What Inese spoke about.

Dear Chair, Dear colleagues, Commissioner Jergensen, Housing is a sense of security, the basis of the family and also an economic issue. The challenges vary greatly from one Member State to another. While short-term rental housing is under pressure in southern Europe, the challenges in the Baltic States are quite different for the five-storey immigrants built during the Soviet occupation. It is difficult for young people to buy their first home because the demands of banks are too high. For seniors and families, heating bills in non-insulated buildings are a heavy burden. Housing is the responsibility of the Member States and a common solution for the whole of Europe will not work – we acknowledge this in our committee's report, but the main lines of action are clear. First, more investment is needed in renovations and energy efficiency by improving state aid rules. This means lower bills and a better quality of life. Second, the supply of affordable housing needs to be increased, both through the construction of new and empty buildings, brownfield sites in line with the principles of sustainability and the New Bauhaus, through the European Investment Platform in cooperation with the European Investment Bank and Member State development banks. Of course, bureaucracy must be reduced. Excessive requirements make projects more expensive and lengthen them. Digitalisation is very important. Finally, investments need to be made in the regions. Especially on Europe's eastern border, as increased depopulation is also a security issue.

Madam President, dear colleagues, thank you very much for this convincing and constructive debate. What we have heard today confirms clearly that the vast majority in this House and in Europe fully supports ending Europe's dependency on Russian gas. Even more, you believe it's necessary, urgent and long overdue. To succeed in doing it, we must adopt this regulation and implement it properly. Member States must act now: invest in interconnections; secure new supply routes; and continue reducing gas consumption; develop renewable energy. Phasing out Russian gas is a good starting point. Europe must go further. After gas, we must end all remaining imports of Russian oil, as Parliament requested. We must also address our remaining dependence on Russian nuclear fuel and services. This is a strategic weakness that Europe can no longer ignore. So, this regulation is the beginning of Europe's full and lasting energy independence. Also, because every euro we stop sending to the Kremlin strengthens our security, at the same time weakening Russia's ability to kill in Ukraine. Sanctions are very effective. They made Russian economy weak. But this law is much more. I have to stress again: this regulation is not a sanction regime. Even with progress towards peace in Ukraine, which I sincerely hope we will come, Europe must stay away from Russian energy. Experience shows too well that dependence on Russia is dangerous. It is not only because of the current regime in Kremlin – it is, unfortunately, about Russia. Europe must never repeat previous mistakes. Let me end by stressing that Europe must choose strength over dependence, security over short-term comfort, a future where our energy decisions no longer put our values at risk. This is how Europe becomes stronger, safer and truly independent.

Madam President, dear colleagues, for the first time in European history, the European Union is going to end imports of Russian energy. It's a real turning point in European energy policy. Phasing out of Russian gas is a great achievement for the European Union, a truly historical step. I would like to sincerely thank Commissioner Jørgensen for his initiative and determination, the Danish Presidency for engagement and, of course, my co-rapporteur, Mr Niinistö, with whom we had an excellent cooperation, for his hard work, and the great team of the shadow rapporteurs, whose constructive support made this result possible. The European Parliament put forward a strong and legally sound position, but not all Member States were ready to move with the same level of ambition. The Parliament insisted, and we succeeded, that Europe must end its dependency on Russian gas as soon as possible. We delivered earlier phase-out deadlines for Russian gas than the Commission originally proposed. The Council resisted, but the Parliament stood firm. We also secured a special provision on harmonised penalties. Without enforceable penalties, no phase out would be credible, and we tightened safeguards to prevent a circumvention. Russian gas must not return to Europe, also through illegal ways. At the same time, we made it simple for trusted partner countries to import gas into the Union. They must not face bureaucratic burdens. It will pave the way for friendly countries to supply Europe with necessary gas. After strong pressure from this House, the Commission has now made a clear political commitment to present a similar legislative proposal on phasing out Russian oil. Oil revenues also fund the Kremlin's war machine, and both oil and gas imports must be stopped. Colleagues, we must speak honestly. Russia has never been a reliable partner. It manipulated gas flows to weaken governments and destabilise markets, most dramatically before invading Ukraine. Energy and aggression in this case are intertwined. No one should claim 'business is business' when energy is used as a weapon. The good news is that Europe has alternatives. Over the past two years, firstly, the EU gas demand has been falling. Secondly, our gas supply has become far more diversified. And thirdly, the LNG supplies are rapidly increasing. The argument that we cannot replace Russian gas is not true. We can, and we already have. Colleagues, this regulation is not just an energy or trade file. It is a political, economic and moral decision. Since the full-scale war began, the EU has paid over EUR 216 billion for Russian fossil energy. We still pay around EUR 40 million every day, and every euro continues to fund the killings in Ukraine. Strikingly, Europe has paid more to Russia than we have collectively given to Ukraine in support. Tomorrow, when we vote, the Parliament has to send a historical message: Russian gas – never again.

Dear Chair, Commissioner, Dear colleagues, Russia has been using natural gas supplies as a weapon of political blackmail for twenty years. Moreover, since 24 February 2022, every euro that Europe pays to Russia has been transformed into a bullet, drone or tank that kills in Ukraine. Since the beginning of the war, European countries have paid Russia over €210 billion in energy bills. As much as the Kremlin spent on killings in Ukraine. The European Union must give up Russian gas, oil and nuclear energy without delay. Russia is not and will not be a reliable partner. It is also a political and moral decision. Thank you to the Commission for the initial draft law, but in the report just adopted the European Parliament's position is much stronger: ban the import of both Russian gas and oil as of 1 January 2027, including through intermediary countries. Moreover, a temporary suspension of that prohibition is not permissible under any circumstances. Unfortunately, the position of the Member States is much weaker: it only provides for a gas ban and only from 2028, with unjustified exceptions for Hungary and Slovakia, which have alternative supply options. I call on the Council to respect the opinion of the European Parliament, which was confirmed by a large consensus. This is a turning point in European energy policy. We will strongly defend Parliament's position. Europe must be bold and decisive.

Madam President, dear colleagues, many agricultural producers have become increasingly dependent on Russian fertiliser imports. The dependency on Russian gas is being replaced with a new dependency on Russian fertiliser. In addition, it has had a negative impact on the European fertiliser industry. Instead of a ban on importing Russian fertilisers as we, the European Parliament already called for in September, the Commission proposed to gradually, over a period of three years, increase import duties for fertilisers and agricultural goods from Russia and Belarus. This will give the farming sector time to adjust and the fertiliser industry time to boost their production. Additionally, European producers will benefit from increased tariffs on other agricultural goods imported from Russia and Belarus. To prevent that these tariff measures have a negative effect on the agricultural sector, we have asked the Commission to provide a statement about their action plan. Dear colleagues, I urge you to adopt this proposal without any amendments. This way, we will be able to ensure that this regulation enters into force, as foreseen, by 1 July this year. Every delayed day will mean lost lives in Ukraine. Of course, this proposal is a compromise and it's never the case that compromises make everyone happy. Can you name a law that everyone is 100 % happy with? The Council has already confirmed their readiness to adopt this regulation without any amendments. I sincerely thank the Members who were able to set aside their particular interests for a while to agree on the overarching goal at the forefront. We need to stop financing Russia's war in Ukraine. War is right next to our external borders. Stopping it is needed for our safety.

Mr President, Dear colleagues, Russia kills women, children and destroys infrastructure in Ukraine every day. Since the beginning of the war, €150 billion worth of infrastructure has been destroyed. This is the right step for the Russians to pay for what they have done. There is no alternative to this. There is no alternative to this either, that we all need to help and that all our countries – the democracies – need to be united. We also need to go further. Russia's frozen assets in Western banks amount to 210 billion. However, the funds frozen by the oligarchs, yachts, real estate and financial assets are also there – they must be immediately confiscated and used to support Ukraine, which needs €400 billion. We must not hesitate. Ukraine must be allowed to attack military facilities on Russian territory. The means must be found to bring this war to an end as soon as possible, so that the war ends with Ukraine's victory.

Dear Chair, Dear colleagues, Hundreds of thousands of people, including ten thousand civilians, have died in Ukraine since the Russian war. Russians bombard schools, hospitals, behave like in the Middle Ages. What else needs to happen in order for Ukrainians to be allowed to attack the objects in Russia from which these missiles fly? Already military drones arrive in the Baltic States and other border countries. What to do? Firstly, Ukraine should be immediately allowed to use long-range weapons when attacking military facilities in Russia. Military deliveries need to be accelerated, as Russia recognises only force. And these will be important steps for Ukraine to win the war. Secondly, the financing of the war must be stopped. Russia must first pay for the devastation of the war. Therefore, not only must the interest on Russian frozen assets be used and Hungary must stop behaving like a supporter of Russia, but the frozen Russian assets themselves must be used for the benefit of Ukraine. We here in the European Parliament called for a full embargo on Russian energy resources from the beginning of the war. It is absurd that several countries of the European Union are still financing this war through the import of energy sources. It is also necessary to ensure that all G7 countries provide serious military support and that every country assists Ukraine, every democratic country. It is necessary to introduce even stricter sanctions against Russia and Belarus, as well as against those countries that help Russia to circumvent the sanctions and help it militaryly and financially.

Dear Chair, Dear colleagues, There can be no doubt that we must support Ukraine before and after victory in order to fully rebuild the Ukrainian state. Ukraine urgently needs assistance, now and immediately, both in the form of arms and in order to develop its military industry. I call on those countries that have not yet provided the kind of assistance that their economic potential could provide, such as France, Spain, to increase it immediately. Delays can be costly for the whole of Europe. However, it is not enough for Ukraine to be helped by the democratic world: the US, the European Union. Russia, the aggressor state, has to pay for the damage it has caused itself, so the profits of frozen Russian assets must be put at the disposal of Ukraine without any doubt. The return on Russian assets alone will not be enough. The frozen assets of Russian oligarchs and the Russian state must be seized, from real estate, yachts to the frozen assets of the Russian central bank. More than a year ago, I developed a pilot project entitled ‘How to confiscate properties of Kremlin workers and oligarchs in support of Ukrainians’. The European Commission is working, but I want to see the results of its work more quickly, without fearing bold solutions and remembering that Russia has violated all international and also human laws in this war.

Dear Chair, Dear colleagues, Last year was a severe year in Europe, with a drop in GDP and high inflation. The future is uncertain due to Russia’s brutal invasion and war in Ukraine. Economic weakness must be overcome by investing in a modern economy that is environmentally friendly, resource-saving, based on modern technologies and the development of artificial intelligence. Major investments are needed in the digital sphere and cybersecurity. Energy innovation must provide cheap and clean energy. Europe must give up Russian energy resources altogether. The economic transition will entail additional costs, which requires financial support for small and medium-sized enterprises, farmers and the poor. Regional and social policy is important here, leaving no one behind in the outermost regions of Europe, including my Latvia. More investment is needed in the military industry, which must be smart and innovative. It will also give a positive boost to the economy and contribute to overall security.

Dear Chair, Dear colleagues, The Kremlin has poisoned Europe with propaganda for years. Therefore, there was no strong European response to the Russian aggression in Georgia and Crimea, which would probably have prevented the war in Ukraine. Putin is unable to improve the standard of living of ordinary Russians. Instead, they cultivate the myth of the good liberators of Europe from fascism. The impunity of the atrocities of these liberators at the time encouraged Russia to complete inhumanity in Ukraine. In fact, it is Russia that is currently under a fascist regime. The European Union budget already includes the pilot project I have developed to fight Russian disinformation, but it needs to go even further. Disinformation has made the Russian nation ill, as evidenced by the widespread support for the terrible war in Ukraine. Access to all Kremlin media must be blocked. There is no question of freedom of expression, because Russia is constantly lying. Discard the Kremlin’s ideology in Europe and increase arms deliveries to Ukraine. In the fight against Russian propaganda, we must be as determined as Ukrainians in the battlefield. Thank you.

Dear Chair, Dear colleagues, Illegal migrants sent by Lukashenko continue to cross the border of Belarus with Latvia, Lithuania and Poland on a daily basis. It is an unprecedented aggression against the European Union when a neighbouring country uses people as a weapon. Let us not be naïve – this is not a refugee crisis, but a hybrid war. We are right not to allow illegal migrants to enter the European Union! It is the duty of every country to protect its borders! It is already easy to criticise border countries for those countries that are in the middle of Europe and do not have to worry about border protection. However, all Member States must actively contribute to strengthening the border with Belarus, which is also the external border of the European Union. European funding should also be used to build a fence, as a physical barrier is the basis of protection. The temporary measures proposed by the European Commission to facilitate the deportation of rejected migrants are a correct but insufficient step. The law should provide much more scope for a firm response to such hybrid attacks, also in the long term. It is also necessary to strongly oppose Russia, which both supports Lukashenka and threatens our ally Ukraine. The Kremlin respects only the strong, so it is positive that Western democracies have consistently warned against very painful economic sanctions in case of further aggression. It must be hoped that this will lead the aggressor to the mind and stop.