Daniel BUDA

Policy topics Daniel BUDA is active on

What Daniel BUDA has said (80)

• 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 “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
• 2026-03-09 “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 “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
• 2026-01-26 “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 “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
• 2026-01-15 “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
• 2026-01-05 “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-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
• 2025-11-09 “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
• 2025-09-29 “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-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-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-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-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
• 2025-09-05 “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)
• 2025-08-20 “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-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 “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-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
• 2025-07-15 “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 “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
• 2025-06-02 “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-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-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.”
  Digitalization of public governance & administration · Electronic identity
• 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 · State Aid
• 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-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-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-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-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-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
• 2025-02-20 “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)
• 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
• 2025-01-29 “E-000398/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement is currently subject to legal revision and translation after which the signature and ratification process in the EU and in the Mercosur countries will be launched. For EU sensitive agricultural sectors, the Agreement sets clear quantitative limits as regards providing preferential access to the EU market. It also contains bilateral safeguards to counter potential negative impacts on a specific EU agricultural sector. For the unlikely event that the agricultural market situation in the EU is negatively impacted following the implementation of the Agreement, the Commission intends to set up a financial reserve in the context of the next Multi-Annual Financial Framework. The expected impact of the agreement for the EU only points to very limited price decreases for certain sensitive sectors 1 according to the Joint Research Centre study on cumulative economic impact of upcoming trade agreements on EU agriculture 2 . There is no indication of disproportionate effects at Member States level, including Romania. 1 A recent assessment on the cumulative impact of upcoming trade agreements projects a reduction of EU beef production and price of 0.9% and 2.4% respectively due to the implementation of the ten FTAs covered by the study. 2 https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC135540”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU · Trade relations with Mercosur
• 2025-01-29 “E-000395/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission The Commission acted as follows: i) closely monitoring the foot and mouth disease (FMD) situation in the EU; ii) developing an EU legal framework 1 and specific legislation 2 for implementing emergency disease control measures for FMD and other diseases; iii) adopting immediate measures to enable FMD regionalisation 3 , protecting the EU internal market; iv) ensuring EU coordination through comitology 4 ; v) managing an EU FMD antigen bank ready to distribute millions of effective vaccine doses if needed; vi) providing support to all Member States, including training 5 and dispatching the EU Veterinary Emergency Team 6 onsite to assist the competent authorities; vii) regularly informing Member States and trading partners 7 about the evolution of the epidemiological situation and viii) maintaining constant dialogue with trading partners to advocate for the recognition of EU regionalisation and to avoid unjustified trade bans. EU co-financing of emergency veterinary measures is available under the Commission’s Single Market Programme. This includes costs related to culling or slaughtering of animals on affected farms, compensating their owners, and cleaning, disinfecting and disinsectisation the affected premises. Support can be granted under the Common Agricultural Policy 8 , including risk management, improved on-farm biosecurity and restoration of agricultural potential following outbreaks. 1 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, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/429/oj). 2 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, p. 64, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2020/687/oj). 3 The Commission adopted three regionalisation decisions: - Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/87 of 13 January 2025 concerning certain interim emergency measures relating to foot and mouth disease in Germany (OJ L, 2025/87, 14.1.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2025/87/oj); - Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/186 of 24 January 2025 concerning certain emergency measures relating to foot and mouth disease in Germany and repealing Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/87 (OJ L, 2025/186, 28.1.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2025/186/oj); and - Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/323 of 11 February 2025 concerning certain emergency measures relating to foot and mouth disease in Germany and repealing Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/186 (OJ L, 2025/323, 12.2.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2025/323/oj). 4 Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed: https://food.ec.europa.eu/horizontaltopics/committees/paff-committees_en 5 Better Training for Safer Food (BTSF) resources: https://better-training-for-saferfood.ec.europa.eu/training/?lang=en 6 https://food.ec.europa.eu/animals/animal-diseases/veterinary-emergency-team_en 7 https://food.ec.europa.eu/document/download/a0dcc301-94d4-4eb3-8c648cda1d3afc92_en?filename=ad_control-measures_fmd_chron_de-20250110.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 L436, 6.12.2021, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2115/2024-05-25).”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU
• 2025-01-29 “E-000397/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission A range of EU policies currently support the development and uptake of technologies for the agricultural sector to assist in climate change adaptation – including the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Horizon Europe 1 . The Commission's communication on ‘A Vision for Agriculture and Food’ 2 , addresses related issues and paves the way forward. It notes the importance of research, development and innovation to improve the competitiveness of agriculture, forestry and rural areas, and states that the CAP will continue to support agricultural knowledge and innovation system (AKIS) strategies. It also addresses aspects of the climate change adaptation challenge other than technology-related needs. With regard to data on EU food security, the Commission invites the Honourable Member to explore the rich databases available 3 . With regard to the agricultural reserve, the aforementioned Vision for Agriculture and Food notes that the Commission and Member States should ensure policy coherence between risk and crisis management tools, and greater flexibilities for their uptake. The functioning of the agricultural reserve should be carefully assessed to refocus it on specific crises of a specific magnitude, such as major market disturbances and animal/plant health issues, while the provision of exceptional support to farmers should be better linked to appropriate risk management and preventive measures. 1 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-europe_en 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0075 3 https://agridata.ec.europa.eu/extensions/DataPortal/food-supply-security.html”
  Agricultural funding
• 2025-01-29 “E-000396/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The Commission outlined several directions of action in its 2022 Communication on ‘Ensuring availability and affordability of fertilisers’ 1 and is actively pursuing them. A Fertilisers Market Observatory 2 was established for improving market transparency. The Commission has also adopted on 28 January 2025 a proposal to impose additional tariffs on nitrogen-based fertilisers from Russia and Belarus 3 , aiming at reducing and eventually putting an end to the EU’s dependence on both sources of supply. The Commission’s approach has been shaped by the need to balance efforts to limit revenue flows that fund the ongoing Russian aggression with considerations related to food security. As regards the strategy called for, the Commission considers that such strategic approach is reflected in the 2022 Communication referred to above. The current production of the major category of nitrogen fertilisers requires vast quantities of natural gas. Against the background of the structurally higher EU prices of natural gas, compared to other regions, the best prospect for reviving the EU nitrogen fertiliser industry is its conversion to the use of ammonia derived from renewable hydrogen instead of natural gas. This will also help fulfilling the industry’s decarbonisation goals. Finally, in view of facilitating the replacement of fossil-based materials in nitrogen fertilisers, the Commission is assessing the potential of different waste streams in providing recovered nitrogen. A technical study 4 assesses agronomic efficiency and safety of several recovered materials rich in nitrogen, for their possible inclusion in EU fertilising products. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52022DC0590(01) 2 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/data-and-analysis/markets/overviews/market-observatories/fertilisers_en 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52025PC0034 4 Technical study for the inclusion of new materials and processes under Regulation (EU) 2019/1009: https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/36ec94c7-575b-44dc-a6e9-4ace02907f2f/library/78f825aa-5272-44f0-9126f1b25985f650?p=1&n=10&sort=name_ASC”
  Use of fertilisers
• 2025-01-14 “E-000123/2025 Answer given by Mr McGrath on behalf of the European Commission In well-functioning democracies, transparent and accountable interest representation is a legitimate activity. Transparency of information about interest representation activities and entities carrying out such activities is essential for maintaining both EU citizens’ trust in democratic processes and decision-makers’ ability to exercise their responsibilities. In 2023, the Commission presented the Defence of Democracy package 1 which includes a legislative proposal that aims to enhance transparency and democratic accountability of interest representation activities on behalf of third countries which seek to influence policies, decision making and the democratic space. The proposal is currently being discussed by the co-legislators. At EU level, the EU Transparency Register 2 covers activities carried out by interest representatives with the objective of influencing the formulation or implementation of policy or legislation, or the decision-making processes of the EU institutions. It is up to each EU institution to define the rules on their interaction with interest representatives. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_6453 2 https://transparency-register.europa.eu/index_en”
  Transparency requirements for interest groups · Disinformation & online freedoms · Regulation of NGOs in Europe
• 2025-01-14 “E-000122/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission The EU tobacco traceability system established by Directive (EU) 2014/40/EU 1 and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/574 2 allows for the monitoring of the movements of all tobacco products through their entire supply chain within the EU. Thanks to the information stored in the system, Member States are able to determine at which point a product is no longer reported in the supply chain and take appropriate measures as necessary. The EU tobacco traceability system fully complies with the requirements of Article 8 of the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products 3 to the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control 4 . The Protocol is a legally binding international treaty addressing the issue of illicit trade in tobacco products. The Commission is currently carrying out a comprehensive evaluation of the EU legislative framework on tobacco. Following regulatory steps will depend on the findings of that evaluation. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/40/oj 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2018/574 3 https://fctc.who.int/protocol#:~:text=The%20Protocol%20to%20Eliminate%20Illicit%20Trade%20in%20Toba cco,it%20is%20a%20global%20solution%20to%20a%20global 4 https://fctc.who.int/resources/publications/i/item/9241591013”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters · Privacy & law enforcement
• 2024-10-16 “E-002101/2024 Answer given by Mr Wojciechowski on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is closely monitoring market developments in the pig sector. Pig production is subject to supply and demand dynamics, with a period of high export demand driving temporary expansion, followed by a decline over the past two years and current stabilisation. With its relative short production cycle, the sector can adjust rather quickly to demand fluctuations. While coupled support is not available under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), rural development interventions within CAP Strategic Plans offer significant support to pig farmers, focusing on enhancing sustainability, resilience, and competitiveness. The Commission has been funding research and innovation in the different domains of the pigmeat sector through successive Framework Programmes. Examples from Horizon 2020 1 and Horizon Europe 2 addressing pigs only, or among other livestock, include genomics and breeding 3 ; feed and nutrition 4 ; microbiome 5 ; innovative manure management and energy 6 ; pig production systems and pig welfare 7 : antimicrobial resistance 8 . There are not only collaborative projects, but also infrastructures 9 , or thematic networks 10 . As regards animal health, on vaccine development specifically against African swine fever alone, there are three on-going projects 11 for a total of EUR 20 million. In addition to several other projects addressing pig health, the co-funded European Partnership on Animal Health and Welfare 12 provides important resources to strengthen research and innovation in the domain, not least on technological and social innovation. 1 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-2020_en 2 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-europe_en 3 GENE-SWitCH (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/817998); GEroNIMO (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101000236). 4 Feed-a-Gene (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/633531). 5 3D-Omics (cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101000309). 6 Fertimanure (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/862849); RES4LIVE (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101000785). 7 SusAn ERA-NET (https://era-susan.eu/); Pathways (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101000395); ReLivestock (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101059609); MEATQUALITY (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101000344); ClearFarm (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/862919); aWISH (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101060818); PPILOW (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/816172). 8 HealthyLivestock (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/773436); DISARM (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/817591); ROADMAP (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/817626); AVANT (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/862829); NeoGiANT (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101036768) 9 PIGWEB (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101004770). 10 EU Pig Innovation Group (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/727933). 11 VACDIVA (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/862874); ASFaVIP (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101136676); VAX4ASF (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101136439). 12 EUPAHW (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101136346).”
  GMOs
• 2024-10-16 “E-002099/2024 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission To address the housing crisis and promote more affordable and sustainable housing in the EU, the Commission will launch the first-ever European Affordable Housing Plan. The plan will offer technical assistance to cities and Member States, focus on investment and skills needed and support the construction sector. To promote investments in affordable and sustainable housing, the Commission will set up, together with the European Investment Bank, a panEuropean investment platform. The Commission will work closely with international financial institutions, national promotional banks and institutions and other stakeholders in this work. The European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) can support Member States in implementing principle 19 of the European Pillar of Social Rights ‘Housing and assistance for homeless people’. While ESF+ actions can include integrated support services for access to housing, including social housing, the ERDF focuses on the provision and improvement of physical housing infrastructure, including through energy efficiency measures. Moreover, Cohesion policy offers possibilities to use ESF+ and ERDF for housing initiatives in an integrated manner, addressing both the infrastructure and services dimensions. Young people often struggle to afford housing. ESF+ provides targeted support for the youth through programs combining housing assistance with employment or education opportunities, addressing multiple needs to foster independence. The existing EU legislative framework, notably initiatives of the Fit for 55 package, sets policies and measures contributing to affordable and sustainable housing. Its implementation is key and will be a priority.”
  EU housing policy · Youth employment & training
• 2024-10-16 “E-002097/2024 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has been assessing the root causes for the high electricity prices in Southeastern Europe and has engaged bilaterally with the respective Member States. The high prices observed during last summer were attributable mainly to tight supply-demand balance during certain evening hours, a lack of flexibility sources and insufficient interconnector capacity, especially between Southeastern Europe and the rest of Europe. The Commission recalls the importance of maximising the use of existing interconnector capacities and is in continuous discussions with Member States to support the implementation of adequate tools to respond to price spikes, without interfering with the proper functioning of the wholesale markets and the necessary investment incentives for the transition of the energy system, for example to increase and efficiently use cross-border interconnector capacities, protect and empower consumers, incentivise investments in non-fossil flexibility, and mobilise demand-response during critical hours. To that end, cohesion policy and other funding sources finance actions for improved energy efficiency, the deployment of renewable energy sources, storage capacities, and interconnectors. The European Regional Development Fund and the European Social Fund Plus also provided funding for energy vouchers for vulnerable consumers. Already in the first 100 days of its mandate, the Commission plans to adopt the Clean Industrial Deal, including an Action Plan for Affordable Energy Prices to help bring down prices for households and business in the context of its work to address these issues at EU level, involving Member States and all relevant stakeholders.”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-10-16 “E-002094/2024 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is aware of the existence of the genetically modified wheat variety developed to better resist drought conditions. So far no application for approval of this genetically modified organisms (GMOs) has been submitted in the EU. The Commission handles the authorisation of GMOs, after the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) delivers its scientific opinion, under the existing rules on GMOs 1 and food and feed 2 set out by the European Parliament and the Council, which provide for high standards of protection of human and animal health and the environment. The Commission proposed a Regulation on plants obtained by certain new genomic techniques 3 , which aims at steering developments towards contribution to food security, resilience and sustainability goals in a wide range of plant species and in support to farmers, while maintaining a high level of protection of health and the environment. The Commission will continue supporting the European Parliament and the Council in the discussions to deliver on these objectives. In the meantime, plants obtained by new genomic techniques remain subject to the existing rules on genetically modified organisms. Transgenic plants containing genetic material from a non-crossable species, such as the drought resistant HB4 wheat approved for cultivation in the United States of America, are out of the scope of the Commission’s proposal on new genomic techniques. Such plants remain subject to the existing legislation on GMOs. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2001/18 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2003/1829 3 COM(2023) 411 final https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52023PC0411”
  GMOs · New Genomic Techniques
• 2024-10-16 “E-002100/2024 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission Peste des petits ruminants (PPR) is a highly contagious disease that requires immediate eradication measures, including culling of all susceptible animals in the affected establishments, as laid down in Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687 1 . Certain eligible PPR control measures, in particular the costs related to culling or slaughtering the animals in the outbreaks (including compensation for the owners), as well as cleaning, disinfection and disinsectisation of the affected premises are eligible for EU co-financing of up to 30%, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 2021/690 2 and Commission Implementing Decision C(2023) 8926 3 , Annex 3 4 . In addition, Romania included in its Rural Development Programme (RDP) 2014-2022 EUR 18.4 million support for investments in actions meant to prevent and reduce the consequences of natural disasters, adverse, and catastrophic events (measure 5.1 of the RDP) 5 . This measure may finance actions designed to tackle certain indirect consequences of PPR. Member States may implement vaccination against PPR in accordance with the provisions of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/361 6 . The EU PPR vaccine bank set up in accordance with Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/139 7 may offer up to 500,000 doses of free vaccine upon Member States request. 1 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2020/687/oj 2 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/690/oj 3 C(2023) 8926 final, Commission Implementing Decision of 21.12.2023 on the financing of the 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 and the adoption of the work programme for 2024-2027 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/e6150e32-3fa5-4276-923ba36faf4fec1e_en?filename=C_2023_8926_F1_COMMISSION_IMPLEMENTING_DECISION_EN_V3_P1_31 19489.PDF 4 Annex 3 to C(2023) 8926 final, Commission Implementing Decision of 21.12.2023 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/c69d5f53-6966-420f-86287ff84bf91646_en?filename=C_2023_8926_F1_ANNEX_EN_V2_P1_3132789.PDF 5 PNDR 2014-2020 - Ministerul Agriculturii si Dezvoltarii Rurale https://www.madr.ro/pndr-2014-2020.html 6 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2023/361/oj 7 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2022/139/oj”
  GMOs
• 2024-10-16 “E-002096/2024 Answer given by Mr Wojciechowski on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is aware of the economic importance of the EU wine sector and is committed to supporting its adaptation to climate change. The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) provides income support, several risk management tools, and sector-specific interventions aiming to address climate challenges. Through CAP’s Strategic Plans, Member States can tailor measures to mitigate and prevent negative effects of climate change, like preventive investments, harvest insurances and mutual funds, enhancing resilience against climate risks. Investments to adapt vineyards to the new climate conditions, including the reconversion of traditional grape varieties to more drought-resistant varieties are also supported under the CAP Strategic Plans, as well as investments for sustainable water management, including drip irrigation. Acknowledging the multiple challenges that the wine producers are facing, the Commission has established a High-Level Group (HLG) on Wine Policy to discuss and identify the most suitable adjustments to the policy framework that could help the sector to remain profitable in the future. Climate change is certainly among the main challenges discussed that need to be better addressed in future. The HLG is expected to issue policy recommendations by the end of this year, which will be used by the Commission as a basis for its reflection on the future wine policy.”
  Climate efforts
• “Thank you. Chair. I come from the jury where we talked about environmental crimes. And, um, I've been following this debate because it's very important to understand where we're at at the moment, what the reality is. I'm sorry that we can't seem to be aware of the fact that the. The EU will face. A will a lack of diesel for agriculture. It's the. The. It's affected. The lack of kerosene is affected. The aviation. And we're looking at a price in quantity in in prices. And there are no measures from the European Commission now about fertilizers. Can someone tell me why the hell we cannot produce our own fertilizers here in the EU? In Romania, I have a factory that produces 2.3 million tons of fertilizer a year. And we and of course, it's a private company, but we have this in the EU and now we we basically kill ourselves, killing ourselves and we don't let these factories produce. What is the European Commission doing? We have a crisis on our hands, and we have the option to produce these fertilizers at home and we do nothing. But I'm sorry, the European Commission. The colleague was saying that we are sleepwalking. We are indeed sleeping and sleepwalking. I want a clear action plan from the European Commission to to bring back into motion these factories that can bring the production back to Europe. Thank you very much, colleague Buddha.”
  Use of fertilisers
• “Cereals of course this drop in production at the European level amounts to 44% in France, with figures which are very poor for 2025 because the period of the harvest this year has been very difficult in the wine sector. Indeed, we have talked about the difficulties because of climate changes. But of course there is also a restriction of phytosanitary products which enables us to fight against certain diseases such as mildew. And then of course, this the drop in consumption of wine, which we we've seen again this year and we've talked about this in the past, there are a number of concerns for different sectors in the field of agriculture, in particular, when we see the the signing of the Mercosur agreement, this is going to raise more problems for us in the in the meat sector and in France. I think it's true that we are a large meat producing country and the farmers are very worried. We feel that there's got to be more fairness than technical details. Technical details. Debates are one thing, but we should talk to the farmers where we'll see that things aren't shiny. Where there are a number, a number of reasons for concern as to what the future holds. Thank you. Thank you very much. or renew.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Financial instruments that will allow farmers, on the one hand, to buy the fuel they need, and also, on the other hand, to buy the quantities of fertilisers that they find absolutely necessary, that they need to use at the most opportune time. Because there's another problem. Madam director, the quantities available on the market at the moment in Romania, the farmers are telling me that apart from the high prices of fertilisers, there's a shortage, A shortage of fertilizers. They don't have suppliers they can rely on to provide fertilizers, regardless of the price you're prepared to pay. And that's why I'm saying there has to be an immediate intervention to make available financing to farmers, to allow them to deal with the increased prices, on the one hand that farmers are facing, but also make sure that there's enough fertilizer on the market for them. If we react too late, it will be too late to correct things at a later stage. I know that you will mention options that the Commission may have as its disposal, but I'd first like to give the floor to other colleagues. Other coordinators. Miss Maestre for the Socialists and Democrats.”
  Use of fertilisers
• “(17:04:18 – 17:08:01): chair rapporteur. Yes. My political group also fully supports, the approval of this convention. We know that the environmental protection through criminal law has significantly evolved at European level, but the directive from 2008 has reached its limits. The these offenses are not followed. They are not, tried in court in many member states. We wish that all, environmental offenses be tried and sanctioned, effectively. And the new directive, is a essential step forward, but we must be aware of the fact that it is in its, beginning stage. The transposition is, deadline is 2026, and many member states are still moving very, very slowly. So its impact cannot be assessed. In this context, the Council of Europe Convention comes as a, natural, following step, which extends environmental protection through criminal law at international level, which is something that we have repeatedly asked for in this parliament. We wanted to extend the these 2 other states outside of the European Union. Criminal law criminal offenses are the fourth, type of offense at international level. We're talking about pollution, deforestation, traffic, dangerous substances traffic and dangerous substances. And I would also add here the import of waste between member states perpetrated by, organized crime. These offenses are, essentially trans, cross border offenses, so the answer must also be a transnational 1. Of course, this convention follows 3, important objectives. It wants to prevent and to prosecute, criminal offenses, creating, minimum standards for environmental protection and penalties, and, of course, consolidating cooperation at the international level. This convention introduces, a common list of offenses, which is greatly aligned with the European acquis and and common rules for, for criminal, liability and also, enforces, exchange of information and judicial assistance. These, new elements are not just a technical nature. They consolidate the role of the European Union as an exporter of standards in an environment where criminal actions are expanding. And I would like to make a note from the perspective of the agriculture committee because this would be an important help for, this field. It would, prosecute and it would maybe, prevent, the illegal use of pesticides, and it would protect, effectively soil and air in the EU and which would, of course, contribute to, combating combating crime, and it would offer a certainty for, agriculture, for, farmers, and for all the other operators in the field. Of course, it would, create a common level of ambition, maintaining the flexibility for member states. And I believe that this, is a coherent step forward in fighting, environmental crime. And as I said, we fully support, approving this convention. Thank you very much.”
  Environmental crimes and justice
• “Minister, I'm very happy to see you again. I took note of your efforts for animal welfare during the transport phase. You told us that you would like to introduce the highest standards and maintain them. It is a really and truly intricate issue and I would hope for coherence. On behalf of the Commission here in the Parliament, we do so because on the one hand, we want the reduction of emissions. But on the other hand, when it comes to animal welfare and transport, increasing space during transport. Well, I can tell you that millions of fuel will be spent. Additionally, due to the increase of space, there will be millions of litres of water used to clean the increased space. More chemicals will be used for cleaning cleaning agents. And at the same time, please remember that we have a deficit at the level of the EU of over half a million of drivers. The EU is lacking over Hundred thousand drivers and then coming to the slaughterhouses in the EU. If we look ahead and if we see what the cap will be financed and we will hear about this tomorrow, well then how would you like or how do you see an adequate financing of the cap? And stay true to your ambitions, because food ought to be still produced in the EU, and we should not be dependent on the imports. Thank you.”
  EU requirements on animal welfare for farmers
• “Thank you very much. Chairman. Commissioner, I'd like to come back to bluetongue disease because I'm very concerned about this. And. Oh. Excuse me. Foot and mouth disease. It's been once again found in Germany and Hungary. It's therefore very difficult to stop the development of this disease. And I'd like to ask whether the commission has developed a strategy for vaccination. I am aware of the export problems to third countries if these animals are vaccinated, but in my view, there's no other alternative. Only vaccination. I have spoken to vets and we have two vaccines as far as I understand. One when it is in one place and the animals are cold, but there's another vaccine which could perhaps be used so that animals can be can be monitored and then those animals can be eaten. Now, in your country, Commissioner, there has been significantly large farms with 33,000 animals, for instance, affected by this issue. The farmers. Have a long term loans over ten years. What happens to their work once these animals have been called cold? How can they have the necessary resources to pay their bills every month and to ensure the viability of their farms. Is the Commission thinking about the situation of these farmers? And are these farms being supported? Do they receive a compensation? Compensation just for the loss of animals is not enough. Thank you.”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU
• “Production standards outside the European Union, these are lower than within the European Union. And all of this translates into competitivity that will affect our agricultural sector. And it's important increasingly for the future to have a mechanism that will help us. Create a robust system for preventing products coming into our markets, which will negatively affect our competitivity, particularly looking at Mercosur. We need to look and ensure how we can protect and defend our farmers in the EU and guarantee food security throughout our territory. Of course, we do need access to products which are at a good price in the European Union, but we shouldn't forget that there are also conditions that allow for these products to be produced, which are associated with a lot of bureaucracy and other problems for farmers in the European Union. Food security is extremely important in terms of its consequences for farmers. Another point, which is extremely important is that we shouldn't forget Support given to the agricultural sector by other forms of farming. So there are various challenges inflation, war, drought, flooding. And it's important in the European Union that we guarantee food security and also our future.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU
• “Professor, when you mention competitiveness and you say that this mirror clauses would not affect competitiveness, you are mistaken. If we only speak of trade agreements, of course, we can look at the elements that have an impact on the competitiveness of the agri sector in the EU. Look at Mercosur, for instance. The production conditions in Mercosur are different than the ones in the European Union. When it comes to poultry. In the EU, there is a minimum surface per capita for egg laying hens. In Mercosur, there is no restriction. They can raise as many chickens as they want on the same surface. This has an impact on competitiveness. My colleague just mentioned that other countries can use all sorts of chemical substances that are banned in the EU, but what do these substances do? They increase competitiveness for Mercosur countries or other regions. That is why us in the agriculture. And please, we know what we speak about because we speak to farmers and they have all sorts of concerns. Well, if you want trade agreements, please do. Please go ahead. But please give us other farmers the same conditions as EU farmers. We want similar conditions. Otherwise this has an impact on EU competitiveness. And a great risk is that production will be relocated outside of the EU and a kilogram of beef or milk will no longer be €1, €2 it will be €100. So please take into account the sustainability of the agri sector. Please do not create issues for farmers with these trade agreements because they will go bankrupt. They are already having a hard time remaining in the agri sector. A farmer nowadays makes 45% less than any other sector in the EU and still they keep working. So please be very careful because we have to think about of our food, because we risk of becoming dependent on food imports from outside the EU. And now we are speaking of security. Nowadays, military um, more often than not. But please do not forget about food security because this is also very important and affordable prices too. Thanks.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “This is important. I think it's important for every politician to acknowledge their errors. And yes, the Green Deal was a mistake by the commission and I think we need to reconfigure it because we can't have a policy driven by the Greens. Uh, we need the role of farmers. They are key workers in protecting the environment, and they need to be properly financed. Otherwise, uh, if we just focus on the environment, farmers will be on their knees.”
  Agriculture (green)
• “And then young farmers. You've given us the numbers 164,000 farmers that you've supported. Um, they wanted to be inserted. But let's be serious here. We are responsible people. And every weekend we go in our hometowns and we look these people in the eyes. What can we tell them in the context of this new Cap proposal? As my colleague Sara Coleman was saying, it might become history. It might be a memory. Are you what are you doing about these young farmers? They are out of other sectors. We've given them a prospect in agriculture. But do we have the budgetary vision to allow them to have a dignified life in the rural areas, because we've drawn them to these areas? We've tricked them, we've fooled them, we've lured them there, and now we're cutting down on funding. I find this inaccessible and unacceptable from the commission, and you have to make sure that further on these farmers that have moved to rural areas and into agriculture will be able to carry on with their activity, not just for themselves, but for us here in order to have some food and to ensure food security. Now you have the floor. We have the time. Take as many minutes as you want, but please reply to the remarks made here. Thank you.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Your colleagues. Commissioner. The European Union was built on the principles of solidarity and equality. The cohesion policy aims to reduce disparities between regions Based on objective economic and social needs and not on other criteria. I have taken note of the initiative calling for special treatment, but I don't think that European funds should be granted based on national or identity criteria. Europe means unity in diversity. Regions need support in order to fight poverty, isolation or lack of infrastructure, regardless of language or religion. The cohesion policy shouldn't be turned into an instrument of fragmentation, of creating privileged regions where belonging to a particular minority counts more than the real needs of the population. National minorities undoubtedly need a legal framework that allows them to preserve their national cultural identity, and I am pleased that today my country, Romania, is an example of good practice at international level. Education in the languages of national minorities, and access to decision making bodies, including government and regional level, are just some examples. Commissioner, we need to say something very clearly. We need a cohesion policy that should not be diluted into other policies. We need to properly to properly fund it in order to reach all regions of the European Union. Thank you.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• “Commissioner. We have drafted an own initiative report, and we have very clearly said in this exactly what the needs were in the area of agriculture. And everyone rejects the Commission's proposal. We have nothing against you personally. It's just this proposal from the commission that we reject. It's very clear we need to have two pillars because we do not want. The mayors to be fighting with farmers and of course our countries. We don't want the farmers to have to be dependent on certain criteria that they cannot respect. The farmers will not know whether they're going to see a measure being moved from one pillar to another, whether it's going to be carried out fairly. And so they're going to have to have a lot of reserves. I think we need to continue to focus on developing our farming. And the the proposal from the commission does not meet any of the expectations of the farmers nor the European Parliament. The only solution that we have is to say no to this proposal.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• “Commissioner. The Cap budget must remain a separate one. It must in no way be diluted into other polities, and under no circumstances should it be cut Touching the cap budget today means weakening the very backbone of the European Union. This policy is not about subsidies. It's about food safety and the future of European villages. And today, these villages are slowly dying. 800 farms disappear every day, endangering our food security. Today's young farmers no longer believe in us. If we cut the budget, we will accelerate the abandonment of European agriculture. Our villages will become open air museums and we will import pesticide laden food from third countries. This is why I ask you firmly today. And clearly the Cap budget must remain separate, must be financed adequately, and it must be guaranteed post 2027. This is a red line, and who crosses this red line is responsible for the breakup of Europe. Thank you.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Thank you, director, for your work. I would like to talk about what was discussed last week in the European Parliament. These were genetically modified plants. And modified animal feed as well. This is all imported without respecting the rules. 80 to 90% of genetically modified plants are imported from Argentina and Brazil. This is 30 billion tons. So my question is Efsa says that these plants are safe when it comes to food safety. But I would like to know why can we not can we not cultivate these genetically modified plants which are rich in protein here? These plants do contain a lot of energy, but it should be up to member states to decide whether or not they want to choose these plants. Everything we're doing here is we're creating a fundamentally unfair competition for our farmers.”
  GMOs
• “Thank you very much. Thank you very much. I. Here, I would like to say that the our debate with farmers and their associations, uh, led to a lot of concerns. They wondered how we are going to continue to invest given this agreement with Mercosur. The main problems at the moment are those linked to costs for products in the European Union. This is what they have said. I'm not making this up. The the unit production costs for the European Union because of the different uh, requirements are very high. Uh, for Uh, for example, uh, you're talking about €2 for production of a kilo of veal. Whereas in Mercosur it's about half that. And then we're all going to end up on the same market. There's no way we can compete on that basis. So, well, we sign up to FTAs. But what does that mean for our own production standards? How are we going to make sure that we continue or our farmers continue to be competitive? And then you've got the cost of electricity and so on. So European farmers at the moment are facing major difficulties with being competitive in the European Union's market.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “We're critical of the fact that budget for the cohesion policy has been reduced, and nobody can deny that in the current programming period, cohesion received about 27% of the budget in the next period. That percentage is planned to be 40%. But we've merged the cohesion policy with the Cap and the fisheries policy, which means that the real budget was actually cut in real terms. This is in a context where we need more money for regions, not less. On another topic, which is quite controversial, I hear from beneficiaries of the cohesion policy and the Cap. We need separate funds for the cap and for the cohesion policy, because these beneficiaries should not be in direct competition with each other. We have to be able to plan the level of funding. These are the two pillars on which the stability of the European Union was built. If we want to territorial cohesion, we need these two policies with separate budgets. If we reduce funding. Then some regions will have their projects blocked because they won't have co-financing. There will be no stability when it comes to earmarked funds. So we will undermine legal certainty which goes against the treaties. The way it's distributed could create an injustice. Some member states cannot. Guarantee that the money will go to the regions that most need it, and the investment will be concentrated in richer regions. So Europe will then have to start helping disadvantaged regions again. The current policy doesn't just ignore those regions that are in this vicious cycle that are in a situation of economic stagnation, impoverishment and desertification. These regions are going to be even harder hit because without economic development, money will leave and population will leave, and we'll have an aging population there.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• “Chair, thank you. Having listened to this debate, it's become apparent how complex these problems are. It doesn't matter where we're talking about in Europe; farming faces the same challenges. Now, we heard from you yesterday, Commissioner, that we're not going to be pleased with the budget attached to farming and there's going to be a lessening of the C part of the Common Agricultural Policy. Now, farmers need predictability. How can we ensure generational renewal if there aren't prospects? This is a sector which is crying out for funding and there is no way of ensuring a decent standard of living for farmers. The quality of life in urban areas differs completely from rural areas, so we won't have farming if we don't have a decent livelihood. There are many Europeans who can't eat meat more than once a week, many Europeans who can't even eat a hot meal every day. We need to ensure that we continue to produce. We need to look at our trade balance and we need to ensure that we have affordable goods for our consumers. That's when we will have true food security. The next speaker is Mister Daniel Michel Grenier.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Thank you. Chair. Of course, we could keep talking about this issue related to agriculture and cohesion policy from the very beginning. Director, I want you to remember once again I repeated it over and over again. Me and other colleagues that this budget proposal is lower than our expectations. And I don't speak about expectations. I speak about the need to have today from the perspective of agriculture and cohesion policies. And I'm thinking about the budget line. On one hand and on one hand about one thing. I don't understand why you wanted to keep on doing it, to have pillar one and pillar two, pillar two and cohesion policy brought together. Because bringing pillar two of agriculture, together with cohesion policy means that you have destroyed both policies because you, uh, you have um, you made. You turned the farmers against the beneficiaries of cohesion policy and against mayors. And I hope we still have time to reharmonize to resettle this approach of the European Commission, because this minimum of 10% for rural areas coming from the European Commission is not sufficient for the needs on the spot. Why do I say it? Because the regions do not know what money to rely on. Director. Distinguished representatives of the European Commission. Do you have any idea how long it takes to draft a project? To have it authorised to go through all regulation authorities in the member states at least two years? How can an authority? Because we are at a committee, how can it, uh, start a project if it does not know what the financing sources are? The Court of Audit can then come and say, why did you do this project? You did not have the financing.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• “Director. Unfortunately, I do actually read read every page of regulations which come from the commission. Now, the letter you mentioned from miss von der Leyen. Is not a way of amending this regulation from a legal point of view. I'm also a lawyer. We have a legal problem when it comes to the procedure. We can't just include miss von der Leyen's letter in the operational part of the text. We need a correct communication so we can be clear about what is set out in that letter, so we can then be included.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• “Thank you chair. Thank you, ECA for the presentation. Colleagues. As already said, in this House, we are usually critical towards the ECA, but a big thank you this time around because one more time they confirm what we've been repeating in this house, that we do need a cap that's predictable for the farmers. Sadly, the European Commission has ignored completely our requests and I would like to send a message to the European Commission the financial constraints that financial time dimensions that we can understand, but we cannot understand the lack of predictability on when the ECA, which is supposed to go and check how the funds are spent, and the ECA says that they won't be able to do so now, what happens with the final users who will be responsible with, uh, putting this into practice? There will be a decommitment of these funds because farmers will not want to invest. They won't resort to these funds because they don't want to risk. If predictability is missing, then a sort of freedom is missing. So predictability is key. Now why do we need again this predictability now in terms of the CMO about the school vegetable scheme, you want a co-funding of 30%. Some member states won't be able to do so. So there will be challenges because the member states won't be able to fund these school schemes, which is defeating the commonality of the cap. Now we see that we are going through serious and deep crisis, and we are being a bit superficial when it comes to the Middle East conflict. What will happen if tomorrow farmers won't have the gas to plant their seeds, so there will be a lack of food down the stream. So this is why predictability is so key.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Chairman. Thank you very much. Thank you for your invitation. This regulation proposal has the purpose of creating a guarantee in case of market disturbances, and has the purpose of protecting our food safety and our rural areas. This is why the safeguards need to be efficient, not only theoretically, but also in practice. That said, I would like to say that the Mercosur agreement in its entirety is still very worrisome for the agricultural sector. Commercial agreements need to take into account the agri food sector, but also consumers which need which need to receive. Certain foods and, um, accessible foods. This is the only way we can maintain the competitiveness of the European agri food sector. Mira clauses need to become a reality in commercial agreements, and reciprocity clauses need to take into account the fact that certain goods that do not meet EU standards should be rejected from their entrance on the market. Now, as regards the compensations for loss of income, reality shows us that some things, some situations are tougher than we might imagine. So the funds allocated for compensation of loss of income might need to be higher. And then as regards the administrative capacity of the EU in its entirety, this administrative capacity needs to be high enough so that the EU can follow exactly what's happening with this agreement.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Thank you chair. I listened to the debate on my way here from the airport. Like my colleague Dorfmann said, we've been discussing this for a very long time. Biofuels versus food security. We don't manage to find a way to go forward, and we seem to be slipping on thin ice. I believe this problem. Biofuels is badly discussed in contrast with food. We need to develop biofuels, and we can do this in a complementary fashion to producing food. However, unfortunately, the European Commission doesn't have a strategic and balanced approach here. Ten years ago in Romania, it was very fashionable to have agro fuel facilities, but all of these were unfortunately shut down. So now we need to have a holistic approach on the one hand. And then on the other hand, we always talk about soy production and we would love to produce it in the EU. But dear colleagues, this is a plant that is very intensive in heat necessity. Not every state can produce it. And unfortunately, we are in a quite hypocritical environment because in the EU we don't have GMO soy, but we do.”
  GMOs
• “Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I thank the Commission for this very useful presentation because, of course, we've always been worried about the use of antimicrobials, because I say this for the citizens watching us. If you feed us antimicrobials to animals, this can lead to Amr, to resistance to antimicrobials. And of course this needs to be managed properly. But there is an undeniable reality. These antibiotics are very expensive. They cost an arm and a leg. And of course, farmers will only use them when necessary because otherwise it would be a huge cost for any farm. I would like to know if the European Commission has an assessment on Member States regarding antibiotic antimicrobial consumption, and on species for each species. It's very important to go even further to use this data to move on to an exchange of good practices between member states, because let's say Romania, for example, the consumption for cattle, for milk cows is different and it's different from Germany. And what can farmers do in order to cut down on use of antimicrobials? Because they cost a lot. They mean huge costs for the farmers. And we need to see these good examples of good practices in order to reduce such consumption. For each farm, because otherwise, of course, we might find ourselves in the same situation when we were talking about pesticides, pesticides, pesticides. Of course, we had the first regulation and we had a huge debate. There were huge differences among member states regarding the use of pesticides, and we wouldn't want to find ourselves in the same position now with antimicrobial antimicrobials to have such huge differences between member states. Because if we have this subjective reduction, 50% without looking at the consumption of each member states of use and each member states, of course we need to have clear data about this before we make any decisions.”
  Antimicrobial resistance