Debate contributions by Enikő GYŐRI

Dear Madam President, After a long wait, we just lived it. Tomorrow we will finally conclude the first of the simplification packages. Unfortunately, the left-wing factions have not lied to themselves this time either. All efforts were made during the negotiations to slow down the process and not to reduce the administrative burden on businesses, but to force them to count according to new indicators. We, the patriots, have not let this happen, and we have finally managed to find a compromise that really simplifies the lives of European businesses and facilitates their access to finance. Firstly, the InvestEU guarantee will be increased by €2.9 billion. Hungarian businesses will also benefit from this. In addition, we will provide €40 million in additional resources to the advisory centre that will help companies navigate. Secondly, we are also tripling the threshold for reporting obligations. Projects below €300,000 are exempt and the most burdensome green transition reporting obligation has been removed. Thirdly, we protect small and medium-sized enterprises, so that subsidiaries of large multinational companies do not have access to funds through tricks at the expense of smaller ones. This package is therefore finally a real relief for European companies. More resources, less bureaucracy. We Patriots believe in this and we will continue to work for a competitive Europe. It's a long way to go, but we're persistent, and we're confident we'll make it to the finish line.

Dear Madam President, China is an unavoidable player in global supply chains, the EU's second trading partner, from whom we like, dislike and are heavily dependent. Our dependence on rare earths is even more significant than in others, but there is no green transition, i.e. solar power, windmills, without China. The EU therefore urgently needs to rethink its approach to China. America saw that relations with them could be settled by dialogue rather than by fist. The EU should finally take this path. An open economy, in principle a great trading power, cannot close itself. Already the human rights or trade restrictions imposed so far have caused us much harm. If we continue to live under the spell of trade defence instruments, we will further undermine our own competitiveness. The dialogue between Commissioner Šefčovič and the Chinese Trade Minister at the end of October, as well as China's commitment not to further block exports of semiconductors produced by Nexperia, clearly shows that if we talk to them, we can reach an agreement. So let us give up the ideological struggle and finally stand up for our own European interests. I thank the Commission for our balanced relationship with as many regions as possible and after as many negotiations as possible.

Congresswoman, I'm sorry. The thing is, he probably didn't understand what I said. This committee, with your support, has put forward a proposal – your faction is conspiring to put it together – that would be bad for every Hungarian citizen, for every Hungarian family. The fact that this committee does not give the money now has no tangible proof other than that we have already agreed a thousand times, and then there was always an order from the top that we should not agree with the Hungarians. You know, that's what I said about being handed out in the face, and that's what's destroying the European Union if you take it in that direction.

Mr. President, please. Over the weekend, we watched the acting of some self-appointed MEPs and the Commission. Sounding promises to the farmers, all the rules are broken conciliation, and then the result: the big nothing. This was achieved by the great coalition including the Tisza bank and the DK. Let's look at the facts. The overall amount of the next MFF will not change and farmers will not receive more money. The common agricultural policy would be cut by almost 20% and merged with traditional policies into a single fund. The creation of the so-called rural target does not compensate for the loss of the second pillar of the CAP. Then where would the money go? Well, for Ukraine and loan repayments. Conditionality would be extended, so that, to speak Pestiously, it could be even more handed out in the face. The written and unwritten rules of the budgetary procedure, which has been functioning well for decades, are being broken. The role of the European Council, which represents the sovereignty of the Member States, would be reduced in order to eliminate the possibility of a veto. All this without a treaty amendment requiring unanimity, of course. This is the road to the United States of Europe. The Commission should present a new proposal which respects the Treaties, the powers of the Member States, competitiveness, the interests of farmers and regions. Von der Leyen's proposal is only good for fishermen to use her words.

Mr. President, please. Only the substance of the Commission's 32-point work programme has been omitted. Another €60 billion to arm Ukraine and €130 billion to run the Ukrainian state in two years. The title "For the Independence of Europe" therefore has no relation to reality. The Commission continues to march on the road paved by war, which is our greatest burden. Without peace, there is no economic growth and competitiveness. Until then, all other proposals that are supposed to be aimed at competitiveness and the single market are just beauty patches. It would therefore be urgent for the Commission to support initiatives that promote peace, such as the efforts of President Trump and Hungary to end the war. It must also be seen that Ursula von der Leyen is now paying back to the left the price of remaining in power. They didn't even tell the left that they liked the program. Depriving Member States of additional competences, harmonising pension systems, social and green measures. To this end, the People's Party, which also knows the Tisza Party, assists. Brussels does not want to dictate in areas such as pensions. So far, the only thing that has come out of that is a reduction in emoluments. We Patriots want change, we want the Commission to finally work for peace and for Europe's competitiveness.

I understand, Congresswoman, that you're trying to fix the irreparable. You once said that the worse for Hungary, the better for you. They also said they wouldn't tell them what they wanted to do after the election. It's a story about KATA that you said was abolished by the Orbán government. Do you know that big companies have hired people to fit into KATA, and the wretched have no access to gyes, no bonuses, no social security? This was a circumvention of the system, so I would like to ask you, on what grounds do you dare to say such things, when you have already been discredited 62 times in tax matters, and you are saying and deceiving such things to this audience, which is simply not true?

Dear Mr President, A competitive tax environment is essential to put the European economy on a growth path and improve our global competitiveness. Unfortunately, the von der Leyen Commission continues to play its role as a voluntary world saver rather than serving the interests of European people and companies. Any simplification proposals in this report aimed at creating a competitive tax environment are therefore welcome. However, the Left of this House and the Commission continue to push for a toxic green ideology that is destroying the Union's economy, and this is reflected in the report. He advocates excessive climate targets and would be ideological about what is good or bad investment. This is a Member State competence, and Brussels has no say in this. The report also expects a strong commitment to the implementation of the global minimum tax rules. The international scene has completely changed. Brussels transposed global minimum tax rules too early, while with the agreement of the G7, U.S. corporations will be subject to much more favorable U.S. rules, and tech giants will get away with taxation again, negotiations have stalled. There are no pillars, pillar 2 is mandatory. This puts European companies at a serious disadvantage. Brussels is back up against the wall. We should be champions in tax cuts, not taxation, but the Commission is putting tax-reducing countries at risk. The EU is therefore doing its best to reduce its own competitiveness. It is time for the EU to finally look at its own interests, as others in the world do. We, the Patriots, want a radical change in this.

Madam President, Latin America is a region with enormous potential, as well as being an ally that shares our values. The problem is that EU leaders have been neglecting relations for years and betting on the wrong partners. The European left often collaborates with Latin American authoritarian regimes and keeps the narco-communist regimes of Cuba, Venezuela or Nicaragua alive. He has even intervened openly in electoral processes. Over the last ten years, civil society organisations have received close to €1 billion from the EU. A good part of this money has gone to projects related to gender and ideological issues. How can European taxpayers' money be spend in such a way? Moreover, Brussels is not acting decisively enough against organised crime. He watches with indifference as the drug flows into Europe. I urge the Commission, in cooperation with Washington, to take the lead in the fight against drugs. Enough of the policy of double standards and ideological pressures. More collaboration and respect for the freedom-loving peoples of Latin America.

Dear Madam President, The single market is the foundation of our prosperity. By doing so, the benefits of the Union are tangible. Unfortunately, it is still full of internal obstacles. According to the International Monetary Fund, this would be equivalent to a tariff of 44% for goods and 110% for services. Instead of breaking down barriers, the Commission is focusing on war. Officer, I haven't heard anything new that hasn't been promised before. What should be done? Reducing energy prices, improving interconnections, and not penalising Member States with more difficult geographical conditions than my country, Hungary. There should be equality between the regions. The Commission's hand has always been somehow inclined towards Western Europe, as in the case of the Services Directive or the Mobility Package. The Savings Union is coming. I expect the Commission to take into account the interests of smaller capital markets, especially in Central and Eastern Europe. Without them, there is no local ecosystem. Then the SME: easier funding, simpler and fewer rules, but simplification is sluggish. This is where the Council was blamed. I would like to point out that, because of the left of this House, there is no progress in simplification. The Patriots want change, action. It is time for the Commission to finally focus on what its mandate is about.

Dear fellow Members, This agreement is proof of Europe's weakness and blackmail. The EU is getting sicker. In 2008, it accounted for a quarter of the world economy, today it accounts for 17%. Since yesterday, we have also known that only 11% of the recommended recipe, the Draghi report, was implemented in one year. So let us not be surprised if the Union is treated and humiliated on the international stage, as happened on the golf course in Turnberry. But we know the reason. The Commission has not concealed: It was a political bargain for the U.S. to continue funding Ukraine. So for von der Leyen, Ukraine is more important than its own citizens and businesses. I cannot applaud the fact that we have paid 2-3 percent for exports so far, now we have to pay 15 percent, while American industrial products come in duty-free. This is far from a fair, reciprocal and balanced agreement. Moreover, there was no mention of how the Commission intends to compensate the losing sectors, such as the European winery. The Commission has gone beyond its remit, it promised America “cheap’ purchases, without authorisation, of energy and investments. The 28th of July will be included in the history books as a day of humiliation for Europe.

Dear Madam President, A year ago, President Draghi made a very serious diagnosis of the EU: declining competitiveness, low productivity, high energy prices, stifling administrative burden, low investment, fragmented capital markets and a lack of innovation. However, the Brussels elite parks this, together with the Budapest Declaration, which makes implementation mandatory, in the branch and continues the ideologically based economic policy. He is not doing everything he can to end the Russo-Ukrainian war, which is our greatest burden, beyond the fact that thousands of people die every day. We're gonna crash into it. For this reason, European industry pays more for energy than its American or Chinese competitors. The Commission would penalise Member States buying cheap energy and commit to buying expensive LNG without a mandate. And he would do it all out of debt. The left always spends money that it doesn't, hoping it will come from somewhere. Others first earn the money and then spend it. This is the difference between the world's leading powers and the Union. Europe does not understand the new geopolitics, it is unable to adapt, it is weak. And what is the response of the majority of the EP from the People's Party to the Communists? To indebt future generations with another joint loan, to introduce new EU-wide taxes, while from 2028 almost 1/5 of the EU budget should be spent on debt repayment. It would take away the powers of the Member States in the capital markets so that Brussels can tell us what to invest in. So we'll be ruined. We need to reduce corporate burdens, we need real competitiveness, and we say no to indebtedness.

Dear Mr President, This Parliament is once again the champion of timing. He runs forward without a role at the negotiating table. A number of people are shouting wolf, which could worsen the EU's already weak negotiating position. Yes, it must be said, ladies and gentlemen, that we are weak. The Commission has weakened the EU on the global stage. Competitiveness, bargaining power, relationships. We have more enemies and rivals than ever before. Moreover, it was difficult for Brussels to swallow who had been elected as president of their own free will overseas. It was a serious strategic mistake to vote for the Democratic candidate. We still suffer from this effect. And the U.S. negotiates from a position of power, so it's not easy. We expect the Commission to defend the interests of the Union, but to be open to innovative solutions. You have to negotiate with a businessman like a businessman. Make the U.S. interested in reaching an agreement with us. The left of the house wants retaliation. They are confident that it will create a lot of jobs. It's also interesting to think that Trump made a deal with a number of countries, including China, the eternal rival, before he made a deal with us, the historic ally. It is also a sign that we are doing something very wrong. The domestic task is to develop a new EU economic policy, not to complement and patch up the Green Deal. It's the only way we'll be competitive. The external aspect is to re-build partnerships in the spirit of connectivity and see what is good for European companies. And it is an illusion to create an alternative WTO with Asia, without China. This would be as useful as sanctions against Russia. Neither the US nor China can be renounced as partners, neither of which can be replaced. Let's stand on the ground with both feet. The market wants predictability. Let the Commission rise to its responsibilities.

Dear Madam President, Dear fellow Members, Connecting as wide a range of countries as possible is essential for the recovery of the European economy and for improving competitiveness. We can strengthen through connectivity. To do this, however, it is necessary to give up the ideological struggle to divide the world into good and bad, and to trade only with the good. The new geopolitical situation also requires us to put our relations with China in order. Let us finally accept that there will be no democratic rule of law in our sense, and that we will not agree on everything. We can still trade for mutual benefit. This resumption would be the task of the EU-China summit at the end of July. It must be acknowledged that it is not only like-minded political systems that can be productively co-operated. The United States, which has declared China its main enemy, has already been able to reach an agreement with Asian power on certain issues. So let's be able to do it. Let's reduce addiction, let's stand on more legs. And, of course, let's not be naive. Let's make China interested in relations with us. We look at what is good for European companies and what creates jobs. Negotiations and results can only be achieved in the language of mutual respect.

Dear Mr President, Dear fellow Members, We have said many times that Brussels' ideological economic policy has resulted in slow growth, low productivity, little innovation and high energy prices in Europe. According to the IMF, the U.S. economy is growing three times faster this year than ours. Since the Draghi report, it is no secret that we are severely lacking in resources. In a negative story, the European Investment Bank is a positive player because, unlike the Commission, it makes investment decisions on a relatively rational basis and focuses on SMEs. The Budapest Declaration calls for increased engagement on its part, which I support, as well as for simplifying the conditions for accessing EIB loans and significantly increasing the EIB's loan guarantee facility. The bank must maintain its excellent credit rating, because only in this way can it obtain cheap credit and continue to lend. For this to happen, it is essential that its operation continues to be guided by economic rationality. The Bank should also play its part in investment in the defence industry and nuclear energy development and help to realise the long-term development vision of the Member States. I therefore say 'yes' to the bank's activities, but 'no' to this parliamentary report. I would warn you, I would say to the EIB representative if he were here, not to give in to ideological pressure from my fellow Members on the left. This is what they are trying to do in this report. The financing of certain investments would be subject to conditions, such as a code of conduct on human rights as a condition for access to finance, and third countries would be educated on the rule of law, democracy and gender ideology. We know them well. Thank you very much, we don't want any. This is not economic rationality, this is ideology. And I've never heard of a successful bank that was able to do business on that basis. Licensing should be based on market needs and on the principle of equal treatment, and in any case not on political criteria. The Hungarian opposition, therefore, has an enlightenment. I hope that actions will follow.

Thank you for your question. You know very well that the judiciary in Hungary handles corruption extremely harshly. There were cases, and they're under the proper procedure, and whoever's supposed to be in prison is there. If you are aware of any case, please go and report it to the police and you can be sure that there will be proper justice. The accusations, the general accusations we experienced here in the previous debate, have no place. By the way, it could be agreed that everyone should have domestic politics in their own house, and that Hungarian voters should decide whether they like the government or not.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, in Spain, for years, not a day has passed without a corruption scandal linked to the socialist government, the Sánchez family or the PSOE. The Judiciary is under pressure, the Prosecutor's Office is under political orders and the Constitution is no longer sacrosanct to the left. The European Public Prosecutor's Office has processed more than 311 notifications in Spain, worth €2.8 billion in damages. The European Court of Auditors states that it has identified serious problems in the use of European funds. What about Brussels' answer? Well... none. And what if conservatives rule? They take away your funds and organise a debate about you in plenary every month, as is the case with my homeland, Hungary. The Poles have already learned. If they vote according to the taste of Brussels, they are given the money. This is called hypocrisy and double standards politics. And as it is very fashionable to give political advice, I have one for the PP: to have the courage to go to the polls, so that the Spaniards can elect a new Executive.

You have recently been delighted to quote: "the deteriorating standard of living of Hungarians strengthens the opposition". I would like to ask you whether you are planning further actions and colluding with the Commission in the remaining time before the elections, so that Hungarians do not have access to the resources that are due to them for railway renovation, hospital renovation, infrastructure development or the positioning of small and medium-sized enterprises?

Dear Madam President, The report recognises problems in many places, there are delays in the disbursement of funds, transparency issues and the Commission applies double standards. However, its conclusions go astray. Firstly, we cannot allow the RRF to serve as a model for future EU funding. This would result in Brussels making the disbursement of most funds subject to its own arbitrary political conditions. We know what we are talking about, because the left-wing elite in Brussels is still wrongfully withholding the recovery money due to the Hungarian people, simply because we Hungarians think in a different homeland and in a different Europe along the lines of traditional values. We cannot allow the Von der Leyen cabinet's loneliness to determine access to EU funds in the future. Secondly, the report calls for the introduction of new taxes at European level so that the EU can repay the joint loan taken out under the RRF. We patriots say no to that. We are clearly advocating that the consequences of Brussels' flawed policy should not be passed on to European taxpayers. Perhaps the left should not have made an irresponsible decision and indebted the future generation. Thirdly, this House would once again disregard the EU Treaties and seek to increase its influence beyond its sphere of competence. If it were up to you, the left-wing MEPs, the European Parliament could already have a say in the design of Member States' recovery plans. It's a mistaken role. I therefore call on you to respect the rules of the game and on the Commission to stop political blackmail and to pay the money due to the Member States. Learn from the mistakes of the RRF and do not use it as a model when planning the next multi-annual budgetary framework.

Madam President, I'm sorry. This report bears all the hallmarks of a misguided left-wing economic policy. He acknowledges that Europe has competitiveness problems and competition is not such a curse word anymore, but it does not face the main problems. You on the left can't understand that without a fundamental turn, we're just going downhill. With some cosmetics, they remain in the venomous green ideology, which has failed. Factories settling abroad, expensive products and services, excessive rules, unaffordable energy prices remained behind. No wonder there is no economic growth. The rest of the world, on the other hand, does not redeem the world, but looks to its own interests. It attracts investment and companies with a business-friendly environment, i.e. much cheaper energy prices and easily accessible financing. The Commission should also act in this regard. Competition policy should ensure a level playing field between the different regions of the single market and improve global competitiveness – not against Member States, but in cooperation with them. Flexible State aid rules are needed to support the European economy in a simple, rapid and effective way and to offset international disparities.

Mr. President, please. In the current turbulent period, there is a need for strategic calm, just no haste, no threats. You have to think coldly about what's in Europa's best interest. It's definitely not a trade war. That would do the most harm to our own citizens, our companies and our industry. Supply chains would be damaged, prices would rise, companies would be lost. It was a serious strategic mistake that the Brussels mainstream clearly voted in favour of the Democratic candidate before the elections. The correction came too late. We should finally get used to Brussels trying to tell the citizens of certain countries what kind of government to vote for. We expect the Commission to deal with the situation through effective negotiations. Be open to innovative solutions. You have to negotiate with a businessman like a businessman, and at the same time you have to tidy up our own reception. We must finally cut red tape, have fewer and simpler rules, put an end to the ideological, economic and trade policies of the last five years, protect farmers and make the internal market more attractive. In this way, Europe can remain open to all in the hope of mutual benefit. Only in this way can we regain our competitiveness and become once again a major player in international affairs.

Dear Mr President, The first step in correcting Brussels' flawed economic policy is to improve competitiveness. This requires investment, but not credit. As Patriots, we will not allow future generations to be dragged into debt. Deepening the capital market and mobilising private capital is a good way forward. The capital market should be easily accessible to citizens and businesses, as stated in the Budapest Declaration. But a few comments: The first is that Europe's risk appetite will never be the same as America's. Encouraging a complete cultural shift is an illusion, but instead we need to create a business-friendly environment here that keeps and mobilizes savings. Less and more reasonable rules: That's the key. Second, the common market in capital is important for all Member States to provide the same opportunities. The third: the link between savings and investment should be left to the market, without politics or ideology. The Commission should not want to dictate, but should build on good practices and opinions from Member States. Do not focus, but seek synergy. Respect the competences of the Member States, in particular in supervisory and tax matters. We patriots will continue to fight for a fair business environment based on the needs of the market.

Mr. President, please. The European Semester was established in 2011 under the Hungarian Presidency in order to coordinate the economic processes of the Member States and to ensure financial discipline. The left is now pushing its own ideological convictions instead of the topic. It is not enough that the framework has now lost its original macroeconomic focus, you on the left are fighting to ensure that the Commission can hold Member States accountable for as many issues of national competence as possible. I would like to thank the rapporteur for his efforts to prevent this as much as possible. The CSRs should only cover areas of EU competence and should in no way apply double standards. Unfortunately, you did not want to see any reference to this in this report. You will continue to stand up for green ideology when it has become crystal clear how harmful it is to the European economy. You encourage further borrowing, we patriots do not want our grandchildren to pay the price of your ideological campaign. Instead, we believe in cooperation for the competitiveness of the Member States, where no one is coerced into ideologically based economic policies.

Madam President, I'm sorry. I first remembered a meme about the Commission's latest strategy, which portrays the EU as a rainbow-colored plug-in tank whose leader reads a rule book. Then I remembered that we already had a strategy, full of objectives, called the Lisbon Strategy, and it didn't turn out to be anything. We wanted to be the most competitive region in the world by 2010, and now we want to be the most circular. Meanwhile, industrial production fell by 0.8% in December. This is the result of the misguided economic policies of recent years. The clean industry strategy will not change anything. It's a relabelled green pact. The Commission wants 40% of the ingredients in clean tech products to be produced in the EU. Today, solar panels and windmills are almost exclusively produced in China. So I ask you, how realistic is that? Has a feasibility analysis been carried out? We need measures to help industry and people in the short term. This would include, for example, an immediate reduction in energy prices. Instead, Brussels is continuing its campaign against the reduction of utility bills and wants to phase out subsidies for fossil energy projects. The patriots will not assist you with this. We don't want ideological economics.