Speeches

Freedom of the press is the backbone of a functioning democracy. European Media Freedom Act it is not only a legislative instrument, but a guarantee of pluralism, transparency and the protection of independent journalism from political and economic interference. Unfortunately, the implementation of this act in the Member States is uneven and, in some cases, blocked. We see the persistence of excessive concentration of media ownership, intimidation of journalists, commercial pressures on local newsrooms, but also the lack of transparency of algorithms that decide the visibility of content online. I strongly call on the Commission to: establish a clear, public and regular monitoring mechanism on the application of this act in each Member State, make European funding for digitalisation and communication conditional on genuine respect for press freedom, and intervene where national authorities fail to protect free press. We cannot defend democracy without defending the journalists who support it through daily work, often in hostile conditions.

Commission presented the Digital Package on 19 November 2025. You face pressure from companies that seek simple rules and stable expectations. Today you assess a proposal that tries to merge scattered digital laws into a single structure. This approach lowers compliance costs. It also reduces disputes about overlapping rules. These outcomes support competitiveness inside the Union. You should also examine the risks. A large and unified framework gives clarity, yet it concentrates power in one set of instruments. You need clear safeguards. You need strong oversight. Small firms often struggle with complex procedures. A simplified acquis helps them only if the transition is smooth and the guidance is precise. The package supports innovation. It removes grey zones that slow down product launches. It streamlines data rules across borders. These steps help firms build services that work in each Member State. This matters because global competitors move fast and test markets at scale. You should watch for gaps. Digital markets evolve at speed. A consolidated framework can age quickly. Review clauses need strict deadlines. Monitoring needs stable funding. Enforcement needs trained staff. You have the responsibility to secure a balance. Encourage innovation. Protect citizens. Keep rules lean. Keep the Union competitive.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Mr Mark Rutte - a citizen of Europe - recently mocked the idea of European autonomy in defence in the European Parliament. He presented Europe's ambition as an unrealistic dream. This is a mistake of perspective. To describe today's dependencies and turn them into an argument against change is to confuse the present with the political limit. Europe must not accept this dependence as destiny. European autonomy does not mean leaving NATO. It means exactly what's missing: a European pillar capable of producing, investing together and sustaining security over time. A dependent Europe weakens the Alliance. A Europe with strong military capabilities strengthens the Alliance. When autonomy is ridiculed, it is defended. status quo dependency, which means fragmentation, inefficiency, vulnerability. And this is not prudence, but a lack of responsibility. We have everything we need, we only lack the decision to use industry, resources and political capacity together.

Mr President, Madam Vice-President, ladies and gentlemen, the war has changed. The drone has become a mass weapon, has low cost and great efficiency. Europe, however, is not sufficiently prepared. We have fragmented acquisitions, we have critical dependencies on external suppliers for chips, sensors, batteries. We have rules that go slower than technology. In the European Parliament we have to do three things: a common framework for drones and counter-drones, fast, interoperable joint European procurement, and clear rules for military artificial intelligence. Europe's security no longer depends on size, it depends on speed, it depends on coordination, our ability to act together, because delay costs. We have two concepts born in these years in Europe and even promoted by the European Commission: European Drone Defence Initiative part of Defence Readiness Roadmap 2030 and Eastern Flank Watch, cintegrated anti-drone apacity. These are, unfortunately, under construction. They're under construction, we need to put them in operation.

Mr President, Commissioner, online piracy of sporting events is no longer a marginal problem, it is an illegal, fast and well-organised economy. Data show losses of more than EUR 10 billion annually in the European Union. Last year, a network of 22 million illegal users around the world was dismantled in Spain. This value is very high. If the reaction is delayed, any right, any legislation becomes useless. That is why our response at this time is fragmented. Blocking takes too long, rules differ from country to country, platforms do not react and the message must be very clear to the Commission: we need fast lock-in, clear responsibility for platforms and standardised cross-border cooperation. If dynamic injunctions do not work, perhaps common operational guidelines are needed, and if they do not work either, I think we need a new regulatory framework, much more adapted to this type of illegal manifestation.

Mr President, European Democracy Shield enters the last stage: that of action. I think that for us, especially those who lived during the communist period in the countries of the East, we must mention that this project should keep its transparency and maintain dialogue even with the opponents of democracy. There are a few other important conditions. First, the European Centre for Democratic Resilience: It needs to be set up quickly, to know the structure, the transparency, the people who deal with it. Then there is the transparency of the instruments: I was just saying incident protocol, network of fact-finders. We also need public guidelines and procedures that are publicly recognised. Finally, the third element: I think it is very important how countries apply the obligations. It must be monitored and also subject to transparency. The fourth element is related to independent media. There is no democracy without independent media, and here we have to monitor very precisely what will happen.

Madam President, Commissioner, congratulations! EDIP changes the rules in Europe, puts the defence industry at the centre and transforms procurement from national decisions into joint processes. That is, we are finally giving birth to the common defence ecosystem in Europe. For our countries, the stakes are clear: If you join European networks, you gain access to contracts and technologies, if you stay on the sidelines, you continue to depend on imports. The rules are tough, demanding supply chains, ownership without external influences and real production capacities. This strikes directly at the weaknesses of the local industry. There's one more thing: This program requires speed, and that's a very good thing, because we don't have time. However, we have windows of opportunity and we can build partnerships, modernize factories and reposition our companies in European consortia. True, EDIP does not offer long time, but it provides a very clear framework, and Europe is gaining from this project. Congratulations!

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Mr Sandro Gozi's report is an example of a rational and courageous project at the same time. The European Union is really facing a decisive moment. Enlargement has been seen as a political promise, but it is a test of our institutional capacity. If we want a bigger Union, we need a more efficient Union. Our report makes it clear: without reforms, enlargement risks blocking decision-making mechanisms and weakening citizens’ trust. We need to adjust the vote in the Council, strengthen the role of Parliament and prepare a Commission fit for a Union of more than 30 states. An enlarged Union must remain able to decide quickly, protect democratic values and act united on the global stage. Enlargement and reform must go together. Only then will we have a stronger and more credible Europe.

I don't usually give interviews, I don't remember and I didn't give interviews at Antena 3. Maybe someone else said that. Dear Madam, of course we have some situations in which the institutions may not have communicated exactly as they should have in the case of democracy and this vision of yours is one, certain, ideological and partisan.

Madam President, Commissioner, one European Democracy Shield It is not an institutional luxury, but a strategic necessity. Today, democracies are no longer attacked only with weapons, but by manipulating information, distorting electoral processes and undermining citizens' trust. We need urgent and swift action. I propose three urgent directions. First, I was happy to hear it from the Commissioner, a European centre for democratic resilience, connected to national services, able to monitor and react to real-time hybrid interference and attacks. The second would be a common framework for the protection of electoral processes, minimum standards for the security of databases, transparency in campaign financing and control over microtargeting-the electoral system. Third, an early warning and counter-narrative mechanism for citizens to receive verified information before propaganda fills the entire public space. Dear colleagues, if we do not build these mechanisms, the next elections will become the target for hostile actors and I hope, Commissioner, that ReArm and SAFE, our mechanisms will...

Mr President, Commissioner, the Republic of Moldova is today one of the countries most exposed to Russia's hybrid aggressions: disinformation campaigns, energy pressures, attempts at economic and political destabilisation. In the face of this permanent attack, our gesture of solidarity is very beautiful and this touches us, the Romanians, as well as our Moldovan brothers, but we have to do some concrete things. There were appreciated here, mentioned some concrete things, our aids for Moldova, but I specify a few more things. Firstly, we need to help them strengthen energy security through joint digital defence programmes and by connecting to our rapid response mechanisms. Secondly, energy interconnection must be accelerated so that Chisinau is no longer a prisoner of multiple energy dependencies, even if progress has been made lately. Last but not least, it is about democratic resilience, support for independent media, fighting disinformation and supporting local public administration in particular. By supporting Moldova, we also protect ourselves, strengthen the eastern flank, strengthen citizens' trust in our project and show one thing: Europe does not abandon its neighbours, it supports them in resisting and prospering in the face of this aggression.