Speeches

Mr President, humanity is facing global challenges of unprecedented magnitude, with climate energy, with the pandemic, with the war in Europe. In this context, the diplomatic offensive of several European leaders in Beijing is indispensable to avoid a further escalation in the polarization and tension that affect the world. In the discussion of our relations with China it is not in our interest to enter into a logic of blocs. We need to define a position towards China based on open strategic autonomy that ensures secure trade and technology exchanges and a strong defence of international cooperation and multilateralism. And for this we need a coherent, effective, global and more united strategy towards China than ever before. Between China and the European Union, we can only build bridges and strengthen mutual trust if China behaves with its proper responsibility as a member of the United Nations Security Council. Our relationship with China does not aspire to be one of confrontation. We want cooperation based on reciprocity, transparency and respect for international law. Economically, it means balancing the playing field and ensuring full reciprocity between partners. It means opening the East so as not to close the West. On the Ukrainian front, China and the European Union are obliged to seek ways out of a war that is not only causing incalculable human tragedy, but also constitutes a direct threat to our interests and to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. President Xi, a traditional defender of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states and opposed to resorting to a nuclear attack, must act in coherence with his words and put pressure on those who violate these principles and threaten with these weapons: Putin's Russia. As a permanent member of the Security Council, President Xi must meet with Zelenskyy to contribute to a peace based on the withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukrainian territory. We must not forget that China considers Putin as an essential partner in the search for a new international order. It must compel us to strengthen dialogue in order to reduce risks and cooperate as far as possible, bearing in mind the red lines of Europe that mark our principles. The delivery of arms to Russia and a change of status quo by force in Taiwan would be unacceptable to us. The absence of immediate results following the visits of several European leaders should not interrupt Mr Borrell's action in China. Our possibilities for cooperation are immense: strengthening multilateralism, accelerating the fight against climate change, achieving the Millennium Development Goals. We must also speak frankly. China and the European Union must consolidate the dialogue on human rights, because human rights are universal and must be respected everywhere, including in Xinjiang or Hong Kong. Our message to China must be resounding: maintaining sanctions against members of this House will make a relationship of trust impossible. The time has come for China to lift sanctions against members of the European Parliament. Ladies and gentlemen, our strategy towards China needs determination, realism and more European Union than ever. They will allow me to end this speech with a word of advice to Mr Weber: In your new role as leader of the opposition, you don’t mind criticising all the European leaders you need – one day Macron, another day Scholz. With whom he has no qualms and who he does not criticize is never the leaders of the extreme right. Be careful, see if you are going to get clueless and one of these days you will end up criticizing Mrs. von der Leyen.

Madam President, as has been rightly proposed by the Socialists and Democrats Group, we do not share the title of the debate suggested by the European People's Party, and, in negotiation with the Greens/EFA Group, we would like to make the following proposal for a debate: Statement by the Council and the Commission on the need for European solidarity to save lives in the Mediterranean, in particular in Italy. And I am sure that, since, as Mr Weber has already said, your main objective - yours and that of your group - is to save lives, you will agree with the title of the debate that we have raised.

Mr President, eight years after the humanitarian crisis of 2015, the European Union has still not found a solution to the most divisive common challenge of our time. The tragedy of the shipwreck in Calabria due to the inhuman omission of the Meloni government and the illegal deportations, thefts and mistreatment of migrants by the Greek authorities are the latest episodes of a shameful failure of maritime rescue in the European Union. The Governments of Italy and Greece, as well as the Commission, are obliged not only to investigate and explain the facts, but also to take measures to put an end to this situation and to these abuses. In the ten years between the tragedies of Lampedusa and Calabria, more than twenty-six thousand people have left their lives in the Mediterranean. Years of frustrated negotiations, paralysis and blockades. Now, instead of moving forward with the conclusion of a new pact on migration and asylum, the right prefers to debate whether to build walls at Europe's external borders and who should finance them. If there is anything worse than the material walls, it is the mental walls on the right. The walls represent a regression of the idea of Europe, of that reactionary and exclusive Europe, of the most miserable vision of the human being and oppressor of knowledge and selfishness. We really need to restore Europe's dignity. The idea of walls is the false and magical solution of those ultra-nationalists interested in presenting foreigners as a threat that divides us. The 1 million asylum applications in 2022 also demonstrate that there will be no wall to deter those fleeing war, hunger or natural disasters. Closing legal avenues to protection will also not end the human survival instinct. It will only increase migration and strengthen criminal gangs, enriched by the exploitation of the most desperate. The arrival of refugees and migrants is a phenomenon whose most effective and humanitarian management is not through false and ineffective measures, but through a comprehensive approach, based on solidarity and shared responsibility, as proposed by the new Pact on Migration and Asylum; a new pact guaranteeing international protection for asylum seekers, promoting the integration of refugees and guaranteeing legal avenues for immigration, including education, employment and humanitarian visas. The conclusion of the Pact is a test for the Union not only with regard to a particular policy, but for our very founding principles.

Madam President, the truth is that for all of us it is an honor to have today the presence of two women who are referents in their respective fields. We need women who inspire new generations of girls and adolescents to see their potential reflected in the achievements of women like Shirin Ebadi, the first woman of Islamic religion to win the Nobel Peace Prize. Mrs. Ebadi was the first Iranian woman to become president of a court in 1975 and, despite the many problems and obstacles she faced, she has never given up and has continued to fight. She managed to practice as a lawyer and focused on defending the weakest, political prisoners and, especially, women and children. Women like Samantha Cristoforetti, the third woman European astronaut to reach space and the second woman in the world with more days in space. There have been very few female astronauts, but, thanks to the example of Mrs. Cristoforetti, many girls will realize that it is possible to make their way into a world of men and break through the glass ceiling. But today I'm going to be allowed to end with a tribute to the millions of anonymous women who have made history. Mothers who after long hours of work return home and start doing homework with their children and taking care of household chores. Rural women who wake up every morning to attend to livestock, work hours and hours and are never recognized. Women who have been victims of gender-based violence, many of whom lose their lives while others have to remake it. And women who escape war, hunger and injustice. Refugee women. I had the opportunity to be last week in Greece, in a refugee women's center: brave; with much suffering, but also courageous and determined to continue working for a better future. We European women are fortunate to live in a space where we have our rights recognised, despite having to keep working and fighting not to back down. But let us not forget all those outside Europe who still need our solidarity and support. (Applause)

Madam President, the ruins, trenches and corpses piled up in Bajmut are already the symbol of the war of attrition that Putin is pursuing a year after the failure of his first attempt at conquest. Putin has already lost the war. Now our responsibility is to continue to help Ukraine win it. With his army depleted, his economy hit by the greatest sanctions in history and his international position increasingly isolated, Putin only has the way to perpetuate the war until he gets tired of the allies. We cannot allow the long war of attrition to be felt by Europeans and our economies. High energy prices, the rise in the shopping basket, with a food CPI already above 18%, and the inaccessible price of housing are shaking the future of Europeans. Protecting the most vulnerable is our collective responsibility. The decisions we make today will mark the future. There is no better solution than accelerating the green transition and energy autonomy. And the most urgent thing is the reform of the electricity market to permanently limit the impact of gas on bills and not rely on third countries to heat our homes. The current model is not in a position to withstand a stressful situation like that of now. Renewable energy accounted for 10% in 1998; today, 50%, and forecasts point to 74% in 2023. The creation of zero-emission industries, boosting technological competitiveness and diversifying supply chains are key factors for the prosperity and strategy of the European Union to become a reality in the coming decades. The financing needs of the Green Deal Industrial Plan are enormous. Flexibility of the requirements for Member States to help companies in the green and digital transition and not lose competitiveness against the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the Biden Administration is necessary, but also companies have the obligation to protect the lung that keeps the industry alive, which is the working class. Now the European Commission and the European Central Bank recognise what we Social Democrats have always stood for. Companies have room to raise wages, to assume wage increases. We will not allow workers' wages to lose purchasing power while corporate profits increase. In the coming decades we will witness the greatest economic modernization of our time. Faced with the necessary change, we need to launch the reform of the Stability and Growth Pact, which should incorporate the objectives of the European Pillar of Social Rights and a permanent financial instrument similar to NextGenerationEU or SURE to ensure the necessary public investments. Ladies and gentlemen, in a context in which war has returned to Europe, we must redouble our efforts and our ambitions. Everyone in their right mind wants peace, but the Kremlin does not give up arms. Diplomacy must not give up its mission. But what democracies cannot consent to under any circumstances is abandoning Ukraine to its fate. And the way to do that is to continue to maintain our unity. Mr Weber, I see you very concerned about the position of the social democratic governments with regard to Ukraine. And I'm going to tell you one thing very clearly. You can be calm. The commitment of the Social Democratic governments in defending Ukraine is clear, firm and forceful. Perhaps he should worry about what he has within his own ranks and about his political group's alliances with Putin's far-right friend.

Madam President, we are living in a time of fears and insecurities, of dangers and difficulties. Immigration, as old as humanity, is one of the greatest challenges. We will never forget the arrival of one million Syrians who fled death in 2015. Neither that of the four million Ukrainians we have welcomed for Putin's war, nor that of the many immigrants who daily risk their lives crossing the Mediterranean and the Balkans. We need to protect our borders. But as long as forgotten wars, exploitation of the poor and natural catastrophes are a reality, such high walls can never be built to stop the weakest. There are already over a hundred million human beings in the world who have had to forcibly leave their home. Many of them are in Europe and will be many more. At a time when the negotiation of the New Pact on Migration and Asylum is facing its decisive hour, we must choose which Europe we want to live in. In the Europe of walls defended by Mr Weber and the far right, or in the humanist Europe that does not close its eyes to the loss of human lives? In the xenophobic Europe that scourges immigrants or in the Europe of Law that wants immigrants for the development of our societies and our cultures? In the Europe of fear of the different or in the Europe of hope working to find a solution? There are no easy answers for complex times, but it will not be the walls that improve our coexistence, but the union of our forces to manage the arrival of immigrants according to the possibilities of each State and respect for legality. Now that the extreme right accuses Mr Weber of copying his model of Europe against immigration, in the Social Democratic family we turn our gaze to that other soul of the People's Party that is willing to welcome, to protect, to integrate. Walls and nationalisms push us to devastating consequences. Let's overcome the fear of the different. Let us make Europe a meeting place for diverse peoples, a land of peace, progress and opportunity, protecting first and foremost the lives of every man and woman. Because the future of Europe will only be prosperous if we reconcile with the most vulnerable. No European money to build walls.

Madam President, dear colleagues, the subsidy race has begun. The United States, China, Japan or India are in the same competition. It is positive that allied countries such as the United States are committed to the transition to a world without emissions. But the European Union cannot allow unfair paths that violate the rules of the World Trade Organization. The time has come to react. We have been left behind in sectors such as microchip manufacturing or the digital world. Not a single one of the digital giants or the big social networks is European. The Green Deal Industrial Plan presented by the European Commission cannot be a missed opportunity. Their current approach ignores the rights of the working class and their funding is in limbo. We must seize the defining moment of the green and digital revolution to modernise our economy. The most urgent thing is a reform of the electricity market, because its current design is the main disadvantage of European industry. We also need a revision of the public support model for companies that allows us to rapidly roll out strategic projects under the National Recovery Plans and in sectors that ensure greater strategic, technological and energy autonomy, such as clean energy, semiconductors and electric vehicles. But the review of State aid requires not only a modification of the thresholds, but an instrument that balances the differences in size and fiscal margin of the Member States. Under no circumstances can we allow the global subsidy race to become an internal race between Member States that fragments our single market. Another step should be the adoption of green finance to mobilise the necessary public and private investment. Support to national budgets can be provided with appropriate fiscal rules in a renewed Stability and Growth Pact through the mobilisation of a financial instrument inspired by the SURE programme. The Green Deal Industrial Plan will only become a reality if the heart that has been pumping European industry for two centuries is protected: the working class. Without workers there is no industry. Any company receiving public support must promote labour rights, decent wages, decent working conditions, collective bargaining and trade union rights. Ladies and gentlemen, the priority objective of the Green Deal Industrial Plan must be to compete effectively with the United States and China, not between Member States within the single market. And there is no better way to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the single market than to contribute to the birth of a competitive, sustainable, digital European industry that respects the dignity of the working class it deserves.

Madam President, 24 February marks one year since Putin's invasion of Ukraine, a war that has already caused a level of destruction and ruin hard to imagine in 21st century Europe. In the last year we have witnessed the suffering of the Ukrainian people. The European Union, consistent and firm in defending the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states, has provided Ukraine with assistance in all areas: political, humanitarian, military and economic, as well as in the fight against impunity. Total aid of €49 billion makes the European Union and its Member States Ukraine's main support. The summit held today and tomorrow in Kiev should serve to strengthen not only the unity between Ukraine and the European Union, but also the unity of our Member States. Only when we are united do we advance, progress and build trust. Our response to Putin has demonstrated the potential of the European Union when difficult decisions have to be made. At the Kiev summit, Putin must know our true power. For every refugee who flees their home by force, we will respond with the extraordinary humanity and solidarity of our societies. For every hospital, house and school destroyed, we will use all our sanctioning power to invest more than EUR 300 billion of frozen Russian reserves in the reconstruction of Ukraine. For every home Putin leaves without electricity, heating and hot water, we will build the necessary water pipelines until Europe's energy sovereignty becomes a reality. For every man, woman and child killed vilely by Putin, we will make him pay before international justice. And for every cry for help from President Zelenskyy, we will respond with the full force of our military capabilities. Sending heavy weapons is a difficult decision, but one that must be made if we are to avoid a stalemate that freezes the war to the point of turning Ukraine into ashes. Putin cannot win the war, and only relies on a victory by exhaustion of Ukraine and weariness of the allies on both sides of the Atlantic. Military support is essential to curb the half a million troops that Russia will deploy in the spring, return to positions prior to February 24 and guarantee the Ukrainian government a possible peace negotiation on favorable terms. Ukraine's victory will not only make it possible to keep alive the European dream of its own people, but it must be the reward our societies deserve for their enormous sacrifice since the beginning of the war. Turning on the heating or giving the light, making the purchase or filling the car tank involve personal sacrifices that need the permanent support of the public authorities. The EU-Ukraine summit should also serve to send a clear message to the Ukrainian authorities on their way to the European Union: Ukraine needs a rule of law with strong institutions that protect citizens and guarantee their rights. The end of the road will come with a Ukraine that receives and contributes to the European Union what the European Union brings and receives from each Member State: democracy, economic growth and social cohesion. The European Union is one of the world's great powers. We are a courageous power, supportive and open to the world. A responsible power that pursues peace. With confidence in our Union, there is reason to keep looking to the future with hope. And it is the responsibility of the Ukrainian people and the rest of European societies that aspire to live in a free world to continue to decide our destiny together.

Madam President, the great movements of human beings are a sign of our time. Approximately 90 million refugees and internally displaced persons have forcibly left their homes. They are fleeing war, terrorism or persecution. And many of those people risk their lives by land and sea on their way to Europe. Our responsibility is to welcome them so that they can have a dignified life. The next European Council cannot be an empty summit. As of 10 February, the European Union's commitment to conclude the New Pact on Migration and Asylum before the end of the parliamentary term must be clear. I advance to you the full readiness of the Social Democratic family to reach an agreement that includes a mechanism of compulsory solidarity, in which each Member State assumes its share of responsibility. The Commission's successive plans to strengthen the European Union's action after each tragedy are neither new nor capable of solving the tragedy in the Mediterranean on their own. Recommending better coordination between Member States is, of course, an obligation of the Commission, but the inability to adopt concrete measures addressing the management, for example, of NGO rescue vessels is worrying. There is no doubt that we must fight human trafficking in a coordinated manner and offer our support to countries of origin and transit. But we must also give international protection to asylum seekers, promote the integration of refugees and ensure legal avenues for immigration, including education, employment and humanitarian visas. The Commission and the Council cannot focus exclusively on return. Of course, those who have been expelled and expelled from their country have the right to return to their land. But the return requires the end of wars, the defeat of terrorism, the birth of inclusive societies. The criminalization of NGOs and the construction of walls that drive the right and the far right can never erase the most visible trace of our reality. The societies of today and tomorrow are and will always be diverse. Cultural and religious diversity is an unalterable reality, a reality that can and must be compatible with respect for the values of host countries. We cannot change the diversity of our societies, but we can change the management of migration flows. We must lose the fear of talking about immigration as a solution to the demographic imbalance and the lack of manpower in Europe. The European Commission itself reminds us that if 70% of the European population is currently of working age, by 2070 the percentage will fall to 54%. The Netherlands, Belgium or the Czech Republic have almost 5% of unfilled jobs. Germany by 4,5 %. France and Italy, 2.5%. Spain, 0.8%. Several Member States have already started legislation to attract immigrants. We cannot lose that perspective when it comes to addressing our decisions. Ladies and gentlemen, shared responsibility is the only beacon that will illuminate solutions to a challenge that affects us all and that no one can solve individually. Between those who aspire to a Europe of strength and those who defend a Europe of solidarity, we are bound to understand each other. It is difficult, after listening to Mr Weber's words about fences and walls, to understand that an agreement is necessary. It's very difficult. Even Commission President von der Leyen has not referred to this. Let's work with solidarity in mind. We will work with European values in mind. We will work thinking about the horizon we have, about responsibility, with special determination and generosity, and looking at the horizon.

Madam President, welcome to Parliament, Mr Kristersson. The start of the Swedish Presidency comes at a time when the European Union is going through its most important momentum since the last decades. No one could imagine the leap in the integration process with solutions that have lived up to the serious crises that have occurred. If 2022 will go down in history as the year that brought unprecedented decisions to combat the price war, 2023 is going to be the year of structural solutions, it has to be the year of structural solutions. The main challenge of this new year is social discontent. If inflation continues to undermine purchasing power, a permanent financial instrument will need to be put in place to protect the most vulnerable businesses and families. Given the discriminatory subsidies of the United States, we must propose a modification of State aid on a temporary basis to ensure the rapid deployment of the investments of the recovery plan and avoid breaking the single market to the detriment of partners with less fiscal capacity. Although high inflation continues to directly harm the population, the Swedish Presidency programme does not contain a single commitment to the social pillar. Serious mistake, Mr Kristersson, because the objectives of the 2017 Gothenburg summit are the only beacon that can guide us towards a social, strong, fair and opportunity-rich Europe. The 2008 debt crisis, for which austerity was a failed solution, is a clear example. Now, the energy crisis will be the end of the marginalist system. The current electricity market, where renewables account for 50% of electricity production, does not serve as a model for the future. The time has come to adopt a comprehensive reform of the electricity market to limit the impact of gas on the electricity bill. Mr Prime Minister, sincerely commit yourself to the European Parliament that the Swedish Presidency will continue to lead the fight against climate change. It is true that, in his speech, he made that commitment to a greener Europe very clear, but it is also true that his government has eliminated subsidies for electric vehicles, limited the targets for reducing biofuels and, in addition, his far-right partner in this House continuously votes against the directives in the Fit for 55 package. History doesn't have a single address, Mr. Kristersson. This is not the time to get carried away by the extreme right to walk in a direction contrary to science. Climate change and Putin's war demand a clear and decisive commitment to renewable energy, because the long-awaited strategic autonomy will only be a reality when the 27 are freed from the heavy slab of fossil fuels. Defending common achievements requires firmness in the face of the continuing antagonism of Hungary and Poland. We hope that you will keep your word to speed up the procedures provided for in Article 7 in order to stop its autocratic drift. You represent a modern country, progressive and traditionally at the forefront of human rights, but the agenda of your presidency contains not a single reference to women or migrants. What is your proposal for half of the population of our Union, women, to continue to win the rights that guarantee equal opportunities? On gender equality, we will not take a step back. The directives on gender-based violence and pay transparency should become a reality in 2023 and your presidency has a lot of work to do in this area. The future of our Union also requires that migrants have a response to the situation we are currently experiencing. It is a moral imperative that we not live again the shame of fights between prime ministers for rescuing human beings from certain death as demanded by the Law of the Sea. Only the final conclusion of the New Pact on Migration and Asylum will prevent the uprooting of the radical leaders who condition our migration policy. Mr Kristersson, history teaches us that the fertilisation of the far right is often rooted in emotions and false solutions. Instrumentalizing social unrest is their resource and we have an obligation, all democrats, to neutralize this situation. I give him my hand, the hand of the Social Democratic family, so that together we can strengthen the resurgence of Europeanism and continue to guarantee unprecedented solutions to the problems of citizens, today more aware than ever that only union makes the force.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we are on the verge of the last Council this year, with such a range of challenges on the table that we are required to be swift, tenacious and decisive in decision-making. The credibility of our European project requires that not a shred of doubt can break the public's trust in its institutions. Because we must continue to be a model for EU citizenship and also a reference in the world, as we do with the Sakharov Prize. We must be a credible and honest model in all our actions, including at the institutional level and in the socio-economic dimension. I start with the latter. I have repeatedly referred to the urgency of tackling exorbitant prices in the energy market because of Putin's war. The Commission presented a series of measures so urgently that, applying Rule 122, Parliament was excluded from its negotiation. The Commission's proposal to limit the price of gas on the market is ridiculous. Had a regular legislative procedure been followed, Parliament would have been able to propose realistic and effective limits. Colleagues, as I said: If this Parliament acted quickly with COVID-19 vaccines, are we not going to do so now in order to be able to tackle this energy crisis? And the speed of action is pressing us in a galloping social and economic crisis. We can't wait any longer. The absence of ambitious social measures in the legislative package for the years 2023-2024 is exasperating. That is why, from the group of socialists and democrats, we have proposed a European energy bond, identifying more than 100 billion euros in the European budget that can be used to urgently help families immediately. But also for next year, let us be clear, we will continue to need a European response to address the crisis. Regarding the institutional framework, there are two key issues for my political group: Schengen and rule of law conditionality. On the first question, look, I welcome, of course, the inclusion of Croatia in the Schengen area. It's positive. But not doing so, in addition, with Romania and Bulgaria is a mistake. A mistake and an injustice. An injustice that arouses misgivings and gives guinea pigs to anti-European movements. My group proposed a debate on this issue. Colleagues, how can we have a debate on the enlargement of the European Union and, in parallel, fail to include in the free and common space Member States that qualify to be part of it? What will the Commission do to correct this injustice? You have our support to work in that direction. And lastly, with regard to rule of law conditionality, of course, it has been a victory for those of us who defend the rule of law and the common values of the Union that the Conditionality Mechanism can be applied and that funds can be raised, reduced and frozen for those countries – in this case Hungary – when they are not complying with the rule of law. But let's also reflect on something: What Orbán is doing today, calling for blackmail in the Council, cannot be allowed. And that should make us reflect on the need to put an end to the principle of unanimity in the Council. The institutions and framework we have been building are our common heritage. The trust of citizens in them is the guarantor of being able to continue building this common project of peace, freedom and well-being. And we must preserve it. Going back to the beginning of my speech: to any attack that undermines citizens’ trust in the European Union – whether by attacking our rule of law or the values of our Union – and to any case of corruption, firmness and zero tolerance. Dear colleagues, I wish you a happy end of the year and I hope that next year we will be with the same energies to address all the work that lies ahead.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, this Parliament has always worked and will continue to work for democracy, the rule of law and transparency. We have always fought corruption in all its forms and we will continue to do so. But let's recognize that we'll have to do better. Corruption destroys institutions, undermines the trust of citizens and, in addition, damages the political image. We cannot afford it, because we are here to serve the citizenry. Beyond our ideological differences, I am proud of the reaction of this House to the horrific corruption scandal that has unfortunately happened in this Parliament. However, we must make some clear points: above all, that those responsible are the people who have broken the law, who have committed very serious crimes, of whom they were aware, and the full weight of the law must fall on them. And so, as an affected party, I have already announced that my group will be forgiven in the cause. And in that sense, we have to be clear that the rule of law mechanisms have worked, and that is why there is an ongoing police investigation. Our first duty is to facilitate that investigation so that the criminal facts can be fully known. My responsibility as a group leader is to immediately address any actions that may result from the actions of these people. And that is why I immediately asked the Members of the European Parliament affected by the investigation to abandon any position of responsibility, both in Parliament and in the group. And so it has been. We are going to act forcefully and we are going to start an internal investigation. From minute one we have acted firmly to protect the good repute of the Social Democratic Group and also that of this Parliament. Because the criminal behaviour of some people cannot tarnish the work that the vast majority of Members of the European Parliament, as well as their collaborators and assistants, do every day. In addition, we must set up a committee of inquiry in this Parliament, because beyond criminal actions, we must know what internal mechanisms can be improved so that this situation does not occur again. We want maximum clarity and transparency, but bearing in mind that the judicial investigation is not over and that the most important thing is that the criminal process moves forward and the whole truth is known. From there, in the coming weeks, we must discuss concrete measures: the timing and mandate of the committee of inquiry, the need to include third countries in the transparency register of lobbies or the creation of an independent ethics body. It has to be clear to the public: This house is transparent. It's everyone's house. And this unfortunate episode cannot happen again. This must remain a house open to all who want to contribute to building a united Europe, a fairer Europe. Because it is worth our work, because it is worth leaving your skin for Europe - even on days as sad as today - and because it is worth working for Europe, we will be together on this matter.

Madam President, I wanted to start by saying that I am sure I will express what the vast majority of this House has in mind today. This is a black day for European democracy. A very sad day. And also, as you will understand, a very difficult day for the Social Democratic Group. That is why I want to announce that we have just made the decision to stand as an injured party in the judicial process that is going to be opened at this time. Because the criminal behaviour of some people tarnishes this institution and tarnishes the credibility of the European Union. There is a judicial investigation underway and the culprits will have to pay justice. But, in addition, this House must respond forcefully to clarify what has happened and, above all, ensure that it does not happen again. That is why I call for responsibility and unity. I have already spoken with the President and the leaders of the other political groups to work together for greater transparency and accountability. European citizens must know that they are counting on us to clarify the facts, to cooperate with justice and to act responsibly. Because the daily work that the vast majority of Members of this House are doing cannot be overshadowed. We will discuss these days concrete measures in various bodies in this House and also, if necessary, in other European institutions. We must act firmly against corruption. Let's defend the honesty of politics and do it by working together. Because our unity is the best weapon against corruption and against those who want to harm European democracy.

Madam President, today we are holding the debate on women victims of gender-based violence and I am going to be allowed on this occasion to make an intervention perhaps different from what we usually do in this Chamber and to allow me to name the figures. Teresa Rodríguez was a 23-year-old girl, with many dreams, with illusions and with projects. Teresa lived in my city, Valladolid. And he traveled to Belgium. She traveled to Brussels to work as a nurse, with many projects, with many illusions, with many dreams. Projects, dreams and illusions that have been shattered when his ex-partner, a sexist murderer, traveled to Belgium and murdered Teresa. This is a reality. Gender-based violence has no borders. The sexist murderers find no barrier. And there are women in Europe and in the world who are killed for the mere fact of being women. Teresa's not one more number. Teresa saw her life cut short and has left parents, a brother, a family and friends devastated by this tremendous reality. And that family wanted us today, here, to talk about Teresa Rodriguez, and that is why the commitment of all of us who are here has to be to accompany and follow the request of Teresa's family, which tells us: Don't stop working on this. Let us put an end to gender-based violence, let us put an end to the machismo that murders and let there be no more Teresas in Europe. It is essential to have European legislation that can determine what is a victim of gender-based violence, because Teresa is just as much a victim in Spain as in Belgium or Poland. And we need European legislation that can protect all women, wherever they live, wherever they are: a European directive against gender-based violence that can prevent such situations. It is necessary that we can work in the field of training, education, prevention... Let's not let him sit idly by. We cannot resign ourselves and think that this is a reality that we cannot change, because in our hands it is changing it. We have a great responsibility. And let me end by saying that today we have a great moral obligation to name those numbers; to understand that behind each of those women there are tragic realities, that we cannot allow those lives, those dreams, those projects to be cut short. Teresa deserves us to keep working so that there are no more young women like her. We have a great responsibility. Let's not resign ourselves. Let's work. It's in our hands.

Mr President, 'the need for a European solution for asylum and migration, including search and rescue': It's a much-needed title. We could be even more precise and bold and talk about the need for solidarity and shared responsibility, in particular as regards the arrivals of people in search and rescue operations from the prism of human rights and international law. The events that have been happening in recent years in the English Channel, in the Mediterranean, as well as in Lesbos, Lampedusa or Lanzarote, to cite some tragic examples, testify to the magnitude of what we are talking about here. This is not the first time that we have debated this matter in this House and that we have also debated it without any concrete results. According to this year's figures, nine out of ten migrants arrive on European shores without the help of NGOs and we have no doubt that, without their help, these people would also have arrived, in one way or another. And that's why the message is so clear: enough to criminalize those who save lives. To the groups in this House who share the need for a European policy, I extend my hand. I tend it generously, but also without trying to make use of it or causing division in this regard. Let's all be generous, Mr. Weber. Let us not try to use a few words and a few phrases to also provoke what may be cracks in the need for such an agreement. I reach out to all the groups in this House who consider a European policy to be important in this regard, to take action that delivers concrete, sustainable results and without taking into account the issues that some are raising from a nationalist or intergovernmental point of view. Make no mistake, immigration can make a decisive contribution to solving some of the most important challenges we have in Europe: an ageing continent, a continent that is currently facing great challenges. And so I insist that immigration cannot be a problem; We must treat it as a challenge and as an opportunity. Time is running out and death never stops. The dignity of people's lives should be our guide to adopting a New Pact on Migration and Asylum. This is the spirit of the Geneva Convention, but we have to make it a reality. It cannot be just a responsibility of the countries of the South. To pretend that the migratory phenomenon is exclusive, responsibility of the country to which they arrive is to deny the existence of a common European border. We believe in the principle of shared responsibility. Recent events call for us to move forward, above all, on the solidarity pillar of the New Pact, precisely with more European solidarity. Not only in times of increased migratory pressure, but also to deal with crisis situations such as those we have encountered with the war in Ukraine or with Afghanistan. To achieve our objectives, we must also strengthen cooperation with countries of origin and transit. However, this cooperation must be based on mutual respect. We cannot outsource immigration policies in any way. Equally, only in this way will the Mediterranean become a bridge of cooperation, development aid and understanding. Our proposal is clear. Search and rescue is a common European responsibility, it is a constant, especially in a world so globalized that it needs a specific common European category, in line with international law. Let's consider one thing: Every life counts! Ladies and gentlemen, in this legislature we have shown that we are up to the task and that we are able to respond to great challenges. Let us demonstrate that we are also able to do so with the phenomenon of migration before the end of this mandate. It's a lawsuit and almost a plea: Let us work tirelessly to move forward together and get a response to the challenge. To do this, count on us!

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, this is a peculiar commemoration, we could say, because the ECSC Assembly had little to do with this Parliament. To begin with, it had 78 members from six countries and they were also delegates from national parliaments. And I say well: delegates, because there was only one woman. And, it is true, today we have a President of the European Commission - and here I have to correct President Weber a little bit because she is not an EPP candidate, she is our President - voted and supported by this House, just like the President of the European Parliament. They represent institutions and represent what we all stand for. The Assembly at that time did not have a building and was lent the room of the Council of Europe. Look, now we have this great building. With the direct elections of 1979 and the increase in competitions, this house has been completely transformed. But perhaps the most obvious change is that we are here today representing 500 million Europeans from 27 countries. That was a Europe cut off by the Iron Curtain. The first President of the Assembly, Paul-Henry Spaak, said that the Community was born not against anyone, but for freedom, so that more and more people would benefit from the peace and prosperity that democracy and the rule of law bring. This has been the case, even if countries are lacking. I have just been in North Macedonia and Albania, where negotiations are now beginning. And others will come, such as Ukraine and Moldova. The important thing is to deepen democracy, which is the cornerstone, because there are no wars between democracies. As I say, things change because this is a living Parliament. The Conference on the Future of Europe has given us clues as to the way forward and how we should react more quickly to crises, better manage migration, advance social policies and build on solidarity. All this means moving forward in a more political union. And this is precisely what has not changed: our goal, an ever closer union. And I send a very clear message to parliamentarians: We are representatives, not each of your country, but of the community as a whole. I at least feel that way when people in Hungary and Poland ask us not to abandon them in the authoritarian drift of their governments. Some voices say today that the Union has strayed from its origins. But that's not true. Because the members of that 1952 House understood perfectly well that European democracy does not weaken the national one, but reinforces it. Just as European citizenship complements and enhances national citizenship. Now it is up to us to keep the spirit and adapt to the new times.

Madam President, it is true that 25 November marks the International Day against Gender-Based Violence. Since I am a Member, this Parliament has had a debate on this to unite our voices from a standpoint of difference, but with a clear message of solidarity and support for women victims of gender-based violence, for women who have been killed simply because they are women. Sexist terrorism kills: kills in Europe and the rest of the world. And it is necessary to have a debate as we have done every year. But this proposal put forward by the People's Group seems to me to contain few scruples and no respect. Few scruples, because national laws are changed in national parliaments. This is a European Parliament and we must respect the debates we have here. And, therefore, let us bear in mind that much more respect must be shown to the European Parliament. And I respect the victims, the women who have been killed. You can't allow yourself to be lied to in this way. More respect for women victims of gender-based violence. I call for a vote against this proposal by the People's Group, which is only trying to have a partisan debate on what deserves to be a debate in support of all European women.

Madam President, three weeks. Three weeks have passed since the European Council meeting and that is that time flies, but the only advantage of talking to a past bull is that it allows us to have a better perspective of what was decided three weeks ago and the effects that these decisions can have, because the October Council meeting has been a lost opportunity to act with determination and to tackle the tsunami that the energy crisis is causing in the economy. Inflation affects all sectors of the economy, and Parliament has been calling for a number of measures for months, which the Council finally began to adopt three weeks ago, albeit very timidly. If these measures had been agreed in summer, we would have come to winter in circumstances different from those we are coming to. Stopping speculation in the gas markets was the first step, the easiest, and we have already seen that just announcing the measures has brought down the prices of the TTF index for electricity. If it had been done earlier, we would have saved millions of euros. The same as if the price of gas and electricity were finally decoupled, which would save consumers a lot of money. The measures we propose need time and time is what families do not have. We are continually asking them for time, and do families have time when the electricity or gas bill arrives and they can't afford it? Are we going to stop them from cutting their electricity if they can't afford to pay? Maybe that's what we should be talking about, too. To tackle inflation and to reduce bills we need a strong European response. A European solidarity package for this winter with the disbursement of EUR 100 billion to support those most in need in the face of the brutal rise in the cost of living. We need to have permanent fiscal capacity. We have seen how NextGenerationEU and European unemployment reinsurance have worked. The problem we have now, ladies and gentlemen, is our reaction time, because time passes. We took a big step then, at the time, with COVID and now it is a matter of recognizing that we also have to act with a fiscal capacity for this situation. Today, the Commission presented a Communication on the economic governance review. Let us take this opportunity to work on a new framework that will help us face the future. I do not reveal anything new to you if I tell you that the forecasts for next year are not good and, therefore, it is still urgent to ensure that households can afford the cost of living. The Minimum Wage Directive - which we have just adopted in this House - should start to be implemented by the Member States immediately. Moreover, no one in Europe should be left without a minimum income and no retiree should have a pension below the poverty line. Our main objective, when we talk about economic governance, is the dignity of people. It is a matter of social justice; Those who have benefited most from this crisis and also from the COVID crisis should shoulder their shoulders and contribute to a common effort. Taxes on profits fallen from the sky are a good way to generate the income that society as a whole needs. I don't know what we're waiting for to get it going. People's dignity should also be our guide to adopting a new Pact on Migration and Asylum; that is the spirit of the Geneva Convention and also of the European Treaties, but we have to make it a reality and it cannot be the sole responsibility of some countries. It has to be a shared responsibility. Solidarity between the Member States and solidarity with the people who are suffering and who have been asking the European Union for help. This is the only way forward when each member of the community takes responsibility and works in solidarity. I recognize that there is no easy solution, but it is our responsibility and we have to combine three important challenges: lead the fight against global warming, stand firm in defending Ukraine and use our tools and new ones to sustain European industry, businesses and families. And for that - I repeat this to the Council and the Commission - count on us, listen to this House and also stop using Article 122, because we want to be part of the search for solutions.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I am very sad to have to hold this debate, but I think it is essential and that is why our political group has proposed it. No one in our countries would accept a coup d'état, but some in the European Union are normalising the daily deterioration of our democratic systems, the separation of powers and freedom of the press. These government alliances that we are seeing between conservative parties, and now also liberal, with far-right parties whitewash attitudes that cross any red line. The problem is not that they are ultraconservative parties; This is part of political pluralism. Nor is it a problem that they do not believe in a united Europe, because Eurosceptics also have the right to be represented in this Chamber, more would be lacking. The problem is that far-right populisms undermine institutions, use democracy to weaken freedoms and rights. When they enter institutions, they use them for their interests. A parliamentary majority does not justify laws that persecute minorities, violate their rights and undermine the legal framework and coexistence in force for seventy years. Liberal democracy implies an acceptance of political pluralism, cultural diversity, respect for minorities and the rule of law. You can be very conservative by respecting these principles. This should be our red line. It was until the EPP and Renew decided to split up and open the doors to parties like Vox, the Swedish Democrats, Alternative for Germany, the League and the Brothers of Italy. We can call them whatever we want, neo-fascists, post-fascists, far-right populists... The name is the least of it. We all know what we mean, even if some don't want to see it. We refer to those who ask for abolengo credentials in order to enjoy citizenship rights, because they distinguish between the "real Swedes" or the "real French", as Le Pen does, and those who may have been born in another country, or are the children of immigrants, or may profess Islam, or do not have white skin. We are referring to those who link immigration with crime and would like to return to a national Europe of pure ethnicities, as Viktor Orbán said. These are the ones who want to go back to the past, to a Europe of borders, and not just physical ones, because the worst borders are the ones we have in mind. They are the ones who deny that there are women murdered for the mere fact of being women and cut budgets against sexist violence. His friends in the United States are Trumpists like Steve Bannon. They are Bolsonaro's friends. They're Putin's friends. Make no mistake: Liberal democracy may not be the perfect system and we must always work to improve it, but destroying what we have built together only leads to polarization and the inability to reach agreements. Formal democracy is not enough. A democratic spirit and a deep respect for pluralism are fundamental for coexistence. The postwar consensus to build the first communities was based on the firm conviction that there was no place in Europe for autocratic leaders or racist ideologies. Christian Democrats, Social Democrats and Liberals have historically worked on this consensus. We have just closed the Conference on the Future of Europe to reflect on how we are moving forward. That remains the only firm foundation on which to build this common home, which is not a balance of power between nations. That Europe of nations anchored in the past never existed for those on the far right. Conservatives, liberals, return to the common home to continue building a future of peace and democracy.

Madam President, this week we have woken up again in horror after the incessant storm of Russian missiles that hit several cities in Ukraine: Innocent civilians killed in central Kiev, missiles hitting children's areas, terror and suffering. That is the true face of Putin's cruelty and cruelty. This is their new terror strategy that we should not get used to. Ladies and gentlemen, this week the European Council will have to address many of the consequences and challenges of this war, which is also an offensive against Europe. A blackmail offensive that seeks to divide citizens, who want to exasperate us, threaten our industry and sow social discontent. The European Union needs a strong response, with strengthened social measures and a new instrument to protect the most vulnerable sectors, to help them cope with high inflation and rising costs of living. That is why it is also necessary for the Union to implement a solidarity mechanism to redistribute the exorbitant and unfair profits of energy companies and tackle this unacceptable situation of speculation. But this will not be enough if we do not address energy prices or energy supply, because to win this war we have to progress in energy autonomy. The measures presented yesterday by the Commission are positive, but unambitious. First, rapid action is needed to decouple the gas price from electricity. President von der Leyen herself spoke of the Iberian exception, which can be extended to the Union as a whole, but we must do so immediately. Secondly, there is a need to move forward with determination in tackling the prices of imported gas. The proposal presented is insufficient in time, three months, and imprecise in its criteria. Thirdly, a joint mechanism for the purchase of more economical energy has to be established and the European Parliament has to be in that negotiation. There can be no restrictive interpretation of Rule 122, ladies and gentlemen. It's unacceptable. Parliament has to be in the negotiations and we call on the Commission to rectify it. If we did it with COVID-19 vaccines, why aren't we going to do it now? Of course we can. Look, this week Europe's leaders are going to have no choice but to agree on how to move forward. We cannot make a copy and paste of the March and June tips. We need to put in place strong measures with an immediate timetable. Finally, this will be the last meeting in which Italy will be represented by Mario Draghi. We know the reasons, especially the European People's Party. Mr Weber and Mr Berlusconi repeat that Forza Italia will be the guarantee of a pro-European, Atlanticist government that defends the values of the Union. Let me question it. Forza Italia has gone from being the pillar of the centre-right in Italy to the crutch of post-fascism. And let me question it on the basis of the new majorities. Mr Weber, the presidency of the Senate is held by Ignazio Benito La Russa, a nostalgic for the "fascist ventennio". He is now the second authority of the state. The presidency of the Chamber of Deputies is held by the pro-Putin anti-abortionist Lorenzo Fontana, a Eurosceptic, homophobic and well-known in this House. He is now the third authority of the state. You speak of the nostalgia of Merkel's time, Mr Weber. In Merkel's time there were no alliances with the far right. Let me question what the People's Party says it will guarantee. The great challenge of this moment is unity in Europe. Mr. Weber, I'll reach out to you again. Go back to the path we built the pro-European political forces.

Mr. President, we are in difficult times. We know that this cost-of-living crisis is driven by war, the energy crisis and excess profits, raising inflation to levels that we had not experienced in Europe for a very long time. That leaves many households unable to pay their bills and that's what we have to be here talking about today. This reality presses us with a heartbreaking call: that of social inequality and the increase in poverty and that of those hardest hit by this crisis. Our policies – those of the European Union and those of national governments – must now focus on providing an effective response to this problem, on enabling people to pay the bills. We European Social Democrats have concrete ideas on how to support families and businesses, how to reform the functioning of the energy market and strengthen social welfare in a fair way. First, and most urgently, a European Union winter solidarity package, including income transfers, is needed to mitigate the impact of rising energy prices. We can't wait any longer because people can't have to choose between turning on the heating or paying for the shopping basket. The problems we are experiencing confirm that a permanent European fiscal capacity is needed in the face of crises, as well as strengthening the SURE instrument that we put in place during the pandemic. Secondly, we need to make sure that there are strong and effective social safety nets. Member States should immediately implement the Minimum Wage Directive. We know that the regulation has provided for two years for the Member States to be able to transpose, but, in these times of need, we need – it is clear and urgent – to do so now. No home should be disconnected from the power grid. And thirdly, we need more revenue to be able to finance this aid. This is a matter of social justice and fiscal fairness. It cannot be that we are asking for solidarity from families, those most in need, and do not apply that solidarity to those who are really filling their pockets with the benefits that this energy crisis is causing. We defend the principle of urgent implementation of a tax on profits fallen from the sky and a minimum tax for multinationals, not only for companies in the energy sector. Finally, Europe urgently needs to present an in-depth reform of energy markets to diversify our energy sources and to reduce our dependence on Putin and fossil fuels in general. The last few years have been the most difficult for the European Union. War has returned to our doors and brings with it the worst: Extremism, the rise of the nationalisms we expected dead in our Union. We need European solidarity. I call on the Commission and the Council to break the deadlock and come up with solutions. The public is waiting for him.

Madam President, eleven years. Eleven years have been waiting for Bulgaria and Romania without there being any objective reason to block their entry into Schengen. Freedom of movement, as we have already heard here, is one of the fundamental pillars of our Union. And the citizens of Bulgaria and Romania have the same right as those of other Member States. They have no more rights, but no less. It's a matter of justice. It cannot be that a Bulgarian citizen who lives in another EU Member State and wants to travel to his country by car, has to be passing border checks. It's discriminatory. It is discriminatory that they have to go through different queues at some airports. It is discriminatory and, in addition, it has an economic cost that Romanian trucks have to wait in line to pass border controls within the European Union. This blockage in the Council has to end. Because if it does not end, those who are going to run out of patience are the citizens of those countries. We talk a lot about solidarity these days, but solidarity has to apply to everyone. Romania and Bulgaria cannot be called upon to show solidarity when the European Union is not complying with its own rules. It is the best recipe to fuel disaffection towards Europe and support for anti-European populist messages. I hope that this Parliament will adopt a resolution with a very clear message to the Council and that the Council will listen and act. I think it's about time.

Madam President, Madam President von der Leyen, Mr High Representative, Mr Minister, in recent days the world has relived a new episode of reckless and foolish actions by Putin: Russian military mobilization, false annexation referendums and dangerous rhetoric about the use of nuclear weapons. But, in addition, for the first time, serious and worrying events have occurred outside Ukrainian territory: I am referring to the sabotage of energy infrastructure in the Baltic. The world is following this escalation with fear and concern. Also, last week, a civilian convoy was attacked by Russian forces near Zaporizhzhia with fatalities and injuries. Ladies and gentlemen, beyond Putin's daily staging, this is the reality of his war machine. This is an illegal and cruel war against the innocent population of Ukraine. Civilians who lose their lives, displaced civilians, civilians who have left their homes fleeing the atrocity. Putin's annexation last week is illegitimate and a clear violation of the United Nations Charter. Changing Ukraine's borders by force and annexing territories it doesn't even control is pure propaganda. These actions project what Putin is: A desperate man, whose leadership and authority is increasingly in doubt. In the face of this dangerous escalation, we must support Ukraine and its citizens more. We must strengthen our support to contain Russia's illegal actions and we must increase the pressure with additional sanctions to end this war. You know what for, too? To end up taking Putin to where he belongs: the Court of Justice of The Hague. That is why we must maintain unity in our response. That is why we must isolate as much as possible those European leaders who flirt with Putin. Because there are, of course there are. My political family is very concerned. We know of Orbán's isolated position on sanctions against Russia. But trying to weave alliances with Meloni really is a problem that can lead us all a worrying drift. We know about the collaboration agreement between the Salvini League and Putin and we are concerned about Berlusconi's alarming statements when he claims that Putin tried to replace Zelenskyy "with good and decent people." That's what Mr Berlusconi said. Is this what to expect from the new Italian government? What will our colleagues in the European People's Party do about this? Because Putin is going to continue his intentions to divide us, and to more threats we need more unity in our political action. Mr Weber, we need political responsibility right now and to understand that the real alliance must be with those of us who defend European values. I understand that, right now, in this situation, you have a hard time understanding reality. But honestly, outside of here there are many people concerned about what is happening and, ahead of the electoral tactics of some, we must be on the path of those who defend the European project. There are those of us who have not moved from the beginning. Here we follow: defending Europe, defending European values. I'm shaking his hand to get him back on that road.

Mr President, Mr High Representative, in the 21st century, there is a police force in Iran dedicated to monitoring compliance with the rules of women's dress and behaviour. And that policeman boards and arrests a young woman because, according to them, she showed more hair than she should under the veil. And that young woman no longer leaves the police center to which she is transferred alive. Incredible, but true. It seems like a nightmare, but it is the reality that women in Iran live every day, who are treated as second-rate beings, objects owned by a man – their father, brother or husband. If a man kills his daughter, he will be sentenced to only a few years, because there is no law that protects women. But if a woman kills the man who raped her, for example, she is hanged the next day. The Iranian regime exerts a brutal repression against the opponents and women are, by definition, the first opponents, because the authorities tried from the first moment to reduce them to nothing. But they fought from the beginning and, although they have achieved small victories, they are not enough. Mahsa Amini's death has set off a wick that could explode a dark regime anchored in the Middle Ages, drowned out by economic sanctions, against which more and more Iranians raise their voices and take to the streets to protest, risking their lives. As confirmed by the United Nations, there have been many deaths in these protests that may not have been admitted by Iranian forces. The renegotiation of the nuclear agreement with Iran that is currently taking place and the special situation of this country in the midst of a global energy crisis cannot make us look the other way so as not to see what is happening in Iran. Europe needs to respond and support women, who are leading these protests. Women, life and freedom. Iranian sisters, we are with you.

Madam President, it has been an intense debate. We have been able to intervene and we have been able to listen. And let me make a reference to something that I have not seen present in this debate and that I would have liked to see present. And it is to talk more about the social dimension of Europe, about that Europe that has to move forward to be next to those who need it most. We need a social resilience package to address issues such as a permanent instrument on unemployment, to address the fight against poverty, so that people do not stop trusting the European project. Because we cannot allow citizens to feel again that we have left them in the gutter. So we are going to work on everything that unites us, building also the social Europe, the Europe of citizenship.