Debate contributions by Eva MAYDELL

I think we're at the point where we need to have a very clear narrative, as Europe, as to what we stand for, and clear communication of what we are aiming to do with our legislation. And this is why in the first part of my speech I very clearly emphasised what those rules are for, and we need to be finding a way to amplify our narrative and make it stronger. Because I honestly do believe that the issues that we would have with companies across the Atlantic, this means all types of companies, are going to be much more different and much broader than just the tech debate.

Mr President, Executive Vice‑President, dear colleagues, in the last term, a European leader said that 'strategic autonomy is not isolation'. Let me quickly build on that and add something more. I don't think strategic autonomy is war either. It has to be clear that, through strategic autonomy, we do not defend or attack with rules. What we actually do is protect our citizens. And I think it is an important point that has to resonate with our partners and our competitors, such as the United States, but also with our rivals, such as China. European legislation such as the DMA and the DSA is not expanding the European budget through collecting fines. And nor are they tariffs. Our actions are simply aimed at having stronger standards, at having and setting standards for safety, for our European way of life, and our European understanding of rights and liberties. So the main question today is, how do we achieve sovereignty without getting into isolation, and without trade and tariff wars? My answer is, 'by being smart'. 'Smart' here means to know our strengths and weaknesses, the spots where we have leverage and further develop them. It means building partnerships where we can, and resilience where we must. Strategic autonomy is not about closing doors. It's about knowing which ones to open – and how.

Mr President, today we are voting on a decision of great importance for Bulgaria and for the whole of the EU. The report we are considering today is one of three on Bulgaria's future in the euro area. The previous convergence reports of the European Central Bank and the European Commission clearly show that Bulgaria is ready to join the euro area from 1 January 2026 and meets all the criteria. Let us not forget that Bulgaria has been following this path for more than two decades. From the currency board in 1997 to full participation in ERM2. The facts are clear. National legislation is fully consistent with EU requirements, price stability with inflation below the reference value has been achieved, public finances are sound, deficit and debt requirements have been met. The currency has maintained a stable exchange rate within ERM2 for more than two years. And although this report seems quite technical, for every Bulgarian of the last three generations, it is something much more. From those who were in the square in 1989 and peacefully overthrew the communist regime, through those who starved the currency crisis of 1997 to those young people who today call Europe their home. The adoption of the euro is the achievement of the European dream for them in all its fullness. And we owe it to all of them to approve this report. Bulgaria is ready, Europe is ready. Let's take this step together.

Mr President, honourable Members, representatives of the Council, of the Commission, history moves in waves. Some are ripples. Others are tsunamis that tear down the old and create something different and new. Electricity did that. Cars did that. The internet did it too. Today we are staring at another such moment, with the development of AI, quantum, next-generation semiconductors. But this time, the wave moves faster. It doesn't take decades – it takes days and months. And all of this comes with a backdrop of a number of challenges. The first challenge is related to technology's advancement, and AI advancement, which is reshaping every aspect of our life: from the way we live to the way we work, how we govern, how our economies operate. But as well as this, it is disturbing the very fabric of our societies. Secondly, we find ourselves in geopolitical grounds that are shifting. The transatlantic relationship, for example – still one of our most valuable assets – feels less predictable. Trust is being shaken all across the globe. Our Ukrainian friends are fighting at our border for their freedom and dignity. The global order based on rules is changing and no one knows what the new rules will look like. Thirdly, Europe is losing ground in competitiveness and growth. Our energy prices are among the highest in the world. And when it comes to technologies, once we were the leader, but now, of the world's top 50 companies, only four are European. In a way, this is a wake-up call, but perhaps the final wake-up call that we can no longer fail to ignore. So there are several steps to take for Europe to lead in order to be part of the race. We have to do that with vision and strategy, and not with a patchwork of ideas that are glued together. Why do I say that? In order to have vision and strategy, first and foremost, the Commission has to have a clear and comprehensive assessment of our capabilities in each sector – where we can lead and invest more, where we are dependent and need to diversify, and where we need to cooperate, and do that in a strategic manner. Once this assessment is done, secondly, we must identify and prioritise the areas that are key for Europe. We can't afford to spread limited resources across every sector. Instead of chasing the next Nvidia chip, let's double down on areas where we can excel – areas such as deep tech, quantum sensors, and companies like ASML, without which the world would come to a halt. Strategic innovation means investing where we can leverage, not following where others already dominate. Thirdly, we need to make sure we have that innovation and that growth. To close the funding gaps, we need to unleash capital at scale. With the support of the Commission, the European Innovation Council could tap into pension and insurance funds to support deep tech, and help reap higher long-term yields for investors across Europe. The Commission should take the necessary provisions already in the current MFF to lead in the establishment of a public-private investment fund. Such a fund could build on the private market standards together with European private investors. It would unblock a high level of investment and would be beneficial for the entire single market. Fourth, when it comes to European researchers, they are some of the most renowned, with outstanding peer-to-peer recognition. But excellence in research must translate into products and services. This is why we need to ensure innovation doesn't stop in the lab. We must support our leading start-ups and our leading innovators through various initiatives, through connecting mechanisms as well as funding, to bring great ideas to market and scale them effectively. Lastly, the adoption of artificial intelligence by our traditional industries is absolutely key. We might rely on others for semiconductors and components, but our strength lies in applying technology. Currently, only 13 % of European businesses have integrated AI tools so far – 13 %. I believe we can do way more, because history shows that it's not the inventors but the adopters who lead industrial revolutions. So we cannot afford to watch while others write the future. Let's stop managing decline and start winning that future.

Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, business people know that trade relies on two fundamentals: economic incentive and also trust. When it comes to economic incentives, the numbers in trade volumes between the EU and the US speak for themselves. Just last year, US-EU goods trade hit a record of USD 976 billion. But that trust – trust in rules, commitments, in partners is shaken on both sides of the Atlantic. Economic nationalism does not make you first, but it makes you alone. And this is not leadership – this is volatility masquerading as strength. When we speak about strength, the numbers are clear, and Europe can respond with resolve. But our priority is principled openness, because we are not the Democratic Party: we are an ally.

Madam President, colleagues, Europeans, I've heard these days that Europe is in denial, that we are a political dwarf and that we are weak. So I very much wanted to take the floor today in order to disagree with this statement. We have faced various crises – one after the other – and every time we have proven that we are stronger when tested. We have delivered vaccines to our citizens in record time; we secured gas supplies when Russia cut them off; we tackled economic turmoil. And every time there was talk about disunity, we proved we can succeed. Today we face yet another situation, where our closest ally often sounds like an adversary, and that makes us feel threatened and uncertain. And at the beginning of this plenary, I want us to remember the words of Robert Schuman, who said: 'Europe will not be made at once [...]. It will be built through concrete achievements which first create a de facto solidarity'. It is the moment of solidarity where words turn into actions, because words do not build Europe.

(Start of speech off mic) ... important things. First of all, we see that the way the laws we have passed are acting. They are retroactive. We would like them to be able to prevent what we see happening. And this is why we need to think very carefully whether just posing a fine is enough. In my opinion, it is not. We need to make those laws actionable. Secondly, we have to make sure that those laws work hand in hand with national authorities, whether these are the intelligence services, whether these are the ministries of foreign affairs, defence, interior affairs, whether these are the attorney-generals that have to be working together. We need the type of disinformation war rooms or election interference war rooms working together with the enforcers of the DSA and similar legislations.

Madam President, honourable Members, I wonder how you, as elected representatives of European citizens, would react if, in the previous European elections in June, your party received less votes than it actually does? How will you react and how will we accept if your societies want to leave the European Union tomorrow? How will you react if your fellow citizens no longer want democracy? I say this because an internet company with Russian support can lead a candidate to victory in a presidential election in a Member State of the European Union. If she can do that, then she can do anything. So the main question we have to ask ourselves today, in my opinion, is why were we unprepared for such an attack? We've been talking about Russian meddling and election manipulation for a long time. What happened in Romania can happen in Bulgaria, it can happen in Austria, it can happen even in Germany. We know what foreign interference through social media looks like, and so I welcome the European Commission's investigation, but I urge it to go further. Let's assess whether the current legislation can stop such attacks, and if changes are needed, let's make them, because the Kremlin and Georgescu can adapt. If they can adapt, so can we. It is our responsibility to protect European citizens and our democracy.

Madam President, I think it's very important to admit in this Chamber that since 5 November we face an even more complex world. This is why our response has to be immediate and it has to be actionable. There is no time for Europe to defer those decisions and actions that are so needed now. It is of high importance that we become even clearer in our priorities, but also defending our values. This is why I think it is now the time for Europe to step up even further our support and aid for Ukraine. It is now the time for Europe to invest in our tech sector and to build it in a global, competitive way. It is now for us to cut red tape in order to unleash our industries, to innovate, to develop and to be more competitive. Because if President‑elect Trump seeks to be transactional with Europe and the world in general, then we will need to deploy our spreadsheet diplomacy, and I hope we will be ready to do that. This is why, more than ever, we need a strategy where we identify common ground and figure out how to do business.