Speeches

Madam President, Yes, I believe that an initiative to simplify bureaucracy is always welcome in the European Union and is also necessary in many other areas. However, this should not only be an emergency measure, but this simplification of bureaucracy should actually be the rule. And in this context, I am also of the opinion that one should evaluate the Russian sanctions in general. Because the only impact these sanctions currently have is that we here in Europe and the people of Europe feel that energy is becoming more and more expensive and will soon no longer be affordable. A failed energy policy of the last decades leads precisely to the fact that people can no longer heat their homes, that for example we can no longer properly heat our three locations, which we urgently need. The only thing that heats up this House is the S&A/D Group's dangerous contacts with Qatar, which are also illegal. Nevertheless, one thing remains: We will not be able to meet the energy demand for the year 2030, 2035, where we know that e-mobility will increase sharply, with wind turbines.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. What you see here once again is, I believe, less of a crisis of the climate, because the climate on this earth has existed for 5 billion years and has been changing for so long, but we see here more of a crisis of reason. What we are witnessing here is once again an attempt – a naturally misguided attempt – by the European Union to save the climate, the global climate. This attempt will fail, because it will remain a one-off, even at the UN level, because the main players will not play this game. You can be sure of that. These completely unrealistic and exaggerated goals that we see here and that drive us deeper and deeper into these crises that we are experiencing here: this crisis of energy, the crisis of the wave of inflation, the crisis of inflation. I know that the Greens do not care, but they are not particularly involved in their core topic, in this discussion. These crises are experienced by the people of the country. I don't think that's funny – greens can find that funny – and people are experiencing that. It is our very own task, our very own task, to help people and to do something for people that people can make a living with their income. We must ensure that this irresponsible energy policy that we are witnessing here does not go further in the completely wrong direction. The effects are currently seen in Germany. There is a government with green participation that decides on the extension of three nuclear reactors. This will not be the last conclusion, but these nuclear reactors will continue to run, not only until April next year, but also beyond. Bravo, I can only say, dear greens, you have done well. As the main effect of this excessive energy policy, we are still destroying our economy in Europe and, of course, jobs. It will fall on everyone's head.

Madam President, The measures that can be read here in this paper are at least very much reminiscent of the crisis in the 1970s. If, 50 years later, these are your proposals for a solution to this crisis, then one can only say the following: You should not warn against a cold winter, but you should provide people with energy in Europe. This crisis, these energy prices are purely self-inflicted. Everything we are currently experiencing in the energy sector is purely self-inflicted, and the prices are of course very, very close to people. We see that in Vienna, a socialist-administered for 40 years Vienna energy Father State will now need five to ten billion euros to provide for two million people at all – this is one of the largest providers in Austria – in order for it to be able to live on at all. And I'm afraid this won't be the last supplier to buckle in this crisis. Then comes the solution proposal for intelligent energy saving. That is the approach in 2022. For years, we have been on the wrong track in energy policy: low-efficiency alternative energy producers who simply cannot meet the needs we have today. And across Europe, green ministers are switching on coal-fired power plants again, but they are not turning off nuclear power plants. That's how far we are today.

Yes, dear colleague, I have other information. Since this nuclear power plant dates back to the 1970s, I strongly doubt that the Americans have set up a nuclear power plant in the former Yugoslavia.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. Any alternative to nuclear power is better. Even the highly inefficient wind turbines that beautify our landscapes are a better alternative to nuclear power. And very close to the Austrian border, namely in Krško, a nuclear power plant, which still existed from Soviet times, is operated. And when we see an incident there, we no longer need to worry about CO2 pollution across Europe. The Commission's approach, as we see it here, is once again a democratic defeat. This is a chutzpah of the special class that we are experiencing here without being able to deal with political and economic backgrounds. Here, a green mash-up – a loop – is hung around a nuclear energy, and that means de facto the revival of nuclear energy in 2022, a nuclear power with which we have had only negative experiences throughout our history, and I do not have to enumerate all the examples here. Footing does it all on one In-house-Report by the European Commission, which does not even address how nuclear waste could then be dealt with or that there could also be possible incidents. There is a clear no to this taxonomy. (The speaker agreed to respond to an intervention under the blue card procedure.)

Commissioner! A second question, in connection with the first, of course. In addition to the state, which is here again and again as a profiteer of increased and massively increased tax revenues through the energy prices, there are of course also energy companies that profit insanely from the high energy prices and also collect record revenues. In Austria, for example, it is the partially nationalised ÖMV that has now tripled its profits, and of course to the detriment of the population. The question now is: Are you also thinking about whether there should finally be profit limits for energy companies, for example?

Madam President, Dear Commissioner, thank you for letting us try out this new instrument and means in the House today. My question is now very specific: The current EU VAT Directive already allows Member States to reduce the VAT rate to 5%. In your toolbox of 21 October, you gave Member States the opportunity to do so in the context of the energy crisis and price developments, also in the context of these price developments. My very specific question to you now is: Are you aware of this or do you know why the Austrian Federal Government has not already initiated this VAT reduction for a long time?

Mr President! So, how far away some people are from the people out here, I think you can also notice that in the one or the other speech that I have heard there today. Dear colleagues, I am by no means a black-eyed person by my nature. I just don't care. But what we are now observing here in the context of this price development, what is happening in the energy market, are deep black clouds that are moving towards Europe here. On the one hand, this concerns energy prices, which are now going through the ceiling. On the other hand, this also applies to many other commodity prices, such as agricultural products. Esteemed colleagues, people are therefore massively burdened with inflation on several levels in their daily lives. I would even say that these prices go as far as people's livelihoods. In addition to Putin's war of aggression, there are numerous other reasons why this is currently the case, such as the chaotic policies under the Green Deal. Of course, emissions trading also contributes to the fact that energy prices and gas prices rise. Various other types of propulsion, such as transport, have been included here and emissions trading has been extended to include them. This, of course, is subject to speculation. This proves once again for me – and I think also for us – that the Member States are probably better able to take charge of their own energy supply and to guarantee it themselves. In fact, the Commission sets out a different direction each year: In 2019, the end of coal and gas power generation will be announced, and in 2021 we see a tightening of this. Now what? Today, the focus is again on coal. Where do people know where the journey is going? That's one side, dear colleagues. The other, the more important side is the people and their relief, as far as this wave of inflation is concerned now. And this needs to be done urgently: immediately suspend CO2 pricing, immediately reduce taxes on gas and fuel. This is the only way to cushion Europe's people and economy between one crisis and the next.

Madam President, esteemed House! So the approach to this rule of law here in this House and in the European Union is the least rule of law that I have encountered so far in my legal career, esteemed colleagues. This argument, that tax resources must go where they are needed, Commissioner - and we have also heard this from Mr Körner, who has been particularly aberrated there - yes, what does that mean? The Hungarian people, who suffered just as much in this crisis as everyone else in Europe, do not need the tax resources? So how do you junktimize help for the people in Hungary? The supposed good behavior of your government? So how hypocritical is it, dear colleagues? And I think we need to talk about two dimensions here when it comes to this procedure. One is a political dimension, the political dimension, which means – and you know this as well as we all do here – to silence a Member State that does not suit you politically. And the second political dimension behind it is precisely this aid to humanity and, of course, the expansion of the competences of the European Union – an ever-increasing one. Ever Increasing Union. The legal dimension is particularly remarkable, as Mr Beck has already explained in detail. In fact, a procedure is being exploited here in the sense that the procedure of this rule of law cannot be applied here at all. The procedure for reviewing the rule of law and democracy can only be the Article 7 procedure. And what is being done now? This Article 7 procedure, which would be competent under the Treaties, is simply circumvented here by attempting to apply a different procedure. In your opinion, is this a matter of the rule of law? The impression is solidified here with me that it is only superficially about values, because it is rather the case that a political and legal thumbscrew is set here. And this procedure is also being used for the first time. There aren't even guidelines on how this should be applied. Let me now turn briefly to the Commission's report, which says yes: the rule of law in Poland and Hungary. Yes, what are the criteria for reviewing the rule of law in this report? This is nowhere to be seen. What sources have been used in this report to verify this? Nowhere to be seen, this is unfortunately completely non-transparent. And a little bit this report reminds me of the witch hammer of the Middle Ages. However one may assess the state of the rule of law and democracy in the Member States: This report is not in the least capable of commenting on this. Rather, it is used here to hold ‘bad’ Member States hostage. Is that what we want, dear colleagues?

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen. The price of natural gas has risen by over 400 percent from January this year to September this year, in less than a year. Energy prices are already reminiscent of the energy crisis of the 1970s, which I think we all remember well. And what is the reason for this enormous burden that will come on the people of Europe, especially in winter? What is the reason? Is it once again the Russian bear, this evil Russian bear, who now has to stand up for everything, because he blackmails Europe, because his pipeline is to be switched on? Or is it too little renewable energy, as some here claim – renewable energy, mind you, which is highly subsidised, which is also valued by the price of electricity? But it probably has everything to do with something else. At least for a significant part of the prices we have now, CO2 trading is responsible. Since the beginning of this year, CO2 certificates have been tightened and, of course, made more expensive. Since March 2020, the price here has been quadrupled, esteemed colleagues. And of course, these costs are passed on to consumers in Europe. This year, for example, the Republic of Austria has already collected more than 300 million euros with the certificate trade. And I don't think it makes much sense to maximise revenue while citizens freeze to death in their own country. I think there is an urgent need to introduce a price-stop emergency brake to regulate this market.

Mr President! Disaster relief and solidarity funds are important, I think, that we can put out of dispute in order to help the victims on the ground and express our sympathy. But weather extremes and natural disasters, esteemed colleagues, have always existed and will always exist in human history. The climate on our Mother Earth has been changing for billions of years. And the question now is, where does man play an important role in this? And I can answer them: In the case of the Green DealIt is now being proposed by the European Commission. nuclear power as part of the Green Deals seen. Nuclear power is defined as climate-neutral energy, and nuclear power will also be promoted in the future. In Poland, for example, nuclear power will replace coal-fired power plants. And that's where we come to where the human being plays a role – that's where he plays a role. In fact, man conjures up catastrophes as we have all experienced them, such as in 1986 in Chernobyl or in Fukushima. These are things we don't want. This is nuclear energy, where there are obsolete reactors in the middle of Europe, where ghosts are conjured up that nuclear disasters are happening again in Europe.