Brando BENIFEI

Policy topics Brando BENIFEI is active on

What Brando BENIFEI has said (68)

• 2026-06-15 “Tomorrow, the European Parliament is giving its support because we believe it's necessary to take a step forward, stabilizing transatlantic trade relations between EU and US, supporting our businesses, protecting jobs, and creating greater economic predictability. But let there be no misunderstanding. Our approval is only subject to conditions that we clearly outlined and obtained in the legal text that we vote on tomorrow. We have asserted our institutional role, and we have empowered the commission with the tools needed to protect European interests with safeguards and suspension clauses that strengthen our ability to respond if the commitments undertaken are not respected. We now expect them to be used with determination whenever necessary. And rest assured, we will stay vigilant. We have also set a clear end term to this agreement because open and free trade, not tariffs, should be the norm in our trade relationship. Our vote is intended to help rebuild trust, but trust must be earned through credibility, consistency, and mutual respect. That is why we now count on concrete progress from The United States on key pending issues, starting with resolving the unacceptable asymmetry on steel and its derivatives. With this vote, we are doing our part and with the clarity that has too often been absent from some of our governments. We stated clearly, Europe needs a strong transatlantic partnership based on reciprocity and mutual convenience. Anything less would not serve the long term interests of European citizens, which must remain our guide very much.”
  EU-US trade relations
• 2026-03-18 “Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission 26.5.2026 Written question According to the Clinical Trials Regulation (CTR) [1] and the principles of good clinical practice [2] , the sponsor has a responsibility to ensure the safety of clinical trial participants and the reliability of data even when activities are delegated to contract research organisations, including when activities are undertaken outside of the EU. There is, however, no legal requirement for activities to be undertaken by EU-based staff. Article 71 of the CTR defines the obligations for clinical trial sponsors and investigators, including the conditions for delegation of tasks. Furthermore, under Article 74 of the CTR, sponsors established in third countries must have a legal representative in the EU. Member States are required to carry out inspections on their territory or in third countries to supervise compliance with the CTR [3] . The detailed arrangements for Good Clinical Practice inspection procedures are laid down in national implementing legislation, including the need for Member States to establish relevant procedures for arranging inspections outside the EU [4] . The European Medicines Agency also has a role in coordinating cooperation between Member States for inspections within and outside the EU. Hence, the necessary means to allow Member States to conduct inspections effectively and in a timely manner both within and outside the EU are in place. [1] Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on clinical trials on medicinal products for human use, and repealing Directive 2001/20/EC. OJ L 158, pp. 1. [2] https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/ich-e6-good-clinical-practice-scientific-guideline. [3] Article 78 of Regulation (EU) No 536/2014. [4] Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/556 on detailed arrangements for the Good Clinical Practice inspection procedures pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 536/2014. C/2017/1812. OJ L 80, 25.3.2017, pp. 7.”
  Pharmaceuticals regulation in EU · Pharma companies manufacturing and production obligations
• 2026-03-05 “Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission 11.5.2026 Written question 1. The Commission monitors aviation market developments on an ongoing basis, including with respect to prices. The Commission has currently no evidence that airlines operating under the EU’s jurisdiction are abusing their pricing power. Under the Air Services Regulation [1] and under many international agreements for flights to and from third countries, airlines have the freedom to set prices for air services. The Air Services Regulation also requires that the final price including all unavoidable and foreseeable elements be displayed at all times. This applies alongside general consumer law prohibiting unfair contract terms and unfair commercial practices and alongside Union competition rules. 2. The Commission provided support for the Member States’ evacuation and repatriation efforts, including through the EU Civil Protection Mechanism [2] (UCPM) and the Emergency Response Coordination Centre (ERCC), working closely with EU Delegations. The Commission has provided assistance to Member States and EU citizens with targeted information on the applicable EU passenger rights and rights of package travellers published on Your Europe website [3] and issues linked to EU passenger rights were discussed at a meeting on 12 March 2026 of the national enforcement bodies for Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 [4] . The Commission has facilitated relevant exchanges between national authorities in the Consumer Protection Cooperation (CPC) Network under Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 [5] , and shared relevant information with the European Consumer Centres Network [6] , offering help and advice to consumers in Europe and the Europe Direct Contact Centre. [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2008/1008/oj/eng. [2] Between 3 and 16 March 2026, 92 flights were completed under the UCPM, repatriating over 13 400 passengers, including 12 500 EU citizens. Five repatriation flights to Romania and Poland were operated by the rescEU Transport and Logistics capacity which was mobilised for the first time. [3] https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/passenger-rights/air/files/FAQ_Assistance_to_passengers_in_case_of_flight_disruptions_to_the_Middle_East_countries_20260305_EN.pdf (information also available in all EU languages). [4] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2004/261/oj/eng. [5] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32017R2394&qid=1776269281995. [6] ECC-Net is a network of independently managed offices co-funded by the Commission.”
  EU policy on aviation safety · EU Competition policy
• 2026-01-28 “E-000339/2026 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is committed to supporting the swift and effective implementation of strategic trans-European transport network (TEN-T) projects. The Terzo Valico dei Giovi railway project is part of the TEN-T North Sea-Rhine-Mediterranean European Transport Corridor 1 , and is included in Italy’s national recovery and resilience plan 2 (NRRP). In particular, the project is referred to in the scope of target M3C1-9 of the NRRP, which is due to be assessed in the context of the last payment request to be submitted by Italy to the Commission over the course of 2026. Upon such submission, the Commission will verify whether the conditions set out in the Annex to the Council Implementing Decision 3 are fulfilled. The Commission recalls that, under Article 19 of Regulation (EU) 2021/241 4 , it assessed that all national recovery and resilience plans contributed to the objectives of the Regulation, including the green transition and social and territorial cohesion. This assessment was done in 2021 for the Italian recovery and resilience plan, and it is detailed in a Commission staff working document 5 . 1 The TEN-T core network corridors have been replaced by the TEN-T European Transport Corridors, following the revision of the TEN-T Regulation in 2024, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32024R1679&qid=1776343718443. 2 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resiliencefacility/country-pages/italys-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en. 3 https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-15106-2025-ADD-1/en/pdf. 4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/241/oj/eng. 5 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52021SC0165.”
  EU support of rail transport · EU transport infrastructure integration · EU funding for transportation
• 2026-01-22 “E-000256/2026 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission The AI Act 1 prohibits AI systems that employ subliminal or deceptive techniques or exploit vulnerabilities that distort behaviour, when this is likely to lead to significant harm 2 . It also establishes transparency obligations for AI systems directly interacting with people 3 . As AI chatbots are being built on general-purpose AI (GPAI) models, the provider of GPAI models with systemic risks may also bear responsibilities. Harmful manipulation, which may include undue influence in highly sensitive contexts such as suicide detection, is explicitly identified as a systemic risk in the General-Purpose AI Code of Practice 4 . The rules on enforcement of the AI Act will start to apply in August 2026. Therefore, enforcement of Article 5 or other rules cannot be initiated earlier neither on national nor on EU level. The Digital Services Act (DSA) 5 applies to AI systems integrated in online platforms and includes the obligation to ensure a high level of privacy, security and safety for minors on their service. Providers of very large online platforms and very large online search engines must also assess and mitigate systemic risks stemming from their services, including risks to physical and mental well-being, dissemination of illegal content and protection of minors 6 . The Guidelines on protection of minors recommend safeguards for AI features such as chatbots integrated in online platforms 7 . The Commission has also launched an Action Plan Against Cyberbullying 8 and is working towards an EU-harmonised approach to age verification 9 . The European Data Protection Board has outlined principles to design General Data Protection Regulation-compliant age assurance 10 . 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj/eng. 2 Article 5(1)(a) and (b) of the AI Act. 3 Article 50 of the AI Act. 4 The Safety and Security Chapter of the General-Purpose AI Code of Practice: https://digitalstrategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/contents-code-gpai. 5 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj/eng. 6 Article 34 DSA. 7 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C_202505519. 8 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/cyberbullying. 9 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/eu-age-verification. 10 https://www.edpb.europa.eu/system/files/2025-04/edpb_statement_20250211ageassurance_v1-2_en.pdf.”
  Safety features & content control for child protection online · Artificial Intelligence
• 2025-07-16 “E-002936/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission The Digital Services Act (DSA) 1 contains several obligations related to advertising. Advertising must be clearly, concisely and unambiguously labelled and providers of online platforms are required to inform users on whose behalf the ads are shown, who paid for the ad, and provide meaningful information on parameters used to target users. Providers of online platforms are prohibited from presenting advertisements based on profiling using special categories of personal data, including political opinions. Notice and action mechanisms laid down in DSA obligations also apply for potentially illegal ads. Providers of very large online platforms (VLOPs) and very large online search engines (VLOSEs) are required to publish repositories allowing the scrutiny of ads displayed on their services. Providers of online platforms accessible to minors must ensure a high level of privacy, safety and security of minors on their services. The Commission recently adopted guidelines 2 under Article 28(4) DSA on this matter. The Commission is continuously monitoring the compliance of all providers of VLOPs and VLOSEs with the DSA. Investigations related to advertising transparency, targeting and risks to civic discourse have already been opened against Meta, TikTok and X, including on the use of the images of public figures in advertisements. However, it is important to highlight that the DSA does not have extra-territorial effect and only applies to the provision of those services within the EU. 1 Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act), OJ L277/1. (https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj/eng). 2 Commission publishes guidelines on the protection of minors https://digitalstrategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/commission-publishes-guidelines-protection-minors.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• 2025-07-09 “E-002796/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission The General-Purpose AI Code of Practice 1 (Code), foreseen in Article 56 of the Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act), 2 sets out how signatories intend to ensure compliance with the AI Act’s rules applicable to providers of general-purpose AI (GPAI) models. Adherence to the Code is voluntary. The Code was drawn up by independent experts in a multi-stakeholder process, including GPAI model providers, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), academics, AI safety experts, rightsholders and civil society organizations, and facilitated by the Commission’s AI office. While Article 56 of the AI Act does not foresee a role for the European Parliament in the drafting process, the AI office ensured its close involvement, particularly of its working group on the implementation and enforcement of the AI Act. The Commission shares the view of the Honourable Members that transparency and accountability are essential for implementing and enforcing the AI Act. The process that led to the drafting of the Code testifies to this. Approximately 1 000 stakeholders, representing various groups, were involved in the process and had the opportunity to provide feedback in multiple consultation rounds. The Commission concluded, in its adequacy assessment adopted on 1 August 2025, that adherence to the commitments set out in the Code adequately ensures compliance with the obligations for providers of general-purpose AI models provided for in Articles 53 and 55 of the AI Act, including those related to transparency, systemic risk management and documentation. 1 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/contents-code-gpai. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj/eng.”
  Artificial Intelligence · Transparency and oversight of AI-generated content
• 2025-06-06 “E-002307/2025 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission To prevent incidents of inadequate application of the Regulation concerning the air passenger rights of persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility 1 (the Regulation), like those mentioned in the question of the Honourable Member, the Commission published its revised interpretative guidelines 2 on the Regulation, which explains in detail how air carriers, their agents and tour operators must make publicly available information about limitations which may apply to the transportation of persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility and their mobility equipment. The guidelines also emphasise the national enforcement bodies’ responsibilities in terms of monitoring the effective application and enforcing the Regulation and clarifies that applicable safety rules are based solely on safety considerations or on the physical characteristics of the aircraft. Accessibility of information is crucial for persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility. Therefore, the European Accessibility Act 3 , which became applicable on 28 June 2025, requires airport managing bodies and air carriers to make their websites, mobile devicebased services, smart ticketing, self-service terminals and ticketing machines accessible for persons with disabilities. 1 Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 concerning the rights of disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility when travelling by air (Text with EEA relevance) OJ L 204, 26.7.2006, p. 1–9. 2 Commission Notice – Application of the Interpretative Guidelines on Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the rights of disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility when travelling by air C/2024/5992, 4.10.2024. 3 Directive (EU) 2019/882 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on the accessibility requirements for products and services (OJ L 151, 7.6.2019, p. 70).”
  EU policy on aviation safety
• 2025-06-06 “E-002295/2025 Answer given by Mr McGrath on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is aware of recent developments regarding changes to United States (US) visa procedures for international students, including the temporary suspension of certain categories and the introduction of additional screening measures. These developments are being followed closely, particularly with regard to their potential implications for EU citizens. The Commission maintains regular contact with US counterparts through diplomatic channels and continues to monitor the situation in cooperation with Member States. It is also assessing the possible impact on academic mobility of EU students. The Commission remains committed to supporting international academic exchange and mobility for young Europeans to pursue educational opportunities abroad. It considers it important that the rights of EU citizens, also when studying abroad, as well as fundamental academic values, including academic freedom, are respected. The Commission will continue to engage with relevant stakeholders and explore appropriate avenues for dialogue and cooperation.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms · EU-US relations
• 2024-12-02 “E-002709/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is committed to ensuing effective implementation of the transparency obligations in the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act 1 . According to Article 53(1)(d) AI Act, providers of general-purpose AI models must make publicly available a sufficiently detailed summary about the content used to train their models, according to a template provided by the EU AI Office. The Commission has started working on this template based on the objectives and the requirements defined in the AI Act. Recital 107 AI Act requires the template to be simple, effective, and allow the providers to provide the required summary in a narrative form. It also emphasises the need for the summary to be generally comprehensive in its scope rather than technically detailed. The summary should facilitate parties with legitimate interests, including rightholders, to exercise and enforce their rights under EU law, while taking into due account the need to protect trade secrets and confidential business information. Trade secrets are critical determinants for the competitiveness of EU providers of general-purpose AI models and should be considered when determining the granularity of the information. At the same time, the summary should provide sufficient details and meaningful public transparency to achieve its objectives. To further inform the work on the template, the Commission has launched a consultation 2 and collected contributions from a diverse range of stakeholders. Based on this input, the EU AI Office is now preparing a proposal for the template with first ideas presented to the participants in the Code of Practice process 3 . This inclusive process will allow the AI Office to finalise the template and take into account stakeholders’ input before its adoption. 1 Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence and amending Regulations (EC) No 300/2008, (EU) No 167/2013, (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1139 and (EU) 2019/2144 and Directives 2014/90/EU, (EU) 2016/797 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Artificial Intelligence Act) (Text with EEA relevance), PE/24/2024/REV/1, OJ L, 2024/1689, 12.7.2024. 2 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/commission-launches-consultation-code-practice-general-purposeartificial-intelligence 3 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/ai-code-practice”
  Artificial Intelligence
• 2024-11-20 “E-002596/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission Under Article 43 of Directive 2014/23/EU 1 , as consistently interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union, concessions may be modified during their term without a new procurement procedure provided that the conditions laid down in that provision are met. The Commission is collecting more information to assess the compatibility with that provision of the planned modifications to the project referred to by the Honourable Member. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32014L0023”
  EU Competition policy · EU funding for transportation
• 2024-10-17 “E-002127/2024 Answer given by Ms Lahbib on behalf of the European Commission The EU is committed to providing resettlement and humanitarian admission to the most vulnerable refugees displaced in non-EU countries, in accordance with EU and national law. As part of the current ad hoc EU-funded scheme (2024-2025), Member States voluntarily provided resettlement and humanitarian admission pledges, including for refugees displaced in Lebanon. The EU provides financial support to Member States undertaking resettlement and humanitarian admission efforts via the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund 1 . However, a decision to grant a visa, including a humanitarian visa, lies with the competent national authorities of the Member States. The Commission has acted swiftly in response to the increasing immediate needs amidst the conflict escalation in Lebanon since September 2024 and allocated an additional EUR 45 million in humanitarian and non-humanitarian assistance. In addition, the Commission has adjusted ongoing programs with implementing partners in areas such as social protection, education, and primary health care. In 2024, the Commission provided EUR 92 million in humanitarian aid to help vulnerable populations in Lebanon, including Syrian and Palestinian refugees as well as vulnerable host communities and displaced Lebanese 2 . The (over) EUR 92 million include EUR 10 million from the EUR 30 million emergency support announced by the President of the Commission on 3 October 2024. Furthermore, in October 2024, the EU provided EUR 5.5 million in humanitarian aid to respond to the influx of displaced people from Lebanon to Syria 3 . The agreed ceasefire, effective as of 27 November 2024 for an initial period of two months, will facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid in the region. 1 https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/funding/asylum-migration-and-integration-funds/asylum-migration-andintegration-fund-2021-2027_en 2 https://civil-protection-humanitarian-aid.ec.europa.eu/where/middle-east-and-northern-africa/lebanon_en#facts-figures 3 https://civil-protection-humanitarian-aid.ec.europa.eu/where/middle-east-and-northern-africa/syria_en#how-arewe-helping”
  EU Development & Humanitarian Aid · Conditions to access EU humanitarian aid
• 2024-10-14 “E-002063/2024 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Borrell i Fontelles on behalf of the European Commission The EU systematically calls on the Israeli authorities on all occasions and public statements to open more border crossings. As stated during the High Representative/Vice-President’s visit to the Rafah Border Crossing, the most urgent thing is to allow trucks and ambulances to enter and help those in need. The EU is prepared to reactivate the European Union Border Assistance Mission to Rafah mission to help the situation at the border, once security conditions allow. The EU has imposed sanctions under the EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime on several violent settlers and those who enable them. In July 2024, the Council approved restrictive measures against Tzav 9, an Israeli group which blocked humanitarian aid trucks delivering food, water and fuel to Gaza. The assets in the EU of those listed under the sanctions regime are frozen, and no funds or economic resources can be made available, directly or indirectly, to them or for their benefit. Additionally, a travel ban to the EU applies to the persons listed. Delivering humanitarian aid to the population in Gaza is a shared priority. The inauguration of the Cyprus Maritime Corridor initiative on 7 March 2024 was an important step in this direction. An Humanitarian Air Bridge operation has been launched to aid the people affected by the crisis. As of October 2024, a total of 60 flights have transported over 3,400 tonnes of cargo, including medical supplies, shelter, WASH, and educational items, supplied by humanitarian partners, EU-owned stockpile items, and donations from Member States.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine · EU Development & Humanitarian Aid
• “Thank you, Chair Galvez Munoz, and thank you to the committee for organizing this hearing. I regret I cannot be there in person, and I'm grateful to the expert speakers for the work they do and for the testimony they bring today. What makes AI so dangerous in the context of gender based violence is not just the nature of the harm, but its scale. Deepfake videos targeting women have increased exponentially, with 99% of individuals targeted being women and girls. Ai Industrializes misogyny removing the barriers that previously limited who could produce this content and how much of it could exist. The Grok scandal illustrates this with particular clarity. Over half the images generated in just one week depicted individuals in minimal attire. 81% women with imagery of apparent minors included. Produced through simple prompts with no circumvention required. The central regulatory challenge here is a genuinely difficult one. Ai systems simultaneously generate and moderate their outputs. A paradigm shift that frameworks designed around intermediary liability have not fully absorbed. The DSA creates real obligations for X, including the explicit duty to conduct an adult risk assessment before deploying features with foreseeable risks of gender based violence. When X rolled out gross image capabilities, without that assessment, it violated existing law. The AI act also requires frontier models to mitigate these risks, but still leaves too much to providers on discretion, which is precisely why Parliament worked in the digital omnibus to add a prohibition of new defecation systems, alongside clearer expectations on what effective safeguards must demonstrate the prohibition matters. But what is clear to me, though, is that the priority right now is to enforce the rules we already have. The Commission investigation into X must produce consequences that actually change design decisions. Not one that. Not ones that get absorbed as a cost of doing business. The millions of women harmed by systems like grok cannot be treated as an acceptable externality. We have the rules. We need the capacity, the resources, and above all, the political will to make them real. I wish you a very productive discussion. Thank you very much and see you all soon.”
  Artificial Intelligence · Digital platforms liability for harmful and illegal content
• “Thank you chair. And thank you, Director General, for your presence and for the update on the union's trade policy. Let me first underline the progress made in recent months. The updated An agreement with Mexico. The Eu-mercosur agreement that is ongoing, the EU Singapore Digital Trade Agreement, as well as the launch of negotiations with India, which we will visit in October as committee, but also with Malaysia, Thailand and Philippines and the United Arab Emirates. This clearly shows the union's commitment to diversifying relations and building sustainable trade partnerships. So this strengthens us and enables us to project our values in the world. I give the example of Indonesia that represents another crucial step forward a fast growing economy and an essential supplier of critical raw materials for the green transition, such as nickel for batteries and e-mobility. But our group, the S&D, strongly insists this partnership must include clear commitments against deforestation for workers rights and for human rights. These are principles that we want to continue fighting for, for all our trade policy and on deforestation, we are concerned about possible further delays in the implementation of the EU regulation, also reported this week in the news. This would undermine the effectiveness of several agreements, including Mercosur. We cannot backtrack. This is a matter of values, but also of regulatory sovereignty. Finally, a word on the proposal to partially suspend the Eu-israel Association Agreement. It is necessary, of course, but it is also late and insufficient, given the catastrophic situation on the ground. And given the fact that the Commission had already assessed violation of the article two in the previous previous reviews without ending up with concrete measures, we must now find consensus among member states because failure risks undermining EU credibility and exposing union to accusations of complicity. So I ask you, Director General, why propose only suspension of trade preferences for Israel, but not a ban on imports from illegal settlements? And what concrete next steps will the Commission take to avoid being blocked by the vote of reluctant capitals in council, which might also include the government of my own country? Thank you very much.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine
• “Yet the AI act is clear systemic risks arise not only from technical capabilities, but also from foreseeable negative effects on public health, safety, fundamental rights, or society at large. Narrowly linking systemic risk only to technical performance misreads the act and ignores mounting evidence that these harms are already materializing. Discrimination, misuse, privacy violations and disinformation are not theoretical risks. They are real, present and growing. Importantly, effective mitigation is possible. And the obligations. I want to really underline this to the colleagues that might have not followed each step of the AI act. These obligations we are talking about now with the Code of practice, apply only to a handful of providers of GPI models with systemic risk. Really just a few actors. There is no justification to weaken protections. I would therefore ask the Commission how it intends to, um, guarantee, uh, that the final code fully reflects the AI act ambition on this part. Then, beyond fundamental rights, transparency is a critical pillar for proper implementation of the AI act. The third draft of the code still does not ensure the level of transparency needed for a fair and trustworthy AI ecosystem. This means that downstream providers, in particular SMEs, researchers and public sector actors, risk being left without access to essential model information tools.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Charlotte, as well for this study. Very, very valuable for our work in the INTA Committee. Now for the S&D Group, of course, the discussion on trade, agriculture, there are certain fundamental issues, particularly liberalisation. Liberalization ought not have a detrimental effect on certain sensitive sectors. We need, of course, the sustainability factors to be taken into consideration and we need a regulatory framework which is solid taking into consideration national strategies and looking at the various complexities worldwide are maintaining at the same time an agricultural sector which is competitive. Now the for example, the issue of imports, uh, pork, cereals and so on and so forth, these are wonderful examples. Also different types of products, different types of, uh, like sugar, meat. Um, uh, it's very, very clear that we have to have a clear framework within which all of this will take place. Now, uh, also the trade war which is going on is something out there on the horizon. In the future, it will be there as well. So we have to look at this very carefully and look at the consequences that it will have for our production and for our imports and exports as well. We need clear regulation. There are certain things that are not negotiable, certain red lines that all have to be aware of, where, for example, food security. And I think certain things of that nature cannot be up for negotiation in the course of free trade, free trade agreement negotiations. Um, technology as well. We have to have systems in place which will allow for proper analysis of that which is imported, and that in particular in view of quality and food security. Thank you.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU
• “Thank you chair. And thanks also to the colleagues for, uh, letting me speak now. Thanks to Mr. Johnson for his presentation. Uh, it's good that we have found a deal, because we must prioritize stability and predictability, crucial elements for our economy, but also for the United States economy. In my presence in the US in the last months as chair of the delegation, I understood how this is something precious also for them. However, until now, we cannot say that such predictability is truly here. We are still awaiting the final decisions by the US administration to comply with their part of the deal. It should happen momentarily. I'm referring to the cars, but it's not the first time that we see delays, including on the joint statement itself. This doesn't reinforce the case for stability and predictability that was often indicated by the Commission. If anything, it strengthens the case instead, for a clear sunset clause and a review clause in the new regulations, we also need to advance urgently on steel and aluminium. The joint statement included clear references, but the situation has only worsened. The current draft proposal crystallises an unacceptable asymmetry that needs to be addressed. Equally concerning is the opening of our market to a wide range of agricultural products from the US. This raises questions both on the regulatory compliance and on fair competition with European producers. So it is more urgent than ever to secure exemptions in this tariff deal for key European sectors, for the mechanical industry to also certain agri food products, notably wine and spirits, where our competitiveness is at risk. I believe that our task here is to continue working for European interests and negotiate, but not accommodate only American demands. I recognise the difficult context in which the Commission has operated. I found it clearly also talking to the United States authorities, but I need. I think that the imbalance should be addressed and you should not remain at a disadvantage. This is how we should do with a partner and friend like the United States. Thank you very much.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Thank you, Madam President. Commissioner McGrath. Why a company sells products offline, needs to follow rules concerning protecting consumers. But at the same time, big online players who are often from outside Europe can do whatever they want and they can be involved in unfair competition against the companies based in our territory. So this is an important agenda. We need to guarantee maximum protection offline and online. We need to have a market that works correctly. We need to think about these marketplaces and these unfair competition practices. They're making billions per year. We need to take the first step. First. We need to apply the digital legislation. Then we also need to have more effective customs, and we need to have more effective checks. We need to look at the toy market. We know that Europe can protect consumers if it wants to do so. We're waiting for an ambitious digital fairness act, and we want to be able to address these dark patterns. And we want to avoid the ticket pricing, which is dynamic in the entertainment sector. Consumers in Europe are asking for simple, strong standard rules. Let's do that and let's make sure they work. Thank you.”
  EU rules on digital competition
• “Here we are discussing a definitive stop to Russian gas. And on the same day, the Meloni government is voting against using Russian assets to support Ukraine. That's a choice that will make Europeans pay for Russia's Russia's criminal aggression. We want to be free of energy dependency. We want to be free to make our own choices about gas. But Matteo Salvini in Italy is saying that Russian assets should be returned to the Kremlin. And I quote otherwise this would be a violation of international law. How dare he say that? Uh, so Barefacedly, Rosario Dowler and others deserve our solidarity. I'm talking about people sentenced to 15 years in prison in Russia for calling Putin a criminal. The EU needs to be able to make its own choices. We have to be able to choose about our own future without anyone breathing down our necks. So we should go for this fearlessly. Thank you very much.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Today, the digital platforms that are not European are obtaining Resources through people and getting users locked into their system. This dependency needs to come to an end. The DMA exists to break this rule. Two years have elapsed, but measures are too slow and the commission has not enough people to deal with this. We need to be more ambitious on cloud and artificial intelligence services. Companies that cover and control 90% of cloud businesses, and therefore, they control the data that are being used to train artificial intelligence. So we need to make sure that there are rules for competitions. And we need to have true European businesses so that we are sovereign here. Let us defend the interests of our companies, of our workers and our citizens. Mrs. Rivera, we know that your work walking in this direction, in the right direction. Do not stop.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• “Strategic partnership between the EU and India is a political priority. This is clear in the inter committee. We went to New Delhi for this objective. We're talking about relations here that looks at trade and investment but also foreign policy, innovation, security and specifically the fundamental values that great democracy share. Like India and the EU. We are in a positive phase of the negotiations, and I hope that all of the progress that we have made will turn into an EU India agreement on the 27th of January in India for the summit for strategic sectors. There are important things for exports, for example, in excellence in farming, automotive industry and advanced technologies. A credible agreement must be balanced that protects our industry in the face of a huge manufacturer like India and have a strong line on the most exposed sectors, for example textiles, steel and farming. And to avoid unfair competition. The safeguards in the Inter Committee have been important specifically for our relations with India. We need binding commitments for standards in work and labour rights, as well as fundamental charters on rights, the big geopolitical. Stakes mean that the rules based order would strengthen the Eu-india relations. Thank you.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• “Thank you. Chair. Dear colleagues. On February 19th, our AI working group convened to discuss the implementation of prohibitions under article five of the AI act. The session emphasized the critical concerns regarding legal clarity and enforcement mechanisms and member state preparedness. Firstly, we heard from the book the book highlighting ambiguities in the Commission's guidelines, especially regarding AI driven dynamic pricing and personalized recommendations. These ambiguities risk creating a legal grey zone where consumer vulnerabilities might be exploited without crossing into explicit significant harm. Although the guidelines have been published, we must keep a very attentive look at these practices and identify how we can ensure the best protection for consumers, be it by updating the provision in the Commission's guidelines. Then we heard from the Dutch Data Protection Authority that provided insights into their proactive national enforcement strategy. The authority highlighted the Fundamental rights and algorithmic impact assessment implemented by the Dutch government since 2021, as a practical tool assisting companies in compliance. Yet concerns persist around sufficient resources and expertise of national supervisory bodies, underlining the necessity for clearer operational guidelines and stronger inter-agency collaboration. European digital rights raised a serious civil society concerns regarding the prohibitions, particularly around real time biometric identification, the RBI, they warned that national security exemptions might undermine fundamental rights. I am myself worried that some member states are already moving to legalize contentious AI practices, such as real time RBI, potentially endangering civil liberties, hiding behind the national security exemptions, procedural shortcomings, including lack of transparency and limited opportunities for civil society input, remain critical challenges at both the commission and national levels.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “Thank you, dear chair. Dear colleagues, on the 8th of December, we held an unprecedented interparliamentary session of our AI working Group, bringing together national parliaments, EU institutions and the Council of Europe for direct exchanges on AI governance. The first panel focused on AI Continent Action Plan and European investment in AI infrastructure. The commission presented through Roberto Viola outlining plans for compute infrastructure including AI factories and gigafactories. Members discussed the balance between pursuing frontier models and prioritizing prioritising AI uptake in health, manufacturing and public services, raising questions about investment priorities. The second panel focused on AI impact on democratic processes, algorithmic transparency and human rights safeguards.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “Illegal tariffs from the US outside the WTO rules are already hitting 70% of European goods. The European is negotiating good faith. And that's also thanks to your work, Commissioner Sefcovic. It's the way you do between allies. But now it looks like they're more of an enemy. They're on the other side as opposed to being a partner. We want to have this framework agreement. That's the first step. And then you need to review most of these tariffs, because the EU then is going to have to take serious retaliatory measures on goods and services, and some measures are already going to be prepared and going to be activated. Others are under preparation. Now to, um, disincentivize any more chaos, we need to take action. We cannot just go from one ultimatum to the next. We need to set clear deadlines as well so that we have a final agreement which will be beneficial. The European Union's unity is being put under pressure here. We need to be brave here. We need to show that there is action after what we say.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Minister Damianos. Dear colleagues, thank you for presenting the priorities of the Cypriot presidency in the area of international trade policy. The emphasis of an open, rules based and sustainable trade policy, combined with strategic autonomy, is very welcome in a context of geopolitical fragmentation. Trade remains a key tool for stability, growth and cooperation, and the EU must continue to defend multilateralism, strengthen the WTO and expand the fair and balanced trade partnerships while ensuring resilience of our supply chains. We particularly take note of the presidency focus on diversifying external partnerships, strengthening ties with key regions, and advancing ongoing trade negotiations. These objectives align well with the need to reinforce the EU global role, while ensuring that trade delivers concrete benefits for workers, consumers and businesses. At the same time, international trade policy cannot be disconnected from the protection of our industrial base and strategic sectors. In this regard, I would like to underline the crucial work currently ongoing in this committee on the new Commercial Instrument on Steel, on which Inter has just voted its position for the EPP mandate. We are fully aware of how sensitive and politically complex this dossier is. Still is not only a cornerstone of European industry and employment, but also central to the green and digital transitions. The credibility of EU trade policy depends on our ability to combine openness with effective safeguards against unfair practices and overcapacity. The upcoming months will therefore be decisive. The Council presidency will have the demanding task of working under a very strict timeline time timetable to ensure that the new regulation and the accompanying safeguards are adopted and fully in place by summer 2026, without gaps that could expose our industry to serious risks. The S&D Group stands ready to engage constructively with the presidency to achieve all these objectives. We count on close cooperation with Parliament to deliver a balanced, robust and timely outcome on all these important dossiers. Thank you very much.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• “Thank you, colleagues, for a rich debate. And thank you, Commissioner Tzitzikostas, for your support on the direction of this report. But I want to be frank from the Commission. We need also not only support, but also the ambition that matches the one of Parliament with action. So on global AI governance, we must say that from Bletchley Park to Seoul to Paris to Delhi, we have been seeing the building of a fragile international architecture of AI safety cooperation. This is also important for the topics that we are discussing today is based on on my report, this asymmetry where some countries signed declarations and others do not participate, tells us everything about where race dynamics are taking us. Precisely because of that, Europe must lead coalitions of the willing pull capacity and resources with like minded partners and keep AI safety a genuine political priority, not a side event to investment announcements. On the personal data topic that was raised. Digital trade agreements must facilitate data flows, but not at the price of data protection. Our adequacy framework and our citizens. Fundamental rights are not a bargaining position. They are the foundation of trust in the digital economy, and the commission must treat them as such. On the open source topic, I have heard some objections, but I want to be very frank. A handful of firms today control compute, cloud and data simultaneously in that landscape. Open source AI is not an ideological preference. It is a structural response to concentration. So delaying open source strategy is a wrong signal at the wrong moment. Thank you again for this discussion. This report tries to give a clear and coherent framework for Europe on such an important topic as AI in trade. I hope we can make good use of this, and I want to ask the Commission to use it thoroughly to advance in this important endeavour. Thank you very much.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “Thank you, chair, and many thanks to Vice President Sefcovic also for this other part of our work today for this structured dialogue. Um, allow me to begin with a general remark. Our political group considers of utmost importance the timely information on every step of negotiation before and after every round. Um, this is not a political red tape or a burden. It's crucial to allow the European Parliament to adequately scrutinise all decisions, in fact, to take our decisions when we need to take them. To this end, all information should be conveyed in a proper, extensive and timely fashion. I appreciated, for example, this being done for the US that we have talked before, but in general, the speed of negotiation can never justify the lack of transparency and information. And I think we had some unfortunate examples in the recent past, like in the case of the modernization of the global agreement with, with Mexico. Um, and so I ask for more attention on this. Secondly, it's imperative that we maintain a central role for the Parliament in the trade and investment negotiations. The tendency of concluding mini deals risks undermining the prerogative of this House, and we cannot accept it. This trend is combined with the recent approach of the Member States in the Council to renationalise control over trade and investment policy. So we we call on you, Commissioner, to put forward all efforts in ensuring that a fruitful and loyal cooperation between our institutions is always at the core of activities. It's a necessity that comes from European citizens that are looking with a lot of attention to what is happening on this field of trade. Um, so we need transparency, scrutiny and the need to be fully informed always. Um, so, uh, thank you for your efforts in ensuring that this is done in the proper way. Thank you very much.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• “Thank you chairman. Well, there isn't really much I can add to what we've heard up to now, but I would like to thank the rapporteur president, Mr. van der Leyen, for the excellent work in a negotiation that I was the subject of a lot of political pressure. Now, this agreement has shown one important thing. The European Parliament refused to be set aside and considered just simply the notary officiating it, an agreement that others are making. I know there are our other institutions that I'm criticising, and I agree with what other colleagues have said. We defended our institutional democratic role, guaranteeing the transparency and balance, and the rules were not sacrificed on behalf of pressure of and also some excess that we heard from the other side of the Atlantic. The safeguard obtained by strengthening parliamentary control. The mechanisms for monitoring and suspension are the results of a political battle that we took forward in a determined fashion. Our judgment on the agreement is very negative. We've heard this from the debate, too. But one lesson is clear here, and I think we want to go ahead like this. With the future choices we'll have to make. The European Parliament is a central actor of economic relations of the Union. I will not accept being set to the set aside by any one hour.”
  EU political integration
• “Thank you. Chair. Um, as chair of the delegation for relations with the United States, I would like to reaffirm our close attention to the ongoing negotiations with our American partners. While there are positive signals, discussions must continue, and only unity and resolve on the European side will deliver a fair and lasting outcome. Um, the Commission's public consultation on possible countermeasures Measures covering €95 billion in US imports is as timely and important step. It shows we are ready to act if unjustified tariffs are not lifted, but we must ensure the list is balanced and reflects input from both member states and the sectors most affected, those we are here to protect. At the same time, we need clarity. Suspending our countermeasures on steel and aluminium in response to the so-called pause in US. Reciprocal tariffs may have signalled the de-escalation, but it also risks weakening the link between action and reaction. We cannot give the impression that a lower baseline of tariffs is somewhat acceptable. We must be prepared to respond beyond goods if necessary by targeting services, tech, IP rights and procurement. This is not about escalation, but about defending our rules, our values and our standards. We remain committed to partnerships and together we must address global overcapacity and secure supply chains and restore barrier free trade. I look forward to continuing this discussion soon during our intermission to Washington, where I will participate as chair. Thank you very much.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Mercosur of the Mercosur agreement is very important in geopolitical terms and could lead to a new balance for the EU. It could be a way of us boosting the EU presence in Latin America and challenging the influence of other superpowers. However, deciding on whether we're going to vote in favour means we have to assess its effects on workers, farmers, the environment and ensuring that clear and shared rules are respected. Inserting the Paris Agreement in the sustainability chapter is a positive step, but there are things that still need to be looked at the rebalancing mechanism, dispute resolution, the effectiveness of anti-deforestation measures and also the need to boost customs systems to ensure safety for consumers and in the internal market. Now, as the S&D Group, we've launched discussion with the commission, NGOs and social partners to assess every aspect of the agreement. Now I'm turning to the commission here. We have a year to provide a response as an institution to the issues raised by Europeans. We need to be convincing in acting on the issues that remain, with measures that can persuade the Parliament that this agreement is a good one. We need to work together on this, and then we'll be able to take an appropriate decision on the way forward. Thank you.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “At the same time, and I think this is the crucial point where I would like to hear also your feedback. Um, US pressure is increasing on key EU regulations such as the Green Deal and Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act, which are essential for our economic growth, the competition, internal market and also, um, the transitions ongoing, it is reasonable to expect that Donald Trump will use these tariffs as leverage to force Europe into policy changes. Um, accepting this unacceptable trade off, whether on environmental, digital regulations, trade relations with the rest of the world or even foreign policy would mark a point of no return for the European Union. Um, so I would like to know your point on this. And I conclude, paradoxically, by quoting Vice President Pence in Munich, because I think he made a statement I fully agree with. Europe faces many challenges, but the crisis this continent is facing right now is a crisis of our own making. And in fact, President Draghi, who was here yesterday, echoed this kind of, uh, considerations. But in fact, in my view, the point is that, uh, it's true that the European Union, um, will see increasing marginalization or even irrelevance in global trade if it doesn't take the necessary steps towards a process of further integration and coordination. Thank you very much.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “One year ago, Draghi said to the European governments, you have to do something and nothing has been done up until now. And they continue to release the, uh, the report, look at it like a kind of a la carte menu. So passing from a confederation to a European federation, we need pragmatic federation, which will use the resources in a concerted fashion, uh, investment of a joint nature as well, overcoming all of those particular barriers and fragmentation. It is only if we work together that we'll be able to overcome the various barriers, barriers and madam von der von der Leyen spoke to us today about relaunching all of this. But there was not a word about creating some sort of common tax system. Very, very vague things have been set up until now, but we need a Europe that's competitive if we want it to be a real leader. Decarbonizing, building joint security as well, promoting our social model. I think it is the moment for our governments to come together, to take together, take on this particular challenge, work together. Thank you.”
  EU political integration
• “Europe's welfare has been put at risk by the US's threats. Threatened announcements tomorrow. And we now need debate in the EU. We need to act very quickly here. We need to work. Um. And we need to ensure that we do not, um, that we do not subject ourselves to the significant damage that the US would be capable of doing. We also have non-tariff measures that we can use. For example, looking at the rules we've got in the EU, a conflict with the US is not in anybody's interest. We need to negotiate. But in order to do that, we need to speak strongly. Giorgia meloni spoke about remaining calm and justifying her attacks. That is not the way forward. We need to ensure that we don't lose any more time. We need to defend the interests of our citizens.”
  EU-US relations
• “(17:41:21 – 17:43:40): Without steel without European steel, there will be no European industry. And without a strong quality industry, there's no future for Europe for its workers and for its businesses. Tomorrow, we will adopt a regulation that is of fundamental importance. It is a tangible step forward to protect the steel industry from the devastating effects of global steel overcapacity. Currently, there is some, 600,000,000 tons in Europe, in terms of overcapacity. And we know that there's, 300,000 people that would have jobs because of this. This overcapacity is a dumping practice, and it has a huge negative impact on European business, producers, and it puts jobs at risk. We see that there are distorted prices in terms of imports, which has a negative impact, and that causes a lack in competitiveness. We must react. With the new regulation, we will reduce by 50% in team of the, TRQ setting a ceiling of 18,300,000 tons. And we have a tariff on the price that will also agree increase the tariff, the traceability for, to make sure that there isn't a distortion. We are hoping to speed up the calendar to extend the list of products that will be included under the safeguard. We're acting time in a timely fashion to protect the automotive industry, appliances, as well as everything related to construction sites. We're not just defending the steel industry, but the entire industrial base in Europe. Europe must fight energy prices, accelerate decarbonization, and assist in this industry. The Industrial Accelerator Act will assist us in making sure that we have European criteria. Only European steel that is produced in Europe will be able to, benefit from this support. Along with our international partners that share our rules and our values, we can set up a market, for steel that will protect the present but also for the future. Thank you. Graziano, Rivoli. On behalf of the BFE Group, madam Brooke.”
  "Buy European" provisions
• “Thank you very much. On behalf of my group, I'd like to thank the European Commission for this very important report for our political family. Assessing the environmental impact of FTAs is of crucial importance because we've got sustainable development, and it's got to contribute not only to economic growth, but also to social and environmental development. So even though we have a positive impact here, it's still not enough. It's not sufficient. The EU has to be decisive and take the path that the Commission talked about in June 2022, making sure their TSD chapters in trade agreements. A key element is introducing trade sanctions, as in the EU New Zealand Agreement that includes sanctions for the first time in the chapter on trade and sustainable development. It's of vital importance that the European Commission activates the revision, the revision clauses, in order to update the TSD chapters in line with the new strategy. The study shows that trade policy can be a sustainable growth driving engine and part of the solution to the climate crisis. By promoting green technologies, trade and making sure that we are aligned with environmental agreements. I'm very pleased that there are references to non-regression clauses. We have to make sure that the agreements don't weaken environmental protection. So we're very pleased to see that this hasn't happened and that it's bolstered current commitments. This is great news, but we've got to make sure that we keep the bar high so that the results can be fully satisfactory. There are still a lot of gaps in the implementation of the TSD chapters, such as the limited participation of civil society and the many trade and rural barriers that there are. We need more transparency, more involvement and participation, and we want a more structured and strong role for internal advisory groups and and NGOs. Now the European Parliament can play a very important role, including the evaluation of implementation and making sure that clauses are implemented properly. We want to continue working hand in glove with the Member States and the European Commission on this. Thank you very much for listening.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• “Thank you very much, president. What is the Italian right doing? They want to try and make sure that people don't learn about emotions at school. And then here they say that we should not limit social networks because they don't want to rock the boat with some big digital company. But let's talk seriously here. 42%. That is the number of Italian, um, uh, miners who have spoken to a chat bot when they, uh, felt anxious or sad. Not a friend, not a parent, an algorithm. This Save the Children data tells us everything about the how serious the situation is today. Um, platforms provoke, um, addiction. They amplify the fragility of our young people. They are the system, and our young people are paying for it. We need strong European rules. We need, um, age verification. We need common minimum age. We need to, um, fight against addiction. If you are doubting that we need rules, then look at our young people. The European Parliament needs to choose which side it's on.”
  Safety features & content control for child protection online
• “Simplification works, but deregulation doesn't. We have to be cutting red tape in Europe for companies, i.e. to help them access funds. But we have to maintain the European social model. The omnibus package today constitutes an attack on the progress made during the previous legislature on social environmental legislation. The proposals are overhasty and create legal uncertainty. This regulation will affect digital areas as well, which is the wrong choice in the choice of directive. I think looking at the dangers involved in AI, we need to make sure that we provide sufficient protection to citizens and we should not mix up SMEs in that necessarily, because we need to generate innovation, we need to make Europe more competitive. We need to do that through the means we have at our disposal, not on the backs of our workers. The European Union needs to make sure that we don't take the wrong choices and support the genuine interests of Europe.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Thank you. Chair. Dear colleagues, protecting intellectual property in third countries is first and foremost a fairness issue in trade when European knowhow and brands are copied abroad, it's our jobs, innovation and local value chains that pay the price from Italian winemakers and protected geographical indications to designers, engineers and creators. That's why strong IP provisions in FTAs and in the WTO agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual property rights must translate into real world protection. Unfortunately, enforcement is where the system too often breaks down. Counterfeits move fast through online marketplaces and flood the EU market, harming EU brands. Customs and market surveillance struggle to keep pace. What concrete steps will the Commission take, together with customs platforms and other actors in the supply chain to make enforcement faster, more coordinated and SME friendly? Finally, China remains a systemic problem not only an IP challenge, but part of a broader geopolitical competition over technology and standards. How will the Commission use trade tools and bilateral dialogue with China to secure measurable improvements and protect Europe's strategic industries? Thank you.”
  Trade relations with China
• “I am outraged and furious. Today we sing violence against minors and sexual abuse. But you get this. Sovereignty obsessed, right? Saying we shouldn't be applying the rules and punishing those who commit this kind of abuse. That's not standing up for freedom of speech. It's crazy. We've got platforms. And grok is not the only one that allow for instant noodle Fication of girls and other children 12,000 see, some images are higher than ever. Ai assisted. We need to apply the existing rules through the DSA and the AI act. We need to eradicate this phenomenon. We don't need mass Surveillance techniques. We just need to apply online rules more stringently to protect women and children now.”
  Privacy & detection of online child abuse
• “Thank you very much, chairman. The United States have imposed unprecedented, unprecedented restrictions on chip exports. Um. And, uh, of course, this involves the flops as well. It's not only a commercial measure, it is an issue that undermines, uh, governance in the sector. And of course, we do use numerous different possibilities as well as far as the development of artificial intelligence. The Commission has mentioned China, Europe as well. Our access to the most cutting edge technology is limited, and we have structural dependence. That is what the risk is out there. While I think it's necessary for us to establish our own technological sovereignty, this is absolutely key. Now, these particular this particular measure exposes our fragility, lays it bare essentially. Um, we have the privileged access of few, a select few to the particular market. Um, at the same time, many more resources are being invested in the United States on this particular front. Uh, we have examples of large companies in the United States which have dedicated more resources, have attracted public and private investment as well, in this particular field. Uh, as far as Taiwan, um, uh, numerous different difficulties would be created as far as supply the geopolitical consequences and dimensions have to be taken into consideration. Uh, uh, Europe is in the middle of this particular web, a web which is one fraught with difficulty and impediments. So I think the European Strategy on this particular front has to be carefully visited. We have to make it more resilient, more determined, particularly in this sector. The European Parliament, along with the US delegation, uh, we are going to have to work for dialogue with the Congress. This is an important step forward in order to strengthen ties and to create some sort of unity on this front. We also need unity within the institutions between Commission and Council on this matter. Protecting the semiconductor sector is absolutely key. We need global governance on artificial intelligence in this particular front, and everything has to be done to move in that direction. Thank you.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• “Thank you. Chair. Uh, dear colleagues, I am reporting back on two sessions of the AI, uh, act working group held at a critical juncture for implementation as discussions advanced around possible simplification and a potential stop the clock. Concerns have emerged regarding external influence and the need to maintain regulatory coherence. On the 30th of April, we conducted a detailed review of the third draft of the Code of Practice for general purpose AI. Unfortunately, many of the concerns we raised earlier remained unaddressed. Systemic risks, including discrimination and misinformation, have been sidelined into annexes or made optional transparency measures continued to offer wide discretion to provide us, while the model documentation template still lacked the precision needed to protect downstream actors. Equally troubling was the copyright section of the code. I shared the concerns voiced by over 40 right holders organizations across Europe. The draft relied on voluntary opt outs and offered the only mild and mildly enforceable redress, given the lack of consultation and legal clarity. They have even called for the sanctions removal until a credible rights based solution is found. As co-legislators, we stressed, even in the different difference of sensitivities among the political groups, that we must ensure that the code upholds the EU law and the AI act itself and provides real, actionable safeguards. Since that session, many of the concerns are still unresolved. While communication between the Commission and Parliament has been not always easy, um, with the final version of the code expected in August. Um, we are waiting for more updates. Although we know there are some amelioration on the protection of fundamental rights, but we will continue, um, following um, and then on the 17th of June, we had another meeting, the discussion, the discussion with the executive vice president, Wilkinson. Um, as started with the presentation of I continent Action Plan and important strategic initiative. But some of the members, uh, raised concerns that this doesn't address the outstanding implementation, uh, challenges raised by members and stakeholders. So we will push for more transparency on the exact, uh, direction the commission wants to take. Thank you very much.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “Yes, dear chair, dear colleagues, first let me warmly thank the Commission and the office for being here today, allowing us to continue within the committee framework, the important discussions we have been conducting in the AI Act working group on the 25th of March. The working group held a meeting where the third draft of the general purpose AI Code of Practice was presented. This code, which is to be finalised in May, will operationalise provisions of the act for powerful AI systems and create a presumption of compliance for developers. Discussions focus mainly on transparency, copyright and fundamental rights, where we raised significant concerns about the shifting towards lighter obligations. What began as a balanced, multi-stakeholder process is now showing some signs of drifting towards a more industry centred outcome due to pressures. While we fully recognise the Commission's concern to avoid overburdening on a national sector and to manage compliance costs, particularly for SMEs and startups, it is essential to remain faithful to the Parliament's and council intents. When we negotiated the AI act, we must ensure that this process does not erode the AI act. Core safeguards. Starting with the protection of fundamental rights, the third draft of the code that treats key risks such as discrimination, breaches of privacy or attacks on democratic processes as optional, introducing a split taxonomy that renders risk assessment and mitigation optional for many societal harms.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “Thank you. Executive Vice president. It's a pleasure to welcome you in into committee today. We appreciate this opportunity for a direct exchange in such a critical juncture for EU trade and industrial policy. The clear industrial, the clean industrial deal is central to our efforts to build a Europe that is more resilient, competitive and sustainable. Trade must be a driving force in that transformation. Trade and investment partnerships are a promising tool to align our external action with our climate and industrial goals, and they should complement both our existing and future free trade agreements. But this agenda is not only about enhancing competitiveness, it's also about promoting sustainability. Securing fair access to raw materials, energy and key goods, and safeguarding high social and environmental standards, both within the EU and in our partnerships abroad. We must be clear this is not merely about securing supply, it's about ensuring our supply chains are fair, green and future proof that will require investment in technology transfer, capacity building and tailored trade instruments that help our partners in their transitions as well. And of course, we cannot ignore the ongoing tariff discussion with the United States. These talks are pivotal not only for European industry, but also for the credibility of our broader industrial and trade strategy. Cooperation must prevail over confrontation. But the feeling is that this does not really depend only on us, but on the US administration and its final objectives. A clean industrial deal can only succeed if we avoid the harmful trade tensions, and we work towards greater transatlantic alignment. So my questions are how do you see the EU concretely operationalizing the Clean trade and investment partnerships in the short term, particularly with developing economies? And again, on the transatlantic front that you mentioned also in your first intervention? What would be the most important thing to work on with the American counterparts, to be sure that our clean industrial deal can be a success. Thank you very much.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “A few days ago in Italy, Sigfrido Urrutia, a journalist who suffered an attempt on his life and he should receive our solidarity and support from the Parliament. Defending investigative journalism is a civic duty, but you need resources, social recognition and economic models which protect quality journalism. Therefore, when the European Commission decides to intervene on advertising monopolies, this is a. They are, of course, affecting the freedom of journalism and publishing. But it's not enough. We need full respect of European competition rules to protect citizens, the right to have free information, which is a pluralistic, and allow sufficient resources. Defending free media means defending European democracy. Let us never forget that the as a reporter the act. I say let's move ahead to defend the respect of our rules, to protect our values and the freedom of information in Europe.”
  EU support for traditional (non-digital) media
• “Di Fiore words can be like flower vases that fall from a balcony. If you're lucky, one of them won't hit you, hit you on the head, and you can move on. But if you're unlucky, things can go quite differently and you get killed. Those were the last words of Andrea, who was killed due to cyberbullying. We don't ever want to see a story like this ever again. And his story is very well known in Italy, where over a million teenagers have said that they are subject to episodes of cyberbullying. All too often you see a vicious cycle with substance use and isolation as well as self-harm. The European plan that's being presented today does represent a step forward, with common definitions bolstering rules, coordination with the act on deep fakes and manipulation. A unique EU app to tackle this important issue. We need to take action on this for all the Andreas around us, for their families, their friends, for the organisations working to save them, we really need to do our bit. We can't afford to get there late anymore.”
  Safety features & content control for child protection online
• “The Council of Europe addressed challenges posed by deepfakes and influence operations affecting elections. Discussions centred on translating the Framework Convention into operational standards for platforms and political actors, addressing manipulation while safeguarding press freedom and complementing AI act provisions. The third panel focused on national enforcement mechanisms, institutional preparedness and parliamentary oversight. Ireland's AI board representative and the Danish Presidency discussed varying resources and expertise levels across member states for supervising general purpose AI, high risk systems, and prohibited uses. Members raised questions about coordination mechanisms for consistent enforcement. Continued dialogue with national parliaments is essential. The AI working Group will meet again on February 4th to discuss the code of practice for AI generated content labelling that is currently being drafted, as well as the digital omnibus on AI. Thank you very much.”
  Transparency and oversight of AI-generated content
• “Increasing uncertainty and legal risks for European Deployers. Notably, regarding the GDPR compliance, transparency should not be seen as a burden, but rather as a necessary condition for legal certainty, fair competition and innovation in favour of our companies. So I would encourage the Commission to strengthen these obligations in the final version. And finally, on the copyright, binding obligations have been replaced with best efforts commitments. Gpi providers are no longer required to disclose whether copyrighted content was used in training data. This weakens the enforcement of existing copyright law, and the reliance on the robots.txt protocol as the primary tool for rights reservation is problematic. It is not a legal standard. It is voluntary, outdated, and often ignored in practice. The draft complaint mechanism also leaves Rightsholders with two limited options. Smaller creators in particular may struggle to defend the rights to Europe's creative sector. A major contributor to our economy and culture deserves stronger protections. We look forward to discussing these points with the Commission. We will also have a further meeting of the working group in a couple of days, but the code will be really a test of Europe's ability to defend its regulatory sovereignty. Fundamental rights and transparency are non-negotiable foundations for a trustworthy and competitive European AI ecosystem. Thank you very much.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “It showed that access to the infrastructure of the new economy can depend on geopolitics. When China restricted exports of rare earths, the message became even clearer. In the age of AI, dependency can become leverage. Europe is exposed at both ends of the AI value chain. We depend on others for advanced semiconductors, cloud infrastructure, computing power, and critical raw materials. These dependencies are not abstract. They affect our companies, our public services, and our ability to act independently. This is why the report calls for our economic security tools to work together foreign direct investment screening, export controls, trade defence instruments, including the anti-corruption instrument instead of constant delays as it continues to be, I suppose, watered down by industry lobbying, the commission tax sovereignty package must match the urgency of this moment and should not be delayed further. The cloud and AI Development Act and Chips act two are not optional elements. They are central to whether Europe can build AI capacity on its own terms. Open source AI also has a strategic role. It can reduce costs, increase transparency, support local deployment, and help partners in the global South build real capability rather than dependence. The third priority is governance. The AI act is already a global reference for human centric risk based regulation. We should promote this model through digital trade agreements, training and technology councils, digital partnerships and the WTO. The question is simple to conclude will Europe shape the AI transformation of trade or adapt to conditions set elsewhere? This report chooses coherence, ambition and action, so I urge colleagues to support it. Thank you very much.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• “Colleagues, this is a good report, the result of a real cross-party work. It proves that despite Brexit, cooperation with the UK can deliver smooth sharing of police data to fight cross-border crime. Steady energy trade to keep prices down. Joint steps to protect farmers and small businesses from needless border checks. And new partnerships on clean technologies like carbon capture and offshore wind. We also highlight where we must go further, making supply chains safer together, maintaining high data protection standards for stable cross-border services, and building structural cooperation on AI. So our rules lead globally. But let us be honest, we are only here because of Brexit. We are spending time and effort fixing problems that were created by leaving the TCA limits the damage. It does not erase it, so we need to continue working to find new solutions also for mobility and to support further cooperation in areas that are not fully covered. Thank you very much.”
  EU-UK data transfer
• “Dear colleagues, the reality behind this report is that artificial intelligence is changing how goods move, how services are delivered, how companies compete and how economic power is exercised. Europe cannot respond with fragmented initiatives or with regulation alone. We need one strategy that brings together competitiveness, openness and strategic autonomy. I want to thank the shadow rapporteurs and all groups for their constructive work. Their contributions have genuinely enriched this report. The broad support in committee shows that Parliament can speak clearly on this agenda. The first priority is competitiveness. Ai can be a practical tool for European companies, especially SMEs. It can reduce translation costs, simplify compliance, improve logistics and make it easier to enter new markets. It can also help our public authorities protect the single market. Today, Customs and market surveillance authorities face huge volumes of e-commerce, including unsafe, counterfeit and non-compliant goods. Ai can help detect those risks at scale, making trade fairer for companies that respect the rules. And harder to exploit for those that do not. But AI is not only changing how we trade. It is changing. Who benefit from trade in services. It can automate tasks in legal advice, finance, technical consulting and many other areas where Europe has long been strong in manufacturing. Competitiveness will increasingly depend on productivity skills and the ability to integrate AI into production. That is why every trade agreement must assess the impact of AI on workers skills and environment. If we want citizens to support open trade, we must be honest about disruption and serious about managing it. The second priority is sovereignty. When the United States restricted exports of advanced AI chips, it did more than limit a product.”
  EU policy on custom fee on non-EU imports
• “Yes. Thank you very much I will speak with Kathleen's speech on her behalf. So, dear colleagues, dear Commission, a comprehensive Economic partnership agreement with Indonesia is strategically vital for the EU, Southeast Asia largest economy. G20 member and key Asean leader Indonesia is essential in addressing geopolitical fragmentation and securing resilient rules based trade relations. Yesterday, political agreement to advance the Cepa with the September 2025 target is encouraging. It signals shared urgency to strengthen supply chains and collaborate on sustainability, labor rights and climate action. Yet clarity is needed. What has been agreed beyond press statements? How will this shape the CPA content and timeline? Speed must not compromise the substance. The data. The deal's credibility depends on robust commitments to our core values. On the EU, deforestation regulation in Indonesia has voiced strong opposition, calling it colonial and demanding delays. But the EU ADR is not negotiable. It safeguards our climate agenda rather than weakened standards. We must scale up cooperation, providing technical support and traceability tools. What concrete steps is the Commission taking to help Indonesia meet the EU requirements? Will the CPA embed the Paris Agreement as an essential element? Where do negotiations stand on the TSD chapter, especially enforceability and a strong dispute settlement mechanism? We must also address human rights in West Papua. Will CPA provide mechanisms for civil society participation and ensure indigenous rights are respected? Finally, regarding intellectual property, what is the scope of the provisional agreement. Our trips, plus provisions included. And how are they perceived by Indonesia? We welcome progress, but urge the Commission to ensure that the Cepa reflects EU values and global sustainability goals. Thank you very much.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• “Thank you chair. Thank you Commissioner. Vice-president Sefcovic, for being here for your overview. It's clear that the EU US trade relationship is extremely important. It's worth nearly €1 trillion annually supporting millions of jobs in. In this moment of strain of this partnership, I tried in my role to reach out to American businesses, and I gave them a very clear message that they should not play a dangerous gamble. And I think many of them agree. What dangerous gamble? I'm thinking about the risk of accepting this kind of aggression towards our functioning trade relations by hoping that bringing EU legislation into this discussion of non-tariff barriers could end up with weakening the European legislation in their advantage. Some of them have this interest, but I again, I told them it's a dangerous gamble because we are not going to move. Other colleagues have been clear. I think the Parliament will defend strongly, but I think also many governments, the idea of keeping our legislation decided here, not elsewhere, and we risk instead an escalation of the trade conflict. So instead we need to concentrate all all the stakeholders, including the businesses, including all the national institutions, supporting your work to de-escalate. But this means also that we need to react strongly to show that we are ready to have countermeasures in the idea of negotiating or finding solutions. So I am sure that To this Parliament will support this work. And as the US as delegation with the US, we are engaging with the US Congress also to build constructive relations to support this line of action. Thank you very much.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “We found it concerning that these crucial elements were listed only as additional considerations, rather than essential risk categories. Given that protecting fundamental rights is a core objective of the AI act, we urge that these risks be integrated into the selected systemic risk framework to ensure comprehensive evaluation in the area of governance and enforcement. The definition of serious incidents does not yet fully align with the AI act, as it omits references to infringements of fundamental rights. This led to questions on whether this was a deliberate omission and if so, why. Ensuring consistency. Consistency here is vital for legal clarity and accountability. Finally, on technical risks mitigation, the draft takes steps forward. Um steps towards sorry structured forecasting of string of systemic risks, but periodic reassessment should be reinforced to ensure continuous monitoring of evolving risks. Looking ahead, we will continue to engage with the I office and the working groups to ensure that the third draft of the Code of Practice. Expected this week, meets the necessary standards of transparency, accountability and legal clarity required for effective AI governance. The AI working Group will reconvene on February um 19th to assess Member States implementation of prohibited AI practices. A critical discussion for ensuring alignment with the AI act regulatory framework. And in fact, the first part of the act that entered into force. And so very important to scrutinise what the Member States are doing in applying the prohibition. Thank you very much.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “(14:56:59 – 15:00:00): Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Executive Vice President. Today, strengthening the single market is a geopolitical necessity. Europe must reduce strategic dependencies, defend fair competition, and ensure that trade and economic security policies remain coherent with the effective enforcement of our rules. In this regard, I welcome your ongoing reflection among commissioners. Now the EU should approach China to ensure a genuine level playing field while avoiding unnecessary fragmentation or decoupling. This is also an issue of European sovereignty. European SMEs, investing in quality, innovation, and sustainability cannot pay the price of unfair competition from noncompliant actors operating in a single market without respecting the same standards to the detriment of both companies and consumers.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation · Chinese clean tech competition: trade barriers and investment caps vs. open market
• “Thank you. President. Commissioner. To which the real objective of the illegal tariffs imposed by Donald Trump is just one to destroy the European economic model, to undermine our standards, how we protect what we eat, our nature, and what our approach is to tech giants. We should send back a clear message. Our legislation is something which we in Europe decide for Europeans. Over the next few months, we'll be negotiating to to find a way out of this damaging situation for economies on both sides of the Atlantic. Our trade envoy will go to Washington at the end of May. We need to find a good agreement, but if we aren't able to do that, we should be in a position to respond with strong measures against US services and goods. The European Union should form alliances with all those countries who want to hold up the and to uphold the international rules based alliance while pursuing new alliances. This is the umpteenth challenge we've faced, underlining the need for a stronger and more united Europe.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “I think it's important that we support startups. So, for example, when I worked on the AI act, I pushed and we obtained that the member states had to mandatorily establish a sandbox and to support a facilitation for startups to enter the market with new products. And I think we need to concentrate our simplification efforts towards exactly startups and smaller enterprises. But this doesn't mean that I think that we can make the best for them if we just deregulate. I think we would be on the wrong path. Thank you.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “Thank you very much. Notwithstanding the air traffic problems, I made it on time. So once again, thank you for inviting me to take the floor as chair of the delegation for relations with the United States, looking at the amendments tabled by colleagues to the horizontal regulation and its annexes. The key takeaway could be the following members of this committee consider it necessary to outline in this legal text the more clearly certain details, guarantees and predictable rules so we can ensure that the joint statement negotiated by the EU and the USA can be better implemented and respected by both parties. There is clear appetite for legal certainty, as well as a call on the Commission and Council to defend not only the sovereign economic interests of the European Union and its member states, but also our regulatory choices. Since we began discussing the joint statement, I have always underlined that this Parliament is ready to collaborate. Act swiftly and constructively, and even accelerate the process if needed, so we can reach a rapid conclusion of this legislative file, because the transatlantic trade and our transatlantic bond more broadly are still very important. I briefly met USTR Grier last week and conveyed exactly this same message. As an Inter member, I had the opportunity to table some amendments myself. They reflect these considerations and show that it is possible to respect the letter of the joint statement without breaking any taboo. Our chair and rapporteur has presented a convincing case for removing steel from the list of industrial products. Several colleagues, including myself, have proposed changes or deletions to the product list. I am confident that by doing so, we can still provide preferential market access for a wide range of EU seafood and agricultural goods. So, respecting our statement. Finally, I propose. I propose proposed. Sorry. Deleting one manufactured product the non-military Military weapons, which the EU does not treat like ordinary industrial products in trade, procurement or market rules. I see no reason to change this approach in this regulation, just as I see no good reason to facilitate the trade of arms for civil purposes in general. Thank you very much.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “In just a few weeks time, the International Trade Committee of the European Parliament will go to New Delhi. It's a crucial moment for the future of our strategic partnership in a global context, with an uptick in protectionism in the supply chains. And cooperation, therefore, is a strategic choice to strengthen our industrial fabric on both sides. It's important to have negotiations for an FTA that is balanced, ambitious and reciprocal. That is also based on binding commitments in human rights and the environment and labour conditions. We need to have an industrial cooperation fight, dumping non-tariff Burdens that have a negative impact on some sectors, including steel and aluminium. The safeguard mechanisms for steel, as put forth by the Commission, are a huge step forward to defend European industry. It is an essential condition to make sure that we have the same conditions in global trade, and it's extremely important in this dialogue with India. Clear rules, common rules, a shared vision. That is the only way that we will be able to have a strong partnership, a veritable pact for fairer partnership that the world definitely needs.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• “I'd like to, uh, first of all, thank again the committee for this opportunity. I think it's interesting to maintain this this dialogue. So maybe it could be a good idea to replicate this a bit later on. Um, because we are so close to the United States for various reasons that we cannot avoid looking into this kind of situations when they deal with, uh, potential, uh, degradation of human rights at scale. I think it's something that, uh, Um, we cannot avoid looking at debating about, uh, and I agree that parliamentary diplomacy is crucial because I found myself leading many missions to the US in these last year. Uh, a lot of diversity of opinions and also of attention from various angles of US society to this kind of ongoing processes, including, uh, the, um, uh, changes and the politicization weaponization. We could discuss a lot about this, of the migration policies. So I will be back as chair of the US with other colleagues, with the leadership of the delegation in March for a visit to the Congress. And so I'm sure that, uh, together with other crucial issues like today, we discussed on with the special plenary on Ukraine. Also the topic of today. What is the situation with the protection of fundamental rights in in US and the situation with with Ice? I think it will be an important piece of the discussion with the colleagues when we are back in Washington. And so thank you for this opportunity, and let's keep the dialogue open. I think it's important for us, but also for our American friends. Thank you very much.”
  EU-US relations
• “Well, in my frequent travels to us as chair of the delegation for relations with the US of this Parliament, I had the chance to discuss very often the issue of free speech, which I think has been used to cover sometimes economic interests. So I think that when we deal with AI used to produce disinformation and fake elements also on the social media, in the example you made, I think our rules to prevent a lack of transparency to prevent disinformation should be implemented fully. We have them in the AI act. We should not renounce them to them by following an absurd idea of an unregulated free speech that is not in our European values. Thank you.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• “Trump is threatening Europe with sanctions because he doesn't like our legislation. And Mrs. von der Leyen touched upon this today. But no deal, no agreement can be based on coercion and threats. The EPP chair, Manfred Weber said that the Eu-us deal isn't something that convinces him, but I think that we have the political responsibility to tell our citizens the truth. We cannot accept the deal as it stands today. If we want to defend the interests of Europeans, we're going to work on the proposal from the Commission. We need to make sure that we can. There is a deadline and that we can renegotiate the deal. We've got to protect aluminium, steel and any products that contain this. They are vital for our industry because we have. We're talking about extremely punitive tariffs of 50%. And wine has to be excluded as well from these terrible tariffs that we've got to work cut out for us. Some governments, including the Italian government, has boycotted efforts by just kowtowing to the US administration. We've got to open up new trade routes for Europe. We need to bolster our domestic economies, and we need to have a balanced transatlantic relationship based on respect. We will continue to work in a constructive way, but we will stand firm with one sole objective the interests of our citizens, the interests of our workers, the interests of our companies. We will defend principles without which the world becomes a dangerous arena that is completely lawless. And we cannot afford this. Thank you.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Thank you very much. Thank you Chair, dear colleagues. As a co-chair of the AI Act Implementation Working Group, I'd like to update you on the recent meetings covering the digital omnibus and fundamental rights impact assessments. At the October fifteenth session, the AI office presented the initial outline of AI related elements for the digital omnibus published November nineteenth, identifying three primary operational challenges: the absence of harmonized standards and guidance for high risk systems, regulatory complexity from overlaps between AI Act, GDPR, CRA, MDR, and DSA, and significant resource constraints affecting national authorities and notified bodies. The AI office explained that the proposed omnibus would focus on targeted amendments aiming to address these challenges while maintaining the core AI Act framework with potential measures including clarification of interplay with other legislation, strengthening governance, adjusted timelines, and enhanced SME support. Alongside the presentations from the SENSE and ELEC on standardization methodology and the Commission apply AI strategy which were very interesting, members asked the Commission about the potential delays in the application of the high risk measures raising concerns about the legal clarity and certainty for the businesses. We also heard from SENSE and ELEC on their methodology for harmonized standards and from the Commission on the apply AI strategy to support uptake and competence development especially among SMEs. Then during the November fifth meeting on article twenty seven fundamental rights impact assessments, the AI office outlined that this assessment will be mandatory for public sector deployers of high risk AI, private entities delivering public services and specific financial services providers with a questionnaire based template under development with the fundamental rights agency and stakeholders to be adopted in twenty twenty six. Stakeholders from Meta, from Danish Institute, from for Human Rights and the ECNL emphasized that the fundamental rights impact assessments must constitute substantive assessments requiring comprehensive context analysis, affected group identification, structured impact evaluation, mitigation strategies and meaningful public transparency rather than just administrative formalities. The next meeting of the AI working group is next Monday December eighth and it will be an interparliamentary exchange on democracy, innovation and the AI Act with members from the national parliaments. Thank you very much.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “Thank you very much. Your colleagues. The commission. Their recent letter from President Trump to President von der Leyen is a clear provocation. And it's very concerning for its impact on the European economy and the relations. So I echo many of the concerns by colleagues, but I have to say that also commission responds to delaying countermeasures until August 1st raises concerns. We are already facing illegal and punitive tariffs, which are harming our businesses, workers and the integrity of the single market. This is not time for hesitation or for seeking the lowest common denominator in our response. We need to send a strong and united message. Europe will not be intimidated or divided by external pressure. The commission role is not simply to consult member states forever, but to act decisively in defence of European interests. If we continue to react with regret, but without action, we only reinforce perception of a divided union and embolden further provocations. Our credibility in negotiations depends on our willingness to deploy leverage, not just to express willingness to talk. We must show we are prepared to defend our economic sovereignty while remaining open to agreement, provided it is reached on equal terms and by August 1st, deadline only. Through unity and firmness, we can protect our citizens and ensure a balanced transatlantic partnership, which is of extreme value from both economies in Europe and on the other side of the Atlantic. Thank you very much.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Thank you very much. Let me also thank the rapporteur, our colleagues and all the guests of this valuable Interparliamentary Committee meeting. I am personally very interested in this discussion. Also, in light of my different roles in this Parliament as co-rapporteur of the AI act, co-chair of the working Group on the Implementation and enforcement of the AI act, and a member of both Afco and Imco committees. Let me congratulate the rapporteur, Emmanuel Kefalogiannis, for the work done. I believe it's a balanced text. Let me mention some key elements. First, the strong emphasis on human centred approach to AI governance, ensuring that innovation remains aligned with fundamental rights, the rule of law and democratic values. Second, the focus on democratic stability, recognising the growing impact of AI on political communication, electoral processes and public trust and the need to safeguard the integrity of our democratic systems. Third, the attention to the relationship between private and public governance. While private actors play an important role, democratic institutions must remain responsible for setting the rules, ensuring accountability and protecting public interest. We can even do more. I would underline our AI and digital technology can strengthen democracy participation, improve decision making and bring citizens closer to you. Institutions. The challenge is to make participation more accessible. In this context, let me introduce the concept of civic AI using AI to support citizen participation, which has strong potential, provided risks such as bias and lack of transparency are addressed. Second point I want to raise is that I think that the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory is an interesting idea to strengthen. Parliament's analytical capacity is very important that it integrates with existing bodies like the AI working Group and the AI office. So working on the administrative part rather than the political sector. So I to conclude, I will be happy to contribute constructively to the amendment phase of this report with the aim of enriching the valuable work already done so far. Together with the shadow rapporteurs, including the one from my political group, Mr. Andriukaitis. Thank you very much.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “Thank you very much. Madam president, Commissioner, in Italy, 34% of teenagers have been the victims of cyber bullying. This is the product of platforms that make a profit on hate. We have to change course immediately. The commission has said that meta doesn't stop a 13 year old kids from using it. And we know what the impact is. They knew about this, but they chose not to act. Teenagers, LGBTQ and minors are paying the highest price. A I has made turned this into systematic violence. Just recently in ACRI in Calabria, 200 minors saw their own images turn into sexual deepfakes. And this is just the beginning of what could become a real landslide and slippery slope. We have to make sure that we implement rules with real penalties and sanctions. We have to ban non-consensual nudity, and we have to invest in schools, psychological support and the proper culture. Let us not waste any more time.”
  Safety features & content control for child protection online
• “Democracy doesn't disappear in a day. It's defeated one post at a time. So what we need to do is focus on the digital space. I mean, the commission is quite rightly looking at foreign interference, and that's their real threats. But in public spaces, our debates are being distorted at the roots because algorithms are deciding what people can see and what people say. And that really strikes at the heart of democracy. Elon Musk is amplifying his posts using algorithms, and that's far right content. And this is someone who's interfering in our democracies and causing major problems. Now algorithms are generating profits as well. Artificial intelligence is amplifying everything. All these falsified realities, all this fake news. And it's not only foreign interference at the problem. It's this platform model that poisons public debate. We have the rules to deal with this and we need to implement them appropriately. Otherwise people will cause us major problems.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• “Thank you, dear colleagues. Uh, I appreciate that Shane is here to answer to our parliament, but we need the real answers. This exchange comes after all the episodes that we know about. Uh, I'd like to highlight three fundamental failures that I have noted. First, on product safety. 69% of products on platforms like Shane fail EU safety standards. Baby sleeping bags risk suffocation. Electrical goods risk fire and shock. So the platform in this case lists 6000 new items daily. So I'm asking Shane what percentage are checked against the Safety Gate portal before going online. Can you guarantee traceability for every seller? Second, on enforcement response times and repeated violations, you claim to have terminated sellers for non-compliance, yet dangerous products reappear across your platform. What is your median removal time after receiving notices of illegal products? And how do you prevent a repeat offenders from simply relisting under different identities? Thirdly, I'd like to look inwards to the EU institutions. Our digital rulebook is not being enforced where it matters most. This is why our group is calling for a public inquiry under rule 215 to examine these enforcement failures. Without going into detail into enforcement capacity, I'd like to underline that article 51 of DSA provides tools for temporary restriction when platforms like Shane flood our market with dangerous products. What are we waiting for? To suspend their services if we do not get enough clear answers and remedies. Thank you.”
  Liability for online marketplaces