Speeches

The report amending the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive is another example of a socially harmful policy dictated by the ideological obscenity of the left-liberal European elites. Living in isolation from everyday reality, these elites set unrealistic goals for citizens, the cost of which will be even greater due to the dramatic economic situation in Europe. Parliament's position imposes a ban on the use of fossil fuel boilers in new buildings and buildings undergoing major renovations, making an exception only for hybrid systems. This provision does not take into account the differences in the level of development and economic structure of the Member States. The economic capacity of citizens to comply with the technical changes imposed has been completely ignored. Unfortunately, even the recurring energy crisis, aggravated to a large extent by the ongoing Russian aggression in Ukraine, has not brought sobering. Instead of strengthening domestic industry, including heavy industry, instead of pushing for legislation that will allow Europe to compete with Asian economies, the European green left condemns us all to failure.

Before we get to environmental damages this war of aggression has brought about, we need to remind ourselves what exactly led to this war in the first place. I am referring to the short sightedness of the EU led by Germany. For years on end, the EU’s liberal left-wing elites have appeased Putin to pursue lucrative energy deals with Russia. On the one hand, numerous Member States have become addicted to Russia’s dirty hydrocarbons. On the other, the ever-creeping ecologist legislation has cut down Europe’s energy independence and competitiveness. Berlin’s plans to get rich on Russian energy, as the EU’s main energy hub, have backfired. Poland and other countries of the EU’s and NATO’s Eastern Flank have been sounding the alarm since even before Putin decided to invade Georgia in 2008. Instead of promoting fracking imports of energy from places like the US and nuclear energy, Europe kept on feeding Russia’s growing war machine. Virtue signalling focused on limiting the EU’s carbon footprint might have made some among the EU’s elites feel better but it did nothing for the environment. On the contrary, those failed policies made the aggression against Ukraine possible and led to the destruction of the Kahovka Dam.

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. However, I would encourage the continuation and intensification of dialogue with Turkey, not the freezing of relations. It doesn't lead to anything, it doesn't solve anything. Turkey is an important geopolitical, political, economic and regional humanitarian partner for us. We can start a dialogue on visa liberalisation or a customs union. I also believe that consideration should be given to the issue of Northern Cyprus. There can't be a black hole in such an important region. We need to establish a dialogue with this enclave. Can we not return to a united Cyprus within the framework of the European Union?

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. The grain problem is a political problem. In this context, the Commission in charge of trade policy has the greatest responsibility. It is for the Commission to reconcile the interests of the candidate with those of the Member States. Meanwhile, we see the region playing out at the expense of cooperation. Ukraine is tempted by its rapid membership for supporting federalist reforms. Ukraine is tempted by economic benefits against cooperation with its neighbours, taking over false interpretations of the treaty. Such solutions serve Russia. Poland does not need to be taught solidarity. It is up to the Commission to show solidarity and political initiative.

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. What worries me is that five hundred days after the start of the war, the Commission is constantly reflecting on when and how to help Ukraine. You can't wait for the war to end. Firstly, there must be a clear prospect of membership in the transatlantic institutions. This will strengthen your determination to defend yourself. Secondly, help European countries to transfer frozen oligarchs' money to Ukraine. Thirdly, any money from scandals, such as Qatargate, transfer to Ukraine. And lastly, fourthly, the countries that are helping Ukraine should be helped. Do not disturb or stab them in the back by blocking RRPs and other funds. Oh, thank you.

Mr President, thank you very much. The Russian aggression against Ukraine is accompanied by numerous war crimes. The most disgraceful are: Kidnapping, deportation of children and their russification. Poland knows this from its experience of World War II and the German occupation. This is why we have taken the initiative together with the Commission. What should I do? Continue the Court's judgments to identify perpetrators, people, institutions, and to ensure access to and presence in Russia of the International Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders and, above all, UNICEF, which can provide us with information about the situation of these children. Finally, the issue of children must be included in the 11th package of sanctions against Russia.

Mr President, we keep asking the question, why this war lasts so long? The answer is simple, because many still too many of those who decide care more about future phase of Russia than about the security of Ukraine. It's a paradox that the way to create peace and maybe put democracy in Russia is to defeat Putin's regime. The first step to achieve this goal is to help Ukraine not only to defend itself, but to defeat Russia. A free, democratic, sovereign Ukraine, a Member State of the European Union will be the best message for the Russian society that there is an alternative way of being the country.

Madam President, I would like to support all those colleagues who mentioned that to end this war, Ukraine has to win the war. To win the war, firstly, we have to provide all kinds of assistance to Ukraine. This is what I expect firstly from the summit – political, economic and military assistance; all kinds of weapons supposed to be delivered to win the war. Secondly, what I expect from the summit is a clear and fast perspective of membership of the European Union based on the Copenhagen criteria and the acquis communautaire and nothing else. We cannot treat Ukraine as a guinea pig, as a laboratory of liberal visions.

Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Of course, I don't expect you to do it for us. Because the country I represent, Poland, in the vicinity of Ukraine does the most. Among other things, it provides military means to protect this transport. It also opened the borders. Not only for 7 million people, but also for millions of tons of grain and other goods. I just want to remind you of the Three Seas Initiative. Will the EU support those initiatives that are already being implemented, including by Poland?

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. I would like to ask you about Solidarity Lens. Thank you for the information on the funding of this initiative. I would like to ask you about the expansion of the infrastructure. The Ukrainian side proposes to build a pipeline to transport oil. There are other needs – tankers, track cold stores, etc. Is there an idea for development? Next, is there an idea to include this issue in the Regional Three Seas Initiative, which has already included Ukraine and could expand the transport network? Finally, is the Commission monitoring food flows from Russia? Is Russia still using food as a political instrument?

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. We have been wondering for months whether Belarus will join the war or whether its soldiers will fight in Ukraine. We question President Tsikhanouskaya and the political democratic diaspora about this. It should be remembered that Belarus is already involved in this conflict. The first phase of the conflict began last summer. It was then that the hybrid action against Poland and Lithuania began. Lukashenko has made available places to attack Ukraine and gives his full support to Putin. Belarus should be subject to similar sanctions as Russia – politico-diplomatic, economic and civilisational. Lukashenko should be treated as an enemy of peace, as a war criminal. He deserves the International Criminal Court.

Madam President, Commissioner, ‘we should have listened to Poland’, Ursula von der Leyen mentioned in the State of the Union address. Poland was warning you not only about the imperial aggressive plans of Russia, we were warning also that your instrument to challenge the threats are inaccurate – the Strategic compass, European autonomy – these are inaccurate to face the Russian threats. Our recipe was to stick to NATO and transatlantic relations, and who is now helping Ukraine to defend themselves and us Europeans? It’s the US, UK and Poland – the country sanctioning and penalising. How will you face the challenge of further escalation? Cooperation with NATO and US is a good direction. However, how we will have Ukraine back on key terms? Will the EU release funds of EUR 3 billion out of nine promised? Will you force European countries to send more weapons? Will you stop penalising Poland, which is helping Ukraine the most in political, military and humanitarian way?

Mr President, this debate shows that the support of the European Union is a very symbolic one, the most support is coming to Ukraine from their Member countries. Poland is one of the leading countries which is supporting Ukraine in political, military and humanitarian ways. Poland stands also as a hub of international support. At the same time, Poland, as I said, which is a leading country in its support, is sanctioned by the European Union, is penalised by the Tribunal, the Commission stopped the recovery plan, and there are a number of resolutions against Poland, even based on the fake news coming from this House. So my question, Mr Borrell, is, would you like to help Ukraine by helping Poland to assist Ukraine in an effective way? So, if you like to help Ukraine, you have to lift the sanctions imposed on Poland.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you for this factual discussion, which contrasted with previous discussions today, with the very ideological attacks on Poland. Today I would like to thank Members for their amendments, for their expert support. The Eastern Partnership does not have a security and military dimension, hence the Union’s monitoring missions are an important complement to this lack. We do not have a common defence policy, hence monitoring missions are one form of assistance and security dialogue with our partners. We cannot change the mandate to combat missions, so within the mandate we use all the Union's capabilities and potential to support partners. Hence it is a little Christmas tree, such a document. We have therefore sought, in all European policies, all capacities, the potential of European support for these countries. Of course, the most important thing today is the weapon. And that's what we called for in the report. The most important proposal is the enlargement of the Union. It is membership of the Union. The partnership had some original sin. It pulled these countries away from Russia, brought them closer to the EU, but did not guarantee membership. Hence, it led to a certain state of suspension and frustration. This limbo state needs to be fixed and membership granted, at least today. We have to grant them the status of candidacy. This status is a political gesture. It does not cost us anything. It must be granted to this country as soon as possible.

Madam President, I'm sorry. When I started working on the report, many indicated that its assumptions would be limited by those who want to let Putin keep his face and finish the next trade fair with Russian energy giants. The invasion in February caused some MPs to look into the eyes. This is reflected in the report negotiated by our political groups on security in the Eastern Partnership region. I wanted to highlight some of the main findings of the report. Firstly, we demand more efforts to arm Ukraine. Our Eastern neighbours are fighting not only for their freedom, but also for a peaceful future for Europe. Russia must be defeated, not persuaded by phone calls. Secondly, security cooperation should be strengthened, including with the other Eastern Partnership countries. Russia continues to occupy the territories of Georgia and Moldova. At operational level, this means, inter alia, increasing the presence of military and civilian personnel of the Union mission. Thirdly, we stress the importance of digital issues and cooperation in countering Russian hybrid activities. Fourthly, the development of the Three Seas Initiative is an important element of stabilising the security of the region through infrastructure investments. The logistical support and arms deliveries to Ukraine made, among others, through Poland and other countries speak for themselves here. Fifthly, since we are talking about infrastructure, security is also an economic issue, hence the call for Ukraine to be included in the single market as soon as possible and for Ukraine and the other countries to be granted candidate status. Sixthly, we stress the crucial importance of NATO and encourage the intensification of cooperation of the alliance with the Eastern Partnership countries. The Kremlin's repeated propaganda that the alleged threat of the pact is the cause of Russia's wars must be rejected. The invasion of Georgia was the result of a refusal to grant the country an action plan for membership. The Russian aggression should be seen in terms of a smokescreen for the inefficiency and corruption of the Russian elites and the declared source of legitimacy of their governments. In this context, I would like to point out that just getting rid of Putin will not bring lasting peace in Europe. Given the social mood and character of the Russians, he would be immediately replaced by someone perhaps worse, because less detached from reality and more competent. Finally, I would like to stress that the guidelines contained in the report aimed at deterring Russian influence in the Eastern Partnership are a step in the right direction. This proposed policy should continue for years after the Russians were driven out of the occupied territories of Ukraine, Georgia or Moldova. We cannot allow Russia to rebuild its war machine and give us another repetition of history.

Mr President, although we are protected by NATO and US nuclear umbrella, security is not granted forever. There is always a need to discuss, enhance and strengthen security. Time is good for the report on security. And conclusion of this report is in the time of war inappropriate and somewhat wrong. In time of war it’s a time for unity, a united response to aggression. But what we have instead, we have hesitation in some capitals, like Berlin and Paris, ideas like Strategic Compass, European autonomy, or QMV. In time of war, there is no time for experiment, no time for emancipation from transatlantic cooperation, and no time for federal experiments with QMV. Just without the QMV, we adopted already six packages of sanctions, but we cannot accept the delivery of weapon to Ukraine.

Mr President, thank you very much. At the outset, I would like to point out that I fully share and support the position expressed by Commissioner Reynders. I thank him for mentioning that Poland is one of the first countries to start investigating Russian crimes. This is not Putin's war, this is Russia's war. I think that Russia should be prosecuted and judged for aggressive crimes, for violating international law. We should accuse and judge political and military decision-makers, accuse and judge propagandists, political officers who encourage crime, accuse soldiers of perpetration. But we should also provide technology to detect perpetrators, such as interviews and social media posts, and provide technology, mobile labs and DNA tests to examine the bodies of both victims and criminals.

Mr President, thank you very much. We must move away from the dream that we can build European security with Russia, with Russia as it is. If with Russia, then, of course, with a democratically changed regime. I ask if we have the courage to change the regime in Russia. Like many here, he has the courage and willingness to change the government in Poland. We must have the ability to correctly read the intentions and policies of Russia. After Chechnya, Georgia, Crimea, most of Europe could not recognize Russian intentions. So we need technical capacity, but above all political will and a realistic view of Russia. And knowledge. Political will, knowledge, is the need for knowledge about the Czar, communism and present Russia. We succumb often fake newsPropaganda, also here in this room. Technical capacity. You don't need inventiveness to invent a wheel or dust, you just need to replicate the experience: Radio Free Europe, Radio Swoboda and Voice of America.

Yes, I will ask an additional question. Mr Borrell, what are your suggestions for modification of these documents and mandates after the outbreak of the war, after the aggression? Do you suggest more troops, faster deployment of those troops, a bigger mandate to include combat mission? Because I think that right now what we need is rather a moral compass – a document which is telling us who not to sell weapons to, on whom to impose sanctions and who and how to assist when attacked by the aggressor.

Mr President, thank you very much. Thank you, Senor Borrell. I will return to the debate we had in AFET and SEDE. Then I asked you what you did with a document called the Global Strategy of the European Union, which, as Minister of Foreign Affairs in 2017, together with Mrs Mogherini, we adopted as a European strategy. The new document you are presenting to us was published before Russia's war with Ukraine broke out. Then why was the other rejected and the other accepted? You confuse me once again when you say that the Commission does not deal with defence. So what is this document and why is it? Why these five thousand soldiers, if you say that the Commission does not deal with defence? What is the nature of this document? Is this a military document to equip the European Union with a military instrument? Is this just another paper that your successor will throw away next year, as you threw away Mrs. Mogherini's paper?

Mr President, thank you very much. Commissioner, thank you very much. We have been expecting problems from Russia for years, we have warned against them. We called for security for our part of Europe. We were told a few days before the war, like Commissioner Borrell, that the Union did not deal with security issues, or we were told: If you want more security, involve Russia even more. Are we going to answer the same question to the children of Mariupol today? Poland has taken in more than two and a half million refugees, including about one million children. What do they need? First and foremost, they need peace. More efforts by the European Union, perhaps the French Presidency, as President Metsola has shown. We need a register of these children in cooperation with Ukrainians and the authorities – a register of those who have crossed the border, but also those who have remained in Ukraine and are at risk of deportation. As a teacher, I will focus on education. European funds are needed for the transport and safe evacuation of these children, for learning the basics of languages, for the creation of new hybrid textbooks combining Ukrainian programs and host countries, ideologically neutral. Psychologists' positions on cultural integration and adaptation, the creation of libraries, centers for the protection of cultural goods, scholarship programs, but also care programs for the youngest are needed so that their mothers can take care of them and work.

Madam President, Ukraine is fighting for its freedom, is fighting for the security of Europe also – a security which we built for the last 30 years. In this sense it is also our role to protect our security. Some European Union countries are more responsible for Putin’s aggressive military posture. In this sense, they are more responsible for this role and we expect more contribution from them. The are a lot of instruments and sanctions to stop Russian aggression: penalties, weapons for Ukraine and for the security of our eastern front. Sometimes it is not possible to immediately implement this instrument, but the hot issue right now is humanitarian assistance. Delivering it to Ukraine is extremely difficult, but we have to spare no effort to deliver. However, there are millions of refugees in our countries. In Poland alone, as Ms Johansson rightly mentioned, there are 1.2 million refugees added to one million migrants who have emigrated to Poland. We need, for such a large number of people, comprehensive plans and money, not only visits and bureaucrats on board, but money for the state. It is the states which create jobs, education and health programmes for these people. We have to avoid the creation of camps, ghettos and the Palestinianisation of this refugee wave. We have to study the experience of Turkey and Lebanon. But let’s remember that we have provided Turkey with more than 6 EUR billion. Are we prepared to provide the same assistance, the same plan, the same money to other countries which are coping with many more waves of refugees in the last few days than Turkey?

Mr President, thank you very much. For a long time, unfortunately, many of us have been fruitlessly calling for penalties for Russia for blackmailing Ukraine and parts of Europe. Unfortunately, after Chancellor Scholz's visit to Moscow, I no longer believed that such sanctions would occur. I also stopped believing in significant support for Ukraine. We are sending only expressions of political solidarity to Ukraine. However, I am pleased that we are starting to talk about more financial assistance. However, it is time to start the next stage of cooperation after the Eastern Partnership, which seems to have exhausted its possibilities. Let us open the path to European Union membership for Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia. Firstly, it could be a connection to the Three Seas Initiative – sectoral cooperation in the field of energy and transport infrastructure. Secondly, let us open up further sectors and EU agencies. The third step should be the integration of these countries into the common market, for example following the example of Switzerland. Finally, the fourth element is membership after meeting the Copenhagen criteria. Ukraine's economic success in the Union, i.e. the positive alternative development of post-Soviet society in the Union, is a great example for the Russians and a nightmare for Putin. Let us give this fate to Putin.

Mr President, thank you very much. I thank the authors for an interesting report, good for describing Yeti, something that does not exist and does not have a bad security and defence policy. Thank you, however, for addressing the issue of hybrid and cyber threats in an interesting way, for addressing the issue of energy blackmail as a hybrid tactic. The report includes ambitious provisions on civilian capability development. However, the old threats are not lost, they are visible to the naked eye and the report is verified by life in the context of a new version of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. We have a problem with preserving European solidarity, a lack of solidarity and solidarity in assessing threats. Russia is a security threat, it questions the entire security structure. Instead of a realistic assessment, there are myths and illusions about dialogue, economic cooperation. If we don't have a common threat, we don't have a solidarity answer either. We must therefore seek not autonomy, not self-reliance – this is a mistake, not the QMV, which leads to hegemony, but the strengthening of transatlantic ties with the UK and, unfortunately, also with Turkey. At the moment, we are not helped by any compass, but by thousands of American and British soldiers on Polish soil.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Russia is a constant anti-hero of our deliberations. Russian imperialism is manifested not only by aggression against other states, but also by aggression against one's own society, intimidation, repression against all those who doubt Putin's rule. We talked about Ukraine. We talked about Navalny. Today we will talk about actions towards non-governmental organizations, especially those that observe the observance of human rights. Against them a law was created stigmatizing them as foreign agents. The repression of Memorial, which investigated and exposed criminal activities, e.g. in Chechnya or Syria by the Wagner Group, is particularly severe. The memorial also revealed Stalinist crimes, e.g. crimes against Polish officers in Katyn and Polish guerrillas in 1945. Let's defend Memorial activists and defend the achievements of this organization, a huge database, a collection of documents, evidence of crime. This collection must become the heritage of the whole of Europe. Let us create an opportunity for Memorial activists in our countries to act safely, to open a collection of important documents and preserve them for historical truth.