Speeches

You talked about the Draghi report, which I also listened to carefully. My question is: one point in the Draghi report is that we have strong education and health systems in Europe, and it said this as a strong point in the report – do you agree that we have strong education and health systems? From my point of view, precisely here is the weak point and, if we are talking about competitiveness, without a strong education system and without a strong health system, we cannot reach competitiveness.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is sad that we are witnessing fake news live. Colleagues from the far right called this document, which has been extensively worked on, censorship, although the Commissioner announced from the outset that there was no moderation of the content. I know this document very well, as Vice-Chair of the Committee on the Internal Market, and I tell you with all my faith: I believe that you have either not read the document or you are creating fake news as you have created in your country to be elected. We want to remove, through this regulation, in fact, illegal activities and the spread of disinformation, which disrupts all elections, which disrupts, if you will, the scale of values in any European state and in the European Union. So it is sad for me today, when we should be discussing differently – how we apply in each Member State and how we apply this uniformly, that no more children die. There were children who committed suicide precisely through falsely transmitted information. There were women raped, there were people killed for money. So, dear colleagues, read before you speak.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I condemn from the outset, I condemn war and the killing of innocent people. Romanians are also dying there because part of Ukraine... in Ukraine, part of the historical territories were Romania's. What I want to say, Commissioner, is: I was very attentive to communication. I believe that we need to change the way we communicate in order to have the support of the citizens. Summing up sums of money that we give without explaining to citizens why Romania, my country, has helped Ukraine more than, perhaps, sometimes, it has helped its own citizens, because we understand that we need to help – the question is what is the European Union doing, what pressure is it putting on the UN, the United States, the other world powers to get Russia to stop this aggression and mass killing of people? This is important for the citizens to know, because otherwise we will not have the support of the citizens. We don't give money out of our own pockets. We give money to citizens, in fact, and we have to stop this hideous... the most hideous form of manifestation is war.

Mr President, you have said what is right and what is wrong from your point of view. What needs to be done? Tell the Commission, tell us, what are the steps to stop the slaughter. Because it's... (The President interrupted the speaker) You have said what is right and what is wrong from your point of view, but what is the concrete measure or what are the concrete measures? Tell them here: What do we have to do to stop the slaughter? Because that's what this is all about. Should we let Ukraine be conquered by the Russians or give nothing more? What needs to be done? That's essential, that it's easy to make a statement. You have to say from your point of view what needs to be done.

Commissioner, President, ladies and gentlemen, we are discussing an extremely important document, we are talking about the future of agriculture. Commissioner, you have made some very important points, but know that there is still the concern of the European Agricultural Community and I will tell you why. You talked about fair incomes for farmers. Well, how can they have fair revenues when, on the one hand, they do not have money for investments, on the other hand, they have permanent unfair competition in the internal market? I have been Vice-Chair of the Committee on the Internal Market for 10 years and I am fighting for all products, not to have unfair competition. On the other hand, you talked about the bureaucratic burden. Do you know how many hundreds of pages a small farmer has to submit when he has to access a national or European fund? Very many ... enhanced veterinary supervision: In my country, animals die, in the last commission, because I have here the members of the commission, it was said: “We don’t have a vaccine”. How do we protect the farmers? How do we protect agriculture? The CAP also needs to be reformed. You were talking about fair incomes, but shouldn't we also have fair subsidies to farmers? My country has been a member since 2007 and has other subsidies than the other farmers. In conclusion, I believe that this document must be worked with farmers and put in place concrete measures so that we can really reach an internal agricultural market that will ensure our food future, for us, for the European Union.

Mr President, Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, it is good and necessary to look at economic governance and to strengthen the budget of the European Union. It was necessary, there are some good things done, which lead to the possibility that Member States could press on the acceleration of investments, for example, not taking into account the deficit of co-financing on strategic investments. It is not an ideal model, but it is a step taken and we must always think, when we change this governance, that the Member States are not developed equally economically. We can't put a bed of Procust's. External debts are different in the Member States and, of course, we also think about the Treaty, because there is a lot of subsidiarity here, in tax policies and in everything that states have the right to determine in the national context, depending also on the economic situation in that Member State. The steps are good, the fact that the social pillar is also taken into account - let's not forget that we still have a lot of people in poverty, a lot of children in poverty, and we also have to think about this, and about social cohesion. That is why I believe that this is only a first step and must be continued with economic governance, with the flexibility of the European Union budget.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we are looking at competitiveness at the end of the mandate, at the statement by the Commission and the Council. The President of the Commission is performing well, because in five years she has not been able to sit in any plenary to hear the views of MEPs to the end. What performance should we talk about, Madam President? You have shown the greatest lack of transparency! You are the only Commission President to have a negative opinion from all institutions: from the European Parliament, the Ombudsman, the Court of Auditors, on discharge. How can you talk about competitiveness? How can you talk about a fair policy? You have said this several times. What right policy is that you leave a market divided? You failed in your five-year term to make the single market. You have failed to plead and argue with Austria that Romania and Bulgaria should join Schengen. You didn't do anything on this warrant! I think it would be an honor to withdraw your candidacy, because you won the first one with only four votes.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I believe that we are ending this mandate with extremely important reports: combating forced labour. Although we have a convention from 1930, we must say that forced labour has not decreased. In just five years, from 2016 to 2021, it has increased by almost 3 million people who actually suffer from this forced labour. Why? Who are the worst? The poor, the children, the women. And yes, it has been said here: we must not say that this is only happening in third countries, it is also happening in the European Union, and it is very good that today we are debating and I hope that we will vote on this regulation that eliminates forced labour. It is horrible to know that people are being put to work and not being paid, not being able to support their family or their own lives with the money they earn. And I think it is good to have uniform sanctions in all Member States and to eliminate forced labour. Very often we enjoy cheap products, but we have to think that those cheap products are made with forced labor. That is why I think it is very good that we end this mandate with a regulation that protects people.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I think it is an extraordinary thing that I am ending my mandate with this extremely important package. As co-rapporteur on behalf of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, we obviously wanted to make this package in such a way as to protect, on the one hand, vulnerable consumers, on the other hand, to take care of small and medium-sized enterprises, because, obviously, the pressure on the price of utilities can drive them out of the market. That is why I want to congratulate the whole group that worked on this package, because, in the end, as Mr Geier said, we have improved the committee's proposal, we have put out an acceptable package, it is not ideal, but of course we can still work. We are going on the idea that, especially in the cold season, they should not be disconnected and we managed to put this amendment. Negotiating with the Commission and the Council has not been easy, but in the end we have succeeded and I believe that the message that we must now give to the Member States is to be attentive to the implementation of the package, because ultimately responsibility is shared. It is very important how each state implements this important energy and gas market regulation package.

Mr President, Commissioner, honourable Court of Auditors, I must say that I am frustrated when I heard the Commissioner say that the Commission's transparency is at the highest level. At the same time, we are well aware that we are struggling, both the Ombudsman, the Court of Auditors and we, the Committee on Budgetary Control, to find out what happened to the money and contracts concluded by the President. There is a double measure. In Parliament's discharge report, where I am rapporteur from my group, I find that there are strange amendments in which we have to show the notes, keep the coffee, water and paper vouchers that we buy in cabinets. At the same time, a lot of money and the minuses and negative opinions given by the Court of Auditors are not taken into account. I believe that we need to look very seriously, to treat with the same unit of measure the discharges of the Parliament, but also of the Commission, the Council and the agencies, obviously, because this is the only way to protect the financial interests and the citizens' money, after all. I would therefore like the Council to stop giving discharge so easily and for colleagues in Parliament to be demanding. I did not vote on the European Commission's discharge last year and I probably will not vote on it now.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, today's resolution is a sign that Romania needs solidarity. We are members of the European Union, we need support. Commissioner, you said it was a bilateral issue. Yes, but what is the purpose of the Union, after all? You should know that Romania is not now asking for the first time for the return of the treasure and to end with the robbery made by Russia. For over a hundred years in history, Romania has demanded these rights. He didn't make it. It is time for this resolution, of course, with the support of all colleagues who will certainly vote, to be taken over as a document, Commissioner, and not put aside, because here, in this Parliament, we have voted a lot of resolutions and nothing has happened to them. Citizens of Romania are waiting for this sign. Is there solidarity or not when a Member State is wronged? It is the right of citizens to recover this treasure, for which generations have worked to have it. I therefore ask you, Commissioner, to put this resolution, which will be voted on today, into action. It is Romania's right to hope for solidarity.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I believe that the Commission has taken the wrong approach, the Commission has taken the wrong approach: that environmental protection, the Green Deal, is in opposition to industrial policy. No, it must be neither industrial policy against environmental policy, nor vice versa. However, we must keep in mind that the transition from one technology to another needs a transitional period and the fact that we want to make monocolour – one technology – will lead to a huge problem in the internal market and for citizens, who will not be able to buy their new expensive cars, and for industry. Comparison of colleagues here with China – who pollutes more, the European Union or China? China must take action to reduce pollution, the United States must take action, India must take action. The European Union is the least polluting and we cannot destroy an industry. We also have an industrial policy strategy. Why is this industrial policy strategy not taken into account? I believe that the correction that Parliament has made with the Council is balanced.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, of course, we are discussing the broad lines of the 2025 budget. Someone else will finalize: a new Commission, a new Parliament. My perplexity is why, if we always say that we must have social cohesion in the internal market, that we must support SMEs, that we must support research and innovation, why we do not arrive after so many years making budgets – however, SMEs are the most in demand, the operating costs of SMEs are the highest, innovation and research cannot benefit SMEs, but only large companies, bankers are getting rich, polarisation in society is high. That is why my requirement is that, in the future, the budget really be managed on the principles that lead to social cohesion, to an increase in the number of SMEs, which we say are the backbone in the European Union, and to lifting citizens out of poverty. The money from the European budget is the money of the citizens and this is how we must think if we want to have peace and cohesion in the European Union.

The Prime Minister has said here several times: “must, must, must”. I want to ask you whether, from what the Prime Minister has presented here, you understood that we all have equal opportunities in the European Union now? The Prime Minister was also Minister of Agriculture. I ask you, the Prime Minister has used the word ‘must’ several times (The speaker is interrupted for technical reasons). The Prime Minister has said several times in his speech that he ‘must and must and must’. I will relate to one sentence, which is that we need equal opportunities, all of us, in the European Union, that is, all the citizens of the 27 countries. Do you think that, with what the Prime Minister said, we now have equal opportunities? Domnul prim-ministru este și membru al Consiliului și fost ministru al agriculturii, și întreb: How does it consider that the CAP should be amended in order to be equal for farmers in the European Union? How should Schengen advocate for a single market?

Mr President, Commissioner, of course we are debating a very important topic, especially since we have so many elections this year. Do you think it is important to be concerned about all elections, not just elections at the level of the European Parliament? Because, in the end, elections at local level, at national level, national parliaments, those will then influence the outcome of the elections there, they will also influence the elections for the European Parliament. Therefore, if there is a foreign interference in the local and national elections and it distorts the outcome of the elections, obviously the others will be influenced as well. Can you estimate in what percentage do you think there are foreign interferences in the 27 states now? You've said a few things, but I think asking them just not to use artificial intelligence with fake videos isn't enough. Don't you think we should have regulations at European Union level that restrict? That doesn't mean we don't have freedom of speech, but to severely restrict and sanction all this false information and manipulation.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is sad that this year, 2024, we are still discussing violence and harassment against women at work, but also on the street. Maybe we should do a prevention and maybe we should have a much better gender balance in all institutions, because when we have a female majority, there would probably be no violence and harassment in the workplace. I think it is very welcome and of course I will vote for this document. It is very welcome for all Member States to ratify this ILO agreement, because it is not enough, we must also act, and behold, this year is an extremely important year, because in most Member States there are elections, both local, and national, and European Parliament. Political parties must promote women more and gender balance in all institutions – state, private, political – will certainly lead to less violence. We also need education and culture. And yes, I believe that our male partners must assume this, support women on the basis of value in all jobs where it could be done, and fight, associate and fight when violence occurs.

Thank you, dear colleague, for your question. Yes, I'm an engineer by profession and I've never gone on improvisation. It is good to make sure that everything that is placed on the market also has the safety of using devices.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is very good that we are discussing patient safety today. It's late. After 12 years, we're going to change the rules. Too much of us follow the ‘better late than never’ principle. Domnule comisar, în țara mea și în multe alte țări pacienții nu au acces la dispozitive. Be scheduled in three months for a C.T. or CT scan. Not to have access to a prosthesis, not to have access, as has been said here, for children, to catheters or essential things. It is absolutely astounding that after so many years patients die because they do not have access to devices. On the other hand, there are devices on the internal market that do not have performance, are not certified and have even led to the death of the use of devices. Health systems are in crisis, it is clear and I hope, Commissioner, that if we now analyse and amend the regulations, we will also be able to have access for patients, no matter in which country they live, to these devices, on which their lives ultimately depend. After all, nothing is more important than people's lives. (The speaker agreed to answer a question raised under the ‘blue card’ procedure)

Madam President, Commissioner, we are discussing strengthening common defence. Very little has been said about peace. The President of the Commission leaves again after she has made her point of view known. It is not interesting to hear Parliament's views. Yes, of course we need to strengthen our defenses, but we also need to fight for peace. This is what European citizens expect, and look, my country has 2.5% of the defence budget, but unfortunately it is not treated in the same way as the other states that have less for defence, and the best example is Austria. Romania is discriminated against both in the case of farmers and in the case of Schengen. We are talking about consolidation here: in order to be able to strengthen defence and fight for peace, we need to aim at least for this. We do not have a very good diplomatic outcome and yes, it may be a good proposal to have a Commissioner for Peace, but what do we do now? Peoples are impoverished, people are dying on the front lines, and we are unable to find a peaceful solution.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, today I am glad that we are coming to talk about this regulation, which I fought for when I was in the employers' movement. I believe that geographical indications for wine, spirits, but also for agricultural products bring effects including in the circular economy, preserve cultural traditions, and small producers in rural areas can develop tourism. They know best and this tradition is passed down from generation to generation. The label put on the product assures consumers that it is an authentic product from that area and somehow combats counterfeiting. That is why I support this regulation and I hope as soon as possible and I am glad that from my country we have Dobrogea pie, Ibănești cheese and many other products with a geographical indication and I hope that we can apply the geographical indication to other handicraft products as well. This identifies us in the world and, Commissioner, of course, I am also saying that in trade agreements we should also put in place and protect instruments to support small producers.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, of course the regulation makes sense. We need to see how we can protect intellectual property. My problem, from the point of view of small and medium-sized enterprises, from the point of view of the internal market (I am the Vice-President of the internal market): I believe that the regulation will have detrimental effects on small, small and medium-sized enterprises. Additional administrative costs are introduced, there is not enough transparency. Commissioner, I believe that this point of view that I am now saying has been conveyed to you through over 200 questions by the Member States. Neutral experts said it too. I think we had to think about when we make this regulation and the impact of the end-user and the impact on research and innovation if we want the European Union to be a leader in innovation, in research, in technology compared to the global market, and that is why I think it would be wise to withdraw this proposal, because the future effects will be hard to counteract if this regulation comes out in its current form.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we are discussing an extremely important thing if we start from statistics and we are well aware that we have a lot of road accidents. It was normal to come up with a proposal and improve traffic conditions. It is strange to hear colleagues here say that it would cost us to have a medical visit at 15 years old. I strongly support it, because we cannot expose citizens to accidents just because we would not want to make this visit at 15 years old. Good thing we do the car overhaul every year or two. I also agree that we have a driver crisis in the European Union, which is why I support lowering the age of driving trucks to 17, but of course with an attendant. After all, our target is zero accidents and we can't make a difference. We have an internal market. If in a Member State there is already a mandatory medical visit at 15, that man may be exposed to an accident in a country where no medical visit is ever made and say that you discriminate when we know well that, physiologically, at 70, you do not have the same skills is absolutely strange. I support, however, the protection of citizens and security in the internal market.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, of course this is a step and it is the first step we are taking to revise the financial framework, but I am sceptical because, Commissioner, did you say, at the end of your presentation, 'the need to increase competitiveness'? I speak from an internal market perspective, I am the Vice-President of the internal market. It is not normal to review and cut exactly the funds that could lead to social cohesion, that could lead to competitiveness, that could lead to reindustrialization, because here we are behind the other states and, of course, lead to this cohesion and this geographical balance. That is why I believe that what the Commission is sending us and Parliament is working to correct, the Council is demolishing – and this is not the first time that it is demolishing, fragmenting the market, making decisions that are only politically related, not to what we need and what citizens need after all. If we don't have industry, we don't have jobs, if we don't have competitive industry, we can't have high wages and people are getting poorer every day.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we are discussing food price inflation. Commissioner, you came and told us a story here. Nothing happened. We're talking about causes, root causes. Do you know what the root cause is? It's speculation, Commissioner, because it's speculation. The farmer sells his wheat for less, but the bread is more expensive on the shelf. The farmer sells his milk for less, but the dairy products on the shelf are more expensive. Why? They don't interfere with those who speculate. Who? Big stores, hypermarkets. What bargaining power does a small producer have with these colossi? No, no, no. And you were talking about inputs. What's been done? Fuel, energy, farmers are down. And no, we have not mobilised you and the Commissioner for Agriculture has not mobilised what is still happening in Brussels today. Commissioner, either we want to save European agriculture and not impoverish or starve people, or then I think very strongly that you do not care about people. People, millions, tens of millions of people have nothing to eat, they can no longer afford from wages and pensions to buy at the prices we are talking about today, and there is no concrete measure and you have not presented here any concrete measure.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, today we are talking about what we can do with this regulation so that there is this balance between transparency and the right to expression. We all know, I don't think there is a country where there has not been interference in elections, for example, an attack on democracy, as the Commissioner said. It's fine and we're taking some steps with the ledger we want to set up, but I'm skeptical that any unclean paid political advertising can be identified, so to speak, and fake news. Commissioner, I support these things personally: I received the European Parliament Award for MEP of the Year in 2019 at the IMCO Committee. Do you know what the press says? That I was awarded by Sputnik. So, these deformations will, of course, lead to a lack of credibility in front of the citizens, and I believe that we should not stop here. We must continue to find ways to really counter fake news and manipulation of citizens, especially in the act of elections that can distort the democratic act.