Monika BEŇOVÁ

What Monika BEŇOVÁ has said (8)

• 2026-06-17 “(15:10:36 – 15:11:53): you very much, President, commissioner, energy is a matter of security, competitiveness, and social stability. In Europe, we have slowly destroyed our industries in which we excelled for decades. We've replaced them with industries where that we don't have the technology for, we don't have the raw materials for, and we don't have the electrical infrastructure for. Our electrical infrastructure is 50 years out of date and lacks adequate capacity. The commission promises cheap electricity, data centers, quantum technologies, robotics, decarbonized industry, and competitiveness. But without modern power grids, these are just empty promises. In 2024, emergency interventions to manage overloaded grids cost us approximately €4,300,000,000. And the new multi annual financial framework is the last opportunity we've got to change course. We need to do the following, remove bureaucratic barriers, speed up permitting, focus on investments in our core energy infrastructure so that we can be resilient in the future. Thank you. Thank you, madam Veschler.”
  EU energy infrastructure integration
• “Thank you very much, Madam President. Madam chair, colleagues, I welcome the EU's plan for cardiovascular health. And what I would like to stress is the impact of cardiovascular diseases on women and mothers. Um, it is about time to find a clear heading, um, in this plan to help these women, prevention of these diseases in women are very often, um, weak. And the typical symptoms only lead to an intervention when it's too late. We can avoid these diseases by an early intervention. It is a broad spectrum of diseases that that we can stop or that we can prevent through prevention steps which are easy and through identifying the risk factors early enough. We know that prevention and regular screenings reduce the number of hospital visits or hospital stays, i.e., burden on the health system, and add years to the lives of our citizens that they can enjoy. And at an age of AI and new tools, we can have a cheaper EKG and other treatments.”
  Gender roles, equality and inclusion
• “Yes. Thank you. Short intervention. Yeah. Very short. Very short. Just a few comments. Um, uh, first I, I do not believe that this is any place for ideology in this report because this is a matter of public health and our policy choices should be guided by the best available scientific evidence. That is why I find it difficult to accept an approach that places red meat in the same category as junk food and ultra processed. Foods without making the necessary distinctions. High quality, unprocessed red meat can be part of a balanced diet and is an important source of protein and other nutritions. It is precisely this kind of dogmatic and undifferentiated thinking that prevents us from examining cardiovascular cardiovascular health in an objective and evidence based way. The reality is not all products present the same level of risk. Risk depends on the nature of the product, its composition, its level of processing, and the pattern of consumption. Processed red meat does not present the same risk profile as processed red meat, and in the same way, different alcoholic products have different patterns of harm and different. Tobacco and nicotine products also differ in their health impact. Recognizing these differences is not ideological. It is simply a matter of scientific honesty and sound policy making. For that reason, I welcome the inclusion of the principle of differentiating products according to the level of risk they pose to cardiovascular health. That is the right approach. Proportionate, evidence based and credible. I also welcome the emphasis on protecting vulnerable groups, especially young people and children. We know that some products are more harmful than others. Our duty is therefore clear to act more strongly where the risk is highest, and to ensure that those who are most vulnerable are properly protected. And my last comment for today, which I want to emphasise, concerns alcohol. We need to inform consumers. Fairly far too long have we protected and promoted alcohol consumption in Europe. In the name of culture and habit. We finally need to change this approach. Thank you.”
  EU measures on lifestyle-related behaviours (smoking, drinking, eating, etc.)
• “Thank you for giving me the floor. Ladies and gentlemen, you know, at the time when we are about to import fossil fuels from the USA and will be dependent on the US for up to 80%, and we are going to say that in this way, we are going to defend the environment rather than taking proper measures. I think that this whole debate is about nothing. Back in 2023, the EU only contributed about 6% to the global emissions. Now, if we stopped all our emissions here from cars, it would drop to 4.8%. Percent. Let me reiterate. We are going to import 70 or 80% of our fossil fuel from the US. And let's take into consideration how many people are employed in the automotive industry in Europe. So how many thousands of lives depend on the health of the healthy automotive industry in Europe? Thank you.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Thank you very much, chairman. Colleagues, I do support the proposal that large corporations with a turnover of over €100 million, should pay a one off contribution of €100 to the union's common budget. I am disappointed by the attitude of Germany and the Netherlands because 100,000 is no threat to corporations. After all, we are talking here about corporations that optimise their taxes to the last penny. Already today. This is a morally perverse logic and a grotesque hypocrisy. And the same leaders have no problems taxing twice their own citizens through the ETS, through taxes on fuel, heating or Housing. We do tax, labor, consumption, energy. But when it comes to capital, suddenly our moralizing leaders protest vehemently. This is not a coincidence. This is a systemic protection of corporations from even a token redistribution of wealth. If this symbolic corporate tax is withdrawn but ETS one and two remain on the table, the European Union may well be saying goodbye to the last shred of credibility in the eyes of its citizens, because the days of taxing the citizens was. Yes, but corporations no longer. Only you don't see it yet. Thank you.”
  Own EU resources
• “Thank you very much, Madam President. Dear colleagues, I would like to express my concerns about the proposed ban of novel tobacco products in public spaces. I think we all agree that our aim should be the protection of public health. I believe this measure misses the mark when it comes to addressing the real issues, the increasing use of novel tobacco products by young people, and evidence based protection of public health. Our main priority should be preventing the next generation from becoming addicted. You are right to. Tobacco products and developing a clear understanding of the risks of these products. So my question is, has the Commission prepared a risk assessment of novel and emerging products as opposed to traditional tobacco products, in preparation of these recommendations? Because I think it is more effective to focus on enforcing sales bans to minor and addressing accessibility in shops. In my view, the definition of public spaces is not a clear term, and the current wording can be interpreted to also include beaches and open parks, where the health risk from second hand smoke are minimal. But young people are still able to get these products too easily and this is where our attentions need to be. I would like to ask whether we have an impact assessment because you mentioned from 1999 2009, but excuse me, is 2024 or some data on the efficacy of these measures on protection of public health and especially to uptake of smoking by children. And my last point or recommendation, you know, I am in this house for 22 years this year. So let's put our efforts, for example, into stronger enforcement of sale restrictions. We can better protect the future generation from the harms of smoking and vaping without bothering the public with unnecessary and ineffective policing in outdoor spaces. Thank you very much, Madam President. Thank you. Colleagues, thank you so much.”
  Electronic cigarettes
• “Mr. Commissioner? Colleagues. It is a pleasure to. Take part in this debate because many people have expressed support for this commission and now they are criticising it. I didn't vote for this commission and I explained my reasons for that. Nevertheless, I do think that the commission programme is fine. It's a good proposal. It's February now, and now it remains to be seen how you will work together with the European Parliament in order to turn this proposal into a reality. The draft programme is important because it comes at a very difficult moment in geopolitical terms. It's difficult to see how things will turn out, will have to be. Patient and see how we get out of this, Maurice. In which we find ourselves. But let's wait and see how you breathe life into this program.”
  Von der Leyen
• “Thank you, Madam President. Colleagues. Just as in the case of sex crimes, in the real world, in the digital space, to law enforcement needs the tools to identify and arrest offenders. The internet is not about just about entertainment. It's also a place where predators look for victims. We should not delay. There is more and more online abuse. We need legislation. We need measures to stop this brutality against our children. This isn't about controlling the internet. It's about control over those who lurk on the internet in search of victims. We need to help and protect our children, and I hope the Commission shares this priority. And I call on call for the conclusion of the work on the directive on sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of Children.”
  Privacy & detection of online child abuse