Daniel BUDA

Policy topics Daniel BUDA is active on

What Daniel BUDA has said (80)

• 2026-07-16 “(11:58:47 - 12:01:13): Chairman, thank you very much for giving me the floor. I've been following the debate with the minister from my office. I was just in a meeting with Romanian beneficiaries, over 200 participants in this event. And we were talking about the cohesion policy and the new MFF. A few very important questions were raised regarding the predictability of European funds on the one hand. And on the other hand, bureaucracy. Many times, bureaucracy puts a dent in the absorption of European funds. Minister, we are now drawing up new European policies. The process is in full swing. It's important to do everything we can so that the beneficiaries can access European funds. There will be, if we don't, there will be a battle between farmers and the beneficiaries of the cohesion funds. People are extremely worried about this. The allocation of these funds will depend very much on governments, on whoever is in power at that time. It's also important to clarify what it means to have a well-paying job. In the European Union, we have this objective, the right to remain. This has to be associated with the need to invest in well-paid jobs. If we don't do that, the efficiency of the cohesion policy will be reduced. We have to also invest in public services, schools, and hospitals. And we can do that, but we also need well-paying jobs at the same time because if people don't have well-paying jobs, they will leave their regions. I know the negotiations are now in full swing, and I will conclude on housing. People are expecting us to provide them with instruments in order to help the member states tap into these funds. Housing is an issue that affects not just young people, but a good chunk of the European population as well. Now back to well-paying jobs. I think that should be an objective for the presidency because that is how we guarantee the right to remain for every citizen.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2026-07-14 “(17:44:27 - 17:45:51): you very much, chair. 1st of all, I would like to congratulate the rapporteurs, the shutter rapporteurs, and everyone who has, come with amendments. Many of the amendments reflect our concern to create an instrument that can be adequately used at all levels by national, actors. But at the same time, I would like to take the floor from the point of view of somebody who is in AGRI and in REGI or REGI 1st or AGRI later, whichever way you wish. What's important for all of us is to have predictability. It would be inadmissible to have a fight in member states between farmers on the 1 side and the beneficiaries of, cohesion policy on the other side. Dear colleagues, beyond the mere financial, aspects, are important, we would like I would like to focus on predictability. All beneficiaries should know on what money they can rely, what money they can expect. This is why we need predictability. And finally, conditionality. I don't want to believe that we will have some conditionalities that were will lead to the loss of European funds in these sectors. For us, it is, therefore, very important to follow this up in the final document. Thank you.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2026-07-14 “(18:16:47 - 18:19:33): Thank you, chair. I promise I will, make an effort to speak more slowly. Unfortunately, our colleague, Novakov, had to go to a different meeting. But as Carlo was saying at the beginning of his speech, I don't think these thousands of amendments are a burden. It's important that in them, we should see beyond the vision of each political group, the needs and realities of every place in the EU because we can't be united in diversity if we do not take into account each reality and each specific need of the regions from the Azores regions in Romania, Germany, Italy. All of us have specific needs, they need to be reflected in an instrument that the beneficiaries of these European polity policies can use, can benefit from because we can speak of cohesion or agricultural policy, but they all need to be consolidated. And the consolidation of the EU depends on the efficiency of these 2 policies. Because Ursula from the line, when she 1st run, was saying that we need to develop the EU in such a way that each citizen can stay where he lives. And this depends on the efficiency of these policies. And, of course, mayors, presidents of regions are important too. And we see that the commission proposal didn't take into account the organization of each member state from the beginning, but these amendments will allow us to identify all beneficiaries and ensure their involvement in decisions that concern them. And, of course, we need the simplification for the absorption of EU funds. And 1 of the colleagues also mentioned very important, very important thing. We need to consolidate these policies. But on the other hand, we don't want them to become a Christmas tree. And each time the European Commission, has to fulfill a need, shouldn't be able to take money from, these 2 policies to reallocate them. I'm sure that together with the other repertoires, the shutter repertoires, we will present an instrument powerful, for us that would help us in the negotiations because we all have a common objective to create instruments that are really useful for the beneficiaries of European policies. Thank you.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2026-07-14 “(15:19:01 - 15:21:43): you, chair. I'd like to take the floor because I have had the pleasure of visiting the African Continent 2 years ago. I stayed in South Africa for 2 weeks, and I was able to see, the agricultural sector, hands on. And I can say that on very many levels, you are examples to be followed. If I think about the way you use wool, for example, sheep's wool, I've seen collection centers where you are able to use this product to its maximum potential. On the other hand, I believe that the EU could collaborate better with you based on something that we do not have here in Europe, which is enough land where we can grow our crops. And I believe we can have collaboration agreements with Africa because Africa has very large tracts of land so that we can increase production capacity in your states. And therefore, we can guarantee food security. I trust you know that for us, security is very important. The war in Ukraine has created problems as regards the export of cereals to Africa and beyond. We've done many efforts to ensure the continuation of this of these exports. We want to continue to support you at the adequate level so that you can develop your lands, which are very rich, very fertile. The climate is also very favorable for various types of crops. And together then we can guarantee food security. What I saw in your little movie before, the people that were digging at, the cornfields, this must only be in in past movies. We need to bring new technology so that we can all be competitive on the world stage because we cannot be talking about food security except when every child goes to bed with a full belly in Africa, in Europe, and everywhere on, the globe. And I believe that we can make these efforts together to have food security on, in the entire world. Thank you.”
  Agriculture (green)
• 2026-07-14 “Minister, I'm one of the rapporteurs for the animal transport file, which is very sensitive and very complex, of course. But I think, um, it's important that whatever we put in this proposal should be implementable by growers and transporters. But now we have this issue of diseases among animals. Uh, in Romania, we now have a ban on exports to third countries on sheep and goat. And this is because of the small ruminants pest. Um, the, the, the outbreak of this disease, um, is not accompanied by very good knowledge of the way this disease appears. So now the question is what do we do? If we vaccinate all animals, we will not be able to export dairy products and carcasses, even if these are not dangerous for human health, they are not a risk for human health. So the question is what will the farmers do? Where will they sell? So of course we have a strategy on animal rearing. But if we come against these blockages, what do we do? Because the farmers are asking me, what do we do with the sheep? They are not cars that can be stored in in some some place. And wait. We need concrete answers from the European Commission.”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU
• 2026-07-14 “We appreciate the work done by the rapporteur. This is a very important file for everything that concerns agriculture. And the colleagues have had good positions. But, um, as regards the resilience of agri culture, we need to consider the, uh, animal rearing sector, which is now facing great difficulties because of diseases. So I think we need a new approach for this, uh, responsibility for these diseases, which sometimes come, uh, we, we don't understand where they come from and make difficulties for farmers. Um, there are diseases for which we have vaccines, but which are not widely used because this could endanger commercial agreements. I think we need to, uh, go into detail into this vaccination issue and understand that we cannot control the diseases without vaccination, but also that we need compensatory measures for farmers who are now suffering as a result of the appearance of these diseases for which they are not guilty. So also, we should understand that we need measures to ensure that healthy animals could also could continue to be used and turn to account and to understand that they are not a danger.”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU
• 2026-07-06 “(21:47:51 - 21:49:40): Thank you very much, dear director. Before passing the floor to the 2 core rapporteurs, I would like to draw a few short conclusions regarding tonight's debate. The same as our colleague, Maria Grapina was saying, some of us are in the minority, but as we can see, they are a very loud minority. That's the reality. And the other side, we're trying some way or another to guarantee food security. All of us, however, are operating in good faith, I believe. Nobody in this room would not like to have to deal with malnourished children. There are more than 40,000,000 people in Europe today that go to sleep feeling hunger. These are official data. They cannot eat meat once per week. This is reality, ultimately. Yes. You can take the floor later, missus Paolo. I've listened to you. So this is why I believe that this report goes in the right direction. We are all motivated by what we wish, which is simplified rules. And, Anja, I would like to say a thing. Using pesticide incorrectly by some people in the public sphere is not something that we can regulate here. This is something that pertains to each member state's responsibility. It is the responsibility of each member state. No matter how much we regulate at the EU level, if somebody breaks the law, we cannot fix that. Regarding the report, I believe that this goes in the right direction. We can each bring the amendments that we wish, but I believe that our objective should be protecting food safety. The floor goes now to mister Picarron.”
  EU policy on pesticides
• 2026-07-06 “(20:32:18 - 20:33:18): Thank you very much, mister president. I would like to use my language. Thank you very much, mister Manal, for this joint meeting. We welcome the purposes of the commission to simplify the legislation related to food and feed safety. Nevertheless, there are many changes in different fields of, these legislative acts of the existing legislative acts. All these implications are important for European farmers. The discussion this evening regarding the 2 draft reports, drafted by our colleagues, Piikka Rondendorfman, is very important for agriculture and in order to move on with our legislative activity. So, dear chair, I suggest to move on without further ado. And now let us give the floor to the reporters.”
  Agriculture (green)
• 2026-06-29 “(16:08:32 - 16:13:04): Let's move on with the shadow rapporteurs, and I will take the floor for the EPP. 1st of all, I would like to thank our colleague, Sagiacomo, for this report and the colleague, Nadella, for the presentation. Undoubtedly, this report is a good starting point for a serious discussion on CMOs. Given that European agriculture the European agriculture is faced with a number of crises, not just 1 off crises. This is why we need a real instrument that prevents crisis and I would like to emphasize this, not just a reaction to a crisis. This is why it is important to manage crisis correctly. Right now, we have a couple of examples that show us that we failed in managing these crisis. I'm talking about the milk sector. We have a crisis on our hands there, but because the member states I'd like to emphasize this, Member States and the European Commission are unable to collect proper data, we cannot support this sector. Let's not forget matters related to grains, the grains from Ukraine. The intervention was much too late and farmers took the hit. Now we need to take about helping farmers in supply chain so that they can have their say through producers' organizations. We've talked about supporting young farmers. In this file, we have this need again and we need to look at this seriously if we need to have a sustainable agriculture. We cannot have that without young farmers. And in order to attract young farmers, we need predictability, sustainability and they need to be able to know what their future will look like. So, we need very clear mechanisms to this end in order to have real fairness for farmers. When I say this, I mean by I also refer to imports from 3rd countries where we need a guarantee for these products' quality, an adequate guarantee. And now I'd like to address an issue that 1 of our colleagues raised regarding denominations for meat, meat nominations and whether we are ambitious in this matter or not. I don't think that any product that has nothing to do with an animal, that doesn't come from an animal, that has nothing to do with animal husbandry to be referred to as meat, because we need to give our consumers predictability. We can't expect our consumers to have all the information to understand everything that is written on the labels. No, this burden befalls us. We need to take care of our consumers to ensure predictability. This is our duty. At the same time, we have the EU fruit and vegetables in schools program. This needs to go on. But it's been marred with problems in many member states and I salute the fact that the commission lays great emphasis on awareness amongst young people about agricultural products. But together with our colleagues, Sergio Como, we'll manage to find a solution in order to make this instrument 1 that really helps farmers in order to consolidate their position in the supply chain and to allow them to keep producing food, the food we put on the table. I'd like to give the floor to colleague Penelope from the Patriots.”
  EU policy on farmer–buyer relations in the agri-food supply chain · Food labelling harmonisation at EU level
• 2026-06-29 “47:06 - 15:49:25): Thank you. Before giving, the floor to the next speaker, please allow me a few, comments on this, report. 1st of all, thank you very much, Robert Nins, for your proposal. I think we can all say that this is a proposal that goes in the direction that we all wish it to go. Of course, we can all make amendments and according to our ambitions on this file, but it's clear that the propose the difference between the commission's proposal and your report is huge. Of course, we still have a few hot potatoes here about decisions that we need to make, and capping is a matter that concerns us all. But dear colleagues, I think it is very important for us to understand that common agricultural policy should not be regarded as an instrument for social welfare. CAP should be an instrument that supports those people who feed us every day. That is why I think it is incorrect to cause trouble between large farmers and small farmers because both categories, do their specific, jobs. They produce food. I think that is why your, proposal Norbert is a very wise 1. It's a Solomonic proposal in the sense that it takes into account the reality, in the field. Of course, degresivity should continue to be optional, and there's another, matter that was, mentioned by colleagues before, the definition of active farmer. Because our great CAP problem is how do we make sure that the CAP money really reaches true farmers, not armchair farmers who have no connection to their land, who do not perform any agricultural activity but just gather subsidies. Of course, I'm sure we'll find the best way to provide our farmers with efficient instruments that can help them maintain themselves on the market and face the challenges ahead of them. Let's move on now, with the intervention from DG Agri for the 4 minutes for the representative of the commission.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• 2026-06-29 “15:51 - 15:18:40): Thank you very much. And next speaker for Issiar, Giovanni Crosetto. Thank you, chairman, colleagues. The discussion on the future CAP is now moving towards a decisive phase. The draft report is a step in the right direction because it restores part of the consistency that we have in the cap, reintroducing elements such as the definition of beneficiary, agricultural farming, the kinds of support available, and also the monitoring and control framework framework. And this is an important signal, which shows that we want a CAP based on 2 distinct pillars and joint rules, the minimum income part funded by the EU and rural development co financed by member states. At the same time, there are certain key issues that remain open, capping, for example, and also degresivity. The goal of making support more redistributive and fairer is something that we can share, but that we don't believe that should just simply be cutting payments or putting ceilings on payments. What we need to do is recognize the extraordinary diversity of European agriculture and come up with tools that are appropriately adapted. So we are favorable to the deletion of the obligatory digress digressivity as the farmer says, and we also believe that funds should be capped at a €100,000 per holding. That's more realistic than the commission proposal, but we need further measures. We can't penalize professional businesses that innovate and generate jobs. Those who generate employment should be supported rather than having their competitiveness undermined. At the same time, redistribution cannot be the only response to generational change. We need more resources to young for young farmers, but that's not enough. The real problem is access to land, income for businesses, the economic stability of the sector. Weakening structured businesses means reducing their productive capacity. Finally, we agree with the idea of making the CAP more consistent, but we can't have different 27 different kinds of CAP. This would put the single market at risk. Chairman, let me conclude by saying that the e c r as the ECR group, we look forward to being constructive in the amendment phase. We want a CAP that brings together fairness and competitiveness that supports young people without putting businesses in danger, guarantees jobs, investment, and gives European farmers a genuinely common CAP. Thank you.”
  Agriculture (green) · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• 2026-06-29 “08:32 - 16:13:04): Let's move on with the shadow rapporteurs, and I will take the floor for the EPP. 1st of all, I would like to thank our colleague, Sagiacomo, for this report and the colleague, Nadella, for the presentation. Undoubtedly, this report is a good starting point for a serious discussion on CMOs. Given that European agriculture the European agriculture is faced with a number of crises, not just 1 off crises. This is why we need a real instrument that prevents crisis and I would like to emphasize this, not just a reaction to a crisis. This is why it is important to manage crisis correctly. Right now, we have a couple of examples that show us that we failed in managing these crisis. I'm talking about the milk sector. We have a crisis on our hands there, but because the member states I'd like to emphasize this, Member States and the European Commission are unable to collect proper data, we cannot support this sector. Let's not forget matters related to grains, the grains from Ukraine. The intervention was much too late and farmers took the hit. Now we need to take about helping farmers in supply chain so that they can have their say through producers' organizations. We've talked about supporting young farmers. In this file, we have this need again and we need to look at this seriously if we need to have a sustainable agriculture. We cannot have that without young farmers. And in order to attract young farmers, we need predictability, sustainability and they need to be able to know what their future will look like. So, we need very clear mechanisms to this end in order to have real fairness for farmers. When I say this, I mean by I also refer to imports from 3rd countries where we need a guarantee for these products' quality, an adequate guarantee. And now I'd like to address an issue that 1 of our colleagues raised regarding denominations for meat, meat nominations and whether we are ambitious in this matter or not. I don't think that any product that has nothing to do with an animal, that doesn't come from an animal, that has nothing to do with animal husbandry to be referred to as meat, because we need to give our consumers predictability. We can't expect our consumers to have all the information to understand everything that is written on the labels. No, this burden befalls us. We need to take care of our consumers to ensure predictability. This is our duty. At the same time, we have the EU fruit and vegetables in schools program. This needs to go on. But it's been marred with problems in many member states and I salute the fact that the commission lays great emphasis on awareness amongst young people about agricultural products. But together with our colleagues, Sergio Como, we'll manage to find a solution in order to make this instrument 1 that really helps farmers in order to consolidate their position in the supply chain and to allow them to keep producing food, the food we put on the table. I'd like to give the floor to colleague Penelope from the Patriots.”
  EU policy on farmer–buyer relations in the agri-food supply chain
• 2026-06-29 “(18:23:56 - 18:24:18): Thank you very much, Herbert, for all the efforts that you've made. I we know all that this was a very, very difficult file, and has it has, caused a lot of discussions in the public arena also regarding the new genomic techniques. But I'm glad that we've had a common solution. Well,”
  New Genomic Techniques
• 2026-06-29 “23:56 - 18:24:18): Thank you very much, Herbert, for all the efforts that you've made. I we know all that this was a very, very difficult file, and has it has, caused a lot of discussions in the public arena also regarding the new genomic techniques. But I'm glad that we've had a common solution. Well,”
  New Genomic Techniques
• 2026-06-29 “(17:46:45 - 17:50:25): you very much. Before, I give, the floor to the commission, I'd like to say a few things on the topic. Of course, we're looking at EUR $540,000,000. This is a considerable amount that farmers will make good use of, but 300,000,000 come from the crisis reserve for agriculture. And to be fair, yes, some colleagues were saying that this crisis reserve needs to be increased for agriculture. On the other hand, it's very important to understand that all we're doing is some sort of patchwork here, a pipe burst and we patch it up. We don't solve the actual problem. Madam Director, we've had this discussion before and with the commissioner. We wish him a lot of good health. What do we do with the production of chemicals inside the EU? Because unless we find mechanisms to support this sector and member says that have a chemical industry industry of chemical products, we will be dependent on The U. S. Today or a producer in Iran or who knows where. We need to have the ability to strengthen our own production and infrastructure for chemical fertilizers. Romania had 20 factories for chemical fertilizers. Now the number has gone down, and we're not doing anything to support it. I know that these are private structures, but unless we put together a mechanism, a European mechanism instrument for these structures, we will be dependent on imports from Russia and Belarus, and we will feed money for that will be used for war by these countries. Of course, we need to support the farmers. We don't know how long they'll be able to last. I was talking to farmers in Romania and also look at the cereal prices for barley, for example. This price is the same as 10 years ago, the same for wheat. But look at the production costs, how they've gone up. How long will these farmers be able to survive to stay afloat because they have families, they have needs, they have children? How long are we going to be able to ask them to keep going like this? This is why we need a general approach in order to support these farmers, to give them instruments. Because sometimes I think that it's like they're just beggars, beggars begging in the street and we just drop a coin in their palm. This is the way I see farmers. They're just begging for money with their hands stretched out, but we forget that they're doing something very important for us 20 fourseven in terribly scorching heat, just like now. They're working for us and with every debate, we realize that we are unable to give them the instruments they need. So this is a huge challenge, we appreciate everything that the commission is doing. It goes without saying, but we need to do more, and we need to be aware of the fact that agriculture is the most important sector, even more important than than, the armament sector because you can have weapons. But if you don't have food, we won't be able to do anything. Madam director, you have the floor for 8 minutes.”
  Use of fertilisers
• 2026-06-29 “(18:13:21 - 18:16:03): Thank you very much. Before giving the floor to the European Commission, allow me a few, words about the rapporteur also mentioned, namely the need to adequately, finance all the, institutions that control the quality of food products entering the European Union. You know very well that the Mercosur agreement has left a deep trail in our activity and will continue to do so. I visited the Paris Salon de la Agriculture in France. Although my counselors advised me not to go there because it was right after the Mercosur scandal, and I knew that French farmers were very angry. But I did go there because I wanted to listen to the French farmers. I wanted to know what were their worries, what were their concerns, and their greatest concern had to do with the EU's ability to perform adequate controls on the products that enter the European Union, agricultural food products. And this question, was like a a red line. I got the same question everywhere in Romania, in Finland, in Germany, wherever I visited, wherever I spoke with farmers, everybody said the same thing. They said, we don't trust these control, mechanism that the European Union has regarding the, agriculture products coming from 3rd 3rd party 3rd countries. They did not have a problem per se with trade agreements because they understand that there can be advantages for us as well. We sell things to those 3rd countries as well. However, this initiative, should give adequate financing for all these equipments that allow identifying allow the identification of products that do not respect the same standards of quality as we have in the European Union. Because this tilts the the the the playing field in against our farmers. And if we think of all the all the documents we voted, for example, the Inter agreement with Mexico. We understand how much pressure there is on the agricultural sector. All these trade agreements combined with the energy crisis, with the fertilizer crisis, with the wars, with the inflation, they they are, millstones on the back of the farmers that the farmers have to carry on their backs. We need to make sure that these farmers do not collapse under these, these, millstones. I will give now the floor to the representative of the Digi Agri for 4 minutes.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU
• 2026-06-29 “20:06 - 17:22:11): Dear colleagues, I, would not like to keep on, discussing this issue, although I am completely in agreement with you about this, problem. And what I suggest is that we should send a letter to the conference of presidents on behalf of the AGRI committee. I shall consult with president Verechnova because it's not my power to do that. It's the president of the committee who should decide that. But I do believe that we need to send this letter criticizing and expressing our disapproval about this procedure, about the way in which the AGRI committee is being treated because I think it's, unacceptable that we are put in front of this situation, that we only have to to to give our vote on on files that are very important for us in our member states. So, okay, I don't care what the procedure says. But, after all, at the end of the day, we have to go back to our, to our member countries and face the music, so to speak, and give, and explain why, why all these agreements, which are being approved without our consent, without our influence. And let's also write to president Metzola on the same topic, and let's say let's communicate to her that we disagree with this method to be asked to vote on matters that we did not have a chance to debate. Again, think about it. You'll go back to your farmers and your farmers will ask you, what did you do in the European Parliament? Why did you give your your vote there? They don't care, about these procedures. How are we going to explain, this to to our voters? We cannot, of course. I understand that now I cannot stop the vote. I would have liked to, but the technical staff tells me that I cannot do that. So we have to vote today. Please vote your conscience. But I will discuss about this issue with president Vrechonova about sending these 2 letters to the conference of presidents and to missus Metzona. The vote. Open the vote.”
  Agriculture (green)
• 2026-06-29 “(16:00:42 - 16:02:18): Thank you very much, dear Norbert. Thank you, the commission. Thank you all the colleagues who made contributions. Undoubtedly, dear colleagues, we are, ahead, we are we have ahead of us a very long road to walk together. 1 thing is clear, as Norbert said, the commission must understand that in this committee, have a vision regarding the need to maintain, the CAP as an European policy. We cannot accept a renationalization of this policy. We cannot accept distortions between the member states in the implementation of of this regulation. Of course, further discussions and negotiations will have to continue regarding capping and aggressivity. But again, dear colleagues, what we need to do here, what what this is all about is the need to support people who make food. And again, let's leave behind this logic that says that big farms can self sustain themselves. Big farms have big problems. I think money should be distributed equitably to all those who work, who function. Because even if you have a big farm with bigger financial resources, that farm also faces bigger problems and needs bigger support if we want those farms to survive on the market. But, again, let's close this point here and continue, discussing, based on the amendments that will be made. And, because mister Sagiacomo is caught in traffic, I suggest that we take a few minutes break. Oh, mister Novella.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• 2026-06-29 “(17:42:55 - 17:44:04): you. The prices of key fertilizer ingredients have skyrocketed over the past few months. The phosphate price has gone from 600 to €700, and the nitrogen price has gone from 400 to 550. The main cause of this is high gas prices, and it's also linked to the fact that The US Iran ceasefire agreement is very fragile. Even if the conflict is resolved, it will take months to restore gas production, supply chains, and shipping. Now with such high energy prices, European production is at risk. And what makes it worse is that the commission is not willing to suspend the additional tariffs on fertilizer imports that were introduced in January. What's more, these fertilizer price increases have come in a year that is already incredibly difficult because of droughts. We're we welcome the fact the commission is allowing flexible use of rural development funds to give farmers some relief. It's a positive step, but it's not enough. The agricultural reserve needs to be increased significantly. The past few years and recent events show that the funding is simply insufficient. Thank you.”
  Use of fertilisers
• 2026-06-29 “(15:03:47 - 15:06:24): Dear colleagues, please take your seat because I would like to start our meeting. Dear colleagues, let's start, by adopting the agenda. 0.2, Chair's announcements. Today's meeting is web streamed in 20 languages just like it says on the agenda and we thank the interpreters. 0.3, adoption of minutes of the May 2026 and June 2026. If there are no objections, I consider the minutes of the committee meetings of 4th and 5th May and 1st and 2nd of June as approved. Moving on 0.4 on the agenda establishing the conditions for the implementation of the union support to the common agriculture policy for the period 20 20 eighttwo thousand and 34. We will examine the report competent committees agree Norbert Linsa da Rapporteur and the deadline for tabling amendments is the 06/09/2026 at 1PM. I'll come back to this. It has been almost a year since Commissioner Hassan presented the CAP proposals to us here on 07/15/2025, the response that day was, to put it mildly, mixed. I am pleased that Norbert Linz, the rapporteur for the CAP regulation has now submitted his report. The deadline for amendments is the July 9 at 1PM. In this context, I'd like to remind you once again that articles and provisions such as the CAP definitions have been transferred from the NRP regulation to the CAP regulation. So please be advised when you table amendments. The Secretariat has already sent to you a consolidated version of the regulation that reflects these transfers. I would ask that you use this version as guidance when submitting your amendments. But for now, the floor goes to the rapporteur followed by the shadows. The rest of our colleagues, Norbert, you have the floor for 5 minutes.”
  Agricultural funding
• 2026-06-29 “22:57 - 17:24:07): to 0.7 on today's agenda. Temporary support and payment of advancements, advanced payments, in relation to the fertilizer crisis caused by the middle, by the Hormuz Strait crisis. So we are going to discuss the impact on the fertilizer situation because of the Middle East crisis. We need to the proposal aims to provide member states with additional flexibility and temporary support instruments under the CAP in order to help the farmers cope with rising input costs and preserve agricultural production. Given the importance of fertilizers for the competitiveness of European agriculture and food security, this exchange of views will give us a chance to talk about the adequacy and the timelines of the measures proposed by the commission. I have the pleasure to welcome missus Elizabeth Werner, who will, make a presentation of, this proposal from the European Commission for 4 minutes. Missus Werner, you have the floor, please.”
  Use of fertilisers
• 2026-06-29 “48:38 - 16:51:54): Thank you very much, Eric, for your comments. Just 1 reaction to the commission's communicative position about storage. This is a matter that has to do with the national level. We cannot force the member states to create these storage facilities to give farmers the possibility to have storage for their products. However, we can create mechanisms that may, incentivize member states to do this. Because if, for example, Romania is in a food crisis, Germany will not be happy about it or vice versa. So we need to think about a network that is Europe wide, and we need to incentivize member states to develop such a network. Dear colleagues, look at the latest crisis that we faced, fuel, fertilizers, drafts, floodings, etcetera. We need to have these emergency stocks that, for example, will allow us to survive a terrible agricultural year. Of course, we can fight a lot of things, but it's very hard to fight hunger. And I will close with an idea with a comment about intervention prices. I I lay the blame for the milk crisis on the European crisis. I'm sorry. It's a it's a crisis that is not just happening in Romania, but in many member states because data has not been collected from the field adequately and in time for us to be able to make an intervention. And this situation that we have now where farmers are forced to sell their milk under production cost. This may work for 1 month, for 2 months, for 3 months. But if this keeps on later on, they will not survive on the market. They will shut down. Once you shut down a milk farm, it takes you 5 years to reopen it. Let's say this very clearly. So European Commission, please, we need intervention mechanisms that work when we see that farmers are under pressure, okay? It's not our farmers' fault that Hormuz is blocked. It's not our farmers' fault that we have a fertilizer crisis. So if we do not have the umbrella mechanism from the European Commission level, it's clear that the European agriculture will suffer and will even collapse. And then we'll end up importing products from outside of the European Union. And then, of course, we go into the discussion regarding the standards of those products. But please, I won't go any further. I would just say that this file will also be a very intensely discussed file by all the colleagues. But I'm I do hope that we will obtain a good result together with the European Commission. Given the fact that at 5 past 15 past 5, we have a vote, let's no. We don't take a break. Before that, please be advised that for this file that we've been discussing, the deadline for amendments is July 15 at 13 hours. I forgot to say that. So July 15, 13 hours. This is the deadline for submitting amendments, to the Common Market Organization. And now we break until, 10 past 5. Thank you.”
  EU policy on farmer–buyer relations in the agri-food supply chain
• 2026-06-29 “00:42 - 16:02:18): Thank you very much, dear Norbert. Thank you, the commission. Thank you all the colleagues who made contributions. Undoubtedly, dear colleagues, we are, ahead, we are we have ahead of us a very long road to walk together. 1 thing is clear, as Norbert said, the commission must understand that in this committee, have a vision regarding the need to maintain, the CAP as an European policy. We cannot accept a renationalization of this policy. We cannot accept distortions between the member states in the implementation of of this regulation. Of course, further discussions and negotiations will have to continue regarding capping and aggressivity. But again, dear colleagues, what we need to do here, what what this is all about is the need to support people who make food. And again, let's leave behind this logic that says that big farms can self sustain themselves. Big farms have big problems. I think money should be distributed equitably to all those who work, who function. Because even if you have a big farm with bigger financial resources, that farm also faces bigger problems and needs bigger support if we want those farms to survive on the market. But, again, let's close this point here and continue, discussing, based on the amendments that will be made. And, because mister Sagiacomo is caught in traffic, I suggest that we take a few minutes break. Oh, mister Novella.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• 2026-06-29 “(17:20:06 - 17:22:06): Dear colleagues, I, would not like to keep on, discussing this issue, although I am completely in agreement with you about this, problem. And what I suggest is that we should send a letter to the conference of presidents on behalf of the AGRI committee. I shall consult with president Verechnova because it's not my power to do that. It's the president of the committee who should decide that. But I do believe that we need to send this letter criticizing and expressing our disapproval about this procedure, about the way in which the AGRI committee is being treated because I think it's, unacceptable that we are put in front of this situation, that we only have to to to give our vote on on files that are very important for us in our member states. So, okay, I don't care what the procedure says. But, after all, at the end of the day, we have to go back to our, to our member countries and face the music, so to speak, and give, and explain why, why all these agreements, which are being approved without our consent, without our influence. And let's also write to president Metzola on the same topic, and let's say let's communicate to her that we disagree with this method to be asked to vote on matters that we did not have a chance to debate. Again, think about it. You'll go back to your farmers and your farmers will ask you, what did you do in the European Parliament? Why did you give your your vote there? They don't care, about these procedures. How are we going to explain, this to to our voters? We cannot, of course. I understand that now I cannot stop the vote. I would have liked to, but the technical staff tells me that I cannot do that. So we have to vote today. Please vote your conscience. But I will discuss about this issue with president Vrechonova about sending these 2 letters to the conference of presidents and to missus Metzona.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• 2026-06-29 “(17:22:57 - 17:24:07): to 0.7 on today's agenda. Temporary support and payment of advancements advanced payments in relation to the fertilizer crisis caused by the middle by the Hormuz Strait crisis. So we are going to discuss the impact on the fertilizer situation because of the Middle East crisis. We need to the proposal aims to provide member states with additional flexibility and temporary support instruments under the CAP in order to help the farmers cope with rising input costs and preserve agricultural production. Given the importance of fertilizers for the competitiveness of European agriculture and food security, this exchange of views will give us a chance to talk about the adequacy and the timelines of the measures proposed by the commission. I have the pleasure to welcome missus Elizabeth Werner, who will, make a presentation of, this proposal from the European Commission for 4 minutes. Missus Werner, you have the floor, please.”
  Use of fertilisers
• 2026-06-29 “(15:47:06 - 15:49:25): Thank you. Before giving, the floor to the next speaker, please allow me a few, comments on this, report. 1st of all, thank you very much, Robert Nins, for your proposal. I think we can all say that this is a proposal that goes in the direction that we all wish it to go. Of course, we can all make amendments and according to our ambitions on this file, but it's clear that the propose the difference between the commission's proposal and your report is huge. Of course, we still have a few hot potatoes here about decisions that we need to make, and capping is a matter that concerns us all. But dear colleagues, I think it is very important for us to understand that common agricultural policy should not be regarded as an instrument for social welfare. CAP should be an instrument that supports those people who feed us every day. That is why I think it is incorrect to cause trouble between large farmers and small farmers because both categories, do their specific, jobs. They produce food. I think that is why your, proposal Norbert is a very wise 1. It's a Solomonic proposal in the sense that it takes into account the reality, in the field. Of course, degresivity should continue to be optional, and there's another, matter that was, mentioned by colleagues before, the definition of active farmer. Because our great CAP problem is how do we make sure that the CAP money really reaches true farmers, not armchair farmers who have no connection to their land, who do not perform any agricultural activity but just gather subsidies. Of course, I'm sure we'll find the best way to provide our farmers with efficient instruments that can help them maintain themselves on the market and face the challenges ahead of them. Let's move on now, with the intervention from DG Agri for the 4 minutes for the representative of the commission.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• 2026-06-29 “(18:19:41 - 18:21:01): Thank you very much for your intervention. Herbert, please take the floor for now. Well, dear colleagues, then let's close this point, as well and move on to 0.9 on the agenda, which relates to the production and marketing of plant reproductive material in the union, amending regulations 20 sixteen-two 31, 20 seventeen-six-twenty 5 and 20 18 8 4 8 of European Parliament and the Council, and repealing council directive 66 4 0 1, 66 4 0 2, 68 1 93, 2002 slash 53, 2002 slash '54, 2002 slash 55, and 56, 57, and 50 72. The rapporteur is mister Dorfman. According to article 75.3, after several years, the negotiations have been successfully concluded on June 15 during the trilogue. I would like to congratulate mister Dorfmann for this success. And dear Herbert, please, once more, have the floor.”
  Sustainable use of seeds in EU policy
• 2026-06-29 “55:17 - 17:56:52): Thank you very much, madam director. Of course, the mechanism that lots this money is very important because farmers are worried about how this money will be allocated, especially regarding final beneficiaries of these amounts. Member states do bear this responsibility after all of allocating this funding. Thank you very much. Moving on to number 0.8 on the agenda, the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2027, all sections. Our operator is Mr. Baek here. The deadline for table of amendments for the June 22 this year. Dear colleagues, we'll now proceed to the consideration of our draft opinion on the general budget of the European Union for 2027 as the final budget under the current multi annual financial framework, it is particularly important for ensure continuity and predictability for farmers in rural communities and for preparing the transition to the post-twenty 27 period. In the context of geopolitical tensions, climate challenges and market uncertainty, it is essential that the union budget continues to support competitive and resilient agricultural sector while ensuring food security and the vitality of rural areas. On behalf of the standing rapporteur, Wooter Beke, Herbert Doffman will present the draft opinion. He will be followed as usual by the shadow rapporteur. Herbert, you have the floor for 5 minutes.”
  Agricultural funding
• 2026-06-29 “46:45 - 17:50:25): you very much. Before, I give, the floor to the commission, I'd like to say a few things on the topic. Of course, we're looking at EUR $540,000,000. This is a considerable amount that farmers will make good use of, but 300,000,000 come from the crisis reserve for agriculture. And to be fair, yes, some colleagues were saying that this crisis reserve needs to be increased for agriculture. On the other hand, it's very important to understand that all we're doing is some sort of patchwork here, a pipe burst and we patch it up. We don't solve the actual problem. Madam Director, we've had this discussion before and with the commissioner. We wish him a lot of good health. What do we do with the production of chemicals inside the EU? Because unless we find mechanisms to support this sector and member says that have a chemical industry industry of chemical products, we will be dependent on The U. S. Today or a producer in Iran or who knows where. We need to have the ability to strengthen our own production and infrastructure for chemical fertilizers. Romania had 20 factories for chemical fertilizers. Now the number has gone down, and we're not doing anything to support it. I know that these are private structures, but unless we put together a mechanism, a European mechanism instrument for these structures, we will be dependent on imports from Russia and Belarus, and we will feed money for that will be used for war by these countries. Of course, we need to support the farmers. We don't know how long they'll be able to last. I was talking to farmers in Romania and also look at the cereal prices for barley, for example. This price is the same as 10 years ago, the same for wheat. But look at the production costs, how they've gone up. How long will these farmers be able to survive to stay afloat because they have families, they have needs, they have children? How long are we going to be able to ask them to keep going like this? This is why we need a general approach in order to support these farmers, to give them instruments. Because sometimes I think that it's like they're just beggars, beggars begging in the street and we just drop a coin in their palm. This is the way I see farmers. They're just begging for money with their hands stretched out, but we forget that they're doing something very important for us 20 fourseven in terribly scorching heat, just like now. They're working for us and with every debate, we realize that we are unable to give them the instruments they need. So this is a huge challenge, we appreciate everything that the commission is doing. It goes without saying, but we need to do more, and we need to be aware of the fact that agriculture is the most important sector, even more important than than, the armament sector because you can have weapons. But if you don't have food, we won't be able to do anything. Madam director, you have the floor for 8 minutes.”
  Use of fertilisers
• 2026-06-29 “(16:48:38 - 16:51:54): Thank you very much, Eric, for your comments. Just 1 reaction to the commission's communicative position about storage. This is a matter that has to do with the national level. We cannot force the member states to create these storage facilities to give farmers the possibility to have storage for their products. However, we can create mechanisms that may, incentivize member states to do this. Because if, for example, Romania is in a food crisis, Germany will not be happy about it or vice versa. So we need to think about a network that is Europe wide, and we need to incentivize member states to develop such a network. Dear colleagues, look at the latest crisis that we faced, fuel, fertilizers, drafts, floodings, etcetera. We need to have these emergency stocks that, for example, will allow us to survive a terrible agricultural year. Of course, we can fight a lot of things, but it's very hard to fight hunger. And I will close with an idea with a comment about intervention prices. I I lay the blame for the milk crisis on the European crisis. I'm sorry. It's a it's a crisis that is not just happening in Romania, but in many member states because data has not been collected from the field adequately and in time for us to be able to make an intervention. And this situation that we have now where farmers are forced to sell their milk under production cost. This may work for 1 month, for 2 months, for 3 months. But if this keeps on later on, they will not survive on the market. They will shut down. Once you shut down a milk farm, it takes you 5 years to reopen it. Let's say this very clearly. So European Commission, please, we need intervention mechanisms that work when we see that farmers are under pressure, okay? It's not our farmers' fault that Hormuz is blocked. It's not our farmers' fault that we have a fertilizer crisis. So if we do not have the umbrella mechanism from the European Commission level, it's clear that the European agriculture will suffer and will even collapse. And then we'll end up importing products from outside of the European Union. And then, of course, we go into the discussion regarding the standards of those products. But please, I won't go any further. I would just say that this file will also be a very intensely discussed file by all the colleagues. But I'm I do hope that we will obtain a good result together with the European Commission. Given the fact that at 5 past 15 past 5, we have a vote, let's no. We don't take a break. Before that, please be advised that for this file that we've been discussing, the deadline for amendments is July 15 at 13 hours. I forgot to say that. So July 15. This is the deadline for submitting amendments, to the Common Market Organization. And now we break until, 10 past 5. Thank you.”
  EU policy on farmer–buyer relations in the agri-food supply chain
• 2026-06-29 “(15:15:51 - 15:18:40): Thank you very much. And next speaker for Issiar, Giovanni Crosetto. Thank you, chairman, colleagues. The discussion on the future CAP is now moving towards a decisive phase. The draft report is a step in the right direction because it restores part of the consistency that we have in the cap, reintroducing elements such as the definition of beneficiary, agricultural farming, the kinds of support available, and also the monitoring and control framework framework. And this is an important signal, which shows that we want a CAP based on 2 distinct pillars and joint rules, the minimum income part funded by the EU and rural development co financed by member states. At the same time, there are certain key issues that remain open, capping, for example, and also degresivity. The goal of making support more redistributive and fairer is something that we can share, but that we don't believe that should just simply be cutting payments or putting ceilings on payments. What we need to do is recognize the extraordinary diversity of European agriculture and come up with tools that are appropriately adapted. So we are favorable to the deletion of the obligatory digress digressivity as the farmer says, and we also believe that funds should be capped at a €100,000 per holding. That's more realistic than the commission proposal, but we need further measures. We can't penalize professional businesses that innovate and generate jobs. Those who generate employment should be supported rather than having their competitiveness undermined. At the same time, redistribution cannot be the only response to generational change. We need more resources to young for young farmers, but that's not enough. The real problem is access to land, income for businesses, the economic stability of the sector. Weakening structured businesses means reducing their productive capacity. Finally, we agree with the idea of making the CAP more consistent, but we can't have different 27 different kinds of CAP. This would put the single market at risk. Chairman, let me conclude by saying that the e c r as the ECR group, we look forward to being constructive in the amendment phase. We want a CAP that brings together fairness and competitiveness that supports young people without putting businesses in danger, guarantees jobs, investment, and gives European farmers a genuinely common CAP. Thank you.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• 2026-06-29 “13:21 - 18:16:03): Thank you very much. Before giving the floor to the European Commission, allow me a few, words about the rapporteur also mentioned, namely the need to adequately, finance all the, institutions that control the quality of food products entering the European Union. You know very well that the Mercosur agreement has left a deep trail in our activity and will continue to do so. I visited the Paris Salon de la Agriculture in France. Although my counselors advised me not to go there because it was right after the Mercosur scandal, and I knew that French farmers were very angry. But I did go there because I wanted to listen to the French farmers. I wanted to know what were their worries, what were their concerns, and their greatest concern had to do with the EU's ability to perform adequate controls on the products that enter the European Union, agricultural food products. And this question, was like a a red line. I got the same question everywhere in Romania, in Finland, in Germany, wherever I visited, wherever I spoke with farmers, everybody said the same thing. They said, we don't trust these control, mechanism that the European Union has regarding the, agriculture products coming from 3rd 3rd party 3rd countries. They did not have a problem per se with trade agreements because they understand that there can be advantages for us as well. We sell things to those 3rd countries as well. However, this initiative, should give adequate financing for all these equipments that allow identifying allow the identification of products that do not respect the same standards of quality as we have in the European Union. Because this tilts the the the the playing field in against our farmers. And if we think of all the all the documents we voted, for example, the Inter agreement with Mexico. We understand how much pressure there is on the agricultural sector. All these trade agreements combined with the energy crisis, with the fertilizer crisis, with the wars, with the inflation, they they are, millstones on the back of the farmers that the farmers have to carry on their backs. We need to make sure that these farmers do not collapse under these, these, millstones. I will give now the floor to the representative of the Digi Agri for 4 minutes.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU
• 2026-06-29 “(17:55:17 - 17:56:52): Thank you very much, madam director. Of course, the mechanism that lots this money is very important because farmers are worried about how this money will be allocated, especially regarding final beneficiaries of these amounts. Member states do bear this responsibility after all of allocating this funding. Thank you very much. Moving on to number 0.8 on the agenda, the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2027, all sections. Our operator is Mr. Baek here. The deadline for table of amendments for the June 22 this year. Dear colleagues, we'll now proceed to the consideration of our draft opinion on the general budget of the European Union for 2027 as the final budget under the current multi annual financial framework, it is particularly important for ensure continuity and predictability for farmers in rural communities and for preparing the transition to the post-twenty 27 period. In the context of geopolitical tensions, climate challenges and market uncertainty, it is essential that the union budget continues to support competitive and resilient agricultural sector while ensuring food security and the vitality of rural areas. On behalf of the standing rapporteur, Wooter Beke, Herbert Doffman will present the draft opinion. He will be followed as usual by the shadow rapporteur. Herbert, you have the floor for 5 minutes.”
  Agricultural funding
• 2026-06-29 “03:47 - 15:06:24): Dear colleagues, please take your seat because I would like to start our meeting. Dear colleagues, let's start, by adopting the agenda. 0.2, Chair's announcements. Today's meeting is web streamed in 20 languages just like it says on the agenda and we thank the interpreters. 0.3, adoption of minutes of the May 2026 and June 2026. If there are no objections, I consider the minutes of the committee meetings of 4th and 5th May and 1st and 2nd of June as approved. Moving on 0.4 on the agenda establishing the conditions for the implementation of the union support to the common agriculture policy for the period 20 20 eighttwo thousand and 34. We will examine the report competent committees agree Norbert Linsa da Rapporteur and the deadline for tabling amendments is the 06/09/2026 at 1PM. I'll come back to this. It has been almost a year since Commissioner Hassan presented the CAP proposals to us here on 07/15/2025, the response that day was, to put it mildly, mixed. I am pleased that Norbert Linz, the rapporteur for the CAP regulation, has now submitted his report. The deadline for amendments is the July 9 at 1PM. In this context, I'd like to remind you once again that articles and provisions such as the CAP definitions have been transferred from the NRP regulation to the CAP regulation. So please be advised when you table amendments. The Secretariat has already sent to you a consolidated version of the regulation that reflects these transfers. I would ask that you use this version as guidance when submitting your amendments. But for now, the floor goes to the rapporteur followed by the shadows. The rest of our colleagues, Norbert, you have the floor for 5 minutes.”
  Agricultural funding
• 2026-06-29 “19:41 - 18:21:01): Thank you very much for your intervention. Herbert, please take the floor for now. Well, dear colleagues, then let's close this point, as well and move on to 0.9 on the agenda, which relates to the production and marketing of plant reproductive material in the union, amending regulations '20 sixteen-two thousand and 31, 20 seventeen-six-twenty 5 and 20 18 8 4 8 of European Parliament and the Council, and repealing council directive 66 4 0 1, 66 4 0 2, 68 1 93, 2002 slash 53, 2002 slash '54, 2002 slash 55, and 56, 57, and 50 72. The rapporteur is mister Dorfman. According to article 75.3, after several years, the negotiations have been successfully concluded on June 15 during the trilogue. I would like to congratulate mister Dorfmann for this success. And dear Herbert, please, once more, have the floor.”
  Sustainable use of seeds in EU policy
• 2026-03-19 “Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission 5.5.2026 Written question The Commission is closely monitoring the evolution of the different animal product markets, focusing on the potential impact of animal disease outbreaks [1] . The production of eggs increased in some Member States, in particular in Germany in 2025 compared to 2024. Egg imports also increased in 2025. The EU legislative framework for animal health [2] recognises and enables the use of vaccines to ensure effective prevention and control of category A diseases, including for vaccination against Newcastle disease (ND). In addition, vaccination against ND is required for certain movements within the EU [3] and for entry into the EU [4] from third countries or territories. In some Member States, vaccination against ND is mandatory, but certain are aiming on disease-free status from infection with ND virus without vaccination, as granted in the EU specific legislation [5] . For decades well-designed and properly implemented vaccination against ND, coupled with appropriate biosecurity practices effectively prevented outbreaks. Therefore, in the current context of budget difficulties, it is essential to prioritise the use of budget available for the support of emergency measures envisaged by the Single Market Programme (SMP) [6] to other category A diseases where vaccines are not available or not sufficiently effective to prevent the disease. Hence, in 2025 the Commission phased out co-financing emergency measures for ND under the SMP [7] . Following animal disease outbreaks, Member States may support investments in restoring production potential [8] and introduce crisis payments for affected farmers [9] . At the request of the concerned Member State, the Commission may adopt exceptional support measures to address trade restrictions. [1] https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/farming/animal-products/eggs_en. [2] Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on transmissible animal diseases and amending and repealing certain acts in the area of animal health (‘Animal Health Law’) (OJ L 84, 31.3.2016, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/429/oj). [3] Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/688 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council, as regards animal health requirements for movements within the Union of terrestrial animals and hatching eggs (OJ L 174, 3.6.2020, pp. 140, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2020/688/oj). [4] Commission Delegated Regulation (Eu) 2020/692 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards rules for entry into the Union, and the movement and handling after entry of consignments of certain animals, germinal products and products of animal origin (OJ L 174, 3.6.2020, pp. 379, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2020/692/oj ). [5] Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/620 of 15 April 2021 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the approval of the disease-free and non-vaccination status of certain Member States or zones or compartments thereof as regards certain listed diseases and the approval of eradication programmes for those listed diseases (OJ L 131, 16.4.2021, pp. 78, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2021/620/oj ). [6] Regulation (EU) 2021/690 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 April 2021 establishing a programme for the internal market, competitiveness of enterprises, including small and medium-sized enterprises, the area of plants, animals, food and feed, and European statistics (Single Market Programme) and repealing Regulations (EU) No 99/2013, (EU) No 1287/2013, (EU) No 254/2014 and (EU) No 652/2014 (OJ L 153, 3.5.2021, pp. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/690/oj ). [7] Summary report of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed, 16-17 December 2024: https://food.ec.europa.eu/document/download/a1190b22-fb16-4f97-b105-c0c674fe4ba3_en?filename=reg-com_ahw_20241216_sum.pdf. [8] Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 December 2021 establishing rules on support for strategic plans to be drawn up by Member States under the common agricultural policy (CAP Strategic Plans) and financed by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1305/2013 and (EU) No 1307/2013 (OJ L 435, 6.12.2021, pp. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2115/oj). [9] Regulation (EU) 2025/2649 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2025 amending Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 as regards the conditionality system, types of intervention in the form of direct payment, types of intervention in certain sectors and rural development and annual performance reports and Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 as regards suspensions of payments, annual performance clearance and controls and penalties (OJ L, 2025/2649, 31.12.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2025/2649/oj).”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU
• 2026-03-09 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 8.5.2026 Written question 1. The suspension of inward processing would address a short-term market disturbance. The Commission is assessing whether further action may be warranted to address potential structural challenges in the sugar sector. The Commission is conducting a ‘health check’ of the key markets, including sugar, which will inform these reflections. 2. Since the end of the quota regime in 2017, the sector has adjusted to a more market-oriented organisation by improving competitiveness and better aligning supply to demand. Without jeopardising the market-oriented nature of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), where necessary to respond to market disturbances or imbalances, the Commission may adopt appropriate measures within the framework of the common market Organisation. To address other challenges, such as high production costs, the EU offers investment and coupled income support, which may be included in Member States’ CAP Strategic Plans to support sugar and sugar beet producers. 3. Under the future Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2027-2034, the proposed national and regional partnership (NRP) plans will continue to offer Member States the opportunity to support farmers depending on regional and national needs. Existing CAP policy instruments, such as income support, are maintained in the Commission proposal. In addition, the CAP and NRP Regulation proposals provide a complementary set of tools to alleviate pressure and reducing risk in farm operations. The EU facility under the NRP fund also provides a Unity Safety Net intended to help farmers cope with the impact of market disturbances.”
  Agricultural funding
• 2026-03-09 “Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission 26.5.2026 Written question Active substances (AS) used in plant protection products (PPPs) can, in principle, only be approved where it is demonstrated that at least one representative use of a PPP containing the AS fulfils the approval criteria set out in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 [1] . Alternatives are only considered to determine if AS failing approval criteria need a derogation because they're essential for controlling a serious danger to plant health that no other available method can address [2] . In the Vision for Agriculture and Food [3] , the Commission committed to carefully considering any further ban of AS if alternatives are not available, unless the AS in question represents a threat to human health or the environment that agriculture relies upon for its viability. The Food and Feed Simplification Package [4] proposed by the Commission in December 2025 aims to accelerate innovation and market access for new biocontrol AS to provide more sustainable PPPs to farmers to protect their crops. To speed up Member States’ evaluation of biocontrol AS applications, the Commission proposes replacing systematic time-driven renewals for all AS with a flexible system targeting AS that may harm human or animal health or the environment [5] . The Commission has also proposed to allow derogations from existing approval criteria if an AS is essential to protect plant health or plant production and the possibility for Member States to grant longer grace periods to use existing stocks of non-approved substances when no alternatives exist. The Commission receives information on alternatives provided by stakeholders. So far alternatives have always been identified where the approval of an AS has not been renewed [6] . [1] Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC, OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2009/1107/oj. [2] As set out in Article 4(7) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, such substances may be approved for 5 years [3] Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions A Vision for Agriculture and Food Shaping together an attractive farming and agri-food sector for future generations. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0075. [4] https://food.ec.europa.eu/horizontal-topics/simplification-legislation_en. [5] The majority of Member State resources is currently occupied with the systematic renewal process for all active substances meaning that innovative companies applying for the approval of new biocontrol substances often have to wait for several years before a Member State agrees to take on the role of rapporteur (RMS) for the first risk assessment. [6] In addition, various tools to help farmers in finding solutions protecting their crops have been developed for example IPMWORKS project developed based on Horizon 2020 funds or Agrowise supported by the LIFE Program.”
  Reduction targets for pesticides · EU policy on pesticides
• 2026-03-09 “P-000963/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Given the current situation on the milk market as described in reply to written question E000668/2026 1 , the Commission does not envisage at this stage mobilising market instruments financed by the agricultural reserve. The milk market situation in 2025 and at the beginning of 2026 is fundamentally different from that in 2016. The Commission will continue its close monitoring of developments in the milk market and stands ready to act in a responsible and proportionate manner, should circumstances so require. Milk producers will benefit from a recently agreed strengthening of the position of farmers in the food supply chain whereby contracts between dairy farmers and their buyers will need to be in written form (political agreement reached between the European Parliament and the Council on 5 March 2026 on a Commission proposal amending Regulations (EU) No 1308/2013 2 , (EU) 2021/2115 3 and (EU) 2021/2116 4 as regards the strengthening of the position of farmers in the food supply chain). In line with the amendment proposed by the European Parliament, such measures will also expand the scope of collective negotiations in the dairy sector and provide for stricter conditions on the statutes of producer organisations in the dairy sector, ensuring their democratic control. 1 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/-ASW_EN.html. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1308/oj/eng. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2115/2024-05-25/eng. 4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2116/oj/eng?uri=CELEX:32021R2116.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · EU policy on farmer–buyer relations in the agri-food supply chain · Agricultural funding
• 2026-01-26 “E-000286/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission notes that the EU beef market has experienced changes in production and trade dynamics in recent years. The latest data available 1 show that cattle numbers and beef production have declined compared to previous years, while exports decreased and imports increased. The self-sufficiency rate remains strong, and the trade balance positive both in volume and value. Firm internal demand has resulted in favourable conditions for producers, with prices reaching historically high levels and margins improving. In its Vision for Agriculture and Food 2 , the Commission recognises the vital role of livestock in EU agriculture, competitiveness and cohesion. To address identified challenges, the Commission will adopt a Livestock Strategy by June 2026 to guide and establish a long-term framework for an EU livestock sector that is resilient to crises, globally competitive, and sustainable across economic, social, and environmental dimensions, in full respect of Europe's territorial diversity. As part of its proposals for the future CAP post-2027, the Commission proposed to significantly increase coupled income support from current 13% + 2% to 20% + 5%, in order to give Member States an opportunity to support sectors such as livestock, depending on their needs. Regarding generational renewal, the Commission notes that Member States are required to allocate at least EUR 1.14 billion to attract and support young farmers in 2026, including young cattle breeders. This will be achieved through various forms of aid, such as area support, investment aid, and support for setting up new operations, helping to ensure the future sustainability of the sector. 1 Agri-food data portal : https://agridata.ec.europa.eu/extensions/DataPortal/beef.html. 2 COM/2025/75 final.”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• 2026-01-15 “E-000159/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission’s legislative proposals for a Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2028-2034 promote an integrated approach to the development of rural areas. Moreover, the Commission suggested setting a ‘rural target’ of at least 10% of the resources of each National and Regional Partnership (NRP) Plan on top of amounts earmarked for the Common Agricultural Policy to support rural development, including the provision of social services which benefit women. As announced in the Vision for Agriculture and Food, the Commission will soon launch a platform for Women in Farming to attract more women to the sector. 2. Article 7 of the NRP 1 Plan proposal defines the applicable horizontal principles, such as the principle of non-discrimination and gender equality. Article 56 of the proposal requires the monitoring committee, inter alia, to ensure the application of the principle of gender equality. The proposal for a Budget tracking and Performance Regulation 2 introduces the single expenditure tracking and performance framework to measure the budget’s contribution to gender equality more accurately. This is expected to contribute to fostering gender equality including in farming and in rural areas. 3. The obligation for more targeted support for women under the proposal establishing the conditions for the implementation of the Union support to the Common Agriculture Policy for the period from 2028 to 2034 3 , set out in Article 6, together with the provisions on farm relief services in Article 17, and complemented by the NRP Plan proposal, provide a strong framework for advancing gender equality including in farming and rural areas and steering Member States in taking tailored actions. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52025PC0565&qid=1770404542141. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:bb24b1ec-62fc-11f0-bf4e01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_4&format=PDF. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52025PC0560.”
  Gender roles, equality and inclusion · Agricultural funding
• 2026-01-15 “Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission 23.3.2026 Written question The Commission refers the Honourable Member to the answers to P-004688/2025 [1] and E-000029/2026 [2] , with regard to the EU framework which provides for surveillance, containment, including emergency protective vaccination, as well as the effectiveness and proportionality of the control measures against lumpy skin disease (LSD) . The Animal Health Law [3] and the delegated acts adopted pursuant thereto [4] prioritise prevention alongside rapid response for animal diseases, including through surveillance, biosecurity, early detection, movement controls, regionalisation and vaccination where epidemiologically justified . These measures are risk-based and proportionate, aiming to prevent the spread of diseases and limit outbreaks , while e nsur ing animal health protection and managing trade implications transparently, scientifically and in line with international standards . [1] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-10-2025-004688_EN.html. [2] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-10-2026-000029_EN.html. [3] Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on transmissible animal diseases and amending and repealing certain acts in the area of animal health (Animal Health Law); ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/429/2019-12-14. [4] Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687 of 17 December 2019 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and the Council, as regards rules for the prevention and control of certain listed diseases OJ L 174, 3.6.2020, http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2020/687/oj.; Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/361 of 28 November 2022 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and the Council as regards rules for the use of certain veterinary medicinal products for the purpose of prevention and control of certain listed diseases (OJ L 52, 20.2.2023, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2023/361/oj).”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU
• 2026-01-05 “E-000007/2026 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is aware of the importance of these cases for both the European dairy and pig meat sectors and has intervened in these investigations from the start in support of the industries and Member States concerned. The EU has been using all means at its disposal to defend EU farmers and processors confronted with the abusive use of trade defence instruments, notably by taking action at the World Trade Organization (WTO) against China’s initiation of the anti-subsidy investigation on dairy. While the impact of the measures will be significant, it is too early to quantify in terms of trade impact since the additional duties from China have been imposed recently. As regards the concluded investigation on pork, the Commission’s interventions together with those of industry and Member States have achieved a reduction of the definitive measures compared to the provisional measures imposed. Concerning the ongoing dairy investigation, the Commission, in close cooperation with the Member States and the dairy industry submitted comments throughout the proceeding and also in reaction to the final determination issued on 30 January. It is noted that the final duties proposed are lower than the provisional duties. Nevertheless, the Commission considers that the whole investigation and the duties are unwarranted and will now consider any further steps. The Commission will explore all options to protect the interests of the EU industry, also in view of the compliance by China with its obligations as member of the WTO. The Commission will continue to monitor the economic impact of the Chinese duties on the affected sectors in the EU. If needed, steps may be taken to respond to market disturbances through EU measures financed under the agricultural reserve.”
  Trade relations with China · Export of EU agri-food products
• 2025-11-21 “E-004662/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission As explained in the Vision for Agriculture and Food 1 , the Commission is working on an impact assessment of the modernisation of the EU animal welfare legislation on farm for certain animals 2 . The aim is a targeted revision focusing mainly on the follow-up to the European Citizens’ Initiative ‘End the Cage Age’ 3 , that does not cover animal welfare labelling or animal welfare at slaughter. The impact assessment will consider both the potential positive effects and the potential costs of modernised and harmonised rules, such as greater long-term regulatory stability for farmers’ investments, reduced market fragmentation, enhanced consumer confidence, and opportunities for innovation. As set out in the Vision, the Commission is also committed to ensuring that any future animal welfare legislative proposals apply the same standards for products produced in the EU and those imported from third countries, in a World Trade Organization compliant way. Based on the impact assessment and stakeholder consultations, the Commission aims to propose proportionate rules, with a gradual approach, species-specific transition periods, and adequate time and support for farmers to adapt. Any cumulative impact on farmers will also be carefully considered in this process and taken into account when preparing a possible upcoming proposal. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0075. 2 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14671-On-farm-animal-welfare-forcertain-animals-modernisation-of-EU-legislation_en. 3 https://food.ec.europa.eu/animals/animal-welfare/eci/eci-end-cage-age_en.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU
• 2025-11-09 “E-004428/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission The reviewed EU-Ukraine Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) 1 is fair and balanced. It creates a situation where no economic reasons can be invoked to maintain national measures. The reviewed DCFTA provides additional market access for Ukraine, while limiting imports of sensitive products. For these products, the Agreement will lead to a significant decrease of imports as compared to the situation under the autonomous trade measures in place until June 2025. Ukraine also improved market access for European pork, poultry and sugar, and reduced further or eliminated import duties for other key products like dairy. In addition, the EU additional concessions are subject to a strong safeguard that can be invoked in case of negative effect in one or several Member States and are conditioned to the gradual alignment by 2028 of Ukrainian legislation to relevant EU production standards. In the past, some Member States have already received specific funds under the EU agricultural reserve to address the local disturbances caused by the logistical bottlenecks that emerged in 2022 and 2023, as a direct consequence of Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine. The Commission’s proposal for the new multiannual financial framework 2 includes a new Unity Safety Net for crisis measures, with a total budget of EUR 6.3 billion — effectively doubling the current agricultural reserve. If needed, this reinforced support will allow to respond to market disturbances and help safeguard the EU farmers affected by agricultural market crises. 1 OJ L, 2025/2130, 20.10.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2025/2130/oj. 2 Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European Fund for economic, social and territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, fisheries and maritime, prosperity and security for the period 2028-2034 and amending Regulation (EU) 2023/955 and Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 COM/2025/565 final.”
  Agricultural trade: Ukraine imports
• 2025-11-09 “E-004429/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The 6 % proposed in the Strategy for Generational Renewal in Agriculture is an aspirational benchmark intended to double the current level of dedicated support for generational renewal. Its purpose is to urge Member States in prioritising young farmers support planned in the National and Regional Partnership (NRP) plans within their budgetary envelope and to promote coordinated action across policies and competences. The benchmark covers all Common Agricultural Policy expenditure contributing to generational renewal, including ring-fenced measures and other interventions that have a clear and demonstrable link to this objective, for example advisory schemes, knowledge-transfer actions or initiatives supporting succession. Member States will identify these measures in their NRP Plans. This requirement provides transparency on what each Member State counts towards the 6 % and ensures that budgetary choices can be assessed against the ambition to double current efforts. The Commission will oversee and guide the implementation of this target through the future steering mechanism, in particular common agricultural policy recommendations and approval process of NRP plans. This approach ensures that, even if aspirational, the benchmark acts as a concrete reference for national spending decisions and increases the likelihood that additional funding is effectively directed to young farmers.”
  Agricultural funding
• 2025-11-09 “E-004427/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission EU agri-food exports peaked at EUR 235 billion in 2024, up 3% from 2023. Similarly, imports reached EUR 172 billion, an 8% increase compared to 2023 1 . Between January and July 2025, EU agri-food exports further rose 2% to EUR 139 billion, while imports increased by 15% to EUR 113 billion 2 . Growth in imports was mainly driven by higher prices for cocoa and coffee, as well as fruits and nuts to a lesser extent, leading to a moderate decline in the EU's agri-food trade balance. These commodities, along with oilseeds and protein crops, are the most imported agri-food products in the EU. Protein crops are essential for the sustainability of the EU's livestock sector and hence EU food security. In turn, tropical food imports are necessary to meet the demand of EU agri-food manufacturers and consumers for products not produced in the EU or which are in short supply. In the current complex trade environment, the Commission remains committed to an ambitious trade agenda with a diversified range of partners. 2024 trade data confirms that EU agri-food trade with preferential partners grew at a faster pace (+6.4%) than with nonpreferential partners (+2.8%) 3 , highlighting the importance of EU trade agreements for the competitiveness of the EU agri-food sector by lifting tariff and non-tariff barriers. Under the Multiannual Financial Framework 4 post 2027, agriculture will also continue to benefit from Horizon Europe, as well as from the new Competitiveness Fund which will support innovations driving competitiveness. 1 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/document/download/8e6be7cf-e1d2-48fd-911490c448e09643_en?filename=monitoring-agri-food-trade_dec2024_en.pdf. 2 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/documents_en?f%5B0%5D=document_title%3AMonitoring%20EU%20agrifood%20trade%3A%20development. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_2569. 4 https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/eu-budget/long-term-eu-budget/eu-budget-2028-2034_en.”
  Export of EU agri-food products
• 2025-11-09 “E-004430/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Under the revised EU-Ukraine Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) that entered into force on 29 October 2025, the EU has liberalised the tariff lines contained previously under the import tariff quota of ‘Fermented milk’ (order number 09.6716 before the entry into force of the revised DCFTA). These tariff lines cover various types of flavoured and unflavoured yoghurts, as well as some buttermilk and kefir products 1 . In addition to these lines, the revised DCFTA provides for the liberalisation in the dairy sector of imports of certain processed milk and cream products, whole milk powder and other yoghurt, buttermilk and kefir products not listed above. There is no expected impact for farmers in the Union given the positive trade balance in these categories of products in favour of the Union. 1 The tariff lines in question are: 0403 20 51, 0403 20 53, 0403 20 59, 0403 20 91, 0403 20 93, 0403 20 99, 0403 90 71, 0403 90 73, 0403 90 79, 0403 90 91, 0403 90 93 and 0403 90 99. Please see for detailed descriptions the Combined Nomenclature as defined in Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature (OJ L 256, 7.09.1987) and on the Common Customs Tariff which are valid at the time of publication of this Regulation and mutatis mutandis as amended by subsequent legislation.”
  Agricultural trade: Ukraine imports · Import of agri-food products in the EU
• 2025-09-29 “E-003782/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission Foodstuffs imported into the EU from third countries must comply with the same sanitary requirements as those produced within the EU. These requirements are non-negotiable. To ensure that imports entering the EU from third countries comply with EU requirements, products of animal origin, including eggs and egg products, are subject to mandatory official controls at the border control posts of first arrival into the EU, ensuring that consignments that are found as non-compliant are refused entry. In addition, where fraudulent or deceptive practices are suspected, or serious or repeated infringements are detected, the Commission, can launch measures of intensified official controls (IOCs) regulated by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1873 1 and applied to consignments of goods of animal origin coming from the same non-EU establishment than the initial non-compliant consignment. In relation to eggs and egg products from Ukraine, there is currently one active IOC due to banned antimicrobials. Overall, provisions of EU law on traceability and official controls of consignments of products of animal origin entering the EU are robust and have consistently demonstrated their effectiveness in ensuring a high level of protection of both public and animal health. 1 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2019/1873/oj.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU · Maximum residue levels
• 2025-09-05 “E-003442/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission On 27 July 2025, the President of the Commission and the President of the United States (US) reached a political agreement on tariffs and trade, later confirmed by the Joint Statement 1 of 21 August 2025. In line with the deal, the majority of EU exports are subject to an all-inclusive 15% tariff rate, except where the most favoured nation (MFN) tariff is higher, in which case the MFN tariff prevails. Certain strategic sectors have been excluded from this new tariff regime, such as aircraft or generic pharmaceuticals. The Commission will now use the implementation of the EU-US deal to find a solution to the 50% tariffs on steel and aluminium and related derivatives, including through tariff rate quotas. The Commission will also work with the US to expand the list of products and sectors excluded from the 15% tariff ceiling, such as wine and spirits. The political agreement safeguards competitive access to the US market. The Commission therefore does not foresee as such setting up a compensatory measures. That said, in case of specific circumstances, such as serious injury to the domestic industry of the EU, the Commission legislative proposals 2 that implement the EU commitments to improve market access for US products made in the Joint Statement provide for the possibility to suspend the concessions, in whole or in part. The Commission will continue to monitor the implementation of the EU-US deal. 1 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/news/joint-statement-united-states-european-union-framework-agreementreciprocal-fair-and-balanced-trade-2025-08-21_en. 2 COM(2025)471 final and COM(2025)472 final.”
  EU-US trade relations
• 2025-09-05 “E-003447/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The EU is a net beef exporter and the trade balance for beef and live animals has been positive for many years, including at the beginning of 2025. EU bovine imports amounted in 2024 to a value of EUR 2.6 billion, whereas EU exports were 4.9 billion, resulting in a positive balance of over EUR 2.2. billion. Decreasing EU exports are mainly due to a shortage of bovine animals and related decline in production. Prices continue to be sustained by robust internal and external demand. EU producer prices remain at historical high levels. According to European statistics on international trade in goods 1 , the EU has neither imported live bovine animals nor beef meat from Ukraine in 2025. In the context of the review of the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) with Ukraine 2 which is currently under discussion in the Council, it is not planned to increase existing tariff rate quotas for beef meat. Generally speaking, Ukrainian exports of live bovine animals and beef products are destined to other markets than the EU. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/bookmark/f48a373f-a225-421b-b82b4ec363f8ed42?lang=en&createdAt=2025-09-23T13:36:07Z. 2 COM (2025) 450 final, 28.07.2025.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU · Agricultural trade: Ukraine imports
• 2025-09-05 “E-003453/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. Building on the Vision for Agriculture and Food, the Commission’s proposal for a future Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) 1 emphasises further simplification, directing support to farmers who need it most and finding the right balance between obligations and incentives, investments and additional sources of financing. Agriculture and rural areas also stand to gain from funding opportunities and synergies with other policy areas, with the CAP integrated into the National and Regional Partnership Plans (NRPP). These elements go in the right direction to make the CAP fit for an enlarged Union. 2. The amount identified for the CAP is EUR 300 billion for 2028-2034, including at least EUR 293.7 billion ring-fenced for income support and an allocation of EUR 6.3 billion to address market disturbances through the Unity Safety Net. Each Member State can increase its contribution to agriculture by tapping into the unallocated amounts in their overall allocation under the NRPP. The proposal for 2028-2034 2 includes a clause for revision when the timing of enlargement is known. 3. To support farmers from enlargement countries and help countries prepare for the implementation of the CAP, the EU focuses on gradual alignment, technical assistance, and financial support. Key elements of this include strengthening the administrative capacity of their authorities, promoting sustainable agricultural practices, and fostering economic diversification in rural areas. For the period post 2027, the Commission proposal establishing ‘Global Europe’ 3 provides a significant increase in EU funding for the Europe pillar, including enlargement countries, to accelerate their alignment with EU values, laws, rules, standards, policies and practices. 1 COM(2025)560 final of 16.7.2025. 2 COM(2025)571 final of 16.7.2025. 3 COM(2025)551 final of 16.7.2025.”
  Agricultural funding · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• 2025-09-05 “E-003444/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. To help farmers invest in agricultural machinery, the Commission’s post-2027 Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) proposals treat on-farm investments as an ongoing priority. Member States would include investment support for farmers and forest holders in their National and Regional Partnership Plans and would be able to fund these investments both from the ring-fenced income support and complement by the non-ring-fenced part of the budget. To ensure efficient use of machinery, the proposals reinforce the digital transition by strengthening knowledge systems and advisory services. Wider use of simplified cost options is also expected to make support more accessible. Beyond the CAP, legal persons within the farming community will benefit from other EU funds, such as the European Competitiveness Fund and the EU Research Framework Programme. 2. The relevant types of intervention currently available under rural development policy especially for investments 1 and cooperation 2 - allow Member States to support the joint purchase of machinery, according to legal and other arrangements regarding the entities concerned. In specific sectors (e.g. fruit & vegetables, wine), farmers and producer organisations may receive EU financial support for joint purchase of machinery 3 . Member States can also programme stand-alone financial instruments 4 (e.g. loans, guarantees and working capital) or in combination with grants. Finally, Horizon Europe research projects such as Farmtopia 5 and Guardians 6 support small-scale farmers by making digital services more accessible to farmers. 1 Article 73 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115. 2 Article 77 of Regulation. (EU) 2021/2115. 3 Articles 42-68 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115. 4 Article 80 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115. 5 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101083541. 6 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101084468.”
  Agricultural funding
• 2025-09-05 “E-003448/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission The Commission closely monitors cereal markets. EU soft wheat production in 2025/26 marketing year rebounded by 11.3% compared to 2024/25. A recovery is also expected for EU cereal exports in 2025/226, forecasted to reach 45.4 million tonnes, 25% more than last year. EU cereal prices continued to evolve in line with global prices, which are currently relatively low amidst ample global supply, while these remain roughly in line with 2020 prices. In the current complex global trade landscape, the Commission is prioritising the expansion of its network of free trade agreements (FTAs) and other engagements. These include efforts to conclude the FTAs with Mercosur, Mexico and Indonesia, and the negotiations with India, Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia, United Arab Emirates. By doing so, the Commission aims to enhance the competitiveness of EU exports, particularly in the agri-food sector, where the EU maintains a strong position as a top global exporter with a significant trade surplus of over EUR 60 billion, including a positive trade balance of EUR 2 billion in cereal trade. On logistics, EU measures focus on digitalisation for trade facilitation. Investments in transport infrastructure like ports are eligible for support under the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF). The Commission’s proposal for the next multi-annual financial framework includes a budget for CEF of EUR 51.5 billion. In addition, ports can be supported through the National and Regional Partnership Plans, where Member States define their funding priorities. The Common Agricultural Policy, in particular through income support, and to a less extent, sectoral interventions, provides stability to farmers’ income. The Commission remains fully committed to supporting EU farmers.”
  Agricultural trade: Ukraine imports
• 2025-08-20 “E-003260/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Agriculture as an economic sector has one of the eldest workforces in the EU, with more farmers over 65 than under 40, putting at risk the continuity of farming and affecting food security. Postponing retirement hinders succession planning and modernisation. Young farmers face unique challenges to access land or high start-up costs. Generational renewal in agriculture is instrumental to vibrant rural areas, enabling innovation, investments in resilience, and safeguarding future food security. The European Parliament has identified this as an issue 1 and the Commission, on 21 October 2025, has adopted a strategy concerning generational renewal in agriculture 2 . For these reasons, the Commission has proposed that farmers, who have reached the pension age and receive a retirement pension, would not be eligible for Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) degressive area-based income support by 2032. Member States may lay down a transition period. Given the strong demand for land and for support for a new generation of farmers, the Commission estimates that this approach will create opportunities for new and young farmers and enhance innovation, without leading to land abandonment or food security challenges. The proposal provides Member States with a robust set of tools to support intergenerational cooperation, including on farm succession, to ensure adequate support for elderly farmers. To note that the provision referred to in the question does not apply to the other CAP income support interventions. In particular, access to the payment for small farmers is maintained (pensioners remain eligible) which allows Member States to maintain or reinforce such income for small farms which on average belong to the most vulnerable category of farms. 1 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2023-0376_EN.html - Generational renewal in the EU farms of the future - 19 October 2023. 2 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/document/download/a4574611-30d7-4f48-bfaf58559edffdc0_en?filename%E2%80%A6.”
  Agricultural funding · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• 2025-08-20 “E-003258/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission The Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) is a disease regulated by the EU with the aim of eradicating it completely to achieve disease-free status across the EU. To this end, the Commission has established specific rules, notably Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/689 which 1 , together with Regulation (EU) 2016/429 2 , addresses all aspects necessary for its eradication. To prevent the potential spread of MTBC between Member States, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/688 3 , along with Regulation (EU) 2016/429, outlines specific conditions that bovines must meet to ensure they are safe for transport to another Member State. EU regulations are based on the latest scientific advice from the European Food Safety Authority, aligned with international standards 4 , and have been thoroughly discussed with experts from Member States, taking into account decades of experience in tackling MTBC within the EU. This results in a robust, effective, and flexible legal framework and control system that is well-suited for its purpose. Although Germany has achieved MTBC-free status 5 , there have been a few reoccurrences (38 outbreaks) since 2020 6 . In the event of an outbreak, the competent authority must conduct an epidemiological investigation and assess relevant factors to determine the most appropriate response 7 . Finally, regarding the potential review of Regulation (EU) 2016/429, the Commission is currently evaluating it. This evaluation may lead to amendments to Regulation (EU) 2016/429 or the development of subsequent EU regulations. As of now, no specific issues related to MTBC have been identified. 1 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/689 of 17 December 2019 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards rules for surveillance, eradication programmes, and disease-free status for certain listed and emerging diseases. 2 Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on transmissible animal diseases and amending and repealing certain acts in the area of animal health (‘Animal Health Law’). 3 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/688 of 17 December 2019 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council, as regards animal health requirements for movements within the Union of terrestrial animals and hatching eggs. 4 World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH): https://www.woah.org/en/home/. 5 Part I of Annex II to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/620 of 15 April 2021 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the approval of the disease-free and non-vaccination status of certain Member States or zones or compartments thereof as regards certain listed diseases and the approval of eradication programmes for those listed diseases. 6 As notified by Germany to the Animal Disease Information System (ADIS): https://food.ec.europa.eu/animals/animal-diseases/animal-disease-information-system-adis_en. 7 See chiefly Article 25-27 of CDR (EU) 2020/689.”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU
• 2025-08-10 “E-003221/2025 Answer given by Ms. Roswall on behalf of the European Commission As highlighted in the Water Resilience Strategy 1 , water scarcity and droughts are rising concerns in the EU 2 . The Strategy lays down 50 actions to better protect and restore the water cycle, improve water efficiency, and adapt to climate change to reduce drought impacts. This includes, for instance, actions to detect and reduce leaks in municipal water networks. Since 2007 3 , the Commission has supported Member States by promoting drought management plans, developing drought and scarcity indicators, and encouraging transboundary cooperation and best-practice exchange. Copernicus data powers the European Drought Observatory (EDO) 4 , which provides EU-wide drought information, alerts, predictions, and supports risk assessment and impact monitoring 5 . The Water Efficiency First Recommendation 6 offers practical guidance for more efficient water use. A dedicated working group on water scarcity and drought helps coordinate knowledge and action. Through the Cohesion Policy 7 , the Common Agricultural Policy 8 and Horizon Europe 9 , the Commission funds measures to reduce drought risks 10 , improve water infrastructure and storage, restore ecosystems, enhance soils, increase irrigation efficiency, promote water reuse, and support research on water resilience. The mid-term review of Cohesion Policy 11 prioritises water-resilience investments, giving Member States added flexibility and incentives to deploy measures quickly. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/topics/environment/water-resilience-strategy_en. 2 The 2022 drought alone is estimated to have costed Europe around EUR 40 billion, https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/economic-losses-from-climaterelated?activeAccordion=ecdb3bcf-bbe9-4978-b5cf-0b136399d9f8. 3 Commission Communication ‘Addressing the challenge of water scarcity and droughts in the European Union’, SEC(2007) 993- 996, COM/2007/0414 final. 4 https://www.copernicus.eu/en/european-drought-observatory. 5 https://drought.emergency.copernicus.eu/tumbo/edid/regional?code=RO&fromTable. 6 https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/commission-recommendation-water-efficiency-first-guidingprinciples_en. 7 https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/2021-2027_en. 8 https://ec.europa.eu/info/food-farming-fisheries/key-policies/common-agricultural-policy_en. 9 https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/horizon-europe_en. 10 E;g., https://rea.ec.europa.eu/funding-and-grants/eu-mission-soil-deal-europe_en, https://research-andinnovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe/eumissions-horizon-europe/restore-our-ocean-and-waters_en, https://research-andinnovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe/eumissions-horizon-europe/adaptation-climate-change_en, https://www.water4all-partnership.eu/, https://researchand-innovation.ec.europa.eu/research-area/environment/prima_en. 11 https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/information-sources/publications/communications/2025/a-modernisedcohesion-policy-the-mid-term-review_en.”
  EU policy on water management
• 2025-08-05 “E-003181/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission As explained in the Commission’s publication ‘Monitoring EU agri-food trade’ covering developments in 2024 1 , the decline of the value of EU agri-food trade balance in 2024 can be attributed mainly to price increases of certain products for which the EU is a net importer (especially cocoa products, coffee, fruits and nuts). These higher prices led to an increase of the value of EU imports of coffee, tea, cocoa and spices of EUR 9.8 billion in 2024, which impacts the overall EU agri-food trade balance in value terms. However, EU exports continued to grow, and the EU remained a large net exporter. Reinforcing the competitiveness of European agriculture is a key objective of the Vision for Agriculture and Food 2 . For this purpose, it sets out several actions including the intention to pursue international partnerships, diversifying trade relations, creating new export opportunities and reducing the administrative burden for farmers and food businesses. Furthermore, the Commission regularly analyses the policy, trade and market drivers affecting the future of EU agriculture through its EU agricultural outlook report 3 , most recently published in December 2024. Based on this, the EU is expected to remain a net exporter in the next decade across a variety of key agricultural products. This is also thanks to a growing demand for the EU quality products. A study 4 conducted by the Commission's Joint Research Centre in 2024 assessed the economic impact of upcoming trade agreements on the EU agriculture. It confirms that they would result in a balanced increase of both exports and imports, supporting a slight increase in the EU trade balance. 1 EC (2025), Monitoring EU agri-food trade. European Commission, DG Agriculture and Rural Development, Brussels. https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/document/download/8e6be7cf-e1d2-48fd-911490c448e09643_en?filename=monitoring-agri-food-trade_dec2024_en.pdf. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0075. 3 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/data-and-analysis/markets/outlook/medium-term_en. 4 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_1001.”
  Export of EU agri-food products
• 2025-07-15 “E-002876/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission EU animal health rules 1 lay down the obligation for Member States to draw up from, and keep up to date, contingency plans in the event of outbreaks of the listed diseases in order to ensure preparedness and rapid responses. Those contingency plans need to cover inter alia access to facilities, equipment, personnel and emergency funds, in particular for the necessary stamping out operations. In addition, according to the EU animal welfare legislation on the protection of animals at the time of killing 2 , facilities used for killing and related operations shall be designed, constructed, maintained and operated to ensure animals are spared any avoidable pain, distress or suffering during their killing and related operations including in case of emergency slaughter and depopulation operations. The Common Agricultural Policy post-2027 will continue to be anchored in the EU Treaty objectives and will maintain its full set of instruments, ensuring farmers receive fair income, support environmental sustainability and benefit from investments in rural areas. Beyond the EUR 293.7 billion allocated for farmers covering income support measures, additional funding from the national and regional partnership plans can be dedicated to providing other support towards rural areas, including possibly support for setting up of local slaughterhouses. 1 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/429/oj. 2 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2009/1099/oj.”
  Agricultural funding · EU requirements on animal welfare for farmers
• 2025-07-15 “E-002879/2025 Answer given by Mr Hoekstra on behalf of the European Commission The Commission’s proposed amendment to the European Climate Law provides a 90% net emission reduction target for 2040 and the basis for an ambitious and pragmatic approach to the transition to a climate neutral European Union in 2050. These proposals and their underlying impact assessments will take into account (among others) fairness and solidarity between and within Member States and efforts reflecting costefficiency and solidarity, technological neutrality, cost-effectiveness, economic efficiency, and economic security, strengthening EU competitiveness, ensuring a just transition, and enhancing environmental sustainability. These factors will help realise a balanced post-2030 climate policy framework between Member States for both their national climate action and their industrial competitiveness. In designing the post-2030 climate policy framework, the Commission will also look at investment needs and opportunities. Public funds need to be used smartly to leverage private investments as the bulk of the investments to reach the Union’s climate targets will need to come from private sources. The Commission proposal for a new Multiannual Financial Framework for 2028-2034 1 will help boost investments to reach the 2040 target, and provide support for innovative companies and maintain Europe’s leading role in cleantech sectors. A fair and just transition will remain a priority and is now encompassed in the specific objectives of the proposed Regulation establishing the European Fund for economic, social, and territorial cohesion, agriculture, and rural fisheries and maritime, prosperity and security for the period 2028-2034. 1 Publications on the new Multiannual Financial Framework 2028-2034: https://commission.europa.eu/publications/multiannual-financial-framework_en.”
  Energy transition (state support) · Climate efforts
• 2025-07-15 “E-002894/2025 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission considers that more stringent standards for training, driving times and rest periods are more likely to have a positive impact on alleviating the shortage of professional drivers in the EU than a negative one. Stricter rules on driving times and rest periods, introduced as part of the Mobility Package 1 1 , have improved working and social conditions, thereby increasing the attractiveness of the road transport profession. Certificates of completion of specialist training also improve drivers’ career prospects and, as a result, increase job satisfaction and the attractiveness of the profession. 2. The Commission will continue assisting Member States and the relevant stakeholders in increasing the attractiveness of the profession through various programmes, such as Erasmus+ 2 , the European Social Fund+ 3 , the reinforced Youth Guarantee 4 and InvestEU 5 . Safe and secure parking areas for professional drivers also contribute to better working and rest conditions. The Commission accordingly proposed to continue financial support for the creation of parking spaces for commercial road users in the context of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) in its proposal for the Multiannual Financial Framework 2028-2034 6 . 3. Space allowance provisions introduced in the Commission proposal for a Regulation on the protection of animals during transport 7 are based on the recommendations of the scientific opinions provided by the European Food Safety Authority. The Commission is committed to continue working with the Council and the Parliament in the ongoing legislative procedure to find workable solutions for the protection of animals during transport whilst maintaining trade and the normal functioning of the internal market. 1 Regulation (EU) 2020/1054 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2020, Regulation (EU) 2020/1055 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2020 and Directive (EU) 2020/1057 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2020, all OJ L 249, 31.07.2020. 2 https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/esf/main.jsp?catId=62&langId=en. 4 https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=1079&langId=en. 5 https://investeu.europa.eu/index_en. 6 Proposal for a Council Regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2028 to 2034 (COM(2025) 571 final. 7 COM(2023)770.”
  Driving licences · EU funding for transportation
• 2025-07-15 “P-002877/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The proposed Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2028-2034 1 reaffirms the strategic role of agriculture and the commitment to ensuring EU food security. This is reflected, among other things, in a dedicated budget of at least EUR 293.7 billion allocated under the future Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to income support for farmers, covering instruments from the current CAP’s two pillars. This guarantees that, as today, these familiar tools will continue to provide farmers with stable and predictable support, ensuring they receive a fair income, contribute to environmental and climate sustainability and benefit from investment. To address possible market disturbances, an additional budget of EUR 6.3 billion is reserved under the Unit Safety Net, a twofold increase compared to the current agricultural reserve. Finally, an inflation-handling method is also introduced for the whole MFF to avoid that unexpected inflationary shocks impact the EU’s ability to deliver on its objectives, including support to farmers and rural areas. Under the new National and Regional Partnership plans, agriculture and rural areas will benefit from synergies with other policy areas, as well as opportunities to access additional funding, such as for investments in services, or infrastructure, increasing the available funding benefitting farmers further. By overcoming rigidities between funding instruments, the plans maximise the impact of funding and enhance coherence. The agricultural sector will also benefit from the European Competitiveness Fund and the Horizon Europe Programme 2028-2034, where under policy window 2 around EUR 40 billion will be available, including to foster innovation in health, agriculture, bioeconomy and biotech. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/eu-budget/long-term-eu-budget/eu-budget-2028-2034_en.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · Agricultural funding
• 2025-07-15 “E-002893/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission proposed significant simplifications and flexibilities in 2024 as regards Good agricultural and environmental conditions (GAEC) to address the farmers’ concerns taking into account the increasing challenges, the unpredictability of the weather and economic uncertainties. Indeed, according to Regulation (EU) 2024/1468 of 14 May 2024 1 , concerning GAEC 8, the obligation to devote a certain share of arable land to non -productive area has been removed from 2024 or 2025 depending on Member States’ decisions and their possibilities to introduce a targeted eco-scheme for the maintenance and establishment of landscape features. Concerning GAEC 7, an option to implement crop diversification including minimum requirements has been introduced to better accommodate specific situations in certain regions. Despite this substantial flexibility and the potential to reduce farmers’ administrative burden, the GAEC objectives have been preserved for this programming period, considering the need to maintain a level of protection as regards soil quality and biodiversity, as well as to ensure a minimum playing field among Member States. In the same vein, the proposal for the future Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has also retained such objectives related to the protection of soil health and biodiversity but streamlined rules allowing Member States to better adjust the conditions to their specific circumstances Indeed, a set of protective practices – encompassing crop rotation or crop diversification and protection of landscape features – are part of the proposals for the post-2027 CAP 2 , presented by the Commission on 16 July 2025. Such protective practices would be designed and included in the national Plans by Member States. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1468/oj/eng. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52025PC0560&qid=1753798247771.”
  Nature protection and restoration in the EU
• 2025-07-15 “E-002878/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission is aware of publications on the presence of microplastics (MPs) in food. Following a mandate by the Commission, in 2016, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published a statement 1 identifying data gaps on the presence of microplastics and nanoplastics (MNPs) in food and their effects on human health that required further research to enable a safety risk assessment for consumers. At the EFSA scientific colloquium on MNPs in food 2 in 2021, it was confirmed that still further efforts are needed to generate the data necessary for such assessment. As currently standardised and harmonised analytical methods are lacking for the monitoring of MPs in food, the Commission has been funding research under the EU’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme 3 . 2. Once suitable analytical methods are available, the Commission may recommend monitoring the presence of MPs in food. In case EFSA identifies health risks due a certain contaminant in food, the Commission may establish maximum levels, which are enforced via official controls. EFSA scientific colloquium on MNPs in food in 2021 confirmed that further efforts are needed to generate the data necessary for a comprehensive human health risk assessment. Recently, a scientific article was published providing a systematic global review of trends, health risks, and implications for consumer safety of microplastic contamination in fish 4 . 3. The Commission promotes adequate waste management and circular economy in third countries through its development cooperation as well as in bilateral and multilateral engagement. It aims at agreeing an ambitious Treaty to fight plastic pollution across the planet. 1 EFSA Journal 2016;14(6):4501, https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/4501. 2 EFSA Supporting publication 2021: EN-6815, https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/events/event/update-scientificcolloquium-25-coordinated-approach-assess-human-health%20. 3 https://cusp-research.eu/. 4 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2025.118279.”
  EU policy towards plastics · Microplastics
• 2025-06-02 “E-002208/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission LEADER 1 community led local development is implemented in shared management mode between the Commission and the Member States. The Commission monitors that the Union legal framework is correctly applied and respected, yet the administration and implementation of the intervention lies with the Member States. The Commission encourages the Member States to ease the administrative burden, inter alia by the use of simplified cost options in project implementation. Simplification practices are regularly shared through the Common Agricultural Policy Network and other technical meetings. Ensuring public national co-financing is a matter for the Member States. To promote the accessibility of LEADER and community-led local development (CLLD), the Commission encourages Member States to provide appropriate access to co-financing by all local action groups. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/enrd/leader-clld_en.html.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2025-04-18 “E-001579/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Under the Common Market Organisation Regulation 1 the Commission may adopt exceptional measures financed by the agricultural reserve and may provide emergency support to farmers negatively affected by extreme adverse weather events and natural disasters as it recently did for producers in Spain, Croatia, Cyprus, Latvia and Hungary 2 . This exceptional measure followed a request for support from the five Member States and was designed following an assessment of the situation and of its exceptional nature by the Commission services, based inter alia on the available information and data on actual damages and losses per sector provided by the relevant Member States. The Commission has not received information from Romania on damages due to frost events that occurred in March 2025. 1 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1308/oj. 2 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/441/oj.”
  Agricultural funding · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• 2025-04-05 “P-001395/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission Cohesion Policy 1 investments in research and innovation under policy objective 1 –‘Smarter Europe’ may support development and testing of innovative technologies and solutions for green transitions and circular economy identified in smart specialisation strategies (S3) areas such as water management or agriculture. This may include developing technologies for smart irrigation systems that harness treated urban wastewater. The examples of such projects implemented under Cohesion Policy can be found on the Kohesio website ‘discover EU projects in your region’ 2 . The proposed amendment to Regulations (EU) 2021/1058 and (EU) 2021/1056 3 , with respect to the specific objective related to promoting secure access to water, sustainable water management and water resilience under policy objective 2 –‘Greener Europe’ aims to contribute to build a water resilient society and protect water ecosystems and infrastructures. However, it is important to note that Cohesion Policy funding in general excludes support for the deployment of technologies and solutions for water irrigation intended for agricultural purposes, as this falls under the remit of other EU funds. The Common Agricultural Policy 4 provides support for investments in digital and water-smart agriculture, increasing water use efficiency. This includes investments in more efficient irrigation installations, such as decision support systems and remote sensors for irrigation planning. Investment and infrastructure will feature prominently in the European Water Resilience Strategy that will be published in June 2025. The Commission recognises that pooling financial resources available from public sources but also attracting private capital is vital to ensure water resilience. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/policy/how/priorities_en 2 kohesio.ec.europa.eu/en/search?keywords=irrigation 3 https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/communication/mid-term-review-2025/regulation-proposal-midterm-review-2025_en.pdf 4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2115/oj/eng”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2025-03-07 “E-000999/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission Since the start of the new United States (US) administration, the Commission has been engaging with its US counterparts to avert unnecessary tensions by seeking negotiated solutions with the US but has also been ready to act to safeguard the EU’s interests, where necessary, for instance through the adoption of countermeasures. These measures are suspended in view of the US decision to suspend for 90-days its reciprocal tariffs, for the same length of time to allow space for negotiations. When it comes to sanitary and phytosanitary standards, the EU has a robust system in place to ensure that all food placed on the market satisfies the requirement of a high level of human health protection and to prevent the spread of pests or diseases among plants and animals. All goods imported into the EU must comply with EU health and product safety requirements. The definition of such EU standards is not negotiable. In the Vision for Agriculture and Food 1 , the Commission has set out the approach to a fairer global level playing field. This includes using bilateral free trade negotiations and Agreements to their full extent. The Commission will also pursue, in line with international rules, a stronger alignment of production standards applied to imported products, notably on pesticides and animal welfare. 1 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, A Vision for Agriculture and Food Shaping together an attractive farming and agri-food sector for future generations, COM/2025/75 final; https://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52025DC0075”
  Pesticides & trade · Import of agri-food products in the EU · EU-US trade relations
• 2025-03-07 “E-000995/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Critical Raw Materials Act 1 , which entered into force in May 2024, is the main framework to stimulate extraction, processing and recycling of critical raw materials in the EU. It allows the Commission to identify and support strategic projects linked to extraction, processing and recycling of strategic raw materials. Such projects will help develop European value chains and reduce EU dependencies. The Commission adopted a first Decision listing 47 strategic projects in the EU on 25 March 2025 2 . 2. Among the selected strategic projects, three are in Romania and concern the extraction of copper, graphite and magnesium. These strategic projects will benefit from a pre-set permitting timeline of 27 months maximum as well as coordinated support for access to finance and to industrial off takers. 3. The Critical Raw Materials Act is the main framework to create an integrated European supply chains industry. It is complemented by other initiatives, such as the Net Zero Industry Act 3 , the Chips Act 4 and the Automotive Action Plan 5 for other segments of the value chain. These initiatives contribute to the strengthening of European supply chains, the reduction of strategic dependencies and the promotion of EU industrial competitiveness. 1 Regulation (EU) 2024/1252 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 April 2024 establishing a framework for ensuring a secure and sustainable supply of critical raw materials and amending Regulations (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1724 and (EU) 2019/1020 (Text with EEA relevance). 2 https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/raw-materials/areas-specific-interest/critical-rawmaterials/strategic-projects-under-crma/selected-projects_en 3 Regulation (EU) 2024/1735 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on establishing a framework of measures for strengthening Europe’s net-zero technology manufacturing ecosystem and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 (Text with EEA relevance). 4 Regulation (EU) 2023/1781 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 September 2023 establishing a framework of measures for strengthening Europe’s semiconductor ecosystem and amending Regulation (EU) 2021/694 (Chips Act) (Text with EEA relevance). 5 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Industrial Action Plan for the European automotive sector https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52025DC0095”
  EU industrial funding · Sourcing of critical raw materials
• 2025-03-07 “E-000994/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is closely monitoring the evolution of the different animal product markets, with a particular eye to the potential impact of animal disease outbreaks 1 . There is a worldwide scarcity of eggs due to outbreaks of avian influenza and the culling of animals. In the EU, it is worth noting that the production of eggs increased in some Member States. Egg imports also increased in 2024. As it stands now, producer prices are at high levels compared to recent years and do not show a particular downward trend that would justify intervening with exceptional market support measures. Support measures are available under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), including for risk management and for investments to improve the biosecurity on farms. CAP Strategic Plans can also include economic mitigation efforts through the restoration of agricultural potential on infected farms or farms suffering from the impact of a preventive destruction of animals. 1 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/farming/animal-products/eggs_en”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU · Agricultural funding
• 2025-03-07 “E-000992/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission Strengthening previous initiatives such as the Coordinated Plan on Artificial Intelligence (AI) 1 , on 9 April 2025, the Commission published the AI Continent Action Plan 2 to make Europe a leading AI continent. The Plan will enhance the EU’s AI data and computing infrastructures, strengthen skill and talent, and foster AI adoption in science and key sectors. To this aim, the AI in Science and Apply AI Strategy will be crucial. To minimise regulatory burdens, the Plan will also support a smooth implementation of the AI Act that already provides legal certainty across the EU and fosters innovation including via the regulatory sandboxes. The EU is also engaging in large-scale AI investments. Through the European High Performance Computing Joint Undertaking, significant funding was mobilised to establish 13 AI factories enhancing the European ecosystem for training advanced generative AI models. Overall, investments in supercomputing infrastructures and AI factories will reach EUR 10 billion between 2021 and 2027. Moreover, the InvestAI initiative 3 will mobilise EUR 20 billion for establishing AI gigafactories, facilities integrating massive computing power to develop large AI models, alongside energy-efficient data centres. The EU is also continuing its efforts under the EU Chips Act 4 . Over EUR 80 billion investments were approved or planned in industrial deployment in semiconductors. The EU and Member States are investing close to EUR 4 billion in five semiconductor and quantum pilot lines to move from the laboratory to the fabrication. A European design platform is being developed to support companies in designing advanced AI chips. Building on this, the Commission is working on the revision of the Chips Act to foster investments in the area. 1 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/coordinated-plan-artificial-intelligence-2021-review 2 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/commission-sets-course-europes-ai-leadership-ambitious-aicontinent-action-plan 3 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_467 4 https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/european-chipsact_en”
  EU industrial funding · Artificial Intelligence
• 2025-03-07 “E-001000/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is fully aware of the challenges faced by farmers such as the drought conditions in Romania. To address these challenges, the Vision for Agriculture and Food presented on 19 February 2025 1 contains an ambitious roadmap and different work streams towards an agri-food system that is attractive, competitive, sustainable and fair for current and future generations, including trade and simplification. Trade agreements, like the EU-MERCOSUR Partnership Agreement, strike a balance between both the EU offensive and defensive interests of the agri-food sector. Trade agreements open new export opportunities for the EU agri-food sector, to the benefit of EU farmers income. At the same time the EU agri-food sector relies on imports from third countries. Moreover, imported products need to fully comply with EU sanitary and phyto-sanitary standards (SPS). These standards include the ban of hormones in cattle raising in both domestic and imported products. The current autonomous trade measures 2 for Ukraine include strengthened safeguards setting caps on imports of certain agricultural products from Ukraine. They helped stabilising markets and provide stability and predictability for farmers on both sides. Meanwhile, the Commission continues its efforts to simplify the delivery of the current Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in view of reducing the administrative burden and providing more flexibility to farmers and national administrations. The second simplification package of the current CAP is expected for the second quarter of 2025. 1 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/vision-agriculturefood_en#:~:text=Shaping%20the%20future%20of%20farming%20and%20the%20agrifood,entire%20value%20chain%20within%20the%20EU%20and%20globally 2 Regulation (EU) 2024/1392 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 May 2024 on temporary trade-liberalisation measures supplementing trade concessions applicable to Ukrainian products under the Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, of the one part, and Ukraine, of the other part (ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1392/oj).”
  Agricultural trade: Ukraine imports · Agricultural funding · Trade relations with Mercosur
• 2025-03-07 “E-000998/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Council Directive 2001/110/EC 1 , as amended by Directive (EU) 2024/1438 2 , establishes a Honey Platform that shall, among others, provide recommendations with a view to establishing a Union reference laboratory. The Commission launched a call to set up the Honey Platform 3 on 13 June 2024 (day of entry into force of the revised Directive), and the first meeting was held on 6 November 2024. The topic of a Union reference laboratory will be part of the subjects to be discussed by the platform. As mentioned in reply to written questions E-000209/2024 4 and 000343/2024 5 , the Commission adopted measures to address honey adulteration at EU level. EU import requirements were reinforced with an authenticity requirement for exporting countries 6 and the import of honey is now only allowed from listed establishments. In 2023, the Commission launched a project to harmonise analytical methods to better detect honey adulterants, and Directive (EU) 2024/1438 introduced mandatory origin labelling for honey blends and provisions allowing for progress on traceability and authenticity. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2001/110/oj/eng 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32024L1438 3 https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/expert-groups-register/screen/expertgroups/consult?lang=en&groupId=3963&fromMeetings=true&meetingId=57603 4 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/-ASW_EN.html 5 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/-ASW_EN.html 6 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2020/2235/oj”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU
• 2025-03-07 “E-000991/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission On 12 March 2025 the United States (US) imposed a 25% tariff on all US imports of steel and aluminium and derivative products 123 . This affects EUR 26 billion in EU exports. The EU adopted countermeasures for entry into force on 15 April 2025 45 . Since 2 April 2025 the US also imposes a 25% tariff on cars, to be extended to car parts as of 3 May 67 . Also on 2 April, the US announced broad horizontal tariffs of 20% on imports from the EU as of 9 April. These additional tariffs also include all EU exports to the US of agrifood products 8 . Subsequently, for various reasons, including contacts with trade partners, the US suspended its horizontal tariffs on many trade partners including the 20% tariff on the EU for a period of 90 days, while still maintaining a 10% base-tariff. The EU has adopted countermeasures against the US tariffs on steel and aluminium but has also suspended those for 90 days. This was done to allow time and space for negotiations towards a mutually satisfactory solution and should these negotiations not be successful, the adopted countermeasures can enter into force again. In addition, the EU continues preparatory work for possible further proportionate countermeasures in response to the other US import tariffs. The EU has at its disposal several instruments that allow addressing unjustified measures, including tariffs and other countermeasures, as well as internal measures to address impacts on EU agricultural producers from situations of market disturbance. More broadly, and also in view of recent developments in EU-US trade, the Commission will continue to work on diversifying trade with other partners and will intensify efforts to remove internal barriers in the EU and to develop the EU Single Market. 1 https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/adjusting-imports-of-steel-into-the-united-states/ 2 https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/02/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-restores-section-232tariffs/ 3 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-02-18/pdf/2025-02832.pdf and https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-02-18/pdf/2025-02833.pdf 4 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/document/print/en/ip_25_740/IP_25_740_EN.pdf 5 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2023/2882/oj/eng 6 https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/adjusting-imports-of-automobiles-and-autombileparts-into-the-united-states/ 7 https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/03/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-adjusts-imports-ofautomobiles-and-automobile-parts-into-the-united-states/ 8 https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/02/reciprocal-trade-and-tariffs/”
  EU-US trade relations
• 2025-03-07 “E-000993/2025 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission shares the concern of the Honourable Member about the impact of the housing crisis particularly affecting vulnerable people. To help tackle it, the Commission will put forward a European Affordable Housing Plan (EAHP) to support national, regional and local authorities to address structural drivers of the housing crisis and to add value at the European level while respecting the subsidiarity and proportionality principles. EU funds and programmes have already played an important role in implementing policies, reforms, and realising investments to ensure social, affordable and sustainable housing: i) The Recovery and Resilience Facility, the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund+, the Cohesion Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the InvestEU programme are among the major EU instruments to support relevant projects and investments 1 . ii) The Commission published a toolkit on the use of EU funds for investments in social housing and associated services 2 . iii) In April 2025, the Commission put forward a legislative proposal to enhance the mid-term review process of cohesion policy programmes and to allow Member States and regions to double the planned investments in affordable housing for their 20212027 programmes. iv)The Commission is working with the European Investment Bank, as well as international financial institutions, national promotional banks and other stakeholders, to establish a pan-European investment platform for affordable and sustainable housing. v) The forthcoming Anti-Poverty Strategy will lay down a complementary approach on addressing social exclusion. The Commission reaffirms that in the context of the EAHP, it will carefully consider the matters described by the Honourable Member. 1 Recovery and Resilience Plans (RRP) include measures worth at least an estimated EUR 21.3 billion that contribute to social housing and other social infrastructure for social inclusion purposes alone. In addition, the RRPs also cover measures promoting affordable housing. EUR 10.4 billion in total investment is planned, involving an EU budget contribution of EUR 7.5 billion from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), Cohesion Fund (CF) and Just Transition Fund (JTF). In particular, the ERDF focuses on the provision and improvement of physical housing infrastructure, including through energy efficiency measures. The InvestEU programme earmarked EUR 2.8 billion for the Social Investments and skills window (including other priorities such as microfinance, social finance and social impact) and EUR 9.9 billion for the sustainable infrastructure window. The European Social Fund+ (ESF+) can support Member States in facilitating access to housing and promoting integrated services, in line with the European Pillar of Social Rights. An exact amount indicating the amount of the ESF+ funds allocated only to housing-related actions cannot be determined. 2 https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/042f7559-fd3f-11ee-a251-01aa75ed71a1/language-en.”
  EU housing policy
• 2025-03-07 “E-001001/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The Clean Industrial Deal 1 includes measures to speed up the decarbonisation of European industry by strengthening the business case for decarbonisation. The Action Plan for Affordable Energy 2 , presents actions to lower energy bills in the short term, while accelerating the implementation of much-needed cost-saving structural reforms and strengthening energy systems to mitigate future price shocks. The Commission also reviews State aid rules to make it easier for Member States to demonstrate compatibility of proposed support measures with State rules. The Steel and Metals Action Plan 3 introduces several immediate measures to support industry and protect workers. To address high energy costs, the plan promotes the use of power purchase agreements and encourages Member States to apply energy tax flexibility and reduced network tariffs, to stabilise electricity prices for energy-intensive industries. Trade protection measures are also strengthened. Before the end of the year, the Commission will propose a new long-term measure to maintain highly effective protection of the EU's steel sector once the current safeguard expires in mid-2026. The Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism 4 ensures that foreign producers pay an equivalent price to that paid by European producers under the Emissions Trading System. The Commission provides support to Member States that have identified territories expected to be the most negatively impacted by the transition towards climate-neutrality. The Just Transition Fund 5 supports the economic diversification and reconversion of the territories concerned. This includes among others the upskilling and reskilling of workers and investments in small and medium-sized enterprises. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/9db1c5c8-9e82-467b-ab6a905feeb4b6b0_en?filename=Communication%20-%20Clean%20Industrial%20Deal_en.pdf. 2 https://energy.ec.europa.eu/publications/action-plan-affordable-energy-unlocking-true-value-our-energy-unionsecure-affordable-efficient-and_en. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_805. 4 https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/carbon-border-adjustment-mechanism_en. 5 https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/just-transition-fund_en.”
  Carbon leakage support · EU industrial funding (mechanism level: EU-pooled vs nationally-financed)
• 2025-03-07 “E-000996/2025 Answer given by Mr Brunner on behalf of the European Commission The Commission recognises the challenges faced by Member States at EU external borders in managing migration flows. The Commission will continue to provide financial assistance through the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy (BMVI) established by Regulation (EU) 2021/1148 1 , and operational support via the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex), as set out in Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 2 . The Commission adopted a decision to provide an additional EUR 3 billion to support Member States with the implementation of the Pact on Migration and Asylum and to host refugees from Ukraine 3 . Frontex's deployment of personnel and equipment to vulnerable regions will be enhanced, subject to the available budget as well as Member State agreement and cooperation. The Commission is committed to strengthening Frontex's capacity. Plans to increase logistical, financial, and operational support are under review, with a focus on ensuring adequate resources for border management. The Commission will work closely with Member States to assess needs and allocate resources effectively. Well-managed integration of migrants is part of the Pact on Asylum and Migration 4 and is important for its success. In the framework of the Action Plan on integration and inclusion 5 , the Commission provides financial support to Member States on migrants’ integration under EU funds, such as Asylum Migration and Integration Funds 6 and the European Social Fund+ 7 , and promotes exchanges of good practices. 1 Regulation (EU) 2021/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing, as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund, the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy, OJ L 251, 15.7.2021, p. 48–93, http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/1148/oj. 2 Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2019 on the European Border and Coast Guard and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1052/2013 and (EU) 2016/1624, OJ L 295, 14.11.2019, p. 1–131, http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2019/1896/oj. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_1176. 4 https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/migration-and-asylum/pact-migration-and-asylum_en. 5 Action plan on integration and inclusion 2021-2027 | European Website on Integration, https://homeaffairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/migration-and-asylum/legal-migration-resettlement-andintegration/integration/action-plan-integration-and-inclusion_en. 6 Regulation (EU) 2021/1147 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, OJ L 251, 15.7.2021, p. 1–47, http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/1147/oj. 7 Regulation (EU) 2021/1057 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 establishing the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1296/2013, OJ L 231, 30.6.2021, p. 21– 59, http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/1057/oj.”
  Asylum & border control · Legal migration
• 2025-03-07 “E-000997/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission The Interoperable Europe Act 1 mandates EU and public bodies to conduct interoperability assessments (since 2025) and promotes cross-border collaboration via a share-and-reuse mechanism for solutions. This addresses interoperability gaps in states like Romania. To strengthen cybersecurity, the EU equipped itself with an extensive and solid legal framework, which includes the NIS2 Directive 2 , the Cyber Resilience Act 3 , the Cyber Solidarity Act 4 and the Cybersecurity Act 5 establishing the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA), while the Digital Europe Programme (DEP) and Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) fund IT infrastructure upgrades. For example, the Romanian recovery and resilience plan contains several reforms and investments to bolster cybersecurity of public and private entities for a budget of approximately EUR 138 million. The European Digital Identity (EUDI) Wallet and upcoming EU Business Wallet provide secure, harmonised digital identification for citizens, businesses, and public administrations to authenticate, receive notifications, and share verified credentials. For data protection, the Once-Only Technical System (OOTS) enables secure cross-border data sharing (e.g. birth certificates), identification through eIDAS/EUDI Wallets, with user consent and data previews. The Digital-Ready Policymaking (DRPM) framework ensures EU policies embed interoperability safeguards, including a mandatory ‘digital statement’ during policy design. Together, these initiatives streamline access to digital services (e.g. a Romanian citizen sharing data with a German institution) while ensuring compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) 6 and cybersecurity standards. 1 Regulation (EU) 2024/903 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 March 2024 laying down measures for a high level of public sector interoperability across the Union; OJ L, 2024/903, 22.3.2024. 2 Directive (EU) 2022/2555 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 on measures for a high common level of cybersecurity across the Union, amending Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 and Directive (EU) 2018/1972, and repealing Directive (EU) 2016/1148; OJ L 333, 27.12.2022, p. 80–152. 3 Regulation (EU) 2024/2847 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2024 on horizontal cybersecurity requirements for products with digital elements and amending Regulations (EU) No 168/2013 and (EU) 2019/1020 and Directive (EU) 2020/1828; OJ L, 2024/2847, 20.11.2024. 4 Regulation (EU) 2025/38 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2024 laying down measures to strengthen solidarity and capacities in the Union to detect, prepare for and respond to cyber threats and incidents and amending Regulation (EU) 2021/694; OJ L, 2025/38, 15.1.2025. 5 Regulation (EU) 2019/881 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on ENISA and on information and communications technology cybersecurity certification and repealing Regulation (EU) No 526/2013; OJ L 151, 7.6.2019, p. 15–69. 6 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC; OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1–88.”
  Interoperability requirements for digital platforms · Scope of EU cybersecurity obligations · Electronic identity
• 2025-02-20 “E-000792/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission As the autonomous trade measures for imports from Ukraine will expire on 5 June 2025, the Commission is committed to pursuing the review of the current trade conditions under Article 29 of the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) 1 with Ukraine. The Commission is confident that this review will be the best way to provide stability and predictability for producers and other stakeholders in the EU as well as in Ukraine. The review of the DCFTA should take into account as much as possible the concerns of the EU producers and other stakeholders. It will be crucial to find the right balance between the necessity to continue facilitating the movement of Ukrainian agricultural goods, thereby supporting the Ukrainian economy in its efforts in sustaining its fight against the Russian aggressor, and at the same time address the concerns of EU stakeholders about the increased agri-food imports from Ukraine. Furthermore, the Commission is considering including a strong safeguard clause as well as a link to compliance with relevant EU production standards. The Commission is currently working on the details of its position. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:22014A0529(01)”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs) · Agricultural trade: Ukraine imports
• 2025-02-20 “E-000793/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission The stated tariff measures proposed by the Commission 1 at the end of January 2025 are not yet in force, and their final scope will depend on the outcome of the ordinary legislative procedure currently ongoing in the European Parliament and the Council. To date, imports of Russian nitrogen-based fertilisers continue to take place as before. If the Commission proposal is adopted in its current form, increased tariffs on imports from Russia and Belarus would start to apply as of 1 July 2025. The Commission proposal is designed to gradually phase out the EU’s dependence on Russian nitrogen-based fertilisers through a transitional approach. This involves measured annual customs duty increases on imports from Russia of such fertilisers over a period of three years, minimising the risk of potential price impacts. The Commission expects the measure to result in a gradual and orderly replacement of Russian nitrogen-based fertilisers with alternatives, including domestically produced ones, contributing to fair competition in the EU fertilisers market and supporting a stable, long-term role of the EU fertilisers industry in ensuring the EU food security. The proposal mandates the Commission to monitor nitrogen-based fertiliser prices for four years following the foreseen Regulation’s implementation. If prices rise substantially, the Commission will assess the situation and take appropriate measures to address the increase. Such measures may include proposing the temporary suspension of tariffs on nitrogen-based fertilisers imported from sources other than Russia and Belarus. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/documents-register/detail?ref=COM(2025)34&lang=en”
  EU-Russia relations (from March 2022)