Speeches

Mr President, Parkinson's disease is the fastest growing brain disease in the world. “It is a disease we inflict on ourselves. Parkinson’s disease is a disease of well-being.” A leading Dutch neurologist recently said, referring to Dutch streets where as many as six cases of Parkinson’s were found at the same time. He wants a ban on glyphosate. And so do we. Glyphosate, the world's most widely used agricultural poison, kills everything in its path. Not only plants, but also bees, frogs, fish, soil organisms and – slower, but also – people. Despite all the scientific links between the use of glyphosate and the development of cancer and Parkinson's, despite the rapidly increasing costs of purifying our drinking water and the erosion of biodiversity, the Commission wants to allow this agricultural poison for another ten years. Not because it's safe. Not because it's necessary. No, because it's making billions for Bayer-Monsanto, at the expense of everything that's vulnerable. That's unacceptable. We're not gonna take that. The resistance grows and cannot be stopped. Germany, Austria and the Netherlands – not the smallest players in agriculture – say no to glyphosate. If France joins the growing resistance, we can start a healthy and sustainable future. A question to the Commission: Do you acknowledge that the current risk assessment does not look at Parkinson's? And do you agree with me that the precautionary principle says that a ban is the only conceivable solution?

Today is World Animal Day. And it is precisely today that the European Commission is abandoning all animals. Previously promised actions, such as the ban on keeping animals in cages and rules for the slaughter of animals, appear to have been scrapped. On behalf of millions of citizens and 8.4 billion animals in the European livestock industry, I demand that all promised laws for animals are now on the table. Commission, keep your promise. Commission, deliver the proposals.

Mr President, many people have been fighting chemical factories such as Chemours and 3M for years. Factories that produce very harmful toxins that will never disappear from the environment and that pose a very serious threat to our health. But there is hope: We see small steps to contain the danger of these factories. Vorige week besloot de rechter dat Chemours aansprakelijk is voor de milieuschade die vier gemeenten rondom de fabriek hebben geleden door gevaarlijke PFAS. With this legislative change, on which we have worked hard over the past six months, we are also taking concrete steps to protect people, animals and the environment. From now on, endocrine disruptors and PFAS should be labelled and clearly legible for users. I am therefore surprised that the lobby of the chemical industry has again found parliamentarians willing to prevent users from being properly informed. I hope that tomorrow everyone will vote with common sense. And then another point. A huge number of animals are being battered and killed by the chemical industry for useless animal testing. I am pleased that we are also making progress on this important issue. We require alternative testing methods to be used and promoted, and chemicals tested for primates anywhere in the world should no longer be allowed in Europe. In addition, it is important that we ban environmental claims in advertisements for hazardous substances and mixtures thereof. This is how we put an end to greenwashing by Shell, Bayer and their toxic friends. I shall end with a question to the Commission: you have promised other legislative proposals to curb dangerous poison, such as REACH, an export ban on dangerous agricultural poison and a ban on all PFAS. When will you really protect people, animals and the environment and come up with these proposals? A date, please.

Mr President, wolves are beautiful and impressive animals that play an important role in nature. Yet 150 years ago the last wolf was killed in the Netherlands and also elsewhere in Europe the animals were almost everywhere exterminated by hunting and by destroying their habitat. After a century and a half, there are finally some wolves living in the Netherlands again. And again shooting is the first reaction of a few. How short-sighted can you be? That the wolf is back is mainly due to the strict protection that the animal has since the eighties. However, the majority of wolf populations in Europe are still vulnerable. Ministers of 12 European countries and environmental organizations therefore call for the strict protection of the wolf to be maintained and not to make the same mistake as we have done in the past centuries. Commissioner Sinkevičius has always stood up for the wolf, and last week he confirmed to the Environment Committee that the position of the European Commission has not changed either. The attempted abuse of power by Commission President von der Leyen has failed. I condone Mrs von der Leyen with her late pony, but this personal drama is no reason to shoot all the wolves in Europe. The Party for the Animals advocates peaceful coexistence between wolves, bears, humans and other animals. Stopping the persecution of predators and fully committing to powerful nature restoration are the key to this.

Mr President, an unidentified monster was the reason that Jules Verne’s hero Aronnax undertook his journey, twenty thousand leagues under the sea. In his adventure, he discovered beautiful coral reefs and amazing wildlife. If we were to follow Aronnax today, we would not find Captain Nemo and luscious sea life. We would find plastics, forever chemicals, heavy metals, dying coral reefs and further and further diminishing shoals of fish. And just as in Verne’s masterpiece, the threat is man-made. We’ve managed to put our oceans at grave peril all by ourselves. The monster is us. I am glad that the High Seas Treaty has been signed, but a piece of paper is not enough. What will the Commissioner do for its implementation? How will we properly protect marine reserves? And when will we finally put an end to subsidised overfishing and destructive bottom trawling?

Mr Millán Mon, you say that it is mainly done abroad, that these fins come from Asia, because it has been banned in Europe for so long. Now we know that the Spanish fleet, in particular, Spanish fishing vessels are regularly caught trying to land fins without the sharks being attached to them. In December, for example, two more ships were arrested for landing a total of 13 tons of shark fins. What are you doing in your own country to really tackle this practice? Simply pointing to countries outside Europe is not enough.

Mr President, Commissioner, sharks have an indispensable role in the underwater ecosystem. And yet, more than 100 million sharks are killed worldwide every year, especially for their fins. And shark fishermen – including in Europe – are regularly involved in the finning of live sharks, an illegal practice in which the fins of the still living sharks are cut off, after which the animals are thrown back into the sea helplessly. This horrific shark hunt has resulted in 167 shark species being threatened with extinction. 1.1 million citizens have signed a citizens' initiative to stop the trade in shark fins and thereby end the horrific hunt. But under pressure from the Southern European fisheries lobby, this Parliament refuses to take action. I call on the European Commissioner not to abandon these citizens and sharks and to stand up for the protection of sharks worldwide. I also believe that European agricultural and fisheries subsidies should be abolished.

Mr President, the common agricultural policy has cost us hundreds of billions of agricultural subsidies. Meanwhile, many millions of farms have disappeared, 85 % of which are small farms. The big companies are getting bigger and the small companies are going to break down. These billions of agricultural subsidies have also caused us a climate, water and biodiversity crisis and cause an enormous amount of animal suffering every day. We expect farmers to be at the basis of achieving the goals of the Green Deal. Farmers have a world to gain from a sustainable food system. This requires a radical change in the European agricultural policy. But the agricultural lobbyists in Brussels disagree. They only represent the interests of companies that stand in the way of a sustainable food system. And these are the companies that produce agricultural poison, fertilizer and animal feed. These are the exporters of milk powder, cheese, pigs and chickens. It is clear that many MEPs here also only pay attention to the multi-billion-dollar interests of the agri-industry and do not look at small-scale farmers at all. Tackling dangerous agricultural poison and methane emissions, nature restoration measures, reducing the number of animals in the livestock industry, an ambitious animal welfare legislation that meets the needs of animals rather than the needs of industry, including a ban on fur farming, keeping animals in cages and long animal transports: all necessary for sustainable food production and a liveable planet, all held back by the agricultural lobby machine and their spokespersons here in the European Parliament, blocking any progress. Let's listen to those farmers who want to roll up their sleeves with us, instead of listening to people sticking their heads in the sand.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, more than 1.1 million citizens have signed the citizens’ initiative entitled ‘Stop finning sharks’ and they are calling in this citizens’ initiative for a ban on the trade in shark fins. And that is badly needed, because 100 million sharks are killed every year, especially for their fins. As a result, 167 shark species are threatened with extinction. At the end of March, the seven coordinators of this Parliament's Committee on Fisheries decided behind closed doors that there was no need for a resolution on this subject. Seven MEPs are thus sweeping the request of 1.1 million citizens off the table, without even considering that request. That's not how you take people seriously. I therefore call for a resolution on this citizens' initiative to be added to the agenda and for it to be voted on at the mini-session on 31 May.

Mr President, the latest report by the IPCC is more intense than ever. So there should be no doubt that we must now intervene drastically in all areas. This week we voted on the climate package of this Green Deal Commission. That includes congratulations. But the Commission has promised us much more: much more building blocks for the green transition, and is lagging behind. Our food system – accounting for one third of climate emissions – remains out of the question. In fact, monocultures and mega stables receive billions of subsidies. Fossil fertilizer gets millions. Not to mention promotion campaigns for meat and dairy. Even in the deforestation law, there are exceptions for corn and meat that are harmful to the climate. Will the Commission, as promised, come forward with the framework law for sustainable food and will it finally take the necessary measures to tackle the climate catastrophe that lies on our plate?

Mr President, our toxic footprint already reaches the highest peaks and the deepest ocean floors. We even leave PFAS on the moon, Mars and Jupiter. This footprint will never go away. I am therefore pleased that we are finally working on a ban on PFAS. This ban must be implemented quickly and must apply to all applications. No exception, because no purpose is worth permanently polluting the planet, all life on it, our food and our drinking water. That's exactly what this nasty group of toxins does. The revision of the REACH chemicals legislation is necessary for a broad ban on all PFAS, even before the summer. Can the Commission commit itself to this? Can the Commission also commit itself to supporting the Council's proposals to ban PFAS from our food? I'd like a response.

Mr President, forests are essential for all life on earth, but they are under serious threat and the livestock industry is one of the main causes of deforestation. It is therefore very important that this deforestation law be adopted so that soya and beef that have led to deforestation can no longer be imported. Unfortunately, maize, pork and chicken meat can still be imported, even if forests have been cut down for it. The Party for the Animals wants this exception out of the law as soon as possible. No more imports of products for which forests have been cut down. Finally, the Mercosur agreement, the trade agreement with Latin America. This will destroy the fight against deforestation by this law in an instant. The Netherlands has already said that this trade deal should not be concluded as long as agriculture is part of it. I would like to hear the Commissioner's reaction to this.

Mr President, the Netherlands is one of the smallest countries in the European Union and, at the same time, one of the most livestock-dense countries in Europe: 3.8 million cows, 11.3 million pigs, 98 million chickens, hundreds of thousands of dairy goats, sheep and rabbits. In total, there are 115 million farm animals on that tiny piece of earth. Due to the intensive Dutch livestock industry, it is not possible to guarantee animal welfare and to protect nature. Forced by the highest judges, the Netherlands will finally take measures to protect nature. But a huge lobby of the bio-industry is doing everything it can to sabotage this protection. I therefore call on my colleagues not to join the lobby of this livestock industry. Stand up for nature protection, stand up for animal welfare and vote against the EPP and ECR requests.

Yes, thank you for this question. No, of course not. Bees are also animals. Sheep are animals. If we have one Commissioner for animal welfare, he can take care of all those animals that are under pressure from the current farming system. We would like the current food system to be revised towards more plant-based, more sustainable and better for animal welfare. One Commissioner can solve all these problems.

Mr President, Commissioner, we have Commissioners in Europe for finance, industry, agriculture, the environment, oceans, fisheries, health, but we still do not have a Commissioner who is fully committed to the welfare and rights of animals. That's crazy, actually. We keep billions of animals in Europe, stuffed in stables, in trucks, on ships, in laboratories, in zoos, dolphinariums, circuses, arenas, in shops, in markets and in our homes. But also the lives of animals in the countryside, in the city, in our forests, in the oceans and the seas are under increasing pressure. Why are the rights and welfare of these animals still not recognised? The moment is now. Now that the whole animal welfare legislation is being overhauled, we demand a European Commissioner for Animal Welfare to put an end once and for all to the inconsistent policies of the various European Commissioners and the interference of the Committee on Agriculture, which is directly dictated by the agricultural industry. We are on the verge of major changes in the way we treat animals and I, together with millions of citizens, look forward to the new ambitious proposals for the new animal welfare legislation later this year, with of course a ban on keeping animals in cages by 2027 and a ban on the production and sale of fur in Europe. I also believe that European agricultural subsidies should be abolished. (The speaker accepted a "blue card" response)

Mr President, Commissioner, I am here with mixed feelings. On the one hand, I'm super proud that so many people have taken action to protect bees and farmers. On the other hand, I am angry because this European Parliament does not see the need for a truly healthy and safe food system. Bees are threatened by massive use of agricultural poison, but if pollinators die out, this will have disastrous consequences for nature and for the production of our food. Industrial agriculture, which relies on fertilizer and poison, threatens the future of the planet and of all rural residents. I hear a lot of support for the citizens' initiative here today, but in the meantime the legislation to phase out agricultural poison is being sabotaged by this Parliament. The amount of disinformation and frightening we hear around this bill can be compared to the tobacco industry's attempts to weaken and delay legislation necessary to protect people from lung cancer. De tactieken van de agro-industrie zijn vergelijkbaar: Sow doubt about cause and effect with the aim of delaying and weakening. I hope common sense prevails. We urgently need to work on the protection of bees and away with dangerous agricultural poison. We urgently need to restore nature and help farmers transition to small-scale, sustainable, plant-based and healthy food.

Mr President, Commissioner, today we again see the narrow-minded and terrifying short-term vision of many agricultural spokesmen in this Parliament. What a pity that there is no realization that without a healthy soil we cannot grow food and that fertilizer and too much animal manure are the death blow for that same healthy soil. Does the Commission understand that subsidising fertilisers and companies like Yara destroys soil and undermines climate objectives? I would like to hear from the Commissioner whether the long-awaited Soil Health Act will come before the summer and whether the Commissioner is keeping a finger on the pulse of the Dutch implementation of the Nitrates Directive. Can the Commissioner also confirm that the Farm to Fork Strategy’s goal of reducing nutrient loss by half is rapidly being transposed into legislation? A farmer recently told me that agriculture is nothing more and nothing less than enabling the interplay between sun, plant and soil and guiding it to a higher level of fertility. But almost three quarters of our soils are in poor condition. By making fundamentally different choices, we can turn the tide. I also believe that European agricultural subsidies should be abolished.

Mr President, small fishing boats cause less environmental damage than the industrial monster boats used by European fishermen to empty the world's seas and oceans. But a lot of small fishing vessels still catch a lot of fish together. Too many fishermen still hunt for too few fish. Overfishing in Europe and the rest of the world, which would stop no later than 2020, continues. Despite this, Brussels continues to invest hundreds of millions in subsidising fisheries. It even advocates continuing to exempt the fishing industry, which uses 2 billion litres of fossil fuel a year, from the fuel tax. Such tax exemptions for fossil fuels are disastrous not only for the oceans, but also for the climate. It is crucial that the polluter pays. The same applies to the fisheries sector. That is also why I believe that European fisheries subsidies should be abolished.

Mr President, Commissioner. Food is a human right and we need to ensure that everyone has access to healthy food. The Commission's study shows that there is a risk that rising food prices will cause people to eat unhealthily. We must, of course, prevent that. Healthy and sustainable food should be the cheapest option. This can be done by removing VAT on fruit and vegetables across the EU. How will the Commission ensure that citizens in all countries have access to fruit and vegetables without VAT?

Mr President, more than 150 years after wolves were exterminated with the hunting rifle in large parts of Europe and due to the loss of their habitat, some wolves have found their way back to the Netherlands. This is good news for our nature. They are also beautiful animals. Today we were able to admire the first images of playing cubs in Drenthe. Really great! Despite this, some farmers, hunters and their political mouthpieces plead for wolves to be turned around again after their difficult return. They talk about emotional damage to farmers when their sheep are killed by a wolf. When an animal is found dead, it is indeed terrible. But why do we slaughter 60 million sheep every year in Europe, often without stunning? And why are we dragging hundreds of thousands of sheep to North Africa and the Middle East under heartbreaking conditions? I would like those who say that we have to protect sheep from the wolf to join us in fighting to protect the sheep from humans. The Party for the Animals warmly welcomes the wolf. We are more concerned about the danger of the livestock industry to the survival of thousands of animal and plant species than about the danger of a single animal species to the livestock industry. Especially in times when economic activities significantly exceed the limits of nature, it is important to maintain and strengthen nature protection. I also believe that European agricultural subsidies should be abolished.

Mr President, enough food is produced worldwide to feed everyone. But then we all have to make different food choices and distribute the food better. So we do not achieve that by having Ukrainian grain ships come to the Netherlands to fatten our poultry, while people die of starvation all over the world. We do not achieve this by using three-quarters of our agricultural land to feed billions of animals in the livestock industry, while we can also directly grow food for people. This is not achieved by allowing four large companies to dominate the global grain trade. We cannot achieve this by letting hundreds of small-scale farmers go bankrupt every day, while a handful of large food companies make billions in profits. And we will not achieve that as long as many politicians here say what the lobbyists of the industry have whispered to them in the corridors. Shameless. Dear Commissioner, keep your back straight. Make haste with the promised framework law for sustainable food, because this is the only way we guarantee food security.

Mr President, the current energy crisis makes it painfully clear how polluting fertiliser production is. Yara's fertilizer plant in the Netherlands alone chases 2 billion cubic meters of gas through it every year. This leads to a significant contribution to global warming and a record electricity price. But there are more disastrous consequences of the fossil addiction of agriculture. The depletion of our soils, the leaching of nutrients and the fertilisation and pollution of our rivers, lakes and oceans also make it clear that we do not need more fertilizer, but less. And you can. Nature and organic farmers have had the solution for a long time. Peas, lupins and other legumes bind nitrogen, enriching the soil. Green fertilizers, crop rotations and a truly circular agriculture in which we not only extract nutrients from the fields, but also return them to them, are effective, cheap and future-proof. We must get rid of the fossil form of agriculture and, of course, of agricultural subsidies as soon as possible.

Mr President, a core task of the government is to protect the individual from the power of the majority. The Dutch government has failed in this. That is heartbreaking for all those thousands of parents and children who faced severe financial and emotional damage. It also results in citizens no longer trusting the government. This trust can only return when the government acknowledges its own mistakes and liberally and quickly rectifies the consequences of these mistakes. But that's about more than reparation. The government must also follow the principles of Restorative justice apply. This means: Acknowledge the perpetratorship and feel what you have done. Only then can we work together and in equality with the victims on recovery. This whole scandal is the result of a corporate neoliberal government that has cut itself to pieces. The result was an administrative system that had to cut costs and at the same time focus heavily on tackling fraud. It is also the result of the ‘metaversification’ of this government. The use of algorithms and artificial intelligence everywhere poses major risks. Computers do not apply human rights. They simply incorporate institutional racism, which unfortunately is still very much present in Europe, into their algorithms. I would like to know: What will the Commission do with these important lessons? How does she prevent a benefit affair in her own home? Because I don't see any guarantee for that.

Madam President, I welcome the Commissioner and the Minister. In these times of climate and environmental crisis, we need to urgently step up the protection of the most endangered animals and plants. Crucially, this means that we need to protect more species via the annexes of the CITES convention, and we need to increase enforcement and tackle wildlife crime. I am very glad that my colleagues in the Environment Committee supported the proposal to write this ambitious resolution. This ambition is much needed because, all too often, the European Union made poor choices during the CITES negotiations. CITES was designed to maintain commercial trade in specimens of wild animals and plants, rather than protect them. However, shouldn't CITES regulate the trade, instead of stimulating it? Today, I would like to focus on the role that the European Union plays. The EU's position is often the key reason for the failure of many CITES proposals. One would hope, with this Commission's loudly trumpeted commitments to halting biodiversity loss, that there would be greater support for the range states when they are making a desperate bid to protect their native wildlife populations at the upcoming CITES CoP. Why doesn't the Commission support the range states’ proposals? For instance, proposals to protect the hippo and the elephant. At the last CoP, the Commission refused to support the uplisting of the African elephant to Appendix I. Now, six years later, the situation with some of the African elephant populations is dramatic. At this moment, 10 range states have proposed to transfer the common hippo to CITES Appendix I. These West African countries are bearing direct witness to the decline of this iconic species, and yet the Commission thinks that it knows better and seems determined to not support the hippo uplisting proposal. This Parliament, however, noted the African nations’ concerns and is voicing its support for ending the commercial trade in hippo products in this resolution. We recognise that this will throw a lifeline to the species, which is jeopardised not only by habitat loss and climate change, but also by the trade in its tusks and teeth for ivory. I urge the Commission and Member States to support this hippo proposal. Do not make the same mistake as you made with the African elephant. The same can be said for the proposal to list glass frogs on CITES Appendix II. These amphibians are becoming increasingly popular in the exotic pet trade. They are protected in many range states, but are collected and traded illegally. Also, these species fell victim to the EU's position at the last CoP. We know that we can really make a difference when the EU steps up its action. For example, six years ago, the Morocco and the European Union promoted together the listing of the Barbary macaque. This has already borne fruit: we are now seeing the stronghold population in the Atlas Mountains recovering. Staying on the subject of the exotic pet trade, it is good that this resolution reiterates Parliament's support for an EU—wide positive list. This would also limit the number of wild species that can be kept by private owners and thereby reduce a huge amount of animal suffering of species that are unsuitable to be kept as pets. I urge my colleagues to support the text as agreed by the Environment Committee. I am hoping that the Commission listens to these and Parliament’s other demands and soon delivers a revised action plan against wildlife trafficking, with real teeth and the funding to be able to tackle the overexploitation of other species. We need to increase enforcement and penalties for wildlife crime and decrease the demand for products from endangered species, particularly hunting trophies and traditional medicines. I'm looking forward to hearing the response of the Council and the Commission to the crucial points I raised and also to hear their answers to ENVI’s questions, in particular, the need to address the link between wildlife trade and the risk of zoonotic pandemics. I would like to hear from the presidency about what they will do to make sure that this CoP, as well as those on climate and biodiversity, will deliver the success that we so desperately need to protect our planet. I would like to thank, lastly, all the ENVI shadows for the great collaboration on this resolution and look forward to its adoption tomorrow.

Mr President, fish farms are the mega stables of the underwater world. Just like in mega stables on land, animals in fish farms are locked up in too small spaces at the same time. Just like in mega stables on land, animals in fish farms are kept in such a way that they cannot show their natural behavior and their lives are one great agony. As in mega stables on land, the accumulation of large quantities of animals in fish farms leads to environmental pollution, diseases and excessive antibiotic use. The breeding of fish is also far from sustainable. The African coast is literally being emptied to provide our fish farms in Europe and elsewhere in the world with fishmeal. Growing up one salmon in such a fish farm requires 350 wild-caught fish. A Spanish company even wants to open the world's first octopus farm next year: A disaster for animal welfare and a disaster for the environment, scientists warn. But in spite of all these disastrous effects on people, animals and the environment, there is a call here in Strasbourg for a strong increase in the number of fish farms in Europe. The Party for the Animals wants to prevent us from making the same mistake as in livestock farming. That is why we shall be voting against this report.