Debate contributions by Gheorghe PIPEREA

Mr President, by a decision unprecedented in history, the presidential elections in Romania were annulled on the basis of intelligence briefings, on the basis of assumptions, not proven facts. There has been talk of interference by unnamed state actors. We don't know who it is, what it's about. The power system believes that voters can be manipulated through TikTok to vote for a candidate as if they were being forced into voting booths. This reasoning, folks, infantilizes millions of voters and nullifies the concept of universal suffrage as a fundamental element of democracy. We despise, don't we, what happens in Belarus, Venezuela, Russia or China, where presidents are stuck in power for life? But what's going on at our house? The European Commission congratulates Klaus Werner Iohannis for ensuring Romania's stability, cancelling the elections at the cost of suppressing freedom of expression and destroying the principle of representative democracy, which states that sovereignty belongs to the people. The European Parliament cannot guarantee such a slip...

Madam President, China is a Trojan horse built on dumping, subsidies that disregard free market rules and cheap products. An EU-China agreement could turn from a successful European market into an aggressive manipulation of the EU single market. For many European companies, competing with Chinese prices and volumes of goods means not only financial losses, but even bankruptcy. The EU-China Investment Agreement signed in December 2020 needs to strengthen its investment policy. de-risking. Some states are still permeable for Chinese investments, because they have tolerance from the EU. Others, however, do not. It is a double standard and a breach of the single market. In other news, foreign investment in Europe, including Chinese investment, should not escape the principle of taxing capital gains where they occur. Companies Big Pharma, Tech or Finance they should be banned from exporting surplus value to tax havens.

Madam President, in this very House, Mrs von der Leyen made a statement in July, uttering a cliché: "we will leave no one behind". Primarily, this would mean that the European Union should take care, first and foremost, of the citizens of the European Union who live on the verge of poverty. In 2019, there were 100 million poor Europeans and 102 million in 2023. Of these people who were left behind, 6.5 million are Romanian citizens. It was more about the mirage of climate change, the war, the pharmaceutical, banking and technology businesses, including unnecessary vaccines, with the iconic Pfizergate at the forefront – there is a criminal case with that name. In its new form, the European Commission is moving further and further away from the original project of the European Union. The new College of Commissioners has reserved a special train for the neo-feudal elite of the European Union. Ordinary citizens will be left on the station platform. That is why my vote is against the investiture of this Commission.

Madam President, the US elections have proven that reality is above ideology. So as not to fall further into the pit that the current bureaucratic establishment is so enthusiastically digging for it, the European Union should learn something from this. The European Green Deal is an ideology parallel to reality and insensitive to the specificities of each Member State. It violates the principle of ‘leave no one behind’, impoverishes our world. The Green Deal needs to be rethought, perhaps even abolished. Individual rights and freedoms must be restored in the natural order. The priority of collective rights over individual rights and the censorship of expression and opinion are traits of totalitarianism. The U.S. election showed that power belongs to the people, not to self-mandated elites, the media, or global corporations. People change elites when they are bullied, humiliated and lied to. The people do not want to die in the wars of decadent empires. With today's illegitimate elites, the European Union will collapse like Constantinople.

Madam President, the situation of the Romanian automotive industry can be described quite well by a Romanian saying: ‘the tailor has no clothes, the shoemaker has no shoes’. Romania is the sixth country, the largest in our area, the sixth country in Europe in terms of the number of cars produced each year. This amounts to more than 513 000 units, to be delivered at 2023 level. Unfortunately, Romania is also among the first countries in the European Union with the largest fleet of old cars, older than 16 years. There are no less than 5.23 million such cars older than 16 years. Therefore, Romanian citizens, although their country produces new cars, cannot afford them. These figures, which are antithetical, reflect the effectiveness, in quotation marks, of the European green zero-emission strategy. Owners find it hard to get rid of old cars because they can't afford new cars. This rigid greening machine in Europe must also take into account programmes for car scrapping and real support for citizens to buy new cars. And I wonder how the European Commission intends to comply with the principle of the European Union ‘Not to leave no one behind’?

Mr President, the problem in the Apple case is not only that this company has received illegal State aid from Ireland, which is confirmed by the Court of Justice of the European Union. The real problem is that the double standard of friendly taxation vis-à-vis large companies has so far been tolerated. Thus, we see how some Member States are free to favour tax competition, which, of course, is not fair, but only some. It's not just Ireland in this situation, it's the Netherlands and it's Luxembourg, for example. On the other hand, there are countries like Romania that are not allowed to practice friendly taxation with large companies. The problem is one of principle. In a Union where all members should be equal, according to the Treaties, why are some allowed practices that turn others into the black sheep of Europe? We are equal and that's normal. But it is not normal for some to have favors, while others to be put on the wall. Is the European Union going to reflect on this issue, or will we continue to pretend that we are equal?

Mr President, according to the risk analysis carried out by the European Centre for Disease Control and Prevention on 17 September 2024, the overall risk of monkey pox for the population in the European Union is assessed as low, i.e. the probability and impact are very low. It's also proof that we have a huge empty hall. So the interest in debating this topic is huge. There is not a single additional case reported in Europe, after the only one reported by Sweden on 15 August. In the context of alarmist statements by the World Health Organization, the purpose of which should be clarified without delay, I draw the attention of the European Commission that a reaction vitiated by panic and economic interests could lead both to economic losses for the states of the European Union - for example, Romania is a country affected by millions of vaccine doses, which now need to be destroyed and extremely expensively destroyed - and to the suspension of some fundamental citizens' rights and freedoms through questionable restrictions in terms of efficiency or scientific basis. I recall that the reaction of the European Union, and in particular of the European Medicines Agency, in the field of Covid, has been exaggerated, inadequate. This is a recent audit by the European Court of Auditors, which says so. We don't want to see a scenario where a problem is created just to immediately propose an antidote. I recall that it is now recommended to increase the doses of the vaccine for the Republic of Congo, where there appears to be an outbreak of monkeypox. Finally, I want to say that, as the Covid pandemic has unfortunately shown us, the European Union, on the basis of crises, is arrogating to itself powers that it does not have under the Treaties of the European Union, and we do not want that.

Madam President, Mr Draghi was the head of the European Central Bank, he said at the time that he would save the euro at all costs, and through his programme of quantitative easing it has managed to save the euro by reducing its purchasing power by tens of percent and amplifying Member States' budget deficits to astronomical proportions. Now, Mr Draghi proposes to save the competitiveness of the European Union at all costs. So we start again, in the same way. The price is 800 billion euros per year. How will this price be paid? By issuing Eurobonds, that is, again by hyperindebtedness, again by decreasing purchasing power. Einstein said that insanity is repeating the same mistakes over and over again in the hope that the results will be different. How irresponsible would it be to want to destroy the future of our children and grandchildren? How can you applaud? How can you believe such a program?