Debate contributions by Erik KALIŇÁK

I think the answer lies in where Ms Urszula von der Leyen came from, what position she held before and what scandals are associated with her, corruption, both in terms of her minister of defence within Germany and in terms of that pfizergat, I will call it in brief. So I think that there is as if to see where the wind is blowing from and why, despite the surveys, which clearly, as you say, confirm that the Ukrainians already want peace, they no longer want to fight. Let's look at the numbers, at the people who have already fled Ukraine. Here, some politicians pretend, moralize and talk about how to fight further.

Mr President, President von der Leyen, we are here again and you are proposing to do exactly the same as you have done in the last three years. Sending another tens of billions of euros to a country where one corruption scandal after another comes to light, where the economy is dominated by oligarchs and where our billions of euros are lost without any visible effect on the battlefield. You're doing the same thing, but expecting a different outcome. It's not a strategy, it's a textbook definition of madness. While I have no doubt that there are indeed some crazy people sitting here among us today, the vast majority of you headed by you, Mrs von der Leyen, who support this senseless prolongation of the conflict, do so not because you are not sovereign politicians, but because you are merely obedient executors of the interests of an arms complex whose profits are breaking all records. Unfortunately, at the expense of Ukrainian lives and European resources. You cover your servility here by moralizing solidarity with the victim. But true solidarity is not in prolonging the war, but in ending it. I therefore ask you, Mrs von der Leyen: If you can't contribute to peace, at least please don't bother him.

This Parliament has the magical power to overcome every session and to invent an unnecessarily different debate than the last one. Instead of expressing support and appreciation for the Hungarian government for an international success that can take us one step closer to peace, we are attacking again in the most bizarre way. A completely anonymous article with no evidence or witness that alleged espionage of the European institutions by Hungary took place. Ten years ago, so little was enough to leave this House and need another dose of hatred against Orbán. Apart from the fact that the whole accusation is meaningless, because it describes the standard communication between compatriots, there is no single institution to confirm these suspicions. Neither the Belgian authorities, nor the Belgian Prime Minister at the time, nor the European Commission have encountered anything like this through the mouth of their spokesperson. In addition, the alleged leader of this espionage is today the Commissioner himself, who has passed two parliamentary hearings. No one controlled him with any espionage until he decided to ban NGOs from spending grants on their day-to-day operations, taking away their volunteer paychecks from activists. And that's the real reason why we're fabulous here today for the dirt against vandalism.

Mr. Zdechovský, you were part of the so-called. fact-finding mission, That's why I have to ask you: Why is your message full of lies? And I will choose one specific, which is absolutely serious for me: Why do you claim that Slovakia does not use the Arachne control system, even though you know very well that Slovakia is one of the first countries to make full use of this service? Unlike the government of which you are part and for which you are now campaigning politically at the expense of Slovakia.

Madam President, after the last meeting of European leaders with Presidents Trump and Zelenskyy, I have read a good statement. Europe will spend the $100 billion it does not have to buy weapons from America, which it will not get to arm the soldiers that Ukraine already lacks. Unfortunately, the Commission also applies this completely detached approach to competitiveness and economic growth. The green transition is being pushed through and will do nothing about climate change globally. You have fallen in love with electric mobility so much that you already want to subsidize not only manufacturers, but also consumers. And yet no one is interested in it. Not only are you ignoring all the experts who warn you that Europe's electricity networks will not carry the planned number of charging stations, whose construction is, by the way, delayed everywhere, but you are also systematically destabilising our energy network by switching to renewables, whose performance is extremely unstable. It doesn't matter if you call it Green Deal, Clean Deal or (incomprehensible part). Unless you get rid of the eco-terrorists in Brussels who are forcing us to commit economic suicide, you will not save European competitiveness.

Mr President, if anyone needs our protection today, it is not journalists, but democracy and the will of the people. Over the past decade, the vast majority of journalists have completely surrendered to their fundamental task of informing in an objective and balanced manner and have preferred political activism. From a position of soft power, they began to dictate to people what they could think, who to trust, and who to vote for. With censorship and one-sided criticism, they distort the struggle of political views in favor of their horses, who then obediently fulfill their dream green world full of immigrants and rainbows. Any politician who disagrees with this progressive vision is immediately identified as a Russian agent, and if he nevertheless gains the trust of citizens, he is directly promoted to dictatorship. The most perfect example of what I am talking about was presented last week by journalist Andrew Rettman in the EUobserver newsletter, in which he called two democratically elected prime ministers for their sovereign views traitors and Russian foreigners, who must be destroyed by freezing EU funds, infringements, audits, litigation or even the deployment of secret services to feed journalists like him with dirt against Fico and Orbán. Any sovereign politician should strongly protest against such journalistic slippages. Unfortunately, you will not find many sovereign politicians in Europe or in this hall.

Mr President, thank you very much. I will admit that I did not prepare anything for this speech, because I was very interested in what I will learn here in this hall. I have to say, I was in awe. I will tell you a secret that some of my older colleagues may not be aware of, but it is no longer 2003. Your stories don't work again. You know, yes, as authorities, you can convince voters that what is happening in Ukraine, for example, is an absolute disaster. That it is inexcusable what Russia did, that the first attacked, that it cannot be done. And yes, as authorities, you can also do the exact opposite and claim that the attack launched by Israel is correct, that the genocide it has committed and is committing against the people of Gaza is normal and correct and necessary. But you can't do it all at once. And you're trying right now, many of you, to do it all at once. But we already have the internet. Youth is literally suspended on social networks and follows these statements of yours and laughs at you. You can't do it anymore? You can't do that anymore.

If you think free media is funded by the CIA, congratulations on that. And propaganda, which was, for example, 1956 when it was this radio that was spreading propaganda to Hungarian citizens that, if they tried to protest, they would come to their aid from the West, and it did not happen, and they themselves acknowledged that it was deliberate propaganda. So no, I don't think free media is funded by the CIA.

Mr President, Radio Free Europe has been conceived since its inception as an American tool of anti-communist propaganda. It was an influential operation during the Cold War that was funded directly by the CIA. I therefore find it absolutely absurd that here today, when any communist regime is thousands of kilometres away from us, we are debating whether Europe should not take over the financing of a project that spread American and later globalist propaganda on our territory. Are we really so wrong about foreign policy that we are still financing our own propaganda against us? Yes, Donald Trump has put America ahead of globalism and uses the toughest economic levers instead of covert influential operations. And instead of looking forward to the end of American propaganda domination in Europe and focusing on protecting our industry from Donald Trump's protectionist policies, here we are talking about how to continue to fund American influence operations. God save Europe.

Mr President, three years ago in the EU we decided to cut off Russian gas. However, we achieved a 53% decrease in imports compared to 2021 not through innovation or diversification, but through the ritual sacrifice of our industry. Three times the energy prices drove the chemical giant BASF from Germany to China, shut down the furnaces of the largest steel producer ArcelorMittal in Germany and Spain, stopped the production of fertilizers at the Italian factory Yara and in Slovakia our oldest aluminium plant in Žiar nad Hronom fell victim. Ladies and gentlemen, this is not what energy independence looks like, but economic suicide. And the only reason we are still alive is because we are hypocrites and imports of Russian liquefied gas into the EU have increased by 61% over the same period. I understand the noble reasons why we made this decision in 2022. But the world is not a fairy tale. In fact, the facts and figures decide, and they speak clearly. So clearly, even Ukraine had to start buying liquefied Russian gas from the West after interrupting the transit of Russian gas through the oven from the East. Now let's begin to see reality.

I'll wait for the master. It is terrible that, at a time when the whole world is pressuring for diplomacy and peace negotiations, we are speaking in the European Parliament for two and a half hours about armaments and the need for some sort of military federalisation. For me completely off, but a question to you. We are talking about hundreds of billions of dollars for arms as a way to help Ukraine as well, but it is desperately lacking not money, not weapons, but people. How do you want to solve this problem? Deporting Ukrainians from the territory of the European Union or deploying our troops?

I signed up for a simple reason. I haven't read anything more nonsense than the title in my life, and the debate so far has absolutely confirmed my feeling. If you were to say that the cooperation of the Conservatives with the far right threatens the rights of minorities, migrants or the LGBT community, I would say okay. But Europe's competitiveness? Are you aware of the irony of you saying that? Part of the centrist majority, which has literally devastated the competitiveness of the European Union in the last 10 years? Your absurd and dysfunctional ideas are the real threat to our competitiveness. Green Deal, resistance to nuclear power, disconnection from cheap Russian gas and oil, constant digging and sanctions against China. You have decided that we must not exploit for ecological reasons and import cheap raw materials for ideological reasons. And do you still have the audacity to point out to those who disagree and claim that they are a threat to competitiveness? Don't go crazy! You know, you're terribly overwhelmed by a sense of superiority because you think it's saving the world. But in reality, with your policy, you cannot save even one single European factory.

on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. - (DE) Madam President, colleagues, it is frustrating to see how many of you are Democrats only as long as you have power over information. Until recently, you didn't mind when the rich bought the media because it wasn't our evil conservative-national oligarchs who did it, but your good progressive-globalist philanthropists. Until recently, you didn't mind being supported by successful personalities, actors or influencers in the media. But when Elon Musk does that, you suddenly reject that kind of interference in democracy. And Thierry Breton publicly threatens that if the AfD wins in Germany, they will cancel the election just as they did in Romania. I beg you, and where were you when it became clear that Soros funded activists and journalists in millions in the run-up to the European elections in 2014 in order for progressive Eurofederalists to succeed? Isn't democracy at risk? Either way, I forgot, that was all right, because you're the right ones. Colleagues, you can pretend here for hours that the Digital Services Act is there for the security of citizens. In fact, it is here for you as a tool to silence opponents of opinion and gain control over social networks. This has nothing to do with democracy.

Mr President, isn't this really embarrassing to anyone these last days? For months, we have been squatting one country after another for violating the rule of law. The further away from us, the tougher the resolution. And then comes the most flagrant violation of the rule of law, when the serving president of our ally, the US, grants an amnesty en bloc to his corrupt, prefetched and pedophile son for any crime he may have committed in the last ten years, and the European Parliament, the standard of morality, is silent?! No resolution, condemnation or scandal? What has all of you suddenly lost the desire to be wise in the internal affairs of foreign states? Or are you all just saving up for tomorrow's debate on Kyrgyzstan? That's where you dumb down, huh? But not a word to the corrupt Commissioner Reynders, right? This is exactly the double kilometre that Europe is showing at international level. Why are we laughing at the rest of the world? But all right. Please continue this five-hour debate about how bad TikTok is. Unlike outsourced media, it doesn't censor all politically inconvenient content.

Madam President, today we are debating the fight against energy poverty and the rise in energy prices. Well, it is very difficult to combat this phenomenon when, for political reasons, the European Commission demands that Member States disconnect from cheap gas and oil and instead start taking away the more expensive ones. It is difficult to combat energy poverty when, until recently, nuclear power plants were shut down across Europe for ideological reasons. Even in the case of Slovakia, this was one of the conditions for joining the European Union. And the most difficult thing to combat is energy poverty, where, as a matter of principle, investments are given priority to green alternative sources that are economically unfavourable to date. Let me give you an example for all of them. In Germany, several days of windlessness with inversion, i.e. cloud cover, were recorded this month. Dunkelflaute, The Germans have an expression for everything. And what happened? The price for 1 MWh on the market for the day ahead climbed up to 800 EUR, which is in the order of ten times the normal price. And I am not going to say that almost half of this electricity was produced that day in thermal power plants made of coal and lignite, which in Germany decided to close because of ecology. Ladies and gentlemen, in a few years' time, we will not be fighting expensive energies here, but their existential scarcity.

Madam President, in the United States, a patriot and a sovereign politician have won, not an exorbitant system of globalists. That is why I am delighted with Donald Trump's victory, even though it is undoubtedly a difficult period for Europe from an economic point of view. The problem, however, is not with Donald Trump, but with who sits opposite him at the negotiating table and represents our European interests. We are scourging Draghi's report on the decline in our competitiveness for a month in vain, when the President of the European Commission's response to four times more expensive energy than the US, which has been battling European companies and entrepreneurs in recent years, is: Let's give up Russian gas, let's diversify into the American one, which she says is even cheaper. This is what a politician from a country that reproaches India, for example, says that it began to take large quantities of Russian gas after the outbreak of the conflict in Ukraine. However, he will no longer say that imports of Indian gas – and I am now putting quotation marks – to Germany increased by 1 100% last year. Yes, you hear it right. Germany last year elevenfold imported gas from India, and we are all pretending that it is certainly not Russian gas. In the evening, we will even discuss whether to place Russia in the category of high-risk countries. I ask, how long are we going to deal with Ukraine's wet dreams instead of European interests?

Madam President, massive illegal migration poses an existential threat to Europe. However, many Western countries have downplayed this threat for decades and are now reaping the bloody consequences of their sunshine naivety. Anyone who warned them of the dangers of open-door migration policies was described as a xenophobia, racist or extremist. And today they are shocked that their extremists are gaining a majority in one Member State after another. When will we also understand in this House that illegal migration is not the right thing to do? Our task is not to endlessly deal with its unmanageable consequences, but to stop it once and for all. Redistribution of immigrants, the demolition of Schengen or the migration pact: none of this works because none of it solves the cause of irregular migration. The only workable solution to this problem is strict control of the external borders and only then comes a strict return policy. Only immigrants who have been carefully checked and legally authorised to enter the European Union are required to do so. Everyone else is behind the border, the external border of the European Union. Yes, the solution is really that simple. So please, let's stop pretending that after a decade we are suddenly going to look for some innovative solutions, because we are already really laughing. Of course, this solution also costs a lot of money, but what deserves it more than the safety of our citizens? If we can give tens of billions to a non-member state to protect it, we must also be able to find them to protect our borders, our way of life, our Europe.

Mr President, for understandable reasons, I will talk about the part of the rule of law report that concerns Slovakia, because it contains a shameful number of factual errors. For example, you complain to the Government Office that on 1 July this year it abolished the Corruption Prevention Department as the central body for coordinating corruption prevention and reallocated its tasks to the Prime Minister's Office. Well, it just doesn't fit the date. The Prime Minister's Office does not exist in Slovakia. The Corruption Prevention Department is not a central body. That is the government office, and it did not redistribute the tasks of this department, but elevated them to the level of the state security section, thus giving them greater importance. Furthermore, the Commission criticised the power of the Attorney General to overturn the decision of the lower prosecutors through Section 363. It bothers you that he can do so without any justification and that the investigators have no choice but to start again and gather new evidence, which allegedly must be different from the original evidence. Dear Commission, every decision of the Attorney General in Slovakia must and is often justified on hundreds of pages, and investigators can re-use all the original evidence, provided that it has been obtained lawfully. That is what the rule of law is about. Within a minute, I was able to draw attention to two factual mistakes made by the Commission, but know that I could speak here for dozens of minutes.

Madam President, when I asked Commissioner Johansson in committee what specifically made her feel threatened by the Hungarian national card, I was told that her main problem was that these permits were obtained by Russians and Belarusians, who, in her opinion, today, regardless of the severity of the control, pose a security risk to Schengen. Of course, repeating such a thing about illegal immigrants that are not controlled by anyone would make us extremists and racists spreading hate speech. Even if I accept the Commissioner's concerns, I still do not understand why we are talking today about Hungary and not about Germany, which granted the most such permits to Russian citizens last year. Or about Poland, which keeps these statistics for Belarusian citizens. By the way, Hungary is in eighth place. According to official Eurostat data, there were about 720,000 Russians and 85,000 Belarusians in the European Union last year. But you have decided that the security of Schengen is endangered precisely by the Hungarian ten Russians and four Belarusians who have obtained a national card this year. It's ridiculous! This debate is in fact just another disgusting attack on a sovereign Member State and the embodiment of a Slovak proverb: Anyone who wants to beat a dog will find a stick.