What Csaba spoke about.

On 15 October, you issued a resolution that organic production should be promoted instead of extensive cereal production. This is exactly the same reasoning as the reduction of area payments. This is the same reasoning as in the document commissioned by the Commission on the future of agricultural policy. Why are you trying to deny your previous words? And while we're here, according to the authorities, you stole a cell phone because they could have recorded your behavior with women in a nightclub. My question is, how long do you want to hide behind your immunity in this house?

I am very pleased, honourable Member, that you are speaking in plenary for the second time, many months after your election. Why energy prices are rising, please discuss this with your new allies who have imposed sanctions that have led to an increase in energy prices across Europe, not just in Hungary. Discuss with them why they let in imports that would otherwise have pushed down prices. As regards area payments, I would like to quote your resolution of 15 October, in which you said that organic production should be promoted instead of extensive cereal production. This is exactly the same reasoning as the reduction of the agri-cost and area payments. So you're in line, and then you deny it. Does it not feel awkward to mislead the Hungarians, and in this case the Hungarian farmers, after the fake news of the Syrian planes. It's a disgrace!

Mr. President, please. Nothing has a greater impact on the situation and well-being of farmers than the direction of the common agricultural policy after 2027. Some would cut EU agricultural subsidies significantly. This would seriously harm the living conditions of European farmers. The common agricultural policy should not be derived from war expenditure or enlargement, but from the interests of European farmers. Again, area payments must be preserved because they provide a strong safety net for hundreds of thousands of farmers. We welcome the fact that the European Commission is looking for ways to support young farmers. Hungary also considers this important, which is why young farmers receive additional area-based support and a higher support rate for their investments. There is a third important aspect here: protect farmers from unfair practices in third countries. Imports must be subject to the same rules as European producers. At the very least, we should agree on these in order to improve the living conditions of farmers.

Dear Mr President, I consider it an important milestone that a frank dialogue has finally begun in Budapest on how to stop a process, the drastic decline of European competitiveness. The reasons for the decline are clear. First and foremost, energy prices. For ideological and warlike reasons, the European Union is gradually cutting itself off from cheaper energy sources, and European companies have to pay for the price difference. According to the Draghi report, European businesses pay three times as much for electricity as they do in the United States. The consequences are dramatic. Long-established car brands are planning to close their plants, steel giants are laying off most of their workers, and high fertiliser prices are causing a crisis in the agricultural sector. I regret that in the Commissioners' hearings, there was no concrete plan for strengthening energy independence and reducing prices, apart from empty rhetoric. After today's vote, the European Commission can now start its work. It is time to look at the interests of European industry, not just the expectations of others. If not, hundreds of thousands of jobs could be at risk.

Mr President, I intended to talk about the Budapest summit, but tonight's events changed my intention. Not too far from here, our group leader, Jordan Bardella, was about to launch his new book. Everybody has the right to express their views, even in a book. The left shares the opposite view. Radical activists tried to block the book launch. They harassed participants, even clashed with the police, so many could not even enter the event. This is how the democracy of the left looks like. They only respect it when they are in power. Otherwise they cross all possible limits. They block a book launch on one day, then a conference on the other, impose a cordon sanitaire on the Patriots for Europe Group here in this House, or even beat passers‑by bloody in the streets of Budapest. All of this happened. We will not step back. We continue to stand for Europe's security, national sovereignty. For sure, we have yet another reason to read Mr Bardella's book. The left cannot silence us. They cannot stop change. They cannot silence the voice of the people.

Dear Mr President, I would like to address the agricultural policy aspects of the Court's report. The report proposes to examine the effectiveness of area payments. They would also limit such payments. The findings of the report are eerily similar to those of the Strategic Dialogue document. This is about the future of the Common Agricultural Policy, commissioned by the President of the European Commission. The authors, among whom farmers are rarely found, stated, even before the Court's possible audit, that area-based aid should be abolished. We only hope that this is not being prepared with the Court's report we are discussing today. If the Court were to review area aid, it would contradict itself. In fact, the Court of Auditors itself states that the lowest payment risk among agricultural subsidies is the area-related one and a half percent, compared to almost three percent of rural development subsidies. So it's not really a problem of efficiency, it's something else. It's about putting the burden of spending money on other people on farmers. European farmers face a wide range of challenges, including massive imports threatening their incomes, drought damage, climate change and epizootic diseases. They need support, even more support, not to take away their existing subsidies.

Dear Madam President, The increasing number of epidemics is putting an increasing burden on European livestock farmers, especially as several epidemics, such as avian influenza, are slowly becoming endemic and therefore have a good chance of continuing to be present. This is exacerbated by the fact that climate change is enabling and accelerating the spread of new diseases. Coercive measures taken as a result of epidemics, such as emergency slaughter, are causing enormous damage to producers. In principle, there is a compensation procedure, but the resources allocated to it are insufficient under the current EU budgetary framework. There is also a general reserve, but this has been used by the European Commission for other purposes, such as supporting Ukraine. Against this background, our question is how can the European Commission specifically ensure that farmers are compensated for implementing the EU’s prescribed disease control measures? Does the European Commission even aim to have additional resources for this?

Dear Mr President, At the last EU summit, the parties agreed on the need to step up efforts to increase EU competitiveness. We agree with this, but we are also sad to note that there is a lack of explicit dialogue on what is causing Europe to fall further behind in the competitiveness race. We can identify many reasons, but the most important is that energy prices have gone up. They flew away because Europe, under pressure from the Brussels institutions, turned its back on pipeline gas for ideological reasons. The liquefied gas purchased in its place is much more expensive. Unfortunately, green energy is also more expensive in most cases, and this puts a drastic burden on European companies, both small and large. It is no coincidence that more and more companies are moving their production elsewhere. According to the Draghi report, electricity prices in Europe today are two to three times higher than in the United States, and gas prices are four to five times higher. If this persists, Europe's remaining competitiveness will be lost. We don't have to accept that this is the case, we need to redesign.

Dear Madam President, I have heard elected representatives here in Hungary speak out against their own country. It's not new, but it doesn't mean we can get used to it, and we won't. If I understand Mr Weber correctly, he recommends Péter Magyar to the attention of the Hungarians. Let's stop here for a moment because there are a few things you should know about him. For example, he tapped into politics by listening in on his wife. Not another man's wife, his own wife. He is also charged with a criminal offence: By stealing a cell phone. Not for livelihood reasons, but because someone recorded how he behaved with women in a nightclub. So I would think twice, Ladies and Gentlemen, whether such a figure is worth basing on in Hungary. Whatever you decide, please take care of your cell phone every minute if Mr. Magyar is here. Especially Mr. Weber, who sits next to him. Dear House, We are living in a time when the European state is crumbling, competitiveness is weakening, and the Schengen system is crumbling. The horror of war is here. What does most of the European Parliament do about this? He continues the witch hunt against Hungary for the twenty-sixth time. Is this really your most important thing right now? I think there's more to be done. It's not for us, it's for Europe.

Dear Mr President, The fundamental condition of the upcoming European Council is that Europe is facing a triple crisis. In addition to the war situation and economic difficulties, migration policy also needs to be rethought. Germany has recently closed its borders and other countries are introducing internal border controls. Currently, there are checks in eight Schengen countries. The Schengen system is collapsing before our eyes. So we have come to the point where Europe is forced to give up another achievement: their free movement. This is where the liberal migration policy led to the summit. Europe's doors were left open, and those who wanted to protect the borders were left alone and even punished. Hungary, for example, did not receive support for the border fence, but will receive a fine of EUR 200 million. We've been saying for nine years: First and foremost, the external borders must be protected. Many of us think, and many of us hope, that it is not too late to change direction. If there is no intention, sooner or later the electorate will enforce it.