Tom VANDENDRIESSCHE

Policy topics Tom VANDENDRIESSCHE is active on

What Tom VANDENDRIESSCHE has said (22)

• 2026-03-19 “Answer given by Mr Brunner on behalf of the European Commission 19.5.2026 Written question The EU Internet Forum provides a collaborative environment to explore responses against terrorism, child sexual abuse, and other crimes online. The handbook in question provides information to support online platforms in their voluntary efforts to keep their users safe and to protect EU fundamental rights, including freedom of expression. The handbook does not equate Eurosceptic or anti-establishment speech and political satire with violent extremism. EU legislation , such as the Digital Services Act (DSA) [1] and the Terrorist Content Online Regulation [2] , includes strong safeguards to protect fundamental rights, in particular freedom of expression and information online. For example, the DSA introduces transparency requirements and redress mechanism, empowering users to obtain explanations and redress if their content is removed or restricted . These measures aim to ensure that any content moderation aiming to remove illegal and harmful content remains lawful, non-discriminatory and fully aligned with EU values. [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj/eng. [2] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/784/oj/eng.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• 2025-11-13 “E-004520/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission Under the Digital Services Act (DSA) 1 , providers of designated very large online platforms (VLOPs), such as Facebook and Instagram, are required to diligently identify, analyse, assess and mitigate systemic risks presented by their services in the EU, including risks to fundamental rights such as freedom of expression and media pluralism and risks to civic discourse. These risk assessments are mandated at least annually and must also occur prior to deploying any functionalities that could significantly impact a platform’s risk profile (Article 34(1) of the DSA). In these risk assessments, providers must consider how their algorithmic systems, such as artificial intelligence (AI) features integrated into VLOPs, may affect these risks. It is Meta’s responsibility to comply with the provisions under the applicable EU and national laws, including the DSA and provisions protecting freedom of expression. The Commission is monitoring Meta’s compliance with the DSA overall 2 . However, at this stage, the Commission has not investigated any specific internal guidelines used for Meta’s AI chatbots. The DSA applies to companies providing certain services in the EU regardless of the location of their headquarters. 1 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/digital-services-act. 2 Commission sends requests for information on generative AI risks to 6 very large online platforms and 2 very large online search engines under the Digital Services Act https://digitalstrategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/commission-sends-requests-information-generative-ai-risks-6-very-large-onlineplatforms-and-2-very.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• 2025-07-10 “E-002829/2025 Answer given by Mr Hoekstra on behalf of the European Commission The Commission takes note of the Canadian Government’s decision to suspend its planned implementation of a digital tax. As this is a sovereign policy decision, it is not a matter for the European Commission to comment on. As stated, the Commission and its Member States would prefer a multilateral solution to the tax challenges arising from the digitalisation of the economy. Significant work in this regard has been undertaken by the Organisation on Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) as part of Pillar 1 of the Two-Pillar solution. For the time being, the OECD discussions on Pillar 1 are temporarily on hold. However, the United States (US) administration has communicated its intention to resume the discussions on Pillar 1 once a solution on Pillar 2 is found. The recent G7 statement issued on 28 June 2025 on the coexistence of Pillar 2 with the US tax system gives a positive signal towards finding solutions. The Commission therefore expects that the discussions on Pillar 1 could resume at OECD later this year. The Commission aims to focus its efforts on developing and securing a successful multilateral solution at global level. This requires providing the OECD process with the requisite space and time to develop. The Commission will continue to engage constructively with third countries, including the US, to foster a multilateral solution within the OECD. In case a global solution cannot be agreed, the Commission would remain in close contact with the European Parliament and Member States on the best way forward. It is the sovereign right of the EU and its Member States to put in place tax policies that ensure fair and equitable taxation of all economic operators, including in the area of digital taxation.”
  EU-US trade relations
• 2025-07-10 “E-002830/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is aware of the new measures put in place in the United Kingdom and has collaborated with Ofcom as part of an administrative arrangement signed in 2024. The EU’s commitment to protect children online is at the core of the Digital Services Act (DSA). The adoption of meaningful age verification measures by providers of online platforms hosting pornographic content is a priority for the Commission. In May 2025, the Commission initiated proceedings to assess whether the providers of Pornhub, Stripchat, XNXX, and XVideos breached the DSA in relation to the ability of minors to access pornography and the apparent lack of age verification 1 . In parallel, the Commission and the European Board for Digital Services launched a coordinated action under the DSA on minors accessing pornographic platforms of all sizes 2 . In July 2025, the Commission published guidelines on the protection of minors online. The guidelines set out the measures that providers of online platforms accessible to minors should adopt to comply with their obligation to ensure a high level of privacy, safety and security to minors 3 . These state that age verification should be put in place to restrict minors’ access to content posing a high risk to their privacy, safety and security, and that should only be available for adults. The Commission simultaneously launched the pilot phase of an age-verification app, intended to bridge the gap until the EU Digital Wallet becomes available in 2026 4 . The app can be made available by the Member States and used by providers of online platforms to verify whether a user is over 18, without revealing further identity information. The Commission is committed to building on this years’ progress and working towards meaningful solutions to protect minors online. 1 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/commission-opens-investigations-safeguard-minors-pornographiccontent-under-digital-services-act. 2 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/european-board-digital-services-launches-coordinated-actionreinforce-protection-minors-regards. 3 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/commission-publishes-guidelines-protection-minors. 4 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/eu-age-verification.”
  Regulation of pornography in the EU
• 2025-05-27 “E-002118/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on on behalf of the European Commission The Digital Services Act (DSA) 1 contributes to a safe, predictable and trusted online environment, in which fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, 2 are effectively protected. The DSA protects with robust safeguards freedom of expression ensuring that EU citizens are informed about when and why online platforms providers remove content. According to the DSA, providers like Meta must include information on any restrictions imposed in relation to the use of the relevant service in their terms and conditions. Under that provision, the relevant providers are required to inter alia explain their content moderation rules and enforce any restriction rules diligently, objectively, and proportionately, with due regard to the rights and legitimate interests of all parties involved, including the fundamental rights of the recipients of the service and other fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter. 3 In addition, providers are required to provide clear and specific reasons for their content moderation decisions and must submit these statements and decisions to the Commission, so that they can be included in a publicly accessible transparency database. 45 These obligations ensure that service’s recipients have the means to challenge content moderation decisions. Moreover, providers of online platforms are required to establish an effective internal complaint-handling system allowing recipients to lodge complaints, in case they disagree with a content moderation decision. 6 As part of the DSA investigation against Meta 7 , the Commission is examining whether recipients in the EU have access to an effective internal complaint-handling system. 1 Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act), OJ L277/1. (https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj/eng). 2 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, OJ C326/391. (https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/treaty/char_2012/oj/eng). 3 Article 14 DSA. 4 Articles 17 and 24(5) DSA. 5 https://transparency.dsa.ec.europa.eu/. 6 Article 20 DSA. 7 On 30 April 2024 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/list-designated-vlops-and-vloses#ecl-inpagemetaplatforms.”
  Digital platforms liability for harmful and illegal content · Disinformation & online freedoms
• 2025-01-29 “E-000406/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is in the process of preparing a detailed overview of the costs incurred in 2024 for the fulfilment of the tasks under Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 (Digital Services Act (DSA), 1 in accordance with Article 43(7) of that Regulation). The information requested by the Honourable Member on the cost of the compliance team in 2024 will be included in this report. On 30 June 2023, the Commission estimated the cost for 123 Full-Time Equivalents (FTEs) needed in 2024 at EUR 19.41 million 2 . As a reference, the costs incurred in 2023 for 36 FTEs amounted to EUR 7.38 million 3 . The information required by the Honourable Member in his second question, on the estimation of costs to be incurred in 2025, is publicly available in the staff working document published by the Commission on 30 June 2024. The overall number of FTEs necessary for the fulfilment of the tasks referred to in Article 43(2) of the DSA is estimated for the year 2025 at 202 FTEs. The associated cost is estimated at EUR 29.21 million 4 . The cost resulting from the implementation of the DSA by the Commission, including the estimated additional resources, is covered by external assigned revenues stemming from the supervisory fees charged by the Commission on providers of very large online platforms and of very large online search engines, in line with the provisions of Article 43(2) of the DSA and part of the Commission budget (line number 02.200305). 1 Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act): https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj/eng 2 SWD(2023) 242: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/dsa-overview-elements-accounted-estimationamount-external-assigned-revenues-stemming-supervisory 3 COM(2024) 523: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM:2024:523:FIN 4 SWD(2024) 167: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/overview-elements-accounted-estimationamount-external-assigned-revenues-stemming-supervisory-fee”
  Digitalization of public governance & administration · Size of EU budget
• 2024-09-25 “E-001816/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Vestager on behalf of the European Commission As mentioned by the Honourable Member, the Commission initiated formal proceedings on 30 April 2024 against Meta inter alia ‘for shadow banning’ practices 1 . In addition, the Commission is examining the potential impact of Meta’s practices, including shadow banning, on the systemic risks to which it services give rise, as referred to in Article 34 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 (DSA) 2 . However, the Commission cannot disclose further details on the ongoing investigation. As referred to in recital 55 DSA, shadow banning may consist in the demotion of content in ranking or in recommender systems, as well as in limiting accessibility by one or more recipients of the service or blocking the user from an online community without the user being aware. The Commission is investigating whether Meta’s practices, including the policy linked to the ‘political content approach’ that demotes political content in the recommender systems of Instagram and Facebook (including their feeds), are compliant with its DSA obligations, including the obligation to provide a clear and specific statement of reasons for any restrictions imposed on the visibility of specific items of information laid down in Article 17 DSA. The investigation will focus on the compatibility of this policy with the transparency and user redress obligations under the DSA, as well as the requirements to assess and mitigate risks to civic discourse and electoral processes. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_2373 2 Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act), OJ L 277, 27.10.2022, p. 1–102.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms · Recommender systems
• 2024-08-14 “E-001511/2024 Answer given by Mr Reynders on behalf of the European Commission The Commission does not have a general competence to intervene in elections of the Member States. Subject to the respect of certain basic principles, such as those laid down in Articles 2 and 10 of the Treaty on European Union, and their international commitments, it is the competence and the responsibility of the Member States to lay down the specific conditions for the conduct of elections, including on electronic voting, and of the competent national administrative and judicial authorities to ensure compliance with applicable law and relevant international standards. Such standards may include transparency, fairness and reliability. As regards the elections to the European Parliament, national electoral procedures must also comply with the principles set out in the Act concerning the election of the Members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, which do not specify who may vote 1 . The Court explained in Delvigne 2 that the definition of the persons entitled to exercise that right therefore falls within the competence of each Member State in compliance with EU law. In December 2023, the Commission issued a Compendium of electronic voting practices 3 which includes specific information on ensuring integrity of electronic voting systems, including through effective testing and auditing of systems. In 2023, the Commission presented a Recommendation on inclusive and resilient elections 4 which highlighted, among others, the importance of ensuring necessary safeguards and appropriate training for election officials when introducing e-voting. The Commission intends to review the follow-up being given to the Recommendation by Member States in the context of the Commission’s Report on the 2024 European elections. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A01976X1008%2801%29-20020923 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62013CJ0650 3 https://commission.europa.eu/system/files/2023-12/compendium.pdf 4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32023H2829”
  Rule of law and democracy in the EU (political compass)
• 2024-07-26 “E-001435/2024 Answer given by Ms McGuinness on behalf of the European Commission In December 2021, the project for a feasibility study for a European asset registry was awarded to a consortium led by the Centre for European Policy Studies. On 18 February 2022, the project, including its different tasks and timeline was presented to the Expert Group on Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing 1 . The consortium then started its work and the study was published on 10 July 2024 2 . The study was commissioned at the specific request of the European Parliament 3 . As with all study projects, it does not, by any means, prejudge future Commission policy. The study takes stock of asset registers in the EU. It further sets out the main operational and legal obstacles to the creation of a potential EU asset registry, namely regarding restrictions to fundamental rights of EU citizens. The Commission would further like to recall that the creation of a register of assets at European level was not included in its July 2021 Anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism legislative package (AML package) 4 . Despite it being part of the European Parliament’s negotiating mandate, the creation of such an EU asset register was also not retained by the co-legislators in their final agreement on the AML package. Instead, co-legislators agreed to a more targeted approach focusing on a limited set of highvalue goods such as luxury cars, boats and planes. The new AML framework, that will now need to be implemented by Member States, does not foresee the creation of new asset registers, but rather provides for systematic transaction information reporting. 1 https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/regdel/web/meetings/2832/documents/8130 2 https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/0d82b09f-3ff9-11ef-865a-01aa75ed71a1 and https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/050b047e-3ff5-11ef-865a-01aa75ed71a1 3 See Working Document on Pilot projects and Preparatory actions in budget 2020 and 2021, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/BUDG-DT-648406_EN.pdf 4 https://finance.ec.europa.eu/publications/anti-money-laundering-and-countering-financing-terrorismlegislative-package_en”
  EU regulation on financial data access · Anti-money laundering regulation
• “Madam president, dear colleagues, the European Union's climate policy is a real disaster. Energy is more expensive than elsewhere in the world, and that's because of the ETS. And this is punishing companies. It's quite simple. Companies and families who want to heat their homes in China, they protect their industry. But in the EU we just punish them with the E. S more measures, more bureaucracy and price hikes for energy. And if that weren't enough, we are getting version two of ETS with more requirements on companies, extra taxes added to the existing taxes that are already a burden on households in Europe. The European Commission doesn't understand the real lives of men and women around Europe. This is a climate madness. While the population is paying the price for the policies they adopt, what the European Union needs is cheap energy and especially common sense.”
  Extension of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
• “Thank you very much, Commissioner. I'm going to be speaking Dutch. 1984 was a warning, not a manual. As a democracy, shield tells us, we have to be protected against ourselves. There is a fear of the opinions of public opinion. So we have to control sources of information. Were facing a magistracy, Marine Le Pen was excluded from political life, and other politicians in Romania have been. Disqualified because the results of the election were not to the taste of the regime that happened in Romania. It's going to happen in Germany as well. So this is how we put our democracy at risk with the Digital Services Act. Legal opposition has been muzzled. Any criticism of the political climate? Is denounced as a madness. Many governments are effectively, directly or indirectly censoring. When they're under pressure. So I have a question, but I've been interrupted.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• “Honourable members Europe is the weak link and unfortunately, the European Union is to blame. It started as a peace project and has now become a war mongering monster project. Smaller member states cannot see their rights trampled under foot by larger countries. That is the lesson we must learn from history. And so the veto right is vitally important. It is a guarantee of freedom and it is no longer being respected. Legal manipulation is being applied and we are seeing brutal power plays. What ever the cost, they are looking to wage war as long as they themselves do not have to pay the price. What about these Russian frozen assets? What if those do not suffice and they need further billions? We are seeing cynicism and war mongering by the European Union. The. We are seeing a bank heist, if you like, the largest bank heist in history, which comes with great risk. If you wish to support Ukraine, you are free to do so with your own resources and bear your own responsibilities. Thank you.”
  EU-Ukraine relations
• “You very much indeed Europe and more particularly Belgium is overwhelmed by asylum seekers in twenty twenty four forty million twenty twenty five the government registered fifty thousand requests. If you look at the Netherlands with the double Belgium's population has less than half the number of asylum requests. Almost half of these requests come from Palestinians. Across the EU the majority of these requests can be found in Belgium because Belgium has the highest level of positive decisions. Now the process is very long indeed and very few successful returns this is what's happened in twenty twenty four twenty twenty five. The DVIVA government has shown it's completely incapable of dealing with this these increasing numbers. Palestinian refugees have to travel through a number of safe countries before arriving in Belgium and submitting their request. It seems that Belgium has become the whipping horse for all for the rest of Europe here.”
  Asylum & border control
• “Now, of course, you need to show responsibility. Now, that tale may play well with children, but it is not realistic. Now we have a risk here with this bank heist. It undermines the financial stability of Europe and the Western banking system. We have another risk here. The European Union is not willing to show solidarity and collectively guarantee this risk. It is leaving it to a small member state alone. And I can't accept that risk. Thank you.”
  European Banking Union
• “President, ladies and gentlemen, with the Green Deal, the EU wanted to introduce climate obligations, climate regulation and climate taxes. And that's meant to be the future. And even this is going to save the world. This dogmatic climate policy has meant that across the world, Europe is being passed by the US, by China, And they don't see anything attractive about what this policy is meant to achieve. The question about banning plastic straws and having your bottle tops tethered is something that people are bemused about in other parts of the world, and make products twice as expensive as others are. We can't negate this. And yet now we have the competitiveness compass. At least there's a recognition that there is a problem. But what's the solution from the European Commission? Well, it seems even more Green Deal is the answer. So billions of subsidies are going to failing and disastrous policies in trying to maintain life in them. Maybe this is the way Soviet Union's planned economy approach is meant to be. A planned economy didn't work back then, and this climate deal will not work either. You're not going to work with subsidies Days and, uh, these sort of policies, you've got to work with innovation and look to the future. So we want to see a complete abolishment of the Green Deal and a return to the policies of common sense. That's the first and most essential step to allow our competitiveness to work on an equal footing with others.”
  Climate efforts
• “The European Committee states that it wants to protect democracy with the so-called democracy shield. But here it's not about protecting our democracy, it's about protecting themselves themselves against the will of the people, because the people is not allowed to have another opinion than anything that tallies with climate, mass migration and endless wars. The democracy shield is nothing other than a ministry of truth that wants to decide what the only truth is, and what you can't doubt about any more. With its own press regime and its its own authorities, they can decide what is allowed and what they deem to be dangerous. But in a real democracy, dear colleagues, there is there are no dangerous opinions. In a real opinion, the freedom of expression, of freedom of opinion is not a risk. It is actually a fundamental building block. Let's be clear here. If there's any danger here for our democracy, then it is not coming from outside, but it is coming from this European Commission itself. Thank you.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• “Thank you very much. Now, Mr.. President. Colleague, the digital service law and artificial intelligence, it's being sold as a protection of our digital sovereignty, but in reality, it doesn't protect us at all from dominance. Outwith It builds a wall against the freedom. So we talk about freedom. But when you talk about freedom, you mean controls. You talk about transparency, but you mean subjugation. You talk about truth, but you mean obeying. That's not protecting our democracy. It is allowing censure to be used by the lawmakers to hide behind. And surely it should be possible for citizens to say anything they want. But you mean they can say anything they want as long as they don't say what they really think? Nobody should be strong enough to beat down truth. Nobody should be strong enough to undermine freedom. But citizens are going to suffer if this goes through. Thank you.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• “I really don't understand what you're driving at. My point is that small member states need their veto right to protect themselves. Larger countries cannot trample underfoot the smaller member states. That is precisely the point I was making.”
  EU political integration
• “Honourable member I would quote Mr. Costa, Council president, late last count last week, he said that this trade agreement is clearly uneven. The focus is on the war in Ukraine. We need a new strategy. We need peace and a strong Europe.”
  Russia-Ukraine conflict (10th term)
• “Thank you commissioner for the PFE group Mr Bandit Riese Fluoresource thank very— Much. In two thousand and twenty four there were almost forty thousand asylum requests in Belgium. In two thousand and twenty five we were thinking about two hundred and fifty thousand additional demands. So our system for welcoming migrants has been held up and the number of asylum seekers continues to go up. The European Commission's strategy seems to be about organizing migration. We can manage migration as we've done like a tap to ensure that there are few people coming in. I think that regular mega migration is going to be replaced by legal migration but in reality the number of irregular migrants continues to increase and that's all. And there are new channels being created as well for legal migration. There's the European talent pool that you've mentioned. So in reality what you're doing is opening the door even more. The strategy has been applauded by our government. It was said that Belgium had to pay twenty thousand euros for asylum seekers. We're already the country that seems to have most asked of it at European level and this is unfair. It's unfair for European citizens who work very hard, especially for Flemish citizens who work very hard. Forty thousand asylum seekers was the figure last year. If that figure rises even further then how are we supposed to take care of them? There was a leaked document that appeared in the press that said that Belgium was supposed to take in a certain—an additional number of asylum seekers or it would have to pay even more. I would like to know the exact figures please.”
  Asylum & border control
• “Honourable members. That is an interesting viewpoint. You refer to Baltic states and Poland, EU member states, and so is Belgium, my country. And we would show solidarity accordingly. Now what are our duties? We need to face facts. Ukraine is not a member of the European Union nor NATO. There is no treaty that requires us to demonstrate solidarity. Now how I would recognise a moral duty to support Ukraine. And that is what my party and country has done by taking in refugees.”
  Russia-Ukraine conflict (10th term)
• “For the normal protest, colleagues, Antifa is not a normal left wing protest movement. It is an international network which is protected and funded internationally, and they fight against the globalized world, and they try and intimidate people at the national level and attack them just because they have a different opinion from theirs. Racists, fascists, they're the labels they place on us. And this discourse is tolerated even though people are sometimes killed. Charlie Kirk, Quentin de rank, for example, the left has blood on its hands, but it continues to distract attention. And I think this really shows the situation that we're in. This Antifa organization is on no terrorist list, but what we do need to do is reveal their sources of funding because those who defend Antifa today are involved in violence.”
  Regulation of NGOs in Europe