What Eva spoke about.

I think we're at the point where we need to have a very clear narrative, as Europe, as to what we stand for, and clear communication of what we are aiming to do with our legislation. And this is why in the first part of my speech I very clearly emphasised what those rules are for, and we need to be finding a way to amplify our narrative and make it stronger. Because I honestly do believe that the issues that we would have with companies across the Atlantic, this means all types of companies, are going to be much more different and much broader than just the tech debate.

Mr President, Executive Vice‑President, dear colleagues, in the last term, a European leader said that 'strategic autonomy is not isolation'. Let me quickly build on that and add something more. I don't think strategic autonomy is war either. It has to be clear that, through strategic autonomy, we do not defend or attack with rules. What we actually do is protect our citizens. And I think it is an important point that has to resonate with our partners and our competitors, such as the United States, but also with our rivals, such as China. European legislation such as the DMA and the DSA is not expanding the European budget through collecting fines. And nor are they tariffs. Our actions are simply aimed at having stronger standards, at having and setting standards for safety, for our European way of life, and our European understanding of rights and liberties. So the main question today is, how do we achieve sovereignty without getting into isolation, and without trade and tariff wars? My answer is, 'by being smart'. 'Smart' here means to know our strengths and weaknesses, the spots where we have leverage and further develop them. It means building partnerships where we can, and resilience where we must. Strategic autonomy is not about closing doors. It's about knowing which ones to open – and how.

Mr President, today we are voting on a decision of great importance for Bulgaria and for the whole of the EU. The report we are considering today is one of three on Bulgaria's future in the euro area. The previous convergence reports of the European Central Bank and the European Commission clearly show that Bulgaria is ready to join the euro area from 1 January 2026 and meets all the criteria. Let us not forget that Bulgaria has been following this path for more than two decades. From the currency board in 1997 to full participation in ERM2. The facts are clear. National legislation is fully consistent with EU requirements, price stability with inflation below the reference value has been achieved, public finances are sound, deficit and debt requirements have been met. The currency has maintained a stable exchange rate within ERM2 for more than two years. And although this report seems quite technical, for every Bulgarian of the last three generations, it is something much more. From those who were in the square in 1989 and peacefully overthrew the communist regime, through those who starved the currency crisis of 1997 to those young people who today call Europe their home. The adoption of the euro is the achievement of the European dream for them in all its fullness. And we owe it to all of them to approve this report. Bulgaria is ready, Europe is ready. Let's take this step together.

Mr President, honourable Members, representatives of the Council, of the Commission, history moves in waves. Some are ripples. Others are tsunamis that tear down the old and create something different and new. Electricity did that. Cars did that. The internet did it too. Today we are staring at another such moment, with the development of AI, quantum, next-generation semiconductors. But this time, the wave moves faster. It doesn't take decades – it takes days and months. And all of this comes with a backdrop of a number of challenges. The first challenge is related to technology's advancement, and AI advancement, which is reshaping every aspect of our life: from the way we live to the way we work, how we govern, how our economies operate. But as well as this, it is disturbing the very fabric of our societies. Secondly, we find ourselves in geopolitical grounds that are shifting. The transatlantic relationship, for example – still one of our most valuable assets – feels less predictable. Trust is being shaken all across the globe. Our Ukrainian friends are fighting at our border for their freedom and dignity. The global order based on rules is changing and no one knows what the new rules will look like. Thirdly, Europe is losing ground in competitiveness and growth. Our energy prices are among the highest in the world. And when it comes to technologies, once we were the leader, but now, of the world's top 50 companies, only four are European. In a way, this is a wake-up call, but perhaps the final wake-up call that we can no longer fail to ignore. So there are several steps to take for Europe to lead in order to be part of the race. We have to do that with vision and strategy, and not with a patchwork of ideas that are glued together. Why do I say that? In order to have vision and strategy, first and foremost, the Commission has to have a clear and comprehensive assessment of our capabilities in each sector – where we can lead and invest more, where we are dependent and need to diversify, and where we need to cooperate, and do that in a strategic manner. Once this assessment is done, secondly, we must identify and prioritise the areas that are key for Europe. We can't afford to spread limited resources across every sector. Instead of chasing the next Nvidia chip, let's double down on areas where we can excel – areas such as deep tech, quantum sensors, and companies like ASML, without which the world would come to a halt. Strategic innovation means investing where we can leverage, not following where others already dominate. Thirdly, we need to make sure we have that innovation and that growth. To close the funding gaps, we need to unleash capital at scale. With the support of the Commission, the European Innovation Council could tap into pension and insurance funds to support deep tech, and help reap higher long-term yields for investors across Europe. The Commission should take the necessary provisions already in the current MFF to lead in the establishment of a public-private investment fund. Such a fund could build on the private market standards together with European private investors. It would unblock a high level of investment and would be beneficial for the entire single market. Fourth, when it comes to European researchers, they are some of the most renowned, with outstanding peer-to-peer recognition. But excellence in research must translate into products and services. This is why we need to ensure innovation doesn't stop in the lab. We must support our leading start-ups and our leading innovators through various initiatives, through connecting mechanisms as well as funding, to bring great ideas to market and scale them effectively. Lastly, the adoption of artificial intelligence by our traditional industries is absolutely key. We might rely on others for semiconductors and components, but our strength lies in applying technology. Currently, only 13 % of European businesses have integrated AI tools so far – 13 %. I believe we can do way more, because history shows that it's not the inventors but the adopters who lead industrial revolutions. So we cannot afford to watch while others write the future. Let's stop managing decline and start winning that future.

Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, business people know that trade relies on two fundamentals: economic incentive and also trust. When it comes to economic incentives, the numbers in trade volumes between the EU and the US speak for themselves. Just last year, US-EU goods trade hit a record of USD 976 billion. But that trust – trust in rules, commitments, in partners is shaken on both sides of the Atlantic. Economic nationalism does not make you first, but it makes you alone. And this is not leadership – this is volatility masquerading as strength. When we speak about strength, the numbers are clear, and Europe can respond with resolve. But our priority is principled openness, because we are not the Democratic Party: we are an ally.

Madam President, colleagues, Europeans, I've heard these days that Europe is in denial, that we are a political dwarf and that we are weak. So I very much wanted to take the floor today in order to disagree with this statement. We have faced various crises – one after the other – and every time we have proven that we are stronger when tested. We have delivered vaccines to our citizens in record time; we secured gas supplies when Russia cut them off; we tackled economic turmoil. And every time there was talk about disunity, we proved we can succeed. Today we face yet another situation, where our closest ally often sounds like an adversary, and that makes us feel threatened and uncertain. And at the beginning of this plenary, I want us to remember the words of Robert Schuman, who said: 'Europe will not be made at once [...]. It will be built through concrete achievements which first create a de facto solidarity'. It is the moment of solidarity where words turn into actions, because words do not build Europe.

(Start of speech off mic) ... important things. First of all, we see that the way the laws we have passed are acting. They are retroactive. We would like them to be able to prevent what we see happening. And this is why we need to think very carefully whether just posing a fine is enough. In my opinion, it is not. We need to make those laws actionable. Secondly, we have to make sure that those laws work hand in hand with national authorities, whether these are the intelligence services, whether these are the ministries of foreign affairs, defence, interior affairs, whether these are the attorney-generals that have to be working together. We need the type of disinformation war rooms or election interference war rooms working together with the enforcers of the DSA and similar legislations.

Madam President, honourable Members, I wonder how you, as elected representatives of European citizens, would react if, in the previous European elections in June, your party received less votes than it actually does? How will you react and how will we accept if your societies want to leave the European Union tomorrow? How will you react if your fellow citizens no longer want democracy? I say this because an internet company with Russian support can lead a candidate to victory in a presidential election in a Member State of the European Union. If she can do that, then she can do anything. So the main question we have to ask ourselves today, in my opinion, is why were we unprepared for such an attack? We've been talking about Russian meddling and election manipulation for a long time. What happened in Romania can happen in Bulgaria, it can happen in Austria, it can happen even in Germany. We know what foreign interference through social media looks like, and so I welcome the European Commission's investigation, but I urge it to go further. Let's assess whether the current legislation can stop such attacks, and if changes are needed, let's make them, because the Kremlin and Georgescu can adapt. If they can adapt, so can we. It is our responsibility to protect European citizens and our democracy.

Madam President, I think it's very important to admit in this Chamber that since 5 November we face an even more complex world. This is why our response has to be immediate and it has to be actionable. There is no time for Europe to defer those decisions and actions that are so needed now. It is of high importance that we become even clearer in our priorities, but also defending our values. This is why I think it is now the time for Europe to step up even further our support and aid for Ukraine. It is now the time for Europe to invest in our tech sector and to build it in a global, competitive way. It is now for us to cut red tape in order to unleash our industries, to innovate, to develop and to be more competitive. Because if President‑elect Trump seeks to be transactional with Europe and the world in general, then we will need to deploy our spreadsheet diplomacy, and I hope we will be ready to do that. This is why, more than ever, we need a strategy where we identify common ground and figure out how to do business.

Dear Mr President, dear Otmar, dear Mr Rapporteur, dear Christian, dear Members, Commissioner, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to participate in today's debate and also for the opportunity to contribute with concrete constructive proposals, with which I believe we have made this report much more strategic. In the last two years, we Europeans have learned the lessons of energy dependence on Russia the hard way. And this reminds me of Albert Einstein's famous quote, which says: “It’s crazy to do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result.” I am joining today because I believe that we all want a cleaner economy, but right now we need to know where we are when we want our economy to become greener. And I'll give you just two examples out of many: China produces over 80% of the world's solar panels and over 90% of the magnets and lithium needed for these batteries. That is why, now more than ever, we need a strong and powerful European response. And I believe that this new law gives just that, gives strong support to European decarbonisation technologies. It offers shortened deadlines and easier regulations, but at the same time it also provides funding opportunities. In my country of Bulgaria, for example, we have at least four industrial valleys that have the potential to benefit from these new resources. This includes the nuclear sector, the extraction of critical materials, the chemical and cement sectors, the blue economy and the hydrogen industry. And these are areas where I believe my country can lead. I believe that with this law we show that we have learned our lessons and are already making decisions in a different way, much more strategically.

Mr President, Madam Vice-President of the European Commission, one of the recent Eurobarometer surveys shows that there are Member States where satisfaction with the fairness of elections is quite low. In addition to countries such as Bulgaria and Romania, the survey shows that since 2019, this satisfaction with fair elections in countries such as Germany and the Netherlands has also fallen dramatically. So I would like to ask you: Do you think that this loss of confidence in the integrity of elections in Europe is dangerous and that it could open the door to further manipulation and interference by Russia in the upcoming European Parliament election campaign? In this direction, I would like to ask you what is the action plan of the European Commission so that it can be linked to increasing trust in the EU electoral process, especially when it comes to the campaign for the European elections?

Mr President, colleagues, Commissioner, we’ve arrived to the week that we are going to have the final vote of the first-ever law on artificial intelligence. The way I see it is that we are laying out a common European vision for the future of this technology – one where AI is more democratic and safe, but also, I would hope, more competitive. That is, if it’s done right. In a way, we close one chapter, but the story continues. What I believe now is important is that we focus on three things. First of all, to provide legal certainty to all stakeholders, including companies. Second of all, to play an active role in ongoing global efforts through the G7 Process, OECD and the UN. And thirdly, to prioritise AI excellence through concrete commitments and investments. I stand before you because I do believe that in Europe we are more than just a referee. I believe we are a continent of innovators, of doers, of dreamers, of achievers. And now it’s time for us to walk that talk, when it comes, particularly, to promoting AI excellence in Europe.

Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, we are approaching the end of the term of the European institutions and while many like to look back on our record and take stock, I think, more importantly, we need to set a clear vision for the future we want to build in Europe. I think the only thing that has to be bigger than our ambitions to make Europe the best place to make business and the most competitive place in the world has to be our determination to make this a reality. That would mean, though, less bureaucracy and cutting red tape. That would mean greater focus on implementation. That would mean less fragmentation of our capital markets and more start-ups able to scale up. Today, I hope in this debate we can commit on Europe about the big ideas, Europe that has created the eurozone and the single market. We are facing a backdrop of global multi-crisis and I believe Brussels can ensure the economy can survive to unleash that vision of more unicorns, more growth and more opportunities for companies and people in Europe.

Madam President, Commissioner, Prime Minister, welcome to the European Parliament! Bulgaria is a frontline state in the war that Russia started against Ukraine. The previous Bulgarian governments refused to provide military assistance to Ukraine and thus created an impression throughout the EU about the ambiguity of the Bulgarian position on the Russian aggression. In the new majority in the Bulgarian Parliament, this has already been overcome, I believe, to a large extent. But it is precisely because of these suspicions against Bulgaria that it is important to clarify whether Bulgaria controls compliance with the conditions of the derogation for imports of Russian oil to Lukoil, which the previous regular government requested from the European Commission. On this occasion, firstly, Bulgaria has an obligation to notify the European Commission of the implementation of the 2014 embargo against Russia, and secondly, specifically on the derogation decision, we have to notify the Member States and the European Commission of any exports from Lukoil that are subject to the environmental risk exemptions. I would therefore like to have a very brief and clear answer: has this been done by the Bulgarian government and have you notified the Member States and the European Commission?

Madam President, colleagues, I believe it is not enough to be a powerhouse of production, because Europe needs to be actually a powerhouse of ideas. But for ideas to have impact, we also need investment. We need a level of European funding that translates ambition to action. We need to utilise private investment to the maximum because when we talk about deep tech, it also requires deep pockets. We currently find ourselves in a global tech race. And when we are talking about a race, there is usually winners and those that also lose. If anywhere Europe could have a leading edge, that’s in R&D. This is why I think when it comes to STEP, it must create an effective blueprint for a fully-fledged sovereign fund to emerge and it must do it quickly. I would like to congratulate my colleague Christian Ehler for providing the much needed focus to this proposal, because strategic technology requires strategic thinking and the Parliament has provided a clear value in that regard.

Madam President, the single market is one of Europe’s greatest achievements. Europe’s stability and peace have been assisted by the prosperity which that single market has brought, and I think ensuring its integrity during times of crisis must be one of our main priorities. Any instrument we adopt has to focus on the prevention of a crisis and not only on its cure. It must provide a framework that cuts bureaucracy, as the rapporteur in the main committee said, not one that adds further bureaucracy. It must support competitiveness when it is needed the most while resisting the trap of protectionism. So, with this, I would like to congratulate my colleague Andreas for his work and our cooperation throughout this process. And I very much like to believe that this file is moving us on the right path, and it is an instrument that will successfully ensure that we continue celebrating the achievements of the single market for at least the next 30 years to come.

Madam President, colleagues, Commissioner, there is an old saying that the proof of the pudding is in the eating. And I think when it comes to the Chips Act, all the indications so far are positive. Even before we formally adopt the Chips Act today, tens of billions of euros of investment have already been unleashed. Just look at the thousands of new jobs at the Intel plant in Poland or the investment in the chips factory in Grenoble or the historic investment in Magdeburg. And the list actually continues. I would like to warmly thank Mr Nica and the other shadow rapporteurs for the excellent cooperation we have had. As a team what we achieved is, first of all, we listened carefully to the concerns, but also to the input that the chip industry gave to us. So today we will vote a text which reflects the complexity of the global supply chain. I believe that the Chips Act is now far more than just a mechanism for granting State aid. It is a framework to advance innovation and productivity across Europe. We have managed to cut red tape and created an environment where public and private partnership can thrive. We have shaped a crisis strategy that focuses first and foremost on prevention and not only on the cure of a heavy-handed market intervention. Looking at the big picture of things, and if the EU is to turn its ambitions into a reality, then the EU needs to de-risk and reduce its dependency on strategic rivals. And I think the Chips Act provides a blueprint exactly for that. Finally, no one single act is a silver bullet for any challenge we face. And this is why I believe the Chips Act gives us the tools to help invent but also build a more competitive and resilient economy.

Mr President, Executive Vice-President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, regulating artificial intelligence may at first sound like a very technical matter, but it is so much more than that. It is about asking ourselves the big question: what kind of society do we actually want to live in? And to me, the answer is very clear. A society in which AI enables our democracy and not one in which it undermines it. But, of course, this is much more easier said than it is actually done in practice. For us to get there, I think we should not be playing Whac-A-Mole or regulating the next big thing. It is about putting in place effective guardrails. It is about putting principles and mechanisms that will last for at least the next couple of years to come. But it is also about working with our partners. It is about working with international partners to shape a global governance framework. It is about maximising the potential of AI, while at the same time addressing the existing and looming concerns. So no, it is not technical. It is about the future of our democracy.

Madam President, Vice-President Schinas, Commissioner Breton, I think when we talk about cyber, I think there’s a lot we can learn from Ukraine and how it managed its response to the Russian invasion. I say this because Ukraine is no stranger to Russia’s cyber warfare, but we’ve all been in awe of its ability to keep its critical infrastructure broadly operating during the unrelenting hybrid and kinetic attacks against it. And I think one core lesson from Ukraine is that the public and private sectors have to collaborate more together. This is why, for me, it is important to have the Cyber Solidarity Act, and I very much welcome it. The act will create a form of collective cyber defence for the European Union and the idea that when one Member State is attacked, we all have the tools to rally support and to rally assistance for it. The act also establishes a critical new public-private partnership, bringing the expertise of the private sector within the cyber reserve and the coordinating power of the public sector. On the skills initiative that Vice President Schinas talked extensively on, it’s another critical tool for building this much needed resilience. I think with this act, now, we see the different layers of cybersecurity legislation in place – again, as the Commissioners mentioned, now we have the Cyber Resilience Act, the Cyber Solidarity Act, the NIS2. And these are all some sorts of acts working in a jigsaw together to make sense of each other. But also most importantly, and the key here, is that we must make sure to implement those laws from here onwards, making them work for the business and for the citizens. Because we have to remember that the cyber defence does not start in a text, does not start in the EU act, in an agency, or in security services. It starts from the desktops, from the laptops in the business offices, from those devices. I hope that today we have put another basis to support that protection.

Madam President, colleagues, rapporteur, I think we find ourselves today in the face of a full-blown hybrid warfare in Europe. Just in 2020 alone, cybercrime cost the global economy around EUR 1 trillion and this figure continues to rise astronomically day by day. This is why cyber resilience is no longer a topic we can pay lip service to. Without it, Europe’s economy and security will simply crumble. This updated directive, I believe, is an important step towards better preparing Europe’s defences. It must mark the beginning of our journey towards effective cyber resilience, not the end. I believe this is a piece of legislation of an ever-growing jigsaw puzzle and not a silver bullet necessary by itself. We need the resources, we need the skills, but also the political will to ensure intentions become a reality. We also need all Europeans, businesses, governments and individuals to work together. And, last but not least, with the growing appetite of some global players such as Russia, that are trying to rewrite the rule-based order and attack our critical infrastructure, I believe cybersecurity is also about protecting our democracies. Failing to do so will simply hand the keys to the backdoor of our democracies to countries like Russia, Iran or China.

Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, inflation in the euro area and the European Union is currently reaching record levels. A family will now have to choose what to buy and what not to buy, because they will have almost 10% less. The European Union began as a peace project, but the economic prosperity it provides is what largely sustains us today. People like Europe because they have a peaceful, good and secure life here. Today, we are taking very firm and clear positions against Russia's aggression. Sanctions and an embargo. And these are really the right steps. But if they are not to be unacceptable and too burdensome for citizens, we must take concrete action to compensate for any negative effects. This is exactly what needs to be done in a practical and targeted way. We need to support people at risk, but we also need to support business in its recovery, because only strong, strong and rapid economic growth can compensate for record inflation.

Commissioner, dear colleagues, Putin has been waging a bloody and devastating war against Ukraine for almost three months. It makes no distinction between military and civilian, between homes and military objects. Russia is pouring its entire military capacity onto a sovereign state. We want to stop the flow of funds to Russia so that these funds cannot be used for even more murders in Ukraine. Therefore, we want to impose an embargo on oil and say that we will refuse to pay for gas in rubles. But countries in the European Union actually continue to buy Russian gas. Just like the Bulgarian government does. Others want an exception to the oil embargo. Again, like the Bulgarian government. Others say they will veto these sanctions. Again, as the Bulgarian government does. And others just pay, and some of them pay in rubles. And that's why I'm asking myself. Where are our values today? Where is our choice? It is really time for us Europeans and our governments to start doing only what we say, and to say only what we intend to do.

Mr President, I believe cyberattacks are just another front in Putin’s all-out attack against democracy and against democratic states. Every government, every company, every individual stands on the frontline of that war, of Putin’s war. I’m very proud that this Parliament is currently working to deliver on the NIS2 Directive, which could offer a real opportunity for Member States and industry to be able to collaborate. Of course, businesses will need the resources and the scale to tackle those very complex and hybrid tricks. The same applies to institutions and to agencies that assist at both national but also European level. If cybercrime costed the world USD 1 trillion back in 2020 alone, well, I believe it’s only common sense to significantly make sure that we increase investment in our critical infrastructure and, most importantly, digital defence. We simply have to wargame the various scenarios together with the Internet service providers, together with the telephone companies, to make sure we can repel potential attacks and make sure we can restore basic functions at an unprecedented speed. We also have to make sure we build greater resilience among our populations. And this we could do with more cyber and media literacy efforts. This item has to be very high on the agenda of the European Council and during its next meeting in June. I am actually surprised that we do not see the Council present here today. European leaders should stop shying away from topics related to tech and cyber – because the effects of a cyberattack can be instant, can be devastating, and they could be very far-reaching, knowing no borders. So this is why there is no time to waste for us to increase our resilience.

Madam President, just in a couple of days on the 9th May, we will remember the visionaries who embarked on a project of peace, stability, growth, prosperity. We will also attempt on that day to be looking ahead towards our bright European future together. Today, our continent is struck by war. But we have seen that our freedom no longer lives in fear. And this is because of our unity and of our solidarity. I hope that one day, very soon, we can offer the same European future to our Ukrainian friends. What this Conference did is to reaffirm those exact values and to root them into fresh ideas. I was one of many colleagues working within the Digital Transformation Working Group, and we have put concrete proposals that aim to make Europe’s tech sector more vibrant, more innovative, safer and full of opportunities for the next generations to come. I think citizens want a union that understand the needs of its towns, of its villages, of its cities, of its capitals, and that knows how to defend their rights and values on a global stage. A Europe that has the confidence to see itself as one, with pan-European candidates that are able to reflect those values. This is how I believe we are going to be building a European Union, by the citizens and for the citizens.