Speeches

Mr President, it is awful to conclude, but we must admit that the EU Member States are not committed to the Western Balkan region. Their permissive conclusions of the summit last week made that again painfully clear. The refusal to keep their promise towards countries making progress towards the EU accession criteria has a devastating impact. It hurts their economy, young people leave, Russia, China and Turkey fill the gap that the EU leaves and tensions rise in the whole region. And some tensions are related to resistance against reforms. And we see a big crisis now in Bosnia—Herzegovina with the potential to escalate into another civil war. A vote is scheduled in the Republika Srpska (RS) Assembly to withdraw from the federal infrastructure of Bosnia—Herzegovina. Yesterday, they already took the first step with the RS medical agency. These decisions directly threaten the stability and peace in the region. It will blow up the Dayton agreement and throw the country back in time, far from the path towards succession. And I wonder, do the High Representative and the Commission realise the urgency of this threat? The joint declaration of Mr Borrell and Mr Blinken called upon all parties to respect and protect state institutions. Why not a clear call upon Mr Dodik, who is playing with fire at the moment? We urge you to do everything you can to prevent these votes and also to show the consequences of the adoption of the votes beforehand, because the members of the RS Assembly must realise the impact of their decision before they take it. And we need to be reassured that the EU has prepared an adequate response. So, bring this crisis to the highest level of the Commission and discuss it in the EU Council tomorrow. At the same time, we must keep our promise, start the negotiations talk with North Macedonia and Albania, make unambiguously clear that both countries already meet the criteria. Bilateral disputes are no justified reason to obstruct the start. I hope that the High Representative will affirm this very clearly, and I urge the Bulgarian government to lift the veto as soon as possible. Opening negotiations and granting visa liberalisation to Kosovo is not only deserved but necessary to regain the trust of their citizens and to reassure the people in the whole region that we generally welcome their European aspirations.

Madam President, I must confess it’s with deep concern and also despair that I contribute to this debate. Yesterday, in an intense debate on the rule of law, a vast majority in the Parliament demanded clear action against the destruction of the rule of law in Poland. And that makes me wonder: does the rule of law stop at our borders? For years now, we know that thousands of people have been pushed back from the EU borders. They all could not request for protection. Many of them suffered from violence, and a number of them even lost their lives. The silence from the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, and from the Member States has encouraged border countries to make these push packs a systematic practice, and the debate has even turned from denial to a demand that push-backs are legalised. Let’s just hear the Council just a minute ago. Dear Commissioner, I know that you condemned push-backs, but you are the vital actor who is able to put those words into practice. We depend on you to stop these flagrant violations and ensure protection, to start infringement procedures, make funding conditional and to ensure that Frontex does not facilitate but prevent push-backs. And you also referred to the new pact proposals. But I hope you realise there is no sense in waiting for new legislation. The current rules have to be respected now, so let’s avoid that at the end of our political term, we have to conclude that we did not manage to restore the rule of law at our borders and that instead we have only turned it into worse. We still have a chance, but we really do not have time to lose.

Mr President, with its decision to deny supremacy of EU law, the Polish government is not only undermining the EU, but also its own country. The treaties are here to safeguard equality of the Member States but, of course, also the equal rights of all EU citizens. President von der Leyen, you expected to solve the rule of law crisis with dialogue and, well, after two years, we must conclude that the situation has only deteriorated. So, we need the sense of urgency in your actions. Commission, use all legal and financial means at your disposal now because the house is on fire. The Council must finally break its deafening silence and take action and stand up for the Polish citizens’ rights, to rely on EU law, to have an independent judiciary and a government that respects their fundamental rights.

Madam President, I would like to congratulate all the rapporteurs. This report can really help to ensure that future funding goes hand in hand with accountability and human rights compliance. For that, we need democratic oversight and to make sure that funding is used for the right purposes, for instance, with development policy money. We also see a high risk that funding border and migration management would facilitate human rights violations, such as refusing access to protection or even worse. Just take a look at yesterday’s UN report on Libya. A stronger conditionality between funding and human rights is much needed. For all these reasons, we urge the Commission to ensure transparent and independent monitoring of how the funds are implemented and how fundamental rights are respected. It’s not the first time that we are asking for this. The Parliament has pressed for this many times now, and it’s high time to take action as the EU’s credibility is really at stake.

Mr President, one year after the fraudulent presidential elections, the situation in Belarus politically, and human rights situation has only further deteriorated. As my colleague already pointed out, the EU must step up its support of the Belarusian society, and make our sanctions and measures more effective. But in the meantime, Lukashenko has looked for a strategy to silence or punish the EU and the Member States for rightly supporting democratic opposition. The use of migrants and refugees as a geopolitical tool at the borders is shameful and disgusting; it should be strongly condemned, and in no way become effective. But we also need to ensure we do not play the same game as Lukashenko does, and this is actually, what we exactly see happening now. Poland, Latvia and Lithuania are keeping the borders closed for asylum seekers who ask for protection, and even refrain from giving them food, water and shelter for many weeks now. Five migrants have died at the borders, and many others, among them Afghan and Syrian refugees, are still kept in a deplorable and threatening situation. No one is allowed access to these people, despite clear instructions from the European Court of Human Rights, which are completely disregarded. Until now, the most important measures from the message from the EU was that the EU stands behind Poland, Latvia and Lithuania. Of course, we need to support those states, but at the same time, not accept that normal EU rules on Schengen and asylum are so painfully violated. When will the High Representative and the Commission clearly speak up against instrumentalisation of migrants and refugees from both sides? We urge you, Commission, to immediately act to ensure that no more people will die, that access to protection is guaranteed. Of course, we need to give support, but let us show real solidarity by relocating asylum seekers... (The President cut off the speaker)

Mr President, we welcome the IPA III Regulation, as already said by my colleague Mr Waitz, to support and incentivise the accession process. But we must be honest: the accession process is in a very challenging situation in many countries and sometimes even in a deadlock. In North Macedonia we saw due to external actors, and in some other countries, think of Bosnia Herzegovina, we really see that political leaders are obstructing the process themselves. And in those situations, EU accession is not an effective tool anymore to make progress. And there’s a big risk that the process of accession is being misused in order to get access to IPA III funding for the own interest of the political leaders. So therefore, I really welcome the strengthened conditionality mechanism in IPA III on democracy, human rights and rule of law, and the possibility of suspending assistance in case of severe backsliding. But we need to make it an effective tool. If I look at the current text, it’s quite vague on how to trigger it, so we would invite the Commission to specify this part and make it an effective tool for a real integration.

Madam President, High Representative, as the dust settles from the rapid Taliban takeover of Afghanistan and the departure of the Western presence over summer, we should seize this moment to reflect, to learn from this debacle because we need to create a more strong and effective foreign policy to protect and strengthen human rights. But we also must urgently act now because it is heart breaking to see how Afghan citizens are exposed to the brutal violence of the Taliban, with summary executions, arbitrary decision and the severe and violent oppression of women and girls. The Afghan people face an enormous humanitarian disaster with shortages of food, water and other basic needs. And those Afghan people were counting on us. So let us do whatever we can to protect them against the Taliban terror. So let us take our responsibility with a strong EU coordination on evacuations of people who worked for us or at imminent danger of Taliban persecution, on a humanitarian visa for those arriving in neighbouring countries, on increasing and ensuring access to humanitarian aid to Afghan people. Redirect developing assistance to non-governmental actors or international organisations to help the people but prevent any type of recognition to the Taliban as long as human rights are at risk. And on taking our responsibility for refugees, it is time to step up resettlement, facilitate family unification and prepare for the arrival of Afghan refugees at our border. They must receive immediate protection even if their request was already rejected before. The Temporary Protection Directive was designed to equally divide refugees between Member States and the Commission and Council must now fully make use of it. The Justice and Home Affairs Council gave a wrong and selfish message. Let the Parliament give the right direction. Dear colleagues, I look forward to a strong parliamentary resolution reflecting courage and solidarity that the Afghan population so much needs and deserves in these difficult times.

Mr President, summer holidays are knocking at our door and many EU citizens long to travel again. So in the coming weeks the ambition of a common COVID—19 certificate will be put to the test. Will the certificate be easily accessible? Will there be discrimination? And will the Member States apply the same rules? This does not seem to be the reality for now. We hear about additional restrictions and hassle at borders, restrictions that completely undermine the whole point of a single EU—wide certificate facilitating free travel. And not only do Member States make up their own rules, but there’s a huge lack of clear information. Citizens are totally confused and uncertain. So I urge the Commission to closely monitor and immediately intervene if Member States act against the regulation, because time is of the essence here, and to report back to Parliament. But, Commissioner, you also made a strong commitment yourself, namely to ensure financial support with a fund to promote affordable testing and to make more funding available if necessary. But when Parliament asked you to do so, you simply answered ‘No’. We see that mainly young people, who are not yet vaccinated, are facing the threshold of expensive tests. Their access to testing will not only facilitate free travel, but also protect others against the virus. So I urge the Commission to spend more money on free travel for all. Parliament wants you to do so for the sake of harmonisation, free travel, non—discrimination and for the protection of everyone’s health. I wish you a relaxing, free and healthy summer holiday.

Madam President, I’m very happy with all the criticism over the Hungarian developments, which are very concerning. But the EU Council also decided to consolidate the EU Turkey statement with new funding. And only the previous part-session, Parliament adopted the resolution with clear demands on migration deals. We must ensure human rights compliance, which requires impact assessments and independent monitoring, democratic and judicial control, and scrutiny of the use of funds. The EU Turkey statement doesn’t meet any of these criteria. So how do we monitor the situation of refugees? Is it taken into account that non-Syrian asylum seekers lack access to an asylum procedure? Will the funding of border controls result in a complete closure of the southern-east borders where refugees tried to escape violence? There are strong indications that forced returns to Syria are being made and that UNHCR doesn’t have access to any removal centre. Let me be clear: we must support the refugees in Turkey. Many of them are in precarious circumstances, and Turkey takes a large share but the conditions on border control and readmission have a human rights impact, and we must ensure that we support human rights that affect them in our external action.

Madam President, I would like to thank the rapporteur again for the report and the strong position. Of course, 2020 was an extraordinary year due to the pandemic, but also before, we observed the shocking lack of compliance with the rules on border control, internal border controls that were not temporary nor justified, and consistent reports about pushbacks at many places along our external borders – a grave violation of Article 4 of the Schengen Borders Code. It’s important that we look ahead and discuss a new Schengen strategy. But whatever the outcome will be, without compliance and enforcement, no border policy is credible. What will hopefully help is a more robust, swift and transparent Schengen evaluation and monitoring mechanism, with much more attention for fundamental rights. I call upon the Council and the Commission to ensure that Parliament can act as a co-legislator while making those new rules – because societal support for our border policies starts with democratic control.

Madam President, on behalf of my colleague, shadow rapporteur Alice Kuhnke, many thanks to the rapporteur for her great work and achievements. I think due to the pressure of the European Parliament a number of important improvements have been made in this legislation, like more emphasis on non-discrimination of fundamental rights, support for humanitarian visa, and improving the visa policies and search and rescue as an autonomous implementing measure. But we object to some other elements like the unlimited possibilities to fund border cooperation with third countries and to the large-scale IT systems interoperable in the hotspots. But our main objection actually, for the moment, is in general that we have big problems with agreeing at the moment on a huge amount of financial support for external border management in a time of persistent and consistent allegations of fundamental rights violations at the border without transparent and thorough investigations or enforcement actions from the Commission. We first need to see improvements in respect for fundamental rights and accountability and this funding should be made conditional upon fundamental rights compliance. It should be a tool to demand monitoring and compliance and to link the funding to the condition that a Member State which cooperates with Frontex fully also cooperates with monitoring and investigations by Frontex. I would like to hear and see from the Commission that this will be part of the gain. But for now, for the reasons I gave, we will abstain.