Speeches

The first vote is on the deteriorating situation of women in Afghanistan due to the recent adoption of the law on the 'Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice' (See minutes, item 7.1).

The ECR Group has notified the President of a decision relating to changes to appointments within committees. This decision will be set out in the minutes of today's sitting and take effect on the date of this announcement.

The President has received nominations for membership of the interparliamentary delegations from the political groups and the non-attached Members, in accordance with Rule 229. The lists of Members nominated to form the interparliamentary delegations are published on Parliament's website and will be annexed to today's minutes.

(Start of speech with micro switched off) ... and colleagues! As we have now exhausted our debate time, I would like to close the debate with this. The debate is closed.

Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to point out once again that you must respect your speaking time and not exceed it by at least half of the speaking time foreseen. We already have 17 interventions under Catch-the-Eye, and we would also like to give the other colleagues the chance to take the floor here. That's why I'm going to be very restrictive about speaking time now. We now also have to close the list of speakers for catch-the-eye, because otherwise we will not be able to cope with the debate time.

We have to interrupt again very briefly, because it seems that the problem has not yet been finally solved. I ask for the technology so that we can continue here.

Madam President, First of all, I would like to thank the many supporters for this initiative – for example, President Roberta Metsola, who was very positive from the first moment, the two Vice-Presidents Gabriele Bischoff and Ewa Kopacz, who were very supportive of this initiative, as well as the initiators of this initiative. Because I believe that without the initiative of people on the ground, of people at the local level, many actions in this form are not possible. Children as the youngest members of our society are not only our future, but also our present. Your thoughts, ideas and needs are invaluable. Their well-being, education and participation are crucial for the development of a just and sustainable society. Children must not be merely passive recipients of decisions; Rather, it is essential to hear their voice and take their views seriously. As Members of the European Parliament, we have been successful in strengthening the rights of children, be it through legislation, education programmes and safeguards. We now call on the Commission to evaluate ways to establish a European Capital of Children, because it is also important that we make local authorities, municipalities and cities that are particularly committed to children's rights, to the participation of children, visible, best practice models. Such a children's capital would be next to the children's capital. EU Children's Participation Platform Provide a physical platform to voice their concerns and share ideas. In addition, they would have the opportunity to get to know the EU in a playful way and experience democracy up close. This would not only boost their self-confidence, but also promote their understanding of democracy and the EU. The opportunities for children from different countries and backgrounds to meet could promote intercultural understanding at a young age, which is the basis for peaceful and harmonious coexistence in the EU. The European Capital of Children is a logical complement to successful initiatives of the European Youth Capital. Both initiatives could reach their full potential through sufficient European support. Let us take the initiative of the European Children's Capital and thus take a significant step towards strengthening our children, the future of our democracy and international understanding in Europe!

Mr President! I do not want to forget to congratulate you today on your birthday. I think this is a great debate – I say very cheeky on my birthday – because freedom of the media – I think – is something very special, and I hope that tomorrow we will also get a corresponding result in the vote. First of all, I am pleased that so many colleagues have taken part in the debate. However, I would also have liked each of the colleagues who spoke today to have read the text of the law, because some of what has been said here today does not correspond at all to what is really in the text at the end. Yes, the Media Freedom Act is not a censorship law – on the contrary. Independence is the goal of this law, not censorship. And that's why the accusation that this law would serve to better censor and control the media is actually nonsense. It is also not an anti-disinformation law. No, we want to strengthen reasonable, reputable, free media so that disinformation has no place, so that disinformation does not prevail. But it is not a disinformation law. If it is said here that the body does not work independently and not independently: In contrast to ERGA, the body is much more independent than before, because this body can draw up opinions on its own. It is the national media supervisory authorities that form this body. And the secretariat of this body is paid by the Commission, the staff, but the mere supervision of the service, i.e. the supervision of what work the staff do, what tasks they have to perform, is exclusively the responsibility of the body itself. I believe that this must also be clearly emphasised once again. Here independence is guaranteed, and we have revision clauses in the text that if something does not go anywhere, we will certainly be able to turn again on one or the other set screw. We have made huge progress with this law to better secure media freedom in Europe. The protection of journalists is far-reaching. Source protection also plays an important role here. We have taken another big step together with the Anti-SLAPP Directive and we need to look at media legislation together: whether the AVMSD, the Media Freedom Act or the Anti-SLAPP Directive – these are laws that work together, interlock and ensure media freedom and diversity in the long term. The concentration of media – which was also mentioned by a colleague – must also be covered by competition law. We already have working rules that prohibit excessive media concentration. Only, of course, the Member States must also take action and the Commission, which also monitors and controls such steps or even the use of competition law accordingly. That is why my great request to the Commission, when it comes to the implementation, implementation and implementation of the European Media Freedom Act in the Member States, is to really keep an eye on taking the supervisory task seriously and to really help ensure that this law comes to a successful conclusion. For the first time, we are providing the Commission with a secondary legal instrument to act in the interests of media diversity and freedom where Member States do not respect media freedom, fundamental principles of our Treaties; And we have to do that. I believe that this law is a right and important step in the right direction. More and more can be desired, but we also had to find agreement with the Member States in an area that is actually the original competence of the Member States; because media legislation is Member State competence according to the Treaties. And we went as far as we could within our legal powers. And I believe that this law will be a great success if we all work together to ensure that it is also implemented accordingly in the Member States.

Mr President! Dear Commissioner, Vice-President Jourová! Tomorrow we will vote on the European Media Freedom Act. This law is not only a milestone for the diversity and freedom of the media, but also a significant step for democracy in the European Union. The importance of a free and diverse media landscape for a functioning democracy cannot be overemphasized. Free media is the foundation of every democracy. They are the guardians of our freedom and contribute significantly to the enlightenment and exchange of views in our society. But we must not close our eyes to the fact that freedom of the press is under threat worldwide, even here in Europe. The murder of Daphne Galizia in Malta, the impairment of press plurality and freedom in Hungary and many other worrying events make this more than clear. The European Media Freedom Act is our response to this threat. We have developed a balanced text that recognises and protects the dual role of the media as an economic enterprise on the one hand and as a guardian of democracy on the other. With this law, we protect the independence of media supervision, establish transparency about the ownership of media companies and set minimum standards for the independence of the work of journalists and editors as well as for the independence of public broadcasting from the government in editorial and financial terms. Media providers are better protected against interference and spyware, including journalistic sources and confidential communications. The Media Freedom Act will also lead to greater transparency in the use of public funds for state advertising and utility or service contracts. We will thus bring light into non-transparent structures. I am particularly proud that we have also included the major online platforms in this law. The European Media Freedom Act protects access to high-quality journalism. The platforms have immense power over the distribution of information and must not arbitrarily decide which content we get to see and which we don't. That is why we have put in place mechanisms to ensure that legal and reputable content is protected and cannot be blocked without good reason. It was important to us that the Digital Services Act maintains its full application for illegal content. Another important aspect of the European Media Freedom Act is the transformation of the European Regulatory Group on Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA) into the Media Services Board, which will play a crucial role in protecting free media at European level. The Board will have an extended range of tasks beyond the previous functions of ERGA and will be strengthened in its independence. For example, it will be able to determine its own internal structure. Media providers directly affected by national measures may ask the panel for an opinion. This is a crucial step to ensure that the voice of the media is heard and that freedom of the press in Europe is protected. In order to address the specificities of the press sector, the Board will set up an expert group in which the press sector – such as journalists, publishers and self-regulatory institutions – plays an important role. This group must be consulted on matters going beyond the audiovisual sector. The European Media Freedom Act creates an environment where media freedom and democracy can flourish and gives media providers the support they need to fulfil their important task. I would like to thank all those who have been involved in the development and implementation of this law, in particular the shadow rapporteurs, the rapporteurs for the LIBE and IMCO committees and the whole team of the European Parliament. Their hard work and commitment have helped us pass a strong and balanced law despite the enormous time pressure. I call on all Members to support this law, sending a strong signal for media freedom and democracy in Europe. Together, we can ensure that media freedom remains an indispensable part of our society.

Dear Mr President, dear Commissioner! The threat to our democracy from disinformation campaigns and attempts to influence elections has become undeniably real, especially online. That is why it is important that we in Parliament have tackled a difficult but correct project, namely the regulation on the transparency of political advertising. We have found a balanced approach that implements strict measures not only in the offline area, but above all online. Free and critical journalism as well as political reporting are fundamental components of our democracy and are therefore rightly not covered by this regulation. We have taken into account the special conditions under which traditional media operate. They continue to fulfil an important social mission and are a reliable source of information. At a time when it is difficult to distinguish political opinions from political advertising, especially on social media, this regulation gives us a clear legal basis and plays a crucial role in protecting our democracy. We must also strengthen trust in politics and in the media as a source of information. To do this, our voters need transparency about what advertising is and who is behind it.

Mr President, dear Vice-President Šuica, dear colleagues, in the past decade, children have started using technology more intensively and at an ever-younger age. They are real digital natives. Digital tools and devices are everywhere around them. This creates opportunities, but also challenges. Under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, children must be protected in the digital environment. Violence, sexual abuse, cyberbullying, grooming and other forms of abuse against children have increased to a worrying extent recently, and with a major impact on the physical and mental health of the younger generation. At the same time, social services and protective institutions have become more and more inaccessible. On 11 May 2022, the Commission adopted the communication on the European strategy for a better internet for kids (BIK+), which tackles several issues that were missing from the 2012 BIK strategy and aims to address persistent challenges. This strategy has three pillars: first, safe digital experiences for children; second, children’s digital empowerment; and third, active participation of the children. The Commission has invited the European Parliament and the Council to endorse the strategy and work together on this implementation. In this context, I would like to ask the Commission today, on behalf of the Committee on Culture and Education, several questions. First, how does the Commission intend to help the Member States and industry to implement the objectives set out in the BIK+ strategy? How can we ensure that adequate funding is allocated to support hotlines, helplines and safe internet centres, so that they can achieve the objectives set out in the strategy, in particular in relation to prevention, awareness-raising campaigns, and support to victims. Second, how will the strategy foster an inclusive and holistic approach, in order to bridge the digital divide and enhance the digital skills and competencies, including media literacy of children, parents and educators, including people with disabilities and those from vulnerable backgrounds? Third, how is the Commission planning to ensure that pan-European data collection and research will be carried out on prevention and victim-assistance programmes, and on the digital activities of children? How will it guarantee that future digital policies and initiatives take new technological developments into account? And fourth and not least, how does the Commission intend to involve children of all ages in the monitoring process and the effective implementation of this strategy? We would like to hear some answers from the Commission on all these questions, because it is a very important issue that we protect our children in the digital environment, to give them the opportunity not just to face the challenges, but really to use in a safe environment the opportunities and chances that lie in digitisation.

Madam President, thank you very much, colleagues, for the great support. Today we took a milestone to safeguard media freedom in the EU. I would like to thank everybody who has worked on this important file and has supported us here today. Therefore, based on Rule 59(4), I request the matter to be referred back to the committee for interinstitutional negotiations so that we can close the file hopefully at the end of the year, but at the latest at the end of this legislative term.

Madam President, Thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for the intense debate. Above all, I would also like to thank the teams of secretariats, the teams of my shadow rapporteurs and the rapporteurs who have done an enormous amount of work at technical level. We have a legally sound text in the Committee on Culture and Education and it does not interfere with the exclusive competence of the Member States, Mrs Kruk, but safeguards fundamental principles of independent and free media in a functioning democracy. The fact that the Board for Media Services, as the successor to ERGA, is to be independent, including from the Commission, is due to the work of Parliament, in particular the Committee on Culture and Education. And, dear Daniel Freund, the Commission could already take stronger action today if it were to pursue non-compliance with European legislation in the media sector more consistently and courageously, such as the non-implementation of the AVMSD or other areas. I believe it is important that we also ensure the independence of the body. It is essential before any kind of commission, whether on the right, whether on the left, whether green - however - independence is essential here and not whether or not a commission should get a lot of influence on the board right now. On spyware, I would like to reiterate that the present compromise of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs excludes exactly what Mr Sinčić has just criticised: Journalistic work and the protection of sources must not be spied on, and any action is subject to a judicial reservation. So we have put in place appropriate safeguards here as well. With regard to Article 17, I would like to clarify once again that the media services are not dependent on the consent of the national media supervisory authority, and in case of doubt, in case of conflict with the platforms, they can also contact the European Board for Media Services directly, which can then issue a recommendation to that effect. Many protection and safeguard mechanisms are being put in place to prevent political arbitrariness, influence from third countries, but also arbitrariness from national supervisory authorities, and there is no loophole for disinformation, for which too many protection mechanisms have simply been confiscated. I therefore ask you to agree today with the well-balanced, legally sound and important legal text in its form, so that we can take a big step forward in safeguarding media diversity, freedom and democracy. I would also like to thank the Commission for its constructive cooperation. I look forward to working with the Spanish Presidency and hope that we will be able to finalise the legislative text by the end of this year.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Without free media, there can be no democracy. As Alexis de Tocqueville has already pointed out, the press is the ‘most important democratic instrument of freedom’. While we are proud of our high democratic standards, we must not turn a blind eye to the worrying state of press freedom worldwide, a trend that also affects Europe. The European Media Freedom Act is a crucial tool to address these challenges. Media is not just any business. Beyond their economic dimension, they contribute to education, cultural development and inclusivity in society and protect fundamental rights such as freedom of expression and access to information. Therefore, the dual nature of media services must be recognised in the European Media Freedom Act. We have found a well-balanced text that does justice to this dual role of the media and protects it from interference. We have ensured that media supervision is politically independent, create transparency about the ownership of media companies and set minimum standards for the free work of journalists as well as public broadcasting. We also give media providers the opportunity to reach out to the European level on their own if national regulation makes it impossible for them to fulfil their task. In addition, we have included the major online platforms that act as gatekeepers in our digital lives. These mainly non-European platforms have considerable power in deciding what content reaches us, what content we have access to, and strictly controlled European media content must not be subject to arbitrary decisions by such platforms. We've seen many instances where platforms have blocked legal and reputable content for no apparent reason. This shows us that we need this protection mechanism. This protection does not apply to illegal content, and I would like to say very clearly at this point: This provision in Article 17 is without prejudice to the Digital Services Act. It is about the protection of quality journalism, scientific articles and investigative journalism, which should not be subject to the arbitrariness of platforms. Now, as MEPs, we can show whether we are serious about protecting free media - media that is already subject to regulation in the form of media oversight or recognised regulatory mechanisms in Europe, such as a press council or a self-regulatory mechanism. We have already reached important legislative milestones – whether this is in the area of combating SLAPPs, whether this is the Digital Services Act or the Digital Markets Act, the AVMSD or even the Copyright Directive. Now it is about securing our media landscape and our journalists in the sense of diversity and freedom. With the European Media Freedom Act, we are taking another important step towards protecting our media and our democracies, and that is why I ask you to support the dossier in the votes this afternoon.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, The way in which the European Year of Youth is discussed here shows that it is not just a topic, but a very broad range of topics that interests young people, where young people also want to be involved and which has relevance for young people. That is why I would have liked to see today not only the Commissioner in charge of education programmes, training, universities and research, but also a whole series of Commissioners sitting here. After all, this is an issue that all Commissioners are ultimately touching on and that everyone must have on their radar. That's why my question: To what extent is the issue, or are the issues raised by young people during this year – I always call them the Big Five, i.e. environment, education and training, digitalisation, mental health, topics such as unpaid traineeships or participation – really happening in the Commission, in a regular exchange between DGs? An important question that is also close to my heart is: To what extent were Member States really involved?

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Disinformation campaigns and attempts to influence elections have also increased in Europe. They are now a serious threat to our democracy. The Regulation on the transparency of political advertising is not an easy but correct and important project. I believe that we have been able to find a balanced approach in Parliament. While we have often had stricter measures in the offline area through media regulation, regulations and laws that were imposed at the national level to cleanly separate content and advertising, the online area has now also been adapted accordingly. Unpaid content is not covered and free and critical journalism, as well as political reporting and information, is not advertising and therefore not covered by this Regulation. They are an essential part of our democracy and that was particularly important to us in the Committee on Culture and Education. We also consider the special requirements of traditional media, because even though our lives are often digital today, traditional media are still very popular and fulfill an important social mission. They remain a reliable source of information and should not be overburdened with excessive bureaucracy. At a time when we are taking a closer look, this regulation can give us all legal certainty and more transparency and, above all, play an important role in protecting our democracy.

Madam President, Commissioner! The European Year of Youth was the right initiative at the right time, as young people showed particular solidarity during the coronavirus pandemic. It was therefore only appropriate that we made them our priority in 2022. But I think we could have done even better by communicating more into the base, down. Many young people did not know at all that we had a European Year of Youth. This is urgently in need of improvement. We should have involved them even more from the outset, also at the base and not only in the Brussels bubble. We have learned a lot in the exchanges with the young people this year: What moves them, what their desires for politics are. But now it's all about what we make of it. The year must not be a straw fire that occurs on the 31st of December. December is gone. It must have a long-term legacy, because we need genuine political participation of young people, and we owe them tangible outputs. Last year, we promised ourselves that the European Year of Youth would not only be a nice to have Now is our chance to prove that we are serious. Let's take the input of young people and create structures for better participation! Topics such as youth participation and better participation, such as: Youth Test, a structural dialogue with young people – issues such as sustainable climate and environmental policy, mental health, jobs and skills – and since a thank you to the Commission for making next year the European Year of Skills; this also takes up an aspect that young people have brought forward – and the issue of digitalisation: These were the Big fivewhich we must continue to pursue in the future; These were the topics that were repeatedly brought into focus here at the EYE event, but also at many, many other youth events. Let us continue to work on this together with the young generation in the coming years and not over the heads of the young people – I think that would be the most important output of this year, that we act together with the young people.

Madam President, Commissioner! The European Union must not be dependent on digitalisation. Europe's move into the digital decade is overdue if we want to keep up globally. But all the technical advances we make mean nothing if we don't get people ready and take them with us. I firmly believe that this will be a decisive factor for the labour market. But in order to achieve this with as many people as possible, one principle applies: First teach the teachers. First of all, we need trained personnel who can pass on the knowledge, otherwise we will not be able to succeed in fundamentally digitizing the population. This applies to teaching staff in schools, but also especially in the area of continuing education. We must not leave anyone behind in digitalisation – no matter what age group, no matter what social class. In my opinion, we have to meet three points in order to be successful: We need to train teaching staff, promote lifelong learning and create the necessary digital infrastructure in schools and educational institutions. Some EU countries are already significantly more advanced in digitalisation than others. But as they say in sports: We are only as strong as our weakest member. So let's tackle it together and bring Europe into the digital decade! Let's use the time now to create the necessary investments in people and infrastructure!

Madam President, Madam Commissioner! The war in Ukraine shows that the unthinkable is possible and unpredictability is the new normal. In addition to military aggression, Russia is also waging war on the cultural front. This is reflected in the destruction and attempt to separate Ukrainian cultural heritage from its history, culture and tradition. Against this background, the CULT Committee adopted a motion for a resolution on solidarity and emergency assistance for culture and cultural heritage in response to Russia’s attack and the destruction of cultural heritage in Ukraine, with a view to developing new cooperation mechanisms for the reconstruction of culture and for future emergencies. This resolution clearly states the facts that Russia's war against Ukraine is an attempt to annihilate the identity and culture of a sovereign nation, including through strategic and targeted acts of destruction at cultural sites. We believe that the EU institutions, national governments, private partners and civil society must work together systematically and effectively to address the complexity and scale of this man-made disaster. The aim is to mobilise strategic multi-stakeholder partnerships across the EU. The Commission should propose an appropriate legal and fiscal framework for such cross-border measures. Artists and cultural workers, journalists and scientists are particularly at risk from the Russian invasion. The freedom of art, the quality of news, the independence of the media and access to information, academic freedom and freedom of expression are threatened, curtailed and negated by Russia. We need to act together to support Ukrainian cultural actors, universities and civil society in protecting their cultural values and infrastructure, and to develop a roadmap for reconstruction with Ukraine. Finally, we call on the Commission and the Member States to include culture in all key EU policy priorities, such as climate policy, digital transformation, economic reconstruction and international relations. Therefore, our questions to the Commission: What measures will the Commission take to counter Russia’s propaganda and disinformation campaigns? Second, In addition to the policy measures already announced, is the Commission planning to mobilise additional resources and take additional measures to support the cultural and creative sectors and creators in Ukraine? Does it plan to adequately support the reconstruction of Ukraine's cultural and architectural heritage? Thirdly: Will the Commission include culture in all policy areas in order to create a resilient European cultural area? Will it explore the possibility of setting up an EU emergency and recovery mechanism, specifically but also focused on culture, cultural heritage and creative ecosystems, based on a multi-stakeholder approach? We must support and help Ukraine maintain and restore its cultural integrity. This too is the task of a values-oriented European Union.

Mr President! The DMA and DSA are the right steps at the right time as the online world and large platforms increasingly play a crucial role in our lives and economy. We have certainly set a milestone here in the regulation of online content at Union level, but from the point of view of the Committee on Culture, in addition to all the praise for the adoption of the DSA, I must point out some missed opportunities. On the one hand, the principle ‘Know your business customer“ unfortunately not extended to all online intermediaries. On the other hand, there is no guarantee that illegal offers of live and time-sensitive content will be removed immediately, and here the European Commission must quickly take the next step in protecting European content, which deals with the problem of piracy, especially of live content. Only a legislative proposal that really does justice to this problem and brings solutions ensures that you can really say what is illegal offline in this sector for live broadcasting should also be illegal online. Furthermore, the obligation for intermediaries to respect the freedom and pluralism of the media in their terms of use is a core concern and must be enforced. The limits of media freedom are set by law and not by the terms of use of private companies.