Speeches

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, throughout the 20th century and up to the present, our industrial system has led to significant exploitation of the resources offered by nature – we cannot deny this. Whether it is ephemeral fashion, agri-food products or the tobacco industry, these sectors, like all products processed by humans, have a negative impact on the environment. Given this urgency, you will not have missed the fact that these practices are now triggering a drastic change in our production methods, but also in consumption. How do you want to make consumption more respectful of the environment and our citizens without access to transparent and consumer-friendly information? Part of the answer is to comply with strict environmental standards for businesses, environmental standards that, for example, no longer allow Philip Morris to bait the consumer with supposedly environmentally friendly disposable e-cigarettes. Because, in addition to the lie about the lack of respect for public health, this constitutes deception in the legal sense. Stop the too many products that are marketing on the back of the environment, without any real scientific basis, and for simple marketing reasons! I therefore invite you, ladies and gentlemen, to vote on this text tomorrow so that companies no longer have their hands completely free to allow themselves to put green where sometimes there is only profit.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to welcome the importance of this report and the observations it makes. The rule of law is fundamental to advancing democracy, which is now under attack and weakened. And why? Because we have to worry about respect for the rule of law in some Member States. And yet it is this democratic framework that guarantees our fundamental freedoms and no state, let alone a member of the Union, should be able to tackle it with impunity. Thus, we must preserve the freedom of the press, civil liberties, as we recalled in our fight against the use of spyware such as Pegasus. In fact, too many governments are playing with our fundamental rights, as if they were just adjustment variables. This Parliament has already established many shortcomings in the Member States and the last-minute amendments tabled by certain groups will not be able to change the reality of things. So tomorrow, let us have this report adopted for what it contains, for what it represents. But I also think for the hope it brings to better tomorrows for our democratic life.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, our debate today joins the work of the Parliamentary Working Group on Tobacco, which I was co-hosting with our late Michèle Rivasi and whose conclusions I am announcing today will be presented in the week of 26 February in the form of a White Paper. As regards the Dentsu Tracking/Jan Hoffmann case, which refers to the conflict of interest in the development of the EU traceability system for tobacco products, several problems arise. First, the choice of the provider, Dentsu Tracking, by the European Commission. The European traceability system is not in line with the WHO Protocol, which was ratified by the European Union in 2016. It explicitly requires that this traceability system be entrusted to an independent actor and free from any proximity to the tobacco industry. However, that is not the case with Dentsu Tracking, which uses the Codentify system, conceptualised by Philip Morris itself. Moreover, the recruitment by Dentsu Tracking of an official from DG SANTE, Jan Hoffmann, highlights the collusion between the Commission and this powerful tobacco industry. The fact that this company was designated as a partner without a call for tenders or public procedure, and then renewed last December in the same terms, is a real disguise for the transparency and accountability of the institutions. You see, Commissioner, I have a big ear, but I have the impression that Mrs von der Leyen is even deafer than I am, since we asked for copies of the exchanges that took place between the Commission, the tobacco manufacturers and Dentsu Tracking, and we got answers that are piecemeal, scratched, anonymised and unusable. This is a scandal in a scandal. I therefore have several questions. Why does the Commission allow a mere official, Filip Borkowski, to claim, in an article published in December 2023, that the European system complies with the WHO protocol when it is proven that this information is false? Moreover, recalling that he was the head of Mr Hoffmann, what role did Mr Borkowski play in the scandal involving Dentsu Tracking and the Commission? Why was he exfiltrated from DG SANTE and decommissioned just after the revelations of this scandal? Why does the Commission continue to block the revisions of the two directives of 2011 and 2014 on tobacco products, which would make it possible to implement the WHO Protocol? So does the conflict-of-interest tree not ultimately hide the forest-corruption? (That’s a question.) And if that were not the case – I dare to hope so – let’s shed full light on these issues and finally act for legislation that meets the challenges for our citizens. Because this is also about public health, and I think we need to do something about it.

Mr President, dear Biljana, Commissioner, this text, which aims to empower consumers in the green transition, is part of a series of important texts, as colleagues have already said and which are still being discussed in Parliament, I am thinking of sustainable textile ecodesign, repairability, green claims. These future directives do not deal directly with the same subject, but have a common objective: enabling European citizens to be actors in the green transition and thus consume in an informed way when, as we know, the ecological emergency is ahead of us. The text we will vote on tomorrow is certainly not perfect. Why? Because we are dealing with early obsolescence without really ending the planned obsolescence that is doing so much damage to the wallets of our fellow citizens. Misleading interfaces often remain untargeted. So obviously there is still work to be done and that is why we need to continue working to strengthen consumer rights and protection. Now we must acknowledge that this directive, despite everything, is an essential step forward and we must support it. It better regulates targeted advertising of an ecological nature. Reparability becomes normality. Recyclability and sustainability become information given to consumers for informed choice. As we know, some obstacles, especially on spare parts, remain on the job. But this text reinforces its requirements. Obviously, companies will have to play the game by applying affordable prices and indicating the availability of spare parts at the time of purchase. This is, in my view, the substantive marrow of this text. And in this spirit, the European Union must lead by example when it comes to the issues at stake. Our citizens expect a lot from us, and rightly so. Trust in Brussels is largely eroded by many. So let’s work together on the rights of our fellow citizens and not just open our mouths to yawn but to push the issues forward.

Madam President, rapporteur, Commissioner, the liberal ogre, swallowing up profits after profits, is fuelling overconsumption, which is harmful both to the planet and to citizens. When it is cheaper to buy new than to repair, the choice of citizens to consume is understandable. But eureka! In 2023, we rediscover our common sense: repairability. It is still quite incredible to be allowed to repair your products today, when our grandparents naturally did. And yesterday we voted on a text called "Eco Design", another text today that we will vote tomorrow on repairability. After tomorrow, it will be the green allegations. And all this is part of a dynamic that will make it possible, through European law, to move in the direction of protecting consumers and the planet. And companies also have their responsibilities. Yes, they must have spare parts within a reasonable time. Yes, they will have to have parts at an affordable price. Yes, planned obsolescence must be penalised. So tomorrow, ladies and gentlemen, let us vote up to the stakes. Because I think the consumer portfolio and the planet will be better off.

Mr President, Commissioner, Qatargate, SMS Gate, Dentsu-Hoffman affair, Frontex ... The list is long and rather than looking these scandals in the face, everyone looks away. No, it's not happening at home. Yes, it's happening at home. Our institutions must not be content with slogans, but with a real action plan. Public access to documents is a fundamental freedom and our role is to guarantee it, starting with one very simple thing: make accessible to all and all the websites of our institutions. It is really trivial, but it is the first liaison with European citizens. So when it comes to defending our values, we are very strong. But others are very involved in the interest of multinationals or their own. And I tell you, the policy of keeping the trust of the markets loses the trust of the people. And in these dark times, the unknown and the shadows sow doubt. It may be clarity and transparency that will re-ignite the European stars. We must rise to the challenges. This is what European citizens want. We are no longer just in the time of necessity, but in the time of priorities. Not at the time of the advertisement. Because it only takes one thing for our democracies to be in real danger.

Mr President, Commissioner, thank you to Sophia in’t Veld for her report. A year later, history wants us to have answers for victims, but these are myths and legends. Legend to believe that states would offer us answers, legend to believe that our democracies would no longer have to face this affront. While Pegasus was the creator of sources, Pegasus diverted them for surveillance purposes, giving ideas to the French Senate, with the adoption of Article 3 of the draft law on the remote activation of mobile phones. The trampling of our fundamental rights has become their dogma. Defending them has become our duty. Is this really what we want for our children? We are – you are – their muse. Our lives and your lives are their interests to better criminalize us and you. Counter-powers become threats. Yet they are the pillars of our democracy. Thus, I warn us: These practices are an announced death of our societies. Because, if mythology is soft to read, its real transposition is the authoritarian madness of a few.

Madam President, Commissioner, dear Biljana, thank you for this text. "Good for the environment", "green product", "eco-responsible", "100% recycled materials" are all arguments put forward by companies on their products, suggesting that they encourage sustainable consumption. The problem is that often this information is simply false. This is a shameless and indecent deception of consumers. All you have to do is see Total or Shell with their dripping reports and communication of spurious benevolence towards the environment. I state this here, as do my colleagues, on greenwashing is a real scourge. And beyond words, let's look at deeds. In the acts, it is not beautiful to see. Between erroneous information and misleading marketing practices, planned obsolescence of products, total lack of transparency, obstacles to repair, this is the finding. And it is no longer possible, in 2023, given the climate emergency that we are going through, to tolerate companies that are trying to buy themselves a conscience and to exonerate themselves with these false ecological arguments. This is a nameless contempt for consumers. And let us make no mistake about the target, individual consumers should not be blamed. They already want to consume sustainably, so the whole system needs to be reviewed. And it is up to companies to take responsibility. Some are already doing this and we need to support them. On the other hand, I regret that some colleagues wanted to weaken the text to such an extent, and again this evening, and I wondered in the face of this right-wing bad faith, whether we were all living on the same planet, the very one that is burning and where these same right-wing colleagues, with their hands on their hearts, enthusiastically voted for the Green Deal. This text is welcome to empower consumers to be actors in the green transition. And it is a sad thing to think that nature speaks and that some politicians do not even listen to it.

Mr President, Madam Rapporteur, ladies and gentlemen, we live in a society of risk as theorised by the sociologist Ulrich Beck. The promises of modernity have not been kept in our industrial societies. Poverty and inequality are increasing and progress, together with the wealth created being confiscated by the hands of a few, has created all sorts of risks, including industrial disasters, accidents of life, threats to the environment, and the best. Trust is no more. It is our duty as European legislators to restore it to our citizens and to ensure that the existing legal framework is adapted and as protective as possible for women and men. Risk management – of each risk – actual or potential, present or future, must be ensured. In terms of product safety, I would even say that we need to go further. Vigilance must be at all times, especially when profit prevails over the consumer, when the lack of means of customs allows large platforms to sell potentially dangerous products. Risk management – of each risk – actual or potential, present or future, must be ensured, and this is the precautionary principle. If a certain product can cause a health or environmental disaster, do we need to be sure that this is the case in order to take action? No, no. The stakes are real. We are not joking about the lives and safety of European citizens. We have to live up to it. If fear does not avoid danger, prevention is better than suffering.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for the work that we have done together, since we had a common objective, namely to look for Mrs O'Reilly's work and this request for transparency. Tonight, in this Chamber, I have heard all the groups, all the groups, call for transparency. Commissioner, it is your duty today to remind Mrs Von der Leyen of what you have heard this evening. It is not just a few groups that are asking you for transparency, it is all the groups in the European Parliament. And if this report was voted unanimously in the Committee on Petitions, it says something about this need for transparency. Report all the comments you have heard to Mrs Von der Leyen and ask her for these famous SMS messages, because we need them, as Mrs O'Reilly said, not only for the citizens, but also for you, the Commission, to gain from this transparency and to show that you have a good institution and a good functioning of your institution. Because of the mistrust, the loss of trust of the citizens, it is our democracies that are in danger. You see, Commissioner, I had a whole text in writing, I listened to my colleagues and today I have no text. I went blind. But really, I think that this demand of the European citizens, is it our democracies that go wrong in the shadow of Qatar, in the shadow of all the revolving doors that exist at the level of the Commission? It can't last any longer. Because, if you do not do something and if we do not help the Ombudsman so that all this is put forward then, in this case, you will be responsible for the fall of European democracies.

Madam President, first of all, I would like to express my sincere thanks to you, Ms O’Reilly, and to your office for all the work you have done in 2021. The European Union can be proud of having an institution that works tirelessly to strike a balance between the right of the EU institutions to work and the public interest in transparent and accountable administration. In PETI, we have the chance to work hand in hand with the Ombudsman's office. Our indispensable cooperation has a twofold objective: increasing the accountability of the EU institutions and bringing citizens' voices directly to Parliament. Your efforts are extremely important to us as direct representatives of citizens, as they strengthen both representative democracy and participatory democracy, as well as increase the legitimacy of the EU decision-making process. Enshrined in the Treaties and the Charter, the right to refer matters to the European Ombudsman is a cornerstone of EU primary law. Symbol of transparency, impartiality, accountability and guarantee of the fundamental rights of every citizen. And it was in response to citizens’ requests for assistance that in 2021 you opened 338 investigations, 332 of which were based on complaints and six own-initiative investigations and closed 305 investigations. Transparency, accountability, service culture, good exercise of discretionary powers. These are the main topics addressed in the investigations closed in 2021. Other topics discussed included respect for fundamental rights, recruitment, revolving doors, sound financial management, citizen participation in EU decision-making and ethical issues. In line with the Heading to 2024 strategy, the work of your office increased in 2021 with the opening of more surveys and initiatives on a wide range of issues. And for these reasons, we agreed that it is essential to allocate an adequate budget to the Ombudsman in order to have the necessary resources to manage the entire workload. I congratulate you on your continued commitment to the fight against revolving door cases. In particular, your office has launched a wide-ranging strategic investigation into how the Commission has handled this revolving door. You have been careful to ensure that access to documents of interest to the general public is granted, in particular with the revision of the expedited procedure. And in this regard, I have made sure to highlight two key elements in the text: whereas transparency and public access to documents of the EU institutions must be ensured, and the revision of the Transparency Act is a priority in order to put the EU at the forefront of progress in this area. And it is thanks to your investigation that we became aware of the existence of the text messages exchanged between Ursula von der Leyen and the President of Pfizer. All political groups have worked to highlight your office’s attention to ethical issues as well as issues related to transparency and decision-making. Throughout 2021, you have done such a remarkable job of investigating the respect and protection of fundamental rights, the EU’s main values. Two own-initiative surveys are essential here. One on how Frontex complies with its obligations, the other on how the Commission ensures the use of EU funds to promote the right of people with disabilities and older people to independent living. I mention this in my LIBE report towards equal rights for people with disabilities and I would like to repeat it here, your commitment as a member of the EU Framework for the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is essential to protect, promote and monitor its proper implementation by the EU institutions. Colleagues, when the unknown and the shadow sow doubt, it is clarity and light that reassure us. Transparency, trust. So tomorrow, let us live up to the confidence of those who entrusted us with the keys to European democracy. Let us show our citizens that Parliament can speak with one voice.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the video game industry is worth more than EUR 23 billion and one in two Europeans plays video games. This sector has developed and established itself over the years in the cultural world and we must protect consumers, especially the youngest, by regulating which ones are a scourge for players. Not only is the random pack principle paid for by a currency, virtual or not, dangerous, but it also reinforces the addictive side of video games. The same applies to the principle of which must also be regulated or even prohibited. Half of European players are women. Yet, between the hypersexualisation of characters, rape culture and cyberbullying, there is not a day when women are not assaulted online and offline. As evidence, there was a video game called Rape Day where women, mostly naked, were presented beaten, raped, prosecuted or threatened with weapons by a male character. I would say that this is where the patriarchal inter-self leads with the exclusion of women in the video game industry, which serves to perpetuate the culture of rape and to rape half the population. The fight against gender-based and sexual violence also requires cultural representation. Video games can and should be a tool to raise awareness of violence against young people and older people alike. Regulating this sector in this direction would, in my opinion, make it possible to put an end to these practices online and offline.

Madam President, first of all, I would like to show Mrs Dalli how much this Parliament is asking her to activate things and is clearly asking her for a directive on the European Disability Card, before the end of this term of office, so that equality at least wins that victory during this parliamentary term. It is time for thanks, and I would like to thank all my shadow rapporteur colleagues, as well as the PETI, EMPL and CULT colleagues, who brought us many good opinions and remarks, which were important to us. It has been since I came here in 2019 that I have been thinking: I will have a report on people with disabilities, because in a not-so-old time I was dealing with people with disabilities. I think that we are all different, that we are all unique, and that ultimately it is from the difference that diversity is born, and that it is from diversity that society is born. It is therefore important that here in Parliament we have a strong voice to ensure that there is genuine equality of fundamental rights for people with disabilities. I repeat to you, Mrs Dalli, our demands and ambitions, so that there will never again be inequality between citizens in any Member State. Validism exists, and today we realise that this validism means that we think for people with disabilities, that we act for people with disabilities, and that too often we leave them the voice, the voice of the forgotten. So, in any case, I hope that with this report, here in this Parliament, I will have succeeded in giving a voice to people with disabilities, a voice to those who have been forgotten.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, this is what people with disabilities experience. You have experienced what they experience every day. You did not understand what I said: I simply said that in Europe – and I could not finish my speech in French sign language, since it is not a recognised language in the European Union – many people with disabilities were discriminated against and that, in this Europe, the accessibility of work and fundamental rights was still far from being achieved. This report was done with great enthusiasm, because I wanted to put the individual back at the centre. How do we put the individual at the centre? Simply by listening to him and listening to his needs. This report was drawn up on the basis of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and I have relied, Mrs Dalli, on your strategy. While it is still too early to have a proper impact assessment, these goals are ambitious and we can go even further. At any rate, I would like to congratulate some Member States on their commitment to the deinstitutionalisation of people with disabilities. I will not have my four minutes, because I took more than two minutes to speak in sign language. So I will be brief: we need to go further and call for genuine anti-discrimination legislation in the EU. A directive exists, but it has been blocked in the Council since 2008. Fourteen years already since Parliament took a position, and since then nothing. It always has better things to do than look after the most vulnerable. Didn't you hear us? We'll scream louder. We are going to change our approach, and instead of asking for the release, we are asking the Commission for an update of the EU Equal Treatment Directive. I am asking here, as my colleague Younous Omarjee has already done, that the international sign language and the language ‘easy to read and understand’ be put in place. Indeed, if we really want to talk about the inclusion of people with disabilities in public and political life, then here in the European Parliament we have to put the means in place. What more can I say? Call for an end to forced sterilisation, an end to institutionalisation and an end to EU funding for these institutions. A person with a disability must be able to decide for themselves where they want to live and what support they want to receive. Speaking of support, it is also necessary for the EU to put in place Community aid so that every person with a disability is no longer left at the side of the road and that every child with a disability can have transport to school. I thank Mr Cañas for being in the Chamber today. Every person with a disability must be able to benefit from work. Here in Parliament, or in the Commission, or in our institutions, how many people with disabilities, visible or invisible, are hired? Let's talk about family caregivers, those people who dedicate their time, their life and their love to accompany their loved ones in disability. Let us think of them and give them our full support. We need to think about a triangular policy that can take into account both people with disabilities, socio-educational staff and caring parents. As such, let me think of a woman with a disability named Odile Maurin who did not have access to justice. Here too, fundamental rights are trampled on, trampled on, trampled underfoot every day. I could not say everything I wanted to say, but I said it differently, as a number of people with disabilities speak out, and I am proud to have said it differently, less proud than I was stopped along the way. I will be delighted to hear what my colleagues and the Commission will have to say about this report. I would like to thank a woman named Céline Boussié who for ten years denounced the abuse of children with disabilities in medico-educational institutes.

Madam President, Commissioner: humiliated, insulted, harassed, beaten, raped, killed; the continuum of gender-based and sexual violence against women has been going on for too long. Even though the Istanbul Convention is the most protective text of women’s rights, too few States have ratified it and far too many are struggling to put it into practice. In the face of women's words and courage, we can only bow, listen and respect them. So let us demand a strong directive against gender-based and sexual violence against women, in order to defend their fundamental rights. We are all martyrs of the cause. Enough! Let's defend the emerging feminist imbued with sorority and solidarity. Women from all over the world, we believe you!

Madam President, I would like to thank Katrin for this ambitious text, which is so necessary for people with disabilities, as it will ultimately improve the daily lives of 87 million people with disabilities in Europe. The Resource Centre promises better knowledge and expertise on disability, in particular on accessibility issues: This is how we can build a fair society. I am pleased that the text includes my proposals on sufficient financial and human resources for the proper functioning of the Centre as well as on the representation of persons with disabilities among the staff of the Centre, in order to strengthen its role towards the institutions and the Member States or to include provisions – on language accessibility for example. And here, ladies and gentlemen, allow me to think that we must be exemplary here. Where is the international sign language in this Chamber? Where is the easy to read and understand in our texts? And even here: where is the accessibility for people with reduced mobility who would like to come and discuss in the centre of this Chamber? Nowhere. Accessibility is a cross-cutting issue, affecting all areas. PRM standards must play an important role in the design of objects, in the way transport is conceived, in the rules of public procurement and with regard to ecological risks. Accessibility must therefore be synonymous withau-to-no-mie. Thus, I can only hope for the adoption of this report, because disability and accessibility issues need to be considered with people with disabilities. They must be at the centre of our public policies, whether at national or European level, because our values must be part of a fair society and respect for the fundamental rights of European citizens, and because yes, I repeat, people with disabilities are citizens who have rights. Let us never forget that they too must be able to have access to our texts, to what we say, as they must be able to have access to their daily lives, in complete autonomy.

Madam President, finally: a decade of waiting and recurrent requests from the European Parliament, and here we are! I welcome the positive outcome of the discussions on this universal charger dossier, which represents an undeniable step forward for European consumers. Within two years, a universal USB-C charger will therefore be mandatory for all mobile phones, but also – and again, thanks to the ambition of the European Parliament – for many other devices. This is in the interest of consumers, but also of the planet. In our capitalist system, excessive consumption is encouraged, without limit: 57 million tonnes of e-waste in 2021, a large majority of which is not recycled. However, I point to the inaction of the public authorities for too long, but also to the unscrupulous responsibility of large companies – Apple and others – which constantly pose obstacles to the repair and interoperability of these products, making billions of dollars in turnover on the backs of consumers. The planet can no longer wait, nor can European consumers. Let us hope that consumers will no longer be the milk cows of this system and that this text will have a real impact on corporate abuse.

Mr President, fundamental rights, on the walls of the State of the Union, I am writing your names. The crisis that we went through in 2020 and 2021, and that we are still going through, has put fundamental rights to clinical death. But is it not said that the slightest injustice, wherever it is committed, ultimately threatens the entire edifice? Inequalities are exacerbated, systemic discrimination. And they have shown Europe’s failure in its policies, such as that of disability, where accessibility, autonomy and citizenship appear in our texts, but rarely in everyday life. Europe's failure, too, in its asylum and migration policies, where our duty of humanity is sacrificed on the fortress ramparts On the other hand, the victory of market Europe, preferred to our elders in Ehpad and elsewhere, mistreated, as demonstrated by the Orpéa scandal, a European group, and others before it. The list is long and not exhaustive. Today, it is up to us to reshuffle the cards. It is up to us to rethink our European policies for the common good, for the citizens. Because depriving people of their fundamental rights is tantamount to challenging their humanity.

Mr President, Pegasus, born from the bowels of the Medusa, this multi-headed monster, appeared thanks to Perseus. Was it premonitory, because what a great breakthrough in our phones and in our lives: spied on, monitored, privacy farewell, for the pleasure of a few who wish to control. Control our ideas, our commitments, our orientations. So, for the past year, the Pegasus scandal has erupted thanks to associations and journalists, who have been whistleblowers. For the past year, as we all know, this has been a global scandal. However, no sanctions were taken. Everyone is offended, everyone looks at their phone and wonders. I am therefore pleased that the European Parliament has set up a committee of inquiry. Pegasus, a weapon of choice for repressive governments to pressure journalists, political opponents and human rights activists. But Pegasus is only the result of the insanity of these rulers and their obsession with wanting to devastate our democracies. I would also like to lend my full support to my colleagues, who have had their fundamental rights violated. Walls have ears, they say. They're the walls. So good kisses to the NSA: Here and now, we say stop to these practices.

Madam President, thank you Anna for this beautiful resolution. In Europe, we are the world champions of electronic pollution: no less than 12 million tonnes of this waste generated each year, or 16.2 kg per capita. A mountain of TVs, computers, connected toys, washing machines, telephones. While the recycling sector in Europe is one of the most developed, it is still far from sufficient. As we know, a large part of this waste ends up thrown into the wild, not recycled or shipped back to other countries where it feeds open dumps, also polluting the soil. We send our waste to Africa, Asia, for our comfort as Europeans, but with total disregard for the environment and people. That is why we need to act quickly: oblige manufacturers to make spare parts accessible and to facilitate repair. These must be available at a lower cost. What about planned obsolescence, which is a scourge for consumers, their purchasing power and the planet? Let us therefore encourage consumers to assert their rights and to favour, as they wish, 77% of the repair of their products. Let them make well-informed purchasing choices based on mandatory product reparability indices. Repair is a right and a right of common sense for consumers.

Mr President, as our rapporteur has said, toys are the first category of products notified by the European Product Hazardousness Alert System. It is therefore that there are risks, constant as well as new, linked to the manufacture of toys, the materials used or the distribution networks – I am thinking in particular of e-commerce. Children are particularly vulnerable consumers. It is therefore our responsibility as European legislators to provide them with the most ambitious level of protection possible, regardless of their age. I hope that the Commission will hear this strong call to revise the existing Toy Safety Directive. It is no longer fit for purpose, and we need to take into account new risks and evolving technologies. I am thinking, for example, of the new connected toys: Our children now have their eyes on screens or access to connected interactive games. We know the risks: concentration disorders, risks of addiction, risks to their mental health, risks also related to personal data, which are not sufficiently regulated. I therefore insist on taking into account a preventive, risk-based approach and on full compliance with the precautionary principle. Children’s safety cannot be the subject of political schemes or lobbyists. It is therefore imperative, in my view, to give sufficient means, first of all to the supervisory authorities; but we must also promote more responsible consumption with labelling on the durability and repairability of toys. Let’s offer our children safe, playful toys that resist the use of time as well as their imagination and can later be used by other children.

Madam President, rapporteur, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for this vital report in order to strengthen the fight against cancer. Let me tell you about a cancer that is too little known to the general public: triple-negative breast cancer. The latter represents 15% of cases, or about 9,000 people per year, with a median survival in a metastatic situation of fourteen months. The testimonies I have received are terrible: Ma'am, you have triple-negative breast cancer. There is no targeted therapy. We will try a protocol and hope you will react to this treatment. If not, we have no solution." So, going to the US or Germany to benefit from innovative treatments, creating crowdfunding pools - because the sums are astronomical - can no longer last. Regardless of the stage of the disease, regardless of the criteria given: all women must be able to benefit from approved innovative treatments, trial rights and, above all, adapted and cared for care throughout the European Union – not just in certain countries. As I recall, access to health and care are common goods that everyone must be able to benefit from. All these women want to live, develop professionally and evolve personally. That is why we must act as quickly as possible, because the disease, for all these women, does not wait.

Madam President, first of all, I would like to thank our colleague for his excellent report. Madam Ombudsman, I would also like to thank you sincerely for your work, which highlights the administrative dysfunctions of our institutions. The report provides a window into your important work, which gives the European Union the basis to ensure transparency, access to documents, and which holds the institutions accountable to European citizens. You may know that, Madam: I am not one of the politicians by profession. Politics came into my life as I struggled with others every day to make it fairer. As soon as I joined the benches of this Chamber, I promised to give Europe back to its citizens. Yet, as you have shown, the road will be a long one. What about the invisible SMS messages between the President of the Commission and the CEO of Pfizer? Were they engaging, informal or personal? The doubt is there. What do we think when, while an obligation that does not say its name is emerging all over Europe, we are still denied access to vaccine contracts? The doubt is there. And what can we think of the Council, which, with the back of its hand, and without us having access to the ongoing negotiations, can call into question our votes? Is not the fact that Parliament is the only democratically elected institution of our Union enough to have a right of scrutiny? The doubt is there. Our institutions, our work and, in itself, the whole European project exist only through the trust that citizens have in us. This trust will only be achieved by being completely transparent, between us, but also – and above all – towards them. So let us be indignant and rebel against these shadows! Let us preach and demand light in our administrations, because only in this way can we together, ladies and gentlemen, return the European Union to its citizens.

Madam President, our personal data is the new gold mine. Our navigation, geolocation, age, gender, preferences, political, religious, sexual orientations, personal health data: Whole swathes of our privacy are collected, fed to companies whose business model is based on the violation of our privacy. I am of course thinking of Facebook, Amazon and others. Not only do they capture huge amounts of personal data, they guide all of our behaviour and thoughts, sometimes even our ballots. Masking commercial advertising first, political advertising now, with considerable risks for the proper functioning of our democracies. What GAFAM puts on sale, beyond our data, are our future behaviors. Our data is not merchandise and Internet users do not want this invasive bludgeoning in their private space. So let’s stop these attacks on our free will, our democracy and put an end to this surveillance and influence capitalism.