Speeches

Mr President, Commissioner, the aim of this report is to inform the Commission of Parliament's position on the protection of citizens in online gaming, especially minors. I would like to thank the rapporteur, Adriana Maldonado, for her work here. I believe we have achieved our goals: to identify gaps in regulation and, indeed, to put on the table the need to harmonise the laws regulating video games in Europe, so that all European citizens enjoy the same level of protection regardless of which country they live in, while being able to promote a favourable ecosystem for companies to develop in such an important sector. Europe must become the safest place to play video games, but it must also become the best place to develop them. That's why I'm especially happy, because I think we've achieved all the goals we've set ourselves: the creation of a European video game strategy, the harmonisation of labelling through the PEGI system and the promotion of accessibility of video games for people with disabilities. In short, it is a matter of protecting especially young people, children, in the online world, in the video game sector, but also, I repeat, of creating an appropriate ecosystem so that our companies can develop and be leaders at a global level, because the protection of rights and the momentum of the industry can and must go hand in hand.

Madam President, Mr Prime Minister, those of us who defend trade looked forward to your intervention with a special desire to hear in your words trade as one of the priorities of your semester. That was because, in recent European semesters, trade has not been one of the priorities of the different presidents and presidencies. However, I have to say, with some concern not without some disappointment, that this has not been the case. I hope it is because the agenda was very full and time was very limited, because Sweden has made trade a key element in its prosperity and Europe needs trade. We have been paralyzed for too long in our trade policy, especially in a key agreement, which I am calling on you to unravel: the Mercosur Agreement. Europe – its businesses, its jobs, its prosperity, its competitiveness – needs trade agreements and Mercosur is key. That is why I ask you for your impetus, your courage, in making your Presidency key so that 2023 will be the year of trade relations between Europe and Latin America and that the Mercosur Agreement will go from being the problem to being the solution to the challenges we have as Europeans and as citizens of this planet.

Mr President, first of all, I would like to thank and congratulate the proponents who have taken this initiative to this point, to the European Parliament. It is very important because the trade of proximity to me reminds me very much of an essay by George Steiner who talked about the idea of Europe, who said that the idea of Europe was built on cafes, on those streets that have names of famous people, of writers, of scientists; about that landscape, that geography that is walked, that is known. I would add to Steiner's ideas about the identity of what Europe is about proximity trade. That identity that those who live in cities go down to our streets and find there that close trade that knows, that attends, that is close to what we need, that knows the elderly, that knows the problems they have. It is trade that has resisted pandemics, that has resisted crises, that has resisted franchises, consumption models, but that is essential to maintain our idea of Europe. That is why I wanted to propose to the Commission that it adopt this proposal. I would like to thank the proponents once again and, as I am convinced that the Commission will endorse this proposal, as a Barcelonian, I would also like to propose Barcelona as the first European Capital of Proximity Trade.

Mr. President, how can we defend our democracy from foreign interference? For not allowing it, not protecting it, not legitimizing it. Because for too long we have allowed, protected and legitimized Russia and Iran, Venezuela and other countries to finance and promote extremist political movements in different European countries and also in this House. Because we have allowed, legitimised and protected countries such as Russia to support separatist movements in Europe in order to weaken and break it, as in Catalonia - as our dear Member Puigdemont knows well -. Because we have allowed and supported countries to pay some Members so that some of the issues that concern them are not brought into this House or defended in some way. And that's known to everyone. So, how to defend it? Not allowing it. And, above all, not by opening the doors of our democracy and its institutions to the Trojan horses of our enemies.

Madam President, the title of this 'Report towards equal rights for persons with disabilities' is an honest title, because 'towards' is a preposition that indicates and marks the movement towards somewhere in relation to a goal. And we really have that goal, which is equality, but we're not there. We are sometimes , but not . The reality is that there is no such equality. We checked it out here today. There really is no such equality. Equality, at its core, is an objective that we are always pursuing. For everyone. But our fellow citizens with disabilities especially need it. We, as Members, have an obligation. This Parliament must commit itself to a clear idea: all rights, for all citizens, in all countries of the European Union. For what it is de jure either de facto in all countries of the European Union. There can be no exceptions from countries in the pursuit of equality, because equality is something that defines us as Europeans. And that search I hope that one day we will stop going "towards" it, to really be in an equal society for everyone everywhere.

Mr President, Commissioner, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, mental health is the great neglect of public health policies across Europe. It is the great forgotten that moves, in addition, in the misunderstanding and stigma of the people who suffer from it, often between loneliness, sadness and isolation. Crises reveal certain situations and this crisis has revealed the profound impact that mental health has on our citizens and the misunderstanding they suffer. Therefore, it is time that mental health ceases to be that great forgotten and, therefore, the European strategy for mental health is so important and so necessary. And that framework is a very important, much-needed framework, but one that requires the commitment of States. It also requires more professionals, more resources, more prevention and more investment. Because without more professionals, without more resources, without more prevention and without more investment we will not be able to offer the mental health that our citizens need, we will not be able to offer the treatments and accompaniment they need. Therefore, yes to this initiative. Hopefully it will come sooner rather than later and hopefully it can be implemented across Europe for the benefit of our citizens.

Mr President, Commissioners, is it acceptable that, while the electricity bills paid by our citizens, the self-employed, SMEs and companies are multiplied by 100, 200 or 300, the large electricity companies multiply their profits by three, four and ten? The answer is very simple: no. Is it acceptable that, while citizens pay for this crisis, there are companies that benefit from it? No, because then it's not a crisis. It is a crisis for the usual and the question is: Do they ever again have to pay the same price for this crisis? The answer, obviously, is: no. Is the proposal to tax profits fallen from the sky enough? No, is it necessary? Yes, because are benefits fallen from the sky? No. These are benefits that come out of the suffering of citizens, the self-employed, SMEs and companies, and that will fatten the profit accounts of companies that benefit – yes! – from the crisis. Then, so that they do not always pay the same, for once they pay those who benefit from this crisis.

Mr President, Commissioner, the dramatic situation of journalists in Myanmar is merely a reflection of the systematic violation of human rights in this country. Torture, murder, disappearance. Given this, what do we do, apart from resolutions and blah, blah, blah? What can we do? What instrument do we have to promote and, I would say, force this dictatorial government to assume its commitments regarding respect for human rights? We have an instrument: "Everything but Arms". Does that ring a bell? "Everything but Arms". In exchange for what? Respect for fundamental human rights. So, having this instrument, why don't we use it? That's the question: Why don't we use that instrument to force that government to respect minimum human rights standards? Achieving this scheme and being part of "Everything But Arms" has one condition. And if the condition is not met we can do one thing, and not only can we, but we must: suspend it.

Mr President, Commissioner, is trade an end in itself? Trade is a goal. Among other things, because we are the world's leading exporting region and millions of jobs depend on our exports. We must also talk about jobs when we talk about sustainable development. Of ours, of the employment of our workers, too, which some forget. They talk about trade as if it were a vague and ethereal concept. No, it is a reality of our companies. But do we just want to trade? No, we want this trade to contribute to sustainable development. In this context, we welcome this revision of the plan and these 15 measures. But watch out, ladies and gentlemen; For development to be sustainable it has to be development and it has to be sustainable. But I develop too. And if we want partners and allies to converge with us on our goals, we have to not only threaten sanctions, but offer cooperation, collaboration and trust. Because between partners and allies, trust is a principle and a goal.

. – Mr President, Commissioner, Ukraine is at war with Russia and Europe has been engaged in a hybrid war against Russia for years. A hybrid war of disinformation, propaganda and political interference that has supported the far right, the far left and separatist parties. Here we have heard of Salvini. Yes, yes. We've heard of Berlusconi. Yes, yes. We've heard of Le Pen. Yes, yes. But do you know who we haven't heard of today? Do you know who met three times in Moscow, once in Geneva and once in Barcelona to ask Russia, its secret services, for the independence of Catalonia, economic, political and military aid, with the sending of ten thousand soldiers to support the independence of Catalonia? Carles Puigdemont, former president of the Generalitat of Catalonia and its hard political core. This is a reality. They're facts. Facts, not insinuations, actual facts: communications with secret services, with the direct environment of Putin, to ask for help for the independence of a part of the European territory. The Ukrainians will win the war, but are we going to win ours against the Russians?

Madam President, Madam Vice-President, rapporteur, Europe is certainly making progress in major crises, but also in small things. And this is a small thing that will make life easier for our citizens in an extraordinary way and that gives meaning, sometimes, to what we do in this Parliament. And it does so for several reasons: in the first place, because it gets, obviously, less cables, less waste, less costs, less waste. Get more savings, more clarity, more information, more options and more environmental protection. But above all, because it sends out a signal that this Parliament is putting citizens at the centre of its debates, because this Parliament is ambitious and does not give in to the terrible and very powerful pressures of lobbies, and because we are moving forward by imposing rules on a global scale that not only articulate our internal market but also send signals to the whole planet. I think that gives full meaning to legislative work. Ten years is too long, and that also shows that self-regulation is not enough, that it does not work and that this Parliament and the Commission have to go hand in hand to always be more ambitious and cut the times because ten years of that tangle of cables that I see the rapporteur has on the table mean a lot of waste of time, resources and money, and a lot of inefficiency. Therefore, congratulations to the rapporteur on his extraordinary work and because that work gives meaning to this Parliament. Because when we put citizens at the center and work together, we are unstoppable.

Madam President, do we have to renew and strengthen the partnership with the Southern Neighbourhood and the Southern Neighbourhood? Sure, of course, it is a priority for Europe, but how can we explain to our fellow citizens that we have to strengthen key relations in order to seek an area of shared prosperity and security when, to this day, those countries with which we want to strengthen our relations are violating the agreements we have with them right now? I give you two examples. First example: Algeria since June this year has closed and suspended trade relations with Spain, boycotting Spanish producers. Second example: Morocco has two years with the land borders closed with Spain and two years without being able to trade and without Spanish products being able to cross the Moroccan border. What have you done while the Commission has solved our problems? No, then, we must ensure neighbourliness, yes, but good neighbourliness, and that requires respect for commitments. Look, to finish, Europe also has a southern border, it is in the south: Ceuta and Melilla are two European cities in North Africa that you systematically ignore in your relations with the countries of North Africa. It would be good if, in this future of strengthened relations, we also thought about strengthening the countries of southern Europe and how they relate to the countries of the southern shore of the Mediterranean.

Madam President, the tragedy of the death of Dom Phillips and Bruno Pereira, killed for their commitment to the defense of the Amazon and indigenous peoples, adds to the unbearable list of more than twenty environmental defenders killed in Brazil since 2020. But, in addition to condemning, regretting, making – necessary – resolutions, what else can we do, apart from the traditional ideological verbiage? We need political instruments to be able to fight and to be able to do something effectively to fight for the rights of indigenous peoples. The resolutions neither put out forest fires in the Amazon, nor prevent the killings of environmental activists. I am very sorry, the resolutions are not for that, they are for propaganda. What can we do? Use political instruments. And what is the policy instrument we have, which does provide a solid framework for addressing indigenous peoples' issues? I'll tell him: in the Agreement between the European Union and Mercosur. And finally, look, before we give lessons, we should demand ourselves, because, for example, there are European countries that have not signed ILO Convention 169.

Madam President, imagine that the government of a region of the European Union maintained contacts with Putin's Russia to help repeal the constitutional order in that territory. Imagine that in that region the Russian interference machinery has been working since 2017, aggravating a political crisis with the aim of destabilising the Union. Imagine that the president of that meeting... Excuse me, Madam President. I'd appreciate it if you didn't yell in the middle of an intervention. – Please, I think it’s better not to cry out when a colleague has to ... no? Anyway. Let's get started. Imagine that the government of a region of the European Union maintained contacts with Putin's Russia to help repeal the constitutional order in this territory. Imagine that in that region the Russian machinery of interference worked since 2017, aggravating a political crisis with the aim of destabilizing the European Union. Imagine that the president of that region met with Russian emissaries days before illegally declaring independence on October 27, 2017. Imagine those emissaries allegedly proposing the sending of 10,000 troops and financial aid for independence. Imagine that that president had escaped in the trunk of a car to escape justice days later. Imagine that, in 2017, the head of the office of that former president and current MEP traveled to Moscow to meet with members of Putin's personal environment to, in his own words, not talk about caviar or vodka, but about issues that interest in the creation of an independent state in the future. Well, don't imagine: the region is Catalonia, the president, former president and current deputy of this Parliament is Carles Puigdemont and the parties are the separatist parties that allied themselves with Putin's Russia to try to repeal the rule of law in a European country called Spain.

Madam President, among the priorities of the presidency’s programme – in the letter – was progress in the negotiations or even the finalisation and ratification of the European Union’s agreements with third countries, especially Latin America and the Indo-Pacific. It seems to me a very good idea, very convenient, after the paralysis of these processes during the French presidency. But I was very surprised that, since this advance in the trade chapter is a key and very important element in the future of Europe, because we need more markets and more suppliers, you did not mention it in your speech. They've skipped the trade chapter. Then that surprises me. I would like to believe that you are going to push for the ratification of the agreements and are going to change the non-virtuous cycle in which the Commission has been installed since 2019 because of some Member States. I would therefore like to be able to hear in this Parliament that you are really going to push forward those ratification processes, finally, of all the pending agreements with Latin America, especially Mexico, Chile and Mercosur.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your words, thank you for your work. But some MPs asked: What is the social economy? Look, when I hear "social economy" I think of commitment, inclusion, respect, dignity and opportunity. That's the social economy. It is a lever of transformation, it is a way in which those who need it most can enter the labor market, can receive the aid, the support they need. And so does the social economy. And the social economy is key in the Europe we want, in the economy we want and in the society we want: a fairer, more inclusive society. Here we are often caught up in rhetoric –logica, politics et rhetorica—. Proposals are often rhetorical. The social economy is a reality that exists, that has only asked us and asks us for help, that we give it the framework so that it can develop, that we give it the legal instruments so that it can develop, that we give it the financial instruments so that it can develop. In short, that we give him instruments to do his job, to continue allowing to give millions of people something that in politics is very difficult to achieve, which is hope, future and opportunity. I would like once again to thank Commissioner Schmit and this Commission for pushing an ambitious proposal black on white. Can you go further? Sure, always, but you have to find balance. And what this Parliament intends and has intended with this report is to specify, complement, but go hand in hand, because we need to go hand in hand to build what we want for the social economy. I regret not seeing the Council here. I'm deeply sorry. I regret this because this report seeks to guide the Council's recommendations. I hope his absence does not mean his lack of commitment. I'm convinced I'm not. Because basically all this we do is nothing more or less than trying to help put the social economy and those millions of people where they belong: at the heart of our public policies.

Mr President, I would like to begin this speech on the report on the Union's action plan for the social economy with thanks. Firstly, thank you to Commissioner Schmit, because without his work and without his impetus the action plan presented by the Commission for the social economy would not have been possible. Secondly, I would like to thank all the shadow rapporteurs for their work on this report, a report that belongs to all of us, in which we have worked hand in hand to develop it in a constructive and positive way, and I would like from here to thank them for their work. I would also like to thank the Social Economy Intergroup, which for years and years has worked and promoted the social economy in this Parliament, seeking to place it at the centre of the political debate. But, above all, I would like to thank the bodies, associations, foundations, cooperatives and all those who work in the social economy, who for years have worked tirelessly to reach this moment, to reach the moment when the European Parliament contributes and gives its word and proposes measures to contribute, together with the action plan for the social economy, presented by the Commission, so that the social economy is at the centre of the political debate and occupies its rightful place in the social Europe we want. The report, like the action plan, is the result of years of struggle by these entities that make up the social economy to have a harmonised framework at European level that allows them to grow, that allows the social economy to grow. And this report seeks to complement and concretely implement the action plan with the aim of boosting the debate, so that finally the resolution put forward by the Member States conforms both to the will of the Commission and to the will of the democratic majority that this Parliament expresses. This report, therefore, seeks to guide the Council's recommendations to create an enabling environment for the social economy, also with the aim of exploiting the EU's funding potential and instruments to establish them and place us in the social economy and, above all, for the proper implementation of the action plan. Because the social economy needs a European framework that allows it recognition and visibility, that gives it a legal environment, that gives it a sufficient financial and regulatory environment. Because the social economy is very important for Europe, it is very important because it plays a fundamental role in creating quality jobs, especially for the people who need it most: persons with disabilities, persons at risk of social exclusion. It is a key inclusion lever, which has demonstrated this even in the most difficult times, demonstrating a unique resilience, which Europe cannot give up. The social economy has to be a key element that is and that guides in the triple sustainability, in the social one, in the environmental one and in the economic one. It is a transformative element or a lever of change to make Europe fairer, more cohesive, more inclusive, a more social Europe. The social economy has much to contribute. And this report of the European Parliament aims to develop its full potential and wants to do so, first, by urging the Member States to provide a common definition of the social economy, a common taxonomy that gives them legal guarantees and that allows it to develop in all the countries of the Union. This is currently not the case. The presence of the social economy in the different states is very asymmetrical and we need to move towards harmonisation that will allow them to grow throughout the European Union. To this end, we have proposed five key points: that the Member States and the Commission integrate the social economy dimension into policies and programmes in a cross-cutting and comprehensive way; the Commission to set up a working group for the implementation of the action plan; the Commission to create a lever, a single online EU platform for the exchange of good practices; that Member States designate coordinators for the social economy and set up local contact points, in this area, in order to raise awareness of the forms of support and funding available; and finally, that the Commission monitors that Member States closely follow social economy commitments in their national recovery and resilience plans. In short, 13.5 million social economy workers in the 27 Member States are going to look at us tomorrow, they are going to look at what we vote for. We are at a historic moment when this Parliament must be united and propel the social economy to the place it deserves and to which Europe needs.

Mr President, first of all, I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mrs Walsh, for her excellent work, because this is a report on mental health in the world of necessary digital work, because it is attached to the reality of a world of work redefined by the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic has changed the working conditions of millions of workers in Europe with positive consequences, but also with negative consequences, such as excessive connection, blurring of the lines between work and private life, increased work intensity and the technological stress it can have, which it has, negative psychological, physical and social consequences, such as work-related anxiety, burnout –burnout— or depression. We therefore have an obligation, as legislators, to safeguard and promote the right to physical and mental health of workers in this context. But mental health has been and is the great forgotten in health systems and also in occupational safety and health policies. This new situation therefore requires a new and broader definition of health and safety at work. And it also requires legislative frameworks that are able to address in a holistic way the problems that the digital world means for workers. That is why, Commissioner, I would like to stress once again the need to promote a European regulation on teleworking that is capable of addressing in a comprehensive and holistic way the problems posed to workers by this new world linked to digital work.

Madam President, what happened on 24 June on the border between Morocco and the European Union is a real tragedy, a tragedy that this Parliament condemns. But what happened is the tragic corollary of Morocco's border management, a management that is a mixture of negligence and incapacity, coupled with an indecent political use of the migratory drama as a mechanism to pressure Spain and the European Union as a whole. This Parliament must demand that Morocco scrupulously respect the human rights of immigrants and combat irregular immigration and migrant smuggling. But it also has to make it respect the commitments it has made to the European Union, for which it receives and has received more than EUR 346 million. However, the increase in inflows by land in Ceuta and Melilla in the first quarter of 2022 was 239 %. Morocco's border management is a real disaster, a disaster suffered by immigrants and the citizens of Melilla. Because Morocco must be reminded that it must comply with human rights, but the European Union must also guarantee the security of the citizens of Ceuta and Melilla because, as the Commission said, Ceuta and Melilla are the border of the European Union. They are not only a border of Spain, they are a border of the European Union, and their citizens deserve the respect and security that every other citizen of the Union deserves.

Madam President, first of all, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the rapporteur on her extraordinary work on this report on inclusion measures under Erasmus+ 2014-2020 and to thank her for having included and developed the ideas that we, the Committee on Petitions, have put forward for inclusion in this report. First, to correct the unacceptable lack of reliable quantitative and qualitative data on the number of people with disabilities and people from vulnerable and underrepresented groups accessing the opportunities offered by Erasmus+. Without this data, we cannot design good measures so that these people can truly participate fully in this program. Second, to support the removal of physical, psychological, social, socio-economic, linguistic and digital barriers that limit the learning mobility of the most vulnerable groups and prevent them from participating in the Erasmus+ programme. Thirdly, to urge the National Agencies managing Erasmus+ to appoint specific inclusion and diversity actors to reach out directly to learners with special needs or fewer opportunities and to ensure equal rights to prevent anyone who wants to be unable to do so. In short, more data, fewer obstacles and more support equals more equal opportunities for all, to make the next Erasmus+ truly more Erasmus.

Mr. President, the war has shown our weaknesses and our dependencies, and in the face of those weaknesses and dependencies, I have not once heard of trade, of deepening our trade relations, of seeking supply alternatives. I've heard it for gas and oil, but not for food. And you know what's going on? The Commission has been paralysing vital trade agreements to secure alternative food supplies for almost two years. Among them, the Mercosur agreement, fundamental for two exporting countries, such as Brazil and Argentina. When you look at the photo with the results of the vote on the resolution at the United Nations supporting the condemnation of the war in Ukraine, do you know which part was in green? Latin America. Do you know which part was in blue abstention? Asia. Do you know who we never pay attention to from the European Parliament, from the Commission and from the Council? Latin America. At a time when there was talk of geopolitics, President Charles Michel said: ‘if we want to be a geopolitical power ...’ – if we want to be a geopolitical power, can we start doing geopolitics and stop keeping our trade agreements in the freezer until someone decides it is time to put them into circulation? Can we start trying to ratify trade agreements that can guarantee us alternative markets and alternative supplies?

Mr President, it is paradoxical that the Catalan separatist politicians, who repealed the Constitution in Catalonia in a coup d'état against democracy, denounce without proof that the rule of law is defended. It is paradoxical that those accused of spying on and following Catalan politicians, journalists and constitutional activists now report alleged espionage, without evidence. It is paradoxical that those who prevented the creation of a commission of inquiry in the Catalan Parliament to investigate complaints of alleged espionage now use this House and a commission of inquiry for their propaganda campaign, without evidence. And it is paradoxical that whoever stole seven million data from the Catalans is astonished that they enter theirs, without evidence. But hey, it's not paradoxical, because Catalan separatists are experts at propaganda and lying and defending their rights while violating everyone's. In any rule of law, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution, but Catalan separatists accuse without evidence, using and abusing this Parliament, not to know the truth, but to propagate the lie. We must therefore prevent those accused of being Putin's Trojan horse in Europe, Catalan separatism, from using the Pegasus scandal as a Trojan horse to surrender the democratic rule of law using this Parliament.

Mr President, the Guatemalan authorities are sliding the country down the slope of corruption, attack and judicial and rule of law independence. A slope that ends on the precipice. The Guatemalan authorities have to decide whether to take a step forward or take a step back, backtrack and orient public policies in Guatemala towards the path of the recovery of the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary. That is a key decision, because its future will depend on it. This resolution seeks to give a warning signal, which adds to that of many others, because we are interested in democracy in Guatemala, because we are interested in the future of Guatemalans and what we want is for the Guatemalan authorities to reflect and realize that they are on time. If they do, if instead of taking a step forward and falling towards Nicaragua they take a step backwards, they will find the European Union there, working hand in hand to guarantee a future of prosperity and freedom for all the citizens of Guatemala.

Mr President, Commissioner, this directive lays down the strictest legal framework in the world for the safety of toys. Europe, once again, is a leader in regulatory standards, in this case to protect our children. It shows that our standards are a guarantee to ensure that our children can play safely and that our producers comply with them. The problem is that we have many operators today who continue to introduce dangerous and counterfeit toys into our internal market. Third countries, such as China, which do not meet our standards when exporting their toys to Europe. And it is not only unfair competition practices that affect and can suffocate a key sector, such as, for example, in the Valencian Community in Spain, but also directly affect the safety of our children. Therefore, these irresponsible practices put our children and our producers at risk. The review of the framework addresses these issues and requires more market surveillance, more customs controls, more traceability and more resources to ensure effective compliance with our directives. Because defending children means ensuring the safety of toys, but it also means defending our borders. And we must do that, too.