Debate contributions by Maria GRAPINI

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Social Pillar is obviously an objective of the Commission. Social cohesion within the internal market is also an objective of the Commission, but has failed. Commissioner, in my country, Romania, which you know, one in three children is in poverty. 1.2 million children are excluded - social exclusion. In order to be cohesive and, unfortunately, what Mr Macron was saying ‐ Multi-speed Europe ‐ there can be no such discrimination. A person who has a salary of 600 euros, a person with disabilities who has 150 euros in Romania, cannot have access to housing. So it's an extraordinary discrepancy. How did social cohesion work? If we do not really make social cohesion, social protection, the conditions of workers, people with disabilities, mothers, Romania loses 1.5 million inhabitants in a decade, it has the highest demographic decrease. We cannot have a multi-speed Europe with more conditions and more, so to speak, facilities for citizens. Commissioner, true cohesion is needed, with concrete measures.

Madam President, President Costa, Commissioner, we are living in an extraordinary historical period and, as we have heard, what the Prime Minister of Canada has said, it seems that the world order is a world disorder. The European Union needs power. I have listened to you very carefully, Mr President, and, among other things, you have said that the European Union must show its citizens that it is concerned with economic prosperity, economic growth, innovation, wages, affordable housing, but we must do so, Mr President, and for that we must strengthen the European Union's economy and solidarity. Dear colleagues, I believe that we must assume that politicians no longer manipulate citizens, assume the truth, explain what every gesture and step and measure we take here means. Otherwise, we will destroy the unity of the European Union, which is so much needed now in global instability. So we have to take the truth and fight for the citizens and their rights.

Madam President, Commissioner, cyber threats are growing and we all know, I think we agree, that cyber attacks are digging into the foundation of democracy. We know well, both in my country, in Romania, and in other states, what happened to the cyber attacks. After all, I believe that those who deal with such a thing take advantage of the weakness of the European Union, of the Member States. We have made a lot of statements, but we need to move on to concrete measures and it is very good to strengthen ENISA. It is very good to allocate budgets for research, for technology, to have it here, in the internal market. Let us not depend on third countries, because then we are open to these attacks. And yes, not only democracy is at risk, but also people's lives. That is why, Commissioner, let us proceed to the facts. Let us now, after this debate, after the report, see how we can concretely improve and eliminate and prevent cyber-attacks that can be in all areas, from hospitals to transport, and we know well what can happen in this case.

Dear Madam, you contradicted yourself in your statement. On the one hand, you said yes, we need to protect ourselves from sexual exploitation and all fake news. On the other hand, you say that DSA It is a censorship. Well, we regulate here for protection. It is shameful to hear in our countries that MEPs want to free children, 5-year-old girls, 6-year-old girls, 7-year-old girls, 14-year-old girls to be sexually exploited, to manipulate the population with all kinds of fake news. And you say here that DSA It's fake news, or it's proof of power, it's censorship. How do you explain this?

Madam President, Commissioner, Parliament is providing you with a report through which you indeed have the chance to contribute to the Single Market. We have crossed the threshold of 30 years of talking about the Single Market. The European Union has a problem with innovation, it has a problem with start-ups. So now you just have to take over this and implement, not directives, that we will have 27 decisions again. A regulation, a very clear regulation, very simple, allowing a start-up, an innovative company to do it quickly, fairly, transparently and, as the report you are receiving states, to be ethical, because we need ethics and fair trade and cooperation in the single market, fair. So, Commissioner, I hope it will not take very long, because we have many own-initiative reports since I have been in Parliament, which I voted on and which have remained somewhere on the table of the Commission. We need this step, especially in this complicated global context, both politically and economically.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is strange to me that there are colleagues in this House who criticise the existence of a mechanism for controlling European money. We were chosen by the citizens to defend their financial interests. How do I criticize a mechanism by which I want to control? However, we should think critically if this mechanism is applied correctly and, Commissioner, you will also see critical points in the report, because the lack of transparency, which the Commission often practices, is not a good example. I was the discharge rapporteur in the Commission's past mandate and I tell you frankly that I did not vote for it. Why? Because the Commission did not answer the questions that the Committee on Budgetary Control and other parliamentarians asked. So, if we want this mechanism to work and it has to work, you have to show a lot of transparency, fairness, equality, treatment between states and, why not, maybe we, Parliament, think about how we protect citizens and end consumers if a government does not apply the rule of law correctly, because citizens must not (...)

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we are at the last plenary, a stocktaking plenary, and once again, President von der Leyen has left the room, she has no patience to listen to us. About what balance? He made a self-praising report, as he usually does, he started telling us how we would finance the fight and not how we would negotiate peace. We have lost a million jobs this year. We were unable, Commissioner, and we stayed together until midnight with the Danish Presidency, to conclude the trilogue on the Customs Regulation, which is very important for the protection of the internal market. Farmers are on the street, as you know, tomorrow. We don't have energy independence and we pay three times as much energy. Let's see. Maybe this holiday break brings us all together to have a real project to support European citizens. This is important, people to be put in the center. I was talking about the housing crisis yesterday. We won't be able to solve it until incomes grow, until we have a stable and strong economy, and until we have independence. We depend on imports. Merry Christmas to everyone!

Thank you for your reply. The point is that you spoke about the cohesion and development policy of the regions. The concrete question now is: in future policy, do you think it is good to have the budget for the common agricultural policy combined with cohesion policy?

Dear colleague, you said in your speech that you want an equal development of Europe. Do you think the report by President von der Leyen, now on the year-to-year balance sheet, shows anything? Does it show any basis for what you said? I have been in Parliament since 2014. Farmers in my country, in Romania, still have different subsidies. There are still disparities, there is a fragmented market. Do you think that the President of the Commission, at the end of the year, made a fair, realistic report or just slogans and political statements that citizens do not need?

I want to ask you a question, dear colleague. I agree with what you said. My question is: Do you think that the suffering in which the automotive industry is now is due to our mistake, the European Parliament, the European Union, the European Commission, which regulated before we had solutions? Because there are tens of thousands of jobs, there is an industry behind it that ultimately ensures the well-being of citizens. And if you think we need to correct what we did years ago, which is to impose deadlines and solutions before we have technology, before we have enough money, before we have innovation.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I would first like to congratulate those who initiated the letter, because the signatories of the letter, in fact, have responded to the citizens' request and, since I have been in the European Parliament, I have always argued, Commissioner, that we have to listen to all stakeholders, we have to listen to citizens and we have to respond to them, but we have to respond to them to understand why, for example, livestock farming alone could be prohibited by a decision at European Union level - and this must be seen in the context of the Treaty. Again, this must be well understood: not all animals, animals exclusively bred for fur. Of course, here we have to listen to the specialists, because in the letter written by my colleagues there is also a paragraph, I am convinced that you have read it, in which it is said that there is also the probability, the risk of transmitting diseases to people, to those who use these furs. That is why I believe that, on the one hand, we need to be careful how we reach a decision and, of course, based on the citizens' demand, but we also need to be careful. I have worked for 35 years in the textile sector, the textile industry, where the fur industry also enters and it is extremely important how we make the exit of these companies from the market. Many companies have retrofitted, have cars, have people employed, so we need to have a transition period in which to offer an alternative to those who have built a business on this topic for years. Then, a very important thing: I am also Vice-President for the Committee on the Internal Market; I still see an imbalance in many trade agreements. If we ban - and we come to a conclusion that yes, we will ban these things (breeding animals exclusively for fur), what do we do with imports? Because if products come - fur from animals bred exclusively for fur - then we did nothing. We have again created discomfort and, let's say, even unfair competition with producers in the European Union. At the same time, I am also in the Committee on Agriculture and the Intergroup on Animal Welfare, and I am sure that I am looking at this issue with balance, and I very much believe that we must not take quick decisions, but we must also analyse it from a scientific point of view: whether or not the disease is transmitted to humans by wearing these furs, what we replace with. If we replace it with synthetic, we also need to see - and I'm telling you now, as a textile specialist - whether the synthetic is somehow more harmful to humans. All these things cannot be taken, but it is salutary and it must be stressed that we have reacted - Parliament, the colleagues who made the letter - at the request of the citizens. That is our duty, as elected people, I mean Parliament, and you, as an executive government of the European Union, to take into account what we come from taking over the problems of citizens, and I hope that a solution will be found that is fair - that is very important - also for animal welfare, but also fair for workers who for years have built businesses in this area. I look forward to a response to the letter made by colleagues and I am convinced that you will have the power to find fair solutions and, ultimately, on the basis of the Treaty for which we operate. Good luck to you, Commissioner!

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, the result you have presented here does not seem to have satisfied you either. Does it please the citizens? The objectives of climate change must be very clear and coupled with measures that can be applied. No one is challenging climate change, I think. People are dying in the heat, people are dying in the floods, but people are also dying in the cold, Commissioner, because they cannot pay for their energy. Europe pays three to four times more for energy than America. What's the solution? Did you talk about just transition? What do you mean by just transition? The European Union has the objective of cohesion. Do we touch him or not? I believe that the objectives for climate change must be harmonized with the competitiveness that we can have, with reindustrialization. We have a reindustrialization program and yes, you have to take partners, citizens and companies. Only then will there be compliance. If citizens and companies feel that they are not partners in these goals, they will not comply. I therefore expect you, Commissioner, to convey to us the objectives coupled with the measures.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, of course we need decarbonisation, we need a clean environment, but we also need industry, we need jobs. Commissioner, you said that 100 billion investments would be needed, and you said yourself, most of them from the private sector. I come from the private sector. Do you think that a company invests when it knows that it increases its costs 3, 4, 5 times and can no longer sell its service or product? No, no, no. I believe that the pace at which we are doing this decarbonisation - now we are talking about aviation and maritime transport, but also in other areas - must be the pace at which we can ensure that European industry exists, that it is refurbished, that there is money for refurbishment. What else do we do? The responsibility for the clean environment is the responsibility of the entire globe, it is not only of the continent of Europe and we know well that the USA, China, India are much, much bigger polluters than Europe. If you, we, put pressure on European industry here, we will certainly disappear and import products that actually pollute in countries that do not have the same conditions. That is why, Commissioner, I believe that this programme for the transition to sustainable fuel must be carried out at the rate at which industry can bear it, and budgets must be granted for the transition to sustainable fuel. We can't replace something if we don't have something to put in place.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we are debating a report that is essential for the future of the planet, after all, for the future of Europe. How can we say that the responsibility of protecting minors online is solely that of parents? We have not excluded in this report the importance of education, of parents, but in democracy there are rules, platforms must - and this was the message of this report for the Commission and for the Member States - find levers for platforms to limit the right of minors to access data unrelated to their age. What could be sadder than seeing children hurt themselves or commit suicide? And now, recently, a little boy has killed his sister. They're platforms with lying interfaces, they're lured into dangerous games. Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I am glad that we have a very large majority. For us, the future of Europe is the protection of these minors and we must, together - parents, education and ourselves - regulate things so that access to things that are not allowed for minors is limited.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, of course, the 2026 budget is not perfect. We know all those who have worked with budgets that we always need more money. But, Commissioner, in your speech you said one very important thing: It's a huge waste. Well, let's see where the waste is being made, because you also said that we have to rethink the future MFF completely differently. How do we ensure that the basic points that actually hold the European Union together, namely cohesion, the common agricultural policy, reindustrialisation and security, are fed with budgets that are fit for purpose? We have had for years - I am in the Committee on Budgetary Control - we do not know how to stop VAT evasion. There are some countries that have a high rate of VAT evasion. Then, we failed to fine platforms, for example, for violations of the directives and regulations that we work with. There are sources, we do not necessarily need to borrow and pay interest, but we need to clean up the functioning of the economy in the internal market, in order to be able to have more money.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I believe that we must eliminate the manipulation that we have seen today, in Parliament and in our countries. Having a national defence strategy and an integrated strategy at European level does not mean that we want war. We want to be able to defend our citizens in the European Union. Yes, Commissioner, I agree with you: cooperation, not fragmentation - and perhaps we need to increase that 65% of components made in the European Union. Perhaps the colleagues who have spoken out against this report are not in the situation of my country. You too, Commissioner, are close to the conflict in Ukraine. Every day, drones fly over Romania. We need to know, we need to have a way to defend ourselves, and we don't demand war. And here, maybe we reach peace, because there is more and more talk these days of peace, but that does not mean that we should not have a defense strategy, because yes, the main priority is to have the security of citizens from all points of view: and defense, and food.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, as I said in the last plenary, the Council had a lot on its agenda, but, Commissioner, we still have a few days to go and we are entering the cold season. I am concerned about what citizens are doing, what we are doing with the situation of those who in many places – and in my country, unfortunately – cannot pay for their energy and gas, cannot warm up, will live in the cold. What about big loans? How do we invest them so that we can reach the citizens, increase the income of the citizens? It will also increase confidence in our project, of the European Union, to increase the industrial power of the European Union, of the internal market. How do we use the money we borrowed (and the European Union is now at a high borrowing threshold)? What do we do with them? After all, of course, the housing problem is all related, but if now, on the brink of winter, we don't take some drastic measures to support citizens who can't pay for their electricity, their gas, they can't take medicines, then we can't talk about a single market. We cannot talk about a sustainable European Union project. Yes, we have a very difficult period ahead of us and we need to see what we do with the multiannual programme. We cannot destroy agriculture, we cannot fail to give the common agricultural policy the budget it needs.