Speeches

Madam President, For a year now, Myanmar’s military junta has been murdering, expelling, arresting and raping with impunity – so perversely planned and systematic that we need to speak clearly of crimes against humanity and war crimes. And there is no end in sight for the cruel military rule. Last year, my colleagues and I had the opportunity to meet Myanmar's elected representatives online. They had to go into hiding to protect their lives or that of their families. The civilian government is in exile, on the run, murdered or imprisoned after sham trials. It must be the interest of all democracies to restore Myanmar's still young democracy. Therefore, there must be no international cooperation for us with Myanmar's rulers, especially when we see who the friends of the military junta are: China and Russia are reliably supplying weapons for the killings and blocking the UN Security Council. They are destabilizing a country that hopes for a democratic future. They are destabilizing an entire emerging region. The great conflict of our time is called autocracy versus democracy. This conflict is more than just economic competition. The autocrats and despots of this world terrorize and murder worldwide because they despise and fear the desire for freedom and democracy. It is therefore completely incomprehensible and, frankly, intolerable to me that the Commission has still not initiated an examination of Myanmar's trade advantages. Thank you, Commissioner Jourová, for being here today, but I repeatedly ask myself in foreign policy debates: Where is Mr. Borrell? I ask the Commission to: Finally, make sure that no military company benefits from preferential access to our single market! Expose the trading benefits! As a European Union, we must live up to our responsibilities as a democratic and economic power. No democratic country can be too small or too far away for us not to stand by the side of freedom and democracy. Thank you for your commitment, colleagues!

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner! Responsible and sustainable consumption is important to many consumers. And yet, it is very likely that each of us has a sweater or a T-shirt from forced labour hanging in our closets, because 20% of the world's cotton comes from China's forced labour region of Xinjiang alone. As consumers, we have great power. We can make a difference. But we cannot all bear responsibility. This requires a legal framework: The textile strategy. The textile strategy must set this fair framework. In a globalized world, responsibility is global. Fair rules of the game in a social market economy strengthen responsible entrepreneurship and sort out black sheep. The textile strategy must advance the global circular economy. We hear: Reuse, recycle and reduce That's the credo. The textile industry accounts for around 10% of global emissions, more than aviation and shipping combined. The textile strategy and the textile industry must finally strengthen human rights. The textile strategy must be a building block in the fight against child labour and forced labour. The textile strategy must therefore also be closely linked to the Supply Chain Act. However, the Commission proposal on the Supply Chain Act still needs to be improved in some places. Dear colleagues, with clothing we associate emotions above all else. Clothing is warmth and protection, clothing is an expression of our personality. Some garments are special memorabilia. Clothing also has an environmental and social footprint. And with the textile strategy, we finally have to go to the collar.

Mr President! I was 29 years old in the last European election campaign. At that time, I had many conversations about my political goals. But I was also asked surprisingly often if I wanted to have children, because that would be difficult to reconcile with such a mandate. Because women who make politics are always reminded that they must not forget the kitchen table when they are already striving for the tables of power. Women who hold an opinion are often attacked solely for their participation in public discourse. Insulting, degrading or threatening – for me and other politicians, this is part of our everyday lives. It's part of a culture that prefers to keep women out of the public eye. As a society, we must consistently oppose this culture of discrimination and hatred, solidarity and visibility. As parties, we need more resources and more commitment to get women engaged in political work, to strengthen their candidatures. Only about 40% of the European Parliament is made up of women. That is still good on average in Europe, but that cannot be enough for us. We need to make our parliaments more inclusive and family-friendly. There is no parental leave in our European Parliament. Living and working between three countries is a particular challenge. Colleagues, let's make parental leave possible! Let us enable young MPs to be parents and at the same time to be able to continue to represent the votes of their constituents. Because when I talk to young women about my work, the first thing I'm often asked is what kind of discrimination I experience as a woman in politics. Because as a girl, as a teenager, as an adult woman, in school, at work, in politics, they repeatedly experience that they have to work against prejudice because of their gender. I argue that gender no longer plays a role in individual opportunities and gender no longer plays a role in political participation. We start with ourselves and will make the European Parliament more equal. Thank you to our co-rapporteurs and, above all, to Irene from my group for your important work.

– Mr President, since President Rodrigo Duterte took office, the human rights situation in the Philippines has eroded in a landslide. There has been an appalling number of extrajudicial killings and human rights violations. This has been going on for years. This House last asked the Commission to act in 2020, and it pains me that the Commission has in fact not acted. The only thing that has happened since is that human rights in the Philippines have worsened. More Filipinos have suffered. In fact, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights estimates that between 12 000 and 30 000 people have been killed in Duterte’s so-called war on drugs. Around 6 000 people lost their lives during police drug raids alone. For me, as a democrat, it is unbelievable that President Duterte personally encouraged extrajudicial executions and even promised immunity to perpetrators. Another way – and I’m sad to say this, but a popular way – to silence anyone who does not support the regime is the alleged fight against communism. The so—called red—tagging has even been institutionalised in the anti-terrorism law. This red—tagging is the procedure where the authorities link organisations and individuals to communist groups and use this as an excuse for killings, threats, warrantless arrests, harassment and sexual violence against human rights defenders, opponents and journalists. One can ask now, what leverage does the European Union even have to react to this? Trade policy. The generalised system of preferences (GSP), the preferential access to the single market, is a tool to support less-developed countries in their economic growth. It is a tool to help communities and individuals enhance their opportunities through trade. But this access comes with conditions, and respect for human rights is the most important requirement a country has to meet to even qualify for these preferences. The Philippines does not respect the agreed human rights standards and still the regime profits from these trade benefits. I have said it many times before, and I will repeat it today: the European Union is not yet the diplomatic power we strive to be, but we are an economic power, promoting value—based trade. But this will only stay true if, while we wholeheartedly advocate for free trade, we also make sure that the agreed conditions are actually met. Colleagues, I’m going to be very precise. Today, we ask the Commission to set clear goals and benchmarks and, if there is no substantial improvement and willingness from the Philippines Government to actually meet their human rights obligations under GSP, then we expect you to withdraw the trade preferences. This House will no longer accept inactivity and we will not compromise on our European values.

Mr President! I'm 32 years old, a member of parliament, so I don't want to presume to know what all young people want. But before I came to Parliament, I did ten years of voluntary youth policy, and in the ten years I learned one thing: There is a lot of talk about young people and very little about them. And when the Commission declares 2022 the Year of European Youth, without a real programme, without a significant budget behind it: Sorry, I have to ask myself: Is there more to it than a PR maneuver? Ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, Minister, I want us to listen to young people. I want us to incorporate their ideas, simply: I expect more from the European Union. I want an EU where it doesn't matter where young people come from, where they have equal opportunities to achieve their goals and dreams, whether they grew up like me in rural Schleswig-Holstein, in Sweden, Spain or Slovenia. Young people have set back quite a bit in the last two years: in education, work, private life. Let's make 2022 their platform so that from now on every year can become a year of European Youth!

Mr President! In Hong Kong, we are witnessing in public what the Chinese communist leadership thinks of democracy, freedoms and international agreements – nothing. The dismantling of "one country, two systems", the breach of international treaties, the eradication of history, the detention of journalists and democracy activists, the undermining of freedom of expression and freedom of the press – this is a reality in Hong Kong, and also internationally, China puts pressure on countries, institutions or companies that do not act well. The most recent example: Lithuania cooperates with democratic Taiwan and is extorted economically. And the EU still does not have a clear, common stance on China. We must not let ourselves be divided! If you want to take on a member state, you have to know that you are against the entire EU. The competition of authoritarianism versus democracy is in full swing. Our values do not defend themselves, we have to do it ourselves. And it's time for us to start.

Mr President, Commissioners Vestager and Breton, Mrs Schaldemose, ladies and gentlemen! When scrolling through social media, shopping online or browsing for new apps: The Digital Services Act will shape our everyday lives. After more than 20 years of e-commerce, it is expected to be up to date. This, of course, aroused desire. Because, of course, the conservative colleagues have once again brought out their surveillance fantasies; We are now seeing the last resurgence in their amendments, and some ideas from the left side of the house are so frighteningly hostile to innovation that no tech company would really be founded in the EU with them. Fortunately, it was the liberal ideas that prevailed. No encryption ban, no data retention, no identification or clear name obligation, no upload filter obligation, notice and take-down stays. The DSA follows the principle: With size, responsibility grows. For non-profit organizations and small businesses, different rules apply than for the big players. The DSA creates clear rules for platforms on illegal content. The DSA will help to target disinformation, including from foreign propaganda media. We need to confirm these achievements here today and then defend them in the negotiations with the Member States – for a free internet, for a genuine digital single market and for our citizens’ rights.

Mr President! Bernd Lange reminded us of this musical classic with ‘’, as Marilyn Monroe once sang, and he came to the conclusion: “”. Currently, however, unfortunately, the following applies: “”. The Kimberley process was a major success in curbing the trade in blood diamonds. The trade in illegally mined diamonds that have financed conflicts or wars has been significantly curtailed. However, even just these diamonds, these conflict diamonds, fall under the definition of the Kimberley process. Grave human rights violations such as violence, rape or child labour can still be stuck in these diamonds, in these diamonds that we carry on our hands or around our necks. This is why consumers rightly expect their jewellery to be free from child labour or exploitation. However, this requires transparency in the supply chain and traceability from the mine to the market – from the individual rough diamond to the finished piece of jewellery. There are already important initiatives and certificates from responsible players in the industry. Overall, however, we need a clearer legal framework. That is why I also expect the Commission to come up with concrete proposals on how it intends to further develop the Kimberley process and how it intends to implement it in concrete terms, particularly in line with the planned Supply Chain Act. We also need to discuss including diamonds in the regulation of conflict minerals. The review is already due in 2023. A recording is obvious. The Kimberley trial was a great success. It is time to expand it so that we can be sure that the engagement ring as a sign of our love or the earrings we wear every day and want to pass on once to our daughters is a sign of connectedness and not a memorial to exploitation.

Madam President, Mr Schwab, rapporteur! The Digital Markets Act is a milestone in big tech regulation: It's long overdue, and now it's finally here. Dear Margrethe Vestager, dear Thierry Breton: The Commission's proposal bears a clear liberal signature, and our position in Parliament goes in the same direction. With the DMA We create fairness for users and clear rules for companies, because responsibility is also measured by the size and influence of a company. The new rules finally put a stop to the exploitation of market power. Fair competition is a win-win for all of us – for those who are already big today and for those who could be big tomorrow, for consumers who will get more clarity and stronger rights. With today's vote, we are laying the foundation for fair competition online. With our consent, we make it clear: The free Internet goes hand in hand with our basic democratic values and market economy principles. Thank you very much for the cooperation.

Mr President! Commission President von der Leyen never tires of stressing that she wants to lead a geopolitical commission. Open strategic autonomy is the word of the day. And yet, I think Taiwan shows that it is a long way from Sunday speeches to reality. Parliament has repeatedly called for preparations to be made for an investment agreement with Taiwan. What happened? Nothing. On the contrary: For a Taiwan agreement, the Commission even makes one with China a condition. The comprehensive investment agreement CAI is rightly on ice: China's serious human rights violations and sanctions against MPs are unacceptable. The democratic and constitutional development in Taiwan is the counter-proposal to the authoritarian system of rule of the People's Republic of China. After all, a geopolitical commission must promote cooperation between democracies, and this also means closer civil society, scientific and economic relations with Taiwan.

Mr President! More than 1,000 people have been killed, nearly 9,000 arrested, over 200,000 displaced or fled Myanmar since the military coup in February. Dear colleagues! I find it unbearable that the military in Myanmar could benefit from the EU's trade advantages. The military is deeply corrupt and finances its brutal rule through its vast network of corporations. That is why I expect the Commission, I expect you to ensure that no military company benefits in any way from preferential access to our internal market. And if that is the case, the Commission – I expect you to – must then initiate a suspension of the trade benefits. And from the Council, of which I do not even see a representative here today, I expect the Member States to continue to tighten the sanctions screw. All military personnel responsible for the coup, who commit inconceivable human rights violations, must be sanctioned. At the same time, we must consistently support civil society, democracy activists and persecuted minorities. The EU is not yet the diplomatic power that we could be, but we can already live up to our responsibility as an economic power today, and we must stand with the people of Myanmar.

Mr President! I am a transatlantic and convinced of the power of free trade. But since the failure of the TTIP, our trade relationship has been difficult. The solution of Airbus Boeing punitive tariffs is a start. But the fact that the protectionist US tariffs on steel and aluminium are still in force is a failure. The EU is not a national security risk for the US, and that must be said so clearly! It's so good to finally see cooperation again, like at the Trade and Technology Council. Because looking at the world's autocracies shows how important it is for democracies to set a framework for our digital future. Trade is increasingly becoming foreign policy. In doing so, we must not forget that trade is primarily intended to enable people worldwide to rise, prosper and participate. For this, the transatlantic friendship must once again become a trade friendship. We can no longer be satisfied with piecemeal work. Our goal must be a free trade agreement again.

Mr President! Innovation through artificial intelligence is an incredible pool for progress. It can also bring relief to the police and the judiciary and significantly improve the quality of work. However, the use of AI in law enforcement often requires the label ‘high risk for civil rights’. And some things have to be completely prevented. Mass surveillance through automatic face recognition software in public spaces is a no-go. That is why it is so important that the Parliament's proposal adopts a clear position per citizen's rights and against facial recognition. Humans and civil rights are non-negotiable, especially when new technologies are used by government agencies. And I am not surprised that it is again the conservative colleagues of the EPP who are pushing for biometric surveillance. With your amendments, you are repeatedly putting surveillance dreams – your surveillance dreams – above the protection of our fundamental rights. This vote is also a signal for the planned Artificial Intelligence Act, which the European Parliament attaches importance to our citizens' rights in the digital future. And I'll tell you one thing: I will work every day to ensure that the AI Act strengthens and does not undermine our fundamental rights in the EU.

Mr President! Thank you, Commissioner, for this exchange today. You said it very well: Preferential access to the single market, free of customs duties and levies, is a great way for many developing countries to give their citizens prospects for economic progress and development. However, this cooperation is based on rules, and this includes compliance with labour rights and compliance with agreements. Bangladesh will make the transition from one of the world's least developed countries to a country with real development prospects in the coming years. What an enormous social progress! That is why it is so important that we talk today about the future of trade relations. Because our cooperation is already under scrutiny today. What will it look like in the future? So it is good that we have this discussion. And it is good to hear that the Commission finally has a clear idea of what this cooperation can look like and that you now have this action plan. Unfortunately, we don't have it yet. I therefore hope that the action plan will also be made publicly available. We in Parliament will analyse this very closely. Because if Bangladesh wants to continue to benefit from preferential access to the European market in the future, we must above all see an absolute ban on child labour. In order to combat child labour, the education system must above all be improved. Children have to go to school in the morning, not to the factory. That is why it is so important that Bangladesh's government finally commits itself unequivocally to labour rights. And it's good that we have this detailed action plan. Trade is not an end in itself, ladies and gentlemen. Trade creates opportunities for economic activity and participation. For many people – especially in countries such as Bangladesh – this means self-determination and concrete ways out of poverty. But economic development must always go hand in hand with human rights. And as a trading partner, you have to be able to rely on each other. That is why it is so important for our future economic cooperation that we now look closely and set clear rules for cooperation, especially with regard to labour rights.