Debate contributions by Anna ZALEWSKA

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Friends and colleagues! Were they surprised? Surprised, are you? Disappointed? I mean, really? Since several climate summits, the whole world has been sending clear signals that the European Union has gone crazy, that by building an ideology it makes a huge amount of money, that it is a hypocrite – yes, Commissioner – a hypocrite because by setting impossible targets – see 90% reduction in carbon emissions by 2040, with 55% not being achieved by 2030, with the ETS – one, two, three, four – Europeans are to pay for not being able to achieve these targets. At the same time, the European Union is a hypocrite. You become hypocrites of the world because you say that if we cannot realize, then we must reach for everything that is emission, in order to increase this emission even more: see the agreement with Merkosur, see the agreement with Ukraine. This is how the world sees the European Union. We need to wake up, build a good world for our children.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. When we worked in the Environment Committee in the last legislature on the next Green Deal documents, I warned, I asked why, in full disregard of the Commission and colleagues in the Environment Committee, all the projects that made us absolutely dependent on China were being implemented. But that's not what we're talking about today. Today, the Commissioner will also receive a strategy, an analysis of the situation prepared by scientists and experts from Poland together with recommendations for actions here and now. Recommendations for the development of own mining projects, for the establishment of a European Raw Materials Fund similar to the Japanese and Korean ones, strengthening the European value chain, expanding partnerships with democratic countries rich in raw materials, including European raw materials projects on the list of strategic infrastructure, diversification of import sources, increasing the ability to monitor risks, and finally revising the EU's energy transition strategy. I leave a full analysis to the Commissioner. Commissioner von der Leyen has already received it together with mine.

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. I have the irresistible impression that Commissioner von der Leyen does not hear, does not listen, does not see, does not even read the reports she orders herself, well, maybe two or three cards prepared by officials. Europe's economy is burning, not the planet. Anyway, your green guru, Bill Gates, just called off the climate catastrophe and said unequivocally: Fortunately for all of us, this vision is not true. Later he said: Humans will be able to live and thrive in most places on Earth in the foreseeable future. And the European Union? Commissioner, I feel sorry for this role at the climate summit, because you will have a big problem, because the whole world is turning away from it, because it is simply unexplored, incalculable, unanalysed. We know for sure that we will not achieve the result of a 55% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2030. You have to break the thermometer, pretend that there is no fever, say that it will be 90 to 2040. I call for repentance.

Madam President, I'm sorry. How embarrassing and cruel it is to the victims that it has been recognized here in this room that climate change is responsible for the catastrophe, for the death of people, for the loss of property. It is easy to wash your green hands. It is easy to live in ideological obscenity, and not to point out that man is to blame, or rather people, unprepared, who did not implement basic principles, did not implement basic investments. The Commissioner, a colleague who was then Deputy Prime Minister, seems to have been a minister, and even spoke with disgust about dams, about reservoirs, because the restoration of nature is to take place and this agenda must be implemented. No one was responsible. No one was punished. And the one who is indicated as the person who was supposed to organize, among other things, the entire warning system, was rewarded. He is now a Commissioner of the European Commission.

Mr President, thank you very much. The Commissioner says that it is good, even very good, that he has a plan and a bright future ahead of us. What does the automotive industry say? The Environment Committee met with her in a closed meeting to discuss the state of play and opportunities for the implementation of the e-mobility regulation. Commissioner, they said unequivocally – Commissioner, they need resuscitation, because soon they will simply die. Therefore, they need two drips. The first is to withdraw from the ban on registration and production of diesel cars by 2035. Let freedom rule, let competition rule. Europeans don't like orders and prohibitions at all. They do not want to live in a totalitarian and totalitarian Europe. The second drip is ETS 2, because it hangs over the Europeans. This is the punishment for the fact that they will refuel to their cars everything that is not related to electricity. We need freedom, resilience, competitiveness, and that is the only way. Finally, Commissioner, dear colleagues from the Left and the Greens, release your physicists, chemists and engineers from the cabinets. You need them. Talk to them.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. This is a step in the right direction. For the first time, the Commission has listened so clearly to Member States that implement CBAM and industry. But this is not enough, because the exclusion of small enterprises is not yet saving European industry, as Draghi writes in the report. It is time for the next step and the introduction of urgent solutions that will realistically lower the prices of energy production in Europe. We need real changes to the ETS Directive, which is most responsible for the increase in production costs. We need concrete solutions to support European industry, including a return to free allowances. European industry exporting its products outside the EU to countries with a much less restrictive climate policy is in a worse situation, losing its competitive position on the global market. So we're doing the right thing, but not enough. It's time to take the next steps.

Mr President, thank you very much. People are dying in the burning forests, animals are dying, biodiversity is disappearing, there are huge losses to human property and the economy. But also the climate target you want to discuss here, that is, carbon sequestration, suffers. And for those who want to increase the target to 90%, we will not reach the target by 2030. What do forests need? Forests need man, forest management, money, monitoring, good fire protection systems, and finally hydrological systems. Without deep analysis, it is not possible to bet on specific funds to spend these funds. Moreover, the Court of Auditors reminds the European Commission that there is no evidence that these funds are properly spent. Very detailed analyses by Member States are needed, not least to show who is responsible for these burning forests.

Madam President, I'm sorry. During the negotiations on the Waste Directive, I had two objectives: ensuring a real reduction of waste through legislative changes while ensuring a realistic and proportionate approach in its implementation to the need to reduce food and textile waste. I welcome the approach taken with regard to the obligation of Member States to reduce food waste. The targets introduced are low and acceptable for Member States. They are not based on penalties, but on supporting Member States in taking action to reduce food waste and waste. During the negotiations, we were able to ensure that agriculture and farmers would not be covered by the objectives of the Directive, i.e. the obligations to reduce food waste. We have also strengthened the position of farmers vis-à-vis unfair practices by supermarket operators, such as last-minute cancellations of orders of fresh produce or discrimination against so-called ugly fruits and vegetables. Under the negotiated directive, we have also succeeded in significantly reducing excessive bureaucracy, including by excluding micro-entrepreneurs from the scope of the directive and introducing simplified reporting for certain entities. In addition, we listened to the needs of Member States and significantly extended the implementation deadlines for administrations. Thanks to this, we will be sure that the planned changes will be good, realistic to meet and will ensure a real reduction of waste, a goal that unites us all in this room. I believe that the agreement on the waste directive is a great example of how wisely environmental concerns can be combined with simplified legislation that reduces bureaucracy. I ask you to vote in favour of the directive I have negotiated. I look forward to repeating the outcome of the vote on the agreement in ENVI and I thank my colleagues and rapporteurs.

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Europe's strategic trading partner and security provider must also be discussed with respect, in a spirit of partnership and with full responsibility for words. Also for the words that fall here. The European Commission has a lot of work to do to erase the bad impressions of the election campaign. Contempt is remembered. It is necessary to cut off from contempt in order to create an atmosphere for good conditions, for good negotiations, for good agreements. At the same time, the European Commission must probably be questioned – not by Commissioner von der Leyen – but perhaps by the European Parliament on the basis of knowledge of the Draghi report, which clearly shows what is happening to Europe's competitiveness. We have to fight for our own, but remember that everyone deserves a partnership.

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. To say that Europe is at a turn is to say nothing. We have to admit unequivocally that we are standing on a precipice and the Commission is proposing to turn on the next gears in order to get to the bottom even faster. Projects without ideas, without analyses, without sources of funding, without engineers, chemists and physicists, against logic and against reason. It makes the whole world talk about it. At the climate summit, we experienced it unequivocally, that the European Union does not know what it is doing. Nobody wants to join us. I remember when we were working on the Fit for 55 package during that term of office, every time I warned my ENVI colleagues that the next document was to rifle the Chinese, because we have neither rare earth metals nor technology, that we are far behind, as all possible logical economic reports say.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Everything we discuss is good, noble, true, honest. That's the way it is. But in order to make this a reality, the strategy must provide, firstly, for no interference in the competences of the Member States. It must indicate the sources of funding. It cannot lead to another dramatic bureaucracy. It must indicate technical and technological possibilities, because the ENVI Committee's communication contains wording that has nothing to do with physics, chemistry or engineering. In addition, we must remember that we cannot constantly multiply further documents. After all, we have not yet finished discussions in trilogues on water purity and quality, and we are already proposing further solutions. Finally, in order for there to be a chance to do anything, discuss and talk to Europeans in general, it is necessary to carefully analyse and diagnose what has been done on the basis of the previous dozens of documents.

Lack of competition, high energy prices and bureaucracy are the three deadly diseases that are killing the European Union. You have to find ways and there are three. Three documents need to be changed. Firstly, the Directive, which in 2014 changed the rules for the functioning of the ETS market. It has become a speculative, manipulative market, and in fact a financial pyramid. We also need to change the climate law. Five years ago, climate law was created and already then we knew that it did not correspond to reality. The pandemic has begun. Then came the war. The world described in the climate law simply did not exist then and does not exist. And the third way: we need to change the budget immediately, think about how to reduce green investments (which the Court of Auditors already has doubts about) so that we can prepare for war without loans, be ready to defend ourselves.

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. You are aware that your plan is to increase energy prices. It's time to get rid of the algorithms, the blackmailers, the greens you pay, the lobbyists. It's time to sit down with engineers, energy engineers, chemists and physicists. It is time to return to the ETS before 2014, because at the moment it has become a bubble, a financial pyramid that speculates and manipulates. At the same time, it's time to throw ETS 2 in the trash. Citizens cannot be held responsible for your carefree ideas, for your ideology and for being held hostage by big businesses. The ECR will prepare a motion for a resolution and a debate on putting ETS 2 in the trash in the coming weeks.

Mr President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. I think farmers deserve to be told the truth. The European Commission speaks directly. The European Union is in debt of over €500 billion and has not yet started paying interest on the recovery fund. Commissioner von der Leyen says unequivocally and repeatedly: There will be no separate fund for agriculture. There will be one for one country. At the same time, the Commission is determined, it encourages. The Commissioner is also writhing without answering questions. The decision was made to sign a contract with Merkosur. At the same time, a meeting was held in the AGRI Committee, where we heard that from June, agricultural products from Ukraine will flow in a full stream, an open border. You are so afraid that you don't even show the regulation. I say this in order to confront you and your country with reality. This vision does not agree with her.

Madam President, I'm sorry. The Commission's presentation is a plan to prolong the agony of the automotive industry. No dates, deadlines, documents that need to be changed tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, at the latest in a week. You are talking about money. This money is in the budget, no new money. After all, you have been talking about the same thing for many years and nothing has changed. You are talking about the need to support, strengthen supply chains. Which one? When it comes to rare earth metals, in most cases we are dependent on everything external to the European Union. Finally, you say that there is a need to support, that there is a need to help, forgetting – because this was not the case today – the ETS2, that is, the upcoming tax, the penalty for citizens who will drive combustion cars. Europeans need to be taken seriously, tasks need to be carried out and planned so that they can be carried out.

Madam President, thank you very much. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Forgive this wording, but it seems to me that at the Commission they are giving you happiness pills so that you can create a reality that simply does not exist. At the climate summit in Baku, the corridors were not only talking about the Draghi report and showing how and to what misfortune the Green Deal, so ill-conceived and so innumerable, had led. But it was also said that there would be no funding, no following the European Union. Because it's not just the United States, it's China, it's India, it's Brazil saying that there is simply no such money in the system and it's a road to nowhere. In addition, neither the European Union nor the institutions that have the money generously allocated from around the world can account for what they spend, how they spend and what the results are. It is enough to look at the latest report of the Court of Auditors – yes, the one in the European Union – which accurately says that what is green is unclear. It's time to wake up. It's the last moment.

Madam President, thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner, I would like to thank you. We are all aware that the problem is and will continue to grow, but I think we should stop debating and hystericalizing that we are not reaching an agreement on global solutions. Let's show the world how to do it. Let's do it within the European Union. Alternatively, let each of these hundred countries show how precisely to take care of it. After all, we know well that we need education, we need money, we need a system, circularity, recycling, and finally such consumer responsibility, but less than producer responsibility. Because everyone does what they want, and then burdens the consumer, who has to think about how to take care of the environment. Therefore, let us also ensure the stability of the law. Let me remind you about the packaging. We have demolished a well-organized system concerning, among other things, plastic bottles. We have returned to the system from 30 years ago, to Chinese solutions and materials that we will not be able to dispose of. Let's take responsibility for ourselves.

Mr President, thank you very much. The research is unequivocal. The poor condition of the European farmer is primarily due to the Green Deal, bureaucracy, uncertainty, unachievable ambitions and goals, and a negative image in the media. European farmers bear responsibility on their shoulders for European thoughts and ideas on climate change. In addition, they learn from the media that they do not really know anything about agriculture. In addition, they live in great uncertainty, because in addition to lack of money, lack of employees or constantly forcing them to hire lawyers, accountants to get through the European bureaucracy, they hear: Why cultivate the land when you can get crops or goods from Ukraine or Mercosur? Why cultivate land when it can be turned into renewable energy? We have infected European agriculture. They need peace.

Mr President, thank you very much. Commissioner, I'm sorry. The Green Deal has been a global hoax. It arose without citizens, against people, it arose against treaties. The entire Fit for 55 package on the energy mix and taxes should be on a legal basis that moves towards unanimity. Member States have been deceived. The Green Deal was built against the economy and competitiveness. You can't enchant reality. We have a situation in which we need to stop reform and realization immediately, because we are creating unrealistic goals and ambitions that are impossible to achieve. We do not in any way expect the Commission to report every year and every month on how specific money affects these expected changes. We should meet immediately with the Environment Agency, this European agency, which already warned in December that we would not reach 55% by 2030, while the Commission wants to make us happy with the discussion that we therefore need to get 90% by 2040. Finally, outside the control of the ECJ, no one knows what happens to citizens' money, no one knows how it is spent. It's an absolute pyramid scheme. It is time to stop it, like other directives and regulations. Just so we don't get to be alone. The climate summit in Baku said unequivocally that the whole world has turned its back on us. No one wants to listen to us, because everyone is realistic and cares about their citizens.

Mr President, thank you very much. Who doesn't go to the climate summit? Commissioner von der Leyen, Chancellor of Germany, President of France. There will be no President Biden, no leaders of Brazil, India and China. Why won't they be there? Because they stopped looking at Europe as prime movers. Because they read the Draghi report and see that the result of these ambitions, too aggressively outlined, is a loss of competitiveness. We go there to ask for money, that we want even more money for the actions that we define and we want to define for the whole world, without settling accounts with Europeans, without settling accounts with the world. Let's show how we spend this money, who is the beneficiary of this money and what effects it brings. It is important to be true so that Europeans and the whole world are not deceived.

Madam President, thank you very much. The steel industry is dying. It is an industry that is responsible for the entire European economy and, ironically, for the implementation of the Green Deal. This Green Deal, which is just killing an entire industry, an entire industry. Because, after all, high prices for buying carbon allowances, because there is vain and vain hope when it comes to the border tax – all this means that there is no time for analysis, no time to make plans, no time to announce new investments in clean steel. In a moment you will not have to write a pure strategy for the industry, because it simply will not be, because there is no money. I recall the Draghi report, which says that 800 billion a year we need money to make the European economy competitive. I would like to remind you that the Court of Auditors said that the European Union is indebted to EUR 540 billion, and there is still no money to pay interest on the Recovery Fund. Today we speak with one voice and say: alarm for the European economy.

Mr President, thank you very much. Today we are talking about the housing crisis, yesterday we are talking about the automotive crisis, the refugee crisis and the security crisis. This is what the outgoing Commission leaves behind. But we want President von der Leyen to continue to lead us into the abyss. I have bad news for you, tragic news for Europeans, especially young people: Housing and housing prices are exploding. The following documents are responsible for this: the Energy Efficiency Directive, the Ecodesign Regulation, the Construction Products Regulation or the Carbon Sequestration Certification Regulation. This will make the apartment not only a luxury good, but an unattainable good. And what does the Commission propose? If someone does not comply with these documents, they will pay taxes on how their apartment is, among other things, heated. The situation is dramatic. Therefore, these documents must be thrown in the trash.

Mr President, Commissioner, I would like to thank you for your support. To be honest, your speech put me in the chair. I thought you were joking, because here you are coming to the European Parliament for a debate about the automotive crisis and saying that this topic is not there. You don't see factories closing down, workers being laid off. You do not see that electric batteries are full of carbon footprints, that they consist of elements not available in Europe, that we are absolutely dependent on China, and in fact the Chinese have put the automotive economy on their shoulders. So I ask, where is the common sense? Because Europeans demand concrete solutions. You know very well that every document in the package Fit for Fifty Five He was very happy to be received in China, actually written under China in order to conquer European markets. Well, what do we say? Well, just like the Commissioner, that is, we are also going to the COP to Azerbaijan, to Baku, with even more green turbocharging. Everyone will laugh at us. I call for repentance for the good of Europeans.