Speeches

Madam President, friends of Putin can be found in every single Member State. Let me start from Marine Le Pen in France to Matteo Salvini in Italy and Nigel Farage, the Europhobic UKIP party. And for what purpose? Of course they both want to divide us and to destabilise European democracy. But Putin’s unprovoked aggression against Ukraine has had the unplanned consequence of putting Europe’s populist superstars on the back foot. Marine Le Pen is now destroying a million campaign leaflets featuring a photograph of her with Putin. We who are working for a democratic, inclusive and peaceful Europe should count this as a win. But we shouldn’t stop. It is high time to expose these extreme movements. It is high time to act. And, Madam Vice—President, thank you very much for your strong support to Ukraine, to the brave people of Ukraine, to President Zelenskyy. As a representative of all the parties, I am proud that the Verkhovna Rada is part of our family, because we care about democratic values, we care about freedom, we care about a free society. Slava Ukraini!

Mr President, dear High Representative, dear colleagues, I am convinced that we all in this room want China to be our partner and to continue a dialogue on key areas, including deepening our trade and investment relationship, especially in this severely aggravated atmosphere of war on the European continent. Unfortunately, the reality is different. There are many concerns, which require us to be vocal on what is happening in a country which is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and at least supposed to play a constructive role in Putin’s war in Ukraine. But no. Forging closer ties with Moscow and adopting an ambiguous position in its war is particularly worrying. Together with enduring human rights situations, the brutal crackdown against Uyghurs in Xinjiang, unjustified trade measures against Lithuania, sanctions against Members of the European Parliament and direct interference in our society force EU to take a different approach towards China. We cannot turn a blind eye anymore.

Mr President, thank you so much for your clear message on putting a conditionality under these difficult circumstances. I think we should act. We should act now. It’s time for the EU to send a very clear signal. First, we must strongly condemn the divisive ethno-nationalistic rhetoric. Secondly, we must strongly condemn moves to undermine State institutions. And thirdly, we must be prepared to issue sanctions and immediate restrictive measures should be taken on board if the situation further escalates. The EU must step up and increase its focus on events in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and we must clearly demonstrate our collective commitment towards the country’s European and Euro-Atlantic aspirations. This is our opportunity to demonstrate the importance of our European values and democracy. We must ensure that the October elections are held, that the transparency of the vote is ensured and their results are implemented. I firmly believe the country’s future is within the European Union, so we must make sure that the hard-earned progress is not lost and we should give the country a clear and visible path towards European Union and grant them candidate status. This will be decisive for the political future of Bosnia Herzegovina, and not only for them, but for the region. EU and Bosnia-Herzegovina; zaedno i tochka - They go together.

Mr President, we speak to them, to the refugees, in numbers. But behind the numbers, there are thousands of families split apart. Difficult goodbyes between fathers and their children. Bitter tears. Shattered dreams and peaceful lives left behind. I am pleased to see that this time around, Europe is responding in accordance with the values of humanity and compassion. That people escaping war have been widely welcomed by governments, local communities and a wave of citizens’ engagement to help. I am also happy to see that this time the Council reacted with a swift and unified response, triggering the first time the Temporary Protection Directive. But even in these difficult times, we should have lessons learned. We cannot have Europe à la carte any more. We need a European Union that has a common asylum and migration policy. These are truly testing times for us. To the people that left their wives behind, to our empathy and to our readiness to react effectively as a Union in the future, regardless of where people in need of protection come from.

Mr President, dear colleagues, we have a war in Europe on a scale and of a type we thought belonged to the history books. And let me be clear, this is not the war of Russian people. This is Putin’s war. Putin’s regime is the one to blame for waging the war, killing civilians, destroying country’s infrastructure. Putin has attacked the democratic values and European aspirations of the people of Ukraine. But the brave Ukrainians stood up strong, and they deserve fully fledged support. Colleagues, it’s time to be on the right side of history and to grant Ukraine candidate status. Dear Ukrainians, we will not let you go. I’m sure that the light will win over the dark. We are with you the brave people of Ukraine. Slava Ukraini!

Madam President, Ukraine is Europe, and Ukrainian security is European security. High Representative, unity among Member States is most important for us, but we cannot have unity if we have Orbán going and negotiating alone with Putin. Common action within NATO, and full support for Ukrainian independence, territorial integrity and strategic choices should be supported by us. This is the only way to answer to the unprecedented military aggression that country has been facing recently from the Russian Federation. At the same time, we need to continue providing political support, economic help and assistance to Ukraine, including in defence and security related areas, and to develop a long—term strategy. This requires Europe to formulate a geopolitical answer, because this crisis is also a lesson for us, and it could dramatically change the way Europeans think about their own security.

Mr President, I would like to start by thanking the rapporteur, Sergey Lagodinsky, for his very progressive approach. Indeed, the report rightfully stresses the essential role of civil society, which contributes to a number of crucial areas – promoting democracy, protection of minorities, healthcare and social services – while understanding that their cross—border work and financial efforts have increased considerably. However, despite the important roles NGOs play in public life, there is as yet no harmonised pan-European legislative framework to allow all those who want to engage and organise themselves for non—profit activities, to do so cross—border. As a result, in the absence of Union legislation, the cross—border work of the non-profit sector is characterised by legal uncertainty, discrepancies, different practices and hurdles at national level. The report provides a long—needed answer to the situation by proposing, on the one hand, a clear regulatory framework for European associations and, on the other, a set of common minimum standards for non—profit organisations in the Union. Mr Commissioner, it is a good basis so it’s time to act!

Madam President, while some world leaders push hate, vote against rights, ignore horrific crimes against humanity, let inequality and suffering go on, the European Union reaffirms its role as a leading global proponent of the promotion and protection of human rights. I am glad that during 2021 we continued to oppose firmly any unjustified restrictions of rights, freedoms and silencing of dissenting voices. What more should be done to address the challenges to human rights? And I am speaking worldwide, as the COVID-19 pandemic, economic and social insecurity, continue to shake the world in 2022. Defenders of democracy sustain heavy new losses in their struggle against authoritarian regimes, starting with China, with a deteriorating human rights situation and abuses against the Uighurs, to the arrests of activists and journalists in Belarus. I invite the European Union to make full use of its own toolbox at our disposal, including economic leverage in mutual trade relations in order to develop more ambitious support for freedom, good governance and rule of law.

Mr President, I would like to thank both rapporteurs, Ms Loiseau and Mr McAllister, for their accurate report. Indeed, the world of today is rapidly shifting – geopolitical trends, in addition, the fragmentation of the multilateral order forces, the EU to confront its own position in international affairs. The current volatility shows us the need to have a strong and united European response on the international arena, but also a Europe that has the capacity to set the global standards, lead and ready to fully embrace solidarity and act in a prepared and unified manner. Because let’s be honest, there is no longer much truth in the cliché that Europeans believe war is unthinkable and take peace for granted. Therefore, in order to achieve our strategic objectives, we should shape the common foreign and security policy and the common security and defence policy by making full and more effective use of the EU’s hard and soft power instruments, including by introducing qualified majority voting for decision-making in EU foreign affairs and by achieving European strategic autonomy.

Mr President, I would like to pass on my congratulations to Madam Commissioner. The European Parliament always stands for democratic values. We cannot ignore the tragic events that took place in Kazakhstan earlier this month. Kazakhstan is a strategic partner in Central Asia, and we have always welcomed positive developments in this country. But, at the same time, we act rightly to any violations of human rights there. And yes, innocent citizens protested for a better social economic life. But why these protests quickly spread violence, anarchy, that led to military intervention by a third country, killing dozens and violating human and fundamental rights, is a question that should be raised. Therefore, I do believe that we must give Kazakhstan time to explain to us the reasons for the terrible tragedy and how the country plans to further implement its own promises. Kazakhstan should carefully examine every fact and launch a full—scale and transparent investigation into the events.

Madam President, dear Mr President, ‘revival, power, belonging’ is the motto of the French Presidency of the European Union. It defines the needs of today’s European Union, facing the health crisis, the rise of aggressive powers and climate disruption. A Europe that relates on unity to lead through these difficulties times. You mentioned a war of priorities, but I want to focus only on building a genuine European sovereignty and strategic autonomy. If we don’t go forward with that, Europe will always be blamed to be ‘too little, too late’. Second, engaging with Western Balkans and Eastern Partnership countries. Mr President, engaging with Western Balkans is the best investment in security, values, in the European interest. Countries from Western Balkans are surviving and geographically part of the Europe, and they deserve to be part of today’s European Union. And thirdly, the Conference on the Future of Europe. It is not a listening exercise. It is a project that can lead and renew European Union for better. We need more... (The President Cut Off the Speaker)

Mr President, I would like to congratulate Lukas Mandl for his timely and accurate support. The fight against crime has been on the top of the agenda of the Western Balkan governments for almost a decade now. Organised crime is a problem of such magnitude that it could limit the democratisation and development of the Western Balkans as a whole and could undermine the European integration of every country in the region. However, most of the Western Balkan countries have recognised the dangers to their peoples constituted by organised crime, and have already implemented a number of required legal, institutional and political measures in order to able to successfully combat it. But no question, more has to be done. In order to meet EU membership criteria, the Western Balkan countries need to deliver concrete results, in judicial reforms and the fight against corruption and organised crime. The EU must stand alongside the people of the Western Balkans in their fight against organised crime and provide further assistance as part of the EU accession process.

Madam President, we have imposed a series of sanctions, but the truth is that those measures have failed to deliver results, and the current situation shows that we have failed to learn the lessons. We cannot underestimate this threat, because the number of Russian troops and equipment being brought to the border is huge. Six years after the Minsk II Peace Plan was signed to stop the fighting in Ukraine’s Donbas region, it is clear that the Minsk Protocol has reached a dead end. Yes, words do not have much meaning unless followed by actions. The European Union and the United States must agree on further joint actions and be ready for all possible scenarios. This is the only way to prevent the worst case scenario. Changing European borders by force would have political and economic consequences. Therefore, I call for a peaceful solution and Russian re—engagement in the Normandy format.

Madam President, there was an emergency agreement necessary to stop war. But today, we see the consequences – a real prospect for a third conflict. It is time to admit the truth. This is the greatest existential threat of the post—war period in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The EU should guarantee the territorial integrity of the country, as well as the maintaining of the functionality of the state institutions. It would be a catastrophe for the European Union and the Atlantic community if we do not take actions to stop Serbian separatists from pushing towards succession. Therefore, I call on Mr Dorić and all parties involved to respect and protect state institutions, resume constructive dialogue, and take steps to advance the progress of the EU integration pact, including on relevant reforms. A lack of response to the current situation would endanger the Dayton Agreement, while instability in Bosnia and Herzegovina would have wider regional implications.

Mr President, speaking about Europe means speaking about solidarity and about potential. Potential we constantly need to free up, to watch, to maintain. This can mean, for example, making private resources available for the public good, informal financial means. But the nations are unaware of what the term ‘philanthropy’ refers to: it is about time resources, expertise and network. Europe’s success is made of people dedicated, their skills and competences, to the European dream. They do this in diverse forms of expertise and civil engagement in foundations and associations, as corporate and individual donors in small—scale work or actions. They all form the backbone of our society. But just as a backbone stays under the surface of the skin, philanthropic organisations are mostly working behind the scenes, operating a little bit under the radar. They are often acting in the space where neither government nor commercial sector wants to act. Moreover, they are ready to take risks when experimenting with innovative solutions, and this played back during the COVID—19 crisis. Foundations and civil society organisations had been quick to respond. They mitigated the crisis in pooling emergency funds, helped bridge the gap in public provision by supporting the most affected communities with medical and food aid, social assistance, as well as research to fight the virus. Lately, we learned from the COVID—19 pandemic that issues do not stop at borders, so that’s also not philanthropy. Stakeholders, donors and organisations work more and more across borders with partners from all over Europe. Institutional philanthropy in Europe includes more than 147 000 philanthropic organisations, with a combined annual expenditure of nearly EUR 60 billion. They support a wide range of projects in the field of research and innovation, environmental protection, social care, culture and youth democracy, to name just a few. Imagine this huge potential, a potential that cannot take full effect even within the European Union; complex rules hinder cross—border philanthropy in the form of multiple legal, administrative and fiscal barriers. These concern larger and old foundations investing their assets across borders by, for example, supporting start—ups or social enterprises with social impact investment. It concerns the giving of funds by public benefit organisations, but it also hits hard on the donors giving cross—border. Further restrictions to foreign funding still makes it difficult for philanthropic organisations to find formal banking channels to transport philanthropic money across borders. Ladies and gentlemen, I’m grateful that Commissioner Vestager, Commissioners Reynders and Breton, all showed their interest for this truly European topic. And that Commissioner McGuinness, who has been a true ally in this topic since the beginning. I also would like to thank in particular my dear colleague and Vice—President of the European Parliament Nicola Beer for her tireless work. The Parliament, Commission and Council – I think it’s time to act. There is a lot of potential.

Mr President, I welcome the past EU—Western Balkans Summit and its conclusions not only because the most important historical lesson for Europe is investing in integration of the continent, but because such public expressions of solidarity are more important than ever, as disinformation campaigns attempt to create divisions have recently been very strong in the Western Balkans. It shows that any hurdle can be overcome in the commitment to the enlargement process and that fully—fledged EU membership is the ultimate goal. The EU’s commitment to provide nearly EUR 30 billion in grants and investments over seven years in order to aid development and propel Western Balkan countries towards membership is real proof that we stand side by side with our partners and reaffirm our unequivocal support for the region’s European perspective. However, the enlargement process does not only depend on the level of economic growth, but also on many other achievements, among which are the rule of law, democracy and, last but not least, good neighbourly relations. We have the current examples for this: the provocation on the Kosovo—Serbia border shows us how fragile the peace in the region is, or the difficulties between Bulgaria and North Macedonia to find a compromise on the bilateral dispute demonstrate to us what the role of the past is in the region. I believe we should continue to support Western Balkans in carrying out all those necessary reforms because the European Union and alignment with its values and standards remain the greatest unifying factor for all the people of the Western Balkans. Having said that, I urge both North Macedonia and Bulgaria to finally resume a constructive dialogue in order to achieve sustainable results. Reaching a compromise over an action plan of concrete measures could foster the whole EU integration, and I think the further delays will put at risk the credibility, objectivity and reliability of the accession process.

Madam President, Commissioner, Minister, undoubtedly the most important issue to be addressed by the forthcoming European Council is the high electricity prices in Europe, which are on the verge of having disastrous consequences for the European economy. The numbers are shocking. In some Member States, electricity prices are three times higher than they were a year ago. It is our duty now to protect industries and especially consumers before the winter season. Here are a few short-term actions that can be taken. First of all, help, national, for energy poor families. Secondly, aid to small and medium-sized enterprises which are in extreme difficulty. And thirdly, to think longer term about dealing with the crisis. But at the same time, we should not blame the Green Deal, nor do we need individual decision-making. What we need is a European approach to address the immediate impact of the current crisis by implementing common measures and by introducing a reform of the European Union's energy market, including a collective agreement on gas supply prices in a concrete future.

Mr President, colleagues, the statistics are staggering: nearly 23,000 road fatalities every year in Europe. Unfortunately, it has not seen much improvement in the last few years, and behind these figures are broken human destinies and shattered dreams. This is an unacceptable and unnecessary human cost to mobility. My colleagues in the Committee on Transport and I have worked on the recommendations for a European Union framework on road safety to achieve the zero-mortality objective, driven by the belief that we need to change these statistics. Our proposals take into account the analysis that only 8% of deaths occur on motorways and 54% on rural secondary roads. They are based on three pillars: first, safer vehicles; secondly, safer roads and, of course, thirdly, improved emergency services. We need intensive and collaborative efforts, the implementation of research and innovation, the harmonisation of national approaches to road safety, stricter measures and zero tolerance for drink driving, with the sole and clear idea of complying with the rules and protecting the life and health of all road users. It is also important to improve emergency infrastructure, including through the provision of aerial medical services in remote mountainous areas.

Madam President, let us focus the debate a little on Mr Aguilar's specific issues, which definitely deserve attention. Undoubtedly, the United States is the European Union's most important partner. This also applies to my country, the Republic of Bulgaria. They are a strategic partner. There is no need to explain exactly what the role of the Movement for Rights and Freedoms is in confirming this strategic partnership in Bulgaria under the Euro-Atlantic Partnership and in Bulgaria being part of the civilized space. But in this case, our partners are deeply misled, misled by a Capital Round led by oligarch Ivo Prokopiev. And let me tell you my reasons for that. First, the accusations made against Mr Peevski are absolutely untenable. This is proved every day by the Bulgarian authorities, our parliamentary group asks questions and receives the appropriate answers. Second, for a long time certain lobbyists have talked about their role in the process, although as far as I know the process as such, they have no significant role. Third, one of the most influential figures in this round, literally a few days, even a day before the sanctions were announced, said he expects good news from the United States, whatever that means. Apparently, this circle is very well informed and can afford a day before the official announcement of the sanctions to speak publicly to the Bulgarian public. Since we know the mechanism of disclosure itself and it is very limited, within Washington, there is no way this information could have come out if other lobbyists do not work in the whole process. At the end of two minutes, I am aware that I cannot explain the whole problem, but let me tell you what is behind this oligarchic circle. It is very interesting as a construction. It includes strong media influence, a claim to absolute protection of human rights and freedoms and democratic values, a claim to liberalism in the Bulgarian political space, but there are also deviations, branches that are related to non-governmental organizations. And most importantly, Madam President, this circle participates in power without participating in elections. This is what Prime Minister Boyko Borisov said. In his first government there were six ministers who were nominated by this round, well, they like that. Mr. Peevski does not like them, because with the three media outlets he exposes them for years, and we will continue to do so. I say this from this stand with my greatest responsibility. We will continue to communicate with our American partners and... (President interrupts speaker)

Madam President, it is worth the effort to review the scope of the European Magnitsky Act, especially in the context of its geopolitical influence as an important part of the European foreign policy toolbox. But it is equally worth saying that the European Magnitsky Act must not become an instrument of over-repression and violation of human rights and freedoms. Contrary to the fact that the US Magnitsky Act has no effect on the territory of the European Union, some Member States use the imposition of US sanctions as a pretext for unlawful repression against individuals and companies, which is in flagrant contradiction to both their domestic legislation and Community law. This is the case with the Republic of Bulgaria. But to conclude, in the light of what has been said, I believe that, given the existing negative practice of misinterpreting the US Magnitsky Act by the Member States, the same should not be allowed with regard to its European counterpart – i.e. the sanctions under it should not become an over-punishment without the guilt being proven by an independent judicial authority in the assessment of all facts and evidence.