Svenja HAHN

Policy topics Svenja HAHN is active on

What Svenja HAHN has said (40)

• 2026-06-17 “Oh, now it's on. Dear colleagues, a social media ban for minors means everyone needs to ID themselves on social media all the time. Age verification is the end to anonymity anonymity and free Internet as we know it. Children protection is once again disguised, as the disguise for surveillance. This week, The UK introduced a social media ban, and the backlash is massive and right fully so. Because we see a ban is not working, 60 percent of children in Australia circumvent the ban. The evidence for a social media ban is not there. Experts and academics all over the world Say it. Make the Internet safer for kids. Don't ban them from it. But too little politicians are willing to do the hard things to fix it. Hold platforms accountable. Make it safer for kids to be online, and put digital literacy, in the education program and hold parents accountable. Don't let anyone fool you. We can protect children online without building a massive surveillance infrastructure.”
  Age restrictions on children's access to social media
• 2026-06-16 “The big AI innovation is happening outside the EU. And after the cut off of Europe from the latest anthropic models, really, everyone must see how vulnerable and dependent we are. And yet the voices that cry the loudest over the lack of powerful European AI, the voices that call for European tech sovereignty and protectionism. Those are the same voices that pushed the hardest against cutting red tape for European companies. The rest of the world is way ahead of us, and I'm going to say it to everybody who really believes that innovation can thrive in the shadow of the wall of protectionism that you want to build. Look at the history. Look how it made people poorer and countries fall apart. Cutting red tape is not about giving in to China, to the US, or to big tech. It's about giving room for innovation for our European companies. Tech sovereignty. We will reach through deregulation, lower taxes, more affordable energy and more capital so that our smartest minds can just go and innovate.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• 2026-06-16 “The big AI innovation is happening outside the EU. And after the cutoff of Europe from the latest anthropic models, really everyone must see how vulnerable and deep it end we are. And yet the voices that cry the loudest over the lack of powerful European AI, the voices that call for European tech sovereignty and mean protectionism, those are the same voices that push the hardest against cutting red tape for European companies. The rest of the world is way ahead of us, and I'm going to say it to everybody who really believes that innovation can thrive in the shadow of the wall of protectionism that you want to build. Look at the history. Look how it made people poorer and countries fall apart. Cutting red tape is not about giving into China, to The US, or to big tech. It's about giving room for innovation for our European companies. Tech sovereignty, we will reach through deregulation, lower taxes, more in affordable energy, and more capital so that our smartest minds can just go and innovate.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU · EU digital & tech sovereignty
• “Colleagues made in Europe. It must stand for excellence rather than bureaucracy. It's good that the Commission has finally taken ideas from the Draghi report to the 28th regime is overdue. We need initiatives. Initiatives for strengthening innovation is important. We need to speed up when it comes to AI cloud infrastructure on quantum computing. It's a shame that miss von der Leyen isn't here for the whole debate. I would have want to see more daringness from you when it comes to the market economy and tackling red tape. You want you want to make 38 new proposals to add to the 111 existing and but only 25 proposals. You want to remove 25 proposals and one law and and three omnibuses. We need we need to reduce regulation, not more, because the present omnibus initiatives are not enough. And Miss Sphondylium, do you have the courage to think big for competitiveness, energy independence and a strong and genuine single market because a Europe with a strong economy. That's the only way to have a strong Europe in the world.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Instead of deregulation, the commission's work programme just includes a whole unlimited number of new ideas, including getting rid of all sorts of legislation. There are 37 pieces of legislation which are blocked, so you can get rid of those, but there are 123 new pieces of legislation that are being brought in. There are 45 new ones that are coming in almost immediately. New regulation is not going to generate growth. We have to stop with this heavy handed approach that is really dragging our industry into a coma and undermining our single Europe. We need to have a U-turn. We need to get rid of bureaucracy if we want open free trade. Europe has to become a hotspot for capital and innovation. We have to strengthen the social market economy, not the state economies. Let us not destroy Europe. I want Brussels to be seen as opportunity. Let us do it better.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “In general, more trade with more us makes us more versatile and less dependent on individual partners. So diversifying our trade and having more trade agreements is the thing that the EU needs to do now. And we need to talk with the US for finding solution in specific sectors, like we're doing in the Trade and Trade and Technology Council. And if we have more partners that will strengthen us, that will strengthen our partners, and we need more dialogue with the US now more than ever. We do not need less dialogue.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Thank you very much, Commissioner, for being with us. And thank you for being so clear on enforcing competition rules. Uh. Um, also from my group, uh, full support for that. I think, uh, we might disagree on some aspects of the DMA, but I think we should all agree that the EU is based on rule of law and that we enforce our competition rules no matter where you're based and no matter how big you are. And we've seen that. Mr. Drum, uh, Mr. Trump has been claiming that our digital legislation is, uh, um, to harm US companies. I think quite the opposite is correct. Now you find two American companies. Um, but I think no matter if you're based in Cupertino or in Amsterdam as a gatekeeper, uh, the rules apply for everyone. Um, no matter how close you are to the Oval Office or how far you are, um, and we see that competition is good for everyone. Also, for us, companies like Mozilla, um, like DuckDuckGo or German company like Ecosia. Um, and also for app developers and Market place sellers. Um, I think it's, it's good that we make clear that we are the place for respecting the rule of law. Uh, if you want to do business in our single market. Um, so particularly thinking about that, I'm looking into AI and competition in, in AI. Um, I would really strongly encourage you to, to continue the way of enforcing our competition rules. Um, and I think the hardest talk of the town is everyone is seeing that meta is now starting to use data from its users for AI training purposes. And I was wondering if the commission is currently looking into this topic from a competition perspective because it's a huge access to data that they have compared to other companies. So do you see the process that meta has set up as compliant with EU rules?”
  EU rules on digital competition
• “Geopolitics in uncertain geopolitical times. There are some things we cannot afford, and one of those things is an incomplete single market because partners like the US are becoming more and more unpredictable. More and more countries are massively betting on their own economies. The EU must finally pull out its biggest asset, which is our single market. And to be honest, it's unbelievable how we keep on putting spokes in our own wheels are getting bogged down in national egotism, national exceptions. It is this that is holding back a genuine single market. Our aim has to be one product, one service subject to the same rules in one market. If we finally complete the single market for services for the digital and energy union, for the capital markets, if we cut through red tape, instead of increasing more and more rules and regulations, then we will create what we need, which is a strong single market which will boost Europe economically and geopolitically. Instead of a fragmented single market that weakens us both internally and externally. Commissioner, I wish you all the best. Every success in your fight for a strong single market.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Thank you very much for joining us. Thank you very much, Commissioner. Thank you, Stefan, for for joining us. Um, I was listening very, very careful. Uh, to to your words. And I think you really set the right focus, particularly in this very, very difficult times. Um, Europe really needs to ramp up being an economic powerhouse, and we really need to tap the potential that we have in industry and innovators, particularly now that we see that the US no longer, um, is, uh, secure, um, market for, you know, people and for capital. So we really need to do our own homework to attract business and enable growth here. Um, so I'm very grateful that you're working on the single market strategy and the digital fitness check, um, which even might lead to a digital omnibus. Um, so particularly for that, um, I'm really interested to hear a bit more about your personal assessment, particularly on the digital fitness check. Um, I'm really convinced that, uh, we need a digital omnibus that streamlines and simplifies the obligations from our recently adopted digital rulebook. There are quite some overlaps in the And the definition from from legislation to legislation, and particularly thinking about the AI act. That was one of the the leading negotiators, um, from my group there. Um, I think it became overly complicated in the end. And it creates, in some parts, a lot of unnecessary legal uncertainty. And we hear from a majority of European businesses, um, that look at it in a way that it's hampering instead of supporting innovation. I know the Commission is planning to propose an action plan on AI this week as well. Um, but maybe you can share a bit. What way can the AI rules and obligation be simplified beyond just giving better guidance and offering a single point of contact on the regulation? Particularly, maybe you see some potential to relieve businesses from the regulatory burden of the AI act. And how could that work? Maybe in an omnibus proposal, particularly also because the act is not yet fully enforced? Force. Thank you very much.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “Particularly, we have seen bilateral trade in both goods and services increasing in the past years. And with 99% of tariff lines abolished by 2024, I mean, that is, uh, an amount of terrorists being abolished we would be dreaming of with other relationships. Um, so even more importantly, the initial fears of Canadian beef flooding the European market have not materialized, with only around 2% of the annual quota for beef under the agreement used in 2023, so we've seen it's been a success on all on all areas also where there are worries. We see that they have not materialised. Um, of course there are areas for improvement as well. Um, particularly the aspect of e-commerce, uh, that chapter obviously no longer lives up to the standards of modern trade agreements. Uh, so I was very happy to see that the rapporteur already included an amendment on digital trade, uh, with Canada and the draft opinion. And I'm really looking forward to work on this. And I will table amendments building on these points and yeah, hopefully strengthening the resolution even further. Thank you very much.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• “Thank you. Thank you very much, chair. I must agree, I say I agree with the rapporteur. I think the simplification exercise is absolutely necessary. Um, I think we need to see that we make this set of regulation legislation and reporting requirements more feasible for European companies. I think it's quite clear that we're not achieving competitiveness by overregulation. I think we actually had the opportunity with both the Csrd and the triple D to give our companies a competitive advantage. We know that consumers are becoming more conscious when it comes to to transparency, when it comes to sustainability of supply chains. But somehow along the way, during the negotiations, we lost track of the sensibility of this and the duty to respect, protect and safeguard human rights ultimately lays with the state and not with with companies. But obviously, in a globalized and digitized world, the responsibility for observing universal human rights must be borne by the entire international community by doing their due diligence. Companies help to to respect and strengthen human rights. But however, this can not only this can only be done in addition to to the state obligation to protect and not as a substitute. So we need to think about European legislation should be designed in such a way that they support companies and makes it easier for them to live up to their corporate responsibility. And this is where we got it wrong. I believe instead of making it easier for companies to take the responsibility. We created massive new burdens. And this is a situation that the omnibus package now needs to fix. I personally believe some parts of the package, like the Kpsp-cd, would be better to be withdrawn, but the priority now is to simplify it, to streamline the obligation and to ensure that the measures do not negatively affect our SMEs as our backbone of the economy. I think the commission proposal is a good starting point. I would like to go even further, be bolder in aspects for simplification, but we will reflect that in our amendments that we're going to be putting forward. Thank you.”
  Due diligence in supply chains (environmental and human rights)
• “Colleagues. 100 days of the von der Leyen Commission. And we're once again talking about reducing bureaucracy and competitiveness. I could just come up and read you my speech from a month ago. We need to leave these kind of statements behind and deliver results. So the first omnibus can only be the beginning. We need to cut excessive regulation and reporting. So I renew my call to the commission. Please withdraw the excessive proposals for legislation from the last term, because otherwise we'll find that the oligarchs, etc. have exploit the gaps. What we need to do is use our power in the world to succeed. But when I hear about growth being supported by zombie zombie subsidies, I get worried. We need to reduce red tape, be a pragmatic partner and Develop partnerships throughout the world and turn Europe into a hotspot for capital and innovation. Thank you.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “In a world which is more insecure geopolitically, we can't rely on others. Our economic and geopolitical strength starts in our own single market. We need a genuine single European market for our companies. But still, companies in Europe find regulatory problems within Europe and. Life is made difficult. 27 different rules, different procedures. 27 systems holding things up for innovation. Which one product. One service. One set of rules. That should be the rule. And finally, we should have, uh, get rid of radical bureaucracy. Every single market is put to the test. What can be removed? What can be made simpler? What is endangering jobs? Because competitiveness comes from Competition not by state led. Um, wishful thinking. Europe shouldn't start have central planning for innovation. Now is the time to be courageous and to think big. If the commission is serious when about a strong European economy, it must finally complete the single market. We see good proposals, but the Commission needs more courage to do something about national protectionism in member states. Because one thing is clear if you want to strengthen the single market, that makes Europeans stronger in the world, if you block it, Europe, that is weakening Europe. And that is the strength that we need most urgently.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Thank you. Thank you very much, chair. And thank you, miss, for for the overview. Um, I mean, it's very clear, even clearer now that Canada is one of our most like minded partners and CETA is a true success story. And we should in this situation, see what we can do to build more in it. And, um, still realizing in a lot of conversations that people are not realizing or not aware of that. And I think particularly in this geopolitical situation, we really need to stand shoulder to shoulder with Canada. Um, so I reiterate my call here. All the member states that have yet not ratified the CETA agreement should absolutely do so, because also, looking at the facts and figures that we heard from CETA, it is really positive. It is a success story.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• “So we really need to turn the switch around and switch from overregulation to simplification. And I'm very happy that also the commission is now on this track. They decided to withdraw several legislative proposals from last term, like the AI liability directive. And I'm also very happy to see that it's very much a big priority for the Danish presidency to work on simplification. But I think it's really important that we fill words with action here. Um, so if we want to cut rules, we need to be very clear. Uh, Brussels is a synonym for for bureaucracy for many people. So we need to focus on prosperity. So maybe you could share with us, uh, what are your actual problems? To deregulate our highly overregulated market? And how do you plan to address when we have a stalemate situation where member states want more in the Parliament, want less like example in the case of late payments regulation? Thank you so much. And probably now I give the floor to you again, um, because you had a lot of work already and a lot of answers. So please, Minister, please.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “(10:52:43 – 10:54:24): In a world which is more insecure geopolitically, we can't rely on others. Our economic and geopolitical strength starts in our own single market. We need a genuine single European market for our companies, but still companies in Europe find regulatory problems within Europe. And life is made difficult. So 27 different rules and different procedures, 27 systems holding things up for innovation. We should 1 product, 1 service, 1 set of rules. That should be the rule. And finally, we should have, get rid of radical bureaucracy. Every single market is put to the test. What can be removed? What can be made simpler? What is, endangering jobs? Because competitiveness comes from competition, not by a state led, wishful thinking. Europe shouldn't start be have central planning for innovation. Now is the time to be courageous and to think big. If the commission is serious when it about a strong European economy, it must finally complete the single market. We see find see good proposals, but the commission needs more courage to do something about national protectionism in member states. Because 1 thing is clear, if you want to strengthen the single market, that makes Europeans stronger in the world. If you block it, Europe that is weakening Europe. And that is the strength that we need most urgently. Missus”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Yeah. Sorry. Um. Yeah. I can also happily take over. We're very much aligned there, because we fundamentally believe the most important thing is to streamline our rules. It's completely unbelievable that we have 27 different implementations and more than 300 different reporting obligations for the posting of workers. That's completely artificial barriers. And I think we really should abolish those created by the member states. It's very much against the idea of the single market. Um, and it makes it makes it a lot harder for workers as well. Um, so from, from my perspective, I think the particularly the part of the mandatory, uh, instead of a voluntary, uh, single digital portal would be a very important starting point. Um, Um, I think the proposal should be a very quick and easy win and a difficult attempt to strengthen our single market in Europe and the world right now. Um, it reduces burdens for companies, especially smaller ones. And, uh, it makes enforcement of our rules much more effective also for the protection of workers. Um, so looking at the at the draft report by Mr. Schwab and Mr. Danielsson, I don't consider many amendments to the commission proposal necessary. In my opinion, we could just move as it is. But most amendments introduced by the Co-rapporteurs are supportable. Um, I would just like to highlight that I will not at all support a record keeping of ten years, as suggested by the Co-rapporteurs. I'm a bit surprised by this very bureaucratic, uh, suggestions. I think we need less and not more obligations like this. Other than that, I think the draft report is a very good basis for compromise and I really thank the rapporteurs for the work. Let's get this done and make our single market easier.”
  EU regulation of cross-border and posted workers
• “Clearly our main objective must be to protect free trade. At the same time, however, the European Union must maintain the elbow room to fight back with the tools we have. Somebody such as Donald Trump only recognises force. And this should help us find a solution. At the same time, we should finally use them. Make the most of the opportunities which we have. Trade policy must always be pragmatic rather than acting as an ersatz a replacement for a lack of EU foreign policy. We have to work hard to conclude agreements with India, Mexico and of course, those countries which have not yet ratified the agreement. Canada must do so. I can no longer understand this ridiculous blockage of the Mercosur agreement. If Trump continues to trample all his trade partners around the world, the European Union must go back to our role as being a reliable partner, making it clear to those in other countries and blocs we want trade with them, and that should strengthen us both economically and geopolitically.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• “Thank you very much, chair and dear colleagues. I think we can all tell that tensions are running high every time we discuss something on Mercosur. It's something colleagues are very passionate about, but I think it's important that we focus on what is on the table today. It's about the safeguard regulation and that I think we need to look into and to to scrutinise. I think there will be the time to really look into the agreement as a whole and the potential risks and benefits, but I think today we need to focus on talking about this very technical regulation. And as shadow rapporteur for Renew Europe, I have not tabled any amendments on behalf of our group. Um, I agree with the rapporteur sure that not only is the proposal from the commission balanced, but it's also building on established EU practice in other trade agreements and offers a reliable safeguard. In fact, we heard it the farthest reaching safeguard regulations ever. Um, but most importantly, we know that having the safeguard regulation in place as soon as possible is of utmost importance since some member States have made it a precondition for them to decide on the Mercosur agreement. And as far as I understood, the regulation was drafted in close cooperation with the member states concerned, which is also why the council already adopted it without amendments. I've seen the amendments tabled by other colleagues and moving on to the negotiations. I think we need to keep in mind what is possible for the Parliament to amend and what is relevant for this regulation.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “We need pragmatic solutions now with the US and a framework agreement, which will be a roadmap for further talks. That means no deal at any cost. We must be willing at any point to adopt counter tariffs and we should be clear. Donald Trump is focusing on the right of the fittest. He wants Wild West trade policy, but it's also just as dangerous to hear people who are against, on principle, the left, who rejected ttiP and are now celebrating as if less trade with the US were a victory. It was a gift to China, but that is what they want. They want to close in instead of having freedom, communism instead of capitalism. Although capitalism has made us so strong. So if you block trade agreements, then you're pushing up prices. You'll have fewer jobs, less prosperity, and more influence for autocrats. Europe needs to shape things and not be driven by events. If you block free trade, you're strengthening the wrong party. Trump achieve populists from the left and right. We want more trade with more partners for freedom, prosperity and a strong Europe.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “That could create an obstacle for authorities to ensure compliance with digital rules and other legislation, we have heard. Another concern was the wording on data protection on cross-border data flows, which some fear could enable a weakening of fundamental rights. In the discussion, we have both here in the committee but also in the monitoring group. The Commission has assured us that the agreement does not put the enforcement of EU legislation in any jeopardy. The Commission has underlined that similar provisions are in this, like in this agreement, have already been negotiated and included in agreements like UK, Chile and New Zealand and regarding data flows with Japan. So these rooms have been applied in parallel to the negotiations and adoption of this new digital legislation. Um, so it does not seem like this agreement would have a chilling effect on any future EU legislation. Quite the contrary. Um, this agreement is setting standards for digital trade and data flows, data protection and online consumer rights. Um, to conclude, I would like to underline that this agreement comes at a time when multilateral rules based order is being questioned and protectionism and isolationism are taking over international trade. So concluding this agreement is really an important political, um, signal that we're ready and able to deliver agreements. Um, so, as you can see in the draft, uh, the recommendation and draft resolution. I absolutely recommend to the entire committee to give consent to the conclusion of the digital trade agreement with Singapore. And just to inform you, the deadline for amendment has been postponed to Friday, 18th July at noon and I look forward to your input now. Thank you.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• “Bureaucratic barriers in the single market cost jobs and money because they artificially keep our companies small. I'll give you two examples. The posting of workers causes more bureaucracy than it brings in in turnover. The national rules for packaging and waste disposal are really deal with tiny details. Is it not time that we finally dealt with this? I'm very grateful to Commissioner Séjourné for the impulse he's giving through the single market strategy. The omnibus is the first step towards reducing bureaucracy in the single market. The. Besides the SME definition, we now have a definition for small and mid-cap companies that should also be useful reducing bureaucracy for these companies. As with the reduction of bureaucracy on the GDPR, this has to be just the beginning. Please don't stop with omnibus one now. We need to adapt all of the single market legislation to the new definition. We need to make the rules better for SMEs and small midcaps. We need to stick to our rules. Innovation doesn't have to be imagined in Europe. It has to be done in Europe. So let's finally release the single market to do its job, and let's give our companies a breath of fresh air.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Now dependencies, creating them and then using them against us. That's China's strategy, and that's what's happening through China's technical technological dominance and its export controls on rare earths. At the same time, we are being flooded with China's structural overcapacity, which are targeted for exports, not for their own market, which destroys competition, competition and endangers our jobs and industry. Europe needs to act against this dependency. We need more trade with other partners. The Mercosur agreement needs to be ratified now, reducing our vulnerability. Yes, we do have to bring in targeted protective measures where Chinese overcapacity is flooding our markets and our companies are under pressure. Especially, we have to make life simpler for our own companies and get rid of superfluous red tape instead of more state intervention. We need more courage and encourage people towards the market economy. We should not be able to be blackmailed or bribed.”
  Trade relations with China · Chinese clean tech competition: trade barriers and investment caps vs. open market
• “Ladies and gentlemen, it's extremely frustrating when we see how small steps of the member states are seen compared with Putin. Trump and the autocrats of our world are actually sprinting, and we can see that the EU is being stopped from making progress by ourselves. You know, Mr. Orban is being sprinkled with money just to stop him from saying no. So we're actually using our own money to divert democracy. Coalition of the willing is one thing, but the coalition of those who are willing to act is something else. Otherwise, we can end up just being irrelevant or divided. Then we can see a security order being developed. We need to defend ourselves. We need to be the home of innovation, not bureaucracy. We need to be considered worldwide, reliable partner which defends our interests. The EU can take over the beacon of freedom from the US and push for freedom. Democracy.”
  EU political integration
• “Oh dear colleagues, sometimes you think, how do you counter those misogyny? And then you think, maybe just continue and show them how strong women are in this House. Um. Dear colleagues, the deal with the USA is a bad deal. Mrs. von der Leyen wasn't brave enough to negotiate harder because we are so dependent politically, economically from the USA. So Europe was faced with a choice either no deal or a bad deal. I think Europe should pull itself together. We should pull ourselves together and really sit at the negotiating table on an international stage, because we have to have geopolitical relevance and we need to fight for this and fight for it through trade. Mrs. von der Leyen really should be looking at economic growth and really emphasize that, not what she's done when it comes to European subsidies. We're told that there will be something on the horizon, but unfortunately so far not much to see. So if you are making our economy weaker. You are making Europe weaker without growth. We become irrelevant. You've got the Mercosur agreement. Bad for jobs. We're only going to be strong in the world if we have more trade and if we have more partners. So let's take this opportunity. And I'm also turning to the Danish Presidency of Council. Please make sure that we get this agreement a good agreement soon.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Subvention subsidies. So this is the kind of things which we see in Europe, European countries here in the EU, in the last year there has been regulation instead of a competitive single market independent. These are the places like China are using it as a weapon against us. And the EU is hesitating instead of opening up new markets in a decisive way. More trade with more partners. That would be a pragmatic solution which we could use against the USA in individual sectors. This is the chance to set up a new trade agreement with India, and those that have those trade agreements have not been ratified yet have to be ratified. So we could use Canada to help us work against react to Trump's threats and Mercosur. This is the other problem. It's the same as with CPTPP. This is a fact free zone. Trade policy. Policy is a bit of a battlefield with with trade and with democracy, and we can only really succeed if we are networked in a democratic way across the world.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• “Um, most of the content of the safeguard regulation is based on what is in the Mercosur agreement. So we can't change, for example, the transition periods or how long the safeguard regulation can be applied, as the Parliament do not have the power to amend trade agreements. And the same applies to many of the other amendments proposed. I know colleagues also that there are quite concerns from the agricultural community, and I understand that a lot of colleagues share them, and I think we need to respect and address that. But we also need to be honest about what is possible, what is within the Parliament's power to amend and what is not even part of the safeguards. For example, the merger clauses will be also discussed later here after this exchange. But it's not something that we can unilaterally change or impose after an agreement has been concluded, and not especially in the safeguard regulation, which is supposed to deal with very specific events and namely surges in import. So I really do hope that we can work constructively and try to find a way to proceed, which would not slow down the process unnecessarily, because the member states and the European economy are waiting for us to give a clear signal on the way forward. And I really look forward to working with all of you on finding a solution, addressing concerns, and finding a pragmatic way. Thank you very much.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Thank you very much. Executive Vice President Diana, it's really, um, it's always a pleasure listening to you and hear about what the commission is planning, because I think particularly, um, on the AI area boosting AI, unleashing the potential here in Europe will be extremely the key area for us to be able to digitally compete, to keep up in the geopolitical game that is happening. So I was wondering if you could maybe clarify a little bit more about the measures proposed in the digital omnibus package and how they will interact with the cloud and AI Development Act, how this is one part of one big strategy to boost AI use. And maybe also in that regard, though, it's maybe not so much of your aspect. Um, but regarding the Saving and Investment Union about unlocking the potential for AI there also maybe in regard of the 28th regime. Thank you.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “Colleagues, geopolitical, uncertain times are what we're living through, and we need, given that, to extend the internal market, that's what makes us an attractive partner. The US is no longer a reliable partner, so we need to make our internal market more attractive also for our own businesses. We need to stop being so regulatory hlatory in what we do, we need to get rid of regulation. We need to look at what we're doing. And what I would say is that competition comes from competition. I mean, I am a bit skeptical about, uh, massive state interventions. I think that we should be buying the best products at the best possible price, rather than trying to make political decisions on that. Now, Commissioner Séjourné, it's great to see that you have the courage to make the single market great. That's what we need to do. We should think big. The single market makes us strong in the world and we need to increase that strength. Otherwise we will be weaker in geopolitical terms. Thank you.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Dear colleagues, Europe is losing the global competitiveness battle. And that is because essentially what we've had the last few years has been putting the brakes on our company. You can see that, um, China and the US are really forging ahead, and Europe is chaining itself up. We should not just make things easier for Chinese or us big tech companies. You know, we shouldn't just be listening to what Zuckerberg wants us to do. We need to be liberal, but we need to be talking about, um, competitiveness. Because the truth is that our overregulation is actually hitting the wrong people. It's hitting SMEs. And the big tech giants are very grateful that, you know, we're letting them get away with unfair competition. What we need to do is we need to, um, ensure that we have a homegrown AI that's based on our, um, digital, our European values. This is an opportunity for us to bring about a growth and competitiveness in the AI act. We look at, um, protecting our citizens and promoting Made in Europe innovation. Um, if it doesn't come from Europe, then Europe will essentially be a digital vassal, and that is something that we should not let happen.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “China is flooding our single market with subsidized overcapacity from toys to steel. And I expect to underline that at the EU China summit, she'll find pragmatic solutions for fair trade for our industries. But above all, to make sure that EU doesn't remain so naive vis a vis China, because for years we've been fighting this asymmetric dependency and trying to free ourselves from that as Germany, as the EU. We need to do that now. China needs to look at the way that they're restricting our critical raw material access, and they're using it as a weapon in the fight between autocracy and democracy. Let's not forget that China is an autocratic regime that doesn't support democracy and human rights. Look at the Uyghurs. Look at Hong Kong, look at Taiwan and the threats there. This is not the time for appeasement. Neither vis a vis Trump's USA nor to China. It's time for standing shoulder to shoulder. We need more trade with more partners. And I'm looking to the Danish presidency. Bring together the European member states for more free trade. Open up more markets for raw materials.”
  EU-China relations
• “Thank you. Chair. We need brains. Capital and I. These are the three elements we need. If we have the best brains, we will be a market for talent. But the brains that Trump is pushing out of the U.S. are not coming to us because of the taxes and an uncompetitive environment that makes this an unattractive place for skilled workers. And we need to do better here. So let's create the capital market, make it easier to invest in Europe and make it simpler to scale up. Let's approach learning and invest in it. We cannot suffocate these movements with bureaucracy. Let's not govern from fear, but really govern only where rules are necessary. Let's move to simplification. Our prosperity for tomorrow depends on our ability to develop and innovate. I really wish that Europe would no longer just speak about innovation, but rather be passionate about it and act. Thank you.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Thank you very much. Um, that's all the interventions from your side. Yeah. Um, then we come to the members and I have already several people, and we continue the list. We start with Sven Jahan for renew. Thank you very much, chair. And thank you very much, Lucia, for coming here. I think it's really important that we're debating this in the committee. The working group of the AI act so far unfortunately only met in camera. So it's good that we have this this public forum. It's just about a year that we formally adopted the AI act, and we see that all the issues I was warning about are coming more and more to life. We see that AI development and use of thriving in other parts of the world, and we're still stuck in the debate about uncertain rules that are coming from the AI act. Um, and particularly the interplay with sector legislation is still a problematic issue. And currently we are very much risking stifling innovation and falling completely behind there. And on the other side, we see that states are starting to use facial recognition to intimidate opposition and people whose way of life they oppose with, like we see with the pride in Hungary. Um, so I'm really, really worried about that. Um, but also we see that the process of drafting the code of practice for general purpose AI models has been complex and very difficult, also because of short deadlines, but mainly because the co-legislators and the commission outsourced a lot of open questions a year ago because we just wanted to have a deal.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “Thank you. Thank you very much to the Commission for the presentation. Unfortunately the AI Act was a bit short because particularly we don't expect the data aspect to come to us. So I would love to highlight about the AI Act. I think that our European industry needs simplification in this art because I don't see this as a matter of US influence on the EU. We're not talking DSA and DMA here we need to fight tooth and nail to defend our rules here for fair competition. But we're talking about the AI Act and I know that in and out for four years of negotiation I've been part of that I've particularly know the weaknesses of that law and we all know that it was very much pushed over the finish line two years ago with a lot of flaws that we need to correct now and I'm very grateful that the Commission is putting a proposal forward on that because overregulation in the digital sphere that's not a big problem for the big tech but it's a huge problem for the European digital economy and for many other sectors in our industries which are using AI tools like medical devices or machinery sector. So I think this digital omnibus is a huge opportunity to improve our laws, remove regulatory burdens which is not needed and to smooth out the touch points to other legislation and particularly what I think is really important that the AI omnibus unlike the data omnibus is not touching on fundamental rights perspective and I really welcome that the Commission is not opening that up again and I hope that there's not a will here in the Parliament to do that because we need as much simplification as possible for our industry because many AI application have absolutely no negative impact on citizens but we need to foster this as an opportunity to get more AI made in Europe. This needs to be our goal to enable that but I also want to be very clear what we do not need is any touching of the bans of mass surveillance for example and we really need to safeguard our citizens' rights here as well.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “So many colleagues shared example today how AI is used to harm women. But I still believe in AI making our lives better, making our workdays easier, or help us live healthier lives. But instead, there are too many people choosing AI to humiliate women, to undress women without their consent, to create pornographic deepfakes, to sexualize, to harm, and to silence female public voices like politicians, journalists, or attack their colleagues, their neighbors or ex-partners. Let me be clear AI is just a tool. The real perpetrators are behind the screen, and most of the time they are men. And yet creating new deepfakes is hardly ever punished. So women live in fear and we will change that. Women should not be afraid. It should be the perpetrators that need to be afraid. We will not accept technology being used to roll back decades and centuries of female empowerment, because our digital rules in Europe are worth nothing if we don't enforce them, because AI will only be beneficial to all if we defend all our citizens rights.”
  Gender roles, equality and inclusion
• “Now cheap products are flooding in from China, and we are doing damage to our environment and our enterprises who are complying with the rules and regulations. And when we take a look at the over half the toys imported from China that are dangerous, then we really have to ensure that we do something about this. We don't want unsafe toys in the hands of our babies where they might choke themselves. Now, people who like to go online to shop, unfortunately, will be wearing new clothes that may contain chemicals and all sorts of carcinogenic substances. Illegal products and unsafe products are have nothing to do on our markets. We therefore need legislation, but we need to ensure that the existing um, legislation through the DSA, for example, and other acts must be complied with. We must ensure that illegal products cannot even enter the market. And with regard to the Chinese platforms, we need to make them accountable and make sure that they pay their taxes. Let us have a safe and fun online shopping rather than having it dangerous to our health and to the environment. Thank you.”
  Trade relations with China
• “Dear colleagues, to be honest, it would be. It is irresponsible to put forward incorrect facts put forward by populists to stir up fear. Of course, we have to take the concerns of farmers seriously. That's why in some sensitive areas, we have low trqs for beef. We're talking about just 1.5% 200g of beef per person. And the commission also has compensatory payments in the pipeline. So I think it's too much bureaucracy, not free trade, that affects our farmers. Protectionism won't help us and we won't be weakening climate protection. No, we'll be boosting it. Respect of the Paris Agreement is a major building block of this agreement. If we look at the EU, there are some 800,000 jobs linked to trade with Mercosur. My native Germany sends many, many goods. 12,000 companies, uh, from Germany send goods to the Mercosur countries. We've just heard from Mr. Sefcovic. There will be lower tariff duties which will really boost companies. And there is a possibility for growth. And we will be able to access more critical raw materials that will help us with our climate goals, and it will make us less dependent on autocracies such as China. Let me be honest with you. I will not give in to the autocracies of this world. Those autocrats are standing shoulder to shoulder. We should work with other democracies. I am not willing to accept what's happening with autocracies. I don't want to have a spiral or a spiraling situation. What we need more is more trade with, uh, with trade partners that we trust. We don't need de-globalisation. We don't need de-growth. Those are fantasies. We need Mercosur for jobs in the EU, for economic growth, and above all, for international cooperation.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “I'm relieved that Mrs. von der Leyen is ready to correct her poorly made laws. Above all, when it comes to the Supply Chain Act, we said at the time that the scope and the liability needed to be limited, and it's good that that's finally happening. I would go further, though, and say it would be better if the Commission took the Supply Chain Act and withdrew it. There is still too much red tape in it, and it's there's not enough effective protection of human rights. Despite that, the omnibus law has to come. It's a minimum for reducing bureaucracy and strengthening competitiveness. That's why I have an honest question. Have colleagues from the Social Democrats and the Greens not realized how difficult the situation is for the European economy. I think it's really irresponsible the way some people here want to wave away any simplification and reduction of red tape. And if I look towards Berlin, the exploratory paper there also doesn't reassure me that the union there is really serious about reform after the election. That's why I call on the commission. We still need a lot more simplification. We need the reduction of superfluous laws and regulations. And that's why we need a new omnibuses. And the next one has to be a digital omnibus, because we need to deal with the panoply of digital legislation that we have. We need to be world leaders in innovation and not in regulation. Thank you very much.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Commission President Ursula von der Leyen likes talking about competitiveness but let's look at the reality of the situation. Let's look at all the regulations of the taxonomy and look at the bureaucracy because Europe is not saving the world, we're simply ruining our own economy and we are finding the brakes being slapped on by overregulation. But we have to try and do away with national protectionism. We need a genuine single market for services and we need in that way to boost our sovereignty but not via subsidies. We need to have greater competitiveness, not something handed down by the Commission. We have Chancellor Metz who's talking in Germany about less bureaucracy but the SPD and the Union are piling on the red tape. But we've got the Free Democrats who stand there consistently for growth and less regulation. Europe can become an economic power again if at long last we put our faith in the strength of our single market.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Thank you sir. It's working. Thank you very much for for your presentations. I think that was particularly interesting. And I think it's good that we have this very open exchange, particularly to get a lot of the myths around this agreement out of the way and to really stay with the facts. And I know there are a lot of concerns, particularly from the agriculture sector. Um, but I think the solution to the worries are not found in shutting down a trade agreement, but addressing them in the EU internal agricultural policy. But that's something maybe for another committee. Um, Mr. Freeze, um, I mean, we're all very much aware that the, the automotive industry are facing quite some difficulties right now, um, particularly looking to China. I was wondering if you could elaborate a bit more. How do you see that the Mercosur agreement could support the EU goals of diversification, particularly for the sector? Um, particularly when I think about provisions regarding market access and standards and regulatory alignment. Um, and uh, for, for, uh, Doctor Sanchez. Um, I mean, we all know that the topic of European wine is a very emotional topic in the debates. Um, we hear that the wine sector really is a part of possible retaliation regarding the US Tariffs. Um, but maybe you could also enlighten us a bit more in in what regard? The Mercosur agreement could alleviate a bit the situation as well. I think that would be very interesting in the current situation and also maybe to, to Mr.. Vis, particularly with the, um, tension regarding cars, also regarding the US, how this could help the sector. Thank you so much.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur