Speeches

Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear Minister, yesterday marked the 100th day since the second von der Leyen Commission took office. As the President of the Commission said herself last Sunday, the 1 December 2024 now feels like a lifetime ago. Of course, we knew that the world was not going to remain the same, that change was coming, but the scope, the speed and intensity of global developments have really been unprecedented. In unprecedented times, Europe needs leadership and strong leadership – I can say after these first 100 days – is what we get from this Commission, leadership on making Europe competitive again. With the Draghi report as the foundation, this Commission has put competitiveness at the heart of its mission, not by making incremental changes here and there, but by presenting real game changers like the Competitiveness Compass and the Clean Industrial Deal. We are looking forward to working on these concrete proposals, because it's clear that we can no longer afford business as usual. That was the message of the voters in the election, and it's the message that has been clearly heard by the Commission. For the first time since I can remember, we don't only have beautiful words about the need to reduce bureaucracy and red tape, we actually have the first concrete proposals on the table to slash the disproportional bureaucratic burden for our SMEs and industries. It's a promising start to what President von der Leyen has called the unprecedented simplification to unleash opportunities, innovation and growth, and you can count on our support. We have also seen this leadership on keeping Europe secure and taking responsibility for our neighbourhood. The unwavering support for Ukraine has rightfully intensified in these past months, and ReArm Europe is a historic step on the way to a Europe that will finally be able to defend itself, allowing us to take our future into our own hands again. After years of beautiful words on European defence investment and cooperation, we now have concrete actions and concrete, ambitious proposals on the table. We disagree on the procedure used, but on the substance, you have our full support and we welcome the ambition shown. This ambition now needs to be translated into concrete, immediate and tangible European action and European projects. Leadership, ambition and concrete action are perhaps the best words to characterise these first 100 days. We saw it this morning, on the 101st day, with a strong but proportional response to the unjustified US tariffs. We saw it yesterday when the Commission presented the new Return Regulation, a missing piece in the puzzle to really manage migration in the EU. After this Parliament had been discussing the previous proposal for over six years, the Commission shows that it can deliver in 100 days. This brings me to my final point. The European Commission, or its President, does not have the same executive powers as, for instance, a US President. So next we are discussing the first 100 days of the European Commission, and we should ask ourselves the same question. I am also specifically asking this to our Platform colleagues from S&D and Renew. Have we truly understood the monumental global changes, and are we ready to deliver with the same speed and ambition? What can this Parliament achieve in the next 100 days? Can we swiftly conclude the Omnibus package? Can we agree on the Return Regulation? Can we finalise the work on the European Defence Industrial Strategy. The European Commission has delivered in these first 100 days. She has heard the message that voters delivered in the polling station and has understood that we live in unprecedented times that need unprecedented measures. This Parliament now needs to mirror that ambition and determination and get to work as well. There are roughly 18 100‑day periods in a five‑year mandate. The first is gone now, so we still have 17 to work. Let's get to work. The bar is set high and you can count on our support.

Mr President, Europe is a safe haven for people fleeing war and persecution. And it has to stay that way. But that is only possible if we are also clear to the people who are not allowed to stay, people who are safe in their own country. At present, only 20% of asylum seekers who have been expelled return to their country of origin. Hundreds of thousands of people a year ignore our laws and regulations and remain ordinary. That gnaws at our sense of justice and it comes at the expense of support in society to help the people who really need our help. Without effective returns, no European asylum policy will be sustainable and it is therefore crucial that the Commission now comes forward with this ambitious proposal. I am pleased that Commissioner Brunner has listened to our call and is already presenting this new Return Regulation in the first 100 days of this Commission. In doing so, we are today clearly demonstrating that it is one of the most important priorities of this mandate and that we have heard the message from the electorate. This message is also reflected in the content of this proposal: a single European system to avoid endless accumulation of procedures; stricter rules to enforce cooperation with procedures; clear rules on forced return and a no-nonsense policy against those posing a security risk; more tools to prevent people from disappearing into illegality. And yes, also innovative solutions such as return. Fortunately, all of this is now on the table and this Parliament now has an important responsibility to deliver. We can't argue endlessly for another six years. We need to get to work.

Madam President, when your neighbour's house is on fire, you don't haggle over the price of the garden hose. With those words, the US under President Roosevelt came to our aid during the Second World War. 80 years later, war is raging again on the European continent, but this time, the US does not only want to negotiate the price of the garden hose, they bully the neighbour into giving up his house altogether before considering any help. This is the situation we are in today and it's a wake up call like never before for Europe, a wake up call that should not have been necessary. For years and years, we have been discussing the need for Europe to get serious about its own defence. Many European leaders have stood here in this room, passionately arguing the necessity of this. So it's fair to ask exactly what we have achieved in all these years, and the clear answer is not enough. So in that sense, I really welcome the determination and the ambition shown by President von der Leyen and the European leaders last week. This ambition needs now to be translated into immediate and tangible European action. Extraordinary circumstances ask for extraordinary measures, and we must be brave and bold not only to be able to help Ukraine, which is, of course, of crucial importance, but ultimately to help ourselves, because Ukraine's interests are Europe's interests, we are defending common European values. We are defending international law and the rules-based order. We are defending the very basic principle that the aggressor should not be rewarded at the expense of the victim. Today, we must defend a future for our children in freedom and safety on our European continent.

Madam President, many colleagues were indeed critical of the level of representation of the Commission. Indeed, as the Commissioner has said, it is standard practice that the Commissioner responsible for the relationship with Parliament comes here to present the work programme. But, more importantly, of all the Members who complained, with the notable exception of Mr Gerbrandy and Ms Neumann, all of them have left without waiting on the answers of the Commission. So I would also say to those colleagues that respect goes both ways!

Madam President, Commissioner Šefčovič, today is an important moment because with the presentation of this Work Programme, we see the first confirmation of what this Commission will deliver on. And I have to think briefly about last year's elections – the highest turnout in over 30 years. Europeans went to vote because it mattered, and they voted to make sure their concerns were heard on the economy and cost of living, on security, on migration. And we must now deliver, as you already said, Commissioner, we cannot afford five more years of business as usual. People must be able to recognise that their vote matters and that change is possible. Now, five years ago in this room, the Commission presented the Green Deal as Europe's 'man on the moon' moment. And there's an implicit promise of reciprocity in there; we need to reduce our emissions and grow our businesses. We need to protect our planet and our economies. Frank Sinatra sang it once about love and marriage: you can't have one without the other. And this also follows from the Draghi report. We talk about innovation, but we continue to add regulatory burden that is costly and self-defeating. We have – and I quote – 'reached the point where, without action, we will have to either compromise our welfare, our environment or our freedom'. The EPP is not willing to compromise on any of these, so we call for action. Stick to our goals, but be pragmatic on the how. And that includes critically reviewing, and possibly changing, what we've done in the past. I do not understand this obsession where the European Parliament is the only parliament in the world that can only ever work on new proposals and never on changing, pausing or repealing existing legislation. There's nothing bad about doing that. Legislators in all democracies do it. What would be bad is to stand on the sideline doing nothing while family businesses go bankrupt, suffocated by bureaucracy, to see factory doors close under the pressure of high energy prices, to see complete industries leave European territory, helping neither the planet nor our economies. We need to reduce red tape and help SMEs, businesses and industries grow in Europe. We now need a 'man on the moon' moment for European competitiveness and, in this sense, we welcome this Work Programme. It presents a clear choice to tackle Europe's challenges head on. The Clean Industrial Deal, the omnibuses, the affordable energy plan, the vision for agriculture, the return regulation, the white paper on defence and so many other initiatives. All the ingredients to succeed are there and it shows the much-needed decisiveness that so many key initiatives are to be presented in the first 100 days of this Commission. Much will depend on the substance of these proposals, and we call on the Commission to show ambition. Now is not the time for incremental changes, for amending a few dots and commas, here and there. We need a real game changer. The world is not waiting for Europe. We need to send a signal to our voters, to our businesses, to investors, to our partners, that we are ready to do the necessary – that we can and will succeed. That is our message to the world, and we must send it with strength and vigour.

Madam President, more than 90 % of irregular migrants who reached the EU use the services of smugglers, the services of criminals for whom a human life is merely a business opportunity. They built a 6‑billion annual industry on the backs of the most vulnerable people, putting their lives in danger on perilous journeys, often subjecting them to violence and abuse. And investigations revealed, obviously, that migrant smugglers often use existing infrastructures of parallel criminal activities, such as drugs, firearms or human trafficking, in combination with abuse of legal instruments and business structures. And those networks adapt quickly to external developments by flexibly allocating resources and using new routes, technologies and modus operandi. Migrant smuggling has by default a cross-border dimension, and therefore dismantling smuggling networks requires more efficient and effective data sharing and cross-border cooperation at the European level and with third countries. It should be a top priority for all of us to break the smugglers' business models, and I'm happy that the Commission indeed acknowledges with its proposed update of the Facilitators Package, including the Anti-smuggling Regulation, which also enhances the role of Europol because Europol plays an essential role in coordinating these efforts. And, Commissioner Brunner, my group will support the Commission and push for enhanced operational actions of Europol and, in particular, its European Migrant Smuggling Centre. We must give law enforcement, whether at national or European level, the right instruments and sufficient flexibility to fight these criminal gangs. At the same time, I would like to use this opportunity to call on the Member States to please show some ambition. You cannot be serious about fighting smuggling gangs and at the same time refuse to share data. You cannot be serious about dismantling smuggling operations while refusing to properly strengthen Europol. We need ambition in this legislation to match at least the scale of the challenges we face. It is time to take our European efforts to the next level to tackle these criminals. There must be no impunity for smugglers and it should be the European Member States, not smugglers, to decide who enters Europe.

Madam President, President von der Leyen, President Costa – welcome, President Costa, for your first appearance here as President of the European Council and congratulations on your first EU summit and on the 50th anniversary of the first meeting of the European Council. There is an impressive history there, but now, more than ever, we need to focus on the future. Thank you for being with us today. It's unfortunately not what we were used to in the last months of your predecessor, and we count on you to continue coming here regularly for exchanges with the elected representatives of Europe as this is an important part of our democracy. Looking back at the European Council summit in December, I must admit it already feels like a lifetime ago. The world looks different. The EPP welcomes the ceasefire in Gaza and the progress it represents for the release of the hostages, and for addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. It is a significant step to end the immense suffering on both sides, and we call on all parties to fully commit to their obligations. On Ukraine, there is less reason for optimism. President Trump, unfortunately, has not kept his campaign promise to end the war within 24 hours. The fighting, dying and destruction continues also today. The European Council confirmed its unwavering commitment to support Ukraine, and of course we welcome and support that. But I also listened very carefully to President Zelenskyy yesterday asking Europe to step up and learn how to take care of itself so the world cannot ignore it. He even posed the question openly as to whether Europe will even have a seat at the table when the war against Ukraine ends. Now, I don't have to explain here how crucial it is that Europe is sitting at that table when it's about the future of our own continent. We must be there. I'm looking to the European Council to indeed step up and provide an answer to these strategic questions with more ambition. With the inauguration of President Trump, we have also entered a new phase of geopolitics. Yes, the US remains an important partner and an ally, but it is clear that under the new administration, Europe is also a target. Another wake‑up call that now more than ever, we need to ensure our own strategic independence. We need to bring back competitiveness to Europe and reduce red tape and unnecessary regulatory burden, to make sure our SMEs and industries can flourish regardless of what happens at the world stage. We cannot simply continue business as usual. We need to step up our efforts in the fight against illegal migration, and protect ourselves against the weaponisation of migrants by dictators at our external borders. And we need to make sure that Europe can defend itself. We need a proper and ambitious European security and defence policy that really prepares Europe for any future challenges. Those future challenges are manifold, and we count on the leaders of Europe to step up their ambition.

Madam President, before going on to the vote of the new European Commission, let me also thank the outgoing Commissioners for their dedication and their work in the past years. Regardless of nationality or political colour, you have put yourself at the service of the European citizens and we thank you for that. As for the new Commission, almost 200 million voters went to the ballot box and they put their trust in us to deliver on their priorities and to address their concerns. They gave us the responsibility for making sure that Europe is heading in the right direction. We take an important step today in that responsibility, by making sure Europe is governed and by making sure the new European Commission can take office without delay. I would like to say to President von der Leyen and the new team – and this might not be a shock – but you can rely on the support of the EPP Group. At the same time, I will say though, our support will come with expectations. Expectations that you will deliver on that message from the voters. Like Robert Schuman said, Europe will not be built at once, but through concrete achievements, and this European Commission must be the Commission of concrete achievements on European competitiveness and reducing red tape, on migration, on strategic autonomy, on agriculture, on security and defence. On all these issues Europe must deliver. We have no time to lose. War still rages on the European continent. Dictators at our eastern borders continue to try and destabilise our Union and the world is in turmoil. We need European leadership. You were right in July when you said that we cannot control demagogues and dictators in the world, but we can choose to protect our own democracy and we can choose to build our own European future. The big decisions of the next five years will define for a long time the future and our place in the world. So, we must get these decisions right and we must get them right together. With a strong European Commission and with a strong pro-European, democratic, pro‑rule of law majority in this House, we can build a future European Union that prospers, that protects us and that prepares us for whatever the future will bring. So let's get to work.

Madam President, thank you very much, and thank you very much for the request to have common sense. You know, it was the EPP who requested this postponement in the first place so, first of all, you're welcome. Secondly, we have tabled amendments to further improve this legislation, and it's fully in line with the rules of procedure and I would say: if you don't like them, you can vote against them, but don't be so afraid of democracy. We are committed to the one-year postponement, but we can at the same time improve this legislation.

Madam President, I am confused. I listened to the Commissioner from our socialist colleagues having a very constructive and balanced approach to migration, doing more to counter illegal migration, working harder to improve returns – an agenda that was embraced also by the European Council last week, including all the socialist leaders there. And then I listened to the leader of the socialists in this House, and I only hear, 'No, no, no. It's all extreme right.' Is Ms Dalli extreme right all of a sudden? Is Prime Minister Sánchez extreme right? Let's embrace the fact that leaders actually from left‑wing to right‑wing governments, from east to west and north to south, came together on an idea that more commitments are necessary. Indeed, returns are down. Arrivals have been down in recent years because of the very agreements with third countries that you so fiercely opposed in this House. So yes, this is not about burying the pact. It is about implementing the pact, but also realising that more is necessary. As President von der Leyen wrote, we cannot be complacent. The pact is a huge achievement, but we need to do more, especially on returns. One in five people who were told to return actually go back to their country of origin. In 2023, this was 350 000 people. Also, for the colleagues on the left, if we want to keep public support, if we want to keep resources to take care of real refugees, we need to improve this and we need to do it together in a spirit of compromise. So let's put new ideas on the table. Like the Council said, let's dare to think outside the box and let's do it quickly.

Madam President, just to underline that we fully agree with the substance of this amendment, but due to the fact that our colleague stood up, it is now actually factually incorrect because it mentions the wrong university. So in this case, even though we fully support the issue that is raised, we cannot vote in favour because it's simply factually incorrect. And it's disappointing that colleagues will not allow us to vote on a factually correct text.

Madam President, dear Mr Orbán, I actually read the programme of your presidency, but, given this debate, I wonder if you actually read it yourself? Your first priority is strengthening European competitiveness, but at home you give the keys to your economy to China. You plead for stemming immigration, but you open the back door to Russians and you release people traffickers early from jail. You talk about protecting democracy and rule of law in Europe, but you abolish them both at home. You want to combat child sexual abuse, but your government protects the child abusers from prosecution. You talk about cybercrime as a major threat, but you spy on your own citizens with Pegasus. You call for sincere cooperation, but in Europe only resort to blackmail and obstruction, and abuse of vetoes. You mentioned the sovereignty of Ukraine in your programme, while travelling to Moscow to embrace the aggressor. Many Dutch citizens ask me, why does the EU keep funding such a Member State? Why do we keep funding someone who criticises and obstructs the EU six days a week to, only on the seventh day, hold out his hand for some more cash? The answer is that Hungary is so much more than this government: the Hungarian people already suffer from frozen funds due to the actions of Mr Orbán and they deserve better and they demand better. We will stand shoulder‑to‑shoulder with the Hungarian people on their way to a sovereign, modern, democratic and European Hungary, free from the propaganda factories of Mr Orbán and free from the control of his gang of oligarchs. Change is coming to Hungary and even Mr Orbán will not be able to stop it.

Mr President, I have a very simple message. If you want to protect Schengen, you need to control migration. Because it's quite ironic that this German Government introduces checks at our internal borders against illegal migration, when it was the same German Government that a year ago was harshly criticising the EU's agreement with Tunisia, which is actually bringing arrivals down; the same government that significantly increased funding to NGOs operating in the Mediterranean; and the same government that, until the very end in our negotiations, tried to weaken the EU's migration pact. Those actions a year ago lead to closed borders today, and I don't want closed borders in Europe. They have a huge negative impact on people's lives, particularly in border regions like my own. And there's a reason citizens regard freedom of movement as the most positive result of the EU. But if we want open internal borders, we must protect our external borders. We must reinforce Frontex as a true border and coast guard. We must make sure that less people arrive in Europe illegally, and when they do, they do not get to travel freely on our continent. We need a new return directive, and we need to intensify our cooperation with third countries, and to do all that, the cynical politics of certain governments must end because they show one thing very clearly: closing your eyes for migration ultimately leads to closing your borders for all citizens.

Madam President, now let's recap. Prime Minister Orbán visits Putin on 5 July, which was in itself already a blatant violation of the EU's Treaties and our common foreign policy. In more or less the same week, all of a sudden, Orbán makes it a lot easier for Russian citizens to come to Hungary and, by extension, the EU and our Schengen zone. Less stringent security checks, more favourable conditions. What a coincidence. And at a time when, as the Commission rightly said, we see more and more reports of Russian sabotage and espionage coming from our Member States when we have a collective effort to reduce the number of Russian visas by 90 %, we have one Member State that opens the back door. What a coincidence. And of course, the Hungarian Government claims that these decisions were made on the basis of labour market and competitiveness considerations, but they fail to give any kind of justification for this. Even in the answers of the Minister they now claim that it's not such an attractive scheme, not many applicants will actually be there. So which one is it? It is a good attempt to defend the indefensible, because when you look through the Hungarian fog, you can see it very clearly. This is a gift from Orbán to Putin and a middle finger to the rest of the EU. And it's putting the EU's policy against Russia since the start of Putin's war of aggression at risk, and it is a direct sabotage to all the work we do, while putting the security and the integrity of the whole Schengen area at risk. We cannot accept this. The Commission cannot accept this. We must act and we must act now.

Mr President, we are expected to get a grip on migration. Major steps have already been taken in this area: The New Pact on Migration is a historic step and will bring about change. The Pact should be implemented by the Member States as soon as possible, as the consequences of the lack of effective European policies can be seen: Countries are retreating behind their own borders to make themselves feel in control. However, the EU as a whole is not making much progress on this. The swift implementation of the Pact is only a first step. If it had been up to the left, we would not have made any agreements with Tunisia. However, the results of these agreements speak for themselves: The number of illegal arrivals has decreased significantly this year. More agreements of this kind need to be made. In addition, as early as 2018, European leaders called for plans to accommodate people rescued at sea in other countries. Since then, however, it has been quiet due to political unwillingness. This is no longer tenable. The issue needs to be put back on the agenda soon. Finally, no asylum system is sustainable without effective return arrangements. This is a big challenge. A proposal for a new Return Directive was prepared in 2018. Negotiations on this, however, remain stalled, because the left-wing groups, led by the Greens, are constantly trying to strip this law as much as possible. We need to withdraw this proposal and come up with a new, ambitious proposal and an effective return law.

Madam President, let’s not misuse the court for political purposes. There was a court ruling yesterday in a case that was brought against the Commission as an institution, not against any individual, and the court ruling actually followed the logic of the Commission in many of the claims. So, do not pretend this is a legal issue. This is purely a political motion, and it makes sense because we have a political decision to make today and it is our right to vote today. It is even our responsibility to vote today and I am convinced that the majority of this House would like to take that responsibility right now. So let’s get to it.

Madam President, Madam von der Leyen, my message here today is fairly simple: in a world in turmoil, Europe needs to be strong, united and independent. We need to wake up and we need to grow up urgently. Strategic autonomy is not a theoretical exercise. It is a precondition for delivering on our citizens’ expectations, because they have sent us a clear message at these elections and we must answer. That means, first and foremost, investing in our security, keeping all of us safe, but also keeping life for Europeans affordable, when it comes to issues like housing, food and energy, without depending on dictators abroad. Strengthening Europe’s competitiveness, protecting our values and fighting for democracy and rule of law. Managed migration and protecting our borders. Continuing our work towards climate neutrality in a smart and inclusive way. But also, very importantly, in a specific area like medicine. Millions of Europeans depend on important medications and this dependence is simply unsustainable. We must be able to produce the medicines we need within our own borders. We can no longer afford to be dependent on other powers in any strategic sector. Dependency only brings vulnerability. So the task ahead is clear. It’s not an easy task, but at least it’s clear. The strategy is there. What we now need is stability and strong leadership. And leadership and stability that you, President von der Leyen, have shown over the past five years. So we put our trust today in you to lead Europe on this path to maturity. And you can count on our support along the way.

Mr President, this is the last late night debate of this mandate of the European Parliament. So it’s rather fitting that it is dedicated to such an important topic. And I would like to congratulate the co-rapporteurs Assita Kanko and Jan-Christoph Oetjen, for really bringing this important file to a very good and satisfying conclusion. Now, every year, over a billion passengers travel to, from or within the EU. And of course, this is good news because it means that Europe is and remains a very attractive place to be. But it obviously also comes with certain security implications. And we have a duty, all of us together, to make sure that Europe is as safe and secure as possible. We owe this to our citizens. And passenger information, especially when it’s combined with passenger name records, can really be useful to improve border controls, to reduce irregular migration, and to enhance our fight against serious crime and terrorism. And the existing API Directive has already really proven its value in this regard. But there were some elements that needed fixing. The uneven implementation in the Member States, and the fact that there was no mandatory collection of such data, meant that only 65% of incoming flights were actually checked in this way, making it fairly easy for those who wanted to avoid these checks to actually do so. This will no longer be possible. Everybody travelling to the EU will be subject to the same checks, and this is very important, just as it is important that we now can also use API data on intra-EU flights where this is relevant, in order to help our law enforcement authorities to do their job and keep us safe, and fully in line with the way we use PNR for the same data and in line with the Court of Justice ruling. Now, this is really an important element of the EU’s security strategy. It will close the loopholes that we see today and it will have a direct impact on the safety of us all. So I really look forward to its rapid implementation. And once again, thanks to the co-rapporteurs, to the Commission for the excellent proposal, which I agree, we actually managed to strengthen and improve in our negotiations and to all those involved, thank you very much.

Mr President, today we are voting on a fundamental review of European asylum policy. Nine years after the crisis in 2015, there is finally a plan on the table that will put an end to the chaos and suffering at our external borders. That plan includes strict screening and reception at those external borders, distinguishing between genuine refugees and migrants from safe countries, with mandatory border procedures and return for the latter group and increased solidarity within Europe. In other words: With this migration pact, we finally get a grip on migration. At last, it is no longer the smugglers who decide who gets access to the EU, but the Member States. Of course, a compromise like this is rarely perfect. Not all challenges will be solved like magic. But it's a very important first step that we need to build on. Let's not fool each other. A vote against this pact is not a vote for a better policy. No, a vote against is a vote in favour of maintaining the current situation, for years to come a high influx of illegal migration, for overcrowded reception centres and a lack of control at the external borders, for the business model of smugglers and their life-threatening routes. A vote against today is a vote against the status quo. That is what the extreme left – and I count the Greens – and the extreme right are trying to find each other in today. Horseshoe politics in optima forma. A dark coalition between Frans Timmermans and Geert Wilders, while people across Europe have been worried about migration for years and rightly expect the European Union to act. That is a huge responsibility for all of us here in this room today. Let us not shy away from this responsibility.

Madam President, true democracy cannot exist without strong, diverse and, above all, free media. It requires scrutiny, and media play a key role in those checks and balances. We must always stand side by side with those performing that essential function. And we must do this in a fact-based way. It’s far too important to be politicised. Also, in this House, we must have the courage to be critical towards our friends, but also treat our political opponents in a fair way. And I hope we can do this in this debate today as well. Not everything can always be portrayed as either black or white. I speak here on behalf of the EPP Group, and it’s no secret that the government of Greece belongs to my political family. Yet you won’t hear me say today that everything in Greece is perfect. Like in many Member States, there is always room for improvement. Like everyone here and in Greece, I was shocked about the 2021 murder of journalist Giorgos Karaivaz. We welcome the two arrests in April last year, and I hope that we can soon see justice truly and fully done. More is also needed to guarantee the working conditions and physical safety of journalists. The Commission recognises the progress made and the taskforce is welcomed as an essential step by all stakeholders. So now is also the time to further build on these initiatives and equip this taskforce with the necessary means and make sure it works, as the Commissioner said, with concrete and targeted plans, in particular with regards to SLAPPS and the safety of journalists. On spyware, tomorrow we will vote on the Fundamental Rights Report, where we call again on Greece, Spain, Poland, Hungary and Cyprus to follow up on the recommendations of the PEGA Committee. And I think it’s important to also reiterate that call here today. Concluding, we see work ahead, but we also recognise the steps taken by the Greek Government. The Rule of Law Report highlights a number of key positive points, such as the new law on transparency of media ownership, the new Ethics Committee and the fact that a controversial provision of the Criminal Code was amended. Progress is being made and we are confident that Greece will continue its work to further improve upon the implementation of these important recommendations.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, about five years ago I stood here as a proud rapporteur for the creation of the European Labour Authority (ELA). A historic step for the European Union to ensure that our common, single market is not only free, but also fair. To ensure that free movement of persons is not only free, but also fair. In the European Union, there should be no room for bogus self-employment, social dumping or unfair competition on the labour market. There should be no room for exploitation of people through outrageous working or living conditions, no Race to the Bottom when it comes to working conditions. No room, in short, for inhuman situations. Unfortunately, we still see too much of that. Five years ago, we in the European Parliament joined forces from left to right to try to make the powers of the European Labour Authority as strong as possible, against the protests of some Member States. Now that ELA has developed so well in recent years and also shows in practice the potential of this, it is absolutely time to look to the future and expand the powers of ELA as quickly as possible. The most important thing, and I would like to stress this very much here, is that ELA is given more powers to carry out its tasks, including with regard to workers from outside Europe. We are seeing more and more false self-employed people from third countries who are active in the European labour market and this is leading to major problems. It is a cross-border challenge that should also be tackled cross-border via ELA. A stronger authority is absolutely necessary to really tackle these and other abuses in the European labour market. Anyone who believes in the importance of a genuinely fair European labour market must make a firm commitment to this in this Parliament's new mandate.

Mr President, I have to say it’s genuinely sad that it has to come to this – the point where we once again need a plenary debate and even a plenary resolution in order to try and get a sign of life from this Commission, because this Parliament, with a great majority, adopted an important set of recommendations to prevent abuse of spyware and to protect our citizens’ fundamental rights. And we did so more than five months ago, and the Commission had three months to answer. In the meantime, the LIBE Committee sent a letter, but no action was taken. We had a plenary debate in October where also Commissioner Jourová said that it would soon be formally transmitted, and up to today I have not seen anything yet. I trust the words of the Commissioner that it has now finally been sent. We organised an exchange of views in LIBE last month, where again, the European Commission was conspicuous by its absence. Until today, as I said, we haven’t seen any official reply, but we are told, and this is surely in reply as well, that the Commission is – wait for it – ‘exploring the possibility of a non-legislative initiative’. I mean, that’s brilliant! The Parliament has investigated spyware for a year. We spoke to well over 200 people, organised fact-finding missions, requested meaningful studies, research, a very thorough exercise in order to come up with a comprehensive report with those concrete recommendations. What on earth has the Commission been doing in the past year and a half? It is disrespectful to the principle of loyal cooperation with Parliament, and it’s a slap in the face of the victims of spyware. The only people that I have seen who are happy with the approach of the Commission are the ones that are normally sitting right there, colleagues of the Polish Law and Justice Party who ironically find a great partner in the Commission in their attempts to sabotage our recommendations. For obvious reasons they tabled a resolution to ask you to be cautious with our recommendations. And they’re so comfortable that they don’t even bother to show up today because they’re confident that you are dancing to their tune. So it’s time to change the music. We are urging you to show respect and ambition, and you have to ask yourself which side you want to be on: the side of the rule of law destroyers, or the rule of law defenders.

Mr President, separation of powers is an essential pillar of the rule of law. Judges should not make policy and politicians should not take the seat of judges. And it is extremely concerning to see that, in Spain, this concept is completely turned around. Prime Minister Sánchez no longer protects the separation of powers. Instead, he embraces the power of separation. A slippery politician who will do anything to cling on to power, and who cares more about his own position than about the unity of his country or the opinion of his citizens. Exactly the type of behaviour that has no place in a democratic system, that has no place in Europe, and it only serves the interests of those opposing democracy in the first place. Let us not forget Putin was willing to spend billions in support of the Catalan independence movement in order to undermine the stability of Spain and, through Spain, the stability of Europe. He can now sit back and relax because the Spanish Socialists are doing his job for him and free of charge. Not so long ago, Prime Minister Sánchez vowed he would never support amnesty. He justified spying on Catalans because of the graveness of their crimes. Here in this House, not so long ago, with the full support of the S&D Group, we criticised Russia’s deep interference with the Catalan movement and demanded a real investigation. Today you defend an amnesty for all those involved. If this was about any other European country, you would have been screaming for the European Commission to intervene, and rightfully so. Today you are telling Commissioner Reynders to mind his own business. It is pure hypocrisy. Spain deserves better. Europe deserves better.

Madam President, I was very concerned after reading reports last month about how the Commission was preparing to release funding to Hungary in exchange for Orbán’s support for assistance to Ukraine. I was shocked, frankly, because the rule of law principles are not for sale. They are non-negotiable and they cannot serve as a bargaining chip. Everyone here should be crystal clear about that. Abusing a veto for blackmail is a cynical and a shameful practice that should be abolished, not rewarded. Ukraine needs our help and Ukraine must get our help, and the EU must find ways to get that aid to Ukraine without rewarding the dismantling of the rule of law, and Hungary. Because it would be cynical if, in trying to help Ukrainians fighting for freedom and democracy and the rule of law, the European Union would actually turn a blind eye to the attack on those very same values at home. It’s clear that Hungary has not made effective or sufficient progress towards fulfilling the conditions on judicial independence. In fact, the Hungarian Government seems to be putting more efforts into sabotaging and derailing the reforms than into implementing them. This is pretty much true for all announced reforms and milestones. It’s a very sad situation, because we want this money to reach the Hungarian people – the sooner, the better. I also want to make it very clear to the Hungarian citizens that there’s only one person responsible for these funds being blocked, and that is Viktor Orbán himself. So, we welcome the commitment of Commissioner Hahn, in his letter, and confirmed by both Commissioners today, that the European Commission cannot reimburse expenditure as long as the horizontal enabling conditions are not fulfilled; that further action is needed before measures under the rule of law conditionality regulation can be lifted; and that no payment under the RRF is possible until Hungary has implemented all milestones. For the EPP, and this is our key message to both the Commission and to Viktor Orbán today, only significant, tangible and lasting reform can enable the release of taxpayers’ money. Nothing less will do.

Madam President, Madam Vice-President, last weekend I read the very moving story of Daphne Caruana Galizia’s son Paul in The Guardian. It was an extract of his book about his mother’s life and legacy, and he writes how, as young children, they had grown used to politicians suing and slandering her, having their house set on fire, seeing her check her car for bombs before taking the kids to school. All of this in retaliation for her work in exposing corruption at the highest levels of the Maltese Government. It is terrifying that the public inquiry concluded that Daphne’s death was both predictable and preventable, due to the total collapse of the rule of law in Malta. Every October we commemorate her life and work and, in the past six years, frustration has only increased with the continued culture of impunity in Malta because there is still no full justice for her murder, there is still no real progress in implementing the inquiry’s recommendations to protect journalists. There is still a total failure to address the corruption exposed, evidenced also by the most recent vote-buying and driving licence scandals. It just doesn’t stop. Daphne’s husband and sons expressed their anger in a letter received by many of us, rightly asking the EU to take action to restore the rule of law, because the State’s failures that made their wife and mother’s murder possible have not been reversed, exposing others to the very same danger. Daphne’s family was never interested in justice without change. Six years later, they are still sadly waiting for both. It is a disgrace, a disgrace for Malta and a disgrace for the whole European Union.