Flavio TOSI

Policy topics Flavio TOSI is active on

What Flavio TOSI has said (9)

• 2025-09-10 “E-003515/2025 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission 1. and 2. The Commission is of the view that a common package of measures on the Brenner motorway is the best long-term solution. The Commission is available to resume negotiations should the Member States concerned wish to agree on such a common package. The closure of the Mont Blanc tunnel, mentioned by the Honourable Members, is imputable to maintenance and structural works. Such works, as well as those related to the Fréjus tunnel, are necessary for road safety reasons and in order to prolong the useful lifetime of the infrastructure. They will have a positive effect for the single market in the long term. However, the Commission supports the initiative of several Alpine States to better coordinate road and rail maintenance and structural works to ensure sufficient capacity at the Alpine crossing at any given time. At this stage, the Commission does not plan to revise the Transport Protocol of the Alpine Convention which ensures the right balance between transport needs and environmental protection. 3. The Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) supports the implementation of the trans-European transport network (TEN-T), including key trans-Alpine corridors. Under the proposed CEF programme for 2028–2034 1 , with a transport budget of EUR 51.515 billion, funding will continue to be awarded through competitive calls for eligible projects, including cross-border Alpine transport infrastructure. In addition, CEF can be combined with other EU instruments to leverage private investments and accelerate the delivery of resilient and sustainable connections. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52025PC0547.”
  EU funding for transportation · EU transport infrastructure integration
• 2025-09-10 “E-003514/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is ready to assess any substantiated complaints on alleged measures or practices restricting access for EU companies, goods or services to procurement markets in third countries, including China. After a preliminary assessment, the Commission may decide to open an investigation under the International Procurement Instrument 1 that may lead to restriction of access to EU procurement markets of economic operators, goods and services of the third country concerned, if the latter does not remove its barriers (in the form of exclusion of bidders or a score adjustment in a given sector and such restriction is not limited to projects with EU funding). The Commission undertakes a preliminary review of all submissions received under the Foreign Subsidies Regulation 2 . The Commission may open an in-depth investigation if there are sufficient indications that a bidder has been granted a foreign subsidy that distorts the internal market. To date, three such investigations have been launched in two procurement procedures and closed after bidders withdrew from tender, 3 and a more recent one is ongoing 4 , all involving different Chinese bidders. The Commission is preparing the revision of the current public procurement legislative framework 5 to assess possible new measures, including in areas like awarding criteria, sustainability and European preference. Further to judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the cases Kolin 6 and Qingdao 7 , it is very clear that it is already today up to the contracting authority or entity to decide on the participation of economic operators from third countries who cannot rely on EU’s commitments in the World Trade Organisation Government Procurement Agreement or bilateral trade agreements. 1 Regulation (EU) 2022/1031 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 June 2022 on the access of third-country economic operators, goods and services to the Union’s public procurement and concession markets and procedures supporting negotiations on access of Union economic operators, goods and services to the public procurement and concession markets of third countries (International Procurement Instrument – IPI) (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 173, 30.6.2022, pp. 1–16. 2 Regulation (EU) 2022/2560 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 on foreign subsidies distorting the internal market. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/statement_24_1729. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/statement_24_2570. 4 https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/news/commission-opens-depth-investigation-construction-lisbonrailway-line-under-foreign-subsidies-2025-11-05_en. 5 Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the award of concession contracts Text with EEA relevance, Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC and Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC. 6 C-652/22 Judgment - 22/10/2024 - Kolin Inşaat Turizm Sanayi ve Ticaret. 7 C-266/22 Judgment - 13/03/2025 - CRRC Qingdao Sifang and Others.”
  "Buy European" provisions · Trade relations with China
• 2025-05-21 “E-002051/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission Under the Clean Industrial Deal 1 (CID), the Commission announced that the upcoming Industrial Decarbonisation Accelerator Act 2 (IDAA) will develop a voluntary label on the carbon intensity of industrial products, starting with steel, based on a simple methodology with Emissions Trading System data and building on the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism 3 (CBAM) methodology. The label will be designed to provide frontrunners a transparent mechanism to earn a green premium and drive the development of low-carbon lead markets. In parallel, the Commission will continue working on developing comprehensive life-cycle assessments, building on the IDAA’s voluntary label where relevant. By the end of the transitional phase of the CBAM, the Commission will conduct a comprehensive review of its implementation which will examine key issues, including the role of scrap in steel production. The Commission is aware of the particular situation associated with this and is assessing the issues and potential solutions, as appropriate ways to address them. As announced in the CID 4 and in the European Steel and Metals Action Plan 5 , the upcoming IDAA will introduce resilience and sustainability criteria to foster clean European supply for energy-intensive sectors, such as steel. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0085. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=PI_COM:Ares(2025)3570423. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32023R0956. 4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0085. 5 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_805.”
  Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) · Climate efforts
• 2025-05-02 “E-001776/2025 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission The Commission shares the concern for the safety of riders of powered two-wheelers (PTW). This is a very vulnerable road user group, and the Commission, in cooperation with Member States, is promoting a range of initiatives to support PTW rider safety. In response to the questions: 1. The Commission has no current plans for an EU proposal for the adoption of specific advanced protective equipment for PTWs, such as airbags. 2. There are no EU-level funding streams to give specific financial support to the purchase of this equipment. 3. The Commission promotes the safety of vulnerable road users through all available mechanisms, including the exchange of best practices through the High-Level Group on Road Safety 1 and the biannual EU Road Safety Conferences; a specific focus on vulnerable road users, and PTW safety in particular, for Member States participating in the EU Road Safety Exchange 2 ; and highlighting successful initiatives to support PTW safety through the EU Road Safety Charter 3 and in the annual Excellence in Road Safety Awards 4 . One recent winner of an Excellence in Road Safety Award, an initiative on the use of road markings to promote safe PTW driving in bends, has resulted in a 60% reduction in road trauma, and has been implemented in other Member States. The Commission would also emphasise that it recently adopted a proposal 5 to amend Directive 2014/45/EU 6 on periodic roadworthiness tests, where it proposed more stringent requirements by introducing mandatory inspections for motorcycles above 125 cm 3 . The Commission regularly collects the most recent research on topics related to the protection of vulnerable road users, PTW safety in particular, and makes it available to the public through the EU Road Safety Observatory 7 . 1 https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/what-we-do/high-level-group-road-safety_en. 2 https://etsc.eu/projects/eu-road-safety-exchange/. 3 https://road-safety-charter.ec.europa.eu/. 4 https://road-safety-charter.ec.europa.eu/content/excellence-road-safety-awards?page=0. 5 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2025%3A180%3AFIN. 6 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/45/oj/eng. 7 https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/european-road-safety-observatory/data-and-analysis/thematicreports_en.”
  Driving licences
• 2024-10-07 “E-001973/2024 Answer given by Mr Hoekstra on behalf of the European Commission The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) monitors how each Member State applies and effectively implements the common EU rules on aviation safety, particularly in the area of surveillance of organisations that the Member State has certified. EASA carries out this oversight through standardisation inspections, conducted on the basis of Regulation (EU) No 2018/1139 1 (the EASA Basic Regulation) and Regulation (EU) No 628/2013 2 . These inspections follow a risk-based approach and may include on-site visits to organisations, such as operators. Furthermore, Regulation (EU) 996/2010 3 establishes that Member States’ national civil aviation safety investigation authorities are responsible for investigating accidents and serious incidents that have occurred in their territory, to identify their causes, and to issue safety recommendations if necessary to prevent their recurrence. EASA closely monitors the outcome of such investigations to determine the need for follow-up actions, which could relate either to aircraft/engine design and operating procedures, or to aspects specific to the aircraft operator. The responsibility that an aircraft is airworthy and fit to fly lies with each individual air carrier. The air carriers and the aircraft involved in the referenced incidents are subject to the safety oversight by the national competent authorities (NCAs) that have issued their respective Air Operator Certificates (AOCs). 1 Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2018 on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Union Aviation Safety Agency, and amending Regulations (EC) No 2111/ 2005, (EC) No 1008/2008, (EU) No 996/2010, (EU) No 376/2014 and Directives 2014/30/EU and 2014/53/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Regulations (EC) No 552/2004 and (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91, OJ L 212, 22.8.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2018/1139/oj 2 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 628/2013 of 28 June 2013 on working methods of the European Aviation Safety Agency for conducting standardisation inspections and for monitoring the application of the rules of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 736/2006, OJ L 179, 29.6.2013, p. 46, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2013/628/oj 3 Regulation (EU) 996/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 on the investigation and prevention of accidents and incidents in civil aviation and repealing Directive 94/56/EC, OJ L 295, 12.11.2010, p. 35, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2010/996/oj”
  EU policy on aviation safety
• “Thank you. Thank you. President. Dear Commissioner, you know we have a serious and a great lack of truck drivers, and this is a big problem for the entire transport system. The estimate is about 500,000 workers that are missing in the European Union. And the question is which action will take the Commission to attract new workers, new truck drivers? Thank you.”
  Driving licences
• “So furthermore, we're we're seeing the rollout of want or the intended rollout of electric vans and trucks. Most operators don't really want these. And if we look at Euro six and the mid to short distances on the 40% for areas like the Alps and so on, is it really realistic? And what about the roads within the ports where the ports have the necessary tracks and necessary platforms? And then there was the digitalization, which is also fundamental. But the immediate introduction of compulsory platforms such as the feet might be a significant burden for SMEs, and that would well be difficult for them to sustain. So are the data and the instruments currently available mature enough and standardised enough to allow an SME to to see that it will have proper savings without having to incur disproportionate costs, first of all. So I think that the Parliament's approach should be that we need to try and make sure we have a direct directive which functions and which can be applied directly. It should have clear, realistic and effective rules for SMEs.”
  Road transport environmental policy
• “Thank you. President, I prefer to speak in my language because the time is short and I have to be brief and clear. I'd like to thank, particularly Mr. Pierini for his words. Because I think he clearly set out the heart of the problem here. We want to avoid any ideological approach on energy drinks. We need to base ourselves on the only certainty that we can have, which is based on scientific evidence. Today, we don't have that, at least not sufficiently when it comes to the effects of energy drinks. This committee's approach and the Parliament's approach has been pragmatic. Given that we're talking about businesses, the economy, businesses that are key to our territories. They create jobs. They create wealth. It's similar to the debate on smoke free. When the plenary rejected those restrictive approach because there was a lack of scientific evidence. Similarly, in this case, yes. Recommendations are appropriate. We need nutritional education in schools for young people, but it would be incorrect as unfortunately it is happening for all countries to individually introduce restrictions or bans. It would create unfair competition between different countries. We know that health and scientific data are key and so bans without this information are pointless.”
  EU measures on lifestyle-related behaviours (smoking, drinking, eating, etc.)
• “As rapporteur, I would just like to stress that we fully support the objectives of the directive. Improving combined transport is essential for the environment and for the industrial competitiveness in Europe. We need to take specific steps to look at what's come up in the study, the aspects that it deals with. The Commission's original proposal and the observations of member states and operators in the sector. So there are some questions that need to be addressed. First of all, infrastructure. We talked about the Verona Quadrant as a good example. But we do know that in Europe there are major disparities when it comes to infrastructure. So I wonder if a single rigid rule could work in such diverse contexts, or whether perhaps we need more flexibility to adapt the rules to the different geographical specificities and different levels of development in different areas. The second point is the 40% threshold for combined transport. Perhaps setting a rigid threshold for receiving of external costs could create barriers unnecessarily. If we add up road distances covered, we could take or we could take to lower distances out of the equation. And this might also happen with ports which are not currently covered.”
  EU transport infrastructure integration