Speeches

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, strengthening the strategic partnership between the European Union and India is a clear political priority. We were with the Trade Committee at the end of October to hold meetings in New Delhi precisely for this purpose. We are talking about a relationship that concerns trade and investment, but also foreign policy, security, innovation and above all fundamental values to be shared between great democracies, such as India and the European Union. We are at a positive stage in the negotiations. I hope that the progress made can be translated into an agreement by the EU-India summit on 27 January 2026. Opportunities for Europe are significant, in particular for strategic sectors of our exports, such as the agri-food industry of excellence, theautomotive, the mechanical engineering industry and advanced technologies. But a credible deal must be balanced and protect our industrial interests in the face of a manufacturing giant like India. It is essential to maintain a firm line on the protection of the most exposed sectors, from agriculture to textiles to the steel industry, in a global context of unfair competition and overcapacity. The work on trade safeguards in the Trade Commission is therefore also central to the relationship with India. Finally, legally binding commitments are needed on compliance with labour standards, environmental protection, ratification of the fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organization. On major geopolitical issues, a rules-based agreement, multilateralism and international law can further strengthen EU-India cooperation.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the title of this debate is already indicative of what the majority of this Parliament thinks. We need a united European response to the American blackmail of Greenland. We need to send a clear message to the United States: Stop, go back to the discussion table, because this time the countermeasures, the sanctions will really be there and they will hurt. I say this to the European Commission, I say this to you, High Representative, and I also address our governments: Be brave this time and don't stop. Only if our intention is credible will it be possible to stop this escalation that nobody wants, not even - I am sure - the majority of the American people. What is certain is that Europe must stop being naive and become a power, that democratic power that can stop the dismantling of international law that has been in place for a long time and in many different contexts. Reversing the course is possible, but it depends only on us.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I am outraged today. I am outraged and angry that, in this Parliament, even in the face of violence against children, sexual blackmail and suicide, the sovereign right can clearly say that it is necessary to apply the rules and punish those who abuse. On the contrary, we are asked not to censure freedom of expression. We're insane. So do we want to continue in Europe the cases of platforms, Grok and not only, that allow to strip in a few seconds the photos of girls and boys? In the last year, 312,000 images of child sexual abuse were certified, the highest number ever, also due to artificial intelligence systems. We must apply the rules that exist, such as the Digital Services Act and theAI Act that, if activated without shyness, allow us to counteract these phenomena. We don't need mass surveillance mechanisms, but rather to consider even more stringent changes to digital regulations. European girls and boys need to be protected now.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner McGrath, why does a company that sells offline have to follow a whole series of rules to protect customers and consumers, while in online commerce large players, often non-European, can still do whatever they want, making unfair competition to companies in our territories? This also impacts consumers, so this agenda is an important piece to ensure maximum protection offline and online and have a market that works properly. Pay attention to marketplaces: Incorrect online practices cost almost €8 billion a year. We need a change of pace. First the digital regulatory framework needs to be fully applied, then more effective controls, customs reform and anti-dumping action are needed. The recent Toy Safety Regulation shows that Europe can protect consumers if it wants to do so. We expect then a Digital Fairness Act ambitious, clear rules against the so-called dark patterns, the prohibition of unfair practices of dynamic ticket pricing in the entertainment sector and strong online child protection. European consumers are asking us for simple, strong and homogeneous rules: Let's do it and, most importantly, let it work.

Madam President, colleagues, this is a good report, the result of real cross-party work. It proves that, despite Brexit, cooperation with the UK can deliver – smooth sharing of police data to fight cross-border crime, steady energy trade to keep prices down, joint steps to protect farmers and small businesses from needless border checks, and new partnerships on clean technologies like carbon capture and offshore wind. We also highlight where we must go further: making supply chains safer together, maintaining high data protection standards for stable cross-border services and building structured cooperation on AI so our rules lead globally. But let us be honest, we are only here because of Brexit. We are spending time and effort fixing problems that were created by leaving. The TCA limits the damage; it does not erase it. So we need to continue working to find new solutions also for mobility and to support further cooperation in areas that are not fully covered still.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, there are rules in the digital space regardless; It is a question of deciding whether we let the big tech companies establish them in agreement with each other, or whether we set them up in a democratic way. It is right to simplify our digital regulations, for example by helping small and medium-sized enterprises and start-ups by removing their bureaucracy and complications, as it is essential to strengthen centralised governance to counter fragmentation, which is still very much present, by giving more resources and expertise to institutions such as, for example, the European Artificial Intelligence Office. It is not acceptable to deregulate, remove transparency, delay expected measures, affect data protection; Unfortunately, this is also part of the Commission's proposal. The theme is based on: We cannot apologise for wanting to be the global benchmarks for regulation, but rather we need to accelerate investment, capital market completion, common industrial policy initiatives that really enable us to compete with the US and China. Otherwise we will find that, from omnibus to omnibus, our competitiveness remains at stake, because we have not made the really necessary choices. It's not too late to do the right ones.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I am laying a pitiful veil on colleagues on the Italian right who want to ban affective education at school in Italy and then, in this Chamber, say that we must not put limits on social media, perhaps in order not to annoy some large digital enterprise. Let's talk about serious things: 42% of Italian teenagers turned to a chatbot for comfort when they felt sad or anxious. Not to a parent, not to a friend – to an algorithm! This figure of Save the Children It tells us everything about the seriousness of the situation. Today, platforms design dependency: infinite scrolling, dark patterns, algorithms that amplify fragility. They are not system errors, they are the system, and our young people are paying the consequences. With this report we call for clear European rules: harmonised minimum age, age verification with respect for privacy, prohibition of addictive designs. The big tech They should stop treating children as products. For those who doubt the necessity of our rules, look at the damage to our young people. The European Parliament must choose its side.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, today's debate demonstrates one thing: the European Union does not yet have the appropriate tools to defend our economic security in the face of unilateral decisions that can bring entire strategic chains to their knees. We welcome the temporary one-year suspension of some restrictions on Chinese exports negotiated between the United States and China but, let's be clear, the restrictive measures introduced in April remain fully in place, and this short breath is not a sustainable and structural solution. We therefore need a pragmatic and autonomous European approach to China, independent of the United States but firmly rooted in our strategic interests and based on our values. At the same time, we need to strengthen cooperation with partners who share these values – Canada, Japan, Australia and others – to diversify supplies, increase resilience and counter aggressive economic practices such as these export controls. We must continue with proactive policies such as the steel safeguard, which I myself am negotiating with other colleagues, because overcapacity is the other side of the restrictions. Today, Europe is weakened by a patchwork of fragmented national policies; This fragmentation is no longer an option. If we want to defend our economic space in a world defined by the strength of the industrial policies of other global powers, we must act together as Europeans, and we must also act soon!

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the European Union is today organised in such a way that it can respond to the challenges it faces, from conflicts to transitions to economic security. We say with this text that there is much to be done to live up to it. For this reason, in the wake of the Draghi report, we affirm the need for greater political cohesion and greater institutional solidity in order to pursue the objectives that the report itself lays at the foundation of competitiveness: decarbonisation, innovation, common security. The proposal we are voting on today is the result of a compromise between the political forces to make Parliament's voice heard in this debate, with some key proposals: increase the number of matters where the right of veto is exceeded and decisions are taken by qualified majority, starting with foreign policy; strengthening the role of the European Parliament in the legislative process; developing enhanced cooperation where there are difficulties in moving forward in common policies. I would like to thank the rapporteurs of the political groups and the chairman of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, Sven Simon, for their joint commitment. I therefore ask you, ladies and gentlemen, to approve the original text as adopted by a large majority in the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, voting in favour of the paragraphs where the separate vote was requested. Today we can take a step forward for a sovereign, competitive and united Europe; Let us do this together by approving this text. Thank you very much.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, enlargement of the European Union is a clear political choice. Today the accession processes have regained momentum but if we want to welcome new members we can not only add chairs to the table: Before enlarging, the Union needs deep institutional reforms for more effective, simplified and targeted decision-making. We have to go hand in hand. Even the Draghi report, often evoked in these classrooms, says it clearly: Treaty changes are needed to overcome the unanimity constraint. And if you can't do it right away, we use tools that we already have, such as passerelle clauses and enhanced cooperation. But I say more: those who are ready to do more together, do so, without fear of differentiated integration. Serious work is needed, so that each new entry does not dilute the unity of Europe but makes it more united, stronger, closer to its citizens. We can do it, working together with commitment and determination.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, a few days ago, in Italy, the journalist Sigfrido Ranucci was the victim of a terrible attack in which they tried to kill him. From here too, from this House, it must receive our solidarity and closeness. Defending those who do investigative journalism is a political and civil duty, but to do so also requires resources, social recognition and economic models that protect quality journalism. That is why, when the European Commission decides to intervene on those who create advertising monopolies, it acts, among other things, to protect the freedom of publishing and journalism. But fines are not enough: full compliance with European competition rules must be demanded, in order to protect the right of citizens to free, plural and qualified information and to avoid the diversion of resources. Defending free media means defending European democracy: Let's never forget that. As rapporteur for the Artificial Intelligence Regulation, I say: We are moving forward, committed to enforcing our rules to protect our values, to protect freedom of information in Europe.

In my frequent travels to the US as Chair of the Delegation for Relations with US of this Parliament, I very often had the chance to discuss the issue of free speech, which I think has been used sometimes to cover economic interests. So I think that when we deal with AI used to produce disinformation and fake elements also on social media, in the example you made, I think our rules to prevent lack of transparency and to prevent disinformation should be implemented fully. We have them in the AI Act. We should not renounce them by following a absurd idea of unregulated free speech. That is not in our European values.

I think it's important that we support startups. So, for example, when I worked on the AI Act, I pushed and we obtained that the Member States had to mandatorily establish a sandbox and so support a facilitation for startups to enter the market with new products. I think we need to concentrate our simplification efforts exactly towards startups and smaller enterprises. But this does not mean that I think that we can make the best for them if we just deregulate. I think we would be on the wrong path.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, let us send a clear message to those who listen to us outside this House. We will not accept blackmail and pressure from Big Tech and foreign governments that would like to erase our regulatory autonomy in the digital and technological sphere. Today, the European Commission presents Apply AI to increase skills and use of artificial intelligence in our economy, to increase productivity and opportunities. We support this work, as well as the'AI Continent PlanBut we want even more ambition. It is time for a European Digital Authority that centralises more implementation and enforcement to make our rules clearer but also more effective, to protect our citizens from health, safety, fundamental rights, cybercrime as well as systematic disinformation and mass surveillance. This would be a real simplification. This point needs to be clarified. The issue is not just technical, it's very, very political. To have a more integrated financial market, to support start-ups and scale-ups, to have adequate resources for digital infrastructure and EuroStack, to make structural decisions and not just make fines, we need more political cohesion, we need more united and reformed institutions, without vetoes, without wasting time. We need Europe, which is closer to values and its history.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, in a few weeks' time I will be attending the mission of the European Parliament's Committee on International Trade to New Delhi, at a crucial time for the future of the strategic partnership. In a global context marked by the return of protectionism and increasingly vulnerable value chains, cooperation is a strategic choice to strengthen economic and industrial security for both sides. It is essential to advance in the negotiations for a free trade agreement that is balanced, ambitious and mutually beneficial, but also based on binding commitments on human rights, labour and the environment. Fair rules and genuine industrial collaboration are needed to counter dumping, distortive subsidies and non-tariff barriers that penalise key sectors, such as steel, aluminium and base metals. I cite them because the new safeguard measures for steel presented by the Commission today are certainly an important step forward in defending European industry, an essential condition for ensuring a level playing field in global trade and therefore very important also in this dialogue with India. Clear rules, common objectives and a shared perspective: This is the only way to build a strong partnership, a real pact for a fairer and more sustainable globalisation, which is absolutely needed.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Trump threatens sanctions on Europe because he does not like our laws and von der Leyen flies over all this in today's speech, but we cannot be blackmailed and no agreement can be based on coercion and threats. The President of the EPP, Manfred Weber, said that the EU-US agreement does not convince him, but must be supported out of a sense of responsibility. I believe, however, that we have a political responsibility to tell the truth to our fellow citizens, that is, that we cannot accept the agreement as it is today if we want to do the good and interests of Europeans. The European Parliament will work on the duty regulation presented by the Commission: we need to insert an expiry date to the agreement in order to be able to renegotiate it within a defined timeframe; we need to protect steel and aluminium and products containing them, which are crucial for our industry, from ultra punitive tariffs of 50%; We must protect our agriculture and wine production, with exemptions to be negotiated immediately. The European Commission has carried out a very difficult task. Some governments, such as the Italian one, immediately boycotted this effort, bowing down to the American administration, but now we have to react. That is why we need to open new trade routes for Europe, strengthen our economy internally and rebuild a balanced and respectful transatlantic relationship. The work will continue constructively, but firmly and with a single objective: the interests of our citizens, our workers and our businesses, defending the principles without which the world becomes a dangerous arena without rules, also in this field. We can't afford that.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the American red carpet for the war criminal Putin has produced only more bombs on Kiev, killing defenceless civilians. Listening to Trump, the war was supposed to end 24 hours after he took office, but we're still here making fun of ourselves by a murderous autocrat. No ceasefire was reached, but this was to be the precondition for further negotiations. It is enough to waste time, it is necessary to take a concrete step forward in the use of frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine so that it really pays those who caused all this, overcoming the divisions between European countries. Now let the international community unite in defining the right conditions for a sustainable and secure peace that is respectful of the Ukrainian people and of Europe, of which Ukraine is a part, and that rebuilds an international order based on law and not on spheres of influence and arrogance.

Mr President, renewing the mandate of the Internet Governance Forum is essential for safeguarding global internet governance. Its inclusive, multi-stakeholder model ensures that governments, civil society, businesses and the technical community can work together on equal footing, preventing fragmentation and purely state-driven approaches and political manipulations that threaten digital rights. The 20th IGF, held in Norway, with over 9 000 participants and over 165 countries represented, demonstrated the forum's irreplaceable role in preserving an open and interoperable internet. I was honoured to take part in these discussions, reaffirming the IGF as a cornerstone of global cooperation. With this resolution, we urge the United Nations General Assembly to renew and reinforce the IGF mandate, providing it with the resources it needs. Looking forward, the IGF must address pressing issues regarding artificial intelligence, disinformation and responsibilities of major platforms. European Union must stand for an internet governance for all, and with everyone involved in dialogue and cooperation, to deliver the best results for the whole humanity.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, illegal US tariffs, which are outside the rules of the World Trade Organisation, are already affecting 70% of European goods. The Union is negotiating in good faith, also thanks to your work, Commissioner Šefčovič, just as it does between allies, but today Europe is increasingly being treated as an adversary, not as a partner. This is not acceptable, it has to change. When a framework agreement, a first stage, is agreed, these tariffs will have to be largely revised, otherwise the European Union will have to take serious countermeasures on goods, but also on services, immediately. Some countermeasures are already ready and must be activated, others must be prepared, to disincentivize further volatility and chaos, inevitable, if we remain defenseless. We can no longer move from one ultimatum to another: Let us set clear deadlines, at this point, to arrive at a final agreement that is mutually beneficial. Europe's unity is being tested and we must respond as Europeans: firmly, consistently and courageously, showing that words are followed by deeds.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, respect for the law is what underpins accession to the European Union. Precisely this is missing in the shameful memorandum signed by Giorgia Meloni with Albania, a bankruptcy agreement of 800 million, now recycled with the idea of transforming empty centers into CPR, throwing mountains of taxpayers' money. An inhumane plan, but also useless and expensive, that does not really address the migratory challenges. This is also demonstrated by criticism from several European governments, even those closest to Meloni. Instead, the government should really support Albania's entry into the European Union and not exploit the issue for useless and harmful agreements. Instead, Albania's European path must be supported with seriousness and commitment, supporting reforms and supporting proximity to our Union. We will continue to do so with commitment, here, from the European Parliament.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, 70% of Europeans buy online and the increase in imports from outside Europe poses new challenges to the safety of our citizens and consumers. We need to act now. In 2024, 4.6 billion low-value parcels arrived in the Union, often taking advantage of the duty exemption below €150. This flaw fuels fraud, undervaluation and unfair competition, harming our companies: In the clothing sector alone, fake products cost us 12 billion a year. I have worked on this dossier to strengthen the rules and fill these gaps. We have worked well together with the rapporteur and the other Members. We support a fair tax on e-commerce imports, to finance controls without weighing on consumers. We now need to accelerate customs reform and invest in digital and modern control tools. We need to protect European consumers and businesses: Strong and uniformly enforced rules are key to the safety of all.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the European Union's support for a fair, sustainable and comprehensive peace in Ukraine must go hand in hand with justice. It is precisely on this basis that the new European Loan Cooperation Mechanism for Ukraine is based, on which I have worked together with other colleagues. It guarantees resources for reconstruction using the profits derived from the asset Russians frozen in Europe. Because the cost of supporting Ukraine must be paid by those responsible for this devastation: Vladimir Putin's Russia, not Ukrainians and Europeans. No peace can be built behind Ukraine's back. Kiev must be part of the negotiation process. Europe must be at the table, not as a spectator, but as a key player. The only way to do this is to stay together. Faced with what is happening in the world, I think of the massacre of civilians in Gaza with Netanyahu's criminal plan to occupy the Strip, defending international law everywhere remains an existential necessity for Europe but, I would say, also for the future of the world to stop conflicts and violence.