Debate contributions by Raquel GARCÍA HERMIDA-VAN DER WALLE

Madam President, I've been told that Viktor Orbán really cannot get enough of a Hungarian comedian called Somogyi András, because he does a wonderful impersonation of how Brussels is an evil conspiracy and how Ursula von der Leyen doesn't want anything to do with democracy and only wants to punish Hungary. And I understand why people in Hungary love him, because that's exactly what we have heard today – that Brussels is the evil conspiracy and that we are only trying to kill Hungarian democracy. But I think that you have to be very serious and very real. And Brussels is not the reason why Hungary is in economic decay. Brussels is not the reason why Hungary has an education system which is crumbling. Brussels is not the reason why people in Hungary have to bring their own toilet paper when they go to hospital. And Brussels is not the reason why 600 000 people have left the country. So, to the Commission, I will say: the next time that you have the opportunity to take swift action, please do so and apply conditionality properly, because the Hungarian people deserve our protection. Thank you so much in advance and please – please –do not leave it at promises. Take action.

Thank you, colleague, for your reading of the situation in Slovenia – which I do not share, because this initiative is not about Slovenian politics. This initiative is about providing women everywhere in Europe, regardless of whether they have the resources or not, with access to safe and legal abortion. But let me ask you something. Have you talked to organisations who help these women coming from Poland, for example, to the Netherlands? Because I have talked to them and they have told me their stories. Have you taken the time to engage with those doctors helping these women? Because I have talked to them and they have told me the stories. Have you?

Mr President, Commissioner, Mehdi Kessaci, lawyer Derk Wiersum, crime journalist Peter R. de Vries, Hakim Changachi, Mohamed Bouchikhi: They were all killed by drug criminals. A threat to our European security, freedom of expression and democracy. In the fight against international drug crime, we are not going to win with endless discussions about ‘sovereignty’ or ‘subsidiarity’, as we do in this house. Criminals don't have a message and laugh. Only by truly European thinking and doing can we master these criminals. That is why I call on the Commissioner to speed up action, with stricter European rules on criminal law, with more powers for Europol and Eurojust, without taboos, and with better cooperation with private parties in ports, such as shipping companies and port companies, and finally with prevention through education. We can win this.

Colleague, thank you for your answer. I was not implying anything about the personal circumstances of anyone who has had difficulty in becoming a mother – I do regret that and I hope that we can, as institutions, support those people as well, whether they are women or men, by the way. But my question was not that and you're not answering my question. So I would really appreciate if you answered the question that I posed to you. Thank you.

Thank you for taking my blue card. The regional government in Lazio, in Italy, is preparing to approve a law that would guarantee protection of the foetus from conception. I was wondering if you, Ms Magoni, agree with this proposal – that is my first question. My second question is, if you do, and you said that every woman has should have the right to be a mother, then would you also support criminalising women who might engage in dangerous behaviour with consequences for the foetus? Because, according to your view, they might be found guilty of failing to protect it from conception? Thank you.

Thank you, colleague, especially for your first reaction to the colleague from ESN and for presenting such a strong pro-European voice. I listened very attentively to your speech. I am very happy that you highlight the need to work together also with our regions. And at the same time, I have to say that I'm a bit disappointed because when I look around in this room and when I look at the speakers' list from the EPP today, I was hoping to see a very strong voice from the Regional Committee, where we have been working very closely together with the colleagues from the EPP, but I don't see them, I don't know if they are coming, but I would like to hear their voice, because I would like to hear their voice, and from you, if you're still willing to commit to one of our main common demands, which is that regional chapters become a mandatory element of cohesion policy and the NRPPs.

Mr President, I really listened very carefully to the Commission President earlier this afternoon. I heard her saying that she will always listen, and I listened to her saying that she will always be open to find common solutions. I also heard her speaking of a sense of frustration among citizens, and also that in Europe we want to be 'masters of our own destiny'. And that's exactly what our regions want to be. They want to be and remain the masters of their own destiny when it comes to how we invest European funds in our future. So, I would like to ask the Commission President to listen very carefully to the opinion of this Parliament on her plans for the European budget, to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions, and to the opinion of many, many citizens who are expressing their concerns with us. Please keep the regions at the core of cohesion policy.

It's not campaign-related at all, Mr. Berendsen, but go ahead. You are talking about future-proof economy and competitiveness. We agree, I think, that this is very important. Do you also think that our regions should be at the heart of these plans? And do you agree with me that the European Commission's current proposal for the multi-annual budget reform is, however, pushing the regions aside and that we need to fix it?

Mr President, I was going to say something else, but, Mr López Aguilar, I am surprised and very sorry that the implicit accusation of your contribution is that we are incorrectly using the tribute to Mrs Caruana Galizia to accuse the Government of Malta of something for which it is not guilty. No, no, we are here denouncing that not enough has been done to bring justice to Daphne, her children and the people of Malta. We are here to defend the rule of law across the European Union, regardless of political or party considerations. So let's be serious and let's make things very clear. Nothing is being misused here. We remember Mrs Caruana Galizia and her work against corruption in Malta, which is the work against corruption throughout the European Union.

Mr President, thank you for allowing me the right to answer. You say that the Corruption Perceptions Index is not facts, but it is from Transparency International, the most respected index to measure corruption in its perception among citizens, which is important to us as representatives of the people. How can you say that that index does not reflect facts? What index would you like to choose instead of that one?

Thank you for taking my blue card. First of all, I would like to repeat what some colleagues have said: this Parliament is not acting against the Maltese people. The Maltese people are a European people and deserve our protection, just like in any other Member State, and that's what we're doing here. And now my question: you say there is no backsliding in Malta. How do you explain that? In the Corruption Perceptions Index, Malta has dropped five places since 2023 – a quite steep decline.

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, Mr Lenaers just said it very well: Our agents are being harassed and spit on. But how are they being harassed? Attacked? Very often this happens with explosives that have the power of a hand grenade. Explosives that are legally produced in the EU and then sold. A Cobra 6 can be found online for a pinch. It has nothing to do with fireworks. Criminals like to make smart use of the possibilities of our internal market. The recent evaluation of the current fireworks rules shows that it is time for European action. This confirms what mayors across Europe have been warning about for a long time. Commissioner, please take this seriously. Make sure our agents can do their job safely. Give the people back our streets. Take this reaching hand and we'll get to work together.

Thank you, colleague Düpont, for taking this blue card. I am sure that you are also very familiar with the latest terrorist threat report – also from Europol from last year. We both share the concern that radicalisation on the extreme left and the extreme right poses a security risk for our Union. So, I wanted to ask you if you agree with me that any sort of cooperation with any parties on any side of the extreme spectrum should not be taken as a serious political possibility or option at this moment – on a national level, but also on a European level?

“Woman dies after stabbing incident in Groningen. Man arrested.’ ‘Woman shot and died in Sneek. The perpetrator: ‘Women stabbed and died in Lent. Man arrested.’ ‘Woman shot dead at home in Purmerend. Man arrested.’ ‘Deceased woman found in house in Heerlen. Man arrested.’ Five fatalities in one month, in my country, where the perpetrators were often in the picture. Femicide is a preventable epidemic, but femicide is ‘only’ the tragic tip of the iceberg. It is the extreme form of a worldview in which women are reduced to ownership, to ‘carriers of children’ or – in the words of Dutch university students – to ‘sperm buckets’. It is a worldview in which online hatred against women and vulnerable minorities is not only accepted, but even promoted. A worldview which, unfortunately, is becoming louder and louder in this House. I choose to fight against that worldview, for our rights and for our lives.

Thank you, colleague – I listened very attentively to what you said; you said equal rights have been achieved in Europe, and that's a good thing. But that's a lie. It's a lie that equal rights have been achieved in Europe. There are more than 20 million European women who are forbidden by law to decide on their choices and their own bodies, because abortion is forbidden for them. Why do you lie to the European public and say that equal rights have been achieved? Men do have those rights to decide what to do with their own bodies. Thank you.

My question is as follows. I think that you gave a very, very good description of the horrible situation in which the women of Afghanistan are at this moment. So my question to you, given your very good perception of how grave the situation is, is if you agree with me – and with the European Court of Justice – that the women of Afghanistan have the right to protection as refugees in the European Union on the basis of their gender. Thank you.

Mr President, dear Minister, Commissioner Lahbib, dear Hadja, dear colleagues, last month, an earthquake took the lives of at least 2 200 people in Afghanistan, swallowing villages whole and leaving entire communities devastated. Now imagine being a woman, a girl, in this situation, under the Taliban regime. Food and water are being handed out in the valley below your village, but you are not allowed to travel there – without a man, anyway – so you starve. Doctors are providing aid, but they are not willing to help you because they fear the consequences of touching you. While winter is setting in, you have no place to go, because as a woman alone, you are not welcome anywhere. The best you can do is actually get married again, quickly, but who will take you? Natural disasters tend to affect the most vulnerable the most. But the Taliban are taking this to a whole new level. What we see in Afghanistan is not inequality or simple discrimination. It has a name, and that name is gender apartheid: a system built to erase women from public life and, eventually, a system to erase women as human beings. The world needs to acknowledge this reality and recognise gender apartheid in international law. Make it a crime, not just a tragedy we watch in the news. And hold those guilty accountable. Let us be the voice of those who are now silenced – for Afghan women, for all women.

Madam President, we have heard a lot of good things tonight, and the rest, because it will be about the people, I will say it in Dutch for also the people at home. Because I want to talk about the people, the people that this is about. These are the Slovak people. I was there, in Slovakia, this summer. I spoke there with people who are fed up with Prime Minister Fico's corrupt mismanagement. Just like other Europeans. They are also fed up with their taxpayers' money going to such a corrupt gang. That is why we must stand beside the Slovak people. That's why we have to support the people there. People want hospitals. They want to weigh. They want schools. The people want to put an end to the corruption of this government. There is hope, because in Slovakia I heard that people want something different. A government that tackles corruption and does it differently. A government that respects the rights of LGBTIQ+ people. We saw that tonight. It's possible. There's hope.

Mr President, Commissioner, Minister, I actually came here to have a serious debate on root causes of criminality and violence against women, but I'm not going to do that because I'm not going to legitimise this intention of this debate after what we have heard today from the extreme right to demonise entire groups of people and put them aside and put groups of people against one another. Because if the extreme right was interested in fixing the problems which might come with migration, they would be working constructively to implement a good migration pact and everything which comes with it. If the extreme right was interested in the rights of women, my own daughters, they would not be voting as they do in the Netherlands against more money to combat femicide. And if the extreme right was interested in building a healthy society where we can live with one another, they would not have put this debate forward. I refuse.

I will speak in English. I was wondering, given your your very fierce defence of private property, which I share with you – and I wish that that we all shared those thoughts – if you're willing to defend so fiercely the good use of European funds, because that is a huge problem in Italy. The amount of fraud that there is in Italy at this moment is gigantic, and I don't see your government doing much about that. So I would like to ask you to put as much energy into defending the Europeans' property, our funds, in your country.

Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, the cohesion policy is a foundational policy for our Union. We invest in our weakest link to create a stronger chain. All of our regions and all of our citizens should benefit. As times change and new challenges arise, we want and need cohesion policy to adapt and modernise. We can simplify access to funds without lowering the standards. We can strengthen our European defence while investing in smaller companies and poorer regions. We can address one of the biggest concerns of the European citizens present here today, namely the housing crisis, and meet our green ambitions. Cohesion policy is valuable, literally. It is the best ambassador of our values and the desire for an ever closer Union. Therefore, we have to be fierce and ruthless in defending its foundation. Centralisation, as proposed by the European Commission, undermines these fundaments. And this Parliament, also today, has been very clear: regions should remain at the core of this policy and we need to ensure that not one single euro from European funds ends up in the hands of those who want to destroy the rule of law and our shared European values. No money to autocrats and their cronies ever. Cohesion policy is worth improving and worth investing. It sends a message of an idea dear to all of us: a Europe that protects.

Madam President, I would like to have a minute of your attention for the catastrophic situation unfolding as we speak, as we gather here, in Afghanistan as a result of the recent earthquakes. I am informed that EU help is already on the ground and that is something that we should all be proud of. But let me also remind you that in the four years since the fall of Kabul, we have learned one thing, and that is that the Taliban do not care about the lives of women. They do not value them. That is what we are seeing right now, with help not being able and not being allowed to reach the most vulnerable in the country: women and girls. I think that we, as this Parliament, have to stand firm with the Afghani people and with Afghani women. I think that we have to make very clear to the European Commission that they also have to make clear that Europe stands with the people of Afghanistan – their most vulnerable, their women and their girls – and that help should be deployed immediately and without any restrictions, in that any of the restrictions that would get in the way of life‑saving help should be lifted immediately.

Thank you, Madam President, for giving me the opportunity to ask the colleague the same question. I asked you to put the thing on, but I will repeat. I was very encouraged by your intervention, because I see that you do care a lot for our outermost regions and the role of the European Union in protecting our outermost regions, including the French outermost regions. But I also see that climate change is one of the biggest threats to the well-being of outermost regions – also the French outermost regions. So I was very curious to understand, given your political grouping and what you are doing to fight our fight against climate change. Why do you want to protect them from a cohesion policy perspective, but you don't want the European Union to protect your outermost regions from a climate change perspective?

I will be speaking in English. Thank you, Madam President, and thank you, colleague, for your intervention. I appreciate your concern with cohesion policy and I really appreciate you mentioning the outermost regions, because the outermost regions are one of the most affected regions by climate change. And as the group of the Patriots, it's very surprising to see that you're so interested in the well-being of the outermost regions, also in France, but not the well-being of outermost regions when it comes to protecting them from climate change, which the European Union is trying to do. So could you please explain how you see the difference there working?