Debate contributions by Nikola MINCHEV

Mr President, dear Mr Commissioner, dear colleagues, sport is built on the rules of fair play. Online piracy breaks that rule even before kick-off. When a live event is stolen in real time, its economic value is destroyed instantly. No replay, no compensation, no second chance. Yet, today, pirates are faster than the law. The digital market moves fast, while enforcement still takes hours or days, if it happens at all. In May 2023, the European Commission published a recommendation on combating online piracy of sports and other live events, but the improvements following this are not enough. In order to ensure that the investment flows back into Europe's sport or other live content ecosystem, and not into criminal networks, we need targeted legislation to establish a more effective notice and action mechanism, and dynamic and swift blocking of illegal streaming of live content. We believe in fair play on the pitch, and we must enforce fair play online as well. If we fail to act decisively, we reward illegal actors and penalise those who play by the rules.

Mr President, Mr Commissioner, dear colleagues, when governments undermine the rule of law, citizens must not lose Europe. Conditionality must hit those who break the rules, not the people who depend on the respect of the rule of law. The report rightly insists on one essential guarantee: this regulation must not become a bargaining chip. The rule of law report should be the objective basis for country‑specific recommendations. If these are ignored, conditionality must follow. This is not a weapon against governments we dislike, but a neutral legal tool to protect the EU budget and our common values. Crucially, if funds to a government are suspended, the EU must still support people on the ground by efficiently channelling money directly to municipalities, schools and any other meaningful civil society project. In Bulgaria and elsewhere, we see thousands of citizens marching against corruption and state capture. They are not asking us to close Europe's door, but to apply our rules fairly. Stop financing those who capture the state while standing with those who demand more democracy and justice.

Dear Madam President, honourable Commissioners, honourable Members, yes, action is needed against the growing problem of addictive behavioural patterns, but they must be well thought out and targeted. The proposed ban on the use of social networks by children aged 13 to 16, except with the permission of parents, is not such. Will we present a copy of the child's birth certificate plus a copy of the parent's identity card? We are aware that if the method of verification is not reliable, then the prohibition is also simple to circumvent. But at the same time, what do we achieve? A 15-year-old child took her life in France four years ago because of the content she was exposed to. Paragraph 28 of the report transfers responsibility to the parents and is removed from the platforms because the principle would be that up to 16 years of age use is prohibited, and for the range 13-16 the responsibility lies with the parents who have authorised earlier access. The role of parents is undoubtedly exceptional, but blanket bans have never produced a positive effect. I welcome the report's focus on harmful, dangerous content, manipulative algorithms, on the effective implementation of the legislative framework that we already have, but not on the production of new, controversial measures.

Madam President, dear Mr Commissioner, dear colleagues, Russia's aggression has dismantled any illusion that our security is guaranteed and our only answer lies in unity. EDIP will allow Member States to buy together, plan together and prepare together, securing the availability of defence equipment across the EU. With this deal, we ensure that European money serves European interests. By setting a fair balance, requiring two thirds of the component value to come from the EU or trusted partners, we preserve space for cooperation while shutting out suppliers that compromise our security. I also welcome the new Ukraine dedicated instrument within EDP, which is the start of its gradual integration into Europe's industrial ecosystem – an important step for strengthening both Ukraine's resilience and the Union's security. Although EDIP itself is not enough, ultimately it equips Europe with the capacity to act together, which reinforces Europe's contribution within NATO while laying the foundations of a genuine European Defence Union in practice. EDIP must be more than a two‑year programme. Europe needs to be able to respond quickly, act together and stand on its own.

Madam President, Madam Commissioner, dear colleagues, across Europe, families risk their lives on dangerous routes, while criminal networks make billions by exploiting them. These groups are global, well-funded and increasingly sophisticated. Strengthening Europe's capacity to confront them is therefore essential. Renew Europe has always said that a credible migration policy must also tackle the business model of smugglers and traffickers. After the Pact on Migration and Asylum, and as we advance work on the returns regulation, this reform adds the operational component that was still missing. The regulation brings four key improvements. First, it creates a permanent European Centre against migrant smuggling inside Europol. Renew strongly supported this. The Centre will bring Europol, Eurojust and Frontex experts together to share intelligence, coordinate investigations, and help identify victims and vulnerable people. Second, it clarifies the role of future operational task forces. These task forces will allow Europol to support Member States directly on the ground, including in the Balkans and along our eastern borders, where countries like Bulgaria face constant pressure. Third, it strengthens the rules for biometric data. Parliament ensured strict safeguards so that any processing remains necessary, proportionate and fully compliant with EU data protection standards. We also call for stronger action against crimes committed through social media networks. Fourth, it provides the resources needed for Europol to deliver on its mandate. The agency will receive 50 additional staff, EUR 50 million and a clear role in helping enforce EU sanctions. Colleagues, this is Europe acting responsibly: protecting our borders, defending our values and responding to what citizens expect from us.

Mr President, dear Mr Commissioner, dear colleagues, democracy is like a dyke holding back a rising tide. If we ignore the first crack and we hesitate to reinforce the walls, the flood will still come. And when it does, it will not just wash away one country's rule of law, but will undermine trust in our entire Union. Hungary's backsliding did not happen overnight. It grew in the silence of our hesitation. Every day we delay, every compromise we make with impunity, we send a message: that the rule of law is negotiable, that corruption can be tolerated, that judicial independence is optional. But the cost of inaction is not just Hungary's – it's ours. Because when we allow one Member State to dismantle democracy, we embolden others, and what starts as a crack becomes an unbridgeable divide. This report is not just about Hungary: it's a test of our resolve. The longer we wait, the harder it is to reverse the damage. We saw it now in Hungary, and unless we act decisively, we will see it elsewhere.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, dear colleagues, every year the Commission's rule of law report uses the same phrase: lack of progress. But the truth is that the reports are much softer than reality is on the ground. Let's be clear, pre-trial detention instead of being a measure of last resort is used as a measure by default. A democratically elected mayor is given an ultimatum to choose between switching party allegiance and a new beginning for his mandate, or be arrested. He chose integrity and he is still in custody. We have an anti-corruption commission, the work programme of which involves only representatives of the opposition, even violating the independence of the National Bank simply to remove from its board an opposition nominee. We have an acting prosecutor general who clings to his office long after his mandate has expired. Even after the Supreme Court confirmed that he does not have the legal authority to serve. We have an electoral process with countless violations, summed up best by the sincere, 'who gives the money now?', said by a voter immediately after leaving the voting room? And don't get me started on media freedom and pluralism. It's time for Europe to face these issues head on. The President of the Commission must deliver on her promise that respecting the rule of law should be bound to the access of EU funds. European parties, too, must hold their own members to the same standards they preach. We cannot afford to repeat the same mistake we made with Orbán. Nothing fuels the anti-European narrative more than Europe closing its eyes in front of corruption and wrongdoing.

Mr President, Commissioner Ribera, dear colleagues, the Commission's decision to fine Google for abusing its dominance on the AdTech market sends a clear message: the EU will not tolerate gatekeepers who distort competition and undermine media freedom in their Union. But let's be honest, a fine alone does not solve the problem. Google can pay it and move on. Google needs to make changes because, if its practices remain, there is no level playing field and no equal terms for all – and that puts media freedom at risk. If we truly care about democracy, we cannot settle for this victory only. We need real change: proper remedies that break monopolies, open the digital space and ensure fair competition. Only then can independent media survive and thrive. Citizens have the right to choose, and they must have access to diverse and reliable information. A healthy democracy cannot function without free and independent journalism that can investigate, inform and hold power to account. Fair markets and free media are the pillars of our democracy, and it's our duty to defend them.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, colleagues, we have reports, we have data, we have policy objectives, we have recommendations. The task is clear: end the fragmentation, unite our market. We cannot call our market single if internal barriers still divide us. People do not have equal access to products across all countries. We still see dual quality and unfair pricing that depend on the borders between Member States. Yet, we have pledged to break down the borders, so let's make it real. Completing the single market is the smartest move to make and the best policy for Europe. No new bureaucracy, just effectively enforce the rules we already have, fix what is not working, and remove the obstacles that raise the prices for our consumers and hold back our businesses. This is the only way for Europe to prosper and compete globally. We have already achieved so much. Let's finish the work and deliver on our promise of a true single market.

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, this is a report whereby we, as the only European Union institution that is directly elected by the European citizens, want to show how we see sport being developed on our home soil and we want to reinforce it together with the Commission. For better or worse, sport in Europe is not organised the same way as in other continents; I think, personally, that is for better. But let me highlight just a couple of important aspects from the report. Yes, the European Sport Model encompasses professional and grassroots sport. The top level earns the most, is the most glamorous, but without the foundation there is no top. That is why redistribution down a pyramid is essential. Yes, sport faces numerous challenges, like problems of governance, match-fixing, dynamic ticket pricing, online piracy, doping, discrimination – we need to tackle them. Member States should ratify the Macolin Convention. The Commission should act against illegal streaming of live content that deprives the ecosystem of deserved income. Yes, there should be a careful balance between national team competitions and club competitions. Players should be allowed to play for their nations. National teams should pay attention to their health. Yes, there are new and evolving trends in ownership and we need to be very careful with them. Yes, domestic competition matches should not be played abroad. I do not think we should invent a definition for 'domestic' or 'international' in order to understand what should be played where. Wherefore the opposition of today is a good day for governance in sport. And yes, European sport does not recognise breakaway competitions. Full stop. Otherwise, we should call it a day.

Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, the single market is one of the EU's greatest strengths, delivering significant benefits to both citizens and businesses. Yet, despite its vast potential, we are failing to truly seize its true advantage. This week, I had a meeting with a group of Bulgarian students here at the European Parliament. When I gave them an example of the price and quality differences for products between Sofia and Brussels, caused by territorial supply constraints, they visibly jumped in surprise. They asked, 'But how come? Isn't this against the rules of the single market? Isn't it competition that should determine prices?' This is precisely the issue that we must address. Citizens' confidence in the single market is essential. Persistent issues such as territorial supply constraints, unfair pricing, and unequal access to goods are more than mere inconveniences. These are market failures that cost us billions of euros every year. Swift and decisive actions are needed to ensure that the single market fulfils its promise of fairness, efficiency and resilience for every corner of Europe.

Madam President, Bulgaria supports the full membership of the Republic of North Macedonia in the European Union and has a long history of support. We were the first to recognize its independence, we have a declaration and a good-neighborly treaty, and we have sent military assistance. We were among the first to ratify North Macedonia's NATO accession protocol. At the same time, we are worried. We are concerned that instead of focusing on the implementation of its commitments under the French proposal, including the protection of the rights of the Bulgarian minority, the current government of the Republic of North Macedonia puts a serious emphasis in its policy of anti-Bulgarian rhetoric and actions, as we also see from the verdict against Lyubcho Georgievski, whom we are pleased to welcome today in the European Parliament. Obviously, the current government in North Macedonia is not looking for progress in European integration, but a convenient excuse to put things on hold. I am glad that with a lot of work, effort and conversation we have come to an understanding here on the content of the report, for which I thank all those involved in these conversations and I hope that this will manifest itself tomorrow in the vote. We must confirm that the report follows the framework of the French proposal and the decision of the European Council, and when this is implemented, we will gladly accept North Macedonia in United Europe.

Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, first of all, it is important to note that the annual Rule of Law Report is a report on one of the foundations of the Union. One of the main reasons it is a place of high standard and quality of life and a place that in times of global instability and irrational policy-making remains a center of principles and reason. It is no coincidence that the report begins with the independence of the judiciary. It is extremely important to understand that there can be no compromise with the independence of the court and to strongly oppose any attempts to place the court under any form of control and political influence, any attempts, and that successful, we see in some European countries. For the court cannot be conceived as an extension of any other power, but on the contrary as its corrective. For those who think that the rule of law is just an abstract mantra, look at the part of the report on the effective functioning of the single market – how it needs an established legal order, an effective fight against corruption, because these are key pillars that are essential for competitiveness and the labour market in the European Union.

Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, pluralism is the lifeblood of a real democracy. Without pluralism, there is no democracy. But in order to preserve it and strengthen it, we need to emphasise the importance of media freedom and media pluralism. They are essential to our democracies. They are enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights. They are key to holding power to account and to helping citizens make informed decisions. On the anti-corruption agenda, regrettably, we have seen in EU Member States how brokers of influence in the judiciary, brokers of employment in the judiciary, brokers of justice pull the strings in the shadows of a nominally functioning judiciary. This is intolerable. We should be very clear: impaired independence equals no independence; selective justice equals no justice. A key issue remains the lack of consistent results in cases of corruption at the highest levels of power. However, the EPPO is now investigating a potential such case in Bulgaria, and I urge both this House and the Commission to closely monitor this case.

Mr President, honourable Members, today's vote on the agreement between Canada and the EU on the transfer and processing of passenger name record (PNR) data is a strong statement that the EU will not compromise on security or fundamental rights. And it demonstrates that the two can go hand in hand. The collection and analysis of PNR data can provide the authorities with important elements, allowing them to detect suspicious travel patterns and identify associates of criminals and terrorists. Of course, we should acknowledge that the processing of passenger data does interfere with passengers' privacy and data rights. However, it should be considered that the limited and strictly regulated intervention by law enforcement provided for in the present agreement is necessary and proportionate in light of the role that the international exchange and processing of PNR data plays. Contrary to the previous version of the agreement, the current renegotiated version does contain the necessary safeguards in order for it to be compatible with the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) explicitly confirmed this prior to the execution of the agreement. Dear colleagues, I am convinced both by the objectives of the agreement and the guarantees contained therein. The conclusion of the agreement is a positive development in the fight against serious crime and terrorism, whilst maintaining the necessary limits and safeguards to ensure respect of the fundamental rights of passengers. Last but not least, I would like to extend my thanks to the shadow rapporteurs, the EDPS and the LIBE Secretariat for their cooperation.

Madam President, Commissioner, honourable Members, Ukraine has chosen the path of democracy, human rights and the rule of law. But what does it get in response? It faces aggression from a regime that recognises only tyranny and violence. Russia must understand that its actions have consequences. Our unwavering support for Ukraine is not just a moral obligation; it's a clear statement that no dictatorship or invader will succeed in overturning the will of a free people. The growing military cooperation between Russia and North Korea presents a new threat to global stability. North Korea has deployed 11 000 troops to support Russia's war effort in Ukraine, but what it will get in return is even more alarming. The dark alliance of autocracies should compel us to act decisively. This crisis underscores the necessity for European strategic autonomy. We must be capable of defending ourselves through our own strength. By building a robust European defence infrastructure, we ensure that our Union can stand firm against any aggression – united, resilient and self-reliant.

Mr President, the European Union is a global leader in setting high standards with the aim of ensuring quality and protecting our consumers. 'Made in the EU' is not just a label; it's an unmatched guarantee of quality and safety. Yet we allow unreasonably cheap, low-quality, sometimes even dangerous, products to flood our markets, undercutting our industries. This must change. We need stronger enforcement of anti-dumping measures to defend the integrity of our single market. The European Commission has made recent strides, improving trade defence instruments by over 40 % to allow faster investigations and duties on unfair imports. But more action and especially enforcement of the existing rules is needed. Take my own country, Bulgaria. As the EU's sixth largest exporter of electric bikes, our manufacturers face competition from cheap, lower quality imports from non-EU countries. These imports threaten to destabilise the growing sector. Robust enforcement, like recent EU actions against Chinese e-bikes, is essential to protect jobs, innovation and fair competition across Europe.

Madam President, organised crime is one of the most serious threats to the internal security of the European Union, but this threat does not remain locked within national borders. It often extends to neighbouring countries and to the wider European Union, undermining security, destabilising institutions and undermining public trust. Unfortunately, there are cases in which it is also rooted in various sectors of the economy. I come from a country, an external border of the European Union, Bulgaria, which also plays the role of a gateway to the European Union, which in turn makes it vulnerable to transnational organized crime, the impact of which is felt throughout the Union - from drug smuggling and human trafficking. The fight against organised crime is therefore not just a national issue, but a pan-European one. It is essential to cut off the financing of organised crime. For 2023 alone, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office has frozen a billion and a half euros. There are approximately 2,200 ongoing investigations, of which more than 10% are related to organised crime. That is why our parliamentary group has tabled a proposal to increase the budget of the European Public Prosecutor's Office by EUR 30 million, so that we can ensure that it functions even better. I hope that the other parliamentary groups and the Commission will agree to increase the budget of the European Public Prosecutor's Office in order to fight organised crime more effectively.