Speeches

Now that it is time to take stock of the state of the Union over the past year, we must be proud of the EU. Despite the shadows, which have also been there, we cannot ignore that the European management of the crisis has been positive, creating a safety net for citizens when it was most needed. Examples of this success are the vaccination campaign or the management of the ERTE. However, it is crucial not to fall into complacency. As we have already learned from past crises, the real challenge now arises, when it comes to deciding what to do with the Recovery Plan, which will lay the foundations for the Europe of the future. And this future involves intelligently resolving open fronts. The first is to ensure that funds are spent and well spent. The Recovery Plan should be geared towards the green transition, digitalisation and sustainability. In short, to ensure a more prosperous future for the next generation. Step by step Europe must walk towards the light that appears at the end of the tunnel and be aware that falling into triumphalism will only lead us to stumble again with the same mistakes that we have already made in the past.

Europe’s dependence on China for critical raw materials is not new. It’s structural. And it’s becoming a strategic vulnerability. China controls a significant share of global CRM supply and has used this dominance to restrict exports, from rare earths in 2011 to gallium, germanium and graphite in 2023. This pattern exposes EU industries to bottlenecks, price shocks and loss of competitiveness. From automotive to wind energy and defence, our key sectors rely on materials we import over 50 % from China. This reality demands more than speeches. We need European-scale action. We welcome the Commission’s clear priorities: rebalancing our economic relationship with China, reducing strategic risks, and advancing cooperation on global issues like climate. But these goals require concrete tools. Europe must invest in its own CRM value chains, from mining to recycling, and boost European-specific financing for our strategic projects. We also need to diversify supply through partnerships with reliable allies such as the recently signed trade agreements with Mexico and Canada. Strategic autonomy is not a slogan. It’s an industrial and geopolitical imperative. We must shift from dependency to resilience. From short-term fixes to long-term solutions. Our competitiveness and sovereignty depend on it.

Commissioner, Europe cannot remain naive vis-à-vis China. Just yesterday he announced his intention to create an international alliance to further strengthen control over rare earths. This is a worrying sign. Beijing is willing to institutionalize the use of raw materials as a geopolitical weapon. China already controls virtually all of the world's rare earth processing and subjects thousands of European companies to opaque licenses, arbitrary restrictions and confidential information requirements to authorize exports. This is a systemic risk to the competitiveness of European industry. The temporary suspension of controls by China is not enough. The message must be clear. Europe does not seek to confront China, but neither can it accept vulnerability. There is a need to diversify suppliers, to cooperate more with reliable partners, to accelerate European extraction and refining projects and to coordinate trade defence measures to ensure that no essential value chain is held hostage to unilateral decisions taken outside our borders. Time is running out, Commissioner.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, this debate is not just about technology, it is about people and avoiding job and industrial losses, because the reality is stubborn: Selling only electric cars in 2035 is unrealistic. But it's not about backtracking either, because we know there are billions invested. What the industry is asking of us is something much more sensible. It asks us for more time, more flexibility and to put in place the measures to make this possible: charging points, affordable prices, incentives and access to the network, because this debate is not about ideology either, it is about pragmatism and common sense, and that means recognizing that all technologies are necessary to reduce emissions. We need technological neutrality, and we see this very clearly when we talk about vans or trucks from our carriers, of which, incidentally, we speak very little; You can't buy an electric truck or have a place to charge it. But above all, this debate is about competitiveness, whether we want to make Europe the place where the cars of the future are made or whether we are going to cede that leadership to others. And, for that, we must also put the long lights: invest in innovation, in battery manufacturing, in fearlessly reducing regulatory burden and in ensuring that the next generation of electric vehicles also bear the seal made in Europe. And for that, Commissioner, always count on our Group, because listening to the sector, adapting dates and protecting our industry is not going backwards, it is ensuring that Europe is up to par, not with promises, but with decisions.

Madam President, ten days after the blackout, we still do not know the causes. But it was not an unforeseeable fatality: many experts had already warned of the risk of blackouts with an energy mix too dependent on renewables, low investment in electricity grids and the fragility of the system in the face of peak demand. The problem is not renewables, a very abundant resource in Spain and that we know how to take advantage of very well. No, the problem is the neglect of energy planning based on ideology and not on technical criteria, which demonizes nuclear ones, which are what give security and stability to the system. The problem is the lack of investments, interconnections, storage and capacity mechanisms. And the problem is that this can happen again, because we have a Government that does not assume responsibilities, prisoner of some partners that now what they ask here is to nationalize and intervene the entire electrical system, while nothing has been said here about the responsibility of Red Eléctrica. What we demand here is an independent investigation.

Madam President, first of all, let me send a big hug and all our affection to the families of the miners who died in Asturias. I wish the wounded a speedy recovery. Today this Parliament pays tribute to them. Thank you, dear Commissioner Séjourné, for your involvement in finally having a plan to protect European steel. It's about time. This sector, which is strategic, had been demanding solutions to its crisis for too long. I know this very well because, in Asturias, as in many other European regions, thousands of jobs are at stake because of unfair competition from other countries. The most urgent thing today is to put in place as soon as possible the new instrument to replace the current steel safeguards, a more ambitious system that offers greater protection, that reaches more countries and products and that takes into account the country of origin of the foundry. I am also glad to see that the Commission is finally starting to work on closing the loopholes in the CBAM, the border tariff, to prevent it from being easily circumvented and thus protect our exports. Of course, I am concerned that the implementation of many measures proposed to reduce the price of energy, such as the reduction of tolls or taxes, depends on the will of the countries. But, without a doubt, this is a great first step and we have to implement it as soon as possible, because unfair competition does not wait and external threats, such as Trump's tariffs, do not wait either. Europe needs a strong industry and, for that, we need competitive and future-proof steel. Let's act and act now.

Madam President, Commissioner, this Action Plan for the automotive industry is very welcome. The sector is at a critical moment and thousands of jobs are at risk. It is very good news that the Commission is finally reacting to avoid million-dollar fines for European manufacturers. It would be incomprehensible to punish our industry - which we have forced to electrify - and then benefit Chinese cars. But we also need self-criticism. Is this Plan enough for Europe to regain its leadership? Much emphasis is placed on the technology of the future: in the autonomous and connected car. It is very necessary, but this does not solve the problems of the present: incentives to purchase vehicles or upgrade charging infrastructure are limited to recommendations to Member States. The problem of trucks is hardly dealt with. Is it realistic to electrify heavy transport right now? No, it's not. Why not make your goals more flexible? Where is technological neutrality in this whole Plan? Commissioner, this Plan is a great step forward, but for there to be a future for European automotive we need first to ensure that there is a strong industry in the present.

Madam President, Commissioner, the Clean Industry Pact is a very good sign that Europe is changing and there is strong support for reindustrialisation. That's good news. But, in my opinion, this is four years late and, therefore, today I want to emphasize, first, the urgency, because its success will depend on how fast we are in implementing all the actions you have announced today and this roadmap: from regulatory simplification to incentivising demand. Secondly, decision. We need more concrete and effective measures, because the affordable energy plan already falls short for the electro-intensive industry, and many proposals such as reducing tolls, charges and taxes or investing in networks are only recommendations for Member States. And in the case of Spain, bent on shutting down nuclear weapons, I'm afraid they won't follow. Thirdly, fair rules of the game. There is an urgent need to update all trade defence mechanisms to make them effective. You know it very well because sectors such as steel are in an unsustainable situation. Commissioner, we can do this. Europe has historically demonstrated its ability to adapt and lead in times of change. But we must act now.

Madam President, Commissioner, while you are here today defending the future of nuclear fusion, nuclear power plants are being shut down in Spain. Because of the ideological dogmatism of the Government of Spain, we give up 20% of cheap, clean and safe energy to replace it with gas. The first plant to close will be Almaraz in Extremadura, regardless of the 3,000 jobs that are going to be lost, nor the increase in emissions, nor that the Spanish will pay more expensive the price of energy. Today it is Mrs Ribera who should be in this debate, so that she can explain to us how one thing can be preached in Brussels and the opposite can be done in her country. Because while for the European Union nuclear energy is considered green and necessary for the transition, in Spain Almaraz is closed. While all nuclear-capable countries invest in extending life or in new reactors, we dismantle them. And while here the Commission defends technological neutrality and that all technologies are taken into account to decarbonize, in Spain they demonize them. Nuclear fusion, indeed, is a promising and innovative technology that can provide us with abundant and inexhaustible clean energy and complement renewables. Europe cannot be left behind, because China and the United States are investing massively. Therefore, yes, Europe must continue to focus on fusion technology, ITER and international cooperation. But here today I would like to address Commissioner Ribera in particular to ask for consistency. I ask you for consistency and to reconsider the disastrous decision to close Almaraz.

Madam President, Commissioner, the ArcelorMittal steelworks in Asturias will stop next week due to lack of demand: Chinese imports of cheap and subsidised steel are flooding our market and putting at risk a strategic industry for Europe and, with it, thousands of jobs. Commissioner, we already need urgent trade defence measures and review the safeguard clauses, as other countries are doing, but we also need measures to regain our competitiveness because, let us not fool ourselves, investments to produce green steel will not take place if we are not able to guarantee that it is economically sustainable, and we know that very well in Asturias, where our direct iron ore reduction plant is standing still. To do this we need competitive energy prices and to ensure that the carbon border adjustment mechanism works properly before withdrawing free allocations to industry and securing our exports: That is why, Commissioner, we are calling on you to take urgent, courageous action so that we can compete on a level playing field, and to act now, because we cannot wait another minute.

Madam President, Commissioner, the automotive sector, the jewel in the crown of European and Spanish industry, is on a tightrope. We know what China's bet is on the electric vehicle. We know what the response of the United States has been, but do we know what the response of Europe has been? We have rules that set objectives, yes, but the mechanisms to reach them are not established. There is a lack of overall vision, of putting the long lights, because today we are not only talking here about job losses and closures. Today we are also talking about technology and the loss of technological sovereignty. The two highest added-value elements of the electric car - batteries and chips - are not made in Europe. And, who dominates technology, dominates the world. So, Commissioner, there is an urgent need to act. Electrification does not go at the expected pace and it becomes mission impossible to meet the objectives, not already of 2035, but those of 2025. And fines are no solution. So we ask the Commission to review the regulation to assess whether the necessary conditions for electrification are in place in Europe. Do we have charging points? Is our network ready? Are electric vehicles affordable for citizens? Secondly, we ask that in this review the Commission take into account all available technologies for decarbonisation, including biofuels. Thirdly, as Draghi requested, we requested a specific plan for the automotive sector in the first hundred days. And finally, as this Parliament has approved, we call for a fair transition fund to support car-dependent regions in this transition. A new term is opening and the next five years will be vital in reversing this situation.

Mr President, Commissioner, after a very difficult negotiation we have managed to agree on a balanced and ambitious reform of the pharmaceutical legislation. Today's protagonists are patients, who will have better access and availability of medicines regardless of where they reside. The protagonists are people living with a rare disease today or children, because we encourage innovation in areas without available or effective treatments and, in addition, we introduce a European plan for rare diseases. The protagonists are cancer patients, who will be able to have access to advanced therapies and hopeful treatments with the improvement of the hospital exemption. And for all this we need Europe to be an attractive, competitive and innovation-friendly market. We need to regain our leadership. That is why we have improved the Commission's proposal, which we felt was clearly insufficient, and now we have a more attractive incentive scheme to stimulate the development of new medicines or new antimicrobials. A leading Europe in health cannot afford to discourage innovation and today we are taking a big step in building the European Health Union.

Mr President, Commissioner, after lengthy negotiations, we are finally going to adopt today a Euro 7 standard with which we must all be very satisfied. A sensible proposal with realistic implementation times and that improves air quality. Fine particulate matter – the most harmful to health – is regulated for the first time, as are brake and wheel emissions and battery durability. And this does not entail more costs for citizens or unnecessary extra investments; without ending small cars and without impeding European competitiveness, which is at stake, as we saw last week, because of unfair competition from China. We therefore ask you to support this proposal because the European Union can no longer turn its back on citizens who need to replace their old, polluting cars with clean, affordable ones. The European Union cannot put more sticks on the wheels of a sector that needs to transform very quickly, invest in technology and win the electrification race. Health, the economy, jobs and our strategic autonomy are at stake today.

Mr President, Commissioner, today we are giving the green light to the Artificial Intelligence Act, a law unique in the world. A law that allows or prohibits its uses depending on the risk to people and provides for penalties for non-compliances. A law that includes transparency criteria so that we know if a text or a photograph has been generated or manipulated artificially and to ensure that the data that has been used respects copyright. In short, with this law, we European citizens can be sure that our fundamental rights are always respected. But we should not talk today only about risks. This technology offers great benefits for society and 80% of uses are low risk. Protecting citizens' rights and promoting innovation must be compatible in the European Union because otherwise we will drive innovators out of Europe. We now have a good umbrella law. We have said here that this is the beginning. Flexible agile sectoral regulations must be developed so that our companies can adapt to the speed of this technology. Not over-arranged. It is, in short, about taking advantage of the benefits of artificial intelligence, not being slaves. Because it's about Europe leading the race for artificial intelligence because we're risking our competitiveness.

Madam President, Commissioner, today is an important day: we passed innovative legislation that will improve health care for all European citizens. With this health data space, patients will be able to access their medical history or e-prescription anywhere in the European Union. And, for that, we have introduced guarantees so that they do so with maximum security, privacy and confidence. The citizen will have control of their data and will be able to restrict or decide who can access them and for what. It is an interoperable health data space that will enable better diagnostics and reduce testing costs and duplications. But, in addition, the potential is enormous if this data – securely, anonymised and with the patient’s consent – is made available to medical research. It will be a giant step to accelerate the development of new medicines and clinical trials, and a critical mass of data at European level is vital for rare disease research and for saving human lives. Europe makes a difference today.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, in recent years we have passed a lot of legislation in this Parliament to make the European Union a benchmark in the fight against climate change. But let's not fool ourselves: this transition will have a social and economic impact on the day-to-day life of citizens, on the way our industry operates, and will affect some regions unevenly. For example, regions that are heavily dependent on the automotive sector, which is facing unprecedented transformation, are at risk of losing jobs, economic activity and population. It is our duty to redesign the future of cohesion policy and the Structural Funds to provide financial support to those most affected by these transitions. Something that the Committee of the Regions has long been asking of us and that we are going to vote on today in this Parliament's report: support to retrain workers, to transform businesses, especially SMEs, and to prevent the relocation of our industrial fabric. Thank you very much to all those who have made this report possible; I ask you for a positive vote.

Mr President, Commissioner, without lithium, there are no batteries, and without rare earths, there are no wind turbines or electric cars. China controls 98% of these lands, using them as a Russia-style geopolitical weapon with gas. Without secure supply, there is neither energy transition nor strategic autonomy in Europe. Therefore, this law that we have processed in record time is very welcome. We need more alliances with reliable partners like Chile. It is also important to accelerate permitting and map strategic reserves in Europe. But it's not enough. In Spain we have lithium and rare earths, but, as elsewhere in Europe, they cannot be exploited because of social opposition to these projects. It is not enough to ensure maximum environmental and sustainability guarantees. We also have to involve local communities in these strategic projects and not only extract resources from them, but also keep their territory with added value and quality jobs. Also, as we have called for in this Parliament, we need more efforts in the recovery and recycling of waste from these raw materials.

Mr President, Commissioner, after lengthy negotiations we will be able to vote on a coherent and balanced Euro 7 standard that takes into account the health of citizens and improves air quality. Our proposal reduces NOx emissions by 60% in trucks, 33% in cars and – for the first time – particulate pollutants from brakes and wheels, as well as increasing battery durability. As I say, it is a sensible proposal, with realistic implementation times for the industry and, what is very important, without entailing more costs for consumers. Because I remember that what socialists and greens are asking for here increases the price of precisely the lowest-end vehicles and puts more sticks on the wheels to renew the fleet of vehicles so old that it circulates on the roads in many European countries. Not only that: its proposal also puts at risk the manufacture of smaller vehicles – precisely those made in Europe – and thereby thousands of jobs, for example in Spain. We therefore ask you to support our proposal, which is good for the environment, good for citizens and also good for Europe's competitiveness.

Mr President, Commissioner, we are bringing a very important debate to this House because the shortage of medicines, such as antibiotics or medicines for children, is a recurring and chronic problem. And the situation is getting worse and worse. But, in addition, the European Union is already dangerously dependent on very few manufacturers and regions, especially China and India, and we suffer a constant loss of competitiveness in a sector in which we have been leaders. We are on our way to a vulnerable situation. And we cannot limit ourselves only to mitigating the current shortcomings: We need to prevent it. The Commission has already recognised that this area is key to our strategic autonomy. What we are asking for is action; What we are asking for is a clear policy to support innovation and the production of essential medicines. made in Europe. This is not only key to our resilience to future crises, but will also accelerate access to treatments for our patients, ensure the sustainability of our health systems, drive a biotech sector where Europe was a leader, and create jobs and prosperity for all.

Mr President, the emergence of generative artificial intelligence has shown us only the tip of the iceberg of this technology. The potential and business opportunities that open up are unprecedented. The use cases are so broad that no industry is going to be left out of this revolution. But the threats are also evident. If not properly regulated, we are jeopardising intellectual property, fundamental rights or even democracy and the rule of law. Here in the European Union we have been courageous and anticipated the risks with the Artificial Intelligence Act that we have passed in this Parliament. But it's not enough. The impact is global and international cooperation is essential. Europe needs to lead in developing international standards and codes of conduct that are joined by partners who share our core values and principles. The exponential speed of this technology is demanding it.

Mr President, Commissioner, we have made no progress since the last debate in this House on SMEs, and our economy and competitiveness depend on those 25 million small and medium-sized enterprises, many of them micro-enterprises, which generate innovation, growth and jobs in Europe. Today we are failing them and we need action now. We need and urgently need the revision of the Late Payments Directive, because today we demand that they pay on time, but we do not care if they will collect or if the current legislation is respected. We need to simplify the bureaucratic procedures, because more and more papers and records are required of them, and we have to see how the legislation affects them. By when a new law only if an old one is removed? By when? Finally, we need simpler mechanisms to access European funds, which are now a pipe dream, and to access funding. In short, Commissioner, we need concrete measures now.

Madam President, today we are addressing a critical issue: how to make the European Union more attractive to businesses and investors in a globalised world where the US and China lead us. We cannot limit ourselves to being mere spectators, nor is it about competing in grants and subsidies. Europe has always been a reference in innovation and technology, with leading companies in the automotive, pharmaceutical and renewable industries. We cannot lose this strength. We need to invest more in R&D, skilled labour and digital infrastructure. We also need to address all the remaining challenges, such as excessive bureaucracy and fragmentation of the single market, and conclude the capital markets union at once. It is essential to create a regulatory environment that does not choke companies and that all decisions made are accompanied by a rigorous impact assessment. Because I am concerned that many times the legislation that we pass here is conceived as alien to the reality suffered by SMEs and companies in our countries. We have to turn it around with sensible policies and simple processes because that is also what Europe's competitiveness depends on.

Mr President, Commissioner, this is historic legislation. Europe is a pioneer in having an artificial intelligence law. A technology that can bring many benefits, but also poses clear risks in fundamental rights, security or disinformation. That is why I welcome the approach taken by this law, because I believe it is vital to distinguish between technology and use. We do not condemn artificial intelligence itself, but risky practices. We are very clear about what is unacceptable for Europe – prohibited, intrusive and discriminatory uses – and that exceptions should only be granted under judicial authorisation. We want safe and transparent systems subject to rules, limits and accountability for high-risk uses such as health, environment, transportation, education or justice applications. We are also clear that we need a flexible law, which incentivizes innovation, gives certainty to companies and can be quickly adapted to the spectacular advance of technology, as we have seen in the development of generative AI with GPT Chat, where time is pressing for us to establish transparency and safe use requirements. Today in Europe we are taking an important step. This law will help citizens build trust in technology and position us at the forefront of artificial intelligence.

Madam President, Commissioner, in recent years the European Union has been hit by crisis after crisis and I believe that we have shown flexibility and have been able to stand by those who need it most. Therefore, in the face of this new energy and inflation crisis, the flexibility of the Temporary Framework for State aid measures is very much needed. But we need to go a step further and take social and territorial cohesion into account in this review. What we ask for future standards de minimis is that there are special ceilings for less developed regions, depopulated, rural, transitional and outermost areas, as well as islands. If I refer to my country, I think of the Canary Islands, but also of the Balearic Islands. All these structurally disadvantaged areas need to have specific measures in place to be able to cope with the crisis and attract companies and talent. Therefore, they need specific thresholds. In short, it is a question of avoiding a Europe with first-class citizens and second-class citizens.