Speeches

Madam President, cyber attacks have become an increasing threat to our societies and governments. In times of crisis, such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine, cyber attacks pose an even greater danger since they are used as political weapons against democracies. We must strengthen the resilience of our critical infrastructure against cyber threats, enhance cooperation between Member States and ensure the protection of our citizens. Europe is vulnerable unless we do so. But there is a critical aspect that we should never forget, and I’m calling on the Commission and the Council to be very alert and aware of it: keeping our democracies healthy along this process. Member States should never use the umbrella of cyber security and national security for building excessive rules and political control. Democracy should never be militarised. I am looking at Romania’s recent cyber security and defence legislation, which gives extensive powers to intelligence services. We risk turning private service providers of technical solutions and other private stakeholders into informants of State authorities with excessive reporting obligations. And I am concerned about this interpretation. In democracies, we need civilian oversight and accountability of the intelligence services. Cyber security means also respect for privacy, fundamental rights and the rule of law, protecting personal data, properly fighting organised crime and toxic foreign interference. Resilient societies are about that, and I would like to thank you, Commissioners, for your work and for mentioning the value-driven approach to this package. I hope that with this package we will all continue to build safe and healthy democracies. This is what Europe needs.

Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, because we are discussing the rule of law, I would like to confirm to you that, unfortunately, it is not just a rumor. Indeed, yesterday, the Romanian Senate voted an amendment that practically decriminalizes abuse of office, setting it a threshold of 50 000 euros, that is, a luxury car or a provincial apartment. I hope that this happened out of a regrettable error and I ask those colleagues in the governing coalition who propose incentives for corruption to stop embarrassing us. If they do, because the Constitutional Court decided so, although the Venice Commission said there was no need, it must be symbolic; one euro, not 50 000, not 2 000, not 5 000, because we are not in any competition about the amount from which he is free to the damage in people's pockets or to steal. I ask you, Commissioner, to address this matter urgently with the Romanian Ministry of Justice, because both the European Commission and Parliament and the Venice Commission have repeatedly called on the Romanian authorities to oppose any measures that lead to the decriminalisation of corruption among dignitaries and officials, and when we seek support and credibility in Brussels, for Schengen or for other things, we must first not mock Romania at home and do our job there.

Madam President, ‘Organised crime continues to pose a significant threat to the safety and security of our citizens. Our collective response must involve law enforcement agencies, judicial authorities, intelligence services and civil society. We must enhance our capabilities in areas such as information sharing, intelligence analysis and cross—border cooperation to disrupt the activities of criminal networks’. This is, dear colleagues, a speech written by an AI tool, and I agree with it. Basically, everyone can speak brilliantly about countering organised crime; people, politicians, machines, it sounds great. The difference between us and an AI tool is that we need to act on it. We need to make it reality. We need to adopt strong legislative proposals. We need to enforce them in the Member States. This is the difference. We have an anti—money laundering package coming soon and I hope that this House will have a very powerful position on countering money laundering. We need a strong AMLA, we need FIUs that can work with each other. We need access to information for journalists and for the civil society. This is what we need to produce as decision makers. Otherwise we can kindly ask AI to produce nice speeches and this is it.

Madam President, the use of wiretapping technologies against independent journalists goes against the most basic principles of democracy and is a key feature of a police state regime. Journalists must be able to work without fearing for their own safety, and their sources must remain protected under all circumstances. This is something that the Greek Government should hear and understand if it claims to protect the rule of law. The scandal in Greece confirms once more that the EU needs strong and clear legislation giving workers in the media sector the right tools to face the pressure and counter the threats to their independence. This is exactly why we need the European Media Freedom Act. The Act responds to the pressing challenges the media are currently facing by banning the use of spyware in journalists’ devices and allowing us to sanction such practices. The European Media Freedom Act can become an essential part of our framework for safeguarding European values. We owe it to the journalists, to those who support the free press, and to all those who fight to defend the rule of law in Europe.

Mr President, at the beginning of this legislative term, the Commission promised to put on the table a proposal for the establishment of an independent European ethics body. However, it took a corruption scandal that shattered citizens' trust to put this topic back on the table. Why would we be afraid to clearly assume integrity? Why should anti-European populists have where to point their finger? We have models in the European Union. Romania, for example, has a National Integrity Agency that independently assesses possible conflicts of interest and possible cases of revolving doors. Does anyone have anything to hide behind office doors? Then let's open them wide. Not for Russia's or Qatar's money. It's for integrity checks. Otherwise, of course, we can work in the industry or lobby, but I'm afraid, ladies and gentlemen, we don't have much to do in a public office.

Madam President, over the past eight years, 426 women have been killed in Romania by partners or family members. In 2022, almost 40 000 women were victims of domestic violence. The 2022 Gender-Based Violence Barometer published by the FILIA Centre shows that biases that encourage violence against women persist. 19% of Romanians believe that a woman is raped after agreeing to go home to a man. 12% think rape is justified if a woman is dressed provocatively. And today we have in Romania politicians, parliamentarians who hit their wives, beat their wives without major political consequences. We have the tools to change things, we need courage. The European Union must ratify the Istanbul Convention and the Member States must be determined and consistent in its application. Gender-based violence hinders the exercise of fundamental rights. Democracy, without ensuring the rights of all people, regardless of gender, is not called democracy.

Mr President, in July 2022, following the revision of the FATF list, which included the United Arab Emirates in the list of jurisdictions subject to closer monitoring in the area of money laundering, we sent the Commission a written question on the inclusion of the United Arab Emirates in the European list of high-risk third countries on anti-money laundering. In December, the Commission proposed to revise this list and include the Arab Emirates, together with other countries, but the Council did not consider this proposal a priority and postponed the discussion on this topic. On the other hand, even today, after so many scandals with corrupt dictators and laundromats laundering money that affected the Union, we have not clearly and firmly banned golden passports and visas in the Union. I want to believe that we are not closing our eyes either at home or in third-party anti-money laundering jurisdictions, all the more so as we know very well that Russia is circumventing EU sanctions with the help of some of these jurisdictions. I ask the Council why are we still reflecting today? Why don't we have courage, just interests? If not now, when?

Madam President, the 2021 PIF report revealed that the number of cases of fraud and irregularities reported by the competent EU and national authorities remained stable in 2021 compared to 2020. But the value involved rose significantly – from EUR 1.46 billion in 2020 to EUR 3.24 billion in 2021 – and this is really worrying. Detection of fraud and irregularities simply takes too long, averaging from two and a half to three years until they are reported to the Commission. We need to work together in order to change this. The EPPO and OLAF are doing a very good job, but Member States also have to improve their detection methods in order to decrease this significant delay. On 1 June 2021, the EPPO finally started its operational activities and proved its capabilities and cost-effectiveness, despite the minimal resources and extreme time pressure. Although the EPPO’s budget for 2021 was less than EUR 45 million, they managed to order the seizure of more than EUR 250 million in their first year of operations. This means that we – in this House and at home – need to ensure full support and full speed to this institution. It is one of the best performing projects of Europe so far. They need money, human resources and trust. Let us give them the means and we will all succeed to better counter fraud in the European Union.

Madam President, press freedom is a key condition for a functioning democracy under the rule of law. The findings of the 2022 Commission’s rule of law report demonstrate once again that this vital pillar needs immediate reinforcing not only in some, but in all, Member States. To be very clear, there is no rule of law without a free press, and the reality on the ground is that too often journalists face enormous political pressure. Editorial independence is under threat. They are harassed to the point of having to abandon their profession and some politicians, their oligarch friends, as well as third country exponents, make constant efforts to control the press and distort realities. Through the anti-SLAPP directive and the European Media Freedom Act, we have the responsibility to equip the press with the necessary tools to protect its independence. These acts are a vital part of our framework for upholding the rule of law. Journalism is about much more than just the mere provision of services. It is about democracy, freedom, values, education and fighting for the truth. If we want to keep and defend these things, journalists must feel safe, empowered and financially independent, and stay free. We owe this to them.

European democracy is fragile and suffering. Extremism is growing, we have foreign interference in elections, disinformation, unprecedented threats against journalists. The wounds of our democracy have increased exponentially with the Russian aggression against Ukraine and are deepening. The Kremlin is sowing propaganda against European values in our home and neighborhood. In Chisinau, paid protesters are trying to change the country's pro-European election. Qatar is buying leaders from European institutions. What do we do, give up so easily? Are we putting an end to a chapter in the freest and most civilized European history? More than ever, no. But that takes courage. This requires strong institutional responses and people with vision. This requires integrity. Each of us is equally responsible. Democracy defends itself by sanctioning illiberalism, education, free press, media literacy, informed voting. Democracy defends itself with a united Europe. If we want to do something here and at home, that's what we have to do.

Mr President, my child's godparents are Romanian citizens who live in Austria and teach at a university in Vienna. From their hands emerge generations of young Austrians and Europeans whom they raise in the spirit of European values, European unity and solidarity in which we believe. And the Austrian chancellor, declaratively, believes in them. In other words, Chancellor Nehammer, my Romanians are educating your young Austrians. I do this with great professionalism and dedication. They and others like them have been humiliated by the JHA vote that throws Romania on the periphery of Europe, while some Romanians are educating Europe right at its heart. But I am convinced that they will not do their duty for Austria and its young people less than the values they believe in, but they will continue precisely because they understand these values and respect them, as the country respects you. This is what Romania must do now, at the December Council and beyond, to continue civilized and with dignity, to support its cause. Campaigns of hatred and revenge do not help us. I am convinced that we will meet our Austrian colleagues in many political and diplomatic negotiations that we learn, after such experiences, to behave better and we will do so. None of us will stop until Romania is in Schengen, because it deserves every man of its own.

Madam President, nobody’s trying to punish Hungary, as the Hungarian Government is saying publicly when discussing the application of the Conditionality Regulation. But we in this House have a responsibility towards the European citizens to protect EU values, to make sure EU funds are used correctly and that there is no risk affecting the EU budget. I know the European Commission is also aware of this huge responsibility. We cannot base our decisions on vague commitments to rule of law and promises of reforms without long-term monitoring. If we release these funds without true restoration of the rule of law in Hungary, then we will fail our collective responsibility. We will fail the Hungarian and European citizens alike. We will undermine all the work done so far in order to protect the rule of law in Europe. Then we must make sure that Hungarian citizens do not suffer for the actions of their government and channel EU funds towards the civil society and local authorities. And, finally, freezing money for Ukraine and vetoing NATO’s membership in order to negotiate one’s unique interpretation of the rule of law is a form of international blackmail. If I were you, Mr Orbán, I would never go that far. The boomerang effect could be international, too, and I am not sure that you could ever explain it to the Hungarian people.

Madam President, I have heard the word 'reforms' very often in this Chamber today. It is good that these reforms continue to happen. Tomorrow's most important vote is the vote on recital 22, splitting the vote that allows us to keep the Commission text referring to the continuation of these reforms, while integrating REPowerEU into the national recovery and resilience plans. Romania is directly interested in this happening. Therefore, my direct appeal is to the Romanian rapporteurs, first of all Mr Muresan, but also Mr Nica, to keep this voting indication. It's simple: recital 22, plus, minus, plus, plus, that is the order in which we must vote. It's the key vote, even if the Renew amendment doesn't get to be voted on. In this way, we secure the reforms and keep the interest of Romania and of all the member states that want to make further reforms. This is the purpose of the Regulation, this is the purpose of the Recovery and Resilience Facility, and I hope that we will be lucid, united and united. I hope that the European Commission will have again in this discussion, which will be complicated, all the power and support that we can give it, so that it can talk to each individual Member State and be Europe's reformists, not those who bring anti-reform to each of these Member States.

Mr President, reports from the US and European intelligence services published by the press tell us that Russia has invested at least $300 million in countries on three continents in recent years to influence our politics and public policies. They're tiny numbers, just the tip of the iceberg. There are Russian agents, and there are so-called useful Kremlin idiots, who make the Russian propaganda agenda free and devastating for democracy. Any attempt to legitimise an extremist party or politician by any of the European political families has costs that are hard to imagine. We already have extremist and ultraconservative factions in Europe in power. Look around. We are talking about those for whom social rights do not exist, for whom the superiority of the race is a faith, for whom diversity pays with death. The battle of the next decade is for values, rights and freedoms. Either we win it, or we will no longer exist as democracies. The Swedish Aurists, Melanists and Democrats and the like must never make the political agenda of Europe and our countries. When that happens, we have lost peace, freedom, democracy, balance. I mean everything.

Mr President, one can fight with a gun or one can fight with a pen. History proves that most of the times a pen was a lot more powerful than a gun. For soldiers of the truth like Daphne, the fight for a world with less corruption, for the freedom of speech and for the rule of law cost her life. They killed her, with impunity until today, but they could not kill her story. The Daphne Project - Forbidden Stories is still alive today and continues her work. Governments should honour this fight for the truth, not bury it. There must be an end to impunity for those who silence journalists, activists and media workers. This is what we need to do in this House as well: legislate and work with our governments as well so that it stops and journalists are protected. This is what we owe to Daphne and people like her. Otherwise, there will be no truth left to fight for. And please, dear colleagues and Commissioner, consider naming the European anti—SLAPP Directive, the Daphne Law, because she deserves that.

Madam President, Romania deserves to be in Schengen! Every truck driver who goes through this hell all the time, every man who stands in line for hours! We really deserve this! The colleagues from the ruling coalition are here, I heard them speak, they had very strong messages from PNL, PSD and UDMR had post-accession all the Romanian governments, with one exception. I believe that none of these governments have fought enough, effectively and genuinely for Schengen, and we have not given signals of confidence when we have made justice vulnerable or bought the press. It's time to move on. So I ask them a lot this time to fight real and efficient for Schengen. Together to fix the laws of justice, to solve our problems at home and I think that will help a lot, because Romania deserves Schengen. Maybe we can make it together this time.

Mr President, there must be a misunderstanding with the title of this debate. It sounds like some hero leader of the opposition was illegally arrested in some third country while fighting for democracy and human rights. We are talking about Mr Boyko Borisov, former Prime Minister of Bulgaria. This House adopted the resolution on 8 October 2020 on the rule of law and fundamental rights in Bulgaria – some of the EPP Members voted for that resolution. I quote from it, ‘whereas in recent years, reports of the misuse of Union funds in Bulgaria have been proliferating; whereas in recent months, Bulgarian citizens have witnessed a large number of high-level corruption allegations, some of which have directly involved the Prime Minister; whereas also in recent months, international media have repeatedly reported possible interconnections between criminal groups and public authorities in Bulgaria; whereas these revelations have led to large demonstrations and civil society protests and have seen Bulgarians call for justice, respect for the rule of law and an independent judiciary, and protest against erosion of democracy and endemic corruption’. Mr Borisov and his party were in power back then. Is he the leader of the opposition mentioned in the title that you are turning into a hero before the elections? Please think twice next time. Double standards hurt us all. First and foremost, the people of Bulgaria are hurt and disappointed. Second, if you are pushing him and his gang of friends back to power again with this kind of debate, it’s again the people of Bulgaria who deal with the consequences – all of us and the Union. Then we are back to writing resolutions again.

Madam President, I would like to thank again the rapporteur for her excellent work, as well as other shadow rapporteurs and colleagues. Together we worked very well in achieving this comprehensive, balanced and solidly documented report. Across the main political groups we are united in our condemnation of the deliberate and systemic efforts of the Hungarian Government to undermine the founding values of the European Union. And we clearly ask the Council to take its responsibilities under Article 7 seriously and finally act. What was the reaction of the authorities in Hungary to our report? Beyond the usual scapegoating of opposition MEPs and of so-called Soros networks, on 19 July, Fidesz parliamentarians pushed through a resolution asking for the abolition of the European Parliament and a return to one composed of deputies appointed by Member States. The text also asked for moving away from the objective of establishing an ever-closer Union among European people. This is very, very worrying, and it shows a clear unwillingness to acknowledge well—founded criticism or to put an end to disregard for EU values. We see this again with the latest move to limit abortion rights on the eve of our debate. We must make full use of the Conditionality Regulation. We cannot allow the European citizens to finance this madness, nor the superiority of races, as Mr Orbán stated in Romania. At the same time we should be creative, apply smart conditionality so that the Hungarian citizens are not deprived of the benefits of the EU funds, because they are very important.

Madam President, the protection of the Union's financial interests means a complex framework that includes mechanisms for detection, investigation, punishment, recovery, but also prevention. Whistleblowers play an extremely important role in detection and prevention, in particular, but not only, in the context of purchases made during the pandemic. They are those vertical people who, when they detect corruption in the companies or public institutions in which they work, have the courage to denounce them. To report corruption, however, whistleblowers need safe channels and increased protection guaranteed by law. Even the Chief Prosecutor of the European Public Prosecutor's Office highlighted this last week, in the context in which Romania has not correctly and completely transposed the European Directive on the protection of whistleblowers. And it is not the only one, it has done so alongside 17 other Member States that have not yet correctly transposed this directive. Moreover, in Romania, the law recently adopted by the Romanian Parliament empties the content directive. This also jeopardises the work of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and the framework for the protection of the Union’s financial interests. I ask all these Member States that have not transposed the directive to do so correctly and as quickly as possible, because otherwise we are not protecting the financial interests of the Union, but opacity, fraud and corruption.

Mr President, I would first of all like to thank my colleague Dragoș Tudorache for this excellent report. It wasn't easy at all. The context of this report has been constantly evolving both for the better, with the submission of Moldova's application for membership, and for the worse, with the invasion of Ukraine. It is precisely because of this context that our message today is essential: we stand with the Republic of Moldova more than ever. We want him to join us in the Union and especially we are with him in implementing the courageous reforms that the authorities in Chisinau have started. We need to be more strategic and determined. Political dialogue needs to be stepped up, sectoral cooperation needs to be expanded, macro-financial assistance needs to be increased and made more coherent, with a focus on grants. Setting up a support group for the Republic of Moldova, along the lines of the one already set up for Ukraine, would allow us to better accompany judicial reforms, the fight against corruption, economic recovery, including the preparation of future accession negotiations. Finally, a word on justice reform and anti-corruption efforts. I want to encourage the authorities in Chisinau to continue with the same determination on this path. These sectors are fundamental to give the citizens of the Republic of Moldova the future they deserve and deserve together with us here in the European Union. Today, in plenary, when President Maia Sandu took the floor, there were students from the Republic of Moldova, from the College of Europe, who attended this speech. I think and hope they were proud of their leader, the Republic of Moldova and the representation she has in Europe. They are waiting and we are all waiting for Europe in the European family.

Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, the Republic of Moldova deserves trust, it deserves the European perspective and the status of candidate country, not because it is an important political moment to be capitalized on, but because it has proved to us in this crisis with great courage, but also beyond it, that it deserves this trust. Today's Europe is the result of people's vision for a future of peace, prosperity and democracy. We cannot now, in the midst of the war of imperialism against democracy, ignore this vision. The Europe of the future is not a space that we inhabit with rules, but it is every country and every man won in society and in governments who fight for these rules and for our values, who appropriates them, who defends them. Moldova does that. A country the size of a German state with a pro-European vein the size of the whole heart of Europe must be part of our construction. Economies grow and develop in a few years, but for nations to aspire to European identity it took decades. The Republic of Moldova now has this aspiration. Money, rules assumed and respected, accession chapters are tools that we must give. The objective is to bring her home, here, to the European family, even if it is not easy, even if it will not be tomorrow. Open the doors for those who believe, feel, act pro-European. This is a vision for Europe.

Madam President, 2002 was not an easy year for any of the Justice and Home Affairs agencies, nor for the Court of Justice of the EU, as they all had to adapt to the new reality of the COVID-19 pandemic. I would like to congratulate the Court of Justice in particular for being once again among the top performers in terms of efficiency, budgetary performance, staff policy, cooperation initiatives, trainings and communication visibility and Green Transition. The Court has also stepped up its efforts in digitalisation, ensuring fair and easy access to justice for everyone. This was essential in times of COVID. The Justice and Home Affairs agencies have made commendable efforts and collaborated well, offering support to national authorities, issuing joint publications and recommendations. Now, a few words on Frontex. This is the largest and one of the most important EU agencies with a mandate of keeping our borders safe. Its role is crucial, in this war as well, and its support is needed. This is exactly why the EU needs a strong and functional Frontex, not a controversial or weak one. We cannot afford doubt on procedures, mismanagement or breaking rules, nor should EU citizens pay for that. We need an efficient structure, with clear tasks and responsibilities, working together with Member States. Mr Leggeri’s resignation does not address all of these concerns. Frontex has a clear set of conditions, which must be met in order for the agency to operate according to its mandate and relevant EU legislation. I expect the current interim and future management to make an absolute priority of ensuring full compliance with EU legislation and our requirements, from fundamental rights monitoring to compliance with the ECJ ruling concerning its operations in Hungary. A robust and trustworthy Frontex must protect the EU border while abiding by the highest standards in terms of respect for fundamental rights. I am looking forward to our future cooperation in achieving all of these goals.

Madam President, an attack on a journalist is an attack on us all. I started my day by reading these words from OCCRP. Emilia Șercan is a Romanian investigative journalist whose private life and reputation are tarnished as we speak only because she had the courage to reveal a rotten system. When Diana Oncioiu, Vlad Stoicescu and Ovidiu Vanghele shed light on corruption and abuse within the church, they rapidly became targets of abusive lawsuits. Many other names are on this list, and they’re not limited to only one Member State. The anti-SLAPP directive proposal is the first piece of EU legislation which directly addresses the protection of journalists, as it deals with abusive litigation. I would like to thank the Commission for making this possible, and I would like to thank the President of this House for making it possible because it was not an easy fight. This proposal will be followed by the Media Freedom Act later this year. The MFA should provide us with a surgical tool addressing main threats to the freedom of press, while at the same time avoiding ministries of truth or tearing apart functioning models where journalism thrives. We have long called for such legislation, and this is just the beginning of a complex road to implementation. But it is finally happening now. Let us not forget those journalists who are reporting from the war in Ukraine or are oppressed by Putin’s regime. Ten journalists have been murdered so far by the Russian army in Ukraine while doing their job. Putin’s war is also a war against free press. Journalists have been targeted. They have been captured and abducted, held hostage, having their names on extermination lists. These are war crimes and every single one of them needs to be paid for. We stand with them all. We cherish their work and bravery. We need to support them with facts and actions, not just words. They are gatekeepers of freedom, pluralist, informed and resilient societies. Long live a free and independent press.

Madam President, I would like to start by thanking the French Presidency for resuming the Article 7 hearings. It is indeed important that the process continues. I would also like to acknowledge the announcement made yesterday by President von der Leyen regarding the conditionality regulation, and the fact that it will be finally applied to Hungary. I do believe, unfortunately, that it comes a bit too late. Looking at the results of the elections in Hungary, and the new and fresh Fidesz and Orbán grip on this country, I think that every time that we are hesitant regarding the rule of law, it sends the message to all those throughout Europe that would like to follow Orbán’s autocratic tendencies that this is okay – that you can still win elections, you can still disregard democratic rules and still get rich with EU money by doing what he does, and this is okay. And I believe that this is not what people want to hear from us. Nevertheless, I would like to commend the effort of the united opposition and of all those Hungarians who have fought for our common values in these elections, which were unequal elections, and they were not fair. This is what the Observation Mission stated as well. But how could it have been otherwise, given the absence of level playing field, the media bias, the media capture, the state capture, the opaque campaign funding? How could it have been otherwise? Anyway, nobody is eternal in power, neither Orbán nor Putin. And one day the people of Hungary and the united opposition will win, for our European values.

Madam President, in 2020 alone, over EUR 253 million of detected fraud were lost, and this is only in EU funds under shared management. This is the tip of the iceberg, as national data reporting is not accurate and reliable enough. But we’re not only talking about stolen money. We are speaking about a connection to oligarchic networks seeking to gain control over independent judiciaries and free media to cover up conflicts of interest and fraud, and to capture the State. The new multiannual financial framework and Next Generation EU make available EUR 1.8 trillion in EU funding. OLAF has already warned of the vulnerabilities we face in the absence of appropriate tools for monitoring this allocation. And we have these tools. We must extend the use of Arachne and EDES to all EU funds under shared management. We must improve their functionality and make the systems interoperable with national and local databases. Article 61 of the current Financial Regulation has been a game changer in fighting conflicts of interest in the EU. The revised version must be bold enough to enforce this framework, make it stronger and lay down clear rules on preventing, identifying and managing conflicts of interest. This is how we can succeed.