misclassified/meps_speeches huggingface dataset:
Preparation of the European Council meeting of 15 December 2022 (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2022-12-14

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Mr President, dear colleagues, I have listened, Mr Bek, to the long list of items that you will discuss tomorrow and after tomorrow in the Council, but I have to tell you the most important items were not there. That is, in my opinion, the sanctions and the weapons that Ukraine needs to end this war the fastest as possible. 
You can all talk about price caps on oil and gas, but the best way to end the energy crisis is to end the war. For that, Ukraine needs to win the war. There, for the moment, what we see is that weak sanctions create weak results. It’s ten months and what we see is an escalation of brutality of Russia in Ukraine – rape, genocide, deportations of children in that country. 
So what I want and expect of the European Council is that, first of all, you start a decision to give more weapons. These discussions about Patriots, about Leopards, of the European governments is a scandal! You need to send them, to transfer them to Ukraine so that they can win the war. 
The second item is on sanctions – there are still, dear colleagues, 11 oligarchs of the most important oligarchs not on the list of sanctions in Europe. In total, after the ninth package – remember you are already on the ninth package – there will be 1 400, 1 500 or maybe 1 600 on the sanction list and, in total, there are 6 000, 7 000 people that need to be on the sanction list, because they are the real backbone. 
The same for Iran. Will you discuss, in fact now, sanctions for Iran? Can we still support Iranian diplomats on the territory of Europe, dear colleagues? We need to expel them the fastest as possible from Europe. That is what we need to do, and that is what I expect: sanctions and weapons for Ukraine and sanctions against Iran at the next European Council.
Defending the European Union against the abuse of national vetoes (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2022-12-14

  Guy Verhofstadt,  on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, so it’s not only a question of, ‘Ah, finally we find a solution, even with the unanimity’, it’s the time we lose. That’s even a more important problem. So it’s not only a question of saying, ‘Yeah, but finally, in the European Union, after six months, nine months, one year, two years – the migration package is already seven years but OK, that’s only an exception maybe – we find the solution. No, it’s not about that. It’s also about the time you lose. How you manage Europe in the modern world if you need seven years to agree on a migration package. If you need six months to agree on some sanctions in the case of a war against Ukraine, that’s the problem.
And that, apparently, Mr Bek and the Czech Presidency and the whole Council doesn’t want to understand. Now they are saying, ‘Look, it’s going better because the last packages prove that it is working’. Some people are even waxing lyrical about the agreement that has been found in the beginning of this week. In fact, what is happening is that two evident files with no contestation – the 80 billion loan to Ukraine and a minimum tax on multinationals – are traded against two disputable concessions to Orbán: the approval of his recovery plan on the one hand, and then lowering the frozen amount from 6.3 to 5.8 billion. Well, I predict you something. I predict to you this at this moment that this is not the end, Mr President, of this file. What Orbán will do is to continue every new file in 2023 or to lower that amount, or to escape completely on the rule—of—law mechanism. This is not the end of the blackmail. It’s only the start of the blackmail, the agreement that you have found.
So, I think it’s high time to abolish vetoes. We have done, you have done, President Metsola has done a request based on Article 48. What I ask for is a little bit of respect of the Council towards the Parliament. If the Parliament – based on the Treaties, on Article 48 – is asking for a convention, at least that they have respect for the Parliament and answer that request, and are saying yes or no. For me it’s the same. Say no, say no against the citizens of the European Union, who in the Conference on the Future of Europe asked for such a convention and abolishing unanimity, but at least show respect for the only democratically chosen institution of this continent.
Defending the European Union against the abuse of national vetoes (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2022-12-14

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew),  blue-card speech. – Mr President, I find the attitude of countries like Austria and the Netherlands, who are using their veto to block two countries who are fully fulfilling the conditions to enter Schengen, as deplorable as the attitude of a country like Hungary using their veto in that case. 
The only thing that you have to do, Mr Dzhambazki, is say ‘yes, I agree with you’!
Order of business
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2022-12-12

  Guy Verhofstadt,  on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, I think that it’s obvious why an additional point on Wednesday afternoon would be added on defending European Union against the abuse of national vetoes. Because everybody can see today what is happening with national vetoes, on every file. More and more of these files are blocked today. The last days, the last weeks: migration strategy, Schengen, electoral law, energy, price cap on gas, taxation policy, the minimum rate on multinationals, further sanctions and further financial aid to Ukraine, where we need to find now a solution with 26 instead of a solution inside the Union.
So it’s clear that, in my opinion, vetoes are an instrument for blackmailing the Union, and it is increasing for the moment. I know that we asked for a convention to seriously discuss this. And again, due to the lack of consensus, the Council is not in a position to respond to that request. So I know that we have a discussion on Wednesday with the European Council, but it’s only 2 hours. What we are going to discuss is Ukraine, and we’re going to discuss energy.
So I request that we need to urgently debate before the Council on Thursday, and my proposal will be to add that item Wednesday afternoon as the second point on the agenda.
Keep the bills down: social and economic consequences of the war in Ukraine and the introduction of a windfall tax (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2022-10-18

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Mr President, Mr Commissioner, it has been eight months now since this energy crisis started. Eight months, and I have still not seen a coherent plan by the European Commission. I find it hugely disappointing because your job is not to come up with a fragment approach but with a global structural approach. And there isn’t one. You are talking about price caps, okay. You’re talking about windfall tax. But what is the whole picture? What will you do to tackle this energy crisis? 
I think you have to do three things. That is an energy purchase platform that is completely different to what you are doing now. You will buy together 15% in 2023 – it is the opposite of what you have to do, to buy together 85%. Where is the security fund for the investments that we absolutely need? And where is the energy assistance plan for households or companies, the same as we did with COVID-19? Why do we not repeat it now? 
You are right when you criticise in this op-ed the German approach with the 200 billion but it is not only necessary to criticise it, you have to also to come forward with an alternative. And we are going to do that with a number of MEPs. In a few moments, we are going to send you a letter about it, with these cross-party proposals.
Countering the anti-European and anti-Ukrainian propaganda of Putin’s European cronies (topical debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2022-10-05

  Guy Verhofstadt,  on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, I think that we can be very honest about this: the Russians are losing the war on the battlefield, but the Russians are not losing the propaganda war. They are winning the propaganda war.
If you look to our social media for the moment, what you see is more and more posts echoing the narrative of the Kremlin. And the narrative of the Kremlin is that this is a war that was started by us to punish Russia. And that everything that is happening with the energy crisis today is not the consequence of the war, but the consequence of the sanctions and the measures we are taking. 
And I know that there is an aid package – Mr Schinas, you have said here everything that needs to be done, but in the aid package, there is nothing about that. In the aid package is a package where we increase the sanctions against Russian individuals from 1232 to 1262, 30 more, mainly people who are involved in the referenda in eastern and south Ukraine. But nearly nothing about the celebrities, the influencers, the opinion leaders, the propagandists. 
Already on 29 June we sent, together with the Navalny Foundation, a list of 135 people that are the core of the propaganda machine of Putin to the External Action Service. And you know how many have been sanctioned? Two of them! And since the aid package, four more. We are at six now of this 135. One is Dugin, for evident reasons, and three musicians, three singers. That is what we have done, six in total. 
So my question is: if it is all true, what you are saying, why are the Commission and the Council not going after the core of the propaganda machine, tackling the 135 people in Russia? 
And secondly, if we talk about countering Putin, and the Putin propaganda machine inside our own European Union, let us not make agreements, government agreements and government coalitions with the cheerleaders of Putin like Mr Salvini or Mr Berlusconi even. But Mr Salvini was even better with his T-shirt on the Kremlin showing his support for Putin.
Well, you are from the PPE I think, Mr Schinas, maybe it’s a good moment now to say to your friends in the PPE, not to make a coalition agreement with these cheerleaders of Putin in Italy.
State of the Union (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2022-09-14

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Madame la Présidente, c’est dommage que M. Bardella ne soit plus là parce qu’il faut avoir du culot pour dire ce qu’il a dit ici. Attaquer la présidente de la Commission, qui serait responsable de l’inflation, qui serait responsable de l’augmentation des prix, quand tout le monde sait que c’est la guerre en Ukraine avec Poutine, et que c’est eux qui défendent Poutine et sympathisent avec lui depuis des années… Il faut avoir du culot pour le faire! Et ils sont même payés, peut-être? Je ne sais pas ce qu’il y a sur la liste des Américains. ça ne m’étonnerait pas si le nom de Mme Le Pen et celui du Rassemblement national étaient sur la liste des Américains, payés par les Russes. 
That said, Madam President, I thought there was one black hole in your speech – not so big as those were discovered for the moment, but – that is the absence of defence, because I think really that we are going to live in a total new world order, with huge problems for our security. And you never know what happens if tweeting Trump is returning in the US, then we will be on our own for our own security. So a defence community is an absolute necessity.
We are spending today EUR 240 billion on defence in Europe, the same amount as China, four times more as Russia. We have 130 weapons systems in Europe. We have a world record of soldiers in the world – 2.4 million. And we are powerless. That’s at least the sentiment of most people.
So my request to you is when we have a convention, and thank you for supporting it so clearly, we need to talk also by that and we need to come forward with, I shouldn’t say a copy, but a draft like the Treaty of Paris of 1952, negotiated by Adenauer, de Gasperi and Robert Schuman. That’s the way forward. Don’t forget it. And fill the black hole, please.
Presentation of the programme of activities of the Czech Presidency (continuation of debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2022-07-06

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Madam President, the Prime Minister said here in his intervention that the reform of the European Union and the change of the Treaties is a long-term exercise. That’s true. But if it is a long-term exercise, Prime Minister, you have to start early. Certainly to be ready for 2024. And as you know, the President of the Parliament has triggered Article 48, has sent you a letter, and my request to you and the request of the whole Parliament is that you react smoothly and swiftly to that request. It’s a limited request – to end unanimity and the national vetoes in the European Council because the war in Ukraine shows very well that that is the problem in the European Union for the moment. We need three months to have an oil embargo in the European Union – three months to decide that, because of national vetoes. 
We have no agreement now on this minimum taxation, a multilateral agreement in an international framework, because of the blackmail and the veto of whom? Of Hungary. And at the same time we have the whole migration package in limbo because of what? Of national vetoes. So the war is showing that that needs to change. 
So, my request to you is to smoothly say yes to the request of the Parliament to have a convention and not to play games about that, Minister – like yesterday preparing a letter with the other Member States, with a silent procedure, and saying, yeah, but, we wait for a more bold proposal of Parliament or Article 48. So the Council is now saying we cannot say yes to the limited proposal because they ask for a bold proposal! That’s playing games, Minister. Say yes to what the President of the Parliament has asked for. Don’t only use the words of Havel, act as Václav Havel.
The call for a Convention for the revision of the Treaties (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2022-06-09

  Guy Verhofstadt,  on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, for those who are still doubting if they are going to vote for this resolution, let me maybe recall what happened last week in Europe concerning the sanctions. The Americans, when the war started on 24 February, were capable immediately, three weeks after that, to launch – by an Executive Order of President Biden – an embargo on oil, on coal and on gas. And they did that on 8 March, so the war started 24 February, and 8 March, by an executive order, the Americans were ready to stop the funding of the war machine of Putin. 
You have to compare that with the way we in Europe have handled that same issue. For us, it has taken three months to come to a conclusion. It was on, I think, 4 May that Ms von der Leyen said, ‘yes, I have a proposal’ – two months after the Americans, and then it has taken three weeks, nearly a month, to decide on it, and it will be implemented by the end of the year. And there will be an exception for a number of Member States, especially for Hungary, because of unanimity and the veto right. That is the reality of today. Europe is not fit for the world of tomorrow. The world of tomorrow is not a world of nation states, dear colleagues. The world of tomorrow is a world of empires. Whether you want it or not, China is an empire; India is an empire; the US is an empire; Russia wants to be an empire. In such a world, only a European Union that is not based on unanimity, not based on veto rights, not based on such an instrument can survive. 
Therefore, I think we did a good thing to ask for a convention, Article 48, and to concentrate on the main issue that blocks the Union for the moment – and that is this unanimity rule, the veto right that exists today in our Treaties. 
I think the two articles that we have mentioned are not the only articles I hope that we as Parliament will want to reform, but we will have the chance to discuss that in the Constitutional Affairs Committee. But at least giving up the veto right in sanctions, creating a passerelle clause that was never used – it was created in the Nice Treaty – it has never been used since the moment that it was in the Treaties. 
By launching a possibility to have, with qualified majority, a passerelle clause, I think that it is absolutely needed to survive with the European Union in this 21st Century. So I hope for a massive ‘yes’ for the call for this convention to make that a reality.
The follow up of the Conference on the Future of Europe (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2022-05-03

  Guy Verhofstadt,  on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam Chair, I’m very grateful for this debate on the follow-up of the conference, because I think, in fact, that we cannot allow this conference, after one year of work, after this innovation, of the involvement of the citizens, and with the publication of a beautiful document – that is then classified vertically, I should say. That is also what the co-chair, Dubravka Šuica, and myself said at the end of the conference. 
Therefore, I think that what we as Parliament need to do is to keep the lead in this and to see where the conclusions of the conference can be implemented immediately, as we already did today with the vote on the transnational lists. Let’s remember that. Because let’s be honest, it was a recommendation of the citizens and it was a conclusion of the conference. Let’s not forget it!
But OK, OK, we will not redo the vote from a few moments ago, but we need to do that on every topic and there are a number of topics that require treaty change. When you talk about the health union, to make it a shared competence, you need the treaty change. That was also in the recommendation of the citizens. When you want a real energy union, you need a change of the treaties – because an energy union, we don’t have one. We have not one energy mix that is decided at European level and we don’t have a common purchase of energy decided at European level. So therefore, we also need a change. When you want to end unanimity in a lot of areas, you need to change. When you want to give the right of initiative to the European Parliament, you need a change. 
So, I think it’s obvious that the only way to be true to the conclusions of the conference is to call for a convention – a convention, Article 48, a convention in which we are going to say exactly what articles need to change and how they need to be changed. I hope that, if Parliament votes in favour of this with a big majority tomorrow, then on 9 May, there will also be a positive response from the Council, and that we can go in the direction that is absolutely key and needed: a real union, capable of acting and not always acting too little too late, as has been the case until now. 
So I hope anyway for a big majority in the House, for the follow-up, the approval of the results of the conference and the goal of the convention, Article 48.
Election of the Members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2022-05-02

  Guy Verhofstadt,  on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, I want first of all to thank the rapporteur, Domènec Ruiz Devesa, who did an excellent job because this is not only about Spitzenkandidaten, not only about transnational list, it is a complete electoral law. It’s a huge legislative file that we have prepared that is an overhaul of the electoral system on the 8th, on transnational votes, on a democratisation for the Spitzenkandidaten on the election day, on everything. 
I want to thank especially Sven Simon for his intervention. I have older bottles in my cellar, but I will wait until the votes are sent to open them, so we will see. 
So let there be no hesitation for those who believe in Europe to vote in favour of this. I know that Mr Annemans’ idea people vote against. He’s against Europe. He’s against the European demos. He will say it himself, he has another opinion about Europe in any way and in any way, a Europe that is not based on transnational list and on a European demos. That’s the reality. 
And I want all those who have hesitations to reflect on that. Listen to Mr Annemans and you will know why you will vote in favour of this file in a few moments, in a few seconds. Don't follow those in fact who don’t want a European demos and who think that democracy can express itself by simple addition of national democracies.
By the way, this file doesn’t abolish national democracy. What we have is we give two votes to the people, one vote on European level to vote for his own representative in the European Parliament, national representative on the parliament, and then a second vote to express the European concerns, the European challenges that are at stake.
And the most important point of this side, and I think Sven Simon has quietly underlined it, is this is also to avoid the catastrophe – may I say that? – of 2019. In 2019, when the Parliament was an outsider, I should say, in the designation, the nomination of the leading figure of the European Union, the President of the Commission. By this system, there will be a democratisation of the Spitzenkandidat. There will be votes for the Spitzenkandidat, and it will be impossible in my opinion, dear colleagues, that the Council will choose somebody else, will nominate somebody else than the Spitzenkandidat who has won the elections in 2024. 
That is what is at stake, with the balance between big Member States, small Member States and medium Member States. So for those who are still hesitating, this is in fact an historical and existential file for Europe and for the European project.
(The speaker agreed to respond to a blue-card speech)
Election of the Members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2022-05-02

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew),  blue-card answer. – On the first point it is a different file from the file in 2018, because for good reasons you have voted against it because there was no balance between big Member States, medium Member States and small Member States. Well, we, especially in Domènec’s report, have taken that as the basis for the proposal, so making a balance between the Member States so that that argument that you have used, with right reasons, doesn’t exist anymore. 
Second point: the second point is that you cannot put that in that file in the electoral law. Therefore, it is in the recital. And in the recital we explain very clearly what the engagement is of this Parliament, that we will never designate, nominate, a President of the Commission who has not been a lead candidate – lead candidate on this transnational list.
Debate with the Prime Minister of Estonia, Kaja Kallas - The EU's role in a changing world and the security situation of Europe following the Russian aggression and invasion of Ukraine (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2022-03-09

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Madam President, I would like to thank the Prime Minister for her leadership. Let’s say it here in the House: Estonia was one of the first countries, if not even the first country, to send weaponry to Ukraine. You are showing that in these dramatic circumstances, smaller countries in our Union count and can lead by example. So thank you very much for that. 
But for the rest, let’s not pat ourselves on the back. The sad reality, dear colleagues, is that we are not doing enough for Ukraine today. A no-fly zone is not on the radar. Our financial sanctions are only targeting seven Russian banks. That’s 30% of the Russian banking sector. And most importantly, there is still no ban on Russian oil and gas. 
Ukraine is fighting for European values and for our democracies while we Europeans continue to finance the war machine of Putin’s evil. So, in my opinion, it’s time that, after the Americans and also the British, we decide on a full temporary ban on Russian oil and gas for as long as this aggression is continuing. That is what we need to do. 
And yes, we will suffer, but we will survive in the coming months. But it is not clear if the Ukrainians will survive in the coming months if we don’t take that decision and we don’t need – Mr Borrell, it’s not to you that I'm saying this, it’s to the Commission in general – a fantastic strategic paper to lower our dependency on Russian gas. No, that’s for later. What we need now is immediate action and a decision on the European level, to temporarily ban, until the end of the war, Russian oil and gas.
EU-Russia relations, European security and Russia’s military threat against Ukraine (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2022-02-16

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Madam President, I’m asking myself what Mr Borrell is going to take from here as a conclusion of this debate. In my personal view, I think there’s an enormous unity in this Parliament. Besides some people on the extreme left who still think that the Soviet Union exists, and besides a part of the extreme right which is financed by Putin, I think all the rest have a huge unity.
I think that the conclusion of this debate, if I can give some advice or make a suggestion, is that we need a more robust strategy of the European Union. It’s true you did your job, and maybe more than is possible with 27 Ministers of Foreign Affairs, but the conclusion of this debate is that we need a more robust stance.
On 20 February 2014 I was at Maidan, when in the morning 49 people were killed by snipers, and I saw in the eyes of these people how they in fact belong to Europe and want to be in the European Union. Their future is there, not with Putin. Even those people who speak Russian in Ukraine don’t want Putin to come in.
So I think we have to be more robust. We need to do more. First of all, maybe use the European Peace Facility to make a common transfer of defensive weapons to them. We could do that. We have the instrument to do that. And finally – and then I will stop, Ms Hautala, because I know that you have a strong instrument with you, your hammer – we also need a pro-Russian agenda. Because Putin is not Russia, and there is an opposition there with Navalny, who needs our full support because, in the end, there will only be stability and security in Europe if there is a democratic Russia at our borders.
Presentation of the programme of activities of the French Presidency (continuation of debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2022-01-19

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Madame la Présidente, vous avez vu, Monsieur le Président, nos collègues français, du moins la plupart de nos collègues français sont obsédés par les élections en France, par l’élection présidentielle. D'où apparemment toutes ces attaques: M. Bellamy, M. Bardella, Mme Aubry, M. Bompard... M. Jadot, je le comprends: il est le seul candidat pour le moment, ici, donc il est encore enthousiaste. C’est le début de la campagne, alors on se trompe de temps en temps de discours – c’est un fait possible. J'ai eu l'impression que vous étiez à Antenne 2 ou TF1, quelque chose comme ça.
Cela dit, ce dont on a besoin, ce n’est pas de ces divisions pour le moment. Ce dont on a besoin, pendant ces six mois, c’est de l’unité européenne. Parce que, Monsieur Jadot, l’heure est grave pour l’Europe. On est menacé à l’intérieur: Kaczyński et Orbán. On est menacé de l’extérieur, par Poutine. Et à ce moment-là, il faut de l’unité, pas seulement en France, mais en Europe en général. Et donc, je vous le dis, Monsieur le Président, «fais ce que dois, advienne que pourra». Parce que je peux vous dire qu’en Europe, les citoyens vous soutiennent.
Breaches of EU law and of the rights of LGBTIQ citizens in Hungary as a result of the adopted legal changes in the Hungarian Parliament - The outcome of 22 June hearings under Article 7(1) of the TEU regarding Poland and Hungary (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2021-07-07

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Mr President, I see that you are very active with your hammer today.
So I have, first of all, a question to the Commission, can that be done independently from my speaking time? Because I hear, in the German press, that there is a suspension of the recovery plan of Hungary. But the German press is not the official gazette of the European Union. My question: is this the truth? Has that been done?
(A voice responds ‘I will reply to it)
OK, that is confirmation that you will reply to it. This House has a right to know if there is a suspension of the recovery plan of Hungary; that is a major decision. We also need to know because Ms Von der Leyen didn’t say anything about that this morning in her intervention, and we need to know that. So, that was outside my speaking time, if would allow me.
Saying that, I have followed this debate since this morning, and I’m stunned. I say that to Slovenian Presidency. After three years, closing the university, closing a radio station like Klubradio, going after the judges, the only thing that you can say here is: oh, we got the debate, and it was an interesting debate, and we didn’t apply Article 7 Paragraph 1, because we had no time to do it; we cannot decide.
I think that’s a shame! When are you going to take the only decision that you need to take, that is to request from Hungary to repeal the LGTBI law that had been voted. That is what you have to decide. No, Madam Commissioner, it is not sufficient to hold it on the agenda; there needs to be a decision. Article 7 was launched by this Parliament three years ago. It’s a shame that, after three years, the only thing you have to tell us is: oh, we will come back later on in autumn.
Presentation of the programme of activities of the Portuguese Presidency (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2021-01-20

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Madam President, I say to the Prime Minister: thank you for your clear commitment on the conference on the future of the European Union.
I know that there are still some problems in the Council, but I know your strengths. I think you are maybe the only one who can overcome that in the Council, and there is also good reason to do so, that conference, because it’s not because now that Trump is out and Biden is in that we can do business as usual.
We have reacted better to the COVID-19 crisis in comparison to the financial crisis – which was a disaster, because it took us 10 years to have the Banking Union and it’s still not there.
There are still weaknesses in the European Union. Migration is not solved. The problem of our geopolitical weakness in our relationship, for example, to Russia: not solved. The rule of law: a number of countries not biding by the rules. I think we need this conference urgently and I count on you, Prime Minister, to achieve that in the Council in the coming weeks if possible.
The arrest of Aleksei Navalny (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2021-01-19

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Madam President, at the end of the debate, I want to say something about the hypocrisy that I have heard here in this debate from Mr Zanni, the representative of the ID extreme right—wing group here. 
He is criticising the arrest of Navalny, but his master, Mr Salvini, is paid by Mr Putin, like Ms Le Pen is paid by Mr Putin. Half of the ID Group have links with Russia and Putin. 
And it’s not the end. Mr Putin is continuing his in—fight against Europe. Ponder, for example, that this right—wing Twitter thing is now using servers – because they are forbidden in the US – where? In Russia – Russian servers with their extreme right—wing policy. 
So my plea to you, Mr Borrell, is we need, as fast as possible, more sanctions, broader sanctions on more Russians, on the oligarchs. I think, even if I have never said it before, that even Nord Stream 2 has to be reconsidered in that respect.
Future Relations between the EU and the UK (continuation of debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2020-12-18

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Madam President, I am an optimist by nature. 
I think that ultimately there will be a deal, because it is in the interest of both parties to have a deal. In the interest of the UK and also in the interest of the European Union, but let’s be a little bit realistic. Everybody talks now about how someday there has to be a deal possible. Hopefully, yes, but let’s be realistic. It could be that we need all the time to negotiate this the deal.
Then there could be solutions for that. A technical prolongation of the transition, a provisional application of the agreement, or even stopping the clock! That’s also done in such negotiations.
What is now the most important for us all is not to panic from the European side and to fully support our negotiator, Michel Barnier, and to have fair competition in the end. Because it’s about that. 
It will be far more devastating for our companies if the outcome of this negotiation is unfair competition to their disadvantage. That is the reason why we have to continue to be very clear on this. There has to be a level playing field: no unfair competition can be accepted. 
Also on fish. If they want us to eat their fish, well, we have to have the possibility to catch their fish, in their waters. That’s the bit.
One last remark that I want to make, is a request to Michel Barnier, and to the negotiation team, that is to do something on Erasmus. I know the cherry-picking attitude from the Brits, which is in fact devastating for Erasmus, but let’s take a unilateral measure towards the students in Britain that they can continue unilaterally to make use of Erasmus. 
It’s a pro-European generation this young generation and it’s this generation which will bring the UK back inside the European family in the next decades.
Conclusions of the European Council meeting of 10-11 December 2020 – MFF, Rule of Law Conditionality and Own Resources – Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 – Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, as well as on new own resources, including a roadmap towards the introduction of new own resources – Regulation on the protection of the Union’s budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2020-12-16

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Madam President, all those here from the Eurosceptic side who have criticised this package are completely right. Indeed, this is a huge step in European integration, a historic step in European integration – EUR 750 billion in recovery funds paid with the EU’s own resources, financed by eurobonds, and that linked to the rule of law. 
But, let’s also be honest. There is one shadow cast over this and that is the way, naturally, Ms von der Leyen and the European Council have to ‘molest’ European treaties and principles to get over this blackmail by Hungary and Poland. I have here this fantastic opinion from the Legal Service – four paragraphs, no mention of one article of the Treaty, no mention of one court case, and saying exactly the opposite. The reality is that what the European Council did is not a coup d’état, but nearly a coup d’état. I think that the European Parliament anyway has to examine whether or not we go to court over this because there is one thing and I will conclude with that. You cannot save the rule of law in a Member State if you in fact ruin the rule of law of the Union itself.
(Applause)
Preparation of the European Council meeting of 10-11 December 2020 (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2020-11-25

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Madam President, first of all, I don’t want to intervene on Brexit. I think that we are in injury time, like we say in football, in these negotiations, but I’m still optimistic, Mr McAllister, because I do not think that this is like football. Footballers are tired in injury time, but politicians are not. I think that politicians are at their best in injury time. I am still optimistic, because it’s in the interests of both to have this agreement. 
On the rule of law, I want to simply echo what Luis Garicano and my colleague, Valerie Hayer, have said here in the debate. Ms Szydło, and Mr Zanni – sorry they are no longer here – can read the Treaty. The rule of law is not a question of subsidiarity, because that’s what they in fact are saying, that it’s a question of sovereignty. Freedom of expression, freedom of gathering, democracy, that is not a question of subsidiarity. Respect for the LGBT community in your country, that’s not a question of subsidiarity. That’s a value of the European Union, and that’s the reason we have to stick to the compromise we have found, even when I personally don’t think – and I’m grateful for the tenacity of Ms Merkel in still trying to find an agreement with Poland and Hungary – that there is a lot of room for compromise, because already in the text today you need to prove a link between the breach of the rule of law and the accounts of the European Union before the European Commission can act. So, if there is room for making it better, it’s to strengthen the system, not to weaken the system. If it is not possible – I repeat – there is only one way forward, which is enhanced cooperation inside the Treaty, based on Article 226 of the Treaty, like we did with the euro, like we did with Schengen and like we did with the European Patent. That is far better than to cave in to the blackmail of Orbán and Kaczyński. 
(Applause)
Multiannual Financial Framework (including Own Resources), Rule of Law Conditionality Mechanism and the Recovery Fund for Europe (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2020-11-11

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Mr President, the word ‘historic’ has been used, I think, 100 times here in this plenary but for once, I think, we are using it in the right way, because my impression is that exactly 20 years after the launch of the Convention, this is a real big step. Why is this a big step? Because we are in fact breaking three long-standing taboos in Europe.
The first taboo was no eurobonds, no recovery bonds – that was impossible. That was the call of the Council and of everybody after the financial crisis. And what we will do now with this programme is launch nearly one trillion of these bonds on the market, and the first bond that has been launched is a huge success.
The second new thing we are doing concerns own resources. I have heard for years ‘no, it’s impossible to have new own resources’ – for 10 years we have fought for that. It’s there and it’s not taxing the ordinary citizen, it’s taxing Google, Amazon, the big tech companies in America, imported products from China, which are in fact bad for our environment, and so on. So I don’t know what Mr Eppink has against taxing Google and Facebook and Amazon – who is against it? Not the citizens, anyway.
And then there is the fact that there will no longer be money for authoritarians.
But I want to give two short warnings. The first is to the Commission. Mr Hahn, tell your colleagues to use now the tools. I hear already in the corridors, ‘now we going to use this and we’re going to try to find out if Hungary and Poland are in accordance with the system’... but you have to do nothing at all, that has already been proved! You have now to use it and not wait two or three years before doing it.
And my second warning is this: let’s not stop the reform of the European Union. There are other things to tackle: the lack of a European Defence Community, the unanimity rule, and the fact that we cannot elect our own leader. In America they can do it – not always easily – but we cannot do it.
Conclusions of the European Council meeting of 15 and 16 October 2020, in particular the negotiations of the future relations with the UK (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2020-10-21

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Monsieur le Président, M. Bay du groupe ID n’est plus là parce que sa position frôle le ridicule. On doit s’arrêter de punir les Britanniques, on doit mieux reconnaître la souveraineté britannique mais quand il s’agit des poissons, ce n’est plus le cas, donc c’est vraiment ridicule, c’est n’importe quoi!
It’s the same with Mr Eppink. Mr Eppink is explaining to us that we do not have to do it in a European way, but we have to do a bilateral deal. Every country with the UK. The last time that you did this, you lost New York, I presume, when you got your negotiations with the British.
So, if I have a suggestion to make, Michel, it’s the following. If we make a deal with the British - and I hope that there is a deal in the coming weeks - then we put in this final agreement, in this treaty - it’s an international treaty - a disposition that automatically that treaty ceases to exist if the British don’t follow all the commitments that they have taken, including in the Withdrawal Agreement. In my opinion that is absolutely necessary because otherwise, if there is a deal, if there is an agreement, and the 27 will have ratified it, and they don’t follow their commitments, it will be a huge mess and it again be necessary for 27 decisions by the 27 Member States to stop that agreement. 
So I think that, after what has happened with the Internal Market Bill, it’s in the interest of the European Union to foresee such a disposition in that final agreement as fast as possible. I hope that there is a deal because it’s the only way to secure the Good Friday Agreement, to secure peace in Northern Ireland and to secure our internal market. 
(Applause)
State of the Union (topical debate) (debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2020-09-16

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Monsieur le Président, c'est dommage que M. Bay ne soit plus là, lui qui donne des leçons à tout le monde, même sur le financement du fonds de redressement, à un moment où c'est lui, M. Salvini, Mme Le Pen et leurs amis autrichiens qui reçoivent de l'argent de M. Poutine. Peut-être qu'il peut s'occuper de repayer l'argent à M. Poutine. Je trouve ça personnellement scandaleux que des gens pareils soient en train de nous donner des leçons, alors qu’ils reçoivent de l'argent pour détruire l'Union européenne. C'est peut-être ce qu’il est en train de faire, je suppose, parce qu'il n'est plus là. 
My proposal, Ms von der Leyen, is that you repeat these 75 minutes of your speech, that I liked a lot, in the Council. Because let’s be honest, half of the issues that you raised are in fact blocked in the Council. 
When we talk about migration, the tragedy in the Moria camp. That’s the consequence of the impossibility to reform Dublin, to reform the Migration Policy. When we talk about Belarus, it’s 40 days after these elections were stolen by Lukashenko and we are not capable of putting sanctions on the table – 40 days later. 
When we’re talking about Turkey drilling in the Eastern Mediterranean, in Greek waters, no sanction, no action at all. When we talk about Hong Kong, when we talk about the minority of the Uighurs, words yes, but sanctions no, action no. 
And when we talk about the rule of law inside the European Union, let’s be honest, it’s 5...6 years that we are talking about that here in Europe and in the European Parliament. There are no sanctions against these authoritarian regimes. 
So my plea to you, is to repeat this as fast as possible, or in 75 minutes in the Council and let’s make a pact, a deal between us, that that is the priority for 2021 next to the Recovery Fund, Mr Frans Timmermans, and to the Green Deal, naturally. That is the priority. To end unanimity, to have a Magnitsky or Navalny Act as Mr Borrell named it. And to have a real rule of law mechanism, because I don’t want it to be that at the end, in a few years, we are calling you not the geopolitical Commission, but the geominimal Commission - that I want to avoid. (Applause)
Conclusions of the extraordinary European Council meeting of 17-21 July 2020 (continuation of debate)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, Renew Europe Group / Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Date: 2020-07-23

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – (start of speech off mike) ... I have to tell you that we were with a few lone rangers that, since the outbreak of the financial crisis, started to say that eurobonds and new own resources were needed, and everybody said, ‘impossible, unrealistic, a dream that will never happen. This is Europe.’
Well, it is happening, and so I’m pleased with the outcome of this summit, and I think it’s historic. Yes, it’s historic. The first leap forward was the internal market; the second leap forward was the euro; the third leap forward is the fact that Europe will issue bonds for the first time and will increase its fiscal capacity in a dramatic way. So, I’m pleased and this is historic.
But there are also weaknesses in this plan, let’s be honest. And the most important weakness is due to what? Yes, the rule of unanimity. And that’s the reason why the pan—European projects have been gutted and that the direct transfers to the Member States and the rebates for the frugals are still there.
I think that – I will be very blunt here, in this House, and I think that I’m speaking for the whole House –this House will not give its green light for this package and for the MFF if this is not rectified, if we again do not have these pan-European projects as the priority in the MFF – and it’s easy to do! The easy way to do it is to start with its own resources earlier than foreseen in the plan. In the plan, it’s foreseen for 2023. My proposal is to start in 2021.
And finally, my last point, Madam President, before you use your weapon again against me – like every time. There needs to be a co-decision by Parliament. We’re going to spend and collect EUR 750 billion. That is only possible with democratic control. We are in Europe. We are not in China or in Russia.
(Applause)