Speeches

Mr President, what is the legitimacy of a Parliament elected by 11% of voters, while 89% of citizens remain at home? They're sending a rejection message. Rejection of President Saïed’s roadmap and the way he has implemented it, in an overly authoritarian manner, as can be seen with the wave of arrests in recent days. Rejection of a parliament that was once too corrupt, with fragile majorities, but also rejection of a parliament that is now powerless. Tunisia is suffering from a severe economic and social crisis, which President Saïed’s controversial decisions fail to address. On the contrary, it has only managed to exacerbate political divisions and generate dangerous apathy among the population, whose living conditions continue to deteriorate despite all promises. Tunisian society needs to reach a new consensus on how to save the democratic transition and restore the pillars of a clean, inclusive and effective democratic governance system. Neither today’s polarising hyper-presidentialism nor a return to the system of stagnation before July 2021 is an option. For us, for the European Union, what needs to be done? Supporting the economy? Yes, of course, but also resolute support for democracy in Tunisia.

Mr President, as long as there is someone tempted by corruption and others willing to corrupt, our institutions will be exposed to corruption. Therefore, we must adopt rules and mechanisms that minimise and possibly eradicate the chances for corrupt practices and corrupt individuals to make their way into our institutions. The Qatargate and Moroccogate scandals have made it clear that our rules on transparency, integrity, anti-corruption and the use of public money must be improved, and we are working on that. But what is particularly needed are mechanisms to ensure that the rules we already have and the ones we will have in the near future are enforced. Where we dramatically fail is in oversight, in supervising and controlling the compliance with the rules and in sanctioning when such rules are broken. In 2021, this Parliament already proposed establishing an independent ethics body to oversee them and the maintenance of standards of integrity with the same rules for at least the Commission and Parliament, taking into account their different powers and competences. And despite the fact that President von der Leyen promised to do so, thus far, the Commission has not presented any proposal in this regard. Now, with a corruption scandal seriously affecting our credibility more than ever, it is time to move forward with this proposal and therefore I welcome the announcement made by Vice-President Jourová in the sense that the Commission will table a concrete proposal in the coming weeks. I hope it will come really in a short time and we are looking very much forward to that proposal.

Mr President, we have had to tear down many walls, both physical and psychological, to make the Union that Europe is today. It is therefore regrettable that some Member States and some political families are again insisting upon building new walls and fences and financing them with EU money to seal off Fortress Europe. They say walls will better help stop migration. But what they will stop is our European values. We know how quickly they fade away in outrageous episodes like the one at the Melilla wall, on the beaches of Lesbos and in so many other places. We need safe and legal pathways for migrants, amongst other reasons to ensure that we tackle the demographic and labour market challenges that we face. We need to guarantee the right to asylum for those who need shelter so they are not shamefully piled up in refugee camps or illegally pushed back or drowned in the Mediterranean Sea. The far right and a complacent reaction to them must not dictate the fundamentals of our common migration and asylum policy.

Madam President, Morocco is committed to making progress on human rights, but in some areas this progress is not being felt. This is the case of press freedom and acts of intimidation against journalists critical of the government, through campaigns of defamation and judicial harassment or through unlawful surveillance methods such as Pegasus, including against European journalists, such as Ignacio Cembrero. The cases we are denouncing today are examples of how journalists are being discredited and destroyed by the misuse of sexual harassment charges, upheld in court proceedings that fail to meet fair trial standards. We call on the Moroccan authorities to lift restrictions on freedom of expression that are incompatible with international law and to end intimidation tactics against critical journalists that ultimately undermine press freedom.

Mr President, blocking access to Nagorno-Karabakh and depriving 120 000 Armenians living there of access to essential goods is an act of barbarism. Doing so under the disguise of alleged environmental NGOs is an act of cynicism. And doing it by cutting off the Lachin corridor is a mockery to the trilateral ceasefire statement of 9 November 2020. People in Artsakh have the right to live in peace, dignity and security in their own places. It’s time to reach a peace agreement that guarantees the rights and security of the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh and settles its final status, taking into account the will of their own people. The EU should step up its involvement to reach such a final deal.

Madam President, the ongoing energy crisis, inflation, the American Inflation Reduction Act – all this is casting a large shadow over our economies. But it also is offering us an opportunity, which is to provide for a common European response. We have already seen that when the EU opts for common solutions at European level, it yields positive results. Take, for instance, the NextGenerationEU and the impact that the RRF has and is having in dodging a prolonged economic downturn, or hopefully in keeping the EU on the path of economic growth. If we leave the answer only in the hands of each Member State we know what happens. The gap will increase, according, amongst others, to the capacity of those with greater fiscal firepower, to offer subsidies to their citizens and companies. We need now to mobilise new resources to accompany European industries in the much—needed green transition to improve their capacity to compete internationally against other massive state aid schemes or against the lack of a level playing field. Therefore I hope that the Green Deal industrial plan that has been announced today has a strong pillar in European common financial resources.

Madam President, seriously and systematically strengthening the strategic relationship between the European Union and Latin America is necessary, all the more so since there is a current of political change in Latin America that opens an opportunity for more and better cooperation, and at a time when it is clear that we Europeans need to have more reliable partners in the world. This relationship must be developed on an equal footing and with mutual respect, with agendas that go beyond trade and investment and include fundamental issues such as the fight against climate change and social inequalities, the defence of human rights, shared development, the protection of nature and biodiversity, feminism, the defence of democratic institutions, the fight against organised crime or respect for indigenous peoples and self-determination. Finally, this strengthened relationship must also be an incentive towards greater integration among the peoples of Latin America.

Mr President, I would like to welcome and, obviously, support this initiative on the European Capital of Proximity Trade, as well as thank the proposal, particularly, the Barcelona Comerç Foundation and also the Catalan administrations that have been giving them support. A proposal to value everything you do and everything that local trade means and also help you to face your most pressing challenges, which are not few. If we want to have vibrant cities, neighborhoods and towns, with identity and social cohesion, urban fabrics with diversity of uses, local economies that bet on the commercial fabric as one of its main pillars, it is necessary that the European Union bet on proximity trade. If not, we risk having cities with magnificent shopping centers and leisure areas, but replicable almost anywhere in the world, devoid of authenticity and uprooted from local commerce and territory. Así que enhorabuena por la iniciativa, espero que la Comisión la haga suya y también me sumo a la propuesta de mi compañero de proponer Barcelona para que sea la primera Capital Europea del Comercio de Proximidad.

Mr President, we know what the solution for a lasting peace between Israel and Palestine is: two sovereign states living in peace and security on the basis of the 1967 borders, and with Jerusalem as the capital of both states. But we also know that we are far from this solution – the farthest we have been in a long time. The situation on the ground is explosive. Illegal settlements proliferate, as well as demolitions and threats of evictions, such as in Masafer Yatta. The unacceptable reality of occupation becomes unbearable. Attacks on Israeli territory are back. The Palestinian leadership is incapable of unity and renewal. The new Israeli Government will include far—right extremists threatening to formalise the annexation of the occupied territories, and the international community seems to get disengaged from the real end of the conflict. In such a context, we need, more than ever, political resolve from the EU. We need a European peace initiative, which is based on international law and UN resolutions, and which envisages the end of the conflict as an absolute priority.

Mr President, the shadow of corruption is tarnishing the reputation of this Parliament today. But this threat is not new: We already suspected that certain autocratic regimes might be trying to influence the work of this House by illicit means. I personally denounced it in 2017 through an amendment adopted by this plenary, which, in addition, called for, and I quote, "strong measures to prevent such corruption from occurring that would undermine the credibility and legitimacy of Parliament's work". But we didn't do anything. And now suspicions have turned into criminal charges. I hope that now we do act with concrete measures, such as providing ourselves with a true independent ethics committee with real powers, knowing that, even if we end up with the highest standards, in the end, whether there is corruption or not depends on our sense of democratic responsibility and our ethics. Against corruption there are no excuses of any kind. We have to start by questioning ourselves.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, rapporteurs, shadow rapporteurs, colleagues, during this decade, we want to give the EU’s digital transition a decisive boost. We had the Compass and now, with today’s decision, we have the concrete targets that we as a Union need to achieve by 2030 and the way to get there. Now all we need to do is to add political will and financial resources to these tools. In the digitalisation of the economy and society, much is at stake. We have to avoid lagging behind in terms of competitiveness for our economy and companies. We strive to be able to compete for leadership positions in the field of ICT and other advanced technologies. Issues such as territorial balance, technological sovereignty, the efficiency of public services and administration, energy sustainability or social cohesion are also at stake. Incorporation into the digital world should not result in more fractures and divides in our societies. This is why it is so important that the targets that we have agreed upon produce positive effects in each and every of these areas. On the positive balance of the final outcome, I want to emphasise the fact that we included the regional dimension in the digital transition. There are sub-state governments, like the Catalan government, that are very active in digital policies, and it’s good that they become involved with the joint endeavour to reach the 2030 targets. On the negative side, I regret that governments didn’t accept even the possibility for the Commission to issue recommendations to those Member States not on track with digital benchmarks. That no doubt would have helped the implementation of the targets. It’s also regrettable that we couldn’t fully counter the big push from some big Member States to introduce in the final text a reference, albeit indirectly, to the so-called fair share principle for investments in digital infrastructures. We need to ensure that net neutrality rules will not be changed and consumers and businesses will not have to pay more for online services due to a misleading concept of fair share. But this is a story to be continued.

Mr President, the debate on mechanisms for the search and rescue of people at sea – of people – is somewhat paradoxical because it does not match the approach. Instead of demanding that governments stop putting human lives at risk, putting absurd obstacles to disembarkation and not complying with their obligations derived, above all, from international maritime law, we blame NGOs for doing what others should do, which is to rescue migrants and asylum seekers on the high seas and bring them to safe harbor. And, in addition, some are dedicated to discrediting them and, in some cases, even put them in quarrels, normalizing the irresponsible and immoral discourse of the extreme right and the extreme right on issues of migration and asylum. These NGOs would be happy to stop doing their work on the high seas if there were a public policy to save the lives of migrants and refugees that respected the right to asylum and basic principles such as non-refoulement. But, unfortunately, this is not only not the case, but we see how some governments, such as the Italian one, intend to implement a selectivism when deciding who can disembark on their coasts and who cannot, in very clear contravention of their legal obligations. We are facing a resounding failure of European solidarity: external solidarity, but also internal solidarity between States. We need a European search and rescue mechanism, a European civilian operation with proactive involvement of states to rescue, with a well-defined mandate and aligned with current European and international legislation.

Madam President, let me start by thanking the rapporteur, Manu Pineda, for his job with this file, as well as the collaboration from the other shadow MEPs. I think we will reach a good, balanced and interesting outcome. The vast region covered by this report across the Middle East has undergone profound changes over the last decade. We have been witnessing, for instance, the rise of the Gulf States as engines of regional development. We’ve seen growing rivalries between big players like Saudi Arabia and Iran, and an authoritarian restoration across the region following the years of the Arab Spring uprisings from 2011 onwards, with severe negative implications for fundamental rights and freedoms. In the light of the many conflicts and deep divisions that affect the region, and given its importance for the EU due to its geographical location but also the common ties that we have, we have a stake in contributing to the progress and stability of the whole region. And there are areas of collaboration that need to be explored more intensively. For instance, partnerships in the field of clean energy, taking into account the region’s large renewable energy capacity. However, any deepening of the collaboration must be based on the demand for respect for human rights in accordance with international law. Severe and pervasive state repression against human rights defenders, activists, journalists, dissidents throughout the region has to be condemned. In this regard, the EU has to make engagement with civil society a priority and aim at concrete commitments at the respective regular human rights dialogues with countries in the region. Finally, more engagement is needed from our side in the region’s forgotten conflicts like the war in Yemen or protracted ones like the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Mr President, at the last European Council – and President Michel mentioned this – there were lengthy discussions concerning EU relations with China, apparently with no definitive conclusions. But while the debate remains ongoing, Chancellor Scholz has rushed to visit China to promote stronger bilateral trade relations, leaving aside the wider European agenda. We see how China is becoming an increasingly assertive superpower, internally implementing aggressive nationalist policies that involve gross human rights violations. We also see how other big powers, indeed partners of our own, such as the US, surpass us when it comes to protecting their technological sovereignty. If we have learned anything from our relations with Putin’s Russia, it is that strategic dependencies upon authoritarian regimes are extremely problematic and very difficult to redress, and that we need a single EU policy, not 27, when dealing with others. So it’s time to agree on a clear and unified EU strategy towards China that allows us to strengthen our strategic autonomy and to be consistent with our fundamental values.

Mr President, Madam Commissioner, when Russia invaded Ukraine in February this year, many researchers across Europe quickly mobilised to host fellow Ukrainian researchers. Let me tell you about a nice example of this kind of solidarity. A few days ago, I visited the Beta Research Centre in Vic in Central Catalonia. They do an outstanding job in the fields of biodiversity, circular economy and environmental and food technology. During the course of my visit, I was told that only two days after the war started and appalled by the images of the cruel invasion, the centre decided to offer to host Ukrainian researchers. As they were spreading the call through the social networks, they quickly found out that similar initiatives were emerging all over Europe. At least 100 volunteers from all countries were organising the reception of Ukrainian researchers in EU facilities in an altruistic and self-managed manner. Then these volunteers decided to open the Science for Ukraine website to provide in a clear and open way all the useful information for Ukrainian researchers willing to flee the war but at the same time continue their careers. Globally, more than 2 000 offers were collected and in some cases they welcomed the first refugees even before the official administrations had put in place reception measures. The Beta Centre provided work, housing and salary for eight Ukrainian researchers, and now they are proud to tell about their experience, which was positive both for the Ukrainian researchers and the host centre. Support to the Ukrainian research community has to be part of the EU’s comprehensive support to the people of Ukraine, to whom we’ve just decided to grant the Sakharov Prize. The Commission has rightly provided coordination support to concrete actions like the one I just explained. It is important that, despite the horrors of the war and the massive latest attacks on civilian infrastructure, the Ukrainian research community can keep working inside the country, preventing brain drain, and that we keep providing support for the projects under Horizon Europe and other additional instruments. And in the future reconstruction efforts education and research infrastructure will have to get special attention because, as we know, the research and innovation capacity of any country is key to a more prosperous future.

Madam President, the biggest achievement of the first European Political Community Summit is probably that it happened at the moment it happened. Bringing together 44 leaders from across the continent at a time of war and overlapping crises in Europe is something positive, particularly given the need for political and security cooperation, as well as the need to send another strong message to the Kremlin as regards its isolation. A flexible format where leaders can meet and discuss issues of common interest and also hold bilateral or trilateral meetings is certainly not useless. There always has to be a space for dialogue. For instance, the fact that on the margins of the summit, the leaders of France, Azerbaijan, Romania and the President of the European Council could meet and discuss the armed conflict in the South Caucasus, apparently achieving some progress, is a positive spillover from the summit. That being said, the summit was not exactly a meeting of democratic leaders, given the presence of certain authoritarian rulers who make a mockery of democracy. Macron’s original idea of gathering, and I quote, ‘democratic [European] nations that subscribe to our shared core values’, will have to wait for better times. Nevertheless, we must hope that the European Political Community will become an instrument for dialogue that, at least in the long run, will contribute to the goal of bringing European states closer, not only in terms of interest, but also in values.

Madam President, for a growing number of Europeans, making ends meet is becoming a real headache. It is no longer simply paying skyrocketing energy bills, it is also dealing with a shopping cart, with climbing food prices and facing mortgage repayments as rates soar. Putin now has to use energy as a weapon against our economy, and we should have been prepared for that. But we weren’t, we chose to be shackled to Putin’s gas and at the next European Council you will again have to discuss how to deal with the ongoing energy crisis. But beyond discussions, it’s time to take decisions. Time passes, social concern grows and winter is approaching. Yes, we will need to reduce demand while ensuring security of supply, but we will also have to take courageous decisions to contain energy prices. Joint purchases won’t be enough. We need to both cap gas prices for a longer time and decouple them from electricity prices. We need to impose windfall taxes on the energy companies, and all this without reneging on our climate goals, whether for 2030 or 2050. We have to stay true to our commitments: phasing out fossil fuels – not just Russian ones – and speeding up renewables. And finally, if each Member State does its own thing, if only the states with the greatest fiscal margin can afford to implement powerful social shields, then we will deepen again territorial inequalities. We need coherent and coordinated action at EU level. We need solidarity and we need the European Commission to take the lead. Yesterday’s proposals are welcome, but we will need to show much more determination.

Mr President, in Schengen Europe and cross-border cooperation, five huge stones have cut since January 2021 the Coll de Banyuls border crossing, between the northern and southern parts of Catalonia, on the border between France and Spain. Note that we are talking about a total, general and absolute closure, not a reintroduction of controls; a closure that had to be temporary, but has been in place for almost two years; closure affecting the communication and day-to-day life of neighbouring populations, but also, for example, the provision of emergency services. The criteria put forward by France, in due course, to justify closure and prolong it three times in no way can be compatible with the criteria of necessity and proportionality referred to in the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Commissioner, enforce this sentence, reopen the Coll de Banyuls and restore freedom of movement there as well.

Mr President, the scale of the floods in Pakistan isn’t easy to grasp: 1 600 deaths, 33 million inhabitants affected, around one third of the landmass under water and more than 10 million people in need. As floodwaters slowly recede, the sheer scale of damage becomes even more evident. This catastrophe is yet another demonstration of the terrible effects that climate change can bring. It’s a country where the socioeconomic situation was already very fragile. Despite massive relief efforts from Pakistani authorities to alleviate the devastating impacts of the floods – and beyond, the immediate response from the international community, there are still many pressing needs to be covered and many health threats to be countered. Therefore, we should step up our efforts to help Pakistan in facing not only the immediate but also the long-term consequences of such a huge disaster and in building resilience against climate change. We welcome the new EUR 30 million humanitarian aid package, but we ask to go beyond that.

Madam President, Putin’s regime has continually violated international law since the very beginning of Russia’s latest aggression against Ukraine, but actually, since long before that – remember Crimea? The sham referendums that took place in four Ukrainian regions two weeks ago constitute yet further mockery of international law and democratic principles. These so-called referendums, which happen in military—occupied territories with a brutal war of aggression ongoing and with forced displacements of population, were simply a pretext for the illegal and violent annexation of Ukrainian territories. They were nothing but another of Putin’s failed attempts to feign legitimacy for a criminal aggression. Make no mistake: this has got nothing to do with the democratic right to self-determination, which is an honourable right that has to be upheld. These fake referendums are not acts of self-determination. They are an act of external determination. The free will of the people cannot be expressed at gunpoint. Borders should never be changed by the use of force. We shall continue to stand firmly with the people of Ukraine, imposing more sanctions on those who fuel and sustain the aggression and blatantly disregard basic principles of democracy and international law.

Mr High Representative, the two leaders of both countries pledged several times to continue negotiating a possible peace agreement; The last time was in August. Despite this, we have seen the latest of Azerbaijan's aggressions, this time already inside Armenian territory. It seems as if Baku would like to seize the moment to strengthen its negotiating position on these negotiations in order to reach an agreement, particularly on Nagorno-Karabakh. Moreover, our growing energy dependence on Azerbaijan, with the new gas contracts, certainly gives Azerbaijan a stronger geopolitical position. But at the same time, I feel that we are eroding Armenia's confidence in our ability to bring about an agreement. My question, Mr Borrell, is this: Do you think that, in these circumstances, we still have enough influence over Azerbaijan to try to mediate and achieve a just, lasting and sustainable agreement?

Mr President, the mullahs – religious fundamentalists – killed Mahsa Amini and the regime’s repressive nature is now killing dozens of protesters, many of them women, who are demanding life and justice, life in freedom and dignity. All authoritarian regimes respond to popular unrest by claiming that they are the result of foreign interference, because they are simply unable to recognise that even under the most brutal circumstances, there are always citizens willing to sacrifice everything to defend human rights, human dignity and freedom. We have to stand by those protesting against the repressive rule imposed on them. We have to use all the mechanisms at our disposal to get the Iranian regime to stop persecuting dissidents, to stop imposing policies on those that attack the most elementary human rights, and finally open up a country diverse in ideologies, thoughts, religions and minorities, a democratic country where Mahsa Amini would never have become the spark and the symbol that lit the fire of protest.

Madam President, Madam Commissioner, yesterday’s announcement by President von der Leyen on the establishment of an SME relief package is very welcome. SMEs are suffering the consequences of the war in Ukraine with difficulties in access to raw materials, to certain agricultural products and with the increase in energy prices. All this happens after the huge impact of the pandemic, from which many SMEs were only starting to recover. The measures under the upcoming package should be defined together with the representatives of SMEs and should deliver as soon as possible: there is no time to waste. And another great difficulty that SMEs are facing is, as has been mentioned, late payments. And this is not a consequence of the war, but a systemic problem that has only been worsened by the current situation. For this reason, I very much encourage the Commission to come up with an ambitious revision of the Late Payment Directive that strengthens the compliance mechanism and introduces an effective system of sanctions.

Madam President, once again this Parliament strongly condemns the repressive and authoritarian drift of the Government of Nicaragua. We did it last June and we do it again now, because unfortunately things have only gotten worse. To what we already said in our June Resolution we must now add the condemnation of the persecution of members of the Catholic Church. Imprisoning Bishop Rolando Álvarez, who always defended dialogue and a peaceful solution to the conflict in Nicaragua, Ortega and Murillo silence one of the last remaining critical and free voices in the interior of the country. But when they are left without critics, without dissidents, when they have already completely drowned political pluralism, the free media and civil society, when in the country there are only affections for the regime and many quiet people, afraid to speak out, when in prisons there is no more room for traitors to the homeland, as the Nicaraguan authorities call those who defend democracy and human rights, then what will they have left? They will have, perhaps, the pleasure of believing that they have everything under control, a country at their feet and at the service of their interests, which is what all dictators want. But it will be, if it is not already, a country with too many wounds, with too much repression and too much fear to be able to give its best. We reiterate our call for the release of all political prisoners, for the return of all exiles and for the 1 800 closed NGOs to be allowed to operate again in the country, and for the European Union to take further measures that can help reverse and redirect the situation in terms of respect for human rights.

Madam President, confronted with a Russian invasion of Ukraine, the EU has provided a firm and united response. We have rightly decided to stand with the Ukrainian people in the face of this criminal aggression. We did the right thing. We have to be with those defending democracy, freedom and ultimately what we like to call the European values. But it should be remembered, as you did in your speech, that within our European Union, these same values cannot at all times and in all places be taken for granted either. That here too, it is necessary to defend every day respect for fundamental rights and democracy, although luckily in our case, not with a force of arms, because we do indeed have problems in this regard, and not all of them are caused by threats coming from the outside. While in some Member States we are spied on by the hacking of our phones – as has happened to me and other colleagues in this Parliament. We have a serious problem when political and judicial abuses committed in Member States must be called out by international organisations as it recently happened to Spain. We have a problem when the rule of law continues to deteriorate in some Member States and when we don’t really use the mechanism to correct that situation, we also have a problem. So, Madam von der Leyen, I kindly ask you for more courage to protect, defend and improve the state of democracy and the respect for fundamental rights in our Union.