Speeches

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would first of all like to address those who today strongly wanted this debate, namely the European Lefts. Once again you want to convince us that governments are democratic only when you win the elections, or, better yet, when you go to the government, perhaps without an electoral mandate, exactly as has happened for many years in Italy. Obsessed with those who think differently from you, you are holding this Parliament hostage and preventing us from dealing with the real problems of Europe. The danger of the right does not exist, there is no evidence, but only so many prejudices and cheap propaganda. Let's talk about the danger of anti-democratic lefts: Since you have lost contact with the real problems, do not respect the popular vote and pillage democratically elected governments. On the other hand, we are talking about the danger of European leftists who are not ashamed to make agreements with dictators all over the world and who are pressing for Turkey to enter Europe, an absurdity that only the European right have opposed. Enough of this theater. The only danger facing this House today is to waste precious time discussing dear energy, dear bills and inflation that erodes wages. So, if not out of respect for us, at least out of respect for those who elected us, leave this Parliament free to work seriously, to give concrete answers that the citizens expect. Because, dear leftists, the citizens are not convinced by the accusations, but by serious, concrete and credible programs and the elections in Italy have shown it to you.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Masha Amini, Hadis Najafi, Roshana and who knows how many other names have escaped the news these days. But how many women still have to die before Europe takes a strong stand against the fundamentalist regime in Tehran and against the process of Islamization of Europe? The time has come for Brussels to get out of ambiguity, if it really wants to stand in solidarity with those women who are fighting and dying today to protest against the hijab, it cannot spend millions of euros to propagate in Europe the use of the veil or social models against which these women today are courageously rebelling against the cry of women, life and freedom. Brussels cannot betray the trust of those women who flee and flee to the West, where they believe they can live free from all submission like Samam. Now more than ever, we have a duty to strongly defend our European values, so that what is happening today in a seemingly distant country is not the dramatic anticipation of our future.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, energy efficiency is crucial to reducing Europe's dependence on suppliers that are no longer reliable, such as Russia. However, in order to be effective, energy savings in homes, industry and energy production must go hand in hand with realistic ones, especially when it comes to the redevelopment and decarbonisation of public and private buildings. If we really want no one to be left behind, we must look beyond mere energy saving and put our hands on pragmatic solutions that for years the ideology green He has demonized this House. Focusing everything on renewables without these technologies still being mature has been a serious mistake, as it is to create dependence on Chinese batteries that risk destroying our sector automotive. I hope that this debate will help to relaunch without ideologies quick and viable solutions to protect businesses and families in view of this winter. Our citizens can no longer wait.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, water scarcity is bringing all our territories to their knees, causing enormous damage to an economy that is already struggling. In Lombardy alone, losses of 500 million euros are already complaining and, also due to higher energy prices, companies in the sector will have greater burdens in harvest management and fruit production, which will inevitably be passed on to consumers. However, this dramatic situation was largely predictable, but Europe did not run for cover in time. Instead of listening to the alarms sounded for years by the agricultural world, the European Commission preferred to consult with Greta Thunberg, welcoming her to this very House with all the honours of a Head of State. When water-saving infrastructure and technology would have to be financed, this House was engaged in debating the rights of Roma and the measurement of clams. Finally, when we finally decided to take climate action, Europe set itself ideological and unrealistic objectives, which were finally called into question yesterday in this House, also thanks to the vote of the League. It is time for Europe to change course. Against drought we need exceptional support measures in the most affected territories, but above all a greater openness to sustainable energy sources such as hydrogen and nuclear, to safeguard our strategic autonomy and not to contribute to the economic expansion of China, which is already the largest producer of greenhouse gases on the planet.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, at this dramatic moment, it is very risky to sacrifice European economies on the altar of the ecological utopia of the green shift. Some of Europe's biggest polluters, such as Germany, which alone is responsible for a quarter of greenhouse gas emissions in the European Union, want to erase their guilt by imposing unrealistic climate targets on everyone, such as stopping combustion cars, before technologies, infrastructure and citizens are ready for this momentous turnaround. Producing only electric cars from 2035 does not mean becoming green or sustainable, but it means closing down companies, creating unemployment and poverty. Is Europe, which contributes the least to global CO2 emissions, really willing to move from the slavery of Russian gas to that of China's lithium batteries, and this for absurd reasons of principle? Brussels is still in time to revisit this ideological and punitive vision towards itself, which risks turning the most important Western civilization into a reality. dépendance of the least democratic and most polluting countries in the world.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the aggression against Ukraine has turned the issue of energy into an economic crisis that is hitting households and businesses hard. Our citizens seem powerless to witness price increases that risk leading us to a new recession soon. At this stage, addressing the role of trans-European energy networks is strategic for all of us. That is why we have asked in the negotiations to examine such a crucial issue, with a view to technological neutrality. No one denies progress, research or ambitions for decarbonisation. But to cope with the current crisis we would have preferred a less ideological approach: The role of natural gas transmission networks, which is essential for the continent's energy security, and above all for reducing emissions, continues to be marginalised, at least until alternative solutions have been developed. It insists on preferring electricity or hydrogen, of which no one denies the potential, especially when they will be completely based on renewables. But limiting ourselves today to these technologies, without considering the role of other sources, means deluding ourselves and, in practical terms, it means not giving the immediate answers that citizens and businesses are clamoring for. If the challenge of this mandate is really strategic autonomy, we cannot afford to discard solutions that are only available for ideological reasons. As we have often said in other Green Deal dossiers, we are asking for more pragmatism, especially in this emergency phase.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the energy crisis is choking businesses and citizens, undermining economic recovery and, not least, giving Putin's Russia a weapon of blackmail against Europe. The European Union was born on the rubble of war precisely from energy as a Coal and Steel Community. Maybe we haven't learned our lesson. The foresight of the founding fathers in recent decades has left room for ideologies and guilt. So today we are chasing energy independence, which is crucial to strengthening Europe's role in the world. The time to act is now. Exceptional measures are needed immediately to diversify sources of supply, stop demonizing gas and nuclear and face the reality of the actual impact of renewables in the short term. Today, the priority is to protect our economy, competitiveness, value chains and especially jobs. This requires a revision of the Green Deal Concrete and realistic answers are needed. Otherwise, Europe will abdicate its own history.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, when we browse the web, we feel free: free to inform us, free to use new services, free to meet virtually and to share experiences and opinions. This freedom, however, can become an illusion or worse a trap when it is not guaranteed and protected by a system of certain and shared rules. For this reason, the primary purpose of a European Digital Services Act must be to defend users, in particular those most exposed to the network's pitfalls: women, minors, disabled, elderly, affected by odious phenomena such as the revenge porn, cyberbullying, child pornography and online scams. Thanks to the amendments tabled by the League, there will be greater protections for the most fragile entities and also for small and medium-sized enterprises active on the web, but without this entailing new bureaucracy, destined to further hinder their investments in cybersecurity at a time of great vulnerability of the system. I would therefore like to thank my colleague Alessandra Basso for the great work she has done in committee with the aim of improving this measure, which, however, remains inadequate in many respects. These include, without doubt, the attribution of excessive discretionary powers to the European Commission and digital platforms. The majority of this House has indeed decided that the Commission should continue to have enormous power over supervision, investigations, monitoring of large platforms and the possibility of imposing sanctions, despite the fact that the Digital Services Act has provided for the creation of a control system for each individual Member State. As for platforms, they will have the power to decide which harmful but not illegal content can be removed, themselves determining the boundary between freedom of expression and the right to information. Everything that can threaten freedom of expression, democracy and the autonomy of states, in our opinion, must be absolutely deepened and re-discussed.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, combating cyberviolence is a battle of civilisations in which we all recognise ourselves. I myself, in Italy, have denounced chats dedicated to revenge porn and I have promoted a national initiative to raise awareness among women on the issue of security on the web. What we cannot agree with is the will of the progressive majority in this House to use the dossier on gender-based violence to advance its political agenda, re-proposing at European level the contents of the Zan Decree, which was rejected by the Italian Parliament, and calling to order as many as fifteen countries unwelcome in Brussels, that is, most Member States, because they do not include the definition of gender identity in their legislation. Well, what do these arguments have to do with the desperation of that 51 percent of victims of revenge porn Suicide as a solution? The European Parliament must think of these girls and women. We are not afraid to agree on several aspects of this dossier, in particular on the need for transnational directing against cyber violence. But only if we abandon an ideological approach to adopt a pragmatic and shared vision will we be able to achieve the goals we all aim for.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the sudden rise in energy prices, also due to the European Union's green policies, is holding back the recovery and is likely to have serious repercussions on businesses and citizens. In Italy, despite the corrections introduced by the government, this year households will spend an average of 300 euros more on electricity and gas. In the production sector, expensive energy jeopardizes our newfound competitiveness, while the rise in fuels is already penalizing many driving sectors of "Made in Italy". This situation calls into question a very ambitious, but certainly unrealistic, energy transition model. How many companies with small profit margins will be able to invest in conversion? But above all, is it right that, while the whole world pollutes, it is only Europeans who have to pay the price of the green transition? Europe reflects on these contradictions and pursues its climate goals with less ideology and more pragmatism.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the European Commission has decided that in just 14 years' time we will no longer be able to produce internal combustion cars in Europe. We in the League are not prejudicially opposed to the Green Deal However, we believe that the energy transition must take place in a practicable and, above all, progressive way. In fact, overnight armies of workers cannot be converted into computer technicians capable of programming an electric car and even the vast chain that produces components for combustion engines – 100 companies with 7 000 employees only in the province of Varese, Italy’s leader in this sector – cannot wake up one morning and start producing software. The real risk is the closure of many companies, hundreds of thousands of unemployed, with the paradox that most consumers will not be able to afford an expensive electric vehicle. The Commission then slows down this mad race towards climate neutrality and puts its policies back at the centre. green Measure and common sense.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, the scarcity of raw materials – wood, plastics, metals – is hitting our real economy hard, penalising the restart. The environment is certainly important but, while here we discuss transition, out there factories stop because there are no microchips and construction stops because cement costs too much. Stocks are finite, logistics do not support demand and prices rise rapidly impacting citizens. In a nutshell, our recovery moves away as China recovers. We have been asking for months where Europe is. We do not live by rhetoric alone on the ecological transition, we must start again from production in Europe because we can no longer limit ourselves to importing. As we see, dependence costs entrepreneurs and citizens dearly, we must avoid the demonization of entire sectors such as steel and plastic, because without them we would not have goods for many daily activities. Finally, we must think - and the League has often asked for this - of a Green Deal that in this crisis dialogues with the business world rather than accusing it or hitting it with unnecessary taxes. Without quick answers, all of us consumers will be the new victims of this crisis. All these costs that companies cannot bear will be passed on to us, with the result of blocking the recovery, work and impoverishing the citizens who have already paid dearly for the pandemic.