Krzysztof HETMAN

Policy topics Krzysztof HETMAN is active on

What Krzysztof HETMAN has said (53)

• 2026-07-16 “(09:30:08 - 09:31:52): Good morning, everyone. I'd like to welcome very warmly, my colleagues, members of European Parliament, our guests, our experts. I have pleasure, to replace our Chairman for the next hour. We start this morning session of the Reggie Committee meeting with a public hearing, on the Just Transition Fund. The Just Transition Fund has been a vital tool for regions in transition. However, several challenges persist. Cohesion policy funds, which have so far played a crucial role in driving a Just Transition to climate neutrality, will be merged into a signal centralized fund, the National and Regional Partnership Plan fund. This new fund will constitute the main source of financing for climate and just transition objective. Reggie, as the lead committee on the JTF regulation, is following closely these developments and through this public hearing. We will listen carefully to our experts and to their insights on the state of play of JTF, the challenges and the future perspective. Let me make a short introduction in my native language. So please use your headphones because I'm going to speak Polish now. Ladies”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2026-07-16 “(09:31:53 - 09:36:50): and gentlemen, dear colleagues, as I have told you before, today's hearing will be about the Just Transition Fund, its effects, its achievements, and also the future. Nonetheless, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that today, we are speaking about a broader context, not just the Just Transition Fund, but about the transformations that many regions in the EU have to go through in general in connection with the policies implemented in the EU. I have no doubt that those regions, those cities, and those municipalities need to receive support also from the EU budget. No city, no municipality, not even a region or not even a single member state will be able to cope with the challenges that are so huge that are related to the huge transformation we would like to take place in the EU. We are talking about an immense reform, not just transforming specific regions that have to shift from coal to clean energy. As a matter of fact, I think all of us agree that that transformation is right, and we all agree that the renewable energy sources are the future. Nevertheless, let me point out that in this context, it's not only the money that matters. It's extremely important because we will not be able to perform the transformations without it. But what is more important acceptance. Without, social acceptance, we will not be able to achieve such a giant transformation because costs are not only monetary, but also social, and they are immense. We need to have a permission. Let me call it this way. Let me put it, in a straightforward way saying that we need a permission from the inhabitants of the region to make the transformation, to do the transformation. Let us remember that many regions, many cities, many subregions, are sometimes dependent on even 1 single plant. For example, the city of Wencna, the town of Wencna in the Lublin Voivod ship in Poland. I'm very happy that the mayor of that town is with us today. I'm sure he's going to tell us about their situation, but we need to remember that for such towns and cities, such a transformation and the fact that today they are dependent on 1 single plant for employment, They need alternatives for the people who work there. Because otherwise, if they don't have alternative jobs, the whole transformation may, fail completely. That is why, 1st, we need to present them with an alternative. We need to show all the people who live there and work there that they will be able to stay, work, live and live there. Let us remember that those regions and those municipalities today are in a difficult situation because they have to face huge challenges of the population, weaker infrastructure. And if we perform the transformation too fast, we may only deepen those problems. That is why we need to be cautious. Anything is possible, but you need to, do it, guided by your common sense. Otherwise, the whole idea of, transformation, the whole reform may be jeopardized and may risk failure. At the very end, let me also add 1 sentence as a politician. If that transformation is performed too quickly with too high social costs, we will only stimulate nationalists and populists, which are quite a few in Europe right now. I would like to warn you against that. Thank you very much.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2026-07-16 “(12:02:32 - 12:03:03): Thank you, mister and minister Chambers, for this open exchange with the members of our committee. My thanks go equally to all of you for sharing your views and contributing to the debate as well as our interpreters for facilitating today's discussions. With that, we conclude our meeting. I wish you all a well-deserved summer break, and I look forward to welcoming you back to our next strategy meeting on September 1. Thank you so much.”
  EU public communication strategy
• 2026-07-16 “(09:36:51 - 09:37:15): With our 1st panel, lessons learned from EU regions supported by the Just Transition Fund. I give the floor to the experts for 10 minutes, each. 1st 1 will be mister Leszek Vodarski, mayor of Wenshna Lubelski Voivodeship, Poland. Mister Vodarski, the floor is yours.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2026-07-16 “(11:21:41 - 11:22:30): We move to the next point on our agenda, and we have the pleasure to welcome mister Jack Chambers, the Irish minister for public expenditure, infrastructure, public service reform and digitalization for an exchange of view on the priorities of the Irish presidency for the coming months. The debate on the commission's proposal proposals in the context of new EMFF and their impact on equation policy will no doubt constitute one of the biggest points on the agenda. I will now invite mister Chambers to open the discussion with an introductory statement. And after, I will give the the floor to the members, starting with the representative of political groups. Mister and minister, you have the floor.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2026-07-16 “(10:29:46 - 10:30:17): Thank you very much for our two experts. And we continue with our second panel, the Just Transition Fund and Ensuring Continuity Beyond 2027. I'd like to welcome very warmly the next two of our experts. The first will be Mister TS Schroeder, who is Director of Theropolis and Project Manager of Forum Ratineau, Germany. Mr. Schroeder, the floor is yours.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2026-07-16 “(11:14:19 - 11:16:29): Ginco Ibarzo? Thank you very much. I would like to thank everyone. Thank you for this meeting. In particular, I would like to thank our guests, speakers. Thank you very much for your time, for being here with us, for your participation and thank you for your contribution, for your expert contribution into this topic. And the topic is the Just Transition and the future of just transition. I am convinced that your knowledge that today's presentations will contribute to a better understanding, just like Mr. Schroeder has said that it is not only about transition, it is also about just transition. This transition must be just and our objective should not only be limited to shift to green renewable sources of energy, but the main objective should be to take care of the people. People should benefit from these transitions. People in comfortable conditions should be able to go through this transition, and this is our responsibility to help them. We cannot do we cannot act too swiftly. We must remember about common sense. If we do that, then this transition is bound to be just and this transition will be the way we want it to be. So we have to remember about all those people that we talked about. And I would like to assure you that our committee and all the members of our committee, we will always be helping regions, not only in Poland, Ireland, in Greece or in Germany, but everywhere in all the regions in the European Union, also in island areas, in distant areas, you can be assured that we will always be safeguarding regions.”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2026-07-14 “Thank you, sir. I'm going to speak Polish. Please use your headphones. Thank you very much. Commissioner, I would like to talk about the work that's been done on recommendations on regional airports. For example, the airport of Lublin, there we have a regional airport, and I believe that these guidelines need to be revised. Firstly, we have to look at the volume of passengers. That's the current indication, and it doesn't reflect what currently happens in regional airports. Sometimes they have no opportunities to diversify their revenue when revenue goes down. Secondly, over 1,000,000 passengers receiving aid lead companies to make business decisions that are dictated by these rules rather than by efficiency, and this slows down the development of the market rather than speeding it up. Also, we have a space that is defined by kilometers, and that does not reflect competition between airports. Transport time is a determining factor, and we shouldn't be looking at potential rather than this time. These airports have offered to support in military forms, to NATO, etcetera. All of this cannot purely be financed by commercial activity. Commissioner, I would like to ask you for greater flexibility when it comes to regional airports to take into account just how important they are economically and strategically. Thank you.”
  EU funding for transportation
• 2026-07-14 “(17:58:48 - 18:00:19): Thank you, chair. The NRPPs are something which I have discussed with our local and regional authorities, and I've also discussed them with, farmer associations and employer associations. And they all say that they want more flexibility, more simplification. They want to also have the opportunity as interested parties of the NRPP to be involved in the decision making process, to be involved in discussions. This is why I have submitted amendment. Towns and cities need to be supported. I am surprised that the European Commission does not have a specific budget for towns and cities. I have proposed 8%. This is a very important fund. For it to be a success, the member states and regions must be taken into account as part of the decision making process. If this doesn't happen, the fund will not work. Everyone has to be able to speak, and we have to take what they say into account.”
  EU policy on urban development
• 2026-07-13 “(16:13:44 - 16:14:39): Madam chair, thank you. To the commission, there will be safeguard clauses in this agreement. And so Europe should be able to take measures if there is an increase in imports from the EU, if those increases could pose a threat to European value chains. There's a seven year term on those safeguards for the most sensitive products. It's eight years for sugar. So just a question on that for the commission, and I would like a clear answer from you. Can you give us some figures in terms of the volume that will trigger the safeguard clause? When will the commission have to take action in this regard? Thank you.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• 2026-06-17 “(16:20:34 – 16:21:38): Thank you very much, chair, commissioner. I have a question. How are you going to electrify Europe without a thorough revision of ETS? How are you going to do that given the prices of energy that we have today? 40 up to 60% of the invoice for the industry energy invoice is related to ETS. What are you going to do in order to to provide this motivation for industrial users? So let me put it straight. You are losing time setting goals that are not realistic. You need to, 1st of all, revise ETS, and then we can go on elect towards electrification. It has to be smart. And anything can be done and achieved, but we need some common sense of which there is a deficit in the EU institutions. Archiek. Thank you very much. And now mister Mularczyk. Thank you very much.”
  Extension of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
• 2025-07-16 “E-002908/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission Under the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement 1 (‘Agreement’), imports of cement from Ukraine into the EU are duty and quota free since 2019. The objective of the recently concluded review under Article 29 of the Agreement was ‘to consider accelerating and broadening the scope of the elimination of customs duties’. The review therefore covered products that had not yet been fully liberalised; hence, cement could not be included in that review. There is no mechanism in the Agreement that would allow the reintroduction of customs duties on the import of a product like cement that is already fully liberalised in bilateral trade. 1 Association Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and Ukraine, of the other part - OJ L 161, 29.5.2014, p. 3 (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ%3AL%3A2014%3A161%3ATOC).”
  EU policy on custom fee on non-EU imports
• 2024-12-04 “P-002758/2024 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission The Commission briefed the Honourable Members of the International Trade Committee (INTA) on the state of play of EU-Mercosur negotiations as it regularly does any time it is invited to participate in such meetings. The modalities of such participation fall under the remit of the INTA Secretariat. Transparency towards the European Parliament is and will remain a priority for the Commission, notably as regards the Mercosur Agreement. In the past legislature (2019-2024), the Commission informed the European Parliament on these negotiations on a regular and frequent basis, namely at 14 monitoring groups and two technical briefings and provided the state of play in 10 committees or delegation meetings other than INTA. The Commission also held at least 40 bilateral meetings with individual Members of the European Parliament or with political groups.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Thank you very much, Commissioner. Ladies and gentlemen, I must say that in the last few months I was amazed by the voices of our industry and the challenges that the industry faces. Of course, it is important to work for the benefit of climate and the environment. But we cannot kill our industrial production. This would benefit third countries that would take over our production, and this would undermine our security and competitiveness. Labour intensive and energy intensive industry has many challenges and therefore to reduce costs we need to use deregulation and investment support. We need to adapt to the changing reality. We must focus on our security and strong industry.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Thank you very much, Mr. President. Mr. Commissioner, dear colleagues, we hear wonderful announcements of the future of the Common Agricultural Policy. Simplification, flexibility, less bureaucracy, less red tape, more time to be spent on the field, less time filling out papers and documents. A wonderful bit of news. We have been waiting for it for a long time. Farmers have been waiting for it. They have been waiting also for a more swift reaction to crisis situation during today's debate, we speak about strengthening the position of farmers. What does it look like in practice? In practice, European and particularly Polish farmers are not able to sell their products. They are not able to cover the costs of production. So what position do we want to strengthen for farmers? Do we want to do we want to allow a situation where Mercosur products and products from Ukraine would flood our market, distorting competitiveness on the European market? In agriculture, our farmers will no longer be able to compete with these products. When these farmers in those countries are not obliged to follow the rules that are applicable for European farmers when it comes to phytosanitary rules and other rules. Food security is one of the pillars of our security in Europe. Apart from security in the field of energy and our defence. So either we want to support farmers or we want to pretend that we support them. As Mrs. von der Leyen does.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU
• “Thank you very much, chairman. Commissioner. First of all, let me say this. You're doing a great job. Congratulations. The flexible approach that you're proposing so that member states can make decisions on how much they're going to spend, on which areas that require support, that they can control it themselves. That's a very good way to go. My proposal, though, is for you to be consequent in your actions because it is member States who should decide how much they want to spend on defence, how much on cities and how much they want to spend on rural areas. And this level of consequence should also apply to all those who work at lower levels, being at national or regional level. When they can decide what they want to do with the money, they should also have a free hand to a large extent in their decisions. Because I can agree with you when you say that member States are different, but also they are there are different within their territories inside and needs and problems are very varied and very different in regions and subregions. And when I look from the perspective of cities, let cities decide how they want to spend the money, because if people want to build a subway systems, you can combine it with defense and with good transport possibilities for the population and with clean transport. At the same time, because the subway system can be used as a means of comfortable public transport, in times of peace and in times of threat, it will be an excellent piece of infrastructure to provide safety to the population. So this level of consequences should be present throughout all the tiers and levels of this system. So let me point this out to you. As much as 34% of the budget is to be connected with climate objectives, but at the level of regional and national plans, you're looking at 43% already.”
  Conditions to access EU budget
• “(17:18:09 – 17:20:49): Thank you, chair. Managing director, you presented a great diagnosis of the disease concerning fertilizers in the European Union. However, we have to say it clearly that it is a chronic disease. Unfortunately, every single time when a problem appears, the European Commission proposes Ibuprofen or another painkiller. The problem is that farmers, and I'm saying it with full responsibility, are not expecting any payments, and adding money, because of this problem. Farmers expect possibility and accessible for reasonable prices and fertilizers available at reasonable prices. Farmers, let me say it again because it's important. Farmers do not expect any grants, any payments, and I take full responsibility for these words. Farmers want possibility. They have not. You say farmers must have access to fertilizers before the season planting season at available prices. It's June now. It's in the autumn that you buy, in April when you buy, fertilizers. Today, you promised some money to them, which in fact nobody knows when they will receive, when they will get to their accounts, and when they will support their farms. The key to solve the problem is domestic industry because everything's turned off its head. European Commission has an instrument to manage these situations, problematic situations. You'll say, we have to introduce an early warning system. No. You have to introduce a system of early support. The European Commission should suspend the use of ETS for the fertilizer industry for 2 years. This would help the fertilizer industry and farmers in having access to reasonable priced fertilizers. If you don't understand it in the European Commission, if you don't see it, the problem will recur and continue every 6 months or at least once a year. Thank you.”
  Use of fertilisers
• “One single fund which will cover many things. Security, migration, farming. Can we have the same conditions for all of these different areas? You know, you've got someone building a a rocket, some building, a hospital and someone running a farm. Are you going to have the same criteria applying to all of these different areas? I think maybe we'll have the same criteria, um, for those in the administration, but different criteria for those stakeholders. Farmers need simplification. Farmers need their own simplification. Farmers shouldn't be wasting their time filling out masses of paperwork. We need one single, uh, but one single system for farmers. But I'm worried about that. There will be different actors pitted against each other, trying to get their hands on cohesion funds and other funds. So I think there could be a big, uh, pitfall there. One final question. Now, the European Commission has made, uh, forecasts and predictions, but Uh, where is your ambition? I don't think there's any ambition for farmers. I think what we're seeing instead of ambition and pride is, uh, plans of von der lion alone.”
  CAP delivery architecture: ring-fenced common fund vs integrated national plans
• “Thank you. Chair. Please use your headphones because I'm. I'm going to speak Polish. Ladies and gentlemen, this debate about Horizon Europe is obviously very important in the context of the competitivity of the whole of the EU, and we are losing out in comparison with the United States. And that's been that's certainly been the case over the last two years in Europe. But unfortunately, I believe that this programme doesn't use our potential that we have in the EU. If we look at statistics and virtually 80% of resources go to six EU countries, this means that we're losing sight of the Entrepreneurs and universities all over the rest of Europe who I'm sure have got numerous innovative projects. I often hear that we can't support the weaker academic seats, but in my opinion they are not weak, they are just ignored. And we have had a huge amount of money from infrastructure funds from, uh, from various sources. And there are. The problem is the threshold to be able to get access to funds. And you've got competitions which are supposed to be organised by the European Commission and, uh. The implementing bodies. And. Um, obviously, um, you've got people who are working in Siena, in Salamanca, in Wroclaw or somewhere like that. Um, what we really have got to do is to have a decentralised approach so that everyone who wants to, uh, everyone who wants to participate will be able to get funding, because it's only in this way that we'll be able to use the whole of the potential of this programme and will increase the competition of this, um, of Horizon Europe. Thank you very much.”
  EU research funding
• “(11:04:33 – 11:06:09): Dear colleagues, we want to stop using Russian gas and oil. This is about energy security, but about much more. Our solidarity and resilience is being put to a test. Russia attacked Ukraine, which confirmed that being dependent on Russian oil undermines the stability of the whole region. We cannot be dependent on supplies which might be used as a weapon against us. We need to phase out Russian gas forever. And I'm very happy about those brave decisions of many countries from the energy community that diversifying, including their import routes and supply routes. We cannot be easily blackmailed. In order to be resistant to this blackmail, we should all diversify so as to become independent of Russia and at the same time more competitive. Therefore, renewables are crucial. We need to invest in cross border infrastructure. The EU regulations need to be applied fully, and the gas storage needs to work smoothly. If we do it jointly, if we depart from Russian fuel jointly, it will be a signal that our energy market is becoming resistant, safe, and integrated. I'm very happy that many countries of the European community are well on the way.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources) · Energy (green transition)
• “Thank you. President, Commissioner. Ladies and gentlemen, the Future ERA Act is a chance to strengthen the foundations of the EU's competitiveness. The EU has great scientists, but still too often it loses in the global race for breakthrough technologies. That is why we need smart legal framework, which will allow the institutions, the researchers and the enterprises to cooperate faster and better. We have to also counter the growing concentration of research and innovation in the biggest centers. We have to include smaller centres and SMEs in the European innovation ecosystems. This requires simplification of rules for smaller entities, and what is of key importance is to strengthen the potential of member states who have a weaker research structure, so investment in laboratories and networks and cooperations. These are necessary to support less obvious, innovative, innovative projects. And here also a bigger synergy is important for many countries. This combination of research funding is the best for getting the best results. Without the synergies, it will be difficult to use to benefit from the financing. We need innovation that is created in the whole area of Europe. This is the only way to build competitiveness which is strong and sustainable. Thank you.”
  EU research funding
• “Yes, thank you very much, chairman. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen. There is absolutely no doubt that biotechnology is going to be one of the key factors for global competitiveness. And we have to see whether Europe is going to take the post of leader when it comes to the kind of biotechs that are being developed in the face of competition from the US. So we have heard a lot during the course of this debate, I, that we have a huge scientific potential in Europe. We've got industry, we've got scientists, university, but we're losing when it comes to competitiveness. And we're weaker when it comes to competition that we have nothing to be ashamed about. However, when it comes to competitiveness, our position there is slightly weaker than that of our rivals, whether they to the east or the West. So, um, I think the the funding is a bit too scattered. The regulation is too complicated. Innovation entails taking a risk because it's very difficult to predict what the results are going to be. If we want to, um, take a look at all these indicators, factors and comply with all the rules that are written down by the legislators when it sometimes when it comes to the final stage, maybe we may we can meet all those rules. But when it comes to the final stage, the marketing, it doesn't always work. I think we have to be a little more flexible at every stage, and I would like to know to what extent the commission is going to be able to be flexible when it comes to procedures relating to innovation in biotechnology, because I think flexibility is the key. Thank you.”
  EU policy on ethical standards in biotechnology applications
• “Good afternoon everyone. I think that we should start our meeting today. Colleagues, dear colleagues, ladies and gentlemen. First of all, we need to adopt the agenda for today's meeting. The agenda has been sent to everyone, and I understand we can accept it. Okay, now we move to Charles. Announcements. Today's meeting is web streamed, of course, and interpretation is very important. Message in entrepreneurs for the following 19 languages are present today in the European Parliament for this meeting. Now we move to third point. Exchange of views on promoting the inclusion of persons with disabilities is in the agriculture sector. The example of. Canopy. Canopy. Thank you, Miss Canopy in Belgium. Dear colleagues, we will begin with an event organized in the framework of Disability Rights Week in the European Parliament. I would like to recall that 3rd December is the International Day of Persons with disabilities, and this is the third consecutive year in which Parliament is marking this occasion with a dedicated week of activities. Throughout this week, several parliamentary committees are hosting disability related events. Together, these initiatives reaffirm Parliament's strong commitment to mainstreaming the rights of people with disabilities in all areas of policy making and allow men, women and children with disabilities to participate on equal footing in all areas of life. At this point, I propose that we watch a short welcome video featuring our president, Roberta Metsola herself. The video provides a general introduction to the importance of disability rights and a warm welcome to the week.”
  Gender roles, equality and inclusion
• “Thank you very much, Commissioner. Ladies and gentlemen, I am deeply convinced and feel that for a long period now, for the first time in the European institutions, we responded in real terms to the challenges and needs that we hear from different communities, citizens and professional groups in the Member States in connection with this mid-term review. We took some very good decisions on. Transferring some funds to defense, especially to dual purpose uh products. These uh, funds, uh, will mean greater, uh, competitiveness. And this can also, uh, jumpstart our economy. And the second issue that we would like to emphasize is the energy transformation, uh, clean and affordable energy affordable at prices that could be, uh. Accepted by, uh, households and, uh, industry alike. The next issue is, uh, border regions, uh regions that border with Ukraine and Belarus. Thank you very much. Next is water resilience and, uh, water uh, management, uh, a very important objective given droughts and floods. Finally, uh, flexibility in built in, uh, cohesion policy. We need to introduce this law as soon as possible. We need to vote on it so that all these changes took effect on the 1st of January, 2026.”
  EU cohesion/structural-fund architecture: consolidation vs ring-fenced separate funds · Defence spending
• “(12:20:51 – 12:22:03): Thank you, chairman. Now I'm going to speak Polish. Colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, if we, had decided to agree, for the European Commission to create 1 single fund and to have everyone included starting from businesses, local authorities, but also to include, farmers in this single European fund. And we had 1 argument at the base. We want to make the system simpler and more flexible. We just have to stay consistent. We have to now try to translate this decision and explain where these monies will go and where should they be earmarked at the level of countries and local authorities and speak to organizations of farmers, trade unions, etcetera. It's those organizations that should be able to act in a sovereign but also transparent manner and then decide based on these principles where these monies should go. Otherwise, we'll have overwhelming, centralization, which will run counter to what we agreed with originally when we created the single fund.”
  EU industrial funding (mechanism level: EU-pooled vs nationally-financed)
• “Thank you sir. I'm going to speak Polish so please use your headphones ladies And gentlemen, first of all thank you very much for this presentation provided by representatives of the European Commission. Very interesting things, positive information, the amount of money earmarked within CEF to be increased significantly with respect to the new budget. But let me point out a number of aspects that are perhaps missed while you're looking from the level of the European Commission in Brussels because obviously transport networks, this is beyond any doubt that this requires financing. Absolutely, I fully understand and I acknowledge this. So that our guests are not surprised, I understand very well that this is about transport networks within TEN-T network but please note that in the case of dual use projects where we talk about military mobility as well, that there you should try to describe the possibility to develop projects in their complexity. This is about express roads, motorways, the ability to move armies but one should remember that motorways and expressways are used by armies at times of peace but in times of threat, which is well shown in the case of Ukraine in the state of war, the army is mostly using local and national roads for obvious reasons. Therefore, I would try to convince representatives of European Commission. I know there are demarcation lines that there is Regional Development Fund for supporting local government to develop infrastructure roads of dual use at the regional level but I think if we develop such projects under this instrument then should be developed horizontally and there should be a possibility for supporting local government while including local and regional roads within the network of motorways and expressways if it's access roads to military facilities which are not located directly on motorways or expressways. The same about companies producing military equipment. This equipment has to be moved over local and regional roads and the same goes for other companies producing other items that are necessary for the military. This is also about local roads where we already decided under the midterm review that we would use European funds to organize collective protection facilities for civilians. People have to access these in some manner as well. I understand these are major transnational projects but I would still argue that the Commission should change their angle, look at the issue more widely. And let me reiterate that there should be a possibility to include local road infrastructure into the great projects obviously if this network is included within the TEN-T network that we're talking about today. And yes, I fully agree that transborder projects are of key importance. They're particularly important in the context of the situation in Ukraine. I'm happy that the Commission managed to recognize this and they're also thinking of adding flexibility but I would still argue that you should take a second look at flexibility and simplicity also with respect to projects developed within the EU in particular Member States because we have heard this on many occasions over many years that this is what people expect particularly when it comes to simplifying the development of such projects. Now when you talk about energy infrastructure please note the following. We should try and describe to the Connecting Europe Facility in such a way that an opportunity should be given to European companies but it should involve middle and large European companies not only multinationals but large European companies because the increased envelope of money should be used in the first place to help our economy grow because we are losing competitiveness, we are losing growth. So the program as this in particular should try and help European companies. Now finally my question, another question about gas transport because I'm not clear on this. So perspective within the new addition of the program, will we be able to finance gas transport projects as well? Thank you. **Dragoş Benea (Romania, S&D) @Chair: From S&D Miss Rosa Serrano Sierra. **Rosa María Serrano Sierra (Spain, S&D): Thank you Chair. I have two questions for the Commission. We understand that the funds are there to complement the basic network. However, we cannot forget the network that connects territories and that gives access of these, these gives small municipalities access to the larger network. So my question is whether the parts of the fund will be earmarked for these kinds of projects like cross-border projects for instance across the border from Spain to France or for the TCP project. My second question is we have already criticized certain aspects about the cohesion policy and we have to really involve local authorities. The corridors depend on the area. We need to ensure that these projects will support infrastructure projects. Will they support? Thank you. I think that connectivity in terms of transport and the infrastructure matters are extremely crucial in terms of development rurally and in the case of Esremadura which is a region that is on the border with Portugal, it's really important that these aspects are taken into account to improve the population's quality of life and to improve cross-border relations. So I have a question on the mechanism for Connecting Europe, the Connecting Europe Facility. Do you think that this facility could be viable when and in line with national plans for connectivity and regional plans? And how do you think you'll be able to complement the funding of both facilities? We've seen a sixfold increase, we've discussed this but it can't increase at the cost of other facilities. **Dragoş Benea (Romania, S&D) @Chair: This is a reply by Mister Santrin and Mister Balke.”
  EU cohesion/structural-fund architecture: consolidation vs ring-fenced separate funds
• “Thank you, Madam President. Ladies and gentlemen. Commissioner. Yesterday there was a violation of the Polish airspace by Russian drones. And this shows clearly as ever before, that discussion on security in Europe cannot be an abstract concept. And it must take shape of specific actions here and now in order to reinforce our capacity to defend ourselves and to react towards external threats. A single market can be an excellent tool in that direction, but we must urgently improve the way it operates, particularly in defence. Unfortunately, so far we have different regulations. Complication, uneven. Development of the single market which weakens our ability to react quickly. Therefore, I call for simplified procedure for a common space for European defence industry and better combination of the single market strategy with the defence strategy. We must quickly implement legislation and have the same rules for everybody, including SMEs, being included in the defence industry. We must guarantee a free flow of services and goods, but also of strategic components of dual use and critical infrastructure. Security cannot be treated separately. It must be an integral part of single market policy. The single market in the EU is the foundation of our economic community. But today it must also be a foundation of our common resilience and security. Thank you.”
  EU competences on defence
• “This proposal is much better than the special measures we had in the last three years. But I have a specific question for the Commission. We heard about the equal standards of foreign products, and the Ukrainians have to comply with those standards. How is that controlled? How is that implemented? I think that the reporting from the European Commission will not suffice. Will there be checks carried out at Ukrainian farms with special measures be taken for the member states who will support them? Talking about phytosanitary measures on the eastern border of the EU. Secondly. How will the safeguard mechanism operate? How will the guarantees kick in? How quickly will we respond? If a member state finds that too much of a product is ending up on its territory, how rapidly will we respond? How much time will it take to stop the import and also the safety mechanisms for transit and those that go leave the European market? Has there been a risk analysis in relation to the agreement with the Mercosur? How will that affect the European market if products come in from Ukraine and from the Mercosur? Thank you. It's high time we're dealing with this and that. The European Parliament be updated on the negotiations after three years of almost complete open markets.”
  Agricultural trade: Ukraine imports
• “Thank you very much. President. Commissioner, the European water resilience strategy is extremely necessary. And it's good news if we want to protect the hydrological cycle that's been disrupted and guarantee people clean and drinkable water. If we want to promote a closed circle water management system and promote investment and allow industry and agriculture to use the water. They need to guarantee our food and economic security, then we can't create or make the mistakes we did like with the ETS. We can only offer incentives and the like to people who are actually going to help carry out those goals. So incentives but not fines because it just didn't work out. Let's make sure that we put trust in municipal, municipal authorities and farmers. Thank you. **Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ @Co-Chair: Thank you. Mrs.. Victoria has the floor.”
  Water pollution
• “Thank you. Chairman. I must admit that I'm surprised by the Commission being stubborn and continues with the idea of combining cohesion with agricultural Agriculture policy when it first surfaced. The Committee of the regions, which is a grouping of local government people they've been against ever since, agricultural unions, farmer unions they've been against. I failed to mention a name of a single member of European Parliament being on the left, being on the right, who would be happy with this idea. And then on the other hand. I've been hearing the director who spoke here a moment ago, she used this very beautiful sentence that everything should be based on the analysis of local needs and that I can agree with 100%. But I wonder why the European Commission is not applying its own principles. Why are you not listening to all of those telling you this for a few months now, repeating that it's a bad idea. Even if you say that there's going to be 10%. Which was mentioned by president von der Leyen in her letter. 10% of what is my question? What is the amount of which you apply? The 10%? Is it 10% of the total of the 800 billion? Are we supposed to deduct the 300 billion preassigned for rural areas? So then you're talking 10% of the 500 remaining. Or are we deducting 218 billion for outermost regions. And then you count the 10% on the remaining amount. So what is the final amount. Please tell us. I've also heard this rightful proposition to encourage the young generation to take over farms. Then I wonder. Why you fail to assess rightly what could be the correct, uh uh, reason, or the correct incentive for the young people to take over farms from their parents or grandparents? And it was said by Mr.”
  CAP delivery architecture: ring-fenced common fund vs integrated national plans
• “Thank you very much. President. Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. The use of AI may bring numerous advantages. This may mean competitiveness of our economy and our access to international trade, and also combating fraud and disloyal trade practices. What is very important to me is the possibility of using AI for a more efficiency in terms of trade and customs activities, particularly in the context of a new trade agreements with the Mercosur countries. Now, AI may contribute to a higher efficiency in terms of regulations helping the consumers in the EU. This could also be a major opportunity for our trade and the condition that this system will be innovative and efficient. But there is one problem. If we start with Overregulating, as it happens to be the case here in the EU and not starting from the system, then we will be playing the catch up game forever.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Thank you, dear colleagues. The Agri Committee has chosen to organise an exchange of views with the director of Le Canapé. Created as non-profit organisation, Le Canapé is an adopted training and social professional integration center supported by the European Social Fund. It welcomes adults with disabilities, motor, sensory, cognitive or psychological Ecological, as well as people who experience difficulties participating in standard training programs. The mission of Le Canapé is to train, guide and support people who have difficulty integrating into the traditional labour market by offering both technical training and personal personalised social assistance. Each participant benefits from individualised Integration plan adapted to their abilities, needs and professional goals. I have the pleasure to welcome the director of Le Canapé, Miss Valérie Legrand, miss Legrand. We look forward to hearing from you about your project, and to discussing how people with disabilities can be better integrated into agriculture work, including the specific challenges as well as possible solutions. You will have the floor for around eight minutes after your presentation, members will have the possibility to ask questions and you will have time to respond. I also welcome Miss Mr. Schildhaus from DG agri, who will give a short statement after miss Legrand has replied to members questions. Miss Legrand, the floor is yours.”
  EU policy on disability inclusion & accessibility
• “Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I don't think there's any doubt that we should help Ukraine, but that shouldn't be at the expense of European and Polish farmers. We're just three weeks left until the expiry of this regulation on autonomous trade measures. So the solution is simple. On the 6th of June, the association agreement should kick back in with Ukraine. The agreement that applied before Russia's aggression on Ukraine. If necessary, that agreement can be renegotiated with our Ukrainian partners. I would just like to ask the lady from the commission one thing. Now, if I've understood correctly, you said that on the 6th of June a directive, a transition directive will come into force until the new association agreement comes into force and that that will be presented to the Parliament. But and it was done on the 8th of May, but on the 8th of May we only voted on the suspension, a certain number of products from Ukraine being imported into Europe based on the 2018 regulation. My last sentence. Now. Now, the Commissioner has stated that this was only about steel. Only about steel. So could the lady from the Commission please say, what regulation were you actually talking about?”
  Agricultural trade: Ukraine imports
• “Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Mr. Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, today's debate and the action plan presented by the European Commission is not only about problems, about accessibility to fertilisers for European farmers or the dramatic situation of our fertiliser industry. It is a debate about the fact that agriculture and industry in the EU is losing out on competitiveness due to being overburdened by red tape and overregulated. It is being flooded by European bureaucracy. Today it is more and more difficult to be active in business, industry or agriculture. We don't need, you know, half solutions. We need to suspend the ETS system. It's going to be a breath of fresh air for the fertiliser industry and ensure price accessibility to farmers. The EU is the best project that was ever born here, but we are losing out because of technocrats and bureaucrats. And let's make things clear, I do not mean Commissioner Hansen because I consider him one of the very few in the European Commission who want to change Something. Euroscepticism is on the rise. Nationalism. Populism. Two. If today we do not stand and protect European industry and farmers, this wonderful project called the EU will lose. Thank you.”
  Use of fertilisers
• “(11:51:22 – 11:51:47): Thank you. I go I I get information that miss Anna Katrina Mendez is not present. Is anyone replacing her? No. So we go to, employment reporter. Sergio Humberto Pereira da Silva is present here. No. And what about, miss Marta Tamido from, NV?”
  EU policy on forced redundancies
• “Thank you very much, Madam President. Dear colleagues, we need to enforce the responsibility and make platforms accountable. We need to hold them accountable for contents that are published on such platforms. Otherwise, we will not be able to deal successfully with cyber violence. It is important to prosecute those who are using the violence online, but it's not enough because the provider may not say, I am giving you this tool, it's at your disposal and I'm not responsible for what is happening. This is unacceptable. Plus, there are also the algorithms which are promoting aggressive content. So my message is the operators. The platforms need to be held accountable for the contents for what is happening on such platforms. Otherwise, we will sadly keep witnessing such tragedies of young people, adolescents and children. Thank you.”
  Digital platforms liability for harmful and illegal content
• “(10:28:44 – 10:30:50): Dear colleagues, to start with, I would like to welcome all the members of the Energy Community. I'm very happy that we can talk today together about the accelerated integration of the Energy Community with the European gas and electricity market. The geopolitical situation is unstable, so we are not talking about a technical adjustment. This is a guarantee of our energy security, of our competitiveness, and the stability of the whole region. We want to accelerate this process in practice. Declarations are not enough. All the EU rules need to be applied in practice, and the systems need to be cooperating in a cross-border way. There has been a lot of progress recently when it comes to legal alignment. The European Commission has given its positive feedback. We are on the right path towards the full integration of the Energy Community to the EU market. A few words on gas. There is quite a lot of work still left to be done. We need a level playing field. The rules need to be applied, including those provided for in the latest gas package. We need to reinforce the interconnectors. We need to respect the rules on gas storage. This is very important when it comes to energy security. Hydrogen and renewable gases will soon be used, and our infrastructure needs to be ready. This will be decisive for our competitiveness in the future. The Energy Community is an integral part of our energy structure. The integration of both regions is a necessity for the sake of our prosperity and security. And now on behalf of S&D, Mr. Nicolas Gonzales, Kazares.”
  EU energy infrastructure integration
• “President, Commissioner. Ladies and gentlemen, farmers in Europe have quite often already complained. And protested about the administrative burden and so on. And. I'm glad that we've got new rules on the table. And we're very grateful to Commissioner Hansen for showing such sensitivity and understanding. I mean, we're talking about just one control a year. Um. There are going to be no crisis payments from the first pillar. And these are all changes that were absolutely necessary. We were looking forward to them, but it's not going to be enough. What we need is a system that is user friendly and something. That will not look upon the farmers as criminals of some sort. They need support. Um, we shouldn't really need to have so many different registers about whatever nitrogen, all sorts of procedures as well, that have to be carried out to with pesticides and so on, and fertilisers because the system is too complicated. Farmers should be able to just work the land, and they shouldn't be obliged to go out on the streets and on the roads to protest.”
  Agriculture (green)
• “Thank you president. With out energy intensive industries, we can't talk about it, about competitiveness in Europe. We can't develop our defense. It's these sectors which support the, um, geopolitical, uh, demands and the energy transition. We have to support them. Therefore, we can do that via the transfer mechanism, which will bring down energy prices. That's why we need to review the ETS system. It's certain sectors in industry which can't be entirely electrified because of their specifics. That's why we need to allow them to use gas in future. I would like to give you an example. In the chemical industry. Sometimes I'm worried about what is said here in this Parliament. It said we can buy certain products in Russia, Africa or South America. We don't talk about buying these products here from our chemical industry.”
  Natural gas
• “Thank you very much. Thank you very much for. Having listened to our experts, ladies and gentlemen, I think there can be no doubt. It's clear that the world we are living is an unstable world, and one where we do not have security guaranteed. Cyber defence and cyber security are going to be key for our security and as important as our military or economic security. However, as our experts have said, and I think no one can doubt Europe is increasingly vulnerable and exposed to different types of cyber attacks. That's why I welcome the cybersecurity package presented by the Commission, which aims at strengthening the European Union's capacities in this domain. However, something we haven't spoken about and that I would like to emphasize today, is that resilience in key services can't be achieved without involving the private sector because its businesses and particularly SMEs, who can ensure that our services will not be disrupted and will increase their capacity and quality, that will make us more effective and will also be feasible and proportionate. For example, supply chain security has to take account of SMEs. Without the organisational input from these companies, they will also suffer. They should not be placed under too much regulatory burden. So my question is as follows. What specific simplification mechanisms will. Ensure that these standards are can be achieved by SMEs without reducing security requirements and avoiding a situation where SMEs are no longer able to be actors on the market.”
  Scope of EU cybersecurity obligations
• “Mr.. President. Commissioner. Ladies and gentlemen, let me start off by thanking Mr. Halik for the work he's done on the 2026 budget, which is a response to the major challenges that we face. Security is certainly one of those major challenges for Poland, as it is of paramount of importance that we strengthen the eastern flank and the necessary financial resources need to be made available for the border guard and the infrastructure along that border to the east. There's unprecedented support for the defense industry and dual use goods in particular. And it's not just support for the military industry. There's also support for SMEs and local authorities. And I welcome the fact that the Commission has now finally realized that these are priorities and. Uh, also, it takes seriously the threat in cyberspace. We need to react. And this 2026 budget does guarantee that. Typekit. Thank you.”
  Defence spending
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. Dear colleagues, First of all, I would like to sincerely thank Mr. Vedanta for preparing the draft opinion on the revision of the Energy Taxation Directive. This document provides a solid foundation for our future work and contains many well-founded proposals with which I fully agree. At the same time, I would like to strongly emphasize that as we resume work on revising the ETD directive, we must ensure that actions aimed at achieving climate goals are socially and economically balanced. The proposed changes should be fair, realistic and proportionate. That is why I argue that the mechanism for raising minimum tax rates should reflect the diversity of energy mixes and different social economic conditions in the member states with adequate great derogations and pragmatic solutions as members of the Agriculture Committee. We have a particular responsibility to take into account the specifics of the European agriculture sector and its strategic importance for EU food and energy security. We must not forget that energy costs directly affect food prices and thus inflation, which particularly affects most sensitive households. In this context, agriculture requires special protection. Our priority must be to maintain the competitiveness of European agriculture and industry sectors, especially in relation to third countries which do not apply equally strict climate standards. We must not allow a situation in which the proposed changes lead to social impoverishment through a sharp rise in energy prices verbally deepening and energy poverty. I feel sure the reporters view that the development of renewable energy sources, such as ugly photovoltaic systems, should not occur at the expense of farmland and food production at the same time. Biofuels derived from agricultural materials can at the same moment contribute to emission reductions and support the viability of agricultural agriculture enterprises. We must therefore develop solutions that are consistent with existing legislation and do not create opportunities for abuse or discrimination against agriculture renewable sources. In conclusion, I would like to express my readiness to continue working with Mr. Vincenza and the other shadow rapporteurs. I believe that together we can create a document which is balanced, realistic and effectively supports European farmers and the agricultural sectors. Thank you.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Thank you. Chair. Commissioner. Dear colleagues, uh, Cooperation between enforcement authorities on unfair practices in agricultural and food supply chain may seem strictly technical, but this is a wrong impression. This is an issue of basic fundamental justice and equality on the European market. Detecting violations and sanctioning encounters serious barriers, especially if the entity is seated in another member state, and the levels of enforcement differ widely between member states. In some member states, farmers are more protected than in others, and uh uh, bad actors can take advantage of this. Uh, so sanctions must be effective and deterring Polish farmers and other farmers have long been declaring that they are the weakest link in negotiations with large entities. So we must ensure that this power is not abused. We need effective and coordinated cooperation between national authorities, and we must remember that a just supply chain is not just about protecting farmers, it's also about food prices and food security of citizens. Europe needs a resilient food and agriculture sector, and that requires eliminating violations that distort the market.”
  EU policy on farmer–buyer relations in the agri-food supply chain
• “Thank you very much, Mr. President. Commissioner. In the EU, entrepreneurs and companies are interested in stable And a price affordable sources of energy. Over the last couple of years, a renewable sources of energy were promoted. This is all good, but what we have forgotten, it seems, is we've forgotten how to manage our grids. And the Spanish and Portuguese blackouts have shown this. Not financing gas infrastructure was a mistake. That has to be remedied. The current network infrastructure requires integration of transmission grids of hydrogen and natural gas grids. By applying a common management system for all sources of energy. This means we have to integrate storage of the energy, management of demand and network stability. I want to stress the importance of cross-border connections. They allow the creation of a European energy network. Of course, we will need a lot of money for investments as much as €1 trillion up to 2040. So in connection with work underway now on the Multiannual Financial Frameworks, we should develop new innovative financial instruments so that we can boost the development of our grids. It should be a priority. Thank you.”
  EU energy infrastructure integration
• “Thank you very much, Madam President. Commissioner, this summit for the Northern Sea shows that Europe can act together when it comes to our security and new technologies. I would like to highlight how important the offshore projects on the Baltic are are indeed investment in nuclear energy in Poland, for example. We are risking damage that comes to us because of the geopolitical tensions. So we need to invest in our safe energy. It's also very important for our security and our competitiveness. Europe cannot trust its in its future, only based itself on the others. We need our own sources. We need to focus on our infrastructure. We need more investment in research. The offshore wind parks is not just clean technology, it's also a chance for cheap energy, a reliable energy to our industry. They are really important. They can do it. We have to cooperate on offshore wind energy and on the transmission channels. Thank you.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “So 10% more. And I think this is blocking the free hand of member states and regions on how to spend the money. So what I'm calling for is being consequent and each and every level. Now the last thing about simplification, let me reiterate. Let me say it again because it's worth your while. You're doing a great job. Yes, but my impression is that you're in a position of a person who is standing in the middle of a boat, which is being sunk by the bureaucracy and the red tape behind spending European funds. So there is water flowing into the boat you've been trying to bring to to pour it out with a bucket, but at the same time, at the back end of the boat, there is a hole through which water is getting in as well. And all in all the, the, the the boat is sinking all the time. So it is not the case that it's only member states who overregulate the system. Commissioner, believe me that there are European institutions which are auditing beneficiaries on how money is spent. And they impose. Requirements which are results of the audits. And this all results in a situation that you have more and more red tape. And sometimes the requirements are absurd. And all they bring is anger and frustration among beneficiaries who are to use the money for their Projects. So please note that the excellent job that you have been doing on. Simplification is being undone in different places, which you should look at because otherwise it's it's a waste of your time and reputation for you to be involved and try and do good things where your efforts are then undone elsewhere. Thank you.”
  Conditions to access EU budget
• “Ladies and gentlemen, this house has Disability Rights week is a moment in our calendars we have all come to look forward to is an opportunity to reflect on our progress, assess the challenges ahead, and most importantly, recommit to making Europe work for everyone. We all know the statistics. Over 100 million people in our union live with a disability, whether visible or invisible. Each person is somebody's child, colleague, neighbour, friend, Someone who has to fight every day against barriers that should no longer exist to education, employment, mobility and public space as their elected representatives entrusted with improving their lives. It is our duty as legislators to demolish these barriers and help every European to achieve their full potential human, social and economic. As president, I am proud of how this Parliament is stepping up to the challenge. Our Disability Intergroup is spearheading efforts to make our union more accessible, and I am grateful to my colleagues here for organising such a fantastic week. As you always do. Now it is up to all of us to maintain this momentum, not just when the attention is on us, but every week, every day. This House also looks forward to the Commission's update to the European Disability Rights Strategy. And on our side, we have upgraded our infrastructure across all our buildings, from adapted conference rooms to more inclusive interpretation. This is all progress. We still have a lot to do and we must never even better. So my request to you all today is keep up the good work, because Europe will only change if we change it ourselves, and we can only move forward towards a better, more equal future if we work together. Thank you.”
  EU policy on disability inclusion & accessibility
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you very much. The European Competitiveness Fund is a great opportunity for us when it comes to strengthening our competitiveness, and it's also of great importance for the agri food sector, of course, which is one of the pillars of our economy and of food security more generally. This requires a stable framework, a stable financial framework in particular. And I think that that is what will provide us with the necessary guarantees going forward. We need stability. We need to be able to resist or be resilient.”
  CAP delivery architecture: ring-fenced common fund vs integrated national plans
• “Thank you very much, Madam Chair. What we have just heard is really good news. News that farmers have been waiting for for quite some time. They've been demanding this simplification, this cutting through the red tape of this whole system that they're tangled up in. And that stops them from working in the fields, so they have to sit at their desks and fill out forms. I will say, however, that simplification should be a continuous process and it shouldn't end with this package. There are a lot of things that are causing trouble for farmers. Let me give you an example. The Capital Requirements Directive imposes upon EU banks that they report on a variety of issues. Now the supervisory authority is very much determined to have reports from the banks. They have to report back on their to their clients who are some of their customers. So the bank is actually asking farmers to fill out forms, but they've actually been exempted from reporting on some of those matters. So you have this sort of absurd situation. We have to keep an eye on this because it's not building trust in the Parliament, in the Commission, or indeed to the EU. Thank you.”
  Agriculture (green)
• “Thank you. Chairman. Thank you for this very interesting presentation. But I must admit that I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, you've been saying that there is plenty of flexibility in the new approach. On the other hand, I hear there would be percentage levels for specific areas of support for member states. So on the one hand. There won't be thematic concentration, but then on the other hand, there will be elements put in the preamble. So I would like to have an answer to this question. What will be the shape of it? Finally will there be or will there not be flexibility? Will Member States have more of a free hand as to how they want to spend the money. Or would things stay the same day the way they are now so that you prescribe thematic concentration? You said those thematic objectives have been reached. I'm not sure if you realize that the commission that to date, many beneficiaries are preparing projects not because they need some investments and they are not preparing projects for European funds in order to fulfill their expectations and to meet their needs. But they do so in line with where money can be achieved, which is like totally counterproductive if you look at fulfilling the needs and requirements of the regions. So I would like to receive a clear answer for you what the shape of this new program will be, because it all sounds very good in theory, but I'm hearing in the background that there are objectives, that there are percentage levels that need to be met, and in truth, neither myself nor those listening, because that was a request that I heard from beneficiaries of the Sfp+. Nobody knows what the final shape of the new instrument will be. Thank you.”
  EU cohesion/structural-fund architecture: consolidation vs ring-fenced separate funds
• “Thank you very much. President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. The UN climate summit has proven that we need a policy that would combine competitivity with climate goals. We need to remember that the energy transition and emission cutting slogans are backed by specific segments of our economy. Europe needs a valid climate policy based on realistic premises, which is not only increasingly ambitious, sometimes ambitious, without without the recognition of facts, but also needs to support the domestic industry. We need to Introduced regulation, and we need to support our companies in order to make them stand up to the international competition. Competition. We also see that other countries outside of Europe are not adopting equally ambitious goals, which means that the level playing field is no longer valid. We need to protect our market in a valid and efficient way. Perhaps we should implement the carbon taxes so that the industries are not punished for the standards that we are introducing ourselves. Heavy industry, energy, industry and transport are employing hundreds of thousands of people throughout the European Union. We need to support them in terms of regulation and finance, because what is at risk is the fact that they might move outside of Europe and weaken our economy. Thank you.”
  Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM)
• “(10:59:31 – 11:02:47): Dear colleagues, I have to say there is a number of contradictions here, including in your interventions. For 4 years now, you have been talking about phasing out Russian oil and Russian gas, but some member states have done exactly nothing. There is 1 point on which you are right. We will always be dependent where we are importing, but we if we want to stop importing, we need to speed up investments. We need to deregulate because now we are only talking. We are talking about alternative fuels, big buzzwords. Green hydrogen, which is not really available. Synthetic fuels, not available either. If we really want to replace oil and gas and if we maintain the current method, in 20 years, we'll still be in the same place. There has been a lot of political debate but little action. But because of this debate, some people, some investors stop investing in refineries and petrochemical industry. From since 2010, 30 refineries have stopped, have been closed down in Europe. They stopped producing. Today, we are dependent on oil and gas, but that's not it. We are also dependent on fuel products. Let me give you an example. Jet fuel, kerosene, a very telling example. Diesel, fuel oil. We keep importing not only oil and gas, but also petroleum based projects and gas because we did not find any substitutes. We don't have alternative fuels. With the current level of regulation, we are nowhere near. Let me tell you. I am in favor of transformation, but there is 1 thing that needs to dawn on you. This is a clean transformation, but not everything can be 100% clean on this way, on this path towards clean energy. Otherwise, we will run out of time. Energy savings, very well. But I'm failing to understand. The cheapest energy is the energy you don't use. This is a buzzword. But where do we want to end up? Do you do you want to stall our economy? Do we want to stop tourism, mobility? Is this the way for the next 20 years? I'm waiting for those synthetic fuels for hydrogen. The regulations are still thwarting us, especially on green hydrogen. We need to diversify. We need to speed up. We need new technologies. We need to simplify permitting procedures, and we need to make it easier to get capital. And on behalf of renew, missus Sigrid Friess.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “(10:36:01 – 10:37:15): Thank you very much, dear Chair, dear Mister Benea. This third joint committee meeting is an important step towards shaping the Parliament's position on the draft NRPP regulation. Given the scope of the Commission's proposals, the stakes are high here. The implications that the new budgetary and policy framework is likely to have on our respective policies mean that the upcoming negotiations with Council and Commission will be crucial. So I believe it is important for us to send clear messages on our priorities and red lines. We also need to make sure that the Parliament's call for ambitious EU long-term budget translates into opportunities for our region's fishermen and farmers. I would, therefore, like to thank the reporters and the shadow reporters for this draft report and invite our committee's members to amend it in a constructive way. I will first give the floor to the co-rapporteurs for 5 minutes each. Mister Ressler, you have the floor.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture