Debate contributions by Katarína ROTH NEVEĎALOVÁ

on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. - (DE) Madam President, the previous Slovak government, which was right-wing, advised people in raising the price of energy to cook with a lid, to ventilate only for a while at home, and to bake so as to bake several things at once. These were the actions of the right-wing governments. What I think we should do about rising energy prices in the European Union is certainly to give people fair wages and a fair income. There is certainly also a need for better social support for vulnerable groups, the fight against poverty, which will be conditional on fair taxation, and the promotion of nuclear energy, because that is really the clean energy that we can produce enough to provide people with enough energy at a good price. I am fascinated by the fact that in Belgium, for example, where most of us live in some way, apartments are still rented with simple glass, through which it blows, and it is a place where there is a lot of rain, where a lot of wind blows and everyone knows that so much energy escapes. That we use, for example, still accumulation stoves in Belgium, which we know are absolutely energy-inconvenient. So it is necessary to start in the heart of the European Union, and also in Belgium, using really good technologies. I am sorry, Mrs Simson, that you were one of the Commissioners, or the Commissioner who presented us here, how great it is to ban fossil fuel boilers in the European Union, which will cause additional financial costs for people and a further increase in the price of energy for our citizens. So let's get back together and really think about how to save energy so that those prices don't keep rising.

Mr President, I would like to thank the Hungarian Presidency for having such a declaration on the sustainability of the European Union's competitiveness for the future. But it is very ambitious in my opinion, which is perhaps not bad, but this declaration gives a bit of an answer to how we will ensure that the European Union is still a global partner, a global player, that we are competitive, but at the same time that we keep our agriculture competitive and sustainable. And I agree with Mr Waitz that agriculture is only at point 12, and we know that farmers and farmers are often the ones who take away our new proposals, our changes and our fight against climate change and for a sustainable ecological environment in the European Union. We need to change that a little bit. I am glad that, even during the hearings with the Commissioners, it was said that we want less bureaucracy in the European Union. So it's time we did it. That we want less reporting so that our companies, our companies, but also our farmers, really do what they have to do. And I also agree with what my colleague, Mrs Vrecion, has said that we need more impact studies of the legislation that the European Union is preparing, so that we know what specific impacts this has on individual sectors and can prevent us from giving them more and more problems that they have to deal with. So that both our companies and our farmers can really do their jobs.

Madam President, unfortunately, when someone dies in the course of their work, it is, of course, very sad, and it is also sad in the case of journalists, but it is also sad in the case of humanitarian workers or, for example, journalists who cover war conflicts. However, I do not like the fact that we are once again linking such a situation to some kind of rule of law and we are criticising another Member State, in this case Malta, and we are not giving them peace for seven years and telling them that they are not good enough to change this because such an unhappiness has happened. I think we're dancing on the graves of these people who died like this. And these people - all of a sudden here we are talking about how we knew them, how wonderful they were, what life they had, and so on. It's very, very cynical because most of us haven't met these people like Daphne in my life. So please, let us not abuse the memory of such people who have died in this way to make political capital out of it. We're not investigators here, we're not prosecutors, and we're not judges in one person to make some judgments. I believe that Malta is the rule of law, that the Maltese authorities and institutions can solve such a problem and know what to do, and that they will investigate everything fairly so that the perpetrator of this is really punished, but let us not say that it is the fault of the government, that it is the fault of Maltese politicians and that it is the fault of Maltese leftists.

Mr President, first of all, I would like to ask the Commissioner to stop tapping the phone and listening to our debate, and perhaps to make some remarks. Thank you very much. We are talking here today about how to abolish bureaucracy, so maybe we could listen a little more. We have been talking about this for a very long time, I remember, we have been talking about Simplification, simplification of bureaucracy for at least 20 years in this European Union. Perhaps the debate that the Council is planning to make about finally simplifying public procurement in the European Union could be an interesting start. We could also, as Member States, address how much we really need audits and controls. Unfortunately, the Slovak Republic, for example, is a country that would need only 5% of the on-the-spot checks, but we are at 95% of the checks. So for us too, this is such a domestic task as to simplify such controls. Also, when we are talking about proposals for new legislation, I am very pleased that the Commission is finally going to do some impact study and check what types of legislation in the European Union we already have in these areas, and that, in fact, we will only be adopting legislation that should not interfere with any other competences. A very good example was, for example, the implementation unit in the Slovak Republic, which was unfortunately established only in Slovakia and Denmark. Despite the fact that the European Commission has talked about the fact that states should set up such implementing units and actually control how the legislation is implemented and how exactly bureaucracy interferes in the lives of ordinary people.

Mr President, these days we are commemorating the 80th anniversary of the Slovak National Uprising, which broke out on 29 August 1944, and the 80th anniversary of the Carpathian-Dukla operation, which was the largest mountain battle of World War II and the largest battle in Czechoslovakia. Unfortunately, today we left one of the last living partisans in Slovakia, Mr. Karol Kuna, who was 96 years old, and we have fewer and fewer memorials of the Slovak National Uprising. I would like to quote Mr Kunu, who said: If it weren't for the many who broke the bonds of enslavement, we wouldn't be living in a free country today. Slovak partisans fought for the values of resistance against fascism, such as freedom, justice and equality, and only thanks to them was Czechoslovakia and the Slovak Republic finally a free country that stood on the side of the winners. Today I would like to pay tribute to these people who have fallen for our freedom. In the Slovak National Uprising, about ten thousand people fell, who were not only soldiers, not only partisans, but also civilians who helped these people survive in the mountains. About 150,000 people were killed in the Dukla operation. Either they lost their lives, their health, or they were captured. Honour their memory.

Madam President, I understand that this is a discussion about the priorities of the Hungarian Presidency, despite the fact that many of the speakers are speaking about their feelings and about the different facts, so they should be taken away the floor. But my question for Mr Körner is: can you explain to me, please, how is it connected the national discussion or national decisions of Hungarian Prime Minister or the Hungarian Government with the Presidency of the European Union? Because I didn't understand very much from your presentation. How is this correlated or connected? You didn't very much speak about the Presidency priorities, which I would like to hear, finally, somebody in this room to speak about. Because this is just the hearing of Mr Prime Minister of Hungary and not the Presidency discussion which should be here.

Madam President, this summit, and indeed today's debate, is also about some global agreement, that we are building peace, human rights and sustainable development. And I believe that the United Nations has an irreplaceable role as a global mediator and also in creating a real space for discussing the future of the whole world, because all countries are represented there. I consider the end of wars and the promotion of peace to be one of the most important agreements, which actually came into being during this summit, that we all want to continue to work together on this. Maybe I'd like to go back to that development. We, as the European Union, are now presenting such modern colonialism that, while we say that we want the whole world to get better, we are fighting for people all over the world. On the other hand, we do not mind exploiting the countries of Africa and other regions for the sake of mineral resources and raw materials, and we pretend that it is all right, and we export to them our waste, which we produce here. I think we should change that. And I would like to commend the agreement in the field of digital cooperation, in the field of digital technologies, where we can really help education in third world countries.

Mr President, people buy a car because they need it, not because they have nothing to do with money. When I buy a car, the most important information about the car is the price. So affordability of cars for any type of car is the most important thing that people look at. When we talk about the current crisis in the automotive industry, we caused it ourselves. This Parliament, too, with its decisions and, above all, with the fact that we have put so much pressure on the Green Deal and on such nonsensical aspects and nonsensical regulations that we have not thought through properly. I hope that the new Commission will also talk about the impact and impact studies on such different proposals that it is going to put forward, how different our decisions can affect different sectors of industry and how they actually have an impact on individual people. The automotive industry is in crisis because we have decided, we have decided, that we will use only electric cars. We definitely need to reverse this. We need to look, as the European Parliament and the European Union, at what we are capable of doing. I liked the ideas that colleagues also mentioned that let's support different types of fuels and let's support different forms of hybrid cars, for example. But let's not just talk about electric cars, because there's really a big problem with that.

Madam President, first of all I would like to say that I am very sorry for all the victims who died on 7 October last year. And I want to express my solidarity with their families and, of course, with the families of the people who, unfortunately, are still being held hostage. Of course, no form of terrorism must be accepted or excused, and we must all say that this is wrong. And we, as the international community, must fight terrorism together. However, a terrorist attack does not give Israel the right to attack the population living in Gaza. I am very sorry for the 40,000 victims of these people who died in Gaza. They were women, they were children, they were young people, they were elderly people. And, you know, we talk a lot about Israel, about the Jews, and about various things that concern this region. And we say sometimes, I feel like second-class people who live in Gaza today. I personally visited the refugee camps that are in Lebanon a few years ago. And you know, to see generations of people growing up in a refugee camp from those previous conflicts: What will we grow out of these people? It will not be people who will see peace, who will want to cooperate. We must do more than the international community to resolve this conflict, to win two states on this territory. Above all, we need to stop the humanitarian crisis that is there at the moment. And I am very supportive of Mr Borrell. As the European Union, we must do everything to get help to those people who need it most, and Israel must make this possible.

Commissioner, when we are talking about the Energy Union, I wonder whether that Union is real cooperation and where the European Commission was when Hungary and Slovakia were blackmailed by Ukraine and threatened to stop Ukraine from importing critical raw materials through Ukrainian territory, for which we paid. This was also mentioned by a colleague from Hungary, so I would be very interested if you could answer me. When we talk about the Energy Union, it is very important to talk about the fact that we still have high energy prices in the European Union, which are felt by our own citizens. Our companies pay about three and a half times what companies in the United States pay for energy. So we really have to deal with how much that energy costs us. We support the production of hydrogen in the European Union, but we still do not know exactly what we will be using it specifically for. It might also be interesting to know what ideas we have and how we will use the hydrogen we plan to produce on a large scale. We need better infrastructure for electricity. If we want to use electricity more, whether we should focus more on Member States investing money also in ensuring that energy security is actually supported by good infrastructure. And also, when we talk about electric cars and the use of electricity, the safety of these vehicles is important, because we can see that today, even car manufacturing companies are going back to fossil fuels and standard engines, because they are much better.

Madam President, I think this report is a very good basis for further discussion, and it is a wish list that we could perhaps make a little use of, but look at how. The proposed amount of money that Mr Draghi proposes that we add to the European budget every year may not be the best idea, and the Member States will, of course, have to deal with it, but it must be taken as a good proposal. I think we shouldn't forget people. I also miss a little bit in this report such a social dimension and the promotion of employment, but the promotion of workers' social rights and what we have actually built in the European Union in this area. I am also pleased that he mentions support for cohesion and cohesion policy, which is indeed a very good EU policy for investment and balancing regional disparities. However, I am somewhat sorry that he is saying that some regions should be left out and that we should invest this money more in innovation. Supporting the start-ups of our own smart people is certainly a very important part of this report. But the most important question that arises is what we are sacrificing. Mr Draghi asks whether we are sacrificing the environment, the standard of living or our soul. I think we should sacrifice a little pride and say that some legislation is not good and we should correct it.

Madam President, the European Union is an institution designed to promote peace, not war. I will repeat this in this House all the time. We're confusing two things here. Some of you here say that you want peace, and then at the same time you say that peace means the defeat of Putin. Because these are two different things. When we talk about peace, peace means discussion, cooperation, or negotiations to bring a solution to the table. When we talk about war, we are talking about the dead. We're talking about guns, we're talking about guns. I think that the Union should talk about a peace policy, and that we should call more in this House, too, for some peace negotiations to be held and for us to support, no matter what peace plan, just so that this war ends and people do not die. You know, the Slovak Republic is inundated with people who have fled Ukraine. And I am very sorry that some Member States are releasing these people to go to war in which they do not want to fight. This is also a violation of human rights in my opinion, and we should also consider whether this is right. Ukraine is actually a country that will be devastated by war. You are all saying here that we will support Ukraine until the last minute, until the last euro. But how many? What does that mean? We have here the Draghi report, which speaks of support for the European Union's competitiveness. But at the same time, you're saying that you're going to give an infinite amount of money to get people killed there and keep fighting there. So we really need to recover so that we don't sell our souls to the devil just to take some kind of revenge that many of you here are longing for.

Madam President, we are talking about the future of agriculture. We saw farmers on the streets, and suddenly it was possible to change European legislation. So I'm glad that we really want to do something. On the other hand, we should perhaps stop importing cheap agricultural products from Ukraine and really make a real difference to European agriculture. Potrebujeme investície, potrebujeme diverzifikáciu, potrebujeme inovácie, technológie v poľnohospodárstve, ako ste povedali pani komisárka. Otherwise, I wonder why Commissioner Janusz Wojciechowski, who is in charge of agriculture in such an important debate, is not here. You talked about these necessary things, but that's why we need more money for agriculture. And then the most important thing in all this is certainly that we maintain sufficient support for farmers in all regions of the European Union. Many colleagues have said that animal production needs to be reduced a bit. I think the opposite, because animal production also benefits us in that it also contains the products that we need in order to increase crop production. So I would certainly also talk about more support for animal production, because not all people in the European Union want to be vegan. Farmers must not suffer from the Green Deal, and we also do not need new regulations and for agriculture to absorb the problems we have. But the most important thing to do is to finally match the payments between eastern and western farmers so that we have real equality in agriculture in the European Union.

Madam President, this first part-session is mainly about big symbols, and I am very sorry that the first debate in this new European Parliament is not about our citizens, it is not about our topics, it is not about social security, it is not about fighting poverty at all, but it is about a third country, Ukraine. But I understand that this is your decision. I am also very sorry that the debate on the debate on Gaza, on the situation taking place there, was not adopted. I do not know where this war is less important or where these people are less important than the people in Ukraine. I am also very sorry that we have not accepted the debate and discussion about the current political culture, not only in the European Union, but also in a world where political leaders or people who have a slightly different opinion than a majority or what is said in the standard media are being attacked, as happened to the Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic Robert Fico and, more recently, Donald Trump. So I am very sorry that this House has once again decided to talk only about Ukraine and still about Ukraine. Nevertheless, speaking of Ukraine, I think that what we should be saying first is certainly the EU's peace policy. The European Union was created as a project of peace, and that should be the first thing we should say. That we are to push for peace negotiations, we are to push for a solution to the situation and we are to push for the two sides to sit at the same negotiating table and for peace to finally come to Ukraine, and not just to deliver constant weapons and talk about how this war must end with Russia's defeat.