Volker SCHNURRBUSCH

Developing a new EU anti-poverty strategy

The report calls for an anti-poverty strategy by the Commission but instead of providing an in-depth analysis of the causes of poverty across the EU and how to address them, it paints a dramatic picture in which poverty is caused by intersectional discrimination and should be dealt with by introducing more “equality” funding for European programmes, a creation of a taskforce, ratification of the Istanbul Convention by Member States who have not yet done so, alignment with “green” objectives, a more equitable distribution of wealth, a new minimum income directive and the right of co-creation in policymaking for NGOs. The strategy would increase red tape by producing more EU legislation, which would further perpetuate economic crises in the EU. The report does not encourage economic growth by proposing measures such as reducing bureaucratic burdens, lowering taxes and supporting businesses. Instead, it presents a top-down approach by the Commission without offering adequate help for Member States to address poverty and its causes. It is telling, that the rapporteur is a Socialist. For him, economy is obviously an unknown concept.

Addressing subcontracting chains and the role of intermediaries in order to protect workers’ rights

Working conditions should be monitored so that workers are not exploited, but Member States are at liberty to do this, tailored to their own needs. Increasing the role of the EU in such important business matters is a backwards step which will lead to more costs for legitimately operating businesses, and new loopholes for criminals. Therefore, in the interests of national sovereignty and good business practices, I voted against this call for an EU Framework Directive. It is telling, that the Rapporteur is a Socialist from Sweden. They still dream of a past, where the Government regulated the economy in every detail. Thankfully, these days are over.

Recommendation to the Council on EU priorities for the 70th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women

We should all be in favour of accelerating the implementation of international commitments to further prevent and respond to all forms of violence against women and girls in both the public and private spheres, including female genital mutilation, forced marriage, non-consensual sharing of intimate or manipulated material, cyberstalking, cyber harassment, cyber flashing and incitement to violence or hatred online; (2025/2240(INI), 20.11.2025). We reaffirm our commitment to protecting the integrity of girls by prohibiting the use of puberty blockers before the age of majority, in accordance with Chapter II of the Oviedo Convention on individual consent. We condemn the practice of surrogacy, reproductive exploitation and the use of a woman's body for economic or other purposes. We cannot accept terms "eco-feminist perspective" and "gender apartheid", because they lack a factual foundation. There are only two genders. Everybody should know what a woman and a girl is. Sounds easy, but apparently not for those, who deny biology - and facts - in favour of a dangerous and harmful ideology, which has called for countless victims already.

World Cancer Day

Of course I support any efforts to tackle one of the most dangerous menaces to our health.

Situation in Northeast Syria, the violence against civilians and the need to maintain a sustainable ceasefire

Das Schicksal Syriens liegt mir sehr am Herzen, seit ich vor Jahren dort war, als der Krieg offziell noch anhielt. Die tapferen Menschen dort haben einen dauerhaften Frieden verdient. Ob die islamistische Regierung, die vom „Wertewesten“ hofiert wird, diesen garantiert, darf bezweifelt werden. Daß ausgerechnet die EU, die sich auch dort als diplomatische Nullnummer erwiesen hat, hier Abhilfe schaffen und Garantien geben will, ist absurd. Am Ende läuft es wieder nur auf „stupid money“ hinaus, das mit weltfremden Bekenntnissen zum Gender-Gaga o.ä. verschleudert wird. Syrien hat nur eine Chance, wenn der Westen sich endlich heraushält. Es ist ein arabisches Land mit vielen Nachbarn. Unser Augenmerk muß zuvorderst auf den religiösen Minderheiten liegen, die einer ungewissen Zukunft entgegensehen.

EU strategic defence and security partnerships

The ESN group should vote against the final text, while supporting or abstaining tactically on specific amendments that defend national sovereignty, limit supranational “strategic autonomy”, and avoid hostile language toward Hungary and other dissenting Member States. The text operationalises a de facto Defence Union by making SDPs, the European Peace Facility, SAFE and the European Defence Industrial Base mandatory pillars of a supranational security architecture coordinated with NATO's Defence Planning Process. This reduces Member States' freedom to determine their own force posture, procurement choices and strategic partnerships. The resolution commits the EU to open-ended "whatever it takes" support for Ukraine including legally backed security guarantees and use of frozen Russian assets, without adequate democratic control at national level. It also sets a dangerous precedent by explicitly condemning Hungary for exercising its treaty-protected veto rights on EPF and instructing other Member States to pressure and circumvent Budapest.

Implementation of the rule of law conditionality regime

This report represents a highly politicised use of the concept of the rule of law and is repeatedly used to single out and stigmatise specific Member States, in particular Hungary. Instead of applying objective, neutral and Treaty-based legal criteria, the report reflects a selective and ideological approach that undermines national sovereignty and democratic self-determination. The report further normalises the use of financial conditionality as a political pressure tool, allowing the Commission to interfere in domestic constitutional and policy choices that clearly fall within Member State competences. This approach exceeds the EU’s mandate under the Treaties, risks deepening divisions within the Union and weakens trust between Member States. This report contributes to the politicisation of EU institutions and promotes centralisation at the expense of subsidiarity, equality of Member States and respect for national constitutional identities.

Decarbonisation and modernisation of EU fisheries, and the development and deployment of fishing gear

Apart from the amendments tabled in plenary by the PfE to remove the most problematic green references from the text, the rapporteur proposes a positive vote because the final text retains the essential elements of our original line. The vote in the PECH Committee was shaped by an ambiguous cordon sanitaire: although the EPP supported both the PfE’s text and the alternative one, the alternative compromises were put to the vote first and therefore prevailed. Despite this, the final report remains balanced, addresses key structural weaknesses of the CFP and the EU funding system, reduces administrative burden, and outlines a realistic, economically viable and step-by-step approach to decarbonisation and modernisation.

Military mobility

The principal reasons for voting against this report are the significant loss of national control over military and defence-related policies resulting from the establishment of an EU task force and the concept of a 'military Schengen'. The report raises concerns about insufficient national oversight of foreign military troops and equipment moving through Member States, as well as fiscal commitments that would place a disproportionate burden on wealthier Member States. In addition, military infrastructure is elevated to an EU spending priority without adequate democratic control through national budgetary processes. The proposals also imply a partial loss of national border control, particularly in times of war. Finally, the report is criticised for focusing almost exclusively on the EU’s eastern flank, while neglecting the need for stronger military preparedness in the southern regions, including the Middle East and North Africa, where threats related to Islamic terrorism and illegal migration remain significant.

European Defence Readiness 2030: assessment of needs

The motion for a resolution correctly identifies decades of underinvestment and fragmentation in Europe’s defence, and stresses the need to strengthen the European defence technological and industrial base and eastern flank resilience. However, it responds by promoting a de facto defence union based on large, permanent EU-level financial envelopes, new own resources, possible joint borrowing and binding planning targets aligned with NATO spending benchmarks. This architecture would shift key decisions on defence budgets, capability priorities and industrial policy away from Member States and into EU institutions and EU-managed financial instruments. The ESN supports credible territorial defence, robust national armed forces and a competitive European industry, but rejects the federalisation of defence financing and planning.

Resolution on the European citizens’ initiative entitled ‘My Voice, My Choice: For Safe and Accessible Abortion’

Since abortion is considered the termination of unborn human life, it should be protected by the law and given moral consideration. Rather than being influenced or encouraged by EU-level funding, health policy and ethical decisions about abortion should be seen as matters for individual Member States, exhibiting their cultural, moral and constitutional customs. Even though formal participation is optional, providing EU funding for abortion services is seen as an indirect form of pressure on nations to expand access. Alternatives like maternal healthcare, family support, adoption services and programmes that encourage childbirth should be the primary focus of EU funding. In the end, the project might go beyond EU jurisdictions and erode respect for subsidiarity. So I voted against this initiative. It is not helping women in need, but is directed against families and the individual decisions of men and women about their unborn children.

Relations between the EU and Saudi Arabia

The text is a standard example of EP tendency to add unnecessary ideological load into a sensible proposal. EU again tends to interfere with internal policies of third countries (in this case, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) and make EU diplomacy conditional on left agenda being implemented in states EU wants to enter partnerships with. Proposal contains sensible proposals focusing on increasing the cooperation between EU and KSA into strategic partnership. Such cooperation is positive, and areas mentioned in the text are key for Europe, especially defence, trade and energy. We view positively the idea of including protection of Christian communities in Syria within partnership agreements with KSA. Visa-free travel arrangements to boost tourism from GCC countries and support of large-scale infrastructure initiatives like the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor are very good proposals, and something aligned with interests of EU Member States. We cannot, however, support a proposal that includes completely unnecessary ideological elements in a file that should focus solely on common EU-Saudi interests and how to generate the biggest gains for EU Member States. Therefore, it is recommended to abstain. We also vote against all left amendments trying to hinder tourism.