Speeches

Mr President, Vice-President of the Commission! Without wealth taxes, there could not have been a middle class. It could not have arisen at all. Franklin D. Roosevelt did this in 1935. Revenue Act recognized. But where are we today? Taxes on large private assets continue to decline and, at the same time, wealth is more unequally distributed than ever. Eight men – you mentioned – own more than the poorer half of the world’s population. Anyone who sees a connection here is correct. Because slowly there are only a few very, very few rich and a lot of poor. And no middle. But we can counter this if the nationalist and conservative parties and governments finally stop doing clientele politics for the rich. With a wealth tax, a super-rich tax, we are finally doing politics for the many, for a real middle class. That is why, of course, we can only vociferously support the initiative of the Brazilian G20 presidency, support it as a European Union, when a globally necessary super-rich tax is now called for. Let’s tackle it – together.

Mr President, Commissioner, 13 billion – an almost unimaginable sum. And this 13 billion euros is now at stake, because the European Court of Justice has ruled that Apple must pay back this incredible sum to Ireland. This ruling is groundbreaking in the fight against tax avoidance, because it is clear: Tax tricks are not only morally reprehensible, but now also illegal. This is drying up Europe's tax swamps more and more. That's right, because we can use the 13 billion euros more than well in times of the climate crisis, the social crisis. Floods and droughts, i.e. the damage caused by climate change, amount to 5 to 7 billion euros per year in Austria alone. That's where the $13 billion comes in. I think Ireland can use it very well. So let's get the money we are entitled to as a society back from the corporations!

Mr President! The images of recent floods in Austria, Poland, Hungary, Romania and fires in Portugal speak for themselves: Our habitat is in danger. However, the Commission's new mantra seems to be: Competitiveness at all costs. But what good is it for us if we are competitive, but in the end have exploited our natural resources in such a way that we can no longer live on and off our earth? Then we can say that we have prevailed economically against China and against the USA, but half of Europe has either sunk or burned down. This can happen, but it doesn't have to. If we Green New Deal, who has given us so much hope, consistently pursue and implement, then we create the turn, the turn that saves all of our lives. For this reason, the Commission may Green Deal We cannot go into the background, because we can only operate on a planet that also lives.

Madam President, Innovation, investment, production – these are the three magic words in the Draghi report. I think we all agree here that we want to put these three magic words into action. The spirits are divided on the ‘how’. There is talk of cutting red tape, but if we consider that industrial policy is nothing more than state support for companies to promote certain economic activities, then the industry must also play by certain clear rules of the game. These rules of the game are often sold as bureaucracy. The key lies in the harmonisation of rules within the European Union and not in the national patchwork. Because only if we really act together can we be competitive. That is why I would like to add two other magic words that Mr Draghi did not address so clearly or not at all in his report, namely redistribution and social inclusion. Because we as a society, we as a community must ensure that everyone benefits from growth and not just those who are close to the lever.

The next item is the debate on the report by Christian Ehler, on behalf of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing a framework of measures for strengthening Europe’s net-zero technology products manufacturing ecosystem (Net Zero Industry Act) (COM(2023)0161 – C9-0062/2023 – 2023/0081(COD)) (A9-0343/2023).

I wish you an excellent good morning on this last day of the parliamentary term. We start with the debate on the report by Daniel Freund, on behalf on the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, on the conclusion of an Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council, the European Commission, the Court of Justice of the European Union, the European Central Bank, the European Court of Auditors, the European Economic and Social Committee and the European Committee of the Regions, establishing an Interinstitutional Body for Ethical Standards for Members of Institutions and advisory bodies mentioned in Article 13 of the Treaty on European Union (N9-0008/2024 - C9-0127/2024 - 2024/2008(ACI)) (A9-0181/2024).

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Money laundering not only costs us an exorbitant amount, money laundering also threatens and degrades our democracy and our security. This is also why the anti-money laundering package is absolutely important. In the future, we will be able to shed more light on oligarch toys such as yachts, private jets and also football clubs. Among the highlights is AMLA, the EU anti-money laundering authority. Money laundering knows no boundaries. The importance of this new EU anti-money laundering authority is particularly evident when banks such as Raiffeisen Bank International in Austria are also expanding their business in Russia – with over 2,000 new local staff and more money – which is grotesque. So if we think of Putin's ongoing war of aggression, if we want to protect and defend democracy, then we must fight money laundering consistently. Our money laundering package is more than suitable for this.

Mr President! Only a yes is a yes. This is the key to our overall togetherness. Its boundaries stop where its boundaries begin. This is especially true at times when we are particularly vulnerable. This is especially true for sexual acts. That is why it was, of course, a bitter disappointment for me when it became clear that our new EU law will not be able to follow the European Parliament’s ‘yes only means yes’ approach. There was too much resistance in the council. But we have achieved a lot with this new EU law. We underline: Violence is nothing private, online or offline. This anti-violence package is an important start. In the revision, we must, of course, complement the "yes only means yes" principle. Thank you, Frances, thank you Evin, thank you Helena Dalli and thank these great collaborators that we were able to achieve this.

The next item is the debate on the report by Malin Björk and Eugenia Rodríguez Palop, on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality, on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2011/36/EU on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims (COM(2022)0732 – C9-0431/2022 – 2022/0426(COD)) (A9-0285/2023).

The debate is closed. Thanks very much to the rapporteurs and to everybody who contributed in this debate. The vote will be held tomorrow. Written statements (Rule 171)

The next item is the debate on the report by Samira Rafaela and Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques, on behalf of the Committee on International Trade and the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market (COM(2022)0453 – C9-0307/2022 – 2022/0269(COD)) (A9-0306/2023).

The next item is the debate on the Commission statement on Russia’s undemocratic presidential elections and their illegitimate extension to the occupied territories (2024/2665(RSP)). I should like to inform Members that there will be only one round of political group speakers, no catch-the-eye procedure and no blue cards, so be aware of that.

The next item is the joint debate on: – the report by Pernille Weiss, on behalf of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Union code relating to medicinal products for human use, and repealing Directive 2001/83/EC and Directive 2009/35/EC (COM(2023)0192 – C9-0143/2023 – 2023/0132(COD)) (A9-0140/2024); and – the report by Tiemo Wölken, on behalf of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down Union procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human use and establishing rules governing the European Medicines Agency, amending Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007 and Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 and Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 (COM(2023)0193 – C9-0144/2023 – 2023/0131(COD)) (A9-0141/2024).

The next item is the debate on the Council and Commission statements on the deterioration of living conditions in the EU (2024/2656(RSP)). As we are moving towards voting time, there are no blue cards or catch-the-eye procedure for this debate.