Speeches

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, strengthening rural areas is an extremely important objective. Commissioner, we need to think about the Cohesion Fund together with the Common Agricultural Policy, but not take money from the Common Agricultural Policy and put it into cohesion, because we have done nothing. We have opportunities and opportunities: to develop tourism, rural tourism, to develop and consolidate and preserve traditions, crafts, we can also develop trade. But for these things, the people there and especially the young generation do not return to the countryside because they have no conditions, no infrastructure. That is why I say that we need to think about consolidated projects: infrastructure, to have a doctor, to have a school, to be able to have an internet connection. There are whole rural areas where there is no possibility of connectivity. I hope, Commissioner, that you will argue for these rural areas to have targeted budgets, because if we budget a lot and there is another problem, it has been discussed here, we need to simplify the procedure for accessing funds by administrations in small communities or by small entrepreneurs.

Madam President, Commissioner, I have listened to you carefully and I must say that I am disappointed. You've given us some briefings, actually. The citizens who listen to us here have had enough of three years of us debating, making resolutions, the Commission noticing, and in fact not having anything happen. People are dying there, Commissioner. My country has welcomed refugees, children, and adults. Of course, we cannot move the entire population of Ukraine. I ask: Is there a solution for peace? Have you talked to the international community? Can one man defeat an earthly globe? It can't be! I believe that diplomacy has remained repetitive, no negotiations have been set up to put an end to this war and this slaughter. Because we are not only talking about economic objectives, we are talking about people here, we are talking about children who remain marked throughout the period. And they're hypocritical states. We voted for sanctions here in vain, when the states of the European Union imported further and supplied Russia's budget with money and not a few. So, Commissioner, I think that we need only talk when you come up with a concrete proposal. Or did you think Mr. Trump would make peace in 24 hours? Behold, he did not do it, but went to Ukraine to get riches there and deposits. I believe that we have a responsibility, the European Union, to tell our citizens what we can do to end the war.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, here we are talking about such an important subject ‐ spyware ‐ in a democratic space, when we know well that espionage was characteristic of states in which there was a dictatorship. I come from a communist state and it is difficult for European citizens to understand how we can not have measures to counteract these programs. If the Commission moves so hard, no action can be found after two years. It is necessary to protect not only the press or journalists, or, I know, prime ministers, but also citizens, Commissioner, because they are private citizens, they are spied companies, they are businessmen spied on, blackmailed, they are citizens who no longer want to enter politics because they are afraid of being followed and spied on. What do we do? What answer should we give home? If we fail to put an end to this, let us not be surprised by Euroscepticism and the lack of trust in the European institutions. You have to give a concrete answer: something can or cannot be done, because otherwise democracy is simply torn down and we cannot expect the best politicians if people are suspected and spied on.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, now, when we must rejoice that it is 80 years since the end of the Second World War, we are on a powder keg and I am certainly not populist if I criticise the President, because every time she comes, says and leaves, she does not listen to us. I would have liked to know how the European Union is contributing to the reconstruction of Ukraine, because we have helped Ukraine and it is natural to stand in solidarity, but the Polish Presidency has announced to us how many hundreds of billions are needed for reconstruction. Madam President, is the European Union also entering reconstruction? What are you doing with the neighboring states, neighboring Ukraine, which helped, were in solidarity with Ukraine? Are you helping them or facilitating their entry into the reconstruction of Ukraine? Peace is fostered through diplomacy and compromise. The European Union is passive, it lets Trump play all the games. Trump will go into reconstruction, America will go into reconstruction, and the European Union is losing. This is what the European Commission is asking: give us a roadmap, what happens to Ukraine after the end of the war and what do we do to end the war, to have peace?

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, today's topic is extremely important for the future of the European Union. Commissioner, negotiating power is extremely important from the point of view of negotiators, but also what arguments they have behind it. If we don't have a strong internal market, we don't have anything to negotiate with. If we do not take our fellow citizens to increase the purchase of European products and the development of European industry, we will not be able to convince him – it is Mr Trump’s freedom of decision, no matter how much we criticise him. That is why, Commissioner, of course, we have a 90-day respite, but what are we going to negotiate with? We have to go with strong arguments that yes, the European Union market is important, to make it tempting for the United States and to succeed in negotiating on the win-win principle. Otherwise, we try other agreements in vain. It's a consistent market. You said it yourself, the large volumes of investment, of trade, but I don't see an agenda and make it transparent. Tell us, with what arguments do you go there to negotiate?

Mr President, Commissioner, we are discussing a subject for which, it seems to me, the title has nothing to do with reality. I was also the Minister of Tourism in my country. I would prefer to do medical tourism only on what is related to nature, water, mud, air, but medical tourism, as we now understand it from what you have presented, is an ordeal for the patient. The patient should have the closest place to be treated. And my colleague said, to go from one country to another to get treatment is to fill out some forms, pay from you and wait for them to give you when they can. So if we want to do tourism, I would not call it ‘tourism’, I would call it ‘patients’ right’ to be treated in their country, in their place, in their region. Because ‘tourism’ means something pleasant, or the patient to carry it on his arms, to fly it, to carry it with rescue, is absolutely unpleasant. Because we also discussed rare diseases today. I believe that we really need to come to those directives that we have – the right of every European citizen to health, access to appliances. You can't stay and go to another country and get an X-ray. So here we have a lot of work to do, and my request is now, at the beginning of your mandate, that you ask, the College of Commissioners, that we really have a strategy for treating patients at home.

Mr President, Commissioner, imagine that 30 million sick people would have listened to what you said today. That's right, you told us it was going to be, we're going to be, we've spent five billion in 25 years, which means little in research. Do you think you shouldn't have presented us here with an exact situation or at least proposed us? What will you do to make cross-border treatment work? What will you do to ensure that research results in medicines for sick people? Parents who carry their children with muscular dystrophy on their arms, do you think they still believe in our slogan that no one is left behind? How do we do it? How can you be credible when you haven't come forward? You gave us some statistical figures we could find. I ask you, Commissioner, to come to the next session and tell us clearly what you are doing to prevent, to identify these rare diseases early on. What do we do to have medicines and access to medicines in all Member States? Because if you make a situation, you'll see how different it is. Every day I receive messages to donate money to treat these children or these adults with rare diseases.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, without a solid industry, you said yourself, Commissioner, we cannot have economic security and we cannot have social security. And yes, the metals industry, the cement industry, the chemical industry are energy intensive, they consume a lot of energy, but we need to have a combined plan, Commissioner. You presented the plan for steel and metals. Of course, other industries also need a plan. The key issue is energy. If we don't solve the cost of energy here, clearly, inputIt is he who gives the final price. And yes, we also need to resolve the protection of the internal market linked to entries from third countries that do not have as many restrictions as products from the European Union. Commissioner, you were with us in Parliament, I believe that the Commission needs to change two things: to make impact studies before establishing anything and the speed of decision. Because I was born in an area in Romania, where the steel industry had tens of thousands of jobs, almost all of them were destroyed. What do we do not to continue the demolition of the metal industry, steel industry and other industries? Concrete measures.

Mr President, Commissioner, cohesion, cohesion policy, keeps Europe united. If we do not understand this - and yes, you have now proposed to modernise, but, Commissioner, I think there should be a Commission exercise, to look at the impact, because we have always had money earmarked for cohesion policy, and yet regional disparities exist: the difference between rural and urban areas, the difference between areas far from the centres of the Member States. I ask you: Do you know if you also apply the geographical criterion when giving cohesion funds? Because we had the experience of a strategic investment fund to which we asked for geographical criteria, we put first come, first served and all the money was concentrated in four five states and created a difference between the member states. Therefore, I believe that modernization must take into account a few criteria. On the one hand, the geographical criterion that we really reduce these regional disparities, but also the efficiency of spending money, because it is important to see what happens with 100 euros spent. Therefore, the criteria I see that you should put are those related to efficiency, and geographical criteria.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we have not succeeded in setting up the capital market and we are rebaptising it now. You've come up with a new name, very poorly explained. You know, Commissioner, and you have heard here in my country, too, that people are already afraid, they want to take their money out of the bank, because they understand that yes, the European Commission is taking their investment money, their private money. Commissioner, first of all, you need to build trust. A citizen, an entrepreneur – and they come from their world, from there, from the business world – invests if they trust. We need to build this trust, to invest in the European Union, not to take the money to other states, not to leave well-trained citizens elsewhere. Therefore, this project can only be built if you communicate well, explain well the project and both the citizen and the entrepreneurs will come up with private money in strategic projects. Otherwise, it will be a failure again and we do not achieve what we really want: to have a common policy in the capital market, to be able to have common laws for everything that happens in the tax area, to have comparable taxation in the Member States, because we have an internal market, but it all starts with trust, Commissioner. This project was poorly communicated. Everyone is afraid and does not know how to protect their private money now, be it to the citizen or to entrepreneurs.

Mr President, Commissioner, setting the priority directions for the 2026 budget is extremely important. Why? We cannot have more money in the next period if we do not invest it where more money can bring us, namely in research, in innovation, in SMEs, in order to be able to develop well-paid jobs. We cannot have a competitive economy if we do not have well-trained people – that is why we must have a budget for education – if we do not have healthy people – that is why we must have money for health – and if we do not have well-paid people. So, Commissioner, you were saying that we need to find additional resources. Where do we find them? I think we can find them if we invest well, if we invest in cohesion, if we invest in all geographical areas, not to have areas left behind. Yes, if we have a good economy. But there is another problem, if we know how to defend our internal market, because today we have unfair competition and we are destroying jobs. The budget's priorities for 2026 are extremely important and it is up to us to do them well.

Mr President, Commissioner, we are talking about affordable prices, but I wish you had given a definition: What do you mean by affordable energy prices? Because another price is affordable for citizens of Luxembourg, another price is affordable for those of Romania or Eastern countries. You were very sure of yourself, as if you had the ace in your pocket. You can work it out by making an energy union, lowering prices, clean energy – all this means investment and especially time. The citizen needs it today, because for three years Europe has always been in crisis. Where is the crisis going? In the pocket of the citizen. I'd like you to tell us in the answers you give now, when? One term, one time. As a businessman, I understood: Let me tell you the measure and the time. When do we have affordable prices for all citizens, depending on their income? Besides, I believe one more thing, Commissioner. It is a speculation in the price of energy, unresearched, unsearched and left like this, to live well the uncontrolled energy producers and energy suppliers, and the costs again go to the pocket of the citizen.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, today's debate must be immediately followed by action, Commissioner. That's what farmers expect. We need to have more economic and social fairness in the internal market if we want to have sustainable agriculture, because that's what we're talking about. We need to have regulations that combat inflation and stabilize prices. Inflation eats from the budget. We cannot let farmers sell their produce below cost. We need action here. We need to step up efforts to combat unfair trading practices. We are well aware that we have unfair practices in every Member State. Why? Because uncontrolled products enter the internal market. Farmers and agricultural workers need a decent life, they deserve better living conditions. We must encourage – if we do not resolve this, the younger generation will not work, the generation you were talking about having to replace. The common agricultural policy? The common agricultural policy must be reformed, but direct subsidies must remain. Commissioner, you spoke of polarisation. How are you going to stop being polarized? How will you make subsidies ethical and fair for all farmers? And yes, farmers support simplification without affecting competence and fair competition in the internal market.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, what we do is very important, not just what we say. The European Semester was a concept, a concept that, of course, brought a lot of expectations in the Member States, brought a lot of expectations to the citizens, because, after all, we have to work for the citizens. The results of our work here, of the regulations, must lead to an increase in living standards, an increase in jobs, an increase in competitiveness in the European Union. That is why, Commissioner, I hope you are telling the European Commission that in the European Semester, and what we will do in this 2025 programme, until our mandate is over, we need to bring about measures that will increase social cohesion and, as I was saying, people's well-being. We can't with energy that costs three times as much as in the United States, we can't with very large inputs, we can't only with restrictions. In agriculture, this is again a problem. Of course we also need a clean environment, but we also need a European industry that can withstand global competition.

Dear colleague, we are discussing the European Semester. You didn't say much in your speech. I want to ask you specifically: why do you think that the European Semester that we have had for a long time has not worked in terms of social cohesion, increasing employee incomes, increasing the number of SMEs, sustainability? Because this is the debate, what should the European Union do, what should the European Commission do for the European Semester to bring results? The governance that the Minister was talking about, economic governance, which would bring social cohesion. What, in your view, would be the measures to be taken?

Madam President, Commissioner, first of all I would like to stress something positive, namely that for the first time we have four European institutions led by women. I am proud that Romania, my country, has had a female commissioner for three mandates. These are things that have developed in our democratic society. There's one more thing I'd like: the word ‘protect’ has been widely used – let’s replace it with ‘assume’, not ‘protect’. Why? Women are strong. I want to address our male partners now. Assume to emphasize the criterion of value, that she is a woman, that she is a man, on the criterion of value. Then we'll be competitive and efficient. I want to tell you something else: in my country, on 8 March we celebrate – and all over the world, of course – International Women’s Day, but on 9 March it is Men’s Day and we respect each other and I believe in this partnership so that we can do projects together. I have been running a women's association in Romania for 28 years and believe me we work very well with male partners. In the roadmap, Commissioner, and I am proud that you are here, you also need to talk to the other Commissioners, to have concrete measures. As I have said in other debates, it is not enough to debate, but we must have concrete measures to make progress.

Madam President, President of the European Council, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, today we were supposed to debate the Council meeting on 20 March. Unfortunately, almost all speeches were related to rearmament, defence; are very important, but I want to stop at the three points raised by the Polish Presidency and I want you to discuss them, Mr President, on 20 March. This is about the economic problem. We cannot be strong – you said, Minister, and rightly so, three very important pillars: simplification, energy and investment. If we don't do these three things, we can't defend ourselves. I must say with regret that over the last 20 years, the European Union's diplomacy has declined. If you want to be strong in the global world, you need to know how to negotiate with those who are stronger than you and those who are weaker than you, and clearly have a solid economy, which then allows you to sit at the negotiating table. Therefore, President Costa, especially for you, please discuss on March 20 what solutions we have for energy. SMEs are on the ground, people cannot pay for their energy, at least in my country and other countries in the east.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Europe's problem now is not only that of conflict, it is also the economic problem. And, Commissioner, gold-plating can lead to job losses. We have to understand, we have worked much more in the economy, in industry than in politics, we have to understand that we have to treat workers' rights as a package, with conditions for SMEs, especially, and for companies, because only companies create jobs and if we regulate, overregulate, these jobs can be eroded. But even if we deregulate, we can end up eroding jobs in the long run. This is why a very good analysis is needed, and perhaps the biggest fault of the European Union, the European Commission, is that regulations are being put in place, and a farmer, a farmer, an SME no longer knows what to do when these laws come into conflict. That is why we must be very careful to analyse what we are deregulating and, above all, to stop adding bureaucracy that brings nothing, neither competitiveness, nor job security, nor sustainability, nor the possibility for companies to raise wages.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I would first of all like to congratulate the Polish Council, the Polish Presidency, which is sitting here in the debate, unlike the President, who has not even presented her programme. Commissioner, are you in charge of the internal market? Of course it is good that we aim for competitiveness, but I tell you from experience, as an entrepreneur, we cannot have competitiveness without taking into account some policies to be integrated. For example: energy policy, also research and innovation, modern technologies, education and training. We can't do anything without qualified human resources, but we can't have qualified human resources if we don't think about people's lives. We cannot, in an unbalanced Europe where we have people in poverty, increase competitiveness. That is why, Commissioner, I propose to you that this Competitiveness Compass should be based on these pillars and that you link them together so that we do indeed get it! And look back at what we've legislated for. Do we have results or not? It's not enough to write on paper.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I think I can start by saying that the President of the Commission is being defiant, disrespectful and disinterested. If, when he has to present the Commission's five-year programme, he does not find time to come to Parliament, I believe that we must give him a vote of blame. Now, Commissioner, 11 pages has this five-year project. Know that a student I mentored made a better and more concrete program, because any program must answer three questions: How? With what? and when? Don't answer here. There are three and a half rows for agriculture, nothing for SMEs, you are resuming the social pact, but we have a social pillar, the same president led the last committee. Don't say anything about how to get the money back. It's a huge fraud. We feed budgets to the European Public Prosecutor's Office, to a lot of institutions, but we fail to collect the money that is defrauded. And one more problem: energy policy. It all starts here, Commissioner, and you know it. I appreciate you, but I do not appreciate the Commission's programme.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we are, of course, discussing a very important issue: export restrictions on chips from the United States, but I think we are not aware of these restrictions now. They started five years ago, we know well, and I think that the European Union should have been active, developing its chip production in the European Union, because we know well that advanced technologies, Commissioner, are based on chips. We don't have any. We depend on imports and I think that's the weak point. I am interested, Commissioner, if in the programme that you will be presenting tomorrow, the Commission's programme, you have included concrete measures to develop capacities and boost production capacities, because we cannot have advanced technologies, we cannot have competitiveness, we cannot have resistance in the global market and in vain we are angry at any administration coming from the United States or Asia, if we do not take our fate into our own hands to produce here. That's why that's my question. I hope that tomorrow we will learn more about how chip production will develop in Europe.