to this plenary, Commissioner, for the next five years to continue to be five years of combating hate speech, in particular of those who are afraid and hide behind screens and on social media, continuing to pulverize and increase the discourse of division, hate speech and disunity speech. Saving European democracy means continuing to uphold respect for human rights.

I base myself on the various studies that are being done. They are made in Portugal, they are made in Spain, they are made by the European space. The European Commission has a lot of data on this. Migration cannot be directly linked to crime. That is why a great deal of work is needed to clarify this for you too, honourable Member.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the first word is a word of vehement condemnation of this Parliament for the terrible attack that took place in Solingen. The second word is a word of solidarity with the relatives of the victims of these people. But, ladies and gentlemen, we cannot and should not confuse immigration with criminality. This is not how we deal with migration policy. What is really needed is a fierce fight against radicalization, against radicalized discourse, investing, for this, in education, investing in more means, betting on prevention. Secondly, European cooperation needs to be further strengthened. For almost 75 years, the European Union has been an area of diversity, expression, difference, culture, peace and security. And that's how we want it to continue to be. It is therefore essential that the Global Compact on Migration is implemented, that its implementation is monitored in each of the Member States. We must accept that this is the space of Europeans, of those who are born here, of those who choose to live here, who choose to have their lives here, who flee war, who flee hunger, who flee climate change, who flee dictatorships. This is the area of the European Union. This is the area of respect for human rights, where those who attacked Solingen last August are mercilessly condemned.