"There is only one love and I wish we were an open society where no one has to be afraid to love," says MEP Danuše Nerudová
We are about a month after the elections to the Chamber of Deputies. What do you think about the results?
The Communists did not get into the Chamber of Deputies, which I think is the most important and principled news. The second thing, which is also positive, is that Russia did not win. The SPD came to an unacknowledged coalition. Not only did it get half the percentage that the polls predicted, but it also got fewer seats than in the previous period. But this is where the good news ends. When you look at it, the boundaries of the conceivable in politics have moved so far that it is completely unacceptable to me - and I believe to most people. I think that at the moment there is basically no political culture in this country.
The new governing coalition is actually a 'no issue' coalition, because Tomio Okamura has been elected President of the Chamber of Deputies. This, of course, does not reflect the decision of the voters, who gave him a small percentage. But it does reflect the fact that the only thing Andrej Babiš has sought and is seeking is not to be extradited for prosecution.
For what reason do you think the coalition led by Petr Fiala did not win?
His government was unable to communicate with the citizens, it was unable to explain to them the good things it had done for them. It is one thing to have a values-based foreign policy and support for Ukraine, but if the government cannot show people that it is doing pension reform, for example, so that future generations will be able to afford their pensions, and cannot make them feel the sense of such reform, then it is no wonder that the result looks like this.
The government should have been more vigorous in dealing with the economic situation of the people, but it has governed in difficult times and at the same time no economic indicator corresponds to the image of a 'scorched earth' that has been created in the public arena. But this is simply the result of non-communication.
So the main cause of the electoral failure of the now former coalition is, in your opinion, poor communication?
I think so. And I also think that the government of Petro Fiala could have done much more to combat the spread of disinformation in cyberspace. I don't think anything has been done there. The National Security Adviser has succeeded brilliantly in a number of areas, but when it comes to the spread of disinformation on social media, that is a major failure. Yet there are countries that have been able to take concrete steps, and it looks better for them. And I certainly do not mean blocking anything, but enforcing the laws that are already in place and protecting users (including children) from, for example, often targeted aggression.
The government-in-waiting has already signed a programme statement, but it is not yet clear who will lead the various ministries. Less than a month ago, the case of Filip Turek emerged. How do you think it will turn out? Will Andrej Babiš propose him to the president as a candidate for minister?
I don't want to speculate, but in a normal political culture it would be unthinkable for a person who is obviously a cuss, makes racist speeches and flirts with Nazism to be a Member of Parliament at all, let alone a minister. The headlines in the foreign press are truly appalling - it is a disgrace for the Czech Republic that such a thing is even coming out. My colleagues in the European Parliament, especially the Germans, are asking me how this is possible. It is an extremely sensitive subject there.
Do you think that his appointment could jeopardise the international reputation of the Czech Republic if he actually became foreign minister?
Absolutely yes. The foreign minister is supposed to represent our country, to deal with international relations. Moreover, many of his statements are less than five years old, so they are not time-barred, and there may be proceedings over them. The Chamber of Deputies can decide whether or not to extradite him, so this government is actually a coalition of people who have each other's backs. And, of course, this would damage the image of the Czech Republic abroad. Can you imagine such a minister coming to Israel or Germany?
It is not only the Motorists who have been facing problems lately, but also the PRO party. How do you perceive the current case of its chairman Jindřich Rajchl, connected with the publication of an intimate video and photographs of him in a sexual act?
Let everyone do what he wants in his private life, but he must take into account that when he enters politics, journalists will "strip him naked". The king is naked - it turned out that Rajchl was preaching water and drinking wine.
Let us return to the emerging government coalition. To what extent do you think that the fact that its partners are the SPD and the Motorists, who are opposed to minority rights, will influence the direction of the future government? And what impact might this have on the general social atmosphere?
It will certainly have an impact on the atmosphere in society. It is already felt that we are moving towards closed-mindedness and fear rather than openness and respect. The last government at least managed to make some partial steps forward - we have civil partnerships, although full marriage for all is not yet. Moreover, there is still a lack of equal parental rights, so couples who have adopted children abroad have to worry that their parentage will not be recognised here. I am glad that at least something has been pushed through, but it is not nearly enough. The mayors will continue to fight for equal rights.
If we look at the situation in neighbouring countries, such as Slovakia or Hungary, the attitude of politicians towards LGBT+ people has changed significantly in recent years. Do you see a real risk that a similar development could happen here? For example, that the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman would be introduced into the constitution?
I don't think we will go down the Slovak route, although many of us are afraid of that. We may be on the way there, but I do not think we are there yet. However, it is difficult to draw conclusions until we know the specific names of the ministers and who will eventually occupy the various ministries. It is obvious that Andrej Babiš is in no hurry to go anywhere, and he has not yet explained his conflict of interest, as he promised the president, and that is what the president is making his appointment conditional on. Nevertheless, I believe that we will not go the way of Slovakia after all. I do not want to make light of it, but I think that the well-known video by the influencer Fer very accurately described what is happening in Slovakia.
Why do you think politicians like Viktor Orbán and Robert Fico are attacking LGBT+ people so harshly? Is it an attempt to divert attention from their own problems and failures?
Exactly. They have no added value, no results. This is the case for both Fico and Orban. That is why they focus on culture wars and pointless bans instead of addressing the economic situation of their countries.
Fico, for example, promised not to raise taxes, and the first thing he did after taking office was to introduce a transaction tax. Fifteen years on, Orbán is facing a big problem - the opposition party TISZA has 45% in the latest poll, while Fidesz has less than 40%. These attacks on minorities are a cover to divert attention from the fact that their countries are not working and their economies are in a bad state.
Moreover, both Slovakia and Hungary have decided not to get rid of their dependence on Russian gas and oil. And when the United States announced sanctions, they ran into a huge problem, which will, of course, lead to energy prices for their citizens.
However, the situation we are talking about is not just Slovakia and Hungary. Globally, we are seeing the emergence of a new conservatism. Do you think that voters are disillusioned with liberal democracy?
I don't think they are disappointed with liberal democracy. I think what our society is running up against is that the standards of communication on social media are not set. While social norms of behaviour have evolved over centuries, we don't have any norms on social media. We have lost the battle against misinformation, which spreads a hundred times faster than the truth. Unless we understand this and find a way to regulate it, the fight will always be unequal and essentially unwinnable.
So would you be in favour of regulating social networks in some way to prevent misinformation from spreading?
First of all, I think politicians should set an example. Social networks are still a young medium in relation to society and lack the norms of behaviour that need to be established. Every politician should therefore moderate discussions on their profiles, create a safe space for debate and not let it be dominated by hate or vulgarity.
In your opinion, should the media also do this?
Yes, the media should also approach discussions responsibly. Personally, I consistently block troll accounts - it's not hard to spot them nowadays - and I also moderate discussions on my profiles. Someone who is rude, xenophobic or racist should behave in the same way as if they came into your living room - you wouldn't let them spit on your floor and shout loud abuse. Moderated discussion creates a safe space where people are not afraid to speak and can have a substantive dialogue.
Do you have any misinformation that you consider to be the most serious threat to liberal democracy?
I think the whole Russian strategy - the so-called Russian playbook - is extremely dangerous for democracy. The big problem is the hollowing out of concepts. Words like 'fascism' are now used for completely different situations than they actually represent. This is creating confusion and uncertainty in the general population, and people are beginning to doubt what these terms actually mean. Similarly, terms such as 'totalitarianism', 'Bolshevik' or 'communism' are being misused, and we are losing the ability to name real phenomena by their true names.
This year, the European Commission presented a new strategy to promote LGBTQ+ rights. What specific changes do you think it could bring to queer people in the Czech Republic?
I wish it would bring more support for queer people and impact in the form of concrete programmes. Honestly, we haven't gotten to that stage yet. At the moment, we are deciding whether we will approve the whole EU budget or whether we will throw it off the table because the proposal significantly limits the powers of the European Parliament. We are also worried that there will be a reduction in funding for agricultural policy and a reduction in funding for the Eastern European countries.
So now we are fighting a fundamental battle over the architecture of the budget - over how the system will be set up in the first place. Only then will we get to the individual chapters and programmes, which will, of course, include those relating to minority rights.
Roger. So now it is more about the basics.
Yes, now it is really about the construction of the budget itself, it is really a revolution. And while we believe that this is the right way to go, we need to clarify the architecture first. Only then will the specific programmes come into play.
How do you see the situation in the Czech Republic from a European perspective? Are we rather behind the curve when it comes to minority rights, not just LGBT rights, or are we one of the more open countries?
I think it is true that one should never be afraid because of who one loves. There is only one love and I really wish we were an open society where no one has to be afraid to love and be themselves. Slovakia should be a warning to us. Unfortunately, I think the Czech Republic is still stumbling in this respect - we have started some changes, but we still lack the courage to follow through.
This also applies to marriage for all, which has still not been approved. It is also about parenthood, or joint adoption. As a mother, I am very sensitive to this, because every child needs loving parents. And the state should be able to respond to that.
Why do you think the situation is stuck, even though polls show that the public is overwhelmingly positive about marriage for all?
It's a typical culture war that politicians use to define themselves. This is true not only towards minorities, but also towards women - we are a very conservative society in this respect. The fight between conservatives and liberal-minded politicians was extremely heated in the campaign.
On the other hand, the voters have made it clear what they want - we have never had so many young politicians, new faces and women in the House of Commons. While the politicians remain in their trenches, the voters have moved on, and it is clear that many politicians have not yet taken that step with them.
When you watch the Czech debate, does it seem to you that society has become a little afraid of liberal issues? There's a lot of talk about gender or women's equality, but if you look at the comments on social media, you find a strong resistance.
This has always been there. I myself, for example, am an opponent of quotas, because if society itself does not understand the added value of diversity and the inclusion of everyone, there is no point in artificially ticking off tables. Such a measure does not really help society. However, I think that this election has shown a change in thinking, and I am glad of that.
I firmly believe that all the young women who have been elected, despite the fact that they will have to work at least twice as hard as the MPs who have been in the House for longer, will eventually show everyone that they are needed, not just in politics and public debate. That they are an important link in the political system that can bring a different perspective, an unencumbered view of the world, and, above all, fresh wind and courage. And it is the courage of women that is really great.
For several years now, there has been talk about the fact that officials in Brussels are distant from the people. How can we bring European politics closer to people so that they understand it and do not feel that decisions are being taken without them?
I think it is the fault of the politicians themselves. If you look at the way they communicate, everything good that happens is attributed to the Czech Republic and everything bad to Brussels. It is a question of responsibility. For populists, of course, it's easy - they can blame "bad Brussels" and absolve themselves of blame.
I try to explain even complex topics simply, for example on social media. It is not sexy news that flies around the internet, but it is important for people to understand that 80% of the legislation passed by the Chamber of Deputies comes from the European Union - from the European Parliament and the European Commission. It is therefore extremely important to influence things at the point where they are made. I am constantly trying to explain how the process of negotiating legislation in the European Parliament works and that Czech politicians can also have a significant influence on this legislation when it is being drafted.
The situation has improved a little, but it is still bad, and it is not just a problem for the Czech Republic, but for all Member States. The distance from Brussels is great, but above all it is about the fact that domestic politicians also have a responsibility. You will never hear the phrase "bad Brussels" from politicians who are not populists, whereas populists say it every day. Yet in that 'bad Brussels', there are also MPs from their parties who are sitting there doing nothing because they have chosen to be part of a far-right faction that has no influence on anything.
The Czech delegation is therefore weakened because we have only a minimum of representatives in the factions that actually influence something.
Does this not seem paradoxical to you? You are probably referring to the ANO movement, which used to profile itself as a liberal movement and was a member of a liberal faction, but now sits side by side with extremists.
If your only goal is not to be handed over for prosecution (as it is with Mr Babiš), you don't care. Three MEPs from the ANO movement have already left, because they have discovered that they are sitting there just "for decoration" and have no real chance of influencing anything without Mr Babiš's consent. It is much easier to do far-right politics than to be a centre-liberal party that comes up with specific proposals and seeks support for them.
Andrej Babiš often claims that he has many contacts with European politicians and that, unlike Petr Fiala, he will promote Czech interests in Europe. How do you see this? In your opinion, is Babiš more capable than Petr Fiala in European politics?
The old phrase applies that you cannot teach an old dog new tricks. The foreign diplomacy of Babiš's government consisted of the Czech Republic "digging its heels in the ground" - blocking everything, but not coming up with any proposals or solutions itself and not gaining allies. So it did not push anything through. It gained nothing for its stubborn blocking, unlike, for example, Poland.
The government of Petr Fialy, on the other hand, was able not only to defend its interests in Europe, but also to seek compromises and partners. It was able to win support for the 2040 emissions targets from nineteen Member States or negotiate a reduction in fines for fleet emissions from car manufacturers. European politics is about finding allies and compromises, and Andrej Babiš has never been able to do that. We will see if that changes.
The European Union is often criticised for its so-called democratic deficit. Do you think this is justified? That it is too far removed from ordinary people and is losing its democratic element because of bureaucracy?
I do not think that it is losing its democratic element. But it certainly needs reform, its processes need to be faster and more flexible. I must say that the current European Commission has picked up the pace considerably and is presenting legislative proposals more quickly than before, but there is still room for improvement.
One widespread cliché needs to be disproved: that the European Commission are 'unelected officials'. This is not true. The members of the Commission are proposed by national governments, that is, democratically elected governments. So to say that the Commission is not legitimate is simply nonsense.
So how do you think the Commission should be reformed to make it more effective?
Certainly the deadlines should be shortened, although I am shooting myself in the foot a little. The European Parliament, too, should work more efficiently. It is not possible, for example, to take three weeks to find a rapporteur for a piece of legislation. We need to speed up the whole process.
With so many Members, is that even possible?
I am sure it is. Even with this number of MEPs, the European Parliament is much more organised than the Czech Chamber of Deputies. We know exactly when we start and finish, we have fixed times for debates and speeches. Democracy does not suffer from this. If a similar system were to be introduced in the Czech Chamber of Deputies, I am convinced that more women would be able to attend there, because they would be able to plan their time better, to devote themselves to their families and to politics.
If you had to pick one major priority that the European Union should address to improve the lives of people in the Czech Republic, what would it be?
At the moment, definitely the EU ETS 2 emissions trading scheme. It needs to be adjusted so that it does not affect citizens' wallets in such a fundamental and burdensome way. This should be the main priority of both Parliament and the Commission.
Could this put certain groups of people, such as those on lower incomes, at risk?
Yes, especially people who heat with coal and do not have an insulated house. They could be most affected by the measures.
When you ran for president, many people saw you as the Czech equivalent of Zuzana Čaputová. If a queer person who lives in a family that is not completely open to queer people were reading this interview, what would you say to them?
To never give up and not be discouraged by what the people around you think. To live his life the way he feels will make him happy.
Do you know what your next steps will be after your mandate in the European Parliament? Are you considering running for office again, or would you rather return to Czech politics?
Although it is still a long way off, I really enjoy working in the European Parliament. I really appreciate the trust of the voters who gave me the mandate. I would therefore like to run for the European Parliament again, but we will see what comes.
