Debate contributions by Lukas SIEPER

Mr President, before I do my speech, in the direction of a point of order: if I understood the colleague directly, she said that the European Parliament ordered for protesters to be shot. If that is the case, then I would really like the Bureau to investigate that, because this is a level of lie and deception that is unacceptable in light of the honour of this House.

You said something very refreshing. You said that it hurts that we are here and have to discuss a problem with the democratic system in your home country. And why is this refreshing? Because in many other cases when we discuss problems like this, we see colleagues who are very angry and very disappointed about the fact that we have this kind of debate. So maybe, for me, could you elaborate? Why do you think it is important that here in this European Parliament we also discuss such situations that in principle fall under the sovereignty and the competence of the Member States?

You talked, dear colleague, about the amendments, and talking about these amendments, why do you think there is so much importance put on those where it goes about freezing the financial assets in this?

Madam President, dear people of Europe, earlier in this debate I was very direct in my criticism of the Commission, and I stand by that criticism because this Parliament exists to scrutinise. But scrutiny and hostility are not the same thing. When it comes to our approach to India I must also say clearly that the Commission has done important and good groundwork. You have chosen realism over illusion, strategy over symbolism. You have treated India not as a junior partner, but as what it is: a decisive global actor with its own interests. On trade, on supply chains, on the Global Gateway, on connectivity, this is not improvisation, this is preparation, and Ms Kallas, I salute you for that. Do we still need stronger parliamentary involvement and clearer communication on values? Absolutely. But politics is not about pretending we agree on everything. It's about building something workable where agreement is possible. That is why I look forward to the work ahead in the committee, because Europe is strongest when the Commission and Parliament argue hard and then work even harder together.

Thank you, Madame, for accepting the blue card. You have quite rightly spoken about the relevance of new trade agreements in a complicated geopolitical world. And there, of course, the trade agreement with India is very important, but this, as we have just heard, also worries many people. And at Mercosur, it's also the case that many people have concerns. I, as someone who voted in favour of the referral to the court today, but who will probably also vote in favour of Mercosur – do you not think that if you make such processes very determined, that you prejudge the concerns of the people and that you take the concerns away from the people so that they can ultimately live better with the result of such globalising trade agreements?

Thank you, colleague, for accepting my blue card. My question goes more into a certain aspect that you mentioned and less to the file at hand, I have to confess. You talked about the fact that we are constantly attacked in the digital realm, that we are hacked, especially for you, coming from a country that is under direct threat of Russian imperialism and has been always, I think that matters. So, should we also develop offensive capabilities in this area or merely defensive? What would be your opinion?

Thank you, Madame, for accepting the blue card. And simply because I didn’t know it until just now – from the point of view of my student self, who travelled through Europe, I also thank you for the roaming legislation. My question is: You said that we need to think about how we finance this – the grid conversion. This is a correct and important question, which, I say, is repeatedly asked by broad sections of the population when it comes to such larger projects. What would be your thoughts on how exactly we finance this or who exactly finances this?

Madam President, dear people of Europe! I recently had one of those moments that shows how fragmented Europe is in everyday life. My internet in Brussels was absolutely stable, absolutely fine and exactly the level I knew from my fiber optic connection from Cologne. Then Proximus called me and said: Mr. Sieper, we would like to switch to fiber optic with you. I was honestly surprised, because I thought I already had fiberglass. But no, in Brussels I was still on copper and still had the same speed as years before in Cologne on fiberglass. This cannot be the case in a genuine single market. This is where the Digital Networks Act That is why, among other things, this legislation is so important. Perhaps a word to Mr Mazurek: People are not afraid of modern EU legislation. You are afraid because of the disinformation that you and other populist and extremist forces are deliberately sowing in order to make political capital out of it. Yes, Europe sometimes lags behind, but laws like the Digital Networks Act That's exactly what we're changing that with.

Madam President, Dear people of Europe, I would like to have two children someday. A boy named Heinz and a girl named Tilda. And one day I'll tell you about that moment. From the moment a U.S. president who dismantles democracy and puts children in cages kidnapped a Venezuelan president who stole elections and turned his people over to starvation. I will tell you that this was the turning point. The moment Europe stood up and said: We defend the rules-based order. Not with deals, not with double standards, but with clear principles. When heads of state commit crimes, there is a competent institution – the International Criminal Court. And that was the moment when the United Nations ensured a peaceful transition to democracy. The moment when we did not hide our own interests behind the claim to give freedom to a people. When Europe stood up for a world where rules count more than violence. Help me build this world. by Tilda. for Heinz.

Mr President, dear people of Europe! Many of our colleagues have mentioned important measures, such as sanctions, such as putting the Revolutionary Guards on the terrorist list, and I can only agree with that. But the most important thing that has often been said is the support of civil society, the support of the opposition. But now, at this point, we have to ask ourselves: Who are we actually supporting? Who is the right group? Who are the possible successors of the mullahs? There are some of us here who make the absolutely great mistake of supporting the monarchists now. Although not everyone is responsible for his father's sins, it cannot bring about the change of wanting to place on the throne the son of a monarch who, as a Persian nationalist, has oppressed Iran's minorities. Others here support the so-called People's Mujahideen, which are well-connected here in the European Parliament as a lobby group, a sect that carried out massive terrorist attacks against civilians in the 1990s and declared freedom of thought an enemy. If we support someone, it is only those who choose the Iranian people themselves as their successors and their first free rulers.

Madam President, The dismantling of air passenger rights is unspeakable and a mistake. But I would like to go into something else, as Mr Haider said in his speech. He said: ‘the unelected and totally incapable Ursula von der Leyen’. And Madam Vice-President, while I am doing this just as well in a Point of Order I can only say that I find this behaviour and this rhetoric, which is already going on throughout the day and which is becoming more and more common in this Parliament, unspeakable. It is a violation of respect for the Treaties, as required by Rule 10(1) of the Rules of Procedure, to suggest that the President of the Commission would not have democratic legitimacy. And it is a violation of the prohibition on using offensive language, which is in Article 10, point 4, when it is said that this lady is completely incapable. Madam Vice-President, we cannot continue to watch the tone, the manner and the manner in which the dogs are being treated in this Parliament. Please do something!