Speeches

Madam President, I'm sorry. Brussels is actually creating a new arms superministry, which is to decide from now on who in Europe can produce weapons, how to produce them and to whom to sell them. This is no longer a collaboration. This is taking over the competences of nation states step by step, because it is each state that should decide on its defence policy. After all, the European Union does not deal with defence, and I do not know when this change took place. In fact, every country, including Poland, is supposed to contribute to this fund and count without any guarantee that it will get something in return. And above all, before we took care of our factories, 300 million euros is directed towards the integration of the Ukrainian arms industry with the European one. Once again, we do not remember an important principle: Before we help someone, let's help ourselves first. Because our factories, because of the madness you've enacted here, because of the Green Deal, they're barely going to die, and because of that, the arms industry needs support.

Mr President, thank you very much. There is no more persecuted religion in the world, no more persecuted social group in the world than Christians. Let's look at the great African country of Nigeria, which has been burning for years. Thousands of Christians die every year because they believe in Jesus Christ. The militias are killing people, burning churches, kidnapping clergy and displacing entire villages. This is not a land dispute. This is genocide caused by religious hatred. Hundreds of villages disappear from the map, and unfortunately the world is silent. The West is indifferent to what is happening in Nigeria. The Nigerian government is passive and the perpetrators really go unpunished. The European Parliament has condemned the genocide taking place in Nigeria. On the other hand, unfortunately, the European Commission, I get the impression, is not doing everything that can be done. After all, this is really about Christians, who still make up the majority in Europe. This is about our brothers and sisters in the faith, who must be helped and decisive action must be taken here.

Mr President, thank you very much. I have three problems with this report. The first concerns the income tax itself, which is the most harmful tax. There is no more harmful tax because today, across the European Union, work or profit is taxed more than vodka – and I do not understand it at all. Because if the authorities want to discourage someone from drinking, then they tax alcohol. On the other hand, if they want to discourage someone from working, from developing, from making profits, then income is taxed. In addition, income tax in itself causes that it is the rich who have money to care about it, to invent loopholes, hide income, optimize. And it will always be so, because they have the money for lawyers and advisers, not an ordinary man or a small company. The second problem is that there is no such thing as EU tax law. There shouldn't be such a thing. We should not harmonise tax systems and countries that have better taxes should win over those that have worse taxes. And the third problem I have is that in fact this BEFIT is an introduction to the next own resource of the Union and in this way you will be collecting money from sovereign states.

Madam President, I'm sorry. I don't understand something. We all agree here, even with the Commission, and then this clock and millions of clocks across the European Union will have to reverse or move the hands forward on command. It's time to put an end to this. And I get the impression that the European Union can do anything, as long as it's about small things. Once, a long time ago, it regulated the curvature of a banana, the use of a flush in toilets or the air margin in the package of chips. She even ordered the nuts to be attached to plastic bottles, otherwise no one would be able to handle it. But when 84% of citizens in the Commission's consultation said clearly: ‘raise this time change’, then suddenly the whole EU machine is jammed. It's been six years and silence, because no one can decide whether we prefer the sun at five or six in the morning. If the EU stops on such a simple matter, how can it deal with more serious problems, such as the migration crisis, such as the crisis on the energy market? It's time to end this absurdity. The change of time is a relic from the era of candles and steam locomotives. That's when the energy was saved. Today we have LEDs, we have automatic lighting control, 24-hour production, and official reports from the Commission and the European Environment Agency say clearly: Energy savings are zero, but costs... Twice a year the whole continent gets jet laga without an air ticket. Increased accidents, heart attacks, sleep disorders. Children fall asleep in schools, drivers go semi-conscious, trains have wrong timetables. And why? Just to keep this bureaucratic clock of absurdity ticking. Let us finally put an end to this time change before we debate it again.

Mr President, thank you very much. This report is very interesting and worth getting acquainted with. In it, the Court says that we have had another year of errors in the spending of EU money. Although this level of errors in the European Union countries has fallen to over 3%, it is still too much, because over 3% is about 6 billion euros. It should also be noted that the Commission does not carry out its own checks, but trusts the papers presented by the Member States. If we went deeper, it would probably be even worse. This is called Green PR. The Commission overestimated climate spending by 7 percentage points. The Court has previously alarmed about billions of euros spent on NGOs, various foundations and think tanks without any transparency and without auditing the results. And in fact, if a private company had received such an audit result, the prosecutor would have been sitting with it a long time ago. We don't have any such stories. No one bears the consequences. As is usually the case in Brussels, no one answers. The Commission boasts that there are fewer errors and it is better. But really, it's like someone said they stole less from us this year: instead of eight billion, six.

Mr President, thank you very much. The European Union budget for 2026 is no longer a financial plan. This is really an ideological manifesto. It is an expression of philosophy, and unfortunately it is a philosophy of interventionism, redistribution and bureaucracy. Again, we see an attempt to spill money wherever we can, in the belief that more money produces more results. Meanwhile, it is not the lack of funds that is Europe's problem, but the misdiagnosis of its disease, the fact that Europe is structurally inefficient, overregulated and suffocating its initiative through its fiscal policy, by paying more and more taxes, more and more hidden costs of doing business and ordinary life for its citizens. And there is nothing in this budget to reverse the decline in Europe's competitiveness vis-à-vis the rest of the world. Instead, we see all that has already happened, that is, maintaining artificial demand, subsidizing green ideological projects and billions more for the operation of the central apparatus. No nation, no institution wins by subsidies, only by freedom. More freedom, less subsidies. That's how it should be.

Mr President, thank you very much. Ladies and Gentlemen, The European Union can sometimes come up with a law so complicated that a farmer has to measure centimeters of grass, and an entrepreneur fills in tables longer than he works. And when the consequences come, ordinary people pay for them. That is why the Committee on Petitions is invaluable. This is the only phone number that someone is really answering in Brussels. This is a straight line from the people of the European Union to the European Parliament. And thanks to these petitions, there are issues that we are not talking about here in the plenary, that are not in any reports, and that everyone knows from life - the effects of poorly written regulations, poorly implemented legislation, wasting taxpayers' money. From railway safety to environmental decisions issued without reliable data. Here the European Union can prove useful, fix something, clarify or simply stop disturbing people. But above all, this commission is to serve the people, not to be a club for the Member States or to serve for some political disputes. If the Union were governed by its citizens, maybe something would finally work here. I therefore take a very positive view of the Committee on Petitions, as it is one of the few places in this institution where there is still a human voice. And let's not ruin it.

Mr President, thank you very much. Ladies and Gentlemen, There are no good or bad taxes. There are less bad taxes. And these less bad taxes include a tax that is neutral, that least affects the market and people's choices. However, as Ludwig von Mises pointed out, the tax is better for the rulers, the less neutral it is, because thanks to this they can shape human behavior and choices. And I, unfortunately, doubt that the Commission would care about such simple taxes, because many officials, but also lobbyists and lawyers, would lose their privileges. For example, EU VAT, which is a milking cow for fraudsters. You've known that for 50 years. We in Poland have known about this for 20 years. And you are introducing more and more new restrictions and requirements officially to fight all these abuses. But the same advisors who write these laws also advise everyone on how to handle them, including these great criminals. And always on these changes suffers the most small entrepreneur who does not keep up with these changes. And, of course, every step towards simplification should be commended. But in fact, you would have to come here with some big lawn mower and cut these rules to almost zero, because only then can Europe be competitive. Taxes must be low and simple.

Mr President, thank you very much. Ladies and Gentlemen, Today we are talking about a strategy that affects millions of European families. And of course, each of us has probably read the statistics, which are frightening, but you have to be aware that behind each of these numbers, behind each of these millions, there are actually millions of individual cases that affect individual families, individual patients that cause them suffering, experiencing this tragedy, also the financial burden, but also all other feelings associated with it, hopes, pain and experiencing this disease. This is certainly the main cause of disability and dependency among the elderly at the moment. This is a huge scale of the challenge. Indeed, we need such a coherent, ambitious strategy on Alzheimer's and other dementias, primarily covering those things that Member States seem unable to cope with on their own, i.e. including issues of diagnosis, research for treatment, but also issues of care or support for families. And above all, in all these actions, it must be remembered that every person, including those suffering from Alzheimer's or dementia, is still a human being and must be given dignity and their lives protected. I can't hide one fact here, unfortunately. In some countries that have legalized euthanasia, it is increasingly possible to apply it to people with Alzheimer's disease and dementia, including those who are no longer able to express their will. And this undermines our core European values, the values that underpinned Europe – the inviolability of human life. A person with dementia does not cease to be human. The answer cannot be shortening her life, but solidarity, care and support. First of all, I would like to emphasize that this disease is not only the suffering of the patient, but also a huge burden for caregivers, as has already been said before. They are the ones who most often bear the burden of daily care, give up their professional work, live in constant stress, face loneliness and lack of systemic support. And they certainly deserve our highest respect and appreciation for this great sacrifice. And we should provide systemic support through access to respite care, rehabilitation or social services. Remember that people with dementia or Alzheimer's also suffered from well-known people, such as Margaret Thatcher or Ronald Reagan. In fact, anyone can become a victim of it and Europe deserves to build such a solid plan.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Every year the European Union spends billions of euros on investment, and every year it spends heavy money in various funds. In addition, because the money is missing, it is in debt and we are already paying this debt, and our children and grandchildren will pay it back. We will be burdened with this all the time. And in addition, in order to move all this, it has been proposing centralization for years. For years, he has been trying to ensure that most decisions are taken in Brussels, not in individual countries. Well, what's the effect? Even Draghi's report said that. Europe is not competitive, it needs big investments to catch up with the rest of the world. We don't have innovation. It was all these decisions that killed you and you didn't draw any conclusions from it. You're still proposing the same thing. You propose that we spend even more this time and now it will surely end differently. Well, it will not end otherwise, because an official will never make a better decision than an entrepreneur, than a man. He knows what's best for him. He knows how to invest money, how to save. He knows this much better than any, even the smartest official from Brussels. You have to learn from your mistakes and stop centralizing everything. Creating more unions, more reports will not help. The economy must eventually be deregulated. Ultimately, we have to bet on countries to build their own capital markets and not to disturb people. You've actually driven capital out of Europe. We do not produce anything in Europe, we will have to import everything. This needs to be addressed, not further harmonisation.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Ladies and Gentlemen, We have already discussed the crisis in the automotive industry, in the steel industry, in agriculture, in the energy sector, even in beekeeping, and today it is time to save the chemical industry. Everywhere a crisis, but it is not really a crisis, but the result of this crazy, bureaucratic, climate policy of the European Union. Europe does not need further strategies and plans, but real relief from the burden on the economy. The chemical package is a step in the right direction. It's a simplification, but it's still too cautious, it's late, and it's still too bureaucratic. We continue to create a system in which the entrepreneur has to talk to the clerk and lawyers, not to his client. That's not how we're going to build competitiveness. New concepts, concept One substance one assessment it can increase regulatory coherence, but it also risks centralising decisions and marginalising Member States. It is supposed to be simpler and faster, but in this way we are killing competitiveness. We need deregulation, simple rules, strong companies and respect for national competences. We need common sense, not ideology. Without it, Europe will be a museum, not a healthy economy.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Ladies and Gentlemen, We have already discussed the crisis in the automotive industry, in the steel industry, in agriculture, in the energy sector, even in beekeeping, and today it is time to save the chemical industry. Everywhere a crisis, but it is not really a crisis, but the result of this crazy, bureaucratic, climate policy of the European Union. Europe does not need further strategies and plans, but real relief from the burden on the economy. The chemical package is a step in the right direction. It's a simplification, but it's still too cautious, it's late, and it's still too bureaucratic. We continue to create a system in which the entrepreneur has to talk to the clerk and lawyers, not to his client. That's not how we're going to build competitiveness. New concepts, concept One substance one assessment it can increase regulatory coherence, but it also risks centralising decisions and marginalising Member States. It is supposed to be simpler and faster, but in this way we are killing competitiveness. We need deregulation, simple rules, strong companies and respect for national competences. We need common sense, not ideology. Without it, Europe will be a museum, not a healthy economy.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Ladies and Gentlemen, I don't know if you've seen the comedy Man versus Bee starring Rowan Atkinson. There, the main character, chasing one bee, demolishes the whole house. Today, however, it is not the bee that is bothering man, and man, and more specifically also EU policy, is bothering bees. The bee does not have an office in Brussels. He doesn't employ a lobbyist. He does not write reports and does not wait for the next directive, for the next plan, for the next order. She simply lives, pollinates and does what she does best – supporting nature and giving people healthy food. Meanwhile, in the Union, we create pacts, strategies, green deals, consultations, and we forget that the best ally of a bee is not a bureaucrat, but simply a beekeeper and a farmer – one who knows that without pollinators there will be no harvest. If you want to save bees, stop harming farmers. Stop supporting competition from outside the EU. Do not bother them with further regulations, prohibitions and reporting. Stop punishing them for wanting to produce food, not fill out Excel sheets. Bees need peace, tranquility, balance in the landscape, not legislative chaos. They need forests, meadows, apiaries, no – the Green Deal, which destroys what it was supposed to protect. Let's not duplicate the script from the movie, in which a man destroys everything to get rid of one bee. Let us protect nature together with those who truly understand it – farmers and beekeepers.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Ladies and Gentlemen, I don't know if you've seen the comedy Man versus Bee starring Rowan Atkinson. There, the main character, chasing one bee, demolishes the whole house. Today, however, it is not the bee that is bothering man, and man, and more specifically also EU policy, is bothering bees. The bee does not have an office in Brussels. He doesn't employ a lobbyist. He does not write reports and does not wait for the next directive, for the next plan, for the next order. She simply lives, pollinates and does what she does best – supporting nature and giving people healthy food. Meanwhile, in the Union, we create pacts, strategies, green deals, consultations, and we forget that the best ally of a bee is not a bureaucrat, but simply a beekeeper and a farmer – one who knows that without pollinators there will be no harvest. If you want to save bees, stop harming farmers. Stop supporting competition from outside the EU. Do not bother them with further regulations, prohibitions and reporting. Stop punishing them for wanting to produce food, not fill out Excel sheets. Bees need peace, tranquility, balance in the landscape, not legislative chaos. They need forests, meadows, apiaries, no – the Green Deal, which destroys what it was supposed to protect. Let's not duplicate the script from the movie, in which a man destroys everything to get rid of one bee. Let us protect nature together with those who truly understand it – farmers and beekeepers.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I come from Poland. We have a lot of coal. Coal is the backbone of our energy, and as a result, we have been doing well, and now we still have energy sovereignty. We do not depend on Russian gas, we can draw from our own deposits. And you want to shut down our coal-fired power plants. You want to close our mines and force us to use panels and windmills. We want to continue to use coal and atom. And these are the two foundations on which we can base our energy economy.

Mr President, thank you very much. Ladies and Gentlemen, You say that windmills and panels are almost free energy from wind and sun. You're lying. This is the biggest fraud of our time. See how much you have to pay to upgrade your network with these green toys. How much do you make on this? Because I don't believe that you are so naive that you promote the most expensive and unstable source of energy. The report we are debating today is not a plan for cheap and safe energy. This is a costly manifesto of the Green Deal that turns Europe into a testing ground for ideological experimentation. The Commission wants to double investment in electricity grids. And these costs mean that every EU citizen will pay more than €1,300 by 2030 for this plan, and more than €5,000 by 2050. Every inhabitant of Europe will pay so much for adapting the network. The more renewable energy sources, the more cables, the cost of bureaucracy and the risk of blackouts. This is the way to nowhere. We need energy and reason, not fanaticism.

I don't see such a change. I certainly don't see a change for the better. We currently have several categories of judges in Poland. In fact, no one in the courtroom is able to say whether he is judged by a judge who is recognized by both the government and the opposition at the same time, because I have the impression that such a category does not exist at all. So, when it comes to the rule of law, nothing has changed for the better. On the other hand, these reports show one thing, in fact it turns out that officials that the European Commission wants to make itself out of the 8 commandments a limited liability company. It can't be like that. The report should present facts, not ideological desires.

Madam President, I'm sorry. After seven years of threats, debates and reports, the European Commission is proud to announce the closure of the Article 7 procedure for violating the rule of law against Poland. But not because the rule of law has returned, but because the Tusk government, convenient for Brussels, has returned. And what does reality look like? Constitutional bodies, even the Constitutional Court, are being dismantled. The power-stricken media continues to be stubborn. In the course of the election campaign, funded, it is not known from where, organizations spent hundreds of thousands of zlotys on a campaign directed against opposition candidates. And even if this government, this inept government, lost the election, it now accuses the opposition of having rigged the election. Well, that's amazing. What is the Commission's response? The committee claps, evaluates the declarations themselves and, in fact, zero effects. After all these years, it turns out that the fight for the rule of law, all these admonitions, all these debates, procedures, reports was just a drink on the water. Looks like this nativity scene was just blackmail and setup. As a result, you lied and frightened Polish women and Poles, and forced Europeans into our country by showing us as bandits.

Dear Mr President, You flood us with thousands of pages of reports and analyses every day, and in fact you have a big problem with transparency. In the case of secret SMS negotiations between the head of the European Commission and Pfizer, the case had to go to court. Findings of billions of euros were hidden here. And what? There is a judgment of the Court of Justice, so what? No repercussions. Similarly, on the popular Polish safety belts for children, Smart Kids Belt, which have been ploughed up by EU regulations. Here, too, the court found that the Commission had been in contact with competitors and that this had exhausted the Polish company. And no consequences. Members also do not have access to important documents and findings. What is transparency? Only in theory. And these institutions really only work for the elite, not for the people. This is evident in the petitions we are considering. You can't stand the change of time for seven years, but when you have to spend another billion euros, when you have to get another bailout for Ukraine, we act quickly and without thinking. These are small matters, important to people should be dealt with in an express manner, and important matters concerning multibillion-dollar expenses should be considered carefully and thoughtfully.

Madam President, I'm sorry. EU competition policy – here we are dealing with a bureaucratic Frankenstein: It is supposed to guard the free market, but in practice it is a regulating dragon that devours initiative, innovation and small businesses. We hear that competition policy is meant to protect against market concentration. What effect do we have today? Three U.S. credit rating agencies control 90% of the market. Four global audit firms are holding the finances of the entire Union in hand, and digital giants are growing faster than the European Commission's debt. Brussels says it's helping industry, but if it weren't for the Green Deal, it wouldn't have to help industry at all. Two countries, Germany and France, receive more than 77% of notified state aid. And Poland, my country? He's on the reserve bench all the time. Not because we can't compete, but because, according to these rules, we can't even get on the pitch. The EU talks about fair competition, but in practice creates market feudalism in which the elected receive subsidies and the others receive forms and controls. We don't need any funds. We need economic freedom, equal rules and a return to common sense.

Mr President, thank you very much. We're talking about winning the global race. European innovators, entrepreneurs and inventors, on the other hand, are unfortunately held hostage at the start by bureaucracy, by tons of directives, regulations and regulations. We are not going to win this race. If one believes in the myth of the enterprising state, one believes that the government creates innovation, and this is not true. The truth is that central planning inhibits, not supports, progress. To attribute merit to governments or the Commission for inventions simply because they were present in the process is an abuse. The history of the Internet, the history of social media, the history of search engines shows that key innovations arise despite central planning, not because it was present in the process. And if we plan centrally, then it often leads to waste and inefficiency. It is time to reject these myths and bet on the free market as an engine of innovation.

Madam President, I'm sorry. You can see a repeat of history. The Roman Empire collapsed due to a moral, economic crisis and the invasion of the barbarians. Today, Europe is making the same mistakes. Europe is under threat because for years we have believed in the end of history and the superiority of our model. We have abandoned real politics, disarmed ourselves and opened the door to mass migration. And this migration today is tearing our civilization apart from the inside. Protecting borders is a top priority. We are talking here about the external borders of the European Union, and above all, from my perspective, about an effective, real dam in the east. Support for Poland in this area is the interest of the European Union. This is a necessity in the face of the hybrid attacks of Lukashenko and Putin on our country and thus on the European Union. We dig holes under ourselves. We need to strengthen our industry, energy security, abandon the Green Deal ideology so that we are also economically strong. And we also say a firm ‘no’ to the European superstate. We protest against it. A Europe of sovereign nations is the future of Europe.

Dear Commissioner, I look at your activities and the topic of the debate and I feel like it is already the "Prima Aprilis". Pluralism, transparency and the fight against corruption are important and necessary ideas. It is a pity that the European Commission and the European Parliament are doing exactly the opposite. You talk about pluralism and democracy, and you support the removal of poll leaders from the elections, you do not allow right-wing groups to lead committees or deliberations in parliament. Even during the Hungarian Presidency, you have gone even to petty malice like children in kindergarten, not respecting and not maintaining neutrality. You are talking about transparency, but citizens do not really have any influence on the actions of the European Union. And the President of the European Commission is fighting to hide text messages in which she negotiated a vaccine deal with Pfizer. You are talking about the fight against corruption, while another corruption scandal breaks out under your noses again. This is the result of an overabundance of government officials. After all, the people who caused it will not suddenly withdraw from it. The real change, the real transparency, will be when we take power from the officials and give it back to the citizens. Long live freedom!

Madam President, I'm sorry. Once, a European car was a real brand, a symbol of class and quality. My holy uncle, who lived in France, drove only French cars, one by one a peugeot, a renault, a citroen, because it was pride, tradition and style. We Poles brought millions of German great cars, because the Germans made solid and durable machines. Even in the US, European cars were appreciated because they were the best cars, the best design. Even James Bond didn't want anything else. And then, unfortunately, came the madmen who invented the electric charge. It's a disaster. Unfortunately, today we see the consequences. This is not a crisis, it is the result of this crazy policy. Recently, even under your nose in Brussels, the Audi factory has closed. Interestingly, it was the first factory to achieve energy neutrality, emitting a zero carbon footprint. And what? Now there is also a zero carbon footprint, but there are no more jobs and no cars.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Ladies and Gentlemen, Changing the name from green to clean industrial order does not change anything, because it is still the same harmful project based on the regulations of bureaucracy and ideology. Unfortunately, the European Commission has learned nothing. Acknowledges that energy prices in Europe are high and that regulations are stifling entrepreneurs, but instead of eliminating this problem at source, i.e. eliminating the ETS system and giving up the Green Deal, we receive further proposals for quota subsidies made in EU and regulation. That's not how it's going to work, because it's not going to work and it's not going to work. We hear that energy prices will be lowered, but we hear nothing about the suspension of the ETS, which artificially raises these prices. How can we promise cheaper energy if we maintain a system through which it is expensive? At the same time, the US and China have cheap energy from fossil fuels. We create new institutions and we have old problems and we are really experimenting on a living organism. It is time for a real change and a move away from this harmful policy.