Niels FUGLSANG

Policy topics Niels FUGLSANG is active on

What Niels FUGLSANG has said (44)

• 2026-06-17 “(15:08:44 – 15:09:41): You will need trans translation. Yes. My telling is not so sharp. So you use alright. Right. Thank you. So you're saying that, when we invest in solar and renewable energy, we pay to multinationals, multinational companies. But right now when we use oil and gas, you know who we pay to? We pay to foreign powers with whom we don't share values. 98% of the oil and gas we consume in Europe, we import from abroad. We don't have it ourselves. So we support regimes in The Middle East. We support Vladimir Putin. We support Donald Trump. Isn't it better to invest in our own energy that we can produce here in Europe rather than sending those money all those money abroad? Well, that's a very interesting question, colleague.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• 2026-06-17 “(15:14:53 – 15:16:10): Thank you, Thier. Friends, we have a problem, obviously, with our dependency on foreign fossil fuels. We import for billions every day when we import from The Middle East, from Vladimir Putin, from The United States, when we import gas and oil that we don't have ourselves. We need to import 98% of the gas and oil that we consume here in Europe. I think it's absolutely crazy that colleagues here in this room seriously think that it's a good idea to keep on doing that. They reject investments in renewable energy. We have the possibility to produce our own energy, homegrown energy here in Europe. That means that we need to invest more in electrification, solar panels, wind turbines, heat pumps, and we can do that. And we can become independent and we can combat climate change at the same time. It's not a good strategy to be dependent on dictators from foreign countries. It's a good strategy to invest in our own industry. We should do that. Thank you. There is a blue card for you. Okay. Please, mister Tonin.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• 2026-06-17 “(15:16:43 – 15:17:26): I think, dear colleague, when the sun doesn't shine, well, the wind might blow in another place of Europe. And so we need to invest in our grid system so that when the sunshine in some places, to do well, different kinds of storage. So I think that there are clearly solutions to that problem and those who need to invest in. Thank you very much. Now, mister Kueck.”
  EU energy infrastructure integration
• 2025-06-27 “E-002610/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission Food safety rules are intended to avoid exposure of humans to possible health risks transmitted through food. The placing on the market for human consumption of meat from bulls killed in a bullfight is subject to EU and national food safety legislation. No Common Agricultural Policy aid is designed at EU level to specifically support the economic viability of the breeding of bulls for fighting. The farmers may however benefit from interventions that pursue objectives unrelated to this activity (e.g. basic income support per hectare of eligible agricultural land, including permanent grassland or schemes for the climate or the environment). The Commission has no information about the overall amount of such indirect supports. Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 1 states that, in formulating policies and legislation in a number of policy areas, the Union and the Member States shall pay full regard to the welfare of animals, while respecting the legislative or administrative provisions and customs of the Member States relating in particular to religious rites, cultural traditions and regional heritage. Bearing in mind that bullfighting as such is under the sole competence of the Member States concerned, the Commission remains open to discuss this question with the European Parliament and the Council. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT&from=EN.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• 2025-04-30 “E-001721/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission 1. In 2022, two Member States (the Netherlands and France) reported dog testing in procedures in the framework of industrial chemicals legislation. The Netherlands responded upon clarification request that the data was incorrect and that instead it should have been reported under plant protection product legislation. Commission Regulation (EU) No 283/2013 on data requirements for active substances used in plant protection products 1 requires a 90-day toxicity study that includes non-rodent species which is usually a dog. France confirmed the data were correctly reported in relation to chemicals: it had been a dose range finding study, preliminary to a 90-day toxicity study as per Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Test No 409 2 , which may be required by authorities outside the EU 3 to obtain marketing authorisation. Member State-specific additional information may in some cases be found in Section V of the EU summary report on the statistics on the use of animals in the EU 4 . 2. Directive 2010/63/EU regulates the use of animals for scientific purposes in the EU 5 and requires the use of alternative non-animal methods for testing to satisfy legislation when these are recognised by the legislation of the Union. However, it does not prohibit the use of animals when testing for non-EU purposes when no equivalent data requirements exist in the EU. 3. The use of dogs may be necessary in some cases to ascertain, before proceeding to clinical trials involving humans, the safety of medicinal products. The use of alternative test methods is however actively encouraged by the European Medicines Agency 6 . 1 Commission Regulation (EU) No 283/2013 of 1 March 2013 setting out the data requirements for active substances, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, OJ L 93, 3.4.2013, p. 1–84. 2 https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/1998/09/test-no-409-repeated-dose-90-day-oral-toxicity-study-in-nonrodents_g1gh2933.html. 3 e.g., US Environmental Protection Agency and Brazil. 4 https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/chemicals/animals-science_en#implementation. 5 Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, OJ L 276, 20.10.2010, p. 33–79. 6 https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/homepage.”
  Pharmaceuticals regulation in EU
• 2025-04-30 “E-001722/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission Non-human primates (NHP) continue to play a role in certain research areas, such as neurosciences and immunology, where alternatives are limited. Their use is governed by Directive 2010/63/EU 1 , which imposes stringent measures limiting their use for specific purposes including basic research, species preservation, translational/applied research, or for the development/testing of substances related to debilitating or life-threatening human conditions. Scientific justification is required to demonstrate that objectives cannot be met using other species. In 2022, five vervet monkeys were used in France for the production of blood-based products. Baboons predominately participated in translational and applied research (75%), focusing on human immune and musculoskeletal disorders and infectious diseases, while 25% were involved in basic research, largely related to nervous system studies 2 . In Denmark, zoo animals, destined for euthanasia, were used in pharmacokinetic research to develop safer anaesthesia, contributing to animal welfare knowledge. Further context on how and why NHP are being used is available in the ALURES nontechnical project summary database 3 . In line with the European Research Area Policy Agenda 2025- 2027 the Commission, alongside Member States, has launched an action 4 , focusing on accelerating new approach methodologies (NAMs) aimed at advancing biomedical research and reducing reliance on NHPs. In the Netherlands, an independent committee has been assigned to explore further reductions in NHP use without compromising essential research 5 . Meanwhile, the Innovative Health Initiative's NHPig project 6 endeavours to replace NHPs with mini- and micro-pigs in non-clinical safety studies. 1 Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, OJ L 276, 20.10.2010, p. 33. 2 https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/chemicals/animals-science/statistics-and-non-technical-projectsummaries_en#statistical-database. 3 https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/envdataportal/web/resources/alures/submission/nts/list. 4 COM(2025)62 - European research area policy agenda for the next three years. 5 https://www.tweedekamer.nl/kamerstukken/brieven_regering/detail?id=2025Z07267&did=2025D16494. 6 https://www.ihi.europa.eu/projects-results/project-factsheets/nhpig.”
  Use of animal testing
• 2025-04-30 “E-001720/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission In 2022, 33 029 skin sensitisation tests were conducted on animals constituting a reduction of 12.2 % compared to 2018 and 12.5% compared to 2021. Based on ALURES 1 data, most guinea pig sensitisation assays occur in the medical devices (MD) sector. Testing requirements for these are governed by the International Organization for Standardization standards, and the relevant standard 10993-10:2021 2 still lists guinea pig assays next to the local lymph node assay (LLNA) and non-animal methods. Member States are expected to urge manufacturers to validate the LLNA or other alternatives for specific needs such as MD. Manufacturers should prioritise application of Defined Approaches for skin sensitisation. These consist of a combination of non-animal methods and a defined algorithm to interpret results and are described in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Guideline 497 3 . These approaches have superior performance compared to the LLNA in predicting human responses. Member States require regular reporting on progress made with alternatives, or to limit the project authorisation period for animal tests. If validation of the alternative fails, use of animals should continue to be allowed. The Commission collaborates closely with Member States to remind them of the obligations 4 under Directive 2010/63 5 to ask product-specific qualification of recognised alternatives. The European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing 6 has invited the MD industry to join initiatives such as the skin sensitisation project to share knowledge and accelerate qualification of non-animal methods also by MD manufacturers. The Commission will publish a Roadmap on phasing out animal testing which covers MD legislation. 1 https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/chemicals/animals-science/statistics-and-non-technical-projectsummaries_en. 2 Biological evaluation of medical devices – Part 10: Tests for skin sensitisation. 3 https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/guideline-no-497-defined-approaches-on-skin-sensitisation_b92879a4en.html. 4 E.g., during bi-annual meetings. 5 Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, OJ L 276, 20.10.2010, p. 33–79. 6 https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/chemicals/european-partnership-alternative-approachesanimal-testing_en.”
  Use of animal testing
• 2025-04-28 “E-001689/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission As announced in the Vision on Agriculture and Food 1 , the Commission intends to present a targeted review of the animal welfare legislation, also aiming to follow up on the European Citizens’ Initiative ‘End the Cage Age’ 2 . The Commission will do this in line with the latest science provided by the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA), taking account of ethical, scientific and economic considerations, as well as the EU’s multilateral obligations. At this stage, aquatic animals are not included in the scope of the consultations that will be carried out this year in preparation of the on-farm welfare legislative proposal. Concerning aquatic animals, the Commission is focussing on improved implementation of the existing rules applicable to these animals. The recently established EU Reference Centre for Animal Welfare on aquatic animals (EURCAW aqua) will, amongst others, support Member States in carrying out official controls. It will furthermore increase scientific and technical knowledge on aquatic animal welfare needs. Work is ongoing on animal welfare indicators for farmed fish, through the work of the EURCAW aqua, the EU Aquaculture Assistance Mechanism, as well as an ongoing study on animal welfare indicators. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0075. 2 https://citizens-initiative.europa.eu/initiatives/details/2018/000004/end-cage-age_en.”
  EU requirements on animal welfare for farmers · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-02-13 “E-000690/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/745 on medical devices 1 (MDR) contains specific provisions on the roles and obligations of economic operators (Articles 10 to 16), as well as on the reprocessing of devices (Article 17). Section 14.4 of Annex I to the MDR prescribes that devices shall be designed and manufactured in such a way that adjustment, calibration, and maintenance can be done safely and effectively, while Section 23.4 of the same Annex lays down requirements regarding the information to be supplied when a device is reusable under certain conditions. Aspects related to the repair of medical devices (MD) are not specifically regulated in the MDR; they are rather covered by national legislation of the Member States. However, in cases as the one referred to by the Honourable Member, Article 16 of the MDR applies. It prescribes that the obligations on manufacturers are assumed by a distributor, importer or other natural or legal person when they change the intended purpose of a MD already placed on the market or put into service, or modify a MD already placed on the market or put into service in such a way that compliance with the applicable requirements may be affected. However, if the repair is carried out according to the relevant information and instructions on maintenance duly provided by the manufacturer, this should not adversely affect the performance and safety of the MD. In such latter case, there would not be any need to have a different identification number of the MD, nor the natural or legal person who carried out such repair would have to assume the role and obligations of a ‘manufacturer’. The Commission would also like to inform the Honourable Member that the targeted review of the MDR is ongoing, and it will consider all issues related to the application of the current rules. 1 Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2017 on medical devices, amending Directive 2001/83/EC, Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 and Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 and repealing Council Directives 90/385/EEC and 93/42/EEC (OJ L 117, 5.5.2017, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/745/oj).”
  Medical devices
• “Mr. president, Dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, during the old Parliament we adopted a number of pieces of legislation regarding the climate. The purpose was to strengthen the green transition and reduce our CO2 emissions. We can be proud of what we did. We have to take the lead. When it comes to the green transition. We need to make requirements of our businesses and the economy, but we cannot accept at the same time that our companies lose out in competition from third country businesses who do not have to live up to the same requirements and do not have tax on CO2. For that reason, I find this Cbam proposal to be an excellent idea. With it, we ensure that we have fair competition and that we make the same requirements of imported goods that we make of our own. But of course, we have to do this in the most simple way possible. We mustn't overburden our businesses. So the Commission's proposal regarding reducing the burden for most companies and maintaining 99% of the effect is a very good idea. Let's endorse the proposal and vote tomorrow to approve the proposal. Thank you.”
  Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM)
• “Thank you chair. Thank you Commissioner. I just have to note, I think it's always interesting to debate these issues with the nationalists from Patriots and ESPN because, you know, I mean, I think this is important to protect our nation states from being robbed by companies who don't pay what other companies pay in taxes. We can discuss whether the tax should be high or low, but when you see shell companies being exploited well documented, I think we are being robbed. As a Danish citizen, we have a large welfare state. It needs to be financed. That requires that the companies and people who earn money in Denmark, they also pay their taxes. And I wonder why we disagree on this. Just a remark, Mr. Commissioner, I, I deplore the withdrawal of the of the, uh, files that you have. Um, indeed. Withdrawed. And and I would like to ask you with regards to the on shell bill, uh, This bill was proposed by the Commission to with a clear purpose to limit these kind of letterbox companies that indeed are being are being misused. And by withdrawing the directive, how does the Commission now attempt to address these very concrete and well-documented problems that have that you have identified yourself and through which specific policy, enforcement or legislative instruments do you plan to to go forward? Because I assume you or I hear you as you you also think this is important?”
  Tax Havens
• “Thank you. Colleague. So would you agree that. Okay, so we will need some metals for renewable energy. But in contrast to oil and gas, which we don't have in Europe, 98% of the oil and gas we consume, we import in Europe. In contrast to that, the metals, we can get that also from Europe. We can we can reuse the metals to a much larger degree than we do today. And we can also have mining projects in Europe so we can provide for ourselves. That's not possible with oil and gas because we don't have it. So we need to import it. Would you would you recognize that there is a difference here?”
  Sourcing of critical raw materials
• “But renewable energy is something we can make ourselves. So it's both the green agenda and it is a security agenda. And that's why we need to boost it. And I can tell you that in the European Union the discussions are going around. How can we boost it even more when it comes to grids? We need more grid infrastructure. Um, so we need to support, uh, grids in our member states and between our member states. We need more interconnectors and the European Union needs to support that also financially. And when it comes to permitting, we need shorter permitting deadlines. Sometimes we spend 810 years giving permits to renewable energy projects and, uh, and grid projects. And our commissioner has said that actually we need to get that reduced to six months for simple energy projects. We need the permanent permitting, permitting times deadlines to be six months, uh, to the max. And I think that's something we need to work on to, to together go towards even more renewables. Thank you very much.”
  EU policy on permitting for renewable energy projects
• “(15:48:57 – 15:50:39): Yes. Thank you, chair. Thank you, commissioner. Dear Dan, I would like to highlight the importance of heating and cooling. You have mentioned the Electrification Action Plan, and I believe this plan will also have some ideas on a heating and cooling strategy, which I think is very important as we know that heating and cooling accounts for 50% of our energy use in the European Union and 70% of that comes from fossil fuels today. And we know that when we talk about fossil fuels, we are so dependent on importing, especially oil and gas from from foreign powers that with whom we don't share values. So I'd like to ask you about the potential that you see and and and if you think we can do something, about the waste heat that we create here in in Europe. We know that from data centers alone, if we use just half the heat generated, we could heat 4,000,000 European homes. However, we're not using a lot of that heat today. So how can we do that? Do do you have ideas that we can work with here? I assume it would also, require more district heating systems if we are to use this waste heat. And you know that in the energy efficiency, directive, we have we have a requirement for municipalities with more than 45,000 inhabitants to have heating plants and cooling plants and to see where can they have district heating. And how can we, according to you, promote this idea and make sure that this is actually implemented? Thank you.”
  Energy efficiency
• “Dear Commissioner, honourable colleagues. Dear Minister, we need to stop the import of Russian gas as soon as possible. And that's why I think that the 6th of May, where the Commission put forward the proposal on the phasing out of Russian gas, is was a good day, and I hope that we can name it the Independence Day, the European Independence Day in the future, because we need to follow up on this in the European Parliament as co-legislators. We need to adopt the necessary measures. And I think it's clearly necessary because Russia has been waging an illegal war more than for more than three years now, a war that's breaking all international Uh, justice, all international law and which is costing hundreds of thousands of people their lives. And we've supported Ukraine. We've supported them with a lot of money, which we have supported them by sanctioning Russia. And that has been necessary. That's been the only right thing to do. But it has not been enough, because at the same time, we've been buying so much Russian gas that actually the amount we've been paying for this gas is larger than what we've been giving to Ukraine. That that's sad. That's a scandal that needs to stop. And that's why we need to adopt the, the, the necessary measures. We need to support the Commission's plan. We need to do this as fast as possible. I'm happy to hear the EPP and the representative of the council, the Polish Presidency, support the plan which has been given on the table here. Thank you very much.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Listening to this debate, I am puzzled by the colleagues who argue that we should slow down the energy transition because honestly, I think we need to do the exact opposite. We are completely dependent in Europe when it comes to importing fossil fuels from abroad. 98% of the oil and gas that we import that we use is imported from foreign powers, often from foreign powers with whom we don't share values. And we risk ending being in the pockets of these foreign foreign actors. You look at the Iran war right now with with prices of gas and oil spiking and we are in a horrible situation. Mr.. Donald Trump is in a much better position because he has his own oil and gas. We don't in Europe. So of course we need to build our own energy. We can do that investing in renewable energy, investing in energy efficiency, empowering our energy consumers, eradicating energy poverty. We have 30 million people living in energy poverty today who struggle paying their energy bills. Let's get on with it and stop this nonsense of dependency on fossil fuels.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Listening to this debate, I am puzzled by the colleagues who argue that we should slow down the energy transition because honestly, I think we need to do the exact opposite. We are completely dependent in Europe when it comes to importing fossil fuels from abroad. 98% of the oil and gas that we import that we use is imported from foreign powers, often from foreign powers with whom we don't share values. And we risk ending being in the pockets of these foreign foreign actors. You look at the Iran war right now with with prices of gas and oil spiking and we are in a horrible situation. Mr.. Donald Trump is in a much better position because he has his own oil and gas. We don't in Europe. So of course we need to build our own energy. We can do that investing in renewable energy, investing in energy efficiency, empowering our energy consumers, eradicating energy poverty. We have 30 million people living in energy poverty today who struggle paying their energy bills. Let's get on with it and stop this nonsense of dependency on fossil fuels. **Nicolae ȘTEFĂNUȚĂ @Chair: Mr. Wilson, Mr. Fugelsang. Mr. Fugelsang. Mr. Fugelsang. Mr. Fugelsang. I hate to interrupt you from your networking with the commissioner, but there is a blue card. There's a blue card from Mr. Noahtech. Will you accept it?”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Thank you, chair, and welcome the ministers. Thank you for your perspectives that you share here in the committee. I would like to ask you about, um, the spending, the defense spending. Uh, you mentioned it, Mr. Paulson, that we have the EDP, uh, program, the European defense industry program, which is an attempt, of course, to strengthen our defense industry, putting funds, public funds behind it, €1.5 billion from 2025 to 27. Um, However, I think we agree that that's probably not going to be enough. So we need to do what we can to increase, um, the support for our defence industry and increase our defence spending. And you agreed in NATO recently to to really spend more on defence in the coming years, which I think is a very good thing. So my question, uh, would would, would be how do you look at, you know, we have the long term budget being presented today from the European Commission. And, and I think that defence and defence industry will, will likely be more present in this long term budget. I hope so than compared to previous years. How do you see that discussion? Do you see a possibility for for really doing more on an EU level than what we have now, taking into account the new budget? Also, do you see a possibility for the Danish presidency to to put the the spending of um European member states to discussion.”
  Defence spending
• “Um, I think, uh, some, uh, some issues that could be that could be strengthened. Uh, I think the question of fragmentation, tax fragmentation that we see, uh, you know, we have, of course, many complex rules also from the EU on taxation. And, and it makes it sometimes difficult for businesses. But sometimes the problems comes from not too many rules, but too few EU rules in the sense that if you have 27 national rules that are not aligned, that are not that don't speak with each other, then it becomes very complicated for businesses. So sometimes we need some overall EU rules to make it less complicated really. And I think that could be that could be underlined also. Taxation on digital services. Uh, I think we could, we could, we could elaborate that in the report. And then I would say from the discussion you organised yesterday, Mr. Robertson, which I think was a very fruitful one. Um, we had a speaker from Portuguese University and I, I, uh, forget her name now, but it was a professor who who said that the question on personal income tax could also be relevant, because you have more and more people that are working for a company, but they live in another country. And so countries are starting to compete on making preferential tax systems for these individuals. And I think maybe that's something we also need to. Could be relevant to look at in this report. But I think it's a very good starting point and I look forward to the discussion from here. Thank you.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Thank you. There's one thing this crisis makes clear is that we need more renewable energy and more energy efficiency. 98% of the oil and gas that we consume in Europe, we imported from foreign powers, often from foreign powers that we don't with whom we don't share values. And it's hurting our citizens. The high prices that we are seeing, it's hurting our industry. So we need to build on the Green Deal. And that's why I am genuinely puzzled by large parts of this House who work to dismantle the Green Deal. The speakers that we've had on in this floor just previously actually voted to just Dismantle or to reject the climate target for 2040. The EPP group I saw on social media, they call the phasing out of combustion engine cars by 2035 a, quote, historical mistake. Why do you do this? I mean, do you think that post will and that policy will age very well? When you look at the prices for oil and the prices we can foresee and the dependency that we have? Why not change the policy in a green direction so that we get independency from fossil fuels? That is what we need. Who makes the historical mistake? Well, perhaps you should look in the mirror. Thank you very much.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Thank you. Thank you. Chair. And I'd also like to say thank you to the rapporteur. I agree, chair, that I think indeed it is a very good outset for the discussion that we will have. Many good elements and I think, um, the report has many good ideas and perspectives on how to simplify and avoid fragmentation in order to help our businesses so needed. When we look at trachys report, that is also referred to in your report, Mr. rapporteur, um, in order to increase our competitiveness, I'd like to, uh, stress a few points, um, because we, we can say from the S&D that we are also very happy. We're very content that that the draft report, uh, commits also to the implementation and ongoing work regarding the international tax frameworks and agreements, especially on the pillar two, on the minimum corporate tax rate. I think this is very important, especially taking into account the current international situation where, uh, it will be an important signal from this committee and from the European Parliament that we stand firm on this agreement. This is also about having a level playing field. Uh, we can we can discuss whether you know what level the taxes should be, but we cannot accept that some, uh, some companies are able to pay much lower tax because they profit shift. Uh, and while other companies, small and medium sized companies don't have these opportunities. So it's about making sure that we have fair competition. And I think the report underlines this. I think that's very good. Uh, also, I'd like to emphasize the importance of the inclusion of combating tax evasion and aggressive tax planning, which is also, uh, an element in the report.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Mr. Commissioner, dear colleagues. China is an important partner for Europe. Trade cooperation. In light of the big challenges that we have, such as the climate changes. But we have to see that we have become dependent of the big. Country. Greece has sold its biggest harbour to China, the harbour Piraeus. We have made ourselves dependent of critical raw materials, rare earth. We have made ourselves dependent within the green energy. 95% of everything to do with solar has come from China. So could we make an agreement that in the future we do not sell critical infrastructure to China? We keep it in Europe and we do whatever we can to make ourselves independent. As for the critical energy. Thank you.”
  EU policy on screening foreign investment in strategic sectors and critical infrastructure
• “Thank you. Chair. Uh, okay. Uh, I, I would like to focus on the question on on harmonization versus fragmentation. Several of you have said that a lot of the problems really are caused by the reason or the fact that we have 27 different tax regimes, and it makes it makes it very complex. It also creates some loopholes for when what you can speculate in, in different, uh, arrangements to avoid to, to exploit the differences between the tax system. I think it's a general problem that no, you know, the countries, they don't want to harmonize the tax systems. They're very reluctant to do so. And I think we agree that at least I think that we should not have an EU, you know, the tax system in my country, Denmark, I would not prefer that it's decided in, in Brussels because we have different kind of welfare states. Some states are big, some are smaller. So we'd like to have some flexibility. But but my question is really how can you find that balance? I think we I agree that we should harmonize more of these systems to avoid the loopholes. But at the same time, we want to give member states flexibility to decide, of course, their own tax rates. And so it seems to me to be a a dilemma. And maybe you can comment on how to find the balance here. Um, so that's my first question. Second question is capital taxation. I would like to we have not discussed that very much. We've discussed corporate taxation. Pillar two and so on. But capital taxation, taxation of dividends, taxation of capital gains in general. Do you think that's a, that's a big, uh, area that the EU should go into and look at. We looked at the corporate taxation with pillar two in the OECD framework, but we don't have many common rules or common approaches for capital taxation. And how big a problem do you do you think that that is or is that a problem? Thank you.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “We know that some member states spend a lot on defense and spend a lot on helping Ukraine. Your own country. My own country is one of them. But also the Baltic states and and some of the northern states. Other, other countries spent less. And we need, I think, an increased spending from everybody, uh, to meet this challenge that we agree that we face can. Do you have plans on putting this on the agenda? Um, and then I would like to also lastly to ask you about if we are to support our European industry, we need to make sure that we don't only buy military equipment from outside the European Union. We need to make sure that we buy European as well. Do you see chances that we can actually further this effort in your work in the presidency? Which which kind of discussion do we need here in order to increase the by European perspective. Thank you very much.”
  Defence spending
• “Thank you very much, Minister. Thank you very much to both ministers for explaining the priorities of the presidency. This is about industry and about bolstering environmentally friendly industry. And we want to be able to create jobs and ensure we have affordable energy so that we can become independent of Russian gas, and we won't need to import so many fossil fuels. My question relates to European competitiveness when it comes to the environment. Now this is going to be key in creating jobs in the future. But we are under pressure, as you very rightly said. We have solar panel industry. When 95% of solar panels installed in Europe are produced in China, and then when it comes to electric vehicles, these are also increasingly imported from outside the EU. I rented, for example, a Volks wagon recently, but we're talking about predominantly Chinese electric vehicles and we are being having pressure from China as well. How can we create advantage for Europe? Because as I say, we're under huge amounts of pressure. Then there's also the simplification and speeding up of permitting procedures. You mentioned this. What kind of tools could be used to achieve this? Simplifying state aid as well. That also needs to be discussed further. How do you see that?”
  State Aid
• “Thank you very much, chair. And I would also like to, um, express my gratitude to the rapporteur, to the shadow rapporteurs as well. I think we had an excellent cooperation. Um, And, um. It's a little bit unusual to have this discussion on the consideration of the amendments. Now, since we we have been in a way too fast or faster than the process in the sense that we, we already, um, discussed and agreed on compromises. From our side, we think it's, uh, it's good compromises that we have made. And I think the rapporteur has been indeed inclusive and willing to see different perspectives from different groups. Uh, and we've both have both of all the groups I believe have given and taken a little bit. So I think it has been an excellent, uh, process. And I think the result of the of the report, which is the text on the table now, um, is a good one, is a balanced one. It is about, of course, um, increasing or making sure that we have tax rules that increase competitiveness and that we don't have, uh, more fragmentation than we need. Of course, tax is a, uh, sovereign matter for member states. They decide their tax policies. That's that's clear also in this report. But when we can cooperate, uh, and, and coordinate to make sure that we have actually a good business environment for investors also to make sure that we have, uh, rules that prevent tax evasion and tax avoidance. And that has, of course, been important for, for our group. So both perspectives are in in this report. Then we need to do it. And that's the clear signal that this report sends as far as I am concerned.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Commissioner, colleagues. The international order is undergoing changes and it's not going to improve. We have to wake up and see what's going on. We're still seeing wars in Russia, in Ukraine. And we've seen this for more than five years. It's not just Ukraine that's being attacked. It's security for all of us that's at stake here. If we don't support Ukraine would be naive to think that others will come in and help us out. We've seen very clearly no one's going to come. No one's going to heed the call. We need to invest in our own defense, but we need to do that in a smart way. The industry the sector is fragmented in Europe. Different systems are being developed across Europe. There's no coordination. It's high time for us to coordinate things now so that defence can be strengthened. If we want to protect the Europe that we know today, there's no time to be to lose. We must act now.”
  EU competences on defence
• “Thank you. Thank you chair. Dear colleagues, dear Commissioner, congratulations once again with your good proposal to phase out Russian gas. And congratulations to the political groups here in the European Parliament for having been able to keep their heads cool and their hearts warm and negotiate an agreement that has wide support. And I think this is worth noticing in a time where it seems that politics is becoming more and more polarized, that we are not able to agree on many things. But this, this we have been able to agree on from left to right, that it is wrong to keep on financing Mr. Putin's war, that it is wrong to give Russia an instruments that they can use to put pressure on us, that it is wrong to to spend more on Russian gas than we have spent on helping Ukraine. It is a great day for us that finally this will come to an end. And I think this is about time and congratulations to Europe.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “And you have some best practices to make sure that you lower that trade off risk, so to speak. I would like to ask you about the possibility of an EU framework. What do you think the EU could do? You have some best practices for what countries do when you say that they follow some of the best practices, the countries you've looked at, but not all of them, of course. But do you think that there could be some kind of EU US policy that we could improve here from, from the EU system, so to speak, to, to guide Member States in a certain direction and make sure that Member States do not use these tax incentives to compete and distort the internal market, and that we risk a sort of a race downwards, a race to the bottom, which I think is not in our interest. I understand that tax incentives are useful in many cases, but maybe we can have an EU policy that that limits the to the risks that you also point at. So that's my second question. And my third and final question. We have some goals in the European Union, some policy goals. We can discuss what what they are. But I think that we agree, for example, that a policy goal could be our Green Deal, our climate ambitions. Could you make could you say anything about which kind of incentives would would be effective to, to, for example, promote the Green Deal, to promote the climate ambitions that we have to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to go in that direction.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Thank you very much. Madam Vice President, I would like to say that first, I support fully your ambitions in the clean, clean industrial deal. And I think you could emphasize even more the role of energy efficiency in the clean industrial deal. I think there are reasons for why to do this. I think when we talk about energy efficiency technology, we are world leaders in Europe. So we'll create a lot of jobs. We have the technology in the companies here. Of course, when we want to reduce imports of gas from Russia, energy efficiency will also reduce the imports. And I think, uh, well, we all know that, uh. Mario Draghi wrote, wrote a very important report. He said that energy prices are way too high in Europe. Gas prices 4 to 6 times higher than than in the US. Uh, to reduce that, of course, we also need to increase energy efficiency. So my question is what do you see of concrete proposals for boosting energy efficiency and clean industrial deal? I think it should be on the top of the agenda. Thank you.”
  Energy efficiency
• “Could could you have any would you have any input here? This is as policy makers here, we are interested in in reaching or turning policy towards a certain direction. And maybe you could maybe you could help us here also. I would say a goal for, for us also if you read the report is that we have a European. Our European model is also about that. We don't have too much inequality in our society. When you compare to the US and and basically when you compare to every other part of the world, we would say that we don't we don't have so much inequality, and we'd like to have a model where we don't increase inequality very much. I would think that if you make a lot of tax incentives, could, if you do them in a not so fortunate way, could increase inequality, because, for example, if you have the risk of tax evasion, do you could you comment on this, how to make sure? I don't know if you have some general thoughts on how to use these tax incentives, some best practices for. But making sure that we don't boost the inequality that we've seen is on the rise the later years. That's some general questions for reflections. Thank you very much.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “Um, so just maybe I could highlight a couple of, of elements in the report that I think are very good. Um, so, so first, the Parliament is sending clear signals of its readiness to work constructively with the Commission and Council on reforming EU tax rules, particularly in light of upcoming proposals aimed at deepening the single market and boosting competitiveness, while at the same time maintaining our commitment to fighting aggressive tax planning. We also reiterate our long standing position on pending legislative files that are still pending in the Council, including the unveiled directive. We recall our support for progressive tax resolutions adopted during the last mandate, such as, um, the call for reforming the EU list of tax havens. Uh, and also we we reaffirm our strong commitment to the OECD, G20 inclusive framework two pillar approach, including the global minimum corporate tax. And also we are ready to say that, uh, of course, the the if we can simplify these rules, that's, uh, welcome. Um, and uh, we think that I think and our group think that this is very important that we stand firmly on these rules also in the current, um, international climate. And I think the rapporteur also recognizes this. So we're very positive to what's that? Um, so there are a number of elements that I could also mention other elements. Uh, but, but I think overall we have struck a good balance in the report. And I hope that that many groups can support it. And I think that, that, uh, I think that many groups can support it, but but, uh, let's hear from the other groups. Thank you.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Thank you chair. And I also have to say I think it's it's great to hear from our friends in the energy community. I think that we all need to support this project where we share energy, where we can transfer energy to each other and also commit to certain targets for renewable energy together and work together in this aspect. I think it's good to hear from you, our friends in the energy community, that you're committed to the renewable energy agenda. That's a clear message I take from your interventions about all your plans and how how far you've come and how far you want to go. We want to go far. We've we've adopted the Renewable Energy Directive last term in the European Union, saying we need at least 42.5% renewables by 2030. And we'd like to have more than that, but at least 42.5%. And, um, and I can tell you that after the the illegal war started by Russia and Ukraine begun, um, the, the German vice chancellor, who, who does not belong to my party, but he said something, um, something good, I think, which is that renewable energy is freedom energy because we're so dependent on we realize we're so dependent on Russia for natural gas and dependent on foreign powers for fossil energy.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “You know, I don't exclude nuclear power for some countries, renewable energy for other countries. I think it's a problem only to put your money on nuclear power for a number of reasons. One important reason, from my point of view is that it takes too much time. If you look at the three last nuclear power plants, most recent nuclear power plants, projects in Europe, in Finland, France and and UK. The average time is 17 years from. You start the process till you have to until you have them producing power. So I think it takes too much time, but I think we should invest broadly in our own energy in in Europe. Thank you.”
  Nuclear energy
• “Thank you very much, chair. So I'm the rapporteur of the opinion to this climate law, and I have presented my report. It's not about rejecting the proposal. So that's not what we plan to do in, in uh, but we have, uh, we have negotiations this week and next week, and we hope to be able to find each other. There are two groups. Three groups, actually, uh, the Patriots, the ECR, the ESN that will reject the proposal. So I consider that that will not be part of the picture. Those those groups will not be able to, uh, be part of a deal. All the rest of the groups the S&D, the EPP, the renew group, the the Greens and the lefts, none of them go below 90% in 2040. Some of them go on 90%. I propose at least 90% because if you listen to the scientific advisers to the European Commission, as you know, they say 90 to 95%, but none of the groups go below 90%. And I think that is a good starting point from the perspective from the industrial and energy perspective. We see a great need to have stability for investments to put a target for 2040, because we need our industry. We need our economy to have certainty that this is the direction in which we are going. We know that from the Treasury report that this will be a driver for, uh, prosperity in our economy because the renewable energy is cheaper than the fossil energy.”
  Climate efforts
• “Madam Minister. I appreciated what you had to say. I think it's important that we have less bureaucracy. And you mentioned a number of initiatives, such as in the area of digital sovereignty. I think this is a very important area. We have big problems because we are dependent on American technology companies in the area of communications infrastructure, and we have seen where this leads us. So I think it is, uh, really urgent for us, uh, to, uh, act now. I'm not an ex. I don't follow Elon Musk. But I do hear what he has to say. And he is quite supportive of the AfD of Marine Le Pen. He supports, uh, movements, which I don't think are good for Europe. Now, regardless of your ideology, this is an external person that has a lot of power and influence on our democracy, and there's no alternatives. And when we look at TikTok, for example, there was the situation with the Romanian elections and Russian interference. I mean, TikTok is an external Chinese platform. We don't have any influence over this. So I think we need to develop a European alternative. We don't want to be dependent on American companies when it comes to protecting our democracy. They're the ones who are setting the agenda. These big American technology platforms, and they are partly dependent on foreign powers. So it's really important we have our own alternatives. What will you do? Thank you.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• “My colleagues, Commissioner, I often hear arguments saying that countries should decide their own tax policy and the EU shouldn't interfere, and I agree that we should each country be determining our tax policy. But when you look at things today. Where it's possible to move, um, assets to tax havens, where accountants can move company revenues to places where tax is 1%, we have a 22% corporate tax rate in Denmark. Um, but Apple doesn't mind. Google doesn't mind. Facebook doesn't mind because they take their profits where it's taxed at 1%. So we no longer have sovereignty over our tax policy. And I think that's something we need Needed to recognized. In 1990 ten European countries had asset taxation. Now it's just one. The average tax rate at that time was 35%. Now it's dropped to 21%. Corporate taxation. That's not because Europeans have suddenly decided that we've taxed the rich companies enough. Or is it because countries have been exposed to a race to the bottom and have had to compete and get tax rates as low as possible? I fear it's the latter. And we don't want a policy where society loses, where hospitals, old people's homes, schools lose out. That's why I welcome this report and I welcome we respond, we agree of a minimum corporation tax of 15%, which I think is important that the EU agree to as well. So let's support this report and thank you to the rapporteur.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Thank you very much. Dear colleagues. Dear Commissioner, I want to congratulate you on the proposal on reducing greenhouse gases by 90% in 2040. I think it's the right proposal. I think it's a sound proposal. And I think it's important when we go to the cop meeting that the European Union delivers ambition also to move other countries. We are struggling in the European Parliament to get your proposal through. I am leading the negotiations in the committee and as you can hear, Commissioner, there are lots of groups in this Parliament that either don't believe in climate change or don't think it's important that the Europeans should act. So we need to work together. Those that can the SPD, the Greens, renew, hopefully the EPP. Actually, we are struggling with the EPP right now, so I hope that the EPP your group will come together and support your proposal. We want to work and we need the European Union needs it. The climate needs it and we need it for the Cop meeting. So good luck to all of us.”
  Climate efforts
• “Thank you very much. Of course. Never again should be our our message. We are so dependent on foreign companies who claim to have the same values as us. We can see how dependent we are on Russia for Russian gas. It was absolute disastrous for Europe. But that's not enough. You'd rather have gas from the Middle East or oil from the Middle East or from the US. That would also be a mistake. We need to make sure that we're producing our own environmentally friendly energies here in Europe, but we need to make sure that there's permits It's available. Otherwise we won't be able to set up the wind parks. The fact that it can take nine years to get a wind farm up and running, that's absolutely ridiculous. The fact that this takes so long, this means we're going to have to speed things up because it's about our future and our competitiveness. Thank you.”
  EU policy on permitting for renewable energy projects
• “(15:53:09 – 15:53:44): A quick follow-up, perhaps. And I know you used to chair the animal welfare group in this house, Dan. So also congratulations to you on the animal welfare minister. Quick follow-up. Geothermal energy then in the heating and cooling approach, do you see a role for that? You know that in the city, we know very well Aarhus, you have a very exciting, and promising, geothermal project. You think that could be rolled out in in in other parts of of Europe? Could that be part of our strategy? Thank you.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “(15:58:18 – 15:59:52): Thank you Chair and thank you to the speakers. I would like to continue on the notion of don't pick the winners and I'm not sure if we disagree but I would like you to elaborate a little bit on that idea. To me it sometimes seems as if that's a slogan from some kind of fairy tale that we should not pick the winners because isn't that what we do to some extent when I'm in the competitiveness front? We want renewable energy to win over fossil energy and when we go in a certain direction, for example, we want to electrify, we have to set up a whole infrastructure so we don't want to have a lot of different infrastructures to compete with each other. We want to pick one set of infrastructure because otherwise it would be really expensive and probably not very efficient. And when we look at a country like China, when they have electrified much more than we have, I mean, have they not had a strategy of picking the winners when they, for example, outcompeted our solar industry? Didn't they say, you know, we want to win on this area, we want to pick this winner? And did they not succeed? So I want to ask you if you can elaborate on the idea of picking or not picking the winners and how we should go about that in the competitiveness front because I think to some degree we are picking the winners and we should be.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Thank you, thank you chair. Dear Commissioner, down here, I appreciated your words on the need for predictability and stability in our economy and for our industry. If we are to succeed in, in in having, Um, in having a prosperous development. And I think that also applies to the car industry, where we need to stick to our target as far as I'm concerned. It's not a way forward to say we have these targets. But by the way, you don't have to live up to them and there will be no consequences if you don't live up to them and we'll postpone things. That's not a good strategy. That's bad policy that might risk harming our industry in the end. I have a general question on the implementation of the climate and energy targets. And in regards to the NAACP, the National Energy and Climate Plans, as you know, 13 member states still have not submitted. The NAACP and the commission sent out a notice to these 13 member states in November, giving them a two month notice. Now, these two months have passed now. And so I would like to ask the Commissioner, what is the state of play and what do you intend to do? Of course, we have adopted renewable energy targets and energy efficiency targets. I have been involved in it myself in the Parliament, and we need to implement them. And here we need the from the member states. So what do you intend to do, dear Commissioner, to make sure that we deliver here? Thank you.”
  Climate efforts
• “All right. Thank you very much. Um, so I agree that, of course, we need to focus on the grids and invest. And I hope that the budget proposal being presented today will also reflect that. But I would like to ask you, uh, last or go on on another topic which is just as relevant, I think, for what you mentioned, about stopping to stop, to stop the financing of Putins war machine, which is heating and cooling. Um, we have um, we have a situation where, um, we of course, we spend a lot of energy on heating and cooling our buildings. I think 50% of all the energy we we spend is on heating and cooling of buildings, and 70% of that energy is fossil today. And how do you think we can use the Danish presidency to push for a change here? We have, I think, good experiences in Denmark with district heating also coming from renewable sources and also new projects on Earth. Geothermal energy. So I would like to ask you whether you can think we can also push these ideas and how we can make a change in Europe. Thank you.”
  Energy performance of buildings
• “Well, I think Germany needs to invest more in more aggressively in renewables. I think Europe needs to invest more aggressively in renewables. And if you look at my own country, Denmark, I think that's a counterexample to to what you're saying. We don't have nuclear power, but we have invested in wind turbines. We have invested in different forms of renewable energy, and we have reduced our carbon footprint. In fact, we have a climate law that says that we need to reduce by 2030. We need to reduce CO2 emissions by 70% compared to 1990. And it looks like that we're going to make it back. **Nicolae ȘTEFĂNUȚĂ @Chair: Mr. Georg Meyer is next.”
  Energy (green transition)