Luděk Niedermayer
Member of the European Parliament · PPE · CZ
“Madam President, let me just react on three points on the Council agenda. First of all, on Russian aggression. Ukraine is showing strength on the battlefield every day, but it would not be possible without continuation of our economic, political and military support.”
“Last but not least, on competitiveness: One Europe, One Market is a great plan, but we must deliver – deliver not only on small things, but especially on large things like the electricity market, banking union and so on.”
“Mr President, economic dependency is more expensive than ever and more risky than ever. It does not matter if we are talking about goods, energies, services or materials and energies. The political direction is clear: we need to reduce it. It is the same as the economic necessity. Let me just say two comments.”
“Madam President, this debate confirms that the majority of the House understood that Draghi and Letta were right: the single market is the asset that can assure the stability and prosperity of the European Union.”
“I guess we should go more for regulation instead of directives and remove these obstacles. And third – and this is very important – are the barriers that are created on the Member States level by different national regulations.”
“Mr President, on 12 March, tomorrow, the Czech Republic will mark the 27th anniversary of joining NATO. This was a huge step for the Czech Republic on the way to democratic Europe. Unfortunately, many Europeans have understood NATO membership as an umbrella under which someone else looks after our security and defence.”
The complete record
Every one of 29 lines we hold for Luděk Niedermayer, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account.
“Last but not least, on competitiveness: One Europe, One Market is a great plan, but we must deliver – deliver not only on small things, but especially on large things like the electricity market, banking union and so on. But, at the same time, leaders should understand that it's up to them to improve the market by removing the obstacles that were created on the Member State level. Unless we do it, this agenda will not be complete and will not deliver. 3-0072-0000”
“Madam President, let me just react on three points on the Council agenda. First of all, on Russian aggression. Ukraine is showing strength on the battlefield every day, but it would not be possible without continuation of our economic, political and military support. We must keep going, not only because it's the right thing, but, as it was said by our chairman, our relationship with Ukraine is not a liability. It is an asset for us and we must act accordingly. The second, on enlargement, just keeping going with what we were doing so far is not enough. We must conclude negotiations with some Balkan countries that are prepared for membership and work out a plan to develop quickly a much stronger relationship with others that, for strategic reasons, need to join.”
“Mr President, economic dependency is more expensive than ever and more risky than ever. It does not matter if we are talking about goods, energies, services or materials and energies. The political direction is clear: we need to reduce it. It is the same as the economic necessity. Let me just say two comments. First, we should recognise that each sector is different. In some, we can reduce the demands for imports, for example, replace the gas and oil by the electricity. In others, we can diversify to reduce the risks. In some areas we should encourage creation of EU demand, while in others we can create the supply side by demanding EU goods, for example, in the defence. So this is my first remark. The second is: we should never forget about keeping the competition at the market and the boost for the innovations.”
“I guess we should go more for regulation instead of directives and remove these obstacles. And third – and this is very important – are the barriers that are created on the Member States level by different national regulations. The first two areas are within our remit, and we need good proposals from the Commission, agreement here and support from the Council. The third is entirely up to the capitals. I believe we can deliver and we must deliver. The alternative is clear, this is what Draghi described, this is 'slow agony'. And this is what we do not want to bring for Europeans. 3-0089-0000”
“Madam President, this debate confirms that the majority of the House understood that Draghi and Letta were right: the single market is the asset that can assure the stability and prosperity of the European Union. I am pleased to see the 'One Europe, One Market' proposal from the Commission as a very comprehensive plan on how to reach substantial improvement – improvement that we really badly need. But this is just a plan. In order to make it real, we need to attack three areas of the problem at the same time. First of all, the unfinished part of the single market, this is what Letta put in his report. I am talking especially about the banking union, capital market union, better and deeper single energy market, and so on. Second, fragmentation of the single market caused by gold plating.”
“On top of that, we should build part of our defence together. It is more effective, cheaper and it will deliver quickly. This is the way to a more secure and safe future. 3-0082-0000”
“Mr President, on 12 March, tomorrow, the Czech Republic will mark the 27th anniversary of joining NATO. This was a huge step for the Czech Republic on the way to democratic Europe. Unfortunately, many Europeans have understood NATO membership as an umbrella under which someone else looks after our security and defence. This was a big mistake. The big mistake that has got us into the current, very difficult situation. We cannot change the past, but we are making the future. It is not enough if the Member States will adjust properly and increase the defence expenditures. There is a clear role for our joint Europe to be played. First of all, Article 42.7, the mutual defence clause of the Treaty of the European Union, must be real, and we must make sure that this is a credible commitment of the Member States to help each other.”
“It's good to listen to Mark Carney – former governor of the Central Bank and Prime Minister of Canada – and his speech in Davos. This is the world that we are in and this is the world that he described, using the words of Václav Havel. So that's why I call on the Council to be clear and bold on support for Denmark and Greenland; be united; make Europe stronger; partner with the countries like that of Mr Carney. We together need to build a stronger Europe – a Europe that is fit for the world of today. 3-0056-0000”
“Mr President, President, dear colleagues, the start of the year unfortunately reminds me more of Hollywood movies than the world we want to live in. It doesn't mean that the challenges for us – both external and internal – are different. External challenges – I mean especially Ukraine – are even more pressing because, unfortunately, the rhetoric of the White House very often is very close to something that Mr Putin wants to hear. That means that our call for clear and strong support for Ukraine is still the same. But I expect the Council mostly to react to new challenges: I am talking about Greenland, I am talking about the tariffs and I'm talking about the peace committee the President wants to introduce. These are not isolated events: everything fits together.”
“So, I hope that the Council will find the courage to look after our defence in the right and the most effective way. Last but not least, I don't want to go into details about our competitiveness, about our economic sovereignty. That will probably be part of the geopolitical debate at the Council. I just want to say that, instead of trying to do what we could do, we should aim for what we should do. That is the difference. And only addressing the real things, the big things – the single market, competitiveness, and our delay in implementing technologies like artificial intelligence – will lead to a bright future for Europe. 3-0103-0000”
“Mr President, the US administration view on the situation of Europe and its future should not lead to our anger. It should lead to our reflection and action. Obviously, the Council is the right way to start with that. So let me just give three suggestions. First of all, Russian money should be what finances Ukraine. It's economically and morally right. So I call on the Council to find the agreement, while taking the legitimate request of the Belgian Government into account. Second, the EU needs stronger defence – I guess what is clear is absolutely right. And we need joint investment in some areas. I believe that some part of our defence, like electronic defence, like the missile defence and drones, should be built together. And I believe that financing that together is the right thing.”
“The second very important thing is the euro; I am very happy that the leaders are underwriting the goal to conclude banking unions, to promote the capital markets union, I just hope that in these matters, we will move from words to real results, and we will do so quickly. 2-0047-0000”
“Madam President, let me start by reacting to what was said here. I firmly believe that simplification and modernisation are important topics, but building the single market is the way to make Europe stable and prosperous. We should not forget that in doing so, we have to sacrifice 27 different treatments of different goods and services, create one set of rules and give up those that are created by Member States through gold plating or other measures. I hope, Council, we will talk more and more about it. Otherwise, I especially like two topics from the Council meeting. The first is drones – on drones, we have to team up together, first of all to be technologically on a higher level and, secondly, to better protect our soil, our infrastructure and our citizens.”
“And again, the time will come and we will show who is caring about the future of Europeans, about their security and living standards, and who does not. I know that you are on board, most of our colleagues are on the board. Council should be on board. If we make it, we succeed. If not, we fail. 3-0099-0000”
“Madam President, President von der Leyen, your Commission is in office only for half a year, so I guess your speech that was rather analysing the situation and showing the way forward was the proper one, but now time is coming when not speeches, but action will decide if we succeed in the battles that you properly describe. In months to come here in the House, we will have to show who has courage and who has the wisdom to do the right things. Difficult files will be on the table and we should show who is responsible, who is thinking about the future of Europeans and who is not. We will be voting on the EU-Mercosur Agreement and many others. The Commission should come with important proposals on how to improve our economy. We still don't have them and we badly need them.”
“At the same time, extending the network of our partnership, but mainly promoting the single market and remove the barriers. That's the way how to eliminate negative impacts of White House policy. 3-0309-0000”
“Mr President, Donald Trump has pushed the US trade policy almost 100 years back. Indeed, in 40s the US tariffs fall to 10 % and then continue declining to to pre-Trump 2 to 3 %. Now they are heading steeply, steeply up. On top of that we have that incredible unpredictability. The first who will suffer will be US citizens, US households who will pay more for the goods and have lower availability of the goods. But the global economy will suffer too, and obviously our businesses will suffer. But let's face the reality, this is where we stand. I'm glad to see here that the Commission has strong support from the Council and majority of Parliament to find the best possible solution. I hope we will reach it, but we must be ready also for the other result.”
“In defence, we should have more courage to work together because only by purchasing together, by coordinating, will we be able to improve our ability to defend ourselves effectively. It is the same for competitiveness. We know that the key for competitiveness is the strengthening of the single market, removing the barriers. But I don't see progress on the Member States level because these are Member States that build the barriers that are slowing down our economy. Why don't they start to race who is quicker in removing these barriers? This would make Europe stronger and this is what we need. 3-0027-0000”
“Madam President, let me start by congratulating our Bulgarian colleagues, like my friend, Dolors. I really envy them, that they have the courage to take the right decision. I'm saying that as a Czech – unfortunately, my country hasn't had this courage so far. But talking about our debate, I would say that this is a little bit of a half‑empty glass situation. I will talk about three issues. Only in one of them, I guess, are we on the very right track. The very right track is concerning the foreign diplomatic policies or foreign trade policies because here, I must say, I have great respect for the work of the Commission. I hope we will have the courage as the Parliament to take the right decision and go forward with that because this is something that will strengthen our economy. In the other two areas, it is not so positive.”
“So that's why I'm really surprised that Malta keep providing this service for ten years. And I was very surprised by what was said here, because I guess the Commission clearly indicated that this practice is not correct. And there were several kind of Commission opinions reacting on the adjustments of the plan. I'm quite happy that the verdict of the Court is very clear, and I hope the Council will have a debate about it and it will be accepted by all Member States, not just by Malta. I guess the word of the day is difficult. We are facing a lot of troubles, a lot of challenges, a lot of risk. And one more by persuing such a bad policy is just not something that makes the world better. So I hope it will be stopped completely. 3-0374-0000”
“Mr President, selling passports for cash is just wrong. It is wrong from so many angles. It is wrong ethically, it was said clearly that passports are not candy or a telephone, and it undermines the value of citizenship. It hurts EU citizens because very often it's associated with increase of real estate prices created by this bubble of of gold-passport holders. It undermines the security and not just the security of the Member State that issues the passport, but security of all of the Union. It hurts very often the economy, because sometimes these people are involved in illicit activities that are hurting all the economy. And at the end of the day, it hurts mutual trust between the Member States and the citizens. I guess it is a pretty extensive list, isn't it?”
“Secondly, we should extend, where possible, trade with the third country and also coordinate on possible responses. But the most important and most effective way is to deepen and complete the single market. There is no excuse for not doing that, because it will ensure the prosperity and stability of the European economy. 2-0093-0000”
“Mr President, dear colleagues, US tariff policy is just wrong – not only for all the world, but also for US firms and businesses. It will be the people and firms of the US who will pay most of the hundreds of billions in tariffs if they are actually collected. But we are not here to set the US policy. We are rightly debating our response. And here I am very glad that I can endorse the plan of the Commission, and I would just encourage the Commission to keep trying up to the last minute and find the best solution. I guess the first part of the plan is obviously an effort to minimise or avoid tariffs, and to keep or even extend the fair and free trade with the US. If you ask me if it's likely, I don't know. So that's why we should have the plan B that is proportionate.”
“What I'm talking about are the projects that will substantially increase our ability to defend, and make it much more effective, and save money – for example, anti-missile defence, drone defence, electronic defence, and so on. It would be – and I guess you understand – much more effective to make it together than try to develop 10 or 20 different systems at the same time. We don't each need to reinvent the wheel. 2-0097-0000”
“(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question) 2-0095-0000 Ondřej Dostál (NI), blue-card question. – Good morning, Mr Niedermayer. I hope you will respond to my question. Do you really think it would be a good idea to transfer deciding about war and peace from Prague – or other capitals of sovereign nations – to Brussels, and let Brussels institutions decide if our sons will go to war? Because this is a necessary aspect of the common European defence you propose. 2-0096-0000 Luděk Niedermayer (PPE), blue-card answer. – First, this is not exactly what I was talking about. But it's absolutely obvious: either we defend ourselves together, or we don't defend ourselves.”
“Madam President, the world has changed, not to better, in the last few years, but mostly in the last few weeks. It's clear what we Europeans have to do: the exact opposite to what Moscow, Beijing, but also Donald Trump, is dreaming about. We must get united and we must get much, much, much stronger. From that point of view, the summit was a good start. But not everything is about money. We need a strong and clear foreign policy to be able to represent the interest of Europeans. Common purchases are good, but it's not the same as the European defence that we desperately need, and this is what Manfred Weber was talking about. So for me, the summit was a good start. But we must go much, much further and we must go much, much quicker, because there is very little time left.”
“O propunere din partea dumneavoastră pentru Comisia Europeană. 2-0056-0000 Luděk Niedermayer (PPE), blue-card answer. – I just think the first: negotiate with EU to try to reduce our harm. The second: promote the single market that will make our economy stronger. And the third: develop the trade relationship with other countries through trade agreements. This is a way which I would propose. 2-0057-0000”
“We should negotiate with the US as with our friends, as well allies, but when we get into hard negotiation, we should really understand that we have a good position to defend our interests and also to fight for the multilateral trade relationships in order to help the global economy to be stronger. (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question) 2-0055-0000 Maria Grapini (S&D), întrebare adresată conform procedurii „cartonașului albastru”. – Stimate coleg, ați spus de mai multe ori „trebuie”, „trebuie să facem relații cu Statele Unite”, dar nu ați spus nimic concret. Ce ați propune concret să facă Uniunea Europeană în relația cu Statele Unite? Credeți că politica de acorduri comerciale a Uniunii Europene este suficientă? Protejează suficient industria din Uniunea Europeană? Ce ar trebui concret?”
“Madam President, high unjustified tariffs don't make economies stronger. They don't make economies more competitive. It doesn't solve the fiscal problem. This was proved many, many times, but obviously Donald Trump is right, he can take this way if he wants. We as Europeans must stay united and negotiate in our interest, also to protect multilateralism. At the same time, we should clearly understand what cards we have in our hands. It's true that Europe has big surplus in trade in goods, but US firms have big surplus in trading of services. At the same time, US firms, especially large digital firms, are using EU single market with very free access to generate huge profits. So, we should understand what cards we have in our hands and they are not weak.”