Speeches

Thank you, Madam and Mr, for this brief intervention on this important issue, but I do not know whether the interpretation of the word ‘short’ increases the enthusiasm to grant future exceptions to the Rules of Procedure.

We now come to the report by Mr Kohut and Mrs Kokalari. It concerns the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence with regard to the institutions and public administration of the Union. Normally, no interventions under the Rules of Procedure are foreseen here. The President has allowed the two colleagues to intervene briefly. However, I was told that she had granted ‘very short’. Let's see what the interpretation of this exception is.

I would like to point out briefly that we have a speaker on the list of speakers who wears a political announcement on his clothes. This is not in line with our rules. This colleague will not be given the floor later if we do not move along the lines of the rules.

Thank you very much, Commissioner. We were a little late this morning due to technical problems, which did not get much better due to the division of speaking time. I do not want this to be at the expense of colleagues in this important debate, so I will pay attention to speaking time, and I would also be grateful if the speakers from the first round did not regard the designated speaking time as non-binding proposals. In addition, we already have many interventions on the ‘blue card’ procedure. I would like to point out that the services always have a bit of an eye on who is there throughout the debate. If we have to choose afterwards, that will also be a criterion.

Colleagues, I would ask you to put your earphones on and test your language, even if you do not need interpretation. Has anybody only one language and only the language he or she has chosen? I would propose, Minister, that you just restart.

Do you have translation, colleagues? Three languages at the same time? Possibly they are trying to catch up with what happened yesterday! In that case we have to wait. I also have two languages now too. I guess the expression ‘simultaneous interpretation’ is getting a completely new meaning! I do not want to increase the pressure. Possibly we should interrupt for two or three minutes. (The sitting was suspended at 9.03 for technical reasons)

The next item on the agenda is the debate on the Council and Commission statements on the role of farmers as enablers of the green transition and a resilient agricultural sector (2023/2696(RSP)).

As regards the decisions of several committees to enter into interinstitutional negotiations pursuant to Rule 71(1), announced at the opening of the meeting on Monday 8 May 2023, the President has not received requests to vote in Parliament from Members or one or more political groups reaching at least the medium threshold. The committees can therefore start negotiations.

The next item on the agenda is the debate on the Council and Commission statements on the need for European solidarity in saving lives in the Mediterranean, in particular in Italy (2023/2656(RSP)).

The next item on the agenda is the debate on the report by Janusz Lewandowski, on behalf of the Committee on Budgets, on the general guidelines for the preparation of the 2023 budget, Section III – Commission (2022/2184(BUI) (A9-0124/2023)).

All parliamentarians are equal! Excuse me, Mr Verhofstadt, at the time you have been a group leader. You have sufficiently profited, and took the benefit of the first round – . When I try to make the difference not too harsh, then I reduce the speaking times, not to exceed. We have 34 minutes delay. I can show you. I took my minutes. We can go to the records.

Thank you very much, Mr Tertsch. I expected Mr Verhofstadt in particular to scream again: It's not fair. Today I wrote down exactly when I interrupted whom. Contrary to my own conviction, I have given the chairmen of the political groups – all of them – as long as they have spoken. I didn't interrupt anyone. I normally interrupt after five seconds, and Mr Tertsch, we are welcome to go through the minutes. I wrote it down exactly – 31 seconds, but red already, but red. Excuse me, Mr. President, I have written it down very precisely. Now let's look at the conflict with those who talk here all the time. In the first round I also let it run, as some took advantage of it heavily, others did not. In the second round, and we are just in the second round, Mr Tertsch, I met Mrs Juknevičienė ... (Interim calls)

The next item on the agenda is the debate on the Council and Commission statements on the need for a coherent strategy for EU-China relations (2023/2637(RSP)).

In accordance with Rule 132(2) of the Rules of Procedure, three motions for resolutions were tabled. The debate is closed. The vote will take place today. The vote on the three other Commission statements on the rule of law in Greece (2023/2628(RSP)), the rule of law in Spain (2023/2626(RSP)) and the rule of law in Malta (2023/2627(RSP)) will take place in April. Written declarations (Article 171)

Ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, we are really very late in the agenda, so I am now making a decision that colleagues will not like: We will not carry out any procedure. I would like to apologise to the colleagues concerned, but I would also like to point out that you can also ask your group leadership whether the speaking times and the procedures here in the House in the Conference of Presidents really need to be so tight. But in a house that is only talking about it, I no longer consider this debate to be appropriate. That is why, at the end of the debate, I can now give the floor to Commissioner Jourová.

The next item on the agenda is the joint debate on the Commission's statements on: - the 2022 Rule of Law Report - The rule of law situation in the European Union (2022/2898(RSP)), - the rule of law in Greece (2023/2628(RSP)), - the rule of law in Spain (2023/2626(RSP)) and - the rule of law in Malta (2023/2627(RSP)).