Speeches

I fully agree that we need action, not words. Therefore, I would like to hear about whether you and the Danish People's Party are reconsidering your relationship with Trump and the MAGA movement, because it is your chairman who went to Mar-a-Lago. It's your party, it's your group that's Trump's closest ally in Europe, and you're the one who's going to tear down the foundation that's going to stand up to Trump. I would like to know if the last few months have really made you reconsider and reconsider your position and the position of your group?

Madam President, let me start by thanking the rapporteur for both the results and the good cooperation. 'Societas Europaea Unificata'. I cannot be the only one who struggles to pronounce the proposed name of the new corporate forum by the 28th Regime, but even though few under 40 ever had Latin in school, the vision is simple: making Europe the best place to establish your business and seeing it grow. By harmonising EU rules, removing unnecessary burdens and making access to capital easier, the 28th Regime will allow SMEs, start‑ups and scale‑ups to actually experience a single market, and it will allow Europe to overcome the innovation gap. However, if this vision is to survive and not become yet another missed opportunity, it must earn public support. That is why it is crucial for both me and the Greens that workers' rights are fully protected. We should always harmonise to the highest standards, not the lowest. If we do this right, it can set Europe on a new, innovative and competitive track. So, let's make this vision a reality.

Madam President, colleagues, let's be honest: this is not simplification, this is deregulation and a complete dismantling of European sustainability and due diligence rules. Some have tried to paint the picture that certain negotiators have not been willing to compromise. But this picture is far from reality. I have experienced colleagues who were competent and ready to compromise on everything: on the scope, on climate transition plans and on civil liability. But the compromise that lies at hand does not reflect a compromise; it reflects political blackmail. And this mandate removes civil liability, it weakens climate transition plans and it empties out the scope drastically. If the chaos in the last couple of weeks has shown us anything, it is that if you want a stable, pro-European majority, having the Greens on board is probably a good idea. Colleagues, we can and we must do better than this. So give us a chance to make this law meaningful, to compromise and to ensure that it has a shred of civil liability included.

Mr President! It will be our children and society's weakest who will pay the price for the necessary build-up and for the green transition. At least if we let Donald Trump decide what tax policy we should pursue in Europe. Trump has shown with his trade policy that he is not afraid to threaten other countries with punitive tariffs if they tax American companies in a way he does not like. He has broken global tax treaties, and he has twisted the arm of countries that have introduced a tax on digital giants. This is totally unacceptable, because the European Union must stand firm on the right of Europeans to decide for themselves what taxes we choose to have. This includes taxing US tech giants who make huge profits from European consumers, but who don't contribute to the common fund at all. Right now, we have huge funding needs. We need to find money for armament, and we need to find money for the green transition without compromising our welfare and without it being our children who pay the price in the form of fewer educators and fewer teachers. At the same time, economic inequality is greater than it has ever been since World War II. In Europe, the richest one percent now owns almost a quarter of all wealth, while the poorest half of Europeans own only three percent. That's not good enough. That is why we need fair and efficient tax systems that European citizens can trust.

Mr. President! When Trump threatens Europe, the answer is not to bow your neck. Therefore, it makes me uneasy to read in this trade agreement that the European Commission promises that our rules on sustainability and human rights must not become an obstacle to American trade. Because EU sustainability rules are set in the world to ensure that companies do not make money from forced labour, from pollution or from child labour. These are fundamental European values that have made Europe strong and rich. And now it is time for Europe to stand up and stand guard for those values, because if we first start to let our policy be dictated by a United States waging a trade war against Europe with one hand and trying to blackmail us with the other, then we are not just failing our companies, we are failing our European values and we are failing the position of strength that Europe has built up over decades. Namely, a Europe with the highest standards in consumer rights, green ambitions and equality, an ambitious Europe that refuses to be part of the race to the bottom. So, therefore, dear Commission: Drop the fate of Trump and believe in Europe!

Madam President! Thanks for the speech. I have been looking forward to today, and I am sure you have too, because the Danish Presidency is facing some major challenges. Deliver on a secure, competitive and green Europe. Let me start with the latter, because I have high expectations for Denmark. Especially because, over time, when there has been an environmental problem that they do not want to solve themselves, ministers have looked to the EU. This includes, for example, a ban on PFAS and perpetuality chemicals, an end to the export of toxic pesticides and pesticides from Cheminova and the protection of our marine environment. Now you have the opportunity to turn words into action, and it is urgent because the water we drink is becoming increasingly polluted, our ability to have children is affected by fertility change, and our marine environment is dead. In SF and the Green Group, we are ready, and I also hope that the Danish government is, because it must gradually be clear to everyone that the planet, it is burning. Just last week we saw heatwaves desolating the streets, we saw floods sending people from their homes, and we saw agricultural production on its knees. Therefore, it is also crucial that Denmark uses the presidency to move forward in the green transition and keep the green hope alive. And we are fortunately the proof that it is possible – that climate, security, a strong economy and a safe welfare society can go hand in hand. That's why it's so important that Denmark lands a strong 2040 plan that actually reduces CO2 emissions.2 by 90 percent, without climate credits and with no fixed calculation methods. To me, this is one of the major success criteria for the Danish Presidency. For the next six months, Denmark will be in the chair. It commits. It commits not only to the EU, but also to a world that is becoming increasingly insecure. I will be proud when Denmark takes the lead in military support for Ukraine. I am also proud when we stand on the side of Iranian women and when we defend the right to live in a democracy. Unfortunately, however, we have a situation in Gaza and the West Bank that is out of control, where civilians and children are killed, where humanitarian aid is used as a weapon, and where families are still waiting to get their loved ones home. The next year, Denmark will have the ball. I hope you will take that responsibility on you.

Mr President, I would like to first thank the rapporteur for her wonderful work, and also the team of shadows. I echo that I hope the Commission will take in a lot of the ideas. And with this, I will switch to English. Mr President! In Europe, we pay two to three times more for our energy than they do in the US and China, not least because our power cables are overcrowded, outdated and poorly connected. It is unsustainable, because it slows down the installation of wind turbines and solar cells, and it stands in the way of ordinary people getting green power that is affordable. Electrification is the bridge to the green transition. Our cars must run on electricity. Our houses must be heated without oil, and our factories must be powered by green power instead of coal and gas. The decisive changes require a modern electricity grid that can adapt to the increased demand. At the same time, we must make it socially fair so that no one is left behind during the green transition. The electricity grid is the backbone of our energy system, and right now it cannot bear the green future that our planet needs. That is why we need to invest massively in extracting, optimising and interconnecting the electricity grid in the EU across borders. This is how we get more sun and wind, and how the power becomes cheaper, greener and more accessible. It requires both political will and the money to make a difference. But we must ensure that the green power actually reaches consumers both quickly and efficiently. It is good for the climate, it is good for the economy, and it is good for citizens across the EU.

Madam President, thank you first of all to the rapporteur for the work. When Donald Trump is targeting our diversity programmes, NGOs and US federal agencies, when he is rolling back financial and environmental legislation, we Europeans should not mimic his policies. Some in this Chamber pushed for deregulation of legislation previously agreed by a broad section of this House – legislation intended to further the green transition, to further social justice and to ensure financial stability. But Europe will only become more competitive if we ensure regulatory and financial stability, and if we intensify the transition to renewable energy, getting rid of shameful dependency on expensive imported fossil fuels. Europe must demonstrate to the world that our green, our social and our democratic economic model is the best competitive economy. We should double down on our common values, not bow to Trump and copy his policies.

Mr President! Dear Dan, Congratulations on the plan. It was interesting to read because we are in a very difficult time. Our President of the Commission described us this week as Europe's moment. I agree. I believe that, more than ever, citizens are looking to the European Union to solve the major challenges, and that is why we need to remind each other that the most effective way to a safe, independent and sustainable Europe is through an ambitious green transition. This requires that we make Europe free of fossil fuels. It also requires us to resist the temptation to pursue short-term gains through investments in new gas projects that are otherwise being planned. The way to lower energy prices is through massive investments in green energy, not through fossil fuel contracts. More sun and more wind is the cheapest and fastest way to reduce our CO2 emissions.2-imprint on and avoid the catastrophic consequences of the climate crisis. More sun and wind is also the cheapest and fastest way to achieve independence from old men with imperialist ambitions, and it is our strongest card to ensure a competitive European industry. That's why we need more green energy. We need to invest massively in renewable green energy. It's good for the planet, it's good for people, and it's good for the economy. We must drastically reduce our emissions, therefore we must adopt an ambitious 2040 target for our CO2 emissions.2-reducing and taking action to ensure that we reach the Paris Agreement. We cannot continue to pollute and expect future generations to clean up after us. With green energy, we can at the same time create concrete changes for ordinary people in everyday life. Today, over 41 million Europeans are struggling to pay their energy bills. It is a political failure, because no child should go around freezing. We need to renovate our homes. We must invest in energy efficiency and we must keep our hands under those who find it difficult to make ends meet. Cheap, green energy is not just good for the climate. It is social policy that ensures that everyone can live a dignified life. Cheap and green energy is also the best help we can give the companies that are going to compete with China and the United States. Therefore, we must remove the barriers that make it difficult to connect green power to the electricity grid. Anything that can be electrified must be electrified. This is the way to a strong and competitive European industry. It takes courage to make those decisions, but as Van der Leyen said, this is Europe's moment and we can do it!

As a fellow Scandinavian, dear colleague, I would like to ask you if you recognise that a green economy is a strong economy, and that the green transition and competitiveness go hand in hand? And why EPP could support the taxonomy, the CSRD, the CSDDD as a way to fulfil our transition goals, but now want to roll it back?

Mr President! We are told that we must choose between a strong economy or a strong climate policy. But nothing could be more wrong. The green transition is a prerequisite for competitiveness, because we need to expand green energy so that both businesses and consumers get lower energy prices. We need to create a stable framework so that companies know that it is worth investing green. And we need to make it easier and more attractive to invest in green solutions. Unfortunately, the Commission is doing the exact opposite: you are rolling back sustainability rules and creating uncertainty. It penalizes those companies that have already invested green and rewards those that have slept per hour. This is not fair to businesses or to the climate. And the EU is faced with a crucial choice. Should we take the lead in the green transition, or should we follow the example of the Americans and sacrifice the climate for short-term gains? Right now, it seems that the Commission is taking the wrong path. That is a pity, because the green transition is the best prerequisite for European competitiveness.

Thank you very much for the question, and I'm happy to see we have a proper debate in this House. I think looking at my own country, Denmark, actually gives you the answer, because Denmark is a quite highly regulated country. We've been pushing the market economy to fuel the green investments. We have strong Medicare. We have strong renewable energy sectors. I think that's showing both that green aspects and competitiveness go hand in hand, but also that, of course, we shouldn't fear steering the market economy. No one wants regulation just for the sake of regulation. But I think if we do it right, we will actually do a favour to Europe.

Then we got it; The Commission's long-awaited work programme, which sets the direction for Europe in the coming years. One word goes again: Competitiveness. This is important because we need to make it easier to do business and to be present in Europe. But it is as if the Commission has overlooked the fact that we are still in the midst of a climate crisis that is booming. And year after year, we break heat records. Nature is disappearing and biodiversity is collapsing. Climate change is already affecting us. So where on earth are the green ambitions to ensure that we live up to the Paris Agreement? Where is the ambitious environmental legislation that protects nature instead of weakening it? We need a Europe that runs on green energy, that restores nature and that makes sure that those who pollute also pay. It requires courage and it requires action, and I miss that in this work programme. The climate crisis does not wait, and neither can we. Then turning to another topic, Commissioner, in your work programme, you also proposed to withdraw the proposal on the EU horizontal anti-discrimination directive. I believe that this is a big mistake. In a time where we see attacks on our fundamental rights, withdrawing this proposal is the wrong way to go. I know it requires patience and courage to get this legislation over the finish line, but we've seen that it's possible to unlock equality legislation. So I urge you, Commissioner, please don't give up on our anti-discrimination laws.

Mr President! One would think that the super-rich believe that they live on a different planet than all of us, that the rules that apply to them do not apply to us. With their private jets and superyachts, they emit tons of CO2, and because of tax evasion they often pay much less tax than the rest of us. In fact, EU countries miss out on up to €60 billion a year. It is money that could finance more wild nature and more nurses, but which instead is hidden away in tax havens. It's not solidarity, and it's unfair. This summer, for the first time, the G20 agreed to work for the super-rich to pay more in taxes. It's an important step, but it takes more than just fine words. We must close down the international tax havens, and we must ensure that the very rich also contribute. That is why we have proposed across the EU a tax on the wealth of the super-rich. For the super-rich, they don't live on another planet than us, and they have to contribute far more to the community than they do today.

Mr President! When you pay your taxes, you expect others to do the same. You should be able to do that. But the reality is, unfortunately, that some companies, if only they are big and rich enough, slip by. They employ an army of tax speculators and their job is to ensure that multinational giants contribute as little to the common fund as possible. It's insanely unsolidaristic. But fortunately, this tax hypocrisy can now become a thing of the past. Last week, Margrethe Vestager/Commission won a historic victory at the European Court of Justice. Ireland is no longer allowed to give Apple huge tax rebates. These rebates have meant that Apple has paid ridiculously low taxes in the EU and that we as a society have missed billions that could be spent on hiring more nurses, educators and setting up wind turbines, which we need to stop. If multinational giants are to benefit from our welfare states and good labour, they must pay into the common fund.

Mr President! Europe must be the greenest continent in the world. We need a Europe that runs on green energy, takes care of the planet and restores nature instead of destroying it. We need to be the ones who put the climate bar first, so the rest of the world has to keep up. But someone's trying to stop us. That is, the Conservatives and the Liberal Group with the Left, the Radical Left and the Moderates. As temperatures rise, they will stop green progress and spread more poison in our nature. They will replace Europe's environmental law, watering down the first ever nature law in the EU. They will allow dangerous chemistry so that we cannot have the children we dream of. The left has voted against protecting nature and the soil from pesticides. Radicals have also voted against less poison in the wild, and they have removed the few environmental demands that are made on agriculture. For the past five years, I have been in the greenest parliamentary group in the EU. We have achieved a lot, but progress is under pressure. That is why it is crucial that we all come down and vote on 9 June for a green Europe that continues to make progress.

Mr President! In Gaza, children are dying of starvation. Families eat grass, and the lucky ones get animal feed. Women receive caesarean section without anaesthesia, and children are amputated without anaesthesia. We hear about mothers who can't breastfeed because they don't get enough food and because there's no substitute. Over 10,000 children have already been killed and many more injured. Entire families have been wiped out and many children are left without mother and father or siblings. Some die quickly, others suffocate slowly under the rubble. The survivors are traumatized for life, and Israeli hostages are still in Hamas custody. The International Court of Justice recently condemned Israel to ensure access to humanitarian aid in Gaza, stating that genocide cannot be ruled out. Israel has chosen to respond with more bombs and even less access to emergency aid. In the European Union, we must stand on the side of the international legal order. We must demand a ceasefire immediately, and we must embark on the necessary two-state solution. And all the while, no civilians should be fined for the work of the terrorists. Both Palestinians and Israelis have the right to live in peace and dignity.

Mr President! The warmest year ever measured. The wettest month in man's memory. The driest summer in 100 years. Climate change has long since ceased to be something we need to worry about if our children are going to experience. Some of us discover it most in the scary articles we read on the web. Others have ruined their lives. Climate change destroys people's homes every day, destroys entire cities and kills people. This requires the EU to take responsibility. That we show that we are a green great power when it comes to the climate. That we set high and ambitious goals, and that we demand that those who infer, they also pay for it. Today, the Commission says we need a 90% climate target by 2030. If it were for us, we would be climate neutral by 2040. But I am, frankly, positively surprised, because I feel that the right wing and the black industry are blowing our necks. They will stop all climate progress and curb all green legislation. And if they get a large majority after the election, then they can get their way. That must not happen, and we in the Green Group are the guarantor of that.

Madam President, unfortunately, those that have been misusing this debate to spread false claims and watered down the report did not even show up for today’s debate. Allow me to be extremely honest: those that claim to stand for less or low taxation are selling false promises. If you want lower taxes, how are we going to face the huge societal challenges that we need to face? We are facing a war at our borders, and a climate and a biodiversity crisis. We have a transition to pay and an ageing society to fund. Are we going to pay for these challenges with more debt, or are those calling for less taxes actually calling for austerity, massive cuts in public services leading to less health care, less education and less infrastructure? Over the last decades, our tax laws were designed to tax more – much more – those that consume, work and can’t move around, and tax less – much less – those with capital, profits and property. Do we want to stick to this deeply unfair status quo? I don’t think so. Instead, we should look beyond political misconceptions, and stand for fair, reasonable and responsible tax policy. That is what this report is all about. While the very rich, the big polluters and the big corporations should pay more, workers and self-employed should pay less. Our tax system needs to be rebalanced. So we should unite in the call for a fairer, more just tax system – one that benefits every citizen and safeguards the future of our European Union as a social, green and economic powerhouse.

Madam President, dear Commissioner and dear Members, I’m standing here today as the rapporteur for the tax policy in times of crisis, the report by the fiscal subcommittee. I think we should start by recognising that the role of taxation as a policy instrument to redistribute revenue and steer behaviour remains underutilised in European policymaking. We all collectively pay every single day a high price for this failure to act at EU level, especially in times of crisis. During the most recent crises, such as COVID, the energy crisis or inflation, inequalities increased, inequalities between men and women, inequality between the very rich and the rest, and inequalities between big corporations and small businesses and self-employed. The report proposes key elements to make European tax systems more equal, fairer and green, and we want the Commission to play a stronger role in making this happen. Only a holistic and responsible EU wide tax reform will make us collectively ready to pay for the many challenges. Today, I hope we can use this plenary debate to confront the stark reality of our current tax system – a tax system where a nurse, a teacher or a fireman dedicating their lives to caring of others face a higher tax rate than a shareholder, a billionaire flying around the world in a private jet or a big multinational. Let’s be concrete and allow me to share two examples. The very rich pollute much more than regular citizens, and in 2021 and 2022 alone, we have seen a big increase in private jets in the EU, an increase of 64%. At the same time, some multinationals are misusing the crisis years to raise consumer prices for them to have even more profits, the so-called ‘excess profits’. We’ve seen that inflation has been profit driven in the EU, and this is recognised by both ECB, IMF and academia. So the scenario that we collectively live in is one where a nurse earning a normal wage contributes an important portion of her salary in taxes, funding essential public services that benefit us all, while due to political choices, a wealthy shareholder will see its profits zero or low tax in the EU. This is not merely an abstract concept, but a tangible inequality that exists within our societies. Those who contribute directly to our communities bear heavier tax than those who profit immensely. That’s not the society I want, and it is not the society that the 99% deserve. Tomorrow, Members of this Parliament stand for clear choice when voting on this report. Do they want a tax system that doesn’t make workers bear the burden, as they can’t easily move around to another country, a more gender equal tax system – and it is no coincidence that men mostly own shares and have most wealth, and that this wealth remains low taxed – a fairer tax system in which big polluters and multinationals pay taxes on their excess profits made on the back of normal people paying a higher bill in the supermarkets, a society with sufficient tax revenues to invest in our healthcare, education, infrastructure, renewable energy and innovative businesses? Regrettably, today and tomorrow, conservative voices will consciously attempt to mischaracterise progressive tax policies as synonyms with higher taxes on workers. This is deeply false. Not taxing fairly the rich, the big polluters and the multinationals is a political choice, and it shouldn’t be our political choice.

Madam President, dear colleagues, dear Commissioner, dear Council, since 2020, the richest 1% have captured almost two thirds of all new wealth. Two thirds! That is nearly twice as much money as the bottom 99% of the world’s population. Some might think that this is only a problem for the US and it is not a European one. Well, they could not be more wrong. Wealth concentration in Europe is high, extremely high. The top 1% holds over 30% of total wealth, while the poorest half owns less than 5%. This is deeply unfair. And guess what, those at the top are mostly men, and those at the bottom are mostly women. Wealth taxation is thus also a gender issue. Over the last decades, the super rich have been protected by the dominant belief that taxing them would be detrimental for our economy. But taxing on capital has been shrinking over the last years, and wealth taxes have almost disappeared. Estimations vary, but a wealth tax in Europe could raise between EUR 200 billion and EUR 1 trillion. This is massive and it has the potential to save our planet, to educate our children and to care for our elderly. So is this proposal for a tax out of envy of people and companies that have made a fortune, who have invested cleverly or have used the capital markets to further gain profits? No, not at all. This is a matter of justice. It’s a matter of fairness. It’s a matter of showing solidarity and responsibility towards our common goods, our nature, our detrimental effects, as climate change is already harming a million people. So I call on you, Commissioner Gentiloni, to bring this forward for the G20 meeting and find a way for a European wealth tax.

Madam President, I think it is clear to all of us that even though the Banking Union is important, it might not be as interesting as, for example, the Nature Restoration Law. But I’m very happy to see the Commissioner and the Chair and greet them, because the last year has further shown the value of the Banking Union, while also calling for our collective efforts to continue in building a framework that fosters trust, transparency and accountability in the banking sector. Therefore I am also a proud rapporteur of the annual report on the Banking Union, which this year seems especially relevant, with two elements giving flavour to the report. First of all, the failure of three US banks reminded us of how important it is to implement a sound prudential framework, and the EP report stresses that the EU should fairly, timely and comprehensively implement the internationally agreed standards. The recent political agreement reached with the Council will allow for this timely implementation. The management of these failures also demonstrates the need to have a robust deposit insurance framework that fosters depositors’ confidence to avoid bank runs. Secondly, the Commission published its proposal to revise the EU crisis management framework for banks, and everyone agrees that the EU resolution framework contains some loopholes that we need to fix. The management of Credit Suisse’s failure also demonstrates the importance of having a credible resolution framework. Fifteen years after the great financial crisis, it is time to put an end to the ‘too big to fail’ issue. Obviously resolution aspects and deposit insurances go hand in hand, and I do hope that the co-legislators will now be able to agree on a comprehensive and coherent reform of the EU framework. I am particularly proud that Parliament reiterates its commitment to complete the Banking Union against this background, and I would like in this context to also thank all the shadow rapporteurs for their constructive contribution and for the smooth work to draft the report that I hope will be voted with a broad majority. This year’s annual report also considers the economic and social impact of the Russian aggression on Ukraine and calls on competent authorities to carefully monitor ongoing developments. The report also acknowledges the decreasing trends of non-performing loans in bank balance sheets, while stressing that risk reduction in bank balance sheets should continue. So far, the progressive withdrawal of the public support measures adopted during the pandemic, as well as the rising interest rates environment, have not led to an increase of non-performing loans in bank balance sheets. However, our report stresses that we should continue to closely monitor the situation and continue the progress made in the reduction of risks in the balance sheets. The report also acknowledges the banking sector’s role in financing the green transition. There is a clear recognition by Parliament that climate change poses a threat to financial stability and it is now time that the financial and prudential framework fully embeds this reality. Our report also deplores the lack of gender balance in top management positions, both in banks and in EU financial institutions. Gender—balanced boards are not only a matter of social justice: numerous studies have shown that the gender balance on boards and the workforce brings both societal and economic returns. All in all, I truly believe that we have achieved an ambitious report which advocates for the deepening of our economic integration and the completion of the Banking Union. And finally, I will switch into Danish. For til sidst vil jeg gerne appellere til mit eget land, Danmark, om at tiltræde bankunionen og dermed slutte flere års nøleri. Ved at tiltræde bankunionen vil Danmark både styrke sin egen finansielle stabilitet og det europæiske samarbejde inden for den finansielle sektor. Et dansk medlemskab vil også give os langt mere indflydelse på EU-lovgivning, der påvirker den danske finanssektor. Fordelene ved et dansk medlemskab af bankunionen er veldokumenteret. Så er det bare om at komme i gang.

Mr President, I thank Samira again for her tireless efforts to fight for women, and all kinds of women. And thank you very much, colleagues, for all of your remarks. I’m extremely happy that we are finally voting on this agreement and that we move forward with this important piece of legislation. I envision a future where employees are valued for their work regardless of their gender. A future where employees know their rights and they are not afraid to exercise them, because they know that they are protected by European law. The future is here. We have achieved that and we finally have patented tools to combat pay discrimination, gender-income inequalities and to empower workers. So I look forward to the vote and I’m going to celebrate as well. And I hope that this whole House is.