Debate contributions by Jessika VAN LEEUWEN

Madam President, Commissioner, thank you for being here with us tonight on a Monday evening – it shows your engagement. But the recent outbreaks of lumpy skin disease in Europe caused enormous distress among European farmers, especially in France, Italy and Spain, not to mention the discomfort in all the animals affected by the disease. In France alone, over 3 000 animals were lost. But it also pointed towards a weak point in our animal disease control, especially for diseases that are transmitted not only through animal contact but by vectors like wild animals and insects, as is the case for avian influenza, bluetongue and also ASF. It causes direct economic losses to the farmers and affects international trade negatively. What farmers are complaining about, Commissioner, is not the fact that the disease re-emerged, as this is difficult to control, but the fact that EU support is insufficient and too slow. This disease does not threaten human health, but it threatens the livelihood of cattle farmers across Europe. What this crisis shows, above all, is that Europe cannot afford to act only once the damage is done. So, Commissioner, we need a preventive approach with early vaccination strategies and EU co‑financing so farmers are not forced to carry the cost of protecting Europe's entire livestock sector by themselves. And prevention only works when countries act together. Insects do not stop at borders and neither does this virus. Early detection and stronger coordination between Member States and cooperation with neighbouring regions is essential to contain the spread. At the same time, we must ensure that disease outbreaks in one region do not trigger disproportionate trade barriers for the rest of the EU. Farmers need stability and predictability, not sudden export restrictions or internal market disruptions that add to the crisis. They have already too much on their plate. We need a systematic EU assessment of contamination pathways. Long‑term resilience requires sustained investment in monitoring systems, vaccine development and effective treatments, while we also must ensure that our health measures remain compatible with trade rules. When outbreaks occur, farmers need help immediately. That is why the Commission should examine the creation of a European animal health fund – a fast, fair instrument to respond to this type of crisis. Only if we act together can we reform Europe.

Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, this Thursday, farmers associations have announced a massive protest in the streets of Brussels. Thousands of farmers will protest against the new plans for CAP after 2027. And they have all the reasons to be concerned. But today we discussed the outcome of the negotiations on the simplification of the current CAP, and I think it is important to bring a positive message to all the concerned farmers. Your vote matters. Thanks to your vote, we are here as the Farmer Citizens movement, right in the centre of decision-making. We have taken the current CAP and made it better and easier than the way it is right now. And the same thing we will do with the new CAP post-2027 proposal. We will fight to make it better for European farmers, what we achieved now is a step in the right direction. Cutting red tape and lowering administrative costs so farmers can focus on producing food. Fewer controls. Let's work from trust and bring less stress. Exempting farms under 30 hectares from GAEC 7 crop rotation and diversification. A new 75 000 rural-development payment going well beyond the Commission's proposal. But simplification must remain practical and not create new uncertainty. This agreement is not the end point, but the start. The next CAP should be built on trust, realism and simplicity with farmers at the centre and should dedicate sufficient funds to show food security is our strategic priority. So to all the farmers that will protest this week and all the ones supporting them from home, be assured that there are some people here in Parliament that will not rest until we have a better deal for European farmers. I say let's reform Europe.

Madam President, Commissioner, today I stand here before you to speak neither against nor in favour of fur farming. I stand here in response to the petition signed by 1.7 million European citizens, who deserve our attention. It is a fact that most Member States have already banned fur farming in their national laws, leading to a decline in fur production in the EU. However, we also see a decline in fur production worldwide, so demand is decreasing. So, if the demand decreases, the question is if we need to continue the production of fur. I am not the one pointing a finger here or framing an industry with hardworking family farmers as unethical. My point is that if you decide to ban a sector, you should do this the right way, and the right way is with sufficient transition time and proportionate compensation – something that was not done in the Netherlands. Mink farmers in the Netherlands were told in 2013 that they were unwanted. They were promised a transition time and fair compensation. However, in January 2021, three years before the end of the transition period, they had to stop – effective immediately – due to the contamination of minks with COVID-19. 180 farms were without business from one day to the next. The compensation they received was insufficient. This has caused tremendous stress, economic pressure and family tragedy. Last month, a court ruling in the Netherlands stated that they were unfairly treated and not well compensated for. So, when we as a society decide that the sector has to stop, we have to do it the right way to avoid maltreatment of people involved, like the mink farmers in the Netherlands, with appropriate transition time and fair compensation at any cost. And if the decision is made to ban fur farming in the EU, we will also make the fur processing industry disappear. And when that happens, there is no longer the risk that hunting for fur will occur. For fur hunting, soft-catch traps are used, which are one of the friendliest ways to trap a wild animal. Now these traps are forbidden, but we should consider re-approving them, as this is the most humane way of trapping wild animals, like wolves, for tracking or research purposes.

Madam President, Commissioner, cooperation with Latin America is of great strategic importance for the European Union, especially in these times of geopolitical uncertainty. But strong collaboration starts with protecting our own interests. The Green Deal, and as a consequence deindustrialisation in Europe, demonstrates precisely what should not be done: neglect competitiveness and the power to produce. Trade is extremely important to strengthen the link with Latin America, but not at all costs. To reduce tariffs for products that are not produced under comparable conditions, such as agricultural products, is to neglect our own interests. We are already, as the European Union, Latin America's main trading partner with an annual exchange of almost EUR 4 billion without reducing tariffs. I say that we have to bet on a realistic strategy, with fair commercial conditions, equal means of production and a common approach to organized crime and drug trafficking. Only if we take our own interests seriously can we be a credible partner for a prosperous future for both continents. Long live the fucking freedom!

Mr President, dear Commissioner, last week I was milking dairy cows together with a young girl named Jonne. She told me: 'I just have one dream, and that is to take over my parents' farm.' We, the young farmers, are the food producers of tomorrow, and young farmers need to know that they can take over a farm, that they can start a family and raise a new generation of farmers. They need security and protection. Are you aware, Commissioner, that there is a judge ruling in the Netherlands that forces the publication of addresses of all animal farms? Farmers do not feel safe anymore as activists can be on their doorstep any time, without punishment. Tomorrow, we will vote on the simplification of the CAP and about strengthening the position of farmers, and this is a huge step forward. But it is not enough. We need you, Commissioner, to step forward. The new CAP proposal is too low and creates an unequal playing field within the European Union. It was you who said, this morning, 'you cannot build a continent on an empty stomach', Commissioner. But you are allocating the CAP budget in a way that punishes productivity. The Netherlands is in the top five of the highest‑producing EU countries, but ranks 16 when it comes to the amount of CAP money it receives. If you really believe that food security is important, then why are you not stimulating this productivity? Because if Dutch agriculture does not survive, we will all lose, because it will be a big step backwards in terms of access to innovative solutions for all European farmers. And ultimately, consumers pay the price. So I am asking you, Commissioner, to have a careful look again at your proposal and make the changes to create certainty and financial stability, so young farmers like Jonne can have a future.

Dear colleague, I just have one short question for you. You are questioning this 'waste of time' of a debate because apparently we are discussing burgers, but you are the first one mentioning this topic. It is only one amendment of two very important reports. So actually, I believe – and I mean this respectfully – this part was not a very useful contribution to this debate.

Mr President, Commissioner, I called for this debate, as I am shocked by the unjust and outrageous decision of China to impose extra import duties on EU pork. It is a clear retaliation for our anti-dumping claim on electrical vehicles. And I remember clearly that when we decided to go ahead with this claim, I warned the Commission that retaliation on EU pork was a risk, and now we are faced with extra import duties varying between 15 % and 62 %. These tariffs will hit our swine producers and the processing industry very hard. It will affect our export possibilities and reduce the circularity of the sector, as we export cuts that were not, or very rarely, consumed in the EU. And it will lead to unfair competition on the internal market, as the tariffs vary between companies. Commissioner, the European swine industry is the best in the world. It has made great efforts to reduce antibiotics, has the lowest environmental impact and complies with the best animal welfare standards. Our farmers already faced threats as a result of our policies, reducing CAP support and upcoming trade deals, and now they are used as a bargaining chip in a trade conflict about electric vehicles. The Dutch Farmer–Citizen Movement is not willing to let this happen. We therefore insist, Commissioner, that the Commission challenges these duties at the WTO, launches a diplomatic initiative to resolve this dispute quickly and, if necessary, establishes a crisis fund to stabilise incomes and prevent job losses. Above all, the Commission should make it clear that farmers are not left behind in this geopolitical crossfire. It should send a strong message to show that we stand behind our farmers. I say let's reform Europe.

Madam President, last Friday, China announced extra import duties on pork as of this Wednesday, 10 September. These import duties are different for each supplying company and vary between 15.6 and 62.4 %. Many EU countries will be hit heavily, and these duties will also lead to consequences for the internal market. Evidently, these extra tariffs will hurt our swine producers very badly. It is therefore important that we have a debate with the Commission with the following title: 'Commission statement on China's unjustified decision to impose duties on imports of pork products from the EU, and the need to support European farmers and workers'.

Madam President, Commissioner, the current form of the common agricultural policy was started by Sicco Mansholt, a Dutch visionary that reformed agriculture in Europe. And now we are at a crossroad for agriculture in Europe again. On Monday evening, with the vote in the AGRI Committee, we sent a very strong signal to you, Commissioner. A clear signal for an independent, separate agricultural policy and the responsibility of the AGRI Committee for simplification and reduction of bureaucracy, for strengthening agriculture as a strategic sector, for food security, for empowering farmers within the supply chain, for ensuring future for our young farmers – because those were the reasons that farmers took to the streets and we have taken their concerns very seriously. We listened to them, we stood up for them. But this is all now at stake. Losing a separate CAP budget threatens the survival of thousands of European family farms and puts European food sovereignty at risk. So, Commissioner, you are our only hope. Don't let this happen. CAP is the very heart of the European Union. So let's reform Europe together.

Mr President, Commissioner, Minister, a deal can only be reached when the counterpart accepts your term. So we need conversation, not confrontation. And behind the deal there are companies, there are workers, there are families depending on it. Those are our priorities, so we support you very much, Commissioner, in finding a very balanced deal. But we do have a red line and that is an equal playing field for our farmers. That is non-negotiable. This means no chlorine-washed chicken, because that only compensates for poor hygiene – while our farmers need to comply with the strictest hygiene and quality rules – and no meat from animals raised with growth hormones and antibiotic growth promoters. And on countermeasures, let us be very cautious: American tariffs burden Americans, but European countermeasures will hit European jobs.

Madam President, one minute is way too short to mention the names of all these children – 20 000, and likely many more, who were kidnapped from Ukraine. But I will mention three names: Karina, 4 years old, Vladislava, 3 years old, and Margarita, 1 year old, who were all three taken from Kherson by Russia. This is not an incident, but part of a systematic Russian campaign to erase Ukrainian identity and steal Ukraine's future. These children are illegally adopted or sent to filtration camps, where they are subject to Russification, illegal adoption, and even sexual abuse and exploitation. Many children have lost their lives, killed by Russian forces. In the camps, they are forced to forget about their homeland, to eventually replenish the ranks in the thinning Russian armed forces, to fight against their very own homeland. My heart cries for these children and their families. Safe and unconditional return of these children must be part of any peace deal, and all responsible for these crimes need to be held accountable. As a mother of four children, I urge you all to support our resolution and to raise your voices, because these children must come home!

Madam President, while consumers are paying more than ever for their food, our Dutch and European farmers are being squeezed out of business. Let's be clear: the root cause is not a lack of regulation, but too much of it, combined with sky-high energy prices, and quality and compliance standards that exceed what is actually necessary for safe and sustainable food production. Lower energy costs – not only for households but also for businesses – are a basic necessity, not a luxury. And while Brussels, with the Green Deal, keeps pushing for more extensification, what we really need is sustainable intensification – smarter, more efficient, more productive farming. Extensification only drives up prices and drives farmers out of business. Moreover, it threatens European food security and sovereignty. Europe must choose. Do we want imported food from countries with lower standards? Or do we want affordable, high-quality food from our own soil? The time to decide is now. I say: let's refarm Europe!

Mr President, Commissioner, this is a more tailor-made and realistic approach to European agriculture. But it's much more than that. In these geopolitically uncertain times, food security is the most important stable factor in ensuring European unity. After all, food shortages are regularly at the cradle of high tensions. I welcome the farewell to the One size fits all approach and therefore expect customisation for the Nitrates Directive. Because right now, we need to adapt measures to the specific circumstances of our Member States so that our farmers can guarantee that food security. Now is not the time to scale down or extensify, but rather to fully focus on innovation, to allow efficient food production to go hand in hand with the climate objectives and wishes in the field of animal welfare. A specific focus on encouraging young farmers to make it easier for them to take over or continue a business contributes to the continuity of our food production. It is very good that you want to allow alternative plant protection products more quickly, but we also call on you to take a critical look at recently banned substances and to reverse some of these bans. ...

Mr President, women's rights. Our grandmothers and mothers fought for these rights. And today, if we're not careful, we will lose them again. And as a mother of three daughters, I am a strong advocate for gender equality. However, I do believe two things. First of all, without allowing men to actively, actively participate in gender equality, we will never achieve anything. So this feminist hatred against men will not bring us any further, but will polarise society instead. Secondly, we women are part of the problem. As long as we victimise ourselves, we continue to keep the vicious circle of gender inequality intact. It's time to take responsibility for our actions and to refuse to be treated as victims. We are not victims. If we refuse to be, we are not victims. It's time we take our rightful place in the society just because we can and not because a gender quota assigns us a spot.

Mr President, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to speak today. I will continue in Dutch. Mr President, the position of BBB is well known. We cannot support this trade agreement with Mercosur. Our objections concern the uneven playing field. The EU is forcing our farmers to meet much higher standards than what is the norm in Mercosur. As an animal scientist, I have worked in South America for years; I know that it is impossible to maintain agreements on production methods and animal welfare. This agreement goes against the wishes of almost 90% of EU citizens: they have indicated that they want safe and fair food on their plate. For BBB, food security is a strategic priority. We believe that this trade agreement does not take sufficient account of this.

Mr President, dear colleagues, how would you feel if you saw your child slipping away from you, as a mother or a father, and you had to wait six months before you receive any help? I can assure you it's devastating, because in my home country, the Netherlands, the mental healthcare system has waiting periods of six months or longer before a child gets help, even in the urgent cases. More than a third of all problems starts before the age of 14. Mental health issues at a young age often lead to physical and mental issues in adult life – substance abuse, sleeping disorders, depression and suicide. Our focus should therefore be on the prevention in early life, well below the age of 14. This starts at day-care centres, kindergartens, elementary schools, where we need to stimulate our children to not only acquire knowledge, but also to build their mental resilience. And we need more trained professionals in these centres that focus on picking up early signals. As with everything, prevention is better than curing. So let's join together at all political levels to make mental resilience in our youth a top priority.

Madam President, the ability to stand here as a woman and speak freely is both a right and a privilege. Pakhshan Azizi, Wrisha Moradi, Behrouz Ehsani, and Mehdi Hassani ‑ four names, but there are many, many more. Those people are not violent criminals. These are brave, courageous people. It is for them that I stand here today. Some ask today, does it matter? Will what we say and do here change anything? Well, when we raise our voices, we send a message not only to those suffering under tyranny, but also to those who impose it. Silence allows oppression to thrive. Speaking out challenges it. If they were brave enough to speak up, we cannot simply stay silent. Because if we do not speak up, the Iranian authorities can continue to silence their voices. I encourage you all to use your voice, to raise international awareness and to open the debate on what we can do, because this is not about us; this is about standing with the people of Iran. Let us use our power to unite and strongly condemn the executions and suppressions by the Iranian authorities, and increase support for Iranian human rights defenders.

Madam President, and welcome back to you, Commissioner, good to see you back. I'm happy to hear you talk about balancing competitiveness while also improving animal welfare. We have the highest animal welfare standards in the world within the EU. I'm happy to hear that when we're talking about Mercosur, the left side is defending our animal welfare levels in the EU. Interestingly, in this debate, they're questioning that same high level of animal welfare. So that's a very interesting aspect here, because it doesn't seem to be very consistent. Of course, we do need to protect our farmers from unfair competition. We've seen the farmers – the French and German farmers – here today outside. But we also need to maintain competitiveness. We do not need more rules, Commissioner. We actually need to harmonise what we are doing inside the European Union, and we need to help Member States reach that same level of high animal welfare. Because yes, we want to improve animal welfare, but we also need to reward Member States that have already reached that high level of animal welfare. Then, with regards to the Animal Transport Regulation, good intentions of improving animal welfare do not relieve the Commission from the obligation to make sound legislation which is based on science and also maintains the balance with our competitiveness. We are ready to work with you, Commissioner.

Mr President, Commissioner Hansen, I was very pleased to hear in your statement that good mental health of farmers has priority for the new Commission. I was also very pleased that MEPs from all sides here today seem to agree that we are in trouble when we neglect the mental health of farmers. I joined politics to speak up for our farmers. I am not interested in speaking about the differences that we have. I'm actually interested in trying to find what we have in common, and what we do agree on, to make stable policy for the future of European agriculture. We all seem to agree here that the situation is very severe. So that's good news. But without addressing the root cause, we are not solving anything and we are just putting patches. Dear Commissioner Hansen, you are really our only hope here. Coming from a farm yourself, I call on you to reassess the effect of the Green Deal on agriculture, because the agricultural industry seems to be hit disproportionately by the tsunami of ecological measures that have been poured down on us by the previous Commission. I think it would show good leadership to admit that the impact of the Green Deal on the agricultural sector was not well assessed, and turned out to harm farmers instead of helping them. So let's work together, all of you! Let's work together to ensure a stable income, no unfair competition, but also room for a long‑term business plan for our farmers so that all farmers and their children wake up proud every morning and say 'we're proud to be a farmer'.

Mr President, dear colleagues, I wrote a speech because I thought we were going to talk about how to strengthen children's rights in Europe, so I brought ideas and I was optimistic. Let's, you know, let's talk together. What can we do? But instead, I come here and the only thing I hear is one side, the other side fighting with each other: 'Yeah, you're right.' 'You're not right.' If we are not able to overcome our political differences for the sake of our children, for the sake of the children of Europe, then I am very, very, very sad. Look at this room. The future of the children of Europe. Who is here? Well, thank you for being here. But, everybody that's not here, why are you not here? Unbelievable. I mean, it's like there's nothing going on in Europe. We have mental health issues. We just had a debate yesterday on the recruitment of minors for criminal activities. Nobody's here. I am the mother of four children, aged 5 to 15, and I am very, very concerned for their well‑being. So I invite you all: get over these political differences and work towards a solution and to real ideas to strengthen children's rights in Europe. If you want to have any suggestions, my speech is here.

Mr President, I'm here today to stand in solidarity with the courageous women of Iran in their efforts to break free from the chains of the Iranian regime. Women journalists and activists are imprisoned, tortured, sexually abused and even executed simply because they are fighting for their rights. Iran is one of the few countries regularly executing women. When I was born, my father's greatest wish for me was that I would never be dependent on a man. His wish was granted. Today, I stand here before you as an independent woman and a mother of four children, three of whom are girls. I wish the same independence and freedom for them. Let us not forget the privilege we enjoy in this room: the ability to speak freely, to protest and to engage in activism without risking our lives. But we cannot look away. We must stand with the brave women of Iran who are fighting for their freedom. This is for my courageous Iranian friend watching me right now, who stood up for her freedom so her daughter can grow up in freedom. Women. Life. Freedom.

Mr President, do you know the story of Hansje Brinker who saved the Netherlands from a flood by sticking his thumb in a dike? Of course, that did not really happen, but it does mark the long battle of the Netherlands against the water. As regards the impact of extreme weather on agriculture, two issues are crucial: calendar agriculture and water management. For the nitrates directive, we have made agreements on so-called calendar agriculture, but it is madness that Brussels decides when a farmer can sow, harvest and spread manure without taking into account the weather conditions. Thanks to the extremely wet spring, several crops were planted or sown much later than usual, but our farmers are obliged to harvest before 1 October. Good water management includes: retaining water in dry times and draining water as quickly as possible in wet times. In recent years, many dams and flood defences have been removed in Europe to let nature take its course. Fortunately, our water boards in the Netherlands are a lot more cautious. After all, we know from experience that if you remove flood defences, you increase the risk of wet feet. Despite the record precipitation in 2023, we managed to lead that in good channels in the Netherlands. According to experts, weather conditions will only become more unpredictable in the coming years. So let's make the right choices now. In my opinion, when dealing with water responsibly, safety takes precedence over wishful thinking. The same goes for calendar farming, where our farmers deserve the confidence to be able to adapt their production calendar to the unpredictable weather conditions.

I didn't say all of Europe rejected the Green Deal. I said that this report uses feed to enforce unrealistic Green Deal policy upon us. That's what I said.