Debate contributions by François-Xavier BELLAMY

Mr President, Commissioner, the murder of Mehdi Kessaci is not a miscellaneous fact. It is not even just another crime committed by drug trafficking. It is not even just one innocent victim too many. This is the alarm signal that should wake up all of France and all of Europe. Mehdi Kessaci had nothing to do with drugs. He wanted to become a policeman. He died for one reason: He was the brother of Amine, who has been fighting these criminal networks for years after losing another brother, who was murdered. The courage of Amine, who is here tonight, inspires admiration. He decided not to shut up and act as if: as if everything were normal when watchmen greet you at the bottom of the towers, when criminals hijack a generation, when deal points are won with a weapon of war, when gangs clash in front of classrooms to the point where a school has to move – as in Saint-Ouen – or a college burns – to Dijon last weekend. Amine refused silence, and I admire her for that – although we are not on the same side. In the face of this outbreak of violence, the same resistance must bind us, because the essentials are at stake. When the mafias are ready to kill in order to silence, fear begins to install a power other than that of our states. Drug money is not just about ill-gotten luxury, corruption, profit: He wants power, through terror. It is enough to listen to the heavy silence caused by the death of Mehdi Kessaci. I was in Marseilles to walk in her memory with Marie Toussaint, with thousands of French people, elected representatives from all walks of life, all those who refuse to resign themselves. But where are the great voices, the great figures of Marseille and the country? Drug money wants to replace our states. It has already taken control of entire territories, of a parallel economy. In neighbourhoods in France, he ensures order, he delivers at home, he issues loyalty cards, he provides social services, he pays rent. Tomorrow, he will take control of our institutions faster than we think, to increase his gains, he will destroy our democracies. It is time to finally realise the danger and act, above all, before it is too late; prevent harm to those who run the networks, sometimes even from prison; finally enforce the law so that every consumer understands that he is complicit in the worst; take back control of our ports, which are open to all the poison that is spreading across Europe; to give law enforcement, the armed forces and the judiciary the legal and humane means to fight networks that have no limits, neither material nor moral. This is a challenge for the sovereignty of our countries, but it is a challenge that we will only face at the level of the European continent. We owe it to Amine. We owe it to Mehdi. We owe it to all the lives destroyed, wounded, to all those who refuse to give up freedom.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, yes, it must be remembered today that our countries are under threat. Yes, history is tragic and, yes, war is returning to the dangerous world that is emerging before our eyes, and it is our duty to look it in the face. It is astonishing that during this discussion we have heard the denial of reality that continues to be displayed with pride. I am thinking in particular, dear colleague, of you who said: "Europe should make social housing rather than ammunition." You can build as many homes as you want, dear colleague, the day you disarm our countries, these homes, these houses, these homes will all be in danger. Because today, as yesterday, the only real way to guarantee peace is to prepare for war. This does not mean that we want war, quite the contrary. And to refuse denial of reality does not mean to yield to distressing and anguished statements. We don't want war, we want to protect peace. But the only way to protect peace is to apply this advice that comes from the very origin of our civilization, "Si vis pacem, para bellum": If you want peace, you must be ready for war. For having forgotten it for too long, Europeans have entered a guilty dependency that puts them, that puts us all, today in danger. Last year, our countries collectively purchased 79% of their armaments outside the European Union. This dependence, as we know very well, ladies and gentlemen, was a sign of the gamble that the European countries had made collectively, that of underinvesting in their own security in order to take shelter under the umbrella of another. This dependency today endangers the sovereignty of our states, the freedom of our democracies and the security of every citizen on the European continent, and that is what we must get out of. The word "historical," dear friends, is often overused, but today I believe it can be rightly used. From this choice of dependency – 79% of armaments purchased outside Europe – we are now making the choice to reverse the logic. With the European Defence Industry Programme, the European Union, for the first time, will contribute to the financing of our states' armaments needs, reversing this paradigm. From now on, an armament will be financed if, and only if, it is made up of at least 65% of European components; if, and only if, it is designed in the European Union by companies from our countries; and, thirdly, if it is not subject to any legal license that would prevent our states from using it sovereignly in order to be able to defend themselves tomorrow. This fundamental choice was made by Parliament and the Commission, and I would like to thank you, Commissioner, for these long months of work. Of course, the road has been long, but today we have arrived at this decisive result. I hear, of course, some colleagues say 'It is not enough, it is not enough, it does not go far enough' and some may find the pretext for not voting for this text, which they know is an opportunity to express the true patriotism they would like to claim. If we are patriots, we have a duty to support this new direction created by this text, because this new direction - the whole world has understood it and in Europe all industrial players have understood it - is decisive for the sovereignty and the future of our democracies. Today, we do our work peacefully, calmly, with determination. We assume our political responsibility, not to agitate fearful statements, but to produce solutions to ensure peace tomorrow. With this text, we offer all those who work in our countries – you were talking about workers, dear colleague, but you are depriving them of this text and the means it will give them – the means to produce in our States what we need: support workers, support the industry of our European countries, support engineers, technicians, support researchers who have in their hands a decisive part of our security for tomorrow. 'Cause the battle's going on here. It is played out first in our factories, in our ability to produce. It is played out in our laboratories, in our ability to invent strategic technologies to guarantee our sovereignty. And we are finally giving today - and it is to them that I would like to think with you, ladies and gentlemen, this morning - we are giving today to those who bear arms on our behalf the means of their mission. I would like to have a word for all those who, soldiers of the armed forces engaged under the flags of each of our States, today carry the protection of our countries by committing their own lives for our security. With this text, we want them to be able to count tomorrow on the means to act, on the means to carry out their mission and to defeat in all the battles in which they will be engaged for the success of the weapons of our countries and to defend what we have in common, the very principles of our civilization and this spirit of freedom which is today threatened everywhere in the world, and especially everywhere in our countries and against our countries. It is by empowering our armed forces to carry out their mission that we do our job and assume our political responsibility. This morning the choice is very clear, ladies and gentlemen, for all those who will have to vote: choose whether or not to support our soldiers, choose to be with them, behind them, in support of their mission, or choose instead to fail them at the most decisive moment. I would like to thank all the colleagues who have contributed, from all the political groups, to this crucial work, and in particular my co-rapporteur, Raphaël Glucksmann, for the work we have carried out in a relationship of trust in the service of this common cause that transcends all divisions. I hope that our Parliament today will bear witness to this unity in the service of our future.

Madam President, ten years ago, Islamist terrorism claimed more than 130 innocent lives in Paris. We have a duty to remember, of course, and to think of all those who are still grieving today that nothing can fix. But it is not enough to remember, we still have to look at how far we have come and everything that has not been done. The threat still exists against our countries, and all the vulnerabilities of the European borders that allowed terrorism to strike at the heart of Europe have not been repaired. Of course, thanks to the courage and commitment of all those who fought against it – police, gendarmes, soldiers, especially from all our countries – the Islamic State has been destroyed. But Islamism still exists, and it still threatens. It sows terror in many other countries of the world, and it still threatens to destroy everything on which our countries are built. Our duty is to keep fighting. We not only have the right to remember today, we also have the duty to act. Because Europe’s naivety must end once and for all, we have a duty to commit ourselves today by thinking of all those who paid with their lives for this Islamism that struck at the heart of Europe. We have a duty to act to ensure that such a tragedy never happens again. Colleagues, let us all ask ourselves this question today: what action is in our hands, which will be decisive tomorrow, to ensure that Europe lives and survives by finally being freed from the threat of Islamism?

Mr President, Commissioner, I will never forget the day on which the ban on combustion engines was voted in this Chamber a few years ago in 2035. I will never forget the celebration of so many elected representatives to whom I objected – as did the EPP Group, which opposed this deleterious measure – that Europe had just made the biggest gift to China and committed the biggest crime against its own competitiveness. A few years later, the result is there. We are now seeing Chinese cars flooding our markets, and tens of thousands of jobs are being destroyed in factories in our countries; Millions of Europeans can no longer buy new cars or move freely. This immense damage to the automotive industry is precisely due to the choice of a single technology, which destroys the very principle of our responsibility. The role of policy makers is not to decide on the right technology; their role is to set the goal by giving industrialists, researchers and technicians the freedom to develop the means to achieve this goal. Yes, we want to decarbonise, but decarbonising does not mean going to school in China, which is now the world’s biggest polluter. Our duty is to save technological neutrality and, for that, to repeal this absurd norm that set 100% electric vehicles in 2035, in order to give back to those who produce in our countries and to those who want to move the freedom to which they are entitled and the prosperity that we must regain.

Dear colleague, I think I have already replied: Western Europe has for too long turned a blind eye to the reality of danger. I have no problem saying it in front of you today. But I, in turn, would like to send you an alert, dear colleague: What those who want to attack Europe today – whatever their name is in the world of the return of empires that we have before us – are seeking is to divide us. Now, the spectacle of throwing absurd accusations at each other is precisely what they expect. By entering this game of division, you are playing into the hands of those who want to bring Europe to the ground today.

Madam President, Commissioner, when will we open our eyes? The recent attack on Poland, launched by Vladimir Putin's Russia, shows how what is at stake today is the shaking of the foundations of the world in which we thought we could live for the future. We will not have security without assuming the means of our defense. Weakness is today, as yesterday, the safest path to war. It is urgent for Europe to rearm itself today, to rebuild a defence industry that is able to provide autonomously the resources entrusted to our armed forces. It is necessary to accelerate on the SAFE program, on EDIP. We must accelerate the ramp-up of our production capacities. For what is at stake is our ability to guarantee peace for generations to come. Western Europe – and I say this from France – must never again forget that what is at stake is our security at all, not just that of Poland, our security at all. The Second World War, which devastated our countries, began when Western Europe accepted, through the German-Soviet pact, the dismemberment of Poland, with the support of so many communist parties in Europe. We no longer have the right to this abandonment because it will devastate Europe tomorrow, as yesterday, if we do not take care of it.

Mr President, Commissioner, to try to get back to the point, let us also go back to the facts. Some have been contesting the very title of this debate for some time now. But there is no doubt about the link between immigration and delinquency, if we look at the facts. Take some major cities of France. In Paris, 14% of the population is of foreign origin, 48% of those implicated in crime are of foreign origin. In Marseille, 11% of foreigners, 55% of foreigners among those who are accused of delinquency. And this is especially true when talking about sexual violence: In Île-de-France, 63% of sexual assaults in transport are committed by foreigners. For a while now, I have been hearing from colleagues who say that it is a scandal to make this connection and who have even preferred to explain that, when it comes to sexual violence, all men are guilty, rather than looking reality in the face. I think we need to go back to reason. The subject is not only the observation. The subject is to provide an answer to this situation that citizens in our countries live in their flesh every day. To this end, we have before us the opportunity to review the Returns Regulation, which will finally make it possible to deport illegal aliens outside Europe. I hope that all political groups here will be able to seize this crucial opportunity.

Dear colleague, I fully share your point of view and I was also impressed to hear this morning in your speech, Madam President, that Europe must defend the freedom to pray. I believe that freedom of conscience is at the heart of the European heritage and that freedom must be defended through the appointment of this representative. We are counting on you to make rapid progress on this essential appointment.

Madam President, what is the state of the Union? Europe is threatened with going out of history. Fragile, divided. All those who work and who make our countries live the reality of an impoverishment that strikes everywhere, of a stall that already makes us lose control of our destiny. There is an urgent need to react. This morning, in your speech, you announced many new plans, initiatives, texts. But the main thing is undoubtedly to start by correcting the mistakes and denials that have led us so far. You talked about security. First, let us stop massively financing foreign-purchased armaments. No longer depending militarily on the United States will be the condition to no longer suffer the commercial blackmail that they impose on us today. You talk about energy prices, but continuing to massively finance renewables will only increase our dependencies. Finally, let us stop excluding nuclear power from European budgets, which, despite what the Greens have been saying for a long time, is sovereign and decarbonised. The Court of Justice confirmed this very morning the fight we have been fighting for years for this. We don't need a plan to make small cars affordable. We need to first abandon the rule of buying only electric cars. And then let our builders innovate. You want to advertise for European farmers. But let us start by abandoning the massive cuts planned by the Commission in the budgets due to them, and by guaranteeing them that they will not be Mercosur's adjustment variable. You're talking about fighting illegal immigration. We will of course do the work in Parliament to finally facilitate, through the return regulation, evictions. But we'll have to go much further. After years of warning, during the last legislature, about a policy largely dictated by the left, which at the time cared very little about what the central majority thought in this Parliament as in our countries, we have made a clear choice, but now we need results.

Forgive me dear colleague, my question is not addressed to you, it is addressed to the Socialist Members who, since just now, have been doing everything to escape the questions we want...

Mr President, a simple reminder to the Rules of Procedure to say that, since just now, our Socialist colleagues - the Socialist voters and the Spanish citizens have the right to know - have been marching in this gallery to defame without any reason...

It seems to me that the protection of children from sexual abuse is too important a subject to be transvested in absurd divisions. This is a subject that must bring us all together. And I would just like to say that, on this major issue of children's exposure to pornography, there is no political divide that holds. Today, we have a historic opportunity to finally force pornographic platforms to get out of their denial of reality, to obviously get out of the profits they make so they can continue to thrive on the lives of our children. Our duty is to act together and all those who seek excuses for not committing to it, I believe unfortunately, will weaken this cause that should bring us together.

Madam President, Commissioner, today we are going to vote on this essential text for the protection of children against sexual abuse, a cause that transcends all divisions in this Chamber. Our duty is to guarantee their integrity, and there is a threat to that integrity which we propose to add to this text today: It is that of exposure to pornographic content, which today represents a reality for millions of children in our countries. In Europe, the average age of first exposure is between nine and eleven years. Children who are now exposed to these images are injured for their entire lives, traumatized for many, prevented from building their emotional lives and self-image normally. It is indeed an accelerator of all sexual violence against children, all violence sometimes committed by minors against minors. It is also, as such, sexual violence, an attack on the integrity of these children, their psychic, emotional integrity, and all the data of science, medicine, psychology and psychiatry converge today to show it. We must ensure that the platforms that do their business today on the lack of child protection are finally forced to act. Years have been spent negotiating with these platforms on the basis of a commercial law that, in reality, is not relevant to deal with this topic. This is indeed a case of criminal law. We must act together. Let us vote together, ladies and gentlemen, to give back a childhood to children.

Madam President, Commissioner, there is a silent epidemic going on across Europe and it is particularly affecting young people in our countries. This epidemic has a name, it's called TikTok. Today we have a duty to call it by that name. You spoke, Commissioner, about the risks to data security. But the risk is even wider. There is in reality today, and all teachers in our countries know it very well, a major fight for the attention of our children, this capacity for attention that is decisive for building one's own life. Our hospitals are full of young people who come marked by practices of self-destruction or scarification, by suicidal risks. Young people who are in a difficult situation, in depression, see, on average, twelve times more videos related to suicide on TikTok today. The truth is that the company is aware of these risks and internal documents have shown that the researchers working there know that the intensive practice of this addictive application - it is made to manufacture addiction - can aggravate nutrition disorders, create sleep-related difficulties, endanger the ability of younger people to move around a room or look someone in the eye, learn, memorize, concentrate. Today we have a duty to act, because it is a vital risk for the younger generation. Beyond the measures that the Commission has taken, and we thank you for that, we must be able to create the framework that will make it possible to give children back a childhood. Today, even if this application is supposed to be prohibited to minors under the age of 13, 87% of children in France already have, at 12 years old, an account on the TikTok application and a third of children from 5 to 7 years old use it without any control. We have a duty to require TikTok to verify that no minor can access it without precise control. This is our fundamental requirement: protect our young people from this epidemic.

Mr González Casares, I know that you are interested in industrial matters and I know that you are right to address them. Let's look at it together: tomorrow, if France did as Spain does, as your government proposes, and shut down all its nuclear power plants - because that is your government's plan and that is what Mr Sánchez repeated today - if that happens, then it would be a problem for the whole of Europe, Mr González Casares, it is a problem for the whole of Europe. I remember, you know, the time when the German coalition, socialists and environmentalists, wanted to shut down nuclear power in Germany, the one that still remained, and ask France to keep its power plants running. The situation is a bit the same. It's better to open your eyes.

Madam President, together with several colleagues from the EPP, I was in Valencia, Spain, the day this power cut occurred. A very special experience, it must be said. For a day, more grid, more electricity, more contact with what makes our daily lives. The situation could have been absolutely tragic and it has already been catastrophic: in a single day, 450 million euros of economic activities destroyed and situations of paralysis in several whole countries. But to hear Mr. Sánchez this morning, everything is fine, we must not be, I quote, "apocalyptic". Why this denial of reality? Because what has happened is not an accident, it is a European fable. Colleagues, this is the rest of our story if we are not careful. Of course, it is still difficult to know today, and it is also a problem, the exact cause of this generalized cut. But any college student, in front of a simple scheme, could understand that, when you put on the grid more and more intermittent renewable energies, the grid can not manage this intermittency. A power grid requires controllability and controllability. The truth, ladies and gentlemen, is that Mr Sánchez is saying today, and many here have repeated it, that interconnections with France must be increased. Perhaps, but what is the point of multiplying interconnections if we stop together producing the controllable electricity we need? Today, Mr Sánchez decided to attack nuclear energy, which is nevertheless the means of controlling and stabilizing the grid by providing our countries with decarbonized energy at controlled cost, which allows our industries to guarantee our sovereignty. Ladies and gentlemen, this irresponsible situation means that, tomorrow, we will be able to multiply the connections as much as we want, it is nuclear energy that France will send to Spain. If you really want to shut down the nuclear power plants in Spain as well as in France, tomorrow we will all end up with a power cut.

Mr President, Commissioner, it is not very far from here: In Saint-Ouen, a city in the suburbs of Paris, parents of pupils will have to decide whether or not to move from primary school classes because drug trafficking has made life so impossible and so dangerous for children that their school cannot stay there. Commissioner, you are presenting your new strategy for internal security, and I would like to thank you because you are the voice of a Europe that decides to become lucid – finally! – on these security matters. I would just like to tell you that there is no internal security without a real external strategy. Without protecting our borders against illegal immigration, there will be no security in our countries tomorrow. All our countries, all our countries must cooperate by refusing to issue any visas together to third countries which refuse to take back their nationals who have returned illegally to European soil. The attack in Mulhouse, which bereaved France only a few days ago, was committed by a clandestine man whom Algeria had refused ten times in a row to resume on its soil, even though he had committed crimes on the soil of our country. Europe is clearly powerless, increasing insecurity for our citizens. I am also talking about a strategy to protect borders from drug trafficking, which today threatens public order and the sovereignty of our states, and a strategy to protect our borders from the risk of terrorism. In all these areas, internal security obviously depends on ensuring that we have a real external security strategy together.

Madam President, today is an important day for our Parliament, because here we are: we will vote together to suspend the effect of the Directives on corporate sustainability reporting and sustainability due diligence, which were a major issue for our companies and their competitiveness. This is a key issue, a key geopolitical issue, since our debates this morning, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, will have been very much devoted to this issue of Europe’s security. We talked about what we needed to invest to strengthen the defence of our countries and we talked about the public money that would have to be committed for that, but we know that there is not a single euro of public money that does not come from the efforts of Europeans and the work of our companies. This, ladies and gentlemen, puts us all in front of our responsibilities. I mean, for example, that our Socialist colleagues could refuse to vote to suspend the effect of these directives. Listen to companies, listen to what they tell you about what they know today. Do you want to defend Europe better? Free our companies! Want to preserve our social models for the future? Free our companies! Do you want to protect the environment? Free our companies, which are the ones that respect the most demanding environmental rules in the world! Do you want to ensure Europe's ability to weigh in on the new trade challenges before us today? Free our companies! This is our message to the European Commission. We need to reverse the logic. For too long, Europe has damaged itself, damaged itself, in a logic of systematic mistrust of those who, however, sustain our countries, make them prosper, make them shine, are the only ones capable of ensuring that our continent retains, or regains, control over its destiny. There is no future for Europe if we do not start by giving our companies the capacity to act, work, create value and jobs in our countries. This is our message, this is the message of our entire campaign and this is the message of the action that is taking place today.

Mr President, the time for having the floor will be longer than the time for taking the floor. I just wanted to say that with our EPP Group, we are asking our Parliament to go for an urgent procedure on the European Defence Industry Programme. This will allow us to work, of course, in a very inclusive manner. With the rapporteur of the SEDE Committee, we are very much looking forward to working with all of you on the proposals you will make, but it will allow us to deliver fast. In this very important geopolitical moment, our Parliament has to show that we are ready to be efficient, precise and to work fast on this absolutely decisive programme for the defence of our Europe.

Mr President, Commissioner, the height of indecency has been reached. Aliev attacks Nagorno-Karabakh. Aliev is attacking a population that was asking for nothing but to live in peace on its land, on the land on which it has been living for millennia now. Aliev deports civilian populations. Aliev uses cluster bombs and jihadist mercenaries. At the end of all this horror, what does he do? He's indicting his victims. Today, 23 Armenian prisoners are subjected to a sham trial, reminiscent of the great hours of Stalinism. What is Europe doing? Europe is silent. We have already said so much. Commissioner, you are responsible for energy. How can we, how can you justify that today Europe imports gas from Azerbaijan with a particular contract with this "reliable partner", in the words of the European Commission? How can we justify that criminals are still running in Europe, and that gas is still flowing to our countries? Is it more indecent today to bring gas from Baku than from Moscow? Isn't it the same gas? Commissioner, we need an answer to this question.

Madam President, the first problem for all businesses in Europe today is not to satisfy their customers or manage their competitors, but to face the burden of regulation. During the last mandate – which is why, together with the EPP Group, we kept warning about this – the European Union adopted 13 000 new acts – between 2019 and 2024, and Eurostat indicates that this administrative burden now costs European businesses EUR 150 billion per year. The Commission is proposing a first omnibus package, which will save, she tells us, 6 billion, or at best 4% of the 150 billion. This is very, very, very far from being up to the challenge. It is good to get 80% of European companies out of the essentials of these rules, but what is the point, given that the remaining 20% of companies represent 80% of the European economy and that their administrative burden will be passed on to all the SMEs and intermediary companies with which they work? Where is the solution for the economies of our countries? It is very nice to want to asphyxiate only large groups with forms, but such an approach makes no sense if it amounts to asking them to disseminate these constraints to all their partner companies. Engineers from an industrial company told me a few days ago that European regulations would require them to check that all the products they use were manufactured according to the best requirements, based on 1 200 criteria. A commendable intention, of course, except that these engineers have, on the front line, 6,000 suppliers, which themselves have 1 million suppliers. How do you want to control? For these engineers today, the alternative is simple: stop producing or go to jail. Now, that's enough! If we want to get out of this major economic crisis that is emerging, we must not simply simplify, we must remove rules. Everywhere in our countries, those who run our economy simply say: Let us work! Let us do, create, develop, innovate and invent! Let us breathe! Let us live!" For this, it will not be enough to move three commas; We're gonna have to flip the table.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, in this surprising debate, some, for their small partisan political interests, have decided to confiscate our European Parliament to accuse us of increasing populism. But who is driving up populism, ladies and gentlemen? It is the leaders who refuse to listen to the concerns that are rising all over Europe. It was the left and the Greens who, for years, considered talking about immigration to be reprehensible. It was the left and the Greens who, for years, considered that insecurity was already in itself a transgressive issue. It is the Left and the Greens who have prevented our countries from reforming themselves and who have created the economic drop-out that affects so many households today and generates precariousness everywhere. Who is allying with extremism, ladies and gentlemen? It is, in my country, the left, and it is the Greens who are allied with Mr Mélenchon and France insoumise. You are not only voting on the same texts, ladies and gentlemen, you are running together in the elections, you are defending the same programme, you are running the same candidates. And what is unsubmissive France? Where is the worst today? Where is anti-Semitism? I met him yesterday, unfortunately, in this minority of Sciences Po Strasbourg students who block their amphis by shouting "Zionists out!" and who attack their own university because it has a partnership today in Israel, which is already, according to them, a scandal and a crime that deserves to be stopped and prevented from studying students who want to work. Antisemitism is there and, antisemitism, it is with it that you are partnering. So, ladies and gentlemen, do not come and teach us a lesson, never a lesson. We will solve the problems of the citizens of our countries that you have refused to look at. We will open our eyes and we will bring democracy back.

Mr President, Commissioner, 50 years after Turkey's invasion of Cyprus, hundreds of Cypriots are still formally missing. Their families have not only lost those they loved, they have been deprived of the truth, and without that truth, they cannot grieve. It's not an abstraction. Our colleague Fidias Panayiotou has just given us a very concrete example of what these missing people can mean in a life, in the life of a family. Colleagues, I was speaking myself with a Cypriot friend a few weeks ago, who said to me: Of course, the war was terrible, but even more terrible, perhaps, will have been, after the war, to be deprived of knowing where are those we have lost. Today, we have a duty, all together, and as Parliament's rapporteur for this mission that brings us together, I want to work with all the political forces in this House, because if there is a question that must cross the divides, it is this one. Our duty is to ensure that Turkey finally cooperates and tells the truth. May we finally be able to offer these bereaved families the truth to which they are entitled, because time passes and time runs out and, this time running out, it is that of the generations who will soon leave us and who have the right to know the fate of those they have loved before leaving. This absolute urgency has been reiterated by the European Court of Human Rights on numerous occasions. It is up to our Parliament today to ensure that Turkey can finally return to this much-needed cooperation, because justice depends on it, the truth depends on it, as well as the salvation of these families we are talking about, which is the cause that unites us.